site
stats
Menu

Jodi Arias Trial – Day 48

in Latest News by

.

CLICK HERE FOR DAY 48 VIDEO RECORDING

Click here if you missed my review & pics from day 47.

Jodi Arias - Jennifer Willmott - 4-9

Let’s see what delights are in store for us today… as Jodi takes one step closer to victory.

Leave your comments below on trial day 48…

SJ
Team Jodi

1,308 Comments

  1. I would like to remind everyone that there is a big difference between what is probable and what is provable. The defense does not have to make sense of the events on June 4th. The prosecutor does.

    “We are not sure what actually happened, but we think XYZ makes the most sense” = NOT GUILTY.

    • Agreed!

      I have been trying to explain to people they have NOT proven she went there wanting or planning to kill him. And we all know what happens next…

  2. oops..missed the “book” i wrote to go with the above post…here it is. PS, good morning all!

    How can the jury find the defendant guilty? They don’t get to use “the force”, “the feeling in their gut”, “magic beads”, or flip a coin….

    Here are the steps:
    1) The criminal act: The first thing the legal system must prove in a court of law is that a crime was committed. Part of this legal requirement is proving that the defendant committed the act in question. Simply proving the defendant did “A” crime doesn’t prove they did “the” crime they were charged with. These charges cannot be vague. They each have very specific criteria to meet.
    Example: A cop cannot give you a ticket for speeding, unless he can charge you with going a specific MPH, even if he KNOWS you were obviously going way over the speed limit. He has to pick a MPH and charge you with that speed.

    2) Intent: The Prosecutor must prove that the defendant intended to do the crime. However, there are levels to intent. The intent can be straight forward or incidental. These are “accidental, negligent, knowingly or purposely”. In this case, the prosecution has chosen the hardest of these 4 to prove which is “purposely” or “pre-meditated”. If you are able to prove that a specific crime occurred, then you must prove that the defendant intended to do that crime.
    Example: If a person plans to rob a bank, then robs the bank. He could be charged and found guilty of “premeditated robbery”. (Not that there is such a charge..lol) If a man plans to rob a bank, then robs the bank, then accidently smashes the getaway car into tree, he cannot be charged with premeditated tree Murder. He would be charged with Felony tree killing, as he was planning on robbing the bank, he hurt the tree on accident while committing a felony. This tree killing would fall under the “knowingly” or “negligent” types of intent, because it is reasonable to “know” a tree could be injured while speeding away from a bank robbery.

    3) Beyond reasonable doubt: others. The “beyond a reasonable doubt” standard basically means that the legal system must prove, without question, that every act of the charge was committed by the defendant. The proof provided by the prosecution would make you decide guilty in your own life. If the jury finds it “highly unlikely” that the defendant DIDN’T do it, they have not reached the point of “beyond a reasonable doubt”. There can be ZERO doubt. They cannot simply ask themselves “which is most likely, the defendants story or the states story?”.

    4) The defense: The legal system provides the defendant with several protections. These protections include the right to remain silent during questioning, the right to an attorney, the right to question witnesses and the right to trial by a jury of her peers. A defendant who does not have the funds to pay for an attorney will have a defense attorney assigned to him by the court. Some defenses allow the defendant to admit to a criminal act, but claim that he had reason to do so. For example, the defendant committed the crime in self-defense, the defendant was under duress or pressure to commit the crime or the defendant was trapped into committing a criminal act; the last defense is commonly referred to as “entrapment.”

    The judge has the right to add criminal counts to the case, after hearing all of the evidence and testimony. Even though the jury decides if the burden of proof has been reached, the judge can add “lesser” (but not greater) charges to the defendant. This allows a jury to feel no pressure to convict someone that has not been found guilty of a crime, yet they feel that the defendant did commit a crime. This is very rare, except in the highest of felony cases, which it is much more common.

    So, what do you think? Me…
    1)? The act: I don’t believe the state has even proven that a pre-meditated murder happened, let alone that the defendant was the one that did it. This was the reason that the defense ADMITTED to killing him, they knew that the state cannot prove it was premeditated or during the commission of a separate felony. The second “act” Felony…cough cough..murder? What felony? Besides the possible death itself, what crime was committed?
    2)? Intent: This is the one I have the hardest time with, and I believe this is the one that the state will never get the jury to believe. Their story is what? That Jodi intended to go to Travis’s home, even though Travis invited her? Then she had sex with him, and let him take pictures of her there? Then she stabbed him first, even though she had a gun? Then she continued to stab him, as part of her master plan? Then she slit his throat, as part of her plan? Then she moved the bloody body all over the bathroom/hallway, as part of her plan? Then she spread around her DNA, Hair, finger prints and for good measure she planned on leaving her bloody PALM print in plain site…all as part of her plan. She then had a plan to clean up the scene, which included using a plastic cup and water from the same shower that the dead body was now in? She then planned on getting away with it by locking the door, where no one would ever smell the body and find the victim? Do they really see this as a planned event…how? The jury will NEVER buy that. Gas cans and stolen guns do not make up for the lack of organization to prove “premeditated”.
    3)? Beyond reasonable doubt: There is no reason to doubt Jodi lied. There is no reason to doubt she attempted to cover up a killing. There is no reason to doubt that she made several very poor choices in her life. But, there is plenty of doubt for the actual charges in this case. Just because you can prove someone hit a dog with their car on Tuesday doesn’t mean they killed a horse on Thursday. Having doubt of some ones credibility does not give you the right to ignore the law, that you must be beyond a reasonable doubt as to the guilt of the SPECIFIC charge.

    4)?Jodi has been allowed a fair defense in the court room. IMO. I believe that the prosecutor is a piece of shit, and that he is not the type of person we want defending the states laws. He is overzealous, manipulating the system, abrasive and rude. The people that break the law are allowed to lack standards, but not the officers of the court. Even with this, she has been afforded a proper defense. The prosecution on the other hand has not been forthcoming. This is not, in itself, a reason to throw out a case.
    I do not think she has been allowed a fair defense in the court of public opinion. I feel it is the courts responsibility to ensure that the media does not insight a witch hunt, if they are going to allow the media into the court room. They can’t stop the media from saying what they say, but they can, in turn, stop them from having access with video cameras. The media SHOULD be allowed to show the trial, but they should have to do it with standards set beforehand. Much like the CSPAN type coverage of congressional hearings. This type of drama/entertainment TV would not be allowed to happen if that was a US senator on the stand. Jodi deserves the same respect, if not MORE respect, if for no other reason than she is a US citizen and I and many other men and woman earned her that right.

    I would like to remind everyone that there is a big difference between what is probable and what is provable. The defense does not have to make sense of the events on June 4th. The prosecutor does.

    “We are not sure what actually happened, but we think XYZ makes the most sense” = NOT GUILTY.

    A country cannot be judged based on how they treat their free men, but how they treat there imprisoned men.

  3. Brilliant sirlips! Thank you. I hope the Defense explains Reasonable Doubt as it pertains to this case explicitly to the jury in their closing arguments.

  4. I have not seen Alyce yet but she usually chills in the back room before making an entrance anyhow. #JodiArias
    Wild About Trial

  5. Nurmi and Flores are up visiting the stapler lady while we wait for the Judge and #JodiArias
    Wild About Trial

  6. I don’t know why but I have a good feeling that today is going to be a great day for the defense! Anyone else share that optimistic feeling?????

  7. ? Do we know for a fact that TA was estranged from his siblings? If so, where can I read about that? And why, other than the obvious, were they estranged?

  8. Travis’ family is seated and ready to go. Still waiting. #JodiArias

    Counsel is headed back to chambers. Stay tuned. #JodiArias

  9. Good Morning Peeps! I just wanna go ahead and set the tone with a big fat F U to Dirty Sanchez first thing! Go Team Jodi!!! I gotta good feeling about today!

  10. OoH! Looks like a photo of Juan posing outside courthouse and then Nurmi pointed toit and gestured toward the JURY!

    • Comments on beth karas fbook page.. are saying how beautiful and smart DeMarte is.. omg.. so that means she so much smarter then someone like AL who has had 30 + years of experience??

    • Not at all, I think Alyce’s testimony, along with her experience, has it all over this young woman. Experience teaches SO much more than schooling alone and testing defendant, 12 hours of assessment time… Not enough…Don’t be nervous.

  11. Here come Dr DeMarte. Should be interesting. I am so curious about the tests she gave to Jodi as well as if she interviewed anyone else (other than Jodi)

    • She is saying you must take her journal at face value.. no meaning behind the written word. I am thinking this is where JM is going to go with this.. She also doesnt rely on records etc.. she said.. This should all get very interesting… and the man still paces.. drives me nuts..

  12. LOL! She is NOT gonna be more credible than EITHER of the Defense experts!! LOL This is gonna be HILARIOUS!!

    I can tell you this right off the bat! Mark my words!

    • crime scene specialist would have been great, but the issue is that the judge wasnt going to let anyone testify to the “pre-mediated” vs “in the moment” look of the crime scene. She had already made it clear that the jury was to decide pre-med, not have an expert tell them. That is why the DR couldnt say …what was it…intrucive vs pasive scene..or what ever it was. basically saying if it looked pre med or not.

      I’m not sure what else the CSI could have testified to, that could help the case. AND, the CSI could have hurt them, if the testimony got twisted by pros limp dick.

    • A crime scene specialist could have at least examined the blood spatters and given valid support for Travis being shot first. A different pathologist could have confirmed that Travis could have still been conscious after being shot.

      • I think that point is critical. If the jury goes back and says the ME says stab first & believes it is scientific fact, there could be a big problem here. I think the defense really needs to hit the ambiguity on this ME’s interpretation.

  13. Isn’t this the whiteness who had her laptops stolen with all her info regarding this case? What is she going from Samuels info he provided?

    • didn’t want to get licensed right away…. that’s almost unheard of…. not to take the board right away. She wanted more experience.

      • Yes. That was a suspicious statement I hope the cross-exam explores. Who would voluntarily decide not to become licensed after years of education with that as a goal? Doesn’t make sense. I hope the jury is smart enough to remember La Violette (sp?) saying that the journal entry was just “one component” of a lot that she took into consideration. JM tried to make it look like reading one entry was all that La Violette had done.

  14. Love KN tie!!!!
    I wish this chick would stop “swinging” back and forth in the chair.

    I’m thinking JM…would like to screw her….just saying

    • Yes the chair swing is distracting and she’s only been in it for barely 5 minutes. By day 10 she’ll be doing complete circles

    • well, i havent even seen her and i want to…whats your point. lol

      (ducking and waiting for the shoes to fly towards my head)

      • haha,,, no shoes! 🙂 It’s annoying and my take is she’s nervous. If JM would be attacking her in typical JM style and she were on the DT side, she’d be spinning in circles …

        You haven’t seen her yet and you want to what? Screw her, throw a shoe at her or just see her do the chair spin thing…? ;-))

    • I was thinking the exact same thing, she sounds nervous enough and he is actually being relatively polite. His voice hasn’t kicked into high gear/warp speed yet. I hope the defence tears her to shreds in a nice way 🙂

  15. Well, I guess prosecution couldn’t get anyone with more experience..wonder WHY that is..? hmmm… leaves one wondering.

    • well after seeing how he treated one of his own witnesses(the camera/audio guy) when he was on the stand for the defense in this trial, i can see why no one would want to work with this little fuck stain.

  16. Despicable! Yes, I’d be ALV’s supervisor because I have a PhD and she just has a masters. As if she’d know more than ALV (a pioneer in her field).

    Martinez has sunk to a new low.

      • Matinez made her say. She said she supervises masters students. Then Martinez asked her if she knew of ALV, and she said yes. Then Martinez asked her if ALV would be someone she’d supervise, and she said yes, because ALV had a masters degree only.

        Martinez is really one to twist stuff around.

    • Having a PhD means you know a lot from books,doesnt mean she can be compared to ALV’s hands-on experinece!!!

    • I know that wasn’t really her fault. It was Martinez’s fault for making it seem like DeMarte is more knowledgeable than ALV just because she’d be her supervisor.

      I just find that line of questioning disgraceful.

  17. Ok there are two kinds of therapists
    1) 80% book education and 20% heart knowledge
    2) 80% heart knowledge and 20% book education.

    I think we know who falls where lol

  18. This little girl is who we are supposed to trust when it comes to Jodi’s mental state? I’m sure she’s a lovely person and I refuse to trash her as A.L. was, but based on her limited experience I already don’t believe a word she says!

    • I have no need to trash her either. She’s a young doctor who has lots of education but little real life experience.

      I cannot see myself feeling safe or confident with her in a therapy setting if I were to seek help.

      She seems way to clinical for my tastes in relation to a mental health professional.

      I don’t mind my cardiologist being clinical but thats a whole different area. Whether I lie to my cardiologist or not, my blood test will tell him the truth. Whole different ballgame in mental health.

      Alyce, with her style and experience and ability to come across as she really cares about helping and understands intimate partner relationships and how non linear they are beats the baby psych doc hands down.

      It would be interesting to hear baby doc after she’s been at this for 30 plus years and has some real life experience. Wonder if she’d have the same view.

      • She just doesn’t cut the grade, but the very fact she is there is damning for the prosecutor, not for the defense.

        The state couldn’t anybody with extensive experience to testify on their behalf. That needs to be brought home to the jury.

  19. That was crappy to drop ALs name. I think he has a personal grudge against her. AND, he must really fear ALs testmony to try and keep dragging her down. It will be interesting to hear if he brings up Samuels, condisdering he is a PhD also.

  20. YOU don’t need a Ph.D to administer assessments or test. States only require you have a master’s and be license

    • That’s what I thought. You need a clinical masters degree or something.

      I know SLPs (speech-language pathologists) are licensed to administer standardized tests as long as they hold a masters degree and a license.

      • Correct.

        Special education teachers can even administer I.Q. tests, and they will work with the school psychologist to arrive at a diagnosis, since the teacher cannot do it.

  21. The state’s witness is pretty. (Yes, I’m capable of complimenting a witness for the state, unlike the pro-pros people who bashed all of the defense witnesses, even their looks).

  22. Pfft…Implying SHE has one up on Alyce LOL…I bet Alyce could TEACH!…she “supervised” ALV? To what extent?

    • She didn’t say she had supervised AV. She said if she worked with AV, since AV has master’s and this gal has doctorate, the doctorate would supervise the master’s person, so whats her name would supervise AV. It was hypothetical–not that she had supervised her.

      • Rebecca, she did say she (JD) “supervised her”. I’m fairly certain. My point was, to what extent? You answered my question. Thanks.

  23. She had a handful of patients….children… I really can’t wait to hear what she has to say. Is the the lady whose home was burglarized and had her jodi file computer stolen?

  24. WildAboutTrial ‏@WildAboutTrial 3m Dr. Janeen is familiar with Alyce, says Alyce has her masters degree in marriage and family counseling. She supervised Alyce.

    WildAboutTrial ‏@WildAboutTrial 4m Dr. Janeen is very well spoken and easy to understand. She addresses the jury as she continues to go over her background.

    Is this true?

    • I’m biased and I find her very clinical and unexperienced but trying to come across as experienced because she has an impressive education.

      It’s hard to judge as JM is being nice compared to his attacks at Samuels and Alyce.

      I’d love to see her under the same attack.

    • I can’t watch LIVE, but I read up above that the baby said she COULD supervise her because of the degree difference

      I hope someone who can watch today will supply the accurate answer.

      I told y’all the haters have no comprehension!

  25. If I was seeking care Alyce’s warm style and experience would make me feel much more safe.

    Her attitude, very clinical, comes across as *know it all* with out years to back it up. I’d have a hard time letting my guard down with her.

  26. this baby doesn’t even know how to comb her hair….please stop calling me “Janeen” – let’s go with “J” from now on – PLEASEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

  27. She has a good amount of education and degrees. She has decent career experience as well, (director of the behavioral health center) etc….so her credentials are not in question. Her age and lack of years on the job so to speak will be up to the defense to attack if they choose. I’m not sure if they will, we shall see. She seems nervous on the stand imo.

    On another subject, I wonder if we will find out what happened with ALV in chambers? Maybe it was sealed so we may never know….anyone?

  28. Where the fuck is she getting these records if they are a NEW CLIENT.???? God I could tear her to shreds if I was JW.

  29. LOL! # year degree lady, “Why don’t you tell Dr. Samuels how to do his job” After all YOU would know more than HE does after 35 years! LOL! This is comical. JW is going to easily make this girl a nonfactor.

      • Not necessarily. This is the first of his own witnesses he’s treated gingerly. That tells me two things: 1. That he is actually capable of shifting gears, and 2. He knows that she is too inexperienced to give her even the 2nd degree. My prediction: She will not fare well under cross.

  30. Martinez is very arrogant about degrees.

    Oh, ALV didn’t have a PhD, that means she isn’t as qualified. He harps on that all the time

  31. I think the older members of the jury will not fall for the line of doggy doo doo the baby is trying to force feed them..

    They will KNOW that a baby with a “bigger” degree doesn’t mean a whole lot against someone who has the number of years of experience as Dr. S and ALV.

    At least I am SURE some of them will.

    • That is exactly what I was thinking!

      She’s just there to further shit on Alyce. She sounds so condescending. JM does love those PHDs. :eyeroll:

  32. This line of questioning is absurd! And this so-called expert is mocking the amount of time the other experts spent? WTF! And if they spent only 3-4 hours (like this person said) then JM would have been all over that!

  33. Maybe I’m biased, but this witness sucks. Poor Juan…her few years of experience can’t hold up to either Dr. S. and Alyce.

  34. Any one screaming at their TV Right now????? Alyce is very compassionate about DV totally different then being a clinical psychologist.

    • You bet it’s different—somebody who has vast experience versus somebody who is barely out of diapers and who mainly works with children.

    • Remain clam. We need to wait until JW has a chance to ask questions. Then wait for jury questions. We will know more after that.

      This is just the beginning

  35. She sounds like she’s acting. The way she became alarmed at the 44 hours sounded like she and JM had rehearsed it.

  36. Yes – people who are NOT compassionate go into this kind of work! IF that were true we would ALL be in trouble!

  37. “I don’t know of people who apologize. It feels bad to me.”
    “You should not feel compassion.”
    JM has found his match.

  38. “I don’t feel the need to apologize for anything.”

    I would feel awful for reading someone else’s most private thoughts! I think it was a great thing to do. Alyce is an ABUSE specialist. Reading those journals is a violation on a personal level.

    • I’m sure it’s according to a scale. Unless there is an *experience* component, I’m sure it’s in the $300/hr range like Samuels and LaViolette

  39. I am trying very hard to be objective over here but her Valley Girl manner of speaking is turning me off. I am trying to be fair and listen to what she is saying but I find myself being annoyed. Am I becoming one of “them” and judging before I listen?

    Ok so if 40 hours is too long to interview someone and YOU were the supervisor of the person who was doing that interview then obviously YOU weren’t doing YOUR job were you? And how is it that two people from the same office were sent to interview the same person? Isn’t that a conflict of interest? Am I missing something?

    • As far as I heard, she said she would supervise Alyce because she has a master’s, not that she actually was her supervisor.

      • Oh, we know that…but realistically, somebody qualified would be supervised ALV, which includes having extensive experience.

      • I must has mis heard that part…maybe I can find it again. I could have sworn I heard her say that she DID supervise Alyce at some point. Even if she did, it doesnt mean anything. All psychotherapists have a supervisor at some point.

        • It was a hypothetical question! The two did not work together and this gal did NOT supervise ALV–it was JM’s way to emphasize this witness has a Ph.D and ALV only a master’s.

    • No…you aren’t missing nothing…same office…

      Just like yesterday when JM was giving Bryan Neumeister, another expert witness that grilling interview…JM asked BN if he had ever done this type of video before…and Mr Neumesiter said that he was working on some other video’s for you, Mr. Martinez…the state…

    • caught myself doing the exact same here, trying to stop myself being biased. Dr DeMarte is making it tough on me though. Maybe I have too much experience with psychologists 🙁

  40. Witness looked flustered as JM seemed to be yelling at her! I hope he ‘accidentally’ blows his top – again.

    • Like we discussed EARLIER>>> how many FK times is she going to state that today?

      DISCREDITED>>>>>>>>>>>>> One year on the job ….. and she’s thinks she’s an expert … NOT>>>> Damn, I don’t drink,but I just might have to take a xanx today .. before I break my screen.

    • …..like I said before Renee…….she a BITC!! She thinks she is “better” then ALV and Dr S. Sittin’ up there like she has a stick up her azz……..just saying!!!

  41. Is this bitch serious? How do you compare the career of Alice along with all her experience(s), years and hands on knowledge with someone who only finished her education 5 yrs ago? JM is reaching as usual.

  42. So this lady expert thinks that 40 hours is extreme to evaluate someone….that you need to only have to evaluate someone for 1 hour…or 3 or 4 hours…

    I am glad this chyte had not evaluated me and gave an opinion or diagnosis for me in 1,2, or 3 hours….sounds like she is not the expert that she is spouting that she is…maybe she needs to stay in her classroom just teaching people…

    • Oh, I do! They’ve got plenty to destroy her credibility with without once raising a voice, eyebrow, pen, cup, anything. I think that it will be a masterful thing to watch, and I can’t wait.

  43. We all knew JM and his expert would say they are the only one who knows the exact amount of time a experts should spend evaluating a person

  44. Of course that is what JM will (and is trying now) to so. He wants to totally discredit both expert witnesses that the defense had. By constantly bringing up that ALV didnt have a doctorate, and his witness does. I am sure the jury caught that early on, and it will not matter to them. He will also try to show a difference in the way his witness tests vs Dr Samuels. Remember, it isn;t really a big deal, his main goal and his job really, is to try to discredit all the defense witnesses. The jury knows this and they will believe who they want to believe based on what they have heard so far.

    • Yeah, but her complete lack of any real experience other than working with children rather undercuts the whole thing.

      If I were on that jury I would ask: Couldn’t Martinez find SOMEBODY in the United States who was seasoned and experienced to testify for the state? Apparently NOBODY wanted to do it.

      So he is left with an infant to testify for the state.

      • Tonysam,
        I listened to the beginning when he was asking her about school and early career..and she mentioned children at some point. But that was early on, she doesn’t work with children anymore, in fact she works with people from teens thru elderly.

        • Anna, did her experience with teens through elderly occur before or after she assessed Jodi? My understanding is that she only had experience with children before she got her license and she was licensed not long before assessing Jodi.

          ??

        • You give her more credit, Anna, than she deserves.

          I think you need to really look hard at this.

          NO reputable person would testify on behalf of the state. That alone is damning.

          The fact he has to have a kid who is barely qualified to practice is utterly damning to his case.

          • tonysam,
            I am not giving her anymore credit than she deserves at all. Im not sure why you feel that way? BeeCee, from what I understood, she only worked with children after graduation, then went on to Michigan and then to her practice in AZ. As far as testifying for the state tonysam, really!? Shhhsh……the money and the notoriety from this case? For a young psychologist? Makes sense to me.

      • Well, here is my opinion. I cannot and will not make a judgement on this woman’s character, looks, etc. I cannot call her anything mean as paid whore, bitch etc……and here is why. Alyce did nothing more than take the stand as a defense expert witness and she has endured more hate and cruel words heaped on her than anyone could have possibly imagine. It was wrong and it was unfair. This is a trial, and both sides will have paid experts to testify on their behalf. Calling Alyce a dyke, man hater, etc, was so beyond the pale that it sent her to the er with panic attacks. Calling this woman names may or may not so the same, but isnt it the same thing? They are doing their job, they paid to get on the stand and explain what they do, what tests they gave, and what their diagnosis are.

        That being said, we all have our opinions about what witnesses testify to and how they say it, etc. Remember, the things this witness is saying are in direct response to JM. Of course she will not defend ALV or Dr Samuels, that is the whole point. The defense will be crossing her and get the chance to blow holes in her testimony. I guess I just don’t see the reason for personal attacks on any witnesses for either side. Now, JM, fair game…LOL.:)

  45. Seems she is only there to bash Dr S and ALV.
    When she starts to ‘elocute’ is when it’s a rehearsed sentence.

  46. I hope JW tears this woman to shreds. She is a paid whore for Martinez. No state background in domestic violence, no sense of empathy for people that I can see, nowhere near the experience of AL and clearly everything he is asking her is taken out of context. She is also full of herself. I am a psych student from Michigan state also. Lol! Many years ago. Anyway, treating and understanding domestic violence has nothing to do with this woman. She has no business on the stand.

    • It’s really two different issues. That’s why the defense had two different expert witnesses.

      The state should have done the same and hired people with extensive experience.

      It goes to show that nobody reputable wanted to do it.

      • This is a joke all the way around and again a nasty vicious thing for Kermit to do to undermine the credibility of people with years of experience. I would tear this little pup to shreds if she was under me.

      • You are right, tonysam. Like I said on Twitter, DeMarte is the freshman you put in at the end of the game when you know you will lose anyway and you want her to get some experience. The sad thing for her is that with the way Martinez is playing this, it gives her no room to grow in her practice and be able to testify in the future. She will never be able to apologize to someone before she evaluates him, or get reading material or any subject or inmate, or ever transcribe a personality inventory, or ever rescore a test. I kind of feel bad for her. At the beginning of my career, I was a little like her (different profession, and hopefully not condescending), and I thought that because I was smart and well educated, I should be able to do anything- right out of the chute. I chafed if my boss wanted to read deposition questions in advance, or go observe me argue something in court, or give take a hard witness in a trial. It didn’t take me long to appreciate the help, and more importantly, the GUIDANCE.

  47. Lack of compassion how about EMPATHY…WHERE’S THAT DICTIONARY? hmmm WTF? In the area of Psychology? OOh now a psychologist w/o compassion…Ahh now She’s someone I want to evaluate ME! Yippy…NOT

  48. If she was so concerned about how the book may change a client’s knowlege she should have been aware that Jodi read it and taken it into account. This lady is full of shit.

  49. First of all, this little girl has no clue on how to treat a patient. She a book smart psychologist, and I’ve dealt with plenty of them. They spout their knowledge from the book, then when they come out of their office and open their mouth to a patient, they call us in to pull the patient off of them! And yes, I mean the patient’s end up assaulting them many times because of the arrogant attitude.
    She’s got a real superiority complex, its evident how she’s answering these questions. There is NO time limit on evaluating someone, that bullshit! You could evaualte a patient for DAYS if that’s how long it took. If you know how to keep your boundaries clear, it DOES NOT MATTER …..what a crock of shit!!! If I was the defense, I’d jump all over that, and further more, how many domestic abuse or PTSD patients has she actually treated….I bet the number is VERY low

      • you betcha! nothing I hate worse then someone who acts like a know it all…she’s trying to put every patient in one category, which is TOTALLY not true. Just shows you she has NO experience, very dumb for the DA to hire her to testify. JW will tear her apart!!

      • very true MB…the books smarts is the foundation. She hasn’t got the years on her to testify in a court of law to the extent that she is. I’m sure she’s very bright, but her attitude will get her in trouble with schizophrenic who thinks he’s Albert Einstein and shes starts dismissing him …..not good!

  50. Once again Jm is rejecting the whole evaluation of Domestic Violence. This broads testimony is irrelevant to that issue.

  51. can I just be known as Russo from now on????? It’s embarrassing that her mother copied my mother’s choice of a first name…

  52. I hope there is at least one juror who has had to use a therapist or counselor so they can see how ‘cold’ this person is. This woman sounds more like a teacher than at true therapist and you know what they say, ‘those who can do; those who can’t teach.”

    • Don’t you dare insult the teaching profession with your post. Teachers have to have a LOT of empathy to succeed at their job.

      As somebody who has been a teacher, you just pissed me off with that remark. 🙂

      • I am sorry to have offended you, Tonysam. That comment is not meant to a professional teacher of academics. That is an old saying that us musicians have and it sometimes applies to professions such as doctors, therapists, and artists. In these cases it means because for one reason or another the person could not get a job as a therapist/musician/artist/actor so they teach as a source of income instead. Those that ‘can’ are busy doing therefore they do not have time to teach. It has nothing to do with teachers as a profession. I hope you can see the difference.

        • I see the quip used all too often used to bash teachers, and it really gets my dander up.

          I hope you understand where I am coming from.

          Teachers have to have empathy to be successful at their jobs. So much of what they do is beyond teaching and assessing. Often they have to be almost a surrogate parent to the students, a social worker.

          This snake on the stand would do better as a prosecutor for Maricopa County.

  53. She’s full of shit. ANY and EVERY Psych major knows Wayne W. Dyers Erroneous Zones. I got my degree in 2002 and it was mandatory reading.

    • LOL Carla-
      I thought the same thing. She’s not very well read. Also thought if she’s had patients that have read the Secret and it interfered with their therapy, one would think she would have taken the time to read the book to really understand where her patients were coming from.

  54. She has NEVER heard of the book “Your Erroneous Zones” so how can she say this book would “influence” anyone in a specific way and how does she know Jodi, in fact, READ this book? Did she ASK Jodi if she read the book and what Jodi may have gotten out of the book after reading it, if she read it? This is the only way to assess if the book had any “influence” on Jodi’s having been a victim of abuse. Already this witness is incredible…not thorough evaluation. My opinion.

    • How can she not have heard of Dyer’s book? It’s been around for nearly 40 years.

      Being an infant is no excuse.

      • Definitely not an excuse.Im 2 years younger,Im not a psychologist,Im not american but have heard of the book!

    • I’m 36 and the first time my father mentioned Erroneous Zones I was 12. Up until now I haven’t read it, but last month I saw Wayne Dyer and realized he was the author lol

    • she is far to young of person to know this book, I might even tend to think she could be too young of mind to understand the book “Your Erroneous Zones”

      • vebe, She has had education in the field of psychology but has not been exposed much. Not knowing of this book verifies this fact.

  55. I seriously hope defense asks, have you by any chance had oh.. let’s say 30 years of experienced working with battered women? Have you ever testified in a case for a battered woman? Have you ever been a victim of abuse yourself? Do you know how subjective the field of psychology can be with your limited experience? Do you understand that your evaluations of those already deemed clinically insane have absolutely no bearing on this case? Do you know that PTSD and insanity are two very different things? I’m rambling here, sorry..

  56. The jury is going to wonder why the prosecution only has a witness with a couple years experience compared to the defense’s experts who have been in practice since before this one was born. If i were a juror, I would wonder why they couldn’t find as seasoned an expert as they defense came up with and I would conclude that the seasoned experts wouldn’t agree with the pros. theories. I believe JM probably looked high and low for a couple years for someone with more experience and this is what he got stuck with due to the fact that no respectable expert would take his case.

  57. She speaks like someone who is forcing their lecturing on others, emphasizing each word to make sure they got it. Condescending and turn off to any one who is subjected to it (even children.)

    • BIG TURN OFF! I did not think she would be so bad, she is a Yes Man for Martinez its overly prejudicial towards the Defense Expert witnesses. What a difference between Samuels and LaViolette.

  58. Someone’s going to tear this little neophyte a new you know what.

    I was just driving back to the office and heard little parts of her experience.

    So she did evaluations in a lab after her BA where she worked with other grad students and professors. We know how that works. The Intern is the gopher, makes the coffee, gets the water and sits in on the occasional interview.

    And this directorship. She oversees the testing curriculum of 3 doctoral students. Big whup.

  59. was Jodi forced to comply with an interview with this person….argh….I wish she would of just refused to talk to her…..its her right to do so! This jackass phd is going to twist all her words around, wait and see…

      • AA, thanks for confirming this! And thanks for posting the links here the other day.

        Did you get a live stream? check azcentral.com or kpho – they should work. I use them on my iphone/ipad if not at laptop

  60. What a little bitch this woman is. I can’t get over it. She is so full of herself. I wonder if she has any boyfriends. Sorry, I am being bad but this type of ploy and this type of professional makes me sick.

    • agree Nancy….I try very hard to be open minded, I work with too many docs not to be. But I can see right out of the gate that this girl would be way over her head in the setting I work in.
      So sad, but they don’t teach these young PHD’s how to interact with patients, they only teach them whats in the books. They come out of school, and THEN they learn, after many years, how it really is.
      She has no business testifying to anything, and the jury will see it. Not enough experience

      • She was the defense expert before Alyce and is from AZ. She is a Ph.D., published, highly experienced. She had to back out due to getting cancer in mid-2011. That’s when they got Alyce who was able to take on the case last minute, as trial was already scheduled at that time.

    • Is she the doctor mentioned in the motion document AlsoAbused linked here? She got cancer and was replaced by Alyce.

      It may not be the same doctor but Dr. Samuels was mentioned and another one was.

  61. Goodmorning guys! I cant blv this is happening?!!! If this expert would’ve been the defense expert Martinez would’ve already turn her apart! !! Shes such a joke, she doesnt know shit!!! With the law of attraction, she doesnt blv in in and wouldn’t encourage it because it doesnt help people in the way that it doesnt help them deal with the problem bla bla bla whatever she said. But idiot, its doesnt matter what YOU THINK because if the CLIENT is the one that blvs in it then that’s what YOU have to work with and if you dont know much about it right there it shows that THIS EXPERT viewed everything Jodi said in a whole different way, so HOW can she give an accurate evaluation? !!!!!!!!! And SHE would be ABOVE ALV, WHHHYYYYY, because she just got a license that can read a test? ??? WOW that’s so much more knowledgeable then ALV years of experience.

    This little girl has NOTHING on ALV!

    • That is ok I think JW will tear her a new one but in her sweet smiling tone. She seems to be in way over her head.

    • I have read that every patient is comfortable with a particular style of therpist / approach to treatment and that when you are looking for a therapist, you should not hesitate to change therapists until you find one with whom you feel comfortable and have a good rapport. One size does not fit all in therapy. If anyone on the jury has ever been in therapy, he will know that Alyce LaViolette and Dr. Samuels are not inferior therapists because their styles do not match Dr. “Let Me Show You How Much I Know.”

      (And my work computer has frozen. Will someone please post Jodi’s IQ results? Thanks!)

  62. I have a couple of names. Dr Stuck Up….the BITCH…..Baby Doc….Dr Think Her Chyt Don’t Stink…..pick one!!!!!!

  63. Go ahead DeMarte.If you say ”alleged” way too many times,do you think you’ll be more credible??? hahaha!

    • Arrogant which can really turn off a Jury. The Law of attraction is not something that Alyce or Dr.Samuels condoned or promoted it was something that Jodi and Travis embraced, so I do not even see the relevance it was an explanation for Jodi’s Journals not an acceptance of the Ideology. You can disagree with The Law Of Attraction and the explanation she gave was generic. But cause and effect are part of a evaluation. And since Alyce and Samuels’ were evaluating her, the inclusion of The Law Of Attraction was evidence, not something that was prescribed by them Stupid.

  64. Why on Earth is she making so many facial expressions???Does she think she’ll get credibility points in this way?

  65. Wow, so rehearsed. This witness must have spent hours with JM to get him exactly the answers he wanted. Each move, each question, each piece of evidence carefully scripted. Cross should be interesting.

  66. Hate to say it but based on the jury question posed to AL and Samuels the defense better really bring it as far as turning the jury against this chic. If I had to guess they are eating up her info with a spoon. It will help justify their feelings towards the other experts etc .

    • Of course, Martinez is laying it out beautifully for her, NOT interrupting her answers. Why would the jury be confused now?

    • Yeah, sure they are.

      I am sure they are ignoring the fact she utterly NO experience at all for all intents and purposes and ignoring the fact JM couldn’t get anybody else to testify for him.

  67. Does it sound to anyone like she’s studied way too much last night? ?!!!! Lol i swear it sounds like she went through her lines like a thousand times!!! Even her face, shes acting! !! Maybe Nurmi should chk if this girl is a failed inspired actresses cuz she SUCKS!!!

  68. I think we can now prove that we have more dignity as the haters do, by not going the same road as they did with Dr Samuels and Ms Alyce Laviolette
    Good for JW wanting Dr S referred as Dr Samuels

  69. ”bubble sheet” as in ”answer sheet”??
    How could that involve ”human error”? I have 10 year olds in my class filling in their answers on answer sheets and they are never confused!How difficult is it?

  70. He is flailing his arms, dancing around, gonna fall down, Lecture on ‘THE IMPORTANCE OF BUBBLE SHEETS’
    Bubbles bubbles bubbles

  71. Why is he getting so sarcastic with the DR in Dr Samuels.

    The jury has to get that. That is just disrespect.

    By the way I noticed she wasn’t asked if she can prescribe.

  72. I don’t think she’s pretty at all. I had to sneak a quick look on the computer at work, yikes.

    I still can’t get the video to work on my iPhone. I’ve tried and tried and also tried the Wild About Trial mobile link. GRRRRR Anyone got a different mobile link?

      • Yeah, I tried that one. It was cutting in and out on me or just not loading at all. But thanks! I did get to hear enough of her to form my opinion. She bases everything on tests because she doesn’t have any real life experience. And her posh valley girl voice drove me up a tree.

        On another note though, when you look at Jodi compared to her, you see women of the same age. Jodi sounds more intelligent to me, so it sort of makes you sad that Jodi had the life she did. She could be right where this chick is. I hope the jury feels that.

    • How can she evaluate her the. If she feels she lied?? That was a stupid thing to say. Still catching up so ill have to see the context

    • I have noticed that both JM and Nurmi are writing like crazy. They will have real, valid points to make on cross as opposed to the confused, b.s. dance of JM. Cross should be very good.

  73. What a fucking ROOKIE! That’s all she is, she’s learning and she’s using this as an experience. Didn’t Martinez ask one of the defense experts if they took this case to add to their experience???? Well this is what we have here!!

    She’s such a bad actress! !!

  74. And the prosecution says the defense experts are biased.

    Her statement about Jodi lied on the test shows bias against Jodi.

    Plus, she said the incident happened with a stranger. It didn’t, happened with Travis. She is still protecting him. But all the questions that followed still referenced the same incident. It did not invalidate any answers. It is not like she talked about getting mugged, when that never happened, then went back and said it was an incident with Travis.

    • How can you “lie” on a test if you don’t know what it assesses or what can be diagnosed from it?

      What a bunch of shit.

  75. Please – professionals – I am not a psychologist/psychotherapist but in my experience it sounds like she is giving a limited version of PTSD as opposed to the full explanation where it can happen from a build-up of experiences instead of just one experience. So – is she telling the whole truth?

    • Cindyp,
      Right, and that is something for sure, the defense will address when they get their turn. I’m sure they will ask her if she liked Jodi, as well as other things to discredit her. Trust the defense…they will NOT go easy on her.

  76. I hope Jennifer asks her “You don’t like Ms. Arias do you”? It is obvious that when she speaks of her she sounds and looks like she has tasted something bad. Talk about being partial and biased. She is in the opposite extreme of what Martinez has been accusing the defense witnesses of. This is such a freakin sham.

  77. Wow, I thought this was a page for positivity and clearing Jodi’s name.

    The comments about the witness today are over the top and plain old mean.

    • Lori, the comments here are nothing compaired to the Jodi “hater”sites…you won’t see any death threats or witness intimidation here!

    • This is also a safe place for people to vent their frustrations considering how biased this trial is and how many counts of prosecutorial misconduct are being allowed. Nobody is threatening anyone nor lying about the case. Venting frustrations helps to diffuse stress, too.

    • Lori, we are here for Jodi *and* we are also here to vent our frustrations. We’re not planning an orchestrated attack on this woman. I don’t know which comments you think are way over the top, but I know they’re nothing compared to the ones that have been made about Jodi.

    • Some comments may seem mean to you but we are all entitled to our own opinions. We are not however trying to ruin this woman’s career.

    • Well, Lori, until and unless you are SJ, I am not changing a fucking thing about myself.

      This page is not a requirement, that is, you are not forced to be here.

      In my experience, those who contribute little and then put down the members are actually just here to instigate.

      • Hero…I’ve said it before and I’ll continue to say it ad nauseum….I adore you! You are AWESOME!!!! DON’T YOU EVER CHANGE ANYTHING ABOUT YOURSELF!!!!!! 🙂

      • Brilliantly put.

        Don’t like it? Leave.

        I don’t go to the hater sites to stir shit up (although, sometimes I think I should for the amount of times they have started shit with me here).

        They should stop coming here and getting all pissy when they know damn well they aren’t going to clean up the 1,000 bad reviews left for Alyce on her amazon book page.

    • I find it hard to like Dr DM too, that is why I think we should take the challenge not going down the same road as the haters and try to keep dignity here and refrain from name calling.
      As I said Dr DM is right now very challenging in this regard in my opinion

      • That is what I mean. I am not a hater or name caller. Just because I dont write on this page alot does not make me a bad person or trying to instigate anything.
        I don’t read the haters page, this is the only page I read everday so I have no idea what they are saying.
        Name calling is just not nice. You can be better than that and still write out your frustrations.
        Sorry if I offended anyone, but I got offended too.

        • But Lori, if you’ve read enough posts from us, you know that we’re constantly calling them names.

          The difference is that we are clever and funny and not full of hate. Yes, we get angry, but we don’t take it as far as they do.

          I’ve compared NG to the devil many times. But it was funny and meant to relieve our stress. It wasn’t hateful at all. I’m not a hater either. I feel sorry for those people who caused so much damage with their vitriol and I definitely get offended when I feel someone is putting me in that category.

          I understand you might have felt uncomfortable with some of the comments, but you kind of generalized and kind of implied we were just like them.

          I hope you still support Jodi in spite of this misunderstanding. =)

        • Lori,
          In normal day to day life I don’t agree with name calling either. But this case is quite different.It brings out the best and worst in people because people are passionate about their views whether for or against Jodi. But if you have been reading this site on a regular basis as you said, then you should know by now that most comments are well thought out and well put opinions. And for the most part this is a respectful community where anyone can voice their opinions as long as they are respectful and realize this is a pro-Jodi site.
          Most here watch this trial everyday and have since day one.Many have been victims of abuse themselves and can re