site
stats
Menu

Stephens, Sandbagging & The Six Month Crap-Fest (by Jade)

in Latest News by

.
Click the following link to read Jade’s latest post:

“Stephens, Sandbagging & The Six Month Crap-Fest”

Here’s an excerpt:

Jodi is not going to receive any form of justice until this case emerges from the rat infested sewer it originated in.

Anyone who thinks Stephens was just exercising her “style” and letting the lawyers try their case, I couldn’t disagree more. The unmistakeable fact is that she doesn’t have a clue about what the fuck she’s doing.

She didn’t belong on this case any more than a welder should be doing brain surgery. This was a capital case. It requires totally different temperament and courtroom administration exceptionalism, with extraordinary knowledge in case law precedent in death penalty cases.

Just the bajillion sidebars should tell anyone she was exponentially pathetic. You put a judge on the bench that has never in her life presided over a death penalty trial for one of the most publicized cases in the last 50 years? A defendant who is indigent and must count on her constitutional rights to a fair trial being litigated by the lowest level of representation afforded by the legal system?

It’s obvious going in that it’s going to be the David versus Goliath premier death camp Nazi against a public defender. And this Einstein decision is made to have a rookie trainee get on-the-job training at the expense of the fate of Jodi Arias’ life or death? Whatsa matter? Couldn’t you find a more inexperienced one?……. [click here to read the post in full]

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

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

Juror #17 Exclusive Interview + Verdict Day Court Minutes
My response to Troy Hayden’s latest BS

REQUIEM FOR CANDY CRUSH (by Lise LaSalle)

Sheriff Joe’s 15 Minutes of Fame (by Rasna)

Corruption, State-Sponsored Murder & Twelve Angry Men (by Jade)

Juror #17 – We Thank You

Jodi Arias Victorious Verdict Day: Video Coverage
The Jodi Arias Verdict: My Thoughts On “Pedo-Huggers United”
Jodi Arias Retrial – The Verdict: Mistrial – Hung Jury
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

In the meantime…

We Are Team Jodi!. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Remember…

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

Never question it.

Never doubt it.

Prepare for it.

Leave your thoughts & comments below…

SJ
Team Jodi #WINNING <<<

Click the banner below to read Jade’s post – “Justice Denied: Why The Jurors Got It Wrong & How The Facts Decimate The State’s Case Against Jodi Arias.”:

Read - Justice Denied - Why The Jurors Got It Wrong & How The Facts Decimate The State's Case Against Jodi Arias
Click the links below to read Jade’s previous posts in the series:

Corruption, State-Sponsored Murder & Twelve Angry Men
The Immaculate Deception: Exposed

Michael Melendez – Perjury Exposed
The Presumption of Innocence
The Great Mormon Porn Swindle

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

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

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

444 Comments

  1. Great piece as usual by Jade. Incompetent judge by any definition of the word incompetent or judge – no doubt whatsoever. Her multi-page decision in the instance of the Brady/perjury motion during the retrial was a shining example of the twisted logic she seems to have used throughout this fiasco. Of course it probably escaped no one’s attention that she had that piece of trash written before she even finished listening to all the testimony – seeing as how she released it within an hour, or less of the end of testimony and argument – leaving one to wonder how she had the time to research all of that stuff in that time.

    But, just like jade said, the real culprit in this whole fiasco was the defense team. Their incompetence knows no bounds and their mien throughout the whole trial is one big mystery.

    Let’s start with the fact that Nurmi wanted off this trial in the worst way possible. The fact of the matter was that he was a PD just starting private practice. He had a case that would put him on the national stage. It wasn’t exactly the money, because he argued that and got JSS to give him almost twice what most court appointed attorneys get. In fact Maricopa County had to make a special budgetary assessment to handle Nurmi’s fees. So we have a guy with a fresh practice, being paid a reasonable hourly rate in a major case and he wants out. Just the free publicity was worth more than any difference between the rate being paid him and anything he could have gotten elsewhere – plus I’m sure he had no other expenses with respect to this trial, billing every little cost to the state. So either he is as dumb as a doorknob – or he wanted off this case for some other reason.

    All that stuff about ignoring the client – that actually points to the something else issue, because I am sure that las in the case of every other attorney a client conference is billable hours – which again he was willing to forgo. I know someone said all this will become clear when Nurmi writes his book – but unless he wants a massive headache it won’t because of that little thing called attorney-client privilege.

    Regardless of what the state or the judge or the jury did or din’t do – the defense still has an obligation to provide their client with a rigorous and competent defense. In this case the defense team FAILED MISERABLY. (And yes I am shouting, much as I did during the guilt phase trial).

    I know “StillOutThere” believes that Nurmi approached this with a view towards getting a plea deal for M2 because as a PD that’s what he was used to. Probably a fair enough assessment. But it became very clear to everyone at some date somewhere, that a plea bargain wasn’t in the works. And it isn’t like he was calling their bluff. I don’t think you call a bluff when you yourself are holding a 8 high.

    So let’s look at the crap this DT actually missed. Firstly they don’t seem to have ever interviewed the prosecutions “star” witnesses. You interview and depose everyone, even if you don’t use what you get. Especially those who produce reports for the other side – reports are clinical and often lacking in nuance. Those nuances turn out to be important. Also the report producer could have related information to the other side without putting it in the report. I don’t know if AZ rules disallow interviewing state employees but if not they should have. I know they didn’t interview Horn because if they had, the state would not have had to notify them a few scant days before trial of the changed timeline of the gunshot. And they would have had Horn’s words to hold against him.

    I know they didn’t interview that oaf Melendez, because if they did, they wouldn’t have been bushwhacked by his testimony either.

    And I’m not sure they actually interviewed Jodi about her testimony either, because if they had they would have had someone there to show that the forensic evidence matched her account, or that he story about the virus on TA’s computer was true – heck they didn’t even do that till the retrial. In fact the issue of the virus was first brought up by JM. In fact in the guilt phase JM asked Melendez about the presence of viruses – and that once again opened up the door for the DT to go looking, but they didn’t. And it doesn’t matter which clone/image they had because the viruses were there on all of them.

    Yesterday justus listed 22 questions that needed answering. Damn fine questions at that. In fact those are the questions I was looking for an answer to when I first came across this case. The lack of answers to those is what has kept me on this page, lo all these years. But instead of clearly and concisely bringing those out, Nurmi chose to bury them in some obfuscated alternative argument for a case of sudden quarrel or heat of passion argument he brought up for the first time during closing arguments. You cannot put up a case based on one scenario – the self defense, and then argue to the jury that if you don’t buy that – here’s an alternative theory. If you do that you get the result this DT got – the jury throws out both your arguments. Unfortunately you need to pick one and stick to it.

    Assume for a second that this was not a case of premeditated murder – and like that’s going to be hard for anyone here – then something had to have set off the chain of events that led to the final outcome that day. And the two parts there are what each person’s actions were, and what motivated them. The motivation part only becomes important in as far as the self defense claim is concerned – why TA did something is of no consequence legally. So the first thing you have to do is show what actually happened – the actual sequence of events. At the same time the DT needs to show that the state’s case is bogus. That could be easily done using all the forensics they had and a rigorous cross-examination of the state’s case. When that is done – you’ve disproven the M1 charge. Now you have to address the only motive that actually matters – did Jodi fear grievous bodily injury, which would mean self-defense, or was it just a sudden quarrel/heat of passion issue. I believe these idiots got it backwards. They just addressed the motive – and never showed to the jury how the evidence actually matched up to the sequence of events they were proffering. And of course they did very little to poke holes in JM’s case. When you have to wreck someone’s case you don’t do it with subtle nuances – you take a 16 lb sledge hammer and tear the whole freaking thing down. And they could have – but they didn’t.

    So, coming back to where I was before I started ranting and raving – why did Nurmi want off this case – we know it wasn’t the money or other opportunities, unless he’s about as dumb as a stump. Could it be that he didn’t believe Jodi and so didn’t want to have anything to do with the case, or her. It doesn’t fucking matter. If you have the case, you have an obligation to present a vigorous and competent defense for your client whether you like her or not. If you don’t believe her – you shouldn’t put her on the stand. If she insists yoy should just let her narrate with a single question – Ms Arias tell the jury what happened and leave it there. What the heck was with all inquiry about Pop Rocks and Tootsie Rolls, and BJs on the porch, and type of lube used? None of that was necessary or even relevant, and only opened the door to ridicule and possibly alienation of the jury. Still doesn’t show what happened that day.

    So if he didn’t believe her it doesn’t matter – he has a job to do and he should have done it. If he believes he can’t defend anyone he believes is not innocent, or is an unsavory character then he should get another job. In any crime situation at least one of the characters is unsavory. If you are a defense attorney, and your client is charged with criminal conduct I guarantee that the chances are you will find something unsavory somewhere in their background. If you can’t stomach it get another job – and heck this guy wants to defend people accused of sex crimes!

    OK by now I’m just seething and have lost all semblance of coherence so I’m just going to leave it here.

    • Al,

      I’m no fan of Mr. Brad JustDaTruth, but I don’t do Facebook and would never have seen this conversation except for JustDa’s screenshots.

      At the link below you’ll find a conversation Victoria Washington had with a few people on FB where she discusses Nurmi’s desire to be removed from the case, and the lengths the court went to in order to keep him on it.

      It put me in mind of something I learned years ago, about ‘opposition reflex.’ Google that if you’re unfamiliar.

      http://justdatruth2012.blogspot.com/2013_11_01_archive.html

    • Al, I whole-heartedly agree with all that you have written.

      I don’ t know the law, but to me it seems that the fact that in his closing, Nurmi offered an entirely different alternative scenario of what happened that day, should in itself be considered sufficient grounds for “ineffective assistance of counsel.”

      Nurmi, if my memory is correct, made a statement ( not sure of exact words) that, “something happened that day!”

      My reaction was huh?????? A defense lawyer should have articulated then and there, exactly what the defense’s arguement was__ self-defense.

      When Nurmi said “something happened that day,” it was like he was saying, ‘so what, who cares?’
      He undermined her entire case, and he reneged upon the essential contract he had with his client__ the agreement that he was going to argue self- defense.

      As a lawyer experienced in defending sex- offenders, Nurmi should have known to not subject Arias to such extreme public exposure, which would cause any person to feel humiliated, violated, and even ‘raped.’

      Nurmi’s strategy desensitized the jury to Arias’s predicament, dehumanized her, and made her into an object.

      He should have known better.

    • “only opened the door to ridicule.” Indeed. Nurmi was MADE to stay on this case. I messaged some with Victoria Washington and her words beg even more questions. Nurmi was strong armed in some way to keep on this case. And I would imagine if “someone” would do that, they’d also strong arm what defense he would present. “They” wanted Jodi shamed and ridiculed, not just found guilty, not just given the death penalty.

      • It does seem that way, Sandra. She would have rather gone a way that did not ‘upset the family’.
        IMO she should have been allowed to plead ‘Not Guilty’.
        It is my belief the State had very little real, honest evidence to prove much of anything. All they had was her statements to Flores, which she could and should have renounced as soon as she had an attorney.
        Take away her ‘stories’ and stick with ‘I wasn’t there.

        • Yes, Carol, I agree especially that she should have had an attorney sooner. But then again, if I were innocent, I wouldn’t think I would need one. I seriously don’t buy that she thought she could outsmart everyone.

    • Al, you are the first one I remember hearing comment on the “Defence Team” and that was back when I first discovered this trial, several years ago.

      Specifically, you forcefully stated that “Jodi needed to fire her defence team.”

      As I observed the behavior of the DT over several years, I posted my conclusion that no pair of lawyers could possibly perform their responsibility to the defendant so poorly unless they were purposefully choreographing a woefully deficient performance. Soon Edgar Longenecker began dropping “follow the money” remarks. And sure enough, it began to leak out that the State was essentially BRIBING Nurmi to remain on the case. (Not as much came to light about Wilmott.)

      My take is that the State “Bought” themselves a pair of puppet defenders who were almost guaranteed to loose the case. I saw Nurmi as a player who was more than willing to be lazy, inefficient, and not adverse to playing the “down low.” The duo was portrayed as “Killing themselves to save Jodi’s life.”

      Now more facts are emerging: the State had hired high powered lawyers to force the duo to stay in place. They were literally BLACKMAILED with threat of Bar sanctions should they try to leave.

      I have more faith in whoever it was, might have been you, Al, who warned this forum several times that the optimal result for Jodi would be for her to emerge with the Death penalty. Sounds scary . . . but she would end up close to the front of the line for appeals, and the State would be forced to bear the entire financial burden. The case was so hopelessly messed up, it was close to a sure thing that Jodi would not get the death penalty, especially with her pristine, clean record.

      But rather than pay attention to common sense, humans just want to throw money at issues to make them go away.

      Jodi probably also qualifies for The AZ Innocence Project. However, if she has a lawyer who is currently engaged, it disqualifies her. She would need to get rid of her lawyers. There is a 17 page questionaire to be downloaded online to start inquiry about the project. The process is handled through standard U.S. mail.
      It is guaranteed that there would be no manipulation from Judge Stephens or Juan Martinez.

      There is enough talent and knowledge in this committed group where we gather at the pleasure of SJ.
      I think SJ must have specific expectations of where to take his brain child and how to manage the steps to the end goal. The seems to be an “inner group” of some sort, that has access to SJ.

      The paperwork that covers the details of Jodi’s case has already been done six or seven times over: Starting with the documentation of Jade; JustusforusAll; Herr Speights; Ms. PJ Girl; I can’ remember all.
      Within that collection there is documentation of the perjury, the Brady violations, etc.

      This is not about a money problem; it is about THINKING SMART. There are also deadlines that could close off opportunuties to take ACTION on Jodi’s behalf. This has been an informal team for several years. I think it is at a critical point where somebody needs to decide who should be in charge.

      We supporters need to know how to support that person in reaching their goal for Jodi’s welfare.and who should be assigned specific rolls to get this started and then follow through.
      An example of a door that has already slammed shut is the issue of the death penalty option.

      We should remember and realize, that “death penalty option” likely was put upon us. We actually never worked out for ourselves if that was the BEST option for our goals and the end of the day. I’ll be glad when Cindy, our cheerleader gets back after a successful recovery 🙂

  2. I have a computer question!!! I think I know the answer but….

    Sorry Journee just hand in there for a minute..

    OK we know CH got into TAs gmail account while sitting in Cancun. Just to make this very clear: I have a gmail account so as I stated before I can be anyplace on any laptop in the world and access my account or anyone else’s IF I know their log on info. Name and pass word!!! That’s all CH needed. You can read emails, delete them, file them Into a file, or even get into the trash if it has not been emptied. You can also empty the trash. This is my question: if CH deleted any emails in TAs gmail account and emptied the trash who’s hard drive should it show up on?? TAs or CHs?? Or would it be sitting out in cyber space??

    • Don’t forget there are 3 to 4 different versions of where CH was when he found out about Travis’s death. His version seemed to change with the wind. I would think it would be on TA’s and CH’s computer hard drive. Too many unanswered questions. SMH ((((((((JODI)))))))

      • (((R.))). didn’t fall off the broom yesterday!! I also lost my cleaning lady…hahaha. It really sucks to have a sister with the physical therapist. She showed me how to vacuum one handed…grrrr. lol. Doing great start PT next week.. 🙂

        OK R. Here is why I asked the question and like I said I’m pretty sure I know the answer.
        I don’t think the deleted emailed would show up on TAs hard drive….as we all know you can delete anything but it never is truly gone. So I’m thinking it was sitting out on CH hard drive. He knew this at the time I’m sure. I’m sure that laptop is long gone…..

        • Thankful you are doing well in your recovery! I think you deserve a cleaning lady!!!! Call her back. One armed vacuuming is not fun!!! 😆 I feel a broom ride is in order for our near future. I looked into my crystal ball. 😯

          I’m glad Al was able to answer your question about the computer and yes I’m positive CH’s computer is under a boulder. Probably why his friend got in trouble in Goblin Valley. 🙄

          • I can see them now “. . . .put it right here and I’ll give this boulder a big shove. . . . NO WAIT. . .move it a little to the left. . .yep right there. . .that will do it. . . .uuuggghhhhh. . .(loud crashing noise)Hurry up. . . here come the boy scouts again, there that ought to get it covered. . . Good Job Dave!” ” Oh, by the way CH I don’t think we should be friends anymore.” “Right O Dave” ………..

    • Cindy,

      Google has their own set of hard drives on their servers. When you delete you delete on those drives. So if you had to chase them down, you would be chasing down some hard drive in Google somewhere.

        • no, google’s trash doesn’t get dumped on your hard drive

          the action of having clicked the button to empty the trash may be recorded somewhere for some space of time – not sure on that – but the trash itself is not on your computer.

          Here’s a more specific point, tho, that might be pertinent and I don’t know the answer. Assuming you have used your browser to get to the gmail site and TA’s account, and you’re carefully reading all of these emails, the emails ARE being ‘downloaded’ to the computer you’re using. I’m assuming they’re downloaded as temporary internet files? Which might be held in your cache for some period of time depending on your internet settings – sometimes set by days, sometimes set by max HD space devoted to internet cache.

          Probably a moot point, though, unless the computer used to read those emails was examined very soon afterwards.

          • WOW! Gave me the swirly eyes! 🙄 Nice shade of blue, Journee! Cindy and I just do not get all this computer stuff. 🙁 You do look beautiful in blue though! 😆

              • Journee I really think all that weeding is confusing her….. She is right I am too dog gone old to learn all this computer stuff…I have enough trouble finding my keys….

                • Put a carabiner on your key chain. Then make it a hard and fast rule that the keys can only be in three places – in the ignition of your car, in your hand, or hooked to your purse. NEVER EVER PUT THEM DOWN, always always hook them to your purse.

                  I finally overcame a lifetime of losing my keys.

              • Giggling here: Had to go back and check my sources! Pulling out oxygen bottles here. ♥ 😆 Stop it you two! I even cleaned my glasses!

                “Sorry for the caps, feel like I’m turning blue in the face here and starting to get annoyed at being in the position of defending a couple of people I loathe.. RE READ what I said above: NOT THE SAME as accessing ARCHIVED EMAIL ON THE WEB”

                Too wet to weed today!

                • Ah, lol, would you believe I wrote that before I even had my coffee this morning? And of course it’s now on the prior page and will be missed by CanadaCarol, to whom I was responding.

                  Thanks for clarifying!

                  Downright drippy here today. And dark. Good day for soup and writing.

                • 😆 Nothing like a good laugh! Thanks for the lost key idea! ♥
                  Hard to teach us ole dogs new tricks! I was wondering how Adele was coming along. ♥

                • Adele is planning her wedding, but her niece is turning everyone’s lives upside down. Especially Adele’s.

          • Thank you Journee!!! I did not know this. I thought that gmail was like AOL, yahoo etc.
            So when ever I empty the trash in gmail it’s gone for ever. But if I empty my AOL trash it is on my hard drive someplace.
            I also thought that if I did this same thing on my phone it was on my card. Omg my son would be so mad at me for not knowing this…lol.

            Thanks!!!!

            • um – I dunno about AOL and yahoo, but I suspect that if someone told you that the trash is still on your hard drive, they’re referring to what I was talking about in the ‘more specific point’ – that if you opened the email and read it before you deleted it, it was stored as a temporary file in your internet cache until your settings allowed it to be overwritten.

              • So the AOL application is not web mail, while gmail is web mail. There is an AOL mail application that is a lot like Outlook, or Thunderbird, or Mac Mail or other mail tools. In these apps you can set up your preferences to either leave your mail on the server or download it to your computer. The old AOL mail client used to download it to your computer by default because in the old days server storage was small and costly. I suppose AOL may have left that as the default. On modern email client applications the default preference is to actually leave the mail on the server.

                And hence the confusion 🙂

          • Everything stays on the hard drive when deleted and only special software makes u able to delete off hard drive but then the program used to delete will show up in hard drive files.

  3. Every time that we relive this trial with these wonderful summaries it leaves me in a speechless frustrated turmoil. Absolutely unbelievable to me, all of this was allowed to be performed in a presumed Court of Law in our country!? It has left me sick and extremely disgusted. The guilty need to pay for their crimes.
    Still praying for Divine Intervention. ((((((GOD BLESS JODI ANN ARIAS))))))

        • All of that about the computer?
          I thought the CIA could find a way to investigate
          the computer and find stuff no one else could.

          • Probably true Aly but apparently you have to really be someone important to get help with that kind of thing. I have read that the Mormons have many people in all positions of our Government. . .so who knows the truth? I suppose it would be up to who is trying to hide what from who. SMH

              • That IS really a damn shame.
                Just think of all the “unimportant people” that will
                NEVER get justice!!! : (
                Isn’t there a book called The Best Justice Money Can Buy?

                So unfair and we’re supposed to have the best justice system?
                I know Jodi’s has been anything but fair.
                What a shame!!!!
                Too bad she was ever introduced to the mormon way.
                She really didn’t know how bad it was.

                • I didn’t realize how corrupt it all was until everything has been brought to my attention by this tragedy. Now I am aware and disgusted by the state of affairs!
                  😯

                • R.L,
                  But we’re always told it’s the best.
                  Best compared to who?
                  I’ve never been anywhere other than here.
                  I know I’m told others don’t get a trial.
                  What good is a trial if it’s ll corrupt?

                  The oath?
                  That only applys to Jodi in this case, not the liars from the
                  prosecuting team.

    • R Love, interesting choice of words; “allowed to be performed.” It highlights the essence of unreality that has been flung into our laps. We are expected to deal with it as if it were Reality. But it is just a performance at its core. This is very scary stuff. This cast of characters is the stuff of nightmares. Someone mentioned the never ending story. Groundhog Day.

  4. Where did Jodi dispose of the gun that we know was used? I think I remember her stating somewhere in the desert???
    I think that is the gun that should be looked for. Offer a reward for that and folks from everywhere would be in the desert between Mesa and the Hoover Dam tommorrow with a big enough reward. Gangs aren’t turning in any guns no matter what amount the reward is. Just my opinion.

  5. One more thing, once this case is over turned it will be retried. I agree with Al about picking a defense and sticking to it. Witnesses that can coberate Jodi’s account (abuse) must be made to testify by subpoena no more of this “we’re scared” and let the chips fall where they may. I bet the State will seek the DP again. I know y’all have said it can’t be sought again but I cannot find any case law that states that. I think Nurmi let Jodi make some critical decisions concerning the defense that HE should have overruled her on. That was his job!!!

    • Uh? What did you say? 🙄 NOBODY LISTENED!!!!!!!! It was as if there wasn’t a Judge in the building at all. SMH Anyone remember the robot in “Lost In Space”, reminds me of JSS. . “This does not compute!”.

    • But she never did anything about it when individuals didn’t listen. How many outbursts were there and she didn’t do anything about them. She allowed it to continue……..even allowing A’s walking out all at once probably more than once by the sound of it.

      • I’ve been listening to two days of cross of Dr. Fonseca and the frog might have covered half dozen topics. He repeats the same stupid questions over and over and over and JSS just keeps on denying Nurmi’s objections of asked and answered. He could have wrapped it up in half a day. She was very good at defending herself but grows weary of his constant battering. I will be so glad when its over.

        Journee, I don’t know enough about computers to know what the heck the Hughes were up to. If I met a suspicious demise, I would want only the police department to access my personal and private correspondence, if they deemed it necessary. I certainly would not want any of my friends, no matter how close they might have felt to me, poking around in my private business, not to mention, that it was my employer, which would have made the invasion worse. The point I was really trying to make, was the audacity of this group of people who seem to think they can do whatever they want.

        • I get that, and I agree.

          I hope you’ll go back and find my original post, because I also explain why I’m being so precise about the language.

          No way, no how – is it my intent to defend CASH. There’s plenty of crap they actually DID do – and CONTINUE to do – that is contemptuous and suspicious. If we go piling on stuff there’s no proof of them doing, it muddies the waters and puts us in the same sh*t-hole with the likes of Hayden and Beswick.

          • I don’t remember saying anything that they did specifically. They have been on TV and elsewhere shooting off their mouths for many years and I’m sure I’ve heard them say that they looked at “everything” . What that meant I do not know, but it is they themselves who have been saying that they accessed his accounts after his demise and still had the accounts open even when it was in the possession of Flores. That just does not seem right to me, but it is their words not mine.

            • his gmail account –

              again, ‘accounts’ makes it more ambiguous, open to interpretation as ‘bank account’ which someone will take and run with, then it looks like WE are making that accusation with absolutely no evidence, let alone proof, that he did that.

              That’s why, in that post, I was trying to clarify language.

              I did not compare you to Beswick, Carol, I said US.

              And what you said, that I was responding to, was that the distinction between ‘getting into his email’ and ‘getting into his computer’ was like Deanna’s ‘sexifying’ (I think that was the word you used)… like CH was using some kind of wordplay to disguise having ACTUALLY gotten into Travis’ computer. Which is not at all what he described on the radio show and what I’d already explained several times to various people in that conversation. (hence the ‘blue in the face’ phrase that R quoted).

              Would you like for me to find the whole post to copy here?

              • This is the exchange – what I said, what you said, and my reply that R quoted in part:

                Journee says:
                March 19, 2015 at 7:00 pm
                No Carol, CH denied accessing TA’s computer – NOT THE SAME as accessing archived email on the web – THAT’s what he talked about on the radio, accessing email, not the computer.

                CanadaCarol says:
                March 19, 2015 at 10:11 pm
                So it’s just the wording: computer – no all the stuff on it – yes. It’s like Deanna and her sexitive testimony.

                Journee says:
                March 20, 2015 at 5:49 am
                No it is not “just the wording”. To insist that CH accessed Travis’ computer is to say he had access to anything and everything on that computer, like the porn, the book he was writing, any PPL or financial records, etc., and could have erased or changed or manipulated files. THAT IS WHERE everybody’s brain runs when you give them the sentence “CH accessed TA’s computer.”

                BUT CH DID NOT SAY, on that radio interview, that he accessed the computer. He says he got the gmail password and read his email and gchats. THAT IS NOT ACCESS TO THE COMPUTER. That is using TA’s password to access google’s ONLINE archived data for Travis’ google account.

                Sorry for the caps, feel like I’m turning blue in the face here and starting to get annoyed at being in the position of defending a couple of people I loathe.. RE READ what I said above:

                NOT THE SAME as accessing ARCHIVED EMAIL ON THE WEB

          • Journee,

            I so agree with you. Whatever the Hughes’ did after the fact does not in any way change what happened there that day, unless you believe that it was in fact the Hughes who did this, the Ninja story is true, Sandra Webber’s hearing of “then Sky came back” is correct (which I can’t hear).

            They may or may not have removed e-mails on his gmail account – who knows. Still doesn’t change what happened that day, and there is plenty of evidence to show this was not M1 – I refer all and sundry to justus’s 22 points.

            • Oh come on, Al, listen again! Just kidding 🙂 If I’ve never or haven’t said so in awhile, I enjoy reading your posts. You help me understand a lot…….but then you raise even more questions! 🙂 I suffer from IO….information overload, so I don’t get here very often.

              • Oh, good, since we have the both of you here, I’d like to ask a question Sandra and Al:

                While I was looking at the crime scene people pictures, the bright blue seam of really nice looking blue jeans stood out_well if you could actually see it.

                I’m thinking, who goes to a masacre party wearing their best blue jeans? Blood doesn’t really wash out.

                What do you think? Were these people overdressed that day? I’m serious. Besides wearing gloves that Jodi recommends when attending a murder, I would definitely go dressed in black. I wouldn’t want to ruin good clothes by getting blood all over them.

  6. Great post, Jade !! BAM !! Right on target with everything….I have always thought that some low life drug addicted criminal stole it and pawned it for money at a local pawn shop….so I guess if it got sold whoever bought it is living under a rock bc if I had bought that gun I sure a shootin’ would be either handing it over to the DT or looking for a way to make my money back and then some on that gun and still give it over to the DT…..

    I agree with all your analysis and agree that JSS is a total IDIOT !! This case is replete with error and will be a feast for the appellate courts…

    Jodi never received her constitutional right to a fair trial….she is due another trial or better yet I pray that the appellate court is so incensed that they vacate the verdict and dismiss this case with prejudice !! However, to be realistic it more likely they will overturn the verdict and remand for a new trial especially since this trial is so high profile….

    Debra Milke 2.0

  7. Agree.. ….never have seen a judge get trampled on by all sides in this case. She commanded zero respect for her courtroom and herself. She couldn’t even decide at times whether or not to allow the may we approach. Also would overrule or sustain a objection where u could tell she has it backwards. A pathetic judge who gets to decide a dp case. She belongs in traffic court and then she can focus on her beloved golf game

    • Someone needs to make a bobble-head JSS and sell it….she is just a bobble-head with nothing between the ears……..just picture it in your mind……… LOL !!!!!!!!

  8. So we know CH didn’t touch TAs computer and what ever he needed to delete from that gmail account is gone for ever. We still do not know what day the cashes left for Cancun for sure. OK I think it’s just a bit odd that TA would be leaving for Cancun a week later then the cashes.

    Why oh why did everyone point the finger at Jodi when I’m sure the cashes knew for sure that Jodi was in CA. OK I forgot the connection RB had to any of these people.
    But Jodi was going to see him so people would assume that is where she was.

    Why was ch talking to PIOF from the beginning? He told ch he was looking in a different direction…. was he? Is that why ch was running around talking to all these experts, he had to make sure Jodi was the one who got arrested so he was assured he had power over her??

    OK I could almost believe self defense if it wasn’t for the neck wound and blood all over the place from the chest wound. Jodi would not need to slit his neck. There would have been dragging blood marks all the way to the shower.

    • Jodi’s statement during interrogation by Flores in Yreka, California:

      I don’t know, but if I am… if I go to trial for this and if I’m convicted for this whoever did this is going to be sitting very pretty somewhere, glad that it wasn’t them.

      • Cindy! R Love!
        Whenever I get the blues about the day to day drama of this trial’s corruption I go back and read what Jodi said during the July interviews before she is dressed in orange. Then I see light at the end of this very long tunnel, and it is the pure light of truth.

      • I suppose we could start a list of people who are left sitting pretty. I have done the same thing Carol! I have always believed in Jodi’s innocence. . .never wavered. There are other guilty people out there sweating away. The only thing that gives me comfort is to know that God truly is protecting her and will see her through this. . .He has wonderful plans for her. I believe in that. And all the people who have spent their time scheming and conniving behind her back will pay for their crimes against her. They should be very afraid. IMO

        • They can run, they can scheme, they can lie, they can hide from all of us but God knows who they are. If it was me, I would stay on my knees asking for forgiveness after I turned myself in.

  9. As always Jade GREAT post. So what kind of money are We talking @.Tell auntie S and SHE can tell Me.Or PANDORA or AZ.GIRL……as I,ve said before words are great but $$$ is going to be needed if We expect to bring JODI HER freedom…..and hey that young LADY does have a B-DAY…..SOON. THANK YOU JADE…YOU are AMAZING as ALWAYS.

    • Ha! SJ, I think she has a crush on you. She seems to always ‘squeeze’ your name in everything she writes. Please, give the woman some love, dude. I’m sure that because you actually spoke her name she must’ve had the best orgasm in her life! 😀

  10. Question ???

    I know this has nothing to do with Jodi, BUT has anyone heard from JefffromMesa?
    Just wondering if he is OK, since all of the shooting there this week.

    • Jodi is probably eligible for the “AZ Innocence Project.” NAU Fagstaff.

      I keep posting about this. Until some one looks into this possibility intimately, it is hard for me, and others of my cautious temperament, to throw monetary support behind nebulous concepts.

      This course of action begins with printing the 17 pg screening questionaire. Communicating with, I suppose it would be SJ, and investigating further.

      If Jodi is engaged with an attorney, she’d be inellibible, but I would hope she would be allowed to fire the ones she has, which, Al has been concerned about the long while. He said long, long, ago that Jodi should fire them forthwith. The writing has been on the wall for all this time.

      There is a time frame clock that starts ticking, I suppose when Jodi is actually sentenced. I’ve watched and waited as JAII.com has let various opportunities slip by. Not good.

      My post on this topic for today is way up near the top of this page: mar. 22, 2015 1:51 P.M. Somebody needs to set the works in motion before we loose more opportunities. My post at the top discusses the fact that this community never seriously discussed among themselves the advantages/disadvantages of the finishing sentence w. MCPD being death penalty vs. being LWOP. The answer is not an obvious one. We should have made a preliminaty decision way back as to what to aim for. Ask Al.

      Believe me, my goal is nothing short of freedom for Jodi, soon. Not 22 years from now. I believe this ought to be realistic, but I don’t think anybody is looking at a road-map, and we are traveling in circles.

        • Justusforusall:

          Thank you for asking for more information. I am having problems with that site. On my first vist, they seemed to be in a transition. Then the site functioned for a while, and now they are back to a transiltional mode.

          The second prong to my problems is my own computer seems unfamiliar and hard to navigate.

          I’m going to do my best to give you a few pointers and hope that something will work for you.

          On the JAII site, I am unable to do a copy/paste, I’ve been working around that by writing down the URL into a notebook, and then copying from the notebook back up into the address bar. My fingers are crossed that on your end, these problems don’t exist.

          The 17 pg questionaire was listed at:
          nau.edu/-Arizona-Innocence-Project/History/Contact

          Now it lists as:
          http://www.azjusticeproject.org/process (as in, “process” for getting started)

          Yes, when I started it was called: The AZ Innocence Project.
          Now it is listed as AZ Juistice Project/

          OH, also, the url’s take you to a page like our JAII unfiltered page, and you still have to select the option that seems the best to take you to the actual Website. There’s probably an easier way, but I haven’t found it. Sorry.

      • Also consider this from North Arizona University

        http://nau.edu/Arizona-Innocence-Project/Cases/

        CASES WE TAKE
        The AIP is dedicated to respecting all inmate requests for assistance. The AIP screening process is extensive and involves three levels of review:

        Initial review, Evaluation, and Thorough review of entire trial record.

        CONDITIONS FOR INITIAL REVIEW
        When AIP is contacted by a prisoner or on behalf of a prisoner, we conduct an initial review of the request focusing on the following points of emphasis:
        1. Was the crime committed in Arizona,
        2. Does the prisoner have at least 8 years remaining on his/her sentence,
        3. Is there a viable claim of actual innocence?

        Due to the amount of time it takes to re-investigate old cases, the AIP has joined with most innocence projects across the United States to use the remaining time on an inmate’s sentence as one consideration in determining whether to accept a case.
        Evaluation and review of entire record

        After this and each further level of review, the AIP will contact the inmate and request further documents and/or information if we are able to move forward with the case.

        • Carol Handy, I am nearly in tears.

          How did you find that?
          I had been there before, and tonight I could not get back.
          I’ve exhausted myself.

          Thank you so much for helping with the lifting. 🙂

          Seabird

          • I have it on my toolbar!!!
            My hope is that some aspiring lawyer already has an interest in this case and will jump at the chance to thoroughly investigate it from start to finish.

            • Carol Handy:

              1st can you explain how you created that hot link to get to AZ Innocence Project. I must not know how to do that.

              #2 What do you think about what you were able to see on their Website?
              Last night when Al and several of us were all chatting, it really felt good to have an idea of what his ideas are. Understand his assessment of what went wrong in the past trials, and How we can take a completely different fresh approach.

              That kind of collaboration lights my fire. Compare that with the conventional approach of “assuming that one must hire a lawyer,” and then have all information and control taken away from the people who really care about Jodi. Like what happened with Nurmi, et all.

              We had no idea that Jodi’s trial was spinning so out of control.

              When talking with Al, and hearing all his wonderful ideas, plus all of the strategies, research, evidence etc that is already published in the growing list that greets us every time we log into the JAII web site __I can’t understand why we can’t just use an attorney on an as needed basis and have our own people doing the planning, such as Al was so effectively doing. That puts the power back where the brains are, and takes it out of the hands of the “controllers.”‘

  11. hi everyone.
    i see a lot of controversy over email accounts thought i would share my view on it.
    Gmail is considered online email. meaning you log in to gmail’s website to get and send emails.
    normally at least.
    BUT you can also use a client to download email to your computer and also send or receive email
    from your client as well (from the computer) through pop or imap servers.

    example, i use gmail but i also have thunderbird which is like outlook or outlook express.
    i can send or receive email without going to gmail’s website.

    so even if the email was deleted from gmails website, there is a chance it remains on the computer
    IF they also used a client for email. and vice-versa, if removed from the computer it could still be on
    gmails servers.

    also note just deleting a file does not fully erase it, the space is only hidden to be rewritten on.
    and can be recovered with programs.

    just sharing some information. hope it helps.

    ~friend in canada~

    • Shaw, the issue is that what ever CH got into TAs gmail account for was not done on TAs laptop it was on CH. Back in June 2008. So he could delete away and it was gone.

      • hi Cindy hope your doing good. =)
        yes if email was deleted from the online account and not saved on the computer before delete,
        then by ‘standard’ means the e-mails are gone and no longer obtainable.

        However I think google does keep backups from their servers before purging deleted email.
        Im just not certain on how long. i think it is 30 days in case of server crashes or other issues.
        they also keep record of conversations people have in their gtalk or other chat clients by google.
        and those records can be gotten by court order only if available..

    • While whoever it is reading that letter, think about who it suggests to you that, specifically, Kirk Nurmi is “Working” for: The State of AZ, or his client, Jodi Arias?

  12. Journee,

    So that post at justdatruth is rather enlightening. At least the Victoria Washington parts.

    The only thing I quibble with is her explanation that Nurmi wanted out because he didn’t want to do death penalty cases. I think it has to be more than that. At the end of the day, a defense attorney starting his own practice needs, above all things, cash flow. Its just like any other business. Cash flow, or lack thereof will make or break you. I suppose a new attorney has to build up a practice. In fact a criminal attorney is in a strange position, because he really can’t expect return customers at regular intervals, unless of course he is a mob consegliere or something. A famous case like this is not something I can see him walking away from just because he didn’t want to do death penalty cases. With four exceptions:

    (1) He’s independently wealthy and cash flow is not an issue or he has a bunch of cash saved up and can weather the initial storm – which is hard to imagine him doing as a PD
    (2) He has a bunch of clients lined up
    (3) He has some internal issue that makes him not want to be involved in this case.
    (4) He is just incredibly dumb.

    I personally vote for Nos 3 and 4.

    So now moving on to the whole “sudden quarrel” versus self-defense argument. And I’m hoping I don’t make people’s eyes spin and glaze over here, but see if you can follow me. As I’ve said earlier, and now have support from one of Jodi’s original DT, I think Nurmi made a big error in the whole self-defense thing.

    If you leave out George Barwood’s assertion of some mystical evidence (and he is a logical moron) there is only one piece of evidence that this was in fact self-defense and that is Jodi’s word. All the other stuff – ALV’s testimony, the abuse stuff , all that just goes to show that an assault by TA was within the realm of the possible – but it does not go to show that self defense was in fact what happened there, that day.

    There is a marked yet subtle difference between self defense and manslaughter due to sudden quarrel/heat of passion (I’m going to call it SQHP). Both of them have one common aspect – the cause of the event is provocation on part of the decedant. In the case of SQHP the provocation led to a response that the defendant should have known could cause death. In the case of self-defense the defendant had to be in fear of grievous injury (including death). So the SQHP becomes a felony – a class 2 felony, while the self defense is complete exoneration.

    Now from a truly pragmatic point of view, consider the following – in AZ a class 2 felony for a first time offender has sentences ranging from 5 – 10.5 years. AZ also allows a 1 for 2 time off formula. So for every 2 days served they can get 1 day off for good behavior. What that means is that for a 10.5 year sentence the actual time served is only about 7 years. Given that she had already spent over 5 years in chez Arpiao she would be out immediately or within a year or two. Yes she carries a felony conviction but I guarantee you her life as she knows it was over in any case. But at least she doesn’t spend a lot of time in prison. Now some may say, “Why should she cop to something she didn’t do”? Well putting aside all other arguments – look at what happened when she didn’t and if it hadn’t been for J-17 it could have been a lot worse.

    But here’s the bigger argument for the SQHP argument. We have all this evidence that says this was not M1 (remember justus’s 22 points). That then brings up Nurmi’s statement “something happened there”. Well you pose that question in the opening statement and go about using the 22 points and the forensics and blowing apart JM’s case to drive that point home. Plus you get to put in all the evidence Victoria Washington says would be admissible to show that a quarrel was possible. See in the one case you are trying to show that TAs actions could have led to him trying to kill Jodi. In the other you just have to show that he could have caused provocation – much lower standard. But, and here’s the most important point – you don’t have to put Jodi on the stand. They had to put Jodi on the stand to claim self defense because she has to testify to the fact that she feared for her well being, or life. But no such reason is required for SQHP. So they don’t have to put her on the stand. I don’t care what y’all say – putting her on the stand hurt her.

    The fact that she told some sort of Ninja tale to Flores was never going away. The fact that she came on the stand and said she made that up because she was embarrassed or whatever does nothing. All she’s saying is OK I lied. Heck they could have brought that in through Samuels, or ALV or any other person. Heck they could have had her tell it to DeMarte and brought it in through a prosecution witness. But the danger of putting her on the stand was just too much. And I’ll come back to that in a minute after I go through some more Nurmi bashing. But all in all, the argument that Victoria Washington puts forth for SQHP are very persuasive.

    So lets go back to Nurmi and the whole self-defense case. How and why did that happen? I can only think of two reasons – Nurmi insisted or Jodi insisted. Now if Jodi insisted, and against Nurmi’s advice that may be one of the reasons in category (3) of my 4 points above. So you have a client who insists on a particular defense and the attorney thinks its a mistake. After he has offered up all his counsel, he has pretty much no choice left – either go ahead with the clients wishes or quit. Well, maybe he tried to quit and wasn’t allowed to and so had to do what Jodi insisted on – in which case Dang. The second possibility is that the whole self defense was Nurmi’s idea – in which case that was one dumb move. It seemed to me from the tone of Victoria Washington’s statements that she felt this was Nurmi’s idea. But what do I know?

    But here’s what Nurmi should have known. Any defense that required him to put Jodi on the stand was fraught with severe danger. If he believed Samuels, ALV, Karp and DeMarte he had to know he had a client with some serious issues – whether its PTSD, BPD, BWS, or a myriad of other issues – there was always a danger that something would go wrong on the stand. There is also the distinct possibility that her testimony has some slight discrepancy that then gets blown up by the state – as in the whole gas can/Walmart thing. And the only reason he’s putting her on the stand is to claim self-defense, and she’s coming there with the big whopper of the Ninja story as a burden. And then there is the fact that, contrary to what some may believe, Jodi is not a shrinking violet, and if the jury felt she was copping an attitude things would go south in a real hurry.

    But there is another major tactical issue. In any case one side has to prove their case and the other side must disprove it. The state had to prove M1 and the defense had to disprove it. In fact they could have disproved it enough to possibly lead to anything other than M1 with a possible solution in SQHP. But they don’t shift the burden of proof. Now even though AZ law requires the state to disprove self defense, in order to rise to the level of disproof, the DT must first provide substantial proof for self-defense. As soon as they do that, there is an implicit requirement for proof on the part of the DT. And as soon as that happens the focus of the case shifts from the state having to provide proof, to the DT having to provide proof. And this is very dangerous because a lot of people are now left with saying well if the DT didn’t prove their case then the state’s case must be true. I know that’s illogical, but I see that sort of false equivalency every day. In fact it’s such a common thing that in the study of logic there is a term for it “false equivalency” The false equivalency here of course is that if the defense didn’t prove their case then the state must be right.

    So I don’t know what happened. I don’t know if Jodi insisted on a self-defense case and Nurmi was stuck because JSS wouldn’t give him the wiggle room, including threats of reporting him to the bar. Or whether this was his idea. The impression I got from Victoria Washington’s statements was that it was Nurmi’s idea. If so I hope they can raise this at appeals. If not its a shame.

    If this was Jodi’s insistence and JSS had let Nurmi quit, maybe Jodi would have been more receptive to the advice of the next counsel, or the next one, or the one after that. If not then too bad. I don’t know what Nurmi could have told JSS without piercing attorney client privlege, but I would assume that in a case like this there is some sealed ex parte motion he could have made, especially since it had to do with the relations between a court appointed attorney and an indigent client.

    Regardless of what we might want to believe, the only evidence of self defense is Jodi’s words. All the forensic evidence, the stories about TAs behavior and personality still do not prove self-defense – they just say it,s a viable possibility. But so is SQHP. Assume for the moment that everything she says is true. Every last bit about the dropped camera, the I’ll kill you shout, the charge, the shot, and the black out. The problem is that if you are skeptical then this sounds like too convenient a story – and that is a danger with a jury. Remember the state goes first and has already painted a negative impression, and you have a death qualified jury, and its Arizona. The risk is just too high. So, even though it may not be fair, sometimes pragmatism says you take the path that leads to the least of all possible evils. At the end of the day, the situation she found herself in that day was partially of her own making (remember I’m not necessarily saying fault, just making). She did not have to go to Mesa. I can understand that she did it because of an internal flaw being exploited by someone else – but in the real world we sometimes pay for our flaws even if they are not our fault.

    So yes I agree, Victoria Washington had cause to cry. Though not cut and dried, this was also not an M1 case. And the poor judgement of either the DT or Jodi ended up making it a lost cause. Plus of course the atrociously poor case presentation by the DT and courtroom management by JSS.

    • Al, did you read the 12 page letter that Jodi wrote to the court in order to prove that Nurmi was not doing his job? It is enlightening. It (a link) is included in Jade’s full post. If you haven’t read it, please do. Nurmi was an ass and treated Jodi with utter disrespect. After reading it myself, the mere mention of his name makes me puke. Fuck him and his socks and ties… 👿

      • Dorothy, thanks for pointing that out. I went back and re-read it. Jodi does allude to some tactical issues and advise, including her own testimony. Don’t know what the issues were but it does tend to point to my fact.

        I think the judge put her in a tough spot. She gave her a sort of Hobson’s choice take Nurmi or no one. On the contrary, in the same county, another judge, Sally Duncan, in the case of a guy called Jeffrey Martinson or trial for M1 let a whole series of attorneys quit, eventually getting him two high powered attorneys who eventually managed to get him off 9 years after his original arrest. So if the Judge wants a fair trial with efficient representation for the defendant it can be done, even in Maricopa County. At the end of the day the expediency of a trial should never substitute for the fairness of the trial. So may be somewhere somehow this will become another appellate issue – judicial error.

        • Another appeal issue! The list must be long by now!

          Thanks to everyones reviewing testimony and pointing out what the actual law states really should help an appeal lawyer!

          Jodi should in no way have lwop for this tragic state of affairs.

        • If I’m not mistaken, Duncan was still assigned to Jodi’s case the first time Nurmi asked to quit and the request was denied.

          Of course, at that point the judge received a lengthy letter from Jodi begging to keep Nurmi.

          Al, I’ll have to offer a more complete reply to your post tomorrow…. late and weary here.

      • OMG, Dorothy, lol
        Even his socks and tie??? lololol
        I really needed that!

        Were some of his questions to her in the beginning a little
        uncalled for?
        Makes me sick.

    • And btw it was never Jodi’s job to prove self defense…it was the State’s job to prove it WASN’T self defense.

      • Here’s what I said:

        “Now even though AZ law requires the state to disprove self defense, in order to rise to the level of disproof, the DT must first provide substantial proof for self-defense. As soon as they do that, there is an implicit requirement for proof on the part of the DT”

        So I agree with you, and have said this many a times. However, here is what I believe would happen in any case where self defense is claimed. The defense needs obviously to raise the issue of self defense – right. If they didn’t do that there would be nothing for the state to disprove. The next thing they have to do is offer some evidence of what happened and why this was self defense – if not everyone would claim self defense. Now they can leave it to the state to disprove their proffer. But, and here’s my argument:

        If the DT has to bring up a case of self defense then there is an “implicit” burden on them to show why that is the case. As a matter of fact I am sure they have to proffer this to the judge before they can even raise it in court otherwise everyone would raise self-defense and there goes any case. So it’s not an explicit case of the defense having to prove anything, but before the state can disprove anything the DT must say here’s what happened. And there is a mandatory requirement for self defense. From the Arizona jury instructions

        A defendant is justified in using or threatening physical force in self-defense if the
        following two conditions existed:
        1. A reasonable person in the situation would have believed that physical force was
        immediately necessary to protect against another’s use or apparent attempted or
        threatened use of unlawful physical force;

        …………………..

        You must decide whether a reasonable person in a similar situation would believe that:
        physical force was immediately necessary to protect against another’s [use] [attempted use]
        [threatened use] [apparent attempted use] [apparent threatened use] of unlawful physical
        force; or
        You must measure the defendant’s belief against what a reasonable person in the
        situation would have believed.

        So as you can see that before the state has a burden to disprove anything the Defense must be able to overcome these two issues. How does the defendant show that he/she had a certain belief and that it was reasonable. That’s the burden I’m talking about. So in fact if you look at the part that states

        “You must measure the defendant’s belief against what a reasonable person in the
        situation would have believed.”

        you are faced with two issues. Firstly someone has to set the stage for the “situation” and since the jury must measure the defendant’s “belief” the defense needs to set the stage for the belief. And there you go – the defense needs to present a case. Now even though the state has the burden to disprove the self defense, all of that goes out the window if the jury fails to come up with a favorable response to either of:

        “You must decide whether a reasonable person in a similar situation would believe that:
        physical force was immediately necessary ”

        or
        “You must measure the defendant’s belief against what a reasonable person in the
        situation would have believed”

        So if the jury doesn’t believe the defendant that’s the end of the self defense case. Now the state doesn’t have to do squat.

        • Al, your statements quoted below wholly misstate the law.

          “So as you can see that before the state has a burden to disprove anything the Defense must be able to overcome these two issues. How does the defendant show that he/she had a certain belief and that it was reasonable. That’s the burden I’m talking about.”

          “Now even though the state has the burden to disprove the self defense, all of that goes out the window if the jury fails to come up with a favorable response to either of:

          ‘You must decide whether a reasonable person in a similar situation would believe that:
          physical force was immediately necessary ‘

          or
          ‘You must measure the defendant’s belief against what a reasonable person in the
          situation would have believed’

          So if the jury doesn’t believe the defendant that’s the end of the self defense case. Now the state doesn’t have to do squat.”

          That could not possibly be more false.

          The self-defense part of the Final Jury Instructions includes these words:

          “The State has the burden of proving beyond a reasonable doubt that the Defendant did not act with such justification [i.e., self-defense]. If the State fails to carry this burden, then you must find the Defendant not guilty of the charge.”

          Since what you call “these two issues” is part of the concept of justified self-defense, the burden of disproof as to them falls entirely on the state. There is no ambiguity or uncertainty about this. At another place, the instructions say: “The Defendant is not required to produce evidence of any kind.” When the case goes to the jury, there is no burden of proof on the defense. Period.
          In another recent error, you said the seven jurors who voted for both premeditated murder and felony murder must have misunderstood their instructions, because the charge was in the alternative. Again, that is completely wrong. Charges in the alternative need not be mutually exclusive; there are inclusive as well as exclusive “ors.” And, accordingly, the jury instructions clearly said that a juror could vote for both alternatives:

          “If you find the Defendant guilty of First Degree Murder, you must indicate on the verdict form how many of you have found the Defendant guilty of First Degree Premeditated Murder and/or First Degree Felony Murder. By way of example only, the jury can be unanimous as to both theories, or just one theory, or it may be divided.”

          Note the “and/or” and the “unanimous for both theories.” It is you, not the jurors, who ignore the jury instructions.
          I am not going to spend more time correcting errors like these. My efforts from now on will be devoted to fundraising for Jodi’s appeals, which could not be more urgent. I merely point out that Al misstates basic law over and over again.

    • How about

      (5) He didn’t feel he had the trial experience to be responsible for saving a young woman’s life?

      Hell of a responsibility. How important would money or fame be to you in that situation? You don’t feel you have what it takes to do the job right. Does it matter if you try and fail and your client is executed, so long as you make a pile of money and gain sufficient notoriety to advance your career?

      He was in over his head and it showed.

      And I suspect that his client’s case/story looked like a muddled mess to him, and that he didn’t know when to believe her. Which could certainly complicate matters. How much do you invest (time, money, effort, personal dedication) to prove a story you don’t trust? And if you hire experts (CSI, ME), you run the risk of being stuck with a story that hurts your client.

      Yep, he fell down in a lot of ways. Maybe everything would have been different if Jodi hadn’t convinced Duncan to keep him on as her attorney. Then, too, everything would have been different if Jodi had just bypassed AZ on that June night in 2008.

      Shoulda woulda coulda.

      • I don’t know. If you go look at his web site he’s making all sorts of hoodeedoo about being a capital case attorney.

        But if he wanted out because of lack of experience, that’s an easy point to raise with a judge. Everything I’ve seen always seems to argue around having to build his practice, money, that sort of stuff.

        My point about the money was that I didn’t think it was the money, because that issue was eliminated, and if he did have concerns about money they were not the true issue, that’s why I didn’t say that my point 1 was what I felt was the real issue.

        But I think your second argument about the muddled story and the lack of belief in his client is probably closer to the truth and falls into my point (3). I think he had a situation where he had a client telling a story he didn’t want to go to trial with. I think he had an issue where he either felt it was a lost cause or that it would lead him down some path that could lead him into other sorts of trouble.

        If I read Victoria Washington correctly JSS put told to that my threatening to report him to the bar in any case (don’t know if that was for the first trial or the retrial).

        You’re right a lot of shoulda, woulda couldas in the whole mess, but at the end of the day its the shoulda, woulda, couldas that make the difference.

        I just don’t think the DT was a very good set of attorneys. I think they got outlawyered by JM. That’s my opinion, and you know what they say about opinions.

        • That was Sally Duncan, not Stephens, that threatened to report him to the bar.

          Duncan was still on the case when Washington left, so obviously she was still in charge when KN first tried to quit and was forced to stay.

          As to the fact that he is now promoting himself as a capital case attorney – it could be said that he’s had his trial by fire at this point. And also seems to have found his fire, as well as a considerable amount of righteous indignation that the CA’s office may very well be habitually falsifying evidence to railroad innocent defendants. NOW he knows what he didn’t know back in the day – that the state’s evidence cannot be taken at face value but must be scrutinized and questioned at every turn.

          • Oh OK. I didn’t quite catch from whom or when that threat came. So that came early in the timeline, which would have really tied his hands on trying to quit.

            As to the fact that the state plays fast and loose with the evidence – I guess he learned that the hard way. But defense attorneys have been saying that for years – not just about AZ but also about just about every DA’s office in the country. So that should not have come as a surprise.

            The thing that baffles me about this whole thing is as follows. Let’s assume the attorney believes it is self-defense. Now he needs to go about showing that to the jury. Would he not use the physical evidence to bolster his case. You have to believe that every client who claims self defense is going to face a certain level of skepticism from the jury, especially when there are no victims. If the physical evidence can bolster your case why not use it? In order to do that you have to have some analysis of that evidence done. So if you haven’t done that, you are now relying purely on the defendant’s word to show what happened that day. Remember all ALV’s testimony does is say yes this person, and this relationship are capable of producing that outcome – but not what happened that particular day.

            So it would seem logical to have someone look over all that physical evidence, whether it be computer discs, or blood spatter or the autopsy report. And if that was done some of the state’s shenanigans would have become clearer earlier.

            And that brings me around to my question – why was that not done? Was it sheer incompetence, or was it that someone was afraid of having that stuff looked at in case it tended to disprove their theory?

            Either way it turned out to be the wrong decision – and unfortunately you get graded on the final outcome.

            • “And that brings me around to my question – why was that not done? Was it sheer incompetence, or was it that someone was afraid of having that stuff looked at in case it tended to disprove their theory?”

              To quote Mario Batalli: Why does it have to be this OR that? Why can it not be this AND that?

              As I said way up there somewhere (and have said several times since the retrial started with Nurmi 2.0 at the helm), I don’t think Kirk put much stock in anything his client said, took it all with a grain of salt. Where she contradicted the state’s so-called evidence, he accepted the state’s word against hers.

              • Oh I agree. It could be both. In fact the first may lead to the second. I guess my use of “or” was rhetorical and not a mutually exclusive situation.

                And I agree with your statement of Nurmi not believing the client – which is why I sometimes wonder if the self-defense theory wasn’t just his story.

                • If Jodi had not gone pro per for that week or so back in August, the porn blow-up would not have happened. It was Jodi’s action in her own defense to bring on Neumeister.

                  When BN proved to Nurmi that Jodi was right about the porn, AND revealed what the state had done, I think that was the come-to-Jesus moment for Kirk.

  13. I just took the time to read Jade’s post. You must be a lawyer Jade. Your post is thought provoking to say the least. There are so many things wrong about the first trial that an appeal has to be granted. I agree that the defense did a better job during the sentencing phase but the job needed to be done in the first phase. I am hopeful that someone like you will come along and tear this case apart and the testimony of the law enforcement officials that played loose with the facts.

  14. Good Saturday morning everyone.

    A little shift for today’s morning music. Here are a couple of young ladies who can sing their hearts out. But Susan Tedeschi – the one with the guitar, has to be one of the best things to come along since canned beer. Our son showed me this stuff and I was just so thrilled that the kid can appreciate the real.

    But enjoy this – I know I do.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HIsf_OseKic

  15. Al, I agree with you about Jodi taking the stand in the guilt trial. Never should have happened. But I if I remember right they had to forced to in order to have Dr. S testify. But I think KN tried to reel her in a few times but it didn’t work. Just from my simple perspective that was the down hill spin for the case. That along with the interviews. No way would a attorney allow an interview without him/her sitting right there with them. I’m not willing to throw KN under the bus right now. Did the DT miss things HELL yes!!! But I also think there is a back story to all of this. I’m sure the DT fought Jodi all the way through the first trial because Jodi never wanted any of the negitive stuff to get out about TA.

    If people remember how many times KN and JW stated in court that they wanted off
    the case due to ineffective counsel. So the record shows that!!

    Now I want to say that I understood what KN was doing at closing when he said the 9 out of 10 days he didn’t like Jodi. If people would go back and watch that you would see Jodi smiling. Perhaps a mother choice of words would have been better but his point was, you don’t have to like her to vote not guilty.

    That is my two cents worth!!!

      • I guess, but they probably should have after national TV coverage. Plus they had the lesson of the Casey Anthony trial to show what happens these days.

    • She had no choice but to do it. Everything she said on the stand rang true. I am astounded anybody would fAult her for that.

      Most domestic violence cases, like rape cases, like murder cases, don’t have witnesses.

    • Cindy,

      There is a sort of contradiction in this whole mess. If Jodi did not want to say negative stuff about TA then there was no way she insisted on the self defense defense. Because to claim self defense she would have to air the negative stuff. Which then means that the self defense idea came from the DT. Now did it come from Nurmi or did it come from JW? I don’t know who started the idea but as lead counsel KN had to go with it.

      Now if they say Jodi insisted on the self defense case, then she could not have wanted to keep the TA negative stuff hidden, because if you don’t bring that out where’s the logic for self-defense.

      But its not just the defense theory it’s also all the other negligent stuff like no forensics analysis, no independent medical opinion, no interview or deposition of Horn before the trial. And no catching of the fact that Samuels’ test was invalid once he learned that the premise behind the test was wrong. That site Journee posted the link to yesterday had a statement in it that once JM got Samuels to acknowledge that error the case was over. Because if the jury throughs out his testimony based on a lack of competence then everything goes out – the black out, the PTSD, everything.

      So even though KN may have made all the right motions during the trial its almost like he had given up winning and was only counting on the appeal. Now he may be saying the deck’s are all stacked against me and the best chance is on appeal. But its like I tell my kids. Don’t be afraid to fail. Go for the gold, give it your best and then see what happens, and if you fail so be it. So there is nothing to be lost by presenting a competent defense and still making a record for appeal if needed. Instead this DT seems to have presented an incompetent defense and maintained a record for appeal.

      Of course some might say that given the climate KN had no chance of winning so he purposely did a bad job to allow for appeal on ineffective assistance of counsel. Other than the fact that that’s just such a cynical conspiracy theory, I don’t think he has the brains for such a deep ploy.

      • Al, I’m not saying your wrong. Yes it was a mess and the DT made some very big blunders.. that should never have happened.

        But we really don’t know what happened between Jodi and KN. I sure and heck wouldn’t want someone defending me that didn’t want to or didn’t feel he had the experience to. That leads me to why JSS wouldn’t let him go???

        • I agree about not wanting someone who doesn’t have experience. But Nurmi apparently had 2 capital cases before Jodi’s. Under normal circumstances that would be a fair amount of experience.

          Of course Maricopa County has a rather unusual situation with respect to capital cases. See this link to get a view of their problem:

          http://www.omlaw.com/uploads/publications/2012-04%20-%20LAH%20-%20ARTICLES%20-%20Capital%20Case%20Crisis%20in%20Maricopa%20County%20Arizona%20and%20A%20Response%20From%20the%20%20%284%29.pdf

          This might also explain why JSS wouldn’t let him go. How does she find another lawyer. Of course she could have done what Sally Duncan did in the Martinson case – go get private attorneys at regular market rates. But then this is JSS – a judge with absolutely no gumption whatsoever.

            • Here is an excerpt from Sally Duncan’s 4/4/2011 ruling about Nurmi’s reason for trying to withdraw and her action:

              THE COURT FURTHER FINDS that, in order for Mr. Nurmi to represent the
              Defendant conflict free, he must be compensated at a reasonable rate otherwise his personal financial interests place him in a conflict with his client’s right to receive effective
              representation.
              THE COURT FURTHER FINDS that Mr. Nurmi recently left the Office of the Public
              Defender to go into private practice. Mr. Nurmi faces the unusual and challenging circumstance of building a practice at the same time that his ethical obligations require him to devote most of his attention to representing a capital defendant who is facing an imminent, firm and final trial setting. In order for Mr. Nurmi to fulfill his ethical obligations and effectively represent the Defendant, Mr. Nurmi will have to forego work opportunities necessary to build and sustain anprivate practice. The Office of Contract Counsel contract rate is inadequate.

              IT IS ORDERED that Mr. Nurmi shall be compensated at the hourly rate of $225.00 per
              hour.

              So at least at one stage that was his stated reason. And Sally Duncan as seems to be her practice agreed to the financial aspects and adjusted his fee accordingly.

              Still looking for other early rulings and will post them when I find them.

              • OK another one from an earlier filing (minutes of 3/22/2011)

                The Court received and reviewed Defendant’s Renewed Motion to Withdraw filed on
                March 21, 2011. In the motion, Mr. Nurmi indicates that The Office of Public Defender
                informed him on March 21, 2011, following a court hearing on this case that it was removing the assigned mitigation specialist, Teresa Price, the assigned investigator, Kim James, and the assigned paralegal, Aurelia Berry, from any further work on this case. According to Mr.Nurmi’s motion, The Office of Public Defender justifies this decision because “it does not want Mr. Nurmi] to be directing staff” presumably because he is no longer an employee of The Office of the Public Defender.

                The defense team was assembled by court order pursuant to Rules 6.2, 6.3, 6.8 and 15.9 of The Arizona Rules of Criminal Procedure, the ABA Guidelines and the Sixth Amendment. The Office of the Public Defender does not have unilateral authority to dismantle the defense team. The Office of the Public Defender also has ethical obligations to exercise its authority
                over lawyers and staff in a manner consistent with a defense lawyer’s ethical duty to his client, and to take reasonable remedial action to avoid ethical violations. Supreme Court Rule 42
                (Rules of Professional Conduct), ER 5.1, 5.3.
                Accordingly,
                IT IS ORDERED denying Defendant’s Renewed Motion to Withdraw.

                IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that The Office of Public Defender shall immediately
                reassign Teresa Price, Kim James and Aurelia Berry to the case and their work shall resume immediately.

          • I *think* that by the time Stephens was turning him down, the case had already been too long delayed and/or was already at trial.

            • Possibly. Looks like those motions came during the trial. Though I don’t understand the reason for denying it during the retrial, except it seems she left Jodi with no choice – use Nurmi or go it alone.

  16. This thing with KN and Jodi is such a tangled web, that we on the outside are trying to unravel without enough information, and that just leads to speculation.

    We know that at one time Jodi was moving the court to keep KN. Later she was moving the court to have him removed. Obviously something changed in that whole relationship. We don’t know what or why. At least I don’t. So everything now boils down to connecting the lines between few far flung dots. Good way to pass a cloudy Saturday, but I doubt if we’ll know the truth. We may have stumbled across it in our musings, but who knows.

    • We won’t know until Jodi tells us, and I think she has blocked the worst from her mind. I do know that where she is now is a travesty!

  17. Guess my last post with another one of the reasons for KN’s motion to withdraw went into La La Land. Anyhow it seems that was because The PDs office took away the support staff. So judge Duncan ordered them to rpovide the support staff.

  18. Jade, another fantastic post. Thank you.

    JSS, did not have the know-how to rule a case like Jodi’s. She was in family court up to the moment she was appointed this case. Although I’ve heard that she did a great job in her ‘family court’ cases, she was clueless in Jodi’s case.

    Add the ruthless POS martinez with all his tantrums and shenanigans, the talking heads, the biased first jury, the constant gallery testimony to the factor and voila: She had lost the plot… so instead of trying to take control, she probably said “Fuck this shit! Ain’t worth it. Lady Justice can go suck it.”

    As for Nurmi? I wish he had given half the fight he did the second time around during the first trial. He had stated that he didn’t want to be on this trial many times and I think that is one of the main reasons JSS didn’t allow him to leave the defense team: martinez found this opportunity to do whatever was possible to keep a defense atty on this case that clearly didn’t want to be thus would not give his 100% in trying to help Jodi get a different, smaller verdict/ sentence – which is what she should have got and should have been free now for time served. Remember: SELF DEFENSE is not a crime. It’s everyone’s human right.

    ((((Jade)))) ♥
    (((Jodi))) ♥
    ((((TEAM JODI))) ♥

  19. Well I agree with Journee. The would have,could have, should haves, don’t change one thing. Of course all of us want answers!! But perhaps someday we will get them but I for one am not going to bank on it. The one and only thing that really matters now is Jodi’s appeal!!!

  20. I was googling some of the names in Al’s comment @ 9:17am. I found this interesting site called: “My Sens-iety.” It describes a lot of the pre-trial maneuvering. A few of the issues:
    – Rosemarie A. Urbanski, Executive Director of Drake Polygraph Division, was listed as a potential defense witness at one point..
    – There was a Motion to Allow Jury to Consider Method of Execution (lethal injection) as a mitigating factor.
    – Alyce LaViolette was orginally supposed to be a mitigation witness
    – Alyce LaViolette submitted many redacted documents (more than 20) but was ordered to submit them unredacted.
    -The Court found there was “sufficient cause to allow Maria Schaffer & Gregory Parzych (sp?) to withdraw” from Jodi’s case but cause is not given.
    – When Kirk Nurmi left The Office of the Legal Defender, the mitigation specialist, the investigator and another staff member (who were appointed by this Office) were also withdrawn but were reinstated and then later replaced.
    https://mysensiety.wordpress.com/2013/06/20/the-search-for-mitigation-for-jodi-arias-pt-1/

    • It is my understanding that Jodi wanted to take a polygraph test, but Martinez would not allow her.
      If that is true, that is an enormous red flag. Who ever heard of prosecutors or police refusing to allow a defendant to take a polygraph?
      I doubt that Martinez was very familiar with Jodi Arias at the time he refused the polygraph. He would have had no reason at all to suspect she had the remotest chance of beating a polygraph test.
      So if it is true that Martinez would not allow a polygraph to be administered, then it is another example of Martinez being a monster, because as a human being, wouldn’ t Martinez have liked to have as clear a conscience as possible that he was proceeding in the right direction by trying to have this young woman murdered by the state?
      People who are anti- Jodi should ask themselves why Martinez refused to allow her to take the test.
      It would be interesting to examine the other cases Martinez worked on, and find out if he agreed to allow other defendants to take a polygraph, or have the results admitted.
      I don’ t know if anything could be done now regarding a polygraph.
      I don’ t know if the fact that Martinez refused to allow her to take one, could be brought up in appeals.
      Also, I am not sure if Jodi did already take a polygraph test, but Martinez refused to allow the results to be admitted in court.

  21. Flores told her that no one would ever believe that story about those 2 dressed in black,
    Didn’t she ask him WHY?
    It makes more sense than all of these other questions
    ALSO, remember that night she told Flores, she wanted to talk to Travis’s Grandmother?

    Jodi was abused, but as someone mentioned she never said ninja. The two that were there, they told her to leave, they didn’t need her.

    That IMO was what happened. It didn’t sound made up.
    Remember the 2 that came in and murdered a mother and father that were foster parents of about 12
    disabled children?
    Why was that anymore believable than the 2 dressed in black that enterd that home and killed them more believable?
    They had cameras in that home.

    Also, I know this just brings up more questions, but hell we have a life at stake here and justice needs to be found.
    When Searcy said Jodi was shaking all over before leaving to go to TA’s, MAYBE TA told her he was being threatened for his life.
    He may have known it, maybe not, but she at that time was being set up.

    They say Jodi told a lie about the intruders. I believe she was telling the truth.

    The whole thing needs to start over, be damned the mormon church, OR money spent to find justice for Jodi.
    The Alexanders should want the truth about Travis.
    I think they know, they just are hiding what they do know.

    • Aly,

      I am absolutely behind you on this.

      I have spent enough time reading the history behind what the Mormons are doing that I believe anyone who has not taken that step to understand their culture, is NOT qualified to understand what is REALLY going on here.

      Does anyone still remember what the “culture” was here, back when we were first drawn to this website.
      Do you remember when POLITICAL CORRECTNESS had all of us gagged? We had to walk on eggshells when speaking of the potential Mormon role in this affair. We have come a long way, and that makes me proud.

      Now we are starting to see that the Mormons ARE this affair. If you read their own material online, they are quite blatenly stating that their end goal is . . .I’m going to do a virtual “redaction” on my thoughts beyond this point for reasons that I do not believe this list is ready to contemplate. (just like back in our “Political Correctness” days.) From my heart, Seabird.

      • Thank you seabird!!!
        Maybe I wasn’t here then, but the Mormons talk about what they do.
        Why should it be hidden???
        Why didn’t the investigation lead into that?
        I’ve never understood.
        It makes me sick that some religions can get by with anything as long as that’s what they believe.
        So why don’t they just say he needed an attonement and got it?

        So many “religions” think that just because they use the church that they are protected
        from the public.
        WHY???
        You can read about any of them and listen to some that left there and what happened to them.
        Are we NOT supposed to believe any of them. These are people that have been through it and lived to tell the story.

        Any time there is a religion that isso secretive, I would be out of there, but like you said DO they all
        really know the (consicenses) probably not spelled right, but you know what I mean.
        If they’re proud of their belief, than shout it, don’t try to hide it.

    • It seems to be a challenge to keep the absolute details straight re exactly the terms used in what Jodi said in those early days regarding several issues:

      I am presently addressing the current post which refers to: “Those two dressed in black”: IIRC Jodi had said that one was dressed all in black; and the other one was wearing jeans.

      I am curious that I personally have no recollection of any words used that would indicate how their heads were dressed such that these individuals were not recognizable by sight.

      Secondarily, I do not recall any mention of VOICE RECOGNITION. Jodi did report them as making statements back and forth.

      I don’t remember what she said caused her to conclude that there was one female, and one male. It seems like the female was in the dominant role. (Why are the words C&S hughes screaming in my ears as I type this?)

      Whether or not this is perfectly accurate at this point in time, I do believe it is IMPORTANT that we keep up our effort to relay Jodi’s statements as authentically as possible.

      For, instance (re braids vs pig tails) I just remember her correcting Flores over and over that they were braids. It was important to her, for some reason, or no reason. I just think we should keep refining when we have an opportunity to pick up on another nuance, retaining her frame of mind and her personal style.

      seabird

      It’s the same with : Ninjas (sounds hokey) vs two people in black (partially incorrect if she did actually say one was wearing jeans) vs Intruders which is the term I believe was first used by Jodi.

      • seabird,
        I want to get this right.
        I’m watching the #1 interrogation and Flores says we have pictures,
        and he says you were in pigtails and she said pigtails?????
        Because she knew HE was lying.

        The pigtails and braids I’ve always thought were the same. I use pigtails usually when it’s
        like 2, braids when it’s any part of the hair. But, yes she said pigtails??? Like that was really a stretch on Flores’s part.

        As much as I hate to see her interrogated. I’m watching again and AM more convinced of her
        innocecense.

        Not through, when I get to the clothes, I’ll make sure I get it right

        • seabird,
          Still watching!!!
          This is so hard watching, but as I watch again I feel CERTAIN she had nothing to do with his murder.
          Folres, “everyone says you did it, everyone says you were jealous. REALLY!!!!!!
          I wish they had interrogated “everyone”

          • seabird,
            I agree.
            It’s not good to get something wrong.
            I can’t find about thr clothes, but thanks for letting me know.
            Like I told Journee, I this is where I will learn to get it right

  22. If I have a naked dead body lying on the floor and I want to move it, I’m going to take it by the ankles or maybe grab it under each knee cap and pin the ankle/shin areas under my armpits and drag it that way. I’m not going to pick it up under the shoulders b/c I would have the extra weight of the head, chest & abdomen to carry while I drag it.

    • thinking out loud cc53?

      I agree. That would be the way to do it. But I guess I’d have to have a reason for doing it in the first place. I mean, why do I want to move the body?

        • I tell ya, the ‘why was he in the shower’ question is probably the thing that bugs me the most.

          I flat just can’t make sense of it if Jodi, alone, killed Travis. There is no explanation that makes sense.

          • AND if you’re on the jury and none of it makes sense, they tell you to use your
            common sense? 23 jurors didn’t, from the 1st trial and the 2nd.

            • Yes,indeed. As per my 1st post above in reply to Aly. I had not yet thought forward to that next step.

              That being that we are addressing a jury that has never had to process in their brains the facts embedded in the cult-culture of secrecy.

              It’s like expecting them to be able to believe in UFO’s, with a defence attorney trying to convince them that space aliens “did it.”

              There is huge cognitive dissonance here. All of us who are like-minded, have reached this point gradually. We probably underestimate the magnitude of the gulf that has created between “us and them.”

              If, as I stated, any of US, deeply involved in this brain twister, literally for years are still unable to truly understand this case w/o understanding the truth about the Mormon culture;

              it follows that a JURY would be totally unequipped to mentally process the “cognitive dissonance” embedded in whatever horror actually occurred that night.

              We are under a severe handicap in a courtroom.

              • It should have been brought up, subtly if necessary, by the defense at some point in this case. It was a part of the plot. It did play a part, someone wanted to express that.

        • Take Jodi out of the picture and what do you have?
          Two people who kill Travis for a reason we can’t imagine; I’ve been wondering what went on with Jodi and her family BEFORE she was arrested. Who did any of them, all of them, talk with? What fear was put in her head? In her family’s heads? And there certainly was fear…
          The only way this murder is possible and the only way it makes ANY sense is that 2 or more people were involved. It makes no sense that a 127 lb girl with no history of temper eruptions could carry this all out in two minutes. NO WAY!!

          • Absolutely, Carol,
            NO WAY!!!!

            My questions have always been who did this?
            I believed her story and I believe her family and others were threatened and
            any of us would do what Jodi did to protect them.

              • Lawyers agree??? GREAT!!!
                Of course NONE of them agree in the media, not even the defense attorneys.
                Unless some changed. I quit watching after hearing them all bash her.
                They’re so clueless on there and so many idiots believe what they say is truth.
                Same thing on you tube.
                Then I found this site!! : )
                Gives me a LOT of HOPE!!!!

          • I feel as though we in the public were intimidated into thinking ‘that ninja story is nuts’ and instead of showing where it isn’t nuts….we went along! I am so so so disappointed in our lack of clear thinking. No, not ‘ninjas’…people did it!
            If it is rational to believe ONE person didn’t accomplish everything in 2 minutes than it is also rational to believe someone came in at some point and committed this murder.

            If it is rational to believe that the roommates didn’t report the murder until they smelled death than it is also rational to believe that the murder didn’t take place until later in the week.

            It is also rational to look at that corpse and admit it does not show outwardly what 5 days dead would look like.

            • Caol,
              I forget who reminded me on here that Jodi never called them ninja, that was the media.
              Jodi discribed them diquised in black, never mentioned :ninjas”
              So, there I was thinking she said “ninjas”
              Shame on me for believing ONE word of this so called media we have.

              Everything you just said is right.
              The room mates didn’t see or smell blood, OLD DRIED BLOOD at that.
              When they came looking for TA after several days (RIGHT) they really missed him.
              I believe the room mate was there watching TV with his girl friend. UGH!!!
              And no one has really answered about who took care of the dog unless the KILLERS
              took him.

              • Enrique’s girlfriend, Kim, was feeding Napoleon in the days they supposedly assumed that Travis had already left for Cancun.

                • Good thing they thought about the dog,
                  I wonder how the dog acted with TA supposedly in the shower, blood everywhere
                  and even the dog didn’t notice the smell.
                  Did Kim testify at the trial?

                • NONE of the roommates or their girlfriends – the people who spent several days in the house with the dead body – testified at trial.

                  I swear, if I’d been on that jury, I’d have used that fact alone to browbeat other jurors to my way of thinking, lol

                • That is one of the things that has bothered me. One would think the dog would have been beside himself trying to get to Travis. Strange.

                  And yes Journee, I believe all of us would have brought that up to other jurors. Where were the room mates in all of this. Why were they not called to the witness stand? Stranger than strange.

              • Yes, yes, yes 🙂 They were not “Ninjas”/they were “Intruders” as in “Home Invasion” (which seems to be rampant in Mesa these days.)

                Also, Jodi never had “pigtails,” They were braids. . . .in those earlier pictures which had to be recovered from Jodi’s personal professional camera. The earlier pictures that Flore was trying to equate with crime scene.

                • That was crazy too!!!
                  Why the brown pigtails, when they were ytrying to say she dyed her hair blonde?
                  I never thought those pictures meant a damn thing.

      • Journee,
        I probably was thinking out loud. I was on a site tonight where a guy was saying he would get behind TA’s head and drag him by putting his hands/wrists under his armpits and drag him as he (the dragger) walked backwards. It seemed to me that’s the hard way to do it.

        I also came across a question: If Mimi Hall, Chris Hughes and other friends were wondering/worried about Travis not answering calls or missing the conference call , etc., why didn’t they phone the roommates and ask them to check on Travis?

        As for why Travis was dragged to the shower, I don’t know.

          • You realize, Cindy, that if Jodi is lucky enough to get a new trial, she should, and most probably will, plead ‘not guilty’ and then the prosecution will have to PROVE: what day he was killed, that she was there, and that she did what they say she, and did it the way they say she did it. WOW! THAT will be impossible for the State to do. She wasn’t there, she didn’t do it! No valid evidence will point to her.

            If she had a lawyer worth a single grain of salt, she would never have been on the stand at all.
            Jodi is INNOCENT of the murder. Some OTHER people committed the murder and they are sitting pretty thinking they got away with it because Jodi was found guilty.

  23. Hi All, still reviewing the videos….boy, listening to JM rant on and on is almost unbearable…..he is such a deceptive and pathetic little man IMHO….he doesn’t want the truth, he can’t handle the truth IMHO….he does everything in his power to bully, harass, shout down/over, and twist the witnesses’ words on the stand and mischaracterizes everything trying to deceive the jury into believing his story IMHO….how does he sleep at night???? Does he care that he is trying to kill a woman based on hiding/altering/destroying exculpatory evidence??…..God is not mocked, whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he reap…….Dr. F did a good job holding her own with the little runt…haven’t finished Dr. F’s testimony yet, but am wading through cross right now….JSS DOES NOTHING !!! She is worthless as a judge IMHO…….

    • Anyone yelling going out of control is trying to have jurors focus on him and what he’s doing, not what is truth or fact and also hoping they forget the lies that they just heard from the state.

    • I started watching the cross of Dr. F. but when JM began grilling her on the exact date J and T started dating and because she couldn’t recite the exact day he started asking if she has memory problems, I just couldn’t take it any more. My PTSD, brought on by the first trial, started to kick in and I was having visions of shooting HIM in the head and slitting HIS throat.

  24. Good Sunday Morning ((((Jodi’s)))) extened family!!!

    I’m reading the post from late last night. Journee you asked the question that No one has ever asked….Why move the body??

    Then there were the different dragging methods. OK now my question is: wouldn’t Jodi have TAs blood all over her?
    Now if she was able to get him in the shower (pretty big if to me) and she washed him off how did she wash herself off stand on top of him? They didn’t find any evidence in any other bathroom that Jodi could have taken a shower in. She would have had to change her clothes. The shower was “to” clean for having Jodi put TA in it and then shooting him and cutting his neck. Oh wait geez what’s the matter with me? The gun came last. Ya OK….Not!!! Jody would have to have scrubbed that shower down because her prints would have been all over the shower.

    I can believe the chase and Jodi getting the gun and it going off. I can believe TA standing at the sink blood coming out of his nose grabbing the knive off the counter and coming after Jodi saying “kill you bitch” body slamming her to the floor. She somehow gets the knife and starts slashing at his back. ( the widest part of the slashes were at the top of the slash, so she was going over his shoulder). She gets him of from on top of him… Now that’s all I can wrap my simple little brain around… Perhaps after she got up she saw the cuts on his back and drops the knife??

    Now that’s what Jodi said what happened on the stand. I can almost believe that. So what happened next?? Now remember you only have 62 seconds according to the states story.

    I had a passing thought this morning that we might have in all of our coverstation hit upon what really happen that day. I also think the person/persons who really killed TA has been lurking here.

      • ‘They said’
        Who said? Where is the proof?
        THEY say a lot of things, but as I said above, in a retrial she will plead ‘NOT GUILTY’ and the State will not be able to INFER anything, they will have to PROVE it!!

        • Carol,
          It has to be!!!!
          That’s the only way.
          So guess what? They tore all of the evidence out of the house.
          The lady that bought it knew JM. No surprise there.
          BUT any really good investigator can find the most important thing
          and it will lead to the killers.

          • One thing they will never find is what the new owner gave the Alexanders which she found in the attic. PIOF should have found it if he had done his job which we know he didn’t. What was in the attic? Why did they not report it?

            • 😯 I’m shocked RLove, you mean the PIOF didn’t do his job? ;=) Well, for that matter did anyone did their jobs? Not a one! 🙄

              • Exactly!
                Didn’t the jurors even question anything??
                It isn’t like their names weren’t called.
                Since she bought the house, it really wasn’t listed as a crime scene. (which it should have been until a thorough investigation) subpena her happy ass too.

    • Good Morning Cindy 🙂 Just dropping to say Hi and I agree it doesn’t make any sense…..with room mates coming and going she wouldn’t have had time to do all this….there are still pieces to this puzzle that we just don’t know….and scary thought to think that the real killers are lurking here but who knows ?? Got to run now…….

    • Granted there are mysteries to this case but I’m not one who believes there were others who came in later and finished him off. I believe Jodi’s testimony to be truthful and I don’t believe Jodi would have left Travis if he was stil alive.

      • Justus, so please tell me why Jodi put TA in the shower?? How can you believe something she doesn’t remember? People told her she killed him. Did she say she stabbed him in the heart or slit his neck or dragged him into the shower??

        • I have no answer to why he was in the shower other than what I have previously proffered: the final fight took place in or near the shower. From his position in the shower I believe he was originally upright and slid down the right wall as he lost consciousness. If anyone (Jodi or anyone else) had drug him in, his head should have been near the left corner with his feet to the right. If his head went in first, getting him stuffed in the way he was would be an acrobatic and body twisting feat.

          I know there are theories about the final battle taking place far from the shower because of the blood evidence but perhaps there was a great deal more blood in the shower than we see because it was washed down the drain.

            • I can envision Jodi backing into the back corner of the shower stall as Travis came at her.I And I believe the shower was still running throughout the whole fight because I doubt Travis stopped to turn the water off before he came screaming out of the shower. So blood could have been washed away before he even hit the floor.

              • So you are then saying that Jodi stabbed him in the chest and cut his throat while he was in the shower? Is that right?? All while the shower was on? Now why did he get back in the shower again??

                • If Jodi backed into the shower trying to move back away from him and he went after her, thinking he could take the knife away from this little woman, not realizing until it was too late that she would go nuts on him. I can imagine that knife going every which way and any body part that was in the way got hit, stabbed, sliced. And down he goes.

              • My biggest problem with that scenario is that we either have Travis walking around on his own steam after his throat has been laid open or we have the throat cut happening in the shower – which seems improbable to impossible given the close quarters of the 3×3 shower.

                I also think the blood loss in the bedroom (where blood stained the subfloor under the carpet and pad) would have taken much of the fight out of Travis, limited his ability to stand up, let alone walk all the way back to the shower.

                • That blood loss in the bedroom is a bit of a monkey wrench in my speculations. But it does seem that he did come back to the bathroom because there is a blood trail on both sides of the hallway and neither look like dragging.

                • Justus I honestly have tried to look at this from everyones minds or perspective. Let me ask you one question: when did Jodi cut his neck, in the shower or out of the shower? When did she stab his heart?

                • Thanks Journee,
                  I was wondering how big the shower was.
                  3 X 3 ???? All of that action took place??

                  I was talking about not being able to pick my husband up when he fell and there were 3 of us. My husband weighing about 190 lbs.

                  Our shower is a little over 5 ft. long and 3 ft. wide.

                  When I look at my husband and try to figure out how to drag him BACK into the shower, (the picture that the jury saw) it would have pulled his head off.
                  There would have been a lot more blood and blood isn’t easy to clean. There’s no way that she could have gotten all that clean, PLUS herself.

                  Plus there’s a ledge that keeps the water out to have to consider.

                • Cindy, I believe all the cuts and stabs took place in the last short moments of the fight. If she is flailing with the knife in sheer terror, I think everything could have gotten cut within just a few seconds.

                • Right, Aly –

                  The ‘threshold’ of the shower is about four inches high, and then there’s a metal lip about one inch high that is part of the shower door frame. That’s why I don’t think it’s possible that he was dragged in there, because whether arms first or legs first, some part of his midsection would have to have scraped across that metal lip, causing the kind of bruised scrapes that were only found at his ankles.

                • But that doesn’t account for the volume of blood in the bedroom, Justus. Or the blood up and down the hall.

                • Um, Cindy?

                  Just another ‘clarity of language’ thing.

                  Travis wasn’t stabbed in the heart. The wound is actually just to the right of the midline on his chest, cutting the superior vena cava which would cause major blood loss – how fast depending on his position and level of activity.

                  And the location of that wound is the big thing that goes against this being a blood atonement. Unless there’s some super secret mormon knowledge that that’s a better place to stick the knife, someone wanting to stab him in the heart would have been aiming a few inches higher on the other side of his chest.

                • And as far as two people fitting in those showers, it’s done all the time. (I would even bet that Travis and Jodi showered together on occasion.) And not much space is needed if one of the them is jammed against the wall and the other one is jammed up against that person. I would think that once she started stabbing (perhaps in the back to get him off) he would have tried to back away but it was too late. She’s not stopping and she’s now stabbing and slashing wildly with all the strength and adrenaline she can muster.

                • Ah, well Justus, in truth I can offer no explanation for the blood in the hallway because I’m mystified by the apparent linear nature of those tracks down each side – and in particular what looks like the perfect curve of a wheel rounding the corner there where the tile meets the carpet.

                  Now, IF those lines and that curve were made by a gurney that wheeled the body out of the bathroom, then the ‘blood evidence’ in the hallway was compromised and we can’t surmise anything about Travis’ death from those photos.

                  IF, OTOH, those lines and that perfect curve were there when the police arrived, I’d say it looks like someone might have used a hand truck or something like it to transport the body to the shower.

                • And that begs the same question we have for Jodi: Why would she put him in the shower? Why would anyone go to the trouble of putting him in the shower, much less go get a hand truck to do it?

                • Yep –

                  My question to coldcase53 last night. Why did the body have to be moved at all?

                  I can imagine a struggle that went down one side of the hall, the chest wound happening at or near the bedroom and Travis collapsing there. Losing a good bit of blood there. I CAN’T imagine him getting up by himself and pursuing her back to the bathroom. I guess I could imagine her helping him up and them staggering together in that direction and ending up in the shower – tho again I’d have to ask why because IT MAKES NO SENSE. lol

                  But, Justus, that neck wound – I cannot see that as any single flailing/slashing motion. Even with an adrenaline burst of strength, an ordinary kitchen knife would not cut that deep in one motion. Sawing would be necessary.

                • Justus, I wrote one reply that took a detour. I’ll trust that it’s going to turn up and not repeat myself.

                  That one was my speculation on Jodi and Travis in a struggle that ended in or near the shower… aka ‘why did Jodi move the body’ answer it wasn’t a body yet.

                  The only reason I can think of for someone ELSE to move the body would be to stage a scene to LOOK like a blood atonement ritual. Because that does call for the washing of the body, as well as the garments – which were in the washing machine. But, as I mentioned to Cindy above, the chest wound doesn’t match descriptions of blood atonement, though the neck and belly wounds do. And there remains the little niggling thing of there being no hemorrhagic tissue in the neck wound. Horn says ‘possibly due to decomposition’ for the neck wound, but the same lack of blood in the presumed bullet path is his proof that the bullet wound was post-mortem.

              • Journee, I am sure that whoever did the knife stab to the chest was not a medical expert and just assumed he/she got it right! The ritual doesn’t demand the person to be a perfectionist!!

                No one can determine which ‘wound’ came first the ‘heart’ or ‘gut’ so the movement on the victim’s part, as he tried to get away, could easily have affected the actual ‘location’ of the wounds.

                • Does it take a medical expert to know which side the heart is on?

                  I dunno – seems like someone intent on the actual ritual would stab the heart, if only after the fact when the victim was no longer moving, in order to satisfy the ritual. I mean, assuming that’s what was going on, they went to the trouble to get him in the shower, to wash his temple garments, why not put a stab wound in the right place?

                • Well Journee not normally it would take a medical degree…but there are those cases that hearts are on the other side…sorry just throwing in a bit of sarcasm. I bad.. 🙄

                  The neck wound is what throws me off and that darn shower!!! The state didn’t prove anything and the DT well need I say more??
                  I’m sorry but if it was a fight to the death Jodi sure didn’t have any battle wounds. Why is that?? Now if we believe that Jodi did all of this was wasn’t there more focus of temporary insanity? Because if she had truly gone there to kill TA she could have done it way before that time.

      • Thank you Justus,
        All of us have differing feelings and it’s not possible to take a stand without others getting bent.
        I wonder would the others, besides Sandra of course, be willing to state their feelings about how they THINK the circumstances really happened in a letter to Jodi?
        I believe Jodi’s account, until Jodi says otherwise. Also, the part where she doesn’t remember is irrelevant to me at this time.
        I believe Jodi could have easily put ta in the shower without marking him up. I’ve had a gun in my face and reacted with adrenaline. I’ve seen small women on emotions and adrenaline first hand and it’s as powerful as any man.
        The issue is what does it hurt to express ourselves? No one is gonna change till Jodi says so I’m gonna express what I think just like everyone.

        • Well John you are right we all have different perceptions on what may have happened that day. But we do respect one anothers beleafs. Not one of us knows what really happened that day.

          But I do disagree with your thoughts do to the fact that it matches JM’s.

        • Johnm, how can the part that Jodi doesn’t remember be irrelevant?
          Consider what her position was when Nurmi and Dr. Samuels approached her with their view of the case: in other words, ‘you will have to admit to something in order to have domestic violence defense work’. She was worn out, defeated by her own attorney who wouldn’t listen to or believe in what she said.
          So she admits to a ‘gun going off’ and ‘not sure the bullet hit him’ and then ‘I don’t remember anything else’. What exactly did she admit to? that she killed him. But how? if the gun didn’t hit him per her certainty and the rest is a blur. She really never confessed to anything, and she really isn’t sure about anything specific. It appears to me, that her confession was a non confession in fact.

          • It’s only irrelevant to ME, at THIS time.
            I’m not sure you have an interest in seeing anything from my view.
            I think you may be interested in subjecting me to your view, as you challenge my viewpoint.
            I think you takeyour own liberties in the hindsight available to us all.
            That’s your prerogative.
            I’ve been very clear, and I understand you feel Jodi was coerced.
            I don’t agree with your characterization of Nurmi and Samuels’ interaction with Jodi.
            That’s my prerogative.
            Why is it SO hard for you to just give Jodi’s testimony the benefit of the doubt until such point as she changes it?

            • Oh, you are so wrong about me not looking at it from your point of view, Johnm, I really tried to see what you see, but I came to a different conclusion from yours. Jodi would have had to be ‘Wonder Woman’ and she isn’t; she is not the type of woman to have done this, not even in a fit, not even to save her own life. She is one of those ‘passive women’ who go along to get along, as she has always demonstrated.
              Yes, you can stick with your view of the characters in this charade and you can judge them according to what ever standard you chose.
              Yes, what I say IS hindsight, exactly, because the story told doesn’t fit the characters and the characters do not fit the plot.

              Why can’t you look at the things she said BEFORE she went on trial. She stuck like glue to not guilty for a very long time until she saw that her lawyers just didn’t believe her.

              I come to a rational conclusion from looking at the whole picture and it is an evolving conclusion; the more I learn the more I find myself settling on the conclusion that: Jodi was not there on June 4th, that she didn’t murder Travis, that she said on the stand what her lawyers TOLD her to say:
              The gun went off, don’t know if it hit him, and I remember a knife falling but that could have been from another time, and after that I know nothing, I remember nothing.
              I really do believe what Jodi said. What is there to believe? The words ‘I killed him”? Then does one forget the rest of the story? The ‘I don’t knows’, the ‘I don’t remembers’, the ‘I don’t think so’s’?
              I am not battling with you John, I just have come to a different conclusion and you don’t have to consider a thing I’ve ever said.

                • John we all my be wrong. The only thing we know for sure is Travis is dead and Jodi doesn’t remember. The one thing we all agree about is Jodi did not get a fair trial.
                  She should never have been tried for murder.

                • 100% cindy!
                  And whatever I can do for Jodi while I’m on this plane and whatever I can do for Jodi when I’m dead and gone, I’m gonna do!

        • Johnm, I also believe Jodi’s account, and I believe she was the only person there that day.

          If I am understanding you correctly, you are proposing that people send her letters describing their ideas about different hypothetical scenarios?

          If so, I think that is not a good thing to do, because it can easily potentially harm her, depending upon how she responds in writing. Everything she writes can and will be used against her. Everything she does is monitored. Every word, phrase, intention etc., can be twisted and distorted in ways that can be used against her.

          • No Amy,
            I was trying to make a point about the spirit of saying Jodi is innocent, BUT, that she lied or was coerced to lie on the stand or that ninjas did it.
            I only want those that cannot just support Jodi to consider how they might express those attitudes directly to Jodi, and I don’t think they would, that’s all.
            I agree those letters to Jodi would be hurtful, that is a point I was trying to make.

          • Me too. . .I have a vision of you and me sitting up on our cloud throwing thunder bolts down at a few people. 🙂 Everyone better look out when we bite the dust! ♥

        • Justus!! How in the world does any of this happen? Just supposed to believe Juan Martinez’ version of facts when we have learned how much HE lies? His version of what happened has been shown to be preposterous so what comes next? Why do we have to accept HIS version and figure out how it fits what Jodi said? HE is the liar, not Jodi.
          It is very important how the body got in the shower without so much as a hand smear on the tile walls, without a single fingerprint left! So logic would say he was LIFTED in carefully by TWO people.
          Now, I have read somewhere how she might have tossed his body over her shoulder and heaved him in. But that is truly idiotic and ridiculous!

          • Carol, I am in no way believing Juan’s moronic version of things. If you mean, do I think the whole fight began with Jodi stabbing him in the shower, no way. He comes out of the shower and knocks her to the floor. She runs down the hall and around into the closet, gets gun, backs into bathroom, shoots him accidentally, they both go down, she runs down the hallway. He goes to sink. She thinks the violence is over and comes back into the bathroom to help. He reinitiates the attack. She runs down the hallway where he catches up with her. Another battle with him continuing to bleed from the gunshot (perhaps gushing even more because of his heart pounding in the violence and his rage). She gets away again and runs back to the bathroom (perhaps he’s lying in her way to run out the door). He follows her back into the bathroom where she’s found the knife. He cursing her and she’s backing up as he comes at her, backing into the shower. He thinks he can disarm her and follows her into the shower where all hell breaks lose.

            I’m not saying this is necessarily the way it happened, just a possible theory. I realize the amount of blood at the bedroom end of the hallway is problematic. But it certainly appears, looking at the blood trails in the hallway that even after that battle he came back to the bathroom. Unless someone has another explanation for two different blood trails in the hallway.

          • I understand what you mean Carol. . .who could believe anything Juan has said. He wouldn’t know the truth even if it walked right up and he got slapped across the face with it! He would be too busy trying to cover it up.

      • The intruder story was always a load of crap. Nobody here should be peddling it. It’s basically saying Jodi lied under oath.

        It is very easy, folks, why she told that intruder story to the police. Not only was she covering for herself, but more important, she was covering for Travis.

        This whole trial has never been about justice. It’s always been about covering for Travis. When you are dealing with a cultlike religious sect, everything is about how they look and how they protect one of their own, in this life and in the next.

    • CC thank you for posting this link. Now let’s see who was in the court room at the time that JM brought up the fb page of #17. Jodi, DT, JSS, court clerk, JM and the “family”….. Now it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure this one out!!!!

      JM really f~ed up. He let the ball drop on this potential juror or did he??

      So it started out 7 for DP, 4 on the fences and 1 for life. I would really like to know how long it took to get the 4 to vote DP.
      Maybe I missed it but what day did #17 send the note to JSS?? Talk about not taking control of her courtroom.

      • They started deliberating on Wed afternoon and by Thurs afternoon, the undecided had switched to death. The notes went to the judge on Tuesday of the next week. 17 was sending a note, so the others got together and sent theirs.

          • WOW!!!
            I’ve never seen a juror so questioned and harrassed.
            She was harrassed in the deliberation room and she’s still be harrassed.
            ALSO, they said don’t let your personally feeling be the jury, HOWEVER a juror asked her over and over if it were her son could she vote for the DP????

            That is just wrong, wrong wrong!!!

            The other jurors??? She was deliberating, you couldn’t comfence her, like they did the other 4/5 jurors and now they’repissed off at her. The media all think she must be nuts.
            What in the hell is wrong with everybody? Another juror had to leave and she calls in crying because she believes Jodi would have gotten the DP, EVEN though, she didn’t hear the rest of the trial, NOR was able to deliberate at all. Don’t tell me that her mind wasn’t made up already.
            I believe the others that wanted DP are so angry BECAUSE they already had their minds made up.

            IF other lawyers are watching, I hope that they see this for what it is. #17 isn’t the one to be asking all of the questions.

            • I suppose the main thing that went wrong with the jury is THEY WEREN”T SEQUESTERED!!! Ridiculous! Only in A R I Z O N A !! The other thing is
              they needed a unbiased and experienced Judge IMO. Wow, she couldn’t
              make a decision without help from the prosecutor. Bizarre. It should have
              never even made it to court. Self defense is not a crime! Period.

      • I cannot believe it! I am on day 15 – direct of Dr. Geff and I am reading posts from viewers that it is the last video that CrimeTime is going to post. So now what??? This whole thing is one big disgusting display of BS!!

          • I am so repulsed that this same group of news media that mere months ago were screaming their heads off about their right to be in the courtroom to cover this retrial, almost completely obliterating Jodi’s mitigation witness list, are now censoring the coverage because of the result. This is happening right in the centre of the supposedly greatest democratic country in the world. I will have to buy my own box set and learn how to splash it all over the internet.

        • CrimeTimeVid guy – David Lohr – is out of town on a story, will continue uploading videos when he gets back.

          • Journee, I have always respected the fact that you keep us straight with the true facts.
            I also think that we may be on the same page on our thinking. Your question last night really got my mind going in different directions this morning.

            Why even move the body??

            I’m sure we can all come up with different scenarios on why…..

            Just a simple question but one very importan answer……..

            • I can’t think of any reason at all for Jodi to move the body. Not one that makes sense, anyway. Of course, I realize she may not have been thinking clearly, her actions wouldn’t necessarily make sense. But moving him to the shower, positioning him as he was – assuming she COULD have done it without causing scrapes and contusions to the body that were not noted in autopsy, and I don’t believe she could have – would have been a struggle that took TIME. Just as cleaning herself up would have taken time. And the (albeit minimal) cleanup efforts of the scene took time. And starting the load of laundry (after transferring bedding to the dryer – with hands bloodied by carrying the crime scene laundry?) Yet still she was gone -along with the gun and the knife and the rope- before Enrique got home.

                • I, uh, don’t think the jury was told what time Enrique got home that day.

                  Should have been brought up on cross with with the posPIO, but by the time KN finally got to question him (because JM artfully had him on and off the stand several times over several days before he finally tendered the witness), it was all about his changing story on order of wounds.

              • As Jodi so eloquently said: ‘ I don’t know, but if I am… if I go to trial for this and if I’m convicted for this whoever did this is going to be sitting very pretty somewhere, glad that it wasn’t them.’

                1. If the murderer(s) had finished killing him in the bedroom, hallway or wherever, the only reason to move the body would be to fulfill the ritual of atonement; no other reason makes sense.

                2. Whoever the killer was he, she or they wanted to leave a story behind, that there was a REASON for his death.

                3. Cleanup was so superficial it would appear to just scratch the surface; too many clues existed that make no logical sense. For instance, put the camera in the washer with the religious clothes. Part of the STORY the perpetrators wanted to tell?

                4. Although Detective Flores said they could tell if the perpetrator wore gloves, the perpetrators must have worn gloves…. unless the police found fingerprints that didn’t match Jodi’s and ‘hid’ them from the defense. There were no fingerprints and there should have been.

                5. To believe that Jodi had blood on her hands literally is disproved by the car she rented which had no trace of blood anywhere in or on it. So she didn’t have blood on her hands. The gun might not have had blood on it, but the knife surely would and why take a dopey piece of rope. She just answered vaguely to all the questions the prosecutor proposed.

                All this is why I call her ‘confession’ a ‘non-confession’.

            • I wrote a reply – it detoured to some horse barn somewhere. Keep your eyes peeled (or is that pealed?) for its return.

    • Thanks CanadaCarol, Good grief! I still can’t believe nothing has been done about the computer which was FULL of porn in the hands of the MCPD and the State Prosecutor’s Office and NOTHING has been done about their lies, tampering and deleting?!? JM and PIOF appear to be guilty as charged, IMO, alledgely. . . 😆 They dare to call Jodi a liar? SMH

    • CC….I read this this morning. Just look at who was in the courtroom at the time. So I’m sure the DT or the court people didn’t leak this. So now was it JM or the family or maybe PIOF once again had pillow talk that night with his wife.

      So everyone pretty much new it was going to be a mistrial.

      Now someone tell me why didn’t JSS stop deliberations right then and there?? Someone is stating she is being harassed and she does nothing???

      I hope that the FBI fines who did this and they do jail time…

      • I reposted the link because of Jason Lamm’s tweet. Sorry for redundancy. The media were handed the FB page as they walked into interview the 11 jurors that day, but what is so weird is that JM was checking her FB at that point. He should have done his checking at the time of juror selection. JSS did absolutely the right thing not to interfere with juror deliberations and to remove a lone holdout in a death penalty case would be automatic reversal.

  25. ♥ HOPING ALL TEAM JODI IS HAVING A CALM,
    LAZY & UNEVENTFUL SUNDAY! 🙂
    (((((((((FREE JODI ARIAS ARIZONA))))))))

    Trust in the Lord with all your heart
    and lean not on your own understanding;
    in all your ways submit to him,
    and he will make your paths straight.
    Proverbs 3:5-6

  26. In relation to the article that CC posted @5:32am (TY, BTW) did you see the comment that Gina Longaberger posted? Here is part of it:
    “I work with a girl who was on the first jury. She came in every Friday to give us weekly updates, she had a chat room set up with other jurors and the court reporter. This is why the reporter was dismissed. The Judge knew al this….”
    Is this just the ravings of a woman who wants attention or what

    • Darn I may become a dead head fan yet!!!

      I was going to ask why you didn’t hire it done but remembered the kids are on the money train…. ( that’s what we call it in our family)

      • The Mrs thinks yard work is good for my soul.

        But actually just picking up branches and stuff that have fallen over the winter. The yard guys don’t show up till sometime next month.

      • I’ve been watching all this talk about various scenarios with interest over some period of time. I think the problem we all face is that we have two different narratives of the events from Jodi – the “intruder” story and then her testimony during the trial. Up to a certain extent the blood spatter matches both narratives. Then of course we come to a halt in the narrative in both cases and the rest is all up to speculation.

        Other than the drag marks and stuff, another other odd thing with the blood spatter is that interspersed with splatters, and streaks, and brush marks, there seem to be a fair number of places where there is pooling, or other depositing that seems to show a sort of interval in movement so that more blood can be deposited in a single spot. One curious such pool is in fact inside the linen closet (the one with the white cardboard box with the watered stain running up it.And then of course there is the blood on both sides of the hallway.

        Now I have absolutely no idea what causes this kind of blood spatter. Could it just be that whenever TA stood still more blood got deposited, or could it be that if someone stopped while they were dragging the body, more blood got deposited. The state didn’t seem to put forth any explanation or analysis of this stuff, and of course neither did the defense.

        One thing is clear, somewhere during the incident there was a flurry of activity between TA and the assailant. Other than the one deep stab wound and the neck incision, there are still twenty some nicks, cuts, slashes, gashes, stabs or whatever scattered over TAs head, back arms, hands and chest. None of these look like they were meant to be killing blows, instead they seem more like someone flailing around, almost as if they were trying to fend someone off or something like that. But this is a real flurry of knife activity. So whatever happened, there was a definite period of vigorous combat in there somewhere. I have often read of people doing strange stuff during or in the aftermath of combat and might that not be an explanation of why the body was put in the shower – just one of those strange things during a violent period with no real logical explanation.

        On another subject, has anyone ever come up with and explanation or reason for why the DT didn’t just get an X-ray of Jodi’s finger to show that it had in fact been broken? And is it possible for doctors to use an Xray orMRI or something to be able to date when that break occurred? Am I being too simple, or wouldn’t that have been a straightforward way of settling the issue?

        • AL,
          Wasn’t that another time when he kicked her and you’re right they could have had
          some way of showing that.
          BUT, like you said, too simple!
          There’s a lot of questions that could have been answered.
          Simple questions, BUT evidence distroyed.

          Also with all of the knife activity wouldn’t Jodi have been cut somewhere.

          • CUT and BRUISED! and she was neither.

            Thinking about the activity during the knife struggle:
            The victim was not passive – assumed.
            The victim was a kick boxer – known.
            The victim had upper body strength – known.
            The victim aggressively fought back with his arms and legs – known.
            The aggressor with the knife was both kicked and hit – concluded.

            Where are the bruises on Jodi??
            There were no bruises, no scars, no cuts – if there had been that would be in evidence.
            How could she have been the aggressor?

            • Any remarks about the ugly, thickened lump on the side of TA’s neck, toward the back, where the neck meets the shoulder? I’m pretty sure it was on the right hand side in an autopsy photo.

              Interesting that Jade included “sandbagging” in the title of her recent posts. A few months back someone referenced that lump. They said that type of injury was something that gangs tend do to. Thy position a sand bag against each side of the neck. Then, if they know what they are doing, they can cause a death that leaves virtually no bruising or clues behind.

              That was specifically called “sandbagging in the article.”

        • Good logical post, though most of the shallower wounds have hit the bone underneath preventing deeper penetration, according to autopsy which tends to support your vigorous combat scenario rather than flailing around.

  27. We do know that social media was an issue in the first trial. Did we not see evidence of Tara Kelly on facebook or twitter or something. Of course the judge knew. The first mistake was not keeping the jurors away from contact with the outside world. But then again the prosecutor et al may not have got the outcome they wanted. I would not at all be surprised that they had a chat room to go to with someone who worked for the court involved. Not even a bit surprised with that idea. More will be revealed in time.

  28. Just looking at Tara Kelley’s Twitter page. It’s almost a tribute site for the Alexander family. So many pictures of Tara with the Alexanders on many different occasions. Even one of Steven, Tanisha & Tanisha’s husband attending a 10th wedding anniversary party for Tara & her husband.

  29. Now that is real impartiality isn’t it coldcase……a tribute page to one of the parties when you have been a juror on the case. Oh my Gad!

    • Yes, but Tara is not the only juror/alternate juror who bonded/identified with the Alexander family. Other jurors from the original trial also are in photos with the Alexander family at events, restaurants (or bars) after the trial ended. It seems odd to me but maybe jurors do identify and mix & mingle with family of deceased after a trial. Here is a case where a woman became romantically involved with a murder defendant while she was a juror in his trial.
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gillian_Guess

  30. Oh I remember Gillian Guess – that was quite the scandal here on the west coast. She had a tryst or two with one of the defendents of a murder trial—Peter Gill. Believe me she got herself involved with some vicious people. Since that trial one or two of the codefendants have been bumped off. She was charged with obstruction of justice.

  31. I’m not sure if I have the correct woman but there is a Gina Longaburger that lives in Anthem, AZ which is 31.1 miles and 34 minutes from Phoenix. She is a “producer” (also called an agent or insurance broker) in an insurance company in Phoenix, AZ. So when she writes:
    “I work with a girl who was on the first jury. She came in every Friday to give us weekly updates, she had a chat room room set up with other jurors and the court reporter. This is why the reporter was dismissed. The Judge knew all this.”
    Again, let me say, this woman in Anthem may not be the same Gina Longaburger that wrote the above and even if she is the correct one, what she writes may be completely innocent and have a simple explanation, BUT…..

    It does sound suspicious. As Journee mentioned, the fact that she says the updates were done on Fridays, matches up to the fact that jurors usually didn’t have trial on Fridays so many would be back at work on Friday.
    And, the fact that “the girl who was on the first jury” must have either worked at the insurance company or had a link to the insurance company, probably eliminates Tara Kelley as the juror who might be the one giving weekly updates. Tara was an alternate juror, not a juror and Tara was a manicurist. Of course, Tara could have done “office calls” or perhaps changed her job.
    Any thoughts or is this just another dead end?

    • I should have added:
      Do we have any information that a juror in the first trial worked for an insurance company or was linked in some way to an insurance company. If so, there may be something to this comment. The voir dire sometimes gave info about the juror’s occupation.

    • Tara wasn’t an alternate until just before deliberations began. ALL were jurors until then.

      But, yes, she was a manicurist at the time of the trial.

      • Yes, you’re right, Journee. And, I may not even have the right woman so we have to take the insurance company info with a grain of salt.

  32. Justus –

    I posted two different replies (call them part one and part two, lol) to your last question way up there ^^^. They’ve been detoured so check back, okay?

  33. This got posted in the wrong place, so here it is again.

    I’ve been watching all this talk about various scenarios with interest over some period of time. I think the problem we all face is that we have two different narratives of the events from Jodi – the “intruder” story and then her testimony during the trial. Up to a certain extent the blood spatter matches both narratives. Then of course we come to a halt in the narrative in both cases and the rest is all up to speculation.

    Other than the drag marks and stuff, another other odd thing with the blood spatter is that interspersed with splatters, and streaks, and brush marks, there seem to be a fair number of places where there is pooling, or other depositing that seems to show a sort of interval in movement so that more blood can be deposited in a single spot. One curious such pool is in fact inside the linen closet (the one with the white cardboard box with the watered stain running up it.And then of course there is the blood on both sides of the hallway.

    Now I have absolutely no idea what causes this kind of blood spatter. Could it just be that whenever TA stood still more blood got deposited, or could it be that if someone stopped while they were dragging the body, more blood got deposited. The state didn’t seem to put forth any explanation or analysis of this stuff, and of course neither did the defense.

    One thing is clear, somewhere during the incident there was a flurry of activity between TA and the assailant. Other than the one deep stab wound and the neck incision, there are still twenty some nicks, cuts, slashes, gashes, stabs or whatever scattered over TAs head, back arms, hands and chest. None of these look like they were meant to be killing blows, instead they seem more like someone flailing around, almost as if they were trying to fend someone off or something like that. But this is a real flurry of knife activity. So whatever happened, there was a definite period of vigorous combat in there somewhere. I have often read of people doing strange stuff during or in the aftermath of combat and might that not be an explanation of why the body was put in the shower – just one of those strange things during a violent period with no real logical explanation.

    On another subject, has anyone ever come up with and explanation or reason for why the DT didn’t just get an X-ray of Jodi’s finger to show that it had in fact been broken? And is it possible for doctors to use an Xray orMRI or something to be able to date when that break occurred? Am I being too simple, or wouldn’t that have been a straightforward way of settling the issue?

    • I often wondered about the X-Ray myself? I realize the opposition still wouldn’t have believed her (and probably would have speculated that she broke it herself while she was in jail) but at least it would have put a slight bit of cold water on the liar-liar-pants-on-fire chant that JM was performing. Why in the world wouldn’t they have shown an X-Ray rather than having Jodi drape her hand over Jennifer’s shoulder?

    • Why the defense didn’t get an x-ray of Jodi’s finger is a great question. Yes, I know they can determine about how long it was since it was broken.
      A list should be drawn up of all the things the defense didn’t do… it might be long and interesting.

      One question, Al, if the person fighting the victim in a vicious knife fight would the aggressor have received any kind of wounds of any type?

      • Carol,
        I didn’t see this until after I asked about the same question.

        Whoever did it would have to have cuts on them.

        The broken finger happened another time, and yes an X-ray would have been
        good, but I honestly think that the jury had their minds made up already.

        • CUTS and BRUISES, Aly!!
          The victim was not going to ‘submit’ and just ‘let’ someone kill him. He fought a ‘good fight’ as shown by his defensive wounds. To even think he was passive in this doesn’t make sense. SO…

          The victim tried to defend himself against attack – known.
          The victim was a ‘kick boxer’ – known.
          The victim had developed ‘upper body’ muscles – known.
          The victim was in a knife fight – known
          The aggressor would have bruises – assumed.
          The aggressor would have some cuts – assumed.
          So ask the question:
          Where are the scars from bruises and cuts on Jodi Arias that show she was the aggressor?
          Did the prosecutor show even one in court – NO!

          • Carol H. This is why the states Siri doesn’t make sense. Any of them. Even if Jodi had the knife in her hand TA would have been able to over power her. His adrenaline was flowing just as much as hers!!!!

    • Al, no you are not being to simple!! I do believe we talked about this back it the 1st.
      Trial. I’m going to give my simple answer (as always). By the time they were building a abuse case Jodi was already incarcerated. One would think a simple xray would be able to tell the story after all they find old breakes all the time in child and others when they go to the ER. I’m not a radiologist so I don’t know if they can give you a time frame of the brake.

      Here is my point. They do not have x-ray machines in jails so I’m not sure what it would take to get Jodi out of jail to get it xrayed. I did come up with a thought when we were discussing this earlier during this trial. Jodi never got it looked at when it happened for possibly two reasons, 1 she didn’t have insurances. 2. Because of Travis. They always ask you what happened. Now another thought that just came to mind is why didn’t TA just ask his Dr. Friend to look at it? He had no problem asking for money….. They could have made up some story….but they didn’t.

      So we all know that Jodi’s finger was broken at some point.

      Al you did make some very valid points in your post.

    • Same as the issue of whether a person would be incapacitated after a gun shot wound to the face is discussed on medical internet, I would suppose there would be information out there on how to ID the aftermath of a broken bone. Seems to me that in pictures of Jodi when she is most distracted and not thinking about it, the injury actually is more obvious. As opposed to that she is putting on affectations for sympathy.

      • seabird,
        Her finger was broken. She couldn’t make it look crooked, but if you relax something
        it is different.
        They wouldn’t have believed it if she had it x-rayed.
        Just like THEIR fake pictures, the idiots would have said it was
        fake.
        Then nothing else about th finger.
        The only reason JM carried on about it was to keep them from wondering
        why she had no bruises, or cuts..
        Funny how they went on about that, but never mentioned
        her not havinf bruises or marks that day.
        And like you, IMO, Jodi NEVER tried to get sympathy.

  34. Good Monday morning “Team” Jodi… I pray that Jodi is doing well. So many things seem to be dropping like rain drops from the sky around this case. It’s difficult to know who’s investigating whom on any given day. Let alone what we believe is true coming from the media. I for one have this gut feeling that something is going on behind all of this circus that is called the trial of Jodi Arias. For the love of God I have never seen such hate except for the Casey Anthony trial. But to compare these cases is just wrong. But thank you to HLN who’s only reason for even reporting (if you want to call it that) was not only the $$$$ but to be able to wipe the mud off their faces after Casey Anthony was acquitted. We all know who started during the pot of hate on the national level.

    Everyone out their trying to make a name for themselves. So called Friends of TA who wouldn’t cut their fun in the sun vacation in Cancun short when hearing about TA’s death. I’m sorry but if that were my best friend I would be on the next flight out of there and doing what ever I could for the family.

    You wondered why some of us tend to lean towards a conspiracy theory? Well for almost 7 years of not having answers to our questions. It starts with why upon finding TA did everyone point to Jodi who at that time was living how many miles away? Then you add all the lies and corruption that took place. The evidence that doesn’t make sense. It’s only human nature to want answers to our questions.

    Just like the historical statement out of the OJ trial: if it doesn’t fit you must acquit!!! Well the states theory does not fit the evidence!!!! But for some reason 12 people didn’t look and question the evidence.

    So if some of us are trying to make the evidence fit together in our own minds we are not doing harm to Jodi. If we were SJ would block us in a heart beat. Everyone of us has our own thoughts and we are here to discuss those thoughts and to support Jodi.

    In reality no one truly knows what happen that day except for 3 people, ones dead, one does not remember and God.

    • Well said, Cindy.
      Only through the efforts of the many, many people who are willing to express their thoughts on this site, have I come to believe what I believe. Putting the puzzle pieces together, so to speak, as you said.

      People joke about what Johnny Cochran said, but it is the absolute truth.
      If evidence doesn’t fit the prosecution’s case, than the jury MUST acquit. That is the criteria that MUST be used. It wasn’t in Jodi’s case.
      There should be an appellate issue that involves the jury that does not consider the actual evidence in a case; but I am almost positive there is not. Maybe BB knows.

      • From Mar 22, 4:36 and 5:13 pm – thread way up yonder where we lost the reply button around mid-day yesterday, talking about why TA was in the shower. Mine are the last two at the bottom.

  35. Jade, your post was very insightful and illuminating. If you are in the legal field, I’d like to share some information from you taken from the American Bar’s website:

    “Empirical, historical, and sociological evidence should be used by experts to show that the necessity of a battered woman’s actions in self-defense is in large part created by societal pressures that demand that women stay in the home, and submit to the domination of men. For instance, an expert could demonstrate how the assumptions of the law and subsequently of law enforcement officials reflect the social norms that compel women to silently and privately cope with domestic abuse.

    Each year nearly 1500 women are killed by their batterers. Approximately ninety percent of women killed by husbands or boyfriends were stalked and had previously called the police. Women who have been victimized by their intimate partners may have tried, and failed, to get help from the police. Many women who have ultimately killed violent mates tell of their inability to get police protection. If she is like the overwhelming majority of battered women, she also knows, first-hand, that she cannot rely on the police, the courts, the neighbors, relatives, or anyone else for protection against her violent mate. Every attempt to get help is likely only to reinforce her perception that she has no alternative but to protect herself.

    This ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ mentality demonstrates a societal preference for idealized notions of the family over protection of the woman. This preference prevents women from seeking protection from the very public agencies that were created to help victims of abuse. These are the social ills that so severely limit a battered woman’s choices. This is what expert testimony should identify and seek to remedy. It is not the woman’s pathology that kept her from leaving a violent relationship, it is society’s illness that made it acceptable for the man to batter in the first place, and also pressured the woman to stay in the relationship. The battered woman’s actions were reasonable, because her community gave her no other choice.

    Experts, on a case-by-case basis, can work to shift and refine social norms. Testimony on the frequency of battered woman syndrome can demonstrate that domestic violence is a public, rather than a private, problem. Evidence about the unresponsiveness of law enforcement, the skepticism of judges, and the social pressures that keep women in battering relationships can reveal the community-wide syndrome that allows for the perpetuation of domestic violence. These pressures drive women to privatize domestic violence, and force them to take matters in their own hands in order to defend their lives. Expert testimony can not only reveal that these acts of self-defense are entirely reasonable, but can also awaken in jurors and judges a sense of social injustice, and a need to become more publicly aware of domestic violence.

    The introduction of BWS (Battered Woman Syndrome) was intended to ‘overcome sex-bias in the law of self-defense and to equalize treatment of women in the courts.’ This sex-bias in the law of self-defense is evident in the normal formulation of reasonableness that asks what the reasonable man would do. In other words, ‘Jurors in self-defense cases are usually told to assess the reasonableness of the defendant’s act by asking themselves whether what he or she did was the sort of thing that would have been done by a reasonable man in the same circumstances.’

    The ultimate question in a self-defense case is whether the defendant’s act was a reasonable one. Even if she can successfully negotiate the legal hurdles of seriousness, imminence, retreat, and the like, she must still convince the jury of two things: that her belief that she was in imminent danger of death or serious injury was reasonable under the circumstances and that her response to that perceived danger was a reasonable one, not an overreaction. Self-defense law asks what a reasonable man would have done in a battered woman’s situation, and this question has proven inapposite to the reality faced by battered women.

    It was thus recognized that the ‘reasonable man’ standard could not explain the justified self-defense actions of a battered woman. Even application of a “reasonable woman” standard is not entirely helpful, because the reasonable woman would still be viewed as the stereotypical, passive female, who must submit to her man’s violence without complaint. Therefore, lawyers defending battered women who had killed needed a way ‘to explain to the jury that the woman’s behavior, which seems to defy common sense, was entirely characteristic of women in her situation.’ The way this could be done was through the testimony of an expert witness. This testimony is permissible because the environment in which a battered woman lives is ‘beyond the ken of the average layman’ and ‘the reasonableness of the woman’s fear and the reasonableness of her act are not issues which the jury knows as well as anyone else.’ The expert therefore is able to provide to the jury information about ‘otherwise puzzling aspects of defendant’s behavior-especially her failure to leave or get help or tell anyone,’ and about how ‘the battered woman’s prediction of the likely extent and imminence of violence is particularly acute and accurate.’

    • Noel, ……. (hope this does not post as a duplicate)

      This case has an enormity of complexities with all the puzzles that are unsolved and in fact, fly in the face of established science or just plain logic.

      Jodi was self deprecating and lent herself ideally to those on the prowl for somebody they could mold and use for their pleasures. Enter Travis. Abuse was something she internalized to herself as having done something to cause it. Then when she got all twisted up in the Mormon dizzy rituals resembling almost a cult, it was like mixing a 90% concentration of hydrogen peroxide and hoping it won’t ignite.

      Alyce was supposed to fill in all the blanks about the battered woman syndrome and had she been allowed to testify as the expert she was, it would have shown the pattern. But this judge was abominable and let her be savaged and personally attacked with an inane freak show about Walt Disney mythology and the King of the Emerald Valley. She also wasn’t allowed to get into and relate the volumes of communications she saw between Jodi And Alexander By not admonishing the little runt who was all but foaming at the mouth, she validated the ridicule and endorsed him to the jury. The testimony was ignored.

      How much more perfect could it be when someone logs in a daily journal? But because of the Mormon garbage, the abuse never got documented due to being brainwashed to always speak only of the positive. Then you put that together with all the multiple versions she kept juggling, the trial testimony under oath wasn’t given the scrutiny that should have led reasonable people to see the State failed on every element of the charge of premeditated murder beyond any conceptual standard of reasonable doubt.

      The hardest thing to overcome was the slit throat as to the standard of reasonableness. But you have a right to use lethal force if you perceive any viable threat of serious injury to yourself or someone else. Enter the gunshot. After that, opinions diverge and then you bring in the all the forensic exculpatory that was just virtually left like low hanging fruit on a tree.

      Dust would have been flying everywhere if a defense attorney on top of his game was at the helm. For the State, this was like shooting a goal into a hockey net with no goal tender there. The premeditation pablum should have been eviscerated. And it wasn’t Alyce LaViolette or any battered women’s specialist expert who was going to get that done.

  36. Have I got this right? In Jodi’s first trial, they started with 18 jurors. There were 7 female jurors. We know the names of 5 of the seven women. Does anyone know the name of the other two female jurors, i.e., jurors #1 & #3?

  37. I see Gina Longaberger removed her comment (about the juror from the first trial giving a weekly update to her co-workers) from Michael Kiefer’s article of March 21, 2015. O well, la de da. Here today, gone tomorrow.

  38. Not sure if this has been shared yet or not but: 🙂 YYYYEEEEEAAAAAHHHHHH!!!!!
    Debra Jean Milke, Arizona Woman Who Spent 22 Years on Death Row, Has Murder Case Tossed
    NBCNews.com‎ – 5 hours ago

    PHOENIX — A judge on Monday dismissed the murder case against an Arizona woman …

    • Well R.Love, I have been falling behind with reading all the comments & posts on this site. …But I just saw this terrific news about Debra Jean Milke, that you ((R.Love)) wrote, and I had to look at Google for more real time information. …
      …Since I was stationed in Germany for nearly 5 years I learned a little Deutsch, but I turned to Google to translate these two sentences for me:
      …A wonderful decision of Arizona Judge Rosa Mroz.
      …God Bless you Judge, and God Bless Frau Debra Jean Milke, an innocent German-born woman.
      >>>>>
      …Eine wunderbare Entscheidung Arizonz Richter Rosa Mroz.
      …Gott Segne euch Richter, und Gottes Segen Frau Debra Jean Milke, einen Unschuldingen in Deutschland geborene Frau.

      And I say this for Frau Milke:
      …Bill Montgomery, gehen Holle. >>>>>>>Bill Montgomery, go to Hell.

  39. PHOENIX — A judge on Monday dismissed the murder case against an Arizona woman who spent more than 20 years on death row in the 1989 killing of her 4-year-old son.

    Debra Jean Milke hugged her supporters and sobbed as she exited the Phoenix courtroom. Judge Rosa Mroz ended the case after prosecutors lost their last appeal last week.

    • I wonder if Dateline or 20/20 will do a story on Debra Milke? Frontline would be even better. I want to know how she endured/coped with such a horrific experience. How did she spent her time? Who did she talk to when things got really tough (i.e., tougher than a normal tough day). I understand Debra once met with the warden to discuss the menu for her last meal. I don’t know how close she was to execution at that time. It doesn’t seem like something you would plan that far in advance though. I hope she writes a book.

      • CC53, all the media stations will be fighting to get to her first. I pray she takes her time with her family and a just to life as a Free woman. I also hope her law suit happens soon. Bet it never makes to court. They will reach a settlement….

        • As long as it’s not Diane Sawyer. I didn’t like the interview she did with Amanda Knox.She seemed skeptical of many things Amanda said. I expect she would be the same way with Debra.

          • I hope that Debra and Jodi never ever speak to any media again. . .ever.
            If they want their truth to get out for the world to know they should write a book about their lives IMO.

            • My thought exactly, R. Love. They don’t need the lady present to tell her story. Now that they know the truth of what happened the facts speak for themselves.

    • The prosecutor of this case should have to pay the consequences for allowing this to happen. I hope she gets every penny she is asking for with interest from the day she went on trial.

  40. So here’s the list of folks who had access to the juror 17’s name. Let’s see who would have benefitted the most, using media as a tool for revenge.

    Judge Stephens and her staff: I don’t know what they would gain by releasing such information. And they could all certainly lose their jobs.

    Prosecutor Martinez: Well, I wouldn’t put it past that bastard but it also doesn’t buy him anything at this point.

    Case Detective Flores: We all know he has a big mouth but you would think his last blab would have thought him a lesson.

    Defense Team and Jodi: Now, why oh why would they want to create havoc for the one person who saved Jodi from death row???

    And that now brings us to:

    The Alexanders: We need only ask ourselves the following question – who would gain the greatest emotional sense of satisfaction and revenge from outing their current arch enemy, the person who stole from them the chance to watch someone die, or at the very least, revel in the fact that she is rotting in isolation on death row?

    • Justus that’s my way of thinking….they also knew that it was a hung jury long before JSS ruled it!!! So now I will say great performance for the cameras!!!

      So hopefully the FBI will track it right to their doors. I’m sure that no one in Bill Montgomery’s office is investigating. They know!!!!

  41. In Maricopa County recently, there has been a conviction of a woman who killed a man, stabbing him many times, slitting his throat, cutting him up and trying to burn the remains in a trash can! 👿
    I believe it happened in 2009.
    Her name, I believe, is Angela Simpson and she was in the same jail as Jodi for a period of time before her conviction, and maybe she is the one that another, mentally handicapped woman said she talked with, not Jodi. Now Angela Simpson is serving life without parole – because she admitted guilt! She has relatives in prison so it will not bother her to be there, she says, and she also said that she has killed before and would again, given the chance.
    This is the kind of person Jodi will be serving time with.
    To me, there is absolutely no comparison that can be made.
    Jodi would not ever do such a brutal killing; not even in when she was enraged which I seriously doubt. She just plain and simple didn’t kill Travis.

        • I know – he was either drunk or high or in a roid rage or damn near illiterate – or some combination of any of those.

          • My view, ta was holding Jodi hostage and making Jodi responsible for everything he ever channeled negatively in his entire life. He battered the shit out of Jodi,and he treated it like a workout. I pray that some factoid, somehow, comes to light and straightens out this travesty that Jodi is experiencing.

          • Journee,
            All the time I was reading it, I kept thinking: Geez, Travis sounds like he’s drunk…but, he doesn’t drink, does he? I couldn’t figure out why he was angry. He went from one issue to another..blaming Jodi for everything. How was she ruining his life? He went from passwords, to flirting, to money, to his tires, to Jodi not really caring for him, to hating him, to lying, to breaking the vows of chastity (?), etc. But, I never got to that “aha moment” where I knew: This is what it’s all about. That’s why it was like talking to a drunk. Nothing ever gets accomplish. The drunk just trashes everything that’s said.

            • I think some of the disjointedness came from other communications that were happening at the same time – FB messaging, email, early on he tells her to call and she says deal – so maybe there’s a phone conversation too. There was a point, and I can’t find it now, where it was clear that something, some communication had happened between one of T’s entries and the next, a sudden out of context ‘wow’ – did you catch that? That’s when I caught on that they were having other communication too.

              But yeah, my first thought was drunk – he’s acting like he’s drunk or something. “Under the influence” of something, for sure.

            • It seems to me that this long rant is about Jodi having done something to make him mad enough to end it… to get them both out of the relationship. She talks about it being the wrong thing to do, and being sorry for how it turned out, and that it wasn’t what she intended but that it had been perhaps her way of renouncing him, immature, etc.

              But throughout her tone was you’re right, I was wrong, I’m wrong for you, okay yeah we should move on. And for all of his ranting it was like he was still hanging on, NOT ending but hanging on (you know how this will go, I know how this will go, I’ll forgive you and you’ll do it again, etc. – we’re just gonna FIGHT dammit and keep doing what we’ve always done.

              I swear, one of the first thoughts I had about these two was that they were circling the drain from the day they met.

    • Just a few observations from the Travis/Jodi Gmail chat:

      -Either Travis couldn’t spell worth a shit (as opposed to “shiz”) or was very angry when he was banging at the keyboard.
      -Travis apologizes for his r’s not working, but not for repeatedly calling Jodi a “whore”, “slut” and “3-hole wonder”. Incidentally, I apologize for the language.
      -I believe Jodi when she says that she didn’t slash his tires. If she did, she would have told him. I believe that.
      -Both Travis and Jodi used the word “addicted” and they’re both right. They most definitely were addicted to each other, in the worst way.
      -Travis admits that Jodi was “noble in the sack”, but it’s because it “served her to be”. What an utter a-hole!
      -Jodi lent Travis a few hundred dollars for a re-fi, gave him a membership that would have taken her out of chargebacks and devoted time to pushing counters so he would qualify and repeatedly apologizes to him, yet look at how he treats her time and time again.
      -Travis goes from an angry yet calm person on Page 1 to a raging monster on Page 10. You can almost hear him screaming at Jodi in an almost Mel Gibson-esque way.
      -Since when is being a full-time bartender at a Mexican restaurant a “sluts job”? He says to her, “maybe you can’t get tips for BJ’s, oh I’m sure you can, u r good at that”. Stereotype much? *rolls eyes*
      -The real Travis Alexander is revealed at the end of this conversation when he sardonically invites Jodi to “send your piece of shit lie fest so I can mock it” and ridicules her for being “miss high class serve can’t even get a job at a freakin dine”. Well, I guess we all can’t be motivational speakers, can we?
      -The smartest thing that Travis said on this whole chat was “I think I was a little more than a dildo with a heartbeat to you.” Yes, Travis, you were a dick.
      -As for Jodi, she wasn’t perfect either, but at least she acknowledged that she was wrong and repeatedly apologized for hurting Travis, remaining calm and mature throughout the conversation.

  42. I always thought Martinez’s motive about Jodi killing Travis because he had ended their relationship and was taking another woman to Cancun was BS. It wasn’t over and Travis admits it in the 14 page Gmail. He couldn’t resist Jodi no matter how angry he was at her. I think the craziness or compulsion would have continued after Travis came back from Cancun. If anyone would have ended their relationship, it would have been Jodi since she knew for a long time that it wasn’t going to work. She knew “something was wrong with that boy.” She states it in the Gmail she knew he wasn’t in love with her the way she wanted. She seemed resigned to that fact and wasn’t denying it. Plus, she was trying to start a relationship with Ryan Burns. And, if that didn’t work, there would be any number of men she could have chosen from in the future.

  43. I’ve been awake on and off all night trying to figure this out. Now we know why JM didn’t want it put in. I want to hear Dr. F’s testomy again.

    Journee was right they were having other conversations, fb, email, phone. I wish there were time stamps on this exchange.
    He was waiting for her to send a e-mail but
    but wouldn’t shut up long enough for her to send it.

    This took place 10 days before TA was supposedly killed. There has to be more texts, gmail chats, e-mail after this one. Where the hell are they??

    • Hello Cindy and Everyone here on JAII 🙂

      Where the hell are they? They went the way of the shredder just like all the other exculpatory evidence in this case….We will never have the full picture of what happened in this conversation just as we will never have the full picture of to what extent TA was involved with kiddy porn….I have always thought that Jodi wanted TA to get help for his porno addiction/problem and go to the bishop, etc…..I think she was encouraging him to do so and this really angered him….he wanted to be in control and that included trying to control Jodi’s thoughts on this sensitive subject matter……. I have always said that Jodi was the woman who knew too much and this is a dangerous position to be in…..those with intimate criminating knowledge can end up dead….TA was furious that Jodi had found out his pedophilia and was paranoid that she would tell others….this is why he needed to control her even though she was in CA….who are you going out with? why are you going out with others? you’re a slut ! etc, etc, etc,….I am just about finished with watching Dr. F’s testimony and she lays it out really well the dynamic that was going on between these two….

  44. Keep in mind that the BIGGEST LIAR OF THEM ALL WAS TRAVIS ALEXANDER !!!!!! He was living a lie every single day of his life….Jodi was ensnared into his web of lies and deceit….hiding her in a closet and taking her out whenever he needed to satisfy his own needs….he was the lowest of them all IMHO….so this long “Rant” where Jodi keeps apologizing for everything under the sun just to calm him down….she puts herself down and lifts him up and even this didn’t help TA’s rage !! Who knows what he was accusing her of doing – talking to another man? getting into his facebook account? who knows? TA was LYING TO EVERYONE IN HIS LIFE INCLUDING HIMSELF !!!!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

*

Latest from Latest News

Go to Top