weekend discussion: discuss the trial here #154

[Zuri]

bbm
the poster i referred to never gives clarification,this is my problem.

i and others have asked on several previous occasions and we are ignored.

different opinions are of course welcome but i like clarification with them,not just a statement bashing someone and then not expansion on it.

i cant believe someone accused you of being an alcoholic because of you PTSD issues,some people are down right mean :hug:

:tyou::blowkiss:

 

[Mrs G Norris]

I think Juan will wrap on Tuesday and we'll get closing arguments next week, unless of course the DT decides to cross the witness for days on end.

 

[Angelina Frost]

I'm watching JW's cross of Kevin Horn (I didn't watch it the day of) and she's just a hot mess questioning him about the bullet passing through the brain. She asked him 3 different questions about it and all the answers were the same and not what she wanted.

I am too. It is the most brainless, witless, ridiculous cross I have ever seen. I haven't the slightest idea which side JW is working for.

Her arrow in the head example is CRAZY. :help: :help: :help: :help:

 

[JRS_JD2L]

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.
Let me say that I started watching this trial when Jodi took the stand...before that I actually knew VERY little about it, so I feel like I was very unbiased in the beginning, much like the jurors. I actually BELIEVED Jodi during Nurmi's questioning! I had NO IDEA what the real story was, and that she was just acting and lying her way through it. So I feel like I came into this, as I said, with a blank slate like the jurors.
THAT ALL CHANGED once Juan took over. I completely did a 180, I began to see her manipulation, her lies, her act. I had caught onto her...from then on I became "biased" and feel like now I am VERY biased against her...I feel like every single word out of her mouth is a lie. So I keep thinking, since I was much like the jurors in my lack of information, they MUST be seeing what I saw!
I went back and started watching more testimony from the beginning of the trial that I had missed. One was the blood pattern expert...what got me VERY worried was the juror question about COULD THE PALMPRINT of Jodi have been left on the wall from some previous time? This, to me, was a question that was so out there...does that mean that the person is even doubting that JODI COMMITTED THE CRIME??? To me, this sounds like someone doesn't even want to believe she was even there or that she did it!! As I said I was not following the trial at the time, so I'm sure this was discussed on this forum at the time, but I missed all of that. But that really stuck with me. Then Juan went back and had the blood pattern expert EXPLAIN that it was Jodi's blood MIXED with Travis' blood...but WHY would someone need verification that it was HER palmprint????
Then there were also a handful of questions since then....like, could the camera have been moved by Travis because he picked it up after Jodi dropped it and was checking it while she was running away? DOES THIS QUESTION NOT WORRY OTHERS? It's like someone is just reaching for things to support what they ALREADY believe. This question goes against what really happened and EVEN WHAT JODI CLAIMS, because that would have given her enough time to run away!
Also the question that could Jodi have stabbed him after the gunshot due to the rage she felt inside from his previous abuse (or something like that, maybe it was could the overkill been because of her rage from the abuse?). This shows to me a, they believe Jodi's story that she shot him first, AND they believe he abused her. Other question was, could the overkill be because she was pouring out all her emotions at the time...I don't know if that was part of the last question or not. Then yesterday, what bothered me more than the tiger/bear question (which I can't tell which way it goes), were the CAMERA questions...it's as if someone wants to believe Jodi's story and feel like she put the camera in the washer because she was so frazzled by what had just happened, not as part of her PLANNING. To me, whether or not the camera was in the washer doesn't even matter...the fact that she DELETED the pics is what matters. So is one juror not willing to believe that deleting the pics show planning and ORGANIZATION? To me, Jodi didn't know that they could retrieve the pics...just like the rest of us, I had no idea...I thought if someone deleted pics that means they were removed from the memory card. Jodi claims to have more knowledge of cameras, but I DO NOT believe she knew anything more than the rest of us. So the fact of whether it was in the washer or not doesn't matter, but yet there were two or three questions about this and whether or not it indicates planning, which it CLEARLY does.
Okayyy...sorry this is so long. I just had to get this out there because now I'm really worried, I have been watching the trial daily and I don't know what I would do if it ends up in a hung jury or even life in prison, she deserves the death penalty. I'm worried about this one juror.

Good post! Welcome!!!

I see how you would have many concerns over the jury questions, but I don't think we should read too much into them. As a law student, I listen to a lot of Supreme Court oral arguments, and I have found that the Justices that ask questions that sound really "one sided," many times end up siding with the party they are challenging. That is, I think sometimes, people ask questions in order to confirm that they are on the right side of the matter and want to be able to know that they fully vetted their opinion. So, they imagine question that might come up in say, deliberations.

With that said, there certainly could be a juror, or two, on the fence. But, that's what deliberations are for. The evidence here appears overwhelming...much more so than in "the case we shall not mention." There the state had to prove who did it, and here that is not in dispute. I am confident the majority of the jurors here sees through all of the DT's shiny objects and will be able to convince any potential fence-sitters. :twocents::seeya:

 

[elementary]

I think you make a good point. The tiger/bear question suggested to me that the juror was asking: does it really matter whether she was attacked by Travis or a ninja? She was still attacked and therefore she would still have post-traumatic stress syndrome. It seems that the juror has a preconcieved notion that Jodi is a battered woman and therefore everything she did is justifiable, but the only way to arrive at that conclusion is to completely ignore all of the evidence.

Well, that would be sad. The fact is the kind of traumatic event matters and so does the subject. Not every event ends up in PTSD. It's not automatic.

 

[AstroKitty]

Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - trial day 50: REBUTTAL; #153



Hi I moved your quote over here for discussion ...

That is AWFUL!! That is just the LAST thing that anybody would want, as it must be hard enough to live with it as it is .. I'm not a labels person per se because I think it tends to oversimplify and lump people together and allow for forms of discrimination and marginalising, although I accept that it's a diagnosis which is important for understanding and treatment.

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".

 

[Southern_Meadow]

I am too. It is the most brainless, witless, ridiculous cross I have ever seen. I haven't the slightest idea which side JW is working for.

Her arrow in the head example is CRAZY. :help: :help: :help: :help:

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

 

[kayice]

I just want to know what happened to the "whole truth and nothing but the truth" in our justice system. When did it become, keep out all a lot of the truth and anything goes for the defense in the way of lying to save a cold blooded murderer, including killing the victim, in name, all over again.

 

[kscornfed]

I think Juan will wrap on Tuesday and we'll get closing arguments next week, unless of course the DT decides to cross the witness for days on end.

I really hope you're right but I fear rebuttal will take longer than a day. I can't wait for closing arguments!!!!

 

[lil_buddy]

I really hope you're right but I fear rebuttal will take longer than a day. I can't wait for closing arguments!!!!

I can't wait for the verdict mwahahahaha

 

[Mrs G Norris]

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".

Far out!!! Someone will die over this. I think that generally there needs to be a whole lot more public education about personality disorders ..

 

[Mrs G Norris]

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.

 

[leebee52]

Hi everyone. Had to get away from hearing Wilmot yesterday before court ended, I was just toooo disgusted. Can't help but feel that her cross of JD was a payback for ALV.
I watched JVM last night, not too bad and was hoping NG would be good but not even. Someone needs to scream at NG. Every time she would go back to the court room she would then come back as a popup and butt in to insert her own commentary and talk over what was going on in court. Dr. Drew was better thank goodness. I swear, after this trial is over, I will NEVER watch HLN again.

 

[pferrin]

I am too. It is the most brainless, witless, ridiculous cross I have ever seen. I haven't the slightest idea which side JW is working for.

Her arrow in the head example is CRAZY. :help: :help: :help: :help:

For me it was a boomerang defense. Defense keeps throwing carp towards the prosecution and it keeps coming back and carp is in their face, again.

 

[WhoaIsMe]

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".

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.

 

[InALandFarFarAway]

Lol, I have been sick all week so I actually do have an excuse, but I still did a rush job on the dishes just now.

Hope you're on the mend, Schuby.

 

[Mrs G Norris]

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.

 

[WhoaIsMe]

I just want to know what happened to the "whole truth and nothing but the truth" in our justice system. When did it become, keep out all a lot of the truth and anything goes for the defense in the way of lying to save a cold blooded murderer, including killing the victim, in name, all over again.

Apparently 'the whole truth' doesn't include the stuff that makes the defendant look really bad.

 

[Celeskitty]

I think you make a good point. The tiger/bear question suggested to me that the juror was asking: does it really matter whether she was attacked by Travis or a ninja? She was still attacked and therefore she would still have post-traumatic stress syndrome. It seems that the juror has a preconcieved notion that Jodi is a battered woman and therefore everything she did is justifiable, but the only way to arrive at that conclusion is to completely ignore all of the evidence.

The impression I got from that question was regarding Samuels' test results. He had said that even though she was attacked by a stranger but it was actually Travis, the test results are still valid. I think the juror wanted to know if the bear/tiger scenario would be as valid. I think the juror wanted Dr. DeMarte to answer a question about the test validity without directly asking. There were very few questions asked and none of them were asking about her expertise in battered women's syndrome.

I honestly believe they don't think she was battered and wanted clarification on whether or not PTSD can wipe out five hours of memory (which the doctor said no).

 

[InALandFarFarAway]

BBM - Right, which I strongly believe won't happen. I think the juror may very well place a high value on DD's credentials and skills as a psychologist and just wanted DD to clarify and confirm that the DT's diagnosis of PTSD is not logical.

I am crossing my fingers. If that little murdering snot gets anything less than First Degree, I'm going to be crushed. No one should be on the wrong end of her crazy ever again.