trial day 44: the defense continues its case in chief #134

[josie1986]

not done catching up yet, but heard on HLN last night that ALv is NOT their last witness.....who could be up next?? anyone know?

oh god dont say things like this :floorlaugh:

how much longer can their circus go on:facepalm:

 

[momof7]

ITA. It's pretty obvious from Flores' interrogation of Jodi that they were open to the idea that someone else was involved, but Flores clearly states that there was no evidence of anybody being there but Jodi. I also think that had anybody else been there, Jodi would have long since thrown him/her under the bus with the other 2,478 people there.

Yes, I think when she was telling the Ninja story she was throwing it out there in hopes something would stick.

I don't believe she had help in the killing itself. She was there alone. If she wasn't that person would be sitting beside her or waiting for their own trial. She wouldn't go down alone. If anything, that person would be portrayed as the abuser who threatened to kill her if she didn't help kill TA. It would be more believable.

And for the record, I don't think it was MM if that were true. We pretty much heard JM ask her if MM were her former friend who would not betray her. I think JA DID try to do something and point the finger, it just didn't stick and that is why MM isn't testifying for her. I know the standard line he 'supposedly' wrote that he asked her not to get him involved, but I just don't believe it.

Kelly

 

[josie1986]

I think it may be Ms. Wong the HLN producer. They still haven't resolved that motion for mistrial.

im hoping its her,because thats a hearing not the actual trial right? the same thing jinkasauraus did?

 

[LambChop]

I believe the hardest part in believing ALV is the fact that she wants to place all the blame on Travis and Jodi was a helpless victim, twisting the text from Travis around saying he is being abusive. The text clearing is him telling Jodi he is done with her because of her actions. She had to have done something really, really bad to provoke him. He does not appear to be an angry type of person. So she has clearly pushed his buttons by something she did. That is the unknown but ALV is unwilling to give Travis the benefit of the doubt that Jodi did something evil in Travis' eyes.

After all that she plans to visit him even though she clearly cannot afford to do so. This trip, along with the check she left for Travis practically cleared out her checking account. Why would you spend that much money to go visit someone who accused you of being so evil wrote that they never wanted to see you again unless you were actually that evil. Considering what happened I would say Travis was right in what he wrote.

In considering the whole picture......ALV left out a very important part in her considerations. She forgot about how Travis was murdered. This is not about self-defense and there is no way with her educational background she could ever justify what happened to Travis. It should have been a very large red flag.

 

[jellybeanz]

When I heard LAV's ringtone, I instantly thought it was the following. Can anybody confirm if it is the same tune?
I used to use it maybe five years ago as an alarm ring tone.

(Actual song is PPK - Ressurection Robots)

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f4_sZK3HXs8"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f4_sZK3HXs8[/ame]

 

[camcneishg]

oh god dont say things like this :floorlaugh:

how much longer can their circus go on:facepalm:

it was at the very end of DD I think.....Kristi was his guest, she said at the end of the show that they just got word that ALV was NOT the last witness for the DT, then she kinda made a face.....LOL....me too

 

[Nhic]

:what:

http://www.[link removed]/

There ought to be a law criminalizing websites of prisoners. WTH

 

[G&AMom]

I'm disgusted. 1500 followers.

Followers doesn't mean fans. I'm sure some of those 1500 are media. And some could be people like us, just keeping track of the nutjob.

 

[JayB12]

I refuse to waste my time listening to re-hashed garbage from ALV and Willmott. Willmott will string this thing out and beat that dead horse as brutally as Arias butchered Travis.

I will check here periodically to see if the juror questions are being read. Otherwise, I'll do the opposite of ALV and Willmott and be productive today.

 

[Softail]

im hoping its her,because thats a hearing not the actual trial right? the same thing jinkasauraus did?

:yes: Not part of the trial, just a hearing.

 

[camcneishg]

maybe it is the tape of TA shooting the gun with his friend.....?

 

[YESorNO]

Hello all!

I loved JM yesterday. I didn't watch Willmot's re-direct and didn't really follow on here much either. Just put the video on mute and went about my stuff. I do hope she's done at some point today and we can get to the questions from the jurors! I hope the Defense rests this week.

I read Katiecoolady's post on the other thread about not giving JA more attention. I agree completely! JA knows all eyes are on her and she does everything to take attention away from Travis and be back at the center of attention. She assumes we're more interested in things like her giggling and whispering with her team, pretending she sees juror misconduct, being secretive with her body posture etc. than the fact that Travis was butchered to death.

I'm going to focus all my attention on those supporting Travis! I'm not going to pay attention to these miserable conscience-less people again. Till verdict day that is. On THAT day I will look at Arias and Defense team and will watch their faces with unbridled glee as the GUILTY OF MURDER ONE verdict is read.

Morning :seeya: What if the jury decides to give JA "manslaughter"? JA will be out when she's about 40 or "not guilty". How will we feel? My son asked me yesterday. He was worried about me because I was so upset with that verdict in Florida. I told him I am steeling myself and holding this trial at arms length- very hard to do- it's almost impossible. I may be just kidding myself.

 

[momof7]

I did not watch JW on re-direct. Too worn out from "extraction" of yes or no from LV!!! It was that painful, and I would think the jury felt the same way and were also tuned out.

The jurors question will be the most telling, IMO. They should give us a read of their feelings about LV's evasiveness.

Hopefully all of the seeds JM planted will be brought up by these questions. Then let us see if Juan finally gets the answers, as she will not want to F--- with the jurors!

Yes. The juror questions are where we see how much ALV impacted their thinking and if they feel DV could have possibly been part of it.

If true, they were putting few questions in when JW was examining the witness, yet throughout JM cross, there were several questions put in the basket. For some reason, that feels like a win for the good guys. He brings up points and they want explanations. When JW is up there, they feel like its not vital to their judgment. I won't be surprised if we get a mistrial motion becuase the jury isn't asking enough questions during JW examinations of the witness. :waiting:

Kelly

 

[LambChop]

maybe it is the tape of TA shooting the gun with his friend.....?

I think that is who it is. Remember, he was asked to leave the courtroom because defense planned to call him?

 

[cityslick]

Morning :seeya: What if the jury decides to give JA "manslaughter"? JA will be out when she's about 40 or "not guilty". How will we feel? My son asked me yesterday. He was worried about me because I was so upset with that verdict in Florida. I told him I am steeling myself and holding this trial at arms length- very hard to do- it's almost impossible. I may be just kidding myself.

I think it's ridiculous to auto assume a guilty verdict no matter how slam dunk a case is. As long as verdicts are judged by just your average person off the street, there could always be one, two or twelve who's opinion is rock solid in the other direction.

 

[camcneishg]

Well, we got late word, of course, Dr. Drew, that LaViolette is not the last witness for the defense. So, I`m looking forward to see who`s going to call next.
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1304/10/ddhln.01.html

 

[raisincharlie]

I didn't know Alyce went to the hospital last week due to all the stress!




Wow. Didn't she realize what she was getting herself into? I know she's not the brightest crayon in the box but, dang! She's coming off extremely unprepared and unknowing!



This article goes on to mention, Alyce, Wilmott and the other staff member were seen/photographed eating dinner last night and that supposedly is considered witness tampering.



http://www.freep.com/usatoday/article/2073067

This article bothers me. I don't give a hoot if Wilmott goes to diner with ALV, no big deal, so what. As always, it seems political correctness leans toward punishing the many to kiss butt to a few. I am way tired of it. If the author would have taken a bit more of an investigative approach, they could have, through checking into actual court cases, concluded that it is not the cameras that should be banned from the courtroom but rather it should be the so called "experts" (specifically head doctors and social activists).

Since our justice system leans toward protecting the rights of the accused, the camera allows for the truth to be seen. Since the justice system has this built in lean, what we get are hired guns who will say anything to get paid or to just to further their agenda. We also get lawyers who are not suppose to subjorn perjury but routinely do so. What we get are frivilous motions, more sidebars than testimony and a majority of evidence excluded because with this lean, much of it is considered too prejudicial.

Bull baloney - if an accused's activities are so egregious, the jury should be allowed to know it, as that is who the accused truly is. But yet what we get are dimwits who want cameras removed from the court to ensure the public is kept without knowledge and therefore ruly and subject to sucumbing to the game. The courts and their activities should never be kept secret from the public they supposedly serve and protect.

If experts such as ALV and Doc Samuels can't take the heat then perhaps they should consider being first honest and true to their professions, and secondly being fair instead of tilted toward protecting those that would cause harm. Yesterday, someone (and I am sorry I do not remember who) pointed out how frightening it was to think of how many children could no longer see their fathers because of ALV. I was deeply saddened by that thought as I watched ALV rail on men as being nothing but dildo's with heartbeats. Perhaps members of the press need to consider a few things before putting stupidity to paper.

 

[Jane Jetson]

I would tend to suspect her nose might simply appear more prominent now because her face isn't as full.

Or because a liar's nose grows, doncha know? :floorlaugh: (Am I gonna get in trouble for that?)

 

[rose222]

Morning :seeya: What if the jury decides to give JA "manslaughter"? JA will be out when she's about 40 or "not guilty". How will we feel? My son asked me yesterday. He was worried about me because I was so upset with that verdict in Florida. I told him I am steeling myself and holding this trial at arms length- very hard to do- it's almost impossible. I may be just kidding myself.

Morning YESorNO!

First of all based on this information I don't think there will be lesser options.
State v. Andriano, STATE of Arizona, Appellee, v. Wendi Elizabeth ANDRIANO, Appellant."We held in State v. Celaya that “where the sole defense is self-defense so that the evidence requires either conviction or acquittal, any instruction on any other grade would be impermissible.”  135 Ariz. 248, 255, 660 P.2d 849, 856 (1983);  see also State v. Wall, 212 Ariz. 1, 6, ¶ 29, 126 P.3d 148, 153 (2006) (noting that when defendant asserts an “all-or-nothing” defense, the record usually will not support the giving of a lesser-included offense instruction);  State v. Jones, 109 Ariz. 80, 81-82, 505 P.2d 251, 252-53 (1973) (holding that lesser-included offense instructions were not required where evidence at trial and defendant's self-defense theory presented an “either-or” situation requiring either first degree murder conviction or acquittal)."


Even if the Judge decides to allow the jurors to consider lesser options I don't think they will vote for anything less than murder one. I'm confident.

 

[momof7]

I think it's ridiculous to auto assume a guilty verdict no matter how slam dunk a case is. As long as verdicts are judged by just your average person off the street, there could always be one, two or twelve who's opinion is rock solid in the other direction.

I am going to admit to being stunned with the verdict for CA...but the truth of the matter is I have followed some trials I thought for sure was a slam dunk either way and I was wrong.

You can never know what a jury is going to do until they do it. I would be upset/shocked/stunned if JA only got manslaughter, but I also remember I see and hear so many things the jury does not. I always remind myself that the jurors are literally supposed to take what they hear at trial and form an opinion. They don't get to watch HLN and Nancy Grace and JVM trot out all the drama on nightly tv.

Kelly