Page 59 of 104 FirstFirst ... 9 49 57 58 59 60 61 69 ... LastLast
Results 871 to 885 of 1552
  1. #871
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    358
    Quote Originally Posted by katiecoolady View Post
    Just confirmed in an article by Michael Kiefer which I won't link because his inaccurate and embellished reporting on this case is officially disgusting me, that only present in the jury questioning on the photogate issue were the judge and attorneys. No Jodi.
    That makes sense. It would have been all kinds of wrong if JA was permitted to sit in on questioning the jurors.

    What a waste of time this latest stunt has been. Personally, I don't see anything wrong with what JM did. He's outside of court and is being polite to his supporters.

    If the DT is worried about what a juror may possibly see or hear, then why are the jurors permitted to sit on the benches or hang out anywhere around the court building to begin with? Do they really believe they can stop jurors from hearing comments from the average people hanging out?

    If the DT wants the jury to not see or hear anything on breaks or after court, then they should suggest that jurors be escorted from the property and make some rules that the jurors cannot hang out around the building.

    Gee whiz - just nonsense. Shows desperation in my opinion.



  2. #872
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    358
    Quote Originally Posted by Maryann123 View Post
    Well that was a good one from Mark, but even better was when he said he would like to ask ALV, what it was like to work for the Brady Bunch all those years. I swear, she does look like the BB maid, and her name was Alice too, LOL!
    Oh my gosh - that's funny. I never thought about it before but she does look a little like Alice from the BB.

    Mark Eiglarsh is one of the few defense attorneys that I enjoy hearing from. Most defense attorneys get on TV and abandon common sense to make a case for a defendant just because they are defense attorneys. They can't even say what comes out of their mouths with a straight face half the time. Unlike them, Mark has a good sense of humor and common sense.



  3. #873
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Beaufort, SC
    Posts
    12

    Observations on Expert Witness Alyce

    I love popping in here to read the insiders observations at the end of the week! It really helps keep this case in perspective. I wanted to point out a few things I observed concerning the "expert witness". First if all initially I was a bit impressed with her CV, that was until I did some digging and listened closely. As a survivor of DV myself she began to loose credibility based on:

    1. Her CV states she is a Psychotherapist yet she WAS registered only as a PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSISTANT which was canceled back in 1992. In fact the Dr she worked under back then Dr Charles Stockton had his license revoked back in 1998 for inappropriate sexual behavior with a patient. Alyce is only licensed as far as I can see as a MFC Marriage, Family and Child since 1992 and a Continuing Education Provider since 1997.

    2. Her use of improper terms the first days such as "Bottom Lines" instead of Boundaries, "Hostage Syndrome" instead of Stockholm and the non existent "Chronic Combat Syndrome"

    3. Much of her information comes from outdated information with her referring back to the 1980's

    4. Her amazing ability to have memorized more about JA's own life history and story then JA evens knows herself.

    5. The fact that she is "paid" and making over $12,000 for her testimony and time spent with JA

    6. Any good DV advocate or person working within that field KNOWS they can not make assumptions as to the abuser without having substantiated evidence. Just because an abused person says it is so does not mean it is so. Even the Women's shelter I eventually fled to back in the 90's had to question MY motives for fleeing with my children and make sure I was not trying to flee with them for custody reasons or there was some other motive involved.

    7. Lastly, to state that a child's possibly "neglectful" environment is "abusive" is a very dangerous statement. Just because a child comes from a neglectful home, does not mean that child will be abusive even if that home was abusive. It actually is the opposite in the majority of cases, it sets that child up to be abused as an adult is all. My abusive childhood did not make me abusive, it made me an easy target for abuse.

    Sorry so long, but I am disgusted that this women attempts to speak for me or the others I know who are survivors! Men are OFTEN abused but for them to report it makes them appear weak as a man is all.

    Keep up the inside work! Love what I read by everyone posting!!!!! I hope this trial ends soon for Travis's family



  4. #874
    In #jodiarias trial daily. Hv seen JM exit front door ONCE , photo op ONCE. Def team exit same front door daily, no security. Be accurate.


    My tweet. So there. Lol

    thank you for inspiring me travis alexander




    My posts are 100% my opinion with whatever bias I enjoy. Please read accordingly!




