trial day 34: the defense continues its case in chief #97

[Tulessa]

No, at 15 she opened the Hershey highway.

We saw that, up close and personal! :floorlaugh:

 

[HarvestMoon]

Isn't amnesia losing what memories you already have?

Apparently not, with Jodinesia.

 

[JusticeJunkie]

"We have choices."
One of them being to fill out the score sheet yourself, and manipulate it however you like.

 

[luvtenniss]

Just got here. Did I miss much?

Absolutely nothing. JW is mostly repeating yesterday.

 

[newsjunkie]

As I recall he also said=
"I am a MORE-ON."

That's how Reba says it. . .LOLOLOL!!!

 

[ynotdivein]

Hideous thought, but could JW be aiming for a filibuster-type thing, where she will just continue to rehash previous statements until court ends for the day, just so as NOT to get to those undoubtedly pesky ole' juror questions?

 

[Mrs G Norris]

Is JM bringing in a doctor?

 

[lonetraveler]

Just got here. Did I miss much?

Not unless you are a glutton for punishment. :floorlaugh:

 

[Midnight Meddler]

I have this sickening feeling Wilmott is going to stretch this out till the end of the day.. Then, study the jury questions for 3 days.

 

[KMouse]

When Dr. Fog was talking about the raw data coming out in whatever form all I could think about is Soylent Green. Don't ask me why. This testimony has done strange things to my mind.

 

[Prime Mover]

Yippee! CNN livestream finally working

Great. Thanks.

At least I can hear the testimony now. Mind you, with Wilma doing the questioning, maybe not hearing was better.

 

[perfectvirgo]

Hee hee, poor Wilma can't decide if it's DATTER, DAYTER or DARTER!

 

[Schuby]

I think Dr S saying she had oral sex because she felt she had to do so to keep "relationship" with TA is... THE MOST TELLING TRUTH IN THIS WHOLE CASE...

She did everything she could to keep TA and when she couldn't "keep" him she snapped & killed him...

That sentence was this case in a nutshell!

Maybe the oral sex was the reason she wanted to keep him.

 

[Mrs G Norris]

He is taking a dig at JM now.

 

[Steely Dan]

Just got here. Did I miss much?

No. She's trying to rehabilitate his image. Ain't workin.

 

[LaneGirl]

WildAboutTrial ‏@WildAboutTrial 27s
Raw data is the answers to a test. It took 3 minutes to get that out.

 

[Linda From New York]

Errrrrrr.....the hypothesis of the triangle...errrr...equals the circumference of Jodi's.....<beep>.

 

[Kensie]

Yeah, that and she claims it's good for a facial.

LOL - I just spit my tea out from laughing so hard!!!!

 

[Arishia]

You know, to be fair, she's okay. In fact, she's pretty good. She just has a really horrible case.

But, she does get on my nerves personally because I can't stand her client and I am disgusted by what these defense attorneys are trying to do.

It's dishonest. They know jodi premeditated the killing of Travis. They know Travis did not abuse her and that he wasn't a pedophile. And they are not just letting their client tell a narrative. They helped her create this story. They went to the jail with Samuels and basically told her that her story wasn't working and likely gave her options to choose from as to a new story that would work better. I think that's very wrong.

Every time she repeats this garbage about Travis being a pedophile or an abuser, she is perpetrating a lie. And further victimizing the victim and his family.

So when she feigns outrage over Juan Martinez's objections or line of questioning, and when she acts like everything her witness says is interesting news and totally believable, or tries to coach her witness, it's offensive to me. So, I don't like her or Nurmi.

But my dislike has nothing to do with their actual litigation abilities or how they dress or their grooming habits, etc., which I have seen in posts. I have actually seen very little wrong in those areas in the weeks they have been in trial (notwithstanding tight outfits, crazy socks, or junk adjustments). There's much more of substance for me to be disgusted by.

Bingo!

 

[scorpio24]

Who needs raw data when you can just read the summarized version?

YES! That's why there's no need for silly things like "answer sheets" completed by the person you're evaluating! :facepalm: