weekend discussion: discuss the trial here #154

[BeachGirlFromPA]

No, I think it was one of the roomies as documented in the Flores report.

I remember JA stating that she and Travis discussed different cameras and I think she said she looked some up online to help him make his choice. Not sure if it was in testimony or in interrogation, but I remember it.

 

[Alexander family fan]

http://youtu.be/KXAF7rT9ZjI

I had never heard this much of the 911 call before. OMG!

 

[BeachGirlFromPA]

Plus she has to add it was her car registration the Ninjas found in her purse (her address on her drivers license is a P.O. Box!)

She had the rental car, right? Most people keep their car registration in their car, not their purse or wallet. Why did she have her own car registration if she had rented a car to go to Mesa?

 

[VALee]

IMO, the camera in washer can be discussed 1 of 2 ways:

1. Accidentally scooped up with clothes and bloody towel
2. Purposefully put in washer to destroy and remove DNA

Either way, it was a mistake that JA made and fortunately, evidence was not destroyed, whether or not that was her intent. I hope that is how JM addresses the camera in Rebuttal. The camera, hairs (1 fresh with a follicle-she didn't know her hair fell out), and bloody palm print (either forgot or didn't realize she touched the wall with her hand that had her own blood on it, are all tangible unplanned evidence.

We also have 'planned' evidence:

Removal of weapons (gun and the knife were not found in the house, knife is missing its tip, that was found in TA's skull)
No bloodied footprints beyond carpet/tile separation at hallway/bedroom.
Testified she threw clothes away.
Body staged in shower
Body washed in shower
Gas cans (IMO 2 is compelling enough, if we have 3, that is just whoa!)
Says she didn't decide to go to Mesa until in Pasadena. But if that were true, then the path from Salinas to SLC, Utah you would take I-80, which is very different and going through Pasadena is not part of that route.
Distance from Salinas to Pasadena is about 300 miles, surely not a distance one would travel if can't get a hold of someone to take pictures of their new baby in San Diego which is another 120m south of Pasadena.

Potential evidence we don't know about yet:

Was KY bottle found in house? If not, that was removed too.
Was a knife with tip missing found in rental car? We know knives found, but don't know if match murder weapon.
What was remote control issue about with DB? (Would link a stolen item from grandparents home to JA)
JA was missing shoes (her testimony). Were the flipflops at scene hers?
Were the black socks found in washer hers? I can't see TA wearing black socks with the shorts and T-shirt that were also found in the washer. The shorts and T-shirt are likely the outfit he took off when getting into the shower.
Were JA's sweatpants discovered when arrested?
Blood on washer, were the drops hers? (This may have been addressed, and I missed it or we haven't been told.)
Are there calls to DB's sister, if so what time, what does DB's sister say about that?

I'm sure you all have things to add to this list...

 

[InALandFarFarAway]

Can we put this Tiger versus the Bear carp to bed already? Dr. D is a licensed psychologist (unlike what the DT offered) and she knew the differences between how a person would react between the two and how it would effect them as far as PTSD is concerned.

Sometimes questions aren't formed in a way that expresses what the confusion actually is so the answer given is not satisfactory. None of the witnesses can ask for clarification so they answer them at face value. And the juror can't leap up and say, "No, no, no. That isn't what I was asking!"

If I had asked that question, I would not have received the answer I was looking for but maybe because I'm viewing the metaphor differently.

And so it goes with juries.

I know others IRL who were disturbed by the question also so maybe we simply attached too much significance to it.

I've read most interpretations of the question here and I'd love not to worry about it but that question out of all of the questions asked of any witness to date stopped me cold.

But that is only 1 juror out of 16 who will be whittled down to 12. Chances are, that person won't make the final cut.

And it's only 1 question out of thousands.

 

[NancyGracesBangs]

I was initially concerned when hearing the bear v. tiger question but I went back and listened to the juror's questions again. As a lay person in the area of psychology, I had some trouble wrapping my head around the same idea that I think this juror wanted to clarify. In essence, if the expert is stating that her being attacked by a stranger v. attacked by someone you know would conceivably dictate different responses, as a lay person juror I'd want to understand how on earth that is possible since the variable of stranger/known person is different. Essentially (again to a lay person) it appears the same. When I listened again I didn't feel it was "snark" but rather someone (as a lay person) trying to "dumb" it down to figure out exactly what Dr. D was trying to say. I also think this juror wanted to see whether Dr. D. would do what the defense experts did..... NOT be consistent. If Dr. D said that the tiger/bear would be the same, that juror would see that Dr. D is is not being entirely consistent because in many ways. I think the question was trying to elicit a simplified response from someone who probably was thinking aren't these two types of attacks really the same? Plus this juror wanted to see if Dr. D would be consistent in the response.

I actually understand better because it was reduced to a bear/tiger question and I was glad to see that Dr. D said the test would be invalidated regardless.

The other questions the juror's asked her when compared to the defense experts were very different as well. The defense questions had an overall tone of challenging what they testified to whereas the questions to Dr. D were more of clarifying her testimony.

Jodi's mask was slipping when she was on the stand. Big change in her appearance while this expert was on. While Dr. D was stripped away at Jodi's psyche, you could almost see a physical change of appearance coming over Jodi. It was very disturbing

 

[sacrablue]

Juan Martinez is going to make the sky blue again , in rebuttal. He is amazing.

http://youtu.be/teciQLsqeWw

Yea so far he is 9 for 10 in shooting fish in the barrel, amazing.

 

[momof7]

I have been going back the last couple days and going back through testimony of beginning of the trail. Its been hard to keep up and hard to keep the facts straight.

But oddly enough, I noticed that JA never looks at JM in the face. She will stare at his back but when he approaches the table to give them evidence to be admitted she turns away.

Things that make you go hmmm...

K

 

[dadgum]

I am not sure what to believe. With the *advertiser censored* question, it almost feels like there is one juror who is making fun just to lighten the day or see what crazy thing someone is going to say next.

But honestly, IMHO, the bears/tigers question didn't seem to be a thumbs up for the DT. kwim?

K

I found the bear/tiger question interesting. Several of Sam's nurses have animal fears, a couple from being bitten. The one afraid of frogs is not bothered at all by snakes..only frogs. The one afraid of large dogs is afraid of certain large dogs. Same with the one afraid of horses. A fellow I know who was attacked by a rooster as a young child (no joke..they can be mean and have sharp claws and flapping wings..and stalk you from behind..) he is only afraid of chicken-like birds, but also of feathers.

Did anyone get why JW brought out that JA remembers shooting the gun (not that it went off), running down the hall, Travis falling on her (hmm.was this the 'lunge'? Was it really a fall after being shot or stabbed?). Her grasp of brain/memory was very weak. Are they saying the PTSD was from battering or the killing? Seems they have said both in an attempt to throw everything in to excuse the act, the coverup, and the lies afterward. What a mess.

 

[BeachGirlFromPA]

Well, back to reality here....dogs to walk, laundry to do...TY all for some incredible questions, posts and things to ponder!

 

[InALandFarFarAway]

Fingerprints? Or, maybe she drug Travis along the floor in towels or bedding after she deleted the photos and the camera got caught up in them - Why did she feel like doing LAUNDRY on her way out any dam way?

That's my belief. She had bigger things to worry about. I don't understand why she bothered doing laundry in the first place. Instead of doing a wash, I would have focused on getting my palm print off the wall and getting clumps of my hair from the floor. Not that I'd murder anyone but ...

I think the one unadulterated truth she's ever told about the murder is that she had no memory of putting the camera in the washer. Literally, she didn't remember doing it because it was tossed in by accident. When she said she didn't know why she would do that, I think that was true. She's probably asked herself a thousand times, "How in h$ll could I have done that?"

I think the camera was entangled in the bedding she pulled off to drag Travis to the bathroom. She picked up the bundle, took it to the washer and started tossing things in indiscriminately. She missed the camera during both washes.

The camera was a part of the wash by accident. I'm sure she wasted precious minutes looking for the camera because she wanted to take it with her. She was already taking the gun, knife, cash from Travis and Lord knows what else.

I don't understand the reasoning why she focused on one thing and not another while getting out of the house except her fog was actually serious panic.

 

[momof7]

Dr. D was coached to say the results would be invalid period. Very obvious. The jury knows she is on the take.

I guess that could be a opposing opinion.

But I will disagree.

K

 

[sacrablue]

IMO, the camera in washer can be discussed 1 of 2 ways:

1. Accidentally scooped up with clothes and bloody towel
2. Purposefully put in washer to destroy and remove DNA

Either way, it was a mistake that JA made and fortunately, evidence was not destroyed, whether or not that was her intent. I hope that is how JM addresses the camera in Rebuttal. The camera, hairs (1 fresh with a follicle-she didn't know her hair fell out), and bloody palm print (either forgot or didn't realize she touched the wall with her hand that had her own blood on it, are all tangible unplanned evidence.

We also have 'planned' evidence:

Removal of weapons (gun and the knife were not found in the house, knife is missing its tip, that was found in TA's skull)
No bloodied footprints beyond carpet/tile separation at hallway/bedroom.
Testified she threw clothes away.
Body staged in shower
Body washed in shower
Gas cans (IMO 2 is compelling enough, if we have 3, that is just whoa!)
Says she didn't decide to go to Mesa until in Pasadena. But if that were true, then the path from Salinas to SLC, Utah you would take I-80, which is very different and going through Pasadena is not part of that route.
Distance from Salinas to Pasadena is about 300 miles, surely not a distance one would travel if can't get a hold of someone to take pictures of their new baby in San Diego which is another 120m south of Pasadena.

Potential evidence we don't know about yet:

Was KY bottle found in house? If not, that was removed too.
Was a knife with tip missing found in rental car? We know knives found, but don't know if match murder weapon.
What was remote control issue about with DB? (Would link a stolen item from grandparents home to JA)
JA was missing shoes (her testimony). Were the flipflops at scene hers?
Were the black socks found in washer hers? I can't see TA wearing black socks with the shorts and T-shirt that were also found in the washer. The shorts and T-shirt are likely the outfit he took off when getting into the shower.
Were JA's sweatpants discovered when arrested?
Blood on washer, were the drops hers? (This may have been addressed, and I missed it or we haven't been told.)
Are there calls to DB's sister, if so what time, what does DB's sister say about that?

I'm sure you all have things to add to this list...

I think of it this way. The killing was suppose to be nice and neat and quick. One shot to the head in the shower. Travis dies instantly and all evidence gets washed down the drain.
Well like all planned out tasks something always throws a wrench in the fan
Travis doesn't die and the house turns into a blood bath. JA is now out of her comfort zone and the clean up I am sure was frantic so little mistakes will happen in the rush to flee.

 

[momof7]

That's my belief. She had bigger things to worry about. I don't understand why she bothered doing laundry in the first place. Instead of doing a wash, I would have focused on getting my palm print off the wall and getting clumps of my hair from the floor. Not that I'd murder anyone but ...

I think the one unadulterated truth she's ever told about the murder is that she had no memory of putting the camera in the washer. I think the camera was entangled in the bedding she pulled off to drag Travis to the bathroom. She picked up the bundle, took it to the washer and started tossing things in indiscriminately. She missed the camera during both washes.

The camera was a part of the wash by accident. I'm sure she wasted precious minutes looking for the camera because she wanted to take it with her. She was already taking the gun, knife, cash from Travis and Lord knows what else.

I don't understand the reasoning why she focused on one thing and not another while getting out of the house except her fog was actually serious panic.

Honestly, I do think JA was in a panic. I am in the camp that believes in the premeditation/plan aspect of the killing. It wasn't spur of the moment. JA doesn't strike me as somone who can change gears quickly when something doesn't go as planned.

I think her plan didn't go as expected and she didn't even realize how much evidence she left behind. She had a minimal timeframe etc. I do think she planned to kill him by shooting him and possibly staging a suicide. Maybe the gun did jam, so she is throwing out the gun first because it would have been first. Just so happened it didn't work and plan B was in effect. He could say it was her that attempted to shoot him. She didn't want that.

IMHO

K

 

[sacrablue]

I guess that could be a opposing opinion.

But I will disagree.

K

I look at her this way. She is young in-experienced but smart. Her job is to do everything by the book, spend the allowed amount of time and get the heck out. Make no mistakes, keep everything squeeky clean, administer some worthless tests and let the prosecutor mop it up at trial. This Dr. was not out to do any deep well thought out analysis....just do her job.

 

[Beffie]

That's my belief. She had bigger things to worry about. I don't understand why she bothered doing laundry in the first place. Instead of doing a wash, I would have focused on getting my palm print off the wall and getting clumps of my hair from the floor. Not that I'd murder anyone but ...

I think the one unadulterated truth she's ever told about the murder is that she had no memory of putting the camera in the washer. Literally, she didn't remember doing it because it was tossed in by accident. When she said she didn't know why she would do that, I think that was true. She's probably asked herself a thousand times, "How in h$ll could I have done that?"

I think the camera was entangled in the bedding she pulled off to drag Travis to the bathroom. She picked up the bundle, took it to the washer and started tossing things in indiscriminately. She missed the camera during both washes.

The camera was a part of the wash by accident. I'm sure she wasted precious minutes looking for the camera because she wanted to take it with her. She was already taking the gun, knife, cash from Travis and Lord knows what else.

I don't understand the reasoning why she focused on one thing and not another while getting out of the house except her fog was actually serious panic.

I was lurking and had to log in to ask did she really take cash from him? She is really a piece of work. :facepalm:

 

[momof7]

I was lurking and had to log in to ask did she really take cash from him? She is really a piece of work. :facepalm:

I don't think that has been confirmed, just a theory that is floating out there that possibly she took cash from him. She was broke on that trip, borrowed money etc but somehow managed to make it on $200 per her testimony.

But we know she spent money willy nilly before she even got to Mesa so she would by going by the sums we KNOW she spent, had very little money in SLC.

But, I don't know that it has been confirmed by anyone, she took any money.

K

 

[InALandFarFarAway]

I am not sure what to believe. With the *advertiser censored* question, it almost feels like there is one juror who is making fun just to lighten the day or see what crazy thing someone is going to say next.

But honestly, IMHO, the bears/tigers question didn't seem to be a thumbs up for the DT. kwim?

K

I actually just posted about those things! lol

I do think there are a couple of jurors toying with the DT because they're bored or they want to break the monotony by watching JW appear relieved only to watch the deer-in-the-headlights eyes immediately reappear.

I believe an analytical thinker would understand Dr. D's theory without reducing it to that level. Not to say it was a stupid question. It wasn't. Those who understand the points she made regarding trauma and PTSD understood it clinically and could either accept it or not. They needed more information to understand and those questions did not bother me.

The bear/tiger question indicated to me that the person either didn't understand the distinctions between the two or did understand it but was not in full agreement with how it was applied to Jodi. It made me think that person viewed Jodi as being disturbed in a way that would not make her criminally responsible and anything outside of that was splitting hairs.

But again, that's how *I* reacted to the question.

 

[kayice]

I loved the end of that storybook lie.......after JA watched the 2 ninjas murder TA, they didn't think it necessary to kill their eyewitness to the crime. :floorlaugh:

Didn't they ask if she was that girl or maybe even, b---- from CA? Jodi always has to puff herself up in every story. Still think she tried to pin it on the Mormons (blood atonement from the very old days and remember, how morbid sociopaths are in their thinking, not saying anything about Mormons, mind you...just Jodi's justifications.) for Travis having sex....well, basically in Jodi's mind "cheating" on her.
And still, 2 weapons = 2 intruders = Jodi's premeditation. Jodi likes her knives too well but the gun was for back-up and alibi. imo Although, after shooting someone with a gun...you can see where she went and bought herself a new one immediately along with more knives. The questions to Det. Flores.."What kind of gun is that?" (his police firearm)to a cop who is questioning her for the brutal slaughter of her so-called love? wth? How Flores' hand didn't automatically start resting on his gun while talking to her, I don't know. Creepy.

 

[kscornfed]

That's my belief. She had bigger things to worry about. I don't understand why she bothered doing laundry in the first place. Instead of doing a wash, I would have focused on getting my palm print off the wall and getting clumps of my hair from the floor. Not that I'd murder anyone but ...

I think the one unadulterated truth she's ever told about the murder is that she had no memory of putting the camera in the washer. Literally, she didn't remember doing it because it was tossed in by accident. When she said she didn't know why she would do that, I think that was true. She's probably asked herself a thousand times, "How in h$ll could I have done that?"

I think the camera was entangled in the bedding she pulled off to drag Travis to the bathroom. She picked up the bundle, took it to the washer and started tossing things in indiscriminately. She missed the camera during both washes.

The camera was a part of the wash by accident. I'm sure she wasted precious minutes looking for the camera because she wanted to take it with her. She was already taking the gun, knife, cash from Travis and Lord knows what else.

I don't understand the reasoning why she focused on one thing and not another while getting out of the house except her fog was actually serious panic.

good morning! i'm in the 'she put it in the washer on purpose' camp. that camera had some weight to it and i don't see how she missed it with some towels and socks. i think she's dumb like me and thought it would destroy it, and the bleach was added for extra measure to remove the blood that was on it. like washing his body off, i think she was trying to remove her DNA from the scene.
in fact, adding the bleach, TO ME, shows thinking and planning---specifically to destroying DNA evidence, and it's the REASON i think the camera was in there intentionally.

there was blood all over the walls and she didn't know her palm had touched it or where, IMO, and without knowing how to find a print, she couldn't clean it up. she wasn't worried about the hair or other prints, because she'd been in the house and didn't think they would be enough to put her there that day. she didn't know there was a hair with a root.

and i don't think she washed the sheets. i think TA did that some time that day. they were found in the dryer so i think he'd already done that before she ever got to the laundry room with the load she put in the washer.

the only truth i think she told was that she killed him. other than that, i don't believe anything she's said.