The State v. Jodi Arias: break in trial until 28 January 2013 #13 *ADULT CONTENT*

[kscornfed]

It won't be nice but the truth is if someone did in fact see JA with bruises or injuries they can testify to having seen them and when they saw them. jmo

i agree with that. but if she was showing her neck bruises to her ex-BF, why didn't she show him all the other bruises TA supposedly gave her? on her arms, legs and torso as i recall. i thought she claimed she was hiding her injuries from people.

this was probably some sex thing they did. i can't wait to hear what she told him.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

It won't be nice but the truth is if someone did in fact see JA with bruises or injuries they can testify to having seen them and when they saw them. jmo

How would they prove they came from Travis. Didnt she said she did not fear Travis?

Even the defense in their opening seem to suggest there was no physical abuse. They mentioned emotional abuse. Ya know something that no one can prove one way or the other.

IMO

 

[polleypockets]

It won't be nice but the truth is if someone did in fact see JA with bruises or injuries they can testify to having seen them and when they saw them. jmo

but is he allowed to tell the story jodi told him about how it happened?

 

[lil_buddy]

even if jodi doesn't watch - her attys are and i am sure they are telling her everything to help her w/ her story

They have everything from discovery to weave their story around. They don't need to defend against the random people NG & Dr.D have on.

MOO

 

[kscornfed]

if she showed her bruises to her ex-BF in the last week or 2 before TA was killed, i'd say the PA could argue that's part of her premeditation.

 

[2door73chevy]

She wasn't around him often enough to have isolated him, and with the social nature of his job and his church, it would've been difficult for her to accomplish this. Also, she did text back one woman on his phone and sabotage things by texting back, [SIZE="5[COLOR="DarkOrange"]"]"It's cuddle time with Jodi, Good Night!"[/COLOR][/[/SIZE]QUOTE]



That just makes me GAG! Did Travis find out about her doing that? ...I can't imagine how that girl felt getting that message.:furious:

 

[popsicle]

How would they prove they came from Travis. Didnt she said she did not fear Travis?

Even the defense in their opening seem to suggest there was no physical abuse. They mentioned emotional abuse. Ya know something that no one can prove one way or the other.

IMO

What she said may not come in...only what was seen and when.

 

[JusticeJunkie]

They have everything from discovery to weave their story around. They don't need to defend against the random people NG & Dr.D have on.

MOO

Having lived through the CA trial, you are IMO, underestimating what lengths an attorney (or the accused in this case) will go to in order to defend a case.
As I recall, there were many that believed social media played a role in the defense strategy Baez chose to use - that was not in discovery.

 

[LambChop]

You are right. The jury is not to even think about the sentencing phase at this juncture. They are to concentrate on the guilt phase and render a verdict based on the evidence entered. Then they will listen to the aggravating factors and mitgating factors in the sentencing phase.

Frankly I look at it this way from looking at so many prior cases over the years. If this crime had been done by a male and the victim was a female he would receive death. So I think JA deserves the same treatment.

However I highly doubt she will get death because she happens to be a young white female.

IMO

OT, but are you getting snow?

 

[popsicle]

if she showed her bruises to her ex-BF in the last week or 2 before TA was killed, i'd say the PA could argue that's part of her premeditation.

Yes, I agree and it wouldn't benefit her in my eyes, if I was a juror, especially since it wasn't noticed while in Utah. I am thinking about the months prior to the murder.

 

[Harmony 2]

It was a very sad story for sure. It was also a VERY well made low-budget documentary. Something like that could only have been filmed and edited by someone who knew Andrew well.

Besides a gut-wrenching story, a wonderful piece of film making.

I plan on viewing that documentary tonight... I will be prepared with a big box of tissues...

Plus Jodi NEVER makes one of those scrunched up, ugly crying faces. Her face is always serene, as she delicately dabs her nose. Real crying is ugly, eyes all scrunched up, gasping, nose running profusely. Her crying is not realistic at all. Bad acting Jodi!

Very similar to CA IMO...

http://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphot...43x403/282844_407779795964835_322272139_n.jpg
http://img2-1.timeinc.net/people/i/2011/news/110606/casey-anthony-440.jpg

 

[popsicle]

Having lived through the CA trial, you are IMO, underestimating what lengths an attorney (or the accused in this case) will go to in order to defend a case.
As I recall, there were many that believed social media played a role in the defense strategy Baez chose to use - that was not in discovery.

Yes and he clearly read here or had someone who did because he mentioned WS in his book. jmo

 

[lil_buddy]

Having lived through the CA trial, you are IMO, underestimating what lengths an attorney (or the accused in this case) will go to in order to defend a case.
As I recall, there were many that believed social media played a role in the defense strategy Baez chose to use - that was not in discovery.

Perhaps you are right. I did not follow that trial very closely.
MOO: I think it is difficult to compare the 2 cases. The only similarity as far as I can see are that the defendants are young, good-looking, Cluster B women.
The evidence in this is so massively damning...

 

[LambChop]

It won't be nice but the truth is if someone did in fact see JA with bruises or injuries they can testify to having seen them and when they saw them. jmo

Maybe she got it from the 2 hour......"conversation" in the car she had with the church member who wanted to leave his wife. If she were still trying to get back with TA I doubt she would have told the ex she got it from a 2 hour session with another man. lol

 

[popsicle]

OT, but are you getting snow?

I am!

 

[Wishbone]

The court finds substantial evidence to support a conviction on a felony murder theory based upon the evidence presented at trial. The court also finds there is substantial evidence to warrant a conviction on both of the charged theories of First Degree Murder based upon the evidence presented at trial.

I guess they are still using the sheer viciousness of the murder as the basis for the death penalty

 

[popsicle]

Maybe she got it from the 2 hour......"conversation" in the car she had with the church member who wanted to leave his wife. If she were still trying to get back with TA I doubt she would have told the ex she got it from a 2 hour session with another man. lol

Thinking back to the "shark week" photos, it is highly probable that JA is the sexual deviant in which case you would be so right!

 

[JusticeJunkie]

Perhaps you are right. I did not follow that trial very closely.
MOO: I think it is difficult to compare the 2 cases. The only similarity as far as I can see are that the defendants are young, good-looking, Cluster B women.
The evidence in this is so massively damning...

IMO they use it to judge where possible deficits may be in the case. Sort of like a mock jury if you will.
Plus, if they watch HLN, they have already gotten some hints ( by more accomplished defense attorneys) of what a real defense would look like. I hope they don't use them. Some approach legally sound advice of ways to argue the case.
However MOST agree she is guilty, just different approaches of how to present the case.
I don't know how ethical her present attorneys are, but I have a hard time believing they actually buy the hog wash they are presenting.

 

[JusticeJunkie]

Snowing here, too.

 

[lil_buddy]

I just watched "Sheila Labarre" on Discovery ID "her sharp mind and raw sexuality to her advantage her whole life"...Scary woman, she put me in the mind of Jodi..*shiver*

I just googled this as I had not heard of this case.
Seems like "sharp mind and raw sexuality" was a bit of an overstatement.
*shiver* is right.