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

[Brillig]

When I review Nurmi's closing argument he consistently referenced the juror questions. I believe the defense closing was structured around those questions and whatever weaknesses they could find in them.

There was a reason he said he didn't like Jodi, I'm not sure what it was, but I think he might have been trying to identify with the jurors based on their questions. Who knows what effect it could have on them. His team has been watching the jurors very closely.

I think you have a good point about Nurmi's closing encompassing the juror questions. I also think the reason you give is the most likely explanation for Nurmi saying he doesn't like Jodi... he can tell from the jury questions that the jury dislikes her, and he is trying to identify with them. (See, jury, I don't like her either!)

Just to clear up the facts for all of us. Weren't the gas cans bought after Jodi left Mesa and not before? Sorry for multiple posts.

There were three gas cans. Two Jodi borrowed from Darryl while enroute to kill Travis. She had called him in advance and asked to borrow them for a trip to Mesa. The third gas can, Jodi bought at a Walmart in Salinas, also while enroute.

So the one gas can Jodi purchased was bought after she moved from Mesa to Yreka, but before she returned to Mesa to kill Travis.

[Peace Corpse]

"Each man's death diminishes me"


Am I reading this all wrong? It was really the prosecution that used this poem? When they're arguing FOR the death penalty? Isn't it a little
risky to get jurors thinking that way if you want a death verdict? Or have I got it completely arse-about & it was the defense that used it ?- that would make more sense. Sorry if you've already discussed it guys. I keep getting stuck on pages for HOURS today - as do we all I expect. If you have, just ignore & I'll catch up on the original discussion soon I hope...

The whole poem open for interpretation :

No Man Is An Island

No man is an island,
Entire of itself.
Each is a piece of the continent,
A part of the main.
If a clod be washed away by the sea,
Europe is the less.
As well as if a promontory were.
As well as if a manor of thine own
Or of thine friend's were.
Each man's death diminishes me,
For I am involved in mankind.
Therefore, send not to know
For whom the bell tolls,
It tolls for thee.

-John Donne

[Brillig]

"Each man's death diminishes me"


Am I reading this all wrong? It was really the prosecution that used this poem? When they're arguing FOR the death penalty? Isn't it a little
risky to get jurors thinking that way if you want a death verdict? Or have I got it completely arse-about & it was the defense that used it ?- that would make more sense.

The prosecution used it. Juan quoted from it at the very end of his rebuttal.

I assumed the reference was to the death of Travis.... Travis' pointless slaughter 'diminished him' and diminished all of us by his loss.

I assumed that the bell tolling reference was for Jodi. Jodi's richly deserved death would be justice.
"(Ask) not for whom the bell tolls, it tolls for thee." (The reference is to funeral bells)


But I suppose that is open for interpretation.

[blighted star]

I'm not just a troll. I am fucking SUPER TROLL with 53 MILLION troll points and FU to you motherfuckers that are positive repping me. I was pushing 100 Mil earlier today.

Awwww, I said I was sorry. It's still all pretty & red. & you've got Shayna Hubers to mess with yet.

[bete noire]

Nurmi says "it's not about bad haircuts or the sexual orientation of the witnesses...." these are items from Twitter and FB land that the jury knows nothing about... People made fun of Nurmi's buzz-cut and mentioned the obvious (and not hidden) fact that Alyce is a lesbian. The jurors must have been scratching their heads about that...

They jury asked a rather sarcastic question about a bad haircut causing something (ptsd or some kinda amnesia), though, didn't they?
Could he be referring to that?

Was Alyce asked if she liked Jodi, as well?

Couldn't that be it? Not necessarily stuff on the internet... even though they may well be reading up on that, too.


Then again I could be totally wrong since I haven't had a chance to watch Nurmi's closing argument yet...

Ugh, gonna do that now.
Here goes nothin'!

[tinaturner]

They jury asked a rather sarcastic question about a bad haircut causing something (ptsd or some kinda amnesia), though, didn't they?
Could he be referring to that?

Was Alyce asked if she liked Jodi, as well?

Couldn't that be it? Not necessarily stuff on the internet... even though they may well be reading up on that, too.


Then again I could be totally wrong since I haven't had a chance to watch Nurmi's closing argument yet...

Ugh, gonna do that now.
Here goes nothin'!

thats what i thought too.

[Poppycock]

;/

[blighted star]

GREAT song.

Oh no, now Ill always think of Jodi when I hear it. Ugh!

Yeah & now I'm the same with The Clash. "Fought the Law" will always remind me now. & the African Lion Safari ad. My youngest has been singing it as "with liars & tigers & bears ...it's scary, but nobody cares" all day. Catchy.The ripple effect flows on.

[Freaktab]

Damn Cocnut.... Check out that 80's hair and moves! Makes me want to go get some Zinka and Bonnie Bell lip-smacker!

