State rests rebuttal case- thread #166

[travelgal]

Hi Everyone. I have just been lurking the past few days as we await the big finale to this trial. I just got back from a dr's appt, and grocery shopping. It is 85 degrees here in NE KS and I was buying like a storm is coming. The checker asked if I have a big event coming and I said "yes"! I'm already to get back to trial! I now know I am a very addictive person -OJ Trial, CA Trial, JA Trial & M&M's!!

 

[Schuby]

Then possibly the pre-trial hearings need to have new "guidelines"? I don't know what the correct terminology would be.

And you're absolutely right, it is solely a desire on my part to see people like Jodi Arias denied the chance to slander everyone she "feels" like, just to save her own life, after she so cruelly and viciously took someone else's.

I have no idea what the proper solution is. I do think it needs to be considered and looked into by people who understand the law, to see if there is anything that can be done. Maybe there isn't... :/

Unfortunately, the truth is that this issue has gravitas only within the context of an extremely publicized trial. In 99.99% of trials any allegations raised by the defendant aren't presented for mass public consumption. Shall we change all of trial law in consideration of the .01%?

 

[AZWatcher]

Is it just me or does Nurmi seem as weee bit on the sleazy side?

Which signals the time after which I can no longer safely answer questions like this ... Thank you for playing.:silenced:

 

[Truth Detector]

I feel you, I do. But the truth is this would have been a very different trial were the DP element gone. It's just a stretch for me to believe the whole system needs overhauling over one lying bimbo. Yes, she's insufferable, but let's not let her become something bigger than she actually is.

No worries there. JSKS is irritatingly 'small'.

Small enough to march to the DT's tune while standing up to no one.

I can't remember when I've ever heard so much twisted hearsay foisted as fact in a court of law.

 

[Linda7NJ]

That is exactly how I feel FrayedKnot, and I have been hesitant to post about it today. So I thank you for putting it into words for me! The breaking point for me was Skye's willingness to believe Nurmi, that was it, I don't want a friend that would even consider the possibility that I could do something like that. I have seen comments that Nurmi was an authority figure or an officer of the court, that doesn't explain it for me, nope, it doesn't. That officer of the court is DEFENDING the woman that brutally killed my good friend. Nope, never gonna believe a word that guy says, wouldn't even talk to him unless I was ordered too. But I guess that's just me. As for the other emails.... CH said that he went on to say in those emails that saying abuse was being harsh. I can't believe that not once did Juan bring that up? I find that hard to believe too. JMO

All just my opinion, and I apologize if it offends anyone. But this is a forum, to discuss things, and unfortunately for the Hughes', their words were used in this trial an awful lot.

Sorry still have to strongly disagree!

I'm erring on the side of caution when it comes to my kid. An accused pedophile isn't getting anywhere near mine. Period.

I realize Travis was dead at the time...

But I would bet my last dollar Sky thought back to all the times Travis stayed overnight, was he ever alone with the kids, omg omg omg!!!

That's how my mind would race.

And I would be beyond furious upon learning Nurmi lied about such a thing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Sulamith]

Apparently, it is big mystery as to what lead up to Travis getting so mad in the May25 texts.

I think it has to do with sex recording. moo


"@findthebrad really. No one knows. I've read ALL of his emails & chats with JA. Can't tell what fight was over. Big mystery"

I might be reading the Twitter wrong, but is CH saying he has read ALL of TA's emails and chats? If so, how did he get them? They have not been released to the public yet as far as I know. I do remember that Sky had some of TA's journals and wondered how she got them. But a PP said that CH was the executor of TA's will so maybe that is how SK got them.

I feel rather nosey wondering about all this but then again, it was TA's friends who went on TV to talk about what they know and now I am curious.

 

[Linda7NJ]

I'm so jealous. It's STILL snowing here :facepalm:

Wow! I'm jealous! Where are you? I love snow!!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Schuby]

The battle will begin in 15 hours.

"The battle begins.." Reminded me of this (which I find hilarious):

[ame="http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=UCcskKfG0OM"]Cat vs. Chihuahua - YouTube[/ame]

 

[kscornfed]

Another example of how poorly Jodi lies. She could have said, hey, I'm an airhead, sometimes I forget to buy gas, I've run out of gas before, so I try and remember to carry extra gas just in case. It would have made her look kind of stupid, but it would have been a whole lot more believable. And then it wouldn't matter how much the gas cost. But I guess that wasn't in whatever TV episode she was copying.

Yeah. But an airhead carries one can of gas----not 3. The 2 cans of gas were suspicious, but apparently Darryl had told the police about the gas cans so she couldn't lie about those. The 3rd was absolutely crazy and she knew it, so she just lied about it, like everything else.

 

[Zuri]

Closed hearing was about whether Juan could bring in a witness AFTER Nurmi's surrebuttal witness. Assume happy faces means the answer was YES

Or that their surrebuttal witness cannot rebut Dr. Horn's testimony. I think JM additional witness move was perfect. I think the judge has had enough. This will be never ending if this Dr. Gefner is allowed to rebut the ME and so on and so on. JMO

 

[Numbers]

Is it just me or does Nurmi seem as weee bit on the sleazy side?

It's just you. The rest of us think he's waaaaaaaay over the line.

 

[missy1974]

And they were told they had been verified by the handwritting experts. I bet nobody is as sorry as they are about this.

But again, they were told that by the guy DEFENDING the woman that brutally killed him. At what point do they question his word before responding with 'I knew Travis had issues but...' and 'what ages did he like'? (not sure if those were the exact words but they were similar)

 

[dhunter]

Sunny-

Thank you for reposting Michael James' post.

He is entitled to his opinion regarding the Hugheses, and other people who post respectfully are entitled to theirs.

To MJ:

I understand that the Hugheses may have friends and family members who read here. But the same might be said of Judge Stephens, or ALV, Nurmi, Willmott or the mitigation specialist. And yet we make fat jokes, play fashion police, criticize Her Honor's ineptness, I mean C'MON!

Why is is fair game on those people but the Hugheses should be tiptoed about? They have made public statements to CBS and other outlets that have opened them up to conversation. I am one of those folks who can say I trust them about as far as I can throw them. As for SH's smirk, would anyone excuse the smirk on a defense witness? NO! It would be a character flaw! But because it's Sky, it's just "nerves"? I don't think so.

Again, all opinions are welcome, but the pendulum swings both ways. The friends and families of ALL folks who have inserted themselves into this case have possibly read here. That's life. I have no wish to hurt anyone, but if the Hugheses are pained by honest, thoughtful opinions about their characters, then perhaps they should refrain from reading anything but fan mail until the case is decided.

Nothing said here has been out of line.

With respect,
-Frayed

Woah,
I think the Hughes, while I don't know them, do deserve some consideration. They aren't just witnesses thinking of self preservation. I never ever had that impression of these people. They are grieving over the unnecessary death of a close friend and, with all due respect, my heart goes out to them and will for their loss.

Again, I hope I am not coming across as snarky but this is my two cents worth.:twocents: To those who make mean comments about them I ask: What if it were your best friend who was violently brutally murdered by his ex? :waitasec:
How would you deal with your loss? :hero:

It is so disturbing, the way we try to excuse the perpetrator and vilify the victim. This case seems to painfully demonstrate our loss of reason and focus on what's really important. A young beloved man was murdered; not by a stranger but by someone he trusted, took places, cared about, helped unconditionally. When we ask why? Try to understand how? I think the words of those involved, like the Arias family and the Hughes, help us to learn and maybe do things hopefully better, more informed, when faced with similar scenarios.

 

[kaydono]

If we could only get the HLN guests without the hosts and their shameless standards of 'professional journalism': Their interruptions, editorializing, changing the subject right when the guest is actually mentioning some key piece of info is enough to make you want to pry your ears out with a rusty butter knife! The HLN hosts rival the Arizona livestream Courtroom sidebars in time wasting video footage. They beat the DT in terms of verbose examples of tedium.

Kick the HLN hosts off of their own show? Works for me. Where do I sign up? : :abduction:

 

[Jill-in-NV]

Sunny-

Thank you for reposting Michael James' post.

He is entitled to his opinion regarding the Hugheses, and other people who post respectfully are entitled to theirs.

To MJ:

I understand that the Hugheses may have friends and family members who read here. But the same might be said of Judge Stephens, or ALV, Nurmi, Willmott or the mitigation specialist. And yet we make fat jokes, play fashion police, criticize Her Honor's ineptness, I mean C'MON!

Why is is fair game on those people but the Hugheses should be tiptoed about? They have made public statements to CBS and other outlets that have opened them up to conversation. I am one of those folks who can say I trust them about as far as I can throw them. As for SH's smirk, would anyone excuse the smirk on a defense witness? NO! It would be a character flaw! But because it's Sky, it's just "nerves"? I don't think so.

Again, all opinions are welcome, but the pendulum swings both ways. The friends and families of ALL folks who have inserted themselves into this case have possibly read here. That's life. I have no wish to hurt anyone, but if the Hugheses are pained by honest, thoughtful opinions about their characters, then perhaps they should refrain from reading anything but fan mail until the case is decided.

Nothing said here has been out of line.

With respect,
-Frayed

Very well stated! It does work both ways, and all opinions are valid even if one disagrees! I completely agree with you, thank you!

 

[JusticeJunkie]

Does anyone know what the pic was that they just showed being passed from Juan to nurmi during court? (on Dr D) tia

 

[sammijo]

I feel you, I do. But the truth is this would have been a very different trial were the DP element gone. It's just a stretch for me to believe the whole system needs overhauling over one lying bimbo. Yes, she's insufferable, but let's not let her become something bigger than she actually is.

But what about Casey Anthony? She did the same thing?

And I can't think of names right now, but there are other cases where the very clearly guilty defendant has used an "offensive defense".

I'm not trying to argue with you just to argue. I would really like to understand. You clearly have a legal framework that I do not. But I used to have respect for the law and courtrooms and judges....and after the trials I've watched I just have a fear of more injustice being done.

Maybe I've just seen too small a picture of the whole system and therefore my "sample size" is too small. Lol!

That's why I appreciate the legal minds on here. They help me understand these things.

 

[G&AMom]

Yes.

And, as per ALV :giggle: Sky said she would not Travis date her sister.

Ah, yes, thank you. There are so many emails and so many stories my brain tends to scramble (where have I heard that? :waitasec

My take on the Hugheses is that they are somewhat naïve. Jodi tells Sky a bunch of stories about Travis and Sky believes them -- until somebody says otherwise. Nurmi spins some tale about the letters and Sky and Chris believe them -- until somebody says otherwise. To a certain extent, it shows how Jodi could have a field day with Travis and his social circle.

 

[Mare10]

Wow the truth lady Judy on Dr. Drew, feels that JSS favors JA over the Prosecution. Now I need to find out what past JM and JSS have. I really don't want to say it, but I have felt this all along. UGH. TV TV TV, it's just TV. Is that the law of attraction?

 

[FrayedKnot]

I learned long ago to never put anything past anyone. You never truly know what goes on behind other people's closed doors. If a person told me my friend wrote it down and it's been authenticated to boot. Id believe it. I have a child to protect and that's my number one priority. I'm the most loyal friend you'll ever find..., but my kid comes first.

I don't fault them for believing it for a second. I lay the blame firmly at Nurmi's feet.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I do see your point, Linda. Nurmi was slimy for presenting false evidence to the Hugheses.

I still cannot see myself suddenly believing such toxic lies about my dear friend for whose safety I had serious concerns, especially if I were so alarmed by his girlfriend that I had ordered her out of my home forever.

I would assume that this was just another of JA's nasty lies, and would scream to the mountain tops that my friend was NOT a pedophile!!!! I am not even TA's friend and I know with every fiber of my being that he was NOT a pedophile.

The Hugheses are not on trial here, nor should they be, but I do think their credibility is relevant.

That said, I think you are one of the smartest and most thoughtful posters on WS. Oh. And funny as H-E-7-7!!!!