State rests rebuttal case - thread #170

[Troubled]

I was thinking 9:00 (and waiting for some smart aleck on here to comment on my stupidity - Sleuth?? Steely?? Dewey?? ).

:tyou:

It should be starting in 30 minutes however we know how this court is it could be an hour and a half.

 

[TotallyObsessed]

I have to argue a bit about this. My hubbie works for Homeland Security and it appears to me daily that no one can spell or type correctly in his office or others he deals with. I get the impression from him that people are hired for jobs more because of their clearance levels,seniority, military rank, disability than whether they can actually perform the job.

OT but I totally agree with you. My DD is trying to obtain a LEO .gov job and because she is not one of the bolded above, she is waaaay down on the list of hires. Pity. She is extremely smart, dedicated and good at what she does. But because of certain protected classes, if you will, (not talking about racial class) her resume gets shuffled to the bottom, regardless of performance superiority.

 

[Hopeful One]

The mafia weapon of choice for executions was a .22. The bullet enters the brain and causes dramatic damage as it deforms and tumbles immediately due to low velocity, typically never exiting the head. I simply do not understand the hub bub about a .25, not much difference in characteristics overall, especially a hollow point. Hollow points were designed to tear and damage tissue encountered regardless of calibre.

And what gets me, no matter the caliber, it's a BULLET THROUGH THE BRAIN. That's going to cause some damage. It's not like a little bump to the skull.

 

[katydid23]

I was thinking 9:00 (and waiting for some smart aleck on here to comment on my stupidity - Sleuth?? Steely?? Dewey?? ).

:tyou:

I think the judge said 9 am. But I am sure they will be late, as usual.

 

[Bittiness39]

:floorlaugh:

If that juror concludes premeditation can you please give me an example of a thought process that would support such a conclusion when the totality of Travis' injuries are considered. If a juror concludes premeditation they would have to have rendered the dura mater irrelevant.

Maybe the gun jammed? Maybe she was full of rage?
I just wish she had been injured significantly. If not wounded mortally, but perhaps with injuries that would plague her until she is put to death.

 

[Rocco]

I totally agree with you Rocco. But it can be an excuse for a juror if they don't want to give the death penalty.

I respect your opinion but I just don't understand it. The bullet went in his forehead and lodged in his jaw so it had to pierce the dura mater or it could not have ended up in his jaw. It's clearly a mistke on the report and not a question of did it or didn't it pierce the dura mater. I don't see how that could be an excuse not to give the death penalty.

 

[princesspjs]

After the incredible shock of the CA trial, I am so hoping the jury gets this case right. Being from Canada I do not know the answer to this, so this is my question ...do you think people on the west coast of the USA would have heard how angry everyone was with the CA verdict being that it was across the country in Florida? Hopefully this jury was aware of that horrible outcome. Even though the JA jury haven't seen everything we have, there is still plenty of evidence to convict JA of first degree murder. I will be very interested in what this jury has to say when the trial is over.

We on the left coast are just as aware and angry about FCA as those who are on the other side of the US and we still bring it up almost daily in conversation. :furious:

 

[Litigatrix]

Lawd have mercy on the jury! You know how Jenny writes down every single detail and then has to cover the same every single detail in her cross-exams? I dread she may cover every single detail which she wrote down during the trial.

I hope the judge gave them time limits. Or even have Nurmi give the closing.

JW did the opening, so Nurmi will do the closing. JW can't object if she isn't the one doing the closing...so at least we won't have to deal with her high pitched pop-up objections.

 

[SusieD]

For anyone who believes that the omission of the word 'not' is no biggie from a medical professional.
Consider having your doctor read you your own pathology report.....
_____ malignant
Not malignant

Still not a big deal?

But that's not what happened here.

Apples and rocks.

 

[Boodles]

If it were me (of course it's not!), I would be overwhelmed with putting the closing together for the prosecution. Not because of lack of material, but because of the overwhelming amount of information from which to choose.

How does he boil down so much evidence, so many photos, videos, interviews, testimony of the liar, data trails, etc. into a comprehensive overview?

I would have such a hard time pulling something this vast into a tidy package. But I know Juan will. I can't wait to hear it.

 

[JustMeDeb]

JustMe, objections are allowed in closings :banghead:

Yep that is what I said. I just hope nobody tries to delay the inevitable. let this trial end and let justice decide the outcome.

