Jodi Arias Trial – Day 36

in Latest News by


Following on from the little guy’s recent wayward references from Websters dictionary and The Book of Mormon, I thought I’d take the opportunity to look up the meaning of “Prosecutorial Misconduct” in my handy US Legal dictionary.

Here’s what it says:

Prosecutorial misconduct is conduct which violates court rules or ethical standards of law practice. Examples, among others, may include:

*** Courtroom misconduct (making improper remarks or improperly introducing evidence designed to prejudice the jury: violating rules regarding selection of the jury; or making improper closing arguments);

*** Hiding, destroying or tampering with evidence, case files or court records;

*** Failing to disclose evidence that might tend to exonerate the defendant

*** Threatening, badgering or tampering with witnesses.

So how many of the above violations have we witnessed so far throughout Martinez’ dismal performances? I’d say all of them. The only exception being “making improper closing arguments” – mainly due to the fact that we’ve not yet reached that stage… but no doubt he will.

Leave your comments below on day 36… as another new trial week starts, and Jodi takes one step closer to victory…

Team Jodi

If you would like to help Jodi directly by way of a financial donation via check or PayPalclick here (or click the Team Jodi link below) for further details.

New original Jodi artwork is also now available exclusively through this websiteClick here for info.



  1. The Flores report stated that Jodi invoked her 5th Amendment right…by saying she wouldn’t give statement until getting advised by an attorney since she had heard from many sources that she was being implicated. Why then the interrogations? Where was her attorney? Flores probably lied to her or used a legal loophole.

    • Probably is never a good word. It is best to site a fact. All of the conjecturing does not help the cause. I am confused. Did not Jodi try to tamper with “witnesses” when she tried to smuggle those magazines to Matt?

  2. Phillip,

    If you look at the bottom of Page 18 of Flores’ report you’ll see that he says Jodi essentially waived her right to an attorney. That was dumb.

    Never talk to the police without an attorney, even if you had nothing to do about anything. Lawyers tell you that all the time and people always think its just shysters trying to make a buck. But you can get into trouble just by saying something inconsequential that the police believes is a lie.

    • There are 2 rules to talking to the police 1)There is NEVER a good time to talk to police 2) If there IS a good reason to talk to police, reffer back to rule #1


      I know, i know, you are all thinking, “yah but” or “except in this situation…”. Let me say it again..NEVER TALK TO COPS.

      Here, rather than type up one of my 10k word rants…view this Youtube video…they explain most of what i am talking about:

      • Sirlips LOL what are the chances we both post the same video at the same time! I posted the refreshed and there is your post with the same Don’t talk to Poliec, LOL

      • Sirlips,

        That is great advice to all. I have two boys that turned out to be great kids, but I also raised them that if the police ever bring you in for ANYTHING you request a lawyer no matter what they promise. One had asked, “What if I didn’t do anything wrong?” I again explained your number 1 and number 2 above. I also had them watch the interrogation of the Moore boy who was wrongly accused of murdering his sister. Then, they both understood.

        To take it one step further, I can remember driving with an attorney friend when we passed a State Trooper that had someone pulled over with their belongings all over the ground. He had told me, even when you have nothing to hid, you never give them permission to search. Make them do the work of obtaining a search warrant.

    • She had to have been very confused having never committed any kind of crime and suddenly finding herself in an interrogation room. She might not have understood her right to an attorney or how important it is to utilize that right.

  3. My goal for today is to not let the “little man” get under my last nerve…..if I do the bully will have won!!!!!! I am here to support Jodi and she was strong enough to endure his ratting and badgering so can we.

    Yes, there is something very wrong with this, but I will let KN and JW deal with him. Remember it only takes one person on the jury….

    So let’s just LOL when he starts his questioning…..and see what a ass he really is.

      • I understand Al….but I would miss you if you did that…..besides do you really want to have to go out and buy a new TV? Yes, he is a SOB and honestly he is trying trying to bully the jury into thinking he is right…The old saying : the ones who scream the louded are the ones who have the most to hide…

        He has nothing left….

        • Yes, he has nothing left.
          He had nothing to start with.
          He’ll finish up with nothing… (apart from a book & movie deal of course)

          Team Jodi

          • Talk about a waste of taxs payers money… I can understand in a way the siblings wanting vengeance…..they are living with tunnel vision. The seed was planted years ago. But the day will come when the truth will come out…..all the truth……

          • And we know who will buy the book and watch the movie….Dave Hall and all his pals…if they are not in jail by that time….to take a phrase from Jodi….”there is something not right about that boy”.

    • Yes, Cindy, and JM is trying this case to NG, Drew Pinsky, and that bimbo he has on his show- the (shudder) groupie of JM.

        • OK … I have to admit….. I secretly like watching JM. He’s like a soap opera and a train wreck all rolled into one. You just cant make this stuff up!
          But entertainment value aside… this is supposed to be a legal proceeding.

  4. Snow Day. School’s closed so no car pool driving chore for me this morning. I get spared a half hour’s worth of smart ass teenager comments.

    Now that I think I have the defense strategy figured out, I wonder if it’s a little too intricate. I think what they are saying is self defense by someone with a domestic violence history, so that’s the standard the Jury must apply and JM must disprove.

    Jodi was put on the stand to bring out the claim of self defense and the abuse/DV. The only salient parts of her testimony as far as the defense is concerned are the claim of self defense, the broken finger, the choking, the forcible sex in the office when the CD wouldn’t load and the body slam/chase in the bathroom. The rest was just to humanize her.

    Dr Samuels was put on the stand, not for the PTSD, etc but to show that there was a past history of violence that led to a fear of bodily injury and an explanation for some of the “lies”. The rest – acute stress, PTSD, etc is just fluff.

    The DV expert is being put on to elevate the standard of proof for negating self defense up to the level of a reasonable person who has been a victim of abuse.

    That is all. By the law JM has to not just prove premeditation as he claims but must also disprove, beyond a reasonable doubt. Here’s the interesting part and I don’t know how the judge is going to issue the instruction:

    Assume Jodi left Yreka with an intent to kill TA. Assume that when she got to Mesa she didn’t follow through with the initial intent (this is clear from the almost 13 hours she spent there doing everything but killing TA and proven by the prosecutions case). Now assume TA attacked her. The killing now happens as self defense. The initial intent (if any) doesn’t matter.

    I think the defense has put the case squarely into this condition. So they can argue that even if she did leave Yreka with that intent, that is not why the killing happened, and Mr Prosecutor, it is up to you to prove that during those last minutes of TAs life Jodi was not in fear of TA exerting physical force on her.

    I don’t know if JM gets that. I don’t know if this may be too nuanced for an average jury, but it makes sense to me. And when I look at the prosecution’s case to this date all they can say is don’t believe her because she lied in the past.

    I think things will get really interesting in the closing arguments and the way the judge instructs the jury. BTW those instructions are where any judicial error is likely to happen.

    • I said “By the law JM has to not just prove premeditation as he claims but must also disprove, beyond a reasonable doubt. Here’s the interesting part and I don’t know how the judge is going to issue the instruction:”

      What I meant was

      By the law JM has to not just prove premeditation as he claims but must also disprove, beyond a reasonable doubt, the factors that make up a self defense claim, i.e. that Jodi as a victim of past violence perceived a threat from TA. Here’s the interesting part and I don’t know how the judge is going to issue the instruction:

      • He cannot do it. The case for murder one was never there. JM’s case fell apart with the sex tape.

        I can’t begin to stress how that tape totally undermined the prosecution’s theory.

        • That is so true. That coupled with some of the texts and e-mails talking about punishing her put TA in complete perspective.

          • Yep, those texts and emails were also damning. The very voice of Travis himself on that tape, however, just ripped the entire theory to pieces.

        • Yes, the tape was damning to the prosecution IMO. WHAT IF… What IF the defense had been unsuccessful in their bid to have that tape of the phone call admitted? IIRC, they had to fight to be able to get it in, and I find it scary to think about what happens if there is an appeal and it does NOT get admitted NEXT time…. hopefully it won’t come to that, or course.

    • Her testimony also helped to undo all the vague suspicions about the trip.

      And also that the “jealousy” motive is not credible.

      And that she was very submissive to Alexander.

      And probably a load of other points I don’t have in the front of my mind at the moment.

      I expect the final defence witness to make some pretty strong statements about whether Jodi could have acted other than in self-defence.

    • LOL Al, you will one day miss those “smart ass teenager comments”. Well if they are like any other TEENAGER they will sleep most of the day away….and then stand infront of the open door of the refig. and ask whats to eat….

