weekend break: discuss the latest here #123

[TigerBalm]

I'm having weird dreams too! Last week I had one where I was with a media crew searching for JA for some reason and we ended up at the Anthony's house to search and Caylee was alive!!

BBM
That is one dream I wish was real. :hug:

 

[Schuby]

I might show up if I thought it was a good way to take my power back from someone who was spreading lies about me. From the DT's reaction, that might be the case.

I had that thought too. If it were me, I would do it just as an F-U to the people who kicked me off. (Still think she's planning a book deal tho).

 

[Nosey Parker]

InSession was replaying ALV direct, regarding June 4.

What it seems ALV took away from that day...how horrible it must be for the defendant's genital area to be on blast in the worldwideweb.

ALV also stated the defendant wrote things in her journal she never thought anyone would see.

Well let's take a look at a few pages of the defendant's journal entries she never thought anyone would see, starting with June 10, 2008.













http://images.bimedia.net/documents/Arias2.pdf

The more I read from her journals, the more convinced I am that she rewrote them before her arrest, at least the 2008 pages.

The flow is not natural to me; the writing out in full of places and names, where one would normally use short forms, nicknames or initials. It's just too convoluted and self-serving.

'I can't put my finger on it, but there is just something off with that journalese'

 

[gauntlet]

Wow what an afternoon yesterday. I was pleased to JM back up again. He wins that first round every time. I am sure the jury have become used to that stategy. Someone posted that he is hard on the female witnesses. I don't believe that's the case. His recross of Det Fl wasn't exactly chatty!

I'm looking forward to Monday. In the meantime here's a link to one of my other favourite JM moments. I love the fact JM doesn't move til the objection is officially called.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ItZ5_CwdSsw&feature=youtu.be

 

[Charterhouse]

I am sorry I haven't read this morning. I just watched the replay of JM opening cross of ALV and I am furious with the judge. She needs to take control of that courtroom.

There was so much disrespect going on that I can not list it.

Has anyone that has been on a jury or any attorneys ever seen anything like this. I have not in my experience.

Sorry for the rant so early in the a.m.

 

[SusieD]

Their opinion is what matters in the grand scheme of things....not mine or anyone else's. I think that is the point some here are trying to make is all.

Sent from my SGH-T989 using Tapatalk 2

<modsnip>

My opinion matters to me on a public message board. I don't believe I have to shut down discussion on a subject because TA's family expresssed their opinion.

 

[hindsight2020]

Tanisha Sorenson was quoted a few posts back stating she was supportive of her being there. With that said....thats all that matters.

Sent from my SGH-T989 using Tapatalk 2

Good Morning Everyone!:seeya:
Juror 5 seems like a sweet lady from the 30 second interview she gave, however, I think she should not be there, her presence in the courtroom is just another distraction and we don't know what impact it may have.

Yesterday she had to wait until the end of the the day, after everyone was gone, only to be escorted out, as the media was following her around, the circus just gets bigger. MOO

 

[TigerBalm]

Such a GREAT observation! Within 5 minutes, I saw the exact same defiant, snarky attitude with ALV on cross that I saw with JA.

I thought yesterday's testimony from ALV was scary, actually. Calling TA the perpetrator, approaching his sister during a break, sparring with JM rather than just answering "yes" or "no." It all demonstrated an arrogance and egoism I had only seen in JA up to this point. But, worse than that, was the passive aggressive "Are you mad at me, Mr. Martinez?" condescending calm laced with sarcasm that she attempted to sell on the stand. It didn't come across well.

She thinks she is smarter than him and, frankly, she came across as almost narcissistic to me. Anybody who gets up on that stand to tell THIS whale of a tale spun from texts and emails and journals and JA's pathologically lying lips must have some kind of ego, IMO.

Many TH's and some on here didn't appreciate JM's explosive approach. I did. Not only is it his style, it's the only way he can pin down these witnesses on key points. His JOB is to discredit them and their findings. Frankly, we can speculate all day, but I don't think anybody knows exactly WHERE JM is going with the Snow White line of questioning. I like that, mainly because I'm sure the DT doesn't.

One of the key points he made, I thought, was that ALV needed the journals and exhibits in front of her to make her "case." He had to press her to remember key phrases and subject matter. Essentially, he took away her crib notes. And she didn't fare as well. He didn't have to use his patented "Do you have a memory problem?" question. He demonstrated it. (I think JW will pay for that snarky remark in a BIG way.)

I understand that ALV first signed on as the mitigation specialist. She spent 44 hours with JA. I wonder what kind of "coaching" she did on how to "handle" JM.

Somebody should have TOLD her it didn't work out well for JA. I see the same fate for her. :twocents:

BBM

A lot like the defendant was with Travis.

 

[Sleuth5]

At most, I thought there could be 1, but only 1. Ironically enough, I swore it was Tri-Color. The freaks at the psycho is innocent site tapped her to hang the jury.

I'm a paranoid person by nature and trust nobody on the planet. Can't lie and say I haven't wondered if her dismissal and subsequent pop up yesterday smacked of some kind of collusion with the DT. My spidey sense tingled just a bit....

Could be too much espresso and coke though....

Remember...just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't really out go get you.:seeya:

 

[Novice Seeker]

I can just hear it now -

I have this one client, who suffered through a year of the worst verbal abuse ever...she ended up murdering him...

It's concerning that ALV is going to be discussing how to assess for DV. Her biased and prejudicial mindset is so significant that it makes ALV incapable of recognizing any other reality. When ALV sat there and testified in support of and favor of a sociopathic delusional murderer she destroyed her professional credibility.

 

[Mare10]

The more I read from her journals, the more convinced I am that she rewrote them before her arrest, at least the 2008 pages.

The flow is not natural to me; the writing out in full of places and names, where one would normally use short forms, nicknames or initials. It's just too convoluted and self-serving.

'I can't put my finger on it, but there is just something off with that journalese'

She writes that she spoke with DF and he tells her she will need to take a trip out there and nothing more. She writes that she doesn't know what's going on. The then writes that she prays that there is a mistake and calls his phone. Hmmmm, if she doesn't know what's going on then please tell me what she is praying is a mistake?? This was IMO written after the fact!

 

[LambChop]

BBM

I can tell you without hesitation that there is no way I would turn myself into the center of attention by showing up at the courtroom. No effing way.

So speak for yourself, but claiming you don't want to speak to the media (via the media) and showing up in the middle ring of the circus is by no means universal behavior.

Legal advisors? GMAB

J5 was a very active juror, taking notes, asking questions. Her questions are probably the reason she was dismissed. The one about "" was probably commented on in the jury room, without a doubt and that is what did her in. She may not have said a word but it could have been enough to get her dismissed. She was discharged for misconduct and I have to say if I did nothing wrong I would not be hiding my head in the sand. I see her with two choices: 1) give a statement of what happened and how she was not the one to blame for her dismissal; or 2) show up at court and let everyone know she has done nothing wrong and deserves to finish this trial even if it's from the gallery.

If she does not show up on Monday that was all she wanted to do. If she does show up on Monday she is committed to finishing out this trial even if she has to sit in the gallery to do so. She has a lot of courage and she is showing us all she will not be intimidated by defense. If anyone would discourage her from being there it would be Travis' family and they are supporting her right to be there. That should be enough for us to accept J5's right to take part in a public trial. jmo

 

[Applejack]

ITA. The problem with Alyce is that she thinks it's fine to be condescending and dismissive so long as she is dealing with a man (at least from what I've seen here so far!) She is obviously attempting to control the dynamics of the cross examination by being obtuse and patronizing. I think she imagines that the jury sees her as an innocent "victim" of the prosecutor, which is a role I think she adopts whenever she feels a "power differential" with anyone -- but particularly a male.

I, on the other hand, think that the jury doesn't see her that way at all. I think they see someone who has been highly opinionated and clearly unwilling to acknowledge that her conclusions regarding "abuse" could obviously apply to the defendant in the case. Had she had the sense to at least gesture to JA's own abusive behaviors, they might hold her in higher esteem. At this point, I think they can see a pattern with these defense witnesses of evasive, confrontational responses to even the simplest question the prosecutor poses.

Ya know, sometimes a yes or no question is simply that. When you won't even answer something that straightforward, you can't expect people to take you seriously.

:cow:

I agree with everything you said except the last bit I bolded. When testifying it is very important to ensure that you truly say what you mean. In day to day conversation it isn't as important and people fill in the blanks themselves or understand what you mean to say. But if you aren't perfectly clear in testimony, especially with Juan, it WILL come back to bite you. So while Juan WANTS a yes or no answer, sometimes a question cannot be Properly answered with a yes or no. For example, the "did you use this continuum to identify domestic violence in this case, yes or no." I understand why she did bot want to give in and wanted to give a proper answer to that.

At points she was totally rude and WAS just sparring for the sake of being difficult, but at times Juan does make it difficult to give an accurate answer.

 

[Sleuth5]

For anyone that I have heard say she has no pattern of this kind of chaos in prior relationships, to that I say, it drives the point home even more that this is a classic Stalker situation. If they don't have this weird almost chemical attraction for a man, they can and do walk away, they actually get bored and move on. Once they lock eyes on someone and there is this "thing", um, he'll be lucky to get out alive. Same if a man is the stalker and goes along fine until he sets eyes on "the one". Once you live through it, you know how possible it is that someone has no criminal record, no real reputation for being bat shi* crazy...until that moment.

They can go along very normal, in and out of relationships and to some, not show an ounce of weird behavior, nothing that sets off alarm bells (I must admit my bias in that I do feel men fail to recognize "trouble" sleeping next to them in bed, as fast as a woman realizes it)

I am sorry, and hope I don't offend any men, I believe this stems from social cultural ways we are different. Men tend not to be afraid of women until they wake up and go to the kitchen in their boxers and find her standing there holding their cats body in one hand and the cats head in the other and her nightie is covered in blood and there is a knife on the cutting board.

Well, I'm afraid of women who can think up stuff like that. :what:

 

[SusieD]

She writes that she spoke with DF and he tells her she will need to take a trip out there and nothing more. She writes that she doesn't know what's going on. The then writes that she prays that there is a mistake and calls his phone. Hmmmm, if she doesn't know what's going on then please tell me what she is praying is a mistake?? This was IMO written after the fact!

It was definitely written as an alibi.

Her eagerness to share her journals with the police makes them suspicious right from the start.

They were written for an audience, that's for sure

 

[Kamille]

RBBM

And from everything I've come to know of psychopathy a similar pattern emerges too. A psychopath often willingly discards their victim in lieu of a prospective one - 'good' psychopaths will sometimes even have several targets waiting in the wings, simultaneously manipulating all of them. They're 'fine' as long as they're in control of the nature of the relationship - and when such a relationship ends.

If a victim chooses to leave them, though, I believe it unleashes controlling and abusive behaviors of epic proportion. Personally, I'm convinced the only way one can safely choose to leave a psychopath is if the psychopath is incarcerated, dead, or has already latched onto a new victim.

MOO

I totally agree with this and she really hadn't let any of her other "victims" go, she just rearranged their place in her life and what they were useful for. The only one she didn't seem to still have contact with was Bobby and I believe I've read somewhere on these threads that he was killed in an unrelated incident? Or was that just someone else with the same name. I don't believe he's on either witness list so I assumed he is deceased?

MOO

 

[Karmady]

Good Morning Everyone!:seeya:
Juror 5 seems like a sweet lady from the 30 second interview she gave, however, I think she should not be there, her presence in the courtroom is just another distraction and we don't know what impact it may have.

Yesterday she had to wait until the end of the the day, after everyone was gone, only to be escorted out, as the media is following her around, the circus just gets bigger. MOO

Gosh, I'm not seeing that at all. To me, showing up in court after having been excused from the jury, especially in THIS case, seems (to me at least) to be a highly aggressive thing to do. Maybe it's just my personality, but you couldn't have forced me into that room under the circumstances. jmo

 

[dog.gone.cute]

:moo:

IMO. Juror number 5 should take a back seat until this trial is over.. IMO she is on her way to causing a mistrial!

BBM: I totally agree ...

Now I will admit, I was very anxious to hear what she had to say when she was removed because I wanted to hear HER side of the story -- NOT talking heads or speculation ...


THEN she issued a statement -- which contains the following snippet :

"Until the verdict in murder trial case of Jodi Arias is reached I will not make any statements or give any interviews regarding my removal from the jury. I believe that the attention should be focused on the actual trial. I would ask from everyone to please respect my privacy and the privacy of my family."

http://www.abc15.com/dpp/news/regio...pdate-juror-kicked-off-trial-issues-statement


RBBM: Juror #5's actions yesterday were totally contrary to her statement ...

She wanted "privacy" and there is nothing wrong with that.

BUT she showed up at the courthouse knowing full well that the media would shift its attention to her -- she had to see the news the evening she was dismissed ... good grief, she was the headliner !

Juror #5 has lost all credibility IMO ...

She should have stayed away, at least for the sake of Justice for Travis and his Family !

MOO ...

 

[oceanblueeyes]

Well then why don't we all just string the woman up and hang her in public? My gosh, she served on this jury, she is emotionally invested and all she told that reporter is she would love to tell er story but had to talk to her attorney first. This is still a free country. <modsnip>

I admire this woman very much.

Everyone that has spoken out that has been INSIDE the courtroom has said repeatedly that it is far far different being in the actual courtroom than watching it on line or TV.

ITA! She has a right to be there. This woman sacrificed months of her time doing her civic duty. I wouldn't be surprised to learn that she did nothing to be booted off either.

Its not her fault that the camera kept panning over to her. She was very quiet and dignified while listening. Far more dignified than the laughing goons in court yesterday.

IMO

 

[Anbud]

I Like how JM addressed AL after she asked him if he was angry at her...
iirc JM said something Like this --- would you answer the question differently if I changed my way in asking it or would your answer be the same no matter how I asked it.lolololol