The State v. Jodi Arias: break in trial until 28 January 2013 #18 *ADULT CONTENT*

[Lucylu7]

:what: I don't know about you guys,,,,,but if it were not for the camera in the courtroom, I would have a very skewed view of what went on based on the coverage on Jane VM and Nancy G.

(What happened to Jean C??? It's like she is on the DT payroll.)

Huge waste watching these shows, mostly.

jmo

I've had friends and family "casually" following a case on these shows and I always tell them to check Websleuths to find out what's really going on!

 

[legalmania]

Lets put it in perspective about the letters and some hired expert....

They have a domestic abuse expert going to testify for Jodi!

Hello?!?!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

And the prosecutor will probably rip the expert to shreds. If he was tough on the employees imagine what he'll do to the expert.

 

[Carol2]

I really hope you are right. However, if/when she does testify, Websleuths will probably crash!

We're gonna need a bigger server. LOL!

I'm sure you are right. But honestly, if she takes the stand, I will not be on Websleuths until it is over. I don't want to miss a second of Juan on her like a small pitbull.

 

[FrayedKnot]

Chris Hughes posted this to his FB:
eta 7 hrs ago

Damage control, lol.

And I like "attorney's" rather than "attorneys". :lol:

But then I type "alot" a lot.

 

[LaneGirl]

I am confused.

There are the letters that were penned by Jodi showing that TA was a pedo. Wasn't she in jail when those showed up?

Wasn't Chris Hughes questioned about some emails?

To me those are totally different things.

They are two different things but DT asked CH about both in same hearing.

 

[norest4thewicked]

I'm sure you are right. But honestly, if she takes the stand, I will not be on Websleuths until it is over. I don't want to miss a second of Juan on her like a small pitbull.

I do both! I DVR it AND can be on Websleuths. It's even crazier that way!

 

[Karmady]

I am confused.

There are the letters that were penned by Jodi showing that TA was a pedo. Wasn't she in jail when those showed up?

Wasn't Chris Hughes questioned about some emails?

To me those are totally different things.

At least some of the e-mails referenced in Chris Hughes' part of the evidentiary hearing pertained to at least one of the letters. The one where Sky Hughes initially believed that the letter was written by Travis. So the e-mail and the letter are distinct, yes, but related, imo.

 

[LaneGirl]

I don't know who said they were fake, but I'm assuming the State's expert whoever that might be, including possibly the FBI, said so. My point is that Nurmi wouldn't be standing up there in front of the court referencing documents in an evidentiary hearing that were previously ruled to be fake by the court OR lying about whether he had an expert report to the contrary when the court clearly would have seen the expert reports and been acutely aware of the ruling, if not having made it herself.

State expert said some were inconclusive. So maybe DT has expert saying one of those is likely from TA. Idk

 

[PrincessSezMe]

:what: I don't know about you guys,,,,,but if it were not for the camera in the courtroom, I would have a very skewed view of what went on based on the coverage on Jane VM and Nancy G.

(What happened to Jean C??? It's like she is on the DT payroll.)

Huge waste watching these shows, mostly.

jmo

You're so right. I'm looking forward to being off on Friday and catching up on the trial via Youtube. Fuzzy pink jammies all day, and hot chocolate (brrrr it's gonna be cold here in the Great White North :cold.

 

[SkiptomyLu]

If he had been stupid enough to go against the Judge's ruling and said that in front of the jury he should be charged with contempt of court and Juan would be standing there demanding it too, imo.

WHAT on earth is he even doing in court with those "letters" in hand, challenging Chris Hughes as to their authenticity?? I am so confused. After YEARS, are they still trying to get them admitted as evidence? I know JA (can't say her name) is DEMANDING this of her defense attorneys.

Am sure one of their witnesses has to do with investigating & authenticating whatever material this is in being "electronic".

OK - this is ridiculous. I don't know how you guys do this! I am literally squirming around every expectation and attention my family assumes & expects from me with flimsy excuses and all! Yikes… And this is going to go on for how long?

 

[legalmania]

Remember there's 6 alternates so we don't know yet the ratio that will be deliberating. Right?

Does anyone know what happened to the juror who asked a question about a witness who was questioned outside of the juries presents?

 

[Karmady]

Gotta love this place! Only here can regular folk disagree with professionals and actually feel like they are right!

It ain't rocket science

 

[norest4thewicked]

It ain't rocket science

I totally agree! That's why I find it so amusing! :laughcry:

 

[kkdj]

That's why I never watch, I record dr drew to fast forward to mark.... Then I shut it off!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I stopped watching dr drew a while back. Something just strikes me as wrong.
I do however love mark! Not sure if it's true or not but I heard he is vinnies cousin.

 

[Carol2]

OK - this is ridiculous. I don't know how you guys do this! I am literally squirming around every expectation and attention my family assumes & expects from me with flimsy excuses and all! Yikes… And this is going to go on for how long?

Oh, I hate to admit it, too, but I have been hiding out from everyone. I have been ducking and running for cover from any sort of responsibility until this is all over.

 

[FrayedKnot]

It ain't rocket science

Questioning the "experts" is what propelled some of the greatest thought movements of all time. In art, science, maths, geography, etc.




Pssstttt: the world ain't flat! :floorlaugh:

 

[4Jacy]

Bottom line: JA killed Travis. End of friggin' story!!

 

[TigerBalm]

Nurmi said in open court that an expert has said that the letter used in Chris Hughes' testimony was probably written by Travis. The Judge allowed that statement by Nurmi and the State did not object, afaik, or the objection was overruled. So, as of right now, I have no reason to think that the letter has been proven phony. And I have never seen an instance where experts have disagreed over the validity of evidence and the court didn't allow it unless there was some other objection to it -- probative value outweighed by prejudice, relevance, etc. I'm very curious about this aspect of the defense case.

BBM


:nono: If I may refresh your recollection:

Juan Martinez: I'm gonna object to this portion of him reading this, clearly these letters have been shown to be forged by the defendant and the fact that he's reading them is inappropriate.

Direct to the above statement by JM: http://youtu.be/2QodsaSRoDg?t=17m22s
Testimony regarding the letters starts here: http://youtu.be/2QodsaSRoDg?t=11m32s

 

[Linda7NJ]

Common sense tells me there isn't any way in hell Travis would confess to Jodi he was a pedophile. For the sake of argument ...if he was.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Carol2]

Ya'll, I'm headed to bed. Have some fun and I hope you get it all sorted out! See you tomorrow.

Carol