Jodi Arias Trial – Day 12

CLICK HERE FOR DAY 12 VIDEO RECORDING

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

Let’s see what’s in store for us today, as we continue on our mission.

Leave your comments below…
SJ

 

Comments

  1. T. Robles says:

    Tell her I said Much Love and GODSPEED. THX SJ

  2. Debbie says:

    Is court starting late today?

  3. Bystander says:

    Why are they always late getting started in the mornings!! Very aggravating………

  4. Suzy says:

    They’re on!

  5. Nicole says:

    Geez, we could make a drinking game out of the judge saying “approach.” I think I would be hammered by the end of the day! lol

  6. Nicole says:

    So, how does Martinez know that Jodi and Travis were having oral sex? I mean, Travis’ friends didn’t even know he was having sex. Where did this come from?

    • Daniel Tremont says:

      Nicole:

      Jodi said this about the oral sex …remember she told people (was it on 48 hours, police interviews, cant remember) that Travis told her oral sex ok, anal sex ok, intercourse, not ok.

      • MickyD says:

        I’m always entertained by the mental gymnastics and the denial used by religious people to justify their, in this case, sexual behavior.

        What was the name of those god fearing people who wanted to minister to the world and convert and save all the heathens … oh yeah, the gold stealing, people enslaving, culture abolishing, in the name of god Conquistadors.

        I guess flipping someone over to avoid vaginal sex isn’t such a, pardon the pun, stretch.

        • Pique says:

          And the “mental gymnastics” continue with the camp that holds Jodi, and only Jodi, responsible for the sex. He valued chastity, they say, but she seduced him. Men will be men, they say, how could he resist?, but she–she had a choice. OR, even, all the power. She chased, seduced, lured with incantations, and put a spell on his penis. Magical stuff! Incredible!

          • G189 says:

            I’m sure it was all that Wicca she was practicing or her experience with energies, casting an evil spell on his penis. /s

        • Pique says:

          No doubt, G189, no doubt. And that self-portrait she took–the one with her hand filtering the flash, creating a low, warm, mood-light–that picture is the proof. That there’s Wicca stuff.

  7. Trixels says:

    Daniel is a great witness for Jodi. Hallelujah

  8. eli says:

    the witness Daniel was great to the defense but the jurers questions was not on jodi’s side

    • Daniel Tremont says:

      I agree Daniel has been the best witness so far.

    • Bystander says:

      Agree, Eli. The questions were not in Jodie’s favor.

    • Nicole says:

      I agree. They keep asking witnesses whether they saw Travis hit or be verbally abusive to Jodi.

      Of course, this could go either way. Maybe the jury wants to see if Travis was a “closet” abuser. However, I don’t think that’s it.

      I’m starting to get a little worried for Jodi. Too bad they can’t find better witnesses than this.

      • MH says:

        Agreed. The jurors keep asking those “key” questions. Worried for her too. I hope the jurors think about the dynamics of an abusive relationships.

        Everybody has different ways we act…at home, with our kids, our spouses, and friends etc! Don’t care who u are.

        • Nicole says:

          The only way the jurors could think about abuse is if they or someone they know was in an abusive relationship. Of course, they could have also watched movies.

          As someone who was in an emotionally / mentally abusive relationship, I can totally see what happened with Jodi.

          • eli says:

            But one of the questions was if he sow anything different from a normal argument between any other relationships

            and the answer was no

            so this is what really concerns me

      • Denise says:

        Almost all abusers are closet abusers. Usually they don’t hit in public or in front of friends and family. And actually they can appear very charming and never to have been able to do such a thing. It is their Mojo

        • CJ says:

          Eli,

          And the witness didnt listen to every argument such as when they went into the bedroom. In relationships like that, the fights become about much more than the issue at hand. I felt the defense should have redirected and asked whether he was privy to the personal conversations. However, that would have opened it up for the jury to think, well if he wasnt privy, he couldnt know for sure anything…

          Lawyering is tricky. LOL

        • MH says:

          That’s right Denise. And to Nicole. I see it too. Been there…
          No abusive people don’t generally act out in front of others. And he had his business partners and church rep to worry ab. My ex husband would call me every name you can think of before we walked into church and then stand up and testify how thankful he was for me in the church. He was a youth pastor. So yes, this is all possible!

        • Trixels says:

          Yes exactly. Take for instance famous people, that are oh so charming on tv or in movies, and then dirt comes out on things they have said, or done. Everyone is shocked. No way so and so did that. Travis had a lot to lose if Jodi ever spilled the beans. Maybe she threatened to do just that and he lost it and smacked her around.

    • Daniel Tremont says:

      UGH. She is going to have to get on the stand. Thats all there is to it imo.

      • Kira says:

        They do have some expert witnesses on abuse coming up, don’t they? Maybe that will be enough to keep Jodi off the stand.

        Hopefully the experts will highlight the fact that many abusers act one way in front of others and another way in private.

      • M. says:

        I think you may be right Daniel.
        Hopefully as Kira said there will be some experts in abuse that take the stand, but I’m thinking regardless Jodi’s going to have to speak – the experts will just be able to back her claims.

      • CJ says:

        yep.

    • Debbie says:

      Keep in mind eli that not all the jurors questions were answered. Council has to approach the bench before the Judge asks the juror questions of a witness to determine if a question is admissable. This could be a huge mistake on the part of the prosecution because it could lead to the jurors not believing the prosecution if their questions keep going unanswered.

  9. Bystander says:

    When do we get to hear the recorded phone conversation between Jodie and Travis where Travis said he wanted to tie her up to tree,,,etc., etc…….

    I hope the Defense Team is slowly building up to something better than we’ve seen so far.

    • Pyromie says:

      From what I understand, those were letters written to jodi, and (if I heard correctly) were proven to have been forgeries.

      • BeeCee says:

        No. They were not proven to be forgeries. CH helped pass that lie around and so has the media. They refused to analyze them because they were copies. The document that discussed handwriting analysis ONLY did comparisons of journals and Jodi’s handwriting, not any letters.

        • CJ says:

          Right Beecee.

          And the media put the murder indictment up ALONG with the diary analysis while stating the letters were forged. I believe the state released those docs that way and used the media to confuse. ( along with the friends going round with they were forged, the DA said so crap)

          • Daniel Tremont says:

            I got it…i finally understand about what you were saying before about the mystery letters only being compared to Jody’s handwriting but didn’t get compared to Travis’s…

          • BeeCee says:

            Yay Daniel!!! I couldn’t figure out how to explain it better to you before. I just thought if you looked through the docs you would eventually see :)

            Yes CJ…the media sure did and it makes me very frustrated that people don’t pay attention in the rest of the world.

            Even the trash paper the enquirer didn’t quite get it.

    • LC says:

      I know… I hope so too. Im starting h to get a little worried n that the rest of the trial is going to be just like this….. like yesterday n today. That we’re all waiting for this big slam from Nurmi n it wont happen.

  10. Debbie says:

    I think the jury would have been better asking if she ever seemed to be covering up marks or bruises, like wearing long sleeves on hot days. Asking if he ever saw Travis hit Jodi means nothing. Abusive people make sure there is no one else around most times.

    • Suzy says:

      That’s a very good question Debbie!

      One of the things I know in being part of a strict church was the type of rebuking you’d get for being intimate with another church member (boyfriend/girlfriend). If some of the church leaders or members saw TA and JA type of relationship wouldn’t they be rebuked or asked to break up?

      • Pyromie says:

        My wife and I were intimate before marriage, our bishop sat with us, and told us we were to pray for forgiveness, and he said we should repent, but never once did they ask us to break up.

        • Suzy says:

          I used to belong to this church called The International Church of Christ (ICOC) and they’re known to be on the cult side and I was told to break up withy my bf at the time aside from needing to repent etc… Always had to ask advice for just about anything with the discipler.

          • Suzy says:

            It was so easy to live a double life and lie about a relationship. The more you’re told to stay away the more you want to be with them.

          • CJ says:

            Suzy,

            My husband and I attended a fundamental conservative church for 18 mos. We were told it was wrong for me to work. I was a teacher. My husband was laid off!!! They also said I could not teach Sunday school without a male in charge. As in women weren’t deemed worthy to teach… The rules were if I had a problem my husband would address it with the elders. Women had NO place but to make food for picnics and homes-school children.I was told I was arrogant for seeking my masters degree!

      • If Travis’ bishop knew he was having sex with Jodi, Travis would have been excommunicated, because he was an “Endowed Member”; meaning he had been through a Mormon Temple Endowment Ceremony where he swore oaths to God NOT to have sexual intercourse with anyone not his lawful wife. Of course, Travis KNEW that he was breaking his Temple Covenants. He would have been excommunicated, which means he would have lost many, if not most, of his Mormon friends, and his business, which depended much upon his reputation among Mormons–the buik of his business–would have been very seriously damaged.

        Jodi, on the other hand, because she was not an “Endowed Mormon”, never took the temple oaths. However, she broke her “baptismal covenants” to remain chaste. She most likely would have been put on “probation” which is just a slap on the wrist. But, Travis would have been excommunicted, lost his ‘Priesthood’ (his Eldership removed). No “good” Mormon woman would have dated him after that, at least not for a few years. His business would have gone into the shitter, and no virginal Mormon woman would date him after that. So, naturally, the LAST thing he was going to do was to confess to his Bishop that he was having sex with Jodi, and perhaps others girls as well.

        • Nicole says:

          You are right on the mark. Travis had SO much to lose by confessing his sexual behavior.

          I also think he was pressuring Lisa to get married so he could have sex “legally” by the church’s standards.

          I think that’s the only reason he kept Jodi around – to have sex. This man was clearly a sex addict.

          You never get over a past like Travis had. He was emotionally and mentally abused by his parents through their drug use. And, guess what? Abusers carry on things they learn.

          I think Travis had HUGE rage inside him from his mistreatment as a child. But, he probably learned as a child to have an outward appearance that “everything was fine.”

          • bill says:

            I wonder about grandma who took them in. This is the same woman who raised his drug addicted father. What makes anyone think she would do a stellar job the second time around?

        • Daniel Tremont says:

          Cj, I hope your husband stood up for you at that point with those idiots?
          that kind of misogynistic mind game arrogance really pisses me off… did you get to give them a piece of your mind?

    • MB says:

      Debbie, my thoughts too. The juror’s questions seem to indicate that they are unaware of how private intimate partner violence can be. The defense has an expert to testify to that, though, so there’s hope!

  11. Daniel Tremont says:

    Does anyone know what is going on with the “final” status of the Evidentiary Hearing? I want to understand what will happen with those letters…if there is a way they can be re-introduced at this point… When the lawyers were looking at their calendars, none were talking into microphones so I missed everything…

    Also, I wanted to amend a prior post re: the “Mystery Letters”. After thinking about it, (being seriously confused as to the WAY they were introduced) & after others brought up the point that they (CJ, Nicole, LC, BeeCee, M.) thought Nurmi’s purpose was to let the public become aware of the authentication in Travis’ hand…I realized another very good reason Mr. Nurmi would have brought them up in THAT way. IF it was this same judge that dismissed them, then Mr Nurmi KNOWS he is treading in dangerous waters potentially IF the judge has already SEEN Mr. Nurmi’s authentication by Travis letter and dismissed them. He does NOT want to risk an outright challenge maybe to her judgement but at the same time, wants to get into the record (because as far as I know, there would BE no other record anywhere that such a document even exists yes?) there WAS a letter by an expert that DID authenticate the letters and they were dismissed UNFAIRLY. ?

