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

[wasthinking]

I guess you must have thicker skin than some of us. Look what happens to anyone who dares to voice an objective opinion that goes against the 'party line' here. It's like a scene from the Hitchcock movie 'The Birds.' There is very little other than blind devotion (Juan Martinez walks on water and can do no wrong) and hatred for anyone defense-related. People have let their emotions run rampant and short-circuit their brains. Which is a real shame because this thread started out as a very entertaining place to discuss the trial, and degenerated into a love/hate fest. It's really become insufferable.

Luv the Birds visual lol fitting.



In all fairness cricket, I see it occur on both 'sides'
Be it blind Hail to JM making false idols, or obnoxious devils advocate games... both use a horrific murder as a playground. Tragedy is used for weird hate hate hate, or anal anal anal bullshit for entertainment that I admit, I don't understand.

I can see occasional humor, but how is murder a funny game to be played 24/7?
Unfortunately, somehow, this is what our society has made it no matter where you go on the internet. This isn't the first and won't be the last case that this modern era has created w these sad results of our digital society. We' the People have created a monster! We have all contributed to a rotting away of serious discussions (and opportunity to learn). Shit, I get bashed and smited for putting up infromation! Heaven forbid, you present court facts from their site! But where were the outcries for that ridiculous game? Who played a part and fed such nonsense? Again split, some appreciate getting the information and don't play juvenile games. The fact is, there isn't a side that hasn't lowered to petty nit picking, reduced tragic murder into cheap jokes, online stalking, a search for idols like rockstars to worship, or hasn't failed to respect anothers views. or input.

I think all we can do is monitor ourselves, individually, from our own conscience and self discipline.
Here too there will remain splits, because, people are people, and come in different lights and darknesses. Some want to 'play' some want serious discussion. The two don't mix well. And there will always be some like JA that will not change, not accept any responsibilty, or discipline their own actions. Some will always find their fun and giggles in hating, gangbangs, with no interest in e contributions into any serious discussion. The juvenile smiters whether they have the guts to post attacks or are cowards that have to sneak behind the scenes will always exist. Just like murderers, cons, criminals, highschool meanies ... sneaks ... negative players are always looking for an outlet.

But I can't point only to here at MDS. It is our new society unfortunately. Ignore is the only tool to fight it but .. there's always those that won't do that either. Daily we see those that give JA the attention she wants, drag her so called 'art' and tweets on any and every forum I've ever seen, give her supporters new life daily by dragging their idiotic posts around giving them the publicity they desire.

I'll get off the soap box now and commit the unforgivable .. google some info on what we should expect for the after verdict appeals. I know they go to state direct appeals first but can't remember what happens then, think it goes to federal hebeas then.

[tinaturner]

I just watched Juan's closing again. I really feel like the strongest and most eloquent part of the entire thing is when he is speaking of the sequence of events of the murder itself. I truly felt like i was in the bathroom observing what was transpiring and i could imagine the fear that Travis must have felt. I really think it was smart how much Juan emphasized that Travis was trying to get away from her and the visuals of the photographs really made it almost tangible. I actually teared up. It is really amazing that Jodi was nearly unscathed considering the size difference between the two of them. I know she must have taken him by complete surprise but still it seems like his efforts were only to escape and not to fight back.

[Saffron]

I just watched Juan's closing again. I really feel like the strongest and most eloquent part of the entire thing is when he is speaking of the sequence of events of the murder itself. I truly felt like i was in the bathroom observing what was transpiring and i could imagine the fear that Travis must have felt. I really think it was smart how much Juan emphasized that Travis was trying to get away from her and the visuals of the photographs really made it almost tangible. I actually teared up. It is really amazing that Jodi was nearly unscathed considering the size difference between the two of them. I know she must have taken him by complete surprise but still it seems like his efforts were only to escape and not to fight back.

I agree with you. I thought this was the best part of his closing argument for all the reasons you list, and it was quite moving. I think Juan did an excellent job overall.

Thank you to everyone who answered my question on the previous page. Your answers really helped me to understand better. You're all such good critical thinkers.

[bermstalker]

I have read a lot of interesting and probably very close scenarios for how the killing went down. But there's one thing I have never seen adequately fit into the sequence of events.

When did the multiple stab wounds to the stomach happen?

Travis would have to be standing or laying on his back, and not defending his stomach (maybe hands on head?).

Wasn't there a stab wound in his neck (below the ear) and one in his head? I always thought that was one of the first wounds Jodi did and the back stabs came when he was trying to get down the hallway. I thought the stomach wounds came after he quit fighting.

[blighted star]

Originally Posted by *crickets*
And I noticed Mr. Martinez backed right off the whole subject today...not one mention of 'frontal lobe' or 'immediate incapacitation' anywhere to be found, was there?

Originally Posted by Brillig
Because he is saving it for his final argument. To counter the defense bringing it up. Wait and see. E

Originally Posted by *crickets*
Wanna bet?

I apologize for fucking that up earlier. Crickets, I'll bet that JM will go over it if the D team does! I believe JM has planned to bring that up in his final argument purposefully, knowing he can tailor his response to whichever lie the defense chooses.[/QUOTE]

Yay TMY for putting this whole conversation in one bubble for me. Between my tablet & the quote weirdness & site problems it was all too much for me. So ..did he? Or didn't he?

[I doubt it]

KCL on WS had a little quiet talk with JM on Fri. One of them said that KN was trying to imitate JM, but didn't do a good job. JM said that KN is not a good speaker. JM is also hoping for a M1 verdict on Mon.

[lorizfree]

his legs aren't crossed..it look like they are but that is his calf of the same leg. it is an optical illusion.

After looking at it more closely, you appear to be right. But he sure is crammed up against the back of the shower wall.

[lorizfree]

[QUOTE=Morticia;3409947]

Makes me wonder if he's deliberately creating grounds for appeal. Between making a fuss about the Walmart store, saying TA was shot in his left temple, and getting the date of the car rental return wrong, it sure looks like a lot of errors in a death penalty case that even us hacks on a forum can see.

No shit. Good point(s).

[I doubt it]

After looking at it more closely, you appear to be right. But he sure is crammed up against the back of the shower wall.

But look at his back. It looks like he slid down to that position. Anyone have that size shower to try this out in? I wonder if she drugged him too.

I don't think this thread to the never-ending-trial will ever end. We still have the aggravating and mitigating stages of the trial before the sentence is handed down Then she'll have her appeals. I wonder how many new stories she'll come up with.

If the state finds new evidence now, they can bring it into her appeal case?

[lorizfree]

I had quoted a post, but I realised I'd seen so many similar posts, ranging in severity from outright attack & accusation, to mild rebuke, that it'd be unfair to single out just one & impossible to cover all. Most of what I'm referring too happened 24hrs ago, & because it's Coconut everyone's probably kissed, hugged banana's & made up & fallen out anew several times more since. But, also because it's Coconut, chances are, this post will be relevant again now, or sometime very soon.

Sooo...

Geez guys, an IMPARTIAL observer CAN be critical of the prosecution AND point out the defenses strong points (& vice versa, which Coconut DOES do) without it having ANY bearing on their belief in the defendants innocence or guilt. That's what you're supposed to do if you're on a jury, aren't you? That's how our system works & I thought that was how your's did too. If you form an opinion that's weighted heavily for one side, it can skew your view of some evidence.

These commnts about the 12yr old girl conversation are a good example . If the victim in this case looked like Gus, or Dr G, or Dr S, or even Nurmi himself, do you think you'd be as quick to scoff & say it wasn't his fault, she MADE him do it or would you be all "see! see! I knew it! you can tell he's a sick, sleazy old and/ or fat fuck just by LOOKING at him". Coconut is doing what is supposed to be done - an OBJECTIVE appraisal of the evidence.

If it wasn't possible, or reasonable to expect a person to do that, even in a case where conviction is pretty much a foregone conclusion, then juror's wouldn't be asked if they're able to put their emotions aside & consider the case objectively. If you consistently score one side 100% & the other 0%, then you have lost your objectivity. & to those here that have said "I HATE her" & have openly stated they have no objectivity anymore when it comes to JA, that's fine - because you've made your position clear.


