Arias Claims She Is Innocent of Murder
http://gma.yahoo.com/arias-says-shes-innocent-murder-195955095--abc-news-topstories.html
http://gma.yahoo.com/arias-says-shes-innocent-murder-195955095--abc-news-topstories.html
I agree. He is not her defense attorney guiding her through their overly rehearsed testimony. This is how you have to treat a lying psycho like Arias. He needs to cut her off before she starts going into the long diatribes and stories and innane rehearsed annecdotes. He is yelling and finds her "stories" of abuse incredulous. As we all do. I would be yelling at her too. No reason to treat her with Nurmi's "kid gloves".
Maybe her attorney's displays of amusement are their signal to her to tone it the heck down. She clearly wants to get smirky and is working hard to keep up the beaten down attitude.
I have to agree. Watching JM work... well, just say I'm totally captivated, and am truly in awe of his patience with that woman. I really don't know how he does it. He's amazing.
i think she knows. sounds to me like he didn't back up her bruised neck story and she's pissed off about it. i just don't know if either side can call MM because he's involved in forging those letters.
i was wondering if the state could use him in rebuttal but not about the letters---he can't be made to incriminate himself. i was wondering if they could ask him JUST about the 'strangling' incident. don't know if that's possible but i wish it was.
It's worth repeating over and over that Juan is a seasoned veteran. He's been doing this for decades, he's put at least one other young woman on death row. Apparently he usually tries defendants on his own without co-counsel. It's obvious he's prepared-- he doesn't refer to notes, he knows the facts of the case better than anyone, he knows the law inside and out. He is prepared in ways that we probably don't consider or in ways that we underestimate.... I think he knows his juries very well. Whether he conducted voir dire on his own or had someone specializing in that selection, he is quite aware of who is on that jury. Personally I think he is aware of how he's conducting himself, how he's presenting evidence, how much he's putting on, and I think he has an excellent handle on how the jury is receiving his case as well as the defense's case.
Is anyone else feverishly hoping that out of 18 jurors the ones that may for one reason or another cause a hung jury be cast out as alternative jurors (random draw so we call on luck/divine intervention!) and that we have 12 responsible, intelligent jurors to decide this case? I am!
:seeya: Jumping of your post here about MM and the forged letters :
I hope that Mr. Martinez can bring those letters in to PROVE that it was another one of Jodi's LIES and schemes ... these letters were forged by her "friend" because Jodi asked him to do it ... this needs to be EXPOSED !
Another reason it needs to come out is because it should be made CLEAR to the Jury that this BS about Travis being a "ped" is one of Jodi's LIES :furious:
Travis' name and reputation MUST be cleared ... it is the RIGHT thing to do !
JMO ... but "tough" IF MM has incriminated himself ...
Travis is the VICTIM ... NOT Jodi and her "friends" ...
All JMO and MOO !
:seeya:
2/25/2013Anyone know what this is about?
2/25/2013 MOT - Motion - Party (001) 2/25/2013
NOTE: MOTION TO PRECLUDE ANY AND ALL EVIDENCE RELATED TO THE LETTERS WRITTEN BY TRAVIS ALEXANDER TO MS. ARIAS
http://www.superiorcourt.maricopa.go...=CR2008-031021
I don't know how he does it, either.
Yesterday was like watching a defiant teenage girl on the stand. Just pizzed me off to no end how she became so dumb on the one hand (gee, didn't understand anything) or so smart wanting definitions and clarifications for every word, etc.
At the end of the day, I don't think it would make her more endearing to most jurors. She was playing games, and it was obvious she was trying to be difficult.
I think it was another "fail" for JA's strategy. Thursday was a fail, and yesterday was a fail.
Mr Martinez- hats off to you!!!!
JMO
Do you think she will begin to crack & unravel today? Someone on one of the talking heads shows last night said that was going to start today. The "mask" is going to come off.
I'm watching yesterday's cross again. In part 1 of the video at about 0:23:50(JM is talking about Jodis' memory problems and how she's able to discuss all the sex bits with no trouble) JM says "Is anybody saying that you didn't do it to the best of your recollection?" and Jodi says "You're implying that" the woman defense lawyer actually SMILES that Jodi is acting defiant. Does she think it's a battle of wits? Does she not understand that Travis was murdered in cold blood and that HER client is charged with first-degree murder? She smiles!
i think she knows. sounds to me like he didn't back up her bruised neck story and she's pissed off about it. i just don't know if either side can call MM because he's involved in forging those letters.
i was wondering if the state could use him in rebuttal but not about the letters---he can't be made to incriminate himself. i was wondering if they could ask him JUST about the 'strangling' incident. don't know if that's possible but i wish it was.
And Nurmi did that a lot, too! I remember that Jeff Ashton got reprimanded for that in the CA trial. I was told yesterday that the attorneys can do that, but it just seems so wrong!!!
Do you think she will begin to crack & unravel today? Someone on one of the talking heads shows last night said that was going to start today. The "mask" is going to come off.