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

[zeebee]

I just wanted to let everyone know Deanna said thank you for the kind words she really appreciated them.

That is awesome! She was a great witness and seems to be a lovely person.

[blighted star]

I don't think she would have grounds for appeal if she chose to go against the lawyers advice and her defense angle did not pan out. She would have to prove that their negligence somehow violated her rights. Stupidity on the part of the defendant won't work for her, in this case!

That is good news, but also sad news. Because it means a certain big guy is taking a savaging over something he had very little say in. He tried to refuse the case. If he is stuck with the defense she demands, then unless she is demanding he act illegally, it sounds as though he has very little room to move & it puts the questions to Deanna in a very different light. He must've known people would blame HIM. If he'd refused, then could it have become grounds for appeal at some point?

Is there any chance that by doing what he did, her own attorney just blocked at least one route of appeal & therefore has removed at least one future source of pain for Travis' family? Of course, that's completely negated if he could've said no, without any fallout later. But if he has had no choice in any of this since being ordered to take the case, then he probably felt sicker than anyone with that questioning. You guys will know better than me though, whether he can say no without potentially giving Jodi grounds for appeal.

[Metis212]

This is why I am not a celebrity (it has nothing to do with the fact that I am average looking and have no talent! )

I was involved in a high profile child death case in the early 90's. We called cases that were in the media "heater cases". Each time I visited the woman alleged to have killed the child, the press showed up. I got really good at sneaking around. I then testified going against the opinion of the agency where I worked. The attorney representing the agency and me indirectly threw a pen at me during testimony. I made declarations against an internationally known shaken baby expert with more initials after her name than the abc's. Ultimately, the babysitter was never charged and the case against her dropped.

The time in my life taught me many life lessons about "justice". The most important being doing the right thing is never easy. Going up against an angry mob is terrifying and has nothing to do with justice.

[I doubt it]

why in THE world did the defense NOT call him too? is this a WTF for anyone else? seriously, they knew about what Demarte would say before this trial started, why would they call Alyce in and NOT have this one there, did they think with the "tag team" of samuels and alyce, it was a done deal?
Only thing that comes to my mind is that they want to put a clinical dude up with more "experience" (yes, I have trauma from hearing the snarky Jenny introduce every 2nd question with "in your experience Dr" (sneer that word experience) This new Dr musta been pretty bad for the defense to bring samuels and alyce instead... mind-boggling

I think the defense planned this sur-rebutal from the beginning. Geffner interviewed her before the case began. They knew what DeMarte was going to say. So, this is their answer to DeMarte.
That's pretty much what a sur-rebutal is limited too. Isn't it, legal folks?
I only hope the defense team took some lessons from Mr. Martinez during his rebuttal, short and to-the-point. If they don't, they will look like clowns again. Since our own, Metis, has a respectful view of this doctor, there is hope we will hear some professional type testimony on Wednesday.
If they try to go over his CV line by line, I think they will get a sustained "out of scope" objection. The judge is limiting the time allowance, but it is the law that limits the scope of questions that can be asked and answered.

[blighted star]

That is exactly what is throwing me off, too. The stubble. It is possible that he waxed or shaved his chest, but I have compared the wound to the one in the other photo and they don't seem to be the same. Glad I am not the only one who finds that one confusing!

No idea what you're looking at, I was flipping back to catch up & saw this question. You probably sorted it out ages ago, but just in case, it's not an area the M.E has clipped, to make detail more visible is it? I have my Dad's Australian Police Journals, which are basically a monthly forensics magazine. What you're describing is something that appears fairly often in wound measurement pics. Could that explain what you guys were looking at?

[*crickets*]

Here is my opinion on them calling Dr. Geffner as a surrebuttal witness.
The defense has the right to do this and I am glad that the judge granted it because we wouldn't want this to be an appellate issue if she is convicted of M1.

I don't care whether or not other courts found the Dr. to be credible or a hired gun and here is my reasoning. We know he is a hired gun, and a last ditch effort in THIS case.

I am sure that ALV and Dr. Dick would not have looked so bad had they not got into a pissing contest with every single question from JM. I have patience and I found myself screaming "Just answer the fucking question" at the monitor.

They're all "hired guns". DeMarte was one too.

And not every question has a Yes or No answer. "Are you still beating your wife? YES OR NO?"
"Well, I've never..."
"The question was yes or no. Do you have a problem understanding that? YES OR NO!"

[zeebee]

I was involved in a high profile child death case in the early 90's. We called cases that were in the media "heater cases". Each time I visited the woman alleged to have killed the child, the press showed up. I got really good at sneaking around. I then testified going against the opinion of the agency where I worked. The attorney representing the agency and me indirectly threw a pen at me during testimony. I made declarations against an internationally known shaken baby expert with more initials after her name than the abc's. Ultimately, the babysitter was never charged and the case against her dropped.

