trial day 43: the defense continues its case in chief #131

[Steft50]

I have a comment: Has anyone noticed how imo this awful witness is behaving abusively to Juan???? I've observed the witness to behave abusively to Juan all along (trying to mock him, trying to silence him, not behaving respectfully to him, acting condescendingly to him, attempting to ridicule him). She is just awful imo. She's The Last Person I'd want to have teaching me what healthy relationships of any sort look like !

Certainly, she has tried to verbally belittle him, and is very snotty and condescending towards him. She, imo, views him as the big mean bad man and she will do or say anything she has to to maintain her initial assessment, JA was physically and mentally abused.

During this trial, this icon :banghead: seems to have become my fav!

 

[khaki]

I'm confused about something Juan's doing. He made the point today that the reason Jodi didn't write about her jealousy was because of the law of attraction. Right? Did I miss something and therefore am getting this wrong? Because earlier in the trial the defense said she didn't write about the abuse because of the law of attraction. Yet, Juan said she didn't write about it because it didn't happen.

So Juan's trying to have it both ways and I think that's a big mistake with this jury. Frankly, I'm disappointed in him.

I understand what you're saying, this crossed my mind too, but the more I thought about it I came to feel that Juan is pointing out to them that if you're going to use the law of attraction as justifiaction for why JA doesn't write about the abuse, if that's your explanation, then couldn't that also explain why she didn't write about her jealousy? He is saying to them you can't pick that as an explanation for what's missing only if it benefits JA. He has enough evidence of the jealousy regardless of jounal entries by JA but he's pointing out that they can't go with their explanations only as it suits their case. I don't think I'm explaing myself well but I think he's trying to make a point about their excuses for JA.

 

[pferrin]

After watching Mr Martinez today ....I keep singing that song "That man is on fire...he's on Fire"

Best day yet. Go JUAN.

 

[G&AMom]

They did the same with RS to some degree. JA admitted some of her lies in court were a way of trying to prevent being caught but these lies RS was still calling them an "alternative reality." Juan caught him on that in a very similar situation to today and RS said "well she didn't tell me that."

You're right. What possessed them to do that? I can hear the appellate attorneys screaming with joy.

 

[Lorelilly]

HLN is still showing testimony. ALV looks like she's aged about 50 years today. Hope she isn't sick tomorrow...

 

[Schuby]

I have a comment: Has anyone noticed how imo this awful witness is behaving abusively to Juan???? I've observed the witness to behave abusively to Juan all along (trying to mock him, trying to silence him, not behaving respectfully to him, acting condescendingly to him, attempting to ridicule him). She is just awful imo. She's The Last Person I'd want to have teaching me what healthy relationships of any sort look like !

I understand her attitude IF they were just two people discussing the case for kicks. But he is a prosecutor and she is a witness, sworn under oath, and paid quite handsomely I might add. What did she think being an expert witness entailed? Slumber parties and slam books?

 

[katiedid2]

Wrong B. Juarez

Same thing right? Lol

 

[Cracka*Jaxx]

Everytime I think of domestic violent victims that the court sided with the female ...I think of little Sky Metawala ...he has been missing for a long time now ...he was in the custody of his mother. She was ..is trully evil as is ja.

Another truly evil woman is Genene "Angel of Death" Jones who murdered between 11 and 40 BABIES! And she'll be getting out of prison in 2018! Why, on earth, does society put up with these monsters?! WTH has become of our society? We don't just give them a 'fair' trial, we pay for their defense, their 'expert' witnesses, let them run the court room because we are 'afraid' of their lawyers (yeah, the ones WE hired for them), let them bankrupt us due to never ending appeals for 20 years, and then we might even decide to let them free again! This is NOT justice- not for the rest of us, anyway!

 

[JustMeDeb]

I still shake my head over Wilmott's objections. She is the one who keeps opening the door for Juan to bring in all this evidence.

 

[missmazzy]

:blushing:Not to be shallow....but I can listen to JM say "Bobby Juarez" all night!:blushing:

 

[gauntlet]

Since you all have watched this from the beginning, has anyone (JM) asked ALV is she has ever found the man to be the victim of abuse or if she has ever found a woman to be the instigator in abusing her male partner?

I'm fairly sure that ALV said the last column in her continuum described female perpetrators... However ALV's view is fairly clear in this article on her site

"Researchers Agree Women May Hit Their Male Partners, But Infrequently 'Batter' Them — Pattern of Coercion Is Seldom Present in Female Aggression
http://www.alycelaviolette.com/Women-Who-Hit-Their-Male-Partners.htm

Alyce LaViolette, 2002
www.AlyceLaViolette.com"

It ends as follows:

Having said that, I will end by quoting Ola Barnett and myself: "There is no research that can say that the cost of women's violence — emotionally, physically, or in regard to property damage — in any way matches the violence perpetrated by men.
"The body of evidence suggests that there should be no argument. Diffusing energy in an ongoing gender war takes away from the critical task of developing effective prevention and intervention strategies." (It Could Happen to Anyone, LaViolette and Barnett, 2000, p. 109)

--
Shocking, well not shocking but you know...

 

[Lark2]

I'm confused about something Juan's doing. He made the point today that the reason Jodi didn't write about her jealousy was because of the law of attraction. Right? Did I miss something and therefore am getting this wrong? Because earlier in the trial the defense said she didn't write about the abuse because of the law of attraction. Yet, Juan said she didn't write about it because it didn't happen.

So Juan's trying to have it both ways and I think that's a big mistake with this jury. Frankly, I'm disappointed in him.

He's showing that ALV wants it both ways. She testified that the reason there was no negative info about violence from TA in the journals was because of the Law of Attraction, i.e., JA wouldn't write negative things.

Then she testified that Jodi didn't write anything about being jealous of Travis - so that proves she wasn't jealous! The lack of info about violence she attributes to Law of Attraction, the next she takes at face value-in other words, whatever most benefits JA.

 

[Nosey Parker]

I understand her attitude IF they were just two people discussing the case for kicks. But he is a prosecutor and she is a witness, sworn under oath, and paid quite handsomely I might add. What did she think being an expert witness entailed? Slumber parties and slam books?

... and what's with not writing a report????

 

[Mrs G Norris]

Why O why doesn't ALV just say that she believed JA about abuse .. if she was lied to and she believed the lies so what? Join the club! Plenty of people believed Arias in her lifetime. She makes it worse by getting defensive, and she allows Juan to discuss the point for longer which drives it deeper into the minds of the jury.

 

[Lorelilly]

I'm confused about something Juan's doing. He made the point today that the reason Jodi didn't write about her jealousy was because of the law of attraction. Right? Did I miss something and therefore am getting this wrong? Because earlier in the trial the defense said she didn't write about the abuse because of the law of attraction. Yet, Juan said she didn't write about it because it didn't happen.

So Juan's trying to have it both ways and I think that's a big mistake with this jury. Frankly, I'm disappointed in him.

I read your post and am unable to wrap my head around the question. It's not you, it's watching this trial...I need a break.

 

[Coldpizza]

Oh snap!

In watching the (lets assume) testimony JM is reminding the jury of earlier testimony. Of course it's not lost on JM how long this has been going on. I expect he will refresh the jurors minds again tomorrow.

 

[beeshie]

I understand what you're saying, this crossed my mind too, but the more I thought about it I came to feel that Juan is pointing out to them that if you're going to use the law of attraction as justifiaction for why JA doesn't write about the abuse, if that's your explanation, then couldn't that also explain why she didn't write about her jealousy? He is saying to them you can't pick that as an explanation for what's missing only if it benefits JA. He has enough evidence of the jealousy regardless of jounal entries by JA but he's pointing out that they can't go with their explanations only as it suits their case. I don't think I'm explaing myself well but I think he's trying to make a point about their excuses for JA.

I think I understand what you're saying and really appreciate your response! I'm confident he'll give a brilliant closing and tie everything up nicely, but I'm worried that he's confusing the jury with this approach.

 

[panthera]

And ALV calling the father an abuser and liar when she has never talked with the man. Has no clue if what Jodi said was true or not. I can see initially when Jodi was arrested them being truthful to LE.

It is truly sad that this DV expert only sees women as being victims, and all men either lie or they are the abuser even if they are being stalked by a woman.

No wonder men don't report women stalking them.

:furious:

MOO

 

[3trees]

They did the same with RS to some degree. JA admitted some of her lies in court were a way of trying to prevent being caught but these lies RS was still calling them an "alternative reality." Juan caught him on that in a very similar situation to today and RS said "well she didn't tell me that."

I wonder if these professionals have the option to sue the defense attorneys for giving them half to zero truths thus causing their careers to be flushed down the commode? haha

 

[Curious Me]

Alyce looks like she's aged twenty years since last week. I just heard on NG that there's so many jurors questions that they haven't been able to count them yet. My worry is that ALV will go out in a wheelchair crying into her hanky then forget about it and keep testifying in cases. . I call it shotty spotty work if she didn't consider Jodi being the possible abuser, liar, stalker, killer, premeditated murderess. I guess Alyce never considered it.:doh: