Book released by Defense Attorney, Nov 2015 #2

YESorNO said:

....

talks about sexual abuse and the people who abuse

"..after being sexually abused, the person became a victim of the entire world and whenever something bad happened to that person it was not their fault, but instead of

the fault of another person or the world at large. This Ms. Arias to a tee." (pg. 57)

another thing learned is that victims tend to be "very manipulative people", blends into society- everyone thinks these victims are normal/trustworthy- also fits the

murderer "to a tee"

Click to expand...

This is just off-the-wall. Victims of sexual abuse are manipulative people? Victims of sexual abuse blend in and everyone things they're trust worthy? Whenever something bad happens to a sex abuse victim, they say it's not their fault?

This man knows nothing about sex abuse, and this stuff is extremely offensive. He is talking about psychopath traits, not sex abuse traits.

Nurmi didn't put Sandy on the stand because he thought that would open the door for JM to bring in the damaging jail calls between the two...the killer verbally abusing her mother.

(Nurmi verified info, LOL).


Definition of hoisted by your own petard:

Matt was willing to get on the stand and lie about seeing bruises on her (and who knows what else about the "abuse" by Travis).

Sadly for her, Nurmi couldn't call Matt to testify- the only "witness" to physical abuse by Travis--because she'd involved Matt with her even more vile pedo lie.

Hoist. Petard.

Nurmi snark about the witness who could not be found:


The killer told Nurmi that 2 men at a PPL conference saw her bruises and joked about Travis beating her.

Nurmi and co-counsel tracked down one of the men, who said he never saw the bruises, so obviously didn't joke about them with "Frank," the alias Nurmi gives the second man.

Nurmi looked high and low for Frank, no success.

The snark: Nurmi says based on the reports he's read by the PI she hired herself (Bond, I take it), she's still looking for that mysterious Frank. Nurmi says she seems convinced that Frank will set her free, that she'll win on appeal because her ineffective counsel couldn't locate Frank.

LOL

I wonder if Nurmi had any interaction with Gus Searcy. He was a Jodi supporter from early on, and supported her Ninja story, even after she changed it to self-defense, and he claimed to have gotten a phone call from Jodi telling him Travis was dead before his body had been found.

For anyone with the book, anything about Searcy in there?

I went ahead and bought this book. I feel dirty doing it. I bought the ebook. I don't even really want to read it. The first 4 chapters look like a waste. So "who is Nurmi?" I don't care.

The only good thing I can say about Nurmi is he looked better with more weight on him.

Trapped with Ms. Arias:

Chapter 11

My Initial Review of the Evidence as it Related to Mr. Alexander

L talks about learning about the victim so the jury can figure out the sentence for client

"Many might say that this amounts to 'dragging the victim through the mud' "

L talks about the talking head's on TV "verbal tirade about defense attys or our criminal justice system"

"Thus, as it related to Ms. Arias' case her jury needed to consider the dynamics of the relationship she shared with Mr. Alexander before a lawful sentence could be rendered....if I had not presented such evidence Ms. Arias would likely be getting a new trial.

Having offered all this information to you, those waiting for me to apologize for doing my job had better not hold their breathe because they will be waiting a long time,in fact, such an apology will never come. Furthermore, I will make no apologiers about repeating the reality of the evidence that had to be collected and/or presented throughout this book. 'Facts are stubborn things' " (pg. 82-83)

L says -in beginning of case it's hard to get accurate picture of who Travis was- "inaccurate or contradictory [info] to other evidence"

Talks about Travis' job and how it was described by people- insurance salesman, motivational speaker, Executive Director for Pre-Paid Legal- pyramid

"He worked for a multi-level marketing company whose product was legal insurance"

Travis had a "rough childhood"- parents were drug addicts- no food to eat; he was described as a "flirt, a player and also a 30 year old virgin...very generous, very charismatic and very kind

"It was obvious that there was another side to Mr. Alexander, a side that many of his friends and family did not know."

Travis on spiritual level: "devout Mormon...living by the dictates of the church to such a degree that he wouldn't even drink caffeine"

people said that he was well-off financially- had big house, BMW

L said TA's financial situation didn't show that he was well-off

"Likewise, the nude pictures of Mr. Alexander he took on the day of his death demonstrated the clear reality that he was not a 30 year old virgin...despite the fact that most of his peers thought he was living a caste life, he was not.....his lifestyle was far from chaste.... I saw him as a person who was loved by many but who, at the same time, was not who people thought he was." (pg. 83)- he was hiding things- "living a lie"- thus could not be himself- "would danger the image others had of him"

L's initial assessment of TA- "I found it to be very sad."

================================================== =============

Chapter 12

My Initial review of the Evidence as it Related to the Relationship

L talks about relationships between killer and victims- the murderer's and TA's - "atypical" and often considered second degree murder or manslaughter..rare for these crimes between romantic partners/lovers to be charges as capital offense

"the state wanted to kill my client because she killed her lover"- he knew that their relationship would be important role in "quest to kill my client"

L said that every person who spoke to police re relationship said something different

the murderer described relationship (in 48 Hrs program) that it was sexual- boyfriend/girlfriend, but labeled it as a "friendship"

L stated it was hard to tell if they were in love or friends "who happened to be secret 'sex buddies' "- confusing statements from friends "especially comments made by Chris and Sky Hughes"

L talking about the Hughes..."They went on to describe how in their eyes Ms. Arias was being clingy and obsessive towards Mr. Alexander and how this sort of behavior led them to feel scared to have Ms. Arias in their home."....after asking the murderer to leave their home, TA's and the murderer's relationship "went 'underground' "... and they didn't know "the extent' of the relationship anymore"

in Det. Flores interview with the Hughes when asked about TA's temper- Det. F asked might have been domestic violence ???? Hughes talked about TA "hitting things but not people"

Chris H said to Det F "that he could see Mr. Alexander pushing Ms. Arias if he really got mad"- L found comment very interesting

TA's roomates/other friends interviewed by police- stated that the murderer was "a crazy ex-girlfriend that Mr. Alexander wants nothing to do with...did not have a sexual relationship because Mr. Alexander followed the principles of his faith which would not allow him to engage in premarital sexual relations."

L talks about "objective evidence"- nude photos recovered from TA's camera- told story that murderer and TA were having sexual relationship and that people had no idea- so secret relationship and "...if Mr. Alexander told others that he wanted nothing to do with Ms. Arias he wasn't being truthful, that the relationship was part of the lie he was living. I felt this way because if one does not want anything to do with a former romantic partner one does not have a sexual relationship with them and take photographs of the encounter." (pgs 87-88)

L had suspicion viewing photos taken on TA's camera that day ("very graphic")- that their relationship "was longstanding, intense and unrestrained"

L's thoughts on relationship- "very intense and that sex played a huge role in this relationship..had to be kept a secret..due to their shared faith..was their dirty little secret....suspected that love played a part....interacted so much in non-sexual settings..ways...on some level they either loved one another or were sexually addicted to the relationship." (pg. 88)
================================================== =============

Chapter 13

My Initial Review of Mr. Martinez

never had a case against (with) JM

had other sources of info about him- court opinions -"always nuclear war with him"- L took to mean that JM did what he wanted, "didn't care about what others thought of him, including the court"

L heard from former colleague ("who was Jewish") referred to JM as "Hitler"

goes on to talk about things/stories that JM said/did- "but suffice it to say he was not well thought of within the defense community, not because of the convictions he obtained but because of the way he operated." (pg.89)

impression L got of JM- "a no holds barred kind of guy....feels like the ends justify the means and for that reason he feels comfortable with being so caustic in the courtroom."

End of Section 2 (pg 89)
================================================== ===========================

Next:

Section 3
Preparing For the Guilt Phase

Chapter 14
The Text Messages

Chapter 15
The Emails and Other Online Communications
================================================== =======================

Thank you, YesOrNo, for your continuing synopsis.

I must say I didn't think it was possible to dislike Nurmi more, and yet somehow it is.

Sent from my KFSOWI using Tapatalk

G&AMom said:

Thank you, YesOrNo, for your continuing synopsis.

I must say I didn't think it was possible to dislike Nurmi more, and yet somehow it is.

Sent from my KFSOWI using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

I agree. Nurmi should include a chapter in his final book about how Juan's book outsold his and how that made him feeeeel. Trashing Travis Alexander and Juan Martinez while holding Laviolette and the rest of the misfits that made up the defense teams up as paragons of virtue and professionalism will not help him sell more books. I wonder if Keifer was his ghostwriter because the stuff written about Juan sounds like the same vitriol Kiefer is famous for. Reality and Kirk Nurmi are strangers. :facepalm:

Re YesOrNo's synopsis of chapters 11 through 13.

It's bizarre to me how Nurmi convinces himself about all the stuff he apparently believes.

Travis is not the man his friends believe him to be and is living a double life, but when Jodi DOES EXACTLY THE SAME THING, apparently that's okay. When Travis violates his Mormon beliefs, it's his own fault. When Jodi violates her (alleged) Mormon beliefs, it's Travis's fault.

It's okay for a defense attorney to interpret evidence to put the victim in the worst possible light, but IT IS NOT OKAY for the prosecutor to use evidence against the defendant to make her look bad. Nurmi can call Travis a physical and emotional abuser, a fake and a fraud, not to mention a pedophile, but he gets hysterical when Juan calls Jodi a liar.

It is okay for the defense to do anything to win, but it is not okay for the prosecution to do the same thing.

How on earth does he justify these totally opposite beliefs? I really don't get it.

Sent from my KFSOWI using Tapatalk

G&AMom said:

Thank you, YesOrNo, for your continuing synopsis.

I must say I didn't think it was possible to dislike Nurmi more, and yet somehow it is.

Sent from my KFSOWI using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

I know, right? He repeatedly pats himself on the back for being a disinterested defender of justice, for being able to discern the truth that others can't or won't see, and for being able to put his personal feelings to the side. And yet he happily repeats gossip about JM (including a Hitler comparison--spoken by someone else, of course) and even criticizes JM for operating in the courtroom as if the ends justify the means. Excuse me . . . what??? Does this man have an ounce of self-awareness?

To answer my question: no, of course not. I read only self-regard in place of self-awareness. In fact, judging from all the excerpts provided here (and thanks YorN and others!), his book smells of weaselness. He wants to have it both ways: on the one hand, he wants to assure readers that he really really doesn't like JA (shades of seventh grade) but was forced to defend--heroically--her constitutional rights (pat pat); on the other hand, he repeatedly implies that Travis got what was coming to him and therefore, so goes the whispered implication, the killer's obvious lies, while still lies, might have been "right" after all.

It's not that I assume criminal lawyers have to like their client, or even believe their innocence--far from it. But I do find Nurmi's insecure need to reassure the world that he was on to the killer from the beginning very revealing. He seems so eager to prove that he was always on top of everything and was never snowballed. Heh.

Whatever, Nurms. BTW, you really rock that '90s gangsta look. (I know, I know--unfair and very petty snark. I just smacked down my typing hand.)

And finally, I have to confess that as an academic I'm a snob about self-published "books." In the publishing world, nothing gets published until it's peer-reviewed. And then edited. And then copy-edited. If something is self-published, well . . .

Enough said and angry rant over!

Becky Sharp said:

I know, right? He repeatedly pats himself on the back for being a disinterested defender of justice, for being able to discern the truth that others can't or won't see, and for being able to put his personal feelings to the side. And yet he happily repeats gossip about JM (including a Hitler comparison--spoken by someone else, of course) and even criticizes JM for operating in the courtroom as if the ends justify the means. Excuse me . . . what??? Does this man have an ounce of self-awareness?

