The Instagram Shower Evidence

The Instagram Shower Evidence

Fact Based Reporting by

Amanda Chen and Rob Roman

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

Travis Klein 2

plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose

(The more it changes, the more it’s the same thing)

What happened in that bathroom?

Just wandering around on my favorite Twitter channel, #JodiArias, I came across this very interesting tweet with an attached picture.

The picture was actually an array of the shower photos of Travis along with some commentary. I call it the Shower Instagram. It has comments and explains why the shower photos show that Jodi attacked Travis in the shower. The Instagram is given as further proof that Jodi Arias is guilty of 1st degree premeditated murder.

I downloaded the “Shower Instagram” and later I looked for the original Tweet. It was either deleted or I could not locate it. The original Tweet said something I’ve seen a few times before.

I have no ideas who made this. It said something to the effect that Jodi Supporters avoid the shower photo evidence at all cost because it proves it’s a 1st degree murder. So I wanted to show that we can look at the shower photo evidence and see where it leads us.

This is the text of the Shower Instagram:

“Jodi Arias LIED AGAIN she said she was kneeling kneeling when she dropped his camera. Travis got mad. He told her she holds the camera like a 5 year old & told her I’ll f****** kill you bitch. He lunged at her and body slammed her… knocking the wind out of her.

HE WAS INJURED INSIDE THE SHOWER – IT’S ALL PREMEDITATED PERJURY

The shower Door was closed for every pic & and he was standing inside the shower until photo 5:29:20.

Photo 5:30:30 Travis is down / injured-inside the shower.

In 50 seconds after the door was open he was shot or stabbed. He never had time to get out of the shower or body slam her. The gun jammed, she ran downstairs got the knive (sic) while he staggered to the sink/mirror. She came back upstairs & started stabbing him in the back.

He turned around trying to defend himself & she kept stabbing him like a wild savage. He was trying to get away & she kept stabbing him until he got to the hall where she ended his life by slashing his throat.

HER WELL THOUGHT OUT PLAN WAS TO UNLOAD THE GUN IN HIM INSIDE THE SHOWER AND LEAVE WITHOUT A TRACE OF EVIDENCE…

NOT ONLY DID SHE PREMEDITATE THE MURDER, SHE PREMEDITATED ALL THE LIES AND PERJURY

WE’RE READY FOR ROUND TWO – THE SENTENCING TRIAL”

This is very interesting and thought provoking, but at the end of the day it’s more of the same.

It’s an El Speculation Supremo. Let us show you how we got there.

You can click on many photos to enlarge, so you can see them better and read them.

Instagram 1 lg lt

Instagram 2 lg lt Instagram 3 lg lt

Instagram 4 lg

Gun in her left hand? Left handed gun owners would not agree. Black gloves on? What evidence is there of that?

Jodi lied? She said she was kneeling kneeling in front of Travis? What purpose would that serve? Why is standing or crouching so much more sinister than kneeling? I don’t get that point. Oh, BTW, Jodi testified that she was crouching.

Defense Attorney Nurmi correctly stated that Travis’ seated position would be awkward for a knife strike from a left-handed person. Lefties usually fire a weapon and use a camera with their right hand. Prosecutor Juan Martinez responded that Arias stated she was ambidextrous (can use both hands well). This is an idiotic response, because it implies that Arias switched the camera to the left hand, struck with the knife right handed, then switched back in the middle of a knife fight to get the ceiling shot!

Looking at the Instagram photo and reading what it says, I want to share the ways we think about evidence. These are the kinds of mental steps we go through:

1)      Surface Errors

The first thing is we look for factual errors and things that are incorrect on the surface of the Instagram.

2)      Facts given

What facts is the argument presenting?

3)      Scenario Identification

How do these facts fit into both a scenario based on guilt and a scenario based on innocence? We look at the situation in good faith from both sides.

4)      Implications of the argument

What is implied by the argument? Do the implications of the scenario hold up under a lens of guilt? Do the implications contradict or dispute the scenario under a lens of innocence?

5)      Summary

What have we determined by objectively looking at the evidence?

Now, we can introduce the Shower Instagram:

(You can click on the photo to enlarge it)

shower argument lt

1)      Surface Errors

“Travis got mad. He told her she holds the camera like a 5 year old… He lunged at her and body slammed her… knocking the wind out of her.”

What Travis said, according to Jodi was that a 5 year-old could do a better job taking pictures (paraphrase). This according to defense domestic violence expert Alyce LaViolette, was character assassination, as Jodi prided herself on being a talented photographer and hoped to do it professionally.

“Body Slammed her” and “Knocking the wind out of her” are expressions that can have different meaning to different people. A body slam can be a particular wrestling move where a person is lifted up and thrown or slammed down to the floor. Another person can say that a body slam simply means forcibly pushing a person or throwing them to the floor. Knocking the wind out of a person in sports is a term meaning the person is hit so hard that the air is expelled out of their lungs and they are briefly knocked unconscious. Another person can mean that they hit the ground with enough force to push air out of their lungs.

“*(Travis) told her I’ll f****** kill you bitch.”

This is incorrect. According to Jodi, Travis did not threaten to kill Jodi until after the gun went off and they were both on the floor

“HE WAS INJURED INSIDE THE SHOWER”

“Photo 5:30:30 “Travis is down / injured-inside the shower.”

Let’s remember to look for any evidence of that based on the shower photos.

“In 50 seconds after the door was open he was shot or stabbed.”

shower tilt lt

Let’s look for evidence of this in the photos. “Shot or stabbed”: Here, again, is the contention offered by prosecution supporters that it doesn’t matter whether Travis Alexander was shot or stabbed first. But, it does matter. It matters a lot. The prosecution went to extreme lengths to demonstrate that it was impossible that Jodi shot Travis first. The ME said he would have been “immediately incapacitated”, so the defense wounds and knife wounds had to be first. The ME also said that the gunshot wound above Travis’ right eyebrow was post mortem, in his opinion.

If you take the ME’s statements and opinion as fact, this is all you need, along with the crime scene evidence, to conclude that Jodi Arias premeditated the murder of Travis Alexander. If you choose not to believe the ME, it could be a 1st degree premeditated murder or it could be something other than 1st degree premeditated murder. If the gun was first, we may need to re-evaluate both Jodi’s veracity on the stand and the idea that her story actually is possible. The order of injuries matters. If Travis was shot first, then the ME was either severely mistaken or he lied on the stand.

shower reach lt

“The shower Door was closed for every pic.”

This is an interesting observation. Let’s look into this claim and see if it’s true.

“He never had time to get out of the shower or body slam her.”

We can investigate this claim, too. Martinez said that according to Jodi’s story it’s impossible for everything she said happened to have happened in 1 minute and 2 seconds. (The amount of time between the ceiling photo and the foot photo.)

At the same time, Martinez also demonstrated to the jury how incredibly long 2 minutes is with his all too predictable  2 minutes of silence when the jury was considering the cruelty aggravator.

Jodi pointed out on the stand that the “foot photo”, taken 1 minute and 2 seconds after the “ceiling light photo”, could show Travis partially injured, specifically by the gunshot, and that this photo is not necessarily the end of the deadly skirmish. There is plenty of time for Jodi’s story to be true, but that’s something for another article.

Jodi-Arias-trial-pic-1-1024x673L

“The gun jammed, she ran downstairs got the knive (sic) while he staggered to the sink/mirror.”

This statement directly contradicts the arguments of the prosecutor as well as the testimony and evidence from Dr. Horn. Adding this to the idea that it doesn’t matter whether the gun injury was last or first, is troubling. This is a capitol murder trial. The life of the defendant/convict hangs in the balance. We cannot be ambivalent about these facts. Was Travis Alexander shot or stabbed first? Was he shot or stabbed when he went to the sink? Before a possible execution or life imprisonment for Arias, we had better know for sure.

“She came back upstairs & started stabbing him in the back.”

vinny lt lgThis goes back to the question of the back stabs. Where, when and why did Arias stab Alexander in the back? Amazingly, only that genius detective, Vinnie Politan, was able to give a decent answer to that question for the prosecution. Vinnie Politan once theorized on HLN that all or most of the stabbings, including the back stabs, could have been done when Travis was in the shower. Travis, unable to escape the shower, may have turned his back or doubled over while Arias kept stabbing.

Since the prosecution must prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt, isn’t it unsettling that two avid prosecution supporters, one a former criminal attorney and the other a Twitter tweeter, give such different accounts of what happened? Alternate scenarios should be the province of the defense, not the prosecution.

 

“He turned around trying to defend himself & she kept stabbing him like a wild savage.”

Now this is a new variation. This is the first time I heard someone from the prosecution theorizing that the back wounds were the first knife wounds.

Many people from the defense also believe the back wounds stabs were the first knife wounds. The wild savage part, I can also agree with. Having the mind of a wild savage works equally well coming from a lens of innocence or a lens of guilt.

Now we can move to step two:

2)      Facts Presented

A)    Jodi Arias lied about kneeling on the floor.

B)    She was standing when, according to her, she fumbled and dropped the camera.

C)    Arias lied about Travis’ “5 year-old” statement. He did not yell at her, he did not come out of the shower and throw her down, She did not shoot him by accident and he didn’t say “F****** kill you b*tch!”.

D)     Travis was injured inside the shower and the shower photos demonstrate this

E)     By photo 5:30:30, Travis is seated in the shower and injured.

F)    50 seconds after the shower door is opened (5:29:20 to 5:30:30), Travis is injured. Where is the Instagram person getting the 50 seconds? This is 70 seconds. There are 44 seconds between the seated photo and the ceiling light photo. Is that what the Instagram maker means?

G)    Shot first or stabbed first, it doesn’t really matter.

H)    The Instagram theorist is going with the gunshot first murder theory.

I)     There was no time for Jodi’s scenario to happen.

J)      Jodi leaves the bathroom to get a knife and returns while Travis is standing at the mirror.

K)    She jabs him in the back multiple times (WHY?).

L)    She continues stabbing him until he’s down on the bedroom carpet at the end of the bathroom hallway

M)   Since Travis doesn’t know Jodi is there taking pictures, he is not cooperating with poses and he’s just showering.

We have assembled all the facts alleged in the argument, let’s look into Scenario identification from both sides and put them all together.

3)      Scenario Identification

Guilt perspective knife first:

Within 50 seconds of the shower door being opened, Jodi attacks Travis with a knife. Jodi was standing the whole time and just bent her knees or crouched to attack Travis.  Let’s call the Instagram theory the Hidden Dragon, Crouching Tiger theory. At some point Travis makes his way to the sink. Travis gets to the end of the hallway, and collapses shortly before or after his throat is cut. She drags him back by the sink, stops, and shoots him in the face before putting him back in the shower.

Guilt perspective gunshot first:

Jodi is standing with the gun. She shoots him while he sits in the shower. This fits the trajectory of the gunshot well. The gun must have jammed or it only had one bullet, because otherwise Jodi would have continued firing. Travis is injured but still alive and he’s presumably crawling around before making it to the sink. This fits the blood evidence. Jodi leaves the bathroom to get a knife. She returns and Travis is now at the bathroom sink. She jabs him in the back and then continues stabbing him, he gets the defensive wounds to his hands. Travis gets to the end of the bathroom hallway and his throat is cut. Jodi drags Travis back to the shower.

Innocence perspective

(justifiable homicide / self-defense) (2nd degree murder, sudden heat of passion, manslaughter):

Jodi is kneeling on the mat while taking photos of Travis in the shower. Travis sits down in the shower and the shower door is opened. According to Jodi, there is a simmering argument going on, but she did not elaborate. Jodi fumbles and drops the camera. At this point, Travis becomes enraged. He calls her a stupid idiot and yells that a five year-old could do a better job. He knocks her to the floor, her breath rushes out of her lungs on impact. She rolls away, gets up and books down the hallway.

Afraid that Travis will catch her before she gets to the bedroom doors, she cuts right and into the closet and slams the door shut. He catches up and opens the door. Jodi puts her foot on a shelf and reaches for an old gun that Travis keeps near the picture of his dad. Jodi enters the bathroom and turns around. Travis comes into the bathroom and Jodi points the gun at him with two hands. Travis, perhaps knowing the gun is unloaded comes at her like a linebacker and tries to tackle her. The gun goes off and Travis is shot. There must have been a round in the chamber. They both fall to the floor and continue to struggle. Travis threatens Jodi’s life (F***ing kill you, b*tch!).  Jodi’s memory is overwhelmed at this point and she goes on auto-pilot..

Now, we can look at the implications of these 3 scenarios.

4)      Implications of the argument

Jodi’s presence in the bathroom:

Under the innocence scenario, Jodi uses the excuse of taking muscle or body photos of Travis that he can keep. She wants one more intimate experience with Travis before they part company and move on to their new lovers. She convinces Travis to do the photo shoot. He’s aware he’s being photographed. She directs him in a number of poses.  The shower door is always closed. At the time of the 5:29:20 photo, Jodi is going for the “Calvin Klein” photo.

not calvinModeling shots of men in the shower are a very common thing. Travis had recently been working out heavily and bulking up. At some point Travis sits down in the shower. This could  be because Travis becomes agitated by the photos and asks Jodi to stop. Maybe Travis was going to do some seated poses, or he wanted to see the photos. At the point of the 5:30:30 photo, an argument that has been smoldering all afternoon is heating up again. At the time of the 5:31:14 photo, Jodi fumbles and drops the camera and Travis lunges out of the shower, attacking Jodi.

Under both guilt scenarios, the Shower Instagram implies that Travis had no idea Jodi was in the bathroom with him taking the photos. He may have thought she was downstairs or had already left. Jodi may have been angry at Travis and wanted to get his attention somehow or wanted to invade his privacy out of spite. The photos then would be less trying to capture poses and more just attempting to control and annoy. The idea of the Instagrammer is that the shower door was closed until she’s ready to strike because he doesn’t know she’s there. The shower Instagram idea is reinforced by two shower photos that appear to show Travis reaching for the shampoo and washing his hair.

At the time of the 5:27:18 photo, Travis looks out the clear shower door and sees Jodi with his camera. He’s startled and becomes angry. He turns around and turns the water off, according to the Instagram. He faces Jodi. He’s very upset and aggravated. Travis appears to be close-mouthed and not talking. Maybe he is giving her a cold, angry staredown. Perhaps Jodi is already flashing a weapon. If so, we can imagine that Travis may be trying to give her a warm, pleading stare. This is the look he describes giving the man with the gun in the story he tells at the hotel, when Jodi has her head in his lap.

collage_zpsba572278 BrtWe can imagine that Jodi is smiling and perhaps laughing as she shows Travis a knife or a gun. Maybe she shows anger. Jodi threatens Travis with a weapon and forces him into a seated position. Then the attack begins.

Here, Gray Hughes, a prosecution supporter, attempts to prove that Travis was an active participant in the shower photos and that the door was open throughout. Gray even thinks the camera was inside the shower for some shots.

The Gray Hughes shower pics video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DHt4kziV_jw

Is it true that Travis is unaware that Jodi is right in front of  him for over 5 minutes (5:22:16 – 5:27:18) snapping photos? Then this must be a regular shower when Travis is soaping and shampooing.

Jodi is avoiding taking any photos where he is soaping up. Maybe he had already done that. At 5:24:30, you see Travis appears to be wetting down his hair in preparation for a shampoo. At 5:24:49, he appears to grab a handful of shampoo. At 5:24:56, according to the Gray Hughes video, Travis appears to be washing the shampoo off. That’s 26 seconds to wash his hair. Is that too fast for a guy to shampoo his hair? It’s seems about right.

The Shower Instagram states that the shower door is closed in all the photos until the seated photo. Gray Hughes, a prosecution supporter, believes the shower door was always open. Gray Hughes also believes the water in the Calvin Klein photo is water on the camera lens, and the door is open. From Travis’ blogs, we know that Travis’ mother couldn’t stand bath water on the floor, and she punished Travis for this. We can theorize that the shower door would be closed unless he agreed to take the shower photos.

Then again, for this same reason, we can also believe that Travis agreed to the photos but he wanted the door to stay closed. So the closed shower door may not be as evil as it seems.

The Instagram and Martinez both claim Travis was jabbed in the back by surprise at the sink. Martinez claims Travis was already stabbed in the chest and abdomen by the time he got to the sink, while the Instagram claims that Travis had only a gunshot wound when he was jabbed in the back a the sink. Jodi supporters and some prosecution supporters also believe that Travis only had the gun wound when he was at the sink.

For the Shower Instagram ideas to be correct, Jodi would need to have avoided any photos of Travis soaping and shampooing, while managing to take all the seemingly posed photos. Another Tweeter claims these poses match the poses from the shower scene in the classic movie Psycho. Could this be done accidentally? Could Jodi be that quick to know these poses by heart and capture them all accidentally? Isn’t that highly unlikely? Perhaps Travis had finished soaping and shampooing and he was just rinsing off when Jodi suddenly appeared in font of the shower and started snapping the photos.

psycho 1 lg Calvin Klein Jeans by Weber, Bruce (photog.);

It’s also possible that Jodi convinced Travis to let her take the shower photos as a way to get him into a vulnerable position for attack. In this case, he would be aware of the photos and posing for them. Wouldn’t the quality of the photos be better then? The photos were deleted and needed to be recovered, so it’s difficult to know.

For this same reason, it’s difficult to know if the door was open or closed. The Shower Instagram claims that the shower door was closed at all times because Travis was not aware Jodi was there. Looking at the back photo, it is difficult to tell. Is the shower door so clean, clear and water drop free that it appears to be open?

Travis Alexander shower photo. Can you tell if the door is open or not?
Travis Alexander shower photo. Can you tell if the door is open or not?

Here is a professional model photo:

A Calvin Klein type model in the same pose
A Calvin Klein type model in the same pose

Is it a stretch to believe the photos were posed?  They certainly could be posed. Until the Shower Instagram came along, I thought most people agreed that the photos were posed.

shower light ltWhat about the ceiling light photo? If Travis was injured in the shower by gun or by knife, what happened to cause the ceiling photo at 5:31:14? Prosecution supporters need to explain how that photo happened. One could theorize that an injured Travis came out of the shower suddenly, causing Jodi to move her arm and snap the photo.

How about the back wounds? Jodi supporters believe it’s possible Jodi stabbed Travis from under him or from in front of him with shallow, defensive jabs. What is the reason for these stabs under a theory of guilt? No one has provided a reasonable answer except, incredibly, Vinnie Politan, the vacuous, and shameless hot-headed entertainer from CNN’s Head Line News.

Martinez’ idea about the back stabs makes little sense and neither does the Instagram’s. What would be the purpose of the back jabs?

Now we can make our summary.

4)      Summary

What have we determined by objectively looking at the evidence?

We have honestly looked at the Shower Instagram evidence and opinion. We have looked at it from theories of guilt as well as innocence.

Did Jodi lie when she said she was kneeling on the mat when she took the final 3 shower photos?

shower iris lg ltHere we can look to the evidence of the iris photo scientist. Although Martinez and most prosecution supporters believe this is junk science, the scientist works with law enforcement and his iris enhancements have been used as evidence for the prosecution to determine such things as license plate numbers, proof of location and time of day. He also testified that his enhancements are 10 times more visible in the perfect darkness of his lab and when shown on his expensive lab equipment.

Travis Alexander slumped over in shower 5 30 pm june 4 2008 lt

It’s inconclusive whether Jodi is standing or kneeling for the Calvin Klein photo. It seems that Travis is seated in the photo, and therefore, Jodi would have to be kneeling or crouched down at the time of the 5:30:30 seated photo. It appears that the camera is pointed straight at the subject.

Seated in the shower seems like a vulnerable position that Jodi wanted to coax Travis into. It’s also possible that Jodi forced Travis to sit down or that he sat down out of embarrassment or frustration, or to look at the photos. It seems to be an open question.

A male model posing while sitting in a shower
A male model posing while sitting in a shower

The idea that Jodi planned to shoot Travis in the shower and leave no trace is possible, but it goes against the ME and the prosecutor. The idea that the shower door was closed at all times until the seated photo is inconclusive. The surprised look of Travis could have an innocent explanation. The idea that Travis had no idea Jodi was there until the surprised look photo is contradicted by Travis not soaping and shampooing and all the poses Travis seemed to do, whether Jodi wanted the Calvin Klein look or she was going for the Psycho look.

-It’s likely that both the “Calvin Klein” photo and the seated photo are shot not while Arias is standing, but while she is kneeling or crouched on the bath mat. They both appear to be straight on shots. The Iris photo is inconclusive.

-It’s inconclusive as to whether the shower door was always closed until Alexander is seated in the shower. Even if it was, there could be an innocent reason for this (Travis was beaten for getting water on the bathroom floor).

-The theory of the Instagram contradicts the testimony and evidence of the M.E. and the arguments of the prosecutor.

-One can theorize that Travis Alexander did not know that Jodi Arias was snapping photos of him. But one cannot be sure the shower door was closed for all the shots. Alexander is not seen washing his body or hair and he he may be posing like a model or doing poses from the Psycho shower scene. There is too much reasonable doubt.

-The look of surprise on Alexander’s face in one photo is strong evidence, but it’s inconclusive.  Arias would have to be snapping photos for over 5 minutes through a plexiglass door before being noticed.

-Alexander’s face in the “Calvin Klein” photo could be registering fear, anger, pleading, or frustration. His face could also be a posed in a stern look typical of male models.

-Contrary to popular belief, there’s plenty of time for Arias’story to fit the timeline of the photos. All of the knife wounds could have happened in 10 seconds. That’s a whole other article, though.

-There’s no real evidence that Travis was attacked in the shower. You can surmise that it happened that way, but you can’t really be sure. The seated photo provides no evidence either way.

The Shower Instagram theory of Hidden Dragon, Crouching Tiger is interesting, but it’s a theory with major problems.

In a strange inversion of tradition, the prosecution and prosecution supporters seem to have numerous speculations, explanations and theories regarding the Jodi Arias case, even though it should be one proven theory beyond reasonable doubt. At the same time, the defense and Jodi supporters are not allowed to speculate or raise any possibilities or alternate scenarios, like the system intends, because they are just dreaming or being spoil-sports.

Prosecution supporters need to take a nice cold shower, but they should watch out for stealthy, ninja paparazzi in revenge mode!

What’s YOUR opinion? Leave a comment, we want to know!

psycho_shower_scene_frames lg

Advertisements

More lies and juanipulation: Crystal Blue Persuasion

Misrepresentation and Deceit in the Arias Trial:

Crystal Blue Persuasion

 

Fact Based Reporting by

Rob Roman and Amanda Chen

 

crystal blue 2 lt

“Somebody lied to you about important facts in this case.” – Juan Martinez

*

“If you believe what the defendant is telling you, then all the arguments begin to make sense.” – Juan Martinez

*

According to Juan Martinez:

If it is written down, it’s the truth. If it’s not, it’s a lie. A white lie is just as bad as a regular lie. Not telling the full and complete truth at all times is a lie. Omitting details is lying. Anything that anyone says happened that is not in their diary is a lie. If you are attacked or beaten by your partner and you don’t document it, tell someone or call 911, it never happened and you are a liar.

You are a liar if, after you do something unspeakable, you do not tell every person you meet what you can remember about what you have done.

Somebody did lie about important facts in this case, and we’re not talking about Jodi Arias. We have broken these lies down into five categories. The headings in bold type are assertions made by Juan Martinez in his closing argument . These are the categories of lies:

1 white lieWhite Lie Typically a white lie is a harmless lie that is often done to be polite. Here, it’s a lie that plays into Martinez’ themes and theories, but it’s immaterial to the murder charge. These white lies are far from harmless. 1 exaggerationExaggeration Something from the facts or testimony is taken out of context and magnified. It’s a fish story where a mountain is made out of a molehill.

3 misrepresentationMisrepresentation This includes presenting mere speculation as fact, and changing the meanings of facts. It’s a deliberate effort to skew a fact to align it with other facts in the case.

4 mirrorMirror It’s a manipulation of the jury. Juan Martinez is projecting his own feelings, motives and ideas, or those of others, onto the defendant. (see more about the this in the previous article, Lies and Juanipulation: The Mirror Crack’d) 5 whopperWhopper It’s an obvious untruth in light of the facts. It’s deceitful and a breach of integrity Let’s examine more of the territory covered in the prosecutor’s all-important closing arguments:

The Manifesto and Salt Lake City

white lie 1“She has signed a Manifesto just in case she becomes famous” – Juan Martinez

This is another thing Martinez dug up in Alyce LaViolette’s notes. The prosecution had no witnesses attesting to any “Manifesto” and it was never entered into evidence, even though Martinez wants the jury to believe that Arias made copies and autographed the copies in jail in Yreka. 3094a7646b1ffb10310f6a7067003407-1306071742_4_3Even if she did, it’s just the same “intruder story” again, and Arias has already claimed she invented the story as a stalling tactic.

Reporters have requested proof of the Manifesto from the prosecutor’s office, and they’re still waiting.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/08/jodi-arias-manifesto-day-42_n_3041141.html

“This woman who claims she never went to Salt Lake City” – Juan Martinez

Martinez tells the jury Jodi testified that she was never in Salt Lake City, Utah. She was in West Jordan, on the far outskirts of Salt Lake City. This honest answer is a lie and a manipulation, according to Martinez, because a gas receipt near West Jordan states “Salt Lake City”. This is simply a trick of semantics.

“Staging The Scene”

 4 mirrorArias believes “she will not be convicted, after she has staged the scene for you”.  – Juan Martinez 

It’s The Mirror. The most important question here is why does Martinez feel he needs to add all the ornamentation you see throughout the trial? This is yet another behavior that El Espejo, the mirror, attributes to Jodi Arias. we can cook itJuan tells the jury that “in the light of truth you can see who she really is.” “This is an individual who is manipulative.” “This is an individual who will stop at nothing and will continue to be manipulative and will lie at every turn and at every occasion that she has.”

This from the man who peppered the trial with lengthy inquiries and discussions about Bobby Juarez, high school era windows and doors, happenings from Arias’ life when she was 5 and 8 years old, the backspace button, the criminal, the stupid sister, the gopher, the dog, the chameleon, the wildebeest, that thing, Snow White, the Shack, the Christmas tree, the Ring and The Fog.

Yet in his closing argument, when referring to Arias’ answers to mostly irrelevant questions, Juan says “There’s nothing, absolutely nothing important about that as it applies to the killing other than to try to manipulate you, to try to shock you…”

Who is really “staging the scene” here and who is really the manipulator? Who uses lies to kill instead of a gun or a knife? Who is “not a very nice person”?

Arias Has Memory Problems

1 exaggerationThis is one of Juan Martinez’ favorite tactics and he uses this often at trial. Everyone who testifies will have some discrepancies in their testimony. Martinez seizes on this to discredit witnesses. He will claim that there is a memory problem and that it must be because the person is lying. Martinez says that Arias has trouble remembering things, but yet he says “she has an incredible memory for her fantasy world”.

The events were over 4 1/2 years before. Arias used photographs, her bank records, and her journal to try to remember dates and times. The evidence showed that Jodi has a very good memory.

Juan likes to say “with the the truth, you ain’t go to remember nothing” – This is false for an event that happened 4 ½ years ago. Any honest person trying to accurately recall an event will remember things incorrectly and will correct themselves as related facts are brought to light.

Jodi does not have memory problems.  

Arias Is a Manipulator Because in 5th Grade She “played the victim”

 3 misrepresentationCan this seriously be presented as evidence?  There’s not one detail or example about how Jodi “played the victim”, other than the statement itself. This is another Martinez Special, and he serves these up frequently throughout the trial. What is going on in this death penalty case with this kind of “evidence”?

What did you do in 1st through 5th grade? Anything different now? This is a self-defense case. Of course, Arias is claiming the victim attacked her and she was forced to protect her life.

Jodi is not playing the victim.  

Jodi Arias Is a Criminal

 3 misrepresentationMartinez said during the trial that Jodi does in fact have a prior record because: She’s a liar and a murderer. She probably has committed crimes and engaged in criminal type crime behavior in the past. She has engaged in criminal behavior during the trial. She would not hesitate commit plenty of crimes if she could, but she’s in jail, so she can’t. juan-martinez-prosecuting-attorney

Prior to this trial, Jodi had no prior convictions for any offense, and had nothing more than a few traffic tickets. Of course, Martinez tries to fit her into the category of hardened criminal or insane psychotic, both proven to not be true.

She was convicted of 1st degree murder in an unfair trial, but Jodi Arias is not a criminal.  

Jodi Was Not Abused by Travis

 5 whopperJodi was abused by Travis throughout the relationship as demonstrated by testimony, facts and evidence. Travis called Jodi a “skank” and a “pathological liar” behind her back within two months of meeting her.  One and a half years later, he is still fanning the flames in phone sex conversations, conducting various business deals with her (including having her clean his house),  and jumping into bed with Jodi Arias.

He had to have known she has a mental illness, it’s obvious to anyone who has some experience with the mentally ill and watched the trial. He confided in no one about her, and he took the relationship underground early on. He hid her away and berated her to his friends and acquaintances. He is the one who made it a sex only relationship. He used her for sex and he threatened her. Then, he blamed her for the whole thing.

All these things are excused by his community, the media, and his LDS Church because of his terrible demise.

Travis Alexander callously tampered with Arias just like someone would recklessly play with explosives. The result should have been readily foreseeable.  

Jodi was abused by Travis, without question.

 

Nothing Is Jodi’s Fault

 4 mirrorJuan claims in his closing argument that Jodi refuses to take responsibility for any problem. She blames others for everything and she projects her problems and bad qualities onto other people. Juan is saying this after he himself invited a completely non-threatening and amiable woman in her sixties to “spar” with him in open court.

Jodi accepted responsibility for killing Travis Alexander. She has stated numerous times that her dealings with Alexander were the results of her own bad choices and bad decisions and they are entirely her responsibility. Jodi Arias has shown remorse and regret for her acts on numerous occasions, both in and out of the courtroom. She has shown sympathy for the victim’s family, regret for her false stories, and has shown concern that the victim’s family “can somehow find peace”. justice for travis 4

Jodi Arias has stated that she will accept her punishment, whether it’s execution or a life sentence, and “deal with it”.  She said “I will be sorry for the rest of my life, probably longer.”

According to Juan, everything is Jodi’s fault. He even says it’s Jodi’s fault that Darryl Brewer did not want to commit to her or start a family with her after almost four years of being with her. How does that make any sense?

Yet when Deanna Reid testified to the exact same thing about Travis Alexander, it was perfectly reasonable.

Jodi accepted responsibility for her actions and for Travis’ death.  

Arias Targeted a Good Mormon Boy

5 whopper“She decides those boys from the Mormon faith are people with lots of family values and they’re successful hard workers and can give her what she needs.” – Juan Martinez

Jodi Arias did not target a Mormon boy. She met someone who happened to be Mormon who often gives a book of Mormon to non-LDS friends and girlfriends.

Travis' friend Chris Hughes
Travis’ friend Chris Hughes

Travis Alexander actively sought converts as part of his position in the church. The evidence strongly suggests that Jodi Arias, far from being dependent on a man, went to Las Vegas to the PPL convention not to meet a Mormon boy, but to start a new, independent career for herself.

She was met by some good Mormon boys doing what they were normally doing at PPL conventions: Trying to set one of their away from home friends up with a potential sex partner by impressing her with an Executive Dinner.

These friends of Travis lied when they tried to suggest they were setting Travis up with a future wife. Jodi wasn’t LDS. They knew she was with him in his hotel rooms in the early months of the relationship. These were hypocrite phony Mormons and they knew exactly what was going on. Non-LDS girls are fair game for trysts for single and married Mormon men alike, because they don’t count.

Travis’ Mormon friends targeted Jodi Arias. They set her up with him. They provided Alexander with cover in their homes where they went to hook up. They warned Travis not to play games with her. They then began to warn Travis about Jodi when she began to take the relationship too seriously. Alexander then took the relationship underground. Why? Because Arias was bad for church and business, but good for some guilty pleasure.

Jodi and Travis met and talked about common interests and they quickly fell for each other. Jodi was looking for a religion where there are strong family values and the men do not cheat on their wives. It appears that in this case, the LDS Church was not the answer to Jodi’s dreams.

Travis knew that Jodi was not ready to be baptized into the church and he was not qualified to baptize anyone due to his behavior. This shows his utter disregard for the teachings of the church. Travis is the only one to blame about that.

Jodi fell in love. She did not target a good Mormon boy, and she did not even target Travis Alexander

Mormon Rules Were Arias’ Responsibility

1 white lieDid Jodi corrupt Travis by offering him a Strawberry Frappuccino, (a caffeine beverage not allowed by the LDS church)?

Starbucks Blueberry Frappuccino
Just try saying “NO!” to a Starbucks Blueberry Frappuccino (with whipped cream)

“There’s a word in the English lexicon called ‘No’ that you can use when you don’t want a person to do something.” – Juan Martinez

Juan Martinez claimed that Jodi blamed the young missionaries who came to her home in California for not teaching her the specifics about the law of chastity. He claims that Jodi blamed Travis for telling her that avoiding vaginal sex was the really important principle. Juan is suggesting that it was Jodi who manipulated Travis to accept this interpretation.

– “It’s unconscionable to blame Travis Alexander when she had the same knowledge and same position as him.” – Juan Martinez

Jodi Arias was giving literal answers to literal questions. She was asked if the missionaries taught about the details of the vow of chastity and she answered the question. It’s obvious that she didn’t want to say “No” to Travis. They both knew what the Mormon rules are relating to pre-marital chastity and they both broke the rules. Jodi said that there is no commandment that says “Thou shalt not fornicate”. She also said that “If it’s wrong, I don’t want to be right”.

However, Jodi was not an ordained leader of the LDS Church.  She was not an active member of the LDS Church for 20 years. Travis introduced the religion to Jodi. Travis baptized Jodi into the church. Is there any evidence at all that he tried to get her to follow the rules? We have never seen any. crystal blue 3

One guess is that the younger generation of Mormons probably follow the guidelines of the Law of Travis more often than strictly adhering to the laws of chastity. “Grinding”, heavy petting, and even oral sex are probably rampant, but it’s a big secret.

So it seems Jodi is much more knowledgeable than Juan Martinez about the vow of chastity, at least for many young Mormons. Jodi did not have the same position as Travis. Who would you rather ask important questions about the LDS Church?  A novice or an ordained elder who has been involved in the church for twenty years?

Juan Martinez must be snorting some crystal blue meth.

Arias Made Her Own Rules

 4 mirrorAs far as when Jodi and Travis were not exclusive, Jodi seemed to be more concerned that they were being honest and open with each other, which Travis never was, and not hiding things from each other, like Travis often did.

Travis in his home office in full business attire
Travis in his home office in full business attire

Jodi told Travis all about her date with Abe Abdelhadi and about Ryan. Travis responded with Jealousy and threats of violence towards Abe.

Travis may have been lying to Jodi, or Jodi may have been lying to herself about Travis. In any case, there seemed to be a big communication problem going on there.

Jodi didn’t make her own rules, She was sticking to the rules she followed long before Travis, rules that many people have. Being intimate together means commitment.  Exclusivity is expected in a relationship and if it’s not exclusive, they want to know if and who the other person is seeing.  

There’s an important reason for this, it’s called STD’s. For Travis, being intimate meant exactly the opposite. It meant there was no commitment, not now and not in the future. Here is the confusion. As long as Travis kept coming back to Jodi, she thought she still had a chance with him.  

Jodi Arias wasn’t following her own rules, Travis Alexander was.  

Arias Moved to Mesa to Stalk Travis

3 misrepresentationThis is what’s really important to the “stalker” question. What happened in the summer of 2007 when Travis and Jodi “broke up” and Jodi moved to Mesa? Juan thinks that this is the the fulcrum of an obvious stalking that led to murder, that Jodi is a liar and her witnesses are all liars because they base their conclusions on Jodi’s lies.  

Since the defense is just one big lying lie, Juan thinks whatever bull he digs up or says should automatically become the truth by default.

There is no evidence that Travis discouraged the move. In all the communications, there was no evidence presented that Travis didn’t want Jodi in Mesa or that Jodi was unwelcome at Travis’ home. There were late night calls and late night rendezvous sessions. Travis was seeing both Lisa Andrews-Daidone and Jodi Arias at the same time, and neither of them knew about the other for quite some time. That doesn’t sound like stalking. It sounds more like Travis was not being honest with Jodi or Lisa Andrews, ….. or Mimi Hall.

Alexander was Breaking Bad and Arias was chasing after him
Alexander was Breaking Bad and Arias was chasing after him

Jodi was confused about what was going on in the relationship. This is what the evidence says. This was the testimony. Jodi was going over the line in trying to find out what was really going on, but there’s no intimidation or threats of violence.

Jodi was fighting for Travis. She was not threatening him or attacking him. It’s not a typical “fatal attraction” situation because Alexander continued to get together with her time and time again.

Here are the ten stalking acts attributed to Jodi Arias form that dubious source, Radar Online:  

http://radaronline.com/exclusives/2013/05/10-stalker-acts-committed-by-jodi-arias-against-travis-alexander-slashed-tires-email-hacking-eavesdropping/

There’s a rivalry going on, and Travis is not stopping it. He’s actually stoking the fires by continuing to play Jodi and lie to Lisa and he’s refusing to honestly deal with the situation. Lisa Daidone testified, and she offered very little knowledge about what was going on. Dan Freeman also knew almost nothing about it either, other than Jodi was confused about the relationship and that Travis planned on ending it with her in January, 2008, but he didn’t really get around to it until March and April.

Arias was not “stalking” Alexander.

Arias Displayed Stalking Behaviors

 3 misrepresentationHere is the entirety of Jodi’s so-called “stalking behavior”: 1) When they were first seeing each other, Travis and Sky and Chris Hughes left her alone in their house and the three went to the master bedroom to discuss Jodi. This is rude behavior. Jodi was wondering what was going on (which we all sometimes do) and may have been eavesdropping (which we all sometimes do). She became angry at this, which is understandable.

2) She went into Travis’ e-mail and phone at least once. Many people check up on their partners and spouses. 3) She went over to Travis’ house, found Lisa-Andrews with Travis, and left immediately. 4) Travis had his tires slashed, which was never linked to Jodi. If she did this, this is known to often be a passive-aggressive behavior designed to get a person’s attention. Maybe she was saying “stop avoiding me. Communicate with me.” 5) A letter was sent to Lisa Daidone, supposedly by Jodi, warning her to not sin with Travis.

Two of these so-called stalking incidents are these: Mimi Hall said that Travis “thought Jodi had followed him on a date”. Lisa Daidone said that “a home security alarm alerted that a door was open”. Of course, why would a smart professional like Alyce LaViolette challenge and question this so-called evidence in a capital murder trial?

The legal definition of stalking revolves around an intent to instill fear or injury. There is no intent to instill injury whatsoever. There is no intent to instill fear. Jodi is either trying to find out what Travis is up to, or she wants proof of what he is doing. These are techniques law enforcement uses all the time.

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Stalking

This is the time when some intervention should have been done, yet other than a police report, nothing was done. With all these incidents going on, there is no sign of a big fight between Travis and Jodi until after she leaves Mesa. Travis did almost nothing to allay her concerns.

A person with a mental illness showing obvious signs of distress and confusion over a relationship is not “stalking behavior”.

Travis Claimed That All He Was to Jodi Was a “dildo with a heartbeat”

1 mirror whopperHere, Travis gives Juan a run for his money as far as reflecting his own deviant thoughts and behaviors onto others. Like Travis’ addict parents, Travis and Juan are both snorting the crystal blue meth.

It was Jodi who wanted a full relationship, it was Jodi who was in love. It was Travis who forced the relationship into a secretive, sex only situation. Travis was conjuring up all kinds of sexual scenarios. Travis’ actions are wholly devoid of any caring, love or romanticism, save one candlelit bath with flower petals and one instance of leaving a pastry on her car. The romanticism was directed towards the good Mormon girls.

Jodi, probably due to childhood issues and mental illness, thought she could rescue the relationship. She was staying loyal to him. She was in love with Travis Alexander and Eddie Snell, the late night guy we hear on the sex tape.

This remark that Travis made does not make any sense and actually applies to himself, based on what the trial revealed. Travis is going to extraordinary lengths to keep the lid on what he had done and what he was doing. What’s the reason? The LDS church is the source of his business, his customers, and his community.

A more accurate version is that Jodi was nothing more to Travis than a living blow-up doll with a heartbeat. blue pesuasionIt’s an addiction with just as many disastrous consequences.

This is not the entire truth, though. Jodi seemed to be smitten with Travis because the relationship embodied secrecy, chaos and the emotional extremes from her unresolved childhood. Travis seemed to be drawn in by the love/hate relationship he may have had with his mother or both parents from his childhood.

The more he kept getting back with her, the more he unleashed blame, repulsion, and hatred onto Jodi Arias that was better reserved to himself.  Tensions were increasing, and Jodi was beginning to lose her already tenuously balanced mental stability.

One can assume because Jodi was ready with her Helio phone to record their sex conversation in May, 2008 that this must have been a regular thing. He was calling Jodi late at night again while continuing with Mimi and who knows who else, in the light of day.

Travis’ friends didn’t call him T-Dawg for nothing. It seems that he continued this dating of multiple women the entire time, using his traveling and long hours to keep the women separate and at bay. It was ideal to have Jodi in Palm Desert, California and he just added her to his list. Jodi started to cramp his style when she moved to Mesa, but Travis seemed to think he could control it and handle her and he just kept on with his game plan.  

Jodi Arias probably got closer to the real Travis than anyone had. Jodi Arias to this day is still enchanted by her memory of Travis.

It’s clear that Travis Alexander was much more than just sex to Jodi Arias.  

Jodi Was a Peeper and a Stalker (because she refused to let Travis play her)

3 misrepresentationMuch was made by Martinez about the “peeping incident”, even though Jodi went over to Travis’ unannounced, which she did all the time, found the doors locked and went around to the back only to see Travis on the couch with an unknown woman. She peeped for a while and then she left. Most of Jodi’s so-called stalking behavior seems to be intelligence gathering. This is the same thing people do when they hire a detective, or go on a show called “Cheaters”.

She wanted to know the truth, she felt she was being played, and it appears she was right. This peeping incident is interpreted not as Jodi doing what she normally did, heading over to Travis’ for a nighttime rendezvous and being surprised, but something much more sinister. This is because Juan fits it into his stalking theory, and cleverly persuades others to do the same.

This theory makes all the sense in the world, had Jodi been scorned, but she had not been scorned.

The trial shows us that Travis is talking to Jodi late nights regularly over the span of their relationship. He is meeting Jodi first in hotel rooms and on trips away from home, on secret trips to his friends homes in California, and then in secret trysts in his bedroom. But he never gave Jodi any status among his friends and acquaintances, and that’s what her e-mails show.

Additionally, after Jodi left town, Travis was also being very helpful to two married women who were having problems at home, Ashley Reed and Shannon Crabtree. Both ladies had been over his home a number of times. One admits to at least kissing him and the other was planning on living at his house during her separation.

Philip Markoff and fiance Megan McAllister. The other women were dead or violently injured.
Philip Markoff and fiance Megan McAllister. The other women were dead or violently injured.

These two appear to be possible replacements for Jodi. This could mean more secrecy, late night sex, and no obligations or emotional involvement. Amazingly, after Juan Martinez forces Arias to reveal the name of one of the married women on national television over Arias’ protests, Juan then claims in his closing arguments that Arias could not name any “other women”.

Arias also knew that Deanna Reid was Travis’ first sexual experience, which was confirmed by Deanna on the stand. Arias was telling the truth here, and it also shows that Travis did confide in her.

Arias seemed to be okay with Alexander dating other women as long as “she knew where she stood”. The two did discuss their other love interests with each other at times, according to communications shown in court. At the very least, it appears Jodi did not know where she stood at times.

John Wayne Gacy, married with 2 children, with 1st Lady, Rosalyn Carter. The other women were young boys.
John Wayne Gacy, married with 2 children, with 1st Lady, Rosalyn Carter. The other women were young boys.

Are we to believe that Arias was so powerful as to push and control Travis and constantly invade his life and he was completely powerless to stop her? Are we to believe that Alexander was just too nice a guy to not be honest with her and end the situation?

He never sought help or the counsel of anyone, Mormon or not. Jodi was pushed to fall prey to her own mental illness and to perhaps become unstable due to Travis’ dishonesty and contradictory communications.

These were not “stalking behaviors”.  

 Regan Housley’s IM’s Prove Jodi is a Stalker

 1 white lieTravis needed to make excuses to his dates and friends for why Jodi is seen late at night at his home, why she was contacting him and why she was often around Travis. When Jodi was in Yreka, California in May, 2008, Travis was communicating with non-Mormon Regan Housley, telling her that he had a stalker and he was extremely afraid, they even joked about the possibility that Jodi could be seeing their IM’s and be privy to their conversations.

Juan Martinez makes this a huge point, stating that this proves that Alexander was in fear of Jodi. But Regan Housley was never called to testify as a witness, and why not? You just have to wonder if there was something damaging she could have revealed about Travis.

Yes, he was extremely afraid, but of what? That he would be exposed? That the lid would be blown off all the things he had done and was still doing?

Arias was 1,000 miles away.

This is another big hole in the prosecution case. We know Travis must have been annoyed and agitated by what had been going on. After all the warnings and all these incidents, he is still engaging in phone sex with her, still complimenting her, and still encouraging her, right up until the end of May. That’s the reality that Alyce LaViolette was pointing out.

This does not add up with the prosecution’s view of stalking, in spite of Juan’s skill in forcing unproven allegations to become reality via clever interrogation tactics on the witness stand.

Regan Housley doesn’t prove a thing.

Jodi Arias “scammed” Travis Alexander

 4 mirrorThis is yet another charge just thrown out there by the prosecutor and Travis’ text message with nothing to back it up. How did Jodi “scam” Travis? There was nothing brought out at trial that gives any credence to this idea other than the statement itself.

It sounds like Jodi may have been threatening to play the sex tape or go to the Bishop and expose Travis in some way. This is a huge threat to Travis’ standing in the community and his business affairs. He and Deanna went to the Bishop about their one time dalliance and Travis was punished. He did not go to the Bishop about all the sins committed since then. Travis would be a two-time offender in the LDS church which would require an excommunication for a period of time.

Jodi had every right to go to the Bishop and confess about her relationship with Travis. Travis should have gone to the Bishop himself when he made his clean break in April, 2008. Had he done so, there would be nothing to allegedly bribe him with.

Team Justice in full regalia
Team Justice in full regalia

Travis, from PPL Team Renew seemed to be engaging in a little of the “law of attraction” himself, just hoping this whole thing would just go away and writing his blog about how great he was going to be in 2008Trial watchers forget that though we assume that Jodi was going to cause Travis some kind of problem or exposure, it was Travis who actually threatened Jodi, and that’s right in the communications.

Defense witness Gus Searcy who gave Jodi the Helio phone
Defense witness Gus Searcy who gave Jodi the Helio phone

Gus Searcy from Jodi’s PPL Team “Freedom” is another witness who testified that Travis was chasing down Jodi, at least on the phone, and that his call to Jodi when she was with Gus in Las Vegas made her very upset, even terrified.

In Las Vegas, it was Gus Searcy who gave Jodi the Helio phone, one of the few at that time with a recording function.

How did Jodi “scam” Travis Alexander? Were there any facts, evidence, or testimony in support of this?  Travis said this to Jodi in a text message. Does that make it true? This scam idea sounds really good, it sounds so devious, but it’s meaningless.

A white lie, by definition, is a harmless lie sometimes meant to be polite or courteous. This is far more than a white lie from the mouth of Juan Martinez.

Jodi did not “scam” Travis. This is Travis projecting his own behavior again. Travis, the influential and highly organized motivational speaker,  who could did the work of 20 people, according to his friends, scammed Jodi.

There is zero evidence of Travis trying to get some help for Jodi. He lied to everyone for his own selfish interest. He scammed everyone that he tried to recruit into the Church and his entire LDS community. He scammed everyone in the LDS church that he taught about the tenets of the Church in his bible studies and everyone he baptized into the church.

This is not “trashing Travis”, it’s just the truth. Jodi did not “scam” Travis.  

 Jodi Lied Because She Did Not Masturbate Properly

 1 white lieAccording to Juan, Jodi owes Travis a sincere apology for not properly masturbating while having phone sex with him and allegedly faking an orgasm.  She’s manipulating it. She’s faking it, when she’s “squealing like a cat” according to Martinez. She’s being insincere, because Jodi usually used two hands, and she needed one hand to hold the Helio phone.

She’s lying even during the phone sex. Juan wants the jury to remember this vital fact. This is in the closing statement in a search for the truth, capital murder case, after all.

Jodi Is a Stalker (because she hid a sexual relationship)

1 exaggerationTo Jodi and her defense team, “it was really, really bad that someone had sex and didn’t want other people to know about it.” –Juan Martinez

They were both enjoying and hiding a sexual relationship. Arias’s defense doesn’t dispute that, and Arias doesn’t dispute that. Who was the controller and who was the controlled? That’s where the dispute is. Because of the nature of the secretive relationship, Jodi is at a distinct disadvantage in knowing what Travis is up to.

Jodi is being loyal to Travis. She can’t go to the suspected other woman or to the other woman’s circle of friends, because that could expose Travis. She can’t seek outside help or seek the counseling of the Bishop or a friend like Dan Freeman, because that could also expose Travis. What little she could do to assert herself and have some idea of what the truth was about her relationship with Travis is confined to actions that seem stalking- like in nature, because of the secrecy.

Travis Bears No Responsibility (because he hid a sexual relationship)

 3 misrepresentationJuan tries to portray Travis as adapting to sexual encounters that Jodi Planned and provided. This is nothing more than convincing and persuading the jury to accept a simple tale that just doesn’t hold up under scrutiny.

It’s a campfire monster story, and it sounds so very convincing coming from a very good story teller. Watch the trial video and you can see Dennis Alexander just eating it up.

This is Juan’s career and his talent. Jodi’s the violent sexual deviant, the instigator and the aggressor, while Travis is the befuddled and hapless victim. Jodi is some kind of insect that blinds and overpowers Travis with her outlandish mating rituals. Jodi is the toxin that poisoned the relationship.

It’s nothing more than some really good Crystal Blue Persuasion.

