I had vowed to turn off the computer and get dinner ready, but I was still watching, of course. And all the barf-inducing back-and-forth with JW and ALV made me wonder: Why doesn't the prosecution hire a domestic violence expert themselves? Is it too late?
There have been so many dv victims that have some on the various TH shows and said that JODI was abusive, that Travis was stalked, etc. It seems the prosecution could benefit from having an expert testify to that. Have they had one on and I missed it? TIA for your help!
I do agree that the prosecution should have had a Domestic Violence Expert. The Defense Expert Domestic Violence Expert - to me - comes across as overly biased to The Defense. Of course, this makes sense (since she is 'their' witness). However, she contradicts herself all of the time. IMO, I think that a person familiar with terms such as 'battered women syndrome,' the DSM - could be sitting in court as The Defense Expert Domestic Violence Expert.
The Defense Expert Domestic Violence Expert, I do not feel as though she really is an expert in this field. Plus, I think that this expert gives testimony that is very manipulating. For instance, "throwing" in comments such as, "when we have children things we swore we would never do, we end up doing."
Children do not have any merit in this case - Arias, and, Travis Alexander were not a married couple with children. This witness although her true ability as a Domestic Violence Expert comes across as questionable from her own testimony - this witness is very skilled at weaving irrelevant stories with a clear motive to get someone in the jury to say, "I said things to my children I swore I never would - Arias must have had reason to murder Travis Alexander." Plus, this expert witness, IMO, behaved inappropriately towards The State by saying things such as, "are you mad at me ... Mr. Martinez ... I am being bullied by you (JM).
Really - this expert witness felt bullied by JM? This is a witness that is supposed to be "hands on" with both abuse victims and abusers. Yet, JM bullied this witness?
No, I do not believe so. I think that the above is another example of how this witness knowingly, willingly, and happily said things on the stand to purposely try to make JM look bad in front of the jury. Also, why couldn't this witness answer The State's questions? She could answer the defense questions without any forced difficulty.
I do think that the prosecution should have had a domestic violence expert. If for no other reason, just so that a reasonable, well trained, well educated, and person motivated with having the best interests, and, well being of abuse victims / abusers could have been heard.