trial day 42: the defense continues its case in chief #128

[Hatfield]

I can't say for sure, of course, but I wonder if Travis felt about JA like I did about my best friend-psychopath who eventually committed a horrible crime against me. I would go through, say, a day where I added things up and really wondered about her. I had serious, huge misgivings about her. Then the rest of the following days were just so normal and she was so charming that I felt silly for taking her flaws so seriously. It must have been an overactive imagination on my part, see

I bet he felt silly for fearing JA when she was in front of him with her smile and giggles, etc. You don't get taken in by a psychopath without finding them believable or charming. I bet Travis could not wrap his head around how bad she was, even as he himself voiced concern on occasion. I did that. I almost still don't believe how bad mine was. It's surreal to try to reconcile the awful with the good parts you like[d] about the person.

I have little doubt JA showed up with the most convincing, amazing con we could imagine. And apparently (imho) she seemed really sincere and credible. I could see that. You'd have to know a psychopath like that, maybe. I would have sworn on a stack of Bibles that mine was really harmless about violence and that sort of thing. She's really a monster. It's mind-blowing, seriously.

I totally get it now after watching Jodi on the stand and also seeing her in many of the interviews and other video footage we have of her. Like the one with Travis and his friends where she is fake sleeping. And the one of her singing in jail all nice and pretty. And the one where she is interviewed on 48 hours. So many sides of Jodi.

I can easily see where Travis was fooled by her and that is what is so scary to me about her. Had I not known what she already did to Travis, I would still almost swear that she could never do such a thing.

One thing that has come across loud and clear is her lack of true feelings and emotion. That is so scary to witness. She fakes real well, but when you look at her carefully, she emits hardly any true feelings of remorse to this day. She is not sorry for what she did to Travis.

 

[mattzane227]

That's OK. Scientific studies prove 6 people must say something before people believe it.

I'm also usually hours behind since I'm usually watching on HLN and verbally battering every host who has to see ALLLLRIGHT WE'RE GONNA PAUSE RIGHT THERE. YOU'RE NOT GOING TO MISS A MINUTE OF TESTIMONY. I get it. Just go to freaking commerical. I miss In Session a lot.

 

[AlanCFA]

So this Alyce thinks that EVERY SINGLE WOMAN that TRAVIS had known in his personal life was VULNERABLE. How in the world would this woman possibly come to this conclusion and this woman is supposed to be a professional? I just do not see it...I don't see it at all.

When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail . . .

 

[AuburnSchnauzer]

Here I found it just for you.
Now if I need free legal advice from your hubby, will you help me?

Jodi Arias Trial - Day 42 - Part 3 - YouTube

Woo-Hoo !!! Thank You So Much !!! As for legal advice from my hubby, I cannot guarantee you Nuttin !!!

Whew - Thank You SOOOOOOOOO Much!!!

 

[MeeBee]

Thanks Gitana,

She has frustrated me so much during this trial. There was one particular point during today where Juan asked a perfectly valid question of the witness and solely because Wilcott did not like the question, she asked to approach and the judge of course said yes, and they approached and Juan literally limped to join them again.

That was the perfect opportunity for the judge to say...."No, Miss Wilcott you may not approach and if you want to object, you can object just fine from your chair"

It would have gone a long ways to stopping the needless approaches just because Wilcott doesnt like the flow of the questioning.

It is ridiculous to me how Wilcott constantly asks to approach just because she either wants to interrupt the flow OR because she doesn't have a valid objection ready.

This judge IMO is not caring about the jury's time or effort at all. She treats them like they are employees of the court and she is their employer. She shows them little respect IMO.
Another perfect example is when she ordered them out of the court for 3 minutes. Good grief.

I rather like her new way of objecting: Objection, relevance, speculation, foundation? PICK ONE lady.

The one the other day was hilarious: Objection, relevance, foundation, speculation...fairytale?

:facepalm:

 

[PPKik]

It must have been good and true--if they forced it down!

Yeah, it was, but didn't seem any different than a few others I've seen.

[video=youtube;0VnIFOCbj-U]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0VnIFOCbj-U[/video]

 

[Thurston]

I wane to preface by saying I am 110% pro prosecution... But I am soo mad at Juan Martinez. Why does he need to badger LAViolette .. He is being way too arrogant .. He's coming off diminutive, angry and feels the need to constantly belittle. Ughghg. If I'm feeling bad for her I just sure hope the jury isn't either. He didn't need to address this witness the same way he addressed arias or Samuels. I just don't want his terrible cross exam to sway the jury away from 1st degree. This is a horrible cross exam. Why can't he soften his tone? Does he not get how his points are being lost within his fights? I love Martinez, I admire his work and dedication to this case. I just don't like that he's being counterproductive. If it's just me please tell me. I hope it is. Please we can't lose this one. My humble oo!

I feel bad for Travis Alexander - he was slaughtered. We see at least two pictures where it is clear that Travis Alexander is not a threat to Arias' life - so, why does she continue to butcher Travis Alexander? Arias is supposed to be afraid for her life - why doesn't she Arias use the time where Travis Alexander is incapacitated to flee and get help?

