Trial day 31: the defense continues it's case in chief #86

[Nali87]

you all think it's weird how
1)this expert thinks JA has PTSD & whatever else,
2)JWilmott referred to JA's "mental condition", and
#) JA said in response the the jury question that she is not aware of having any mental condition?

I know right!?

 

[StephanieHartPI]

Not after the read all your Websleuths' postings! :floorlaugh::floorlaugh::floorlaugh:

LOLLLL I will have to get a new ID! MaryAnn Hastings... and maybe even a fake bruise or two (i'm too chicken to have someone hit me LOL)

I just get mad thinking they are either lying for her or they believe her crap

 

[paperwing]

you all think it's weird how
1)this expert thinks JA has PTSD & whatever else,
2)JWilmott referred to JA's "mental condition", and
#) JA said in response the the jury question that she is not aware of having any mental condition?

And JM just stated in his motion this morning that Samuels has *been seeing* JA - and has seen her a few years ago and did testing on her - apparently he never informed her of his findings... or he didn't find anything. Hm....

 

[4Jacy]

For some of us, this little break is a blessing in disguise - we get to watch General Hospital now. LOL!!

Maybe tomorrow I might have to finally make a decision to watch or not...which just goes to point out all of the delays.

That's 4 days after I should have had to make that choice!

You won't have to make that decision, tomorrow is Friday - court is dark. :seeya:

 

[katiecoolady]

Greetings- family emergency so not in court today but caught a minute of arguments - ill listen to willmott any day over Nurmi. I have limited tolerance also for these expert$. I'd also rather be sitting in an ER than stomaching their unethical B$. Not to mention de edified.

 

[LadyEdith]

Jodi shouldn't have said Travis got mad because she fumbled the camera, Jodi should have said Travis got mad because she called him a 'f'ing pedo' to insult him after he said she takes photos no better than a 5 year old. We may have actually have believed that a fight escalated after barbs like that started flying around. Instead she comes up with this lame lie. She really is a bad liar.

Yes, she comes across as unbelievable because everything, absolutely everything is somehow "Travis' Fault". If she would have copped to something, she would be more credible. Like if she said "he didn't want to have sex, but I did and eventually he agreed", she would have more credibility with the jury---because that's how things are in real life. It's give and take, even in domestic abuse situations. She could have said she talked him into sex thinking he'd mellow out and be less suspicious of her and trust her more if they had that kind of intimacy. That would have been a believable like.

She could have said she stole the gun because she was afraid of Travis, even though she wanted to see him. Then she could have said she threw it away because she didn't want it known that she took the gun.

If she would have owned ANY part of this she would have had a ton more credibility and made a lwop sentence more likely. I even think owning some of the things she did would have even helped her self-defense claim.

 

[pufnstuf]

Dr. Samuels' CV (from his website):

Richard M. Samuels, Ph.D.
Curriculum Vitae



LICENSES AND CERTIFICATIONS
Licensed Psychologist, State of New Jersey, 1975, # S 101060
Licensed Psychologist, State of Arizona, 1989, # 3043
Diplomate in Forensic Psychology, ABPS, 1999
Diplomate, American College of Forensic Examiners, 1995
Diplomate, American Board of Forensic Medicine, 1996
Diplomate in Clinical Psychology, American Board of Professional Psychology, 1980
Diplomate in Sexology, American Board of Sexology, 1989
Fellow, American Psychological Association, 1986
Fellow, Academy of Clinical Psychology, 1994
Clinical Fellow, Behavior Therapy and Research Society, 1985
Clinical Fellow, American Academy of Clinical Sexology, 1990
Recognized by the National Registrar of Practicing Psychologists, 1976
Certified Sex Therapist, American Association of Sex Educators, Counselors & Therapists, 1976
Licensed Radiotelephone Engineer, 1964-present, FCC, Washington, DC
FCC Licensed Broadcast Engineer and Announcer, 1961-1966

EDUCATION
New Jersey Medical School, Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology
Newark, New Jersey
Post-Doctoral Fellow in Human Sexuality, 1974-1975

City University of New York
Biopsychology, Ph.D., 1973

Hofstra University
Psychology, M.A., 1967

Hofstra University
Psychology, B.A., 1965

State University at Farmingdale, New York
Electronics Technology, A.A.S. 1961

FORENSIC EXPERIENCE
Member; Arizona Supreme Court Mental Health Providers Panel.

Court Appointed Psychologist in Bergen, Morris and Essex Counties, New Jersey;
Court Appointed Psychologist in Maricopa and Yavapai Counties, Arizona.

Expert Witness in most New Jersey Counties;
Expert Witness in New York City Supreme Court incl. Kings County, Queens, Brooklyn & Bronx Courts.
Expert Witness in Rockland, Westchester, Orange County, Nassau, and Suffolk County, New York;
Expert Witness in Maricopa, Coconino, Pima and Yavapai Counties, Arizona

Conducted numerous evaluations for plaintiffs and defendants in New Jersey, New York, and Arizona, for criminal, civil and domestic matters, evaluation and recidivism risk.

Sexually Violent Predators evaluations and testimony and Psychosexual Risk Assessments for sentencing in sexual misconduct matters in Arizona.

Experienced working with police officers statewide, conducting evaluations dealing with shooting trauma, posttraumatic stress disorder and other matters.

Specialized training in custody and visitation matters.

Extensive experience in cases dealing with medical malpractice, personal injury, negligence, criminal misconduct, sexual harassment and misconduct, job discrimination, corporate conflicts, custody and visitation determinations, divorce mediation and other domestic matters.

MOST RECENT SPECIALIZED TRAINING
Over eight hundred hours of postgraduate continuing education in Forensic Psychology ~ most recent listed below)

Children, Divorce & Custody: Lawyers & Psychologists Working Together - Sponsored by the American Bar Association Section of Family Law & the American Psychological Association Los Angeles, California, 1997, 22 hours

Training Mental Health Experts in Legal Competency & Restoration in Criminal Juvenile Courts, Supreme Court, State of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona, 1998, 24 hours

Sexually Violent Person Commitment Evaluations, Arizona Department of Health Services, Arizona State Hospital, Phoenix, Arizona, 1998, 16 hours

Family Court Mental Health Training Seminar, Superior Court of Arizona, Domestic Relations Department, 1999, 4 hours

Family Court Mental Health Training Seminar, Superior Court of Arizona, Domestic Relations Department, 2000, 4 hours

Training Mental Health Experts in Legal Competency & Restoration in Criminal Juvenile Courts, Supreme Court, State of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona, 2000, 4 hours

Ethics in Psychology, Institute for the Study of human Knowledge, 2000, 17 hours,

Geriatric Congress, Las Vegas, Nevada, 2000, 13.5 hours

Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers, Annual Conference and Workshop, San Diego, CA, 2000, 17 hours

Family Court Mental Health Training Seminar, Superior Court of Arizona, Domestic Relations Department, 2001, 7 hours

Assessing Psychopathy, Clinical & Forensic Applications of the PCL-R, conducted by Robert D. Hare, Ph.D., Arizona School of Professional Psychology, April 5,6,7, 2001, 21 hours

Family Court Mental Health Training Seminar, Superior Court of Arizona, Domestic Relations Department, 2002, 7 hours

Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers, Annual Conference and Workshop, Montreal, Canada, 2002, 14 hours

Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers, Annual Conference and Workshop, St. Louis, MO, 2003, 14 hours

Current Trends in Assessment of Sex Offenders and Efficacy of Current Treatment Strategies, Dennis Doren, Ph.D., at AZATSA, Phoenix, AZ, 2005 .

He has zero publications listed, and that's always a big part of a CV. His "licenses and certifications" are pay-as-you-go memberships to professional groups. And his CV appears to stop about a decade ago, with most of his "work" being in the 1970s-90s. No wonder he has to rely on a Time article. Google paid off for him.

I find it hilarious that he lists "FCC Licensed Broadcast Engineer and Announcer, 1961-1966 " on his CV. Completely unrelated to his field. LOL.

 

[OldCarGal]

Plain & simple BS. Jodi described Travis crying, screaming and crawling on the floor when she was describing the ninjas to Det. Flores, so that is probably exactly what happened when she killed Travis. She remembers every second.

 

[StephanieHartPI]

I would like to know how many times Mr Nurmi has used these Experts

 

[katiecoolady]

And JM just stated in his motion this morning that Samuels has *been seeing* JA - and has seen her a few years ago and did testing on her - apparently he never informed her of his findings... or he didn't find anything. Hm....

Rrrrrrrright

 

[twirlin]

It's sad that the defence is only interested in winning! Not justice! They know this inmate killed travis brutally! It's about winning!

Yes, they need that plus mark on their record even if it means their
defendant goes out and kills again. It's all a game to them.
Although we do know Nurmi did want to get off the case.

 

[QueenD]

Does anyone have a link to the TIME article "Brain on Fire"? JM stated that article was referenced as well. TIA

http://swampland.time.com/2013/01/16/your-brain-in-a-shootout-guns-fear-and-flawed-instincts

 

[marciec]

Anyone watch Dee Dee Moore murder trial in Tampa? She murdered Abraham Shakespeare, taking what was left of his lottery winnings & all assets.
Judge Emmett Battles did not suffer fools, nor tolerate drama - from anyone! Told defendant "you are to compose yourself!" when she would sob for the jury..And "You are to stop! Do you understand me?" when she made eye contact with jury & shook her head at them during testimony.. No one crossed him, it was clear who was in charge!

 

[TotallyObsessed]

I think the important point that JM will be able to bring out of any expert witness is that prior to the 'event' occurring, the person wasn't experiencing fogs or PTSD or any of that. Meaning: at the time of the murder itself the lying liar who lies knew full well she was attacking and killing T.A., intended to do just that, kept on doing it, and whatever 'cognitive dysfunction" ensured (conveniently, of course) happened after she did all of that.

It does not absolve her of responsibility for the murder itself. She's on trial for murder. What she did afterwards or what she claims about her mental state really was not a part of the murder itself.

I think that will be obvious to the jury and if it's not, JM will make sure it's obvious to them.

Great post :goodpost: and I absolutely love your "lying liar who lies" description :floorlaugh:

 

[LadyEdith]

There is no way that these experts (even if everything they want is allowed in) will influence this jury to such an extent that they vote for anything other than first-degree murder. This jury will hear again from JM (rebuttal and closing) about this woman who stabbed Travis 28 times, cut this throat from ear to ear and shot him in the head! That's all they will consider. I don't really worry about it all coming in. I just don't like such a wishy-washy Judge. Rule without so many breaks for heaven's sake! Anyway JM will hammer down a dozen experts without even reading half of the material. Go JM!

I will have faith because you have faith.

 

[JSR]

Rule 15.6. Continuing duty to disclose; final disclosure deadline; extension


a. Continuing Duties. The duties prescribed in this rule shall be continuing duties and each party shall make additional disclosure, seasonably, whenever new or different information subject to disclosure is discovered.

b. Additional Disclosure. Any party that determines additional disclosure may be forthcoming within 30 days of trial shall immediately notify both the court and the other parties of the circumstances and when the disclosure will be available.

c. Final Deadline for Disclosure. Unless otherwise permitted, all disclosure required by this rule shall be completed at least seven days prior to trial.

d. Disclosure After the Final Deadline. A party seeking to use material and information not disclosed at least seven days prior to trial shall obtain leave of court by motion, supported by affidavit, to extend the time for disclosure and use the material or information. If the court finds that the material or information could not have been discovered or disclosed earlier even with due diligence and the material or information was disclosed immediately upon its discovery, the court shall grant a reasonable extension to complete the disclosure and grant leave to use the material or information. Absent such a finding, the court may either deny leave or grant a reasonable extension to complete the disclosure and leave to use the material or information, and if granted the court may impose any sanction other than preclusion or dismissal listed in Rule 15.7.

e. Extension of Time for Scientific Evidence. Upon a motion filed prior to the final deadline for disclosure in Rule 15.6(c), supported by affidavit from a crime laboratory representative or other scientific expert that additional time is needed to complete scientific or other testing, or reports based thereon, and specifying the additional time needed, the Court shall, unless it finds that the request for extension resulted from dilatory conduct, neglect, or other improper reason on the part of the moving party or person listed in Rule 15.1(f) or 15.2(f), grant a reasonable extension in which to complete the disclosure. The period of time of the extension shall be excluded by the court from all time periods prescribed in Rules 15.1(c) 15.1(e), 15.2 (d), 15.2(e), 15.6(b) and 15.6(c).

 

[Diva]

It is.

what book are you referring to?

my attempt @ multitasking today is a FAIL.

 

[katydid23]

"Your brain under fire" article in Time magazine

http://swampland.time.com/2013/01/16/your-brain-in-a-shootout-guns-fear-and-flawed-instincts/

Thanks for that link. There are a few things that I don't see as being that helpful to the defense. For example:

"Under sudden attack, the brain does not work the way we think it will. Millbern has seen grown men freeze under threat, like statues dropped onto the set of a horror movie. He has struggled to perform simple functions at shooting scenes, like unlocking a switch on a submachine gun while directing people to safety. “I have heard arguments that an armed teacher could and would respond to an active shooter in the same way a cop would. That they would hear gunshots, run toward the sound and then engage the shooter,” Millbern writes in an e-mail from Baghdad, where he now works as a bomb-detection K-9 handler. “I think this is very unrealistic.”

==============================================

Jodi did not freeze under threat. Quite the opposite. She was a killing machine.

 

[Love Never Fails]

Greetings- family emergency so not in court today but caught a minute of arguments - ill listen to willmott any day over Nurmi. I have limited tolerance also for these expert$. I'd also rather be sitting in an ER than stomaching their unethical B$. Not to mention de edified.

I remember the experts in the FCA trial were sooooo boring! Between Nurmi Being boring and then hearing experts, we will all die from boredom. Wilmott will be better to watch but I haven't really been impressed with her so far.

 

[Zeno49]

I know darn well I heard Juan say they are trying to get in things that were ruled not allowed. Therefore why is the judge making Juan take time during court to interview this guy? Why can't she take control of her courtroom and rule on something?

This trial is turning into a circus show with the only sane person up there being Martinez and the detective.

And it still sounds to me like she was snapping at the Prosecution. I just watched it again on HLN. She was said this is obviously something that should have been raised if there was a problem but that ship has sailed. The one with the problem is Mr. Martinez. Can someone explain how this is not against him?

This trial is a calamitous spectacle featuring the Keystone Cops - Nurmi Wilmott and a joke of someone pretending to be a real "judge".