trial day 36: the defense continues its case in chief #106

[Linda7NJ]

Love of the law and constitution & right to a vigorous defense DOES NOT & SHOULD NOT give the DT permission to persecute the victim or present allegations made by the defendant as the truth. The rules and laws that prevented Jodi's past history of stalking and Fatal Attraction like behaviors from being admitted in the trial should apply for Travis and everyone else.

The jury heard about her stalking behavior and tire slashing. It came in through both Mimi and the blonde haired girl he dated.

The defense, in this case, are working with what their client put forth as the truth. Their hands are tied and IMO it shows.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[jojomonkey]

I thought she was 15 when she went to Costa Rica as an exchange student, and 17 when she moved out? I could be wrong. I too have sympathy for her mother. I cannot imagine being in her shoes.

I don't even believe the exchange student story - I think she lied to her parents so they would give her money for the trip, but she was secretly shacking up with her boyfriend at the time. I would love to see proof of that trip, not that it matters, but I don't believe her. I could see her saying, "just give me the money mom, I'll take care of the ticket and so and so will drive me to the airport".

She was 15 when she supposedly fell in love with Bobby, knowing teenagers, they are attached to their first love at that age and we all know what a paranoid, jealous girl she is. I really don't think she would have left Bobby all alone for that long to go to Costa Rica. I think she made the whole thing up to skip school and hang around with him that whole time.

 

[Linda7NJ]

Love of the law and constitution & right to a vigorous defense DOES NOT & SHOULD NOT give the DT permission to persecute the victim or present allegations made by the defendant as the truth. The rules and laws that prevented Jodi's past history of stalking and Fatal Attraction like behaviors from being admitted in the trial should apply for Travis and everyone else.

The jury heard about her stalking behavior and tire slashing. It came in through both Mimi and the blonde haired girl he dated.

The defense, in this case, are working with what their client put forth as the truth. Their hands are tied and IMO it shows.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Nosey Parker]

I am shaking my head at JA and JW dressing in the same colors. Could this be JW's idea or is it JA's. I also wonder what the jury thinks about it, could it be how silly they look, or could it be 'how stupid do they think we are' ?

It looks creepy. It's not just the look-alike either - they move in sync. At least, Arias moves in sync with Wilmott. If I were Wilmott, I would have to put a stop to it, just for the sake of my sanity. That has to be stalking to its ultimate degree.

 

[missgulfsouth]

I cannot keep up with this thread, it is insane!!! I keep coming here hoping to read that they have a verdict (can't stand to watch the JA trial myself) but it just keeps going and going. Was the Scott Peterson trial this long? I watched that entire trial and it didn't seem nearly as long and drawn out as this one. I really can't wait for it to be over, so I can watch NG/HLN again. Oh but wait. She will continue to talk about it, won't she? UGH.

 

[blueherron]

But remember, the jury should not/hopefully is not aware of everything we are. The DT is throwing out there any possibility to save their client from the DP. The flipside is that these witness and experts know more than we do and have seen/heard things we have not. I don't personally think JA was abused, more like the abuser.

Maybe this witness will give the jury that conclusion as well once she starts discussing domestic violence. I also think that JM will be able to dispel any issues. Lets face it, he can merely show that JA was just as abusive to TA inthe stalking and obsession. He has texts, conversations, etc. I believe in the end this testimony won't mean much regardless of whose side called her in. He might even be able to get her to admit that.

I actually hope...not betting the farm mind you...that her testimony will be interesting.

Kelly

I agree, Kelly. I think (hope) LaViolette will speak to the psychology of the abuser (Jodi) in this relationship. She provides therapy to abusers and knows their common response to "triggers" like perceived abandonment, jealousy, obsession, etc.
I think the main purpose of her testimony is to question the premeditation charge in this case.

 

[nightwatch]

Its possible that her family knew that forcing her against her will to do something she didn't want too was a much worse scenario. I think JA probably held her family emotionally hostage during her teen years for sure.

