The State v. Jodi Arias: break in trial until 28 January 2013 #15 *ADULT CONTENT*

[Hatfield]

If that was not CONTEMPT OF COURT, then nothing is.

 

[magpie]

I hope he writes down 867-5309

Hahahahaha! :floorlaugh: A much needed laugh after having to watch Searcy again! :great: Thank you so very much!

 

[minor4th]

Holy crap what just happened? I just tuned in to see the judge admonishing Gus of his right to confer with counsel and then she announced a sub rosa hearing? Did Gus perjurer himself or was he asked something that would incriminate him or what?

 

[Linda7NJ]

Not his own name, the name of the person who was in the car with him when he received that phone call from Chris Hughes about being on the witness list. Allegedly that person is afraid to step forward and confirm that they were there because they're worried about Chris Hughes finding out. At least that's how I understood it.

Chris Hughes =the Great and Powerful Oz!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[norest4thewicked]

So now I REALLY think that this is the guy who was making out with Jodi and was ready to leave his wife for her! lol

 

[Steely Dan]

This is how I'm reading it. The prosecutor asked him how often he talks to (forget his name). He asks the prosecutor to define often. Gus then says every month or so(?)

The prosecutor then asks him for his phone number which Gus says is irrelevant. The prosecutor tells him that's not how it works.

The judge calls a sidebar and then the prosecutor comes back and asks him to write down his phone number. The judge tells him it will be sealed. He then asks to plead the 5th.

Is that about right?

 

[GobBluth]

None of this stuff is happening, roflmfao. Pinch me. This is all a dream, a crazy dream! It HAS to be.

 

[CUCKOOHEAD]

How's that 15 mins of fame working for ya right now Gus?!?!?!

:floorlaugh:

 

[gitana1]

question for you, since you're an attorney. didn't that whole thing seem to be nurmi just messing with a guy who insulted him and who he clearly doesn't like? making him fly in to appear, etc?

I can;t say that. I think the defense dislikes him but is just grasping at sraws to get their client off. TRial is not going well for them thus far.

I apologized for statement including "most posters".

I respectfully disagree with your definition of emotional abuse. Here is a link that describes emotion abuse AMONG many other ways as... "

"Withholding includes refusing to listen, refusing to communicate, and emotionally withdrawing as punishment. This is sometimes called the “silent treatment.”

"Minimizing is a less extreme form of denial. When minimizing, the abuser may not deny that a particular event occurred, but they question the recipient’s emotional experience or reaction to an event. Statements such as “You’re too sensitive,” “You’re exaggerating,” or “You’re blowing this out of proportion” all suggest that the recipient’s emotions and perceptions are faulty and not to be trusted.
Trivializing, which occurs when the abuser suggests that what you have done or communicated is inconsequential or unimportant, is a more subtle form of minimizing.
Denying and minimizing can be particularly damaging. In addition to lowering self-esteem and creating conflict, the invalidation of reality, feelings, and experiences can eventually lead you to question and mistrust your own perceptions and emotional experience."

http://www.counselingcenter.illinois.edu/?page_id=168

Emotional Abuse takes many many forms.

AGAIN I am in no way saying TA did anything to warrant his horrible death. My MOO he wasn't very nice in the way he treated JA and TA, as this link shows he very well might not have known he was hurting her emotionally!

I;m sorry. Refusing to engage in an emotional relationship with a woman you have broken up with but who continues to try to rope you in via sex, is not "withholding". Withholding is a control and manipulation technique. There is zero evidence that Travis was manipulating this woman. It's not like they were a couple who he "punished" by withholding affection or by ignoring, which is what withholding refers to. There is also zero evidence that he "minimized" her. Getting angry with someone who is manipulating you, and using you and stalking you, by calling that person a horrible name, is not emotional abuse. It's not minimizing. Sorry.

Wow he straightened Nurmi out LOL

I loved it!!!

This witness KILLED the defense! KILLED him!!

Fantastic.

I think I feel sorry for Newbie I mean Nurmi. Everybody yells at him and calls him a snake or a liar.

If the shoe fits.

Please tell me...lease: I can't watch it right now, because DD is home today. Teacher planning day.

Basically, Nurmi is grasping at straws, questioning witnesses and trying to insinuate that they colluded with the prosecution or adapted their testimony or were influenced by the prosecution. This witness was very forthright, very confident and firm when the defnese tried to play its game. In answer to auqesion about whether the prosecution contacted him, the witness stated, "No. In fact, it was I who..." Then he got testy and stated, in a firm voice, "Do you got that? I just want to make that clear. We are on a phone so I want no misunderstandings." Or something to that effect. But his tone was priceless. He wasn't about to let the defense b.s. their way into something that wasn't true.

Sadly, this seems to be the case. I wonder if she will have grounds for incompetent representation by counsel. Even the woman attorney (blanking) is kind of smirking at his ineptitude.

Nope. No way. The defense is not incompetent. They are becoming sleazy, but not incompetent. They have NOTHING to work with. Zero. So they are using every trick in the book to delay to deceive to do something to be able to use on appeal. Whatever. They are failing, but not because they suck.

 

[bobloblaw]

Works for a legal service, yet has no access to an attorney? :floorlaugh:

Worst marketing ever!

Too Funny!! :great:

 

[Hatfield]

Me thinks there never was another person in the car OR the guy in the car will say something totally different.

 

[TigerBalm]

Holy crap what just happened? I just tuned in to see the judge admonishing Gus of his right to confer with counsel and then she announced a sub rosa hearing? Did Gus perjurer himself or was he asked something that would incriminate him or what?

He's refusing to write down the name of the lady that was in the car with him when he received the call from Chris Hughes. She is afraid to come forward fearing big bad Chris Hughes.


:floorlaugh:

 

[Linda7NJ]

What was the relationship between phone dude and Jodi? Did I get that right that they too had dated?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Madeleine74]

Why would he need to "plead the 5th?"

Because he lied...? Was there no one in the car with him and he lied and said there was and now he's being forced to tell the truth?

OR

Was there really someone in the car with him and he's trying to "protect" them in some way from the big bad Chris Hughes?

OR

Was there someone in the car that he doesn't want anyone to know about because it's something else entirely/hinky?

OR

Is Gus just trying to play games?

 

[kscornfed]

gus may regret wanting to be part of this show if he was with someone mrs. gus doesn't know about.

:floorlaugh:

 

[luv]

I can't figure out who you guys are talking about that's shown up to court in her extra sexy version of prison strped attire??... scrolled back and can't figure it out?..will somebody help a sister out and appease my curiosity about this classy gal?

TIA

Here you go:

 

[lonetraveler]

I can't figure out who you guys are talking about that's shown up to court in her extra sexy version of prison strped attire??... scrolled back and can't figure it out?..will somebody help a sister out and appease my curiosity about this classy gal?

TIA

I missed it too. If you get a photo please share.

Never mind. I just saw it. She looks stoned.

 

[Steely Dan]

Mr. Prepaid Legal has no representation?!

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!

:laughcry: :floorlaugh: :laughcry:

 

[BritsKate]

So what's worse...

Chris Hughes asking to see the entirety of an email exchange prior to answering under oath?

or...

Gus Searcy refusing to answer a question when ordered to do so by the judge?

 

[Carol2]

Judge: Mr. Searcy, do you have an attorney?

Mr. Searcy: No, not handy.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!