site
stats
Menu

Jodi Arias Trial – Day 32 (afternoon session)

in Latest News by

.
CLICK HERE FOR DAY 32 VIDEO RECORDING

Leave your comments below on the afternoon session of day 32, where Dr Richard Samuels once again continues his testimony.

SJ
Team Jodi

799 Comments

  1. Another late start. Do they really need hour and a half lunches??? This is just crazy!! They will be lucky to be done by Christmas at this rate.

    • ” … the beautiful woman may be seen as atypical of battered women and as therefore less readily viewed as a victim. Since she did not walk away and instead killed her abuser, she is seen as more intentional as opposed to reactive to the situation and thus is blamed more for the murder.”

      Interesting. Thanks for posting this link, coldcase53.

      Another interesting article about female defendants is here: http://strikelawyer.wordpress.com/2011/10/05/amanda-knox-casey-anthony-sephora-davis/

      A snippet:

      “The government’s tale is almost invariably directed at a man. On rare occasions it is directed at a woman. On even rarer occasions, it is directed at a very attractive woman, and on those occasions it takes on a curious quality: it becomes frenzied, and irresistible.”

  2. I remember some of us wondering if she has received therapy,which as many pointed out would be kind of a ‘luxury’ in jail.I guess now we know.No therapy,just evaluation.Poor Jodi…

    • maria, yes same here. I imagine it would be therapeutic for her to talk about what happened, and know that the listener believes her; which is why we see her much more sure of herself on the stand.

      Imagine if she had full access to therapy… she’d be a powerhouse. 🙂

      • On a sidenote, Jose Baez said Casey only began to understand her behavior after the grief expert testified. She broke down during that part of the trial. This testimony is reminding me of that part of the casey trial.

  3. I find it interesting that JM’s objections seem to have the goal of not allowing the jury to here facts that might hurt their accusations. It runs contrary to what we might want of prosecutors – to seek the truth.

    I once debated TA lovers that police and prosecutors only present evidence that supports their case. Their goal does not seem to be to seek the truth. Very sad.

    • “It runs contrary to what we might want of prosecutors – to seek the truth.”

      Gosh, exactly. I don’t know how people aren’t upset that this guy is being paid by the public’s taxdollars; and he isn’t working to do his job to the best of his ability; he’s working to secure a conviction, whether that conviction reflects the truth or not.

      I’m disturbed that he can do this at the expense of the public with no accountability; and that he doesn’t give a crap about the lives of the people he steamrolls just to score another win.

      • It is consistent sadly with the way the Maricopa County attorney history of overcharging. I know people personally who have been charged felonies when they are guilty of misdemeanors. And the courts let them get away with it. The first DA who set this policy has since been disbarred for his antics (Andrew Thomas). But his successor has continued this with things like overcharging undocumented immigrants so they can’t get bail.

        They are a despicable group of people.

      • A friend of mine is a prison psychiatrist. He prescribes what the patients needed, as long as it would not interfer with the inmate being able to assist in their own defense. I’d say anxiety medications might be considered necessary if Jodi’s stress level is high and the doctor deems it necessary. Especially for the shaking episodes.
        So tired of people without credentials making calls about stuff like this.

    • I have no idea.But she seems ”off” today.As if distracted,about to faint or fall off her chair.At least to me,idk…

    • Only if they were written to the person outside (before they were put in) of the prison system. Most times new medicines are not allowed or prescribed while incarcerated. It takes several authorizations and permissions as well as cooperating physicians’ statement. It’s quite a hassle to get new/changed medications in jail. Or at least that is what I am being told by a detention officer (not a police person)

          • Great weekend…the sunshine was really great up in the upper mid-west over the weekend. Ahhhh but now old man winter in just pull a mean trick on us….

            I wish I were working right now……this is crazy….

            • Mother Nature is a real Basket case… here too. 2 weeks ago, it was freezing. Last week it was 90’s for 2 days and this weekend it was mid 70’s. Later this week we will be High 90’s again. Your Old man winter is nothing compared to Arizona’s Mother Nature. I think she (Mother Nature) is bi-polar! Holy COW!

              • Tell yall what, it is crazy! Here, we just had not one but two hailstorms about 15 or 20 mins apart. Something I was going to say about the media is, they should NOT just be allowed to ONLY sit on the prosecution side. Those people on the jury KNOW who they are. They haven’t been living under a rock their entire lives. If the media only sits on the prosecution side, doesn’t that influence the jury? CHECK that NOW hailstorm number THREE

    • They probably would, but she would have to be evaluated and treated first by a psychiatrist. That would have required a court hearing (as Sheriff Joe decided inmates only receive care if it’s court-ordered). And that would have then allowed the state’s psychiatrists/psychologists to evaluate, examine and treat her. That would not have been good before the trial.

  4. Uuuugggghhh He has to approach right when its about to get good! !!! What an ass, now he’s definitely NOT getting a tip tonight!!!!

    • I think he’s in cahoots with HLN’s commercial spots or something…these breaks seem like they come at regular intervals…Let’s break for commercial !

  5. JM is still going to try to keep out the different types of killing based on his experience although they already agreed that he wouldn’t use the slide show and Willmott said she would not ask the question of what type of killing does the good doctor believe took place.

    Our dysfunctional system is alive and well. God forbid that JM do what he is supposed to do in seeking the truth and/or facts and allowing it into a trial for someone who is facing the ultimate punishment.

    • I want all evidence (as painful as some of it has been to me personally) to be presented. I want every item brought up, discussed, dissected both the pro and con. I want a vigorous defense, I want a meticulous prosecution. I want this done once; (I am sure Jodi feels much the same, as every item the prosecution has brought up can then be addressed by her defense team. I feel like every time Martinez opens his mouth, another opportunity is given to the defense to readdress the issue. So let him run on, waive his arms like a mad man, Ma’am her all day (like he did/does/will) as it can then be addressed by her team). Whether or not there is an acquittal, manslaughter or other punishment handed down, every item must be seen, heard, defended/discussed or whatever to not have to face a hung jury or any other additional penalty phase. Justice needs a powerful microscope; it cannot survive in a vacuum.

  6. I wish somebody would evaluate Kermit. His body language, etc., just drives me crazy. Taking a line from JA’s journal, “there is just something off with this boy”.

  7. Why did in sessions stop airing in the afternoon? they seemed to cover alot longer without interuptions. There that litle frog again,I object.J.W. is putting him in his place.Good job J.W.

    • If you watch from the link provided at the top of the page each day you get the full trial coverage without commercials and none of the additional talking head’s BS

    • The “man” at Turner Broadcasting decided that Lizard Lick Towing was more important than live trials. I know many hate IS here… but it was good for the US to get a look into the courtroom.

      • In Session (when it was Court TV…a LONG time ago) was pretty good. When it turned into TruTV is when all the idiot/sensational/bullcrap people/shows replaced the educational part of it. AND some of the people changed their personalities as well. Never did figure that out…I wish it was like it used to be, before everyone started wearing dunce caps.

  8. salad bar?again???What’s Kermit’s problem??Maybe the good doctor is the only one who could really answer this million dollar question!

  9. I think these current objections from JM are actually helping the defense because Willmott’s techniques are a little different than Nurmi, but she’s getting crucial info to the jury.

  10. On a lighter note, a random thought: Remember when Nurmi called on Ms. W. to stand w/JA and have JA drape her arm around her? Just for a fleeting second there I wondered what craziness would’ve broken out in the courtroom if Nurmi had instead asked JM to stand with JA since he is about the same height as Ms.W and JA’s sister (could also have been just punishment for calling her sis dumb!). All the sputtering and screams of ‘Objection, Objection…’ and to make it worse if the rest of the court was in on it (flash mob style) and started singing ‘kumbaya…’

      • Speaking objections are when instead of a short, “true” objections, the attorney makes a speech usually to make an argument in his/her favor to the jury or to “coach” the witness in their direction. Sometimes they can be grounds for appeal and are often considered “unfair” by both judges and attorneys alike.

        However… this is Arizona and a “fair trial” seems be be irrelevant in their judicial system.

  11. Kermit is going to go after him and cut him off as usual. I’m glad that it is Ms. Willmott handling the good doctor, because I think she will go to war with JM if needed.

    • This examination is the first time I’ve seen Ms. Willmott’s technique and I’m impressed. I’m not panning Mr. Nurmi’s examination of Jodi Arias, but I actually believe Ms. Willmott would have been the better choice for that task. (I’m sure they had their reasons for the workload assignments, however.)

  12. So what do these “expert witnesses” charge for their services? I found a website (http://www.seak.com/expert-witness-fee-study/) that will give you an idea of what these people are making for trial time etc:

    Expert Witness Fees By Area of Expertise
    The survey includes responses from over 1,000 expert witnesses in over 300 areas of expertise, from Accident Reconstruction to Wound Care. This is the most comprehensive study ever conducted on expert witness fees.
    There was significant variation in fees amongst different areas of expertise. Medical expert witnesses are on average better compensated than non-medical expert witnesses. The average hourly fee for in court testimony for all non-medical experts is $248. The average hourly fee for in court testimony for all medical experts is $555. Medical expert witnesses on average earn more than double (124% more) what non-medical expert witnesses earn. 45% of all responding experts were medical experts and 55% of all responding experts were non-medical experts.
    Surprisingly, less experienced experts generally charge more than experienced experts. The median hourly rate for all experts for in court testimony was $300. The median hourly rate for experts who have been testifying 1-5 years was $350 and the median hourly rate for experts who have been testifying 26+ years was $275.

    Not a bad hourly rate! Does anybody else feel this is unethical, to be paid for giving testimony? It certainly would seem to give an expert the incentive to say what the defense/prosecution needs them to say. I can understand why experts are useful in certain cases but any form of compensation other than travel costs and reasonable reimbursement seems excessive.

    • If the person is professional and ethical he deserves to get paid for his expertise by all means. Do you really think someone who has been educated to the nth degree and had vast experience and is highly qualified to be an expert witness would sell themselves out and risk their reputation? I think not. This would be far too much aggravation to tolerate for a few measly dollars. Plumbers and electricians make that kind of money, why not doctors, et al Think of how much money and time he has devoted to his education and experience. I think they are not getting paid enough. How much is the Atty getting paid? (less schooling)

  13. OMG another recess due to JM’s antics. Willmott was quick to object before JM could ever put whatever out there to the jury. Go Ms. Willmott, objection before JM can ring a bell that can’t be unrung.

  14. The little guy lost this grossly overcharged case a while ago.
    Today that has just been confirmed.
    The earlier description of him was accurate.

    SJ
    Team Jodi

  15. Oh my God. What a f–ker Kermit is. He’s trying to bring out that Nurmi tried to withdraw and Jodi was depressed … even though there’s a motion in limine on the subject. I want to smash that bastard’s head right now.

    • Not exactly. The object was sustained to the questions he was going to ask but apparently there is a tape that JM wants to play for the jury that Flores has and will bring to court first thing in the morning. So it looks to me like JM is going to try and discredit the expert through this tape. We will have to wait and see the ruling on that one.

      I would say any line of questioning into this area that is allowed will definitely have the defense filing a motion for mistrial or worse. IMO

    • I missed the judge’s ruling on the second issue. But she sustained the objection on the first issue. That issue was that Kermit was trying to say Dr. Samuels provided Jodi with treatment at the time that she Nurmi moved the court to withdraw from the case. The defense and the doctor say that no therapy was provided, but he was called in to evaluate her around that time. Kermit argued that’s a fine line and the doctor, because he gave her treatment, is biased towards his patient. Jodi was extremely depressed at the time and thought her case had no hope without Nurmi. Prior to trial, the judge had ruled with the defense on a motion in limine (to preclude) any discussion of Nurmi’s attempts to withdraw from the case (so that the jury cannot infer anything from it). Bringing up this issue now would leave the doctor with no way of skirting around the issue that he WAS called in because Jodi was depressed. On redirect, JW couldn’t delve into why Jodi was depressed. The judge sustained this objection and so, Kermit can’t bring it up.

      I hope someone can tell us what the second ruling was.

  16. Kermit can’t win his case on facts. He cannot prove premeditation. He is not doing his job as a prosecutor and has a “win at all costs” or “the ends justifies the means.” It pisses me off because it is unconstitutional. The sad thing is that this tends to be the norm.

    This is another all time low.

    • Yes. He just drifted into Nancy Gruelface prosecution style.
      Judge, let the defense witnesses speak!
      Let JM’s witnesses speak too, for what they’re worth.
      This is disgusting.

    • I know Jodie. Isn’t it scary that “The State” can do this? If they doing it now to Jodi, they can clearly do it to ANYONE (just to win a case). Its scares me that the state can do this and if you have no protection on knowledge of law, you better hope for a good defense if you dont have the money to hire your own. They WILL violate your right and the amendments.

  17. I can already tell that JM is going to try every trick in the book to impeach the doctor. This should be interesting.

  18. Did they say when they will be back? Also Please, anyone who has the down low about Nurmi leaving the case, will you pleas fill me in. This is news to me…was this a recent event? I must have missed it!

    • They should be back at any moment.

      Nurmi tried to withdraw when he left the public defender’s office and began his own practice. This is very typical of attorneys. The judge denied his request as the case was already set for trial then (even though there were further delays) as it would have been prejudicial to the defendant to have to start all over again with another attorney. Remember, she had already had to start all over again when Victoria Washington (who was first chair with Nurmi from the public defendant’s office) withdrew, and that set the case back a year for Wilmott to get up to speed.

    • Dorothy – no, it wasn’t recent, it was a few years back. Nurmi wanted to open his own practice and was not being paid enough as a public defender, so he tried to withdraw from the case. He was not allowed but they did compensate him with more money.

      • Thank you :o) I thought it was just recently and I thought to myself..”How did I miss this?” I feel I’m paying attention. Couldn’t imagine how this slipped by me.

  19. I liked this bit:

    Sometimes it is so horrific you have to detach. It can be difficult for a soldier to talk about what happened. It could be detrimental to hammer. Testifying is stressful.

    At this rate the jury are going to convict Martinez of defendant abuse.

    • “At this rate the jury are going to convict Martinez of defendant abuse.”

      I so wish that were possible!!!

  20. Sorry, I wanted this to be a standalone post. But since I a bit of a zealot when it comes to spelling, punctuation and grammar I took too long in writing it. As it is important (at least to me) it bears reposting. Sorry if you read it above.

    I want all evidence (as painful as some of it has been to me personally) to be presented. I want every item brought up, discussed, dissected both the pro and con. I want a vigorous defense, I want a meticulous prosecution. I want this done once; (I am sure Jodi feels much the same, as every item the prosecution has brought up can then be addressed by her defense team. I feel like every time Martinez opens his mouth, another opportunity is given to the defense to readdress the issue. So let him run on, waive his arms like a mad man, Ma’am her all day (like he did/does/will) as it can then be addressed by her team). Whether or not there is an acquittal, manslaughter or other punishment handed down, every item must be seen, heard, defended/discussed or whatever to not have to face a hung jury or any other additional penalty phase. Justice needs a powerful microscope; it cannot survive in a vacuum.

  21. Every time they show TA’s brother the song “Aint Nothing But A Hound Dog”, pops into my head. Anyone else have these issues? It is quite distracting to have a song played over and over in the brain when trying to watch and concentrate on an expert’s testimony.

  22. JM is off the chain…what a hot mess!!!!! Why is he screaming at the doctor!! Won’t let the man answer the question….just acting a fool!!!!!

      • The head phones make it so much more intense don’t they? Something is lost when listening to my laptop, so I also wear the headphones. I make sure before JM stands up I turn the volume down first ;o)

  23. This makes Jodi look much less hostile (as some pro pros were calling her), she’s not the only one who won’t take Martinez’s shit and is confused by his backwards questions.

    Even a Dr. is confused at what Martinez is asking.
    What a prick Martinez is, yelling and clapping.

    He may as well stand on his desk and fart in Flores face at this point.
    It’d be just as shocking and abrasive. And a lot funnier.

  24. Good objection, JW. The clapping, I mean come on. There is NO WAY he should be able to badger this witness like that.

    • Really??? Kermit said that??

      Holy shit.

      Does lil man Kermit have a mental illness of some kind coming on?? He says the sames things to all the people on the stand?

  25. Memory Problems… I think JM may bust a blood vessel trying to figure out how to shade Doc Samuels… He makes my head hurt.

  26. how come Martinez is not objecting to his own words ”jail” ”incarceration” ???
    Wasnt he the one who objected when Jodi mentioned the word ”cell”?

  27. OMG… Even the court reporter thinks JM is getting rediculous!!! Did you see his face? He is doing the same thing to the Dr. As he did to Jodi… Might as well just rewind the previous cross of JA and hit the re- play button.

  28. This prosecutor is a shame to our whole judicial system.
    He should be in a straight jacket before he hits his fists again and kills himself.

  29. The doctor is answering the questions, but Martinez is trying to twist his words and try to paint him as a quack.

  30. He’s grasping at straws with this cross! Of course the defense is going to put people on the stand to further their case!

  31. Wow… I think the judge is completely biased to the prosecution. She is allowing him to badger the witness until he gets the answer he wants. She and JM should both be disbarred for this is not justice.

    • Alternatively, the longer Martinez goes on, the more foolish he looks. Because I am sure the jury realizes he keeps asking the same thing over and over, and just ends up with the same answer. He just gets louder and more aggressive, does not change the question or clarify.

      Judge not stopping him, just letting the jury see how ridiculous he is being. He isn’t doing anything against the law, he just isn’t effective.

      I personally felt the judge flip-flops. There were days where she definitely sided more with the defense, and other days where she leaned toward the prosecution.

      • I don’t think she is necessarily smarter or anything, but she is more relatable — she smiles, seems much more personable than the other attorneys, including Nurmi. I guess I was thinking that I simply liked her best of the attorneys, and wonder if the jury relates to her as well. She just seems warm.

      • I also think it helps that she talks at a more typical pace. Not as slow and methodical as Nurmi, not as quick and mad-doggy as Martinez.

  32. I guess we’re all the stupid ones for not realizing that Dr. Samuels is on trial not Jodi! Let’s all pray that karma rears its ugly head on Martinez!

    • “Subject shows signs of agitation, stress, inability to hold a coherent thought and understand the basic definition of words… could be ADHD? Could insult my patients with ADHD if I determine that…”

        • I’m sure he’s thinking JM could use some therapy. Can you imagine what the good doctor is thinking about possible diagnosis for JM.

      • ROLF!
        “Or he could just be a giant penis…I better have him take the M.R.F.A.W.F.F.I test”

        Disclaimer: That is not a real test, at least to my knowledge.

  33. I don’t understand why Nurmi didn’t do what Jennifer just did…objecting to JM yelling at the good Doc.

    JM yelled at Jodi the whole time…

    • this was the stupidest argument EVER!!! Is he trying to say that psychologists are NOT doctors?? If I were one I would be offended as hell,I hope there are psychologists out there listening to this crap and taking offense and realizing how blood thirsty M is!

      • Actually, a psychiatrist can prescribe medicine. A psychiatrist deals more with the science behind things and should be an expert in prescribing the appropriate medical “cocktail.”

  34. What jm is saying is he wants to killll her. Please go get him Ms Wilmott. What jm wants to do is stick her in the ground half way and stone her. I pray for her this was not just on her shoulders others were involved. Please fight on! I have been watching and reading this site is the only fair and balanced place to be.

  35. OMG I am dying here! He is beating a dead horse. He is getting nowhere. If I were a member of the jury I would be siding with the defense just out of spite. Martinez’s voice is doing that munchkin thing again. It’s not fazing the Dr. cuz make no mistake he has handled much worse in his career. I agree that the judge is letting him away with much more than the defense got away with. Obviously Martinez is trying to corner the Dr into a certain answer because he has somewhere he wants to go with this, (who knows where?? Only he in his little mind knows).

    • Neither do a whole bunch of medical doctors unless they are trained surgeons …

      so GPs, ENTs, pediatricians, GI doctors, internal medicine doctors —> unless they were surgeons who specialized in one of those areas…

  36. “Learn to recognize the influence of socially sanctioned hatred”

    This line is from this article “Seven Ways to Fix the Criminal Justice System” which is a great read. This trial, along with others, is really bringing out the need for reform.

  37. HOLY COW!!!!!!!!! I would be livid if I was spoken to this way. The Dr is handeling mouthy McSquirmy so much better than I would.

    • The doctor is getting a little ticked off with him, but he’s doing his best to maintain his cool while this asshole runs his mouth about all sorts of BS. I think, occasionally, it’s like a observational study in attorney job displeasure for him.

      But Kermit is just WAY over the top. It’s one thing for him to treat the defendant this way (even though I didn’t like it). But he’s treating a seasoned experienced professional psychologist with years of therapeutic experience, diplomates and fellowships at his belt. as if he’s a 5 year old. This is just ridiculous.

  38. All McSquirmy is doing is putting down this witness. Making accusations. One of these jurors might see a psychologist.

  39. In the above titled suit of Pen vs Pencil we rule in favor of the pencil. That is how stupid it sounded. No Doubt the HLN crew will talk about how brilliant that was.

    • I know right!! They celebrate these little non-victories and gush about how brilliant he is. I wonder how Martinez feels, knowing that the only people who like him are hate filled, pitchfork mongering malcontents. Ah nevermind. He’d be in like company.

  40. He is trying to insinuate Dr. Samuels manipulated the results of the test by using a pencil rather than a pen.

    This is pretty damned despicable on JM’s part but shows how absolutely desperate he is.

  41. All this BS to point out when she took the test she was still saying 2 intruders. Doesn’t this play into the whole diagnosis of PTSD?

    • Caligirl your screen name shoulve been “shitgirl” your that bored?! Go clean you ass or do something useful, you piece of trash! !!

      • She’s gone. Strange thing is, the “Jason” that was posting and agreeing with her actually had the same email (cathymagorien@yahoo.com) & IP as she had. Sounds like she wasn’t just talking to herself, she was agreeing with herself too :mrgreen:

        SJ
        Team Jodi

      • Well geez maybe we are an embarrassment… I mean we should all get on Facebook and talk about “Saint Travis” ( who obviously WAS NOT saintly) and how Jodi is a ‘psycho’ and discuss ways that she should be killed… Because that is absolutely not Crazy… Nope not at ALL… Call girl go blow a goat.

        • Blow a goat LOL!

          I noticed that she was melting down all day because some people were discussing a two-person theory. I say, so the fuck what? Some of us (me included) feel that it was just Jodi and Travis tat day, but if others want to believe something different, then that’s their right. I don’t know why she kept getting so upset. Don’t like someone’s theory, don’t read it.

          Hope she has fun on the pro-pros boards where people theorize that Jodi was a serial killer who was stopped early, Travis was a virgin who never had sex with Jodi, and Travis was already stabbed/shot while Jodi was doing the shower photoshoot. And don’t forget the Munchkins!

    • No worries. Willmott is taking great notes. As familiar as I am on this case, JM has me lost and confused. IMO the jurors probably feel the same way.

    • I don’t see how it is allowed for Martinez to look at the questions/answers/scoring of this test. This can affect the ability for other psychologists to give this test to a client. The APA should complain about this. This is so invasive & violating for both this case & the profession of psychology.

      • So what? Did he explain why he had to?

        People, c’mon. Juan wants you to think he manipulated the test to get what the defense wanted.

        • Exactly. Defense gets to ask again after cross? Willmott will likely ask him that question to get the explanation. JM has a habit of never asking a direct question because he is afraid the answer will be believable and help Jodi. He didn’t ask why the test was administered twice for this reason

          • That’s why I think people are getting alarmed over nothing. This man has been a psychologist for something close to 40 YEARS.

            • The Dr. is admitting he made an oversight and should have administered it again. IMO, it doesn’t change the overall diagnosis of PTSD, but it can e construed as not looking good to the jury.

            • Well said tonysam and others.
              Mrs. Willmott hasnt even recrossed.
              I will put my faith in Dr. Samuels knowing what the hell he is doing…and has been for 40+ years.

              Martinez, eh, not so much…

          • There is always some risk in admin’in a test twice: the client/subject will eventually become familiar with the test & not answer as honestly. The first test is usually the best info on how the subject truly feels about the q’s being asked.

      • And the defense will clarify it…so now everybody is ready to throw in the towel.

        It’s so predictable. How does it prove premeditation?

        • Im not, I have faith. Martinez is just an ass and he MAKES everything look this way. I cant blv he insinuated dr Samuel cheated for her and then when he straight out asked him if he was saying that he cheated, Martinez changed his question.

  42. Somebody HELP me out here. What does the following mean like used in the post from Cali above

    “…” I added the quotes.

    Thanks.

  43. Wait.
    He’s not a real Dr., he put glasses on and hasnt been wearing them all day!
    Faker!

    (the above is pure sarcasm)

  44. Guys,

    I hate to be a downer, but this is a real issue here. The Dr knows that the reason given for her trauma is false. He can’t believe the rest of the test.

    But he claims he relied on this test to diagnose PTSD.

    He just again claimed he should have regiven the test.

          • It may look bad in the eyes of some of the jurors. Thats all anyone is saying here. I don’t think any of us are running in the other direction all of sudden screaming she’s guilty – get for real. We are just giving our honest take on the testimony.