      I think your thinking is right on….they had to put JA on the stand or everything the experts said would be assumed…..

      • You must have been through teenagers, because your description is spot on. My wife announced that this would be a good day to clean the house and pick up rooms. So I’m off to work. HaHa

        • Oh yes I have been through those days….I would take them back at any time. Let them sleep the day away….they honestly do need the sleep. Good day for a pot of chile….besides it will feed them all day

          • Cindy,

            Where the heck do they put that food. I have a 16 year old who is 6’4″ and if I ate the way he does I’d be about 500 lbs. And he’s a bean pole.

            The other night my wife said “what are you eating now, we just had dinner?”

            He says “I’m hungry, so I’m having a sandwich”

            What kind of sandwich?

            He says Ketchup.

            Ketchup? just Ketchup?

            No I put mayo on the bread.

            That’s the teenage mind and food.

            I often wonder how they ever make it to adulthood.

    • As always, very thought provoking…and I agree that this case will rise or fall on the jury instructions. I don’t think, though that is either necessary nor likely for the defense to get that “meta.” The defense need only point to each doubt separately. They don’t NEED a cohesive narrative; the pros does. I think that they will (rightly) spend their closing picking clean the carcass of the prosecution case.

  5. SJ, I really like your post, but I think you might be giving too much credit by saying that he hasn’t yet made improper arguments. He has attempted to testify repeatedly. My brain just isn’t in gear yet to site specific examples, but I know that I’ve jumped out of my chair repeatedly in objection. Stephens just doesn’t listen to me. I can’t figure out why!

    • Oh, yeah…and I think that the willful mischaracterization of previous testimony on cross is unconscionable. How many appellate lawyers do you wanna bet are wet dreaming about this case?

          • I dunno…she holds the reins for right now. She doesn’t have a boss in the courtroom. She’s the boss. She has rules that she is supposed to rely on, but right now she is the interpreter of those rules. The first best recourse that anybody has if he thinks that she is breaking the rules is the appellate process. It’s just the way our system works. Or doesn’t work, I guess depending upon your perspective.

    • Hi JJB.

      There’s no credit due. The only reason he’s not loused up the closing arguments is because we’ve not reached that stage yet, lol. The appellate court is gonna have a field day with all the underhanded & devious BS that JM has pulled… if it gets to that stage… not withstanding Flores’ ever changing testimony, the SMS guy, non-disclosure of witness testimony, withholding & tampering of evidence and a whole lot more. There will only be one winner here.

      Team Jodi

      • Ok so am I to understand that there will be another case that will bring all this misconduct forward. How many years will that take before that happenes? How will it effect this case?

        • If Jodi is convicted of M1, then she gets an automatic appeal to a higher court. The appellate court examines the proceedings of the first trial in order to determine whether or not the verdict should be upheld or overturned. There are several apellate levels, all the way up to the US Supreme Court, which is why death row inmates can have their executions delayed for years.

            • Yes. It might not be automatic but Jodi’s defense team can appeal a lesser conviction as well. Casey Anthony’s lawyers got two of her four “lying to police” convictions thrown out on appeal.

              • Anyone deprived of their liberty for a year has an automatic right to appeal to the next higher court no matter what crime they have been convicted of. Death penalties in California skip the intermediary court and go straight to the California Supreme Court. Appeals to the U.S. Supreme Court are not automatic. The appeal has to meet certain criteria and the U.S. Supreme Court chooses whether or not to hear the case. I am a former criminal defense appellate attorney and this case has tons of appellate issues. The challenge will be for the appellate attorney to winnow the issues so as not to appear nitpicky. JM’s comment today alone accusing the psychologist of “having feelings for the defendant” is almost enough for prosecutorial misconduct. It undermines the entire testimony of the expert. The judge sustained the objection and ordered the jury to disregard the question but, as the saying goes, you can’t unring the bell.

      • Thanks again for this site, SJ. I’m sending all my mojo that it does not, but even if the worst does happen, there is no way a guilty verdict will survive on appeal. And JM’s requirement not to give improper argument is not confined to opening and closing. He is not supposed to couch arguments in his questions, either, which he can’t seem to stop himself from doing. One other habit of his that makes me want to box his ears, is that when he disagrees with an answer, he’ll say, “no,” or “see, no.” Fortunately, I believe, he’s put off enough members of the jury that it doesn’t hurt Jodi’s chances with them at this point. But it sure pisses me off in the mean time!

        • The thing he does that bothers me the most is when he doen’t like the answer he says, “Did I ask you” such and such. I always want to shoud, “Yes, Mr. Martinez. You did!”

  6. Thanks for the great site, and for all the heart (and work) you put into it, SJ! I am glad those of us that really are “Team Jodi” have a place to more or less congregate, and have rational discussions.
    I have lurked here for quite some time now, and have been keeping up with the info you put out, (as well as watching the trial) and have finally decided to jump right in to the mix with you all.

  7. Eveyone – whats on the schedule for today? I heard there are more jury questions in the basket. I believe we start with JM continuing (god help us all), and then will it be the additional juror questions with yet another attorney’s round od questioning Dr Samuels? I’m really looking forward the Defense’s next witness – Ms LaViolette (hope I got her name at least half way right!).

      • Also a ton of . That is not was I am asking is it Sir. Yes or No. Yes or No. And “sure”

        Maybe a few I Ask the questions here.

        And let’s not forget Of course his favorite. DO you have a memory problem sir?

  8. HLN is saying that the DV witness will be the defense’s last witness. I thought I read somewhere that we were also going to hear from several of TA’s friends and ex-girlfriends. Anybody know?

      • I thought the ones we saw were prosecution witnesses…but I did miss one day (ironically i was reporting for jury duty that day inside the Phoenix court house).

      • You wonder if other defense witness’s have seen how Martinez treats the others and chicken out. Who wants to be treated like that?
        I’d love to see the people who think Martinez is so great have to be questioned by him as a defense witness.They wouldn’t be pro Troll anymore.

        • exactly. Which is why I believe if she is convicted, it will be overturned on appeal. What JM and the media are doing to Dr. Samuels is nothing less than witness intimidation and tampering.

          already on TA support sites, there are cries to ruin the next defense witness.

          and….yes, I would love to see the haters sit through a questioning session with that little prick. They would be crying or screaming.

          If it were me, I would refuse to answer until he rephrased the question without hostility.

  9. I despise JM. The little troll could care less about justice or court room etiquette and rules. If he can get away with it he does it. I blame Judge Stephens for that. Personally I think she is intimidated by JM because there is NO WAY he should be getting away with his badgering and disrespect of witnesses. The ONLY thing he cares about is winning this trial and putting Jodi to death no matter what.
    Just as bad as Juan “Little Troll” Martinez is his gang of sycophants on HLN. VP, JVM, NG, MB, are giddy to watch Jodi die. HLN should be ashamed but of course anything to rile up the public and get those ratings.
    The best thing people could do is turn HLN and everything else off and just watch the trial with your own thought and opinions and not pay any attention to “experts” telling you how you should think.
    Okay I’m settled down for the moment

    • That’s because watching the trial without any editorial comment is completely different than the distorted “coverage” by HLN.

      It’s a scandal the media are using this case to whip up a lynch mob mentality.

      • I agree. The first 2-3 days I watched this trial it was on HLN and Tru TV. I couldn’t stand Vinnie Politan and Mike Brooks. I have no respect anymore for HLN.
        I started watching the trial online streaming from this site and other Phoenix news stations minus the commentary from the lynch mob. Much better that way. This site has educated me more on this case than anything has. Both pro and con.

      • Am I mistaken, or is HLN getting the benefit of delivering a salacious reality show without having to pay anybody for the privilege, ratings and profit-making.

        This seems like stealing to me?

      • Media Ethics with a Life At Stake: See: Dr. Sam Sheppard case 384 US 333

        The massive, pervasive and prejudicial publicity attending Dr. Sam Sheppard’s trial preventd him from receiving a fair trial, “freeing Dr. Sheppard from prison” and condemming the MEDIA for the massive publicity.

        When the media interferes with the legal system, it does harm to every American Citizen who may have reason to go to court. It is unconstitutional and it is unethical when the media crosses lines and decides innocence or guilt.

  10. Last week there was an incident with two of the spectators in the courtroom. They said they wished Jodi was dead or something like that and they said it loud enough that people around them heard. They were removed from the courtroom.

