Milk and Cookies for the “Crusher” of Candy Crush ! (Dec 28)

Opinion by Amanda Chen and Rob Roman

candy crush

Lise LaSalle, a Canadian blogger, fired the first shot across the bow in the battle of the upcoming 2nd penalty phase in the Jodi Arias trial with her article called “The Infamous Trial of Candy Crush”. Lise’s article was a very well written and intelligent summary of many of the problems Jodi Arias supporters and others see in the first phases of the trial.

This shot must have made quite a splash, because JustDaTruth, a well-known advocate for the prosecution fired back with a scathing article, called “Crushing the Candy Crush”. In this article, the author, who prefers to remain anonymous,  gave factual reasons and logical arguments for why he believes the Candy Crush article was off base.

cookies-and-milk-cookies-367297_593_552In this article, we will be replying to the Crusher of Candy Crush, and we will not fire back. We will simply serve him or her milk and cookies, better known as food for thought. This culinary response is based on facts, logic, and reasoning.

These are the first articles we have read from Lise LaSalle and from JustDaTruth. We were impressed with both articles as civil dialogue and a healthy exchange of ideas. Links to both articles are shared below. We highly encourage and recommend  that you read both of these articles to get some real insight into the major arguments from both sides.

Dear JustDaTruth,

justdatruthSome of your points were very good and interesting, but we find fault with some of your arguments. Your points are highlighted and below them are our responses:

One major point:

We disagree with the verdict of 1st degree premeditated murder. We do not find fault with the jury on that verdict. We are saying that what was presented to the jury was not the truth.

Why Try to Plead to 2nd Degree When Arias Claims it was Self-Defense?

Jodi is responsible for Travis’ death, regardless of whether it was self-defense, heat of passion, or murder. She knows this and she was willing to take a 20 year sentence for that responsibility and to avoid making this so public with a trial. However, she is not willing to take a life sentence or allow the state to execute her for a domestic homicide with no prior offenses, which has no business being a death penalty case in the first place.

The Jury Wasn’t Biased

jury 8“Death qualified jury” means that no one who is totally opposed to the death penalty should be allowed to serve. That’s a whole lot of people. This is why the State of Arizona prosecutors like almost every murder trial to qualify for the Death Penalty. This means there are more people on the jury who will side with the prosecution and be more willing to convict. This deprives Arias of some jurors who will understand the rights of the accused, including some who are especially empathetic and understanding of both domestic violence and some of the less understood causes of violence in our society.

(Please see new discarded jury questions for Jodi Arias….)

The Defense Attorneys “Are Not Public Defenders”

All Arizona defendants in a capital crime MUST, by statute, have two attorneys. A mitigation specialist is now required. Nurmi and Willmott ARE public defenders no matter where they work now. They are under constraints of a budget when presenting a defense. They cannot advocate for the defendant in any way outside the courtroom. sweetLawyers who are strictly public defenders also clear their schedule for a major trial and are very busy at other times, just like private defense attorneys.

Niether Nurmi nor Willmott can compete in terms of trial experience with Martinez’ 25 years prosecuting cases and influencing juries in court. If you look at his trial history, you can see that winning the conviction trumps the truth and ethical considerations, in spite of his having convicted some really bad blokes.

(Please see Spotlight on Juan Martinez, State vs. Falater, State vs. Grant. You might also want to watch Martinez’ testimony at Robert Towery’s Commutation hearing on Youtube. Look at the defenses’ response and the testimony of Towery’s sisters. There’s something about this Martinez, there really is.)

Death Penalty

Arias is death penalty eligible meaning her crime qualifies her for the death penalty. But does it really? No one in America has faced the death penalty with similar facts. This is because of Arizona’s F(6) aggravator cruelty prong which can qualify almost any homicide for the DP. Three other women stabbed their partners to death in AZ in 2008. One shot their partner to death, and two ran them over with cars. None of these women, or any of the scores of men who killed their partners in 2008, or any other years, besides one man who chased down and stabbed his wife to death outside his home in front of witnesses, faced the DP in Arizona.

cookies and milk bffsTraditionally Non-Sequestered Jury in AZ.

If we always rely solely on precedent, we ignore the realities of an ever-changing society. The new reality, according to Alan Dershowitz, the very experienced appellate attorney and Harvard law Professor, recommended by Fox News, is that no one can expect a fair trial in a high profile murder case in this day and age. He went on to say that even judges and governors can be affected by ratings motivated sensationalism and the “lynch mobs” they create.

(Please see Heroes, Zeros ans Geniuses in the Jodi Arias Case)

Judge Stephens Controlled the Court Room

Judge Sherry is not experienced in capital cases and this was her first. What’s the reason? The court in AZ is jammed with capital murder trials, so they need more and more judges to preside over them. Judge Stephens was afraid to make the tough decisions for fear of political backlash and appellate review and she was not in control of her courtroom.
Had a cell phone gone off during Martinez’ closing statement instead of Nurmi’s, do you think that Judge Stephens would have admonished the court instead of just giving a blank stare? The idea that Arias’ family said or did anything inappropriate in the courtroom is a flat-out lie, there’s no evidence of that at all and they are as just as about far away from the jury as you can get.

The Alexander family did in fact purposely make eye contact and conducted non-verbal communication with jury members. It’s not their fault, they were never told they cannot do this. This is entirely different than emotional reactions when they were looking straight ahead instead of to their left. This is forbidden in most court rooms throughout the US. Did you see this principle being clearly demonstrated in the Zimmerman trial? The Martin family members were stoned-faced throughout the trial, and they left when they felt they could not keep their emotions in check.

Evidence of this non-verbal communication is clear in many trial videos. Family members can be seen making direct eye contact with jurors. This communication revealed itself when one juror went directly up to the Alexanders and apologized for the failure to achieve a death verdict.  Look at the stares of anger at jurors when there was no death verdict. If Sherry had no bias, how do you explain her emotions when the jury could not come to a unanimous agreement? Failure to reach a unanimous decision happens all the time, so what was that emotion about?

Electronic Devices Are Not a Problem

It’s just too easy to go on Facebook or Twitter, etc. and see things about the trial without meaning to do so. If these comments and reports are all one-sided, the juror then is aware of overwhelming public sentiment, and may feel compelled to act in support of that sentiment, which is the main argument for sequestration. (Please see New Discarded Juror Questions….)

Your statement “What exactly was out there that was patently false, that the juror’s might have been influenced by?” – You really can’t be serious by asking this, can you? Where would we begin?

Lisa Daidone: Stalking Evidence

Lisa Daidone hardly knew Jodi, had rarely met her and only spoke of one incident when Jodi showed up at Travis’ home. She depended primarily on the word of Travis Alexander, who was derisive of Jodi to his friends while talking to Jodi for hours and having sex with her late at night between and after dates with Lisa Daidone. Did YOU watch the trial? Please tell me  who else testified with a first-hand story about Jodi’s “stalking behavior”?

cuteDeanna Reid didn’t testify that Jodi hid behind a Christmas tree or crawled through the doggy door. Deana Reid, Travis’ ex-girlfriend, showed up at Travis’ home one week when Travis was away on business. She claimed that Travis asked her to walk his dog, Napolean. Deanna went over to Travis’ home and was surprised to see Jodi Arias there. She claims that Travis had no knowledge that Jodi was there. Is this true? Jodi didn’t hide behind a Christmas tree then. Instead, she was baking and she offered Deanna some chocolate chip cookies. Deanna’s described Jodi’s behavior to the jury as like a “Stepford Wife”. Damned if you do serve cookies, and damned if you don’t and just hide behind the tree .

LaViolette Was Not Balanced / Fair To Travis

As far as Travis being afraid of Jodi, he did not report any incident, he did not change his locks, he did not change his garage code, and he did not even lock his front door. He did not stop answering the booty call. This is why LaViolette was saying that Travis’ actions did not mimic his words when he said he was in fear of Jodi.

Alyce LaViolette is one of this country’s foremost experts in domestic violence. She isn’t a “shopped for” witness. With over 30 years experienced directly dealing with both the victims and the perpetrators of domestic violence, she’s a wish-list witness. Her testimony is that Travis Alexander’s behaviors as reported by Jodi Arias and as objectively supported by independent evidence, were derisive and abusive throughout the relationship. They fit a pattern she recognized. LaViolette stands by her testimony to this day.

(Please see Spotlight on Domestic Violence)

Samuels Cheated for Jodi

Psychologist Dr. Samuels did not think that Jodi needed to be re-tested because whether she is a witness to a murder or a participant in a killing, the trauma she experienced is the same trauma experience. Therefore the idea that she needed to be re-tested is a ludicrous technicality. PTSD victims have different symptoms and different ways of compensating, depending on their personalities, etc. Since you feel Jodi Arias does not suffer from PTSD, can either you or DeMarte explain the extra symptoms in her testing not accounted for by either BPD or PD non-specified (NOS), yet do account for PTSD? We are patiently awaiting your answer……

Offering Books to Prisoners

thinking man

Offering books to prisoners, to put it bluntly, don’t mean sh*t.
This is just nitpicking by Martinez.

Arias was tested by 3 psychologists in all and the findings of 2 were reviewed by a 4th psychologist. Yes, there were four Psychologists altogether. You may hear from the 4th Psychologist at the 2nd penalty phase. The sole dissenting opinion about the diagnoses came from Dr. DeMarte, a novice.

How do you know the prosecution did not “shop” for Dr. DeMarte, as they did with Ray Krone, who spent 10 years in prison and 2 years on death row on shopped for false expert testimony?

(Please see What’s going on in Arizona, Maricopa part 1 and 2)

Jodi Lied to Her Parents

What Jodi’s parents said about her, that was not brought into evidence at trial, was that Jodi did not CONFIDE in her parents. This is much different than saying she lied to them all the time. Jodi did not share the details of her life with her parents. She hardly spoke to them. This is understandable as she was shown little affection or love. If you think a good idea as a parent of a 14 year-old is to call the police because your daughter is growing some pot seeds in Mom’s Tupperware on the roof, then God bless you. Experimentation is the basic job description of teens. This is a perfect occasion to communicate and be a parent. If your own parents are not on your side and loyal to you, God help you. Who throws their own child to the wolves and doesn’t even provide legal help for a daughter accused of murder? Fortunately people can change. Jodi has changed and her parents have changed.

The Defense Agreed with DeMarte

The defense did not “buy” Borderline Personality Disorder. They had already stated Personality Disorder NOS (Non-Specified). The defense adopted both BPD and the 1st degree premeditated guilty verdict at the time of the 1st penalty phase because that is what threy believed the jury accepted. At that point in the trial, you have to argue the facts that the jury most likely believes, not your own.

Martinez Destroyed Defense Witnesses

thinking man 2With both LaViolette and Samuels, Martinez did little damage to their testimony and the objective facts they presented. What Martinez is so experienced at is discrediting the source of the information. Samuels is nothing more than a Messy Marvin and a pervert aching to touch Jodi’s naughty parts. LaViolette is a kooky liberal lesbian who believes that even Snow White is a battered woman.

Defense Expert’s False Claims

There were no experts who claimed or tried to demonstrate that Jodi acted in self-defense or that it was a sudden heat-of-passion homicide. The experts presented merely provided evidence and testimony which demonstrated that it was a possibility, and that’s all they needed to do.

Gas Can Evidence Proves Premeditation

ccspresskitThe amount of gas purchased at Tesoro was 25 + gallons. The capacity of 2 gas cans and the Ford Escort gas tank is 25 + gallons. It was not proven that Jodi had 3 gas cans at Tesoro, nor was it proven that she did not return the third gas can to Wal-Mart. It was merely proven that a clerk, who testified that a SKU number is spelled S-K-E-W, did not find a record of return in the places that she searched.

Talk about skewed testimony! The defense had no opportunity to adequately investigate and respond to this claim.

Back Stabbing and George Barwood

A note about George Barwood.

George is a UK resident. He has painstakingly compiled many facts and ideas about the Jodi Arias case on a Wikispace. George is active in helping advocating for the accused in wrongful conviction cases and he has worked on issues such as reducing domestic violence and abolition of the death penalty.

George is attacked as “not an expert” and not from the United States and therefore not qualified to give his opinion. This is the typical Martinez tactic of attacking the source rather than the information. Since George Barwood, as posters  say, is not an  expert, then you don’t need to be an expert to refute his ideas. So how about attacking his ideas and opinions with some of your own, instead of trying to cop out and attack him personally? Hmmmm?

The questions surrounding the tight pattern of wounds on Travis’ back have been contemplated by many people with the autopsy photos and a sense of reasoning. It is not only George Barwood’s theory, but agreement among many people, including, believe it or not, Juan Martinez.

Many people on the defense side of this trial have vastly differing beliefs about what the verdicts should be as well as having vastly different theories. This includes ideas from George Barwood, a meticulous collector of facts, and two articles by Richard Speights, on how the knife attack can be defensive in nature and a theory about the gun being first. Various others with varying degrees of experience and common sense, have also come to similar conclusions.

It was Juan Martinez himself, demonstrating using the court reporter as victim, who showed that a person can be stabbed from a variety of angles and positions. Juan used both sides of the same argument to make his points many times during the trial.

Travis autopsy diagramIf you stabbed a person in the back from in front, the sharp edge could still be facing downward depending on how you grasped the knife. Most of the stab wounds are diagonal. How can a stab wound to the back be an inch or more deep when they were all stopped by the ribs and spine? Travis was a man, he was not a seal.

The measurements listed in the autopsy report are the widths of the wounds, not the depth. The deepest wound could not be more than 1/2 inch, and the majority were 1/4 inch. No one has given a good theory about how, where, or why Jodi Arias would stab Travis in the back with shallow wounds when one stab to the kidneys would have stopped him in his tracks. Defensive wounds meant to ward him off make much more sense. These are “chopping wounds”, and chopping wounds are most often defensive.

Martinez theorized that Travis was stabbed in the back at the sink. Really? Logically and reasonably, why would a person do this?

Use of Felony Murder Charge

If the prosecution was so positive it was a premeditated murder and only Jodi was involved, then there’s no need for the 1st degree felony murder charge. You stated that under felony murder if a fight breaks out and a person is killed, if it’s the victim’s house, it’s first degree felony murder and if it’s at the perpetrator’s home, it’s not.

This is what you said. Think about it. That’s ludicrous.

This is why felony murder and domestic violence don’t mix. The added charge of felony murder means that the prosecution does not believe the gun was last (Gun first is the only reasonable explanation for felony murder). The felony murder charge can also mean that the prosecution doesn’t believe that only Arias was involved in the crime (felony murder charges are often used when accomplices are involved) and/or that this was a pre-mediated murder (felony murder charges are used when the murder is not pre-meditated).

In any case, this doesn’t bode well for a fair trial, because the jury believed all of these ideas.

This is just an advanced version of Martinez’ trick questions akin to “Have you stopped beating your wife yet?”. A good example of this is “Did you cry when you were stabbing him?”. How clever! Both trails of yes and no choices mean you beat your wife, you stabbed him and you are going to the execution chamber.

Sex Evidence Used for Distraction

cookies and milkThe sex evidence was not used for distraction or to win over a horny juror. The sex evidence was crucial in showing Travis’ carefully hidden character and why it was possible that he suddenly could fly into a severe and violent rage. This was a hidden relationship with hidden activities, hidden conflicts, and alleged hidden violence. Without that sex evidence, no jury could ever believe what Jodi was saying about Travis, an ordained elder in the LDS Church. The sex evidence was not aimed at “trashing Travis”

(Please see An Open Letter to Wendy Murphy)

“Humiliation / Battery” of Victim’s Family

Perhaps this is just your perception because of your viewpoint. There is no real evidence that Jodi lied under oath about Travis. There is no basis to claim that she has done anything at the trial or publicly during the trial or since that “batters” or “humiliates” the Alexander family. This is begging for sympathy for Travis, which by the way we ALL have, but not when evaluating the facts.

As a matter of fact, Jodi Arias sided with the prosecution against her own attorney in arguing to clear the court for the playing of the sex tape.

If you insist that your allegations of “humiliation and battery” are true, please supply specific examples. Travis’ lifestyle and behavior were objectively proven, independently of Jodi’s testimony, to be abusive and demeaning throughout the relationship. In fact, he was abusive to Lisa Daidone and Mimi as well. Deanna was all for living with Napoleon, not so much with Travis.

Oh Holy Night

Both Lisa LaSalle and JustDaTruth are correct. Sheriff Joe has not done anything negative towards Jodi Arias, in fact he has done some good things for her (allowing her interviews, supplying her with excellent protection during the trial, allowing her participation in a talent contest at Christmas time). Regardless of how anyone feels about the other policies of Sheriff Joe, he has been generally good to Jodi Arias.

Lisa laSalleLise LaSalle’s paragraph about Oh Holy Night (the song Jodi sang in Estrella Jail to win the Christmas talent contest) wasn’t about Sheriff Joe, it was about how so-called “haters” love to hate Jodi and love to wish her cruelties and suffering even at Christmas time.

This hating of a complete stranger continues, even though Jodi Arias is in custody and will face life in prison or execution for her acts.
…….As if somehow this is not enough.
Relax. Let justice run its course. Listen to both sides of the story, follow the 2nd penalty phase and enjoy some milk and cookies!


Unlike most blogs, ALL comments are accepted and will be posted.

Lise LaSalle’s Article:

JustDaTruth’s Article:

George Barwood’s sites about the Arias case:

100 thoughts on “Milk and Cookies for the “Crusher” of Candy Crush ! (Dec 28)”

  1. I don’t understand what you mean by this:
    How can a stab wound to the back be an inch or more deep when they were all stopped by the ribs and spine? – Only due to the decomposition / bloating of the body.

    1. Who has 1 or 1 1/2 inches of muscle on their upper back? The autopsy report says all knife wounds to the back were stopped by ribs or the spine,

      Don’r you find that to be not possible? I’m assuming that the bloating body made the knife wounds measure out to be deeper than they actually were.

      1. The autopsy says the wounds ranges from 3/4- to one and a half inches. I’m sure the ones on or near the spine were the shallower wounds, but considering Travis was slightly over weight most definitely he had at least 1.and a half inches of muscle and fat on his back

      2. Also, since the wounds terminated at the bones, it wouldn’t be hard to apply pressure near the wounds to reduce the bloating around the area to be able to measure down to the bone. You would also be able to visually see the difference between the sliced tissue from the stab and any tissue that was torn apart from the bloating that might have caused the wound to appear deeper.

      3. Here, I think you are forgetting the main point about the back wounds. The back wounds don’t need to be shallow to be defensive wounds. I never said they were all shallow. If you think a person has 1 1/2 inches of muscle and fat beyond the ribs and spine, that’s fine by me, but it seems to me to be a little high. It sounds more like a seal than a man. But, that’s just me and I’m no expert on this.

  2. The reason that people find George’s “opinions” so absurd is because no matter how many facts you give him to refute what he believes to be true, he refuses to acknowledge any facts he is confronted with.

    Fort instance the back wounds that we were just speaking about, well George believes those wounds aren’t deep at all and are just superficial scratches.

    He also refuses to accept that WalMart shows no record of a gas can being returned because he holds he belief the records were lost because the actual cash register that was used to process the return transaction is no longer around to search its history. He fails to accept that all of Wal MArt’s transactions are stored on the main frame of the computer system. They are not stored on each individual cash register. He has a very detailed website but can’r grasp the concept of a system that backs up all its information at one central location.

    Finally and the most craziest I believe of his theories is that the reason Jodi bought enough gas for 2 gas cans and not 3 is because rental car companies have some deal with car manufacturers for the rental cars to have bigger gas tanks then the typical car people buy say from a car lot. That is just so many different kinds of crazy I don’t know where to begin…

    1. Yes, ha ha, I know what you mean

      As for the back wounds, it says right on the autopsy, so there’s no denying it. I will say that they are measuring the length and depth of wounds as they are and that may differ a little from the dimensions at the time the wounds were made.

      The Wal-Mart records show what they show. You have to deal with facts. I will say that the prosecution witness only showed that no record was found, which is not exactly the same as proving the gas can was not returned. You can’t pick and choose which facts you want to believe, like believing in a crazy fact because it helps your theory.

      I also had a discussion with GB about the gas tank. Rental cars are no different than any other, I believe they are mostly leased cars. The gas tank was most probably 14 gallons. The capacity of 2 gas cans and the car gas tank is 24 gallons. You can put more than a gallon extra into a 14 gallon tank. So You don’t need a special large gas tank.

      She bought 25+ gallons and the capacity of 2 gas cans and the car tank is 25+ gallons.I will say that Jodi herself said she never lets the car get that low.

      The question of the return, the defense never had a chance to fully answer to this. Nurmi asked no questions, but still, This is something that needs to be explained.

      He thinks Peterson is not guilty too, so, there you are!

      1. Martinez had no way of knowing what Jodi would say until she was on the stand. How was he suppose to know that Jodi would have claimed to have returned the gas can. He wouldn’t at all. The defense team however they would have known and they should have know that the receipt in evidence in no way matches Jodi’s claim that she returned. They could have asked Jodi about the discrepancy and they could have spoke to WalMart prior to the trial beginning. They could have dine all that without Martinez ever knowing that Jodi had claimed to return it. However they didn’t. They chose to I guess just believe what Jodi had told them. They also could have deposed the WalMart witness before she took the stand but they decided to take the route of not addressing it and pouting in the corner like a 3yr old would do if they didn’t get their way. Martinez subpoenaed WalMarts records as soon as Jodi testified to returning the can. When prior to that should he have known he was going to need to do that….

      2. You are right that the gas can issue was a surprise. I never said it wasn’t. Since it was a surprise to both sides, the defense team had no way of preparing for it. This case has many facets to it, and you cannot analyze every piece of evidence to death. The defense team had a chance to depose the witness and to question the witness at trial. Why they did not is purely speculation. There still needs to be an answer from the defense on this matter.

        As a matter of fact we all knew what Martinez would do the minute Jodi said she returned the can.

      3. A 2008 ford focus has 13.5 gallon fuel capacity. It’s not an estimate its an exact amount that the tank holds calculated prior to it being installed. The only addition fuel besides the tank the car could hold would be in the fuel line from the tank to the opening where you refuel the car. There is no way the gas line is long enough or wide enough to hold an extra gallon of gas. I haven’t but I could do the calculations of how much additional fluid the gas line could hold. Rental cars aren’t leased they are purchased by the rental company from the car manufacturer at a discounted price because they purchase large quantity of vehicles at one time. After a certain amount of time/miles put on a rental car the company then sells them to the general public, but like you said they are the same cars that people would by at a car dealership,.

        I don’t understand when you say the WalMArt witness says only that no record was found that the can was returned, but that is not the same as proving the can was not returned. If the can was returned the records would show it. What more could there possibly be to prove that,. Walmart has a very detailed inventory system system., she was even able to tell you the next time that gas can SKU was found anywhere in there system.

      4. That’s right. The 2008 Ford Focus does have a 13.5 gallon tank. Earlier and later models have a 14 gallon tank. I disagree that you cannot fill the tank with more than 13.5 gallons. My research says you can put close to 14 gallons into this tank and close to 14.5 gallons in a 14 gallon tank. You can also overfill the 2 gas cans, which she did do. I don’t have information that the car is a 2008. The Wal-Mart witness proved that no record was found, not that the gas can wasn’t returned. There are a number of reasons why the record may not reflect a returned gas can. The fact that the witness states that she found a similar gas can returned a week or so later is not relevant to the argument.

      5. It is scientifically impossible to fill a container more then the volume capacity. It would be like saying you bought a gallon of milk that was over filled and you actually got a gallon and a half of milk. As far as the car yes it can hold more gas then the capacity of the gas tank, but it will be the gas in the fuel line into the tank. I’ll give you some calculations

        Being extra generous lets say a 2 in diameter fuel line( that is extra generous because a fuel line is nowhere near that big)

        and lets say again being generous 2 ft long of tube stretching from the opening of the car to the gas tank

        Volume=pi X radius squared X height
        V=3.14X 1 X 24

        V=75.36inches cubed

        1 inch cubed = 0.004329 US gal

        75.36 X .004329 = 0.3262 US gal

        Which means being generous at the absolute most that car could hold an extra .3262 gallons

        Even if the car was a 14 gallon tank your only at .3262 additional gallons.

        A 5 gallon can is a 5 gallon can… If it could hold more it would be a 5.5 gallon can or whatever the extra amount is that is being claimed she overfilled the can.

      6. I would have to say you are wrong on both. Your calculations are close, but it has been determined by tests from more than one source to be + /-3%. = 13.905 for a 13.5 gallon tank. or 14.42 for a 14 gallon tank.

        Here we are stretching the limits of what’s possible, but it’s possible.

        Do you have a link to information which says Arias’ Ford Escort rental was a 2008 rather than a 2007 or 2006 which both have a 14 gallon tank?

        A 5 gallon can is not 5 gallons. I have mowed many lawns in my day, so I can guarantee you that.

      7. In light of showing just how obsessed I am with being accurate I went through my garage and uncovered my 5 gallon gas can. It has a fill line indicating the five gallon mark, which was just below the handle. So I filled the can to the 5 gallon fill line and then measured exactly how much it took to fill it to the very very top. It was 24 oz. or an addition .1875 gal. So that’s .375 between the two cans. So in the technical sense a 5 gallon does have some wiggle room, but if it were to have another .5 gallons worth of wiggle room, then it would be a 3.3 gallon gas can not a 5 gallon can. I have a 2 gallon gas can that is actually a 2.2 gallon gas can and it says 2,2 on the can. I also looked online and I saw a couple different cans that were 2.2 gallons, but all the 5 gallon cans were 5 gallon cans.

        I haven’t been able to find anything on the actual year the focus was that Jodi rented, but I did see that George used a 2008 Focus and I can’t imagine him using the year that has the smaller can unless he know it was that one. Do you know where you saw the info on the 3% uncertainty.


        Click to access B-014.pdf

        I think you are maybe too obsessed about GB. He says many things I agree with and some things I don’t. If you have an issue with his ideas, you should talk directly to him.

        I reviewed the testimony of the Avis guy and he did not mention the year of the car.

        The main thing about GB is he has amassed a lot of facts on his Wiki. Conclusions drawn from the facts are a different matter. One thing he has on his site is the exact amount of gas bought at Tesoro.

        You can believe that Arias filled the two gas cans with 9.583 Gallons, fills the 3rd gas can with 5.091 Gallons and then put 10.672 gallons in the car gas tank. Makes sense.

        It’s possible she put 10.672 Gallons in the two cans, 5.091 in the car gas tank, and then finished filling the car gas tank with 9.583 gallons.This would be 14.583 gallons in the car tank. Stranger things have happened.

        Another possibility is that Arias did not return the can and was mistaken. She may have thought about returning it, but didn’t, and so thinks she returned it. She could have returned a can at a Wal-Mart elsewhere sometime previously (like when Darryl refused to lend her the cans the first time) and believes she returned it in southern California.

        Additionally, there could be another reason she took the gas cans other than fear of dying in the desert or to save money on gas. This could be tax purposes. She probably learned something about write-offs from her PPL buddies.

        She could take a long trip, and write part of it off as a shorter trip using the gas cans.

        It doesn’t make sense to be so obsessive about creating an alibi and the separate receipts for the car, the two cans, and the third can, when she then spends 13 hours or more off her route, totally destroying her alibi.

      9. Thank you for those links, it helped me understand some peoples tank overfill beliefs. Can you honestly say that the possibility her gas tank is larger then the 3% variance, that she drove into tesoro with fumes left in her car, and that when filling her tank the ground was not level so she could fill the vapor head area in the tank as well is something that should be considered reasonable doubt? Especially when there is no record of her returning the can and she didn’t make a single stop in AZ for gas that I know of.

        I don’t think it reasonable to think for Jodi or make excuses for her considering she has told her side of the story as to why she used the gas cans and when she took it back. She never mentioned anything about using the can as a tax write off.

      10. No one is making excuses for Jodi Arias. The gas can facts are bad facts for her and maybe in the 2nd penalty phase, but definitely in a possible re-trial, Arias will have to answer for her bad facts.

        The prosecution also has a lot of bad facts, many of which have been pointed out on this site. Both sides must answer for these to finally get to the truth.

        Jodi Arias did have a separate checking and business account, demonstrating that she was writing off business expenses on her taxes. A highly likely explanation for this is that she learned write-offs from the experts, the PPL “Tycoons”.

        The prosecution demanded Arias’ tax returns and the defense objected. The objection was sustained. Therefore the defense cannot bring in any tax issues. So my theory seems like a reasonable explanation for the gas cans, in addition to not wanting to die in the desert and wanting to save money on gas.

        In any event, it can explain the separate receipts she kept for the gas.

        There are bad facts on both sides in all murder cases, even on the side of defendants later found to have been completely innocent.

        There’s a difference between academic experience and real world experience.

        In the real world
        The stated volume of a gas can or a gas tank is less than it’s true capacity.

        People who have been witnesses in a trial know that they can become confused, tired, or have a distorted memory. They can say something that is inaccurate, without lying. People know that they can have a vivid memory that is not correct.

        People who have experienced something that is embarrassing or traumatic know that this memory can be completely submerged.

        People know that even a highly likely explanation for purchases on a receipt is not the only possible explanation.

        Nurmi stated that the actual capacity of the car Arias rented was never brought into evidence, and he’s correct. He stated that Arias may have returned the can to a different Wal-Mart, and there’s no proof that she didn’t.

        Arias never tried to hide the fact that she brought and used gas cans on her trip. This was not a big issue for her. She kept the receipt for the third can.

        The prosecution only picked up on the third can issue when Arias stated she had returned it to the same Wal-Mart. Now it’s the crux of the prosecution’s case which suggests a certain weakness in the case to start with…and this is a death penalty case.

  3. Just reading this, and if I may, I will used that overused expression, “wow, just wow!” I knew Lisa had written “hater bait” , as I call it now (not that she wrote it with that purpose, of course, but that is what so much becomes). As usual, Rob and Amanda, your words are strong and logical, and even the most simple-minded haters should be able to at least see on some level what an idiot “JustDaTruth” makes of herself when she tries so valiantly, but ineffectively, to compete with facts and the “actual story” instead of the one that Juan Martinez (yeah, there is “something” about this guy for sure), HLN and their whoredom, and the CASH and Sky Hughes Mormon Babble-nacle Choir have sung so loudly since this all began! On that note, damn it bugs me when I see “Just Da” instead of “Just Duh”!

    I would disagree though about Sheriff Joe and his treatment of Jodi. Without going into a lot of detail, I believe evidence is accumulating that ol’ Joe and his posse of yes-men-and-women FED Jodi to the media. From day one. Jodi is both strong and intelligent, but still led, I believe, and influenced by, and pardon my expression, the Mormon mind-fucking she received since she met Travis Alexander, and that likely she has and is still receiving through post cards, and books, and who knows what other communications getting through to her in her cell.

    Yes, Amanda and Rob, cookies and milk sounds delish! Now I have to get back to ghost writing Jodi’s tweets and blog posts and God only knows what else! All my “personalities” and the duties that go with each have exhausted me! “Being George Barwood” though, is the most challenging, yet exhilarating persona to date, as I’m sure you can see how it would be!

    So, cheerio and toodles to you guys, and all the best to you in 2014!

    1. Happy New Year, and you are just a riot! So funny.

      Thank-you, We both wanted to write responses to that article but there was so much to say that it grew into an article.

      Stating facts just isn’t enough, they need to actually be facts and they need to support your position.

      Think about this gem that Amanda didn’t want me to respond to: Jodi is guilty because she didn’t kick Travis in the balls! WTF?

      Justdatruth should try telling that to the 52 women per year who are killed by their husbands and boyfriends in Arizona and the over 1,100 women killed by their husbands and boyfriends each and every year in the USA: Just kick them in the nuts! That’ll work.

      Lisa did an excellent job, and there is no appeal from reason. What a great piece! So well written and it gets to the essence of the matter.

      You are right about Sheriff Joe. I also believe that the court room case was coordinated somehow with the media to make execution in this case to seem appropriate and astonishingly, they have largely succeeded.

      This is somehow an effort to prop up the death penalty and the Mormon church must be somehow backing this whole thing.

      Did you here that during another court case, a deputy in court went snooping through the defense papers and grabbed a paper and tried to take it out of the courtroom?

      The judge held him in contempt and Sheriff Joe ordered him to continue appearing in court and to not listen to the judge – outrageous!

      Yes Joe always says he believes in giving prisoners their first amendment rights, but he was just too willing to give permission to set up an elaborate press conference for Jodi, wasn’t he?

      Please let me know more what you are thinking about this.

      Happy New Year to you, too Sandra and we hope to see you around cyberspace!

  4. Yes, Rob, this whole debacle is just a gold mine for both humor and serious analysis! Lately, it’s been interesting to see folks slowly coming round to ask some of the questions we’ve been asking all along, though. Apparently, stupid is not bone deep on some once enough facts and folly are presented and enough different “voices” start speaking out!

    Oh yes, ol’ Joe and his posse have been milking this for a long time. I am also eager to know more specific details on how her very first interview in Yreka came to be. That “one phone call” rule must have been in effect in California at that time, right? Are we supposed to believe she made it to the guy who interviewed her or to his station? Well, yes, we are SUPPOSED to believe that! Well, I DO NOT!

    As for the Mormon Mafia, as I affectionately like to call them, I am certain there are some fine, upstanding, non-demented Mormons, unwilling to be intimidated by CASH Hughes and his dangling….”Legal Shield” minions; however, I just haven’t seen any in relation to Jodi and Travis! Is Joe Mormon? Oh, he can’t be! As usual more questions and my head…..(not all the voices, however:)….is starting to spin again!

    Yes, I hope we keep crossing paths…..but if I see you on a bicycle, or anyone with a white shirt and tie, on a bicycle, on my street, I am heading the other way! 🙂

    1. My theory about Arizona: As Phoenix was developing so quickly, just about anybody with minimum skills and a big ego could go there and be a big shot. Right now, there is a shortage of qualified medical examiners, for example. They’ll take anybody.

      So this explains Martinez, Sheriff Joe, and even Jan Brewer who completed community college with an x-ray tech certificate. It can even explain why DeMarte graduates and quickly runs her own business.

      What did Jodi say? The LDS is Very Strong in Mesa, Phoenix and Arizona. There is big power there. The media is looking for a story and they have controlled the story.

      I used to really respect the LDS Church, but Mitt’s capitulation to the far right and now this, say and spend anything to accomplish an execution…

      These cowards could step right in and take death off the table and end this thing, but their political considerations outweigh their moral convictions once again.

      I am always careful to separate good, true Mormons like Mimi, Lisa, Dan, and Desiree, and Deanna from the business cartel posers like Dave Hall, Chris Hughes, etc.

      Until this one guy, no one would dare say anything helpful to Jodi’s case. Their social and business lives and that of there families would be finished.

      After the final verdict, I expect even more support. More people are seeing what we have seen all along. We can tell who is telling the truth.

      Joe is from Philadelphia? Something like that. I suppose they think he’s the cat’s pajamas out there.

      I believe Jodi was encouraged to do the interview by a guard. Of course, even then, she was trying to get her story out. The media will find a way to get in there. I remember this from late 2008 and I knew this would be a big story.

      I don’t know about Mormons, but the Witnesses are very big in NY. I was in the back of my truck working on it when this Witness came right on the property and startled me and I bumped my head. I had to chase his butt out of there. But I think all these people are basically the salt of the earth.

      They don’t go out and shoot people but they do tend to get creative with bathtub swimming lessons and impromptu cliff diving lessons.

      This had been endlessly entertaining, you really need to write a book.

      1. Okay, this is why we put children in a separate room for Thanksgiving! Your comment is not worthy of discussion and merits no response.

        (My eyes are blue.)

    1. It’s a great article! That really needed to be said about why Travis has been worshiped and the good vs evil dichotomy that\s not realistic when looking at the behavior of 2 individuals. It’s like right out of a Marvel comic book!

  5. Yes, Rob, your theory about Arizona may well be the truth. I do believe that what Jodi is going through, and also the Alexanders (as I feel they have also been manipulated by Hughes and Juan Martinez) is paving the way for some positive changes in the future. I think the “good” Mormons as you mentioned also were coached. Just watch Deanna during her testimony. And even when Steven is delivering his speech at the end, he looks at Juan for direction. I believe also that he had a lot of help writing the speech, which is fine, but for me made it feel like all of it wasn’t authentic.

    Yes, Pitchforks’ analysis is pretty much how I view Jodi and Travis as well. I do, however, need to look up some of the words she uses, but I like to learn!

    A book? Oh dear. Would that require the “f” word, you know “finishing”? Ha!

    1. Yes, finishing. You have to end it somewhere. I think it’s a little much that Steven blames Jodi for his marriage woes. You would think a tragedy would draw them closer together. He needs to get some therapy and start believing in the Mormon doctrine of forgiveness and repentance.

      Right off their page “Jesus suffered and was crucified for the sins of the world, giving each of God’s children the gift of repentance and forgiveness.”

      The Mormons should practice what they preach.

      Good true Mormons are real sticklers for the truth, they believe a lie condemns you to hell. You are right that if anything good comes out of this trial, it is that America and the world are taking a closer look at Arizona, and for good reason.

    2. Some Jackhole named “Jeff” made a comment today. I will not post the comment because it is off topic and contains absolutely no sign of intelligent life.

      I can only say that “Jeff’s” comment reminded me starkly of the judge from Billy Madison:

      Mr. Jeff, “what you’ve just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.”

  6. I felt like I was playing candyland with a super crappy, nonsensical set of instructions/rules devoid of all logic trying to read it. How long did it take you to steal all of the pictures you used to adorn it?

    Actually keep the pictures and get rid of the words. It will be a huge improvement. You ‘ll get a ton of traffic from hungry nine year olds.

    1. I’ll take that under consideration. You might consider getting an education, getting some manners, and becoming a more evolved form of animal.

      The article is factual.

  7. Yes, I agree about Steven. Although I would say he needs to place a lot of that blame on Juan Martinez for no doubt pressuring and pushing the family to continue for the death penalty, and having them endure what may yet be years of court proceedings reminding them of their brother’s tragic death. I feel bad for the Alexanders and Arias’ . I always have, even with some of the Alexander shenanigans. They are playing a part in Juan’s quest for another notch in his death penalty belt. One day I think they’ll recognize this and more.

    1. I also believe that it would have been better for the Alexanders to accept a life sentence. I don’t know how much influence they have on the decision.

      I think that if all the Alexanders called Martinez and said let’s take the DP off the table, he would not do so. I believe this could have all been settled long ago without the DP. I believe it victimizes the victim’s family as much as the defendant’s family, like you said, because it goes on for decades of appeals and hearings, etc.

      1. Yeah, I think you’re probably right that Juan Martinez is the thirstiest of all for Jodi’s blood and will never give in. He’s so cunning and manipulative I feel sure the Alexanders are under his “spell” and at least some of the siblings are willing to let their dead brother help him get his trophy. Adding to the tragedy is how Travis’ dead, mutilated, body has been paraded for so many agendas, none of which have to do with love or justice.

      2. Where will they find jury members, under a rock? More people know about this case than know how many states there are in the US.

  8. “The new reality, according to Alan Dershowitz, the very experienced appellate attorney and Harvard law Professor, recommended by Fox News, is that no one can expect a fair trial in a high profile murder case in this day and age. He went on to say that even judges and governors can be affected by ratings motivated sensationalism and the “lynch mobs” they create.”
    Gotta love the Dersh, he makes such an insightful observation only to follow it up by making a public statement, during the trial, claiming that Arias is guilty, pouring oil on the blazing momentum of the mob. He’s not strong on self-awareness or irony I guess. I wonder if he feels his client OJ got a fair trial. I wonder how long it would have taken Dershowitz to slap a lawsuit on the unfortunate ivy league law professor should one have announced on national TV that OJ is guilty of double murder, during his trial. I wonder what he would have done had the governor of California announced OJ’s guilt before the verdict was handed down (As Ms Brewer so thoughtfully did for Jodi Arias). Dershowitz doesn’t seem concerned much with the state of the justice system or contributing to making it better (Oy Vey, Que Sera Sera, can’t expect justice when you have publicity, just accept it, C’est la vie…)
    Good points Rob and Amanda!

    1. I know, do I ever know! You can see on Heroes, Zeros, and Geniuses Lights Out, The Deresh is both a hero and a zero, for those exact reasons.

      Brewer wanted to do the same thing California’s Governor did before their famous Mass Murderer was found guilty. It’s tradition, don’t cha know.

      Dersh split the difference recently on FOX News by saying the OJ Simpson verdict was correctly decided,because the police “framed a guilty man”. How do you like that for pandering to all sides!

      He should have went into politics!

      1. Sorry I don’t see him as a hero for stating the obvious and doing less than the minimum as a law professor who markets him self as a champion of constitutional and civil rights. Even zero is a rather high ranking for him in my book, but ok. I know this buzz phrase, which he finds extra witty, that a guilty man was framed, is quite obtuse. He’s essentially saying there was no reasonable doubt about his guilt but because of this strategy the dream team took, the system worked. Well no. Even if we assume the DNA was tainted (ridiculous) or planted (even more ridiculous), the accused must be judged on all the evidence. If Dershowitz believes OJ was a guilty man then he obviously believes that the rest of the evidence left no reasonable doubt even if you throw out all the DNA. So wrong, the system did not work. Furthermore, I don’t know what the law says about this but I find it highly dubious that he, OJ’s former lawyer, is coming out publicly and talking about his client’s guilt. Is he not supposed to take that attorney/client privilege to the grave? You’re right he’s pandering, and he’s trying to fix that black eye his reputation received from defending Simpson (and Von Bulow). I think he was doing the same thing when he announced that Jodi was guilty, that’s a popular opinion, what a hero. Pathetic

      2. Right on the money. He highly recommended Ted Cruz, saying he was one of his best debaters, which is fine.

        I thought he was heroic when he went to defend Simpson at the time, and you’re right: if you take this on, you stick with it for life.

        Kardashian’s kids have no stigma from the OJ trial, because they bleached their anuses! So they are in.

        What about Jason Simpson? Does his DNA match? Did he get the Bruno Magli shoes? He was a chef with his own set of razor sharp knives.

        OJ is pushing forr a pardon or something form Obama, I saw in the news a few days ago.

      3. I didn’t see it as heroic even back then. Not because I don’t understand the importance of everyone being entitled to a good defense, which takes courage in an unpopular case, but because of his history. He has a tendency to represent high profile, high worth clients and does little to no pro bono work for the real down and out (especially if there’s no publicity). Meserau for example, does one or two death penalty cases a year in the deep south, pro bono, for many years now. Even F. Lee Bailey I could admire for taking the case because he was a nobody when he represented Sam Shepard, very unpopular cause at the time. I see Jenifer Willmott as a hero. I could almost say the same about Nurmi had he not tried so hard to wiggle out of this case and had he not made that stupid and dangerous 9 out of 10 remark in closing, yet I still respect him. I see both of Martin Macneill’s lawyers as heroes. Many others, Dershowitz – never.
        OJ’s trying to get a presidential pardon? Are you yanking my chain? LMAO
        First of all, I think the pardon line is rather long and probably not filled with many “guilty framed men”
        Secondly, that’s all that Kenyan guy needs now, can you imagine what that would do to his already plummeting popularity? He’d be better off starting a new war or adding a new wing to Guantanamo. That would be more popular
        Get in line OJ!

      4. Knowing he did it, and he damn well did it, and i remember I turned on the TV and there’s a police chase going on for a long time and I was watching it at work.

        I remember where I was when the verdict was read and I couldn’t believe it. But, I still feel he should not be punished for that and the two crimes should be separate.

        Willmott was one of the most heroic closings I’ve ever seen. Smershowitz is precisely that. That is the right thing to do, pro bono for the poor. Great!

      5. Ps. Barry Scheck is trying to redeem himself through the Innocence Project, I didn’t hold OJ against him back then and now he’s doing heroic work.

      6. I never did either. I thought he did a great job. He was only working on the DNA, and I never considered him part of the team, but just a scientist lawyer. I could tell he was the type who would do something like that and I was impressed by him back then.

      7. Oh yes the Bronco! He just had to commit suicide in the Bronco. Which suicidal person doesn’t need a vehicle, a passport and a ton of cash to do themselves in?
        The Bronco chase was surreal.
        I completely agree with you. Vegas was payback for the system which failed, the payback made it fail twice. It’s using the same logic why I believe Dershowitz should keep his mouth shut about OJ’s guilt, in spite of what I think of OJ’s guilt. But the reality is that he’s not getting a pardon, no way no how. Maybe he thinks that he and Barack are bros, so he’s naturally getting one??

      8. Free OJ. He’s done his time. That stuff was my stuff. How can I be charged with stealing my own stuff?

        Did that little dude win the Heisman Trophy? I don’t think so. Who’s name ‘s on it?

      9. LOL, the same name that’s on this here mugshot.
        Yes, his intentions were good his heart was pure, but then there’s this little matter of a gun.
        OJ with a gun, that’s like giving it to a postal worker. And he’s not the sharpest tool in the shed either, do you remember his book: If I Did It? He should do a sequel now, “If I Stole It”

      10. I want to read that book, “If I did it”. I think four guys do not need guns against one or two guys. If not for the gun, OJ would be playing golf this morning.

      11. Yes and no. He would have gotten into trouble sooner or later. He already had a road rage incident where I think he got off or got off easy. It’s not out of the realm of possibilities that he would have eventually killed someone, he could have killed someone that night in Vegas had things gone differently. He’s not your average Arias or Macneill who pose no danger to society. The guy’s a walking timebomb, not the lamb we saw in court when he realized the gig is up.

      12. Oh, I agree. The man had some rage. He was the most awesome running back, and nothing diminishes that. But after you just squeak out of a life sentence, having a full blown road rage incident is not a good idea.

      13. Zimmerman is a fool. One speeding ticket, okay.

        Hey, it’s not Zimmerman. It’s all these women and police and stuff that keep bothering him and breaking their own glass tables.

      14. This guy’s no intellectual, he’s got no sense of humor, he’s got the killer bod of a doughnut addict and his eyes are too close together. Why is it that he gets more action than Bradley Cooper? He must be a sexual dynamo

      1. When is O’Reily going to retire? Let someone else in there. The thing about Fox is all they do is complain.
        I just turned on Nancy Grace and they showed a guy running over a dog about 20 times .

      2. So you got your wish; Nancy’s covering animals now.
        O’Reilley’s retiring when the men in white come and take him away in a straight jacket. Personally I think he’s the one who needs be smoking pot the most, he needs to calm down.
        The worst thing about Fox is their fair and balanced views.

      3. Yeah, she covered that dog pretty good. JVM was almost speechless. She claims the part of the video they didn’t show shows the dog suffering, and I wonder if that’s a lie?

      4. I can’t see Nancy passing up a chance to exploit some suffering. That would be like an alcoholic declining a margarita, in her case, a bottle of tequila.

      5. It’s her favorite thing to do. Oh for the OJ days, when I actually liked her. Before her head grew to the size of Manhattan, and then slipped quietly away up her own ass.

  9. Can I just chime in and blurt out how delightful I’m finding you guys’ conversation to be? I agree about Willmott and even Nurmi being heroes. Although, I’m sure Nurmi showed his innate arrogance to Jodi, which in her mental state was likely multiplied 100 times, hence her 12 page complaint against him. But the more I learn about the exculpatory evidence being withheld and all the trickery and dickery of Juan and the courts, the more I believe her defense did the best they could.

    Rob said, “Before her head grew to the size of Manhattan, and then slipped quietly away up her own ass”, regarding Nancy Grace.

    Priceless, although I would disagree about “quietly”.

    1. Did you hear something about withheld exculpatory evidence?

      I am positive that Jodi and Nurmi fought over strategy. If you realize that the jurors were actually divided on the guilt phase more than it seems, you can see they came very close to a hung jury.

      This is the first time in a long time I watched Nancy. I didn’t miss a thing.

    2. I agree Sandra, It wasn’t exactly a deafening silence. I would also take issue with Manhattan, I was thinking more along the lines of something the size of Beijing.

  10. Did I “hear” something? Well, you know how the “grapevine” is!:) I still haven’t gotten past the “pedo letters”. Chris Hughes apparently has them, and according to an “expert” he “hired’, they were forged. Really? I think now would be a good time for CASH to come forward and put his money where his mouth is. Because the more I know, the more I believe the pedo stuff is very real, and ultimately may be very damaging to all those who participated and continue to participate in the coverup of this aspect in the killing of Travis Alexander. Oh, and Casandra Collins mentioned last night that Jodi had told her during their 37 day jail cell relationship that at least one child had been molested by Travis. Now, can we believe anything Jodi says, or anything Casandra says, or do the two cancel each other out?

    I think it’s a good time for me to read my essay again to remember what I said. Okay, I read it. Still applies:)

    1. I saw that interview with Cassandra. I think if Chris Hughes had the original letters and they’re as bad as Jodi says, then I think he would destroy them.

      I know there’s a big difference between not being able to guarantee they’re authentic, and saying they’re forgeries.

      1. Well then you’ll have to cash in your life savings, I don’t think Hughes is the altruistic type

      2. Ps. When somebody comes up with the right price he’ll start singing a new song: These letters are 1000% authentic….

      3. This woman’s picture should be on the cover of the DSM-5 (Nancy’s should be on the back cover)

      4. She sounded pretty sane. I think if you pressed her on the details, she would slip up. She let it slip that she had 6 convictions expunged from her record. They never mention what her crime(s) were.

      5. Are you serious about the sane part? She looks like a middle aged Cindy from Eight is Enough and talks like someone who just dropped some acid. Jodi wanted Juan to have a mafia bow tie? Really? If I had to share a cell with this woman I wouldn’t tell her my shoes size. She’s a lunatic

      6. Well, she changed her hair style. I could tell right away that she was trying to jump on the Jodi wagon.

        But she claims she took her allegations to the FBI in early 2013. I highly doubt Jodi was running around telling how she killed Travis right before her trial.

      7. Really, early 2013? When it started to be more and more evident that this was going to be a hell of a media storm? Why didn’t she take her concerns to the FBI in the spring of 2012, a whole year earlier, when these alleged conversations actually transpired? Right before she was involuntarily committed. It takes you a year to realize the gravity of somebody talking about a “mafia bow tie”?
        According to the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office (not Nurmi) “This individual making this particular claim has a history of mental illness and was ruled not competent and not restorable…this person also has a history of fabricating information.” Collins is charged with aggravated harassment (yeah that’s normal).
        Wow, I’m surprised Ms. Collins was not Juan’s star witness during the trial, she certainly fits his MO.

      8. I knew about her incompetency, but not about fabrications. I really want to know her crimes. Harassment, you say?

        Yes, if she had a story like “Jodi was nice to me and nothing noteworthy happened”, nobody would be interested in her story.

      9. “Aggravated harassment” now what do you think the aggravated part could mean?
        ps. Yeah the Seagal thing should help – OMG

      10. Harassment sounds like stalking, “aggravated” sounds like she had one of those pink AR-15, Hello Kitty rifles with her at the time.
        Rob you’re not Switzerland, get off the fence and tell us what you really think

      11. I think I would need to hearfrom a second witness before I believe CC Rider.She’s already on Twitter and selling paintings, and Sandra’s right and maybe there will be a book. .

      12. That book is going right to my top shelf beside Sarah Palin’s Going Rogue and Dr. Seuss’ Cat in the Hat

      13. She used to do the news and poems while in a headstand. Does that ring a bell?
        She used to (and evidently still does) talk like a two year old.

  11. Her “picture on the cover of the DSM-5”! Indeed. Yes, Rob, she “sounded” sane, but couldn’t you tell how rehearsed she was? She made sure to get a plug in for Juan at the end, too. I need to look at her court proceedings more carefully, but it’s clear just at a glance, that she is a “nuisance” to the court system at the least. And why, if she truly felt she was in danger, and if Jodi’s “threats” in the jail cell were thought to be authentic, didn’t Sheriff Joe remove her? I think Sheriff Joe failed Ms.Collins, and now the poor thing is suffering “physical” pains because of it, as she referred to on Dr.Drew. I think Cassandra should hold Sheriff Joe accountable for all her future sufferings and that she should get a lawyer right away!

    Yes, CASH Hughes will find try to find a way to profit on his “best friend Travis” even more down the line. Trouble is, he’s so damn sloppy in his efforts, and can’t think much long term, that I doubt he’ll be very successful.

    Amidst all this garbage, is a family that truly did lose their loved one, flaws and all, in a horrific way. Their pain is far from over. One day, maybe they will recognize and deal with the travesty of the egomaniacs Juan Martinez and Chris Hughes, and realize Jodi Arias probably loved and protected Travis more than anyone he’d ever known and would have ever known. Isn’t it ironic?

    1. You write so well.
      Cassandra’s stories don’t add up.

      Yeah, I don’t think the Alexanders will ever see it that way.

      You know, Steven Seagal is running for AZ Governor, will that help?

  12. I love this blog & thank you for being one of the few voices of reason in this modern day witch hunt. I agree with everything I’ve read here and hope that you continue writing the truth about this case because you say it very well.

    It baffles my mind how the majority seem incapable of seeing the truth about Jodi’s case. After spending the last few days discussing (or attempting to) it on twitter I am honestly shocked at the ignorance of so many who refuse to even entertain the thought that Jodi is anything other than an evil whore who deserves to die. They want her dead & seem to feed off each others hate, these people are cheering for a womans death when they haven’t even taken the time to do any research. They are sheep blindly following the herd. Until this case I had no idea that the state of our society was as bad as it is. It is truly frightening

    1. Thank you, CM, for the really nice compliment! We were always incensed that no one in the big media (save Geraldo Rivera and Michael Kiefer) dares to tell the other side of the story.

      There IS another side, and we just keep chipping away at it. This is a matter of appearance vs. reality. Everyone wants a simple story of good and evil.

      On social media, we still hear things like “well, she admitted it” and insane stuff like that. They”re like the “Terminator”, they can’t be reasoned with, LOL.

      We agree, this case says plenty about the frightening state of our society. Too many people don’t realize what true evil really is.

      Thanks again!

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