Jodi’s pre-sentencing interview – Part 8/10 – May 22nd, 2013 [REPLAY]

.
Here’s part 8 of 10 from Jodi’s pre sentencing interview with 12 news anchor Mark Curtis (AZ Central) – from May 22nd, 2013:

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Get the Flash Player to see this player.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

If you missed our earlier post featuring the JAA Appellate Movie, click this link to watch it.

Remember: WE ARE TEAM JODI – AND WE WILL BE VICTORIOUS in our quest for JUSTICE FOR JODI!

Leave your thoughts and comments below.

SJ
Team Jodi

If you would like to help Jodi by way of a financial donation to the official JAA APPELLATE FUND, click the Team Jodi link below for further details. All donations go directly to the fund for assisting with the legal fees associated with appealing Jodi’s wrongful conviction. You can also check out Jodi’s new Art Gallery website by clicking this linkThank you for your ongoing support!

We Are Team Jodi ---- And We Will Be Victorious!

.

Comments

  1. Eli Landers says:

    First !!!

  2. CanadaCarol says:

    I can’t believe that I am the first.

  3. Judy F. says:

    Another Canadian second

  4. Pandora says:

    Hi everyone! Happy Monday!

    This part of the interview is so crucial:

    I really would like to ask the defense team why on earth wouldn’t they call the witnesses that would testify that they had seen Jodi physically abused… Also, Nurmi decided not to do mitigation. WHY? Daryl wanted to speak for behalf of Jodi… WHY not let him? The last days of the trial IMO were done very sloppy from first chair. It’s like he wanted Jodi to get the ultimate punishment… WHY?

    As for Jodi’s apology? Many times Jodi has stressed how sorry she is for all that happened. Hundred’s of times she has said that she wishes there was something she could do to take travis’s family’s pain away… I don’t know what many non-supporters say when they say that Jodi never apologized…. Jodi is constantly apologizing. If Jodi was to break down and cry on camera screaming “I’m sorry, I’m sorry, I’m sorry” again the haters would say: She’s faking it!!! So tell us what is the right way (in your opinion) to apologize… Cause it seems that any way Jodi apologizes you are never satisfied! Sheesh!

    (((((Jodi))))) ♥

    • johnm says:

      The reason people do not accept apologies is that it gives them the upper hand, the control they so desperately NEED.
      Jodi apologizes continuously. I point to the note attached to Jodi’s Sails painting. I wanted to say something before, but I’m saying it now. The note next to her painting says:

      “100% of the net proceeds from the sale of Sails will be donated in Travis’ name to a reputable non-profit organization that helps children. The organization and exact amount donated will be disclosed after the sale. I am aware that many of my supporters despise Travis and will not agree with my doing this. Please understand that my reasons are complex and ones that I hope to be able to explain in a forthcoming blog post.” – Jodi Arias

      I, like many have been on both sides of the Apology circumstance. If you cannot learn to be humble, and forgive, then you will break, simple as that.

      Praying every day for you to be free Jodi!

      • Pandora says:

        Johnm, nicely said and so true.

        It is much easier to keep hating than to forgive. Unfortunately, for those that don’t forgive and continue to escalate their hate and revenge, they will never have any peace in their souls and mind. Hating keeps you ‘still’. Forgiving and moving on allows you to live life to it’s extend.

  5. Eli Landers says:

    Here is another statement from Jodi to ABC News regarding her apology:

    “Asked why she didn’t apologize to the family in court, Arias replied: “I did apologize to them.” Reminded that she did not use the words “I’m sorry,” Arias said, “Well, then I’m sorry I didn’t say that. Because certainly I am sorry. I think in a sense, I– the– the words, ‘I’m sorry,’ just seemed meaningless, especially since nobody believes what I’m saying anyway. ”

    She went on to say that, “I think people believe that because I lied, that everything that comes out of my mouth is a lie. Which is unfortunate, because, if that were the case, then that would be true for everyone. Because I don’t know somebody that’s never lied,” she said. “

    • Pandora says:

      Eli, using the words ‘I’m sorry’ doesn’t mean shyt! Jodi has apologized so many times, saying “If there was a way to undo what I have done, then I certainly would” or “I wish I could take the pain I have caused to travis’s family and friends and have it put on me”. Now, if that isn’t an apology, then I don’t know what is. But people think that if they hear those 3 words: ‘I am sorry’ then that’s only an apology. Those 3 words have been brutally overused that they lost their true meaning. So next time people say “Jodi didn’t apologize.. yadda, yadda, yadda” I’d advise them to actually listen to what Jodi is saying than to onlt try and hear those 3 words!

      As for the ‘lie’ ya, I’m not getting into that again. I said what I wanted to say in the thread with part 7 of this video….

      • Eli Landers says:

        She does have a hard time convincing the majority of the public that she is sorry. It is a losing battle for her no matter how hard she tries.

        Maybe her new project of selling her art work and donating the money in Travis’s name will change some of the of public’s minds.

        • RASNA ADMIN says:

          Hey there Eli. Can you please explain what you mean by “Maybe her new project of selling her art work and donating the money in Travis’s name will change some of the of public’s minds.”?

          What Jodi is doing with the donations isn’t a ‘project’ nor a way to ‘trick’ people into liking her! Jodi strongly believes in helping others. Now, if Jodi decides to donate the money in Travis’s, Buddha’s or my next door neighbor’s name, that’s her business and kudos to her. It’s where the money is donated that counts, IMO. So, let’s not speculate the reasons for why she’s donating in Travis’s name, we already have non-supporters making those kind of speculations. ;)

          Rasna – TEAM JODI

          • Eli Landers says:

            Hey Rasna,

            I was just thinking that I have seen on your site a lot of focus on raising funds for Jodi’s appellate actions and thought that is was kind of Jodi to devote some of her needed resources to raising money for a charity.

            If this helps change others view of her, then so be it. As to it being her motive, I can’t speak for Jodi nor will I even try to and I’m sorry if I gave that impression.

            I look forward to the blog posting that she promises to make to better understand her intentions. Any good deeds done, by anyone, should be returned with kindness.

            • CanadaCarol says:

              I so agree with your last statement. It seems to me that Jodi has been helping others for a long time, for example, driving the sisters to church and selling her locks for love. NG dug for months to find someone in jail that would say something negative, but instead they told her stories of Jodi helping other inmates with English and other acts of kindness. Her good deeds should be recognized and returned with kindness but there are some people who are not capable of seeing the good in others because they are not capable of giving empathy themselves.

  6. maria rigadopoulou says:

    There are so many thing the defense team that seem illogical. Not saying they are not good lawyers or that they did something on purpose.
    But let’s go back:
    1) to Nurmi’s 9 days out of 10 comment, for example. There’s no way anyone can convince me that this is not a bizarre thing to say; bizarre and oh so inappropriate. I can understand what his goal was, but still it could be taken (and indeed it was) in such a different negative for Jodi way. There were TA supporters, saying ”See? Not even her own lawyer likes her!” and spiteful things like that.

    2) Jodi’s parents wanted to speak during her mitigation phase. Defense team didn’t let them; yeah, I know it was because of Kermit and that he would try and tear them apart on the stand for the things they both had said during their interrogation. But c’mon! Their daughter had just been arrested for murder, of course they would break down and share all their complaints, all the things that made them upset with Jodi. It was like going to the priest for confession, you just need to take it out of your chest, it is NOT backstabbing your child. FFS! I’m sure Jodi’s lawyers could have advised them how to turn Martinez’ attacks around. Instead, defense chose the easiest way, not call them on the stand at all.

    3) There WERE witnesses who had seen Jodi’s bruises. YES, THERE were! I can’t for the life of me understand why on Earth Nurmi and Wilmott decided not to call them on the stand. Why? Why? I’m asking as the layperson who has no idea how the Law works, but if there’s something that can validate your customer’s testimony, why not do it? Oh, I know what haters are gonna say: there was no calling this witnesses because they were fictional and in Jodi’s heads. I laugh at their ignorance.

    As for Jodi apologizing or showing remorse, oh well…. In Greece we have a saying : ” A lot of ink has been shed” meaning that people have written (or talked) about a subject till they feel they have exhausted it. Apparently there are no words in the Engilsh language that Jodi can use and that will make the haters happy or satisfy their constant need for Jodi’s blood and crucifixion.

    • maria rigadopoulou says:

      *the defense team DID

    • Pandora says:

      1) What Nurmi said was unacceptable! Wtf??? Did he think he was at a stand up comedy stage and tried to make jokes? This is a woman’s life on stake – that was not the time to joke around! pffff

      2) I too think that Jodi’s parents should have been allowed to take the stand. I agree that the defense team might have not allowed that because they wanted to protect them BUT a sworn testimony from a parent is a very strong testimony, IMO. What the defense team should have done was prep them for martinez’s bullying bs. They are tough people, I don’t think that martinez’s tantrum/ bullying/ badgering scared them!

      3) I’m guessing that witnesses that saw marks of physical abuse on Jodi wouldn’t have been taken seriously because there was no documented evidence to back them up (pics, reports, medical examination, etc). What I ask the non-supporters is how can you be so sure that travis didn’t abuse Jodi? Did you know them personally? Did you know Jodi personally? And to the friends of Jodi and travis that had seen signs of physical abuse: how can you live with yourselves not coming out and telling the truth of what you had witnessed?

      If people could put aside their feelings about Jodi and just speak the truth allowing the jury to have a spherical view of all facts, then once the jury came back with whatever verdict they decided, that is when they should believe that justice was served. Not now, knowing how many things were kept from the jury… this was abstraction of justice. A coin has two sides…. The jury only saw one side with a couple of moments where they had a glimpse of what the other side looked like.

