She is everything that Ms. LaViolette and Dr. Samuels, should have been. She is a true professional clinical psychologist. Her professionalism fills the courtroom. She is bright and articulate. Her integrity is beyond reproach.It is quite apparent that she believes deeply in her profession. It is also apparent that she is well-educated and could serve as a role model for her profession. In the opinion of this writer, her integrity is not for sale.
Dr. DeMarte is very confident in her opinions and conclusions. She answers each question with the truth, as she sees it, without regard to whether or not it pleases Juan Martinez or Jennifer Willmott.
During the first day of cross-examination, it became apparent that Jennifer was not going to be able to dominate or outwit Dr. DeMarte. Gamesmanship would not be effective in deterring Dr. DeMarte. No clever sleight of hand by the defense attorney would obscure the testimony of Dr. DeMarte.
If I have not been sufficiently ebullient in my praise of Dr. DeMarte, please allow me to say this. Dr. DeMarte is an absolute nightmare for the defense team. Her credentials are impeccable. Her intellect is not to be challenged. Her competence is unshakable.
She is being paid, for her time, as was Dr. Samuels and Ms. LaViolette. We should not begrudge anyone for charging for their professional services. There is a real difference with this witness. We get the impression that we can buy her time but not her professional integrity. I really don’t believe that her integrity is for sale at any price.
It is refreshing to see a professional witness who is not deliberately attempting to be evasive. A witness who can answer a simple yes or no when it is appropriate. Did you get the same feeling when Ms. LaViolette answered a question?
If prosecutor Martinez asked Ms. LaViolette a simple question like: Ms. LaViolette, did you eat lunch on Tuesday? I would expect her to respond in the following fashion.
“Mr. Martinez, it is a difficult question to answer. First of all there are different time zones around the world and I have no idea which calendar you’re referring to, not to mention, I think the Mayans were dead set against Tuesdays.
You need to look at the full context. You see I always look at the full context, Mr Martinez. You can’t take time out of context and Tuesday is time and I seem to recognize a pattern of Tuesday’s and patterns are very important to me, Mr. Martinez.
I wasn’t hired to evaluate Tuesday’s. I was hired to say that Jodi Arias was a victim of abuse and I think I said that about $30,000-$50,000 worth. Now Tuesday’s, Tuesday’s I don’t know. Did I ever tell you the story about a friend of mine…”
Dr. DeMarte is a professional and has formed a professional opinion. She backs it up with a belief in her profession and a belief in her abilities. She will answer a question honestly and without regard to its benefit to the defense or the prosecution. From my perspective, I am so very glad that Dr. DeMarte can be seen by the nation as a great representative of the mental health profession.
In my experience Dr. DeMarte is the rule and the other “expert witnesses” in this trial, the exception.