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

[smurfy]

Does anyone know if JM is going to have another expert like Demarte? I would be concerned about the experience questions, if he has another older one that is on the same page as this one, it might really drive it home for the jurors?

[Estefaniia]

looks like they're all having a good time up there

[AnnieBelle]

Some of these questions make me nervous.

First of all, there were only a few questions. Compare that to the basketfuls that of questions that were asked of the defense witnesses. This tells me the jury took her testimony for what it was. Only a few questions to clarify the tests/scales. Nothing that questioned her logic. Nothing that was mocking or sarcastic. I think they couldn't find much fault with this witness or the testimony she gave. To me, it's a good sign.

[poppym]

They whitewashed/ignored and excused all of Stabby's behaviors.

So right! Which is A LOT further than minimizing!

[Ruthven]

Anyone recall Demarte's answer to this juror question off the top of their heads?

Do you feel "mark my words no jury will convict me" is part of borderline personality disorder?

She said something about it meaning she has self-esteem and something about immaturity.

[Estefaniia]

Have to register for that one, so I don't use it. The commercials came relatively late to the game on the other sites.

Install Adblock on your browser.

Or use the direct link http://bcove.me/r9952nln

[AgathaAppleswine]

Bad question about the camera IMO! Bet it's from the juror I've heard ask other bad questions. I think there's one in there!

I think the jury doesn't realize that, even though Jodi was a 'photographer' (supposedly), she may have known a lot more about photo-editing (e.g. photoshop) than she did about the workings of a DSLR! DSLR technology was still in relative infancy in 2008, and it's highly plausible that Jodi thought it was enough to delete the photographs and run the camera through the wash to destroy the evidence!

Jodi started taking pictures way early in life, and probably used a 35mm SLR, and maybe even earlier technology using film. If you run film through a wash, it WILL destroy it! She knew you had to delete the images (and did so). IMO, she thought it would be enough to run the smart card through a cycle to destroy it!

As to why she didn't just remove the memory card, or even take the whole camera, well, in her words, "I've never killed anyone before!"

I would love to point out to everyone (especially any defense team members on HLN) that even people who plan crimes sometimes do it wrong. Even if they think they've got everything covered, they'll slip up a little -- like using a rewards card to make a purchase, or being caught on a camera they don't know is there.

You can plan and plan and plan for any event (including murder) and have things go awry. It's not that shocking that Jodi would have left some evidence behind, especially since she was clearly running out of time to get out of the house before someone arrived home.

[AnnieBelle]

Does anyone know if JM is going to have another expert like Demarte? I would be concerned about the experience questions, if he has another older one that is on the same page as this one, it might really drive it home for the jurors?

Look at all of the "experience" that ALV and Doc Dick had under their belts......and yet, they were less-than-brilliant witnesses. Sometimes, TOO much time in the field softens the passion and conviction in what they do. Though JW tried to make this to be about money, as JM did with defense witnesses, it just didn't wash. Their witnesses were bought. Dr. DeMarte was not. She was just doing the job she was hired to do, in a totally professional way. That is why the defense failed to punch holes in her testimony.....there were none.

[olgasbunghole]

Bad question about the camera IMO! Bet it's from the juror I've heard ask other bad questions. I think there's one in there!

I think the jury doesn't realize that, even though Jodi was a 'photographer' (supposedly), she may have known a lot more about photo-editing (e.g. photoshop) than she did about the workings of a DSLR! DSLR technology was still in relative infancy in 2008, and it's highly plausible that Jodi thought it was enough to delete the photographs and run the camera through the wash to destroy the evidence!

Jodi started taking pictures way early in life, and probably used a 35mm SLR, and maybe even earlier technology using film. If you run film through a wash, it WILL destroy it! She knew you had to delete the images (and did so). IMO, she thought it would be enough to run the smart card through a cycle to destroy it!

As to why she didn't just remove the memory card, or even take the whole camera, well, in her words, "I've never killed anyone before!"

that's a BIG 10-4 and I love the "jodi was a photographer (supposedly)"! ha ha ha ha...... i saw a couple of her photos on ebay last month.................. my dog could have taken better photos! and surprise surprise...... they didn't sell!

[wasthinking]

The jury had only a few questions. Martinez didn't have any follow up except to let her answer the other question.

I bet Willmott has lots. She was scribbling like crazy. She will have as many as she can squeeze out.

Good questions overall. Only one that causes worry. Either that juror believes Jodi or likes playing devil's advocate. Hopefully they won't make the cut. Or they will see the truth in time.


ETA: Willmott is continuing on with her ridiculous behavior.

sorry to be the wet blanket Justice, but I think we've had this staunch JA advocate all along on the jury questions.

