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

[Brillig]

Also I was reading one of the court documents where the State was arguing about the inadmissability of the forged letters from Travis and it gave some insite as to what was contained in those letters....
1) He had a couple of experiences with young boys
2) he confessed to a bishop...but not HIS bishop
3) he admitted that he had fondled little boys before

How sickening of her!!!

It is sickening. She is SO low. She is revoltingly devious... "confessed to a bishop, but not HIS bishop" (because that would be easy to check out).

When she was coming up with her "story", I think she actually sat and thought "what would make Travis look the worst of all, what would make him the most despicable?"

Cheating on me... a little despicable.
Using me for sex.... a little despicable.
Slightly kinky sex.... a little despicable.
Physically abused me a bit... fairly despicable.
School girl fantasy.... somewhat despicable.
Devout Mormon who is really a molester of six year old boys?!?!.... JACKPOT!!

[JOLfan]

LOL at the autocorrect!

LOL

[Cara]

My toddler : What's funny mommy?

Me: *still dying*

[tiggrrl72077]

Also I was reading one of the court documents where the State was arguing about the inadmissability of the forged letters from Travis and it gave some insite as to what was contained in those letters....
1) He had a couple of experiences with young boys
2) he confessed to a bishop...but not HIS bishop
3) he admitted that he had fondled little boys before

How sickening of her!!!

For the record if this was true which I do not believe it is. and if Travis did in fact confess to A bishop but not his own. That bishop would have told Travis that needs to go to his own bishop. You don't confess to any bishop you want. That's not how it works. You confess to the bishop that is over your ward.

[Morticia]

I understand there is no gun now, but there WAS a gun because Travis ended up with a .25 caliber bullet in his brain/face. It's not hard to establish that the gun existed. We also have the testimony of Jodi saying she shot him.

Interestingly, she claims she used Travis's own gun against him...a gun he supposedly kept loaded on the top shelf of his bedroom closet. Although I don't believe her story of taking Travis's own gun (because I don't believe in the coincidence that her grandparents' owned the same stupid caliber gun and it was stolen the same week), if the jury does believe her story that she shot him with his own gun, then they also have to believe she removed that gun from his home when she cleaned up the scene after her crime. Then we ask the questions: Why on earth would she remove Travis's own weapon from the scene? Why not just clean it of her prints and leave the weapon there? Does stealing it after shooting him lead to felony murder?

What about the knife?

I don't know about you, but I don't believe Jodi's story. It's easier to believe she stole the weapon from her grandparents' house, shot Travis with it, and then removed it from the scene because it could be traced back to her grandparents. I would love to have the gun in hand, but we don't...and we don't necessarily need it for the reasons I stated above.

I couldn't rep you again, but you've laid it out PERFECTLY! "cheerleader:

[ImBatman!]

Ugh!!! Any day now!!

[*crickets*]

Who is the real Jodi Arias? Is there a real Jodi Arias?

After months of talking about her life, all we have are layers of lies and bullshit... trained professionals who are paid to study her and represent her have no fucking idea what she is really about.

The more I learn about her, the less I understand about her. I wonder if I am becoming hypnotized just like Dr. Paycheck. Just speculatin'... I get paid for it you know.

One reason this trial is so addictive to me is trying to wrap my mind around this sociopath. The more I learn about her the more I get 'sucked in'. It is mesmerizing!

[Brillig]

All of the disorders, whether Personality Disorders or Anxiety Disorders, are rooted in the unique chemistry or function of the brain. Science and research have suspicions as to what neurotranmitters are the likely culprits in causing these. And they don't understand any of it very well. There is also evidence to suggest that genetics plays a role in some of these disorders, as some are seen to run in families. With all of these disorders, the sooner the individual gets evaluated and treated, the better. Nurture certainly plays a strong role in many of these....but in the true disorders of the brain, none are brought on simply by being raised in a whacky home.

I believe strongly that there is a genetic component in some disorders (from what I have read, seen and experienced), but I also think that genetic component just makes one "predisposed" to acquire the disorder. I think a predisposed person has to have some environmental/nurture triggers to actually bring the disorder into full being.

[Morticia]

I'm will beg for the death penalty if we have to listen to Ms. Walmart all afternoon.

[ImBatman!]

I believe strongly that there is a genetic component in some disorders (from what I have read, seen and experienced), but I also think that genetic component just makes one "predisposed" to acquire the disorder. I think a predisposed person has to have some environmental/nurture triggers to actually bring the disorder into full being.

Yes!!

[Blah28]

New to this site, enjoy reading all your thoughts. Thought it was worth mentioning that I visited JAII site one time, got so disgusted that I posted something that they must have taken offense to since they appeared to have blocked my ip address after that point. I can no longer see that website at home but I can at work. My thought about the trial so far is that Juan Martinez has managed to Impeach most every witness of the defense at this point. I can't wait for Alyce LaViolette to take the stand.

Same here!! Couldn't help but let them know what I though of them. Now I can only view the site on my cell phone. What a bunch of losers!

Welcome by the way

[AgathaAppleswine]

As for the bolded statement you wrote above...doesn't it irk you that she's been able to say totally unsubstantiated trash about Travis over and over again on the stand (pedophilia, domestic violence/abuse, deviant sexual behavior, etc.) YET the prosecution can't do the same with her because it's "prejudicial." I know how the law protects those who are accused (innocent until proven guilty), yet when a defendant admits to a heinous crime such as this one, it's frustrating that she's getting the same benefit as a woman who legitimately defended herself...or was legitimately abused.

It does bother me that she has said all that. At the same time, it is so important for her to be able to say this. And what I mean is this: abused women don't always tell people. I didn't tell people about my abuse. Not at first, and then I only told my best friend and my mother. There were never police reports. If I had ever tried to defend myself, and ended up killing him, there would be next to no proof. So it would have been vital for me to be able to say, "Yes, he abused me. Yes, he wanted to make a sex slave out of me. Yes, he enjoyed humiliating me. Yes, he burned me".

I shouldn't say that there wouldn't have been evidence (one look at the porn on his hard drive would have proven his obession with humiliating sex play), but even so...to be able to say it would have been important in defending myself. There are many, many women out there who never report abuse, and never talk about it. I want them to be able to make "unsubstantiated" claims as well.

Jodi is making a mockery of real abuse. But it is vital to every other woman out there that yes, she be allowed to say these things. It makes it easier to pooh-pooh her story because there is NO evidence. Anywhere. Like I said, my ex's computer would have been a testament to what kind of activities he enjoyed (non-consensual, heavy-bondage, humiliating sex play). But Travis has nothing; little to no porn, nothing to link him to child porn, just...nothing.

This brings to mind something, and I've wondered about this for a while now. Is there anyone besides Travis's friends who have noticed weird things about Jodi? I mean, to some extent, I don't know how much of what they say can be 100% trusted. They hate Jodi, so I don't know if a lot of what they say is accurate -- not that they are lying, but how much of their perception of Jodi has changed since she's been arrested? So how much more have they built up the stories in their minds about her actions? I mean no disrespect. It's just natural to really, really blow things up, or make them seem worse when you hate someone.

Are there people out there who have dealt with her who know her to be honest? Are there people out there who know her to be a liar? Where are Jodi's friends? Why was there just the one ex-boyfriend whom she shared the abuse with? Why doesn't she seem to have girlfriends?

[gypsy1197]

My sister's ex didn't attend a day of classes, never wrote a thesis nor defended one. Bought his degree...yes, a doctorate. There are diploma mills if you look for them.

Don't get me wrong. I know you have to work long and hard to earn a doctorate. Just saying there are diploma mills out there.

[Morticia]

This is a pretty fun video honoring the great JM!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rJgku...ature=youtu.be

[Brillig]

Great points. I can get to premeditation. I can also see her motive. However, JM really hasn't focused on it as much as I had hoped he would. Although the DT entered the text of 5-26-08 to prove abuse, I think it instead helped me see her motive. Travis called her a sociopath and the worst thing that's ever happened to him. That's huge! Unfortunately, JM never went back to those texts. Nor have we heard or seen the supposed Facebook message he sent her. We really haven't even heard more about the stalking claims, or doggy door, nor any testimony from people who knew more about her obsessive behavior. I know it's out there. IMO, more needs to be done to show motive. Hopefully that's coming in rebuttal and closing arguments. Sometimes jurors need it all spelled out for them...that's where I'm coming from. Although we see it, I want them to see it too. The couple people on here who are questioning things make me really nervous.

I honestly think JM did not emphasize the sociopath text more on purpose. If he spent too much time on it, there was a good chance Stabby would come up with yet another outlandish and extremely detailed story about why Travis would say that to her (that would make Travis look bad and Stabby look like a victim). And while reasonable people would not believe the story, it only takes one person on the jury to fall for it to cause big problems.

As it stands, he can use it in his closing arguments, and there is no stupid story from Stabby to cloud the issue.

[AnnieBelle]

Thanks Batman! His background of medical malpractice, PTSD with police or soldiers, sexual violence and even psychosexual risk assessments simply is not the same as evaluating a highly deceptive murderess. I bet that once she told him the "real" murder story, he was hooked. He said she had a breakthrough. That is how she seduced him.



This case required a psychologist who relied on hard data rather than hour after hour of talk. He comes across as the "absent minded professor" because he has 30 hours of notes in longhand and missing pages of testing. He is "old school". Most likely he took on this case to solidify his business relationship with Nurmi and Nurmi's foray into sexual crimes.

I've had to testify a few times in my career. It's not my thing as I prefer evaluation of seriously mentally ill and suicidal patients. Once, I was required to testify in a child death case. The babysitter caring for the child was about to be indited on murder charges. I concluded that the evidence did not support she killed the child and I was up against an internationally known and respected shaken baby expert. Every one was against the babysitter and me, it was unpleasant. One of the lawyers was similar to JM, but for different reasons. She was emotionally wed to the outcome because it would have made her career and lifted her into celebrity status. As she examined me, she was so angry she broke a pencil and the pencil pieces flew across the room. It was outrageous. I answered the yes or no questions (over and over and over) but each question required more information. I am sure I looked and sounded like a complete imbecile. But in the end the truth won out, the babysitter wasn't charged and her own children were returned to her.

What I am trying to say with this long winded story is not everyone is cut out to testify with the pressures of this kind of case. To his credit, Samuels established JA has dissociative amnesia and her memory loss and gaps are "real".

I agree with everything you said, with exception to the last paragraph. I do believe that this doctor was not the one the defense should have chosen as it's witness. I'm not sure if they were familiar with JM's style, but Doctor was no match against him.

The only part I, personally, disagree with is that I don't for a moment believe that he proved JA had disassociated amnesia or memory gaps. I feel like the only thing he proved was, given the story and answers she TOLD him at that time (which we now know to be untrue), it was indicative of those disorders. But he now admits he should have re-administered the test, as the "facts" have changed. Thus, his report is not accurate.....it reflects the "ninja" Jodi.

[bete noire]

She asked Det Flores in the interview "can't you just look at red light cameras to see if you spot my license plate?"
Se said that because of there being a lot of red light and speeding cameras in Mesa, Az. I know cuz I got a ticket once.

Did she really ask the detective that?

One reason this trial is so addictive to me is trying to wrap my mind around this sociopath. The more I learn about her the more I get 'sucked in'. It is mesmerizing!

EXACTLY. Her, and her actions, are like some puzzle my brain is trying to piece together... and failing miserably at.
Kinda like trying to put together a 500 piece jigsaw puzzle together, but having 1000 pieces to work with 'cuz 500 of them are fake (lies)! So frustrating.

[ImBatman!]

My sister's ex didn't attend a day of classes, never wrote a thesis nor defended one. Bought his degree...yes, a doctorate. There are diploma mills if you look for them.

Don't get me wrong. I know you have to work long and hard to earn a doctorate. Just saying there are diploma mills out there.

Bully for him.... sorry gypsy. I'm getting snarky.

[royals02]

Was JA charged with making false statements to law enforcement? I don't remember hearing that...and if she wasn't, I wonder why?

[ImBatman!]

Was JA charged with making false statements to law enforcement? I don't remember hearing that...and if she wasn't, I wonder why?

I think that would be the least of her worries right now.

[Brillig]

Not sure if anyone posted this. Too funny!
http://youtu.be/LqbMtDj6CCQ

This is absolutely HILARIOUS!!!

Thanks for posting the link!

