site
stats
Menu

Jodi Arias Retrial, Day #29 reviewed

in Latest News by

.
If you missed yesterday’s ruling on denying the Motion to Dismiss, click the link below:

CLICK HERE TO READ THE RULING – (16 page PDF)

Pickles denying the motion was no big surprise really. Maybe one or two of the points stated by the defense were a little borderline. but the remainder were solid & factual.

However, the farcical manner in which Pickles brushed them aside was strange to say the very least… including (but not limited to) the child porn found on TA’s PC… the state’s proven evidence tampering… Kermit’s showboating antics… and even Flores’ wife seemingly given a free-pass to tweet sealed hearing information.

Here are all 17 key Motion points:

1. Potential mitigation witnesses will not testify.
2. Text messages were not timely disclosed.
3. Defendant’s rights were violated by the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office.
4. Inconsistent testimony was given by Detective Flores regarding the sequence of injuries sustained by the victim.
5. There was a delay in providing the defendant with the mirror image of the hard drive to the victim’s Compaq Presario computer created on June 11, 2008.
6. Social media postings by the case agent’s wife prejudiced the defendant.
7. Detective Flores allegedly commented or provided information to the press about the dismissal of a juror.
8. The Maricopa County Sheriff made harassing comments about the defendant to the media.
9. Detective Flores “awakened” the victim’s computer from sleep mode on June 10,2008 resulting in the destruction of potential evidence.
10. Evidence was possibly destroyed when the victim’s computer was accessed on June 19, 2009.
11. Prior attorneys for the defendant were ineffective.
12. Detective Melendez testified at trial and the penalty phase retrial that he found no pornography or viruses on the victim’s computer.
13. Comments by the prosecutor during a bench conference were insulting and unprofessional.
14. The prosecutor harassed a defense witness.
15. The prosecutor signed an autograph in front of the courthouse.
16. Reluctance of witnesses to testify at penalty phase retrial.
17. The cumulative effect of the prosecutorial misconduct resulted in an unfair trial.
.
The reality is, and as we all know, this was never a DP case to begin with… so the DP has never even been “on the table” to start with. The Addams family magically turned it into one based on their ability to effortlessly piss away several million dollars of AZ tax payers money. And right now — aside from their faux fund raising activities (which appear to have paid “big dividends”) — they are no further forward in their phoney attempt to get “Justice” for their dead & abusive pedophile black sheep. And they never will.

.
Fact. Not fiction.

There’s no trial today, Friday or Monday. The circus returns to town again Tuesday, Jan 20th @ 9-30 am PST.

In the meantime… WE ARE TEAM JODI - #WINNING!

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

Click the links below to read Jade’s latest posts:

The Great Mormon Porn Swindle

Michael Melendez – Perjury Exposed

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

Remember…

WE ARE TEAM JODI – AND WE WILL BE VICTORIOUS in our quest for JUSTICE FOR JODI.

Never question it.

Never doubt it.

Leave your thoughts & comments below…

SJ
Team Jodi #WINNING <<<

Click the banner below to read Jade’s post – “Justice Denied: Why The Jurors Got It Wrong & How The Facts Decimate The State’s Case Against Jodi Arias.”:

Read - Justice Denied - Why The Jurors Got It Wrong & How The Facts Decimate The State's Case Against Jodi Arias
If you would like to help Jodi by way of a financial donation to the JAA APPELLATE FUND, click the Team Jodi link below for further details. All donations via Justice4Jodi.com go directly to the fund for assisting with the legal fees associated with appealing Jodi’s wrongful conviction. Justice4Jodi.com 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!.

558 Comments

  1. Alright, alright, alright, now… settle down children.

    We all had a little spark of hope in our hearts that the judge would have seen the ‘light’ by now but deep down in our guts, we all knew that she would never rule for Jodi.

    Honestly? It’s not such a big thing. We just wanted this circus trial to be over with so we can move on to the important part: APPEALS and not waste more time with nonsense. Apparently, Arizona needs more money so they decided that they would continue with this charade and dig deeper in the tax-payers pockets. I guess citizens of Arizona like pissing their money away or they have been ‘fucked over’ by the state so many times that they have become numb. Any which way, it’s their money, they are entitled to giving it to the muggers of their State… I personally would raise hell but that’s just me. The citizens of Arizona are being taken for a ride and have landed in North Korea: who dares to speak up? Crickets? I thought so.

    So everyone… KEEP IT DOWN, we don’t want to wake up the Arizonians.

    Furthermore, Lady Justice is not available at the time: she’s getting her butt-hole waxed and has to focus on enduring the pain. She knows that she’s getting screwed and wants to be at her very best for her rapists.

    What does piss me off though is the conniving Judge: I have yet to see a coward of her rank. Even the lion in the Wizard of Oz had more balls than her. She sent everyone home before she announced her decision. I wonder why? She didn’t even have the gull to notify the public that she would be announcing her decision later on that day. How’s that for all you journalists? Why aren’t you protesting now? She just robbed you of a great headline… Well, that’s your problem, not mine. I’m guessing that she didn’t want anyone to see her when she was announcing the ruling: her eyes would have been mirroring dollar bills. How much did you settle for Pickles? I hope it’s enough to get you through the rest of your life because I’m guessing that after this trial your career is over.

    The unspeakable atrocities of judicial corruption, prosecutorial misconduct, perjury, destruction of evidence are all documented and the responsible parties will be held accountable when it’s time to.

    So people get up, dust off the dirt from your knees and get ready to rock and roll. This is far from over. Just a setback; a delay.

    Remember: one for all and all for one! WE ARE TEAM JODI AND WE ARE HERE FOR THE LONG HAUL.

    (((JUSTICE FOR JODI))) ♥ ♥ ♥

    • I agree that there have been horrible abuses and misconduct. But that just is not enough for the DT to be successful at trial or on appeal. I was very disappointed in KN’s motions because KN never connected the misconduct to the jury’s verdict. KN must specifically explain how the abuses and misconduct caused the jury guilty verdict *and* how the jury verdict would have been different had those abuses and misconduct not existed. KN simply did not do that.

      The prosecutorial misconduct portion would have been the ideal time to elicit testimony that tended to prove Jodi did not steal grandpa’s gun. KN could have also put on the wife who used social media and the defense witness that was bullied.

      I cringe at KN’s questioning of Jodi because whether the defense is self defense or domestic violence, the questioning should have started and built to the crescendo to prove that she had no other choice. KN made the killing sound clinical and unemotional.

      I continue to pray that Jodi gets a better advocate in the appellate process.

      • Thank you for explaining and bringing attention to those points.
        I agree with you.
        Nurmi is doing far better this time around, but better is not good enough when it is a matter of life and death.
        As a lawyer, he should have known to do what you pointed out.
        It is truly frightening how much a person’s life depends upon the precision of what is written in black and white.
        Even if it is the case that Nurmi understands the entire matter with all of its implications and ramifications, he is not proficient in being able to communicate subtleties and nuances. I have seen him make very poor word choices, and that is a real danger, because the right word is critical to getting across to the audience, the implications and ramifications.
        Nurmi is not artful enough.
        Martinez is crude and sophisticated but he knows the art of manipulating, ( and as a lawyer he needs to know), and Nurmi does not.
        When communicating to a jury, a lawyer needs to be able to have the ability to use and exploit words the way a poet would.

        • Amen Amy. And in Jodi’s case, Nurmi had it easy because he had the truth on his side. Nurmi would not need to manipulate or exaggerate at all. Nurmi could have and should have slowly and methodically taken the jury through the events that led to Jodi’s decision. Then he could have gone through the back story of her family and the old boyfriends. Norma is a horrible “story teller” and that translates to an ineffective trial attorney.

          It is very sad that we are almost two years since the guilt phase and Jodi’s story of that day *still* has not been told.

          Remember that Arizona State Bar Rule of Professional Responsibility (Rule 8) requires that attorneys (including judges) report attorney misconduct to the Arizona Disciplinary Commission. If the judge and attorneys fail to report JM, then they too are violating ethics and could be disciplined. It is like a military honor code for attorneys. I betcha JSS does not report JM. 😉

          • It alarms and upsets me that Nurmi did not do all that you described.
            Is it possible that the DT could write another motion, now or later, that addresses everything you pointed out, and effectively fixes what was lacking?
            Could they/ do they have to wait to / create a future motion and then incorporate all that you describe they needed to do?
            I have not even read the response to the motion because the whole situation depresses me, but I am shocked to find out that Nurmi did not link the motion to the jury’s verdict. The fundamental necessity of that should have been obvious to him. IT SCARES me that it wasn’t.
            I appreciate Nurmi’s effort, but Jodi’s life is on the line, and he must get it right.
            She tried many times to fire him and declared that he has an,”utter poverty of people skills,” and this is evident in the fact that he is an inadequate ‘story teller’. And I agree; that does make an ineffective lawyer.
            I presume that Nurmi has a duty as a lawyer to absolutely be knowledgeable and savy enough to be able to put together a motion that can ‘get the job done.’
            Certain areas might not be Nurmi’s forte, but it is unforgivable that he does not know what he must do, and then do it.
            If the DT is not able to rectify matters by attending to what you address, is Jodi’s appellate lawyer able to ‘go back’ and cover the same ground and ‘fix’ it?
            Is it possible for Jodi’s supporters to convey to Jodi and the DT the content of what Cheryl wrote?
            I imagine lawyers and judges are very reluctant to report misconduct.
            If they won’ t report misconduct to the Arizona Disciplinary Commision, are other people allowed to report it?

            • I hope KN tries to make the connection in the penalty phase and then renews the motion that just lost. He may have problems getting some testimony in because JM will object to relevance. (But, then again, every time JM mentioned “lying” or grandpa’s gun or doggie doors, KN should have made the “assumes facts not in evidence” objection).

              The appellate and higher courts will only see the “four corners of the record on appeal.” The AC may be familiar with JM’s antics. But on paper they will not see the bluster and intimidation. And they will also not see JA’s mannerisms and personality that make her a victim and not an aggressor. It is KN’s responsibility to make that record on appeal for the appellate attorneys.

              With respect to the porn. The record seems to show that JM intimidated Dworsky on cross and had him dummy up about the porn on the computer. But that porn issue was addressed by JM with Dworsky BEFORE the guilt phase of the trial. The porn was not a new issue – it may have been new that KN finally believed JA. :-/ If Dworsky was intimidated into not testifying about porn because of JM then that connection should be made. KN should have questioned Dworsky and made the connection for the record. And, if KN screwed up by not focusing on that issue on the guilt phase because he just did not believe his own client, then KN needs to man up and take HIS punishment. Jodi should not suffer because her attorney thought she lied.

              My sense is that KN thought JA was lying about the porn and that he did not believe her either. So KN told Dworsky to focus on the time line and not the porn. That sickens me. Law school 101 teaches that in order to be an effective defense attorney you MUST show the jury that you like the defendant. The defense attorney is the thread that connects the jury to the defendant. The jury figures that KN knows JA the best and if he likes her and would have her over for dinner after the verdict then she must be okay. KN told the jury that he did not even like JA. :-O That was inexcusable.

              My heart breaks for JA. Can you imagine being a domestic violence victim who has struggled for acceptance and approval and have the man who is supposed to be your advocate say to the jury “9 days out of 10 I do not like Jodi”?

              Anyone can send complaints to the state bars about judges and attorneys. It is a trial open to the public.

              • My recollection is that Nurmi did object to the gun, doggie doors, stalking, etc. but was overruled, and Lonnie was Jen’s witness. Although Nurmi has his faults like us all, he created the best record possible for Jodi, and in this case, with all the lying and corruption, that is most valuable to her for appeals.

                I can’t understand how the average American can know about this corruption in their legal system and turn a blind eye to it. 1.5 million Americans in prison, and a fair number of them didn’t get a fair trial. 🙄

              • That is when I started really paying close attention to this case. The Frog saying Jodi was the most hated woman in America. I thought OH Heck NO! That next remark from KN sealed it for me, I knew I would do anything I possibly could to help Jodi right then and there. I was truly sick over that and still am! I pray for the day that Flores and Martinez are put in their places of doom and gloom. I feel KN realizes he was very wrong to have made that statement. I have forgiven him for that and knowing how Jodi is I’m positive she has too.
                Bring on the shackles for all of the criminals and FREE JODI ARIAS!!!!!

    • Did anyone inquire to the reason why none of the friends of Travis who accessed the crime scene before police did hadn’t seen the piece of rope on the stairs which is obviously darker in color than the stairs carpeting itself? It’s obvious with Travis being a clean freak that one of them would have seen it and picked it up not knowing that Travis was already dead and still thinking that he was alive. Or did they leave it on purpose knowing that Travis was already dead? Marie Hall says that she was concerned for Travis but did not arrive to check on him until June 9th and late in the evening at that.

      Why didn’t she arrive early in the day to check on him? Why is Marie Hall was so concerned that she didn’t come over to Travis house earlier in the week to see if he was okay when she had left so many phone messages for him that he did not return?

    • Another issue is that Clancy Talbot on a HLN interview mentioned that she knew Jodi’s entire schedule meaning that Clancy was actually stalking and gathering detailed information on Jodi’s activities. Why though? Tanisha Sorenson also has an extensive criminal record that includes burglary. I would have to think that Clancy was stalking Jodi to gain information about Jodi and her grandparents movements so that when both are away from the home Tanisha would be able to break into the home to steal items of value. The item of value being the gun stolen. Possibly taken in response to the allegations to Jodi stealing a ring that Travis was going to give someone else. The gun taken to hold leverage above Jodi in order to control her.

      What needs to be know is where is Tanisha and Clancy on May 8th, 2008 and where is Jodi and the grandparents?

    • “Justice is often rendered impotence by the art of falsehood. Conceit & Sophistry – Perfected by Lawyers & Politicians. Dr. T.P.Chia.

  2. I am disappointed but not surprised at Judge s decision.

    1. It was proven that computer was tampered with. Whether it was on purpose or bumbling, doesn t
    matter. The computer information has no value in this trial, it is tainted.It was proven in the last
    trial that witnesses were intimidated, that is why there were no witnesses in penalty phase for jodie.

    When a prosecutor stands on the court house steps and signs an autograph without sanctions from
    the court, that is an action that should be taken seriously by the court and was not.

    The state of Az. is playing fast and loose with Jodie and with taxpayer money. That is a shame.

  3. What did I tell you? This judge is useless. I hope they will get a new judge for the appeals process, I think it will come to that because its hard to imagine that the jury will sentence her to death after this. I have a feeling that a few members of the jury are as disappointed as we are.

      • Ah, I see. I guess I haven’t been following closely enough. There are so many twists and turns in this mess that its hard to keep up with when the jury are present and when they aren’t.

        • EP, it was trial yesterday and the jury was present, hearing Smith’s and Florinna’s testimony. I agree, that hopefully, that some of the jury should be as appalled as we are of the crap going on between Lying Flores and Lying Juan and Lying Melendez.

          • We can only hope, although I’ve heard of some members of juries in other trials coercing and bullying other members who disagreed with them. One example is the Michael Jackson molestation trial of 2005. A few jurors spoke out more recently about how they were confident he was guilty shortly before the verdict. However, they could barely voice this because they claim the other members were controlling, forceful and very biased. I think this is what led to the ‘not guilty’ verdict in the end. Its quite disturbing that they couldn’t go with what they truly thought and felt — because of a few trolls breathing down their necks.

      • Exactly why I wouldn’t be on a jury. Plus I would let them KNOW why I wouldn’t be on one.
        People get up there, perjure themselves and that’s OK?
        Oh, hell no!
        It’s OK for those to lie to the jurors or NOT tell them th truth, but watch out for juror misconduct.
        WHICH, they don’t even care about that.
        SICK!

        • I so agree with you, Aly! How hypocritical, isn’t it? There’s a tangled underlying network of corruption yet they stick to appearances so to speak by asking the jurors to raise hands, so as to check if they have been misbehaving. Grrrr! 🙄

          • What would she do if they all raised their hands? lol
            I would love it.
            Sounds like she’s a first grade teacher.
            Raise your hands?????

  4. So at the end of this trial in March as SJ predicts, the jury will either be deadlock and test another mistrial or the will vote against the DP. So let the tally keep adding up.

    In the end after all the witnesses are done the world will know what a sick perverse person Travis really was. So to you the Alexander’s siblings, you are the ones who are dragging your brothers name through the mud. Your brother died because of his own behavior. Jodi never wanted any of his “secrets” to come out. People will remember this trial decades from now, but it will not be remembered as Jodi killing Travis….. It will be that sick perverse pedophile that someone killed.

    • Awesome comment Cindy!

      This is what I posted last September. The same still applies:

      “Getting back to Jodi’s penalty phase circus, which comes back to town a couple of weeks from now — this is basically how I see things playing out over the foreseeable future:

      After several weeks of the new AZ retrial debacle… the jurors, based on evidence presented (or rather LACK of evidence as we had the first time around) will ultimately be split. No way will there be a unanimous DP verdict. Ain’t gonna happen. After all, how can a group of people — however clueless they might be — decide that someone should be killed because they defended themselves against an animal? (Answers on a postcard, please).

      That will leave the final decision to Kermit’s BFF, Judge Pickles… who after several weeks (or even months) of pondering (in between her hair salon appointments & typically high-scoring golf games), will ultimately decide on L-W-O-P or some similar half-assed derivative.

      Once again the DP won’t (politically) be an option, due the knock-on effect of it more than doubling the current $XX millions AZ has already pissed away on the trial. That of course also being the very same self-defense trial that should never have happened in the first place.

      Following on from that — be it later this year or the early part of 2015 — Jodi’s appeals process can finally begin. Then this whole fiasco can finally be exposed for what it really is.

      Taking all of that into account, we (cumulatively) have no need to get stressed out or worried over the next 6 months or so. It’s just gonna be a waiting game… until… one day in the future… maybe even in the distant future… justice prevails for Jodi.”

      SJ
      Team Jodi #WINNING < << http://jodiariasisinnocent.com/oscar-pistorious-my-thoughts-on-the-retrial-circus-justice-for-jodi-arias

      • Thanks SJ. You know karma is coming around…I am happy that for Jodi’s sake Bryan has vindicated Jodi. He proved that Jodi did not lie about the porn.

        More to come out I’m sure….way to go siblings…. How are you going to explain this to your children??

        God bless Jodi and her family.

  5. Sad, disgusted BUT NOT DEFEATED!!!!! Shame of you, Sherry Stephens,
    as far as I’m concerned you should never be called Judge of anything not
    even a pie eating contest. Turn in your robe to Goodwill ASAP.

    • ((((R.Love)))). JSS is done after this trial is over. I have a gut feeling that this was not only her ruling. Even a uneducated person as myself (didn’t go to college so I don’t know nothing) can see how corrupt this was from the beginning!! It was not just the draw of the straw that they put JSS on the bench for this case. No way, no how!!!!!!

      • Yea, why in h*ll would Arizona put a Judge with absolutely NO experience in a DP case on one of the highest profile cases in the country. The whole thing has been rotten from day one.

        • When Arizona knew they didn’t have enough death- penalty qualified judges, the right thing to do would have been to take the death penalty off the table.

        • One of the things that still has me dunbfounded. A Judge who has never ever presided over a death pentalty case was appointed… Go figure! If you’re not qualified or if you’re inexperienced, how on Earth are you supposed to be a good Judge??? And of course, same goes for Kirk Nurmi.

            • Journee you really do bring up a good point.
              I’m not sure how this all works. Perhaps they just thought it was a slam dunk case. I’m sure they are keeping a eye on her and giving her advice.

          • I wonder if JSS’s lack of experience, (and here it is not that it was her first death penalty case via means of simply being a natural progession in her career __ but was a role thrust upon her when Arizona forced her to undergo a ‘crash- course’ in order to be death- penalty certified, ____ I wonder if this fact can be cited in appeals?

        • Hey Cindy, your not alone 🙂 . We are in the same club. I chalk it up to young and dumb, what’s your excuse? LOL Although, after reading the tweeters yesterday I would much rather have my common sense than what they displayed. 🙄

            • CC that is why I made that comment. The frog was trying so hard to discredit him because he didn’t finish College. I’m sure our Mr. Smith has a very impressive resume. I find it intriguing that his identity is being kept secret. I don’t think it has anything to do with fear either.

              • And Martinez insists one way the defense can allow their witnesses to remain anonymous, is by using a fake name, and then the very first thing Martinez does in court is try to bully John Smith into giving his real name.
                And if it turns out that TA’s family actually know the people who are witnesses, how can their identity possibly be protected? Maybe the witnesses don’ t want to be known by TA’s family?
                [ Maybe I am wrong; I am just thinking.]

                • No Amy, I think your right (as usual). 🙂 I understand why they do not want their names released to the public just look at what these people have done to anyone that is for Jodi. Scary Bunch.

                • NO Amy you are so very right!!! They are better not to testify. The problem is that if the do a video per JM he can throw their testimony out because he was not able to cross. Just like he will do if Jodi does not take the stand again. The DT can not all of a studded perduce these witnesses after makeing a record of this for mitigation. I’m just throwing this out here I would not be surprised if after Dr. G and Bryan are on the stand if the DT rest. They can then make a record of none effect of counsel. (My wording might be right but you all get my drift).

            • It’s interesting that Juan attacked “John Smith” about not having a degree when his very own Mr. Smith, when asked about his credentials, tells us that he’s “always built his own computers”. (WTF? Hardware and software are two very different animals.) I didn’t hear one word about any college education or degrees.

          • Umm I don’t know I have a memory problem..

            I was the middle of 7 kids and it was in the middle of the war. I guess I just wanted the American dream… Do I regret now? Yes but it does not define me as a person. You are right doesn’t look like some of the posters are a good case for further education…

            Look at our Jodi…she could run circles around most of them.

            • Cindy, I too regret not finishing college but I was wanting to get married and have a family more! Oh my. Thanks to all of my life learning experiences, I have discovered it is very important for our children to finish their education, arm themselves with every means possible! I truly believe a great education is great ammo for life this day and time. I have made sure my kids have continued their educations. . .you know “Don’t do what I did but Do Better!” We can never improve ourselves enough. IMO. I love you Cindy!♥
              I agree Our Jodi is Brilliant, Loving and the most thoughtful person I have ever seen!
              Jodi doesn’t deserve what has happened to her. . .it could have happened to any of us.

      • Never underestimate your knowledge because you never went to college. The best school in the world is life itself.

        Just take a look at Pickles and Frog… they spend half their lives in universities studying and the outcome? Pickles is clueless at her job and Frog only wins by cheating! Ha!

        Jodi hasn’t finished high school but she’s a brilliant, talented woman with a high IQ.

        Jose Baez almost never went to college and university… wasn’t really fond of it. Failed the Bar at least one time and look at him: one of the best lawyers USA has to offer!

        Have a look at the following link. “Hall of Fame” of school dropouts. You’ll be surprised to know that the most successful, brilliant people didn’t even make it out of high school! http://www.collegedropoutshalloffame.com/

        • If I’m not mistaken, Jodi completed high school requirements in jail. Abraham Lincoln never went to law school. He was self taught, a fact of which a certain prosecutor in AZ is no doubt aware.

        • Pandora, thank you. That was very interesting! Most striking entry: Gerard Depardieu – dropped out of elementary school. Child actor? I don’t know. I believe that people should attend college if at all possible, unless there are other pressing obligations or awesome opportunities that cannot wait. Otherwise, finish at least one semester/quarter. If a person really wants to bail on getting a degree after having given it the old “college try”, they should do it and not look back.

            • To address the point about trades, that is exactly why I said a person should leave college if they do not feel a degree would be of (practical) use to them. If a person feels they are miserably spinning their wheels in an academic setting, by all means, they should ditch it, especially if they can envision success in operating their own business and expanding it to train others. But I know for a fact that many people pursue trades early in life without ever having attended college and only realize their capacity for and interest in academic work much later, when their opportunities may have somewhat narrowed.

              IMO (to clarify it) college study should involve the pursuit of knowledge for the sake of learning, not only in order to learn a trade. If a person wants to learn a trade, there are many technical schools and junior colleges that offer programs in a two-year timeline. (Even art, drama, music and film schools could be considered trade schools by a broad definition.) But a person can do themselves a disservice if they approach college work with the idea that their only objective is to focus on one career goal to the exclusion of other potentially enriching coursework – hence the breadth requirements for the first couple of years that many people complain about, but that do broaden a person’s general knowledge. Is possession of general knowledge not a confidence builder? I say, “heck, yes!” And, I do NOT feel a person should have to declare a major right away or even after one single year of study, because being forced to do that is often what drives people away from institutions of “higher learning”. Students are in many cases not sure what they want to focus on at the age of twenty, so they stop taking any courses at all, rather than to rack up (costly) units in a specific field they are unsure about.

              Of course, an individual can pursue a subject to their heart’s content outside of a curriculum. Nevertheless I strongly feel that the idea of pursuing knowledge for the pure enjoyment of learning, i.e. “broadening one’s horizons” should be encouraged because of the positive impact that it has on one’s ability to understand other cultures and religions through the humanities and language study, the way it exposes a person to new developments in science, and how it can demonstrate the value of art and music through hands-on work or history courses. It has been said that it is not important how many books a person reads, rather is it better to find out which ones offer the most and to read those. The 101 courses simply open doors to testing the waters with lots of guidance. They should not be agonized over, and even having a degree is not an end-all-be-all situation; there is no bus that pulls up to the university gates and sweeps a graduate off to Wall Street, Hollywood, Silicon Valley, or to research work at the Mayo Clinic. And there is no age in a person’s life when it is too late to be in a college setting.

              President Obama said a few weeks ago that he would like to see a way to make the first two years of (junior) college free and I think that is a good idea. He gave as a reason that a program like that (with some federal funding) can help Americans stay competitive with the rest of the world. Seems to me that Americans have been falling behind intellectually for quite some time, especially in the area critical thinking.

              Getting back to the original topic, some people leave high school early because they are ready for college and then leave college early because they are ready to work. This occurs often with young computer scientists. The most important thing in life IMO is to keep an open mind, to nurture one’s curiosity so as not to become an unwitting tool of dogma and prejudice. College work can be of assistance in this regard because of the face-to-face exposure it provides to varied opinions and modes of thought. On the other hand, we tend to find the type of work we like to do just by trial and error.

      • You put your self down and underestimate yourself too much, Cindy.
        Many of the most intelligent and accomplished people have never gone to college.
        College allows people to get a certain amount of information. College is by no means synonymous with wisdom.
        Many people are self- taught in different fields and know far more than their counterparts who attended college.
        College has its value, but, ultimately it is only a tool, and consists of a time- limited endeavor wherein something particular is gained __ no more, no less.
        There are many people with PHD’s who truly are quite ignorant in general.
        College is run as big business, and it is in the interest of that business to attemp to sell people the notion that college determines their degree of intelligence and validity. None of that is true.

        People that consider it to be true, do so because they want to believe it is true, for the sake of their ego, and the profit- driven education system tries to capitalize on that.
        Civilization existed for thousands of years without formal education institutions, and still, an enormous amount was accomplished in this world.
        Whenever I use the term ‘educated,’ I mean it in a general way. I consider being self- taught to mean educated also, and self- taught is often far superior.
        And like Pandora says, the best school is life itself.
        There are many college- educated people who are very complacent in their knowledge, and they are unable to see beyond their pre- conceived ideas and prejudices.

        • Oh Amy thanks but I wasn’t putting myself down at all. It was a very sarcastic remark in reference to JM trying to discredit Mr. Smiths knowledge because he didn’t finish college.
          We all did enjoy your post there was so much truth in it. Two of my brothers went to graduate school and neither one of them has a lick of common sense. My older son never went to college but is a Master Plumber and has his own company and made $250,000 last year and he doesn’t have student loans hanging over his head. I personally have never judged a person on how much schooling or money they have. It’s all about how they live their lives and treat others.
          Don’t get me wrong I’m still trying to get my younger son back in school, he was prelaw.
          I think his brother talked him out of…grrrrrrr.

          • You don’t have a college degree, do you? shouts Martinez to Kelly

            Steve Jobs (Apple) didn’t have a degree when he started Apple, Mark Zuckerberg (Facebook ) dropped out before getting a degree, Arash Ferdozi Co-founder of Dropbox dropped out of college before getting a degree, the list is endless with computer start-up entrepreneurs not having degrees yet. I have a great friend in my community who left school at 14 & now runs a repair computer company, he fixed mine many’s a time. I have some knowledge of computers myself, i.e fixing problems & taking them apart (to put in new memory & parts) & putting them back together again.

            As for Autopsy, it is a good programme (even if free) many of the free programs, antivirus, spyware, anti malware, are as good as the paid up ones. There is a newish programme called “Recuva” that is just brilliant at searching for deleted files, on computer. It come from the stable of the company who have C-cleaner a brilliant cleaner to use. The company is called Piriform. Recuva would surely find the porn hidden on T.A’s computer, for sure.

            Now the thing with T.A’s computer that bugs me is that he had so many antivirus programs on his computer, with the result, if he had numerous ones on his computer, none of them would work. Your only supposed to have one anti virus programme on your computer having more than that they clash and nothing works. The are so many fake anti virus programmes in Internet land that one has to be very careful of. I have all free software on my computer & never had a problem, I have Avast Antivirus (free) I have Spyware Blaster (free) this software keep spyware from your computer…even before it’s come through the door, something like a (Bouncer) I have Comodo Firewall which is another very important defence on a computer. It’s like a wall between you an d the baddies & this particular program is brilliant at being that “Wall”. And I have (Malware Malbytes) anti-malware programme, another one I would highly recommend. With these 4, I never have a problem, (there’s one thing though) being free you have to manually update every week otherwise they again will be of little value. But it only take a few minutes & then you can feel totally secure. Not making sure your software is updated even paid one is not very intelligent, because you might as well open the “Gates”. Also, updating Windows, again absolutely essential.

            I used to have Spybot (search & destroy) it’s a very good programme at what it does, but it hunts down Malware & Spyware (Trojans, Pups, Botware, Scareware,etc., but it doesn’t delete files, porn or otherwise unless there’s a virus, spyware, etc. attached to same. So John Smith was right about what he said, & I bet if he ran “Recuva” he would find all the porn/images/video, and if it was a case it had already been written over & unrecoverable, it would still give him file name, etc. that is still there on that computer. That’s if Flores didn’t go into it again & wipe the drive clean, the “Plonker”.

            PS. Martinez was investigated three time before this trial for iffy goings on , so I am sure the powers to be (Senior Judges) that were questioning his behaviour are keeping an eye out for all the times during this trial he has made an ass of the law. Their book must be now filled with misdemeanour’s & it’s high time they got his size so as to fit him into an orange suit…the same for Flores & Shelly, mind. That would be a good catch to get & then they could throw away the key!

            • I am saving this because you have provided me with so much information about this topic that I know so little about. I go to the store and buy Norton and hope for the best. I am even guilty of not keeping it updated, but this testimony and your post have taught me a lot. Thank you! 😀

              • Good to hear, Canada Carol, I may have helped you with my piece, if you’re going to buy Norton in a store…then once you have put it on your computer you will be safe…& you won’t have to update it yourself…for it will automatically do that for you, seeing its a paid for version. (But if you’re a bit unsure of the setting up process, then get someone to set it up for you, even the shop, just to be sure it’s set up right.)

                Norton a few years ago was beginning to get a bad name because it was bloated & was hard for one to follow with setting up. But it has since improved & is now back up there with the best of them in the top 5. The Spybot I use has many clones on the internet that are fake & will try to take your computer over by downloading themselves on your computer with out you knowing it, once they take the control from you, they then try to make you pay for them to take it off.

                Never pay anyone, if you see something is wrong with your computer, then disconnect your modem as quickly as you can, so that they are cut off internet-wise. Then close your browser & run Malwarebytes (Anti Malware) & follow instructions) if you don’t have the programme? Get it off this site “File Hippo” (they are trustworthy & will only give genuine products/software out. Malwarebytes is free for home use. Then also do a scan with Norton or whatever anti-virus your computer has.

                Happy Computing.

                • Thank you again for info on Norton. I’m happy that I’m safe with it, because I’m sure I would get myself in a mess if I tried doing what you do. I loaded it myself, but will now make sure to update. I will check to see if I can change a setting.

                  😀

            • jojnjo, Thank you so much for all this info! BTW, welcome to our safe haven! Hope you stick around! We need people like you that speak out and explain stuff! 😉

      • Excellent parenthetical double-negative, Cindy! [Your 7:39am comment.] Perfect statement on the double-teaming nonsense we saw yesterday with Flora and Fauna. Who’s on first? I dunno, haven’t heard his voice in years…..

  6. Two dignity-lite women:
    Jen’s Trial Diaries ‏@TrialDiariesJ 52m52 minutes ago
    Juror #3 will be with us tonight for an hour, Jan 15th at 8pm EST discussing the #jodiarias testimony! Come hang! http://www.TrialTalkLive.com
    0 replies 8 retweets 27 favorites

  7. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/11/21/counties-that-send-the-mo_n_4317245.html

    Excerpts from above article. Maricopa County AZ and Riverside County CA share this shame.

    Last month, an investigative series by the Arizona Republic found that of the 42 cases in which an Arizona convict sentenced to death alleged prosecutorial misconduct, 33 occurred in Maricopa County. The series include one installment devoted solely to former Maricopa County prosecutor Juan Martinez, who sent eight people to death row, and in 1999 was named the state’s “prosecutor of the year.” Martinez has since been cited for misconduct by Arizona court’s three times in the last year.

    Current Maricopa County Attorney Bill Montgomery refused to release any prosecutor personnel files for the Arizona Republic investigation, even of prosecutors no longer on the job. To do so, he said, wouldn’t be in “the best interests of justice.”

    Among the other counties with prolific histories of sending people to death row . . .

    — Riverside County, California, recently had to review more than 3,000 cases after a defense attorney that prosecutors hadn’t disclosed that a crime lab technician had admitted to fraud, forgery, and perjury.

    • Am I reading that right? Does that say FORMER Maricopa County prosecutor Juan Martinez?

      Is THAT why he’s sitting second chair, next to his babysitter? Because he’s NOT a prosecutor anymore and is only being permitted to finish out his cases?

    • Reading this kinda turns my stomach. Why is it that they seem so eager to let Martinez do whatever the hell he wants? 33 out of 42 cases? OMG! And 3 times in one year? What will it take for Martinez to finally be held accountable for his misconduct?

      • I think JM’s conduct IS under scrutiny – that’s why he has a baby-sitter in court. It’s really almost laughable how the press corps has so little to say about that, because it’s a pretty big deal for the hot-shot bulldog prosecutor to be forced to sit in second chair.

        Likewise there’s been nothing more than a mention of Florinna’s job change.

        The misbehavior hasn’t gone unnoticed, apparently – TPTB are just keeping details close to the vest so as to minimize damage to ongoing cases.

        The presentation of the state’s case at the start of the retrial is hazy now, and I have no visuals to refer to. Does anyone recall whether Melendez testified? Or was this Smith guy the first state’s witness on computer forensics that we’ve heard from? Just wondering whether Melendez has changed jobs also.

        • Journee I thought Smith was the DT witness. He works for BN? Hummm do we have 2 Smith? I think the frogs witness for the computer stuff was already up. He was a joke rember he didn’t have any experience except for building a 3 computers?

          • Without checking, I can say with 99.9% certainty that there were two Smiths. The DT’S witness was called ‘pseudonymn’ and used the name John Smith in court.
            I wish pseudonymn would have chosen a different last name so that there could not be any chance of confusing the two in court, ( especially in memory)__but maybe no one would be confused.
            Personally, I hate reading novels where similar names are used, or even names beginning with the same letter, because then it is harder for me to remember who is who.

            • re: confusion

              I think the state’s Mr. Smith was black.

              Pseudonym Smith wasn’t described, of course – except I think he probably was a few weeks ago, when BN was first talking about him in court. One or two of the tweeters that day described a guy who only came in long enough to watch BN’s testimony, white guy VERY casually dressed for a courtroom, one of the tweeters said he wore a ‘wife beater shirt’. Anyone else remember that?

        • Journee, Melendez testified Day One of the retrial, October 21, 2014. Just scroll to the half-way point of the page to Pandora’s comment at 2:14pm.

  8. Spoke with Jodi an hour ago. She told me to tell all of you guys- “her friends” as she calls you – here are JAII that she felt your love and support yesterday. She thanks you for standing by her side. ♥

    Jodi is such a strong woman! She’s not laying down in defeat! Although she didn’t say anything, judging by her voice I had a feeling that Pickles ruling didn’t come as a surprise to her! I’m sure Jodi would have been in shock had the judge ruled in her favor!

    SO, Jodi was the one to lift my spirits and now we continue with our fight for Jodi’s freedom!

    (((((Jodi)))) ♥

          • Okay, lol, Cindy – imagine this:

            Pandora picks up her phone in Greece and calls Sheriff Joe’s place there in Shitzona. And Pandora says, ever so sweetly to the person who answers the phone “Hi, this is Pandora, I’d like to speak to Jodi Arias, please?” And Sheriff Joe sighs and trudges down the long noisy corridors of Estrella jail to Jodi’s cell, to tell her she has a phone call.

            Or, imagine this:

            Once a day, a corrections officer escorts Jodi from her solitary cell to a phone where she’ll have a limited amount of time to make a few phone calls.

            Now, you might legitimately ask how Jodi could possibly be calling our Greek girls from a phone at Estrella. But since Pandora and Maria have both made it clear that they talk to her almost daily – I’m guessing our clever Greek girls got themselves on a cell phone plan that is local to Phoenix, so Jodi can call them on a local number.

            • Journee are you making fun of me??? LOL. OK I got it mixed up and I know how I did it.. When a person I knew was in jail here they would call but before they could talk to you you had to give then a charge card number to pay for the call.

              Hey cut me some slack there you know I have memory problems and I ain’t got no smart cause I didn’t go to college….geez..

              But I did enjoy your little hypothetical story…

                • Honey I knew that and yes it did. I can see that we have almost pickles f-ing ruling from yesterday. You know I wonder when the DT knew?! Perhaps that is why Maria(?) Hugged Sandy. I have to tell you I know where Jodi’s inner strength comes from, I’m a strong person but darn I’m not sure if I could have gone through this. But I guess it comes down to mom’s bear instinct.

            • Journee, “And Sheriff Joe sighs and trudges down the long noisy corridors of Estrella jail to Jodi’s cell” – LMAO!

            • ((((((( Journee ))))))))

              YES!!! We do talk to her almost on a daily basis and yes, we do have a local AZ number where she can call us. Otherwise, it wouldn’t be affordable 😉

              After the ruling, I too talked to her. She tends to focus on more positive things. I’m sure she was prepared for JSS denying the motions, so we never mentioned it. She is always upbeat on the phone, she is THE SWEETEST person i’ve ever met. She never fails to mention how thankful she is for her supporters.

  9. AZ Girl Diary ‏@doriowen 22m22 minutes ago

    “We are not trying to gain your sympathy,” she told the jurors. “We’re trying to gain your understanding.” Judy Clarke, Defense Attorney

      • Yes, E.P., she is. She’s known for defending people who are hated by the public and helping defendants avoid the death penalty consistently- Susan Smith, Unabomber Ted Kacsynski, Olympic bomber Eric Rudolph and Jared Loughner (“Gabby” Giffords shooter).
        She’d probably be a great lawyer for Jodi but probably impossible to get. Plus, she’s 62 or 63, and it could be a few years before Jodi gets a retrial.

        • CC53, say what? Be careful on what you say in regards to age. 63 or 64 plus 5 years would be 68 or 69…not old at all to be a attorney.

          Wow I’m going to be 64 in a few weeks geez perhaps I should be going down south to live in R. Loves barn. You know closer to the pasture…… LOL

          • Come on down but leave your weather up there!!!! Not room in the barn but always room for you in our shack!!!! Be sure and let us know when your Birthday is, we are always ready for a Party!!!!! Nothing like a JAII Birthday Party!!! 😀 We might even have Frog Stew! 😉

            • CC53, You do know I was just giving you a hard time don’t you!! Lol
              Hey don’t underestimate older people ( older then me). Yes I could she her going up against the frog even 5 years from now. I’m sure she would to him to shut the f.. up and sit down before she steps on him. A funny thing starts to happen to people in their 70dys. They get feisty they don’t put up with any BS They always tell you how it is.

  10. Not only was Jodi his “dirty little secret” but she knew his “dirty little secret”. I’m sure at some level of his subconsciousness that was his true motive for attacking her that afternoon. He may have even thought to himself it was because she dropped his camera but I think he was on edge all that day knowing in the back of his mind that she was actually soon to leave the relationship to pursue another. He was quickly losing control of both of his “dirty little secrets” and he snapped. With that type of deep seeded fear he could well have killed her.

    • A controlling man losing his “toy” would be pushed into a rage when he finally realizes she is going for good. I wish a record of Travis calling/texting Jodi asking her to come to see him could be found.

    • I agree.
      And, as I posted a few weeks ago, TA’s My Space page contains the bizarre passage about him cruising for young boys, probation, and the strange emphasis upon a particular number of days before Christmas, and not simply the day before Christmas, as corresponds with the familar verse.
      No man I know would ever permit such a passage to be associated with them, and publicly posted! I can not believe that any man would not be enraged, indignant, and embarrassed, and even worried by it because of its criminal implications.
      How could that passage ever be explained away as just humor?
      I would think anyone that knew him would be mystified by that passage, and especially by the fact that it was allowed to remain there.
      [ Exploration about this subject is a quest for answers, and is not a matter of any one being disrespected.]

      • I know the passage you are referring to. When I first read it I went wha what???
        He may have gotten angry but it would have been Jodi that felt the wrath. He would have accused her of saying something I think. I figure it got left there to remain hidden… People had seen it…. if he removed it after seeming to laugh it off, people might start asking questions and he didn’t want that.

    • He knew Jodi was monogamous, (that was why he never let her know about Lisa – she found out after it was over) and very likely knew she WAS moving on in June of 2008. So where would that have left him, with Jodi knowing his secrets, but no longer under his control at all? Perhaps to his surprise he could also see by that time that she was resilient.

      Jodi was able to make clear in her secret court narrative (the information came out during the first trial but many objections, sidebars and interruptions distracted the jury) that she was willing to search out and work for the life she wanted. She had been the one to end all of her relationships. Jodi repeatedly broke if off with Bobby; he would reel her back in. And when Matt was seeing someone else yet continued with Jodi, she got to the bottom of it and broke it off with Matt. She decided that she wanted more than Daryl could offer and ended that too. She broke it off with TA at the end of June, 2007; moved from Palm Desert to Monterey for another stint at Ventana. He was the one to convince her to move to Mesa from Monterey, citing financial opportunities, then wouldn’t commit. So she left. It was too depressing for her to try to make it work.

      But the story the prosecution wanted the jury in the first trial to believe was that the three previous men had dumped her and that she could not accept that these romantic relationships had ended. When Jodi moved back to Yreka after feeling suicidal in Mesa, she got her life back together very quickly: Photography gigs lined up, her artwork in a gallery, another restaurant job, new friends. This productivity was evidence of Jodi’s substantial resiliency and her desire to move forward. This is not then the behavior of a loser. Losers commit heinously premeditated crimes, not people like Jodi who show a core belief in themselves by embracing life’s possibilities with appreciation and passion.

      It must have felt good for Jodi to finally be able to tell her story without being subjected to continual objections and sneering insinuations. As JW elicited the testimony, it seemed wholly appropriate that Jodi be questioned from a woman’s perspective, because a feminine viewpoint with regard to Jodi’s struggles had been sorely lacking in these proceedings.

    • Exactly, Justus!!! And it is our side’s strongest argument:what we’ve been screaming at the top of our lungs for such a long time. Personally, I don’t even think it was ona subconscious level. he MUST have been shitting his pants, knowing Jodi knew the real him, his dark side – and now watching her getting her life back together, standing on her own two feet….oh boy! That must have been scaring the shit outta him.

      Haven’t we all been there (of course not ina situation like this). Just think of a secret you have willingly (or inadvertently) shared with a good freind whom later on in life you happened to drift away from. Now remember, haven’t you caught yourself wondering what will happen if that person ever shared your secret with someone else? In this case, TA secret was a million times darker and able to destroy his entire life… It is only natural he would hide great resentment and anger for the person knowing his secret.

  11. Oh NO NO NO NO this is not good at all !! I went searching for misconduct and Juan Martinez. This article was written by Michael Kiefer Feb 28/2014 . I do not like how the supreme court feels towards Martinez according to this article http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/20131028jodi-arias-juan-martinez-conduct-day3.html
    Transcripts show Justice Andrew Hurwitz turned to the attorney representing the Arizona Attorney General’s Office, the prosecutorial agency that handles death-penalty appeals.

    “Can I ask you a question about something that nobody’s discussed so far?” he asked. “The conduct of the trial prosecutor. It seems to me that 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 judges once ruled improper and then rephrased the question in another improper way. … Short of reversing a conviction, how is it that we can … stop inappropriate conduct?”

    The assistant attorney general struggled to answer.

    Justice Michael Ryan then stepped into the discussion.

    “Well, this prosecutor I recollect from several cases,” Ryan said. “This same prosecutor has been accused of fairly serious misconduct, but ultimately we decided it did not rise to the level of requiring a reversal,” Ryan said. “There’s something about this prosecutor, Mr. Martinez.”

    • Yes, there IS something about this prosecutor. He’s a LYING, win-at-all-costs, POS who does not hesitate to vilify the profession he chose to supposedly serve with dignity objectivity and ethos. But I don’t think he EVEN knows what ethos means.

    • This article is absolutely shocking with all the misrepresentations JM has gotten away with in the eyes of the Supreme Court of AZ over the years. JM hides evidence, and makes up disgusting sexual facts out of thin air and is still a prosecutor!

      In reading the decision from JSS I got the feeling at times that she was giving tips to Nurmi on how to make his motions for dismissal more meaty and meaningful.

      “Looking for the good”, I was heartened that she said more than once that the computer evidence investigation was still ongoing – meaning to me she was making an initial ruling on that to date but more could be coming depending on what defense’s computer expert finds.

      She at least wasn’t shutting the door on considering future motions.

      My big question that maybe I missed in her decision is: what happened to Nurmi’s motion that Mesa Police release the complete written record of where all the evidence was at every moment, including if it was sent out to prosecution experts including their names and their reports?

  12. I’m again very sorry for Jodi… This is another example of how the judicial system is inconsistent, unjust, and lame in this country. Some influential people, who are against Jodi, play a big role in the yesterday circus. Jodi is a person who is a victim now, a victim that is trapped. Oh, how I wish she just stopped keeping in touch with TA, and did not go to Arizona at all. Years ago she made this big mistake that made her trapped now. I still hope that the appeal would help her. I keep my fingers crossed!

  13. I don’t like to blow my own horn too much ( 😆 ), BUT I mentioned a Phoenix Steakhouse in a tweet to Wiliam Pitts the other day when JSS called a lunch break. This morning the tweet got “favored” by the steakhouse. Note: I removed my Twitter name (handle?) b/c of potential hater assassins passing by. Please forgive my pathetic need for attention.

    @william_pitts Martinez headed for Rustler’s Rooste Steakhouse for his usual rattlesnake sandwich?

    11:04 AM – 14 Jan 15

    Favorited by
    Rustler’s Rooste Rustler’s Rooste @RustlersRooste
    Rustlers Rooste is a family owned and operated Steakhouse in Phx AZ,

            • OH my, I forgot we will need to synchronize our times! How about 11:30 MST. . .no one will miss me here and as long as I can fly back before daylight!!! My broom flies pretty fast so I know I’ll make it. Jodi loaned me her special broom so I (and my evil twin), can sneak around do evil things in the darkest of the night. hehehehehehe Apparently, that is when people sneak around in Mesa County when they need to hide what they are up to. Do you want to meet at Starbucks first? Thoughts?

                • 😆 Oh that was a good idea!!!! Well heck, maybe we should do this tomorrow night. . .when is the next full moon? OH OH OH be sure and make a “selfie” with a date on it!!!!! If Journee can bring gas cans ( 3 preferably) we will have it made. . .of course they might be hard to hold on to on the broom. I will bring my FREE JODI ARIAS bumper stickers to stick on all of the police cars. Hmmm We might need to plan this out just a bit better. 😉

              • Well, R, I’m not so sure about Starbucks after reading Jodi’s testimony about her “after Starbucks story” in the park with Travis. I’ll probably get a twinge of sadness every time I have a cup of coffee now.
                As for Journee, she may be still in bed nursing a baaaaaaaad hangover moaning: “Never again.” If she carried through with her plans after JSS’s ruling, that is.

                • Cringing!!!!!! Your right. eeeewwwhhh What a sicko. (((((JODI)))) How I wish she had known us when she needed true friends!!!!
                  Journee has been rather quiet. . .hmmmm. She must have really tied one on! Her pups won’t let her lay around long she will bounce back fast! Can’t live without Journee!!!!! ♥ We’ll just have too wait on her to recover, we all can get our hair dyed and then we will make our plan.

                • You are funny girls.

                  No, not hungover. A little groggy this morning from not enough sleep and not enough coffee.

                  Just keeping myself busy. Figured there’s no point wasting time while I’m waiting on edit notes for novel #1 and the novella. Might as well get rolling on novel #2, now that I’ve worked out the direction and major story arcs – and have five straight days of no trial when I can actually get some work done.

                  I pop in during breaks to make sure y’all are behaving yourselves!

                  ♥ ♥ ♥ Team Jodi ♥ ♥ ♥

  14. It’s clear this battleaxe is in way over her head and hasn’t got the vaguest clue of the interpretation of settled case law or what it mandates. What don’t you understand sidebar, about garbage in–garbage out? Having her make a ruling based on sound legal precedent is like asking Kim Jong Il to write a protocol ruling for civil rights in North Korea.

    A defendant is entitled to defend against pristine evidence as originated exactly as it was found at the crime scene. Once the crime scene tape goes up, it is no longer in the defendant’s hands to control anything. A computer that is dicked with by two people from the police force changing that pristine evidence to GARBAGE whether it is from ignorance or accidental is irrelevant. It was changed! And what was in this computer underlayed the entire foundation to shatter the contentions of the pious prosecution that Alexander was the churchgoing Mormon who every woman should pray to be privy to be in the presence of. When in fact the truth was that Alexander knew Jodi had of just just the opposite and held over him, which could send him to the graybar hotel where he would have been the recipient of some anal for his child craving pedophilia.

    But we have much more than that here. From the very onset, emails and texts were attempted to be withheld. The very hardware nugget that contained all the sickness was examined by the person who is supposed to be the authority on examining digital evidence for the police department, finds absolutely nothing. Even though he testified that the first thing he saw was an alert indicating one or several viruses. Then this original is implicitly buried in a vault and withheld from the defense and the clone which they know to be different as caused by them with files deleted, is the one they farm out to pretend this was original as found at the crime scene.

    The Brady case as settled law does not discriminate as to accidental or on purpose. It only allows a judge who should know what the hell they’re doing, to decide the seriousness of the denial of true evidence that is material and RELEVANT. And what it requires of that judge to rectify that withholding of evidence.

    Stephens contradicted herself in so many ways in that ruling that it defies believability that a judge could have wrote it. Things that were proven were passed off as “not being before this court.” WTF? What testimony are you monitoring on those goddamned monitors Stephens? Are you watching The Price Is Right?

    You rule that Lonnie Dworkin had the opportunity to examine the hard drive. What don’t you get about the fact that he examined a USELESS evidence hard drive? The one that had the filth that you would have had to almost stumble over, was kept as secret as the formula to Pepsi Cola until last month. Where the hell did you go to law school?

    Then if you want to play that game and say that Dworkin said there was “some” porn and the defense had the right to explore it further, didn’t he also admit to your courtroom spouse that he DIDN’T see porn at all if that’s what he stated in his interview? So now what? Isn’t that just the opposite of what your ruling is based on that you heard with those two things on both sides of your head?

    Then why did you close the courtroom if the secret testimony that created a firestorm was no big deal and there were alternate ways for the new witnesses to testify? What are you hiding Stephens?

    Your rulings have been an outright abortion from day one of this case. I have to think learned judges when they see the case based motions that you just blew off, they are going to be astonished. NOT EVEN A SMALL SANCTION against the prosecution–nothing.

    You should be a judge somewhere where you would fit right in–like one of ISIS territories.

    • Jade, I agree with you and you brought up the very points that we all have been screaming about all along.

      Your comment about Isis was spot on. Let us pull back that curtain and see who’s behind.

    • Great post, Jade !! JSS is so incompetent one wonders how she passed the bar. If the judges of this country continue to turn a blind eye to the epidemic Brady Violations it’s not going to be “Justice is Blind” (which is just a imaginary theory anyway) but it will be “Justice is Dead !”

      • BB, Jade, do either of you honestly feel that
        JSS made this ruling on her own? I’m not buying into it. She has to want this over with. She also has to know that the verdict will be over turned in the higher court. So what is the reasoning behind this?? Anyone with half a brain can see something is wrong here…..

        • I don’t know if it’s something sinister or just that she is so unquantifiably incompetent. The eye roll after after the verdict was very revealing.

          The thing that stands out as a mega-mystery to me is that she takes an action which is almost precluded by the constitution, which is shutting out the public totally from the courtroom, and then she plays it down like it was no big deal in the ruling denying the motion for dismissal.

          Jodi is a victim of the indigent system and although there is a very good record preserved with timely motions, top grade attorneys would have made all the difference in the world. Just the sidebars alone tell you, Sidebar has no inkling of how to run a courtroom or what conduct is egregious in ANY criminal case. Let alone, a death penalty case.

          Verdicts have been overturned for far, far less than what has happened here.

          • Do you know J.M. & Stephens are old buddies from college days where they both went to same university…& do you know there’s rumour that they both have book deals in the offing & that the books will be more successful if they get their nasty way and get to keep the “Death Penalty on Jodi’s head. The difference will be if they lose the case their books will be so & so regards sales, but if they get to keep the death penalty, they will have No I bestsellers on their hands. Also, the bestselling books will help Martinez in his political ambitions.

            • Really. . .I thought the Frog already wrote one book, you mean there is another one. I suppose it will be like the Hughes book full of totally complete LIES!!! Hard to believe people are still believing their fairy tale!

    • Yes Jade, loved your post once again!!! Spot on! JSS reminds me of the robot in “Lost in Space” (for those who can remember it) . . .the robot would always say “This does not compute”! JSS never got it, she is Lost in Space. . Plus Gone With The Wind! Pfffffffftt

      • R.Love you are right she does sound and act like the robot…lol

        Oh by the way I’m going to Walmart today is there anything I should pick up for our “fly over” tonight. Hey Journee you sound busy you want me to pick up the gas cans???

  15. Hello Admin,
    I have found the article I was trying to post yesterday on a US courts.gov website (in PDF file) so is this okay to post here? It is on point about there being an epidemic of Brady violations and that only judges can stop it. It was written by a justice on the Ninth Circuit of Appeals court in a dissenting opinion and it just parallels the problems with this case in many ways and I found the opinion very interesting to read…Let me know if I can post that website link and I will …….Thanks 🙂 🙂

    • Darn, I wanted to read that US Courts one, Carol. Maybe, R, will kick it our way later when she’s in the barn working on her “horse whispering.”

      • What I wanted to say wasn’t anything of importance, but I stubbornly wanted to say it and it showed up. I hope that we do get to read BB’s article because it does sound very interesting. 🙂

  16. Okay, here is the dissenting opinion that I read and found very interesting. It starts out by saying that there is an “epidemic of Brady Violations abroad in the land. Only judges can put a stop to it.” The chief judge wrote the opinion and four other judges joined the opinion in expressing their strong disagreement to the majority opinion which denied a rehearing to a defendant despite the clear Brady violations…..

    http://www.cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2013/12/10/10-36063 web.pdf

    • A person is considered innocent until proven guilty BUT a grand jury “will indict a ham sandwich”, prosecutors only want to win at any cost, public defenders are overworked and underpaid, judges are biased and accommodate the prosecutors’ cheating, forensic scientists and police departments falsify evidence and commit perjury, and Brady violations don’t mean anything much any more.

      Kiefer gave me hope when he said that the higher courts don’t like Brady violations. 🙁

      That was very interesting, but sad. BB

  17. Brady Violations:

    A Brady Violation is the hiding of or the failure to disclose exculpatory evidence to the defense and it does NOT have to be intentional. The defense is under no obligation to ask for the evidence as it must be turned over voluntarily by the state. It has to be relevant and has to be a reasonable probability that the outcome of the trial would have been different had the prosecution disclosed the evidence.

    This is a legal rule that has been violated in this case. This has been confirmed and verified in this case. So the only question that will remain for the appellate courts and possibly the US Supreme Court if it has to go that far (depending on whether the AZ appeals courts can do their jobs and follow the law) is whether or not the violations were relevant and would have been reasonably expected to produce a different outcome.

    Well, let’s look at that exact question:
    Did the exculpatory evidence that was not disclosed have any relevance to Jodi’s defense? YES !

    How do we know that? The prosecution used the fact that there was supposedly NO PORN on TA’s computer to destroy the credibility of key expert witnesses for the defense and used it to consistently and effectively call Jodi Arias a liar. The prosecution’s entire case was wrapped around TA’s reputation as a good Mormon boy. Who had the motive to hide this exculpatory evidence? Whose side does this evidence hurt? The prosecution. Had the evidence been available then the jury would have been able to clearly see that TA had some severe problems and was a sexual pervert/deviant who was dangerous and they would have been able to more clearly see that he did indeed abuse Jodi verbally, mentally, and physically and possibly come to the conclusion that this was a self-defense case, certainly not the fairy tale that the state tried to cram down their throats. This would have changed the entire context of this case and would have been reasonably expected to produce a different outcome.

    It will be clear to the appellate courts that this is a Brady Violation and that the verdict in this case was based entirely on a lie and on tampered evidence. JSS’s excuses (and her entire decision is nothing but excuses for the prosecution) will not hold up under the severe light of Brady. This is not a game of hide and seek where the defense is burdened with trying to find the exculpatory evidence that has been hidden by the state. You can not now (as JSS is doing) claim that there was no harm done to the defense for the failure of the state to turn over exculpatory evidence. The law does not work that way and JSS should know this !! The law is black and white it leaves no room for excuses.

    This case will be overturned and the verdict vacated and if the appellate courts deem these violations egregious enough they will dismiss with prejudice (if not they will allow another trial if the state desires to refile the charges)

    • Brady *is* an important issue. But a Brady argument will never work when the defense attorney drops the ball. The record reflects that KN and his expert Dworsky knew about porn at the guilt phase. KN should have rehabilitated his expert at the guilt phase and asked about the porn. If because of JM’s conduct the expert witness was intimidated into not testifying then KN needs to make that connection.

      If (as I suspect) KN failed to address the porn issue and as a consequence failed to make (assumes facts not in evidence) objections because KN thought in fact that his client was a liar . . . then that is an issue that KN needs to man up and accept.

      There can be misconduct and lies by the state. But if those lies do not rise to purposefully trying to mislead jurors & if those lies do not go to a substantial issue in the case . . . then the Brady argument fails every time.

      With due respect, BB, the case is not likely to succeed with a Brady argument on appeal unless and until a better record on appeal is created that makes the necessary connections to a substantial issue in the case. (Ironically, it seems that KN is relying on the substantial issue being Jodi’s credibility. Ironic because KN’s behavior and failure to make timely objections suggests KN himself did not believe Jodi at the guilt phase.)

      • Cheryl, do you dispute that the state lied about the porn history, that the existence of the porn history is relevant to Jodi’s credibility, or that Jodi’s credibility is a substantial issue in the case?

        • (1) I do not dispute that the state lied about the porn history.
          (2) I do not dispute that the existence of the porn history is relevant to Jodi’s case.
          (3) I do not dispute that Jodi’s credibility is a substantial issue in the case.

          I dispute that the porn was a surprise.
          I dispute that KN has created an adequate record on appeal.

          I believe that KN screwed up the record on appeal in the guilt phase by not objecting to the state’s claims that porn did not exist.

          I believe that KN did not work up the porn issue in the guilt phase because KN himself thought Jodi lied.

          I believe that KN failed to make adequate causal connections between the misconduct and the jury verdict.

          • Cheryl, Lonnie was Jen’s witness. You cannot put all this on Nurmi. As for the rest of it, if your justice system has been reduced to find the exculpatory evidence if you can – then all I can say, is God help you all!

            • I use KN’s name because he is lead counsel but both are equally responsible for allowing JM to make statements and bring evidence in without objection.

              You are correct. Given that porn was seen by DW on the computer prior to the guilt phase, JW is responsible for failing to press Dworkin on the porn issue.

              • It’s all very easy for us to sit in our easy chairs with all the benefit of hind-sight and video of the testimony that we can pick apart word by word. LD was hired for a specific purpose and it wasn’t to look for porn. He had the wrong evidence drive 2009 vs. 2008. The fact is that he mentioned seeing porn, and then was told otherwise by Lying Juan asserting that in an interview two years earlier, he had not seen it. What are the defence supposed to do at that point? Call the prosecutor a liar when all anyone has ever told them, was that there was no porn on TA’s computer – Melendez, Flores, and JM – they all LIED and said it wasn’t there. Nurmi did request the hard drive during the trial, but was put off by JM and JSS and he was basically told what they had was good enough.

                ♥♥♥ Nurmi, Jen & Maria ♥♥♥

                • That’s the bottom line. The defense is not supposed to have to go on a fishing expedition. Jodi knew what she saw, she told Nurmi and Willmott. They hired an expert to review what they thought was the hard drive untouched and unaltered.

                  Dworkin was either bluffed by Martinez on cross—which was a risky move–because if Dworkin had said, show me that testimony to refresh my recollection, and it wasn’t there, that would have been a bombshell moment for the jury. So probability is that he DIDN’T see any. And he WOULDN’T, because he is an expert just as Bryan Neumeister is and Bryan said, “you couldn’t miss it” if you had the correct raw data.

                  So Sidebar ruled that Dworkin had seen the pornography and therefore the defense should have pursued it. But he didn’t ! Nurmi didn’t even know about the plundering into the computer by Flores or the hard shutdowns prior to THIS trial. How can he challenge evidence that the prosecution says isn’t there? Ipso fatso her own ruling is based on exactly opposite of what is in the court record just before she issued the ruling. Because Dworkin said, “if what I said in the interview two years ago is that I saw no porn, then I STAND BY MY STATEMENT.” That is the state of the record that the jury heard.

                  The prosecution is supposed to be beyond reproach in not only turning over all evidence, but WITHOUT QUESTION evidence which tends to favor the defendant. Ask yourself why did the Mesa Police department make a clone of the 2009 hard drive and send it to defense examiners? And not the o-r-i-g-i-n-a-l. Plus the original was already tampered with by two prosecution team agents and this caused umpteen files to be lost that was sitting there like manna from heaven. Already a fair trial is compromised.

                  And that’s the point.

        • I *think* what she is saying is that the state’s lies – which are clearly documented – may not rise to the level of prosecutorial misconduct, simply because the defense failed to challenge the lies in a timely manner.

          The jurors are the finders of fact. And they are told, up front, that they are to decide for themselves which witnesses are credible and which are not, that state or LE witnesses are not inherently endowed with any more credibility than any other witness.

          The first big stumbling block, in this case, was that a DP qualified jury is always more inclined to view the state as the authority, always going to give more credence to the state’s case.

          But the bigger stumbling block is what Cheryl said above in her last sentence: even the DT gave credence to the state’s case. They were of the mindset that BN expressed in court the other day, that in his experience, working with LE, when LE said something was true about a piece of evidence, it WAS true. So he was confused and kind of flabbergasted when he found that LE’s assertions were patently UN-true. Likewise, Nurmi and Willmott had no expectation that the state was pursing a death penalty case based almost entirely on false or mis-represented evidence. That’s why Nurmi went round and round with Flores about his changing testimony – Nurmi was dumbstruck, couldn’t believe it was happening. Problem was, he was so focused on that one discrepancy he didn’t even think to look further, to consider that the state might be telling other lies.

          From the higher court’s perspective, it may not be enough to point out all of the deceptions perpetrated by the state, or even to point out how those deceptions served to undermine Jodi’s credibility and support the state’s depiction of her as a liar. Because it was the DT’s JOB to challenge and document those deceptions AS THEY OCCURRED, it was THEIR JOB to undermine the STATE’S credibility. So rather than find prosecutorial misconduct, or even a Brady violation, they’re quite likely to see it all as ineffective assistance of counsel…. which they won’t FIND for unless it is included in the grounds for appeal.

          Clear as mud? Yeah. Frogs like mud.

          • EXACTLY Journee. Even JSS acknowledged in her written ruling that the state made big mistakes. And when we read the ruling closely we see the glimmers of direction that the court gives to the DT. She explains (and rightfully so) that the failures of the state are irrelevant unless and until the DT can provide a direct, causal connection between the specific misconduct and the jury verdict.

            So even proving that Juan misled or even lied to the jury (ie. when he stated in closing that JA is a liar) is a “no harm and no foul” error unless and until the DT can show that the jury would not have convicted absent Juan’s lies.

            And proving that Juan intimidated expert witnesses is another “no harm and no foul” error unless and until the DT can show that the witness was intimidated into not giving full and complete testimony and refused to return to another trial stage.

            Now here is an interesting thought – Maybe Juan’s and Flores’ bluster, lies, intimidation, destruction of evidence effected the DT’s strategy. Maybe if the DT knew that Juan was engaged in prosecutorial misconduct then they would never have advised JA to testify and instead demanded that the state prove their case to every reasonable doubt. THEN, the case would fall quicker in a Brady challenge because there was no confession. THEN, the case would fall quicker because the court could never concluded that (even absent the misconduct) the jury would have convicted based on JA’s confession.

            So maybe a Brady argument becomes — the jury verdict would have been different because the DT would have chosen a different defense strategy. The US Supreme Court allows cops to lie to suspects in order to get confessions that they would not otherwise get. But the lies must happen outside of a courtroom. MAYBE, it is time to extend Brady to stopping prosecutors and cops from manipulating evidence to get a confession at trial. And if it means that someone walks who killed a man (Jodi) then that is frankly a small price to pay to protect everyone’s constitutional rights.

            • There is no difficulty in arguing that the verdict reasonably might have been different “absent Juan’s lies.” As I see it, besides the ridiculous premeditation evidence (which Vladimir Gagic called “pathetic”), the only items Juan had to negate the self-defense claim were (1) the sudden switch from gunshot last to gunshot first (which itself looks like state misconduct), and (2) evidence that Jodi lied to the jury themselves. And weren’t there only two key examples of the latter: the gas can, and Travis’s porn usage and sexual interest in children? Destroying one of these two might well affect the verdict, given that the burden of disproving self-defense was on the prosecution.

            • PS: I would not myself describe Jodi’s testimony as a “confession.” That suggests that she did something wrong in killing TA. According to her testimony, what she did was morally and legally justified. (I expect you agree with that, though.)

              • In 2010, Jodi changed her claim and said that she defended herself against TA’s attack, admitting that she killed him. Commentators on HLN have erroneously stated that the prosecutor was able to get Jodi to “confess” on the stand, completely ignoring Willmott’s opening arguments. HLN further amped up the public’s confusion about the trial by continually playing the interrogation tapes of Jodi’s earlier denials. The words “she confessed” in the context of the trial obfuscate Jodi’s claim of self-defense.

        • I have to side with BB on this one. The burden is not on the defense to discover exculpatory or mitigating evidence in the custody of the prosecution. It is the state’s burden to disclose it — that’s the point of Brady. Furthermore, the basic Brady violation is just nondisclosure of exculpatory or mitigating evidence. What we have here is far worse conduct by the state: not only lying about the existence of such evidence, and making that lie a mainstay of their case against the defendant, but even trying to destroy it — apparently in the dead of night, no less.

          I do not believe that whether doing all this is prosecutorial misconduct depends on whether the defense challenged the state’s denial of the existence of this evidence in a timely fashion. But I will check this when I have some time. The state is forbidden to base a conviction on withholding such evidence, let alone on lying about it or destroying it. And the jury instruction not automatically to believe state witnesses is irrelevant here.

          I do not disagree with Cheryl about Nurmi’s failure to have the computer searched by his own expert. In fact, to me the main irony here is not the one Cheryl mentioned, but another. If I recall correctly, Jodi tried hard to dump Nurmi even before the original trial, and was refused by JSS. It was only because after that trial Jodi took matters into her own hands, went pro se, and sent Neumeister to look at the computer that the file scandal came out. So, if Nurmi’s behavior is ineffective representation by counsel, it is a defect that JSS had a role in creating. (Correct me if I’m wrong here.)

          I believe the porn-file scandal, along with everything else, offers very strong grounds for a higher court to vacate Jodi’s conviction. What she needs is a pile of money to hire a private lawyer to pursue these appeals as far as necessary, including the federal level.

          By the way, the judge who wrote the opinion BB cited above, Alex Kozinski, is chief judge of the Ninth Circuit. He also wrote the blistering opinion for the panel that threw out the Milke conviction. To read that, go here: http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-9th-circuit/1625531.html. He also gave an interview last year to the libertarian magazine REASON.

            • “Sides” of a legal issue. As I say below, I’m very glad you’re raising all these questions. It’s a valuable discussion so far. No questions of loyalty involved! I’ve been in your role over and over in the past regarding felony murder.

          • Nurmi tried to QUIT the case before the guilt trial. He wanted nothing to do with a death penalty case, and wanted out when he realized the state wasn’t going to play ball on a plea. PD Nurmi had plenty of experience pleading out sex-offenders, none in capital murder cases.

            Jodi submitted a lengthy handwritten plea to KEEP him.

            I don’t disagree with your opinion or BB’s – was simply submitting the reasoning I’ve seen in other appellate opinions. And you see it in JSS’ opinion – she’s holding DT accountable for what they’ve failed to do.

            • I know she wrote one letter early on begging to keep him. Did she not later try to dump him, though, before trial started? I know that she saw the relationship as broken before the trial began.

              • She tried to dump him between the guilty verdict and the retrial.

                I know. Seems like eons ago.

                I think – *think* – the letter to keep him was in 2011.

              • I remember both letters and when they occurred; I just thought for some reason that she’d also made an effort to dump him before original trial. As I recall, her second letter made it clear that she’d already wanted to then. But maybe she did nothing about it. I’d still guess JSS was well aware that Jodi wanted Nurmi gone by that time.

          • Alan, total great read that everyone should read…Jodi’s case is another Milke case and they will be vacating and remanding on this in the future…

      • I disagree. I don’t think we can assume that KN and LD knew about porn at the guilt phase of the trial. First, we do not know what LD stated in his interview with JM. If he said that there was no porn during the interview and then confirmed that as he did during trial then what? But beyond that it is a much simpler case than that. Brady is absolute. You can not set up the defense for failure by hiding exculpatory evidence and then blame the defense for not finding the evidence fast enough. It doesn’t work that way. If you violate Brady, it is over. You are shifting the burden on the defense for not catching the Brady violation. This will never fly in the appellate courts. The burden is ALWAYS on the state to disclose all exculpatory evidence. It is really that simple..

        • BB, The porn was not only an issue but the defense expert knew about the porn at the guilt phase.

          In fact Dworkin *did* see pornography on Travis’ computer in the guilt phase. KN should have pressed the issue.

          On February 4, 2013, during cross-examination at the guilt phase trial, Mr. Dworkin testified he recalled seeing some pornography on the victim’s computer but he was not asked to look for that type of information. See R.T. February 4, 2013, page 52, line 3 through page 54, line 3.

          • He also quickly retracted that statement. Unless we have the interview to look at which we don’t we do not know the entire context of what that conversation was. LD verified under oath that there was no porn. And yes he wasn’t asked to look for that kind of info bc the state had hidden it from the defense and they allocated resources accordingly. It is not what you know but what you can prove in a court of law. KN had no proof that porn existed on the computer…he knew of course that Jodi had told him that TA viewed it, etc. Proof is the only thing that matters in court. Again, you are shifting the burden to the defense. Brady demands absolute obedience that the state turn over exculpatory evidence. The burden is on the state.

            • And the court (correctly) opined that the DT had the opportunity to press Dworsky on the issue. The curious aspect is *why* did the DT think that the porn was not a good issue for the guilt phase.

              It is the opposing counsel’s responsibility to box the other side’s expert in a corner and limit the usefulness. It was then the responsibility of the DT to rehabilitate the witness. That was not done by the DT in this case.

              I don’t know why the DT did not press the issue. Perhaps the state intimidated the DT into not believing their own client about issues such as porn or perhaps the DT was reluctant to offend the victim’s family.

              Regardless, porn was not a surprise to anyone. And at a minimum, when JM started spewing lies about porn not being on the computer, the DT should have bolted out of their chairs to object. They didn’t. They just sat there. Jodi deserved and deserves better.

              The requirements under Brady are not insurmountable but they did exist. Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963). The Brady test has three elements that a defendant must prove to establish a Brady violation:
              (1) evidence is favorable to the accused because it is exculpatory or impeaching;
              (2) evidence was suppressed by the government, either willfully or inadvertently; and
              (3) prejudice ensued.

              It is that *prejudice* aspect that demands the DT prepare a better record on appeal.

              • ……or perhaps KN was sitting there with a transcript of the interview and confirmed LD’s testimony that there was no porn….I think we can not jump to conclusions without hard evidence which is exactly why the DT did not pursue this line of attack..It is not what you know but what you can prove and without evidence you can’t prove anything. You can not withhold the evidence and then blame the DT for not finding it or pursuing it. The burden is not on the defense and this is what everyone keeps insisting on here that the DT is at fault for not finding the evidence. This verdict will not stand the scrutiny of Brady…The post that Alan above has a link on the opinion of the appellate court that threw out the Milke conviction (same judge that opined in the link I posted today about Brady violations) is a very informative read. KN has already implored JSS not to go down the same path as Milke, but that is exactly what she is doing unfortunately. Also, the Arias case meets all three of the requirements of Brady.

                • ALV testified about TA’s “fear” of Jodi. This was a point with resounding implications that needed to be addressed by Jodi’s defense counsel during the guilt phase because in the absence of other evidence, it was prejudicial. That issue could not be addressed effectively because the DT did not have all of the evidence. If he had been doing something illegal on his computer that she knew about, then proving he was doing it is exculpatory insofar as it supports Jodi’s credibility and raises doubt that she would have initiated the fight because such evidence could suggest that he had a motive to intimidate her related to the aforementioned “fear”. This applies to Brady criteria #s 1 and 3. The DT should have received the first 2008 hard drive mirror image and it was not handed over in a timely manner for whatever reason; that meets #2.

        • From the written order:

          “The Court has no basis to find the Mesa Police Department withheld evidence or refused to provide a copy of any evidence to Mr. Dworkin. To the contrary, a mirror image of the victim’s computer was given to Mr. Dworkin. As he testified at the trial, the focus of the defense at that time was not on the pornography contained on the victim’s computer. Rather, the focus was on the timeline of events that occurred on June 4, 2008. Mr. Dworkin was able to testify about those matters at the guilt phase trial. During cross-examination at the guilt phase trial, Mr. Dworkin testified he had been interviewed by the prosecutor about the pornography on the victim’s computer but it had been two years earlier and he could not recall specific details or what he had stated during that interview.”

          • Cheryl, I did not read these two comments before writing my reply above. I do not think what you quote will change my opinion, but I’ll have to reflect further.

          • JSS is wrong – it does NOT have to be intentional which is what I think she is trying to say. There is absolute evidence that the original 2008 mirror image was withheld until just recently – which the defense I believe is still examining. And she misses the bigger point of the state claiming consistently and fraudulently in front of the jury that there was NO PORN. The Brady violation exists and is real and will be dealt with in the appellate courts. And let’s not forget the Brady violations of destroying evidence by the actions of the state whether intentional or not. But we will all find out in the end what the appellate courts will do on this matter and we don’t need to argue among ourselves bc we are all on the same side….

            • BB – The problem for the DT is that the DT *did* know that porn was on the computer and (according to the defense expert) the DT did not want porn to be a focus in that phase.

              The only new aspect (and it is a HUGE example of prosecutorial misconduct) is that the DT didn’t know the existence of the two clones and that one was different than the other.

              Since the DT and the defense experts knew about the porn at the guilt phase, the DT failed in their obligation to JA to make the issue a focus. And the DT failed when they did not jump up and make objections for the record each and every time JM stated that no porn existed on the computer.

              I am all about complaining that JM should be disbarred. I am all about complaining that JSS is in over her head. But the fact is that we do not have the luxury of licking our wounds and expecting the appellate court will fix all things. The DT has to take some responsibility in where we are at this point. The DT has itself made HUGE errors. I pray that the DT will put aside their collective egos for the benefit of their client and re-evaluate their strategy.

              The courtroom is like a chess game. Regroup, refocus, lock and reload.

              • Cheryl, what is it exactly that you’d like the DT to do at this stage? (Also, what is the relevance of the difference between the two clones? I’d expect you to be questioning that!)

                • Alan –

                  One clone had porn and the other clone did not. It was this clone evidence and how they were different that raises a HUGE prosecutorial misconduct issue. But (and its a HUGE but) this judge sees that as incompetence or inexperience rather than something untoward. It is up to the DT to spoon feed the judge why she is wrong.

                  I suspect that knowing about the different copies and clones and ruination of evidence made the DT think that perhaps they missed the boat and that they should have respected what JA said about porn. And I suspect that the DT is trying desperately to do damage control.

                  What would I like to see the DT do at this point? At this point licking wounds and complaining about how unfair the world is does not help advance the ball. The DT *absolutely* should be Monday morning quarterbacking. They should (and I suspect are) going through every word of that ruling and figuring out what they did wrong, what evidence the court needed and how they could do a better job explaining the legal issues and facts to the court.

                  Yes. Monday morning quarterbacking. Take the opinion, dissect it, regroup, re-strategize, lock and reload.

            • You are correct BB. The error can be inadvertent. But there must be some prejudice to the defendant.

              But fortunately there is still time for the DT to try to salvage the record on appeal.

              • There is prejudice to Jodi. Prejudice exists when the state’s failure to disclose exculpatory evidence undermines the confidemce im the outcome of the trial. (my keyboard has messed up I am missimg a letter as you cam tell…. 🙁

          • On further reflection, I do think that what Cheryl quotes raises question about whether the state’s behavior is best described as a Brady violation. Does Brady cover a situation where the state knows full well that a mass of evidence contains an exculpatory nugget, but turns the whole mass over to the defense without pointing this out?

            Cheryl does, however, concede above that the state lied about porn history, and I explained why this lie was important to its case for conviction. Therefore, whether we call this lie a Brady violation or not, it’s a violation of a much more basic rule: the state is not entitled to convict anyone by lies. Contrary to what you and Journee both suggest above, I cannot believe that it is a rule of American criminal procedure that the prosecution is allowed to lie at will — whether by knowingly putting on false testimony, or even in a closing argument — as long as the defense has a fair chance to discover, through effort, that it is doing so! Neither side is permitted knowingly to put on false testimony. And it’s especially outrageous for the state to do so, because of the bedrock principle that the state has different duties from the defense. It is the prosecutor’s duty to “do justice,” not just to win a case. Nurmi quoted this famous statement in a motion, and it’s directly relevant here.

            So, whether we call them Brady violations or not, the state’s lies about porn history, as well as its attempt to destroy evidence, plus my explanation above of why they might reasonably have affected the jury’s verdict, constitute a strong case for vacating the conviction on appeal.

            Cheryl, I’m grateful to you for raising all these points and helping us clarify our thinking. Do keep playing devil’s advocate, please!

            • Juan lied about porn not being on the computer. It was outrageous and inflammatory and Juan should never practice law again. No judge, no court, no defense attorney should ever trust him. In fact, I am frankly surprised that this judge shrugged her shoulders and said oh, well.

              But, the reality is that the appellate court reads the words in the transcripts. They read what Juan blustered about there being no porn and how JA cannot be trusted because she lied about porn. And the appellate court will keep reading and wonder *why* the DT weren’t out of the chairs objecting.

              Why not object? The DT knew dang well and at that very moment that JM was lying and they knew the lies were inflammatory. When an attorney fails to object to falsities then it is a is either incompetence (which I do not want to believe) or strategy. Objecting at closing has the danger of offending the jurors and causing more attention to the lies. The DT made the strategic decision to not object.

              When an attorney does not object at the guilt phase then it looks like that attorney did not consider the lies to be relevant to a material issue. It looks on paper like the DT did not think that JA’s credibility was a material issue at the guilt phase.

              I suspect that the DT regrets not objecting to the lies. The DT knew the porn existed when Juan was spewing the lies. Maybe the DT needed to be honest and fall on the sword a bit and admit the decision to *not object* was strategic. I suspect that now that the DT knows of the extent of the porn that was withheld and destroyed, they recognize that the porn issue is more important than they first thought. Maybe the DT finally believes JA. Maybe the DT sees that JA is not a liar and that they should have protected her credibility at the guilt phase.

              I spend a lot of time dealing with Juan supporters on the Internet and they worship each and everything Juan does. Juan can do no wrong. It would be a shame if those who support JA became equally blinded by the shininess of the DT. This case is not about the attorneys and not about the judge and not even about the victim’s family – it is about the defendant.

              • We must have watched different trials because I did see the Defence objecting over and over again. This is too depressing – I’m going to watch the terrorist coverage on CNN. 🙁

                • Carol,

                  Did you know CNN is the big sister of HLN the station that are vilifying Jodi Arias by the day & who want her dead. CNN are anti Jodi as well because they report negatively about her & also carry reports HLN do because it’s cheaper to do that. Jodi Arias, means big money to them, & that’s what the awful treatment by both HLN & CNN is all about, “Money”.

                  The more the trial goes on the more money they make in advertising & the more Nancy Grace & Co get to shout lies & innuendo about Jodi. If she gets the death sentence then they’ll claim it was down to their experts knowing the outcome & so they’ll publish a book/s on their inside story & that will sell for greedy money as well. The don’t care whether she’s innocent or not they want as much revenue as Jodi Arian can make for them. So remember, HLN, is the twin of CNN & both want to do Jodi harm. Shame on both of these “Networks”!

  18. Not only did Nurmi signal that he did not believe Jodi, He told the jury he did not like her. I think
    ineffective assistance of counsel could be the biggest issue in this case. He is doing a
    credible job in the retrial, but his mistakes were very costly to Jodi in the guilt phase.It is very hard
    to prove self defense, I think a heat of passion argument would have carried more weight.

    • I agree Joan. And I expected that KN would have led JA through the minute by minute of the day. Her testimony should have reached the crescendo of *she had no other alternative but to kill Travis*.

      KN brought out the confession and then immediately moved to Jodi’s family life. WTH?! KN made what must have been a horrific decision for Jodi sound clinical and unemotional. In fact it was JM who had to drag the specifics out of her. That should have never happened.

      • Certainly saying 9 times out of 10 I don’t like jodi arias did not help jodi. In fact it hurt her. Extremely incompetent to say that in front of jury. Jw should do all the talking as far as arguments go.

      • Cheryl, I don’t know what you mean about “drag the specifics”. Jodi told her story point by point under direct by KN. He could have used the photos better to tell her story, yes. But as far as I can recall, JM didn’t “drag” any more facts out of Jodi than those she had already revealed in direct to the best of her memory. JM asked her to speculate about what she couldn’t remember – specifically with respect to the photo of the pant leg with him on the floor. Since she couldn’t remember that period of time, KN repeatedly objected; with JSS continually overruling, she tried to cooperate and answer. Jodi’s responses in that regard were only speculation. The same went for JM’s questions about when and where she retrieved the knife – he was questioning her in a vacuum. She couldn’t recall whether it had been left in the bathroom or the bedroom. He tried to refute the possibility that it had been left in the bedroom by citing the short timeline. But he never did prove that timeline by simply putting a photo up on the screen. He asked about whether or not she had been crying. Again, she said she couldn’t remember.

        • I was not impressed with the DT’s presentation of JA’s story. It was a peculiar strategy to have JA take the stand and ask her out of the box whether she killed Travis and then have her say “Yes, I did. “The simple answer is that he attacked me and I defended myself.”

          Then the DT went directly to having JA describe her childhood in California. That was peculiar and not effective.

          I have never seen a trial where killing is admitted and argument of domestic violence or self defense is made where the defendant admits the killing and then moves directly on to childhood.

          The idea of presenting a self defense and domestic violence is to build to the crescendo of “I had no other choice.” The standard and effective way to do that is to start a 24 or so hours before the killing and then walk the defendant through – ie. (1) What plans did you have for 6-4-2008? (2) What did you do to prepare for the trip? (3) Where were you when you started the trip? (4) and what did you do next and next and next . . . etc.

          The idea is to engage the jurors and have them feeling the horror, panic and desperation that defendant felt in the hours leading up to the killing. The DT needs to help the jurors understand how JA found herself in the position of killing someone she cared about. Then, the jurors understand the whole self defense or domestic violence defense because they were taken emotionally and logically through the steps.

          By the time the DT finished the direct, there should have been no questions about the specifics of the day’s events. DT should have put out every action in that house. By the time the DT finished the direct, the jurors should feel as sick for JA as she felt when she killed Travis. At that point, the jurors should feel revulsion at the state if Juan asks too many pointed questions. At that point, the DT should have been 100% transparent and the jurors have complete compassion for JA. If the DT does not have that support when they rest then the DT blew the direct.

          The sad fact is that if JA had more periods of fog and confusion than periods of lucidity on 6-4-2008, she should have NEVER took the stand. If JA could not tell a complete story of the day’s events (because of such emotional turmoil that she lost memory of chunks of time) then she should have told no story at all.

          The DT knew that credibility was going to be an issue. The DT knew that JA lied to Flores in interviews. The DT had a duty to protect JA.

          • Jodi remembered more events than she cannot remember of the tragic day. She doesn’t remember the killing and doesn’t remember leaving the house. Her testimony was intended to counter previous denials that had been broadcast on TV via her appearances on tabloid news, those stories she made up during interrogation and her dissembling during phone interviews with EF. It was also to let the jury get to know her as an ordinary person in light of the death penalty threat. The photographs – the intended shower shots and the “what went wrong shots” were desperately in need of clarification. Overall, there were far too many things that needed explaining for Jodi NOT to have taken the stand, including the phone call she made from the Hoover Dam after she left Mesa and her reasons for continuing on to UT instead of just turning around and going back to Yreka.

            Jodi also explained why a knife was in the master suite. In order for the decorative rope/knife evidence to be credible, some history of their sexcapades had to be revealed. KN used the bedroom photographs to support the role playing so that the jury could understand why a rope would have been cut in that suite. As part of his DV strategy, KN also asked Jodi specific questions about the degree to which she was under TA’s control during those sexcapades.

            The defense’s strategy was based on the wound sequencing that LE had asserted for four years – that the gunshot was first. They couldn’t rework their case to challenge that effectively in the few remaining days before jury selection. If there hadn’t been a flip-flop on that issue at the last minute, the defense’s narrative together with Jodi’s testimony would have been much more effective, indeed.

            As to your contention that the defense team was generally weak on narrative and did not effectively build to a “she had no other choice” conclusion, I agree.

  19. I think one of the most positive things Jodi conveyed in her testimony was why she did the things she did afterward the fact (lying to everyone, going to the memorial, sending flowers). It’s exactly the thing her supporters have understood all along (but somehow could never convey to the type of people who do not think too deeply about anything). She was in cover-up mode but that doesn’t mean she planned to murder him or that she even murdered him at all (she *killed* him). And it was the trauma of killing the man she loved that threw her into intense trauma and the inability to admit, even to herself, that she had done such a thing. People who can’t understand that have little empathy, unable to put themselves in other people’s shoes (unless, of course, those other people are exactly like them, act exactly like them and wear exactly the same size shoe as they do).

  20. I think we can all agree, regardless of what “side” we are on, that this judge is a absolute joke. She is a disgrace and certainly not qualified to handle a murder case, nevermind a dp case

  21. Shift of burden of proof to the defense.

    In that Kiefer article from early ’14 that explained all the times JM has been in trouble, he was pretty much forgiven for them all, except coming dangerously close once to shifting the burden to the defense.

    One of the most interesting exchanges of the this trial came through sketchy tweets Jan. 12th. (Read tweets from bottom to top for correct order.)

    Steve Krafft @SKrafftFox10 · Jan 12

    Det. Flores: “there is history of access to porn sites on Travis Alexander’s computer.” #jodiarias
    0 replies 7 retweets 6 favorites
    Steve Krafft @SKrafftFox10 · Jan 12

    #jodiarias redirect from defense to Det. Flores: “no porn on computer is not same as saying Travis didn’t visit porn sites.”
    0 replies 5 retweets 6 favorites
    Steve Krafft @SKrafftFox10 · Jan 12

    #jodiarias Det. Flores says “there is no child pornography” on Travis Alexander’s computer.
    0 replies 10 retweets 29 favorites

    To me that says if you ask “Was there porn on the computer?” the answer is no.
    vs, if you ask “Were there searches for porn on the computer?” the answer is yes. It’s because the actual porn pictures are no longer there. So Flores felt comfy saying there was no porn on the computer. Omitted is “just hundred of thousands of searches for it.”

    Somehow in the guilt trial I thought there were certain subjects that were banned by order of the court, and they all seemed to be related to subjects that would defame Travis. – Like the mysterious 2 emails that couldn’t be admitted into evidence, and portions of the Hughes emails. Am I wrong?

    • Yes Nym there were some things that were not supposed to be brought up in court. One of those things was the fact that Jodi’s grandfather’s gun was stolen a few days before she went to Arizona. Someone had broken in to her grandparents’ house and stole some things. It was never proven that it was Jodi that did it and she was never charged for it. Therefore it could not be considered as evidence in her trial.yet Juan brought it in.and tried to accuse her. So far as I know no gun has ever been found. The bit about the little boys from his blog or myspace that was written by someone else was also never admitted because the person that wrote it would have to testify. Reading it from the net written by someone else is considered hearsay.

        • I don’t think he testified. Why didn’t he, btw? It’d made sense if he did. I don’t wanna jump into conclusions and say ”the DT dropped the ball here” , I’m sure there must have been a reason for not calling him to testify. As I’m pretty sure the frog would try and twist the story and make the witness say it was a joke of some kind; but at least the jurors would get to hear the story.

    • Nym, this question and answer is from January 2, 2015

      Lying Juan interviewing B. Neumeister

      Q: So then you went the first time. Then you went a second time. Why did you go a second time?
      A: The second time was to do a different type of clone. I wanted – the first time I did, I just captured what was on there, because I thought – it was said there was no porn. I didn’t – most of the time when I deal with the police department file, what they say is on there is on there. In this case, it was completely opposite of what they said was on there. So I wanted to get a complete clone so I could look for deleted files.

      • Oh yes, Canada Carol, this was one of the most gratifying answers of either trial! Then to have Flores on the 12th tell us that there is a difference between finding porn on the computer vs visits to porn sites, that just puts the icing on the cake. They said there was no porn because of the way the question was asked from the start, and knew it. They figured “No porn on the computer” would stop the whole conversation.

        There’s an interesting description of EnCase that says it sometimes doesn’t show images at all, depending on what version you are using.

    • The burden was indeed shifted to the defense and the state was playing a hide and seek game. This exchange between JW and Det Flores perfectly demonstrates the state’s hiding of evidence by admitting that there was a history of access to porn sites while at the same time saying there was no porn on the computer. I believe that this shows that the state was fully aware of the fact that bc of TA’s extensive cleaners on his computer (which were put there to hide the porn) that there was no “porn media” found on his computer but they were fully aware that there were thousands upon thousands of porn sites accessed by TA. These kinds of semantics will not be lost on the appellate judges. Playing these word games as Det Flores demonstrated by the exchange between himself and JW actually proves the state’s intent to hide the truth. This will NOT impress the appellate judges. There is NO excuse for the state withholding the evidence for 6 years. The defense has an absolute right to the evidence as it was found on the day they entered the home. Did they get that evidence? No. Many things happened : Det Flores deleted files / overwrote files / destroyed files by waking the computer up not once but twice that day. Then someone unplugged the computer and did a hard shut down further destroying evidence….this alone is a Brady violation enough to overturn the case. But no they went further – then days later they copied the hard drive and then shoved it in a vault for 6 years. And why wait until June 11 to copy the hard drive? why the wait? And why copy the hard drive without a write blocker ??? But not done yet, they further destroyed files on the computer when they fired up the computer on June 19, 2009 again destroying evidence and then doing another hard shut down. And they can claim all they want that the defense team were the ones that handled the computer and plugged it in, but this is simply not credible and this is not what Maria Schaffer testified to. JM sat there in the room with Maria Schaffer and looked through lots of photos and was looking for pictures of women’s breasts and other porn pictures – he knew there would be none there but what he didn’t tell the defense team was that there was thousands of porn site hits.. And now both Det Flores and JM can’t remember that JM was looking for pictures of porn and women’s breasts, etc.?? Really? This is evidence of DISSEMBLING TO COVERUP THE TRUTH !! They are not fooling anyone. Who are the judges to believe Maria Schaffer who has no dog in this fight or det flores and JM whose credibility are both in serious doubt. Lest we also forget the laughable testimony the other day by Det Flores regarding the taped interview with one of the roommates. Det Flores refused to speak the truth and identify the roommate but obfuscated and refused to admit that that was the roommate on the tape stating that he had never used TA’s computer. And when JSS asked JM about the taped interview with the roommate he conveniently couldn’t remember? JM, do YOU have a memory problem? Well, do ya? But that’s still not it yet. We have the mysterious 11:00pm access of the computer that same day of June 19, 2009. And don’t you know it the computer is still in the control of the state and NO ONE ELSE!!! So who accessed the computer at 11:00pm at night? Really, are you going to blame that one on the defense as well??? More destruction of evidence – Another Brady violation.. Then you still have no copy of the computer turned over to defense yet at this point and that wouldn’t happen for another approx 6 months until December when they gave over a copy of the hard drive to defense, you know the one that shows all the porn and the one that is a mirror image of the one from 2008, NOT !! Oops, we are still playing hide and seek and we hide and you have to seek some more….so you get the 2009 tampered with/corrupted version, you know the one that has been cleaned up ….. and then finally in 2014, six years later, the prosecution finally coughs up the 2008 copy which still was not a representation of the true evidence as found at the scene but oh well it’s the closest one they have to the pristine evidence..NONE of this is the DT’s fault, period ! The DT is NOT responsible for the evidence, the state is. The state failed its absolute duty to disclose the evidence to the defense. There was irreparable harm done to Jodi’s case and her constitutional rights were violated by not disclosing this evidence from the beginning. The 2009 image was NOT the same as the 2008 image and the defense is still examining that 2008 image and may find further damaging evidence that was deleted. And just to say it again: IT IS NOT WHAT YOU KNOW BUT WHAT YOU CAN PROVE IN A COURT OF LAW. KN had NO evidence that porn existed until recently regardless of the fact that he was told by Jodi that there was porn there on the computer. LD’s testimony that there was NO PORN is sworn testimony, JSS ! So hello what was there to follow up on ?? JM would have had to lie to the jury and the court to stand there and correct LD about his interview statement and make him retract that he did see porn on the computer AND HOPE THAT NO ONE WOULD EVER GO BACK AND LOOK AT THE INTERVIEW STATEMENT!! No doubt that has already been followed up on by KN to see exactly what was said by LD and we haven’t heard anything about it since. We haven’t seen any filings of motions claiming that JM lied about it, have we? So this complaint that KN should have followed up holds no water. Perhaps just perhaps with all the happenings of late on this porn issue LD was truly confused and bc he NOW knows there is tons of porn history on the computer he thought he had stated that earlier in his interview two years earlier. Obviously not or we would have heard something by now about that. So, JSS when you say that the DT “should have followed up on that” you are trying to excuse the inexcusable. It won’t work. The Brady Violation does not require ANYTHING FROM THE DEFENSE, PERIOD !!!! The state’s position throughout the trial was that there was NO PORN !!! That is a proven lie….

      • 10-4.

        We don’t even know if they didn’t “study” the 2008 drive before they made the clone of the 2009.

        I wouldn’t trust those sob’s with anything they say if they had a gun to their head.

        Somebody is on it at almost midnight? Oh just please with the no harm or prejudice act Sidebar.

        • My belief is that they did study the 2008 drive and knew what exactly was on it. Why else would they have hidden it away for 6 years until forced to turn it over? And why else would they have made the defense a copy of the hard drive in late 2009 instead of as you said turned over a copy of the o-r-i-g-i-n-a-l ???????

      • Ignore my last line about LD that starts “perhaps just perhaps” – I was tired when writing and don’t know what I was thinking. Should have just said that perhaps just perhaps LD was confused, period, when he said what he said in his testimony that there was porn on TA’s computer……

        • Another example of JMs tactics. Was there porn ON the computer? No..someone had VIEWED porn on a porn website. The DT dropped the ball on this one.

          Can the DT include the misconduct that was denied by JSS in another motion for dismissal ?

          I hope that John Smith is still working on the 2008 image and can tell what was deleted by the Prosecutor? at 11pm. Martinez asking if there were any pictures on the hard drive rings alarm bells..he knew that “someone” was supposed to
          fix that problem.

          There still is exculpatory evidence being hidden by the prosecutor..the sim cards and the SD cards issue.

          • When you view porn on a computer your computer retains those links so technically since everyone wants to play the semantics game and blame the DT there absolutely was porn on the computer. Links to porn sites on your computer is porn on the computer. Now if the defense had asked was there any porn media or photos on the computer and that was the only question they asked then, I guess you could say that they dropped the ball. They asked was there any porn on the computer. Answer to that was a resounding YES !!!! This argument is all a distinction without a difference and when the appellate court judges rule on this they will see that the semantics game that the prosecution is playing denies the intent of the questions asked…this will only anger them….we are talking about a death penalty case and someone’s life is in the balance….And further the semantics game does NOT RELIEVE THEM OF THEIR ABSOLUTE DUTY TO DISCLOSE EXCULPATORY EVIDENCE WHICH THEY DID NOT!!!! That is absolute fact and there is no worming they way out of that…..

          • And yes, the DT is still reviewing the 2008 image and hopefully will come up with more damaging evidence to show what the prosecution did. And specifically address the mysterious 11:00pm access on June 19, 2009 which ONLY could be done by the state….

            • How can the DT be held responsible for “dropping the ball” ? They didn’t find the exculpatory evidence fast enough? KN was told by Jodi about the porn. That’s all he had. He had no hard evidence to back that up. The prosecution made sure that he would never find the evidence from tampering with the computer at the scene to handing over a corrupted and tampered copy in 2009 with NOTHING ON IT ! Not to mention the other tampering on June 19, 2009 in front of the defense team and then again later that day at 11:00pm. The DT was never given the true original copy (and even that did not reflect the true evidence bc of what Flores did at the scene by waking up the computer multiple times and then doing a hard shut down) They were lied to throughout the trial about there being no porn. LD did not see any porn unless you can show me in his interview where he stated he did and then we would be seeing KN making motions regarding JM’s lying in court to the jury and the court in order to get LD to quickly retract his statement. There have been no such motions by KN on this subject so we can safely assume that LD did state in his interview that there was no porn. You have JSS faulting the DT for not “following up” on this which is ridiculous if you understand that LD’s sworn testimony in front of the jury was that there was no porn and you have confirmation in his interview that he said the same thing…So what is there to follow up on ???? You can not hide the evidence and then scold the DT for not finding it !!!!! And when you access porn sites on your computer and your computer retains those links and data points then you technically do have porn on your computer. The fact that there was no porn media or photos or pictures or whatever word you want to use is meaningless bc there was porn on the computer and further JM and Flores and others knew about it. WE ARE TALKING ABOUT LIFE AND DEATH HERE !!! This will NOT be lost on the appellate judges at all. THE BRADY VIOLATION IS IN CONCRETE AND THE STATE VIOLATED BRADY, PERIOD !! They failed to disclose the exculpatory evidence to the defense, period!!! END OF STORY………

              • BB I know your up set. You need to take a deep breath here. This isn’t over yet. We do not know at this point what the DT will do next. But I’m sure they are not going to just be sitting around doing nothing.

                • I do and thank you. I am upset bc I don’t think people are getting this truly. They are shifting the burden to the defense without even knowing it…It’s not what you know it’s what you can prove in court and there was no hard evidence to back up Jodi’s statements about the porn …..until recently …..

              • I’m sorry if my post was confusing..I agree about the porn as you have stated. JM is the piece of work who mixes everything up to make it appear as if he has done no wrong and paint everyone else as a liar.

                • No need to say sorry. I am just on hyperdrive bc of the idiotic decision JSS handed down. She simply is unwilling to apply the law as she should and Jodi must suffer as a result…It is JSS who is making invalid excuses and shifting the burden to the defense with her you “should have followed up” mantra which is utterly ridiculous. She will be slapped down in the appellate court IMHO but unfortunately unless a witness comes forward that rats out this well orchestrated coverup by the prosecution – coverup of the Brady violation and various sundry prosecutorial misconduct – then Jodi is likely to be in prison for many years before she has the chance of freedom or another trial. I am trying to be positive for the remaining of this re-trial and perhaps more damning evidence against the state that would possibly change things for Jodi now instead of years from now….

              • BB, I have also felt frustrated when people have tried to make too much sense, legal or otherwise, out of the proceedings or legal maneuverings such as they have transpired in this case. I agree with your take on JSS’s Ruling. There is one particularly vague passage in it having to do with the ongoing examination of the 2008 hard drive that is so poorly written it is beneath contempt in a capital case.

      • Access to the evidence room reminds me of OJ trial. In that case, they figured out who went in and out because they had to swipe themselves into the room. There was some testimony of scanning from Florinna, “the state’s star witness” per one tweeter, but that must be the item itself. Do these keystoners have to swipe themselves in and out? Probably not – too sophisticated and you can’t cheat.

        • BB I don’t think anyone is not taking you seriously. Yes I’m concerned about about you and everyone else out here. We are living this trial day in and day out. I know I personally am. I not sure what we can do except for support Jodi unconditionally and trust in the DT as Jodi does.

  22. I am sincerely hoping all of this is setting Jodi up for an amazing appeal. Like what I read from everyone leading up to the latest let down, I felt so sure and confident she would walk free. Just have to keep the faith that day is coming soon!

  23. To reinforce my point above about how important the state’s flat-out lies about the porn history were to its case, here and in my next post are excerpts from JM’s closing:

    And one of the other things that she did with regard to this is that, not only did she make up that .. this lie for her defence, the other thing that she did is that she created a lie that really involves behaviour that involves a hot-button kind of topic. How horrific it is to be accused falsely of being a pedophile. He’s not here; he’s not here to say no, that’s not true. She can say to Alyce LaViolette that it was on the computer, the images, but then Alyce LaViolette comes in and says no, that’s not what she told me. But remember Alyce LaViolette has a problem with the truth, and so, the state goes to the computer and doesn’t find anything there. Oh no, no, no, I changed my mind. It was actually images, they were like this. How does one defend that when there are no images there? The police looked through the attic, the police looked everywhere. How absolutely hateful that allegation is and how absolutely extensive she was with it, but remember I said that she went a little too far with these thoughts?

    Pedophilia
    First of all, her journal indicates that there wasn’t such an event. Second of all, the text messages also indicate the same thing. And what human being, if that is the allegation, if they really are caring, what human being doesn’t go to the police and say, or somebody else, this person is a pedophile? For her, instead what she does is she says, no. And she talks about all these phone calls going back and forth, and that also doesn’t match; what she does, well it’s the new approach; it’s the new approach to pedophilia. What does she do? Well, let’s jump in the sack. That’s what we’re going to do. At least that’s what she tells you now, but with regard to Alyce LaViolette, no, she didn’t. She can’t even keep that together. If that is the truth, and if that is what happened wouldn’t you expect that her journals, if she didn’t write about it, at least wouldn’t have said that nothing noteworthy has happened? She has gone too far at least with regard to that particular allegation. And at least in this allegation, it is fortunate that the police did have Mr. Alexander’s laptop and there weren’t any images of children on it, none whatsoever. They checked throughout the house. There was nothing inside of the house that indicated anything like that. There weren’t any photographs, there wasn’t anything. And so this allegation of hers, whether it was on the computer, or whether it was in photograph form, just went a little bit too far. These lies to take from Mr. Alexander, the only thing that he has left, his reputation, is just a little bit too much to, uh, in the light of what we know, and in the light of she says, it’s just too much even in this particular case. It is a hateful allegation, with nothing to support it, but can you imagine what goes through somebody’s head when they hear it for the first time? That person does not deserve justice, that person doesn’t deserve anything because of what he did. It’s so easy for her to make these allegations. It’s so easy for her to get on the witness stand, as you’ve seen, and lie. And this is really the pinnacle. It doesn’t get any higher, or worse or lower, whatever way you want to look at it, than that. Well, how do you judge that allegation? Well, the judge has. How you judge these sorts of allegations? Well, just like everything in this case, there are rules and those rules are the jury instructions, such as the ones that have been read to you today. And one jury instruction particularly deals with this aspect.

  24. And here’s the continuation. (For a complete transcript, see (link removed), “transcripts” toward the very end of the menu at the right.)

    Credibility of witnesses
    It’s the credibility of witnesses’ instruction. I know, the judge has read it, but because it’s so important it is worth my referencing it again, because it directly relates to the two primary allegations in this case, that of physical abuse and the fact that Mr. Alexander was interested in little boys and girls, according to her.

    It tells you that in deciding the facts of this case, you should consider what testimony to accept and what to reject. What it’s telling you there, is that you ultimately decide whether or not this person here, who is the epitome of a liar, whether this individual, whether you are going accept or reject what she tells you. Are you going to pick and choose some things of what she says and then accept some other things? How is that you can know with any certainty whatsoever whether or not she’s telling the truth about anything? It says you may accept everything a witness says or part of it, or none of it. The state submits to you that you are, based on what you’ve seen, based on what you’ve heard, and based on the testimony of others, you should accept none of it. It doesn’t mean that the eighteen days that she was on the witness stand are wasted, no, what that means is you are finally able to see this individual in the light of day. You’re able to see how she reacts. You’re able to see that when push comes to shove, she’ll look each and every one of you in the eye and lie. It doesn’t matter where. And this instruction then goes on and says, in evaluating testimony you should use the tests for truthfulness that people use in determining matters of importance in everyday life. Important matters, what kind of matters would those be? Medical care; would you, would anybody, not you but anybody, go to a doctor who has lied to them consistently about major aspects of their life? No, people would not go to a doctor who lies to them. And the factors that you are to consider are the witness’s ability to see or hear or know the things the witness testify to; that when we’re talking about the defendant, she was there. She knows. The quality of the witness’s memory; the quality of her memory is incredible, absolutely incredible, down to follicles of hair. Unless it hurts her; then the fog rolls in. Then there’s an excuse, then there’s a reason why she doesn’t remember.

      • CC, I remember when you were doing that. You deserve appreciation and respect for tenaciously suffering through those transcriptions.

    • Whew! Thank you, Alan! Will you write Jodi’s appeals????

      I heard the closings, but I’m not sure I ever read the transcripts. She was literally convicted because of their lie about no porn on the computer!

      I would love to see a montage of JM with dates and times on a video showing about 100 examples of him stressing that Jodi lied. But start it with the recent statements that prove she was telling the truth.

      • LOL. Thanks for the compliment, but I’m not a lawyer. Cheryl Handy would be a better choice! I offered last year to do something I would be great at — proofreading Nurmi’s motions — but got no reply on that (though I have got brief replies on other things).

        • You may have missed your calling…
          I thought perhaps Cheryl was a lawyer, but then there are astute posts from many so it’s hard to tell.

          I’m concerned about Pseudo-Smith saying that the 6/19/09 viewing of the computer overwrote files but they are still retrievable – it’s just easier using the ’08 hard drive. JSS mentioned that in her response to the motion to dismiss, that technically it didn’t matter that they weren’t given the ’08.

          I sure hope, as Cheryl said (I think), that the defense team is going over JSS’ response word by word to see how they can improve their motions. But what difference does it make if the DT or the State didn’t represent her properly? Or a combination of both. Unfair trial is unfair trial.

          You were the one who wrote that wonderful piece on the circumstances under which Jodi gets a new judge AND a new prosecutor. Can you refresh our memories on that one particular point?

          • I think it matters as to the stated GROUNDS for appeals.

            Hopefully Cheryl can tell us (what a GIFT to know we have a lawyer among us at last!)

            I don’t *think* an appeal could be made simultaneously citing two points that cancel each other out or suggest equal culpability – as in the Brady violation ALONG WITH the ineffective counsel that dropped the ball on the Brady violation. If true, then the appeal would have to be built on the stronger case with the hope the higher court agrees – but the court is only going to rule on the issue put before them, they’re not going to look at it and say ‘no, it’s not this – but it’s this other thing and we’ll reverse based on that.

            Ok, I’m confused too, lol.

            Ah hell, I’m going back to writing fiction. Later gang.

            • LOL… Surely this whole trial is fiction. It’s hard to find a piece of truth. There sits Jody, surrounded with chaos, lies, insouciance, and incompetence.

              She could probably get up and reorganize the whole bunch – maybe take them all on a hike to unknown, sacred places as a field trip, so they all regain their mental clarity.

              • ” It’s hard to find a piece of truth. ”

                You got that right.

                At this point, there is absolutely nothing left of the state’s case that is credible.

                • You got it Journee. Look at it from just one the many examples of prosecutorial misconduct. The porn.

                  (1) During guilt phase, DT knows that porn existed on the computer. The testimony came out in open court . JA keeps insisting that TA watched porn all the time. The DT is worried about insulting TA’s family and offending the jurors. The DT focuses on domestic violence and self defense and ignores porn.
                  (2) During guilt phase, the state keeps saying that JA is a huge liar because she says that porn is on the computer. And the state keeps insisting no porn is on the computer.
                  (3) The DT weighs the risks and benefit of objecting to the state statements that JA is lying about porn on the computer. The DT opts against objecting because they don’t think the porn is a big issue and since the DT doesn’t like JA “9 days out of 10,” they see nothing to be gained from objecting.
                  (4) Guilty verdict then DT asks to be withdrawn and court says no.
                  (5) The DT puts in no case for the first penalty phase. Jury hangs without any defense case.
                  (6) The DT learns months later that the state destroyed evidence and that there was even more porn than anyone knew. The DT has a chance to reflect, talk to colleagues about the case, get in shape and be healthier.
                  (7) The DT now wishes they had objected to the statements back during the guilt phase of the trial. But the DT did not know about the plethora of porn in 2013 and they did not believe JA.
                  (8) Court says – but the porn was not an issue for DT and that is why DT did not object and that is why DT did not try to rehabilitate Dworkin.
                  (9) DT says – _______________________.

                  Fill in the blank and improve our chances at success. What is the best reason why the porn is an issue now?

                  Also, is there a good argument to extend the Brady violation to cases where the DT makes defense strategies based on the state’s lies and destruction of evidence? In other words, if Juan convinced the DT that porn was not an issue and the DT did not dig further because the DT trusted the state’s assertion that porn was not an issue, then can the defense strategy to not dig further (including not objecting and not rehabilitating expert witness) be grounds for the prejudice needed under Brady? Remember that the DT knew there was at least some porn on the computer. And that was testified to during the guilt phase. In that case, JA is prejudiced by the DT trusting the word of the state. And in that case, I think the DT has to fall on their sword and admit that they got sucker punched by the state. It will tough for the DT to say they were tricked by a prosecutor who has a reputation of not being trustworthy. Why would they trust JM over their client!J

                  Or were the strategic decisions to not consider porn an issue (and therefore not object and not rehabilitate the expert witness) just a bad strategic decision? Again, the DT would have to fall on their sword and admit that they made a horrible decision.

                  Maybe it is time that people stop worrying about their egos and futures. Maybe it is time for people in the court system to put the defendant first.

                • Cheryl: Re “What is the best reason why porn is an issue now?”, see my earlier quotes from Juan’s closing. Answer: because it was one of the three pillars on which Jodi was convicted.

                  Also, I think it’s unjustified to speak of “the DT” as though it were one unified team. Jodi viewed Jennifer and Kirk very differently, at least in 2013. Kirk was lead attorney, and we don’t know what Jennifer might have done differently had she been in charge.

          • Again, thanks for the compliment, Nym. I know a little bit about substantive criminal law and have both published and taught courses on little aspects of it. But I know nothing about criminal procedure (which is what appeals turn on) except what I can find in a textbook. I would be happy to help with appeals if asked, but I don’t expect to be asked.

            Everything I know about Jodi’s appeals process is in the answer to FAQ #2 on the appellate-fund website, http://www.justice4jodi.com. These answers are beautifully written, but not by me.

    • Why does the Prosecution get two chances to make closing statements in US cases. I mean in the first trial, Martinez gave his closing statement, Nurmi then gave his, & then Martinez gets another go to put the nail in the coffin (literally). How can that be fair?

      • It’s because the prosecution has the burden of proof and it’s called closing rebuttal. The closing rebuttal is limited though only to those very specific things that that the defense talked about in their closing argument. They can’t go beyond those particulars or it’s called “beyond the scope.”

        That’s the way it’s supposed to work but the proof was laughable here.

        Also in Arizona, there is a thing called affirmative defense. Self defense is an “affirmative defense,” meaning that Jodi had to show some evidence to the court that she had to act in self defense.

        This most likely forced her to have to take the stand and testify on her own behalf because there were no eye witnesses and Travis is dead.

        Arizona has some of the strangest criminal statutes in the US.

    • No R. Love, you are in All ways a magnanimous individual with a heart bigger than your barn and with all the understanding and compassion in all the universe. You mean more to us alll than you will ever know.
      (if I knew how to make heart I would send you a dozen red ones!

    • I’ve been reading and feeling at awe of all our posters great knowledge and insight of the legal system.
      Thank you, guys!!!!!!!!!!!! ♥

      Carol, here’s how you do the heart shape & hearts ; ——– no spaces in between

  25. R.Love javascript:the_new_window=window.open(‘http://fsymbols.com/bookmarklet/’,’the_window’,’height=460,width=700′);if%20(window.focus)%20{the_new_window.focus();}

        • Sorry CC53 I was out starting up the broom. . .figure I will meet you, Cindy and Journee about 11:10 MST at the nearest Golden Arches or Waffle House which ever is open! 😉 😉 I will be the one with flaming red hair smoking a corn cob pipe standing beside her broom. ♥ And away we go!!!!! Be careful and be sure and keep this on the down low.

          • R,
            If we’re going to the JSS’s mansion to protest, could we use Greenwich MEAN Time, i.e., the time the haters are on. Just to piss them off. Just think, when we turn JSS’s license plates upside down, she’s sure to get pulled over by the cops before she even gets to the courthouse. I wish I could be there to see her saying: “Do you now my name, sir?” a la Reese Witherspoon. Of course, if we paste FREE JODI stickers over her block, she might catch on who’s doing it. Put 2 + 2 together. Nah, that’s not going to happen. Corn cob pipe? Hmmnn, what do you smoke in the thing?

            • Greenwich MEAN Time : check! Glad I stopped back in here. . . .got half way over MO and forgot my screwdriver and had to fly back home to get one. (and not the drink, the tool. . .hehehe) JSS will probably get pulled over as soon as she leaves her driveway, those cops are on top of that kind of trick. . .they really check those upside down license plates. 😀 Grabbed a couple of extra cases of TP and more bumper stickers. . . on my way…Do you think the Rustler’s steakhouse will still be open we might need some rattlesnake steak sandwiches when we get done! Hope Cindy and Journee are ready I think I’ll swoop up there and grab them on my way. . .then we will not need gas cans…. see you soon. Hey Marja, you get ready and go with us pick you up soon! Remember this is our secret. See you soon cc53! Check over and OUT !!!!
              PSS ♥ I found some hater posts out behind the barn and that’s what I’ll be smoking in my pipe!!! Don’t want to waste any of them, at least they are good for something. 🙄

      • LOL 😆 ♥ I just meant there are so many brilliant people on here. . .I’m in awe! I LOVE IT!!
        I love to watch you all brainstorm away!!!!! Thanks for the very kind thoughts! Everyone one of you amaze me!!! Why is JODI NOT FREE YET????? (((((JODI)))))) Love to ALL TEAM JODI!!!♥

        • I wasn’t brainstorming. Makes my head hurt. You probably won’t recognize Cindy tonight b/c she changed her hair color. It’s not real but it’s spectacular. See you at Pickles. This plan isn’t beginning to sound a little Charles Manson-sony, is it?

          • Ah, so sorry girls – just now catching up on what I guess I was supposed to be in on. Thinking I missed the meet up time, maybe, I don’t know… is it the greenwich MEAN time or the MEAN standard time? Probably doesn’t matter, I think maybe I missed them both. And they’re both mean anyway…

            Riding along on a different story for now. Jodi seems to be telling part of it, if that’s any consolation. I’ll be here and at attention when the trial picks up again.

            Give Pickles a kiss from me, as she is part of God’s plan too.

            • That’s A-ok Journee, We waited as long as we dared but you didn’t show up. . . we were afraid we might look llike “Women of the Night” kind of thing so we took off to only fail at our mission! Marja jumped on as we flew over MO. . .that was a super trick too!!! We didn’t even have to slow down!!!! Get that novel wrote so you can go on our next mission. We will Succeed. Pickles will never catch on. . .Your Right She is part of God’s Plan just wish we understood her part in all of this.

                • I am the “Queen of Inpatients”.
                  Isaiah 40:28-31

                  Do you not know? Have you not heard? The LORD is the everlasting God, the Creator of the ends of the earth. He will not grow tired or weary, and his understanding no one can fathom. He gives strength to the weary and increases the power of the weak. Even youths grow tired and weary, and young men stumble and fall; but those who hope in the LORD will renew their strength. They will soar on wings like eagles; they will run and not grow weary, they will walk and not be faint.

                • Lol, I was thinking of the soft little flowers, even though it is not the right season! Well, very timely comment, R. Love. Thank you!

          • CC53, R. Love geez why didn’t you tell me my hair was orange?? I guess you do have to use more boxes of dye to change dark brown hair to blond. I thought I could just quick change it right before we left.

            Do you think anyone noticed????

        • R.Love, darn you mean I have to return these Gas cans??? No,no,no…I won’t do it!! We all know what happens when you do that…….geez…

          R. Hon I was also reading the post and just was so taken back by the brilliants of the minds. The one thing that came to my simple little mind is none of us knows everything that went on the scenes or behind closed doors. ( judges chambers). We only see what was given to us. Were there missed opportunities, hell yes!! What I have walked away with is like trying to build a child’s gym set for the back yard. You start building it and you realize some of the prices are missing. What do you do??

          • UUggggghhhhhh! You go back and read the instructional manual! I personally, am enjoying watching all of our Legal Eagles figured this all out. Some Real Smarties! Beaming with Pride here!!!!
            I don’t know about you but my back is aching! Jodi didn’t tell me it is so hard to hold on to that Fantastic Broom. . .and did you see how we disappeared when the Keystone Cops showed up! They won’t scare us though, we will be back and finish this mission! We will not be scared by the likes of those goons. Wonder who told them we were coming?? So much for the Secret! Going to find my Advil, how in the World will I do my barn chores today?
            PS Also, I giving up smoking, it just about got me, all that HATE!!!

            • You did good…. Ya that up, up and away was a bit hard on the back but next time…just saying……

              Ya perhaps the smoking isn’t such a good idea. That hacking almost gave us away…. But you did a good job of getting away from the keystone cops, I looked back and they looked pretty dumb standing there pointing in the air with their mouths open…

  26. I haven’t gotten to catch up with everyone, but have a question?
    The witnesses are able to lie perjurying themselves, the state is so full of corruption and lies, but
    it’s up to the jury to decide who is credible?
    That’s messed up!
    I don’t know how the judge is going to instruct this jury without being hypocritical.

    • All, we will just have to wait and see what else comes out with the witness testimony.
      In the coming days and weeks it’s going to get ugly. But now the DT knows what their up against.

  27. I want to cofrim a short post regarding CNN last night. It was a sarcastic remarks between Canada Carol and myself. Yes I think we both know the connection between CNN and HLN both under the Time Warner unbrella.

    • I’ve always thought this all goes WAY beyond the death of Travis Alexander and Jodi Arias. Way too much money has been spent to cover up and sweep their lies under the rug. What will next week bring?

    • OH don’t you go acting all innocent on me now! SMH 😉 ((((((Cindy & cc53)))))))
      Thanks for the good laughs. Never doubt for one minute though, Jodi’s freedom is always on my mind!
      When Jodi is FREE again we all will be celebrating!!!!! What a party that will be! 😀 ((((JODI))))

      • You are so right…one heck of a big party!!!!

        I wonder if Jodi ever gets copy’s of our post??? If not I hope her family does and perhaps will find the humor in this…

        ((((Jodi))))

  28. This is probably going to be a stupid statement because my mind is jumbled from so much information and you can grab me and give me a good shake & tell me to:”Wake the hell up!,” BUT:

    If someone offered me a million bucks to PROVE 100% WITHOUT ANY DOUBT that Jodi killed Travis Alexander, I couldn’t do it. Could you?

    • CC53, interesting question. Not sure where your going with this but my humble little brain would say Hell No! Not because I’m biased either. Way, way too much is coming out that proves there is something very wrong here…..IMHO.

      • Not really going anywhere with it, Cindy. Maybe, looking for reassurance that Jodi really did do the deed. I know she has confessed to killing him and we have the gas cans, the upside down license plates, the rented car, the photos with the added time & date stamps that “prove” she was at Travis’s place until at least around 2pm on the day he died, etc., but I still have a lingering doubt that she did it. I keep going over and over the “evidence” looking for that one piece of information that will make me finally think: “OK, that proves she did” but I can’t find it.

        • CC53, I have done the same thing from day one. No one but Jodi herself will change my mind. It’s the little things that just don’t add up for me. Am I delusional? Time will tell…..

        • The best I can do with the circumstantial evidence, such as it is, is that she might have killed him. Sometimes, if I try real hard, and mainly b/c she said she killed him, I think she probably did kill him. But, I know if I was a juror, I could never convict her of first degree murder or even 2nd degree murder. Not even sure I could vote for manslaughter. Probably not. To me, Jodi comes across as a truthful person and a good person, so I would have voted “Not Guilty.”

          • Isn’t this the would have, could have and Should have? We can sit here until the sun shines in hell we can’t go back at this point. Everyone has their own perceptions on what truly happened that day. I’m not saying anyone is wrong, I’m just saying we will have to wait until more evidence comes out.

          • OK I just want to throw this out here. OK we all know TA was attracted to children.
            Jodi wasn’t around to feed his addiction by playing the roll. So just perhaps he did something to someone’s child??
            I could go on and on but there sure is a big cover up going on here and I think the church has something to do with it.

            Does anyone find it odd that the room mates had to either climb over the doggy gate or take it down to go up to their rooms? Was this something TA did every time he went on trips?? I know that one of the girl friends was taking care of Napoleon but that dog had to be acting mighty strange those 5 days. He had to have known that TA was in that house. Just saying….. If you have or had a dog you will understand what I’m saying.

            What was on the memory card that didn’t fit in TA’s camera???

            • There’s a memory card that doesn’t fit in Travis’ camera??? Did you know that Jodi is concerned about a second memory card gone missing that she always had with her own camera? It contains photos of her sister and herself visiting a Buddhist monastery during the time when her grandfather’s home was burglarized.

              • Justus – how have you missed all of the camera memory card discussions?

                The memory card in evidence at trial, the one shown to us by Connor as the item found loose in the washing machine along with the camera, the one Melendez said was IN the camera when he received it – and from which he said he extracted the damning photos – would not have fit into Travis’ camera. Travis’ camera would only hold a memory card which was proprietary to Sony a the time, slightly smaller and slimmer than other cards on the market, a narrower rectangle – and BLACK in color. The card entered into evidence looked very dark in the few video close-ups we saw, but was described by Connor and Martinez both as BLUE.

                That’s the card Cindy’s referring to, I think.

        • CC53 and Cindy: I do not feel comfortable with the current story. This is why.
          Jodi does not seem to be a devious person to me. I cannot listen to what she said in the very beginning, the sincerity in her voice and her mannerisms, without believing her completely. As hard as it might be for some people to believe her very first recounting of events, it is the only version of events that makes sense, at least to me.

          Jodi is a not a good actress. She cannot play a part.
          Jodi is a terrible liar. When she does not tell the truth it is obvious. We do not believe her when she says she ‘killed him’ because it comes across poorly. It sounds insincere.

          Jodi has a vivid memory; it is an element of the artistic mind and personality. All the details of events that happened in her life, she talks about vividly. She focuses on vivid details in her artwork. Each element makes sense and is connected as she expresses herself in her art.. In many ways her art is key to who she is.

          During her first interview she tries to explain to Detective Flores what happened: the story as she lived it. He does not let her finish or explain in detail. He takes the pen from her hand. He takes her artist’s tool away from her. She reacts like the child whose teacher says ‘don’t draw in class’. She sits back in her chair in compliance.

          • Carol it’s as if you read my mind. The words that I could not form. Yes, you are write about Jodi being compliant. That is what she learned from her mother never standing up to her father berating her. Jodi in all 4 of her relationships was compliant. She did what was expected of her. We see this play out in her relionship with Travis. I truly do understand how Jodi expresses herself with words. Her memory is amazing. For those who question it….I am going to be 64 and I can recall events that happen when I was 3.
            It all has to do with how it affected the child at the time. Everyone of us have memories locked in our brain. You never know when or what will trigger them.

            I believe Jodi….I believe Jodi can not remember what happed..

  29. So relieved to see that you all made it home from your Secret mission to Kolob aka AZ. I thought I might be waking up to hear all about your escapades on CNN. You can’t smoke that shiz RL. It will really mess with your head. Cindy I hope you get you hair color under control.

    😆

        • Cindy, I’m not saying your hair looked like Larry’s, of course. Just referring to the color…. oops, almost put my foot in it there.

            • He certainly does!!!! 😆 You get ready your going on the next trip! Of course you’ll need to meet us at the border!!!! If we cross the border they might not let us back in! 😉

              • You better stay clear of the drones at the border. I’ve got my own broom so I could meet you down in Kolob if you give me enough time to get through customs and make my flight down. Golly, I sure would be in a mess of trouble if we got caught by the keystoners. I use Canada Very Mean Time. 😉

                • Thanks for the Laugh CanadaCarol !! Correct me if I’m wrong but I believe brooms are allowed to fly anywhere at any altitude. . .no one would dare stop you! Just forget customs. Let’s see if you flew at an altitude of 35,000 ft going around 300 miles an hour I would say we could intercept you right over MI, fly over MO pick up Marja and land at Kolob Zero by midnight and home before daybreak. I’m going let Cindy steer for awhile because I almost fell asleep coming back from MI to TN. Even with Jodi’s autopilot on her broom, I really got tired. It was a long stretch all alone. We will coordinate our plans closer to the next mission. 😉 Remember it is our Secret. And absolutely no one can know. Shh
                  PS I ordered my own broom but wouldn’t you know it, it is on backorder, that might hold us up just a tad bit.

          • ROFLMBO!!!! Way to GOOD! cc53 I thought we all looked amazing and that was one reason the keystone cops were in shock from our beauty!!! I bet they are still babbling to themselves about the experience! If only they had given us just a little more time, we would have accomplished our mission. You should have seen the look on my husband’s face when the sun came out and he actually could see my new flaming red hair-do!!!! We have left a trail of shocked people in our wake. . . . …….
            Hey, did anyone else notice Broom Hilda’s pink undies. . .looked like she has met Sheriff Joe!!! If only……POOF!

            • Hey where have you been?? So does your husband like the “new you?”.

              I tried to dye my hair back and now it’s green. I need to talk to our girl (Jodi). I wonder how she did it with one box’s driving down the interstate. Maybe I should call the frog I’m sure he has the answer…but he’s most likely busy trying to get totdoc on board to should like she really knows something.

              • Truly helped clean the barn. LOL This is the truth and the whole truth, No Olay here! No, he didn’t care for it. . .he doesn’t like any shocking changes, I’ve been trying to go back to my real color but am now in between a blue and purple stage. We might ought to leave it be until the Mission is accomplished. I would hate to be bald during the rest of this winter!!!! Stay warm up there!!!!!

  30. Note to Cheryl Handy and BB: You both say above that the 2009 image, which is what the DT, including Dworkin, had in the original trial, contained no porn. JSS’s opinion says the opposite. She says that the porn-history content of both copies and the source is identical and cites defense expert John Smith as authority for that.

    • Alan, What does “identical” really mean here? How deep did Neumeister and Smith have to go to find what they did find? The overwriting and deletions leave footprints. Were they deep in the woods or on the outskirts of town where anyone could have seen them? Were they partly washed away? On what particular statement of Smith’s would you think she based her opinion? Do you suppose Smith could forthrightly agree with her conclusion without adding his own addendum and qualifiers – if he could?

      • Sorry, no idea. I have no technical knowledge about computers. Read that part of the opinion and you’ll know as much as I do!

            • I doubt that even Smith, whom JSS cited in her most recent Ruling, would have unreservedly agreed with her assertion that the 2008 and 2009 clones of the laptop hard drive are identical. That is my opinion based on BN’s testimony – BN, the guy who performs forensic work for the Department of Defense. She hasn’t even taken into consideration the potential damage from the hard shut-down of the afternoon of June 19, 2009 in making that statement, much less the unaccounted for 11:00pm laptop activity later that same day, neither of which would have been recorded on a June 11, 2008 mirror image of hard drive. I’m no lawyer but IMO there is evidence and then there is evidence, meaning: To what lengths does an investigator have to go to discover it? It matters.

              Seems to me there is a substantive question as to the particular clone LD received vis a vis the “miss[ed]”…”aircraft carrier in the room”. JSS did not address that glaring discrepancy in her Ruling and she obviously wrote it before the last day of court, not after. She pulled a Robert Kennedy [in the Cuban crisis of ’62, the U.S. answered and negotiated with Khrushchev’s second-to-last cable in the showdown, responding as if they had not yet received the last untenable offer; they were able to do this without insulting the U.S.S.R.(and Cuba) owing to the communications lag time – it took four hours for a cable to arrive from Russia] by not addressing the most recent day’s testimony in her Ruling.

              KN and JW by this time are more than familiar with the Judge’s modus operandi and probably understood it better after the first week of the guilt phase than we do now. E.g. just the sidebars must have been very telling…The President and the Attorney General’s purpose in their 1962 brinksmanship was to avert a disastrous conflict. JSS has apparently kicked the can down the road by sidestepping testimony (including disingenuous representations made by Flores about the September, 2014 interview recording played in court) on this most recent day of the penalty re-trial, but why she has done that remains unclear.

    • Alan, I know that BN testified that the only way to miss the porn would be if the raw data wasn’t there. It was that obvious once you had the raw data. He said it was like the “aircraft carrier in the room.” So, either LD is a complete idiot with no skills whatsoever (which I do not believe for an instant) or it is as BN stated – that he simply was not given the raw data….Also you need to think about why the prosecution did not turn over a copy of the o-r-i-g-i-n-a-l (thanks Jade !) 2008 hard drive instead of a 2009 copy made in late 2009? Why would the prosecution not turn over the most pristine evidence (although even that wasn’t pristine as we know bc Flores messed it up at the crime scene and destroyed tons of files when he woke up the computer twice and did a hard shut down by pulling the plug – all done without a write blocker being installed to protect the evidence ) So JSS is an idiot who doesn’t understand a word of BN testified to she needs to get a tutor so she can catch up bc she is THAT STUPID !

      • And as I recall (someone correct me if I am wrong on this) BN had to go back and make a different clone bc he had been trusting that what the state had told them that there was no porn on the hard drive and he never imagined that they would flat out lie about that so he needed to go back and do something different before he could thoroughly examine the hard drive…..

        • You got that right!!!!

          I think I figured out Why JSS denied the motion…in my mind at least. How many cases would they have to go back and look at of that little …….. frog??

          • Exactly ! Read that link that was posted back a bit on the Milke case – they found tons of cases that this corrupt detective was involved in and it was like going through a mile high stack of cases he had tainted ……

        • November 21st hearing:

          JM: Did you know he reviewed the same information and concluded that there was no porn?
          BN: Yes, I know it from the testimony. I think whoever imaged the drive and gave it to Lonny, did an improper image. I believe what Dworkin got was not a raw file. If Encase was used, they didn’t do a raw data recovery. There’s a good chance they didn’t get any of the deleted stuff.
          JM: You’re guessing? You don’t know?
          BN: There’s only one way Dworkin could have missed it–if he wasn’t given a raw image of the drive. It’s impossible to miss it. There’s so much data, Juan. It’s packed with porn.

          • BB, BN’s remark about an “improper image” assumes that LD did not, in fact, see porn on the 2009 image he examined. I know you believe that too because of your argument above. But if it isn’t true, then BN is working from a false premise. On the other hand, if it is true,, then, given JSS’s report of John Smith’s testimony and assuming LD’s competence, the defense must have had two different copies of the 2009 drive, and maybe Smith does not realize that. Whatever the facts, I hope the three defense computer experts get their stories harmonized soon.

            On rereading that section of JSS’s opinion, what strikes me is that she totally ignores BN’s testimony that someone “rummaged through” files and tried to delete many of them by hand. Nor does she mention John Smith’s added discovery that someone went back into the computer at 11 PM. These are the bombshell revelations, yet she doesn’t even mention them.

            • JSS is an idiot, literally. She has no idea or background to understand the testimony of BN. She ignores those facts that you mention bc she wants to pretend they don’t exist. She has been advocating for the prosecution from the get go on this case. First, it is quite clear that LD was not given a proper image with the raw data bc if he had there would have been NO WAY for him to miss the “aircraft carrier in the room” it was that obvious. Second, if he had stated in his interview that he did see porn on the computer then we most certainly would have heard from KN through a motion about it. KN would have filed a motion about JM lying to the jury and to the court itself in order to extract the retraction out of LD. So absent that motion and taking into account BN’s own testimony about this matter, I am convinced beyond doubt that it was just as LD testified to – that he saw NO PORN on the computer. And this was the state’s plan from the beginning – to hide the exculpatory evidence from the DT. And your point about if JSS is going to claim that the DT knew about the porn then equally the state knew about it is a good point. The state did know that the porn existed and this was the motive to hide it. There is not only perjury, prosecutorial misconduct, but multiple counts of Brady Violations that will be insurmountable to overcome for the state and they will be overturned, period.

          • Another obvious point is this. If JSS claims the DT knew about porn history on the computer at the original trial by virtue of LD’s brief (and retracted) testimony to that effect, then equally the state knew about it by virtue of that testimony. Hence it has no excuse for Martinez’s denial of it as a major point in his closing. He knew, or should have known, that what he was saying was false. I don’t think JSS can have it both ways: DT knew, but state didn’t. So I go back to my main thesis: the state is not allowed to lie its way to conviction, whether or not there is a Brady violation.

    • Alan – I may have misspoke.

      I am not clear what “version” of the clone Dworkin had. But from Dworkin’s testimony in 2013 guilt phase, Dworkin saw the porn and he saw it prior to the 2013 guilt phase.

      My understanding is that Dworkin does *not* have the 2008 “version” of the clone. But I do not even know that at this point. My understanding is also that there were different version of the clone and that Dworkin probably did not see all of the porn.

      Someone needs to prepare a Venn diagram and flow chart.

  31. The Case of the Master Bedroom Double Doors – A Plausible Reason For Self Defense Using Deadly Force.

    I believe that Jodi defended herself on the night in question using deadly force because she did not have any other choice than to defend herself with deadly force. After Travis slammed Jodi on the floor in the bathroom for dropping his camera, Jodi runs down the corridor, which is very compact mind you, and into the closet. Why into the closet though? Like Jodi mentions she said that Travis had blocked that way once before. In the reenactment on After Dark the actor makes a motion towards the left side of the hallway at its opening into the Master Bedroom towards the only exit from the encounter and like Jodi does not go that direction. The only reason that I can think that Jodi does not try use the double doors to leave is because they are locked. Zach said that in order to gain access to the Master Bedroom that he had to use a set of keys that day to gain access. This means that the doors were locked after Jodi left. Just from looking at the door latches it would seem that the right side door latch is meant to lock the door the right door into place so that only the left door can be used with the left door being the keyed and locking mechanism for the left door. We know for certain that the entrance into the Master Bedroom requires a key to unlock the door with but I am uncertain of whether or not the Master Bedroom side of the door handle itself requires a key to open and lock it. Lets assume the lesser of two evils in this case and the Master Bedroom door side of the door handle is a push button or twist button locking mechanism. Remember Jodi says that she cannot go that way because it had been blocked by Travis before. By being blocked I would have to say Jodi meant that Travis had locked it. Locking the door behind them while engaging in sex would make sense because Zach being in the house and possibly walking in on them would expose Travis to having sex with Jodi when Travis was in fact still in a relationship with Marie Hall. Marie said that she was concerned about Travis because they had recently had a discussion regarding their relationship. This does in fact prove that Marie was concerned for Travis where the discovery of Travis and Jodi having sex would have ended the relationship between Travis and Marie with Marie possibly not wanting to go to Cancun with Travis the following week. This does show a reason why the Master Bedroom door would have been locked. The reason Jodi did not try and use the only exit to safely withdraw from the encounter was because it was locked and would have taken Jodi time to unlock it and exit because Travis was pursuing her. If Travis hadn’t been pursuing Jodi then Jodi would have had enough time to unlock the door by twisting the locking button to then leave the encounter by. But since Jodi would not have had enough time to unlock the door allowing Travis to catch her and continue his abuse from the shower because Jodi had dropped his camera Jodi instead runs into the closet closing the door behind her to provide a momentary barrier against Travis. Jodi seeing the gun which Travis had told her about being in the house picks the gun up and runs into the bathroom. The gun can only be Travis Alexander’s for the simple matter of fact that the gun reported being stolen from Jodi’s grandparents residence was loaded with hollow points unlike the casing and round found at the crime scene that was ball or round ammo. Both types of ammo are distinctly different in their ballistics and since Juan has not been able to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the gun stolen from Jodi’s grandparents residence was the gun used to shoot Travis with but had in fact been Travis own gun, then Juan cannot say that the murder was pre-meditated. It has also not been proven that Jodi stopped along the way to purchase ball or round ammo either. If such a sale had occurred then whoever sold Jodi the ammo would have remembered selling it to her because of the widespread media coverage that Jodi has had. Who wouldn’t remember a well built and beautiful Jodi Arias purchasing ammo from them? Jodi is now with her back towards the bathroom exit with Travis coming out of the closet with his back towards the closet where she shoots him with the gun in the head. Travis coming at Jodi in his linebacker stance tackles Jodi taking her to the ground where he says “Kill You Bitch!” while at the same time Jodi shoots Travis. The extent of the close proximity of the knife wounds to the upper back that are shallow would suggest to me that Jodi was not able to use her full momentum as she after sliding out of underneath of Travis who had just tackled her picks the knife up from the sink and begins to stab at his back. Its obvious that Jodi no longer had the gun in her hand at this point but instead has the knife. Where is gun at? She must have dropped it after being tackled and Travis seeing it in the floor picks it up and tries to aim it her. Since Travis is right handed this would explain why there is a predominance of wounds to his right upper shoulder, mid arm and hand where Jodi would have been striking at him compared to the left side of the body which is relatively free of wounds. Either Travis was choking Jodi, had ahold of her or was threatening her with the gun is unknown but was is know is that Travis was using his strong or dominant side against Jodi that necessitated her striking at that side of the body. From what I have been able to gather is that Jodi defended herself against Travis who locked her into the upstairs Master Bedroom area without any chance of escape. Arizona Revised Statute 3.13-404 and 3.13-405 do in fact provide for the use of deadly force in self defense if the person is not able to safely withdraw from the encounter and does not know what the assailant (Travis) might do next. Based on an earlier childhood event where Bobbie Juarez nearly choked Jodi to death as well as almost breaking her arm would have added to the acute fear that Jodi was experiencing. In the event with Bobbie Juarez however both left the encounter safely thus de escalating the encounter, But the encounter with Travis there was no escape for Jodi because she was scared what Travis might do to her next if he caught her seeing as how the only method of withdrawing from the encounter, the Master Bedroom Doors, were locked thus trapping Jodi upstairs with Travis who had already slammed her to the ground for dropping his camera.

    • Dryson

      Jodi didn’t say the bedroom door was locked. The roommates wouldn’t just open the bedroom door and come in. The very least they would do is knock if they needed Travis urgently for something.

      The reason she didn’t go out the bedroom door instead of turning right is because the left door, which is the one that opens, opens ‘toward” you and you would have to go “around” it to get out. Those couple seconds extra is why Travis caught her before. If the right side door was the one that could open, the opening would have been right in front of her. She would just fling the door open and she would be out. But the right door *was* locked. It has a bolt that goes up into the door jam.

      The second reason she thought it was better at that second to go to the closet is because, she also thought he could possibly still catch her on the stairs or before she got out the front door. Plus her route through the closet still left her that same option to go around again. She knew he couldn’t trap her if she decided to run down the hallway again.

      She made those decisions instantaneously.

      Every attempt at sleuthing is great though. Keep it up.

  32. Let’s all send our positive thoughts, white light and prayers to our Mr. Smith in his search for the truth.

    In matters of truth and justice, there is no difference between large and small problems, for issues concerning the treatment of people are all the same. – Albert Einstein

  33. If the Arias vigilantes would like to ponder something, ponder this…

    What if Jodi had said Travis slammed her to the tile and then everything that transpired after that was because she told him “Travis, I have asked you to get help for your sex interest in children. It’s perverted, it’s sick. And you won’t do it, you just keep saying you will but you don’t do anything. I can’t keep silent about this any longer. You have to get help. I’m going to have to tell the bishop or report you. And that’s what I’ve come to tell you.”

    Do you think THAT would have been enough to make him go into a rage and chase her down the hallway? Do you think the argument that progressed from there about his whole life being ruined might have made him lose it? Do you think a reason like that would have made sense to a jury that he would go biserk? Instead of saying he was furious just because she dropped a camera?

    And why didn’t somebody as intelligent as she is come up with a story like that that made a million times more sense than just fumbling his camera? Because it wasn’t TRUE. She told the TRUTH exactly as it was. THAT’S WHY !

    • Amen!!! Same goes with the memory gap. She was ridiculed, vilified, crucified and called every name in the book -not only by the frog but by the media and haters alike. I remember reading back then :We’ve waited for so many days for her to get to the day of the killing and just when she’s describing the events of June 4th she conventienly doesn’t remember? And I remember wanting to scream Yes you morons!! Isn’t that reinforcing her entire testimony? Isn’t that refuting Juan’s allegations and accusations that she is the greatest liar who walked the Earth? IF Jodi was a pathological lair, IF she was this master manipulator, why not come up with something that would show in chilling details everything that happened after the gunshot? And after the f*cking kill you bitch line? She JUST couldn’t remember:classic case of the hyppocapmus NOT saving memories in the LTM (long-term memory). It’s survival, it’s what our brains automatically do.
      And this is her life she’s fighting for; she wouldn’t opt for the easiest way out, puh-leez! IF she remembered what happened, she’s TESTIFIED with every painful detail possible. Simple as that.

      Again, you can’t fix stupid. SHE TOLD THE TRUTH.

      • To me, the memory loss explained why she made up stories in the first place, only adding to the reasonable doubt I already had that she planned any attack on him. How could she admit to doing something that she couldn’t remember doing? She couldn’t even admit it to herself. She was petrified to describe how he had attacked HER, setting it all in motion. That her memory loss prevented her from coming forward makes more sense than the diabolical over-reaching the state has dished out in insisting that she is still lying.

        They didn’t know what to do when she DID admit to killing him in self-defense – two years after they believed they had their case lock, stock and barrel – so they started grabbing their own behinds and haven’t stopped since. Gunshot last? After he’s dead? She doesn’t fit THE PROFILE!

  34. I agree, she is so smart she could have made up this excuse that would have fit better but she didn’t, she told the truth. But she was still the woman who knew too much….all of TA’s deep, dark, ugly perverted secrets and I have always felt that this played a part of his rage at her bc she was dangerous to him and his double life and livelihood with his church…..he needed to keep her under control…

    • And by excuse (wrong word on my part) I don’t mean that the fact that he was a pervert who was attracted to children isn’t true. She could have told this alternative story instead of what really happened to make it more understandable about his rage at her……..

      • Absolutely and if she had done that, the defense focus could also have been more on what it should have been on instead of domestic violence ad nauseum. The crime scene refuted every damn thing the prosecutioner said.

        This in addition to the fact that the slime posing as purveyors of the truth, had Nurmi and Willmott looking in an empty rabbit hole and chasing the wrong rabbit.

        But if this jury with salt–for–brains had put it together , 2 + 2 still equalled 4.

          • Cindy, I don’t buy that Nurmi and Willmott didn’t buy what she was saying about Alexander being a class A pervert that she had witnessed proof of. They had it right there on the emails and texts. And then the phone call, where the “corking the pot of a 12 year old girl” confirmed it beyond question. I don’t know what the very first appointed lawyers thought but they are irrelevant as to the first trial strategy anyway.

            What Nurmi didn’t buy was the “ninja” stuff. And when Samuels and Nurmi went to see her in jail, they convinced her to drop that.

            The bathroom scene had ALL kinds of clues that it wasn’t premeditated and that the whole sham of the prosecution shooting last and dragging crap and time constraints was easily refutable. But it was left virtually almost unchallenged.

            And then you have the rest of the story….the jury.

            • I know what you are saying and I don’t think I said that KN and JW didn’t believe What Jodi told them. I said the 1st DT didn’t. I agree with you. But perhaps I’m stuck on what Det. Said when he walked into the crime scene. His first thought was more then one person killed TA.

              If Jodi truly did do this it was self defense. But I’m not sure how she dragged him into the shower. Have you ever tried to move dead weight before?

                • I wonder if Travis attacking Jodi had anything to do with his loss of his “temple recommend” in 2008? Some ranking official in the Mormon temple, chapel or church must have received or observed some “damaging” information about Travis. Loss of temple recommend would probably be an initial step in any investigation into his behavior. Further more serious punishment may have been in his future (not a pun). Perhaps, if we knew when (WHY probably would be more difficult) it occurred, we might be able to link it to some discussion in JA-TA emails. Does anyone know if Jodi went to a Mormon bishop (or ranking official) sometime in the weeks or days before June 4/08?

                • I suppose if Jodi had reported Travis to the church and he attacked her for doing so, she would have mentioned it in her original trial. Or perhaps Jodi confided in a Mormon friend about Travis’s “problem” and the friend reported Travis without telling Jodi.

                • The most dangerous time in a dv relationship is when the victim is attempting to leave, and the perpetrator is losing control. T-Dogg at least said he loved Lisa and wanted to marry her. He was going to trade in Linda’s ring for one for her. She dumped him in Feb. His old reliable Deanna had finally given up and was moving back to Riverside. Mimi, his hope-that-she-would-be his wife, had given him the just friends talk. And, Jodi had already left Mesa and was on her way to see another guy, someone that he knew through friends and work. I can’t see him pleased about that. Dr. G testified that he and Jodi were speaking of suicide in the weeks before. I think he was a guy that was primed to have a melt down.

              • Maybe she got a rush of adrenalin, you know when your life is/feels threatened you have this adrenalin that makes you to be stronger & better able to do stuff. It’s been proven time & time again…that a person can get more strength when their life in in danger that you do things you can’t make out you done.

            • Carol,
              Yes, leaving is a critical, dangerous time. It’s too bad the DT didn’t focus on information like your info and paint Travis as a highly distressed man who had enough of women leaving him and had a melt down. Even if they said it was Jodi that had a spontaneous meltdown, she probably would have gotten a lesser sentence.

              • CC53, you have a good point there. Why did the DT let JM being in all that crap about Jodi’s ex’s all 4 of them from the age of what 16? When TA had a swinging door of woman? I’m not remembering Linda at all. But I am really am finding it odd that TA feel in “love” with Lisa so fast. Nothing negitive ment about her.
                If he was so hell bent on getting married why didn’t he just go back to Deanna?? Hummm something odd there.

                Anyway back to what you said he pretty much had been jilted by every girl he went out with.

        • The jury didn’t buy the DV defense but if they’d had some reason to understand why TA wanted to keep Jodi under his control (beyond their secret sexcapades) there would have been at least one person on the jury willing to give the DV defense more weight.

          In the absence of a rigorous CSI approach to the case, the issues of DV, furtive sex, and potential jealousy took over everyone’s imaginations. But in the end, the person with the motive to cross the line in this relationship was NOT the defendant.

          • Bill, the foreman for one, did comprehend the evidence and understood that Jodi was emotionally and psychologically abused.

            There were a few jurors sitting that were so emotionally and socially involved with the Alexscampsters, that one truly had to wonder if they weren’t somehow plants of JM’s. Their questions came from HLN. Hopefully, Jodi has a brighter and more honest bunch this time around.

              • Their questions so far really seem to be different – intelligent and not filled with caustic sarcasm.

                I don’t see how anyone could witness that display between JM and EF not willing to recognize the voices in that taped interview – Zach, who found the body, Nurmi and Lying Juan and not come away with the impression that something is really wrong with those two.

                • JM and EF put on a display of dissembling to cover up by pretending they couldn’t remember or didn’t know…..the jury had full view of that act and if they have a brain they won’t be fooled by that shameful display by an officer of the court (JM) and a lead det (EF) who are both sworn to defend and protect the public and the state of Arizona (the people) and the constitution of the United States. By making such obviously false statements in court they have both failed their duties miserably….NO ONE WAS FOOLED !!!

                • CanadaCarol, I wounder if they ever wonder if they ask themself…what the hell is really going on….or how did the 1st. Jury ever convict her?

                  JM knows his case is in the toilet. He’s going to down play all this computer stuff.

  35. I found this very interesting from the same place I found the corruption and loss of files that can take place with hard shutdowns or when disconnect from power.

    _____________________

    “The suspect in this case has a prior conviction related to child pornography. He spent his period of incarceration diligently studying how to avoid another conviction. Fortunately, investigators knew that he was employing forensic countermeasures. Investigators executed simultaneous search and arrest warrants at his residence while the suspect was engaged in a conversation with an undercover police officer from another state. Detectives lured him away from his computer and to the front door by means of a ruse. The first words that the suspect said while being taken into custody were, “I want a lawyer.”

    Investigators found that the suspect was using an effective but relatively simple encryption system. The suspect kept all of his unlawful material and evidence of criminality on fully encrypted external hard drives that did not contain the encryption software. In this way, he could transport the material with no fear of being interdicted by law enforcement. He had one desktop computer where no contraband was stored, but the encryption software resided there. To view his large collection of unlawful material, the suspect connected an external drive to the desktop computer. He decrypted images and material by dragging them to the desktop or any folder that did not have encryption enabled.

    To enable the encryption software, and decrypt an image, the suspect kept his encryption key on a USB thumb drive and had a log-on password that he memorized. The encryption is reactivated once the thumb drive is removed. In addition to the memorized password, which he cannot be compelled to reveal, the suspect had a mechanism to quickly destroy the thumb drive. If the thumb drive containing the encryption key is broken, all encrypted material is permanently irretrievable. The traditional procedure for preserving digital evidence includes unplugging the desktop computer before transport.

    If this had occurred, not a single contraband image or piece of digital evidence could ever be recovered. Fortunately, an on-scene computer forensic examination was already planned. In this case, investigators remained at the search scene for more than 36 hours because they knew that once power was interrupted to the desktop computer the data would be irretrievably lost.”

    Now with Alexander having 19 trace removal programs on his computer, we know for a fact that he was taking extra precautions to keep his secret world secret. The fact that this was not only incredibly against his religion just to look at NORMAL pornography, this would have made him research and know every trick in the book to hide it. But to know that he could go to prison and bunk with some very nasty people who would really frown on corking pots of twelve year old girls, that would make him go to extraordinary lengths to never let it be discovered. And he certainly didn’t plan on dying for quite a few years.

    Wouldn’t it be interesting if something like this had been employed and a thumb drive had been laying innocently around there someplace.

    Probably a far-fetched scenario for sure, but 19 malware, anti-virus and trace cleaner programs wasn’t there because he was buying merchandise regularly from Home Depot. And I’m not so sure, images don’t exist or DID exist on that hard drive, or somewhere, that he could easily access besides all those links that have been discovered and proven.

    • Now Jade that is what I’m talking about.. Let’s go with 2+2=4 for a minute. I wold love to look at TA’s bank statements. Kiddie porn is not free. I think TA was in a ring, I’m sorry I don’t know what else to call it. I think there could perhaps be more people from the church involved in this. I’m just going with this train of thought. TA was not that big of a deal in the church that they would make him out to be a saint.

      Perhaps it is just a f-up of the MPD…

        • Another thing, that child pornography case I referenced above was in 2006. Again, exactly the same technology that existed with him. Travis would have been all over the best ways to keep his sickness hid with the best ways available.

          No doubt he knew others in that grapevine and had some kind of communications with them. Chad Perkins ring a bell Travis?

          Why don’t we find that guy and subpoena him? If he wasn’t one of the 14 who already had decided it was time to tell some truth. And as long as they could live to have their next dentist appointment.

            • My Space Travis Alexander
              Twas two nights before Christmas, and all through the greater Phoenix area, Travis was cruising for underage boys to make his Christmas more cozy. Have fun, just don’t violate the terms of your probation!
              Chad Perkins

              Good question…where is Chad Perkins?

              • If I was him I would definitely be in hiding. I think whoever it is, he would’ve used an alias, no one in that surrounding area would do that unless he knew Travis really well and apparently Travis didn’t want to stir the pot with whoever it was. Just saying……

              • The more I think about this, the more that sounds like the mormonmafia mesa pd…
                giving the big T a warning. There is wayyy more to this than meets the eye!

            • Cindy, this is from his twitter account. Not much info. There is also a video of him on HLN talking to Nancy Dis-grace where he calls Jodi a “sweet, little thing” and said he couldn’t believe she did it. But, following Nancy’s lead, he manages to come up with a few negatives about Jodi. I’ll see if he has a FB account. I would like to see the DT question him, too, about his “Two nights before Xmas” comment of TA’s MySpace page. Such a weird comment.

              Chad Perkins
              @chad_perkins

              Tweets 956
              Following 3,884
              Followers 4,160
              Favorites 254
              Lists 2

              Chad Perkins
              @chad_perkins

              Author- How to Cheat in AE, the After Effects Illusionist, http://Lynda.com author, VFX supervisor, filmmaker, founder of Movies & Computers- from Seattle!
              iPhone: 47.358337,-122.107025
              moviesandcomputers.com

                • I never saw the clip of this guy on NG. I thought no one knew who he was. Did I miss something? Did he ever say why he would have posted such a thing on Travis’s FB account? Just a very weird comment for anyone to make on FB or anywhere, isn’t it? There had to be fuel for that fire. . .I guess is what I’m thinking.

                • Sorry, R. That first Chad Perkins was the wrong one. I should probably have ADMIN remove it (ADMIN, could you PZ remove Chad Perkins Facebook page – it’s the wrong Chad URL eds with gaychad)) or it will start a rumor Chad Perkins is gay (not that’s there’s anything…).

                  Here is the real Chad Perkins with Nancy Grace
                  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Mi6G239CjA

              • I agree it was a very odd thing to put out there for the world to see. But to be realistic, no pedophile is going to call attention to himself by making statements like that. Don’t you think?? Or perhaps he (Chad) isn’t one but knows about TA’s attraction?

        • yeah, the linen closet –

          I asked y’all about that some months back, when I’d been watching Connor’s testimony again for some reason. So weird that JM got so into boring the jurors with minutae that he talks about this thumb drive in open court, then never follows up with any forensic evidence about it.

      • Yes indeed that’s certainly an odd place to have a computer peripheral.

        I just know there were photos he had stashed somewhere on that equipment he had. Maybe the mystery ghost that was looking at them at almost midnight in the locked evidence room was finding them titillating.

        Nobody with at the MINIMUM 160,000 files of perversion that we KNOW of on that Compaq, would not have pictures somewhere and have quick access to view his favorites. Somewhere! Somehow!

    • I agree with you Cindy. Have they checked the bank statements of Travis and his friends? This whole tragedy has always stunk to high heaven from the beginning. I have never truly believed Jodi could have done any of this by herself. . .and if she did kill Travis it was only because he was attacking her viciously and she had to fight for her life. Having said that, there are way to unanswered questions for me. . .Reasonable Doubt has been screaming out at me from the start! There are people who know the truth but will we? I hope so but I have my doubts. I just want Jodi FREE and back with her family. ♥

  36. Nym’s comments yesterday has me thinking about computers & porn. I don’t have much knowledge about computers so I have some questions? I thought of going to an online tech center and asking: “Can you tell me how one goes about hiding child porn?” but I didn’t want to go to jail.
    Here is my understanding/questions. Please feel free to correct me and provide correct information.
    1.You can watch porn 24 hours a day and there will be no porn images/videos on your computer UNLESS you save the videos or images BUT you will leave an identifiable path to the porn sites you visited.
    2. This identifiable path (sorry) will reveal the name of the site, the time you visited and how long you stayed there and the name of the videos you watched or the name of the site displaying images.
    3. If you saved a video or videos but later deleted them, would that leave different info on the computer than if you had just watched them but didn’t save them?
    4. If you saved or transferred porn to a USB thumb, like Carol mentioned above, would you be able to tell porn had been sent to an external device and would you know the type of porn that was transferred (i.e., child porn vs legal porn)?
    5. Not really a computer question: Since child porn is illegal, it wouldn’t be on a legal porn site. To find child porn, you would need to know someone who could give that information or have software on your computer that would hide your searching for child porn (i.e., and leave no trace). Travis doing 11,645 searches for “tweens” seems to me a dangerous activity but apparently he wasn’t using any software to hide those searches. And, for the life of me, I can’t think of a legit reason for an adult man to be doing a “tween” search. Can anyone? Buying a gift for a niece? Ah……….nope.
    6. I think it was mentioned yesterday but I’ll ask it again: Asking: “Were there any porn images on the computer?” OR “Did you find any images on the computer?” are the wrong questions for the DT to ask b/c a “NO” response could give the jury the impression Travis didn’t watch porn at all. Correct?

    • #3 If you watch a video on a browser it is written ON your computer, too. It is technically downloaded to your computer, usually it is in a temporary folder or cache and it IS there ’til it’s erased or overwritten. To illustrate, here is a program called VideoCacheView (http://www.nirsoft.net/utils/video_cache_view.html) that is a very small program and will go through your computer and list all the videos you’ve watched in your browser, that the cache is still not erased or overwritten yet. If you have a cleaning program or 17 of them, they will erase those ’cause that’s the folders they target, temps or cache folders. As far as how the computer would store info differently when saved on a computer then deleted instead of watched in a browser, it is approximately the same, I think. It’s there ’til it’s overwritten completely. The first thing overwritten is the title, then as needed the data areas.

  37. Here’s the infamous Chad Perkins who I’d bet my house knows a lot. Come on Chad, you see what is being exposed more and more each day. Will you keep this on your conscience that a woman could be sent to death row for telling the truth about what you already knew? That should give you nightmares.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Mi6G239CjA

    • Well this Chad guy did his interview with the nag from Settler WA. The Space Needle is in the background. So Jade what is your line of thinking with this guy?? Are you going back to the Night Before Christmas thing on Myspace??
      I’m going to lean more to TA being on probation from the church.

      OK there is someone who was a childhood friend that now lives out of the country that was on the witnesses list. I talked about this person the other day because I saw them talking about a childhood friend on the “other” side (berating him). It was kind of a big deal to me that they knew who was even on the list. Then when KN was talking about the witnesses and said one lived out of the country….

      Do you know more about this guy??

    • The difference with this guy and all the other “best friends” as NAG always put it, is that he was a childhood friend.

      I see this clip has T-Dogg doing the devil horn hand sign, which I have noticed a lot in the photos of him. What’s up with that I wonder?

  38. I’m thinking about when totdoc gets back on the stand. Now we already know that she diagnost Jodi with a BPD. But tried to discredit Dr. S. PTSD. One of the first things I would like to ask her is how many cases have you worked on where the person had PTSD?? I also would have her first testimony right in front of me to make sure she didn’t change one thing. JM really messed up with this one because his own witnesses stated that Jodi had a mental illness. Anyone ever notices (I could be wrong and missed something) that KN has been saying Jodi is mental ill after totdoc testified?? I know that the first few times he stated that it didn’t set well with me but now after thinking about it, good for him. seriously how many people would put a mentally I’ll person on death row?? I’m talking about this jury as the people.

    So for all you negitive people out there who are screaming that now the DT is going to use the mentally ill card, just remember whose witness it was… The “prosecutors”.
    Just saying…..

  39. OK I have no idea if Jodi has BPD and if she does where she falls in the the spectrum of the disorder. PTSD yes I do think she suffers from this. The only point I was trying to make was people have been calling Jodi names for years and every one of them falls under the mental health issues unbrella. So just saying to the negitive people out there you can’t expect a jury to put a mentally I’ll person to death.

  40. OK Team Jodi I have a question for you. Does anyone think Jodi will take the stand again? If she doesn’t JM can have her testimony thrown out because he didn’t get to cross. How big of a deal is it really?
    How would the jury honestly forget every thing she said??

  41. I put the statement/question I posted here yesterday: “If someone offered me a million dollars to prove 100% without a doubt Jodi killed Travis, I couldn’t do it. Could you?” on Twitter. I was curious what people were thinking about Jodi & trial. Here are a few responses I received:

    @PitchingAFit
    @1ChordWonder @RedTailspin Yes-her lies about the trip, she had those pants, hair, her blood, confession. Too easy to prove #jodiarias
    05:46 PM – 17 Jan 15

    @PitchingAFit
    @1ChordWonder @RedTailspin her hair, print & blood aren’t tainted. +witnesses, tires cut, license plt, etc. But yes, we’ll see! #jodiarias
    10:39 PM – 17 Jan 15

    Skylene Rethford
    @RedTailspin @PitchingAFit except for the fact that her palmprint was there in his blood,the pictures,and she ADMITTED to doing it? – 17 Jan

    @rethsky @RedTailspin Her palmprint, her hair, the photos, the coverup, confession-she’s all over the scene. Easy 2 prove. #jodiarias
    10:24 PM – 17 Jan 15

    I answered them all and think I discredited all their “proof.” I know lawyers/juries give a lot of weight to a confession but it doesn’t “prove without a doubt” she actually did it. Doubt if anyone’s mind was changed about Jodi but you never know.

      • Well, Cindy, I didn’t learn much. The few that answered are still believing Martinez’s story. You would think the color of hair, the license plate, slashing of tires, etc. would no longer be part of the debate. But, on most hater sites, there isn’t a lot of analyzing, research, etc., like here on JAII. It’s mostly people venting anger by insulting Jodi and more & more, Nurmi, JSS, MDLR and even Jennifer (how could they go after Jenny?). The only value of the hater sites now is that they occasionally have a news flash or some inside info.

    • Alan, I also added a comment above (3:11pm today). Your above 12:25pm comment today is right on. JSS can’t have it both ways.

    • STOP IT CC53!!! Slap Slap SMACK!!! What they will not do to have their faces plastered all over anything!!! They are definitely from another planet! SICK SICK SICK!!!! Puke. Coughin, gagging!

  42. Here’s all the testimony I could find re 2009 Dworkin image:

    Nov 21st – Hearing – B. Neumeister
    BN: Yes, I know it from the testimony. I think whoever imaged the drive and gave it to Lonnie, did an improper image. I believe what Dworkin got was not a raw file. If Encase was used, they didn’t do a raw data recovery. There’s a good chance they didn’t get any of the deleted stuff.
    JM: You’re guessing? You don’t know?

    Dec 4th – Hearing – B. Neumeister
    William Pitts ‏@william_pitts • 4m4 minutes ago
    Wilmott quotes Lonnie Dworkin: “After that I went through all the Internet history registry of the computer itself.” #JodiArias
    Michael Kiefer ‏@michaelbkiefer • 3m3 minutes ago
    Neumeister says that yesterday he received a copy of the clone the original forensic expert got from Mesa PD and it was the same. *
    (me – *same as what – is he referring to G of data – JM was doing math again)
    William Pitts ‏@william_pitts • 3m3 minutes ago
    He says Mesa PD didn’t give HIM or Lonnie Dworkin 55G of data. #JodiArias
    William Pitts ‏@william_pitts • 4m4 minutes ago
    Neumeister was given Dworkin’s actual drive yesterday to compare. #JodiArias

    Dec 11th – Trial – Det. Perry Smith, State Witness
    Wild About Trial ‏@WildAboutTrial • 4m4 minutes ago
    A 5th HD was given to Smith. He is in the process of examining it now. It was an image created on Dec 2009. #JodiArias
    Jen’s Trial Diaries ‏@TrialDiariesJ • 3m3 minutes ago
    Perry is looking at Lonnie Dworkin’s work. Perry says it was an image and it was created Dec. 2009 #jodiarias #3tvarias
    Jen’s Trial Diaries ‏@TrialDiariesJ • 4m4 minutes ago
    The Dworkin drive has exact image of the hard drive and the drive 2, 3, 4 are clones #jodiarias #3tvarias

    JM’s Oral argument – Dec 11th
    Jen’s Trial Diaries ‏@TrialDiariesJ • 4m4 minutes ago  Chandler, AZ
    Lonny Dworkin looked at the history and found no porn*. So Jodi needs a new trial because Numeister comes in here and testifies? #jodiarias
    (*me – JM gets it wrong)

    Jan 8th – Trial – John Smith, Defence
    Michael Kiefer ‏@michaelbkiefer • 4m4 minutes ago
    Nurmi got “Smith” to say that Mesa PD made two images of computer, one in 2008, one in 2009. Gave altered 2009 image to defense. #jodiarias
    Michael Kiefer ‏@michaelbkiefer • 4m4 minutes ago
    Smith says testimony today will be based on 2008 drive, and has only had access to 2008 image for three days. #jodiarias.

    Defence Mr. Smith only testified about 2008 image. I am not computer savvy enough to know if my registry would be different if it were raw data or a Forensic copy of drive E01 format file Encase evidence copy – verify – read only which is what Lonnie testified he got.

    • Canada Carol, that’s a wonderful collection! Where is the last paragraph from? Is it yours? It seems to be contradicted by JSS’s opinion, which on p. 8 says:

      “According to the defense expert, John Smith, the content on the original hard drive (the “source evidence”) and all mirror images is the same with regard to the pornographic data sites to which Mr. Smith testified.”

      This is what I meant by saying that JSS claims John Smith said the porn history on all the copies is the same.

    • Alan, this must be what JSS is referring to – from Jan 5th testimony.

      Wild About Trial ‏@WildAboutTrial • 4m4 minutes ago
      Smith said he was asked to view “the source evidence” … “which is rare” on TA’s Toshiba computer. #jodiarias
      Jen’s Trial Diaries ‏@TrialDiariesJ • 4m4 minutes ago  Phoenix, AZ
      Smith says usually he goes right to the source on hard drive and it wasn’t a good place to go. It was modified after it was in evidence #jodiarias #3tvarias
      Jen’s Trial Diaries ‏@TrialDiariesJ • 5m5 minutes ago  Phoenix, AZ
      Smith had 2 go 2 the image of the hard drive. The 08 & 09 image match each other but there was modifications so 08 image is best #jodiarias

      • Okay – here’s a point of confusion for me.

        TA’s laptop is alternately referred to as a Compaq Presario, or, as above, a Toshiba.

        Does Toshiba make Compaq computers, or are the experts talking about two different machines and we’re not aware of the second one?

            • This is from Defence’s Motion in Limine of BN’s hard drive.

              I. RELEVANT FACTS

              Mr. Bryan Neumeister testified before this Court during an evidentiary hearing regarding the defense’s Motion to Dismiss for State’s Misconduct. Mr. Neumeister testified regarding his analysis of an image of the Toshiba drive that belonged to Mr. Alexander. During his testimony, Mr. Neumeister repeatedly explained that he analyzed an image or copy of Alexander’s hard drive.

              • okay – well, I guess a computer’s components can come from different sources. So maybe the Presario contained a hard drive manufactured by Toshiba?

            • it wasn’t the first time I’d seen Toshiba tweeted – but I guess it might have been the same tweeter. Can’t be sure anymore.

              and was the password protected hard drive really empty – or was it simply ’empty of usable data’ because the content was encrypted?

            • Hmmm, Mesa PD was wrong again …..

              William Pitts ‏@william_pitts • 4m4 minutes ago
              Wilmott was asking about a drive that was reported as “password protected” by Mesa PD. Neumeister says there was no password bc it was blank

          • The hard drive was Toshiba. They are one of few manufacturers of hard drives that haven’t gone bankrupt.

            Prosecutioner: “You attempted to assist him with a Compaq Presario with a Toshiba hard drive, am I right?”

            Smith: “Yes, it was the one from this case. I think the guy who died owned it.”

            And there are enough different fake copies now to match the Beatles #1 hit, I Want To Hold Your Hand.

        • You can replace a a hard drive with another one from another manufacturer, & some computer company’s use other company’s hardware in their computers. I used to switch hard-drives whenever a better one would come my way for an old computer I had, although you would have to find out if the computer bios & other hardware was able to handle the different drive depending on its size, speed. I also changed the monitor, CD. Rom. video cards & modems to different makes than the original. The new modern drives people are using more are the SSD, (Solid State Drives) they run faster & don’t use as much power & have memory inbuilt in the unit. And they have come down a lot in price, in recent times.

          There’s a new mobile phone out in China Mi-Note which is the image of the I-Phone 6, and it uses all Sony technology inside it…& reviews so far are quite good, although Apple might sue for Copyright infringement.

  43. Let’s not forget something that Jade pointed out on a previous post through a link to an article about loss of volatile memory of a computer when a hard shut down is done: As much as 3 gigabytes of volatile memory can be lost (this was information from March 2007 from law enforcement itself) and this equates to in layman’s terms as up to 3,000 books worth of information that can be lost when power is disconnected from the computer if no steps are taken to preserve the information on the hard drive…. So the question that everyone needs to ask is what was in those 3,000 books worth of information that was lost when Detective Flores and his cohorts unplugged the computer at the scene???? Not to mention the fact that files can be overwritten and programs can download when it is awakened from the sleep mode which was done twice at the scene as well???? This ALONE is a Brady Violation whether intentional or not. The destruction of exculpatory evidence is Brady violation exemplified. So Detective Flores, what was in those 3,000 books of information about my client that is relevant to my client’s defense? Well, I’m waiting for an answer ……JW asks…….

  44. I acknowledge coming the table late in this case. But what do you guys know about the December 2011 motion to withdraw?

    From a recent court document filed by the state:

    “On December 16, 2011, Victoria Washington filed a motion on behalf of defendant seeking to allow the Public Defender’s Office to withdraw. The motion stated that further representation of Ms. Arias woud run the risk of disclosing confidential information about a former client. “[A]ny representation of Ms. Arias would be directly adverse to our former client and neither Ms. Arias nor the other client have granted consent to any such representation or disclosure of information.” The motion stated that the conflict did not impact Mr. Nurmi.”

    Does anyone know who this other client would have been?

    The timing suggests perhaps Dustin Thompson. He was in trouble with the federal authorities for mortgage fraud scams. And according to the public court records, there is a public defender client with this name (Dustin Matthew Thompson) who has had two cases with the PD’s office:

    (1) CR2010-166364 is a drug possession case. The offense date was 9-2010. Dustin had a court date 1-25-2011 and that court date was vacated. It does not appear that anything else has happened in the drug case.

    (2) Dustin had another case in 2003 -2004 and it was an identity fraud case. (CR2003-027080)

    A Dustin Thompson went to federal prison for a $4M mortgage fraud case. He was sentenced in May 2011 to 27 months.

    That Dustin Thompson is now in Las Vegas with another get rich quick scheme.

    A lot of stuff happened in 2011. Could Dustin Thompson know something about Jodi’s case? And now is he in Las Vegas away from the subpoena power of the Arizona court on purpose?

    • The mortgage fraud Dustin Thomson was a different guy from Ashley’s husband – different age (older as I recall), different middle name.

      We’ve kicked around thoughts about Victoria’s conflict of interest before, but lawyerly minds that were around at the time suggested that the conflict might not be anything or anyone with any kind of sinister connection.

    • Cheryl, I wrote a longer reply that hasn’t turned up yet.

      Short and pertinent detail: Not the same Dustin Thompson. Ashley’s husband was younger, had a different middle name.

      • Then we are still at *who* was the other client that even Jodi would not agree to waive the conflict? How many people did Jodi even know that lived in the Phoenix community?

  45. I am incensed with this constant repetition of a blatant, outright, purely figment of fiction lie.

    Heather Connor, the print examiner NEVER said there was a bloody handprint, a handprint in blood or anything remotely resembling the “confirmation” of Jodi’s handprint in blood.

    She referred to only as a ‘LATENT” print. And to be clear this is the print she is referring to so you Alexandroids know I’m referring to the print on the wall.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XAdH_s6TH-0#t=10302

    Now listen CLOSELY….I repeat again CLOSELY. Not only does she say she cannot even determine when the print was left. She refuses to say what Martinez desperately wants her to say and only gives a hypothetical example of when a print like this might be found on a crime scene.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=XAdH_s6TH-0#t=12323

    This print could have been left there when Jodi was running down the hallway to escape from the demented lunatic chasing her. A bloody handprint on a wall is somebody who has blood on their hands and they press their hand against the wall leaving the blood impression. Heather Connor refused to use any words except “possibly”, “may have,” “could be.” And it was clear how reluctant she was to confirm anything.

    If only an attorney with the skill was there. He could have torn these “maybe’s” to smithereens.

    • The print wasn’t in blood at all, jade. See Lisa Perry’s testimony.

      It was developed using LCV, so it was in some biological substance that carried DNA. But Lisa Perry said the area tested negative for blood.

      • That’s why Connor refused to be pinned down. She knew the same thing. Toad was getting pissed.

        In fact the side of the wall that had the substantive blood was the other side. Facts don’t matter to dolts.

        • Yeah. The LAB techs who testified for the state are the only ones I give any credence to at all. Those gals were all about doing their jobs RIGHT – TOO MANY cases and convictions rest on their reliability and integrity.

    • Jade I just had a thought. I was just watching the first video you have posted here. They brought out the items that were in the washer and the dryer. The white stuff that was in the washer was still white and it seemed that only one towel and a pair of dark socks had bleach stains on them. I say a pair because it was two socks. I have done laundry for many many years and I am pretty sure that if bleach was thrown in the washer and then turned on, the white stuff would become coloured by whatever the bleach actually hit i.e. salmon towel, black socks, Is it possible that the stuff in the washer was already washed and the roommate actually did try to do his laundry that day like he originally stated in his statement to flores but realized after throwing in the bleach that there were wet clothes in the washer?The bleach would have then just hit the stuff that was on the top in the washer. EIther that or the washer was never turned on? No one said anything about a musty smell coming from the washer and if something is left in the washer wet for five days it stinks.