    • Nicole says:

      I’m not sure what is going on with the evidentiary hearing. Also, what about the mistrial request that happened right after the prosecution rested? Did I miss the ruling on that?

      BTW, it was a different judge that rules on the inadmissibility of the letters. So, perhaps the defense can get them in with this judge?

      I really WISH our lawyers would chime in! :-)

      • LC says:

        Nicole, didn’t Nurmi bring up the mistrial yesterday n she denied it right there on the spot?!

        Lets suppose, that she does grant the mistrial, will she still be the judge on the case???? If not I would imagine her denying the mistrial just to be kept on this case alone.

        Yea…… DOES ANYONE KNOW, IF SHE GRANTS THE MISTRIAL, WILL SHE STILL BE THE JUDGE ON THIS CASE???? ******

        • Nicole says:

          Nurmi brought up a mistrial about the prosecution showing the picture of Travis’ slashed throat to Lisa Andrews. Of course, the judge denied it.

          I would think that she would not be the judge on the next case. But, not sure.

          I did find this on the internet and it kind of explains why Nurmi wants a mistrial – especially with prejudice:

          “Even when a mistrial is declared, it does not necessarily mean that the case is over. It may be dropped or a new trial may be ordered. The judge will declare it to be with or without prejudice. If it is declared with prejudice it means the case cannot be retried.

          A mistrial with prejudice will occur in cases that involve prosecutorial misconduct or judicial misconduct. This is possible in high profile cases when it appears that assembling an impartial jury is not possible. It may also be necessary if the available evidence is unduly prejudicial and must be excluded. If the prosecution cannot make its case without that evidence, there is no sense in retrying it.

          The term without prejudice means the case may be retried at a later date. After declaring a mistrial, the judge may order a new trial. The decision to go forward or to drop the case completely is sometimes left up to the prosecution, based on its ability to effectively and fairly retry the case. If a new trial is ordered, it will start from the beginning and require the assembling of a new jury.”

          Interesting…

          • M. says:

            Thus meaning Jodi would have to sit in prison even longer awaiting a new trial, correct?
            If so, I guess I don’t necessarily understand wanting a mistrial.
            I guess a mistrial would be better than a guilty verdict if mistrial (wrong word here, ignore my lack of lawyer speak) was going on?

      • CJ says:

        The evidence hearing will be continued after trial is over. Sorry for jumping in. The defense said they will be done by Feb 12 and I read the hearing is scheduled for the 13th. But remember, there is a penalty phase. I did hear the letters could be used during that phase and the phase will be long.

        • M. says:

          Will we be able to hear/see whats going on during this time?

        • eli says:

          So if she would be found guilty then before the trial go’s to the penalty phase it would be a chance to undo the guilty verdict by declaring mistrial but if she is found not guilty then there is no need to declare mistrial and there is no need for the hearing

        • Debbie says:

          CJ The guilt phase of the trial is supposed to be finished by the 12th yes. There is no penalty phase if she is found not guilty or guilty of lesser charges than she has been charged with by the courts. The penalty phase is only in operation if she gets a guilty verdict and is to determine whether or not they give her the death penalty. It is at that time that people can come forward and say how what she has done has harmed them and their family and she can also offer up a sincere apology to his family.It is also at that time that her family can speak as well if they so choose.

    • LC says:

      Daniel, i blv they agreed on the 13th.
      About the ltrs. I also blv it was the other judge that ruled them out. Now that u mention that, I wonder if there is anything recoded from the prior hearing??? Anyway, I suppose that they WILL have there own expert come up to the stand. Unless of course prune puss rules them out altogether.

  12. LC says:

    I am SO GLAD SO SO GLAD that Nurmi asked Freeman if he saw/felt that Jodi was stalking TA!!!!!
    Yessssss….. great for the defense!!!! And I’m glad that Freeman cleared it all up by saying that he HEARD, n that it was from people that DIDN’T KNOW THEM that were saying Jodi was stalking. I wonder what NG has to to say about that! !????

    I think both Freeman brother n sister where good for the defense, they told the truth, you can tell they hold there religion very seriously ( no lying)!!! But the sister didnt remember much of the backpack incident, she remember the car argument. Then the brother remembered the backpack n not what happened in the car. That just shows that they both aren’t talking about it to eachother!

    Don you see how Martinez makes it look like TA was scared n didn’t want to be with JA alone, but then Nurmi went up n clarified it by asking about how the chuch would look at it if they went alone. Making it clear to the jury that TA asked Freeman to come along so that people wouldn’t think anything bad of him, not because he was scared of JA!!!

    What I didn’t get, if anyone can help me understand: when Nurmi was done with the last questing, do I you think JA loved TA, Freeman answered, yes. But at the same time Martinez objected and prune puss said to Nurmi, sustain on foundation. ?????? Whatt was that for???

    • Trixels says:

      LC YES, I loved that Daniel said he didn’t see her as a stalker, and he was credible. He also pointed out that there were two groups and Jodi was not included in one of those groups. I bet that is the gang that is calling her a stalker, as per Travis’. He lied to THAT group about her just in case she shows up when that group is together, he has his ready made excuse “oh shes stalking me”. However Daniel thought of Jodi like a sister and knew that Jodi was unsure of what the relationship was, but that she did love him.
      The defense needs to pound away at these points!

    • Daniel Tremont says:

      In regards to that “sustained”…Martinez objected by saying “when” what was time period of Freeman believing Jodi loved Travis…? The reason it was sustained was because Martinez was implying that Freeman could not have been aware JUST before the killing IF Jodi STILL loved Travis. He was trying to get rid of that idea in juror’s heads by saying after what happened, no one would really still KNOW whether this was true. The judge was agreeing on “foundation as to when” Jodi “loved” Travis..the implication being (from Martinez) that Jodi could not have “loved Travis” at the time she killed him. That was the point he was trying to get across. Don’t know if I explained it well, but I do understand why it was sustained.

  13. Sam says:

    I didn’t think this witness was good for the defense. He didn’t think Jodi and Travis’s fights were any different than any other couple and he never saw Travis be abusive towards Jodi.

    I think the only good thing for the defense was that he established that Jodi was welcome around some friends and not others. I hope the defense brings that back up in closing to really hammer it home.

    • Trixels says:

      I think that the domestic violence expert will bring that up, that the abuse was hidden. I hope anyway.

    • eli says:

      I think he also established that Jodi was confused with the relationship which might make her uncertain and confused on how he would react to other situations like if she would drop the camera and he gets really really angry

      But i think as much as we are sharing our opinions here, the defense is not making clear a lot of things what the testimony should imply

      • Sam says:

        Agreed, Eli. Hopefully it will get better. I’m only figuring out the implications by reading opinions on here. A DV expert would be great but I fear the prosecution will be able to block much of the testimony.

      • CJ says:

        That”s exactly what I thought Eli. He was showing the control Travis had.

    • CJ says:

      Sam,

      He did say that the fights were different that what he had in his relationships right? The second question?

    • Debbie says:

      That is the key Sam. Daniel saw Jodi and Travis as a “couple” and that was during the time that Travis was dating Lisa Daidone. He stated that Travis had two different groups of friends , one that included Jodi and the other was a church group and included Lisa…… how convenient as the Church Lady from SNL would say :)

  14. M. says:

    My live feed isnt working; still just the AZ seal.
    Are they not back?

    I used the link above…worked before they went to lunch.

    • CJ says:

      IF you mean now, as in 12:48 pacific time, they just arent back yet and had shown testimony from this morning which probably confused a lot of us.

      • M. says:

        Okay, I thought my live feed was skipping back in time and screwing up.
        Sorry about that – it definitely had me confused.

        Thanks CJ.

    • Michael L. says:

      Over half an hour late this morning, now over half an hour late for the afternoon session. I have yet to see them start a single session of this trial on time, and I’ve watched every day of it. Plus they skipped all last week. Think of Jodi, sitting in a cell waiting for the trial outcome to (hopefully for her) finally be freed. Or the jurors having to lose work time and income, lose time with their families, while this drags on and on. It must be incredibly frustrating. Plus the taxpayers of Arizona are footing the bill for ALL of these attorneys.

      You would think with testimony not starting until 10:30, and an hour-and-a-half lunch break, they would have plenty of time to take care of behind-the-scenes business and still start the testimony on time. Ridiculous.

  15. Wonderingwhy says:

    “Tonight on HLN, Jane Velez… Jodi Arias’ high school art teacher!” Seriously people? I’m around Jodi’s age and I don’t remember my teachers names and almost guarentee they don’t remember me. They are reaching, it’s absurd!

    • M. says:

      I must admit that JVM had one of Jodi’s close high school friends on last night.
      I can’t remember her name (Kara or something?) and I think she was for real.
      She had nothing bad to say about Jodi and when asked if she thought Jodi was guilty she said, “I don’t, I think she was in a bad situation and did what she had to.” (something to that effect).

      Of course JVM tried to twist her words, but I know what she said and what she meant.
      So, at least one of these media hungry “friends” has stepped up, finally.

      But the art teacher – that’s completely ridiculous.

      • Trixels says:

        Her name was Tina Ross. The rabid dogs on other sites are claiming she has an arrest record and have looked it up and posted it on their page.

        • M. says:

          Thanks Trixels, couldnt quite remember her name; knew it was something short.
          Of course haters are digging up the dirt on her; how dare she defend Jodi!

          Its all a load of…

      • Wonderingwhy says:

        Having on old HS aquaintences/friends is one thing, but teachers? These people deal with hundreds of kids over the years. Maybe with a bit of research e.g,having heard what HS the defendent attended and then realizing “Hey I could have taught her” or ” I vaguely remember her” , I could see them acknowledging she was their student. But to recall anything of substance as to her character, PUUUHHH LEEAASSSEE!

        • Kira says:

          Yeah, I’m four years older than Jodi and I HIGHLY doubt that any of my high school teachers would remember me. Maybe within a few years of graduation, but not almost 20 years on.

        • CJ says:

          I”m a teacher ( home with my kids now) and I most certainly would remember students I connected to for whatever reason.

          However, I would NEVER go the media about said student. it’s unethical, wrong and quite possibly a FERPA violation. I don’t trust anyone who calls themselves a professional and exploits their job and student by talking about past performance to the media!

          (Even if the teacher had nice things to say, she should have tried to advocate for jodi without bringing Jodi’s school presence into the mix.)

  16. CJ says:

    Sorry,

    I’m trying to change my gravatar pic and am comment to see if it worked.

