trial day 31: the defense continues it's case in chief #87

[strawberry]

power point of just the "brain". The rest of JM objections will be heard in the morning .... I ASSume 10:30-11:00 a.m.

Thank you! I heard the beginning of his objections but then had to leave. Reminded me of Baez's shenanigens with discovery

 

[sumbunny]

yeah I did the PTSD test based on watching Ja's defense team

My score

Post Traumatic Stress Disorder Screening Test



Screening Results

Your Score = 10 **You are likely suffering from post traumatic stress; please contact us for more information**

 

[Ricki]

power point of just the "brain". The rest of JM objections will be heard in the morning .... I ASSume 10:30-11:00 a.m.

9:30 AZ time

 

[Ransom]

On the next Maury show..

Gus (aka Gustav) son vs Dick (Richard) father

 

[Kensie]

evidentiary hearing is tomorrow and live streamed.

What exactly is this??

 

[AZWatcher]

I hear what you are saying but IMO, and Jodi said it herself.. she "never killed anyone before." She obviously watched a lot of TV/movies; she chipperly said on 48 Hours the jail booking was JUST like what you see on TV.. What she didn't say was killing someone with a knife is sooo NOT what you see on TV! I think she intended on the murder to be up close and personal, but with TA in a vulnerable position (naked and sitting in the shower) but what she didn't plan on is how much he would fight for his life and how chaotic and bloody it would be.
And I guess in my theory, she went there with the weapons and she was going to kill him if he would not take her to Cancun/take her back/etc... so when he wouldn't take her back or whatever, she went on with her plan to kill him.
IDK if that makes sense when I say it.. but yeah either way if what they are saying isn't self-defense which is what their 100% defense story is at this time then I don't see how it could be presented as defense testimony because it isn't fitting in with what they are trying to say?
:moo: Hopefully I am typing coherently.. lease:

I gotcha'. I still don't understand why her defense wasn't temporary insanity. It would have made more sense than self-defense.

 

[PrincessSezMe]

HLN is now talking about Samuels being fined in NJ. He bartered his services for dental services. Samuels was fined and JC said the state will bring this in and find any other thing on him. JC thinks the judge will let the state use it.

I'm hoping they're wrong. That would be kind of like stooping to the DT's level by attacking the character of the witness, and not the testimony (kinda like WS TOS LoL isn't it?). I'm pretty sure JM won't stoop to those tactics. He'll be able to discredit him based on his testimony without going there.

 

[Ransom]

9:30 AZ time

Oh. Wow. Early for this court. Thanks.

 

[popsicle]

On the next Maury show..

:floorlaugh::floorlaugh::floorlaugh:

 

[Hatfield]

JA is doing something very, very sneaky here. Go to 11:05. See that orange file? What do you think she's doing?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=adTQKWFG-PI

Its a great catch. It sure looks like she may be setting up to try to steal a pen or marker and bring it back to jail cell. It does not make sense she would be trying to hide it unless she is up to no good.

 

[ChristYTN]

you guys are cracking me up!!! I'm laughing so hard at the gifs and the one liners.

and, I really really needed it.

 

[Ransom]

I'm hoping they're wrong. That would be kind of like stooping to the DT's level of attacking the character of the witness, and not the testimony (kinda like WS TOS LoL isn't it?). I'm pretty sure JM won't stoop to those tactics. He'll be able to discredit him based on his testimony without going there.

Read here:
http://www.state.nj.us/lps/ca/action/20000313_35SI00106000.pdf

 

[Ricki]

What is is bartering with Nurmie? His new client list??

Evidently, Samuels had a client in 2000 who was going through a custody battle. The client exchanged his dental services to Samuels in exchange for Samuels professional services. Samuels was fined 2500 dollars.

 

[popsicle]

I'm hoping they're wrong. That would be kind of like stooping to the DT's level by attacking the character of the witness, and not the testimony (kinda like WS TOS LoL isn't it?). I'm pretty sure JM won't stoop to those tactics. He'll be able to discredit him based on his testimony without going there.

I think it goes to his ethics imo

 

[katydid23]

What exactly is this??

Juan is arguing to keep out some of this quack's testimony. The judge will decide after she sees it He may testify w/out the jury, so the judge can decide if she will allow it in or not.

 

[strawberry]

Haha Dr Drew is cracking me up. Starring in her own drama..."Jodi Arias and her Brain"

 

[Rosebud1952]

:floorlaugh::floorlaugh::floorlaugh::floorlaugh::floorlaugh:

Who was that guy on The Adams Family? Uncle Fester...........

 

[alwaysonmymind]

I'm hoping they're wrong. That would be kind of like stooping to the DT's level of attacking the character of the witness, and not the testimony (kinda like WS TOS LoL isn't it?). I'm pretty sure JM won't stoop to those tactics. He'll be able to discredit him based on his testimony without going there.

I don't have any issue with Mr. Martinez bringing this up in court. This guy is working to free a sociopath. Moo


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[paperwing]

Are reactive and instrumental homicide formally recognized and accepted by law?

 

[ElleElle]

:floorlaugh:

just wait until AFTER Juan gets a crack at this quack.