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

[Schuby]

I agree 1000%. In my mind, an expert makes a conclusion based on certain facts and that's what they testify on. Not everything will be 100% in favor of their side, and they shouldn't be afraid to admit that. And they shouldn't be sparring with the atty, just sticking to the facts.

It will be really interesting to see how Demarte comes across in comparison. I hope that the jury ends up thinking "Aah, that's what we were looking for. Someone who knows their stuff, is organized, lives in the 21st century instead of the 1970s, and actually answers freaking questions instead of wasting our time arguing that every single peg, even the square ones, fits into her round hole."

Demarte will have a much easier time testifying, mainly because she will be on the side of truth.

 

[UKgirl]

HA I missed that because I am only able to watch so little of it. Good one. It is so noticeable and I am glad that Juan took her out on it.

That was really starting to bother me, especially when she was looking at wilmott for an answer to the questions the state was posing to her.

 

[dizzychick]

Alyce was looking to me at the end of the day like she was going to stroke out, I was really concerned, wonder how much more she can take of this...

Oh and Wendy Murphy was right on when she said it would ruin their career if they took this case I agree fully and btw, money is nice but not worth this hassle and definitely not worth protecting someone like the defendant who should get the Dp IMO

 

[robc]

Awarded to AVL on April 9, 2013, for her statement to Juan Martinez regarding Jodi and her ex-bfs:

"She has a hard time letting go."

 

[TartLemon]

I don't doubt Jodi scores high on IQ tests. Doesn't matter, IMO, since it's squandered. She's used it for criminal purposes instead of good.

I've also absolutely no doubt this is a learning curve for her. Jodi WILL kill again if released just to prove she can get it 'right' by not getting caught. She'll take it as a big double dare.

 

[Bravo]

I am still floored by Alyce's comment yesterday regarding Juan in time out :what: It spoke volumes as to how personal she takes her testimony. Does she not get this Trial is not about her. I'm surprised she didn't march Juan into a corner, whip out a wooden spoon and proceed to spank the pee waddle and doo out of him :what:

 

[josie1986]

Im am SO looking forward today, I didnt want yesterday to end.

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2

 

[muddymcduck]

I guess they will create their own mistrial. Un( :blushing: )believable.

At the very least, her testimony should be thrown out.

Hi Elley Mae,

I'm not especially familiar with judicial rules and regulations, so I wondered if you knew of any that relate specifically to interactions between attorneys and witnesses outside of the courtoom.

Are they barred from interacting with one another, or is it simply considered profesionally 'unseemly', as it were?

Thanks for any clarification!

 

[VALee]

Sayings:
1. 90% of all communications are non-verbal (meaning body language)

So, her conclusions are based on 10% of evidence and 90% of JA's body language (since she has seen no one else's).

2. In the case of domestic violence, there are 2 sides, but the truth is worse than either side will say.

So if you have 2 people, neither saying at the time that there was ANY violence, are we to extrapolate that there is some bad truth that they are both down-playing? Or if we have someone that is so frustrated by someone that rather than talk, they only want to text, IM, then we are to assume they are a physically violent?

No data or report whatsoever to back up what she says, these are not rules, just sayings she employs, and really, one could use a saying or make-up one to justify/align with actions/words for anything.

ex. 'Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned'

 

[camcneishg]

good morning all....so ready for a Juanderful day!!

 

[VALee]

Hi Elley Mae,

I'm not especially familiar with judicial rules and regulations, so I wondered if you knew of any that relate specifically to interactions between attorneys and witnesses outside of the courtoom.

Are they barred from interacting with one another, or is it simply considered profesionally 'unseemly', as it were?

Thanks for any clarification!

And wonder if this meal and the time spent is considered a working lunch, and billed back to the state, after all, they had to re-work her testimony and change it in the afternoon from what it was in the morning...bah.

 

[mamadee]

Arias looks downright deranged in this picture from yesterday. She is getting more agitated as the days go on and I am starting to wonder not if, but when she is going to have an outburst in court.

Hope I don't blow the margins!lease: I apologize if I do:blushing:

 

[indycornstalk]

<modsnip>
Photo Attached Below

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=457196854356462&l=399ac0914c

 

[Sistah Sleuth]

There is only one truthful statement that Jodi has ever said and that is,"No jury will ever convict me and. ou can mark my words!" Fellow sleuthers, I think we should mentally and emotionally prepare ourselves for the event of Jodi walking out of jail.

Eventually, Jodi and Casey will hang out with one another and they'll have their own reality show and the masses will watch. Jurors will write books and get paid for interviews because there are at least a couple of them who think that an acquittal is a much more sexier situation which can generate profits.

So, I'm going to take this ride with all of you but I won't be surprised nor angry when the outcome of this trial will slap us all in the face. I'll just take it like I took it from the CA trial and move on to the next fascinating trial after we all bytch and moan about it...of course.

 

[deedee21]

I don't doubt Jodi scores high on IQ tests. Doesn't matter, IMO, since it's squandered. She's used it for criminal purposes instead of good.

I've also absolutely no doubt this is a learning curve for her. Jodi WILL kill again if released just to prove she can get it 'right' by not getting caught. She'll take it as a big double dare.

I just saw pictures of what that lunatic did to Travis on the Jodis sequence of events thread. She would kill again. Pictures are very disturbing and it shows how much she does deserve the death penalty. I hope JM shows these pics to Wilmer.

 

[Melanie]

Good Morning everyone!

When I went to bed last night I thought I was going to smash my TV. Alyce in Wonderland was avoiding every possible question she could. THAT should NOT be allowed, just answer the question. YES OR NO!!!!!!
She is extremely aggrivating, if I was Juan I would have been totally losing it!

I agree with you 100%. It would take 5 minutes of hard line questioning just to pull an answer out of her. And all I can say is thank goodness we didn't start a drinking game every time she says "Mr. Martinez". We'd all be in rehab by now.

:banghead:

Mel

 

[kaera]

Did anyone else notice this? At one point, Juan asked something like, "didn't Jodi have a pattern of jealousy?" ALV actually said, No. THEN followed up with, "but her JEALOUSY wasn't controlling!" Lol, what???

 

[Mare10]

I understand why JSS is giving so much leeway to the DT and their witnesses, to avoid any issues in appeal. What I don't understand is why JM as to ask her to admonish the witness and her tone to the witness when she does. She seems to rarely deny a sidebar too.

I've had my fair share in courts and I have never heard a judge with such a sweet demeanor when admonishing. I just don't understand, JSS seems to have a hard time with being a judge. She is way to timid for my liking.

 

[Nellie Nelson]

OMG. I can't imagine how she's going to answer the juror questions. That's going to take forever, and oh, boy, I hope they ask her something to make her want to put the whole box in "timeout."

In their own self interests (and ours) I hope that the jurors ask 'closed' questions of the kind that can be answered with a 'yes' or a 'no'.

And just to make absolutely sure she gets the message, I hope they add - in writing - to each question of that type,

'Yes, or No'​

http://changingminds.org/techniques/questioning/open_closed_questions.htm

 

[Mrs G Norris]

How can she walk when she's admitted to overkill and given no credible reason for it? Travis was wet, naked and unarmed .. She had both a gun and a knife and no time to retrieve them from somewhere else during her fictional attack. There were genuine holes in the Casey trial, but not in this one. The idea that a juror would hang the jury to become 'famous' would have credibility if that had happened in the past but there are no famous Casey jurors or any who have written books .. The ones that said anything just said COD wasn't proven (which was true) or said they were suspicious of George .. I also cant see a juror hanging the jury because they 'dislike' Juan .. And even then that's a mistrial. Jodi walk? I don't think so.