Arias and her Defense add Insult to Injury

Fact-based reporting

by Rob Roman & Amanda Chen

We wish to extend our deepest sympathies to the Flores family on the tragic loss of their 15 year-old son.

We intended to post an article all about Travis Alexander, but recent events in the penalty retrial have caused us to change our course. Additionally, I told a very good friend of mine, a prosecution supporter, about my intention to post an article about Travis Alexander, and she asked me why not do an article about Jodi Arias instead? She’s right, so here it is.

Having recently reported that this retrial was not the nightmare many believe it is, I have to backpedal a little after the events of last week. No question, it was a really dark week for the defense.

https://spotlightonlaw.wordpress.com/the-jodi-arias-penalty-re-trial-the-nightmare-that-never-was/

Two things in particular happened last week, and there are just no two sides about it. The first is an affidavit by a former acquaintance of Travis Alexander named Marc McGee, now of New Zealand. The second is the release into evidence of an 18 page letter Jodi Arias wrote to Travis Alexander’s family on July 28th, 2008. Before we delve into all that, let’s have a review of the rest of what happened last week (Jan. 19 – 22).

Dr. Robert Geffner is still on the stand and Jennifer Willmott was finishing up on direct examination of this defense mitigation expert witness. We should keep in mind that this is not all mitigation. The prosecution summed up their version of all the major events covered in the guilt phase of the trial. The defense, in part, is responding to the prosecution’s version of events. Many prosecution supporters have remarked they have seen no mitigation yet in this penalty retrial. Not so, because the two defense expert witnesses have in fact covered much of the defenses’ enumerated mitigators.

detetive FloresWe have to assume that the mitigators relating to Jodi Arias being a good friend and having artistic talents were removed due to possible difficulties in making a good case for those assertions. Why would that be, do you think? Even so, it’s foreseeable some artwork will be featured in some way during the penalty retrial. Mitigators can come from anywhere in the testimony and evidence and are not limited to those enumerated by the defense.

Here are the new enumerated mitigators:

1. Ms. Arias has no prior criminal history.

2. Ms. Arias was just 27 years old when she committed her
offense.

3. Ms. Arias is remorseful for her conduct.

4. Ms. Arias suffered both physical and emotional abuse as a
child.

5. Ms. Arias suffered both physical and emotional abuse during
her relationship with Mr. Alexander.

6. The abusive nature of the relationship caused Ms. Arias to
suffer extreme emotional stress at the time of the incident.

7. Ms. Arias has been diagnosed with Post-Traumatic Stress
Disorder.

8. Ms. Arias has been diagnosed with Borderline Personality
Disorder.

9. Ms. Arias’ psychological makeup impaired her ability to cope
with the tumultuous relationship she had with Mr. Alexander.

Numbers 1 and 2 do not take very much testimony to establish. Number 3 should come from Jodi Arias’ own testimony or allocution, and that’s all on hold now pending the appeal of the ruling by the Arizona Supreme Court that she cannot be allowed to testify in a closed courtroom. Numbers 4 through 8 have all been substantially covered by the expert witnesses.

Jennifer Willmott finished up her questioning of Dr. Geffner by introducing messages and texts suggesting that Travis Alexander was having intimate and sexual conversations with a number of women, including a request for sexually provocative photos, while he was involved with Jodi Arias and Lisa Andrews.

Geffner stated that sexual exploitation was a form of domestic abuse and that Travis Alexander was engaged in such conduct with Jodi Arias. The defense also explored how Travis’ overriding emphasis on sex made Lisa Andrews uncomfortable in several different ways.

JUAN FIT 10Geffner described an “on-again, off-again” pattern in Alexander’s relationships and a history of unstable relationships for Arias. Some of the conversations between Alexander and a number of young ladies happened in the weeks leading up to Arias’ move back to northern California in April, 2008.

References to a “cycle of abuse” and Arias being constantly drawn back into the sexual relationship were made by Dr. Geffner. It was stated that there is no physical evidence of physical abuse and no mention of it in Arias’ journals. Dr. Geffner said this was not unusual. Certain incidents of alleged physical abuse were then discussed.

Dr. Geffner talked about Arias’ diagnosis of PTSD and said the psych. tests he ran on Arias showed the same results as earlier tests.

Testimony then turned to a reported drastic change in Arias’ personality in late 2006, about the time Arias became involved with the Mormon Church, Pre-Paid Legal Services (PPL), and Travis Alexander. Dr. Geffner reported that no one has reported any aggression by Jodi Arias in years and years prior to June, 2008.

Then the defense decided to introduce affidavits from defense witnesses who were supposedly refusing to testify. They introduced them via Dr. Geffner’s testimony. Prosecutor Juan Martinez, who previously argued that the court should not be allowed to be cleared for a witness, because witnesses who wanted their identity kept secret could testify by way of affidavit, was now objecting to the introduction of witness affidavits. This is the same prosecutor who famously declared that Jodi Arias and the defense “cannot have it both ways”.

pittsWilliam Pitts @william_pitts · Jan 20

Nurmi is up. Says the last time we talked mitigation Martinez said bring your affidavits. We brought them, now he says no. #JodiArias

To be fair, his objection could have been based on whether the affidavits were sworn statements or not.

At this point, there was a “sidebar” at least an hour and fifteen minutes long to discuss the introduction of witness affidavits. Then Judge Sherry Stephens went to her chambers either to consult with other judges or to research case law. Then she returned for more sidebars.

af·fi·da·vit

noun

law : A written report which is signed by a person who promises that the information is true.

: A sworn statement in writing made especially under oath or on affirmation before an authorized magistrate or officer.

An affidavit was introduced through Dr. Geffner from a former co-worker of Arias’ in Palm Springs, California attesting to a drastic change in her personality towards the end of 2006. Previously, in the guilt phase, Arias’ former boyfriend, Darryl Brewer, had testified to just such a change.

Now we can get to the dark parts for the defense.

court roomAn affidavit was introduced by Dr. Geffner, signed by one of the defense mitigation witnesses who we now know to be former Alexander acquaintance Marc McGee of New Zealand. We know this because Marc McGee has been vocal in social media, and many trial watchers, reporters and bloggers knew this information was coming from him. The other reason we know this is because Juan Martinez decided to say the name of the author of the affidavit several times in open court, even though it was agreed upon not to divulge the names of the authors/witnesses. At this point what do you think happened? That’s right – Kirk Nurmi motioned for a mistrial. Motion denied, but the Judge admonished Martinez for naming the secret witness more than once. Martinez came out again, blurted out the witness’ name AGAIN, and then he said “Crap!”

