trial day 35: the defense continues its case in chief #99

[Ricki]

KCL just posted they had to take off their ribbons today. I am not sure about the family because they were wearing them.

 

[Nosey Parker]

If it is the jury she was looking at as they were leaving, the one juror who asked the question is probably the same one who asked the PTSD from a bad haircut question, and that juror is probably f'ing with her. Probably grinning at her, like poking at a lion in a zoo cage. Let her think she is making a relationship when that one is the one who cannot wait to say GUILTY

Wonder if it is the same juror that let out the loud laugh as she went out the door.

 

[outofstatelawyer]

I didn't hear any question that was snarky, sniffy, sassy, sarcastic, etc.
Wish I had. They all appeared very respectful of him. Ugh.

I disagree. The bad haircut question was snarky. The question about meds she was on for this "terrible case of PTSD" struck me as quite sarcastic as well.

 

[strawberry]

Who's tony?
If I was her mom I'd be glad she's locked up. Who knows what she would do? Terrible the way she treats her mom and still mom keeps faithfully coming back.

Casey Anthony's boyfriend at the time. :floorlaugh: http://www.orlandosentinel.com/orl-casey-anthony-jail-full-mp3,0,4942958.mp3file

 

[Clue Finder 55]

Dr DoLittle claims his “hypothesis” is “probably” correct based on analysis of crime scene photos, ancillary reports, police reports, and collateral information.
Besides his own interviews with JA and his reading of the prosecution evidence including crime scene photos it hard to see how his theory is corroborated.

He is paid to claim to say JA suffered PTSD and that she suffered amnesia which is the story JA concocted in 2010.
This is tantamount to saying I believe JA’s story because that is my opinion.
How do you know your opinion is correct? ANSWER – because that is my learned opinion and my opinions are correct.

How do you know JA is not lying? Because her true story was consistent did not deviate and her story comports with crime scene photos. PLUS my reading of her journals and police reports helped me to conclude that JA is telling the truth.

DoLittle’s whole testimony is mere blather, full of high sounding jargon, and full of circular reasoning.

Have you heard of Dr Dolittle--Well This is Dr <mod snip>

 

[justsharing]

Juan will straighten out the confusion surrounding PTSD. He will make sure the jury understands that PTSD is not what caused Jodi to kill Travis. She may have PTSD as a result of what she has done, knowing what the consequences most likely will be. PTSD does not excuse what she has done, and is not a "get out of jail card"!

I have a feeling the jury will be much more likely to believe the rebuttal psychologist, whom I'm sure will refute nearly all of his testimony. I think,hope and pray that Juan is saving the slam dunk for rebuttal.
His expert psychologist, secret magazine messages, gas can proof and god knows what else. He has been sleeping,eating and living this case for the better part of five years and it shows. I have 100% confidence that the jury will find her guilty without a doubt in the end. It's not over til it's over.

 

[Truth Detector]

I didn't hear any question that was snarky, sniffy, sassy, sarcastic, etc.
Wish I had. They all appeared very respectful of him. Ugh.

So you didn't think the question challenging him on his personal fondness for the defendant was a bit, shall we say, challenging?

One of my personal favorites was the question reminding him that he said sex, hot water, or cold water could cause transient global amnesia, and then asked him whether a bad hair cut would be traumatic enough to cause it.

We must be listening to different questions.

 

[ChinaBlue]

And so she stalked him until it became apparent she couldn't have this person who was a better class of person so then she killed him. Why can't the good doctor see this?

Gosh - if a pedophile and a woman abuser. is a better class of people, imagine what level Jodi was operating at when she met Travis.

 

[snowcat]

Just before court the DT came out of chambers and it was reported by tweeters that TA's family were instructed to remove the ribbons etc. that were in support of Travis.

It was presumed that the DT brought this to the attention of the court and then it was posted that TA's family was looking quite upset.

Now it appears TA's family are still displaying the ribbons.

Not sure if we got good information or exactly what is going on.

It may have pertained to button with. T's photo ? Just an idea

 

[OldCarGal]

re: Ethics
Giving Jodi a book, may not seem against ethics to Samuels, but what about the two greeting cards. That's a No-No

 

[Nosey Parker]

I disagree. The bad haircut question was snarky. The question about meds she was on for this "terrible case of PTSD" struck me as quite sarcastic as well.

