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

[Smelly Squirrel]

Ok, where did I read/see that she moved out of her house at age 15 to live with Bobby? Was it live testimony? Dr. Samuels? HLN? Dr Drew? Nancy Grace, Jane Valez? I could be wrong...my head is spinning. :banghead:

I don't remember the exact age, but she did testify to that. It was after she got grounded for ditching school (to study for a test she says).

 

[G&AMom]

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.

Welcome, Snips, always glad to see someone who shares our addiction! :welcome5:

BBM. I believe this is a perfect example of how us ordinary people can get sucked in by a psychopath. I've seen many a poster on here who will discuss what a liar Jodi is, and then say, "Well, I believe her when she says blah, blah, blah. I've had that happen to me." As a psychopath, Jodi is constantly trying to appear normal, and sometimes she pulls it off. Heck, by the law of averages, she's got to get it right once in awhile. We all see things through the filter of our own experience, and I know I believe some of what she says occasionally, even if it's just a description of buying those endless strawberry frappucinos (has Starbucks seen their customer purchases of those things drop since she's been in jail?!). It certainly gives us a taste of how hard it must have been for Travis. It's also why I think she is so dangerous. JMO

 

[KMouse]

Had a thought... if Jodi was "suicidal", she would have been on suicide watch. Period.

So take that Dr. $ !

Most jails do a suicide risk assessment when inmates are booked in. Then they are reassessed periodically.
Most of the scoring is dependable on the inmates answers to the questions. Depending on the score it would determine how often they were checked and where they were housed and how.

 

[Linda7NJ]

Linda, love your posts, yet respectfully, the state is not done. RE BUTT AL!!!!!!! as to proving it's case IMHO for your consideration. :seeya: And I do agree on your viewpoint that many that defend ANYONE have passion for the constitution. I could not do it, analogous that I could not be a CPA and do numbers all day! (I know, baaaaaaaaaad analogy, but best one that fits with something I've thought of) :what:

Yet I do admire any and ALL folks that follow their passion in life which many of us cannot understand or put ourselves in their place to even fathom how they do what they do. To me, I would not be able to live with myself or hold my head up to others...........but they should.

While we do here support the victim Travis, it gets lost in the weeds this passion for defending all - and many cannot fathom how someone can defend one who they may believe is guilty. Myself included. I cannot comprehend, but good that there are others that do so that the constitution if fulfilled and followed.

:moo:

I always liken defense attorneys to proctologists! Horrid job I could never do... But a necessary and important one. lol!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[smeck]

It seems easy enough to get her high school records to see if she was indeed a foreign exchange student. We had photos in the year book of students attending any foreign studies.

 

[websurfer]

:rocker:

 

[popsicle]

I think, if one overlooks some evidence, that an argument could be made either way. Gunshot first followed by the stabbing - this makes sense on some levels. For example she shot him first thinking it would give the expected result but it did not so the stabbing followed. I think it is equally possible that the stab to the heart came first. This would have significantly lessened any physical advantage Travis had over her. Given her background in food service and the slashing of the tires - knives were not an unfamiliar object to Ms. Arias.

With that said, the evidence which must be overlooked to accept the gunshot first includes the 62 seconds portrayed by the camera and a clean spent casing laying in blood. One could argue the casing but the 62 seconds is beyond any doubt. No way in 62 seconds that Ms. Arias shot this man and then completed this brutal slaughter IMO.

I'm glad you wrote this...that is one consistent thing I have noted with the talking ME's. They always leave one or a couple major things out, in order to reach their conclusion, always.

 

[ZsaZsa]

I know it is frustrating but it is worth pointing out that this entire Trial is an e ercersize in Travis' rights. That's what we're doing here. Redressing the fact that his rights were violated by the defendant. When people get upset about the money being spent on the trial, what they are actually saying is that Travis' death isn't worth this kind investment in justice.

Most of what I have watched so far has been taken up with what the DT is insinuating and alleging Travis did to Jodi, to deserve his fate.

 

[LynnM]

I don't get it, I wish I could help. I would just love for you to love Juan. Hey, sounds kind of like a song doesn't it, :giggle: . Ahemm... not to get too psychoanalytical, but is it possible you had negative experiences with someone in your past that JM is reminding you of ? Just a thought. :dunno:

There is no one in my past he reminds me of and I don't like the way he always seems hostile to everyone he questions. I think that attitude should be reserved for people who are obviously lying (like Jodi) or incompetent experts and then it would be more effective. I also think that sometimes you just can't answer yes or no. I am not speaking of Jodi and her never-ending answers but with other witnesses where the truth requires some elaboration. If I were a juror and felt that the full truth was being withheld from me by a forced yes or no answer I would be annoyed.

I posted before that I first tuned into the trial when he was questioning Lisa D. and I was so shocked I posted about it on facebook. He seemed so hostile and angry towards her and she was obviously telling the truth and wanting to help the prosecution. It wasn't her fault the defense subpoenaed her. I've been told she was glad to be crossed so SHE could clarify some things but still he should have been nicer to her. What did it gain him to be so hostile?

I do think he is exceptionally well prepared and has brought forth the necessary evidence to have Jodi convicted of first degree murder. I think he is a good man. I am just not in love.

 

[Linda7NJ]

I just posted a little earlier that I highly doubt the entire story, like everything else she says, it makes no sense. I would like to see proof, pictures, etc. I personally think she made the whole thing up.

Agree. If someone repeatedly lies to me ... Everything they say goes in one ear and out the other. I no longer believe anything they say. I don't waste my time searching through BS looking for nuggets of truth either.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[cricket49]

I love Mike Eyelash.