    I’ve heard that there’s a lot of snickering and inappropriate behavior in the gallery. Eyerolling, sneering, laughing, talking too loud, gum chewing… All in all, it seems to me the spectators haven’t been made aware of how they’re expected to behave in a courtroom. They watch Nancy Grace at night and they think they’re at a football game. I hope the judge clears the room of all spectators.

      • If it does I hope the judge sees it as a direct violation of her orders. I won’t judge the family for wearing whatever they want in order to support their brother(within reason). The rest of the gallery should be held in contempt if they follow through with the sea of blue.

    • I’ve noticed many people in the gallery making inappropriate faces and whispering to each other and laughing.
      If others in the courtroom would bring it to Judge Stephens attention she could do something about it.
      If you watched the Casey Anthony trial you saw how Judge Perry handled problems in the gallery when he was made aware them.

      • I don’t mean to be a jerk … but JA’a aunt and mom are right there with them. I don’t think there is any handbook for how to act when you daughter is on trial for the DP – I’m sure they are just doing whatever they can to get through… but it looks bad .. and they are not being very respectful to Jodi. I can see how Jodi has such a strained relationship with her mom.

        • I have never seen Jodi’s Mother and Aunt behaving inappropriately during this trial. I have not seen eye rolling or smirks or the slightest wince…even when Jodi was being badgered by JM Only once did I see them whisper, and it was during a sidebar, not during testimony. When and what have you seen that indicates they are being disrespectful to Jodi?

        • I disagree…Jodi’s family members have their facial expressions at times, but so does Travis’. None of the family members are cracking jokes and being disruptive.

          • I agree. Much more dignity and composure than I could display if that were my daughter on the stand, strained relationship or not! I would NOT have been able to keep my composure when JM was badgering Jodi!

    • If I were the judge, the jail would be so inundated with spectators being held in contempt that they’d probably run out of bologna and be forced to serve real food.

      • I bet Joe has a underground bunker filled with that crap so he wouldn’t run out even if the whole state of AZ were in jail .. LOL .

  11. Does anyone else besides me feel that having Flores at the prosecution table EVERY day is a tactic in itself aimed at swaying the jury? It can hardly be seen as anything other than that. I have never seen the lead detective on a death penalty case, or any other case, seated there, for no other apparent reason than to be the cheering section for the prosecution. I wonder…shouldn’t he be impartial?
    What is with this?

    • It would sway me to wonder why the hell he hasn’t been at work since January and if he’s getting paid to bench-warm for Martinez…LOL.

      • I think I read somewhere that it is standard procedure. I cant remember why .. I think cause he is the investigating officer for the state.

          • Ok looked it up. In Arizona it is standard practice . I have not been able to find out what the exact purpose is though.

            • Ok, here is what I found. the reason for this : The state has a right to be represented by an agent in the courtroom (as they are the ones accusing). So the state can designate one representative to remain in the courtroom and sit at the prosecutor’s table with the state’s attorney just as the defendant can remain in the courtroom throughout the trial with his or her attorney.

              This is standard procedure for Arizona murder cases, as well as some other stated KY, etc.

    • I know, I agee he SHOULDN’T be up there. But its not like he was this great detective that has done such a great investigation. He’s made errors, he’s testified saying that some very important things weren’t important to him during the investigation and the “48 hrs” show that he was in (even though the jury did see it, Nurmi made it know). So he’s a dumbass sitting up there as Martinez water boy. I dont feel like he’s making any difference since he sucks so at everything!

      • I agree….oooh, he figured out that Jodi was at Travis’ house on June 4th…wow, that’s impressive! Any investigator with a brain could have come to that conclusion once the camera was analyzed.

    • The lead detective always sits at the prosecution table during a criminal trial. It should not be allowed, because he or she hears all the testimony and they still may call them as a rebuttal witness. Unfair, but that is how it is.

  12. THEORIES FROM THE LIGHTER SIDE… (as opposed to those Theories from the Dark Side from the hater sites).

    As a long-time reader of this site, I have gotten ‘whiplash’ from reading all the plentiful theories on this trial (The Mormon Connection, The 2-3 Person theory vs just JA, Roommates-must’ve-done-it, etc, etc). I thought I’d like to take a walk on the Absurd Side and present yet more to add on to this list…(with PROOF of course!)  . My top three:

    (1) ELVIS IS ALIVE & KICKING … Please, by now you all have seen him – smack in the middle, in the front. Proof, you ask? That snarl is a dead giveaway! The youthful look? Well, I’m sure he dipped into his plastic surgery fund!!!
    (2) JM IS REALLY A PROCTOLOGIST, MOONLIGHTING AS A PROSC … I’ll jump straight to the proof for this. Just check EVERY witness that sits through all the ‘exams’ (direct, XE, X-redirect, etc, etc) – you will notice them constantly shifting around uncomfortably, and the pained look as they leave the stand!! I’m sure they will back me up when I say that these ‘exams’ feel more like a prostate exam than anything else you can compare it too. He’s so brilliant, it’s a 2-in-1 deal (proctology/prosecution). He is just so good that even the spectators (Judge, KN/JW, JA, and from the comments, I take it the rest of us) feel the effects!
    (3) COCKROACH!! – Yeah, I am pretty sure that the severely ‘Over-Ruled’ Judge is saying ‘Cockroach’ and NOT ‘approach’ as we all think. Proof: Given her propensity to enunciate strangely and all …?

    Anybody got more? 
    BTW, when is this trial starting…?

  13. Hopefully everything goes well and Jodi walks away a free woman,but in the mean time,if the jurrors do swallow JMs bullshit and Jodi is convicted of M1,I read that she will be immediately transfered to death row where she will be locked in a cell 23 hours a day,then one hour of exercise while being shackeled in a caged area,That is inhuman treatment,you dont subject people to that.I understand that there will be appeals which could take years,my god how much could Jodi endure of that treatment.This trial stinks,The media circus,especially the COW Nancy Grace have swayed the public opinnion against Jodi,they have assumed her guilty before she went to trial.I said it before that there is no way on this planet that the jurrors have not some way been exposed to some type of media coverage,some of the questions that were asked were a direct quote from the HLN show at night,DUH!!!I live in Canada and this would have never been allowed,the judge would have instilled a media ban and sequestered the jury.I hope Jodis defence team sees all this( I am sure they do)the way JM treated Jodi and the witnesses.The biggest outcome of this trial is all the media ratings and glory in the hopes that JM and pals will get a big fat paycheck for a movie deal,I think this is so wrong,We have a beautiful young womwn here that could be executed and very few people give a shit about her,the media,movie and glory has stood far above the truth.I believe in Jodi and I cant wait for the day she walks out a free woman,Be strong Jodi and you will endure.

    • Dennis although it does sound inhuman we really have to look at it as a one size fit’s all. We can not have different rules for different people as much as we would like it to be that way. But Jodi will not be sent to death row. She might have some jail time but not on death row. Wouldn’t we all like to see her aquitted but ………Jodi will be in prison no matter what the outcome is here until she gets the help she needs…

      • Yes Cindy I agree she will have jail time,she did admit to killing TA,but the whole thing doesnt add up.If you were planning on killing somebody I dont think you would hang around all day in his house.Jodi being of rather petite stature makes me believe that there was no way she could have inflicted all that damage to TA and then drag him to the shower,what about the roomies,she had no way of knowing when one of them would show up or a friend might come calling?They say they found a foot print in the blood,did not Jodi say she was wearing socks?I am a firefighter and we have a practice dummy that is life size and weighs 190 lbs,We use him to practice rescueing people from burning homes,so that means picking him up or dragging him out of the building.I am 260Lbs and in relatively good shape,It is a chore for me to drag our rescue dummy along the floor and very hard to pick him up,dead weight is hard to lift,so as far as her dragging him down the hall,WELL MAYBE,but I doubt it,remember that the floor was wet and there was blood on the floor making it slippery.I think either somebody else was there or it was done after and Jodi is covering up for someone or something,she says she cant remember stabbing him,maybe thats because she didnt,her story of the masked intruders might not be all that far off.A note on the memory loss,I have seen some very bad things as a firefighter,people smashed up in cars,victims in a house fire,yeah your mind tries to black that out,its trying to help you survive the trauma.I truly believe in Jodi,something aweful happened,she went into self defence mode and was scared out of her wits after.I would say most people would lie to save themselves contray to what all the media coverage and JM say.Jodi does need some help and she will live a productive life.Just a note on the theory of the spare gas cans,I drove through Utah some years ago and it was my first time and I nearly ran out of gas because there are stretchs that have no services for miles,I was driving my wifes car and was not to sure on the range of a tank of gas,Jodi was being cautious,think about this,a young woman in a car she never drove going some where she has never driven,I say she had her reasons for the spare gas.I puke at JM and the way he berates people and tries to lead them down his garden path,On top of it the judge lets him!!I hope Jodi gets her conviction downgraded to manslaughter and gets credit for time served,she should be out soon.God speed Jodi.

    • Yeah the judge shouldve banned the media from the courtroom and sequestered the jury. None of this would be happening and Jodi would’ve been receiving the fair trial that she and everyone else deserves.

      Why couldn’t Jodi be acquitted??? Martinez refused to take her plea, if the jury doesnt find her guilty of anything (like CA people didn’t think she’d walk free), then why is it not possible for Jodi to walk out?? Because the way she defended herself was too heinous? Shes not being charged for that and if she was, who’s to say that she used as much force as she needed to save her own life?? She fought back in SD, saved her own life and walked out alive, why and how should that be punishable? ??

  14. *************************
    Prosecutorial misconduct is conduct which violates court rules or ethical standards of law practice. Examples, among others, may include:

    *** Courtroom misconduct (making improper remarks or improperly introducing evidence designed to prejudice the jury: violating rules regarding selection of the jury; or making improper closing arguments);

    *** Hiding, destroying or tampering with evidence, case files or court records;

    *** Failing to disclose evidence that might tend to exonerate the defendant

    *** Threatening, badgering or tampering with witnesses.
    A few examples of the missconduct:
    making improper remarks : 1) Opening line… “Your stupid sister”. He could have asked if she thinks her sister is stupid, and then questioned her honesty if she said “no”. Instead he reffers to the sister as stupid, as a way to get the attention of Jodi and the jury that “the pitbull is here!”-
    2) Testifying to the court. The Prosecutor is not allowed to testify. Often he will testify then say “right” making it a question, however MANY MANY times he has neglected the question part and this means it was a statement. He is NOT allowed to testify.

    improperly introducing evidence: Evedence should not be presented in a way that confusses the witness, to make them look bad. For example, the state often instructed the DR. NOT to use his notes, then would question him on specific dates and times, to make him look bad when he couldnt answer. There is no rule saying that you can not use notes, unless the prosecutor is challanging the witnesses memory. He was obvisously trying to confuse the DR. this is also “improper introduction” as he is trying to introduce the jury to the idea that “this Dr. is poor”, by tricking him into saying he “doesnt know” or “he cant remember”.
    -More over, he OBVISOUSLY trys to use his volume and tone to intimidate the witness. He is short, cuts the witness off when they are making an answer that pertains to the question.

    -This is most obvious if one asks “is the prosecutor trying to get a “gotcha” moment? We all can see the answer to this.

    Hiding, destroying or tampering with evidence: I beleive the prosecutor has hid evidence. Several times there have been side bars on what evidence can be discussed in front of the jury. Several of those times it was about notes in the journal and the text messages…However the STATE is the one that offered those into evidnece, so they should not be able to piece meal those texts and notes. They continually used small portaions to try an mischaracterize the notes and texts.
    -You can NOT tell a witness to say “captian may i” and then tell them to spell “cup”, and try to claim that the witness now likes watching pirates take a piss! This is obviously done over and over again by the state. “Where were you at 3:26 AM 6 years ago, DONT USE YOUR NOTES!!!”? “you cant recall? Do you have a problem with your memory?” ….. later, when memory is actually being talked about…” you said you dont have a problem with your memory”. TRICKS=misconduct.

    Threatening, badgering or tampering with witnesses: I know that “smurfette with a dick” can treat the defendant as a hostile witness and be more “pointed” when asking questions of her. However he started the questions with the expert witness(The Dr.) the same way. He acussed him of lying. he acussed him of misconduct. He badgered him in tone and volume. He cut off his answers and questioned him personally.

    Even if im 4 cans short of a six pack and don’t know what i am talking about. I’m sure that i am correct on at least ONE of these issues. The point is, that miscoduct is not a “leveled” offense. You either did it, or you didnt do it. you cant “do a little misconduct” and thats OK. Miscoduct in the court is never appropriate, so you dont get to say “in this situation its ok”.

    JM is breaking the law in front of everyones eyes, and i would like to know what people are going to do about it.

    • Actually, all the evidence is presented, but they confirm with the judge and defense that they are able to use just part of it. It isn’t just a “we have this” motion, they must pass it with the defense and the judge.

    • Sirlips, you ate CORRECT in ALL if it and I would also like to know what they’re going to do about it because it shouldn’t be left alone! !!!

      I know Nurmi has tried and the rookie judge is intimidated by him! Someone needs to step it up!

    • You’re so right!!!! And I wonder, if this is such an open and shut case why does he have to resort to these stupid tactics?? I guess if the judge refuses to stop him, it will work in Jodi’s favor on appeal if there is a conviction.

  15. Hello all Jodi Supporters!!

    I am ready to through JM’s hostile attacks and hopefully get to the DV expert.

    Anyone Know if Alyce LaViolette will be testifying today?

    It probably depends on the time frame since we have so many breaks and so many side bars.

    • I believe so .. but as you noted with so many side bars, breaks etc ,, seems like everything takes a day or two longer than expected.

    • I cant wait to hear from LaViolette either but damn i have a quick errand (husband made an apt for car oil chg on HIS work day)!!! Uuuggggrrr ISN’T THAT THE “MAN” JOB????!!!! lol

      So, if she’ll be calked upntiday, ill miss some of it!!! : (( Best luck to her though, I have a feeling, she’ll know how to deal with Martinez.

  16. Back to the defense witness list…I have been wanting to see the creepy Hughes’ and Dave Hall on the stand to be grilled by the Defense. Does anyone know if they will be called? Also wondering if TA’s journals will ever be put into evidence?

    • I wished they could get Hughes on the stand. I also saw where he said he was watching the trial at home. I thought he was not allowed to do that but I could be mistaken.

    • I think both of them have been “released” .. or whatever they call it , so they are free to watch/discuss , go on tv etc . Once they are released they cannot be called again because they are free to be influenced, seek information not allowed etc.

    • Thanks All-
      That is disappointing but I’m sure the defense had a good reason to release them. I’m still hoping they will face charges for obstructing justice.

  17. Good Morning Everyone!
    86 Comments already, time left before trial starts is gonna go fast for me while I catch up.
    Go Team Jodi!

  18. I just listened to the latest Websleuths show on Blog Talk Radio
    There were some interesting points made by the host. In a nutshell she even thinks Martinez is off-putting. Also, near the end of the show it is commented that TA’s family needs assistance with housing while attending the trail. The host asked about the Mormon community where the trial is taking place in Arizona- the host made the comment that she always knew the Mormon community to be very giving and supportive to those in need. The show’s guest, who is in the courtroom and is now friends with TA’s family and helping them out with donations said that they have not heard from the Mormon community in AZ but she would look into it. Now, why do ya think the Mormon community in AZ has not reached out to this family from the get-go?

    • I believe the family is not Mormon. I seem to recall that Travis converted on his own. Mormons are tight-knit, but only with other Mormons.

      • Travis’ grandmother was Mormon and she raised the kids in the religion after she gained custody of them. I’m not sure how many of them are still Mormon, but Travis’ sister Tanisha is. She and her husband had a Mormon temple wedding (vid is on YouTube).

    • there is a donation page for TA’s family on facebook. I woiuld think the Church has policies in place and I do not know what they are. Both TA and Jodi are LDS, and how can you help one and not the other? And we are not supposed to judge others. I’m glad Jodi read the BOM from front to back, Martinez should give it a try, I have never been able to finish it or read more then a few pages at a time and I have been a member of the church my entire life.

  19. Now according to Mike Galanos and friends on HLN, JA is nothing but a scorned sperm lover (their words not mine) who got her feelings hurt because he didn’t take her to Cancun..I WISH they’d just let that cancun theory go and come up with something a bit more plausible because it sounds so silly that somebody would kill over a stupid PPL vacation to Mexico with people who she was aware didn’t really care for her.

      • Yes, it actually came out of one of their commentator’s mouths. I can’t say I was shocked that it was said, though because it fits in line with the rest of the crap they’re spewing these days. And to think that I used to think that Mike Galanos was one of the unbiased reporters they had…

        • Oh it keeps getting better and better…”once the bell sounds and it’s JM’s turn, he basically will charge across the ring and get after the defense’s expert.” Now, I didn’t know we were watching a boxing match….If I weren’t on limited bandwidth internet, I’d def be doing the live feed but so it goes. I have to listen to this crappy commentary as if we’re at a sporting event, which I feel is how HLN is really looking at this, not that somebody’s life is on the line or anything.

    • I haven’t watched even one second of coverage on HLN, or anywhere else. And when I read things like this, I’m certainly glad that I haven’t. I’ll stick with watching the live stream and using my own brain, thankyouverymuch.

      • You are right, Cindy. I think this case is done. It’s all over but the frenzied mob, the welfare mothers trying to run over Jodi lookalikes in Wal Mart parking lots (yes, that actually happened in my city while CA was in hiding), and the dreaded civil action from Cruella & Co.

          • I havn’t heard anything about it., but it is not uncommon for the family of the victim to sue in a civil trial when the accused is not convicted at a criminal trial. The rules in civil case are much less restrictive on what they have to prove etc.

  20. Good morning everyone! New trial week,more Kermit BS and yelping(god help us!) so thank heavens for this site and for SJ ‘s insightful posts!
    10.11…How typical!!! I always rush from work,almost to the point of running people over with my bike LOL and then I wonder,why do I even bother?They are ALWAYS late!Poorly run courtroom.

    Good Luck to Jodi and her team!!

  21. Anyone else here about this rumor that PPL/LS has proof that Jodi was on the list for the Cancun trip but Travis removed her name and put down Mimi in her place?

  22. The inability of the Judge to get this court started ON TIME is getting appalling. Just imagine if all of us could manage our business and/or careers in such a fashion.

  23. The judge just asked the jury if they’ve seen anything in the media, etc. I wonder if they’ve seen our posts? No hands, really? Somehow I doubt that. I have to leave for work now, so I’m going to miss about 40 minutes of the trial until I get set up on my computer there. I hope I don’t miss much, but JM is still talking, so probably not. 😛

    • Well, a friend of mine is not “into” this trial and only hears what I say…so I suppose it is possible that these folks are able to avoid it. Let’s hope they are being honest.

    • At least two of the jury questions for Samuels a few days ago were exactly from HLN. So, maybe they are not watching it so they don’t have to raise their hands but someone is telling at least one juror what is being said.

  24. Yes just started. Looks like Jm is still doing cross with the DR. I bet we don’t see next defense witness today. Jm is starting off a little less ‘confrontational/yelly , today.

  25. Just back from the Juan Martinez film festival on Youtube. Boy, this guy is a “rock star” to some people.

  26. Kerms just pulled out another of his favorite phrases:

    “So, what you’re saying is that it’s the prosecutor’s fault that….”

    • why is he referring to himself in the 3rd personal?I thought only Kings and Queens referred to themselves as ”we”,basically using the 1st person of the plural!

        • Illeism=referring to yourself in the 3d person!
          ” illeism is used with an air of grandeur, to give the speaker lofty airs. Idiosyncratic and conceited people are known to either use or are lampooned as using illeism to puff themselves up or illustrate their egoism ”

          Interesting….Looks like Martinez could use some therapy sessions with the good doctor!

          • JM is a self-centered narcissus. I was thinking that too, that he needs therapy – hard for Samuels to concentrate on q’s cuz he’s so busy analyzing JM.

      • Yes! That is the one that bugs me the most! I want to shout, “You asked it, Mr. Martinez. Shall we have the court reporter read back your question?

  27. He again said it wasn’t meant to be admitted. The raw data is an issue for the prosecution legally as was somewhat brought up last week.

  28. Samuels just said that these scores have nothing to do with his finding of PTSD, etc. JM, that isn’t what I’m asking you, correct? Isn’t that the point…lol

  29. So this piece of evidence was not meant for trial? Did the Dr say Martinez took it inadvertently when he grabbed another piece of evidence from the witness box? WTF

  30. Is anyone else watching with baited breath as Fartinez pushes Samuels closer and closer towards his breaking point, finding the whole experience to be absolutely delightful? Samuels is practicing self control, which, I know is a good thing but SO not what I want to see. If ANYONE can get away with putting Fartinez in the toilet where he rightfully belongs with all of his shit spewing it’s Samuels. It will never happen, though, my life is just not that great.

    So, I say Samuels meets Fartinez in the bathroom during recess and gives him a swirly!

    • It would be tough not to lose one’s cool. JM has called him unethical, inept, and has made it sound like Samuels has fallen for JA.

    • wouldnt all of us?Did you notice how Kermit was oozing with sarcasm when he said ”after 35 years of experience THAT’S what we get of you?” wtf?Badgering the witness,hello???

      • I would be so tempted to fire back with “After 25 years of experience, all we get is petty bullying out of you?”

        • Why would it be so wrong for him to say that? I know everyone will frown upon it, but at this point, someone calling him out seems like the right thing to do. LOL

  31. I get the impression that Dr. Samuels decided over the weekend that he wasn’t going to put up with Martinez’s bullshit this week. Good for him.

  32. The jury has to be very aggravated. These questions have to make them think they’ve entered something like the move “Groundhog Day”

    Same shit another day.

  33. Did I hear that right,that J.M. took some of the Dr.s papers without his permision,and entered it as evidence?What a sneaky little weasel.

  34. Aaaaarrrrgh I want to go right through my computer screen, M is at it again trying to make Mr Samuels look a fool, when the only person looking a fool is HIM!

    He’s a disgusting piece of shit!

  35. Its really hard to believe that the Judge allows the gallery members to continue to talk, chew gum, point and stare, etc. I’ve never seen such poor and tolerated court decorum from the gallery.

  36. Wondering other people’s opinion. Is the police officer sister looking at the jury or the camera? I had thought the jury but now it almost seems as though it is directly into the camera. Any thoughts?

  37. Off topic.

    Do you think the judge is telling JM just take a deep breath when his hands start flapping and head and torso start stretching up and down?

  38. I guess I missed a bunch of stuff. Anyone care to get me caught up.

    Did JM actually steal or otherwise misappropriate the Dr’s papers?

    • Last week JW objected to data that JM was using as an exhibit (I can’t remember which data). This was information that Samuels said is only shared between psychologists and the like and not used as part of exhibits in criminal trials. JW did address a question on re-direct that put her in the position to take it up with the State’s expert.

      Does anyone else remember this?

  39. ”Judge,she said she wanted to approach”
    omg…Cant he refer to Ms.Wilmott as Ms Wilmott???That kinda talk reminds me of my young students,”Miss,she used a bad word!Come scold her!”

    • I am aghast at the leeway he is allowed. Seems to me that there is favoritism going on here or that the judge, at this point doesn’t give a hoot anymore. Does she even HEAR the reason for the objection? She, far more often than not, overrules the objections that the defense makes.

  40. This weekend I went back to much earlier testimony as somewhat of a test. This has gone on so long that there are important issues that I have to admit I had forgotten. This line of questioning, that has nothing to do with proving premeditation, only muddy the waters. Has nothing to do with true judicial process and the job of a prosector.

  41. OMG – this is NOT good for Jodie. JM is bringing out several incidents of anger with her mom, even hitting her. urrrggg

    • It’s already been established that their relationship is contentious though, starting with the mom/dad hitting Jodi as a child.

      • I would guess from when the Dr made the statement that she was non-confrontational and low key (not the exact words). I dont remember though, that could have been before jury questioning. It is so hard to remember what happened when anymore

      • Omg what teen didn’t act out like Jodi did? Not likeing the fact that she hit her mom but how old was she? What does this have to do with this trial? He must be really afraid if he is trying to take the Dr. down……

    • One would hope or even better piss the jury off enough for an acquittal.

      I can’t believe his antics are allowed.

    • I don’t think there is anything she can do about it – if she does. It must be out of the realm of badgering otherwise the defense would object. I wonder if judge has asked for some better behavior though cause I do notice that there is less “speaking” objections etc, and JM has toned down – slightly.

  42. OMG! What is going on here? This is ridiculous! The judge is NOT maintaining order in this court today. The Dr. slaps his hand on the desk…JM SMASHES the podium!!! WTF?

  43. Martinez must be a real joy to be around on a daily basis. Don’t invite him to your party unless you want a disrespectful bully looking for a fight.
    It’s up to the jury to see through the crap the Troll is slinging. In my opinion Martinez is desperate and really reaching now.

  44. An Appeals court will have a field day with this one…wow…How can a judge continue to allow a prosecutor or any attorney for that matter, badger every single witness and belittle and defame. She needs to get a hold of her court room. I have been in many courtrooms and sat on juries and have never seen a preceeding so shoddily run and luoosygoosy as this one. Start Late, leave early. trashing witnesses…I hope someone from the DP office is working on the appeal now just in case… I mean it is something new everyday….sheesh.!!!

    • And the entire trial has been recorded for full appreciatiion of the prosecutorial misconduct, the behavior of the gallery, and the incorrect rulings…IMO

    • You must’ve been reading my mind when you posted that. I was just saying that out loud. There are appeals all over the place here.

    • DCFAN,your rigt on.If she’s found guilty they will overturn.WTF J.M. is complaining about the Dr.s banging.What is the judge there for,just to watch?she might as well stay home and watch HLN.

      • Agreed. Judge Stephens is is intimidated by Martinez. She allows people (Martinez) to do pretty much whatever they want. Why have her there? Oh yeah, for Sidebars. What could they possibly talk about so often for so long?

    • or ”Ladies and gentlemen,we’ll be taking the afternoon recess at this point.Please be back….”

    • Plus,she testified she didn’t read it in like 3 days!It took her quite some time to read it cover to cover.

      • When did she read it? Did she understand it ?Reading does not mean ability to absorb the information you read. .She stated she had trouble reading. She did not say she didn’t read.
        Some people read without concentration and do not comprehend what they are reading. That is why their response is so poor to the subject at Hand. Since she hasn’t read this book for over 3 years or so, did she comprehend what she was reading? she even stated that she went along with Travis on what he considered permissible sexually. which would prove (A) she didn’t really read the book or that she had a severe reading comprehension problem and regarded Travis as her spiritual or sexual adviser. Or the Book itself is ambiguous but having a problem concentrating when reading does not mean she did not make attempts.

        • I dont remember when she started reading it but she said she finished it while in jail.The doctor said she had problems concentrating not understanding.Thus,Martinez’s bringing up her reading the book is irrelevant.She could have read it page to page for all I care or chapter to chapter and still feeling she had a hard time concentrating.It doesnt disprove the doctor’s finding.

            • Martinez never proved she understood what she read, and from what I see she seemed completely not knowledgeable about this Book. So its not important whether she read the issue is she had problems concentrating.

  45. PTSD is PTSD is PTSD. The diagnosis is not going away. The jury nor the the judge have the luxury of sweeping the mental disorder under the carpet. JM is going nowhere with this, maybe he is dragging this out on purpose for some ulterior motive.

    • Well said…I can hardly believe there is a point to this. The only thing I get is that JM is trying to discredit the Dr’s diagnosis of PTSD, make a mockery out of the Dr’s error in typing, imply he is in essence a “quack” thus discredit his testimony all together. JM is disrespectful…he aught to watch his step. He may crush some of the jurors toes with this method. ANYONE who has worked hard for a living and has earned the respect that this DR has earned would be offended. I know I am.

  46. OMG the judge looks like a deer in headlights…good grief; it’s as if she isn’t even paying attention…I’m SO GLAD the camera caught that.

  47. Yes, Juan. Thats right, the Dr does HAVE 35 years of experience. Do you have that much in psyhcology?? I think not, you condensending prick.

  48. I loved when the doctor said, well good for her referring to Jordins reading the book of mormon from cover to cover. When she read it cover to cover is the big ???.

  49. If I had a dollar for every time I said” I’ll kill myself” when I was a teen I would like…um…. Oprah,Yes its a serious subject but young females are emotional creatures,are they not?

    • Yes. My wife is 4’11” and my 10 year old daughter has just measured in at 5’1″ at her last check up with her pediatrician. Well a couple of weekends ago my wife and daughter EXPLODED into an arguement , and so I go and investigate and my daughter is standing face to face with her mom. My daughter said “I don’t have to listen to you anymore, because I’m taller than you. My wife was LIVID. I seperated them and then went to the garage and laughed, before I could instill some reasoning into my daughter young mind.

  50. I wonder how Juan would like someone questioning his prosecutorial skills over and over and over again. Little bastard….

  51. Honestly. If I’m on this jury, my mind is made up. I’ve tuned Martinez out and have written him off as an arrogant, blood thirsty, arse hole. I might be the only person on the jury that feels that way and goes against the prosecution, but one is all it takes.

    I could see if Martinez was like this only when called for with certain witness’s but apparently he hates and bully’s anyone and everyone that testifies for the defense.
    Wouldn’t he get what he was looking for if he acted civilly toward the defense witness’s?

    • Agree. He is a joke. Watched other trials and have not ever seen anything like him.

      They say this is just his style and that he cannot control himself. That he is always this way. He also shouts at his own witnesses when they don’t give the answers that he wants.

      • JC Team Jodi Administrator
        Never Ever saw such a lack of professionalism mingled with abusing a witness The Judge has NO CONTROL and Martinez is a BUFFOON

    • Me too…if I were on the jury, I’d be bored to death by this asshole repeating the same inane shit over and over again. Kermit would have been tuned out long ago.

  52. Lets not talk about things that don’t apply.

    Well then JM needs to sit the f**k down because nothing JM asks has anything to do with the charges he has brought against JA

    • Yes, all these media & public claims of Jodi being a ‘sociopath’. What a joke. She has no criminal record, no violent behavior in her past towards humans or animals, no firestarting. It is very unlikely she has anti-social personality disorder, but they keep pushing with no supporting evidence in her life before this tragedy.

    • Objection…..overruled.

      Why is JM allowed to treat the Dr. like he is a criminal? When the Dr. asks if he’s allowed to go into something further JM says No.

      The way JM is questioning Samuels, why doesn’t he just throw a question out there like:

      “You fell in love with her didn’t you Dr….right”
      “And because you fell in love with her, you modified your report so some day you two could ride off into the sunset….right?

  53. I’m pretty sure that I’m going to be diagnosed with PTSD by the time this damn cross examination is over! Good god!!! It’s excruciating!!!!

  54. There he goes again.What a dick.Why doesn’t the Dr. say something about J.M.s25 years experince.I’m so pissed rigth now I want to jump in my T.V. and stomp on that little weasel!!!!

  55. How can the jury trust Juan’s expert, when he has just dismissed the field of psychology with this expert? Isn’t he hurting his own case by doing this?

  56. I’m so confused, why did the DT put this guy on the stand? He has not provided anything in terms of her need of self-defense, only that the incident on 6/4 gave her PTSD. And, now were watching this guy lose his credibility.
    What a huge waste of time for both sides. This testimony does not prove self defense nor does it prove premed.

    • No. There is one more expert coming whose record stands on her own. That’s the domestic violence expert and she will be better equipped to show why Jodi reacted the way she did on June 4th. Juan will not be able to pull this with her. Samuels proved that Jodi didn’t suffer from an cluster B disorder by the tests he have. those are disorders having to do with empathy and remorse such as borderline personality disorder and ASPD. His testimony was crucial.

    • I thought that for awhile. Now, I’m thinking that it shows she did not consciously take steps to cover-up the crime. Someone who premeditated would also have had a plan to cover it up afterward. Also, if it was planned at the time she left Yreka, she would be in control and not have left such a mess. Just an opinion, but I am a former attorney and I have trouble understanding what his testimony has to do with premeditation. Any other ideas on why it is relevant?

  57. so does the defense get to go again with the Doc or is it done?

    Normally the side that called a particular witness gets the last word (remember this is actually the Defense’s case in chief) bit I don’t know about AZ.

  58. Hi guys,

    I haven’t posted much lately; I’ve been busy heping out with Jodi’s art. 🙂

    Most of you know I train therapists; I am a professor and I work at a graduate school training therapists and psychologists. So I know a lot about these tests and how these things go.

    I really like Samuels. I think Martinez just thinks all psychology is bull. But honestly, Samuels has the hit the nail on the head. I mentioned earlier that Jodi had PTSD. Martinez will do whatever he can to make Samuels look bad, but Samuels is very smart and I think he’s done a good job so far.

    • I have a bachelor’s degree in psychology, and JM’s dismissive attitude toward the science is really irritating.

    • So Kris,

      Is it possible that Jodi’s results on the MMPI could radically differ from those on the MCMI II? Juan has slipped a few comments in about the MMPI. I suspect that’s the test his expert used. I don’t teach psychology but do have taken grad classes. My understanding is that her scores would be consistent on both.

      • Yes, they would or should be consistent. However, it’s usually the psychologist that decides what to give the client and it sounds like Samuels had his reasons.

        Yes, Martinez is driving me nuts. The grad students I teach can’t stant his attitude.

    • Kris I agree I think that Dr Samuels is probably a very good doc. What do you think the possibilities are for her personality disorders? Also do you think that he has enough credibility to persuade the jury that she is not a sociopath?

    • I do not think it is going to hurt anything. How many people on the jury have children and teens. Lets face it teens are are are…ok I’m not going to say it. We don’t know what went on… have Jodi kick her mother…..I’m sure Jodi’s mom didn’t just stand there and take it.

      Humm couldn’t have been that bad…look who’s in that court room day, after day. Her mother….He’s making something out of nothing.

    • LOL.

      True story: I left the room and the live stream on my laptop, during a side bar. All of a sudden I heard a horn and went to look outside to see what was going on…then I realized that the volume had started again and it was JM’s voice.

  59. No, you can’t see into Jodi’s brain and see the actual event, unless you are that psychic Julie Christoper maybe?!!! Wonder how much taxpayer he wastes per minute on bullshit like that???

    JM is absolutely insulting to the intelligence of the jury.

    Will the doctor ever get to talk about TA’s behavior and any psychological diagnosis or hypothesis, I wonder?

    And my question, when the trial is over, and when all the info that is being uncovered as we speak, that leads to the likelihood that Jodi never touched a hair on TA’s head in a malicious way, comes out, will be :



  60. Ok here’s what I see going on…..JM is trying to do anything he can to discredit Dr. Same as he did in the cross. Didn’t work then. JW did such a great job with the GOOD Dr. now he has to work even harder to onces again discredit him. I do not recall the jury asking any of these questions….

    I think if the truth be known JM knows he’s in a sinking boat without a raft to save himself.

  61. I wished there were few people who knew TA and not having PPL as a common denominator. I wonder why the guy ( the one who was renting a room from TA) who was leaving TAs house in the middle of the night- probably upset and angry, was not asked few questions about TA behave.

    Is it somewhere an email or text that shows a romantic, beautiful, soft side of TA?

    • I believe that Jodi has many kind, endearing and sweet pieces of written prose from Travis. But I am also certain that the defense team would/has/asks Jodi not expound on those specific excerpts from her texts, journal or letters she may have received.

      • Bella,

        IMO, if the State had found any during the warrant searches, they would have used them. Also, her journals since back in junior high until June were confiscated. There were very few kind words about TA. Generally speaking, there was a mixture of emotion in the journals as it relates to TA.

        I don’t think the defense has prevented any texts, journals, or letters into evidence. However, the State has prevented TA’s letters from coming into evidence that, IMO, are, for lack of a better term, exculpatory in nature JA.

        • I think that the same holds true on the defense side. A big deal of the beginning days along with the “sweet cinnabon letter & recipe” as well as the obvious flirty texts. I don’t think the defense is hiding anything. But for every one of those items that were brought up, the state shredded them to their benefit. It all boils down to he said she said…

      • Was there at least one romantic dinner between the two of them? Did he invite J out for a fancy-romantic dinner? I did not hear about such.
        Did he surprise her with flowers or sweet nothing? I did not hear abt that.

        Do you believe that prosecutor is unaware of such written texts from TA and would not use it in court? Emails, journals, etc were found and investigated by prosecutor first of all.

    • Will we ever be able to see the email Sky Hughes and Chris sent Travis on his abuse of Jodi or is it sealed ?? Team Jodi can you please look into that.

  62. The one sad part in the Flores report is when he informed TAs brother’s of his death ansd they were clueless as to who might have done it. They informed Flores that since moving to Mesa TA wasn’t close to them. TA would still be alive if he had never latched on to Pre Paid Legal or ever met Chris Hughes.

    • Remember what was important and it was set as a personal life goal for TA: “Money, Power, Women”

      He was 30yo and looking for a marriage, not the love of his life, not a beautiful romance but a marriage with benefits?

      He was sexual enganged with one in the hidden, in the same time he was climbing the mountain and having fun with another woman while the other one was cleaning his house and waiting to satisfy him sexually.

      I just can´t understand how, why, for how long Jodi accepted such humiliation and contempt.

      • Did you ever see his blog about wanting to marry a gold digger. By his own statement his worth was the money he could make.

        And BTW the money he could make as a PPL sales guy would be a pittance compared to a real attorney, or qualified specialist, or entrepreneurial engineer.


  63. Fox News can’t even get the simple things right.

    For example, their guest attorney said that Dr. Samuels testified that “she read the book he gave her cover to cover”, etc. Well, as we all know, the “prosecutor” said she read the Book of Mormon (not the book he had mailed to her), cover to cover and the Dr. only said “good for her” (since Dr. Samuels doesn’t know what books she read).

    No reporting on the correct book or the time frame that it was read.

  64. A prosecution witness had trouble reading on the stand…. And he authored the material. So yes I do believe it is possible that Jodi had reading or concentration issues.

  65. Alrighty, my people… Where are we at this point in the trial today? I’ve been making personalized Prize Eggs (filled with candy, treats, and toys) for every child in my daughter’s kindergarten class (egg hunt this week); it’s a LOT of work!!!

    I swear, They are adjourned or taking a break more than they are ever in session! I’ve never seen such a fiasco in my life. Here, jury duty is 8am SHARP to at least 5pm, with 12-1 for lunch. We EARN our $7/day jury pay, LOL!

      • No, South Carolina. =)

        I was posting as AshleySC83 up until last week, but tried linking my Gravatar here (username SCBeauty1983) but it would never link for some reason. HRS tried to help me, but we never figured it out… *sigh*

        • I think the username thing is throwing people off, so I’ll go back to what I’ve used the entire trial. It’s still me, Ashley, from South Carolina.

          *Still wish I could get my Gravatar account to link here as well, though.

            • I’m on Eastern time. DST has really thrown me for a loop, though, trying to keep up with Jodi’s trial! I can never remember if it’s 2 or 3 hours earlier than my time.

              So now I’ve got the laptop in the kitchen with my earbuds in, waiting for them to come back into court so I can watch/listen while I make dinner!

  66. Defense experts from HLN, including Jean C., just said that most is benefitting the defense and referred to JM as the BULLY! Bahahahahaha……finally some unbiased, truthful comments.

  67. I don’t know everybody criticizes Juan martinez so much here…he is ABSOLUTELY the best thing going for Jodi right now. His hectoring and bullying has got to be turning the jury off BIG TIME!!! If he does to the next defense witness that he is doing to the good doctor…then he is guaranteeing Jodi walking out of that court a free woman.

  68. You know, as I prepare myself for the afternoon Martinez onslaught, I can’t help but think that all of this nonsense this morning has been meaningless. Martinez can crow all he wants about Jodi lying – that isn’t news. We know she lied. We know she killed Travis. His job is supposed to be to prove that she premeditated this killing, and all of his bluster and bullying and bullshit haven’t addressed that issue one single time.

    You can argue that he’s trying to impeach Dr. Samuels, But even if JM completely discredited him, it STILL wouldn’t address the issue of premeditation. It hasn’t been proven, it CAN’T BE proven, and the whole DP thing is just a misguided stunt by an overzealous prosecutor.

    This is really chaffing my ass today!

  69. So thinking of that crater analogy I realized – here’re some zingers:

    1. Can you see guilt? It isn’t like a crater is it?
    2. You can’t point to a thing and say – That’s premeditation, Can you?
    3. You can’t point to something and say – That’s intent to kill?

    So does that mean that by JM’s standards Jodi should walk right now.

    This guy in amazing. Are these the standards on which AZ decides DP cases?

    • She should not have been charged this, but its consistent with the lunatics that have elected these far right wing people running things in AZ. They should have been happy with murder 2 plea. But now I suspect they will get a hung jury or voluntary manslaughter. I’d love to be in JMs face if my prediction is right.

        • I think it might be a type of compromise that an otherwise hung jury might agree to. On the one hand someone who doesn’t buy the self defense may agree that she did go berserk but not premeditated. On the other hand someone thinking self defense might agree that she went overboard beyond just self defense.

      • Don’t know Cindy.

        I escaped. I’ll do anything for my family except those massive cleaning drills. I always assert my constitutional right to not be be sentenced to cruel and inhuman punishment.

        I know I’ll pay in spades for it later, but hey, sometimes the short term escape is as far as I can look into the future.

        They’re Mom’s angels for the day. By the time I get home I’m sure I’ll here things like “You need to talk to YOUR Kids” from one side and “You need to ask your wife to chill” from the other. Nothing like a little familial love fest.

        That’s all right, I’m doing college road trip all next week with two juniors (We have twins). All the way from Maryland down to Auburn and back via the Carolinas.

  70. And off with a bang! …Oh, wait, it’s another sidebar.

    Who’s taking bets that this trial will end up having more sidebars than any other trial in history? ‘Cause I’ve got $20 to put up, LOL!

    • If there is anyone who winds up on the jury who grew up in a home where any type of civility was valued, JM is just barking up the wrong tree. Please, God, let manners not be dead in this country. And let us pray that there is at lease one righteous man in the Sodom that is that courtroom!

  71. OMG OMG he did NOT just go there???? The judge had BETTER instruct the jury to disregard.

    Is this all he has left now, to try to make out that the doctor is a dirty old man? And since his not-too-subtle hints didn’t work, now he has to be blatant.

  72. Any attornies out there? Can the Defense Team call for a mistrial or anything else in regard to this harassment of the witness?

    • I’m not a practicing attorney, but went to law school, have worked for trial law firms and been involved in many trials. I am absolutely horrified with the way he is treating this witness. In my opinion, the vast majority of his questions are argumentative, both in tone, manner, and in the fact that he provides a conclusion and asks him to agree with it. I also feel he consistently harasses the doctor about this 35 years, and asking the same questions over and over. I also believe he is presenting facts that are not in evidence. I do not understand why this judge is overruling most of the defense objections. I am pretty well convinced that these are glaring errors for appeal — should it come to that.

      That being said, the defense could file a motion for a mistrial, but that would require them arguing to the judge that there was irreversible irrevocable error (as in, the error can not be reversed with jury instructions). I’m not sure there’s cause for that, yet.

      I don’t believe JM has impeached the doctors as successfully as he may believe. He has tried every single method to do so, but all he has shown is that perhaps the doctor is a little sloppy with recordkeeping. He’s giving the doctor more and more occasions to explain more and I don’t think it’s at all helpful to his case.

      • Thanks Also-
        I can understand not asking for a mistrial per se’ but could they put something on the record, other than at side bar, to ask the Judge to put a stop to the outright misconduct?

        • Well, their objections ARE on the record so all of this can be reviewed on appeal for abuse of discretion (meaning, the trial court not sustaining the objections as the abuse).

      • Here, here. Have you thought about practicing, Also? Your mind is so keen, it’s a real loss for the profession that you don’t. So many professional legal environments are abusive and/or exploitative, I can imagine why you would choose not to, but I think that you would be terrific.

    • He yelled, “THAt’S BECAUSE YOU LIKE HER DON’T YOU” Objection, side bar, stricken from the record.

      • JM made it stronger than like, he said something to the effect of “because you have developed feelings for her, right?”

  73. Hey Mr. Dictionary man:

    Flogging a dead horse (alternatively beating a dead horse, or beating a dead dog in some parts of the Anglophone world) is an idiom that means a particular request or line of conversation is already foreclosed or otherwise resolved, and any attempt to continue it is futile; or that to continue in any endeavour (physical, mental, etc.) is a waste of time as the outcome is already decided.

    • This dead horse has been beaten, then he flipped it over and beat the other side, then he took every known picture of the horse and beat that and now he’s flogging the whip he used to beat the dead horse with.

  74. What’s so hard to understand that “Travis’s death” and “Perpetrating Travis’s death” are not the same friggin’ thing? The TRAMA is the ACT ITSELF, NOT THE DEATH!

    • Exactly! How many times does this have to be heard to be understood?! I don’t know, maybe it’s just me but Juan looks like the little engine that COULDN’T.

  75. I’m sorry, but JM’s behavior has CLEARLY crossed the line! If this doesn’t lead to a mistrial or (if continued and found guilty) an overturned conviction for Jodi, based solely on Prosecutorial Misconduct, then I give up on our entire justice system!

    • No and that’s why the defense is objecting so frequently. But the judge is sustaining very few of the objections, and it’s her courtroom to preside over.

      Here’s what he’s NOT supposed to be doing and what is typically objected to:

      Questions that are beyond the scope (not pertinent to previous examinations — for example, during cross, he should only ask questions pertinent to the direct; right now, he should only be asking questions pertinent to the juror questions, etc.)
      Questions that call for a conclusion from the witness (although some experts can present conclusions, such as the ME)
      Questions that already contain a conclusion
      Questions that call for speculation (asking the witness to guess)
      Ambigiuous or vague questions (questions should be precise and clear)
      Confusing or misleading questions (same as above)
      Argumentative questions (badgering the witness to change his/her mind or to argue with the witness — he can be somewhat forceful, but he’s not supposed to argue)
      Rephrased questions that have already been asked and answered
      Questions that are inflammatory or preducial (a good example is when a defendant has a criminal history, but I feel JM did this in the kicking her mother questions)
      Questions that assume facts not in evidence (unless used to impeach credibility)
      Compound questions (which are really two or more questions in one)

      If you go through each one of those, you will find multiple examples (in my opinion, anyway) where JM has done every single one of the above.

      • Doesn’t he have to prove the doctor LIKES jodi other than him sending her a book? Can Wilmott/Nurmi motion for mistrial over this or prosecutorial misconduct?

      • Thank you again Also. Very informative. In fact he has broken every rule of law . Obviously the Judge is going to let it continue, but I wish there were some way for the Defense to put in a complaint beyond objections.

  76. What the hell is going on! I am stuck using my blackberry and refreshing it to “watch” the trial through your comments!!!!! Someone threw a cup!!!! When is someone gonna step up and shuit down this f’in circus!!!!!!???????

  77. I just don’t see how Jodi hitting her mom has anything to do with a diagnosis of PTSD after the killing.

    And now why in the world does every objection have to become a reason to approach the sidebar?

      • If the attorneys want to say more than “objection.” and a simple phrase on what the objection is based on, like “argumentative,” or “beyond the scope,” etc., they have to go to a sidebar so the jury doesn’t hear any of the reasoning for the objection. The lawyers arguments are not evidence and the jury is not supposed to hear them. Therefore, they have to make their argument at a sidebar.

  78. As a proud American Citizen, I’m extremely appalled that the entire world watching this may come to believe that the whole American Justice System is as absurd as this debacle is making it out to be!

    • AshleySC83,you are correct,I am from Canada and I cant believe my eyes,This is not a trial,its all for the TV ratings and future expansions of certain people.This is a M1 trial and all media should have been banned and the jury sequestered.My god!!! we are talking about a young womans life here,that seems not to matter,just about every person that has been exposed to the media have decided that Jodi is guilty,not knowing all the facts or seeing her side of it.The media has swayed the public opinnion because they wont show Jodis side and they are all out for blood,just check out any blog or twitter comment,Jodi had an uphill battle even before she stepped into that court room,SO SAD,justice is not being served here,hope at least one of the jurrors uses their brain,its there to reason out the logic,not to stop your skull from caving in.I feel for MS Arias,she is getting a raw deal and it seems that no one cares.

  79. Okay, to talk about something else for a moment so that I may calm down and not throw my laptop in frustration and anger… I think that the white suit Mrs. Willmott is wearing is gorgeous; I want to go buy it! In fact, both Mrs. Willmott and Mr. Nurmi look very nice in white/cream colored clothes today.

    • Yes, she does look nice. But Vinnie said earlier today that it’s weird that she & Jodi wear the same color clothes a lot. He said they look so much alike they could be sisters & that JW may be lending her clothes to Jodi. What a friggin’ moron! Comical.

      • Vinnie Politan USED to be a decent journalist way back when… But been wanting to kick him in the nutsack for the past few years, though. And he just gets worse and worse, along with the rest of the whackadoodle HLN “Legal Analysts”. Haven’t watched HLN (except for Morning Express with Robin Meade) in about a year; I’m scared their particular caliber of “Stupid” is contagious.

  80. Are we seriously on Compassion vs. Empathy again? But good for Dr. Samuels for trying to explain the difference, even though Martinez neither seems to grasp the concept of Compassion NOR Empathy.

  81. Dr. Samuels looks like he’s ready to jump out of that witness box and punch Martinez right in his smug, frothing little mouth.

  82. There has to be a message in that short session for the jury.

    Something like “You know all that screaming and shouting, here’s what it all added up to.”

    You gotta love it.

  83. Jennifer’s act reminded me of Joe Pesci’s opening statement from My Cousin Vinnie.

    “Everything that guy just said is bullshit. Thank You”