      • CanadaCarol says:

        There is quite a list of people involved that I wonder how well they sleep at night with this on their consciences beginning with the ME and lead detective. I wonder who the witnesses to her injuries were and what kind of pressure they may well have felt from the church and/or PPL. They even tried to shut Gus up, but he wouldn’t have it.

        Jodi didn’t agree with Nurmi and I can’t figure out what he did. JM managed to intimidate some witnesses into silence himself and in the end, Jodi stood alone in front of that death-qualified jury. And now the haters hate her for even doing that.

        • Pandora says:

          Carol, those people – IMO – are ruthless. I don’t know if they even have a heart!

          It’s beyond me how people choose to lie, twist the truth around or keep their mouths shut (talking about the jury and witnesses) rather than speaking out just so they can be approved by the bigger ‘crowds’, by their religions.

          To put someone’s life and reputation on stake out of fear is cowardness to me. To withhold the facts & the truth is unethical.

          To not respect the justice system and make a mock out of it (talking about kermit and pickles) just for winning is plain unacceptable!

          As I’ve said many times: it’s not about liking or disliking someone. It’s about justice. If domestic violence and self defense was buried so easily in the name of winning… then why even spend so many thousands of dollars for a trial? Why not just throw everyone in a cell and throw away the key?

      • whichtrial? says:

        The destructive and obstructive manner in which ALV and her life’s work were held up to ridicule and scorn in that courtroom should have been illegal, IMO. The jury could only have felt browbeaten to have come up with those wrongful convictions.

        After all, many of us JAII supporters heard and saw quite a bit of the misrepresentation on HLN. We saw past it. But those jurors, if they saw/heard the constant psychobabble, could not. They were not only captive to the prosecutor’s performance, they became characters themselves within the drama once he began to play so shamelessly to their emotions.

        As far as the mitigation that did not take place: I’ve begun to wonder if Nurmi’s decision had anything to do with the first two stories that Jodi made up. What would/could JM have done with whether or not they believed her? I’m afraid he would have distracted the jury from anything positive that the mitigation witnesses could have said, subjecting them to ridicule while painting her as a relentless liar yet again. But I don’t know the rules of evidence and haven’t made head nor tails of the hearsay restrictions in this case, so it’s just a guess, and there is probably more than one reason for Nurmi’s choice.

        • CanadaCarol says:

          A number of the questions asked clearly point to a deep-seated bias for at least some of the jurors so early in the trial that it’s reasonable to assume they had their minds made up before the trial began. We can all see the ridiculous bullying nature of JM’s treatment of the witnesses and their expert testimony, but the jury’s questions reveal that they were thinking about whether they shrugged their shoulders or smiled at someone, instead of considering their years and years of experience and what they were actually testifying to. Except for the foreman who saw some truth, I think they would have remained blind to the truth no matter what.

          • R. Love says:

            I believe your right Carol! All they could think about was the press interviewing them and making a name for themselves! I just watched an interview with one of the jurors and she was beyond ridiculous. . .her mind was made up before the trial started.

            • whichtrial? says:

              I don’t believe all of the jurors can be painted with the same brush, even though the premeditation verdict was unanimous. We don’t know whether any or all violated the media rules or that all the jurors had their minds made up from the beginning.

              I wouldn’t think that they all violated media/talking rules and some may even live alone and so would not have needed to deal with an HLN-viewing spouse. (I know one juror – I guess that’s the one you are referring to, R. Love, did say that she made up her mind during or right after the prosecutor’s opening statements.)

              Even questions that were asked of the witnesses by the jury members cannot be attributed to all of the jurors; very often just a few people will participate and be responsible for most of the discussion in Q & As.

              What I do know is that the jury sat there every day seeing a prosecutor behave atrociously while the judge condoned his conduct. Objectivity on their part was therefore impossible.

              Maintaining a balanced atmosphere and a spirit of fairness in the courtroom is not the responsibility of the jurors. Their critical thinking skills should be applied to weighing the evidence, not to the burdensome tasks of filtering out egregious behavior by the attorneys or – even more absurdly – second-guessing the judge.

              Jodi’s brains weren’t the only ones that were “scrambled” by the prosecutor. It seems to me that the great thinkers of many centuries ago – philosophers, playwrights, political leaders – grasped more about human psychology and how impressions are formed than we understand as a society today.

              • CanadaCarol says:

                I know that it was a handful that spoke out after the trial, but they all reached the wrong verdict together. I totally agree with you that anyone having to listen to Kermit all day would have their brain scrambled if they were listening or attempting to.

      • I’m not a big fan of Nurmi, especially after I read Jodi’s 12-page motion to have him dismissed. I gave him the benefit of the doubt during the trial (albeit he looked rather slovenly, uninterested and disengaged) but now I have absolutely no respect at all. He treated her with disdain and disrespect, was demeaning and patronizing. She also says he ignored leads and wasted county money chasing irrelevance. He even asked other team members to lie to her and numerous other piss-poor behaviors. Yup, I’m no fan.

        • Jeff in mesa says:

          Truth be told, I’m no fan of Nurmi either. I thought his 9 out of 10 days he doesn’t like her comment was WAAAAAY out of line and extremely irresponsible. And could somebody please remind me why he did the closing argument? I’m still miffed at that decision.

  7. Marja Liisa says:

    This was posted on Twitter!

    justice4jodi.com

    Michael #FightOn @MICHAELINLA3

    All #JodiArias Supporters,go to justice4jodi.com Jodi’s new official website!It’s an Awesome site Sanctioned by Jodi and her family!

    20 Jul

    Wrongly tried, prosecuted, persecuted, and convicted

    Jodi Arias was wrongly charged, unfairly tried, and wrongly convicted. This is her official support page.

  8. alan says:

    I have a number of thoughts on the new website justice4jodi.com, which apparently replaced the old appellate-fund site of the same name. I’m holding off commenting here for the moment, though.

  9. maria rigadopoulou says:

    Cyber family!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Today was such an unexpectedly exciting day for me!! Guess what?
    I spoke to Jodi FOR THE FIRST time on the phone a few hours ago!
    O……..M……….G……….!
    She is the sweetest person EVER, not that I had any doubts about that ;)

    She is grateful for each and every one of us.
    I told her about our family here and all our postings and efforts- she kept saying ”Oh wow, thank you thank you, thank you”
    so much that she made me say ”Stop thanking us, you have nothing to thank us for; we love and support you and that’s why we do everything we do for you”

    ♥ ♥ ♥

    • johnm says:

      Wow! that’s totally awesome! I bet you made her heart feel good, Maria! I know she made your heart feel good!Thanks for letting us know. I hope she can get the hell out of there and head to Greece!

      • maria rigadopoulou says:

        It was AWESOME johnm!
        Being able to actually hear her voice was such a reminder of what we are fighting for. When she had to hang up (the guards told her) was an even bitterer reminder of the Injustice that’s been done to her . And yes…how she must get THE HELL outta there. One day…Let us not lose hope.

        • Jeff in mesa says:

          That is absolutely awesome, Maria! I was actually able to visit her Sunday with another JAII member. I got the impression that she’d love to meet all of us if she could. She’s amazing! She’s a wonderful, wonderful person. She was all smiles and laughter too. I told her I was amazed at how she was in such good spirits and she said she just keeps thinking positive. So she is staying strong and she looks fantastic. We only got to see her for 30 minutes but I can tell you that I hold that half hour very dear to me. We’ll be going back to visit again soon. She only gets visitors Sunday and Monday from 8am-8pm. Yeah, just 2 days a week – ridiculous. She told us she gets peanut butter everyday and she stopped eating that. She also gets beans which are cold and hard and she told us about what she calls slop, which is soy meat, lentils, carrots and potatoes. Nice. Joe Arpaio is a schmuck! But through all that she still looks fabulous and is still very positive. She told us she would have much more “freedoms” once she got out of County jail. And I must apologize for my long absence. Running 2 businesses takes a lot out of you. But I’m back now for good. I hope everyone here is doing well! Keep the faith!

          • johnm says:

            Incredible, more great news! Keeping the faith, that’s for true!

          • CanadaCarol says:

            That is so wonderful that you visit her and it is very kind of you and Maria to share with us how up beat she is.

          • Pandora says:

            Jeff! Fantastic! Wow! It must be great seeing Jodi ‘in person’ – if you can say that when the visit is behind a plexiglass window… I’m guessing that anywhere else out of joe’s jail would be better for Jodi. More human-like.

            Welcome back to JAII, I’m glad we’ll be seeing more of you! :)

          • maria rigadopoulou says:

            (((((( Jeff )))))))))
            I’m so glad you got to visit her. I can’t help but getting emotional when I think of all the selfless supporters out there.

            Keep showing our girl how much she is loved everybody! :)

    • WLOPEZ4JAA says:

      Yes, thanks Maria & Jeff & others who can actually get to see & talk with Jodi & let her know of our increasing support & our getting others to believe in her total innocence by self defense. …I hope that she is receiving visits from her attorneys & news media (media of her choice), to tell the world how the jury was snookered & tricked to believe the ridiculous premeditation scenario.
      …(Jodi, IMO, felt she was OBLIGATED to go visit him because *she probably still owed him money* for his old car that he tricked her into buying from him (so he could buy himself a new car) & that she ruined his old car in a towing accident). ….How come I don’t read anything about this being FRONT & CENTER for the prime reason for her to have been persuaded to go visit him???

      …She had to rent a car because: 1) her old car could not make the long trip (through the desert) safely …2)She accidentally ruined the car he tricked her into buying from him …3)Her finances were exhausted & could barely afford to go visit him when he persuaded her to come …4) I think she was going to use the *new car rental cost receipts* for a partial tax deduction as business expense, so NO HIDING THE RENTAL CAR was possible ….5) If there was in any way that she was trying to hid her (trip to Mesa) it would have been to innocently *just not tell her Mother* that she had to run see Travis. …Because her Mother had just helped Jodi move away from that *Jerk* …
      … …The judge let the prosecutor suggest only “his theory or scenario” such that it was the only possibility that could have happened. …And, the jury, STUPIDLY thought it was Jodi’s responsibility to *have to prove the prosecutor wrong*, at each and every point. …I believe that Jodi could have explained almost each and every scenario. …But the judge let the prosecutor scream at her & stop her from explaining her (yes or no) answer to his questions which were filled with his body language animation to the jury to make the jury think Jodi was being deceptive & to hate her.
      ……((((Jodi is absolutely innocent)))). … …..(((WLOPEZ4JAA)))

      • Pandora says:

        WLopez, you’re absolutely right!

        This was not a fair trial. As Journee had said: the prosecutor screamed and bullied anyone (even his own witnesses) if they dared to go ‘off script’.

        What can be worse than denying the First Amendment of the United States Constitution that codifies the freedom of speech as a constitutional right? Furthermore, having that happen IN A COURT OF LAW (that’s suppose to honor the Constitution), by a person that has sworn to serve the law… anything to say mr. kermit?

    • Pandora says:

      Maria, that is awesome news! And Jodi is a sweetheart!

      They can assassinate her character all they want but truth is that Jodi is a graceful, loving, caring, kind, charismatic, talented woman that has been mistreated, misunderstood and ridiculed.

      She made the worse mistake of her life and because she knows that that can’t be ‘undone’, Jodi is trying reconcile in anyway she can by doing good deeds. All Jodi is asking for is a second chance to prove that she isn’t the ‘monster’ that everyone has portrayed her to be…

    • Ray Chastain says:

      Maria, I told you that she was an amazing woman, now you know it first hand. I’m soooo glad that you got a chance to talk to her, the only bad thing is the guards never let her talk for very long.
      (((((JODI))))) ♥ ♥ ♥ ♥
      (((((MARIA)))))♥ ♥ ♥ ♥

      Ray in H-burg Va.

  10. Dale H. says:

    Maria and Jeff that is great news that you both got a chance to speak and see Jodi, that is great that she is feeling optimistic, hopefully other folks other than the true supporters will one day see the real Jodi that we have come to love and support.

    • Jeff in mesa says:

      That’s right, Dale. I invite anyone to go and spend just a little time with her and not come away thinking “Wow, what a terrific person.” The only ones who wouldn’t are those who hate everyone and everything, including themselves. She’s everything I expected and more.

  11. Dale H. says:

    She is terrific to us supporters, very nicely said Jeff.

  12. R. Love says:

    FANTASTIC EVERYONE! Thankful to all who have talked or seen Jodi and shared their experience! Although I have not talked with her I have received her letters, very dear ones. I know that she is certainly a very loving and compassionate woman who was taken advantage of. Thank heavens she was able to defend herself from Travis Alexander. Travis is the one guilty of his own death! His actions brought his own fate. We must continue our fight for Jodi’s freedom and make the TRUTH known! Martinez and ARIZONA are WRONG!!! Jodi is innocent! Plain and simple. ((((((JODI))))))))

  13. R. Love says:

    A friend shared this with me . LOL Unfortunately it is very true!
    “If being stripped of your Constitutional right to defend yourself makes you more “safe” according to the government — you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots.”
    THINK BEFORE YOU VOTE!

    • Jeff in mesa says:

      “Think before you vote”. No truer words were ever spoken. Our useless Governor’s term is coming to an end, thank God. But what’s running for the position may actually be worse! Do any of you remember talking about Andrew Thomas? Anyways, he’s the Maricopa County Attorney who was DISBARRED in 2012 for ethical misconduct and prosecutorial misconduct. Super! A disgraced County Attorney running for Governor. Why should he even be able to run for this high position? I hope the people of this state have enough common sense not to vote for this guy. But I’m not optimistic. Just look at the people that have been put into office by voters here. Joe Arpaio is one fine example of that.

      • Judy F. says:

        That’s pretty bad Jeff in Mesa. I read about that guy. I cannot understand why he would be allowed to run. Pretty scary thought about him as Governor. He will have his followers but I hope people in the main are more with it than to vote for him. Arizona strikes me still as the wild wild west!

        • Jeff in mesa says:

          It IS still the wild, wild west! I think most voters here couldn’t possibly be more behind the times. This ain’t Tombstone with the Earps and Doc Holliday anymore for Christ’s sake! But most people think that’s neat. It’s neat history but it’s just that – history. It’s time to move on from that. Do you know it is still a law that any misdemeanor committed while wearing a red mask is considered a felony here? This law dates back to the 1800′s. No joke. Also, up until the 1970′s horse theft was considered a capital offense punishable by hanging. Or how about this one; you may not play cards in the street with a Native American. I’m not making this stuff up, guys. This is for real. Here’s some more sensible laws that are still on the books in Arizona:
          A possible 25 years in prison for cutting down a cactus.
          When being attacked by a criminal or burglar, you may only defend yourself with the same weapon that the other possesses.
          Donkeys may not sleep in bathtubs.
          No more than 6 girls may live in any house. (Maricopa County law – aka Mormon law)
          Anyone caught stealing soap must wash themselves with it until it is used up. (Mohave County)
          Wearing suspenders is prohibited. (Nogales)
          No one is permitted to ride their horse up the County Courthouse steps. (Prescott)
          Finally, in Tombstone, it is illegal for men and women over the age of 18 to have less than 1 missing tooth visible when smiling.
          These are just a few but it’s a fact; they are still laws. Though I highly doubt most of them are enforced any longer. But it does give you an idea of how far behind our lawmakers are here. Stunning, isn’t it?

  14. Eli Landers says:

    Will it be possible for any of the members here to be able to speak at Jodi’s mitigation phase?

    With all the positive feedback and experiences that JAII members have had with Jodi it would make a very good impression to her jury. Also the bravery and determination that JAII members show would enable them to stand up to the negative feedback they would receive from the haters.

    • Pandora says:

      Eli, I don’t know if that’s doable. I mean, the state might object because we didn’t know Jodi before. Otherwise, I think it is absolutely a great idea! IMO, the defense team should consider it (if it’s allowed) because it shows that although Jodi is called a ‘monster’ throughout the USA and maybe beyond there, there are people all over the world that have ‘met’ her and have seen what a wonderful person she is.

      I had discussed this with SJ and Maria a few weeks ago, telling them I wish I could go and speak for Jodi in the mitigation phase. As for the haters? I wouldn’t mind one bit what they would say about me. The more they hate us, the more it shows that we are doing an awesome job in supporting Jodi! It will be when hell freezes over (and not even then) that the haters will be able to make me shut my mouth and stop supporting Jodi!

      • maria rigadopoulou says:

        I agree 100%. And yes Pandora and I were talking about it; Jodi may be seen as a cold-blooded murderer in the eyes of the majority but for those of us who support her, she has changed our lives in a very positive way.
        She’s a woman who was GROSSLY overcharged and who is trying to make the world wake up about DV matters.So, in our eyes she represents a fighter fighting 2 battles: one against the corruption of the Justice system and one against the blinders people wear when it comes to Domestic Violence.

  15. Jeff in mesa says:
    • Journee says:

      I’m watching Maddow about that now – Kiefer was just on, in fact. Took almost two hours for Wood to die. One reporter was counting Wood’s gasps – over 660 times witnesses watched this man gasp for breath. His lawyers had time to leave the witness room and file for another stay and come back while he was still gasping.

      • Journee says:

        And as a further example of Arizona corruption -

        A federal judge has ordered that evidence – blood and tissue samples from various parts of Wood’s body – be collected by the Pinal County Medical Examiner in a timely manner, no later than 8 PM AZ time. The medical examiner responded to the ORDER of the FEDERAL JUDGE, saying he doesn’t have time.

        • whichtrial? says:

          Journee, Thank you for mentioning Rachel Maddow. I just viewed her entire piece about this on the msnbc website – it is front and center; saw Kiefer and Troy Hayden and the other reporter who counted the man’s last breaths – that reporter choked up so much that he could scarcely speak several times during his report.

          Everyone should take a look at what Maddow had to say. I heard a previous report from her after the botched Oklahoma execution and it was very revealing. Tonight she says that the states are experimenting on these death row prisoners, since they can no longer procure the lethal drugs from Europe, and that local compounding pharmacies (not as rigorously regulated as drug manufacturers because the pharmacies only create compounds on order in very small quantities) are providing the drugs to the executioners. And the Federal Government is trying to determine the sources of these substances, which the states have not disclosed.

          I suspected that the news out of AZ would get worse over time, but I didn’t think it would get this bad.

          • Marja Liisa says:

            I don’t even begin to have the words to describe all the EVIL taking place in this country of ours (USA), from the complete asinine verdict of premeditated, M1, for our sweet, Jodi and her circus of a trial, to the horrible experimental executions on human beings!!! We ought to be very ashamed!!!

            This is all truly, truly a very SAD state of affairs here in the USA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

            How much more will God put up with???

            I think the rapture is very NEAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

            • R. Love says:

              I agree Marja because God will not stand for much more of this nonsense! America should abolish these executions. Isn’t it amazing what a mess we have let our country get themselves into. It is never to late and we must see that changes for the better are made.
              The sooner the better. All the news about this new execution really is sickening. I am also ashamed of us. Sad. One positive note: At least, when the rapture comes there will be no more chains for Jodi or any of the other believers in Jesus Christ. God is alive and well (as is the Devil) and God will not let much more happen before it all is put to an end. Wake up America!!!!!!

        • WLOPEZ4JAA says:

          Thank you Journee & whichtrial, ….I also went to MSNBC.com & watched the several segments of The Rachel Maddow Show about Arizona getting into the CLUB of HUMAN EXPERIMENTATION on PRISONERS (those are my words, not from the Show). …Although Rachel does mention … …..”human medical experimentation on live prisoners…” …
          …..Why is this so important? …
          ……….When I was in the Air Force stationed in Europe (during the Cold War), I was in England watching a very good movie: “Judgement at Nuremberg (1961)” …Half way through the movie, the lights came on & a loud voice from the back, an officer said: “LISTEN UP ! ! …THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, JOHN FITZGERALD KENNEDY, HAS BEEN SHOT WHILE RIDING IN A MOTORCADE TODAY IN DALLAS TEXAS. ….. …. THE PRESIDENT IS NOW DEAD. … …THAT IS ALL ! ! !
          It was about 8:30 pm but with the time difference, it had just happened, within an hour or so. … The movie stopped & everyone left to find a television. ….
          … When I got out of the Service years later, I finally saw the ENTIRE MOVIE. …The Nuremberg Trials were carried out (after WW2) to demonstrate to the world that The United States (and Allied Countries) would not tolerate the autocracies that were carried out by the Nazi and the Axis Powers during World War 2. …Especially the extended experimentation on living human beings. …And, mass exterminations of prisoners.

          IT IS TIME TO STOP ALL STATES OF THIS COUNTRY FROM USING THE DEATH SENTENCE.
          ….It is time for The United States to join the rest of the civilized world. …

          …THE REASON WHY WE HAVE LETHAL INJECTION IS THE SAME REASON THAT THE REVOLUTIONARY FORCES OF FRANCE ADOPTED THE GUILLOTINE FOR THE (((EXTENSIVE USE))), TO REMOVE THE ROYALIST FROM POWER. ….Because the Revolutionary Forces said it was quick & painless & it would be (((TOLERATED))) by the rest of the population (those who did not expect to be condemned themselves). ….

          …BUT THAT IS THE SAME REASON THAT LETHAL INJECTION WAS DEVELOPED & USED IN SOME STATE IN THIS COUNTRY: …..IT WAS FOR ANTICIPATED (((EXTENSIVE USE))) & it would be (((TOLERATED))) by those who believed that (THEY) could never get convicted & executed because it was (((thought that innocent people NEVER go to jail/prison/death))).

          …Well, I understand that 4% of people on DEATH ROW are actually innocent or they are overcharged. …..Well, if there are 100 US Senators in this great country, WHICH FOUR SENATORS (4%) would volunteer to take the place of the 4% of innocent people in our prisons on death row?? ..Sure, the US Senators can joke about it & say: START AT THE OTHER END OF THE AISLE ! !
          …(((Jodi Ann Arias is innocent by self defense which escalated because Travis thought he could take her down, this is my opinion))). … …..So did the Biblical GOLIATH think that. …But David injured Goliath in his head & took away Goliath’s sword, …and had to use Goliath’s own sword on him before he attacked again.
          ….Jodi Ann Arias is absolutely innocent of premeditation & she had to STOP her Goliath before he attacked her again. …GOD helped David…. & St Joan of Arc is Jodi’s Guardian Angel.
          …. I am (((WLOPEZ4JAA))) ….. http://www.disqus.com/WLOPEZ4JAA

        • CanadaCarol says:

          Journee, If that is true, they should axe everyone in that office and start all over again. He doesn’t have time. How can these people get away with not doing their jobs in such a callous way?

    • Welcome back, Jeff.

    • maria rigadopoulou says:

      I am sorry to have to criticize your beautiful country once again but WTF is wrong with America??????

      This poor man’s death made headlines even in Greece where I live, FFS!!!!
      Where are all the US citizens protesting on the streets about that?!?! Greeks have the reputation of looking for even the slightest excuse to go out and protest, but sometimes I think that well….at least we DO! At least we still have that revolutionary spirit in us, damn it!

      So, the message this unfortunate and tragic incident carries across the world is this: the American Justice system is not about Justice. It is about REVENGE, an eye for an eye. If you have commited a murder (and of course your victim suffered) you’re gonna be subjected to the same cruel (if not worse) death, at the State’s expenses.
      Great….. do we live in the Dark Ages?

      Forgive me if I sound bitter or mad but I am , I truly am.

      • R. Love says:

        You have every right to be disgusted by our country, Maria. Unfortunately, things have gotten way out of control in our America. I suppose one could say we are suffering from a “High and Mighty” complex. There are still those of us who have had families who have fought and served to defend our country’s honor who would be very disappointed into the way things have come to pass, just as we are. Our people have made great sacrifices for our Freedom and now it seems they want to do away with it!? Things must change and it must happen quickly. Please forgive us for the awful mistakes that our country is a part of. I am so sorry and ashamed. We must remember while we are praying for Jodi’s Freedom to also pray for America. Pray for the WHOLE WORLD! We all need God’s grace and forgiveness. There is HOPE, we must keep the FAITH

      • Journee says:

        I understand your disdain, Maria, because I share it.

        But you’re really not surprised, are you? You’ve certainly witnessed the mentality – in spades.

        All those haters get to vote.

      • Journee says:

        Click to read the comments here:

        http://www.aol.com/article/2014/07/24/ap-reporters-account-of-botched-execution/20936064/?icid=maing-grid7%7Cmain5%7Cdl3%7Csec1_lnk3%26pLid%3D506431

        I was more than 50 comments in before I found anyone who was appalled by what happened in AZ yesterday.

    • CanadaCarol says:

      The drug companies that used to supply this one drug that “worked” cut off supply because of its inhumane use so now these states are experimenting even though it is written in your Constitution that it must be done in a humane way. What is going on in the minds of these statesmen and lawmen of your great nation that they allow this cruelty be carried out? This is insanity.

      • maria rigadopoulou says:

        So, one drug ”worked” , supplies were cut off yet they continue at all costs, despite the suffering, despite the eerily similar Doctor Mengele approach to this executions. Jesus….

        • CanadaCarol says:

          Amnesty International 2012 Annual Report lists the U.S. as the country with the fifth highest number of executions carried out, behind China, Iran, Iraq and Saudi Arabia. During that year there were 21 countries worldwide who carried out executions.

    • Pandora says:

      I read about that and saw different journalists talking about it. I was shocked.

      How can people really believe that by appointing the DP to a human being and executing him – whatever the crime is – will make things ‘ok’? Will the victim’s family suddenly be cleaned from sadness?

      TWO WRONGS DON’T MAKE A RIGHT!!!! The only ‘role’ the DP plays is a barbaric, revengeful, unethical role. And EVERY DAY we see so many people wrongly executed.

      Finally, I think that most religions believe that ONLY one can decide who lives and who dies: GOD. So, how is it possible that a dollar bill says: IN GOD WE TRUST but nobody follows GOD’s rules? If someone knows sth more, please enlighten me. Does God send a telegraph, a fax, an e-mail saying “Dear humans, today you will execute….” I don’t think so….

  16. Eli Landers says:

    With the upcoming penalty phase of Jodi’s trial coming up soon do you think that her Defense team will be reviewing statements made by previous jurors to better present her case to the new jurors?

    The foreman (who did not vote for death) Mr. Zervakos made these statements in various interviews:

    “The system we think is flawed in that sense because this was not a case of a Jeffrey Dahmer or Charles Manson. It was a brutal no-win situation. … I think that’s kind of unfair. We’re not lawyers. We can’t interpret the law. We’re mere mortals. And I will tell you I’ve never felt more mere as a mortal than I felt for the last five months.”

    “You’ve got Travis Alexander’s family devastated, that he was killed, that he was brutally killed. You’ve got Jodi Arias’ family sitting in there, both families sitting and seeing these humiliating images and listening to unbelievably lurid private details of their lives, and you’ve got a woman whose life is over, too. I mean, who’s winning in this situation? And we were stuck in the middle.”

    “What she did was horrible, there’s no question about it, but this is a human being. Our jury’s prudence system is based on innocent until proven guilty. And this girl was crucified in the court of public opinion. We didn’t know that of course until after the fact.”

    “There was a Jodi Arias before June 4 of 2008 and a Jodi Arias after June 4 of 2008. Jodi Arias before that time seemed like an absolutely normal young woman; going through relationships, ups and downs, there was no history of any kind of violence, there was no history of any unusual problems with relationships, they were pretty typical.”

    “But then there was the Jodi Arias after this horrendous crime, so why would I not expect lies? Why would I not expect her to try and cover her tracks? I think the interviews, to be candid with you, and I’ve understood that she’s done some since the trial and just before it was over, I don’t think it was very smart of her. But did it affect our decision? I wouldn’t think so, no.”

    “I do believe that she was emotionally and verbally abused. You can’t listen to that kind of hurt, the pain, the anguish, and not be touched.”

    —-

    Based on Mr. Zervakos statements and how he was influenced, it would seem that the Defense should put be putting more focus on the life of Jodi before June 4 and what lead to her state of mind after Jun 4.

    • whichtrial? says:

      “Based on Mr. Zervakos statements and how he was influenced, it would seem that the Defense should put be putting more focus on the life of Jodi before June 4 and what lead to her state of mind after Jun 4.”

      I agree with that also. Her lawyers must humanize her, show that Jodi was the normal, lighthearted person she was before June 4, 2008. She was a stranger to herself after that – even Darryl said he couldn’t recognize the same person. The Period of Lies needs to be understood as a coping mechanism, the same way that traumatic amnesia is accepted in medicine as a protective neurological phenomenon.

      ["Dirty Little Secret" evokes the Rick James song: "She was a very freaky girl, the kind you don't bring home......That girl's alright - with me". Her lawyers might as well have been fantasizing aloud about the ridiculous (oft heralded on HLN) "stripper vibe".]

      Nor was it sufficient to Jodi’s case to bring in a Physiological Psychologist to explain her memory loss. That should have been obvious from the start. A NEUROLOGIST, an M.D., perhaps even one who performs surgeries (not an M.D. of psychiatry) should have taken the stand for the simple reason that the blackout SEVERELY affected Jodi’s ability to testify in her own defense. Jodi’s blackout wasn’t an issue in the case, it was THE issue: Without that critical gap in Jodi’s recollection of events, would the prosecutor have dared to “announce” that the gunshot was last? (It would seem that because of that gap, he was able to go on to create gaps of his own.)

      The expert testimony of a medical doctor (who likely would be granted more latitude to educate the jury) would be a more FAIR legal remedy for Jodi’s inability to account in a court of law for the events of the entire fight and the moments following.

      Can anyone imagine JM trying his trademark scorn and ridicule on a brain surgeon?

      • whichtrial? says:

        The Period of Lies has been explained by Jodi herself in moral terms.

        But would we ever have heard Jodi’s dissembling if she had remembered with utter clarity what had happened? She says she thought the gunshot had hit the wall…she remembered dropping the knife and screaming and something about putting the knife into the dishwasher (which she allows could have been a previous recollection).

        How does a person confess to doing something they cannot remember? It is a moral question, but it is first a medical issue. It only presents as a moral problem secondarily.

        So again, the memory gap is not an issue in this case, it is THE issue.

        Famous defense lawyers around the country were interviewed during this trial; were asked what was the strongest evidence that the prosecution had, and one of them (I believe it was Alan Dershowitz, and if it wasn’t please forgive me, Mr. Dershowitz) said, “That she lied.”

        Whoever did say that turned out to be right, as everyone knows.

    • Journee says:

      I wish I could say I expect anything in the way of *different* or *more* or *better* from the defense team at the retrial, but I don’t.

      This next jury can’t overturn the conviction. Only the judge(s) in a higher court can do that.

      Truth be told, I think their only strategy at this point will be to expedite appeals.

      • Eli Landers says:

        Journee, you are correct, the upcoming trial can’t overturn the conviction but it does determine the sentence.

        If death, Jodi does get an automatic appeal but the conditions for prisoners on death row are very grim. For the lesser sentence the costs for appeal are paid by the defendant but allows more freedoms than an inmate on death row (of course I use “freedoms” very loosely here).

        I can’t speak for Jodi, but if it were me I would prefer being able to interact with fellow inmates.

        I agree with you about expediting her appeals but from what I read the appeals process in death penalty cases takes time to complete. Typically, a case may take between 6 to 10 years, but there are always exceptions. For lesser cases the complexity of the case will determine the time it takes for the appeal. Some can take a year while others significantly longer.

  17. Judy F. says:

    Mr. Zervakos statement is well taken. He is on the money as far as I am concerned. I do hope this comes up in the next part of this trial. Couldn’t agree more.

    • He seems like a kind, caring and logical man. At least he recognizes the crucifixion. (But just because may not have been aware of it doesn’t mean there weren’t those on the jury who were aware. And he talks as if he thought it could have possibly been self defense (although he does comment about her deed being horrible). So what made him vote for M1? Is it simply because she won the fight in a way she felt she needed in order to keep on living? This so reminds me of how “witches” were tried in medieval times. They would throw the accused in the water; if she drowned she was innocent, otherwise she must be a witch — burn her at the stake. Winning the fight and continuing to live is being used against her to prove her guilt.

      Regarding the graphic nature of the killing, I’ve asked this rhetorical question before but why do people believe a self-defense scene, in which a violent fight took place, should be all methodical with strategically placed wounds while, at the same time, accepting that a preplanned murder would be total chaos? I can’t get my mind around that sort of reversed thinking. And that it is used to convict someone of M1 is down right scary.

      • Journee says:

        I’ve always thought the scene would look that way – that there would have been a violent struggle – whether there was premeditation or not.

        Because Travis fought.

        • R. Love says:

          I do believe that Travis started the fight and there was no premeditation on Jodi’s part. I’m positive she was taken off guard by his uncalled for anger.

          • Journee says:

            I believe that too, R. Love.

            I just think Travis would have fought, regardless.

            • R. Love says:

              Yes, it was apparent that he had no respect for a woman, or man really. Any man that would hit a woman deserves what comes to them. I remember some of the conversations that he had with Jodi about various different men that he knew and worked with; he showed them absolutely no respect either ( behind their backs). Martinez and Travis had a lot in common! The word coward keeps popping into my mind when I allow myself to think of either. No one but a coward would abuse someone in the manner Travis had become accustom to. I thank God everyday that Jodi was able to defend herself from him. SMH If only she would have had a TRUE friend who she could have called for HELP! Jodi was way in over her head when it came to Travis. . .he was a real piece of . . .work! hehehe . . . started to say something else but ran and locked the evil twin in the closet again. Darn her she keeps sneaking out! LOL

              • I was just talking elsewhere about Travis’ disrespect for women. I had just watched, for the first time, all of “Eddie Snell”. And as I get near the end, I hear “Mr. Snell” say to a woman in the audience, “I would beat you dead, woman!” And he follows that up with “You need to hit a woman once in a while.” When he gets tones of disapproval it’s “Just kidding”. Disgusting!!! Oh, but the nay-sayers all say, it’s just a comedy skit. But apparently Mr. Travis didn’t think there was anything wrong with making jokes about beating women.

            • whichtrial? says:

              I believe Jodi thought that the fight was OVER once the gun discharged accidentally.

              She did not leave, therefore, in the moments TA was inspecting himself at the mirror. The evidence suggests that he was the one who started it up AGAIN out of fury that he was hit.

              The prosecutor had many reasons for saying the gunshot was last, and one of them was to explain why that weapon was only fired ONCE.

              • Jeff in mesa says:

                The gunshot HAD TO have happened first. We know this because Travis had blood coming from his ear. The ONLY wound he had that would cause blood to come from his ear is the gunshot wound to his head. If the gunshot were last, when he was already dead, there would be no blood in the ear because the heart was no longer pumping blood. The stab wounds to the chest and throat would NOT cause blood to come out of the ear. It’s impossible. This is a medical fact of which I’m sure ME Horn knew. Somehow Jodi’s defense team failed to capitalize on this fact. So if the gunshot came first wouldn’t Jodi’s story make complete sense? I’m thinking yes, without a doubt.

  18. Judy F. says:

    Very good point made re : “people believe a self-defense scene, in which a violent fight took place, should be all methodical with strategically placed wounds while, at the same time. accepting that a preplanned murder would be total chaos” Preplanned and the chaos just doesn’t fit.

    • Pandora says:

      I too agree. If Jodi had premeditated in killing travis, I am sure she would have chosen a totally different way in doing so. Firstly, she would have NEVER made a bloody mess out of it. There are so many different ways that don’t need any knives or guns!

      We’ve all watched those crime series that air in the USA: premeditated murder would be done in a matter where Jodi could have drugged travis…. No bloody fight, no nothing…

      Playing devil’s advocate, let just say that hypothetically Jodi had premeditated this…. why in the world would she kill travis while he was awake and all his senses were intact (is that the correct word?). She had plenty of chances when he was sleeping… So, the premed theory is FULL OF HOT AIR….

      It’s in a woman’s nature and scientifically proved that women would never choose a weapon that makes a mess. This only happens in self defense when they don’t have the luxury of time to choose their weapon.

      Finally, how is it possible that although Jodi is “the most evil, devious, wicked mastermind” she was so fucking dumb to premeditate a crime like that???? WAKE UP PEOPLE…. the evidence, the crime scene speaks volumes: IT REEKS OF SELF DEFENSE!

      • whichtrial? says:

        “…all his senses were intact” is correct. I have also heard that women murderers often poison their victims. This premeditated knife attack idea is something out of a movie.

  19. whichtrial? says:

    Wondering, Journee: Does “expedite appeals” mean that the usual process would be accelerated?

    Also, have a hard time here imagining that the next trial won’t be any different from the first. Isn’t it meant to be shorter? Since the new jurors are not supposed to know anything about the case; would have to become very familiar with it in order to be able to carry out their duty in good conscience. So unless no defense is presented at the new trial, the jurors would hear from both sides. How all of that fits into a shorter version – who knows?

    Tonight the news out of AZ is: No new death warrants until they review the execution process. Is that only in one county? Don’t know what to think at this point.

    • whichtrial? says:

      they would have to become very familiar with it

    • Journee says:

      I meant (didn’t I say?) I don’t expect to see anything different or more or better from the DEFENSE TEAM. Though I suppose we might see a new expert, since Alyce won’t come back and Samuels didn’t really fit the bill. But otherwise I am not expecting any shift of focus or new information or change in approach. I expect to see the Cliff Notes of what we’ve already seen.

      Shorter, yes – which may be why you didn’t understand my first post. I was trying to avoid saying that I thought we’d see “more of the same” from the defense team, when what I envision is *less* of the same.

      • whichtrial? says:

        Journee: Was originally referring to Jodi’s traumatic memory loss, suggesting that a Neurologist would be a better fit for this case than a physiological psychologist. You seem to agree (unless you have a different thought about an M.D.) and let’s hope the DT goes that way also, so that the jury is less likely to hear a sneering comment from the prosecutor such as he produced in the first trial: “…hippocampus, whatever that is.”

        A strictly neurological approach to the memory loss could be the foundation for the DT’s explaining Jodi’s stories as dissembling, [ "Dissemble" - Webster's: 1. To hide under a false semblance or seeming; to feign (something) not to be what it really is; to put an untrue appearance upon; to disguise; mask 2. To put on the semblance of; to make a pretense of; to simulate; feign 3. To pass as if unnoticed; ignore; as, to DISSEMBLE wrongs Syn. - Hide, conceal, mask, counterfeit, cover]
        instead of being only “lies”, a word that implies that Jodi KNOWINGLY covered up killing TA in FULL AWARENESS of how it happened. She did not remember exactly what happened though she did admit on the stand that when she “came to” in the desert, she did not think Travis was alive.

        I have hope that a medical expert on brain function/injuries, together with good follow-up from the DT (if that is even allowed in the second phase) could help Jodi avoid death row living conditions while she appeals, that is all.

        • Journee says:

          I think Geffner was a very good witness, and IF he – or his institute – has had time to do some direct work with Jodi, he might be a great witness to meet the goals the DT had with Samuels AND LaViolette. He can explain the memory loss, he can the trauma as relates to DV, the PTSD, all of it. And he was very likable.

          • whichtrial? says:

            I thought Dr. Geffner was wonderful too, and he can do all of those things – Seems like most everyone keeps forgetting about his testimony, though, (including supporters).

            It might be better to show strength through numbers, so that there are still at least TWO experts on the defense side – himself and an M.D. who can speak about the neuronal injury that occurs with PTSD and Major Depressive Disorder.

            • Journee says:

              It’s hard to imagine what they’ll do because we don’t know what a ‘retrial of the penalty phase’ is supposed to consist of. What evidence or testimony will be allowed if the jury is ONLY deciding on the penalty? What is a trial that begins with the presumption of guilt?

              Geffner is a PhD with a diplomate in clinical neuropsychology, tho, so he would probably be redundant paired with a neuro MD.

              Now, me, if I had my druthers in another expert, it would be a crime scene analyst – but I guess that’s moot if the jury is to presume guilt.

              • whichtrial? says:

                ” What is a trial that begins with the presumption of guilt?”

                – Double Jeopardy. A Whichtrial. Or maybe something out of the Theatre of the Absurd.

                Re: Geffner. Without redundancy he could expand on the PTSD (after the M.D.) vis a vis behavior. Also think he could do a good job on the DV in the absence of ALV.

                A crime scene analyst, profiler type – better late than never.

                • Eli Landers says:

                  It can be confusing when Jodi’s penalty-phase is referred to as a trial. But double jeopardy can’t really apply to this because Jodi has already been convicted but no sentence was pronounced.

                  How this case will be presented to the new Jury will be interesting. I don’t see how they can find anyone in the Arizona area that hasn’t been exposed to media overload about Jodi. It will take some really, really honest juror’s to say they haven’t already formed an opinion about Jodi.

                  I liked Dr. Geffner’s testimony, much better than Samuels and LaViolette.

                • whichtrial? says:

                  Eli, Because the jurors are going to see (according to all reports) a “shorter version” of the trial, it follows that they will hear from both sides.

                  The state cannot ask jurors to put a person away for life, much less sentence a defendant to death without understanding WHY. Otherwise, the state would be dictating its citizens’ moral consciences, in violation of THEIR rights.

                  The fact of the second penalty phase taking place IS based upon the guilty verdict, but the purpose of the second penalty phase is to bring down a sentence without prejudice. It will be therefore immaterial to the DECISION the jury will be asked to make that Jodi was found guilty; the state is obligated to ensure that the second jury will approach the case without bias.

                  Since proceedings (the so-called “shorter version”) will be conducted in order that the new jurors be CONVINCED of the defendant’s guilt, I view this second penalty phase as double jeopardy.

                  And why is Jodi in 23 hours a day lock-up BEFORE sentencing? I gave up thinking I could make sense of the AZ court system well over a year ago.

                • Here’s what I envision happening during jury selection. The first question asked will be “Did you follow this case or know anything about this case?” The honest ones will raise their hands and out they will go. Then the jury pool will be asked who isn’t able to sentence someone to death. And out go the people actually capable of compassion. What we have left, for the most part, will be people who can’t wait to be part of putting this “witch” to death. As a matter of fact, just thinking about all the interviews and possible book deals will make them absolutely giddy!

                • Eli Landers says:

                  You bring up some good points whichtrial, but I don’t see that jeopardy has been doubled yet.

                  All that is being determined at this point is death, lwop, and eligible for release after 25 years. As to the shorter version of the trial, this can either be an advantage or disadvantage depending on how well her defense team screens the jurors and presents Jodi’s case. Her team did succeed in the last sentencing-phase as it ended up with a hung jury.

                  You are right, the state has to ensure the second jury approaches the case without bias as any failure to do so can be used later in appeal.

                  As to 23 hr lock-up I can’t really say. Jodi is a high profile case and this may be a way to protect her from any fame seeking lunatic that may wandering around the Estrella county jail. But like you say, who can make sense of the AZ court.

    • Pandora says:

      After having experience about how JM tries to manipulate everything the defense team, Jodi and the defense witnesses said, I really do hope that this time around they are well prepared in fighting back and debunking him. I’m pretty sure that he will try and pull his bs again.

      One thing I’m really worried about is JM dragging poor Cinderella or Little Red Riding Hood in the the trial…. :D

      • whichtrial? says:

        Wouldn’t think there would be any time for fairy tales. I’ll bet the state coffers are still “smarting” from all of that time that was taken up with the Snow White analysis!

  20. CanadaCarol says:

    JM changing the order of wounds just before trial, left the defence unprepared for this aggravating factor kermit cooked up. IMO Jodi’s expert witnesses were three of the best in their fields and each played a very important part in her defence. Dr. Samuels has 30 yrs experience working with PTSD and post traumatic stress amnesia and I have never heard it explained better. His sins were to give Jodi a self-help book so she could become well enough to assist her lawyer, and to receive service for service from a patient in NY, a rule that was changed without his knowledge. He paid his dues for that in NY. Ms. LaViolette is one of the most respected professionals in her field helping men like TA every day for years and she did begin to speak of the overkill that often happens when a battered person finally snaps but was quickly shut up by JM and Stephens. Her testimony reached at least the foreperson. Her sins were to spend too much time with Jodi and to use Sleeping Beauty as a catchy title in one of her talks. Dr. G. was an excellent witness to bolster their testimony and did his best to explain this bullet first vs. last thrown at them days before trial starting. Dr. G’s sin was to spill some water on the stand while being yelled at by that horny toad. A forensic pathologist would be able to show how just saying it was a typo is not a good enough explanation for Horn’s testimony. Jury was swayed too much by the crime scene and the defence needs an expert that would be allowed to explain why it is that way. The photos prove that it all happened in less than 2 mins so everything was happening at a frenzied pace and state. IMO it is obvious that the gun went off like Jodi said and then sheer terror chaos broke out, and she was fighting off a raging, wounded double-her-size martial arts wrestler in an amnesic state.

    • Journee says:

      CanadaCarol – I agree absolutely with everything you said about the experts (and I REALLY WISH Alyce would come back for the retrial, but I don’t blame her for declining).

      But the photos don’t really prove that it all happened in less than 2 minutes – that’s just what JM wanted everyone to believe. All they prove is that Travis was down and bleeding less than 2 minutes after the last intentional shower photo. IMO, that photo of him down and bleeding happened right after the gunshot. Travis was grabbing for Jodi and she jostled the camera trying to get away from him.

      • CanadaCarol says:

        I see the photos confirming Jodi’s story that there is the last posed photo at 5:30:30 and then the picture of the ceiling when the camera is dropped, and that last photo showing Jodi moving his body at 5:32:16. That could only happen at the end of the battle when he was not moving anymore. Jodi didn’t know he had been shot when the gun went off. I think his reaction would be to spin around to the sink and look in the mirror, causing that blood splattering and then the battle with the knife began and continued down the hallway. I do not believe that the wounds to his back were made at the sink but more likely when he was on top of her at some point.

        • CanadaCarol says:

          Anyone who doesn’t believe in PTS amnesia should watch that new TV show “When Vacations Attack”. Yesterday, it recounted how a man saved himself and his girlfriend from a sinking vehicle but he does not remember it. Very often on that show they don’t remember the worst part of their experience.

          • Pandora says:

            Carol, you know that non-supporters do not agree on anything that is ‘pro’ Jodi. Even if the truth bitch slaps them – with open palm – in the face, they would never accept it!

        • Journee says:

          “that last photo showing Jodi moving his body at 5:32:16″

          Again – that was JM’s spin on what is depicted in that photo.

          But Travis isn’t necessarily dead in that photo – certainly his neck has not been slashed as he appears to be holding his own head up. You don’t see Jodi’s hands, you don’t know that she is pulling him or moving him. You only see that Travis’ arms are up and JM led us to *assume* that his arms were being held up to move him. But his arms could just as easily be grabbing for Jodi.

          “Jodi didn’t know he had been shot when the gun went off. I think his reaction would be to spin around to the sink and look in the mirror,”

          Jodi testified that they both went DOWN after the gunshot, as he was hunched to tackle her when the gun went off. They hit the floor, him landing on top of her and sending her into a panic.

          Remember when JM first laid out his theory of how it all went down? How impossible it seemed that it could all have happened – from Travis sitting in the shower, looking into the camera, to dead on the floor and being ‘dragged’ by Jodi – in less than two minutes? But if we don’t ASSUME, as JM wanted us to assume, that Travis is dead and being dragged two minutes after the last shower photo, it all seems far more plausible – IMO anyway.

          • CanadaCarol says:

            You are correct, it’s true that she testified they both fell. I think he was standing at that sink with a nasal sinus full of blood though because of the aerial splatter pattern, but I’m just me, not an expert.

            • Journee says:

              Yah – Travis having time to stand at the sink (I think he got himself up to look in the mirror – trying to figure out why his nose and mouth had filled with blood) after Jodi got away from him), turning the water on and off again, bleeding and aspirating blood there – THEN the bloody conflict that took place in the hallway, AND time allowed for Travis to lose a lot of blood on the bedroom floor, AND time for her to ‘drag’ his dead weight back up the hall to the bathroom area where the camera snapped the accidental ‘dragging’ photo – that just had to add up to more than two minutes.

              • CanadaCarol says:

                It happens much quicker than one would think. In the OP case, from the time a neighbour first heard a scream until the time that OP phoned his friend for help was 3:30 seconds. During that time, a lot happened with the shots and the cricket bat. Timed by phone records.

                • whichtrial? says:

                  I agree, Carol on everything you said about the defense experts, and as for your last sentence in your 6:15 am comment: Spot on.

                  I’ve read though, that JM asked Judge Duncan (I believe it was in Michael Kiefer’s series that included a story about JM) for the death penalty well before he declared that the gunshot was last. Please let me know of any further light you can shed on the trial chronology as it relates to the death penalty becoming an option in this case.

                  In JM’s arguments to JSS in court on day nine of the trial – at the end of the day – wherein he and Nurmi dispute the logic of the Felony Murder charge, JM tells the judge, “On May 28 of 2008…..the defendant staged a burglary of her own home to steal the murder weapon, so that she could kill Mr. Alexander.” [He then briefly mentions the car rental color and hair color issue, etc.] Then the prosecutor asserts, “In addition to bringing a gun, she also brought a knife.” [He describes activities that went on in the house leading up to the shower photo shoot.] Then he says, “And it is the state’s position that she stabbed him first.” [He mentions Horn at this point.] Then continues: “And so once she begins stabbing him, it’s not a situation where she stopped.” Nurmi argues that there is no evidence that she brought a knife and that the Felony Murder charge is an “empty vessel” of circular reasoning, etc. So on this day the Felony Murder charge was argued for with JM’s claim that the felony that Jodi committed, in furtherance of which TA died – was not the gun burglary at TA’s, as many people tend to think, but rather a knife attack, with a knife that was brought into the house for the purpose of that attack. He also insists here that the knifing did not stop once it started. That claim abrogates the need for the state to have to disprove self-defense twice – i.e. when the fight started up for a second time after TA coughed up blood in the sink. So in light of the sink blood spatter – about which JSS proceeds to read aloud from court documents indicating that Judge Duncan had taken note of it previously – JM needed to assert that the stabbing was continuous, even when TA could have seen her in the mirror. Saying that the knifing was continuous supports the Intent requirement of his Felony Murder charge, AND his timeline, but it ignores that TA would have turned his back on his attacker even when seeing her in the mirror, and that the stab wounds on his back are not straight in, rather slash wounds at angle and on one side. It also ignores the lower torso photograph of TA and the photograph of the ceiling. By stating that the fight began with a knife and that it was continuous, JM distracts from the copious blood spatter in the sink, AND the pause in the fight, but he doesn’t solve the mystery as to how the spatter got there. He can’t change the fact that many people are hit in the head with bullets of that caliber and can still move around, still fight. He can come up with various scenarios, and he has, to fit both the premeditation charge and the felony charge – but this is what he argued on day nine of the trial. He even called the gun the “murder weapon” in his argument for the knife first, as you see. (There are other reasons that the “gunshot last” was a disadvantage to the defense which I wrote about at the end of last year.)

                  I agree with Journee about that “dragging photo”. From the start, I was not able to accept on face value that TA was dead in the photo. Something did not add up to me. It is a still photograph. No definitive proof of dragging movement is embedded in that image. Journee’s 8:13am comment states that very well. One can only study the observable particulars in the captured moment to discern what is going on. Setting the timeline aside, in that photo:

                  His neck muscles are taut, so IF she were dragging him, (but I don’t buy that a person of any size or strength could drag a person of TA’s bulk by one arm, especially at that point on his arm so far away from the trunk of his body – there would be no leverage) pulling from the side would not cause his head to lift up completely from the floor whether or not he had already passed. Head, brains, skulls, are very heavy even if a person is alive but unconscious.

                  If he were bleeding from the sinuses, a struggle on the floor (we have to ADD time for that floor struggle to the tally) could produce a substantial flow of blood past his neck such as is seen in the photo, generated from adrenaline and his fast beating heart.

                  Jodi testified that there was a struggle on the floor after the gun went off during his lunge. She said he grabbed at her clothes as she was finally able to escape his grasp – and that it was the LAST thing she recalls before being able to remember that she dropped the knife at the end of the fight. I believe that is exactly what we are seeing in the photo: The accidental gunshot has occurred, they’ve fallen to the floor, struggled – we don’t know for how long – and now she is on her feet about to escape him. but he is trying to hold onto her – just as she testified. Jodi suggested on the stand that the struggle was not exactly brief. (And I believe the only reason that Jodi escaped from that struggle on the floor was that when TA realized he was bleeding he relaxed his grip on her for a moment.)

                  Camera position: I originally thought that the ceiling photo was the one taken when Jodi dropped the camera, but since considering Journee’s take on the photos some months ago, I no longer think so. There is one photograph previous to the ceiling shot that Jodi admits “taking” by accident. She it took from the crouched position beside TA when he was seated in the shower, and it shows his lower torso, verifying that he was seated. This is the last picture that Jodi herself took as she fumbled the camera. The camera then bounced onto the floor.

                  Jodi clarified on the stand that she didn’t originally recall photographs that she took during the shower photo shoot, but that she remembered them as they were shown to her. Upon being presented with the ceiling shot, Jodi testified on direct that she didn’t take that one.

                  Many folks who posted here last year asked how the camera came to be moved from the position Jodi said it landed in. They don’t see how it could have framed the (erroneously named) “dragging shot” the way it did, with the hall in the background, if it landed where Jodi said, by the bathtub.

                  Consider this: If TA took the ceiling picture intentionally to test the shutter (the button was visibly loose, it was said in court) it would explain three things: 1) The fact that Jodi said she didn’t take that ceiling shot, even accidentally 2) Why Jodi had time to get the gun from the shelf 3) The slightly different camera position in the 5:32:16 photo.

                  The (top) video about Gus from Greta’s show on Fox that is shown in the “Unanswered Questions” re-post of today reveals very clearly the aspirated blood spatter in the sink, on the counter and on the mirror. The spatter is very substantial and scattered in these images. (Not all of the crime scene photos depict the spatter on the mirror that clearly.) TA had to have been at the sink coughing up blood for more than just a few seconds.

                  The prosecution has maintained that Jodi planned this fight and did it with the premeditated idea that she would flee the scene swiftly. But it is likely that the fight took longer than the state is allowing. Remember, the longer the fight, the less likely it would appear that Jodi planned it; and the more time that did pass, the greater the implication is that Travis was actively engaged in a fight with Jodi – and the less likely it would seem that Jodi had gotten the fast drop on him.

                  At five-thirty PM, some neighbors would already be home from work, out walking their dogs – the state had to attribute as much dispatch as they could to Jodi’s actions to account for the obviously bad timing of this “premeditated murder”.

                  The last thing the prosecution wanted was for a jury to believe that the fight was the chaotic mess that it actually was, an unplanned tragedy that edged up closely to the time that the roommates would have returned. The two minute timeline is also another way for the prosecutor to argue that Jodi is lying, since her story is difficult to cram into it – but so are his various versions.

                  I am not suggesting that all of what we know couldn’t have happened quickly. Stab or slash wounds, gunfire, a body slam, all can occur very quickly. In a fight to the death, one second is a very long time.

                  The still photographic images should speak for themselves, however, outside of time, even if one computes that the two minute measure could fit a particular scenario.

                • CanadaCarol says:

                  When you consider that a round in a boxing match is three minutes, you can see how much can be done in that time.

                • Journee says:

                  “Consider this: If TA took the ceiling picture intentionally to test the shutter (the button was visibly loose, it was said in court) it would explain three things: 1) The fact that Jodi said she didn’t take that ceiling shot, even accidentally 2) Why Jodi had time to get the gun from the shelf 3) The slightly different camera position in the 5:32:16 photo.”

                  YES!
                  See – I want the defense to have some kind of expert talk about THAT photo. Such an apparently innocuous image – an “accidental” shot of the ceiling taken from ‘like, waist high’ according to Melendez. NO ONE recognized that photo’s potential to substantiate Jodi’s story.

                  The camera moved because TRAVIS moved it. TRAVIS was the one who cared about the damn camera so much that he assaulted Jodi when she dropped it – TRAVIS was the one who paused in the assault long enough to pick up the damn camera to examine it, giving Jodi time to get a head start running down the hall away from him

                • CanadaCarol says:

                  Journee, I do believe that she had time to run and get the gun but the photos are in this sequence: 5:29:20 – the full on face photo, 5:30:30 – the final shower photo that Jodi did not intend to take because it is him sitting down and shows his butt, and then 5:31:14 – the accidental shot of the ceiling which shows the top of the shower. That pic is 0.84 sec later if my math is correct and Travis is in a sitting position in the photo just before. I’ve always thought that Jodi said she didn’t take it because it is out of focus and of the ceiling. She did not remember taking even the good ones. Jodi would have time to run and get the gun but not contemplate leaving or any of the other things JM wanted her to think about. Jodi is slight and had been training running. She would be quicker on her feet than Travis wet out of the shower.

                • Journee says:

                  from 5:30:30 to 5:31:14

                  is 44 seconds – or almost 3/4 of a minute

                • whichtrial? says:

                  3/4 of a minute is enough time for TA to have stepped out of the shower while berating Jodi, to have body slammed her to the floor, wiped off his wet hands, picked up the camera and tested the shutter with that ceiling shot. It was not taken from a low crouched position on the floor, where Jodi’s last photos of him were taken.

                • Journee says:

                  Nor was it taken from the floor, as subsequent photos were. So, 44 seconds into the ‘less than 2 minute’ struggle that killed Travis, someone was holding that camera.

                • CanadaCarol says:

                  Jodi testified that the camera did a double bounce, did a roll and ended up right against the bathtub. Jodi testified that he stood up and came at her, she was body slammed, she rolled left and ran. If Travis tested the camera, which she didn’t testify to, he would have had to hold the camera back where the shower door would show up.

                  Jodi is built like a runner. She testified that she had been running distances each day. As soon as the camera was dropped, she was terrified. She was in flight or fight with adrenaline, noradrenaline, cortisol etc. rushing through her. JM expected her to remember everything that happened throughout this fight. Anyone who has been in a situation like this understands that you DO NOT REMEMBER. Jodi was able to get the gun in the same way that battered women survive everyday. JM doesn’t even try to understand and expects her to remember blow by blow.

                • Journee says:

                  So Travis was dead less than 76 seconds after someone was holding that camera?

                • whichtrial? says:

                  “If Travis tested the camera, which she didn’t testify to, he would have had to hold the camera back where the shower door would show up.”

                  She didn’t testify to it because she didn’t see it. And Travis had already stepped OUT of the shower (to body slam her) when she rolled away from him and ran down the hallway to the closet, remember? [We might ask ourselves how she was able to roll away from him and exit. Was it because his eyes were now on that camera, on the floor beside them?]

                  So I agree with Journee that his next concern, after punishing Jodi with insults and a body slam, would have been to check that camera. He could easily have picked it up, stood anywhere in that room and pointed it ANY direction. There were no physical constraints as to his posture or body position at that point; I don’t see where you are getting that he is somehow captive to the shower – he’s already out of it, could even have had a few seconds to towel off after she ran out.

                  The only purpose of hitting the shutter would have been to see if it still worked – to see if it produced an image – any image. How else does one account for the higher angle of the shot? It wasn’t taken from the floor – even the investigator said that – and nowhere in Jodi’s story does she say that she herself was standing when she took her last shots of TA and fumbled the camera.

                  And nowhere does she say that when she fumbled the camera, she knocked it sending it upward. It would not have bounced so high, either, that it would have framed the ceiling shot from that closer angle spontaneously.

                  Jodi’s fumbled shot, however, included a lower portion of TA’s body. It is obvious that the composition is not intentional, that something went wrong there, and its photographic content shows evidence (their crouched positions and locations) that is consistent with her version of events.

                  She said the camera went AWOL when she was trying to delete a previous shot, and that after she fumbled it, it bounced and came to rest on the floor. The ceiling shot’s timing is 3/4 of a minute after the fumbled lower torso shot. That’s enough time to fit Jodi’s description of the first assault of the fight. Otherwise, what is going on in that period of nearly a minute?

                • whichtrial? says:

                  Carol, I misunderstood you earlier to think he was IN the shower. So I see what you are saying about the shower door “showing up”, but what does that prove? I mean, he could have stood anywhere; could have checked the zooming mechanism too, to widen the angle, thus fitting more into the composition. But wide or tight, you can still tell a camera’s relative position, and it doesn’t appear to be at ground level when that shot was taken.

    • CanadaCarol says:

      I need to correct myself. She was in flight or fight stage first which cones with amnesia. Post event is ptsd amnesia.

      • CanadaCarol says:

        typo (comes)

        • whichtrial? says:

          The brain chemicals were setting up the amnesia even while the fight was underway and she was in a state of acute stress, so I think it is probably technically accurate to state it as you did. As I understand Dr. Samuels, there is perception of what is taking place, and an ability to deal with events, but memory of what is occurring is not able to be created in the hippocampus for use in later recall. E.g. the computer is working, but nothing is saved from a certain point onward – in this case from the point that TA was grasping at her clothes as she broke away. So she would have had an impaired memory during the knife fight and during the minutes afterward.

          Is that what you were referring to – [as you wrote], “an amnesiac state” ?

  21. I’m sorta working the media bias angle. I’m going through the HLN/CNN transcripts during the trial. So here, before I hardly get started, we have a couple of excerpts from Nancy Grace:

    Jan 2, 2013 (First day of trial)

    Nancy Grace: “They meet at a conference in Vegas and fall for each other hard. But when the flame ultimately burns out and they break up, then she moves 300 miles to pursue him, even converting to Mormonism to get her man. The dead body of 30-year-old Travis Alexander found slumped on a shower floor, shot, stabbed 29 times, violence so brutal it resembles a mob hit. But then naked photos on a digi-cam emerge.”

    ————————————

    BETHANY MARSHALL, PSYCHOANALYST: Oh, you know, the defense is just trying to blame the victim, paint him in a bad light, make him out to be almost like some sexual pervert or someone who is betraying his faith.

    But the fact is, Nancy, she used sex to have power over him. I`m sure what happened, as any young man will do, he started dating other women, living a free life. She got stuck in rejection, seduced him continually in an attempt to have power over him and to reassure herself that she was desirable to him.

    And the day or the night of the murder, just like “Basic Instinct,” she had sex with him to put him into a powerless state, and then she went in for the kill.

    GRACE: Well, Bethany, I know that you`ve got all your degrees and your Ph.D. and all that, but I don`t need a Ph.D. to tell me what happened, all right? She moves back 300 miles to try to get him back, all right? So she goes over there. They`re having all this crazy wild sex.

    Let me just point out she went into the home with a gun with her. But then he tells her he absolutely is going to go on a trip to Cancun the next day with another woman. Uh-uh! She was not having any of that, all right? That`s when everything goes sideways.

    ————————————

    • Journee says:

      Well, I don’t have any fancy degrees either, so I won’t offer an uninformed ‘diagnosis’ of Nancy Grace.

      I’ll just say that she plays a stark, raving lunatic on television – and far-be-it-from me how anyone can possibly take her seriously.

      • And I guess from that day on every knew that she entered the house with a gun because Nancy said so. No evidence required after that.

        • Journee says:

          One of the videos over at the new site shows a clip of her arguing with a guy who insisted this should never have been a DP case. And she keeps talking and shrieking over him, saying several times “SHE TOOK PICTURES OF HIS DEAD BODY IN THE SHOWER!”

          • What??? She took pictures of his dead body??? Where does she get this crap??? Has she no morals??? (What am I saying…of course she doesn’t…she’s a friggin’ psychopath!)

            • Journee says:

              Now, now Justus – last I heard you don’t have the credentials to diagnose Nancy Grace, either.

              All we know for SURE is that Nancy Grace plays a lunatic on TV.

              • R. Love says:

                Too funny! :) Nancy Grace is a disgrace to the justice system. She should be banned from every network.

      • Pandora says:

        How can anyone take NG seriously knowing that she ‘drove’ a woman to suicide. I wonder: does that haunt NG???? Probably not. She has NO MORALS.

    • CanadaCarol says:

      While NG was spewing her poison the 1st day of trial, Mimi in one long statement on redirect announced to the jury that his stalker slashed his tires several times, she had slashed the tires of someone he had dated, had sent threatening e-mail to TA and his girlfriend, she followed them on first date, she had broken into his email and bank accounts, she would sneak into his house through the doggie door, and sleep on his couch at night without him knowing. She learned all this from TA right after she gave him the only friends talk on their 3rd date. All unsubstantiated bs from TA. Garbage in the courtroom and garbage in the media.

    • CanadaCarol says:

      Two really disturbing things I heard recently on that station:

      On the day of the botched execution while most others in media seemed to be doing a little soul searching, Vinnie’s old pal Mike Brooks was calling for them to bring back old sparky, even bringing back the guillotine. I don’t think he said it for shock value but that is certainly what it did to me.

      Instead of covering the story that live media would not be allowed in the penalty phase (they didn’t mention it at all) they ran one of their rigged contests and of course Jodi won biggest liar so something like that, but the score that they gave her was 666 and, yes, you can guess what they called her after that. Vinnie, Brooks and the guests they had on that day all agreed that she was the “s” word.

      And finally, I cannot stand that after all this time, none of them know what strabismus is and that Jodi does need to wear glasses. It really bugs me how they say her eyes are evil all the time instead of reading up on ophthalmology.

    • CanadaCarol says:

      JVM has Dave Hall on 06/20/13 re delay in trial. Dave refers to Patti W. as a “crackhead” . I just checked out his arrest record on Occupy. How many arrests for possession and clandestine lab does that guy have? I noticed he also had a concealed handgun charge at some point. The way he and the others acted in Goblin Valley is very revealing. Am I allowed to say redneck? If so, he is a redneck.

Want to Comment?
Welcome to the #1 Jodi Arias Support site. All comments are moderated. If you are a knuckle-dragging hater - or a TravisTown pedo-hugger - then do not waste your invaluable time here. Your post will be deleted and you will be banned. You have been told. We are TEAM JODI… and WE WILL BE VICTORIOUS. Make no mistake. SJ / Team Jodi.

*