Monkey See, Monkey Do, Monkey step in a big steaming pile of wet Monkey-Poo.
Past and Present Female Murderers
Fact-based reporting by
Okay, so there is a little more to say about Jodi Arias, and there are 3 more articles on the way. One is an article about Jodi’s Support. Are there any supporters left and if there are, who are they? There will be one article in particular about one ardent supporter named Kareem “Lefty” Williams and his high-jinx and adventures with ‘the Joadster’. There will be one article about a new theory I have come up with called the 6-6-6 theory of Jodi Arias.
There is not going to be much more to say about Jodi Arias for a while, so here at Spotlight On Law, we are going to move onto other things. What we will be moving on to will be called Jodi Arias Wannabees Past and Present.
The sub-title will be “Monkey See, Monkey Do, Monkey step into a big steaming pile of wet Monkey Poo”.
Can you identify any of the above by either first or last name (both is even better)?
No cheating, now (No Googling or looking for articles allowed).
The thing about the fairer sex, the life givers and nurturers, being involved in murders is that it’s much more rare and it’s usually very varied as to motive and circumstance. Instead of patterns of criminal activity and violence, there seems to be more of a pattern of relationships and mental illness or mental breakdown.
Are any of these women just plain evil and born as a demon? We will take a deeper look at the facts, the crimes, and the circumstances to find out.
We will look at some older cases, some famous cases, but mostly recent cases either in court or recently committed murders. What are the known facts, what are the disputed facts, what evidence is there, and who will the witnesses be?
Did the defendant have good representation? How were the Prosecutors? Was it a fair trial? Was it a fair sentence or a just outcome? Any chance they are not guilty as charged?
As a warm up, no cheating now, can you name at least six of these accused / suspects / defendants? Can you name at least 6? For bonus points, can you name at least one victim each? Can you name more than 5 off the top of your head?
Use the comment Section to give your answers.
What happened to each of these women that possibly made them flip their burgers and kill a human being? Do they regret their activities after they realized that they had stepped in a big pile of fresh poo?
Okay, so we’ll be coming back at you with a new article on Jodi Arias, then one of these Jodi Wannabees of the past, and then we will bring you a present day Jodi Wannabee. We’ll take it from there and see what other cases we can find. Hopefully some lesser known cases as well as the more interesting of the well known cases.
Okay, have a happy! But, don’t make a rash decision then step in some Crappy.
In part 6, we look at the phenomenon that is Jodi Arias. Whether you want to admit it or not, Jodi Arias does have some amazing capabilities. I mean, could you make a perfectly normal and even bouncy sounding voice mail right after you hacked up your intimate partner? Could you smile for your mugshot, sing and do head stands right after you’ve just been arrested for murder? Could you go head to head with Juan Martinez and even get the better of him every now and then?
The phenomenon that is Jodi Arias
Could you stand in front of the jury that’s deciding whether you live or die and tell them that their verdict was wrong and show them your domestic violence Survivor T-shirt? Could you be profound, warm, and originally entertaining with tweets sent from 23 hour lock-down in jail while you are awaiting the remainder of your death penalty trial? – without even knowing what Twitter is?
Notice how Jodi Arias uses pieces of evidence and intertwines them in her narrative to lend credibility to her story? “He had some blood all over the floor and there was some just coming down on his arms.”
The funny thing about this interview is that Jodi Arias tells the story as if she was not there at all, the emotions aren’t there, the details aren’t there, and this is why some Jodi Supporters continue to claim that she was not involved in the killing.
Could you do a series of interviews taking on every subject under the sun and do a very impressive job of it, right at the end of your capital murder trial and just after almost being sentenced to death?
Would you have the nerve to actually beg the jury to give you the death penalty in your penalty phase re-trial? (No testimony other than testimony given under conditions impossible to be met by the court, no mitigation witnesses presented, no allocution) Jodi Arias is all that and more. Look at how well she handles her first interview with Troy Hayden.
Could you fabricate a story out of whole cloth and tell it to a nationwide audience on TV? Could you win a talent contest among scores of inmates? Could you sing the Star Spangled Banner for a large audience at a County Fair? Could you sell your artwork for thousands of dollars a pop? Jodi Arias can do all this and she does it well. She takes a story that she made up, to explain her presence in Travis Alexander’s home, tells it on National TV, and then she turns it into a sprawling manifesto.
Love her or hate her, you have to admit that Jodi Arias is a phenomenon.
Thoughts on Travis Alexander
Is there some kind of relationship between this story by Travis Alexander about how he was held at gunpoint at a Diner, and what happened on June 4th 2008? In this familiar film clip. Travis is sitting in the hotel lobby with a bunch of PPL friends (Pre-Paid Legal Insurance brokers). The friends are sitting in groups of couches and chairs, there are maybe 30 people, and some are standing. He’s relating a story about a time he was held with others at gunpoint. Jodi Arias seems to be tired and is not listening to the story, and she’s all over Travis in a very inappropriate way, especially for a single Mormon.
“To think this is how you die ….. this is it
and there’s this woman who’s about 10 feet away
and she started like crying uncontrollably.
So I got a gun against my temple and he keeps, like.
doing this with his gun (makes gestures).
and she’s very near,
so, I’m looking in my peripheral
because I don’t want to turn this way and I’m like:
“shut up”, because
he’s like: “SHUT UP! – SHUT UP! – SHUT UP!”
and I got this gun against my head
and all he needs to do is squeeze, you know?
and I’m like
this woman is gonna get me killed
and I’m like looking at her like with
all the despair I can muster up in my retina
you know what I mean and it was…..it was….it sucked.”
It’s a mystery what is going on here, with Travis seated in the shower and seeming to look despairingly at the camera. It’s difficult to know if he’s being threatened with a weapon or just getting exasperated at Jodi Arias’ antics. This is right before what ever happened in the bathroom happened, just a minute before the attack.
So does Travis’ story of a near-death experience play any part in Jodi’s plans? Did she hear that story ‘a million times’? It’s all part of the mystery, the things that only Jodi Arias knows for sure, and probably will never tell. Even if she did tell us, could we believe her? I think Jodi Arias revels and basks in the radiance of this deed. She tells the story her way, knowing that no one can contradict her and she realizes that “no one knows what goes on behind closed doors” except her and Travis.
Here is Travis’ story of his near-death experience, and then another story is told about a confrontation between Jodi and Travis’ good friend, Sky Hughes.
Was the gun first or last?
A reader reminded me that I did not address the gun first or last issue. It’s strange, because, if it could be proven that the gun was not first, then it’s game over for Jodi Arias without having to address anything else.
If the gun was not first, she’s guilty of 1st degree premeditated murder – The End.
Much has been made about the defense not having their own medical examiner to counter the prosecution’s charge that the gunshot was last. Really, if the defense actually had their own Medical Examiner, they could not counter the prosecution theory. The most they could do would be to say that gunshot first was a reasonable possibility. Maybe it just wasn’t worth it to go through all that with another expert just to say it was a reasonable possibility.
Important to remember: Gunshot first does not mean it had to be self-defense. There’s a gunshot first self-defense scenario and a gunshot first murder scenario, in addition to the gunshot last murder scenario.
Dr. Horn, the Medical Examiner who did the autopsy on Travis, stated unequivocally, and at three different times on the stand during the trial, that the gunshot had to be last, and could not have been first. As a juror, that’s all I would have to rely on to find that Jodi Arias is guilty of 1st degree premeditated murder. I need to hear no other evidence at all (other than proof that she was at the scene and she did kill Alexander).
As such, the defense made a huge error in not opposing this idea that it’s impossible for the gunshot to be first. These missteps of the defense are not grounds for appeal. If the prosecution knowingly presented evidence to the jury that they knew was wrong, which I and many others believe they did, then that is grounds for an appeal, if it can be proven.
People like to point to the fact that the bullet casing landed on blood, indicating that the the stabbings came first before the shooting.
This is not a “pool of blood”, but only a spot of blood that’s about 1″ or so long.
No one had proven that that casing was exactly where it first landed on June 4th, 2008.
The casing could have come first and the blood oozed under it.
That blood could have come from the gunshot wound
The casing could have been kicked by Arias, by a roommate, or by the police.
Polished brass is a very slippery substance and blood does not adhere to it. It’s possible the blood fell on top of the casing.
The prosecution argued that a violent confrontation and a hasty clean-up happened in the bathroom, yet they want you to believe that the shell casing was found exactly where it landed.
The prosecution argued that the floor, especially by the linen closet, was flooded with water, yet at the same time, they want to argue the casing never moved.
Video from the firing of a typical .25 caliber “Saturday Night Special” shows that the expired casings are ejected just over the person’s right shoulder. Most left handed people fire a gun with their right hand. Arias could have used either hand. Let’s see if we can trace the casing backwards:
Please bear with this video and watch how close to the end, you will see how the ejected shells fall and that the magazine is often the culprit when these guns jam. The man also notes that it is not best to fully load the magazine with 6 in the mag. and 1 in the chamber, as this can cause problems with the magazine. This is exactly how Jodi’s grandfather kept the gun: fully loaded.
In the gunshot last murder scenario, assuming the body was brought in head first, the placement of the casing would eject over Arias’ shoulder, and this placement makes sense. If the body was dragged back legs first, then this scenario doesn’t work. The shell casing would be somewhere in the middle of the hallway. Here’s yet another reason why the gunshot last theory doesn’t fit the evidence.
In the gunshot first murder scenario, if Arias shot Travis in the shower, the casing could eject over her shoulder, bounce against the shower door, and could roll or bounce to the location the casing was found in.
If, in the gunshot first self-defense scenario, Arias somehow ended up with the pistol facing the back corner of the bathroom when she fired a shot and the casing ejected, the casing could also end up where it was found.
So the placement of the casing could support all three scenarios.
Remember that baseboard with the blood on it?
This evidence implies that the body was dragged down the hallway by the legs, then swung around by the arms to go into the shower, scraping the bloody head or hand against the baseboard. That would go against the bullet casing ending up where it did in a gun last scenario, assuming it never moved once it landed. Another possibility was that the body was brought in by the legs, spun around, and then placed directly into the shower before being shot. In this scenario, Arias would have to have him propped where he was sitting in the shower photo, shoot him in the head, then spin him around 180 degrees to the position he was found in. In that case, the bullet could get there in the same way as it could have in the gunshot first murder scenario.
Besides, the Medical Examiner – Dr. Horn’s, testimony that the gunshot wound had no blood in the wound track and would have been immediately and permanently disabling, rendering a gunshot first scenario impossible in his opinion, there are a few other reasons for believing in such a scenario. one is the bullet casing found in blood, already mentioned. The other is the blood pools by the linen closet door, indicating the body may have been brought to that area to be shot. The body probably was not shot in the shower after being dragged back there, because the right side of the body was towards the rear of the shower.
That’s about all the evidence there is indicating this possibility. However, Dr. Horn’s opinion in past cases pointed to one of two possibilities as being the only possibility. This includes two wrongful convictions / prosecutions where Dr. Horn was found to be in error. One was a Death Penalty case. Why didn’t the defense hire their own medical examiner? No one knows at this point. Is it because no one can dispute the medical examiner? If that’s true, then this case is ‘game over’.
Reasons to believe the gunshot was first, whether self-defense or murder:
Injuries indicated by blood evidence in the bathroom to the left of the sink are consistent with a gunshot wound, while injuries indicated by blood evidence in the bathroom to the right of the sink are consistent with knife wounds.
The defendant claimed from the beginning that the gunshot was first. The defendant described the ringing of the gun and the decedent holding his head and letting out a high pitched wail.
If this was a gunshot first murder, then the defendant stole her grandfather’s gun. Why go through all the trouble to steal the gun if the plan was to use a knife?
A gunshot wound like that is immediately and permanently incapacitating, according to whom?
It didn’t incapacitate Kevin Bright –
Kevin Bright of Kansas survived two gunshots by the BTK killer. He fought off the killer and was shot directly into the brain. He went down, and was shot again. He then came back up and was able to negotiate his way out of the house to safety. Kevin Bright was the only witness to see the BTK killer and survive. The bullet remains in Mr. Bright’s brain today.
Kevin Bright of Kansas survived two gunshots by the BTK killer. He fought off the killer and was shot directly into the brain. He went down, and was shot again. He then came back up and was able to negotiate his way out of the house to safety. Kevin Bright was the only witness to see the BTK killer and survive. The bullet remains in Mr. Bright’s brain today.
Travis’s left hand was severely cut up with 4 incised wounds, the majority were deep. Travis’ left hand would have been pouring blood. The scene at the sink is not consistent with that. It’s more consistent with a gunshot wound and a bloody right hand where he was holding the wound. Injuries to the scalp and forehead are very bloody due to all the small arteries and veins there.
If Travis were motionless, then why is the shot such a badly placed shot?
In order for a shot to be made to Travis lying on the floor at this angle and trajectory, the barrel of the gun needs to be around 8 to 12 inches off the bathroom floor. This is not a reasonable or natural position.
Shooting someone post mortem is the infliction of “gratuitous violence”. This perfectly fits the Arizona requirements for the Heinousness and the Depravity prongs of the “especially heinous, cruel and depraved” aggravator. Incredibly, Arias was only charged with the cruelty prong of the aggravator, demonstrating that the prosecution did not believe Alexander was shot post mortem at the time of the indictment and subsequent pre-trial hearings.
The only way felony murder applies to this case, is if this was gunshot first. This would be attempted murder and the gun failed to kill Alexander, so Arias switched to a knife to finish Alexander off. This indicates that the state believed this was a gunshot first murder, originally. That makes it a felony murder because the gunshot was not fatal and constitutes an assault. At this point Arias is not welcome in the home unless she renders aid / calls for help. Instead of helping Alexander, Arias gets a knife and finishes him off, constituting Felony Murder. If it was knife first, there is no separate assault and therefore it is not felony murder.
A person who is shot in the head is much more likely to go to a mirror to check what is wrong than a person who is stabbed. if you’re stabbed, you do not have to go to a mirror to see your wounds.
There are a bunch more good reasons, including that the trajectory for Travis being shot in the shower in the last position he was photographed in fits perfectly.
If he never saw the gun, from this angle, Travis would never know he’d been shot. There would be pain, blood, and confusion, prompting the trip to the mirror.
Gray Hughes, and a lot of other people who believe this was a 1st degree murder, also believe the gunshot was first, in spite of Kevin Horn, an M.D. and Medical Examiner, saying that this is impossible. Regardless of what Jodi Arias did, it seems that the state led the jury to believe something that the state itself did not believe to be true.
So, just like Forest Gump – “That’s all I have to say about thaaaaaaat.”
“Jodi couldn’t get Travis in life, so she chose to own him in death.”
This is what someone in our facebook group said, and truer words were never spoken, in my opinion. If you really look at Jodi’s actions:
She didn’t ask for an attorney
She didn’t invoke her 5th Amendment rights
She wrote that very strange manifesto and the letter to Travis’ family
Arias’ behavior in court indicates she feels she was justified
Arias’ really begging for the death penalty in the 2nd penalty phase trial
Arias’ really odd interviews before and after the trial
Arias’ asking for make-up and her smiling mugshot
Arias saying in the 48 hours interview “He (God) knows, and I know, and Travis knows“.
….. and her unceasing interest in what people are saying about her all scream
“I own Travis in death”. All these secrets, that only she knows, about what really happened are precious jewels to her, in all probability, because this is how she can own him outright and forever. The manifesto and letter to the family both show a strong will to be the writer of history where Travis is concerned. It’s way overblown, as this was a very brief relationship of only a few months, really. They were “official” for 5 months. They knew each other for a year and a half. – Whoopee!
I believe that, in Jodi’s mind, he is hers and no one elses for eternity.
This is the best way to explain what we saw at trial and in the interviews and in the writings.
Don’t give false hope
I think what I have learned in supporting Jodi Arias and reporting on “the other side of the story”, is that knowing what I know and what I have learned and reading what others have written, I cannot pretend that there is a chance for Jodi Arias to prevail in a new trial although she may be able to win a reversal of her conviction and a retrial. I think really caring for someone is to not give them false hope.
Always I had a belief that there was a reasonable possibility that Jodi was not guilty of the charge of 1st degree murder. There’s no doubt in my mind that the state had a strong will to give Arias the maximum penalty for this horrendous death. They may have gone too far, well, they didgo too far, but that’s not a reflection of this being anything other than what it appears to be.
Now, I have exhausted all possibilities and find that I can see no way forward for her. I wish her luck with her appeal(s) and I really believe, at this point in time, that she deserves a new trial, which is much different than saying she can get a better outcome. I hope she is treated no differently in prison than any other prisoner, and I hope she has some dignity and something to look forward to in life.
People will disagree and say it was a fair trial, and the defense got everything they wanted and Judge Sherry Stephens “bent over backwards” for Arias and the defense, to make certain it was a fair trial, but that is all mythology. Errors happen in trials and one error is all it takes. That doesn’t mean the trial wasn’t as fair as could be. The longer a trial goes on for, the greater the chance of an error. The harder the prosecution is pushing for a certain outcome, the greater the chances for error as well.
I always like to be on the right side of a case. I think the fairest thing I can do for both myself and Jodi Arias, is to say that I did my best to support her and to find every way possible to see that there was a reasonable possibility to her story, but there just isn’t, at long last, in my opinion. I think Jodi Arias has no respect for those she gets over on, and I hope she has respect for people who she can not get over on.
Most people are not blindsided by Arias because of sex appeal or attraction, or her Laws of Attraction. Most are not drawn to her because they were victims of abuse or reformed practitioners of abuse. They are drawn to her and they care about her and they idolize her because this woman is truly a phenomenon. I hope you can keep an open mind and just drop everything you know or believe about Jodi Arias for a moment and listen to this next section.
Watch how this exchange between Jodi Arias and Prosecutor Juan Martinez is eerily reminiscent of Abbot and Costello’s Who’s On First comedy routine.
I was really captivated by Jodi Arias because she can really draw you in and she looks believable and honest whenever she talks. Really, the post-guilty verdict interview is amazing, as are most of her interviews. Watch it and try to listen to it with an open mind. She’s completely believable. The other thing you should look at is her last full day of testimony. Who is in control and who is flustered here?
Anyone who has ever testified in a courtroom before knows how difficult and stressful this situation can be, even for a few hours on the stand. Jodi Arias testified for 18 days on the stand, returning to her cell every night on two meals a day and having to get up as early as 4:00 AM each day. To me it’s startling.
The woman is a phenomenon, as was Travis, but each in a different way. She’s clever and fast on her feet. I think she had him wrapped, I think she knew it, and I believe when she lost that control and Travis pulled out of her orbit, she snapped.
I think the key to the Jodi Arias case and the heart at the middle of the whole thing is this one word: incongruence. Once I understood that, it all became clear. Jodi Arias can make everything look and sound good, but her actions, and the actions of her “fans” (Big difference, now, between “fans” and “supporters”) are incongruent. It’s just another word for inconsistent. When you see Jodi Arias through the lens of incongruence, you can finally see the truth.
Loving an ex lover, a friend, a person you admire and being forced to kill them in a violent and gruesome manner is incongruent with Jodi Arias’ actions and behaviors. Sending that letter to Travis’ family, people who lost a brother in a horrible fashion, is incongruent with someone who really loves this person and by extension, is sensitive to his family’s feelings at one of the worst times in their lives.
But, just look at what Jodi Arias writes to the family:
“Deanna Reid. I had no hostility towards her, from what Travis said, she seemed like a very nice girl. But he made it clear that she could under no circumstances ever know about us because if she found out she would freak out and he was tired of dealing with her every time he tried to date someone.” – Why would the Alexander family give a horse’s patootie about that?
“We often talked about family structure, baby names, how many children we wanted, boys, girls, etc.” – Great thing to tell his relatives who just buried him.
“No matter how painful it is, we must trust that the hand of God is at work in our lives.” – Well, okay, but I would not say that.
She talks about their trip to Daniels Summit, Utah, for which they had an inside joke on the phone sex tape. Remember? And then Travis said that Jodi was “at the top of his list”, and Jodi made a joke out of “in more ways than one!” (Here Jodi is talking about her last name, Arias, which when going by alphabetical order, puts her, and Travis also, near the top of the list. This is when she admits going through Travis’ text messages in his phone.
Jodi Arias also admitted that she was caught going through Travis’ e-mail, because a friend of his noticed that his g-mail log-in said he was on-line at a time she knew for a fact that he was not online. Jodi was caught red handed, although she had all kinds of intricate explanations for her behavior.
Did you see in the trial, the phone expert? Jodi spent 16 minutes on June 4 after 11 PM, going through Travis’ voice mails after he was dead. Now that’s Nosy.
They broke up, but Travis didn’t want to break up. He asked Jodi to marry him. Jodi didn’t want to move to Mesa. Travis insisted that she come. One would have a hard time believing ALL of these statements.
In March 2008, they had a “come clean” conversation where Travis tells Jodi he was dating Lisa Andrews almost the whole time Jodi had been in Mesa. Travis admitted he was interested in Mimi Hall and was gushing about her. “But when it was my turn to come clean, his attitude changed 180 degrees. All hell seemed to break lose. He lost his temper and flew into a rage. He began punching himself in the head so hard that he injured his neck and his back and could barely turn his head from side to side. I was afraid to get near him, but I wanted him to stop.” Well, do you suppose that Jodi might be re-writing history here?
“Travis never hit me in the face, but he bruised me in other parts of my body. It was easy to shrug off a few visible bruises to friends. I could blame it on work or clumsiness.” This shows that Jodi Arias was talking about physical abuse as early as 2 weeks after her arrest. But is that something you want to tell his family?
“I know it is common behavior for women in abusive relationships to protect their partner by covering for him (or her) by making excuses….”
“But even when I moved away, he didn’t let up…..Travis called me in the middle of the night, angry that I’d moved, angry that I’d dated other guys.”
“His cruelty and abuse never made me angry.” – Whoah
“Travis told me that I hurt him more than the death of his father. How is it that he could date and have relationships but if I did so he branded me a whore?
“He would not let me escape his influential grasp. He called me at all hours of the night.” “He would send me sweet text messages in the middle of the night, beckoning me to get up out of bed and sneak over to his house.” – Possibly some re-writing of history going on here, too.
Notice how much Jodi Arias talks about herself and how little she talks about Travis.
“At the time I didn’t notice the pain, maybe it was the adrenaline, but my left foot was later throbbing and bruised so I know she (the female ninja intruder) got me at least once, probably more on that foot, and she had caused two toenails on my other foot to bleed, which I didn’t discover until later as well.” – Oh, really? Why should Travis’ family give a hoot about that?
“I did not harm Travis, I did not take his life. But looking back on the way that I acted, I might as well be held equally responsible for his own death ***” I did not commit a murder that day, nor would I ever harm Travis.”
“I hesitate even mentioning all of the little knick-knacks he’d accumulated that adorned his house as a result of our travels together or the gifts from me that he treasured and proudly displayed for fear it would taint your opinion of those same items, which are no doubt now in your possession.
Jodi Arias explains why she smiled for her mugshot. “I know of my own innocence, and so does our Father in heaven.” “As for the physical way he retaliated during two arguments that we had, my father has done worse to me as a means of discipline.”
“Ultimately, the persons responsible will be held accountable. I however will not serve one day in prison for a heinous crime in which I had no part.”
“Travis lives. He is not far and it won’t be long until you see him again. “…and your sorrow will be turned into joy. – John 16:20”
Saying you don’t want to present Travis Alexander in a bad light at the same time your letter to the decedent’s family does just that, is incongruent. Not getting emotional when viewing Travis’ remains and crime photos is incongruent to Jodi Arias trying to present herself as a person who was forced to kill him. Allowing Simon Johansson and JAII to say horrible things about Travis Alexander’s family is incongruent with supposedly being forced to kill Travis. The same for her mugshot. The same for her writings and the interrogations which were all about Jodi and almost nothing about Travis.
That’s icongruence. Once you realize this, you cannot be fooled by Jodi Arias ever again. Perhaps this is the truth that Travis Alexander was just starting to realize and he realized too late.
In case you are STILL not convinced?
Get on the bus – the Omnibus.
The Omnibus hearing
Remember that Omnibus hearing – Motion to dismiss the Death Penalty, for lots of defendants facing the death penalty, to see if the death penalty should be taken off the table in their cases? Jodi Arias was supposed to be a part of that.
“PHOENIX (KSAZ) –A major issue is taking center stage in superior court on Friday. A judge will hear arguments challenging how the death penalty is applied to cases in Arizona.
More than two dozen Arizona death row inmates have come together hoping that their lawyers can argue to have the death penalty taken off the table in their cases.
Death row inmates say the law is unconstitutionally arbitrary. Their reasoning is that under Arizona law, there are 14 aggravating factors listed giving the justification to apply capital punishment. By and large the most popular aggravating factor is “Especially Cruel”, one prong of the “especially heinous, cruel, or depraved, the F(6) aggravator.
The prosecution only has to allege at least one of those factors to seek the death penalty as a possible punishment.
Opponents say with that many options, nearly all first degree murder cases can be made to fit under at least one of these aggravating factors, leaving more defendants eligible for the death penalty at the whim of prosecutors.
The suit cites a 1972 ruling in which the US Supreme Court said the state’s laws must distinguish between cases for which a death sentence can be sought and ones that can’t. There must be a narrowing factor, that makes a Death Penalty case objectively in a separate category from non-capital cases.
The hearing will be held at 1:30 p.m.
It’s not clear what will happen to all the death row cases in Arizona if they judge rules that the law in unconstitutional.”
My understanding is that nothing happened at that hearing in front of Judge Steinle. So, it wouldn’t have helped Jodi Arias had she been sentenced to Death and would not be applicable if it had, since she was handed down a Life sentence.
Will Jodi Arias throw you under the bus? The chances are great. Look at all the supporters she has done this to already. Earlier in the series, I reported all the people Jodi Arias turned on, but if you’re STILL not convinced, think about Darryl Brewer.
This man had to face scrutiny from his community and loved ones in order to defend Arias, a person who had left him hanging with a mortgage and bills he could not pay on his own. STILL, this man comes and does a wonderful job for Jodi Arias as her very best witness and character witness, even though she almost made him an accessory to murder with the gas cans. How does Jodi Arias pay Darryl Brewer back? She tells an embarrassing fact about him that he was trying to keep a secret from his son and lots of other people. Do you recall what that secret was? Nice job, Jodi!
More Evidence of Premeditation
So, if after all that AND the articles on the 6 elements of premeditation, the 7th element – the gas cans, the autopsy, and the crime scene, and not counting the hair color change, which Jodi Arias “forgot” all about until the selfies from June 3rd were introduced, and realizing that I am a Jodi Supporter and I tried in every way to give her every benefit of each and every doubt to make her story work – If after all that you are STILL not convinced, then how about this:
Jodi Arias is off on her way by 9:00 AM at the latest from her visit with ex-boyfriend Darryl in Monterey, CA. That was basically breakfast and it was about the time that Darryl’s son Jack was off to school. Then she drove 20 miles to Salinas, CA, which would take about 30 minutes.
But it isn’t until 3:22 PM that the receipt from the Salinas Walmart shows Arias shopping for a few items including the gas can. It’s around a 5 hour drive to Pasadena from there, which would put Jodi Arias in Pasadena by 8:30 PM or so. That’s what her gas receipts show, that was around 8:45 PM, when she was pumping gas in Pasadena.
Watch when Jodi Arias testifies. If she is giving too much detail, or she is adding things or if she is proactively being defensive, there’s something wrong with that testimony. She kept saying she had her nails done in Salinas and she had to wait a long time. She was very cagey about what she did in Salinas.
She told her own defense attorney that she couldn’t remember what else she did there. What was she doing for Five or six or more hours in Salinas? Her family used to live in Santa Maria, about 2 hours away. She’s familiar with that area.
She’s not just getting her nails done. She also colored her hair. What else was she doing? This was 5 or 6 plus hours of unaccounted for time. The most the nails would have taken is two or three hours, even with the wait. That leaves at least 3 hours.
How about this.? Take a look at this photo:
That is smooth. isn’t it? Smooth as a baby’s bottom. Did Jodi Arias get herself a Brazilian in Salinas? She would not do this for Ryan Burns, she doesn’t know him that well. Did she do this for Travis? That’s premeditation right there. She knew she was going to see him. What else was she doing? She was waiting for it to get dark, I’ll tell you that.
Still not sold? How about this?
Jodi Arias testified that she had no intention whatever to visit Travis until he “guilted” her and convinced her to divert from her plans and come to Mesa, Arizona to see him. Now, remember how many people point to the 2 CD’s Jodi Arias testified to, that she had with her of her and Travis’ travels that she never gave him the photos from?
First of all, that clearly shows you her selfishness and lack of concern for others right there. She took all these photos from these trips, many from over a year before, and she never sent Travis copies of the photos? Selfish.
Second of all, I was quick to dismiss the Cd’s as evidence that she did in fact intend to see Travis, because WHO was she going to show the photos to, Ryan Burns? Hell, no.
So, I made the point that maybe those CD’s went everywhere her laptop went. This is because at that time, I always carried around lots of CD’s with my laptop, so we can dismiss the CD evidence as evidence of proof of intent to see Travis. Really though, I thought that was kind of strange that she did have those CD’s with her on her on a trip to Utah to see a new love interest.
By the way, if Travis’ CD player could not work because it had a virus, why not pop them in Jodi’s laptop? Easy solution, isn’t it?
But then, look at this:
“……Before leaving Pasadena, on an impulse I called Travis back and told him I was coming to Mesa and I’d be there before dawn. He said he’d wait up. I arrived at his house around 4:30 AM on June 4th, 2008. He and naps were in his office waiting for me and watching silly videos on Youtube.com.
Travis was happy to see me. The feeling was mutual. It had been months since I’d seen them and it made me realize how much I missed them both. I was exhausted from driving all night, but Travis insisted on showing me more videos on Youtube.com and on giving me a demo of the correct way to punch his new punching bag.
We finally slept around 5 AM and slept until about 1 PM.
We hung out, among other things. I surprised him with the original, hand written copy of chapter one of his book, which I had in my possession for the purpose of typing and editing it.
Although I e-mailed chapter one to him several weeks earlier so he could post it on his blog, I hadn’t gotten around to dropping the original in the mail yet. We also tried looking at CD’s with pictures from our various Church history trips, but his computer had a virus and we were having a difficult time bringing up the disc drive, After a while, we gave up and went back upstairs. With Travis’ permission, I took pictures of him in the shower…..” – Jodi Arias’ Manifesto 7/29/2008
If that doesn’t show intent, then nothing does. This never made its way into the trial. As many people feel, I’m sure that there are more hidden truths that will come rolling out of the closet. Things precluded from trial as too prejudicial, will come to light.
People will one day be validated for their deeply held suspicions and beliefs about this case, I have no doubt.
Is that enough examples of premeditation for you? How do you explain away the bad facts? Not 1 or 3 or 5 or 9, but literally legions of bad facts and contradictions and things that need to be elaborately explained. It just becomes absurd after a while, and you find yourself detaching from Jodi Arias more and more each day.
In Article #5 of the series, we are looking at a scenario based on fact, of what could have happened between Jodi and Travis especially on June 4th, 2008. After that I list 30 things you must believe in order to believe that Jodi Arias is NOT guilty of 1st degree premeditated murder.
What was really going on in the “relationship”
Jodi Arias did in fact try to intimidate and chase away Travis’ girlfriends and she did monitor his activities and keep tabs on what he was doing in any way she could. Her brief romance / relationship with Travis failed and he returned to or continued to, as always, look down other avenues.
Jodi Arias did in fact catch Travis having intimate communications with other women at the end of June, 2007. Travis would have called it quits there. The relationship having failed, here comes Jodi Arias trying to go ahead with plans for something that had already failed, a key personality feature of Jodi Arias.
Jodi Arias thought the distance would work for her because it would make Travis long for her and he would have to go on trips with her in order to have sex. Travis spent way too much on these out of state trips and he had to chill down. Now, the trips had come to an end. Jodi Arias moves to Mesa, Arizona after she realizes that Travis might be getting sexual with other women. That was always her trump card, as Travis was trying to be a devout Mormon, but now, she wasn’t so sure.
Jodi Arias can fix things
Remember, Jodi Arias walked out on Darryl and the mortgage payments and bill payments and left him hanging, but even so, he feels very close to her. It seems that one can be up to their chin in muck that Jodi Arias caused and one phone call or one letter sweeps it all away, and the sun shines, the rainbow comes out, and sparkly unicorns appear.
More about what was really going on
Definitely Alexander and Arias had arguments and fights, definitely it was a tempestuous relationship, definitely it brought out the worst in Travis, and definitely he was violating all his own voluntarily agreed to morals, tenets and precepts of the LDS / Mormon religion. In addition, Travis had emotional problems, anger issues, intimacy issues, stemming from his childhood, and he did act out very inappropriately on plenty of occasions.
Jodi Arias was perfect for him at the time, even after he found out she wasn’t what he thought she was, because she was not demanding of that kind of intimacy and she put up with and even normalized his inappropriateness and his dark side. Jodi Arias turned out to be a wonderful petri dish for Travis Alexander. He could use her as a sounding board and experiment with her in all sorts of ways.
Travis Alexander felt at some point that he had been cured of his intimacy issues enough to continue pursuing a chaste Mormon girl, and he wanted to fall back on that. Jodi Arias was not going to allow that. She was not going to be Travis’ Personal Brigham Young University of kinky sex and secret intimacy only for Travis to use all these new found skills on another woman.
The religion angle
In spite Of Jodi Arias having read and remembered passages from the Book of Mormon, it is apparent from the trial that Jodi Arias was not interested in seriously pursuing the LDS Mormon religion or developing friendships within the church in any meaningful way.
Between July and December of 2007, in this six month period, there were various back and forths, sexual dalliances, while Alexander was dating another woman (Lisa Andrews – Daidone). Intense Psychological Processes are involved here. This is Travis (heavy build, strong personality, dominant) representing Jodi Arias’ father who had abandoned her emotionally, in Jodis’ mind, for a younger girl – her younger sister, Angela.
Travis’ former girlfriend, Lisa Andrews Daidone, ended up marrying a friend of Travis’ roommate Zach Billings
The other thing in Jodi’s mind is she always feels both big and important, beautiful, powerful and sophisticated and at the same time she also feels, small and insignificant, ugly, powerless, and crude. This is why she has such a difficult time with her mother, as she sees in her mother what she does not want to see in herself. Not to say that Sandy Arias actually encompasses these negative qualities, but she does in Jodi Arias’ mind. This explains the constant berating of the mother and the correcting of everyone’s grammar, etc. The third thing in Jodi’s mind is she had been betrayed / cheated on twice before and she wasn’t going to let that happen again
Following through on a plan that had already failed
So there is this going back and forth of Jodi Arias monitoring Travis’ activities, fearing abandonment, trying to get him to turn back towards her, making her feel bad about herself, feeling like she had sacrificed a lot for this relationship, and at the same time trying to put the pieces back together after it had already failed. This is very different than what’s going on in Travis’ mind. He’s is going along with it and taking what Jodi Arias is dishing out, and he’s happy to get the sex, but he’s not thinking too much of it and he’s still pursuing his other romantic interests.
The trips reveal the relationship
The Havasupai / Grand Canyon Trip shows perfectly the Arias Alexander relationship: insecurity – dissatisfaction – jealousy – anger – misunderstanding – arguing – yelling – drama – the silent treatment – the trip – forbidden and secret sex – closeness and re-establishing of all those peak emotions. Look at the photo. This was right after the sex after a morning of arguing and then the silence treatment. This trip is the whole relationship in a nutshell.
Jodi Arias stated she was wearing a “tank top” on the day of the killing. I believe the blouse above may be the tank-top she wore, as this seems to have some important meaning for her and is dark in color.
Alyce LaViolette was right about the above cycle in Travis and Jodi’s relationship, but wrong about the cycle being about physical abuse.
Prior to 2006, Jodi Arias had a wonderful relationship with Darryl Brewer, seemingly free of problems. I believe this was due to stability. Darryl brought lots of structure and stability to Jodi Arias’ life. A person with her Personality Disorder needs this in order to thrive. When she started her pursuit of Travis and all the things she thought she was missing out on, she began to destabilize. This continue to get worse and worse, until it hit the breaking point.
In late 2007, after a big blowup with Travis, Jodi cries on the phone to Matt McCartney, and Matt calls Jodi’s Mom, saying she needs help and she may may be BiPolar. He thought that because she was really freaking out uncontrollably.
January 2008 and Travis’ big plan
By January, Dan Freeman is threading the needle between his two friends, Travis Alexander and Jodi Arias. I suspect Arias kind of wheedles out of Freeman what Travis is up to. (Someone should check to see if there are any phone records between Jodi Arias and Dan’s younger brother Josh. Apparently Jodi was getting inside information from somewhere).
Dan and Jodi continued to be friends and Jodi is friends of the Freeman family, while Travis is going to Dan Freeman and confiding in him about Jodi Arias.
Every year, Travis makes a long list of goals and his strategies for achieving those goals. Among his top goals for 2008? End it totally with Jodi Arias.
Travis tells Daniel Freeman he is intending to get rid of Jodi Arias totally by the end of January. He is evidently unsuccessful. No doubt there were large arguments and lots of drama, but whether Travis started getting physically violent with Jodi Arias, we don’t know. There is no evidence whatever of it, however.
The Lisa Andrews and Mimi Hall tug of war
Travis is not successful in getting rid of Jodi Arias, and there are some big tugs of war involving Travis, Jodi, and Lisa Andrews Daidone all the way through February. Maybe Jodi Arias will expose Travis’ escapades to his other women and the LDS church, maybe they can somehow end it amicably. After February, Lisa Andrews has had it with Travis (mostly because of all the problems with Jodi) and she stops seeing him. Jodi Arias has won. But then, Travis moves on to Marie “Mimi” Hall in April, 2008. Hey, that’s the same time frame that Jodi Arias left Mesa, Arizona. Imagine that?
Jodi Arias has to start all over again. No doubt the Mimi thing, coupled with Jodi Arias running out of funds and employment culminated in her breaking down, and asking her mom for help. Travis is pulling away and he’s becoming stubborn and losing patience with the entire Jodi Arias “thing”. A plan is made for Jodi Arias to move back to Yreka to recoup and regroup. All this in the midst of fighting and yelling with Travis, a continuing of the monitoring of his activities and a invasion of privacy, and Travis even flipping Arias the double bird from his front steps as she threatens to leave.
Arias tries to minimize Mimi Hall, but somehow, I get the feeling she knew everything that was going on. How she got the intel (hacking into e-mails and facebook, or from an informant in Mesa, or both, no one knows).
Arias tries to keep fires burning with Alexander from a distance
Jodi Arias’ Mom gets in contact with Jodi and offers to help her move home. Jodi Arias reluctantly agrees. This is when Sandy Arias comes down to Arizona and they get a U-haul. A lot of her stuff is Stored at Travis’ house, so that gives her a reason to try to continue to be close to Travis. She offers to buy his BMW on credit, and this is where she hooks it up wrong and blows the engine. On the way up to Yreka, she visits Gus Searcy, who gives her the Helio phone with the recording function and she visits her half-sister
Maybe Jodi Arias thought the increased distance would bring them back together, maybe she just wanted to end things amicably, maybe she knew this relationship was just too volatile, who knows?
There seems to be a sort of dueling banjos as Travis starts blogging, and Jodi Arias tries to harmonize with or outdo him. He blogs, then she blogs. Apparently, a few of their phone calls devolve into phone sex. Jodi Arias is constantly trying to arrange a meeting between the two, but Alexander is trying to avoid this.
“May 2, 08- EX 392-Text about Little Red Riding Hood May 2, 08- EX 391- Long nasty text about photo shoots and sex May 3, 08- A few texts where Jodi is hooking up with Ryan Burns May 10, 08- Phone Sex Tape May 10, 08- EX 495- Jodi admits to JM that she used the term “fuck you” on this day. May 10, 08- EX 448-The text message about Steve Carrol May 10, 08- EX 425, 426, 427-Breast pictures. (These were not shown in court) but they are pre surgery breast pictures before Jodi’s surgery in June 06 May 10, 08- Jodi posted the last entry to her blog. It reads, in part: “I cannot ignore that there is an ever-present yearning and desire that pulses within me. It throbs for gratification and fulfillment.”
May 11, 08-EX 499- The text where Travis tells Jodi she looks beautiful in her photos May 15, 08- EX 452- The picture of Jodi and her sister with the blondish highlights May 16, 08- EX 406- Long email that Jodi wrote to Travis May 18, 2008-Travis makes a blog post titled “Why I want to marry a Gold Digger“ May 19, 08- EX 399- The poem Jodi wrote to Travis May 22, 08- Jodi says on the stand that she changed her passwords to all her accounts.
May 25-26, 08- EX 450- The text where Travis calls her a sociopath. May 25 to 26 Jodi says she remembers that night very well! She called Travis about the pedophile pamphlets she sent him and Travis got upset. They had phone calls and text messages over the fight. May 28, 08- Jodi’s grandparents home is robbed. A gun is stolen May 28, 08- Jodi tells JM that this is the date she found out Travis was taking MiMi to Cancun. (She admitted this on Day 3 of JM’s cross of Jodi)
May 31, 08- EX 506 & 507- Jodi’s bloody finger she cut at work, then took pictures with her cell. May 2008- Jodi answers the jury questions and says this is when Travis “hit her in her car.”
June 08- Travis mentions to a friend that Jodi hacked his facebook account
Jodi Arias is very unhappy that she helped Travis edit his first chapter for his intended book called Raising You. Instead, Travis gave editing credit online to his friend Katie Barnes (possibly his newest love interest), although Jodi claimed that 3 women helped him (Travis’ spelling and some grammar were atrocious).
From the sex tape, you can see it is very evident that Travis is being very gracious yet balking at any mention of the two getting together. This is early May. Then we have the giant fight. Travis is unmovable and he wants Jodi Arias to admit she lied to him or to never speak to him again. She will not admit it, and she is now in a quandary. In spite of trying every manipulative trick she knows, Travis wouldn’t budge. Six hours later, it was the end. Travis had achieved his goal of ending it totally with Arias, albeit in a very messy and hurtful way. Jodi Arias was left broke, humiliated insulted, and made a fool of. It was beginning to burn in.
A plan of revenge
Sometimes I think, as many others do, that Jodi Arias may have commenced stealth hostilities against Travis starting in April 2008, when she was forced to move back to Yreka, or even sooner, in March 2008, after Travis Alexander confessed he had been seeing Lisa Andrews the entire time Jodi was living in Mesa, or even before that, in July 2007, after Jodi believed Travis had cheated on her.
No doubt that there is a direct relationship to the words spoken on that day, and Alexander’s murder. This was the real motive and the reason he died, I believe.
Two days later the gun is stolen from the grandfather’s home where Jodi is staying, and ASAP, Jodi Arias finds her way to Mesa. It’s difficult to tell whether they had sex or not. Probably. It seems that Jodi Arias threw it at him in every way she could.
Some people think that Jodi stole a chef’s super-sharp butcher’s knife from her work, and I think that’s probably true. She did not take anything out of Travis’ house that was his if she could avoid it, and I think the same goes for the knife and gun. I do not think she would risk leaving the murder knife in Travis’ dishwasher, etc. She brought them to the house and she took them away with her, in my opinion.
“Diversion to Mesa”
Arriving AT 4 am, Jodi Arias either parks the car in the garage and at some point, or backs it into the driveway. The front license plate is already off, and she removes the rear license plate. Now what I’m thinking is that Jodi Arias took off the front plate in Pasadena, like she said. But she wouldn’t risk turning the rear plate upside-down. The knife is in her purse. Before she arrived, Arias probably removes the gun from it’s place taped up under the hood in the rental car, and dumps in two of the cans of gas. The gun goes in her purse as well. She may have bought ammo for the gun and she may have practiced firing it with Matt McCartney, before they went out to Karaoke. Somehow it is very important to Jodi Arias that both former boyfriends participate in this murder in some way, in my opinion.
They go to sleep soon after Arias shows up, and in the morning, Jodi plays with the camera to put Travis at ease.
Understanding Jodi a little better now, it’s entirely possible that she got to Travis’ and he was already asleep. She fooled around on his computer for a while, looking at what he was looking at, or maybe just looking at stuff she found herself., then she just snuck in his bedroom. She did note that Travis was cleaning the floor and had moved chairs on top of the couch, etc.
The camera comes into play
I did note that the case for the camera was near the beanbag chair in the upstairs loft area. I’m thinking she grabbed it out of Travis’ office before he awoke, and she was messing with it (ie Looking through the pictures, etc.)….
….. at the beanbag chair in the hallway outside his bedroom. Alexander is surprised but playing along. He joins in the fun, but takes photos that are more revealing of his attitude towards Arias.
I believe Jodi and Travis hung out and ruminated over the good times, while Jodi continued to try to see when they could get together again. I think Travis either balked at this or led her on. Around 5:00 PM, Travis mentioned he had to get back to work and Jodi should get on with her trip. I think she packed up and may have been having cold feet about killing Travis. I think Travis was getting ready to take a shower when Jodi Arias brought up the idea about taking the photos in the shower. Travis reluctantly agreed to it as doing so was the best way to eventually get rid of her. He figures he’ll just delete the photos after she leaves.
Alternatively, she may have asked Travis to take the photos and he refused. she may have gone out to get in her car to leave as Travis went into the shower. Then in the garage, she hears the hot water heater kick on and she knows he’s in the shower. She turns around and heads up the stairs into Travis’ bedroom and she grabs the camera.
Arias carries out the plan
I think at that point she made the most fateful decision of her life, She grabbed the camera and went into the bathroom. She just started taking photos of Travis, who was oblivious to her being there. When he finally noticed she forced or charmed him into sitting down in the shower enclosure, They had a very emotional conversation when Jodi Arias became overwhelmed and shot him aiming at his head from behind him. Travis had no idea what had just happened to him. When he came to, he was dizzy, bleeding and in pain and shock. He crawled out of the shower and this is when Jodi Arias flailed back and hit the button on the camera, taking the ceiling shot.
She stepped back, blocking the exit and she may have put the camera down on the floor by the linen closet. Jodi watched Travis writhing around in pain on the floor. With the exit blocked, Travis may have realized it was Jodi who did this and he may have tried to lock himself in the toilet room. Jodi Arias may have kicked Travis at this point.., leaving the blood spatter on the door frame of the toilet room.
Travis wasn’t dying, he was continuing to move, he is confused about what was happening to him. He was trying to get up on his feet and perhaps get a towel off the rack. There is blood spatter high on the blinds on the window by the bathroom scales. That could be Travis flinging the blood off of his hand or Jodi striking him with something, or it could be from Jodi cleaning up later. The gun isn’t firing again, Travis is not dying, he’s getting to his feet. Jodi needs another weapon. A real sharp knife form the restaurant may have been in her purse. She goes to her purse or to the kitchen to get a knife, leaving the camera on the floor.
This is when Travis is able to get to his feet and get to the sink. At some point he slipped and fell or collapsed and wound up on his back. Here Jodi Arias re-enters the bathroom with a sharp butcher knife and steps in front of Alexander, stepping on or kicking the camera she set down earlier, taking the foot photo, She lunges down and strikes sending the knife deep into his heart. He blocks the next few strikes with his hands, incurring deep wounds.
Travis suffers more stabs including a deep stab to the abdomen. This is when he flips over and tries to protect himself. Arias shifts over him and strikes at his back over and over. Travis gets up all the strength he can muster and manages to slowly scurry away. As he struggles down the hallway, Joid Arias is stabbing at him all the way. He’s trying desperately to get out of the bathroom.
Jodi Arias follows striking him in the back of the head and neck and his upper back. She is still stabbing at him as Alexander tries to get to his feet shouts that he can’t feel his legs and collapses into the wall right near the carpet. Jodi Arias straddles him as he continues to struggle, getting onto the carpet area. Jodi Arias cannot allow him to get out of the bedroom or mess up the carpet and she cuts his throat.
Covering her trail
Alexander is continuing to bleed out, the blood is blocking her escape. In a typical Jodi Arias move, she grabs him by the arms and spins him around pulling him down the hallway and back into the shower, as was the original plan. Doing this, she kicks the camera and it takes the “baseboard photo”. She uses water and a towel to clean the floor of footprints and excess blood, she deletes the photos. Jodi Arias gathers up the gun and knife and some bloody clothes and she finds some plastic bags. She showers over Travis, to remove her blood from his body, and she puts on clean clothes.
She goes down to the laundry. Earlier in the afternoon, Jodi and/or Travis brought the bed sheets down and threw them in the washer. That cycle had already finished. She throws the sheets in the dryer and throws the bloody clothes and towels in the wash. She grabs the camera, looks at it for a while, then dumps it in the water of the washer.
Knowing that water killed her old cell phone, she expects the water to kill the camera. besides, her prints are all over the camera in blood.
Jodi Arias loads up the car quickly in the darkness of the garage or in the driveway. She puts the back plate on hurriedly, but puts it on upside-down. She waits for a while, then she’s off on her way. Jodi Arias scoots almost all the way out of Arizona using the remaining gas in the gas cans, and she finally calls Leslie Udy, Ryan Burns, and Gus Searcy to re-establish her alibi. Leslie tells Jodi she called Travis but only got his voice mail. This is when Jodi Arias gets the idea to call Travis and leave a message. The message is so strangely carefree and even done in a joking manner.
She feigns surprise and sadness when Travis’ body is found, 5 days after she thought it would be discovered. Jodi Arias goes to the memorial service, goes to the Police with friends and voluntarily submits to fingerprinting and DNA swab tests. Then they all go for a ride past Travis’ house. Jodi posts a memorial to Travis on her MySpace.
A funny thing here is that you can tell that Jodi is out of touch with Travis, because Jodi posts Travis’ comedy video of Eddie Snell’s “Possum balm” (instead of “Tiger Balm”), but she lists it as “Eddie Snell’s Paustenbalm”, proving that she has no first hand knowledge from Travis of this event. She is just going by phonetics.
She contacts Detective Flores and assists him in his investigation, calling him daily. After the DNA, the prints and the recovered photos all point to Jodi Arias, she’s indicted by a Grand Jury and Arias is arrested and interrogated, giving the intruder story, after first giving a flat out denial. Detective Flores and Detective Haney both suggest she contact Travis’ family.
The letter Jodi Arias wrote to the family, as her stories in the interrogation, were all about Jodi Arias, and hardly about Travis Alexander at all.
And this brings us to the present day.
The turning off of the cell phone, removal of the front plate and possible flipping of the rear plate, and the filling of the gas cans all at Pasadena makes this much more than a chance or casual connection. Jodi Arias is clearly trying to create the impression she got on the I-15 highway from Pasadena to Las Vegas on her way to Ryan Burn’s home in West Jordan, Utah. This is why she keeps the Walmart receipt from Salinas, because it helps with her alibi, even as it hurts her with the purchase of the 3rd gas can.
What next for SpotlightOnLaw?
I think I will move on to other cases, old and new. There are many interesting cases out there and so little really written about them. It’s always good to try to bring a lot of different information about a case all together in one place.
What about Jodi’s Supporters?
I hope Jodi Arias will retain her good supporters and gain some new support. I can support her as far as wanting her to be treated humanely and fairly. I will support her efforts to win an appeal, but I don’t see how she could prevail in a new trial and convince all twelve jurors to give here a better outcome. Outside of this speculative scenario, I have tried to stick with the established and provable facts. I have deliberately avoided educated guesses, half-truths, speculations, and theoretical possibilities.
I challenge any reader to name one fact we mentioned in this set of articles (or anywhere on this blog), that is wrong, mistaken, or mere speculation. I have to go with the facts, and this is what the facts say. Jodi Arias is where she belongs and she’s proven it many times over with her behavior since the start of the trial.
What punishment does Jodi Arias deserve?
In spite of what she did, I don’t wish her spending her natural life in prison. This to me was a heat of passion domestic homicide, augmented by a very destabilized state of mind. I hope she gets out some day after getting the healing and therapy she needs. I think I have fought for her in every way I could. I’m not disappointed that I advocated for her. In spite of what she did, there is only one person, male or female, on Death Row, with a fact pattern anywhere near that of the Jodi Arias case. That person is Isiah Patterson, who really shouldn’t be on Death Row either, in my opinion.
This was a man who chased his wife naked out of their apartment building and stabbed her to death in front of eye witnesses, then coldly walked back into the apartment after calling her a whore. That’s not enough for the death penalty, in my book, and neither is this. This is biblical law Arizona style, and it’s disgraceful. This only brings all Arizonians down to the level of an Isiah Patterson or a Jodi Arias.
Reversal of the conviction possible?
I really do hope she gets the reversal, even though I feel there is no way she can get a better outcome, whether it’s 2nd degree murder, manslaughter or a complete acquittal. But an unfair trial is an unfair trial, and I know one when I see one, and this was one. I’m happy for the Alexander family that there was no death sentence. That would have dragged this on for decades, and Jodi Arias would have become the victim and the spotlight would be on her for years and years and years to come. This all would have continued to only about her.
SJ and JAII’s support of Jodi Arias
I hope Simon Johansson packs up and gets out of the Jodi Arias biz, as he is a very bad representative of Jodi Arias or anyone, for that matter. The hard core “fans” surrounding him need to come to their senses and realize that this case is exactly what it looks like.
Even Supporters will realize the truth
If I do any more Jodi Arias projects, the one at the top of my list is to debunk the articles of the only ones left who have some form rationality. I won’t bother with the rest.
Little by little and more by more, people will see the truth, no matter what side they’re on. Supporters who stand by Jodi Arias should know that she’s gonna have the same address for decades to come. It’s gonna be a long ride, so settle back, people.
30 things you MUST believe in order to believe Jodi Arias is
NOT GUILTY of
First Degree Premeditated Murder
So let’s evaluate and review: In order to believe that Jodi Arias is not guilty by reason of self-defense, one has to believe all this
1) Two days After Arias has a fight with Travis Alexander on multiple methods of communication lasting over 6 hours, someone else breaks into Arias’ grandfather’s home, where Jodi Arias is staying, and steals a .25 caliber gun, ignoring other things of much greater value.
2) The Monday after this huge argument, which is the end of the work week for Arias, she just happens to decide to go on a week long vacation, even though she just started the job and has very little money.
3) She just happens to decide to see a number of people who live south enough in California to bring her into close proximity to Arizona.
4) A friend’s baby (Darryl Brewer’s sister Laura) she wants to photograph in the Los Angeles area, the Hotel del Coronado in San Diego, a place in the “1,000 places to see before you die”, are some of the lame excuses Jodi Arias gives for continuing South another 319 miles (I was waiting for Laura to call me back, etc.), when Arias could have continued from Monterey / Salinas on to Utah via I-80 near Sacramento.
5) One would have to believe that even though Jodi Arias had no plan other than a vague mention of Death Valley, to go into remote desert areas, and even though her whole trip is on the Interstate highway system, that Jodi Arias makes a point of making sure Darryl Brewer had two gas cans for her before she left for the trip, and 30 minutes after securing those gas cans, she decides she needs a third can, but this is all happenstance. Three is better than two. A young woman is afraid for her safety, so she drives in the southwest in the summer with 3 full gas cans in the trunk of her car, because she might ‘go somewhere in the desert’?
6) Even though she claims she was thinking about a trip to Death Valley, one of the “1,000 places to see before you die”, her phone calls to Darryl reveal she needs those gas cans much more than merely just thinking about it. Pasadena to Death Valley is 259 miles and Death Valley to Las Vegas is 150 miles for a total of 409 miles (1 gas tank full). There are plenty of places to get gas in between.
7) You have to believe that Jodi Arias, who had been calling Travis Alexander throughout her trip, suddenly decided to go see him on a whim, and left her new love interest she planned to see, hanging. If you believe that, please see the next and final article of the series.
8) You have to believe that Jodi Arias had to fill those cans in Pasadena instead of anywhere else further South or West by happenstance, and not just because Pasadena was right at the beginning of I-15 to Las Vegas, the route Jodi Arias apparently wanted it to look like she took to West Jordan, Utah.
9) You have to believe that
– at that key point in Pasadena,
– where Jodi Arias is supposed to be traveling north west on I-15
– where she filled the 3 gas cans and filled her tank, giving her an extra 450 miles of range
– and a total range of 855 miles
just then is when either:
a) Jodi Arias’ battery on her phone ran out of juice and she misplaced her charger and she just didn’t have time to find it.
b) Jodi Arias decided to turn off her phone because she didn’t want Ryan Burns calling her and interrupting her or making her feel bad for not getting to West Jordan quicker.
c) Jodi Arias’ phone ran out of juice and she lost her charger and had to buy a new one.
Jodi Arias gave all three answers. “Take your pick”.
Total range Jodi arias needs to sneak in and out of Arizona (701 miles)
Total range Jodi Arias has with 2 gas cans (705 miles)
Total range Jodi Arias has with 3 gas cans (850 miles)
Estimated Distance, in theory, Jodi Arias traveled since filling up 3 cans in Pasadena (15 gallons x 30 mpg = 450 miles) + (11 gallons x 30 mpg = 330 miles) = (780 miles)
Distance Pasadena, CA to Mesa, AZ to Las Vegas, NV (701 miles)
Distance Las Vegas to Mesquite, NV (82 miles)
Total Pasadena to Mesquite, NV (783 miles)
Earlier, I had thought that Salinas was right next to Pasadena. I did not see the significance of all this until I checked it out carefully on a map. I didn’t realize that all these things Jodi Arias did that look like preparations All happened in Pasadena. I didn’t realize, until Brad Smith of Justda Truth pointed it out, that ok, maybe it’s possible that Jodi Arias can fit 2 more gallons into her car somehow, than everybody else, but in order to do that, the tank has to be completely and totally empty, which was so unlikely as to be pretty much impossible.
Pasadena is also where Jodi Arias’ license plate gets taken off the front of the rental car and magically gets flipped upside down on the rear of the car.
Jodi Arias is leaving from Pasadena at 9:00 PM (just happens to be just after dark) on a 386 mile, 5 and ¾ mile trip to Mesa, Arizona. This should easily get her there by 3 AM. Add the 1 hour time difference, and you get 4:00 AM, just as Jodi Arias stated.
10) You have to believe that Jodi drove all the way from Salinas, CA to the border of Arizona (530 miles 7 hrs 50 min) with no front license plate and an upside-down rear license plate and no one noticed. She drove all the way to Mesa, Arizona (692 miles, 10 hours 11 min) and no one noticed (someone beeping and pointing, the police, etc.)
11) You have to believe that both a 1 1/2 inch butcher knife and a loaded and cocked gun were within easy reach of the master bathroom, just by happenstance, on the one day that Travis Alexander decided to lunge at Jodi Arias and threaten to “kill her life”.
12) You have to believe that Travis Alexander would bend Jodi Arias over his desk and have sex with her when the bedroom is just upstairs and anyone could have come in the house.
13) You have to believe that Travis Alexander would agree to being photographed nude in his shower by Jodi Arias, when he is generally known to be very private about his showers and was not liking the idea in the past. By the way – anyone seeing these photos of a naked Travis in the shower, a supposedly devote Mormon, is going to wonder who was in the bathroom taking these photos of Travis, right? Why would Travis have wanted that? He wasn’t going to show those photos to nobody.
14) Additionally, do any of these photographs, with the possible exception of one, look professional?
15) Additionally who really takes a few photos, then discusses which to delete, takes a few more, then decides which to delete? Don’t people usually take a whole slew of photos and then delete the ones that they don’t want afterwards?
16) You have to believe that Jodi and Travis played sex games with a rope that was so long it needed to be cut, with a butcher knife, though the rope length used, the remaining rope, and any packaging the rope might have been in were never found (Brad Smith of Justda Truth came up with that on, too).
17) You have to believe that Travis Alexander, after all the restraint he showed in the major conundrums with Jodi Arias, flew into a rage and lunged out of the shower, slippery and naked, wet on a tile floor, trying to assault Jodi Arias.
18) You have to believe that Travis Alexander, naked and wet, would chase Jodi Arias around the bedroom instead of just finishing his shower.
19) You have to believe that Jodi Arias stopped running away from Travis long enough to climb up the shelving in the bedroom closet to get the gun, the same caliber as the one stolen from where she was staying just 7 days before, placed in the only area of the closet that was not thoroughly photographed. You have to believe that Jodi Arias, in a panic and emotionally stressed, climbed up on the shelf disturbing absolutely nothing in the closet whatever, including the bench right in the middle .
20) You have to believe that Jodi Arias, having never fired a gun before or hardly ever, by accident and under duress, aimed and fired at a moving target and hit Travis in the skull above his right eyebrow – by accident.
21) You have to believe that Travis, once shot in the face with a bullet that crashed through his skull into his jaw and caused profuse bleeding, nevertheless, shrugged it off, and continued his deadly attack.
By The Way, Jodi’s story of shooting Travis (“Oh crap” *) by accident and then the two of them falling to the floor in the back of the bathroom together, side by side – does that remind you of anything?
Jodi Arias used the words “Oh, crap” to describe shooting Travis – a word that Travis specifically told Lisa Andrews that he hated and did not want her to use.
22) You have to believe that even after being stabbed with a deep wound to the heart, a deeper wound to the abdomen, 14 knife wounds to the back, and 12 other knife wounds, with his back and his neck and his head and his hands and his face all bleeding profusely, and after being down and bleeding in 2 other places in the bathroom, and after trying to get out of the bathroom and away from the other person, that Travis was still continuing to attack Jodi Arias and still posed a deadly threat to her.
Yet, Travis, as a Mormon, didn’t do drugs or even drink coffee or other caffeinated beverages.
23) You have to believe that Travis Alexander, with all those wounds and all that damage to his body and blood loss, still needed to have his throat slit to stop him and came after Jodi Arias in attack mode, covered in blood, with his chin tucked into his chest.
24) You have to believe that Jodi Arias remembers none of this after the gunshot until she is out of the state, – but she does, – but she doesn’t.
25) You have to believe that Jodi Arias killed Travis Alexander on autopilot, and in that autopilot mode, remembered to delete photos, attempt to destroy evidence, clean the area of some blood and prints, and remove items from the scene, leaving only a few small drops of blood beyond the main crime scene.
26) You have to forget Jodi Arias’ description, at the interrogation, of Travis shot and bleeding and letting out a high pitched wail as he is crawling around on his hands and knees (“Travis was just ………. there.”), as well as her reporting of Travis remaining stationary on his hands and his knees.
27) You have to forget about Jodi Arias’ description at the interrogation, where she stated twice that after being shot, Travis was left there alone for quite some time.
28) You have to believe that in spite of claiming PTSD from the trauma of being forced to kill in such a gruesome way, that Jodi Arias went to Travis’ memorial service, took a DNA test, and then took a sightseeing ride back to Travis’ house and scene of the crime and also, she qualified for and purchased a 9 mm handgun.
29) You have to believe that the 9 mm handgun, which was hidden so well and so cleverly in her second rental car that is wasn’t found for over a week, was taped to the hood of the car with duct tape and was the first time Arias had ever concealed a handgun in a car in that way.
30) You would have to believe that in January, Arias helped Travis put away Christmas decorations which she said were stored in the attic, when she came back and caught him masturbating to photos / computer images of young children, when the lead detective said the attic was utterly empty.
>>>>>>>> If you are still skeptical, what would you think if you saw a photo from June 10th 2008 of an empty attic? If I saw that, that photo alone would prove to me this was a 1st degree premeditated murder. <<<<<<<<<<
31) You would have to believe that Arias, a person who complained about her hurt toe from June 4th to Travis’ family, sustained a broken finger from Travis kicking her in the ribs, yet she never mentioned it to anyone or took a photo of it or was able to produce any witness to verify it.
32) You would have to believe that Arias unintentionally and meaning well, wrote the letter she wrote to the Alexander family and made her remarks to the judge at her sentencing.
33) You must believe that the strikingly insensitive comments in both instances were just completely misunderstood by nearly everyone.
34) You would have to believe one or more of George Barwood’s theories:
a) The special, extra large gas can that Jodi’s rental car had but no one else in America had.
b) That Jodi was-making-bandages-for-Travis’-head-after-he-got-shot-when- Travis-suddenly-started-attacking-her-again-theory. Even though people in America do not make bandages and no evidence of home-made bandages was ever found.
c) That Travis-slipped-and-fell-in-the-hallway-and-landed-on-the-carpet-and-“bled-a-bit”, -before-getting-up-and-running-back-down-the-hall-into-the-bathroom-to-attack-Jodi theory. That,-therefore,-Travis-was-down-on-the-floor-bleeding-for-quite-some-time-now-in-three-(not just two)-different-places,-yet-this-was-still-self-defense theory.
d) The “4 gas can theory” (The Jodi-borrowed-2-gas-cans-from-Darryl- Brewer,-then-bought-a-3rd-gas can-immediately-returned-it,-then-bought-one (5 gallon)-or-two (2.5 gallon)-more-can(s)-in-a-fog-after-the-killing-theory).
35) You would have to believe that even though Jodi Arias wrote a letter to the Alexander family in July 2008, detailing how Travis Alexander abused and beat her, leaving bruises, that the reason she told the Ninja story to the authorities which completely absolves her of any responsibility for or any participation in the murder, that Jodi did this for the main purpose of protecting Travis Alexander’s reputation.
36) You would have to believe the prosecutor and the prosecution witnesses and the defense attorney and the jury and the media and the social media and judge were all in on the conspiracy to find Jodi Arias guilty of 1st degree murder and to get her the Death Penalty.
37) You would have to believe that Travis begged Jodi Arias to come to Mesa, Arizona and move to Mesa after they had broken up, even though Alexander was hot on the trail of other women.
38) You would have to believe that Deanna Reid and / or Chris and Sky Hughes are devious people and possibly murderers who wanted kill Travis Alexander and frame Jodi Arias.
39a) You would have to believe that this is the Travis we never saw:
39b) Fill in your own:
You would have to believe _______________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________.
By the way – In Estrella Jail, Jodi Arias called her first Boyfriend “86”, and he called her “99” (The secret agent numbers of Maxwell Smart and his partner).
40) Finally, you would have to believe that this guy, this guy who would sexually abuse young children as well as Jodi, the guy who choked Jodi to unconsciousness (Even though she said in the 48 hours interview: “I was never in fear of my life”), …
… the guy who kicked her in the ribs to the point of breaking her finger, body slammed her on solid tile, and continued to attack Jodi Arias and threatening to kill her, is the same person in the following video:
Okay, I promised you 30, but you got 10 bonus ‘things you would have to believe’, not including the one you were supposed to come up with. 🙂
Did you catch all that?
All Rights Reserved
What’s on YOUR mind? Comments from all viewpoints are welcome.
Warning!! This version of the article DOES NOT contain explicit and graphic autopsy / crime scene photos.
There are two versions of this and every article, this one is a “post“, the other is a “page“. If you wish to view the more graphic and explicit autopsy / crime scene photos, please click on the link to the alternate version here:
The other version, the “page“, is also where the most people comment.
In part three of the Table Has Turned Series, we are now going to review Jodi Arias’ attitude and actions as portrayed by the prosecution and the defense, to see which one fits best, according to Jodi’s actions throughout the trial. Then we are going to look at the autopsy (WARNING: Graphic Photos) and the crime scene to see what they can tell us about self-defense vs. murder.
Let’s take what we have learned about the 7 most salient pieces of circumstantial evidence, and add these indisputable facts that we were talking about earlier in (part 1):
Facts about Jodi Arias
1. Accusations of stalking
2. A seemingly nomadic lifestyle
3. A poor work record / not doing much in PPL
4. Though Baptized into the LDS, little to no involvement in the LDS
5. No solid friends in Arizona save Travis Alexander, Daniel Freeman, her roommate, and a couple of females from her singles ward.
6. Arias had abandoned her responsibilities (Mortgage and Bills) in California with Darryl Brewer.
7. A habit of violating Alexander’s personal space and monitoring his activities.
8. Proof positive that Arias had stolen a diamond engagement ring from Alexander
9. No solid plan for the future
10. A habit of following through on plans even after the plan had already failed
11. Questionable move to Mesa, Arizona in the first place (after she “broke up” with Alexander).
All of this screams obsession with Travis and a single-minded plan to capture him. Notice how I said “accusations of stalking”? This is because I don’t see that any stalking at all was proven in court. I do believe she was following him around, though. That’s not stalking. The stalked person needs to know they are being followed and create a fear in the stalked person for it to be stalking. Travis telling someone he is fearful is not enough for me, because he didn’t take any of the actions a person who was truly fearful, would take, in my opinion. For example, did he call the police? No, he called his sister in California who is a police officer.
Now, let’s add Arias’ actions directly after the crime:
* She gives few details about the day of the crime, and is ambivalent about what happened the day before the crime. This is because she wants to give no details that can pin her down, in my opinion.
* When some part of her story is troublesome, then you get Technicolor detail and everything down to the split second.
* She altered the crime scene (Removed the weapons, deleted photos, attempted to clean the floor, straightened out the scales, dragged Travis back to the shower, threw bloody clothes and items in the washer, etc.).
* Jodi Arias immediately tried to cover up her involvement in the crime (text messages and voice messages to Travis).
* Jodi Arias went to Travis Alexander’s memorial service knowing she was involved in his death (there were over 1,000 people at Travis’ memorial service).
* She sent an exceptionally insensitive letter to the family complaining that she hurt her toe and lamenting that Travis’ family would get souvenirs from Travis’ home that she helped pay for. She lied to the family about what happened.
* She called Detective Flores and offered to help with the investigation while also trying to throw him off the trail, suggesting possible suspects, and monitoring his progress (what other interactions does this remind you of?).
* She lied in the interrogation, and when shown proof she was at the scene and some evidence, she used that evidence to fabricate a second set of lies. (The “Calvin Klein photo” – Would Jodi Arias have said this if she never saw that photo? The ninja woman standing over Travis. – Would she have said that if she didn’t see that “foot photo”? (Would Jodi Arias have said there was a woman involved?)
Jodi Arias is a very well-practiced liar. Just look at her two pre-trial interviews. I’m still sold even after I know for sure she’s lying. This is why some Jodi Supporters feel she didn’t kill Travis at all.
Now, let’s add Arias’ character from inside and outside the courtroom into the mix:
1. Jodi Arias did write a manifesto in jail and she went on several interviews before the trial against the advice of her attorney(s)
2. Jodi Arias did manipulate her fellow inmates to have sympathy for her and advocate for her innocence and freedom
3. Even though Arias was facing the death penalty, she still managed to have serious conflicts with the lead attorney on her case, a person she was once very closely allied with, to the point that they no longer communicated with each other. That’s really not too bright.
4. Jodi Arias also had conflicts with at least 10 to 20 of her supporters, including personal friends who wanted nothing from Arias but to help her, because Arias thought she knew better than they did.
5. Jodi Arias has sided with Simon Johansson of JodiAriasIsInnocent .com and has condoned and approved of his actions in attempted jury tampering and intimidation, a violation of our US Constitution, our American values, and our Justice System.
She has condoned and approved of slandering and attacking the victim’s family members (People who have lost both parents and grandparents as well as their brother), posting a photo of Travis Alexander in a body bag, with a message that Justice was “served” and Justice was “in the bag”.
She has condoned and approved of SJ calling the Alexanders the “Adam’s family” and calling Travis Alexander’s eldest sister, Tanisha Sorenson, “Morticia” and “Skeletor”. To this day, Jodi Arias has failed to repudiate anything SJ has said or done, giving more credence to the idea that SJ’s words and actions are synonymous with Jodi Arias’ words and actions.
6. On the day of the original trial guilty verdict, Jodi Arias got in a heated argument and screaming match with her attorneys over whether or not she should do an interview with Troy Hayden. What were the attorneys trying to do? They were looking out for Jodi Arias’ best interests. Juan Martinez chose not to use material from the interview, and Arias was lucky he didn’t.
(NOW, what is “Team Jodi” saying about Troy Hayden?
7. Jodi Arias, during her allocution, told the jury that she was a survivor of domestic violence in spite of their guilty verdict and spoke mostly about herself.
8. Jodi Arias showed no regard for the feelings of others, especially people who cared about her and tried to help her, on several occasions. (Detective Flores, Her attorney Kirk Nurmi, her parents, Donavan, George Barwood, Jason Weber, Elizabeth Schilling, A person named “Coco Elsie”, A person named Edd Stackowitz, numerous supporters who wrote to her and were left feeling she had treated them badly (I have this first hand from far too many supporters), and even Sheriff Joe Arpaio, who treated Jodi Arias well, as much as I hate to admit it.
Donavan was in court every single day, she did interviews, she answered E-mails, she advocated for and supported Jodi Arias. How did Arias treat her? Not too well. And amazingly, like quite a few supporters who were treated badly by Arias, Donavan is still out their pulling for her.
What happened with Donavan? She was smart enough to listen to a lot of Jodi’s supporters who felt her tweeting in between trials might endanger her chances. Donavan stopped doing the proxy tweeting for Jodi Arias. Jodi found someone else to register her tweets, and she took it out on Donavan, refusing to speak to her. Sound familiar?
These are just the ones we know of, as Jodi Arias was on trial for her life, people who were supporting her would want to keep quiet about problems like this. Of course, it’s remarkable that in the midst of a death penalty trial, Jodi Arias becomes intensely involved in everything that is going on in her supporter groups and in the social media at large. This is the fault of her super-supporters or “fans”, who got her all involved in the crazy internet goings on when they should have been taking Jodi’s mind off of all these things.
The sheer idiocy of these people has no limits.
The end result was it ended up dividing the supporters as Jodi chastised and humiliated some popular supporters, who had a big following, in favor of other supporters. (See the Jodiland Wars). This in turn alienated a lot of supporters, including myself, because Jodi Arias attacked the unselfish and kind people who we knew were doing the most for her.
And in the midst of all of this, Jodi Arias called for unity.
Jodi Arias was undeniably acting the way the Prosecution portrayed her, not the way the defense portrayed her, in my opinion. The same defense attorney who portrayed her that way is also the one who said that 9 days out of 10, he doesn’t like Jodi Arias and did not communicate with her at all for months and months.
After being accused by the prosecution of deceptively taping Travis without his knowledge and using the phone sex recording for her own gain, and denying this, Jodi Arias went on to duplicate this exact same behavior by deceptively recording a supporter named Elizabeth Schilling, over the phone via a “third party” and then using the recording to try and discredit her. What Jodi Arias did to Elizabeth Schilling, a recent college graduate and well meaning and ardent supporter, was despicable.
9. Jodi Arias broke the rules of video visitation procedures and encouraged others, including minors, to follow suit.
Who was backing up Jodi Arias in ALL of this destructive behavior? Simon Johansson (“SJ”), His website JodiAriasIsInnocent dot com, and his core handful of baboons.
10. Jodi Arias treated her mother badly during the course of the trial.
11. Jodi arias lied under oath in her trial.
12. Consider that IF she in fact premeditated the murder of Travis Alexander, that means that during the trial, she told a veritable circus tent full of lies.
13. Jodi Arias has engaged in an almost adolescent “love affair” with a Supporter named Ben Ernst and has gone off the deep end with him, duplicating her capacity to get involved with obsessive relationships characterized by a childish over dependence on the other person.
Jodi Arias was 34 years old at the time of the writing of this letter:
“(O.k., I’m in court now so I must cut these silly musings short. Ben, I love you so, so much. I’m a lucky lady. You mean more than the world to me.)”
Must run xxoo ❤ JUDITH A.ITH ARIASITH
P.S. Don’t forget your GRATITUDE! 🙂
4. At her sentencing, after hearing the prosecutor talk about how the family members found what little solace they could in the fact that Travis Alexander was most likely unconscious when his throat was cut, Jodi Arias told the court that no, contrary to what she said on the stand, she now remembers that Travis Alexander was conscious and was still attacking her when she sliced the knife into his throat and slashed his throat open.
In doing this, she completely contradicted the testimony of her Expert Psychologist, who thought it was possible that no memories of the traumatic event had been formed (if she really remembered nothing of the killing). There is no way possible to put Arias’ words to the judge and her actions at sentencing in a light favorable to the defendant, that I can see.
This is a person who seemingly begged for the Death Penalty by refusing to testify unless impossible conditions were met, not bringing in any character witnesses to speak in her favor, and refusing to allocute. She even states at sentencing that she wanted to allocute and “beg for the Death Penalty”, but she did not due to her family. Those words at sentencing seemed to be the words of a person who must have known that her only chance was the trial. Either that or she really just does do what suits her best at the moment with absolutely no regard for future consequences.
Now let’s go back to the beginning and bring down the defense’s portrayal of Jodi Arias and decide whether this portrayal fits her actions:
The Defense Portrayed Jodi Arias a driven and hard-working woman, who got into a toxic relationship. The salesman she fell in love with had a big ego, and he was controlling and abusive. Jodi Arias was a shy, withdrawn, passive bookworm type who was happy to just quietly read books and draw nice pictures. While trying to enter a professional career, she meets and falls for a charismatic leader and successful business man.
She becomes interested in the LDS religion, even becoming a Mormon herself. The relationship degenerates into sex only, as Travis Alexander cannot commit to any one woman. The more she tries to get him to commit to one woman, the more he runs away until one day, Travis Alexander reveals a terrible personal secret to Jodi Arias. Travis is tormented by sexual thoughts involving young children.
Having let that secret slip, Travis now starts to take his anger out on Jodi. He can’t end the relationship because Jodi will spill the beans. Mentally and emotionally abusive behavior on the part of Alexander towards Arias quickly turns into physical abuse as Jodi Arias tries to find ways to exit the relationship. This all culminates in tragedy when the exe’s get together one fateful day, and a simple light-hearted “photography session” turns deadly when Alexander snaps and attacks Jodi Arias. Alexander relentlessly attacks and refuses to back down. The demure and petite women uses everything she can find to stop him and defend herself when adrenaline kicks in, causing a massive overkill.
Travis Alexander continues to attack and refuses to back down even after he is shot in the face, stabbed deeply into the abdomen and heart, was lying down on the floor bleeding for a considerable period of time on at least two separate occasions, had his left hand deeply cut multiple times as well as the right, had received 7 additional knife wounds in the front and 14 more in the back.
Does this comport with everything we have learned about Jodi Arias both inside and outside the trial?
Let’s take a look at the prosecution’s portrayal of Jodi Arias:
The Prosecution painted Jodi Arias as a lying, manipulative, scheming stalker who targeted a rich Mormon and pursued him relentlessly. Another key element of Jodi Arias is that she will take an action that benefits her in her mind in the short term without giving any thought to long term consequences. Jodi crossed many personal boundaries and she continuously violated Travis’ privacy, read his private text messages and e-mails, and listened to his voice messages. Even when they were not officially dating, Arias was monitoring all Travis Alexander’s moves and his girlfriends and love interests.
Arias caused Travis to spend lavishly on her as they went on many personal trips together, yet sparks of anger and unhappiness kept flying. Finally Arias was told no and cut off and she flew into a rage, devising a plan to go to Mesa, Arizona fully armed and ready to tear Alexander apart for having the nerve to tell her “No”.
Keep in mind that they only knew each other about 1 year and 8 months and they dated steadily for less than 5 months. Yet she talks as if they had been together for 10 years or more. In that year and 8 months, what did Jodi Arias do to improve her own personal, professional, social, and spiritual situation in life? She did almost nothing at all.
Jodi Arias, says the prosecution, knows best what is right. She will defy anyone who tries to tell her what to do, and she’ll throw anyone under the bus at the drop of a hat. She will turn her back on and devalue anyone who “disses” her.
Does that sound like Arias’ both in and out of the courtroom? A few months ago, I would have said no. Now, I have to admit, it’s the correct judgment. She has duplicated so many of the behaviors that the prosecution suggested.
I can not overemphasize the incredible devastation that has happened among so many Jodi Arias Supporters. Almost everyone I know, either still believes in her but no longer supports her, or no longer believes in her and no longer supports her, or have simply moved on to other things due to The actions of Jodi Arias towards them. I contacted some former ardent Jodi Supporters to give them a “heads up” prior to writing this series of articles. Their reaction? Go right ahead. What changed them?
1. JAII and Simon Johansson
2. Jodi Arias’ own humliations of popular Jodi Supporters.
3. Jodi Arias’ Statements to Judge Sherry Stephens at her sentencing.
The two sides of the story. Which do YOU believe?
From the 48 Hours interview. Jodi Arias and Samantha Alexander speak.
Now, let’s go to the crime scene and the autopsy.
The autopsy really fails to help Jodi’s case for self-defense, even if you factor in an adrenaline rush, trance, auto-pilot, trauma-induced overkill. Why? Take a look:
The autopsy mentions “blunt force trauma”, stating there are many abrasions and contusions.
The 3 sharp force injuries to the head were probably all done from behind. The one incised wound to the top of the forehead also seems to have come from behind.
Examination of the head reveals the following sharp force injuries:
1-2) “Two (2) oblique linear full thickness incised wounds of the right and left posterior scalp, each measuring 2 inches in length”. *
*” Incised and roughly triangular cortical defects of the right and left portions of the skull calvarium, corresponding to the incised defects described above”.
3) “A 1 ¼ inch oblique stab wound of the lower scalp (over the mastoid process), below the earlobe of the right ear, with an apparent blunt 1/32 inch wide end posteriorly, with penetration into scalp and superficial upper right sternocleidomastoid muscle”.
There’s one wound to the back of the neck:
4) “A 1 inch oblique stab wound of the posterior left neck, with penetration of superficial posterior paraspinal neck muscles”.
We have the cluster of nine stab wounds to the back:
5 – 13) “A cluster of nine (9) stab wound of the upper paramidline right and left sides of the back, ranging in size from ¾ to 1 1/2 inches, within a 6 x 5 ½ inch area; all wounds display blunt and sharply incised ends; all wounds penetrate soft tissue of back and impact upon ribs and lateral aspects of vertebral bone (transverse laminae and vertebral bodies), without penetration of chest cavity”.
14) Here’s another wound in the same general area as the cluster of nine:
“A 1 inch oblique stab wound of the right paramidline neck base/upper back, with penetration into trapezius muscle”.
15 – 19) There are 5 defensive wounds of the hands, one to the right hand and 4 to the left.
So, out of 29 knife wounds, at least 14, or about half the wounds are coming from behind the target. It’s only logical that these wounds came after the gunshot, the deep penetrating stab wound to the heart (20), the stab wound to the sternum (21), the stab wound into the pectoral muscle (22), the 5 ¾” stab wound to the abdomen (23), the three incised wounds to the front of the neck (24 – 26), and the two shallow and parallel incised wounds to the front of the shoulder (27 – 28).
Then there is number (29)
“A gaping oblique deep incised wound across the anterior upper neck, 6 x 1 1/2″ with a lower right side (within 2 1/2 inches inferior to the right external auditory meatus (ear) and 2 inches inferior to the left external auditory meatus (Not quite ear to ear), and transection / perforation of the entire upper airway, strap muscles of neck, right jugular vein, and right carotid artery.”
All together there are 13 incised wounds & 15 stab wounds (cluster of 9 back stab wounds) + 6 other stab wounds). If you want to theorize that the cluster of nine stabs to the back were defensive in nature, then you could classify these 9 as “chopping wounds”, giving a total of 6 stab wounds. It’s only a different way of classifying the wounds, it doesn’t make them any less damaging. Also, some of the incised wounds (the wounds to the skull and hand, etc.) are devastating. The incised wound to the throat, was fatal.
The 14 wounds to the back most likely came after Travis turned his back in defense before and during his attempt to get down the hallway culminating with the slashed throat after he fell over and collapsed near the threshold of the carpeted bedroom.
Then there was the gun shot wound to the head and face, which could have come first or last. I think first makes the most sense, and I explain why in the next article. There are so many reasons to believe the gunshot was first. I have come up with 15 to 20 reasons why. It will be extremely difficult to prove that the prosecution purposely changed the order of injuries, although I believe this is true. The prosecution having a wrong or inaccurate theory is not cause to reverse a conviction.
It’s interesting to note that Travis Alexander himself said that when he was a child, he would instinctively turn his back when his mother was trying to beat him:
“A good woman, with the intent at an early age to be a loving mom. A few poor decisions changed that. As she progressively got more involved in drugs she progressively got less capable of raising children. Most commonly was a beating for waking her up. It hurt but we got used to it. I learned how to turn so that when she hit me she would strike my back and arms, the pain was less there.”
Would Travis Alexander shower with the shower door open? Look what he said in his blog:
“We didn’t have the convenience of bathing every day so we tended to stink. I didn’t mind going with out a bath that much really. I was a boy like most and didn’t have a problem being dirty. But I was scared of bathing because if I once got the bathroom floor wet and my mother accused of me of urinating on the floor and threw me half way through a wall.”
This makes it much less likely Alexander would shower with the door open unless someone (such as Jodi Arias) intervened. This implies he knew she was there taking photos.
So, is this self-defense? The defense needs to come up with a scenario for self-defense when the “attacker” seems to be the one trying to defend himself. Now, that doesn’t look very promising for a defense team. How about the crime scene? Can they help a defense team to find self-defense was a possibility? Remember – you only have to show that self-defense was a reasonable possibility.
The crime scene:
In addition to all the wounds to the back of his body, it seems as if Travis Alexander was trying desperately to get out of the bathroom and away from his attacker. I don’t know how many self-defense cases you will have with the attacker engaged in retreat and escape from the victim? Can we theorize that Jodi Arias was being attacked, she went into an adrenaline induced overdrive and just went ballistic? After Jodi Arias had gained the upper hand, Travis would then try to get out of dodge with Jodi Arias, basically on auto-pilot, not being able to stop until Travis stopped moving?
Can a defense team convince all 12 jurors of this possibility? Hmmmmm.
Is this possible in light of the evidence? In light of some of the evidence, yes. But in light of ALL of the evidence, it’s not possible, in my opinion.
Yet, according to Jodi Arias, Travis, with 28 stab wounds, blunt force trauma, and 5 deep incised wounds to his hands, and, oh yeah, the gunshot to the face, and all the resulting blood loss, is Still coming after her when she took the knife and opened up his neck?
Most of the wounds to the front are made in the same direction and more or less horizontal, implying Travis may have been stabbed as he was lying on the floor..
Travis was stationary at the time, or in a confined area. He could have been on the floor on his back when he received these wounds. I think it’s possible he was standing or sitting up, and stabbing from a further distance than the angled stab wounds in the back, which must have been at close range. I think her theory makes more sense, though.
Make a stabbing motion with your arm. See how it would most likely hit a target on an angle ( \ If you are right handed, / If you are left handed) but then flattens out to horizontal (—) as your arm gets farther and farther away from your body?
So, we have in the front, wounds mostly made when Travis was not mobile, the cluster of 9 back wounds which seem to be made also when Travis is in one place, then chaotic stab wounds that seem to be when Travis was in motion. We have motion going down the hallway, so which wounds do you theorize came first? I think it’s possibly the motion wounds came first, but I think it’s much more likely it was the stationary wounds to the front, then the stationary cluster of 9 wounds to the back, then the chaotic, in motion wounds to the back.
The likely way this throat slash happened is with the victim crawling, or on their stomach and the attacker over the victim’s back. I believe Travis was on his stomach when he got the throat slash, because of a video, I was unfortunate enough to view. A man on his back on the sand had his throat slit by an ISIS fighter. Because of the victim’s neck diverting the blood flow, when the man was removed, there was a distinctive butterfly pattern. For Travis, there is no butterfly pattern. it’s more of a unobstructed blood flow, leading me to believe he was on his stomach.
The throat wound is unusual in that it is immediately below the jaw line and follows the bones of the lower jaw (see photo above).
I was talking about this wound with a friend, The first thing he asked me was if Travis had any experience with wrestling. I said yes, he had, he was on the wrestling team all four years of high school. I asked him why?
My friend said that it makes sense that when someone was behind Travis and they drew an arm and a knife across his neck, that he would instinctively bring his jaw down to his chest, in a chin tuck, then the knife would naturally follow the line tight against bottom of the jaw. Imagine that: Even Travis’ last move was most likely defensive, as he tried to protect his throat.
Nope, I don’t see how you can get a slashed throat like that face to face or from the front, or from someone beneath the “attacker” when the receiver of the throat slash has their chin tucked into their chest. You have my ear if you want to try to explain it, though.
Note to JAII inner core of people –
No, it’s not speculation, it’s fact. Maybe you would care to challenge this series of articles with a little more than merely barking at the moon as usual?
What’s YOUR opinion? Have your views evolved? Let me know, please.
In the first “Tables Have Turned” article, we looked at six out of seven of the most salient pieces of circumstantial evidence of a long premeditation of murder by Jodi Arias. Keep in mind that even if none of these 7 could be proved, it’s still possible to prove a short premeditation. To do that, we need to show that Jodi Arias was not under duress, she thought about it, had sufficient time to reflect upon her act (even if it was only a minute or less) then she went ahead and killed Travis Alexander. A significant amount of ‘cool reflection’ is all that is needed for premeditation.
This last major piece of circumstantial evidence is the biggest and it ties everything together.
7) The use of three gas cans in the trunk of the rental car, enabling Arias to cruise through Arizona without having to stop for anything and leave a trace.
Many Jodi Supporters as well as Jodi herself try to ignore or minimize or attempt to explain away this evidence, but they are not being honest with themselves. All the other circumstantial evidence can be explained away quite easily compared to this. The gas can evidence is a very serious problem for Arias defenders and any defense team that takes this case on will find the gas can evidence as difficult to surmount as Mount Everest.
When you tie in all the other circumstantial evidence with the gas cans, the defense has a major problem. Jodi Arias claims she borrowed two, 5 gallon gas cans, form her ex- boyfriend, Darryl Brewer. For some reason, Arias buys a third gas can at a Walmart in Salinas, CA. Darryl was in Monterey, CA and after meeting with him, Arias drives directly about 20 miles to Salinas where she buys the third gas can. Yet, Arias and her Supporters claim she immediately turned around, went back into the store, and returned the gas can.
>>>>>>>>>Question: Why does Arias even buy the 3rd gas can in the first place? This is a question Jodi Arias Supporters do not want you to ask, because there is no reasonable, innocent answer. They also want to pretend that a prosecutor in a possible future new trial will not ask the jury that question.<<<<<<<<<<<
Jodi Arias needed to stop for gas by the time she got to Monterey / Salinas. Remember that she drove her 2004 Infiniti G35 to Redding where her brother Karl and his wife lived to pick up the rental car at the Redding Airport. She drove the white Ford Focus rental car to her brother’s place for a rest. Then she got on the road heading to Santa Cruz near where her ex-boyfriend, Matt McCartney, lived. Redding, CA to Monterey, CA is 318 miles and Redding, CA to Salinas, CA is 338 miles. Somewhere in there, probably after visiting Darryl in Monterey, Jodi Arias needed to gas up.
If she was reasonably smart, she could look up the miles from Pasadena through Mesa to Las Vegas on MapQuest, and this is the amount of miles she needs to travel while maintaining her alibi of going directly to Utah. She could have checked her mileage since leaving the Redding Airport rental agency with a full tank, checked her miles, added gas until the gas pump clicked off, then divided the miles by the gallons she just put in the tank to get her actual MPG (Miles Per Gallon).
Jodi Arias even testified that the Ford Focus was not getting the mileage she expected, compared to her Infiniti. But that’s not right, a 2004 Infiniti G35 has a gas tank capacity of 20 gallons, but gets closer to 20 mpg (20 g x 20 mpg = about 400 miles) . The Ford Focus has a gas tank capacity of 13.5 gallons, and gets better than 30 mpg (13.5 g x 30 mpg = about 405 miles. So, they are fairly even in range which goes to show Jodi was well aware of what her gas mileage was. She expected the Ford Focus to go further on a tank of gas than her Infiniti. She knew how far she could go comfortably on so many gallons of gas. Jodi probably did not expect the smaller gas tank.
She needs to fill up every 300 to 350 miles. Again, it’s about 338 miles from Redding to Santa Cruz. She needs to fill up once before she goes on to Pasadena. This has to be where Jodi Arias checked her miles per gallon and realized it was going to be awful close, even with 2 gas cans. She had better get a third can.
It’s a major coincidence that Jodi Arias is needing to fill up right around the time she makes the decision to buy the 3rd gas can. Was Jodi Arias thinking about such things as her mileage and range in her Ford Focus Rental?
The rental car was a 2008 or 2009 Ford Focus with a gas tank capacity of 13.5 gallons. How do we know that it was a 2008 or 2009? The car was brand new and only had about 1,500 miles on it. A low estimate of 30 mpg for the Focus yields a range per tank of gas at 13.5 g x 30 mpg = 405 miles of range. If you estimate that 4.5 gallons goes comfortably in a 5 gallon can, then you have another 4.5 g + 4.5 g = 9 x 30 mpg = 270 miles (or 300 miles if you assume each gas can had closer to a full 5 gallons of gas in it). Add that to the 405 miles of range from the gas tank for a total of 675 to 705 miles of range that Jodi Arias has with the 2 cans she borrowed from Darryl. With the 2 cans she has an extra 270 miles or an extra 4 hours of driving time at 60 mph. wouldn’t that be enough range to find a gas station in that area of the U.S. under almost any circumstance?
2 cans = 270 to 300 miles of Extra range.
2 cans + the tank = 675 to 705 miles of Total range.
Now, let’s take the prosecution’s theory that the gas cans were for the purpose of getting Arias in and out of Arizona without stopping anywhere. This is the path that Arias took to Mesa, AZ and on to West Jordan, Utah.
Since Arias’ staging area seemed to be Pasadena, CA, and since Interstate 15 begins near Pasadena and goes to Las Vegas, we can see that there is a high probability, assuming malfeasance, that Arias wanted to leave a trail suggesting she went from Pasadena directly to Las Vegas, and then from there to West Jordan, Utah. So it is very reasonable to assume that she wanted her trip to appear to look like this:
Jodi Arias claimed she wanted the gas cans for two reasons 1) She was worried about running out of gas and getting stuck in the desert and dying of exposure or being vulnerable to anyone who came by. 2) She planned on filling up in Utah or Nevada on the way home, where gas prices were cheaper than in her home state of California, to save money on the way home. Notice how this only works on the way home. If you fill up the cans in California to drive in Nevada and Utah, you are not saving money, you’re losing money. If you fill up the cans in Nevada and Utah only to do more driving in Nevada and Utah, you save nothing.
Here’s the part of the trip, assuming malfeasance, that’s Jodi Arias is not supposed to be on:
This area where Jodi Arias is not supposed to be has a distance of approximately 700 miles. Her range with the 2 gas cans is 675 to 705 miles. She can just about achieve her alleged goals with 2 gas cans. Jodi Arias really didn’t need the 3rd gas can. She especially didn’t need the 3rd gas can if she filled up at Desert Center. (Some people theorized that she wanted the extra can to take Alexander’s body out into the desert and burn it). Be that as it may, this is too close for comfort. If her calculations are off, Jodi Arias will run out of gas before getting out of Arizona.
Range with the tank and 2 cans = 675 to 705 miles
Distance to cover = 701 miles
It’s too close for comfort with 2 cans. Is this why Jodi Arias stopped at Salinas, only 20 miles after leaving Darryl’s house, and bought the 3rd gas can?
This is most likely her plan, from the prosecution’s perspective, to make it appear as if she went direct from Pasadena to West Jordan, near Salt Lake City, Utah via Las Vegas, Nevada. If so, this is all interstate highway driving and there’s little chance of getting stuck without gas. The only part of her drive that could involve desert driving may be in Utah or Nevada on her way home. Jodi Arias can still say she had other plans involving some desert driving after Pasadena until she decided at the last moment to go visit Alexander. In, fact, she did just that, claiming she intended a trip to Death Valley, CA. Then what she did after the killing, getting OUT of Arizona undetected, can be attributed to fear and shame from being forced to kill Travis Alexander.
But for a trip to Death Valley, is needing the cans reasonable? She didn’t tell Darryl that was her plan and she really just casually mentions it at trial. Here is a question and answer about Death Valley from 2007:
for Death Valley Junction, Death Valley National Park
1. Re: Gas stations around Death Valley Jul 23, 2007, 3:18 PM “There are stations all along Hwy 395. Lone Pine is the last substantial town before the park. Panamint Springs resort in the western part of the park, about 50 mi/80 km farther past Lone Pine, has gas. But it is incredibly expensive; I’ve seen it up to $.50-.75 more per gallon than other stations in the area. Stove Pipe Wells and Furnace Creek, the main resorts in the park, have gas. Stove Pipe Wells typically has lower prices. It’s another 25 mi/45 km or so to Furnace Creek.
If you want to go to Scotty’s Castle, there is no gas there now but you can make a round trip from either SPW or FC without filling up. There are several routes to Las Vegas from Furnace Creek. Depending on the one you take, you’ll find stations in the towns of Beatty, Amargosa Valley, and Pahrump NV and in Shoshone CA.
On the stand Jodi Arias claims she went from Pasadena, CA to Mesa, AZ, but she stopped for gas at Desert Center, CA and at Buckeye, AZ.
Problem: It’s only 174 miles from Pasadena to Desert Center or 5.8 gallons of gas. Jodi Arias claims to also stop at Buckeye Arizona which is only 170 miles from Desert Center or 5.7 gallons. If she made a mistake, and only stopped at Buckeye, AZ, this is 344 miles or about 11.5 gallons, a little too far to go according to Jodi’s habit of not letting the gas gauge get in the red.”
Jodi Arias didn’t stop at Desert Center, CA or Buckeye, CA this time, though she was familiar with those two stops from previous trips to Arizona.
What is Jodi Arias doing? What she always does:
1) She gives explicit detail when there’s a problem with a part of her story.
2) For the rest, she leaves it as open as possible, so she has some wiggle room later.
3) She throws bright, shiny distractions out there and interesting diversions.
4) She tries to muddy the waters.
Jodi Arias gives some really unbelievable testimony about stopping for gas twice between Pasadena, CA and Mesa, Arizona.
Why did Jodi Arias throw in those extra gas stations during her testimony? She knows it’s too far to get to Mesa, Arizona from Pasadena, CA on a single tank of gas (400 miles or 13.3 gallons). She probably emptied two cans of gas into her tank before getting to Mesa. She knows she dumped two cans of gas in her tank, so she mistakenly adds two gas stops to compensate. But 2 cans, or 10 gallons, would be one gas stop. These two stops are too close together and really make no sense. In short, Jodi Arias lied on the stand, again.
Trial day 24, Jodi Arias testifies about the gas cans.
Other Jodi Supporters will put a lot of emphasis on the amount of gas Jodi Arias put into the cans and the tank prior to going to Mesa, Arizona. What does that prove? Arias filled her tank and filled all three gas cans in the trunk in Pasadena prior to heading off to Mesa, Arizona. Arias did not stop for gas in the State of Arizona or after passing Interstate 15 near Pasadena. Arias filled up her tank from the cans somewhere in Arizona. She testified to this. Three gas cans gives Arias (13.5 gallons x 30mpg) + ((4.5g +4.5g + 4.5g) * 30 mpg) = 405 + 405 = 810 or 405 + ((5g+5g+5g) * 30 mpg) for up to 855 miles of range.
There is no practical reason whatever to need an extra 405 to 450 miles of range for this trip. Two cans give an extra 270 miles or 4.5 hours of extra driving time at 60 mph.
Three cans give her an extra 405 miles of range or an extra 6.7 hours of driving time at 60 mph.
The defense could then say that Jodi Arias is a woman who is not really into cars and maps and math and she’s not really a physics or math expert. She is deathly afraid of getting stuck in the desert sun where she will bake with no AC. So, she overcompensates by getting 3 gas cans. She’s going into Nevada and Utah and she wants to be prepared.
So far, so good, but now we have another problem. Jodi Arias claims she bought the 3rd gas can, but then she turns around and returns it before leaving the store parking lot. Some Jodi Supporters say she definitely returned the gas can, and Walmart just cannot locate the records. But, Jodi Arias had the original receipt for the purchase of the third gas can, which was blue (kerosene) instead of red (gasoline). A Walmart employee found the copy of that original receipt.
Jodi Arias’ original receipt has no markings or signature on it, as would be expected if one item on the receipt is returned. Jodi Arias had no extra receipt, with just the new can return on it, which is also Walmart standard operating procedure. Walmart could not find a copy of this return, or any records of any gas can returned at all in that store, until 2 weeks later.
Also on that receipt was a twin pack of suntan lotion.
Some Jodi Supporters will now start talking about Amanda Webb and how she was mistaken or lying or her search for the records was incomplete. Records were moved because that Walmart later became a Walmart Auto supply and repair store only, while a new Walmart store opened up down the road, taking the old store’s number.
Now they are both Superstores.
This is true but not really relevant. All this speculation that the Walmart employee was incompetent in locating the records is just a load of nonsense. The record of Jodi Arias’ original purchase WAS found. A record of a gas can return 2 weeks after June 3rd WAS found, indicating that there was no “mix up” with records. The idea that some of the records for some of the cash registers are in one location while other records from other cash registers that were moved to the new store are in a different location is just absurd. The records for THAT DAY, June 3, 2008, when there was only ONE store, are all in the same place. The record for that gas can return will never be found by anyone – because it does not exist.
So there is zero evidence (other than Jodi Arias’ word), that the can was returned, and all available evidence indicates that Arias did not return the can (No marked original receipt, no new receipt showing the return, and no record of the return found by Walmart). But then on top of that, we have this:
In West Jordan, Utah, Arias buys:
Tesoro, 1699 W North Temple, SCL, Utah 84116,
10.672 gallons of gas (3:57 AM Mastercard 3.859 per gallon $41.18) 5.091 gallons of gas (4:01 AM Mastercard $19.65) 9.583 gallons of gas (4:05 AM At Register $36.98)
= 25. 36 gallons of gas Total (Total price = $97.81)
13.5 gallons = Capacity of Ford Focus gas tank 4.5 to 5.0 gallons = Capacity of gas can #1 4.5 to 5.0 gallons = Capacity of gas can #2
22.5 to 23.5 gallons = Capacity of the tank and 2 cans
The comfortable capacity of the gas tank and 2 cans is 13.5 + 4.5 + 4.5 = 22.5 gallons. Even if you want, you can assume that 5 gallons will fit in the 5 gallon can, and you can then add it up like this 13.5 + 5 + 5 = 23.5 gallons. This capacity of the tank and 2 cans is assuming the gas tank and the cans are all completely empty.
We still have roughly 1.85 gallons that cannot fit into the tank and 2 cans. Add that to Arias’ statement on the stand that she tries to never let the gas gauge get in the danger zone, as is also the habit of many people.
Jodi Arias testified that
1) She usually doesn’t let the gas gauge get in the danger zone.
2) She ran out of gas in the night to early morning of June 5th, 2008
3) She almost ran out of gas in Nevada.
If she never lets it get below 3/4 ’s of a tank, then she will usually be putting 3/4 * (13.5) = 10.125 gallons plus or minus a gallon in the car. If that’s true, this would mean that she would normally buy 10.125 + 4.5 +4.5) = 19.125 or (10.125 + 5 + 5) = 20.125 gallons of gas (if you believe she filled the cans closer to 5 gallons each instead of a more comfortable 4.5 gallons).
9 gallons to 11 gallons: Total of a normal tank filling for Jodi Arias
15.350 gallons: The smallest amount Jodi Arias had to have put in the 13.5 gallon tank.
Here, even if she filled the 2 cans to capacity, this means she put 15.350 gallons of gas into a tank that only holds 13.5 gallons dry. You are straining a reasonable person’s ability to believe this to the maximum possible extent (Another Jodi Arias trait).
Jodi Arias is about 4 to 5 gallons over her habitual filling pattern. Hmmmmm, what a coincidence.
In West Jordan, near Salt Lake City, Utah, after visiting Ryan Burns, laughing and joking, and even falling asleep in his arms, she buys 25.346 gallons, which is more than 5 gallons over what she can comfortably fit into the tank and two cans.
Now remember what her actual purchase was: 10.672 gallons + 5.091 gallons + 9.583 gallons = 25.346 gallons
She’s about 1/2 a gallon over my rough estimate of 10.125 gallons, if the 10.672 gallons were put in the tank, and about 1/2 gallons below my rough estimate if the 9.583 gallons were put in the tank.
Some Jodi Supporters are suggesting that Arias fit an extra 1 or 2 gallons into the 13.5 gallon capacity tank, which would mean she let it run completely out of gas. Alternatively, they want to tell you that Jodi Arias paid for someone else’s gas or that the store clerk charged some other item off as gas, etc.
If she paid for someone elses’ gas, etc., why didn’t she say so in 18 days of testimony?
The gas pump was calibrated badly? No, i don’t think that’s an explanation that will work.
1) So, there are no markings/ initials on the original Walmart receipt,which is Walmart “standard operating procedure”.
2) There is no additional receipt for the returned fuel can
3) Arias expects the jury to believe that she paid for the can by card but received cash back, that’s not Walmart “standard operating procedure”.
4) A Walmart employee did a search and she found the original purchase receipt, but no record of a return for that can or any other fuel can at that store until 2 weeks later.
5) This means that she WAS looking at the right records, George Barwood.
6) It is impossible, by common sense, by math and by the laws of physics, for Jodi Arias to have fit 25.346 gallons of gas into a tank and two cans which can hold 23.5 gallons.
7) Even if the impossible were possible, Jodi Arias testified that she doesn’t let the gas gauge get in the red AND she testified that she ran out of gas the night before. The odds she would let that happen twice in two days is exceedingly, crushingly, staggeringly high.
Now, in order for Jodi Arias not to be guilty of premeditated 1st degree murder, besides EVERYTHING ELSE we have discussed, you must also believe that Jodi Arias returned that 3rd gas can despite all 7 items above. The odds of that are simply Trillions to one.
Well, a Walmart employee wanted the gas can for himself or herself, so they gave Jodi Arias cash and took the can for their own?
No. Because employees get a discount and they could not walk out of the store with a gas can and no receipt for it. Nice try, though.
Okay, so having 2 or even 3 gas cans shows a plan to do SOMETHING, but does not prove premeditated murder, you say?
Maybe not, but we look at each item in isolation. We can come up with reasonable and alternative explanations for each item. We may even be able to surmount Mt. Everest which is the 3 gas cans and show how that was really something else entirely, even if Jodi Arias never claimed it was, in 18 days of testimony. What you cannot get away from is what happens when you add everything together in totality. Two things immediately happen:
1) You cannot make excuses or reasonable alternative explanations for all these really crushing pieces of circumstantial evidence that a reasonable jury of 12 will reasonably believe, without wallowing out into the land of absurdity.
2) Each one of these pieces of circumstantial evidence reinforces the other and they are entwined together and they fit together in a way that just cannot happen and would not happen in isolation, or by happenstance, or by chance.
As if this were not enough, it’s a proven and indisputable fact that Jodi Arias lied about a good number of things on the stand. There are maybe 10 things Jodi Arias stated that are beyond a doubt not true. There are so many more things we cannot prove, so if she lied about these things for sure, what else did she lie about? Her testimony is useless, and would be useless in any future trial, because she made the fatal mistake of lying on the stand. This is something she absolutely could not afford to do, because of all her lies in the past.
Who, me? Jodi Arias talks about the gun theft as if she heard about it 3rd or 4th hand. According to Jodi, the fight was over the same day it started and She and Travis engaged in phone sex after the big fight. Not likely.
What if there were 3 cans in West Jordan (Salt Lake City), Utah?
10.672 gallons fills up the Ford Focus gas tank,
5.091 gallons fills one gas can, and
9.583 gallons (about 4.8 gallons in each can) is put into the remaining 2 cans.
Or (less probably, in my opinion):
9.583 gallons fills up the Ford Focus gas tank,
5.091 gallons fills one gas can, and
10.672 gallons (about 5.33 gallons in each can) is put into the remaining 2 cans.
Let’s compare that to what Jodi put in the car in Pasadena:
June 3rd 20:46
8.301 gallons of gas (8:42 PM Cash 4.169 per gallon $34.61)
9.590 gallons of gas (8:46 PM Mastercard $39.98)
2.770 gallons of gas (8:53 PM Cash $11.55)
Total = 20.661 gallons. Total = $86.14
Some people claim that Jodi Arias returned the can in Salinas and she had only two cans in Pasadena. She put 8.301 gallons in her car, then filled the two 5 gallon cans, then she topped off her tank with the 2.77 gallons.
If you have 2 gas cans in your garage, like Darryl had, what are the chances they will both be empty? Kind of low, no? It seems that Jodi Arias actually filled the partially full gas can she got from Darryl with the 2.77 gallons.
The distance from Pasadena, California to Mesa, Arizona to Mesquite , Nevada, where Arias filled up next, is 781 miles. In Mesquite, Arias makes a purchase sufficient to buy about 11 gallons of gas.
781 miles = distance from Pasadena to Mesa to Mesquite 675 to 705 miles = Range with the tank and 2 cans 810 to 855 miles = range with the tank and 3 cans
So, Arias cannot make it to Mesquite, Nevada from Pasadena California on a tank and 2 cans of gas. On top of that, Arias testified that she became lost in the desert between Arizona and Nevada, so the distance is even farther (IF she was telling the truth).
You can do any amount of double checking through estimates and nothing adds up to a tank and 2 cans. This is so, no matter how far you are willing to stretch it.
In Mesquite, Nevada, Jodi Arias made a purchase sufficient to buy 11 gallons of gas. This means she used roughly 24.5 to 26 gallons of gas to get there from Pasadena, if she used 3 gas cans, which is a distance of 781 miles.
24.5 gallons x 30 mpg = 735 miles
26.0 gallons x 30 mpg = 780 miles
That would give Arias a range of 735 to 780 miles which fits very well with the distance from Pasadena to Mesquite, NV. Remember that the estimate of 30 mpg is low, especially if you are driving all highway miles. Seems like maybe Jodi Arias didn’t get lost, either. 🙂
In Pasadena, Jodi Arias bought 8.301 gallons to top off the tank + 9.59 gallons in two cans ( look how close that is to the 9.583 gallons she bought in West Jordan) + 2.77 gallons in the third can.
It appears as if Jodi Arias usually fills the car tank first, then fills the gas cans. Why does she say she doesn’t know in what order she filled the gas? She’s muddying the waters.
The tank and two cans would hold 22.5 to 23.5 gallons of gas.
Remember that in Pasadena, Jodi Arias bought 20.661 gallons, meaning if she only had the two cans as supporters want to claim, she bought just 1.84 gallons less than what would be needed if the tank and 2 gas cans were all completely empty, which Jodi Arias testified that she usually does not let happen.
Anyway you want to do the math, it does not work out comfortably with 2 cans and in most cases, it doesn’t work at all.
Inescapable Conclusion: Jodi Arias had 3 gas cans in Pasadena, CA and in West Jordan, UT. She did not return the can to the Walmart in Salinas or anywhere else. Jodi Arias lied on the stand about returning the 3rd gas can. Why would she do that?
Here’s the reason: Why on earth would Jodi Arias buy that 3rd gas can in Salinas, CA in the first place? There is no Innocent reason, justifiable reason or even a mistaken reason for doing so. Whether she did or didn’t return the 3rd gas can, there still is no reason for her filling those gas cans in Pasadena if Pasadena to Las Vegas, via Interstate 15, was her intended route.
Going instead to Mesa, Arizona still gives no reason for filling those cans as that route, also, is all interstate driving. Jodi Arias called Darryl Brewer a number of times about those gas cans. She wanted to be sure she had those cans before she left on her trip, so there must have been a very important reason for needing those gas cans. At no time did she tell Darryl Brewer she was going to Death Valley. At trial, she only states casually she may have gone to Death Valley, but AFTER going to West Jordan.
You can say that Jodi Arias planned on doing something artistic, etc. in the desert before she changed her mind to go to Mesa, yet she never mentioned anything about that, in 18 days on the stand, except for a casual mention of Death Valley.
Jodi Arias lied on the stand about the gas can because that 3rd gas can is such damning evidence, while in her mind, 2 cans could be explained away. Now, we have to wonder what else did she lie about on the stand? Because of Jodi Arias’ previous lies:
– directly after the killing,
– during the investigation,
– in the interrogations,
– in her Manifesto
– to her Attorneys
– in her letter to the Alexander family and
– in her TV interviews,
it was critically important that she did not lie even once on the stand.
Jodi Arias should have told the truth about the gas cans, as since she had 2 cans already, she may as well have 3 cans, but she decided it was a problem for her, and it is, but it was much more of a problem for her to lie about returning the 3rd can and to get caught doing it.
If there is a new trial, Jodi Arias must come clean about the gas cans and admit that she did not return that can. Much has been made of the idea that filling the cans at West Jordan proves that Jodi Arias had an innocent reason for having those gas cans. But actually, if she had a malicious reason for having those gas cans, she would be certain to fill them up again as this would help cover her story and reason for needing those cans.
On top of that, we know Jodi Arias did fill those gas cans in West Jordan, Utah. This means that they were empty and she did use them. Well, you could say she was forced to kill Travis when he attacked her relentlessly in the bathroom, so that’s why she used the gas in the cans. But, then again, you have to ask what is the reason for needing an extra range of 405 miles and an extra 6 ¾ hours driving time, when with 18 days on the stand, we heard all about pop rocks and tootsie pops, but we never heard the big plan needing the gas cans.? That’s because the big plan was murder.
All the other circumstantial evidence that is difficult to explain, is still explainable within reason, but the gas cans tips the scales and makes the pendulum swing in the other direction. Now, with all the other evidence and the gas cans, the combination of all this becomes exponentially more difficult to explain away within reason. It just overwhelms a person who is trying to remain fair, objective, and reasonable. It propels a person into the twilight zone, where magical or other-worldly influence will be needed for a sane person to buy this story.
You must believe that you can walk on water in order to believe Jodi Arias’ story. That’s the truth that Jodi’s “fans” refuse to look at or see. There is no way around it.
Remember: This is a Jodi Arias supporter saying this.
So let’s double-check the method. In Pasadena, If Jodi Arias had 3 cans with 4.5 gallons in each can, she would have 27 gallons of gas or 810 miles of range. If she had 5 gallons in each can, she would have an additional 1.5 gallons or 28.5 gallons which is 855 miles of range. An average of the two would be 27.75 gallons and 832.5 miles of range. By coincidence, and purely by happenstance, the distance between Pasadena and the first recorded place after that, where Jodi Arias stopped for gas, is 795 miles. This is way above the maximum 705 miles of range that Jodi Arias would have with 2 cans of gas in the trunk, although it may have been enough to get to Las Vegas (713 miles).
Well, she bought gas before that and paid cash, so there’s no record? Sorry, but the math for that idea just doesn’t work.
No way did she have only 2 cans in that trunk. It’s impossible.
I challenge and dare anyone to debate the gas cans.
Still not convinced, Jodi Supporter? Now one of Jodi’s plans for the gas cans, we never really heard about, but the other one, we did. Jodi Arias will fill the cans and her tank with cheap Nevada gas to use in California, thus saving money.
Problem: Here’s the map from Reno, Nevada to Yreka, CA.
It’s only 255 miles back to Yreka. You could make that 355 miles, because Jodi Arias went back to Yreka first, then she drove the 100 miles back to the Redding Airport. So, that’s about a tank of gas or about 3 gas cans worth of gas. So, Jodi could use the tank of gas to save money bringing the rental car back, but she still has to fill the tank with California priced gas when she returns the car.
For a tank of gas, here’s how much Jodi would save with her plan:
GAS $3.86 per gallon x 11 gallons = $42.46
Gas $4.17 per gallon x 11 gallons = $45.87
Total savings = $3.41
Even if she fills the tank and the 3 cans and figures out a way to use it all in California, this would still be 13.5 gallons + (3 x 5 gallons) = 13.5 g + 15 g = 28.5 gallons.
Gas $3.86 per gallon x 28.5 gallons = $110.01
Gas $4.17 per gallon x 28.5 gallons =$118.85
Total savings = $8.84
Look at those whopper savings? Who is she trying to kid?
Now, let’s predict how much gas Jodi Arias will need when she gets to West Jordan from Mesquite, Nevada. We know she drove to the PPL meeting and lunch and back to Ryan Burn’s home, so we can make an estimate on that.
The distance from Mesquite, NV to West Jordan, Utah is 331 miles. Jodi arias may have driven an additional 30 miles, so let’s guestimate 361 miles.
That’s about 12 gallons of gas at 30 miles per gallon.
Jodi Arias purchased 10.672 gallons in West Jordan, which is enough to drive 320.16 miles. That’s pretty close considering that 30 mpg is a low estimate and this was all highway miles (Interstate 15).
331 miles = Distance from Mesquite, NV to West Jordan, UT 361 miles = guestimate of Joidi Arias’ gas usage prior to Tesoro fill up. 320.16 miles = range calculated using the gas Jodi put in the main tank at Tesoro x 30 mpg. This would be equal to the amount of gas she used between Mesquite and West Jordan.
That’s awful close, so the math appears to be sound.
So, we are stuck with the 3 gas cans. Jodi Arias bought them and filled them so as not to leave a trail in Arizona, and she used them. And she lied about the number of cans. There is no innocent or alternative explanation for the gas can evidence.
>>>>>If there were such an explanation or argument, trust me, I would be making it.<<<<<<
Anyone making an innocent or reasonable argument for the gas cans is either
– badly mistaken,
– not giving you all the facts
– or deliberately lying.
Then why does Jennifer Willmott say this should have been a 2nd degree murder case? My guess is because she only handled certain parts of the case and she never had the time or the inclination to sit down with all these facts, calculate them out and process them in her mind in totality.
Plus, she’s the defense attorney, what did you expect her to say?
Slick words from Jodi Arias or her Supporters can never make this evidence go away.
Now, with the gas cans, which by the way, conclusively proves premeditation in and of itself, all the other evidence follows this right over the cliff.
1) The rental car – Still, no proof of anything, in my opinion.
2) The License Plates – The odds of having both your license plated messed with, yet not stolen? Long, long, long. No one is going to take your license plate off in the front and turn the back one upside-down. They will either steal the plate or toss them away
So, half way through California, she turns her license upside-down? Isn’t that too risky? Why does Jodi Arias give that answer? Because she knows she didn’t stop anywhere after that, all the way to Mesa. Why did this happen after going into Starbuck’s in Pasadena for a few minutes? It has to be after she filled the tank, or else she probably would have noticed the rear license plate. Jodi Arias is basically admitting she did not buy gas after Pasadena.
All the times she went into the trunk and she never noticed the license plate was upside-down? Come on!
3) Hair colored dark brown on the 3rd – Inconclusive as to premeditation. She could have been just trying to improve her appearance for Travis and/or Ryan Burns. But, do note that Jodi Arias denied dying her hair under direct examination. She got caught in this lie, due to the selfies she took in the rental car.
Jodi Arias forgets all about getting her hair colored, until her memory is jarred by the selfies she took in the Ford Focus on June 3rd, 2008.
Oh, yeah, THAT dye job. Uh……I forgot.
4) The Major Argument – Just 2 days before the theft of the gun. As soon as Arias completes the work week, she’s off to Mesa and one week later Alexander is dead.
5) The phone was turned off before entering Arizona, stayed off at Alexander’s home and continued to be off until Arias is almost out of Arizona – Not reasonably explainable in light of other evidence.
6) The stolen .25 caliber gun – To ignore that the stolen gun was used in the killing, you have to believe Travis also had a .25 caliber gun,
conveniently located right near the bathroom, AND it was loaded and cocked. You have to believe it was sitting there with no extra ammo or accessories of any kind (accept for the holster and/or the box that Arias said was there but wasn’t there). You have to believe that Jodi Arias climbed up on the shelves in the closet in a fight for her life and got hold of the gun without disturbing anything in the closet.
Don’t try to tell me Jodi Arias ever went back into this closet after the killing. White carpet and not a mark? Look at the bench. Do you really think that would have not been disturbed in a life and death struggle and a chase through the closet?
You have to believe that Travis Alexander, naked and wet, ran and chased her around his closet and master bathroom, and that Jodi Arias aimed at and hit a moving target under extreme duress having hardly ever operated a gun before. You have to believe that Jodi took Travis’ gun out of the house even though there was no need for her to take it, if it was his, and even though it seems she took nothing else of Travis’ that she didn’t absolutely have to take, out of the house.
Additionally, Jodi Arias also had to state that her shooting Travis was an accident and the gun just “went off”. If, as she testified, Jodi Arias was thrown down on the tile floor, then chased after by Travis, she had every right to fire that gun. Why didn’t she just say I shot him to stop him after he attacked meand he was still coming at me? She refuses to say it was anything other than an accidental firing. So now, on top of the tiny possibility that Jodi Arias could hit a moving target in a life and death situation , and hit him above the right eyebrow, you also must now believe the gun went off by accident.
The fight, the gun, the gas, the phone and the plates = premeditation beyond a reasonable doubt when you put it all together. It’s way too much of a coincidence for all these things to happen by happenstance and independent of each other…..
….I really think Jodi Arias laughs at the people who actually buy her explanations. I think Juan Martinez might be correct about the plates. I’m not so sure she would risk turning a license plate upside-down and driving like that half way through California and all the way to Mesa (387 miles or over 5.5 hours at 60 mph). Nor do I think a teen vandal flipped her license plate.
On top of that, the hair dye evasion looks very suspicious, so I’m being real charitable in not including it in my analysis.
I think she may have changed that plate inside Alexander’s garage in the dark or in the driveway in a big hurry after the killing, just as Martinez theorized. She may have changed it in Pasadena as she said, but that’s very risky, considering she does not want to be noticed on her way to Mesa. It’s also worse for her case if it happened the way Jodi Arias claims, rather than if she changed the plates at Travis’ home.
‘But even if her story is partially true and Arias did drive from Pasadena to Mesa with the flipped license plate, that’s even worse’? Why do you say that, Rob?
The probable route Jodi Arias wanted people to believe she took.
And the places she was not supposed to be at or leave any trace?
Note the gas stops Jodi Arias mentions at Desert Center, CA and Buckeye, AZ, also Jodi and Travis’ former meeting place at Ehrenberg, AZ on the border.
Pasadena: Jodi Arias buys gas and fills the gas cans starting at 8:42 PM. It’s getting to be 9:00 PM. It just so happens, just by coincidence and happenstance, to be the dark of night at this point.
Watch this video carefully. If there any doubt about Jodi’s Pasadena planning?
Pasadena was the staging ground for premeditated murder.
Do Ewe concur? Are Ewe Kidding me? Let me know in the comments, please.
Jodi Arias is fortunate to have a lot of really good supporters with big hearts who give her unconditional love and support.
These are some really wonderful and kind people, the silent majority of Jodi Arias supporters, who you will probably never hear about. This is because they do not want to interact with you. They stay to themselves in secret groups and quietly go about their business.
I have been proud to be a supporter of Jodi Arias, especially when she faced the Death Penalty, and I would do the same thing again. It’s good to know there are Americans and some foreigners out there who will stand up and fight when they see that a person is being bulldozed by both the media and social media on the outside, as well as the state and the prosecutor on the inside. This was an unfair trial, in my view, and the conviction will be reversed and remanded to court for a new trial some day. I feel that this case has something in common with the Darlie Lynn Routier case. This is another case where there was an unfair trial. There is more than enough evidence that there should be a new trial in that double child murder case from Rowlett, Texas.
However, winning a new trial, as difficult as that is, is the easy part. Next, you have to convince 12 diverse people unanimously that the defendant is not guilty or guilty of a lesser offense. Jodi Arias would no longer face the Death Penalty, and this means no “death-qualified” jury. Death qualified juries are known to be more likely to side with the prosecution and to convict a defendant. But there will still be a spectrum of jurors sitting there and you will have to convince all twelve. Now, in the case of Darlie Routier, if there is a fingerprint in blood in the home that doesn’t match anyone in the home, then you have a giant problem with finding Darlie guilty of the murder of her child. My understanding is that the fingerprints are unable to be identified. That must be so, since this evidence had been ordered by the court to be tested / re-tested in 2009 and that’s almost 7 years ago. In other words, what is holding things back is probably that Darlie Routier cannot be excluded as a source of the prints to a reasonable degree of certainty.
Barring any conclusive evidence found that someone, anyone, either entered or left the home or was inside the home, there is little hope for Darlie Routier. There are too many problems with her story, and the common sense and the evidence that simply doesn’t match up with that story. This was a very sloppy job on the part of the Rowlett Police department, the court reporter, the prosecution, a lot of people. If there is any doubt about her guilt, Darlie Routier must be freed whether she murdered her two sons or not. If there’s a bloody finger print that absolutely belongs to no one in the home, and was an adult’s print (remember, the two boys were never fingerprinted), then absolutely, Darlie should be freed.
For Jodi Arias, there’s a different set of circumstances. Whereas Darlie Routier has more and more people saying she might be innocent, there are fewer and fewer people who think Jodi Arias is innocent or guilty of a lesser charge. Many people who believe she is innocent or guilty of a lesser charge have stopped supporting her, and many supporters continue to support her, but believe she’s guilty of 1st degree premeditated murder. Now, I will continue to support Jodi Arias in that I want her to be treated humanely and fairly, and she has every right to appeal her conviction. But, I must add my name to the growing list of supporters who believe she’s guilty of premeditated 1st degree murder.
I’m a facts person. I have to go by the facts. The facts as I have assessed them say she is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. To be fair to myself and Jodi Arias, I have to accept these facts. For me, this really started in between the main trial and the 2nd penalty phase. Some things I thought were good points for Jodi Arias turned out to not be true and provably false. Some of my arguments that I thought were rock solid fell apart when I learned a little more. I debated with people, talked to people. People reasoned with me, and I gave my counterpoints. The turning point was the gas cans, when someone commented on this blog and we went back and forth about the gas cans. I will show you what I discovered in a series of upcoming articles, as I debated with people on all sides.
I looked up the Ford Focus, the size of the gas tank, and the gas mileage. I sat down with a calculator and some Google maps and all the distances between cities and towns. I checked it once, twice, three times. People on the other side were correct about the gas cans (Brad Justda / Justda Truth. Mike LeBlanc, Cate Ellington, a lot of people). Since this was a Death Penalty case, I decided to back Jodi Arias 100% until the end of the second penalty phase. Now it’s time to emerge out of the closet.
I hope I can still keep the friendships I have made with supporters and non-supporters alike. Of course, I don’t like a person based on whether they support Arias or not. I either like you or I don’t because of who you are, not what you believe. So if I didn’t like you before, non-supporter (or supporter), chances are I’m not going to like you now. If you like me better now, that’s fine. I’m still in Jodi’s corner as far as the dignity and rights she should be entitled to. I believe that Jodi Arias is severely mentally ill. She can never admit fully to what she did, because, she would then literally melt or cease to exist, in my opinion. This is because everything she is comes from her-self image that she has built up over a lifetime. This crime fits nowhere in that self-image. To admit all, in her mind, is to lose everything she has left.
I explain below my inescapable conclusion that Jodi Arias is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. I wish it weren’t so, but it is. The people that prevented me from making that conclusion much earlier are Juan Martinez and his emotional, speculative arguments, the state of Arizona, with their history of corruption and their push for the Death Penalty in this case, the media, (especially HLN), for creating a lynch-mob mentality in the public, and Pro-State and Pro-Travis as well as pro-Jodi zealots on social media, for preventing intelligent and factual discussion from taking place with angry dogma, memes and attacks. They all created an atmosphere of coming down on Jodi Arias and her defense (or on Travis Alexander) like a tidal wave, like a Tsunami. So naturally, like some others, I took the side of the underdog.
I saw the possibility of self-defense, and all that is needed is just the possibility, a reasonable possibility. But Jodi Arias has not been reasonable, especially during sentencing when she addressed Judge Sherry Stevens. This was the time for Jodi Arias to show her supporters and all trial watchers she was rational and redeemable. This was the time to step back and let the Alexander’s finally have their say. This was the perfect time for Jodi Arias to show gratitude to her supporters and all people who were in her corner, to show heart and to show grace. Instead, Jodi Arias acted like a 6 year-old spoiled child. She did nothing except prove that the prosecution was right about her all along. She showed the Jodi Arias that not only could have done this, but did do this.
I do not feel that Jodi Arias has any gratitude for her supporters nor do I think she can feel or show gratitude. It’s all part of her sickness. She even went on to double down on her remarks at sentencing and she said she wished she had said more. It was then that I felt that Simon Johansson and Jodi Arias were speaking with one mind. In the following articles, I lay out the reasons why I have come to my conclusions.
Is Jodi Arias truly guilty of 1st Degree Murder
(beyond a reasonable doubt)?
Keep in mind that I’m a Jodi Supporter and I have been since shortly after the start of the trial in 2013. Unlike many Jodi Supporters, I have kept up with all the relevant facts in the case. These are facts as they stand now, after all the testimony and evidence has been considered, not the facts as they were at the very start of the trial. In groups with both Jodi Supporters and State Supporters, we have gone over it all, over and over, with a fine tooth comb. We have gone over it again and again, backwards and forwards- all of it.
Many Jodi Supporters have remained in their bubbles and talked it out only amongst themselves. They can’t see the flaws in their own ideas. Other supporters who do talk it out with people with opposing views, stubbornly maintain their outmoded ideas and theories, even when evidence and testimony from the trial makes some of their theories and ideas impossible. Like Jodi Arias’ parents, I can explain away and rationalize a lot of things Jodi said and did, but there comes a point when you cannot explain away all of the far too many problems with the defense case. Once you reach a certain point, you’re bordering on absurdity to explain away all these things, and the house of cards collapses.
When evaluating reasonable doubt, especially when it appears like there is overwhelming evidence, I always want to look at the person who is the defendant. What is her character? What is her believability and reliability? What is her sincerity, and what is her temperament? How does she present herself? Why is this important? Our legal system recognizes that there are two sides to a crime, the criminal act (Actus Rea) and the criminal mind (Mens Rea). Looking at both the act and the mindset of the defendant will help to show if the theory of the crime and the portrayal of the mindset go hand in hand.
Of course we have from before the crime:
– Accusations of stalking
– A seemingly nomadic lifestyle
– A poor work record / not doing much in PPL (Pre-Paid Legal)
– Though Baptized into the LDS, little to no involvement in the LDS
– No solid friends in Arizona save Travis Alexander, The Freemans, Jodi’s room mate, and a couple of females from her LDS singles ward.
– Arias had abandoned her responsibilities (Mortgage and Bills) in California with Darryl Brewer.
– A habit of violating Alexander’s personal space and monitoring his activities.
– Proof positive that Arias had stolen a diamond engagement ring from Alexander
– No solid plans for the future
– A habit of following through on plans even after the plan had failed completely.
– Questionable move to Mesa, Arizona in the first place
Now, you can explain away and rationalize some or most of these issues, but the thing is, you have to explain them all. It all points to a single minded and reckless pursuit of Travis Alexander. Jodi Arias is doing nothing at this time to build her own friendships and to provide for her own security and future. It’s just reckless pursuit. Now, let’s look at what happened as part of the crime, as far as character.
(Manifesto, letter to family, excerpts from interviews)
– She gives few details about the day of the crime, and is ambivalent about what happened the day before the crime.
– Unless it is something that affects her guilt or innocence, then you get massive amounts of information in excruciating, painstaking, split-second detail.
– She altered the crime scene
– Jodi Arias immediately tried to cover up her involvement in the crime (text messages and voice messages to Travis)
– Jodi Arias went to Travis Alexander’s memorial service knowing she was involved in his death
– She sent a letter to the family complaining that she hurt her toe and lamenting that Travis’ family would end up with souvenirs from Travis’ home that Jodi Arias partially paid for.
– She called Detective Flores and offered to help with the investigation while also trying to throw him off the trail, point him in certain directions, suggest possible suspects, and monitor his progress. (sound familiar?)
Now, everything she did after the crime can be written off as covering up for either a terrible but necessary killing, or a murder. It could be either. All these things after the crime can be attributed to fear and shame and a cover-up due to being forced to kill, but we have to add it in with the other information in order to make that decision.
Next, it’s important to look at how the defendant was painted or portrayed by both sides. How does the way Jodi Arias behaved in the trial and behind the scenes comport with either of these two views? Is Jodi Arias’ true life character, as best as we can tell, more like the prosecution’s portrayal or the defense’s?
The Prosecution painted Jodi Arias as a lying, manipulative, scheming stalker who targeted a rich Mormon in a sort of adolescent adulation and pursued him relentlessly. Another key element of Jodi Arias, according to the defense, is that she will take an action that benefits her in her mind in the short term without giving any thought to long term consequences. Jodi crossed many personal boundaries and she continuously violated Travis’ privacy, read his private text messages and e-mails, and listened to his voice messages.
Even when they were not officially dating, Arias was monitoring all Travis Alexander’s moves and his girlfriends and love interests. Arias caused Travis to spend lavishly on her as they went on many personal trips together, yet sparks of anger and unhappiness continuously flew between them. Finally Arias was told no and cut off and she flew into a rage, devising a plan to go to Mesa Arizona fully armed and ready to tear Alexander apart for having the nerve to tell her “No” and trying to end the relationship completely.
Jodi Arias, says the prosecution, knows best what is right. She will defy anyone who tries to tell her what to do, and she’ll throw anyone under the bus at the drop of a hat. She will turn her back on and devalue anyone who “disses” her.
The Defense Portrayed Jodi Arias as a hard-working woman, who got into a toxic relationship. The salesman she fell in love with had a big ego, and he was controlling and abusive. Jodi Arias was a shy, withdrawn, passive bookworm type who was happy to just quietly read books and draw nice pictures. While trying to enter a professional career, she meets and falls for a charismatic leader and successful business man. She becomes interested in the LDS religion, even becoming a Mormon herself. The relationship degenerates into sex only, as Travis Alexander cannot commit to any one woman. The more she tries to get him to commit to one woman, the more he runs away until one day, Travis Alexander reveals a terrible personal secret to Jodi Arias.
Mentally and emotionally abusive behavior on the part of Alexander towards Arias starts to turn into physical abuse as Jodi Arias tries to find ways to exit the relationship. Alexander will not allow Arias to exit the relationship for fear she will reveal his terrible secret. This all culminates in tragedy when the exes get together one fateful day, and a simple light-hearted “photography session” turns deadly when Alexander snaps and attacks her. Alexander relentlessly attacks and refuses to back down. The demure and petite woman uses everything she can find to stop him and defend herself when adrenaline kicks in, turning this into a massive overkill.
We will need to look at how Arias’ actions and behaviors both in the courtroom and outside the courtroom match up with these two very different portrayals. Which one is more like the truth? She cannot be as the defense portrayed her AND guilty of 1st degree murder. If she is as portrayed by the prosecution, then she must be guilty of 1st degree murder.
After this, we need to look at the autopsy of the victim and the crime scene. What can the crime scene tell us about the respective theories of self-defense vs. premeditated murder? Speaking of premeditation, whether it is 30 seconds before the killing or 3 months before, the proof of premeditation is essential to find Jodi Arias guilty of 1st degree murder. Felony Murder is out of the question.
No matter what Arias’ defense strategy is, there has to be reasonable doubt about any circumstantial evidence of premeditation. If it was premeditated, then this must be an ambush killing when the victim was the most vulnerable.
The elements of a long premeditation are listed by most trial watchers as:
1) The use of a rental car to prevent detection (White car wanted, not a red car)
2) The upside-down and the missing license plate
3) The coloring of Jodi Arias’ hair one day before the killing
4) The cell phone which was switched off hours prior to the murder and remained off while Jodi Arias was in Arizona.
5) A serious argument and fight between Arias and Alexander just days before the gun was stolen and her trip was planned.
6) The theft of a .25 caliber gun from the home Arias was living in 1 week before the killing.
7) The use of extra gas cans in the trunk of the rental car, possibly enabling Arias to cruise through Arizona without having to stop for anything and leave a trace that she was in Arizona.
The defense needs to explain away, rationalize, minimize and neutralize all these items of circumstantial evidence as well as their cumulative effect.
1) The rental car – Much has been made about the rental car, but the fact is that Arias’ car was not in the best shape and also subject to being repossessed by her lending institution. In addition, Arias’ family members brought Jodi Arias from Yreka to the Redding Airport to rent the car, so how does that stop people from knowing she rented a car? She claims she parked her Infiniti at the airport, but it seems clear a brother or male cousin brought her there or at least was with her. I also would prefer a white car over a red car if I had a choice. The rental agent stated that Arias’ hair was blonde, yet there is a wide variety of “blonde” and Arias’ hair was closer to brown as demonstrated by the photos of Arias taken in May, 2008. Item #1 is effectively neutralized.
(photo of Arias’ hair color)
2) The upside-down and missing license plates. – There is ample evidence demonstrating that both license plates were removed from the rental car, the front plate being placed inside the car, and the rear plate refastened to the car, but upside-down. Arias stated young teen vandals must have messed with her plates as a trick in Pasadena, CA, prior to her trip to Mesa. The prosecutor, Juan Martinez, believes the plates were changed shortly after Arias arrived in Mesa, Arizona to avoid detection of a car with California plates. If this is so, changing the plates after, rather than before the crime helps the Defense, as this could be seen as a cover-up after killing Alexander in self-defense. If Arias actually did change the plates at any time after the killing, then she hurt her own case by saying the plates were moved around prior to the killing.
Changing the plates this way could have prevented cameras from identifying the vehicle from gas station cameras and cameras located at traffic lights. Saying the plates were changed prior to the killing is less believable because who ever had their plates messed with on a personal or rental car, but not stolen? Not very many people, indeed. This means Arias drove 530 miles in California, from Salinas to Ehrenburg, Arizona at the border, and another 470 miles in Arizona, then another 400 miles to Utah, before someone finally noticed the upside-down license plate. She also passed through the very sensitive checkpoint at the Hoover Dam. Here again, you can explain away evidence, but having to explain away 100 different things weakens each of the explanations. The odds this occurrence would happen on the same day her ex boyfriend gets justifiably killed? The odds are loooooong, very long. This is a damning piece of evidence, but not in isolation.
3) The coloring of Jodi Arias’ hair one day before the killing – There is no question that Jodi Arias stopped at a salon in Pasadena and had her hair colored dark brown the day before the killing. This is augmented by the fact that Jodi Arias did not admit to the hair color change until she was forced to by photographic evidence (Selfie taken in the rental car with date / time stamp). However, the fact she took the selfie can be used as evidence that she was not trying to cover up the salon visit and the hair color change was not nefarious. She was visiting one ex and a new love interest that week. One was an ex-boyfriend, and she would want to look her best and the other was a new love interest in West Jordan, Utah she was trying to impress. There was testimony Jodi Arias was short on money until she deposited her latest paychecks, which could explain her going to the beauty salon at the last minute. Item #3 is effectively neutralized.
4) The cell phone which was switched off hours prior to the murder and remained off while Jodi Arias was in Arizona – This is a damning piece of circumstantial evidence. Anyone on a trip out of state, especially a young woman traveling alone, would make it a high priority to have a cell phone available and charged. The simplest explanation, and we invoke Occam’s razor here, (Occam’s razor in the vernacular is simply saying the most straight-forward, simple, explanation is usually the correct one) is that the phone was turned off the entire time Jodi Arias was in Arizona because Jodi Arias wanted it turned off the entire time she was in Arizona. Phone records even show that Jodi Arias turned her phone back on before she was completely out of Arizona, indicating she switched it back on at the very first opportunity. To complicate matters, Jodi Arias said both that she inadvertently ran at out of charge on her phone while at the same time misplacing her charger, as well as stating she deliberately turned the phone off so that Ryan Burns, etc. would not be bothering her with calls.
She also stated to Ryan that she lost her charger and had to buy a new one while telling authorities that she misplaced and later found her charger under the seat of the rental car. If in fact she had lost her charger or ran out of charge, one would think Jodi Arias could charge her phone at Alexander’s home in some way, shape, or form. The cell phone being turned off during the late night ride to Mesa is not as damning as Jodi Arias “maintaining radio silence” at the home and then also throughout Arizona. It appears Alexander made no calls and received no calls on June 4th as well.
Having her cell phone switched on from the night of June 3rd through the entire day of June 4th would have definitively placed Arias in Arizona and marked her path. Again, having the phone off prior to getting to Mesa is not so much of a problem to explain in a way favorable to the defense. The phone being turned off after the crime is also not difficult for the defense to explain. Shutting it off prior to leaving California, having it off all the time Arias was in Alexander’s home, and having it off until almost out of Arizona is a large problem. It’s not so easy to explain away especially in combination with the other pieces of circumstantial evidence
5) A serious argument and fight between Arias and Alexander just days before the gun was stolen and her trip was planned – Jodi Arias had a prolonged and high intensity fight / argument with Alexander. This argument showed Alexander as refusing to give in until he got certain truthful answers which Jodi Arias was not willing to give. In the argument, Travis’ language was abusive, mean, and misogynistic. Arias goes to the extremes of apologizing and even blaming herself. She is constantly trying to get Alexander to move past his anger in regards to certain events, but she is unsuccessful. Alexander is unmoved, and the argument continues throughout the day, lasting a reported marathon 6 hours. Nine days later, Travis was dead in his bathroom shower enclosure.
This was no ordinary argument. It seems that even the 1,028 miles that separated Jodi and Travis was not enough to mitigate their troubles. The prosecution maintains that Travis was moving on and trying to break it off completely with Jodi Arias. The defense maintains that Travis asserted more and more control as he felt Arias slipping out of his grip and moving on to other love interests. Listening to the sex tape of May 10th, it seems that Arias repeatedly tries to get Alexander to commit to coming up to visit her, while Alexander repeatedly tries to not answer her or change the subject. This indicates that the prosecution may have been correct, although Arias would say she was just trying to sustain the friendship part of their relationship.
Jodi Arias trying to get Travis to come up her way, Travis balking and not answering
May 10th – Sex Tape – Alexander and Arias are getting along well, although Alexander balks at plans / invitations for him to come up to the Yreka / Oregon area.
May 26th – Big, Nasty, major argument between Jodi Arias and Travis Alexander
May 28th – .25 gun stolen from Grandparent’s home where Arias is staying.
June 2nd – Arias hits the road to go to various places in California, Mesa Arizona and West Jordan, Utah on long thought about, but hastily arranged trip.
Is that major argument irrefutable proof that this was a murder? No, because this could have given Jodi Arias the impetus to go to Mesa to murder Alexander, or it could have motivated her to meet him face to face in order to straighten out their differences. Is this a major piece of circumstantial evidence? Not in isolation, but when combined with other pieces, it could have some relevance.
6) The theft of a .25 caliber gun from the home Arias was living in 1 week before the murder – A .small 25 caliber pistol was reported stolen form Arias’ grandparent’s house where she was staying, on the afternoon of May 28th. Five days later, Arias was on her way to Mesa, Arizona where Alexander was shot in the face with a .25 caliber gun. Jodi Arias claims that a thief stole the pistol at her Grandparent’s home and that Alexander had a loaded .25 caliber pistol lying around in the closet which he told no one about. No ammo, no accessories and no cleaning supplies were found for the gun. Could Alexander have had an old, loaded .25 pistol just sitting in his closet? Sure, it’s reasonably possible, however Arias had previously told the lead Detective that Alexander did not have a gun. Also, Arias had previously claimed both that the gun was in a box and / or that the gun had a holster. No gun box or gun holster was found in the home. Why did she testify to the box and the holster? Maybe she was worried that the prosecution would claim that if the gun were merely sitting on the closet shelf, there would be oil or a dust imprint or something of that nature. Why else would Arias claim a box and / or a holster that didn’t exist?
To believe Arias’ story, you will have to believe that a thief really did break into her grandparent’s house and stole a .25 caliber gun, plus a few items from each room in the house, ignoring more valuable items two days after she had a giant fight with Alexander and just 5 days before she went to Mesa where Alexander ended up being shot in the face with a .25 gun. Then you also have to believe that, coincidentally, Alexander also had a .25 caliber gun (a rare pistol that fewer and fewer people own since the 1980’s). He kept the gun close to the bathroom in his closet and never used it, but it was also loaded. There are more unlikely facts you would have to believe in order for Arias’ story concerning the gun to work, which I will get into, in more detail, later.
What about the shell casing (Winchester .25 Auto) found in Travis’ bathroom not being the same ammo the grandfather had on hand and the bullet type (round nose bullet) not being the type the Grandfather reported using in his gun (hollow point)? That’s something in Jodi Arias’ favor, but she could have gotten more ammo from a different source, or the Grandfather could have been mistaken. All in all, the .25 caliber bullet and the .25 caliber gun, stolen shortly before the killing, will remain a tough piece of circumstantial evidence against Jodi Arias. Not so much if it were a .22 caliber, 9 mm, .38 caliber or .44 caliber stolen in Yreka and used at the crime scene in Mesa. These popular calibers are much more in use nowadays.
If Jodi Arias claimed complete innocence (It was someone else who killed Alexander), then the .25 would make more sense, because this is an untraceable weapon often used in crimes, but fewer and fewer people have them for normal, law-abiding usage. They don’t have the knock-down or stopping power, and the rounds are too low of a velocity and often bounce or deflect off a target. Most have switched to the higher caliber weapon. Had it been one of these guns, the coincidence would be much less pronounced. Again, this can be explained away in isolation, but it becomes much more damning when put in combination with the other evidence.
The top 10 guns used in crimes in the United States, according to an
unpublished Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms report:
1. Smith and Wesson .38 revolver
2. Ruger 9 mm semiautomatic
3. Lorcin Engineering .380 semiautomatic 4. Raven Arms .25 semiautomatic
5. Mossberg 12 gauge shotgun
6. Smith and Wesson 9mm semiautomatic
7. Smith and Wesson .357 revolver
8. Bryco Arms 9mm semiautomatic
9. Bryco Arms .380 semiautomatic
10. Davis Industries .380 semiautomatic
Handguns Taken in Evidence in California, 1993
What is the most common handgun caliber in the US?
Answer #1 (From 2010)
“As far as the most common handgun caliber, I would say it is a toss up between the 9 mm and the .38 Special. Most police departments don’t use the .38 Special any longer because a semiautomatic has greater firepower and the venerable ‘0l .38 really is a bottom-of-the-line self-defense/combat round. If it were me and I was picking a semiautomatic for self-defense, I would either choose a .40 S & W or a .45 ACP. If I were picking a revolver, I would choose a .357 magnum. They DO and HAVE made revolvers in calibers such as .44 Special and .45 ACP, but they are limited in the number of models and styles from which to choose. Either of those would be more powerful than a 9 mm.”
Answer #2 (from 2010)
“I would say a 9mm. If you have the phobia I wouldn’t recommend a 9mm revolver they are a pain not to mention if it needs parts its not a common gun there for parts would be hard to come by…get a .357 mag plenty of stopping power and can shoot a .38 special round. So it doubles your chances of finding ammo in an anarchy situation. Look into a Ruger SP101 in .357 mag. I have 1 and its a beast it fires everything from .38 special +P to the most powerful .357 mag rounds you can find it will definitely outlast me, I couldn’t break it if I tried. Also look into the Ruger SR9 or SR9C for a 9mm it’s an awesome gun I have 1 of those as well. Ruger knows how to make great guns at even better prices.”
The .25 caliber pistol, one of the most popular being the Raven Arms .25 pistol, commonly called a “Saturday Night Special”. Very likely to be used by a criminal but not very likely to be on hand in a gun owner’s home.
In addition to all this, Arias also bought a 9mm gun shortly after the killing and she duct taped it under the hood of another rental car so well that it wasn’t found until days later. A piece of duct tape was found on Alexander’s master bedroom floor at the crime scene, and Alexander was a certified neat nick. It could have been for his body bug, it could have been from the gun, or it could have been something unrelated.
Keep in mind that I’m a Jodi Supporter and I am dealing with only the proven facts, no speculation and no denying facts or adding facts that are not proven. I have worked with these facts for a long time now, only seeing them as much as possible in the light most favorable to Arias. New information, such as proof positive Arias stole Alexander’s diamond engagement ring and took his original notes for his book, are facts that came out during the 2nd penalty phase of the trial.
Next article: Why the gas can evidence is the most crucial evidence and the crux of the Jodi Arias case.
Perhaps, we could all learn a lesson from sole Life juror #17 and from disgruntled former Jodi supporters.
First, a little about Juror #17.
Before that, I just wanted to note that Christine Beswick and her pal, “Juan’s Tie” just wrote a really reckless and fact-less article about accounts leading from Marie De La Rosa to SJ at JAII. Christine’s articles have improved a lot in the past months, but I’m afraid she’s reverted to making it all up again.
I should remind her that if there is a secret source, such as Juan’s Tie, there still needs to be details, of which there are almost none. It’s gossip only, and no facts to back it up whatsoever, We will get back to that later. Really a big disappointment. I was also surprised to learn that prosecution supporters in the know do not trust either Christine Beswick or Juan’s Tie, and for good reason.
Now we are a not for profit blog, so we are basically untouchable no matter what we do. Nevertheless, we are careful about the facts and what we say because we have personal ethics. Not true with the Examiner.com. This is a for-profit site and Christine Beswick is responsible for what she reports. She is subject to lawsuits for her journalistic lapses. She better watch out when she makes it all up, or she depends on bad sources. I suggest a retraction and apologies, but that’s just me :).
OK, we’re a little late on this one, but they can investigate the jurors until the end of time, and people can be sore losers all they want, cause they didn’t secure the Death Penalty for little Honey Boo Boo.
Juror #17 deliberated and tried to convince the other jurors to do the right thing, but the 11 hold-outs refused to budge. The 11 hold-outs are now under investigation for possible coercion charges in attempting to secure a misguided Justice4Travis. Juror #17 is also under investigation.
None of this will go anywhere, however. We maintain, as we have all along, that Life is a better outcome for everyone involved including the victim’s family. They will come to appreciate this in due time, I do believe.
I was being facetious about the 11 hold-outs, but there has been a lot of flack about Juror #17, and whether she’s a plant, a stealth juror, or had any kind of agenda. Let me make it easy for you – She didn’t. Just because the other 11 jurors and many people who were praying for state sponsored murder didn’t get the result they wanted, this in no way implies that somebody did something wrong.
This was not a guilt verdict, this was a life or death verdict. That’s a different story, a very different story. The jurors were not trying hard to get a unanimous guilt verdict. They were not deciding between the subtleties of 1st degree and 2nd degree murder, or the complicated differences between manslaughter and acquittal. They were deciding between A) Life or B) Death. There are no subtle differences there.
So if juror #17 made up her mind fairly early in the deliberation process, why is that unusual? Juror #17 was free to make her own personal, moral choice and she was free to hold onto that choice without having to explain it to anyone. People who do not understand that have something to learn. Those are the rules in Arizona.
I was under the impression that jurors were supposed to weigh the single aggravator of cruelty against any of the 9 enumerated mitigators plus any other mitigators a juror could come up with. I thought the jurors were supposed to simply see if the mitigators outweighed the aggravator. I was mistaken. Apparently the Arizona jury instructions imply that individual jurors are supposed to weigh the single aggravator and all that entails (the details of the crime) against any possible mitigators they found to be more true than not true.
But even that explanation is not really accurate. If you read the Arizona jury instructions very closely, you will see that what the instructions really say is you can choose Life or Death, for any reason or non-reason you want.
So, if you want to blame anyone for there not being a unanimous sentence of Death, feel free to blame the State of Arizona. They wrote the juror instructions which were actually intended to help increase the probability of achieving a Death sentence, just as many strange Arizona statutes pertaining to the DP are designed specifically to facilitate death sentences.
I suppose that’s a great thing when the defendant is a serial killer or a serial child rapist/torturer/murderer who was caught red-handed. But, when it’s much more iffy than that, these statutes and instructions become downright frightening.
The juror instructions actually say that you can decide whatever you want for any reason you want, so there is zero legal recourse for juror #17 (or the 11 hold-outs).
Especially if you are a Justice4Travis supporter, please please please listen to this video. hang in there and watch the whole thing. Don’t say “I’m not interested and I don’t want to hear anything that Willmott has to say”. You really need to see this edited video to better understand why there was absolutely nothing wrong with juror #17’s decision.
This will also show you why, if Nurmi had Jennifer Willmott do at least one of the closing arguments, that it’s a near certainty there would have been more than one Life juror at the end of deliberations.
Naturally, as soon as news of the single Life juror surfaced, her name and a map to her home were all over Twitter in minutes. Simon Johannson (SJ) at JodiAriasIsInnocent.com released the full names of the 11 Death jurors. The deathies wanted to have a unanimous vote so they could get Justice4Travis. Some people who wanted the jurors to vote for Death for Jodi Arias issued death threats against juror #17.
Tanisha Sorenson, a younger sister of homicide victim Travis Alexander, showed her true feelings outside the court house when she made this quote:
Someone in social media actually said this:
– “Juror # 17 ‘brought this internet wrath on herself'”.
Are you sure about that?
I found it highly amusing when the 11 jurors were being interviewed on the day of the 2nd penalty phase mistrial, they talked about how juror #17 didn’t deliberate, while at the same time describing exactly how juror #17 DID deliberate. Investigate ’till the cows come home, there’s nothing to be found.
Life is a wonderful choice. It’s almost always a good choice and rarely a bad choice. If McVeigh were still alive and holed up in a Super-Max somewhere, that would suit me just fine. First of all, most reasonable non-Jodi supporters, who know the facts of the case well, did NOT want a death sentence for Jodi Arias.
Deathies willl find no solace, but they need to hear this important fact:
The defense team doubled down on their strategy of attacking the victim and adding insult to injury. This was cited by jurors as one main reason why they selected the Death Penalty. Jodi Arias did Not complete her testimony. She did not offer up ANY personal mitigation witnesses, She did NOT show remorse (that doesn’t mean she has no remorse, just that she didn’t show it), She refused to allocute.
In short, Jodi Arias remained true to her word that if she ‘hurt Travis, she would beg for the Death penalty’. Jodi Arias offered up the Death penalty on a silver platter to the prosecution and their supporters. Still the jurors could not come back with a unanimous decision for Death. Too late now, friend. Case closed.
So, enough with all the hot air about how she should have gotten the Death penalty. This tells me that Life was the correct sentence for this particular case.
My personal theory, both at the time of the original penalty phase of the trial and at this 2nd penalty retrial, is that Juan Martinez took his foot off the gas in both closings. I believe he did this because he secretly personally didn’t want Jodi Arias to get the death penalty. There’s no question in my mind that a Death Penalty would have been reversed and remanded in this case.
Hey listen, Perryville Prison is a barren blast furnace with just about zero mercy. It’s a living hell. It’s not like Life in prison is some kind of big break or special treat for Jodi Arias. You’ll see.
Note: Please, do not be afraid of videos. Youtube Videos from SpotlightOnLaw cannot harm your computer or device. Youtube Videos from SpotLightOnLaw are usually clips or edited versions from other listed sources and they do not profit anyone if you click on them.
Youtube videos from SpotlightOnLaw are very integral to the article and greatly enhance the understanding of the subject matter. Please take the time to watch the video. Here’s a clip from Saving Private Ryan. You will understand this section much better if you view the video.
Saving Private Ryan – “Earn it!”
So what next in this Jodi Arias case Grand Fiasco?
We have said a lot of things about other people and principles surrounding this case. Now it’s time to say something about Jodi Ann Arias. Jodi Arias’ support doesn’t come from SJ or Jade or Pandora or Ben, no matter how much they may believe that. They are just bizarre people with no real accountability or values.
Jodi Arias’ support actually comes from and will continue to come from reasonable, fair-minded people who understand the prosecution side of the case and the intense pain of the Alexander family, yet still believe the state and media tried to run Jodi Arias down like a freight train. That simply cannot be allowed to stand. Guilty or Innocent or anywhere in between, it doesn’t much matter at this point.
These are the people who will rise up to support Jodi in prison and see that she finally gets the fair trial that every citizen is guaranteed by the United States Constitution.
But they will want something in return, and it’s not a Jodi band, a Jodi chain, a signed painting, a blog byline, a seat on Jason’s Board or a seat in SJ’s secret war room. They will want honesty, facts, and humanity from Jodi Arias. The will want a person who knows how to earn her support. I’m not giving my support for free, and neither should anyone else.
I’m not going to listen to Jodi Arias or do what she says. I’m not going to answer to her pals or follow her commands – ever. Why should I or anyone follow her advice? Look where she has ended up. Life in an Arizona prison? Who in their right mind would follow her advice? LOL.
If Jodi Arias wants any help from me whatever, she had better learn how to EARN it.
Why are you saying this, Rob? (My God, I think I just pulled a Martinez).
In Saving Private Ryan, a small group of soldiers volunteers to go onto the European battlefield to find Private Ryan and return him safely to the USA. Ryan is a Private, the introductory and lowest rank of the U.S. Army.
Ryan is nobody special, but circumsances have made him special. His other 3 brothers have all been killed in combat on various battlefields in WWII. The Army decides it’s a mater of Justice (and PR value), that Ryan is returned home safely.
A group of volunteers under Captain John Miller (Tom Hanks) set out from the beaches of Normandy, through France towards Germany to find and save Private James Ryan (Matt Damon). Along the way, many in the group are wounded or killed, trying to save this one soldier of lowest rank.
When the group finally catches up to Ryan, it’s not really about him anymore. The group of volunteer soldiers have formed a common bond. They have fought with and for each other, and they suffered setbacks and losses together. Their mission brought them closely together and bonded them, but it was now way more than Private Ryan or their mission holding them together.
Private Ryan feels the same way about the men he had been fighting with, and rather than escape in security and safety he fights to protect his new war “brothers”, including the team sent to rescue him. Captain Miller is fatally wounded in that final battle just before completing their mission to save Ryan. Captain Miller grabs Private Ryan and with his dying breath tells Ryan to “Earn it!”.
Here in the same way, volunteers supporting and helping Jodi have taken a lot of flack in her name. They’ve been fired at, sniped at, bombed, banished, attacked and pelted relentlessly.
George Barwood had his own daughter harassed at her college. He has been insulted, attacked, pilloried and ridiculed mercilessly, all for trying to save a life.
Jason Weber, another “Jodite”, had his Facebook page, like many, shut down due to false claims of “porn”. His Occupy FB site was just attacked non-stop. His mugshot and DUI convictions were posted in an attempt to humiliate him. He was insulted, harassed and bombarded by a succession of crusading “Travesites”.
Lisa Schilling was made out to be some kind of modern day Ma Barker, willing to run roughshod over common decency and break each and every law and defraud everyone because all she cares about is lies and making money.
She was so villified, that people in a FB group yesterday refused to allow her to even comment in her own defense.
Nothing could be further from the truth, but some Facebook and twitter people have been told these lies about Lisa so many times, they refuse to even be in the same group with her. It’s really crazy, trust me.
Pascal Van Daele was accused of being of course, a foreigner, probably up to no good, and a crook only out to get people’s money.
