trial day 41: the defense continues its case in chief #121

Status
Not open for further replies.
  • #321
I have to say I am really shocked by the animosity for ALV on these boards.

I know she is on the "other team", but for God's sake this woman has committed her life to helping people being domestically abused.

I will be curious to see who all of the sudden LOVES her when JM turns her into a witness for the prosecution, and he will....

I spent years in therapy trying to recover from my real PTSD caused by the REAL abuse I endured at the hands of my father for 18 years. ALV has made a mockery of everything myself, and every other abuse victim, went through. She should be ashamed of allowing herself to be used this way. While I have no doubt Juan will straighten any issues caused by her testimony out, that will not change my opinion of her. She isn't helping abuse victims, she is setting the cause back 20 years. IMHO
 
  • #322
She shouldn't be there for the above reason, there is something about her personality that doesn't know how to behave and she should stop using her own judgement in regards to this trial and err on the side of caution. It's a distraction for the jury to have her there, her presence effects them more than anyone, and they need to focus of the trial.

Attention seeking, it's not about her, or the jury .. it's about what happened to Travis.

If she is there on her own choice...wtf.......
All I can hope for is that someone asked her to be there because she has to go on the stand or something important. !!
 
  • #323
In terms of LaViolette, for me personally, this is where the potential dangers lie:

There are still rather rampant misconceptions about intimate partner violence. Honestly, I see it from a lot of warm-hearted, well meant posters following IPV trials (not this one specifically) who make flippant, hurtful comments just because its something they (very fortunately) have never experienced. (It can be hard for some to understand why someone would stay in a relationship that literally killed them unless you've been in one that nearly has.)

And to that I say YET...because the statistical likelihood is that one will at some point in their lives know a victim/survivor intimately. A cousin, a brother, your best friend, a daughter.

A lot of what LaViolette has testified to is part and parcel of an abusive relationship. (I do not, and never have, believe Jodi was ever abused by Travis.) So in a sense, I'd like to believe she's educating the public to some extent about the different forms in which abuse can manifest. I'm a survivor of a mostly psychological abusive relationship with threats of physical violence, weapons brandishing, destruction of property, arson, rages in which furniture was broken and doors literally broken down trying to get to me. But I was never hit. Still there are many who would believe my relationship couldn't be defined as abusive because of that.

The problem is though is she's piece-mealing abuse and applying it poorly. There are behaviors Jodi has exhibited far more consistent with an abusive personality than Travis has. (I disagree cheating is emotional abuse too...though I think it can certainly be utilized as a weapon to become emotional abuse.) And normal people can be jealous, can be possessive, and can even become abusive in their own actions without rising to the rank of 'abuser'. An abuser is never not controlling. An abuser wouldn't encourage their victim to openly date others or willingly allow them to put a thousand mile distance between them.

So for me the danger lies in how much more she's both blatantly ignoring and deliberately avoiding - like the beginning of an abusive relationship and subsequent, very gradual escalation into abuse that's missing in this case. Like the likely stalking Travis would have engaged in once Jodi moved, the constant phone calls and texts asking where she is, the moving her in and marrying her almost immediately...I could see a few red flags missing...but all of them?

MOO
 
  • #324
Wow!! Did you guys see this?? I read this somewhere on the internet... apparently when Jodi gave that sneaky bird/finger to someone, she wasn't flipping of her sexpert witness Dr. Dick Samuels like we thought... She was flipping off Nancy Grace! Lol!


This is from the Jodi Arias Twitter account:

"Jodi Arias@Jodiannarias: Actually, Nancy, that finger was for you. Have a nice day."

I'm sure Nancy will be crushed!
 
  • #325
We're back.....
 
  • #326
My :twocents: regarding the latest news about Juror #5 in the courtroom :

I want to hear her "version" as to why she was dismissed ...

And ... I want to hear "straight from the horse's mouth" which way she was "leaning" : guilty of 1st degree pre-med murder -- or -- was she buying into the self-defense ?

JMO ... but ya just never know what a juror may be thinking ...

MOO !
 
  • #327
You need to ask yourself: Is it possible for an intelligent woman who is an expert in domestic violence to be completely snowed by Jodi's story?

Can any reasonable person actually believe any part of Jodi's story that Travis was a pedophile, a woman batterer, a sexual deviant and a liar?

LanieFI: Someone who may not know all of the details may...

Does Travis' corpse look like it was the result of a terrified woman attempting to flee being attacked?

LanieFI: Nope, not to me.

The answer is no. So, I have to conclude that ALV took this case for different reasons. I don't know the reasons, but if this woman actually believes the DT position, she just isn't capable of rational and critical thought.

MOO

I answered in line...
 
  • #328
I think JA is thrilled about her journals being released - she thinks she writes great prose and that they explain why she was justified; she's pissed abut her parents' interrogations being released.
MOO

I don't recall the exact wording, but one of the snippets shown on HLN sounded like it was being written for a romance novel.
 
  • #329
I wonder if they're all in chambers because of juror #5 being there or something else. I wouldn't be surprised if it's something Donovan pointed out to the defense.... if so, I called it. She is a menace in that courtroom.
 
  • #330
  • #331
OK Vinnie just stole my question!

It just boggles my mind that ALV seems to actually believe every word that has come out of Jodi's mouth.

I don't think, no matter what my job was or how much I was paid, that I could put my own credibility on the line for someone that is a COURTROOM APPROVED ADMITTED LIAR!
 
  • #332
Here we go...
 
  • #333
Question - Didn't the whole CHOKING incident come out in the middle of her testimony and it just sort of slipped out...? As in, she just threw that out there, the liar that she is. Or is my memory so bad due to the pot I grew in my moms tupperware on the north side of our house? (i should have had them on the south side i guess)
 
  • #334
WildAboutTrial @WildAboutTrial
Tricolor is wearing a teal colored shirt and has blonde and red hair. She is in the seat closest to the wall in row 3 spectators #JodiArias
 
  • #335
She shouldn't be there for the above reason, there is something about her personality that doesn't know how to behave and she should stop using her own judgement in regards to this trial and err on the side of caution. It's a distraction for the jury to have her there, her presence effects them more than anyone, and they need to focus of the trial.

Attention seeking, it's not about her, or the jury .. it's about what happened to Travis.

She has a right as a tax paying citizen to watch this trial - I feel like she is probably more entitled than me to be watching.
 
  • #336
WOW, Juror #5 is in the courtroom watching from the gallery as per HLN.
 
  • #337
Tricolor should go with our team to roof top happy hour!! :great:
Just dreamin'.

I think that's a bad, bad idea - if she makes any comments whatsoever or suggests that any of the jurors have discussed this case among themselves, it's over - there will definitely be a mistrial. She needs to keep her mouth shut and talk to NO ONE or every single second of this trial would be for nothing.
 
  • #338
I think Juror #5 should have stayed away. This is going to give the DT even more fuel for a mistrial IMO. :furious:

Gotta agree. I think she was most likely a great juror, in that she seemed engaged and asked a lot of juror questions. I believe that whatever she did was inflated by the Defense.

But for her to actually attend trial and sit in the gallery two days after she was excluded smacks of selfishness and a desire for attention. No reason for her to be there when she could watch at home.
 
  • #339
Or purposefully trying to cause a mistrial. I don't think the other Jurors seeing her there is appropriate at all now that she can see all the media.:moo:

The Judge knows she is there she was brought in by her clerk.

She has broken no laws so there isn't anything to appeal.
 
  • #340
juror #5 :seeya:

feels weird putting a face to the name
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
52
Guests online
2,843
Total visitors
2,895

Forum statistics

Threads
632,247
Messages
18,623,835
Members
243,065
Latest member
kim71
Back
Top