Jodi Arias Legal Question and Answer Thread *no discussion*

[minor4th]

now that jodi has said she thinks she put the knife in the dishwasher and that it was TA's, and in any case did not take it with her, will JM call one of the crime scene people to establish whether the knives in TA's home were tested? i don't remember them saying they tested knives in his house after the murder. if so, i missed it.

but isn't this important to establish that the knife used in the murder wasn't in the house and wasn't one of his knives?

If there is evidence one way or the other, either ruling out the knives in Travis' house or ruling them in as possible murder weapons, then Juan might call the forensic techs in his rebuttal case. As far as I remember there has been no testimony that conclusively excludes those knives -- all I remember is that there was testimony that there were no knives missing from Travis' house. I also don't remember any testimony about whether there were knives missing from the grandparents' house -- but the fact is Jodi could have gotten a knife from anywhere and disposed of it just like she disposed of the gun. It's not as easy to track a missing knife like it is a .25 auto pistol.

 

[minor4th]

First I have to thank you all for the time & effort to check in on this thread & to answer our seemingly endless, sometimes a bit silly, questions! :gthanks: I was curious about these photos as well, but to be clear, will they have all of them, or only the ones the prosecution was allowed to show them already? (GRR, :furious: sticky keys!!) I'm wondering if all of them were in evidence but DT was objecting to pulling them out again? Also, the 'new' testimony JM is objecting to; is it indeed new? Is this expert witness actually attempting to add a new diagnosis and/or attempting to testify outside of his field? Just the very little I've been able to understand about how they want him to testify, then watching the clips of JA's "foggy" memory over again, sseems she has made VERY certain to tell her bs story to FIT this so called PTST, 'reactive' stuff, and/or his diagnosis to fit her defense? Hmm, I'm not even sure what my exact question is, so good luck trying to respond!:waitasec: Actually, I'm just anxious to see this addressed by our own legal eagles here, versus the often slanted opinions on you-know-where!! Thanks again, and again, and...

The jury will have all of the photos that were admitted into evidence, even if the photos were not published to the jury as part of the trial presentation. I do not know if there are any photos that were admitted but not published because we did not see all of the photos that were shown to the jury.

From what I gather from the arguments yesterday, Juan believes that Samuels is attempting to testify to areas that are beyond the scope of his report that was given to the prosecution in 2010. Wilmott argues that there is nothing new, but I think the defense is trying to be sneaky here (kind of like how they initially tried to sneak in the penis picture).

It also seems from the arguments that the defense is trying to get the expert to give an opinion about whether the killing was premeditated or a "crime of passion" and the defense knows that is not allowed, and I cannot imagine that the judge will allow the expert to make such opinions. We shall see what comes from the evidentiary hearing.

 

[kscornfed]

If there is evidence one way or the other, either ruling out the knives in Travis' house or ruling them in as possible murder weapons, then Juan might call the forensic techs in his rebuttal case. As far as I remember there has been no testimony that conclusively excludes those knives -- all I remember is that there was testimony that there were no knives missing from Travis' house. I also don't remember any testimony about whether there were knives missing from the grandparents' house -- but the fact is Jodi could have gotten a knife from anywhere and disposed of it just like she disposed of the gun. It's not as easy to track a missing knife like it is a .25 auto pistol.

i'm thinking the state didn't test the knives in the house and that's why she's saying what she is about it being his. i can't imagine why they wouldn't have done that, but wouldn't it have come in during the state's CIC if they had?

 

[minor4th]

i'm thinking the state didn't test the knives in the house and that's why she's saying what she is about it being his. i can't imagine why they wouldn't have done that, but wouldn't it have come in during the state's CIC if they had?

I don't know if they tested them or not, but it might have only been discussed if there was evidence that one of those knives was found to be a possible murder weapon. IMO the state's CIC was pretty thin in terms of this type of evidence because it was not essential to prove that Jodi committed the homicide or the manner in which she killed Travis. That does not mean that there is not evidence of this nature that can be brought in during the rebuttal case.

 

[MajorCynic]

I don't know if that would be a proper jury request or not since the actual crime scene location is not in evidence. I really don't think so -- it's not like witnesses to whom they can ask questions. It would be the parties' obligation to bring that evidence forward if they want it to be considered as evidence. But I am not the expert on Arizona procedures, so there might be something that would allow it.

Do you know of other cases where the jury was allowed to take a field trip to a crime scene or location away from the courthouse for evidentiary purposes?

I am aware of many cases where the jury visited the crime scene away from the courthouse - I believe they were all at the jury's request. For example:

2013 Framingham MA (victim: Heather Alleyne ; defendant: Kyle Alleyne)
2013 Boston MA (victim: Lauren Astley; defendant: Nathaniel Fujita)
2012 Culpepper VA (victim: Patricia Cook; defendant : Daniel Harmon-Wright)

I wonder if the jury in the Jodi Arias case could make such a request.

 

[minor4th]

I am aware of many cases where the jury visited the crime scene away from the courthouse - I believe they were all at the jury's request. For example:

2013 Framingham MA (victim: Heather Alleyne ; defendant: Kyle Alleyne)
2013 Boston MA (victim: Lauren Astley; defendant: Nathaniel Fujita)
2012 Culpepper VA (victim: Patricia Cook; defendant : Daniel Harmon-Wright)

I wonder if the jury in the Jodi Arias case could make such a request.

Hmm. That's interesting; I was not aware of any cases where this happened. So maybe they could make such a request if they had questions about the shelves or the dimensions of the bathroom or something.

 

[My3Sons]

Hmm. That's interesting; I was not aware of any cases where this happened. So maybe they could make such a request if they had questions about the shelves or the dimensions of the bathroom or something.

Question on that--isn't it true that, if there were a visit by the jury to the crime scene, Jodi would be entitled to be there since as a criminal defendant she has the right to be involved in all proceedings of her trial? :facepalm:

 

[minor4th]

Question on that--isn't it true that, if there were a visit by the jury to the crime scene, Jodi would be entitled to be there since as a criminal defendant she has the right to be involved in all proceedings of her trial? :facepalm:

Yes, I believe so.

 

[princesspjs]

Will the jury be able to see the entire un-cut version of the interrogation tapes? I am sitting here watching her going :what: at all of her activities she does here. They said there are even more that we haven't seen. Who does a head stand, sings songs about her memory issues, digs through the garbage, giggles to herself and just acts so weird. Freaky weird.

http://tinyurl.com/a6us4xp

Back to the question...will they jury get to see all of this? I wonder why Juan hasn't actually brought up all of her strange behavior...including all of these which were recorded during her interrogation!

ETA: Another link with a series of different cuts from the tape
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/03/1...dstand-minutes-before-murder/?test=latestnews

 

[kai]

Sorry posted in wrong thread. My apologies.

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Tapatalk 2

 

[princesspjs]

IMO I think there is a slim chance that if the jury were to view the "headstand" tapes that one person might find her to be "insane" and may choose to use that in their personal jury deliberations. If I were a prosecutor I would not show these to the jury.

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Tapatalk 2

This is a no discussion thread that only attorneys are supposed to answer but, I believe this behavior goes directly against all of the "Post Traumatic Stress" defense that they are trying to use. That is why I would love for the jury to see that there is no sign of her being under any stress at all - it's all an act.

ETA: BTW - She is not claiming to be not guilty by reason of insanity, she admits to killing him due to self defense.

 

[minor4th]

Will the jury be able to see the entire un-cut version of the interrogation tapes? I am sitting here watching her going :what: at all of her activities she does here. They said there are even more that we haven't seen. Who does a head stand, sings songs about her memory issues, digs through the garbage, giggles to herself and just acts so weird. Freaky weird.

http://tinyurl.com/a6us4xp

Back to the question...will they jury get to see all of this? I wonder why Juan hasn't actually brought up all of her strange behavior...including all of these which were recorded during her interrogation!

ETA: Another link with a series of different cuts from the tape
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/03/1...dstand-minutes-before-murder/?test=latestnews

The jury will only see the portions of the tapes that have been admitted as evidence. I do not believe the headstand. giggling, singing portions have been admitted.

I think there is a possibility that these tapes may be shown during the mitigation/penalty phase to show lack of remorse or something along those lines.

 

[SCSam]

Yes, can't remember significant details but others may since has been on various TV crime shows. Man/wife took in young separated wife, drugged her and pushed off scenic overlook in California I believe, for insurance. Judge actually held court at location.. first time ever. Hope someone remembers details but I will look for. TY!

http://articles.latimes.com/1992-03-03/local/me-3062_1_life-insurance-policy


Found: Deana WIld: case During the trial, the jury, court officials and Rearden went to Big Sur and heard testimony at the cliff where Wild was pushed to her death.

 

[SCSam]

If there is evidence one way or the other, either ruling out the knives in Travis' house or ruling them in as possible murder weapons, then Juan might call the forensic techs in his rebuttal case. As far as I remember there has been no testimony that conclusively excludes those knives -- all I remember is that there was testimony that there were no knives missing from Travis' house. I also don't remember any testimony about whether there were knives missing from the grandparents' house -- but the fact is Jodi could have gotten a knife from anywhere and disposed of it just like she disposed of the gun. It's not as easy to track a missing knife like it is a .25 auto pistol.

An aside thought here. When she was arrested, she had a 9mm hand gun and one or more knives with her. Maybe she "replaced" her knife stash just as she bought a new gun...and where does she get all this money she spends just working off and on as a waitress? Even had an Infiniti she had too turn in after Darrell. Sorry OT

 

[Angelina Frost]

The jury will have all of the photos that were admitted into evidence, even if the photos were not published to the jury as part of the trial presentation. I do not know if there are any photos that were admitted but not published because we did not see all of the photos that were shown to the jury.

From what I gather from the arguments yesterday, Juan believes that Samuels is attempting to testify to areas that are beyond the scope of his report that was given to the prosecution in 2010. Wilmott argues that there is nothing new, but I think the defense is trying to be sneaky here (kind of like how they initially tried to sneak in the penis picture).

It also seems from the arguments that the defense is trying to get the expert to give an opinion about whether the killing was premeditated or a "crime of passion" and the defense knows that is not allowed, and I cannot imagine that the judge will allow the expert to make such opinions. We shall see what comes from the evidentiary hearing.

BBM x2

Minor, what would this mean in terms of jury deliberation? They can come back with murder 2 or worse, manslaughter?

I'm not well versed in legal matters, although I'm fully aware how serious this is. I guess my question is, worst case scenario for the State and the judge decides to allow this- I know you can't say for sure she will, but she seems to have given the defense a LOT of leeway- what is the significance?

TIA. :seeya:

 

[Renee110]

Hmm. That's interesting; I was not aware of any cases where this happened. So maybe they could make such a request if they had questions about the shelves or the dimensions of the bathroom or something.

The shelving unit may not even be the same as it was in 2008. That picture of Travis's dad won't be there. They could see the length of hallway and the bathroom.... but I would be particularly interested in those shelves and trying to climb them to grab off of the top without disturbing anything.

 

[ClosArgs]

Thanks again guys for this thread.

1. In a death penalty case where the defendent doesn't have financial means and are using public defenders, is the defense under specific cost regulations or may they call any experts needed for the client?

2. Lets say you call psych experts and the first few fail to find validity to JA's claim do they just disappear quietly until one finally agrees to support JA's version?

3. Is it difficult to find an expert willing to support what a client needs? I don't mean by any means the expert would lie, but would be willing to accept face value story told to them and then find the pieces of psychology to support it?

 

[Doester]

In Arizona, do the judges give the instruction to the jury that if a witness (in this case JA) lies on the stand that the jury can dismiss her whole testimony?

 

[minor4th]

In Arizona, do the judges give the instruction to the jury that if a witness (in this case JA) lies on the stand that the jury can dismiss her whole testimony?

It's not that specific - I read the general instruction the other day. It basically just says that they are to determine the weight to give testimony and to determine the credibility of witness testimony based on common sense and experience, considering the entire context of the evidence, demeanor of the witness, motives for giving dishonest testimony etc.

 

[runs_with_scissors]

I am a disabled veteran, one of whose conditions is PTSD. I am familiar with the
DSM and the conditions for diagnosis. My question is this:

With the defense expert diagnosing JA with PTSD, I would expect JM to cross with regard to the symptoms. Could he then introduce the "handstand film" then or in rebuttal, even though it was originallly precluded as being prejudicial?

Thanks to all of you taking your time to answer our questions.