trial day 32: the defense continues its case in chief #93

[Linda7NJ]

I posted earlier how Samuels and Jodi testified in the same manner. It bothered me, and still does. Someone coached them. It DOES seem like Nurmi and Samuels worked more closely than what they're testilying to in court.

I really think you're onto something here! Very thought provoking!

Birds of a feather..,like water seeks its own level


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[JusticeJunkie]

willmott - can we ask the state not to yell at the witness?

Was this BEFORE or AFTER she objects to "talking objections"?

 

[KarmicLaw]

I don't think RS developed the defense theory. I think it was all Nurmi. That is his specialty. Sexual offenders. He simply flipped the tables and built a case around what he is used to defending against. He only needed a willing expert.

 

[KPinMN]

I'll admit that I didn't watch most of the direct because I knew it was BS, but did RS performed an MMPI on JA? It still remains one of the gold standards and is easily invalidated by an individual trying to "game" the test. I wonder if the doctor buried any test results that didn't support the defense, and simply disregarded them. If so, he's toast. Even he he admits to not performing standard tests, he is toast. I just don't see any way for this guy to redeem himself...unless he meets with the defendant tonight and gets a lesson in spin testifying. Again, I can't help but cringe when JM is unleashed onto a witness, but then it always pays off. My only wish is that he would start by playing nice and then move into the attack mode when they squirm. But, then, meh...it wouldn't be nearly as fun!!

Nope, no MMPI testified to being performed. I was surprised by that myself. I thought that was standard before the other more specific test he administered.

 

[Callisto]

Jodi leaving court today giggling... cameras still a rollin'...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=LGYHuDDLDQ8

This was from last Thursday 3/14/13! She probably wasn't so giggly today.. she thought Samuels was working out for her Thursday :what: She was wrong-o!

 

[Schuby]

Wow, eLeL -- You said it all for me, too. Not 10 minutes ago, I was wondering the same thing. Does she have some aura about her that draws these older, not-so-attractive men? Like Searcy and now this one? Does she rub up against them when others aren't looking or aren't around? I'm no prude, but I just don't get it, other that what you've suggested. These h*rny older men who aren't attractive to anyone and have really nothing much to offer... Men of quiet desperation...

Certainly we (women) have met and/or known very attractive women who turn nearly all men's heads -- this we can easily understand. But IMHO, JA is not of that sort. TA was knocked off his heels by the easy, feel-good sex with a master. She's good at what she does -- she knows all the buttons to push (and pull) when it comes to knock-your-socks-off sex. And if TA was a virgin, or a near virgin, he was doomed. He was trying & succeeding (till this semi-pro came along) at being chaste for marriage -- I think he took his religion and a successful afterlife very seriously, and here she comes. Oh how he must have rued the day.... And finally, after she had already taken much of the best of him, she had to have it ALL. And she did.

..

So bash away at JA, eLeL, bash away!:banghead:

JMHO

My guess (and it is only a guess) is that Jodi sized him up immediately as a useful idiot and batted her lashes accordingly.

 

[minor4th]

willmott - can we ask the state not to yell at the witness?

Was this BEFORE or AFTER she objects to "talking objections"?

I believe it was after the objection to speaking objections. She was really reaching ....

 

[ElleElle]

Thanks Callisto for the correction ! You :rocker:

This was from last Thursday 3/14/13! She probably wasn't so giggly today.. she thought Samuels was working out for her Thursday :what: She was wrong-o!

 

[MaryNo]

I don't have an issue with her, either. In a death penalty case, I expect extra leeway given to the defense, etc. It's the life of a human being at stake. Earlier, someone here said the court room was out of control, running amok. I don't see that either.

I don't have an issue with Martinez and his supposed aggressiveness. I see it as passion. If this were a man, this trial would have undoubtedly been over with, and the first death penalty appeal filed.

I tend to ignore the comments on the judge, and the ones on Martinez. It doesn't appear, from court watchers, that the jury has an issue with Martinez' style.

I keep seeing all of these comments about how inept this judge is and how she's not handling this death penalty case very well, and I just don't see it.

I think a lot of people commenting on this don't completely understand exactly what a judge can and can't do, and what might give rise to a point of appeal.

There are a couple of decisions of hers that I take issue with, but nothing major that in any way prejudiced the prosecution.

So, court starts late every day? 15 minutes on average, and it's often not because the judge is not ready -- and it's not harming anything. The courts are way overburdened and much of this cannot be avoided, especially in a county like Maricopa that has a limited budget.

What exactly does anyone think she has done wrong that is prejudicial to one side or the other?

 

[LambChop]

Jodi leaving court today giggling... cameras still a rollin'...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=LGYHuDDLDQ8

That was not today.

 

[Sweetiemom]

Jodi leaving court today giggling... cameras still a rollin'...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=LGYHuDDLDQ8

That was published on March 14, not today.

 

[snowcat]

Jodi leaving court today giggling... cameras still a rollin'...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=LGYHuDDLDQ8

i think that was last Thursday

 

[KarmicLaw]

Wow, eLeL -- You said it all for me, too. Not 10 minutes ago, I was wondering the same thing. Does she have some aura about her that draws these older, not-so-attractive men? Like Searcy and now this one? Does she rub up against them when others aren't looking or aren't around? I'm no prude, but I just don't get it, other that what you've suggested. These h*rny older men who aren't attractive to anyone and have really nothing much to offer... Men of quiet desperation...

Certainly we (women) have met and/or known very attractive women who turn nearly all men's heads -- this we can easily understand. But IMHO, JA is not of that sort. TA was knocked off his heels by the easy, feel-good sex with a master. She's good at what she does -- she knows all the buttons to push (and pull) when it comes to knock-your-socks-off sex. And if TA was a virgin, or a near virgin, he was doomed. He was trying & succeeding (till this semi-pro came along) at being chaste for marriage -- I think he took his religion and a successful afterlife very seriously, and here she comes. Oh how he must have rued the day.... And finally, after she had already taken much of the best of him, she had to have it ALL. And she did.

..

So bash away at JA, eLeL, bash away!:banghead:

JMHO

Y'all are failing to comprehend the savvy manipulation that Jodi is capable of when it comes to preying on a persons vulnerability. I have worked with some psychopaths and it is astounding that otherwise smart people fall for the psychopaths deception, distortion and manipulation. It is one of Jodi's only true skill...aside from an ability to carry a tune, sketch a bit, and be a sex toy. Oh yes, and be a brutal Pre-meditated murderer because someone discovered the truth behind her persona.

 

[BritsKate]

I keep seeing all of these comments about how inept this judge is and how she's not handling this death penalty case very well, and I just don't see it.

I think a lot of people commenting on this don't completely understand exactly what a judge can and can't do, and what might give rise to a point of appeal.

There are a couple of decisions of hers that I take issue with, but nothing major that in any way prejudiced the prosecution.

So, court starts late every day? 15 minutes on average, and it's often not because the judge is not ready -- and it's not harming anything. The courts are way overburdened and much of this cannot be avoided, especially in a county like Maricopa that has a limited budget.

What exactly does anyone think she has done wrong that is prejudicial to one side or the other?

I don't believe she's inept and I don't feel she's prejudicial. (I've seen more than my fair share of DP trials.)

My frustration really comes into play that nearly every objection is heard and ruled upon at the bench. I fully understand some arguments may be too prejudicial for the jury to overhear but quite this many?

It's frustrating because, apart from being a nosy busybody, I truly do want to understand the process of legally getting from point A to B - a luxury I have been afforded in countless other trials. And when the defense is practically given red carpet treatment for their daily, seemingly incessant approaches, it becomes rather vexing.

JMO

 

[Sleuths4Me]

Is there a link for after the afternoon recess...can only find part 1 and 2 and then nothing on part 3. Want to watch juan get this guy. Thanks!

 

[KPinMN]

He did not perform the MMPI, he performed the MCMI (Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory) -- but we have not heard much about the results of that.

He used the MCMI which is something like 175 questions versus the MMPI which is something like 550+ questions. I know that in Minnesota in child abuse accusation cases the parent(s) of the child in question are generally required to take an MMPI to determine if other factors are at play. It's my understanding the MMPI is more comprehensive than the MCMI, so it would seem more appropriate when you are trying to get an understanding of a complex situation, imho of course.

 

[josie1986]

omg why does hln after dark with the bedroom reconstruction have to be on so late! its 2am here!!

 

[minor4th]

I don't believe she's inept and I don't feel she's prejudicial. (I've seen more than my fair share of DP trials.)

My frustration really comes into play that nearly every objection is heard and ruled upon at the bench. I fully understand some arguments may be too prejudicial for the jury to overhear but quite this many?

It's frustrating because, apart from being a nosy busybody, I truly do want to understand the process of legally getting from point A to B - a luxury I have been afforded in countless other trials. And when the defense is practically given red carpet treatment for their daily, seemingly incessant approaches, it becomes rather vexing.

JMO

One thing about the sidebars-- I think some of these issues could have been handled pre-trial, but the problem is the defense is trying to get by with sneaky tactics and bringing in evidence that is a surprise to the prosecution and/or clearly improper. These things could have been handled pre-trial if the state had known about the issues at that time.

The sidebars have increased a whole lot compared to the beginning of the trial. There were not many during the state's case in chief. I think most of this lays on the defense team's shoulders because they are trying some underhanded tactics, and Juan isn't going to let that pass. Then the defense gets all upset when Juan cross examines the witnesses - as if they expect to be able to pass off some BS without any challenge.

 

[LambChop]

My guess (and it is only a guess) is that Jodi sized him up immediately as a useful idiot and batted her lashes accordingly.

Erroneous Zones. I imagine Jodi was disappointed when she found out it was a self help book. More than likely the doctor didn't pronounce the word properly. Just kidding. lol

 

[Hatfield]

After Dark is really great show. Tonight they are deciding if she is guilty of attacking Travis or did Travis attack Jodi.