Lies and Juanipulation: The Mirror Crack’d (Jan 12, 2014)

Lies and Juanipulation:

The Mirror Crack’d

The mirror and dual sinks in Travis Alexander's master bathroom
The mirror and dual sinks in Travis Alexander’s master bathroom

Fact Based Reporting by

Amanda Chen and Rob Roman

His broad clear brow in sunlight glow’d;

On burnish’d hooves his war-horse trode;
From underneath his helmet flow’d
His coal-black curls as on he rode,
As he rode down to Camelot.

Juan Night witness Stand
Juan Knight Stand

From the bank and from the river
He flash’d into the crystal mirror,
“Tirra lirra,” by the river
Sang Sir Lancelot.

mirror sm

She left the web, she left the loom,
She made three paces thro’ the room,
She saw the water-lily bloom,
She saw the helmet and the plume:
She look’d down to Camelot.

369245-jodi-arias sm

Out flew the web and floated wide;
The mirror crack’d from side to side;
“The curse is come upon me,” cried
The Lady of Shalott.

jodi vamped sm

From The Lady of Shalott, by Alfred Lord Tennyson

“This individual, the defendant, Jodi Ann Arias, killed Travis Alexander. And even after stabbing him over and over again, and even after slashing his throat from ear to ear, and then even after taking a gun and shooting him in the face, she will not let him rest in peace.

But now instead of a gun, instead of a knife, she uses lies” – Juan Martinez

It’s important to remember that the prosecution has the burden of proof. It’s not a popularity contest and it’s not about which side has a better story. It’s about a search for the truth. We review Mr. Martinez’ efforts towards a search for the truth in his final argument.

“After all the lies you’ve told, why should we believe you now?” – Alternate Juror #17, Tara Kelley,  questions Jodi Arias during the guilt phase of the trial.

white lie 1

White Lie

This is a “white lie”. Typically a white lie is a harmless lie that is often done to be polite. Here it is a lie that plays into Martinez’ themes and theories, but it’s immaterial to the murder charge. These white lies are far from harmless.

fish story 1fish 2 lt


This is an exaggeration. It’s a fish story where a mountain is made out of a mole hill.

misrep 3


This is a misrepresentation. It’s a deliberate effort to skew a fact to align it with other facts in the case.

mirror 4


This is a mirror. It’s a manipulation of the jury. Juan Martinez is projecting his own or other’s feelings, motives and behaviors onto the defendant.

whopper 5


This is a Whopper. It’s an obvious untruth in light of the facts. It’s deceitful and a breach of integrity


misrep 3The Ninja Intruder Story

For Juan, Jodi’s intruder story illustrates how well she can lie and manipulate and how she can turn this situation into one where she’s the victim who then plays the hero. On the surface, this appears correct, but a deeper look reveals a far more salient truth.

Juan tells the jury that Jodi said “I wish I stayed and fought more”, showing how she plays the hero. Juan shows the jury how Jodi manipulates the story to make her look better. He tells them “Her lying does not stop. She lied to the jury, she lied to the medical professionals, the police, and the media”. “She lied and made herself look like a person who could not do it (murder Travis).”

Juan likes to dwell on the interrogation videos as evidence in the murder trial, yet Arias has admitted that she lied, and explained why she did it. The main thing about the intruder story is there is no way Arias could have thought that her story would be believed by anybody. It’s a really bad lie. She failed to manipulate Detective Flores and no one could possibly believe her story, including Jodi herself.

She claimed it was merely a stalling tactic, and there is no reason to believe otherwise. She’s still counting on the law of attraction to fix everything at that point. That’s what you see in her early interviews. So there are two remaining hypotheses. One is that Jodi is mentally ill (which has been proven), and the other is that she had a diminished capacity, was in an altered state of mind, and her self-defense story is true. Both of these remaining hypotheses are in favor of the defense.

misrep 3Jodi Has “Violent Tendencies”

Juan claims that Jodi had violent tendencies because she wrote that in an e-mail to Travis.

Note to Juan Martinez: Writing in an e-mail that you once became violent is not displaying “violent tendencies”, it is exactly the opposite. Juan highlighted an e-mail Arias wrote to Travis Alexander where she admits to having broken a door and a window at some vague time in the past.

Juan and his Psychologist witness both seized on this single report of violence in 15 years of journal entries and 8,000 communications as proof of both Borderline Personality Disorder and 1st Degree Murder.

Knowing that she has had violent episodes in the past (probably in her high school days), and acknowledging them is great therapy. It’s something known as telling the truth. It shows she has insight into her feelings and behaviors, she’s trying to improve them, and she’s acting on her feelings in a socially appropriate way by writing them down. If only Travis Alexander, or Juan Martinez, for that matter, had that kind of insight and honesty about their inappropriate behaviors.

white lie 1Travis Did Not Give Jodi the Underwear

There’s some attention given by Martinez about there being no mention in that same e-mail of the chocolates, T-shirt and underwear that say “Travis Alexander’s” and “Travis’”, and the boys Spiderman underwear Travis was supposed to have given Jodi for Valentine’s Day 2007. We do know for a fact that Travis wanted to dress up as a park ranger, for example, and he wanted Jodi to dress up in a schoolgirl outfit.

Now, maybe Travis gave her these things and maybe he didn’t. Maybe Jodi bought those things for herself and maybe she didn’t. Maybe they both thought the Spiderman underwear was sexy and maybe they didn’t.

underwear ltHow are Juan Martinez’ accusations any different than those he condemns Jodi Arias for making? Jodi Arias and Travis did not exchange e-mails or text messages about the Valentine’s gifts. They still might have talked personally or called each other. Nothing was proven one way or the other. Juan Martinez does not get to say that Jodi Arias and her entire defense are liars, so therefore his baseless accusations are true, does he?

Obviously, Travis became very upset by something Jodi allegedly did or was going to do by May 26, 2008. But there is nothing about that in their communications. This, according to Juan, must not have happened either. They must have talked over the phone, or communicated some other way. So why doesn’t this apply to Valentine’s Day? Just because there is no mention of gifts by text message or e-mail doesn’t mean there were no communications about the Valentine’s gifts.

mirror 4Jodi Attacked Travis’ Reputation

How do you apply a justifiable homicide defense without saying anything negative about the victim?

Travis has left us his reputation independently of what Arias said. But that sex tape really helps us to see that Arias was telling the truth about Travis. In just 45 minutes, he mentions orgasms and a 12 year-old girl in the same sentence, and talks about taking the virginity of a little girl, reveals his overbearing personality, his love for talking about himself, and his callous use of Arias solely for sexual gratification.

At least one former friend has finally come forward and talked about the Travis he really remembers as opposed to the sympathetic denial of anything bad Travis has done because of his awful death.

misrep 3Jodi Lied about Travis’ Sexual Interest in Children (that he displayed on the sex tape)

The pedophilia claims do not help her case in any way, except one. It’s a very dangerous claim to make in a death penalty case. The jurors will retaliate if they don’t believe you.

As a juror, even if the victim was a convicted pedophile, it would make zero difference to me as far as my sympathy for the victim or the guilt or innocence of the defendant. The only reason Arias brought up the pedophilia claim is to show what happened in January 2008, and why the abusive relationship may have quickly escalated into physical violence.

If Travis Alexander had a dark secret, he may well have confided in Jodi Arias. Her story about catching him in the bedroom with pictures of young boys also illustrates Travis’ open-door policy. She typically let herself in and she went right up the stairs and into his room.

Talking about a “twelve year-old having her first orgasm” and “corking the pot of a little girl” is just role playing and fantasy talk, says Juan Martinez, the apologist.

Pedophilia “is termed pedophilic disorder in the DSM-5 (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders), and the manual defines it as a paraphilia in which adults or adolescents 16 years of age or older have intense and recurrent sexual urges towards and fantasies about prepubescent children that they have either acted on or which cause them distress or  interpersonal difficulty.”

Travis Alexander just happened to casually and spontaneously  mention these things in the only sex conversation that happened to be recorded. Draw your own conclusions.

misrep 3Nothing Noteworthy To Report

The Law of Attraction + my lies +  my word + Alyce LaViolette = It did happen. – Juan Martinez (paraphrase)

Dr. DeMarte, when questioned by Juan Martinez , told the jury that she would take this entry in Jodi’s diary at face value. What he didn’t ask her is if she would take a client’s claim of domestic violence on the same day at face value.

Go ask Alyce, I think she'll know.
Go ask Alyce, I think she’ll know.

Martinez wants to say that nothing bad happened between Jodi and Travis, like Alexander kicking her in the ribs, slapping her, or choking her into unconsciousness, if it’s not written down in Jodi’s journal.

Jodi did not write negative things about Travis in her journal, and besides a few carefully worded entries, we saw at the trial that there were none. We do know that Travis and Jodi had a large number of violent arguments and caustic break-ups, and that Travis was cheating on Jodi. Entries about these incidents are rarely found in her journals. These incidents must not have happened as well.

About the “three tender kisses”, when does Travis ever get romantic with Arias? When he’s leaving her or when he’s in trouble with her. So yes, the three soft kisses in April, 2008 could have been a sweet goodbye like Juan says, or they could have been an apology for physical violence like Jodi and Alyce LaViolette claim.

Remember, the defense only has to show that it’s possible. The prosecution must prove their case to the exclusion of any other possibility. This may also explain why Travis could not break it off for good with Jodi in January, like he told Dan Freeman he was planning on doing, because he felt too badly about what he had done.

Are there any other entries in 15 years of journals where Jodi writes that there was “nothing noteworthy to report”? That is something we would need to know. We didn’t see other entries like this. Martinez proved nothing here, and maybe it’s time for Juan to actually prove something, because this is a Capital murder case.

white lie 1Jodi Was Not Physically Abused Because She Didn’t Call 911

Juan’s big contention that Jodi would have called the police on Travis just isn’t realistic. She wasn’t going to do that and it has nothing to do with the 911 call with Bobby Juarez. She was remaining loyal to Travis and she did so even after his death.

The idea that if there is no documentation, no photos, no journal entry, and no police report, then there was no physical violence is insulting. This is the reason that Jodi is working now on helping to get the message out that if you are physically abused, you should tell someone, document it and call the police.

fish 2Jodi Told Darryl Brewer She Was Going to Mesa

Juan seizes on any minor inconsistency he can find, and then magnifies it into a major piece of evidence. Here is a big lie from Martinez: After Darryl Brewer testified in court that Jodi never told him she was going to Mesa, here is Martinez lying to the jury in closing arguments, and telling them that she did tell Darryl Brewer that she was going to Mesa, because it was in his notes.

Jodi, Jack, and Darryl enjoy a birthday party together
Jodi, Jack, and Darryl enjoy a birthday party together

Here is what really happened. Darryl, at the time he was questioned, knew that Jodi had gone to Mesa and killed Travis. What he was saying at the questioning incorporated what he knew then, not what he knew in June, 2008.

Juan jumped on this and tried to use it as proof of premeditation. Even after the witness said under oath that Jodi did not tell him she was going to Mesa, he still uses it in his closing argument.

This is the prosecutor who claims that even an exaggeration, a failure to tell the complete truth to everyone you  know, or even a little white lie, is a shocking breach of trust.

fish 2Jodi Lied Because She Didn’t Use Priceline

“The only reason Jodi Arias went to Redding airport was to kill Travis Alexander.” – Juan Martinez

How does Martinez know this? Because, he says, Jodi lied about Priceline. This is a fact from Juan, so we better be sure. This happened in 2008 and the trial was 4 ½ years later. Jodi did make a purchase for air tickets on Priceline a few weeks later.

Jodi did use her records to refresh her memory and she did state she used Priceline to scout locations and prices. At no time does she say she purchased the rental through Priceline. If she did intend to say that, she could have been mistaken. After all, Jodi was on the stand all day for 18 days.

Here’s the thing: IF Jodi planned on killing Alexander, and the trip to Utah was only for purposes of an alibi, then the California, Nevada, Utah part of her trip would need to be very visible. Therefore, there is no reason whatever to hide a car rental. There’s better deals at the airport, whether you use Priceline or not.

fish 2Jodi Is Guilty Because She Brought the CD’s

Juan likes to make a lot out of the fact that Jodi brought the CD’s from her vacations with Travis.  This tells Juan she knew she was going to see Travis. Jodi did say it was a possibility and she planned too many things for the amount of time she had.

These CD’s were never entered into evidence and we don’t know if they just have the trip photos on them or if they have all kinds of pictures on them. Many people, including myself, have CD’s and DVD’s in their laptop carrying case. They go with us wherever we bring our laptop.

There was no evidence to suggest that Jodi brought those CD’s because she knew she was going to murder Travis Alexander. It was merely an unsupported allegation presented to the jury with nothing to back it up. Think how stupid this idea is. I want to murder you, but before that, let’s reminisce about our lovely vacations together and let me give you those photos I promised you.

white lie 1Jodi Violated the Law (of attraction)

Here, Juan Martinez is trying to revive the blown theory that Jodi dyed her brown hair brown as part of some kind of plot rather than doing it to improve her appearance for Ryan Burns. This is the real law of attraction: Improve your appearance to attract a new boyfriend.

fish 2Jodi Is Lying Because Other People Misunderstood Her

As far as the knife story with the apple and the rope and whether her ankles or wrists were tied, this doesn’t mean anything. There is no specific statement by Jodi which says the knife was for cutting an apple or her ankles were bound. These came from Alyce LaViolette’s notes.

Jodi Arias has a habit of talking about a subject generally instead of a specific incident. So when she spoke to Detective Flores at the interrogation about her fingers, she talked about other times she cut or hurt her fingers besides on June 4th. When she was asked about Travis shaving, she talked about other days that she saw Travis shave, besides June 4th. This is one source of inconsistencies Juan Martinez likes to seize upon.

This can easily be attributed to a misunderstanding or error of the person documenting the story.  LaViolette specifically stated that she was hired to look into the question of whether there was domestic violence in the relationship and she was specifically not hired to be a detective or look into any of the events of June 4th.

About the sleigh bed, there is nothing about the bed which means you cannot have a rope. The rope could be behind the head board or looped around the head board. This can also explains why the rope was more than 20 feet long.

misrep 3Jodi Is Lying Because She “Staged the Scene”

Juan Martinez told the jury that if Jodi were in an altered state of mind, she would have not taken off her socks and she would have left bloody footprints all the way out of the house. Martinez also stated that in an altered state of mind, Jodi would have left bloody footprints near the bed, when she went to retrieve the rope. Martinez offered no scientific evidence to substantiate his claims other than his own statements and a general assessment by Dr. DeMarte..

Sometime before the shower and photos incident, the bed sheets were removed and thrown in the wash by either Travis or Jodi. At that time, the rope could have been taken downstairs. Self-preservation is automatic and it extends to removing evidence. Juan’s repeated contention that Jodi would have to leave bloody footprints through the house or to get the rope are nonsense.

whopper 5Jodi Lied about the Gun Being First Because Martinez Lied First About the Gun Being Last

There is no forensic evidence saying the gun was last. Every bit of logic and evidence, forensic and otherwise, suggests the gun was first, except for the photo of the bullet casing on top of a 2 inch spot of blood at the edge of the floor and the highly questionable testimony of Dr. Horn.

white lie 1Jodi Lied Because the Shell Casing Defied the Laws of Physics

bullet-casing-grey-thingarticle-2258479-16CAC976000005DC-704_634x358We know there was a large amount of water on the floor. We know there was a cleanup and a lot of hectic movement in the bathroom after the killing. We know the roommate went into the bathroom and found the body and the police went in after that. We know there is an unexplained foot print in blood near the closet door and things were moved around.

It would be far more likely that the shell casing was not in it’s original position than that it remained exactly where it landed after the gun was fired on June 4th, 2008.

whopper 5Jodi Is Guilty Because She Was Not Random and She Was Goal Directed

Juan Martinez points out that someone in an altered state of mind would behave randomly, not “striking to kill”, but stabbing someone all over, like a blind robot. Where is the science for this? That’s not the experience of documented homicides in an altered state of mind.

The blood on the carpet appears more like Arias wiping her feet than stomping and hovering over him. This says nothing about what happened. Arias also left the camera in the washing machine. This is all chaotic activity. Here, Juan is saying that Jodi is both goal directed and chaotic. But you can’t have it both ways, can you, Juan?

Juan states that in an altered state, there would be knife wounds all over instead of a strike to kill. There were knife wounds all over and the idea that someone in an altered state of mind cannot have directed behavior such as aimed stabs and some clean up is a fallacy. There is no evidence for that.

Juan’s contention seems to be that if this happened the way Arias says it did, then Travis would have stab wounds randomly all over his body. He would not have a slit throat, he would have been found at the end of the hallway. There would be bloody footprints going out the bedroom and down the stairs. There would be bloody footprints around the bed as Arias retrieved the rope. There would have been no cleanup and all the incriminating evidence would be left behind.

Scott Falater - Ex-Mormon High Councilor and mild-mannered Engineer for Motorola
Scott Falater – Ex-Mormon High Councilor and mild-mannered Engineer for Motorola

This is the same argument he used in the Falater case. But there is no evidence, facts or testimony and no serious source which can prove that this is what would have happened if a killing took place by a person with an altered state of mind.

“It takes time and takes thinking to chase and kill. In front of the sink, in the mirror, Travis can see ‘that thing’ deliver the strikes to his back.” – Juan Martinez

That Alexander can see Arias coming at him with the knife in the mirror is totally unsupported speculation. There is nothing to support the idea that Travis was stabbed in the shower or in the back at the sink. A person under attack would not support themselves on their severely wounded left hand as Martinez claims. A person under a knife attack would not be able to  stand at the sink for that length of time.

Under a knife attack, which way would You go?
Under a knife attack, which way would You go?

A hand cut as severely as Alexander’s left hand would have left much more blood than that at the sink. If Alexander were stabbed in the shower, he wouldn’t have taken a left and headed for the sink, trapping himself in the bathroom. He would have gone right and out the closet door or down the hallway immediately. He wouldn’t have gone to the sink. The prosecutor’s theory makes no logical, scientific, common, or intuitive sense at all.

A “strike to kill” has no bearing on state of mind. This is not blind man’s bluff or a blindfolded girl striking at a piñata

mirror 4Jodi “lied in this sacrosanct place of finding the truth” – Juan Martinez

Here is a crystal clear instance of projection by a dangerous sociopath and Maricopa County’s “Prosecutor of the Year”.

Like the Falater case, the Grant case, the Carr case, the Lynch case, The Morris case, the Miller case, the Towery case and the Chrisman case, Juan has once again badgered witnesses, misrepresented facts, made exaggerations, given incomplete or distorted facts, told white lies, told regular and ornate lies, and presented mere speculation as fact.

123 lies

The Falater Case:

Juan suggested no less than six competing motives for why Mormon high Councilor Scott Falater killed his wife. None of the six motives were supported by any facts, testimony, or evidence. Juan badgered and ridiculed defense experts, yelled at a priest, and intimidated child witnesses.

Martinez produced a highly biased expert witness who was chosen for his rapport and communication skills rather than for his knowledge on the subject. Martinez misled the jury by suggesting, that people in an altered state of mind cannot engage in goal directed behavior and do not clean up or remove evidence . There was only one college graduate on the jury.

2 lies

The Grant Case:

Juan withheld evidence from the defense, objected over 50 times during the defense opening statements (something that is just not done), pressured the judge to not allow evidence into trial, wouldn’t let defense witnesses fully answer questions, and then objected constantly when they were being questioned by the defense.

Juan accused defense witnesses of lying but offered no supporting evidence. Juan intimidated defense witnesses by claiming they had violated the law in some way. Juan’s theory of the crime was fashioned out of whole cloth.

The jury did not believe his theory of the crime, and Doug Grant was found guilty of manslaughter instead of 1st degree murder.

mirror 4The Carr Case:

Juan withheld evidence, was admonished by the judge for an offense punishable by jail time, and refused to admit wrong doing. He was provided with a top attorney by the County. He blamed the defense for his actions, was forced to write a letter of apology, and lost the case.

2 lies

The Lynch Case:

Juan told the jury there were four death penalty aggravators when in fact there were only two, forcing a retrial.

misrep 3

The Morris Case:

Juan unsealed an evidence bag containing the jacket of a victim who had been buried near Morris’ trailer and invited jurors to take a good whiff. Juan lied to the jury by trying to convince them that Morris had sex with his dead victims because the dead bodies smelled badly.

white lie 1

The Miller Case:

Juan is still angry at Judge Bartlett for not doing something that no judge has ever done: Charging Miller with the cruelty aggravator for execution style shootings. He argued with the Judge even though Miller already had four other death penalty aggravators (prior violent crimes, pecuniary gain, multiple murders, and the murder of a child).

Juan never forgot this, even though Judge Bartlett was protecting him from being over-zealous. To this day, Juan declares that Judge Bartlett, who has presided over numerous death penalty convictions, is soft on crime and the death penalty. He is continuing to try to get Judge Bartlett thrown off the pending Redondo case in favor of a “hanging judge” .

misrep 3

The Towery case:

Juan suggested to the commutation board that Robert Towery injected his victims with battery acid and his claims of severe childhood abuse had no foundation – two obvious and and glaring lies.

white mirror

The Chrisman case:

Juan told jurors that Officer Chrisman was lying because gun powder residue was not found on the bicycle, proving that the decedent, Danny Rodriguez, did not threaten him with the bicycle before Chrisman fired his weapon. In fact, no gunpowder tests were ever performed on the bicycle. How is this not a lie?

Juan did not get the 2nd degree murder conviction he wanted, but he blamed that on the police and he told the jury this was because the police must have somehow hidden his evidence and obstructed justice. Juan, as usual, offered no facts, testimony or evidence in support of this allegation, other than the allegation itself.

4 liesmirror 4

The Arias case:

Juan purposely dropped the camera on the floor, then denied any wrongdoing.  Juan invited Alyce LaViolette, a completely non-violent therapist working with the victims and perpetrators of violent domestic crimes, to spar with him.  Juan badgered defense witnesses, threatened at least two of them with criminal prosecution if they testified, and made baseless accusations. Juan personally attacked the defense attorneys on such things as their knowledge of the law, their appearance, and whether or not he would kill himself if married to one of them.

Juan once again withheld evidence until shortly before the scheduled start of the trial and there is reason to believe he suborned perjury in the testimony of the medical examiner. Juan bent the law and logic to the breaking point by insisting that if it is not a 1st degree premeditated murder, then it’s a 1st degree felony murder because Arias entered or stayed in the home with the intention of committing 1st degree premeditated murder.

This carefully planned and concealed surprise intimidation of defense witness Lisa Andrews- Daidone, which also needlessly shocked and emotionally traumatized members of the Alexander family, is typical of Martinez’ courtroom decorum in a capital murder trial:

(The video itself contains more lies about Arias’ reaction to the photo. She was looking at the judge, not at the video screens.)

Juan Martinez sees everything in black and white. In a rare case where things are not as they appear, Juan insists on seeing things only as they appear on the surface. Juan is the mirror in this case, projecting his own flaws and inner demons onto Jodi Arias.

Juan Martinez is a certified liar.

juan crackd newJuan Martinez is a sociopath per DSM – 5 Anti Social Personality Disorder with the following characteristics:

  • Superficial charm and good intelligence
  • Untruthfulness and insincerity
  • Lack of remorse and shame
  • Poor judgement and failure to learn by experience
  • Specific loss of insight
  • Pathological egocentricity and incapacity for love

Juan projects the behaviors of a typical hardened criminal or psychopath onto Jodi Arias. She is proven to be neither of these. His closing arguments, on the shallow surface, make sense and are logical, but a closer, deeper look, coupled with a history of Juan’s behavior in other cases, shows that once again, Juan told a pack of lies, and the mirror crack’d from side to side.

All comments are appreciated and opposing views are welcome!

All Rights Reserved 








Share this:


293 thoughts on “Lies and Juanipulation: The Mirror Crack’d (Jan 12, 2014)”

  1. “Juan is a certified liar.” Yes, this is a fact. His conviction of Jodi Arias for 1st degree murder should feel hollow to anyone who cares about true justice. But Juan doesn’t care how he got the “win”. He is indeed a sociopath, and many like him exist in the criminal justice “system”. For those who applaud him, without recognizing this, maybe one day they or their loved one will run across similar, and remember what they’ve read here, or seen on my blog, and others.

    Though I may not agree with everything, as I know you guys don’t agree with everything I write, I totally respect yet another thoughtful, provocative, well-researched and sincere article from “Spotlight on Law”!

    1. I’m happy you do. Actually, you have shed a lot of light on aspects of the case we never even considered, so what you do is very valuable to a search for truth. We both know we didn’t get the truth, and we all want to blow the lid off of Juan and Maricopa County in the front of the whole world. Good Luck to us!

      1. You didn’t get the truth? Sorry, you have only one brain cell. You must be American. She ADMITTED to butchering him (after many lies) and instead of calling 911 she waited 4 hours and then sent him a voice mail (knowing he was dead) inviting him to see a Shakespeare play, (setting alibi). YOu people have NO critical thinking skills and are a disgrace to anyone with half a brain., You Jodi nuts are fun to read though, Total imbeciles LOL

      2. What country are you from? Amanda is from China and she doesn’t agree with you. She admitted to killing him, yes. How does that shed any light on whether it’s murder or self-defense?

        Don’t hit and run homicide perps do the dame thing? Kill someone and that pretend it never happened?

        That would make her one in about 300,000,000 who could do such an act without being psychotic or a hardened criminal. What she did after the killing is not relevant as in either case, she would do the same thing – avoid the reality.

      3. FYI, she was found guilty of premeditated murder. that is your system. All that will happen now is decide if she gets LWOP or the death penalty. So you are wasting your time,Bozo.

      4. I don’t think so. I believe they have to do it all over again. Because people cannot do what they did in this trial. Might take a little time.

    2. You didn’t get the truth? Sorry, you have only one brain cell. You must be American. She ADMITTED to butchering him (after many lies) and instead of calling 911 she waited 4 hours and then sent him a voice mail (knowing he was dead) inviting him to see a Shakespeare play, (setting alibi). YOu people have NO critical thinking skills and are a disgrace to anyone with half a brain., You Jodi nuts are fun to read though, Total imbeciles LOL

      1. Thank you for that fascinating analysis of this case and the bonus neurological assessment of the author’s brain cell count, Mr. Yeah Blow Me!
        Nothing new about what you say, and certainly no critical thinking going on in your head, irrespective of your nationality.

    3. Good point Sandra,
      Noel Levy, who withheld the fine record of detective Saldate, thereby costing Debra Milke over two decades of life, also faces many misconduct allegations. He has had two other death death row exonerations: David O. Hyde and Ray Krone. Furthermore, he threatened defense witnesses for Milke:
      Her sister Sandy was threatened with imprisonment if she did not agree to testify against Debra. So relentless was Noel Levy that Sandy who was pregnant at the time was forced to undergo induced labor to have her baby early, to accommodate Noel Levy’s time frame.
      Debra’s mother, who resides in Switzerland, received a frantic call from her daughter Sandy with the message, “Don’t come here for the trial; they will put you in jail if you don’t testify against Debbie.”
      This kinda reminds me of the Arias case and why her mitigation witness stand was so empty and why expert witnesses are too scared to back for the second phase . Maybe it’s an Arizona thing.
      But wait, we can go past Arizona to Missouri and more recently look at Mr. Kevin Krane, now a judge, and ask Ryan Ferguson’s father what he thinks of this former prosecutor’s work, another shining example of grotesque misconduct, rewarded by accolades and promotions.
      And many more where that came from

    4. Don’t worry, Sandra, she will be found NOT GUILTY in re trial. And you are right, the Alexanders and the Mormon church were the ones who committed the killing, setting up Jodi as the patsy.

    5. As per usual, Arias Supporters are huge on condemning the prosecutor but omit the far bigger issues that came up in this case. The defense yes only has to present a ‘possibility’ but that doesn’t mean the jury must just blindly accept her ‘possibility’ when looked at in context of all the evidence. Her story was not reasonable and that’s why she was convicted. And please, don’t simply respond by saying I allowed the media or the prosecutor to brainwash me. What I did was watch the trial. In it’s often tedious monotony. Something btw I understand something even Arias’ most ardent supporters claim NOT to have done.
      Here are the most important issues I believe that prevents one from accepting Arias’ ‘possibility’ as reasonable.
      1. It came out at trial that Arias told her first psychologist Dr Cheryl Karp- that Travis physically abused her far far more often than what she in the end testified to and told Samuels, LaV and DeMarte. This ws testified to by DeMarte when she discussed reviewing Karp’s report and the discrepancies of stories and ultimate justifications of PTSD by Samuels and Karp. (Karp dx’d her with PTSD as a result of all the physical abuse by Travis while Samuels justified the PTSD as a result of her KILLING Travis). This is very important in terms of evaluating the sincerity of Arias’ claims Travis abused her.
      Arias said on the stand there were only TWO reasons she lied before in relation to this case: 1. She wanted to not get caught and 2. She wanted to protect her and Travis’ reputations.
      If she was telling the truth on the stand, then she clearly lied to Karp becs on stand she clearly said Travis only 4 times physically abused her.
      Exaggerating excessive physical abuse doesn’t fall under either becs one wouldn’t exaggerate more abuse to protect someone’s reputation. It goes to the idea that Arias was just lying about the abuse period.

      2. Arias claims that the only person who witnessed the physical abuse was Matt McCartney. ‘He saw bruises all over me’. The problem with that is Alyce LaViolette testified Matt McCartney in an early interview with her attorneys- said he never had any proof Travis physically abused Arias. No proof= never saw bruises=Arias lied on the stand. And..again.

      It also explains why the one witness she had- wasn’t subpoenaed to testify on her behalf.

      It also explains why she was worried abt a particular interview and attempted to send coded messages to try and change a witnesses testimony.

      It all goes to Jodi Arias’ entire defense was a lie. She took angry texts and sex talk fantasy out of proportion to weave a story in an attempt to make the jury despise her victim.

      Bottom line- Arias supporters never address these two issues.

      1. First of all, I hope no one would believe what the media tells them and I don’t think Juan Martinez brainwashed anyone. He genuinely believes she’s guilty and overall he did a very good job, but he went too far.

        He did a great job of proving a killing and that Arias was the killer, something we all knew on the day of opening statements. What he didn’t do so good was proving a murder.

        With all the evidence at hand, why is Martinez going into all this baloney from the past and using the slightest thing he can find in someone’s notes and blowing it way out of proportion?

        I didn’t think the trial was either tedious or monotonous, barring all the sidebars, I found it fascinating. I know that many people who think the verdict was wrong have watched the entire trial many times. I submit that her story is very reasonable.

        1) We didn’t see Cheryl Karp take the stand. We only know one thing: That Dr. Karp was told of more than 4 incidents of abuse. “Significantly more” according to Dr. DeMarte, which only means 5 or more, because “significantly” means something to a psychologist, as I am well aware, having studied psychology. But let’s say it was 20 incidents, like Martinez intimated.

        The other incidents, and we do not know what they are or their severity, may have had no corroboration at all, something not unusual in domestic violence. This doesn’t mean they never happened, only that there is no proof or documentation to allege them in court. But there is no proof or documentation for the other 4 incidents, you will say. My contention is that there was proof of the 4 incidents at the start of the trial, but the proof never made it into trial, for various reasons.

        2) One of these reasons is Matt McCartney. Arias stated that Matt asked her not to be involved in the trial, and she complied. Why is that so hard to believe? The coded message never made it out of the jail, so McCartney would have been entirely unaware of it. We do not know in what way his testimony contradicted hers, and you are only guessing.

        Juan Martinez took a few tidbits from notes and made them into something big. But we cannot know what it means or how important it is. Maybe we will find out in the 2nd penalty phase, as I imagine Karp will be called to testify.

        You have to remember the way she killed him? If there was no severe mental, sexual or physical abuse, then what possible motive do you suppose a woman would have for doing such a thing? Jealousy? Cancun?

        Arias stated she wanted to not make public the details of her relationship with Alexander. Why be so quick to disbelieve her. Like Nurmi said, she would have started damaging Travis years earlier or even the day she was caught, if she thought it would help her case.

        Then there’s the supposition you have that making Travis into a pedophile and an abuser will help her case. They wouldn’t help her with me if I were a juror, not at all. There’s no question Alexander treated her in a terrible way. It’s in the objective evidence and testimony. The question is how far did it go? There’s plenty of reason to believe it went way too far.

        I don’t believe there was an effort to make the jury despise the victim. What good would that really do, and how would that help her? It’s all about the possibility that Alexander, who we already know can get violently angry in an instant, got angry at Jodi Arias and jumped out of that shower and came after her. There’s a lot of reasons to believe that’s very possible based on the objective evidence.

        Back to Matt McCartney, what if McCartney DID see bruises on Arias the last time he saw her before June 4th? What if he was questioned about that and he lied about it to protect his friend? In other words, he didn’t want to supply a motive for why she would murder him. What if then, when she needed his testimony about the abuse, he was already on record saying he didn’t see any. That’s what I think happened.

        But we’re both just guessing, and we shouldn’t be guessing in a capital murder trial.

        He could have been subpoenaed by either side. There is too much dependence by the prosecution on statements that are not corroborated and witnesses who never testified. We discussed this in the Mirror, the Juanderful, and the Crystal Blue articles.

        I’m happy to address all issues, but I find that prosecution supporters will not address the scores of serious issues we have found to be factually relevant.

        I like the way you think, and it’s an interesting analysis, one that I haven’t seen before. Good job!

      2. I think that was a rational comment Puzzled.
        In view of the fact that the major issue, the only issue, in the trial was premeditation why do you think she planned to kill Travis in his house (which was occupied by numerous people), in broad daylight, after a night of sex?

    1. So, you are saying that most Americans are wrong about this case? We agree.

      Sandra Webber can express herself very well, which is more than I can say for you, regardless of your opinion on this particular matter.

      1. I think we are people who believe in the constitution. The right to free speech and the right to a fair trial. I have traveled all over the world. Worked my whole life. I wouldn’t even know how or where to get food stamps.

        You on the other hand, hide behind a phony name. Why?

    2. Sandra Webber is also a LIAR like the skank Where’s her name on the situation logs high lets see NOWHERE Anyone who believes a pathological liar is as sick as the murderous whore and by the way MORONS the next phase is the SENTENCING phase not a guilt or innocence trial you idiots Also SANDRA Webbers. Been talking to the mitigation specialist Maria on twitter Me thinks the MORONS are cooking up more lies for the pathological lying whore

      1. Oh Carla, I don’t think there’s anything to cook up. Of course we know that the upcoming trial is the penalty phase re-trial. It will be quite long, because all the evidence needs to be presented to the new jurors.

        Do you think we don’t know that Jodi Arias will be sentenced to death or life? People are in this for the long haul. I don’t know what a situation log is.

        Maria is a very nice person, she’s just doing her job. If she likes Jodi Arias, maybe that’s because she’s likable.

        Thanks for taking another look at the shower evidence. I wish you told us what you think happened. We want to know your opinion!

    1. Sandra and anyone who believes a confirmed pathological liar is as sick as the BUTCHER She WILL NEVER EVER EVER be acquitted SANDRA her appeals will be denied like the motion to vacate the death penalty She’s admitted to being a lying murderous whore and this retrial won’t be as long as you think all they have to do is go over testimony autopsy photos it’s gonna be a short one lol and then off to perryville for the skank Mark my words pyscho

      1. Oh Carla, I think this trial will be about 2 months guesstimate. Nurmi must be very good at filing that motion to vacate so many times. He has a reason.

        Maybe this trial wasn’t that… It might have to be a do-over. Perryville or bust!

        What about the shower stuff, Carla?

      1. Jodi Arias is a psychopath and extremely manipulative person. Too bad your one brain cell can’t see that. People like her can control people like you so easily. The proof of that is your inane websites about her. Total idiocy.

      2. Jodi Arias is not a psychopath. That’s been proven in court. The media and certain people have manipulated you into believing that. For example, you believe someone who has actually been adjudicated insane (Cassandra). We do not believe her.

        Everything on this site is facts and logic. Show me where we are wrong?

      3. Well he dropped that Bundy thing in a hurry, now he’s back to your one brain cell, do you think Blow Me’s in puberty?
        Man with hand in pocket feel cocky all day – Confucius Say

    1. I bet you support cuts in education, you certainly sound like you didn’t get any. Or are you coming straight out of the Oxford debating club Blow Me?

    2. Pubescent boys with raging hormones clouding their reasoning can be easily manipulated by raging men in suits masquerading as lawyers

  2. I read your entire article. Tell me, why did you leave out her lies about the closet activity, like not disturbing the items on the shelves? Mr. Martinez proved she was lying. Why didn’t you mention the gas can that was proven that she purchased and did not return? Why didn’t you mention aout the more than 25gallons of gasoline she purchased in Utah. The Ford Focus only holds 12 gallons of gasoline.

    1. Thanks for your comment, Gloria. Not disturbing the items on the shelves is completely possible. If you step in the corners of the shelf where the pin is, it will hold the weight.

      Ford Focus holds 13.5 to 14.5 gallons depending on if it was 2006, 2007, or 2008. This can be +/- 3% according to the U.S. Gov’t.

      The gas cans, we covered in another article. The car and the 2 cans can hold 25 + gallons. The gas can could have been returned, but a witness should be able to answer the charge.

      This was snuck in at rebuttal, after Arias was questioned. She’s on trial for her life, she deserves a chance to respond. Martinez is well known for just such an ambush. This technique has no place in a capital trial, which should be fully litigated. It was only proven that no record was located.

      You have every right to your opinion and it’s the majority opinion. Even if Arias is guilty, she has the right to a fair trial. I think you can concede that much.

  3. Also, Mr.Martinez proved the gasoline purchase in Utah. There are many proven facts that you omitted in your article. No matter what you think of Mr. Martinez, he proved without any doubts that Miss Arias is guilty of 1st degree and felony murder. DEAL WITH IT! If you really and truly have Miss
    Arias’ best interest in mind, then, encourage her to tell the truth because she be spending the rest of her life in prison. Now she can do hard time or easy time. The time will be easy if she repents.

    1. Please explain to me how Arias is guilty of both premeditated and felony murder? They are mutually exclusive and even Mr. Martinez will tell you that they are.

      I agree with you that the time will be easier if she admits what she has done. Only she knows. Psychiatric services is what she needs.

      How can you account for the behavior of Martinez in all those other cases? It works great if the person is guilty, but this is not the way to practice law.

      This was an easy case. More evidence than almost any case. Any decent attorney could have done it the right way. Martinez had all the cards in the deck, and he still felt he needed to cheat.

      I respect your opinion. Thanks for commenting.

      1. Under Arizona law, prosecutors had the option of taking the death penalty off the table, which would have meant Arias would either spend the rest of her life behind bars, or be eligible for release after 25 years. That decision would have been up to the judge.

        Instead, the State decided to pursue another penalty phase with a new jury. Once seated, the new jury will be tasked with weighing whether Arias should be sentenced to death or life in prison.

        In the event that a second panel fails to reach a unanimous decision during the penalty phase, the death penalty would automatically be removed from consideration, and the judge would sentence Arias to life in prison or allow her to be eligible for release after 25 years.

        Got that , wanker?

      2. I believe you are an American. I know all this. What a waste of time and money, as 25 years was what she agreed to pre-trial.

        Without the death penalty on the table, the defense would never have been allowed the leeway they had. Without the death penalty, this would all be over and many rapist – murderers would still be in prison in AZ, instead of being free.

      3. Wanker? That sounds more British. On the positive side, Mr. Yeah Blow Me finally posted something cogent, though this was obviously a copy and paste job, since we know Mr. Blow Me cannot construct a sentence without obscenities. Too bad even in this post he says nothing knew.

    2. Please explain how Arias can be guilty of both premeditated and felony murder? Even Mr. Martinez would tell you they are two separate, mutually exclusive theories.

      I believe it’s the best policy for Arias to be honest to herself and others about what she has done.

      Even if you believe she’s guilty, I think the County also has to be honest about what they did, and what they’re trying to do, which is beneficial to no one.

      1. Jodi was stitched up by the real criminals , the Alexander family who actually committed the crime. They did it in order to get over 2 million dollars in donations. This will be proven in the re trial coming up and Jodi will walk.

        So many haters out there.

  4. Why hasn’t she or her supporters called for a combing of the desert to find the murder weapons and the alleged rope? Afraid of what you would find? Why was there no X-ray submitted showing at some point in her life her finger had been broken? Maybe there was never such an injury? Why didn’t the defense call their own ME to back up her version of events? Afraid of the cross on the stand? You can throw out any number of red herrings you like……..they still don’t add up to reasonable doubt.

    1. 1) There is the problem: It is not up to the defense to prove it wasn’t murder. It’s up to the prosecution to prove it was. They couldn’t prove it without cheating.

      2) The finger is the finger. The prosecution didn’t prove she wasn’t physically abused. They just tried to make her out to be a liar. This way, you don’t have to prove nothing.

      3) The defense should have called their own ME. The prosecution changed their opinion on the order of injuries as the trial was originally scheduled to begin. The defense had already spent their budget.

      4) I have reasonable doubt and so do many other people. There are way too many re-trials and reversals in Maricopa County.

      1. Roboman, Why aren’t you clowns protesting your country’s ,murders of children by cowardly drones? Get a life, Bozo. or get laid. Jodi Arias is a psychopath and I bet you aren’t a job interviewer. Suggest you stick to this

      2. Hey Blow Me, the biggest critics of American policy are Americans. Have your heard of Edward Snowden, Noam Chomsky or any number of countless others? Why don’t you focus on your own government and their crimes. The British invented criminal activity. It’s you who should get laid as soon as possible, but then that’s mission impossible with your charming personality. Maybe you can have sex with someone you truly love, yourself, WANKER!!!!!

      3. 1) I believe they proved it was a murder by the simple facts of Travis having defensive wounds, 27 stab wounds and a gun shot to the head. Coupled with the fact they have a witness that says hours later Jodi was seen with absolutely no injuries asides from two band-aids on her finger. If Travis was continuing to attack her and she had to defend herself. What exactly was he doing to “attack” her? Even a little bee who attacks you leaves behind some evidence of the attack.

        2) I believe the fact she told various version of how she hurt her finger is what made her out to be a liar, not the prosecution.

        3) The prosecution changed their opinion, not the ME. They wouldn’t have needed to call their own ME if they would have bothered to ask Dr. Horn what his opinion was on the order of events.

        4) Other cases of Maricopa is what causes you to have reasonable doubt. I would say the handful of people who believe Jodi are greatly outweighed by the people who don’t. I don’t think it’s reasonable to think 3rd times a charm when it comes to someone telling the truth, but I guess you do.

      4. Mayo, you have a lot of class.

        1) The law of self-defense does not require that the claimant have any injuries whatsoever. The only thing required is that in her mind, there was an immediate threat of severe injury or death.

        To this state of mind, we need to take into consideration Arias’ mental illness (and Travis’ as well) and that she has claimed to have been physically attacked by him in the past. Overkill can be the effect of an altered state of mind.

        2) The jury was not given all the facts as to what Arias has claimed in regards to her cut fingers. The interrogation and what she said to Ryan were lies and she has admitted this.

        3) Dr. Horn gave his opinion on the order of injuries, stating that the gunshot first was not possible. Detective Flores stated that he defers to the ME as to order of injuries and it was clear that he did not believe Arias. So where did he get the idea when he stated “We believe that he was shot first”?

        4) Jodi’s truthfulness or untruthfulness, innocence, or degree of guilt is a separate issue from the behavior of Juan Martinez. People agree this was an easy case with more evidence than most cases. So why does Martinez feel that he needs to behave in a way not consistent with the ABA code of ethics?

        As far as the trial, I suppose the second time will have to be a charm as this trial should not survive appeals in the United States.

      5. What exactly did Martinez do that he behaved in a way not consistent with the ABA code of ethics? and what exactly was the code that his behavior was not consistent with? I believe that Jodi’s own thoughts that she put to paper in her diary was used to prove that the times in which she claim to have been physically abused she did not reflect a mental state at that time of one who had just been abused. If she claimed to be physically abused and that is the reason she claimed self defense, how else do you feel Martinez could have gone about proving this to not be the truth? He didn’t make her out to be anything. I believe most people know the golden part of the meranda law which states anything you say can and will be used against you. So if she gives varying versions of answers to particular events she made herself out to be a liar not Martinez.

      6. Nothing that you talked about is any problem. It’s not what he did, but the way he did it, which was not necessary.

        Physical abuse is not the reason she claimed self-defense, but it goes to her state of mind.

        We have stated our reasons in the articles on the closing arguments for why we feel Martinez breached ethics and we have one more article on this.

        Any competent prosecutor could have done just as well using the actual facts and testimony,letting the jury make their own decision instead of telling them what to think.

        Nothing noteworthy to report seems very telling especially if this is the only time in 15 years of journals that she wrote this.

      7. Hi Mayo!
        To begin with here’s an example:
        “What was not mentioned in court Thursday was the history of the emails. A defense filing from January 2011 details the efforts Arias’ attorneys went to obtain them. Initially the prosecution told the defense attorneys that there were no available text messages sent or received by Alexander and then was ordered to turn over several hundred.
        Furthermore, according to the filing, the case agent, Mesa police Detective Esteban Flores, told the defense attorneys that there was nothing “out of the ordinary” among Alexander’s emails; about 8,000 were turned over to the defense in June 2010, including the Hughes emails.”
        Overcharging Arias with first degree murder (premed AND felony) subject to the death penalty, instead of accepting 2nd degree, to advance his career is another example. Not disclosing the testimony and evidence in regard to Tesoro/Walmart until mid-trial rather than during discovery is another example. Changing the theory of the sequence of events and pressuring the ME as well as the lead detective to not only go along but perjure themselves, that’s another example. I don’t even want to think about what he did with Alyce Laviolette, that was beyond unethical.

    2. Judson, those are all good questions. We know she killed him so the only question is if she planned it. If she planned it why do you think she planned to do it in his house, where a number of people lived, in broad daylight, after not only having sex with him but spending the night there and leaving a ton of evidence? Why do you think she chose this place?

  5. I got some inside info yesterday. Jodi will get 25 years with parole. She is a wonderful person and was 100 percent correct in killing the proven pedophile, Travis.

    And the Alexanders are SCUM for profiting from Jodi’s actions.

  6. I just ordered 10 wrist bands in support of our beloved Jodi Arias. The new trial will begin next year and I believe this time she will be found NOT GUILTY. He was an abuser and a pedophile and she was right to drive 1000 miles to kill him. Men are basically lowlife scum. We love you Jodi. I have a room at my home when you get out. I get wet thinking about you staying with me.

  7. “Ford Focus holds 13.5 to 14.5 gallons depending on if it was 2006, 2007, or 2008”

    Specs are 14 gallons for 2006,2007, 2008 it drops to 13.5. Now given the car only had 1925 miles at time of rental in mid 2008 it was likely a 2008. Now even if it was by a fluke a 2007, two five gallon gas cans plus a tank on complete EMPTY would add to 24 gallons. Even if you add your .3 that’s 24.9 and she pumped 25.31. Being overly generous to your assertions she still pumped close to half a gallon on the pavement? And no they did import the car from Europe either. No need when it would cost much more when you can get them here in the U.S at the Wayne MI plant. Then add to that no one can find proof she returned one………..that’s a pretty big red herring.

    1. The mileage was 1925 miles? Then that would mean it’s a 2008, I would assume. I never said anything about Europe.

      I will be interested to see what the defense says about that the 2nd penalty phase.

  8. Rob the other issue you have on appeal is when Jodi gave her interviews to Flores. Then her interviews on 48 hours ect. Then taking the stand, she opened herself up to having to back her claims. As is told to those arrested “Anything you say can and will be used you against you in a court of law.” If you are purely looking for a technicality for her to get off on (and not justice) she placed an Empire State sized hurdle in her own path.

    1. I will agree with you, Judson, that Detective Flores, at the interrogation, warned Jodi what would happen and gave her plenty of chances to say what happened.

      Even taking your view, it’s still was not a trial that will survive appeals, IMO.

    2. Judson, Taking everything in the trial in light of the prosecution, in other words, that everything the prosecution said is true, the story is not logical and it does not excuse the actions of the prosecutor. The existence of the death penalty really seems to obstruct a search for the truth, in my view.

      1. What exactly obstructed the truth from this case?

        Also, in the article you state:
        If Alexander were stabbed in the shower, he wouldn’t have taken a left and headed for the sink, trapping himself in the bathroom. He would have gone right and out the closet door or down the hallway immediately.

        The same can be said for Arias, if she was body slammed and under attack she wouldn’t have turned right trapping herself in the bathroom. SHe would have turned left ran out the house and got help right?

      2. No Mayo.
        She did go right and out of the bathroom before going in the closet. That’s my point. She would not exit the house. I think she would stay.

        In the past, when she claims she was assaulted, she stuck right with Travis and did not run away or seek outside help. She was protecting the relationship.

    1. Are you serious? I find it difficult to believe that it could have gone ten years without an escape attempt or without anyone noticing. That said, I believe the state did the right thing and Castro did the right thing (killing himself).

      1. If you find that hard to believe you should read about Josef Fritzl, the Austrian maniac who imprisoned his daughter for 24 years, in his basement, and had seven children with her. That should make you see how possible the Denver story is.

      2. I know that story. Equally bizarre. Neither of these guys F’d up and just forgot to lock a door, etc. in years and years. Most people can’t find their car keys or even something to open a wine bottle with.

      3. Still I think Jodi was railroaded by the real murderers. The Mormons and the Alexander family killed Travis because he was embarrassing their ”belief”. Now they are getting rich on donations from the idiot supporters of Travis.

      4. Jodi was 100 percent correct in driving 1000 miles to rid the world of the MORMON abuser and pedophile. Women needn’t put up with abusers and need to take pre emptive action like Jodi did. That would put a stop to abuse.
        Instead of prison she needs to get a medal.

  9. I think Perry Mason was a bully to people on the stand also. Why do people support these MORONS like Martinez? Don’t they realize its a prosecutors job to be kind to someone on the stand? And treat them with kid gloves?

    1. No that’s not their job to be kind to witnesses and treat them with kid gloves.

      Their prosecutor’s job is to zealously represent the victim and the rights of the state and to observe a code of ethics and to comport themselves in a manner in line with the decorum of a capital murder trial.

      Had he done so, this site would not exist regardless of the verdict.

    2. Just civilized would be good enough don’t you think? In search of the truth as opposed to putting on a big melodrama that would be ok don’t you think? Do you think people hear better the louder you scream? Au contraire…

      1. Nice to meet you, Martina. The Seacat trial shows the right way to conduct the prosecution. The Zimmerman trial shows how the prosecution resorted to the emotional appeals and speculation because the facts and the evidence were not favorable. If Zimmerman did not have a very good attorney, the media and the prosecution would have defeated him, although some people wish they did, LOL.

      2. I agree Amanda.
        I think to a large degree it is up to the judge to control this. And often, though not always, you need only look at the judge to see how much the prosecution will or will not getaway with.
        In the Arias case the judge was more like a water boy than a referee, she took absolutely no responsibility.

    3. Oh so you get all your legal knowledge from Perry Mason. I think that’s great, they should teach that in all the Ivy League Law schools of America. Our legal system would be the utopia of jurisprudence schwoochtie woop!

    1. We think Detective Flores is a good man and a good Mormon, but we think he got his information on the order of injuries from the M.E.

      We believe the vast majority of Jodi’s testimony on the stand was truthful.

      We have documented the misrepresentations, lies, and exaggerations of the prosecutor past and present. We have another whole article coming out with even more.

      1. As much as you respect Flores you must admit that he either lied in the 48hrs interview or lied on the stand, or was it all a big misunderstanding??

      2. He’s Twiggy next to Nurmi, and Kareem Abdul Jabbar next to Martinez
        He’s cute, in a Michelin Mormon Man way

      3. Actually, I’ve said from very early on in the trial that if she’s convicted it’ll be thanks to Flores and in spite of Martinez. Flores actually did all the work and had he not lied on the stand, which he definitely did, I’d have complete respect for him. At least he was doing his job and he wasn’t talking to her like she’s an animal. He’s no Saldate. I think they put the squeeze on him and he cares about his career more than eternal life, so he went with the flow.

      4. That’s exactly what I think. He wasn’t trying to upset the trial, just doing what he had to do for his career.

        Horn, I think is a company man and he’s gone along before. Flores would have been sunk if he didn’t go along.

  10. Wow Ryan and Martina threatening the life of a State prosecutor? I highly doubt either of you keyboard cowards would go on Public record making those threats. And by the way Einstein offering to pay a person to kill another is just as bad as doing it yourself.

      1. Martina, you hit the nail on the head! So many “normal” people as they seem so proud to call themselves simply do not understand intellectual humor and sarcasm. I’ve seen it many times and you simply cannot teach it! Sad, but true!

      2. The person I was responding to in the first place was actually ridiculing this article, the author and this site. Unbeknownst to them, these two are actually on the same side, the paradox was obviously lost on this individual

    1. What does Einstein have to do with anything? As far as I know his claim to fame is E=mc2 NOT murder for hire. You should lighten up you hero.
      Here’s a bit of Einstein for you, make a note:
      “Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I’m not sure about the former.”
      Sincerely Albert

    2. Ryan should know that this is a nation of laws and we settle disagreements with civility. Ryan’s comment was inappropriate and the overt racial slur is not acceptable and will be deleted.

      Martina was just reflecting Ryan’s words back to him and was done in jest. We wish to avoid censorship when possible, but this goes too far. It does not help anyone.

      We believe Juan Martinez is a hard worker, a decent man and a good man, but over the years he has let his hatred of defendants and defense attorneys poison his ethics and he has gone too far. We have also reported on how this happened in Spotlight on Juan Martinez..

      1. Honestly Rob, I assume you’re referring to the word “wetback” (feel free to delete me here if you wish lol), now while I do not need nor wish to use these type of words in my vocabulary to express myself I feel I must stand up for the first here: How is the the word “wetback” any worse than referring to the defendant (a human being) as “that thing”? My vote is leave it up.

      2. Just because it insults a whole class of people who may be reading these comments. I have called Martinez a “too tightly wrapped burrito”, which I do not think is racial.

        It’s difficult to decide when and where to draw the line. Free speech is a bitch – oops!

      3. While the word “burrito” is cute we all know it’s a Mexican dish, not derogatory, just clearly Mexican. Now we’ve used the word c–nt before, and bitch, no problem. The word dwarf is not exactly sensitive either. Juan has used the phrase “that thing”, are you responsible for what others say? Ok sanitize your heart out…

      4. I am against political correctness and censorship. I have Latinos in my immediate family and one person tried to call me out on the burrito comment, but I don’t accept that. I think it’s a comment which needlessly hurts other people than the intended target. I also thought to leave it there for people to think “what a stupid comment”.

  11. So Ryan are you saying that the money Jodi is raising for her appeal, is in reality going into a fund to kill Juan Martinez?

  12. martina clearly threatening the life of others is a normal occurrence in your life? I am not sure where you live, or what your poor upbringing did to contribute to this perception? But in a normal civilized society it is not acceptable.

    1. As I have mentioned and you obviously missed, the passage I was responding to was obviously sarcastic. Do you understand what the word sarcasm means? Where I live or was brought up is absolutely none of your business but just FYI, I am a pacifist and much more tolerant of the very person you want to fry because you think that the amount of gas she took in Salt Lake City was off by .3 gallons, according to your calculations. If you are ready to condemn a person based on the stupidities you have posted here then it is your upbringing you should question, not mine. Please try to absorb the big picture here.

  13. Its quite fun to talk a load of BS here. But the fact remains, that people like Sandra E. Webber and Jason Webber and other shyte for brains yahoos don’t have a real job and feel very important posting lots of bullshyte about this case. Have fun. But really I have to agree with Sandra E. Webber of Clearwater, Florida (address given on request). that the Alexanders had Travis Alexander so they could make millions in donations.

    Our beloved Jodi, was a PATSY.

    1. We do not agree with that position.

      Sandra is our friend and in this country, people have the right to free speech. Jason is a hero which is defined as someone who stands up for the little guy against a sh*t storm of opposition. They are entitled to their opinions as you are entitled to yours.

      Amanda and I have stated our opinions and we base them on facts readily available on the internet. We invite readers to look at the other side of the story and decide for themselves. We respect everyone’s decision. We like many people who do not share our opinion. There are more important things in life.

      You do not make a good example of yourself by making a veiled threat. It would be better to just weigh in with your opinion.

      1. Rob,
        Yes, there is a certain group of people you do not criticize in the USA or in Europe or you will be blackballed or DEAD. You know who I am talking about, the people that control the MSM and the banking of most of the world and also control the White House and Congress. Here is the link to who they are.

    2. And what precisely is it that you’ve been doing here? You’re not exactly wanted in surgery are you? Webber is a Cornell alumnus, translation: a graduate of an Ivy League School. Having a website does not mean he’s unemployed nor does it mean it is his only interest or the nucleus of his life. The only shit that’s been quite prolifically spread around is the incessant and futile attempts at wit on your part. You have failed miserably, but then you must be used to that. Arias has been convicted, what else do you want? Are you satisfying some latent sadistic urge here? Take your simplistic, infantile mentality and go watch some Perry Mason, your fave. Next time you blow a bit high on the breathalyzer on your way out of Hooters I hope it is someone like your Juan who will prosecute you mercilessly, pray you don’t get the death penalty.

      1. hahahah, yes you have free speech but nothing ever changes, in the USA the people are afraid of the govt. in Europe the govt is afraid of the people and YES we have free speech here just like you do, Furthermore, in my country , the perp of a crime is not allowed to be filmed or even the last name or their face shown in the media. Why? Because we believe in innocent before proven guilty. You should try it sometime. All you have are a bunch of hyenas on HLN and other idiotic FOXCNNABCCBSNBC that pickles your brains with bullshit (especially when it comes to foreign affairs).

      2. Well, Dolores, here we have found something we can definitely agree on.

        I like the Russian news network RT, and Reuters for a balanced view. I believe that our entertainment really hurts due process.

        I agree that these networks do not give a real objective or broad view about foreign affairs.

        I believe that there is an interest served in America by keeping the people uneducated and educated-but-ignorant.

    3. In Europe the government is afraid of the people? Wow you are hysterical! Please look up the British historian David Irving. Then look up what he served time for in an Austrian (that’s your EU) prison, at the dangerous age of 68. There is no first amendment, the equivalent of free speech, in Europe. That is where freedom begins and ends. You speak freely at the pleasure of your master. The fact that you don’t allow the accused to be captured on film may be good, but then it may be be bad as well. If the public doesn’t know what goes on in the courtroom behind closed doors how does that bode for justice do you think? Maybe you should think back to Stalin. HLN and all the other grotesque media is exactly the point of this website and others like it. It is a perversion of justice and that point has been made quite clear here. If you didn’t get that then you completely missed the bus.

    4. “All you have are a bunch of hyenas on HLN and other idiotic FOXCNNABCCBSNBC that pickles your brains with bullshit (especially when it comes to foreign affairs).” ??
      What is really interesting is that it is you Dolores who is on the same page as the hyenas you name, not us, maybe it is your brain which got inadvertantly pickled with bullshit.

    5. Dirk, shall I post your video here? You know of all your threats, including ones against the President? And YOUR address? Rob can have my address, and pretty much anyone with a half dozen brain cells could find it! See, Delores Jennings is yet another of your aliases you hide behind. But not very well, I might add.

      1. You post peoples photos and addresses online, and they are still, there, we have the website links and screenshots. and YOU are the threatening bully. Shall I post the link? Never mind, its already in snail mail on the way to some agencies. Sandra, YOU are the true bully and we also have screenshots of your death threats against Juan Martinez and your libel of the Alexanders.

      2. Sandra, nice try, but this is NOT someone called ”Dirk” which is a knife. LOL. I am on the Justice for Travis FB page and also have a Twitter account and follow you closely. Try again. 🙂

      3. Okay, Sandra, what is my real name on Twitter, I follow you and sometimes even Tweet you. Also what is my real name at the State vs Jodi Arias FB site? Enquiring minds want to know LOL

      1. You like Dicks? LOL Thank you so much for proving you steal things. Like photos from photobucket websites. Also, if you were truly educated and informed you would know that the USA destroyed Libya and its now a hellhole. I have numerous email messages from people in Tripoli that can attest to that. But let me guess, you believe the total LIES about Ghaddaffi.

        I bet you support the kackling killer khunt Killary also.

      2. This is just one subject. You are mistaken to think that we have no other interests or views. In fact, we are well aware of the views expressed in this video.

        Thanks for sharing.

        “People who believe in absurdities will commit atrocities”. We agree, and this is why we believe the Arias issue is related to all these other issues. It’s why we started the site

        We started with our domestic policies but next we will talk about why a cultural change is needed in our foreign policy.

      3. Dolores hun,
        Abby Martin is AMERICAN! As is Glenn Greenwald, Chelsey Manning, Edward Snowden, Seymour Hersh, Noam Chomsky, Norman Finklestein, Daniel Ellsberg… – ALL AMERICANS!! Name a couple of heroes from your country before you start attacking the entire population of America.
        Ryan Ferguson is also a convicted murderer, and many like him, I’m sure his father would be very happy with your calls for us to lock em up and throw away the key, just forget them all.
        Just because some of us are concerned with the state of the justice system does not mean we are unconcerned with anything else. I can walk and chew gum at the same time, can you?
        ps. Thank you so much for that barrage of videos, some of us have seen these and much more long before you woke up and smelled the coffee. Maybe you should read a book, and I don’t mean Dianetics!

  14. The legal standards of Arias supporters demand unrealistic, unattainable levels of proof, under which almost no one could ever be convicted of anything.

    For example, they explain that Jodi was never PROVEN to have stolen the .25 caliber handgun from her Grandfather.
    Yet, there was even less evidence of Travis owning ANY firearm, let alone that very same caliber gun.

    Arias supporters would submit that under this set of circumstances, jurors should ASSUME Arias is telling the truth, and that Travis indeed owned this .25 auto pistol that only she knew about ( and was able to locate in a supposed blind panic)

    1. Thanks for commenting.

      It’s the same standard for everyone. If it was such a one sided trial in terms of evidence, why did the prosecution decide to hedge their bet by changing the order of injuries to such an unbelievable theory? I am 99% sure the gun was first.

      This alone makes this an unfair trial regardless, and provides ample reasonable doubt to some.

      As for the gun, there were many things that Arias knew about Travis that no one else did. There’s so much his friends didn’t know about him. The idea he must have ammo and a cleaning kit are ridiculous. This assumes he actually fired it.

      One of Travis’ many housemates could have left the gun as is, or a family member. If it was a .22, would you be so sure? Ravens and such were the most popular small handgun back in the day. getting to the top of the shelf is easily possible.

      At least on the self-defense side, there is motive. There is no realistic reason why Arias would do such a thing. Jealousy? Revenge? There has to be a precursor for someone to be able to do such a thing, and there is none. There are some big pieces missing to this puzzle.

    1. There is little in this video that I disagree with. I believe we are changing our foreign policy, beginning with ending the foreign wars. More and more people are questioning such policies, because many policies, such as slavery, were the choices of the upper class and not the majority of the people.

      Just like the Palestinian-Israeli question, there are two sides to every story, and we need to hear both sides, even if many people refuse to hear it.

    1. Thank You for the video. Yes, of course there are a vast array of problems in the world. We have another site devoted to the need for cultural change in America, but we have few visitors so far.

      We believe the two problems are related. What has come out in the Arias trial is the overwhelming power of the media to shape public opinion and to give only one side of the story. Internal change needs to come to American culture before foreign policy can change.

      Many Americans do not like our foreign policy, and regard such policies as the war in Iraq to be completely unjustified.

      Just like people who speak out for Jodi Arias have learned, many people simply do not want to hear things that challenge their deeply held beliefs.

      1. Rob,it is quite easy to undertand why Americans are so uneducated and ignorant,. this is done by design, I lived 35 years in the USA and now 24 years in Europe. FOXCNNABCCBSNBC are all controlled by ZioNazis. HLN is a joke and panders to imbeciles with their plastic looking hyenas.. The morons on the Travis support pages on FB are as idiotic as the Jodi supporters. Its a shame they don’t spend their time exposing the truth of the US govt and their Nazi miltiarism which affects the whole world. Instead they waste their time writing blogs with their pseudo intellectual bullshit, supporting a convicted pyschopathic murderer. I have a psychiatrist friend here who told me off the record over a drink that he watched the whole trial and there is no doubt in his mind she is ,was an obsessed psychopath, not unlike the woman in ”Play Misty for me” or ”Fatal Attraction”.

      2. I don’t think it’s pseudo-intellectual bullshit. We are showing how the case against Arias is buttressed by the establishment of Arias as a liar by an even better liar.We are showing this using Martinez’ own words and actions.

        We are not a “one trick pony”. This is one subject we are discussing on this one site. All people have a variety of interests.

        Arias was not diagnosed by any of 4 psychologists to be psychotic, but rather on the borderline of neurosis and psychosis, or personality disordr unspecified.

        People are forgetting that Arias mental issues were stabilized by a structured and loving environment over 4 years with Darryl Brewer. We are saying that Arias was destabilized by a selfish religious hypocrite, and this may have caused a psychosis and the ensuing violence.

        And the answer to a psychotic break is to put this person to death? Wouldn’t it be better for both Arias and the general public that she finally receives treatment for a mental illness that continues, after 5 years in jail to be untreated?

      3. That was a very well thought out comment Rob, I’d say right on the money.
        Judging from Dolores’ response, I think you’re barking up the wrong tree, this one ain’t budging. Dolores thinks that because she gets 2500 FREE channels she’s not subjected to propaganda, LMAO!!!
        As far as US foreign policy goes, Europe is America’s poodle.
        The Europeans are so brave that they didn’t let Snowden’s plane land anywhere, a 27 year old guy with a laptop, they are such resistors of oppression!! Champions of freedom and justice!

      4. Meanwhile, China is making friends all over the world by using butter instead of guns:Not intervening in internal affairs of foreign governments and taking on projects in foreign countries that improve the quality of life. Maybe the USA could learn a lesson here?

      5. That’s great, over a drink your psychiatrist told you that Arias is a psychopath, without ever exchanging a word with her. Perfect. Maybe you should look for a new doctor.
        The point is not Arias, the point is the justice system. If you want to educate your self then get your ass out of videos and look up the innocence project.
        Oh and what are you doing here? Are you trying to change the world by your insane rants and incessant posting of videos? You have some serious issues honey!

      6. Yes Dolores, the way to get people to listen to you and to convey the message effectively is to insult everyone as much as possible. Calling people imbeciles, hyenas, uneducated, ignorant pseudo-intellectuals and more is definitely the way to go. It says a lot about your depth of understanding about the complexities of politics and human nature. Your messages scream your own ignorance.

      7. The US has plenty of lessons to learn, again, but let’s not delude ourselves by pretending that other governments are more benevolent by choice. Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. The only reason the US seems worse than the others is because the US spends more on the military then all the others combined, that puts them on top of the heap. But them is not the people, them is the government. If any country in Europe or anywhere were in that position they would also get out of control. Do you remember Britain when it colonized the world? The Roman Empire? None of them acted with benevolence toward others. Yes there needs to be change. The change will come from the people and suppressing speech or expression is not the way to go. Dolores trying to get you not to discuss a subject you care about, trying to humiliate you by calling you a pseudo-intellectual, is kind of counterproductive. The wonderful thing about the internet is if you don’t like something you don’t have to read it, there are plenty of websites which discuss her concerns, this does not make your subject bullshit. There is also a way to convey a message, regardless weather the conveyor is in agreement with you or not. It’s not just what you say but how you say it.
        Just because I’m concerned about snow removal in my neighborhood does not mean that I don’t have the capacity to care about the world nor does it mean that snow is the most important thing in my universe.

      8. One more thing I’d like to mention, the American people, many of whom don’t have a lot themselves, are always at the forefront of relief when ever and wherever there is a disaster somewhere in the world. Americans are no more heartless or ignorant than the Europeans, just for the record.

      9. One thing you don’t understand , Rob. You cannot rehabilitate a psychopath because in their mind they are 100 percent correct in what they do. She has shown NO remorse. Psychopaths are usuallly extremely intelligent. Many of them are in govt and even become Presidents.

      10. Jodi is not a psychopath, it’s a proven fact. Jodi had shown remorse and regret inside and outside the courtroom and she has taken responsibility for her actions.

        Jodi has stated she hopes that the Alexander family can somehow find peace.

        Government and business leadership is full of egocentric personalities with a whole host of addictions and neuroses, just like we have seen in this case.

      11. It is an absolute lie that she has shown no remorse, just another example of what an agent of disinformation you are. Just FYI, many people have shown no remorse, even when showing remorse would have meant getting parole. Sometimes showing no remorse, against one’s own interest, is a compelling reason to believe in one’s innocence. You cannot show remorse for something you didn’t do, like planning a murder for example.
        There has been no expert, defense or prosecution, who has diagnosed Arias as a psychopath, but there you go again, the great lover of truth, spreading propaganda. You are not qualified to diagnose ANYONE as a psychopath. You should get your own mental illness treated.
        In your country, do the lunatics run the asylum?

      12. “You cannot rehabilitate a psychopath because in their mind they are 100 percent correct in what they do.”
        Sounds like you!

  15. Rob, did you say “conspiracy theory”?:) You know, that’s yet another word that gets a bad rap since this trial! Ha!

    You know I’m not sure what is thicker than Karo syrup here and all over about Jodi and Travis and Juan, oh my….. the “stupid”, or the “crazy”, or the “evil”.

    As you’ve mentioned before Rob, Jodi knows, at least on some level. Travis knew. And most likely Sky and Chris Hughes and Dave Hall know. Actually, a lot of folks probably “know”. I don’t “know” or pretend to “know” everything, but I do “know” that there are layers and layers and layers of lies, and injustice, perpetrated by Juan Martinez, encouraged by HLN, and spread as fast as the lyin’ lips of Chris Hughes would move since June 9, 2008.

    1. We agree.

      And I have never believed in such crazy things as 911 conspiracy or Sandy Hook conspiracy. Here the government is seen as completely ignorant and inept AND incredibly all powerful and devious, at the same time.

      1. It doesn’t matter what you believe Rob. If you understand physics at all and do some critical thinking and research you would see that the govt story of 19 Arabs with boxcutters is completely scripted bullshit. Certain elements of the CIA/Mossad are highly intelligent and compartmentalized falses flags like this and JFK to make people question for years. Most Americans aren’t even aware that there was an exercise that day and that was great cover. 7/7 the same.

      2. 911 was carefully planned and pulled off by a handful of religious radicals who exploited weaknesses and actually did not complete their attack (which included the Capitol building or the White House).

        JFK AKA “Old poppy-top” was assassinated by an alienated guy with a yearning for fame using a mail order rifle.

  16. Rob,
    if you don’t think the US govt would kill 3000 of its own people to furthur an agenda , I suggest you Google ”Operation Northwoods’. Or Google ”33 Conspiracy theories that turned out to be True” and READ.
    Did you know the Gulf of Tonkin incident which led to the escalation of the Vietnam War in 1965 NEVER HAPPENED?? 58,000 Americans died because of that undeclared war. The govt now admits it and you can read it yourself using the FOIA.
    As to the Jodi Arias case. My opinion is she stabbed him first and the gunshot was last after he was already dead after she pulled his head back and slit his throat.
    Then she goes and rehearses a voice mail 3 times (she admitted that) and sounded very cheerful and acted like Travis was alive. Then she went to cuddle up and screw Ryan Burns.
    No ‘normal’ woman could do that. A normal person having to act in self defense would have called 911. And DO NOT give me this bullshit about that not being important in the trial.
    You try and act self important and use some flowery multisyllabic words in your blog but you and people like Sandra Webber are very deluded and have an amazing lack of critical thinking skills and objectivity.
    You are wasting your time discussing this psychopath who will continue to lie and manipulate people even if she goes to prison for 25 years or more. This will be proven in the future.

    1. Yes, yes and USS Liberty and Remember Me Maine, you think you’re the only one who reads (or rather in your case watches videos, most of which come from US sources NOT Europe)? You are an obsessed, ignorant freak who’s insulting people and using the very same “hit them over the head bully tactics” you ostensibly condemn. Have your fucking medication recalibrated ASAP. And stop drinking with your psychiatrist.

    2. Regardless of what Sandra or Rob think, it is you who has the Napoleon Complex. If you think this site or others are a waste of time then instead of trying to indoctrinate people with your undoubtedly correct views, in some misguided way compensating for the size of your penis, then for the love of God just FUCK OFF already!

      1. Wow, a bit of Voltaire!
        The best of all possible worlds would be if we could discuss this person’s opinions without being reduced to cretins.

    3. The shot was first, there is no doubt in my mind. This makes this an unfair trial, regardless of Arias’ guilt or innocence.

      A better interpretation is she could go to Ryan’s and adjust him in the love seat because her mind never recorded the horrible incident.

      I am not acting self-important. For three months, we had zero visitors to this site. Then we had 3 per day average. Now we have more. It’s a free site, we make no money on this. We are writing down our views. Read it and make your own decision or don’t.

      We enjoy studying and writing about this case.

    4. There are hundreds of hit and run accidents every year, all over the world including the wonderful place you reside in. By definition, a hit and run is an accident where the person killing the victim DID NOT DIAL 911. Also by definition it is an accident, though with criminal liability, which rules out premeditation. So your argument about not calling 911 being proof of a planned murder is a non sequitur, you genius.

    1. Sorry, I don’t think so. No ban for you.

      We will consider further comments unrelated to the issue or the article to be spamming and we will start “hitting that backspace button”, just like Jodi Arias.

      You’re our favorite poster!

  17. @Rob
    You believe 19 Arabs with boxcutters story because your lying govt and media fed it to you. You are gullible sheeple. There are 100’s of anomalies in the govt story but I bet you haven’t bothered to read any of them. I suppose you think 1500 Architects and Engineers and professional pilots are also ”tin toil hatters’.
    I bet you weren’t even aware that there was an ‘exercise’ that day. Those 19 Arabs were patsies just like Lee Harvey Oswald. Even the 911 Commission admits they didn’t investigate enough,
    Do some research and USE YOUR OWN BRAIN. (if thats possible).
    As for Jodi Arias. the only remorse she showed was that she got CAUGHT.
    You certainly don’t impress me as having any analytical reasoning skills, either DEDUCTIVE or INDUCTIVE,
    You are SHEEPLE.
    Same goes for Martina, Sandra, and all the other Jodi fans who she has maniulated. Suckers
    As for HLN and your idiotic MSM. Its all about the $$$$$$$$$$$$ for them. Look at the idiots posting on Justis for Travis sites. Just as loony as the Jodi fans sites. America is a Nation of Idiots and its proven everyday by how fast you are going down the tubes.
    ”Coming from Northern Europe back to the USA is like leaving the Jetsons and returning to the Flintstones” – New York Time reporter quote in 2011.
    Have a nice day. If ignorance is bliss you must be overjoyed. 🙂

    1. I totally and thoroughly researched it. Occum’s razor. The simplest explanation is usually the right one.

      BTW, As soon as George Bush was elected and he had Dick Cheney as VP, and I saw the cabinet he assembled, I knew we were going to war in Iraq. I was talking about in the Spring and Summer of 2001.

      He would have found another pretext. 911 just fell into their laps.

    2. Where did you get all this information, from your media? I think not.
      Where did you get all your information on this trial? There were only two sources, either people watched it live stream (also recorded for posterity) or they got their info from HLN. You obviously did not watch the trial (with your incompetent psychiatrist) because you are thoroughly unfamiliar with the facts and regularly spew HLNisms. I’m starting to suspect I’m talking to Nancy Dolores Grace.
      Why is it, if your country is so wonderful, where they don’t photograph or video the perp, because you all consider the accused innocent until proven guilty, why is then that you are following an American trial? Is it to live vicariously through another system? To get your sadistic rocks off? Since you “can’t get no satisfaction” in your own country?
      I’ve got news for you bud, if the US goes under you will be very nostalgic for the Flinstones days, you will find yourself in a cave in a loin cloth praying for the likes of Arias to come by and cuddle with you.
      Without the US you would not even have a keyboard to spread your shit around with, you Jetson you LMAO!

      1. You are legends in your own mind. LOL
        I tripled my income the day I left the USA 24 years ago and have NEVER had to 2 work 2 lousy jobs to make ends meet since. I am debt free and living the ”American Dream” in Europe.

        You are a clueless little twit and twat, take a hike KHUNT!!

      2. If not for Russia you might be speaking German, You don’t seem to know much of anything about history. BTW, we all DO speak German here, plus French, Spanish and English. Required starting in second grade.
        I get all my info from working around the globe during my 40 years in aviation. I speak 4 languages and have been to 70 countries and have lived and worked in 5 of them., including 35 years in the USA. I get my info from real life experiences and reading. 80 percent of what your media feeds you is pure bullshit and propaganda and I could cite many experiences to PROVE my assertions. Have a nice day and don’t even bother replying, you only make yourself look more imbecilic than you already are.

      3. Dolores. I knew all this 30 years ago. Where do you get the idea that we don’t know this or that we disagree with you about certain historical events?

      4. Well I guess you pilfered some capital from your stay in the US then? Why else come to such a vile nation? And stay for decades you fucking moron? You must have been shining shoes while here because certainly you’re no intellectual. If your dream is living financially well off then your moral preachings you extoll here are pure hypocrisy, again over your giant, overinflated head.
        If the US hadn’t come to your rescue during World War II, then you’d be bilingual right now, you would be speaking German and singing Russian Sputnik songs. You’d be fantasizing about your American dream in a Gulag while picking Stroganov out of your anus. .
        I never thought I’d say this but I’m glad the NSA has your number. You are one of the sickest fucks around, and you’ve got some stiff competition…

      5. She won’t be back unless she wants to talk about the issues or the article because if not, I think she’s just trying to spam the comments

      6. Aviation? LMFAO!!!
        Dolores must be the oldest stewardess around. She’s a bit like herpes, once you get it there’s no getting rid of it.

  18. Murdered Past CIA Director William Colby: “The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media.”

    “If you (Senator Wellstone) vote against the war in Iraq, the Bush administration will do whatever is necessary to get you. There will be severe ramifications for you and the state of Minnesota.” — Vice President Dick Cheney to Senator Paul Wellstone (D), October, 2002, just days before Wellstone’s death in a suspicious airplane “accident”.

    …”Sarah, if the American people had ever known the truth about what we Bushs have done to this nation, we would be chased down in the streets and lynched.” — George Bush Sr. 1992

    “For we are opposed, around the world, by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy…” (Zionism) — President John F. Kennedy

    When stupidity is considered patriotism, it is unsafe to be intelligent.” ~ Isaac Asimov ~

    “You can fool some of the people all of the time, and those are the ones you want to concentrate on.” — George W. Bush

    “Only Fools Learn their Reality Drinking from a Fountain of Illusion” [i.e. matrix of the Big Brother controlled media]. ~ cyber Kung Fu Tse

    “I am a Canadian, free to speak without fear, free to worship in my own way, free to stand for what I think right, free to oppose what I believe wrong, or free to choose those who shall govern my country. This heritage of freedom I pledge to uphold for myself and all mankind.” From the Canadian Bill of Rights, July 1, 1960.

    “I believe there are more instances of the abridgement of freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments by those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations. … The means of defense against foreign danger historically have become the instruments of tyranny at home..If tyranny and oppression come to this land, it will be under the guise of fighting a foreign enemy.” President James Madison

    “When once a republic is corrupted, there is no possibility of remedying any of the growing evils but by removing the corruption and restoring its lost principles; every other correction is either useless or a new evil.”~~- Thomas Jefferson

    Vincenzo Vinciguerra stated, in sworn testimony on Operation Gladio in Europe: “You had to attack civilians, the people, women, children, innocent people, unknown people far removed from any political game. The reason was quite simple: to force … the public to turn to the state to ask for greater security.”

    “We annually spend on military security more than the net income of all United States corporations. This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence — economic, political, even spiritual — is felt in every city, every State house, every office of the Federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society. In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes.” President Dwight D. Eisenhower in a televised speech 1961

    Former Italian President Francesco Cossiga: “[Bin Laden supposedly confessed] to the Qaeda September [attack] to the two towers in New York [claiming to be] the author of the attack of the 11, while all the [intelligence services] of America and Europe … now know well that the disastrous attack has been planned and realized from the CIA American and the Mossad with the aid of the Zionist world in order to put under accusation the Arabic Countries and in order to induce the western powers to take part … in Iraq [and] Afghanistan.”

    John Swinton New York journalist at a banquet (1880’s): “What folly is this, toasting an independent press? There is no such thing, at this date of the World’s history, in America, as an independent press. You know it and I know it. There is not one of you who dares to write your honest opinions, and if you did, you know beforehand that it would never appear in print. I am paid weekly for keeping my honest opinion out of the paper I am connected with. Others of you are paid similar salaries for similar things, and any of you who would be so foolish as to write honest opinions would be out on the streets looking for another job. If I allowed my honest opinions to appear in one issue of my paper, before twenty-four hours my occupation would be gone. The business of the journalists is to destroy the truth, to lie outright, to pervert, to vilify, to fawn at the feet of Mammon [Biblical ref.], and to sell his country and his race for his daily bread. You know it and I know it, and what folly is this toasting an independent press? We are the tools and vassals of “rich men” [Biblical ref.] behind the scenes. We are the jumping jacks, they pull the strings and we dance. Our talents, our possibilities and our lives are all the property of other men. We are intellectual prostitutes.”

    “The individual is handicapped by coming face to face with a conspiracy so monstrous he cannot believe it exists”. — J. Edgar Hoover, FBI Director 1924-1972, quoted in The Elks Magazine (August 1956). “It is the duty of the patriot to protect his country from its [corrupt feudal] government.” — Thomas Paine. “Each of you, for himself, by himself and on his own responsibility, must speak”. — Mark Twain. “The money powers prey upon the nation in times of peace and conspire against it in times of adversity. It is more despotic than a monarchy, more insolent than autocracy, and more selfish than bureaucracy. It denounces as public enemies all who question its methods or throw light upon its crimes. I have two great enemies, the Southern Army in front of me and the bankers in the rear. Of the two, the one at my rear is my greatest foe.” — President Abraham Lincoln. “In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.” — George Orwell.

    “Zionism is but an incident of a far reaching plan,” said leading American Zionist Louis Marshall, counsel for bankers Kuhn Loeb in 1917. “It is merely a convenient peg on which to hang a powerful weapon.” The far-reaching plan is Illuminati world dictatorship. The Illuminati is the highest echelon of Freemasonry, an occult secret society dedicated to Lucifer. The world’s central bankers have intermarried with the richest dynastic families of Europe and America to bring about world hegemony. They instigated wars and depressions to degrade and destroy humanity. The American people have been financing their wars since 1914.

    Zionist Theodor Herzl “We Will Lead Every Revolution Against Us”.

    Mossad role in 9-11? The Washington Times, “Army study suggests U.S. force of 20,000” by Rowan Scarborough, 5 April 2002: Israel forces a “500-pound gorilla in Israel. Well armed and trained. Operates in both Gaza [and the West Bank]. Known to disregard international law to accomplish mission. Wildcard. Ruthless and cunning. Has capability to target U.S. forces and make it look like a Palestinian/Arab act.”

    “It is perfectly possible for a man to be out of prison, and yet not free – to be under no physical constraint and yet to be a psychological captive, compelled to think, feel and act as the representatives of the national state, or of some private interest within the nation, wants him to think, feel and act. “The nature of psychological compulsion is such that those who act under constraint remain under the impression that they are acting on their own initiative. The victim of mind-manipulation does not know that he is a victim. To him the walls of his prison are invisible, and he believes himself to be free. That he is not free is apparent only to other people. His servitude is strictly objective.” Brave New World Revisited, Aldous Huxley, 1958In 1938, William E. Dodd, U.S. Ambassador to Germany, sent President Franklin Delano Roosevelt the following message: (as reported in George Seldes. Facts and Fascism, p. 122).

    “The greatest obstacle to discovery is not ignorance ~ it is the illusion of knowledge.” ~ Daniel Boorstin .[this is the illusion that the mainstream news media projects to the sheeple]

    “A clique of U.S. industrialists is hell-bent to bring a fascist state to supplant our democratic government and is working closely with the fascist regime in Germany and Italy. I have had plenty of opportunity in my post in Berlin to witness how close some of our American ruling families are to the Nazi regime…. A prominent executive of one of the largest corporations, told me point blank that he would be ready to take definite action to bring fascism into America if President Roosevelt continued his progressive policies. Certain American industrialists had a great deal to do with bringing fascist regimes into being in both Germany and Italy. They extended aid to help Fascism occupy the seat of power, and they are helping to keep it there. Propagandists for fascist groups try to dismiss the fascist scare. We should be aware of the symptoms. When industrialists ignore laws designed for social and economic progress they will seek recourse to a fascist state when the institutions of our government compel them to comply with the provisions.”

    In 1933, Marine Corp Major General Smedley Butler was approached by a cabal of influential American bankers and industrialists working under the umbrella of the front group, American Liberty League. Their request of Butler: that he lead a 500,000 strong force of rogue veterans in a coup against FDR and the legal American government. The intent of this cabal, already supporting the efforts of Hitler and Mussolini in Europe, was to instill a government not unlike that of Hitler and Mussolini in the United States. Butler went along with the scheme until he was able to ascertain who the participants were. He then blew the whistle on this group before the House Committee on un-American Activities. For his efforts, Butler was ostracized and black-balled by the mainstream media;his testimony before the House Committee on un-American Activities was omitted from the record. The cabal was never brought to justice, but the coup was foiled. Who were the American bankers and industrialists involved in this plot to overthrow the legal government of the United States? According to Wikipedia, while most of the funding came from the Du Pont family, participants included U.S. Steel, General Motors, General Foods, Standard Oil, Birdseye, Colgate, Heinz Foods, Chase National Bank, and Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company. And among the participants in this coup attempt was one Prescott Bush (who is the father of George Herbert Walker Bush, 41st president of the United States, and thus is the grandfather of George W Bush, current president of the United States). Prescott Bush was not only instrumental in bringing Hitler to power in Germany, Mussolini to power in Italy, but was also plotting to overthrow the legal government of the United States and establish a fascist state here. Prescott Bush served as a Senator from Connecticut and was a partner in the prominent investment banking firm Brown Brothers Harriman.

    US General Smedley Butler wrote in his 1935 classic, “War Is a Racket”: “I helped make Mexico safe for American oil interests in 1914,” “I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefit of Wall Street. I helped purify Nicaragua for the International Banking House of Brown Brothers in 1902-1912. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for the American sugar interests in 1916. I helped make Honduras right for American fruit companies in 1903. In China in 1927 I helped see to it that Standard Oil went its way unmolested.” Butler acknowledged that he’d spent most of his thirty-three years in the Marines as “a high class muscle man for Big Business, Wall Street and the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism[ts].”

    Wars are really a continuous stream of coordinated acts of terrorism, related to money and power instigated by the people who will benefit from the war and its expected end result. War is an instrument to expand economic power by destroying the national institutions and intelligent people of the victimized nation.

    “In the counsels of Government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the Military Industrial Complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists, and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals so that security and liberty may prosper together.” — President Dwight Eisenhower, Feb 1961

    “For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy that relies primarily on covert means for expanding its sphere of influence–on infiltration instead of invasion, on subversion instead of elections, on intimidation instead of free choice, on guerrillas by night instead of armies by day. It is a system which has conscripted vast human and material resources into the building of a tightly knit, highly efficient machine that combines military, diplomatic, intelligence, economic, scientific and political operations. Its preparations are concealed, not published. Its mistakes are buried, not headlined. Its dissenters are silenced, not praised. No expenditure is questioned, no rumor is printed, no secret is revealed. It conducts the Cold War, in short, with a war-time discipline no democracy would ever hope or wish to match.” — President John F. Kennedy Waldorf-Astoria Hotel New York City, April 27, 1961. The US/UK/Zionist governments are deeply infiltrated by the Conspiracy.

    “The interests behind the Bush Administration, such as the CFR, The Trilateral Commission – founded by Brzezinski for David Rockefeller – and the Bilderberger Group, have prepared for and are now moving to implement open world dictatorship within the next five years. They are not fighting against terrorists. They are fighting against citizens.” — Dr. Johannes B. Koeppl, Ph.D., former German defense ministry official and advisor to former NATO Secretary General Manfred Woerner

    “The high office of President has been used to foment a plot to destroy the Americans freedom, and before I leave office I must inform the citizen of his plight.” — JFK

    “Military men are dumb, stupid animals to be used as pawns for foreign policy.” Henry Kissinger, quoted by Bob Woodward in The Final Days, 1976

    The illegal we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes a little longer. “[The New World Order] cannot happen without U.S. participation, as we are the most significant single component. Yes, there will be a New World Order, and it will force the United States to change it’s perceptions.” — Henry Kissenger, World Affairs Council Press Conference, Regent Beverly Wilshire Hotel , April 19th 1994

    “You can fool some of the people all of the time, and those are the ones you want to concentrate on.” — George W. Bush …”Sarah, if the American people had ever known the truth about what we Bushs have done to this nation, we would be chased down in the streets and lynched.” George Bush Sr. 1992

    “I don’t know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and I really don’t care. It’s not that important. It’s not our priority.” – GW Bush, March 13, 2002

    1. One more time, since you don’t seem to get it: All this, which you have copied and pasted, none of which is your own words, comes mostly from AMERICANS! Some of us have read this and known this long before you got the memo in Finland or where ever it is that you live. Now please quote some of your own heroes instead of misappropriating wisdom of those of other nations.
      You have the classic “smartest guy in the room” complex. That’ll get you far. You are too incompetent to diagnose your own narcissism.

  19. The last comment the hermaphrodite posted was a kilometer long (.6 miles) copy and paste job. Along with the 50 videos, not one of which is even remotely related to the article, I think it’s safe to assume that he’s trying to flood your site. The best part is that he’s upset at how idiotic this site is while no one reached out to him or induced him to come here. He sought this site out, as he seeks conflict, not an exchange of ideas. He/she hates the US so of course he glues himself to American websites. Just freaking move on if you don’t like it, instead of insulting everyone and shoving your opinions down everyone’s throat.
    Ps. Dolores is in aviation
    Mental note: avoid air travel

      1. His comments are interspersed with venom towards Arias as a decoy meant to give the impression he’s in the right place, web site wise. His real hobby though is to whip an America loathfest, an agitator (that was Hitler’s job before he was promoted to dictator). Pursuant to his comments he doesn’t care about the trial nor anything in your article. That is his point. He would like you to stop posting on this subject altogether and do something more constructive ie; something which is important to HIM.

      2. I don’t really care what his motivation is, perhaps his 35 years in the US accumulating wealth has caused him some sort of PTSD? Poor baby, he and his bank account must have been held captive in the States for three decades, otherwise he certainly would have left the Evil Empire immediately. The point is that its important for him to realize that it’s not going to work. He can call me a cunt as many times as his primitive mind desires.

      3. Like if you write “whetbach” or “Jablohmee”? Yes that’s perfectly fine.
        Cannon? More like a hypodermic needle.

      1. Yeah ok, that was a narcissistic rant, not the rants above calling everyone an imbecile and insisting that everyone who does not see things the same way has no critical thinking skills (it’s my way or the highway approach), no that’s not narcissistic.
        There is absolutely nothing abnormal about this email. What is severely abnormal is using three different aliases to incessantly post propaganda. That might be a textbook case of MPD.

      2. blog comments are like a box of chocolates……

        I thought 2014 was going to be a better year, but already, the news has proved me wrong. We have already had a school shooting, a grocery store shooting (clean-up on aisle 12), and another good guy (read-idiot) with a gun who saved the entire movie theater audience from the horrors of texting.

        On you movie network (Thanks again) is a movie called Factotum. I highly recommend it if you haven’t seen it.

      3. And it’s just January.
        I’ve never heard of it, I’ll check it out. I really like Dillon.
        It’s funny because it was one of Arias’ tweets that turned me on to Bukowski. Did you know that Barfly was semi-autobiographical and that he even had a cameo?
        Welcome 🙂

      4. What was the tweet?

        My punch-drunk heart is sadder than all the dead Christmas trees of the world? – trying to get that quote from memory.

      5. “If you want to know who your friends are, get yourself a jail sentence.” – Charles Bukowski

        “My beerdrunk soul is sadder than all the dead christmas trees of the world.” you were close

      6. Though I don’t think one needs to take such drastic measures to find out who one’s friends are, I think the quote is quite astute. Donovan Bering and Patti Womack certainly prove his point.

      7. It’s hard to be really critical, she’s a young single mother with a daughter, she’s scared. Laviolette is an old pro with a strong support system and she was intimidated into silence. For reasons I don’t understand, Jodi’s own mother didn’t even testify?? But having said that, yes, Patti didn’t pass the litmus test and Donovan is a real surprise.
        Even Brewer, who owes her a lot imo, wanted his face obscured, that’s fear. Usually the only people given that type of anonymity are witnesses in mafia trials. This gives you an idea of the extent of the absurdity of this trial.

  20. InconvenientTruthsTV ‏@InconvenientTr1 14h
    @fentonlawless @markgeragos @JodiAnnArias Jodi’s case is a gold mine for an attorney with guts & passion. Juan Martinez needs an a$$ kickin’

    So states the lunatic, and thief and cyber bully S.E.W.

    1. I think she’s right. I would think that an ambitious attorney could do take this case and could make a name for themselves.

      Also, someone needs to stand up to Martinez. I can only imagine how he is when the cameras aren’t rolling.

      1. I think you got an idea of he’s like when the camera’s are off when he told the Judge, at the sidebar, that Willmott should go back to law school and that he’d be suicidal had he been her husband. I don’t think it’s an act for the camera, I think it’s him, all the time. Maybe he’s even worse when there are no witnesses. I agree with Sandra, he needs his flabby ass kicked

      2. The difference with a private defense attorney seems to be media management, understanding the jury, and presenting the facts, testimony and evidence in a more effective manner.

      3. In the Zimmerman trial, O’Mara got involved in the media narrative and he gave the jury arguing points. The first thing, Arias’ defense was not allowed to do. The second thing, Kirk Nurmi failed to do.

      4. I am framing that, Rob! “I think she’s right”….Thanks:)
        Jodi is intent on selling her art and bracelets to pay for an attorney. That is admirable, but not realistic in my view. Any attorney who says, “I’ll take a look for a $50K retainer” or likely more, is too risky. I am certain by now a few lawyers have looked at this, and hopefully your blog especially for how the legal aspects are laid out so nicely.

        Yes, Martina, “multiple personality disorder” seems to be rampant in social media with discussions on Jodi and Travis. I had never been a big facebook or other participant until this trial. I have several clear examples of where I’ve seen this “multiple alias” phenomenon. Funny thing is, so many accuse me, Rob, Amanda, and now George Barwood of all being the same person! I don’t know if this is what the “normal” or mentally sane people think (oh wait, they don’t do social media, ha!) or if this is all coming from the “multiples”. Oh wait, yes I do. It IS all coming from the “multiples” or otherwise deluded! My “other voice” just told me!:)

        Oh BTW, Dirk emails me from “Hercule Poirot” as well with his propaganda. I have a special gmail folder for him. He appears to have a lovely, elderly wife, and maybe a girlfriend, from what others have told me. I’m sure both have tuned him out by now anyway, which is likely why he acts out on social media and blogs. Oh well, ONWARD!:)

      5. You said it, Sandra.

        I don’t see why an attorney could not take the case just to elevate their profile. The important thing is to believe in the case.

        These social media profiles are not “profiles in courage” but rather profiles is discouragement of constructive and civil free speech.

      6. I think this will be tough. Kathleen Zellner, who represented Ryan Ferguson pro bono, said that it cost her firm over a million dollars to get him out (and it took a decade). Ferguson had no bad facts and definitely didn’t kill anyone. Zellner has gone on CNN a few months ago and said that Jodi’s story doesn’t fit the evidence. Even in the Macneill trial and subsequent verdict, while the public is overwhelmingly against him, there is a split in the legal community. There seems to be not much legal dissension in regard to the Arias trial. There are a few soft voices like Vladimir Gagic and maybe Kiefer but not much.
        Even if you look at someone like F Lee Bailey, who represented Dr. Sam Shepard when he was an ambitious nobody, and Shepard (like Arias) was very unpopular, Bailey believed that Shepard was innocent. Everybody knows she killed someone, that makes this very difficult.

      7. The whole trial was about 1st degree murder vs. a lesser charge. The truth is that the prosecution’s story does not fit the evidence. Jodi’s word is suspect and she claims to have a memory deficit and Travis is gone.

        So the only remaining witness is the forensic evidence, which matches Jodi’s story better than the prosecution’s. But yes, I guess the private attorney will want to be compensated up front (retainer).

        I wonder how many attorneys actually watched the trial and kept in mind only what the jury saw and heard?

      8. Sandra, I think the dumbest I’ve done is responding to “Sybil”, it’s like giving Charlie Sheen a shot of Bourbon and a machete. The Youtube video you posted sent him into a rage, LOL

      9. I’m not saying it’s about a retainer. I’m saying it will be hard to find someone who will believe in the case, even if they believe that the trial was a fiasco. Most of the exonerations you see are in cases where someone is charged with murder and is the wrong guy, in other words completely innocent. You don’t see it often that someone takes up a cause (an uphill battle) where the person was overcharged. This is particularly true after a conviction. I think Baez took Anthony with the understanding that she was overcharged, but that happened during the original trial, not to fight a verdict. Fighting a verdict is infinitely more difficult and it’s a protracted, costly, mostly fruitless proposition. This does not bode well for Jodi.
        I also doubt that many lawyers watched the trial but that’s just another thing which works against her.

      10. I agree. It’s a tough fight. Winning an appeal, I feel is possible. A new trial will come with problems. Those problems will not be going away anytime soon.

        That’s why the bright side is that I think more people are getting involved in wrongful convictions, overcharging and over sentencing. If Jodi is sentenced to death, more people will look at the death penalty.

      11. I think it must be true that at least in the legal community they see that this was not a death penalty case. Even in the public there are those who think she’s guilty of 1st degree but think the death penalty was over the top, though not that many (thanks to HLN et al). I think there was so much crap going on in this trial that she should have a shot at an appeal but the misconduct in the Ferguson case, for example, was more blatant and his appeals all got denied until last year. Now he had a heavy hitter on his side and I don’t see anyone rushing to Jodi’s rescue. I think it’s crucial that she has some proper representation and the reluctant Nurmi’s not it.
        It is not to be underestimated that she has no public support to speak of, this has a serious effect on her ability to get a proper lawyer. Barry Beach has overwhelming public support and he’s back in prison.

      12. That’s all true, This is why it’s sad but the best outcome for Jodi may be to get sentenced to death. Then maybe the tide will turn. It’s awful that then she will be in the terrible environment of Arizona’s death row for a long time. But her appeals will have priority and the higher courts will be more inclined to get involved.

      13. I don’t agree that Jodi’s death penalty would serve as impetus to look at the death penalty more closely. There is so much aggression out there against her that most are completely blinded and rooting for death. People should have looked closely at the death penalty when Willingham was executed, or when we heard of Saldate and the prosecution of Debra Milke (who was on death row for over two decades), Troy Davis or any number of others. Davis and Willingham were executed after it was well known that they were innocent. These people all had public support and we still merrily execute like it’s going out of style.

      14. I think the tide is turning on the death penalty. I think most people who think Jodi should be executed were already supporters of the death penalty. I never heard of Debra Milke until last year, and the emphasis was on the appeal before the execution. It just takes a long time to go through all the processes.

      15. Debra Milke had support for a long time, even from Europe – you know the people who are cutting off the supply of lethal chemicals to the States and their death apparatus. You have to follow this stuff to know because Nancy Grace won’t tell you. I’m not sure if the death penalty would be a good outcome if Arias has to sit in a steel cubicle for twenty years – that’s already a life sentence with an uncertain outcome to boot. Though having said that, there was that article if you’ll recall where the majority of death sentence prisoners in California didn’t want it abolished because it would take away any hope for their appeals, so you could be right. Either way you look at it, she was overcharged, and she needs a good lawyer. Willmott will be around for this second phase but I’m not sure about afterwards, that would mean she would have no life for a long time to come. Nurmi should be released, neither he nor his client want him to be on the case, how could he possibly be effective counsel?

      16. Nurmi is gone as soon as possible. I still think he does not get enough credit for the job he did. I don’rt think it was possible to take him off the case for the 2nd penalty phase, because it’s the same trial. Willmott probably be very helpful, whether she takes an active role or not. It’s a grim choice between two dark paths either way.

        I think public support is overrated. The legal issues will be raised regardless of guilt or degree of guilt or innocence. Many a convict who was certainly guilty won a new trial because the trial was not a fair trial.

      17. I agree they won’t take him off before the second phase, if for no other reason than economics. I think he should have been replaced when he expressed a strong interest to be removed, a long time ago, that was the same as saying “I’m not interested in providing a vigorous defense for this person”.
        I don’t think he’s stupid but I think he’s not qualified to represent anyone accused of homicide as the lead counsel. This is why Arias spend so much time on the stand talking about anal sex, he’s a sex crime specialist. There was nothing about forensics, no blood splatter expert, no doctor disputing the “could he ambulate, couldn’t he ambulate” stuff, nobody to explain how a 112lbs woman could(n”t) move a 200lbs guy from the hallway to the shower, nobody to explain that if you have an entry wound and no exit wound you cannot map the path of a projectile, no ballistics expert etc. In the cases he sees I guarantee you he’s not concerned about gas cans, this he should have focused on, this was predictable.
        Another thing I don’t understand is, even in Arizona there must be some basis on which to object about badgering the witness. Not once did he get up and do that. This made all the defense witnesses totally useless as nobody heard a complete sentence out of their mouths. Now their whole focus was the psychological angle, so they lost the game right there.
        I believe it is always the case that when you have someone less than enthusiastic representing a client, the client will not get a fair shake.
        Public support may be overrated but it NEVER hurts. You are right, there are people who get verdicts overturned but I think it’s Russian roulette. It’s another absurdity of the justice system, many guilty have had their verdicts thrown out while many of the innocent have been executed, died in prison or forced to take the Alford plea after decades.

      18. In Arizona, I would guess that badgering the witness applies to getting right in their face, and they were not allowed to do that. Other objections would take the place (asked and answered, relevance, etc.) and these should have been sustained.

        The trial was scheduled to begin in 2011, and up to the beginning of the trial, there was no dispute as to order of injuries and the defense had spent it’s allotted money on experts. Arias was twice as long on the stand as she should have been, but some of the sex testimony was very important, I believe.

        Martinez was using objections to keep defense witnesses from fully explaining 15 years before the Arias case. LaViolette damaged the case by not just answering yes or no or a very short answer. She also did not concede certain things, which would have bolstered her credibility.

      19. On the subject of public support, do you think that Ryan Ferguson’s verdict would have been overturned had his father not launched a major publicity campaign a decade ago? Do you think the West Memphis Three would be out today had it not been for three documentaries, one of them nominated for an Oscar? I don’t think it’s overrated.

      20. In Ferguson’s case, the 2008 appeal established serious problems with the case, that’s why the case was taken on pro bono.

        In the Memphis 3 case, the documentary actually produced evidence. So I think they played a part because public opposition needed to change for them to be set free. So, there, I would agree.

      21. Actually there were serious problems with Ferguson’s case from the very beginning, not the least of which is that he had no motive, no criminal past, did not know the victim and there was DNA which did not match him or Erickson. In 2008 there was an appeal hearing but his appeal was denied. Zellner and her firm took his case in 2009 and it was only after that that both key witness, Erickson and Trump, recanted. I don’t believe Zellner took the case because of some change of tide in terms of evidence, she took the case because the awareness of the case became impossible to ignore.

      22. I didn’t see that the appeal was denied. That makes a difference. What I did see claimed that Erickson and Trump’s testimonies were recanted in the 2008 appeal. Maybe I didn’t see an accurate summary of the case.

      23. It was Zellner who was sent to prison to take Erickson’s statement when he recanted, so this happened after she was on the case for some time. The same is true for Trump, the janitor. All of Ferguson’s appeals were denied despite overwhelming evidence of misconduct.

      24. “We conclude that Ferguson has established the gateway of cause and prejudice, permitting review of his procedurally defaulted claim that the State violated Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963) by withholding material, favorable evidence of an interview with Barbara Trump, the wife of Jerry Trump, one of the State’s key witnesses at trial.
        The undisclosed evidence was favorable because it impeached Jerry Trump’s explanation for his ability to identify Ferguson.”
        Trump was a convicted sex offender pressured by Crane, then the prosecutor now a judge, to give false testimony. The other witness was Erickson, then a 17 year old goofed out on skunk weed, no lawyer, no parents present during long interrogation. During police interrogation he did not know how Heitholt died, did not know the murder weapon, did not even know the location. During the police “interview” he stated he could be dreaming and making all this up. He was threatened with his own head on “the chopping block”. Everything he “confessed” to was fed to him by the police and the prosecutor knew this well (very much like Jessey Miskeley of the WM3).
        There were a number of other issues. Eg. The other janitor, who talked to one of the guys that night, said that they were neither Ferguson nor Erickson, nobody heard that testimony while Crane was well aware of it – I believe the word for that is exculpatory.
        These was the hearing in 2008, from the voice of the defense you can tell this is not Kathleen Zellner, this was before she took the case and Ferguson’s appeal was denied after this hearing despite everything you hear here.
        There is a comment below this video, from a man who was a cop for 40 years, read what he thinks of this interrogation.

      25. Well, that was pretty thorough. The thing with these convictions due to confessions is that the confessions should match up with other evidence that can only be known to the perpetrator. A simple “I did it” with nothing in the confession to corroborate it should never be accepted as evidence.

      26. In about 25% of DNA exoneration cases, innocent defendants made incriminating statements, delivered outright confessions or pled guilty, according to the Innocence Project. Just talking DNA.
        There was a great documentary I saw a few years ago, on the Passionate Eye I think, about confessions. It was absolutely unbelievable.

      27. Of course, because they just want to leave the interrogation. They’re not thinking about the long term when they’re sleep deprived, mentally confused, and they just want the interrogation to end.

      28. This documentary is maybe the most shocking documentary I have ever seen. I’ve forgotten how bad this story was. This documentary should be shown in all law schools.

      29. What I find interesting is the liberals vs. conservatives dynamic and their surprising roles in this. It is all highly political and not very justice oriented. It’s also not only a question of innocent vs. guilty but as Mills said, it’s a question of how we treat the guilty. This is very relevant in the case of Arias as well I would say.

      30. It could that’s true, but it’s much more likely that it will happen to the homeless guy who steals a pair of socks than the banker laundering money for a Mexican cartel. The fact that it may happen to you is a sad motivation for caring, people should care even if they are in no danger themselves, for moral reasons. The fact that few care is a symptom of a society devoid of much empathy. Sad

      31. What in your mind is the notion behind the three strikes under any circumstances? Why is justice based on a baseball concept? What is the logic behind that?

      32. The idea was to prevent a child molester or violent criminal who was working his way up to murder. There are a number of cases of murderers who got 5 or 10 years and then murdered again.

      33. I would say that if a murderer gets five years that’s your problem right there, unlikely to be solved by three strikes, or two or four. I think it’s a way to circumvent due process, a fast track to railroading people. If you reoffend, you should be sentenced according to your new crime bearing in mind that you have a previous record. I don’t think anything should be automatic, I think that’s the most dangerous part of these brilliant ideas, which are more political slogans than justice. Even the death penalty is applied on a case by case basis rather than everyone who’s convicted of murder gets it.

      34. Oh, that would make too much sense. On Pre-Occupies with HLN facebook page, they posted a Pro-death penalty post from this idiot

        I sent it to Amanda and she found a lot of problems with the cases, such as way too short of a sentence for murder, or the fact that many of these people were minors on their first conviction. This is where “killing you’s the right thing to do” article came from.

        What are judges for, anyways? Every situation is different and needs to be decided based on a balance of what is best for society and what is humanitarian.

      35. Still reading the Rolling Stone article. Catch-22 again. LOL. Wants to request paper but has to make a written request to get it!

        California is a very strange state.

      36. Ross Stores sent a letter supporting the release of a man who was sent away for life for stealing a pair of its baby shoes. – “You’ve gotta be kidding me’ motion.”

      37. No empathy or understanding, like swatting a fly (with a buick).
        Some of these people go in for five and are never the same or even worse, they never get out. The prison system is like higher education in crime. You may steal a slice of pizza because you’re hungry but after you serve a stiff sentence for that you come out with connections to the Sinaloa Cartel.

      38. LOL. Yes, and how does that benefit society? I believe in a fair chance. I haven’t seen one article about Quartavius Davis. How can you give someone a sentence that is more than 8 times his years on earth?

      39. Did I illusion myself, or wasn’t Cheney coming out on all the New shows just as his daughter was running was running for Senate? Nice place to start, with the Senate.

  21. According to Cornell Law badgering the witness is the following:
    When a lawyer is unnecessarily hostile to, combative with or harassing a witness. For example “Do you really expect the jury to believe that?” or “WHERE WERE YOU ON THE NIGHT OF FOURTH? WHERE? HUH? ROBBING A BANK?”
    Sound familiar?
    Even if they changed the sequence of events last minute, the defense focused on the wrong stuff. They knew about the gas cans. They should have focused on the forensics regardless of the sequence claimed by the prosecution, they should have told a story move by move, their own story supported by the blood trail. I guarantee you that had she had someone from OJ’s dream team on the case they would have zoomed in on the bloody footprint, which doesn’t seem to belong to anybody, and made a giant story out of that. I’d like to see the three stooges (Martinez, Flores and Horn) explain that one. If someone like Geragos was representing her he would have pounded away on the fact that Alexander was killed in a busy house in broad daylight, this fact pointing to self-defense or a crime of passion and ruling out any sort of plan.
    I think Laviolette conceeded plenty, like for example that Travis was a victim of his own childhood and he was not one dimensional. She said he had good qualities and she could see how he was a good person despite the fact that she believes he abused Arias. I had no trouble with her credibility.
    What do you think she did not but should have conceded?

    1. I totally agree that behavior such as Martinez’ should not be allowed in an American courtroom. Is it any wonder, knowing the history of Maricopa, where judges and county officials have to sue their own employer to prevent Sheriff Joe and the DA from destroying them, that a judge feels powerless to control a prosecutor?

      With LaViolette, it’s tricky. The main thing is she should have answered directly and let the defense attorney clarify her answers.

      1. I completely agree, Montgomery even had the gall to criticize the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. The lunatics are running the asylum over there.
        On Laviolette, not so much. I think the questions were deliberately structured in such a way that she could not give a yes/no, she was also kept on the stand on cross for a long time to drive this “recalcitrant” attitude of hers home to the jurors. It was all show, he gave her questions impossible to answer by yes or no (damned if you do damned if you don’t) so that he could demonstrate what a combative, bad girl she is, he had absolutely no interest in hearing answers. I understand what you mean, answer the minimum and let the defense rehabilitate you, but that’s tough for an expert. I think you’re right to a certain degree, I think during the whole Snow White fiasco she should have just said: yeah ok Mr. Martinez maybe she was battered, lol, there was no point in having a big battle with him over that. But it did show what an idiot he is.

      2. That’s Martinez’ special talent, cultivated by an intense hatred of defense attorney’s and defendants. I swear he could make any honest person appear bad on the stand. That’s why he should not be allowed to do the Things he did.

        You put that very well.

      3. He can only do that under three conditions:
        1 If the judge tolerates the badgering – this does not go on in most other trials
        2 If the jury is not too bright and doesn’t get antagonized by his approach
        3 If he knows the defense won’t retaliate with his witnesses, which they certainly did not during this trial
        Had he been up against someone more experienced and aggressive he would have acted like a lamb. I’d like to see him tell Dershowitz to go back to law school.

      4. Exactly. He’s mocking the defense at the sidebar while the judge is pleading with him obviously scared. It would be hysterical if it wasn’t so tragic.
        I’m watching the doc about the confessions, I’m 10min in and I want to cry.

  22. I am so glad to have finally found, what I was looking for!

    The whole trial was so incomplete, missing evidence(s) and witness(es) and so many questions left unanswered.

    The behavior of the prosecutor made me think how lucky I am not to be in his “care” … and the judge obviously on his side!

    By just watching, I felt so miserable in my stomach It seemed that the prosecutor manipulated involved persons – my opinion – made witnesses look not reliable and biased, just because they didn’t answer, what HE wanted to hear … making it impossible to answer some quesions with “yes” or “no”.
    Sometimes I felt like an inquisition is going on. I hate when people talk in third person of themselfs – in my opinion these people don’t want to take responsibilty – means they do whatever they do in the name of someone (in this case for the victim?) or rather for their career!?
    He NEVER gave a proof – not for premeditated murder and not for the motive.

    Thanks for this page 🙂

    1. Thank-You Allmoi,
      We both had the same exact feeling that there was an effort to influence and tell people what to think rather than simply producing the evidence.

      What was really surprising was taking a second look and discovering there was even less evidence than we thought.

      We can now say that there is nothing at all that can be called stalking or even stalking behavior. This is a master at weaving a tale and bending the evidence to fit the tale. It’s an abomination.

      I really like what you said about the 3rd person. I can tell you something true: Beware of people who have a large picture of themselves prominently displayed in their office and also of people who refer to themselves in the 3rd person. There’s something really wrong here.

  23. Yes, I agree there is a foul play going on.
    Witnessed by thousends of people (sheeples) and only a few who can see the openly told lies!
    I believe, only because of his profession and demeanor(!) people follow his version, blinded by the so called justice. Maybe it’s even possible that some follow him only, because they are afraid, are they?!?
    Hmmm,or is it just another Story of “The Pied Piper of Hamelin”?

    This happening reminds me of another person who could perfectly persuade and manipulate – he lost WW II

    I now don’t want to say they are the same, but the characteristics are very much alike – very dramatically and great speeches … they love to hear themself talk and taking “stage dives” into the crowd of followers.
    I am just comparing and trying to tell my feelings about Mr. Prosecutor of AZ.

    Thanks for letting me being part of this page, it feels so good to read interesting views and explanations. The very best place, and only one, I have found about this subject.

    1. I think Juan Martinez is very persuasive to the level that his persuasion goes well beyond the evidence. He manipulates testimony for sure.

      I believe he is a public servant who believes he is doing things in the best interest of the people. But if you look at his other cases, you can see that he became jaded and he hates defendants and defense attorneys.

      He started using defense attorney’s techniques against them by introducing speculation into his arguments and facts not supported by the evidence. So you have the bicycle argument in the Chrisman case, which is a lie, the battery acid argument in Robert Towery’s commutation hearing, another lie, and the argument that Arias is a criminal, a stalker, and a person with violent tendencies – all lies.

      This makes him a dangerous person in death penalty cases and searches for the truth. It goes against the ethics of a prosecutor. This man lies to kill, and in this way he is similar to you know who from WW II.

      If you are interested in a particular aspect of this case, a particular witness or piece of evidence please let us know. We can write an article about it.

      Thank you so much for your nice comment. We have tried to be a moderate (not extreme or crazy) voice for the defense. We believe there are severe problems with the prosecution case, and we have set forth these problems using a factual basis and rational arguments.

  24. Juan did not suborne perjury from the ME. The rest of the autopsy report supports the bullet going in the brain.
    Travis’s brain was dead for 5 days. The brain of a dead person goes under a process called liquefactive necrosis. When the cells of the brain no longer get oxygen, they release digestive enzymes that break down the tissue and turn it into a sticky slimy pus. This causes a loss of structure and the result of something that has the consistency of a sticky slimy brain shaped jello mold. Any wound tract that would have been left by a projectile would basically have fallen into itself and no longer be able to be recognized. It would be like sticking a stick in a pile of thick mud and pulling it out. The path can be seen. Pour a few cups of water on the mud to make it mushy (autolysis, ie brain digestion) and one can no longer see that path because it all melts together.
    This is what is meant by “NO APPARENT CEREBRAL INJURY” and the reason why the statement about the brain being somewhat limited by the decomposed nature of the remains.
    The ME was being factual in stating that there was not an apparent injury. He made it a point to discuss the decomposed nature of the remains because he was not able to say if there WAS or WAS NOT a DEFINITE injury to the brain because he was examining mush that would collapse on itself with the slightest pressure. Because of the state the brain was in, there could have very well been a wound track that melted into itself due to liquefactive necrosis.
    Support from the autopsy that the bullet did enter the brain:
    1. PERFORATED (went through) the ANTERIOR FRONTAL SKULL (the forehead) near the superior orbital bone (just above the eye)
    2. The brain is immediately behind this point of entry
    3. TRAVERSES (goes across) the RIGHT ANTERIOR FOSSA (this is on the INSIDE of the skull)
    4. The projectile RE-enters (back into something )
    5. Terminates in the left cheek (on the OUTSIDE of the skull).
    There is NO room for the bullet to travel between the dura and the skull on the inside of the skull. That is a 6.25 mm item trying to move within a space measuring less than .01 mm. Physics says that is impossible.
    The idea that because the autopsy report says there is a good preservation of cerebral symmetry supports the dura being intact is unfounded. In a necrotic brain the tissue is not viable enough for close exam, thus the term symmetry is only in relation to shape and size. Factors such as tumors or large brain hemorrhages would result in a brain that would be asymmetrical. The injury to Travis’s brain via the bullet did NOT contain major blood vessels that would cause such a hemorrhage. Over time bleeding and swelling may have caused a change in symmetry, but this would take longer than the 62 seconds between life and death as shown via the photographs due to lack of major vessel involvement..
    Given the relation to the entry wound and the fact the dura lies flush with the skull, there would be no need to further elaborate on the dura above the fact it was or was not intact. The actual thickness of the dura is only 78-82 microns OR 0.078 mm – 0.082 mm OR about 0.003 inches. In relation, the human skull is 6.5 mm. There is no space for a 6.35 mm bullet to travel between the dura and the skull without causing noticeable injury to one or the other. Thus, if the area of skull perforation is noted and it is believed that the dura was perforated as well by the ME conducting the autopsy, it would serve no purpose to further elaborate as to the location, size, or characteristics of this rupture.
    The part of the autopsy that states the dura was intact does not correlate in any way with the rest of the autopsy given human anatomy. To make it work with the entry wound and following it to the exit to the cheek, we would have to rewrite basic human anatomy. The only explanation as to why ONE item does not match with the rest of the autopsy is because that ONE item is a typo. If there is evidence within that autopsy report as to otherwise, please point it out.

Leave a Reply

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

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

Google+ photo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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


Connecting to %s