Travis Was Not That Into Jodi


5 whopper

 This is simply not true. Instead, they were attracted to each other and they hit it off. The evidence strongly suggests that they were into each other not just due to physical attraction and common interests, but also because they subconsciously recognized certain psychological deficits in each other.

This was a meeting between two highly charged and ambitious young people. Most likely, Travis also had an untreated mental illness. Travis is often commenting on Arias’ beauty and sexiness throughout the relationship and states that he loves her.

Jodi with Eddie Snell from Alabama.
Jodi with Eddie Snell from Alabama.

Judging from many communications, including the sex tape and the way Travis carefully hid his relationship from his friends, there must have been more to this for Travis than just sex. He was carefully managing and controlling these relationships.

It was like an addiction. The deviancy, the illicit secrecy seem to strongly appeal to “Eddie Snell form Alabama”, Travis’ hidden alter-ego. This is why there was so little testimony about what was going on in that relationship. No witness came to the stand to shed light on what was going on from Travis’ point of view. Out of all his friends all over, Mormon and non-Mormon, he confided in no one about this.

Who did this troubled man confide in? Jodi Arias says he confided in her. Why should we be so quick to disbelieve her? Travis was very much “into Jodi”. She was fun to talk to and to be with. He even once said she was beautiful, inside and out.

Travis was always denying the relationship and being derisive towards Jodi to his friends. So, of course they would say that he was “not that into her”. Travis needed to marry eventually, and that meant he would have to get rid of Jodi. She wasn’t a true Mormon and she didn’t count, anyways. Maybe this was the real crux of the problem.

There’s no question that this was a volatile and combustible relationship, and the evidence shows that Travis was encouraging it by fanning the flames. He did not want it to end.  

Jodi was an outlet for Travis’ deviant alter-ego. He even confesses to this hidden side of him in his blog.

In this so-called comedy routine, Eddie Snell punches at and kicks at people.
In this so-called comedy routine, Eddie Snell punches at and kicks at people.

– “Desperately trying to find out if my date has an axe murderer penned up inside of her and knowing she is wondering the same thing about me. That’s usually when I think myself into a panic and start acting weird in consequence to trying so hard to act normal.”

– “I realized the reason I wasn’t married wasn’t because the type of person I was looking for doesn’t exist but that the type of person I wanted wouldn’t be interested in me.

– “What they usually don’t understand is those same character flaws are in them too. In fact that is usually at least partially what attracted them to each other.”– Travis Alexander, “Being Bette” Blog, May 15, 2008

Not to blame him, but Travis, a high school drop-out and a poor speller from the looks of his e-mails and text messages, required the services of at least two women to help him write his rather simple blog.

This hidden side emerged way before Jodi entered his life and probably extends back to his background as a child of meth-addicted parents. With Jodi, it was okay to act weird and to be himself. This Eddie Snell character looks like a way that Travis Alexander could bring his deviant and crude side out into the open. “Woman, I will beat you dead.” and “Hit a woman every now and then.” were two “jokes” Eddie Snell told at a conference full of salespeople in Las Vegas. He also joked about Vegas being full of “shows and hoes” and he talked about chlamydia being something that happens in Vegas, but doesn’t stay there.

Is this really appropriate for a mixed group of salespeople, many of whom are Mormon? Is this something more than a comedy act? Travis appears to have been addicted and like a conflicted addict, he was very into Jodi at times and pushing her away at other times.

Travis was very into Jodi, but not in a healthy way.  

   

Friends of Travis Said Jodi Was Stalking Him

 1 exaggerationOne friend of Travis stated that Jodi basically pulled him into her world, and he just couldn’t get himself away from it. Knowing Travis’ horrendous childhood and the deep psychological trauma and emotional scars he must have had, this is too simple an analysis. There was something very compelling in this relationship for Travis and it wasn’t just sex. It had to be psychologically magnetic, too.

Dave "we did it for the children" Hall. Former scout leader who now has legal problems of his own
Dave “we did it for the children” Hall. Former scout leader who now has legal problems of his own

It must have been a full blown addiction. It attracted him like no other, and it repulsed him like no other. Alexander is projecting his own thoughts and behaviors onto Arias, and his own self-loathing and guilt manifest into a palpable hatred and anger directed at Jodi Arias. Unlike so many of Juan’s claims, this is right in the testimony and it’s right in the evidence.

Deanna Reid broke up with Travis after returning from her missionary position
Deanna Reid broke up with Travis after returning from her missionary position

One popular blogger thought that this was a classic example of the Madonna Whore complex, where a child has both great love and great disgust with his mother, and this manifests in later life with a powerful fascination for women that he can both worship and hate. This seems to fit very well into what the evidence shows. Travis’ friends had no idea what was really going on.  

Travis is the Hapless Victim Jodi Targeted, Stalked, and Finally Murdered

1 whopper misrepThis  defies the evidence. People vilified Alyce LaViolette, because she was showing how this charge does not comport with the evidence. In just the 10 months since the “break up”, Alyce rattles off a whole list of women that Travis appears to be involved with. Of course, just messaging and communicating doesn’t mean that anything more is happening. But it’s indisputable that Travis is involved with more than Jodi Arias and the good Mormon girls he dates with an eye towards marriage.

Juan wants the jury to believe that it’s all Jodi, that she’s the one coming at him, showing up unannounced, reeling him in with sex, and forcing herself into his life. That Jodi is the scorned woman stalking the hapless Travis is refuted by Travis’ own words:

– “I want you to ride my face like a horse.”

– “When I’m all by my lonesome I have nobody else to think about in my scandalous fantasies.”

– “I’m gonna take you like youvé never been taken before. When it’s done the intensity will make you feel like you’ve been raped, but you will have enjoyed every delightful moment of it.”

–  Jodi Arias? ‘She’s a skank!’

– “I love you.”

– “It will be like…legitimate rape”.

– “This photo shoot is gonna be one of the best experiences of your life and mine.”

– “You’re Evil….soulless… a corrupted carcass.”

– “I haven’t stopped thinking about the pics I’m gonna take, The progressiveness of it, from the very clean to the very dirty and everything in between.”

– “It will tell quite a story and be a lot of fun and not a day has gone by that I haven’t dreamt about driving my shaft long and hard into you.”

– “Nothing from my own experience, nothing is even enjoyable compared to you.”

– “You are beautiful inside and out.”

– “You’re a whore and a slut.” justice for travis 3

Travis was the up and coming salesman and motivational speaker. He was extremely persuasive and endearing. He had the strength of an entire Mormon community behind him. He had many friends, a vast network of social and business connections, and he was an ordained elder priest holder in the LDS church. Jodi was under his influence and she was influencing him.But by March, 2008, she was on the outside looking in.

In the midst of the break up and chaos in early 2008 as Travis is trying to keep the lid on and trying to end things with Arias, she claims she was physically assaulted by Alexander several times. Arias, who is supposed to be so obsessed with Alexander, suddenly moves 1,000 miles away, home to Yreka, California. Travis had lost control of Arias. He was also going to lose his “sex slave”. Jodi was looking for a new partner and she is undeniably faithful and exclusive to her partner. Travis has shown jealousy before. Jodi Arias may have told him she was going to the Bishop to confess the entire relationship, so she could start clean with a new boyfriend.

Travis Alexander had very compelling motives for both assault and murder.

Travis Alexander was conflicted by his success, and his wholesome-pretense exterior, not unlike the outstanding and very promising medical student, Philip Markoff, the Craigslist Killer. Travis Alexander was conflicted and driven by his hidden inner demons, just like the pillar of the community, John Wayne Gacy, the bisexual control-freak serial killer.

Would Travis have become a killer like Markoff or Gacy? That’s doubtful, but all the same precursors existed in his personality and his psyche, especially a stunning lack of empathy or insight into his own behaviors and their potential causes.

hope diamondTravis was the hapless victim? Only in Juan’s World with his misrepresentations, his inability to see things from a different perspective, his many lies and his crystal blue persuasion.

Martinez even managed to get seven of the eight death jurors to vote for both of two mutually exclusive theories of 1st degree murder. Translation: They were following Juan’s erroneous facts and his seasoned gifts of persuasion. Some jury members clearly didn’t understand the facts and they weren’t following the law.  

Conclusion

The defense team claimed that much of this trial was all about lies, but many of the lies didn’t come form Jodi Arias. The prosecution claims there is no corroboration of Jodi’s testimony. There is plenty to suggest that Jodi’s story is highly plausible if not probable.

It is the prosecution that cannot corroborate many of it’s claims other than sneaking things in on re-cross and re-direct, alluding to what someone might have said, and speaking of evidence and witnesses never presented at trial.

Martinez’ closing arguments were an exaggeration, a misrepresentation, a speculation, a consternation, and a detestation. The point is simply this: He lied.

That’s okay, because for Juan, Jodi Arias is a liar and a murderer. She doesn’t count. She’s not entitled to a fair trial and he is justified in getting the conviction and a death sentence by any means necessary. This makes Juan Martinez a very dangerous person. Justice for Travis American style

Staple an American flag to it, say that it has God’s blessing and say something about “justice”, and we might just get a death sentence out of this complete embarrassment of a trial.

What does this say about America and our deeply entrenched inability to see that all stories have two sides?

There is no “Justice for Travis”. There is either Justice for all or there is no Justice. The insistence on the Death Penalty in this case has prolonged suffering for all involved and has actually obstructed justice.

Jodi Arias lied to live, while Juan Martinez lies to kill. Just ask the family of Robert Towery. Juan Martinez is a bigger, more sophisticated and accomplished liar, manipulator, and persuader than Jodi Arias could ever hope to be.

Let us know what you think. Your opinion matters. Opposing views are welcome!

All rights reserved

Philip Markoff, a top medical student and Craigslist killer. John Wayne Gacy, an important businessman and serial killer. Just a friendly reminder from the “one never knows, do one?” category about thinking we know people
Philip Markoff, a top medical student and Craigslist killer. John Wayne Gacy, an important businessman and serial killer. Just a friendly reminder from the “one never knows, do one?” category about thinking we know people
Sources:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rElcdNOwuwI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1XJsW-_hmFY

travisalexander.blogspot.com/  

Lies and Juanipulation: The Mirror Crack’d

Lies and Juanipulation:

The Mirror Crack’d

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

Fact Based Reporting by

Amanda Chen and Rob Roman

His broad clear brow in sunlight glow’d;

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

Juan Night witness Stand
Juan Knight Stand

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

mirror sm

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

369245-jodi-arias sm

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

jodi vamped sm

From The Lady of Shalott, by Alfred Lord Tennyson

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

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

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

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

white lie 1

White Lie

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

fish story 1fish 2 lt

Exaggeration

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

misrep 3

Misrepresentation

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

mirror 4

Mirror

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

whopper 5

Whopper

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

 

misrep 3The Ninja Intruder Story

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

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

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

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

misrep 3Jodi Has “Violent Tendencies”

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

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

Juan and his Psychologist witness both seized on this single report of violence in 15 years of journal entries and 80,000 communications as proof of both Borderline Personality Disorder and 1st Degree Murder.

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

white lie 1Travis Did Not Give Jodi the Underwear

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

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

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

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

mirror 4Jodi Attacked Travis’ Reputation

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

misrep 3Nothing Noteworthy To Report

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

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

Go ask Alyce, I think she'll know.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

fish 2Jodi Told Darryl Brewer She Was Going to Mesa

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

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

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

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

fish 2Jodi Lied Because She Didn’t Use Priceline

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

white lie 1Jodi Violated the Law (of attraction)

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

fish 2Jodi Is Lying Because Other People Misunderstood Her

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

bullet-casing-grey-thingarticle-2258479-16CAC976000005DC-704_634x358

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

123 lies

The Falater Case:

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

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

2 lies

The Grant Case:

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

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

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

mirror 4The Carr Case:

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

2 lies

The Lynch Case:

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

misrep 3

The Morris Case:

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

white lie 1

The Miller Case:

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

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

misrep 3

The Towery case:

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

white mirror

The Chrisman case:

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

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

4 liesmirror 4

The Arias case:

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

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

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

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

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

Juan Martinez is a certified liar.

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

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

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

All comments are appreciated and opposing views are welcome!

All Rights Reserved 

Sources:

http://www.psychologytoday.com/articles/201305/how-spot-sociopath

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedophilia

http://jodi-arias.wikispaces.com/Closing+Arguments

http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/criminal_mind/psychology/automatism/6.html

http://www.prosecutorintegrity.org/media/cpi-calls-on-prosecutors-to-root-out-misconduct-after-az-report-of-widespread-unethical-practices/

http://www.prosecutorintegrity.org/wp-content/uploads/EpidemicofProsecutorMisconduct.pdf

*

*

http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/20131028jodi-arias-juan-martinez-conduct-day3.html

http://blogs.phoenixnewtimes.com/valleyfever/2010/11/richard_chrisman_phoenix_pds_k.php

http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/2002-08-29/news/justice-delayed/full/

http://murderpedia.org/male.M/m/morris-cory.htm

http://www.azcorrections.gov/inmate_datasearch/newDeathRow.aspx

http://www.azcourts.gov/

*

*

http://murderpedia.org/male.S/index.S.htm

http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/2002-08-29/news/justice-delayed/

http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/2002-02-14/news/the-big-sleep/

http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/local/articles/20121102prosecutor-files-motion-vs-judge.html#ixzz2eoadFt00

*

*

http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/1999-07-01/news/wake-up-call/7/

http://murderpedia.org/male.M/m/morris-cory.htm

http://www.abc15.com/dpp/news/region_phoenix_metro/central_phoenix/scottsdale-man-sentenced-in-arson-case

http://news.gila1019.com/delays-in-the-death-penalty-trial-for-christopher-redondo-in-the-shooting-death-of-gilbert-police-lt-eric-shuhandler/

http://www.azcentral.com/community/mesa/articles/20110531mesa-craig-miller-murder-death-penalty0531.html#ixzz2f7LDhTin

Share this:

The Jodi Arias Murder Trial: A Juanderful Closing Argument

The Jodi Arias Murder Trial: A Juanderful Closing Argument

(SpolightOnLaw The Jodi Arias Murder Trial: The OTHER side of the story)

Fact based reporting by

Rob Roman and Amanda Chen

jodi

51bbd855dbd0cb1fb700033a._w.540_s.fit_

In this photo, Travis Alexander is wearing the costume and carrying the wig of "Eddie Snell from Alabama", his crude and violent alter-ego.
In this photo, Travis Alexander is wearing the costume and carrying the wig of “Eddie Snell from Alabama”, his crude and violent alter-ego.

In the all-important closing argument, Maricopa, Arizona prosecutor, Juan Martinez, promised to “shine the light of truth” on the defendant. He explained that Jodi Arias is guilty of first degree murder because:

*

  •  Jodi called her sister “stupid” (Important)
  • She had conflicts with her parents
  • She got in big trouble and lied about it
  • Jodi “adjusted” Ryan Burns
A Mormon couple, modeling their "magic underwear".
A Mormon couple, modeling their “magic underwear”.
  • She “committed perjury”. Everything she said is nothing but lies.
  • Jodi is a liar and manipulator because she testified that Ryan Burns was “full of crap”…
  • …after Ryan testified that he thought she said “she worked at Margaritaville” and he “touched her vaginal area”.
  • “A field of lies sprouted every time she took the witness stand”.
After earthly life, the next step for Mormons is to live with God on Earth's sister planet Kolob, which is closer to the throne of God, becuase earth was relocated form near Kolob to it's present position.
After earthly life, the next step for Mormons is to become celestial rulers and live with God on Earth’s sister planet Kolob, which is closer to the throne of God, because Earth was relocated away from Kolob to it’s present position in our solar system.
  • She is a waitress / manipulator who flirts with customers for tips.
  • The defense experts and defense team are all liars.
  • If Jodi told the truth about Travis having a gun and she did not premeditate the murder, she’s still a thief because she stole Travis’ gun and she’s still a murderer in the first degree because the prosecution, with the approval of the judge, legally manipulated the law with the felony murder charge.
Jodi Ann Arias is " a chameleon who will adjust to the situation and make herself go further to manipulate. " - prosecutor Juan Martinez
Jodi Ann Arias is ” a chameleon who will adjust to the situation and make herself go further to manipulate. ” – prosecutor Juan Martinez
  •  She stomped around like a wildebeest migration and left behind incriminating evidence. 
  • She was focused and deliberate, removed incriminating evidence and she did not leave a trail of bloody footprints while exiting the home.
A real Wildebeest "hovering" in a real field.
A real Wildebeest standing, not “hovering”, in a real field.
  • Jodi is a liar because she has a good memory for buying a Strawberry Frappuccino but can’t remember the details of a horrific, traumatic killing.
  • The only victimization or trauma Jodi ever experienced in her life was this: Jodi is “a victim of the trauma of lying”.
  • Jodi implicated herself on the stand and violated the spirit of the law by stealing a license plate that she was not absolutely sure belonged to her rental car.

download (1)

  • Jodi was criminally careless and negligent in possibly depriving a citizen of their lawfully obtained California license plate.
  • Jodi “has created a fantasy world”. Yet, even in her fantasy world, Juan reaches in and catches her several times violating the law.
Scene from Disney's Snow White and the Seven Dwarves
Scene from Disney’s Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs
  • She decorates her lies with ornamentations to make them more believable.
  • Jodi is a lying liar. She even lied to Travis by faking an orgasm.
  • Jodi is a story-teller and sociopath who will defy the laws of common decency, bend the law to suit her purposes, lie, manipulate and even break the law in order to achieve her goals.
  • Jodi is strong-willed.

 

Scene from the "Wildebeest Stampede" from Disney's The Lion King
Scene from the “Wildebeest Stampede” in Disney’s The Lion King
  • “She’s not a reasonable person, she’s a liar and a murderer.”
  • She is physically strong enough to take Travis and she “Adjusted Ryan” (Important)
  • After killing Travis the “chameleon” proceeds to Utah where “that thing” kisses Ryan Burns, straddles and “adjusts him”, and “rubs genitalia”.
  • Jodi exaggerates and is dramatic.

images

Jodi Arias:
“Has a dumb, stupid sister”
“Is not nice to her mother”
“Is not a very nice person”

Lady-Tremaine-and-Stepsisters-cinderella-1991155-360-264

“will lie and manipulate at every turn”
“targeted a good Mormon boy”
Because she “decided she needed to breed”
Good Mormon boy whose halo is a CTR (Cherish the Right) Ring reminding him never to defile his future bride by engaging in inappropriate sexual conduct prior to marriage.
Good Mormon boy whose halo is a CTR (Cherish The Right) Ring reminding him never to defile his future bride by engaging in inappropriate sexual conduct prior to marriage.
 
For prosecutor Juan Martinez, this is key evidence in the Jodi Arias trial. Jodi called her sister stupid one time while communicating with Travis Alexander. This was one of the first questions he put to Arias on cross-examination. Juan made certain to bring up this major piece of evidence in his closing argument.
Allegations that Arias also once stuck her tongue out at her sister, Angela, and called her a “poopy face” were not allowed into evidence.
Judge Sherri Stephens absolutely controlled the courtroom because earlier in the trial she made sure the spectators remained silent and did not interrupt the prosecutor in an hour back and forth examination about crucial testimony concerning Snow White, the role of the Prince, the ages of the Seven Dwarfs, and whether their home was a “shack” or a “cute cottage”.

judge stephens

If Judge Stephens had the temerity to simply ask Juan “Where are you going with this?” she may have risked a mistrial or a successful appeal. It was a grand fishing expedition, but Juan got nary a nibble.
According to Juan Martinez, Jodi Arias should allow Travis Alexander to berate her father and her grandfather (people he never met) because Jodi called her own sister “stupid”. These are the footprints of murder.

Untitled

Arias, like many young people, had a strained relationship with her mother. This is evidence of either abuse or Jodi’s mental and emotional problems stemming from her childhood and mental illness. This is an issue which supports the defense, not the prosecution.
Martinez stated that Arias’ behavior and acts from her birth to her late teens were irrelevant to the crime or it’s mitigation. Yet, he brought them up again and again in this capital murder case.
Juan Martinez is fond of saying “You can’t have it both ways”.

kirk nurmi

This is a man whose imagination is confined to the world of Disney, where the whole world is invited to participate in the reduction of great works of literature and psychologically profound fables about passages into adulthood, into simplistic and pleasing tales and colorful, lilting rides.

That’s why author E.L. Doctorow, in his historical work, The Book of Daniel, called Disney World rides, themed after simplistic Disney stories loosely based on the true literary works of art, “a sentimental compression of something that is itself already a lie”.

"If it's not written in the journal, it didn't happen" - Juan Martinez
“If it’s not written in the journal, it didn’t happen” – Juan Martinez

That’s the Jodi Arias trial in a nutshell, ladies and gentleman, after the actual, and complicated truth was corrupted and bastardized into a simplistic good versus evil morality play by the “Bulldog” of Maricopa County.

Your opinion is valuable. All comments are welcome and appreciated

All Rights Reserved –

(Please do not reproduce this article in whole or in part without permission)

Myspace007P6062005

Sources:

http://movies.disney.com/snow-white-and-the-seven-dwarfs

http://movies.disney.com/the-lion-king

http://mormon.org/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kolob

Juan Martinez gives his closing argument in the guilt phase of the trial

Spotlight on Juan Martinez

The Jodi Arias Trial

Shining a spotlight on the Prosecutor Juan Martinez

Fact based reporting

By Rob Roman

“Mr. Martinez, you keep trying to make this a rational scenario, and it isn’t rational.” – Expert defense witness

For Juan Martinez, there are no “irrational” scenarios about a murder. Murder is against the laws of God and man. There is a victim here. A human being is dead in an unnatural way. The defendant is the accused. Many hours of police work and investigation have been rendered. The defendant has been brought to trial. Juan Martinez is going to trial to put them in a cage. A conviction will slam the door shut. When the conviction survives appeals, the door will be locked. That is the only rational response to murder.

 

juan in 2002

 

Juan Martinez doesn’t want to hear about any exceptions to the rule. He doesn’t want to hear “this is not what it seems”. The defense always seems to have an excuse, a rationalization, explanations, and alternate scenarios. The prosecution must prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt. All the defense must show is any doubt, any doubt at all. The prosecution needs a unanimous jury to convict. The defense only needs one juror on their side to jam the wheels of justice. If you get a conviction, an appeal can change a sentence, send the case back to trial, or even free the defendant.

 

juan martinez large

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

From Juan’s perspective, one can see why he may feel like the system is against the victims of crime.  To Juan it’s truly an “adversarial system” and he will fight to win. When the death penalty is involved, the two sides tend to go too far and we might be losing a search for the truth. Winning the conviction becomes more important than the truth. Juan’s black and white way of viewing crime works well most of the time. But sometimes there will be someone in the defendant’s chair who is innocent of the crime charged or over-charged.

Sometimes this person gets stuck in the wheels of justice. Many innocent defendants have been convicted and jailed and some have been executed. So we must always be sure a trial is a search for the truth, even if sometimes the guilty person is set free. The prosecution and the defense both play vital roles in this process. The rights of victims must be carefully balanced with the rights of the accused.

During the final arguments in the guilt phase of the Jodi Arias murder trial, lead Defense attorney, Lawrence Kirk Nurmi, talked about shining a spotlight on the actions of the prosecution, specifically detective and co-counsel Esteban “Steve” Flores and the sole prosecuting attorney, Juan Martinez. The implication was that Mr. Martinez had acted improperly during the trial. I believe Detective Flores to be an honest man who only followed Dr. Horn’s opinion and he tried to help Jodi at the interrogation.

Of the enthusiastic trial watchers in the Jodi Arias case, there is also a spotlight on Juan Martinez. Prosecution supporters (Justice4Travis), see him as a “bulldog” a hero who tenaciously pursues the defendant until he can wrest a guilty verdict. Defendant supporters (Team Jodi) see him as over the top, going too far, and using a combination of emotionally charged persuasion, some direct evidence and some speculation to sway juries to render a guilty verdict.

There are many ways a prosecutor can win a case. There is hard work, attention to detail, experience, excellent direct and cross-examination of witnesses, and preparation. There is also a fierce devotion to the job of bringing a dangerous criminal to justice. Finally you will need a good grasp of the evidence, and know how to explain and persuade a jury that your evidence is sound. Juan Martinez is all of this and more.

He is passionate, dedicated, and I believe he sees the defense as having too many advantages in the system. I believe he employs methods normally used by defense attorneys to persuade the jurors to see things his way. Juan Martinez is well known for using wild speculation and “facts” not supported by the evidence in his closing arguments.

Maybe the truth is not in the extremes but somewhere in the middle. We can shine the spotlight on past and present cases to try to determine what is motivating the prosecutor with the impressive 22-1 record, Juan Martinez.

new sealHere is what his admirers in cyber space say about Juan:

Respectfully I’d like to thank Mr. Martinez for giving me the realization there’s someone fighting for victims. My father was brutally murdered in 1990, very similar to what happened to Travis Alexander.

It was very brutal I lost my faith in the judicial system after what my family went thru and watching the way these murderers have all the rights yet the victims do not. Mr. Martinez, as I see it, represents a man who I wish there were more of. He is God’s light and I wish him all the best in this world where sometimes I think our society’s become blind to so many things…

And if anything at all, perhaps some could look at this man and appreciate what he does for so many. He is truly an asset to the state. As for Ms. Arias, I hope for the victims’ family…Justice.

Juan Martinez is the best. So sick of the trash that is going around surrounding this case. Who is on trial here?

I think he is the best. If I ever need a lawyer he’s it. No BS with him. Why waste time with guilty killers?

Juan is the second youngest of a family of nine. He came to America at age 6 when his family emmigrated from Mexico and settled in California. He vowed to learn English well and be a success. He participated in many activities, such as running long distance track in high school. He finished college and attended ArizonaStateUniversity where he earned his law degree. Juan did some volunteer legal work and some work defending clients. Then, in 1988, he joined the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office.

juan early yrs

 

 

 

 

 

What is in Juan Martinez’ heart and mind? We can try to have a better understanding of him by knowing his feeling. In this world and surely in Arizona, there is crime and there are criminals. There are vicious and violent senseless crimes and uncaring evil and cruel criminals. Juan is very aware of this. Let’s take a look at the A B C’s of the convicts now on Arizona’s Death Row:

 

frank atwood atwood victim

Atwood, Frank

Kidnapped and raped an 8 year-old boy.

Kidnapped, raped and Killed an 8 year-old girl and left her in the desert.

 

patrick bearup

Bearup, Patrick

With three accomplices, beat a man half to death with a baseball bat,

threw him in the trunk of his car, cut off his finger,

shot him with a shotgun and threw him off a cliff.

 

jonathan burns and victim

Burns, Jonathan

Kidnapped and raped a woman and shot her twice in the head.

 

chappell

Chappelle, Derek

Choked his girlfriend’s 2 1/2 year-old son nearly to death

then later drowned him in a swimming pool.

 

cota

Cota, Benjamin

Beat an older man to death with a hammer, then bound his wife and struck her

in the head repeatedly with a hatchet until dead.

He wrapped them up in plastic, hid in their home, then stole everything they had

of value including their car.

 

djerf

Djerf, Richard

Raped a 17 year-old girl, then shot, stabbed and beat to death the girl,

her father and mother and her 5 year-old brother.

 

ellison

Ellison, Charles

With an accomplice, broke into a couple’s home, bound them with telephone cord

and masking tape, then suffocated the husband with a pillow and choked the wife to death.

 

So, it’s easy to see why Juan grew up believing in law and order, right and wrong, good and bad. He believes that if you intentionally caused a person’s death, you should pay by being removed from society and in many cases, sentenced to death. It’s just so simple. It’s not difficult to see where his sentiments come from.

 

It was 1997, ten years after Juan Martinez joined the Maricopa County Attorney’s office. Late at night in an upscale neighborhood in MaricopaCounty, Greg Koons heard screams coming from his neighbor’s back yard. He went outside and peered over the fence. He saw his neighbor, casually pushing his wife into his in-ground swimming pool and holding her head under the water. He sprinted inside and called the police.

scott falater

 

 

 

 

 

Soon after, the neighbor, Scott Falater, opened his door to the police. Confused and not understanding what the fuss was all about, the police went into his backyard and found his wife Yarmilla floating dead in the pool. She had been stabbed 44 times. Scott Falater was a High Councilor in the Mormon Church, and a husband and father of two. He was a successful design engineer with Motorola and very active in the church. He was a mild-mannered man, had seldom become angry, and had no motive to kill his wife whom he loved dearly.

Juan Martinez went to court to exact justice. It seemed like an open and shut case. There was an eye witness, a direct identification of the perpetrator, and a viciously stabbed and drowned wife. The man was arrested within minutes of the crime. The courtroom was nearly empty. Next door in a crowded courtroom was a high profile case. Teen members of a Crips gang were on trial for a brutal, three hour sexual assault of a fifteen year-old mentally handicapped girl.

Juan Martinez was shocked to find out that the man’s high paid attorneys were claiming their client, Scott Falater, was innocent by reason of sleepwalking! Like the Jodi Arias case, the focus was not on who did the killing, but why. The defense claimed that Scott Falater had no incentive, motive or reason to kill his wife of 20 years. There had to be another explanation for why this would occur. For Juan, there is no why. She’s dead and he killed her and justice will be done. For Juan, you are either a good or bad person. If you do something like this, you are a bad person and the “why” shouldn’t matter at all. Still he needed to give the jury a viable motive.

This is the template case for the Jodi Arias case. Both involved horrific killings where the defendants admitted to horrific acts but claimed no knowledge of the killings or any intent of murder. Both defenses relied on crucial expert testimony. Juan struggled to find a motive for this senseless killing during the trial. He offered many scenarios to the jury. His wife refused to have more children. His wife was moving his family away from the Mormon Church.

falater family large

Sure, he was mild mannered, but he took his anger from work home to his wife. Juan argued with the defendant and declared that Falater didn’t even know his wife’s birthday. He told a shocked Falater he had the year wrong. Juan was mistaken due to an incorrect report.

Juan Martinez even argued that Falater killed his wife because he thought she was fat and dumpy. Falater made the statement to police that “a terrible sin has been committed”. Falater was referring to the killing. Juan suggested to the jury that Scott Falater killed his wife because SHE committed a terrible sin.

By the end of the trial, State v. Falater starring Juan Martinez had become the new high profile trial in Arizona. The sleepwalking defense became famous around the country. Juan attacked the defense experts. He claimed that the expert’s conclusions were invalid because the expert was not provided with all the details. The defendant recognized his dog but not his wife, and he cleaned up the scene and the evidence.

In closing the defense attorney reminded the jury that Juan Martinez mischaracterized the evidence and made comments not supported by the evidence. The defense attorney implied that the prosecuter violated his duty to see that truth and justice is done. The defense reminded the jury that Scott Falater was a passive and non-violent man, and that the prosecution could not come up with a valid reason or motive for the killing.

The defense attorney tried to explain to the jury that sometimes there are cases where things are not as they seem. There are exceptions when things happen which are difficult to explain. At one point the defense expert witness addressed the prosecutor:

“Mr. Martinez, you keep trying to make this a rational scenario, and it isn’t rational.” At some point in the closing, Martinez slammed the door on all this talk about sleepwalking.

“Do you think that she deserved to die?” he asked. “Look at her. We’ve placed so much attention on him, everything’s about him. Look at her!”

juan 1

 

 

 

 

 

Juan Martinez then threw a photo up of the victim on the autopsy table. He loudly implored the jury to look at her, to look at the indignity of the victim.  The defense attorney talks about reasons, REASONS?

Scott Falater “had 44 reasons to KILL his wife”, Martinez screamed. He was referring to the 44 knife wounds. Only one member of this Arizona jury had a college degree.

He appealed to the nuts and bolts sense of the jury.

He had a sound argument for the jury:

“This guy here killed his wife ….. and he’s guilty of first-degree murder.”

Scott Falater was found guilty of 1st degree muder and sentenced by the judge to life without parole.

Even 15 years before the Jodi Arias case, Juan Martinez was already honing his craft. He was becoming an expert at arguing the details with expert witnesses, discrediting witnesses, questioning the memory of the defendant and defense witnesses, and calling them out as liars. He was becoming better than defense attorneys at weaving speculation into the facts of the case while at the same time, calling defense evidence fictions and  “fantasy”.

He ridiculed defense theories, calling them such things as “The man of La Mancha defense”. Fifteen years before the Arias trial, Juan was already in the habit of yelling at witnesses, including a priest, and ridiculing witnesses. Even in the Falater trial, he questioned the children of the victim and the defendant in a voice laced with irony and sarcasm.  In Juan’s view, he had delivered justice for Yarmilla. Her children who lost two parents may beg to differ.

doug grant

 

 

 

 

 

hilary falaterLater, Juan had another case of seemingly obvious 1st degree murder. Two divorced Mormons had married. Doug Grant was a very successful in the health products business. He owned a multi-million dollar company. His clients included famous professional athletes and NBA teams.

Doug cheated on his wife with his receptionist. His wife, Faylene, found out and complained to the church. Here we see the dangerous nexus between the LDS Church, social life, and business. It seems that if Doug Grant did not return to his wife, the church would get involved and this would impact his business. It’s important to understand this dynamic of the Mormon Church in the Jodi Arias trial.

Doug told Faylene he ended it with his girlfriend Hilary, and he wanted to remarry Faylene in Las Vegas. They went for an impromptu  2nd Honeymoon at Timpanogos Cave National Monument where his wife suddenly and mysteriously fell into trees down a sixty foot cliff.

ht_doug_faylene_090331_msShe survived and they returned home. Faylene took some pain killers and a bath to heal from her injuries.

She was found dead in the bathtub by Doug Grant in September, 2001. Three weeks after Faylene’s death, Doug Grant married his receptionist, Hilary Dewitt, and they soon became a family aftter Hilary adopted Faylene’s two sons.

Another high priced attorney and in Juan’s mind, more excuses, fancy explanations, technicalities, more sure signs of guilt that the court would not admit into evidence.

hilary falayer 2Imagine Juan’s shock and disbelief when he could not convince the jury of the 1st degree murder he believed was so obvious. The jury was clearly divided and Juan was forced to give instructions for lesser included offenses. Murder one and the death penalty was off the table for Doug Grant. He got  a 5 year sentence for manslaughter.

Faylene had made many statements about committing suicide and had even given Hilary her blessing to take car of her children. The prosecution had tried, unsuccessfully,  to hide these facts from the jury.

I can imagine that Juan was devastated, and thought justice had not been done. He had failed to get justice for Faylene. He contemplated his lessons and moved on.

 

 

The Grant family still believes Doug is innocent. They list a number of accusations of prosecutorial misconduct in State v. Grant. This includes

-“Losing” key evidence, “throwing away reports”, and failure to turn over key evidence to the defense in a timely manner.

-Convincing the judge to not allow into evidence testimony that the medical examiner was pressured to change his opinion about the cause of death on the victim’s autopsy report from “accident” to “undetermined”.

-Convincing the judge to rule possible exculpatory evidence as inadmissible

-Convincing the judge not to allow into evidence testimony and records showing that investigators were removed from the case when they told their superiors they could not find evidence of foul play.

-Objecting over fifty times during the defense opening statements.

-Preventing defense witness from trying to explain their answers by cutting off their answers and forcing them to answer either yes, or no.

-When these same witnesses were being questioned by the defense, Juan Martinez objected “over 200 times per day”.

-The prosecution case took three and one half months, but the judge ordered the defense to complete their case in two weeks in order to “stay on schedule”.

-Intimidating defense witnesses by accusing them of violating the law without evidence or any record of a law having been broken. The accusation that they broke the law is used to discredit their testimony and truthfulness.

-Accusing defense witnesses of lying but using arguing tactics and word tricks rather than evidence to support it.

-Using the normal and common variations in a witness’ statements and memory to attack their memory of an event, and then to suggest that the memory varies because the witness is lying.

-Also in this trial, jury members who were not a part of the final jury admitted that they had been influenced by the media and they had made up their minds the defendant was guilty before the trial began.

The jury did not believe the prosecution’s theory and did not like Juan’s tactics. Do any of these tactics foster a “search for the truth”? Do you recognize any of these tactics from the Jodi Arias trial? Doug’s family feels that truth and justice were not found in State v. Grant. These two quotes appear on their website:

 

“Anybody who understands the justice system knows innocent people are convicted every day.” –Florida Supreme Court Justice, Gerald Kogun (Ret.)

 

“In this country the presumption of innocence is dead, dead, dead.” –John Grisham

 

Not long after, Juan found himself on the losing side of a case. A man had been found shot dead in the forest. The defendant was David Wayne Carr. The evidence was thin. Juan started fighting back in his own way. With less than two weeks before the trial, Martinez did not give the defense a list of his witnesses and other materials. The defense was angry. They could not properly prepare their defense. They filed a complaint to the judge. This offense was punishable by up to six months in jail. The judge was very upset that his court was delayed.

The County attorney hired a high powered attorney to defend Juan. He fought back against the charge. Juan accused the defense of not giving a list of possible defenses to him until 2 weeks before the trial. Do you recognize this lawyer’s tactic of counter-charging from the Jodi Arias trial? Juan ended up being forced to write a letter of apology to the court. The case was delayed and later, the jury found David Carr not guilty.

This is the only case Martinez lost. Strangely, a mysterious friend of Jodi Arias appeared in the courtroom during her trial. He called himself “Bryan Carr”. He claimed to talk to Jodi daily and that he had confidential information. He claimed Jodi was telling the truth about the two masked people that were responsible for the murder. The claim was that Travis Alexander’s murder was actually an old Mormon atonement ritual called “blood atonement”. A Mormon who had committed grave sins could still go to heaven if he paid for his sins through this death ritual. Arias claimed she did not know Carr and she did not listen to him. Then, “Bryan Carr” disappeared from the courtroom and the media as quickly as he had appeared.

wendi andrMartinez recovered with the murder trial of Wendi Andriano. Wendi’s Husband was terminally ill. There were changes in his life insurance policy. He was going to win a large lawsuit. The bleach blonde Wendi was neglecting and cheating on her husband and always out drinking. She was never home. There was a question about whether her husband would leave her. Maybe he would cut her out of his will.

On October 8, 2000, Wendi tried to poison her husband. It wasn[t the first time. She called an ambulance when it seemed like he was about to die, then she sent the ambulance away when he partially recovered. Later she hit him 23 times in the head with a barstool. She stabbed him multiple times leaving the knife in his throat.

 

wendi andriano large

 

 

 

 

 

Arias

Juan cross examined Wendi Andriano ferociously. Wendi claimed that the poisoning was a planned assisted suicide, that her husband accepted her cheating, and that he attacked her and she defended herself.

On the stand she said “If I am convicted, it is because of my own bad choices”. Interestingly, Jodi Arias actually mimicked some of the mannerisms of Wendi Andriano and quoted her while on the stand. Wendi’s hair also returned to its natural brown color and she dressed down and wore glasses at her death penalty trial.

But the victim, Joseph Andriano would win the day. The jury didn’t believe her story and they sentenced her to death just a few days before Christmas, 2004.

wendi andriano 1

 

*******************************************************

Empowered from his victory, Juan must have felt invincible. Things were going well for Juan, and his record was impressive. Then he ran into a legal buzz saw named Shawn P. Lynch.

This may have really hardened him about the justice system.  Lynch and a friend had killed a man and then went on a spending spree with his credit card. There was plenty of evidence and little doubt about who committed the crime. The confusion came from who did what. The jury convicted Lynch of murder but they could not agree on premeditation.

Next Juan would learn about the aggravation of the aggravators. The jury agreed on murder for a money motive, but they disagreed on heinous cruel or depraved. A second mitigation and penalty phase was ordered.

During the second phases, Juan instructed the jury that there were four aggravating circum206125stances: Pecuniary gain (money), heinous, cruel, and depraved. In 2006, the jury found all four aggravators and sentenced Lynch to death.

Juan thought he had justice for James Pazarella, but the case was far from over.

Shawn Lynch appealed with a barrage of issues, including prosecutorial misconduct on the part of Juan Martinez. The higher court rejected most of the claims.

Technically, heinous, cruel and depraved are not three aggravators. They are three “prongs” of a single aggravator. The court stated that since the jury was instructed there were four aggravators instead of two, this was found to be prejudicial to the client. So this crime from 2001 and death penalty sentence from 2006, has yet go back to trial a third time for another sentencing phase.

More than 12 years later, there is not a final sentence. There has been no closure for the Panzarellas.  I think this experience aggravated Juan and made him feel that the justice needs a little push sometimes since the system and appeals process all seem to be on the defendant’s side.

dean glickJuan had better success with State v. Glick. Dean Glick, 41, was a vile and degenerate person by any standards. He lived with his 82 year old mother. He abused her and stole her money. He hired a prostitute and promised her a huge bonus. His mother protested when he tried to use her credit card to pay. The prostitute left with her driver when the argument became heated. They quickly called the police.

Dean Glick then beat his 82 year-old mother to death with a plastic flashlight. When the police arrived, Glick had barricaded the front door. There was plenty of evidence and two eye witnesses who saw the beginning of a horrible fight just minutes before the murder.

Imagine Juan’s attitude towards defense attorneys when Glick’s attorneys told the jury that Dean was caring and responsible. He loved his mom way too much to kill her. They simply had an argument. The argument got out of control and the beating was not so bad. Glick broke his mom’s ribs and sternum not while beating her but while trying to perform CPR on her fragile body! It is not difficult to understand Juan’s disdain for the defense. Dean Glick was convicted of 1st degree murder and sentenced to life in prison.

cory and victimsMartinez had further success with a high profile serial killer case. Cory Morris was accused of killing his girlfriend and four other women and burying them next to his trailer. From 2002 to 2003 he had lured the women into his home with promises of money. Then the victims were subjected to beatings, rape, murder and then necrophilia. Imagine the disdain on his face when the defense counsel addressed the jury.

corry morrisThis is the case where Juan Martinez cut open an evidence bag containing the coat of one of the murdered and buried victims, removed it, and “invited the jury to take a good whiff”. This was supposedly to prove necrophelia, even though:

1) There was really no need to do so, and

2) How does a jacket that smells like death prove necrophelia?

 

 

The defense was equally irrational, arguing that although Morris committed 5 murders, he had not premeditated any of them. Therefore, Corey Morris should get five counts of 2nd degree murder and not the death penalty. The jury did not accept the argument.

Morris was sentenced to death in July, 2005.

 

In 2005, Juan Martinez was the prosecutor in the case of an Arizona State University star running back who shot a teammate to death in a parking lot. Juan was not moved by the idea of the popular Arizona Sun Devils running back making some bad decisions and a terrible mistake.

loren wade 2

In 2007, Loren Wade was found guilty of second degree murder and sentenced to 20 years in prison. Juan had another win under his belt. Most likely Juan doesn’t remember Loren Wade’s name, but he certainly remembers Brandon Falkner, who was shot to death for talking to Wade’s girlfriend. Falkner was the less well known football player who’s life was cut so short.loren wade

 

 

 

 

 

 

Then there was State v. Miller. William Craig Miller, 34, was a business owner who committed arson, burning down his own home for insurance money. He talked his employee Steven Duffy into helping him. When Duffy and his girlfriend, Tammy Lovell, offered to help the police prosecute him, Miller retaliated.

He killed Duffy, his eighteen year old brother, Lovell, and her two children ages 15 and 10. Imiller victimsmagine the ire in the conscience of Juan Martinez when the defense attorney implored the jury to “keep an open mind” and to remember that “things are not always as they seem”.

The defense attorney told the jury that life in prison is punishment enough and showed smiling baby photos of Miller. They said to remember that there was a human being inside the monster and that Miller suffered from bipolar disorder. Juan pounced on this sickening plea. What about Duffy, Lovell, her brother, and the children? Where is their mercy?

1234216_GThe jury convicted him of five counts of 1st degree murder and sentenced him to death in 2011.

For Juan Martinez, he will grudgingly provide a “why”. If the jury needs a “why”, he will find one to give them. But for Juan, there is no why. You took a life. We know you did it, and now it is time to pay for your sin. Many murders are straightforward. Juan Martinez doesn’t see that there are rare exceptions and sometimes there are possible explanations for something that seems like a horrible and vicious murder.

In 2013, in the Arias trial, Juan finds himself once again accused of prosecutorial misconduct.  Withholding from the defense text messages, Instant messages, and e-mails recovered from the cell phone of Travis Alexander in time for trial.  Thousands and thousands of messages were recovered and turned over in 2011 shortly before the anticipated beginning of the trial. The trial was delayed many times.

Other incidents of misconduct throughout the trial have been alleged by the defense, including suborning perjury in the testimony of the Medical Examiner, Dr. Kevin Horn. More recently, there are allegations that the prosecution tried to hide evidence found on victim, Travis Aexander’s computer.

*********************************************************

Juan Martinez was in his usual element, berating defense witnesses, attempting to insult and humiliate the defendant and expert defense witnesses. Appealing to the emotions rather than the reason and logic of the jury, trying to shape the testimony of defense witnesses, cutting them off  before they can explain their answers, and questioning witnesses with cynical and aggressive questioning, even screaming, barking and snapping at witnesses in bulldog fashion.

 

jodi juanNurmi attempted to shine a “spotlight” on the actions of the prosecutor by making accusations of misconduct throughout the trial, an attempt to deceive the jury by making their unlikely order of injuries a scientific certainty which would highly benefit the prosecution’s case.

Finally, adding the nonsensical charge of 1st degree felony murder for fear that the jury would not believe the thin and mostly speculative evidence of premeditation. Whatever it took, Juan vowed to deliver justice for Travis Alexander and his shattered family.

juan katie wicktrial century

Many trial watchers praised Juan Martinez as a hero. In the media and also in social media, victim’s rights were enshrined and Juan’s devices were duplicated.

Witnesses were threatened and intimidated by mostly anonymous Facebook and Twitter avengers. Only one side of the story was presented. Anyone who said anything in support of the defendant, her attorneys and witnesses was castigated. Speculations were presented in the media and social media as fact. Exculpatory evidence was not allowed into the public domain. Any opinion in any way favorable to the defendant or the defense was ridiculed, blocked, and deleted. Posters were driven away by swarms of avengers and Facebook pages supporting Jodi Arias were deleted due to false complaints of “pornography”.

juan 2Currently, Juan has completed the Chrisman trial where a former Phoenix police officer is charged with 2nd degree murder, assault, and cruelty to animals after shooting a man and his dog in his home during a complaint of violence. Juan had an eye witness and some evidence, but there was a problem with missing evidence from outside the home favoring Chrisman.

chrismanJuan responded in a clever fashion. He suggested to the jury during closing arguments that Chrisman’s fellow officers may have hidden and destroyed evidence as well as altering the crime scene. No evidence was introduced in support of the accusation.Richard Chrisman2794230_G

The judge gave the jury instructions that what is said in closing arguments is not evidence and that lack of evidence should be seen as favorable to Chrisman. Even so, jury members were influenced by the contention that his fellow officers helped Chrisman by removing and destroying evidence.

chrisman trial 2Chrisman claimed that he shot the victim because he picked up a bicycle and threatened to assault the officer. Juan told the jury that “no gun residue was found on the bicycle”, proving that Chrisman was lying. In fact, no tests were conducted on the bicycle for gun residue. Juan Martinez had used a defense-style tactic to influence the jury.

Chrisman’s defense attorneys have complained that the Grand Jury was not given the evidence it needed to make a sound decision about whether the case should be brought to trial or what proper charges were to be brought.

“Chrisman’s lawyers filed a motion claiming the prosecutors in the case, Juan Martinez and Ted Duffy, omitted certain facts and ignored questions from the grand jury that indicted him”.

“Chrisman’s lawyers say prosecutors never told the grand jury about the victim’s alleged drug use or comments made by Chrisman to the first officer on the scene.”

juan crossIn the past, these actions were deemed as misconduct by Arizona judges. Now the exact same behaviors are not viewed as misconduct. Here is the response to such behavior in Arizona in a 2006 murder case:

“Mr. Duffy  (the prosecutor) did a lot of things during the trial that in my opinion were just outrageous,” said Raynak (the defense attorney).”

“Raynak says Duffy’s misconduct included introducing evidence after he was told not to, and making statements about evidence that simply weren’t true. Judge Arthur Anderson agreed, and after notifying the bar, Duffy was suspended for 30 days and given probation for a year”. In the Chrisman case, Martinez and Duffy had teamed up to deliver Justice for Danny Rodriguez and his mother who had called the police to begin with.

Although it seems that ex-officer Chrisman was very wrong in his actions, pepper spraying, tasing, then shooting Rodriguez to death, the jury should be given the sound evidence and be able to make a fair decision based on the evidence and testimony presented. The jury should not be unduly influenced by tricks and tactics designed to influence the jury outside of the facts of the case.

The prosecutors should not mislead the Grand Jury, try to keep out exculpatory evidence, and make arguments to the jury which mischaracterizes evidence. Expert witnesses can be discredited or have their opinions questioned, but character assassination, taunting and ridicule of qualified experts should not be allowed. The prosecution should turn over witness lists and evidence to the defense on time.

http://blogs.phoenixnewtimes.com/valleyfever/2010/11/richard_chrisman_phoenix_pds_k.php

Iredondoeric shuhandler

In his upcoming case, State v. Christopher Redondo, Juan has been sparring with the judge. Redondo has already been convicted for the unrelated murder of Ernie Singh on June 24, 2009.  For this, Redondo was sentenced to life in prison. Now, Redondo is accused of shooting to death Gilbert Police Lt. Eric Shuhandler in January 2010.

Redondo was reportedly despondent in his cell and refusing to talk to defense counsel. Judge Barton requested that Juan Martinez attempt a plea bargain to life in prison and has ordered a competency hearing. Juan Martinez became incensed and convinced that the judge is trying to stop him from getting Redondo the death penalty.  Juan also feels Judge Barton is “sympathetic” to the defendant and should not be allowed to preside in the competency hearing. I would say she believes the Death penaty should be used judiciously.

He wants a stricter judge to find him competent to stand trial and to be eligible for execution. Juan knows Redondo is already serving life in prison for the killing of Singh. If he is found guilty, this means he will get no extra punishment for the killing of Officer Shuhandler in 2010. So, Juan feels that Redondo should stop playing mentally sick and should just face execution. In his motion, “Martinez accused Barton of being hostile toward the death penalty in three other cases”.

judgeBartonJanetThis can be directly traced back to State v. Miller. The judge in that case was Judge Barton. Miller was the man who killed 5 people as retaliation for testifying against him in an arson case. Even though there were multiple aggravators such as multiple murders, prior felonies, witness elimination, and the murder of two children. Juan still insisted in motions with the judge that the especially cruel, heinous or depraved aggravator be allowed to be used. The judge replied that there were plenty of other aggravators, and that the five were shot in rapid succession, making it difficult to prove significant mental suffering took place.

“Based upon the evidence presented, the state has not shown that any significant period of time elapsed between the killings and that any victim did not die instantly from the gunshot wounds,” Barton responded. “Rather, it appears that the victims were killed in rapid succession and none of them had significant time to contemplate their fate,” the judge said.

Why does Juan Martinez fight so hard to get an aggravator he doesn’t need to get the death penalty? The answer is precedent.

If this particular crime is seen as supporting the heinous, cruel, or depraved aggravator, then many more cases can claim this aggravator for gunshot murders due to the precedent that can be created in State v. Miller. This allows the prosecutors in Arizona to use the threat of the death penalty more often to force a plea in selected cases. This also widens rather than narrows the number of homicides that can be found eligible for the death penalty.

Judge Barton has presided over other death penalty cases where the sentence was death. Judge Barton has also refused to block death sentences from being carried out. So maybe Juan Martinez is being too tenacious in attacking Judge Barton for being reasonable and judicious in the application of the death penalty.

 

Update: Bryan Hulsey was found guilty of 1st degree murder of a Police Officer and was sentenced to death in the murder of Glendale Police Officer Anthony Holly on August 28th, 2014. Juan Martinez was the prosecutor. Hulsey threateningly gave the jury a standing ovation, of sorts.

juan 3It’s wonderful when you have a tough prosecutor who will fight hard for the rights of victims and victim’s families. It’s a blessing to have a tenacious prosecutor to protect society from serial killers, cop killers, rogue cops, mass murderers, and outlaw felony murderers with drug habits. The problem comes when you have people such as Scott Falater and Jodi Arias.

These are passive people with no criminal history or history of violence who are claiming that something irrational or not easily explainable happened resulting in a murder. These are cases where the jury really needs to decide on the facts and the evidence without the undue influence from emotional arguments, speculation, and deceptive tactics.

The code of ethics for prosecutors states:

(a) The office of prosecutor is charged with responsibility for prosecutions in its jurisdiction.

(b) The prosecutor is an administrator of justice, an advocate, and an officer of the court; the prosecutor must exercise sound discretion in the performance of his or her functions.

(c) The duty of the prosecutor is to seek justice, not merely to convict.

So to try to discredit an expert Psychological witness with 30 years experience because he made a math mistake, or to try to discredit a domestic violence expert with 30 years experience because of the title she chose for a speaking engagement, seems a little over the top. To withhold evidence and witness lists from the defense in order to put them at a disadvantage in a case where their client faces possible execution also seems over the top.

To try to convince the jury with argument based on speculation and emotion also seems to fall outside the bounds of the ethics of a prosecutor who is supposed to seek justice. To express the sentiment that the defendant is a liar and by extension, all defense witnesses are liars also, falls outside these bounds. To accuse defense witnesses of crimes without evidence and to use these accusations to try and prevent a witness from testifying is a violation of law. For Judges to tolerate these tactics is wrong on its face. Excessive screaming, sarcasm, taunting, and contempt violate the decorum of a capital case. So is purposely dropping evidence (the camera).

Do you want to defend a mass murderer? Neither do I. Do you want to defend a child rapist and killer or an outlaw drug induced spree killer? Neither do I. How far over the line would you go to prosecute the bad guy? If you go too far, the scales are tipped, and you start to become part of the problem. But if you are falsely accused of such a thing, you would want a prosecutor with ethics. You would not want a Grand Jury to indict you on false, misleading, or missing information. You would not want charges to be brought against you without probable cause. You would not want to be overcharged in the crime.

jodi 2You would not want a prosecutor withholding evidence that could set you free, manufacturing, destroying or mischaracterizing evidence, influencing the jury with speculation, or shopping for a hanging judge. Deciding whether a person lives or dies should be based on their guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. People who think Juan Martinez is a hero like to ask “What if Travis Alexander was your son, your brother, or your friend?

But you also need to ask “What if Jodi Arias was your daughter, your friend, or your sister?”

us constitution

There is no “Justice for Yarmilla”, “Justice for Faylene” or “Justice for Travis”. There is only Justice for all. The balance between victim’s rights and the rights of the accused must be carefully maintained. Otherwise, we are only seeking a conviction. We will have left Justice far behind.

ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

We warmly welcome any comments from anyone with any opinion.

ALL comments are accepted and will be posted.

You can also comment on our FB page

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

 

Sources:

http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/2002-08-29/news/justice-delayed/full/

https://asuwebdevilarchive.asu.edu/i…11/news/701208

http://www.eastvalleytribune.com/new…=image&photo=0

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=2897067

http://www.abc15.com/dpp/news/region…y’s-murder

http://murderpedia.org/male.M/m/morris-cory.htm

http://murderpedia.org/male.M/images…CR050267AP.pdf

http://www.azcorrections.gov/inmate_…RRIS%2C+CORY+

http://www.azcourts.gov/Portals/23/p…CR060220AP.pdf

http://murderpedia.org/mal

http://www.azcorrections.gov/inmate_…ype=SearchInet

http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/2002-…stice-delayed/

http://www.people.com/people/archive…128694,00.html

http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/2009-…rything-wrong/

http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/2002-…the-big-sleep/

http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepu…rder-case.html

http://crime.about.com/od/deathrow/i…andriano_w.htm

http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/local/articles/20121102prosecutor-files-motion-vs-judge.html#ixzz2eoadFt00

http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/1999-07-01/news/wake-up-call/7/

http://murderpedia.org/male.M/m/morris-cory.htm

http://www.abc15.com/dpp/news/region_phoenix_metro/central_phoenix/arizona-man-sentenced-to-death-in-family’s-murder#ixzz2eq4EwMy

http://news.gila1019.com/delays-in-the-death-penalty-trial-for-christopher-redondo-in-the-shooting-death-of-gilbert-police-lt-eric-shuhandler/

http://www.azcentral.com/community/mesa/articles/20110531mesa-craig-miller-murder-death-penalty0531.html#ixzz2f7LDhTin

 

Heroes, Zeros, and Geniuses in the Jodi Arias Case (Nov 10)

November Update:

Heroes, Zeros, and Geniuses in the Jodi Arias Case

Fact-based Reporting by

Amanda Chan and Rob Roman

iq-bell-curve 2 new

In anticipation of the upcoming Jodi Arias Murder Trial, 2nd Penalty Phase, we have started a new regular report called Heroes, Zeros, and Geniuses.

heroes 2

 Here we mention some current updates and commentary about anything related to the case in the media and on social media.

kiefer lg

Hero #1

Michael Kieffer
A reporter at the Arizona newspaper, the Arizona Republic, Mr.Kieffer wrote a series of articles on prosecutorial misconduct in Arizona. Kieffer attended the Arias trial daily. One article was specifically about Juan Martinez.
“Martinez helped send seven other killers to death row since he was hired at the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office in 1988.
He was accused by defense attorneys of prosecutorial misconduct in all but one of those cases; the Arizona Supreme Court characterized his actions as constituting misconduct in one of them, and cited numerous instances of “improper” behavior in another, but neither rose to the level where the justices felt they needed to overturn the cases.
Allegations of misconduct by Martinez in the second case and at least two others are pending in state and federal courts.
michael-kiefer-pet-rocks2
Justice Michael Ryan then stepped into the discussion.
“Well, this prosecutor I recollect from several cases,” Ryan said. “This same prosecutor has been accused of fairly serious misconduct, but ultimately we decided it did not rise to the level of requiring a reversal,”
Ryan said. “There’s something about this prosecutor, Mr. Martinez.”
There had been multiple allegations of prosecutorial misconduct against Martinez in Gallardo’s appeal. Ultimately, in its written opinion, the court determined that Martinez had repeatedly made improper statements about the defendant.
During the oral argument before the Supreme Court, the justices fixed on a question that Martinez asked three times, even though the trial judge in the case had sustained a defense attorney’s objections to the question.
But in the end, the justices ruled that Martinez’s behavior still did not “suggest pervasive prosecutorial misconduct that deprived (the defendant) of a fair trial.”
And, as the justices noted, it was not the first time that Martinez had walked away unscathed.”
  http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/20131028jodi-arias-juan-martinez-conduct-day3.html
 Attention is finally being raised about not only the highly questionable practices in Maricopa County and Arizona State, but also the specific bad acts of the Maricopa prosecutor, Juan Martinez.
Here are the other 3 articles in the series:
http://www.azcentral.com/news/arizona/articles/20131027milke-krone-prosecutors-conduct-day1.html
http://www.azcentral.com/news/arizona/articles/20131027wintory-prosecutor-conduct-day-2.html
http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/20131029prosecutor-conduct-can-system-curb-abuses-day4.html

cpi logo

Hero #2

CPI (Center for Prosecutor Integrity)
In response to Kieffer’s article and other information, the Center for Prosecutor Integrity is asking Prosecutors nationwide to hold each other accountable for ethical conduct.
“WASHINGTON / November 6, 2013 – Following revelations that 22% of death sentence cases in Arizona involve judicial findings of impropriety, the Center for Prosecutor Integrity is calling on prosecutors nationwide to take a proactive approach to hold unethical prosecutors accountable and restore public confidence in the criminal justice system.
cptThe finding of widespread prosecutor misbehavior is based on a review of all death sentence convictions in Arizona in the past decade. These sentences are routinely seen by the state Supreme Court. Since 2002, there have been 82 death sentence cases reviewed by the state high court. In 18 of the cases – 22% of the total — the Supreme Court made a finding of impropriety.
Examples of unethical practice include presenting false testimony, resorting to emotional appeals in closing arguments, referring to mitigating evidence as “excuses “, and removing a jacket worn by a victim from a plastic evidence bag for the jury’s “smelling pleasure.””
http://www.prosecutorintegrity.org/media/cpi-calls-on-prosecutors-to-root-out-misconduct-after-az-report-of-widespread-unethical-practices/
http://www.prosecutorintegrity.org/wp-content/uploads/EpidemicofProsecutorMisconduct.pdf
The article also specifically mentioned the conduct of Maricopa prosecutor Juan Martinez in State v. Morris (2005).
Genius that he is, Juan responded colorfully to allegations that there was no proof in State v. Morris (2005) that the serial killer, Cory Morris, engaged in necrophilia with the 5 women he murdered and buried near his trailer.
In open court, he broke open a sealed bag containing a jacket worn by one of the victims and invited the jury to take a good whiff.
Hey Juan, the odor of decomposition on the clothes taken off a corpse yields no evidence whatever of whether or not the defendant engaged in necrophilia (had sex with a dead human body). This is typical of Juan Martinez’ conduct in death penalty trials.
This is the list that CPI offers as the most typical types of prosecutorial misconduct:
 Types of Misconduct
 Prosecutor misconduct can assume many forms, including:

heroes 3

  • Charging a suspect with more offenses than is warranted
  • Withholding or delaying the release of exculpatory evidence (State v. Arias – alleged)
  • Deliberately mishandling, mistreating, or destroying evidence (State v. Arias – alleged)
  • Allowing witnesses they know or should know are not truthful to testify (State v. Arias – Dr. Kevin Horn – alleged)
  •  Pressuring defense witnesses not to testify (State v. Arias – Patti Womack – alleged)
  • Relying on fraudulent forensic experts (State v. Arias – Dr. Kevin Horn – alleged)
  • During plea negotiations, overstating the strength of the evidence
  • Making statements to the media that are designed to arouse public indignation
  • Making improper or misleading statements to the jury (State v. Arias – alleged)
  •  Failing to report prosecutor misconduct when it is discovered
http://www.prosecutorintegrity.org/

Alan-Dershowitz-

 Hero #3

Alan Dershowitz
Famous Appellate Attorney, Law Professor at Harvard, and Constitutional Scholar.
heroes 4On FOX News, while selling his latest book, this famous legal expert said that we need to realize the truth. The pervasive media coverage of crimes makes it a reality that “the public is the 13th juror”. He said that not only the jury feel the pressure of public opinion, but even judges are influenced by this intense pressure.
He went on to say that juries should be sequestered in high profile crimes, Dershowitz said that TV shows, such as HLN, should not be allowed to televise trials, infuse it with thir own opinions, and use them to attract ratings. Dershowitz feels that court cases, including the Supreme Court, should be televised on free public access without comment. He admitted it would be “boring”, but it’s necessary to ensure fair trials.
 Now we introduce our zeroes in the case:

alan-dershowitz

Zero #1

Alan Dershowitz
Famous Appellate Attorney, Law Professor at Harvard, and Constitutional Scholar.
Alan Dershowitz said that Jodi Arias “will not have a successful appeal because she’s guilty”. Dershowitz made this remark this past summer. First of all, a famous constitutional scholar should know that guilt or innocence plays no part in whether a trial was fair and whether an appeal is upheld and a conviction is reversed and remanded back to the court for a new trial.
Is Dershowitz actually saying that he doesn’t see any error that could change the outcome of the trial? If so, I cannot believe he watched the trial. If Dershowitz stated that he DID in fact see legitimate appealable issues in the Jodi Arias trial, how would that affect his popularity, his welcome at FOX News and his ability to sell his books?
gigiMaybe the judge and the jury were not the only ones feeling the pressure. Commentators, other lawyers and potential witnesses feel the heat, too.
Alan Dershowitz learned his lesson well after taking an unpopular stance when he supported OJ Simpson in the 1990’s. He managed to mitigate his support for OJ by splitting the difference and saying that he was right to support OJ because “The police framed a guilty man”.
Want to know how? Buy his new book.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: Dershowitz is nothing but a Smershowitz.

bill montgomery

Zero #2

Bill Montgomery
The elected District Attorney for Maricopa County, Arizona
What’s Not Important, Bill?
zreos 2The Jodi Arias case in general and the settlement conference in particular:
“In his regular news conference Wednesday, Montgomery explained that he did not attend the settlement conference as he had intended because the “case is no different than any other case,” he said.
“I don’t see it as an important enough case to where I have to be personally involved to where I can’t have the prosecutor who’s responsible for the case take care of it himself,” he said.”
http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/2013-11-07/news/bill-montgomery-is-prosecuting-a-medical-pot-patient-for-one-piece-of-thc-infused-candy/
What IS Important, Bill?
A single piece of marijuana candy.
A man was pulled over for driving erratically. In his center console was a pot pipe and a single piece of marijuana candy. Due to his medical marijuana license, the pipe was acceptable. However, the single piece of candy may be a Felony according to Bill.
candy 4“Medical-marijuana users were warned. And now Maricopa County Attorney Bill Montgomery is carrying out his plan to harass qualified medical users for resin-infused edibles.
candy 2Montgomery repeatedly has refused to say whether he is prosecuting patients for possession of marijuana concentrates who otherwise are acting within the boundaries of the 2010 Arizona Medical Marijuana Act.
candy 1New Times has learned that his office is moving forward with at least one such case, a felony prosecution of a medical-marijuana patient for possession of a single piece of infused candy.”
No, the Jodi Arias case is not important to you, Bill. It’s just like any other case, Bill. Would you care to say that under oath, Bill?
candy 3
Way to get “tough on crime”, Bill.

facebook 2

Zero #3

Various and sundry Pro-prosecution Facebook commentors
Judge Stephens recently denied Jodi Arias’ motion to fire her lead attorney, Kirk Nurmi.
No way was Judge Stephens ever going to grant that motion and delay the 2nd penalty phase by 6 months to one year. Judge Stephens could then kiss her job goodbye. Jodi knows this.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/10/24/jodi-arias-files-motions-to-fire-attorney/3183327/
facebook 1Arias believes that the client – attorney relationship with Kirk Nurmi is hurting her case. Jodi Arias is properly preserving this issue for appeal by filing for the second time to have Nurmi dismissed.
Many Facebook commenters smugly suggested that Jodi was purposely trying to prolong the trial in order to do one or more of the following
1) She likes being in Estrella County Jail and wants to stay there. She does not want to go to Perryville Prison.
 2) She is trying to hurt the Alexander family by making them wait and prolonging their suffering.
 3) She is trying to hold up the proceedings out of spite.
zeros 7 None of these “reasons” have any factual basis.
1) Many prisoners in Arizona prefer the Prison to the CountyJail. One County jail prisoner who was sentenced but not yet transferred to prison, complained to Sheriff Joe Arpaio that he wanted to be transferred to prison, where there were better conditions and food. Juan Martinez replied: “We are not a taxi service”.
Here is what the people who know have to say about this:
“Interviewer: What’s the difference between jail and prison? Can you talk about the specific jails in your area?
Acacia Law: Whether you’re in prison or whether you’re in jail you’re entitled in visitation. In Maricopa County, the most populated county jails include the lower BuckEye Jail, Durango Facility, and Estrella, which include the tents.
heroesThere is also a Durango Juvenile Facility. There is also The Towers. Each one of them has their own pluses and minuses, in the viewpoint of someone who is incarcerated.
Interviewer: Isn’t there The Fourth Avenue Jail, and then TentCity as well? Are they crowded?
Acacia Law: In terms of your question as to whether people prefer the county jails to prison they much prefer prison. The Department of Corrections is actually much easier time. Many of my clients who are repeat offenders much prefer going to prison than spending a year in county as a term condition of probation.
That might give you an idea of how bad the jails are here. They are notoriously bad throughout the state at the county level.
Pima County in Tuscon has bad facilities as well. Penal County used to have one of the worst facilities in the state. I don’t know if they still do or not since they made the new jail about eight years ago.”
http://www.acacialawgroup.com/is-there-a-difference-between-jail-and-prison
2) Jodi Arias wants to Harm the Alexander family and prolong their suffering
In her motion to dismiss Kirk Nurmi, Arias claims that it was her desire, as well as the prosecution’s desire to clear the courtroom before playing the “sex tape”conversations between her and Travis Alexander. Kirk Nurmi fought Jodi Arias on this. Nurmi wanted the sex tape played in public. Arias stated that she didn’t want this to be played in public as it would cause pain to her and the Alexander family.
3) Jodi Arias wants to delay the proceedings out of spite
Jodi Arias has no reason to delay her sentencing because this would only delay her appeals, which cannot be filed until after she is sentenced.
As far as public outcry, more time before the second penalty phase will not help Arias. The media and public fury will begin again and will rage just as before as soon as the trial resumes.
Hopefully, Nurmi and Arias will mend fences and join forces for the 2nd penalty phase.

Zero #2

dave hall 5
Dave Hall
dave hall 2Friend of Travis Alexander
Frequent guest on HLN during the trial
Phony Mormon
Slanderer of potential defense mitigation witness Patti Womack
Desecrator of ancient archeological formation
Former Boy Scout Leader
Dave Hall, a close friend of the victim, Travis Alexander, laughed and sang “Wiggle it – Just a little bit” as he filmed his friend, Glenn Taylor pushing over a world-famous, million years old ancient rock formation in a State Park in Utah.
dave hallHis friend, Glenn Taylor, who grunted and groaned like Atlas on camera as he struggled to man handle the boulder, was suing for injuries he incurred in an automobile accident from which he claimed he was severely physically disabled.
This incident caused immediate and vast world-wide outrage.
SALT LAKE CITY –  Two Utah men already facing possible charges for purposely toppling an ancient rock formation in a state park have now been removed from their posts as Boy Scout leaders.
dave hall 2A northern Utah Boy Scouts council announced Monday that Glenn Taylor and Dave Hall will no longer be allowed to lead scouting troops due to what happened Oct. 11 at Goblin Valley State Park, which they filmed and posted on Facebook.
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/10/22/boy-scouts-remove-2-men-who-toppled-ancient-rock/
In typical fake-Mormon dishonesty, Dave Hall said they did it “to protect innocent children”.
dave hall 7
Rock-on, Dave!

Watch the YouTube video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AYFD18BwmJ4

And now, we move on to the Geniuses of the Jodi Arias case.

Genius #1

“Michelle”
Commenter on Facebook
This person gave a rant recently on an a pro-prosecution Facebook page:
facebook 3“Now that I am not looking at or listening to Jodi everyday, as if that were her fault, I can think about the trial with less passion. Before she ever took the stand and started the 17 day marathon of lies, I had some sympathy for her in the sense that she is a girl who probably could have made something of herself and she threw it all away in a jealous rage.
She left home at 17, which is indicative of our troubled youth these days. The I want it all now and I am entitled attitude. Something went terribly wrong in her psyche when she met Travis. His interest in her must have sent her into a fantasyland.
zeros 6Here is this guy who looked and acted very successful, was liked and admired by hundreds of people, owns a 5 bedroom house, drives a Beemer, travels all over…someone with her background must have thought she had landed in Nirvana and then it all fell down!
What a crushing blow to her. THEN THE REAL JODI SHOWED UP FOR ALL TO SEE AND HEAR! End of story for me. She is where she belongs, keeping other male prey safe!”
I will now reply to her rant:
zeros 9Leaving home at 17 is indicative of nothing. Family dynamics run the gamut and there is nothing to be derived as far as murderous tendencies in having left home at the age of 17.
In fact, a female who leaves home at 17, is much more likely to be used and abused than to be an abuser or a murderer.
Travis’ phoniness and shallow interest in Jodi must have sent her into a fantasyland. Shallow Hal and his fake Mormon, Pre-Paid Legal, religious goon friends turned an honest hard worker into a champagne wisher and a caviar dreamer.
More due to his parent’s actions than his own, something was terribly wrong in Shallow Hal’s psyche from the start.
Here was a phony salesman, never honest with Arias or anyone else. His roommates’ rent paid the mortgage, everything else was financed. Arias said that her Infiniti was nicer than his beat BMW.
The trips were tax-deductible “business expenses” = free. He was going to write a book about himself, buy a Prius and thereby save the world.
Instead, he should have sought help from his church or a licensed therapist and saved himself. The PPL legal insurance racket and it’s promises of vast wealth negatively impacted both Jodi and Travis. Someone with his background, who never finished High School, must have thought he landed in Mormon Nirvana, but then it all fell down.
Typical fake Mormon, he blamed it all on the girl.
Who knows what he was capable of doing when he was finally going to have to face his behaviors, be exposed and excommunicated?

Genius  #2

“Michele”
Commenter on Facebook
This is another Michele, with one “L”. Maybe it’s the same Michelle. There’s no way to be sure.
facebook 5Though we welcome any and all opinions and comments on Spotlight on Law, people who have read the article and take issue with it choose not to directly engage us in a fact-based discussion. Michele is a commenter on a Facebook page that discusses the Jodi Arias case. Here is what this genius said about our article, “Why Jodi Arias will get a new trial”:
“I cannot help but laugh when reports like this claim they can set the rules for the criteria to be met for the Appellate Court. When they go even further by misquoting expert testimony to make their point, it’s shameful.
Not the first or the last time this has been done. Junk like this has been written on many cases without results for obvious reasons.
zeros 3Your girl is going to need a lot more than this. First degree murder with especially cruel factor. The bar is VERY high when it comes to grounds for appeals and she doesn’t come close to reaching it.”
Hopefully, Michele, you do not need to be an attorney to understand what is and is not a fair trial and what appealable issues are.
facebook 4When a prosecutor and a Medical Examiner team up to deliberately give the jury false testimony intended to sway the jury to deliver a guilty verdict, this is an unfair trial, gross prosecutor misconduct and an appealable issue. If this one is rejected by the courts, there are plenty of others.
The article is not “misquoting expert testimony”. The article contains no quotes. If you mean “misrepresenting or mischaracterizing expert testimony”, we beg to differ. The article is factual.
Is it possible that you could debate using some facts? We would welcome that.
heroes 5We don’t “set the rules”. The higher courts, existing statutes, and past cases do. “Junk like this” has been written before many convictions were reversed and new trials ordered. The news and the social media are chock full of such cases. In many cases, public outcry played a large part in reversed convictions, new trials, and exonerated prisoners.
Obviously, Michele, you didn’t read the article or other articles on this site. If you did, you would begin to realize that something is rotten in Denmark (Maricopa, Arizona). Arizona’s “especially cruel” aggravator is unconstitutionally vague and arbitrary.
We will see how high the bar is in 5 to 7 years. By that time, you will have forgotten all about this case.

Genius #3

“Brooke”
Commenter on Facebook
zeros 5In response to our article “Why Jodi Arias will get a new trial”, this is her response:
“I’d like to see the degree on law that makes this factual reasons.”
Brooke, what I’d like to see is a simple phrase without so many grammatical errors. “degree on law”?   “makes this factual reasons”?
Come on Brooke, you must be smarter than that. If not, you are not qualified to debate or give an opinion on the facts.
******************************************
zeros 8
We anticpate that there will be more Heroes, Zeros, and Geniuses as this case moves forward. Whenever they occur, as they inevitably do, we will collect them, report on them, and issue another update.

Unlike many blogs, All opinions and any comments are welcome here

All Rights Reserved

Why Jodi Arias Will Get a Whole New Trial

Why Jodi Arias must have, and will get, a New Trial

Factual Reporting by

Amanda Chen and Rob Roman

WARNING: Graphic Crime Scene and Autopsy Photos!

may be disturbing to some people!

sherry stephens 1
joe and jan
juan and horshack
arias jurors
Jodi Arias must and will get a new trial. No matter if you think she is guilty or innocent or anywhere between the two. Jodi Arias, no different than you or I, has a constitutional right to a fair trial. This should not stand and the higher courts or the U.S. Supreme Court should reverse the conviction and remand the case back to court for a new trial. Her are the reasons why this was not a fair trial.
  1. Doctor Horn was called to the stand 3 different times and on all 3 occasions he answered the persistent questioning of prosecutor Juan Martinez about the order of injuries. It is very unusual and curious to be called to the stand at different times to testify about the same thing.
  1. Doctor Horn stated over and over again that the gunshot was last and probably post mortem.
  1. The reasons he gave were
               a)      No blood was found at the wound entrance (the blood had been washed off of the victim).
               b)      There was no blood found in the wound tract in the brain. Horn also testified that no wound tract was found in the brain. (How can you testify to what is or is not in a wound tract that you did not find?)
               c)      The bullet entered the skull and must have gone through the brain because the brain butts up against the skull. (This is not true. Travis Alexander was shot right above the orbital cavity and through the nasal cavity, it is very possible for a .25 bullet to not enter the brain at all.)
               d)     The shock wave caused by the hot gasses from the gunshot would cause immediate incapacitation. (Not if the wound tract doesn’t enter the brain. Even if the wound tract did enter the brain, the tract would be mere fractions of an inch.)
               e)      According to Dr. Horn, the medical report meant to say that the outer membrane of the brain was penetrated. But, he said there was a typographical error and the report said it was not penetrated. (There just happens to be a “typo” right at the point where the report is discussing whether or not the brain was penetrated.  What a coincidence!) Also when any M.E. reports penetration of the outer membrane of the brain, the report then goes on to describe this penetration, the size the direction, etc. This lends credence to the accusation that the “typo” is no typo at all.
               f)       There was no blood found in the wound tract (The wound tract goes straight through the nasal cavity. In the shower crime scene photo, there is clearly a large accumulation of blood below the victim’s nostrils.
ta nose light

A large amount of blood under the nose

not much blood coming out the mouth.

4. Dr. Horn tried to remain truthful while giving deceptive testimony, but he has clearly lied. It’s evident that by asking about the order of injuries so many times, that Juan Martinez clearly coordinated this effort with Dr. Horn to sway the jury with false testimony. (For more information, please see Spolight on Dr. Kevin Horn, Spotlight on Juan Martinez, Spotlight on the Jodi Arias Trial)
5. Detective Flores testified that the order of injuries changed from gun first to gun last when prosecutor Juan Martinez asked Detective Flores to meet with Dr. Horn to discuss possible aggravating circumstances for the death penalty.
6. Travis Alexander was left in the shower with his left side facing out. If the victim was shot last, it must have been as he was lying motionless on the bathroom floor. So why is the shot such a badly placed shot? Also in order for a shot to be made at this angle, the barrel of the gun needs to be around 8 to 12 inches off the floor. This is not a reasonable or natural position.
7. If Alexander went to the sink after suffering the deep incised wounds to his left hand, blood would be pouring out from his left hand and the sink would be covered with blood on the left side. There is none of this on the left side of the sink. This contradicts the prosecution theory that Travis Alexander was stabbed in the shower. This reinforces the defense theory and casts doubt on premeditation.
ta left hand 3 lightFrom the official autopsy report:
“A deep 1 ½ inch incised wound across the left thenar eminence (palmar with extension onto the dorsal left hand) with deep penetration and partial severing of the musculature and tendons of the thumb base.”
 “A 1 ¾ inch incised wound of the palmar webbing between the left thumb and index finger, with an adjacent separate ¾ inch linear incised wound.”
 “A 1 inch incised wound across the dorsal surface of the distal inter-philangeal joint of the left thumb.”

ta left hand 1 light

Deep incised wounds on Alexander’s left hand

jurors pus

Little blood on left side of the sink

8. Shooting someone post mortem is the infliction of “gratuitous violence”. This perfectly fits the requirements for the Heinousness and the Depravity prongs of the “especially heinous, cruel and depraved” aggravator. Incredibly, Arias was only charged with the cruelty prong of the aggravator.
9. Felony murder does not in any way apply to this case if the gun was last. If the gun was first, and Travis was wounded, prompting Arias to switch to a knife to kill Alexander to cover up her presence in the home, then this is the only way that Felony murder could possibly, technically fit this case.
10. Dr. Horn was involved in two other cases. One was a wrongful prosecution seeking the death penalty. This was a grandmother who owned a day care center where a baby died. The other was a wrongful conviction. This was a self-defense case against a Mormon retired school teacher with 7 children who was attacked on a hiking trail by a man and his two dogs. In both cases the indispensible part of the case was the testimony and the opinion of Dr. Horn. In both cases he was completely wrong.
11. Arias wasn’t charged with the heinous and depraved prongs of the aggravator and the Felony murder charge was not dropped, proving that the prosecution does not actually believe that the gun was last. It also suggests that the prosecution believes that Arias may not have been the only person involved. Yet, the prosecution argued vehemently against both of these possibilities
12. If Alexander was stabbed first in the shower, there is already water in the shower. The wounds can be seen easily. There is no need to go the bathroom sink and look in the mirror. Alexander must not have known what happened to him, and he must have wanted to find out. How could Alexander turn his back on his attacker and go to the sink in the middle of a knife attack? Even the prosecutor, Juan Martinez, proved at trial that he doesn’t believe this. Yet he persuaded the jury to believe yet another idea that he himself does not believe.
13. If you are a juror and you believe Dr. Horn, then Jodi Arias is guilty of 1st degree premeditated murder. There is no need to even present a defense or any further testimony or evidence. Therefore the testimony of Dr. Horn constitutes reversible error in the case of ArizonaState v. Jodi Ann Arias. Jodi Arias’ constitutional right to a fair trial has been violated. On top of this there are numerous other valid and cogent appealable issues.
Other appealable issues include:
  1. The State of Arizona’s cruelty prong of the “especially heinous cruel and depraved” aggravator is in violation of the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution because the statute along with the jury instructions are too vague and can be applied to almost any murder and used to target a particular defendant with the Death Penalty.
  1. The possibility that the jury was tainted by the omnipresent media coverage which was almost impossible to avoid. The jury should have been sequestered. Evidence exists that jurors discussed the case outside court and perhaps on social media. A juror stated that the jury was 12 – 0 for the guilty verdict at the very beginning of deliberations.
  1. The possibility that the jury did not understand jury instructions, for which direct evidence appears on video.
  1. Prosecutorial misconduct throughout the case and the trial. There is direct video evidence that Juan Martinez lied more than once during the commutation hearing of Robert Towery, in order to secure his execution. The prosecutor purposely tampered with evidence during the trial (dropped the camera). The prosecutor deliberately withheld evidence until just before the scheduled start of the trial. The prosecutor suborned perjury in the testimony of Dr. Kevin Horn.
  1. Possible evidence favorable to the defense which was not provided to the defense or allowed into trial (exculpatory)
  1. Possible evidence favorable to the prosecution which should not have been allowed into trial (more prejudicial than probative)
  1. The judge failed to control the courtroom, allowing such things as the victim’s family’s purposeful, non-verbal communication with the jury throughout the trial. This can be seen in process on many trial videos.
  1. Witness intimidation perpetrated by the family and friends of the victim. One witness was called before the trial began and threatened if he testified for the defense. The witness was called shortly after the prosecutor released a list of potential defense witnesses to the victim’s family.
There is anecdotal evidence that other witness on the list were successfully intimidated into refusing to testify. An Alexander family member was involved in threats and intimidation of Alyce LaViolette during and after her testimony. Dave Hall slandered defense mitigation witness Patty Womack on National television after she and her family were threatened and intimidated in the social media.
If the higher courts find even a single one of these factors to be true, Jodi Arias may get a new trial. We contend that all these factors are true. Even Hannibal Lecter or Charles Manson has the right to a fair trial. Whether or not she got the result you desire or whether she deserves the verdicts makes no difference.
If these verdicts are allowed to stand, we are all at risk of having our constitutional rights violated in the future. No one who watched this trial should be able to say it was a fair trial. Did you see the emotion shown by Judge Sherry Stephens at the end of the first penalty phase? This is reason for a new trial right there. The judge is clearly prejudiced towards the prosecution and a death sentence. The jury did not reach a unanimous decision, so what? What was that display of emotion for? Maybe it should be mandatory in a capital case that the defense must provide an independent autopsy and Medical Examination.

All rights eserved

Unlike many blogs, all comments are accepted and will be posted