I know a lot of people are really over Wilma and Nurmi, but can you all imagine working with Stabby? The job of any defense attorney is to get their client off or, in a DP case, to save the client's life. Did the DT have to crush Travis' credibility? It is really all they had and trashing the victim has been around forever. For most of us, we want to see Stabby found guilty, but I would be willing to listen to credible evidence of her self-defense theory. The problem is, there is just too much evidence that points to pre-med. murder.
The last thing I would ever want is for the Alexander family to go through this shit again. As it is, if Stabby is found guilty and gets the DP, there will be years of hearings and appeals. The Alexander family will more than likely attend every appeal hearing to show solidarity and support for Arias' sentence. I can't imagine how terrible it would be to relive the murder and trial every time.
Stabby will not be acquitted and she is going away for a long, long time no matter what happens. I don't like the DT tactics, however I am grateful that she got a good defense as it closes another door on that smarmy face.
At the end of today's preceding, I saw relief on the faces of Nurmi and Wilma. They know she is a liar, but I think they also know that their job is done; no way do either of them handle her appeals.
Once the verdict and sentencing are completed, I don't ever want to hear Jodi Arias' name again. I prefer to think about Travis and his life. Just because Travis is dead, I refuse to make him into a saintly being who was perfect. He seems to have been struggling with a lot of issues, but he was working on them. Travis was very sexually inexperienced and I think Stabby exploited him. The guy didn't have a chance!
The DT had a nightmare case because the client is a fuck-up and couldn't keep her mouth shut. After JM's closing (on Thursday) I was watching both Nurmi and Palin and I saw defeat and hopelessness. They both have to know that it is over for Stabby. Shit, I thought Palin was going to quit the defense and ask Juan if she could carry his books home!
Although the tactics disgust me, I think it's commonplace and most defense attorney's would have done the same thing. Palin and Nurmi were doing their job and the job is to save the client. I think both of them fought for Stabby and, if nothing else, it closes the door to an appeal.

[Jadedmile]

I beg the jury to look beyond the sex, beyond the lies, to look to the bigger picture. Truth is, he had Stabby by the throat, metaphorically; he had put together the puzzle and figured out ALL her lies, and probably all at once, just like the light bulb so many speak of... He cornered her. Between what the Hughes have revealed in the last few days, the journals, T's blog, etc, I know, without a doubt, she killed him on purpose, premeditated. She had no credibility left, with anyone nor any agency, and Travis was gonna blow her cover for good! In her own little precious world, she had no choice. Everyone except her Grandparents were done ENABLING this evil bitch, and she had no other choice, in her sick twisted mind.. Justice for Travis, I beg of the jury!

[bermstalker]

Good morning everyone!

"For whom the bell tolls" - WOW, when JM quoted (or tried to)that was powerful to me. The whole book is very powerful! I guess the quote could be debated on, but you almost have to read the book to understand what it *might* mean. To me it has always meant we all depend on one another and are all affected by the actions of others. BUT of course......I'm also always reminded of the Metallica song "for whom the bell tolls" too.

Just my 2 cents- I thought Nurmi did much better than I expected him too. I definitely think Nurmi was talking to that one juror that may have had doubts (or at least it sounds like one juror does from the jury questions) I don't think it's a stretch to say one may think it was a heat of passion killing. Nurmi's BEST evidence, IMO, is the dirty pictures Travis and Jodi took earlier in the day.

What I think hurts Nurmi the worst is when he started talking about the killing. It almost sounded like he was giving his theory on what happened. He kept using the words "It makes no sense" and I kept saying to myself....oh course it doesn't make sense. A murder and a murderer never make sense. The actions before, during, and after...rarely make any sense at all. What made me absolutely disgusted at Nurmi yesterday was the way he totally turned the knife in Travis' back even more. Sure, I understand it's his job, but implying Travis raped Jodi was outrageous and unnecessary. I knew he was going to talk about the PEDO, but when he said "let's hope looking at pictures was all Travis did with little kids" made me want to puke. That went way beyond defending your client. That was downright character assassination and a huge Fuck you to Travis' family! That is the moment I knew Nurmi would never be an attorney worth anything. All I could imagine was all the future sex offenders he was going to defend and all the little kids he was going to character assassinate in the future.

I thought JM was good. He drinks way to much water in the middle of his sentences. It started to bug me. BUT I think he was truly meant to be the voice of Travis. It's very easy to see that he became emotionally attached to this case. Anything less than M1 DP will feel like failure to him, I'm sure.

I've said it before.....Something is very mentally wrong with Jodi, IMO. The way she acts in court proves that. I think Travis may have been right when he diagnosed her mental condition in that text. That bitoch is bat shit evil!

