site
stats
Menu

Juror #17 – We Thank You

in Latest News by

.
Today’s post is dedicated to Juror #17 — for having the inner strength & courage to stand your ground against 11 clueless brain-dead pedo-hugging motherfuckers.

Juror #17 — Team Jodi (and Jodi herself) thanks you…

Jodi Arias - Keep Calm & Thank Juror #17. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

If you missed any of our previous posts, click on the links below:

Jodi Arias Victorious Verdict Day: Video Coverage
The Jodi Arias Verdict: My Thoughts On “Pedo-Huggers United”
Jodi Arias Retrial – The Verdict: Mistrial – Hung Jury
Jodi Arias Retrial, Day #793 – Verdict Expected @ 9.30 am
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Remember…

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

Never question it.

Never doubt it.

Prepare for it.

You can mark my words on that.

Leave your thoughts & comments below…

SJ
Team Jodi #WINNING <<<

If you would like to help Jodi by way of a financial donation to the JAA APPELLATE FUND, click the Team Jodi link below for further details. All donations via Justice4Jodi.com go directly to the fund for assisting with the legal fees associated with appealing Jodi’s wrongful conviction. Justice4Jodi.com is the ONLY website authorized to collect donations.

In addition, please DO NOT, under any circumstances, donate through any other website or Facebook page/group claiming to be “official” and/or acting with Jodi’s approval or authorization. The same applies to any “Jodi Membership Clubs”, groups or fake Trust funds that have been set up. These sites are bogus – as are their intentions – and they should be actively avoided. If you are aware of any such sites, please help Jodi by clicking here and reporting them. Thank you for your ongoing support!

We Are Team Jodi ---- And We Will Be Victorious!.

463 Comments

    • Congrats on #1 Pandora!!!!! ♥ I thank the LORD for Juror #17 and in my prayers along with Jodi and her family, I will add Juror #17 to my list! It truly was a Blessing from the Lord! ♥ Onward we march!!! 🙂
      FREE JODI ARIAS ARIZONA!!!! IT’S TIME TO MAKE THINGS RIGHT!

      • My dearest Jodi,
        God has blessed you with wonderful attorney’s and so many who love you and know that Travis was no saint and pushed you to do what you would never have done had he not behaved like a DICK sorry, but that’s the way I feel because I’ve been there, letting men treat us like as if we were carpets till the pressure inside of us builds so high that we go and react in ways we normally wouldn’t. I have been praying for you, for your family, for your entire team that God will judge you and not the juror’s or the judge, but God Himself! I am so thankful to Juror No.17 for doing what all the rest should have done in the first place! God bless TEAM JODI for all your hard work and may you all succeed in freeing innocent people who get caught up in life’s devious ways.
        Love to all of you,
        Anna.

      • R. Love, you know, being an outsider, I find this story is so disturbing. My heart breaks for those who are wrongfully convicted at the hands of people like Martinez and Jurors 🙁 I commend Jodi for being brave and standing up and feel that even when she did lie and say she didn’t commit the crime, well, I would have lied too due to fear at the time anything is possible!!! I feel people are too quick to judge Jodi or for that matter any given human when they don’t really know the real Jodi themselves but of what hear-say of what those who hate her and why hate her? What has she done to anyone besides Travis who God alone knows made her do things and behave in a manner that she would otherwise have not. Sad, but it’s people that rob the naive of their innocense.Thank you, Juror No.17 for letting standing up against those other Spineless Jurors who were afraid of what Travis’ family and other people would think of them. Thank you for choosing to be different! I would have done the same! God bless you and your family and keep you safe always.

    • when will Jodi come forward and tell the truth! she is a true hero, she still refuses to expose the real killers just to save her family. she is willing to spend the rest of her life in hell just so her family is safe. fanatical mormon killed travis. all the evidence proves it. the slashed tires, the emails, the following, all of it proves he was being terrorized by fanatical mormons for his behavior. all jodi did was tell him she will finally come forward, this is why she needed a gun, to protect him and herself. everyone I know see’s how strong jodi is for her sacrifice to her family. review all the evidence and it will show that travis was killed by fanatical mormons, they then kidnapped jodi, drove her around for hours, terrorizing her and reminding her of her fate if she ever speaks about this. they held her captive for hours, hence the delay to get to ryan’s home and not be able to call the police to help travis. she could not call the police because after they killed travis they took her, drove her around, terrorizing her, showing her they know all about her family to prove they would kill them. jodi needs to stop protecting everyone else, she needs to protect herself and let the FBI protect her family. everyone knows that there are fanatical mormon who will do anything to maintain a clean image.

  1. Hi everyone!

    I took some time off since the day of the verdict because I really felt drained. I needed to ‘recharge my batteries’. These past few months have been an emotional roller coaster. But now I’m back, rejuvenated and ready for the next phase: the sentencing and then the appeals.

    And now for the main topic: JUROR #17.

    I wholehearted thank Juror #17 for voting LIFE for Jodi. It’s what I have been saying from the beginning of the re-trial: It only takes 1 person to make the difference. This juror was in court every single day just like the other jurors. Heard the same things that the other jurors heard. But this juror had one more thing to base her decision on: she had been a survivor of Domestic Violence and you know how the saying goes: IT TAKES ONE TO KNOW ONE!

    Juror #17 did recognize that Jodi was an abused woman. And that just there makes her vote valid. The evidence that was provided was enough to show that travis alexander abused Jodi almost every day. And the worse abuse is the emotional kind. It’s what most abusers use cause it leaves NO visual scars. When someone as abused as Jodi was, finally builds up the courage to fight for her life when physically threatened, you’re damn straight this person is going to fight back and fight back HARD with every fiber of her being.

    The evidence was there! Juror #17 witnessed it along w/ the other jurors. Why did the other 11 jurors want death? I don’t know. But I read somewhere that when they went into deliberation mode it was a split 50/50. Why did they change their minds? Who knows what goes on behind those closed doors?

    JUROR #17 made a decision. End of story. She was elected to be on this jury from both sides. Why was this juror awesome (just like the other 11 ones) before starting deliberations and suddenly she’s called all the names in the book? Because she voted for LIFE?

    I’ve read all kinds of BULLSHIT about JUROR #17 from the haters. They say she was ‘planted’, ‘paid-off’, ‘revengeful towards martinez’.. Oh come on now! Don’t make it sooo fucking easy for me:

    So if Juror #17 was all the things you say she was, then why shouldn’t people say that the MORMON JUROR was also there for the same reasons??? What makes the MORMON JUROR so special and ethical? travis was one of their own! And you know how MORMONS stick together! 😉

    So stop with the biased bullshit. JUROR #17 was just like any one of the other jurors chosen to do her duty. And she did it. And if her vote is not of you likingz that’s too bad. You’ll all have to suck it up, put on your big girl & boy panties and move the fuck on.

    I heard that haters are turning to the hughes asking for their help about finding the ‘truth’ about JUROR #17 … and chris hughes is replying “Looking into it”

    -HAHAHAHHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAA 😆 😆 😆 That was the best laugh EVER! chris hughes is NOT ABOVE THE LAW; He’s not above justice either! I can say from all that I read and hear that he is really below the law… so below that it might be really shady too. (Just saying what I’ve read..) – I’m sure he’s really busy finishing up his book thinking “I gotta keep the crowd happy so they will buy my book, so if that means bullshitting them, so be it”!

    JUROR #17, Thank you for being ethical, standing by your decision and not allowing any bullies make you change your believes. If there were more people like you around, this world would be a better place to live in.

    ((((JUROR #17)))

  2. I never got a chance to welcome back our good friends: Al, StillOutThere, Raja, Karrie, and all the others I might be forgetting.

    I want to also welcome all newcomers to our safe haven.

    And of course, my good friends that have been on this site almost everyday supporting Jodi, analyzing every single detail of this circus trial and never backing down and surrendering to all those haters out there.

    Finally, I want to thank SJ for keeping this site safe for all of us despite all the slandering and bullshit he gets on a daily basis. He’s my HERO. ♥

    I know for a fact that RASNA admin is also around and has been working day & night blocking & fighting off all those haters that have been trying to sneak in and spew their vile hatred here. Rasna, just because you are not visual on the main page I know we couldn’t do it without your hard work! ♥

    WE ARE TEAM JODI. WE ARE VICTORIOUS and will continue to be so! It’s just a matter of time!

    (((((Jodi))))) ♥
    ((((TEAM JODI)))) ♥
    ((((TEAM JAII)))) ♥
    ((((CYBER FAMILY))))♥
    ((((SJ & RASNA)))) ♥

    • Bravo Pandora!!! You our dear shining star!!
      If there were any prize to be given out you would get everyone of them. All the hours you have stayed up until ungodly hours so we would know what was happening. Sorting through nonsensical tweets for hours upond hours. Thank just doesn’t seem enough….. But I do with all of my heart!!!

      As for all the other BS……. It’s all been said.
      A woman wouldn’t let the masses bully herinto changing her mind. So now she is being crucified. Just were in United States of America is this justified??

    • Hi Pandora!

      Great posts this morning regarding Juror #17. I’d also like to welcome back Al, StillOutThere, Raja, Karrie & friends too.

      Just as a side note and having checked back over the stats… 24 hours either side of the first verdict in 2013, we blocked in the region of 1,500 IP addresses. With the verdict & mistrial from last week, and over the same period, we blocked 7 IP addresses. Make of that what you will… but it looks to me like a lot of people started to actually watch the trial and take notice of what was happening, as opposed to going along with the pedo-hugging masses.

      All I know for certain is this:

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

      Never question it.

      Never doubt it.

      SJ
      Team Jodi #WINNING <<<

      • Amen SJ. Thank you from a simple women from the Midwest who has found a safe haven to not only to express her views but has learned so much from all who post.

        I have been truly amazed at home many posters are from other country. But then again I’m thoroughly appalled that this injustice has occurred in the United States not only to Jodi but now to a woman who did her civic duty.

        I guess I have sadly realized our justice system in reality is just a chess game. Who you know and how much money you have..

        • Hi Cindy,
          Yup, I too agree with you, it’s all about $$$ the more one has the better the chances of getting what you want out of life! Have you watched FIFTY SHADES OF GREY? If you haven’t, please do watch it and you will kind of think of Jodi and how naive she really was at the time in 2008 and the guy in the movie reminds me of Travis, oh, so perfect from the outside and who must have made Jodi do all of that to have him, it was like, all of that or none of him and Jodi really seems naive and that’s what got her in this horrible mess that she’s in now 🙁 and I so wish I had anything to do with the justice system, I would NEVER even give her life!!! Aaaahhh well, this is America and as you said it, it’s a Chess Game!!! 🙂

          • Hi all! Glad I finally found this link!
            I wrote to donate, and requested a copy of the “unrevocable trust agreement ” so I could ensure my money was going where it I want it to. (Jodi’s appeal).
            I never received a response.
            Could someone email me a copy of the agreement?
            Thanks! Go Team Jodi!
            -Harold

      • Hiya SJ great job on blocking and keeping us safe from the haters. One thing that crosses my mind is that the reason there aren’t as many blocks this time, There was no live streaming of the trial,no in your face nag constantly or dr drip. All we had to go by is tweets.Even the prosecuting attorney’s office said there were not near as many people outside the courthouse this time and it was not as much of a circus.

      • Thank you both for your warm, kind comments. I may not be here as much, but I’m never too far, just on the outside periphery. Keep up the great work and fighting the good fight!

    • Pandora, thank you for the welcome. I am very touched by that. I have been waiting for an opportunity to thank you so much for your dedication and service every day in bringing the tweets of testimony over here. I also thank Maria for assisting you in that on certain days and at certain times.

      It was absolutely awful, often sickening, to attempt to read through all the tweets #jodiarias with so much disgusting hatred expressed. Reading just one tweeter was not enough to give a sense of the testimony at all. And other than Michael Kiefer, and at times but not always, Jen’s Trial Diaries, I didn’t find anyone else who actually attempted to remain impartial and simply report on the testimony being given. If I only read Michael Kiefer, I found that I missed something that might be important. But some twitters, who reported some interesting things, were just beyond difficult to read on an ongoing basis.

      It was amazing to me that I could come here and find a very comprehensive reporting of the testimony which you gathered together from many many tweets, sifting through the rubbish, and managing, extremely quickly, to differentiate between the crap and post only those which provided a picture of what was actually occurring in court. I’m not sure how you did that, but someone should give you a medal for it, really. I am extremely grateful to you for doing what you did, every single day. It was really amazing. I kept wishing that you were in the courtroom as I know you would have reported the actual truth, impartially. Hugs and gratitude!

    • I was elated to see old posters coming back 🙂 ♥ Welcome back, guys!!

      No matter how much time has passed, I believe deep down we all feel like this is our home – a place which is kind of like our comfort zone; we know it’s public yet we come here to be close to friends and we feel safe because no one is judgmental, no one looks down on us. We ALL believe in Jodi’s innocence and this is exactly what’s keeping us all together.

      • Yes, Maria, exactly. You are such a special person. This site, the people I met here, the few I sustained friendships with (I would have had more, except for the fear), you have all contributed so much to my life today. I came here in 2013 a very very broken person. Hey, I still have scars, but I’m so much better. I’ll always have scars, but the acceptance I received here resounds with me today. And I believe Jodi felt that way too.

        Some from this site, but more who read this site, judged me horribly and attacked me, and tried to attack me personally. I had everything to lose, and I was attacked elsewhere, and “required” to denounce my views here in order to stop the attacks. It was more than I could handle. I ran away from this site, very very very scared. But I never stopped believing, and you welcomed me back.

        Thank you! Thank you so much.

    • Al, great posts yesterday. You did a great job of laying it out there so that simple little old me could understand. I just still do not understand why a judge who has never presided over a death penalty trial was allowed to do so. Perhaps KN new from the get go that he was not qualified to try this case. I guess I’m just naive enoughto believe that if a attorneywants to quit a case there are major issues with the defendant. I want to know why early on before trial started JSS wouldn’t let him. Didn’t she just set herself up to have this whole mess overturned for ineffective Council??

      • Cindy,
        Good point. It never occurred to me that JSS may have forced Nurmi to stay on Jodi’s case because this type of trial was not really his strength so he would be a weaker opponent for Martinez. Plus, their presentation styles were the complete opposite. Martinez’s style full of emotion and raoid fire questions versus Nurmi’s slow (very slow) questioning in a monotone voice. It was noted in the 2nd sentencing trial, Nurmi appeared to adopt some of Martinez’s techniques.

          • HAHAHA Cindy you are not alone. . .I just am enjoying reading all of our smartie pants and their opinions. LOVE IT!!!!! Glad to have so many back to stay, I hope!!! 🙂

            • Hey R. I’m physically and mentally exhausted. Physically is due to spending 3 hours in the car spending 3 hours at a over the top birthday party for my great nephew who turned one yesterday and 3 hours back.. Who invites 95 people to a one year old party?? Just crazy…

              I’m mentally drain from this past week..but here I am.. I need to put time limit on this. But I will see this through to the end …until Jodi is walking free.

              • WOAH! That is a rather large birthday party for a one year old. Hmm how will they top that one? No wonder your tired.
                Last week was draining for all of us. . I can only imagine how it must have been for Jodi and her family. . .OH MY!!! At least we can all take a deep breath now. Jodi is constantly on my mind. I suppose she will be until she is FREE again. God is with her, guiding her, protecting her or I do not believe she would have been able to survive this much abuse from so many different people in her life. God has a plan for JODI and I truly believe one day Jodi will be FREE again. ♥

            • Same here. I am as grateful as I was back in 2013 to be blessed enough to find myself among brilliant people who teach and share so much knowledge.

  3. I have no idea of what the issues with Juror 17 are or were, but clearly she did what the jury instructions allow, or in fact encourage her to do. A well understood principle of US jurisprudence is:

    “that no juror should surrender his honest conviction as to the weight or effect of the evidence solely because of the opinion of his fellow jurors, or for the mere purpose of returning a verdict.”

    In fact it may be argued that JSS came damn close to giving rise to an appellate issue by issuing the Allen instruction.

    If you root around you will find that trials where the Allen instruction was issued are overturned with amazing regularity across the country. The original Allen decision by the SCOTUS was supposed to set the limit on what a judge can do to try and unlock the jury. However across the country various appeals courts have decided that, at times, even that may be going too far. In fact some states disallow the issuing of any instruction at all. Others, and that includes Arizona, have made it such that the chances of being overruled are very high if the judge does in fact issue such a charge. In fact here is what the Arizona Supreme Court says about the Allen charge:

    “It now appears that its continued use will result in an endless chain of decisions, each link thereof tempered and forged with varying facts and circumstances and welded with ever-changing personalities
    of the appellate court. This is not in keeping with sound justice and the preservation of human liberties and security. We are convinced that the evils far outweigh the benefits, and decree that its use shall no longer be tolerated and approved by this court”

    This just about says it all.

    It’s also rather interesting that one of the circumstances in which cases are overturned after an Allen charge is when the judge is notified of the numerical split in the jury, which apparently was the case here, because it is seen as a clear case of possible coercion. I am sure that if I could find this so could JSS. So why then did she resort to this charge?

  4. So I am going to raise a real interesting question here. And this should get every ganglion of every conspiracy theorist vibrating like crazy. But this has been something that’s been rattling around in my brain for a couple of years now. And I know its going to sound crazy as all get up, but all I ask is – what if?

    So now for the hypothesis – What if JSS did not believe that this case ever warranted the prosecution in the manner it was charged? Could she have intentionally acted in a manner that would lead to so many appellate issues that the case would eventually get resolved in a more equitable manner?

    Like all conspiracy theories you need to go through some really convoluted thinking to get to this conclusion. And of course most conspiracy theories are either untrue or just not verifiable – mainly because for the most part they are the products of idle minds with a little bit of the crazy thrown in, and a liberal dose of just being as nutty as a whole bunch of squirrels. I’ll give you that, and couple it with the fact that this is merely an exercise in idle wondering, but follow me through on this.

    So you have a judge who doesn’t believe in the case brought forth, but has to be reelected to their job, and the local populace is all up in arms about the case, and the judge isn’t strong enough to take a public stance. What can the judge do? Take a brave stance, and possibly be out of a job very shortly thereafter. Or muck around with the case in a manner such that it will eventually get overturned, and by then it is so far removed in time that it has no impact on her livelihood. Also the time between trial and overturning is enough for what she considers to be a fair length of incarceration for the crime that she believes was committed and should have been charged. What does a judge in that position do? Probably exactly what JSS did.

    So she let the prosecution carry on with everything they wanted to do, regardless of any possible consequence. She made dubious rulings with respect to the defense. She forced attorneys to stay on, against their wishes, even before the trial started. She made all sorts of dubious rulings with regards to the defense. She made dubious decisions with regards to just about everything that came by her, issued an Allen charge, in a state where the State Supreme Court has decreed the Allen Charge will not be tolerated, and in the meanwhile let the defense spend so much money, that one would have to seriously reconsider retrying this case.

    In the meantime she has everyone in arms against her – the prosecutors, the defense, the pro-defense side, the pro-DP side, everyone. Makes you wonder if instead of being thick as a brick JSS is in fact sly as a fox.

    Just thought I’d throw this out there and watch the fun. Sort of like tying a rag to a dog’s tail.

    • Al, oh you are a brave soul. But you do bring up food for thought. Is it possible, yes. Is it probable, who knows. Time will tell.

      Very interesting about the Allen charge. It’s mind boggling that this would be just a oops on her part. Didn’t she do the very same thing in the first sentencing trial??

      • Where is BB? She had a great take on this issue. I finally understood exactly what she meant (I think), that JSS gave the wrong, more coersive “talk” to the jury than the one she was supposed to give. I wrote to her (BB) but we flipped to a new page just after I sent it to her so I don’t know if I got it right after she explained to it me 2-3 times.

    • Ah, I’ll see that conspiracy theory and raise you twenty bucks –

      It’s not about getting re-elected, because she’s shot that all to hell.

      It’s about appeasing whatever pressures were brought to bear upon her, to get this woman convicted at all costs, and passing the buck.

      • Journee, I agree with you but have one question. Why if what Al said is the case regarding the Allen why on earth would she/they do that? Let alone closing the courtroom…was she just a pawn??

        • Racking up as many potential reversals as she could, while still tipping the scale towards the conviction she was supposed to get?

      • That outside pressure has always been a question – why?

        At the very best this is a case of a domestic squabble/fight that ended up very very wrong. That is all it is. Unlike other cases of spouses killing other spouses, or people in relationships killing each other, there is no pecuniary gain here, or any other such issue. The best argument folks have been able to make is that Jodi was jealous of the other women TA was seeing, and so killed him. If, for purposes of argument, we give them that – its still just a inter-personal relationship squabble. This isn’t a case of some heinous crime being carried out by either a depraved person with a long history of depravity, or one being done for any sort of pecuniary gain. So why the heck do they even charge this as a DP case?

        Was it just because the Alexanders wanted it? I understand that the state values and gives deference to the wishes of the victims, next of kin, etc. But at some stage in the game they have to draw a line somewhere. I also understand that for the most part, justice doesn’t translate to any sort of evenhandedness across cases. But carrying this to where it ended up just doesn’t make sense.

        I’ve often wondered if the use of the DP charge isn’t a way to ensure some sort victory for the state. Two things happen – firstly the state now gets a death qualified jury, allowing them a certain edge. Secondly the starting chip in any bargain gets higher. So if the state charges with M2 or manslaughter, that’s the starting point for any plea bargain. If you charge M1 and DP that’s the starting point. Now even if you believe you can only make a case for M2 or manslaughter, if that’s what the jury returns you’ve still won. If on the other hand you get M1 because a death qualified jury is more likely to convict – you’ve got a bonus.

        I know that’s an awfully cynical view, but I could believe it.

          • Basically what you’re dealing with is a cult, or a denomination with cultlike tendencies.

            This whole case, from Jodi lying to Detective Flores to the ridiculous jealous stalker crap peddled by Travis’s friends and the prosecution, is all based on the desire to protect Travis. He was a psychological trainwreck. He was a liar, a chest, a pervert, a business failure, an abuser, a fraud, a porn addict especially with kiddie porn. That last fact is outright illegal. Remember, Travis had some standing in the church.

        • Al,
          There was a lawyer who stated (where?) that if they go for 1st degree murder and death penalty, they find it easier to get people to confess to M2. I’m sure that’s true because it scares people half to death. It puts more innocent people in jail though for sure.

        • I think the Alexander family and the adverse publicity enabled them to go after the DP.
          Jodi is no threat to society, she has no criminal record. Similar cases were allowed to plead
          to 2nd degree murder. They asked for the DP and there was no turning back.The DA
          represents the people of Az. not the Alexander Family.That is why there are civil
          attys and the Alexnder s have one.In the mean time the taxpayers are out millions of $$s.

          • Someone please explain why a family of California residents are allowed to dictate the management of a trial for a crime that was committed in Arizona????

        • Exactly, Al! And by the way, so good to see you posting here again. There is really nothing more to this case than at its absolute worst, a crime of passion, where someone died (and that doesn’t discount that it could have been self defense where either one of them could have died, at all). It’s always very sad when someone dies. It’s even more sad when a young life is cut short. And this particular young man had many many more years to live naturally and no health problems noted in his autopsy. He was also a man who had overcome incredible problems in his youth, which were beyond his control. Whether or not he was a good person or a bad person or a misguided sexually driven young man or even a potentially dangerous young man who abused women and could have abused children and could have done worse if he had lived longer, is really beside the point.

          There was no pecuniary gain for Jodi in killing him. That is a very true fact. There was no reason for her to premeditate his murder that makes ANY sense to any reasonable-minded person. All the crazy dribble out there about her wanting to ensure she was the last woman to have sex with him simply doesn’t make sense. She loved him, yes. It may not have been a very healthy type of love. She may have been unhealthily obsessed with him in part. But she was trying to move on beyond that and the evidence is there that she tried hard to do just that.

          And although his injuries on the last day of his life were just awful, and he did lose his life, what makes this a death penalty case when so many other dreadful, much more heinous crimes in that same state were charged as much lesser offenses?

          Let us never forget that she offered to plead to second degree murder. Elsewhere, it is said that she offered that as a threat “I’ll reveal all these sordid details unless you give me this lesser charge.” Second degree murder does not provide a slap on the wrist type of sentence. Not at all. So, why was that not accepted? What was the real motivation behind putting on this media circus trial and, even after the first jury deadlocked regarding sentencing, continuing with this second trial?

    • This has also crossed my mind in the past. But one thing that makes me give a little less credence to this theory is something she said during the “closed courtroom” discussions, that she thought Jodi was possibly being manipulative. Echoes the awful sound of haters.

      The sentence she hands down on April 13 will be very telling.

      • So why would a sitting judge let a defendant
        manipulate the court? JSS took a big chance on closing that courtroom or perhaps someone gave her the go ahead. Perhaps they didn’t see the up to or from the media??? Or did they???

        • Pickles surely hates Jodi enough to do so. And she (judge) has always been on the Prosecution’/Mormon mob’s side so I do not expect anything from her. 🙄

          • Well, to be fair, it IS required and part of her job to set sentencing as soon as possible. And if she wants this to be over sooner rather than later, I don’t think we can really blame her for that sentiment. This has been going on for a very very long time. Everyone wants resolution. But, she did ask to hear from Jodi herself regarding presentencing, so she did her job fairly in that respect.

          • CC that was actually very odd. apparently they ( KN//JM/JSS) had had a discussion about 30 days out prior to the non verdict.

            Now wouldn’t that have been drama filled…having the family up begging JSS to give Jodi life preferably chained to a wall with only bread and water. I’m sure it will be very dramatic….Then later that day they will file their wrongful death suit. Good luck with that….

            If it wasn’t so pathetically ignorant it would be funny. People honestly think that the Alexander’s will be able to take the appellate fund to be used for Jodi’s appeal.

        • I do too, because even if Pickles wants to offer Jodi the chance of parole, she’ll be too afraid of the rabid Jodi haters doing to her what they did to Alyce and Juror 17.

      • Did she mean that Jodi herself was being manipulative or that she thought the legal strategy Jodi’s attorneys were choosing to use was potentially manipulative of the court? The “Twits” of “Twitterverse” of course, interpreted it as the judge disliking Jodi and “seeing through” her, recognizing that she’s a “terrible person.” And they went to town with that and had a field day. Honestly, I found the entire thing somewhat amusing (in a sick way) because if Juan Martinez and his prosecution wasn’t manipulative of the court, I honestly don’t know what else in this case was.

        When you think of the word “manipulative,” give a moment’s pause to Deanna’s testimony. I’m sorry, I do realize that on this site, many people dislike her. But she was a very strong witness for the prosecution, if you look at this objectively. She came across as very credible the first time around, and apparently, if the Tweets were accurate, also the second time around.

        But, let’s not forget the particular manipulation she was obviously schooled to use. She refused to accept the official sworn transcript of a court reporter as accurately reflective of her answers during her deposition. That was a typewritten transcript, sworn by a court reporter. But Deanna demanded that the defense team bring an audio recording of her deposition instead because she said something along the lines of not being sure of the accuracy of someone transcribing her words. While it’s very rare, it is possible for a transcript to be other than 100% accurate, but there are other channels to dispute that and require it to be corrected. That should have occurred long before trial, however. Since it didn’t occur at some other time, essentially, that transcript became officially 100% correct (as it was not disputed). I was in total and complete shock that Deanna, on the witness stand, was allowed to challenge the deposition transcript then. But even more shocked that the judge allowed that challenge and even more so, that the defense complied with her request and brought in an audio recording. THAT is manipulation of the court plain and simple.

    • Interesting, Al….I believe JSS is just plain corrupt like the prosecutor…..IMHO….. there never should have been an Allen charge – KN objected and then requested a mistrial thus creating a record but the most she should have issued if anything was a “Duty to Consult With Others” as stated in Capital Case Instructions per the Arizona Bar which is a far milder instruction….thank God for the one lone hold out juror…yes there are appellate issues all over this case….JSS doesn’t have the knowledge, competence, or integrity to have been sitting on a DP case…….IMHO

  5. Enrique Cortez, one of TA’s renters, wrote this a couple of weeks ago. The part that caught my eye is this section;
    “That Tuesday night, our bishop held a meeting in our church building to discuss what information Travis’s sister passed on to him. There were a couple of theories floating around such as a business deal gone wrong. I think everyone who knew Travis when (he) was dating Jodi suspected her of doing it.”
    It shows shortly after Travis was killed, another theory (other than Jodi) was considered, however briefly. And, if I can use Al as a role model for a minute, I’ll add a bit of conspiracy to this story. Late in May, 2008, Mimi Hall sent a brief message to Travis….something like: “It’s on for the first week of June.” Now, Mimi may have been referring to going for lunch or a movie or maybe, “it” was something else that was on.

    http://www.courtchatter.com/2015/02/jodi-arias-new-traviss-roommate.html

    • CC53, I read the letter. Do you not question why the phone call to Mimi was never brought up in court? Why was Lisa so afraid? She was out of the picture and had moved on and had a boy friend. Nothing in his letter makes sent to me. Why now is he writing a letter?? Let these people keep talking, eventually one of them is going to slip up… I do not have a problem believing that this was a self defense case. But I do have too many questions about the evidence to be satisfied with that belief. Now if someone can explain a few things to me I will concede that it was self defense.

      • So basically Jodi lied and got convicted right? Jodi was on the stand for 18 days lying her ass off? I’m certain there is as much we don’t know as do. I’m also certain that the only truth we have is from Jodi’s trial testimony. Until Jodi actually says that something else might have actually happened, we can fill our time with guesses, but it’s not really fair to Jodi to undermine her choice, to say what she wanted to say.

        • Yup basically – they convicted her because they didn’t believe her. Not necessarily because the state proved their case, but essentially because they didn’t believe her.

          It’s a sort of false equivalency argument that people fall victim to all the time. Person A says XYZ, person B says PDQ. I don’t believe person A so I don’t believe XYZ, hence what person B is saying must be true, and so the answer has to be PDQ. But in reality the answer could be something completely different. It’s a sort of basic pitfall that anyone studying in the scientific fields is taught to watch out for all the time.

          The second jury was willing to carry this even further – most of them were willing to sentence her to death because they didn’t believe her. So essentially they would now make the death penalty appropriate for lying!

          • That’s not where I was going Al.
            It’s this constant drumbeat of guesses.
            I would not be here if ninjas killed Jodi and she took the blame.
            I’m not gonna deride every contrary to my opinion, Jodi supporter.
            I’m saying that Jodi has my support by HER words, not my disdain for frog and pickles.
            We all have flaws in our shaping of our emotions and perceptions, here at JAII, We either support her or prove she was untruthful, so what do YOU want to do?

            • I guess I’m coming at this from a slightly different angle. I do believe that the admonishment that says “innocent until proven guilty” carries weight. So for starters, in as far as I am concerned the state didn’t prove their case of M1, or felony murder or any of that. So before we go any further about what I believe or don’t believe about Jodi’s statement the whole thing just comes to an end in that the state didn’t prove its case. Hence in the very literal interpretation of the law, in as far as I am concerned Jodi Arias is innocent. I understand a jury has found her guilty, and that’s how it stands today, but I don’t agree with that verdict and fortunately I am still allowed to hold and voice that opinion.

              Also it follows that I don’t support Jodi because of disdain for JM or JSS. I may not agree with their methods, or decisions, or tactics – and yes I do question the logic behind them, but that is not why I disagree with the verdict. I do that simply because I don’t believe that the state proved beyond a reasonable doubt what they allege.

              Now comes the second side of the issue – do I believe Jodi and if so to what extent? That’s a much more difficult and complicated issue. Let’s start with a simple statement of fact – I don’t know her and so have nothing to gauge her by. So there are two stories of hers that we have heard – the “Ninja” story and self-defense. She now says the Ninja story was untrue and I believe that. That and all her contacts with Flores after the incident are like some sort of stupid Columbo script. I have often wondered if some of that wasn’t driven by a marginally smart, non-criminal mind. A seasoned criminal would have immediately asked for an attorney. A really smart person, wise to the ways of the world would have also immediately asked for an attorney, but it is quite likely that a person who is marginally smarter than most people they rub shoulders with, and who has been able to talk their way out of trouble in the past may fall into the trap of thinking they could do this again. Or it could just be that Flores’ interrogation technique got a stressed out person to do something really dumb – I don’t know, and have no way of gauging what led up to any of that.

              So now we come to the self defense story. Is it believable – yes. Is it believable that TA was an abuser – yes, all the signs are there. Is it believable that Jodi was one who could be abused – yes, again all the signs and evidence of past abuse are there. Did this actually go down the way she says it did? I have no reason to believe it didn’t. The conditions for it existed – the signs are there. Could she have blanked out at the critical time in the chain of events – the science says it’s possible. Could she have acted as an automaton thereafter – again the science says that’s possible. Does that conflict with her trying to cover it up – no, because I think I can understand why she said what she said in the police interrogation.

              So does it seem that I am hedging on whether I whole heartedly believe that side of her story? If so maybe I am. It doesn’t change the fact that I do believe she is not guilty of the charges the state brought against her.

              The skeptic in me questions all of this stuff. But in that questioning I come to the basic conclusion that she is not guilty of the charges brought against her. For me that is enough. It may not be for others, or others may come to the same conclusion through a completely different line of reasoning – and that’s OK by me because its their prerogative. So I can support her, without having to either prove she was truthful, or untruthful. I can support her based on the fact that I don’t believe this was M1 with premeditation as alleged, and for me that is enough.

              Heck you probably won’t want to hear it but I could speculate up a dozen different scenarios that would fit the evidence presented, but that is all that would be – rank speculation. And to find someone guilty of murder on speculation is just plain wrong. So in the alternative one is left with the only sane conclusion – not guilty.

        • John,
          I believe Jodi told the truth as she sees it. It could be what actually happened – or not. The mind can play a lot of tricks on us (see the other article I posted). I personally like to keep all options open. My beliefs are not going to affect the court or the eventual outcome at all. But, if we simply take Jodi’s story at face value then there would be no sense searching for other information. We would just be washing our hands of the case and saying: “Let the courts have their way with Jodi. Whatever will be will be.” It seems to me this group has brought out a lot of things that are different than what was presented in court. Will our searching result in a “Perry Mason moment” in this case? Probably not. But, if Jodi was my daughter, I would be searching day and night for something that would help her. If you watch shows like Dateline, 48 Hours, Forensic Files, etc., you will notice it’s not always police that solve a case, it’s sometime the family or friends. I don’t feel I’m undermining Jodi. That’s the last thing in the world I would do.

          • You missed my point too, so until you understand my point I cannot respond. I do “get” you coldcase53, you don’t “get” me

            • Sorry Johnm I don’t understand your point. Perhaps you could be more explicit.. Because the way it is written is that we should just let it all go and if we don’t we are undermining Jodi’s testimony.
              Please don’t take offense.

              • If you would respond to my original comment to you, I’ll respond to this one.
                I said it six ways to Sunday. All we have to go on is, what we see, what they say, what we say, and what Jodi says. If we want to say Jodi was a bystander, we need to be prepared to be wrong. So I prefer to side with the words out of our dear Jodi’s mouth during the trial. If you get evidence to completely put Jodi in a situation where she is obligated to state in court something else happened on June 4, then I’ll have to re access my support.. I’m not praying for ninjas, I’m praying for Jodi. And I don’t pray FOR anything, I only thank God for my life and existence!

                • Johnm, I understand and support you. Jodi was on the stand a total of 20 days, and I haven’t come across a single incidence of where she was caught in a lie on the stand. All of Jodi’s lies were to Flores in 2008, and not on the stand in 2013 and 2014. No one is capable of being questioned for that long, particularly suffering from dissociation and blanking out, and not be completely honest. When Jodi was trying to protect her and TA’s reputation after her arrest, she could not keep her story straight – that is when Flores caught her inconsistencies.

                • John, it does not matter if we agree with one another on what may or may not have happened. I respect your opinion.

                  We are all here for one reason and one reason, to support Jodi!!!!

                • Yes cindy and thanks CanadaCarol. We are a CERTAIN common denominator. Free Jodi and Thank You #17 for saving Jodi’s life!

                • John,
                  Note that some of this comment is in capital letters. It is not shouting. It is an attempt at highlighting what I think you believe as compared to what I believe and all of it may be wrong as to what you believe. Jeez, what a sentence. Let me know if I finally understand what you are saying.

                  YOU BELIEVE JODI WAS THERE WHEN TRAVIS WAS KILLED. I believe she COULD have been there. There is some indication (corroborating proof, maybe) that Jodi was at Travis’s place early in the morning of June 4, 2008. We don’t know how long she was there before she left. It’s possible she was still there in the early afternoon. We may definitely know WHEN the nude photos were taken at some point but, for now, I still feel the date & time on the photos is suspect.
                  YOU BELIEVE JODI TOLD THE TRUTH IN HER TESTIMONY. I believe it COULD have been the truth. I also believe it could be a false confession. The Innocense Project study of about 260 people convicted of murder later found (using DNA) that about 25% were innocent people who had confessed to murder. I also believe Jodi’s testimony COULD be prompted by her defense team as her best chance of getting a lesser conviction of M2 or manslaughter. In other words, I’m willing to believe any of these 3 possibilties but I don’t have any proof which one is true. And, if another possible theory pops up (with proof), I would be open to believing it.
                  YOU BELIEVE WE ARE NOT BEING LOYAL TO JODI AND ARE UNDERMINING HER IF WE DON?T BELIEVE HER TESTMONY. I believe we are showing our belief in Jodi as a good person, in spite of whatever happened, by staying in this group and supporting her in our own fashion by doing what each of us feels supports and helps her the most. Some by praying, some by discussing, some by doing both, some by searching for new information or re-examing old information and some by simply observing in silence or with an occasional comment.
                  BTW, you mentioned the ninja story. Someone on Twitter yesterday stated (as a joke, I think) that the scene in Travis’s house after his death looked exactly what a ninja attack would look like.

                • coldcase53,
                  My belief is approximately what you wrote in capitals.It sad we gotta be at odds about anything. I stated when Jodi SAYS so, I’ll re-evaluate, not ’til then. You respected me enough to label me, I’m gonna respect you back and say I hope the day comes when Jodi’s free and we’ll all own more truth about June 4

                • footnote to what CC53 said:

                  YOU BELIEVE WE ARE NOT BEING LOYAL TO JODI AND ARE UNDERMINING HER IF WE DON?T BELIEVE HER TESTIMONY

                  Um. I DO believe her testimony. I BELIEVE HER when she says remembers practically nothing between the gunshot and ‘coming to’ somewhere in the desert. The rest of it she agreed she must have done, but she has no memory of doing it.

                  I also believe the EVIDENCE that suggests that someone else was there at some point when there was still wet blood on the floor and THAT person has never given testimony about their presence at that time.

                • Journee,

                  didn’t Jodi also say she remembers the knife hitting the tile and her screaming? And she also has a vague memory of putting a knifer in the washing machine but she’s not sure if it was from june 4th, since she’d been in TA’s house many times and had put things in the washing machine before.

                  I SO agree about the bloody footprint, someone did step on wet blood and IF it was Jodi I don’t see how she wouldn’t have left other footprints on her way out.