 

[Bittiness39]

I think the judge said 9 am. But I am sure they will be late, as usual.

I am so happy you are here! :seeya:

 

[~Lyric~]

Wild About Trial @WildAboutTrial
At courtroom. No one is let in yet. Its a zoo out here. #JodiArias

http://wildabouttrial.com/videos/jodi-arias-live-stream.html

 

[JusticeJunkie]

I get the same thing, but mine is a 'message from the website' and I have to click OK to continue. It only happens when I hit the Thanks button but I've been getting it for months, and it happens at least 20 times a day. That's why I mention, every now and then, that I appreciate posts, in a post of my own since so many times I can't use the Thanks button.

Been happening to me for months. If you find a solution, please share.

 

[aa9511]

Modified for emphasis with my utmost RESPECT & AGREEMENT!

:twocents::twocents: This was a point of discussion/teaching moment @ work today (how else do you all think I justify watching trials! :floorlaugh! Testifying in court IS part of "the job", granted not every case makes the media but every case MUST BE presented clearly to individuals with a differing phenomenological experience blushing: gotta "show off" with the big word!) and like that "big word", one needs to EXPLAIN "stuff" in understandable terms, RELIABLE LIFE EXPERIENCES.
My "guess" is that after ~ 10 years in the medical-legal community, JW had Kevin D. Horn, M.D.'s "Achilles courtroom heel" and she played it to the hilt, the "me dense J.D. vs you fancy language M.D" trying to confuse us "little lay-people". Bet her style at the deposition was NOT exactly as "incapacitating".
Connecting with the jury is CRITICAL, watching & turning toward the box helps, providing CLEAR & CLEAN visual materials is effective (& yeah, maybe proofing the document(s) on a blow-up would have helped too!) and remembering for whom you are testifying is paramount, YOU SPEAK FOR THE DECEDENT, the missing member of the trial, the VICTIM! :facepalm::facepalm:


:twocents: :twocents: PS: Isn't it AMAZING that so many (yep, I'm including myself) read & re-read that post report, SAW the printed words and because of ingrained knowledge of some of us ..............NEVER SAW THE TYPO!
Perhaps that's because Hippocampus activity, i.e. memory, serves that metal & bone shears thru delicate tissue matter?

I actually LOVED DR. Horn's no-bs, no elaboration way. After days and days of TSI, MMCI, MMPI, blah blah blah, my head is so confused trying to get all the stupid tests straight, trying to follow along as 4, that's FOUR, different psychologists went over WAY TOO MANY tests a GAZILLION times making for a GAZILLION different combinatins. Then you have Martinez and Wilmott on top of that trying to be psychologists all of a sudden. Guess those others were royally duped spending years and years getting their doctorates...it seems you can get one in just a couple of weeks!! :floorlaugh:
I am willing to forgive Dr. Horn for his typo for making me not have to listen and try to comprehend medical jargon that I don't understand and that would confuse me even more, then on top of that having to listen to Wilmott drone on for days b/c her equation is that WITNESS TESTIMONY TIME X 5 = WILMOTT'S QUESTIONING TIME. For me, DR. Horn gave me the pertinent information in clear way.

 

[Hopeful One]

Seal up on azcentral. http://www.azcentral.com/video/1724204566001

 

[zaza]

I'm going to head for the duct tape or sit on my hands with this issue LOL
Too many years in the profession for me to change my personal view on things of this nature. We'll just respectfully agree to disagree :seeya:

I'm with you, Beachgirl. After many years in the working world, I've seen lots of firings for such mistakes. It shouldn't be tolerated.

 

[BetteDavisEyes]

I think the judge said 9 am. But I am sure they will be late, as usual.

I believe that the Judge told the jury to be there at 9:15 for a 9:30 start. AZ Central feed was still running when JW asked JSS when they should arrive, and she reiterated 9:15.

 

[darcedarce]

http://youtu.be/gvXP2Nl1WUs

1:16:30 Does anyone else think JA was trying to be seductive yesterday? I finally found one of the times she was doing this.

 

[camcneishg]

Lol, is that next door to the Alyce LaViolette School of Truth?

oh that just cracked me up when Juan said that......even tho it was sustained, the jury still heard it.....:floorlaugh::floorlaugh::floorlaugh: