Jodi’s pre-sentencing interview Part 5/10 – May 22nd, 2013 [REPLAY]

in Latest News by

Here’s part 5 of 10 from Jodi’s pre sentencing interview with 12 news anchor Mark Curtis (AZ Central) – from May 22nd, 2013:

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

[hdplay id=255 width=500 height=300]

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

If you missed our earlier post featuring the JAA Appellate Movie, click this link to watch it.


Leave your thoughts and comments below.

Team Jodi

If you would like to help Jodi by way of a financial donation to the official JAA APPELLATE FUND, click the Team Jodi link below for further details. All donations go directly to the fund for assisting with the legal fees associated with appealing Jodi’s wrongful conviction. You can also check out Jodi’s new Art Gallery website by clicking this linkThank you for your ongoing support!

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



  1. Hey everyone! I hope you all have a wonderful Sunday! 🙂

    It really amazes me how people portray Jodi as a ‘vixen’, ‘slut’, ‘unethical’…. etc. All adults over 18 yrs old at least once in their lives have gone to extremes regarding their sexual life, for any reason: either because they or their partner wanted to try sth different, either to spice up a relationship, either because they just like doing sth further than the missionary position. Does that mean that everyone that has tried sth ‘juicy’ is a slut, a whore or a malewhore? I don’t get it…. Just reading an article in Cosmopolitan about how to spice up things in the bedroom would make some of you blush…..

    Everyone that has taken a sexual nude picture, sexted, had phone sex, has written a sexy letter, e-mail or private message : PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND…. hmmmm 9 out of 10!!! Does that mean that you 9/10 people are unethical? Are floosies? Are lowbred? Are lewd? Are dirty? Are sexually filthy???? I didn’t think so!

    SO next time someone has the need to bash Jodi and her nude pictures…. please, take a minute, go down memory lane and remember what it is YOU or your ‘other half’ have done. I don’t think anyone is fit to throw stones!

    And even then, if you still don’t care as long as you bash Jodi for having taken sexy pics, so be it! With a stunning body like hers? Good for her!

    And to whoever is insulted: sit back, relax and take a chill pill !!!

    (((((Jodi’s sensual nude pics)))) ♥

    • I’m guilty as charged, I’m one of those 9/10. Let he who is without sin cast the first stone. Thank you Pan for stating the obvious some people need to sit back and really think about this. I know I was young once and did a lot of things I would never think about now. I wouldn’t want to subject anyone to an image like that, some things you just can’t unsee……….LMFAO. 🙂

      Ray in H-burg Va.

      • Too funny, bro!!! Noooooooooooooo, if it’s gonna be ‘tattooed’ in my brain, I don’t wanna know!!! LMFAO!!! 😀

        I’ll be calling you sometime tomorrow so we can catch up. Today I’m really busy + good games on today (WORLD CUP): Greece is playing! Yay!!!

        (((((Ray)))) ♥

        • Hey Sis! check your FB PM I sent you a picture from our ride today. I look forward to talking!!
          (((((PANDORA)))))♥ ♥
          Μυ σςεετ Γρεεκ σιστερ ♥

          Ray in H-burg Va.

    • Oh Yeah congrats on being first sis. Happy Sunday to my cyber family!!

      (((((JODI))))) ♥ ♥ 🙂
      (((((SIS))))) ♥ ♥ ♥ 🙂

      Ray in H-burg Va.

    • My problem is not with the pictures themselves, but the fact that JM chose to have them viewed in open court. As Jodi states she was mortified and wanted to crawl under the table. I am certainly not judging her for doing things to please Travis whom she loved but she certainly did not intend for her family to see them. Travis, the chaste Mormon priesthood holder was the one holding the camera two inches away from her beautiful body.

      • I can’t understand how these pictures prove premeditation.
        I think Martinez showed them to knock the wind out of Jodi’s sails. There’s no probative value to these pictures. If I had been the judge I would have precluded them right away!

          • Exactly! Especially the really graphic ones were totally unenecessary. Martinez may supposedly want them in because they were taken the day the crime occured, some of them were time-stamped but the Jury could have viewed them privately, NO reason in the world for those pics to appear on the court projector FFS and to the entire world, of course. SMH… 🙄

            • And since more than four hours passed between the nude photos and the crime photos, the nude photos really proved nothing about who was there four hours later.

                • A horny little frog he is!!! I’m guessing he has some copies stashed in his desk drawer and spends many hours viewing them and uses the excuse that these pics helped him in building his case against Jodi…. ya right! Hey Kerm! I’d like to see BOTH your hands on the desk at all times while viewing those pics! 😉

            • The relevant material could have been introduced in a way that would have been more in keeping with even what his own client, Travis would have wanted. Nine long minutes he spent flipping through those private pictures. Thank goodness Jodi has the strength of character that she does. That was only day 6 of the trial too.

        • Alexey, you’re right. The problem here is that the ‘judge’ (using the word very lightly) never did or ruled anything in the name of the law! IMO, she was totally incompetent in sitting in for this trial. She should take what little dignity she might have left and resign. That way, maybe the next case she tries will give a chance to a fair trial to whomever will be tried! 😉

        • The photographs don’t depict the rope, but they make it more plausible that one could have been used in their sexcapades.

          Would have been difficult to handle the rope and a camera at the same time, I guess.

          JM was hellbent on distracting from the rope any way he could, because it was linked to a knife – – even though crime scene photographs were shown in court at the beginning of the trial of the knife block and of knives in the dishwasher.

          The prosecutor needed the jury to believe that Jodi carried the knife from Yreka in order for them to buy his Felony Murder charge.

          Importing the knife is crucial to the “intent” component of the (“back-up”) FM charge. This is how I interpret JM’s approach: Importing the knife is not as crucial to the Premeditation charge, because she would have known that the knife block was there, and the jury would already believe that she planned to kill him if they swallowed all of the circumstantial (road trip planning) evidence. [I am setting aside the “premeditation in an instant” possibility here.]

          If the prosecutor wants the jury to believe that she entered the premises with the intent to commit grievous bodily harm, but furtherance of this Felony resulted in TA’s death, then he has enough for the FM conviction. He’s moved the gunshot to last, and not made it lethal, because TA would already be deceased in that scenario. It is far easier for a jury to get to that FM conviction if they believe she had some sort of knife on her person when she arrived on the premises because intent is required as she ENTERS the premises.

          Of course, the gunshot still has to be explained even in that FM scenario, but it has been removed as the goal of the burglary, which is extremely difficult to buy. Obviously, if it was stolen from a house in Yreka, it cannot be considered to have been burgled from TA’s.

          Getting back to the rope: There were not just one, but two explanations from LE for the fibers on the floor: TA’s sandals, or a decorative pillow. In not sending the fibers to a lab, more “wiggle room” is allowed for their interpretation, and their probative value is greatly diminished.

          But they look exactly like what would come from the soft decorative rope that Jodi said TA had purchased for their “antics”.

          • Yes, whichtrial? ,,, On your informative comment above, you said: “JM was hellbent on distracting from the rope any way he could, because it linked to a knife –” …Yes, of course, it would have had to be HIS knife that HE used to cut (HIS) soft decorative rope that Jodi said TA had purchased for their “antics”.
            …I seem to remember her saying somewhere in testimony that he previously, at another time, used another rope, and that Jodi complained that it was irritating or hurts or something like that. …And, that is why Travis purchased this new soft decorative rope.
            …I remember how carefully & delicately the prosecutor chose his words around the use of the rope, (almost like he did not want to embarrass her) & like he did not want to have her say A-N-Y-T-H-I-N-G (anything) else that **went on** except just her being loosely tied up & suggesting that she was “really not tied up” because she could free herself. …
            …Well, why did the prosecutor not ask her to tell exactly what TA was doing with the other half of the soft rope??
            … Why would TA cut in half a perfectly good rope if he had no intention of using the other half at that time? ….Perhaps HE, himself, was playing with the other half of the soft decorative rope & then at some point played with it around Jodi’s throat, suggesting “breath play” on her. …He was **in back** of her (as it was testified) so she really did not know what he was doing with the rope or where it was, ((at first)). …So, she would be telling the truth, when she said she did not know where was the other half of the rope, at the specific time in the prosecutor’s questions. …She knew the prosecutor did not want her to further embarrass [[[the family]]]. ….
            …Of course the rope on her wrists was loosely tied, but with him immobilizing her, by pulling her to “taught the rope”, she was immobilized. …Why would any MASTER tie up his MINION if it was not in his warped mind to also “attempt breath play” or even just playfully suggest it?? …Isn’t that is why he wanted to tie her to a tree??? …If he “did perform breath play”, I believe that (((she knew))) that the prosecutor (((did not want))) to know, in court, (SPECIFICS) of the actual “antics”. …So, that is why she did not blurt out something like ((whatever he was specifically preforming)) & perhaps she blacked out, “temporary rush”. …And perhaps that is why she had that look on her face like: ((is that what you wanted to do to me)), in one of those pictures?? …An emaciated look ! ! ! …She was [[[pardon me if I say ….very, very, very sexually high or exhausted]]]. …
            … … I will try to put a link but if it don’t work, please GOOGLE: Altered States of Consciousness Occurring During Expanded Sexual Response In The Human Female: Preliminary Definitions … … … … …
            … … … …
            …Jodi Ann Arias is absolutely & totally innocent by reason of justifiable self defense (IMO)

            • WLOPEZ, there was a lot of discussion here at JAII last spring on the topic you bring up. People who actually knew something about BDSM wrote that they didn’t think that TA and JA were into that.

              But I don’t want to veer off-track. As far as Jodi’s defense was/is concerned, what is significant about their costumed behavior and intimate photography is that it is not much of a stretch to picture a rope at the scene. From there, it is not unreasonable to consider that a knife was available as a defensive weapon of opportunity, especially given the cut tassel remnants in evidence on the stairs and the bathroom floor.

              It was not necessary to show ALL of those photographs, however, to make that point. Plastering private parts all over those large screens in court derailed the jury. It was one of the reasons they would not accept the logic of Jodi’s story – especially since most of them were older and might not know that many young people these days photograph EVERYTHING. By the time they absorbed those images (knowing that they were intended to be private), the jurors wouldn’t have been thinking about tassel fibers at all, if they ever were, since Flores claimed they were from a source other than a decorative rope.

              (Yes, Jodi said they had tried tying before but that the rope was too rough, which is why they ended up with the soft rope TA bought.)

              • Well, whichtrial?, I only got my username WLOPEZ4JAA, about 5/25/2013, so I do not know about any discussions on this site on whether or not TA & JA were into or not into any BDSM, that you said was discussed last Spring. …
                …But, I believe I heard Jodi say that Travis wanted to tie her to a tree, so that was definitely the BD part of his desires, no doubt about that in my mind.. … Jodi did not have to be **into anything** herself, because she was the slave/minion of her Master Travis. …Only a fool would believe that Travis was not her Master. …IMO…
                …But, what concerns me is how the jury in 2013, could be so tricked to believe that Jodi was the persuader or seducer of Travis just because she brought KY lube to that room that day. …I assume women carry that around all the time even to Church.
                …It is sort of like the prosecutor got the jury to believe that Jodi was like “Delilah” in the Biblical “Samson & Delilah”. …And that Travis was the poor innocent “Samson” who got his strength robbed from him & Samson was ridiculed & died the hero. …
                …You said that you think that the jury did not accept Jodi’s logic because they are OLDER & do not understand that many young people these days take pictures of EVERYTHING. …And, the jury did not understand that they (TA & JA) were viewing their own totally private pictures & that is perfectly legal, not immoral in any way, as long as it is shared with consenting adults. …. It is the right of Free Speech. …
                …And, this ((breath play)) that I talked about, which I believe Travis was doing with the other half of that soft decorative rope, perhaps to himself in order to (((feel like Samson))), & then to her, is so much of just what young people do these days. …But, I am an old guy (age73) but I am not stupid or unaware of what goes on. …
                ..Please Google: erotic asphyxiation …& it says that 250 to 1,000 people die each year in the United States by practicing (((breath play))). …And, I think perhaps 500 times that many practice breath play & DO NOT die. …
                …This breath play subject was all over H L N television few weeks ago & about young people using computer spray duster & other things to “get high” & sexual. …And some die ! ! ! …..
                … …Well, I typed a longer post but I pressed the wrong button & the entire thing disappeared. …I re-typed this from memory, it is shorter. …Good night. …
                … ((Jodi is innocent)) … ((Let the world know))… …(((WLOPEZ4JAA)))…

      • Carol, I totally agree! I don’t know how even showing those pics that proved that travis was a fraud to his church, he came out ‘clean’ and only Jodi was judged. Double standards! (rolling eyes the samantha way! – haven’t done that lately!) 🙄

    • I AGREE WITH YOU ALL THE WAY, Pandora 🙂 They try to make her out to be this immoral, cunning, almost sadistic person. When all she was doing was living in her private life with her then boyfriend who was a Mormon and raised as a Mormon. Her fist take and experience of Mormonism was by him. His perception and ways of the religion that she only knew for some time. They were engaging in a private act which was assumed to be kept private until tradegy strike. But we shouldn’t chastise her continuously for that of which was meant to be private!!!

      • Nikki, yes! ANd the fake shock that everyone showed is what pisses me off!

        As for his religion? What bothers me is that someone (an elder – is that what they’re called?) should have stood up for Jodi. They should have spoken out and said that travis having sex prior to marriage was an ultimate sin for their religion. They chose not to speak and you know what? That gives a ‘free pass’ to others in their religion to start having sex before marriage. Good luck with that mormon religion!

        IMO, an adult having sex prior to marriage is no biggie. To each their own. My problem is when people are hypocrits and preach one thing and turn a blind eye to that same thing! Not speaking up about travis’s sin was a bad move and a blow to the trust and respect of rules they want all mormons (and potential mormons) to have for them.

    • What I find fascinating about this is how so many people were willing to give Travis Alexander a pass for his sexual behavior, but Jodi is a slut, a whore, a vixen, a stalker, etc. It’s the age-old perception that society has about how if a man is promiscuous, he’s a stud and gets a pat on the back or he’s “sowing his wild oats”, but if a woman does the same thing, she’s a ho.

      People say that Jodi was stalking Travis. If that was the case, why didn’t Travis get a restraining order against her? Why did he keep contacting her if she was this deranged stalker that was obsessed with him? I can almost guarantee you that anyone on this website that was being stalked by someone, the last thing that they would want to do is to come anywhere near them or have any contact with them. The simple fact is that Travis used Jodi time and again and, unfortunately, Jodi allowed herself to be put in precarious situations with him that were unhealthy for both of them.

      We all acknowledge that we’re all sinners here, but there are varying degrees of sins. Abusing someone or repeatedly having them commit acts that are painful to them physically and emotionally is a much bigger sin than growing pot. I know that Jodi went along with Travis’s sexual fantasies and it’s disheartening to hear that, but I believe that she did it because she loved him and was desperate for his love, affection, attention and approval that she literally would have done anything for him.

      • Raja hi! Just yesterday I was watching a stand-up comedy show by Whitney Cummings (not the porn star; the comedian! 😉 ). It’s called ‘I love you’. What you just wrote? It’s all there!!! Why women do what they do just to ‘please’ their men! She talked about ‘stalking’, men being pedophiles (they all do like their women soft and smooth and hairless: just like babies are… red flag!!), she talked about how men call women ‘crazy’… Whoever can, please take an hour in watching it. It’s funny and it does explain perfectly fine why women that love or are in love get to be called shit like that. Now for the men that can’t handle the truth? It is a bitter pill to swallow because Whitney is absolutely right and hits the nail on the head without sugarcoating anything!

  2. Subject: Today’s Thought

    I really think this should be brought forward as a gentle reminder that (to those who might feel lead to judge Jodi and others) no one is perfect only Jesus Christ. We all have our faults. For those who do not believe in Jesus please be patient with me. . .because I know what a difference he has made in my life and I want the same for everyone. 🙂

    Do you remember the story in the gospels about the time when Jesus was teaching the people and was rudely interupted by a group of Scribes and Pharisees who through down a woman in front of him? They brought her because she had been caught in the “act of adultery” and they wanted Jesus to publicly pronounce judgement on her.
    They quoted the Old Testament saying that Moses had commanded that such a person should be stoned to death. Mind you, “in the act” means that a man was also guilty of adultery as well, but was conspicuously absent now.
    Instead, Jesus knelt down to draw in the sand. No one knows just what he was drawing in the sand. Some have speculated it was the names of the men who were bringing her to him, because the next thing he did was to make this statement. “He who is without sin, cast the first stone.
    He then knelt again and continued to draw in the sand. Speculators here think that he was writing the sin(s) that the men bringing the accusation were guilty of in their own lives, but we just don’t know for sure. The result, however, we do know. One by one, they dropped their stones and walked away, leaving Jesus and the woman alone.
    Jesus didn’t condone anyone’s sins,for he told her to “go and sin no more”. But he also had not come at that time to be a judge. He said, “For God so loved the world that He sent His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish, but have eternal life. For God did not send the Son into the world to judge the world, but that the world should be saved through Him.” (John 3:16 & 17).

    What goes around, comes around. When we dispense mercy, we receive mercy. When we give value, we receive value in return.
    The same God who wrote the Ten Commandments on stone tablets with his own finger, was here, in the person of His Son, using His finger to point out that mercy rejoices over judgement, and that grace is stronger than law.
    Jodi Arias and her family will continue to be in my prayers ever day. As a believer in Jesus I realize he wants me to pray for the Alexander family and “friends” also and I will (but I am having difficulty with it) pray for their hearts to be open to His love. The hate they carry for Jodi will only destroy them.

    • Yes, R.Love, I heard that phrase many times: “He who is without sin, cast the first stone.” …Thanks for telling the whole story from the gospels. … I don’t read the Bible much, mostly online or movies. … … But, I agree that Jesus was writing in the sand, the names of the men (& their sins) who wanted HIM to let them punish that poor woman who was brought before HIM. …So, I tried to picture myself in that assembly (as an observer), and I believe Jesus was also writing, (next to the men’s names) some various numbers, written in Roman Numerals. …And, I believe one of the men asked Jesus: what are those various Roman Numeral (numbers) mean? …And I believe Jesus (probably) said: …”Those numbers are the number of days before your own Judgement Day, and, this poor woman will be the first to bear witness against you.” …! ! ! ….. …And, they cowered & dispersed. …
      ….And, (I PRAY) so will Mademoiselle Jodi Ann Arias (after she is FREE from her false imprisonment) & perhaps 100 ++ years from now, bear witness against all the “Hate Lover Nuts” including the (SNOOKERED) jurors as they will be facing their own Judgement Day. …And, that they be escorted away from the Gates of Heaven, by St Joan of Arc’s 8,000 ++ spiritual loyal French soldiers. ….

      • I, WLOPEZ4JAA, pray that Jodi Ann Arias, be released soon. …Or, if she goes to trial again for the DOUBLE JEOPARDY portion of her trial, that she receive at least a JURY NULLIFICATION verdict, (or that the new jury refuse to accept the original guilty verdict). …And, that the judge be compelled by overwhelming enlightenment (if that is possible) to sentence her to just time served. ….And, that Jodi be totally free to travel, leave this prejudicial country, if she chooses, and live another 100 + + years or so, in peace, before she is called in God’s good time & then to bear witness to all those who persecuted her in the first trial, at their own Judgement Day Trial. or just Google: jury nullification Arizona

    • I don’t believe in organized religion. Organized religion placed woman in an inferior position than man, organized religion was responsible for many wars,bloodshed, unspeakable cruelty and division…
      But I do believe in Jesus. And even if it weren’t him having said that, I’d still admire the person who said ”He who is without a sin, cast the first stone.” because there is wisdmon and empathy in those words. There is the need to understand human nature and seeking to forgive.

      And Jodi ” is a far better person than her very worst deed” as Jennifer Wilmott said.

      • Truly Maria you are right. I really do not believe in organized religion either but I do believe that God sent his son Jesus so that we might be saved through him. Religion has become a BIG business in most places of this world I do not believe that you have to be a part of any one religion. If one asks Jesus into their hearts and proclaims him to be their Savior to me that is all you need do. He will be there for you to guide you through life. . .We do not need a preacher, a priest, a pope or for certain not a misguided Mormon to save us from our sins. . .God has seen that it has been taken care of. We just have to ask him into our hearts and we will be in his Forever family. 🙂 To me it is as simple as that. I have been sprinkled into the Methodist faith then baptized into the Christian faith and also the Baptist faith but really none of that matters as long as people know where my heart is. Jodi is a far better person than any of the people who have condemned her too. I agree with you.

  3. I hoping everyone will continue to write to Jodi and send her all of our love. It always is good to hear positive thoughts from the people who love and care about her. So please don’t wait to write her. When she does get her mail it is something she can hold in her hand and know that we cared enough to write. She is in a very lonely, depressing place (I can’t even begin to imagine) and we need to do all we can to keep her spirits up. ((((((((TEAM JODI & JODI)))))))))

    • Yes R! Everyone, don’t forget that right now, Jodi lives through the postcards we send her. Our everyday activities might be boring to us but for Jodi it’s a way of participating! So, I agree on writing her how much we support her and stand by her side but it’s always nice to let her in our everyday…. 😉

      Every so often when I send her postcards I get stressed if she got them and start hassling everyone that speaks with Jodi on the phone to ask her if she got my postcards or to tell her that I’ve send her some so she will expect them!

    • Of course we’ll keep on writing!! As September gets closer, she will be increasingly busier but I believe it will be a time she will need our kind words, love and support even more ♥

  4. I’ve added a new section on the “Closing Arguments” page of the reasonable doubt site called “Questions to Ponder” ( It would be great if we could get our opponents to each answer all the questions. What we get now is one person answering one question with something plausible but unlikely and then another one answering another question, also plausible but unlikely, but also conflicting with the first persons answer. What I want to see is one person answer all the questions in some cohesive manner. I doubt they can do it and still sound sane.

    Questions to Ponder

    Why stage the gun theft as a burglary such that the police are immediately called and a record is created? Why not just “borrow” it? It might not be discovered missing for months and it probably wouldn’t be known exactly when it went missing.

    Why, in her master plan to murder, would she change out the bullet type to one less powerful?

    Why visit friends in the rental car if its purpose was to travel in a car not connected with her?

    Why borrow gas cans from someone who will mention them to the police, should he ever be questioned? Why not buy gas cans with cash in no-man’s land or in some large store where she’d be just one of many customers?

    Why does she make cell phone calls in Arizona heading north from Kingman toward Hoover Dam, thus negating the supposed reason for borrowing the gas cans?

    Why does she fill the cans in Salt Lake City if their purpose was to hide her trip into Arizona? Was she also hiding her trip home to Yreka?

    Why tell Ryan she’s on her way if she’s already planning a six hour trip to Mesa and then at least another 10 hour trip to Salt Lake City? What kind of alibi is that?

    Why go to the trouble of removing license plates to hide her presence at Travis’ house when it would have been infinitely easier to just drape something over it or park down the street?

    Wouldn’t a missing license plate draw even more attention to the car?

    Why didn’t she kill him upon arrival at 4 am? She’s already going to be late getting to her so-called alibi by at least five hours.

    Why didn’t she shoot him (or quietly slit his throat) during the night when he was sleeping? Why wait until he’s fully awake with the capacity to then kill her instead?

    Why have sex with him and leave her presence all over the crime scene?

    Why have him take time-stamped photos of her and then not think to take the camera with her?

    Why would she first attack a man who has martial art skills and at least 60 pounds on her using a knife if she supposedly came with a gun?

    Why after supposedly stabbing him in the shower does she let him go stand at the sink?

    If Travis had enough in him to go from the shower to the sink, stand there turning the faucet on and off while Jodi is supposedly stabbing him in the back, why didn’t he just turn around and smash her a good one?

    How would anyone, except the one controlling the attack, have the option to stop and stand at the sink?

    If he still had enough energy to travel down the hallway to the bedroom, why didn’t he just use that energy to stop all the stabbing she was supposedly doing?

    Why did Travis have only four defensive wounds on his hands, only one on his dominant hand, and none on his lower arms if he was supposedly defending himself against a knife attack for more than a minute and perhaps up to two minutes?

    Upon leaving why wouldn’t she have noticed the license plate was upside down while supposedly screwing in those little fasteners?

    Wouldn’t it be more possible for someone to notice her squatting behind the car thus drawing even greater attention to her presence? Certainly more likely than anyone noticing and remembering a license plate.

    How would ultimately arriving 24 hours late at Ryan’s house expect to establish an alibi?

    How is it Jodi came up with such a dumb plan but was then supposedly able to fool three experts with more than 90 years of collective experience in their respective fields?

    • I edited that last question because I think it just screams misogyny buried in the collective subconscious of our society. I believe this attitude that a 28-year-old woman would devise such an idiotic plan is an insult to all women. I can’t imagine these same people believing a 28-year-old man (say, Travis) would ever devise such a stupid plan, one sure to get him caught. The jury would most likely have laughed the prosecutor right out of the court room. An insult to all women!

      Edited question: “How is it Jodi supposedly came up with such a dumb plan (a twelve-year-old could have devised a more intelligent plan than that) but was then apparently able, with all her “caginess”, to fool three experts with more than 90 years of collective experience in their respective fields?”

      • Justus, it’s double standards: to people that don’t want to see things for what they are. On one hand they have portayed Jodi as this evil, conniving, devious, malicious psycho bitch that premeditated in killing travis BUT on the other hand they go and debunk their own words by showing us that Jodi was as dumb as a door knob leaving evidence of her presence all over travis’s house… Now which is it? Choose one opinion of Jodi and stick to it, ffs!

    • There won’t be any answers Justus! They can’t answer these questions. They’re not obligated to answer, they’re only obligated to spew the pros line, with that impunity that makes humans sub-human But I have a question for them too.Show me one piece of direct evidence that proves that Jodi premeditatedly killed and/or that she didn’t defend herself and I’ll read it and consider it, but that’s not gonna happen either, cause there is NOT any evidence. So, it boils down to they want Jodi to die because Travis did, and that scenario is a circumstance that cannot be fairly judged with their circumstantial evidence. Free Jodi, she’s done too much time already for defending herself!

      • Yes, Justus you have really gathered up a great group of questions for them. It will be interesting to see if anyone steps up to answer them. 🙂 Free Jodi is RIGHT!

    • Great questions Justus!

      As I was reading them, ‘Criminal Minds’ ended with a quote from Ayn Rand that seemed apropos, but I didn’t catch it all so I had to google it.

      The part they quoted was:

      “Reason is not automatic. Those who deny it cannot be conquered by it.”

      AH! but the quote in it’s entirety, when I found it, is:

      “Reason is not automatic. Those who deny it cannot be conquered by it. Do not count on them. Leave them alone.”

    • Justus, all these questions should have been the questions the jury talked about while collaberating to come back with a verdict. This is the reason why I personally believe that not one of those jurors actually followed the trial in the courtroom. They had made up their minds while watching HLN during recess or at home after a hard day in court! 🙄

      I really do hope that some of them read your questions above and realize what a shitty job they did at Jodi’s trial. They should feel ashamed of themselves.

    • Very hard hitting questions!
      Also why did Dr Horn change his report on the stand?
      He had averred that Travis’s brain had no visible trauma and that the dura mater was intact. Then on the stand he recanted claiming it was a “typo” (or better make it three typos). This verbage (just a typo) was meant to downplay the impotance of it, no doubt. Then he tried to weasel out of it by saying that “the brain was autolized and it was impossibe to tell”. But if it was impossibe to tell then why did you explicitly say that the brain was intact and then now why are you trying to say the opposite – that the brain was damaged? Makes no sense. He’s being completely inconsistent in his testimony.
      Dr Horn is hiding something.

        • Typo, my big ‘ole butt. He just out right lied, said what ever Kermit wanted him to say.

          Ray in H-burg Va.

      • What really pisses me off is that it took Dr. Doolittle… how many years?…. nearly 5? to ‘catch’ this typo? GMAFB!!! He wrote an official autopsy report, a report that I am guessing he reviewed before handing it in…. he probably knew that he would be called to the stand, so probably reviewed this report many times to freshen up his memory and yet this ‘typo’ never came up…. until it just had to so it could ‘fit in’ with martinez’s theory.

        How stupid do these people think everyone is? It’s insulting, to say the least! Even the people that don’t support Jodi should be insulted! What Dr. Doolittle and martinez did was say: these sheeples are gullible! Their hatred for Jodi will blind them enough in even questioning the ‘typo’….. so, at least be honest with yourselves (aside emotions and likes or dislikes): are you so ignorant that you allow those clowns to underestimate your intelligence?

      • He must have had another typo when he listed the cause of death as “sharp force trauma of neck and torso”.

        The autopsy lists the degree of decomposition of the body as moderate but on the stand suddenly the brain is completely autolized.

  5. Jodi not only didn’t plan to kill Travis, she didn’t kill him, period!!! Even a kindergarten graduate can figure that out!!! Yes, they have kindergarten graduations today! Maybe some people should go back to kindergarten and actually graduate!!! LOL!

    I agree with johmn that some people (and that is a whole other topic right there) just want Jodi to die because Travis died!!! It’s as simple as that!!!

    (((((FREE JODI ANN ARIAS, AZ, NOW!!!)))))

    (((((ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!!!)))


    • 1. Why stage the gun theft as a burglary such that the police are immediately called and a record is created? Why not just “borrow” it? It might not be discovered missing for months and it probably wouldn’t be known exactly when it went missing.

      Jodi didn’t just need the gun, she needed the DVD player as well. Whether she thought of that at the time is unknown. The DVD player appears to have gone to Darryl Brewer when she picked up the gas cans, because she returned to his house later in the morning to ‘return his DVD remote” that somehow ended up in her purse. She could never ‘borrow’ that gun, because she could never return it to Grandpa. If for some reason she came under suspicion that gun would literally have been the smoking gun and pointed right at her. She knew she couldn’t risk returning the gun. She may have even feared her grandparents would put two and two together and turn her in, after all, her own parents had called the cops on her at age 14 when she was growing pot with her friends. That incident triggered a lot of mis-trust in her relationship with her parents, and she may not have wanted to risk the same situation with her grandparents.

      • This is just more of the same, it’s nothing more than conjecture. Conjecture can’t prove anything. How do you even know that the dvd remote was for the stolen dvd player? Can you PROVE the remote was for the stolen dvd player? Justdatruth is invested in this case, we all know that. But Justdatruth can’t prove anything, so datruth is daConjecture. Once again, all datruth wants is dablood.

      • Why in the world would Darryl need a stolen DVD player? He was honest enough to testify for the prosecution about the gas cans Jodi borrowed. That is as crazy as the things JM made up.

        • Right, Carol. I don’t remember Darryl testifying about receiving a DVD player from Jodi. And who testified about Jodi returning with the remote? Was that Darryl’s testimony at the very same time he was telling us about the gas cans but NOT telling us about receiving the DVD player? Or was it Jodi, the very person who supposedly stole the player and remote but then, for no good reason, is drawing our attention to it???

      • Anyone knows that if you want to get caught you use a weapon that can be traced back to you. There would be no way that “stealing” or “borrowing” grandpa’s gun from the house where she lived would do anything but tie her to this and there is no way out of it. Even this guy realizes that she wouldn’t be able to bring it back so it would be reported stolen anyway eventually, like when Esteban comes to town.

      • So at least a week before the incident, Jodi apparently went through a thought process something like this: “Let’s see. I’ll need a gun and I’ll also need some gas cans to get through Arizona without having to stop for gas. I know. I’ll steal grandpa’s gun and then rather than buying gas cans I’ll borrow some from Darryl. But, of course, Darryl is the kind of guy who doesn’t lend anything to his friends without getting something in return so what I’ll do is stage a burglary and also steal my grandparents’ DVD player to give to Darryl because, well, even though my grandparents live a relatively modest lifestyle, screw them!”

        • Haha,
          According to them, Darryl is like a loanshark – no gas cans without a stolen DVD!
          And of course the thought that she could have simply bought the three gas cans with cash (who the hell uses a credit card when they are planning a murder), without involving Darryl, never occurs to them. They are blinded by the idea that she planned it and cannot see the obvious holes.

        • Coudn’t agree more, Justus!!!! Some of their suggestions are laughable at best.
          1)She staged a burglary (ummm, they give her credit for being a mastermind but one who starts off her devious plan so ridiculously wrong! ) to make sure she could be traced back and
          2)Daryll must be a pawnshop owner if he lends stuff only by receiving something in return, WTF?

      • I am not even going to get into the DVD trading bs. I am going to stick to the MIS-trusted relationship Jodi had with her parents because she grew pot with her friends at the age of 14??? REALLY?!!! I hope this reply was meant as a joke! Cause I am just laughing too hard right now.

        OMG! Ya, at 14 maybe her parents didn’t trust her because of that incident but are going to really base this theory that after more than a decade, Jodi’s parents still didn’t trust her because of the pot? GMAFB!!!

        90% of mankind has smoked, grown, bought and shared pot with their friends in their teens! I’m sure that a lot of folks are rolling a doobie as we speak even in their adult life! An 8 season hit show in USA called THAT 70’s SHOW was based on teens smoking pot. That’s what teens do! They all experiment with pot with their friends! They get caught by their parents, get in big-time shit but that doesn’t mean that getting caught with pot will shadow the trust of any parent over their child for the rest of their living days!

        SHEESH! 🙄

    • Think I’ll just take Ayn Rand’s advice and ‘leave them alone’. It’s clear the author got his information from HLN rather than evidence presented at court, or he’d know there was never a ‘bloody hand print” and he wouldn’t be talking about things the room mates said or didn’t say since they never testified.

      • Normally I’d agree, Journee. But this is ONE person answering ALL the questions, not just the random response that contradicts not only the truth but the logic just laid out by some other respondent. I just want to get one person’s response and all the better if it’s someone claiming to be searching for just da truth and then shows us how one does that by coming up with a bunch of absolutely bizarre answers that have little, if anything, to do with what was testified to.

        • Oh, I get it – he challenged you directly and it makes sense you’d want to respond – though how you’ll respond to so much conjecture I don’t know. It’s not just ‘one person’, though, Justus – he credits one person in particular for a couple of the answers and at the end credits a few others for thoughts shared in conversations over the last year and a half. These are the stories they’ve told each other to fill in the blanks, and the stories have become truth to them.

    • 2. Why, in her master plan to murder, would she change out the bullet type to one less powerful?

      It’s likely she didn’t know the difference between one bullet and another. I don’t know much about guns myself, but I do know if I were to steal a loaded gun, I would get rid of the ammo in it and replace it with fresh ammo in the event it could be somehow traced (I guess I watch too much CSI). Hollow point bullets have a distinctive dimpled head, she may have thought that quality could more readily identify the weapon. She was at the house while the police officer was interviewing her grandparents and may have heard her grandpa stress that the gun had hollow points and decided that it would look too suspicious if Travis was killed with the same ammo. That was a smart move on her part, because it makes people such as yourself doubt the stolen gun theory.

      • Ok, so what I’m reading is that Jodi is making this satanic plan in killing travis (working on her devious plan for a week or more before actually doing the deed) but she just grabs any bullets to use in the gun without knowing if they were compatible to the gun? It doesn’t make sense. She is not some specialist in guns. Do ya think she might’ve called Dave Hall to give her his professional info? As stupid as that sounds, that’s how stupid the whole ‘changing the bullets – stealing the gun’ theory sounds.

        Again: double standards: Jodi the mastermind in planning a murder vs Jodi the stupid girl being sloppy.

      • OK, here’s the deal.

        Maybe Brad SHOULD read the Burglary Report, filed by the police officer who was sent to the Allen’s residence. In the report, it is CLEARLY STATED that Jodi was N O T at her grandparents’ house when the officer arrived and her grandfather was giving him an account of what exactly was missing.
        So, no. Jodi did NOT listen to grandparents ”stressing” anything.

        Can we please stop making up information, now??? Thanks!

    • 3. Why visit friends in the rental car if its purpose was to travel in a car not connected with her?

      I will defer to the the succinct response from one of my social media friends, PR: “Her plan was not to be noticed in Arizona. She didn’t care if people outside Arizona saw the car”. If she were to take her own car to Arizona, she risked one of Travis’s room-mates recognizing it. Jodi and Travis had several mutual friends, and with Travis’s “open-door” policy, she could expect that any one of them may visit at any time and see her car in the driveway or in the neighborhood.

      • While this sounds plausible, I have a little problem with it:
        If you plan a murder, you’d want to be as inconspicuous as possible about it. You’d want to avoid anybody spotting you in the vehicle that you are going to use to drive to the person you plan to kill.

        I mean, these people won’t provide you with an alibi, but they’d sure to note and remember a different car and if questioned by the police will tell them about it.

        In short, it doesn’t make sense to be seen in a “murder car”.

        • By the timeline Zack gave Flores, he should have seen her that afternoon. He told Flores he was home from 3 til 4 that day. Jodi would have been with Travis in his office before Zack left.

        • Don’t forget that Zack himself was driving a rental car that he turned in a few hours after Jodi arrived. Said the 4th was his day off, and when he got up he went to turn in his rental car and pick up his car from the repair shop.

      • Travis did have an open door policy and if one of his friends dropped by they wouldn’t be just driving by. They would go in the house and there would be Jodi. It’s not like she was there for just a few minutes.

    • 4. Why borrow gas cans from someone who will mention them to the police, should he ever be questioned? Why not buy gas cans with cash in no-man’s land or in some large store where she’d be just one of many customers?

      Jodi didn’t care if Darryl told anyone that she borrowed gas cans. Her reason that she was going through the desert would be perfectly reasonable if there was no other evidence to place her at the crime. The gas cans she borrowed from Darryl, on their own, are meaningless. When combined with other evidence, they point to motive and means to carry out a pre-meditated killing.

      What she wasn’t expecting was that Darryl would accidentally disclose that she returned the DVD remote to his house, which was very suspect in light of both a .25 caliber gun and a DVD player being stolen from Grandpa’s the week before, and then within 24-hours, Jodi somehow finds a DVD remote control in her purse AND shoots Travis with a similar (if not the same) gun. She also wasn’t expecting him to disclose that she had told him of her plans to Mesa beforehand. He didn’t understand the implication of revealing that fact, and it was only later when he found out she denied it, that he tried to back-pedal.

      • I think JustDaTruth has dogded this question somewhat. He didn’t answer why she borrowed the gas cans (as opposed to buying them). Any thinking person who is planning to murder someone would take great pains to be as inconspicuous as possible, and to involve as few people as possible. Why involve Darryl in her plan when she could have bought the gas cans? Especially sinse she BOUGHT a third one (and she even kept the receipts – anyone who’s trying to cover his tracks would dispose of them the first thing).

        He also says “Jodi didn’t care if Darryl told anyone that she borrowed gas cans” and then he says “what she wasn’t expecting was that Darryl would accidentally disclose that she returned the DVD remote to his house”. Well, something doesn’t add up here – surely if Darryl talked, he would have mentioned everything, the gas cans, the remote…

        Returning to the gas cans, noone (including JustDaTruth) has explained to me why, according to Martinez, Jodi lied about returning the third gas can. What was that lying supposed to accomplish?

        • That IF she’s lying under oath on the stand in the jury’s face then they can disregard her entire testimony! Few stop to think that IF that was the lie Jodi told, why not tell a more convenient lie??? One that couldn’t be proven through receipts, mileage and gas. Why not say she walked in on Travis caressing a young boy, for example??? To make her story more believable?

          In a nutshell, Martinez perpetuated this idea that Jodi is a liar, that every word that comes out of her mouth is a flagrant lie, he harped on the gas cans because he thought he could easily trip her up and now the gas cans are an URBAN LEGEND.

      • Jodi’s testimony about the remote was that it was for either Darryl’s TV or DVD player and that she somehow ended up leaving with it. JM did not push her about this at all so it may have been for his TV and not even for a DVD.

        • And once again, Martinez didn’t ask the question because the innuendo was more useful than the truth.

          I’m sure it seems like a weird thing that she would end up with something like that in her purse — to people who aren’t familiar with the kind of crap little kids do. I took care of my cousin’s little boy while she was at work for most of the first five years of his life. But about the time he started kindergarten my life changed a lot too, and I didn’t get to see him very often. But when I DID visit, he was forever putting important things in my purse or in my car so that I’d have to come back very soon.

    • 5. Why does she make cell phone calls in Arizona heading north from Kingman toward Hoover Dam, thus negating the supposed reason for borrowing the gas cans?

      Cell towers are strung at somewhat regular intervals from one another throughout populated areas. Jodi was in the desert and may not have been aware that even if she crossed the Nevada border, that doesn’t mean that her phone call would ping off a Nevada tower, it would ping off the closest tower, which may have been in Arizona. The call was pinged about 25 miles from the Nevada border. I don’t remember testimony about the distance between cell towers in that area, but she likely thought she was safely within the state of Nevada, or she was confused in the dark and didn’t realize she was in Arizona still.

      • She filled up her car twice in Arizona on her way to Mesa using credit. IMO that negates the theory that she was trying so hard to hide the fact she was in AZ.

        • Carol, I think the problem is that she did not use credit but paid in cash and therefore there is no record and those who want her to be guilty have therefore decided she’s lying.

          • I apologize for that but in any event, these two stops in Desert Centre and Buckeye were brought up in that testimony to determine the capacity of the tank. They were used to back up the NV receipt for 12.175 gals that was shown in court. If those transactions didn’t exist, I would have expected JM to object but he accepted that testimony so my assumption is there must be some kind of proof the defence has.

    • 6. Why does she fill the cans in Salt Lake City if their purpose was to hide her trip into Arizona? Was she also hiding her trip home to Yreka?

      This is just speculation on my part, but I believe the fill up in Salt Lake City was so she could bee-line it home without having to stop. She was already running late. She had no idea what the status of Travis was at that point–had he been discovered, was she a suspect, were the cops closing in on her? In her mind it would have been better to fill up all those gas cans and eliminate the risk of needing to stop at a gas station . In the event the cops were on her trail she travel for some distance on the gas in her tank and then pull a Clint Eastwood switcheroo in the brush and fill up her tank and continue. While in hindsight that would be a dumb idea, Jodi by that time had to have been somewhat anxious.

      A question for you Justus: Ryan Burns stated that Jodi left his house around 1:00 in the morning. Jodi filled up in SLC at around 4:00 that same morning. The gas station is about 15 minutes from Ryan’s house—where was Jodi for almost 3 hours?

      • I’m not sure how his question of time is relevant unless one is grasping at straws looking for nefarious behavior. What does it matter what she was doing during those three hours unless he’s implying that, just because we don’t know, it must mean she’s hiding something and it’s just more proof, in his mind at least, that she was up to no good (maybe off committing another crime.).

        • I couldn’t make anything of this aprticular question of his either. (Not gonna comment the Clint Eastwood BS, it’s childhish.) Why is it important what she was doing for 3 hours? Travis is dead, she is away from the crime scene, Ryan says she leaves at 1 in the morning, and she fills her car up at 4, OK….. Where is the room for great detecive’s work here?

          Maybe she was driving around or sitting in that car crying her eyes out, damn it!! She has just commited a murder and has had to go, meet up with a stranger and pretend everything’s cool and she’s a girl- she’s bound to lose it and break down!

          • Self-defense is not murder in this country. Interesting to note that recently Bill O’Reilly was corrected about that one on-air during his Fox TV broadcast one night. Actually, HE – as a journalist, and author of “Killing Jesus”, “Killing Kennedy”, and another in that series, should have known better. (Must admit I don’t know much about Bill O.’s career or his credentials.)

            Martinez was using the word “murder” at trial. Nurmi objected, and JM responded that he would say “the killing” from then on, and he did.

            I don’t recall Ryan saying she left his place at 1:00AM. Jodi testified that she overslept, so by the time she left, there was no option to nap in the car because she was running late to work The oversleeping took place at Ryan’s place.


            And regarding the “Urban Legend” gas cans – (good one, Maria!)

            From: The Department of Redundancy Department

            It is obvious that Jodi filled the cans in Utah for the Same Reason she filled them in Pasadena. Desolate territory lay ahead, and lots of it. And let’s not forget that she must have been on camera each time she entered a gas station and ran her card! We all know a paper trail is generated in paying with cards and that all such stores have cameras, and we know from whom she got the fabled cans, so what exactly is underhanded about the whole fuel issue? NOTHING, NADA!

            This is precisely why JM harped on the alleged third can, and brought in rebuttal “evidence” – in the form of sworn testimony – oral evidence that was not originally entered along with the other paper receipts at the beginning of the trial. Therefore we are asked to take a person’s WORD for it that an additional Utah transaction was for gas. If the Tesoro lady concluded that the transaction was in fact gasoline, then what led her there? Where was the proof that she uncovered at the corporate level that the charge wasn’t instead for snack food or drinks?

            That particular unsubstantiated add-on was ALL the prosecutor HAD. Same with the Walmart return: As one juror pointed out via a question at trial, a dummy SKU # could have been used to return the (inappropriate kerosene) can for cash, or alternatively, as Journee described here, the multiple scan ring-up method.

            No jury should be asked to consider a life sentence, much less a death penalty for a defendant based upon such flimsy evidence. Jodi is no longer denying that she took TA’s life. She claimed self-defense, and it was demonstrated in court that both of them tragically fought for their lives.The prosecutor had a job to do, but society-at-large needn’t be so mean-spirited. It is INHUMANE.

            Today is Independence Day, even in Arizona, so I will leave with this:

            The publishing, film, radio (and TV) industries in the USA have generated billions upon billions of dollars for over the past one-hundred years creating content based upon an individual’s right to self-defense.

            In these scenarios, men have been defenders of freedom, father protectors, righteous vigilantes, war heroes, Davids versus Goliaths, and masters of the universe. They find themselves in “bad situations” (like Harrison Ford caught in the tightening trash compactor in “Star Wars”) and disastrous conflicts sometimes even of their own creation – but they almost ALWAYS manage to fight their way out, even when facing the worst possible odds. And those “slim to none” survival odds make for the most exciting tales, illustrating the powerful mystery of “life fighting for life”. The essential inescapable fact of our cultural history is that the heroes, the underdogs – whichever they may be – prove their mettle in the end. And too often, that end justifies the means.

            Self-defense has been considered a sacred right in the United States of America since its conception. One could argue it is one of the key human rights that was fought for in the Revolution. It is deeply embedded in the “American Character”, part and parcel of the country’s collective psyche.

            WHY is this right not applied equally to women?

            PRESUMING Jodi guilty of premeditation means that one has to work one’s way backward from the conclusion of guilt, imputing to her thoughts and negative behaviors with respect to the circumstantial evidence that were never actually proved in a court of law. (The prosecutor was never required to prove “motive”, but he was free to impute jealousy and resentment to Jodi at every turn.)

            Assuming guilt from the outset then allows that every step Jodi took in preparing for her road trip had a nefarious aspect. At that point a bevy of items present themselves as potentially damning, because it is undeniable that she did indeed PLAN that trip. But if she had never gone to Mesa, she would have rented a car, gotten gas cans, and could have misplaced her cellphone nonetheless! And are we to take a rental car manager’s word that Jodi dyed her hair after renting the vehicle when he has a California Driver’s License picture of her in his paperwork that shows platinum hair and he’s asked weeks later to I.D. her? Neither can one study the scene at the house – while not ignoring evidence in the bathroom sink – and conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that Jodi planned an attack on her friend.

            The Benefit of the Doubt is Jodi’s right, the same as everyone’s!

            Happy Independence Day, (((everybody, including Jodi supporters worldwide))), and please stay safe!!

            • BRAVO WHICHTRIAL? !!!!

              (footnote: The police report filed on the burglary at the grandparents house describes Jodi as having BROWN hair)

              • Thanks, Journee!

                Re: Hair – that’s right! And as you’ve noted more than once, a police report should carry more weight [than car rental man’s memory]. The DL photo obviously only reflects what color her hair was the day the DMV photo was taken. By the time the police visited him, weeks and many other car rental customers had come and gone! Typical example of JM’s cherry picking.

                By the way, Journee, I don’t think the police EVER INVESTIGATED the rental car forensically. All they brought to court, as far as I can tell, was the car rental man’s testimony about the condition of the car and the standard paperwork on the rental. Is that your impression? And if that is true, does that seem like a proper investigation for a homicide? Doesn’t seem thorough to me. Also I don’t see anything on that paperwork about the front plate still being on the floor of the car…

                And, Jodi was up near Oregon, (if not in the other state) when the burglary occurred.

                • Regarding the comment I posted at 3:59PM –

                  There was also a LACK of evidence in the shower at the house. There was no blood on its walls. This was the observation of a forensic specialist assigned to the investigation – not my opinion! It indicates that TA was not attacked in the shower, as the prosecutor alleges. More discarding of evidence “that does not fit” by the state.

                • No, they didn’t examine the car.

                  Nor did they luminol the shower.

                  They didn’t have the fibers analyzed.

                  Nor did they conduct a thorough search for weapons (Flores admitted, when a juror asked, that they didn’t check Travis’ car – what else didn’t they check?)

                  The roomies and Travis’ friend all gave buccal swabs for DNA, but Legg said only TWO profiles were developed from all the samples given, Travis’ and Jodi’s. So when Flores tells Jodi there’s no evidence that anyone else was there, how would they know?

                  They never even interviewed Thompson even though he was right there at the station with the rest of the friends after the memorial.

                  Lazy, sloppy work all the way around. The mormons in the front yard gave Flores a suspect before he even saw Travis’ body, and Flores never looked beyond their accusation. He never INVESTIGATED the death of Travis Alexander.

            • During cross Nurmi asked Ryan how long he and Jodi spent together on the 5th and that is when he said that she left “12 – 1 – it was late.” It was after Nurmi cleared up what the actual conversations were like when he had said that they had phone sex after the visit. Ryan was a state witness and did show some bias IMO.

        • Most likely, IMO, that five years after the fact Ryan simply didn’t remember what time she got up to leave. Especially since he probably went back to sleep after she left.

          Perhaps JDT prefers to believe she spent the three hours driving back to Mesa to kill Travis again?

      • “This is just speculation on my part, but I believe the fill up in Salt Lake City was so she could bee-line it home without having to stop. She was already running late.”

        Yeah, but filling up takes what – a few minutes?
        And wouldn’t she have to waste some time stopping her car, getting out and pouring the cas from the cans into the gas tank? (not to mention that filling up the gas cans themselves takes some time (however little))

        • That’s right, Alexey. It isn’t like while she’s racing down the highway in a hurry to get home the gas is magically going to transfer itself from the cans into the tank so that no stopping is required. Just shows how far one has to reach to come up with what they think are plausible explanations.

      • Ryan was not sure when he said she left at 1:00 – he said it was late. Jodi testified that they set the alarm. She had to drive all day and then work, so my guess was she was trying to get in as much sleep as possible.

    • 7. Why tell Ryan she’s on her way if she’s already planning a six hour trip to Mesa and then at least another 10 hour trip to Salt Lake City? What kind of alibi is that?

      Another succinct response from my friend PR: “So he wouldn’t get worried and alert others that she was running late”. As I recall, within her conversation to Ryan she also told him that she might take a nap, and that’s a really great excuse when you think of it. She could “nap” for and hour or 10 hours and no one would question it knowing the arduous journey she had already traveled from Yreka to Pasadena and then supposedly straight to SLC. Taking a nap and then getting lost are perfectly valid reasons and anyone who has traveled any distance by car would understand.

      • This sounds weird.
        If she knew that she was going to be late, it would have made much more sense to tell Ryan that she would show up at his place at a later time. Telling him that she would be at his place at a certain time and then being several hours late would make Ryan suspicious as to where she was – something he would have undoubtedly told the police, when questioned (simply telling him that she would arrive at a later time would have been the easiest and best way to handle this, if she had planned it).

        • My thoughts exactly, Alexey! If she didn’t want him to worry, why tell him anything at all. As far as I know, until she told him she was on her way, he didn’t know when to expect her. Why not leave it that way? Now she’s created the very situation where he IS going to worry. Bizarre logic going on here.

        • Yep, yep… this goes back to the days-in-advance premeditation theory.
          If she had planned this, if the visit to Travis was not an impulsive act, why not tell Ryan FROM THE START that she would be arriving a day later? Why not tell him ”I estimate I’ll be arriving on Thursday” and no harm no foul?

    • 8. Why go to the trouble of removing license plates to hide her presence at Travis’ house when it would have been infinitely easier to just drape something over it or park down the street?
      Wouldn’t a missing license plate draw even more attention to the car?

      In Arizona it is legal and common to only have a back plate. This would not have raised suspicion in the least. A car with California plates would raise suspicion though. The roommates reported they did not see a car in the driveway when they left for work, though Jodi claims she parked there. That means either the room mates are lying, or Jodi is. Let’s assume Jodi is lying (the room mates have no reason to lie about this, it’s more damaging to Jodi’s case if they saw a car because that places her at the scene of the crime). Let’s further assume if she wasn’t parked in front of the house, she was parked in the general neighborhood, say around the corner from Travis’s house. A California plate would stand out, so would an upside down California plate. Simply removing the plate wouldn’t be as eye-catching as an out-of-state plate. The license plate on a 2008 Ford Focus is on the bumper, not on the trunk. That means it’s not as obvious as a trunk mounted plate, so removing the plates and parallel parking would shield viewers from the street noticing the plate was missing.

        • Why would anyone put any faith into what the “roommates” even said? These are a group of people who immediately found fault with Jodi; only to distract the so-called Detective away from the obvious suspects which would have been one of them. Frankly, I find it much harder to believe them than Jodi. Who doesn’t look for their roommate when things are out of place? When things do not look normal one would start checking thing out. The gate for the dog was in a different place. . .Travis’s personal items there when he always had them with him. Someone had been cleaning and left the cleaning products out. . .They had to have known Travis with his OCD personality would have put everything in its place. Things with Travis always needed to appear perfect (apparently). And, I can’t forget the DEAD body that was in the house for 5 days, NO ONE SMELLED Anything???? The guilty would naturally throw the blame to Jodi only to protect themselves. SMH

    • 9. Why didn’t she kill him upon arrival at 4 am? She’s already going to be late getting to her so-called alibi by at least five hours.

      At 4 am she risked having a gun shot heard. She also risked him yelling, screaming or otherwise sounding the alarm to his sleeping room mates. I’m not entirely convinced she actually went into that house at that hour. She would have seen the room mates cars in the driveway, and she could see Travis’s office light on, so knew he was up and when he went to bed. She could have slept in her car until the room mates left and then either snuck in or was invited in.

      As stated above, she already covered her tracks by telling Ryan she would probably take a nap, so she wasn’t worried about being late.

      • Lol, this explanation make me chuckle a little,
        According to the prosecution, she stabbed him first, right? (I assume JudtDaTruth is with the prosecution). And the gunshot was just “gratuitous violence”, right? How much noise does the knife make? If she was worried about the neighbors hearing gun shots, why use the gun at all, when he was clearly dead by that time?
        And being late by 13 hours? That would have raised SOME suspicion, you just don’t take 13 hour naps (the time between 4 PM and 5 PM).
        Sorry, but this one just doesn’t stand up to scrutiny at all.

        • It makes me LOL, too Alexey! The stupidest explanation EVER!

          One of the Prosecution’s weakest points. HOW MUCH noise does it take to slash a man’s throat while he’s sleeping? And then wash yourself up and sneak out of the unlocked door he kept?

    • 10. Why didn’t she shoot him (or quietly slit his throat) during the night when he was sleeping? Why wait until he’s fully awake with the capacity to then kill her instead?

      Again, as responded in Question 9, she couldn’t risk waking up the room mates. She had to ensure he was alone. She came armed with both a gun and a knife, and the element of surprise. She probably felt the risk to her own life was very low in relation to his ability to harm her fully armed. This is a question probably better asked of Jodi, but I think I’ve given a plausible enough response.

      • Justus, I wanna correct your question abit. ”during the night” is not the best option to go qwith. BUT during the early morning is. Both his roomates had jobs. Think about it…

        Brad, again, as responded above ^^^ sliting a man’s throat makes NO noise PLUS his roomates were out of the house early the next morning. She could have woken up, take the knife, slit the man’s throat, give her coup de gras gunshot (according to prosecutor), have ALL the time in the world to cleah up and quietly go away HOURS BEFORE the roomates ever returned NOT MINUTES BEFORE THEY RETURN.

        Seriously, Jodi must be dumb to go with the 2nd option…. She slept till 1 in the afternoon, then fucked the guy twice, then JUUUUUST minutes before his roomates were supposed to be back from work she decided to go apeshit and commit the murder. Pleeeeease…

    • 11. Why have sex with him and leave her presence all over the crime scene?

      There was no intention to “leave her presence” all over the crime scene. As a matter of fact, there was very little DNA of hers left–a few strands of hair and a bloody handprint. The hair had to have been tied up in some fashion. A girl with long hair involved in a life and death struggle–no matter victim or aggressor, will lose some hair if it’s not put up. Even when put up, if she’s being attacked there would have been a lot more hair at the scene, that tells me Travis never had the opportunity to pull her hair or attack her in that manner. The bloody hand print was not suppose to have been left. The walls in Travis’s hallways were sponge-painted rust over orange, she simply couldn’t see the print in that pattern.

      She may have used sex with him to convince him that they should continue their relationship and when he wouldn’t take the bait, she decided no one would have him. Remember, Travis’s 31 birthday was fast approaching. He felt he needed to get married or at least engaged before then. He felt Mimi was ‘the one’, despite her wanting to be just friends. Jodi may have feared that he would charm Mimi on the trip and come back engaged to her, or interested in another of the girls there. That trip wasn’t about Jodi’s jealousy so much as it was about trying to prevent Travis from promising himself to another woman.

      Or, she just wanted to sex him up one last time… Then again, we only have her word that they had sex that day. I find it strange Travis would have sex with a calorie counter duct taped to his bicep—the tape was found in the bathroom.

      • The fact is that Travis had been having problems with long-term relationships with women beginning as far back as Linda and Deanna. His sex life didn’t match up with his religion or the type of woman he was supposed to take as a wife. Jodi did not want to marry him anymore either because he could not be faithful in a relationship.

    • 12. Why have him take time-stamped photos of her and then not think to take the camera with her?

      First I don’t think she was aware of the time stamp. Even though she saw it on the picture viewer, it may not have computed in her head that it would stamp the actual file. There’s a lot of data on picture viewers that doesn’t transfer to the actual file when downloaded, so it obviously wasn’t something she was mindful of.

      Second, she deleted the pictures, not realizing that even after being submerged in water, and deleted, that they would still be recoverable. This is a common error and the combination of deletion and being run through the washer would assure most people that the camera and card were ruined.

      As to why she put the camera in the washer in the first place–I don’t know. There is a lot of speculation, much of it plausible, but in this case we’re trying to make sense about the implausibility of someone putting a camera in the washer in the first place.

      If she took the camera with her that would have pointed suspicion at her, especially if other evidence pointed to her. She felt she did a good job of destroying evidence that would implicate her, she had no way of knowing all the evidence that would be discovered that would conspire to paint her portrait as a murderer.

      • The camera theory always made me scream out: TOO STUPID to have been done by Jodi! Jodi was a camera ‘wizz’ she knew that even deleted pictures can be retrieved from a digital camera.

        And why leave it behind? She could have destroyed it in the desert (broken it to pieces, ran over it with her car) and then scattered the remains throughout her trip back. It wasn’t as if she had to carry a fridge ffs! It was a camera!

        Again, double standards: Jodi was brilliant enough to think of this devious plan of premeditated murder and to stay out of the spotlight but stupid enough to leave one of the most powerful evidense behind: the camera. Please!

        • Putting the camera in the washing machine is a completely illogical act and demonstrates the foggy state she was in from her flight or fright state when her thinking mind is turned off and her primitive brain takes over.

      • ” First I don’t think she was aware of the time stamp. Even though she saw it on the picture viewer, it may not have computed in her head that it would stamp the actual file. ”
        Please, be kidding…. She’s not a 5 year-old.

        ” she had no way of knowing all the evidence that would be discovered that would conspire to paint her portrait as a murderer.”

        Again,please be kiddding…..
        Jodi is a photographer! You think she wouldn’t thinjk of taking thre camera that had pics of HER FACE with her? I’m not a photographer and even *I* know files can be reitrieved even if they are deleted or if the camera (or even your computer) completely crashes down- not to mention that Forenscis experts are called in a murder cases, not the average tech guy next door 😉

    • 13. Why would she first attack a man who has martial art skills and at least 60 pounds on her using a knife if she supposedly came with a gun?

      I don’t know where you got the idea that Travis had martial arts skills, but that is a fallacy. Travis enjoyed watching MMA matches with his friends and he had a weight bag, but his interest in martial arts is not equivalent to having any sort of ‘skills’. I love watching basketball. I have a basket ball hoop attached to my garage, and I play around shooting hoops all the time, but in no way is the NBA seeking me out or knocking on my door for training tips.

      Jodi is the one who had more martial arts skills than Travis. She took professional lessons as a child with her brother. Her father was big into martial arts himself, and spent many years weight lifting. I would assume that Jodi knew more tricks and moves than Travis ever would, because her dad likely taught her stuff outside her lessons. When dad’s get involved in their kids’ sports, especially if they share the interest, they usually spend some time showing them more advanced moves and working on their form.

      • Maybe martial art skills is too strong a term but, come on, is he implying that not only did Travis develop 16-1/2 inch biceps by sitting on the couch watching MMA matches on TV but apparently Jodi was the ninja in this whole story?

      • Ok, so Jodi was a modern life ‘catwoman’ who was a specialist in martial arts (that she took professional lessons as a child) and only used them at this last time she met up with travis. Why the f*ck would she not have used them, those other times, when travis attacked her? When he was pounding on her (verbally and physically)? Why didn’t she beat the living crap out of him then?

        I have taken professional lessons in crav maga from an Israeli specialist. It doesn’t mean that I am a master in using them! Martial arts need years and years of hard core training. Most women that take martial art courses for self defense unfortunately end up raped, mugged or beaten up by their attacker. So, to overpower a man of travis’s size would need more than some professional lessons that were taken while she was a child.

      • Did Jodi have a punching bag in her house?
        Did she work out at the gym?
        Did she have biceps anywhere near the size of Travis’s biceps?
        You don’t have to be a professional MMA fighter to EASILY overpower a woman who weights 70 lbs less than you, has far less musculature, and who took some lessons when she was a kid.

        BTW I took karate lessons as a kid. Can I be considered a skillful fighter? Hardly, because I can’t remember any of the moves that I was taught! Travis on the other hand used his punching bag to practice his punches (or else why would he have it). And in some of the videos with him we can ever see him kicking barefoot – he looks like Hulk.

        And what does that remark about her father being a weightlifter have to do with anything? Are you implying that her father was there to help her?

        • Couldn’t agree more.
          He was the one into punching bags filled with sand to practise his fists, he was the one enchanted so much by MMA matches that would organize special night events for his friends to gather and watch them all together, he was the one proud of his new sculpted body…
          To even suggest Jodi had the upper hand in this fight is beyound me, I am Jodi’s size, I could NEVER overpower a man Travis’ size.

      • And again JustDaTruth completely dodged the question – why didn’t she shoot him first?.
        Any thinking person would use the most powerful weapon first, who wants to take chances?

        • Yes, he was on a wrestling team.
          BTW, the following passage was copied verbotim from Travis’s support site:

          “He was on the wrestling team, and loved to practice his wrestling moves on his sisters. He would also flex his muscles whenever an opportunity presented itself… or even when it didn’t!”

          Maybe he also practised his wrestling moves on Jodi? That’s why she had to defend herself? I guess this idea never occured to whoever created that site.

          • Also from the same site, here’s how Travis describes himself (his own words):

            “I’m a simple man really. Smart, successful smashing good looks, a real suitor.” and he goes on extolling his own “virtues”, how awesome he is and why everyone should grovel at his feet.

            Now that’s called conceit, when a person thinks so highly of himself. That either comes from insecutities or narcisizm (a hallmark sign of a psychopath). Would anyone want to be around such a snob? I sure wouldn’t feel confortable around him, and I sure wouldn’t want to be friends with him. I can’t understand how his friends could stand him, or they are lying about liking him.

    • 14. Why after supposedly stabbing him in the shower does she let him go stand at the sink?
      If Travis had enough in him to go from the shower to the sink, stand there turning the faucet on and off while Jodi is supposedly stabbing him in the back, why didn’t he just turn around and smash her a good one?

      I don’t think she stabbed him in the shower, perhaps right outside the shower. If she stabbed him in the chest, he would go down, and for whatever reason made his way to the sink. We don’t know what was going on there. Was Jodi racing to her bag to get the gun? Was she still stabbing him as he made his way to the sink? Martinez has him at the sink with Jodi stabbing him from behind. There are several plausible scenarios, but it’s hard to say which is closer to the truth, only that we know he sustained a substantial blow, most likely to the chest that caused the bloody expectorant in the sink.

      The stab to the chest nicked the vena cava and likely his lung. Blood would be pouring out immediately. He would also be stunned and weakened by the injury. If she was continuously stabbing him at this point, he would be unable to effectively fend off the blows. He would have lost quite a bit of blood fairly quickly and may not have had the strength to hit her. The wounds to his back, neck, torso, and shoulders were sufficient to render some of these muscles impotent. When muscle tissue is sliced, it’s not able to contract and expand as normal and his strength would be diminished, if he was even able to use those muscles. The wounds to the muscles of his arms and chest may have made him unable to do more than fend off a couple of blows with his hands, and then not even be able to lift his arms.

      Question 2: The evidence shows Travis was at the vanity, coughing blood into the sink , with both hands on the vanity. Whether it was for a couple of seconds or a dozen seconds, that would have given Jodi the opportunity to escape if she so desired. If she felt he was a threat before, he was no longer a threat to her with his back to her and his hands engaged on the vanity. So why did she continue stabbing him?

      • First of all the superior vena cava was not ”nicked”. It was penetrated according to Dr Horn’s autopsy report. I don’t think Brad is suggesting yet another typo by the good Doctor??
        The vena cava injury cannot be among the first ones, the superior vena cava brings blood from the HEAD, the neck and the arms to the atrium, to the HEART. If he had received this wound first, he wouldn’t be able to stop at the sink, with his hands on the vanity. His functions would be compromised. So since he has defensive wounds on his hands, this particular injury must have come last.
        In other words he wouldn’t just be ”stunned and weakened”.. He’d be dead in a matter of seconds.And there wouldn’t be a spitting pattern of blood on the sink, we’d see huge amounts of blood there. Just like the blood pools around the room. The wounds to the chest area came at the end of the fight.
        The coughed up blood pattern is only compatible with the gunshot wound. Period.

    • 15. How would anyone, except the one controlling the attack, have the option to stop and stand at the sink?

      This is an odd question, and it goes to my question number 2–if he was such a threat before, how is he a threat standing at the sink with both hands on the vanity and coughing up blood? Wouldn’t that be the perfect opportunity for a victim to leave–perhaps go get help? She was the last person through the bedroom door–she would know if she locked it or not, and what it would take to get out of there. I think any of us who think of the scenario where a man has been stabbed in the chest and is bleeding heavily and coughing up blood, we would think that whatever his injuries were, they were sufficient to slow him down at least enough for us to escape. Who would think they were better off staying in that situation?

      How was Travis ‘controlling the attack’? The person who was controlling the attack had a knife and a gun. She walked away with no injuries (other than a cut hand from wielding the knife). Why does she have no injuries? Have you ever in your life heard of an angry man attacking a woman and not leaving a mark on her? And this wasn’t just an angry man, for all intents and purposes this was a man who was dying and he knew he was dying and his only hope was to either kill her or escape. He obviously tried to escape because he had neither the strength or stamina to hurt her in any meaningful way. What was the attack? He said ‘fucking kill you bitch!? What would you say if a woman was stabbing you repeatedly? Travis was in pain and terror. I guarantee he was screaming, crying, praying, and begging and all that was ignored as Jodi continued her attack on him.

      • Again. Difference of opinions. He was coughing up blood at the sink due to the accidental gunshot not because of the knife chest wound, then screaming ”Fucking kill you, bitch”, so OF COURSE he was controlling the attack and she was already in a mortifying state NOT thinking clearly,desperately trying to find something to defend herself. And bam! There was the knife…

    • 16. If he still had enough energy to travel down the hallway to the bedroom, why didn’t he just use that energy to stop all the stabbing she was supposedly doing?

      Another oddly phrased question. What do you mean “all the stabbing she was supposedly doing?” She wasn’t supposedly stabbing him, she was actually stabbing him. There is no doubt that she was stabbing him. No doubt whatsoever. Travis was terrified man–he was trying to escape as Jodi rained down stabs on him. He couldn’t fight her off, the tendons of one thumb was severed at the base, which mean he had no ability to use thiat hand. He was losing blood and likely had very little control over his arms–they were likely flopping at his sides with no real muscle control due to the stabs in the back, chest, shoulders and necks. Damaging all those muscle like she did, meant he lost control of his arms. He just wanted to get out of there, he was running for his life, though one could hardly call it running.

      • There were two muscle involved in the wounds to the back: a 1″ wound penetrating the trapezius muscle and a 2″ incised wound that penetrated the right pectoralis muscle. His left hand did sustain partial severing of the musculature and tendons. Travis did have many defensive wounds on his hands indicating a fierce struggle for the short time this went on.

    • 17. Why did Travis have only four defensive wounds on his hands, only one on his dominant hand, and none on his lower arms if he was supposedly defending himself against a knife attack for more than a minute and perhaps up to two minutes?

      She over powered him and rendered his hands and arms useless with all the other injuries she rained down upon him. I notice that many supporters seem to think that all those stab wounds had zero physical affect on Travis. That couldn’t be farther from the truth. Slicing through tendons and muscles in the upper body has a profound effect on the hands and arms. Many of the muscle that support the biceps, for example are in the chest. If you sustain a chest wound over that muscle, it will weaken the bicep. With the bicep weakened or disabled, muscles in the forearm won’t work. Look again at those autopsy wounds and you’ll plainly see how disabling those injuries were. He likely couldn’t raise his arms after a few stabs, let alone hit or punched her

    • 18. Upon leaving why wouldn’t she have noticed the license plate was upside down while supposedly screwing in those little fasteners?

      I think she put the plate back on under cover of darkness in the desert after she got rid of the bloody clothing and the gun (and perhaps the knife). By that time she had much more pressing issues on her mind and may not have noticed or if she did, she didn’t care.

      Remember she claimed she retrieved the front plate, even though she didn’t think it was hers—the car was returned with both plates. Where did the screws come from for the front plate, unless she had them with her? Ryan didn’t say anything about having to go to the hardware store for new screws and Jodi never said she picked any up off the ground.

      • Testimony was that Ryan did have to help her put it back on. Perhaps the skaters were just pranksters and left the screws so the licence could be just put back on.

        • Many times the screws will be already in place, just screw them out and reinstall the plate. . . what difference would all of that have to do with the price of tea in China??????

          • We know the upside-down rear plate was the one noticed by the UT officer. So it just needed to be righted.

            The UT officer never said a word in court about the front plate. Only rear plates are required in AZ.

            For all we know, the front plate was still on the floor of the car where she put it when she found it resting on the cinder block in the Starbuck’s parking lot in Pasadena.

      • JDT writes:

        “Remember she claimed she retrieved the front plate, even though she didn’t think it was hers—the car was returned with both plates.”

        It’s not my recollection that she didn’t think it was “hers”. I recall from her testimony that she surmised that the plate was from her car when she observed that her rental was missing its front plate. It was a CA rental and she was in CA where both front and rear plates are required. She also noticed that there were “bugs” on the plate that looked the same as others stuck to the front of her car. She didn’t check the rear plate or the rental paperwork when concluding that the plate belonged with her car.

        It was twilight by this time and she was in fairly unfamiliar territory. She testified to the effect that she did not want to stay in the parking lot when what she saw indicated that she should just place the plate inside the vehicle and go.

      • And according to JDT, he believes that in her master plan to cover her tracks by removing the plates, she also decided to drive all the way north out of Phoenix and half way to Nevada before putting them back on, I’m assuming with her fingers crossed the whole time that a cop would not notice. Brilliant plan!

    • 19. How would ultimately arriving 24 hours late at Ryan’s house expect to establish an alibi?

      She thought Ryan would cover for her, just as she thought Darryl would cover for her (and he did). And she did have an alibi as far as she was concerned because first she took a long nap and then she got lost. Neither of those things can be proven, if she didn’t leave other evidence behind. In other words if all Martinez had on her was she was late by a full day, then there’s no way he would have enough of a case to convict her.

      Also, she didn’t expect to end up at Ryan’s so late, she likely had a plan and time got away from her. For one, Travis took a lot longer to kill than she had planned. If he had just died where she stabbed him (whether inside the shower or just outside it) she wouldn’t have had the bloodbath of a mess to clean up. That took at least a half an hour of time to clean up the scene and clean up herself.

      • ” She thought Ryan would cover for her, just as she thought Darryl would cover for her.”

        What? Who? Huh? Mind reading? AGAIN? Listen, guys I don’t wanna sound hostile but I can’t help it when I’m reading gross speculation. This is all BS! If the other side is convinced Jodi is guilty of premeditated M1, I demand PROOF from them.

        I’m not gonna comment anything on the 2d paragraph, the speculation is beyond stupid.

      • How do think that Darryl covered for her? If you are setting up an alibi you keep to a strict timeline so that you are not late. Clearly Jodi talked to Ryan before she even decided to go to Mesa..

        • Carol, I really don’t know what JDT means when he writes that Jodi thought Darryl and/or Ryan “would cover” for her.

          “Cover” when the police come to investigate a homicide? Really?

          If that’s what JDT is trying to say, he is really “out there” with speculation of that nature. Jodi was examined by several psychologists and none of them diagnosed her as insane.

    • 20. How is it Jodi came up with such a dumb plan but was then supposedly able to fool three experts with more than 90 years of collective experience in their respective fields?

      When Jodi was formulating this plan she was thinking of best case scenarios. She isn’t a murderer by trade. This was her first killing. She only had her own tv and movie watching experience and book reading to give her a hint of what to expect. And like all green-horns, she came across many real life scenarios that didn’t conform to her picture perfect plan, so she had to wing it. Sometimes she was successful (and we likely haven’t heard of her successes, because she will never share them) and other times, she wasn’t–which is why we have a bloody hand print, hair, and a camera full of pictures, among other things.

      The 3 ‘experts’ is confusing to me, I’m assuming two of them are Samuels and LaViolette, I don’t know which is the third though.

      Before I talk about Samuels and LaViolette, let me preface my statements by acknowledging that these two people are in helping professions. They are driven to help, not to harm. They don’t want Jodi to die. That alone is what drives the professional and ethical issues that they were faced with and why they ultimately failed to sway the jury.

      Jodi was a beautiful woman–charming, gracious and soft-spoken. Their initial impression had to have been very favorable—after all Jodi was on her best behavior, wasn’t she? She stuck to the ninja story for some time while under Samuels watch. He knew that story was a lie. He and Nurmi tried to convince Jodi to tell the truth and if not the truth, than a more plausible lie. It was during this time, when Samuels knew Jodi was lying, when he even admits he knew she was lying, that he administered the PTSD test and based his findings of PTSD on that test. As it turns out, all the terror and horror she felt with the ninjas was a lie. Therefore the test was invalid. As a matter of fact, Samuels re-scored that test 3 times until he came up with a score that was within the perimeters of PTSD.

      In addition, Samuels grossly over-stated Jodi’s symptoms that he claimed conformed to the criteria for PTSD. Anyone with PTSD who listened to him describe her symptoms and why he felt they fit the criteria, was horrified by that spectacle. One of the hallmarks is PTSD is the effect ‘triggers’ have on the subject. Jodi had none of the triggers. None. Not one. Obsessively thinking about Travis and the good times they had, is not a trigger, not a symptom of PTSD, though Samuels tried to say it satisfied the criteria for ‘thinking obsessively of the abuser’. The criteria refers to a victim who thinks obsessively of the trauma the abuser initiated, not happy times. There are no happy times for PTSD sufferers.

      LaViolette was another person, who while caring and sympathetic , also did not want to be the person to greenlight Jodi’s death. Her bias against Travis was chilling. Jodi wasn’t a stalker because she went through Travis’s text messages, or kept tabs on who he was with, or showed up unannounced and unwanted, it was actually Travis who was the stalker because he called her several times on some days. Jodi’s stalker behavior was because she was in victim survival mode, and therefore it wasn’t stalking.

      LaViolette found a handful of nasty emails from Travis out of 10’s of thousands she examined, and made the determination he was an abuser because from his words and tone she could tell the violence was escalating, but then ignored other emails and texts where Travis begged Jodi to respect his privacy, where he lashed out in anger over some unknown thing she had done and called her the worst thing that ever happened to him. Rather than wonder what could have triggered his angry responses, LaViolette swept those under the rug and made Travis out to be the instigator, when his emails were clearly in response to something that was done to him.

      Furthermore, LaViolette dismissed all of Jodi’s aberrent and violent behavior, from squeezing a cat too tightly, to kicking her mother, and screaming and verbally abusing her as typically found in abused women. There was no way Alyce would ever admit Travis was justified in his fear, though she finally admitted he claimed he did fear Jodi.

      So did Jodi fool Samuels and LaViolette? I don’t think you can call it “fooled”, any more than I would say you or any other supporter was fooled by her. I think both of them are aware that Jodi is a very troubled woman. Her mental issues don’t rise to the threshold of insanity which would spare her life, but I think both Samuels and LaViolette believe Jodi to be mentally ill to such an extent that they she couldn’t control her own impulses.

      There were many test Samuels could have given Jodi which would have better identified her real problems. He chose not to, likely at the urging of Nurmi, who knew if it was known that she had sociopathic traits, it would be a certain death sentence. A jury would consider insanity if Jodi hadn’t so thoroughly left evidence that she knew right from wrong, but they will rarely excuse someone who slashed a man to death in that manner with her disposition if they were told sociopathy is involved.

      Does Samuels strongly suspect Jodi to be more mentally ill with some type of personality disorder? It appears he does. He doesn’t want her to die that’s why those tests weren’t administered.

      Dr. DeMarte did the best job of possibly keeping Jodi off death row. She gave her a diagnosis that at least people (the jury) could empathize with.

      • He gets a big red F on his understanding of this evidence and doesn’t even know about the rebuttal witness. Even Tot Doc had to agree that there would be trauma associated with an attack whether it be from a stranger or someone you love. The results are the same whether it is a bear or a wolf that attacks you. There were numerous other examples contained in their messages that did not come into evidence. JM fought against almost every word of every message that the defence did get to present.

      • In the end, Justus, I think he proved your point:

        Ya gotta go way out on a limb to answer those questions.

    • One pattern I’ve noticed by getting all the answers from one person is how Jodi is smart when it’s convenient for her to be smart and dumb when it’s convenient for her to be dumb.

      • And one of the commenters on the JDT site says that our problem over here is that we think Jodi is perfect. This seems to me to be a variation on the madonna/whore complex; if we don’t think she a cold-blooded killer who made at least 20 nonsensical mistakes in her so-called master murder plan, we must think she’s perfect. Sheesh!

        • In other posts here at JAII I’ve enumerated the MANY advantages to the prosecution that manifested in their claim that the gunshot was last.

          The blustering Hail Mary sequencing change by the prosecutor gave the state every advantage while clobbering the defense, the side that had had the advantage up to that point.

          It negated any possibility of meaningful deliberation by the jury with respect to Jodi’s claim that the shot was an accident, and galloped onward from there.

          It seems that the most virulent pro-prosecution people are simply following the leader, dragging around their “now’s she a master manipulator, now she’s a klutz” banner, echoing the slithery logic of the spurious gunshot switch, which, after all, has to be one the most memorable slip-shod reverse engineering jobs in the history of the U.S. justice system.

          Arguing with the anti-Jodi people at this point is like trying to beseech the state to revert to their original position that the gunshot was first.

          Since there’s nothing to be gained in closing the door after the horses, one returns to the barn to study the latch, the hinges, the bolt and the lock.

      • Frankly I don’t find his answers plausible. I haven’t read all of them, but some of what I read I didn’t like.
        In one answer (why did Jodi change out the bullets) he enev contradicts himself:

        First sentence:
        “It’s likely she didn’t know the difference between one bullet and another. ”

        Then another:
        “Hollow point bullets have a distinctive dimpled head, she may have thought that quality could more readily identify the weapon.”

        If she was so ignorant of the bullets, how did she manage to make that conclusion (that hollow point bullets have a distinctive dimpled head). I find this a big contradiction.

        Even though JustDaTRuth says that he’s completely impartial, I see in this contradiction a lot of bias against Jodi, grasping at straws.

        • Then he says in the same answer “Jodi didn’t just need the gun, she needed the DVD player as well. ”
          Why did she need the DVD player? She wasn’t flat out broke, she had some money on her credit card. If you pawn a DVD player how much will you get? $20? Is it worth the risk of having to come in contact with Darryl and asking him to take a STOLEN DVD player in exchange for two gas cans, and then going to the store to buy a third one when she could have bought all three of them in one trip? And if she’s so savvy about the bullets, then why did she paid with a credit card? Why not pay cash, which can’t be traced to her?

          Sorry, none of it even remotely looks like any kind of premeditation. There’s absolutely no planning here.

        • Who said JDT is impartial??? LMAOOOOOOO! He’s pro-Prosecution, Alexey. Don’t get fooled 😉

        • Jodi had never fired a gun before. She only had the most minimal introduction to firearms, informal instruction that involved one particular pistol in a brief show-and-tell.

          Jodi’s claim of an accidental discharge of the .25 is consistent with her lack of weapons experience. No one was ever presented at trial by the prosecution who could say otherwise.

          JDT wrote:
          “Hollow point bullets have a distinctive dimpled head, she may have thought that quality could more readily identify the weapon.”

          This response to Justus’s question reeks of prejudice.

  6. I read this link, and it was a waste. No one, short of a fiction writer needs to bother reading these texts. datruth’s minions are gonna be pissed when they read that he thinks Jodi is beautiful. Yeah datruth, I guess your fame will come at a price, that price is living YOUR life.

    • ”likely”
      ”just speculation on my part ”
      ” could have”
      ”would have”
      ”may have”
      ” I don’t think”
      etc etc…

      Brad, forgive my non-native ignorance but doesn’t the American Justice System ask the Jury to find a defendant guilty IF there is NO REASONABLE DOUBT in their minds?????

      I see nothing but speculation on your part. No proof, no evidence, no court testimony. Just speculation, which EQUALS Reasonable Doubt. And we all know what Reasonable Doubt equals….. NOT guilty of M1!

      • Let me correct you on that Maria: not PREMEDITATED M1.
        If Jodi’s case didn’t have reasonable doubt, then I don’t know what case does! This case reeked of reasonable doubt.

      • They were questions that asked for hypothetical answers, so I guess we really can’t blame him for hypothesizing. He just comes from a different starting point.

        The law calls for a ‘presumption of innocence’. Not just ‘an open mind’ but presumption of innocence. And juror instructions say that where there is doubt, where there are unanswered questions, the juror is to give the defendant the benefit of that doubt.

        When you come from the starting point of presumption of innocence, and there are unanswered questions, you look for the innocent answers – you don’t fill in the blanks with guilt.

        • Great post, Journee!

          “…you look for the innocent answers – you don’t fill in the blanks with guilt.”

          JM was masterful in filling in the blanks with supposititious arguments. It wasn’t so much that the jury bought every one of them – logically, one can’t because they contradict each other – but the net effect was to clutter up their reasoning to such an extent that the “innocent answers” were choked out. They could not take root and find their way to air.

          JM took such dictatorial control of the courtroom that the implication of looking for innocent answers was that it clearly was “a fool’s errand”.

  7. According to Arizona law Chapter 4: 13-404. (Justification; self defense)

    A. A person is justified in threatening or using physical force against another when and to the extent a reasonable person would believe that physical force is immediately necessary to protect himself/herself against the other’s use or attempted use of unlawful physical force.

    Chapter 4: 13-412 (Duress)

    A. Conduct which would otherwise constitute an offense is justified if a reasonable person would believe that he/she was compelled to engage in the proscribed conduct by the threat or use of immediate physical force against his/her person or the person of another which resulted or could result in serious physical injury which a reasonable person in the situation would not have resisted.

  8. What Justdatruth FAILS to convey to everyone in his responses to Justus’s questions is one MAJOR factor which is that Jodi moved AWAY from Travis!!!!!!! AWAY, FAR AWAY, to get AWAY from Travis!!! Travis didn’t move, JODI MOVED AWAY to her grandparents house!!! She wanted to MOVE ON!!!!!!!!!! She had a NEW love interest who she was on her way to see without seeing Travis UNTIL he guilted her on her cell phone to stop by and see him on her way to see her NEW LOVE INTEREST, Ryan Burns!!!!!!! Jodi, being the kind and caring person that she is, gave in to Travis’s guilted request to her to stop by and see him!!! Travis is the one who didn’t want to think that Jodi may not oblige to his beck and call anymore if she got serious with a new love!!!! Yes, he was thinking of marriage but YES he also wanted to keep Jodi on the side to fulfill his sexual desires because remember any woman in the Mormon religion is supposed to be chaste until marriage!!! If Jodi had a new love, how was Travis going to get sex??? C’mon now, who’s the one who initiated sex anyway? It was Travis when they stayed at the Hughes!!! Travis came in the room that Jodi was sleeping in and performed oral sex on her FFS!!! Then, after Travis baptized Jodi he had anal sex with her and told Jodi that it was ok that way as long as it wasn’t vaginal!!!! Who was the long term Mormon, supposedly high up? NOT JODI!!! She was new to the religion and trusted that Travis, who was worthy to baptize her, knew the faith pretty well????????????? Well, he was supposed to know it but knowing and practicing are TWO different things!!!!!!!!!!!!! Let’s use our brains that God gave us and stop acting like you don’t know exactly what was going on in Jodi and Travis’s relationship!!! It sure doesn’t take a rocket scientist!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    (((((FREE JODI ANN ARIAS, NOW, AZ!!!)))))


    (((((TEAM JODI)))))

    Jodi was DONE with Travis!!! DONE!!!

      • I agree with how you see the evolution of the relationship between TA & JA, Marja Liisa.

        By June of 2008 Jodi had gotten away from the stifling social sphere of Mesa, where she was “not able to hold a job” (as she admitted to Flores in her interview with him) for the first time in her life. She was employed and her photography business was expanding in Northern California. She had graduations and weddings to look forward to for revenue! She was living with her grandparents, so she was not faced with the strains of relating to her parents day in and day out.

        And she had a new love interest. I think she felt sorry about TA, about leaving him behind. She was not going to be intimate with TA behind anyone’s back and that was obvious to him. She had no history of being unfaithful to her boyfriends, and she hadn’t known that she’d been the “girl on the side” when TA was seeing Lisa A. TA had made sure of that, as was revealed in court.

        So who was the happier person at that particular time? Who had more financial frustrations, and intense social pressure to be married? And who was going to be left behind (again) when she walked out the door on June 4th? He had been furious when she moved back to Yreka.

        Now she was leaving again. And we know from Mimi’s testimony that he didn’t have anything to look forward to as far as an intimate relationship with her was concerned.

        • “She was not going to be intimate with TA behind anyone’s back [once she had a new commitment] and that was obvious…”

  9. Ok, to be fair, I’ve got to hand it to Justdatruth for actually taking the time to reply to Justus’s questions. At least he is not replying with: “because Jodi is a skank” or “because you’re all idiots” or “because Jodi is a skank” (oh, did I say that already? Sorry! It’s the only thing we usually hear as a reply from non supporters).

    Admins, I know that what I’m gonna ask you is beyond the rules of this site BUT could it be possible to allow Justdatruth to comment here on the site about Justus’s questions? That is IF the rest of the supporters agree to that.

    We are logical, reasonable, mature people and are capable of having a healthy debate with someone that doesn’t agree with our POV. It seems that JDT can carry a respectful conversation and I am guessing that he will respect our site if allowed to comment here.

    What do the rest of you think?

    • I’m open to it. He’s invited me over to his site for a respectful discussion but history of standing alone, trying to discuss things on their turf, has made me a bit gun shy. (Besides I’m on vacation and don’t need that kind of aggravation.)

    • I agree, Pandora. I respect Justdatruth because at least he’s able to articulate his opinions and beliefs about the case without resorting to personal attacks and hateful comments about Jodi and her supporters. If more people on the other side behaved the way that he did, we would probably be able to have some excellent, intelligent discussions about this case amongst each other.

      • Great point Journee, I don’t think anytime on their opinions matter. They have proved time and time again they are not able (capable) to see the obvious. And, there is still the problem that they believe Travis was not at fault at any time during this horrible traumatic tragedy. ((((((((((FREE JODI))))))))))

    • Pandora, here’s a good article about JustDaTruth:

      I agree with the article that he sees a conclusion he liked and works his way backwards to come to it. That is a logical fallacy. He wants to believe that Jodi is guilty (even though he denies it), and that’s the major problem with his reasoning.
      Letting him post similar “debunkings” (that just don’t hold water on close inspection and are contradictory in nature) on this site will not be condusive to our goal. He doesn’t really debunk anything, just creates an illusion of debunking by supplying too much irrelevant information and getting too scientific (like he bought ten or so kinds of rope or called GM about the size of the gas tank – all al which was for nothing as the author of above article pointed out). Why confuse people even further?

      • Not that I’m afraid of him proving us wrong – the way he has answered most of Justus’s questions proves that we have nothing to fear on that score, because there are too many holes in his answers, some of which I have pointed out.

    • An invite wouldn’t be accepted by duhtruth. datruth is not going to subject himself to being edited and ridiculed. I’ve read his stuff before this feature. I can’t get past the scenarios are like sandbox fictions that don’t even follow the pros line, it’s like a lifetime movies script writer reject, and that’s being kind. An ability and willingness to slander Jodi is not datruth. and calling your writings datruth doesn’t make then so.
      Please Justus, Ask datruth about Dr Horn.

    • Hi there everyone. I just made a suggestion. That was it. I’m sorry if that made people feel uncomfortable. Well anyways, the admins and SJ decided so….. everything is cool!

      • ((((((Pandora)))))) There are many people in this world that we just have to ignore. When there is no rhyme or reasoning to what they say, why bother? I know your HEART was in the right place though.
        You all gave it a GREAT try though. 🙂 FREE JODI!

  10. Even though we believe that having Mr. DaTruth come over here to comment/ debate wouldn’t be beneficial, we’ve decided that if he wants to reply to any of the comments you’ve made we’ll make an exception to our rules this time around and allow it.

    As for the knuckle-dragging haters? Don’t waste your time. The rules still apply to you.

    Rasna – TEAM JODI

  11. Out of respect to the people who think Mr. DaTruth’s visit would not be beneficial, perhaps he should be restricted to replying only to posters who are talking to him.

    • I agree 100%.

      At this point, focusing our energy on debunking someone’s opinion who is convinced Jodi is Guilty of M1 is totally useless.I’ve been on numerous ”Discussion”, ”Debate” ”mixed” groups on FB where the illusion that TA vs Jodi supporters could exhange views on the case was the desirable reason for creating them (the groups). Things would start off civil and end up bitter and hostile by both sides. We just don’t see eye to eye. We come from different starting points, as you said ^^^ Journee.

      The amount of time and energy spent on *that* should better be spent on writing to people who can afford a Donation to Jodi’s Appellate Fund. And THAT’S what will help Jodi. Not this ongoing back and forth.

      • And there are people who are here BECAUSE they don’t care to argue with anyone out there – people who don’t go to the open forums or the mixed groups and never ever to the Travis support sites. Those people shouldn’t be left vulnerable to the unwanted attention of a person who comes here to do exactly what those people come here to avoid.

        • I totally object to letting this “DaTruth” person post on this site. Someone with the Twitter handle “Real Truth” @hardtruth4real posted personal/employment information about one of Jodi’s strongest supporters on his Twitter account and made damaging accusations. I don’t know anything about this JustDaTruth person, but JAII is a Jodi Arias SUPPORT site. I don’t think we need to subject posters here to invasion of privacy to indulge egos. There are plenty of sites on which interested parties can “debate” with those who are mistakenly convinced that Jodi is guilty. I echo Journee’s sentiments entirely: What good will this do Jodi? Can’t we concentrate on raising needed funds for Jodi’s appeal and helping her personally?

          • I second that,
            We need to focus on helping Jodi.
            This guy is obviously biased against Jodi, even though he denies it.
            I think such debates are best done on neutral ground.
            JustDaTruth hasn’s answered the questions well enough, without resorting to speculation.

            Just look at this excerpt: “She stuck to the ninja story for some time while under Samuels watch. He knew that story was a lie. He and Nurmi tried to convince Jodi to tell the truth and if not the truth, than a more plausible lie”

            He’s impugning Nurmi’s and Samuel’s integrity by implying that they colluded to persuade Jodi to come up with “a plausible lie”. Where’s foundation? I’m sure Numri or Samuels would never do such a thing, they a descent people.
            And he’s saying that LaViolette was biased against Travis. By the same token I can speculate that DeMarte was biased against Jodi. Yet JustDaTruth believes DeMarte, even though she has FAR less experience than LaViolette in DV. From an unbiased ousider’s point of view, DeMarte is far less credible than LaViolette exactly because of her lack of experience.

            • JDT chose to ignore Dr. Geffner’s opinions about how Dr. D approached testing Jodi and various other criteria (validity scales) critical to the diagnosis she found. Dr. G was one of the creators of an early Trauma Symptom Inventory test and knows testing, scoring, the DSMs, diagnoses, and validity scales backwards and forwards. He has more professional credentials than most of the doctors of psychology in the whole of the U.S.

              Most JAII supporters have focused on documented past events and evidence presented in court together with sworn testimony. JDT’s conjecture with respect to [what Jodi would have known] about the two different types of bullets (<—- the discrepancy a reason in and of itself for reasonable doubt) and his spin on what state of the U.S. Jodi was actually in when she made cellphone calls after the killing are over-reaching.

              JDT believes that visiting Ryan was a pre-planned alibi for Jodi, yet she had to fabricate a second alibi for her first alibi insofar as her excuse to Ryan for tardiness was that she was "lost" for twenty-fours hours.

              A stealthy murderer could be gone quickly in the night when there is zero traffic. A gunshot in the afternoon would be sooner acted upon by neighbors, (they wouldn't have to fully awaken, get out of bed, possibly even get dressed before investigating) whether roommates are at home or not. She could have lain awake until he fell asleep, attacking him then, but she did not do that. If she had, she could have left Mesa hours earlier and her story to Ryan of becoming lost would have been less preposterous.

              I agree with Journee and Maria and others about the intended purpose of this site, and that the "back and forth", even in a civilized manner, is not currently the best use of time in support of Jodi.

              Apart from the fund raising, the discussions that have been more relevant to Jodi's cause over the last weeks have been those of the fuel tank which Justus shared here, and observations about how gas evidence was presented, not to mention Justus' citing the prosecutor's vagueness about the car tank's specifications, which, since he would go after Jodi tooth and nail about the cans, was puzzling.

              There was so much obfuscation in the state's case against Jodi that the trial was simply not to be believed. Time is much better spent talking and writing to people we already know (and who find us credible) about Jodi's unfair conviction and the many reasons why the trial was an unmitigated farce. The lack of probative evidence in the case is stunning; the trial itself is still worth our scrutiny for Jodi's sake. Arguing with those who attempt to reverse engineer Jodi's "motive, means and opportunity" detracts from these other more worthwhile efforts.

              Haven't we all, (even if we haven't visited anti-Jodi sites) had enough of the Jan Brewer mentality and the negative drain on energy that it fosters? It's apparently socially acceptable in AZ, even if you are Governor and deliberations are underway, to announce to media that a defendant is "probably guilty" even as you admit that you don't know much about the case! What kind of leadership is that? It only suggests that prejudice is not prejudice if enough people or a few powerful people pile on. Geebee summed up those who believe Jodi is guilty of premeditation succinctly: They are cherry picking evidence, discarding any that doesn't fit. (E.g.: see my first ¶ above.) On the side of Jodi supporters, there is a willingness to take into consideration all of the evidence, and to agree with Jodi herself about her mistakes.

              Yes, Jodi DID premeditate a road trip…

              …but she was scared when she realized she couldn't find her cellphone in Pasadena. She knew that SLC meant twelve hours on dark desert highway. Two full backup gas cans notwithstanding, Mesa and TA – at half the distance – would have been the safer bet to anyone who had already driven more than six hours that day. Those gas cans and the flagrant way she picked them up are evidence of Jodi's desert driving history with Darryl. They signify the comprehension she held for the remoteness of the desert, and are consistent with Jodi's decision to cautiously follow a familiar route to Mesa.

              The prosecutor knew that it was entirely possible that some on the jury would come to the conclusion stated in the last sentence; hence his insistence that she lied about the third can – another distraction! Yet this allegation remains vacuous since there was no attempt to hide the first two, for which she also used credit cards for gas.

              As far as Jodi's lies about not being there and then blaming intruders are concerned, a murderer would have produced one scenario and then stuck to it, knowing that a story change would reek of culpability. These fabrications are the hopeless posturings of a terrified young woman who is in shock and cannot come to terms with having killed the man she loved, because 1) she knows she never meant to fire the gun 2) she has traumatic amnesia – a medically recognized condition – and therefore still cannot accurately testify about using the knife, and 3) she knows no one will believe #2 OR what she will have to say about TA in her own defense.

              If you have ever witnessed an abusive relationship, you know that abusers have a pattern of exaggerating the "offenses" of others. That, of course, is the very problem!! If someone tends to make something "global" out of everyday goof ups, they are more than just a drama queen, they are suffering from deep internal turmoil, and they need help. It might be worth noting Jodi's calm texts in response to some of TA's extended rants. That is classic! Exactly what an abused partner does. They stay relatively quiet, engaging enough to allow their partner to eventually cycle down and run out of energy.

              Haven't posted here for awhile but wanted to show support for Jodi AND her supporters. I'll be around.

              • Great points!
                And if you look at the comments left at JustDaTruth’s blog (the last entry, for example), you will see that he doesn’t have any dissenting opinions – everybody seems to be echoing his sentiments and agreeing with him….

                …wait, out of 14 comments, four have been deleted by the author!

                Just goes to show that he takes pains to remove all undesirable (to him) opinions.

  12. Happy 4th of July to everyone. Be safe today in whatever activities you do and please keep your pets indoors.

    After reading your replies concerning Mr. DaTruth, we have come to the conclusion not to allow any ‘back and forths’ here at this site. There are plenty of other cyber places where debating can take place. We respect every supporter and we’d like to thank you for being honest to our suggestion.

    Our main concern is Jodi and her supporters and we wouldn’t like anyone to feel uncomfortable at our site. This remains a support site dedicated to seeking justice for Jodi and is accessable ONLY to true Jodi supporters.


    Rasna – TEAM JODI

    • HAPPY 4TH OF JULY, my dear American friends!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ♥ ♥ ♥

      Celebrate, honor, have fun, enjoy this Holiday as a break from routine and to take your minds off your problems, drink to your heart’s content BUT don’t drive if you’re tipsy!

      • Happy 4th of July!!!!!! Happy Birthday America!!!!!! It’s a beautiful day here in Virginia, a good day for a ride! And yes Maria I think a drink may be in order later, but not too many I have to make this liver last as long as I can. LOL

        (((((TEAM JODI))))) ♥
        ((((((JODI♥ ♥))))))

        Ray in Harrisonburg Virginia. 🙂

          • Door cricking open. . .the quiet sounds of tip toeing. . .pssssst woohoo? Is the coast clear?????? LOL 🙂
            Glad to see everyone holding up!!!!!! Love to All and May All have a very Safe and HAPPY Fourth of July! NEVER forget we are TEAM JODI and THE TRUTH WILL PREVAIL!!
            Praying that Jodi will have a Blessed Day. ((((((JODI))))))))

        • LOL – not for those of us who got sideswiped by Arthur! Cookout plans have been set aside for the weekend because there’s hurricane clean-up to do first.

            • Oh, yeah – roof’s fine. No damages, just a bunch of smaller limbs and trash in the yard from the wind. Like I said, we only got sideswiped. The rain was welcome, as are the cooler temperatures today – but the weather alert buzzing on my phone @1:30 am was no fun.

              Hope you’re having a fun 4th, R.Love!

          • Oh, so sorry to hear that Journee. I had no idea. Glad to see you’re OK.

            (((((( Journee, stay safe ♥ ))))))))

            • eh, no biggie –

              Bit of a concern to see a hurricane so early here. It’s usually late August/early September before any come so close to us. The earlier season storms seem to stay more south of us.

          • Journee, glad to hear you’re safe! Hurricanes must be very frightening. We don’t have them here in Greece. But we do have earthquakes, which I’m guessing are just as scary as hurricanes!

    • Happy belated 4th of July America! I hope everyone had a wonderful time!

      SJ and admins, thank you for valuing everyones feelings and POV about JDT. That’s what I love about this site: that all supporters’ opinions count.

      I think I might have pissed off a couple of my friends here for making that suggestion to begin with. I need everyone to know that I made that suggestion only because JDT was trying to debunk Justus’s post that was written here at JAII. No other reason.

      I too stand by my opinion that this is a Jodi Arias support site ONLY for supporters. I also agree that there are many other sites where debating can be done.

      Thanks for keeping this site ‘clean’ of hatred and non supporters.

      ((((Admins: Rasna & Alexis))))

  13. I want to thank very sincerely RASNA and SJ and all the admins of this site. Through thick and thin, you have remained consistently classy and diligent in protecting Jodi and her supporters from abuse. As someone who has been attacked and abused for over a year on Twitter for simply voicing my support of Jodi’s innocence, I appreciate your decision to keep this a support site. P.S. Your presentation of her artwork is beautiful!

      • Thanks Pandora, I try to read thru the posts as often as I can, but I don’t post that often, but I love this site for the support that everyone gives to Jodi.

        • Hey Dave!
          ” but I don’t post that often”
          Well, try and post more often then, LOL! 😀 Jodi needs as much support as she can get 🙂

  14. Hoping all survived the endless fireworks celebrations where they live. SMH I wish people who enjoy fireworks would take other people’s families and pets into their consideration 🙁 Happy to have Survived! 🙂

    • Amen to that! Especially in states where it’s against the law. And the cops just look the other way! grrrr

      • It is against the law where I live but people go to other counties and buy them and then we suffer all night long. It appears that every city in our country has some sort of fireworks celebration and I do not understand why people will not go and enjoy them there. Yes, I am proud to be an American but I also follow our laws. Last year there was an article in our paper about a man who had fought in WWII he wrote about how he had to endure fireworks for the sake of his children and grand children but he disliked the fireworks because of the horrible memories they would trigger in his mind of war. The animals suffer also. It is not fair. Think of the money the law would make if they would only enforce the laws. People need to be more considerate of others but I suppose that is a lost cause.

  15. I’d like to make a suggestion, if I may. Why not compile a list of all the many, many questions this trial left unanswered, like the list you all prepared for “Brad Duh”? All the inconsistencies and illogical holes in Juan’s fairytale. All the ones that point to self-defense being the truth, plus all the ones that point to others possibly being involved and/or totally responsible? Number the questions, make it simple and easy to read. Leave open all possibilities as to what may have happened. Remember a trial is not generally a place where the total truth comes out from EITHER side. Not Jodi’s fault, just the way the system works.

    Then find the emails of all the death penalty qualified defense attorneys in Arizona and California (as my understanding attorneys can be licensed in either state) and email and/or snail mail the list? Possibly you can find the names and contact info on the AZ and CA Bar Association’s sites. They must be DP qualified.

    You see, from what I gather, Jodi herself is not making an effort to contact any attorneys at this point, and while that is understandable, I believe she needs help in this regard. She may not ask for it for a number of reasons. You might include that she has an appellate fund and is doing all she can to collect donations. No one knows this trial like you guys here do. And you can’t count on that other attorneys have the time or will take the time without being paid first, to realize just all they would have to work with on an appeal. Their interest needs to be peaked! No one needs Jodi’s permission or anyone else’ to do this, as there are just way too many filters and agendas at play through jail communications, etc.

    Ineffective counsel is what I see most prominently. In fact, I see that Maricopa County, through a variety of devious maneuvers, allowed Nurmi to give Jodi the shovel, from which 18 days of gruel questioning allowed her to ….dig her own grave. Sad, unconscionable, but quite likely, true.

  16. Hope everyone had a great 4th of July! Been reading all these posts and videos and came up with a few observations:

    -Mark Curtis seems to be a fair and objective reporter. He asks great questions and Jodi never fails to answer them. Compare this to someone like Scott Peterson or Susan Smith who couldn’t look an interviewer in the eye and often seemed to be hiding something-the truth.

    -Jodi continues to say that Travis is not a bad person. It would be easy for me to disagree, but she knew him better than I. She knew him better than most of us here do. And yet I know deep down that Jodi now realizes more than ever that the things he said and did to her were wrong. It sounds to me like Jodi’s trying to take the high road and focus on the good qualities of Travis, at least publicly. Even if she wanted to take him apart and call him out on a lot of the bad things that he did, I think Jodi realizes that it would only bring more pain to Travis’s family and so she chooses not to do that. To me, that reveals more about Jodi and her character than what you see and hear on HLN.

    -We’re all sinners. If you believe that Jesus Christ was the son of God, then you most likely believe that Christ died on the cross for our sins. He died for us. My problem with a lot of Christians is when so many of them get on their moral high horse and start passing judgments on others while looking the other way at their immoral behavior or others they admire. I remember in the 1980s when the PTL scandals started to break out: Jim Bakker having an affair with Jessica Hahn, Jimmy Swaggart tearfully apologizing for his indiscretions with another woman (“I have sinned against you!”, one televangelist after another revealing themselves to be frauds. There was even a hilarious music video and song about it by Genesis called “Jesus He Knows Me”. The point of it was how so many of these “Christians”, and I put the word in quotation marks because they don’t represent all Christians, is that they tell people to do what they say, not do what they do. I call them HypoChristians

    -Most Jodi supporters do not dispute the fact that she made mistakes and deserved to receive some punishment, however, we do not believe that she pre-meditated Travis’s killing. I have read about similar court cases to Jodi’s where the man or woman that killed their lover in self-defense were convicted of manslaughter and they were out of prison within 5-10 years. What makes Jodi’s case so different? Simple. The state of Arizona and its draconian criminal justice system. Keep in mind that this is the same state that only made Martin Luther King Day a holiday within the last 20 years. If memory serves, they were the last state in the USA to adopt it. On top of that you have Sheriff Joe whose bigotry towards Hispanics and Latinos is well-documented. I can almost guarantee you that if Jodi’s case was tried in California instead of Arizona that she would not be in the situation that she’s in right now. Arizona also was denied a Super Bowl one year because they refused to pass a law making Martin Luther King Day a holiday.

    -I’m not 100% sure on the demographics of HLN viewers, but I’m willing to bet that most of them are women. A lot of them are mothers so when they watched the Casey Anthony trial and their heavily skewered coverage against Casey, portraying her as a violent woman that murdered her young daughter, was it any doubt that there’d be such a vociferous reaction towards her? Had there been no Jodi Arias trial, they likely would still be venting out their hatred towards Casey Anthony, but once Jodi Arias came along, they put Casey on the back burner and had a new target to hate. Many of these women are older, white women and I wouldn’t doubt that there’s a lot of jealousy and resentment that such an attractive, exotic-looking woman was able to win the heart of a white as Wonder Bread Mormon. Some of them fell in love with Travis or developed crushes on him and most people will tell you that most women get very nasty and competitive around other women. Not that guys don’t get that way with each other, but there’s a lot less drama. Most men in America could have cared less about the Jodi Arias trial. They were drive-by viewers who hopped on the bandwagon not unlike most Americans who have pretended to love soccer for the past month while watching the World Cup. And now that the World Cup is over, they’ll go back to their regularly scheduled programming as will most so-called Travis Alexander “supporters” once the next phase of the trial ends during the fall or they find another target in the media to hate.

    -Even if you were to rule out the possibility or probability of domestic abuse or violence against Jodi, which we do not, she was still justified in killing Travis in self-defense if she felt that her life was in danger or felt threatened. I have read Travis’s emails and texts and listened to his conversations with Jodi. He sounds very much like an angry, young man who thinks nothing of calling people “soul-less”. He also took great delight in revealing how someone was intimidated by him after they encountered each other in a men’s room. You listen to his conversation with Jodi and he sounds very much like a guy on a moral high horse who doesn’t think twice about passing judgments on others while looking the other way at his own immoral and sinful behavior. In fact, the more I learn about Travis, the more he sounds eerily like Elliot Rodger, the young man who perpetrated the Isla Vista killings. Now, you want to talk about a butcher? Witnesseth Elliot Rodger.

    -I think that we should welcome spirited debate between us and those who support Travis, but I’ve got no problem with the decision that was made yesterday regarding Brad aka JustDaTruth. To be fair, he writes an excellent blog on Blogger. However, as we all know too well about the “Law of Atttraction”, like attracts like and Brad chooses to align himself with haters that have said and done abusive things towards many of us here which cannot be forgotten. It’s like someone once said about how if you spend enough time in the sewer, you get to know the other rats.

    • I appreciate your writings Raja, but I say you’re wrong about Justduhtrut, I say his writings are completely plausible denial. I won’t bother to dissect every word cause it’s a lost cause. I say datruth is trapped up in the sound of his own voice. Without mercy he’s no human in my book.

      • Last but not least, duhtrut has attempted to re: re: our re: on his “excellent blog”. I respond to his re: of my re: by saying this one last thing. The only comment you made that had any meaning for me was that a “real lawyer” would make mincemeat of your personal opinion. You see it’s already been done

        • I’ve read through JustDaTruth’s response.
          We can argue with him in perpetuity.
          At least he’s not insisting that the gunshot was last. That might be considered a small victory.

        • What I find lacking in JustDaTruth’s explanations is that he oftentimes admits (explicitly or implicitly) that there are many different scenarios. That kind of waffling does not wash, I’m afraid. You have to pick a theory and run with it – defend it against all attacks, and if it stands under scrutiny, then you’re right.
          He has multiple theories of her guilt and he doesn’t even want to consider our theory of her innocense, which is what is so frustrating (at least to me).

          Let’s take a for-instance (his reply to one of my replies about why she used gas cans AFTER the murder):

          “Alexey I may not have been clear in my reply, I was trying to convey that Jodi had killed a man the previous day or so, she knew at any time his body might be discovered, and she also may have felt that she would be questioned, or that the police were on the lookout for her. Her mind may have been racing, her imagination working overtime, and in the event she had to make a run for it, she wanted full gas cans so she wouldn’t have to stop off at gas stations. ”

          That is nothing but guess work, he doesn’t know what went through her mind at that time (no evidence). But he completely dismisses another explanation which is perfectly plausible – that Jodi was just provident and didn’t want to run out of gas in the middle of nowhere. Jodi was an experienced traveller (a fact) and that’s why she took the gas cans with her in the first place (not to cover her tracks, as JustDaTruth wants us to believe, but not to be caught flat-footed in the desert, without gas).
          In fact I have a gas can in the trunk of my car just in case I run out. Does that mean that every time I drive my car I have a murder on my mind? According to JustDaTruth, it does.
          But the main problem with his explanations is that they cannot be backed by solid evidence. And that they can be explained away in a different, reasonable way. That’s what’s called reasonable doubt.
          For example, the gun theft was never solved and we don’t know who stole the gun. JustDaTruth assumes it was Jodi, although that neighborhood had been hit with several burglaries and it’s reasonable to assume that it wasn’t Jodi after all. The bullets in the gun were different from the bullet recovered from Travis’s body. JustDaTruth assumes that Jodi had some (very advanced) knowledge of bullets that made her change out the ammunition so that the gun wouldn’t be traced back to her, but again there’s no proof that Jodi bought any bullets (the bullets didn’t just appear out of thin air) and there’s nothing to suggest that Jodi was an experienced gun owner (she didn’t even have any guns in her possession, she wasn’t into guns).

          • PS: Just to be accurate, by “she didn’t even have any guns in her possession” I meant prior to the incident. I am aware that she bought that 9 mil.

            • Here’s a thought: Let’s follow the supposition, as JDT suggests, that Jodi did fear she might be stopped and questioned at Ryan’s, or at any time on the road after leaving Mesa. That she had that concern is a legitimate assumption, based on her testimony of feeling her “life was over” as she drove through the Arizona desert after the mortal fight.

              Q: If she had stockpiled gas as part of a murder scheme, in furtherance of driving “undercover” in the state of AZ, then why didn’t she ditch the cans after getting back on the Interstate 15, sticking to gas stations and only filling the car’s tank for the rest of the trip? She was, after all, trying to appear as though she’d never been to AZ when she visited Ryan. If she associated the gas cans with PREMEDITATION, she wouldn’t have wanted them around after they were no longer useful to her. She would have tossed them just as she had tossed the knife, the gun and the rope.

              A: She didn’t have a plan to kill TA in the first place, so she did not associate having gas cans with the appearance of guilt. They were simply travel aids to her, nothing more.

              Additionally, she WAS stopped by a Utah police officer because the rear license plate was upside down. She didn’t try to outrun the officer, even though she didn’t know the reason he was pulling her over. She may have figured an APB had been put out on her and that it was over THEN.

              If you go with the presumption of innocence, you realize that Jodi would have turned the license plate around after getting back on the Interstate 15 enroute to Utah – IF she’d been the one to turn it upside down in an attempt to make the numbers look different in AZ. It is a simple conclusion to come to.

              Going with the presumption of guilt, one is obligated to craft embellished excuses for her consistent LACK of covert behavior, because there was no murder plan in the first place.

              • A very good point!
                I would ditch the gas cans as well.
                I also would burn the receipts. That would be the first thing I would do – get rid of the receipts because they link me to those incriminating purchases.
                JustDaTruth, if you’re reading this, riddle me this: why did she hold onto the receipts? For the IRS?
                I’m sure JustDaTruth will explain it by saying something along the lines of “she thought that the receipts alone would not be damning evidence against her because she did not plan to get caught”, but I beg to differ – the most logical thing to do is get rid of EVERYTHING that might link you in any way to the crime, and getting rid of the receipts is like falling off a log – very simple – that’s like the first thing anybody would do.
                The fact that Jodi held on to the receipts proves to me that she did not plan it at all.

                • I mean, according to JustDaTruth, she had the acumen to turn off her phone, dye her hair, rent a car, but somehow she didn’t think of getting rid of the receipts, or the camera or wearing gloves? That just doesn’t add up at all.
                  If a person decides to commit a crime, the first thing that comes to mind is putting on a pair of gloves, right? And trying not to leave any evidence is always top priority. Jodi left a wealth of evidence (it’s like “try NOT to catch me”), and to me it proves that this murder was not planned at all. There was no premeditation involved. To think that Jodi had planned this mess is just preposterous (in my humble opinion, of course).

                • I still believe that Jodi had a world of “HELP” setting up the crime scene. Jodi didn’t even know about all of her “Helpers”! I believe that the “friends of Travis” had much more to do with the discriminating crime scene that Jodi ever did. It all falls back to Detective Flores and his remarkable investigation doesn’t it? What a SAD mess of things he made. SMH

                • I’ve always wondered what happened to the gas cans. Didn’t either the prosecution or the defense go find the gas cans? Maybe the defense didn’t know it would be an issue but the prosecution did. Did they try to locate the supposed three gas cans? Perhaps they did and only found two? If only two were still in Jodi’s possession then wouldn’t it be ridiculous to claim she only got rid of one? (Although I suppose the JDTs of the world would say she thought only the third one was incriminating and she wanted to return the other two to Darryl so she could get her grandparents’ DVD player back that she had used for collateral with Darryl who was apparently running a pawn shop on the side.)

              • And Jodi apparently would have had to transfer all the cans (whether two or three) from the rental car to the car she was picked up with at the rental car agency (most likely her sibling’s) and then into her own car. Wouldn’t whoever picked her up have possibly noticed the gas cans, particularly if two were red and one was blue?

                • Yes, she would have had to transfer those cans – and I think they were found in her car when she was finally apprehended. I remember her saying that she was intending to return the cans to Darryl when they closed in on her.

                  So where is that blue kerosene can – since they would have recovered the other two? JM and EF played it as if the receipts were the only proof of ALL of the cans’ existence. The reason we never saw ANY of those fuel cans in court must be because only producing the two cans as evidence would have blown up their “third can” THEORY very concretely.

                  Isn’t it INTERESTING – the questions the jurors never asked, like, “Where are the gas cans now?” “Was their capacity tested?” And, “What would a service station employee do if they saw a customer filling a blue kerosene can at a gas station?” Or how about, [of Darryl} “Did Jodi ever return the two gas cans to you, and if so, did she also offer you a third can?”

                  Since Jodi’s life hangs in the balance, you’d think these ace cops would have proved their exact capacity for the record, along with the exact capacity of the ’08 Ford Focus.

                  The trial was disgusting, AND…

                  …the stuff the jurors focused on – pffft!!

                • Amen to both of you!
                  Since the gas cans were crucial evidence (in Martinez’ head) why weren’t they ever retrieved and presented at court? Or at least photographed as in Casey Anthiony’s case ( and mind you, the gas can there was just a pice of a billion pieces puzzle, not as important as in Jodi’s case). I remember being extremely confused when Martinez was ecstatically adding up figures and playing the Maths wizard!
                  WHY didn’t he marked the gas cans as exhibits, test their capacity, show them (ALL 3 of them, Mr Kermit) to the Jurors and say Voila!
                  This is a DP trial. It’s disgusting, inhumane and upsetting to know citizens are so unfairly treated when they are being tried for their life.

                • Yes, why wasn’t the two RED ((? 5 gal ?)) gas cans retrieved? Surely they must have been in her rental car & transferred to the car that she got a ride & then transferred to her old car. Or, maybe she returned two red cans to Darryl at some point. But surely the police would have known where they could collect it into evidence. But that was not important to try to prove her truthfulness, police only collect evidence, in this case, TO TRY to prove a person is lying.
                  …I have earlier said that 5 gallons is the (safe capacity) for a 5 gal can. But surely it CAN CONTAIN more, maybe several more ounces. That would be favorable to Jodi’s explanation of where the aprox 25 gallons went into.
                  …Now, was it really two 5 gallon red gas cans? … I mentioned before that I bought a plastic red gas can about 20 years ago & I would have sworn on my life it was a RED 5 gallon gas can. …But I looked at it last month & it is (embossed in red on red plastic) and it says: SEARS CRAFTSMAN 5 1/4 GALLONS 20 LITERS GASOLINE. …. And, (20 liters is 5.2834410472 gallon [US Liquid] …And that is only the SAFE capacity, surely it can hold a few more ounces. … …
                  …So, perhaps no one really noticed if Darryl’s 5 gal cans are really 5 1/4 gal cans. ….The police would surely not tell. …
                  …Perhaps the jury did ask about the REAL MEASURED capacity of the two borrowed gas cans & the REAL CAPACITY of the rental car gas tank. …Surely JM would have argued & quashed those questions. …IMO…
                  …RED 5 1/4 gas can is SEARS part/stock # 71 33625 ……. I looked it up online & it is not listed but if anyone has an old Sears catalog about 20 or 25 years old you may find that part/stock #. …It would be interesting ! ! ……

      • Oh, he’s human alright. He’s just in favor of inhumane treatment of Jodi as are his followers and that is one of many areas in which we don’t see eye-to-eye.

        • Jodi could have left the rental car in Los Angeles and taken a bus, then a taxi to Mesa/TA’s neighborhood. That way the odometer would have had a less incriminating reading. She could have paid cash for the bus and the taxi (I don’t think you need to produce I.D. to take a bus, even across state lines, but I’m not certain of this) and taken the taxi to a house several blocks away from TA’s. She could have planned to arrive sometime around midnight, instead of after four o’clock in the morning, to be less conspicuous to the taxi driver. She could have put her hair up under a hat and worn some glasses. She could have left her suitcase/backpack in the car to travel light. Or she could have carried a briefcase and worn business clothes, to look like a business traveler returning home. She also could have “napped” on the bus, burying her face in a hoodie.

          There are so many ways she could have TRIED to have been more covert. We’ve all read a John Grisham story or two – we know how a person could move around stealthily in this day and age.

          She said she parked the car in the driveway. What murderer would do such a thing? The car was sitting there for thirteen + hours!

          • And when she arrived, there would have been another rental car in front of the house – Zack Billings had a rental because his car was in the shop. According to Flores’ report, he turned the car in that morning (the 4th, which was his day off) – but Zack was sketchy on a lot of stuff timeline wise, so who knows? My point being, there was already a strange car in front of the house, so Enrique (or any nosy neighbors) might not necessarily have thought anything of the car Jodi drove.

            • Right, maybe Enrique saw Jodi’s Focus sitting there after Zack left to return his rental and mistakenly thought it was Zack’s rental and that Zack was still around.

              But how would Jodi have known in advance that they wouldn’t wonder and take note of an extra car? It’s flagrant behavior, like getting gas cans from Darryl and using credit cards to fill them up.

              If Jodi were a man, would the jury consider such flagrant behavior – and not attacking TA until it was time for people to come home from work – on the side of exculpatory evidence? I’ve always thought so.

              • And it’s something we’ve been saying all along: WHY not kill him in the middle of the night? Silently shlash his throat while he’s sleeping? And then sneak out of the house?

                She waited till late afternoon when his roomates were bound to come home from work (or their errands)? In ahouse where doors were NEVER locked and people could come and go? And still sher chose to spend 13 hours and go do it in the daylight?
                I cannot believe the jurors never wondered about such things, and to think they were able to ask questions!
                But of course when Jurors ask questions such as ”After all the lies you have told, why should we believe you now?” you can understand their critical thinking skills were not their strongest point. Yet, those people decided for her life. Chilling, isn’t it?

                • They had no questions at all for the truth-dodging ME and only questions about the palm print for the crime scene tech, but they wanted to know why ALV had shrugged her shoulders, which is just a habit of hers.

                  I couldn’t remember the testimony about the bloody footprint so I went to review Conner’s testimony and was surprised that her testimony was interrupted at the lunch hour to take Horn out of turn with no cross done on that part of her testimony. There were 4 more witnesses (Northcutt firearms expert, Ryan Burns, and then Smith and Biggs, latent prints) before Conner gets back on the stand. The only testimony about the footprint was the introduction of the photo and that’s it. No questions from JM, no cross from Nurmi and no questions from the jury. I wonder if they would have had any questions if there had not been such a long break in the testimony, but really with that group I sincerely doubt it. It’s the only trial that I have heard of where there is a bloody shoeprint a few feet from the body and there is no investigation or testimony about it except for the crime scene pic.

                • Martinez pulled the same stunt with Flores, Carol – several times. He’d put Flores up there for an hour or so, between one break and the next, and without ever tendering the witness for cross he’d call a different witness after the break.

                • Oh, but it WAS a juror question, Carol, that finally nailed Horn on the dura mater issue.

                  I *think* Willmott was kept from asking it herself when Martinez called Horn in surrebuttal, because in rebuttal cross must stay within the scope of direct. But the juror questions are not held to those same restraints, so the juror got to ask the dura mater question and Willmott got to press it in follow-up.

                • I was just thinking of the first time that Horn testified on Day 3. I found it strange they had no questions even though Wilmott had brought up the changing of stories between him and Flores.

                • I don’t think any of us understood what the fuss was all about at that point – at least not among those *I* was discussing the trial with at that point. All this back and forth with Flores about what he’d been saying for four years, then grilling Horn about it, it didn’t make sense when observers (jurors included) were just trying to get to the meat of the state’s case.

                  It wasn’t until Jodi’s testimony about what happened on Jun 4 that we understood why this was a critical issue.

                • As soon as I heard Horn’s testimony changing the gunshot sequence I knew what JM was up to. There’s only one reason to want the gunshot last and that is the cruelty aspect. To have it come out on day 3 that the lead detective perjured himself in a previous hearing and to have the medical examiner deviate from his written report so much was hard for me to believe.

                  Since then I have learned of the corruption within the district attorneys of the state having read Mr. Keifer’s article and now I learn that this is effectively strike three for Dr. Horn and his testimony from the stand. I like Alexey wonder how he still maintains his licence. I don’t understand why the citizens of AZ put up with such a corrupt bunch running their justice system.

  17. I know this is off-topic, but I would like to know what people here think about Casey Anthony. I saw that she’s in the news again and that triggered this comment/question.

    Personally I think she was not guilty. If she was, the prosecution did a terrible job. The entire case was based on “She’s not a nice girl” and very little supporting evidence.

    I think something similar is going on with Jodi Arias.

    • I know nothing about that case, but Cheney Mason has a new book released tomorrow, called “Justice in America: How the Media and Prosecutors Stack the Deck Against the Accused.” CNN has a story today featuring an interview with him.

    • SJ runs a site for Casey Anthony’s case.
      I believe it’s best not to start talking about other cases here (mentioning them, yes ) because CA ‘s was also one that was hugely controversial. And I agree with you, very similar to Jodi’s in the sense that Casey was also dehumanized and demonized by the media. Her Jurors were sequestered however and I think THAT was the MAIN thing that made a difference. Plus, the Prosecution overcharging her in the first place- again, similar to Jodi’s. You can’t convict someone of M1 if your case isn’t strong enough. Unless your Jurors are not sequestered of course and are watching HLN! 🙄

  18. Question about the license plates: Does anyone remember whether both plates were reattached when it was returned to the rental agency? I seem to remember that the front plate was still on the floor but I could be wrong.

    • Well, I don’t know if both plates were reattached when returned to the rental agency, but, she certainly could have attached the front plate very, very, very easily & quickly, without (as one person asked)… “did she go buy screws with Ryan” ?? …She did not need to buy screws, if only the “haters” would understand her logic. ……..If the front plate was incorrect & (she did not realize it), she could have easily taken one screw from the rear plate (after the cop stopped her) & installed that one screw on the front plate. ….Reasonable doubt of her guilt, because most everything she did was of the logical & innocent mind of Jodi. …

      • And it seems to me if she was wanting to disguise her trip to AZ and her presence at Travis’ she might have had a great ah-ha moment as that front plate presented itself to her on the ground. If she wasn’t sure it was the same plate, it would have been an opportune time to first see if they are different and then replace the back plate with this one. Why would she never have thought about it? Well, we know why but I’m assuming JDT, etc., would see that as one of Jodi’s dumb moments since it doesn’t fit into their presumed master plan.

    • My recollection is that the front plate was still on the floor. I’ve no recollection of Jodi saying she or anyone else ever reattached it. I noted that the rental car man said nothing about the front plate, and neither did the UT patrolman.

      • Exactly. If Jodi had had that “ah ha!” moment, realizing that the “found” front plate didn’t match the rear plate, then she would have thrown out that front plate after using it temporarily on the rear of the car as a cover.

        But the rental car man never said that she returned the car with just one plate, and in CA, two plates are required.

    • There was no testimony from Colombo about a plate being off or missing – just that the floor mats were missing and there were the spots that looked like Kool-Aid on the seats.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


Latest from Latest News

Go to Top