LaViolette as a witness makes me angry - LaViolette seems unable, unwilling, and not interested in being a witness that answers The State's questions. LaViolette violated not only the sanctity of court - but knowingly made light of the severity of the crime when LaViolette said, "Mr. Martinez are you angry with me?" LaViolette knows better - LaViolette knew that she was being sarcastic and cocky. LaViolette has no reason to behave in an offensive manner - The State is doing their job. LaViolette goes out of her way to be difficult instead of answering the questions - in fact LaViolette stated that she performed testing as an undergraduate, then, goes on to say that she is unfamiliar with testing. It cannot be both - LaViolette treating the court in a hostile manner is off-putting, IMO.

LaViolette states that she does understand DNA because she has read about it - but then goes on the say that she does not understand DNA. LaViolette putting on a "show" by throwing out comments such as "The FBI Profiles People - then they put that into a computer," is ridiculous. More so, it shows that LaViolette is not interested in the truth - LaViolette is only interested in giving answers "okayed" by the defense.

I've never seen defense witnesses behave so poorly in court.

If I were on the jury, I still would be upset that LaViolette purposely made a flippant comment - then smiled as her 'friends' jeered. There is no room for this when the reason everyone is in that courtroom is because a human being was slaughtered - we know that he was stabbed almost 30 times, his throat sliced, he was shot in the head. We do not know the possible torture Arias subjected Travis Alexander to before she butchered him - we know that Travis Alexander did not have much to eat on June 4 and missed an important business call at 7pm. It appears as though it is possible that Travis Alexander was Arias' prisoner - unable to freely do what he wanted on June 4th - then when Arias decided it was time, Arias slaughtered Travis Alexander.

Witnesses, courtroom observers, everyone in the court should behave in a way that is respectful to The Courtroom. LaViolette has gone out of her way to disrespect the court - and I find this type of courtroom demeanor to be rude.

I hope that no one in the jury feels badly for LaViolette - she chose to be part of this. Unlike Travis Alexander - perhaps The State should remind the jury daily the horrific damage Arias inflicted to Travis Alexander's body.

 

[marlap]

Thanks, I've been lurking for a while and finally decided to sign up. Usually if I have something to say 5 people have already beat me to it. It's hard to keep up with the break-neck pace of the threads!

Welcome to our group Mattzane, happy to have you!

:wagon:

 

[shane13]

Today, the issue of profilers came up.

And JM asked ALV if she knew if profilers' testimony is allowed in courts? No answer given.

Anyone know the answer?

Is this like lie detectors--not admissable?

 

[DairyGirl]

The judge admonished the witness at least 7 times today. Juan asked for the witness to be admonished and the judge did admonish her. If the prosecutor doesn't ask, there is nothing a judge can do.

Thank you for clarifying this. I was wondering why she just sat there until Juan said something.

 

[Imprint]

(snip)

LaViolette as a witness makes me angry - LaViolette seems unable, unwilling, and not interested in being a witness that answers The State's questions. LaViolette violated not only the sanctity of court - but knowingly made light of the severity of the crime when LaViolette said, "Mr. Martinez are you angry with me?" LaViolette knows better - LaViolette knew that she was being sarcastic and cocky. LaViolette has no reason to behave in an offensive manner - The State is doing their job. LaViolette goes out of her way to be difficult instead of answering the questions - in fact LaViolette stated that she performed testing as an undergraduate, then, goes on to say that she is unfamiliar with testing. It cannot be both - LaViolette treating the court in a hostile manner is off-putting, IMO.

LaViolette states that she does understand DNA because she has read about it - but then goes on the say that she does not understand DNA. LaViolette putting on a "show" by throwing out comments such as "The FBI Profiles People - then they put that into a computer," is ridiculous. More so, it shows that LaViolette is not interested in the truth - LaViolette is only interested in giving answers "okayed" by the defense.

I've never seen defense witnesses behave so poorly in court.

If I were on the jury, I still would be upset that LaViolette purposely made a flippant comment - then smiled as her 'friends' jeered.

(snip)

I hope that no one in the jury feels badly for LaViolette - she chose to be part of this. Unlike Travis Alexander - perhaps The State should remind the jury daily the horrific damage Arias inflicted to Travis Alexander's body.

Snipped for space. What a fantastic post, a pleasure to read. You perfectly described what makes this expert so repulsive to watch.

 

[lil_buddy]

so when something disastrous happens for the defense, I like to peek at the no-no site.
They are in complete denial about the Einstein/manifesto thing.
A couple of posters limped in with 'well, it doesn't prove premeditation'.
They HATE the judge.
Since everyone hates the judge, she must be doing it right.

 

[AlanCFA]

"...a trial that comports with the rights due Ms. Arias pursuant to the 5
Amendments to the United States Constitution and Art. 2, §§ 4, 15, 23, and 24 of the
Arizona Constitution into something that more closely resembles a modern day
equivalent to the Salem Witch Trials which ended in 1693."


LMFAO! RRREALLY?

- Tell me, what do you do with witches?
- Burn them!
- And what do you burn, apart from witches?
- More witches! - Wood!
- So why do witches burn?
- 'Cause they're made of wood? - Good!
- How do we tell if she is made of wood? - Build a bridge out of her.
- But can you not also make bridges out of stone?
- Oh, yeah.
- Does wood sink in water?
- No, it floats. - Throw her into the pond!
- What also floats in water?
- Bread. - Apples.
- Very small rocks. - Cider! Great gravy.
- Cherries. Mud. - Churches.
- Lead. - A duck!
- Exactly.
- So, logically--
- If she weighs the same as a duck...
- she's made of wood.
- And therefore?
- A witch!

 

[dani]

Thank you so much! My laptop has been overheating so quickly then it just shuts down! So I have been attempting to use my moms IPad (yes my mom is in her 70's and is more technologically advanced then myself lol) and am having great difficulty getting around on this thing! Honestly not trying to be lazy just thankful for the ease of the link! Xoxo

O/T: Sounds like you need a new fan for your computer.:twocents:

 

[AngelWings444]

I feel bad for Travis Alexander - he was slaughtered. We see at least two pictures where it is clear that Travis Alexander is not a threat to Arias' life - so, why does she continue to butcher Travis Alexander? Arias is supposed to be afraid for her life - why doesn't she Arias use the time where Travis Alexander is incapacitated to flee and get help?

LaViolette as a witness makes me angry - LaViolette seems unable, unwilling, and not interested in being a witness that answers The State's questions. LaViolette violated not only the sanctity of court - but knowingly made light of the severity of the crime when LaViolette said, "Mr. Martinez are you angry with me?" LaViolette knows better - LaViolette knew that she was being sarcastic and cocky. LaViolette has no reason to behave in an offensive manner - The State is doing their job. LaViolette goes out of her way to be difficult instead of answering the questions - in fact LaViolette stated that she performed testing as an undergraduate, then, goes on to say that she is unfamiliar with testing. It cannot be both - LaViolette treating the court in a hostile manner is off-putting, IMO.

LaViolette states that she does understand DNA because she has read about it - but then goes on the say that she does not understand DNA. LaViolette putting on a "show" by throwing out comments such as "The FBI Profiles People - then they put that into a computer," is ridiculous. More so, it shows that LaViolette is not interested in the truth - LaViolette is only interested in giving answers "okayed" by the defense.

I've never seen defense witnesses behave so poorly in court.

If I were on the jury, I still would be upset that LaViolette purposely made a flippant comment - then smiled as her 'friends' jeered. There is no room for this when the reason everyone is in that courtroom is because a human being was slaughtered - we know that he was stabbed almost 30 times, his throat sliced, he was shot in the head. We do not know the possible torture Arias subjected Travis Alexander to before she butchered him - we know that Travis Alexander did not have much to eat on June 4 and missed an important business call at 7pm. It appears as though it is possible that Travis Alexander was Arias' prisoner - unable to freely do what he wanted on June 4th - then when Arias decided it was time, Arias slaughtered Travis Alexander.

Witnesses, courtroom observers, everyone in the court should behave in a way that is respectful to The Courtroom. LaViolette has gone out of her way to disrespect the court - and I find this type of courtroom demeanor to be rude.

I hope that no one in the jury feels badly for LaViolette - she chose to be part of this. Unlike Travis Alexander - perhaps The State should remind the jury daily the horrific damage Arias inflicted to Travis Alexander's body.

Twice tonight, your posts have had me in tears. Not an easy thing to do. I want Justice for Travis and his family!! Hoping and praying the system works this time.

Thank you!

 

[shane13]

O/T: Sounds like you need a new fan for your computer.:twocents:

Same problem ALV now has--a need for new fans!

 

[PPKik]

Today, the issue of profilers came up.

And JM asked ALV if she knew if profilers' testimony is allowed in courts? No answer given.

Anyone know the answer?

Is this like lie detectors--not admissable?

That's a strange question for JM to ask her. Do you remember about where it was he asked ALV?

I don't know the answer, but I don't see how they [profilers] could be useful during a trial. After John Douglas, the most infamous FBI profiler I know about, became a hired hit man for the Ramseys, I found it difficult to give profiling a whole lot of credence.

 

[JustJudy]

well u know jodi - always defying the odds - always the rarest of rare exceptions.

Yes, she's soooo special, just like....oh, I don't know...SATAN?!
(Imagine I know how to & inserted pic of Dana Carvey's Church Lady)

 

[shane13]

That's a strange question for JM to ask her. Do you remember about where it was he asked ALV?

I don't know the answer, but I don't see how they [profilers] could be useful during a trial. After John Douglas, the most infamous FBI profiler I know about, became a hired hit man for the Ramseys, I found it difficult to give profiling a whole lot of credence.

It was either early on in AM session or after lunch break.

It makes sense, as a profiler's result is really not evidence.

 

[Hark]

:what: :what: :what:



OK first things first, WELCOME!! Secondly...I was just banging on my keyboard this evening about this VERY subject!!

My theory being that something about TA reminded her of her father.

My :moo: is that something TA said or did in the shower sent her into a flashback mode and that woman snapped like a baked chicken bone.

Thanks for the welcome! So glad someone else is thinking along that line.