[Jadedmile]

Just a note, my 16 yr old pulled some shit recently which made me request her phone from her, and it took my huge 6'3" 240lb husband and I both to physically remove her phone from her presence WHILE she was trying to smash it to pieces. Jodi was able to physically manipulate and maneuver travis, soaking wet on tile with no rubber in between, she had full advantage. Guaranteed... Wish my little brat daughter was on tile... Fucking sneaky ass stubborn teenagers with a death wish! Wtf?!

[bermstalker]

here is my take from notes:

#10 Thirty-something woman with long hair and bangs.

#17. youngest female, chubby, very attentive, large hoop earrings. head back, eyes closed during sidebar. uses a lot of kleenex.

#15. an older silver haired man, he uses the headphones. not the oldest male, I don't think.

hard to read any of them! can't judge a book by it's cover.

8 men 4 women

Juror No. 1 (nearest the witness stand)
She is a white female in her 60s and sits closest to the witness stand. She doesn't look at Arias often during her testimony. People in the gallery observed her yawning once during an emotional part of Arias' testimony.

Juror No. 2
He is a white male in his 50s. He takes few notes and usually has his head cupped in his hands as he listens to testimony

Juror No. 3
She is a white female in her 40s. She takes a lot of notes and often watches prosecutor Juan Martinez as he moves around the courtroom. She has been seen submitting questions.

Juror No. 4
He is a white male in his 60s, and he takes few note

Juror No. 5 (she was kicked off 4/2/13) GONE
She is a married, white female in her 30s. She sits on the edge of her seat and is the most visible juror from the gallery because she has a "unique hair style"

Juror No. 6
She is a white female in her 60s and is also seen taking many notes.

Juror No. 7
He is a white male in his 30s, and he is married. He takes notes and often bites his nails.

Juror No. 8 (GONE)
He is a white male in his 50s and is married. He also takes notes and has been observed submitting questions.

Juror No. 9
He is a white male in his 60s. He wears denim on most days and sits at the end of the jury box. He sits close to the first row of the gallery where Alexander's family sits.


Juror No. 10 (alternate)
She is a white female in her 40s. She is an occasional note taker and she often looks at the gallery during sidebars.

Juror No. 11 (He was ill 4/12/13) GONE
He is a Hispanic male in his late 20s to early 30s. He dresses casually and sometimes slouches so far down in his chair that he is hardly visible to the gallery. He does not appear to be taking notes.

Juror No. 12
He is a white male in his 40s.

Juror No. 13
He is a white male in his late 20s or early 30s. He appears to be the youngest member of the jury and takes very few notes. He smiled when Martinez asked Arias if she could predict the future.

Juror No. 14
He is a white male in his early 60s who often swivels in his chair. He does not appear to be taking notes.

Juror No. 15 (alternate)
He is a white male in his late 60s to early 70s. He wears an audio-enhancing headset provided by the court. He does takes notes.

Juror No. 16
She is a white female in her 40s and also takes lots of notes. She swiveled her chair toward Arias during her testimony.

Juror No. 17 (alternate)
She is a married, white female in her 30s. She takes a lot of notes. She does not look at Arias during testimony. She tends to look straight ahead or down at her notes.

Juror No. 18 (nearest the witness stand -back row)
He is a white male in his 70s and is married. He has a tattoo on his right arm. He rarely is seen taking notes. He sits the furthest away from the witness.

[blighted star]

I can believe that skateboarders might mess with someone's license plate, perhaps even remove it, because they thought it would be funny, or anarchistic, etc, but would they ever unscrew someone's license plate, remove it, flip it over, and screw it back on upside down? What would be the point of that? That whole concept seems so unbelievable to me, so I would be interested in your insights.

Sorry MISFIT, this question was yours to answer, but it reminded me of something..

It would be EXTREMELY unlikely ..but...with the right chemicals added, anything's possible. I knew a bunch of big scary tattooed guys who took a little too much of something very nasty & for reasons each of them was later unable to recall, armed themselves with DESSERT SPOONS & marched threateningly down an inner-Sydney main street, assaulting every adult male they passed - by whacking them on the head with the spoons. I think the idea behind it was to see if guys would react differently if they were assaulted with something silly & comical, rather than the standard fist. Unfortunately they were too wasted to make sense of their own results, or remember what made them want to know in the first place.

So... unless there was a spate of frivolously (& possibly drug-induced ) removed-rotated-replaced number-plate incidents in the area at that time, I think we can safely say the chance of this story being possible is a big fat zero. Because if anyone got it into their head to do something so weirdly, annoyingly pointless to random strangers, they wouldn't be doing it just the once - everybody involved would need a turn.

[DenverClipper]

What a shame

Yesterday was the most exciting day of the trial to date and this thread suffered a complete meltdown. I finally just gave up and left. I don't think the problem has been fixed.

[dizzyp]

She said that she returned the gas can to the same Walmart on cross AND redirect. So if the jury gets the whole transcript they will see that in both instances she said that she returned it to the same Walmart.

and it seems to me the jury will have reason to not trust Nurmi and the DT because he was basically either willfully misleading them in closing abut testimony or he was incompetent in not knowing what his own client said in court. It has been suggested he did it purposely to give JA an appeal issue.. that and dissing her in front of the jury.

[alyoop]

I just went looking for tawnidilly, to watch the last argument from Juan.
It pulls up her vids, and I really got a chuckle: over 7,000 watches for Juan's rebut closing. Only 700 for Nurmi's closing.
Maybe its cuz he lives on the corner of ewwwww & Icky Icky...

[Wishmich]

When I review Nurmi's closing argument he consistently referenced the juror questions. I believe the defense closing was structured around those questions and whatever weaknesses they could find in them.

There was a reason he said he didn't like Jodi, I'm not sure what it was, but I think he might have been trying to identify with the jurors based on their questions. Who knows what effect it could have on them. His team has been watching the jurors very closely.

I agree. I think the bad haircut reference was to the question to Samuels. I can't quote the question, but I believe it was a slam against Samuels.

[Wishmich]

I agree. I think the bad haircut reference was to the question to Samuels. I can't quote the question, but I believe it was a slam against Samuels.

Sorry to quote myself. I can't edit. Remember when Samuels went on and on about PTSD and a juror question was about getting PTSD from a bad haircut?

[dizzyp]

Jodi herself made it super crystal clear that she returned the gas can to the very same Salinas Walmart where she purchased it. I believe she even embellished with the detail about how she went to the Starbucks in the same parking lot for a Strawberry Frap, then went back inside Walmart and returned the gas can.
:

If the jury has any doubt as to "what did Jodi say about the gas can?" they can ask for read back of trial testimony. Remember Jodi's has savant like memory up until "the fog" and she was specific and unwavering that she returned the gas cans to the same Walmart, without leaving the Westridge Mall on Davis Rd in Salinas where she purchased it. She got a Frap at Starbucks which is at one of the entrances to the Mall and "thought it was frivolous" and went right back to the same Walmart, within 1/2 hour and returned it. That was her (perjured) testimony.

The real story, of course, is there are also a couple of Hair/Nail Salons in that Mall and she had to wait to get her hair done and killed some time at Starbucks


among other procedures in Arizona:

At the close of evidence in a trial involving numerous exhibits, the trial judge shall ensure that a simple and clear retrieval system, or index, is provided to the jurors to assist them in finding exhibits during deliberations. (including court reporter readbacks of testimony)

http://www.supreme.state.az.us/jury/jury/jury1k2.htm

[dizzyp]

Sorry to quote myself. I can't edit. Remember when Samuels went on and on about PTSD and a juror question was about getting PTSD from a bad haircut?

good catch... I forgot about that...

and someone else mentioned that a juror question did at least infer AL "liked" JA, maybe a little too much, as did JM.

I'm not sure the jury got that context in Nurmi's closing... it went right over my head at the time.

[dizzyp]

They jury asked a rather sarcastic question about a bad haircut causing something (ptsd or some kinda amnesia), though, didn't they?
Could he be referring to that?

Was Alyce asked if she liked Jodi, as well?

Couldn't that be it? Not necessarily stuff on the internet... even though they may well be reading up on that, too.


Then again I could be totally wrong since I haven't had a chance to watch Nurmi's closing argument yet...

Ugh, gonna do that now.
Here goes nothin'!

I think you're right on both points... the juror questions did at least infer AL "liked" JA, maybe a little too much, JM hinted at that as well. There was also a haircut reference...

None of that occurred to me when he said it in closing, maybe the Jury got the context of it, I don't know.

[dizzyp]

But if they remember it and don't need a read back would be hysterical. Nurmi all excited he put one over when they had his lying ass in a sling the minute it rolled out of his mouth. :)

you're right... most will probably remember exactly what she said without a problem. Maybe the Walmart testimony will be the leverage to convince the fabled "one juror" that has doubts (if there is one) to make them realize that the deception started with JA and somehow infiltrated her DT as well... JA lied habitually and KN tried to snooker the jury in closing.

[alyoop]

What was the whole point of the stipulation from the photoshopped picture that the defense tried to bring in? Nurmi never mentioned it. Juan never mentioned it. what was the point?

[dizzyp]

JM didn't need to waste precious resources on checking for another Walmart, he did the smart thing and got her to claim she returned it to the same one.

there was only 1 Walmart in Salinas itself in 2008. Others within 20 miles north or east of Salinas... and I agree with you, why would the prosecution try to save Jodi's ass from her own lies?... The point is SHE DIDN'T RETURN THE GAS CAN AT ALL... she lied about it.. that has been proven. Nothing further required.