The next day, Nurmi took another shot:

kieffer lg brtMichael Kiefer @michaelbkiefer  ·  17h 17 hours ago

Nurmi brings up that he asked that Martinez be held in contempt for stating secret witness’ name yesterday after being admonished by judge.

The two main points in the affidavit of “witness #1” are these:

  • A January 2001 incident at the Bishop’s residnce in Riverside, California where the witness claims to have witnessed Alexander forcibly grabbing and pushing his girlfriend, Deanna Reid, down on a couch and saying “Get it through your f*cking head, I’m not going to marry you.” The witness says his fiancée then provided some first aid to Deanna Reid’s wrists.
  • The same witness also recalled that while looking at files on the Bishop’s computer, as the witness lived at the Bishop’s residence at that time, a file popped up containing photos of child porn. The witness said it came from a user account or folder belonging to Travis Alexander. The affidavit then states that he had a private conversation about the porn with Travis Alexander in a car outside the Bishop’s home. The witness stated Alexander admitted he downloaded the porn, he had an addiction, and that he was sexually abused at age eight.

Jennifer Willmott then drew comparisons to an event where Alexander allegedly grabbed Arias and refused to let her leave his bedroom.

Later, on cross-examination, prosecutor Juan Martinez made the point that since the witness saw the child porn, the witness broke the law and was also guilty of viewing child porn. The child porn allegation includes no evidence or other witnesses, and it’s doubtful that Alexander would make such a damning confession to a mere acquaintance. Also, social media comments from the witness during and after the guilt phase of the trial mention porn in relation to Alexander, but not child porn. Further, the witness, from previous statements on Twitter etc., revealed that he is entirely in the defenses’ corner, seems to crave the limelight and attention, and seems to have an axe to grind with Travis Alexander over some previous incident.

As for the claim about Alexander forcefully pushing Deanna Reid down on a couch in late 2001, there are problems with that, too. First, the witnesses initially gave a date the alleged incident occurred, but it was at a time when Deanna Reid was away on an LDS mission in Costa Rica. The witness then corrected the date to December, 2001, but another problem cropped up.

Travis and deannaFirst, Deanna Reid seemed like a very honest witness, highly credible and reliable. She testified that Alexander NEVER put his hands on her in anger NOR raised his voice to her EVER. Second, Deanna Reid testified that she was not even contemplating marriage to Travis Alexander until 2005, when she broke up with him because he was dragging his feet on the issue. In addition, in December 2001, Deanna and Travis were just getting reacquainted, seeing each other at church and meetings occasionally, and talking about dating steadily again. This makes it doubtful that Reid and Alexander, who had actually dated for only a couple months by the end of 2001, could have had an argument over the subject of marriage, much less an argument that turned physical or violent over marriage.

(Excerpt from CroakerQueen123 video. For the full video, please click on this link: CroakerQueen123

For all CroakerQueen123 trial videos, please click here CroakerQueen123 trial videos  )

Deanna Reid, a prosecution witness, talks about her relationship with Travis Alexander.

So, Witness #1, Marc McGee, is giving testimony via affidavit on two major points and both allegations end up being highly questionable and problematic. No doubt Deanna Reid will appear in person on the witness stand to answer those allegations. This brings up a good question – What is the defense team doing? They brought in a critical witness but they did not properly vet his statements. Meanwhile, trial watchers were saying on the very same date the Tweets flew out of the courtroom that there was trouble with these allegations. Trial watchers picked right up on the problems with these statements, but the defense didn’t?

Another question is: Did the defense know this was a bad idea to use this witness and that his allegations were highly questionable and used him anyways? If so, the culprit might be Jodi Arias herself. Did Jodi Arias, possibly with the help of Simon Johannson, Ben Ernst, or others from the JodiAriasIsInnocent.com crew demand that this witness be introduced? Did they insist on bringing in Marc McGee despite the damage his poor testimony could cause?

This also brings up serious questions about why witnesses refused to testify unless the courtroom was cleared. Why would a man living in New Zealand, who had no trouble spouting off on social media about this case before, now be afraid to testify in a public trial?  Prosecution Supporters were upset about this weeks ago. I just thought there must be some rational reason for the secrecy, but now I can no longer defend that position. I see no reason at all why Mark McGee should refuse to testify in open court.

It’s not really his life that’s at stake here, is it? If a witness cannot get up on the stand and stand up for Jodi Arias, then why come forward in the first place? The prosecution is going to present live witnesses in rebuttal to all this, and that’s much more powerful than paper statements from witnesses who don’t want to risk anything.

jennifer willmottIt’s either really bad work by the defense, or they allowed Jodi Arias (and crew?) to drive the train and introduce this witness, knowing the harm it could cause. Either way, it’s a stunning defeat for the defense. There’s just no way to rationalize it or to describe it any other way. One really bad affidavit now casts a shadow on any subsequent affidavits from any other witnesses. It was an absolute disaster.

Beyond that, how is this mitigation? People are asking this question, but this evidence was given to back up enumerated mitgator #5: “Ms. Arias suffered both physical and emotional abuse during her relationship with Mr. Alexander”. It does apply to mitigation, because if it can be shown that Alexander physically abused another girlfriend, then it could be more likely he physically abused Arias. If there are other connections with child porn, Arias’ statements become more believable. The defense needs to prove these mitigators true by a preponderance of the evidence and they’re critical to saving Jodi Arias’ life. The defense cannot afford to introduce any more evidence that can heavily damage any of the enumerated mitigators.

Well, they just did exactly that, and it’s not going to get better, it’s probably going to get worse.

Sparks flew when direct examination of Dr. Geffner ended and cross began. Juan Martinez sprang up out of his chair ready to pounce. There were a lot of ‘Yes or No’s? and a lot of ‘Did I ask you that’s?’

kieffer lg brtMichael Kiefer @michaelbkiefer  ·  Jan 21

Willmott is done. Martinez jumps up to cross examine. Already with the “yes or no” please. Willmott objects. Time elapsed: about 20 seconds.

kieffer lg brtMichael Kiefer @michaelbkiefer  ·  Jan 21

Martinez goes to the affidavit about the child porn at the bishop’s house in Riverside. 

kieffer lg brtMichael Kiefer @michaelbkiefer  ·  Jan 21

Says witness #1 gave a different story about the photographs on the computer. Martinez asks for yes/no. Geffner says he doesn’t understand

kieffer lg brtMichael Kiefer @michaelbkiefer  ·  Jan 21

“Yes or no?” “Yes or no, what?” Did Alexander “own” those photos?” “I don’t know if the word ‘owner’ came up.”

