excellent observation! she's told so many different stories about cuts and injuries to her fingers, none of which I believe, but this is definitely problematic for her, if the jury catches it. ryan testifying to the cuts/bandages on her fingers definitely establishes the injury, and her having no bandages on her hand(s) during sexy time pics makes it even more compelling that she sustained injuries during the stabbing.
she's already admitted to killing him, which means she's admitted to inflicting all his wounds, and it's extremely common for someone to sustain cuts to their own hands when stabbing someone, so why lie about it now? i understand why she lied in the beginning, since story 1 was "i wasn't there", but now that she's admitted to the stabbing, why lie about cutting your hand? it's just further proof that she continues to lie on the stand.
now that's what i call a win-win situation!
you can also just copypasta the text and add [ quote ] text [ /quote ] (no spaces) around it. if you want to be nice, you can include the persons name too. it won't link back, but at least you won't be randomly responding to thin air. looks like this:
animosity said: y'all's a bunch of red hot cray!
the amazing thing about chit chat is that it's for everything!
their, they're, there, beli... it will be ok.
yes - i don't really understand it - she has a lot of uneccessary lies - the manager of casa ramos wrote on travis fb and said that when jodi cut her finger at work - they did write a report and she was calling mr martinez - she was pissed - so i bet that the cut from work was no where near the time of the murder ans she didn't think they would really keep their reports = which most restuarants in cali do for at least 7 years in case the employee tries to come back and sue for workmans comp![]()
sorry, but same here! i joined the first of the year and have not posted much at all, mostly out of fear of upsetting someone.
in an attempt to keep this on topic, HLN is doing a "what was your pivotal moment" thing, the moment in the trial that changed things for you. i've been thinking about that a lot lately, since certain small things seem to be stuck in my brain, and while they might not be meaningful to anyone else, they really made an impact on the way I viewed this case.
1. When OG testified that JA had taken pictures of him while he slept, without his knowledge.
2. When OG testified that he and JA had anal sex.
3. When OG whispered "Yes" like it was rosebud when he was asked about the gas cans
that was when it became crystal clear in my own mind that this was in fact premeditated murder.
then when JA was testifying about going to Ryan's house immediately after killing TA and talked about going to sleep. going. to. sleep. somehow the idea that she could sleep, let alone in "love sack" with another man, hours after butchering a man she claimed to love, my brain broke, and i went back to those images of her during her first interrogation with Flores, where she did the yoga stretch and then laid her head on the table as if to nap.
what was your game changing moment?
I haven't heard any juror questions that have made me think, 'these jurors are idiots'. Maybe in the beginning but not now. The only question that made me nervous was whether or not Travis was looking at his camera after she ran into the closet. Other than that, their questions seem more scathing than anything else. She's coming off as someone who isn't making any sense, and after having been held hostage for a month on the stand by Nurmi and Jodi, they're just grilling her.
On another note, I just heard the Defense only has two witnesses left. Has anyone heard that too? They would be the therapists? If so, it looks like Matt isn't going to be called.
Also, I just went back and listened to Willmott's opening statement and it sounds almost laughable now.
PLUS! I hear someone whisper "This is a disaster" at 39:06. It kinda sounds like Nurmi. Does anyone else hear this too? I use headphones, so it's loud and clear to me. (day 29- during juror questions- right as the jury is let out for a break)
http://youtu.be/rlXop0KXznE
I wondered about that question, too, but am curious if the juror was just pointing out that Jodi really didn't know what the heck Travis was doing after she dropped his camera. If her story was true at all, in the beginning, he could have just as easily picked it up and been walking very quickly down the hall to the closet door to tell her it wasn't broken, and then saw her at the other end with a gun in her hand. A gun that shouldn't have been there because he wasn't threatening to kill her. This question may just be showing Jodi that her story is ludicrous...as we all know it is...since there's no way in heck she has enough time to do all that stuff anyway (the time stamps on the camera prove otherwise).
It appears that the questions from the jurors and the contradicting answers that JA keeps giving is thread by thread weaving one hellava rope that she is gonna hang from.
My ex-husband had several mental health issues, one of them being compulsive lying. I don't understand it any better now than years ago, when I first realized the extent of it. I also have an acquaintance who has several raging addictions, and he does the same thing. Lying, when there is no apparent reason for it. It seems to become an integrated facet of their very identity, their personality. Telling the truth becomes near to impossible. After a while, it's almost like they begin believing the stories they weave.
I've never really felt that Jodi had a case to begin with, so I don't have a 'game-changer' as such, but I would have to say that what makes me scoff the most at her story are all the Super Secrets that only she, Jodi Arias knows about.
Somehow no one else knew or suspected that Travis was physically abusive. No one else knew that he was sexually abusive. No one else knew about the gun. The only one of her stories that is even slightly, slightly possible is that he was a pedophile, but even that is lost in the way she supposedly found out about it.
The other thing that has struck me is, as I've mentioned before, her demeanor. She does not act like a victim. Oh, she says all the right things, but there is nothing in how she says them that backs up her idea of an abused, damaged woman. Particularly with the cross-examination. If she were so abused, and so terrified of shouting, angry men, she would have cracked, or snapped, and just broken down. Instead, she was defiant, smirking, and in general, being a bit of a bitch to JM. There is nothing to prove that she is an abused woman, aside from her word -- and we all know how much her word is worth.
Agreed. And the Jury has seen that picture and others that we haven't seen from the day the ME testified. I just re-watched that testimony the other day and of course Jodi hides behind her hair curtain the whole time so she doesn't have to face what she did. Either that or she doesn't want the jury to see that she wants to look. I'm not sure.
That day several members of Travis' family had to get up and leave. it was too much![]()
"You are entitled to your own opinions, but you are not entitled to your own facts." D. Moynihan
See my profile page for the location of my "Dear Diary" posts in the Jodi thread. http://mydeathspace.com/vb/member.php?82091-Justice11
Quote[Bermstalker said " The shocking and game changing moment to me-When MDS posted the stab/throat wound pictures on here.Those pictures alone, speaks 1000 x's louder than anybody's voice ever could. They speak louder than any other piece of evidence"]
I gotta say that was what reaaly struck a cord with me. And then realizing that she probably stood over him after she put him in the shower stall that way and rinsed off over him. How damn disconnected would a person have to be to do that?
Thank you for saying this. There is a lot of misdirected hatred toward the Casey Anthony jury because so many people don't understand what you just explained. It's doesn't matter what a juror knows in their heart, or their gut ... it's all about the evidence and the instructions.
Someone expressed concerns earlier about the JA jury getting bogged down with instructions ... but you can't have 12 people with no legal expertise making decisions based on 12 different interpretations of the law. What a mess that would be!
There are currently 69 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 69 guests)