  5. #875
    Quote Originally Posted by askmeificare View Post
    I love popping in here to read the insiders observations at the end of the week! It really helps keep this case in perspective. I wanted to point out a few things I observed concerning the "expert witness". First if all initially I was a bit impressed with her CV, that was until I did some digging and listened closely. As a survivor of DV myself she began to loose credibility based on:

    1. Her CV states she is a Psychotherapist yet she WAS registered only as a PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSISTANT which was canceled back in 1992. In fact the Dr she worked under back then Dr Charles Stockton had his license revoked back in 1998 for inappropriate sexual behavior with a patient. Alyce is only licensed as far as I can see as a MFC Marriage, Family and Child since 1992 and a Continuing Education Provider since 1997.

    2. Her use of improper terms the first days such as "Bottom Lines" instead of Boundaries, "Hostage Syndrome" instead of Stockholm and the non existent "Chronic Combat Syndrome"

    3. Much of her information comes from outdated information with her referring back to the 1980's

    4. Her amazing ability to have memorized more about JA's own life history and story then JA evens knows herself.

    5. The fact that she is "paid" and making over $12,000 for her testimony and time spent with JA

    6. Any good DV advocate or person working within that field KNOWS they can not make assumptions as to the abuser without having substantiated evidence. Just because an abused person says it is so does not mean it is so. Even the Women's shelter I eventually fled to back in the 90's had to question MY motives for fleeing with my children and make sure I was not trying to flee with them for custody reasons or there was some other motive involved.

    7. Lastly, to state that a child's possibly "neglectful" environment is "abusive" is a very dangerous statement. Just because a child comes from a neglectful home, does not mean that child will be abusive even if that home was abusive. It actually is the opposite in the majority of cases, it sets that child up to be abused as an adult is all. My abusive childhood did not make me abusive, it made me an easy target for abuse.

    Sorry so long, but I am disgusted that this women attempts to speak for me or the others I know who are survivors! Men are OFTEN abused but for them to report it makes them appear weak as a man is all.

    Keep up the inside work! Love what I read by everyone posting!!!!! I hope this trial ends soon for Travis's family
    Only response to this is Bravo! And I love you!!! And please post more!!

    thank you for inspiring me travis alexander




    My posts are 100% my opinion with whatever bias I enjoy. Please read accordingly!




  6. #876
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    7,585
    There's nothing ALV can do to make what JA did on 6/4/08 a justified self-defense killing. JA had to prove her life was in danger or that she reasonably thought it was at 5:30pm that day, and when her own lawyer served up the question, "What did you think Travis was going to do to you?" Her answer was, "who knows..." She couldn't even pretend he was really going to kill her--that was the one important question she was asked and she didn't follow the script.

    I hope the jury paid attention to that and I sure hope JM reminds the jury of her answer from that one question. "Who knows..." That's not what someone in fear of their life (honestly and truly) would respond.

    < /game over Jodi >

    ALV is just wasted testimony, stretching this thing out into infinity.



  7. #877
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    6,092
    Quote Originally Posted by CarolinaMoon View Post
    The only time I've witnessed a similar kerfuffle was during the DeeDee Moore trial in which she was convicted of the murder of Abraham Shakespeare in Tampa, FL.

    The Tampa Bay Times was doing their first live feed with a chat room underneath. They were extremely responsive to reader demands and said they wanted to stream other trials.

    Well, one day, there were problems switching the feed to a new format. During that time, one of the techs accidentally pushed a button that fed his image/conversations live. Most of the talk was technical, but a couple of things came in about the trial.

    Don't ask me details, but the next morning the defense lawyer made an accusation about that feed. A lawyer friend of his had called him and told him x,y,z had been broadcast live. He was as furious and indignant as Nurmi was yesterday.

    Those involved were called in to testify, as was Jean Casarez. It turned out the friend of the lawyer was wrong as to the nature of what came over the stream and the whole incident came to nothing more than a warning not to let it happen again.

    I'd appreciate more details in anyone else there saw this. For what it's worth, there were hundreds of viewers who could have testified to what they observed/heard! I only got to testify loudly to my computer screen!
    IIRC there was a kerfluffle in the CA case - something about the camera man panning the camera to the jurors or something....Or he took an unflattering shot of the princess....can't remember exactly. Judge questioned him (might have been Red Huber) and was just told "don't let it happen again".

    I also agree that JM is the example of HOW TO CORRECTLY PROSECUTE A CASE, and the fact that Nurmi accused him of prosecutorial misconduct makes my blood boil.


  8. The Following 16 Users Say Thank You to TotallyObsessed For This Useful Post:


  9. #878
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    466
    Quote Originally Posted by katiecoolady View Post
    Just confirmed in an article by Michael Kiefer which I won't link because his inaccurate and embellished reporting on this case is officially disgusting me, that only present in the jury questioning on the photogate issue were the judge and attorneys. No Jodi.
    I read his tweet, pointing to his article also. I retweeted him saying "so, in short" if the jurors didn't know that Juan has fans, they do now?"

    IOW, HE caused them to know this.



  10. #879
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    466
    Quote Originally Posted by katiecoolady View Post
    I thought it was highly unlikely Jodi would be in on that. All the reporters have in house sources. Just ask the bailiff for one.
    WildAboutTrail is tweeting that there IS one juror who saw the picture taking episode. Asked how they know this, they are now checking for more sources but claim the one they have is good.


  11. The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to BChand For This Useful Post:


  12. #880
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Rochester, New York
    Posts
    30,575
    Quote Originally Posted by katiecoolady View Post
    Do we know for sure she was in that jury questioning? I thought it was private w the judge.
    The jury wasn't there. When they were done they called the jury in.

    Quote Originally Posted by askmeificare View Post
    I love popping in here to read the insiders observations at the end of the week! It really helps keep this case in perspective. I wanted to point out a few things I observed concerning the "expert witness". First if all initially I was a bit impressed with her CV, that was until I did some digging and listened closely. As a survivor of DV myself she began to loose credibility based on:

    1. Her CV states she is a Psychotherapist yet she WAS registered only as a PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSISTANT which was canceled back in 1992. In fact the Dr she worked under back then Dr Charles Stockton had his license revoked back in 1998 for inappropriate sexual behavior with a patient. Alyce is only licensed as far as I can see as a MFC Marriage, Family and Child since 1992 and a Continuing Education Provider since 1997.

    2. Her use of improper terms the first days such as "Bottom Lines" instead of Boundaries, "Hostage Syndrome" instead of Stockholm and the non existent "Chronic Combat Syndrome"

    3. Much of her information comes from outdated information with her referring back to the 1980's

    4. Her amazing ability to have memorized more about JA's own life history and story then JA evens knows herself.

    5. The fact that she is "paid" and making over $12,000 for her testimony and time spent with JA

    6. Any good DV advocate or person working within that field KNOWS they can not make assumptions as to the abuser without having substantiated evidence. Just because an abused person says it is so does not mean it is so. Even the Women's shelter I eventually fled to back in the 90's had to question MY motives for fleeing with my children and make sure I was not trying to flee with them for custody reasons or there was some other motive involved.

    7. Lastly, to state that a child's possibly "neglectful" environment is "abusive" is a very dangerous statement. Just because a child comes from a neglectful home, does not mean that child will be abusive even if that home was abusive. It actually is the opposite in the majority of cases, it sets that child up to be abused as an adult is all. My abusive childhood did not make me abusive, it made me an easy target for abuse.

    Sorry so long, but I am disgusted that this women attempts to speak for me or the others I know who are survivors! Men are OFTEN abused but for them to report it makes them appear weak as a man is all.

    Keep up the inside work! Love what I read by everyone posting!!!!! I hope this trial ends soon for Travis's family
    If I'm a juror my question would be; You interviewed Jodi. Why would you believe anything she says?


  13. The Following 16 Users Say Thank You to Steely Dan For This Useful Post:


  14. #881
    Quote Originally Posted by BChand View Post
    I read his tweet, pointing to his article also. I retweeted him saying "so, in short" if the jurors didn't know that Juan has fans, they do now?"

    IOW, HE caused them to know this.
    Awesome!!! He *****es about the "spectacle" of this trial (to my face) then creates a spectacle.

    thank you for inspiring me travis alexander




    My posts are 100% my opinion with whatever bias I enjoy. Please read accordingly!




  15. #882
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    628
    Quote Originally Posted by LambChop View Post
    How would he know that?
    It's part of the court hearing, part of the trial, it's on the record.
    My guess is that she was there, because it's her right.
    Unless she waived her right to be there.

    IMO.


  16. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to noor For This Useful Post:


  17. #883
    Quote Originally Posted by askmeificare View Post
    I love popping in here to read the insiders observations at the end of the week! It really helps keep this case in perspective. I wanted to point out a few things I observed concerning the "expert witness". First if all initially I was a bit impressed with her CV, that was until I did some digging and listened closely. As a survivor of DV myself she began to loose credibility based on:

    1. Her CV states she is a Psychotherapist yet she WAS registered only as a PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSISTANT which was canceled back in 1992. In fact the Dr she worked under back then Dr Charles Stockton had his license revoked back in 1998 for inappropriate sexual behavior with a patient. Alyce is only licensed as far as I can see as a MFC Marriage, Family and Child since 1992 and a Continuing Education Provider since 1997.

    2. Her use of improper terms the first days such as "Bottom Lines" instead of Boundaries, "Hostage Syndrome" instead of Stockholm and the non existent "Chronic Combat Syndrome"

    3. Much of her information comes from outdated information with her referring back to the 1980's

    4. Her amazing ability to have memorized more about JA's own life history and story then JA evens knows herself.

    5. The fact that she is "paid" and making over $12,000 for her testimony and time spent with JA

    6. Any good DV advocate or person working within that field KNOWS they can not make assumptions as to the abuser without having substantiated evidence. Just because an abused person says it is so does not mean it is so. Even the Women's shelter I eventually fled to back in the 90's had to question MY motives for fleeing with my children and make sure I was not trying to flee with them for custody reasons or there was some other motive involved.

    7. Lastly, to state that a child's possibly "neglectful" environment is "abusive" is a very dangerous statement. Just because a child comes from a neglectful home, does not mean that child will be abusive even if that home was abusive. It actually is the opposite in the majority of cases, it sets that child up to be abused as an adult is all. My abusive childhood did not make me abusive, it made me an easy target for abuse.

    Sorry so long, but I am disgusted that this women attempts to speak for me or the others I know who are survivors! Men are OFTEN abused but for them to report it makes them appear weak as a man is all.

    Keep up the inside work! Love what I read by everyone posting!!!!! I hope this trial ends soon for Travis's family


    BBM - that is exactly the point when I knew just what this lady was (I think I even posted that exact thought! LOL) - and I agree, I don't want her speaking for me or anyone else!
    Last edited by A_News_Junkie; 03-29-2013 at 10:30 AM. Reason: had multi quote memory! LOL



  18. The Following 15 Users Say Thank You to A_News_Junkie For This Useful Post:


  19. #884
    Quote Originally Posted by BChand View Post
    WildAboutTrail is tweeting that there IS one juror who saw the picture taking episode. Asked how they know this, they are now checking for more sources but claim the one they have is good.
    Saw that too. That juror must have said it didn't influence their ability to be impartial. Fail!

    thank you for inspiring me travis alexander




    My posts are 100% my opinion with whatever bias I enjoy. Please read accordingly!




  20. #885
    Clarification: Jodi was there for the stupid hearing (no jury) but not there for the jurors being individually questioned

    thank you for inspiring me travis alexander




    My posts are 100% my opinion with whatever bias I enjoy. Please read accordingly!




Page 59 of 104 FirstFirst ... 9 49 57 58 59 60 61 69 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. a view from the inside: observations from our own court observers #4
    By nursebeeme in forum Travis Alexander Trial - The State vs. Jodi Arias
    Replies: 1552
    Last Post: 03-25-2013, 10:08 AM
  2. a view from the inside: observations from our own court observers #3
    By nursebeeme in forum Travis Alexander Trial - The State vs. Jodi Arias
    Replies: 1389
    Last Post: 03-19-2013, 08:56 AM
  3. A view from the inside: observations from our own court observers #2
    By nursebeeme in forum Travis Alexander Trial - The State vs. Jodi Arias
    Replies: 832
    Last Post: 03-07-2013, 09:33 AM
  4. A view from the inside: observations from our own court observers
    By nursebeeme in forum Travis Alexander Trial - The State vs. Jodi Arias
    Replies: 1024
    Last Post: 02-28-2013, 08:42 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •