Jodi Ann Arias shot and stabbed her ex-boyfriend Travis Alexander to death

[wasthinking]

Yeah, I remember that discussion. It's plausible the shell casing was given a swift kick and landed on the blood. I heard some dude, from one of the clips posted last night, said it is absolutely impossible. Orly? It doesn't have to be smeared in blood to have been kicked and land on the blood. Another possibility is the casing fell in the shower and was tossed out in the 'clean up' for what ever reason.

I think it is irresponsible for the investigators to say it is impossible. There are many instances where science is defied and the public is expected to accept the 'educated guess' of the 'expert.'

ITA, the roommates were in there, the blood would have been dry by then for the most part and the bullet could be kicked. Not a point to draw to much importance on for JM imo.
Bullet in the shower removed by JA. hum, great thought. I get to where I discount so much of what the liar says, but, maybe that is why defiant Jodi kept insisting that isn't where it landed.

[Jinkasaurus]

I'm at the point now where I don't pay any attention to anything she says. I just tune it all out. I don't believe a word that comes out of her mouth anymore. I am sure there are pieces of "truth" sprinkled throughout her various interrogations, testimony on stand,etc,, but I can no longer spend any mental energy on that.

[morbidT]

i agree that it's irresponsible for them to say 'impossible.' i thought the MD did a fairly decent job explaining there were things they couldn't say for sure. i just don't know. the defensive wounds still make me think he was stabbed first.

I think some people have selective hearing, though. They cling to certain information and don't consider ALL the information before they come to their conclusions. This is what scares me with a jury.

See, I think if he was shot first, the gun jammed (or else Jodi probably would have kept shooting), Travis was trying to get his bearings, Jodi got the knife and the struggle ensued. While Jodi was frantically waving the knife around, Travis was frantically waving his hands around and trying to get on his feet.

I think the shot came first, but, it is reasonable to think the stabs came first. However, I do not believe the fatal stab came first based on Travis' position in the last photo of him alive.

[morbidT]

ITA, the roommates were in there, the blood would have been dry by then for the most part and the bullet could be kicked. Not a point to draw to much importance on for JM imo.
Bullet in the shower removed by JA. hum, great thought. I get to where I discount so much of what the liar says, but, maybe that is why defiant Jodi kept insisting that isn't where it landed.

I don't know what ITA means.

Was there blood on the underside of the casing? If there was, the casing would have landed on the blood spot while it was still wet. Which still could have been from a kick.

If there was no blood on the underside, then the casing landed on the blood after it dried. This would mean the casing was given a swift kick hours/days after the attack, period.

Interesting, I didn't realize Jodi has insisted the casing didn't land where it was found. Where is she stating it landed?

[wasthinking]

I loved the part where Willmot was questioning his knowledge of whether or not the bullet actually passed through the brain. He looked ready to blow a gasket! And her questions were silly, really. I was almost embarrassed FOR her, thinking that she really was grasping at some pathetic little straws with that line!

Judges aren't biased and won't usally interfer without an objection, especially on a death case.

Juan got a ton of rephrase, ask a different question on JA. Nurmi did good objecting actually. Many saw Juan arguing needlessly spending too much time. I had to agree sometimes, but, he talks faster, with passion, comes up with some great one liners, so for me it's not comparable to the dreaded Nurmi. He is just so boring! I realize the man has to do a job but lordy zzzzzz. I hate we have to suffer through his crawling drawl yet again.

[NCBlonde]

Is this Travis? I found it in a yahoo search for his wounds, wanting to see the chest wounds again. It looks like his bathroom tile/walls, but I've never seen this picture before.

[AnnieBelle]

Sorry but only human sounds like an excuse, we are talking an expert, not some John Doe. I don't care what we think of JA or this case .. in our system a woman's life hangs in the balance. I expect better from so called experts.
What I heard is doube speak I can never say seq, but he speculates a seq anyway. I don't care how much experience he has, double talk is double talk . I don't care if I hear out Jodi or someone else, I am just saying that is my feelings when I hear it.