To answer my question: no, of course not. I read only self-regard in place of self-awareness. In fact, judging from all the excerpts provided here (and thanks YorN and others!), his book smells of weaselness. He wants to have it both ways: on the one hand, he wants to assure readers that he really really doesn't like JA (shades of seventh grade) but was forced to defend--heroically--her constitutional rights (pat pat); on the other hand, he repeatedly implies that Travis got what was coming to him and therefore, so goes the whispered implication, the killer's obvious lies, while still lies, might have been "right" after all.

It's not that I assume criminal lawyers have to like their client, or even believe their innocence--far from it. But I do find Nurmi's insecure need to reassure the world that he was on to the killer from the beginning very revealing. He seems so eager to prove that he was always on top of everything and was never snowballed. Heh.

Whatever, Nurms. BTW, you really rock that '90s gangsta look. (I know, I know--unfair and very petty snarky. I just smacked down my typing hand.)

And finally, I have to confess that as an academic I'm a snob about self-published "books." In the publishing world, nothing gets published until it's peer-reviewed. And then edited. And then copy-edited. If something is self-published, well . . .

Enough said and angry rant over!

Click to expand...

Yes, that wanting to have it both ways is the hallmark of his thinking. Plus, he has this attitude (just like his client) that readers will accept whatever he says uncritically with thinking about it at all.

The publishing world has changed so much that I have become more accepting of self-published books, but I find it frustrating that so many authors have total disregard for typos and grammatical errors, not to mention some of the whopping other mistakes I've seen -- doesn't it bother them when they read books with so many mistakes? Or do they just publish but don't read?



Sent from my KFSOWI using Tapatalk

Please note:

It has been brought to my attention on The Sidebar (where I post my notes also) that there were 2 spelling mistakes on what I quoted from Lawrence's words: (BBM)

"Having offered all this information to you, those waiting for me to apologize for doing my job had better not hold their breathe (breath?) because they will be waiting a long time,in fact, such an apology will never come. Furthermore, I will make no apologiers (apologies?) about repeating the reality of the evidence that had to be collected and/or presented throughout this book. 'Facts are stubborn things' "[/I] (pg. 82-83)"

These were in fact my mistakes and not Lawrence's.

This is what I posted on the SB in my defense:

Sorry, but I have made those mistakes in spelling/spacing when I wrote them to my Word Pad and it was not Lawrence who spelled them incorrectly in his book.

The sections quoted are not copied and pasted as what I am copying from is an actual book and not a website on the internet. Since I type with 2 fingers and I'm not a secretary or transcriber, I'm pretty bad at typing (and slow, too). And since I have gotten older, I tend to reverse the order of/add letters; my mind and fingers do not compute anymore. It's very frustrating to me. I do try to copy the exact words when I quote Lawrence's words, but I don't always succeed. I'm sorry as I try to be exact, but I'm just losing my brains as I age. I do go over what I have written also, but I don't always catch my mistakes.

And since the book does not easily stay open, I have to read the sentences, put the book down, and then type the words into the computer and there lies one of the difficulties for me as I'm not looking at the words as I type. So- many problems for me. (What my son could type in 5 minutes, will takes me 30 minutes. )

These notes were just originally for me, but I thought it would be nice for the SBers who were not buying the book, to have a small look-see into Lawrence's mind as I find it very interesting myself.

And for myself- yes- there are some errors in punctuation in the book that I have noticed, but I'm not reading the book to see what Lawrence's editor has done wrong. I'm interested in what Lawrence has to say, so I overlook the errors.

Sorry again.

YESorNO said:

Please note:

It has been brought to my attention on The Sidebar (where I post my notes also) that there were 2 spelling mistakes on what I quoted from Lawrence's words: (BBM)

"Having offered all this information to you, those waiting for me to apologize for doing my job had better not hold their breathe (breath?) because they will be waiting a long time,in fact, such an apology will never come. Furthermore, I will make no apologiers (apologies?) about repeating the reality of the evidence that had to be collected and/or presented throughout this book. 'Facts are stubborn things' "[/I] (pg. 82-83)"

These were in fact my mistakes and not Lawrence's.

This is what I posted on the SB in my defense:

Sorry, but I have made those mistakes in spelling/spacing when I wrote them to my Word Pad and it was not Lawrence who spelled them incorrectly in his book.

The sections quoted are not copied and pasted as what I am copying from is an actual book and not a website on the internet. Since I type with 2 fingers and I'm not a secretary or transcriber, I'm pretty bad at typing (and slow, too). And since I have gotten older, I tend to reverse the order of/add letters; my mind and fingers do not compute anymore. It's very frustrating to me. I do try to copy the exact words when I quote Lawrence's words, but I don't always succeed. I'm sorry as I try to be exact, but I'm just losing my brains as I age. I do go over what I have written also, but I don't always catch my mistakes.

And since the book does not easily stay open, I have to read the sentences, put the book down, and then type the words into the computer and there lies one of the difficulties for me as I'm not looking at the words as I type. So- many problems for me. (What my son could type in 5 minutes, will takes me 30 minutes. )

These notes were just originally for me, but I thought it would be nice for the SBers who were not buying the book, to have a small look-see into Lawrence's mind as I find it very interesting myself.

And for myself- yes- there are some errors in punctuation in the book that I have noticed, but I'm not reading the book to see what Lawrence's editor has done wrong. I'm interested in what Lawrence has to say, so I overlook the errors.

Sorry again.

Click to expand...

Oh YESorNO, you're such a sweetheart! A big kiss to you::blowkiss:

Becky Sharp said:

Oh YESorNO, you're such a sweetheart! A big kiss to you::blowkiss:

Click to expand...

Y/N.....I love that you call him Lawrence.

Your time and care in reading & posting about his gibberish is greatly appreciated. Hope you put down that turkey's book and enjoy a delectable sort of bird tomorrow, followed by heaps of chocolate.

Becky Sharp said:

Oh YESorNO, you're such a sweetheart! A big kiss to you::blowkiss:

Click to expand...

How have you been my dear Becky? :dracula:

And a Happy Thanksgiving to you (and to all on this thread)

:blowkiss:

Hope4More said:

Y/N.....I love that you call him Lawrence.

Your time and care in reading & posting about his gibberish is greatly appreciated. Hope you put down that turkey's book and enjoy a delectable sort of bird tomorrow, followed by heaps of chocolate.

Click to expand...

Yesssss- lots of chocolates :giggle:

(I'll take Thanksgiving off and won't post my notes tomorrow )

Happy Thanksgiving! :blowkiss:

Trapped with Ms. Arias


Section 3

Preparing for the Guilt Phase

in Aug 2009 L thought case was "pretty much set in stone"

more evidence came in

in this section L will discuss:

obtaining new evidence

in chap 14- obtaining text messages
in chap 15- obtaining emails
in chap 16- "the ordeal that was 'The Letters' "
in chap 17- sex tapes
in chap 18 - more info received about TA
in chap 19- "reviewing the murderer's jail phone calls "
in chap 20- "getting past the infamous 'ninja story' "
in chap 21- "importance or lack of the murder weapons"
in chap 22- "Ms. Arias' supposed guilt phase witnesses"
in chap 23-24- "discuss the important interviews that took place since I obtained the file. A new stone had indeed emerged"
================================================== ==========================

Chapter 14

The Text Messages

at first, few text messages

were found on TA's phone by Mesa police dept- recovered from his house (found 2-3 days when TA's body found- phone found between 6/9/2008 and 6/11/2008)

case was a " 'who-done-it' " and who had motivation to commit crime (argument? threats?, etc)

received case a "year or so later"- was not a "who-done-it" to him- never believed ninja story "I did not need to determine who did it"

needed all evidence could find "that would demonstrate to a jury the history of the relationship... evidence that relationship itself gave rise to any psychological issues..."

if he didn't seek out the evidence, could be grounds for conviction/sentence being overturned for ineffective assistance of counsel

entitled to text messages by law and State was required to give them to the defense

State did not give all texts to him

2 reasons- could be

-no text messages?

