Sentencing and beyond- JA General Discussion #7

Status
Not open for further replies.

Coldpizza

Retired WS Staff
Joined
Aug 28, 2009
Messages
19,800
Reaction score
884
Travis_Alexander.jpg

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Travis_Alexander#/media/File:Travis_Alexander.jpg
Continue discussion here...

Please keep off topic information to the Sidebar thread.
Please keep this thread case specific.

link for sidebar (members only):
Travis' Sidebar Friends

thread dedicated to Alexander family and friends:
To the Alexander Family - Express your sentiments here

link to previous threads:
Sentencing and beyond- JA General Discussion #1
Sentencing and beyond- JA General Discussion #2

Sentencing and beyond- JA General Discussion #3
Sentencing and beyond- JA General Discussion #4
Sentencing and beyond- JA General Discussion #5
Sentencing and beyond- JA General Discussion #6
Book discussion:
Prosecutor Juan Martinez releases new book, February 2016 - #2
 

Steve44

Active Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2014
Messages
1,470
Reaction score
11
What mechanisms are those?

Thinking about the recent female-killer cases I've followed: All were convicted and I think none got less than 30 or 40 years in state prison. The only one I followed who was acquitted was Casey Anthony.

It is changing, and I don't have a specific example, but generally the victim card is a strategy available to all women, regardless of the reality. Arias is perfect example of this, and although it didn't work in her case, due to the overwhelming evidence, had that evidence not been so clear, she may well have gotten less than she actually deserved. Even as it is, many bought the abuse story, it just wasn't enough in her case in light of the evidence.
 

Madeleine74

Knower of Things
Joined
Apr 7, 2011
Messages
11,548
Reaction score
19,870
It is changing, and I don't have a specific example, but generally the victim card is a strategy available to all women, regardless of the reality. Arias is perfect example of this, and although it didn't work in her case, due to the overwhelming evidence, had that evidence not been so clear, she may well have gotten less than she actually deserved. Even as it is, many bought the abuse story, it just wasn't enough in her case in light of the evidence.

The abuse card or unhappy troubled childhood card is tried in many cases I follow (men as well) or else the 'mentally frail/unbalanced' card. I don't think I've seen it work in any cases I followed, maybe to save someone from the DP, but certainly not from guilt.
 

Steve44

Active Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2014
Messages
1,470
Reaction score
11
The abuse card or unhappy troubled childhood card is tried in many cases I follow (men as well) or else the 'mentally frail/unbalanced' card. I don't think I've seen it work in any cases I followed, maybe to save someone from the DP, but certainly not from guilt.

It's true that it's working less and less, and it can be used by men as well (it almost worked for the Melendez brothers) but I think it's something that's more freely available to women due to society seeing them as more naturally the victims (of men) than the other way around.

If the reality today is such that it makes my argument weaker, I'm good with that.

ETA: I'll add that the sentiment survives, in whatever weakened form, from a time when men really did have a much more material control over women, and did to them as they pleased with socially sanctioned impunity.
 

Madeleine74

Knower of Things
Joined
Apr 7, 2011
Messages
11,548
Reaction score
19,870
The reality is that there is no abuse claim that is more available to women over men. Both genders can be victims of any kind of harassment or abuse -- and we've seen that in a variety of cases. The only defense a woman can have that a man cannot is related to child birth and postpartum depression/psychosis. That is something that only a woman can claim. Everything else (minus gender-specific anatomy) is available to whoever. Doesn't mean claiming it will work, doesn't mean it has worked. There are many, many cases in which a woman not only got convicted but got decades in prison (or LWOP).

Your comment was about "mechanisms in place," yet there haven't been any cited. There's perhaps the "appearance of mechanisms to those who desire to see them," but actual mechanisms... not so much. The courts are treating everyone the same, the sentencing guidelines are not gender specific. Juries (especially juries in which there are women) judge women on trial with equal culpability and wrath (and sometimes more harshly, though that all depends on the jury and the defendant).
 

TexMex

Punishment is justice for the unjust.
Joined
Apr 26, 2004
Messages
7,614
Reaction score
42
Men abused in childhood often are drawn to BPD females

http://gettinbetter.com/perfect.html



These "rescuers" have often suffered severe emotional trauma at the hand of an abusive parent incapable of providing the affection and emotional nourishment necessary in order to learn how to love in a healthy way. They were deeply wounded at their very core and carry the scars of lovelessness, low self worth, and self-loathing.

Males like this often get involved with clingy dysfunctional borderline women who fill the void in them left by their emotionally inadequate mothers.
 

TexMex

Punishment is justice for the unjust.
Joined
Apr 26, 2004
Messages
7,614
Reaction score
42
Most therapists recommend a strict no contact approach. But it's difficult, especially in codependent situations like the one Travis was in IMO. He had his own issues and combined with her sociopathic manipulations it was toxic.
Jmo but when Travis spoke of his addiction to Jodi and the relationship he was actually manifesting his codependency.


http://shrink4men.com/2014/08/27/goi...-a-borderline/
 

GigiG

New Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2015
Messages
2,567
Reaction score
1
Men abused in childhood often are drawn to BPD females

http://gettinbetter.com/perfect.html



These "rescuers" have often suffered severe emotional trauma at the hand of an abusive parent incapable of providing the affection and emotional nourishment necessary in order to learn how to love in a healthy way. They were deeply wounded at their very core and carry the scars of lovelessness, low self worth, and self-loathing.

Males like this often get involved with clingy dysfunctional borderline women who fill the void in them left by their emotionally inadequate mothers.

Whew! Okay, TexMex, give us a break from all this serious stuff and show-and-tell us what's for dinner tonight... :)
 

TexMex

Punishment is justice for the unjust.
Joined
Apr 26, 2004
Messages
7,614
Reaction score
42
Whew! Okay, TexMex, give us a break from all this serious stuff and show-and-tell us what's for dinner tonight... :)

It's Taco Tuesday


image.jpeg
 

Hope4More

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2011
Messages
13,102
Reaction score
13,482
Steve---Going to try to keep this short (ETA-FAILED AT THAT) and am working from memory, because it takes too much to review all the moving parts. I posted summaries of all the texts by month, so they’re there if you want to double check content or exact dates and times.

Do I believe they had sex on June 4? Consider me an agnostic. I think it is more likely that they did than they did not, but I wouldn’t be the slightest bit surprised if evidence unexpectedly fell out of the sky and say, definitively proved that the timestamps on those photos couldn’t possibly be accurate, or proved just as conclusively that one or more of the photos were taken on another day.

The timestamped photos were extremely important to JM’s case not because they showed the naked bodies of Travis and his murderer, but because they placed her in his house on the day he was murdered. Time stamped photos of the two sitting down and having tea would have accomplished that same purpose.

Any additional significance ascribed to the content of the photos is IMO subjective, speculative, and in terms of the outcome of June 4, beside the point. For that reason, for the most part I’m genuinely disinterested in whether or not they had sex that day. JM seems to genuinely feel sex that day made her killing Travis that much more repugnant, that she shared the “most intimate” moments possible with another soul then went in short order to brutally slaughtering him.

I don’t see it that way. Her slaughtering him while he was naked in the shower, whatever came before that, takes me all the way to revulsion, and the photos, if taken that day, IMO don’t in any case support the notion of intimacy. There’s all the difference in the world between making love and having sex.

One is about being genuinely intimate and is a reflection of that intimacy, the other involves moving and fitting body parts and can mean so little as to take place between strangers who pay and are paid to partake. I don’t see any indication of intimacy in those photos, or playfulness, or happiness, or enjoyment. Neither are even smiling. From the first time I made the mistake of looking at the photos of her nether regions, what I’ve sensed is the photographer’s contempt or complete detachment. The photos are, IMO, completely devoid of sentimentality, much less of intimacy or affection.

If they had sex that day, it was for her an act of hostility. If they had sex that day, what was it for him?

The reason I ever cared one way or another is because I couldn’t connect the dots between May 26 and June 4. Made no sense to me, and I take no quarter with things that don’t make sense to me.

Steve, the first way I connected the dots was as you have, because it fits all the pieces together in a way that makes psychological and logical sense, and it takes into account her adeptness at exploiting TA’s feelings of guilt. The plausibility that he did let his guard down one more time on June 4 out of guilt was reinforced when the texts for January-April became available.

There it was. A very definite pattern of her provoking him to anger, of him being angry with her, then of him apologizing to her for his anger. And, there was as well an equally definitive pattern of his confronting her on lies or manipulations small and large, of her sidestepping, diverting, or turning the accusation back on him, which inevitably led to his backing down and seemingly accepting her layers of lies as truth, or at least, as a reality he could not or chose not to confront.

Then came the May and June texts, and it was those texts which eventually changed my mind. The texts for those months (in context with what was already known) provided what I believe is a more complete, accurate, and disturbing way of connecting the dots going all the way back to April then on through May 26.
Easiest to list, briefly (lol), all Imo.

1. She took his threat on April 1 very seriously, that he would expose her as a psycho to everyone who mattered to her

2. She bought time by convincing him she’d come clean, telling him about sneaking into his house and sleeping there, driving around his house, etc., in order to more plausibly deny she’d slashed tires, stolen his journal, continually hacked into his SM accounts, etc.

3. She believed through April she could reel him back in, but she also began manufacturing a record to use against him

4. She considered his willingness to visit her in Yreka a line in the sand, that if he didn’t visit, that would be a rejection she wasn’t going to tolerate

5. Travis began reality testing about her with friends, who uniformly told him the was mentally ill and scary

6. Travis became more willing to express anger towards her, and to tell her he thought she was lying to him, which IMO likely made her feel not only rage but convinced Travis might act on his threat to expose her

7. Both the and Travis locked in by the first week in May. Whether or not it was true, he believed she had intercepted texts between CL and himself, and in believing that, believed she was hacking in to his phone or computer or both, and in doing that, she had to be aware he’d been intimate with CL, thus making him even more vulnerable to her and with his Church.

8. Her response to being confronted by Travis about those texts came on May 9th, when she turned the tables by indirectly accusing Travis of going into her SM accounts (the “accidental “Steve Carroll texts). She provoked him not once but twice, IMO definitely in an attempt not only to divert him, but to gather “evidence” to support her developing counter lie that it was Travis who was obsessed with her, to the point he became irrationally jealous and out of control angry at the mere mention by her of another man’s name.

9. Travis meant what he told her on May 9. No more mercy. IMO he reached this point as much out of desperation as anything else. Her “accidental: texts weren’t innocuous, or just a subterfuge to get his attention. They were threats, IMO, her way of telling him that she could at any time “accidentally” send incriminating texts about him to…anyone.

10. On May 13-14 Travis, likely by himself, laid a trap for her, pretending to text with an unknown woman (he never calls her by name, BTW) over iirc, close to 36 hours, with breaks for sleep and brief texting with other GF’s he knew made the jealous. IMO it is really obvious that Travis was openly mocking and taunting the over those hours, in specific ways we’ve discussed here at length a while ago.

IMO he was trying to accomplish on May 13-14 what he tried again more overtly on May 26 to do—to make her understand she’d been caught, and fully exposed as a psycho. He wanted her to leave him alone. The texts from those days, if one believes Travis was speaking directly to the and that the either knew that , or believed he was seducing then sleeping with a stranger, are FAR more likely IMO to have caused her to think murder than anything he said on May 26. May 26 was the coda; May 13-14 was a full orchestra symphonic FU.

The texts indicate that another of his goals for the texting charade and trap was to so divert her with that marathon sexting that she forgot to call him as promised as MariaM, a woman she was pretending to be on LDS to mess with his head and to try to trap HIM into exposing himself in writing, online.

She confessed to being MariaM on May 21. Travis was texting with Regan just before and afterwards, and it was intense enough for Travis that Regan reassured him he was not alone, that Heavenly Father would be there with him when he confronted the with her lies. Just days before this, Travis told Regan he was scared of the , that he believed she might kill him or herself, that he knew she’s slashed his tires and more…

When he finished his call with the he texted Regan the had confessed, and he’d told her he wanted her all the way out of his life, but that “(he) didn’t think it would be that easy.”

The dates the end of their “relationship” to that day, May 22 (TA’s calls and texts went into the early hours of the 22), and assigns that date as when both agreed to change their passwords

Travis refused to speak with her from May 22-May 26, texting her that he would not do so unless and until she put into writing whatever it was she was telling him was so dire as to warrant calling an atty. She instead hacked into his FB to “send something down the pipeline” in his name, and he caught her red handed, again.

(((note---It was this insistence by Travis that she confess IN WRITING, one that he continued with on May 26, that led Chris and Sky to believe she had done something illegal or truly dark (worse than the sex tape). I don’t think so. I think he was essentially doing what she was doing—trying to get her to “incriminate” herself in writing about any or all the things we already know about)

Whatever was said before the chat (and yes, it does make a huge difference to read the chat in proper sequence), what’s more important IMO is what is in the chat itself.

IMO what he said in the chat should be taken at face value. He meant everything he said. He was already done with her before May 26, and she was already aware that he’d reached that point. Whatever she told him provoked him into anger, just as she intended. And just as she solicited specific replies and responses on the May 10 tape, so did she during the chat. The difference was that Travis was trying to do likewise. She used the word *advertiser censored* first, and she also used the phrase “I’m addicted to” first, a phrase I’m convinced he picked up and used at the very end of the chat, not as capitulation or statement of fact, but as a tactic to get her to lower HER guard, in the mistaken belief she had succeeded and had “won” once again.

At the end of the chat he told her to call, but he couldn’t contain his contempt as he did so. She did call. IMO that is when she told him about the sex tape and according to Taylor, when he must have told her in response that he was beyond done with her.

Epilogue follow next. ;)
 

TexMex

Punishment is justice for the unjust.
Joined
Apr 26, 2004
Messages
7,614
Reaction score
42
Travis May 26

I'm addicted to it
But it is bullshiz
Yet I'm addicted to it
And you know it
And you know I will take you back
You always know
You know I'll get pissed but I'll take you back


He also meant that. And he did take her back. Like his guilt and religion and "caregiver" type personality demanded IMO . She was in his home and in his bed June 4. Taking pictures of Jodi like he discussed May 10 This was due to a codependent toxic relationship with a sociopath. Jmo
 

Steve44

Active Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2014
Messages
1,470
Reaction score
11
The reality is that there is no abuse claim that is more available to women over men. Both genders can be victims of any kind of harassment or abuse -- and we've seen that in a variety of cases. The only defense a woman can have that a man cannot is related to child birth and postpartum depression/psychosis. That is something that only a woman can claim. Everything else (minus gender-specific anatomy) is available to whoever. Doesn't mean claiming it will work, doesn't mean it has worked. There are many, many cases in which a woman not only got convicted but got decades in prison (or LWOP).

Your comment was about "mechanisms in place," yet there haven't been any cited. There's perhaps the "appearance of mechanisms to those who desire to see them," but actual mechanisms... not so much. The courts are treating everyone the same, the sentencing guidelines are not gender specific. Juries (especially juries in which there are women) judge women on trial with equal culpability and wrath (and sometimes more harshly, though that all depends on the jury and the defendant).


Not more available, just more believable.

Let's take as an example a cold-hearted woman who just wants to get rid of her husband. She kills him in cold blood and then claims she just snapped after years of abuse, both physical and emotional, that her husband constantly and openly cheated on her and tried to pull her into an open marriage, and she suspected he was sexually abusing his children. None of which is remotely true.

Now take that same cold heart and transplant it into a man who just wants to get rid of his wife. He again kills her in cold blood and then claims again that he just snapped, that she openly cheated on him for years, emotionally abused him, and was a terrible, negligent mother. None of which is remotely true.

Obviously the ability to produce supporting evidence (even manufactured evidence) in each case will carry the most weight, but which would be taken as more credible at face value?

The "appearance of mechanisms to those who desire to see them," is exactly from where they draw their reality. They are social assumptions based on traditional but increasingly anachronistic social roles of dominance and submission across genders.

I'm not saying it's any longer a viable defense, it's increasingly less so with a more aware society and increasingly accurate investigative forensics, but there's still an advantage to a female claiming victimhood at the hands of a man as a mitigator for what is really psychopathic behavior.
 

Steve44

Active Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2014
Messages
1,470
Reaction score
11
Steve---Going to try to keep this short (ETA-FAILED AT THAT) and am working from memory, because it takes too much to review all the moving parts. I posted summaries of all the texts by month, so they’re there if you want to double check content or exact dates and times.

Do I believe they had sex on June 4? Consider me an agnostic. I think it is more likely that they did than they did not, but I wouldn’t be the slightest bit surprised if evidence unexpectedly fell out of the sky and say, definitively proved that the timestamps on those photos couldn’t possibly be accurate, or proved just as conclusively that one or more of the photos were taken on another day.

The timestamped photos were extremely important to JM’s case not because they showed the naked bodies of Travis and his murderer, but because they placed her in his house on the day he was murdered. Time stamped photos of the two sitting down and having tea would have accomplished that same purpose.

Any additional significance ascribed to the content of the photos is IMO subjective, speculative, and in terms of the outcome of June 4, beside the point. For that reason, for the most part I’m genuinely disinterested in whether or not they had sex that day. JM seems to genuinely feel sex that day made her killing Travis that much more repugnant, that she shared the “most intimate” moments possible with another soul then went in short order to brutally slaughtering him.

I don’t see it that way. Her slaughtering him while he was naked in the shower, whatever came before that, takes me all the way to revulsion, and the photos, if taken that day, IMO don’t in any case support the notion of intimacy. There’s all the difference in the world between making love and having sex.

One is about being genuinely intimate and is a reflection of that intimacy, the other involves moving and fitting body parts and can mean so little as to take place between strangers who pay and are paid to partake. I don’t see any indication of intimacy in those photos, or playfulness, or happiness, or enjoyment. Neither are even smiling. From the first time I made the mistake of looking at the photos of her nether regions, what I’ve sensed is the photographer’s contempt or complete detachment. The photos are, IMO, completely devoid of sentimentality, much less of intimacy or affection.

If they had sex that day, it was for her an act of hostility. If they had sex that day, what was it for him?

The reason I ever cared one way or another is because I couldn’t connect the dots between May 26 and June 4. Made no sense to me, and I take no quarter with things that don’t make sense to me.

Steve, the first way I connected the dots was as you have, because it fits all the pieces together in a way that makes psychological and logical sense, and it takes into account her adeptness at exploiting TA’s feelings of guilt. The plausibility that he did let his guard down one more time on June 4 out of guilt was reinforced when the texts for January-April became available.

There it was. A very definite pattern of her provoking him to anger, of him being angry with her, then of him apologizing to her for his anger. And, there was as well an equally definitive pattern of his confronting her on lies or manipulations small and large, of her sidestepping, diverting, or turning the accusation back on him, which inevitably led to his backing down and seemingly accepting her layers of lies as truth, or at least, as a reality he could not or chose not to confront.

Then came the May and June texts, and it was those texts which eventually changed my mind. The texts for those months (in context with what was already known) provided what I believe is a more complete, accurate, and disturbing way of connecting the dots going all the way back to April then on through May 26.
Easiest to list, briefly (lol), all Imo.

1. She took his threat on April 1 very seriously, that he would expose her as a psycho to everyone who mattered to her

2. She bought time by convincing him she’d come clean, telling him about sneaking into his house and sleeping there, driving around his house, etc., in order to more plausibly deny she’d slashed tires, stolen his journal, continually hacked into his SM accounts, etc.

3. She believed through April she could reel him back in, but she also began manufacturing a record to use against him

4. She considered his willingness to visit her in Yreka a line in the sand, that if he didn’t visit, that would be a rejection she wasn’t going to tolerate

5. Travis began reality testing about her with friends, who uniformly told him the was mentally ill and scary

6. Travis became more willing to express anger towards her, and to tell her he thought she was lying to him, which IMO likely made her feel not only rage but convinced Travis might act on his threat to expose her

7. Both the and Travis locked in by the first week in May. Whether or not it was true, he believed she had intercepted texts between CL and himself, and in believing that, believed she was hacking in to his phone or computer or both, and in doing that, she had to be aware he’d been intimate with CL, thus making him even more vulnerable to her and with his Church.

8. Her response to being confronted by Travis about those texts came on May 9th, when she turned the tables by indirectly accusing Travis of going into her SM accounts (the “accidental “Steve Carroll texts). She provoked him not once but twice, IMO definitely in an attempt not only to divert him, but to gather “evidence” to support her developing counter lie that it was Travis who was obsessed with her, to the point he became irrationally jealous and out of control angry at the mere mention by her of another man’s name.

9. Travis meant what he told her on May 9. No more mercy. IMO he reached this point as much out of desperation as anything else. Her “accidental: texts weren’t innocuous, or just a subterfuge to get his attention. They were threats, IMO, her way of telling him that she could at any time “accidentally” send incriminating texts about him to…anyone.

10. On May 13-14 Travis, likely by himself, laid a trap for her, pretending to text with an unknown woman (he never calls her by name, BTW) over iirc, close to 36 hours, with breaks for sleep and brief texting with other GF’s he knew made the jealous. IMO it is really obvious that Travis was openly mocking and taunting the over those hours, in specific ways we’ve discussed here at length a while ago.

IMO he was trying to accomplish on May 13-14 what he tried again more overtly on May 26 to do—to make her understand she’d been caught, and fully exposed as a psycho. He wanted her to leave him alone. The texts from those days, if one believes Travis was speaking directly to the and that the either knew that , or believed he was seducing then sleeping with a stranger, are FAR more likely IMO to have caused her to think murder than anything he said on May 26. May 26 was the coda; May 13-14 was a full orchestra symphonic FU.

The texts indicate that another of his goals for the texting charade and trap was to so divert her with that marathon sexting that she forgot to call him as promised as MariaM, a woman she was pretending to be on LDS to mess with his head and to try to trap HIM into exposing himself in writing, online.

She confessed to being MariaM on May 21. Travis was texting with Regan just before and afterwards, and it was intense enough for Travis that Regan reassured him he was not alone, that Heavenly Father would be there with him when he confronted the with her lies. Just days before this, Travis told Regan he was scared of the , that he believed she might kill him or herself, that he knew she’s slashed his tires and more…

When he finished his call with the he texted Regan the had confessed, and he’d told her he wanted her all the way out of his life, but that “(he) didn’t think it would be that easy.”

The dates the end of their “relationship” to that day, May 22 (TA’s calls and texts went into the early hours of the 22), and assigns that date as when both agreed to change their passwords

Travis refused to speak with her from May 22-May 26, texting her that he would not do so unless and until she put into writing whatever it was she was telling him was so dire as to warrant calling an atty. She instead hacked into his FB to “send something down the pipeline” in his name, and he caught her red handed, again.

(((note---It was this insistence by Travis that she confess IN WRITING, one that he continued with on May 26, that led Chris and Sky to believe she had done something illegal or truly dark (worse than the sex tape). I don’t think so. I think he was essentially doing what she was doing—trying to get her to “incriminate” herself in writing about any or all the things we already know about)

Whatever was said before the chat (and yes, it does make a huge difference to read the chat in proper sequence), what’s more important IMO is what is in the chat itself.

IMO what he said in the chat should be taken at face value. He meant everything he said. He was already done with her before May 26, and she was already aware that he’d reached that point. Whatever she told him provoked him into anger, just as she intended. And just as she solicited specific replies and responses on the May 10 tape, so did she during the chat. The difference was that Travis was trying to do likewise. She used the word *advertiser censored* first, and she also used the phrase “I’m addicted to” first, a phrase I’m convinced he picked up and used at the very end of the chat, not as capitulation or statement of fact, but as a tactic to get her to lower HER guard, in the mistaken belief she had succeeded and had “won” once again.

At the end of the chat he told her to call, but he couldn’t contain his contempt as he did so. She did call. IMO that is when she told him about the sex tape and according to Taylor, when he must have told her in response that he was beyond done with her.

Epilogue follow next. ;)

An excellent and sound analysis and undoubtedly in close alignment with truth even if he did somehow succumb to her sexual advances on June 4. Sex itself is a primal motivator in its own right and while Travis' hard-won and bitter insight would have been a powerful attenuator in Travis to those motivations towards Arias, its influence cannot be completely disregarded.

I would challenge your analysis in one regard, and that is the absence of evidence of intimacy in the June 4 photos. That was never a necessary element in their relations, regardless of Travis' likely early and naive beliefs. Intimacy + Arias = Oxymoron.
 

Hope4More

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2011
Messages
13,102
Reaction score
13,482
An excellent and sound analysis and undoubtedly in close alignment with truth even if he did somehow succumb to her sexual advances on June 4. Sex itself is a primal motivator in its own right and while Travis' hard-won and bitter insight would have been a powerful attenuator in Travis to those motivations towards Arias, its influence cannot be completely disregarded.

I would challenge your analysis in one regard, and that is the absence of evidence of intimacy in the June 4 photos. That was never a necessary element in their relations, regardless of Travis' likely early and naive beliefs. Intimacy + Arias = Oxymoron.


Steve, I spent the time to write all that as context for June 4th. I'm not going to hunt and gather the text and call record to post yet again, but the FULL record makes clear he'd broken the pattern of anger-guilt-apology. He didn't apologize. There's no evidence he felt guilty and no reason to think he did. I don't think he was vulnerable to her on that score on June 4th.

IMO it's plenty obvious from plenty of sources that she didn't feel confident he'd allow her in the door when she showed up, unannounced. I think that may well be why she stole and brought a gun- that she anticipated she might have to use force from the get-go.

He didn't know she was coming. He didn't wait up for her. They didn't sit and watch videos together then skip up the stairs to snuggle up and go to sleep together. The evidence is actually pretty clear on those points too.

(breaking this up, next post)
 

Steve44

Active Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2014
Messages
1,470
Reaction score
11
Steve, I spent the time to write all that as context for June 4th. I'm not going to hunt and gather the text and call record to post yet again, but the FULL record makes clear he'd broken the pattern of anger-guilt-apology. He didn't apologize. There's no evidence he felt guilty and no reason to think he did. I don't think he was vulnerable to her on that score on June 4th.

IMO it's plenty obvious from plenty of sources that she didn't feel confident he'd allow her in the door when she showed up, unannounced. I think that may well be why she stole and brought a gun- that she anticipated she might have to use force from the get-go.

He didn't know she was coming. He didn't wait up for her. They didn't sit and watch videos together then skip up the stairs to snuggle up and go to sleep together. The evidence is actually pretty clear on those points too.

(breaking this up, next post)

I never thought he knew she was coming. I've always assumed, for some reason, that the element of surprise was an integral part of her plan from the beginning, even though I also assume she was confident in her ability to manipulate him once in his physical presence.

I believe she wanted to be 'intimate' with him (cough) that day because she wanted to be sure she was the last one. That was her way of owning Travis for all time in her mind, if you will, and thus was an integral part of the plan.

I think manipulation by guilt is a strong possibility, but regardless, manipulation it was, and 'it' succeeded, whatever the mechanism, as was reflected by the physical evidence.

There's also the fact that planting the pictures for any other reason, for any reason at all, directly contradicts her desire not to be seen anywhere near him that day, or to think they appeared by accident through memory card swapping and just happened to fit falsely yet perfectly into what actually happened that day is just a rabbit hole.
 

Hope4More

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2011
Messages
13,102
Reaction score
13,482
We don't know when she surprised him in his own house. Even if one accepts the photos were taken that day and that the timestamps on the photos are accurate, there is no way of knowing what happened before approximately 1pm on June 4.

What makes no psychological or logical sense to me, given what I laid out above, is that Travis would have felt anything other than fear when she did surprise him. He thought she was 1,000 miles away and that he'd regained control over his life. He had expressed fear that she might kill him, and said he was scared of her. He's been told by every friend he'd confided in about her that she was mentally ill, "sick," "scary." And there she was.


Do I think he was "raped"' in some stereotypical way, as in she pointed the gun at him and forced him to have sex? No. But I think if they did have sex it was coerced. As in, she made it clear she wanted to have sex with him and he was AFRAID not to. He'd witnessed first hand, repeatedly, how unbalanced she became at the slightest rejection by him, and IMO he wasn't going to take the chance, because he was exceedingly aware she was in fact, sick, not to be trusted, a liar to the core, not who she said she was, someone who he knew had never acted out of love towards him, but out of hate, and who used sex for her own purposes that had nothing to do with him.
 

Steve44

Active Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2014
Messages
1,470
Reaction score
11
Steve, I spent the time to write all that as context for June 4th. I'm not going to hunt and gather the text and call record to post yet again, but the FULL record makes clear he'd broken the pattern of anger-guilt-apology. He didn't apologize. There's no evidence he felt guilty and no reason to think he did. I don't think he was vulnerable to her on that score on June 4th.

IMO it's plenty obvious from plenty of sources that she didn't feel confident he'd allow her in the door when she showed up, unannounced. I think that may well be why she stole and brought a gun- that she anticipated she might have to use force from the get-go.

He didn't know she was coming. He didn't wait up for her. They didn't sit and watch videos together then skip up the stairs to snuggle up and go to sleep together. The evidence is actually pretty clear on those points too.

(breaking this up, next post)

I have no doubt he broke the pattern, but whether or not he could be reeled back in is the question we should be asking. I maintain that his guilt was at too deep a level to excise completely in the time given.

He may have broken the pattern, but the very nature of patterns of behavior are to persist in spite of repeated efforts to change them. Momentary success is far more common than permanent change, so I think she still had a few tricks up her sleeve to invoke them into action regarding Travis.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top