Kelly

i agree with you, most teenagers can get mouthy but if i were to kick or hit my mom, oh hell to the no. i would have ended up in the er. lol ja knew her mom was afraid of her. jmo

 

[atthelake]

Hi all - I stumbled on the JA trial after watching 48 hours locally (in Australia). It really piqued my interest and so I looked it up and realised that the case was ongoing…. As it turns out, the case is.. 'THE CASE', and I got hooked pretty quickly, and so I looked around on the web to see what was out there in terms of coverage. I found wildabouttrial which gave me a direct hook up to what was going on which was great - but then I searched around to see what communities were out there that would have a bash at dissecting the trial. I hoped for skeptical eyes and 'unlit' torches, and well, websleuths fit the bill. So Iv've been lurking I guess for a couple of weeks, and I like your style.

So here I am.

I have to say, I am continually thrown by my readings of Ms Arias.
In terms of my perceptions of her, I admittedly fluctuate, between believing she is wholly the premeditated-conniving murderer, as close to evil as an atheist (that's me) can conceive of evil, and yet, I find myself somehow (at least in part) believing the odd tidbit that supports her claims. All the while with full recognition of how accomplished she is as a liar.

I know a few of you have hinted at this exact same thing - she mixes in truths to support her lies. Undoubtedly she does. To what extent, I don't know for sure.

What I would say, is that there can be no black and white result to this question of what actually went on. Unless by some freakish stroke of clear thinking and desire of repentance from Jodi, it is unlikely we will ever get the clear picture we are all looking for with regards the lead up / actual event / post event circumstances.

Actually, it just dawned on me, if Jodi is in any way legitimately devout to the Mormon faith, then maybe that will be the only channel through which we find answers. For instance, if she is given life without parole, then after some religious counselling, she may eventually 'fess up. But of course, we may also be 15 years older by that stage.

When i recall the the Flores interviews and also the 48 hours blerrr-dee-blahh-fests, I easily revert to a 'Jodi Arias is a liar, and an evil one at that' mindset - but there is something about her innate ability to meld some elements of truth to bolster her fabrications that makes me - at least to some degree - want to know more. It keeps me clinging to a certain extent.
(And that's not to say I am under her spell. I do not, and have not ever found her attractive, actually. Personally, my interest is more about her innate confidence [ha ha self esteem eh?] ) But aside from from this I am concerned with her ability to switch between these two worlds… How does someone do that as seamlessly as it seems to occur for her? wtf…..

I've got a bunch to say about the trial, and a few thoughts on Jodi and the way she carries herself, but I thought I would leave just this one observation, and expand with later posts:

I know a lot of you have commented on her appearance, and how she has aged since her initial TV appearances. For sure, she has - most definitely. But the thing that sticks out for me, is her voice. She speaks differently now.

It is absolutely unnerving to me to hear her voice in those 48 hours interviews. It seems completely affected. ‪It sounds saccharin‬ sweet - and it sounds softer - the 'esses' are accentuated. Her voice seems higher pitched. It's crisper. And it sounds like she's portraying a diminutive character that of course, would be incapable of such a heinous crime.

5 years later, which voice do you believe?

:wagon: arty: Glad to have you on board down under! (Unless you are like one of my friends from Aussieland, who sent me a global map with AUSSIELAND on the top, lol!)

As an aside, it interests me that folks from Australia are most active in US trials, for instance, the first facebook page for the Rusty Sniederman support was done/created by an Aussie, and one of the most active members in WS chat during FCA was SammieJam (ahhhhhhhhhhh, swoon over her baby and her blue eyed hubby....miss my OZ in chat these days! ....but I digress!)

Folks here are great, and we try to adhere to TOS (terms of service, read them!) .......... and always note the little triangle at the top right to do a moderator notice in private if you have a problem, as the more heated it gets towards verdict........well... 'nuff said.

 

[momof7]

Agree, sorry, I wasn't trying to imply they were somehow negligent, just that they had probably been pushed to all human limits by her antics at that point.