            • exactly.We all know JM’s tricks but it’s the jury we’re worried about,after all wasnt there apoint when we thought that some things sounded pretty clear and then there were some really STUPID jury questions,like they were missing important details?Now oimagine those same jurors listening to a doctor ”scolding” himself for having ”failed” to do his job,well up to a point that is.And honestly Martinez’s yelling and trying to confuse evryone surely includes some of the jury feeling the same.

          • Because he said that the test could tell if someone was lying, if I recall correctly, and also that he relied on the test for his diagnosis. But since she was lying, that invalidates the test, thereby invalidating his diagnosis.

            You and I both know that he would have come up with the same diagnosis either way, but he’s the one who said the stuff about lying on the test. He put his own foot in his mouth, and JM pounced.

      • Then WHY would Nurmi and Mrs Wilmot bring this test up if they knew the results were from BEFORE she came out with the SD?????

        • I agree!
          Did they not check the dates????
          This is a massive blow and an oversight that this defensive team should never have made!
          And why wasn’t the Dr brought back in later to reevaluate her when she confessed to the killing?
          Mind boggling incompetence.
          Perhaps an appeal in the works if she faces the death penalty from an incompetent defense team?

    • He just sort of corrected himself and said that his final diagnosis was made after she changed her story, but Martinez is certainly doing his job by pointing this out.

      I’m sorry to say that Dr. Samuels is coming off looking more than a little sloppy on cross. I hope JW can rehabilitate him.

        • tonysam,nobody said that.We are just trying to see both side,as if we were part of the jury,how this would seem to us.Besides,the jury is not neither in favor nor against the defendant,unlike all of us here who have made up our mind.I believe that’s what people here were trying to point out.That unless Wilmott clarifies that ,it doesnt look good FOR THE JURY not for the outcome of the trial.

      • From what I’ve read from former jury members, expert testimony is somewhat informative but doesn’t carry a great deal of weight because each side cancels the other out. The defense has their experts and the prosecution has theirs. I think that this jury is going to focus most on Jodi’s testimony. She was on the stand for 18 days.

      • The test is just an aid to his diagnosis. The longer test that was computer-assessed also indicated PTSD, and the doc’s own separate diagnosis was PTSD. Anyone who has been watching & listening to Jodi can see that something like this fits, but the sympathetic jury members now have a name for what they felt which should help.

    • Don’t psychologists always assume that what they are dealing with are fantasies, delusions, half-truths and truths?

          • Everybody calm down. I am more than sure that JW will clear every bit ot this up. There was MORE than one test done. Juan is just throwing crap to try and make the Dr look bad. Don’t get caught up in his crap. I understand what some of you are saying but, don’t jump the gun. I’m also more than sure that the heads on tv will say today was a huge victory, it was not.

      • My therapist didn’t. My ethic in psych course never refered to that either. The therapist should remain value neutral.

      • Yes viri, because perception whether right or wrong is the foundation of which they establish a professional opinion. He already said that she built a kind of fantasy world to cope with the aftermath of the killing, so I don’t see how Martinez can then claim that because he knew she was not telling the truth, that the test results are somehow incorrect. Whether or not she was living in a fanasy world, she has PTSD. Plain and simple.

        • MB, didn’t Martinez object during the morning session because he said the doctor was stating Jodi’s answers as truth instead of making it clear that this is what Jodi said happened?

          How can he then say, oh this is a complete lie, blah blah blah. I was just watching a video with no audio because I am in class. When I saw her answer, I didn’t even think of the intruder story. I thought she answered “yes” to those questions because maybe someone physically attacked her in high school or something. The holding of the gun to the head wasn’t the only example
          for that question, physical abuse was too

    • The PTSD diagnosis came from a combination of two tests as well as all the time he spent with Jodi in sessions.

  45. So, is it a lie if Jodi told herself that Travis was stranger when he raped her?
    Maybe it made is easier, to pretend Travis wasnt himself?

    Or maybe I’m thinking too far into this.
    Either way, the brain is a powerful thing…

    • See, that’s what I’m getting from this. The doctor isn’t there to wag his finger at Jodi for lying. He is there to assess her mental state, and to do that he has to have patience with her perception of things. That perception may be right or wrong, but that’s not the point. She has PTSD, period.

      • Exactly MB and so well said.
        Martinez can yell about Jodi lying all day, in the end, all he’s really doing is proving what Dr. Samuels said was a side effect of PTSD, right?
        Or am I missing something, I may be having a memory problem, but I swore there was some talk about her lying from Dr. Samuels pertaining to PTSD or something to that effect.

        Anyway, its everyday someone is worrying that Martinez is onto something, that this witness said something wrong and that witness said something right. Such a minor statement to such a large issue, does one really think all lies in this one sentence that Dr. Samuels muttered? Are they forgetting all the amazing things he’s already said?

        It’s just like the god damn gas cans people!

  46. Well JM is opening the door to discuss the sexual relationship dynamics that. if I remember correctly, JM objected the doctor beng able to discuss this.

  47. Martinez is looking like a total fool, grasping at straws and being argumentative over very petty nissen. I think the jury is getting sick of him and can see right through him!

    • He really is a one-trick pony. I just don’t get the hype about him and don’t know why the Travisites drool over him like he’s a god. “OOOOOOH GO SUPER-JUAN!!!!!!!!” Yeah right.

      JM reminds me of the line from Problem Child when Junior is imitating the principal:

      “Maybe if I shrug my shoulders and move my hands like this, people will think I know what I’m talking about!”

  48. The prosecutor is relentless! I enjoyed watching Dr. Samuels testify; he was very interesting to me. However, I have had to turn off the television since Juan Martinez started cross-examining. The man appears to badger not only the defendant, but anyone who testifies on her behalf or offers expertise regarding her actions. Jodi is the one on trial, not her witnesses and experts, and they do not deserve to be treated and questioned like this, without an attitude of respect, and essentially having words put in their mouth so the state can “win” its case. The man is essentially over the top, a bully who is allowed to treat witnesses for the defense in condesending and disrespectful ways and aggressively and who continually tries to put words in peoples’ mouth to satisfy his views and theories. I feel sadly, not only for Jodi, who is definitely not getting a fair trial, but also for her well-meaning witnesses and professionals who have to put up with this kind of treatment on the stand through no guilt of their own. On a positive note, however, I will be glad when this trial is over and I no longer have to see or hear from Mr. Martinez!

    • He’s trying to prove Samuels is a biased, unethical, incompetent quack, and some people here are falling for that narrative because Samuels said he should have retested her after she admitted she lied about the intruders.

      But as I recall, he mentioned making stuff up like she did is a sign of PTSD. Retesting her probably wouldn’t have changed anything at all.

    • I agree! my mom knows nothing of this trial she just walked in and watched 10 min of juan and says she hopes she gets acquitted because that prosecutor is an ass! hahahaha

    • Me too I had work to do, I get such a headache from his constant screaming, I can;t see any Jury liking this stupid little idiot. He is so obnoxious, is it due to his shortness, his voice grates on your nerves, Its so piercing and high pitched MY Gosh he is so out of line I am sorry, the judge sits there doing What ??SHUT UP JUAN, he is so disrespectful annoying, extremely unprofessional a complete JERK!

      • I wouldn’t answer him until he calmed down and asked me a direct question and listened to the answer. That is reprehensible behavior.

  49. HAHAHA, Martinez almost accidenlty ended his cross, for good instead of the day.
    That would’ve been hilarious.

    How can anyone take him seriously?

  50. I cannot believe that the judge didn’t admonish JM or that Willmott didn’t bring to the attention of the court that JM should be asking to approach the witness. For whatever reason, JM didn’t follow court protocol. Oh yes, I forgot, he is above that.

      • His presence serves no purpose other than to further bias the jury. Oh, even the detective who investigated this is on the prosecution’s side!

        This would be the equivalent of one of Travis’s family members sitting with Jodi.

        Disgusting!

        • yeah, SOoop wierd and i have NEVER seen that before… it is a conscience effort so lil marti’s all alone.
          and u can tell Flores is just a big ole lapdog…
          apologies to lapdogs!

    • yes, I am not liking this doctor’s answers…he should have given her the test again after she told the truth about what happened. I hope I am not the only person that thinks he was crazy not to have done this.

      Seems like he is not as well prepared for this cross exam as he should have been. ARRGGGHHH

      I wish he would have told the jail if he believed she was suicidal…seems like he put her at risk!! He is lucky she did not act on her thoughts.

  51. Sorry, but this right here is grounds for immediate appeal should this turn out bad for her!!!

    How can ANYONE, the psychologist, her lawyers, have missed the fact that the date these tests were administered were prior to before she trusted these guys with the actual truth and that they were during the period of the intruder story????!!!!

    This is insane there is zero rehabilitation with this witness. I would feel sorry for him if I wasn’t so angry about what his sloppiness just did to Jodi’s case. He has most definitely hurt his credibility as an expert witness. His WHOLE value as an expert witness comes in the diagnosis he provides a defendant. To have not administered these tests after the self defense abuse info came out is almost medical malpractice imo.

    • Amelia,

      My feed was cutting out. So did he say he administered the tests again. post the lies or not? I thought Martinez cut him off prior to him saying that? But my feed was hit and miss the last half hour some I’m utterly confused.

      • JC, he did not administer the tests AFTER she started telling what really happened. It does not matter whether PTSD would be there before or after. The fact is it was completely irresponsible as a doctor and so the jury can easily dismiss everything he had to say. And that is the truth. He was doing so incredible prior to this. I thought the way he was explaining things may really get through to this jury.

        I am very upset.

        • I am too. I don’t understand how this couldn’t be cause for a mistrial or at-least more grounds for appeal? I also think her lawyers should have caught this. SO what you are saying is BOTH tests were administered BEFORE she was finally telling the truth about what happened?

          • Not sure about when he gave her the bigger personality test (Milan test 179 questions) – but this one was done before she told the truth.

            And what is up with not having her fill out the answers?? Very shady, and very questionable behavior for an expert.

            I don’t think this is mistrial level, and she would still have PTSD because of the trauma she experienced either way IMO

            • I guess on redirect wilmott can ask, if Jodi had answered a, b, c, would she still have PTSD? That could do some damage control.

              • He can say she was still referring to abuse, just substitute travis for stranger…all the rest is the same.

                Even without the test, I don’t see how anyone can doubt she has PTSD who has seen those crime scene photos…. or the related memory loss.

    • I think there will be a lot of grounds for appeal. That said, though, there is ALWAYS appeal if death penalty is the result :/

    • I’m afraid you’re right, Amelia. He has come across looking sloppy, and, I’m sorry to say it, biased. The book thing may not be a big deal to you or me, but JM is correct that it was beyond the scope of Dr. Samuels’s duties in this case. He also wasn’t completely truthful about the bartering thing – he didn’t mention that he was required to take a test.

      He looked great on direct, but this is why they allow witnesses to be cross-examined. He’s dug himself – and, unfortunately, Jodi too – into a huge hole.

    • Yes, the Dr stuck his big foot right his own mouth. Twice, I might add. See some of the discussion above from Al and Michael L.

    • I disagree, regardless of what story she was telling him, the emotions stay the same. Her emotional content did not change when she finally trusted them enough to tell the truth.

      Yes, he did come off as a bit sloppy, but then that is not uncommon with psychologists/psychiatrists, not to worry…the defense can rehabilitate from this. They should retest her for PTSD with a different test, would take 15 minutes.

    • Jodi’s mom wears a necklace every day, her Aunt uses the headphones. Today the Mom was sitting on the aisle side and the aunt was sitting closer to Jodi

  52. here we go again this time Martinez brings up the intruders again. and again i think no one believed her all travis’s friends said jodi did it some one coached her to go with the i defended myself now its coming back to haunt her that she changed that. I still point to the flores report were Ashley called in to say her husband had something to do with his death or can give information on his death. and the defence know that and probable knew Ashley the wife of Dustin is now dead commited suside as they say it was ???? that or did some one shoot her to keep her quite the hole clan that hung out together all said jodi did it

  53. I just posted my above comment before reading people’s posts. Am I seriously the only one that recognizes how bad this is? This is not about being a Travisite either, so I hope nobody starts calling me that. Earlier someone seemed to imply I was one because of my call to Mr Nurmi’s office. I think those witnesses Searcy was talkin bout need to be subpoenad. I am oh so very pro Jodi and really get annoyed when people start being bullied if they have a opinion that’s not yeah everything is perfect. This guy just really hurt her case. I am surprised people are thinking this is a laughing matter.

    DEPRESSED.

    • I think they are trying not to panic. Martinez has a way of not asking certain questions on purpose if he suspects the answer will help the client. He sorta talks around the issue in circles to make the person on the stand look bad.

      Remember, he administered more than one test. Spend countless hours with her, and saw her 12 times. He still has some credibility. Wait for redirect. Let him be able to explain himself better.

    • The PTSD diagnosis came from a combination of two tests as well as all the time he spent with Jodi in sessions.

      I agree with another poster who said that redoing the test in question would have resulted in the same diagnosis. I think that the only difference on the test would be in the answer to the question regarding what was the most significant trauma. When this test was administered, this was during the time of the intruder story, so ‘non-sexual assault by a non-stranger’ was indicated for that question. If the test was re-administered after Jodi told the truth about how Travis attacked her and she killed him, the answer to the question would have been ‘non-sexual assault by a non-stranger.’

      Although I don’t think it was the smartest thing for the Dr. to admit he should have re-administered the test, it doesn’t mean that the diagnosis of PTSD is wrong.

      • The basis for PTSD was her account of travis attacking Jodi and jodi having to defend herself. From what I know, the test was used to confirm but it isn’t the be all or end all for the defense. He should have re administered it. Could this the basis for a motion for mistrial?

        • She will never get a fair trial in the event of a mistrial because Martinez will not call for a mistrial, but if the defense does, this whole thing would just start all over.

          • Could she be reevaluated by someone else should this happen? Someone who wouldn’t overlook the testing situation?

            • Well whether she gets reevaluated or not may not make a difference. The general public has seen and heard too much. They have been biased and poisoned against her. Especially after that video was released (which to me, seriously seemed like she was suffering from PTSD and that was the reason for her behavior. She seemed like a child, like she was having a nervous breakdown).

            • That’s the problem. The Dr. should have re-administered the test and he KNEW he should have but he didn’t…why? He also stated that usually another Dr. evaluates as well, but instead he used a computerized test…why? A person can tell personality traits/ issues, etc. that a computer cannot, so why did he not follow protocol.

              It looks bad for the psychologist and the defense. Surely they reviewed the tests or they should have.

            • I’m not sure JC if that could be done at this late date. I think the defense needs to try to do something about the fact this was highly irregular, unprofessional etc. But the problem is the judge could easily say that her attorneys SHOULD have noticed the date discrepancy just like Kermit did.

              At this point I think it’s just ammunition for appeal.

      • It wouldn’t have made a damned bit of difference. It doesn’t take a Ph.D. to see Jodi has PTSD–hell, I thought she had it, and I am not a psychologist.

        What Martinez is trying to do, and he’s good at it, is muddy the waters by calling the doctor’s credibility into question.

    • I hate to agree here, but I see today as a bad day for the dr, hence the defense and Jodie. The doctor has lost a ton of credibility – I’m hopeful Wilmott can rehabilitate him and their case.

    • It makes me sick to admit that the doc looks very weak and negligent in following protocols of the purpose for his presence in this case and in his administration of the test. Makes no sense that defense could hv missed this. There must be an explanation for this, l hope.

    • I agree with you — JM, as irritating as he can be, is scewering the witness and it looks bad. And Jodi and her attorneys know it!

      • That’s the point–he’s trying to make the doctor look bad, but there will be a redirect of the witness.

        It’s all smoke and mirrors. I am shocked people around here are falling for it.

    • Amelia,
      I have been sitting here with my heart in my mouth all afternoon/evening. I was a bit concerned about the Dr being questioned about his past violation, but not overly concerned. When the issue of giving her a book came up, I thought “uh oh”. Everyone knows that Dr’s who are simply there to evaulate you, or even treat you, do not give/mail books or cards to you. Still, as I watched I thought, “not too big a deal, we will see”. Then that damn test and his papers, (not to mention him fumbling around and taking forever to find a paper, only to say he left it at home, another left on his desk) This is a BIG trial, why is he not prepared??? Ok, so on JM goes, then the actual test is admitted where the Dr actually fills in the answers instead of Jodi. (odd but still hoping its not too terrible) Then the actual date of the test is announced by the Dr, and my heart sank. I could tell Jodi was getting concerned too, imo. So, this test was given, (both tests) before Jodi actually admitted to her atty. and the Dr the real story. Ughh…..heart on the floor. Then it got worse, the actual QUESTION, that he testified was his reason for the diagnosis, was based on that number 4, (I believe thats the right number) where it says “Assault by a stranger”….Holy crap. At this point, you can SEE the Dr getting red, stammering, flustered, etc…as he says quietly, “I guess I should have readministered the test”. Ya think?? Not just once, he practically hangs his head and says it again! So JM gets him in a corner and basically gets him to admit he has diagnosed her with PTSD based on test answers that were LIES! (at this point I was almost in tears as I watched)
      This is BAD people! My God, this defense should have had a better Dr to be an expert witness, he is fumbling the most important aspect of this case! Now…JM is NOT proving pre-med with ANY of this witness, thats for sure. But what he is doing, is totally discrediting him, and his diagnosis. The defense has ALT of damage control to do. I try to be positive regarding this, but I just can’t find a single thing this Dr has said today that helps at all. And tomorrow, ughhh…..it will go on some more and you cannot un-ring this bell.

      • Initially, the first few questions on cross before the break, I felt the dr was doing well. Then when everything you just mentioned happened, I felt for Jodi. the dr begain to look embarrassed! The book giving does cross the line. And in a case like this he should have thought about any actions he took in regards to her, and actually to any client. Even though it’s a mute point I’m wondering how did JM know about the book? Did someone at the jail report that to JM? Hopefully it wasn’t the defense team trying to make a point of her being suicidal.

    • And as I recall earlier, you accused other posters of trying to get Nurmi’s secretary fired, when we weren’t the ones coming on the Internet talking about a conversation with her in the first place.

      Since when was this a laughing matter? Here is my response:

      http://jodiariasisinnocent.com/jodi-arias-trial-day-32-afternoon-session-jodi-arias-is-innocent/#comment-40260

      Don’t accuse others of mischaracterizing your statements, when you are taking pre-emptive strikes all the time. Just saying.

  54. There is a test from 2010 …the one martinez is grilling him about however after this test which they knew were lies , the dr and Nurmi approached her and told her she must tell them the truth. Remember????

    • yeah, they r gonna have to redirect the dr. bak to other tests. he is literally red faced right now. nancy
      graceless and jean c. r going bonkers.

    • Yes, too funny regarding the journals. JM brought up law of attraction again and again. The doctor is a psychologist. It’s just silly to think he can’t discuss JA’s thought processes and, as you have noted above, on XE he will draw on the doctor’s opinions on JA’s thought processes.

  55. Do we know when that second test was taken/administered?

    I think its easy to answer the book issue. If I or any human being sees another in anguish or suffering, you do the best you can under the bounds you are within. If he wasn’t allowed to provide therapy, and his lawyer couldn’t get her therapy in jail, I don’t see the harm in a person giving her a book, so that maybe if she reads it she can get some comfort. I think that can be easily settled on redirect.

    The real issue here lies in his diagnoses for PTSD. Now he can easily say that I looked at the test. I knew she was lying, but other symtoms made me diagnose PTSD. But I think he sort of cut himself off at the knees by volunteering that perhaps he should have administered the test again.

    Let’s see what happens tomorrow.

    • Seems to me that when people are suspected of suffering from PTS, the doctor takes into account that memories might not be there, might be reconstructed, or might be delusions, or might be conscious lies to start with.
      The interviews and the other test are what clears it up.

      Like all true scientists, he was just too honest, should have spent more time with her, but obviously the State paid for only that much.

      • Well I am very sure that JM will get his come uppance when he goes to rebuttal if he uses his good doctor that does sentient psychology and has NEVER actually spoken with Jodi at all .If this doctor has never spoken to Jodi, how can she possibley attest to anything in a trial setting at all? As far as I am aware, she will be using Dr Samuels reports and putting her own twists on them . I still think it weird her laptop with files from this case was stolen!
        . I do not know this to be absolute truth but often in cases a rebuttal witness has not seen or spoken with the defendant so I am assuming she has not.

    • What Martinez has done, has aggressively reframed the issue of Jodi’s mental state to only be categorized in two slots – deception or truth. But that wasn’t the point of the doctor’s testimony, the point was her state of mind, perception, and the symptoms she exhibited. Even if he readminstered the test, the results would be the same. She has PTSD regardless, his description of her symptoms aren’t limited to the story she told.

      The doctor is honest to a fault. I can tell he takes things to heart, and is ready to admit when he doesn’t measure up. At most this cross examination shows he has a conscience. He is also compassionate enough to reach out to those who needs help, again, I don’t see how this is a problem. The book issue is ridiculous, One there is no way to administer therapy to someone through their lawyer and Two, a book does not cure anyone. A book is just a book, it’s not a pill. I don’t see how Martinez can scream about him crossing boundaries when he has none himself. Nor do I think it was appropriate for Martinez to throw up Jodi’s naked pictures to prove a point. And what point is that? To make him look like a dirty old man?

      I feel bad for Dr. Samuels. He keeps getting screwed by angry people who harp on nonissues and technicalities.

      • Yup, I always agree with you, MB!!!

        His sick for showing the pictures, I think he’s just made it a point to show every single person that take the stand, those pictures to embarrass jodi.

  56. I predict that Dr. Samuels will retire, as soon as he gets off the stand. Time to call it a career, sir!

    Remember in the beginning the defense made a big deal about how fast Samuels had to be to write his notes. Why add stuff? He added fiction of his own!

    Arizona board of Psychology WILL BE PAYING HIM A VISIT…..VERY SOON!

  57. If that was a boxing match between the doc and Martinez, it would have been stopped…although I have seen people get up off the canvas and come back to win in the later rounds. One can only hope.

  58. All her crazy ass answers she gave on that test does not effect her diagnosis. It is actually part of the way PTSD is diagnosed…at least thats what I get from reading about how to administer this test. In the end I think Juan going to be made to look like an idiot!!

    • Yeah I see it that way too.
      And didn’t he say he USED the test as a SECOND OPINION, anyway??? What about his 1st opinion, doee that not count?

        • The doctor testified, I believe, that Jodi was not lying because she “just was lying” but because she was lying to herself because she didn’t want to admit what she did to herself, which is partially why he thought it was PTSD. ( I think that is what I understood)

    • I have a kind of confusing reply to this . . . I think lying on the test somewhat invalidates the test, BUT I also think it supports PTSD as he described it. So it is kind of a mixed bag. Yes, there are tests that psychologists use, but multiple choice questions are so limited that his experience should matter more.

      I feel really bad for the old guy — he was just made into mincemeat, IMO 🙁

      • No, he wasn’t made into “mincemeat.” The lying shows that it is part of the PTSD; Samuels said so in his testimony.

        • We have differing opinions . . . he didn’t administer the test properly, he admits that he should have done the test again, so professionally I think he looks bad. He does seem like a nice, likable guy, but he admits he made mistakes and it sort of made him look like a bumbling old man.

          Obviously this is perception, but that is what it looks like to me. He looks like he wasn’t prepared well. I think some folks here are disappointed with how today has gone, some are optimistic, and some are devastated. I don’t think anyone is wrong, we just all perceive things a bit differently.

            • I am hoping that more than one juror asks why, when she had been diagnosed with PTSD, no one treated her for it in any way shape or form? That will look bad on the prosecutor and also on the jail and the Sherriff.

          • I myself don’t put much stock in the experts, though I do find them interesting. Whatever Samuels said, the prosecution’s expert was going to refute it anyway. Each side hires the people who will validate its arguments. I don’t think the verdict will hinge on Samuels being credible and it never was going to. It’s going to come down to whether the jury thinks the killing was pre-meditated, self-defense, or something in between.

  59. Nancy Grace just had someone in the courtroom report that the jurors are laughing during cross.

    This is concerning. Are they even taking this seriously?

    And why isn’t JM up for prosecutorial misconduct in regards to the emails from Tesoro? He withheld information and possibly allowed her to give false testimony. wth?

      • according to Nurmi’s latest motion there are emails.
        If so, they should have been disclosed to the defense.

        He made a stink about a power point presentation and now he’s withholding evidence.

        I don’t get it

    • Unfortunately this is not misconduct. That is what a rebuttal case is for. Martinez would not have had any idea she would testify that she only had 2 gas cans. He had no reason to believe she would state that she returned the 2rd. Once she did, then Flores probably investigated it. That is the purpose of the rebuttal case.

    • Are you guys saying it’s JM’s fault if she lied on the stand?
      Whoa–you lost me on this one. How did he make her lie? I’m not seeing where he solicited any false testimony. He asked; she answered.

      • He didn’t disclose that he spoke to Walmart and Tesoro employees or give the physical evidence of the emails to the defense. “Would it surprise you Walmart has no record of a return of a gas can that day?”

        Why didn’t he disclose the emails to the defense? He’s required to

        • Candie,

          I think, but I could be wrong, that you may be confusing discovery in the state’s Case in Chief. If I am wrong here someone please correct me. In the beginning the prosecutor is required to submit all evidence and vice versa. But, if he is only responding to things the defense brings into the case during direct testimony, like she returned the 3rd gas can, the state can subpoena or request information from another witness (Tesoro Walmart) without having to further disclose that to the defense. What the defense is doing is smart and is listening to the cross the state is doing and all its implications and subpoenaing either the same info the state got or getting the info the state wanted them to THINK they had. It is really interesting to watch all the legal back and forth that goes on. Some people might say why didn’t the defense subpoena records from Walmart Tesoro ahead of time if they knew her story, to be prepared, but if they did that then they would have had to release those records to the state, possibly tipping the state off to their strategy.

          • The motion (Nurmi’s) clearly states that JM already had these email on hand…

            This motion is necessitated by the fact that the State did not fulfill its obligation to disclose these items in advance of trial…

            The State asserted that it had records from Walmart in Salinas California. These records have not been disclosed….

            On March 8, 2013, the State disclosed an email sent to them from a representative from Tersoro. The contents of this email indicate that the Tesoro conducted a records check of…..results indicate that all three purchases were for gasoline. The records that support this claim have not been disclosed.

            Ms. Arias will address the egregious nature of the conduct that the State has chosen to engage in other proceedings but for now simply asks that the court cure this error and order that the records be disclosed…..”

            To me Nurmi is thinking the same as me.

            Arizona law (according to the motion) says that the State is required to disclose everything no later than 30 days before trial.

    • ‘Cause you can trust anything Nancy Grace has to say? She twists truths even more than Martinez does… it seems to be the way prosecutors operate.

  60. Martinez is rude and disrespectful to every defense witness and the jury can see it. Hopefully the jury is not full of people who are in the habit of abusing others and delight in watching dehumanizing hate shows. Have faith.

  61. Geeze, no matter what test he used, she would still have PTSD – just look at the crime scene photos.

    She was not diagnosed purely based on this test. The Milan 179 question test and his visits with her led him to believe she had PTSD. It also doesn’t change self defense.

    PTSD happened after — it doesn’t impact her guilt.

  62. What’s the scoop with the emails from Tesoro? Can someone catch us up on that please?

    By the way folks, what’s going on with this doctor is what happens to most expert witnesses. They got torn up by the opposition. I think somewhere along the line the defense is going to tear up Kevin Horn on the bullet matter (at least I hope). They’ve already cast doubts on some of Flores’ truthfulness.

    I wouldn’t be surprised if the defense made the same sort of idiot out of the prosecutions witness.

    I belong to a scientific profession, and we have a saying in our business: “Those who do, do it, those who can’t do it, teach it, and those who can’t teach it become Government consultants.” Looks like that true with these expert witnesses as well.

    • He wasn’t “torn up.” Martinez muddied the waters, which that is what he is supposed to do. He didn’t succeed in impeaching this witness, and any muddying of the waters will be taken care of by the defense in redirect.

      • I hope so tonysam, I hope so.

        In my book, when a professional states that he relied on a test to confirm his diagnosis, and is then forced to confirm, that the test should probably have been done again, then in as far as the confirmation from that test is concerned it is null and void. Maybe I’m over thinking this, but that is what my training as a scientist says.

        Now, that is not to say, that there are no other factors that lead to the same confirmation, and so making rerunning the one invalid test moot. However, if so then that must be brought out.

        So, it is quite possible, that a valid answer lies in something the Dr mentioned earlier. He said that he originally based his diagnosis of PTSD on the Millon test and used the PTSD test as a confirmation test. Well, obviously he has himself acknowledged in an implicit manner that the results of the PTSD test were invalid and he should probably have re-run that test. However, it is entirely valid for him to argue that even though he probably should have, he didn’t need to because other observations whether qualitative or empirical led him to a diagnosis of PTSD.

        However, if that is the case JW needs to carefully bring that out. As it stands right now, there is a lapse and that counts as being torn up.

        • Thanks, yes, that’s how I interpreted his answer too. The more testing the better, just to confirm again.

          Perhaps also he would also have spent more time on re-tests if the State had spent more for Jodi.

    • Al–re:the email

      Jodi had 2 gas receipts from Tesoro in Salt Lake City, but there were 3 Tesoro charges on her card. JM asked her why she bought that much gas, trying to imply she had 3 gas cans. Jodi either denied it or couldn’t remember (ha–I can’t remember that exactly). Now JM has an email & witness that says there were 3 gas purchased & Nurmi filed a motion about them. Not sure if they had the hearing about them yet.

      • Gusted,

        Thanks for the update.

        Actually if I remember correctly I don’t think JM ever asked her directly if the third purchase was for gas. I think he laid out this hypothetical about $19.65 accounting for 5.09 gallons of gas at the going rate and her answer was , “Well if the math is correct I guess”. I remember wondering at the time why he didn’t just ask her what the $19.65 was for. Of course he may have and I just missed it. But I think he was saving the answer for later. I remember commenting about it at that time.

        Which is why we all got into the argument of where the money could have gone, because he never asked her. And then there was all the speculation of when those charges were actually made since the bank statement was not in chronological order.

        So if he does in fact have evidence of the fact that the 3rd purchase was for gas the reason Nurmi et al need to know it. So they can address it. I bet the reason JM doesn’t want to disclose it is because it’s either a different date r something else.

        He can always not use it, but if he has the info he must disclose it, even if it was acquired after the case in chief. The prosecutorial misconduct would arise if he has the info and doesn’t disclose it, regardless of whether or not it is exculpatory.

      • ” Now JM has an email & witness that says there were 3 gas purchased ”

        Oh now we all know how that email went. Kermit told them the three transactions were from the same time of day on the same day, even though he doesn’t know what day or time of day the $19.65 transaction was from..(which sounds like too even of a number for gas…sounds like an oil change or tire repair to me.)

        Kermit said “so these three are all for gas, right?”

        Tesoro person: “right”

      • What!??? I missed that somehow, and I watched ALL day! Thats 3rd gas can line of questioning went on FOREVER….between him accusing her of buying gas (by the receipt and the bank statement) on the same night/morning, and her saying she returned that can and only had 2 while in SLC. And now he has an email showing 3 gas purchases at Tesero!? Ughh. When he was taunting her last week, saying, “would it surprise you to know that Walmart has no record of a return”….I kept thinking, oh shit he has something he isn’t telling……but then everyone said he was bluffing, and I thought, “well, he hasn’t brought it up again”. This could be a big problem for the defense, if that receipt shows ALL gas purchases at that station on the same day and time. That amount of gas does not fit in her tank and 2 cans. I just feel sick about this email thing…..maybe that is why he didnt actually SAY, “Walmart has no record”….but said it in a question format. Maybe he was waiting to get records form Tesero. If he does put this in evidence, email, receipt whatever, then yes, Nurmi has a right to know it. Ughhh….this day (for me) has not been a good one at all. What in the world can Nurmi do if this email does show that was all gas? sad. depressed.

        • I see a big problem if Martinez called Walmart asking for a record of a returned gas can on the date in question when the receipt for it clearly states it was a Kero can, not the same thing!

          • Very true Debbie that would be great for the defense. But I was talking about this Tesero gas receipt showing all gas purchases for that day. I don’t know if he has that, I’m going by another person here who mentioned that he did and that Nurmi asked for a ruling on it. As of yet, I haven’t heard any talk about this receipt nor do I know if its in evidence or if he even has it. It would be a big deal if so, as the amount of gas purchased would not fit in her tank and 2 cans. (Talking a out the 19. Amount on her bank statement for same day) Hoping its just a rumor and he has no info from Tesero

  63. Well, this seeming debacle w/the good doc seems to hv the entire ‘cast’ of HLN and the ‘Sunshine’ band truely ecstatic, almost rubbing their hands together gleefully. Crap!

  64. You know…I could really use some help educating the haters on facebook..I converted several today! .I know some of you may be on there…and I understand the reluctance..but…..remember…

    “The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.” – Edmund Burke (allegedly)

    https://www.facebook.com/sandra.webber.75

      • I don’t know what it’s called…it just showed up in my yard one day! Like a lot of my flowers and other things do, ha! But thank you…maybe I’ll try to find out what it’s called one day!:)

    • Wow.. Maggie you are right and I forgot about those words (which I have heard before). I was actually happy that each time I have went over to the hater side – a couple times there were responses from people actually asking “where is that link” or “who is Ashley” proving that there are some who are questioning. And it is true that if even just one person has their eyes opened and sees the truth of our judicial system, the hatred towards victims or the reality of the lies of the media; then it has been a good day Thank you for the reminder.

  65. I bet the jury is laughing alright , they are laughing at Juan! All my employees think he is an ass and none are following the trial…!

  66. I have to get updates here too cuz I can’t take JM’s smarmy antics. I missed most of the docs testimony today but I see here he flubbed up by not re-administering the PTSD test after the truth came out. Hopefully, that does not change the fact, in the jury’s minds, that her memory was affected by the horrors of that day and that by now they are so annoyed by Kermit that they discredit anything else that comes out of HIS mouth. Despite JM having what seems like ‘good day’ I am embarrassed for him, for the State and, heck, even for his family if this is considered appropriate behavior by a prosecutor. Yelling, clapping, misstating, badgering. Enough already!!

  67. Martinez has it all wrong… again. First, Dr Samuels does NOT treat, he already said so. Second, just talking to someone does not mean he is treating them. I listen to all kinds of problems from people, does that mean I’m a freakin’ therapist? No it does not. For heaven sakes!

  68. Okay, I haven’t had time to catch up on all the comments since I left work … but before you all lose your panties … here’s how the Mayo Clinic says PTSD is diagnosed (which is also the way the DSM IV says it’s diagnosed):

    http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/post-traumatic-stress-disorder/DS00246/DSECTION=tests-and-diagnosis

    Criteria for post-traumatic stress disorder to be diagnosed include:

    You experienced or witnessed an event that involved death or serious injury, or the threat of death or serious injury

    Your response to the event involved intense fear, horror or a sense of helplessness

    You relive experiences of the event, such as having distressing images and memories, upsetting dreams, flashbacks or even physical reactions

    You try to avoid situations or things that remind you of the traumatic event or feel a sense of emotional numbness

    You feel as if you’re constantly on guard or alert for signs of danger, which may make it difficult to sleep or concentrate

    Your symptoms last longer than one month

    The symptoms cause significant distress in your life or interfere with your ability to go about your normal daily tasks

    You don’t need to do these tests. This will be very easy for JW to rehabilitate him on!!!!

    I have been diagnosed with PTSD. First, my therapist (a social worker with special education for therapy) diagnosed me. Then, a psychiatrist I was sent to to see if I needed medication agreed. Then, a different therapist (a Ph.D.) also diagnosed me. I never had ANY stinking tests to take. It was ALL based on my symptoms.

    Everyone breathe!!!!

    • And just in case you all STILL don’t believe me, here’s what the National Center for PTSD says:

      http://www.ptsd.va.gov/professional/pages/dsm-iv-tr-ptsd.asp

      Diagnostic criteria for PTSD include a history of exposure to a traumatic event meeting two criteria and symptoms from each of three symptom clusters: intrusive recollections, avoidant/numbing symptoms, and hyper-arousal symptoms. A fifth criterion concerns duration of symptoms and a sixth assesses functioning.

      Criterion A: stressor
      The person has been exposed to a traumatic event in which both of the following have been present:

      The person has experienced, witnessed, or been confronted with an event or events that involve actual or threatened death or serious injury, or a threat to the physical integrity of oneself or others.

      The person’s response involved intense fear,helplessness, or horror. Note: in children, it may be expressed instead by disorganized or agitated behavior.

      Criterion B: intrusive recollection
      The traumatic event is persistently re-experienced in at least one of the following ways:

      Recurrent and intrusive distressing recollections of the event, including images, thoughts, or perceptions. Note: in young children, repetitive play may occur in which themes or aspects of the trauma are expressed.

      Recurrent distressing dreams of the event. Note: in children, there may be frightening dreams without recognizable content

      Acting or feeling as if the traumatic event were recurring (includes a sense of reliving the experience, illusions, hallucinations, and dissociative flashback episodes,including those that occur upon awakening or when intoxicated). Note: in children, trauma-specific reenactment may occur.

      Intense psychological distress at exposure to internal or external cues that symbolize or resemble an aspect of the traumatic event.

      Physiologic reactivity upon exposure to internal or external cues that symbolize or resemble an aspect of the traumatic event

      Criterion C: avoidant/numbing
      Persistent avoidance of stimuli associated with the trauma and numbing of general responsiveness (not present before the trauma), as indicated by at least three of the following:

      Efforts to avoid thoughts, feelings, or conversations associated with the trauma

      Efforts to avoid activities, places, or people that arouse recollections of the trauma

      Inability to recall an important aspect of the trauma

      Markedly diminished interest or participation in significant activities
      Feeling of detachment or estrangement from others

      Restricted range of affect (e.g., unable to have loving feelings)

      Sense of foreshortened future (e.g., does not expect to have a career, marriage, children, or a normal life span)

      Criterion D: hyper-arousal
      Persistent symptoms of increasing arousal (not present before the trauma), indicated by at least two of the following:

      Difficulty falling or staying asleep

      Irritability or outbursts of anger

      Difficulty concentrating

      Hyper-vigilance

      Exaggerated startle response

      Criterion E: duration
      Duration of the disturbance (symptoms in B, C, and D) is more than one month.

      Criterion F: functional significance
      The disturbance causes clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning.

      Specify if:
      Acute: if duration of symptoms is less than three months

      Chronic: if duration of symptoms is three months or more

      Specify if:
      With or Without delay onset: Onset of symptoms at least six months after the stressor

      References
      American Psychiatric Association. (2000). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (Revised 4th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.

      • Thanks for the info Also Abused!! The trauma was real…just the story was different, so I don’t think it’s a big deal he didn’t re administer the test…I do not believe it would have changed the result.

        hopefully they will clarify just that on redirect.

      • Also Abused …you always come through ….. thanks. Anyone who knows someone who has PTSD knows it is not only the vet’s that can have it. Another one of NG’s asshole comparisons.

    • Ans I just asked my husband, the military doesnt even use a paper test to diagnose ptsd. Well they didnt on him and his usmc.

      • EXACTLY! I’d NEVER heard of a paper test before Dr. Samuels. Easy to rehabilitate:

        JW: “Dr. Samuels, how does the DSM suggest diagnosing PTSD?”

        Dr. Samuels: “By having a combination of symptoms you observe from the following: {cites list}.”

        JW: “And which of these did Jodi have?”

        Dr. Samuels: “Blah from A, Blah blah blah from B, Blah blah blah blah from C.”

        JW: “And how long did she have these symptoms?”

        Dr. Samuels: “Well it was X date when I first assessed her and she had them then. And it was Y date when I last assessed her and she still had them. And the event that triggered them was A date which was way back in 2008. So, I’d say she’s had them for 4.5 years.”

        JW: “And again, doctor, just to clarify. Did you need to administer these paper tests in order to diagnose her?”

        Dr. Samuels: “No, the DSM specifies observations of the symptoms.”

        JW: “So why even administer the paper tests?”

        Dr. Samuels: “Well, I’d heard about Kermit Fartinez and thought he’d tear me up if I didn’t have more than my 38 years of clinical observations and training to rely on. Of course, I had no idea what a tyrant he would really be. And I’m pretty sure I’m now going to have PTSD myself because at one point, I was in fear for my life from his cross examination.”

        • Thanx, Also.
          I think, even though he is an expert witness, that lawyers don’t usually display such a vile behavior as implying that he cheats on his testing by using a pencil and taking notes.
          He also mentioned before that usually he testifies for both sides of a trial, even in the next AZ county.
          BUT NOT IN –THIS– COUNTY!

  69. JS I believe you! You go girl keep up the fight. Could say more if you need me please Email. Let me know. The voice of wisdom and experience JS. Love Libra.

  70. I wasn’t able to watch the rest of the testimony, so I’m trying to glean as much info from these posts about the testimony re: the PTSD testing. My thoughts are, that even if one test was not done in the best manner, it does not diminish the rest of the Drs. testimony and experience.
    I won’t go on and on again about how I’m an average American that could be on this jury…..but I think Jurors will look at his testimony as a whole and not rely on the issue of one test.

    Someone who is a regular here, feel free to correct me, if I am off base. I will only trust certain responses here, so the non regulars need not respond please.

    Thanks

    • See my posts right above yours.

      Also, since we’ve just been through 2 wars (Iraq and Afghanistan) in the last freaking 12 years, and since many of the jurors are older and may have lived through 2 other wars (Gulf and Vietnam) what do you think the chances are that someone on that jury doesn’t know someone, or have someone in their family, that has had PTSD? And seeing as the diagnostic criteria for PTSD does NOT include any of those tests, but groupings of symptoms from the lists I just posted, do you think they will rule OUT PTSD for Jodi? I doubt it.