-State not following law?

knew texts existed- issue became forcing State to comply- "had the State been complying with the law, they would have been turned in already"

needed "courtroom intervention" - filed Motion to Comply - response from State- texts didn't exist

State served search warrant on cell phone co- there were 100s of texts! ("not shocking to me at all")

talks about not receiving texts from phone co himself- State received them 1st- "would have preferred this [received them directly] so I could feel more confident that the messages themselves were unaltered"

"..it is amazing how the State when called out for violating the rules suddenly cares about them when it is to their advantage."

talks about "after several weeks of litigation...weeks of waiting, I had info...that should have been automatically handed over to me when I first received the file" (pg 75)

Note: seems the page #s are screwed up (thought I was going crazy) Chapter 13 ends on pg 89- then next- Section 3 Preparing for the Guilt Phase is pg. 71

received many text messages "not spelled out in a cohesive manner"

TA and the murderer texted a lot, every day, often several times day- frequency demonstrated that they were really involved with each other

"demonstrated to me that there was no point in time where Mr. Alexander tried to disengage from Ms. Arias by actually not communicating with her , he either responded
to her text messages or initiated a conversation...instead of wanting nothing to do with her as he told others, the objective data told a much different story, that he was very
into Ms. Arias....further evidence of the reality that Ms. Arias was not a 'stalker ex-girlfriend' but at the very least she was Mr. Alexander's friend and sexual partner" (pg. 75)

to L texts were "genuine and objective..wrote at a time when neither had an incentive to fabricate.....no secret motive behind them... thinking that nobody but themselves would ever read them"

L thoughts about texts- "Wow this stuff is amazing"- provided him with insight into relationship- a "treasure trove"- illustrated "chaos inherent in this relationship"

talks about some of the texts- TA texted didn't want anything to do with the murderer- next, she was most beautiful : another text- called her a "evil liar" then he

loved her and "was awesome"; another text, TA "even threatened to destroy Ms. Arias by turning everyone she cared about against her''

"remarkable" to L because they kept talking to each other- relationship was chaotic- TA "didn't hold anything back...was comfortable articulating his anger"

sex was important part relationship (talks about " BJs,mouth hugs", oral sex, spankings, re to anal sex, sexual intercourse, re their genitals) so many texts that they blended together

found it funny- "Funny because in one text Ms Arias was talking about how she groomed her vagina for Mr. Alexander and in the next text she asserted her support for Mitt
Romney in the upcoming election"

other texts found on the murderer's Helio phone (the one she said was stolen)

some texts were very graphic- nude photo shoots TA wanted her to participate in, rape after photo shoot

conclusions he came to: "My overarching thought was one of sadness- so many texts that were non-sexual, loving or downright mundane"- taken as whole, texts made him feel sad

"it was as if I was watching two people running towards a cliff that neither fo them could see but not being able to warn them because it was too late, they had already fallen" (pg 77)

L says that TA and the murderer were "dedicated to the relationship regardless of how unhealthy it was"

questions he had at this point:

- why did they still interact with ea other

- why did the murderer stay after TA had "disdain" for her- why not move on - had Ryan and others

- why continued sexual relationship after break-up

text messages were sent to others also- important to see how they interacted with others

L wasn't interested in TA's business, meeting schedules or other info about the murderer's misc texts

interested in TA's text messages to other women that were sexual- not to "trash " or "bash" the victim

"is it bashing the victim if it is the truth?"- context of massages is the truth- TA sent "graphically sexual messages to other women...in doing so...revealed that he was certainly not a one woman man" (pg 79)

stated that the murderer was not TA's only sexual partner- he was "reliving the moments he spent between their legs" in his texts to them

L states that TA was free to have sex with whomever he wanted and didn't deserve to be killed for having sex with others

BUT...

"However, you are wrong when you say it is not relevant in the sense that the Supreme Cort says it is highly relevant to present the circumstances of the offense to the jury in a death penalty case, so relevant in fact that my failure to do so could have led to a reversal...these text messages negate any argument that Ms. Arias is responsible for luring Mr. Alexander into the evils of sex. Now you may believe that this is what she did but the facts, those stubborn things that they are, demonstrate that this is not true." (pg 80)

L states- some text messages were missing "from certain conversations"...intentional?

L had concerns that someone deleted some data- could never prove it at the time
================================================== =

Chapter 15

The Emails and Other Online Communications

State did not comply with rules for handing over emails/other commun- filed Motion to Compel

was ton of emails/online "chats"

also "objective" like the texts were, for same reasons

wonders why they just didn't talk to each other in person/on phone? this was how things were done by younger generation he assumes

but- considered possibility deeper psychological issues that made them less "vulnerable to each other's words"- may never understand tho'

many messages "blended together...a few stood out"

email the murderer sent to friend Abe- became big deal - 2nd trial

"..this email made it clear that at some point in time Mr. Alexander and Ms. Arias had a conversation about the interaction and/or relationship that Ms Arias had with Abe"....TA.."did not approve of any continued interaction between Ms. Arias and Abe. "- TA had "power and control over Ms. Arias"

speaks about online "chats"

-L states most important chat to him : 5/2008 (the "*advertiser censored*, *advertiser censored*, 3-whole wonder, corruptive carcass")

- horrible things to say- amazes him that "MS. Arias simply took it and did not return fire by calling him names"...did not.."put an end to the conversation"

- why was TA still talking to *advertiser censored*?, why the murderer kept talking to TA?

- conclusion for L- "they were addicted to each other"

another email: stands out to L: 1/2007- TA speaking to Chris/Sky Hughes ( background- Chris/Shy told the murderer to move on because TA "loved Deanna Reid and because he wasn't treating her well" The murderer told TA and he emailed the Hughes)

- "Mr Alexander begins this conversation by blaming Chris and Sky for speaking ill of him and/or bashing him in front of Ms. Arias. He expressed his unhappiness that Chris and Sky Hughes had called him a jerk who was abusive to woman. Mr. Alexander also seemed upset that the Hughes had told Ms. Arias that he was using her for a booty call and that he would never commit to her until he was over his feelings for Ms. Reid." (pg 84)

Hughes decide that they said things because the murderer lied to them

L says facts "as Mr. Hughes put it..in past 5 years" Ta "not committed to one woman..that Deanna was always in the background..." loved Deanna- no commitment tho' and he was "biggest flirt this side of the Mississippi"- TA likes to claims that "the T-Dog pulls chicks"

Chris amused by how TA "would hook up with chicks, get into their hearts and then become disinterested"

Sky said the murderer in love with TA and " to him she was just a booty call"- TA called the murderer a "*advertiser censored*", she called TA a "heart predator", said TA "took great joy in making women fall for him and laughs about what he could get away with"

Shy also said that she wouldn't want sister to be with TA and would not allow it

"..one of Mr. Alexander's closet friends would be fearful of how he would treat her sister...ponder that statement... and ask yourself, would I want Travis Alexander dating my sister?" (pg 85)
================================================== ===============

Next:

Chapter 16
The Letters

Chapter 17
The Phone Sex Tape
================================================== ===============

Becky Sharp said:

I know, right? He repeatedly pats himself on the back for being a disinterested defender of justice, for being able to discern the truth that others can't or won't see, and for being able to put his personal feelings to the side. And yet he happily repeats gossip about JM (including a Hitler comparison--spoken by someone else, of course) and even criticizes JM for operating in the courtroom as if the ends justify the means. Excuse me . . . what??? Does this man have an ounce of self-awareness?


To answer my question: no, of course not. I read only self-regard in place of self-awareness. In fact, judging from all the excerpts provided here (and thanks YorN and others!), his book smells of weaselness. He wants to have it both ways: on the one hand, he wants to assure readers that he really really doesn't like JA (shades of seventh grade) but was forced to defend--heroically--her constitutional rights (pat pat); on the other hand, he repeatedly implies that Travis got what was coming to him and therefore, so goes the whispered implication, the killer's obvious lies, while still lies, might have been "right" after all.

It's not that I assume criminal lawyers have to like their client, or even believe their innocence--far from it. But I do find Nurmi's insecure need to reassure the world that he was on to the killer from the beginning very revealing. He seems so eager to prove that he was always on top of everything and was never snowballed. Heh.

Whatever, Nurms. BTW, you really rock that '90s gangsta look. (I know, I know--unfair and very petty snark. I just smacked down my typing hand.)

And finally, I have to confess that as an academic I'm a snob about self-published "books." In the publishing world, nothing gets published until it's peer-reviewed. And then edited. And then copy-edited. If something is self-published, well . . .

Enough said and angry rant over!

Click to expand...

Great Post Becky. I agree with everything you said.:tyou::goodpost:

YESorNO said:

Trapped with Ms. Arias:

Chapter 11

My Initial Review of the Evidence as it Related to Mr. Alexander

L talks about learning about the victim so the jury can figure out the sentence for client

"Many might say that this amounts to 'dragging the victim through the mud' "

L talks about the talking head's on TV "verbal tirade about defense attys or our criminal justice system"

"Thus, as it related to Ms. Arias' case her jury needed to consider the dynamics of the relationship she shared with Mr. Alexander before a lawful sentence could be rendered....if I had not presented such evidence Ms. Arias would likely be getting a new trial.

Having offered all this information to you, those waiting for me to apologize for doing my job had better not hold their breathe because they will be waiting a long time,in fact, such an apology will never come. Furthermore, I will make no apologiers about repeating the reality of the evidence that had to be collected and/or presented throughout this book. 'Facts are stubborn things' " (pg. 82-83)

L says -in beginning of case it's hard to get accurate picture of who Travis was- "inaccurate or contradictory [info] to other evidence"

(snipped for space) =============

Chapter 13

My Initial Review of Mr. Martinez

never had a case against (with) JM

had other sources of info about him- court opinions -"always nuclear war with him"- L took to mean that JM did what he wanted, "didn't care about what others thought of him, including the court"

L heard from former colleague ("who was Jewish") referred to JM as "Hitler"

goes on to talk about things/stories that JM said/did- "but suffice it to say he was not well thought of within the defense community, not because of the convictions he obtained but because of the way he operated." (pg.89)

impression L got of JM- "a no holds barred kind of guy....feels like the ends justify the means and for that reason he feels comfortable with being so caustic in the courtroom."

End of Section 2 (pg 89)
================================================== ===========================

Next:

Section 3
Preparing For the Guilt Phase

Chapter 14
The Text Messages

Chapter 15
The Emails and Other Online Communications
================================================== =======================

Click to expand...

BBM: Many absurd statements coming out of the Nurms but the one bolded is incredible. Martinez feels the end justifies the means so no holds barred? Really?

What is so incredible is that Nurmi is quick to point out what he sees as a major flaw in someone else without seeing that same flaw in himself. For Nurmi the end justified the means throughout the entire trial and he had no holds barred to the point of not just unethical but unconstitutional. And he didn't just do it occasionally. Even now he feels justified in what he did, saying it was his job.

Yes, Nurmi, it was your job to provide a defense, to try to raise reasonable doubt, etc. We do not question your doing your job...we question how you did it, especially when you whine about the manner in which the prosecutor did his job.

Wow. Just...wow.