Justice, sorry. We didn't mean to exclude you or Lunarscope or any of the new posters. I am thrilled to read your posts and those of the others because you all add new ideas and thoughts to the discussion.
We may not all agree on everything, but the basic points we agree on is Arias is a psychopath, her entire defense is a sham and her psychologists are saying whatever makes Arias look like a victim and Alexander look like a villain.
I found it interesting that Geffner testified that Arias scored high on psychopathy, Wilmott quickly tried to repair the damage by saying "but the second time you tested her the scores were low right?" and he agreed. I heard it and I'm sure the jurors heard it so I was shocked when right out of the gate on his cross examination of Geffner, Martinez didn't ask, "She scored high in psychopathy, right?" and follow that up with: "So that means Jodi Arias is a psychopath." She's already been convicted of first degree murder with extreme cruelty and the jury is charged with deciding if she is a danger to society. A psychopath is certainly worthy of the death penalty so why did Martinez not bring it up?
Why didn't Dr. DeMarte diagnose her as having Antisocial Personality Disorder as well as Borderline Personality Disorder since every mental health professional commenting on the case has said she is a psychopath and many say she is both a psychopath and borderline? DeMarte didn't even mention Arias' test scores on Antisocial Personality Disorder.
It makes me wonder if Judge Stephens has forbade the state to say Jodi Arias is a psychopath like the judge forbade the state to say Arias is manipulative and has no remorse.
I think the legal system is all screwed up because it allows the defense to lie about the faults of the victim but can't bring up any faults of the defendant. How can the jury make an informed decision on life or death if they don't know the true character of the defendant?
I too was struck by your comment that defense witnesses and the defense team (which includes Arias) have no conscience or moral boundaries. I believe that you are absolutely right Justice.
Duluth - LaViolette is a manipulator just as much as Arias. Whatever her experiences have been in her life, they did not serve her well. She is so confident that she KNOWS so much about DV when in fact her research in this case was not complete and it was biased from the beginning. She interview no one else except Arias. She relied on the text messages and journal entries that were provided to her by the defense (Arias). She judged a good and honest man by a few outlandish things he said to Arias. This alone is without any merit as Travis is DEAD and could not defend himself. She provided written material to Arias to help her get her story in line with LaViolette's testimony. No conscience or moral boundaries at all!
I believe that Arias is punishing her own family along with everyone else. She believes that she never had their support throughout her life. She uses them when it suits her and when she thinks it will be to her advantage, but she really has no true heartfelt feelings for them. Justice, your point that she doesn't care at all about her father's health issues is spot on. She uses them, probably through guilt on their part, to raise money for her all the while watching them go bankrupt. By saying that they were drug users and child abusers, she is trying to show that her early life was more horrendous than Travis'. Difference is, Travis rose above his problems from his early life and Arias went on to cause far many more problems for others and ultimately murder. No conscience or moral boundaries at all!
I too look forward to Dr. Randle's book in the future but until then, when this trial is finally over, I plan to read and follow things on the lighter side of life. I have been embroiled in the evil of Jodi Ann Arias far too long.
Observer,
You are correct but.......
They have listened to her for a day and a half and most likely got a sense of who she really is
And....
|She will be her own worst enemy when she allocates!
I always like to read Martinez’s motions because they are so intelligent and logical that even a layman can understand them.
In his latest motion objecting to the defense’s bogus umpteenth motion for mistrial because of prosecutorial misconduct:
Martinez says in a nutshell:
1-The judge has already ruled on the prosecutorial misconduct numerous times.
2- Jodi Arias claims of prosecutorial conduct do not warrant a mistrial.
3-Witnesses refusal to testify during the penalty phase did not prejudice Jodi Arias.
4- His cross examination of Geffner was not improper. The state is entitled to explore the bias, credibility and motives of witnesses and zealous cross examination of witnesses does not amount to misconduct.
5- There was no cumulative prosecutorial misconduct that affected the trial.
In conclusion, Arias and Nurmi are simply rehashing the same old accusations against the prosecutor, which have not affected the trial in any way, and the motion should be denied.
To that, I say amen. The judge will deny it like she has all the other bogus mistrial motions and the appellate courts will dismiss the accusations as well as pure hogwash.
I hope this is the last mistrial motion Martinez has to waste his time answering.
http://thetrialdiaries.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/Objection-to-Defendants-Motion-for-Mistrial.pdf
Thanks for the link Observer.
I read it and two things jumped out of the page at me and I quote....
"Defendant does not allege that the previous rulings by the court were erroneous or unjust but rather ignores the rulings all together."
"Defendant admits that these witnesses had already made the decision not to testify prior to the start of the penalty phase."
The fact that previous rulings have just been ignored by the defense (Arias) only shows that they are scrambling and trying to delay the inevitable.
I knew in my gut that none of the mitigation witnesses that Arias rounded up when she was representing herself for that short time would testify. I knew it!
She got them entered into the record only as a ploy to let the court AND the jury think there were a number of people that were willing to speak on her behalf as to why she should live.
There was never any intention of calling them and that is why they let their names stand.
Then, the defense (Arias) used the excuse of "fear" on the part of these witnesses as to why they would not come forward unless in secret.
McGee knew that what he had to say was a pack of lies and he would be destroyed by Martinez so he resorted to an affidavit that in the end, WAS proven that he was lying. He is a coward and hides behind social media to make his unjust points.
Carl knew he would never be called so he was willing to say anything for his sister in his affidavit.
Arias tried to testify in secret and although she got a day and a half to do so, she was blown out of the water with the denial by the Arizona Supreme Court.
The witnesses then supposedly decided to follow suit and refused to testify in support of Arias.
ALL THIS WHEN THEY WERE NEVER GOING TO TESTIFY IN THE FIRST PLACE!!!
The defense's (Arias') motion will be denied.
Jodi is vindictive uptill death, she believes if she can be slighted she becomes prone to be slighted, her parents and family receive her wrath consistently' as does everyone else, I just call her demented and read you-all about psychoanalysis' mostly to avoid spell-check and possibility of calling an apple an orange - like calling a psychopath a sociopath!
This jury will punish the DP unless a juror was predetermined to leniency = already charmed!
Martinez could have called witnesses' but rested his case, be it from pressure (judge) or preference we have what we have, the defense never had arguments just attack the attacker (deceased Travis) and in essence Jodi Arias has held the lead chair (self-defending) from day one' nothing was defendable and nothing was defended, I privately believe Jodi will advantage prison weaknesses (new prison is not a super-max) and is unfit to walk the face of the earth, she will be responsible for bad behaviour that will be assessed punishable to others, its her forte.
Note' About Just Da Truth Yuku the conversation will be there when the judge releases the proceedings, all Facebook will follow Twitter, we did a 'rewatch project' between trials where we knew the lies were lies as being told, examining every Jodi expression.
JDT prefers Facebook and that will slow after verdict, (he likes to argue opposition) plus we haven't needed authority since we went private, were are the case history internet summations, after verdict many will desire JDT Yuku access and it may require restrictions of new members or at some future time restricted new posts, if troublemakers sneak-in, I just mentioning that theirs less likelihood of joining after the verdict, and forcing the issue of joining with JDT may be best.
I think the defense is incredibly stupid in even bringing Geffner, Fonseca, Smith and Gworkin back to the stand to defend themselves.
They should have rested on Dr. DeMarte saying Jodi Arias suffers from Borderline Personality Disorder, which is a mental illness, because that is the only mitigating evidence they have that could save her life since there is no corroborating evidence of any of her accusations against Travis Alexander and little evidence of child abuse.
Instead, Wilmott is trying to kill the goose that laid the golden egg by trying to prove DeMarte is a young, inexperienced, lying, unethical non-expert.
Geffner was of course offended that the young female whippersnapper had the nerve to say he, a psychologist, with 35 years experience, did the testing wrong.
How dare she?
So he is very happy to sit on the stand and tell the jury and the world that Dr. DeMarte is not only young, inexperienced and stupid, but she is unethical.
When Wilmott showed Geffner DeMarte’s ad that she has been practicing for eight years, he said it is an ethics violation for a psychologist to count student time as experience.
He said DeMarte has a “little bit of knowledge and becomes dangerous” and says DeMarte did not understand his testing and mislead the jurors.