[Sneakers the Wonder Dog]

Okay, there is something that has stuck in my mind since yesterday...
On one of the PTSD tests, Jodi checked 'yes' to the question 'have your symptoms interfered with your sex life.'
Her SEX LIFE...IN JAIL...*gag*

Maybe she could only masturbate with one hand instead of the usual two?

Stalking brought up by Mimi Hall 1:54 and then at about 2:30 on cross and 2:34 on re-direct - talking about tire slashing, following on dates, doggy door, reading emails



Also on the day that Lisa Andrews testified, a juror question was "did you ever refer to Jodi Arias as a stalker?" Her answer was "Yes"

I don't believe Jodi was ever questioned about the tire slashing or stalking, because there was no evidence to back it up. I could be wrong, but I don't think that line of questioning was allowed.

I'm not sure about the e-mail. I know that she did send one where she told him she was tired of being treated a certain way, and so forth, but I don't know that it mentioned whoredoms.

The "anonymous" email she sent to Lisa Andrews about whoredoms can be seen here, http://wildabouttrial.com/wp-content...ion-Report.pdf , on page 17 of Det. Flores report

The defense opened the door on the tire slashing, following on dates, doggy door, reading emails.

I personally find JM to be at his best when he refrains from yelling at the witness and engages in more of a give-and-take dialogue, asking questions, getting his answers and moving on. Louder doesn't always equate to better.

I'm sure a lot of people admire his zeal and I do appreciate his obvious passion for the cases he tries. I just cannot fathom being on that jury and listening to that yelling for hours on end.

According to people who have attended the trial JM is not as loud in the court room, he sounds much louder to people viewing on tv or live stream due to the microphones placed around the court room.

I understand there is no gun now, but there WAS a gun because Travis ended up with a .25 caliber bullet in his brain/face. It's not hard to establish that the gun existed. We also have the testimony of Jodi saying she shot him.

Interestingly, she claims she used Travis's own gun against him...a gun he supposedly kept loaded on the top shelf of his bedroom closet. Although I don't believe her story of taking Travis's own gun (because I don't believe in the coincidence that her grandparents' owned the same stupid caliber gun and it was stolen the same week), if the jury does believe her story that she shot him with his own gun, then they also have to believe she removed that gun from his home when she cleaned up the scene after her crime. Then we ask the questions: Why on earth would she remove Travis's own weapon from the scene? Why not just clean it of her prints and leave the weapon there?

I so wish a juror had asked "Why on earth would you remove Travis's own weapon from the scene? Why not just clean it of her prints and leave the weapon there?"

We all know the answer is because it wasn't TA's gun, it was her Grandfather's. Otherwise why take it?

To his credit, Samuels established JA has dissociative amnesia and her memory loss and gaps are "real".

Wow? Really? I didn't get that all from his testimony. Especially after reading this:

Dissociative Amnesia

Another major error committed by Dr. Samuels, is his linking dissociative amnesia with the physical inability to form memories, during periods of severe stress, in the hippocampus region. The first problem here, is that science does not accept this ?hippocampus theory? as being factually proven. It would be much fairer to say, that science sees this as a theory, one theory among many others, that may or might help to explain memory encoding. Remember this theory, as expertly explained by Dr. Samuels, says that you cannot physically remember events during traumatic periods, because the hippocampus is flooded with hormones and is incapable of encoding memories.

Now the problem with this, is that some people do remember events during traumatic times. They have excellent recall, perhaps even enhanced recall when compared to non-stressful times. As I stated before in other writings, Dr. Samuels clearly states that it is impossible to remember during these traumatic periods. Well we know he is wrong. It must be possible to remember? because people do remember.

Another problem that Dr. Samuels has, when he links dissociative amnesia with the hippocampus theory, is that they simply do not belong together. The ?hippocampus theory? deals with physical amnesia. The dissociative amnesia theory, deals with psychological amnesia.

Dr. Samuels diagnosed Jodi Arias as having dissociative amnesia because of the stress that made the hippocampus unable to encode memory. He also clearly stated over and over again that you cannot remember what has not been encoded. ?You can?t remember what?s not there.?

While once again the big problem here is that people with dissociative amnesia often do regain their memories. Logically speaking this must prove that memories had indeed been encoded by the hippocampus and encoded during a time of stress.