Prosecutor Juan Martinez continued to attack Dr. Geffner in a flurry of questions, perhaps hoping Geffner would lose control of his water again. There were questions about the affidavit. Did Alexander admit it was his porn at the Bishop’s residence in Riverside, California? Why did Witness #1 have to change the date of the Deanna Reid pushing-down-on-the-couch incident? Why was witness #1 mixed up on the dates to the point he needed to change the date to December, 2001?

At some point, Martinez reaches into his arsenal of bombs and missiles, and threatens to pull out the cat story, not admitted into the guilt phase of the trial, where Jodi Arias supposedly squeezes a cat “too hard”. Martinez is now claiming that she ‘squeezed the cat to near unconsciousness’. Juan wants this in bad. He knows people know that many of the most dangerous serial killers started out by torturing and killing small animals. Martinez also knows that this is highly prejudicial, and would be very effective in a jury of many younger women. Somehow, evidence that was not allowed to be admitted in the guilt phase of the trial is now being allowed in.

kieffer lg brtMichael Kiefer @michaelbkiefer  ·  Jan 21

Martinez asks complex questions and asks for yes/no, he talks fast, cuts off answers to get witness off balance. Very effective technique.

kieffer lg brtMichael Kiefer @michaelbkiefer  ·  Jan 21

“Turn it over, there’s something else on it…”

kieffer lg brtMichael Kiefer @michaelbkiefer  ·  Jan 21

Martinez hands an exhibit to Geffner. “Why don’t you take a look it it…Take a look at it..Look at all of it…Look at the next page…”

kieffer lg brtMichael Kiefer @michaelbkiefer  ·  Jan 21

Martinez hammers the question about whether Travis Alexander denied the porn was his, and when Geffner answers, he shouts, “yes or no?”

kieffer lg brtMichael Kiefer @michaelbkiefer  ·  Jan 21

Martinez berating Geffner, “Don’t tell me, I’m asking you to put your eyes to it.”

juan fit 12

Martinez refers to Alyce LaViolette as “Psychologist #1”, furthering the misunderstanding that LaViolette is a psychologist. She’s not. She’s an MSW (Masters in Social Work), a Domestic Violence expert and a Psychotherapist. Martinez brings up the time when LaViolette wrote in her notes that Jodi Arias caught Travis Alexander masturbating to pictures of young boys on the computer. Geffener says that was LaViolette’s misunderstanding and mistake, not Jodi Arias’. Martinez accuses Dr. Geffener of being a speculating ‘Hired Gun’.

Martinez delves into Geffner’s history of testifying in trials. How much money he made, whether he thinks his opinion is “the best”, and some controversial testimony in other trials. Martinez asks if Geffner is qualified to testify about the brain because he’s not a Medical Doctor. Geffner replies he’s a neuropsychologist, so he is qualified to testify about the brain.

Martinez then questions Dr. Geffner’s associations on boards with Dr. Miccio Fonseca, who testified earlier in the retrial. He also questions the presence of both Dr. Geffner and Jennifer Willmott at the same speaking engagement.  He then brings up the peeping incident at Alexander’s home, when Arias saw Alexander through the window with another woman in August, 2007, after “breaking up” with Alexander at the end of July.

This journal entry is just days after the peeping incident:

Aug 26 2007 Journal entry A
Aug 26 2007 Journal entry A
Aug 26 2007 Journal entry B
Aug 26 2007 Journal entry B
Aug 26 2007 Journal entry C
Aug 26 2007 Journal entry C

Dr. Geffner’s notes and timeline do not include the peeping incident. Here again, and for the umpteenth time, the defense shoots themselves in the foot by not supplying their witnesses with negative information so they can be prepared to answer difficult questions on cross. Witness preparation has always been sorely lacking on the defense side. They move on to questions about what defines “dating, seeing each other, and being in a relationship”.

Martinez then moves on to Witness #3 who stated that Jodi Arias was cheerful, never sexual, normal, and fun in Palm Desert, California in 2006. Then she changed drastically. Martinez asks if this may have been because Jodi Arias was in financial trouble and losing her home? But Jodi Arias changed before all that, according to Darryl Brewer.

Then they talked about the January 21st kick-in-the-ribs incident. Martinez states that Arias had sex with Alexander on the same day she claims she caught him in his bedroom with pictures of young children. What’s up with that? Then there’s a discussion about the fight Arias and Alexander had shortly before leaving on a vacation trip to Havasupai Falls. They discuss how Arias writes in her journal that Alexander apologized and Arias reported “it was 99% his fault”.

This Journal entry is written just days after the alleged rib-kicking, finger-breaking incident:

January 24 2008 journal entry
January 24 2008 journal entry A
January 24 2008 journal entry B
January 24 2008 journal entry B

Martinez believes that the Havasupai Falls Fight and the Peeping incidents are key incidents that say a lot about the bad behavior of Jodi Arias. The peeping incident because Arias and Alexander were broken up and Arias invades his privacy, stalks Alexander, spies on him, and confronts him with the information the next day. The Havasupai argument incident is key for Martinez because Arias blames Alexander for something that was not his fault at all – the unpacking of the contents of her backpack onto the kitchen table. Dan Freeman initiated that, because it was way too heavy to hike with. He was trying to help Jodi Arias, and Alexander was just there.

The questioning continues to Jodi Arias’ journal entry registering surprise when she’s told early June 10th that Alexander was found dead in his bathroom. Geffner states she knew he was dead, but he doesn’t know her “level of disassociation”. Martinez remarks how Jodi Arias omits details in her journal that are unfavorable to her, especially about the Havasupai Fight. Geffner replies that people omit all kinds of details in diaries, both favorable and unfavorable. Geffner also says Arias omitted negative things because she was following the Law of Attraction, where efforts to think of only good thoughts will supposedly attract only good things to your life.

This journal entry is written the day after Alexander’s body was found:

June 10 2008 journal entry A
June 10 2008 journal entry A
June 10 2008 journal B
June 10 2008 journal B

Questioning then moved to Alexander’s position on the bed when Arias allegedly caught him masturbating to children’s pictures. He was reportedly kneeling, which Martinez is skeptical about. Martinez asks Geffner why he described Alexander as manipulative, and Geffner responded that he described certain behaviors as manipulative, not the person. Martinez likes to switch subjects suddenly and skip around the timeline to throw witnesses off. He switches to questions about the forensic computer expert “John Smith” and a teen sex website link found on Alexander’s computer.

Next, Juan projects questions from psychological tests on the wall, and Geffner protests that these are copyrighted tests, and they’ll be invalidated by broadcasting the questions to the general public. The inevitable sidebar is called. Judge Stephens orders court cameras turned off and they proceed. Next are questions about the PTSD test that Dr. Samuels gave, after Arias changed her story about what trauma she experienced.

Finally, Juan brings in the famous 18-page letter Jodi Arias wrote to the Alexander family on July 28, 2008, Travis’ Birthday. This letter was not allowed into evidence in the guilt trial for being too prejudicial to Jodi Arias. This is the second serious defeat for the defense. We have wondered exactly what was in that letter, and now we know:

Jodi Arias 7 28 letter to Alexander family

The first thing that stands out with this letter is that Arias knows this letter will be seen by the police and could be used for evidence. She even says so in the letter. Jodi Arias later stated after being arrested for murder, that she did not want to admit to killing Travis because she did not want to get into the specifics of the relationship which would be embarrassing and reflect badly on both Travis and herself.

Yet, she talks about how the couple had to avoid Deanna Reid because she gets very jealous, about everything being part of God’s plan, and about how she discovered sexual text messages with multiple women in Travis’ phone in July, 2007.

She writes about how she broke up with him and how he begged her to move to Mesa, how he cheated on Her and Lisa Andrews, about having a confession session with Travis where he admitted he had been dating Lisa Andrews, about how Travis became enraged when Jodi talked about her love interests and dates, and about Travis being cruel to her and abusing her.

Remember that this letter was sent to Travis’ devastated family, his grandmother and his 7 siblings.

juan fit 11She writes about how Travis was begging her to come over for late night romps, how he ‘guilted her’ if she refused. She wrote about how Travis beat her and how she covered up the bruises, about her leaving Mesa and moving back to Yreka, about how Travis was extremely angry, and how she pitied him and felt sorry for him for the way he got angry and abused her.

She talks of how upon telling him of new love interests and dates, he branded her “a whore”, and about how she was helping him to court Mimi Hall.

She writes about how Travis planned to travel up to her area to see 3 more of the 1,000 Places to See Before You Die * ( Crater Lake, The Oregon Coast, and the Shakespeare Festival in Ashland, Oregon), how Travis later guilted her into diverting to Mesa, Arizona from her planned trip to lower California and Utah on June 2-6, 2008.

* If you listen closely to the phone sex conversation, you will notice that every time Jodi Arias mentions getting together or Travis coming up to Yreka to travel in Oregon, he stops talking or changes the subject. You will notice that happens several times. Then he finally agrees, but his plans are very vague.

Then she starts giving a very detailed account of the killing on June 4th, 2008. This is the Ninja story where she is taking photos of Travis in the shower when she hears a loud “pop”. Travis is shot by one of two intruders. He is on his hands and knees and screaming. Jodi charges the female intruder and knocks her over. She grabs Travis and tries to escort him out of the bathroom. Travis says he can’t make it and he can’t feel his legs.

The female intruder says we didn’t come here to kill Jodi Arias and the male threatens her family if she tells. The male and female intruder have an argument. The male intruder then changes his mind and points the gun at Jodi’s temple and fires, but the gun doesn’t go off. She brushes by the two intruders and out of the bathroom leaving Travis behind. She peels out of the driveway.

Jodi Arias even supplies details such as she backed out of the driveway keeping an eye on the front door, backing up without even looking at what was in the street. She even supplies witnesses, two blonde girls, a 9 year-old and a 14 year-old, who saw her as she cruised out of Travis’ neighborhood.

Then she talks about Travis’ kindness and generosity and how much she misses him. She makes the remark that some souvenirs Travis had in his home from their trips together, which are probably in their possession now, were bought by her. She writes again about how they both planned to conquer the 1,000 Places To See Before You Die. She gives more references to God’s will and adds some scripture, and explains why she smiled for her mug shot. She writes about how God is just and fair, how they will find and punish whoever did this someday, and about how Travis is close by and living in Heaven.

She goes on to say that Travis had retaliated against her physically on two occasions, but that he did nothing to deserve his horrific murder. She says she wasn’t jealous at all about not being asked to go to Cancun with Travis. She says she harbors no hostility towards Travis and knowing him was one of the great blessings of her life. She’s forgiven Travis for being unfaithful to her, and his family is in her thoughts and prayers.

jodi lg btThen she lets the family of the victim know that she will not spend a single day in prison for a heinous crime in which she had no part.

She mentions physical abuse in this letter, written just 7 weeks after the killing which goes against both the Law of Attraction and her stated goal of not edifying Travis in a negative way.

On the other hand, her claims of physical abuse are very consistent.

To get the full effect of the letter, you really need to imagine your son, grandson, or brother was just found in his bathroom in the state Travis Alexander was found in, then imagine you were told by the Mesa Police they were 100% sure that Jodi Arias did this. You are then told she has been indicted, charged, and arrested for your relative’s murder, then you receive this letter about 7 weeks after the body is found.

Read it several times. There are really only two conclusions a reasonable person could come to:

  • Jodi Arias is selfish, cruel and inhuman, with absolutely no concept of other people’s feelings or pain.

Or

  • Jodi Arias is severely and seriously mentally ill.

Any way you look at this letter, even in the light most favorable to the defendant, there can only be these two possibilities. These people just lost their family member, and she is talking about souvenirs from trips, about Travis’ cruelty and abuse, about herself mostly, and about Travis’ anger and rage. There is just no way any reasonable person could be that callous and insensitive to write the things she writes to a family that just lost their loved one in a brutal killing. There’s just no way she could have not really meant it that way. There is no possible interpretation of this letter that’s favorable to Jodi Arias.

Others would offer a third possibility

  • Jodi was justified in committing this crime or did not commit the crime at all.

barwood

barwood 4

Now try to clear your mind of everything, and put yourself in the shoes of someone who was there and did commit the killing, but completely blacked out, and only remembers small bits and pieces, but she knows she was attacked and she was defending herself. Now read the letter again. Does it make more sense now?

dryson 1

Now put yourself in the shoes of a very confused person who does not remember what really happened, but she knows she did not commit the killing. Now read the letter from this perspective. Does the letter make any more sense now?

“Dryson Bennington” believes that Travis’ roommate, Enrique Cortez, witnessed Travis having that conference call he was scheduled to have on June 4, 2008 at around 6:30 PM. The obvious problem with this is that his fellow PPL’ers stated Travis missed that conference call. No one has come forward to say they were on a conference call with Travis at around 6:30 PM on June 4, 2008.

I agree that the two roommates, Zach and Enrique, could not remember exactly when they saw Travis last, when they did their laundry last, and why they didn’t think it strange that Travis’ CTR ring (‘Choose the Right’), keys and wallet sat on the kitchen counter for 5 days when they thought he was in Cancun. It’s a little strange, but they were cleared in this matter, and it doesn’t seem like a promising lead to me. Dryson Bennington, a fellow Jodi-supporter, blocked me on Facebook shortly after this, when I was questioning his statements.

Jen from The Trial Diaries, a prosecution supporter, blocked me on Twitter, for whatever reason. I questioned something she said. I guess if someone disagrees with you, just block them and you never have to justify your statements or question your own ideas and assumptions. 🙂

But please be objective. Setting aside all other evidence, from which perspective does the letter make the most sense?

  • She planned it, she did it, and she knows she did it.
  • She did it, but she was attacked first and she defended herself, but remembers little.
  • She remembers little, she was there but she did not have any part in it.

This letter does serious damage to a case for Life for Jodi Arias. Presumably it will be in the jury room for the jury to read. Juan Martinez will be sure to see that they all read it. Many people think this letter is subtly, stealthily and deliberately heartless and cruel. Others believe it’s totally blatant and not really hidden at all. Few people see how this could just be an effort to ingratiate herself with the Alexander family and try to rationalize and divert blame and responsibility for the murder onto someone else. Fewer people still, believe that this letter can be explained and rationalized if the person committed the killing, but blacked out and doesn”t remember most of what happened, or was not involved at all.

I see it as more evidence that Jodi Arias has a severe and serious mental illness. I don’t see this as wholly deliberate, but beyond her ability to control it, or to fully realize the magnitude of what she is doing and what she has done.

When you couple this letter together with the affidavit of witness #1, the defense has taken a very serious blow this week. Some trial watchers have reported that this week changed their minds from wanting Life for Arias to wanting Death for her. Many trial watchers have reported that they feel that a sentence of Death is now far more likely than a Life sentence just on account of the events of last week.

judge sherryJuan Martinez has many, many more missiles and bombs in his arsenal to rain down on Jodi Arias, some of these may even be nuclear. The defense cannot afford to stumble again like they did last week. They need to find a way to counter these severe blows and others like them that surely will follow.

jodi arias sleeveless 2 ltThis thing with Marc McGee has been a disaster so far, and they need to fix it. It just makes a person wonder who will be the next star witness? Were these mitigation witnesses selected by the defense team or were these witnesses Jodi Arias insisted on including regardless of the defense team’s advice? Are Marc McGee and other possible witnesses the product of Jodi Arias listening to and believing in Simon Johannson, Benjamin Ernst and others from the crew at Jodi Arias Is Innocent.com?

Entering that letter into evidence was no fault of the defense, but the letter contradicts other statements Jodi Arias made. The Affidavit evidence needs to be as unassailable as possible. It does no good to enter into evidence things that will do far more harm than good for your case.

Whoever is behind this is steering her down the road to the execution chamber. I’m saying this as a Jodi Arias supporter: As of last week, the worm has turned and a unanimous sentence for Death has become a real and glaring possibility.

Do You Concur?

dod do you concur

Comments from all perspectives are welcome. You can also comment on our FB page:

facebookhttps://www.facebook.com/pages/Spotlight-On-Law/189870931203328

All Rights Reserved

Advertisements

23 thoughts on “Arias and her Defense add Insult to Injury”

  1. I don’t think you’re at the same trial I’m hearing about, your Deanna, was not very truthful today the 27 of January, 2015, and seemed to be caught hook, line & sinker as inconvenient with the truth. She has no credibility & her answers to questions today seemed robotic as if she was well versed as to what to say. The same with sleazy, Abe, who lied in court as well. What is it with this Prosecutor, having a shower of wasters tell to the court what he wants them to say. The guy has no morals. Jury this time will see through all of them…& Miss Arias is on her way to winning this part of the trial, re: the “Death Penalty”. It won’t happen!

    1. Thanks for your comment, Jaker. Well, I wrote this article last Friday, and you’re talking about today (Tuesday). Things change day to day in this trial. I believe Deanna Reid made previous statements that she never had sex with TA and she had no knowledge of him having sex with anyone else, both not true. This was before the original trial. That’s my understanding now, I could be wrong. That’s the problem with such a notorious case, if there are people who have knowledge of information detrimental to TA and helpful to JA, possibly no one will come forward because of what happened to him.

      I’m still not sure about Deanna. I never liked Abe Abdelhadi. He was definitely a hot head and an admitted womanizer, and Travis said he had “no soul”. I tend to agree, and he really went for the big interviews, even though, like Dave Hall, Abe had very little to contribute. I’m more concerned about Dr. DeMArte and Dr. Karp (very fishy), and whoever else Martinez has on tap.

      Juan Martinez may just end up being the best thing that ever happened to Jodi Arias. Our position on him is clear. This seems like a very bright and cohesive jury this time. They will really want to come up with a unanimous decision, too. If Arias gets the DP, I think it will be commuted to life somewhere down the road.

      I was surprised the Defense rested today, but that was a wise decision. There’s still allocution for JA to say something. The thing that worries me is the day between Trials when KN and JW came out of the judges chambers looking extremely upset. Was that because she decided to allow that very damaging letter that wasn’t allowed before? Was it about what Dr. Karp was going to bring in ? Or was it something else?

      It’s a really difficult decision sentencing a person to death, especially a young woman. that’s one reason why we keep saying this should never have been a Death Penalty case in the first place. Also, as we reported earlier, an Arizona man choked and stabbed a young woman to death ON VIDEO, then was found bloody in her car later. He had 3 aggravating factors and multiple felony counts against him. The jury WATCHED the video, yet they could not agree on a death sentence (the 1st time). So, there’s that.

      I just don’t understand the wisdom of bringing in Marc McGee, and I wonder whose decision that was. If you ‘ve got something important, step up and testify in person, because a live witness beats a paper affidavit any day of the week.

  2. The testimony of witness #1 as in direct contradiction to Deanna’s testimony. It’s correct that the defense need to impeach Deanna. I hope they can do that effectively.

    1. Thanks for your comment, George. Kirk Nurmi is a chess player, so he had to know if he was going to introduce evidence that TA had physically abused Deanna Reid, that Juan Martinez would put her up on the stand. So maybe they do have something. We’ll probably find out today. The defense will also need a good allocution. I wonder what they have planned for surrebuttal ?

  3. There seems to be something up with the mobile vs real site. When I read this article on my phone 86 thoughts show up, whereas when I read it on my PC only 4 thoughts show up . Most odd. 🙂 Anyway….

    I am somewhat shocked by this post, especially your responses in the comments section, Rob. I am particularly surprised by the reference to Mr Alexander as the victim of domestic violence. Self defense is not domestic violence. So why do you appear to have changed your position on this?

