Retrial for Sentencing of Jodi Arias - 2/5 - 2/9 - Break

[Dogmomof3]

I was wondering if the innocent women who were named today by the defense have any rights to file some type of slander case? Maybe slander is not the right word but something like it...seems sad that their names are being dragged under the bus too!! Its hard to tell from the tweets but it sounded like the defense was implying something sexual

 

[Becky Sharp]

Somehow, back in April 2013, I had a feeling that I wish I knew Becky Sharp in real life. Thank you for confirming my intuition.

VVhat?

 

[PenElaine]

Thanks, Frigga. You are a sweetheart:blowkiss: To be honest, I'm still literally stunned by my sister's death. I always loved her and she, as my big sister, always helped me through my own crises. Geez, I miss her. I'd write more about her, but . . . suffice to say that I miss her so much. Anyway, Frigga, thanks so much for understanding!

((((Becky)))))

 

[Val1]

DM's brilliant presentation means it won't take much reading between the lines for the jury to understand an incomplete but telling enough narrative of what happened between Travis and the woman who murdered him.

JA met Travis and immediately decided she would marry him. Travis was very attracted to her, saw lots of qualities in her he found admirable, and for a few months may actually have loved her.

Her BPD prevented their relationship from developing into one that was exclusive and committed. The more desperately she tried to draw him in deeper, the further away he fled from having any meaningful relationship with her at all.

His withdrawal caused her to panic. She moved to Mesa although he told her he didnt want her to. He told her to date other people, and he did so himself. JA couldn't tolerate that that Travis wanted to be with anyone else. She spied on him when he was with another woman, may have slashed his tires, likely invaded his privacy on many occasions, and went into his house, uninvited.

The more intrusive she became the less likely it was that Travis would want to be in a relationship with her, but she persisted. Travis was torn. He liked having sex with her enough that he continued to do so, even though that caused him problems within his church. He also seemed to want to help her. Its possible that he was afraid to cut her off completely because he was afraid she would harm or even kill herself.

Its unclear whether or not JA actually thought Travis wanted to resume a relationship with her. She said both things- that Travis kept asking her to marry him, and that both were moving on. Travis seems to have made it obvious that he was increasingly focused on getting married, and not to her. If she didn't understand that, it wasn't because he didn't tell her.

That's where the narrative ends. Still nothing of those 1000 miles or of the premeditation, or of the murder.

Its a narrative that makes sense, ties everything together, humanizes Travis, and doesn't demonize JA. The contrast to the DT's cartoon story of Dr. Jeckyl, Mr. Hyde, and a shrinking violet victimized murderer couldn't be any greater.

Hopefully this doesn't get me in too much trouble with BK, but because I basically said the same thing just the other day I just had to show what she reported today:

"13:18
Apart from the photos of June 4, 2008, there's no evidence they were having sex? Not true. There are the phone sex tape recording and texts."

So, other than the bedroom nudie pics that afaik do not show both TA and JA even in the same frame, a few texts and the one sex tape we've heard, there is no proof they ever did anything sexual beyond whatever their "fruitful imaginations" voiced. Yea... for someone who claims to carry her camera everywhere and documents everything, where's the beef JA?

 

[MeeBee]

Hopefully this doesn't get me in too much trouble with BK, but because I basically said the same thing just the other day I just had to show what she reported today:

"13:18
Apart from the photos of June 4, 2008, there's no evidence they were having sex? Not true. There are the phone sex tape recording and texts."

So, other than the bedroom nudie pics that afaik do not show both TA and JA even in the same frame, a few texts and the one sex tape we've heard, there is no proof they ever did anything sexual beyond whatever their "fruitful imaginations" voiced. Yea... for someone who claims to carry her camera everywhere and documents everything, where's the beef JA?

"Where's the beef JA?"

Curtains?

 

[RickshawFan]

Then may I please have the 5th of March? It's a full moon and lots of weird things are reported to happen on the full moon...even the ending of this penalty phase is possible. :happydance:

The Ides of March.......

 

[RickshawFan]

I'm here Becky. i've followed the trial since the beginning but haven't posted but a few times since my DH died. My heart goes out to Travis' family. Its heartbreaking to lose someone you care about and love. DM has made such a pleasant change from the DT experts. Yes, Martinez can become very aggressive but from what I see its been called for when he has had to deal with DT experts who are showing their bias and not being honest. So obvious too. Now Wilmott and Nurmi different story. They come out with attitudes. Wilma with her brattie mouth and Nurmi with his slimey mouth. They didn't learn their lesson in the results of the first trial and now doing it again. Almost hilarious watching them try so hard to copy the excellence of Martinez. JA might not end up getting the DP but it won't be because of her attorneys. She will be put away though much to the relief of so many.

