State rests rebuttal case- thread #165

Status
Not open for further replies.
JW would end up pausing alot, and she would lose the jury early imo.

Nurmi is the best one to do it, the lesser of the 2 evils.

I don't know...he's so plodding and slow. He goes over the same points time and time again. There is nothing noteworthy or compelling about his delivery, except for how much Nurmi skeeves me out when he talks about sex. Whoever is up talking or examining, I always think I wish it was the other one. Then, when I hear the other one, I remember how much I dislike them also, but for different reasons. I think it's a toss-up as to whom is more annoying to me. JMO
 
Oh man, please tell me this is NOT true....
The docket says:

4/27/2013 NOT - Notice - Party (001) 4/29/2013
NOTE: NOTICE OF ADDITIONAL TESTIMONY RE: SURREBUTTAL WITNESS


---
That's still just one witness.
 
ITA. I guess the DT has to do anything and everything to make sure there is not an appeal?

4/27/2013 NOT - Notice - Party (001) 4/29/2013
NOTE: NOTICE OF ADDITIONAL TESTIMONY RE: SURREBUTTAL WITNESS

Source: http://www.superiorcourt.maricopa.g...rtCases/caseInfo.asp?caseNumber=CR2008-031021

BBM

This. A billion times this. 24/7 this. The blame for that falls directly on Judge Stephens. Period. The DT had access to Dr. D's findings. They had TWO "expert" witnesses testify. Both tanked. So what? Doesn't remotely justify this circus continuing.

And now, to the surprise of absolutely NO ONE, they have filed a motion to get in more testiphony and time wasting. Shameful, chum bucket dealings here.
 
Oh man, please tell me this is NOT true....

I don't get it. So what if another ME comes in and says shot first. IMO that makes it even worse for JA.

Look at the amount of time between the shower picture and the dragging one. She had a premeditated plan in place and managed to not get beat up in the alleged fight that never happened.

As a juror if I heard more testimony about what came first it would only reinforce her guilt and the fact that she isn't sorry for what she did.

Moo

Sent from my SGH-T679 using Tapatalk 2
 
ALV is something else. Here she's talking about a video she doesn't like

"Alyce LaViolette ‏@AlyceLaViolette 27 Apr Whomever made that video will burn."

Meanwhile, she testified for JA, a psychopathic murderer, who slaughtered her victim, and ALV tried her hardest on the stand to excuse that all away. :stormingmad:

Why is she even watching "parody" videos on Youtube and commenting on them at all? I bet she wonders why people don't find her credible as a professional!
 
It is def possible the DT wants their own ME. :facepalm:

This is a scheme to get more jurors to drop off. We're at 15, we cannot lose anymore.


So, is JSS now going to allow Jodi to have a ME on surrebuttal?
 
She has, the juror starts to deliberate on Friday May 3rd.

Juror instructions are Thursday, then closing arguments are Thursday and Fridy so although the case will probably be handed over to them on Friday, the jury may not get to begin to deliberate til Monday.
 
The docket says:

4/27/2013 NOT - Notice - Party (001) 4/29/2013
NOTE: NOTICE OF ADDITIONAL TESTIMONY RE: SURREBUTTAL WITNESS


---
That's still just one witness.

What does that mean, that the DT wants the Judge to allow that witness to testify more broadly?
 
The docket says:

4/27/2013 NOT - Notice - Party (001) 4/29/2013
NOTE: NOTICE OF ADDITIONAL TESTIMONY RE: SURREBUTTAL WITNESS


---
That's still just one witness.

Wasn't the notice of the doctor for surrebuttal filed days ago?
 
Juror#8 was taken off the jury because he got busted for a DUI.

to catch up on life and be a good wife and mother. There is no way I can catch up.

Anything earth shattering happen this weekend I need to know?
 
What does that mean, that the DT wants the Judge to allow that witness to testify more broadly?

That's how I took it. They want a broader scope, ie crime of passion bs. :facepalm: They know they've got no chance at self-defense, so this is a last ditch effort for the lesser included charge.
 
Wasn't the notice of the doctor for surrebuttal filed days ago?

Yes. They are filing for "additional testimony".

Nhic - Yes I agree esp after JM busted their errr bottoms when they tried to get in those extra slides with RS.
 
Why is she even watching "parody" videos on Youtube and commenting on them at all? I bet she wonders why people don't find her credible as a professional!

BBM

IDK, supposedly someone sent it to her. She found it so offensive that she posted the link on her twitter page. :floorlaugh::scared:
 
I don't think that's ALV real twitter. If it is, she sure has a lot of time on her hands and sure is getting outraged on behalf of Jodi.
 
Kimberlie Ash ‏@Kimmielynn777 47s

#JodiArias Things that ppl NEVER do! 1)Don't call 911 when they find a 3yo floatin n a swimmin pool. 2)Don't call 911 when attactd by ninjas
 
Nurmi is easier on the ears, but the content of his delivery is creepy, yes.


I don't know...he's so plodding and slow. He goes over the same points time and time again. There is nothing noteworthy or compelling about his delivery, except for how much Nurmi skeeves me out when he talks about sex. Whoever is up talking or examining, I always think I wish it was the other one. Then, when I hear the other one, I remember how much I dislike them also, but for different reasons. I think it's a toss-up as to whom is more annoying to me. JMO
 
Look on the bright side! He has enough questionable history that JM will tear his credibility to shreds before that jury.

The jury will know he is the 3rd DT hired gun expert and dismiss his testimony outright. :floorlaugh:

ETA: Because it's a DP case, JSS had to grant the DT a surrebuttal or risk having this case overturned on appeal.


From some of the appeal articles pertaining to this expert I highly doubt that Jodi would have received an appeal based on him bc

a. This expert is unqualified to testify about anything other than DV,
b. There was NO new information that DD testified to,
c. The DT had this expert's opinion for over a year prior to the trial so they
were very aware of what DD's expert opinion was
d. At this point of the trial any testing/questioning/interviewing done would be
so contaminated, adulterated that the experts opinion would be invalidated
e. There is legal documentation of sanctions against this expert regarding his
ethics and credibility

JSS, IMO, clearly had sufficient knowledge to deny this motion.

But, I will enjoy watching JM deal with this expert and JW's reactions!:fence:
 
What an amazing opening statement. I don't need to see the DT opening statement. Once was enough.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
96
Guests online
1,426
Total visitors
1,522

Forum statistics

Threads
589,167
Messages
17,915,092
Members
227,745
Latest member
branditau.wareham72@gmail
Back
Top