trial day 33: the defense continues its case in chief #96

[carnnell]

I don't support Jodi. I'm disappointed with how the trial is unfolding. I want a conviction for premeditated murder but I feel that the points I outlined will be a big problem come deliberation time. Like her sequence of events that are more plausible than what the state is presenting. I'm not talking about her scooby doo run through the closet but the sequence of weapon attacks.

Premeditation is a plan to kill, knowledge of that plan, reflection of the plan.. She had over 1000 miles to reflect of her plan to kill Travis, then several hours while in the house before she killed him including the photo session to reflect her knowledge of her plan. NOT ONE TIME did she change her mind. amnesia or not she didn't go "foggy" while planning, have this knowledge or time to reflect which was long time.

That is what the jury has to decide. Plan, Knowledge reflection.

“Premeditation” means that the defendant intended to kill another human being or knew [he] [she] would kill another human being, and that after forming that intent or knowledge, reflected on the decision before killing. It is this reflection, regardless of the length of time in which it occurs, that distinguishes first - degree murder from second degree murder. An act is not done with premeditation if it is the instant effect of a sudden quarrel
or heat of passion. [The time needed for reflection is not necessarily prolonged, and the space of time between the intent or knowledge to kill and the act of killing may be very short.] pg. Pdf 71

REVISED ARIZONA JURY INSTRUCTIONS (CRIMINAL) Third Edition Supplement

http://www.azbar.org/media/292098/2011_cumulative_supplement.pdf

Read above.

 

[Litigatrix]

OMG, you are referring to me? A jodi supporter? Now I've heard EVERYTHING.

I DESPISE Jodi Arias and I despise that website you mention. My posting history suggests nothing otherwise. I'm voicing my concern with where this case may be heading. That doesn't make me a Jodi supporter. And yes I am critical of Juan, ever since he tried to claim that sleep sex without prior consent is consensual (like Nurmi surely has done when defending rapists). But I most disappointed with his handling of the shower ruse issue and how it came back yesterday to bite him in the *advertiser censored*. It was a perfect opportunity to expose a lie from Jodi that involved premeditation but the his prior bungle killed it. Samuels used it against him!

FWIW, I don't think there is anything wrong with you not being a rabid JM fan...this is about justice for TA, not JM's fan club.

 

[katiedid2]

So far, it's starts @ 1:00 AZ time. No trial tomorrow, I believe.

No trial tomorrow

 

[Pink Panther]

I am still hung up on something that has been bothering me from a few weeks ago. Regarding her road trip, she refers to "WE" twice in her testimony. No one every asked her who "we" were??



Originally Posted by Ramblinrose01
I was just listening to this afternoon's testimony again and noticed something JA stated that is odd to me. JM is talking about her road trip to Mesa and she states that "we" left early the morning of the 3rd after midnight. Did anyone else catch this and do you know what she means?

It is at 16:30
Jodi Arias Murder Trial Day 24. Afternoon session. Part 1. - YouTube

Jodi Arias Murder Trial Day 24. Afternoon session. Part 1. - YouTube

I'm so glad you mentioned this because it has been bothering me as well. I can't make sense of it. She says it twice. I've even thought that maybe she threw it in there because she wanted JM to take the bait so that she could build a "new storyline". I don't know but it's beyond strange.

moo

 

[Lissa]

Someone show me how to ignore someone's post please and thank you


Update:
Lissa
Thank you I followed your instructions it worked I hope lol

NP! It's a shame we have to do it here, but I can't stomach such irrationality. :banghead:

 

[katiedid2]

Oh, there are definitely more than one!

I agree there are more than one
Lol

 

[Rosebutter]

It is 10 to 2 all over again on the HLN Jury poll. Are these the same jurors as last night?

I personally refuse to watch After Dark after seeing it twice. HLN has turned Travis Alexander's murder into a game show. If you feel like I do please complain to HLN, I already have. Disgusting:furious:

 

[scorpio24]

:ignore: I need a cigarette.

I've never smoked, but I might need one myself! :facepalm:

 

[Tiki]

Hi

Samuels admitted on the stand the PTSD test and diagnosis were made while JA was lying to him about the intruder story! He said on the stand perhaps he should have readministered it, but he never did! He admitted he ignored relevant inconsistencies and did not add them to his report. Anyone who believes this man and his diagnoses are valid or believes a word JA says must be a gullible imbecile incapable of logical thought processes.
MOO...

Sent from my HTCEVOV4G using Tapatalk 2

agreed, and
Even if one was to believe the PTSD diagnosis, Samuels was saying PTSD was caused by the killing, and was meant as a partial explanation of why JA "can't remember" stabbing Travis. I don't think anyone is trying to say she had PTSD before she murdered him.

JMO

.

 

[Ammonitida]

Originally Posted by Ammonitida
Juan is in fact of the belief that she stabbed him while he was sitting in the shower. He revealed this during his direct of the ME. We're talking about fresh blood that would have been gushing out, not dried blood. The shower should show some evidence of blood splatter consistent with a flurry of stabs to the torso but there is none. Jodi did not clean the shower either because that was not her concern (just the DNA on him was her concern). A gunshot is more likely in the shower, because the heat of the projectile could have cauterized the wound and the impact could have bounced him to the bathroom floor in seconds. As for the stabbings and such, none of that matters if the jury believes Samuels about her suffering from PTSD at the time of the killing. According to him she was in a dissociative state, in other words temporarily insane. There can be no premeditation under those circumstances. The jury will have no choice but to acquit if he is to be believed

Not if its been rinsed out after the fact.
What if he was only stabbed once in the shower then staggerd out towards the sink then was stabbed more ( no blood spatter in the shower) It would be unlikely for him to be stabbed many times while in the shower.

That's possible. But I fear the jury may not buy that. They see this blood all over the bathroom and hallway, but almost none in the shower (just the postmortem blood after his body was removed). That doesn't look good.

 

[Callisto]

I would really like to see Juan focus on pre-meditation from here on out. We know that she is a LIAR...but right now, I think we are running the risk of a second degree conviction. Not because she's believable, but because there has been SO much info and this has gone on SO long. He will put a sweet little bow on this for closing arguments, but I want the jurors to have pre-meditation in a neat little package ie "that evil *expletive* planned this from start to finish and then trashed his good name..give her the chair!"

Anything less than 1st degree would make me just as mad as an acquittal, so I want him to ride this on home.

I know JM has what it takes to drive home premeditation I mean he already has 2 reps from Walmart and Tesoro to prove JA had used 3 gas cans so there's that. Right now he is doing his duty to cross the defense's witnesses which may not offer the support of premeditation so clearly but he is working to null their self-defense crap in the mean time... I have no doubt she will get anything less than 1st degree... From Katiecoollady's observations of the jurors to the volume and excellence of the damning evidence against her, I have no doubt! Justice sadly isn't always done and in cases like this there is no true justice. Give the rotten psycho the death penalty, it clears one worthless psycho off the planet but she took a good man who cannot be replaced. But I'll be damned if she doesn't get first degree.

Sent from my HTCEVOV4G using Tapatalk 2

 

[nightwatch]

I think juan is brilliant. It's annoying to have the same people !!! repeating themselves over and over! Criticizing Martinez!! The man that is doing everything he can to get justice for travis family. I suspect we are getting people from the support jodi site
Trying to put Martinez down.!!
I'm ignoring these negative vibes!
Juan rocks!

jm is the only voice ta has, and you can believe jm will do everything in his power to restore ta's name and put ja where she belongs. :moo:

 

[katiedid2]

NP! It's a shame we have to do it here, but I can't stomach such irrationality. :banghead:

Lisa's
I agree! We all know this isn't juans first rodeo!
I've never seen a prosecutor like him. He works without notes! he has a photographic memory. Amazing how he pulls things out of his hat!
:seeya:

 

[justsharing]

Juan is in fact of the belief that she stabbed him while he was sitting in the shower. He revealed this during his direct of the ME. We're talking about fresh blood that would have been gushing out, not dried blood. The shower should show some evidence of blood splatter consistent with a flurry of stabs to the torso but there is none. Jodi did not clean the shower either because that was not her concern (just the DNA on him was her concern). A gunshot is more likely in the shower, because the heat of the projectile could have cauterized the wound and the impact could have bounced him to the bathroom floor in seconds. As for the stabbings and such, none of that matters if the jury believes Samuels about her suffering from PTSD at the time of the killing. According to him she was in a dissociative state, in other words temporarily insane. There can be no premeditation under those circumstances. The jury will have no choice but to acquit if he is to be believed

I don't find it hard to believe that JA stabbed him in the shower. Considering she most likely would have done the chest stabs very quickly with the shower door open. TA would have then jumped out and stumbled to the sink. In this scenario I don't think there would have been much blood spatter in the shower.
I doubt if TA would have jumped up turned around and say" oh crap, i'm bleeding" then gingerly step out after spraying blood all over the shower stall.
I don't know how I feel about the MEs conclusion but he has a lot more expertise than I so I will go with his conclusion. I also think if it was such a given then the DT would have their own expert refute his claims.
Seeing as they haven't leads me to think they couldn't find a Dr. willing to subject his credibility or career for this case.:moo:

 

[Rosebutter]

I'm so glad you mentioned this because it has been bother me as well. I can't make sense of it. She says it twice. I've even thought that maybe she threw it in there because she wanted JM to take the bait so that she could build a "new storyline". I don't know but it's beyond strange.

moo

I wonder if when JA said "we" she was referring to the person who drover her to Redding, CA to rent the car?:seeya:

 

[meanddblj]

Let me say it again:

Martinez has not even put on his case....so just wait for rebuttal, where it has been said by those who know him, where he puts all his cards on the table! I have no doubts in Martinez there is no other prosecutor I have seen that I would want to represent my family....I would like to see those who criticize him do his job. He is passionate and takes it personally so if that is crime then he is guilty. For anyone who doubts him, I cannot help but think they are letting their own fears take control and after the injustice we have seen in past trials they cannot "allow" themselves to be let down again. I understand that, it is hard to lose faith in your own justice system but I have to believe that your faith will be renewed by the one you least expect to renew it! Martinez and this very professional jury who has shown great seriousness in their job.

