weekend break: discuss the latest here #123

Status
Not open for further replies.
Good morning!

Can anybody tell me approximately where in yesterday's testimony you can hear AL saying that Travis was not a victim? I want to see the reactions on people's faces as she says that. If I have to watch the entire day again, I will jump out of a window. Thanks :)
 
No lawyer here, but I don't think it's any kind of crime or even an issue for anyone to look at anyone in a courtroom. She could even talk to a juror, in an appropriate situation (outside of the courtroom) as long as the real juror followed the admonition and didn't say anything about the case.

I beleive the judge would have kept her out of the courtroom if she thought there was any risk of a mistrial. I believe that is totally within her purview.

As much as I find her behavior distasteful, I believe she has every right to look at, and make eye contact, with whoever she wants.




Judge Sherry Stephens advised the jury that Juror 5 is in the courtroom and they are to have no contact with her.



Read more: http://www.abc15.com/dpp/news/regio...t-in-jodi-arias-case-in-phoenix#ixzz2Pbk4xuFY
 
What Juan does that seems to light everyone's fuse is in those yes/no questions. I've never studied linguistics so this is starting to fascinate me. I'm glad we have all these tapes so I can go back and review the exchanges. My understanding is that communication is 70 percent visual, but there is definitely something going on when the witness keeps complaining that they cannot answer just yes or no. Why not, me wonders?

I suspect not being allowed to embellish the response harkens back to childhood. Maybe they feel out of control, or maybe yes/no questions give no quarter to hide untruths. I don't know. But is certainly interesting to watch.

Most of the questions could be answered yes or no. However, there are the exceptions. Yesterday Juan asked ALV if she read "something "(I forget what) and AJV couldn't answer yes or no because there were three of those "somethings" and she didn't know which one Juan was referring to.
 
I have been watching the very last (18 of 18) video of Jodi's interrogation, those posted to you tube by David Lohr. She is right handed and very freely writes with and uses her right hand. So what was with the left handed spectacle in court where she carefully picked up the cup and drank all the water using her left hand?

Does she or her attorneys believe the jury will acquit her or feel sorry for her because she is showing off a left crooked finger? This is the one she hurt while slaughtering Travis, the VICTIM. She disgusts me.

In the interrogation video the previous day she writes with her LEFT hand. It's at the 14:09 mark.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=76clRq1lAwc
 
Up thread it was mentioned that probably some lovely and admirable people were born 7/9. While we do have Jodi and OJ Simpson, we also have Tom Hanks, Jimmy Smits, and my own wonderful non-abusive husband :).

I share a birthday with Jeffrey Dahmer...(also Raymond Burr/Perry Mason!)

But back to the trial! I just watched Juan expound on Snow White and Monday cannot come soon enough! This is shaping up to be great.
 
Good morning!

Can anybody tell me approximately where in yesterday's testimony you can hear AL saying that Travis was not a victim? I want to see the reactions on people's faces as she says that. If I have to watch the entire day again, I will jump out of a window. Thanks :)

No need to watch the whole day, so save the window. Best thing to do is watch the last 30 minutes of trial yesterday, aka. JM's Greatest Hits Volume 41. It also begins to dispel the myth that Snow White was abused, and gives us a fresh look at the fairy tale.
 
I very much agree with you and would love to know when these were turned over to the Prosecution. When were they written? Me thinks they were written in jail.
I'd be prepared to bet that all her diaries were seized in the beginning and photocopies made so you would be able to compare to the originals in any event. However that's not to say she didn't spend three weeks doctoring them knowing full well they would be brought into evidence. That JA even mentions the diaries in her interview with Det Fl makes me think she really wanted them read.
 
That's all well and good, but then don't go out of your way to put out some sort of 'statement' saying you want privacy because it screams hypocrisy.

She is asking for personal privacy. "Don't show up at my house." "Don't bother my family, etc." Her statement has nothing to do with her coming into court to view the rest of the trial. I'm sure she asked the judge and she was told she is free to do whatever she pleases. She is not a threat, to anyone. She may make Jodi uncomfortable but that is Jodi's problem. lol
 
I had heard that ABC news had all 600 pages first. Might try looking for them with ABC.

Right but I don't think they've released them all. They're going to sprinkle them out here or there to keep us watching.
 
It does happen. I am headed to trial in a few months on a case in which the former employee has produced a "journal" of everything that "happened to her" two years after the case began to support her emotional distress claims.

She claims to have written everything down at the time that the events were occurring, but interestingly enough she includes side comments...statements like "I take xanax now (not because I am crazy, only as needed)" and "I am gaining weight, irritable, my period has stopped (not due to pregnancy, due to what [employer] did to me.")...Because people really write explanatory statements in their personal journals.

She then launches into these dramatic missives about how the pain of unemployment and (alleged) discrimination hurts so bad that she can't breathe and can only stay in bed and cry because of what was done to her...even though her Facebook pictures show her partying like a rock star in VEGAS the same weekend the entry was written.

This is written all in the same ink, on consecutive pages but was supposedly written over about a year.

Much like Juan, we aren't going to have it excluded even though it is patently created after the fact. We are going to make her eat it, page by page [*insert gleeful laugh here:rocker:]. I am sure the State's strategy is the same.

BBM Will you be providing condiments, counselor? Thanks for the legal take on the "journal" issue -- goodness knows few of us believe that it accurately reflects events as they occurred at the time.

You know, I think about what my journal would look like -- if I had either the time or inclination to keep one -- and I know very well it would be useless if at some point in the future I was accused of a crime. Sample entries would look something like this:

Monday: Well today I thought I had a dental appt but I guess it's tomorrow maybe. Probably mow the lawn if it stops raining. I had an idea I wanted to write down but I can't remember it. Oh,
Tuesday: Guess I never finished yesterday, I'm tired, thinking about lunch. What was I supposed to do after lecture? I need to get that book from the library
Wednesday: Missed my dental appt. yesterday. Rescheduled it but I don't remember when. Forgot to mow the lawn. Need to remember to buy something. Where is my
Thursday: Finally found my pen.
Friday: DW reminded me about some appt. and I need to write it down. It's on Monday, but I don't remember what month.

:cow:
 
I'd be prepared to bet that all her diaries were seized in the beginning and photocopies made so you would be able to compare to the originals in any event. However that's not to say she didn't spend three weeks doctoring them knowing full well they would be brought into evidence. That JA even mentions the diaries in her interview with Det Fl makes me think she really wanted them read.

I'm sure she doctored those journals before she was arrested. Maybe she even made the whole dang things up. I put nothing past her.

I really don't think they would be taking this journals seriously if she had them in jail with her.
 
Right but I don't think they've released them all. They're going to sprinkle them out here or there to keep us watching.

That's kind of abusive behavior isn't it. Withholding information to keep us in the relationship with them, hmmm, where's that continuum again?
 
Whoa, Whoa, Whoa!!!!! If I am reading this correctly??????!!!!!!!

http://www.psychboard.ca.gov

Holy freaking carp! She better hope Juan doesn't get hold of this. OMG!!!!!

What does it say? It only goes to the directory page.

Hello everyone! I used to be KY Gal on the In Session board, but decided that would be rather tacky now. So I spelt out Kentucky. I read here for the longest time and finally decided to join. Keep up the good work and Carry ON!
 
Here's a link to another long journal entry (8 pages) from 5/22/08; ALV testified about this during her last day of direct with JW.

http://images.bimedia.net/documents/Arias1.pdf

Previously shared on this thread, the June entries after the phone call from Dan Freeman:

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

I tried following the file naming protocol to see if there were others, but no more at this time.

So on May 22 Jodi writes that Travis told her that the $6000 BMW she purposely or negligently wrecked might just end up being "scrapped" (i.e. imo "written off") but two weeks later he turns into a homicidal maniac because she dropped his new camera from less than 2' onto a plush mat?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
80
Guests online
719
Total visitors
799

Forum statistics

Threads
625,990
Messages
18,518,064
Members
240,919
Latest member
LynnKC84
Back
Top