[bermstalker]

A juror asks about tigers and lions!!!

Late afternoon
Dr. Demarte is back on the stand. The judge will ask the questions

Jury Questions

How many forensics cases have you worked on? Several years. 2010
How many time have you testified? 3 times
How many cases involved abuse? most
Common for abuse, forensics cases? I have to check
PTSD would you throw it out if it's a tiger? I would
Would the person be lying in their answering if the same? No, different
Can you remain bias when compassion creeps in? It would be possible
What types of people are at risk for having BPD? Anyone, higher for people that has been expose to trauma
No jury will convict me-would that be BPD? Yes that's another example of self esteem and immature
Would taking the camera show more org? They are both org.
Real or imagined abandonment? Jodi used that word in her diaries with other boyfriends. Jodi would stay with them even after they cheated on her
Washing camera is an attempt to remove evidence? That's the impression
Would you have viewed this as an effective attempt to remove evidence? Yes
Is it normal for a person to be in jail and be depressed? Yes, I see it all the time.
Do you consider Jodi stabbing, shooting, and cutting Travis" throat to be traumatic? Yes. I would be focused on her response
Why didn't you give other test to retest Jodi? It was my decision and I felt like my test gave the answer I needed.
What's the difference between TSI 1 & 2? I haven't used 2
PDS answer sheet. Who's handwriting is on the answer sheet?
Do you see any issues with Dr. Fog filling out the answer sheet? Yes, The person should fill it
Does it concern that the answers is filled out by a profession? Yes, that's why it shouldn't be done

JM-
Do you now know how many times you have involved for Forensics-75 times at least

Palin
Doc admits that staying with a man that cheats on you could also be a sign of low self esteem.
The doc basically says that Palin is confusing her by her questions. Doc admits that she hasn't used the TSI 2.
EX 534- Dr. Fog's handwritting. The doc says she is not an expert.

Palin is finished
Court in recess until Tue 9:30am

[dizzyp]

- like using a rewards card to make a purchase.

I saw that one... she saved like 30 cents and it got her convicted...

[Ruthven]

I would love to point out to everyone (especially any defense team members on HLN) that even people who plan crimes sometimes do it wrong. Even if they think they've got everything covered, they'll slip up a little -- like using a rewards card to make a purchase, or being caught on a camera they don't know is there.

You can plan and plan and plan for any event (including murder) and have things go awry. It's not that shocking that Jodi would have left some evidence behind, especially since she was clearly running out of time to get out of the house before someone arrived home.

Yeah, and as others have speculated, Stabby could've scooped up the camera with everything and tossed it in the washer unknowingly.

[olgasbunghole]

Anyone recall Demarte's answer to this juror question off the top of their heads?

Do you feel "mark my words no jury will convict me" is part of borderline personality disorder?

no, I don't think so.................. just an over confidant murderer that thinks she's smarter than everyone else!

[Justice11]

So how do we fit the whole killing the guy you really wanted to be with into the BPD picture, related to premeditiation? If she still loved him and feared abandonment, why kill him? Why not continue trying to get back into his life?

It would make more sense to me that she would murder his other love interest(s). Let's just say that Ice Queen Demarte was right about everything she found, does that make Jodi a premeditated killer? I'm not seeing it.

Of course you aren't. You want Jodi to be set free. You have blinders on.

Jodi has a juror.

I think so too. Or maybe someone playing devil's advocate.

trial's not over...

Good point. That juror might not even be selected to deliberate. Then there are the deliberations themselves. People can and often do change their minds there.

sorry to be the wet blanket Justice, but I think we've had this staunch JA advocate all along on the jury questions.

Oh, I completely agree. I've seen a few other worrisome questions. All we can do is hope and pray it all settles in the right way.

[Cocopop]

Wonder who these JA supporters are... they made a point to linger around til JA looked back at them... & again waited for her to look back to give a little wave before they exited

[AgathaAppleswine]

I saw that one... she saved like 30 cents and it got her convicted...

There's been a couple. I saw one over the weekend where she shot her boyfriend and set his body on fire. She tried to be clever with the cars, by parking them at the shopping center. She made two key errors; she didn't realize the camera was also in the parking lot, so her little switcheroo with the cars and U-Haul truck were caught on video, and she made a purchase for an industrial cleaner and something else, and paid cash -- but she used her card to save money on her purchase.

If not for the camera and the seventy-five cents savings, she may well have gotten off, simply because everything else is circumstantial.

[coconut]

Their witnesses were bought. Dr. DeMarte was not.

I think that's an idealistic view. All expert witnesses are bought. They are paid well to find specific things to help the case for their employer. You just happen to agree with this one so you don't mind paying her

[dizzyp]

There's been a couple. I saw one over the weekend where she shot her boyfriend and set his body on fire. She tried to be clever with the cars, by parking them at the shopping center. She made two key errors; she didn't realize the camera was also in the parking lot, so her little switcheroo with the cars and U-Haul truck were caught on video, and she made a purchase for an industrial cleaner and something else, and paid cash -- but she used her card to save money on her purchase.

If not for the camera and the seventy-five cents savings, she may well have gotten off, simply because everything else is circumstantial.

if I'm not mistaken she even claimed "would I be so stupid to swipe my own discount card?" ... answer: yes. :)

[faq_q]

Jodi has a juror.

I was listening on my way home and I thought the same thing. I surely hope not.

The way Dr Demarte says "horror" comes out sounding like "whore" to me

Ditto!

First of all, there were only a few questions. Compare that to the basketfuls that of questions that were asked of the defense witnesses. This tells me the jury took her testimony for what it was. Only a few questions to clarify the tests/scales. Nothing that questioned her logic. Nothing that was mocking or sarcastic. I think they couldn't find much fault with this witness or the testimony she gave. To me, it's a good sign.

Dr Fog and ALV were on the stands for a way longer period of time, that could be good or bad. I'm hoping the amount of questions for DeMarte since there were a lot fewer is an insight as to what the jury is thinking but it's hard to tell at this point. Maybe some of them discounted her off the bat as soon as her experience was revealed. I'm not trying to be coconut but it is entirely possible that this could be a bad thing.

sorry to be the wet blanket Justice, but I think we've had this staunch JA advocate all along on the jury questions.

I agree WT, I have thought all along that there could be a Stabby juror in their midst. Possibly juror 2. Wish the tweeters would give us an insight into which juror numbers are submitting questions other than that they are.

[wasthinking]

The jury had only a few questions. Martinez didn't have any follow up except to let her answer the other question.

I bet Willmott has lots. She was scribbling like crazy. She will have as many as she can squeeze out.

Good questions overall. Only one that causes worry. Either that juror believes Jodi or likes playing devil's advocate. Hopefully they won't make the cut. Or they will see the truth in time.


ETA: Willmott is continuing on with her ridiculous behavior.

I think that's an idealistic view. All expert witnesses are bought. They are paid well to find specific things to help the case for their employer. You just happen to agree with this one so you don't mind paying her

yup, cheerleading view aka BIASED view I favor the prosecution side so mine can't be bought off. I agree, not an objective eye but a false base for judging them.
They are being paid to slant it best they can for the side paying them or they wouldn't be using them. If I had my way, shrink experts wouldn't be allowed past determining for the court if you are legally sane or not. It's a suggestive field and you can any one of them to say anything. It's a waste of time white wash.

[Ian 1]

Of course you aren't. You want Jodi to be set free. You have blinders on.

Uhm! How about accepting the fact that Travis told Arias that she was out--the door was locked--bars were up. There was no way back in so don't bother trying. What does Arias do then? Answer: kill Travis.

That's the point. That juror might not even be selected to deliberate. Then there are the deliberations themselves. People can and often do change their minds there.

Perhaps the Juror just needed clarification about how specific the trauma had to be.

Oh, I completely agree. I've seen a few other worrisome questions. All we can do is hope and pray it all settles in the right way.

The reason for Jury questions is to enable the individual Jurors to gain a better understanding of complicated testimony. The theory is that before questions were allowed, individual Jurors would simply ignore complicated testimony.

[*crickets*]

One sure-fire way to really, really piss someone off is to correct their grammar/spelling. People HATE that. Especially when it's done in big, red letters...

Agreed! I am a writer, and I am friends with many authors, as well. We give editors a job! And there are STILL mistakes made. No one wants to be corrected on grammatical issues, in this type of forum. People have fingers that work faster than the mind, at times. I have a very talented author friend who puts most of his peers off, simply because he will correct them on the most minute of issues. And he wonders why people think he's a literary snob??! It truly takes away from how others view him......and for the gifted writer he is. Makes him look like a jerk. :)

Okay one last thing and I promise I'll stop...I have to say that I CRINGE when I read/hear "I seen" for "I saw" and "should of" for "should have"...and had to take a time out when I read "should of went" on this very blog...but I bit my lip hard and didn't say a word...

Last post on that topic, I know there's probably a thread for that but I had to vent. Sorry!

[ShellJett]

I doubt any Juror who believes M1 will compromise to M2. IMO the worst case scenario is a mistrial, and then we can watch Stabby act as her own attorney.

[lisam2013]

...