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

[lisam2013]

...

[Lady MacBeth]

Questions about how many times did she testify seemed to me to be pro JA.

[wasthinking]

I wonder if there were 2 separate occasions- one sleeping under the tree when there was no room and another hiding behind it.

Great point! I hadn't even thought of that.

I'm on to the computer guy wish next. He's more impotant to me than Walmart who we know what that is about.
I better not hear some vague crap from Mesa PD guru, I want intrusion specifics dammit! And not just FB, I want the bank account rumors addressed.
I want to know wth set him off so bad on May 26th.
And whats up with those checks she claims where she borrowed him all that money? vs her asking if he made a deposit?
Is the blonde hair premed going silent because JM screwed up and is hoping it gets lost in the shuffle?

And why was the couple added to the State's witness list this week. All they have is that video, I don't see that as anything important for a last min add.

[AnnieBelle]

The ppl on here-Metis212, Imbatman!, AnnieBelle they all work in the field-my dad, all the professionals on HLN (those kinda don't count) but I do like Betheny Marshall.

My daughter is the one who is in the field. I am well-schooled in the world of psychology, though.

[Ian 1]

The tiger (killing of travis) and the bear (stranger abuse) to me indicate that someone on the jury believes she has ptsd and does not remember what happened.

Re-visit that! What you're suggesting is something we could label 'generic trauma'-- an attack by a tiger-bear-coyote-neighbour's dog--it's all trauma. Dr. DeMarte says definitely not. The Trauma associated with PTSD is very specific to the event. You don't have symptoms when you see a bear if it is really a tiger that attacked you. Dr. DeMarte cleared that up for the Juror who asked the question.

Remember this. None of those Jurors have been evaluated. Who knows what's in their psychological history. Hopefully, they are able to maintain their objectivity.

[poppym]

AMEN! Some people never acquire common sense! It would be interesting to see her in a few yrs and be able to determine if it is youth, or a character trait w her. It's all good in the long run, she's got one more notch under her belt. Didn't like the way she answered some of the jury questions, and one she skirted around and JM had to go back and clean it up. Apparently it's difficult for her to face the simple question, how many times have you testified in a forensic case.

I missed her response on the jury Q's! There were so so few, and they decided so quickly (by counsel), I thought I'd be back in time! But I heard her voice (not her words), and you're right! Everyone is rattled by the Jury Q's IMO! Maybe ultra aware that their opinion, is the ONLY OPINION that matters?

[Lady MacBeth]

Ian - i hope im wrong! She certainly didnt seem bothered by the question

[AnnieBelle]

I really hope in closing Juan hammers home the fact that these two exchanged 82,000 emails and there were probably less than 10 where Travis called her names or "assassinated her character" and 10 is being generous. I mean we heard about a couple and I think that is all. Out of 82,000 fucking emails. That is not a pattern of being verbally abusive.

Good point! And that is why JD's testimony was so much more believable than any of the other psych "experts"......she looked at the whole picture, not just portions of it. Jodi had a "pattern" of stalking type behaviors. There is proof of that. Travis did NOT have a pattern of being abusive to anyone. He may not have had fabulous communication skills, but that does not equal being abusive. And there was no evidence to back up any of what Jodi claims....nothing! No reports, no diary entries, no emails. Just her word. And we all know how reliable her word is!

[wasthinking]

The ppl on here-Metis212, Imbatman!, AnnieBelle they all work in the field-my dad, all the professionals on HLN (those kinda don't count) but I do like Betheny Marshall.

omg, although I appreciate chatting, those are not ETHICAL evaluations! They are not people that performed ETHICAL evaluations in person. HLN and message boards are entertainment.

[Angiebla]

omg, although I appreciate chatting, those are not ETHICAL evaluations! They are not people that performed ETHICAL evaluations in person. HLN and message boards are entertainment.

ok sorry but Im pretty sure even Dr. Dick said she had a personality disorder.

[wasthinking]

The tiger (killing of travis) and the bear (stranger abuse) to me indicate that someone on the jury believes she has ptsd and does not remember what happened.

I wouldn't lean in that direction except for the fact someone has all along asked questions that seem to go in favor of JA. It's been a 'pattern' lol
I don't panic, we don't know if that person will end up going home an alternate never to be needed. And once in deliberations, it can be anyone's game.

[Sneakers the Wonder Dog]

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.

I'd pay money to see that. It'd be all sorts of crazy hysterical lols and shit.

She has to be thinking she couldn't have done any worse than Jenny and and Nurmi at this point.

I found the camera question even more troubling. Whoever asked it seemed to have doubts about premeditation.

What Stabby did with the camera after she killed TA has nothing to do with premeditation. What she did with the camera after she killed him is only evidence that she tried to destroy evidence and cover her tracks.

And why was the couple added to the State's witness list this week. All they have is that video, I don't see that as anything important for a last min add.

Holly Mefford was witness to the day Stabby went to the home of the Hughes' and confronted Sky Hughes about why they didn't want her around/didn't like her. Then she sat in a home where she was told she was not welcome for another 15 minutes in the company of another woman (Mefford) who also had told her she was welcome in her own home.

Kills the defense's lie that Stabby has low self esteem and was non confrontational. Kills it dead.

The tiger (killing of travis) and the bear (stranger abuse) to me indicate that someone on the jury believes she has ptsd and does not remember what happened.

I think it's the 2 ninja story (2nd JA lie about what happened to Travis) With Dr. Samuel's tests, JA's answers were based on that story. He admitted that perhaps he should have retested because of this.

[QUOTE=Ian 1;3395377]Re-visit that! What you're suggesting is something we could label 'generic trauma'-- an attack by a tiger-bear-coyote-neighbour's dog--it's all trauma. Dr. DeMarte says definitely not. The Trauma associated with PTSD is very specific to the event. You don't have symptoms when you see a bear if it is really a tiger that attacked you. Dr. DeMarte cleared that up for the Juror who asked the question.

^That. The jury asked Dr Samuels a similar question and it could be they/he/she are comparing the answers.

[Brillig]

What do you make of the fact that UNPAID Psychologists/Psychiatrists diagnosed her as being Borderline a long time ago?

Who were they?

ImBatman and Metis, I believe.

I agree. I know I will probably get slammed but I really did not think she was so great. If I was on the jury I would not have been impressed. To me, she came off badly and really not experienced. She is very book smart. She will get the life experience down the line. Just my opinion. She got a great case to learn from. JA is one for the books.

So very smart and competent does not impress you. Alrighty then. I'll make a note of that.

She has some skill! She takes passable portraits, and certainly some nice shots of TA which are used by his support sites, a lot! But the problem for an 'artist' (again, loose term) like Jodi, is that when you discover editing suites for digital photography, you care a lot less about skill, because there's so much less you have to achieve with the original image!

She does have some skill. I think in particular that the grimacing photo of Darryl is actually quite striking and compelling. I am always surprised by the posts that want to claim she has zero skill at anything and is a moron. I loathe Jodi, but I am still willing to acknowledge that she is reasonably bright, and has a some artistic talent. Not Einstein, not Monet, not Annie Liebovitz, and not Celine Dion. But she is above average skill level in several areas.

This^, IMO, was also, a HUGE MISS for the defense! They could have played heavily on the fact that Jodi was a 'photographer', by highlighting that her knowledge would negate her actions (i.e. fog), in putting the camera in the wash! Also, they could have argued, that most of the photo's of Travis in the shower were not flash-lit, and not good, because you have that luxury as a DSLR photographer. It doesn't waste film to take bad shots! It doesn't waste anything! You just DELETE them, and start over!

True about the fog/camera in the wash. However, I think they would have had trouble arguing that those exceptionally mediocre pics were what Jodi or Travis would have intended if Jodi's story were true. Jodi claimed that they both kept checking the pics together as they went along, deleting the bad ones and keeping the good ones. But they are all (save one) very mediocre. It seems unlikely they could have looked at them and said "yes, great, this is the look we were hoping for". Yet the session went on for a significant time with no changes in flash setting or improved quality of the pictures being taken. Not very believable, imo.

[AnnieBelle]

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.

You missed the point. It doesn't fit.....because it's not a defense to her crime. She HAS no defense. A BPD person is not typically violent. Self-centered and prone to emotional temper tantrums? Yes. Jodi didn't kill him because she feared abandonment. She killed him because she was furious with him.....in her mind, no matter how MUCH she did to show him that he was "the one", he just couldn't see it. In fact, he didn't want anything to do with it. She became obsessed with him, wanting to become everything to him. But instead, he moved on to other girls. He wasn't supposed to do that, in the world as Jodi saw it. So, she decided he had to die. Nothing confusing about it.

[Lady MacBeth]

I interpreted the bear and tiger question as sarcastic or kinda like the juror was saying trauma is trauma and believed dr d was splitting hairs.

Now, i agree that the doc clarified her position. My focus was trying to figure out the mindset of the juror who asked the question.

[wasthinking]

ok sorry but Im pretty sure even Dr. Dick said she had a personality disorder.

yes he suggested PD NOS but again, he was still a paid expert that regardless of his deceit and sloppiness, actually saw her and tested her.
PTSD or BPD althought making it busier for us to chat about, doesn't help explain premediation or DV self defense for the jury. They are smoke screens to distract from the real questions the jury has to answer .. MURDER or Self def.

[olgasbunghole]

Originally Posted by wasthinking
AMEN! Some people never acquire common sense! It would be interesting to see her in a few yrs and be able to determine if it is youth, or a character trait w her. It's all good in the long run, she's got one more notch under her belt. Didn't like the way she answered some of the jury questions, and one she skirted around and JM had to go back and clean it up. Apparently it's difficult for her to face the simple question, how many times have you testified in a forensic case.

I missed her response on the jury Q's! There were so so few, and they decided so quickly (by counsel), I thought I'd be back in time! But I heard her voice (not her words), and you're right! Everyone is rattled by the Jury Q's IMO! Maybe ultra aware that their opinion, is the ONLY OPINION that matters?

I think it's really hard to read into the jurors minds re their questions to dr. D, they could have been asking for the simple reason of comparing the answers from the past two lug-head "professionals"! doc D is much younger than those two and more in-touch with the reality of our times.................. unlike the wishy-washy mish-mosh excuses that the two "lugs" gave, doc D is straight to the point! Sure doc D has less "professional" time under her belt than the "lugs" but she comes off as very well versed and knows her shit, as far as is needed to see through stabby's labyrinth of lies! ptsd & abuse victim............... so far from the truth!

[*crickets*]

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

I was wondering who they were looking at! Whoever they are, they sure look sketchy. Thank you for catching this...you don't miss a thing with that eagle eye!

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

Coconut, it's SOOOO obvious you love Jodi! We all know it. C'mon, just come clean and admit it...you'll feel better.

[AnnieBelle]

ok sorry but Im pretty sure even Dr. Dick said she had a personality disorder.

We also have to keep in mind that, even the pros, armed with all the "evidence" in the world, can still find it tough to distinguish one PD from another. Many of the characteristics overlap, and are common to more than one condition. That is why it's often noted that someone has "tendencies" rather than a clear cut diagnosis.

[wasthinking]

Holly Mefford was witness to the day Stabby went to the home of the Hughes' and confronted Sky Hughes about why they didn't want her around/didn't like her. Then she sat in a home where she was told she was not welcome for another 15 minutes in the company of another woman (Mefford) who also had told her she was welcome in her own home.

Kills the defense's lie that Stabby has low self esteem and was non confrontational. Kills it dead.

thanks Sneakers, forgot about them. Makes sense, JM chipping away at the shrill voice of JW.

Re-visit that! What you're suggesting is something we could label 'generic trauma'-- an attack by a tiger-bear-coyote-neighbour's dog--it's all trauma. Dr. DeMarte says definitely not. The Trauma associated with PTSD is very specific to the event. You don't have symptoms when you see a bear if it is really a tiger that attacked you. Dr. DeMarte cleared that up for the Juror who asked the question.

^That. The jury asked Dr Samuels a similar question and it could be they/he/she are comparing the answers.

Her example was really a bad one, I wouldn't count on it clearing it up to the one who asked the question. I get what she was going for, but, the fact it was asked suggest someone is a bit slow on the draw and if that is the case, bears and tigers aren't much help.

[sheesh]

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?

Read about BPD splitting: idealizing/devaluing. Fear of abandonment, identity disturbance, emotional dysregulation.

If you had ever been in relationship with a BPD you would understand "why" all too easily, having seen the emotion flash onto her face. But, of course, the vast majority of BPDs just move on ... quickly.

[Lady MacBeth]

WT - i believe the juror's question incorporated the tiger and bear hypothetical. ?

[Metis212]

In her own unique way, Wilmott is trying to make the same points about the prosecution that Martinez tried to make about the defense witnesses. The prosecution witness is using a lot of the same techniques to evade questions that we've seen from Jodi.

All experts are biased, and hired to reach a certain conclusion. They accept certain evidence that fits their conclusions, and reject other evidence that goes against. If Demarte found that Jodi was battered, you can bet she wouldn't be on the stand. They would have found someone else to testify. Demarte was hired to find that Jodi was not battered, not abused, and is just a sick fuck.

It's not surprising that there is evidence that goes against some of Demarte's findings, and even less surprising that Wilmott wants to wallow in it for days.

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

Coconut, honey, love bucket: How would you explain Dr. Samuels diagnosing Jodi with personality disorder nos (a general pd) and Dr. Demarte diagnosing borderline personality disorder?

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.

Coconut, sweety, snookums: Jodi under the borderline persona flipped the switch from the idealized Travis to hating Travis because he made it crystal clear (since april 8) and drew the line in the sand on may 28 with his mean and cruel words that he was done. I would bet real money it had to do with taking his PPL ring and then spewing her twisty lies. What is of more interest (to me at least) is she is enraged at Travis for things she did to push him away.

And, she is right on the mark! Travis was no saint, we already know that. None of us are. Dr. DeMarte is not saying that Travis was reacting in a great way when he called Jodi those things.....She is saying that this was not a long term pattern that showed itself over time. Yes, Travis used less-than-kind words, but it was in response to finding out that Jodi was inappropriately invading his life, his home, his privacy. He had every right to be pissed. I would have called her worse names than HE did if someone did that to me. If you listen closely to the "jibber-jabber", you might learn something! It's called the truth! ;)

Sometimes people dont go away when you end things with them. Sometimes, you must be "mean" with angry hurtful words that say "I have reached the point of no return". When he shared what he said with his friend, the friend was very concerned about Travis's well being. It appears that Jodi didn't get it.

Jodi has a juror.

maybe. maybe not.

I wonder if there were any juror questions on the stolen ring & hiding behind the Christmas tree, that JW & LN wouldn't allow in.

They probably filed it for deliberation.

Exactly, and she may have even grabbed it up with the other laundry, threw it in the washer, then couldn't find it before she could get out of there. She was on a tight schedule before the roommate was due home.

Never thought she fu*ked up and threw it by mistake. Never. She is sociopathic under extreme stress and figured she was smarter. We see she thought she could explain everything away.

What do you make of the fact that UNPAID Psychologists/Psychiatrists diagnosed her as being Borderline a long time ago?

Ha!

The tiger (killing of travis) and the bear (stranger abuse) to me indicate that someone on the jury believes she has ptsd and does not remember what happened.

That question was oblique.

[olgasbunghole]

Originally Posted by coconut
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.

You missed the point. It doesn't fit.....because it's not a defense to her crime. She HAS no defense. A BPD person is not typically violent. Self-centered and prone to emotional temper tantrums? Yes. Jodi didn't kill him because she feared abandonment. She killed him because she was furious with him.....in her mind, no matter how MUCH she did to show him that he was "the one", he just couldn't see it. In fact, he didn't want anything to do with it. She became obsessed with him, wanting to become everything to him. But instead, he moved on to other girls. He wasn't supposed to do that, in the world as Jodi saw it. So, she decided he had to die. Nothing confusing about it.

I agree 100% AnnieBelle! it is the "simple reason" she slaughtered him! And to top it off, she is so full of herself that she thinks she can pull off the perfect murder and get away with it............... "who would ever suspect her, she was never near that area at the time of the slaughter?"........................... if it hadn't been for her arrogance and ego this trial would never have been televised! She brought the attention to herself..............

[olgasbunghole]

Yes, she won the book smart vocab game. I will give JW 1 pt for being coached on the lingo for the tests Mr Smarty was lost on.
She started out confident and that turned into an air of superiority that wasn't fun to watch. Frankly, I was growing tired of her. She didn't come near as sickening as Dick and Jane but JM gets my credit for that, he is heads above the def teams skills and knew it was time to get it off the stand esepcially when she was unable to give him what he wanted too.


AMEN! Some people never acquire common sense! It would be interesting to see her in a few yrs and be able to determine if it is youth, or a character trait w her. It's all good in the long run, she's got one more notch under her belt. Didn't like the way she answered some of the jury questions, and one she skirted around and JM had to go back and clean it up. Apparently it's difficult for her to face the simple question, how many times have you testified in a forensic case.

yeah........ it's kinda a weird trade off sometimes, I have a relative that is so book smart that it's scary but they missed the train in the common sense department! it's very interesting to observe......