JM isn't personally disrespectful, though. If he wants an expert witness to look bad, he uses their stuff against them, like ALV with the Snow White whatever Juan was trying to say....

 

[wendiesan]

Then may I please have the 5th of March? It's a full moon and lots of weird things are reported to happen on the full moon...even the ending of this penalty phase is possible. :happydance:

What are the odds of the retrial of the penalty phase lasting longer than the original trial?

 

[Val1]

I know it is late night, and I do not want to make anyone crazy.

Is Geffner's graph available?

Looking for the DATES for those 12 women that Travis contacted.

My husband thinks he was at his wit's end,...begging for advice...hoping to find a sensible solution with his F. friends, without actually calling the police.

TIA!

RIP Travis...We WILL get there

I haven't seen anything on the graph per se but BK did say the RH messages were from May 13, 2008 to early June, if that helps?

 

[wendiesan]

But! Wait! He grew his hair, and lost weight, and stopped reclining, and says things like ...I didn't ask a question, and I don't care what you think...You mean all that didn't work? :tantrum:

Just remember guys, a hero is only as good as his villain. Just saying....

 

[RickshawFan]

Thanks, Meebee. I wrote a response to your answer but it went poof, I think. If this turns out to be a double response, please forgive.

One of my many criticisms of Nurmi is his obvious and obnoxious tone-deafness and even downright ignorance. As in yesterday, when he didn't know where New Zealand is and his lazy assumption that it's a British colony. When he was corrected, his attitude was "whatever." Maybe I'm old-fashioned, but I believe that a knowledge of geography and history (the British Empire folded more than fifty years ago) is kinda important. And what really shocks me is that, as a lawyer, he is a member of a profession. Most members of a profession are well-educated, but he sometimes strikes me as not even educated, let alone well-educated.

IIRC, first KN said New Zealand was in Europe! (Didn't JM kick in an objection that said: "Geography"?) He didn't even get to the colony part except as a "correction"! This all strikes me as bizarre. I mean his prime "witness", W1, lives in New Zealand. You'd think he'd look it up on a map. Terrible education, lack of awareness of the world, too much interest in sex.

JW also strikes me as having had a very mediocre education. There's no sign of rigor in her CV as far as I can see (i.e. not just a degree), no awards, no honors, no thesis, no law school journal editor, and her use of language is very sloppy. It's very important for attorneys to have a good sense of language and its implications, since their work revolves around precision in language. JW has obviously never been in a competitive academic environment: she would have been pushed by her peers. She might have got all A's, but this doesn't mean facility: it often reflects lack of competition and it very often reflects failure to take challenging classes.

Demarte, on the other hand, developed in a very competitive environment. You can tell by how she talks. She's bounced ideas around and been challenged by peers; this teaches you how to think a few steps ahead and anticipate implications. You have to slow your brain down a bit so you don't get thrown off and have a chance to state your point (note JW charges into a sentence and then it all goes kind of flaccid. Breathy as well.). Batting around stuff with peers also teaches you how to notice flaws in other people's logic, and to synthesize ideas on the fly. Demarte has also sought out contexts where she's taken on additional challenges, and she must have acquired a lot of confidence from that.

It's interesting, though, that I'm not sure DeMarte would be a great personal therapist. She really excels at evaluation and data and she's great at talking. I'm not sure the data point stuff and the style of talking would work very well in a therapy session, except maybe where someone needs a lot of structure.

 

[Wing Ding]

Over in Jodiland they... too were surprised to hear Jodi had been sexually assaulted at age 5 or 6. It is of course Juan Martinez' fault they didn't know this because he kept it from being disclosed during the first trial.

Oh, the incident her dad witnessed, but apparently didn't do anything about?

The same incident she doesn't remember at age five, but she does remember seeing cocaine in her parent's bedroom at age four?

But, yeah... why did Juan keep it out of the first trial? Maybe because he didn't know about it until just today?

If it was common knowledge two years ago, why didn't Nurmi coax it out of Jodi when she was on the witness stand? She was only up there for 18 days. And we all know how Nurmi just luuuuvs to talk about sex. :barf:

They're so cute over there in JodiLand.

 

[PenElaine]

Hi Elaine,

VVhat is this vvino that you speak of? Just vvondering . . .

Actually "rye and coke" if u must knovv!