But calling Coconut a secret JAII member, & a "Jodi is innocent" believer simply for trying to be objective is wrong. I mean shit guys, Martinez would be picking the crap out of his case, just like Coconut is doing, in order to perfect it! There's a very small group of posters here who have tried to add an objective voice to this thread for visitors & future readers, because this IS the only place that allows open discussion of arguments for & against on each point put forward in this case. & if no-one here has the guts to stick their neck out & speak against the group voice , this becomes yet ANOTHER cheer squad for one side or the other. There's nothing wrong with Travis' support sites. They are a good & necessary thing & it would be a sad world if such sites didn't multiply & flourish. But MDS is not one of those sites. This thread is just one of thousands here. MDS was here long before this trial & will be around long after. This thread was created to discuss the case, not to create a cheer squad for either side.

Despite the huge notice at the start of this thread re just because someone holds a different view to yours doesn't make theirs wrong, we frequently have people being called trolls or secret Jodi supporters when they do try to be objective. That is the reason so many people are afraid to post, it's why this thread ALWAYS has at least 3 or 4 times as many lurking as it does posting 24/7. It's the reason so many posters have left, never to return, and, hearteningly, it seems it's also the reason reps take an astronomical leap upwards when someone works up the guts to stick their neck out. Speaking against the group voice here might draw a lot of heavy criticism in the thread - but it seems there's a much, much bigger voice speaking only through reps.

Please people, stop calling anyone who tries to be objective a Jodi supporter. Unless you're very superstitious, you must realise that speaking objectively about the defense in an online forum is NOT going to set Jodi free. As Coconut & others have pointed out SO MANY times, there is a shitload of OTHER evidence against her. Discussing the few teensy positives the defense has to work with WILL NOT JINX JUAN & SET JODI FREE, acting like it will lessens the credibility of this whole thread, & you've all come up with some amazinv arguments over the last few months. Don't lose sight of the big picture & condemn fellow posters to LWOP in a JAII facility for conceding one of the few real arguments this defense can use. Cos Coconut's said it too just not in the same words- but there aint many straws left to clutch. Debating points on MDS CANNOT set Jodi free.

I just think we like coconut is because he has that attractive (but obviously fake ;o) avatar.

[blighted star]

Right! You take the ME's report and his testimony as a whole. You note the contradictions. You then ask yourself, "How did the bullet get from his right forehead to his left cheek?" Then you apply your reason and logic to arrive at the conclusion that it travelled through the frontal lobe of the brain. It's called circumstantial evidence and it's just as good evidence as direct evidence as would be given by someone who was there and rode the bullet through Travis's head. Juan illustrated that well with his example of footsteps in the sand.

Well now I'm really confused. The argument for that bullet taking a path through, or even just slightly into the brain, makes perfect sense if there are TWO holes. None at all if there's one. There was no travelling through anything if there's only a single point of penetration. It would indeed be magical if it penetrated the,skull, continued into the brain, deflected off "something" then turned around& exited the brain perfectly through it's own entry wound. Are there two skull perforations?

If not, Crickets did not deserve the serving of shit that was dished out over this. Wouldn't it be more like say, a ball hits a glass window, in some cases the ball smashes right through & continues it's path of damage inside the room. In other cases, the ball wasn't thrown with enough force, or the glass was thicker, so while the window was badly damaged & there's obvious dents/fracturing, the ball was deflected without smashing it's way through into the room - & so far that is what this report sounds like.

If the ball was thrown with enough force, it could continue it's path through the room & smash through a 2nd window on the opposite side. It could even bounce off a wall & smash a 2nd hole very NEAR the original point of entry. But what it could never do (or to use something I've heard here a few times, what is so unlikely as to be an unreasonable suggestion) is smash through a window into a room, hit "something" in the room, & then deflect & exit perfectly, right back out through the same hole it smashed on it's way in. THAT idea is the laughable one.

All jokes aside, Crickets came in for some pretty heavy fire over this, but if there's only one area of perforation on that skull, like it or not people she's right. & many of you have just contributed to an earlier discussion - is forensic evidence as open to interpretation as psych testimony? Answer : Yep.

ETA for anyone worried I'm going to argue & argue, &I know there's at least one person groaning, don't worry, I'm happy to have just the one post up to support Crickets idea & stand against the 50million denouncing it. As long as there's one, that's all that matters.

[Mayhem]

Not to beat a dead horse here, but I guess I still don't understand Nurmi telling the jury he doesn't like Jodi. He has spent the last four months telling them Jodi was a battered woman, she had to kill someone in a fight for her life, she suffered PTSD, she has been incarcerated for almost five years, she's being falsely accused of premeditated murder, and she's been publicly called a stalker, manipulator and a liar. Nurmi is claiming she is not a liar, but is a victim, and that her story is true. I've tried to factor in the explanation of others that Nurmi was likely talking to undecided jurors, or basing his statement on juror questions. These are all good answers, and I take them to mean that there may be a juror or two who might not be convinced that the evidence adds up to premeditated murder, yet they don't like Jodi... and now they have her very own attorney showing them that he still did the right thing (defended an innocent person) despite his negative feelings about her, and they can follow his example and disregard their dislike for her and defend her in the jury room. But here's what I don't understand: If Nurmi believes (or is advocating as if he believes) that Jodi is telling the truth, what's not to like about her? How, exactly, is she unlikeable? The only way a juror would dislike her after knowing her these four short months is if they don't believe her. Nurmi claims to believe her, but he's also confessing that he doesn't like her. Yet, if she's telling the truth (which he says she is), then she's not unlikeable at all, but pitiable and deserving of sympathy. Who dislikes a true victim, especially when knowing them only a short time? The defense team hasn't named anything unlikeable about Jodi that Nurmi could be referring to. She would only be unlikeable if Juan is right about her. I just do not understand Nurmi's strategy. (I wish I could be more articulate in asking this. I should have gone to college...)

You articulated this beautifully, and I completely understand what you're saying. This may be a common strategy, but it doesn't quite work in this situation. If she was the abused woman the DT wants us to believe she was, there would be no reason for anyone to dislike her.

I think Nurmi was anticipating some of the jurors "hating" her because she lied to police, lied to everyone, sent flowers to grandmom, killed him heinously three-times over, etc. Maybe Nurmi was expecting some of the older jurors to dislike her because she was into tootsie pops up her twat and all that other kinky crap, who knows. The tactic still falls flat for me.

[dizzyp]

double post

[dizzyp]

What you said about the small amount of room in the shower causing his calves to be pressed up against his thighs, made me take another look at the photo. Is it natural for him to be slouching the way he is, or would a person keep their back straight against the wall in that tight space?

I think he's "wedged" in the shower stall upper back/shoulders against the wall behind him and kneecaps in front. Sitting straight-spined would be difficult... this is a more "comfortable" position... body weight supported front back and bottom. (only my opinion of course)

btw: looking for the time-stamps I came across some CS photos and I don't remember seeing the top one in this strip... he looks panicked to me. This is before the photos where he's sitting in the shower. I am more and more convinced that he was being told what to do, while being threatened, throughout the "photo shoot"

[dizzyp]

I just do not understand Nurmi's strategy. (I wish I could be more articulate in asking this. I should have gone to college...)

well I went to Jr. College and I think you are articulate.

What I saw Nurmi doing was abandoning "self-defense" and arguing more for 2nd degree murder (although he was saying manslaughter)

IMO it is very unlikely the Jury will come to a compromise verdict but if they did they would not make the giant leap from 1st degree murder to manslaughter.. it would be 2nd degree murder.

[dizzyp]

JM is also hoping for a M1 verdict on Mon.

Monday? I said Wed. Like most juries they will want to at least take SOME time to deliberate even if they know they're in agreement... too quick a verdict smacks of them having made up their minds prior to deliberation.


End of the day Monday is not out of the question.

[bermstalker]

Monday? I said Wed. Like most juries they will want to at least take SOME time to deliberate even if they know they're in agreement... too quick a verdict smacks of them having made up their minds prior to deliberation.


End of the day Monday is not out of the question.

I think Beth Karus said that JM had one case where the jury came back in less than 30 minutes.
There have been a few other DP cases where the jury has came back quick. It is possible.

[BreachofTrust]

great story! I wish I would have gotten into forensics for a career but being a dispatcher gets you front and center on all the action as it happens... stressful I can imagine, but exciting.

I was not a good dispatcher. Lol. I took many sociology courses in college when I studied engineering, and I also would have chosen some type of forensic science if it had been available at the time. I decided I wanted a change later in my career and got into dispatching to get my foot in the door. I'm more of a thinker than a reactor. I could remember than 6 hours ago a cab was stolen and later there were suspicious people hanging out in a cab and was able to alert the officers that it was possibly a 10-99 (stolen vehicle). However, listening to 4 conversations at once and trying to pick up on background info during a 911 call was very difficult for me. Dispatching is a true talent of which I've humbly realized is a talent I don't have. I went back in engineering. The good news is I can go to the bathroom whenever I want and eat lunch. Lol

My department was consistently in the top 10 cities in the country per capita for crime. There literally was never more than about 3 seconds of silence on the radio or phones. I enjoyed the adrenaline rush on car chases, etc., but the anxiety of not missing a single transmission and recording exact speeds, etc. was too much for me, especially knowing that any mistake i made could have put an officer in danger or gotten me sued. It was very stressful working in such a negative environment where routinely people abused the 911 system, not to mention some of the heartbreaking stories. I rally admire dispatchers that do it for years for so little appreciation and pay.

[BreachofTrust]

In reference to the Walmart discussion, it's my understanding that Walmart has global real time inventory control. They know quantities on hand and what is being sold at any store at any moment in time. I believe they checked each register as a precaution I. The event the cashier did not scan the barcode on the return of the gas can, and it avoid the defense from wedging doubt.

They probably also checked the money against all the receipts to balance the day's receipts as well which is routine.

The only way Jodi's story could be true is if she returned the gas can, the cashier neglected to scan the barcode, circle the receipt, and returned it using some miscellaneous code. Jodi said she returned it that same day. It seems highly unlikely that the barcode would be missing on a brand new gas can.

Once again, Jodi's story is relying on a bunch of unfortunate circumstances where Walmart neglected their business process for returns.

I believe Juan didnt bring other stores into the equation because he didnt have to, and he didnt want to muddy the waters. The defense did not challenge the evidence. I believe they knew, as did Juan, that Walmart knew exactly when and where all gas cans were sold and if any were returned.

[wasthinking]

I think he's "wedged" in the shower stall upper back/shoulders against the wall behind him and kneecaps in front. Sitting straight-spined would be difficult... this is a more "comfortable" position... body weight supported front back and bottom. (only my opinion of course)

btw: looking for the time-stamps I came across some CS photos and I don't remember seeing the top one in this strip... he looks panicked to me. This is before the photos where he's sitting in the shower. I am more and more convinced that he was being told what to do, while being threatened, throughout the "photo shoot"

Those are very poor PARTIAL pics to make a determination from except the fuller 'surprised' expression one. Here is all of them in order
http://i1309.photobucket.com/albums/...ps00e64932.jpg

That said, it doesn't matter what we interpret, Juan Martinez chose to run with killers story that he was posing and that is the 'facts' the jury has ..unfortunately.

[I doubt it]

Those are very poor PARTIAL pics to make a determination from except the fuller 'surprised' expression one. Here is all of them in order
http://i1309.photobucket.com/albums/...ps00e64932.jpg

That said, it doesn't matter what we interpret, Juan Martinez chose to run with killers story that he was posing and that is the 'facts' the jury has ..unfortunately.

I'm looking for the video with the time delays that these shots were taken from. Do you have the link?

[wasthinking]

I just watched Juan's closing again. I really feel like the strongest and most eloquent part of the entire thing is when he is speaking of the sequence of events of the murder itself. I truly felt like i was in the bathroom observing what was transpiring and i could imagine the fear that Travis must have felt. I really think it was smart how much Juan emphasized that Travis was trying to get away from her and the visuals of the photographs really made it almost tangible. I actually teared up. It is really amazing that Jodi was nearly unscathed considering the size difference between the two of them. I know she must have taken him by complete surprise but still it seems like his efforts were only to escape and not to fight back.

Heading into the penalty phase, this killer is going to try and argue against the aggravator of "cruelty". It isn't going to work. The crime scene prsesents, Travis indeed lived while wounded, had defense wounds and the blood trails show he was trying to escape.
------------

State v. (Isiah) Patterson, 230 Ariz. 270, 283 P.3d 1 (2012)
(F)(6) finding upheld. The victim was conscious while the defendant repeatedly stabbed her. Although mortally wounded, she attempted to escape and seek help. The defendant chased her down, sat over her and stabbed her ? a total of thirteen times. The jury did not abuse its discretion in finding the (F)(6) aggravator (?especially cruel?) based on the?..victim consciously suffer[ing] physical pain or mental anguish during at least some portion of the crime and the defendant knew or should have known that the victim would suffer.? State v. Dixon, 226 Ariz. 545, 556, 250 P.3d 1174, 1185 (2011).

State v. (Leroy D.) Cropper, 223 Ariz. 522, 225 P.3d 579 (2010)
F6 cruelty finding upheld. The evidence demonstrated that Cropper sought out a violent confrontation. The struggle lasted up to two minutes, he acknowledged. Further, the medical testimony regarding the victim?s wounds and blood loss demonstrates that the officer suffered physical pain. The medical examiner explained that the wounds inflicted would have been particularly painful because of the ?higher concentration of nerves? in the neck; the officer would have felt a ?stinging, burning kind of pain.? The officer bled to death as a result of a number of penetrating injuries to his thyroid gland, the jugular vein, and his chest cavity and lung. Thus, it would have taken minutes for him to lose consciousness because the time it would have taken to lose consciousness was the time it took him to bleed out. Thus, the facts established beyond a reasonable doubt that the officer consciously suffered physical pain and Cropper knew or should have known he would experience such pain.

[blighted star]

I just think we like coconut is because he has that attractive (but obviously fake ;o) avatar.

Hah, yeah, I've been wondering if there's been a sneaky little social experiment happening with that -will it change the way the opinion is received? If the avatar was a grumpy old woman, or a young attractive one, would the reaction from a mostly female forum be different? It certainly worked on me for a short time, just not the way it was intended.My tablets about the smallest you can get & avatars appear teeensy. So I thought it was the one-time famous Australian tennis player Pat Cash (yes guys I know, embarassing mistake &all - but sport & porn & porn &sport have never been my strongest areas).

Anyway, never could stand that jerk in his blinding whiter-than-white shortshorts, so Coconut kind of annoyed me in some vague barely aware way at first. Then I realised why & seeing as it's pretty stupid to dislike someone for having an avatar that looks vaguely like someone you found annoying 2 decades earlier..well, I told myself to stop being so fucking stupid. I still think I'm seeing Pat Cash out of the corner of my eye sometimes though. Grrrrr.

[dizzyp]

Those are very poor PARTIAL pics to make a determination from ... it doesn't matter what we interpret, Juan Martinez chose to run with killers story that he was posing and that is the 'facts' the jury has ..unfortunately.

very true... and if the Jury spends time speculating on "what ifs" like we do here they'll be deilberting for weeks

[Wishmich]

very true... and if the Jury spends time speculating on "what ifs" like we do here they'll be deilberting for weeks

I think JM made good decisions with what he brought up and what he didn't. Remember OJ's "mountain of evidence"? Well, in short order, it spiraled out of control because they brought in everything plus the kitchen sink. That gave the defense more and more to work with. Why muddy the water when there's enough to put the story together and have very little to dispute. Nurmi really couldn't dispute much. Instead, as JM said, he argued.