I have watched many a trial, and I have listened to many "experts" testifying. I don't see anything that would shake his credibility....in fact, I think he did a wonderful job. Medical examiners use speculation often, as part of their final reports. That is all they can do. They have a dead body to work with. So, they take pictures and measurements of all sorts, do inspections of the body, then begin to disect, organ by organ. They take samples, send them to labs. Then, take all of the data they receive, and try to make sense of what it all means. They are medical detectives, of sorts, trying to determine why this body went from living to being deceased. Often times, a cause cannot even BE determined. ME can disagree on findings. Sometimes, bodies are exhumed to find things that were missed during the first autopsy. It is NOT a perfect science. And he stated, numerous times, that he could only speculate on sequencing, because there was nothing to prove the actual sequence. He was going by what he knows about the 3 specific wounds that were determined to have been sufficient to cause his demise. He testified as to what each one was likely to have done....type and amount of bleeding, how quickly it would cause unconciousness, or death. And he noted that there were many variables to each one. I don't think his testimony could have been any more accurate than what it was. Depending which side was asking the questions, he had to many time answers "yes, that is possible"...and when the other side would ask a question about the same topic, he often said "yes, that is also possible." He wasn't double talking.

[morbidT]

I have watched many a trial, and I have listened to many "experts" testifying. I don't see anything that would shake his credibility....in fact, I think he did a wonderful job. Medical examiners use speculation often, as part of their final reports. That is all they can do. They have a dead body to work with. So, they take pictures and measurements of all sorts, do inspections of the body, then begin to disect, organ by organ. They take samples, send them to labs. Then, take all of the data they receive, and try to make sense of what it all means. They are medical detectives, of sorts, trying to determine why this body went from living to being deceased. Often times, a cause cannot even BE determined. ME can disagree on findings. Sometimes, bodies are exhumed to find things that were missed during the first autopsy. It is NOT a perfect science. And he stated, numerous times, that he could only speculate on sequencing, because there was nothing to prove the actual sequence. He was going by what he knows about the 3 specific wounds that were determined to have been sufficient to cause his demise. He testified as to what each one was likely to have done....type and amount of bleeding, how quickly it would cause unconciousness, or death. And he noted that there were many variables to each one. I don't think his testimony could have been any more accurate than what it was. Depending which side was asking the questions, he had to many time answers "yes, that is possible"...and when the other side would ask a question about the same topic, he often said "yes, that is also possible." He wasn't double talking.

This. Sometimes it comes down to an educated guess based on the information in front of you and past experience.

[beli]

lots of pages to catch up on (aka not read bc there are so many) but has it been determined for sure that user "biggie" is jodi's mom and if it was true that jodi's mom and aunt were sending messages to dimple blossoms or is DB full of shit?

[smashie]

I don't know what ITA means.

Was there blood on the underside of the casing? If there was, the casing would have landed on the blood spot while it was still wet. Which still could have been from a kick.

If there was no blood on the underside, then the casing landed on the blood after it dried. This would mean the casing was given a swift kick hours/days after the attack, period.

Interesting, I didn't realize Jodi has insisted the casing didn't land where it was found. Where is she stating it landed?

It means: I totally agree

[wasthinking]

I don't know what ITA means.

Was there blood on the underside of the casing? If there was, the casing would have landed on the blood spot while it was still wet. Which still could have been from a kick.

If there was no blood on the underside, then the casing landed on the blood after it dried. This would mean the casing was given a swift kick hours/days after the attack, period.

Interesting, I didn't realize Jodi has insisted the casing didn't land where it was found. Where is she stating it landed?

ITA = I totally agree

Interestingly, both sides have steered clear of addressing anything, under of inside of the bullet casing.
Sorry, like I said, I tune her out so much, if she said where, I didn't register it by then. I just remember about 2 -3 times her answering Martinez with no, it didnt' land there. I'll try and find it.

[smashie]

Is this Travis? I found it in a yahoo search for his wounds, wanting to see the chest wounds again. It looks like his bathroom tile/walls, but I've never seen this picture before.

Yes, that's him. That picture is somewhere on this insanely long thread.

[wasthinking]

Is this Travis? I found it in a yahoo search for his wounds, wanting to see the chest wounds again. It looks like his bathroom tile/walls, but I've never seen this picture before.

Yes, that is Travis. It appeared to me to be a pic from when his body was recovered in the house.

WARNING!!!!!!!!!!!!! very graphic pictures !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

http://s1321.beta.photobucket.com/us...74099580819744

[smashie]

lots of pages to catch up on (aka not read bc there are so many) but has it been determined for sure that user "biggie" is jodi's mom and if it was true that jodi's mom and aunt were sending messages to dimple blossoms or is DB full of shit?

None has been determined. I think people have come to their own conclusions.

[NCBlonde]

Was doing a bit of reading on the HLN website and they are saying that Martinez will not be able to re-cross examine Jodi. I wonder why that is, since I believe other witnesses have been in this case. Maybe it's because she's the defendant and not just another witness?

http://www.hlntv.com/article/2013/03...ol?hpt=hln10_1

They do note that jurors will be allowed to ask their questions of Jodi after Nurmi's re-direct is done. Of course now we have the jury question basket where their questions are read in court, but I noticed early on in the trial, that the judge would ask a show of hands for anyone that had a question (the clips I viewed, there were no questions). Any idea why that was changed?

And finally a short bit on the court reporter. http://www.hlntv.com/article/2013/03...er?hpt=hln10_1 I am a fast typist, but 300 words per minute?!

[AnnieBelle]

I, for one, can't WAIT to hear the questions that the Jury has for Jodi. I have a feeling there will be many!

[NCBlonde]

Yes, that is Travis. It appeared to me to be a pic from when his body was recovered in the house.

WARNING!!!!!!!!!!!!! very graphic pictures !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

http://s1321.beta.photobucket.com/us...74099580819744

Ty! I have seen, I think, all the rest of the pictures from the coroner and whatnot, but that one on the blanket in his bathroom was new to me.

[wasthinking]

I have watched many a trial, and I have listened to many "experts" testifying. I don't see anything that would shake his credibility....in fact, I think he did a wonderful job. Medical examiners use speculation often, as part of their final reports. That is all they can do. They have a dead body to work with. So, they take pictures and measurements of all sorts, do inspections of the body, then begin to disect, organ by organ. They take samples, send them to labs. Then, take all of the data they receive, and try to make sense of what it all means. They are medical detectives, of sorts, trying to determine why this body went from living to being deceased. Often times, a cause cannot even BE determined. ME can disagree on findings. Sometimes, bodies are exhumed to find things that were missed during the first autopsy. It is NOT a perfect science. And he stated, numerous times, that he could only speculate on sequencing, because there was nothing to prove the actual sequence. He was going by what he knows about the 3 specific wounds that were determined to have been sufficient to cause his demise. He testified as to what each one was likely to have done....type and amount of bleeding, how quickly it would cause unconciousness, or death. And he noted that there were many variables to each one. I don't think his testimony could have been any more accurate than what it was. Depending which side was asking the questions, he had to many time answers "yes, that is possible"...and when the other side would ask a question about the same topic, he often said "yes, that is also possible." He wasn't double talking.

No offense intend but respectfully, It is a really worn out. I gave my feelings and opinions, sorry differences are appearing to not be respected.
There are 18 people watching, they will be as free as I am to form opinions. I have no doubt some might think like you and some might think like me.

[NCBlonde]

I, for one, can't WAIT to hear the questions that the Jury has for Jodi. I have a feeling there will be many!

I really can't imagine what would be left to ask her, but then, we don't know really know how the jurors are feeling about this case. Certainly, the questions will give us some kind of idea where there heads are at.

I'm anxious for the jury to get their turn, but considering the initial defense presentation of Jodi and how damn long all that bs took, I'm afraid we'll see her on the stand for another week, trying to explain away the damage that Martinez did and the lies he exposed. I for one do not look forward to that at all. I can't really muster up much enthusiasm for the coming week. IF it was to be just trying to explain away all those things, it would probably be one thing, but we all know that the defense can't help but meander all over the place.

Is there a rule about what Nurmi can address now? Will he be forced to stick to just what Martinez has talked about? I was reading earlier in the week about re-direct and re-cross, and in the cases where re-cross was allowed, it was only allowed to focus on things that the defense had brought up in their re-direct and nothing more. I'm guessing that won't apply to the defense and Nurmi can jump around all over the place, bringing up things that are irrelevant (like Starbucks drinks) and tossing out more lies, in an effort to bore us all to sleep.

[morbidT]

lots of pages to catch up on (aka not read bc there are so many) but has it been determined for sure that user "biggie" is jodi's mom and if it was true that jodi's mom and aunt were sending messages to dimple blossoms or is DB full of shit?

DO WHAT?! I don't know anything about this. Please bring it to the Chit Chat thread.

I have noticed DB and that tiffany chick have not posted in several days. However, I did notice DB was online the other night, but she didn't post. And, who is biggie? See me in Chit Chat, puhleeeze.

ITA = I totally agree

Interestingly, both sides have steered clear of addressing anything, under of inside of the bullet casing.
Sorry, like I said, I tune her out so much, if she said where, I didn't register it by then. I just remember about 2 -3 times her answering Martinez with no, it didnt' land there. I'll try and find it.

Oh.

Interesting. It's because it can't be a certainty. I'm not sure it matters what wounds were inflicted first anyway.

[wasthinking]

Ty! I have seen, I think, all the rest of the pictures from the coroner and whatnot, but that one on the blanket in his bathroom was new to me.

You caught the tile faster than I did. When I first saw that pic, I thought it was an autopsy pic, then what caught my eye first was the corner of the shower door, then the tile.
Ever wonder how are these getting out to the public?

[AnnieBelle]

Now that would be one hell of a video wouldn't it!
Insert version 1,2,3 one after the other
Flash story 1 to Flores
Flash, story 2 to Flores
Flash, her story on direct
Flash, her story on cross

Seriously, you could not make up this stuff in your wildest dreams!! She is a unique one, I'll give her that!

[wasthinking]

DO WHAT?! I don't know anything about this. Please bring it to the Chit Chat thread.

I have noticed DB and that tiffany chick have not posted in several days. However, I did notice DB was online the other night, but she didn't post. And, who is biggie? See me in Chit Chat, puhleeeze.



Oh.

Interesting. It's because it can't be a certainty. I'm not sure it matters what wounds were inflicted first anyway.

actually the seq has been the issue of motions and arguments --- attempts to remove the DP cruel factors etc. The result from the court was .. it doesn't matter at all.
The judge in her ruling (denial to the Def) declared it doesnt' matter. The evidence supports he 'suffered' which meets the req of the law.

[AnnieBelle]

DO WHAT?! I don't know anything about this. Please bring it to the Chit Chat thread.

I have noticed DB and that tiffany chick have not posted in several days. However, I did notice DB was online the other night, but she didn't post. And, who is biggie? See me in Chit Chat, puhleeeze.



Oh.

Interesting. It's because it can't be a certainty. I'm not sure it matters what wounds were inflicted first anyway.

DB was chastized, royally, for making comments about Jodi's strange looking female parts....so I am doubtful that she is on team Jodi? I wondered about that odd comment, too.....about the Arias women messaging her here. Hmmmmmmm.

[Crazy Lady]

I have watched many a trial, and I have listened to many "experts" testifying. I don't see anything that would shake his credibility....in fact, I think he did a wonderful job. Medical examiners use speculation often, as part of their final reports. That is all they can do. They have a dead body to work with. So, they take pictures and measurements of all sorts, do inspections of the body, then begin to disect, organ by organ. They take samples, send them to labs. Then, take all of the data they receive, and try to make sense of what it all means. They are medical detectives, of sorts, trying to determine why this body went from living to being deceased. Often times, a cause cannot even BE determined. ME can disagree on findings. Sometimes, bodies are exhumed to find things that were missed during the first autopsy. It is NOT a perfect science. And he stated, numerous times, that he could only speculate on sequencing, because there was nothing to prove the actual sequence. He was going by what he knows about the 3 specific wounds that were determined to have been sufficient to cause his demise. He testified as to what each one was likely to have done....type and amount of bleeding, how quickly it would cause unconciousness, or death. And he noted that there were many variables to each one. I don't think his testimony could have been any more accurate than what it was. Depending which side was asking the questions, he had to many time answers "yes, that is possible"...and when the other side would ask a question about the same topic, he often said "yes, that is also possible." He wasn't double talking.

Exactly. Have you ever seen Henry Lee or Michael Baden testify? Those are two of the most famous Forensic experts in history and they still make mistakes or misspeak. That's what happened to us mere humans.