**Graphic and adult content**Jodia Arias Trial Discussion #7

[Linda7NJ]

He did not say the wound would have instantly killed TA. The ME stated it would have prevented him from movement such as protecting himself from defensive wounds and he would have been in shock and not capable of attack her much less defend himself. I believe that is what he said.

I wouldn't say it was an educated guess, I would say TA was a live, functioning person so the brain was intact when he was shot and the area the bullet passed through would have left him unable to function normally. The ME knows this for a fact which he clearly told defense. She tried to say he did not know for sure and he corrected her and he said he most certainly did know what path the bullet took without the brain matter present. jmo

Yep, then you have to explain that pesky pristine bullet casing !


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Straitfan]

Oh geeze I should have known this would come back at me...there are many gun shot wounds to the head and people live. I'm not sure how to articulate this but to say this ME said that decomp played a roll that he wasnt sure of, so therefore he had to go based on an EDUCATED guess. After all he hasent experienced this himself so he has to go on what? Still be sure of my position that she is guilty I just can't see JA overpowering TA with a knife IF he saw it coming so ALL I'm saying is gun shot first. NOT JA innocent!

Lol, I feel your pain, always has to be defiance.....BTW, I agree!

 

[LambChop]

My personal feeling on why she used the knife first to attack Travis...

The plunging of a knife through her lover's naked, wet skin and into his body was as personal a way to kill him as there is.

In a sense, she was finally 'penetrating' him. She would have eaten him alive if it had been possible, she was so consumed by her obsession with him. She may have even perceived a morbid sense of intimacy with him in this death struggle.

I think she sliced his throat to silence his screams. She plunged that knife in so deep, and ripped it across his neck with so much fierce strength, she almost took his head off.

Pulling him back down the hallway and into the bathroom, and then shooting him in the head was done simply out of panic, I think. She had no way of knowing if his prior screams had been heard, and if outsiders may soon be busting down the door. In her fantasies of killing him, she probably never anticipated the noise.

I don't think the blood and gore bothered her very much. I do believe her fear was of getting caught. Anyone looking to buy her a birthday present should just send her blown up pictures of Travis' autopsy photos to wallpaper her cell room walls. I bet she would never tire of viewing them.

I think that with his death, by her own hands, she finally felt she 'owned' Travis, forever. And, also in his death, she exacted her revenge for a love unreciprocated. Like a 21st Century Betty Broderick. "Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned", and all that. She knew she was losing him. She'd rather have him dead than not have have him at all.

I think she "brought the gun to a knife fight" because it was her insurance policy and her back up plan. If things got too out of control, she'd just shoot him. Like she did, in the end.

Who knows? Maybe the gun was her way of making sure he let her in his house.

You have some very good points here. jmo

 

[suspicious1]

Her "ninja" testimony really got to me as well, because I think there was a lot of truth mixed in with all the lies. I think she was blaming things on the 2 other people (one was a girl), and some of what they did may have actually been what she did.

As far as the knife, someone also mentioned that maybe she did not even bring the knife but went and got one from kitchen (if gun jammed on her). I also heard of people carrying kives as "backup" even though they have concealed carry permit. A knife can be a helpful backup weapon if a life or death confrontation becomes a hand-to-hand combat situation

Still trying to catch up but what if...her intentions were to shoot him first but the gun jammed so she had to resort to a knife. Maybe on the second attempt (after she stabbed him) she was able to get offer the one shot.

Just thinking out loud.

 

[Linda7NJ]

Folks we are on the same page JA is guilty as charged as the evidence so far has proven. It doesn't matter what happened first. We each are have an opinion of how things played out but we are all in agreement with her guilt!

Personally, I'm just curious what made those in disagreement with the ME reach their conclusion? What's the basis for their opinion? Are they bringing some expertise to the table? Have they knowledge that I do not?






Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[suspicious1]

Her "ninja" testimony really got to me as well, because I think there was a lot of truth mixed in with all the lies. I think she was blaming things on the 2 other people (one was a girl), and some of what they did may have actually been what she did.

As far as the knife, someone also mentioned that maybe she did not even bring the knife but went and got one from kitchen (if gun jammed on her). I also heard of people carrying kives as "backup" even though they have concealed carry permit. A knife can be a helpful backup weapon if a life or death confrontation becomes a hand-to-hand combat situation

Still trying to catch up but what if...her intentions were to shoot him first but the gun jammed so she had to resort to a knife. Maybe on the second attempt (after she stabbed him) she was able to get off the one shot.

Just thinking out loud.

 

[polleypockets]

so if you read those 2 statutes 1st degree murder or felony murder there are very specific conditions that if they are not met she can get off - there is no charge of murder in the 2nd degree - per hln charges posted - if the defense can prove it was any part self defense - which from what i read is not really as far fetched than i initally thought imo - for instance coming agressivly after her- shoots for fear of her life- but he is still up in what she believes is after her she stabs in fear for life - since it all happened so fast it could become a probable defense - or enuff for at least 1 juror - that is why i believe imo the defense would make sure the time line of events from their experts would be right - especially if he was shot after he was dead, it is then as close then can get to make it beyond any doubt - so imo thats why i believe the prosecution are be very careful to make sure the expert testimony is correct -

 

[princesspjs]

I understand perfectly what you are trying to say. I just want to know if you have experience in the medical field in this area. We do have nurses and ME assistants here that have had some experience in these areas and their input is often very valuable.

Before I'm ready to discredit the ME I'd like someone with some type of expertise to prove the doctor is wrong. The experts who have spoken up in this thread so far agree with the doctor. If someone has verified information that differs from the doctor's report we'd like to hear about it. So that is all I was trying to find out. jmo

Respectfully, based on your responses to me I can see that you don't understand what I'm saying to you and I am definitely NOT trying to discredit the ME.

 

[Straitfan]

Just curious, if he was stabbed first, how do you explain the "what appears to be blood coming down the side of his neck while still standing in the shower?

 

[Linda7NJ]

so if you read those 2 statutes 1st degree murder or felony murder there are very specific conditions that if they are not met she can get off - there is no charge of murder in the 2nd degree - per hln charges posted - if the defense can prove it was any part self defense - which from what i read is not really as far fetched than i initally thought imo - for instance coming agressivly after her- shoots for fear of her life- but he is still up in what she believes is after her she stabs in fear for life - since it all happened so fast it could become a probable defense - or enuff for at least 1 juror - that is why i believe imo the defense would make sure the time line of events from their experts would be right - especially if he was shot after he was dead, it is then as close then can get to make it beyond any doubt - so imo thats why i believe the prosecution are be very careful to make sure the expert testimony is correct -

He's the expert. They rely on him, it's his job. The ME doesn't work for the prosecution. He was the medical examiner and supposedly unbiased.

The defense pays for opinions...IMO


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Linda7NJ]

Just curious, if he was stabbed first, how do you explain the "what appears to be blood coming down the side of his neck while still standing in the shower?

It doesn't look like blood to me. And IMO the pics after prove it wasn't blood. You know, the last one where he's facing the camera and there is no bullet hole in his head.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[LaneGirl]

Personally, I'm just curious what made those in disagreement with the ME reach their conclusion? What's the basis for their opinion? Are they bringing some expertise to the table? Have they knowledge that I do not?






Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I for one can't see JA overpowering TA with a knife, so the shot first makes sense EXCEPT the casing on top of blood. Also as much respect as I can give the ME it is just his opinion I'm thinking we will have and expert for the DT say something different. Also we all have read reports of people shot in the head that live. But AGAIN I believe JA guilty as charged so far. I just don't think she could have overpowered TA with a knife. Please I'm sitting here with all of you seeing something a bit different than you. But still agreeing with the guilty verdict!

 

[Linda7NJ]

I for one can't see JA overpowering TA with a knife, so the shot first makes sense EXCEPT the casing on top of blood. Also as much respect as I can give the ME it is just his opinion I'm thinking we will have and expert for the DT say something different. Also we all have read reports of people shot in the head that live. But AGAIN I believe JA guilty as charged so far. I just don't think she could have overpowered TA with a knife. Please I'm sitting here with all of you seeing something a bit different than you. But still agreeing with the guilty verdict!

This is very interesting
http://m.phys.org/news/2011-01-bullet-surviving-shot-host.html

IMO this too would prove shooting him was cruel and he suffered...

I don't see how an expert for the defense could testify it was less if he were shot first.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[smart blonde]

I am perfectly happy that we all have our own opinions and points of view on the various topics of this case, but I have to admit to being surprised at just how many people seem to have completely discounted the expert testimony of the well respected Medical Examiner who actually did the autopsy on Travis Alexander's body.

I wonder at the implications of this as far as how the individual jurors may view professional, sworn testimony. I remember this same thing happened with the Medical Examiner in the death of Caylee Anthony / murder trial of Casey Anthony. Many people seemed quick to disregard the ME's findings, and came quickly to their own conclusions.

Could this be part of the so called 'CSI Effect', where people think that after watching countless hours of prime time, forensic based, television programming that they are just as knowledgeable as the true experts who have had years of formal education, and sometimes decades of professional experience to back up their conclusions?

I just find it kind of fascinating.

 

[Karmady]

Personally, I'm just curious what made those in disagreement with the ME reach their conclusion? What's the basis for their opinion? Are they bringing some expertise to the table? Have they knowledge that I do not?






Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Speaking only for myself, I've laid out the reasons why I think so. And I don't need to bring expertise to the table. The jury has no expertise, either. They can credit the ME or not.

 

[smart blonde]

Personally, I'm just curious what made those in disagreement with the ME reach their conclusion? What's the basis for their opinion? Are they bringing some expertise to the table? Have they knowledge that I do not?






Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I swear I didn't read this post prior to writing mine above, but it was the first post I read after I posted mine. Too funny!

 

[Linda7NJ]

I swear I didn't read this post prior to writing mine above, but it was the first post I read after I posted mine. Too funny!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[momrids6]

How is Jodi going to justify a voice mail inviting Travis to accompany her and Heather to a play (Othello and Shakespeare) that she left his on his phone 7 hours after he was dead? I don't care which version of her lies (she wasn't there/the Ninja's did it/self-defence) a juror may choose to believe, in the last 2 versions she knew he was dead, so why leave a voice mail?

At the time she left the voice mail she didn't know she was going to have to change her story. Talk about a screw up! I hope the jurors catch this.

Gobblurth hopes prosecution is reading- listening to Greta a moment ago- proves one of her reporters is reading; he almost word for word recited your post :seeya:

 

[Linda7NJ]

Gobblurth hopes prosecution is reading- listening to Greta a moment ago- proves one of her reporters is reading; he almost word for word recited your post :seeya:

That happens all the time! It wouldn't be so bad if they at least gave credit to Websleuths, if nothing else.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[LaneGirl]

I am perfectly happy that we all have our own opinions and points of view on the various topics of this case, but I have to admit to being surprised at just how many people seem to have completely discounted the expert testimony of the well respected Medical Examiner who actually did the autopsy on Travis Alexander's body.

I wonder at the implications of this as far as how the individual jurors may view professional, sworn testimony. I remember this same thing happened with the Medical Examiner in the death of Caylee Anthony / murder trial of Casey Anthony. Many people seemed quick to disregard the ME's findings, and came quickly to their own conclusions.

Could this be part of the so called 'CSI Effect', where people think that after watching countless hours of prime time, forensic based, television programming that they are just as knowledgeable as the true experts who have had years of formal education, and sometimes decades of professional experience to back up their conclusions?





I just find it kind of fascinating.

I think we all know from one expert testimony there will be an opposite expert testimony, it is how the world works statistic this stastistic that. So we form an opinion based on what is known AND our own interpretation. Except for JA and god if one believes we will never know all the FACTS. Experts have been known to be wrong, not saying so in this trial just saying.