The questions about his 'report errors' were not what I would call friendly. :floorlaugh:

 

[Southern_Meadow]

The attorney who owns the Wild About Trial app was on HLN earlier and she said it sermed that the jurors were making fun of Samuels.

 

[Stolat]

so lets see if I understand this..she came out of her fog JUST in time to clean up before going thru a police or border patrol...how convenient!

Yes, and I'm fairly certain the jury caught his obvious slip where he first said Jodi came out of her fog when she got to the police barricade - and then immediately carefully rephrased it as a checkpoint.

So conveniently enough her fog lifted exactly the moment her brain registered that there could be consequences for whatever action he claims she has no memory of.

So how could she have known enough to register the logic of cleaning up prior to reaching the police - unless she were never in a fog to begin with.

Because according tithe doctor, her memory lapse would have been so severe that she would have driven right up to the police and never have any clue that she would have had any reason to stop first and clean up.

In other words, her fog lifted at the precise convenient moment to prevent her getting caught. That shows awareness, not detachment.

 

[Novice Seeker]

Just home from work and trying to catch up.

Could someone please explain about TA's ribbons? Who wanted the family to remove them? Was it an offical request?

Before trial could start this morning Nurmi was speaking/complaining about something and all of a sudden the seal is back up and the judge calls the attorneys into chambers. Soon after JM escorts TA's family into a side room. After the session began Travis's family confirmed that the DT had requested that everyone remove their blue ribbons. Travis's family refused but everyone else had to.

 

[Sigh Sister]

I find the questions incredibly annoying considering how Juan completely and totally crushed this twits opinion on PTSD.

This isn't a psychology classroom and this witness is the last person I'd want " teaching" me anything. I have zero respect for him and his opinion and IMO the jurors should feel the same way. He's insulting my intelligence.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think the questions mostly came in while he was testifying on direct from JW. I could be wrong, though.

 

[Tipstaff]

Just home from work and trying to catch up.

Could someone please explain about TA's ribbons? Who wanted the family to remove them? Was it an offical request?

Before court DefenseTeam in chambers - They all come out and someone asks TA's family to remove ribbons in support of TA/justice. This was reported by Tweeters.

Now we are finding out that the supporters have complied BUT TA's family has declined to remove the ribbons.

 

[LotusPawprint]

I always come back to the fact (or what I view as fact) that JA's word has no credibility.

None.

That's her own doing.

The more she talks, the more stories she creates, the more inconsistencies, the harder it is to believe her, the more difficult it is to weed out to bs from the potential truth.


Essentially Samuels and Miss Snow White is a DV Victim are entirely responsible for explaining away why JA lies and why she forgets and why we (or the jury) should believe anything she says. I'm sure Alyce LaViolent is a lovely person who worked backwards very effectively in this case, taking the defendant's words about the man she murdered as gospel and crafted her paid expert opinion very narrowly on these accounts to formulate a theory meant to excuse her client's actions entirely.

I have to believe that these jurors realize this case isn't quite rocket science. Let's not over think. Let's use our common sense. Let's look at the evidence. Let's listen to what makes sense and what doesn't. Let's look at who has to gain from testifying and who doesn't. Let's look at who has been consistent and who hasn't. Let's look at what's reasonable. Let's look at the charges, the law, the evidence, the ME's testimony, the timeline of events.

I mean... personally, I have a very, very, very difficult time thinking that someone who is well in the head who has actually sat through this entire trial could possibly come up with anything other than 1st degree murder. It's really not that difficult. Cmon.

 

[rose222]

So you didn't think the question challenging him on his personal fondness for the defendant was a bit, shall we say, challenging?

One of my personal favorites was the question reminding him that he said sex, hot water, or cold water could cause dissociative amnesia, and then asked him whether a bad hair cut would be traumatic enough to cause it.

We must be listening to different questions.

The haircut trauma question was the funniest! :floorlaugh:

 

[StephanieHartPI]

Now they just have to convince those on the jury that are leaning the other way.

My exact thought! We'll need strong Jurors to guide the rest through if they have any doubts!

They all get gift baskets if they do this right!

 

[Roy Rob]

Q - If a person is telling lies, will the lies be consistent each time the lies are related?

A - Yes the liar will tell a consistent story, without variation and without affect, because the liar is not recalling from true memory but from a memorized series of lies.

Q - But isn't this what we are seeing NOW!!!!!! ?