State rests rebuttal case- thread #166

[ElleElle]

ITA and BBM~ I wondered why they never had a lawyer working for PPL and all.

Also, if CH was the the executor of Travis' will, was he the beneficiary of insurance policies?

Just throwing it out, because some of us look deeper into the surface.

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.

 

[G&AMom]

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.

Oh, I agree. Three gas cans is ridiculous. It still would have been a better story.

 

[indicat]

You both raise some valid points to consider. Especially the friendship loyalties and Nurmi's influence.

Don't eat crow, they bring up valid points but so did you.

 

[Mare10]

I can remember how so many loved Judge Belvin Perry. How nice he was to the jury, remember the desert lady and making sure that whole horrid group were well taken care of? I never liked him. As it ends up.......

I have felt that JSS has been way too lenient with the defense. Giving into all their whims, I know she does't want to leave anything for appeal, yeah yeah. But, there is such a thing as giving in too much. A very subtle example is, how is it OK for JA family and friends to wear ribbons for DV and it's no OK for TA family and friends to wear ribbons for him? To me that speaks volumes and very unfair. An extreme example is allowing a new surrebuttle witness.

She has allowed JA to take pills in court, she has allowed for so very much. Almost bending backwards (sorry JA, I know, only you can do that) to appease every DT whim.

I suspect another sleepless night for me.

 

[FrayedKnot]

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.

But I haven't seen anything mean posted here about them.

Most of the questioning posts are regarding why Sky would agree that Travis has issues just because an unscrupulous defense attorney said so.

My honest feeling about them is that they had a financial interest in Travis and the "friendship" was secondary. And Sky feared that if there was something unsavory about to be revealed about TA, she was gonna cut and run in order to preserve their business and income.


Again, not picking on anyone or being mean, this is just how I see it. Especially in the wake of testimony from people who, IMO, really truly LOVED Travis. Like Deanna or Lisa. . I will bet my salted caramels that Deanna would have told Nurmi where to shove it and how hard.

 

[MidwestMama]

To be fair, Matt also is not testifying before the jury and also testified in court outside the jury's presence like Hughes did. There has been much discussion of Matt's credibility. I can't really see much difference between the two other than which side they're perceived to be on. jmo

IMO Matt's credibility only became an issue when he stated to the prosecution that he would lie for Jodi.

 

[Linda7NJ]

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.

Casey.... IMO that was the jurors fault. The prosecution proved their case. They lost sight of the ball.

They had zero common sense, logic ....and reasoning flew out the window. It wasn't the first time, nor will it be the last.

IMO the number of stupid is growing daily in society.

Public school imo is actually counterproductive for children to learn how to think! As a result...Expect more screwed up verdicts.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[G&AMom]

Only, Sky said she had a bad feeling about Jodi and she ordered her out of her home. Not exactly naive. She had Jodi's number down pat. Sky knew EXACTLY the evil mess that Jodi is. Which is why it's weird that she would take Nurmi's bait on the pedo BS.

IIRC, she was on Jodi's side when they were first dating. It wasn't until later that she realized Jodi was an incredible liar, among other things.

 

[Anadarko]

To be fair, Matt also is not testifying before the jury and also testified in court outside the jury's presence like Hughes did. There has been much discussion of Matt's credibility. I can't really see much difference between the two other than which side they're perceived to be on. jmo

I missed Matt testifying in any way. Can you tell me where to find that?

TIA

 

[Karmady]

IMO Matt's credibility only became an issue when he stated to the prosecution that he would lie for Jodi.

Serious question...how do we know that again?

 

[katiedid2]

I have no problems with the Hughes! I think they were deceived by Jodie. I wouldn't want to be in their shoes! I'm sure the loss of Travis has affected them deeply. I know they are helping raise funds for the Alexander siblings.
I think that is awesome.

 

[Zuri]

IMO we need to lay off the Hughes. They are living with the What Ifs. They are NOT on trial. Poster Michael James asked us to lay off. If he is a friend of the Hughes, then he is probably a friend of the Alexander Family. Can we move on and perhaps just send Tricia questions we would like answered by Chris?

 

[lil_buddy]

I don't want to get into my personal life so all I'm going to say is this...

I have seen with my own two eyes very intelligent people accept as true things coming from the mouths of known liars, even tho they know in the past that same liar has targeted the listener.

It is VERY hard to confront someone who you do not entirely believe.
It is difficult to question someone's veracity when you cannot see what their motive for lying is OR you think the consequences for getting caught in the lie are too great a risk.

KWIM?

 

[sammijo]

Offensive to who?

I should have clarified. I was thinking in football terms, that kind of offensive.

 

[Karmady]

I missed Matt testifying in any way. Can you tell me where to find that?

TIA

According to Shana Hogan (iirc), Matt testified a long time ago in a hearing about the pedo letters. I don't know anything about it other than what I've heard here. I haven't seen a transcript or anything and don't know if there even is one or if it was sealed.

 

[ElleElle]

BBM~ A very good possibility.

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.

 

[MidwestMama]

ITA and BBM~ I wondered why they never had a lawyer working for PPL and all.

Also, if CH was the the executor of Travis' will, was he the beneficiary of insurance policies?

Just throwing it out, because some of us look deeper into the surface.

The executor is someone you trust to see your will carried out and all legalities regarding the will to be followed. It shows how much Travis trusted CH if he was the executor of Travis' will. (I haven't seen that so I am saying "if" because I don't know if he was).

I don't know if he was a beneficiary of the will but it wouldn't matter to me one way or the other. As executor he must carry out the will as the will instructs, whether he is a beneficiary or not.

 

[Linda7NJ]

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!!!!

Awww thanks

I would think that news, even coming from Nurmi would unnerve anyone with young children.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[G&AMom]

He mentions everyone. Her family, friends, everyone. Who of those people would be affected by her actions/words?

This is what has gotten me from the beginning. He says he will tell her family. I can think of all kinds of things that he could tell his friends. For example, I can imagine someone spreading a rumor about me on Websleuths that would make you guys really dislike me. But my family? They'd just ignore the whole thing. I keep thinking whatever it is can be found in the many emails and texts we haven't seen, and maybe when the trial is over they'll be released.

 

[dhunter]

Only, Sky said she had a bad feeling about Jodi and she ordered her out of her home. Not exactly naive. She had Jodi's number down pat. Sky knew EXACTLY the evil mess that Jodi is. Which is why it's weird that she would take Nurmi's bait on the pedo BS.

Nurmi was an authority figure and a man and someone supposedly versed in ethics and all that is good and proper. Any well indoctrinated churchy girl knows to yields to such 'persons'. Critical thinking? Questioning? Well, maybe, after you discuss it with your husband or father or priest and receive divine guidance.:therethere: