trial day 47: the defense continues its case in chief #143

[Arishia]

Well, Juan may be comfortable with this stipulation, but I'm not. How the hell could they tell from that picture whether she was or was not holding a weapon???

It doesn't matter to the prosecution's case that at exactly that moment in time she wasn't holding a knife or gun.

 

[pamalamadingdong]

Hope the jurors get their whole $12 today.

 

[Sleuth5]

And not only was it smart to avoid jurors seeing whatever they could find in the photo, by stipulating that it shows she is unarmed it begs them to disagree -- and I suspect a lot of them will do precisely that. They will look at that picture and say, "there's no way i can tell whether she does or does not have a weapon by looking at that picture." So in one fell swoop, Juan nullified the utility of the evidence.

:cow:

 

[katiedid2]

because he believes it and he doesn't feel it hampers his case at all.

Knife could have been on sink counter, etc. Juan is a pro and wouldn't agree to it if it hurt his case even .000000001%.

The eye guys in? Thought someone said no!

 

[Boytwnmom]

that we know of and who knows what else he has locked away for the right time. I see this as a big nothing. Like, did the DT never hear about POCKETS or hiding stuff in the bathroom or under the bath rug? Seriously, we know she killed him with a gun and knife-it is irrelevant at what point she showed them to him. That picture proves nothing that's relevant to the case. Her own defense is that she killed him so what's the issue that was worth the argument?

Personally, I think JM has something else up his sleeve to concur like that.

 

[geevee]

The irony of it all

Trust in the Juan, he will not let you down.

 

[Love Never Fails]

I hope so Gypseagirl. I trust JM but I don't like it when my long-held theory is destroyed just like that!

No no. Your theory is right. Juan just didn't want camera guy to testify because he has already testified on behalf of the State so it would look weird if he got up and testified for defense also. I think JM just made this concession so he could move on and not have to destroy his own witness.

 

[ctmom]

Here ya go

 

[Nhic]

Other than raking in another $10,000, what has the DT accomplished today?

Whether JA was holding a weapon (she was IMO) or not is irrelevant. That has nothing to do with the state's charge of premeditation.

This DT wastes so much time. And taxpayer dollars! :banghead:

 

[gypsyblue]

I didn't hear JM say ever that JA had Travis at knife or gun point to take photos in the shower so not sure why some think this looks bad for premeditation. There was time and another photo prior to the inititial knife attack after that photo anyway. Jmooc

 

[luvtenniss]

Dinner time - see ya tomorrow!! :seeya: Rebuttal dance!! :great:

 

[LadyEdith]

But who is going to edify us on the ALV mystery----she had sealed hearing today----has she stolen away like a thief in the night?

 

[seguek9]

Better the jury had to wait around today for 2 hours than the jury be subjected to another 2 WEEKS of minutiae.
moo.
come on you guys--- this is a GOOD thing!!!!!! Celebrate!

 

[my2sense]

No. Not with the stipulation they just made. It's over.

What I'm saying is, if the Judge wasn't going to allow the testimony, then no stipulation would have to BE made kwim? So it sounds like she was going to allow it, and Juan offered to stipulate instead. And, again, I think that's weird (that the judge was, presumably, going to allow it)

 

[katydid23]

I hope so Gypseagirl. I trust JM but I don't like it when my long-held theory is destroyed just like that!

You're theory could still be valid. I think Juan just wanted to get moving before this jury starts dropping like flies. So he sacrificed a tidbit that is not that important. The jury knows that at some point she pulled out her weapons. So it does not matter in the end if it was at that exact moment or not. JMO

 

[kscornfed]

Right, which is why I can't understand why Juan would agree to this announcement.

probably just easier to do this and not even put the guy on the stand. i don't think amounts to anything in the 'big picture.' (thanks, alyce!)

it keeps it brief, no time is wasted on it, and it's done. ON TO REBUTTAL!!!!!!

:rocker:

 

[Breezy1]

The only thing I don't like about this stipulation is the jurors wondering how on earth they would know that and agree to it.

 

[Liebchenmutti]

It's Juan's Turn!!!!!!
Mi guapo diablo will set the record straight.

 

[momof7]

Well DT thinks they won something HUGE. Because in their mind they think if they can tell the jury Jodi wasn't holding a weapon during the picture taking then the crime wasn't premeditated. Right ....

Basically, IMHO, its to try and make the Jury believe that that time she was not holding a weapon so the running into the closet could have happened and getting the gun could have happened and that she shot him first and the ME is wrong. She didn't bring the gun with her. Premeditation might not have happened.

Not that in the picture he was scared because JA was holding a weapon.

IMHO and probably wrong.

K

 

[AngelWings444]

What happened with Arias tweeting ... is she allowed to continue?

Yes. She is allowed to continue to tweet. Juan was aware of the situation but is not going to investigate, as it will lead to the defense filing more motions for prosecution misconduct. I guess, during a trial, they aren't allowed to investigate the defendant? I think he would have to file a motion to have the judge order no more tweeting. He did call out Donovan in court..it was beautiful. Also, pot..kettle...black with the DT. Oh, and the DT's kettle has some more pennies in it.

Me thinks..he doesn't care, as it makes her and her DT look like fools. They have no control over their client.