Arias and her Defense add Insult to Injury

Fact-based reporting

by Rob Roman & Amanda Chen

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Here are the new enumerated mitigators:

1. Ms. Arias has no prior criminal history.

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

3. Ms. Arias is remorseful for her conduct.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

pittsWilliam Pitts @william_pitts · Jan 20

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

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

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

af·fi·da·vit

noun

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

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

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

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

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

The next day, Nurmi took another shot:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

kieffer lg brtMichael Kiefer @michaelbkiefer  ·  Jan 21

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

kieffer lg brtMichael Kiefer @michaelbkiefer  ·  Jan 21

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

kieffer lg brtMichael Kiefer @michaelbkiefer  ·  Jan 21

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

kieffer lg brtMichael Kiefer @michaelbkiefer  ·  Jan 21

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

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

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

kieffer lg brtMichael Kiefer @michaelbkiefer  ·  Jan 21

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

kieffer lg brtMichael Kiefer @michaelbkiefer  ·  Jan 21

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

kieffer lg brtMichael Kiefer @michaelbkiefer  ·  Jan 21

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

kieffer lg brtMichael Kiefer @michaelbkiefer  ·  Jan 21

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

kieffer lg brtMichael Kiefer @michaelbkiefer  ·  Jan 21

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

juan fit 12

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

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

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

This journal entry is just days after the peeping incident:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Jodi Arias 7 28 letter to Alexander family

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Or

  • Jodi Arias is severely and seriously mentally ill.

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

Others would offer a third possibility

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

barwood

barwood 4

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

dryson 1

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Do You Concur?

dod do you concur

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

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

All Rights Reserved

Just Da Truth: The Banana Boat and Much Ado About Knotting

Just Da Truth: The Banana Boat

and Much Ado About Knotting

The Jodi Arias Murder Trial: The Other side of the story

Fact based Reporting by

Amanda Chen & Rob Roman

All aboard the banana boat!
All aboard the banana boat!

A person who calls himself “Brad Justda” runs a blog and a forum site called Just Da Truth (JDT) where people enthusiastically discuss different aspects of the Jodi Arias case. This is a great thing to do. We all want to know the truth, we want to debate, and we want to find out what we can about different aspects of the case.

Brad Justda makes some very astute points and he is willing to discuss all things great and small about the case and really dig into things, but there’s a problem. He likes to say he is debunking a person’s claims, but when he gets debunked, he remains silent.

Most people relying on JDT’s ideas are prosecution supporters. We respect people who believe Jodi Arias is guilty of 1st degree murder. They are welcome here. We just find fault with the proof offered by people who believe there is no other possibility, like Juan Martinez and Just Da Truth. This is because we keep finding flaws in their arguments and evidence.

There’s another problem, too. Looking at Brad’s arguments, he often builds a logical argument on top of an illogical premise. He builds a logical argument with illogical conclusions, and he makes absolute statements about his conclusions, which is unscientific. He also feels that a person must prove they are innocent of an accusation instead of the accuser having to prove things, which is contrary to law.

Brad tries to debunk the idea that the strands found on Travis’ bathroom floor are from the rope Jodi said Travis used to tie her up with. Actually, that was not really offered up as proof that there was a rope by debaters, but just a possibility.

The Pillow Fringe and the Rope

For example: For Jodi Arias to be be not guilty by reason of self-defense, a knife needs to be in the bathroom, or else it seems Jodi could have run out to the bedroom and out of the home when attacked. Arias testified that the knife was in the bedroom / bathroom area because Travis used a knife to cut the rope they used to tie her up in a sex game. Justda sets out to prove there was no rope and therefore no self-defense. Jodi said the rope was something like decorative drapery cord. She estimated the rope was about 20 feet long. JDT debunks and then even re-debunks this on his blog:

Jodi Arias: Re-DeBunking the Rope

“Despite how thorough I thought I was in my previous blog about the rope, it turns out many Jodi Supporters were not convinced, and didn’t think I went far enough in considering decorative drapery tie-backs as a source for the fiber evidence found at the scene.

On my lunch hour, I went in search of a fabric store. I found one place that claimed they were for home decorating, which I guess is different than regular fabric stores. The girls at the counter were very friendly and one girl helped me out a lot in figuring out what was what.”

http://justdatruth2012.blogspot.com/

Then he goes on and gets busy with some mathematical equations and the dimensions of the bedroom and the bed and even the dimensions of Jodi Arias to debunk that darn rope:

“Bear with me a minute while I lay out the factual details: Travis had a king size (or California king, Jodi couldn’t recall) bed. A King size bed is 76″ wide at the headboard (or 6’4″). A California king is 72″ (or 6′).” 

“If you take the span of your arms from tip to tip you get your height. The same works in reverse, if you take your height, you get your arm span. Jodi is 5’6, so let’s assume from from fingertips to wrist is 6″. That means for Jodi to extend her arms to be tied, she had about a foot and a half total on the mattress.

Jodi’s wrist would be about 5-6″ in circumference. Let’s give them another 3 feet for wrapping and tying (18″ for each wrist, so about 2 times around and then tie). We’re now up to 9 feet total of necessary rope if it’s a California king and let’s say 9 1/2″ of rope if it’s a King.”

JDT decides that Travis and Jodi would require about ten feet of “necessary rope”.

I caught an error right away. This claim is easily refuted with a few simple memes. Brad’s premise is that the rope was set up like this:

brad A

That wouldn’t work too good. JDT can review his math equations and geometry, and go through all his calculations all he wants to. It only took me 5 minutes to come up with a diagram showing a better way to tie a person up on a sleigh headboard which also happens to align with Jodi’s story:

brad B

It seems that sometimes JDT sees the result he wants and then he works his way backwards to get it. Then he writes that most likely, if Travis cut the rope, he would make more than one cut, and so the knife would be in the bedroom. But you may remember that Travis was a neat-knick, there’s a place for everything and everything in it’s place, kind of thing.

You will remember that Travis is a clean and tidy neat-knick.
You will remember that Travis is a clean and tidy neat-knick.

So I imagine, if I were him, and I didn’t want to return to the kitchen right away, I might place the knife in the bathroom.

The Rope and the Strands in the Bathroom

There were some unidentified strands in the bathroom that were photographed. and some Jodi supporters thought this could be possible strands from the rope.

strands of material found in bathroom
strands of material found in bathroom

Some Jodi supporters thought this could be strands that were part of a long length of soft, braided curtain tie rope or cord. which is what Jodi said was the type of rope Travis used.

Sample of braided curtain tie cord
Sample of braided curtain tie cord

The pillows in Travis' room

JDT saw some material on a pillow at a store that looked like the strands in the bathroom. He buys the pillow and brings it home and he then demonstrates that the material from the pillow he bought looks like the material in the bathroom. Imagine that. Since his pillow is a new, cheaper pillow, there are loose strands he can easily pull out and then he notes, via calculations, that the length is about the same. Eureka! Or should I say Yreka!

banana-boat-sport-performance-sunscreen-lotion

Does he understand that both the pillow fringe and braided strands from the curtain cord could be made out of the same type of material? JDT also saw some sunscreen and this means to him that there must have been a Cancun murder ultimatum. Whoop-De-Doo! You solved the murder case, Brad.

That Thing on the Stairs

that thing lt crJustda also goes after the unidentified material on the stairs to prove there was no rope. That material was a byproduct of photographing the stairs. It was never measured or entered into evidence and it was never intended to be evidence.

The defense merely presented this as a possibility.  It’s never been identified.

Yet JDT proves that this material didn’t come from a rope he has never seen or examined.  Actually, the material remains as it was before: inconclusive. I guess JDT made all those trips to the fabric / materials store for nothing.

Secondly, the defense does not have to prove there was a rope. The Prosecution has to prove that there wasn’t a rope and that Jodi brought the knife into the bedroom and bathroom with intent. The prosecution would need to prove the knife was either brought into the home by Jodi or that she brought a knife upstairs with the intention of using it  on the victim. The Prosecution failed to do so, and so did JDT.

Thirdly, JDT offers up new samples of curtain tie back material he finds at a fabric store in 2014. Without a sample of the actual rope to go on, JDT erroneously reports that no strands from any curtain tie back material can possibly be responsible for the strands in the bathroom because the ones he tested don’t bend the right way.

It’s Curtains For That Rope

Look at all the samples he “tests”.

What woman would allow a guy to tie her up with any of these materials, except maybe the green yarn? None of the samples are like the decorative material in the photo above the pillow photo.

JDT checked all these curtain tie back materials

He also decides that the strands in the bathroom must come from the fringe on Travis’ bedroom pillows.

On Facebook, Justda goes so far as to say that the pillow strands were probably tracked into the bathroom by Jodi’s footwear. George Barwood cleverly countered that if the strands were from the pillows, then the strands were probably tracked in by the rope!

The argument then proceeds to the fact that the pillows that were in Travis’ bedroom are now at his sister’s home, in Tanisha Sorenson’s guest room. Calls have gone out to bring the pillows into evidence. This would be evidence of what, exactly?

Wild About Trial was talking about the pillow fringe possibly being the source of the strands on May 4, 2013. The detectives spent three days in that house because “We didn’t want to miss a thing”.  You’d think they would have figured out the source of the strands by now if the source was the pillow fringe.

http://forums.wildabouttrial.com/showthread.php?pid=22752

While one can say that the strands appear consistent with the pillow fringe and could have come from there, you can’t say with any confidence that the pillows are the source. It could be any of a number of things. The defense never argued that the strands in the bathroom were from the rope, anyways.

JDT’s entire two articles about ropes and fibers leads us in a giant circle back to where we started from. We already knew the pillow fringe was a possible source of the strands in the bathroom. We already knew the material on the stairs and the strands in the bathroom were only possibilities of fragments from the rope. We knew this at the time of the trial. So, Just Da Truth’s scientific “proof” is really no more than much ado about knotting.

JDT Crushed the Candy Crush Blog

I Think Knot.

candy-crush-sagaIn Crushing the Candy Crush Blog, JDT tries to refute many things Lise LaSalle wrote in her article The infamous Trial of Candy Crush, which points out various problems she saw with the Jodi Arias trial. Really, JDT trying to challenge Lise is like a Yorkshire terrier nipping at the hoof of a wild mustang. He’s just plain out of his league. Lise LaSalle, a writer on the All Things Crime Blog, is a highly educated and very talented writer with an ocean deep, intuitive soul. She’s also a legislative and court interpreter. JDT failed to crush the Candy Crush which was an article, not a blog, for starters. So, even JDT’s title is factually incorrect.

We found too many problems with his article for a short comment, and the comment grew into a full article. The article quickly became too long, as usual, so we had to scale back our discussion to just 20 of the problems we found. I believe we debunked many things this “debunker” wrote, but he never bothered to respond. In Milk and Cookies for the “crusher” of Candy Crush, we replied to Just Da Truth’s contentions. One of his contentions was that electronic devices are not a problem for jurors to access at will.

Electronic Devices Are Not a Problem

“If Jodi was so innocent as supporters would have you believe, then what was it that supporters felt jurors would see that would turn them from believing in her innocence, to believing in guilt? What exactly was out there that was patently false, that the juror’s might have been influenced by?” – Just Da Truth

Just these two sentences alone contain 3 factual errors. Can you spot all three?

In Milk and Cookies, we responded with this:

“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?”

https://spotlightonlaw.wordpress.com/milk-and-cookies-for-the-crusher-of-candy-crush-dec-28/

This from the same guy who states that “Jodi Arias supporters are more depraved than she is.” calls Jodi Arias a “Ho”, and believes the story that she hid behind a Christmas tree.* Even though we were both on the same page on Facebook for weeks, he never once mentioned our article. C’est dommage!

*(We will explore these claims in a future article)

electronic-gadgets-1We saw what JDT had to say. Now let’s see what the American Bar Association has to say about electronic devices:

” Lawyers, witnesses, spectators, and jurors regularly use cell phones, Smart phones, PDAs, laptops, and other electronic devices before, during, and after trial. Jurors’ use of such devices can lead to serious misconduct, which can require extreme remedies such as mistrials. Or even worse if not detected, it can deprive parties 
of “their day in court.

“The problems created by jurors misuse of electronic devices is occurring across the country, for example, as reported by the Associated Press in a March 7, 2010 article New Rules Designed to Keep Jurors Offline.”

“Last year, a San Francisco Superior Court judge dismissed 600 potential jurors after several acknowledged going online to research the criminal case before them.

Baltimore Mayor Sheila Dixon challenged her misdemeanor embezzlement conviction after discovering five jurors ‘friended’ one another on Facebook during the trial.”

“And a federal judge in Florida declared a mistrial after eight jurors admitted Web surfing about a drug case.”

“Jury misconduct regarding the use of technology has become so widespread that a new term ‘Google mistrial’ has resulted.”

http://www.ncsc.org/~/media/Files/PDF/Jury/fairtrialhandbookauthcheckdam.ashx

And none of these were high profile cases with a nation wide, let alone a world wide interest.

Justda minute now, JDT said “there’s nothing patently false out there” and that electronic devices are not a problem. Nope, no problems there.

Gas Monkey

In another Just Da Truth article, JDT tries to prove that George Barwood is wrong about Jodi’s gas tank size. Gas Monkey lgGeorge Barwood, also called “GeeBee” stated that the size of the gas tank was not entered into evidence and so it could be possible that the tank was a larger size, European tank of about 15.8 gallons.

http://jodi-arias.wikispaces.com/

Forget about the larger gas tank theory, we already know that Jodi appeared to buy more gas than could fit into her gas tank and 2 cans. You only need  a good search engine and a few minor calculations to understand this.

JDT takes on George Barwood’s theory and tries to prove it wrong because the tank would need to be nearly empty to hold the amount of gas Jodi bought, and thus she would have been running on “E” (low fuel) for miles of her trip through Utah. He also goes on to explain that she would be dangerously low on fuel all the time she was at Ryan Burn’s house in West Jordan.

Let’s take a look at JDT’s calculations:

“There are 16 cups to a gallon, so if we do the math, by GeeBee’s estimation, she has about 12 ounces, or 1  1/4 cups of gas at the Tesoro station, which would give her the equivalent of just over 1.75 miles in the city or just under 2.75 miles on the highway before her tank is bone dry.”

“Most modern passenger cars, mine included, give a low fuel warning when you’re down to about 2 gallons of gas. So at some point in the previous 48-70 miles, Jodi’s fuel warning light went off. Remember, we’re basing this on GeeBee’s hypothesis that she was driving with a bigger tank.”

“So approximately 70 miles from West Jordan, her low fuel light went off. She would also have the fuel gauge to indicate she’s down below 1/8 of a tank and she’d know that her gas cans were empty.” – Just Da Truth

gas pumpJDT again goes through a lot of mathematical computations. He even estimates that Jodi would have only “about 12 ounces or 1 ¼ cups of gas” by the time she gets to the Tesoro station.

But he’s forgetting something. If Jodi had 3 gas cans, those were all empty, too. This means that under the same conditions, with a smaller gas tank, Jodi would have run out of gas long before she got to Ryan’s home. And JDT wonders why we think his “scientific” proofs and “debunkings” are laughable?

(This article is in danger of becoming too long, so we will have even more to say about this next time.)

All Aboard the Banana Boat

Then comes the big scoop. JDT does some research and discovers that Jodi also bought Noxema face cleaning pads and sunscreen at the Walmart when she bought the gas can. The inference is that if Travis agrees to take Jodi to Cancun on Pre-Paid Legal’s annual VIP trip, she will not have to murder him.

receiptJDT looks at the items on the Walmart receipt and finds that Jodi bought small sized tubes of sunscreen. He notes that only small tubes of liquids are allowed on carry-on for commercial aircraft. From there he deduces that Jodi decided that if Travis allows her to go on this trip with him, she is ready with the right size of sunscreen for air travel regulations and the murder is off. So this proves that Travis’ refusal to take Jodi on his trip to Cancun, Mexico is the motive for murder.

Here’s JDT sounding the claxon of good tidings of great joy”

“So, I got to really thinking about some my own niggling questions, and decided to create a new thread to address them. In the midst of researching one element of my question, I stumbled upon what I believe is the truth and the motive behind the killing of Travis Alexander.”

“You guys are going to sh*t your pants. Seriously. I won’t even bother sugar-coating it by saying you’ll poo your pants, nope my friends, you’re going to sh*t your pants.” – Just Da Truth

1329953611-348885_fullLet’s think about the implications. What about the gas cans? Will she leave them in Travis’ garage? What about the rental car? Can she drop it off at the Phoenix airport? What about Ryan? What about the gun and knife she supposedly had? What about Jodi’s lack of cash and her need to get busy and start earning some money? Jodi had been in a secret relationship with Travis and hidden away for nearly a year. Now she will go to Cancun and parade around with him in front of Travis’ friends and business partners? Yeah, that would have happened.

And why is it preferable to have poo in you pants, rather than sh*t?

It was an interesting discovery, I’ll admit. I’m not sure who first made this discovery. Maybe matching the small tubes with airline rules for carry on of liquids was JDT’s new twist to an old story. We did our own research months ago when we heard about this from another source. We Googled the SKU numbers. We discovered that, yes, the item on the receipt was sunscreen. Yes, they were 2 small 3 oz. tubes of Neutrogena Ultra Sheer Dry Touch SPF 85 Sunblock.

JDT’s article promised his readers lots of excrement excitement when they found out that Jodi bought sunscreen in small tubes. Even though she is coming from Yreka in far northern California, to the desert states in the Summer in June (104 degrees or 40 C. in June, 2008). Who knows what Jodi was planning to do if she hadn’t spent so much time at Travis’ home? Brad Justda decides that Jodi really doesn’t need any sunscreen when she’s in the states because she drives mostly at night. Is JDT positive that Jodi didn’t get slightly burned in Southern California earlier or realize she may need some sunscreen and then decided to get some?

Does JDT think that Travis would be so gallant in rushing around to change his tickets and accompany Jodi to Cancun, but refuse to share his sunscreen with her?

Yes, it’s all about Cancun, a perplexing motive for which there is meager evidence. There is not real mention of Cancun in their communications and Travis could not change his tickets. This is set up one year in advance and Jodi didn’t expect to go. Jodi knew he was going with someone else weeks before. This idea infers that Travis, on June 4th, could not tell Jodi, you can’t go, but we can do something special together soon, instead.  Would that have stopped Jodi from murdering Travis?  Why not?

Jodi was on a tight budget on her trip. Sunscreen is expensive. I would also buy a small quantity instead of having a big bottle to lug around, and I’m not planning on murdering anyone, or going to Mexico. What’s so great about Cancun that I would murder if I can’t go there? It’s just a dumb motive.

Yes, Jodi was on a tight budget and Jodi loves her some beauty products, that’s for sure. Can Just Da Truth agree on that?

Back when people were talking about the sunscreen issue, We researched it a little more than Just Da Truth did. We found that sunscreen is used by many women as an economical and viable substitute for expensive moisturizers and as a make-up primer.

Guess what is by far the most popular and most recommended brand for these uses? It’s Neutrogena Ultra Sheer Dry Touch Sunblock (with helioplex), the exact sunscreen that Arias purchased.

Here are two different discussions about this:

yahoo answers 2YAHOO QUESTIONS

Can you use sunscreen as a moisturizer?

“Are you able to use sunscreen as a moisturizer for the face? I find that lotion can cause break outs, which is mainly the reason my face is dry. I have been using acne cream, and my face is all kinds of DRY!!!

Best Answer Asker’s Choice

  • aheart answered 6 years ago

“For me the problem is that I have an oily complexion and I also get those unwanted zits, but since I also have sensitive skin I try not to use harsh treatments. I try to go for the natural stuff. Try looking for the healing garden natural oatmeal soap to wash out your face and use Neutrogena’s Ultra Sheer Dry Touch Sunblock SPF 45+ with helioplex, that one is really good and won’t add the unnecessary shine, by the way, using a suncreen also prevents early signs of aging.”

icompactAsker’s rating & comment

DarleneH (09-01-2011) Sunscreen as makeup primer?

Millenium  Club

Have any of you discovered any sunscreens that function as good primers too, for smoothing out your skin texture? I would think a sunscreen with a lot of silicones would work for that?

bagelwright

Senior Member

Darlene- Try Neutrogena’s Ultra Sheer SPF 30-45 as a primer. It has a dry silky feel and the sunscreen is fabulous!

http://www.icompact.com/forums/showthread.php?t=19331

Why 85 instead of 45? Who knows? Maybe the sun was hot or maybe they were sold out of the SPF 45. This Neutrogena sunblock doesn’t come in a larger size.

Do I want to be like Just Da Truth and say that this proves Jodi is not guilty of M1? No, I wouldn’t say that. That wouldn’t be scientific, logical, or a legally sound argument. I only offer these as possible reasonable explanations. Are there any reasons to buy sunscreen other than a Cancun ultimatum?

In the same way, Justda’s discovery of airplane sized sunscreen is an intersting addition to the Cancun conundrum, but I’m hardly about to take a ride on the banana boat over it. Also, he was a little late to the party.

  • Community QVC.com chatters were talking about the Neutorgena sunscreen Cancun connection on March 7, 2013
  • People on Facebook and Twitter were discussing the Neutorgena sunscreen Cancun connection on March 7, 2013
  • Websleuths.com was discussing the Neutorgena sunscreen Cancun connection on March 9, 2013
  • HLNTV.com reported about the Neutrogena sunscreen Cancun connection on March 23, 2013
  • JDT reported the Neutrogena sunscreen Cancun connection on August 29, 2013

If she couldn’t take the sunscreen on the plane, why would people on all these other sites even bother discussing it?

This was old news, JDT. My underwear stayed nice and clean.

I think we’re right back where we started. Cancun? – It could be, or then again, maybe not. By the way, Jodi was unanimously found guilty of 1st degree premeditated murder on May 8, 2013, so why do prosecution supporters still insist on trying to prove stuff for the prosecution? It’s an agenda driven thing, not to mention that you can fire up a lot of fans simply by finding some new thing to report about Jodi Arias and / or calling her depraved and a whore.

justdatruthBrad Justda continues to believe that Jodi has to prove she’s innocent and that her defenders must disprove all elements of any and all allegations against her. Her defenders must prove that Jodi was not running on empty in Utah. They must prove that the sunscreen was not for Cancun and they must prove there was a rope. This can be referred to as the old rope-a-dope.

JDT can start by providing proof of the story that Jodi hid behind a Christmas tree including what day this happened, and provide evidence that Jodi is a “Ho”. What used to be shocking is now only amusing to me. But is this “just the truth”? Knot very likely.

mini meJDT, or Juan Martinez’ mini-me, is a numbers guy, so he knows that there are at least ten times more prosecution supporters than Jodi supporters to populate his websites. These people gather on Just Da Truth forum to cheer on JDT as he  makes logical arguments founded on false premises or with illogical conclusions, “proves” things we already know, and uses unscientific methods to “scientifically” prove things which cannot be proven.

Do Just Da Truth and his more avid followers get some things right? They do make interesting points. They take a hard look at the evidence, but it’s only Just Da evidence that they want to take a look at. Some of them certainly enjoy making personal attacks for the fun of it.

Sounds justda great, but it kind of ain’t.

Speaking of comics, we find Just Da Truth Blog to be an endless source of comedy.

Your Comments are warmly welcome!

All Rights reserved

See the article by Lise LaSalle.

http://www.allthingscrimeblog.com/2013/12/18/the-infamous-trial-of-candy-crush/

A good reference site by George Barwood

http://jodi-arias.wikispaces.com/

http://jodi-arias.wikispaces.com/Pasadena+to+SLC+%28Gas+can+theory%29