Sandra Webber got attacked, but she would turn around and hit them back twice as hard, making her by far the most hated of the bunch. How dare she not just sit there and take it? How dare she have the nerve to hit back, hard?
Notice how all these people are using their real names and we all know or can easily find out where they live. And Jodi supporters are outnumbered anywhere from 95% to 99%. That means out of every 100 people, there is one Jodi supporter. But somehow, we are the big threat to them? Yeah, right.
Name one prominent Prosecution supporter who uses their real name? Almost none of them. Why would that be when they are supposedly in the right and they outnumber Jodi supporters 100 to 1?
Anyways, of all these Jodi supporters above, the worst attacks didn’t come from a few isolated and crazed prosecution supporters. The worst attacks came from other Jodi supporters, specifically SJ the criminal exiled foreigner and his band of useless idiots at JAII. They attacked the reputations of these people.
George Barwood is a gentleman from England with a Cambridge education who supports Jodi Arias. Say what you want about George, most people on all sides of this issue like him. I gave him a hard time too, myself. He is a very humane, polite, and responsible person who put a lot of his own time and money into helping Jodi Arias’ case.
George saw very early that SJ was a really bad character reference for Jodi Arias. Here’s an example of just this: What was SJ doing today? Answer: He was commenting on a Facebook page called “F*ck the Travitard Hypocrites”. That will gain lots of new supporters ans help Jodi Arias, right?
George tried early on to get Jodi Arias and her family to disassociate from SJ and JAII. He saw that what SJ was saying and doing was chasing away current and potential supporters for Arias.
It was very easy for SJ and pals to convince Jodi that George and Jason, two people who had never been about the money, were now suddenly all about the money. But people who know, always knew there was never much money to even begin talking about it. SJ, the person convincing Jodi Arias that Jason and George were out to scam for money, was the only one who had ever scammed people. He’s been run out of the UK for scamming people. So what did George get for his trouble? A letter from Jodi Arias basically telling him to f*ck off and basically calling him an asshat. In spite of this, George Barwood is still hard at work in Jodi’s corner.
Jason Weber has a great deal of experience as a Web designer. An Ivy league graduate, Jason helps companies and individuals set up their own web sites. Jason owns his own multiple servers , and runs a number of websites.
This case just happened to coincide with a major interest of Jason’s, which is wrongful convictions, aggressive and media driven prosecutions, and his abhorrence of the Death Penalty. Jason has plenty of ways of making money without any help from Jodi Arias.
To be fair and to give equal time, I wanted to include this criticism of Jason Weber and Elizabeth Schilling and their website Justice4JodiArias.com. This criticism is from a woman I will call “DC Ritz”.
“I think it’s a sophomoric attempt, at best. The website is super slow and most of the information is bad and/or spun with extra rinse.
Either Elizabeth (Lisa Schilling) has been around JW (Jason Weber) too long, or JW is doing the writing. I think it will fail like most of JW’s other ventures.
His ‘style’ is unprofessional and reeks of bias. IMO” “And oh, I also find their tweets to be even more damaging to their “cause”. In fact, I believe they sent out the 60K of child porn tweet yet again just last week. (A tweet stating that 60,000 pieces of child porn was found on Travis Alexander’s computer) They will never garner donations with their existing style. Again, IMO.”
– DC Ritz March 19, 2015.
Jason got involved in this case mostly through blogging, and he also spent a lot of his own time and money helping on the case. He wanted to get an American based web site going for Jodi Arias which had a positive support framework, instead of the very negative, and combative platform the fugitive foreigner, SJ from Sweden set up.
Jason and Lisa Schilling wanted a site that was accountable and subject to U.S. laws so people would feel comfortable donating to Jodi’s cause knowing the donations would be properly accounted for and utilized.
What did Jason Weber get for his efforts? Jodi Arias basically told him to f*ck off and she allowed SJ to paint Jason and Lisa as frauds. Little does Arias know that the following for both George and Jason is booming, while following for SJ is in the basement. Most of the people following JAII are just curious non-supporter looky-loos. It’s really the same phenomenon as people who stop to stare at a terrible car crash.
Lisa Schilling, a college student from Kentucky, was a star supporter of Jodi Arias. I can tell you for a fact she has a heart of gold, and she worked tirelessly to support Jodi. She’s very smart and likable, and she wanted nothing for herself. What did she get for her efforts?
In a really sleazy situation, unfortunately highly reminiscent of the taped phone call to Travis Alexander, Lisa Schilling was set up by Jodi Arias and taped by a 3rd party without her knowledge as she answered Jodi Arias questions about Jason and her plans to have a web site and to raise funds in support of Jodi.
That single incident, where people I cared about got hurt by Jodi Arias and the sleazeballs at JAII, opened my eyes and forced me to take a second look at Jodi Arias and her behaviors.
Friends of SJ and Ben had tried to plant in Jodi Arias’ mind the idea that Jason and Lisa were out to commit fraud and take money.
Actually the only one of the three who ever may have actually scammed and defrauded people was SJ himself. Before this case he ran and still runs a Casey Anthony website CaseyAnthonyIsInnocent.com. What was his purpose for that site? No good deed ever goes unpunished, though, and it didn’t here, either, as Lisa was humiliated and made to look like some kind of criminal, when all she ever did was try to help save a life and secure a fair trial for the defendant.
Jodi Arias should go to her book club and pull out a book on cause and effect. She really needs to learn that her actions have consequences, far reaching consequences. You might think if she didn’t learn that from June 4th, 2008, then she may never learn it, but there you go.
What was done to Lisa made me absolutely livid. Jodi Arias lost my 100% support that day, and it’s been spiraling down ever since. Why is that? Well, I already knew about a guy I’ll call Fredd who was very nice to Jodi, talking on the phone and visiting her often. Then I found out from first hand sources how he was treated by her. Badly, very badly.
This was a guy who spent his own time and money selling Jodi Bands at a loss to help raise money for her families’ trial expenses. Fredd was kind of shoved aside when Ben Ernst came along and Jodi’s new adolescent-style love drama began. But there’s good old Fredd, still in her corner and working hard for Jodi, even after she told him to go take a flying leap…..
Then there is another person named Donovan Bering. Jodi Arias met Donovan Bering at the Estrella jail. Donovan Bering is a really nice person with a heart of gold. She did some arson, but hey. you are no angel, either! Donovan was released from the jail and she helped and supported Jodi Arias anyway she could from the outside. When the original trial started, Donovan spent endless hours supporting Jodi Arias every day in the courtroom. She was also one of the few if not the only person who did interviews in support of Jodi Arias and her defense.
Donovan was mercilessly attacked because of her loyalty and support to a friend.
I know for a fact that Donovan, without knowing anything about me, did a favor for me and delivered an e-mail to the defense team during the original trial even though I donated no money to Jodi Arias. In between the first trial and the penalty retrial, supporters began getting concerned that Jodi’s activities on twitter, done by proxy through Donovan Bering, would be used against her at trial and may help her to get the Death Penalty.
Donovan tried to get Jodi to suspend her tweeting. Jodi refused. Eventually Donovan took it upon herself, due to increasing warnings from her supporters, to suspend tweeting for Jodi Arias.
These were verbatim tweets directly from Jodi and were mostly positive quotes and status updates. For this, Donovan was put on Jodi’s ever -lengthening “sh*t list”, and she supposedly never spoke to her again. In spite of this even Donovan, who is very ill now, stands ready to help Jodi still to this day.
There’s another supporter I will call “Bosco”. Bosco wrote frequently to Jodi and had many phone calls with her. Bosco gave money to Arias funds, and bought her books and acid-free paper for her artwork. At some, point, reading through her letters, Bosco developed a new unflattering view of jodi Arias. Jodi Arias was acting the way Juan Martinez said she was. She wasn’t acting the way the defense portrayed her. Jodi Arias tried to deal with Bosco, but it wasn’t working.
Jodi supporters tried to silence Bosco.
Bosco released a few excerpts from some of Jodi’s letters where Jodi could be shown to behave exactly in the way Juan Martinez portrayed. Some Jodi Supporters started attacking Bosco.
Bosco stold the attacking Jodi supporters, if they do not stop attacking her, she would release more unflattering letters from Jodi’s own hand. After a few more releases, we are at a stalemate now, I suppose.
How many supporters has Jodi Arias lost? Well, I’m literally surrounded by former prominent supporters who aren’t supporting Jodi Arias any longer. They’ve retired now! This includes many of the above and lots, lots more. You ought to go up there and tell her about all this.
Here is a comment from Pascal Van Daele of Belgium, a former prominent supporter of Jodi Arias:
“Well: Justice4Jodi was made back in time when things were still good with us and Jodi. After we got “accused” of stealing money and scamming (like some of you still do here now). we took distance as matter of protection from Jodi Arias. That’s how NCDP (National Center for Due Process) was born and made to help the ones really in need of support and deserving of such.”
“We distanced ourselfs from Jodi, NCDP nor any of us 3 (Pascal, Jason, and Lisa) has anything to do with Jodi. Jodi doesn’t want or need help. She is helping herself along with her “true supporters” who are doing great and who are putting Jodi deeper and deeper in solitary.”
– Pascal Van Daele, former Jodi Supporter.
I have another quote from someone I’ll call Beverly Rubock Gray, from New York State:
“I’d write to Charlie (Manson) in a heartbeat. I know from my good friend Nancy that he passes the letters to his friend so it’s not worth it but I grew up in the 60s and remember what happened well. I find him a fascinating person. He had to have had a great deal of charisma to get anyone to do his bidding like he did.
He was a cult leader. I don’t LOVE Charlie but love to figure out how he did what he did.
Somehow, and I don’t say this is right, Jodi is detestable, someone you (or I) dislike immensely. Her narcissism and personality disorder make her someone I wouldn’t want to know. That does not apply to all murderers. It’s just the way it is.
If she shut her mouth about 90% of the time, if she stopped goading her culties to do things, if she stopped f*cking with the rules and trying to run a private little cult from jail and sucking money out of people who don’t have it, maybe I’d feel differently, like I do about Charlie and other killers, but alas, she does all these sh*tty things and she creates extreme dislike from the majority.”
– Beverly Rubock Gray, former Jodi supporter.
But Rob, how are you so sure these are actual facts and not rumors? How do you know Donovan was on Jodi’s sh*t list? These are all rock-solid and incontrovertible facts. We have the proof either from Jodi Arias or 1st hand directly from the person involved with her. Like it or not, it is what it is. The only love anyone should be giving to Jodi Arias anymore is Tough-Love.
While those JAII peeps keep cheering about who is the first one of the day to write a comment, real supporters will be expecting some gratitude for what’s already been done on Jodi’s behalf.
Real supporters might even be expecting explanations / apologies for all the supporters so far who have been thrown under the bus by Jodi Arias and her mental midget super-fans at JAII.
Let’s take a look at verified people burned by Jodi Arias beyond the question of a doubt:
– Bill Arias (physical abuse, emotional abuse, drugs)
– Sandy Arias (physical abuse, neglect, drugs)
– L. Kirk Nurmi (malpractice, refused basic legal services, attitude)
– Maria De La Rosa (Did or did not do something Jodi wanted done)
(Two days after the second mistrial, I have a first hand report Jodi was on the phone saying that she was upset with MDLR over something she did, as if chastising a hand-maiden sold into her majesty’s secret service.)
– Ryan Burns (full of sh*t)
– Dr. Richard Samuels (a disaster)
– Darryl Brewer (alcohol problem)
– Donovan Bering (sh*t list)
– “Fredd” (shoved aside)
– “Bosco” (found JA was not as advertised)
– Lisa Schilling (painted as a crook)
– Jason Weber (painted as a thief)
– George Barwood (basically told to F off)
Is there a probblem with gratitude here? These are just the ones that we are absolutely sure of. There are many other supporters and groups who Jodi may have also done wrong. Let us know, we’ll add you (or them) to the list.
It’s high time to re-align the stars in this case. Jodi has some homework to do if she wants my support:
– Dump JAII, SJ and the charismatic fans because they can’t help you, but they will gladly sink you further than they’ve done already. Dump them, because everyone else in the civilized world has.
-The era of Jodi Arias is Innocent is over. You’ve been proven guilty in a court of law, fair trial or no. You tore a good man up and left a river of his blood all over his own bathroom. You’ve destroyed two families and that’s just for starters.
– It’s time to stop remaining silent while your super-fans malign the victim and his family. They are still doubling down on that course of action as of yesterday. SJ has doubled down on insulting the Alexander family, which he commonly refers to as “the Adams Family”. What kind of strategy to build support is that?
– You know what? It might help your appeal chances if you acted more like the defenses’portrayal of you and less like the prosecution’s portrayal of you.
– Jodi Arias, you can’t gain reasonable and sympathetic supporters when you are basically agreeing with the JAII crowd that Travis deserved it and his family are only in it for the publicity and the pay off.
– Earn it.
From here on out, you better realize that you are of the lowest rank (Private) and nobody special. This will help to avoid injuries in your future interactions with other convicts. The supporters who are reasonable people that you haven’t lost (yet) would appreciate that. Normal people who could become your new dedicated supporters might appreciate that, also.
Since Jodi Arias won’t do the following, I will do it for her:
Thank-You everyone who supported, defended or were otherwise involved in saving Private Jodi in any way, shape, or form. Your efforts did not go unnoticed and were all deeply appreciated 🙂
I will be sure to earn you trust and support going forward as I have such profound gratitude for each and every act of each and every supporter, and all you have endured for my benefit.
Thank-you once more, everyone.
Love, Jodi’s conscience
(come out, come out, wherever you are).
So, I’ll say it one more time and then I ain’t saying it anymore. Jodi Arias has an individual moral choice to make. Does she want to stick with SJ, Stankowitz, Fandora, Gem, Crystal, Bobby Juarez III, Krusty Crab, Wavy Gravy and Jaded over at JAII, or does she want to earn real support that can actual help her?
If Jodi Arias wants true supporters, then she needs to acknowledge that she has thrown supporters under the bus. Apologize and try to not do that anymore going forward. She needs to earn trust and show some gratitude. If she wants to maintain the status quo, then good luck playing grab-ass with Ben and phone tag with SJ from Perryville over the next 70 years, cause that’s where it’s gonna end, the way they are doing things over there.
So, Jodi Arias (aka Agent 99) has a moral choice to make, or the people from JAII could do the impossible and straighten up their act. Ultimately, people will need to see some major changes, or else Arias will ultimately lose all legitimate support and end up as just another cult classic followed by just the super-fans and assorted fruits and nuts. Choose wisely. Arias.
“Cate” believes that Judge Stephens and Juan Martinez were correct and that Kirk Nurmi, Vladimir Gagic, Amanda Chen and Rob Roman are wrong about the validity and the application of the Felony Murder charge. “Cate” supplied some very good case law on this issue.
In our last article, we were asking a number of questions about the Felony Murder Charge:
Does it make sense that in Arizona, you can find someone guilty of BOTH Felony Murder (an unplanned murder) AND Pre-meditated murder (a planned murder)?
Does the felony murder charge correctly apply to the Arias case, or was the charge kept solely to give the jurors another choice of 1st degree murder (in a sort of heads I win, tails, you lose situation for the prosecution)?
Can you be found guilty of felony murder (A death occurs in the course of another dangerous felony) based on burglary with intent to commit the murder?
Is this a legitimate charge under the facts of State v. Arias?
Were the 7 jurors who found for felony murder correct or not?
We needed to dig deeper into the issue to get to the bottom of who’s right and who’s wrong about this. I’m going to make this as easy to understand as possible, easy enough for even me to understand. The citings and cases are all here for you to look at in more detail if you like.
“Cate” offered up an appellate case which had most of the relevant case law regarding the felony murder rule in Arizona, and how the elements of the felony and the elements of the murder can now be, in some cases, the same.
The appelate case is State v. Moore, argued in the Arizona Supreme Court.
Moore: It’s not felony murder because I can’t be charged with felony murder based on a burglary that is itself based on the intent to murder.
The Court: Yes, you can, and you did.
“Relying on State v. Essman, 98 Ariz(1965), Moore also argues that under the merger doctrine, felony murder cannot be predicated upon a burglary that is itself based on the intent to murder.”
State of Arizona v. Julius Jarreau Moore is an appeal of a death sentence for a man who killed 3 people. One murder victim was outside the house with a woman who also was shot, and 2 murder victims were inside the house. Sergio Mata, Guadalupe Ramos, and Delia Ramos were all shot to death in their rental home and Debra Ford was shot and survived. The crimes took place during a flurry of crack smoking.
“Debra Ford went to the Phoenix apartment of Sergio Mata, Delia Ramos, and Guadalupe Ramos to purchase and smoke crack in the late evening hours of November 15, 1999. In the early hours of the 16th, Moore came to the apartment looking for Debra. When Debra came out to see Moore, they talked for a bit and smoked some crack.
Shortly after, Sergio came out of the apartment and Moore shot him in the head, killing him and then turned to Debra and shot her in the neck.
Debra remained alive and conscious while praying for her life. She heard several additional shots fired while she was on the ground. When police arrived and went into the apartment, they found Guadalupe on the couch and Delia inside the bedroom closet. Both were shot to death. Debra survived and testified against Moore during trial.”
Sergio was shot outside the apartment building in a public area, and there was evidence of pre-meditation, so his murder was charged as a premeditated murder. Guadalupe and Delia were shot inside the home, it appeared as if Moore’s motive was to steal drugs, and there was some reflection, so those two murders were charged as both premeditated and felony murders.
The felony murder was first based on burglary – theft, but the prosecution changed it later and based it on burglary – assault, possibly because they had more evidence of the assault than the theft.
The trial was in 2002, the jury found for the aggravator of multiple murders, but did not reach consensus on the aggravator of cruelty. The case is interesting because right during the penalty phase, Moore’s medical expert had a heart attack, causing a mistrial. Moore had a new aggravation and penalty phase in 2007, the jury found the same aggravator and sentenced Moore to death.
In the mandatory appeal before the Arizona Supreme court, Moore cites a number of issues. The relevant one to the Arias case is this:
Relying on State v. Essman, (1965), Moore also argues that under the merger doctrine, felony murder cannot be predicated upon a burglary that is itself based on the intent to murder.
State v. Essman (1965)
Essman: It’s not felony murder because the felony and the murder are the same thing.
Felony Murder does not apply when the felony is included in (Merged into) the charge of homicide.
Court: Yes, we agree.
Essman is in itself an interesting case. Essman was home and cleaning his gun with his daughter in a near bedroom. He began playing around with the gun. His wife came home and told him to put the gun away before someone gets hurt.
Essman said something like “See? It’s harmless”, as he pointed the gun at the family dog and fired twice. Nothing happened because Essman had emptied the revolver. Then he aimed the gun at his wife and pulled the trigger. The gun went off and killed her. Apparently there was one bullet left in the chamber. Jerk.
In his instruction on second degree murder the judge in Essman instructed the jury that the felony-murder doctrine applied where the felony was assault with a deadly weapon. The pertinent portion of the instruction was “when the killing is done in the perpetration or attempt to perpetrate a felony such as assault with a deadly weapon.” The felony-murder doctrine does not apply where the felony is an offense included in the charge of homicide.
The felony murder doctrine basically states that any death caused during a dangerous felony becomes a 1st or 2nd degree murder.
The decision quoted People v. Moran 246 N.Y. 1927
“The acts of assault merge into the resultant homicide, and may not be deemed a separate and independent offense which could support a conviction for felony murder.”
In the appeal of State v. Moran, Chief Judge Cardozo quoted State v. Huter
“To make the quality of the intent indifferent, it is not enough to show that the homicide was felonious, or that there was a felonious assault which culminated in homicide”. People v. Huter 184 N.Y.
“Making the quality of the intent indifferent” means that the intent needs to be to commit a felony which causes a death, rather than an intent to commit a murder. Remember in felony murder, the death caused could be accidental (heart attack, death of a bystander, etc) or intentional (sudden decision to kill, foreseeable consequence of felonious activities).
“Such a holding would mean that every homicide, not justifiable or excusable, would occur in the commission of a felony, with the result that intent to kill and deliberation and premeditation would never be essential.” People v. Wagner 245 N.Y.
– And this is why most states practice this kind of common law.
“The felony that eliminates the quality of the intent must be one that is independent of the homicide and of the assault merged therein, like robbery or larceny or burglary or rape.” 246 N.Y.
This is the Merger Rule. When the predicate felony of a felony murder merges with the actual murder itself (assault, aggravated assault, assault with a deadly weapon), the merger rule applies and the crime cannot be charged as a Felony murder.
Why is this so important?
In the case of 1st degree murder, if the crime can be charged as a Felony Murder, two things happen:
First, there are no lesser included offenses or degrees of the crime. You either get convicted of the highest degree of murder, or you are not convicted. It’s all or nothing.
With Pre-mediated Murder, the jury can decide on lesser offenses and lower degrees of the crime (2nd degree Murder, Heat of Passion, Manslaughter), so you do not necessarily get convicted of the highest degree of murder.
Second, intent to murder no longer has to be proven, only that a death occurred during an intent to commit a dangerous felony.
It might be advantageous for the prosecution to charge felony murder over premeditated murder, because a conviction would be of the highest degree, and intent to kill doesn’t need to be proven.
This is why the Merger rule is meant to prevent a murder with no dangerous felony other than the murder itself from being charged as a felony murder.
A serious problem with the Arias case is that the prosecution never really specified prior to trial exactly what the felony defining the burglary was, meaning the Felony part of the felony murder is Burglary with intent to …….?
It’s not even specified in the jury instructions, the way it is in other cases. It merely says burglary with intent to commit any theft or felony.
So what’s the felony in the felony murder charge in the Arias case?
In Moore, State v. Miniefield is also cited. You can hear Kirk Nurmi discussing this on day 9 of the trial (we included the video and where to find it in the Holy Grail article).
Miniefield basically got drunk and went ballistic trying to kill a guy he got angry at. He had at times, a handgun, a shotgun, and finally, Molotov Cocktails. He finally managed to set the guy’s house on fire and the guy’s young daughter was burned to death.
Kind of makes it difficult to root for this guy in his appeal, doesn’t it?
This guy wanted the felony murder conviction dropped so badly, he was even willing to admit to pre-meditated murder.
Minefield: It’s not felony murder because I intended to murder the victim.
It’s not felony murder because the arson was not independent of the homicide.
Court: Yes, it is felony murder and the arson IS independent of the homicide.
“Later Arizona cases implicitly rejected the broad language in Essman suggesting that the predicate felony must be “independent of the homicide.” For example, in State v. Miniefield, the defendant argued that it was fundamental error to charge him with felony murder by arson because “the arson was merely the use of fire to attempt to kill the victim.”
The Court rejected this argument by noting that the felony murder statute provided that when a person commits arson and the arson results in death it is first-degree murder. “The statute does not draw a distinction between a person who intends to kill another by fire and one who only intends to burn down a dwelling house and accidentally kills one of the occupants.”
See the logic there? Arizona doesn’t care if premeditated murder and felony murder, seemingly mutually exclusive, are both charged and both found as long as the basic elements of each theory are proven.
Most recently, the Court distinguished Essman in State v. Dann (Dann I), (2003).
“There, the defendant argued that because he intended to murder a victim rather than assault him, he could not be convicted of felony murder.
Noting that the defendant did not dispute that felony murder could be predicated on burglary based on intent to commit assault, the Court held that sufficient evidence supported the finding of the predicate offense. The Court further observed that the merger rule does not apply in cases in which the separate crime of burglary is alleged.”
Meaning that it helps a felony murder charge, to have a separate charge for the felony.
The Jodi Arias case did not have a separate charge for felony.
“Moore complains that the State, while charging felony murder based on burglary, did not specify until the settling of jury instructions, and after the close of evidence, that burglary would be defined by his intent to commit murder rather than theft.”
Arizona prosecutors sure like to keep secrets from the defense, don’t they?
“We agree with Moore that Blakley implies that the state should identify before trial the particular felony that will be used to define burglary when the latter crime is the predicate for felony murder.”
Moore was indicted for and convicted of two counts of premeditated and felony murder for the murders of Delia and Guadalupe, one count of premeditated murder for the murder of Mata, one count of attempted first-degree murder for the injuries to Ford, and one count of first-degree burglary. The trial court was to sentence Moore in August 2002, but the hearing was vacated after the Supreme Court held that Arizona’s capital sentencing scheme was unconstitutional. See Arizona v. Ring (Ring II), (2002).
Arizona v. Ring (Ring II), (2002). Is a landmark case which held that juries, not judges, should decide the death penalty mitigators and aggravators and decide on life or death.
Landmark cases are sometimes based on the trials of real pieces of ……… work, like Ring.
“In November 2004, the trial court empanelled a jury to determine Moore’s sentence. The State alleged two aggravators: that Moore murdered Delia in an especially cruel manner, and that Moore murdered multiple persons on the same occasion. The jury did not reach a verdict on the (F)(6) aggravator, but did find the (F)(8) aggravator. Before the penalty phase concluded, the court declared a mistrial because Moore’s medical expert suffered a heart attack.
Moore was another endless case.
Why felony murder is so contentious:
Remember that Felony Murder means that if someone dies in the course of a dangerous felony, that death can become a 1st degree murder. A defendant could get life in prison or the death penalty. While Premeditated Murder includes lesser charges a jury could decide on.
There’s a famous case where a man goes into a home with a gun to rob it. He hears a sound and changes his mind and runs out of the home. On the way, he trips over a wire falls and the gun goes off. Unknown to him, there was a person behind the wall who was shot and killed. The man leaves thinking the worse thing he did was the gun went off. He was arrested for felony murder and faced the death penalty. This is because he attempted a burglary and in the course of the attempt, he caused the death of a person.
This is the landmark U.S. Supreme Court case of Furman v. Georgia.
Scary to think that because of the felony murder law, the man faced the death penalty for what was otherwise an accidental shooting. Without the felony of burglary – theft, this would normally be a 2nd degree murder at most or manslaughter.
So, there are lots of consequences, sometimes unintended, when applying the law to the facts of a case or deciding how a defendant will be charged.
Dann: It cannot be Felony Murder if I enter the home in order to commit premeditated murder.
Court: It is felony murder because the felony was burglary with intent to commit assault. In the course of that felony, you caused the death of a person. There is sufficient evidence to find intent to assault.
“The jury found Dann guilty of felony murder on all three murder charges. The predicate offense for the felony murders was burglary, which, in turn, was predicated on an intent to commit aggravated assault. The State charged that Dann went to the apartment intending to shoot Andrew, which constitutes an aggravated assault.
Dann asserts that the evidence showed that he entered Andrew’s apartment intending to murder Andrew, not assault him; therefore, he argues, the only felony offense to support the burglary charge was murder, not aggravated assault.”
“This results in ‘bootstrapping’, Dann maintains, because the State is saying that he committed felony murder because he entered the apartment intending to commit premeditated murder.”
The Court held that sufficient evidence supported the finding of the predicate offense. The Court further observed that “merger does not apply in cases in which the separate crime of burglary is alleged and established.”
“Dann I and Miniefield defeat Moore’s argument that felony murder cannot be predicated on a burglary that is based on the intent to murder. The felony murder statute, A.R.S.§ 13-1105(A)(2), does not distinguish between burglaries defined by intent to commit assault versus intent to murder.”
In Arizona, yes you can!
So who is right about the Arias case? “Cate” and Juan Martinez and Judge Sherry Stephens and The Supreme Court of Arizona or Amanda Chen and Rob Roman and Kirk Nurmi and Vladimir Gagin?
“Cate” made the comment that legal interpretations and decisions should be left to the professionals (Prosecutors and Judges), and not to layman blog writers. She forgets that Nurmi and Gagin are experienced criminal defense attorneys in Arizona, and they say the felony murder charge is in error.
“Cate” also forgets I went to law school as did Amanda, I’m a paralegal working in Federal and State Civil Litigation with an emphasis on the Disabled. I think I can give it a shot.
“Cate” made a big legal boo-boo. She forgot that in State v. Moore, all those cited cases and the appeal apply to State v. Moore. They do not necessarily apply to State v. Arias.
Now let’s bring down all the questions from the top of this article and see if these cases have answered our questions:
Does it make sense that in Arizona, you can find someone guilty of BOTH Felony Murder (an unplanned murder) and Pre-meditated murder (a planned murder)?
Yes, it makes sense – in Arizona. You can find a defendant guilty of both premeditated murder AND felony murder. You can see that it’s a correct verdict in State v. Moore, because Moore was convicted of both 1st degree premeditated murder and felony murder of 2 victims.
So, to clarify, you can be found guilty under both theories of first degree murder IF, in the course of a dangerous felony, you commit pre-meditated murder. That’s the reality in Arizona.
This seems to be only in Arizona, as far as I know. It seems like this gives prosecutors two bites at the apple, though.
Arizona seems to like those second bites at the apple, as shown in their nifty little ‘if at first you don’t succeed (at the death penalty) try, try again’.
Does the Merger rule apply in Arizona? Can you be found guilty of felony murder based on a burglary with intent to commit murder?
Can Juan Martinez use an intent to assault or murder as the basis for the Felony burglary in State v. Arias?
If the felony merges with the murder, then any murder would be a felony murder and there would be no need to prove pre-meditation, deliberation, or an intent to kill.
This is the law in most states. This was the law in Arizona. But, Arizona didn’t like that too very much, so they do it their way.
Later Arizona cases implicitly rejected the broad language in Essman suggesting that the predicate felony must be “independent of the homicide.”
These next three cases reflect that rejection of Essman:
Moore: How can I be guilty of Felony Murder based on a burglary with the intent to commit pre-meditated murder?
Court: Because we find you committed burglary with the intent to commit assault. In the course of this felony, you caused the death of a person. Have a nice day.
Other states have held that a felony-murder conviction cannot be based on a burglary intended solely to murder the victim. Arizona don’t give a squid what them there other states do.
“We have already recognized that Arizona’s felony-murder statute identifies burglary based on assault as a valid predicate offense”.
Miniefield: It’s not felony murder because I intended to murder the victim
Court: Your intention to murder the victim is of no consequence for the purposes of felony murder. Your intention was to commit arson because you did commit arson. Whether you intended to kill or not, doesn’t matter in felony murder. You set the building on fire and someone died as a result, Jerk.
Miniefield: I did not intend to commit arson, my intent was to kill the victim.
Court: You lit the Molotov cocktail and you threw it at the house. How was that not your intention, sir?
Dann: How can it be Felony Murder if I enter the home in order to commit premeditated murder?
Court: We have proof you entered the home to commit an assault. Also, we have a separate felony charge
Felony murder can be predicated on a burglary that is based on the intent to murder.
The felony murder statute does not distinguish between burglaries defined by intent to commit assault versus intent to murder.
Does the felony murder charge correctly apply to the Arias case, or was the charge possibly kept solely to give the jurors another choice of 1st degree murder, (in a sort of heads I win, tails, you lose situation) for the prosecution?
I would not put it past a prosecutor who tries to bring in evidence of “animal cruelty and torture” based on a vague, 3rd party report of a too tightly squeezed cat. After that monkey business with the order of injuries, I wouldn’t trust him anyways, nohow.
Can you be found guilty of felony murder (A death occurs in the course of another dangerous felony) based on burglary with intent to commit the murder?
Under some circumstances, yes you can.
Is this a legitimate charge under the facts of State v. Arias?
No. They can charge whatever they want, but then you have to wonder if there is an ulterior motive.
Were the 7 jurors who found for felony murder correct or not?
Incorrect. (but, it’s complicated)
In Arizona, Yes You Can:
Prosecutors can charge a defendant with BOTH 1st degree pre-meditated murder AND 1st degree felony murder of a single victim. (Guess what? You can charge a defendant with anything you want – but, then you have to prove it)
Jurors can find a defendant guilty of BOTH 1st degree pre-meditated murder AND 1st degree felony murder (The verdict form proves it and State v. Moore proves it) (A juror can make any decision allowed by the jury instructions).
