Jodi Arias Retrial, Day #11 Reviewed

in Latest News by

Click here to read the State’s BS Motion in Limine (in response to the Motion to Dismiss)
filed 11/11 — 3 page PDF Document

State Motion in Limine filed 11-11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Both trial days of this week have been centered around psychologist Dr Lucia Fonseca – who enlightened the jurors no end with her thoughts on TA’s shameful behavior towards Jodi (and many others). The “You Crossed The Line” email also got another airing, further highlighting the fact that Chris & Sky Hughes were well aware of TA’s antics, despite their back-peddling testimony to the contrary during the first trial. A re-run of Dan Freeman’s initial testimony also confirmed the same. The testimony of Dr Fonseca will continue on Monday.

This is the 12 News Exclusive interview with Maria Schaffer (Jodi’s former defense attorney), who Martinez accused of deleting TA’s child porn stash:

maria schaffer 12 news exclusive interview jodi arias retrial
“Attorneys are not allowed to file bogus allegations. That in itself would be misconduct. So you have to assume that if they are filing these allegations it’s because they’re true. Prosecutor Juan Martinez is someone who has a reputation. They have talked about him in the AZ Supreme Court.” – Michael Kiefer

Here’s the bottom line: Anyone still expecting this evidence tampering issue to miraculously blow over is gonna be disappointed, big time. Just like the DP verdict that the ever-dwindling band of pedo-huggers hopelessly cling to, it ain’t gonna happen.

This Motion for Dismissal in itself heralds a major turning point in Jodi’s quest for justice. It’ll show up the State (and their devious cohorts) for what they really are — and more importantly, what they actually did.

You can mark my words on that.

The State Circus returns to town again this coming Monday, 11/17 @ 9-30 am MST.

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



Never question it.

Never doubt it.

Leave your thoughts & comments below…

Team Jodi #WINNING

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 via go directly to the fund for assisting with the legal fees associated with appealing Jodi’s wrongful conviction. is the ONLY website authorized to collect donations.

In addition, please DO NOT, under any circumstances, donate through any other website or Facebook page/group claiming to be “official” and/or acting with Jodi’s approval or authorization. The same applies to any “Jodi Membership Clubs”, groups or fake Trust funds that have been set up. These sites are bogus – as are their intentions – and they should be actively avoided. If you are aware of any such sites, please help Jodi by clicking here and reporting them. Thank you for your ongoing support!

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



    Never question it.

    Never doubt it.

    Team Jodi #WINNING

  2. I was a bit disappointed that the defense motion regarding the deletion of files from TA’s computer was not addressed. It seems to me that this is pretty important and should be ruled on before this circus goes any further. This motion could reverse the conviction or at the very least get Jodi a new trial. And if she gets a new trial wouldn’t that get her out of solitary, and make her eligible to get bail?

    (((((JODI))))) ♥ ♥ ♥ 🙂

    Ray in H-burg Va.

    • Good morning Ray and SJ.
      Ray I asked the same question yesterday.
      It will depend on how the judge rules. If the verdict from the trial is overturned then it will depend on what they charge her with. I found out yesterday that Jodi’s bail was set a 2 million. If anyone could have come up with that she wouldn’t have been sitting jail all these years until she was found guilty at the trial.

      The one thing that I can’t get past in the motion is KN asking for the verdict to be over turned or at least the death penalty be taken off the table. So knowing the stat of AS. I don’t see them letting Jodi out. I also don’t like the fact that JSS will be the one making the decision on what Jodi gets 25years or life without Pororo

  3. I have also noticed that HLN has been deafeningly silent on anything “Jodi”, but I have heard a few stories about her and the trial on FOX NEWS…………..So very confusing.

    (((((TEAM JODI)))))

    Ray in H-burg Va.

    • Good for her. I wounder how he ever passed the bar. I don’t know if it is possible for a higher court to hear this motion? I just don’t trust HAS…

      As for Samantha comment, she would know. Now in order to know anything about your brother you had to have contact with him…I wonder what she thought of her brother’s comments on the sex tape.

    • I couldn’t find the ‘eye roller’s’ comments. She probably deleted them. Didya by any chance screen shot them? If yes, send them to admins. It would be awesome for her comments to be pasted here at the site so the whole world can see her POV…. 😉

        • Oh she said that a virus caused the 1000’s of child pornsites to download on pedo-hugger’s computer. She also said that she knew of soooper doooper zecrets but is not the one who kisses and tells! She’ll be singing like a canary the first minute $$$ are waved in her face. SMH.

          You know what gets to me? Her fugly smugly face. She is so cocky. Didn’t seem to me that she was in pain and emotionally strained from this trial that doesn’t let her continue with her pathetic useless life.

          BTW, hey samantha! Question for you: were you ‘jelly’ of Jodi’s awesome haircut and had to do the same to your hair? Lemme ground you, pumpkin-pie: You will never come close to Jodi’s beauty! Face it and move on!

    • samantha is in denial! What would someone expect? What would she have said? “Ya my brother was a pedophile pervert.”!? Of course she’s going to say it was a virus.

      If people are going to try and justify the child porn that was found on travis’s computer, they should at least know what they are talking about. Virus’s don’t accidentally attack computers. Especially in the form of thousands of child porn sites… Nor do virus’s delete specific browser history & data containing child porn. That is the lamest excuse I’ve heard!

      Anyone with the basic knowledge of computers would know this…

      To those who are trying to justify Travis’s pedophilia issues: Stop talking if you have no idea about what you’re saying! You are making yourselves look more stoopid than you already are!

      • She shouldn’t be talking to the media at all. And even if ehr brothr computer did in fact have a virus, HOW would she ever know? Were they *that* close? That close to the point she even knew abouty his computer activity? LMAO! Maybe she even knew how many times a day TA used to fart. GMAFB already….

