What would you rebut? Discuss rebuttal here

[ScarlettScarpetta]

absolutely not. (it was thru the frontal lobe)

(I concur with the ME's testimony.. he wouldn't be able to move let alone speak and attack her and rip at her clothes)


**I sooooo hope they have a someone with a medical background on the jury... from what katiecoolady is posting from the courtroom one of the jurors was taking a lot of notes during the gun testimony so hopefully someone on the jury also has a lot of knowledge of handguns and knows she couldn't load the gun and fire on the guy at that trajectory the way she was claiming.. utter bunk):twocents::twocents:

So it went into his forehead and into his brain. I hope he gets on this more on rebuttal. That Travis was not going to be screaming with a bullet in his brain. Somehow I did not get that too well and if I missed it, I don't want the jury too.

 

[nursebeeme]

So it went into his cheek and into his brain. I hope he gets on this more on rebuttal. That Travis was not going to be screaming with a bullet in his brain. Somehow I did not get that too well and if I missed it, I don't want the jury too.

no.. it actually went thru his frontal lobe and lodged in his cheek and there was no stippling (it had to have been shot much further away and at a different angle than what Arias was demonstrating yesterday)

There was also no bleeding at the entrance wound. The ME testified that this could have been due to an already significant loss of blood volume (think 27 stabs and throat slash). They could not specifically denote the trajectory, unfortunately, due to decomposition of the brain tissue.

What is most telling to me is that the defense does not have their own medical expert.. :wink: They are just counting on the fact that Flores said the shot came first before the ME had all of the facts to make a determination.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

I know this is OT but I can't find the thread for website problems (is it gone??).

Is anyone else having a lot of trouble with WS lately? It keeps freezing up for me and then I can't get back on for 5-15 minutes. It's very annoying!! And it doesn't seem to always correlate with there being a lot of people on here, it appears random.

yes. It is bumping me off a lot today. Probably because no trial coverage and we are all here!!:floorlaugh:

 

[Kakidoll]

I want to hear from Matt M., Daryll again... and i'm hoping beyond hope that JM's investigator either found the salon or the skateboarders that SAW her change the license plate herself.

I want JM to put to rest that NO pedo material was found and i'd LOVE if the forged letters were addressed somehow

I want them to show that that there is NO WAY she did what she did (unless she has spidey superpowers) that could get her UP on that shelf in the amount of time shown from the photos.

I want it pointed out date by date, w/gun stolen, texts, etc... the progression of how it played out. I think as LONG as the trial is taken, it needs to be simplified in closing just how 'simple' the dates line up... and times. (Guess thats not really rebuttal, more closing) I just want it all strung together for the jurors so they are not confused at ANYTHING.

I want JM to go step by step thru EVERY stab wound (as sad as it will be for the family) and just how violent the attack was.

I want to show the jury the all the movie references she's added to her story.

I want to see her break down into a TRUE blubbering mess at the Def. table.

WOW, all the "I wants'... i'm starting to sound as bad as Jodi... its all about ME ME ME.

 

[nursebeeme]

also just fyi.. but after the rebuttal the defense gets a chance at surrebuttal:

At the end of rebuttal, the defense may be allowed surrebuttal. Surrebuttal evidence is limited to responding to issues that were raised for the first time in the rebuttal case. It is not an opportunity for the defense to present their whole case again, or to open up the door to new issues. It is reversible error for the trial judge to prevent a defendant from introducing surrebuttal evidence to meet new matters raised by the rebuttal evidence presented by the plaintiff or prosecutor.

http://www.boulder-bar.org/bar_media_manual/trial/12.8.html

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

no.. it actually went thru his frontal lobe and lodged in his cheek and there was no stippling (it had to have been shot much further away and at a different angle than what Arias was demonstrating yesterday)

There was also no bleeding at the entrance wound. The ME testified that this could have been due to an already significant loss of blood volume (thing 27 stabs and throat slash). They could not specifically denote the trajectory, unfortunately, due to decomposition of the brain tissue.

What is most telling to me is that the defense does not have their own medical expert.. :wink: They are just counting on the fact that Flores said the shot came first before the ME had all of the facts to make a determination.

So she was shooting down at him. down on his head. So he could have been just laying there and she shot him from across the room?.
I bet they don't have their own expert because they can not find one that can make this plausible for them.
I hope JM has a chance to Re cross this. Because this is the first time this has made sense for me. I got the stabbing and the slitting of the throat but the gunshot perplexed me.

 

[nursebeeme]

no.. it actually went thru his frontal lobe and lodged in his cheek and there was no stippling (it had to have been shot much further away and at a different angle than what Arias was demonstrating yesterday)

There was also no bleeding at the entrance wound. The ME testified that this could have been due to an already significant loss of blood volume (think 27 stabs and throat slash). They could not specifically denote the trajectory, unfortunately, due to decomposition of the brain tissue.

What is most telling to me is that the defense does not have their own medical expert.. :wink: They are just counting on the fact that Flores said the shot came first before the ME had all of the facts to make a determination.

not to quote my own post but it just struck me that Arias has based her whole story on the forensics and most likely that early statement made by Flores (I think that is why it has been a hot spot with the defense and why they tried to declare a mistrial over it early on)

 

[Teresa]

I just heard that there is no rebuttal in Arizona. (Insesssion.) This cant be right?! Someone...I didn't hear this right?!

Teresa

 

[InTheGarden]

I would like to see a duplicate closet the same dimension with shelves attached the same way as TA's closet to show it is impossible for JA to put one foot on a lower shelf, jump up without touching anything and grabbing the gun.

 

[joypath]

no.. it actually went thru his frontal lobe and lodged in his cheek and there was no stippling (it had to have been shot much further away and at a different angle than what Arias was demonstrating yesterday)

There was also no bleeding at the entrance wound. The ME testified that this could have been due to an already significant loss of blood volume (think 27 stabs and throat slash). They could not specifically denote the trajectory, unfortunately, due to decomposition of the brain tissue.

What is most telling to me is that the defense does not have their own medical expert.. :wink: They are just counting on the fact that Flores said the shot came first before the ME had all of the facts to make a determination.

BBM/U/I

:twocents::twocents::twocents: From personal experience (35 year marriage to a now retired homicide State Trooper), MANY (not all!) members of LE "jump to" the assessment that a head shot is a fatal shot, 'specially one that is like this one: frontal and on a decomposing body with other head wounds. Now for the ME or ME investigator on the crime scene, withholding opinions re: COD and even MOD! is a standard behavior, 'cause it's amazing what "cleaning up" a corpse can uncover even BEFORE an autopsy!

Detective Flores could develop ANY hypothesis he wanted to direct his and his team to investigate ANY and ALL leads or concepts HE choose, those hypothetical theories ENDED once the scientific facts were presented to him and gave him direct road maps to follow for the investigation!

:twocents::twocents::twocents: Not so sure that ANY forensic pathologist would want to charge up to the stand to defend the GSW first defense since NOTHING, including the defendant's words of "no observable release of erythrocytic, leukocytic, thrombocytic or serous fluids at impact site,& he participated in constant & consistant, cognitive communication" (NB: JAZZED :floorlaugh: the words up for YOU, JA!:floorlaugh::floorlaugh supports the scenario! :rocker::rocker:

 

[tinkabella]

I want juan to show us that jodi gave stolen items to db..remeber he teased us with do unremeber going back to db's house (insert jodis wordgames here) you brought back a remote didn't you? He asked her why (insert jodi evasives answer here) wouldnt it be funny if the remote was for the dvd player stolen from her grandparents. that would absolutley prove she stole the gun....

 

[Tiger09]

I'd call the ME (who resembles Dexter Morgan AKA Micheal C Hall IMO) , MM, Darryl, a gun expert, and either a hair or rope expert. All together that should prove the State's case. Show some videos- "no jury will convict me", Travis alive- to MM because it will hit home to everyone that JA took down a young man in his prime and MM may have helped- also look at JA's reaction, and then play the video "I would beg for the death penalty" play that one a lot for the jury. Let them see that clip. Can she eat those words too?

 

[kaRN]

I would like to see a duplicate closet the same dimension with shelves attached the same way as TA's closet to show it is impossible for JA to put one foot on a lower shelf, jump up without touching anything and grabbing the gun.

I was hoping the state would have someone the size and weight of JA attempt to do exactly what she states she did in that closet and videotape it. Those shelves were designed for holding shoes or books, not an~ 120lb person on one front corner / edge. The little pins keeping it in place wouldn't have held up and the shoes would have gone flying.

I also think JM should ask the jury to ask themselves what a reasonable person would do in the scenario JA fabricated.
She's a women with a history of battery from her ex. She fears for her life and knows the house well. Does a reasonable person run into an enclosed space and search for a weapon or does she run for her life?

Also he should point out and stress that even if everything happened the way she said it did- the moment she chose to defend herself by getting the deadly weapon rather than running to safety was all that's legally required to fit the definition of premeditation. ( at least where I live)

 

[nursebeeme]

I just heard that there is no rebuttal in Arizona. (Insesssion.) This cant be right?! Someone...I didn't hear this right?!

Teresa

I think they said re-cross:twocents:

(Martinez has already indicated he will be calling one of Travis' friends in his rebuttal case)

 

[Irving]

First I would like to see a security guard from the Hoover Dam checkpoint.

I travel through that checkpoint at least once a year, and when you approach, they check your front license plate, (if you have one, some states don't require it.)

They then check the back plates for registration tags. If her plate were upside down, they would have fixed it there.

Second, bring in Mormon missionaries, either the 2 that (supposedly) taught her, (if they live in the United States), and have them testify as to what they teach new members when they teach in homes.

Sex information is very prominent in the teachings.
I would say bring in her Bishop, but he wouldn't be able to testify due to privileges.

Third, and OH how I hope they have a person from the salon, or even store security video tape of her walking in and walking out with two different colors of hair.
Doubtful with this though.

and MM... he has got to have some insight to all of this.

 

[bexlex]

OK, this sounds fun! Here is my wish list:

1. Proof from the salon
2. Proof from Walmart re: gas can NOT returned
3. DB on witness stand singing like a canary
4. MM on witness stand singing like a canary
5. Witnesses re: the magazine secret messages
6. Timeline showing she lied about trip back to Yreka - her cell phone didn't "drown"
7. Handwriting expert saying her diary on Jan 24 couldn't be written with a broken finger
8. Layout of bathroom and how impossible her story is
9. Bring the ME back - cuz he's a cutie pie

there's more, but I can't remember......

 

[Teresa]

I think they said re-cross:twocents:

(Martinez has already indicated he will be calling one of Travis' friends in his rebuttal case)

Phew.....thanks for clearing that up for me!

Teresa

 

[katiecoolady]

I've said all along this case will be tried and won in the cross (ESP now) and rebuttal case. He will rebut with his own experts the preposterous abuse and self defense claims. He will show the worst photos again highlighting the overkill and emotionality of the murder - not being fear but rage. These will be the highlights destroying any perhaps credible opinions. Jodi's credibility has already been destroyed thanks to her.

 

[G&AMom]

I don't know if this is rebuttal or not, but I would like to hear more about her nearsightedness. She said that when she stopped at the Starbucks and her front license plate was removed, that she got out of the car to see what this reflective thing was -- that she couldn't tell because she was nearsighted and didn't get glasses until 2010 (when she was in jail).

So (1) if she was so nearsighted that she couldn't see 10 feet in front of her (I'm being generous with the distance) then how the he!! was she managing to drive all over California, Arizona, Utah & Nevada? I'm terribly nearsighted and I would fear for my life if I drove without my glasses, even places where I know where I'm going, like my own neighborhood. On an interstate? No way.

And (2) how did she know that picture TA was masturbating to was of a little boy if she couldn't see well. And if she was wearing contacts then, why wasn't she wearing them at the Starbucks/when she was driving?

 

[G&AMom]

I would really, really like to hear from a knowlegeable psychiatrist whether a pedophile can be interested in both girls and boys. I've never heard of this. It's generally one or the other. If I was on the jury, I'd really want some proof that this makes sense.