Arizona’s felony murder statute recognizes assault as a valid predicate offense.
In Arizona the Merger Rule doesn’t always apply. The felony can incorporate some parts of the murder.
In Arizona the felony predicate does not need to be independent of the homicide
In Arizona, felony murder can be predicated on a burglary that is based on the intent to murder.
In Arizona, burglary does not distinguish between an attempt to assault and an attempt to murder.
So, are Juan Martinez and Judge Stephens correct that the felony murder charge is a viable extra 1st degree murder charge under the facts of the Jodi Arias case?
Has “Cate” decimated all the arguments we made in the Holy Grail article?
Do Nurmi and Gagic and Chen and Roman have it all wrong and are their arguments are no good?
Uh………no. They’re still good. Here’s why:
In State v. Arias,
There is insufficient evidence to support the finding of the predicate offense of burglary with intent to commit theft.
There is insufficient evidence to support the finding of the predicate offense of burglary with intent to commit assault.
Although the Essman ruling used to be the law, where the merger rule always applied and a predicate felony needed to be independent of the homicide, that’s no longer true, because of the decisions in the above cases
Later Arizona cases implicitly rejected the broad language in Essman suggesting that the predicate felony must be “independent of the homicide.” The key here is “the broad language” That does not mean that the Merger rule never applies or that felony predicates can always be the same as the elements of homicide.
The important thing is that each element needs to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt to the jury. This means that to find for pre-meditated murder or felony murder, each element of the charge needs to be proven according to the requirements of the two separate theories.
So let’s take another look at the chart from the Holy Grail article, and see if we can find Jodi Arias guilty of Felony murder under the facts of the case.
To find Arias guilty of 1st degree felony murder, we need:
A predicate felony (We are told it is 2nd degree burglary)
A death caused in the course of that felony.
CHARGED OFFENSE – FELONY MURDER
As stated earlier, Count 1 also charges defendant with First Degree Felony Murder. The crime of First Degree Felony Murder requires the state to prove the following two things:
The defendant committed or attempted to commit Burglary in theSecond Degree; and
In the course of and in furtherance of committing Burglary in the Second Degree, or immediate flight from it, the defendant caused the deathof any person.
An “attempt” requires the state to prove that the defendant intentionally did something which, under the circumstances she believed them to be, was a step in a course of conduct planned to culminate in the commission of the offense. The crime of
Burglary in the Second Degree requires proof that the defendant:
Entered or remained unlawfully in or on a residentialstructure; and
Did so with the intent to commit any theft or felony therein.
#1 As far as the first part of burglary, I will accept Juan Martinez’ explanation for now that once Jodi Arias started stabbing Travis Alexander, he revoked his permission for her to be there, and she was now remaining unlawfully in the residence.
Many people believe Alexander was shot first. Then, let’s say that once Arias ‘began her assault’ on Travis, she was no longer welcome and she was now remaining unlawfully in the residence.
Problem: Wait a minute, Juan is assuming intent to assault or intent to kill – take your pick. We don’t know exactly what happened in that bathroom. Reporters still want to ask Arias that question.
Let’s ignore that for a moment and move on.
#2 Remained unlawfully in the residence with the intent to commit any theft or felony therein.
Juan Martinez gave us the theft of the gun as defining the burglary. If we believe Arias’ account of the crime
(No premeditation, she brought no weapons with her, A fight breaks out, Arias shot Alexander with his own gun in self-defense, he kept attacking, she finishes him off with a knife, she steals his gun).
I say “No pre-meditation”, because for felony murder, pre-meditated or not makes no difference. Only an intent to commit the dangerous felony matters. You cannot use your finding of premeditation as proof of intent in a felony murder.
So theft of the gun fails as defining the burglary right here. Why? Because, Juan Martinez did not PROVE WHEN the intent to take the gun was formed. The intent could have been formed AFTER the killing (and most likely was). This means that the death would not be caused “in the course of and in furtherance of the burglary”.
Do you understand?
A death has to be caused as a consequence of Arias trying to steal that gun. If she forms the intent to steal the gun after he’s already dead, then the death is not a consequence of the theft.
“Cate” made a remark that maybe Juan might have been being facetious about the gun. I thought of that also, but I hope not, because this is somewhat of a serious matter.
So the gun theft fails. Let’s move on to the assault.
Jodi Arias remained unlawfully in the home. She did so with the intent to commit assault upon Travis Alexander.
Problem: Where is Juan Martinez’ proof beyond a reasonable doubt of intent to assault? There isn’t any, because Nurmi was right, there is no other felony. There is no other felony because Juan Martinez failed to PROVE it.
Well, I believe she pre-meditated the killing, isn’t that intent?
No, because pre-meditated or not makes no difference. It cannot be an element of intent to assault, or intent to kill. That has to be proven separately. Well, that’s really bizarre. Yes, but law is very bizzare sometimes.
Well, there’s the crime scene and the stabbed and shot body. No one else was there. It had to be Arias. Isn’t that intent to commit assault?
No. Because Juan Martinez didn’t prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Arias intended to assault Alexander.
Well, what about all that case law above?
Right. Did you see the Judge say hey, Moore, You were convicted of both premeditated AND felony murder? You dispute the felony murder, but, you premeditated it, so there’s the intent. He didn’t say that.
Did you hear the judge say, hey, Moore, you see that dead body? That proves your intent. He didn’t say that either.
What the judge said was, it doesn’t matter what’s in your mind, we have evidence that you were heavily engaged in crack smoking throughout, that you got a gun, that you told your gf you “weren’t going to stand for it” and to come and find you if you didn’ return. You showed a friend the gun and asked him for hrlp to “get”the victim. You entered the home with a weapon. There’s an eye witness. That’s proof of intent to assault. And people died in the course of the assault. That’s felony murder.
That kind of evidence does not exist in the Jodi Arias case.
In Minifield, it was proven that he took a Molotov cocktail, lit it, and threw it at the home. That’s proof of intent to commit arson. A little girl died. That’s felony murder.
That kind of evidence does not exist in the Jodi Arias case.
In Dann, he claimed there was no other felony except the murder. The State charged an intent to kill, but later changed it to an intent to commit aggravated assault. Dann told the court he intended to kill the victim, not assault him, so there is no other felony.
The court replied that we have testimony that you borrowed a gun from your ex-gf, you tried to boorow another “untraceable gun” from a friend, you told your friend you intended to “straighten out the problem, you entered the home with the gun, you called your ex-gf and told he you just shot three people, and that’s proof of intent to assault. As a consequence, someone died. That’s felony murder.
That kind of evidence does not exist in the Jodi Arias case.
– Well, what if we forget about pre-meditation for now, and let’s say Jodi Arias was proven to be going to Alexander’s home after preparing for a nefarious purpose of some kind, isn’t that proof of intent to assault?
No. Because we don’t know when or where or if she formed the intent to assault, no proof.
– Well, it’s a reasonable assumption that Jodi brought a gun and/or knife to Mesa and into Travis’ home. Isn’t that proof of intent to assault?
No. There’s no proof that Jodi brought the gun or the knife to the crime scene.
In Moore and Dann, there was proof they were armed when they entered residences. Moore was also charged separately with a felony, so for the facts of his case, the merger rule doesn’t apply anyways.
Arias was charged with the felony predicate of 2nd degree burglary – assault. They used 2nd degree instead of 1st degree precisely because the state could not prove she brought a weapon into the house.
– Well, she said she did it. She said she did it all. So, if I don’t believe her self-defense story or that Travis attacked her, or if I believe she went way too far, then that proves her intent to assault, doesn’t it?
No, I don’t think so. I wouldn’t rely on her word about anything. I see the merger rule coming into play here, as there’s no distinct felony here, just like Nurmi said. I don’t see how there’s a clear intent to kill or assault, beyond a reasonable doubt.
She was an invited guest, they did interact and have a good time, she was there over 12 hours, then something happened, and I believe there will always be some doubt there as far as what exactly happened. Apparently, it wasn’t very clear to 5 of the jurors.
Now, I believe the only way that felony murder makes any sense at all in this case is if the gunshot was first. Think about this: She shoots him in the shower, as part of a plan to kill him, only he doesn’t die. Jodi Arias doesn’t leave the residence, and she doesn’t call for an ambulance or for help. At this point, she’s remaining in the residence unlawfully. It’s burglary – assault. Jodi Arias then picks up a knife and finishes him off.
Here I would say this is a clear burglary – assault, and in the course of and furtherance of this felony, she caused the death of Alexander. The other way, it’s not so clear at all. Maybe Juan Martinez wanted it that way.
That’s another reason why the change in the order of injuries by the prosecution is problematic. The felony murder charge certainly fits much better with the gunshot first murder theory. I believe that when the prosecution changed the order of injuries to gunshot last, they forgot that this new theory doesn’t fit felony murder. I believe that later, they stubbornly refused to drop the charge, for fear it would draw attention to the fact that they swcithed the order of injuries intentionally to squash Jodi Arias’ self-defense claim.
– Well, what is your reasoning for felony murder not working the other way, with the stabbings first?
I see a merger rule problem with that theory. I just don’t see clear proof of intent either to kill or assault, to make this strictly a felony murder.
“Cate” said something to the effect of, well, if the felony murder charge really didn’t make sense, why weren’t the legal minds in the major media discussing it? This is her type of street logic that I just don’t get, using something that didn’t happen to prove that something else did.
Remember the saying – “Evidence of absence is not absence of evidence.”
You drive me crazy that way, Cate, I have to admit.
Maybe they weren’t discussing it because the prosecution was pushing pre-meditation, or because pre-meditation elements and the lesser included offenses that go with it are more interesting to talk about. Or maybe the viewers weren’t asking about it. Who knows?
If Arias was found unanimously guilty of felony murder 1 instead of premeditated murder 1, maybe they would have talked about it then.
Who are these legal experts she’s talking about, anyways? Dershowitz? Beth Karas? Vinnie Politan? – Please!
Is there a quote or an article or a video from anyone about how the felony murder charge is correct?
I couldn’t find any major media Legal Eagles speaking on the soundness of the charge, but I did find one legal commentator who said what Nurmi said – that there was nothing there. Does the name Monica Lindstrom ring a bell?
This case is not the same as the other cases cited above. This is the only case of the above in which I see no clear felony outside of the murder, despite the Arizona way of not always using the merger rule and sometimes allowing the felony to incorporate certain parts of the murder, which certainly seems to favor the prosecution.
Why was the prosecution so reluctant to explain to the defense exactly what their felony murder theory was in this case?
Why was there was a lot of contention in motions in 2010, before Nurmi took over the case about this exact question?
Why did the prosecution argue for pre-meditation all day every day and then spend just 5 minutes arguing felony murder?
Why didn’t the prosecution specify the exact felony (assault, murder, theft, etc.) defining the burglary, even in the jury instructions? Other cases do.
Why was the prosecution intentionally ambiguous about it, and why did they spend so little time explaining it?
That’s just more than a little fishy when the felony murder is obviously not as clear-cut and much harder to understand.
Maybe Nurmi was right: “(This) is either a premeditated murder or it’s not, and the felony murder burglary charge is just an “empty vessel” in order to seek a first degree murder conviction”.
It certainly seems that felony murder charge was left there more to ensure a first degree murder conviction than because the prosecution honestly believed it was a legitimate charge.
Good job rejecting it, jurors!
Again, the predicate felony = remaining unlawfully in the home (via killing Alexander) with the intent of committing any further felony (killing Alexander) and the murder part of the felony murder is (killing Alexander).
Even in Arizona, and even considering all the cited cases above, “Felony-murder still cannot be charged if all the elements of the felony are included in the elements of the murder”. This is the merger doctrine in Arizona.
The gun theft fails, timing of the intent to steal the gun – not proven – therefore no burglary, therefore no felony murder.
The assault fails – no clear and convincing of proof of an intent to assault, therefore no burglary, therefore no felony murder.
Remaining unlawfully in the home. No clear proof of intent to assault – therefore no proof of revocation of consent to be in the home, therefore no burglary, therefore no felony murder.
The charge should have been dropped.
We invite any legal expert, especially those who practice criminal law in Arizona to explain to us why the felony murder charge in the Jodi Arias case makes any sense at all.
Much has been made of the 1st degree Felony murder charge in the Jodi Arias case. The popular consensus is:
1) This is a totally legitimate charge under Arizona law.
2) The prosecution can charge whatever they want. It’s still up to the jury whether or not to convict on each charge.
3) Arias’ defense attorneys are a “joke” and “do not know what the hell they’re talking about”.
4) “F*ck Off, f*cktard!!”
5) Nobody cares / It doesn’t matter, because the jury did not find Jodi Arias guilty of 1st degree Felony Murder.
6) The jury instructions said that jurors can make a finding of both 1st degree AND felony murder, and that’s what some of them did. So what?
7) Jodi Arias butchered Travis Alexander. She was unanimously found guilty of first degree Premeditated Murder by a jury of her peers, so f*ck off!
8) It was Felony Murder, because it was a felony AND it was a murder. – It’s not rocket science – Duh!
“Ladies and Gentlemen: There’s nothing.
It’s silly. It’s fearful. That charge is there out of fear.
It makes no sense …. not under any scenario does that make any sense.
Either she was there to kill him … or she wasn’t.”
– Defense Attorney Kirk Nurmi
What does he mean by “Either she was there to kill him … or she wasn’t”?
What does he mean by “That charge is there out of fear”?
Now is a good time to review the different charges for a murder:
1st degree Premeditated Murder: A deliberate plan to kill or a “period of cool deliberation”.
It’s deliberate and there is an intent to kill in the person’s mind. It’s also called a “cold-blooded murder”. It’s considered worse than 2nd degree Murder because a person calmly made a decision to murder, reflected on it, and then carried it out.
1st degree Felony Murder: A deliberate plan to carry out a dangerous felony (other than 1st degree murder) and in the course of that felony, a death occurs.
The primary or “predicate felony” is the main intent of the person. The person usually has no premeditation to commit murder. As a result of and in the course of carrying out that dangerous felony, somebody dies.
2nd degree Murder: There is no deliberate plan to kill nor a “period of cool deliberation” or it cannot be proven in court, but the person intentionally caused the death of another person.
There is no provable deliberation, but an intent to kill is formed in the person’s mind. It is a murder born of unplanned circumstances. Often, this would be called a “hot-blooded murder”.
If a jury finds that this 2nd degree murder was committed in the intense emotional turmoil called a “heat of passion”, Arizona law requires that the charge be reduced to Manslaughter.
Manslaughter: There is no deliberate plan and no intent to kill, but the person negligently or recklessly caused the death of another person.
Justifiable Homicide: A murder is justified because a person was defending their life or the life of another person.
We have a situation in a Capital murder case, where the prosecution is pushing hard for a 1st degree murder conviction, this will mean lifetime imprisonment or the Death Penalty.
The defense is pushing just as hard to get, at the least, a 2nd degree murder conviction, where the Death penalty cannot be applied and the defendant has some chance of parole and one day getting out of prison. Of course, a heat of passion manslaughter verdict or an acquittal would be even better for the defense and Arias.
The Defense in the Jodi Arias case had a primary goal or mission to get anything BUT a 1st degree murder conviction for the same reasons.
Can the additional but bogus charge of 1st degree felony murder assist the prosecution to achieve their goal of a 1st degree murder conviction?
Now, let’s review the actual instructions that the jury was given and that Judge Stephens read word for word to the jury.
“THE CHARGED OFFENSE – PREMEDITATED MURDER
Count 1 charges the defendant with First Degree Murder. Arizona law
recognizes two types of First Degree Murder – Premeditated Murder and
Felony Murder. The state has charged the defendant with both types.
The crime of First Degree Premeditated Murder requires the state to prove the following:
The defendant caused the death of another person; and
The defendant intended or knew that she would cause the death ofanother person; and
The defendant acted with premeditation.
“Premeditation” means that the defendant intended to kill another human being or knew she would kill another human being; and that after forming that intent or knowledge, reflected on the decision before killing. It is this reflection, regardless of the length of time in which it occurs, that distinguishes First Degree Murder from Second Degree Murder.
While reflection is required for First Degree Murder, the time needed for reflection is not necessarily prolonged, and the space of time between the intent or knowledge to kill and the act of killing may be very short. An act is not done with premeditation if it is the instant effect of a sudden quarrel or heat of passion.
The crime of First Degree Premeditated Murder includes the lesseroffense of Second Degree Murder. You may consider a lesser offense if either:
You find the defendant not guilty of First Degree Premeditated Murder; or
After full and careful consideration of the facts, you cannot agree on whether to find the defendant guilty or not guilty of First Degree Premeditated Murder.
You cannot find the defendant guilty of any offense unless you find that the State has proved each element of that offense beyond a reasonable doubt.
SECOND DEGREE MURDER
The crime of Second Degree Murder requires proof of one of the
The defendant intentionally caused the death of another person; or
The defendant caused the death of another person by conductwhich the defendant knew would cause death or serious physical injury; or
Under circumstances manifesting extreme indifference to humanlife, the defendant recklessly engaged in conduct that created a grave riskof death and thereby caused the death of another person. The risk must be such that disregarding it was a gross deviation from what a reasonable person in the defendant’s situation would have done.
The difference between first degree murder and second degree murder is that second degree murder does not require premeditation by thedefendant.
CHARGED OFFENSE – FELONY MURDER
As stated earlier, Count 1 also charges defendant with First Degree Felony Murder. The crime of First Degree Felony Murder requires the state to prove the following two things:
The defendant committed or attempted to commit Burglary in the
Second Degree; and
In the course of and in furtherance of committing Burglary in theSecond Degree, or immediate flight from it, the defendant caused the deathof any person.
An “attempt” requires the state to prove that the defendant intentionally did something which, under the circumstances she believed them to be, was a step in a course of conduct planned to culminate in the commission of the offense. The crime of Burglary in the Second Degree requires proof that the defendant:
Entered or remained unlawfully in or on a residentialstructure; and
Did so with the intent to commit any theft or felony therein.
Residential structure means any structure, movable orimmovable, permanent or temporary, that is adapted for both humanresidence and lodging whether occupied or not.
“Intentionally” or “with the intent to” means, with respect to a result or to conduct described by a statute defining an offense, that a person’s objective is to cause that result or to engage in that conduct.
There are no lesser included offenses for First Degree Felony Murder.
Okay, I hope you lived through that. If so, you may have noticed a few things. First, it seems as if juries were very confused about how if they decide it’s a second degree murder, then they must decide if it was a “sudden heat of passion” killing. If the jury decides it is, then the 2nd degree murder is reduced to manslaughter. The instructions repeat so many times on this that it seems that there was trouble with the comprehension of this instructions.
The 1st degree pre-meditated murder charge includes the lesser offenses of 2nd degree murder, sudden heat of passion murder, and manslaughter. The Felony murder charge has no lesser included offenses.
The jury is informed that all can vote for premeditated M1, or all can vote for felony M1, or all can vote for both, or there can be any kind of mixture, as long as they are all unanimous that it’s a first degree murder.
In order to make a finding of Felony murder in this case, the jurors need to find that the defendant committed or intended to commit 2nd degree burglary. In Arizona, this only means that a defendant entered or remained unlawfully in a residence with the intent to commit any other theft or felony.
Can two people both be guilty of felony murder with one victim? Yes they can.
Example: Joe Blow and Lou Blew go to rob a horse track. Lou Blew blows away a cashier. Both Joe Blow and Lou Blew are guilty of felony murder.
Can one person be guilty of felony murder with two victims? Yes they can.
Example: Snidely Whiplash is in his Humvee being chased by the police. The police car smashes into a motorcycle, killing Hairy Ryder. Snidely runs over Midge, a little old lady with a walker who was trying to cross the street. Snidely Whiplash is guilty of two counts of felony murder.
Can one person be guilty of both felony murder and premeditated murder with two victims? Yes they can.
Example: Robin Redrum plans on killing Bumptious Q. Bangwhistle in his home a month in advance. She goes to his home and shoots him dead. Bumptious’ brother, Sumptious Z. Bangwhistle, is visiting that day. He hears the gunfire and comes out of the bathroom and Robin shoots him dead. Robin Redrum is guilty of one count of 1st degree Premeditated Murder and one count of 1st degree Felony Murder.
Now, can one person be guilty of BOTH felony murder and premeditated murder with a single victim? Only rarely, and it would take some doing and some verbal gymnastics to explain how this could be so without a separate felony.
Premeditated murder is a planned murder, or at the very least, the person had a moment of cool reflection.
Felony murder is an unplanned murder. The person plans another felony, and in the course of and in furtherance of this felony, a death occurs. (The victim could have a heart attack, your accomplice could murder the victim, the police could shoot the victim by mistake when trying to shoot you, or you could be surprised by an unexpected victim and kill them, or you could just suddenly decide to kill somebody. All these are examples of felony murder).
How does one person commit BOTH a planned and an unplanned killing with a single victim? Not very easily, BUT Arizona law does allow jurors to find both pre-meditated murder 1 and felony murder 1 concurrently under certain circumstances.
Doesn’t that seem like a blessing for prosecutors?
A) Let’s say Horatio Hornblower plans to tie up and rob little Billy Pilgrim. He ties him up and steals his computer and big screen TV. He drives away, then he thinks again and drives back to Billy Pilgrim’s house and kills him with a George Foreman 3 minute hamburger grill. Now, is this felony murder or premeditated murder or both?
B) Let’s say Horatio Hornblower again plans to tie up and rob little Billy Pilgrim. He ties him up and steals his computer and big screen TV. Billy tells Horatio that he’s a useless cowardly thieving dirt bag. Horatio Hornblower then brains Billy with a George Foreman 3 minute hamburger grill. Is this example felony murder, pre-meditated murder, or both?
C) Let’s say Robin Redrum has NO intention to kill Sweet Polly Purebred in her home by suffocating her with a plastic bag. Robin is a welcome guest. A fight breaks out. She puts a plastic bag over Polly’s head, but she’s not dying. She’s injured, but not dead. So Robin stabs her with Polly’s knitting needle 99 times until she dies. She takes the bag and the knitting needle with her. Is this premeditated murder or felony murder or both?
D) Now, let’s reverse that and say that Robin Redrum plans for months to stab Sweet Polly Purebred to death in her own home with Robin’s knitting needle. She stabs her 99 times, but she doesn’t know if she’s dead or not. She puts a plastic bag over her head just to be sure and takes her own knitting needle. Is this felony murder or premeditated murder or both?
The last example is the equivalent of the prosecution’s theory in the Jodi Arias case (gunshot last, pre-meditation, Jodi brought the gun). The one before that is the alternate theory of murder in the Jodi Arias case (gunshot first, no pre-meditation, Jodi used and stole Travis’gun).
Now, can you apply the jury instructions to these 4 cases? What do you come up with?
A) Under the laws of California and many other states, this would be premeditated murder. It starts out as a felony, but Horatio leaves, then deliberates and after cool reflection, decides to go back and kill Billy Pilgrim. For me, this would be 1stdegree premeditated murder plus separate kidnapping and burglary charges.
In Arizona, however, this fulfills all the requirements for a finding of BOTH Pre-meditated M1 AND Felony M1.
B) I would call this felony murder. Horatio intended to commit a felony. While engaged in the felony, he becomes enraged at Billy Pilgrim and, without a plan or cool reflection, murders him. I would charge felony murder and add on the kidnapping and burglary charges.
C) This would seem to me to be premeditated murder or it could be 2nd degree murder, depending on the details. Robin Redrum didn’t plan the murder. There was no intended felony. A fight broke out and Robn went wild. If there was a cooling off period proven, then it’s 1st degree premeditated murder. If there was no time for reflection, then it’s 2nd degree murder. If the jury finds it’s a sudden heat of passion killing. (Robin and Polly had an intimate relationship of some kind), then the charge could be reduced to manslaughter.
D) This would also seem to me to be premeditated murder. Robin Redrum planned the murder and carried it out. There doesn’t seem to be any intended felony or further felony other than the murder itself.
Did you come to the same conclusions as I did?
In the Jodi Arias case, there were 7 out of 12 jurors who found that it was BOTH a felony murder and a premeditated murder. How did that happen? There were also 8 jurors out of 12 jurors who voted for death. Since I do not know, I think it’s a very good educated guess that the 7 who voted for both felony and premeditated murder AND 7 of the 8 jurors who voted for death are the same people.
I would love to hear their explanation as to how this is BOTH. I would love to hear anyone’s explanation as to how this can be both a planned AND an unplanned murder.
In Arizona, there IS an explanation:
If the prosecution proves that a death occurred “In the course of, and in furtherance of, another intended felony”, a juror can make a finding of Felony Murder 1, even if that same juror also made a finding of Pre-meditated M1.
Kirk Nurmi argued that since there is no predicate felony, there is no Felony Murder. So, it is either 1st degree premeditated murder, which the prosecution argued almost exclusively, or it is a LESSER CHARGE, such as 2nd degree murder or heat of passion manslaughter. Here’s what he said about this in the guilt phase part of the trial in 2013:
“Remember when we heard the charge of Felony Murder yesterday and the state making an argument that was….incomprehensible? This idea that well…if you believe Jodi’s version of events she’s guilty of felony murder because she went to Travis’ home, and she decided to steal his gun, and in the course of trying to steal his gun, she shot him. She went there, they had sex, they did all these things, then she decided she wanted his gun, and decided to take it, and wanted it so bad that she was willing to kill him.
That’s the theory of felony murder they have put forward. That shows a little fear, and we’ll talk about some of the fear that the state has demonstrated throughout this case, but that’s just some of it – alright? We also heard this idea that….well, she was unwelcome once she put the weapon upon him and she was there to commit a burglary or another felony ….. there’s no other felony.
Ladies and Gentlemen: There’s nothing. It’s silly. It’s fearful. That charge is there out of fear. It makes no sense …. not under any scenario does that make any sense. Either she was there to kill him, because the state said “Hey this is a plot that began in May”. Either she was there to kill him … or she wasn’t, and that’s ultimately what we’re here to determine.”
– Defense lead attorney Lawrence “Kirk” Nurmi in the guilt phase closing argument.
Start at 9:15
So, in his closing statements, what does Kirk Nurmi mean by “Either she was there to kill him … or she wasn’t”?
What he means is that this is either a deliberate pre-planned, cooly reflected upon murder, or it should be a lesser charge.
The reason why he’s saying this is because he doesn’t see an underlying felony in the felony murder charge. Martinez’ answer during Nurmi’s motion to dismiss the felony murder charge is that the underlying felony can be any lesser offense of Premeditated Murder. This is after he states once again the reasons why this is clearly a premeditated murder. Then Martinez offers up “assault” as the underlying felony in the felony murder charge.
We are well on our way up the hill to the Holy Grail, I promise. But first, let’s take a small detour and look at the genesis of the felony murder charge. It never changed from the time of the indictment, although premeditated and felony murder are clearly stated as ALTERNATIVES.
Here’s the relevant wording from the original indictment on July 9th 2008 (Jodi Arias’ birthday):
“The Grand Jurors of Maricopa County, Arizona, accuse Jodi Ann Arias on this 9th day of July, 2008, charging that in Maricopa County, Arizona:
JODI ANN ARIAS, on the 4th day of June, 2008, intending or knowing that her conduct would cause death, with premeditation caused the death of TRAVIS V. ALEXANDER, in violation of A.R.S. $$ 13-1101, 13-1105, 13-702, 13-703, 13-703.01 and 13-801.
The State of Arizona further alleges that the offense charged in this count is a dangerous felony because the offense involved the discharge, use, or threatening exhibition of a .25 caliber handgun and/or knife, a deadly weapon or dangerous instrument and/or the intentional or knowing infliction of serious injury upon TRAVIS V. ALEXANDER, in violation of A.R.S. $$ 13-604 (P).
OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE
JODI ANN ARIAS, on or about the 4th day of June, 2008, acting either alone or with one or more other persons, committed or attempted to commit Burglary, Second Degree, and in the course of and in furtherance of such offense, or immediate flight from such offense, JODI ANN ARIAS or another person caused the death of TRAVIS V. ALEXANDER, in violation of $$ 13-1105, 13-1101, 13-702, 13-703, 13-703.01 and 13-801.
The State of Arizona further alleges that the offense charged in this count is a dangerous
felony because it involved the discharge, use, or threatening exhibition of a .25 caliber handgun and/or knife, a deadly weapon or dangerous instrument and/or the intentional or knowing infliction of serious physical injury upon TRAVIS VICTOR ALEXANDER in violation of A.R.S. $ 13-604(P).
Did you see that? Premeditated Murder OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, felony murder. Not both, how could it be both? You either planned a murder or you didn’t, right? In Arizona, for whatever reasoning, a juror can find both if the pre-meditated murder happened “In the course of, and in furtherance of, another intended felony”.
In Arizona, you get to
I’m going to throw out a word to you now – Boilerplate. It’s a legal term meaning a standard way of wording things such that there are few problems understanding it. The exact same, time-tested phrasing is used every time. July 9th was just a month after the body was found.
“JODI ANN ARIAS, on or about the 4thday of June, 2008, acting either alone or with one or more other persons, committed or attempted to commit Burglary, Second Degree”. This standard boiler plate language should be narrowed down to exactly what the evidence shows by the time of the trial.
At that point, Jodi could have been hiding and protecting an accomplice who actually did the killing while she just watched. She would still be guilty of 1st degree felony murder, because she was a willing accomplice. Someone could have assisted her, even if Jodi did the killing. Maybe it would turn out that either Jodi didn’t premeditate the murder OR there was not enough evidence of premeditation.
So that boilerplate wording on the indictment including the felony murder charge are there as a catch-all or a just in case. They’re basically a one size fits all. Three or Four years later, you would think the prosecution would know if it was felony murder or a premeditated murder. Everyone knows what they are going to try to prove and what their theory of the case will be.
– But they left the defense guessing.
Kirk Nurmi made two major points in his closing about the Felony Murder Charge.It makes no sense, and it’s only there because of “fear”.
“Either she was there to kill him, or she wasn’t”.
In Arizona, there are 16 statutory (witten in the law) predicate felonies for felony murder. These are:
1) Sexual Conduct with a minor
2) Sexual Assault
3) Molestation of a child
5) Marijuana offenses
6) Dangerous drug offenses
7) Narcotics offenses
8) The use of minors in drug offenses
9) Drive by shooting
15) Child abuse
16) Unlawful flight from a pursuing law enforcement vehicle”
Jodi’s predicate felony is burglary? You’ve got to be kidding me. Incredibly, Juan Martinez sold that B.S. To the jury, or to many of them, anyways. I don’t think you can stretch, mutilate, and warp a law any more than Martinez did here. Then he sold it to them, because he is the fireside story teller. There were five astute jurors, though, who weren’t buying it at all.
The State has put forth that the felony predicate is burglary. In Arizona statutes, burglary is akin to trespassing with the intent to commit any felony. Jodi Arias at some point became an uninvited guest in Travis Alexander’s home. When, exactly did Jodi Arias become an unwelcome guest in Travis’ home? According to the twisted logic of the State, Jodi Arias became an unwelcome guest as soon as she began her premeditated murder of Travis Alexander.
According to the state, when Jodi Arias began killing Travis Alexander, at that point in time, she is no longer welcome in Travis’ home and is now guilty of 2nd degree burglary.
“The crime of Burglary in the Second Degree requires proof that
Entered or remained unlawfully in or on a residential
Did so with the intent to commit any theft or felony therein.”
– Arizona 2nd degree burglary statute.
Here there is a situation where, as soon as Jodi Arias starts killing Travis Alexander, she is now guilty of second degree burglary, because Travis obviously would not want her in his home at that time = remaining unlawfully in a residential structure. That same act of starting to kill Alexander also serves as the further felony Arias intended to commit. So the killing of Alexander serves as the reason why she is guilty of 2nddegree burglary, plus it is the further felony Arias intended to commit, plus it is the killing that was committed in the course of the burglary.
