;/
;/
Last edited by Poppycock; 05-09-2013 at 09:46 PM.
I think she had either her purse or her backpack sitting on the edge of the bathtub, closet to where it meets the shower wall, with the knife and the gun in it. Notice how clean the tub is - blood at all
Hey, don't worry about it. For all I know, the dude was totally wasted. I just wanted to point out that it ain't necessarily so.Originally Posted by blighted star
"...Jeffrey Dahmer... actually confessed and accepted his punishment. Had real remorse for the sick things he did. It's pretty bad when Jeffrey Dahmer is a better person than you are." ~Justice11 (re: Jodi Arias)
Oh good catch! I missed that! JM definitely should have busted her on that! Definitely a BOOM moment!
I believe that was his reason for asking about the investigation and what they found on that top shelf. More specifically what they did NOT find. On that shelf or anywhere else in the home. No traces of a gun, ever. Jodi is a lying POS.
[QUOTE=blighted star;3403222]Some people was a reference to the general population, not necessarily directed at members of this forum.
But I will point out that you're getting lost in the weeds here -- and that is exactly what the defense wants to happen. The order of the shots right now is not the important part of the case. Not unless you are buying into Jodi's theory of self-defense.
Even if the shot came first (which I don't believe), it is difficult to imagine that he could have fought as well and as hard as he did. If the killing scene was kept entirely in the center of the bathroom, it would be a different story.
Instead, we have Travis standing at some point at the sink. He has major defensive wounds that are deep enough to show how fiercely he fought off the knife. There are signs that he probably crawled down the hallway.
The M.E. said that it is unlikely that Travis could have done much of anything, based on the path of the bullet. And the defense never brought in their own expert to refute the M.E.'s findings -- because they knew that even with a handful of abnormal cases, most people who get shot in the head stay down. Ninety percent of all people shot in the head die from their injuries. The odds are too small that Travis would have been able to get up after being shot in the head.
Even if (and this is a huge if) Travis had been able to function in some way, Jodi had plenty of time to get away from Travis. She said so in her testimony. He was on the floor. He was screaming at her, and then the fog rolled in.
With the fight over, the flight instinct for survival would have prompted Jodi to flee the room, not fetch a knife and attack him again.
[QUOTE=blighted star;3403222]The problem comes in that there are too many variables and there were no witnesses to the crime. The body was also in a moderate stage of decomposition. He cant testify with any more certainty to this particular situation. He did testify that having a bullet tear through the brain would cause far more damage than having a solid and smooth object such as an arrow would inflict. However, the story of the Phineas Gage's and Gabby Giffords stick so much in our minds because it is RARE to survive major traumatic injury to the brain, as in their cases. Most times, it is because of the miraculous track that the object takes. The ME testified as to what part of the brain the bullet would have penetrated and it was not one of those that would have allowed for a running, aggressive Travis. He can't and he won't testify with any more specificity that the autopsy would will allow him to. But his testimony, coupled with probability and odds of what are typical damage following similar gunshot wounds to the human brain are enough evidence to leave no doubt in the minds of the jurors.
I would think it's more feasible that a friend like Tom Hall would lend him a gun when they had the conversation of him not feeling safe......but we all know it was Grandpas gun
Like it or not, Jodi is entitled to a defense. And with each one that goes on the stand, I wait to hear exactly what they testify to before I pass judgement on the weight I give the testimony (and not the witness.) For whatever reasons they choose to be part of the defense....that is THEIR path in life, not ours. Perhaps they believe in what they say, or maybe they are not ethical or maybe not professional in their actions...who knows?! But the defense has a right to call witnesses and I am totally respectful of that process. Many of the defense witnesses have turned out to be better witnesses for the prosecution. We need to trust that Juan knows a heck of a lot more about prosecuting this case than any of us do. Let him do his job. And if there is reasonable doubt in the jurors minds, then they have an obligation to act on that, as well. That is how our justice system works.
My husband's got guns. Dear lord he has many!! The guns are kept in a safe spot. The ammo, however, is everywhere!! Once, I got off a flight to Denver, got to my hotel and found 3 bullets in the bottom if my suit case!!!! AMMO!!! Holy shit! How'd I not get arrested?!?! Maybe ammo is ok.., I dunno. Freaked me out tho. If I ever have a house fire, I'm more afraid of the stinking ammo going off and killing me rather than the fire itself. Seems you'd find evidence of a gun in the house if Travis owned one. No matter HOW organized you are. :/
The douchebag line. Sounds like you got your toes right on the edge of it!
Will Martinez ,Nurmi and Wilmont handle her appeal?or will there be new council?
Oh I'm betting on new. I have a feeling they may not be friends much longer. I see disappointment & a rather large falling-out in their near future. & besides, I assume you can't appeal for ineffective counsel if you continue to retain said ineffective counsel
Has it ever been brought up in trial that Jodi told Det. Flores, in one of the very first phone calls, that she knew that Travis did not own a gun?
I realize that everything out of her mouth is completely suspect, but it would be a good point to question her about - why did she say that even before she was a suspect?
;/
Last edited by Poppycock; 05-09-2013 at 09:54 PM.
More on Geffner:
In a Texas case; Clark v. Collins, 956 F.2d 68 (5th Circuit 1992) the court found that Dr. Geffner’s affidavit lacked credibility, in part because it was based on hearsay information supplied by the defendant’s attorney with no independent verification.
The court also excluded the Dr.’s testimony in Hawaii v. French, 129 P.3d 581 (Hawaii 2006) involving allegations of child sexual abuse.
In State v. Supulvado, 655 So.2d 623 (La. App. 1995) the court limited most of his testimony as he relied mostly on the information supplied by the defendant and he testified about effects of brain damage on emotional functioning though he is not a medical doctor.
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 2064, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984). “[C]ounsel is strongly presumed to have rendered adequate assistance and made all significant decisions in the exercise of reasonable professional judgment. Id. at 690, 104 S.Ct. at 2066.
22 The state trial court found that Dr. Geffner’s affidavit lacked credibility for three reasons: (1) the evaluation, which makes conclusions as to Clark’s conduct in 1987, was conducted five years later, in 1992; (2) Dr. Geffner did not review the court records or a transcript of the trial testimony; and (3) Dr. Geffner relied upon records from Clark’s childhood in Pennsylvania, with no records since 1976, and upon hearsay information supplied by Clark’s attorneys, with no independent verification of the information, and interviews with Clark. The state court further found that, even if credible, Dr. Geffner’s affidavit does not support a conclusion that Clark was either incompetent or insane at the time of the murders, or that he did not act deliberately within the meaning of the first special issue.
http://mixedbagblog.com/2013/04/26/w...th-dr-geffner/
JM is going to have field day and you can mark my word on that
[QUOTE=Poppycock;3403330]The jury also has the option of M1 Felony murder. If they get too hung up on gunshot first or last issue, they can still convict on either Premeditated or Felony murder without agreeing on the sequence. IMO, the real place to battle that issue is in the Penalty phase when deciding whether Cruelty was an Aggravator. I believe the gunshot first testimony was tailored to avoid the DP. Once she locked into it, she was stuck with the 62 seconds, and she probably never dreamed that this would become so controversial. She likes it.
Is it a common thing for reports to be excluded or found to lack credibility? Does this happen to all expert witnesses at some point? Or is this something a little extraordinary? It's hard to know how to view it without any knowledge of how common this is.
I think that this defense (of self-defense and battered woman syndrome) is a tough one to sell, and rarely works....even in the most difficult of cases. In THIS particular case, it is ludicrous. And to have supposedly professional people up there, trying to draw the same conclusion with Jodi that they might draw from a truly battered and abused individual adds insult to the injury. And their methods of drawing their conclusions is questionable, ethically, in Doc Dick and ALVs cases.
Coconut!! We missed you, our little love muffin!!
Anyone think this Dr Geffer is going to say she might have PTSD, might have Borderline, but definately everything happened in a "heat of passion?" Can they bring that up now that they have it in the Jury instructions for Man2?
One thing that bugs the CRAP out of me is when people suggest "how could a little thang like Jodi overpower big Travis?" because a) she obviously found the way......he was sliced to ribbons while she had a couple of little cuts on her fingers. b) and because she was NOT this little bitty slip of a girl. She was almost as tall as Travis and she was fairly well toned, back then. and.. c) look at the way she dragged him down, slaughtered him, and dragged him back into the shower and left him to rot. She had no accomplices. She killed him within seconds, so I don't believe she gave him any time to think and react. Whether she was wielding the gun or the knife, or both, makes little difference. She ambushed him, before he even had time to process what was happening.
No. That would have required an entirely different angle from the get go. They can't bring that up as a possibility for the jury at this point.
I know. Makes me mad too. They even showed on HLN a woman of her size carrying a dummy of his weight and she got it all the way back to the shower with little work. Of course stabby had blood on the tile floor so it was easy to slide him back to the bathroom.
You think she was TONED? did you see the photo in pigtails with her huge cottage cheese thighs? She didn't look toned to me, but I dunno?
Whew! So he will just dispute Borderline then?
There are currently 275 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 275 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