Ps My name is Cait - PenElaine is a lame play of the name of my fave Beatles song.....

 

[PenElaine]

VVhat?

Your sweet disposition in your posts has often made me smile. Gawd, hope I'm not sounding like a stalker.....

 

[Wing Ding]

Seriously painful to watch today.

Just out of idle curiosity, was Nurmi last in his class?

Oh, there's no doubt Nurmi is in a class all his own.

 

[Wing Ding]

OR calling Dr. DeMarte a bi**h, as JW looked for papers which she offered to let Dr. DeMarte see, and then, when JW had to search for on the podium, JW said such a not so nice word. It is in a video from the first trial, just not sure which one. I did watch it several times, even the felon and LKN reacted to the word, with the felon getting a grin on her face and it is heard on tape...yes, you can see JW saying it. Such a nice set of defense lawyers. Not a way to get a point across to save your client!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=En7UIKNzwg4

I remember a lot of people talking about Wilmott's comment when that happened in the first trial, but I think time has given me a new perspective on this.

Could it be that JW was just talking out loud about what a b¡tch it is to search for the papers Dr.D wanted to see?

I don't know why I didn't see it that way two years ago, but that's how I see it as now anyway. Still, I wouldn't put it past JW to think it of Dr. D

edited to add: Had JW said "what a pain in the @ss" under her breath instead, would she have been talking about Dr. D, or having to look for papers?

 

[bsk]

She has testified in 3 other death penalty trials.

Which gives her more experience in DP trials than KN and JW combined.

Hey maybe experience IS important - she is certainly schooling those two!

 

[bsk]

DM's brilliant presentation means it won't take much reading between the lines for the jury to understand an incomplete but telling enough narrative of what happened between Travis and the woman who murdered him.

JA met Travis and immediately decided she would marry him. Travis was very attracted to her, saw lots of qualities in her he found admirable, and for a few months may actually have loved her.

Her BPD prevented their relationship from developing into one that was exclusive and committed. The more desperately she tried to draw him in deeper, the further away he fled from having any meaningful relationship with her at all.

His withdrawal caused her to panic. She moved to Mesa although he told her he didnt want her to. He told her to date other people, and he did so himself. JA couldn't tolerate that that Travis wanted to be with anyone else. She spied on him when he was with another woman, may have slashed his tires, likely invaded his privacy on many occasions, and went into his house, uninvited.

The more intrusive she became the less likely it was that Travis would want to be in a relationship with her, but she persisted. Travis was torn. He liked having sex with her enough that he continued to do so, even though that caused him problems within his church. He also seemed to want to help her. Its possible that he was afraid to cut her off completely because he was afraid she would harm or even kill herself.

Its unclear whether or not JA actually thought Travis wanted to resume a relationship with her. She said both things- that Travis kept asking her to marry him, and that both were moving on. Travis seems to have made it obvious that he was increasingly focused on getting married, and not to her. If she didn't understand that, it wasn't because he didn't tell her.

That's where the narrative ends. Still nothing of those 1000 miles or of the premeditation, or of the murder.

Its a narrative that makes sense, ties everything together, humanizes Travis, and doesn't demonize JA. The contrast to the DT's cartoon story of Dr. Jeckyl, Mr. Hyde, and a shrinking violet victimized murderer couldn't be any greater.

And seriously, is there any doubt as to which of these experts makes sense to the jury? DeMarte actually interviewed people on both sides, gives balanced answers, uses concrete examples to back us her assertions, and just plain makes sense. These other clowns go 100% based on what JA says, tell her how to answer tests or just save time and fill them out themselves, claim to be able to read minds, claim evidence that disproves what they are saying actually proves it, etc.

 

[YESorNO]

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
02/06/2015 8:00 AM

02/03/2015

TRIAL MINUTE ENTRY
DAY THIRTY-SIX

LET THE RECORD REFLECT that Exhibit 855, the un-redacted copy of the exhibit, is
deemed as offered only to preserve for the Appellate Court and not to go to the Jury.
Defendant’s Motion to Preclude Witness is argued and denied for the reasons as stated on
the record.
LET THE RECORD REFLECT that an un-redacted copy of Exhibit 853 is to be given to
the Court by Defense on 2/4/15 and is split as Defense Exhibit 853.001 and deemed offered only
to preserve for the Appellate Court and not to go to the Jury...

Dr. Janeen DeMarte is sworn and testifies.
State’s Exhibit 863 is marked for identification.
The State offers State’s Exhibit 863 and it is admitted in evidence.
State’s Exhibit 864 is marked for identification.
State’s Exhibits 865-868 are marked for identification.
State’s Exhibit 869 is marked for identification...

LET THE RECORD REFLECT that juror questions #15, #16 and #17, from the
uncompleted testimony of the Defendant, were not asked and filed this date.
Filed: Juror Questions (3)...

The Jury is not present
The parties discussed the release of the transcript dated 10/30/14.
1:34 p.m. The Jury is now present.
Dr. Janeen DeMarte testifies further.
State’s Exhibit 870 is marked for identification.
State’s Exhibit 871 is marked for identification.
State’s Exhibits 872-877 are marked for identification....

The State offers State’s Exhibit 872 and it is admitted in evidence.
The State offers State’s Exhibit 876 and it is admitted in evidence.
The State offers State’s Exhibit 874 and it is admitted in evidence.
State’s Exhibits 878 and 879 are marked for identification.
State’s Exhibits 880 and 881 are marked for identification...

The State offers State’s Exhibits 878, 880 and 881 and Exhibits 878 and 880 are admitted
in evidence....

State’s Exhibit 881 is admitted in evidence....

4:10 p.m. Court stands at recess until 2/4/15 at 9:30 a.m. in this division...

http://www.courtminutes.maricopa.gov/docs/Criminal/022015/m6685995.pdf
-----------------------

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
02/06/2015 8:00 AM

02/04/2015

TRIAL MINUTE ENTRY
DAY THIRTY-SEVEN

LET THE RECORD REFLECT that on 2/3/15 Exhibit 853 was temporarily released to
Defense and returned this date...

Defense Motion to Preclude Witness is argued.
Various rulings made as stated on the record...

Dr. Janeen DeMarte, having previously been sworn, testifies further.
State’s Exhibit 884 is marked for identification.
State’s Exhibit 885 is marked for identification.
The State offers State’s Exhibit 885 and it is admitted in evidence.
State’s Exhibits 886-889 are marked for identification.
State’s Exhibit 890 is marked for identification.
The State offers State’s Exhibit 886 and it is admitted in evidence.
The State offers State’s Exhibit 888 and it is admitted in evidence.
State’s Exhibits 891-901 are marked for identification.
The State offers State’s Exhibit 891 and it is admitted in evidence.
The State offers State’s Exhibit 893 and it is admitted in evidence.
The State offers State’s Exhibit 895 and it is admitted in evidence..
State’s Exhibits 902-904 are marked for identification..

The State offers State’s Exhibit 899 and it is NOT admitted in evidence.
The State offers State’s Exhibit 902 and it is admitted in evidence.
The State offers State’s Exhibit 903 and it is admitted in evidence.
The State offers State’s Exhibit 904 and it is NOT admitted in evidence.
State’s Exhibit 905 is marked for identification.
The State offers State’s Exhibit 905 and it is admitted in evidence..

LET THE RECORD REFLECT that Exhibit 904 is temporarily released to the State and
returned with a redacted version prior to reconvening. Exhibit 904 is replaced with the redacted copy.
State’s Exhibit 906 is marked for identification...

The State again offers State’s Exhibit 904 and it is admitted in evidence.
State’s Exhibits 907 and 908 are marked for identification.
The State offers State’s Exhibit 907 and it is admitted in evidence.
State’s Exhibit 909 and 910 are marked for identification.
The State offers State’s Exhibit 909 and it is admitted in evidence.
The State offers State’s Exhibit 901 and it is admitted in evidence.
State’s Exhibit 911 is marked for identification.
The State offers State’s Exhibit 911 and it is admitted in evidence.
The State offers State’s Exhibit 615 and it is admitted in evidence.
State’s Exhibit 912 is marked for identification.
State’s Exhibits 913 and 914 are marked for identification.
The State offers State’s Exhibit 913 and it is admitted in evidence.
The State offers State’s Exhibit 914 and it is admitted in evidence...

3:31 p.m. Court stands at recess until 2/5/15 at 9:45 a.m. in this division...

http://www.courtminutes.maricopa.gov/docs/Criminal/022015/m6685996.pdf

 

[LaLaw2000]

tsitra01 and Becky Sharp So sorry for your loss.

I read once a saying about lost loved ones. One shouldn't go looking for them in the dark but should search out light and laughter and they will still be found there. I always found that thought rather comforting. Remember the good things and it will help.

You are so right, Paintr. It took years but I can finally do that now. I have such great memories of the love and laughter shared with my two lost loved ones.

Thoughts and prayers from me to those who have lost loved ones. They are always in your heart.