Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Have you noticed the female lawyer for Jodi could pass as her sister. They both look very much alike. Their hairstyle and mannerisms are almost identical too.
It seems to me Jodi and her team are enjoying their 15 minutes of fame and are milking this show for the excitement of the movie being filmed about the case. They now will be immortalized in history and they are lovin' it.
Hi , I hope you don't mind if I break up your post so that I can address some individual points.
Hi Lady Ice,
Nope. Great idea to break into pts. as I will also do in responding.
I sure wish we had some legal eagles posting here to answer some of the rules of evidence, discovery etc.
From what I have read, Travis seems to have had quite a few women. I'm not sure I believe that he was all that innocent. He seemed to have a string of girlfriends that backed off after a while for whatever reason. (Maybe due to ARIES' threats). He was also apparently this charismatic public speaker with a long list of females making innuendos on his social network pages. He just doesn't come across to me as the retiring wallflower type. That does not mean that what you are saying isn't correct, What publication could I read so I could have a greater understanding of Travis' previous sexual behavior - meaning how many years or girlfriends, not specifics? I'd be interested to know what is being printed internationally. Good point.
I had to fully restrain myself the other day from having a huge rant on here about the use of the psychologist. Both sides of the whole thing had me twisting in knots. I am a psychology student (just two subjects off my degree) and I was furious at how the profession was being made to look in this court case. Firstly the Prosecutor made me want to reach through the screen and slap him. He was trying to discredit psychometric testing, something which he clearly knew nothing about, and concentrating on points that didn't matter. We study for a long time to administer and assess psych testing and then this guy comes along and tries to pull it to pieces while not understanding even what he was looking at.
I partly agree and partly am holding my opinion. I don't underrate Juan Martinez and what will happen with the next psychologist to testify perhaps as much you. I think Juan Martinez understands psychometric testing quite well for a DA but has no need to show his knowledge at this point, but I might be wrong. I do agree in a correctly administered full psychological profile with the full battery of tests, where the psychometric tests are administered, reviewed and scored like other psychologists do and not by hand....... some questions could have been different or easier.
The thing is, the psychologist was dodgy but not for the reasons that Martinez was trying to say. That's why it was so infuriating that he didn't know what he was talking about. The only question he needed to ask him was "Can a psychopath fake an assessment?" and the answer, if the psychologist was honest, would have to be a big "YES". An honest psychologist would have subjected her to a psychopathy checklist and a personality test before even bothering with PTSD or any other anxiety disorder given the nature of the crime. The most salient, if not the defining feature of psychopathy is the ability to lie and manipulate, assessment procedures are useless against them because they just use the information they glean from the process to be more convincing liars. I think that it is a given that anyone having been through such an event would experience some level of PTSD. The test is not to discover PTSD but to assess levels for treatment. It is a test given for the purposes of treatment, the prosecutor should have found that out and made it clear.
This is where I once again wish we had some legal eagles commenting here. And it may be why I have more confidence in what Juan Martinez understands than you, Lady Ice. I understand the psychological stuff you mention; however, I don't know if Martinez, under the legal rules prosecutors must follow, could ask such a straight up question given what the defense submitted in Discovery. In an earlier post I asked if there had been other psychologists evaluate ARIES who perhaps quit, given their findings? Where's a lawyer, paralegal or court officer when we need someone to help all of us understand the rules of evidence etc. in the court? My understanding is the JURY can ask anything, but the lawyers MUST follow correct procedures, which the Defense didn't withholding pictures and more.
So we have a situation where a psychologist has come into this case for the defense. He has administered an assessment procedure that precluded aspects that would look bad such as checking for psychopathic personality traits (of which I have seen a few from her). He has given her a book at the beginning of his assessment that is a self help book for low self esteem which for a psychopath is basically a handbook on how to appear to have low self esteem and this trait has featured in his diagnosis. Then tests her for PTSD (an anxiety disorder) which it would be easy for a psychopath to fake with the motivation to do so. These tests are made for people who are suffering and need treatment. They don't need to prove they have PTSD, it is already understood that they have it!
Martinez was concentrating on the ethical reasons he should not have given her the book because it suggested treatment or sympathy, but didn't make it clear that the reason why an assessor should not provide any such material is because the assessment itself is then tainted. The assessment should be an objective snapshot of the state of mind of the defendant. The doctor giving her that book not only altered her state of mind but was providing her with a clue as to the kind of personality she should adopt to avoid prosecution! He may be saving that for his closing argument, especially after another psychologist testifies.
I could go on and on about this but I'll spare you the boredom of my ranting
The simple fact that he kept having sex with her. If he thought she was crazy, as some of his messages indicate, then common sense should tell him to not let her close. Lock the doors and get a police order for her to stay away. I think he was just as obsessed with her though and maybe he even liked that she was so obsessed with him. The relationship of mine that I mentioned above was a lot like that, it took a terrifying incident for me to finally walk away and stay gone. This was his terrifying incident, only he didn't get out. I'm trying to remember where I read this... I think Travis Alexander did take the first steps of getting a restraining order or orders against her after she slashed his tires the second time. If I can remember that source I'll post it.
What may be valuable to you about my perspective is that I am pretty much only hearing what the jury is (supposed to be) hearing. I have gone over all of the documentation, I have read the autopsy and police reports and I listen very carefully to what the witnesses are saying. When you are listening to all of the friends and family you need to remember that they have lost a loved one and we all tend to see the dearly departed through rose coloured glasses. I have no doubt that Travis was a great guy. I also have no doubt that Jodi killed him and I do think that she planned it. What I disagree with most about this case is that everyone seems to think that there is a strong case against her.
There really isn't a strong case, not for premeditation anyway. The gun used was stolen from her grandparents we all know that, but it hasn't been proved, not by a long shot. Without the gun as evidence they can imply all they want but it does not put that gun in this murder scene.
The gas cans were a ridiculous farce that proved nothing. Let's just say that Martinez saying a store had no returns on a given day was somehow proof of that fact. Let's just say that extra transaction on the bank statement was indeed for gas without any documentation to prove that. Let's just say any of that could be taken as proof of an extra gas can. How does it prove premeditation? If she filled those cans in Salt Lake City when she was supposed to be there and not hiding a part of her journey, then it would appear she needed them for the purpose that she stated, wouldn't it? Martinez made a big mistake trying to do a big gotcha with the extra can. Showing that she had borrowed the cans before the journey and highlighting the contradiction of her filling them in California, when she supposedly wanted to buy extra cheaper fuel out of state, painted a much more damning picture of her guilt then wasting time trying to prove she filled an extra can in Salt Lake City. He actually showed that she didn't necessarily need them for the execution of the murder to me.
Have you ever driven across NV to AZ, given your location, Lady Ice? I'm not trying to be obnoxious, just wondering if you truly understand what you've written and are concluding about the gas cans and how much would be needed to get to Salt Lake City. etc. When did Aries stop in St. George and what did she purchase there?
Being in Utah as I'm typing this and knowing the distance from here to where NV and AZ interact with the UT state line, and the distance to SLC, I respectfully disagree knowing quite a few specifics about the road.
The only real evidence they have in this case is the hand print and the photos. The rest is all circumstantial when you really think about it. I'm not sure what the criteria are for evidence in a US court of law (I'm not even sure what they are here in Australia), how much weight does circumstantial evidence have? Does it have any? Again, a legal eagle needed. I don't know if AZ law is different than other states. I do know prosecutors convict often only on circumstantial evidence in many states.
The activities in the house until the body was found sound wrong to me. Travis' watch and ring that he always wore were in the kitchen, his phone and laptop were in his downstairs office, his car is there, his dog is running around, there are two other guys and their girlfriends living there or going in and out, there is the smell of death pervading the whole house, nobody has heard from him for days.....but nobody thinks to check in his room to see if he's okay? What sort of a household is this? I have lived in share houses before, even with people I don't like or want anything to do with, but I would have checked out their room long before this under these circumstances. It just doesn't sound right to me. There is a whole other layer to this case that isn't being looked at and emotions against this woman are so high that people seem blinded to the inconsistencies in the case against her. I have to agree I've wondered about some of your points. But, I also know it was 96 in Mesa that day and I know how AZ Air Conditioners work. At the risk of sounding really gross, we don't know the temp of the house. Cool enough air in a separate area of the house could account for a few days, but I don't know for long.
I don't think I've seen enough of the house floor plans to understand which of the roommates lived where. Has anyone? There may have been walls separating his quarters from theirs.............actually, as I recall reading what the one roommate said, they knew where Travis kept a spare key, and that is how they got into his residence. So though I couldn't draw the floorplan, I don't believe his roommates "shared" his space with him. I don't know that any females lived there or not, as that would have been on the roommates' portion of the house.
One more example before I go, if you read the autopsy report it is clear that the bullet didn't go through the brain (I can show why if you want). Sure, please explain further. I love neuroscience and am extremely familiar with the frontal lobes and other areas that will be in question . Why did the ME contradict his own report on the witness stand? Please explain....
Sorry for the long post but I have a lot of thoughts on this case. The psychological aspect is fascinating to me, not only because of my studies but because of my own experience with toxic relationships and people. There is a lot more to this case than meets the eye and the deeper you dig, the more interesting it becomes.
True. And one of the funniest parts to me about the psychological aspects, that NO ONE has mentioned, is Samuels used and continues to use the wrong version of the
DSM-IVR. Do you use the DSM-IVR in Australia or a newer version or a different classification system?
MSR
Last edited by Mtn. States Resident; 03-24-2013 at 12:13 AM..
One thing that I have never heard discussed in court or on any of the TV shows is where were the roommates during that 5 day period ? I am not saying any of them were involved, but rather, why didn't they detect any odors or see anything odd. The people who finally found Travis said the whole house smelled horrible, so you would think people living in the house would have smelled it too.
After all the theories we have thrown out about whether Travis was a good guy or a bad guy, one thing can not be overlooked..............he was not only shot, but was also stabbed 29 times and had his throat cut. That is OVERKILL and shows that the person who did it (Jodi) was enraged.
What we are also forgetting is that Jodi is not your average run of the mill liar.......she is a very smart, creative liar. When her first story about her not even being there didn't fly she immediately switched gears and came up with a totally different story about the Ninjas attacking them. She was able to fabricate intricate details about that "attack", down to the smallest bits and pieces. Then, when that story wasn't going to work, she suddenly comes up with the final version, where she was fighting for her life. To sweeten the story and make Travis really look like he might have attacked her, she throws in the part about him liking 12 year old boys, to put the icing on that cake.
Jodi took some cues from Casey Anthony in developing her story. Casey accused her Father and Brother of molesting her, so Jodi builds her story off of that........She said her Mom beat her with a wooden spoon and Travis was a pedophile. When you think about it, she was pretty smart to do that as everyone detests a child molester, and she felt the jury would too.
The sex aspect of this story doesn't alter the bottom line. Yes, they were exploring and experimenting with what some might call kinky sex, but I bet most of us have at one time or another done some things behind closed bedroom doors that would fall into the same category. Humans are sexual by nature and when you get two consenting adults together they will sometimes try new things. Travis had never been with a girl who gave him the freedom to do the things he and Jodi did, and he simply went with it. Unfortunately for him, he chose a very sick young lady to have that relationship with.
Have you noticed the female lawyer for Jodi could pass as her sister. They both look very much alike. Their hairstyle and mannerisms are almost identical too.
It seems to me Jodi and her team are enjoying their 15 minutes of fame and are milking this show for the excitement of the movie being filmed about the case. They now will be immortalized in history and they are lovin' it.
To me the scary part is that Jodi is copying all of her lawyers moves. That is freaky..
That is aside from someone deciding to make her like the twin sister...
After watching all the testimony and reading everyone's opinion, I am still of the opinion that this case should of been a "crime of passion". I don't understand the "self defense" angle which still leaves the death penalty option on the table. I don't believe it was premeditated, at least in the cold-killer sense. I believe people can be in a stupor over an extended period of time, aptly my conclusion that it is not premeditated and therefore a crime of passion. I believe the stab wounds support that, unless she staged that too. The theory holds that she shot him after the fact of the stabbings.
We can all agree that she is a whack-a-doodle! All the talk about Travis being this and that is just some random static noise, IMO.
Anybody else of the opinion that Jodi's defense team is taking the wrong approach to this case? As another poster has stated, Jodi has a say or influence when it comes to legal strategy. If so, I say she definitely overplayed her hand, so to speak. Her say, of legal strategy, if true, really reeks of narcissism.
Wow. There's definitely blockage of the backlight, and the image of 2 persons standing. Riveting. That would explain the look on Travis's face, fright, shock. Flight or Fight...........
It certainly would not surprise me if there's more people involved.
So much does not add up.
It would explain the bootprint left in blood, the impossible 62 second timeline, the mystery death of Ashley who died "of natural causes" after she called police implicating her husband as Travis's murderer, Zac the roommate lack of memory, non reaction to the decomposing body, renting a car the day Travis was murdered.
Where was Travis headed to when he left the bathroom,? Why didn't he take on Jodi in the bathroom, why go down the hall?
In murders the pieces come together. In this case, Jodi acting alone doesn't add up.
I know nothing about the Ashley story. Would you provide some background/link please?
Personally, I think his look is from confusion from seeing Jodi with a gun and knife in one of her hands while she took that last picture. Travis was trapped in a small enclosed shower. In order to get out, he had to get past a scorned woman with a knife and gun. Many smaller/weaker people are able to overcome their victim by attacking during an opportunity while they are sleeping or otherwise incapacitated.
I think Jodi had the camera wrist strap around her wrist to allow her to also hold a knife and gun. This is why we have the camera following Jodi and taking random pictures while the crime was in progress. I also believe Jodi meant to dispose of the camera along with the gun. However, in her haste she accidently dropped it in the washing machine along with the towels, etc...... She may have went back upstairs, after she had her shoes on, in attempt to find the camera. Her bloody shoes and clothes may have been disposed of along with the gun.
If Jodi was afraid of Travis, would she be brazen enough to slash his tires twice, send threatening messages to the women he dated, enter his home without invitation, and all of this for a year after they broke up? She stalked HIM. Claiming that Travis was the abuser is just more of her gaslighting, typical sociopathic behavior.
Spot on!
In cases of abuse, the abuser actually accuses their abused of abuse.
Quote:
It is common for men/(women) who are "called" on their abusive behavior to blame the woman/(man), and claim SHE/ (HE) was the abuser. He/ (She) may even point to his/ (her) abusive childhood as proof that he is just an innocent victim. The truth of the matter is that abusers generally DO have a history of abuse stemming from their childhood, with emotionally abusive and/or physically abusive parents. However, it is important to note that though women can become abuser
After watching all the testimony and reading everyone's opinion, I am still of the opinion that this case should of been a "crime of passion". I don't understand the "self defense" angle which still leaves the death penalty option on the table. I don't believe it was premeditated, at least in the cold-killer sense. I believe people can be in a stupor over an extended period of time, aptly my conclusion that it is not premeditated and therefore a crime of passion. I believe the stab wounds support that, unless she staged that too. The theory holds that she shot him after the fact of the stabbings.
We can all agree that she is a whack-a-doodle! All the talk about Travis being this and that is just some random static noise, IMO.
Anybody else of the opinion that Jodi's defense team is taking the wrong approach to this case? As another poster has stated, Jodi has a say or influence when it comes to legal strategy. If so, I say she definitely overplayed her hand, so to speak. Her say, of legal strategy, if true, really reeks of narcissism.
I believe this was a crime of passion that was premeditated by a woman scorned.
After watching all the testimony and reading everyone's opinion, I am still of the opinion that this case should of been a "crime of passion". I don't understand the "self defense" angle which still leaves the death penalty option on the table. I don't believe it was premeditated, at least in the cold-killer sense. I believe people can be in a stupor over an extended period of time, aptly my conclusion that it is not premeditated and therefore a crime of passion. I believe the stab wounds support that, unless she staged that too. The theory holds that she shot him after the fact of the stabbings.
We can all agree that she is a whack-a-doodle! All the talk about Travis being this and that is just some random static noise, IMO.
Anybody else of the opinion that Jodi's defense team is taking the wrong approach to this case? As another poster has stated, Jodi has a say or influence when it comes to legal strategy. If so, I say she definitely overplayed her hand, so to speak. Her say, of legal strategy, if true, really reeks of narcissism.
Great post Blue Grass Fever!
I posed that question (and others may have as well) about Arias' lawyers having to listen to her and what she wants as ultimately she does have rights to influence her defense. Maybe their strategy originally was NOT to put her on the stand, who knows. I guess I have to give her defense team a few points for #1 Not resigning as her original attorneys did (at least the original female), #2 Listening to her.....I can't even imagine that how that works, #3 Attempting to defend someone who chronically lies. I don't know how they can even plan from day to day.
Defense attorneys, at least court-appointed ones, can't chose the strengths and flaws in their clients. It may be that they wanted to use a different defense but Arias refused given her narcissism as you correctly state (IMHO) above. After all, she was the one who said no jury would convict her.
I agree, there is nothing to be gained about knowing Travis' Alexander's sexual history. Nirmi specializes in defending sex offenders. Maybe he thought, given what Arias told him, there was some way to improve her chances with the jury. If so, I think it's backfired.
The only thing I think that is relevant about T.A.'s social life is he wanted to move on expanding his friendships or perhaps romantic involvement with other females. It really doesn't matter which, he wanted Arias out of his life and to get to know other females better.
You raise an interesting thought about the Crime of Passion. Where I struggle with that one is I think for Arias that was her perspective, but she had to plan in advance to borrow and buy gas cans and get a gun etc. To me, true crimes of passion use a lamp or whatever is easily available to hurt someone and the person has a consistent story of what happened. We may not share the same definition of a crime of passion and I wish we had a legal person here who could clarify.
The state has a responsibility not only to Travis Alexander and his family, but other citizens. Given what we've seen peripherally, would anyone here want to date her or even go to lunch with her? Is she truly a sociopath that poses a greater to risk to others with her stalking, tire slashing and other actions than ultimately lead to murder? I don't know the answer, just saying I can see both sides and we don't know what evidence may have be en suppressed.
I hope others will post how they see Crimes of Passion vs. Murder. Good thought provoking comments!
MSR
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
, I hope you don't mind if I break up your post so that I can address some individual points.
some questions could have been different or easier.