                • I’ll not be able to bolster my opinion. Loyalty is not my chosen word. What evidence was available was forsaken. I’m only voicing my heartfelt opinion. No one here is going to stray from Jodi, it’s not in us.

      • Cindy,
        Enrique’s article appeared BEFORE the jury deliberated so maybe he was trying to influence the jury. A lot of it doesn’t make sense. When he was on Nancy Grace’s show the other night, he made a comment something like his life was ruined because he would live the rest of his life in fear of Jodi. Something like that – maybe, Carol has the exact comment. His fear of Jodi is unreal and makes no sense to me. I think Enrique was the guy dressed in “ceremonial Mormon clothes?” with a long sword (the photo was posted on this site).

        • It disgusts me that he says he will live in fear of Jodi. The entire b.s. he and their ‘ group’ promulgated was that Jodi killed TA because she was jealous, so how the hell is there the slightest, remotest reason to believe she would be motivated toward violence for any old random reason?
          Likewise, I read that the Hughes went on their publicity tour declaring they were in fear of Jodi killing THEM, and that fear existed a long, long time before the June 2008 incident.
          I feel their is a degree of narcissism in their absurd contentions, both roommate and Hughes. My attitude, is ‘get over your self’; you are not, never have been and never will be that important to Jodi.
          I know almost nothing about Mormon culture, but it seems like there are underlying pathological complexes and fixations constellated particularly around the idea of the “Bad Woman” archetype and an evil, all- powerful feminine beguiler who can steal your will- power and soul.
          It is like the Mormon culture thrives upon a dynamic where they need to create a sort of “Great Whore of Babylon” archetype they can war against and try to destroy.
          They insist that everyday women fit a mold, and if they don’ t they are seen as bad.
          They need to project the quality of the demonic onto someone, because they have repressed and denied so many energies.
          These energies become dislocated and then certain triggers (like seeing a beautiful, sexual woman) become ‘charged’ with dangerous energy, because energy denied becomes increasily powerful, always threatening to erupt.

      • These people were all worked up believing Jodi killed Travis. The fact that Mimi got a threatening phone call is interesting but nothing is noted as to whether it was a man or a woman… it does sound similar to the letter Lisa received which was never connected to Jodi unless one believes innuendos equal facts.
        If my theory is true none of these people should have feared Jodi, but at this point in time they could still fear whoever wrote and called with warnings of retribution if the Mormon teachings regarding sexual behavior were not followed.

        • Carol, I honestly believe it has more to it then just the teaching. I tend to believe that the church may have tried to cover up a few things. But Travis wasn’t killed because he was still have sexual relationships with Jodi. It’s much more. I don’t believe it was the heat of passion either. So it’s either self difference or someone else was there.
          If it was self defense why didn’t Jodi have defensive wounds or marks on her? If your in a battle for your life you will not walk away unscaved. After all Travis would have been fighting for his life also. How sad that there are 3 people that knows what truely happened that day…ones dead one doesn’t remember and God!!! IMHO.

          • I believe she had no wounds because the whole knife fight took place at the very end, in a very short period of time, within a few seconds. Jodi was moving away from the violence for most of the time and trying to de-escalate the problem up until the end when, with a bullet in his face, he attacked an airplane propeller in the guise of a woman in a state of overwhelming terror with a knife in her hand.

            • Justus it could be as you stated. Hey at this point my brain is mush. But I still want to know how she got him in the shower and just asking, wouldn’t he have rug burns on his body from dragging??? Hey if someone can come up with those answers I will never question self defense again.

              • There was testimony that the back of his legs did have indications of dragging. The floor was wet which would make sliding easy. I can move a lot of weight on my own using technique and I am not in fight/flight mode with adrenaline rushing through my body. Again, remember all the people who have lifted cars to save their loved ones.

            • I agree. And he did choke her unconscious before, and she had every reason to believe he would choke her to death, and she had to act as fast as possible.

          • Agreed, he wasn’t killed because he was still having sexual relations with Jodi. What the exact reason was is still a mystery BUT could you see that reason being: because he was involved with many, many other women and that he had perhaps hurt someone close to this killer?

    • I have always had a big “???” in my mind about Enrique

      ….the Mimi message might be considered with another tidbit that has ALWAYS bothered me….Robert Brown…..visit Blink on Crime’s website scroll to the Travis Alexander section on left. Now, remember, she is a victim’s advocate soooo ignore her later posts until later. Go back to her first post on the subject and read her assessment of the Prosecution’s case with “bus sized holes in it” . She talks about Lisa Dadone’s ex at the time of the alleged stalking and tire slashing. Then she talks about Robert Brown…see the screen shot from his Facebook she has about a supposed protection rite he was doing…I don’t know….TOO MANY QUESTIONS!

  6. The New Yorker, March 5, 2015
    “Remembering a Crime That You Didn’t Commit.”
    “…this research calls into question whether we should be putting so much weight on any memory in court – especially in the absence of corroborating proof.”
    http://www.newyorker.com/tech/elements/false-memory-crime
    It has been mentioned on this site many times (including yesterday or Friday by Al) that there really is no absolute proof that Jodi killed Travis – no corroborating proof.

    • The part of the eye witness testimony being unreliable is precisely why I question the rental car dude’s assertion that Jodi had blonde hair.

      Unless this guy has an agency that rents no freaking cars, how the heck does he remember several months later that this woman had blonde hair. And it doesn’t have to do with the fact that she wanted a different color car. I travel a lot – I mean a lot (I’ve gathered a million miles on two separate frequent flyer programs – that type of lot), and at any car rental counter anywhere, there are always people asking fora change of the car issued to them.
      The other side to that coin is the fact that the Yreka police report about the burglary clearly states she had brown hair. The person writing the report could have either relied on his observation or used her drivers license. Why didn’t someone ask him.

      • Oh my friend your OCD is back in full force..lol. I know I have truely gone off the deep end. I hope I never ever get called for jury duty again. (I did get out of it ) I have a personality that I have to have answers. I can not make a decision until I do. Not that I have to have it my way, it just has to make logical sense to me.

        None of this does that. The only thing I have come away with is it does not have to be logical. The person with the most toys in the sand box’s wins….. Doesn’t matter if most of them are broken…..I know lame example. But has anything in this case been logical??

        • Ain’t life a bitch?

          Heck if I was on a jury the prosecution would probably end up with a hung jury unless they could prove everything to 100%, dead certain. In my warped mind beyond reasonable doubt means beyond any doubt whatsoever.

          • And you would have done the right thing!
            Questioning everything, being logical, needing 100% proof is what the jury system is supposed to be all about.
            To hell with inferences, innuendos, and mombo jumbo!

          • I think perhaps we all have lived long enough to not buy into every thing people trying to shove down our throats!!! The government, the media. I personally have always looked outside the box. Something that has really gotten me in some very heated discussions!!! But now I just don’t bother with people who try to use bully tactics to make their point. I turn and walk away.. I have tried to have a coverstation with my family about this case. I was told I was crazy. Not one of them watched one day of this trial… So they bought into what the media was saying. So now how many years later are some of the most “trusted” news anchors integrity has been questioned!!

            Obtw, I had one of two choices, I could tell my family members to shove their dagrees up their butts because they had no clue as to what they were talking about..or just turn and walk away. I chose the latter….. Not going there……..

            • I’d ask them if they’d care to discuss the case if the defendant were a man before I gave up completely.

      • Something Colombo didn’t testify to, was that Jodi’s hair had changed when she brought the car back. If he remembered her hair being blonde when she picked up the car, and not just relying on the licence, he certainly should have noticed and testified that it had changed when she brought the car back, and there is no such testimony. Kim K.’s recent change of color to platinum took a reported eight hours, but Jodi supposedly changed hers twice in less than 24 hours. Colombo remembers Kool-Aid stains and missing mats but doesn’t remember hair changing color.

        • I have highlighted blonde hair, as light as Jodi’s was when blonde, but only highlights, not my entire head, and I’ve been highlighting since I was 20. I also have long hair, as long as Jodi’s was in 2008. During my lengthy difficult divorce, while my ex was trying to find me, I dyed my hair a medium brown shade, not anywhere near as dark as Jodi’s though. It was extremely difficult to get the highlighted strands to take the brown. They’d look “okayish” after the colour was first applied, but after one or two shampoos, they would immediately lighten up again and “peep” through. Jodi testified about this problem. It wasn’t easy for her to go back to her natural colour. It takes time. Remember the photo of Jodi with the dog where she’s in the “between” stages of transitioning back to brown? Exactly! The bleached hair simply doesn’t “take” the colour applied. I remained a brunette for a couple of years, dying and dying over the blond highlights. Ultimately, they “took” more than they had before, and became an auburn reddish shade, but you could still see the difference and it wasn’t difficult to see, even if you aren’t a hairdresser.

          I went back to blonde highlights last year, after more than 2 years of attempting to be a brunette. I use “attempting” because I never really accomplished it. Jodi has had 7 years, and obviously, her hair grows quickly, so now, it’s her natural hair that we’re seeing. In my case, the highlights took quickly especially on the ends of my hair which had never really been totally “brown” even after multiple attempts. But, my hair remains very long and doesn’t grow as quickly as Jodi’s.

          Just another perspective I thought I would add. Most women who have ever dyed their hair from dark to light or vice versa (and most of us have) will get what I’m saying.

          • I have screamed at the top of my lungs since 2013 that the hair dying argument Martinez put forth is one of the silliest dumbest most naive most IGNORANT arguments ever!
            I can’t for the life of me understand how those *women* jurors fell for it but of course it just goes to show how *willing* to cast aside anything that did not match “the Jodi is a psycho” scenario and how brainwashed they already were by the time they got to the deliberation room.

            I am a natural blonde who (as years passed by) has turned darker. I’d describe my hair now as dark blonde (if it makes sense in English); I;ve been highlighting it since I was 18 and NEVER on my own, always at a hairdresser’s. Guess what? It was difficult to even turn my hair brown while the highlights were still there, they would show. So you either have to wait for motnhs till they are completely gone or dye it anyways and have them showing, “peeping” as StillOutthere pointed out.

            So for someone to even dare to suggest that a platinum blonde chick would turn into a brunette in just 1 day is at least laughable. Seriously, it just sounds as child’s argument and is a disgrace to have neeb heard at a court of law.

            Again, it speaks volumes of the stupidity of the first jurors, their BIAS, their willingness to go with whatever the prosecutor suggested and their UNwillingness and inability to assess the evidence and come to logical conclusions

    • This morning I decided that I was going to put this case on a shelf for a while. Just couldn’t do it! And thank the Good Lord I didn’t! or I would have missed the links that you have provided, CC53.
      I feel deeply that someone somewhere is able and willing to grab this case and solve it. For as disgusted as I feel about Travis’ friends’ fear, I know it is real to them and it must be very scary for them to think someone could harm THEM.
      I believe from everything I’ve previously read that the real killer is still out there, and THAT IS very scary. The real killer may be threatening someone at this very moment. The real killer may feel very safe with the conviction of Jodi Arias. If I were any one of Travis’ friends I would still be fearful that I might be next.

      • As to the false confessions, I agree that this is more likely than not what happened in this case. The study was impressive.
        From ‘I wasn’t there’ (no way Travis was dead 5 days) and ‘Travis wouldn’t allow those pictures to be taken in the shower’ and ‘I never saw his new camera’ to ‘I shot him’ but ‘I can’t remember’ and lately ‘I must have’.
        Reid Technique was used in the interrogation. Plus, Flores knows it was more than 1 person and that Jodi wasn’t physically able to accomplish such a violent murder, and that Travis had only been dead 1-2 days. HE KNEW then. HE KNOWS now.

        • I have a couple of questions for people who may remember. I can’t and don’t feel like wading through all that testimony again.

          So there were two different memory cards. Seems like one was suitable for Travis’s camera and the other wasn’t. Do I have that right?

          Next, it seems Jodi made some sort of statement about at least soem of those pictures having been taken earlier. Again, am I right?

          So did anyone ever ask which pictures came off which memory card, or did they determine which ones came from where?

          Also it seems that some of the pictures had xiff data associated with them and others didn’t. So I went and looked at my own camera – a Nikon. Seems like the option for .xiff metadata is something you can turn off or on from the settings options control panel. So if some pictures had xiff data and others didn’t we have one of two options – either someone kept turning that option on and off, or the pictures came from different cameras. Did anyone question any of that?

          • Absolutely…you are right….Blink on Crime.com covers this in her posts during the trial….Unfortunately, the defense dropped that ball entirely….

          • There was testimony about the metadata with Melendez in this retrial. Of the pics that were recovered from the unallocated space, some still had the time data and some of them had that part overwritten. That is when Melendez used the metadata to get the times of the pics. For instance, one of the unallocated pics with no time was TA on the bed, but the other one on the bed still had the time.

          • Two cards were essentially presented as one.

            That is Connor said the card in evidence was found loose in the washer. Melendez testified that the card that ALL of the pictures came from was IN THE CAMERA when he received the camera. Except that he was not able to access the card via the camera – OR even through the contraption that would write-block it. Said he had to put it directly into a card reader for different sized cards.

            The SINGLE card in evidence which was supposedly both loose in the washer as well as in the camera was BLUE in color. Hard for us to tell on video that it’s anything other than dark, but Connor and Martinez both describe it as blue. Problem with that is that Travis’ SONY camera could ONLY use a card that was proprietary to SONY at the time, smaller than any other card on the market and BLACK in color. So the blue card in evidence would not have fit in Travis’ camera, would have been too big to ever have been in Travis’ camera.

          • And I could be very wrong but in the retrial weren’t the cards never turned over to the defense and are now missing?

            • There was talk of the phones missing cards. Don’t know that there was discussion of the camera card(s) at all.

                • Journee I remember the whole memory card issue from the 1st trial. Now that was something the DT truly missed. Jodi even told the PIO aka Dt. F that those picture were taken at a different time. So my question is when did Jodi dye her hair? Before she left AZ?? Or after?? If after then??

                • Jodi said she went back to brunette before she moved back to Yreka.

                  Not sure why Flores changed jobs (not sure it was a demotion, either – they seem to have an odd hierarchy at Mesa PD as he also testified that becoming a detective was not a promotion from being a patrol cop, it was a lateral move he said). Rampant speculation on the job change was that it was because of his wife’s twitter behavior.

                • Cindy, from what I can recall Jodi started changing her hair color back to brown before she left AZ – it was done in stages as I recall but she was changing it before she left…..correct me if I am wrong, please….just my memory on this…

          • Al, if you down load a picture from your computer, say it was sent from your friend’s email, the photo date on your computer would be the date you downloaded the picture – not the date it was taken.
            So, if like Jodi said, she had left the cards at Travis’ long before she left, any image date would be suspect, I would think. And she also points out that dates on the pictures can be altered to any date. Kind of makes those dates questionable.

          • Jodi initially said in interrogation, not in sworn testimony that the bedroom pictures were from an earlier time. Flores refers to them on page 18 of his Report. They are described as “other unallocated” photographs on “the card” when he mentions Melendez’ retrieval work.

        • Sure she was physically capable. When you are in survival mode, you are capable of doing a lot of things.

          The intruder story has been debunked for the idiocy it is by Jodi herself. What you can’t seem to grasp is why she told it. I have explained it here,and it is the ONLY reason it makes sense when you factor in the character of the LDS church and members’ desires to protect their own, even from outsiders.

          Overanalyzing evidence will drive you crazy. It’s time to stop peddling the intruder nonsense.

          • I wouldn’t call it the “ninja” story nonsense. I know Jodi never used that term. And, I agree it is unlikely. But,there are intruders stories in the news and online. There are stories of people masqeurading as Mormons to gain access to commit robbery. There is a story of 2 females dressed all in black and using a stun gun and a sword to kidnap a teenage murder witness. I believe the teenage witness had observed a fringe Mormon sect leader killing someone and the 2 intruders were his wives trying to prevent the witness from testifying. There is a detailed Mormon safety checklist (which appears legitimate) which asks about having a plan to prevent home invasion. I haven’t even done any in-depth study for more “ninja’ stories.

            • It only becomes unbelievable when it’s called a “ninja” story. If it’s called a “home invasion,” it’s a different story. I live in a fairly large city and there are several home invasions in and around the city every year.

              • Absolutely coldcase53, it was the police or media who introduced the word “ninja” into Jodi’s initial explanation in order to make it sound unbelievable. …But, whether the words ninjas, or home invaders, or intruders, are used, it means the same thing in the mind of Jodi because she describes that someone or more persons were there besides TA & herself. …And, it was not her bloody hand print.
                …In her mind it is probably still her truthful explanation of what happened. …Someone or more persons (((persuaded her))) to “go with” the police explanation that “she did it” but she cannot remember because her reality does not fit into the prosecutor’s “self serving” theory of what he argued.
                …And, at any time near 24/7, there are probably one million people (all over this country) out jogging around neighborhoods, not their own. …Any joggers can jog in dark colored clothing (for stealth) & no one will suspect they are (perhaps) looking for where to commit a crime or home invasion. …Within 5 second they can pull out a mask, and they could turn themselves into the exact description that Jodi described: two people with dark colored clothes & masks. ….That is not unbelievable.
                …The prosecutor did NOT PROVE her to be telling any lie whatsoever in this entire case except for his use of other of his UNPROVEN foundation evidence. …Except for her misremembering things, but that is not telling lies of deception (IMHO).

        • LOL….I have been questioning my own sanity…Can’t help you on that one bro… I knew you couldn’t walk away but I was concerned that perhaps something might have happened.

      • No evidence, just wishful thinking. You just don’t understand of the motives of why she lied to Flores and why TA’s friends lied about Travis and the relationship between Travis and Jodi. Ignore the Mormon culture rife in this case, and you don’t understand this case at all. It makes no freaking sense there were intruders in the middle of the daytime, and in a suburban area.

        Biggest mistake of Jodi’s life was ever getting involved with the LDS cult.

          • Absolutely.

            Do you know who I would like to see write a book about this case? Jon Krakauer, who wrote a great book about a polygamous sect murder and the history of the Mormon church. He would be ideal to write about the sociological aspects of this case. They’re impossible to ignore.

            Travis’ friends knew he had a dark, even ugly, side. It was important to them that the truth never come to surface publicly, especially the kiddie porn. He had to be protected because of his LDS standing and to protect the reputation of the Legal Shield pyramid scheme.
            portec

            • Tonysam, I commend you for keeping this topic in the forefront. This is important, because it is slowly coming to light that the Mormon cult has had its sights set on accumulating power within our government. They have the patience to establish very long range plans, similar to the groups in the middle east who also supress the females in the culture.

      • Ya like that is going to happen Carol. LOL. I tried that it doesn’t work. You can not be committed to something / someone until the final chapter. Jodi’s chapter of freedom!!!

  7. Good Morning Everyone,

    Thanks Pandora and SJ for the welcoming back comment! This site is “Safe Haven”, to me in more ways than one!

    Pandora, your comment brought tears to my eyes, your warm heart shines!

    From the very start, I can honestly say, this trial has me on my toes! Do many unanswered questions, doubts, most of all nothing adds up, I’m not sure what words to use any more to express the over all confusion!

    Yes, Jodi Arias, made a self defence plea, however, was that her doing or her lawyers! I’m not sure if Jodi recalls everything that happened that day! It’s a tragedy in many ways, for all. Saying that, the corruption is apparent! Just a case, no it wasn’t just a case, it was an unfair trial from the beginning! Kangaroo court is more just!

    As always I stand behind Jodi Arias, much love xoxo

    The support she receives is wonderful, she will remain in my prayers!!!

  8. The reason I believe Jodi words from the stand is because I did all I could to tast those words. I know that NO ONE else did for if they had NO SHOW TRIAL. YES SHE lied and the OTHER side did,nt THEY addmit to with- holding EVIDENCE in a P/D case Is AZ. still part of the U.S. ? Can YOU hear the FOUNDERS rolling……….. And did not t-dog (FITTING) not live a LIE and a very DARK life? Well a MAN owns HIS actions and HIS friends should NEVER defend such EVIL ways. HATE t.a. NO WAY I PITY him and pray he may be forgiven by his GOD and know that JODI has forgiven him because thats who SHE is a person who has always embraced LOVE and NEVER hate . Juror 17 seems to…… aggree…….and for that SHE will be BLESSED. THANK YOU 17.

  9. John,
    I’m not at odds with you. In fact, with a little proof, I might believe exactly what you believe. It’s good though that everyone on this site doesn’t believe in exactly the same things. What a dull group we would be if that were true. It helps us and Jodi (I believe) if we can discuss issues openly and respectfully and even heatedly sometimes. I don’t like to see attempts to steer this group in any one direction, or dismiss the thoughts of others or to say this topic should be shut down or you can’t do this or that. Why anyone would want to do that is beyond me. If someone doesn’t like the topic or the take on an issue, skip over it or challenge it but don’t scoff at it or dismiss it outright. Doing so doesn’t show respect for other members in this group.

  10. I have a question for those of you who believe that Jodi’s confession was Reid technique or false. Jodi told Flores a series of events the night of June 4th, one of them being that when she arrived, she found TA on his computer watching Daft Punk videos. No one planted that into her mind and it was found to be accurate. What Jodi does not remember to this date, is what happened after the gun shot and at the point when the knife was introduced into the fight, I believe, by TA when he went to the sink after being shot. IMO, that is why she kept asking to see the pics so that she could try and piece the missing part of that night together.

    Jodi has a history of dissociation at the age of five when she was sexually molested and another at age thirteen when a neighbor boy held a knife to her throat and she thought she was going to be raped. She also witnessed Bobby going nuts that day with his sabre. Of course, her mind is going to dissociate with something so horrific as this fight.

    • I’m not finding a question mark in your post.

      What’s the question?

      (don’t think Jodi witnessed Bobby and the saber attack, I think Carl told her about it)

    • INTERROGATION TAPES TRANSCRIBED (there are a total of 16 tapes about the same length, and into the 17th tape. (Also telephone, and testimony)
      Tape I is over 30 hours
      Tape 2 is over 31 hours
      Tape III is over 31 hours
      Tape IV is over 32 hours.
      That is a total of 124 hours + 11 hours = 135 hours. I do not know how often there were breaks but that doesn’t matter…it would be time for her to be alone and afraid.
      11 hours into the 5th tape she realizes they are going to charge her with Travis’ murder.
      Up to that point she has vehemently denied having been there.
      It turns my stomach to what unfolds next…
      If her story change isn’t the result of the Reid Technique I will be really surprised. Shocked in fact.
      What ever she said after this point to me is untrue – all of it.

      If you would like to check for the answer it would be after 11 hours into the 5th tape of the interrogation.
      http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?203866-TRANSCRIPTS-of-the-Interrogation-Videos-of-Jodi-Arias

      • I will also offer this for contemplation: The police and prosecutor devised their case based on what she comes up with as a story. There was so much ‘made up’ and the rest is based on ‘her story’. All bunk!

    • Yes, it fits the Reid technique…..it basically makes the person feel that law enforcement has incriminating evidence that proves them involved or guilty….many times they are bluffing and have absolutely no evidence…like I have said before they can look you straight in the eye and lie right to your face….so invoke your right to silence and KEEP YOUR MOUTH SHUT AND GET A LAWYER !!!!

      • And where most people feel that they must or should cooperate bc they are innocent so they have nothing to hide and feel like they want to help and answer their questions…..it is ESPECIALLY IMPORTANT for them not to talk to protect their innocence !!!!

      • Maybe it was interrogation tape #15. Detective had been sitting still up to that point without much physical movement at all, the way he later sat motionless at the prosecution table during the trial. When he begins telling Jodi about TA’s character, saying that he was a good guy, essentially a good citizen, etc., suddenly his head is turning from side to side like a metronome. You can see Jodi staring at him with a deer in the headlights expression, registering his body language. It is chilling. Might have inhibited her if she was about to tell him about having to defend herself. Her impaired memory could have held her back also.

    • The question was if this was all made up and she wasn’t there like some of you insist, how did she know to tell Flores that TA was on his computer when she arrived that night at 3:00 in the morning to find him watching his Daft Punk video???????????????? Had anyone even brought up the computer at that point?????????????? NO.

      As far as I am concerned, it is a disservice to Jodi and the one juror who believed her mitigation.

      Over and out!!!!!!!!!!

      • Okay, good point. Then, she was definitely there and arrived at some point in the middle of the night. But, I guess, the bigger question is when exactly did she leave?

        • I absolutely believe her testimony from the stand. That would mean that she was there in the afternoon having sex and taking the pictures in the shower. She did remember that in the interrogation as well, when she spoke of what he said to her about feeling gay. I believe that she was attacked when she dropped his camera and I believe that she did shoot him when the gun went off by accident. I do believe everything that she remembers which leaves me at that point, and then I do believe that she finds herself driving in the desert with blood on her hands and a feeling of terrible dread, and this gap in her memory.

        • All we know from her testimony is that the sun was in her eyes as she was driving away in the desert. The photograph of him on the floor with the pant leg in the foreground is not definitive as to time of death because he is holding his head up; nor does it depict “dragging”. (It still would not be definitive if his head were down – it is only an image, not medical documentation.)

      • Like I said above: the detective used ‘her story’ to ‘find’ the clues to ‘develop’ his case.
        At the scene:
        No fingerprints in evidence. Not from the rooms, not from the washer/dryer, not on the banister NONE.
        One hair in evidence: No length of hair in evidence, No color in evidence. No connection to Jodi.
        If she had said Travis was watching ‘ I Love Lucy’ Flores would have shown it was ‘I Love Lucy’ on Travis’ computer. That is exactly my point. They fit ‘evidence’ to the ‘her story’.

        • Just one more point: Jodi’s hair – it could have been ‘retrieved’ from her cell; why not? They tampered with, withheld from, concocted and misstated the so called evidence.

          • It could have been in the house since April, along with the partial print. Doesn’t prove anything one way or another. She stayed there for several days before she left for Yreka.

      • I don’t think I’ve ever seen anyone here say that Jodi was never there that day.

        We’ve said there is no PROOF that she was there when Travis died, which is not the same thing.

        I know I’ve said repeatedly that all I know for sure is that Jodi was able to accurately describe the videos that Travis was watching in the wee hours of the morning on Jun 4.

        I also said in a post that went poof awhile ago, but may turn up later, that I believe her testimony. Her testimony was that she remembers nearly nothing about the time between the gunshot and coming to in the desert.

        The rest of what happened to Travis, she only agreed that she must have done it. She doesn’t remember it, but agrees she must have done it.

          • But wait, just to play devil’s advocate for a moment, do you really believe that paltry stupid gun killed him? Or, do you believe it was the “final coup” in the dreadful knife fight as the prosecution would like everyone to believe?

            And, if the gun didn’t kill him, we can’t honestly say she was there when he died.

            I have always wondered about her story regarding the intruders, also I think, contained in her letter to the Alexanders, where she remembered him being unable to walk. Was that a little piece of actual memory seeping through of what happened that day?

            • I believe there were little seeps of actual memory in that ninja story like him being unable to walk. I think the gunshot only weakened him to the point that she was able to struggle with him. During the Hughes’ interview with Gold, he stated that he believed the gunshot had to be first, because otherwise he would have been too strong for Jodi.

              My blank for what happened is as big as Jodi’s.

          • There is no time of death and without that the State cannot prove Jodi was there (granted they did) with sound, undeniable evidence.

          • She also testified that she remembered screaming and dropping the knife. She recalled (and testified at trial) feeling at that moment that what had just happened was something that couldn’t be taken back.

            • You’re right, she did testify to that. I have forgotten so much. I don’t know if I can bring myself to watch her testimony again.

            • I believe Jodi testified that she remembered HEARING a knife drop. She never testified that she dropped a knife. She never testified that she held a knife. She never testified that she stabbed TA. Jodi’s testimony was that she had no memory of a knife attack.

              • Amy, your post describes the way I remember Jodi’s testimony about the knife, too. Listening to her, I had a sense of dissociation from my body. I had a sense that my body was not located adjacent to whatever horror had just taken place. In my mind, I only see darkness, (but not the pitch darkness of being in a cave.) Then, standing within that darkness, I hear the clank of a knife dropping onto the floor, but remote from where
                I am by about six to twelve feet. In a darkness. It is like there are two different scenes. In one, the horror is taking place, in the other scene I am standing alone. It is like one of those dreams in which ones body is frozen in time and place and you can’t move to get away. Jodi’s testifying words are within me, but I feel no knife, and I drop no knife. I only hear it clank to the tile.

                This is made up, kind of. But it feels absolutely real life. Kind of out-of-body. It feels like I actually experienced what Jodi was describing in her testimony.

                Even though this seems like crazy stuff, I feel compelled to post it anyway. Thinking someone else might get the same sensation that I do when my mind goes back to that place that Jodi lived through.

              • That always struck me as one of the dream-like memories that a brain can conjure on it’s own – particularly if one is trying to remember/imagine being in a certain situation.

                I don’t know if everyone does it, but I tend to kinda run movies in my head. Run a movie two or three times, even if it’s a movie I made up, it’s as solid as any memory in my head. I can see it just as clearly and in precise detail. Of course, I KNOW my brain conjured it, but it wasn’t trying to fill a gap in my memory at the time.

              • I found testimony wherein she said she dropped it and screamed. I checked that after others had said that she remembered “hearing” the knife hit the floor.

                • Thank you for clarifying that, TryInnocence.
                  It still supports her contention that she does not remember what happened.

      • She could also eventually explain the “tan ropish fibers” that were in the bathroom and on the stairs. The detective wanted to know what they were, so he brought them up first, but they don’t appear to match decorative pillows that I have seen, though that was her first guarded explanation. Those tassels don’t match whatever it was that could be seen on the sandals either, IMO. The fabric is soft, not gritty, more consistent with what she testified to – a decorative rope.

        Computer-wise, her story fits with more than the video he was watching in the early morning hours. In the retrial it was mentioned that he was working with Spy Bot on his computer at 2:40pm or so on the 4th. That would have been around the time that she took a shower.

        Also, regarding the blurry photograph of the bathroom ceiling…Why didn’t Jodi simply state that that shot was one of the ones she messed up? Instead, she said she “didn’t take that one”. She could already have been headed for the closet at that point, during that nearly minute-long gap after the previous shot and after the body slam, just as she testified.

        • Now that’s interesting TryInnocence. I don’t remember her saying that she didn’t take that photo. Was that during the interrogation or the trial?

        • Yeah – I’ve thought that Travis might have picked up the camera to examine it before he took off after her, and that photo might have happened then.

          • That makes perfect sense because it explains how she got away from him after he threw her to the floor. His attention could easily have turned from her to the camera when he saw her lying beside it, giving her the chance to roll away and run down the hall.

  11. Juror 17, what an unspeakable way for your fellow jurors to treat you. You are truly courageous.

    “The test of courage comes when we are in the minority. The test of tolerance comes when we are in the majority.”

    -Ralph W. Sockman

  12. I THANK JUROR #17, who HUNG the JURY in the re-sentencing phase of the Jodi Ann Arias trial, on that glorious day, March 5, 2015, and who totally snookered & destroyed the reputation of Martinez.
    …I feel that St Joan of Arc, Guardian Angel of Miss Arias, inspired that one juror, who REFUSED to vote for the death penalty of Miss Arias.
    …What pressures were applied to this JUROR #17, we will not know, but I offer this as an example:(although just a movie), but doesn’t movies reflect life experiences? …And, life experiences are reflected in movies?
    …Please Google: 12 Angry Men 1957
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mzPll63y2b0 (1 hr 36 min)
    …A Classic movie with Henry Fonda being that HOLDOUT JUROR who got the entire other 11 jurors to re-think their reasons for their desire to vote DEATH for the defendant in that movie.
    …And then, all of the 11 voted with Henry Fonda for a unanimous NOT GUILTY VOTE on that defendant.

    • I love this movie. Lost count of how many times I’ve seen it. Unfortunately, I doubt if even Henry Fonda could have done much with Jodi’s jury although he might have got some of them go back to their original vote.

    • I only wish the guilt phase of this trial had such a juror. There were far too many unanswered questions about what actually happened. And the general public simply doesn’t understand anything about an abusive relationship and its dynamics. Alyce LaViolette did her best to essentially “teach” on that subject while on the stand. Unfortunately, her amazing words seem to have fallen on mostly deaf ears. I was glad to hear her speak last October and say that she received a great deal of mail and calls from people who were listening. Sometimes, when I read other sites, I end up wondering if I was the ONLY person who heard a word she had to say.

      • People tend to minimize their personal experiences with abuse within a private, intimate relationship, while finding the slightest whiff of rude behavior in public to be very offensive. Part of the human condition, I suppose, as hypocritical as it is.

        • Yes, but it’s even more than that, TryInnocence. The only thing people understand or recognize is physical abuse. Black eyes, broken bones, scars … they are the sign that someone was abused, which makes that person a victim; and someone else did it, then making the abuser the villain.

          I’ll join the chorus of many abused women and say that I’d take the physical abuse ANY day over the emotional abuse, the psychological abuse, the spiritual abuse, the financial abuse, the isolation, the gaslighting. My ex would say that he never hit me. By that, he means very specifically, that he never hit me in the face. That’s true. He never did. He pushed me, he shoved me, he kicked me. He even punched me in the gut. But, he never “hit” me and never in the face. He caused a black eye once when he pushed me and my eye hit a light socket. He broke my toe when he stomped on my foot. He raped me. He dragged me from my bed by my hair. He pushed me down the stairs. He did many many of those things, but he never hit me in the face.

          Long before I began to admit that the pushes, shoves and kicks were abusive, I *was* constantly talking about the arguments, how I felt demeaned, etc., to a few people I was friends with, but I didn’t term it “abuse.” I didn’t understand that it was abuse then. I even typed up an argument we had where I was called all sorts of names and psychologically reduced to a piece of crap. That included a situation where he cornered me (in a corner) and punched the wall. I left out of my account the very last part where he pushed me. But, I presented that typewritten version of our argument to a friend who had studied psychology to ask her what I should do. I also gave it to a psychologist that I spoke to by phone. I even said he was like Jekyll and Hyde and I never knew which version of him would walk through the door at any given time.

          I was told all sorts of things ranging from my need to pray more to that I should try to be a better wife, cook him more dinners he loved, clean the house more frequently and make it a nicer home that he would love. Apparently, if I did all or even some of the above, it would have solved our problems. But it didn’t. I was also told that the types of arguments we were having were simply the difference between how men argue and how women argue. No one ever suggested that I was being abused.

          And then, finally, I came clean about the physical abuse when I could no longer deny it to myself. I was no longer just “clumsy” and fell down the stairs or onto the floor. That night, he pushed me to the floor and deliberately kicked me and continued to kick me over and over and over. He kicked me in the head. I was very ashamed to admit what had happened to others. But as soon as I did, suddenly, everyone’s tune changed. Then, suddenly, I wasn’t the imperfect wife who should do something else to improve our marriage anymore. Then, I was an abused woman who needed to leave and my life was in serious danger. Then, I should call a hotline for abused women. Then, everything else I’d ever told anyone about our arguments was clearly indicative of the terrible abuse I had been enduring for years.

          But everyone’s perspective changed drastically in an instant because there was suddenly my report of serious physical abuse. There had been physical abuse all along, but because I hadn’t described it as such — although I was clearly describing other forms of abuse and crying out for help — no one saw it as abuse. But add in the physical abuse, and everyone’s interpretation was diametrically opposed. Suddenly, all the people I knew were extremely concerned for my safety. Why hadn’t they been concerned all along? I was asking people if I could stay with them, if I could leave. I was desperate long before I admitted there was physical abuse, but no one reacted to my desperation until I said “And he kicked me.” On a dime, everyone’s opinion changed.

          How many times did Jodi tell someone else about her relationship with Travis and all the strange weird arguments they had or how he demeaned her? We know for a fact she talked about it with Sky Hughes. How many other people did she tell? We don’t know. But like me, I believe she left out any details about the more physically disturbing elements of the relationship.

          Why does it require the admission of physical abuse for anyone to pay attention? We know for a fact that the Freemans witnessed an uncomfortable angry exchange between Travis and Jodi on a trip. Can I honestly believe they were the ONLY other human beings who saw something questionable occur? There’s no guarantee in that circle that even if Jodi *had* told anyone about the choking or broken finger, they would have suggested that she was being abused.

          (As an aside, I simply cannot recount the number of times I have now been asked as part of a danger assessment “Did he choke you?” No, he never did. But, that is one of the major signs of serious danger in an abusive relationship — and yet, as in my case, it’s NOT the only one. But Jodi was choked.)

          We need to wake up, as a society, and respond differently to people who are describing their relationships to us, complaining, crying for help. We need not to tell women to pray more, clean more, cook more dinners, but to ask more questions and listen more. We need to help our abused “sisters” to document what is occurring — as Jodi has said. We need to get our heads out of the sand. Abuse isn’t ONLY physical. But, when it becomes physical, it’s often deadly.

        • It’s more than that, TryInnocence. As I think back on my own abusive marriage, I remember so clearly crying out for help to the few people I was able to speak with, and being told I should pray more, clean the house more, cook more dinners he would love, be a better wife, etc. Even as I described arguments where I was cussed at, demeaned, belittled, no one seemed to realize that it was abuse. That’s partially my fault because I left out the physical abuse portions. I was ashamed and/or really believed they were my fault because I was so clumsy. I remember typing up one argument and sending it to a friend who has a psychology degree and also, to a psychologist I was speaking with by phone. I omitted the last part of it, where he punched me, because I wanted them to view it objectively, and I still wasn’t ready to speak about the physical abuse, at that time. I was told by both that women and men argue differently.

          By that point, I was becoming pretty desperate, even asking friends if they would take me in if I ran away in the middle of the night. Everyone seemed to discount that as just me being upset. A while later, when I started admitting to the physical abuse, everyone’s opinion changed. It was as if a light bulb went off in their heads. “Wait, did you say he kicked you?” But his words had been kicking me for years and I’d shared that. When I admitted he physically kicked me, suddenly, I needed to talk to a hotline, I needed to get to safety, I was in danger. Hadn’t I been in danger all along?

          But, you see, everyone’s perspective changes when physical violence is involved. I’ll join the chorus of many abused women who will say that we’d take the physical abuse ANY day over the emotional, spiritual, financial abuse, and the isolation and demeaning. Those all leave much deeper scars.

          Did Jodi ever reach out for help like I did, without ever giving “all” the dirty details? We know she spoke to Sky Hughes and was very upset. We know the Freemans (young as they were) witnessed a very uncomfortable incident where Travis treated her poorly and was very angry. I’d be willing to bet there were others she reached out to. I’d also bet she didn’t talk about the choking or the broken finger or the rape. But she probably described an abusive conversation. And I’d also bet someone told her to try to be a better girlfriend or friend.

          I think this is what Juror 17 also heard while she sat there month after month. She read between the lines. She’s experienced it.

          • I’m sorry for my duplication in posts. It seemed as if the first post went “pfft” as it didn’t appear on the page, so I posted again, what I thought I said the first time. I’m so sorry for duplicating things.

            • “Why hadn’t they been concerned all along? I was asking people if I could stay with them, if I could leave. I was desperate long before I admitted there was physical abuse, but no one reacted to my desperation until I said “And he kicked me.” On a dime, everyone’s opinion changed.”

              Why, indeed? Why do people think that it is just part of the ebb and flow of things, that family or married life, or intimate partner life should be an unrelenting emotional war zone? Why do people think that is natural? It is not natural to be in a continual state of hyper-vigilance in the normal course of daily life. IMO people can develop PTSD just from living or working in a hostile environment.

              I will bring this discussion back to Jodi’s case and say that the hostile atmosphere in the courtroom, as generated by the prosecutor and presided over by the judge, affected the outcomes in both of these trials. The bullying was detrimental to the process of free-thinking. The Modified Allen Charge was unnecessary, especially since this was a redo. The state had already had one chance. The Modified Allen Charge was just more piling on – an echo of the piled-on excessive charges. It assuredly paved the way to inappropriate brow-beating in the deliberation room.

              There was wholesale bullying broadcast by TV networks in this case, and even more of the same in social networking. The judge was woefully remiss to not notice or care that there were wolves howling at the gates through both of these trials.

              This one juror who stood fast in her personal belief is commendable and deserves respect!

              • Thank you so much, TryInnocence. You have very eloquently stated something I was unable to convey — even when my message was sort of duplicated. It’s something we all should be aware of.

                Of course, yes, we all have problems. We all have bad bad days when we break down and ask others to listen to us, be there for us. That is a natural and normal state of life.

                However, if you have a friend or co-worker, maybe just a fairly casual acquaintance, who seems to be in a constant state of distress, all the time, on a regular basis, it’s time to look more closely at what is going on and either help or find someone who can help. Perhaps that person is actually just mentally ill. But perhaps that person is in an abusive relationship. Perhaps that person is in danger. Perhaps that person is suicidal. Perhaps that person is about to commit murder or harm another person. Perhaps that person is about to be murdered.

                We may not be able to do much to prevent what is about to happen, but we *should* do something. We should pay attention. We may feel we are not our brother/sister’s keeper, but if someone is reaching out to us and we’re not listening, we *should* wonder if anyone is listening.

                I don’t find a lot of credibility in Travis’s friends who now say they all thought something was “strange” about Jodi and that he was crying out for help to some degree and saying if he turned up dead, look at her as the one who did it. But, to be devil’s advocate for a moment, let’s say that they are actually being truthful. Enrique, his roommate, claims that all 6 of the people at his death scene, immediately pointed the finger at Jodi and believed she was responsible for his death. Really? Then, they must have discussed it beforehand and said “Jodi might kill Travis. Jodi is dangerous.” 6 people. 6 people thought that. Then, why didn’t ONE of them, just ONE, go to the police or their bishop or someone? Why? They loved this guy, Travis, he was their hero. And they thought he was in danger. But not one of them went anywhere else about it, and yet, they discussed it among themselves, apparently?

                The Hughes, who everyone in that community apparently knew pretty well, allegedly (forgive my sarcasm here) thought Jodi was dangerous more than a year and a half before Travis died, according to their own interviews. They asked her to leave their home and never come back. They were so disturbed by her one night that they came to the conclusion that they had to ask her to leave for the safety of their own human children. But, wait … they didn’t ask her to leave until the following day.

                Really? I don’t have children. I have cats. But, if I thought someone was in my home who I believed might harm my cats or me tonight right now, I would throw them out NOW. There would be NO delay in my actions. If they didn’t want to leave RIGHT NOW, I would be on the phone with my building security and law enforcement within a heartbeat. I wouldn’t be posting this. I would be acting. And, although I’m not a violent person, I have some kitchen knives I’d be grabbing.

                • It’s true, their actions don’t match their words. If they really believed Jodi was a threat, they would have taken some action to protect Travis or contain Jodi.

  13. Thank you so very much juror #17.
    Today we have more of the population that want to do as the rest are doing no matter the cost.
    Whatever is popular and in the media, if you don’t agree with them they TRY to make your life miserable.
    I always believed that if you didn’t believe in yourself you could fall for whatever the pressure you’re given.

    Thanks so much for showing people thay you can stand for what you strongly believe was right and
    also the law. Sadly it’s most of the people that want to hear what HLN and the media try so hard to enfluence others instead of doing the job and telling the truth, not drama to think they can sway a person
    away from their beliefs and values.

    When you don’t they will try to make your life miserable with more lies. Thanks for holding on to what you believed was right and being strong. Don’t listen to the negative about the deliberation.
    I believe that IF the others would have listened, they would have agreed with you.

    You did the RIGHT thing. Always believe that!! You are a strong person, don’t let anything tear you down.With caring and love and doing the right thing, you are my hero, Aly

  14. Here are two quotes I would love to pass onto Juror #17. The second one was written by Winston Churchill.

    1. “It’s better to walk alone than with a crowd going in the wrong direction”.

    2. “You have enemies? Good. That means you’ve stood up for something, sometime in your life.” – Winston Churchill

  15. I really hope that Juror 17 is able to read this site now. I hope she finds us. I hope she will read a bit, stay here a bit, and realize how much we support her and admire her. I don’t know her, none of us do. She may have thought Jodi is guilty as sin, but even so, she didn’t believe death penalty was an appropriate punishment and she wouldn’t sway to the masses. I don’t know that I could ever be as strong as she is, but I’d like to think that I would hold out to my own convictions and never submit to peer pressure.

    She wasn’t asked to determine Jodi’s guilt or innocence. She was just asked to determine whether or not Jodi should be put to death and she did not believe she should. She held out, sticking to her own beliefs, her own convictions. She held out even when the other jurors became angry with her. She tried to explain her views and they wouldn’t listen. They simply displayed the autopsy photos, gruesome as they are. From their interviews, they stuck those photos right in her face and she didn’t look at them. She’d already seen them, after all. We all did. Yes, they are gruesome. No one denies that. Does killing yet another person years later somehow take away from that? Nope. Not even if Travis Alexander had been killed by some crazy nasty killer who just wanted to see another person die (by that, I mean, NOT Jodi). Two wrongs have never made a right. And two deaths will never fix or correct the loss of one life. Never!

    What a really strong lady this juror is! And after all she’s been through in her own life. I read today that her first husband was charged in 1998 with a drive-by shooting murder, and again, in 1999, with a burglary. I don’t know if that’s true or not. He also not only abused her, but he was horribly neglectful (at the very least) of their daughters. If I was a twitter person, I would want to start a campaign of #belikejuror17 or something.

    Bless her heart! I hope her life is extremely happy (once all this BS dies down). I wish I knew her.

    • I was thinking just the same thing….that juror #17 might find some comfort by reading this site to know that there are people out there that hail her as a hero that stood up for what she believed in……

  16. I really hope this is satirical, especially with the typo in the name, but I just read this on Twitter:

    fentonlawless ‏@fentonlawless 27m27 minutes ago
    Wow. Tru TV announces a new reality show “Grieving with the Akexanders”.The length of the contract is forever.

    • Seriously??? Yup it’s all about the $$$$ if it’s true…… I guess they got used to the good life. 3 million wasn’t enough. Anyone one know if they would have to pay taxes on that……

      • Again, it could just be Fenton’s idea of a joke in posting this. However, nothing surprises me anymore. But to answer your question, yes, if there is a TV show, they would have to pay taxes. However, I’m sure they’d set up several tax shelter corporations/partnerships/trusts to avoid paying a great deal of them.

  17. I also heard that Chris and Skye Hughs are releasing a book about Travis, anyone else heard about this??? I guess they are gonna cash in anyway possible!

  18. Wow! I’m not about to share the stupid link here because no further publicity is necessary for that particular joke of a “news” site. But, apparently, because I post here, I belong to a “cult of followers.” OMG, I’m part of “The Following” TV show or something?

    Hahaha really? I haven’t belonged to a cult of any sort in all of my almost 50 years on this planet. So, this is a first. Actually, being a high functioning autistic person, I don’t usually belong anywhere as I’m always deemed “weird,” “different,” “too literal,” whatever. So, I finally belong in a group? Wow. I’m impressed. LOL. I always thought the “other side” were far more cultish than us. We don’t even all agree on every fact of this case, after all.

    So, um, HI my cult family on JAII! Waving at you all! Hello! I’m smiling big, can you see it?

    What do we do next? Should I put aside this glass of wine I just poured and start drinking some Kool-Aid? Should we have an orgy? Do we all commit suicide now? I mean, seriously. We’re a cult? Okay, then.

    Nah, let’s just continue to be us. Thanks for letting me belong though.

    • Still…hell no don’t put that glass of wine!!! LOL. I’m 64 and as far as I also have not belong to a cult other the my family….hahaha.

      Oh for the love of God that is funny…

      • I know, right, Cindy? It’s just waaay too funny.

        For the record (not that anyone is making one but you know, some might be, LOL), if I was to join a cult, for what it’s worth, I’d really like to be in the same cult as you. You’ve always been someone I really like here, and I have always liked you, since the beginning. We interacted a lot waaay back when, but you might not remember. I’ve been here, reading, afraid to post, trying to stay away at times, but I’ve been here for a long time, and I’m a different person today because my life is different. And I’ve so often said “aww” to your posts, you have no idea. I really think, if we’d met under other circumstances, we’d have had a blast together. Thanks for being YOU! You are perfect. You mean a lot to me, even though we’ve never met. You have helped me in ways you probably have NO idea about. You helped change my life. Thank you.

        • I haven’t quite figured out for sure who you are but I know we have had connected in the past. I understand what you are saying about what went on back there. I honesty think this trial brought up a lot of unresolved issues that all of us may have had with past abuse. Then the emotional out come of the trial and all the cyber attacks. But it’s a new time. We truely are a family and we do have so much respect for one another. It’s OK that we don’t agree on every point…. But the most important one, Jodi’s freedom!!! I’m so happy that you came back……I just figured out who you are….Omg I learned so much from you. Thank you for your kind words.

  19. Question: Was just watching the old tape of Gus Searcy on HLN. He was talking about Jodi calling him on June 5, 2008 @ 3:30 am. He claims Jodi was hysterical and told him Travis was dead. Gus asked her what happened and she told him she didn’t know. Gus claims he left for Cancun later that day and stayed in Cancun for about a week. I presume Gus mixed with other Mormons at the conference. Don’t you think he would have mentioned to someone there: “Too bad about Travis dying” or something like that. Gus may not have mixed with Travis’ crowd but you think he would have mentioned TA’s death to some/several Mormons there and the word would have spread. TA was probably fairly well known in some circles because of his Eddie Snell performances and public speaking.
    Note: I believed there was some talk about Gus mistaking the time or date. Anyone ever hear any explanation. Gus doesn’t seem like a guy that would stay in his room at a conference or not be talking to others. I know when someone dies among the people I know, the word spreads like wild fire.

    • In the Susterhien interview he also says that he asked Jodi where she was and she said she was in California.

      And so much of what he relayed about that conversation, and about him leaving for Cancun that day, really convinced me that he had the dates confused… that Jodi had called him on the night Travis was found, or in the wee hours of the morning when she seemed to keep calling people (Bishop Layton, different people that were in the yard, I think Searle maybe? calling to try to talk to police, etc.).

      It SEEMS like, given the scrutiny of Jodi’s cell phone records for the night of the fourth and into the fifth, and Gus’ assertion that he kept trying to give the information to the prosecutor’s office that he’d talked to her that night – I dunno, seems like someone would have put two and two together and gotten back to him. SEEMS like they’d have sought HIM out if his number turned up on her cell records for that night. Don’t you think?

      • Okay Journee, I get what you’re saying. And I agree. But I know I’ve seen some accounts around and about the internet that allege Gus was not forthcoming about everything because he was covering up for various Mormon women in his downline in PPL. And perhaps also for the woman he was involved with who left the country about that time.

        I’ve never seen the entire story about all this, but there are these strange “rumours” that float around which make me curious. Do you know that story? Can you share it?

        • He wasn’t ‘involved’ with the woman that was so afraid of Chris Hughes’ threats that she left the country. Charmaine Juban was her name, and IIRC, she was a mutual friend of Gus AND the woman he WAS involved with (want to say maybe even engaged to?) Juban was the woman who was in the car with Gus at the time that CH happened to phone about Gus being called as a defense witness – she was the witness to Gus’ end of the conversation that he would not name in court because of Juban’s fear of CH.

          And the only thing I know about Gus’ mention of any *other* women was to say he knew of many women who could testify to the truth about Travis, but they are Mormon women, they believe Jodi killed Travis, and they aren’t willing to jeopardize their families or their livelihoods to tell a truth that might set Jodi free.

          I think Gus is a straight up guy, I just think he was confused about the date and time of the call.

            • Wow! That’s a lot of intel that isn’t out there in the public domain. Gus also struck me as a straight up guy — okay, a bit of a blowhard-type — but not someone who would lie about something like this.

              What I find most intriguing is that there may actually be some truth to the story that a woman LEFT the US based on Chris Hughes’ threats if she testified? I can understand her leaving (I’m an immigrant myself). But that kind of fear about testifying? Wow! What could she testify to that made Chris Hughes so afraid? Why would he have to threaten her? Holy crap.

              • oh, and I don’t know that CH’s threats had anything to do with Juban testifying – just that he had threatened her, she feared him enough to leave the country, and Gus wasn’t going to name her in court BECAUSE she was afraid of CH

          • I agree Journee I think Gus was confused of the date. He seemed to really care about Jodi in a fatherly way.
            I still believe that Chris and Sky are up to their heads in this in some way. Something about their behavior isn’t right.

            • Covering up for Travis, just like Jodi was. It’s really not hard to figure this all out. People tend to overanalyze this case.

              • Okay, I’ll take you and raise you, tonysam. (Sorry, I really like your comments, but would like some meaningful discussion, so often not had elsewhere.)

                Why do so many over-analyze this case (myself included, and possibly you)? Why is it so intense for us?

                Me? I’m just another abused woman who got lost in the judicial system, essentially. He had a better, more expensive lawyer. I had no way to fight that and I was fucked (pardon my Egyptian) from the get-go). And, so, yes, I have an agenda of sorts — I want others to understand that abuse isn’t as easy as you might think. It’s not always Ray Rice in an elevator hitting the crap out of a beautiful woman, who later marries him. I related to far far far too many of Jodi’s stories and the texts/gmails/etc. to say “oh there was no abuse.” But I’ve lived it.

                I’ve also lived through something else I HATE to talk about. I was raped by a pseudo/almost-celebrity a long long long time ago (have fun digging that up, if you can even find it, because I can’t). I testified. I talked to the media. I was ridiculed. I was a pretty blonde woman in my late 20s or so (ring a bell?). He got away with it, that time. I’ll leave it there.

    • Great point Coldcase53. One I have always wondered about too. Gus isn’t Mormon as far as I know, but he is a GREAT salesman and so, one would expect him to have associated, bonded, chatted, etc., with others. If he already knew Travis was dead, wouldn’t he have told someone?

      I have a “former friend” (well more of an acquaintance really) who became wrapped up in another of those Mormon cultish pyramids. In her case, it’s a sort of salt water — the latest greatest scam out of Utah (PPL failed over time). It’s actually sad. She has given up EVERYTHING for this water thing and doesn’t even see how inappropriate she is. She just thinks that anyone who walks away from her (me included) doesn’t “get” it. And she’s broke at 60 years of age, living off her mother, alienating any friends she ever had with her brainwashed beliefs that this is THE greatest medical breakthrough since penicillin and it cures cancer (if you believe her), except it really doesn’t, per testimonials. Wanting to believe her, I tried it myself. I still have the same crow’s feet I had before I tried it. She will tell you they have improved and if I only used it a few more months, I’d look 25, but no, at almost 50, I look like I’m in my 40s and I’m somewhat blessed.

      Sadly, she can’t even spell her beliefs well enough to be considered, let alone believed. My heart aches thinking of her, but even I had to distance myself from her because it was just too painful. She’s in the hierarchy of the organization, much like Chris Hughes. But she is broke, broke, broke. I know they (as well as her mother) help her to survive. But it is a cultish thing. And very sad.

    • Not sure I understand. SO they believe it is A-ok to spend hours in front of a computer or tv screen watching porn and child porn and that is ok with them? Funny how quick that closed minded group is to jump on anothers beliefs but find their own lying, sin infested member worthy of saint hood. Weird and Strange. SMH Nope. . .I would never be a part of such a cult. It is a cult and nothing more IMO. I believe Travis kept Jodi, his private secret, so he could have the best of both worlds. He was a crafty manipulator who had his endeavors of deceit catch up with him. He was the predator, not Jodi. I have often wondered, did Travis call Jodi to come by and see him one more time only to silence her? Jodi was the mouse in this Cat and mouse game. Thank God the Cat lost.

      • R Love, You just rang a loud bell. Travis had to be realizing that Jodi was reaching critical mass in freeing herself from his ability to control her. She had written in her journal that her attraction to him was nearly gone. Jody was headed straight for Utah that night, and her commitment to the principles of mormanism was “purer” than TA’s at that point.

        How terrifying that must have been for TA. Psychologically, TA had been dehumanizing Jodi to the point where his own words signaled that he was creating more and more self-justification in his mind to “extinguish” Jodi.

        Wouldn’t it have been his final words to her when he literally said: “I’m going to kill you?” Then his explitive, which was code for “You made me do it.”

        In one of the last images of TA and Jodi together, TA shows a burned out man that has reached the end of the line. His right eye has redened coloration under it, and his whole contenance looks drained. It is easy to see that he is getting very little sleep due to his “addictions.”

  20. “I wanted you to see what real courage is, instead of getting the idea that courage is a man with a gun in his hand. It’s when you know you’re licked before you begin, but you begin anyway and see it through no matter what.”-Atticus Finch, “To Kill A Mockingbird”

  21. Hmmmmm a certain Alexander says the family does not solicit donations and then says if people want to send money through pay pal or directly they can do so. Isn’t that soliciting?

        • Pawns? Who? The Alexanders or the fools who have been suckered into giving their hard earned money? I presume you are referring to the fools.

      • AMEN! Maybe both sides have be pawns in this charade. It will be interesting to seat back and watch them now. Let’s see who will turn on who. Time will tell the truth. We have plenty of time but do they? That money that they seek will not make any of them happy. It will destroy them.
        Also, if the friends and family of Travis Alexander are still bothered and worried about their safety, still, that says a lot for me. They know Jodi wasn’t completely at fault in this whole matter. Why else would they worry about her? There is someone out there that knows the truth. They certainly must be shaking in their shoes. Aaahhh. Tick tock tick tock ……..

  22. Thanks to everyone who commented on my “Gus question.” Sorry, I had to duck out. My daughter arrived with a pizza and a problem. Nothing serious. Just a man problem. Or, problem man.

  23. So, I’ve been following the news outlets and the yellow tabloids referring to the Jodi Arias case and the bullshit that I’ve read about Juror #17 are so ridiculous. It’s impossible for ‘the ROCKSTAR’ not to have made a thorough background check on the potential jurors.

    As we all know, the jurors are the ones that decide on the verdict. They are the most important part of any high profile case. Is it possible that blood -thirsty Juan Martinez did not do his homework when choosing the jurors? I THINK NOT! I’m sure that he knew what size shoes each juror wore. So enough with the slandering about Juror #17.

    The pedo-hugging haters are just peeved that Jodi gets to live.

    I’m doing my own investigation on the MORMON JUROR (I’m not going to release the name for the time being) but I’ve found some shady info already. So let’s focus on this issue:

    It’s most likely that the MORMON JUROR *DID* have an agenda with Jodi Arias.

    So what the haters are trying to do is DIVERT the attention AWAY from the MORMON JUROR just so that LYING POS won’t be in the spotlight.

    Stay tuned, there is more to come.

    WE ARE TEAM JODI AND WE ARE VICTORIOUS.

    -RASNA Admin

    • HA HA ♥ RASNA to the rescue!!! ~~rubbing my hands together with glee~~ Can’t wait for an update!!!
      I hadn’t thought of it that way (AND WHY NOT?) but it certainly makes sense doesn’t it? Your right, that is exactly how the Travis followers work. Professional scammers, create lies and then divert attention from themselves quickly! Leave no boulder unturned. Well now, aren’t they clever. Hmmmmmm 😉

    • Rasna, I agree that Juan Martinez most likely did know.
      I doubt he had enough foresight ( who could even know alternates would be dismissed?, plus they were chosen out of a hat) __ to set up juror #17 and have her take the fall should things have not gone as he planned. That would be far- fetched, but his modus operandi is to leave wiggle room so others can take the fall.

      When did the anti- Arias party find out info on this juror? Nearly immediately, and the yellow journalists refuse to acknowledge that Martinez could have and would have found out all he care to know when he had great access to data bases on computers.
      Martinez has many years of experience checking these situations out. He would not leave anything up to chance. The juror revealed her ex- husband’s name, and I’ m sure it was easy to find out whatever he wanted to know.

      •I am pretty certain that the law asks that the juror discloses information with a cut off point of TEN years previous, so the info people are trying to use against her came from so many years ago, it was not even considered legally relevant. So they are barking up the wrong tree. [ I think this site also mentioned the TEN year cut- off point.]

      The only person responsible is Martinez. And juror #17 did nothing anyway.
      Plus, after the eleven disclosed to the media how they formed their opinion, they revealed they did a lot that was contrary to due process, and I am certain had they ‘ won’ their verdict would have easily been overturned.

      • The haters refuse to consider or accept the simple, obvious reason the juror voted against DP was because she believed in the sufficiency of one or more mitigating factors.

  24. Good morning, very interesting conversation over the weekend. What a bunch of smarty pants as R. Love would say. I have to say that Mr. Al’s find of the Allen charge really gave me a very positive feeling….that and the brady violations….:-)

  25. Morning everyone.

    Way up top someone said something about files and dates and such. I thought I’d respond down here because so much time had passed, but this may help in some way. I do know something about computers so this might add something. (BTW its because I know computers that I found Melendez’s testimony so lame).

    So a computer file system can be considered to be like a warehouse with shelves arranged into stacks (like at a library). But imagine that in this warehouse everything is stored in boxes that look exactly the same. So when they bring something into the ware house they pack it into these boxes. Some may all fit into one box, some may need two, or three or whatever. Now these boxes are placed on shelves. And at the same time they maintain a register that lists the shelf stack, and shelf location of each box, and the date it was brought in. That is exactly what a computer file system is like. The data is placed in files on the computer disk that is broken into certain predefined size blocks. And a location for each block of data is maintained in a register (on some computers these registers i are called the inodes). Now when you erase a file they don’t actually go erase the data in the files (so they don’t empty the boxes), instead what they do is just wipe out the inode entry (in the warehouse you would just erase the entry into the register. So when you go to put more data into the file system, what you do is find an area that is not currently used and overwrite it and make a new entry into the register. In the warehouse example what you would do is look at the register, find which boxes are not being used, empty some of those boxes and put your new stuff in there.

    So the xiff or exif data would actually end up in the boxes since it is a part of the pictures data, while the date the file was created on the computer would be in the register area (not to be confused with the windows registry). When you erase the file, the date the file was created on the computer would be lost, but not necessarily the xiff or exif data. (BTW there are two separate things exif and xiff and both are pronounced the same, so we have no idea what Melendez was referring to).

    Now remember how I said that you could have something that took 2 or 3 boxes in the warehouse. Well the next time around you bring in something that only needs one box. So you toss out the old stuff from one box and fill it with new stuff and the other two boxes still hold the old stuff.

    Now the exif, or xiff file info is a sort of header attached to the file and so fits into a part of one of those boxes. It takes a huge coincidence, (and I could probably research this further ) where I would almost say that it is impossible to wipe out just the xiff or exif data and not at least some of the other data. But remember that the actual data is only wiped out when you put something else into that box. As long as all you did was erase the file, then in our analogy above, you only erase the entry in your register, but do not actually touch the boxes. Those boxes only get touched when you put something new into them.

    So there is no way that those xiff headers got wiped out by erasing files, unless someone put something else on them. Now tahe camera always takes pictures of the same size, unless again you keep changing settings (like the resolution) between shots. So when you erase and overwrite you probably overwrite the whole picture not just the xiff data. So either someone kept changing camera settings when taking those pictures, and erasing and reshooting while doing all this, or someone mucked with that evidence. So in the act of all of this stuff, in the less than 2 minutes while those pictures were being shot, someone was adjusting camera resolutions, file format settings and erasing pictures while shooting others, or someone mucked with this data later.

    That is where my OCD was taking me.

    • Morning….Al. I want to ask a question about the computer. OK there was something on TA’s computer personal email or Business program that Chris H was in a big hurry to get at. I know that you can delete anything but it’s still in the boxes as you used. So I would assume that what ever it was would still be there right??

      I think we all know by now that the pictures have been messed with. DT should have used BN more for this. Not just TA eye picture.

      • Actually Cindy, there is a way to do exactly what you are alluding to. Remember all those scrubber programs they were talking about. That’s what they do. So going back to my warehouse example, let say I came back with a bunch of sand that exactly filled my boxes, asked the warehouse guy I wanted to swap my stuff, took out what was in the boxes and filled them with sand. Now all the boxes have is this nondescript sand.

        So what the programs do is open the file and fill it to the exact original length with garbage (could be all zeros, or some random stuff), then erase the file. So now what you have done is not only removed the file entry in the register but also filled the area the file occupied on the disk drive with nonsense.

        • But if it hasn’t been scrubbed – if the data is still there but ‘deleted’ – can it actually be found in ‘unallocated space’? Is there a way to look for it?

          • True, if it wasn’t scrubbed, or overwritten by something else you should be able to find all the info. Might take some work, but it’s there.

            • ah – I asked the wrong question, as usual

              What I wondered was HOW to look for it, if it is no longer listed in the ‘file catalogue’ so to speak. If it’s no longer assigned to a space, how can it be found?

              • Since you asked for it, here it is in all its gory details.

                OK so computer files fall into two basic classes (there are subsets under these basic classes). The two basic classes are text based files and binary based files. In text based files the data is stored in some kind of computer encoding that relates directly to text. Probably the most common one of these codings is what is called ASCII (American Standard Code for Information Interchange). So in an ASCII coded file everything is stored as ASCII code. Now ASCII code is directly translated to characters you see on your keyboard and a few others such as “carriage return”, “line feed” etc (yup stolen from the old typewriter stuff). So what you do is you dump the contents of a disc drive assuming it was ASCII. Every area of that computer that is ASCII will become immediately apparent. Now ASCII is stored as 8-bit strings (a bit is a memory location that can be a 1 or a 0). Each set of 8-bits represents an ASCII character (called a symbol). Now if you start at the wrong spot you might get garbage, but at most you would have to dump 7 times, shifting your starting point by 1 bit and you would have it. Once you have done this you can separate out all the ASCII regions in the disc.

                Now we move to the next type of data – binary. A lot of information is stored as binary data, such as music, or pictures, or maps, or just other stuff.

                But a lot of stuff that is stored as binary in fact includes ASCII headers because it is meant to be exchanged between different computers. So lets say we have a song we got from iTunes that is stored as an mp3 or a wav file (I’m sure you have heard of both of those). Now that needs to be exchanged between different computer types – so one person may use Windows, the next MacOS, or someone may play it on a phone using iOS (Apple) or Android (Samsung, etc). But all these guys need to be able to analyze the same data. So what they do is they tell you if the file is a mp3, it has a header that is exactly so long, and has the following information in the following locations. But to allow all these computers to use it this info is typically in ASCII. So I now start searching the ASCII stuff I dumped earlier for character strings that match known stuff. So a wav file always starts with RIFF followed by a number between 1 and 128, then WAVE, and so on. Once I find this I can read the header and I now know what I have. The same applies for all the various music file types, or mpegs, jpegs, other picture or video files etc. (As a matter of fact the xiff or exif headers are examples of that. It also applies to stuff like pdf files and files created by programs such as Microsoft Word, Excel, PowerPoint and just about anything else you can think of. This is what allows for exchange of info between different computers and such. So you go through and now find all the stuff that’s a known entity.

                Then you may be left with pure, raw binary files. So sometimes programs create files with absolutely no such header info, because the only entity that uses that data is that one program, and it knows how to decipher the file. So you first look at what programs are on the computer and start running the files through them. You could get lucky. Next you look at the extensions on the file (like .pdf, or .xls, or .doc). Sometimes people use known extensions and you can trace the program based on the extension. If that doesn’t work either you can run the data through programs you might suspect them of being used on. If that doesn’t work you next start trying to see if there are patterns in the data that can lead to some clue (in fact the most common way of encrypting data is to break the patterns that exist), but you are now in the realm of data decryption which I don’t have enough space to go into here, but if you want all that detail let me know and I will.

                The big issue arises with a thing disk fragmentation. Remember my example with the shelves and boxes and what not. We’ll us that for illustration again. So lets say Cindy takes all her Christmas decorations to the warehouse. The clerk says how many boxes do you need, and if she’s like my wife she says “Oh about 18”. So the warehouse clerk open his register and says the first box I have is A1, the next is A3, the next is B17, and so on till he’s gotten 18 boxes. So he creates an entry in his ledger called “Cindy’s Christmas Stuff” (that’s the file name) and enters all the boxes he assigned to her (that’s the inode table). And now her file is “fragmented”. Now if someone were to wipe out the file entry you would have no clue as to where her stuff was. So what would you do – You’d open every box in the warehouse to see where her stuff was. Sort of like we do in our basement sometime every December looking for that one particular angle that goes on top of the tree.

                The exact same thing happens on computer disks. With one extra twist, in that files larger than a certain amount are always fragmented to allow more efficient retrieval of data. (Again that’s a whole thesis waiting in the wings so just take my word for it).

                So if you had someone erase the file we would have to reconstruct the fragments. But its actually not that difficult, because the headers tell you how big the file is, the computer always uses a certain scheme for fragmentation (as in we know the box sizes) and there are other clues in the data to look for fragment boundaries, etc.

                However, as you may have realized a lot of this has to depend on what exactly was stored on the disk, and how. So when you go about analyzing a disk, you have to keep tweaking your tools to match what’s on that disk. That’s why the stuff Mr Smith said about using code he could muck with made perfect sense to me.

                Hope this helps.

                • Gosh, Al –

                  way to make me feel sorry I asked! haha

                  But I do thank you so much for the trouble you went to. I understand more than I think I wanted to. 😐

                  Actually, the part about unpacking the boxes to find the angel? That would have sufficed.

                  Someone would have to physically look for it, couldn’t just send the computer to find it and be done in a flash. It would take time.

                  I don’t think CH had that kind of time, Cindy.

                • Well, this explains to me why Pseudonym Smith knew what the names of the files were but couldn’t see the actual content anymore.

  26. I only listened to the first 32 minutes of this blog talk radio but am actually quite surprised to hear all participants, including Beth Karas, speaking with reason. As in, the death penalty should have been taken off the table and never gone to retrial, as in Juror 17 is to be admired for sticking to her guns, as in justice was served, and even their references to the horrendous lunch mob mentality. Here is the link, if it is allowed to go through here. http://www.blogtalkradio.com/jordan-king/2015/03/06/anne-bremnerbeth-karas-dwane-cates-on-jodi-arias

    • A few interesting tidbits from Karas about Perryville:

      Yes, Jodi will be in solitary for two years, but after only 30 days she will be able to start participating in group activities, group therapy, art activities, she can have a job – she just goes back to her solitary cell. And, uh, hey, who wouldn’t rather have a private cell than rotating unknown roomies? And Sandy told Beth that Jodi actually enjoys being alone. Also Beth had an opportunity to visit another woman at Perryville recently and asked what the buzz is about Jodi, how do the women there feel about her? Because, you know, all the haters are saying that the really tough women at P’ville just can’t wait to take Jodi down, etc. The woman told Beth that Jodi is very well thought of there, that a number of women at P’ville went through Estrella first, had an opportunity to get to know her an like her.

      Thanks for sharing this link, D!

      • Mine too, Journee, especially because I had thought Beth Karas had gone 100% over to the dark side. Also found it quite humorous that she cannot bring herself to watch the HLN garbage. I did get the feeling that towards the end of her tenure on HLN she was becoming disenchanted there and it seemed to me like she was being forced to the HLN darkness. However, when she joined the Wild About Trial group I thought again, dark side. So it was refreshing to hear the old Beth Karas on this blog radio. Still not understanding why she is allowing all the venom to be spewed on her FB page though. Also interesting how the commentators on the radio blog cast were also in agreement that it was JMs option to get rid of this juror and he chose not to. So thank you, JM!

      • That is such good news, Journee.
        Your information relieves my mind so much; I didn’t want to believe all that was predicted by others. Jodi will make the most of her time there, which hopefully won’t be very long. She is an easy-going person and seems very likeable. That’s why we are all drawn to her, isn’t it?! 🙂

    • Oh, oh. Where is that typo elf when you need him? Hopefully it is obvious I meant lynch mob and not lunch mob. LOL

  27. GOOD MORNING TEAM JODI!!!! ♥ Onward and Forward We March to FREEDOM FOR JODI!!

    Optimism is the faith that leads to achievement. Nothing can be done without hope and confidence.
    Helen Keller

    • Once again, I’m not saying Jodi made a false confession, but it’s possible the Reid Technique (if that’s what Flores was using and it appears he was) did affect Jodi during her interrogation.To me, a lot of Jodi’s denial during the first day with Flores rings true. The Reid Technique seemed to leave Jodi feeling hopeless with no way out. She had denied hurting Travis over and over to no avail. Flores and later Det. Rachel Blaney were not believing her. They had already judged her guilty. Jodi reached a point on Day 2 with Det. Blaney where she says:
      JA: “And if…if i give you some false confession that just makes it look just as bad. So there’s really not…” Blaney: “No, we do not want you to give a false confession.”
      Later Jodi tells the “home invasion” story which may or may not be a result of the interrogation technique. I also agree with Carol’s comment that Jodi’s testimoney over 18 days is believeable. So, I feel I still don’t know exactly what happened. I believe some parts, some I just don’t know what to believe.

      From “False Confessions and the Reid Technique – Response from John E. reid & Associates”

      Confessions obtained by the Reid Method fall into two basic categories:
      1.Compliant Confession – the suspect confesses for a reason. Investigators may have promised the suspect that they will be lenient if he confesses. On the other hand, he may have become so fatigued and upset by the interrogation process that he will do anything to end it.
      2.Internalized Confession – the suspect begins to believe that he actually committed the crime. This can happen if the person is particularly susceptible to suggestion. It can also happen if the investigator repeats the same scenario so many times that the suspect begins to feel as though he remembers it.

    • That is the way to start my day! Great detective work CC53!
      They ACTUALLY ADMIT USING IT in Maricopa County, Arizona!!!!! WOW

      The Reid Technique has fallen into disrepute by many in the judiciary here in NC. Hopefully other jurisdictions are also seeing the fallacies in the technique!!!

  28. Yes, I do thank Juror # 17 for standing her ground, and sparing Jodi’s life. Bullying should not be allowed, by other jurors, because a juror votes differently then the rest, nor should the press had even brought her up at the news conference, it’s media frenzy. It’s not like Jodi is going home, that state prison is no picnic. All the time she spent in the Estella jail, people have no clue, and the mental anguish she had to endure with other issues along with the death penalty over her head for almost seven years, would be enough to drive someone mad. The only deal they offered her, was to take a life sentence, with no appellate rights. There are no real winners in this, no matter how you slice it. It’s amazing that Montgomery said in his press conference, that Jodi received a fair deal. baloney, Jodi could believed she could not even speak on her behalf to save her own life, that is pretty sad… What justice is that????

    • I can imagine the bullying that she endured. She is to be commended for her courage, strength, and conviction. The 11 jurors and 3 alternates who ripped her apart are cowards IMO and their public apology for not being able to put Jodi to death is appalling and probably was done to save themselves from the wrath of the lynch mob. They fail to acknowledge that at least 50% of them had their minds made up from Day 1 of deliberations also. That makes them no different than Juror 17. They stuck to their conviction just as Juror 17 stuck to hers.

      • Correction: They do acknowledge 50% of them had their minds made up from Day 1. So they are no different than Juror 17, etc., etc.

      • Again the mob mentality: “We are right simply because there’s more of us than there are of you so if we hold on to our convictions it’s because we know the truth, but if you dare do it, well, it must be that you have an agenda. After all, might makes right.”

      • From listening to juror #4 and the fake blond woman who did all the talking, it sounds like they made it hellish for her. I know that I would not want to spend more than a few minutes with #4 and that woman said she had to apologize for her behavior a few times. There should have been at least one other person who had the decency or character to stand up for her. Instead, they become this angry mob out to lynch their fellow juror, simply because she had a different view.

        AZ seems to be filled with very angry, disturbed people like the 11 nameless thugs on this jury, and the psychologists in that state are no better. Scary, scary place for nice people to live.

  29. I would like to know more about what made five people capitulate so early on. Was it Sherlock Holmes’ brilliant revelation about “the lie”? Or was it the continuous exposure, by the six others, to the autopsy photos? I can only believe these people saw a mitigating factor for saving her life but were equally hungry for an excuse to kill her.

  30. And I cannot believe the stupidity (or actually I can) of the people who went along with the idea of asking the judge to exchange this juror for someone possibly more friendly to their opinions. If I had been on that jury I would be screaming my head off about the inappropriateness of that and if they persisted I would have insisted my juror number be on that note as one who did not approve.

  31. I’d also like to know why the alternates felt so comfortable going on national television with the eleven for death. They weren’t even in deliberations but apparently too would have immediately voted for death. We can literally thank our lucky stars that Juror 17 was not randomly picked as an alternate.

    I’m revising my original statistical hypothesis that 11 out if every 12 people are closed-minded morons. Let’s change that to 14 out of every 15, a whopping 93%.

    • I think the majority of death- penalty advocates are inherently sadistic to varying degrees.
      The eleven were comfortable going on t.v. because they knew they would be in the appropriate milieu suitable for vocalizing their hate.

      I think many people in the U.S. are motivated by more than a desire for revenge. They are motivated by a wish to relentlessly TORTURE.
      We see avatars featuring cute children, and the accompanying comments state the most vile, cruel, inhumane things.

      These sadists habitually live life on the surface, and mundaneness, and the norms of society keep their perverted, evil minded ( I hesitated about writing ‘evil’, but it is the correct designation.) souls from unleashing such hate, until they find an outlet that they can use as an excuse to be evil, and in the cases where death penalties factor, they can live vicariously through the inhumane practices of the justice system.

      The eleven already had hateful hearts (you can’t bring out something unless it was already there), and the system is unfairly rigged to not only attract, but require people to be inclined to sadism and hate.
      Thankfully juror #17 was the exception.

      What a sick society that so many believe it is deviant and immoral to NOT want to torture and kill the convicted. And there is no compassion towards the family of the convicted.

      People on social media have said religion is not supposed to be a factor in assessing anything related to the death penalty, but they will accept ‘eye for an eye,’ but compassion is a big no- no, and viewed as an alien imposition on reality.
      They can’ t understand the rightness of humane people seeing the humanity and dignity of ALL human-beings.

      However someone might want to conceive of “God,” they refuse to realize that “God” by nature, works eternally to free everyone from “hell,”
      and NEVER does “God” condemn anyone to hell.
      The belief in an avenger God who judges and decides whether to put someone in hell, is a projection of human imagination, a projection of a human wish to punish.

      There is no “hell.” The only hell that exists is the hell that human beings create.

      “God” is real, but no conception or definition of “God” is real.

      Reality is an organic Whole, always in continuous flux, always in the process of integrating the Whole at a higher level of complexity.
      Opposites come into existence together; they are complementary. Once a dynamic reaches its extreme, it reverts to the opposite extreme.

      The outrageous hatred, sadism, and oppression of the feminine, as exhibited in the Jodi Arias trial, has reversed its course, and balance is being restored at a higher level.

      THANK YOU JUROR #17 !!!

      “I am good to people who are good. I am good to people who are not good. Because virtue is goodness.”
      ___ Lao Tzu

      • Wow Amy, well said.

        And religion, I’m sorry has everything to do with the death penalty. Look at the application of the death penalty in the country. The more religious the state the more likely the death penalty applies. The whole concept of the DP in a Judeo-Christian (or other biblical based society such as Mormon, Islam, etc) is based on the eye for an eye concept.

        There is no other argument for the DP. It obviously has no deterrence value. If so it should have stopped murder after all the thousands of years for which it has been used. It has no rehabilitative value, because how do you rehab someone you’ve already killed? Unless you believe that something in the after life will take care of it, in which case we are back to religious arguments.

        But more importantly you have to be able to justify the application of this cruel and barbaric punishment to the general populace. At one time they used to be a little more straightforward about it and just call it revenge. Now they have to couch it in other terms and deep in there you’ll find the religious code words.

        But I do so agree with you – How can people feel and express the vile hatred they do for someone they know nothing about?

        It has to have something to do with an offset in their own moral compass.

      • Thanks, Amy. I’ve commented to people on Twitter about displaying their children when they are tweeting hate. Some of them appear to be using their real names, too. It boggles my mind. They usually tell me to do something to myself that’s humanely impossible (I think that might be the Clint Eastwood joke he told at the Republican convention a few years ago when he was talking to a chair that was supposed to represent President Obama).

    • Yes, I read that; it is incredibly well written and very ‘on – the- mark.’

      Perfect characterization of Juan Martinez:

      “… a rabid prosecutor who, at times, reminded me of a pygmy carrying a decapitated head.”

    • The reason JM/Horn/Flores lied about the order of the gunshot wound is actually very simple. It has to do with AZ’s self-defense rule. In most instances self-defense is what’s called an Affirmative Defense. In normal circumstances the prosecution must prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt while the defense needs to do nothing. However in an affirmative defense the burden of proof now shifts to the defense. So if you are in a state where self-defense is an affirmative defense the defense needs to prove self-defense beyond a reasonable doubt, and the prosecution doesn’t have to do squat about it. However here is where AZ is different. AZ is one of those exceptions where self-defense is not an affirmative defense and the prosecution must actually disprove a claim of self defense. This is actually a really big deal, because in essence you have spun years of jurisprudence on its head and are now asking some to disprove a negative. That is why the defense typically has no burden of proof, because it is really hard to prove that something did not happen. However in AZ, in all its wisdom, the legislature has done just that to the prosecution. Once someone claims self defense, the prosecution has to prove that it was not self defense.

      So, it would seem that all a defendant needs to do is raise the claim of self defense, and the game changes. However, I am sure that in order to raise a self defense claim the defense needs to make a proffer of evidence that backs their case, otherwise the judge probably won’t allow them to raise that defense. And obviously to do this, and also clear any disclosure rules the defense would have to divulge the story they intended to present in court. As soon as this happened, JM is in a bind. He now has the story Jodi is going to tell on the stand. And he has absolutely no evidence that can be used to contradict her story. But he has the burden of proof to disprove her story. Whoops.

      So I am sure he was scurrying around trying to find some way around the mess he was in. I’m sure he probably had every forensic thing looked at again. He knew he couldn’t positively tie the gun to Jodi’s grandfather, and everything else she said jived with the evidence. So I think he took a big huge gamble. He was going to get Horn and Flores to lie. Because if they said the gunshot came last, it would contradict Jodi’s story, and given a partially sympathetic jury (a DP qualified one) he hoped to brazen his way through this issue. I bet what he was relying on was that no one on the DT would be able to explain this nuance to the jury, or even if they did it wouldn’t matter.

      And the fact of the matter is that the DT got completely out-lawyered by Juan on this. Firstly it took them until rebuttal through Geffner to even get to the dura mater thing. Secondly no one ever laid out the motive for this lie to the jury. I believe, this had nothing to pain and suffering, or any of that stuff. It was simply his way of claiming Jodi lied about the events, and that is exactly what he did. But if the jury knew that he had a bigger motive behind it, I wonder, if at least one person may not have changed their opinion. Not necessarily because they felt that Jodi was innocent, but because they wanted to penalize the state for this trick. All of a sudden there would have been a motive they could attach to the lie.

      It sort of reminds me of what happened in the OJ case. The conventional wisdom at the time was that OJ was acquitted by an all black jury – but that wasn’t true. The jury was actually diverse in racial make up. I believe what happened in the OJ case was that the jury penalized the state for lying and being shoddy. In the OJ case what you had was the LAPD trying to bolster the evidence. I know a person who is an ex-police officer who told me that what the stupid idiots did was frame a guilty guy. However he also told me that it was pretty common in police circles to often “rearrange” evidence ever so slightly to make sure there is no ambiguity about guilt. I believe they did that in at least two instances in the OJ case, the blood drops on OJ’s sock and that stupid glove that Furhman moved. And they got caught. And that was all she wrote.

      So if someone had explained to Jodi’s jury as to why the prosecution had a motive to lie about the order of the gunshot wound, above and beyond some pain and suffering issue, one might have had a slightly different result. But then being AZ who knows.

      • That is a terrific explanation Al, of why the prosecution had to get “their side” to change the story from (Jodi’s) “accidental” gunshot first, to “intentional” (their description) gunshot fired last. …And, I think that JSS knew exactly what & why they were putting in an (((untruthful sequence))) of the (gunshot) event. …And, surely they tricked the Defense Team initially. …And, even if the DT knew what was being done they could not explain the reason why the prosecutor was changing the gunshot sequence to the jury, because JM overloaded the jury with other meaningless information to consider.
        …And, I like your reference to the OJ trial. …I also followed the OJ trial & heard it said & I do believe he was acquitted because the police tried to frame a “probably guilty or maybe actually guilty” man.
        …And I do believe that the state of Arizona is trying to frame a “totally innocent or overcharged woman” who is Jodi Arias, who may be actually totally innocent.
        …And, whether the small 25 cal bullet (in the Arias case) went through the dura matter don’t make any difference, (IMHO) because there are documented cases of much larger objects (((fired completely through a person’s head))) & they lived normal lives. ..It only made Travis “killing mad.”
        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phineas_Gage …Kevin Horn should know this.
        …I mentioned on ((this site)) about Kevin Horn was incorrect if he argued that a small caliber 25 cal bullet to the face/head would have made Travis totally incapacitated to just fall down. …The diameter of a 25 cal bullet is only slightly larger in diameter than a 22 cal bullet (only by the measurement of the thickness of a credit card. …Most people can not tell the difference by just finger touching.
        ..The 22 cal is the least powerful handgun. …The 25 cal (non hollow point) the 2nd least powerful.

          • Thank you Al, for going a little deeper into the explanation of just how LOW POWER the 25 cal (ACP, Automatic Colt Pistol) ammunition is, even lower than the 22 LR ammunition. …And, we certainly know (with near certainty) that the bullet that was found in Travis, was not a hollow point & not a magnum.
            …It was not the kind of ammunition that Jodi’s grandpa had, so reason would be that it was not grandpa’s gun. …Jodi did not take grandpa’s gun. …(We all know that).
            …And, of course a 25 cal ACP can kill a person, even a pellet gun can kill a person. …But the Medical Examiner can not truthfully say: that the shot that Travis received did anything more than make him extremely mad at Jodi. …And Travis would surely have killed her, as we believe he was trying to do, (IMHO). …The shot that Travis received was accidentally and first, just as she said, she did not lie.
            …The prosecutor tricked the jury with the help of prosecution witnesses especially Kevin Horn and Esteban Flores, and Judge Sherry Stephens allowed this to happen. …We all know that.

      • The defense definitely did not do their homework on the whole dura mater issue. If they had they would have blown Horn out of the water on the spot with no wiggle room. If the jurors even bothered to read his report they would see that Horn writing that whole dura mater thing off as a typo was in no way plausible and was nothing more than a huge lie. Bottom line is that lie was told for no other purpose than to help JM put Jodi to death. Really despicable. What I don’t understand, and maybe you can clear this up Al, is did the judge not have the responsibility and or authority to call a mistrial right then and there? She had to know that was a lie. Or is she covered by jury instructions that explain jurors can chose to believe or disbelieve, in part or in full, the testimony of any witness? There was so much lying going on in that trial it was absurd. Personally, I would expect a defendant to lie, but if I am on a jury where the prosecution is lying, then I vote not guilty. Period.

        • Actually this judge took a route that a lot of these bozo judges take. In fact if you want to see that in writing look at her 17 page decision denying the DT’s mistrial motion with respect to the computer stuff and Melendez and Horn’s testimony.

          To paraphrase here’s what she said – she agreed Melendez lied and was sort of shaky on Horn. But she then went on to say that this is a matter for the trier of fact (the jury) and the DT had the chance to point out the issue, and her instruction to the jury kets them decide what to believe and what not to believe so she was going to wash her hands off the issue.

          As my buddy Sheldon Cooper would see – BAZINGA.

            • So who has the responsibility or obligation to hold these people accountable for perjury? Apparently, if the jury doesn’t hold them responsible and if there is no penalty for perjury then it will just continue on as standard operating procedure. Very scary for the justice system as a whole.

          • Omg Al, I remembered in the 1st trial when JW was questioning Horn about his typo and just dropped it!! You were screeming at her…. Yup the DT dropped another ball. But why???? JSS was right they didn’t make a issue at the time….

            • Just one of those times. Man that whole thing drove me nuts. Couldn’t figure most of that stuff out – why everyone seemed asleep at the wheel.

              • Al and others, Please see Jade’s “Justice Denied” material. It has its own box up on the right side here––––––––––––––> Once you get there, scroll down to the “State-sanctioned Murder Twelve Angry Men” post. Carol Handy and I made comments there today. Didn’t realize at the time I made that comment that you’d been focusing on the same issue on this page today.

                • “Justice Denied” is right under the heading, “Latest Jodi News and Info” at right.

        • IMO it’s doubtful the state could have gotten a conviction at all if they hadn’t twisted around the wound sequencing. The MOST they would have had is a manslaughter/heat of passion situation.

          • Actually the more I think about it the more I am convinced that they actually twisted this around twice – not just once. During the preliminary probable cause hearing for the aggravating factors one of the things JM was going for was this whole mutilation of the body thing. That meant that he had to argue that at least something came after the death. Now the easiest sell is that a gunshot to the head is going to clobber the person being shot (most people would believe that if no one pointed out how weak a 25 ACP is). It’s sort of like saying – heck judge he had a bullet in his head – you know he was dead. Then he could point to all the other wounds as post-mortem mutilation. But that judge didn’t buy it. So now he twisted it the other way, basically because it was the only argument he could use to actually challenge Jodi’s account of the situation. Remember that the forensic evidence all matches what Jodi testified to.

            • Al, I’ve always believed that Morty would have made his way toward the aggravator either way. He argued for the death penalty right from the start, as you say. There were two weapons, after all.

              Just since this re-trial I’ve heard two MORE stories about people walking around with a bullet or bullet fragments in their head. The written autopsy report said that the knife wounds killed him – not the bullet, so the defense had that to point to, the switch of the gunshot notwithstanding.

              The defense had the ADVANTAGE in this trial (vis a vis self-defense), especially, as we know, by virtue of AZ’s rules about the burden being on the prosecution to disprove the defendant’s claims. Nurmi even said Jodi had the advantage in one of the earlier court documents. That is, until Morty made his big de facto argument based on a shell casing that could have been kicked around.

              The gunshot-last switch was asserted in order to sweep away any notions of self-defense by abrogating Jodi’s claim of an accidental gunshot, alleging instead malicious INTENT in firing the weapon. This maneuver covered a lot of ground for the state…all the way from Yreka to Mesa, in fact. It was a HUGE distraction from the autopsy report as well, because if one accepted that the shot was last, the vital question of whether or not it would have been fatal was rendered MOOT.

              And, if the shot is last, who wants to go through the grisly exercise of trying to figure out how the knife wounds were inflicted? Jury Numbification ensued.

              This was how the state convicted Jodi Arias – with the Hitchcock-like scenario that she gratuitously shot him after the fact. Trying to ferret out what else the twelve in the first trial must have seized on in convicting her is an interesting and compelling exercise, but IMO also another distraction.

              The only element of the altercation that both sides agreed on is that the knife wounds killed him.

              And Morty COUNTED on that agreed-upon fact to be the ultimate distraction from the tragic and potentially exculpatory significance of WHEN the gun was fired, and WHY.

              • Ughhh..the whole bullet laying in blood thing…was the bullett covered in blood or just some of it I don’t remember…if only some, and I know some of you on here might hate me, but I can pick up a shell casing and set it down in a pool of blood…devils advocate and all. Did they ever test that for fingerprints?

    • Yes, Wendi may well be yet one more battered woman claiming self-defense persecuted by Juan Martinez. According to Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wendi_Andriano): “After her direct appeal was over, Andriano’s case entered post-conviction relief. For this, her appeals attorneys claimed prosecutor Juan Martinez’s emphasis on her affairs ignited female stereotypes and called it ‘prosecutorial misconduct’.”

      • Justus,
        Martinez seems to start trials by destroying the reputation and credibility of defendants and portraying them in the worst possible light. Once he gets the jurors to hate the defendant, he’s ready to get into twiisting, manipulating and destroying evidence. And, to make sure he wins, he tops it all off with innuendo, speculation and lying.

  32. YES,YES, we can thank our lucky stars that juror #17 was NOT randomly picked as an alternate. …Seems like the other alternates would surely have voted for the Death Penalty if they were NOT dismissed.
    …Our lucky stars, or Mademoiselle Jodi’s Heavenly Stars, ….or Heavenly Intervention??
    …Or, “Joseph Dunninger, ESCAPOLOGIST” (1892-1975) transferring his magical intervention, he said he would come back from his death, or something like that, showing a sign …???
    …I did post on this site and other sites as well http://www.disqus.com/WLOPEZ4JAA over a year ago that the judge ((unknowingly)) selected Sept 8th as the start of this re-trial (then changed it) and I mentioned online that Sept 8th is the celebrated Nativity (birthday) of the Virgin Mary Mother of Jesus Christ, that other innocent defendant: JESUS CHRIST, …IHSOUS, …IESVS ……
    …And I asked Jodi’s Guardian Angel, St Joan of Arc, to show a sign. …And, Juror #17 escaped the “alternate cut”.
    …And, as “The Amazing Dunninger” the masterful “escapologist” said many times that:
    … “FOR THOSE WHO BELIEVE: NO EXPLANATION IS NECESSARY. …AND, FOR THOSE WHO DO NOT BELIEVE: NO EXPLANATION IS POSSIBLE”.
    …I continue to pray for more Heavenly Interventions until Mademoiselle Jodi Ann Arias is released sooner than later.
    ………(((((all of Jodi’s supporters))))) …..and …..(((((JUROR #17, March 5, 2015)))))

    • Perryville prison terms (told to Kathy by laughing inmates for her performance)
      ROY = Rumor on yard
      LURD = Lesbian until release date

      • That’s a good video, KG is funny. But, that last group was sad, on 24 hour lockdown and that one girl was pregnant… Will be a nasty placei think. Will Jodi be on 23 hour lockdown, I wonder, since she will be in maximum security most likely LWOP (we’ll see what JSS says)?

        Maureen

  33. In response to Cindy’s “Say what??? Sorry”.

    Don’t blame me, talk to Journee. She should have never opened that door and let the geek out. Kind of reminds me of the sign my daughter put outside my home office : “Beware of Nerd – Can be injurious to your sanity”

    • Oh…..now that’s funny. How does a hippy turn into a nerd/geek?

      I’m not blaming anyone. I’m sure it was very informative to anyone that understands
      computers. Some of it I did but I lost what you were getting at…. But the boxes helped.

      • Hey, I am a man of many secret and hidden talents.

        My wife who is reading this over my shoulders says if one of those included closing cupboard doors we’d really have something going.

            • No, you couldn’t be since he knows zero about computers. But I always tell my husband I feel like Vanna White (in the old days when she used to have to physically turn those little doors to reveal the letters) when I walk into the kitchen and I have to walk the line and close 8 cupboard doors and 2 or 3 drawers. This happens several times a day. And it is not limited to just cupboard doors, though those are the worst. My husband can’t close any door. Closet doors, vanity doors, screen doors, etc. He says he isn’t done with them, but I truly believe he just doesn’t know how. As far as the kitchen goes, good thing he is a good cook! My deepest sympathies to Mrs. Al. 🙂

              • What do they say about doors – open them you never know what lies ahead. No one ever says close them.

                Plus efficiency demands you never close a door. See if you close the door you have to expend the energy to close the door and then open it again. So for every door you close, you have to eat just a little more food to make up for that energy, which then means someone has to move the food to the market, so that contributes to burning fossil fuels, which in turn leads to global warming. So be a responsible denizen of the Earth – DON”T CLOSE DOORS.

              • No cars allowed during freshman year at college. They both have to live on campus for the first two years and don’t need cars. So there. Got out of that one till the summer. Right now, when they’re home one borrows my car the other gets Mom’s, but we’ll see what happens in the summer.

                Summer is almost 4 months – so we might have to figure something out. I’m pressing for summer jobs. But with two kids in college, both out of state, we’re about as broke as you can get – even though they both have partial scholarships it’s still about 80k/year and then allowances and travel and all of that. Add two cars on top of that and we’re in commissary money territory.

                • Oh wow there goes that second honeymoon. I guess I would be pressing for summer jobs also. I was lucky my younger son only needed living money but that was over a grand a month. He also had scholarships and a small student loan. Needless to say mom’s was not happy when he decided to quit and forgot to tell me….grrrrr.

  34. Lawyer for Alexander’s family says plans for wrongful death lawsuit underway

    CBS5 – not worth posting, but this report says the family is going after her artwork sales and even her commissary money.

    • CC like I said they are not going to be happy unless Jodi is chain to the wall and only given bread and water the rest of her life…
      There are ways around the art work but going after her $15 dollars a month commissary account?? Now that is totally outrageous….. They truly need help…

    • They want to rehash this all over again in civil court to try to get a few pennies from an indigent woman? Why? I have always felt very sorry for them, and I still do. You never really get over losing a family member. But Jodi isn’t wealthy like OJ Simpson and there’s no money to be gained in a civil suit against her. They will end up having to go through all the pain of what happened to their brother and their loss all over again. This just doesn’t make sense.

      • I agree you never get over it. I don’t think they know what to do to bring some closer. They really are still young and never had role models…well except grandma who shoved the Mormon church on them. I’m sure she thought she did the right thing. I wish that some psycholohelp them start dealing with all and help them start dealing with all this.

        I fought very much that they will win this. Jodi has nothing to take away…

      • They want to utterly destroy her life forever.
        I also think they are exploring how/ if they can grab any sort of future profit Jodi’s family or friends could make from interviews, books, etc., regarding Jodi.

    • If they intend to go after her commissary money, then I can only conclude they have the blackest of hearts.
      And they have no right to touch her art money.
      In fact, it would be a good idea if they themselves would pursue learning an art- form; maybe it would open their hearts.
      Even though they hate Jodi, they should stop the sadism. They are destroying the lives of Jodi’s family. Her father is in poor health.
      Even on this very site, which a lot of anti- Jodi people hate, there are very regularly posted comments which include acknowledgment of the Alexanders’ sufferring, and expressions of empathy towards them.

  35. Further up this page, and all along, people have been talking about confessions, and false confessions, and self defense testimony, and interrogations and all that stuff. In fact I lifted this quote from coldcase upstream on this page:

    “I believe some parts, some I just don’t know what to believe.”

    So when you take a hard and cold look at this case I think this is exactly where the issue arises. If you leave out the extreme folks clamoring for death and dismemberment, you still have a lot of skepticism, from normal sane people.

    Now there are two different ways to view all this stuff. One s how people on the jury should view it, and the second is how everyone else may view it. The jury’s interpretation of this stuff is bounded by some rules – which are there for a very good reason, and they have to view evidence within those constraints. But the common man on the street can view it differently. A lot of juries can, and have returned verdicts that conflict with the common view on the street because they must view the evidence within the rules. The Casey Anthony case is a shining example of that.

    In the case of the self-defense argument in AZ, as a jury you don’t have a choice about how it needs to go. Here’s what the statutory jury instruction says:

    “The State has the burden of proving beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant did not
    act with such justification. If the State fails to carry this burden, then you must find the
    defendant not guilty of the charge. ”

    Not believing Jodi doesn’t count. State needs to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt that self defense was not the case. So now they have to prove all their own case but also disprove self-defense.

    Of course the common person on the street can believe or disbelieve anything they want – we are still the US of A.

    I know what some of my friends have said is their problem with this case. And it’s not the first confession. Everyone pretty much agrees that all in all it was poppycock – but its the whole the confession and the testimony that causes them angst. My question to them always is – but what if it were true – i.e. the testimony part. The answer then is well she’s not guilty. So then my next question is if that is so, and you were on the jury you should vote NOT GUILTY and the answer then is but I was not on the jury and moving on – damn the Redskins suck. End of discussion.

    And so while we can argue for ever, the jury must start with accepting the self-defense case and then let the prosecution disprove it. And the only argument JM was able to present about the whole thing was Horn’s patently perjured testimony about the order of the shot. But that jury bought it – so what are you going to do?

      • One thing I have learned from all of this. Never talk to the police without am attorney being present at all times. Never admit to anything that you didn’t do, period. I have given this advice to every one I love!

    • Big mistake she ever talked to the police. But that was not under oath. Her testimony was, and it rang completely true.

      The prosecution had no case for premeditation. Martinez merely peddled the nonsense that Travis’s friends were pushing in the media. The sex tape, which was the true game changer for me, totally destroyed the prosecutor’s case. I can’t even begin to talk about how that tape obliterated their case, but t did.

      The media, social networking sites, the rampant Mormon culture in that part of Arizona, and the death threats doomed Jodi’s case. It’s totally unprecedented.

      • If Jodi hadn’t spun yarns for the police, the state’s argument without an argument that the gunshot was last would have been a much more slippery slope for them. As it happened, they simply pointed to her previous stories and said that she was only presenting another false narrative in testifying that first, she accidentally shot him.

        The DT was weak on CSI/forensics. The evidence absolutely supports Jodi.

        Ironically, Jodi would probably not have the public support she has now if she hadn’t done those TV interviews. They were a mayday call, IMO.

      • Isn’t that the truth. Like they all say – never ever talk to the police without an attorney. Doesn’t matter if you did it, didn’t do it, whatever. And somehow people end up doing it all the time.

        It always amazes me as to what passes for proof beyond a reasonable doubt. So all JM had was:

        1. She rented a car away from home.
        2. She allegedly changed her hair color.
        3. Turned off her phone.
        4. Used gas cans.
        5. Took her tags off.

        That is it. All of it. And if you listen to the jury instruction on circumstantial evidence all but one of them should have been decided in Jodi’s favor. The one that is left is the whole gas can thing. That one has always bothered me. And let me tell you why. When JM started calculating the gallons and dollars and stuff for the SLC gas station it got the geek in me moving. So what I did was check the gas capacity of the vehicle she had rented – don’t remember what it was now but knew it back then. The problem was that JM’s numbers made sense. I was hoping like crazy that Jodi had some explanation like I bought a soda and bag of chips or something and the guy rang it up wrong. I remember that idiot George Barwood saying the difference could be explained by expansion, or contraction due to temperature, but like a lot he said that was just plain wrong – I know cause I checked the expansion rate of expansion of gasoline, the calibration temperature for Utah Weights and Measures and he was just wrong. So something didn’t add up back then and I had this real sinking feeling. If anyone on the jury did the same math one thing would become apparent – something was rotten in Denmark. I’m still not sure what that whole deal was – but there was definitely an odor of the piscine in there somewhere. Still doesn’t prove M1 in any way shape or form, but something wasn’t right there and I knew JM would beat on it like a drum – and he did. And the defense completely failed to address it.

        • I agree. The gas cans were a big deal. It would have been less of a big deal if she had said she did have all 3 since it seems she refilled those cans in Utah for the trip home. Not to say she couldn’t have gotten cash back at Walmart. Stuff happens. I recently returned items to a Big Lots Store. Some were on my charge and some were on my husband’s charge. Since I didn’t have my husband’s charge card with me they credited them all back to my card. I have also returned things to other stores and couldn’t find the original charge card in my purse and they credited a different card I did have. Crazy. Also, a few years ago I ordered some items available only online at KMart. 3 identical items totaling about $40. They sent me 3 completely different items that were about $2 each and the packing slip showed the actual items I had ordered. I took them back to the local KMart and they actually refunded me the $40 in cash. Crazy again. Anyway, filling those gas cans in Utah could have helped her except that the charges and gallons indicated 3 cans, not 2.

        • I thought it was an ordinary thing for people who would be traveling through the desert to take extra gas cans. No one would ever want to be stranded in the desert without gas IMO.

          • That’s not the part I found hinkey. In fact like I said earlier if you look at the route she took back from SLC, it has really some fairly long stretches in remote territory with no gas stations. The fact that she had gas cans is nothing remarkable, especially considering that she had a rental, and you really can’t tell how it does on gas till you’ve driven it for a while. Same thing with the returns. I know I’ve been at stores where I’ve done a return and no one’s generated a return receipt that I was given or had to sign. They just gave me the money.

            The problem was that if you added up all the gas she bought at SLC, and looked at the capacity of the cars gas tank and two 5 gallon cans, you still needed more space somewhere. I remember people saying, Oh you can fill more than 5 gallons in a 5 gallon tank, or George Barwood’s stupid argument about gas shrinking.

            My point was that if you can in fact fit more than 5 gallons in a 5 gallon can, and if that was enough to settle the issue then bring the two cans into court and demonstrate it. If you can fit more gas into the car than the specified capacity then show it – and get rid of JM’s argument. If you can’t then find out what the heck actually happened and present it.

            But to leave it just hanging means you don’t have any answer and that was what concerned me – because if you can’t reply to JMs allegations then they are unchallenged and remain true. If that is the case then what the heck happened? That’s what everyone’s going to ask and you can’t rebut anything JM says about the issue – which he did.

            • The Tesoro corporate lady did not present any documentation for her statement that the $5 or so purchase in UT was for gas. She made an oral statement only at trial.

              The Pasadena purchases could have fit in two cans and the tank if the tank were near empty.

              The Tesoro lady’s testimony should not have been enough to send a person to death row or convict on murder since she brought no concrete proof to back it up. I’m not implying that she had any agenda. In fact, I feel bad for anyone who testified against Jodi. Who knows what the witnesses were thinking? They were subpoenaed.

              • Starting from the last paragraph upwards – I agree whole heartedly. It just doesn’t add up to enough reason, but its just one of things rattling about in my head.

                The Pasadena purchase – I agree, thats why I didn’t say anything about it.

                So now we come to the Tessoro lady. She claims – well if the receipt says gas we did gas. And that’s where the DT left it. What I was saying was it could only be one of two things – either it was gas, or it wasn’t gas. If it was gas then there’s a third can. If it wasn’t gas then offer something up guys – anything. But they just rolled over.

                Now the issue is who cares if she had 2 gas cans, or 3 or 6. There is a perfectly good reason for having spare gas cans, especially in that part of the world, and on that particular drive (from SLC to Reading or Yreka). But if she says she had 2 gas cans, and the state throws out a challenge then address it. That was my point.

                I think its a sort of hokey situation – the defense does not have to put up any evidence at all. They can just poke enough holes in the state’s case to create reasonable doubt. But if they do put up evidence, then it needs to hold up – not because the law necessarily requires it but because I think the jury will (especially one of these crazy ass AZ death squads). And you bet the state will remind the jury of that lack every chance they can get. Now if you have enough such lapses, the state can pound so hard that they actually shift the case’s emphasis from proving their point to beating up on the defendant – she said this, she said that, yada yada yada. And that’s exactly what JM did. So instead of using firm evidence (of which he had really nothing) to convict Jodi of M1 he took the other route and said – look at all the holes in their stuff so you can’t believe any of it so convict. In theory that shouldn’t matter, because he still needs to prove each and every element of his charge beyond a reasonable doubt. But I think in most cases a prosecutor who has the chance to beat up on a defendant’s own case will prevail – and that’s what JM did and the DT let him

                • I would loved to have seen more indignation from Nurmi in the guilt phase. As Jade wrote, [words to this effect]: “How do you expect the jury to see the misconduct if you act as if there isn’t any?” (We did see a different approach in the re-trial.)

            • By that time JM had everybody cross-eyed and bored to tears with the damned receipts.

              And last I heard, from a conversation here a few weeks ago, no one had been able to find where JM showed the third receipt to the court – or the jury. He had the Tessoro gal look at it and confirm the amount as roughly five gallons, but to my knowledge no one ever saw it except the Tessoro lady.

              I dunno – Justus and CanadaCarol were looking into it. If that’s true, that’s the part the DT coulda-shoulda-woulda jumped on. But like I said, EVERYONE was cross-eyed and sick to death of the damned receipts.

              That’s a tactic of JM’s, I notice – bore everyone to tears with irrelevant minutia so that no one’s paying attention when he slips in some dubious ‘evidence’ that he’ll loudly proclaim as definitive PROOF during closing arguments – and the jurors will just look at each other and say ‘yeah, I remember that… weren’t you listening?’

              • If I’m not mistaken, he may have shown the credit card statement or something like that – so some receipts and a statement. In fact you are right, he has a tendency to drag some of this stuff all over the place just to make it sound so big, that people don’t think of the content just the noise being made. What you need to have happen is someone stand up and say (in the words of the unparalleled Vincent LaGuardia Gambini) “Everything that guy just said is bullshit. Thank You”.

                It may have made no difference with these AZ whack jobs, but if you don’t do it you can rest assured it won’t make a difference.

                • 52:44- Exhibit 237.017 – 9.583 gals (cashier) exhibit 237.016 – (pump) 10.672 gals (3:57 AM)

                  55:49 – let me show you an exhibit (635) and you don’t have to refer to it, but if you do let me know, and we’ll talk about that. If I show you for the time – (4:01) hands exhibit to read to herself – 5.0 gals or approx.. $19.65 and some change.

                  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zAWE0iXS9nc&t=3252

                  By my calculations, if that last receipt was for 5 gals that would mean the total was .25 gals over the capacity. Since this fill was at 3:00 in the morning in Utah vs. middle of the afternoon in CA, I thought it might have an effect on the gas volume, but I am no scientist. There was no evidence that 5 gal cans are exactly 5 gals. either but they may not be.

                  The defence’s response to all this was why wouldn’t Jodi just throw away the receipts? Going for logical thinking, but there was no thinking in this trial, only a guttural reaction to some over-played autopsy pics.

              • He whips evidence/photographs on and off that overhead projector like a magician. The jury was, as Edgar has said, “hypnonauseated” without a doubt.

                When jury members revealed that what the psychologists said didn’t really matter to them, they probably meant it sincerely, because the jurors finally just looked at the wounds and chose to believe what the state’s representative said about them. But how they could have bought that the autopsy report simply had “a typo” is really beyond me.

  36. Does anyone know if they can come after JODI’s commissary account money because I was about to donate $500 dollars to her commissary fund but I’m glad I read CanadaCarol”s post.

    • In AZ, I believe it is still possible to garnish an inmate’s commissary account, yes. But remember, civil lawsuits are a lengthy process. The Alexanders will most like win a wrongful death civil suit, I’m sad to say because of the preponderance of the evidence, a much lower standard than in criminal court. But it will be several years from now.

      • Thanks………. StillOutThere

        I will just get a hold of her and see what she says.

        The laws in Arizona are freakin weird,

      • It is incredibly inhumane and cruel to garnish an inmate’s commisary fund. The sadism in this country is sickening.

        I think ‘wrongful-death’ lawsuits are immoral and despicable when it comes to a case of this nature. Basically, it is blood money ___ disgusting.

        Sometimes ‘wrongful death’ suits might be justified, like situations where a company manufactures toxic products, and that results in someone getting cancer.

        • even if they do not file a civil suit, AZ does include “restitution” as part of the sentence,they will take part of her commissary 30 to 50 percent and monies she earns which is between 30 and 50 cents an hour. If she got parole,she would be required to keep paying this money or parole could be revoked

  37. Haven’t been on here in eons or following that closely lately but I want to express my appreciation of the lone juror who didn’t give in to the mob mentality or follow along with the blood lusting crowd. That takes courage and integrity so job well done. I hope the judge gives Jodi the possibility of parole but I don’t have faith in her ability to do the right thing. I guess money is going to make the family feel better about this tragic situation. Jodi is being punished so I think they need to get out of the limelight, go back to their jobs, and grieve without the media attention. Just saying…

  38. Hey Gwen, nice to see you comment. I. like you, don’t have much faith in what the Judge will do at sentencing. I think it is much more than “money” for this family….it is vengeance. They forget that vengeance will also mean that they don’t find peace for a long time, if ever.

  39. They don’t seem to want peace or closure which is hard anyway but impossible when you’re constantly howling at the moon. Go home, close the door, seek therapy and truly grieve for your loved one. Public grieving becomes attention grabbing at some point. I got a card from Jodi a month ago and I was wondering does she still have the same contact details at Maricopa County?

    • I don’t think it’s a matter of this wanting peace. I think it has to do with this never ending trial. Like I said they need help in navigating through all of their emotions. They are truely are in need of help…..

      • They are also contributing to this never ending trial by taking their legal action. They do need help but they don’t see it that way.

        • And they’ll never see it that way. They don’t want closure. Because with closure comes the end of their pity party. And with the end of their pity party comes the end of the gravy train. Most of those givers will stop giving and then they’ll have to find some other way of stealing,errr… making money. No, closure is the last thing they want, but as far as the almighty dollar… that’s a different story. As long as they can keep themselves in the public eye they’ll make out like bandits. But their story, like all the rest, will soon fade and the Alexander family will become an afterthought; a one paragraph write-up on the back page of the newspaper. Soon no one will remember or care who the Alexanders were. But for me that day can’t come soon enough.

          • Couldn’t agree more, Jeff. The have already begun the solicitations for more donations. Though they refuse to call it soliciting. People are so gullible. Well, you know what they say about a fool and his money…..

  40. Someone else would be better than me to answer that but I do understand that she is still at Estrella and will be there a while longer but then will be going to the prison in Goodyear.

            • Lmao..R. You are not “simple foke”. I look at it this way: we ask what we don’t know, we make direct statements in simple terms.
              We stand our ground on what we believe until someone can give us concrete proof that perhaps there truely is a different answers. The most important thing is we are here because we were able to look out side of the box from the very beginning and see something just wasn’t right….. Your heart is full of love!!! You are a shinning star!!!

              • ♥ Thank you Cindy, we will stick together! ♥ Just like peas and carrots 😆
                All joking aside, I am so thankful to our smart brain-iacs here! I would get lost without them. 😉 One thing about us is we know when things are being covered up, skimmed over, tampered with and abuse when we hear about! ♥

                • Oh R. I love reading everyone’s post. Well except the whole computer stuff. Al totally lost me. But that’s OK. I don’t need to know. I really like getting everyone’s opinion rather I agree with them or not.

                  Like I said on the new pages I don’t care what the Alexander’s are doing. If people would go back and watch the misstrial being read and truely look at how up set Jodi was hearing them….it shows how compassionate she is. I’m going to follow Jodi’s lead by not saying anything about them. That’s my belief I am not pushing them on anyone else.

  41. I remember during the first trial being so upset with the pundits like NAG, who kept insisting that Jodi’s case was so upsetting to true victims of dv, and that their stupid guests were speaking for all true victims.

    So now, juror #17 has dv in her background and these same stupid pundits are declaring foul because she would be biased.

    So which one is it – it can’t be both?

  42. Fifty seconds into their press conference, the jury spokesperson used the of so familiar phrase used by the family during this long ordeal. “The eleven of us strived for Justice for Travis, but to no avail. ”

    Everyone’s mind was made up on that jury panel coming into this.

    • “strived for justice for TRAVIS, but to no avail” Yes, that says it all….how about doing your job and “strive for justice” PERIOD !!! JUSTICE IS SUPPOSED TO BE BLIND, YOU IDIOTS !!!! This is not a football game where you take sides, but of course we all know this is exactly what you morons did…..you never even considered the evidence, except of course the inflammatory autopsy photos………

      • Right on, BB! That’s exactly what they did. And that statement does say it all. And we can all take some small comfort in knowing that this kind of stupidity would have helped overturn a death penalty if it had actually come to that.

  43. Is there any word about the Alexander’s filing a wrongful death suit against Jodi? I would expect it is one way they would consider keeping their pity party in the public eye for more monetary soaking. They certainly wouldn’t expect to ever get a dime out of Jodi (although they might just consider it additional revenge to keep Jodi from ever acquiring money.) if they do plan on it, it says volumes about their total disregard for having Travis’ reputation drug through the mud one more time, this time in front of a jury who is not death qualified.

    • Yeah, I’ve heard from BK and CBS5 that they are – even going after her commissary. I thought there was a tweet about her testifying in a civil suit from one of the prisons. And then AZ apparently has that ridiculous payback scheme. They will be after Jodi’s 10 cents an hour job money.

      The haters keep saying that the Alexscampsters just want her to go away, but hell, they are the ones that keep it going by their greed.

    • One thing that might dissuade them from suing is the fact that this time they would pay for their advocate, not the State of Arizona. Unless they expect a huge payback from winning (not!) or plan on getting their fan base to pony up, it could cost them a lot of what they’ve already scammed from the public.

  44. Excerpt from Scoopy’s exclusive interview with Foreman:

    DeMarte he felt was important because she stated there was no physical abuse that happened at the hands of Travis Alexander. The Foreman had put a question for her in the basket that was never asked, “Since you had the most interview time with Jodi did you see genuine remorse from her?”

    DeMorte had the most interview time??? Compared to who????

    • From this interview, it is very clear that juror #17 fully engaged in deliberation but simply saw some evidence like the journal writings in a different way and at the time some of the others wanted to give up and get back to their lives, she believed that mitigation #s 4,5,8 & 9 applied to Jodi. It was very heated and there was a lot of cussing from some of the other jurors towards juror #17.

  45. Hi, I’m new here. My name is Mina, I’m from New York and I am no stranger to the courts and being on the wrong side of the justice system. It can feel like you’re drowning and carrying 10 times your weight on your shoulders, that’s why my heart goes out to Jodi. I am out on bail for my own self-defense case.

    Just wanna say I’m so glad I wasn’t the only one who thought there was something very wrong with Jodi’s trial and conviction. I have been on her side since I heard about her arrest.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

*

Latest from Latest News

Go to Top