Jen Wood says the jury is not taking notes but they are listening to Geffner.
The defense is giving the jurors a mixed message.
On one hand they are saying: “Our psychologist with 35 years experience, knows more than the state psychologist so believe everything he says except when he says she has no personality disorders.”
On the other hand they are saying: “The state psychologist is unethical, inexperience, and too young and stupid to know anything so don’t believe anything she says except for her diagnosis of Borderline Personality Disorder. She is right about Jodi Arias being mentally ill but wrong about everything else.”
You can’t have it both ways. It makes no sense to a jury.
Martinez on the other hand is saying don’t believe anything Geffner says because he is “a hired gun” and his only purpose is to "smear Mr. Alexander's name," which is the truth and nothing but the truth.
Martinez is also saying believe what Dr. DeMarte says because she is a true expert, unbiased and everything she says makes perfect sense because it is the truth.
If I were a juror, I would discount everything the defense witnesses say because it is clear they are biased and skewing everything to make Arias look like the victim and Travis Alexander the perpetrator.
Yet, the autopsy pictures of Alexander’s bloated body riddled with 29 stab wounds, a slit throat and a bullet in the head, show who is the real victim, who suffered extreme cruelty and who deserves the death penalty.
No amount of porn and fog can erase that horrific truth.
Geffner is furious!
How dare a young upstart criticize his methods after 35 years of experience.
I wouldn't be surprised if almost begged Arias to let him come back and he would say anything they needed him to say.
I said it before and I say it again - the proof is in the pudding - and DeMarte under the skillful questioning of Marinez, was able to show HIS unethical behaviour and bogus tests.
What he hasn't counted on is that he must face Martinez again!
lunarscope - I do not believe in any way that Martinez would not call witnesses under pressure from the court and/or judge. He is a professional who will fight his case as he believes that he has the evidence standing right behind him. He would not bow to pressure - IMO.
Yup Observer, the gory photos will tell all and bring it back to the matter that is the heart of this case - should a woman who has been found guilty of Premeditated First Degree Felony Murder with the aggravator of Extreme Cruelty be put to death.
All of the accusations, lies, "fog" AND her diagnosis do not negate the horrific crime she has been convicted of.
The defense is giving the jury a subliminal message that Travis Alexander was such a disgusting vile human being that he deserved death but Jodi Arias was just a mentally ill young girl who wanted love and cuddles and doesn't deserve death.
What's a girl got to do? Fonseca says "Unrequited love causes homicide" so it is not Jodi Arias fault that she just snapped and butchered him and almost took his head off.
This jury will not hear Jodi Arias bogus story of self defense: the body slamming, chasing her into the closet where she gets Travis gun, him tackling her like a linebacker, the gun going off, him threatening to kill her, the fog rolling in so she doesn't remember stabbing him and suffers from dissociative amnesia until she wakes up in the desert with blood on her hands, bloody clothes, a gun and knife and is pretty sure Travis is dead and ditches the clothes, gun and knife.
All they've heard is the defense psychologists saying Travis was an abuser and pedophile and Jodi Arias is the innocent victim, the state psychologist saying that is nonsense, the defense computer experts saying there was child porn on the computer and the defense computer experts saying there was no child porn and Jodi Arias secret testimony in which she says she is so remorseful, only lied because she couldn't admit she was capable of a horrific crime, she was abused by drug taking wooden spoon and belt wielding mean violent parents and Travis Alexander mistreated her.
I think the defense is hoping with all this conflicting information volleying back and forth, the jurors will be in such a state of confusion that they won't know what to believe and throw their hands up in the air and say out of caution, we better just give her life because:
1- What if Jodi Arias is mentally ill and can't help it?
2- What if Travis Alexander was a child molester, a sex maniac and a violent abuser?
3- What if he did beat Deanna Reid and Jodi Arias. After all his best friends said in a text message he abused women.
4- What if he did take advantage of Arias, use her sexually, break her finger and choke her?
5- What if she just couldn't take it anymore and just went into a rage and killed him?
6- What if she is really remorseful and would never do it again?
If I were a juror, I would believe the autopsy pictures and Martinez closing argument over the nonsense the defense is trying to sell but there may be jurors who lack the logic, reason and common sense to see through the defense's smoke and mirrors. I just hope the jurors who can see clearly will be successful in setting straight the confused jurors.
(02-18-2015, 07:26 PM)NERN Wrote: [ -> ]Geffner is furious!
How dare a young upstart criticize his methods after 35 years of experience.
I wouldn't be surprised if almost begged Arias to let him come back and he would say anything they needed him to say.
I said it before and I say it again - the proof is in the pudding - and DeMarte under the skillful questioning of Marinez, was able to show HIS unethical behaviour and bogus tests.
What he hasn't counted on is that he must face Martinez again!
lunarscope - I do not believe in any way that Martinez would not call witnesses under pressure from the court and/or judge. He is a professional who will fight his case as he believes that he has the evidence standing right behind him. He would not bow to pressure - IMO.
Yup Observer, the gory photos will tell all and bring it back to the matter that is the heart of this case - should a woman who has been found guilty of Premeditated First Degree Felony Murder with the aggravator of Extreme Cruelty be put to death.
All of the accusations, lies, "fog" AND her diagnosis do not negate the horrific crime she has been convicted of.
I personally hope Juan knocks some sense into Geffner, but I really don't think that is a possibility. He is really trashing DeMarte. Big time. I wonder if the jurors get to ask questions this go round. If so, I hope they ask something that Juan can really jump on with this goofy Geffner guy. Seriously, can any of you imagine going to him for psychological help? He doesn't come off as intelligent to me. I am thinking I am very prejudiced pre-prejudiced because these guys work for the defense. But I honestly think Geffner seems sort of goofy.
Duluth, I am not worried at all about Geffner bashing Dr. DeMarte. It is common for defense and state witnesses to give differing opinions and say the other is wrong.
Because there is a psychologist on the jury, he will know the testing is the most important thing and he will also make his own observations.
Geffner again repeated that Arias tested high on Anti-Social Personality Disorder because of her history and the killing of Travis Alexander and that coworkers at Purple Plum said she was unemotional and appeared very flat. The psychologist knows that is a symptom of Anti-Social Personality Disorder, which means she is a psychopath.
Geffner is trying to say Arias does not suffer from Borderline Personality Disorder because he does not believe she has fits of violence, that he believed she just said she kicked doors and punched walls to make Alexander feel better. This wasn't entered as evidence but I saw on social media a comment from an executive chef from Ventana who said Arias asked another waitress to trade shifts with her and when the waitress refused went into the restroom and screamed and yelled and kicked a hole in the wall. When they knocked on the door to see if she was okay, she came out and very sweetly said she would pay for the hole in the wall. Her mother and father also said she went into rages and kicked her mother.
He also said no one else but Travis Alexander accused Jodi Arias of slashing his tires but Lisa Andrews said in her interview to Flores that she believed Arias was the one who slashed her and Alexander’s tires and after he spent the night with Lisa because she was scared, she believes Arias is responsible for the the email she got from a John Doe saying: “You are a shameful whore. Your heavenly father must be deeply ashamed of the whoredoms you’ve committed with that insidious man.”
Lisa was not allowed to mention the slashed tires when she testified at the murder trial but even without her corroboration, this jury can figure out Jodi Arias is the only one who would have the motive to slash his tires. When Alexander accuses her of slashing the tires, Arias denies it saying she isn't violent, but the jury knows she is violent because they saw the autopsy pictures with the 29 stab wounds, slit throat and bullet in the head. They would believe that a person who was violent enough to butcher him is certainly violent enough to slash his tires.
.
I agree with these tweets from an attorney who is covering the retrial for a local TV station.
Monica Lindstrom @monicalindstrom
I do really think that the horse has been beaten with this witness #JodiArias and I think the jury has made up their minds.
I wonder how many minutes in a trial day are actually used for testimony in #JodiArias, I would guess no more than 60%
Jury can take all the evidence into deliberations with them, JW just moved 3 items into evid in the 900s, #JodiArias
Psychology is referred to as a "soft science" Opinions will differ though the tests/scales r supposed to bring consistency #JodiArias