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

[Doll-Face]

It does bother me that she has said all that. At the same time, it is so important for her to be able to say this. And what I mean is this: abused women don't always tell people. I didn't tell people about my abuse. Not at first, and then I only told my best friend and my mother. There were never police reports. If I had ever tried to defend myself, and ended up killing him, there would be next to no proof. So it would have been vital for me to be able to say, "Yes, he abused me. Yes, he wanted to make a sex slave out of me. Yes, he enjoyed humiliating me. Yes, he burned me".

I shouldn't say that there wouldn't have been evidence (one look at the porn on his hard drive would have proven his obession with humiliating sex play), but even so...to be able to say it would have been important in defending myself. There are many, many women out there who never report abuse, and never talk about it. I want them to be able to make "unsubstantiated" claims as well.

Jodi is making a mockery of real abuse. But it is vital to every other woman out there that yes, she be allowed to say these things. It makes it easier to pooh-pooh her story because there is NO evidence. Anywhere. Like I said, my ex's computer would have been a testament to what kind of activities he enjoyed (non-consensual, heavy-bondage, humiliating sex play). But Travis has nothing; little to no porn, nothing to link him to child porn, just...nothing.

This brings to mind something, and I've wondered about this for a while now. Is there anyone besides Travis's friends who have noticed weird things about Jodi? I mean, to some extent, I don't know how much of what they say can be 100% trusted. They hate Jodi, so I don't know if a lot of what they say is accurate -- not that they are lying, but how much of their perception of Jodi has changed since she's been arrested? So how much more have they built up the stories in their minds about her actions? I mean no disrespect. It's just natural to really, really blow things up, or make them seem worse when you hate someone.

Are there people out there who have dealt with her who know her to be honest? Are there people out there who know her to be a liar? Where are Jodi's friends? Why was there just the one ex-boyfriend whom she shared the abuse with? Why doesn't she seem to have girlfriends?

Thank you for your response. I'm sorry to hear about your story. Hugs to you.

I guess I am different in that I have never been abused (as an adult), but I was a child of domestic violence. My mother was severely abused by my step dad...as was I as a stepkid. In my mother's case, there were tons of police reports over a 20-year period, injuries (some still exist today), Polaroid pictures taken by friends and family to substantiate the injuries, a couple of overnight trips to a women's shelter, etc. To this day, I see a therapist to deal with what I grew up with...and how it has affected my relationship with my husband, my children, my male employers and colleagues, and my friends. DV never goes away, even when we move away from it. It's devastating. It affects so many things in my life.

Although I feel terrible for what you went through, and you believe you have a right to state unsubstantiated claims if you needed to, I really have a hard time with what Jodi's saying because I know it just isn't true...and that she's using these made-up stories to make Travis look really, really bad, instead of doing what is right...and that's admitting guilt and serving her punishment. I would have respected her more if she had just gone to trial with her other lie -- the one of the two intruders. At least Travis's reputation would have remained intact.

As for people who knew Jodi, and could attest to her behavior, I don't know. She hasn't brought anyone forward yet. No friends, no family, no colleagues. It's very telling to me. She has no one. I have heard that there are people who've crossed paths with her (outside of Travis's circle) who claim she was very obsessed with Travis...based on her actions around them, and things she said to them. I sure wish those people were testifying, but perhaps they're not because they were on tv first.

[ImBatman!]

Are they even having court today?? Or have I been home all this time waiting like a dumb ass?

[*crickets*]

Cricket:
Don't forget the murderer turned her license plate upside down and removed the front plate on the car. She asked Det Flores in the interview "can't you just look at red light cameras to see if you spot my license plate?"
Se said that because of there being a lot of red light and speeding cameras in Mesa, Az. I know cuz I got a ticket once. She turned her own damn plates in order to avoid camera detection.

The license plate thing is intriguing to me. I think she really did it b/c as you say, it was one of the things she brought up to Flores in the interview as part of her 'I wasn't there!' story. But driving around with an upside down license plate is just asking to be pulled over by the police (as happened to her in Utah.) Plus if the car had been caught by a red light camera wouldn't it have been easy to read the license plate # by turning the photo around? Also, a car parked on the street in Travis's neighborhood with an upside down license plate would have stood out to passersby, I would think.

Just one more example of her disordered, bizarre thought processes...