 

[Lissa]

Lisa's
I agree! We all know this isn't juans first rodeo!
I've never seen a prosecutor like him. He works without notes! he has a photographic memory. Amazing how he pulls things out of his hat!
:seeya:

Yes! I'm new to the fan club, but JM is awe-inspiring! :blushing:

 

[Clue Finder 55]

It's VERY important for the defense. It's an attempt to explain her "black out" ploy as well as argue for temporary insanity regarding the overkill. If the jury believes it, she will be acquitted. It's that simple.

Further, judging from the juror questions to Jodi, the jury doesn't believe premeditation IMO. Thanks to Juan, this whole case is going down the drain. Sounds harsh?

Let me explain;

Juan and his experts have presented an illogical theory of the crime. Chiefly, that a stabbing came first in the shower. There's almost no blood splatter in the shower to support the assertion that a flurry of stabs took place there (indeed one jury asked a question about this, saying, "could the shower have been cleaned of blood?"). It is simply more logical that the gunshot came first for a number of reasons. Being far less risky is one. Another reason is that it's utterly foolish and unnecessary to leave behind gun evidence that could link her to the May 28th "burglary" of her residence. And this notion about how she wanted to make him suffer isn't going to cut it when you're talking about a female perpetrator and a predominately male jury. They won't buy it. What does this mean? That Jodi's sequence of events is far more plausible and this could tremendously help her credibility with the jury.

Not even one attempt to explain the ceiling photo and dropped camera photos that Jodi is using to support her version of events. He has not stressed that the camera was on the ground at the end of the hallway, inconsistent with the camera falling to the mat and rolling by the bathtub. The explanation that it got kicked over there is also inconsistent with the crime scene, as no evidence of a commotion occurred in that area, and based on the layout of the bathroom it would require two or three "kicks" to have the camera end up to where the dragging picture was taken (stretches credulity). Or one very hard kick that would cause it to bounce off the walls but then we'd expect to find external damage on the camera and there was none. He has left this wide open but Jodi has not and that could be a very big problem. He has provided no explanation for this and she HAS!

Juan BUNGLED twice now with the issue involving the shower ruse. First, during cross, he badgered Jodi -- incorrectly stating that her repeated attempts to convince Travis to take a photo of him shaving happened on the same day as the murder. She clearly was talking about an incident from a previous date. The sad thing is, Juan didn't need to do this because during the same taped interview she admits to convincing him a second time too -- this time on June 4th for a "Calvin Klein shoot", to which Travis initially responded "I feel so gay". That the issue of who suggested the shower shoot might have been lost on the jury thanks to Juan's bungling could spell disaster for the case!

Why? Because it is germane to the whole issue of premeditation. If the jury believes that Travis suggested the photo shoot, premeditation falls apart. And that's exactly what she told Samuels -- that he suggested the pictures. Jodi lied to Samuels about it because she knew that it had to do with her premeditation of the murder. Juan had an opportunity to expose this lie, but his previous bungle with Jodi on cross allowed both Willmot and Samuels to challenge him about this "inconsistency", referring to his prior incorrect statements concerning that taped interrogation, effectively burying the issue -- possibly implanting in the minds of the jurors that it was Travis who convinced Jodi. And Juan buried it further because he still refused to admit that he was WRONG. It was not an "interpretation", Juan. It is fact that she was talking about a prior incident. This bungle is MAJOR! And here's the funny (sad) thing, Jodi herself acknowledged on the stand that YES she did convince him to take the photos on June 4th, not once but twice. Once under direct, once during cross. Juan could have used those statements to challenge Samuels, but no, he had to be stubborn!

No effort to explain why she had sex with him on the day she planned to kill him. This alone argues against premeditation. It is often brought up by Jodiphiles to support their side. Juan has let the defense characterize the state's case as one involving a contract killing. This was no such case. Jodi had an emotional attachment and likely had second thoughts about going through with her plan to kill him (but was later re-triggered and had to clean up her sex mistakes with a shower ruse).

Failure to establish a credible motive. The Cancun crap is ridiculous when we have the May 26th exchange and the May 28th burglary. She was motivated by RAGE over him trashing her verbally, not jealously. Jodi would frequently shake over these verbal arguments by her own admission and on May 26th, she snapped and had enough. That's the motive! Not Cancun. Juries need motives -- credible ones.

Unless Juan can work a miracle in rebuttal, Jodi has a very good chance of being acquitted of all charges!

I think even somebody that had a labotomy could figure out she killed him with premeditation.
Maybe she has PMS and it was just a bad day for poor Jodi

 

[Camdenres]

This is my 1000th post....That is all! Carry on!

 

[MandyLeigh]

I was reading some of the previous thread where people more than insinuated that Dr. Samuels has a "love that dare not speak its name" for our psycho killer.

I didn't think much of it, but today at lunch I was reading a book and sort of dozed off.

I had a brief snippet of dream imagery, sort of nature documentary footage, featuring a Blob-Fish wrestling with a Praying Mantis.

Thanks a pantload, everyone. I'll never sleep again.

:floorlaugh: