Shelf testing (how to do it – and how not to do it)

in Latest News by

I’m not too sure what to make of yesterday… but it appeared to be a day of sidebars & recesses topped off by an early finish.

In the midst of all that , we were treated to the Flores comedy show and his BS-riddled rebuttal testimony. He basically admitted to “recreating” the shelf set up in the closet, and doing some selective measurements to boot, but I don’t actually recall him saying he’d actually tested the shelf to see how it would react to weight.

Yes, he’d played around with it and took some photos, but wasn’t the reaction to weight the critical factor? Apparently not. Had he done that, then it would have proven Jodi’s testimony to be accurate.

I also mentioned yesterday about the shelf re-enactment a few weeks back on our favorite entertainment channel, HLN. A lot of people missed that, so here’s the brief video showing their re-enactment.

[hdplay id=202 width=500 height=300]

The important part to note is that when the dude momentarily stands on the shelf to retrieve the gun, he’s standing on the far right of the shelf with the holding peg directly under it. Had he stood on the middle of the shelf it would have been different altogether. No wonder Flores never weight tested it.

Leave your comments below…

Team Jodi


  1. I heard ghost hunters wasn’t true but if they were parked there, I guess it’s happening.

    Most ridiculous thing I’ve ever heard

    • That was the most bogus experiment ever conducted. Any person with ant sort of science lab experience will know that an experiment that does not mimic the real scenario of the hypothesis you are trying to prove isn’t valid.

  2. I was so bored and couldnt sleep so I went to the Ta facebook pageto get a laugh. My comments were very quickly deleated but the fact that I got under their skin enough to remove them was FUNNY!! They were commenting one day about Jodi and OJ Simpson having the same bday and how telling that was. Well Nathaniel White a serial KILLER has the same BDAY as TA so what does that say about him?? LOL those people are such FREAKS!!!


    SJ I’m trying to quickly down this 1st cup of coffee so that I will leave dream land…did I just read “Ghost Hunters” were at TA’S OLD HOUSE? Tell me old friend it’s not true….

        • yeah, I bet the recent owners were just THRILLED to have so many stalkers coming around the house and what with dumbo flores wanting to go inside….

          I can’t blame them for leaving.

          • Apparently, the realtor never divulged the “illustrious history” of the property to the new owners. They found out from neighbors after moving in. They also decided to keep it a secret from their kids for obvious reasons, and were ploughing on regardless at that point. Not sure what happened after that… maybe too many sightseers I guess, but it’s now back up for sale.

            Team Jodi

            • I may be mistaken, but i believe there are laws that require the realitor to tell the people buying the home that there was “big event” that happened at this home. ie, a murder, killing, home of a serial killer..etc..

              • According to the neighbors (Objection, hearsay!, overruled), one of them stated they weren’t told until after they moved in (Objection, hearsay!, overruled) and another said they only knew 2 weeks before they exchanged contracts and proceeded anyway (Objection, hearsay!, overruled). I guess we can only speculate (Objection, speculation!, sustained).

                Here’s the Fox 10 video from last month:

                Team Jodi

              • I have an license for the state I live in. You have to tell only if you are asked. But you know it’s possible people will find out from the neighbors.

              • Different states have different disclosure laws. As a super-loose rule of thumb, the eastern states require more disclosure and western states less.

            • Behind funding what? Ghost hunters? or the purchase of the home? The owner’s name is public record. I kind find it strange they bought it, put it back up for sale quickly for $25,000 more and listed it for a year. One could argue they didn’t live in Arizona and had no clue it was the infamous house it is, and once they “found out” they put it up for sale. So why list a foreclosed property for 25k more if you are in a hurry to get out? Very curious.
              SJ clarify who you were speculating about please…

          • Possibly the homeowners “got outta dodge” because of the evilness that the investigator and his cohorts left behind…

            • Regarding the crime scene house:

              The home was sold by the bank after all the criminal evidence was collected.

              The bank got a surprisingly decent price for it – don’t get me wrong; the bank received way, way less than was loaned from 2004 to 2008 – but not bad for that time in that market., I’m just saying the bank’s just not as deeply in the red over it.

              Last I looked, the home is worth less than the bank sold it for, so I wouldn’t be surprised to find out the owner just wanted a little pseudo-reality TV show money.


      • I hate to admit it…3 drinks and I’m done….gee you would think I’d sleep like a baby but I tossed and turned all night… I keep thinking I’m just missing something in this trial…..I was even talking to Jodi for a bit…hopefully it was in the dream a state…

  4. The last few days of the rebuttal have been strange, to say the least. What I’m a little perplexed about is the defense’s strategy in how they’ve tackled the rebuttal. Deep down inside, the scientist in me says you rebut a presentation by proving its wrong. But the AZ procedur doesn’t exactly allow that. In most cases it looks like you can only disprove rebuttal through cross-examination, and that seems patently unfair. For instance how is the defense supposed to rebut Flores’ testimony about the shelves, without being able to do a demonstration of their own? You could do the cross Nurmi did, but that only shows what Flores didn’t do. It doesn’t show what could actually happen in a real life case.

    So I’m not sure how juries view this sort of tilted rebuttal.

    Also I’m perplexed in trying to predict what the ME is here for today, but we’ll find out soon enough. Again I wish the defense had put on a pathologist of their own, because whatever this ME is going to say will end up having to be rebutted through the cross alone, unless the guy opens the door to a surrebuttal like DeMartes did.

    • Al, what did you think about the photos bit? I just didn’t get that AT ALL. It was like, “Here’s a receipt from Wal-Mart from this time. Here’s some photos taken in the car from a little later and Jodi has brown hair. And then, here’s this other photo from an unspecified time and Jodi has blondish hair. But there was nothing on the receipt showing the purchase of hair dye. So, hey, jurors, from this you should infer that Jodi dyed her hair brown while driving in her car on the road. I can’t prove it, but I questioned her on it so I just want you to know she’s a liar.” Did I miss a point because I really couldn’t find one?

      • What he was “trying” to show is she left Yreka with blonde streaks in the front, dyed her in S CA before she left to go to Mesa. The rec. was to show where she was at (location) in CA and the phone photo time and date shows she had to be in same approx. location in CA . Remember him questioning her about dyeing her hair around the same time, she said she got her nails done? This is another one of his attempts to impeach her testimony. I don’t know if the jurors followed it enough to get the connection.

        • I just didn’t see him prove a date the other photo (with blonde streaks) was taken. Did you? He was trying to infer she left Ca with her hair like that. But he didn’t prove it. He never even said how old that photo was.

          • the other photo was entered into evidence by the defense and it was taken after march of 2008

            But what you can take out of it is, that Jodi clearly wanted to dye her hair to a darker color 3 month before the killing and she clearly said on the stand that the first time she dyed it was not what she was going for so she dyed it again so this darker color from the picture on jun 3 can be 2 month already after the second dying of the hair, if anything it proves that she was truthful on the stand about dying her hear 2 times

            but what i think Nurmi was trying to point out is that she took the picture with the hilio phone and the hilio phone was 7 hour ahead as repeatedly pointed out when jodi was on the stand so the picture was taken before the Walmart purchase

            • Yes Nurmi tried but didn’t get very far because the witness said the phone converted the time according to the zone the person was. But it at least muddied the water.

              • So why would the phone time not convert into the text massages as well? i don’t believe the phone has different technology for the camera than the text massages, I think he got the point across pretty well

              • I wonder if the jurors followed what that witness was saying. Nurmi kept asking him because he wasn’t explaining it very clearly. Good morning all!

            • Eli, you said “the other photo was entered into evidence by the defense and it was taken after march of 2008”

              Do you recall if a date was EVER specified for whe that was taken? I mean, there are 2 full months AFTER March and before June last time I looked at a calendar. You know what I mean? That’s just sooo vague!

              As for dying hair from blonde to brown, I only wish there were more women on the jury who would know the difficulty. I have naturally dark blonde hair (now with a lot of grey) ad with one chunk of naturally very light blonde hair in a rather fat streak. I had blonde highlights to match that streak all my life. When I was worried about my ex finding me last year, I decided to dye my hair medium brown. The first time, it came out with a lot of red in it. The highlights started to show through pretty quickly after several shampoos. It wasn’t until the 4th time that the brown colour really took and covered up the highlights entirely.

              Now, if there was a juror who had undergone this process from blonde to brown, they would absolutely get the difficulty Jodi had in returning to her natural colour. But men don’t usually dye their hair or if they do, they only dye it to hide grey. Let’s hope one of the remaining women has been blonde at one point in time.

              As for Nurmi’s questions regarding the time, I don’t think he got anywhere. The witness was adamant but confusing, at the same time.

              • So true about blonde to brunette. I am going through that process. Thought it would be easier and less expensive to do myself. I ended up a redhead the first time. I was devastated. Did it a few weeks later and it is less red but next time I am going to try a darker brown. Then go one shade lighter brown. I don’t know if it will work. If not I have to go to a good professional colorist.

                • I go from dark auburn and grey to light strawberry blonde. So what happens when you go darker and how does it explain the progression in the pictures. Ive been very confused on that issue and thought maybe the date stamps were wrong because they can be tampered with.

                  On that note, the forensics guy ran the data through encase. I’m familiar with that program. All the detective had to do is change the date and time on the phone manually prior to running it through encase. I guess I don’t trust the evidence in this case because of all the games played so far.

                  Also, why would Jodi take pictures of herself in the midst of hiding herself ie hair color while premeditating a murder? She wouldn’t because that doesn’t make sense.

                  Back to my orginal question though, what happens when one goes light to dark?

          • The photo with streaks were already entered in evidence with the “May” time stamp. I think 1 of the 2 Jen entered into evidence showing she had two colors of hair in May..not sure about the date best I remember around the 10th and 14th. He has the Budget rental car guy IDing her from the mug shot stating it was her but different color..blonde hair.

            • I suspect the Budget guy just remembered Jodi’s drivers license picture and not the actual colour of her hair the day she rented the car. Something similar happened to me. My photo on our intranet was me as a blonde taken when I started here. A guy from our IT department in New York met me a few months later right after I’d dyed my hair brown. I was in training with someone else who remarked on my hair, and the IT guy said “Ah, that explains it. I was expecting a blonde after seeing your photo.” Well, recently (about a year later), the same IT guy was just here again. While we were chatting, he said “Your hair looks nice, did you change it? You were a blonde last time I was here, right?” Somehow, that’s all he remembers even though he has clearly seen me (and we worked together for a week) as a brunette.

      • AA

        I didn’t either. The pictures with her sister etc, that show the lighter streaks were taken at different times, some in July if I’m not mistaken. Also the Walmart receipt is later than the pictures’ time stamps. Now if I remember correctly Jodi’s phone was off by 7 hours in any case. So I don’t know what this all adds up to.

  5. Good morning everybody!! Just checking before I have to leave for work in like 10 minutes…..ago! LOL!So addicted to this site/case/Jodi herself! I said so last night-they better leave that man’s spirit alone.He wasnt a good person when he was alive,his death wa violent and sudden oh boy his spirit is gonna be piiiiiissed!! I guess they’re looking for trouble 🙂 Anyways,NOW I really have to go-see you all in 5 1/2 hours! Kisses from my sunny side of the world**

  6. If Nurmi put out the word through sites like this, I bet he would flooded with videos of females doing this on shelf units that are much flimsier than what was in Alexander’s house in 2008. Then he should take those videos and dump them on the desk of that battle axe that calls herself a judge and say do you want to have a surrebuttal on this evidence now or do you just want to wait until you’re excoriated by an appeals panel and ripped ten ways to Sunday for reversible error?

    There was no chain of command of ownership established for that house that this is exactly original without any modifications whatsoever in this master bedroom closet since the day of June 4th, 2008, including WHAT WAS ON THE SHELVES. No one has been subpoenaed to testify that it is exactly the same. She just allows random shit based evidence with no clue what legal foundations have to be established.

    This is no different than Simpson’s Bronco. They had to have a chain of command established for everybody that touched it.

    I have seen at least a dozen women stating they do it all the time in their home or did it just to try and see what would happen. And sure as hell, surprise surprise, guess what? I wouldn’t even be surprised that some of the jurors tried it in their own homes and watched Flores and that walking colostemy bag make a total ass out of themselves.

    The weight on the shelf at the corner over the pin can sustain way more weight than any shelf is rated, let alone the fact that what she did was also to grab an upper shelf with her hand as she was in a quick propelling upward motion to give herself the extra foot to get the gun which made the weight distribution even less.

    If the judge had to explain how a soda straw can go stick into a telephone pole in a tornado, her head would explode. Jesus Christ, I never saw this level of ignorance or ass-kissing the prosecution. on the part of a judge. She should just declare a mistrial and hope that she can save herself the embarrassment of what will happen if this ever has to go to appeal.

    • Do you think there is some negotiation as to what the prosecution can use in closing arguments?

      If say they agree they have proved nothing about some aspect, then it’s dropped and the defence don’t need to have a surrebutal witness to counter it.

      Well I know nothing about this, but precisely what Martinez ever intended to prove about the shelves is beyond my comprehension. He seems to be simply going through the motions.

      • Geebee, in normal trials, judges usually do place limitations on what can be brought up during closing arguments. In this case, who knows? Does Judge Stephens even know what was proven or not during the trial?

        • “Does Judge Stephens even know what was proven or not during the trial?”

          LOL I think she doesn’t! She’s thinking, I’ll just nod my head and they will all go away…

      • This is a judge that overruled an objection that Jodi could answer a question of how does blood look when you walk through it in stocking feet. Jodi is a blood patterrn expert I guess in this black robe wearing mental indigent’s mind.

        So there is no precedence for how literally off-the-chart her rulings will be for what can be used in closing arguments. I can’t imagine what top level judges watching these rulings must be thinking.

        Prejudicial versus probabative? ha ha ha ha ha ha. Martinez probably rents a room in her house.

      • Geebee2 and AA,

        Normally closing arguments are a free for all in as far as arguing the evidence. So if the judge allowed something or some exhibit to be entered into evidence then the attorneys can argue them any which way they want. They can ask the jury to draw pretty much any inference that they want. What the judge will sometimes restrain is arguments that relate to charges that may not have been brought due to an evidence or probable cause reason. So let’s say that you had a case where at one time the prosecutor had claimed that the defendant raped and killed a victim. Lets then say that during a hearing on probable cause the judge felt that the a prima facie case did not exist for rape and so a rape charge could not be included. The prosecutor can then not argue rape in closing. But in as far as the existing charges are concerned the attorneys can say and do what they like with regards to the evidence and what it shows. It is then left to the jury as the trier of fact to make the final decision.

        The judge is required to notify the attorneys of the jury instructions she intends to give prior to the start of closing arguments (I don’t know if there is a time limit). This allows the attorneys to tailor their arguments to the relevant instructions.


        This is in fact a major point of departure from the English procedure. The US judge does not go through a process of summing up the evidence for the jury.In fact any such summation would be an immediate reversible error type situation. If an attorney argues that something is not in evidence the judge may either rule that it is not on evidence or direct the jury to consider the prior testimony and determine whether or not it is so. (We’ve seen Stephens do that a number of times).

        • Al, you said: “Normally closing arguments are a free for all in as far as arguing the evidence. So if the judge allowed something or some exhibit to be entered into evidence then the attorneys can argue them any which way they want. They can ask the jury to draw pretty much any inference that they want.”

          Wow, that free-for-all hasn’t been my experience at all — neither in trials I worked on nor in moot court in law school (which was really just oral arguments) — in Illinois. Is Maryland that different? I guess I should know that, seeing as I live in Maryland now. In fact, we were taught that judges had BROAD discretion in regards to proper jury argument and ensuring the rule of fact. In practicality, attorneys rarely object to even outrageous closing arguments as they worry how the jury will perceive the introduction. But, I’ve often heard of judges laying down rules beforehand about what can and can’t be argued under the rules of proper argument.

          For example, with someone like JM who can be inflammatory and use invective towards a party or opposing counsel, the judge in cases I’ve been involved in might specifically tell him to rein in his behaviour for closing arguments. Or, in the case of one attorney I worked with (who taught a course at a law school and had a tendency to “instruct” the jury on legal interpretations), I remember a judge specifically warning him that he had the power to declare a mistrial if he went too far with that. There was another case where opposing counsel had attempted during the trial to suggest that there had been reasonable settlement offers made which had been rejected (there had been offers but they were far from reasonable). The judge was so mad at him for his repeated attempts to do that, he told him he would be policing him during his arguments and actually asked him for a brief outline of his closing arguments to ensure that there was no reference to those “offers” because he didn’t trust him. The judge told him if he mentioned offers anywhere in his closing arguments, he’d be facing disciplinary action AND barred from making rebuttal arguments. I’ve also heard of judges demanding to see exhibits beforehand and limiting them, specifically ensuring that attorneys are not going to mischaracterize witnesses or the law, and even more that I can’t think of off the top of my head.

          Jose Baez, in his book, talked about the limits placed upon him (and the prosecution) for closing arguments. I just searched for that and found an HLN (groan) article about it:

          He was actually quite restrictive but some of it was necessary because of that awful prosecutor!

          Do judges really not do this in Maryland at all? Not even now?

          • AA

            In a sense you are right that there are certain limits, but within those limits they are pretty much free to do whatever. The limits as I understand them are:

            1. They can not refer to any evidence that was either ruled inadmissible or not introduced, except that they can refer to stuff that is common day knowledge. As an example in the extreme they can refer to Washington DC as the capital of the US without it having been introduced into evidence.

            2. They cannot refer to any settlement issues (as in the case you pointed out) because those are by law confidential. That confidentiality is supposed to allow for open negotiations. A plea deal is actually a settlement effort so cannot be referred to in closing.

            3. There are certain constraints on what they can do by way of interpreting the law. In theory they are actually not supposed to interpret it at all (the judge is the only interpreter of the law) but most judges will allow some leeway there.

            4. The issue of attorney conduct is just court procedure and a judge can instruct the attorneys with respect to that any time. I think Stephens has actually done that to JM a few times because, on occasion, I’ve seen him restrain himself after a sidebar, though his gnarly self gets the better of him in a short period of time.

            5. The attorneys cannot testify.

            I went and looked at the restrictions placed in the CA trial from your link. I think those all fit into the categories above.

            Restricting Baez about George Anthony or Kronk’s behavior or action is valid, since no evidence to those allegations were presented. Personal opinions are akin to counsel testifying in closing and not evidence that has been admitted in the trial, arguments about the defendant’s choice to not testify run counter to the 5th amendment, etc. These are all things that are either barred by law or procedure. I think he was just making sure the attorneys understood. But beyond that, given the evidence presented they can pretty much argue whatever they want.

            The issue with objections is pretty much what you said. Plus most counsel rely on the judge to be a bit of a gatekeeper during the closing, which is what the CA judge did.

    • Chain of custody…not chain of command. lol.

      My fingers are moving at warp speed, too fast for my cerebral cortex to edit what they do.

    • Jade,

      Not only are you correct on chain of custody problems, but there are other issues. Flores’ tests in no way mimic the actual events as described. That makes these tests irrelevant and in fact incompetent.

      The fact that this was allowed in as rebuttal testimony also causes problems with surrebuttal.

      There is a huge Daubert problem with this testimony. This was presented as a scientific, or semi- scientific test (you are trying to show the behavior of a physical body under some sort of force). Rule 702 mandates

      If scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue, a witness qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education, may testify thereto in the form of an opinion or otherwise, if (1) the testimony is based upon sufficient facts or data, (2) the testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods, and (3) the witness has applied the principles and methods reliably to the facts of the case.

      And this was none of the above.

      • How can anything be reliable while testing shelves that are simply not the same as they were 5 years ago? There is absolutely no way to know how much, if any, abuse, wear and tear, etc., those shelves have endured since that time.

        I really cannot believe the judge allowed this. It irks me to no end.

        • She’ll do what she’ll do.

          I don’t think that experiment would fly with normal people and may be it won’t fly with the jury.

          This is one time I’m hoping they were watching HLN

        • It’s almost like she wants to be overturned on appeal. I hate to be a conspiracy theorist, but she just simply can’r be that dense. If there is a conviction, the mob will be sated, then there will be an appeal that at this point we can foregonely conclude would be a winner for the defense. Is it possible that that is what she is hoping for? Is that how she perceives that this case would most gently go into that good night?

    • Roger everything Al. Not to mention, that this is putting evidence in front of the jury that’s based on what its condition would have been five years earlier and wasn’t even testified to by an expert from the shelf company. This was a closet “system” costing probably 2-3K. This wasn’t a $39.99 particle board shelf unit. It was also fastened to the wall. To allow a PHOTOGRAPH of their interpretation of what her force of physics was when she stepped on it is just beyond stupefying. It’s literally judicial malfeasance.

      It’s just hard to put into words how pathetic this judge is. A first year law student would know better.

    • I also have done the photo edits in MP and MO and it is surprising some of what you can see in them. Also look at your photos in the pants leg do you not see what looks like people. Try enhancing more to see what you can see. The second pic under TA’s head if you zoom in you can see what looks like a figure in dark clothing and then you can see what looks like someone in a white t-shirt. The more you edit the more it looks like pics within pics ..also do the hall pic you can see some crazy stuff in that one too.

  7. Ok I have a few questions…once this sham of a trial is given to the jury are they then sequestered until there is a verdict?

    Is it legal for TA family to be giving out info of what goes on in the judges chambers?

    • Someone correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t believe they sequester juries, even during deliberations, in Arizona. The judge could decide to sequester them but seeing as she didn’t advise them they were being sequestered for deliberations yesterday, I suspect they’ll deliberate 9-5 (or 9:30-4:30 with 1.5 hours for lunch and breaks) and go home nights and weekends. I don’t think the court has security or any other staff in that court during evenings or weekends.

      I don’t have a clue about your second question, to be honest, but it wouldn’t be a “crime” per se, if that’s what you mean by it not being legal. It would require them to have been specifically instructed not to speak about it, the judge discovering they had done it anyway, and warning them about doing it again, and then, them doing it again, the judge discovering they did it again, and them being held in contempt.
      It seems her sanction to Tanisha for her ALV witch hunt was to bar her from attending future hearings in chambers. So, hypothetically, if this had occurred, she could do something similar to the family, and that would most likely be her worst punishment to them. On the other hand, the judge sealed all those hearings in chambers (and side bars) until the trial is over. But that doesn’t mean she specifically instructed the family not to speak about what they witnessed/heard.

      On a related note, I recently saw several photos posted on the hater sites of HLN staff talking to members of the family outside the courthouse, taken by gallery members or those who lined up but didn’t get in.

  8. What did everyone think of the juror questions for Gloria Esteban? Did I imagine it or did the judge start to read one that must have been tossed, then stop? Why did they bring up the gun, the attic? Had they been wondering about those things since his last visit to the stand? Was it just me, or did they seem to be questioning his investigative work?

    I think yesterday left me more confused than I’ve ever been in this trial.

    • Hi AA–Hi ALL

      Yes, the judge did start to read out a question then stop. I think she selects questions–if they are pro Jodi she won’t allow it. The jury must notice that, particularly if their question never got read out.
      This trial is such a farce.

      If the trial was fair, everything would be transparent and no evidence would be rejected.

      • Heather, much as I dislike some of Judge Stephens’ decisions (especially over the past week), it’s honestly not completely up to her which juror questions to read. I’m sure she would read just about all of them (as long as they’re not completely offensive) if neither side objected. It’s up to her to rule on those objections, sure, but I suspect that one question was one that was objected to.

  9. Now I have had it. Ghost Hunters and TAPS. What is TAPS? I can’t wait to see who is funding this mess. Ghost Hunters is now off my list of TV shows. I don’t think this trial is as crazy as Casey’s but it is a close second, with most of the players from Casey’s trial.

      • I’ve actually wondering when one of the shows were going to go to this house and investigate. I hope they get some good info. I would also love to see Amy Allan from TDF do an investigation there, she is awesome. I wonder how soon it will air.

  10. WT …? I actually had nightmare about that faux-earnest mofo, Flores. If I tell people about it, that makes my dream real, right? ‘Cause I was totally “looking at him with all the despair I could muster up in my retina”, whatever the f*ck that means.

      • Thanks, PJ — Travis used that very phrase, and it stuck out to me. He was so very odd. Travis also had a habit of capitalizing random nouns and adjectives in his sentences (read his blog!). I REALLY want to see the now “fake letters” that Travis wrote to the Hughes’; I could tell in a heartbeat if they were written by TA.

  11. Can someone out there reassure me that If the ME makes a plausible argument that TA was stabbed first then shot that we don’t have to worry. Do you think the Defense is prepared for that with a good rebuttal? I’m nervous about today.

  12. Top o’ the Morning to everyone! 🙂

    After I checked out from here yesterday evening I did a bit of reading about this trial from other sources. If you weren’t watching this trial and playing close attention to it you’d swear the majority of the media covering it both the small outlets, and major outlets, were watching a completely different trial. You really cannot ever trust what the news media tells you. They tell you what they want you to know and believe.

    So much that I was reading was making Kirk Nurmi’s cross of Deanna out to be really sleazy and nasty and low. That couldn’t have been farther from the truth.

    All of the main stream sites have a lean toward the prosecution. Some VERY obvious and some very subtle but a prosecution slant none the less.

    I don’t know what networks like HLN are going to do in a couple of weeks when this trial ends. They’ll have to find something new to hate and get people into a bloodlust over.

    • Indeed, Joe. I get the feeling the rest of the media simply waits to see what HLN posts and then paraphrases it. I rarely see them change much of anything.

    • You are right on Joe…it’s like they are from planet stupid beamed down to ruffle our planet with their stupidness…

      This morning on Red Robin Express she said that Jodi Arias granny was in the courtroom yesterday…she showed a short snippet of the video of granny in the courtroom looking around then looking upward like she was praying…and Red Robin said something about granny was there because it was her gun that Jodi used to kill Travis…

      That just shows how stupid Red Robin has become on her stupid Express show…

  13. I can’t even believe that Ghost Hunters is going to the TA house. I just sat here and stared at the keyboard for like two whole minutes. I really can’t believe it. Do they think they’re going to talk to TA’s spirit and get an answer of what happened? This is so messed up.

    I pray Jodi gets out of jail and goes to live her life comfortably somewhere away from this circus.

    • Lots of people are going to attempt to cash in over this trial Danielle. It’s what people do. It’s all led by The Alexander siblings and HLN.
      And you are right, it IS messed up.

      • I have seen episodes of ghost hunting shows where they address open cases and there is a disclaimer that the evidence found in the show cannot be used in court. I never understood that. You can’t put a spirit on the stand. Wow.

        I can’t believe how people are trying to cash in on this trial. It’s like they’ve forgotten these are real people. I mean Jodi has had her personal life completely ripped open and made fun of on TV. My heart hurts for her. I can’t imagine being in her shoes.

        I’ve sent her postcards telling her how must support she has and how strong she is and how amazing her art is. I hope she gets to read them. I try to pick out pretty ones from zazzle but she probably would like more artsy ones better. I won’t need them much longer when she goes home. Right Guys!!!!

    • They really should let that man rest in peace. They’d better be careful once they get there, especially if the temperature drops and they start feeling a “weird” pressure in their ass! 😯

  14. Can’t wait to see the Ghost busters show. My guess is that we will see the spirit of TA running around the house calling people 3 hole wonders and whores, looking for boys in spidey undies, and trying to find himself a 12 year old virgin to tie to a tree. This all gets more ridiculous by the day.

      • I believe Jodi is doing just fine. No matter what happens. Life with Travis was much more difficult than anything she is enduring presently. She is alive and well. God Bless Her. If you know how to pray, please pray for the truth to be clear to the jury. And Thank God Jodi will soon be free!!

        • I am worried that juror 8 is gone…he was the one that was thought to be the juror foreman…he asked the most questions for the witnesses…

  15. Am I not paying close attention or was the long-haired sister not in court the past couple of days? I don’t really know which is which but was she the one banned from chambers for online activity? I feel for their loss but I feel for Jodi more because she’s a beautiful intelligent young woman who had such a bright future who was used, abused, manipulated and also brainwashed into a cult-like religion due to her misplaced love for TA. What woman doesn’t transform her behavior to some degree to keep the man she loves interested? I see it all around me in young women. And TA took advantage of this love and vulnerability to use her financially and sexually. I would sure hope my daughter never ran into such a selfish manipulative character but if she did and there were an altercation I’d want her to survive it by any means necessary!!

    • I’ve done it myself. I mean change my behavior to keep a guy. I have to say I’ve really learned something from this trial. I am a total people pleaser! I actually had a serious talk w my Mom about relationships. I’m 33 and born in the same year as Jodi, so meeting guys is kind of like looking at them like marriage material. I’m so close w my Mom and I really talked w her that if she sees me change for a guy like that to do something drastic. This is a wake up call for women. You want to keep things quiet and think the guy will change and then when you seriously need help no one will believe you!!!!!

      Wow I’m talky today. I woke up early w all this energy. In about two hours I’ll be so tired!

      • I agree Danielle! The hope for a guy to change is so much stronger than common sense. I am glad you have your Mom to help you keep a look out!

      • So agree with this post, Very insightful…
        I worked hard pounding into my daughters head that if you can’t be yourself when your with your boyfriend or your friends for that matter, you need to move on. So far, I haven’t seen drastic personality changes in her, which is the first sign. I can’t help but be angry at times at Jodi’s parents. How could they know so little about their own daughter? Jodi’s dad should of kicked Travis’s ass for the way he treated her! I don’t believe for one second that Jodi wouldn’t of confided in them if they only pushed for the info. Lazy parents….

          • I am always putting my two cents worth in on my daughter’s life whether she asks for it or not. It’s no wonder Jodi was led astray if her parents were as disinterested and un-involved as they appear to have been!!

          • I think I posted another comment to this somewhere else…lol….its early here.
            This is a very good lesson to parents about knowing your kids, and who they are associated with. Most kids will tell their parents about their lives, if you show a genuine interest in them, and take the time to LISTEN. There is no way they couldn’t of known how travis was if they just spent the time and put forth the effort. Maybe not the sex part, but everything else about him screams asshole. Just read his myspace..its pretty tough not to see the real man there.
            And her conversion to Mormonism should of been a HUGE red flag.

      • I’m so glad you’re realizing all this now, Danielle. I will tell you that I was 32 going on 33 when ogre came into my life (I should say “came back” as we had dated for about a year and a half 6 years before then). I had never gotten over him the first time and compared every guy to him. For that year and a half, he had seemed like THE perfect man. Looking back now, I see that there were red flags all over the place. I just didn’t know what they were. When he came back into my life, at first, it was long distance, and he again, seemed perfect. When he came to see me, it was heaven. When he packed up and moved everything to be with me 3 weeks later, I really thought I was starring in my own little fairytale. I had no idea that it would be the world’s worst nightmare.

        I guess at 33 (which I was by the time he moved), I was seeing guys as interviews for marriage, as you said. And after a while with him, even though there were already problems showing, I thought we’d invested so much time in each other that there had to be a way to make it work.

        Now that I’ve been in this amazing relationship with my fiance, there’s so much openness, so much joy, so much fun, and such an amazing ability to compromise, discuss, work things out. He loves me just as I am — which I still see as flawed. I always say that if I’d known it could be this easy,

        So here’s a few words of wisdom I’ve picked up:

        If a guy seems too good to be true, he probably is. And it won’t last. Be patient. They put on their best face for the first 3 months, but they can’t keep that up for more than a year. They’ll begin to show their true colours then. The difficult part about abusive men is that, at first, they put us on a pedestal. They are perfect. They are a reflection of us, liking all the things we do. They make us feel like a goddesss. But that’s short-lived. Then, they begin tearing us apart bit by bit by bit. Every once in a while, they lift us back up onto that pedestal, and we crave those moments. As time goes on, it becomes less and less, and our self esteem suffers. Don’t let yourself be fooled. He isn’t really the great guy he was in the beginning (unless he consistently stays that way). He isn’t just having a bad day, week, stress at work, problems with his family. Look at him, long and hard. If his “bad” days are becoming more frequent than his good days, there’s something wrong.

        Watch yourself and how you feel and interact. Remember Jodi’s parents saying she changed, became moody, irrational? Watch for that. Ask your friends to monitor you and if they say you’re changing, take a good look at yourself. I had the unique opportunity to observe my ex’s mistress after he was arrested through her FB posts (her wall was open). Looking back at her posts, they were always upbeat, positive, funny. When he moved in with her, they became dreamy, all about finding “Mr. Right.” As the weeks turned into months, the negativity and irritability began to show. She was changing. Looking back, I remember that with myself all those years ago. I’m just glad she got out when she did.

        If he’s secretive or hiding things and tells you you’re jealous or crazy, he probably isn’t being honest. I’m not suggesting spying on him. But a guy who is cheating will usually not let his phone out of his sight and/or will take calls and meet people without telling you. He won’t open FB on his computer and walk away without closing it. If he has nothing to hide, he won’t be hiding anything not even a little bit.

        If you begin to feel uncomfortable, try to sit down and talk. If he’s not willing to see your point of view, if he can’t have an open discussion with you, or if he makes it all about him … RUN and don’t ever look back.

        You will both need to compromise on some things. For example, if he likes sushi and you don’t, go to a sushi restaurant once in a while. There’s bound to be something you’ll like on the menu as they don’t exclusively serve sushi. But, watch out for compromising too much. Watch for manipulation where if the restaurant isn’t his choice, he sulks or feigns illness or gets irritated with the server. Watch for guilt that he didn’t get his way. Don’t let anyone guilt you. Likewise, watch for signs that he dislikes or disapproves of your friends and tries to convince you to feel the same way.

        One thing I heard from some older women who found Mr. Right later in life and were blissful in their golden years was that women have to find a man who loves them just a little bit more than the woman loves the man. One of the women who told me that was on husband #4 and I thought that sounded crazy at first. But I think I know what she means now. It’s not really that my fiance loves me more than I love him, but being a nurturing woman, a people pleaser, and someone who has always been willing to compromise so that others are happy, I tend to see it that way.

        It’s never too late to find “the right one”. If you want kids, the pressure builds, of course. But women often successfully have their first child in their late 30s or early 40s these days. Fertility clinics accept women up until they’re 43. You still have 10 years! This kind of love I have now, this wonderful unconditional accepting love, it’s truly worth waiting a lifetime for.

      • If you can’t be yourself in a relationship with a guy…then you need to be yourself by yourself…..

        I am doing this now…and it is the most wonderful thing that I have ever experienced in my adult years…getting to be myself…and not what someone wants me to be…

  16. I think everything is going good for the defense but the only thing is the Walmart records of not returning the gas can

    Jodi would had such a good chance to get acquitted if not the returning gas issue, she was sooo believable on the stand and jurors would not be able to ignore her words for no reason and the fact that the defense did not offer an alternative yet to the gas can issue is making the whole atmosphere of her story to be questioned and suspicious

    I think they have an explanation about the gas cans and they want to save it for closing, they did not want to do cross to avoid JM to redirect on their reasoning, because they would be able to point out the human error issue witch is so obvious and possibly other issues what they know to be true

    But I think the damage is done and if this is true “it hurts me very much” because it was such a miner thing to lie about yet its such a big issue for Jodi to be cough in a lie again, that little of admitting that she had 3 gas cans the whole trip would not cause such a big deal than the Lie

    Now the jurors will have to rely only on the proven evidence that is taking away all physical abuse and most possibly will not end up in an Acquittal what i hoped soooo much to be the case

    Please help me out with that bad feeling and give me reason to believe that its not such a big issue and we still have a good chance


    • They will not be able to present a new theory or explaination in their closing. The closing is to explain facts already in evidence, not new evidence.

      Nurmi blew that one for sure…

        • What the heck for? There isn’t anything worth discussing.

          Look at any map of the western U.S. for the answer to the gas cans.

          If you don’t want to be traced, you don’t leave a paper trail everywhere and borrow gas cans from a friend.

          This “argument” is bogus.

          • exactly what I’ve said all along….if its true she bought gas cans to hide the fact she was in AZ, she wouldn’t of kept paper receipts, good god!!
            and, one thing not mentioned…..I used to drive that same route over Hoover Dam every other week, that checkpoint has cameras as well the entire length of the dam is videoed as you drive across. You don’t drive the route you get stopped by hwy patrol at a checkpoint, or video taped if your trying to hide the fact you were there!
            feel better?

            • thanks Tony….I hate to pull the “blame the parents” card, but I feel in this case, they do play a significant role in how Jodi ended up getting sucked into this whole mess with Travis and the Mormons. She was just looking for a place to feel like she belonged. A surrogate family, so to speak. They push for this “family” image, but unfortunately, it appears much of it is just a facade. Not to say all Mormons are fake, I don’t feel that way at all. But alot of people use religion, and its teachings to twist things to the way they want it. And sometimes its for deviant behavior. If her parents took the time to know their daughter, they would of noticed changes in her, like her close friends did.

    • I agree with you. The stupid gas can was such a trivia, small thing for her to get confused about. Why should the jury believe her “now” as they asked her? I’m just hoping DT have a reasonable explanation in closing arguments.
      The deleting of selected photos is another issue that sticks out in my mind but ill wait for the surrebuttal before I make a decision about that.

      • Oh, yes, the gas cans are so devastating. Jodi left a paper trail everywhere she went, visited people, borrowed gas cans, and for what?

      • Yeah, I’d be interested to know more about the deleted photos. What sequence did those photos fall into? Yesterday, I think it was, we also heard something about 90 photos in all. What were those photos? I don’t recall anything said about those previously in the trial. Why not? I would think that would be important evidence. Although I didn’t watch the trial from beginning, maybe someone has the answers?

    • They were showing the Walmart receipt on HLN yesterday. Both announcer and guest referred to it as the “gas can” when clearly the receipt says: “5G Kero Cans” (Kerosene cans) Not sure why it’s plural, i.e., cans instead of can.

      My point of this issue is that if Martinez is trying to prove Jodi bought this blue Kerosene can so she could store enough gas in her car (along with 2 red gas cans)so she wouldn’t leave any evidence of being in Mesa and at Travis’s place, Jodi buying this blue kerosene can will not do it. IT’S NOT A CONTAINER FOR GASOLINE. It’s against the law to put gasoline in a kerosene can.

      If he’s trying to prove that she lies, well, she’s admitted to lying to “everyone.”

      • Because she “lied” to Flores because she was suffering from mental trauma, that means she is a liar about everything?

        Don’t think so.

        The gas cans are a nonstarter, and I hope the jury is smart enough to see it is bogus.

        • tonysam,

          I was quoting Jodi. When Martinez had her on the stand, she admitted she “lied to everyone” at some point (immediately after Travis was killed maybe). I wasn’t accusing her of being a liar.

          I just hope the jurors realize it wasn’t 3 gas cans. It was 2 red gas cans and 1blue kerosene can. Only the two red gas cans could legally carried gas. The cans are different colors for safety purposes since gasoline is much more flammable. Try putting gasoline in a kerosene stove.

        • Your right, it is bogus! !! To ME its always been a non issue! Seriously, i dont waist my time thinking about the gas cans, that’s how ridiculous it is and I hope the jurors feel the same way too. Really, are they sending someone to deathrow all because of a damn gas can and receipts showingPROOF that she was there?! Makes no sense!

    • I’m sorry Eli, you keep posting the same thing and other people keep posting the same replies. I get the feeling that we’re all repeating ourselves.

      There’s so much reasonable doubt in this case, so here I go again with my list.

      1. They did not search for KEROSENE CANS or under the SKU number. Juan Martinez was crafty enough to initiate a search for “gas cans” then changed his verbiage while Ms Web was on the stand to make it sound like he said they were searching for “five gallon” cans. That does not mean they searched for the right product.

      2. The search involved a manual hard copy of a printed report on paper – there was no computer “find” option; leaving this way open to human error. Did you see how thick that report was? It was at least an inch and a half thick with FOUR THOUSAND dollars worth of returns.

      3. Juan Martinez decided to splash up a video of Jodi laying on Travis’ lap, but NOT of Jodi filling up three gas cans at Tesoro? I find it highly suspect that they do not have video footage of this. Most gas stations have had cameras for years to catch people who drive off without paying.

      4. Like mentioned above it is ILLEGAL to put the wrong different fuel into the wrong container. I think it has to do with the density of the material, I think kerosene cans have the highest density, then diesel cans, then gas cans. Don’t quote me. But this is a lot like the upside down license plate. Why would Jodi risk the ire of law enforcement by using the wrong kind of can for gasoline? It makes no sense.

      Martinez still did not prove anything. His case still does not make sense. He is still just hot air and spin. Attaching meaning to a handful of receipts does not prove his case.

  17. Why doesn’t the Dishonorable Shitty Stevens just become genuflect in the middle of the courtroom, fellate the pygmy and be done with it? Everyone already knows.

  18. Did Martinez show the hair color photos yesterday to suggest that Jodi dyed her hair dark brown so she would be less likely to be recognized? If so, recognized by whom? Travis’s neighbors? Travis’s renters/roommates would recognize her no matter what color hair she had if they spotted her in or around Travis’s house, one would think. Was Martinez trying to present this hair color change as a additional sign of premeditation even though a woman (and some men)changing hair color is not an unusual occurrence? Or, maybe she just wanted to change her look and “look nice” for Travis(although I think the trip to Travis’s place was a last minute change of plans).

    Jodi had brown hair on May 28, 2008 (one week before Travis was killed), according to the police burglary report, filed after the break-in at Jodi’s grandfather’s house when the .25 caliber handgun was stolen. So, if she dyed it blonde, she must have dyed it blonde sometime between May 28 – June 3 and then dyed it dark brown again on or by June 3, 2008. If it was an attempt to alter her identity, it seems like a lot of work especially when she arrived at Travis’s house in the middle of the night (around 4am). Instead of changing her hair color, couldn’t she just have pinned her hair up and worn a baseball cap (and cap and sun glasses when she left if it was still light)? It’s not known when she left Travis’s house but it could have been dark again (although unlikely)when she left since she spent some time trying to clean up after he was killed.

    And, why go through all this trouble when she had written a cheque to Travis that day – a payment for his BMW – and left it on the desk in his office in his house. Detectives found it there when they investigated.

    • Good point regarding the description of her hair color in the burglary police report. I wish the DT could bring that up but since it hasn’t been allowed into court they can’t.
      I think when Flores was originally questioning her he said something like, “what if I told you his neighbors saw you around the house at the time of his murder.” Jodi responded with something like, “Idk how they would recognize me bc I used to have bleach blond hair.”

      • I’m assuming Flores was lying because when she arrived it was the middle of the night . And, when she left she had blood on her clothes so if the neighbors really recognized her in spite of her changed appearance (hair color change), were they not close enough see the blood?

        • Since the dark brown (as it is now) appears to be her natural color, and she was previously a light blond, if she had decided to go back to her natural color many woman just put a rinse (semi perm that washes out in so many washes) until it grows back out. Putting a dark semi rinse over the light blond would of probably gave her the blond/brown for awhile unless she decided to go have it professionally done. Defense really needs to explain how this came about using pictures in their closing, so the jurors are not confused.

        • Wait…. so people really think Jodi got in that car DRENCHED in blood, without lvg a trace of blood? And no, not Kool-Aid, blood turns brown and would NOT come out of those seats, blood wouldn’t look like juice, no way! Jodi didn’t get I the car drenched in blood or SHE DIDN’T do it, so she didn’t have any blood.

      • Does changing the color of one’s hair as not to be recognized really make sense? JM changed his hair color and we knew it was him. 🙂 But if he wants to use that argument, let him. There are other things about people they cannot change thus even changing hair color would not make a difference. For example: the way they walk, certain mannerisms etc

        • PJ,

          I think you’re onto something. Nurmi could present photos of Martinez before and after Martinez colored his hair. He could question Martinez as to why he dyed his hair? Was Martinez trying to appear younger? Nurmi could then argue that Jodi dyed her hair for the same reason. Plus, Nurmi would be embarrassing Martinez at the same time. A win-win situation.

    • Was Martinez trying to present this hair color change as a additional sign of premeditation even though a woman (and some men)changing hair color is not an unusual occurrence?

      You know, it’s not unusual at all, and really common for a woman to change her hair color, or change her hair style when she is going through big changes in her life. I’ve done that many times to reflect the changes I’m making in my life. Jodi was moving on!

    • If Jodi premeditated a crime, and she dyed her hair to change her appearance or throw people off, then why take a picture of it almost immediately afterward?

      I still think that the shade of hair color she had could pass as blonde or brown, especially on camera if there’s different lighting.

      But why, if Jodi were in the process of a crime, DOCUMENT her strategy? Last I checked her IQ is above average. She wouldn’t be that stupid.

    • great observation Dr. Watson…now if we can just get Detective Holmes to point out some of these issues in closing maybe the jury can see what is so obvious to all of us…

  19. I built houses faster than this trial has gone on. At least there is a schedule now so we know what to expect. Have been so busy at work I just can’t catch up. Thanks for keeping me updated. HLN says Jodi has a gf in jail? I thought that was only a rumor!!! I am heartbroken. Twitter keeps saying garbage about Jodi, so I don’t even sign up. Wish I could go to closing arguments and cheer on Nurmi or Wilmont. They are so good. Does anybody know who will do the closing? I know JM gets the last word. Not fair.

    • Jodi does not have a girlfriend, per her Twitter. She said that it’s amazing that she’s not gay considering what she’s gone through with men.

    • Haven’t you learned…that is how HLN keeps their ratings up…with such twisted garbage as that…more money in their pockets when ratings stay high….it is a game for them…they are not looking for the truth…the are looking at how to spin the truth for those damn ratings…

  20. Even if she fibbed about the gas can, she’s a young woman in fear of losing her life and it was a stupid mistake not to own it. If I were on the jury, I still wouldn’t discount that she spent 18 days toe to toe with the most disgusting man in prosecutorial history and never budged from her story of what happened that day. I don’t care how many years she had to practice it, no one could be that good. IMO, it’s because she was telling the truth. I would discard the gas can altogether as proving nothing.

      • I think it is a biggie, because you can be sure Juan is going to focus on that in his closing, along with the stolen gun. Only thing defense can do at this point, is bring up that why would she go to the trouble of planning a burglary, dying her hair, getting gas cans, but not pay cash for them and ditch the receipts.

      • They are making a mountain out of a molehill with the garbage can…so yes it is a mountain of evidence for them…they are just gassy for it…

    • Prove it she lied about the gas cans.

      She didn’t; besides, it was a kerosene can, not a gas can.

      She needed the gas cans to drive through the backcountry of northern California where there are no services for dozens of miles on that trip and most likely wasn’t familiar with the country.

      • I hope that Nurmi is holding off until his closing to mention and point it out to the jury that it WANST a gas can, that in FACT IT WAS a kerosene can.

        • I hope he doesn’t forget to say it was 2 red gas cans and 1 blue kerosene can…HLN stupid azzes keep showing 3 red gas cans….they are such dumb azzes…

    • Gwen, im with you. I’d disregard the gas cans along with the receipt (it doesnt prove premeditation). And I would also disregard the hair color dilemma that JM is still trying to make. Oh and I would disregard all of Flores and the rookie wannabe doc’s testimony (just because they both know NOTHING)!

  21. I am wondering why, if certain things would “prove jodi’s testimony correct’, the defense has failed to go do such things. Example: if showing the shelves could bear weight would prove jodi right, why doesn’t her attorneys go do that? Also: if Jodi could only just remember or be hypnotized and recall where she threw away that pesky gun, then her lawyers could go retrieve it and also prove that it wasn’t her grandfather’s missing gun.

  22. I don’t know why this post was taken down the first time I posted this comment. I am pro Jodi and was posting this to show the argument about the gun.

    I don’t know why so many people are saying that it was her grandfathers gun like it’s a fact. I’m so glad that Nurmi made the fact known that you DONT have to have your gun registered with the state. I’m in Texas and I promise you, there are way many more guns out there that are NOT registered than are! Travis could have had a gun, not registered, and NOT told his roommates for protection against them JUST IN CASE….


    Does anyone know why court was dismissed early yesterday? JM still has more witnesses to put on the stand. One in particular is Travis’s friend that said that Travis never owned a handgun and would have to borrow one whenever they went target shooting. JM has been very methodical in presenting the facts to this jury and his closing arguments should be world class. Jodi has to be getting very nervous as this trial comes to an end.


    The friend of Travis that states Travis never owned a handgun is completely full of shit and takes himself way to seriously. Travis may or may not have owned a handgun and it would not be anyone’s business except Travis’. The notion that some a sshole thinks that they are so important that everyone they know would be sure to let them know if they do, or do not, posses a firearm of any type is absurd and immature. Get real.


    It’s the same friend that thought Travis was a virgin, they were so close

    • btw – the comments I posted above I got from YouTube and were posted on the video for yesterdays trial. For some reason I cannot play the videos posted on this site since I got a new computer so I have to watch croakerqueens videos when she posts them.

    • If Martinez calls this asswipe up to testify that TA never told him ne had a gun, all Nurmi has to do is ask him ONE question, “Did TA ever tell you he had sex DR or Jodi?” When he answers, “NO” that’ll prove his argument.

      • Or NURMI needs to ask him…if when Travis went with his friend target shooting…was he the only one there with a little bitty handgun???…when everyone else there has BIG ass rifles doing their target shooting…”Big Toys For Big Men”…….look at the video again…there’s no one there with little bitty handguns…

        I feel that when Travis told them he didn’t have a gun…he was referring to one of those BIG ass rifles…he wouldn’t dare admit that he only had a little bitty handgun at home…they would only have laughed and made fun of him…he avoided that by not saying anything…

  23. Hmmm, Ghost Hunters and TAPS at the house. I will be interested to see what they come up with in their investigation.

    BTW SJ, where did you see that the house was for sale again? I looked up the address and did not see it listed.

    • I thought Ghost Hunters was the show I watch, it is another ghost show on Spike TV. I would like to know why the realtor didn’t tell the potential buyers about a death in the house, some states you have to let them know. What a damn shock to find something like that out. IF this is the family’s idea wonder how much they will make off of it? And how are they now going to sell the house, murder, ghost hunters, not many people would find that to be the ideal house.

      • Leah,
        The bank owned “evidence” until the investigation was complete and couldn’t manage to sell it until a year + change after Travis stopped making his monthly payments.

        During that time, the bank paid property taxes, home owner association dues (I think there’s an HOA in that development), utilities, property insurance premiums and I forget what else.

        The property was financially toxic.

        It wouldn’t surprise me if the bank kicked in a little extra money to the selling agent to do whatever it took to sell the home.


      • I wonder if HLN will buy it????

        It would be an asset for them…They could give us many more nightly BREAKING NEWS reports of what Travis’ ghost is doing in the house…my goodness…their ratings would go through the roof…LOL…

  24. Something to consider…the questions Nurmi was trying to ask Flores about the statements he made to Jodi. Nurmi did manage get in…at the beginning Flores didn’t believe this was premed. The defense is going in a different direction here..manslaughter/heat of passion. The defense want the jurors to consider 2 manslaughter alternative, self dense and heat of passion. If he can guide them to at least consider heat of passion..nothing else matters…pre meditations is out. Smart move on the part of the defense.

  25. All the defense would have to do is bring in the exact same shelving and fill it with clothing then have KN stand on the shelving. Over and done with. The weasel’s “case” is out the door! The only problem I see is the court being able to issue enough protective cover for the JODI supporters when JM explodes and s**t flies everywhere because the lying, sneaky, arrogant, slime-ball’s pre-meditation BS and all of his other cronies and the TA Taliban were proven wrong! GO TEAM JODI! WE WILL BE VICTORIOUS!!!!! Also to coldcase56, let’s not just cheer from here to Canada, let’s send out a cheer so loud that it will be heard around the world when the DT is proven right….that JODI IS INNOCENT!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  26. Do all WAL-Marts correspond with each other? Could she have went to another store? Or is there only one store in Salinas. And, it seems to me that petrol cans and kerosene cans are clearly labeled differently and that it is against the law to put petrol into anything else other than a can specifically intended for that type of usage. I say this because the receipt that the weasel displayed clearly said kerosene can had been returned! So, IMO it was an employee who entered the wrong data into the system when the can was returned and that JODI did indeed return the said gas can when she said she did!

    • i think she said she returned it to wal mart in Salinas, there are two there so we don’t know which one. some people on hear said she said she returned it to same one, but i think she said she returned it to the wal mart in Salinas

  27. Good morning everyone!

    Thanks for posting these SJ you rock! So from the looks of it this Ghost Hunters thing might lead Hollywood to do an Amityville type movie. They should go to the Anthony home too LOL

  28. As for Juan boy having the last word in closing arguments this could be a good thing. Because if the jury is like me they tuned him and his preposterous story out long ago. This may only remind them how annoying and ridiculous this little man really is spewing his rubbish. Waving around useless Walmart receipts, talking about fictional hair dye, his un-provable shelving hypothesis and how TA was such a virgin until the Jezebel Jodi entered his life and introduced him to pop rocks. If I were on the jury I would laugh him out of court.

  29. I just watched yesterdays afternoon session with KM’s cross with Flores. I saw everything that I missed. I should be used to this Puppet judge by now by I mean WOW!
    What a absolute joke of a judge she is.
    How many sets of strings does The Puppet Master go through per week making her dance for him?

    Why does she find it impossible to make a ruling w/o a 20 minute sidebar, then try to start again KM asks one question the Puppet Master objects again side bar another 20 minutes. Then again…then recess.

    Stephens sucks. Who in the world put that dingbat puppet on the bench?

    • Wait until the five who are not going to make it into the final twelve find out they put their lives on hold for 4 months because of this abysmal amateur for twelve bucks a day. They were treated like her personal play things to dick with as she pleased and they won’t even factor in the deliberations.

      I knew it from the day way back at the beginning of the trial when she asked the “FAMILIES” if they minded if she played the audio tape that she had already admitted as a qualified exhibit prior to the trial. Why didn’t she bring in Napoleon and ask him.

      I knew this was going to be a judicial journey into Twilight Zone territory incompetence.

  30. SJ,
    I checked on the petition site. They are all patting themselves on the back. We are being compared to the Westboro Baptist Church with you as the leader. 🙂
    We are a nasty hate group who speak untruths and distort facts and we are sullying TA’s and the poor Alexander family reputation.

    I guess those folks haven’t looked in a mirror in a while.

    • They are the ones posting addresses, phone numbers, info, stalking down witnesses, trying to destroy careers, using abusive and hateful language, advocating violence, advocating rape… the list goes on. All of that qualifies them as the hate group, hence the name Travis Taliban. They are a cult that worships the false memory of a dead man who contributed nothing to society but heartache. How stupid of them.

    “Would it surprise you to know that the teeny teeny weeny Ford Focus gas tank held a whopping 14 gallons?!?”

    Budget is now running an ad that all 2012 rental car must go. It is certainly possible that Jodi rented a 2007 Focus (I haven’t seen the rental receipt & am not that computer savvy). Car rental companies sell their cars depending on mileage under 40,000 miles after 1 to 3 years. Each spec list I’ve found for 2007 Ford Focus lists the gas tank as 14 gallons, and the 2008 as 13.5 gallons. I’ll bet JM knows that and has been holding his breath that it doesn’t come out. It makes sense that the gas tanks keep getting smaller to comply with mpg regs. What’s a quicker way to reduce the weight of a car without losing the amenities? You guys are so smart, you can probably prove all this better than I.
    Also! Jodi made that triple gas purchase at 3 or 4 in the morning when the gas was at its densest and the most could be pumped in. There are huge temperature swings in that part of the country.

    The other thing I’ve been itching to add on this wonderful site is regarding the dark picture of the foot and Travis’ arm with the blood running down his shoulder. Someone here a few days ago gave a very long explanation of the most clear picture s/he could find-in a trial video. That really was a much clearer picture than others. I believe the infamous missing hall rug is there at the bottom of the picture, thus pinpointing exactly where it was taken. Travis’ head is the black blob above the shoulder, and looks just like the back of his hair in the shower pose. Once you put that together with the fact that the shoulder is raised off the floor, you can see that he is in the process of getting up. His feet are pointed toward the bathroom/shower, and Jodi and the ‘missing’ hall rug are further up the hallway. To me that says that the bloodiest part of Jodi’s defense on that rug has not even happened yet. He is bleeding from the right temple head wound and cannot have his throat slit.

    The reason why the right angle chop/stab wounds are on his back is that he was lying on top of Jodi and she was using her more dominant left hand to reach around his right side and stab. That’s exactly how the wounds would have looked in that case. There was testimony from Jodi that she was on the bed and he was into the bathroom, both holding an end of the ‘rope’ when he cut it. I’m betting the knife never came back into the bedroom-it was too clean for part of the crime scene. Either she grabbed it when she ran from the bathroom after the shot, or he grabbed it off the counter and took off after her – more likely as he yelled he was going to kill her. Thank God he was somewhat incapacitated by the shot.
    It doesn’t really matter if it’s Jodi’s right or left foot, but once again the camera had to be kicked in that process in order for the picture to have snapped. If it’s Jodi’s right foot, it may have knocked the camera as she was taking that step.

    I applaud this web site. It’s good to see a site with decency. As a minister I’m disappointed when some cross the line from humor to defamation of character. That’s just the HLN junk you are complaining about! I hope you will check if you stepped into their realm before you hit send.
    Smiles! She’s going to win. Trust JW and KN. It’s going to be a very good closing statement showing that JM has hinted for months but has not proven a darn thing!

    • Nobody here has ever been as bad as HLN or the Travis Taliban. I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again – anyone who wants to complain about what they see here are welcome to show they have real courage by confronting the Travis Taliban, have them take down every nasty, hateful, defamatory statement about Jodi, her family and friends and supporters; every naked picture, every negative review about the defense witnesses, before coming here and accusing us of anything.

      • And a couple more things:

        Nobody here has made death threats.

        Nobody here has encouraged or attempted to leave bad reviews to destroy careers.

        Nobody here has advocated violence.

        The list goes on.

  32. HLN is showing scenes from the shower scene in “Psycho” (Hitchcock version). Before I turned the sound off, the host suggested maybe Travis and Jodi were acting out the scene from Psycho at the time of his death. I can imagine who they suggest came up with that idea although truthfully, I didn’t hear them say it. But, that’s their style.

  33. I wonder if the state or the defense ever attempted to get the video tape of Jodi crossing the dam…or going through the checkpoint that day. It would be interesting to see it….you might not be able to see the license plates, or the driver, but you can definitely see each car as it passes over.

    • Isn’t it true, Al… that the only humorous thing about the seal is that it has the year of Judge Pickles’ birth at the bottom of it?
      Yes or no? :mrgreen:

      Team Jodi

      • Hell yes SJ…I need that one it’s been a rough day. Hey could someone tell me how long Jodi actually live in AZ I’m getting confused on some things. I apologize if this question has been answered many times I thought I knew the answer but after yesterday I’m not so sure.

  34. i have a little morbid side ( don’t we all kinda )
    and before this trial started i was googling “MURDER HOUSES”
    and reading about them.
    I know I myself would never be able to live in a home that had
    horrible murder/murders/suicide/crime etc
    but I know families that don’t care about that stuff and move in
    Loved the film Sinister which deals with Ethan Hawkes character
    moving into a Murder Home.

    Seriously Ghost Hunters? And the media attacks Jodi,
    the defense and it’s witnesses for shamelessly exploiting
    I bet you “Next up at 10… Clairvoyant Barbie’s Burning Bush
    and Psychic Mike Hunt communicate with Travis Alexanders’s
    Cherry Red Penis”

    • haha so true Cherry Red Penis what is wrong with that picture people!

      The other side they do not want to look at that they turn their heads in
      shame to the naughty photos. So they turn their heads to the reality that
      Travis was not such a Saint.

      My sister is in Chandler AZ I am going to tell her there is a cheap house
      on the market !! she is house hunting too !

  35. I’m sure I’m not the only that’s noticed that when the jurors come and go Judge Pickle Face hasn’t ONCE stood for them!?

    Judge Perry should much respect – props to him!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


Latest from Latest News

Go to Top