  17. Trixels says:

    According to twitter, I found this:
    Court cleared in Arias case…Judge wants to see some new piece of evidence in order to decide whether it is admissable

    • M. says:

      So for the day – or just to meet with the lawyers in the judge’s chamber I wonder?
      Wonder if there is any truth to this as I’m not still not seeing anything on my live feed other than AZ seal.

    • LC says:

      Uuggghh really???!!! I bet it was somethibg Nurmi wanted to use n her pickled face is going to dismiss it n were never going to find out what it was!!!

      • M. says:

        And then no court on Friday’s correct?
        Mr. Nurmi must think its pretty important; hope it doesn’t get dismissed if its coming from the defense then.

  18. Trixels says:

    Chatter is that court has adjourned for the day, but I don’t know for sure if that is true.

  19. Nicole says:

    So, the judge kicked everyone out of the courtroom and said might not return today.

    APPARENTLY, as I saw from one of our reporters in Phoenix’ Twitter feeds, there might be a new piece of evidence that they are hashing out whether it is admissible.

    The plot thickens…

    BTW – what was the deal with one of the jury members getting approached by someone in the media (or something like that) that the judge commented on yesterday?

  20. LC says:

    Ok… so are we sure that its done for today???

    • Nicole says:

      I don’t know. Someone on Twitter said there is a lot of yelling by Juan in the court room. Must be something REALLY favorable to Jodi if he is exploding!

      • LC says:

        Ugh she needs to put her foot down n go on with this trial (with whatever evidence Nurmi brought)! Shes like intimidated by Martinez!!! Or hopefully Nurmi puches on whatever it is.

        • Nicole says:

          It must be something pretty damning to the prosecution if Juan is yelling. This will be SO interesting to see what it is.

          • bill says:

            don’t you think he just yells a lot. I have been on quite a few boards and it is the one common statement about him.

  21. Wonderingwhy says:

    Oh to be but a fly on the chamber walls…..

  22. MB says:

    Wow, Travis was an elder of the church, yet Martinez is blowing a gasket because Jodi was giving him oral sex?? Really?? Wasn’t it Travis himself that said oral sex “wasn’t as much of a sin”?

    Good gravy, it’s too early for this shit!!

    • Pyromie says:

      I hadn’t heard Travis had said that, that makes me laugh. Any sexual act is equally a sin in the church, even lusting after someone, and watching porn is just as bad (at least to us).

      • MB says:

        Hi Pyromie, it’s interesting that you bring up the porn issue, because I have a Christian friend (not mormon though) who claims to be a virgin yet is addicted to internet pornography. I always found that odd. Regardless of denomination, it does say in the bible that to even look at someone with lust is the same as adultery, so porn wouldn’t be a safe bypass for the whole fornication taboo. Yeah, that bit about oral/anal sex made me laugh too.

        • Travis is an “Endowed Mormon”; been through the Masonic-like secret Mormon ritual in a Mormon Temple, where you sware an oath to God that “I covenant with the Lord, that I will not have sexual intercourse with anyone except my lawful wife” (or in the case of women, my lawful husband). Travis, like MANY Mormon men, believed that if he had only oral sex, and/or anal sex, he would not violating his covenant with God, since he swore only not to have “sexual intercourse” which is defined as vaginal sex.

          Of course, the LDS (Mormon) Church teaches that even masturbation, or any sexual fantasy violates the Law of Chastity covenant. That means, any Mormon who even has a “sexual thought” has violated the Law of Chastity covenant.

    • Trixels says:

      Travis has had a ton of roommates. A revolving door. I count 6 so far.

      • MB says:

        Hi Trixels, I didn’t keep up with Travis’ living arrangements. Six!? Wow!

        • Frannie says:

          And didn’t most or all of the roommates he had worked at PPL?

        • Trixels says:

          It’s 5 not 6.
          I came up with the following roommates or ex roommates:
          Thomas Brown
          Zack Billings
          Enrique Cortez
          Daniel Freeman
          John Hepworth
          Zack and Enrique were the roommates living with Travis at the time of his death. The others had come and gone before but knew Jodi.

          If I left anyone off or made a mistake pls let me know!

  23. Trixels says:

    Excerpt from a news article i’m reading:
    Accused murderer Jodi Arias was kept away from the Mormon friends of her lover Travis Alexander and their torrid sex affair was kept secret by Alexander who was an elder in the Mormon church and was supposed to be a virgin, according to court testimony today.
    Today’s witness was the latest in a string called by the defense, including Alexander’s former girlfriend Lisa Daidone, who told the court that Alexander had professed to be a virgin.

    Daniel Freeman continued his testimony today, describing how he was a friend of both Arias and Alexander but that Alexander kept Arias distanced from his Mormon pals.

    “Travis had made more friends at (the Mormon) ward, and had (Ultimate Fighting Championship) fight nights at his house many times, and Jodi was in town, but she wasn’t there,” Freeman said.

    “There was that group of friends, them and Jodi, two different groups, and so Lisa [Daidone] and friends from church were there, but Jodi wasn’t there,” Freeman said.

    Finally the truth is coming out about the hidden relationship.
    Here’s a link to the article.

    http://abcnews.go.com/US/jodi-arias-secret-sex-relationship-boyfriend-killed-attorneys/story?id=18368010

  24. Nicole says:

    Interesting – this was filed by the prosecution today – some about a Court of Appeals denial? I’m not sure what this is.

    http://www.superiorcourt.maricopa.gov/docket/CriminalCourtCases/caseInfo.asp?caseNumber=CR2008-031021

    • Nicole says:

      Sorry, the link does not go directly to Jodi’s case. You can search her case history by her first and last name.

      So, the prosecution made this filing: DECLINING JURISDICTION OF SPECIAL ACTION PETITION/STAY

      While I am not sure what it is in regard to, here is something I found:

      An appeal is a review of a judgment or order of a trial court or administrative tribunal. The appeals court hears no witnesses and does not determine facts. Its review is generally limited to alleged errors of law or fact determinations that allegedly are not supported by any evidence. The Arizona Court of Appeals can only consider appeals within its jurisdiction, as prescribed by the Arizona Legislature. The court can consider only those judgments, orders, and other matters that, by statute, are appealable. Thus, not every order or decision can be appealed.

      Here is another website that describes it a little better:

      http://www.pubdef.maricopa.gov/docs/1992/199206-ftd.pdf

      I wonder what this is about…

    • Wonderingwhy says:

      The link you posted isnt showing me anything!! What did it say?

    • Debbie says:

      that link is not working for me Nicole so I can’t see what it says sorry.

  25. Debbie says:

    Is there no more trial today? I have the screen on the seal and they should have been back an hour and a half ago.

  26. Ms. Melly says:

    http://www.abc15.com/dpp/news/region_phoenix_metro/central_phoenix/jodi-arias-trial-delay-thursday-everyone-asked-to-leave-courtroom

    Does ANYONE know anything about this new evidence? I have been doing some sleuthing and have on decent source that this evidence is in favor of the prosecution. Does anyone know what is going on? I have also heard court will likely not resume today. Anyone who knows something….FILL US IN

    • M. says:

      Oh great – its in favor of the prosecution?
      I don’t even want to know…

      • BeeCee says:

        Well, that wouldn’t surprise me. They have seen each others testimonies and now have had time to find something “new”.

        I pray that it is evidence for the defense, not prosecution.

    • Daniel Tremont says:

      Huh…isn’t there a timeline for submission of evidence? If its something in favor of the defense and it is being considered a blindside, Martinez will fight for it to be excluded as it should have been provided prior in discovery…anything critical is supposed to be. Same thing if its something in favor of prosecution, defense would fight it. It would seem to me just in terms of timing, since its the defense presenting their case, that it would be something favorable to the defense…otherwise why would Martinez be screaming…unless he thinks its something that should be introduced and its too late…which…isn’t it? He has had his turn.

      • M. says:

        I agree Daniel (though I know nothing of the rules of trial), but I would assume there is a specific cut off date that must be met for evidence to be submitted.

        And agree with you again with Martinez screaming; that would lead me to think he is either arguing because he doesn’t think the defenses evidence should be submitted or he’s arguing that his evidence should be submitted. Really with his and his ‘tude it could be either situation.

        I would think, as you said, though that since the defense is up what good would evidence do for the prosecutor – its too little too late for him to show as his turn is over, right?

      • eli says:

        Where did you see Martinez screaming ?

        • M. says:

          Someone above stated that he could be heard yelling in the courtroom, as I guess this discussion was happening in the courtroom with no jury or anything.

          I just heard this from above; not sure if its true Eli.

      • JW says:

        I’m very curious about some of the responses here, and I have to ask respectfully, why would anyone here be against any evidence that brings more light to this case, one way or the other? I’ve watched this trial with great interest from the onset, and while I’ve kept an open mind, both the prosecution and defense testimonies have started to sway me more to the prosecution side of this case. This is because the defense is quite frankly, failing miserably. They’ve produced at best, some suppositions, with nothing (so far) to back any of it up, and even their own witnesses seem to hurt them based on prosecution and jury questions, so if they were able to produce some “damning” evidence this late in the trial process, would you still be against them introducing said evidence?

        Listen, I understand the concern around alleged abuse, I grew up in a very abusive home with my mother and various stepfathers. So I understand firsthand, how damaging it can be, and yes I wished bodily harm on my abusers, but I knew there was a better way to get away from that, and I took that route. I do not yet see evidence of any of this from Jodi Arias, excepting hearsay, so it’s bothersome to see so many biting onto this story and taking it as gospel. We must not forget that like it or not, Jodi is not innocent, she admittedly did this horrible thing, and under no current law is she protected from committing such mutilation, she made a poor decision and should pay for it (not with her life, however) And until some proof is offered besides the story of the accused, it isn’t fair to condemn the victim.

        This is speaking solely, from the evidence presented to date, because I don’t think TA was a saint, and I do think that some of the prosecutor’s antics have been in very poor taste. Believe me, if real evidence is presented that indicates JA had no other choice I think leniency (but not acquittal) must be considered.

        • Pique says:

          I hear you, JW. Any trial should be about truth and, ultimately, justice.

        • BeeCee says:

          JW, if you read through our posts, I would say none of us is against ALL the evidence. What I am tired of is that the prosecution is allowed so much leeway and it seems as if they block anything for Jodi regardless of what it is. That is all. I want EVERYTHING to light in order see the WHOLE picture, not just the selective information provided by the prosecution that the media and other sites salivate at.

          • M. says:

            Agreed BeeCee.

            I think you may have skimmed or misunderstood some of our posts JW.
            I think Daniel and I both clearly stated that we would assume there was a cut off date FOR ANY EVIDENCE TO BE SUBMITTED, we did not imply just for the prosecution, we did not imply just for the defense. (not trying to speak for you Daniel)

            I’m glad you took the high road JW, but if I were in a situation where I felt it was kill or be killed (I understand you don’t see it that way for Jodi as this point in time), I can honestly say I would kill.

            I don’t think Jodi is innocent, she has admitted to killing Travis, but when someone is going to be given the death penalty I want to be 100% sure that it was not in self defense (or w/e the situation is), any ounce of doubt and I could not live with myself for not standing up for how I feel; which is what I am doing on this website; and I have many doubts that Jodi premeditated this killing.

            I will stop now; I dont want this to be an argument.

          • JW says:

            I agree with you, and I apologize if I came across as argumentative, that was not my intention. I just think it’s important that true justice be served, and that it be as impartial as possible. And I’m not convinced that true justice is a life for a life in this case, particularly if evidence supports abuse. I just didn’t believe that had happened yet, and it’s important that this case remain about the matter at hand, which is a horrific murder, and potentially about the abuse that could have led to it. I’m increasingly annoyed about how irrelevant some of the points are from the lawyers on both sides, so far the sex and religion aspects are seemingly not indicators of how this crime happened., it really seems like both sides are throwing these in to “flavor” the case more and as the trial goes off on these tangents, we are losing site of the victim(s) in this whole situation. So again please don’t think I want to argue, and I apologize if that’s how I came across

          • M. says:

            Okay, I understand JW, sorry for being harsh.
            I just hope that my posts arent misunderstood or seeming like I don’t want a fair trial for both sides.

            I just really feel like the odds are already against Jodi and the prosecutor gets too many breaks. Maybe Nurmi needs to be more aggressive, I dont know.

            I think in high profile cases like this (and when Martinez is involved) a lot of stuff that we find unnessecary comes up and because of the media it may seem irrelevant as the media plays it up into this big dramatic “Oh my god Jodi is wearing glasses today” situation. You know? I think the reason the defense keeps bringing up the religion and what not is becaue they are trying to show that Travis was someone other than the man he presented himself as; thus helping to show the jury that Travis abused Jodi behind closed doors – maybe?

            No hard feelings hopefully. My apologies again JW.

        • Debbie says:

          Hi JW I don’t see any problem with true evidence but I do see a big problem with what is potrayed in the media. They take little bits (usually the wrong bits) and make a big deal out of them. They are the ones that get the haters going. Not everything ever comes out in a trial either. If it is for the defense the prosecution blocks it and vice versa because both sides are trying to win their case.The defense has to prove nothing. All they have to do is cast reasonable doubt in the minds of a juror as to the guilt of the defendant. Nothing more. They are doing just that as far as I am concerned, Having people come on the stand like LIsa Daidone stating that she broke up with Travis because she thought he was cheating on her only to be told by him that he wasn’t and then finding out after his death that yes he in fact was cheating on them, casts reasonable doubt in the minds of jurors as to what type of person he really was. Even the officer that did the original investigation stated at first that this had to be done by more than one person given the amount of injuries sustained and how fit Travis Alexander seemed to be. Yes Jodi Arias said that she did it and it was in self defense however it took her three years to state that. Thomas Brown a former room mate of Travis’s, and yes he had many many room mates over the years, stated that before Jodi got there that night, Travis was doing some kind of protection rite. Could he have been doing that in his room and was a knife or athame involved? We do not know. What we do know is that in one of the pictures that has been shown, Travis had duct tape around his bicep on his right arm, and there is a picture of Jodi, naked, laying on the bed with her arms spread. Could she have been tied up at the time? Would a knife not need to be present to cut the ropes? These are all questions we have. We do not know the answers. He was shot in the head, a .25 caliber casing was found at the scene. Did any of his room mates own a hand gun? We do not know that either. All we have is questions.

          • Trixels says:

            Debbie, well said. Also, since its been established she’s a liar, why would her admission that she did it be believed? She’s a liar right? Maybe she wasn’t alone and is scared and is taking the rap for it.

          • JW says:

            I wonder though, how it would benefit her in the least to take the rap for a crime she didn’t commit. Her life, at least at this point, is on the line, she isn’t any more safe, and the defense really isn’t doing her any justice, at least not yet.

            But you know, people act with very differently when they’re scared, and I suppose its’ easy to shoot down the idea based on how I would react, so I won’t discount how someone else could react in the face of that situation as it isn’t really fair to assume that everyone would do the same.

          • The Mormon Church has no protection rite other than saying a Prayer for Divine Protection, which does not involve knives or anything but praying. Obviously, if Travis offered a Prayer for Divine Protection, it didn’t work.

          • bill says:

            trixel, I have thought more than once that Jodi might be lying to protect someone who helped her with the crime. However, how to coordinate it? How to get the person to enter just at that time when Travis was taking a shower? Or some other vulnerable time. Do you think the family member would want to walk in when Jodi was naked? Surely the police have been all over all sorts of people’s phone records. Her phone was off. Did she have one of those prepaid phones? But when make the call? The time stamp on the images show there was no time to ring anyone while she was taking the photos.
            Unless, it was two family members who she doesn’t want to give up. That is why they wouldn’t want to kill her. Except how did they manage not to leave any DNA and yet jodi did?
            So we are back to the fact that Jodi did it all by herself. If someone can prove other unknown DNA found at the scene I am prepared to listen.

        • CJ says:

          I’m concerned because I do not trust Martinez or his lead detective. Google Martinez. His reputation is always ethical and he may withhold exculpatory evidence he knows could clear jodi. He did it in another case, so why not hers?

          11th hour evidence, based on my experience happens with the defense in cases, not the prosecution.

  27. Wonderingwhy says:

    So I guess that’s it huh?! No more trial for today me we must all stay in the dark until tomorrow!?

  28. Trixels says:

    tweet from beth karas

    It looks as though court will resume shortly. Going in now.

  29. Debbie says:

    Its back on

  30. Yoganao says:

    I started to be turned off by Juan Martinez when he, without warning, just dropped the camera, which is evidence on the floor. He has continued to compensate for his diminutive height by attacking witnesses.
    Could some jurors seriously consider & follow through with jury nullification because of Martinez’s continued misbehavior? Do they have to state a reason?

    • CJ says:

      In session was discussing that very topic, saying its conceivable that the jury may just disregard aspects of his case because of his behavior.

  31. Trixels says:

    Its back on !

  32. M. says:

    Gah and nothing said about what was going on.
    Just an apology!

  33. LC says:

    When did it start back up??? When this forensic guy was already up n talking???

  34. Nicole says:

    Trial back on with expert computer forensic witness for the defense! :-)

  35. Pique says:

    Psst … I missed this guy’s intro … who is he? what does he do?

  36. Debbie says:

    Seems like the prosecution does not want people to know what was on Travis’s computer. They have a forensics expert on the stand for the defense now.

  37. Debbie says:

    The man’s name is Lonnie Dworkin he is a forensic computer expert.

  38. Debbie says:

    Well after the cameras caught a quick glimpse of erect penis shots, Martinez asked Dworkin if he knew whose it was and when he said no, another trip to the bench then the court recessed until monday.

    • Pique says:

      Gee, I can’t turn away for even a second! I missed an erect penis? That always happens to me.

    • CJ says:

      OH I missed that thank god LOL.

      What does that have to do with anything? I guess they are going to show sexual abuse of some sort as they have a sexual violence expert on this list?

    • LC says:

      W/e the answer could be No, but we ALL know whos private part it was! That was the point the defense wanted to make.

      Anyway, this Diana Reed person, wasn’t this someone TA was also seeing??? Why was her name on TA computer at that time 4ish am in the morning???? Was the forensic guy saying SHE WAS THERE (using the computer) or that TA was online with her????

  39. Debbie says:

    This trial is turning into a perv show.

  40. Wonderingwhy says:

    Damn it!

  41. Shari says:

    Until the world turns on Monday! Whose body part was that! lol

    • CJ says:

      Will they have to identify the penis??? LOL

      • Pique says:

        Yes. From a police line-up.

      • Pique says:

        Seriously, though … it must either be that he had accessed porn (which wouldn’t be shocking) or that he took pictures of himself.

        • Daniel Tremont says:

          SO, I missed the Forensic examiner. Will have to watch later tonight when off work.. What is everyone’s synopsis on the point of his testimony? What do you think the defense was trying to show?

          • M. says:

            Daniel -
            I dont think defense is done talking to forensic examiner, so I assume that will continue Monday. So far it sounded like to me that they are having him explain what Travis was viewing on his computer (on the day he died I think).

            It ended with some photos that had been taken off an external hard drive of his, the photos were close ups of a penis (his penis I assume). Martinez objected that the forensic examiner could not prove it was Travis penis as he is not a penis expert.

            I think the defense is slowly trying to show that Jodi didnt have to bring the sexy out of Travis, Travis in fact already had his sexy? So therfore, more lies from Travis?

            Quick post on my thoughts. Look forward to hearing what you think; I’m sure you’ll explain much better than I.

          • M. says:

            Nevermind the computer part of my post – I didnt pick up on the user name of whom was using it, so it wasn’t Travis it sounds like

            But the penis part I did in fact hear and see correctly…

          • G189 says:

            Well, even though the computer forensics indicated Deanna Reid as the computer name, the times that this activity took place on the computer located inTA’s office was @ 4-5am on 6/4, approximately 12.5 hours before his death. Several YouTube videos were viewed as well as TA’s blog and a gmail account. So I feel certain that this was his activity and maybe the computer formerly belonged Deanna.

            Maybe the defense is leading up to something. Of course the penis pictures piqued my curiosity but not quite sure where they fit in with the computer ( thinking these were on a different drive) and the chronology of activity.

          • Debbie says:

            He had just gotten started Daniel. He was mostly explaining the inner workings of NCase and how they can get things from a damaged or deleted computer hd. He also stated that one of the hd’s he received also came with some parts lol.

          • M. says:

            Okay, thanks G189, I thoght that’s what I was hearing, but its so hard to hear sometimes.
            I’d read where someone else said it was Deanna on the computer, but had no idea who that was.

            Interested to hear more from him.

  42. Wonderingwhy says:

    Anyone know of a link up yet where I can see the rest of todays testimony , after the llloooooonnnnggg pause I have up and continued on with my day. Didnt think they were coming back.
    Thanks

    • RC says:

      This erect penis picture? Is it from the broken case hard drive? Was a chain of custody established and was it established that this hard drive belonged to JA? If so? There was testimony from a former boyfriend/lover that she took at least one pic similar to the pics in the shower she took of TA. Not to assume anything, but, the mere picture of an erect penis, well, it could be anyones penis. Show me a picture of the erect penis attached to a man TA or anyone else for that matter and it can be identified, but (not that I have seen a lot) but I have seen a few and while a penis, is a penis, is a penis, they vary in size, shape, etc. You could show me a pic of my mans penis, whom I have lived with for 20+ years, but if the pic is ONLY of his erect penis, no, I couldn’t identify it. Just giving some perspective here, the fact that it “may” have been a pic found on JA’s hard drive, if in fact it was her hard drive, does not necessarily mean it was TA’s penis. This was by testimony of both former lover and lover of pursuit after the killing, a sexually active person who enjoyed photography. Just sayen.

    • G189 says:
  43. Bystander says:

    Matinez tried to get the judge to let Skye Hughs do telephonic testimony – the judge finally grew a backbone and said NO!!! Skye Hughes – you are hereby ORDERED to appear in person!

    • JW says:

      This woman is the testimony that interests me the most, as this woman has been behind the scenes in a lot of the other witness testimony, seems very curious to me.

      • M. says:

        I agree JW and am glad to hear she will be appearing in person.
        She’s been in the media, then all of a sudden she doesnt want to appear in court?

        What other witness testimonies has she been involved in?
        That could be bad, she may be prepared to lie (even though you arent supposed to), she might know how to weasel her way out of answering honestly.

        I bet she looks at Martinez the whole time waiting for his constant objections.

    • Debbie says:

      Yeah that was great. She authorized Gus Searcy to do his by phone stating that they are already aware of his credibility since he has been there and on the witness stand. Having never seen Sky, she has been ordered to show up for her testimony.

      • Debbie says:

        I also noticed that at one point today the judge gave martinez one of them if looks could kill looks… anyone else notice it? I howled when she did it :)

      • M. says:

        Thanks for filling me in there Debbie; I heard them discussing Gus, but couldnt hear what was being said.

  44. J. Forbister says:

    I am in Canada and have been watching the trial daily and I haven’t heard anyone talk about abuse as being other than physical. Abuse is degrading someone, then pulling them back in to think that they are cared for, then degrading them again with abusive comments, etc. Travis used Jodi as a dirty little secret. His religion was such that he could not be the sexual young man that he wanted to be, he was an elder in the church. He was two people and he wanted Jodi to be two people too. Therefore, he used Jodi for sex whenever he wanted and unfortunately she was wanting a life with him at least at first. Later the emotional abuse caused confusion to the point where she lost herself completely. I have seen this before. Just the fact that he took her to a restaurant and was flirting with the server on the way out saying he wasn’t dating Jodi, when Jodi was right there – is soul destroying when you care for someone. She kept going back like abused women often do, hoping things would change. I sure hope this point gets across in the end to at least save her from the death penalty. As for Travis he had a very traumatic childhood and it twisted him some in his adult life. It was a deadly combo.

    • Pique says:

      “His religion was such that he could not be the sexual young man that he wanted to be, he was an elder in the church.”

      I agree Forbister. I commented above that I do feel Travis’ church should share some responsibility for the volatile situation that led, ultimately, to murder. We should not dismiss its powerful influence on both Travis and Jodi.

      I’m in Canada, too. The media here have been at least a little calmer and more even-handed about this trial, don’t you think? In trying to keep my TV cable bill low, I don’t subscribe to those big, American news stations. And I’m glad! Otherwise, I might be tempted to watch them.

  45. LC says:

    Alright iv had enough of NG!!!! She thinks she’s so right! She’s talked about everything but Freenam pointing out that Jodi was not stalking TA. I want to call her ON AIR so that I can burst her bubble on air! Does anyone have a number???

    • Trixels says:

      LC she only accepts calls from trolls so you probably won’t get thru.

    • M. says:

      HAHAHAHA LC, I’ve thought the same thing, “If I could just call and to see the look on their faces!”.
      However, I’m sure you’d be cut off just as quick as Nancy could say “The Devil is dancing tonight!”.

      They only want caller thats are brainwashed Jodi haters.
      But I’d definately admire it if you tried!

    • LC says:

      Lol I really would call!! Its over now, ill look for her number n call on Monday. Ill make up a bazaar story n say I knew JA from school, that I was her high school bully! She’ll take my call, then when I’m on air, ill surprise her with my question!!!

      • Ed says:

        I would love to Nancy Grace’s face and she would be speechless because she wouldn’t be able to make up a lie to make Jodi look bad. Than she would hang up on you and have you blocked from calling again. I would only watch N.G. just to see someone make her eat her own lies

    • Thorina says:

      She is accepting calls just from nursing homes.

  46. MB says:

    Another reason to stop watching HLN: JVM just had a guest on her show that said it was Travis’ RIGHT to sexually degrade her. Yes, those were her exact words. CNN will have transcripts posted soon. Then JVM says herself that if any woman – Jodi included – can’t find it in herself to leave a man that does, it’s just her own damn fault. Wow, just wow!

    Am I the only one here whose tired of people expecting Jodi to be brimming with self respect and make perfect choices while being in an abusive relationship with Travis? I mean, isn’t that the nature of abuse? To erode your self esteem and any sense of self worth to the point where the decisions you make are altered and are detrimental to yourself and your future? For people to tell me “well Jodi made this choice, that choice” tells me they see Jodi as a robot that can be beat, screamed at, called names, sexually degraded with no consequences. They see her as a walking talking blow up doll where the laws of physics don’t apply to her physically, and being treated with basic human decency doesn’t apply to her psychologically.

    Sure, go ahead and argue that Jodi already had emotional issues, but I don’t think that gives Travis the RIGHT to mistreat her the way he did, nor do I feel he is ENTITLED to exploit her emotional issues to his own gain. To say that any person has the right to do that is so disturbing. Only a sociopath doesn’t consider the lives and dignity of the people they are involved with.

    What adds insult to injury, is that he held a position of power within the Mormon church! To dismiss that without even a word (except from Gloria Allred, who still appears to have maybe at least two brain cells left to rub together) is ridiculous. There is a REASON why religious leaders are held to a higher standard; because those positions of power are easily abused and require people with personalities who want to give to the community, not help themselves to women like they’re at a buffet table.

    So despite everything we’ve seen and heard; Travis holds NO accountability for his actions, while Jodi takes the blame for everything that happened between them. What a crock of bullshit!

    I’m also tired of hearing people say stuff like “well that doesn’t give her the right to stab him.” Nobody ever said it was ok for anyone to stab anyone else! Nobody ever said anyone was entitled to stab anyone else! For fuck sakes. But it’s not a perfect world and shit went down – the point is to figure out WHY. That is what a court of law is for. And if, by the mountain of evidence that has been presented, people STILL can’t put it together why Jodi says self-defense; maybe they should stop talking about it all together.

    So JVM, NG, and all your guests and viewing worshippers that have been instrumental in dehumanizing Jodi, Casey Anthony, George Zimmerman, or anyone else who has the misfortune of being condemned by your motley crew of torch bearers – go fuck yourselves.

    • M. says:

      Hit the nail on the head.

      Though I do choose to not agree with the George Zimmerman part – but do not know enough about to discuss, nor is this the place to do so.

      Everything else, is exactly what I couldnt find the words to say.
      Thanks MB.

      • Daniel Tremont says:

        M. I agree regarding George Zimmerman as I have followed that case very closely. IMO, that is another matter altogether.

        • M. says:

          Thanks Daniel – was a bit worried I might get some backlash for my opinon there.
          But as you said, another matter altogether.

        • Tony says:

          While I know this is not the place to discuss the George Zimmerman case, I think we can all agree that Nancy Grace and Al Sharpton are two sides of the same coin. They’re both egomanical attention whores!!!

      • MB says:

        Hi M, no worries. I’m sure however you feel about it, you have a good reason to.

    • me1 says:

      Amen MB! Yesterday I read a post where a woman said she hoped TA had ejaculated on JA’s face and would award him brownie points for it. A woman (and it usually always is) rooting for a man to degrade another woman?! Absolutely disgusting.

      • Pique says:

        Another “amen” from me. And how about that phrase that’s getting a lot of wear lately: the “abuse excuse”? It’s ubiquitous in discussions about this trial. As if women were getting off the hook left, right and centre … You’re right, MB– the reality is that, on the whole, they get away with LESS when they disclose abuse. The standards for victims are, as you wrote, very high. No choice goes unscrutinized, criticized; each behaviour is checked against a list or weighed on a scale. Compassion, dignity, understanding, trust, belief–the very things she needs are not offered, but have to be earned through proper behaviour and nearly impossible levels emotional health. The “free pass” is a myth. It’s a myth constructed for the express purpose of being able to say, without compunction, “not this time, lady.”

        Me1–these women who are excited by men degrading other women … I know. It’s twisted and perverse. It makes me sad, and it frightens me, too. How cozy and safe they must be feeling when they’re choosing her as a prime object for sexual aggression. What a nice, safe distance that creates when it’s happening to someone else, and that someone is unworthy of even basic human rights. Rape is OK, apparently, as long as we all agree that the victim isn’t a person.

        • MB says:

          Hi Pique, I love your post. Yes the dimension of women helping attackers and rapists decide who “deserves” to be violated is so disturbing. They must be delusional – don’t they know one of these days someone else will point the finger at them?

          When JVM said “abuse excuse” I about come unglued. I wasn’t posting here at the site yet but damn, that would have made a colorful post! lol

          Also, I am perturbed by the idea that the only abuse that matters is when someone is bloody and bruised; or that one has to be a faithful married housemate to be called a “domestic abuse victim.” There’s a lack of awareness that emotional, psychological, and sexual abuse is just as corrosive and damaging to one’s overall health as being physically assaulted. A person doesn’t have to be married to be a victim of intimate partner violence, either. There’s an epidemic of abuse among unmarried teenage couples that proves it.

          I am also annoyed by the idea that abuse can only be acknowledged with absolute proof beyond the victim’s word. You know, kind of like how fundamentalist countries require four male witnesses to a rape for a woman to ever file charges? Sheesh. Abusers aren’t stupid – they aren’t going to abuse their victim in front of others, they purposefully only leave bruises in places covered up by clothes, and they do everything they can to normalize what they do or pass off the blame so that their victim is less inclined to seek help. Plus there are possible long term physical impairments – depression, post concussion syndrome being a few.

          Despite the evidence that’s been admitted into court; I don’t get the feeling that people take Travis’ behavior seriously, and there’s a lack of desire to hold Travis accountable for his part in the entire situation. It’s like people begrudge Jodi for being the one to walk away alive. And they honestly believe that it’s ok and normal for a man to call his girlfriend a slut, a whore, and a three holed wonder and deducing that worse abuses probably happened is somehow unreasonable.

          I don’t believe for one second that “Lisa’s naivety” was the only reason she sent him that angry email. Just because the email was sent in anger, does not mean the things in it were untrue.

      • MB says:

        Hi me1, it’s that kind of shit that’s got me so infuriated! Yeah, I am having a hard time wondering why some women are so eager to throw other women under the bus. I didn’t understand it with the Casey Anthony trial and I don’t understand it now.

        I’m kind of regretting the “go fuck yourself” comment, because I know it doesn’t help anything. But dammit if those wretched scoundrels are traitors to victims everywhere. These women lived through the sixties/seventies where rallying against domestic violence meant having shit thrown at them, called names, threatened with rape, ect.

        And they’re willing to throw all that work away on what? The fact that they hate/fear Jodi Arias? Really? They’re going to tell half the population of the earth that their proper place is underneath some man that views them with contempt? They’re willing to throw away decades of studies that show abusive relationships and situations have lasting, if not permanent affects on the victim just to spite a woman they’ve never met but are threatened by for some childish reason?

        Then they want to say “Well there’s women in other countries that can’t drive a car” as if it somehow excuses the way Jodi and all other victims of abuse are treated. Wow, talk about setting the bar low. What’s next? Making Western women feel guilty for being able to hold down crap jobs and raising kids on their own?

        There’s literally NO WORDS that can describe the level of betrayal and frustration I’m feeling right now. For these women to tell abuse victims around the world that they are to blame for the behavior of their abuser because they stay; KNOWING that the most dangerous time for a victim is when they are trying to leave their abuser – is absolutely appalling, unforgivable, inexcusable, and completely out of touch with reality.

        • Kira says:

          You know, I have noticed that the vehement Jodi-haters and “Travis was a perfect angel” types on the pro-pros boards are overwhelmingly female. Same with the people who hated Casey. I don’t know if fewer men follow these trials or if they’re just not as passionate in their pure hatred, but it’s interesting. I actually think having nearly an all-male jury could help Jodi.

          Now of course, I am a woman myself and we have lots of women here too, so I’m not lumping all females together :) .

          • MB says:

            Hi Kira, isn’t that weird?? Plenty of people get tangled up with the law for whatever reason every day in this world, yet these are the stories they’ve latched onto and invested every ounce of their emotional lives into. And it’s almost like HLN deliberately employs women who hate women to be public mouthpieces for their biased propaganda. And let’s face it; if Travis were the one who survived and were on trial we’d never hear the end of the word ALLEGED and being reminded to assume he’s innocent until proven guilty.

            We don’t see the same thing with Jodi, do we? No, we see a constant stream of “Guilty! Guilty! Guilty! Witch! Guilty! Guilty! Guilty! Whore! Guilty! Guilty! Guilty! Slut! Guilty! Guilty! Guilty! Stalker! Guilty! Guilty! Guilty!” Yeah, so much for respect for the justice system and presumption of innocence.

            Nothing would change for Jodi, though. She’d still be portrayed as a liar, a slut, and a stalker. He’d still be depicted as a pure, upstanding mormon man led astray by an evil sorceress with magical sexual powers that led him down a path of sin; regardless of the mountain of evidence that says otherwise.

            I can’t imagine, for the life of me, why there is one good reason to hate Casey Anthony or Jodi Arias. It’s like people don’t see them as human beings, but symbols of very “mean girl” that ever crossed them in the locker room in junior high. I really wish people would grow up and get over it. There’s nothing more pathetic than watching grown adults act out such immature, petty jealousies long after high school. Then again, JVM says “life is high school.” I think she needs to get out more!

        • Pique says:

          Yes. Because it’s much, much easier to hate Jodi arias than it is to continue to DO the work. To acknowledge that the work still needs to be done. And it’s really not specifically about Jodi anyway, is it? The hatred precedes her and what she did. Now, however, that hatred is legitimized. We’re talking murder, so anything goes. Suspicions are confirmed: all that consciousness-raising, all the literature on DV and abuse dynamics, etc.–it was all a bunch of whiny BS. Poof! Now it’s OK to actually hope–as those women do–that he got her good, in the face, while he still had the chance. This kind of talk is called “support for Travis and his loved ones.” It’s not really, though. These are low, not high, thoughts and feelings. The very same stuff that got Jodi and Travis twisted together in the first place. And there’s a war cry for more of the same!

          • MB says:

            Pique, I wonder how many of those clowns describe themselves as progressive or supportive of social justice issues. By using ideas of sexualized violence against Jodi – and let’s not fool ourselves, it applies to any woman deemed worthless by anyone’s capricious opinion – they are in fact encouraging inequality on it’s most basic level.

            It’s 2013, in America, where people pat themselves on the back for living in a nation so progressive: yet rape is still a joke, abuse isn’t real unless it meets certain criteria, and women are condemned to death before their trial even starts.

            It’s disgusting and depressing at the same time. For them to pretend those terroristic threats “support” Travis or his family just proves the point I made that the people backing up the prosecution are just like him. They think like Travis, they feel entitled to the same things Travis felt entitled to – degrading women sexually being one of them; and they will therefore defend Travis as a fallen hero of their presumed privilege over female people.

            It’s interesting how Travis fans like JVM & Company accuse battered women of participating in their own degradation if they haven’t left their abuser: now what the fuck do they think THEY are doing by encouraging violence and hate against Jodi? Now THAT is participating with abuse!

      • CJ says:

        What??

        This crap shocks me. I just can’t believe it!!!

    • G189 says:

      Loving all your analysis of the hln programs. So true! And JVM proudly weaves the War on Women theme into so many of the other story lines yet that doesn’t fit the pre-ordained narrative for this story so she won’t even mention self defense as a possibility. And I indeed believe that this same network vilified gz, too, putting forth months of one-sided and sometimes untrue coverage.

      • MB says:

        Hi G189, thank you! Yes, the fact that JVM would highlight women’s issues but then facilitates and tolerates the ugly, unnecessary attacks against Jodi is such a HUGE betrayal. She cannot, in my opinion, pretend to care about women after all the stunts she has pulled with this trial!

        I really think HLN should stop doing investigative reporting. One, they are TERRIBLE at it, and two; they single out people, make cartoons out of them (literally) and ignite the public to pile the worst abuses possible on them. It’s just barbaric! Even IF someone is guilty of a crime, I don’t think forming lynch mobs is necessary. Discuss the facts, if they want, but we have a justice system and they should let it work. Look what they did with Casey Anthony – a year and a half later and people are STILL calling for her head on a platter. What part of “not guilty” don’t they understand? And for HLN to encourage mob thinking is socially irresponsible and setting us back into the dark ages.

      • Kira says:

        I loathe JVM and her style of “reporting”. I can’t decide if she or Nancy is worse.

    • CJ says:

      Love it. I’ve been so angry, about societal attitudes toward this case, that I have grown quiet and just PISSED.

      Best comment of the week IMO.

      • M. says:

        MB and Pique -
        Thank you for your posts.
        Truly.

        That’s all I can say.
        Keep posting.

      • MB says:

        Thanks M and CJ! I’m still working on my tact (a lifelong process for me! lol) but it was the best I could do to articulate the raw emotions running through.

    • LC says:

      MB & everyone who posted on this comment, thank u for the comments and really getting into THIS subject, as I also found myself this morning very upset by a comment from someone that dropped by n posted without reading some of our comments. The person wrote this, *****”Hiis bitterness towards her sexuality, and some anger about that may have been expressed to some very believable character.”****** I was infuriated, HEATED, by this comment. The way “I” took it was that TA acted as he did (abusive) with Jodi because of HER sexuallity. Like he wasnt a participant n like he didn’t enjoy it, like he was forced on to Jodis sexuallity. Pleeeaasssee!!! We’re all adults n we ALL know what was going on behind doors, and so did Sky n Chris! Hopefully the jury isn’t as naive as some ACT to be. Because I blv everyone KNEW what was happening. The sex AND the abuse, BOTH! Including Lisa, plz becuse shes 19 n a virgin, he immaturity excused her from the email she wrote??? I dont think so!!! Shes right in that group of people (haters) along with HLN, NG, JVM that you said to fuck off! You wonder why these group of woman go againts JA and CA, why they fear them n why the would say such thing that she deserved it n TA ejaculating on her face???? For my part, the only thing I can come up with is “jealousy” simple as that. It does sound high school but isnt that what she compared it to anyway. As silly as it sounds, girls like that are n have always been jelouse of the more prettier girl (NG JV ugly) sorry but to me they’re not on the so good looking side. They will pick at n bully these girls any chance they get, and they have Jodi up now to tear apart. Lisa, yea shes pretty, but she was a virgin n she for not a second was going to give herself up to scumbag TA n she knew it. She knew Jodi was also pretty but had something over her that she was not willing to give to TA, (SEX)! So, I think thats the true reason she broke it off with him, she coulnt compte with Jodi (in that factor) n shes of course going to hold that against her. What better moment to get back at her???

      Ok well enough said… I just wanted to vent from this morning comment, as I was upset n tierd of listening to these haters categorizing woman n making them seem less of a person because they have an active sexual life without being married.

      • MB says:

        Hi LC, thanks! Yep, sounds like more of the same: people absolutely, stubbornly REFUSE to hold Travis accountable for his actions. But why *shouldn’t* Travis be held to not just the same standard Jodi is, but to the standard of the church of which he held a position of power? Travis is not a little boy who can’t help himself – he is a fully grown adult man who is 100% culpable for his decisions.

        And as far as the women who want to bury Jodi alive in humiliating comments: I do chalk up this behavior to immaturity – the basic idea that Jodi being an attractive woman must be treated like a competitor for the affections of men, and therefore must be destroyed. Only insecure people feel so worthless that they feel they have to crucify someone else to get the attention of the opposite sex. One would think that grown people would be willing to put aside their petty jealousies and personal problems aside long enough to understand the gravity of the situation. This is a death penalty trial, and someone’s life is on the line. This is NOT the time to de-evolve into an ignorant mass of pitchfork weilding buffoons.

        The fact that Team HLN has people in their forties and fifties unwilling to compose themselves long enough to get their damn facts straight is an abomination of the journalism industry. They are touting some ancient double standards for such a “progressive” news channel. Yes, a lot of this is historical fear of female sexuality – that’s why they say it’s normal for Travis to stick his dick wherever he wants without accountability (even when he’s an elder of a church with a vow of chastity!), but Jodi is somehow a slut for putting out to him.

        The whole dialogue is so destructive, especially to women viewers and the fact that people’s daughters might be listening into this makes me appalled. The whole network needs to be disinfected with stupid-b-gone and after the trogdolytes have scampered; they need to install some responsible journalists in their place.

        • Pique says:

          “By using ideas of sexualized violence against Jodi – and let’s not fool ourselves, it applies to any woman deemed worthless by anyone’s capricious opinion – they are in fact encouraging inequality on it’s most basic level.”

          Exactly. That’s why I say this isn’t really about Jodi and what she did. But, by super-imposing Jodi Arias’ infamous face, and her sullied name, over the entire conversation about violence against women (sexual, emotional, physical), they shut down the conversation entirely. The fact that this backlash applies to ALL women (who are, at the moment, “deemed worthless”), is drowned out by the mob crying Witch! Jezebel! Seductress! Murderer! Let ME give her the needle!

          Well. It’s not a conversation at all–which is the point. It’s using the heat of anger and grief (this is, of course, a genuine tragedy for Travis‘ loved ones) as a tactic to preserve/encourage inequality and the status quo, and to ensure that the discussion about abuse and violence and its long-lasting/permanent effects just doesn’t happen. And, it’s working; the conversation is largely silenced.

          To make even a peep about the problems this trial is bringing to light, to even suggest that the story of Travis is an old and well-understood narrative, is to be, in this climate, on the side of murder. Open your mouth about Travis’ mistreatment of women, about his arrogance, about his egregious and very risky lies, and you’re practically pro-murder. And don’t even try to ask if maybe–just maybe–his church shouldn’t share some of the blame for setting up people to fail miserably, and for creating conditions that encourage lying and abusing. Then you’re not only pro-murder, but a godless intolerant bigot. With a cherry on top.

          “Pique, I wonder how many of those clowns describe themselves as progressive or supportive of social justice issues.”

          Probably all of them. That’s the thing: these outrageous calls for a lynching–for the rape and degradation of a woman who’s already in prison, who’s already paying for her actions–these calls aren’t coming from some weird, fringe element. They are coming from what are considered nice, good, upstanding people. You know, people with jobs and spouses and kids and mortgages. And, largely, sadly–as we’ve noticed–these people are women.

  47. Debbie says:

    I have a hmmmmm question. It seems that Travis told Jodi that anal sex and oral sex were not as sinful as vaginal sex. He was a church elder. Makes me wonder…. did he prefer little boys too?

    • AnonyGee says:

      @Debbie Has there been proof(s) proffered that Travis said that it was his belief that anal/oral were not as sinful? Or just Jodi’s word? I’ve missed some of the text/email evidence presented earlier in the trial. For that matter, do we know beyond just Jodi’s word that actual sex acts ever even took place? Is it possible it was limited to nudity/photos and talk?

      • LC says:

        Uuhhh yea ok…. Have u ever heard that saying: a picture is worth 1000 words???

        • AnonyGee says:

          Yes, I have. That’s why I asked. I hadn’t heard of any pictures of actual “acts”. Only of nudity and talk. Have you ever heard of self pleasuring to photography & phone-text talk (to put it as delicately as I can)?

          • LC says:

            Im trying to be as delicate as I can too. But we KNOW Jodi wasnt a virgin n those pictures of het with her legs wide open, say everything (to ME anyway). Who took the pictures, hhmmmm he must’ve ben REALL CLOSE N COMFY, n im sure he wasn’t sitting there twiddling his thumbs!!!! C-on lets be realistinc.

            Like someone said in an earliet post, along with NG, JVM n HNL stop making jodi look like it was all her because shes the woman shes the whore slut but its ok for TA because it’s expected from a man.

            We ALL KNOW they where having SEXXXXX

          • BeeCee says:

            I have a bridge I would like to sell you…. :)

          • BeeCee says:

            I meant AnonGee, I have a bridge to sell you…. LOL

          • LC says:

            Lol beecee…. lol I dont think this person’s coming back. See what I mean with people dropping lines w/out reading into previous comments?

      • Debbie says:

        I’m sorry AnonyGee but I do not believe pictures such as Travis laying on his bed with an “after” penis and his fingers held up in a V with a tube of KY jelly beside him is just a nude pose.There were also pictures taken of Jodi on his bed. Of course all these pictures have blacked out the naughty bits but they didn’t at first. So I would say that they had sex the day he died because the time and date are on the pictures and it was a brand new camera.

        • CJ says:

          SO this is why Martinez said Jodi turned travis out to K Y jelly in opening? he must have known this would come out.

          • M. says:

            Yes CJ, there was a HUGE bottle of KY on the bed in the photo where Travis is doing the peace sign or “V” sign.

            Totally off topic, but I just couldn’t stop thinking, “That’s a GIANT bottle of lube, holy cow…”.

            I guess that’s why Martinez brought that up; I must not have heard that part of the trial.
            Have a hard time hearing the trial (even with ear buds), have appreciated everyone’s updating comments on here, its been helpful.

        • Kira says:

          Oh, I read a comment on another forum today that made me burst out laughing at some people’s need to paint Travis as a saint: “What if he was just lying there naked because it was summertime and hot outside? What if Jodi planted the KY next to him to make it look like they were having sex?”

          Seriously??????

        • LC says:

          Debbie, you’ve GOT IT CORRECT! !! I wassss trying to be “delicate” but you’ve nailed it!!! An “AFTER” penis, thats exactly what I meant that WE all KNOW!!! Its OBVIOUS people! N the ky… what he used it as hair gel?! Lol

    • MB says:

      Hi Debbie, that’s what I assume as Kirk Nurmi asked Jodi’s ex boyfriend if their sex life involved putting little boys underwear on Jodi.

      I still feel like I need eye/ear bleach when I remember that question.

      • Debbie says:

        You know MB I am a bit scared to find out what was on that damaged hd now :( .

        • BeeCee says:

          Debbie, I’m not scared…I want the truth to come out. IF Travis was into children…well, that’s all I’m gonna say that the moment.

          Computer viruses are very common on porn sites.

      • CJ says:

        I thought I heard that wrong! So that was said. I thought I was going nuts and that I couldn’t have heard something like that.

  48. jackie says:

    remember the movie Fatal Attraction, when michael douglas explodes and tries to choke the woman who is stalking him? I think Travis might have come to this point with jodi. i think he had a love-hate relationship with her. he wanted her as a sex partner and nothing more and didn’t want to be pressed for more than he could give her could it be possible he called her to come and visit, planning to kill her? He told enough people she was stalking him and even that he was afraid of her. could he have had a knife and a gun in that shower and was he planning to plead self defense?

    • AnonyGee says:

      creepy movie, that one. If* he had his own gun though..it would have been very foolish of her to get rid of it. Same with a knife. Would have made more sense to show it..show it was his. Bolsters her story. I wonder if she ever told her attorneys where she ditched the knife and gun?

  49. Kensy says:

    I understand being the ” dirty little secret” for guys. Believe m I have been there. My biggest concern though is if she was in imminent danger and how she somehow found a knife and gun to defend herself. She will definitely have to take the stand in order to explain self defense. And of course he never hurt her in public! No abuser really does that if the have something to hide. But yeah she definitely needs to take the stand. No one wants to put a woman to death if they don’t know her story. I know I wouldn’t

  50. Hermitic says:

    It’s hard to tell these days what Nancy Grace hates more; men, women, sex or herself. At the end of the day- if Arias’s trial is enough to unspool that ball of toxic fury she has paid any debt to society she may have.

    She is like an apoplectic poster child for the fear and self righteous egotism which fuel all the crimes she luxuriates in “exposing”.

    • RC says:

      I can’t even watch her show, the first time I saw her try a case I felt she was effective, passionate yet unemotional. Now? ugh, she makes me sick. This case was over charged to be sure, but she is soooo death penalty happy you would think that under her skin lies a killer hiding behind all that you see on the outside. (that is only my opinion of you NG, please don’t threaten to sue me)

      • CJ says:

        She’s the one who is sued all the time.

      • LC says:

        My husband hasnt been wating the trail he’s a USMC so hes out alot. I was watching her show just because I want to see how ridiculous she sounds (n I want to call in so bad), so anyway he was home that day n he was not really watching but listening to what she was talking about; he comes out with, “omg they’re trying to give her the death penalty, wtf did she do” I summarized it him, lvg MY opinions out. He automatically responded with, “idk what she did but I hope they dont find her guilty just becuz I cant STAND NG!” Lol I mean, its not right for him to say that if he doesnt know whats going on in the case BUT you see how NG CAN n DOES turn people agains any case just from the way she is.

        Oh by the way, now he asks everyday, whats going on with the case. He’s TEAM JODI! LOL

    • Thorina says:

      She twists the truth as much as she can. I am starting to dislike her so much. She is jeopardizin the whole trial.

    • Pique says:

      I don’t have the cable channel that airs her show, so lucky for me, I don’t run into her face too often. When I do see her, I can’t watch for more than 5 or 10 seconds. My heart rhythm actually changes around aggressive people; I have a mini flight-or-flight episode.

      She is a fascinating character, though, like something you might see in a wildlife documentary. Her mouth never fails hers, she’s shameless about interrupting others, full of hate, and completely unbothered by dispensing with objectivity altogether. She’s so consistent and extreme that, from certain angles, she’s an almost-comic figure.

      • BeeCee says:

        “My heart rhythm actually changes around aggressive people; I have a mini flight-or-flight episode.”

        Are you empathic? I have that “problem”….I’m an empath.

        • Pique says:

          Off-topic:

          Well, BeeCee, whatever it is, it’s a problem … this tendency of mine to want to get away from aggression and other kinds of negative emotions is because I tend to absorb whatever is flying around. It’s like taking cover during a lightning storm. Some might call it neurosis. “Empath” sounds nicer! No matter the name, though, it ain’t much fun.

          • BeeCee says:

            No. It is not a neurosis, trust me :) It is a gift that enables one to get inside another persons emotions good or bad and sense what is going on in a situation when someone’s words do not match the emotions coming from that person. lol. Makes sense?

            Not to sound kooky, but there imaging techniques to use to block the other person. I had to do that with a co-worker several times because they are a negative person. It sometimes feels like a vice grip is around my heart when the negativity is just pouring off someone. And when I can’t run…well I have to deal with it in other ways.

  51. RC says:

    I guess the first thing I remind myself that the standard to use self defense as a defense to a killing in Arizona is very low. In many states this self defense would not even be available to JA.
    ALL the evidence is not in yet, rebuttal is coming, and I am sure that will be interesting. I am of the impression that villafying TA is not working so well for the jury based on the questions from the jury. If I were on the jury, I would NEED to hear the why’s. Why did she take steps to establish an alibi? Even if you disbelieve all the testimony against her, you cannot ignore the receipts, the phone calls to TA’s phone, or contacting the police herself.
    I hope there is an expert that can effectively explain this behavior because in the absence, I would need to hear from JA herself.

  52. CJ says:

    Okay I know this is gross but I missed the pic of the penis. What is all this about Ky and Jodi and this pic? Can someone tell me what they saw?

    • Debbie says:

      Hi CJ
      Yesterday, towards the end of the trial, Lonnie Dworkin, the defense computer expert had two pieces of evidence in his hands. Ms Willmott asked him for the numbers on the back and he inadvertently turned the pics around for everyone to see to get the numbers on the back(the exhibit numbers). Both pictures were of an erect penis and he had gotten them from the damaged hd in Travis’s office, the hd having been forwarded to him by the Mesa police. As soon as that happened, of course they had to approach the bench and then the trial was over until Monday.
      The KY jelly was seen in two pictures that came out at the beginning of the trial. It was prominently displayed on the right side of TA while he was laying on the bed naked Those pics were in the group of pictures of the day TA died and were evidenced by the Mesa police( the prosecution). They were pictures that were pulled from the camera.

      • M. says:

        Debbie -
        Don’t forget Martinez asked Lonnie, “Are you an expert on identifying who’s penis that is?”
        Lonnie responds, “No.” Martinez says, “Because that isn’t your job, correct?” Lonnie responds, “No.” Martinez says, “So we do not know who that penis belongs to, that is my point.”

        To the bench per defenses request.
        Day is done.

        Sorry – had to get that part in – I just felt Martinez was seeing his side being to unravel and he just had to get that in there. Hopefully the defense can continue to pull this string…unravel away Martinez.

  53. CJ says:

    Can someone explain to me how their sex, no matter how depraved, connects to Jodi being in imminent fear of her life that day. Is the defense going to assert Jodi was raped that day? I get this doesn’t make Travis look good, that he had control over jodi through sex and that he led a double life – but how is the defense going to connect all this sex stuff, fetishes, 12 year old girl orgasm sounds, connect to her being in fear of her life that day? Or is this just to show how abusive travis potentially could have been that day?

    • BeeCee says:

      For me all this shows how much his friends and everyone saying how great he was, really didn’t know him. And that if he can keep that part of his life hidden, pretty much ANYTHING can be hidden.

      I think what people need to REALLY understand is that no one really knows anyone else and what they are capable of. It sounds like Travis would be a closet abuser in addition to all the other skeletons in his closet.

      I doubt Jodi was his first sex partner.

      I learned a long time ago to NEVER bet my life of what I think a loved one may or may not do.

      • CJ says:

        BeeCee,

        I know this comment I’m making will sound extreme but its actually a thought from a male friend who doesn’t comment on blogs. He said, that it’s his opinion that Travis was a psychopath, not a sociopath. He bases that on his studies and work in criminal justice and forensic profiling. He said Travis had no trouble fitting into social groups. Sociopaths have trouble in that area but psychopaths are much smarter in that they learn quickly, that it’s to their benefit to fit in with others. The whole double life aspect really highlights the psychopathic tendencies Travis had because of his role in the church versus his other life, fetishes and total lack of empathy, and remorse for Jodi. He viewed Jodi as HIS sex slave to use how he saw fit, whenever he wanted. Jodi moved there, moved back home, still visited, still called, she still satisfied his insatiable urges by phone.

        There was no love on part of Travis because he was incapable of that. He said Travis’ background with his mother as outlined on his blog demonstrates misogyny which we have have discussed already. Misogyny is often associated with psychopathic tendencies. The notion that Travis was having Jodi role play being a child with him was another factor. The letters also allude to that Travis was deep into this compulsion. The testimony yesterday showed that Travis manipulated not only Jodi but his friends by keeping one group out of the loop with regard to Jodi. He said we often think of psychopaths as people like Bernardino and Bundy when actually, not everyone gets into legal trouble or becomes a serial killer. He talked about psychology not agreeing with one another on the distinction between a sociopath and psychopath too which confused people. Anyhow, he profiled Travis using the evidence, his blog, the comments made by his own friends etc and concluded that ironically, that it was Travis who was the psychopath, not Jodi Arias.

        • BeeCee says:

          Actually CJ I TOTALLY agree with what you posted. I have not gone into a lot of detail about my thoughts because I am not a trained psychologist and I did not want to be like the Jodi bashers who are mistakely calling Jodi the sociopath/psychopath. And especially since I call them armchair psychologists, LOLOL!!!

          The media is delusional, Travis supporters are delusional, the prosecution is death hungry and this all frustrates me to no end. THIS CASE is the one that made me against the death penalty, because I thought, if they call THAT premeditation, then we are all at risk of something like this,

          Sometimes I think we need the Truth Machine like in James Halperin’s book. And yet, one has to worry about who will decide what to punish and how..

          It would not surprise me in the least to have the REAL truth about Travis’ death to be closer to something posted by Edgar.

        • Kira says:

          Very interesting!

          I can’t imagine that Travis’s childhood didn’t screw up his view of women fundamentally.

      • CJ says:

        Good point! Anything could happen given the secrets. Insightful and simple just how I like things.

    • Debbie says:

      Interesting you making the comment about rape there. At one point JA had said to Detective Flores that TA didn’t rape her and then said he never raped her. It has stuck in my mind. Why would she say that out of the blue the way she did? She had stated that they had sex when they got up and they took some pictures on the new camera. Then they went down to the office and could not get the pictures to upload onto the computer.She said both of them were frustrated over this but TA got very angry and she tried to calm him down. She then said they had rough vaginal sex in the office. Did she in fact feel at that moment like she was being raped?

  54. CJ says:

    Re jury questions: Beth from InSession explained that the judge and lawyers go through all the questions first. They can take out questions that imply hearsay etc. She said that several questions the jurors had weren’t answered. We can deduce that Martinez is objecting to a boatload of questions.

    My point is, although it seems as if the jurors are siding with the prosecution, that might not be true for all of the jurors and some could see this from the defense perspective.

  55. CJ says:

    Does anyone know where I could find a map of Jodi’s travels during that trip? Does anyone know whether Jodi drove from Vegas to Winnemucca, then Sparks NV? I’m guessing that was the route after she hit Vegas? I have a point if that’s correct. I cant find a map of her travels though I’m sure it’s out there.

    • Michelle Kerr says:

      Can’t find it either but SO curious to know what point you have – we need a good point :/

    • LC says:

      Geezzzz thats a good Q. I havent seen where they might have a map of the route…..
      But I do want to know your point. Why dont you start with “Assuming that Jodi took…. blabla bla route” lol would work for me…. its ur opinion, your intilttled to it n ur making it clear that your not sure of the correct route. I know she went to visit her ex n told him she was going to visit his sister but never went there.

  56. tnlucy says:

    Here is a link I found to a map of the supposed route Jodi took on here trip. Can’t wait to see your idea CJ.

    https://sites.google.com/site/jodiariastrial/

  57. Michelle Kerr says:

    Has anyone had the thought that it WAS self defense because TA had planned to off JA and she turned the tables on him? She was his ‘dirty little secret’ and had a LOT of personal information that could have ruined TA with both PPL AND his standing with the Mormon Church? And he wanted to permanently shut that link down but failed in his attempt and JA in SD killed him in the process?

    Too far fetched?

    • Daniel Tremont says:

      Michelle, not at all. I was thinking along the same lines yesterday when Nurmi kept asking Daniel Freeman about the Mormon Church’s expectations of a priesthood holder/elder and the worthiness of baptizing someone. Travis HAD to have been feeling either extremely guilty (which seems unlikely given everything else we know) or extremely arrogant as to the rules didn’t apply to HIM. Baptizing someone KNOWING you are not worthy because you are breaking the vow of chastity? That seems like something in the end he could have been extremely worried about Jodi later revealing after the final break up and letting Jodi know that it was never gonna work out between them, he was taking Mimi to Cancun etc. If I had been him I would have been concerned about that…who would not?

      • BeeCee says:

        Yes Michelle and Daniel…those same thoughts have occurred to me also…

        (ACK I just noticed spell checker isn’t working for me, I will need to slow down my typing…)

    • AnonyGee says:

      It wouldn’t be too far fetched had the killing been done outside of the shower.

      If he were the initiator of the violence…with the motives you assign in your theory, which are good motives, btw…he wouldn’t wait until he was in such a vulnerable position such as being naked and wet and barefoot in a shower and then take his actions, imho.

      • BeeCee says:

        Oh, I missed where it is established 100% that the killing STARTED in the shower. Do you have documentation of this?

        • AnonyGee says:

          I refer only to the time stamped digital pictures. Given those…and the order therein…not a likely scenario for acting out a premeditated murder such as was suggested above. I’m not at all sure that the first blow (either way) was struck inside or outside of the shower stall itself..but certainly within feet of such. Logically speaking..for the above theory of Kerr’s re: preplanned murder of Jodi..I don’t think he’d have done so from the circumstances the digital pics show were under way. None of the weapons appear to be inside the shower. jmo of course.

  58. Trula says:

    Kill Without Joy.How to Kill Without Joy – The Complete How to Kill Book Has anyone read this book? I have read through much of the discussions here and haven’t seen that this topic, as it relates to the methodology of killing someone as quickly as possible, has been discussed. One aspect of this case that seems bizarre is the sophistication of the murder. Every time I try to picture Jodi Arias as a skilled Assassin I am hard pressed to see her executing Tavis Alexander with such educated precision. For starters, it is highly unlikely someone with Jodi’s background would instinctually know how to kill; much less likely too would she study up on the topic of how to kill someone before heading out for a date with them. I spent some time reading up on ritualistic types of murders, rage murders, and self defense murders. A lady commented on this website a couple of weeks ago about the Mormon throat cutting from ear to ear as a form of punishment. While reading, I came across quite a lot of Mormon related literature with reference to throat cutting. It seems to me that there are three aspects here that are tied together with cutting someone’s throat from ear to ear: throat cutting is a precision form of killing, it is a ritualistic form of killing, and it is part of the Mormon culture.

    • G189 says:

      I agree! If there were no pictures recovered, many if not most people would have a difficult time believing that this petite female was able to overcome a fit/much heavier male and only get a couple of cuts on her hand. But the photos put her there and captured the couple of minute span where he is alive then bleeding/dying, so the investigation put her there as the killer then made all the other pieces fit.

      But the photos for me are not as damning for Jodi. His expressions throughout the “shoot” have piqued my curiosity – TA appears depressed, forlorned, repentant. Was TA preparing to pay with his own blood since the blood of Christ would never be enough to atone for his sins? And I’ll have to go back and confirm this info, but iirc, there is a roommate account of TA performing some kind of spiritual/protection rite within 24 hours of his death.

  59. BeeCee says:

    ewww uhh hmmm, I don’t actually know who you are Darrick….but i think the TRUTH is the best story. And i think there would be have been people who would have believed the intruder story…she was shaking and crying when she told that one.

    She should not have changed her story AGAIN

    If you really were the one to get her to change her story AGAIN I think you did her a great disservice.

  60. Trula says:

    I tried to cut and paste the Web link for “How to Kill Without Joy.” For some reason it didn’t take. It really is worth taking a look at because it highlights very graphically the science of killing. And one thing that is absolutely certain about the manner in which Travis was killed is that the stab to the heart, the throat slash, and the bullet to the head were all considered deadly in and of themselves. It just doesn’t seem feasible to me that Jodi possessed that level of skill in killing someone. Like I said, while reading the Internet text of this published book on the art of killing, the stark reality of just how precise the killing was in terms of at least two lethal attacks on Travis’s body suggest that the intent to kill was present BEFORE the first attack. I guess that is the dilemma I have. I can’t reconcile Jodi’s persona, her family background, and her friend’s recollection of her with this intent to kill murder.

    • BeeCee says:

      Thanks for sharing that…but probably an actual link to something like that is not a good idea here…I’m almost afraid to look it up on my computer!!!!! What if Deatheater Martinez comes after me!!! LOLOLOL

      I really think the idiot detective should have looked at the type of injuries and realize there might be someone else involved. What a dumb$^%& Flores is. (hehehe, can I say that here, lol)

  61. Michelle Kerr says:

    You did her a grave disservice is this is even remotely true.

  62. Daniel Tremont says:

    I must have missed something.. where is Darrik’s post that has people responding?

  63. raymoond says:

    I think Jody Arias ws abused. Women don’t just give their bodies, time money away (in most cases) just for having perverted sex. I think most woman want something in return. In this case, I believe she wanted his love and he ended up throwing it in her face about marrying another woman, going to Cancun, etc. still having sex with her, using her for his pervertions. I think if he didn’t want to marry her he should have let her go and left her alone. He anniated contact( as well as her) but it takes “two to tango.” in this situation he died.He is a pervert that completely used her under the false pretentions of religion.
    2nd degree murder
    RJM

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

*