I was agreeing with you also! Just another perspective meaning the exact same thing!

I think unknowingly her parents helped her with thinking she could leave and come back, push and pull peoples emotions to her advantage. They were a soft sell.

The one thing about JA I think stands out the most is that every boyfriend she supposedly broke up with. They never broke up with her. Its impossible in my head. Her behaviors are so off, no one can take it for long. It takes a really special person to be able to live with it. Add in the fact that every single one of them cheated on her. She had to have a reason why she wasn't good enough when they broke up with her, it had to be other women. Someone who is always looking for reasons to 'not be good enough' don't normally break up with people no matter the reason. The relationship is buidling self esteem, somebody wants you. IMHO.

Kelly

 

[Kensie]

Agree, sorry, I wasn't trying to imply they were somehow negligent, just that they had probably been pushed to all human limits by her antics at that point.

I have been there with a hell raising kid and believe me it is not easy.

 

[kscornfed]

Uh, just a little picking of nits. From all the accounts I have read of Phineas Gage he didn't "remain mobile" after a steel tamping rod struck him below the cheek, transversed his left eye orbit and exited out the top of his head just forward of the parietal lobe.

From the University of Ohio, Akron page:


BBM

Not that he didn't lose consciousness, but he may not have lost consciousness. Most accounts gloss over the accident and aftermath itself and focus on the personality changes he suffered. But most accounts describe him as being in some manner insensible and having to be carted back home, not surprisingly.

The reason for that is that a the tamping rod, propelled by whatever black powder was in the hole being tamped, is a much slower moving projectile than a bullet. Yeah, it's bigger. So is an arrow. The size of the tamping rod works against it having much energy.

As I have pointed out, what a bullet essentially is, is a little lead delivery device for kinetic energy transferred by its velocity. A military .223 round is going to do a lot more damage than a .22 short, even though they are basically the same diameter, because the .223 has a much larger casing, more powder behind it and strikes with a lot more force.

Another way of thinking about it, is would you rather be hit by a .22 caliber long fired at 1,500fps fired from a gun, or a big .50 caliberbullet that is thrown at you by hand?

What's the difference? Velocity and therefore kinetic energy.

All the comparisons to knives, arrows, nails from a nail gun, even a tamping rod to the head as being any way similar to a bullet misses the basic physics of the hypersonic velocity bullets travel at.

Again, the ballistic gel profile of a .25. in brain-like ballistic gel

25ACP Winchester 50gr FMJ impacting ballistic gelatin (42,000 frame/sec!) - YouTube don't exactly like being "the gun guy" in this thread, but I will keep pointing this out.

:deadhorse:

thank you! the ME did a good job shooting this down with wilmott. he explained the velocity of a bullet and the GASES released with it. it's a totally different thing than an arrow or rod through the head, where people show up conscious and talking in the ER. this comparison drives me nuts.

 

[DebinGA]

Only a guess, but it sounds like the media wants to release something and the DT wants it sealed.

I'd think potential expert witnesses are paid to give a cursory look at the case and decide whether to join/pass. The sealed info may show initial payments to a long, string of "passers" before the DT reached the bottom of the barrel with Samuels.

 

[Donnareit]

The thing with psychopathy is that where many are indeed brutally abused as children even the ones that aren't grow up 'feeling' they were abused and mistreated. I believe they're very prone to victim-mentalities and use their 'victimhood' both as external justification for hurting others and manipulative prop to lure new victims.

No human being is capable of loving a psychopath enough; rewarding them enough; making them feel special enough. It's like they're a vast expanse you keep throwing everything you've got to give into and it's never enough for them. It's part of what makes having a relationship with one so exhausting and draining.

The other side of that equation is manipulation. By going through life adhered to a victim complex they ensure there will be an almost endless supply of victims too - it's why they tend to target vulnerable or compassionate people - after reading their targets, they begin to regale them with their sob stories of how awful their lives have been. They're also in the idealize phase of the relationship so you're also hearing how wonderful you are, you'll be the one to magically fix all that's gone wrong, you're their savior.

JMHO

:goodpost:

 

[websurfer]

very disturbing...

 

[Tulessa]

I hope my surgeons office has a tv. If not? I hope it takes all afternoon, to go over the new witness's credentials! lease:

 

[ClosArgs]

JA was 17 when she moved out. I remember her testimony. She said her father tried to ground her until she was 18 which was for the next 2 months, and she made the decision to move out. The error (surprise surprise) was last night on HLN when Vinnie said to JC that JA moved out when she was 17 and JC said no it was 15.

 

[Kensie]

I hope my surgeons office has a tv. If not? I hope it takes all afternoon, to go over the new witness's credentials! lease:

Good luck on your surgery but please not an afternoon of credentials!!!

 

[rachelle]

First and foremost - **awesome** response, VALee... thank you so much.

Re the gun vs. knife first - I've laid out what I think may have happened (in detail) and if I can find it...

I can't explain Dr. Horn's testimony any better than he has, and I can't explain (psychologically, behaviourally) why the gun shot would be last.

I do know that legally - it doesn't matter - at least that is my understanding, given the judge's ruling as well as the AZSC's ruling when the DT argued (early on) that the sequence of injuries mattered per the DP - the judge ruled that regardless of sequence, the killing was cruel and and qualified as a DP charge. I believe (but don't quote me) that the AZSC ruled on the same argument... I may be wrong. BUT - the result is what matters. This is, and remains a DP case - and the sequence of injury does not matter.

Re: the wrestling - you said it best.

Re" the 62 seconds - (don't throw stuff, guys!) I think this is a weak point and I'm not sure why JM pegged himself into this timeline - UNLESS he knows something. Which, based on prior experience, I have to say, yep - he probably knows something.

He has yet to deliver his most crucial salvos, imv.

But personally - I can't say that Travis was dead within 62 seconds - or that the killing took 62 seconds. It looks that way, but many stab wounds could have been made after that last photo - I don't know. JA knows and she is aroused by the fact that she is the only one who knows... I'm already nauseous and this just puts me over the top.

Does it matter, essentially? Nah, I don't think so. Going on what I know so far, (yet I think JM has something even better in the wings - if not, he makes his case anyway) the clincher/s are:

The Tesoro and Wal-Mart reps. While JM impeached JA as best he could, either or both of these witnesses' testimony will say to the jury (bold, underline): JA - you sat barely feet away and you stone-face lied to us without skipping a beat.

Juries don't like that garbage, I imagine.

If they deem her testimony (as a whole) unusable - that cuts the defense argument to it's knees at best.

And then there is the trip: Who did she see/expect to see?

Matt (old boyfriend - briefly)
Darryl (old boyfriend - briefly/to borrow gas cans, minimum)
Paul guy (?) forget his name - borrowed $$$
John Dixon (never saw - pretended there was a gallery opportunity w/him)
Travis... for her entire 3000 mi trip - she spent the most time with Travis... Because Travis was the reason for the trip.
Ryan Burns - planned alibi.

Matt. Darryl. Travis. John. Ryan. Travis was her target. Period.

BBM

Exactly! I have never actually thought about it like that, even though I know that is why she went. Well put.

MOO

 

[Novice Seeker]

Noooo. A protective order is used to keep something under seal. Not for public consumption. They could be trading evidence (the defense and state) and the defense does not want whatever it is to be in the public record.

I thought the DT filed a motion regarding that last week. This motion specifically identifies three individuals and a hearing scheduled this week.

 

[R.U.Kidding!]

Hi Nosey,

I believe you said something very important to this case. That is "the jury trusts JM not to pull the wool over their eyes".

That is all JA and her Defense team has been trying to do, because they know she knows exactly what happened, and she is guilty as hell.

The directness and no-nonsense tactics by JM are what they depend on to see through all the LIES.