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

[bermstalker]

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.

Yep. It sounds like someone is believing Jodi's version. It also sounds like somebody didn't fully believe Dr. DeMarte's version.

Personally, I think there was a question or two that Palin asked that were very good. IMO, I think there is a juror that believes Jodi just snapped and killed him in a rage.

I think Dr. DeMarte did a fine job, but I also think Palin did a fine job later in the day.
I liked Dr. D better than Alyce or Dr. Fog, but that may be b/c the defense kept their witnesses on the stand way to long. I think Alyce would have been a great witness for the defense if they wouldn't have kept her on the stand forever and let her talk in detail to much.

I don't disagree with you. She killed him from hating him and being pissed off at him. BUT wtf does that have to do with BPD? I think the diagnosis makes her more sympathetic to the jury. She's a messed up love sick wacko.

Maybe that is what happened. But then after "flipping the switch" she was such a good actress that she kept him in the dark for a couple weeks while she planned his murder and then charmed her way into his house, bed, and shower? Even when in her twisted BPD heart she hated him 100% she was still able to have sex, take pics, hang out with him until the right moment and then kill him? I'm just not buying BPD as a complete explanation for premeditated murder. If the prosecution wants to call her BPD then I think it sounds more like she snapped, flipped the switch in the spur of the moment, and killed him. Heat of passion killing.

She may have BPD I just don't think it's the defining trait behind premeditated murder, especially as the prosecution has presented their case. You're telling me she is crazy and unstable, prone to wild emotional swings. I buy that. Sounds like someone who might kill on the spur of the moment, doesn't it?

I agree with you. JM is going to have to prove the premeditation. I believe in my mind and heart Jodi planned to kill Travis, but if I am looking at the case as of right now- JM has not proven any premeditation. If anything, I think JM and Dr. DeMarte proved that Jodi "snapped" on June 4.

By comprehending the testimony. Flipped to despised which included built up anger, blaming someone else for her sorry ass loser life. She had been sleeping on floors! The resentment is seen in her journal about it.
You have a loser told go away from my nice house you dreamed would one day be yours.
Driving away crying, her dream crushed and "it's not fair"
So called friends saying, hey, give me my futon back before you leave.
She's forced back to a juvenile bed in a place she's ashamed of that will never reflect her desires for pretense of successful life.

She'd make him pay! Why should he have anything if he won't share it all with her, 'it's not fair!"

Exactly. This is from Jodi's OWN words in the police interview:

March 2008-15:36 Jodi's word in the police video: I owe my parents a lot of money, and I owe my grandparents a lot of money, and I owe friends money and I owe? I owe... I umm?the guy that I bought a house with ? I owe him a lot of money. He doesn?t ask me for it but I intend to pay him back because he really footed the bill on the mortgage for a few months, umm? and the third reason, and I like to put this third because I like to think that second of those reasons I would have been strong enough somehow but the third reason was to put a distance? a physical distance between Travis and I because? I know that he really liked me and he said he did ? ummm? he just? I kinda? felt guilty, and I know they weren?t dating, but I just felt guilty, somehow, and I didn?t know Ryan at the time. I met him in March at? in Oklahoma City, and it was just brief, and I remember seeing him and saying, Oh, I really want to go say Hi to him, but he was surrounded by people, and he was kind of unapproachable. Umm?and he says he remembers meeting me, too, and it wasn?t until Zion, my friend, umm?texted me?and I think I told you that ?http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=vE_Ue5rF8QM

Ok jokes aside, I would love to read the communication between the psycho and Travis on May 26. I am very intrigued of what was the reason he was fed up. I wonder if someone has posted them online or they are sealed.
What I cannot understand is how the judge allowed Travis' messages to be allowed, but not her, that is BS!!!

On my blog, I have a lot of the texts and diary entries transcribed and in order by the date they were made. Most of the text messages are not compete b/c only parts of the conversations have been entered into evidence. I would also love to see the whole May 26th text message.


Everybody....have a great weekend!

[Ian 1]

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

I use it and don't have to register.
http://wildabouttrial.com/videos/jod...ve-stream.html

also use,

http://radaronline.com/exclusives/20...al-livestream/

No commercials, no registering.

[Ian 1]

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.

Are there any links for these two cases? Please post. Thanks.

[Ian 1]

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!

The most egregious error is ending a sentence with a preposition.
Example: Where's it at? Where are you at?

Correct form: Where's it at, bitch. Where are you at, stupid?

[carnee]

It's one of my favs. Did you ever read the book? The movie is available at target for five bucks. My old VHS died so I'm going to have to break down and replace that movie.



I've never been much of a 'why' person myself so maybe that adds to common sense. I think you are wanting 'feelings' where there are none. Feelings you imagine you might have, trying to put yourself in that situation. Hard to try to comprehend, they don't have what you want inside them. Jeffrey Dahmer, no more understood himself than we might ask why, so how could we understand him? And a long list of others that give evidence they themselves don't know why. It's like JA asking 'whats different' to Flores. I don't think that was manipulation. Most but, I think part of her was sincerly curious 'how why am I different'.
Ted Bundy, would say he had anxiety sometimes, worried he left something behind so it was related to getting caught, but he didn't attribute those feelings to the horrors he committed. Can you imagine the power they might feel? An emotion, even a bad one, would be 'feeling'. The ability to not have fear? I can only imagine it, but even in imagination, I can see why they might enjoy any feeling where little is usually felt.

















They did a remake in the 70s or 80s, Although in color, it wasn't as good in my opinion. Redgrave was good and Carradine but the little girl just didn't fit the role as well as Patty McCormck did.

"The Bad Seed" is a great flick. I have bought a few dvds for friends that know their own versions of Rhoda Penmark. Patty McCormack did a wonderful job. She was chilling. She does remind me of JA. No remorse or empathy. I always wished they would do a sequel. Little Rhoda never really died and murders her way through adulthood, still wearing those perfect blonde braids.

[carnee]

There's a why for ya lol WHY the hell are there these other assholes willing to lie for killers? The old hype when Sybil came out. Rocked the psych world, big breakthoughs, treatments changing across the county BS w ppl too traumatized so the theory flew, she created a few dozens give or take alters. pfft, years later you find out it was all BS lies from both her shrink and Sybil. Sybil wanted the comfort of the shrinks attention and the shrink loved the fame and money.
It's the one answer fits all, crazy F'ing world!

I remember the Sybil shrink. How evil she was....People will sell there souls for money and fame. ALV and Dr S are paying a heavy price for testifying for JA. I am sure now, they rue the day met JA. So not worth it.

[Ian 1]

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.

The issue presents a clear contrast between the 'expert opinion' of Dr. Samuels and Dr. DeMarte. The question remains, "Whose opinion will the Juror accept?" There is nothing wrong with how you read the intent of the question. I'm still wondering--and hoping.

[Ian 1]

I know, and you're right! Dr D is more in touch with our times, hence, the common sense remarks. It's not a judgement on her skill, it's an intuition about her age, tis all! As wt says, "some people never acquire common sense", even with age and/or life experience! Dr D has, at least, 2 of the 3, and it would interesting to see her testimony in 10-20 yrs times.

If you are evolving emotionally, intellectually, spiritually, whatever the label (common sense), I'm not sure you even know who you are until you are at least in your 40's or 50's! And most in their 20's and 30's are going to be reacting to that statement right now, as I would have done! But hey, hang around, there's so much more to know! It's just so fucking shitty, 'law of life', crappy toilet, bullshit, not fair: that you didn't know it 20-30 years ago!

Crap, but true!

Not challenging you at all! Curiously, here's what Albert Einstein is being quoted on common sense.

"Common Sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by the age of eighteen."

http://www.quotationspage.com/quote/254.html

[deanna1247]

I am truly sorry that you have to deal with PTSD like that! it sucks! I hope you eventually reach a point in your life that it becomes less severe. Thank you for sharing, that can't be easy either

Sorry too, that you have to deal with that. I'll say a prayer for you. Thanks for sharing.

[Ian 1]

Actually iirc, the question was something along the lines of "If you diagnosed someone with PTSD after a bear attack, would you throw out the PTSD diagnosis if it was really a tiger attack?"

Very different than whether seeing a bear would trigger PTSD symptoms in someone who had PTSD from a tiger attack. And Dr. D's answer ("Yes, that would invalidate the PTSD diagnosis") made no sense to me.

From what Dr. DeMarte said, I understood that the diagnosis of PTSD arising from a fictional Trauma is a non sequitur. There is no PTSD diagnosis to throw out. It didn't exist. It is a fiction built upon a fiction.

[Freethinker]

Ok people, all this talk about PSTD, borderline personality disorder, psychological tests, high IQ, GSD, bear and tiger, battered women trauma, etc etc etc ARE A BUNCH OF CRAP.
Martinez needs to focus on the real issue in this case which is premeditation!!! PREMEDITATION! and PREMEDITATION! gas cans, car rental, covering tracks, gun stolen, cellphone disconnected, cleaning scene. This case needs to get back on track for the love of God!

Ah, hello! How many times can someone testify about gas cans, cell phones, car rentals etc? These things have been established. All this mental stuff was started by the defense. Was JM supposed to just let the defense strategy of PTSD and battered syndrome go without question?

[Freethinker]

Some other Jenny-isms that made me laugh in spite of myself today:

JD: "That would be an incorrect way to use the MMPI"
JW:(chirpy voice) "Let's do it anyway, okay?"

JW: "Objection!"
Judge Sherry: "Overruled!"
JW: "okay..."

And all the "arright"s, "Okay?"s, "umm"s and "right?"s...in that chipper litte voice.

I just kept shaking my head and sighing, saying "oh, Jenny" over and over. I felt bad for her, I really did.

She did look nice today though, I loved her outfit...

Yes, sure enjoyed her statement of "let's do it anyway". I'm sure the jury loved that. That was sheer desperation.
Over time that snotty voice and nasty remarks got me like "so, you don't know then?" or "you didn't care enough to check it out?"

[Freethinker]

Yeah... I don't know why he didn't continue on with that line of questioning
I think it would have been detrimental to the defense & probably could have been slid in, maybe even the tire slashing somehow<--- wishful thinking

And JA is back to glaring over at the jury & taking notes again (almost broke her neck on that reach)

I thought she couldn't see that far without glasses. The need for glasses on must be a prop. I noticed a few times when the jury was coming in that she put the glasses on almost as an afterthought.

[marshmallow]

it's obvious Jodi feels like a wall flower with the younger prettier Dr on the stand. She is already mimicking her hair and slight behaviors. It's very telling.

I may be one of the few who was glad to see the questions posed by the Jurors. I am one of those who thinks "if you aren't sure, ask". I don't see it as Jodi-Jurors, I see it as Jurors doing what they should do. I liked the bear/tiger analogy. It says a Juror was wanting to be sure that PSTD was non-transferable. It's the type of question I might ask.

[bluterguss]

has anyone ever testified about the suspicion jodi might be a sociopath? or is that completely ruled out?

[lorizfree]

has anyone ever testified about the suspicion jodi might be a sociopath? or is that completely ruled out?

There are some interesting elevated points on the psych graphs. I captured some of them yesterday. Just click on the pic and it should send you to more...

[Metis212]

I agree with you. JM is going to have to prove the premeditation. I believe in my mind and heart Jodi planned to kill Travis, but if I am looking at the case as of right now- JM has not proven any premeditation. If anything, I think JM and Dr. DeMarte proved that Jodi "snapped" on June 4.

Wow! I am more convinced than ever that Jodi did not snap. Demarte helped me by showing Jodi lied on tests, lied to each expert witnesses, AND she remembers but isn't telling. New evidence such as stealing the engagement ring and "returning" Travis's PPL ring assisted by showing Jodi's desire to hurt Travis. Seeing Jodi's reaction to Demarte was telling as well. She was pissed!

Samuels was a good expert for Jodi because he muddied the waters with regard to memory. His explanation of the hippocampus and its role in moving short term memory to long term memory was absurd, but believable for the general public. I never believed Jodi didnt remember and as Demarte said the way Jodi described it didnt make sense.

. This is from Jodi's OWN words in the police interview:

March 2008-15:36 Jodi's word in the police video: I owe my parents a lot of money, and I owe my grandparents a lot of money, and I owe friends money and I owe? I owe... I umm?the guy that I bought a house with ? I owe him a lot of money. He doesn?t ask me for it but I intend to pay him back because he really footed the bill on the mortgage for a few months, umm? and the third reason, and I like to put this third because I like to think that second of those reasons I would have been strong enough somehow but the third reason was to put a distance? a physical distance between Travis and I because? I know that he really liked me and he said he did ? ummm? he just? I kinda? felt guilty, and I know they weren?t dating, but I just felt guilty, somehow, and I didn?t know Ryan at the time. I met him in March at? in Oklahoma City, and it was just brief, and I remember seeing him and saying, Oh, I really want to go say Hi to him, but he was surrounded by people, and he was kind of unapproachable. Umm?and he says he remembers meeting me, too, and it wasn?t until Zion, my friend, umm?texted me?and I think I told you that ?http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=vE_Ue5rF8QM

Thanks for this transcript. If anything Jodi says is to be believed, it can tell us another reason to get rid of Travis. She owed him money and he wanted to be repaid.

I remember the Sybil shrink. How evil she was....People will sell there souls for money and fame. ALV and Dr S are paying a heavy price for testifying for JA. I am sure now, they rue the day met JA. So not worth it.

In the field, it is thought that Sybil had more than three distinct personalities. Her psychiatrist is criticized for poor treatment. DID requires you know the personality fragments cause you cant do the abreaction without it. It like putting together a puzzle without all the pieces.

Wonder if they signed a non-disclosure agreement and cant write a book about their experience.

The issue presents a clear contrast between the 'expert opinion' of Dr. Samuels and Dr. DeMarte. The question remains, "Whose opinion will the Juror accept?" There is nothing wrong with how you read the intent of the question. I'm still wondering--and hoping.

Dr. Samuels was wack about memory. The memory issues are so common in murder cases but the field hasn't standardized how to determine amnesia versus lying. Roughly 50% claim amnesia. I know this because I read the written works Samuels cited.

it's obvious Jodi feels like a wall flower with the younger prettier Dr on the stand. She is already mimicking her hair and slight behaviors. It's very telling.

I may be one of the few who was glad to see the questions posed by the Jurors. I am one of those who thinks "if you aren't sure, ask". I don't see it as Jodi-Jurors, I see it as Jurors doing what they should do. I liked the bear/tiger analogy. It says a Juror was wanting to be sure that PSTD was non-transferable. It's the type of question I might ask.

Jodi is a detachable shadow.

[elamir]

We do NOT know the "all of it". The defense hasn't presented the entire story and the prosecution can't bring in all of Jodi's angry, stalking and tire-slashing because it is prejudicial.

Never fails to disgust me you can bring in unsubstantiated pedophilia claims and can't bring substantiated stalking claims... I understand the law and why but it still disgusts me nonetheless.

[ShellJett]

The most egregious error is ending a sentence with a preposition.
Example: Where's it at? Where are you at?

Correct form: Where's it at, bitch. Where are you at, stupid?

Chiming in, sorry. The worst for me is: "She don't have any" vs. "She DOESN'T have any". I don't care when incorrect grammar is used on this forum, but when I hear it in real life I go a little cray cray.

[Freethinker]

it's obvious Jodi feels like a wall flower with the younger prettier Dr on the stand. She is already mimicking her hair and slight behaviors. It's very telling.

I may be one of the few who was glad to see the questions posed by the Jurors. I am one of those who thinks "if you aren't sure, ask". I don't see it as Jodi-Jurors, I see it as Jurors doing what they should do. I liked the bear/tiger analogy. It says a Juror was wanting to be sure that PSTD was non-transferable. It's the type of question I might ask.

I'm wondering about her headache onset two days ago. Was it to draw attention to Jodi? Was it her way to get her thoughts together how she can keep the attention focus on her?
When Jodi came to court yesterday, she looked the best I've seen. The shirt was really becoming to her, I wonder if there will be more of the same, or if she'll have to use her "wardrobe" as it was before. Her hair was perfectly clean, her makeup was there etc., the eyeglass trick was new. Did anyone else feel the same way?

[*crickets*]

The most egregious error is ending a sentence with a preposition.
Example: Where's it at? Where are you at?

Correct form: Where's it at, bitch. Where are you at, stupid?

Oh, Ian. Damn, that's good! I stand corrected, sir.

[sheesh]

I'm just not buying BPD as a complete explanation for premeditated murder.

BPD is not the answer to murder, BPD is the answer to the faked up diagnosis of PTSD.

The facts are what supports premeditated murder.

If you're asking "why?", you'll have to ask her -- I doubt you'll get the truth. She killed him because it was an option for her. Murder was on the table. She's a murderer. That's all you'll get from a trial.

[deanna1247]

Ah, hello! How many times can someone testify about gas cans, cell phones, car rentals etc? These things have been established. All this mental stuff was started by the defense. Was JM supposed to just let the defense strategy of PTSD and battered syndrome go without question?

Hopefully, all those things you mentioned, will be in the Closing. I can't wait to hear JM's!

[deanna1247]

I do too! I really believe he knows what he's doing. Walmart, Tesoro and the Closing will sum it all up!

[Rockabillychick]

has anyone ever testified about the suspicion jodi might be a sociopath? or is that completely ruled out?

Both Dr.'s sounded like they diagnosed her with "something else" as well but it was not allowed to come out.

Never fails to disgust me you can bring in unsubstantiated pedophilia claims and can't bring substantiated stalking claims... I understand the law and why but it still disgusts me nonetheless.

This! All day. I can understand not introducing the tires because no one ever actually saw her do it and it was never reported BUT let the jury read the emails in full. Obviously they can't possibly read all 82,000 but I believe that they should be able to read at least some of the good and the bad, in full. The same with the text messages, in full, show what she did to piss him off. This snippet crap is ridiculous. Just my opinion.

Chiming in, sorry. The worst for me is: "She don't have any" vs. "She DOESN'T have any". I don't care when incorrect grammar is used on this forum, but when I hear it in real life I go a little cray cray.

My favorite is when someone wants to ax me a question. My reply is usually "that sounds awfully bloody why don't you just ASK me the question instead".

Hopefully, all those things you mentioned, will be in the Closing. I can't wait to hear JM's!

I cannot wait to hear his closing. It is going to be EPIC.