site
stats
Menu

The Prosecution’s Rebuttal – AA explains it all [2013 RE-POST]

in Latest News by

.
If you’re still confused over Kermit’s poor rebuttling attempt, check out the post below from AA… re-posted from April 2013. It sums everything up nicely. Mugshots are included at no extra cost. Enjoy…

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

By AA:

So here we are folks … the last witness of JM’s rebuttal (obviously, he didn’t get the bank lady) and what have we learned?

Tot Doc told us the defense psych experts were unethical because they gave Jodi books. She also told us that Jodi has BPD not PTSD and that she thought Travis wasn’t abusive. In her mind, Travis merely engaged in unhealthy communication patterns infrequently. IMPORTANT NOTE: Tot Doc has less than 3 years of experience in reality, although she claims 8 years. The other experts have 35 and 34 years each. Meanwhile, because she brought in new evidence, the defense gets to put on a third psych witness with 28 years of experience to inform us how flawed Tot Doc’s testing was. Ultimately, this means the jury can decide whether they believe almost 100 years of combined psych experience or a smarmy cold broad with less than 3 years. Seems like that will be an easy decision.

Tot Doc - Jodi Arias Is Innocent - com

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

Wal-Mart couldn’t find a return for the 3rd gas can. But they didn’t look for a kerosene can. Wal-Mart claims a refund could NOT have been issued without a SKU. But, as the jurors quickly pointed out, Wal-Mart doesn’t deny that a dummy SKU could have been used.

Walmart - Jodi Arias Is Innocent - com

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

Tesoro’s Ms. Universe chick said Jodi made 3 separate gas 3 purchases. But I don’t recall Jodi ever denying that, so I’m not sure what the point of her testimony was other than perhaps to prove that women can have guns as big as Travis Alexander?

Tesoro’s Ms. Universe chick - Jodi Arias Is Innocent - com

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

Deanna is a nice ex-girlfriend of Travis. Since she dated him, she became a teacher, and she inherited Travis’s dog. While dating him, she bought Travis expensive gifts, including a computer. This implies she might have lent him money like every other girlfriend he ever had. He broke up with her while she was away on a mission because he wanted to boink other girls. They got back together a while after she got back from her mission, but she didn’t know if he was still boinking other girls or not. She had sex with him several times, then told him she wasn’t going to do it anymore and told her bishop. Travis told her he also told his bishop too, but there was no proof that he did.

Ultimately, she broke up with him when he didn’t marry her and that was “unpardonable”. However, Travis didn’t have “unhealthy communication” with her and didn’t shoot big loads on her face. He also never told her she was a loser for wanting to be a teacher. As Nurmi pointed out, they had a very different relationship from Travis’s later relationships with Lisa and Jodi. Wait, was she a witness for the prosecution or the defense?

Deanna Reed - Jodi Arias Is Innocent - com

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

An asshole friend of Travis’s with a bad attitude (whose name I forgot in a heartbeat) saw Travis being affectionate to Jodi on two occasions over the course of 2 years. He shot a video and took a photo of this, however, in the video, Jodi was asleep on Travis’s lap, and when she woke up, Travis just kept on talking, ignoring her. Anyway, asshole friend of Travis didn’t know they were having sex in 2008. Meanwhile, Martinez called Jodi “something blondish & whitish on Travis’s lap”. So, I guess that was the entire point of that testimony: to insult Jodi AGAIN.

An asshole friend of Travis’s with a bad attitude - Jodi Arias Is Innocent - com

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

Officer Brown, a camera dude, verified that Jodi was a brunette the day before Travis died. Martinez slipped in a photo with a quick contrast of Jodi with blonde streaks to remind us that Jodi used to be a blonde. Wait, didn’t we know that already?

Officer Brown - Jodi Arias Is Innocent - com

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

Officer Melendez came back with his pouty mouth to tell us he didn’t find any porn on Travis’s computer — which is really a computer still in Deanna’s name, that Deanna told us she bought for him, so I’m confused as to why it would have her name on the profile in the first place. Martinez, thinking about porn, got confused on the day the police found Travis’s body.

Officer Melendez - Jodi Arias Is Innocent - com

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

“Detective” Flores came back to tell us that his fat ass conducted an experiment in the closet on the shelves at the same house that used to be Travis’s. Problem is, it’s five years later, and there was no guarantee everything was actually the same as it used to be. Also, he didn’t really do a valid experiment. It was completely shoddy, just like all his work. Meanwhile, the jurors had a few questions for him about guns and the attic. It seemed like, while watching his pudgy butt in court for months, they’ve actually just been waiting for him to get that butt back on the stand to ask a few more questions.

Gloria Esteban - Jodi Arias Is Innocent - com

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

Finally, Dr. Horn, the ME, came back. Apparently, he shaved his beard especially so he could tell us again that the knife wound came first — and for a chance for Martinez to show some gory photos yet again. Martinez doesn’t realize that the photos are shocking the first time, but after he jurors have seen them a whole bunch of times, they lose their effect on everyone except Jodi. Then again, maybe that’s who he’s trying to intimidate. During cross, Horn became very defensive and forgot what his prime directive was. He also forgot everything he testified to in January, and what he said at another hearing before that. Could he have also been a witness for the defense undercover?

Dr Doolittle - Jodi Arias Is Innocent - com

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

And that wrapped up the highly anticipated rebuttal.

In the meantime, the next psychologist is getting all sorts of crap thrown at him by the haters, just as Dr. Samuels and Alyce LaViolette did. Jennifer Willmott is getting death threats and threats about Jodi’s life too. Juror No. 8 — known as the note taker — is now gone for some unknown reason. And we had more side bars and chamber conferences than ever before.

That’s what you missed on the Prosecution’s Rebuttal.

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

Remember: WE ARE TEAM JODI – AND WE WILL BE VICTORIOUS in our quest for JUSTICE FOR JODI!

Leave your thoughts and comments below…

SJ
Team Jodi

If you would like to help Jodi by way of a financial donation to the official JAA APPELLATE FUND, click the Team Jodi link below for further details. All donations go directly to the fund for assisting with the legal fees associated with appealing Jodi’s wrongful conviction. Thank you for your support!

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

.

94 Comments

  1. AA’s post rocked 1 year ago and it’s still rocking 1 year later!

    Taken right out of the Top 10 ‘farse witnesses united’! And all these testemonies were solid ground for proving Jodi had premeditated travis’s murder?! GMAFB!

    IMO, all these loser were just put on the stand so martinez looked like he had a lot of ‘juicy’ crap on Jodi… Ok, mr. frog! We got it! BS can be viewed in capital cases!

    It’s quite sad to know that the jurors thought they did an amazing job. The truth is that they made fools of themselves believing and taking under consideration all the crap coming out of those poor misguided fools mouths. Useless information. Non relevant. “Accusive shoes and telltale trousers” O. Henry.

    I will get back to you soon for more!

    (((((Jodi)))) ♥

  2. Can anybody fill me in on something that was on the news today, but I was unable to hear the whole thing, about Martinez objecting to a leak from the defense or something? I can’t find this anywhere on the web.

    • It would be a healthy sign to see someone of George S.’s news world stature express frustration about the accuracy of the “soft news” reports, not only complain of so-called tabloid stories taking up airtime on “legitimate” outlets.

  3. Can anyone provide me with the details of this dummy SKU? How exactly can a product have a dummy SKU? I would be very appreciative of your help. Laters for now.

    • A dummy SKU is one retailers can use – for sales as well as returns – when the price of an item is known (or often estimated, depending on how lazy the cashier is – or how flexible the management) but the item itself doesn’t have a sticker or tag on it. When the cashier shoots the dummy SKU, the register asks the cashier to enter a price. Done.

        • Can I? No.

          But if you’re asking whether the transaction would still be recorded, I would imagine so. However, unless it was the only dummy SKU transaction of that day (unlikely in a store the size of Walmart), it would be very difficult to determine or prove that a particular dummy transaction was associated with a certain item and a certain customer.

            • If that’s how it was done, Ryan. There’s no way to know whether that’s so or not.

              And as I’ve said several times already, it’s very easy to give cash back on a returned item without processing an actual *return*. Ring the item up once, void it twice, give the customer the negative balance. Cash drawer comes out right, inventory comes out right and there’s no record of a return at all.

              Plus, if you read the explanation on geebee’s wiki, you’ll find that it’s not clear whether the *correct* Walmart records have ever been examined.

              • I will read George’s Wikipedia again. I do recall GB sayin that store #5751 records needed to be checked. However, it was said that the Walmart employees do use dummy SKU’s and this was a question from at least one of the jurors. Definitely reasonable to think that a dummy SKU could have been used.

                • Yes (Ryan Jansen), you refer to at least one of the jurors asked about possibility that a dummy SKU was used to show that the gas (kerosene can) WAS RETURNED. ..If the juror who asked that question can come forward, perhaps we can find out if he/she was pressured or badgered by other jurors or the judge or prosecutor for asking that question. ..Maybe even that juror was dismissed & would have voted NOT GUILTY?? …Reasonable doubt means that Jodi absolutely DID RETURN that (kerosene or gas can) & she did not lie about it. …Yes I think the other store records should be checked. … … On Day 51 [REPLAY] I did mention that the Walmart business clerk snookered (tricked) the prosecutor by ((QUALIFYING)) her answer to him by slipping in her ((CAVEAT)) to say that (((THERE IS HUMAN ERROR))). … …She did not say that sometimes or once in a blue moon there could be human error she said that ((There is Human Error)). …Jodi did not lie about the returned gas or kerosene can.

                • What amazes me is the depth Martinez had to go to find what they consider one lie among 18 days of testimony in order to say “There, see, she’s a liar so you can’t believe anything she tells you.” Why in the world would she lie about that? If she were lying, why not just say she accidentally left it somewhere, something that can’t be proved one way or the other? They want to send her to death row because some clerk can’t find a friggin’ receipt??? As I say on my wikispaces site, “Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.” But they’re going to try to kill her precisely because of the absence of evidence!

                • And with Darryl testifying that he brought gas cans on trips that he took with Jodi. Not to mention that Jodi had five years to think about lying about a recorded purchase, if it was recorded. Jodi had no incentive to lie about the return of this kerosene can.

                • Ohhhh, but Martinez kept harping on Jodi’s lies as if she was charged with first degree murder JUST because she lied during her interrogation! He tried to make a pattern out of a very scared woman who had commited a murder and could not even remember half of what transpired on that fateful day; it was that dread that led her to lie to everyone, even herself.
                  And Kermit being the slime that he is saw an opportunity there and of course took it, the opportunity to present the Defendant as an evil manipulator who distorts the truth for her own benefit- ummm…what’s the idiom now? ”The pot calling the kettle black”, RIGHT Kermit????

                • I could never imagine what it would be like to be interrogated for murder Maria. You would only know if you were there.

          • If the correct store had been checked, they might have had a way to check on whether a certain amount was pulled from a drawer on a certain day in a cash refund to a customer at a particular time of day.

            I’ve never worked at a Walmart, or in that type of customer service realm, but I wonder if, even with a dummy SKU, there are certain identifying procedures that are supposed to be followed. For instance, the cashier (or returns person) might be required to hit a key when using the dummy SKU to show at least what department the item would be from – such as “electronics” “garden” “automotive” “cosmetics”, etc.

            • It depends on the system – some might ask for a department number or even an item description as well as the price. But anytime you’re not using the ACTUAL SKU, human error can factor in.

            • Justus,

              From your comment above ^:

              “…they’re going to try to kill her precisely because of the absence of evidence!”

              – Most importantly, the jury bought the “knife first” scenario – a la “Psycho”.*

              – Secondly, prosecutor was able to confuse them by playing the phone interviews and interrogation videos wherein she acknowledges that she DID lie.

              – As he went along, Juan called Jodi a liar every chance he got. (The receipt-less kero can probably wasn’t the final straw.) When HIS version didn’t add up, it was because Jodi was “STILL lying”.

              – At every opportunity, he treated the judge cavalierly – e.g. the one I’ve been discussing here with Journee and you: The “you rule” admonition, and by just generally acting out.

              To summarize: AFTER he had the jury believing the gunshot was last, he only had to do TWO things to get both of those convictions (the circumstantial evidence was not sufficient to convict):

              1) convince the jury that Jodi’s lies would lift any reservations they had about finding her guilty = Premeditation
              2) assert his dominance in the courtroom such that, by the time the case was sent to them, the jurors would place more value on his opinion than on the judge’s Jury Instructions = Felony Murder

              * HLN was just icing on the cake. ( +HLN harped on words using the “psycho” prefix nightly+.)

              Just my opinion!

              • Well said!
                And don’t forget that kermit played to the crowd a lot – posed for pictures and even signed some old lady’s cane! What prosecutor in American history has ever done such egregious things? It’s beyond unethical!
                .
                And the jury wasn’t sequestered and they must have gotten a glimpse of him being praised by a gaggle of slack-jawed yokels whose combined IQ is below room temperature, and who flocked at the courtsteps every day.
                .
                And when he was called on his unethical behavior by the defence, he acted like he saw nothing wrong with it, like it was par for the course for him.
                He craves public attention, he enjoys the crowd’s adulation, he likes to be in the spotlight and he uses it to his advantage at every turn! What a scumbag!

                • Alexey, LMAO!

                  I always wondered if those yokels on the courthouse steps arrived on the same bus!

                  And yep, when JM is called on his antics, he adopts a quiet, nerdy voice, like one of Woody Allen’s “lost in NY” angst-driven characters.

  4. AA is surely missed, she had a knack for writing in such a concise way.

    Apart from Kermit, DeMarte is the type of person that can push my buttons! GRRR! She was on that stand being the ultimate bitch and enjoying it, FFS!

    When she uttered that sentence ´´unhealthy communication patterns´´, I swear to God I could have slapped the shit out of her smug conceited face! I really wish SHE had been on the receiving end of those remarks, rants and abuse…See if she would call them just ”unhealthy”.

    • DeMarte is by far THE most annoying of them all! Even Martinez doesn’t drive me up the wall as much ad DeMarte does!
      She’s so cocky and arrogant, even though she’s wet behind the ears (has VERY little experience in DV cases) and generally can’t tell shit from Shinolla!
      And I bet she got a LOT of money for her “testimony”! What a jip! Taxpayers should demand a refund! They should be furious over this waste of public funds.

      • Alexey,

        “DeMarte is by far THE most annoying of them all! Even Martinez doesn’t drive me up the wall as much ad DeMarte does!”

        Ditto.

  5. Can anyone answer some questions regarding the Jordan Linn Graham Trial please? I would be very appreciative of your help. This is the only place I can really ask for answers. Good day to all of you Jodi supporters!

    Why did Prosecutor Zeno Baucas settle for second degree murder?

    Was the hairs on the clothing determined to be Cody’s and if so, did Jordan mention what this cloth was used for?

    Did Jordan mention anything about knowing that Cody was afraid of heights?

    Was money or life insurance ever an issue in this trial?

    Did Cody’s friends or family approach investigators and tell them that Jordan was suspicious prior to her being arrested?

    What all abuse did Jordan claim to have received from Cody?

  6. Does anyone remember which “bank lady” that JM “didn’t get” AA was referring to at the top of this post?

  7. Although Journee’s comments on the rebuttal proceedings was bright and boldly sarcastic,I thought it was flippant and ignoring of the seriousness of the trial and the case in general. I actually heard a lot of Travis’ blatant style in it. One of the things I think that has hurt a fair trial has been the swinging over to the far right or to the far left , calling names, venting hates and loves that are of no consequence to the outcome of what we all hope is freedom at last for Jodi.

    • Ronald, That piece above was not written by Journee. The poster used the handle “Also Abused”, hence came to be called AA.

      AA shared personal experiences of abuse here (and the subsequent losses as a result of the abuse) with a great deal of earnestness and sincerity. After attending law school, she did not become a lawyer, but did work in law firms. Her high intelligence and generous sharing of information and insights were appreciated by everyone on this site.

      The sarcasm she employed in summarizing and critiquing the state’s rebuttal was actually uncharacteristic of the vast majority of her posts here. I would venture to say that it caught some of us by surprise, but its tone was a commentary on the state’s case in that it was reflective of its utter preposterousness. The piece also served as an informal answer to the tons of crap that was dished out every day by HLN, the Network From Hell. This site has been, and continues to be a life-saving outlet for many good people, who through no fault of their own, are beginning to lose faith in the justice system in this country.

      You wrote: “One of the things I think that has hurt a fair trial has been the swinging over to the far right or to the far left..”

      Ronald, the prosecution, the judge, the tabloid news outlets and the so-called legitimate news sources who blindly run with the (tabloids’) inaccurate stories about Jodi’s trial could not have cared less what we or any of Jodi’s supporters thought about the proceedings or the despicable “news” coverage of the trial. So please, please, do not lay responsibility for the unfairness of this trial at our feet here. We have endeavored to be voices of reason and decency all along. We have called for fairness from law enforcement and the court system and for responsible reporting. If we have occasionally gotten a bit rough with our language, well, first of all, this is the Internet, but secondly, a VENT room was provided for that purpose on this site after the verdict was reached and emotions reached a sort of “critical mass” last spring. Many of us had to step away and stopped reading here for a while in response to the palpable paranoia that was permeating any site that supported Jodi.

      I have not spent any time to speak of on “hater sites” – but hatred and vitriol has been seen by many of the regular posters of this site all over social media during the past year. Many have tried to address that hatred and to reason with those who believe that Jodi planned out the killing of Travis. But I am told that they repeatedly come up against vile language and insults such as they have never experienced in their lives – even threats. We don’t respond to people that way here. We answer questions about this case calmly and respectfully, even when we sometimes feel the answers should be obvious by now to anyone who really cares about fairness in our courts. We truly feel that if people care about human rights and social justice, they should care what happens to Jodi Arias.

      • whichtrial?,

        EXCELLENT post in reply to Ronald Jones! I don’t think it could have been stated better!!!

        Thank you from the bottom of my heart!

        (((((whichtrial?))))) (((((Jodi)))))

        (((((SJ))))) (((((Admin.)

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

        Love to all TEAM JODI!!! THE BEST!!!

        • Mary, thank you! Glad you are up late. The whole time I was writing that comment, I kept thinking AA could have said it much better!

          (((Team Jodi)))

          • whichtrial?,

            Yeah, I’m always pretty much on the night shift! LOL! It’s nice to have someone else up too! I’m usually by my lonsome – lol!!! 🙂

            NOPE, you said it all, whichtrial?, perfectly!!! Great job!!!

            🙂

      • Whichtrial?,

        (standing ovation) – Exceptionally said!

        AA is absolutely missed! Hopefully she will drop by again and share more of her great posts with us.

        You, my friend, are just as important here! I always enjoy reading your comments and broadening my knowledge!

        ((((whichtrial?)))) ♥

        • Thanks, Pandora!

          I always look forward to your insights and humor here. You were perfectly accurate in pointing out how inane the state’s rebuttal was.

          Wanted to note that Jacob Mefford had nothing implicating to say about Jodi. I thought he could have been a witness for the defense. Did I miss something?

          So why did the state call him as a witness? Just to say he shot the video that was also inane? Seemed as if he had liked Jodi as a person; just my impression as he spoke of her.

      • My sincere apologies to Journee for my egregious oversight! I also value this site as really one of the few pro-Jodi sites that offer intelligent and caring details and information . And thanks for the cogent clarification of my.blunder.

        • Ronald, I don’t know how late or early you came ”into the game” but trust me, emotions were running pretty high back then. I re-read AA’s post after reading your comment and saw nothing that could be characterized as ”flippant” or ”blatant”. On the contrary, it was a nice summary. Admittedly, it was sprinkled with a bit of sarcasm and a bit of humor but please bear in mind that Jodi supporters had and still have have a ZILLION reasons to be outraged and disgusted by this gross miscarriage of Justice.

          AA is not a reporter in a newspaper yet I bet you have seen articles by real reporters that could not in any way be characterized as serious, professional, objective or merely reporting this trial’s proceedings. We were swept away by a legion of garbage that crucified, vilified and annihilated Jodi’s character and her entire being.

          To be hoonest, I don’t get your frustration. A lot of us have admitted (myself included) that there were times we had a sharp tongue and maybe we vented a bit too much. However, unless someone knows the smothering feeling of seeing a person losing all their rights to a fair trial and being railroaded while there is a vociferous lynch mob asking for her head on a platter, then I don’t think this person has a right to judge us. (not implying that this person is you. Just trying to make you understand how *I* see things, my perspective)

          • Maria,

            Thanks for addressing those points about fairness as well. I knew we could count on you!

            There was one slacker “reporter” who commented on the guilty verdict this way after making a few accurate observations about the trial: “She did it.”

            She probably continues to pull a paycheck as a total space-filler, while many individuals who would have done a little digging wait on the sidelines, still scrounging for ANY job as a reporter.

            What to make of the juror, though, who said the same thing to Anderson Cooper?

            And how should we feel about Anderson Cooper, who didn’t call her on it?

            Cooper recently said that he donned diving gear to cover a story about WWII shipwrecks. Why doesn’t he, or any of TV’s broadcasters with real clout put on a “thinking cap”, and take a serious look at the blood EVIDENCE – can we start with the SINK? – in this DEATH PENALTY case?

            Anchor jockeys: Begin the story about Jodi Arias’ UNFAIR TRIAL with a clip of Arizona Governor Jan Brewer’s shining moment as the jury was still in deliberations:

            “…she probably did it.”

    • Know what else has “hurt a fair trial”?

      Careless misrepresentation of the facts.

      I did not write the article above!!!!

    • Alexey,

      Kermit sure does make himself look stupid!!! That’s because when a person lies (Kermit) they eventually start BELIEVING their own lies!!! That is why he was SURE that the lie he was wanting Jodi to admit to was true, but he had to have court reporter to back up in her notes to let him know that what Jodi was saying was the TRUTH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Ha ha to him!!!!!!!!! He doesn’t even know how stupid he looked!!! How sad and pathetic and unbelievable that this kind of nonsense was allowed to take place in a court of law!!! Shame on them!!!

      🙂

      • Yeah, he looked totally stupid!
        The video highlights his stupidity, and this is not a single instance of him putting his foot in his mouth! I don’t know how his bug-eyed fans put up with his bullshit that he routinely spouts in the courtroom.
        .
        And he keeps accusing others of not taking responsibility! Well, ironically it fell on him to take responsibility for being wrong. Did he admit that he was wrong? Nope! He just moved on, he didn’t say “I’m sorry for yelling at Jodi and accusing her of something she clear;y did not do”.
        .
        What a douche! That’s how he wins cases – by playing dirty, by lying and making his lies sound convincing. That’s called bamboozling the jury!

        • You know what? I still don’t get HOW ON EARTH those 12 jurors bought all his shit!
          I will NEVER ever come to terms with that verdict and the level of stupidity of those jurors. I hope they have their conscience clear because oh boy…I wouldn’t want to be in their shoes when they realize (sooner or later ) how terribly wrong they were.

          • Same way everyone else did, Maria – they were watching HLN and (no doubt) joining in the hate fests on social media.

    • Mary, good morning! As inspiring as this article is, it is also sad. To see an innocent man locked up for 25 years is devistating. My heart breaks! He missed out on the best years of his life… those years that he will never get back! 🙁

      That is why it’s important to keep on voicing all the BS that summed up to Jodi’s ‘guilty verdict’ . Hopefully sooner than later everyone will be able to see that this trial was nothing more than a pissing contest for the prosecution and they only wanted ‘to win’ no matter what. Nothing about serving justice. NOTHING.

      No reasonable person can say that this was a fair trial.

      We read – on a daily basis – about exonerations, overturned convictions, dismissal of cases and so much more. But most of these ‘justified happy endings’ occur decades later… what can someone do when they have spent most their lives in a cell?

      As I have said hundreds of times, SELF DEFENSE is not a crime! Jodi has already done ‘time’ for that (if doing time was needed in the first place). She should be freed already! No justice has been served.

      So as SJ and Admins say: we are here for the long haul. WE ARE TEAM JODI – AND WE WILL BE VICTORIOUS in our quest for JUSTICE FOR JODI!

      NEVER GIVING UP!

      ((((Jodi)))) ♥

      • Pandora,

        Yeah, you’re right! It IS sad too that he had to spend 25 years of his life locked up while being INNOCENT!!! That is just outright a terrible shame on those responsible for that!!!

        Yes, we do have to keep voicing all the BS that summed up to Jodi’s “guilty verdict” so she can be free to live her life! Yes, she has definitely served her time already, if there was any to serve!! I keep trying every day, wherever I can to voice the injustice done to Jodi!!!!

        Yep, we are here for the long haul!!! (((((TEAM JODI))))) (((((JUSTICE FOR JODI)))))

  8. YAY! And manymanymanyMANY thanks to ADMIN for revamping the archive access!

    Check it out, y’all!

    Near the top of the column on the right side of the page, we now have a month-by-month drop-down menu to select where we want to search in the archives!

  9. The more I think about it (as i spoke of in the RD site), I believe the smoking gun here is the aspirated blood at the sink. Between any attacker and victim, which one has the option to pause in the middle of the violence, the one being pursued…or the pursuer?

    • Exactly! And what is more plausible: that this aspirated/ coughed up blood was produced by a gunshot that affected the mouth and the sinuses or from a knife wound to the chest?

        • Justus,

          The amount of blood found in TA’s lungs might have been one of the factors Horn cited as he testified about a different sequencing – because there is nothing to stop blood from pouring into the lungs except coughing, or tubation, as far as I know, when it is streaming from the sinus area with that amount of volume. Some of that blood might have gone down the esophagus also. I don’t know if the stomach was ever mentioned on the stand.

          I am really not sure about the testimony Horn gave about the lungs, but I don’t think the lungs were very “full” when the autopsy was done. This needs to be checked, but I’ve never seen the autopsy report myself, only heard testimony about it. So I am just commenting based on auditory memory.

          Could some of the blood that would have accumulated in the lungs (or even in the stomach) have poured out when TA was moved to the shower? It might explain the blood trail on the other side of the hallway. That blood had to have come from somewhere; had to have come from movement.

          BTW it is interesting to note of Horn: He never said he changed his mind. He said it was “a typo”, as if he’d intended the reverse sequencing from the start. If he said now that he was just wrong at first he would render his sworn testimony even less credible, especially after he’d said on the stand that it had been a “typo”, not a series of typographical errors, but whether it is a “typo” or “typos” there is a credibility gap, of course.

            • Thanks Journee, I have seen MPG’s autopsy report but I hadn’t seen this one. Interesting that there is no gun powder on anything isn’t it? Is that normal after being shot? Also, I do not have a medical degree, but it doesn’t say anything about his neck being broken it does it? MPG believed his neck to have been broken. The hands were put in paper bags (?) could that by why they were bruised like someone had bound them together? Just wondering?

              Love the updates SJ!!!!! Thank you Administrators!!!! 🙂

              • From what I’ve read “gun powder” would only be present if the gun was fired from a distance of 12″ or less.

                Stippling should be present if the gun was fired from a distance of 36″ or less, but some guns not more than 24″. (can’t find specific data on .25 ACP).

                • Wouldn’t that debunk Martinez’s theory that the gun shot was last? Did he not say it was execution style? Which would be close range. Sorry thinking out loud.

                • Soooo….according to the State, Jodi shot him in the head (as the coup de grâce) as he lay on the floor dead and she did it from, at the very least, two feet away? They make it sound more like she was using him for target practice.

                • Did the Prosecutor claim that Jodi shot him after putting him in the shower? I can’t recall… Because if that’s the case, then the angle is impossible as already discussed here. SMH.

                • You will find those on Team Travis who say there was no stippling because Jodi used a pillow as a silencer and that is where the stray threads came from (rather than the rope – pretty funny, they think you can fire a gun through a pillow and leave nothing stuck to all that blood but a couple of threads and a bullet casing.)

                • It is pretty obvious they have not been thinking for themselves for a long time or they would be aware of things Martinez has stated in this trial just do not match up with the facts. Sheeple. . .baaaaaaaa The jury had to be in a hypnotized state.

            • Journee,

              Thank you very much for the link. Report indicates that the blood flowing from the sinuses would not have interfered with breathing by filling the lungs, explaining his ability to move around, but he probably had a gigantic headache.

              I think it would have struck any investigator that someone might have been fighting him off, given the whole spectrum of knife wounds.

              It has always seemed to me that the contusions on his legs could be accounted for by her kicking his shins when he had her pinned against the wall. How else could they be accounted for?

              I do think there is a strong possibility that she headed right out of the bathroom to call 911 from one of his phones after the gun went off. As she got up from the floor, she said she felt him pulling at her clothes. She must have broken away and run.

              In re-watching the trial, I’ve learned that the linen closet door was NOT open when the first officer arrived on the scene. So given that information, I don’t think Jodi stayed in the bathroom area for any length of time. She still would have been trying to get away from TA, still would have been terrified because he threatened her at that point, probably before he even got to the mirror.

              Her phone would have still been in the car, as far as I have heard. She never said she charged it in the house; said she could only use the phone again once she found that charger under the seat.

    • Just shared it again with a small FB group of good friends and of course fervent Jodi supporters 🙂 🙂

      • Maria, We got a nice spike in first time visitors after you shared yesterday. We are up to 643. It’s good to see people are reading it but we certainly have a long way to go…and I can’t be sure I’m not just preaching to the choir. Is it making anybody scratch their head? I don’t know. I see a brief discussion of it on one of the “We Hate Jodi” sites but from what they’re saying, I don’t think more than one of the dozen posters actually read it — although you can be sure they had plenty to say about it anyway. (I’m fascinated with the human mind and how it functions – so all these bizarre thinkers fascinate me.) One who apparently hadn’t read it says “They say she confessed because she was scared the ninjas were going to harm her family.” (Gee, I don’t remember saying anything even close to that. Could I be having memory problems???) Another at least admitted he hadn’t read it, but this was apparently just one more opportunity to call us names. And then we got the obligatory “confession proves guilt” and how come we can’t get that through our heads. (Ignorance in its most basic form.)

        Maria, can you tell me if there’s any discussion of it on your friendly FB pages?

        • Oh, and another thing I find fascinating is those who, out of all the questions I pose that should raise at least a small degree of reasonable doubt, they pick out one of those questions, come up with some smug answer to that one question, and then say “There, see, she’s obviously guilty”, with absolute no regard to the rest of the questions. I have often felt like I was inside the story of the Blind Men and the Elephant. Each has his own set of “truths” about the case that convinces them of her guilt. Problem is if you put all those “truths” together, they start to contradict one another. A good example is one I wrote about on the RD site: The reason Jodi came up with such an idiotic premeditation plan is because Jodi is dumb. However, someone else will tell you that she’s so sneaky and cagey that she fooled three professionals with more than 90 years combined experience. That’s why we find it so frustrating talking to these people. Their hatred blinds them so that they see only what they want to see and then claim that’s The Truth.

          • Justus,

            “She’s a criminal mastermind”,etc. And “she’s so stupid because she thought she could get away with xyz”, etc.

            And there’s the “She’s a criminal mastermind only PRETENDING to be stupid to throw everyone off…”

            All of that can be filed under the “Demonic Witch with Superpowers Category”. Some of these folks might be so young they still engage in magical thinking.

            I think the RD readership will start to go up even more this summer.

        • Justus, my posts got a lot of ”Likes” and a few praising comments for your site. A couple of people I highly respect (for the work they do and the knowledge they have on Jodi’s case) were very impressed actually and said they would share. So…so far so good 😉

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

*

Go to Top