That's what my brain always says when I try to say his name. :floorlaugh:

Me too, even when he says bad things about Juan his next comment is "Please no more hate mail". lol

 

[~*~PinxJinx~*~]

I am just now watch the Dr. Drew show from last night.

Mark Eiglarsh just said the crime scene clearly illistrates self-defense. Travis was trying to defend HIMSELF from a vicious attack. WOW!!

I watched it last night and I believe ME was saying that it showed Travis was defending himself. I wish I wouldn't have watched it, I hate that show. It is horrible!! From the first night, they have been putting Travis on trial, making "bold accusations" about the VICTIM....like there isn't enough of that going on in the courtroom. Regardless of the outcome of their ridiculous antics, the words and information that they are broadcasting will be searchable on Google and all over the internet, FOREVER!! They are doing Travis a grave injustice.:furious::furious:

 

[Donnareit]

Hopefully somebody has some insight.

I have these types of dreams frequently.

I find out I have to write an exam and I haven't studied or read any material.
I have school work due and never attended class and have to write an exam.

I've had these types of anxiety dreams for years.

illowfight:
It's a classic anxiety dream along with the one about being naked in public. What I wonder is why so many of us ALL have nearly the identical dream? Do people from other cultures have it to?

 

[SunDawnn]

Seriously, this is the same woman who argued in a hearing that Jodi's pedophile accusation was relevant to the case and should be heard in court. Juan tried to keep it out but this expert won over the judge. She is going to DESTROY Travis with Jodi's lies, in fact she will go even further than Jodi. As evil as Jodi is, she still has her limits to trashing him. Indeed she has even stuck up for him in ways that can not be explained as "downplaying the abuser's violence". For example, she fought with Nurmi over the sleep sex claim and told the jury Travis had been groggy and not fully conscious -- characterizing it as sexomnia which **** Nurmi's questioning down. She also admitted to having ravishment fantasies involving Travis, something she did not have to say (and this also shut Numri down).

Brought this over from closed thread.


No one is going to be remotely effective nor believable if they are garnering their information from Jodi's words. That's why Juan used Ms Arias as a human Swifter and mopped the floor with her credibility. Nothing she says is believable. If she says it's sunny, you best pack your umbrella!!

It's done. It's over. Finite. The jury wouldn't believe Jodi, Jodi's words, Jodi's friends, Jodi's family or Jodi's expert witnesses if they came to court on a notarized silver platter.

After Samuels, the Defenses' position(s) is laughable and every single player, right down to the attorney's are extremely transparent in their motive at this point.
They are not working for human justice. They are the anti-justice team and everyone realizes it now.

 

[gcharlie]

Are you serious, or just messin??

I've had THE same dream...except there a number of classes I couldn't figure out the same thing with, but it started in high school.
THEN, I'd go on to college, and realize I shouldn't be there because I failed all the other courses in high school....LOL
THEN, I'd go to get my degree, but, I STILL didn't finish the high school courses, didn't finish the college courses and kept trying to figure out how to fix it all!!

Oh, Lord.....LOL

(No emu's though....although there MIGHT have been one teaching a Chemistry class......)

What does this recurring dream mean?

I've had the same dream too!

I was an exchange student my senior year of high school. I had taken enough courses to graduate by the end of my junior year so that I could do this and still graduate with "my class". In my 30's, I had the recurring dream where even though I had my college degree, I had to go back to high school and complete a senior year at my original high school.

 

[atthelake]

I didn't hear this tidbit of info on HLN, I read the article on Yahoo news

"The latest research shows that viral and bacterial infections could have lasting legacies on cognition.

In a recent study, researchers found that people with higher levels of common infectious agents in their blood — including Chlamydia pneumoniae, Helicobacter pylori, cytomegalovirus and herpes simplex type 1 that causes cold sores — are more likely to have memory and cognitive problems than people with lower levels."

http://news.yahoo.com/cold-sores-could-hamper-memory-094500696.html

:floorlaugh: As a researcher, look at who are the subjects! Perhaps homeless drug addicts/prostitutes that have been incarcerated and using memory loss as a defense?

Just saying, the ol' adage is "give me what you want to prove, and I can give you the stats to prove it". Unfortunately, most folks and talking heads (and Dr. $) just read the synopsis, and not the details. (I need me some JoyPath here, lol!)

 

[neesaki]

I'm just listening to some parts of yesterday's cross by Juan that I missed. It's just beyond amazing that this Dr. S has given any credence to JA's difficulty concentrating, hyper-vigilance - e.g., due to sounds and noises, felt like her personal space had been invaded,etc. - for the purposes of evaluating her for PTSD. She was in new and strange and not so comfortable surroundings. It's called a jail cell for pete's sake. And the 'sense of foreshortened future' well, :waitasec:, last time I checked there's not much future in a jail cell either, and I bet JA is even aware of this one.
This was a complete sham of an assessment for PTSD and completely invalid, imo. I'm so glad this man is getting blasted by Juan, he deserves to be. I'm not going to refer to him as Dr. anymore, so, RS is either incompetent or unethical or both. :twocents:

 

[Zuri]

Is it normal for a defendant to not have a lawyer on either side of them? FCA was flanked on either side and so were most of the defendants in trials I have watched. JA is on the end, with only JW at her side. It seems weird to me. Nurmi looks like he tries to be as far away from JA as possible. Any thoughts?

 

[TotallyObsessed]

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.

Another example of JC's stellar journalism reporting skills.

 

[Schuby]

Most of what I have watched so far has been taken up with what the DT is insinuating and alleging Travis did to Jodi, to deserve his fate.

Well, let me ask you this, Do you believe that a person accused of a crime should not be allowed to offer their version of events?
One might be tempted to answer this question by saying, "Not if it's all lies."
To which I would say, "Who gets to decide if it's a lie?"