weekend discussion: discuss the trial here #154

[Smelly Squirrel]

Hi, this is the first time I've posted even though I've been lurking on here for a while. So hopefully I'm doing it right!
I just wanna say that after the juror questions yesterday, I am really starting to feel worried about one juror...

Welcome. I agree there is always a couple of odd juror questions, like near the beginning one asked about the roommates' fingerprints and their alibis, this, after they already know she's admitting self defense. So, it appears there is one or a small number of numbskulls on the jury. But, remember, in deliberations this could be sorted out with the other jurors. It appears there are many more sharp jurors than the questionable ones. And that's even if that person or persons make the final cut. Of course, In any trial, all it takes is one juror to spoil an otherwise strongly proven conviction. It can happen any time, but I'm not worried about it here. There is just too much evidence.

 

[Angelina Frost]

Yes! I said, outloud, "WHAT? Did she just say that?"

Do you hear this exchange?! :help:

JW: Just so we're clear, you don't have any medical evidence of (the bullet) passing through the brain, right?

Dr. H: It HAD to have passed through the brain.

JW: You don't have any medical evidence of that, do you?

Dr. H: I do, uh, the skull is perforated where the brain is, so it HAD to have passed through the brain. The brain is there.

JW: Well...but you have no idea...you have no medical evidence of how far or what part of the brain (the bullet) exactly would have hit, right?

Dr. H: It would have passed through the right frontal lobe, I just don't have any evidence of hemorrhage now because of decomposition. But it HAD to have passed through the brain because of the part of the skull that was injured. The brain in a young person especially, is flush against that structure. The brain occupies that entire skull. So to have a hole in the skull here (pointing to forehead), and an exit in here (pointing near sinus), it HAS to pass through the brain.

JW: Uh-huh....so....

She continues with this-

JW: Are you sure of this (bullet passing through the brain)?

Dr. H: (incredulous) YES.

Unbelievable. You cannot make this **** up. :facepalm:

 

[lil_buddy]

I was watching some show on TV last week which was called something awful like 'freaky obsessions' or something and it had a very articulate guy on there who suffered from OCD, the interview was informative and interesting, but the title of the show was so disgusting, that's exactly the kind of rubbish that needs to be called out. Everyone doing a media degree needs to do a course in ethics first IMO.

I forget you're not American - 'til u use the word rubbish.

 

[leebee52]

Welcome. I agree there is always a couple of odd juror questions, like near the beginning one asked about the roommates' fingerprints and their alibis, this, after they already know she's admitting self defense. So, it appears there is one or a small number of numbskulls on the jury. But, remember, in deliberations this could be sorted out with the other jurors. It appears there are many more sharp jurors than the questionable ones. And that's even if that person or persons make the final cut. Of course, In any trial, all it takes is one juror to spoil an otherwise strongly proven conviction. It can happen any time, but I'm not worried about it here. There is just too much evidence.

I'm not sure we can really tell what the jurors are thinking based on their questions. Granted, some of the questions are obvious but those that seem pro defense might not be. Might be that they really want to weed out disinformation thrown out by certain wits and or atty's. I'm sure they have realized that questions asked of the wits are formulated to get a specific answer that favors whomever is on direct or cross.

 

[ShadyLady]

I think there was just a closed hearing. IIRC trail for today was cancelled the other day at the same time court was dismissed early because the drama queen got a headache.

She also claimed headache on the day she claimed she saw Travis masturbating and it was only that he wanted his car back.

She conveniently uses the headache excuse.

 

[WhoaIsMe]

OT but I did a series of paintings once on labels. Called one 'Pin and mount me like a Butterfly' and it showed little girl dolls with labels like 'unstable' etc after a horrible experience with a gallery where they told people I was psychotic because I paint in red predominantly and called my mother to tell her that they thought I was 'bipolar' ***** I DID NOT NEED. Labels can be VERY destructive if used incorrectly.

That was out of line o.0 and reading a whole lot into the colors you prefer. One of my favorite prints is The Accolade and aside from the medieval romantic feel of the picture, one of the reasons it is my favorite is the red tunic the knight is wearing. It's just a beautiful color to me.

 

[Tuba]

To continue grinding the problem PDS test to powder, the clinical tools web page noted that the questionnaire was strictly self-reporting, provided no reverse questions, had format tending to lead to over reporting, had no scales to detect faking nor validity scales and is therefore susceptible to malingering.

There is a candidate off to the left who qualifies as Chief Malingerer and much, much more. We know she lied about opening question, checking the choice of assault by a stranger. Since the test is flawed in inviting over reporting & malingerer's claims, why would she not continue to skew and falsify her answers? Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus. Interesting legal presumption: false in one, false in all. It's my belief that Dr. DeMarte disregarded the PDS test because she did not respect it as a valuable tool for the same reasons clinical tools web site criticised it.

 

[geevee]

I believe her Lawyers would have to be the ones to call her back to the stand. I dont think they have anything to gain by doing so. It would give Juan another shot at her. Yes she did state Deanna was crazy (that Travis had told her that)

The Defense rested, I believe the only one who could return her to the stand would be JM, and I have no clue why he would do that, it's unnecessary for his rebuttal.

 

[Arabian Girl]

Oh man, I'm so sorry. You can't let the decisions one girl made define you. Look Astro, I don't think that was all there was to that diagnosis, I think it was the one thing Dr D was allowed to talk about, the DT did not want the jury to know what she found other than that.

But I do see where you guys are coming from and my heart goes out to you. It really does.

Dang, still haven't figured out the double quote! I just got here so maybe I'm jumping the gun but it sounds like some people with BPD are having a hard time.

I did too at first, but after my initial reaction (emotional surprise, surprise) it really is that many people just don't know anything about BPD let alone PD's in general.

Astro, hang in there, it's not much different than any other mental health issue, left untreated they wreak havoc!!

Totally agree though Jodi is wwwaaayyyy more than your average BPD, I see tons of other issues. Biggest problem she had was by 27 never getting any help...and I think she's also a psychopath!!

:truce:

 

[leebee52]

I've taken those tests before. It was obvious to me that a lot of them are asked over and over again phrased in a different way. I'm guessing that's how they determine malingering. If I noticed, probably JA noticed too.

 

[Mrs G Norris]

That was out of line o.0 and reading a whole lot into the colors you prefer. One of my favorite prints is The Accolade and aside from the medieval romantic feel of the picture, one of the reasons it is my favorite is the red tunic the knight is wearing. It's just a beautiful color to me.

That is a beautiful painting!!!

I use red because I love Sacred Relics and base all my art around that and ancient religiosity, then put those thoughts and ideas into a modern context. I nearly sued the gallery, they gave me a present for christmas that year, guess what it was .. a prepaid visit to a psychotherapist! I do suffer from a disorder, it's called Artistic Temperament. I'm shaking just remembering the experience, evil witches they were :floorlaugh:

 

[swedie]

Just some entertainment to hold you over til Tuesay. :floorlaugh: Enjoy and lol.

Jodi Parody
Jodi Arias: Never Before Seen Testimony - YouTube

Nancy G Parody
Nancy Grace on Jodi Arias Trial - YouTube

Nurmi and chicken wings
Nurmi, SHUT UP and DANCE Bi+ch! - YouTube

 

[Southern_Meadow]

Do you hear this exchange?! :help:

JW: Just so we're clear, you don't have any medical evidence of (the bullet) passing through the brain, right?

Dr. H: It HAD to have passed through the brain.

JW: You don't have any medical evidence of that, do you?

Dr. H: I do, uh, the skull is perforated where the brain is, so it HAD to have passed through the brain. The brain is there.

JW: Well...but you have no idea...you have no medical evidence of how far or what part of the brain (the bullet) exactly would have hit, right?

Dr. H: It would have passed through the right frontal lobe, I just don't have any evidence of hemorrhage now because of decomposition. But it HAD to have passed through the brain because of the part of the skull that was injured. The brain in a young person especially, is flush against that structure. The brain occupies that entire skull. So to have a hole in the skull here (pointing to forehead), and an exit in here (pointing near sinus), it HAS to pass through the brain.

JW: Uh-huh....so....

She continues with this-

JW: Are you sure of this (bullet passing through the brain)?

Dr. H: (incredulous) YES.

Unbelievable. You cannot make this **** up. :facepalm:

Oh, my lord, yes! This is when I knew it was a hot mess.

 

[Arabian Girl]

I'm not sure we can really tell what the jurors are thinking based on their questions. Granted, some of the questions are obvious but those that seem pro defense might not be. Might be that they really want to weed out disinformation thrown out by certain wits and or atty's. I'm sure they have realized that questions asked of the wits are formulated to get a specific answer that favors whomever is on direct or cross.

Boy I don't remember hearing anything more than 1 maybe 2 that sounded like 'maybe defense', but that's just my old memory/brain!!

Do you remember who they asking??
:facepalm:

 

[WhoaIsMe]

That is a beautiful painting!!!

I use red because I love Sacred Relics and base all my art around that and ancient religiosity, then put those thoughts and ideas into a modern context. I nearly sued the gallery, they gave me a present for christmas that year, guess what it was .. a prepaid visit to a psychotherapist! I do suffer from a disorder, it's called Artistic Temperament. I'm shaking just remembering the experience, evil witches they were :floorlaugh:

OMG are you serious?!? What a bunch of A$$hats :floorlaugh:

 

[cecybeans]

I'm watching some blogs I follow on Tumblr regarding it Everyone is muttering the same thing:

"I'll never tell anyone.ever."
and
"This is triggering. I just want to die. I'm a monster".

This girl and her horrible crime have done so much collateral damage to so many innocent people and new victims never seem to end.

ALV basically put domestic violence back years with her outdated approach that she further warped by unscientifically and unprofessionally insisting that this killers behavior was due somehow to her being a victim of alleged and undocumented domestic violence - and speciously tying her to anecdotal evidence of actual victims - instead of that of an angry, immature stalker that drove TA to distraction with her awful behavior.

Unfortunately, many folks out there will not really understand that the only relevance of Jodi's personality disorder diagnosis in this trial is to basically refute her claim of PTSD from an alleged abusive relationship (which has no other corroboration and is her only supporting claim for self-defense) and nothing else. I feel for those who share that diagnosis and must feel profiled and demeaned by sharing it with her.

While her personality disorder may have created challenges for her in maintaining healthy relationships it in no way was the reason she decided to kill Travis. That decision was one that a person without a personality disorder could have made as well and it should not be looked at as a cause because that is patently unfair to all those who are coping with and successfully living their lives with the same disorder.

It is yet another reason that makes me question the ethics of putting mitigating factors into the guilt phase and not in the sentencing phase where they belong.

I also share the concern over that "bear vs. tiger" juror question and ardently hope that person either does not make the cut in the lottery for the final 12 jurors or, if they do, the rest of the jurors jar some sense into his or her hippocampus. A more accurate analogy would have been "if a person fabricates a bear attack, and they switch to describing it as a tiger attack is it any more credible?"

 

[leebee52]

Boy I don't remember hearing anything more than 1 maybe 2 that sounded like 'maybe defense', but that's just my old memory/brain!!

Do you remember who they asking??
:facepalm:

I can't remember exactly...so many things you know. They asked ALV a whole bunch that sounded they could go either way as far as pros vs def.

 

[lil_buddy]

OK thanks. I cannot remember specifically what tests I took but there were three that were very long.

The PDS in a 15 minute that is easily scored by hand in minutes.

 

[Mrs G Norris]

OMG are you serious?!? What a bunch of A$$hats :floorlaugh:

I told EVERYBODY .. they lost a lot of other artists in the mix let me tell you. I was satisfied with my 'reckoning' when the owner was confronted by a large group of angry artists at a public event after she had accused other ones of affairs, more personality disorders, and other infractions in general. Karma comes around all by itself.

 

[DeAnnaMisrahi]

Hi, this is the first time I've posted even though I've been lurking on here for a while. So hopefully I'm doing it right!
I just wanna say that after the juror questions yesterday, I am really starting to feel worried about one juror...this has been with me for some time because in the juror questions for every witness, there has always been at least one question that is, sorry to say, illogical and like someone wants to believe Jodi could have never done this or done on purpose.(respectfully snipped for length)

First of all - WELCOME!

I am so glad to see your post because I have been talking/thinking about those very SAME questions since I heard them. I've been saying that I think there is one juror, at least, who is buying into JA's story, DESPITE the fact that it doesn't make sense. It makes me nervous for a hung jury, but not an acquittal. I think the vast majority of the jury questions sounds like they are leaning towards guilty. But, you are right. There is always at least one question that sounds like it's leaning JA's way. I just hope that they are playing devil's advocate and/or that person doesn't end up deliberating. Because, IF they are really buying into JA's story, their critical thinking is severely compromised. I also think we have to remember that JA isn't alone. There are others out there who thinks the way that she does. God forbid we end up with someone on the jury who thinks that the stuff JA did was just "normal stalking" and signs of someone who, simply, wasn't ready to move on... Then, we're in trouble. :facepalm: