Jodi Arias TAKES THE STAND #38 *may contain graphic and adult content*

[AndreaBingham]

There are some renowned experts that do what these experts in Arizona do, and even by a report only, they can indicate that a certain conclusion drawn is faulty because .. or that "the reason this ME did not find blood is because" and they have legitimate opinions even without being present..

If ME says this is what I see and its because A,B,C
they are only saying, I understand what you see, but A,B,C are not the only reason you see it. D & E are also possible.

Ok, that might make no sense at all, so I will go to Starbucks and hope they have Cranberry Bliss bars, but I am not hopeful.

BBM

Very true. That's why the fact that no one did this in this trial is so telling about whether D and E exist. The defense had an expert testify regarding the computer evidence, which is less important than the ME's evidence. Whether she shot him first or last is crucial to this case and if it was able to be disputed, the defense would have already brought someone forth to dispute it, IMO.

 

[DenverClipper]

His head easily could have been facing the wall.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

His head could have been facing the wall? Huh? What wall? I suppose he also could have been standing on his hands or doing cartwheels thru the bathroom. How does that explain the trajectory of the bullet?

Forgive me for taking offense if no offense was intended Condescending remarks to serious discussing get nowhere IMO.

 

[Linda7NJ]

His head could have been facing the wall? Huh? What wall? I suppose he also could have been standing on his hands or doing cartwheels thru the bathroom. How does that explain the trajectory of the bullet?

Forgive me for taking offense if no offense was intended Condescending remarks to serious discussing get nowhere IMO.

You have assumed if he was laying on his back his head was facing the ceiling. I simply stated his head could have easily flopped to one side or the other. Assuming that's what happened ....Jodi's arm and gun holding hand also isn't fixed. We know he was shot from above and from atleast two feet away.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[kscornfed]

How does this man sleep at night knowing he could have enbabled the Mesa police to find Travis Alexander as early as the day after he was murdered instead of 5 days later when concerned friends of TA's took it upon themselves to find their missing friend? Listen to Searcy's explanation (excuses) why he never called authorities until July 15th the day Jodi Arias was arrested. Absolutely pathetic.

http://www.hlntv.com/video/2013/02/14/arias-friend-she-called-me-night

there's a reason martinez isn't interested in this guy. i think he's a huge liar. he contradicted himself----she called him, then he called her----in this tape. and to act like he knew nothing about the case, really, when travis was a colleague of his, isn't credible. he may have spoken to jodi, or maybe he didn't. but even if he did, we don't know what was said except from him.

and if he didn't call the police when he found out nobody knew TA was dead at the time he had this conversation with her, then that would make him very suspicious if i were the police-----VERY suspicious.

 

[shantastic]

I think she wanted to use the knife. Why else would she bring it? IMO the gun was part of premeditation to deflect suspicion and stage the scene as if there were two perps.

Even during her original interview (she wasn't there) she was talking up Travis's strength and the unlikelihood one person could over power him.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

My only issue with the knife is that I am not convinced she brought it with her. I don't think it's been brought in front of the jury that she carried a knife around all the time. I know there isn't evidence of a knife missing from TA's house, but if a knife went missing at my house, I would probably be the only one to notice. I have a block of knives on the counter that a missing knife would probably be noticed, but I also have a drawer with some assorted larger knives. If one went missing, I think I am the only one who would know. My husband would have no clue. I'm just thinking out loud here... :waitasec:

 

[neesaki]

That's not the rule

Like you, my "own" theory is that the gunshot was first because that makes sense to me, despite what the ME said. I also don't think the ME has an agenda or is a hired gun for the State -- I just think these circumstances may be an anomaly and are not amenable to a certain medical determination because of the decomposition.

Yes, the ME stated in the autopsy report, and it was reiterated on the stand as well, "..without gross evidence of significant intracranial hemorrhage or
apparent cerebral injury (although examination of brain tissue is somewhat limited by the decomposed nature of the remains)." It's for this reason, imo, that it can't be completely validated when the bullet wound was inflicted.

 

[Quester]

To me that sounds like he couldnt tell how much intracranial hemorrhage there was because the evidence wasn't there due to decomposition.

Perhaps ... but according to the ME there was some hemorrhage, not an "absence" of blood as my previous post was attempting to clarify.

" ... without gross evidence of significant intracranial hemorrhage ... "

On page 4 of 8: http://cnninsession.files.wordpress....visautopsy.pdf
​

 

[Lupie43]

BBM - just to clarify, from the ME report, the exact verbiage was:

" ... without gross evidence of significant intracranial hemorrhage ... "

On page 4 of 8: http://cnninsession.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/redactedtravisautopsy.pdf

​

So to me, it sounds as though there was some blood but perhaps not as much as the ME would have expected.

My ME qualifications: I have performed 2 autopsies ... er dissections ... one on a frog and one on a cow's eye.

Last line BBM.
Quester you are too dang funny. You one upped me on that one....I couldn't do the frog or the worm (wasn't asked to do a cow's eye). My lab partner did it when the teacher was out of the room. :floorlaugh:

Gotta run for now. Have a great day.

 

[Linda7NJ]

My only issue with the knife is that I am not convinced she brought it with her. I don't think it's been brought in front of the jury that she carried a knife around all the time. I know there isn't evidence of a knife missing from TA's house, but if a knife went missing at my house, I would probably be the only one to notice. I have a block of knives on the counter that a missing knife would probably be noticed, but I also have a drawer with some assorted larger knives. If one went missing, I think I am the only one who would know. My husband would have no clue. I'm just thinking out loud here... :waitasec:

The jury doesn't know at the time she was arrested she had knives hidden in books and another gun with her. So... I think she brought the knife along with the gun.... Because she planned to use both again


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[K_Z]

To me that sounds like he couldnt tell how much intracranial hemorrhage there was because the evidence wasn't there due to decomposition.

And not to be too indelicate, but the consistency of the brain at that point in time from 5+ days of room temperature decomposition was almost certainly yogurt/ pudding- like. It would not have been possible to identify a bullet tract, but if there was significant intracranial bleeding (indicating a living person with a beating heart, substantial circulating blood volume, AND intact major vessels to the brain), that evidence would have been obvious. We have to remember that the major vessels to his brain were severed.

I think it is highly likely Travis was already dead when he was shot.

The ME's scenario is the only one that makes sense to me, physiologically. He could live a while with the stab wounds, and function a bit, but once the neck cut was made, he would have lost consciousness in seconds. Same with the GSW to the head. This was not a glancing blow to the scalp-- it was a full on intracranial shot.

You just aren't doing a lot of walking around or defending yourself seconds after you have sustained an intracranial GSW, of ANY caliber.

 

[K_Z]

The jury doesn't know at the time she was arrested she had knives hidden in books and another gun with her. So... I think she brought the knife along with the gun.... Because she planned to use both again


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I wonder why that wasn't brought in as evidence?

 

[luv]

My only issue with the knife is that I am not convinced she brought it with her. I don't think it's been brought in front of the jury that she carried a knife around all the time. I know there isn't evidence of a knife missing from TA's house, but if a knife went missing at my house, I would probably be the only one to notice. I have a block of knives on the counter that a missing knife would probably be noticed, but I also have a drawer with some assorted larger knives. If one went missing, I think I am the only one who would know. My husband would have no clue. I'm just thinking out loud here... :waitasec:

If she was the one that was doing the tire slashing then there is a good chance she carried a knife around or had one handy.

 

[popsicle]

You have assumed if he was laying on his back his head was facing the ceiling. I simply stated his head could have easily flopped to one side or the other. Assuming that's what happened ....Jodi's arm and gun holding hand also isn't fixed. We know he was shot from above and from atleast two feet away.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Actually that makes perfect sense. When she is dragging him back and sounds are emanating from the body she thinks he is still alive so she gets the gun. The trajectory works perfect I think.

 

[Linda7NJ]

I wonder why that wasn't brought in as evidence?

They always leave out good stuff, not probative ... Too predgidical


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[minor4th]

Iirc it was the exact path the bullet traveled thru the brain that he wasn't able to determine due to decomp. I believe he was rather emphatic about there not being my blood inside the skull.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Just goes to show that reasonable people can interpret the same testimony in two different ways.

I agree that he said he couldnt determine the path because of decomp, but I took his testimony to mean there were other things he couldn't determine with certainty as well.

 

[Linda7NJ]

Actually that makes perfect sense. When she is dragging him back and sounds are emanating from the body she thinks he is still alive so she gets the gun. The trajectory works perfect I think.

I think she would have shot him regardless believing she's sending LE on a wild goose chase for two perps.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[shantastic]

The jury doesn't know at the time she was arrested she had knives hidden in books and another gun with her. So... I think she brought the knife along with the gun.... Because she planned to use both again


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I wonder if they can put that in front of the jury? Anyway, my post was trying to look at it from the eyes of the jury. We know so much more about the case than they do (or are supposed to). I always find it interesting to see jury members talk about a case afterward. Some things that seem so significant to me are totally disregarded by the jury. It will be cool to see what this jury finds convincing once she's convicted. :great:

 

[Ammonitida]

My only issue with the knife is that I am not convinced she brought it with her. I don't think it's been brought in front of the jury that she carried a knife around all the time. I know there isn't evidence of a knife missing from TA's house, but if a knife went missing at my house, I would probably be the only one to notice. I have a block of knives on the counter that a missing knife would probably be noticed, but I also have a drawer with some assorted larger knives. If one went missing, I think I am the only one who would know. My husband would have no clue. I'm just thinking out loud here... :waitasec:

Based on my understanding, she must have brought the knife with her. Why? According to the story given to her DT, Jodi alleges that she was tied up during their upstairs sexual encounter and that Travis used a knife to cut the soft rope. However, as testified to by Flores, NO such rope was found anywhere near the crime scene or in the bedroom. Every place was checked. Only fibers consistent with other innocent material was found (on the stairs, in the bathroom, etc). There was no such rope to tie anyone up with. So why lie if the knife was just lying around there innocently? Because that knife was part of her murder plan -- brought as a back-up. She of course couldn't say that so she had to come up with some kind of story to explain the knife. Unfortunately for her, that story is inconsistent with the evidence collected at the scene and the bedroom.

 

[shantastic]

If she was the one that was doing the tire slashing then there is a good chance she carried a knife around or had one handy.

Yes, I know. My point was about how much the jury has heard. We have heard all about the tire slashing, but through objections and sidebars, how much has the jury been allowed to hear.

 

[bobloblaw]

Continuing the conscious / unconscious argument from the previous thread - yes, I believe the ME indicated the initial shock from the bullet would have made Travis unconscious. I don't believe he testified whether or not Travis might have regained consciousness.

I think she shot him thinking it would do the job. He slumped in the shower and JA left the bathroom and possibably put the gun away. Her purse or backpack maybe?She returned to the bathroom only to discover Travis had regained consciousness and he was standing at the sink. Blood was flowing from his mouth and nose as indicated by blood pattern.

In a complete rage JA gets the knife and starts stabbing him in the back, neck and scalp. Travis was probably blinded in at least one eye from the shot so he does not fully comprehend what is happening. Hand defense wounds occur here

He turns around and she stabs him in the chest. The ME testified that the fatal heart wound was inflicted with a slight upward trajectory. That wound could not have been inflicted while he was sitting in the shower.

He collapses to the floor and in one final attempt to save himself he crawls on all fours trying to escape the horror by makes it as far as the threshold to the bedroom. His life ends here.

The gunshot came last folks cannot explain how the gunshot was inflicted if it was not first. If he was lying on the bathroom floor when she shot him how do we explain the trajectory of the bullet? The angle is wrong She certainly did not shoot him after she dragged him back to the shower because the angle was all wrong here too.

My 2 cents.

There goes the self defense theory.