The State v. Jodi Arias: break in trial until 28 January 2013 #16 *ADULT CONTENT*

[kimpage]

OK Was not gonna post but feel I need to......I was a battered woman for 8 years ( physical and alot more emotional ) I can say with 100% certainty that JA was the abuser.......TA being the victim kept falling into her trap and it cost him his life...I do not look forward to the defense smearing Travis,but i feel it will backfire and anger the jury.......

P.S. My prayers for the family and friends of Travis they need them



IMHO,JMHO and all that

 

[katiecoolady]

Since you asked, I still think that it can be argued that it doesn't really show that she set out intending to kill anyone. She may have thought about it and prepared, but the decision may not have actually been made until whatever the catalyst was that night occurred. In an instance like that, I think premeditation becomes a large gray area.

The first wound she inflicted after a defensive or fatal wound is premeditated. Premeditation can happen in an instant.

 

[Hatfield]

Chris heard it from Sky, she heard it from someone at the prosecutors office.

Thanks. Its pretty obvious Gus and Chris are not the best of friends after this trial.

In Gus testimony, he never could claim that Chris was forcefully strong arming him, but Gus did say he felt in his opinion that Chris was not happy about him siding with the defense. After all we heard, I dont see grounds for any misconduct.

I think Sky will just basically agree that she gave Chris the info, but it shouldnt matter unless there is something more to it.

It seems to me the judge could question the defense right now and see where this is headed and if they have no more than this, she should be able to rule already without Sky. This seems like an easy ruling to me.

 

[m00c0w]

The emails are hearsay either way...

Why do you think it's hearsay?

 

[Carol2]

Does this mean no court after the 31st until the 13th?? Or is that just the date of that hearing and the trial continues?

Good question. There will definitely be no trial on Friday because they always take Fridays off (unless an unusual exception is made this week). However, who knows what they will do next week. We will have to wait and see.

 

[m00c0w]

I couldn't disagree more.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm not saying I agree with it. I was asked to rebut it, so I did.

 

[katiecoolady]

He's already dead. He got 99 years and served 7. Yes, SEVEN. When he got out, he lasted about 5 years and died of AIDS, which thankfully, wasn't around when I 'met' him.

7 years. Dear Lord.

 

[Carol2]

Hey! Just noticed that Thursday has been added to the docket. So upcoming schedule (that we know of) is:

Wednesday, January 30 - Trial - 10:30 local time (12:30 Eastern)
Thursday, January 31 - Trial - 10:30 local time (12:30 Eastern)
Wednesday, February 13 - Hearing - 1:30 local time (3:30 Eastern)

I missed one - an evidentiary hearing on February 6. Here is a revised schedule:

Wednesday, January 30 - Trial - 10:30 local time (12:30 Eastern)
Thursday, January 31 - Trial - 10:30 local time (12:30 Eastern)
Wednesday, February 6 - Hearing - 10:30 local time (12:30 Eastern)
Wednesday, February 13 - Hearing - 1:30 local time (3:30 Eastern)

 

[BritsKate]

7 whole years huh? Some justice! I'm so glad he's dead, at least that must give you a small sense of comfort? I hope.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

My ex was sentenced to 8 years for drugging and raping his 14 year old niece. He was allowed to plead guilty for a reduced sentence.

The only silver lining is his visitation rights for my children were suspended in part as a result. Up until then the court refused to see my concerns as anything other than a spiteful spouse. My daughter will be 15 when he is released so it's a (very) small measure of relief. Heaven help me if he's ever allowed visitation again it'll be my trial y'all will be following. :furious:

 

[SmoothOperator]

Since you asked, I still think that it can be argued that it doesn't really show that she set out intending to kill anyone. She may have thought about it and prepared, but the decision may not have actually been made until whatever the catalyst was that night occurred. In an instance like that, I think premeditation becomes a large gray area.

And per the law the above described is still premeditated murder.. and that premeditation under the law can be formed in as short as the blink of an eye(thanks to NG) prior to plunging the knife or pulling the trigger..its still the same..premeditated and still falls under the same first degree murder charge.

 

[katiecoolady]

So on the gas cans. She got 2- 5gal cans from the x and bought 1 from wally world. Did I get that right?

I think she got kerosene cans from Walmart...??

 

[TigerBalm]

Why do you think it's hearsay?

For one Travis can't come to court to testify. The defense could call Chris to the stand and ask him if he said something but the actual email wouldn't be admitted. That is why the email was not read out loud in open court today. Just like a detective's report for example is not allowed due to hearsay.

 

[AngelWings444]

Now reviewing Gus' portion where he is hesitant about writing down the name of the other person in the car. This is not as egregious as I thought. Gus was just asking what happens if he declines. The judge took the hearing private and explained to him what would happen, and he decided that he would go ahead and do what he was ordered to do. Gus was actually not really belligerent during this exchange either -- hesitant and ill-informed about the legal process, yes.

I don't think we know if Gus gave the number after he tried to plead the 5th? Maybe, good ole Gussy is :jail:? Did we ever see him again? What I really believe is, he didn't answer the judge and the judge gave him time to seek legal advice. If he made this whole thing up, he's in BIG trouble. :twocents:

 

[Linda7NJ]

If you don't care if she was actually abused and exculpatory evidence may be present, you could have just said that. :twocents:

For the record, I don't care if she felt abused and I do not care if there is any evidence to that effect.

Anything less than a dated X-ray confirming a broken finger immediately following a verified visit with Travis is complete and total LIE. It will be added to the long list of her other lies.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[4Jacy]

Can we knock this off?? You don't travel all those miles to be with a abuser.

 

[Linda7NJ]

My ex was sentenced to 8 years for drugging and raping his 14 year old niece. He was allowed to plead guilty for a reduced sentence.

The only silver lining is his visitation rights for my children were suspended in part as a result. Up until then the court refused to see my concerns as anything other than a spiteful spouse. My daughter will be 15 when he is released so it's a (very) small measure of relief. Heaven help me if he's ever allowed visitation again it'll be my trial y'all will be following. :furious:

Pssst if ya ever need an alibi...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[LambChop]

:floorlaugh: I think the infomercial was canceled out when he admitted that he did not have any means of legal counsel to contact at 3 pm in the afternoon.

I think it was only 2pm in California. I guess the attorney's their firm does business with don't work late hours. In by 10 out by 2. Maybe GS had his attorney's hours confused with his own. :floorlaugh:

 

[LambChop]

Can we knock this off?? You don't travel all those miles to be with a abuser.

Not to mention the expense.

 

[missy1974]

Thanks. Its pretty obvious Gus and Chris are not the best of friends after this trial.

In Gus testimony, he never could claim that Chris was forcefully strong arming him, but Gus did say he felt in his opinion that Chris was not happy about him siding with the defense. After all we heard, I dont see grounds for any misconduct.

I think Sky will just basically agree that she gave Chris the info, but it shouldnt matter unless there is something more to it.

It seems to me the judge could question the defense right now and see where this is headed and if they have no more than this, she should be able to rule already without Sky. This seems like an easy ruling to me.

I agree. Although it's been interesting, and we've heard a few tidbits that have been interesting. I don't really see the point of continuing the hearing. It looks like they will get Sky on the stand now too, and ask her who she heard from, etc. But unless she says that the prosecutor's office asked her or Chris to call Gus and find out what is going on and to report back to them, I don't see it being prosecutorial misconduct. Even if they did ask them to do this, would it be misconduct?

 

[princesspjs]

IMO the very fact that she had either a gun or a knife in her hands, in the bathroom would prove premeditation.

It's not like she was in the kitchen chopping veggies with a knife in her hand when she "had" to kill Travis.

He was in the bathroom, taking a shower. There is no reason to have a gun and/or knife at your disposal while you are snapping pictures of Travis taking a shower unless you plan on killing him.