The time in my life taught me many life lessons about "justice". The most important being doing the right thing is never easy. Going up against an angry mob is terrifying and has nothing to do with justice.

Wow, that is crazy! And I totally agree with you. Glad you made it through that experience and that you were able to do what you thought was right. Good for you!!!

[Jillee]

Does anyone have the link to Nurmi's wife's info? Is she a kindergarten teacher?

[smurfy]

This probably won't go down real well, but now that I've seen a picture, it's raised more questions for me than it's answered. I think it could possibly make sense to someone who's actually had a person charge at them like that. The one doing the charging usually doesn't want to use their head as a battering ram. They tend to start to turn their head to one side or the other as they come at you, so that it's their shoulder that hits you full centre. At the same time or very soon after they start to turn their head to the left or right, they also duck their head down slightly so that it's under the target's arms -which are usually angling up by then for protection.

& before anyone gets frustrated with my stupidity, I'm not saying "this IS how it happened". What I'm saying is if I can have that thought, so can others. A clear, concise model showing the only possible trajectory could've dealt with the issue decisively, & then the jury need waste no time having exactly this type of discussion.

I never make the suggestions I do to cause shit in the thread. It's because even if 999 people say "yep. That's sooo OBVIOUS", there's always going to person 1000 who sees the opposite. Sometimes person1000 is thoughtful & open to discussion. But sometimes they just can't grasp what everyone else has hold of, & sometimes they don't wanna let go of their version. This threads proof that you can never predict how someone else will see something. It's after midnight here again & it's always my after midnight posts that don't come out quite the way I intend, so I hope I'm explaining myself better than I did for my last few after 12am, sorry if I'm not guys, will reread it in the morning & see if I should've reconsidered after sleep (again)

Ive said for a while that I think the trajectory would fit the pose she claims he was in. You don't go straight on when you tackle someone, you do it with your shoulder, so that would make sense as far as being to the side. As you said, the head turns as you are getting to the person and tucks down to protect the face, that would explain the downward angle. I understand it may have been an awkward shot, but I think it is possible. Not that it happened that way she says it did, but that it could happen that way hypothetically. She knows the angle she shot him at, I don't believe she is a genius, but I do think she knows enough to make her story fit the evidence... mostly.
I was pretty surprised that neither of the sides brought it up. I figured it would help one of them.
I dont know if that answered your question at all, but, I do think it is possible.

[BreachofTrust]

By the looks of these shelves, the front pins are only about 2" from the front of what looks to be 16" deep shelves. Cursory calculations indicate that you would need to apply 3.5 times the weight of the shelf on the front edge before the rear of the shelf would start to lift. Add items on top of the shelf and this would also add 3.5 times their weight to the force needed to flip. The force required 1" onto the shelf would be double that at the edge.

I think that Jodi could have stepped near the right or left side of the shelf with her toes 3 inches onto the shelf and it would have supported her without disturbing the items on the shelf.

She might have carefully stepped on the shelves during cleaning, but I doubt that she stepped on them the day Travis was murdered.

Can you provide the statics equation and given and/or assumed values that you used to come to this conclusion?

[I doubt it]

That's one of the things that bothers me the most about her. She says she's so ashamed. She's not the kind of person who would normally do such a thing. She's embarrassed about what people think about her. When it comes to feeling sorry for WHAT she did..she's just not there. There is no remorse, only shame. She doesn't feel sad or sorry for murdering him, or causing his family excruciating pain. She believes he deserved it, and that's perfectly obvious. She has no soul.

I agree. If someone causes a death by accident, they are usually remorseful. American soldiers have remorse when they have to kill in war. The same with law enforcement. What about doctors who lose patients?
Jodi, though, has put it in a legal document that she shouldn't be judged for lack of remorse. Really, Jodi? She claims she loved Travis. She caused his death, even though she feels she had to, there should still be some remorse. She should be putting on a show of remorse, at least. What a freak. The only one she's sorry for is herself.

Let's enjoy our Spring Break while we have it. Put thoughts of that vile creature out of our minds. Enjoy our freedom. Ask ourselves, "What would Travis do?"
Have a beautiful week everyone, in honor of his memory. T-Dawg spirit forever!

[Morticia]

Does anyone have the link to Nurmi's wife's info? Is she a kindergarten teacher?

http://www.linkedin.com/pub/christlyn-nurmi/60/b93/a2b

I see Andy Dick in a wig.

[blighted star]

Full name is Stabby Stab McStabber.

Maybe you should secure the rights to this product name before a certain producer of corporate death burgers decides to release a new menu item...

[Jillee]

http://www.linkedin.com/pub/christlyn-nurmi/60/b93/a2b

I see Andy Dick in a wig.

Bless you, Morticia!

Does anyone find it disturbing that she's a kindergarten teacher and her husband represents pedophiles?! My Lord! If my child was in her class, I'd be doing anything I could to get him/her out of there. Her association with pedophiles is a bit too close for comfort for me. Maybe it's just me, but that would freak me the fuck out!

[zeebee]

So now Nurmi's wife, the elementary school teacher, is fair game?

[debk589]

I have never once seen actual tears

I think the only time she cried REAL tears throughout this entire trial was when she came back in the courtroom from chambers after being told the entire sex tape recording was going to played. Where she called her sister dumb and she realized that the jury would hear HER instigating it all. And those were tears for Jodi, not for anyone else.

[Sneakers the Wonder Dog]

So now Nurmi's wife, the elementary school teacher, is fair game?

Agree. Her husband's client has nothing to do with her.

[zeebee]

I think the only time she cried REAL tears throughout this entire trial was when she came back in the courtroom from chambers after being told the entire sex tape recording was going to played. Where she called her sister dumb and she realized that the jury would hear HER instigating it all. And those were tears for Jodi, not for anyone else.

Yes, I think Jodi does cry real tears for herself, just not for anyone else.

[Jillee]

So now Nurmi's wife, the elementary school teacher, is fair game?

Personally, I wouldn't want my kids in her class. But that's just me. I've been known to be over protective.

NOT because of Jodi. Because he's representing pedophiles/sex offenders. That's a bit disturbing to me. I know someone's got to do it, however I wouldn't want my child's teacher's husband to be around that element. Too close for comfort for me. But that's JUST ME. I'm not speaking for anyone else. I'm sure that wouldn't bother most people, but it bothers me.

[M Joy]

Personally, I wouldn't want my kids in her class. But that's just me. I've been known to be over protective.

But in honesty, Nurmi's wife has nothing to do with the trial.

[zeebee]

Agree. Her husband's client has nothing to do with her.

Yes. I don't even like the attacks on Nurmi (who didn't want the case but was required to take it). Complaining about the way he presents his case: OK! Fair game. But I don't care for the attacks on his appearance. I definitely draw the line when people start making fun of his wife, who has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with this case and is a school teacher for chrissakes.

[Jillee]

Yes. I don't even like the attacks on Nurmi (who didn't want the case but was required to take it). Complaining about the way he presents his case: OK! Fair game. But I don't care for the attacks on his appearance. I definitely draw the line when people start making fun of his wife, who has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with this case and is a school teacher for chrissakes.

I've never made attacks on Nurmi's appearance. And my point has nothing to do with this case.

[faq_q]

So now Nurmi's wife, the elementary school teacher, is fair game?

Agree. Her husband's client has nothing to do with her.

Personally, I wouldn't want my kids in her class. But that's just me. I've been known to be over protective.

NOT because of Jodi. Because he's representing pedophiles/sex offenders. That's a bit disturbing to me. I know someone's got to do it, however I wouldn't want my child's teacher's husband to be around that element. Too close for comfort for me. But that's JUST ME. I'm not speaking for anyone else. I'm sure that wouldn't bother most people, but it bothers me.

But in honesty, Nurmi's wife has nothing to do with the trial.

Not for nothing but I really don't think Nurmi's wife should be a target in here. She is a teacher whom loves to teach and that is admirable profession. IMO

[PopRocks]

I think the only time she cried REAL tears throughout this entire trial was when she came back in the courtroom from chambers after being told the entire sex tape recording was going to played. Where she called her sister dumb and she realized that the jury would hear HER instigating it all. And those were tears for Jodi, not for anyone else.

Yes, I think Jodi does cry real tears for herself, just not for anyone else.

Ive noticed this too. I have seen her cry with tears afew times, but I can tell she is only crying for herself, its pretty insane how she shows such lack of remorse for killing someone she claims to have loved

[ShellJett]

I think the only time she cried REAL tears throughout this entire trial was when she came back in the courtroom from chambers after being told the entire sex tape recording was going to played. Where she called her sister dumb and she realized that the jury would hear HER instigating it all. And those were tears for Jodi, not for anyone else.

Her face and eyes were very swollen that day as if she had been crying. For herself. Her father was in court, and the sex tape was going to get played. The other time I believe she cried was during interrogation when she had her head down saying "It's not fair". She was blowing her nose pretty good that day. Personally, I have not seen her shed a tear. I saw evidence of crying twice but have yet to see her actually do it. Attempts, yes. Real tears, no.