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

[Schuby]

Lol! HLN has a hilarious fog screen layed over clips of Jodi testifying while a fog horn sounds in the background!

 

[leebee52]

I hope no one invites Baez to assess this current happening. UGH

 

[pufnstuf]

:what:...and if you look at the footnotes of the PowerPoint, you will note the very credible source of Wikipedia, which Dr. Samuels uses to help define PTSD....

You are kidding... I hope.

 

[Tracey4AU]

Rule 15.2.(c) of AZ Criminal Rules

c. Disclosure by Defendant; Scope. Simultaneously with the notice of defenses submitted under Rule 15.2(b), the defendant shall make available to the prosecutor for examination and reproduction the following material and information known to the defendant to be in the possession or control of the defendant:

(1) The names and addresses of all persons, other than that of the defendant, whom the defendant intends to call as witnesses at trial, together with their relevant written or recorded statements;

(2) The names and addresses of experts whom the defendant intends to call at trial, together with the results of the defendant's physical examinations and of scientific tests, experiments or comparisons that have been completed; and

(3) A list of all papers, documents, photographs and other tangible objects that the defendant intends to use at trial.

Seems black and white to me!!! :furious:

 

[NotMyselfNEMore]

How can Wilmott say that none of the material in the Powerpoint is new, when the Time Magazine article was not written until this year?

 

[Liebchenmutti]

Did I miss something? I don't think the judge said anything about allowing the Power Point, did she?

She's giving Juan 2 hours to re-interview the "expert" who uses Time Magazine as a source to see if he is trying to present new material.

Then they'll be back in court to discuss it--the judge could then rule it inadmissible & the "expert" can just be questioned on the stand w/o the PP, or with the slides edited appropriately.

Either way, Juan is going to flip this lightweight over to the State's side--he has a gift from God for doing that!

 

[elementary]

Stay calm WSers. Here is the stuff that appeals are made of - and I do believe only the defendant gets to appeal. If some later/higher court finds she was denied the opportunity to present her best defense . . . well, we all know how that goes.

Attorneys please weigh in on this.

NEXT ISSUE the PTSD diagnosis maybe works for AFTER the gun goes off, but there is not and cannot be one for prior that would account for all the planning we've seen in evidence. No matter how triggered she might have been at the shower door, she left Yreka with a gun and she left Pasadena with 3 cans of gas and brown hair.

Psychologist please weigh in on this.

Breathe in, breathe out, breathe in, breathe out . . . Screw that . . . break open the wine!

I think this appeals excuse is used way too much to justify bad judging.

 

[nursebeeme]

:what:...and if you look at the footnotes of the PowerPoint, you will note the very credible source of Wikipedia, which Dr. Samuels uses to help define PTSD....

bbm: seriously?:what:

 

[Timber]

Can I just say that I love the FOGHORN sound effect that HLN keeps playing when they cut to JA testimony on stand. lol

 

[JusticeJunkie]

If Samuels just put the power point together this AM, it's because he ADDED something since Juan questioned him over a year ago.
Juan has not seen this, and I am so mad at the judge for acting like it's JUAN'S FAULT!!
This is CLEARLY set about in the rules of the court.She knows better - she's just too cowardly to admit it.
Too bad the prosecution doesn't have the same appeal advantages as the defense.

 

[Horace Finklestein]

Ptsd diagnosis will come from a quiz in the back of Cosmo

 

[bexlex]

I was in the kitchen doing some mise en place for tonight's dinner and listened to HLN. Sounds to me like the DT is playing games with JM and trying to bring in new information about Jodi's symptoms/diagnosis. :furious:

aaaawwwh girl! You so organized! Makes me feel like I need to get my act together!

 

[3trees]

Rule 15.2.(c) of AZ Criminal Rules

c. Disclosure by Defendant; Scope. Simultaneously with the notice of defenses submitted under Rule 15.2(b), the defendant shall make available to the prosecutor for examination and reproduction the following material and information known to the defendant to be in the possession or control of the defendant:

(1) The names and addresses of all persons, other than that of the defendant, whom the defendant intends to call as witnesses at trial, together with their relevant written or recorded statements;

(2) The names and addresses of experts whom the defendant intends to call at trial, together with the results of the defendant's physical examinations and of scientific tests, experiments or comparisons that have been completed; and

(3) A list of all papers, documents, photographs and other tangible objects that the defendant intends to use at trial.

Legally they did do that. I think a good lawyer needs to rewrite those rules and add: not ten minutes before trial.

 

[Liebchenmutti]

How can Wilmott say that none of the material in the Powerpoint is new, when the Time Magazine article was not written until this year?

She's in over her head. (Just like her client!)

 

[katiewonders]

She reminds me a lot of Perry.....with all the defense love she dispenses. Special smiles for Willmott...

I loved Judge Perry but my memory isn't that great (generally, not only when mean men yell at me), but remember this:

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6U7ubz0qL-o"]Judge Perry Gets Mad At Baez - YouTube[/ame]

I didn't think he loved the defense.

I will work you. I will not stop any more... They wanted to work Memorial Day.

I love the way he punctuated his words in this video.

 

[kscornfed]

Wow. There isn't even a single citation to ANY doctor - psych or medical.

he probably read it in the checkout stand at the store and decided to throw it in. seriously, what's next? an article from "us weekly"?

 

[SassyBrat]

I'm confused, I thought today was about hearing the defenses experts? What is the arguing about? The allowance of these experts?

 

[Litigatrix]

OK...quetstion for all of you lawyerly expert types.

If the judge DOES exclude it, is that a basis for appeal?

I mean, after all, do any of us want THAT???????

If she does exclude it, it would absolutely be a basis for appeal. JA will say that the jury didn't get to hear evidence in her favor. I am sure she will have a long list of other reasons she shouldn't get the needle...but expert testimony is actually a good reason for some appeals to be granted...so that might be why the Judge is being cautious.

 

[Miss Behavin]

OMG.....O/T ---- Debra Jean Milke's conviction has been overturned!!! Thank God! I don't think she did it, at ALL.

REALLY? When? OMGosh...I've followed her case off and on for years. It always bothered me that somebody could be charged, convicted, and sentenced to death on such flimsy evidence.

 

[A_News_Junkie]

And here is the author that the Dr relies on for his research. They have got be kidding http://newamerica.net/user/319

I see she has a book coming out about the best public school systems in the world

GOOD LORD this is so highly inflammatory. First the idea of an article about school shooting (read play on emotions unduly) and shootings in a 'gun fight' type scenario are not pertinent, relevant nor a fair comparison to what we have here at all.

The date of the article alone shows it is "New" material.

:waitasec: Is Time Magazine now a peer reviewed publication?????????? Oh helllllllllllzzz to the no, it is not. Furthermore, it is the hearsay interpretation of a non medical writer.