Jodi Ann Arias shot and stabbed her ex-boyfriend Travis Alexander to death (Part II)

[Angiebla]

i guess i will never quite understand, idk what i would do if i took another persons life my friend was on a very dark curvy foggy road one night and he accidentall hit and killed an policeman who was walking into the street to drop a flare because of a stalled car (didn't walk w/ the flare already lit) the police department competly cleared him, and said it was 100% not his fault, but he has never been the same again - and she is laffing and drawng pics in court

That's horrible I feel sorry for your friend. I wouldn't be the same after that incident either. The difference between your friend and Jodi is that your friend has a conscience. Jodi doesn't have one, which IMHO makes her dangerous. I think she would kill again.

[wasthinking]

I would rep you but none left....I think most of the time, it is a majority of jurors that try to "sway" the non-majority to accept the evidence and come to an agreement. In this case, IMO, that would be murder 1 PM or murder 1 felony murder.

AND most importantly there are paths and rules along the way. Juan's Wendi case the jury was pretty much hung. They sent out a request, what do we do. There are very specific legal instructions that can only be given after a jury indicate they are having difficulty per Supreme Court. In Wendi's case, the judge determined that time had come to meet the required law, and gave them that instuction. Basically it's a go back and try harder type thing. I'll see if I can find it before deiberations and post it. Anyway, if they still are hung, it's a mistrial and the jury is dismissed.

[*crickets*]

I'll give it a good guess. In 7 yrs and broke up, there would be risks in opening that door, why do it? Also, it was before Stabby time frame, so no that relevant. They had two good witnesses from the time frame, they didn't need more.

Gotta disagree with you on this, wt...especially today, with the discussion of his exes and abuse and Deanna being specifically brought up, the jurors have got to be wondering why they haven't heard from her. I hope Martinez does call her in rebuttal, if not it will look really bad.

[Tia111]

I just can't imagine that ol' Alice knows a whole lot about intimacy....she kinda reminds me of an old battle scarred rooster missing a few feathers. She has the strangest balding pattern for a woman!

[sheesh]

Question: WHY HAS THE PROSECUTION NOT CALLED DEANNA REID AS A WITNESS?

Does anyone know? I have been wondering about this for a long time and the juror question today asking if any of Travis's exes had ever complained about abuse reminded me.

The only exes that testified were Lisa Andrews and Mimi Hall and they were both very short-term relationships. Deanna was with him for 7 years. WHY would the prosecution not want her testimony about the lack of abuse in their relationship??

Anyone?

Most likely the information she might give would be more prejudicial than probative.

what is the tool? Why does it stop at 68 and my next one starts at 73? I must have missed something.

Go to the "Advanced" post editor and in the editing tools go to the 2nd row down, 3rd box from the left...

See the little doohickey with 3 lines with "1,2,3" to the left? That will number each sentence.

[AnnieBelle]

Gotta disagree with you on this, wt...especially today, with the discussion of his exes and abuse and Deanna being specifically brought up, the jurors have got to be wondering why they haven't heard from her. I hope Martinez does call her in rebuttal, if not it will look really bad.

I agree. Deanna did a great interview on 48 hours. She spoke very well of her years with Travis. She said he never treated her with anything but kindness and respect. She said that they would get into arguments, like any other couple, but they would always work them out together. She said he never spoke harshly and she said he never even raised his voice to her. So, I believe she will be a good witness for the prosecution, because she rebuts everything they are trying to say about Travis.

[MorbidlyLovely]

There was a Social Media Pro on HLN who said things I totally agree with.

Alyce needs to put her big girl panties on. She knew she was getting herself into a high profile death penalty case, she's being extremely biased and immoral. She has even approached the victim's family in the middle of court which was upsetting for poor Samantha. Her behavior is NOT OK. People writing about her or expressing their disdain in the way she is conducting herself is not wrong. Of course I do not agree with trying to ruin her career or make death threats. Let her career go down from her own actions. And Death threats are never OK, in fact it's no better then acting like Jodi

Alyce has an opportunity every time she walks into court, to turn things around. To change her ways and start doing her job right. She's in her 60s. She is not a stupid old woman. She knows she is using abuse victims for the DT's agenda while she pockets the money. It's never too late to stop needlessly bashing Travis every chance she gets either.

It is time to put her big girl panties on and understand that if she is going to hurt victims of domestic violence everywhere, she can not play a victim when people get upset about it.

I agree. I equate Alyce taking this case, knowing it was going to be big, if not HUGE, just like all those candy-assed celebs who piss and moan they can't do anything without the papparazi following them around.

Dude, it's what *you* freely signed up for. Putting yourself in the public eye is an open invitation to scrutiny by the masses.

It's always been that way except now, with technology being so advanced, any backlash is immediate and more widespread than in the past.

If Alyce (and any other expert who CHOOSES to put themselves in the middle of a high profile case or situation like this) can't take the public heat, then GTFO of the goddamned kitchen.

Bet her panic attacks and fear aren't severe enough to keep her from going to the bank to cash her fucking big-assed paychecks, though, lol!

[Morticia]

Lots and lots of interesting info on Andriano's crime, trial, and sentencing. Quite a few similarities to JA's.

http://murderpedia.org/female.A/a/andriano-wendi.htm

[Morticia]

AND most importantly there are paths and rules along the way. Juan's Wendi case the jury was pretty much hung. They sent out a request, what do we do. There are very specific legal instructions that can only be given after a jury indicate they are having difficulty per Supreme Court. In Wendi's case, the judge determined that time had come to meet the required law, and gave them that instuction. Basically it's a go back and try harder type thing. I'll see if I can find it before deiberations and post it. Anyway, if they still are hung, it's a mistrial and the jury is dismissed.

I believe the jury was only hung in the sentencing phase. The guilty verdict was arrived at in 2-1/2 hours.

[wasthinking]

i guess i will never quite understand, idk what i would do if i took another persons life my friend was on a very dark curvy foggy road one night and he accidentall hit and killed an policeman who was walking into the street to drop a flare because of a stalled car (didn't walk w/ the flare already lit) the police department competly cleared him, and said it was 100% not his fault, but he has never been the same again - and she is laffing and drawng pics in court

Your friend though is a person with a conscience, had an awful accident.
But we have someone here with no conscience. Hard for most people to absorb even the thought let alone identify with it. If we don't identify, we keep trying to instead of just accepting the fact. They are empty, they have no bank of the feelings you expect. It simply is not there no matter how hard that is to fathom. The human creature has great difficulty accepting what we don't understand, or feel ourselves.

[MorbidlyLovely]

Question: WHY HAS THE PROSECUTION NOT CALLED DEANNA REID AS A WITNESS?

Does anyone know? I have been wondering about this for a long time and the juror question today asking if any of Travis's exes had ever complained about abuse reminded me.

The only exes that testified were Lisa Andrews and Mimi Hall and they were both very short-term relationships. Deanna was with him for 7 years. WHY would the prosecution not want her testimony about the lack of abuse in their relationship??

Anyone?

My own personal theory is *maybe* because of the emails Alyce LaV mentioned which Deanna had sent him asking him to pay her back the money he allegedly owed her.

Maybe JM decided it wasn't worth opening up that can of worms; looking at how the Hughes' emails were allegedly twisted around and their own words to Travis used against him, it might have been a wash in drag her up to the stand.

I'm sure JM weighed the pros and cons of calling her (and probably any number of other character witnesses) and, for whatever reason, decided potential risk might outweigh potential benefit of subjecting her (or others) to testifying.

My other thought is that JM decided to concentrate more on proving Jodi acted with premeditation and trying to avoid any type of testimony regarding Travis' character, as, from his stance, Travis' character shouldn't even be an issue in a case of the charge of premeditated 1st degree murder.

But, who knows...It's late, I'm tired, and I haven't even gotten to watch hardly any of today's coverage...Thank goddess for MDS to flip to between reports, lol!

[*crickets*]

@jodiannarias now has 14,800 followers. Latest tweet 1 hour ago, "I bet my website is beautiful. Too bad I can't see it."
People are fighting with each other in the responses, "your art is beautiful, prayers to you" vs "die bitch", lots of name-calling back and forth.

Amazing phenomenon, a lurid murder unfolding in the age of socia media and YouTube!

[Saffron]

I agree. Deanna did a great interview on 48 hours. She spoke very well of her years with Travis. She said he never treated her with anything but kindness and respect. She said that they would get into arguments, like any other couple, but they would always work them out together. She said he never spoke harshly and she said he never even raised his voice to her. So, I believe she will be a good witness for the prosecution, because she rebuts everything they are trying to say about Travis.

I don't know how detailed Juan wants to get at this point, and it may make the trial lag even more if he did, but I wish he would bring this woman in since the only thing I heard LaViolette reference about this relationship was that Travis had said he hoped Deanna met someone who deserved her. And, of course, LaViolette said cynically right after that, "I'm not sure what he meant by that...", implying that maybe he had abused her too and felt bad about it.

[Angiebla]

Your friend though is a person with a conscience, had an awful accident.
But we have someone here with no conscience. Hard for most people to absorb even the thought let alone identify with it. If we don't identify, we keep trying to instead of just accepting the fact. They are empty, they have no bank of the feelings you expect. It simply is not there no matter how hard that is to fathom. The human creature has great difficulty accepting what we don't understand, or feel ourselves.

I def said that last page. Thanks for reading my posts! Jk

[wasthinking]

I believe the jury was only hung in the sentencing phase. The guilty verdict was arrived at in 2-1/2 hours.

Yup, I mixed that up with her other appeals ramblings. I found something interesting in going back to it.

We held in State v. Celaya that ?where the sole
defense is self-defense so that the evidence requires either
conviction or acquittal, any instruction on any other grade
would be impermissible.? 135 Ariz. 248, 255, 660 P.2d 849, 856
(1983); see also State v. Wall, 212 Ariz. 1, 6, ? 29, 126 P.3d
148, 153 (2006) (noting that when defendant asserts an ?all-ornothing?
defense, the record usually will not support the giving
of a lesser-included offense instruction); State v. Jones, 109
Ariz. 80, 81-82, 505 P.2d 251, 252-53 (1973) (holding that
lesser-included offense instructions were not required where
evidence at trial and defendant?s self-defense theory presented
an ?either-or? situation requiring either first degree murder
conviction or acquittal).

[wasthinking]

I def said that last page. Thanks for reading my posts! Jk

Lots of things get repeated here, that the nature of it all. It has to do with answering the post that I was addressing to Harlette, not, not reading. You never know where or what page someone else posted when you see a post you like to reply to.

[Justice11]

Objection, biased Sustained,

Agree!!

omg - i am watching the trial now and just got to the question about her smiling at jodi - isn't she the one that said 90% of all communication is non verbal

There was a Social Media Pro on HLN who said things I totally agree with.

Alyce needs to put her big girl panties on. She knew she was getting herself into a high profile death penalty case, she's being extremely biased and immoral. She has even approached the victim's family in the middle of court which was upsetting for poor Samantha. Her behavior is NOT OK. People writing about her or expressing their disdain in the way she is conducting herself is not wrong. Of course I do not agree with trying to ruin her career or make death threats. Let her career go down from her own actions. And Death threats are never OK, in fact it's no better then acting like Jodi

Alyce has an opportunity every time she walks into court, to turn things around. To change her ways and start doing her job right. She's in her 60s. She is not a stupid old woman. She knows she is using abuse victims for the DT's agenda while she pockets the money. It's never too late to stop needlessly bashing Travis every chance she gets either.

It is time to put her big girl panties on and understand that if she is going to hurt victims of domestic violence everywhere, she can not play a victim when people get upset about it.

Welcome fellow Hoosier! (You seem really cool! Don't let me down!) ;)

and can i just say i still do not why she didn't go with this defense in the first place?? crime of passion or something to that effect, she would be out in about 5 more years

I agree. It's a lie, but more believable than self defense.

Question: WHY HAS THE PROSECUTION NOT CALLED DEANNA REID AS A WITNESS?

Does anyone know? I have been wondering about this for a long time and the juror question today asking if any of Travis's exes had ever complained about abuse reminded me.

The only exes that testified were Lisa Andrews and Mimi Hall and they were both very short-term relationships. Deanna was with him for 7 years. WHY would the prosecution not want her testimony about the lack of abuse in their relationship??

Anyone?

I think it's because Travis is not the one on trial here. Jodi is. I could see him doing it, but only in a rebuttal.

I thought the same thing at first, then I realized shes too much of a narcissist to admit to killing him out of passion. She wanted to play the victim, so ppl would feel sorry for her.

Very good points.

I agree. I equate Alyce taking this case, knowing it was going to be big, if not HUGE, just like all those candy-assed celebs who piss and moan they can't do anything without the papparazi following them around.

Dude, it's what *you* freely signed up for. Putting yourself in the public eye is an open invitation to scrutiny by the masses.

It's always been that way except now, with technology being so advanced, any backlash is immediate and more widespread than in the past.

If Alyce (and any other expert who CHOOSES to put themselves in the middle of a high profile case or situation like this) can't take the public heat, then GTFO of the goddamned kitchen.

Bet her panic attacks and fear aren't severe enough to keep her from going to the bank to cash her fucking big-assed paychecks, though, lol!

I so very much agree. Sucks to be her right now, but that is a choice she made. Hope the money was worth it.

[Angiebla]

Lots of things get repeated here, that the nature of it all. It has to do with answering the post that I was addressing to Harlette, not, not reading. You never know where or what page someone else posted when you see a post you like to reply to.

It's all good nbd. I was flattered I actually had the same idea you did. You are very intelligent.

[Jinkasaurus]

random thought: I wonder if Casey Anthony is watching this trial.

[olgasbunghole]

I have to say that I felt good about the jury's questions. By the looks on the faces at the defense table they are not feeling so good. I love it!

It gave me the warm fuzzies to see them squirming and the stunned looks on all of their lying faces!

[MorbidlyLovely]

random thought: I wonder if Casey Anthony is watching this trial.

I've wondered that myself (BTW, I still giggle every time I see your name and avi, lol!). I'll bet she's glued to this freak show, probably comparing it to her own trial and also because, according to what's been reported, she has nothing else in her miserable life to do but make herself a literal hermit and watch TV all holed up in her residence.

I can totally see CA and JA becoming BFF pen pals. They could compare notes on their self-perceived fabulousness and all. /sarcasm

[wasthinking]

It's all good nbd. I was flattered I actually had the same idea you did. You are very intelligent.

wow, thanks but that really isn't true so I can't act like it is. I have some experience in live, read a lot! and then there's always the really smart google search. lol
I jump around a lot so I do miss posts. I saw this one. She plays it inbetween her 'will the media have it tonight' happy everyone will be watching me role. Today she got a red nose over herself listening to Alyce spew the lies she told to her. Fascinating to watch.

I thought the same thing at first, then I realized shes too much of a narcissist to admit to killing him out of passion. She wanted to play the victim, so ppl would feel sorry for her.

[Dee Stress]

This is not directed at rd, lot's of people have said similar things so this is just a general kind of observation.

I DO NOT believe for one minute that Jodi is innocent, but at some point last week the same witch trial thought crossed my mind & when I keep seeing comments about it I feel like I'm being hypocritical for not owning up to it. I think you'll find the comment has nothing to do with any similarity between Jodi & the women falsely accused of witchcraft in towns all over the world. It refers solely to the reaction of those watching the trial.

I am not making a blanket statement that every single person showing an interest in following the trial or discussing it online is unhinged & whipping up hysteria over the case. Here, and on many other forums there IS reasonable, rational & WARRANTED discussion, but there's an awful lot of unnecessary crazy shit too. You need to consider the statement in relation to the entire web & not just mds (which also has it's moments). Applying the statement selectively is a little bit ALV -ish.

There's an awful lot of blogs, fb pages, twitter, myspace, comments on news articles -the much discussed book review page on Amazon had over 550 reviews as of yesterday & it was climbing by the minute. This is no longer just a national issue for the U.S. This stuff is coming from all over the world - personally I'm about as far away as you can get from the actual trial. There is a massive world-wide reaction to this trial & that is what I think you'll find they're referring to. Comparing Jodi to the women victimised in the witch trials is not the intention.

If your whole trial experience comes almost exclusively through mds & live feeds, you're not getting the whole picture & it could seem an unreasonable statement. I fully expect to be subjected to a figurative stoning & accused of being a Jodi sympathiser for saying this. That's ok. I realise emotions are (justifiably) running high right now, maybe some of you will understand just a little where I'm coming from, after the dust has settled, maybe not.

One fact that can't be denied though, is that while it can be argued that there may be as many men suffering domestic violence at the hands of female partners, when it comes to domestic violence HOMICIDE women FAR outweigh men as victims. The long rollcall of female names is very sobering. Despite that fact, there has never been an outpouring of collective outrage like this, even for all those murdered women & children combined. Maybe that could add some perspective?

I'd replied to this earlier, but having some strange problems when posting with multi-quotes, so i've lost them to reply to you. As you say this is not about the comparison with witch trials, (I think) I'll leave that out of this.

I'm totally confused by what you're saying. Understand i'm being neither snarky nor patronizing, so bear with me. Of course there's interest worldwide, but not on the scale I believe you imagine it is. I'm in the UK and pretty far removed too, but this trial has never once been on our National news, I believe I first became aware of it through 48 hours (Sky or cable) crime channels, or maybe another forum, can't remember at the minute. I do watch the trial itself through streaming, simply because no channel here covers it. To my knowledge it's not even covered US wide, maybe others from the US could confirm/correct this. There is always going to be more wide-spread interest in an interesting or shocking tweet, to spark someone's curiosity on s'thing they've never heard about before, and bingo, you have world-wide followers instantly. Twitter and social networks are the key here, really.

From this very thread, it should be ovbvious to you that the amount of information our posters gather and link to, can't come from simply watching the trial on line and MDS don't work for the Pros or DTeams, so the logical conclusion is they venture elsewhere for that info. I'd imagine most of us have access to all sorts of information, so I'm totally confused about your point about not 'getting the whole picture'.

Bolded part. A national issue for the US?!? What would make you think it would be a national issue? And what exactly is everyone reacting to world-wide? I've read things here and there on the net, but again, not even a whisper of it over here on the media, aside from Online issues of certain gossip tabloids. Are you referring to the the anti-AL feeling by several hundred people? I'm not condoning people commenting on Amazon, but neither am I going to defend a woman who sold her soul to the devil, in defence of a self-confessed murderer and liar when she saw the $ signs and a chance to 'enhance' her reputation. A woman who couldn't bring herself to, even today, admit that the slaughtered boy she had willingly trashed on the say so of that liar, had one redeeming quality.

I hear what you're saying about the number of women and children murdered through DV and the lack of outrage/coverage in comparison here. In this case, DV was brought into this to try and save Jodi's backside built on a foundation of LIES, lies which she stupidly flaunted on TV sparking the initial 'fascination' with this 'pretty' soft-spoken, attention-seeking, obvious fruitloop. There's your hook right there. I suspect that's why this case has attracted so much attention. She, along with her DT and their witness, are the crew to blame for disrespecting the true meaning of DV and mocked every woman out there who has suffered at the hands of an abusive partner. As far as world-wide reporting goes, the level of coverage in the US seems to be on a par or close to, the Anthony case, which, incidentally, was reported on frequently over here in the UK, not sure about Australia though? We even got that verdict live on our national news.

[olgasbunghole]

random thought: I wonder if Casey Anthony is watching this trial.

I would take a bet saying that she is because the backlash of this trial is affecting the added attention on her, and right now she is trying to claim bankruptcy and the administrator(i think) of her case wants to own the rights to her "story" so that the money made from it would go to pay off the people she owes! ha ha ha.......... I hope her evil carcass spends the rest of her life in misery and pain!!!!!

[Poppycock]

Question: WHY HAS THE PROSECUTION NOT CALLED DEANNA REID AS A WITNESS?

Does anyone know? I have been wondering about this for a long time and the juror question today asking if any of Travis's exes had ever complained about abuse reminded me.

The only exes that testified were Lisa Andrews and Mimi Hall and they were both very short-term relationships. Deanna was with him for 7 years. WHY would the prosecution not want her testimony about the lack of abuse in their relationship??

Anyone?

Wasn't Lisa Andrews a defense witness? Strangely?

If she wears panties, they're really big girl panties. My vote is more along the lines of boxer shorts.

I vote pantaloons!

I hope you are right, Harlette. Deanna was very favorable to the memory of Travis in the 48 hours interviews, and her testimony would be very powerful. She KNEW him, very well.

I have wondered why she turned down his proposal after 7 years? And why he said she was nuts, or did Jodi make that up? Jodi offered her a cookie when Deanna stopped by, that super huge batch she baked while Travis was not home.
Has Deanna or Mimi married meanwhile? I know Lisa and Ryan Burns have and have children too.

I agree. Deanna did a great interview on 48 hours. She spoke very well of her years with Travis. She said he never treated her with anything but kindness and respect. She said that they would get into arguments, like any other couple, but they would always work them out together. She said he never spoke harshly and she said he never even raised his voice to her. So, I believe she will be a good witness for the prosecution, because she rebuts everything they are trying to say about Travis.

Now that I got to the end, I am going to have to google that 48 hours, never saw that one. Then hit up David Lohr for todays proceedings.

Though after reading the juror questions already, I can skip that. I am wondering why they keep putting questions in there, I would be so ready to say adios to her. If they don't believe her anyway...why ask her what she thinks. Some are rhetorical, and take time. The jurors are a varied crew. Some look super conservative, but who knows. The guy with the earphones did not appear to me to be the oldest one. He had a full head of gray hair. There are a couple totally bald old guys. And two waist length ponytails, one gray on a slender older male, and one jet black on a roly poly young male with stache and goatee.