trial day 51: REBUTTAL; #158

[nadjatheresa]

90 pics left on camera and not deleted


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

But what astounds me is that this critical evidence might not have come in but for the juror question? Or did I miss something while gagging over Nurmi?

 

[Sulamith]

The chastity questions were good questions for the PT. They clarified that the rules of the Law of Chastity was clear to most people, that there weren't loopholes. JA is lying that TA taught her that only vaginal sex counted.

The idea that anybody would think anal and oral sex was allowed under a rule called the "Law of Chastity" is ludicrous, especially when it's part of a religion like LDS which is known for being one of the stricter religions as far as rules of behavior. She knew what the Law meant and that she was breaking the rules. Just another case where she didn't want to take responsibility for her actions, and blamed someone else.

IMO, there is a slight possibility that TA did tell her that only vaginal sex counted against The Law of Chastity. In my experience with Mormonism, the bulk of the LOC lessons occur during the youth lessons. JA was an adult convert whereas DR grew up with those lessons.

In the adult Sunday classes, the LOC lessons focus more on masterbation (a no-no for singles and only mutual masterbation for marrieds. No masterbation with only one's self) and *advertiser censored*. Both of those are against the LOC. Like I said, this has been my experience.

The definition of sex in some circles sure has changed since I was young. Maybe Bill Clinton had something to do with that?? JK!
For instance: Teens, mostly Christian from what I have read, that do the "Virginity Pledge" are more likely to engage in oral or anal sex that teens who have not committed to remain abstinent. Go figure. Here is just one source. http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/releases/21606.php

 

[SunDawnn]

Which means she had every intention of leaving the camera......now whether that goes to putting it in the washing machine on purpose or mistake, who knows. But someone was either IN those pics, or knew of their existence and JA wasn't going to take the chance of someone saying, "Hey, where's TA's camera? He had some cool pics on there......"

Not necessarily. It could've been an attempt to get rid of HER evidence after she planned on ditching the camera.

It's such a moot point now. But it's still interesting to debate

 

[KMouse]

Reason #34 why I will never watch that show.

You only have 34 reasons? Or is that today's count?

 

[Nali87]

Abstinance is the preference in most religions. It is not just LDS, Catholic, or
Baptist. ty

I'm sure it is, but I was only speaking of what I know for certain based on my religion.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

Where was this camera set up then? There is no place in the room she could put it for a timer picture like that. She did not use a timer on herself.

What could be the possible reasoning for her to take nude pictures of herself, and then delete them? That's even too nonsensical for JA.

I read that this particular camera came with a remote also along with a timer.

Why would she take nude pictures? Why to say that Travis took them of course. After the fact when LE found them.

I have never thought Travis took those pictures of Jodi. In fact he didn't look happy when she snapped his photos.

IMO

 

[panthera]

NG now showing Juan's re-direct of Deanna...

GO JUAN!!! Set the record straight. The relationship WASN'T all about sex!

And Travis was always a gentleman!

Thank you, Deanna!
:hug:

 

[lil_buddy]

JA & JW can not get a juror kicked off the jury for asking a question.The judge ok the question

what was the upsetting question?

 

[Maryann123]

Which means she had every intention of leaving the camera......now whether that goes to putting it in the washing machine on purpose or mistake, who knows. But someone was either IN those pics, or knew of their existence and JA wasn't going to take the chance of someone saying, "Hey, where's TA's camera? He had some cool pics on there......"

I just had to go back and comment on this again. Sometimes, we get so busy trying to dispute all the irrational BS the defense team throws out there that we ignore the obvious. Thanks for bring that back in focus.

 

[SyraKelly]

what was the upsetting question?

someone upthread posted that JW & JA are trying to get juror 7 off the jury b/c he ask a question

 

[OldCarGal]

The time between the photos indicates no timer used. Testimony on day 6

I am talking about the gross photos of Jodi earlier, not Travis's photos.

 

[Queen Bee]

i'm many pages behind as usual :floorlaugh:

but i'm seeing complaints about the ads here.........i use firefox and added as an add-on adblockplus and have NO ads......none at all ever

hope that helps someone :seeya:

back to reading

.

 

[GoAskAllie]

But what astounds me is that this critical evidence might not have come in but for the juror question? Or did I miss something while gagging over Nurmi?

Much of what MM said on the stand came in during the State's CIC. It was much more impactful this time around after hearing the defense case in its entirety including Jodi's testimony, along with ALV and RS. Thought the juror questions to MM were a clear FU to Foggy and the Foggettes!

 

[Kentucky Gal]

IMO it is bs if the defense is allowed another shrink to testify. Come on, they knew exactly what this Doc D would say. Do we honestly believe if there had been a disclosure violation KN wouldn't have been screaming prosecutorial misconduct again?????

JA has had 5 years to prepare her defense. The "my experts got friggin busted by Juan" is not an excuse to bring in yet another expert psych witness.

Sorry for the tirade, but enough is enough.

Can I hear an Amen!

 

[panthera]

With all the clear evidence of premeditation, I really hope the judge doesn't allow manslaughter because Jodi doesn't deserve it.

Exactly. There is no evidence of WHY this would be "in the heat of passion". Travis was taking a shower! Also nothing was even offered in the defense CIC that can be backed up with one scintilla of evidence.

:banghead:

MOO

 

[TexMex]

I am talking about the gross photos of Jodi earlier, not Travis's photos.

I am too

 

[Ranchgirl]

I didn't think they were dumb questions.
Personally, I knew nothing about the Mormon religion before this case and I would have similar questions.
In addition, JA said multiple times, during her testimony that she didn't know much about the Law of Chastity. And that ALL of her knowledge on that subject came from Travis.
Deanna was born into the church, so IMO, she was a great person to ask those questions to.
The way I took it, the juror who asked those questions was thinking about JA and trying to catch her in another lie.

Before someone becomes a Mormon, there is a lot of time spent on education. Jodi would be told about the law of chastity because the leaders knew she was living with a man and therefore assumed she needed extra clarification on this issue. She knew.

 

[lil_buddy]

I wish a Mormon would chime in here and tell us if its really unusual for a young man and woman in their early 20's, who are living together, been together for several years, not dating anyone else, to enjoy sexual intercourse ... and what degree of a sin that is.

It's pretty clear that premarital sex is common in the LDS community.
http://www.sltrib.com/ci_14492575

 

[crime cases addict]

Travis and Deanna weren't living together.

I'm not a mormon, but I am catholic. Sure it happens, but it's against the moral (lack of a better word) rules of the church. My aunt/extended families are mormons; I know a lot about the religion and the law of chastity is pretty much the same thing as remaining a virgin until marriage behaviour encouraged by the catholic church. A sin is a sin, no hierarchy.

I am being offended that HLN is now referring to Deanna as an ex lover...she is his ex girlfriend. She is not a *advertiser censored* like Jodie so HLN cool it and refer to her with some dignity. I liked her and too bad Travis didn't marry her becasue then he would still be alive:scared:

 

[Love Never Fails]

I'm on an iPad and occasionally something possesses it (only when I'm here). It ends by sending me to the Apple App Store to an app called Badonk. It appears to be some sort of *advertiser censored* app. This old lady *don't do *advertiser censored**. :facepalm:

Me too! It shocked me. When I tried hitting the key to get back it goes to yet another *advertiser censored* site. I too am old ns not interested in the stuff!! It only happens when I am on websleuths.