trial day 43: the defense continues its case in chief #131

[zoozoo]

I know a lot of people feel otherwise, but I have a real problem with referring to non physical abuse as domestic violence. Call it abuse, violence is something different.

I totally agree and that's why I thought it strange that a DV expert would testify that non-physical "abuse" is now being considered a part of DV and can be "even more damaging" than physical abuse. I think ALV testified to that simply for the defense's benefit so that if the jury throws out JA's uncorroborated physical abuse claims, they will still consider her a DV victim based on texts etc.
I am just saying that if AVL is going to make the above assertions about non-physical "abuse" then she shouldn't also be able to claim that stats about DV that are based on reported, PHYSICAL abuse prove DV is more prevalent male-on-female than female-on-male; those stats do not include non-physical abuse which might significantly change them.
She is trying to have it both ways and that seems wrong and disingenuous.
If you were to objectively look at non-physical abuse behaviors in this case, clearly there are way more examples of it for JA against TA than there are for TA against JA (privacy invasion, lies, manipulation, illegal taping, stalking etc.).

 

[LambChop]

I think she is older and can't get her wits together and Juan is not even giving her a chance to breathe! moo

She doesn't have to "get her wits together" if she just answers the question and tells the truth. She is clearly trying to create a combative answer to his questions, something that will be defensive and protect her client. She can't just answer the question, she has to reform her answers to be positive to her client even though the truth might reflect negatively on Jodi. That is what is so tiring for her and it shows. Just answer the question to the best of your ability without analyzing it's affects on the defense.

ALV is suppose to be an objective evaluation expert and she is proving to be an advocate for the defendant. With a jury that consists of a majority of men she is not coming off as a strong witness for defense.

 

[HarvestMoon]

Explanation:

Yesterday I was mod-snipped for calling the being on trial, Killer. Saying it was name calling. I am not name calling but stating an action the being has confessed to.

I find it too hard to state the being's name, to refer to the being as she or her. For me there is no defense of the over killing and pre planning, the brutal murder of a beloved family member to the Alexander family. Hence even defendant is something I find too hard to use.

 

[thefragile7393]

It seems to me that JW is very wet behind the ears. She does not appear to have tried many cases. Is she a DP qualified defense lawyer or just Nurmi? Anyway, Jodi's constant whispering in JW's ear while she is the lawyer responsible for objections is extremely distracting. I would never allow a client to do that. That's what paper and pen(cils) are for.

Well her website has these glowing stats about her...but the stats and the courtroom demeanor don't match.

Sent from my SGH-T989 using Tapatalk 2

 

[G&AMom]

Actually some of the younger generation might be worse, fully immersed in Patriarchy Theory.

Patriarchy Theory works like this: this is a male dominated society set up by men for men in which women are basically the Rebel Alliance and men are the Empire.

The idea that women can engage in behavior like manipulative passive aggression is rejected out-right. The only power is the power wielded by men.

This is why Alyce harps so much on the idea of control, under patriarchy Theory its only men who have control and women have no agency. This is how she dismisses all of Jodi's stalking behavior through the idea that it was only Travis who had control and therefore responsibility in the relationship. so the exact same behavior by a man and a woman must be interpreted differently merely on the basis of the genders.

The younger women involved in, for example the Great Schism in the atheist and skeptical community are even more true believers in patriarchy theory and the sociology of knowledge perspective (and overt man haters) than Alyce who, being old fashioned, cant claim that this is the only framework she's ever known.

Of course traditional social conservatism and patriarchy theory are both ideologically based sexist nonsense that interferes with the foundations of true egalitarianism and equality.

Keep in mind when you're listening to Alyce LaViolette's prudish, gender obsessed, control fixated nonsense that her real foundation is not in domestic violence but in Patriarchy Theory

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Tapatalk 2

Here's what gets me. I'm a few years younger than ALV. My father died in the '60s when I was very young. I got a front row seat to how women were treated in that era. My mother was like a non-person. Despite the fact that she had a college degree and a job, she couldn't get a credit card or a car loan. It was truly terrible and I think people just don't realize how bad it was.

BUT, and it's a very large BUT, it was obvious to me looking around that men didn't have it much better. Most of them seemed just as trapped by society's expectations as women were. Often they were stuck in jobs they hated because they had wives and children to support. They drank too much. Divorce was pretty uncommon, no matter how unhappy either party was. Every time I hear some politician bemoaning the good old days of the '50s and '60s, I want to scream. Why do they think people were so rebellious?

Take a good look at the men in Mad Men. Do they really seem happy to you? Because they sure don't to me.

Okay, my rant of the day.

 

[SCSam]

---------
Hi, I agree. If I were JW. I'd try to get her off the stand soon as possible before she blows it again! We never know whats coming out of her mouth..She has seen her day.:what: :seeya:

I soo agree with you but, unfortunately, that's not JW's style. She never seems to know when to stop. Of course, wouldn't it be nice if she surprised me this time.

 

[SusieD]

I wonder how ALV would do with Kelly Siegler as a prosecutor questioning her.

Sent from my SGH-T989 using Tapatalk 2

IMO she would be even more combative. After all, to have a woman, a member of the sisterhood question whether or not poor Jodi was a victim and to imply poor ALV didn't do a very good job of evaluating.....

She would be livid. How could a woman dare not side with her?

Shoot, I'd pay some $$$ to watch Kelly Seigler take on Jodi or ALV, either one. Just for the satisfaction.

Not that Juan isn't doing a great job, but JA seems to be at a loss when the person in front of her isn't turned into a hot mess by her pelvic thrusts and ALV expects ALL women will side with her, it's not that she's a lousy evaluator, but because JM is an evil man that 's the problem.

 

[The Farm]

Just watch Jodi, no emotion, no anything. It is like she is watching the trial of someone else.
Notice that> I would be screaming and crying my eyes out that I was innocent.

 

[missmazzy]

It seems to me that JW is very wet behind the ears. She does not appear to have tried many cases. Is she a DP qualified defense lawyer or just Nurmi? Anyway, Jodi's constant whispering in JW's ear while she is the lawyer responsible for objections is extremely distracting. I would never allow a client to do that. That's what paper and pen(cils) are for.

Actually, JW is the DP qualified attorney, not Nurmi.

 

[boonedock]

New here but enjoying reading all the posts.
It almost felt as though JM was sometimes handing ALV an olive branch at times but she wouldn't take it. She could have retained some credibility if she agreed that she hadn't seen some of the evidence or kept her testimony to broad strokes.
I think JM should ask her about character assasination and does she realise that this is what she has done to Travis. Just my 2 cents, now back to reading

 

[momof7]

4 years behind bars she has settled in nicely. That's actually a long time? We might not think that, but think about where we were in June of 2008. I had both my parents here, I was working a few days in Seal Beach, the rest of the week here.

Fast forward to April 2013. I have a completely different life...both parents died within weeks of each other in Oct and Dec 2008 for the most part, very unexpected. I ended up giving up that position at work because I was here caring for them at the end. And now it taken me into a completely new line of work. Albeit one I was doing somewhat all along in my line of work, but I have a completely different life.

Her 4 years would have her settled in nicely and the American Idol star no less and she is used to cheese sandwiches and showering once a week and she has become quite the pencil and pen thief.

I agree. Also, I would imagine someone like JA who had poor impulse control, ie..job hunting, never having money, trips etc, having all of those things strictly controlled has been a good thing for her. She doesn't even have to worry about things like in the real world. The only issue she has is going to the big house where she will be again, a small fish in a big pond.

Right now, she is the big fish in a little pond, loving the attention from the media her dt and the jail. It will end and she will back to square one.
But have no fear, she will be back on the circuit on shows like 48 hours and Dateline extolling her innocence and TA's abuse. No doubts. She can't be out of the limelight in someway.

Does anyone know if the judge, the Pros or the family can have it asked that she not participate in any shows like that?

K

 

[~ GiGi ~]

Good Morning Websleuthers :seeya:

I have been reading here for a long time. Thought I would go ahead and jump in here.

I can't believe ALV told JM that he needed a time out. No reprimand from the judge except "please just answer the questions" I too believe she had that rehearsed just waiting to throw it out. I think it made her sound silly.

You all are great I love reading your posts. Hope I did this right lease:

 

[kscornfed]

I wonder how ALV would do with Kelly Siegler as a prosecutor questioning her.

Sent from my SGH-T989 using Tapatalk 2

well, since kelly's a woman, she COULDN'T be abusive, right?

:what:

 

[SunnyinMO]

Start watching at 0:49:30

Jodi Arias Trial - Day 43 - Part 1 - YouTube

I can't see her ever being able to recoup her former reputation.....she is digging her own grave by being evasive and combative. KARMA is a B....

 

[JRS_JD2L]

Well, JM got a lot of useful information in yesterday. The fact that JA told LAV that she wanted gas cans because she was going to MESA was a big aha! for me! I know DarylB tried to back-track on that with JM but now we have TWO instances where she most likely did state she had planned to go to MESA!

moo

Exactly, ITA. I thought that the gas can bit was the NG BOMBSHELL(TM) yesterday. It did two things. It corroborated the plan to drive to Mesa, establishing premeditation. And, it also established that JA lied to this jury, which is more important IMO.

I think it will only take one confirmed material lie to the jury to seal her fate after the huge deal Nurmi and Jodi made that she has had an epiphany, and that's why she would never lie now to the jury. That was the theme of JM's cross yesterday, and I think the jury's going to have a plethora of lies made directly to the jury by the end of it.

 

[pjmale]

OT but is anyone else having problems with the thanks button? I will thank a post and when I refresh, my thanks is gone, so I have to thank it again.

Yes

I thanked your post and it didn't show up until I refreshed the page.

 

[SCSam]

4 years behind bars she has settled in nicely. That's actually a long time? We might not think that, but think about where we were in June of 2008. I had both my parents here, I was working a few days in Seal Beach, the rest of the week here.

Fast forward to April 2013. I have a completely different life...both parents died within weeks of each other in Oct and Dec 2008 for the most part, very unexpected. I ended up giving up that position at work because I was here caring for them at the end. And now it taken me into a completely new line of work. Albeit one I was doing somewhat all along in my line of work, but I have a completely different life.

Her 4 years would have her settled in nicely and the American Idol star no less and she is used to cheese sandwiches and showering once a week and she has become quite the pencil and pen thief.

I am glad you rebounded so well after your grief! If Jodi is given the DP, methinks her days in lockup during the years of appeals will not be as nice as the past 4.

 

[fifteen89]

Yes, and she is going to regret ever saying it. Combativeness from a witness needs to be left out of the courtroom in such a serious case.

From what I have heard from the court watchers none of the jury laughed when she said it either.

Start watching from 0:35:00

Jodi Arias Trial - Day 43 - Part 2 - YouTube

O....M....G....
She can't even admit Travis, who had no idea in the world that ANYone would ever hear or read his words, had no motive to fabricate compared to Jodi facing the death penalty. Un.be.liev.a.ble.

The other thing I can't fathom is why the Judge can't say "YOU are the one who needs a time out, Ms. ALV. Please answer yes or no and stop anything else that wants to come out of your mouth before it reaches your tongue."

Hopefully at least one juror question for her will be "is there ANYthing that could convince you Jodi lied to you?"

 

[kscornfed]

Good Morning Websleuthers :seeya:

I have been reading here for a long time. Thought I would go ahead and jump in here.

I can't believe ALV told JM that he needed a time out. No reprimand from the judge except "please just answer the questions" I too believe she had that rehearsed just waiting to throw it out. I think it made her sound silly.

You all are great I love reading your posts. Hope I did this right lease:

welcome, gigi. you did it right. dive right in!!!!

 

[Hopeful One]

Explanation:

Yesterday I was mod-snipped for calling the being on trial, Killer. Saying it was name calling. I am not name calling but stating an action the being has confessed to.

I find it too hard to state the being's name, to refer to the being as she or her. For me there is no defense of the over killing and pre planning, the brutal murder of a beloved family member to the Alexander family. Hence even defendant is something I find too hard to use.

Why can't we call her killer? She is a killer. She admitted it.