    While I don’t agree that the crime was pre-meditated, I can kinda see how some might think that she had planned to kill him. However, I cannot wrap my head around the fact that there are people out there who really think that Travis treated her well. We’ve all read the disgusting texts messages, emails and IMs. We don’t need to take Jodi’s word – these things are right there in black and white. It’s terribly sad to read that people think this verbal and emotional abuse doesn’t count as DV. I now understand on a real level why people stay with abusers (having worked in a DV charity I thought I already had a lot of knowledge about the subject!). It seems that unless the DV victim is killed (and thus becomes a marty and a victim), they themselves will be labelled as a homicidal maniac. See also the Tracey Grisson case: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2745156/Woman-sentenced-25-years-murder-rapist-ex-husband.html/. Yep, defending yourself results in you being labelled as the cold-blooded abusive one.

    When I hear a TA supporter baying for blood, I really wonder what they would say if their daughter had a boyfriend like the T-dog. Would they really want their daughter to marry a man who berates a woman for not answering communications quickly enough, who uses terms like “slut” and “3 hole wonder” and who dates about 12 women at the same time? In what world is that a good guy?

    You also seem to be criticising the use of affidavits. Of course most people will prioritise their personal safety over defending someone else’s freedom. Do you not remember what happened to poor Alyce LaViolette and Patti Womack? There is a reason why people don’t want to be witnesses in this joke of a trial.

    As for Heather’s comments, I have no idea what went on there, but I can say the TA supporters don’t tend to act like reasonable ladies/gentlemen. Their comments on social media and YT are filled with curses and misogynistic worlds like “slut” and “whore” . In fact, anyone who uses the latter words clearly looks at women as Madonnas/whores so I have no time for their judgmental opinions anyway. The accusation that Jodi was a “slut” also makes me laugh as she only ever had sex with four men, and they were all with current or former boyfriends. I’ve given up talking to the TA side because they start off conversations with curses and phrases like “you must be a mentalist to have that opinion”. I have calmed a few down by responding like an adult and stating that it’s very strange to curse at a stranger on the internet. However, I can no longer be bothered conversing with people who want to send a DV victim to the execution chamber. Most DP supporters are not critical thinkers, anyhow.

    I completely agree with Pamela’s comments. That letter does not read at all like Jodi’s normal writings. The state of that letter certainly supports the disassociation case, and the defense should mention that.

    What’s with assuming that people on JAII actually control what the defense team are doing? I am very curious as to why you think that.

    1. Excellent comments, Lynn. First, we publish the articles twice, once as a “page” and once as a “post”. With the post, you can scroll through all our articles and with the page, it’s one single article. That’s why there are 4 comments on the post and many more comments on the page.

      We have always referred to Travis Alexander as a victim, he’s a victim of a homicide. That’s true no matter what the reason for his horrific death. This homicide is officially listed by Arizona as a domestic homicide and it was quite violent.

      The idea that Travis treated Jodi well comes by her own words in her journals and in her testimony. Many people believe that the only bad treatment Jodi received was on 5/26/2008, when they had that argument and Travis called Jodi a slut, a whore, worthless, shit, and a 3-holed wonder. They believe Jodi lied to Alyce LaViolette and all of Alyce’s testimony is false becuase it’s based on Jodi’s lies.

      We have always said that’s not true. You’re correct, Jodi was abused by Travis from the very beginning to the end of that relationship. There is lots of proof of that and it doesn’t come from Jodi, but from several of TA’s friends and his own words.

      There is no change in position on this blog. This article is saying that the defense not seating all the mitigation witnesses was a bad idea. Marc McGee’s affadavit seems to have doen more harm than good AND it damaged Robert Geffner’s credibility, in my opinion.

      Then I was asking how do supporters square that letter to the family with a self-defense theory? I’m saying the letter was written by a mentally ill person, while many prosecution supporters see the letter as vindictive and purposely jabbing the Alexander family.

      I worked with a woman whose boyfriend treated her horribly but wouldn’t leave him. many of us tried to get her to leave, and we were almost successful, and then she quit the job and we lost track of her. I saw first hand in my work many cases of verbal, emotional and physical abuse and I’ve interviewed young women just out of the hospital still refusing to leave their abuser.

      Verbal and emotional abuse is the NEW DV. In some ways. it’s worse than physical abuse because if used effectively, it can turn a person into a vitual slave. For people with low self-esteem, the abuser becomes like a God, the abused becomes totally dependent on their abuser for their happiness and reassurance.

      Yes, on Twitter and Facebook, there are prosecution supporters “baying for blood” as you say. I saw this morning a solemn prayer to God that there is an execution sentence, and that’s disgusting. There’s plenty of ignorant people on the prosecution side, but there are also very well-informed people on that side who believe JA is guilty as charged. There are nuts on the Jodi supporter side, too. Our next article will be all about some prosecution supporters who are way out there in left field.

      This blog was written mainly for fence-sitters and non-supporters so hopefully they can see that there are Jodi Supporters who are sane and reasonable, and there are valid issues on the defense side. There is another side to this story.

      Again, there are ignorant, mean, and crazy prosecution supporters and fighting with them won’t do any good. There are also respectful, thoughtful and caring prosecution supporters, and these people, I like to have discussions and debates with. People like Heather Soper treat both groups the exact same and she attacks them all and she gives her views in a combative way. I just believe that really doesn’t help Jodi’s case at all.

      Many prosecution supporters who are sane and rational, do not want a Death Sentence for Jodi. You will find them on Facebook pages that do not allow attacks, and promote discussion and debate between both sides. Some do want death, or do not care either way, and I hope they will chnge their position on that.

      Many normal prosecution supporters can’t stand “the State vs Jodi Arias” “Justice for Travis” Facebook page and they are very much against the crude and foul comments on that page. How do I know this? I know this because I communicate with prosecution supporters.

      Finally, we know there’s a tension between JA and Kirk Nurmi. He has tried to drop the case and she has tried to get rid of him. Why? Many prosecution supporters believe that Jodi Arias wants certain things done in this penalty retrial against the wishes of her Defense Team. Some believe that SJ and Ben Ernst may also be involved. They’ve been saying that for some time, now. After Marc McGee’s affidavit that seemed to do more harm than good, I have to consider the possibility that JA is driving the train in some ways.

      1. Thanks for the kudos on my comment, Rob. 🙂 That post vs page thing explains it all. I’ll keep that in mind.

        I agree that verbal/emotional abuse is worse than physical abuse. It’s also dangerous because (as we have seen), society does not see it as abuse. Unless one has bruises one is not being abused. Heck, Tracey Grissson ended up with a colostomy bag from her abuser, but she was still convicted of murder. 😦

        I do agree that there could be “nuts” on both sides. However, the difference is that those of us on JA’s side aren’t playing God and asking the state to kill someone. I like to have intelligent discussions. but I honestly have not met any “thoughtful and caring prosecution supporters”. I’ve conversed with ones who keep it civil, but a person who supports the DP cannot be truly thoughtful or caring. It’s like a doctor who testifies in a capital case. He is violating his oath simply by testifying for a side that would take another’s life. Where are these prosecution supporters who do not support the DP for Jodi? How can they rationalise sending a DV victim to jail? Is it because they think emotional abuse and verbal onslaughts don’t count as abuse?

        Yes, there was tension between KN and JA. However, how could anyone have a good relationship with someone who says “9 days out of 10 I don’t like [the defendant]”. I understand he was trying to make the point that a trial is not about liking/disliking the defendant. However, it certainly didn’t help her case.

      2. I hear you, Lynn. This time I have a different picture on the post to make it easier to tell them apart. I had to look up that Tracy Grissom case, I’m surprised that I had not heard of that one. It’s a horrifying case. The shooting was 1 1/2 yeaars after she was attacked, and the law generally looks down on vigilante justice. But there are serious mitigating factors and the jury or the judge should have taken that into account.

        In fb pages like “Jodi Arias open discussion group”, there are prosecution supporters who do not want JA to get the Death Penalty. I don’t know how many just aren’t saying and will secretly cheer, but many have come right out and said they don’t think she should get the DP. I thought there would be a lot more prosecution supporters on the side of life, and the discussion would be all about life vs death, but some prosecution supporters won’t be happy until all Jodi supporters are extinguished.

        The thing is that even if I were to come out and say I think she’s guilty of M1, I would still support her because I will always believe this is not a case where the DP is appropriate, that it was an unfair trial, and that JA is mentally ill and cannot help herself in some ways. I certainly don’t believe that JA has purposely tried to “trash Travis” and attack his family with vindictiveness, as some believe.

        I just saw a comment ‘well we just want to make sure she’s punished and pays for what she did’. That comment makes no sense to me because she has been paying forwhat she’s done and she will continue to do so, no matter what this verdict is.

        Then I saw a comment ‘for me, justice for Travis is about getting to the truth’. I don’t think we have gotten to the truth here, and I think today (Wednesday Jan 4) is a good example of not getting the truth. We have partial truth and partial speculation. Yes, the 9 days out of 10 was a blunder move. There are much better ways of making that point.

      3. I watched half the 48 Hours episode and then had to switch off because I found it so upsetting. Anyhow, she only approached her ex because she couldn’t believe he was still working at their mutual business:

        “There’s a break in the trees. And to the right side was a large toll boat that had a billboard sign on the side that said Grissom Construction,” she pointed out to Moriarty. “And I immediately, within about a 30-second period, made probably the stupidest mistake of my life. And that was to go in the parking lot to take a picture.”

        She says she wanted a photo to show that Grissom Construction was indeed up and running.

        “I was getting ready to take the picture and when I looked up he was standing almost directly towards the front of the boat trailer. He was looking back directly at me. He had this face, that’s like mean – just, I don’t know how to describe it. I mean, I see it over and over like it’s right there all the time. He flipped me the bird, which to me was kinda like, ‘Yeah I’m workin. Screw you.’ And at that point, I panicked.”

        “He’s walking towards you?” Moriarty asked Tracey.

        “Yes. He’s now within five foot of coming at my car like he was gonna bust my window out,” she said.

        In her lap was the gun she bought 18 months earlier. Tracey stepped out of the car and began shooting.

        “I mean I just opened the door,” she said. “The next thing I remember is a click.”

        Tracey had emptied her entire gun — six shots. Four of the shots hit Hunter and brought him face down on the pavement.

        Then she called 911.

        http://www.cbsnews.com/news/tracey-grissom-battered-woman-or-cold-blooded-killer/

        It seems that very attractive women are actually more likely to be convicted if they are tried for a crime in the US. This is in contrast to attractive men, whom studies show are less likely to be convicted. I personally think America is *so* image focused that some women on juries have latent jealousy towards such women. After all, Tracey is a pretty lady also.

        You are correct that we still do not know the truth. 😦 However, Nurmi has vastly improved. He is certainly on point today. “You work part-time as a sort of Dr. Death,” Nurmi says to DeMarte. He is correct about that. Dr DeMarte is a disgrace to the mental health profession. She is taking advantage of a mentally ill woman in order to build her own career.

      4. I totally agree on DeMarte beign a disgrace to mental health. Having worked in the field, I never got to her level, but i would never do what she does. I have not reviewed today’s events, but I did see that tweet about Dr. Death. I can’t fault Dr. DeMarte for doing evaluations and giving her opinion, but she is acting as a conduit to bring in all sorts of cherry-picked data, as she brought in precluded items last time.

        Attractive women more likely to be convicted? I hadn’t thought of that, but I suppose it might be true. Remember how Caycee Anthony was uglied up for her trial? I think that was very effective, but at the time, I thought it wasn’t a good idea.

        This case with Grissom sounds like she snapped. There was a case in NY where a woman’s ex came over and he made a ham sandwich and he had a butter knife. The woman went to her bedroom and got a gun. She shot her ex six times, then went back to the bedroom, reloaded, and shot him four more times. She was acquitted. The law is a strange animal.

  4. I am afraid that I can indeed fault a mental health professional who testifies for the prosecution in a capital case. Major ethics violation there. Plus, she doesn’t understand that BPD cannot be diagnosed in the presence of trauma. BPD is an on-ging pattern of behaviour, and JA does not exhibit many signs of it. I am close to someone with BPD and have a Psych degree, so it bugs me that DeMarte is even suggesting this.

    I am not sure if there are any research studies on whether attractive women are more likely to be convicted. However, it sure seems that attractive women are the ones strung up and labelled as “whores” by the American media. The Madonna/whore dichotomy sure seems to be on fire in the US. We in Europe have mostly moved on from such black and white thinking about women. Anyhow, there are research studies showing attractive *men* are less likely to be convicted. I am not sure if there are any formal studies in women. Jodi was also dressed down for her first trial. I note that she seems more dressed up and put-together in this re-trial…

    I would recommend Michael Kieffer’s tweets for a quick catch-up. I haven’t had much time lately, so his tweets are a great way to get caught up on the day’s events.

    What was the name of the defendant in the NY case?

    1. I have a Psychology degree also, and I vaguely remember someone lecturing the class and telling us that testifying for the State in a capital case violates the code of ethics of the APA (American Psychological Association). I was told that’s not true, but I do remember something like that. In any case, if you are a mental health professional and you are assisting the State to achieve a Death Sentence, especially for a mentally ill person, then something is wrong with you and you are in the wrong profession.

      I listen to Kieffer also, or read his tweets. It’s funny how some of the “reporters” in court are biased, so depending on who’s tweets people read, they are getting a different story. I was very surprised that Kirk Nurmi called Dr. DeMarte “Dr. Death” yesterday. It’s about time someone calls it like it is.

      1. This article focuses on these very issues: http://ethicsandsociety.org/2013/05/17/are-psychologists-violating-the-american-psychological-associations-apa-ethics-code-when-they-conduct-death-penalty-evaluations-involving-defendants-with-mental-disabilities/.

        It’s very clear that DeMarte is an ice-queen who does not belong in the profession. She absolutely should not be treating patients. At best, she should be working in research/lecturing.

        Yes, Kiefer seems to be one of the few unbiased ones. I liked that KN called her Dr Death, and I very much enjoyed his “Good morning, comments”. 🙂

      2. I wonder if Dr. DeMarte will have a change of heart in the future. I certainly hope so. I wonder if Juan Martinez hired a psychologist rigtout of school because those working in the proffesion for some time will refuse to testify for the prosecution. I hope that’s true, too.

        As someone with a degree in psychology, as I said, I am offended by Dr. DeMArte. Not becuase she does her evaluations, but because she has learly crossed the line of neutrality and has been used to bring in damaging and prejudicial evidence. Not cool.

        I like the good morning and part-time Dr. Death comments, myself. Of course, this is the darling of prosecution supporters who just gush and fawn over her.

  5. “I wonder if Juan Martinez hired a psychologist rigtout of school because those working in the proffesion for some time will refuse to testify for the prosecution.” I think that is exactly why he hired her. Get ’em while they’re young, as the fella says!

    I am sure you excel at your job. This site is excellent.

    1. Juan has a habit of hiring young experts who are are good with people. In State vs Falater, he hired a young expert on sleepwalking who denied everything 3 older experts on the defense side were saying about sleepwalking. Thanks for that! We try to do a good job and have in depth articles. Thanks, Lynn!

      1. Teflon Juan because he strays wayover that line so many times, and nothing is ever done about it. Let’s see him peosecute a very “iffy” case, requiring great skill. He would probably lose, as he has either lost or not gotten the guilty charge he wanted in every case that is not a “slam dunk” case.

  6. You seem to be going in the same direction I am. I am against the death penalty period except for recently due to one of my clients being the family of 3 murder victims and watching their pain was incredibly sad. I’ve tried rationalizing in the past: What Jodi Arias did was not right but based on my personal experience I understand how it could happen. I lost a lot of empathy for Jodi when I saw on the site jaii a picture of the body bag with “Justice Served” captioned across the picture, between the terrible things that are posted about the Alexander family (they have every right in the world to grieve and no one should attack them) and the foul language/insults I can’t in good conscience feel like Jodi deserves empathy. I’ve posted before that I met Jodi when she worked in Palm Desert and she was soft spoken and eager to please imagining this tiny person doing such a terrible thing out of jealousy didn’t make sense to me for a long time. Unfortunately I feel naive and that letter she wrote to the family made my stomach hurt because of how good of a liar she is; I wanted to believe her. Do I think it was premeditated? No, something happened in the bathroom and she snapped. Do I think she stabbed him first? No its obvious the gun shot happened 1st and I don’t understand why a competent forensic doctor would change that theory to appease the prosecution but I’m not an expert so I could be wrong. At the end of the day I think she should get a new trial with a sequestered jury and all the evidence should be presented from the letters to Jodi from Travis/the letter Jodi wrote to his family and the eye reflection. It’s unfortunate what juror #17 is going through and I hope that people will come around to seeing the juror’s perspective as I would have voted I’m the same manner. I used to think JA deserved a second chance but in all sincerity I think she needs to be locked up for the rest of her life for the sake of public safety. Both the Alexander family and Arias family are suffering and I hope someday both sides will get peace through understanding.

    1. Yes, Melissa, I think we do think along the same lines. I remember the last time you commented here because you were the first one who actualy met Jodi Arias before all this happened.

      As far as the Death Penalty goes, even if you execute the suspect upon arrest, there will still be no justice or peace for the vicitms of the murder(s). Murder is a gross injustice depriving victim of not just their life, but the rest of their life and everything that could have happened in it. There is no punishment that will bring back the lives of the victims or ever give their families closure.

      The best you can do is capture the murderer and punish them and try to get to the truth of what happened. Their punishment or even their execution will never be equal to the life of the murder victim that was lost.

      You shouldn’t hold one foreign imbecile with a website and the dolts who followed him responsible for the empathy you feel or don’t feel for a defendant. Really, the victim cannot tell us what happened that day and the weeks leading up to it and Jodi Arias can’t either. This is because she testified she blacked out in the bathroom and her testimony about the weeks before may not be reliable.

      So, neither SJ, nor JAII, nor anyone else can say for a certainty that Jodi Arias was attacked on June 4th. The most anyone can do is offer it up as a possibility. My position includes the position of most Prosecution supporters because I believe it’s a possibility that JA is guilty as charged but also I believe it’s possible that she is not guilty as charged.

      The letter she wrote to the Alexander family really shows a lack of sensitivity to other people’s feelings and a lack of discretion. Maybe that was because of all the turmoil in her life at the time. I also believe she snapped, whether it was that day or a week or even longer before the murder.

      I do believe the medical examiner tailored his testimony to fit the prosecution theory and that’s just plain wrong. Even most prosecution supporters who have really studied the facts and the evidence, now believe that the gunshot was first. Could it have been a gunshot first in the shower murder? Yes, it could. It could also have been a gunshot first self-defense outside the shower.

      One thing we do know, it was not a gunshot last murder with a stabbing first in the shower. There’s very little evidence or common sense pointing to that. Doctor Horn may have fooled the jury about the order of injuries, but not most trial watchers who had much more time to digest all the evidence were not fooled, for the most part.

      I would like to see a new, fair trial where all the relevant evidence is brought out, also. I’m sure that this is bound to happen sooner or later in this case. If Jodi Arias were to be found guilty of 1st degree premeditated murder in the future in a fair trial, then I will accept that decision.

      With all the uproar and world-wide noise about Oscar Pistorius, there has been a whole lot of silence lately. There will be very little activity on the Social media about it until they start talking about releasing him. The same will eventually happen with Jodi Arias, too, believe it or not.

      I think after the civil trial and some other news making events, when the smoke clears this too will go somewhat silent. When it does I think the Alexander family along with the Arias family will realize that Life in prison was the best decision for everyone involved under the facts of this particular case.

      Thank-You for your comments once again, Melissa

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s