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

[Sneakers the Wonder Dog]

Jodi Arias Trial: How “Expert” Was Dr. Samuels’ Expert Testimony?

As the defense attorney led him through his testimony, she inadvertently asked a question the answer to which he should have known. He did not know the answer to her question. It’s not so much the fact that he did not know the answer that is telling but it is much more, how he answered the question. When the defense attorney asked him how long these people were immersed in the water, he answered “oh that was in the details of the study and I didn’t read the details.” He didn’t read the details? Isn’t that like saying “I didn’t read the study.” Or perhaps it’s more like saying “I just skimmed it.”

http://kristinarandle.com/blog/category/jodi-arias/


Good read.

[poppym]

Indeed.

I know a sociopath who committed a terrible violent crime. Years later, when it was mentioned (it usually never was), the sociopath had just put it out of their mind. Totally. And not in an "I was in a fog" way, or an "I was traumatized" way. They just put it out of their mind because it did not matter to them, at ALL. It was completely unimportant. (No conscience)

When it was mentioned, the sociopath instantly remembered (Oh yeah, that's right, I had forgotten all about that!). It did not stay anywhere in their mind during those years because they had no conscience at all.

So Stabby was able to do this because it doesn't (and won't ever) haunt her... what she did to Travis. She is annoyed at being caught, but she does not feel any guilt or remorse. People who feel no guilt or remorse have few limits on what they are willing to do to get what they want.

Thanks Brillig! Tis probably why she said to Det. Flores "I needed to move on". Brutally murdering someone, is one way of solving a problem, and moving on! Hence the concern with trivia (make-up etc) while being charged with 1st degree!

[poppym]

Jodi Arias Trial: How “Expert” Was Dr. Samuels’ Expert Testimony?

As the defense attorney led him through his testimony, she inadvertently asked a question the answer to which he should have known. He did not know the answer to her question. It’s not so much the fact that he did not know the answer that is telling but it is much more, how he answered the question. When the defense attorney asked him how long these people were immersed in the water, he answered “oh that was in the details of the study and I didn’t read the details.” He didn’t read the details? Isn’t that like saying “I didn’t read the study.” Or perhaps it’s more like saying “I just skimmed it.”

http://kristinarandle.com/blog/category/jodi-arias/


Good read.

Good Catch! Plus, with Transient Global Amnesia, it is not that you cannot remember the event, while experiencing TGA, it is that you cannot remember anything before the event! i.e. who you are, where you are, etc; IMO he used the wrong kind of amnesia to explain her memory loss.

[Kdon]

Thank you.... And my empathies are with you. I know u truly know where I'm coming from. That's why I think her diagnosis is bogus. She caused the event. Like someone on HLN said its like someone killing their parents and then saying "feel sorry for me... I'm an orphan"

[Brillig]

Thanks Brillig! Tis probably why she said to Det. Flores "I needed to move on". Brutally murdering someone, is one way of solving a problem, and moving on! Hence the concern with trivia (make-up etc) while being charged with 1st degree!

Yes, that probably is why.

There are significant similarities between the Arias case and the sociopath I know and am referring to. In both cases, the "significant other" either had left them or was planning to leave them. In the case I am personally familiar with, the scorned party decided that if they would rather kill the person than let them get away with leaving.

[acertaingirl]

Just an out there thought, wonder if she did headstand to make face go red for when Detective Flores came back in, she may have thought if my face is red they would think Iv'e been crying? Just a thought.

My thoughts on that whole performance are that she was a)head standing to de stress and b) bring color to her cheeks for her mugshot. She also did the hair flip, so her hair would be nice and fluffy. It's all about Jodi you know. Too bad she couldn't wash her dirty feet.

[Sneakers the Wonder Dog]

Good Catch! Plus, with Transient Global Amnesia, it is not that you cannot remember the event, while experiencing TGA, it is that you cannot remember anything before the event! i.e. who you are, where you are, etc; IMO he used the wrong kind of amnesia to explain her memory loss.

That's actually a pretty good link. I'm now reading all of the other posts.

Also relistening to Stabby's Police Phone Interviews June 10, 21 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NmXxc...ature=youtu.be Listen to her change her story about when she last accessed TA's gmail and facebook/myspace accounts when Flores says they are going to subpoena the records and they will be able to see where they were accessed from.

She also starts dropping hints about TA's "mean" emails to her to excuse her own stalking behavior .

It's interesting to go back and listen to these calls/interviews again since she's testified.

[luvit]

If you want to pay minimum of $1000 for a JA Lucille Ball piece of art work there is one for sale... Fuk what a joke.

Fox 10 have had an thing on her artwork as well
http://gretawire.foxnewsinsider.com/...-do-you-think/


Also found this e bay user but they have nothing for sale.
http://myworld.ebay.com/artbyarias

[coconut]

True. And I hope that turns out to be the nail in her coffin.

(I meant that after her lengthy explanation about wanting gas cans to save money because she is so frugal, she bought CA gas before driving into AZ where it was 30 cents per gallon cheaper.)

Let's assume a few things:

1. She had three gas cans.
2. She lied about having the third can.
3. All three purchases in Salt Lake City were for gas.
4. She did not return the third gas can.
5. She lied about returning the third can.
6. All of this has been or will be proven in open court.

Do any of those things prove premeditation beyond a reasonable doubt? No. They strongly suggest planning a crime but I would consider it circumstantial evidence. Her explanations are not credible but you can't send someone to death row for lying about a gas can. It proves she is lying but she lies about everything all the time. Do you see what I'm getting at?

Having three gas cans could just as easily mean she was planning a long trip to go see Travis (not to kill him, just to see him). 2 or 3 cans who cares? It is suspicous but not conclusive. We need a real smoking gun. Like a burnt up gas can with some Travis DNA and a Starbucks cup with Strawberry residue.

[Doll-Face]

Let's assume a few things:

1. She had three gas cans.
2. She lied about having the third can.
3. All three purchases in Salt Lake City were for gas.
4. She did not return the third gas can.
5. She lied about returning the third can.
6. All of this has been or will be proven in open court.

Do any of those things prove premeditation beyond a reasonable doubt? No. They strongly suggest planning a crime but I would consider it circumstantial evidence. Her explanations are not credible but you can't send someone to death row for lying about a gas can. It proves she is lying but she lies about everything all the time. Do you see what I'm getting at?

Having three gas cans could just as easily mean she was planning a long trip to go see Travis (not to kill him, just to see him). 2 or 3 cans who cares? It is suspicous but not conclusive. We need a real smoking gun. Like a burnt up gas can with some Travis DNA and a Starbucks cup with Strawberry residue.

The jury is NOT, and let me repeat, is NOT determining LWOP or DP at this time. They are only determining guilt or innocence and to what degree. The determination of whether or not she gets LWOP or DP is at a second part of this bifurcated trial. We don't need to worry about that yet...and other evidence will be submitted at that time...like viciousness of crime, remorse, her actions leading up to the crime (perhaps) and her actions afterward. I'm sure there will be victim statements from the family. That's what will determine if she gets DP or LWOP...not whether or not she bought 3 gas cans. Those 3 gas cans will be considered in totality with all the other evidence presented in this case to determine if she's guilty or not of 1st Degree Murder...premeditated or felony.

[Poppycock]

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/DaqoF6y5boE" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Have you guys discussed this already?? Have I missed it? Tis possible cos I haven't been on since last night. THIS IS MORE NEW FOOTAGE FROM FOX

OF INTERROGATION TAPE (IN ADDITION TO THE RELEASE ON FRIDAY 15TH MARCH) where Jodi asks Detective Flores if she can put her make-up on

before mugshot. Plus she sings more of the Dido song.

I posted 2 plus hours ago! Can someone just say if y'all talked about it, or is it "knifes, knifes, knifes", already!

I am not sure, but this link has even more footage of the crazed hodi. I wondered how long the headstand lasted. She sings more of the Dido lyrics here. That song itself is incriminating in relation to her actions and the Dido video.

Thanks across the pond!

[poppym]

Yes, that probably is why.

There are significant similarities between the Arias case and the sociopath I know and am referring to. In both cases, the "significant other" either had left them or was planning to leave them. In the case I am personally familiar with, the scorned party decided that if they would rather kill the person than let them get away with leaving.

It is THE ultimate act of ego preservation! If the sociopath identifies completely with the 'ego', then the abhorrent act of killing the 'significant other' will be viewed as 'self preservation' - i.e., 'self defense'!

[Doll-Face]

That's actually a pretty good link. I'm now reading all of the other posts.

Also relistening to Stabby's Police Phone Interviews June 10, 21 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NmXxc...ature=youtu.be Listen to her change her story about when she last accessed TA's gmail and facebook/myspace accounts when Flores says they are going to subpoena the records and they will be able to see where they were accessed from.

She also starts dropping hints about TA's "mean" emails to her to excuse her own stalking behavior .

It's interesting to go back and listen to these calls/interviews again since she's testified.

Thank you for re-posting this link to her telephone interviews with Flores. I am going to try to listen to them first thing in the morning.
P.S. I would love to give you a rep (herp as they call it), but I have to spread some reputation around first. :)

[Rockabillychick]

I don't know if this has been posted before or if any of you have read this. This is an article about one of JM's cases. It was a really good read. If you aren't interested in the whole article page 7 has the closing that JM used.
http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/1999-.../wake-up-call/

[*crickets*]

So, are you all looking forward to hearing more of Dr. Douchebag's testimony about the trauma suffered by murderers tomorrow, how the more violent the crime the more traumatized they are? No? Me neither...I am much more interested in the trauma suffered by THE VICTIMS AND THEIR LOVED ONES, Dr. D.B.

Also, will someone explain to me how whether our little murderess has amnesia or not (NOT) or PTSD (NOT) has ANY RELEVANCE WHATSOEVER to whether she is guilty of premeditated murder?

And yes, I'm just a little cranky tonight...

[coconut]

The jury is NOT, and let me repeat, is NOT determining LWOP or DP at this time. They are only determining guilt or innocence and to what degree.

As you said, talking about premeditation is very important at this time... so let's get on with it :)

[AnnieBelle]

Well its definitely a mattress and its definitely Travis's house...could be that the headboard/footboard isnt showing because of the angle of the pic and I dont remember seeing any other close up pic that would show the mattress, hence it could have the plastic guards on it.....and if its not blood...wonder what it is....I thought it might be blood....maybe JA inadvertently got it there when taking things to launder or changing out of her bloody clothes...something to that effect

So, are you all looking forward to hearing more of Dr. Douchebag's testimony about the trauma suffered by murderers tomorrow, how the more violent the crime the more traumatized they are? No? Me neither...I am much more interested in the trauma suffered by THE VICTIMS AND THEIR LOVED ONES, Dr. D.B.

Also, will someone explain to me how whether our little murderess has amnesia or not (NOT) or PTSD (NOT) has ANY RELEVANCE WHATSOEVER to whether she is guilty of premeditated murder?

And yes, I'm just a little cranky tonight...

It HAS no relevance. They are grasping at straws with her defense....and the whole PTSD is part of attempting to blame the victim for his own murder. "This wouldn't have happened if Travis hadn't abuuuuuuuuuuused me so much!" And, we all know that is a crock of poo poo.

[Kdon]

[QUOTE=jingles;

I know how you feel, truly, as I too lost my brother to suicide 6 years ago

(((HUGS)))
Sandra~[/QUOTE]

I too am truly sorry for your loss I can honestly say I know how you feel. Your post was very emotional to read. Obviously you can also see how her PTSD or "amnesia" is a crock

[Kdon]

Can someone please help me out?
If I just hit reply to a post does it notify that person because otherwise the post just goes to the very end of the discussion and doesn't make sense. Also why when I hit "reply with quote" does it not go blue and pretty like everyone else on here?

[AnnieBelle]

Let's assume a few things:

1. She had three gas cans.
2. She lied about having the third can.
3. All three purchases in Salt Lake City were for gas.
4. She did not return the third gas can.
5. She lied about returning the third can.
6. All of this has been or will be proven in open court.

Do any of those things prove premeditation beyond a reasonable doubt? No. They strongly suggest planning a crime but I would consider it circumstantial evidence. Her explanations are not credible but you can't send someone to death row for lying about a gas can. It proves she is lying but she lies about everything all the time. Do you see what I'm getting at?

Having three gas cans could just as easily mean she was planning a long trip to go see Travis (not to kill him, just to see him). 2 or 3 cans who cares? It is suspicous but not conclusive. We need a real smoking gun. Like a burnt up gas can with some Travis DNA and a Starbucks cup with Strawberry residue.

Did you miss the part where she admits (and evidence supports) that she murdered him in a most viscious and cruel manner? THAT, along with the rest of the evidence, IS the smoking gun, and it's pointing right at Jodi. No one is sending her to death row in this trial.......that is the penalty phase. First degree murder has been absolutely proven beyond any doubt, to me.

[ImBatman!]

Took days, but I read all of your posts. Love the name "Stabby". Early in trial HLN Talking Head said this juristiction is very conservative. I am certain at least 1 of the "conservatives" on jury watches FOX. The video Miss Thing's antics in Interrogation room was re-played over and over. I can't see all 18 refraining from TV. Sure they take oath seriously, but how can they miss it??? Amazing that a trial this long has had no juror dropouts. They are all invested, and some of them must be feeling just like us. Just hope they don't deliberate forever and debate evidence/theories like we do or we are in for a long Verdict Watch. Juan should lead them in right direction in his closing. Go Juan! Can't wait for rebuttal.

Congratulations! And thank you for taking all that time!!! I have read the entire thread and still do not miss pages even though Ive been gone for days! It helps so you are not asking the same questions that have already been "asked and answered" haha!! and welcome!

[denn]

Let's assume a few things:

1. She had three gas cans.
2. She lied about having the third can.
3. All three purchases in Salt Lake City were for gas.
4. She did not return the third gas can.
5. She lied about returning the third can.
6. All of this has been or will be proven in open court.

Do any of those things prove premeditation beyond a reasonable doubt? No. They strongly suggest planning a crime but I would consider it circumstantial evidence. Her explanations are not credible but you can't send someone to death row for lying about a gas can. It proves she is lying but she lies about everything all the time. Do you see what I'm getting at?

Having three gas cans could just as easily mean she was planning a long trip to go see Travis (not to kill him, just to see him). 2 or 3 cans who cares? It is suspicous but not conclusive. We need a real smoking gun. Like a burnt up gas can with some Travis DNA and a Starbucks cup with Strawberry residue.

Yes,I do see what you are getting at with the points you made. She was friggin smart to throw the gun away. If that were only found, pre-meditation for certain. The point it, she was still lying to the jurors. I think JM was hammering that home.

I don't know where pre-meditation can be based upon circumstantial evidence. There are so many things to tie her to pre-meditation, other than gas cans. Turning cell off, changing her hair color, the phone calls to him knowing he was not alive.

It only takes one juror to take her side.

[denn]

Did you miss the part where she admits (and evidence supports) that she murdered him in a most viscious and cruel manner? THAT, along with the rest of the evidence, IS the smoking gun, and it's pointing right at Jodi. No one is sending her to death row in this trial.......that is the penalty phase. First degree murder has been absolutely proven beyond any doubt, to me.

AnnieBelle - when does the penalty face take place? I am sure that the judge will allow victim impact statements, along w her family. Then what? The jurors determine death, or the judge?

[denn]

[QUOTING DENN: She had it with her. Possibly in her back pack. I do not believe she ran around looking for one, based on those last two camera pics. Those last two photos pretty much ties her to knife and gun with her in bathroom.]

I totally can see the backpack being a strong possibility. But, if it were in the bathroom or closeby for quick and easy access it seems like it would had some blood on it somewhere even if it were the tiniest speck.

The backback was never found! AND, remember the car rental agent said the back seat and front seat had stains..

[*crickets*]

k

Yes,I do see what you are getting at with the points you made. She was friggin smart to throw the gun away. If that were only found, pre-meditation for certain. The point it, she was still lying to the jurors. I think JM was hammering that home.

I don't know where pre-meditation can be based upon circumstantial evidence. There are so many things to tie her to pre-meditation, other than gas cans. Turning cell off, changing her hair color, the phone calls to him knowing he was not alive.

It only takes one juror to take her side.

Things she did to cover up, after the murder have nothing to do with premeditation to commit the murder.