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

[Metis212]

Unfortunately for the prosecution, in this case, at least regarding the gunshot, it is very reasonable doubt. It is extremely reasonable to expect that if the gunshot was first, it did not kill Travis, and he could have continued to take actions to preserve his life over the next 90-120 seconds, including attacking Jodi.

It sounds crazy, right? OMG he got shot in the brain! But the frontal lobe is a great place to get shot. It does not control breathing or essential survival functions. And he was shot with a very small, weak weapon. His skull and facial bones stopped the bullet. Yes the outer part of his frontal lobe was injured. But it is not rare or impossible to continue life functions after being shot in the head.

And this is exactly why the Medical Examiner see-sawed under questioning. Martinez wants him to say it's 100% impossible. But it is extremely possible and he knows it, so he must admit it under oath. Not rare. Not a freak ocurrence. Documented by medical science and historical example, battlefield trauma, etc.

I think Martinez and the ME FUBAR'd the slam dunk part of their case. He changed his testimony and his mind, either him or Flores lied about who told who what when. They had great evidence and they shit the bed on this one. They could and should have shut the door on her. Mickey Mouse operation, really.

Ah but it controls all higher order thinking, planning, organizing and yes, movement and talking. it isnt directly in charge of motor functions but the neuronal tracts to other parts of the brain collect here. The bullet and the gases would have disrupted those tracts (not all of them) Travis wouldn't be able to think about getting away. He wouldn't be able to decide the best exit or what to avoid. He most likely would have been talking gobbity gook if at all.

The above information I provide is from a doctorate level neuroscience course taken in 2005 at Columbia University. You wont be able to google it.

[Cocopop]

Dismissed Arias juror speaks out
Corey Rangel
Updated: 26 minutes ago

Herman Weiner, a family friend, said while Gibb proudly served on the jury, Gibb's wife hinted the restrictions of the trial had an impact on the family.

"She'd be like I'm glad when this will be over. My husband will be back to the family, I'm happy this will be over pretty soon," said Weiner.

^ Snipped for space ^ TY for sharing MJoy
I bold highlighted caption above because I am sure there are many of us out there that our own spouse's are saying/wanting the same thing concerning "us".
I am praying just like the majority of y'all that justice will be served whether it is be LWOP or DP <-- I can't imagine anything else.

Plus we'll all feel just a bit more grateful that the Alexander family will have some sort of peace, even if just a little.

Although I will be getting back to a normal day to day life once this trial is over & Summer is approaching, thank the good Lord, I will miss you ALL, I feel like I sorta kinda know you all, your personalities, your opinions (both good & bad/right or wrong) & your strong hearts. I am glad I got to know y'all, even though it was under the circumstance of something that was just so unthinkable & unforgivable.

[coconut]

Jodi's whole story will be mis proven as the jury knows she lied to them several times. I don't think the sequence of events will even matter after that. They can't trust anything she says and her lawyers and experts are all relying on her lies too. However, I do agree with Brillig! You are quite the Big Daddy Yum Yum!

I hope it doesn't matter to them. With all the other compelling evidence it shouldn't. I'm disappointed that Martinez and Horny, who are paid to lay this stuff out clearly for the jury, left this loose end. I want to blame Martinez, I think there is "stuff Juan wants his witness to say" and then "what the witness really thinks and says". And Juan starts getting pissed off and going in circles when his own witnesses don't say it the way he planned it out.

I'll try to stay yummy! I'm sure those little red cards will show up if I'm not

Ah but it controls all higher thinking, planning organizing and yes, movement and talking. he wouldn't be able to thinking about getting away.

[Joey Jackson voice] Would you concur Doctor, that this injury to the frontal lobe was limited to the bullet tract that affected only a small portion of the tissue on one half of the frontal lobe? Since a large part of the frontal lobe was not affected therefore we could reasonably expect some frontal lobe function to continue in some form, like talking or garbled words or screaming. Planning is not necessary either - aim for the sound and light in survival mode and move your limbs.

[Metis212]

I'll try to stay yummy! I'm sure those little red cards will show up if I'm not

yum yum yummo!

