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

[Weebles]

Did he ever find his masturbation notes?

it has not come up yet (pun intended)

 

[Angelina Frost]

Defense needs to let go of sex questions. It's already been determined she was a consensual and willing participant, and she initiated sexual contact.

SHE WAS NOT A VICTIM!

Enough!

The more they :deadhorse: the worse it will play with the jury. She was not just a willing participant, but the INITIATOR.

 

[katiedid2]

The juror who wrote the question "how could you be kissing Ryan Burnes so soon after killing Travis?" won't like the the doctor saying this - at all.

To me! That comment about to soon for sex! Was a dig to destroy travis reputation to his friends! Since she's claiming travis did to her in their home! Because They didn't like her! So she has to throw this dig in there.
But I think it was she who gave him a bj under the covers to say fu friends of travis, look what we did in your home! Your goody2 shoes friend travis is a perv deviant.

 

[Davia18]

I wish Nurmi would not shave his head. I don't understand why he does that. He actually looks nice when he allows his hair to grow out a bit, pretty hansom. Then the next day it's all gone again.

Then when he listens to something he uses the top of his head to do so. Probably becuase he is so tall that he is used to having to put his head down to listen.

Both of these issues remind me of the cone heads for some reason. :waitasec:

BBM : uke: MOO

 

[Amster]

Willnott flirts wth the judge too much, IMO..Cutesy cutesy.....blech

Yep....and, the judge loves it. Her biggest and brightest smiles are reserved for Willnott. I've seen her practically crawl on top of the judges bench to get closer.....:furious:

 

[rose222]

I wish we had an elephant trumpeting outside the courtroom as the Defense goes on blah blah blahing.

 

[Tulessa]

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.

The voice of reason. :great:

 

[mayqueen]

HIPAA-campus

(I'm getting loopy)

 

[Kamille]

...and how do you feel about that? lol

i am curious and have probably missed this answer....but what is the point of jodi continually switching hands when writing? i know a couple of ambidextrous people, but they just have the ability to use both, they dont use both.

Maybe she's working on her right hand skillz in case JM finally decides to mention how she could have written in her journal on Jan 24th with a broken finger without any change in writing style. Or just showing the jury how she could have done it in case they're thinking it and haven't asked. :twocents:

 

[SoCalBuck]

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.

Agreed. In all likelihood we won't see jury questions or Juan til Monday at the earliest

 

[LaneGirl]

WildAboutTrial ‏@WildAboutTrial 32s
Nurmi is laid back in the cut with his knee up on the desk as he listens to his team mate continue questioning Dr. Samuels. #JodiArias

 

[BetteDavisEyes]

Thinking ahead to JM's psychological expert witness, I doubt that we'll hear all this nonsense about test scores/results. I think that Juan's witness will talk about the personality quirks and characteristics that Jodi presents for everyone to see. :moo:

 

[Observer in AZ]

Doesn't the mitigation attorney normally sit behind JA?

IDK about you but I'm happy to see the neckline on her shirt today :floorlaugh:

not sure about seating assignments just putting :twocents: in on her

 

[Kajaa24]

KINSEY SCHOFIELD ‏@kinseyschofield 1m
#JodiArias Jurors still submitting questions.

This case took around 3 years to go to trial, it might take 3 years for the closing arguments to take place

 

[Truth Detector]

wrong, raw data would be each time a rat presses the bar.

Yes, but he has an advanced degree!

 

[Steely Dan]

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.

Why isn't there court tomorrow?

 

[Weebles]

so even another expert in the field can not understand his raw data. I see.

 

[outofstatelawyer]

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.

Agree with you about Willmott. Nurmi, not so much. One thing I have caught Willmott doing is coaching a witness on how to answer a question while that witness is on the stand (head shaking, mouthing "NO"). That is unethical. It's tempting for a young lawyer to do, but it's a huge no-no. I'm surprised the media hasn't picked up on it.

 

[JusticeJunkie]

Is JM bringing in a doctor?

Yes - a competent one

 

[Melanie]

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

Nah, you just need a rat who presses a bar. This is absolutely ridiculous.

:floorlaugh: