Discussion in 'Travis Alexander Trial - The State vs. Jodi Arias' started by LambChop, Nov 25, 2014.
Please continue to discuss the trial here. :tyou:
MeeBee, not sure if you saw my reply in the closed thread. I read somewhere last week that Flores has moved on to other cases and would only be popping in and out when he could. I'm sure Juans boss is only in there to help, assist. I wouldn't read too much into it at all.
Thank you for the new thread Lamby!
I saw it! I think both you and lambs make a lot of sense! I think it does have to do with Juan needing a little help and Flores being preoccupied with his other job now.
Hi wenwe. Thought we had a good conversation today. I am so beat. Did a lot today for an old lady and then kept up with trial. Hoping we hear from COA tomorrow. I thought Juan had a great day and I pray KN doesn't try to continue to smear him next Tuesday with this witness speaking out of both sides of her mouth. Not only is she unethical but she lies under oath. Well, I guess that is the very definition of unethical. Lol.
You are probably right too about Juan's boss being there. Good for backp.
I don't deserve all this credit - see NashBridges and MeeBee's responses.
To be fair - I didn't get a thing done and I'm still an old lady! (ha)
But I truly enjoyed today's court hearing and the intelligent and thoughtful discussions - as well as the ability to voice my concerns about the religion/sex piece of this trial (while trying to not offend anyone's religion).
I am dying to find out the language in Dr. MF's ethical code that Juan referred to earlier today.
I don't know about you guys, but between yesterday's great day of flipping the witness and today's great day of proving she's biased and discrediting her, I feel even more confident she will get the DP. I am more sure than I've ever been. The whole re-direct with her and Nrmi trying to make Juan look like a big meanie, was the highlight of the week for me. The jury will take notice and I imagine they are just sickened by this whole defense as we are.
Thanks Wenwe , thought I would do a little digging and this is what I have so far..
It breaks my heart that it is in the ruination of Travis Alexander's name that the Cailleach and her stooges are planning her salvation. Everyone is a genius, but if you judge a fish on its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid. ~Albert Einstein
A question about today, and likely a superficial one at that.
If I remember correctly, more than one tweeter (WAT and someone else) commented on JA's "nice middle-class woman" attire today (my quotation marks, not theirs). So far, she usually appears in clothing that looks like it came from the Goodwill/Oxfam shop. I wonder if the DT was expecting that she might testify today?
Just throwing this out there.
I wonder how many of the world's worst sex offenders have said the same thing as they were being carted away?
I'd expect a sex expert to be open-minded and less inclined to label people right off the bat. This conventional/unconventional sex stuff bothers me. Where's the list? Who compiled it? When? Where? Amongst whom?
Oh...thank you. It most likely is a different judge then.
ETA: I edited my previous post at bottom to point out spelling is different and probably not the same judge. Thanks again.
I read on the last thread that AZL said yes, Juan gets to go at her again after Nurmi! That will be interesting.
Cailleach (veiled hag) and her stooges are planning JA salvation (DP or not).
This term might be used repeatedly throughout the trial - especially since we have secret witnesses, sidebars, court meetings, in camera, inability to photo or livestream.
ETA: Or did you mean to refer to Dr. MF as the Cailleach's saving her own (salvation) credibility?
Giggle, snort, and high-five, Rainy1!
Quote from today's retrial thread...
'Hatred of women' Where did misogyny pop up from? Did someone use it during trial?
It's possible KN was trying to put in jurors' heads before the weekend that JM is a misogynist and the evidence is his treatment of Dr. F (and JA).
Rubbing my hands together. Oh goody (and heh heh heh).
It does look like she has testified for prosecution in at least the first case I looked at and maybe more.
In JA's case she is testifying for an admitted murderer defendent.
I suppose it depends who hires her.
JMO that witness-for-hires are dangerous to me because I feel they can slant their testimony to whoever is paying them.
Whatever happened to just testifying to the total truth and nothing but the truth.
From what I can understand the appeal was dismissed. However, the Dr. did tell a little white lie when she testified that her ethics have never been called into question, which she will just attribute to 'splitting hairs'. :facepalm: If Juan is able to bring this out in re-cross, it makes her look really bad, even if the appellate court didn't find merit to the claims the she acted unethically. :moo:
Just wanted to make a few comments on the Tweets from court on the other closed thread... a bit late in reading here! :wave:
snipped by me.
:laughing: Good one!!
I guess she's never been in Juan's court room!!! :juanettes:
Well, I say someone here should email this to Juan for Tuesday's re-direct!!! :happydance:
Thanks ALL who Twitty the Tweeter posts!!!! :tyou:
okay... back to reading! cguru:
Separate names with a comma.