Joey Jackson voice] Would you concur Doctor, that this injury to the frontal lobe was limited to the bullet tract that affected only a small portion of the tissue on one half of the frontal lobe? Since a large part of the frontal lobe was not affected therefore we could reasonably expect some frontal lobe function to continue in some form, like talking or garbled words or screaming. Planning is not necessary either - aim for the sound and light in survival mode and move your limbs.

No big black daddy yum yum. Brain injuries are like no other, once the neural tracts are disrupted, automaticity is gone. What you say isnt planning is exactly that. Its taking in all the available information, organizing it and based upon a lifetime of experience making a decision. you say aim for the light , but animal brain in flight could go for darkness which is better for hiding.

The brain is a delicate thing.

[AgathaAppleswine]

Well, I'm confused...

I went into this week firmly convinced a murder 1 conviction was in the bag; that the ME's testimony would seal the deal with a BOOM. Then I heard his testimony, full of "I believe"s and "I think"s and now I'm back to not so sure. Of all the questions he was asked about the gunshot being first and whether Travis would have been capable of purposeful actions after the shot, and even whether the bullet actually went through the brain, the "I think/believe so" and "probably so" (or not) outnumbered the straight-up "yes" or "no" answers by 2 to 1.





So I googled some brain anatomy pics and tried to figure it out for myself. I looked at a bunch and am still confused. Based on the bullet going in just above the eyebrow and angling downward away from the brain, some of the images made it look like the brain would have been impacted, others not so much...then I thought about the stories I've heard about people with small-caliber gunshot wounds to the head who walk and talk after their injuries, some told on this very thread...

Then, hearing the ME say he didn't recall having any conversations with Det. Flores after the autopsy, let alone a conversation Det. Flores testified to with him regarding the gunshot being last, left me wondering even more. Why would this supposedly impartial doctor lie about that?

So I'm left undecided and uneasy when I was so sure...does "I think", "I believe" and "probably" equal "beyond a reasonable doubt"? Does "I'm confused" equal "beyond a reasonable doubt"? The waters seem muddy right now.

Some doubt does not equal reasonable doubt.

We will never know what happened in that bathroom. Not exactly. The only witness is a proven liar, and supposedly she can't remember anyway.

The way it is supposed to work is that the jury takes ALL the evidence, and weighs it to see what a reasonable conclusion would be.

Here's how reasonable doubt is supposed to be handled:

The case: Is it raining outside?

The evidence:

1. Someone has just come indoors from outdoors. They are wet.
2. There are stormclouds outside.
3. There is lightening.
4. There is thunder.

The counter evidence is as follows:

1. The person could have been caught walking near a sprinkler, and gotten wet.
2. They were inside another building where the sprinkler system went off, and they got wet.
3. The thunder is really construction that is four blocks away.
4. The lightening could be from a streetlight that is going haywire.

Rebuttal evidence:

1. Scientific evidence says that the clouds are indeed storm clouds that could produce rain. They don't always produce rain, but there is a great possibility for that rain.
2. There are no outdoor sprinkler systems in the path the person says that they walked.
3. They were previously at an office building, and there were no reports from anyone else that the sprinkler system went nuts.
3a. To that point, it is unlikely that one sprinkler sprayed water. It is also unlikely that this person would have been the only one ever in the building to have one sprinkler break on them, and it happen to no one else.
4. The streetlight is fine, if not a bit sensitive. Sometimes when it gets over-cast, it will go on, and then go off when the sun comes out.

-------

Now you tell me what is a reasonable conclusion. I gave you some potential doubts. Are they reasonable enough to make you conclude that it was raining outside?

The prosecution has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt.

Jodi is a proven liar. Did she give you any reason to believe her story at all? Can you trust anything that she has said?

A reasonable person that looks over the evidence may have a few doubts, but if they can reasonably be over-ridden (i.e. storm clouds do produce rain. Maybe not all the time, but sometimes), then the conclusion should be: It is raining outside.

The State's case is completely logical. It's not that hard to follow: a gun was stolen, Jodi rented a car instead of driving her own, her hair color changed, she has receipts for all her travels, except for Arizona, her phone stopped working outside of Arizona and didn't work again until after she left Arizona, she borrowed gas cans, bought a gas can, and told no one except like what, one person that she was going to AZ? She tried to clean up the death scene, she left misleading voice mails and emails to Travis, she lied in her own journal, and she made up two other stories about what happened June 4th.

It's reasonable to conclude that she planned the murder.

The defense wants to say that this is all a coincidence, that she never even intended to go to AZ, but that Travis somehow 'forced' her to visit him. We're supposed to believe her that Travis was a pedophile who abused her so badly that the only way to save herself was to use his Super Secret Gun to shoot him, and then to stab him and slit his throat. And like all abuse victims, she cleaned up the death scene, had a fog of some sort, and then did all that other stuff to cover up her crime because she was 'ashamed'.

Then she made up a bunch of stories, but now we should believe her. Even though there was no evidence to support her story that Travis was a pedophile. Or that he was an abuser (he got pissed and sent her mean emails, but that's not the same as being battered to the point you need to defend your life). There's no evidence that Travis had a gun.

Let's say you believe somehow that Jodi was forced to shoot Travis. Do you really, really believe that he posed a huge threat to her? Look at where the bullet went! It traveled in a downward angle through his skull and face, and lodged in his cheek.

Think about that for a minute. Imagine the bullet entering your head. The brain actually doesn't have nerves, so there would be no pain from the bullet penetrating that, but think of how it felt as it tore through his face. How likely do you think it would be that he'd be a threat if he was laying on the floor after getting shot?

The M.E. said it would be nearly impossible for him to even raise his hands enough to try to fight her off like he did. The defense did not counter with their own medical expert. They tried to say the bullet didn't do much of anything to Travis, and the M.E. would not agree to that.

To think that Travis was a threat, or that he was shot first at all would mean that we would have to believe yet another amazing coincidence about Jodi's story.

So what to do with what we know? Is there enough reason behind Jodi's story to cast doubt on the prosecution's case?

I honestly don't believe it does.

Unfortunately, there are people who think everything has to be proven beyond any doubt, and I am fearful of a Murder2 conviction for that very reason.

Crime shows have given people the expectation of having things all neatly packaged with absolute 100% certainty, and that just isn't the case.

[gigiann]

I thought one of the best juror questions yesterday was in regards to what was in the attic. There was NOTHING up there yet Jodi said she was there helping Travis but the Christmas decorations up there.....hummmmmm, do you think Jodi would lie about something like that?

[Freaktab]

Some doubt does not equal reasonable doubt.

We will never know what happened in that bathroom. Not exactly. The only witness is a proven liar, and supposedly she can't remember anyway.

The way it is supposed to work is that the jury takes ALL the evidence, and weighs it to see what a reasonable conclusion would be.

Here's how reasonable doubt is supposed to be handled:

The case: Is it raining outside?

The evidence:

1. Someone has just come indoors from outdoors. They are wet.
2. There are stormclouds outside.
3. There is lightening.
4. There is thunder.

The counter evidence is as follows:

1. The person could have been caught walking near a sprinkler, and gotten wet.
2. They were inside another building where the sprinkler system went off, and they got wet.
3. The thunder is really construction that is four blocks away.
4. The lightening could be from a streetlight that is going haywire.

Rebuttal evidence:

1. Scientific evidence says that the clouds are indeed storm clouds that could produce rain. They don't always produce rain, but there is a great possibility for that rain.
2. There are no outdoor sprinkler systems in the path the person says that they walked.
3. They were previously at an office building, and there were no reports from anyone else that the sprinkler system went nuts.
3a. To that point, it is unlikely that one sprinkler sprayed water. It is also unlikely that this person would have been the only one ever in the building to have one sprinkler break on them, and it happen to no one else.
4. The streetlight is fine, if not a bit sensitive. Sometimes when it gets over-cast, it will go on, and then go off when the sun comes out.

-------

Now you tell me what is a reasonable conclusion. I gave you some potential doubts. Are they reasonable enough to make you conclude that it was raining outside?

The prosecution has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt.

Jodi is a proven liar. Did she give you any reason to believe her story at all? Can you trust anything that she has said?

A reasonable person that looks over the evidence may have a few doubts, but if they can reasonably be over-ridden (i.e. storm clouds do produce rain. Maybe not all the time, but sometimes), then the conclusion should be: It is raining outside.

The State's case is completely logical. It's not that hard to follow: a gun was stolen, Jodi rented a car instead of driving her own, her hair color changed, she has receipts for all her travels, except for Arizona, her phone stopped working outside of Arizona and didn't work again until after she left Arizona, she borrowed gas cans, bought a gas can, and told no one except like what, one person that she was going to AZ? She tried to clean up the death scene, she left misleading voice mails and emails to Travis, she lied in her own journal, and she made up two other stories about what happened June 4th.

It's reasonable to conclude that she planned the murder.

The defense wants to say that this is all a coincidence, that she never even intended to go to AZ, but that Travis somehow 'forced' her to visit him. We're supposed to believe her that Travis was a pedophile who abused her so badly that the only way to save herself was to use his Super Secret Gun to shoot him, and then to stab him and slit his throat. And like all abuse victims, she cleaned up the death scene, had a fog of some sort, and then did all that other stuff to cover up her crime because she was 'ashamed'.

Then she made up a bunch of stories, but now we should believe her. Even though there was no evidence to support her story that Travis was a pedophile. Or that he was an abuser (he got pissed and sent her mean emails, but that's not the same as being battered to the point you need to defend your life). There's no evidence that Travis had a gun.

Let's say you believe somehow that Jodi was forced to shoot Travis. Do you really, really believe that he posed a huge threat to her? Look at where the bullet went! It traveled in a downward angle through his skull and face, and lodged in his cheek.

Think about that for a minute. Imagine the bullet entering your head. The brain actually doesn't have nerves, so there would be no pain from the bullet penetrating that, but think of how it felt as it tore through his face. How likely do you think it would be that he'd be a threat if he was laying on the floor after getting shot?

The M.E. said it would be nearly impossible for him to even raise his hands enough to try to fight her off like he did. The defense did not counter with their own medical expert. They tried to say the bullet didn't do much of anything to Travis, and the M.E. would not agree to that.

To think that Travis was a threat, or that he was shot first at all would mean that we would have to believe yet another amazing coincidence about Jodi's story.

So what to do with what we know? Is there enough reason behind Jodi's story to cast doubt on the prosecution's case?

I honestly don't believe it does.

Unfortunately, there are people who think everything has to be proven beyond any doubt, and I am fearful of a Murder2 conviction for that very reason.

Crime shows have given people the expectation of having things all neatly packaged with absolute 100% certainty, and that just isn't the case.

Okay, before I say anything here, I want to clarify that I am a mere trial watcher and certainly no expert on the anatomy of the brain....

I think Coconut brings up an excellent point about possible doubt on the bullet trajectory and if this were the only issue, I would absolutely agree that this might be more of a concern. However, because something could happen doesn't mean that it did happen. Jodi has much more going against her and I think it is the culmination of all the evidence will overcome any juror "reasonable doubt".

I have to say, though, my concern is an appeal after conviction. I am astonished that the DT did not jump all over this and provide their own medical examiner. They have given nothing in terms of medical or forensic experts that would lend credence to Stabby's story and that is astounding to me. By not providing a scientific alternative through their own witnesses, the jury has nothing to hang their hat on except for JA's words, and we all know how we can trust what she says. Ya.... Right.

M1 or M2, either way, Jodi is going away for a long time and, with nothing but time and golf pencils, I can see her making a case for ineffective council. I mean, seriously, this case has been around for 5 years and this ridiculous self defense story has been floating around for a lot of that time. There is no way that the DT could not have exhumed some Medical Examiner to agree with the alternative bullet trajectory theory. Add that to hiring Dr. Fog and ALV to testify, and Wilma and Nurmi look pretty ineffective.

I cannot fathom how devastating this trial has been for the Alexander family and friends and I would hate to see them go through it again. I also would be disgusted if Arizona had to pick up the tab for another trial for this murdering piece of filth.

Again, this is just my opinion as an observer.

[Poppycock]

Patrick Ireland survived the Columbine massacre with two gunshots to the head and graduated as valedictorian.
http://acolumbinesite.com/victim/injured5.html

We have all seen Congresswoman Gabriel Giffords after she was shot in the head by Jared Laughner at a community meeting.

I am not sure one way or the other, but to me it is irrelevant to the fact it was premeditated and heinous.

Everyone sounds pretty sure the deliberations will be quick, I hope so. Will the court announce when the verdict will be read a few hours ahead? Then Faq and all locals and Ian head down or what?

As for the others threads where 'we' get bashed, do they fight and argue amongst themselves too? They do seem to have ceased stopping by here. I do not think they follow this trial as closely.

ETA story by Chris Williams on Juror #8
http://www.azcentral.com/video/2331334295001
and Corey Rangel:
http://www.abc15.com/dpp/news/region...ased-from-jury

[tinaturner]

http://www.abc15.com/dpp/news/region...der-speaks-out
here is a little follow up on dan freeman.

[tinaturner]

I thought one of the best juror questions yesterday was in regards to what was in the attic. There was NOTHING up there yet Jodi said she was there helping Travis but the Christmas decorations up there.....hummmmmm, do you think Jodi would lie about something like that?

definitely, she thinks these sorts of embelleshments to her stories make them more convincing.

[Miller22]

NM

[TMY1]

http://s117.photobucket.com/user/lori939393/media/bwrbgfwf_zps3945216e.jpg.html[/IMG]
Nurmi climbs up on that to insert his death needle as the final moments occur. All that sex talk has him in a tizzy!

[Sweet Pea]

Rehashing the old stuff. Were any of the gas cans accounted for? I know she didn't return them to OG and because I am an OG(old gal) myself I can't remember how she got the car back to the rental company. Did she go by her half-sisters first?

I think Travis may have survived just the brain injury, but I don't think he could respond in the way JA testified. My guess is she wanted to stab him in the heart all "neat and nice" in the shower and leave. A knife is more personal than a gun. She wanted him to feel the pain in his heart that she thought she felt in hers. (We all know she only has feelings for herself)

Travis's girlfriend that was on Nancy Grace (yes I do watch) seemed to be very down to earth. She talked about him bringing her flowers and cooking dinner. All I could think about were the Cinnabons he left on JA's car.

One other thing that is bothering me. I can't understand why the jury was not taken to Travis's home and shown the bathroom and bedroom. I followed the Casey Anthony trial from OH and last year on our vacation in FL I made my family go past the Anthony's house and the area where Caylee was found. The closeness of the two areas was amazing, I think a trip there might have made the jury think a little bit. There is no way George would have put her that close to home, it was a panic job.

Enough for tonight, I hope Travis recieves the justice he deserves.

[elamir]

I think Jodi was the one screaming "fucking kill you bitch" also I remember the bruises Travis had on his lower legs so I bet Jodi was giving him a good kicking as well, we know stabby loves to kick.

[Freethinker]

I thought one of the best juror questions yesterday was in regards to what was in the attic. There was NOTHING up there yet Jodi said she was there helping Travis but the Christmas decorations up there.....hummmmmm, do you think Jodi would lie about something like that?

I don't know why he would even need to use his attic to store decorations. Good grief, look at the size of the house and garage. Why would he wait so long to store the stuff? He had able bodied men living in the house, why would he wait for Jodi to help? These are nonsense questions now, but still a question.

I would like to have seen the jury see the actual layout of that house. I understand the new owner redid that whole area, but those are tract homes. It seems like there would be an empty home they could have viewed.

I'm surprised the DT didn't question about the homeowners finding anything or make a remark about nothing being found after so much time had passed.

[Rockabillychick]

Patrick Ireland survived the Columbine massacre with two gunshots to the head and graduated as valedictorian.
http://acolumbinesite.com/victim/injured5.html

We have all seen Congresswoman Gabriel Giffords after she was shot in the head by Jared Laughner at a community meeting.

I am not sure one way or the other, but to me it is irrelevant to the fact it was premeditated and heinous.

Everyone sounds pretty sure the deliberations will be quick, I hope so. Will the court announce when the verdict will be read a few hours ahead? Then Faq and all locals and Ian head down or what?

As for the others threads where 'we' get bashed, do they fight and argue amongst themselves too? They do seem to have ceased stopping by here. I do not think they follow this trial as closely.

ETA story by Chris Williams on Juror #8
http://www.azcentral.com/video/2331334295001
and Corey Rangel:
http://www.abc15.com/dpp/news/region...ased-from-jury

There are guys in my husbands unit who have survived gunshots to the head as well. I don't think the problem is surviving it. I think the issue is immediately after being shot in the head these people weren't up and running around saying "fucking kill you bitch" and still attacking. I think that is where it makes no sense, to me anyway.

It is sad that no one will ever know the truth.

I think they announce that there is a verdict and give a time for everyone (attorneys, families, etc.) to be at the courthouse. I don't think this will be a long deliberation at all. I think that we will have a verdict by late Monday/early Tuesday.

[blighted star]

[QUOTE=Sneakers the Wonder Dog;3401402]
Stabby's new song is going to be "I fought the Law and the Law won!"[/QUOTE


Nooo. No No NOPE. Now I'll think of her everytime I hear The Clash. sob.... Ruined!!!

[AgathaAppleswine]

I think Travis may have survived just the brain injury, but I don't think he could respond in the way JA testified. My guess is she wanted to stab him in the heart all "neat and nice" in the shower and leave. A knife is more personal than a gun. She wanted him to feel the pain in his heart that she thought she felt in hers. (We all know she only has feelings for herself)

There are guys in my husbands unit who have survived gunshots to the head as well. I don't think the problem is surviving it. I think the issue is immediately after being shot in the head these people weren't up and running around saying "fucking kill you bitch" and still attacking. I think that is where it makes no sense, to me anyway.

I think Travis may have survived just the brain injury, but I don't think he could respond in the way JA testified. My guess is she wanted to stab him in the heart all "neat and nice" in the shower and leave. A knife is more personal than a gun. She wanted him to feel the pain in his heart that she thought she felt in hers. (We all know she only has feelings for herself)

I snipped the length of the posts because I wanted to focus on this part, because people seem to think that because people can survive a gunshot to the head that it somehow lessens the horror of what Jodi did.

She shot him in the head! Gabrielle Giffords may be alive, but notice how she is still a little shaky, how she isn't quite right now. And remember that if someone hadn't been there to help lift her head up, she might have choked on her own blood. She was not capable of movement after being shot. Most people aren't.

The bullet passed through the left part of her brain.

Travis had a bullet traverse not just his brain, but into the soft tissues of his face and lodging into the bone. The bullet either tumbled through his brain, bouncing through that tissue and then went at a diagonal to lodge in his cheek, or Travis was shot when he was laying down. Either way, it casts doubt not on the prosecution theory, but on Jodi's claim of self-defense. Small caliber or not, if you have something tearing through the soft tissue of your face, it's not logical to believe that Travis was a threat to Jodi's safety. By her own account, Travis was on the floor when her fog rolled in. She could have run away. Instead she had to go grab a knife and attack Travis.

Travis's body shows a struggle all right -- a struggle for him to survive. The blood in the bathroom marks Travis's pain-filled journey to get away from Jodi. He was stabbed in the back. He was stabbed in the front. He fought to get the knife away from her. His throat was slit. He was shot in the head. His poor body was dragged into the shower and cleaned off. And then he was left there to rot.

What did Jodi have for defensive wounds? Nothing. A few little cuts, a damaged finger. If Travis was so enraged, why would he have stood around and done nothing to her after he body-slammed her? How was she able to get up and run away from him?

The doubt that is difficult to over-come is not in the prosecution case. It's in Jodi's case.

[Freethinker]

Patrick Ireland survived the Columbine massacre with two gunshots to the head and graduated as valedictorian.
http://acolumbinesite.com/victim/injured5.html

We have all seen Congresswoman Gabriel Giffords after she was shot in the head by Jared Laughner at a community meeting.

I am not sure one way or the other, but to me it is irrelevant to the fact it was premeditated and heinous.

Everyone sounds pretty sure the deliberations will be quick, I hope so. Will the court announce when the verdict will be read a few hours ahead? Then Faq and all locals and Ian head down or what?

As for the others threads where 'we' get bashed, do they fight and argue amongst themselves too? They do seem to have ceased stopping by here. I do not think they follow this trial as closely.

ETA story by Chris Williams on Juror #8
http://www.azcentral.com/video/2331334295001
and Corey Rangel:
http://www.abc15.com/dpp/news/region...ased-from-jury

Some focus is over on the Trayvon/Zimmerman thread. I made a post with my thoughts and got ripped apart. They have George already hung and out to dry, and the trial hasn't begun. If you post over there, you had better believe George went after and killed Trayvon on purpose.

[zeebee]

Yes, just like summer camp!

The "stabbed him firsts" will all be in the same cabin. In the middle of the night, we will sneak over to the camp of the "shot him firsts" and put saran wrap over their toilet bowls. It'll be a blast!

[zeebee]

The above information I provide is from a doctorate level neuroscience course taken in 2005 at Columbia University. You wont be able to google it.

**You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Metis212 again.**

I thought one of the best juror questions yesterday was in regards to what was in the attic. There was NOTHING up there yet Jodi said she was there helping Travis but the Christmas decorations up there.....hummmmmm, do you think Jodi would lie about something like that?

I don't know why he would even need to use his attic to store decorations. Good grief, look at the size of the house and garage. Why would he wait so long to store the stuff? He had able bodied men living in the house, why would he wait for Jodi to help? These are nonsense questions now, but still a question.

Not to mention that I don't know anyone around here who stores things in their attic. Are you kidding me? In the summer, it gets brutally hot in there.

In any case, gigiann, that question stood out to me too. That was the days Jodi supposedly found Travis with the pedo pics, right? Just one more tick on the "Jodi's lies" list.

Phineas Gage's survival was not expected -as most people who had massive brain injuries did not live through it. I think the odds of Travis having purposeful movement after being shot in the frontal lobe are pretty slim. If the odds were 50/50, the ME would have known this. I haven't heard one Medical examiner say that Travis most likely was able to walk around after such a wound. If the defense could have found one that would say that, I would think that they would have propped the guy up on the witness stand and had him say it. 50/50 Coconut?! Naw! No way. Like Phineas, it would have been a miracle. You can't allow for miracles when deciding reasonable doubt.

There are guys in my husbands unit who have survived gunshots to the head as well. I don't think the problem is surviving it. I think the issue is immediately after being shot in the head these people weren't up and running around saying "fucking kill you bitch" and still attacking. I think that is where it makes no sense, to me anyway.

EXACTLY.

[eliqueang]

I thought this was interesting. Article about the one and only Dan freeman and his involvment

http://www.abc15.com/dpp/news/region...der-speaks-out

PHOENIX - A mutual friend of accused murderer Jodi Arias and victim Travis Alexander is speaking out for the first time since he testified for the defense in January.

Daniel Freeman was the friend caught in the middle. He was closer to Alexander, but so charmed by Arias he considered her part of his family.

“She was like a sister. She was part of the family and in my family when you’re a friend you’re family,” said Freeman of his once close relationship to Arias.

Freeman said what most people don’t know is that he was closer to Alexander, but wanted to give Arias the benefit of the doubt when fingers instantly pointed her way after Alexander was found dead.

Arias faces a possible death sentence if convicted of first-degree murder in the June 2008 killing of Alexander in his suburban Phoenix home.

“I kind of defended her and said ‘you know I don't know if she did it or not, but I can't treat her like she has unless I know, and the person I know wouldn't have done it,” said Freeman.

Freeman said he now realizes he really didn’t know Arias all that well.

On the day she was arrested a friend called to “rub” it in, but the news came an hour after his brother committed suicide and Freeman was consumed by a different tragedy.

“At that point, it really didn’t matter," said Freeman.

Freeman visited Arias several times in jail, but the visits soon stopped. He just needed to move on.

“People would tell me to go see her when I was in town. I would think about it, but then never went,” said Freeman.

In 2010 Freeman was told he could be called to testify for either the prosecution or the defense and not to watch news reports.

He didn’t watch the news and his friends held back telling him things.

“My grandmother has watched the entire trial and hasn’t told me a thing,” said Freeman.

So Freeman had never heard Arias’ third and final claim that she killed in self-defense. He only knew the intruder story.

Arias’ attorneys called him to testify with only two choices, come on his own free will or be subpoenaed.

“I was just there to tell the truth and whoever called me would've got the same answers” said Freeman.

When Freeman took the stand he said Arias didn’t look like the Jodi he knew.

“Whey started the questioning that’s when I realized they were trying to paint Travis as the bad guy. Sitting on the stand, I kind of smiled because I knew that wouldn't work. He was a good guy - there wasn't anything bad in anything I ever saw,” recalled Freeman.

Freeman remembers looking over to Arias wondering what was she thinking, but only got a blank stare in return.

He also recalls looking over at Prosecutor Juan Martinez chuckling with Detective Estaban Flores. He said he knew Martinez was about to make him a witness for the prosecution and he welcomed it.

“At least it crossed my mind and whether or not it crossed his I don't know. But what crossed my mind was he realized I was just telling the truth and that I wasn't for the defense and that most of what I said he could actually use,” Freeman told ABC15

Arias’ final story that Alexander physically, emotionally and sexually abused her was too much for Freeman.

“To me, I see someone who was a good man being dragged through the mud. We all have our weaknesses; we all have the things in our lives that we struggle with that are vices and it's not often that we have all our vices and dirty laundry dragged out for the whole world to see.”

In court, Freeman told jurors Arias and Alexander fought, but nothing out of the ordinary from a typical couple.

He said Alexander wanted to move on, but Arias just kept coming around and Alexander had trouble saying “no” to her.

"When you're living a lifestyle that conflicts with your belief's to the degree with what Travis was doing, to me, that was why he said he couldn't marry her. He told me that before he said 'I love her, I care about her, but I can't marry her.'”

And as for Arias’ latest claims in court, Freeman shakes his head.

“I don't believe her story. He (Travis) was murdered.”

Read more: http://www.abc15.com/dpp/news/region...#ixzz2RfulZao2

[just the facts]

How do you explain -If Jodi was standing facing towards the hallway when she supposedly fired the gun the empty shell casing would have ejected to her right so how do you explain the shell casing landing on congealed blood on her left.
I tend to go with the M.E who has done over 6,000 autopsies which to me is a lot of experience compared to average citizens who have done none.
I have watched all of this trial and testimony and believe there is enough evidence that has been presented as to her guilt and premeditation.
I'm sure if Jodi had her way she would try for version four at this point if she could because version three is not going so well for her.
There is nothing that proves to us the public that everything she has come up with in her story is still not based on nothing but lies.
You have to remember we only have her side of the story and there is nothing she says in this one that makes any more sense than version one or version two which even she said was all lies to save her ass.

[Jillee]

I thought one of the best juror questions yesterday was in regards to what was in the attic. There was NOTHING up there yet Jodi said she was there helping Travis but the Christmas decorations up there.....hummmmmm, do you think Jodi would lie about something like that?

Exactly. No Christmas decorations, no "little angle trinket". No "little angel trinket", no reason to go back and catch him with little boy pictures. No little boy pictures, no abuse. No abuse, no June 4th body slam. No body slam, no self defense. Kind of a Jodi lie chain reaction.

[just the facts]

I think one thing everyone is missing here is DR Horn said that in the brain cavity where the bullet passed through the skull that there was very little to no bleeding in the skull cavity or bullet tract into the cheek.
Even if by magic the brain was missed there would be profuse bleeding inside the skull if Travis's heart was still beating and his throat had not been cut yet.

My wife who was a neurosurgeon for many years has told me DR Horn would be right that the gunshot to the head would have had to come last because even after several days you would still be able to see a large amount of blood from the bullet traveling through the skull unless the throat was cut already or the person was deceased already and the heart had already quit beating.
She told me even after several days a pathologist would be able to tell the difference between blood accumulation in the skull and the brain it's self.
My wife also said that by being shot in the head where Travis was shot that it would not have been possible for him to have said kill you bitch either.
Like DR Horn said the shock wave from the bullet would incapacitate him as well especially in the immediate time after the bullet traveled through the skull.
The bullet would have hit the frontal lobe of the brain in order for it to have traveled where it was in the upper cheek.
She told me it is possible he could have maybe stood up after a bit of time but not have been able to speak or chase anyone or function normally.
The fact DR Horn said there was little to know bleeding in the brain cavity or the bullet tract within the cheek shows he was already dead from the throat slashing or his heart had already quit bleeding from lose of blood.
Myself I tend to agree with my wife and Dr Horn that Jodi's story of shooting Travis first did not happen.
If Jodi's story is a lie then premeditation is the only other scenario that's possible.