    • I was unable to view this particular video, but it might be the same one I already saw the other day when she specifically said to the reporter, “I know I am not supposed to talk to the media, but…..”.
      Had the judge forbidden Samantha to talk to the media, or was she simply advised by the prosecutor ( that it was unwise etc.)?
      Is the Alexander family being given a more prominent, obvious and influential role in the actual court room than families of victims would normally be allowed?
      Aside from the fact that the family can possibly influence the jury since the jury can see their emotional responses and expressive body language, is it customary that in a court trial to have the victim’s family visiting the judge’s chambers during court sessions, and most especially, is it customary for the jury to know that the family is going to the judge’s chambers? ( I don’ t know how often the family went to the judge’s chambers.)
      Personally, I don’ t think that it is right in ANY trial for a jury to be able to view the family, or even the familiy’s friends and supporters__ but most certainly not the family__ until the ENTIRE trial, including sentencing is finished.
      And I think victims’ impact statements should NEVER be allowed until the entire trial, including sentencing phase, is absolutely finished.
      I thought victim impact statements were meant solely for catharsis, and were never meant to influence the judicial process. They invariably influence the process if they are held before ALL decisions have been finalized.
      Are any of these practices I described common in other states or countries?

        • Thank you, Canada Carol.
          I watched the video and will re- watch it more closely later.
          Other than as a means of catharsis practised at the end of a trial and after the sentencing/ penalty phase, I think that in most cases the presentation of victim impact statements__ and not just a reading of the statements, but the actual physical presence of the family reading the impact statements__ is a highly disingenous practice that entirely undermines the defendant’s rights.
          The presentation of victim impact statements during trial renders what came before nothing more than a pretence of due process.
          I know there are exceptions, such as a person harmed by a business that caused the victim to get cancer, go blind, etc., but that is entirely different from capital murder cases.
          In the first place, the victim is dead, so the impact statements refer to those people connected to the deceased, not the actual victim.
          Any person on the jury who does not have the maturity, insight and capacity to understand __ without being told__the obvious and likely consequences and ramifications that murder has upon the deceased and his loved ones, has no business being on the jury at all.
          I like what the justice at the end of the video said: “Power, not reason, is the currency of this court….”
          This video shows that the whole structure of the legal system is only as sound and fair as the people at the pinnacle who are making the ultimate decisions.

        • By including victim impact statements before the sentencing it means that if you kill a homeless person who has no one to speak for them then you should get a lesser sentence than if you kill someone with a highly articulate family (or even an overly dramatic family who is out to get you killed).

          • I was thinking about such scenarios last night, and in particular a homeless person who might have no family or friends at all.
            A human life is equally sacred regardless of whether the person has several children, a baby, is married, takes care of a sick relative __ or is completely without ties to anyone at all.
            No difference in weight should be given to a person who has more ties and effects upon a community, than a victim who was completely isolated and unconnected.
            It is certainly tragic that friends and relatives suffer greatly from the effects of crime, but the penalty assigned to the convicted should be determined solely according to a pre- set sentencing guide that correlate with the nature of the crime.
            The sentencing should have nothing to do with how it affects a victim’s loved ones or community.
            Even including such concerns promotes an element of vigilantism which has its own momentum and power to corrupt; this is certainly the case with the Arias trial.

  4. Michael Ryan, associate justice on the Arizona Supreme Court, remembered Martinez from past cases: “This same prosecutor has been accused of fairly serious misconduct…There’s something about this prosecutor, Mr. Martinez.”

    Andrew Hurwitz, a United States Circuit Judge for the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, accused Martinez of ignoring the trial judge’s decision to sustain several of the defense’s objections. “The conduct of the trial prosecutor. It seems to me at least on several occasions, and by and large the objections were sustained, that the trial prosecutor either ignored rulings by the trial judge or asked questions that the trial judge once ruled improper and the rephrased the question in another way.”

    The trial of Richard Chrisman ended with a hung jury for Juan Martinez. Defense in that case accused Martinez of withholding information about a possible witness in the case. The defense said Martinez would not allow the defense to interview the witness. In the end, a judge had to step in and order Martinez to disclose information regarding the witness. In a case similar to the Arias trial Martinez sent a woman who killed her husband to death row.

    Martinez has been accused of misconduct during the Jodi Arias trial. Now destruction of evidence is being added to his ‘permanent record’ of DIRTY PROSECUTOR.

    And now he is trying to blame Defense Team for the destruction? Based on what? Why would the DT destroy evidence that is in favor of Jodi? That proves that Jodi didn’t lie about travis’s PEDOPHILIA? Is he that much of an idiot that he thinks that anyone is ever going to believe that?

    Knock Knock
    Who’s there?
    Supreme Court?
    Supreme Court who?
    Supreme Court’s gonna kick Martinez’s ass!

  5. I turned on HLN real quick last night and was surprised they aren’t covering Jodi. I was annoyed that Beth Karas is charging money on her website for coverage of the trial. smh

    • HLN has gone through a major change. All the shows that used to cover the trial, with the exception of NAG have been cancelled and the channel is changing its daytime focus to what’s trending. I don’t know if NAG is just too embarrassed to bring up the case after all the time that she has called Jodi a liar and TA, Saint Travis. She looks as if she is choking on something.

      Last night instead of NAG, it was JJ covering Ferguson – scary how he tries to stir up trouble where there is already a terrible situation. He appeared on CNN’s Ashley Bamfield’s Legal View about a case in Mexico, and he had to throw in a comment about Jodi. He absolutely cannot help himself. He quickly added though they weren’t talking about that. The impression I get is the remaining stragglers left on HLN and visiting CNN have been instructed to leave this case alone.

      • NG may have shut her poisonous mouth up but I don’t believe for one second it is out of embarrassment.These kinds of people hve no such emotions in them. She thrives on exaggeration, blood, hyperbole and stirring up the lynch mob. She must have been a member of the Holy Inquisition in her previous life, wanna bet???

        • Hahaaaa
          Funny maria, no bets, I believe you.
          I would love all of those shows cancelled on HLN.
          Just to hear they might have been, makes my night!!

    • Vicky, HLN should have had their “News” appellation revoked by the FCC years ago. When evidence revealed by this trial has weighed in on Jodi’s side, it has most often been inaccurately reported as damning for the defense, or not reported at all. The more exculpatory the evidence, the less likely it is that HLN will even ‘go there’, (i.e. “crickets” which have become familiar companions at HLN in the past weeks). That station has proven countless times (and it is not simply because of one single host) that they are a completely unreliable source of news.

      Other news outlets and reporters should be asking themselves now why THEY relied upon HLN to inform them on this matter.

    • I am grateful that HLN stopped their 24/7 bashing of Jodi but unfortunately the damage has been done. They poisoned the public to the core. They convicted Jodi even before the trial had began.

      I really do hope that that blood-thirsting viper: NAG and all the other posse of HLN has Karma a-knocking at their door. Paula Abdul wannabe JVM got her visit from Karma. Let’s not forget that scumbag VP got his visit too.

      Serves them right! They tried to turn this trial into a soap opera with Jodi as the evil witch. Guess their show was canceled due to bad reviews!

  6. My Friday Funny 😀
    May those who love us love us,
    and those who do not love us,
    may God turn their hearts,
    and if He cannot turn their hearts
    may He turn their ankles
    that we may know them by their limping.
    ~Irish Prayer

  7. In Martinez’s counter-motion he states the following:

    “The image of the hard drive originally made by the Mesa Police Department on June 11, 2008 contained 24 viruses and the anti-malware program found 17 malware malicious items.”

    Can someone please refresh my memory regarding the denial of viruses? Who testified about that? (I missed some of the early days of the trial.)

    And then Martinez says:

    “These viruses apparently redirected the computer sending it to various porn sites for the period of May 28, 2008 through June 10, 2008, when the computer was turned off.”

    So is this idiot trying to tell us that from May 28th till June 10th the computer had remained off? That’s ridiculous. Even without Jodi’s testimony regarding him being on the computer at 4am on June 4th and then again that afternoon (attempting to view CDs), who believes Travis never turned on his computer after May 27th (for the whole week before his death)?

      • Since that must be illegal, can he get in trouble for it?
        There must have always been strict rules against this. I’ m sure it would behoove anyone in the legal profession to denounce this sort of deliberate ( spiteful too) misconduct.

      • I KNOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!! So freaking unacceptable!!!!

        SHE WAS N-E-V-E-R charged, goddammit! WHY is he still allowed to say that? He had the NERVE (for it was nerve, no other word to describe it) to bring this supposed staged burglary during his closing remarks. And Pickles did NOTHING. Disgusting to say the least. Total disrespect for the law, which they supposedly serve.

        And now this? In an official document, as you pointed out. Will he ever be stopped? What the hell is that Judge doing? Is Martinez some sort of a law ‘terrorist’, free to do whatever he wants with no repercussions, no consequences, no disciplinary rules he has to follow, no boundaries? What applies to other colleagues of his does NOT apply to Martinez? Is he invulnerable? Omnipotent?

        • “Law terrorist” is the perfect expression.
          The judge should be condemned and scrutinized closely by the legal community for her purposeful ( she absolutely knew what the law permits in court) refusal to punish Martinez for inserting those statements in his closing remarks. “Punish” is not too strong a word.
          Did the judge tell the jury that those particular statements were found to be untrue? If she didn’t then overseers in the legal community should punish her also.
          Martinez is able to get away with everything because she failed to insist that his practice remain within the confines of the law.

          • I have had many problems with my computer this past year. When I talked with a HP computer specialist he told me there was no way anything can get deleted or downloaded onto a computer without first someone clicking ENTER on that computer. I thought that I was downloading and HP something when really it was a little fellow in Timbuktu. But you know what, it didn’t have 1000 files of PORN on it or Child Porn. Whoever deleted the files on Travis’s computer, did it intentionally and it should not be hard to prove the Frog is not up on his computer science skills!’ THE FROG IS GUILTY AND IT APPEARS THE JUDGE IS TOO!
            Also, if my granddaughter had been going to see an ex-boyfriend who was abusive to her and I knew about it, I would have sent a loaded gun with her. Jodi did not steal anything from her grandfather and she was never charged with anything of the sort. The ammo never added up. Jodi never bought ammo at Walmart or anywhere else, we all checked receipts (too many times). IF a GUN was used it was his own! I still have visions of a stiletto heel making that hole in his head. We can believe nothing about the whole crime scene. . .it was and always has been a COVER UP.

    • And maybe I misunderstood this jerk but is he also saying that all this redirection to porn sites actually occurred while the computer was off??? WTF??? I had given him the benefit of the doubt that he was saying once the computer was turned on, on June 10, the virus generated records for those prior days. But even that’s insane. I don’t know what he’s saying and I don’t think he does either.

      • I’m sure you already realize that he is specifying the date May 28 so he can further set up Jodi by linking that date to the grandparent’s police report.
        Now that the legal community especially, has seen Martinez’s attempts to set up Maria Shaffer, hopefully their eyes will widen and they will start to see through them.

    • I’m pretty sure he is saying that the computer was ON 5/28 – 6/10 and that the police turned it OFF when they recovered it from the scene.

      He is, however, contradicting Melendez’ testimony that the laptop was virus free when he examined it, since Martinez says there were 24 viruses on the computer on 6/11/08.

      So no matter how this plays out, he’s shot himself in the foot and guaranteed to be exposed for suborning perjury.

    • Understand they have to come up with a response in a legal proceeding, no matter how absurd. The fact is Travis downloaded those sites, including kiddie porn sites, and somehow the DA and police were made aware of it and tried to scrub those sites.

  8. Regarding Maja Liisa’s recent question about how to help Sandra Webber: I think that her supporters could help her by referencing her blog in their twitters; that way she still has a platform for her voice.

  9. You know what? I’ve been thinking……

    I can understand why Martinez is trying so hard to say whatever BS he’s quick to come up with, regarding these sick sites TA used to access. (I’m talking about the child porn sites in particular). Of course he’s gonna find any excuse in the world to disclaim all responsibility. He doesn’t give a SHIT about TA’s reputation however; his OWN reputation is on the line, heck his entire career may be on the line if it is eventually discovered who really messed with TA’s computer. So as I said, I can at least understand why the need to justify, create scenarios and point the finger at someone else.

    The family will never EVER admit (not even to themselves) that there’s a remote possibility that this may hold any water. None of us would like to have actual proof their brother was a sicko, sexually perverted individual.

    BUT BUT BUT BUT: I cannot FOR THE LIFE OF ME understand why TA supporters are still out there, defending their idol.

    If any of you are reading here, I’m challenging you: think, just for one SECOND please, that what the Defense Team says is true. I know how absurd this may sound in your mind, but please please,allow yourself to do that. Can you honestly say you still have the same opinion of Travis? Can you still sympathize with him? Still think highly of him? Or at least as highly as you used to? Can you honestly say that this would not be a good enough reason for him to get increasingly violent towards Jodi since she knew about this dark side of him?

    But most importantly: if you have children of your own, would you HONESTLY say you would want a person like Travis living next door? Or would you spend 2 years of your life crying for him if he was killed?

    Do not kid yourselves. You’d be RELIEVED there’d be a pedophile less in this world to prey on our children.

    Am I right?

    • kermit can say all day long that viruses caused porn sites to be triggered and that’s why they are in the browser history. What they aren’t saying is it CAN be determined whether those web sites were triggered by a person or a virus or a popup. So when the computer forensics experts start BS ing we’ll see whose pocket they’re in.

      • I have had many problems with computers this past year and when I have talked with the specialists there is no way anyone can download on to your computer without someone at your computer clicking on an enter button. I thought I was downloading an upgrade from HP but OH NO it was some little fellow in Timbuktu and it messed mine up. There sure weren’t any porn or pedo sites downloaded though. The Frog is full of himself!!! I think it will not be hard to prove the Frog’s version of computer science WRONG!

      • I have had many troubles with my computer for the past year. A HP specialist told me nothing can be downloaded onto your computer unless someone clicks on the enter button. I thought I was downloading something from HP when really it was some little fellow in Timbuktu. I don’t think it will be hard to prove the Frog’s computer science knowledge is HOGWASH (Thank Samantha :roll:)

        • I can see my twin and I have been busy! Good grief delete me!!! Where is the TYPO ELF when we need one? Please erase one or two of my comments Mr. TYPO ELF!!! 😀 LOL

    • It’s not just his reputation at stake, if this is found to be true (and it will be) it will bring into question everyone of his previous convictions (wins). Can you imagine the shit storm that will cause. LMFAO I’d love to be a fly on the wall for that ass chewin’. HEHEHEHEHEE.
      (((((JODI))))) ♥ ♥ ♥

      Ray in H-burg Va.
      🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂

  10. Plus I wonder why was it that the Hughes were so fast to do a clean up job on Travis’s computer? Was there something incriminating to them or some one close to them on that computer? They have been way to vocal from the very beginning and have appeared to be “guilty as sin” about something with this case. If I knew them personally I would be questioning them and their motives. . .things do not match up with them. I for sure would not be wanting to join in on any of their money making ventures! They are as devious as striped snakes, IMO!

    • I’m thinking something happened with the kids….There was something on that computer that cash HAD to get into it ASAP. Now wouldn’t that fall under tampering with evidence….I want to know when he got into it…..

    • They have lied so many times that they don’t know what the truth is anymore….
      When did they go to Cancun?
      When did they talk to the prosecutor’s office before and during trial?
      What did they say? What were they told?

      If someone was to watch their sworn testimony on stand they’d see that both the CASHES are lying through their asses! Just watching their body language is enough to realize that: the sweating, the constant asking to be asked questions again, the swirling in their seat side to side in a nervous manner, the uhhhms and the mmmmmssss, the pauses to ‘think’ before answering questions.

      Then on TV interviews totally different info from what they said in court….

      • Sorry to go off topic here but your comments remind me that everyone interprets matters with their own bias and seeing comments here and in contrast the comments of the haters elsewhere I do wonder where truth lies. You see CASHES lying and Jodi being truthful while the haters see it the other way around yet we have the same data to base these opinions on. This trial certainly is very demonstrative of that. I know I don’t bring anything new up here but I just find it fascinating.

        Body language is such an inexact science, but so is a lot of what they have used to judged Jodi on, but they do not really know her now do they? I would hazard a guess that this is one reason this trial has stirred up so many emotions. It’s all relative. hmmm….

  11. Some Witch Hunt Guidelines, (apparently)

    – Overcharge defendant
    – Create obfuscation through conflicting charges “in the alternative”
    – Base at least one charge on a previous alleged crime never charged to the defendant or known to have been prosecuted at all, and occurred in a different jurisdiction; omit mention of it in Indictment
    – Prosecute with supposititious arguments (how else can it be done with conflicting charges?)
    – Demand that a defendant who has testified to memory loss, herself speculate in accordance with prosecutor’s spurious stipulation, (e.g. a fight/time of death timeline) then call her a liar
    – Affect gestures, stances and vocalizations such that they telegraph to the jury a tacit implication that witnesses are withholding testimony, untruthful or otherwise uncooperative
    – Randomly ask witnesses if they have ever had sex (or somehow fantasized about it) with the defendant, no matter if they are married and not on trial themselves
    – Ask a probative question of an expert witness, such as what could have been going on for a specified period of time, (e.g. 45 seconds between photographs) then create a commotion to divert attention from unanswered question, rendering it merely rhetorical
    –Handle the most key evidence in a reckless and possibly damaging manner, implying that what the prosecutor himself states would be more probative than, and superior to any physical evidence that has been or could ever be presented in that trial
    – Accuse defense attorneys of hiding evidence helpful to their client

  12. Until this motion, I had never heard of Schaffer and Parzych as being Jodi’s former attorneys. Does anyone know why they left? I only knew about Victoria Washington. Poor Jodi, that would be so horrible to keep having to change counsel all the time.

  13. Wow, I could not access this site for last couple hours. …I even went to my other two browsers, same thing. …Then I went to that “occupy” site & his was down for maintenance. …There are coincidences!!
    …Obviously, we on this site are all back online now.. …((Jodi is innocent))…

    • My mom about went nuts trying to get on the site. Then she crashed FireFox. :-O We will get to bed now so that she can repair her computer on the am (or whenever we wake up!)

      • LOL First, my comments were not appearing and now we are blessed with an abundance of my comments! So sorry! Then I couldn’t get on the site so I figured I was back in my time out corner! My face was red from embarrassment! Apparently my twin and I have been busy! I bet the BARN is full of lost comments by now! 😀 Sorry ((((((Administrators)))))) .
        Anyhow everyone have a BLESSED Saturday!!! ♥ Love to JODI!!!! ((((JODI)))) ♥♥♥

  14. I think Martinez’ Motion in Limine is hilarious. The pinheads who worship at the altar of the prosecution wait with baited breath to learn what his next pearl of wisdom will be. So he gives them the nuggets like “the defense altered the computer.” And the minions screech with excitement.

    But logic 101 fails Martinez:
    (1) If Martinez knew that the computer was altered then he had an absolute duty to tell the court and to ask his own witnesses about the alterations. So, if the prior defense attorney altered the computer, Martinez has violated about a bi-jillion ethics rules when he elicits testimony from witnesses and no mention is made of the alteration. And conversely . . .
    (2) If Martinez did not know the computer was altered then he has incompetent computer and police experts.

    Either way, Martinez comes across as an ineffective (at best) attorney.

  15. My next thought at 1:05 am (EST):

    The prosecution is required to keep a “chain of custody” of all evidence and that includes the computer.

    If Florez checks out the computer from Evidence Dept to let the prior defense attys and their investigator examine it, then Flores should have made the purpose of the “check out” clear in the record at the Evidence Dept. And the check out time and date should be in that record.

    We know Flores and Martinez take the computer from Evidence Dept (at a specific time) to a conference room (at a specific time) so that the prior defense can examine (at a specific time). According to the prior defense atty, Martinez and Flores hang out in the room while the defense is examining. The prior defense atty said that the defense was not there very long and certainly they were gone by 5:00 pm. So, I am curious (and I am sure you guys know) what time did Flores return the computer to the Evidence Dept? There should again be a time stamp. Did Flores have enough time to do something to the computer between when the defense relinquished custody back to the state and when Flores returned custody back to the Evidence. My guess is *yes.*

    Regardless, the “chain of custody” requires Martinez to show the exact time that the computer was handed to the defense and the exact time the computer was given back to the state. Each hand-off was an important part of the chain of custody and, therefore, necessary to ensure the integrity of the evidence.

  16. Okay – I am trying to get to bed and mom reminded me of what else I thought about — Good ole Juan best be careful. 😉 If it turns out that he was around when the computer was tampered with (either by hahaha the prior defense or more likely the state) then Jaunie becomes a *witness* in the case. And if an atty becomes a witness then they have to recuse themselves and get off the case.

    That factoid is why most decent attys hire investigators and they do not personally inject themselves in the investigation. Becoming a witness in your case is a sign of a rookie (or terribly arrogant) attorney.

    • Cheryl,

      You are SPOT ON to everything that you posted above and in a very EXCELLENT manner, I might add!!!

      It is as simple as this: MARTINEZ AND FLORES ARE BUSTED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! NO TURNING BACK!!!

      Like Ray Charles sings in his song: “BUSTED”!!! LOL!!! 🙂 🙂 🙂 That”s MARTINEZ & FLORES!!!

      • OMG Maja, Thank you so much for that song!!! What a wonderful Theme song for the FROG!!!! Perfect! I can just see him all alone on his Lily Pad with his head in his hands wishing he had been a better Frog to his “public”! HAHAHA Frog!! Your BUSTED!!!

  17. I suppose juan didn’t believe the e-mails should
    be read in the first trial because they didn’t exist,
    He’s such a lying “pathetic dipshit”
    Using Jeff’s description. : )

  18. Human Quotes ‏@wordsofhumans 9m9 minutes ago

    “Great changes may not happen right away, but with effort even the difficult may become easy.” – Bill Blackman

    YES, even the DIFFICULT may become EASY, like getting our JODI FREE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


    FREE JODI ANN ARIAS, NOW, AZ!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    ♥ (((((JODI))))) ♥

    &hearts (((((TEAM JODI))))) ♥

  19. juan say’s IF the child porn was deleted, the first defense attorneys MUST have deleted it.
    Oh, how very stupid.
    He’s saying the cookies are all of the cookie jar, BUT his sister took them. (wink)
    Oh, yeah we get it dipshit, of course they were deleted and let’s just have Schaffer and Parsyke
    sue dipship’s ass.
    Those are pretty serious accusations and I’m sure they don’t mind, what dipshit did and blaming it on.
    them. Hopefully this mess that they created, Jodi will go home and there will be many others going to prison.
    How stupid does he think everyone is?
    He’s not saying he knows they weren’t deleted and besides who had the computer first since travis’s death.
    Did he say he was there when they checked the computer?
    He’s so full of shit.

    • Aly,

      You got that right, ‘he’s so full of shit”!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! He AIN’T getting out of the damage he has done – NO WAY, NO HOW!!!! The SOONER he faces it, the sooner he can start looking for a job!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! LOL!!!

    • Aly, you are so right! He is up to his nose in shit! The only thing that will save him is if he resigns right away! The more he talks the more he digs his own grave!

      (((Aly))) ♥

    • I agree! IF it happened, they did it>>>>> points fingers. Well, YOU sir frog are in charge of this case, period. I am infuriated with these latest shenanigans and outright lies from this pissant frog.
      His motion in limine is filled with contradictions.
      Day 6, Video 2 -48:00 Menendez states Travis’ laptop was found in his office, in sleep mode.
      same video 1:10:15- Menendez states he didnt see any signs of virus on computer.
      This testimony directly contradicts sir frog’s Motion in Lemon, Lemon because its extremely defective.

  20. And to a lot of people that will accuse me of being harsh to the alexander family, I’ve lost all my sympathy towards them since:

    1. They went from being victims to being perpetrators when they decided to aggressively pursue the death penalty at any cost.

    2. When they screamed ‘LIAR’ about Jodi. Just because Jodi lied to the police, does not mean her credibility is gone forever. Everyone has lied at some point in their lives, and if someone says they have never lied then that is the biggest lie of all. Just ask the alexander family. They’ve lied to police and impersonated each other for lesser crimes; so how can anyone -especially them -hold it against Jodi for lying about stabbing her boyfriend in self defense? Can you imagine going through something that horrible and feeling so ashamed that you can’t be forthcoming? If people can’t be expected to be forthcoming about lesser drug charges how can we expect people to tell the truth if they killed someone – in self defense no less?

    The hypocrisy and double standard is staggering, is it not?

    I can’t imagine ANY person eager to tell police “Why yes, in fact I did kill someone” when they know the rest of the tawdry details will be held against them. It doesn’t seem that people want to punish Jodi just for stabbing Travis to death in self defense. They also want to punish her for being an attractive woman with an active sex life, not leaving her abuser, having sex with a man she loves…. They’re not seeking “justice for Travis” because they really believe she planned and did all this. They’re seeking institutional punishment of abuse victims that don’t lay down and die when their abuser says so. That’s not justice, that’s oppression.


    • No way Pandora,
      Not too harsh at all.
      Look how harsh they’ve been to Jodi. The way they make fun of her, talk about
      Jodi lying when everyone of them are LYING, making up shit just to have a tabloid show.
      Dr. Drew???
      He should never be called Dr again after defending pedophiles.
      Same with the other no good so called doctors and lawyers. Everyone of them have
      protected the pedophiles and ignored anything that Jodi said, or laughed and called her
      a liar.
      Like you said the hypocricy is staggering and it just pisses me off that idiots that don’t think for themselves believe anything these so called idiots on HLN and CNN say.

      • Let’s add ABC, NBC, CBS..and all the others.
        I’m appalled that well educated intelligent people such as in my family can here something on the news and that’s the truth and I’m the crazy one.

        • Cindy, Unfortunately many people would rather say that they “know” something, or that they have “heard” (some expert say) something about something, rather than say that they “thought” about something. They might, for example, cite a study and then opt out of any real discourse.

          I don’t know why that is, except that it’s probably about image and not wanting to SEEM to be out of the loop, uninformed, or worse – possibly “out in left field”. And people worry that their opinions aren’t worth much besides. They haven’t been taught how to politely put their point of view on the table, so they simply parrot what they’ve heard. By passing on information instead of truly engaging, they don’t have to take responsibility for the representations of others, do they?

          Of all the retorts people fear, “You don’t know what’s going on!” is probably one of the biggest!
          So as a defense against that potentially mortifying situation, people love to quote authorities. Some individuals, I find, are fond of making clever quips for the same reason. I’ve learned to stay away from people who (habitually) quip, even if they’re funny, because I’ve noticed that especially the trenchant quips of a personal nature about specific persons usually don’t contain much depth. Where there is no circumspection there can be no “big picture” but that’s, more often than not, all we get from TV news. It has never been enough, and it’s getting worse.

          I think the song Bob Dylan wrote with the chorus, “And you know something is happening but you don’t know what it is. Do you, Mr. Jones?” educated me a bit as to how people form their opinions. Pretty sure its title is, “Ballad of the Thin Man”. You know it, I’m certain! Maybe put that one on next time someone gives you a hard time about Jodi.

    • Excellent post,gf ♥

      Kermit is the puppet master, he organized this she’s-a-liar show. It proved to be very convenient to him that Jodi came up with the intruders’ story, because he had solid foundation to build the evil Jodi persona he needed to create in order to convince the Jury that this was indeed a DP case. As for the lynch mob, it is HLN’s brainchild and I am appaled to see our society is full of brain-dead people.

      HLN holds the title of the Ultimate Lynch Instigator while Kermit can boastfully claim the title of the most Wicked Holy Inquisitor!

  21. Yeah,
    Maja, he might as well own up to mama he WAS the one that all of the cookies.
    How can someone be such an asshole that they blame someone for something that they did?
    I’ll never understand how the dipshit sleeps.
    Are his groopies still hanging all over him, now they know he’s trying to protect a pedophile sicko?
    Has anyone even heard nancy fartface say she would be fine and a wonderful man around her twins.
    God, I feel so sorry for them.

  22. I never noticed how much Sister 🙄 looks so much like Travis in a dress. Wish they would stop interviewing her! 🙄 🙄 🙄 I pray she doesn’t have the same personality that he had. . .but I’m afraid they all have been blessed with that dysfunctional gene. Sad.

    • Omg, I was restraining myself soooooooooooo hard from NOT writing the exact same thing but you beat me R!
      She looks so much like him I wanted to slap the smirk off her face!

  23. I can recall saying this well over a year ago.

    The ones who yell the loudest are the ones who have the most to hide…
    We had the same conversation last year about the Cashes their boys and uncle Travis. Needless to say it’s only speculation on our part. The next few weeks will tell the story.. let’s keep a eye open how certain people react to all of this.
    HLN is not going to touch any of this….For one thing they are all worried about their jobs.. Hmmm could they take another hit like they did about the CA verdict??

    • Justus, In the unlikely event he knew there was damage then Martinez was in the room when it happened and so he knew and never told the court. That makes no sense. I suppose Nurmi will have to call Martinez as a witness. The circus continues. “What a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive.”

        • Keep trying with that pullin’ wool over people’s eyes routine, They revive drives when they WANT to, now they say some human error makes the drive irreparable, not bloody likely

      • I took another look at him throwing the camera on the floor (like a spoiled child) and was once again amazed at how the Judge really did nothing. I find my self daydreaming about seeing Nurmi pick him by his little frog tie and give him a slap across his mouth. . .smack smack!! I can just see those frog legs dangling in mid-air! Oh well…….

  24. Here is a progression of Jodi’s lawyers that someone put together:

    History of Jodi Arias changing attorneys and motions by attorneys.

    First public defender at arraignment is James Hann.
    On 9/19/08 the public defender is Maria L Schaffer as primary.
    On 9/19/08 another public defender Judis R Andrews requested an extension of time to challenge the Grand Jury proceedings as they did not have a copy of the Grand Jury transcript.
    On 12/18/08 the primary public defender is Maria L Schaffer and the secondary public defender is Gregory T Parzych. Juan M Martinez is still the State’s Attorney.
    On 5/22/09 the defendant submitted a request for a change of counsel.
    Additional hearings and status meeting are held without further mention of the change of council.
    On 8/10/09 the Court received and reviewed a motion from both public defenders to withdraw from representing the defendant. The Court found sufficient cause to allow them to withdraw and noted that the trial was set for February 2, 2010 so there is adequate time for new counsel to be assigned without putting the trial date in jeopardy.
    On 8/18/09 Victoria E Washington and Kirk Nurmi appear as counsel along with Maria Schaffer and Gregory Parzych at an evidentiary hearing. Of interest, this hearing was to determine if there is probable cause to add an Aggravating Factor that will make this a death penalty case. This is where the prosecution presents to the Court that the victim was shot first, then repeatedly stabbed, then stabbed in the heart and finally had throat slit. Detective Flores represents to the court that he spoke with the Medical Examiner Dr. Horne and that this is the sequence of events Dr. Horne gave him.
    On 8/18/09 Victoria E Washington (secondary) and Kirk Nurmi (primary) are assigned as new defense counsel.
    On 2/25/11 Kirk Nurmi announced to the Court that he is leaving the Public Defender’s Office.
    On 3/8/2011 a hearing is held regarding Kirk Nurmi withdrawing as defense counsel. Very interesting minutes. Defendant strenuously objected to new counsel and possibility of pushing back trial date. The Court noted that “Once a case is set for trial, counsel may not withdraw except upon motion providing the name and address of another attorney, along with a statement from that attorney stating that he or she has been advised of the trial date and will be prepared for trial. Rule 6.3(c). No such motion or statement has been filed in this case. “ Mr. Nurmi was ordered to continue as the lead defense counsel at the standard public defender hourly rate paid to the primary defense counsel.
    On 3/9/2011 Mr. Nurmi submitted a formal motion to withdraw and as hearing on the motion was set for 3/21/2011.
    On 3/21/2011 Mr. Nurmi’s motion to withdraw as counsel is denied. At this hearing the State’s request to change the trial date due to a scheduling conflict with State Attorney Juan M Martinez was also denied.
    On 3/22/2011 another hearing is held with a second motion to withdraw by Mr. Nurmi. After the hearing on the previous day the Public Defender Office notified Mr. Nurmi that they were withdrawing the mitigation specialist, investigator, and paralegal because the Public Defender Office does not want Mr. Nurmi directing staff when he is no longer an employee. The Court ordered that Mr. Nurmi motion was denied and he was required to remain as the primary counsel and that the Public Defender Office must immediately reassign the personnel to the case.
    On 4/4/2011 Mr. Nurmi stated his objection to remaining on the case during a status hearing as he has left the Public Defender Office to go into private practice. The Court found that Mr. Nurmi has an ethical obligation to continue representing the defendant but would begin receiving a reasonable hourly rate of $225.00 as compensation to avoid any financial interests that would place Mr. Nurmi in conflict with his client.
    On 8/8/2011 defendant has a hearing on an oral motion she submitted to represent herself. At the end of the hearing this motion is granted but Kirk Nurmi and Victoria Washington are to remain as advisory counsel, with Victoria Washington as primary. The evidentiary hearing on the purported letters from Travis Alexander alleging he is a pedophile is held with Ms. Arias as defense counsel.
    On 8/9/2011 during a normal status conference both Victoria Washington and Kirk Nurmi address the Court as to the roles and responsibility of advisory counsel, and the primary counsel (which is now the defendant). The Court agrees and addresses this with Ms. Arias and asks her if she wishes to remain as her own counsel. She states she will continue as primary counsel.
    On 8/15/2011 the evidentiary hearing regarding the “pedophile” letters is completed. The Court orders that the letters are precluded and the defense withdraws them. At the end of this hearing Ms. Arias submits an oral request to withdraw as her own counsel and requests that Mr. Nurmi and Victoria Washington be reinstated as defense counsel. The Court orders Kirk Nurmi and Victoria Washington to represent the defendant in all further proceedings.
    On 9/9/2011 the trial date is reset to 2/21/2012 due to the primary defense witness needing to withdraw because of a health issue. A new witness will need to be retained and allowed time to prepare for the trial.
    On 12/22/2011 a hearing was held on a motion from the Public Defender Office to withdraw from this case due to a conflict of interest with Victoria Washington. Motion was allowed but the Public Defender Office will appoint a new second counsel, investigator, mitigation specialist, and paralegal. Victoria Washington is released as counsel.
    On 1/3/2012 a hearing was held on a motion to continue trial due to assignment of new counsel. New secondary counsel Jennifer L Willmott was assigned by the Public Defender Office. Defendant agreed and waived the applicable time limit. Trial date was changed to 10/17/2012.
    On 3/12/2012 a hearing was held on a defense motion to dismiss the Intent to Seek Death Penalty. Per the motion “At the status conference on January 3, 2012, the Court granted an oral motion by the defense to continue the trial due to the recent appointment of Ms. Willmott. Defendant Arias agreed to the continuance and the exclusion of time. The trial was reset to October 17, 2012. All time was excluded. See minute entry dated January 3, 2012. Defendant now asserts the State’s Notice of Intent to Seek the Death Penalty should be dismissed because, to assure she had effective representation by counsel, Defendant Arias had to agree to the continuance of the trial to October 17, 2012.” The Court denied this motion as the need for competent and prepared counsel trumps her right to a speedy trial. During this hearing the defense also submitted a motion to preclude the State from referring to Travis Alexander as a “victim” during the trial. Specifically, Defendant Arias argues she would be prejudiced by permitting the State and its witnesses to refer to Mr. Alexander as the victim since it is contrary to her claim of self defense. As such, she would be prejudiced. The State responds that the term “victim” is routinely used in criminal cases and does not imply the defendant committed the crime with which she has been charged. Further, the State argues Mr. Alexander was murdered and thus he was a “victim” of a criminal offense as defined by Arizona law. The Court finds the defendant failed to establish she will be prejudiced if Mr. Alexander is referred to as the “victim” in front of the jury during the trial. The State’s evidence will show Mr. Alexander was the victim of a homicide. Apparently, the defendant will argue she acted in self defense and was thus justified in her actions. Regardless, referring to Mr. Alexander as the “victim” during the trial will not unfairly prejudice the defendant.
    On 10/30/12 defense submits another request to continue the trial date (there was a previous motion that was granted moving the trial date from 10/17/2012 to 11/19/2012) because they want their own review of a computer hard drive. State objects to the continuation.
    On 11/19/2012 motion is granted changing trial date to 12/10/2012.
    On 12/4/2012 defense submits another motion for continuation. Motion is denied.
    Jury selection begins on 12/10/2012. Final jury is selected and sworn in 12/20/12. Opening statements scheduled to being 1/2/2012.

    • Rb: Thank you for your post. An awful lot of work went into this and I am, for one, grateful to you.
      This trial is now an historical record to be sure. Today we focus on one aspect of a retrial. We remain hopeful if (or,when) the Appellate Court gets the case they will review the whole history.
      Meanwhile, because we know in our heart of hearts that JAA is innocent, we try hard to key in on one part or another to find probable cause for appeals, sanctions – whatever – to set her free.
      While her present attorneys finally seem to have put their hearts into the case and are doing a good job, we have seen too much and heard too much misconduct by the persecutors to feel comfortable.
      There have been so many changes in her counsel over the many years this has been going on, understandably making JAA very disturbed and most probably hurting her chances from the ‘get go’.
      In any case, looking over your list the first time, but definitely not the last time, I already have questions that are in search of answers. Again, rb, thanks!

      • Carol, thanks, but as noted above, someone else put this together. I just copy and pasted it. But you’re right, somebody put quite a bit of effort into it.

    • Regarding Nurmi’s early motions to withdraw, and the court/state saying that defense had failed to provide information as to who might be ready to step in –

      Washington said that *she* had offered to step up as lead, and had a co-counsel who was up to speed and ready to step in as second chair, but the court did not approve of her choice of co-counsel.

      • Interesting Journee, you mentioned above (paraphrasing), that Washington offered to step up as lead & had a co-counsel ready to step in as second chair, but court did not approve of her choice of co-counsel.
        …It would be interesting to find out which judge did not approve & why? …Was the co-counsel black, or Catholic, or too successful?? …And, was it Martinez who did not approve, & did that judge just followed the prosecutor’s dominate lead.

      • They had a “mirror copy” at an earlier date, because Dworkin testified about it. But even that, as I recall, the defense didn’t receive until the first trial was already underway.

        There’s been something hinky about the state’s handling of the laptop from the get – surely the record of the state’s delays, the perjury of Melendez, etc. is going to undermine JM’s claims of no wrong-doing, his finger pointing at the DT.

        But it’ll probably take an honest judge to acknowledge it in open court. Unfortunately, there isn’t an honest judge currently associated with this case.

    • I don’t understand how the State could get away with referring to Travis as the “victim” when that is exactly what the jury was there to determine. (It infuriated me when the media did it as well.) How is that not prejudicial? It just pushed Jodi further into the position of having to prove her innocence, prove that Travis was NOT the victim even if he WAS the one who lost the fight.

      • Yes Justus, I was typing out my response about the same time as you were typing your response as to how ((prejudicial)) it is: …For the police or prosecutor or especially (the NAG’s in the media), or anyone to refer to any person (Travis) as a “victim” at any time before a verdict, or at any time before the entire case is determined, & before all appeals are done.
        …Many times I hear the media say that this case is not about blaming the victim, & they assume who the victim is, so that is ((an extreme media bias)) ….PREJUDICE on a GRAND SCALE.
        …I believe that this is a violation of Jodi’s civil rights just as black persons were more harshly judged, presumed guilty, (and sometimes executed) before the Civil Rights Act of 1964, just because they were black defendants & all the juries were not black or that blacks could be easily excluded from juries.

    • Thanks rb, that is a great collection & sequence of events & names in this case that I never saw all in one place before.
      …And, of course the very last sentence “Opening statements scheduled to begin 1/2/2012”. …Must surely be a simple typo & should be ((1/2/2013)) instead of 1/2/2012.

      …..And I certainly agree that the court should never have let Travis Alexander be described to the jury as a “victim” once Jodi claimed it was self defense, nor at any time. …The police should never refer to any person as a victim. …That is the police determining the entire case.
      …Of course that is usually how most all dead people are described initially by police & courts in this country. …But, I feel that the State or US Supreme Court should overturn her conviction because of this extreme prejudice.
      …I feel that the word “victim” should never be used in a court proceedings and that the Supreme Court should require that the words: ((( “alleged victim”))) should be an absolute requirement.
      …Same in the retrial, because the entire case is being re-evaluated by a new jury. …That new jury should not accept that Travis was the “victim” nor the “only victim”, in my opinion.

    • Just saw Greg Parzych on Dateline – second chair public defender in the Yavapai County Superior court trial of Steven DeMocker for the death of his wife on July 2, 2008, which ended in Jan of this year when DeMocker was sentenced to life in prison. It was DeMocker’s second trial though – his first trial ended in a mistrial when his well paid attorneys discovered he’d perpetrated a deception to turn suspicion away from himself (complicated story, but his attorneys had enthusiastically pursued this line of defense) and abruptly quit his case, mid-trial. By then his wife’s insurance money – which his daughters had used to fund his defense – was gone, so he had to go to PD for help for his second trial.

      So as of early this year, Parzych was still a public defender, but in Yavapai County rather than Maricopa County. So maybe he left Jodi’s case because he moved.

  25. I want to go back to the cashes….Ok I know that CH got into TA email and how he did it. Anyone can get into your email if they know your pass word…Still he was tampering with evidences…..Does anyone know right off hand when they took the stuff from TA’s home to the station and locked it up? We still have the 10th in question. Now I always put my computer in stand by when ever I leave it. Is that the same as putting it to sleep? I’m thinking it is because I have to log in to wake it up. One other thing is wouldn’t the battery be dead after all that time…unless it was plugged in.

    They wouldn’t just leave it on when they took it from the home…..

    • This is such bullshit. The claim that the defense team deleted the files is completely nonsensical. The defense would have no interest in doing that. That info would have potentially helped their client. No, the ONLY side that would have an interest in having those files disappear would be the prosecution. That’s blatantly obvious to me and should be to everybody else. You know, Kermit reminds me of the kid who was the neighborhood troublemaker but would always point the finger at somebody else to save his own ass. Usually though, at some point, that backfires. That kid ends up shifting the blame on the wrong person and gets his ass kicked. I’m hoping that this is that time.

      Oh, and Samantha, the only “virus” on your brother’s computer was your brother. I think maybe it’s time you just keep quiet.

  26. Yes, the word ‘victim’ is undeniably prejudicial. An objective, neutral term such as, “the deceased”, would be fairer and more accurate.
    That is the sort of term a self- defense case should demand. There is no valid reason that the judge denied the request to not use the word ‘victim’.

  27. Guys, I wish we could stop talking about Kermit so much! I had a dream about the movie Clueless and that Kermit was a mean teacher who ruined the movie. Lol

  28. We will continue our prayers for love, freedom, strength, justice and support for JODI ARIAS until Arizona sets her FREE!!! ♥

    ♥ The best revenge is massive success.”– Frank Sinatra 😀

  29. ADMIN can delete this story if they feel it is inapproprite since it is not really about Jodi. But it is about public outcry before a case is proven. Sheriff Joe is in the middle of it. And, the owners of Green Acres Dog Boarding are named Hughes (not Cash & Skye though). One of the caretakers is the son of Arizona US Senator, Jeff Flake. I don’t believe the New York Times has ever featured a story on Jodi – just short news alerts on the rare occasion.

    The New York Times ‏@nytimes 2h2 hours ago
    22 dogs died in an Arizona house in what has been called the “dog equivalent of the Jodi Arias trial”

    • Eh, I don’t want to rush to judgement, but 9×12 is a mighty small room for 28 dogs – unless they’re in stacked cage type units, and even that seems unlikely. And if they’re caged there’d be no way for a dog to have gotten to the AC cord.
      No way, no how, would I leave 28 dogs, who are passing acquaintances at best, alone in in a small room to sort out the sleeping arrangements for themselves. It only takes one yelp to cause a deadly pack fight.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


Latest from Latest News

Go to Top