Do you see why this is insane circular logic? As a matter of fact, that’s what Kirk Nurmi argued when he asked the court to drop the Felony Murder charge after it became clear that the State was arguing just about exclusively for 1st degree premeditated murder. He said this is circular logic. The murder and the predicate felony and the further intended felony cannot be all the same thing.
Not only is it circular logic, but also, there’s a law against it:
“Felony-murder cannot be charged if all the elements of the felony are included in the elements of murder.This is known as the merger doctrine,which holds that if the underlying felony merges with the killing, the felony cannot constitute felony-murder. For example, all of the elements of the crime of Assault and Battery with a deadly weapon are included in murder. If a killing, therefore, occurred during the course of this crime, the accused would be charged with murder.”
Yet this is exactly what Martinez is putting forth. He wrongly divides a stabbing murder into a series of assaults with a knife, and calls the intended further felony “assault”.
Update: It has come to my attention that, In Arizona, Martinez and Judge Stephens correctly cited the law when stating that the intended felony defining the burglary can be assault even if the victim was murdered.
Again, the predicate felony = remaining unlawfully in the home (via killing Alexander) with the intent of committing any further felony (killing Alexander) and the murder part of the felony murder is (killing Alexander).
For this charge of Felony Murder, aren’t all of the elements of the felony predicate “merging” with the murder?
You cannot do that. Yet, Martinez and the state of Arizona did do it. Sound familiar?
It seems that in the Bizarro world of Arizona, a murder can be divided up into a series of assaults.
Now, let’s entertain the theory that it was Travis’ gun that was used in the killing. Besides the fact that this significantly weakens the State’s case for pre-meditation, this scenario doesn’t work so hot either. That’s because the State would have to prove that Arias’ stated intention was to remain in Alexander’s residence with the intent to steal that gun, and in the course of committing this felony, she was willing to kill Alexander.
He would have to prove that Arias intended to steal the gun prior to, rather than after, the murder.
Following this theory, the death occurred while she was in the process of stealing Travis’ gun, which was her primary intention. This is absurd. Since she got rid of the gun, one can then be confident that her main purpose was not to be in the home unlawfully in order to steal his gun.
There’s a much better argument for that:
What if, she broke into the home, was in there without Alexander’s consent or knowledge, and then he caught her with the gun in her hand? She shoots him and kills him because he identified her in his home when she was supposed to be 1,000 miles away in Yreka. This is a much clearer case of felony murder. But, as we know, Travis let her in the home, Jodi knew what he was watching on his computer (You tube: “Harder Better Faster Stronger”).
We know they took pictures of each other, and we know they had sex a number of times. One could have confidence that she was welcome in the home (at least, at first).
Neither theft of the gun, nor “assault”, nor the killing of Alexander can fulfill the “intent to commit any felony” part of the Felony Murder Statute, according to Nurmi. The intended felony must be separate from the killing.
Update: It has been brought to my attention that Arizona does not recognize the merger rule in all instances, meaning if a person is murdered, you can break down that murder into a series of assaults and you can use assault as the felony defining the felony predicate of burglary.
The prosecution, after being asked over and over again by the defense about their intentions with the felony murder charge, in 2010, finally stated what they would be using “any of the lesser included offenses” (murder 2, manslaughter). Later, they added “aggravated assault” and “theft” as the intended offense beyond 2nd degree burglary (remaining in the home unlawfully). Doesn’t this show that they have no clear theory?
Nurmi brought up a motion to dismiss the felony murder charge on the ninth day of trial, in open court minus the jury, on video. There he states that there is no underlying felony for the felony murder charge (video below). Nurmi said “The essence of the argument, your honor, is that there was nothing facilitated, at all. There was no distinct offense for this burglary….and the assertions of felony murder based on that should not stand.” Here he is saying that there was no intent to commit a theft or any felony other than the killing itself.
Juan Martinez states that the further felony is assault, now her status has changed to an unwelcome guest, the assault, and the stabbings that happened after that become the felony. Nurmi responded that it is either a premeditated murder or it’s not, and the felony murder burglary charge is just an “empty vessel” in order to seek a first degree murder conviction. (The motion was denied by Judge Sherry Stephens).
The defense motion to dismiss the felony murder charge.
Start at 47:15
Do you remember this? Jodi must have forgotten her glasses or something and is wearing a different pair. Nurmi and Martinez fight it out over the felony murder charge
At SpotLightOnLaw, we have talked about the felony murder charge a lot. Now, we hope you will soon understand why. Who gives a hoot about the felony murder charge when it’s old news? It’s over and done with, the jury was unanimous for pre-meditated murder anyways, and Nurmi is a blooming idiot!
No, there’s something to this. Either this is Martinez’ trick, or it’s just bad common law. Not the first time we’ve seen a poorly worded statute interpretated poorly in Arizona.
Nurmi seems to feel internally that this is incorrect. He’s not wrong, but his argument is not persuasive enough. He didn’t invoke the merger rule and he couldn’t find any case law specific enough to this issue. He’s a really good attorney, but he’s lacking as a trial lawyer.
I will reiterate this now in a visual format, so I hope you can see that this felony murder charge is ridiculous. It’s ludicrous. It makes no logical, practical or legal sense, does it?
Stay with me, now. I hope you will see that this is at the root of what’s wrong with the Jodi Arias case. The Holy Grail is in sight!
What do you believe is the theft or felony that Jodi intended to commit or committed? No, Juan Martinez and Judge Stephens, it cannot be the murder itself.
But, wait. According to Arizona law, and only Arizona law, Juan Martinez and Judge Stephens are correct in saying that assault CAN be used as the the felony defining the burglary.
Martinez in closing arguments of the guilt phase discussing the felony murder charge
Starts at 23:30 then he picks it up again at 37:30
Now, if you don’t believe me, look at what a very good attorney in Arizona has to say:
Vladimir Gagic, Criminal Law Attorney
“That, for the moment, leaves the felony murder charge, which is count two in the indictment. At common law, felony murder meant that someone could be charged for murder even if they never intended to kill a person, so long as the a death was the foreseeable result while the defendant was committing a dangerous felony.
The classic example of a felony murder is when a kidnap victim dies from a heart attack while stuffed in the trunk of a kidnapper’s car. Thus, even though the kidnapper never intended to kill his victim, he is still guilty of felony murder because the death of his victim was a foreseeable consequence of the underlying predicate felony, kidnapping.”
“Another example is when during a bank robbery the police shoot and kill a bank robber’s accomplice. Even though the bank robbers certainly never intended the police to kill one of them, that result was foreseeable, and thus felony murder. Other common law predicate felonies included rape and burglary. Assault is not a predicate felony in Arizona for the felony murder rule.”
“The important point with the felony murder rule is that the predicate felony is different from intent to murder, depraved indifference murder, manslaughter, or any other homicide charge because the goal of the felony murder rule is to deter the predicate felony itself, while non-felony murder homicide and murder laws deal with homicide charges directly.”
“As most of you are aware, the government has charged Ms. Arias with felony murder, with the predicate felony being burglary. The important point here is that while even though common law burglary required breaking and entering with the intent to commit a theft therein, in Arizona, which follows the model penal code, defines burglary more broadly as (see “Arizona Revised Statute ARS 13-1506 and 13-1507):
Entering or remaining unlawfully in or on a nonresidential structure or in a fenced commercial or residential yard with the intent to commit any theft or any felony therein; and A person commits burglary in the second degree by entering or remaining unlawfully in or on a residential structure with the intent to commit any theft or any felony therein.”
“The prosecutor does not allege Ms. Arias entered into Travis Alexander’s home with the intent to kill him or commit any felony, for that matter, at the moment of entry. How could he when all the evidence shows Mr. Alexander invited Ms. Arias into his house? The evidence is clear she spent at least 8 hours in his house, and during that time together they had sex multiple times.”
“Instead, the prosecutor’s argument is that felony murder applies because at some point Mr. Alexander revoked permission from Ms. Arias to be in his house, and at that point, she was “remaining unlawfully in… a residential structure”. This is where things get quite silly for the government’s felony murder allegation:
if in fact at some point Jodi Arias was still in Mr. Alexander’s house without his permission (we can call that point T1), what felony was Ms. Arias’ intending to commit at T1? If she was intending to kill him at T1, then that would be the exact same thing as count one, murder in the first degree intent to kill, premeditated murder.”
“The defense filed a motion to dismiss the felony murder charge, stating quite correctly the allegation makes no sense. In response, Judge Stephens ruled Ms. Arias’ intent at T1 could have been assault, not intent to kill Mr. Alexander. I believe that ruling is in error because of something called the merger rule.
To count any death that occurred during the course of an assault as felony murder would obliterate the distinction between assault and murder. And even more importantly, there would be no distinction between second degree depraved indifference murder and first degree intent to kill murder.”
“P.S. What I mean by merger rule is that the predicate underlying dangerous felony, the dangerous felony of felony murder, must be different from the actual murder charge itself; that is why assault is not a predicate in felony murder. If it was a predicate, then every murder would automatically be felony murderbecause every murder involves an assault. In other words, proving the murder would automatically prove the assault as the evidence is circular. And thus, there would be no degrees of murder charges (first degree, second degree) as there are now.”
There’s more to it. Let’s move on to the other pieces of the puzzle.
This explanation makes good sense and it’s the law in most states. Here is another instance, like the F(6) cruelty aggravator, where the statute is poorly written, coupled with illogical jury instructions or case law, that leaves Nurmi and Gagic and I, feeling like something is not quite right. That’s my overall feeling about the Jodi Arias case, too.
What did Kirk Nurmi mean by “That charge is there out of fear”?
Now, we are getting to what Kirk Nurmi said about the prosecution’s ”fear”. What’s the distinction between 1st degree Felony Murder and 2nd degree Murder? Both involve no pre-planning, and in both, the person must have an intent.
The difference is that in Felony Murder, as normally observed, there must be an intent to commit another dangerous felony (where a death is foreseeable). There must be a primary or “predicate felony” OTHER THAN THE KILLING, with no pre-planned intention to kill. In the course of committing this dangerous felony, a death occurs.
Martinez argued premeditation throughout this case. He even argues a short moment of cool reflection in the bathroom was also possible, in case the jurors don’t accept the long premeditation theory. The – Travis was “killed three ways” argument is also meant to show deliberation and premeditation. He argued throughout the case that Travis didn’t own a gun, and that Jodi brought the gun with her from Yreka.
Now, Martinez is telling the jury that according to Arias’ version of events, Travis did own a gun and he’s arguing that she did steal it and that makes theft the felony defining the burglary. He’s arguing that Travis Alexander was murdered, and in the process of the murder he was assaulted, making assault the felony defining the burglary.
Martinez is telling the jury that yes, you can find that this was both a felony murder and a pre-meditated murder if the premeditated murder happened in furtherance of the burglary. He’s telling them that as soon as Arias first assaulted Alexander, that at that point, she was now unwelcome and unlawfully in the home. He’s telling them that this fits the Arizona burglary statute.
Who’s right and who’s wrong?
Why is he doing this? What is going on here?
Imagine there are 4 rooms, like motel rooms. Imagine there is a door to each of these rooms. The first room is 1st degree pre-meditated murder, the second room is 2nd degree murder, the 3rd is manslaughter and the 4th is justifiable homicide. Which door will the jury walk through?
If some jurors are unsure about premeditation or if some feel it’s a heat of passion homicide,they could have a compromise verdict and choose to walk through the door of 2nddegree murder. But what if the state is allowed to add the door of 1st degree felony murder? In this motel scenario, that extra door would lead into the same room as the 1st degree pre-meditated door, (or they could be connected rooms). In any case, it’s another choice for the jury.
It’s another choice which gives the prosecution another opportunity for the jurors to go into the room they want. That’s only fair, Martinez would say, because the defense has 3 doors and 3 rooms and we only have one. Now, it’s more fair because they have 3 doors and we now have 2 doors.
That’s what’sreally going on here. He wants it to be as ambiguous as possible.
Whether Jodi Arias is completely innocent or whether she is a cruel and evil, cold-blooded murderer shouldn’t even matter. Does what Jodi did give officials the right to do what they’re doing here, or what they have done and continue to do in the State of Arizona?
Maybe the statute and/or the interpretations of the statute is just plain wrong.
In the beginning of this case, Juan Martinez had much less information about the gas cans than he did by the end of the trial. The major evidences of pre-meditation at the beginning of the trial were the license plates being tampered with, the car being rented 90 miles from Yreka, the borrowed gas cans, the hair coloring, the phone being off, and the recovered bullet being the same caliber as the gun stolen in Yreka.
All these occurrences could have nefarious explanations, but all these could have innocent explanations. If I were the prosecutor on this case, I would have been a little worried. Maybe that explains, both the change by the prosecution in the order of injuries from gun first to gun last (with the help of Dr. Horn), AND the retention of the felony murder charge. Is it just a coincidence that both of these absurd assertions help to dramatically increase the odds for the prosecution?
The biggest untold embarrassment of this trial is that there was division in this jury. They could not agree on the essentials of this case, and they disagreed 8 to 4 over the death penalty. Seven jurors voted for BOTH felony murder and premeditated murder.
Just because the boiler plate jury instructions state that you can vote for both felony murder AND premeditated murder doesn’t mean that voting for both in any way applies to this particular case.
These 7 people were following Juan Martinez’ interpretations while the remaining 5 were at least considering some of the defenses’ arguments.
All this is the Holy Grail of the Jodi Arias case.
Remember the list of 16 predicate felonies?
If you or someone with you causes the death of a person in the course of one of these dangerous felonies, the killing is elevated to 1st degree murder. You could say that 1stdegree Felony Murder is when a person commits a 2nddegree murderin the course of one of thesedangerous felonies.
Notice that 1st degree premeditated murder is not on that list. Premeditated murder cannot be the predicate felony for felony murder. Assault with a deadly weapon also is not on this list. Assault can be the further intended felony that’s required in 2nddegree burglary, but it cannot be the predicate felony for felony murder.
So, 2nddegree murder and 1stdegree felony murder have A LOT in common. Also, 2nddegree murder and 1stdegree premeditated murder have A LOT in common, particularly when the period of cool deliberation or reflection is very short.
This caused a legal expert to say:
“The point is that in jurisdictions where no time is too short to support a finding of actual thought and reflection, sufficient to establish premeditation, the dividing line between first and second degree murder is extremely murky, to put it mildly”.
They could fear that they would lose the case. Remember, Juan Martinez, as shown in his prior and current cases, will cheat even when he has a slam dunk case.(State vs. Morris, State vs. Dixon, State vs. Gallardo, State vs. Lynch). But we know that Juan will cheat even more when he fears he may lose the case (State vs. Falater, State vs. Grant, State vs. Carr, Robert Towery commutation hearing, State vs. Chrisman).
For Juan Martinez, not getting a 1stdegree murder conviction would be a LOSS in the Jodi Arias case. The Death Penalty would be off the table and Jodi Arias would get out of prison one day. That’s unacceptable to the prosecution. This case has been widely viewed throughout the United States and the world. People are getting a good look at Arizona Justice, and this trial was on live TV. Also, the 2nd penalty phase will be available on video and transcripts after the sentencing.
This case is a very big deal in Arizona. There are plenty of biblical law types, who demand the most severe punishment possible when a woman kills a man. The Mormons are a very powerful political base of themselves, and they support the ultra conservative right which reigns supreme in Arizona. Woman’s Death Row just lost one woman (due to a wrongful conviction), so there are now only two women on Death row in Arizona. Isn’t it awful expensive to run a maximum security Death Row for only two women?
Remember that Juan does not like to lose a case, and anything less than 1stdegree murder would be a loss. Remember also that Juan did not really have a handle on the gas can situation until late in the trial. As things stood in 2011, this is too risky for a guy like Juan. He wants every advantage possible. He got that advantage by changing the order of injuries and not dropping the felony murder charge, for starters.
Now, I hope you can understand this just a little better and we hope you will start to see why we consider the retention of the felony murder charge, along with the one-two switcheroo of the order of injuries to be the Holy Grail of wrongdoing by the prosecution.
Lisa LaSalle, a Canadian blogger, fired the first shot across the bow in the battle of the upcoming 2nd penalty phase in the Jodi Arias trial with her article called “The Infamous Trial of Candy Crush”. Lisa’s article was a very well written and intelligent summary of many of the problems Jodi Arias supporters and others see in the first phases of the trial.
This shot must have made quite a splash, because JustDaTruth, a well-known advocate for the prosecution fired back with a scathing article, called “Crushing the Candy Crush”. In this article, the author, who prefers to remain anonymous, gave factual reasons and logical arguments for he believes the Candy Crush article was off base.
In this article, we will be replying to the Crusher of Candy Crush, and we will not fire back. We will simply serve him or her milk and cookies, better known as food for thought, This culinary response is based on facts, logic, and reasoning.
These are the first articles we have read from Lisa LaSalle and from JustDaTruth. We were impressed with both articles as civil dialogue and a healthy exchange of ideas. Links to both articles are shared below. We highly encourage and recommend that you read both of these articles to get some real insight into the major arguments from both sides.
Some of your points were very good and interesting, but we find fault with some of your arguments. Your points are highlighted and below them are our responses:
One major point:
We disagree with the verdict of 1st degree premeditated murder. We do not find fault with the jury on that verdict. We are saying that what was presented to the jury was not the truth.
Why Try to Plead to 2nd Degree When Arias Claims it was Self-Defense?
Jodi is responsible for Travis’ death, regardless of whether it was self-defense, heat of passion, or murder. She knows this and she was willing to take a 20 year sentence for that responsibility and to avoid making this so public with a trial. However, she is not willing to take a life sentence or allow the state to execute her for a domestic homicide with no prior offenses, which has no business being a death penalty case in the first place.
“Death qualified jury” means that no one who is totally opposed to the death penalty should be allowed to serve. That’s a whole lot of people. This is why the State of Arizona prosecutors like almost every murder trial to qualify for the Death Penalty. This means there are more people on the jury who will sympathize with the prosecution and be more willing to convict. This deprives Arias of some jurors who will understand the rights of the accused, including some who are especially empathetic and understanding of both domestic violence and some of the less understood causes of violence in our society.
(Please see new discarded jury questions for Jodi Arias….)
The Defense Attorneys “Are Not Public Defenders”
All Arizona defendants in a capital crime MUST, by statute, have two attorneys. A mitigation specialist is now required. Nurmi and Willmott ARE public defenders no matter where they work now. They are under constraints of a budget when presenting a defense. They cannot advocate for the defendant in any way outside the courtroom. Lawyers who are strictly public defenders also clear their schedule for a major trial and are very busy at other times, just like private defense attorneys.
Niether Nurmi nor Willmott can compete in terms of trial experience with Martinez’ 25 years prosecuting cases and influencing juries in court. If you look at his trial history, you can see that winning the conviction trumps the truth and ethical considerations, in spite of his having convicted some really bad blokes.
(Please see Spotlight on Juan Martinez, State vs. Falater, State vs. Grant. You might also want to watch Martinez’ testimony at Robert Towery’s Commutation hearing on Youtube. Look at the defenses’ response and the testimony of Towery’s sisters. There’s something about this Martinez, there really is.)
Arias is death penalty eligible meaning her crime qualifies her for the death penalty. But does it really? No one in America has faced the death penalty with similar facts. This is because of Arizona’s F(6) aggravator cruelty prong which can qualify almost any homicide for the DP. Three other women stabbed their partners to death in AZ in 2008. One shot their partner to death, and two ran them over with cars. None of these women, or any of the scores of men who killed their partners in 2008, or any other years, besides one man who chased down and stabbed his wife to death outside his home in front of witnesses, faced the DP in Arizona.
Traditionally Non-Sequestered Jury in AZ.
If we always rely solely on precedent, we ignore the realities of an ever-changing society. The new reality, according to Alan Dershowitz, the very experienced appellate attorney and Harvard law Professor, recommended by Fox News, is that no one can expect a fair trial in a high profile murder case in this day and age. He went on to say that even judges and governors can be affected by ratings motivated sensationalism and the “lynch mobs” they create.
(Please see Heroes, Zeros ans Geniuses in the Jodi Arias Case)
Judge Stephens Controlled the Court Room
Judge Sherry is not experienced in capital cases and this was her first. What’s the reason? The court in AZ is jammed with capital murder trials, so they need more and more judges to preside over them. Judge Stephens was afraid to make the tough decisions for fear of political backlash and appellate review and she was not in control of her courtroom. Had a cell phone gone off during Martinez’ closing statement instead of Nurmi’s, do you think that Judge Stephens would have admonished the court instead of just giving a blank stare? The idea that Arias’ family said or did anything inappropriate in the courtroom is a flat-out lie, there’s no evidence of that at all and they are as just as about far away from the jury as you can get.
The Alexander family did in fact purposely make eye contact and conducted non-verbal communication with jury members. It’s not their fault, they were never told they cannot do this. This is entirely different than emotional reactions when they were looking straight ahead instead of to their left. This is forbidden in most court rooms throughout the US. Did you see this principle being clearly demonstrated in the Zimmerman trial? The Martin family members were stoned-faced throughout the trial, and they left when they felt they could not keep their emotions in check.
Evidence of this non-verbal communication is clear in many trial videos. Family members can be seen making direct eye contact with jurors. This communication revealed itself when one juror went directly up to the Alexanders and apologized for the failure to achieve a death verdict. If Sherry had no bias, how do you explain her emotions when the jury could not come to a unanimous agreement? Failure to reach a unanimous decision happens all the time, so what was that emotion about?
Electronic Devices Are Not a Problem
It’s just too easy to go on Facebook or Twitter, etc. and see things about the trial without meaning to do so. If these comments and reports are all one-sided, the juror then is aware of overwhelming public sentiment, and may feel compelled to act in support of that sentiment, which is the main argument for sequestration. (Please see New Discarded Juror Questions….)
Your statement “What exactly was out there that was patently false, that the juror’s might have been influenced by?” – You really can’t be serious by asking this, can you? Where would we begin?
Lisa Daidone: Stalking Evidence
Lisa Daidone hardly knew Jodi, had rarely been around her and only spoke of one incident when Jodi showed up at Travis’ home. She depended primarily on the word of Travis Alexander, who was derisive of Jodi to his friends while talking to Jodi for hours and having sex with her late at night between and after dates with Lisa Daidone. Did YOU watch the trial? Please tell me who else testified with a first-hand story about Jodi’s “stalking behavior”?
Deanna Reid didn’t testify that Jodi hid behind a Christmas tree or crawled through the doggy door. Deana Reid, Travis ex-girlfriend, showed up at Travis’ home one week when Travis was away on business. She claimed that Travis asked her to walk his dog, Napolean. Deanna went over to Travis’ home and was surprised to see Jodi Arias there. She claims that Travis had no knowledge that Jodi was there. Is this true? Jodi didn’t hide behind a Christmas tree then. Instead, she was baking and she offered Deanna some chocolate chip cookies. Deanna’s described Jodi’s behavior to the jury as like a “Stepford Wife”. Damned if you do serve cookies, and damned if you don’t and just hide behind the tree .
LaViolette Was Not Balanced / Fair To Travis
As far as Travis being afraid of Jodi, he did not report any incident, he did not change his locks, he did not change his garage code, and he did not even lock his front door. He did not stop answering the booty call. This is why LaViolette was saying that Travis’ actions did not mimic his words when he said he was in fear of Jodi.
Alyce LaViolette is one of this country’s foremost experts in domestic violence. She isn’t a “shopped for” witness. With over 30 years experienced directly dealing with both the victims and the perpetrators of domestic violence, she’s a wish-list witness. Her testimony is that Travis Alexander’s behaviors as reported by Jodi Arias and as objectively supported by independent evidence, were derisive and abusive throughout the relationship. They fit a pattern she recognized. LaViolette stands by her testimony to this day.
(Please see Spotlight on Domestic Violence)
Samuels Cheated for Jodi
Psychologist Dr. Samuels did not think that Jodi needed to be re-tested because whether she is a witness to a murder or a participant in a killing, the trauma she experienced is the same trauma experience. Therefore the idea that she needed to re-tested is a ludicrous technicality. PTSD victims have different symptoms and different ways of compensating, depending on their personalities, etc. Since you feel Jodi Arias does not suffer from PTSD, can either you or DeMarte explain the extra symptoms in her testing not accounted for by either BPD or PD non-specified (NOS), yet do account for PTSD? We are patiently awaiting your answer……
Offering Books to Prisoners
Offering books to prisoners, to put it bluntly, don’t mean sh*t.
This is just nitpicking by Martinez.
Arias was tested by 3 psychologists in all and the findings of 2 were reviewed by a 4th psychologist. Yes, there were four Psychologists altogether. You may hear from the 4th Psychologist at the 2nd penalty phase. The sole dissenting opinion about the diagnoses came from Dr. DeMarte, a novice.
How do you know the prosecution did not “shop” for Dr. DeMarte, as they did with Ray Krone, who spent 10 years in prison and 2 years on death row on shopped for false expert testimony?
(Please see What’s going on in Arizona, Maricopa part 1 and 2)
Jodi Lied to Her Parents
What Jodi’s parents said about her, that was not brought into evidence at trial, was that Jodi did not CONFIDE in her parents. This is much different than saying she lied to them all the time. She hardly spoke with them. Jodi did not share the details of her life with her parents. This is understandable as she was shown little affection or love. If you think a good idea as a parent of a 14 year-old is to call the police because your daughter is growing some pot seeds in Mom’s Tupperware on the roof, then God bless you. Experimentation is the basic job description of teens and if your own parents are not on your side and loyal to you, God help you. Who throws their own child to the wolves and doesn’t even provide legal help for a daughter accused of murder? Fortunately people can change. Jodi has changed and her parents have changed.
The Defense Agreed with DeMarte
The defense did not “buy” Borderline Personality Disorder. They had already stated Personality Disorder NOS (Non-Specified). The defense adopted both BPD and the 1st degree premeditated guilty verdict at the time of the 1st penalty phase because that is what threy believed the jury accepted. At that point in the trial, you have to argue the facts that the jury most likely believes, not your own.
Martinez Destroyed Defense Witnesses
With both LaViolette and Samuels, Martinez did little damage to their testimony and the objective facts they presented. What Martinez is so experienced at is discrediting the source of the information. Samuels is nothing more than a Messy Marvin and a pervert aching to touch Jodi’s naughty parts. LaViolette is a kooky liberal lesbian who believes that even Snow White is a battered woman.
Defense Expert’s False Claims
There were no experts who claimed or tried to demonstrate that Jodi acted in self-defense or that it was a sudden heat-of-passion homicide. The experts presented merely provided evidence and testimony which demonstrated that it was a possibility, and that’s all they needed to do.
Gas Can Evidence Proves Premeditation
The amount of gas purchased at Tesoro was 25 + gallons. The capacity of 2 gas cans and the Ford Escort gas tank is 25 + gallons. It was not proven that Jodi had 3 gas cans at Tesoro, nor was it proven that she did not return the third gas can to Wal-Mart. It was merely proven that a clerk, who testified that a SKU number is spelled S-K-E-W, did not find a record of return in the places that she searched.
Talk about skewed testimony! The defense had no opportunity to adequately investigate and respond to this claim.
Back Stabbing and George Barwood
A note about George Barwood.
George is a UK resident. He has painstakingly compiled many facts and ideas about the Jodi Arias case on a Wikispace. George is active in helping advocating for the accused in wrongful conviction cases and he has worked on issues such as reducing domestic violence and abolition of the death penalty.
George is attacked as “not an expert” and not from the United States and therefore not qualified to give his opinion. This is the typical Martinez tactic of attacking the source rather than the information. Since George Barwood, as posters say, is not an expert, then you don’t need to be an expert to refute his ideas. So how about attacking his ideas and opinions with some of your own, instead of trying to cop out and attack him personally? Hmmmm?
The questions surrounding the tight pattern of wounds on Travis’ back have been contemplated by many people with the autopsy photos and a sense of reasoning. It is not only George Barwood’s theory, but agreement among many people, including, believe it or not, Juan Martinez.
Many people on the defense side of this trial have vastly differing beliefs about what the verdicts should be as well as having vastly different theories. This includes ideas from George Barwood, a meticulous collector of facts, and two articles by Richard Speights, on how the knife attack can be defensive in nature and a theory about the gun being first. Various others with varying degrees of experience and common sense, have also come to similar conclusions.
It was Juan Martinez himself, demonstrating using the court reporter as victim, who showed that a person can be stabbed from a variety of angles and positions. Juan used both sides of the same argument to make his points many times during the trial.
If you stabbed a person in the back from in front, the sharp edge could still be facing downward depending on how you grasped the knife. Most of the stab wounds are diagonal. How can a stab wound to the back be an inch or more deep when they were all stopped by the ribs and spine? – Only due to the decomposition / bloating of the body.
Use of Felony Murder Charge
If the prosecution was so positive it was a premeditated murder and only Jodi was involved, then there’s no need for the 1st degree felony murder charge. You stated that under felony murder if a fight breaks out and a person is killed, if it’s the victim’s house, it’s first degree felony murder and if it’s at the perpetrator’s home, it’s not.
This is what you said. Think about it. That’s ludicrous.
This is why felony murder and domestic violence don’t mix. The added charge of felony murder means that the prosecution does not believe the gun was last (Gun first is the only reasonable explanation for felony murder). The felony murder charge can also mean that the prosecution doesn’t believe that only Arias was involved in the crime (felony murder charges are often used when accomplices are involved) and/or that this was a pre-mediated murder (felony murder charges are used when the murder is not pre-meditated).
In any case, this doesn’t bode well for a fair trial, because the jury believed all of these ideas.
This is just an advanced version of Martinez’ trick questions akin to “Have you stopped beating your wife yet?”. A good example of this is “Did you cry when you were stabbing him?”. How clever! Both trails of yes and no choices mean you beat your wife, you stabbed him and you are going to the execution chamber.
Sex Evidence Used for Distraction
The sex evidence was not used for distraction or to win over a horny juror. The sex evidence was crucial in showing Travis’ carefully hidden character and why it was possible that he suddenly could fly into a severe and violent rage. This was a hidden relationship with hidden activities, hidden conflicts, and alleged hidden violence. Without that sex evidence, no jury could ever believe what Jodi was saying about Travis, an ordained elder in the LDS Church. The sex evidence was not aimed at “trashing Travis”
(Please see An Open Letter to Wendy Murphy)
“Humiliation / Battery” of Victim’s Family
Perhaps this is just your perception because of your viewpoint. There is no real evidence that Jodi lied under oath about Travis. There is no basis to claim that she has done anything at the trial or publicly during the trial or since that “batters” or “humiliates” the Alexander family. This is begging for sympathy for Travis, which by the way we ALL have, but not when evaluating the facts.
As a matter of fact, Jodi Arias sided with the prosecution against her own attorney in arguing to clear the court for the playing of the sex tape.
If you insist that your allegations of “humiliation and battery” are true, please supply specific examples. Travis’ lifestyle and behavior were objectively proven, independently of Jodi’s testimony, to be abusive and demeaning throughout the relationship. In fact, he was abusive to Lisa Daidone and Mimi as well. Deanna was all for living with Napoleon, not so much with Travis.
Oh Holy Night
Both Lisa LaSalle and JustDaTruth are correct. Sheriff Joe has not done anything negative towards Jodi Arias, in fact he has done some good things for her (allowing her interviews, supplying her with excellent protection during the trial, allowing her participation in a talent contest at Christmas time). Regardless of how anyone feels about the other policies of Sheriff Joe, he has been generally good to Jodi Arias.
Lisa LaSalle’s paragraph about Oh Holy Night (the song Jodi sang in Estrella Jail to win the Christmas talent contest) wasn’t about Sheriff Joe, it was about how so-called “haters” love to hate Jodi and love to wish her cruelties and suffering even at Christmas time.
This hating of a complete stranger continues, even though Jodi Arias is in custody and will face life in prison or execution for her acts.
…….As if somehow this is not enough.
Relax. Let justice run its course. Listen to both sides of the story, follow the 2nd penalty phase and enjoy some milk and cookies!