trial day 37: the defense continues its case in chief #108

Status
Not open for further replies.
My guess is that this woman would find none of that consensual, even after she hears the Jodi tapes instigating it. I bet she refuses to believe that any kink is consenual.

She'll claim it's a symptom of abuse. If you like it, (some kink) it's a bigger symptom.

I would guess this woman doesn't feel there's a woman alive who isn't abused.

Absolutely!:banghead:
 
Her opinion is sound, IMO...but, she keeps talking about, "I think we all want to be good, be empathetic...etc.," but not if you are anti-social PD. So, there's THE major premise missing from her evaluation. I think JM can simply narrow her opinion to the hypo: "Assume that one of the people in the relationship is anti-social PD, would that change your opinion?
 
Here's where Juan needs to take this: Does all your clinical verbiage apply to couples who are broken up with over 1000 miles in between households?

Then when the answer SHOULD be 'no'........he needs to then ask if this can be made up by someone who has a chronic history of lying and fighting for her life?

It should be a relatively short cross by the State.

I so agree with you. He is a smart cookie and it will be totally different from the doc
 
"Women believe if the relationship fails, they fail" based on an "Old old" piece of research. How about something from the last 5 years?
 
Jodi and Travis weren't in a domestic relationship. They weren't married, were never even engaged. Just because Jodi said that they were "official" doesn't mean that Travis felt the same way about their relationship. At the time of the murder, the pair were no longer dating, and Jodi lived 1000 miles away.

someone did a great timeline post yesterday called 628 days. Sums it up perfectly. Hope they bump it over
 
What if the ENTIRE relationship exists in one person's alternative reality?!?
 
What is all this talk about leaving? Jodi didn't live with TA.. she never lived with him, wasn't married to him, no kids, no shared finances...

LOL.. "what about couples with no children?"...lol. JM needs to stress what a short time they were actually together in any kind of a "relationship".
 
Well, I was really hoping she wouldn't go this route, but . . . I'm getting over this witness pretty fast.
 
Objection. Relevance!

Jodi did not have to go to a shelter.

She was never abused and even if she were she didn't even share a zip code with Travis. She also had her own resources such as money and family to go to. There were no children. No serious relationship. No substance abuse. No nothing except a ax murdered girlfriend. The end.
 
Geez! Jodi and Travis were not a couple, they had no children. WTF does any of this testimony have to do with this case?
 
This is like watching a free lecture series...if it were not for the fact that the Defendent slaughtered Travis. How can his family still be sitting there? They are so strong. Still more anectdotal stuff...other than describing JA perfectly, where ar the specifics of her relationship.
 
We may feel it's more important to be a good person than to keeping yourself safe.

Think when Jodi pops in and Lisa is there, people were confused why Travis would go chasing out after Jody.
 
Snorezzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz... I don't understand why the defence didn't prep Alyce to use more relevant examples in her explanations. How does any of this relate to Travis?
 
She's quoting an anecdote she doesn't know how to attribute.....
Oh my.....
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
192
Guests online
517
Total visitors
709

Forum statistics

Threads
626,848
Messages
18,534,274
Members
241,133
Latest member
jenniferms
Back
Top