Assassinating her character!!
What B.S.
So Nurmi is saying that the defense (Arias) can say everything vile they can come up with about Travis, which they have done and continue to do BUT....because this is a mitigation case, the State cannot rebut these accusations by showing the true behaviour of the defendant and showing that she was the instigator!
In fact, Martinez was only bringing in hearsay - which is allowed - just as the defense (Arias) did.
Absolute B.S.!!!
They want to recall Geffner and F. (cannot remember her name and that says a lot, doesn't it?) to rebut DeMarte. Should be interesting because DeMarte has the facts to back her up whereas Geffner for example, only has the bogus test results of Samuels and his own tests where he led Arias to give the answers he (they) wanted.
It is too bad that the State's witness regarding computers will drag this case on for a while longer. Seems to me that it has been proven definitively that there was no porn on any computer that was Travis' but rather put there by a virus and in the case of the Bishop's computer, it was pop ups put on by someone else. I guess it is better to be safe than sorry in the end.
As far as I am concerned, the jury will see that Arias' testimony and timid demeanor was an act given the testimonies that have been entered by the State in their rebuttal. Too many people have seen the true and real side of Arias and now the jury has heard it. Put that together with the horrendous slaughter of Travis committed by Arias AND why the jury is even there and they will not buy what Arias is dishing out - in her testimony and her coming allocution. They will see that it is true evidence of her manipulation to get what she feels she deserves. Jurors are not stupid people.
The jury will also couple this fake act with the fact that Arias has been proven to be very intelligent and is able to come up with a way that she thinks she can fool them.
But again, the issue at hand is .......she used her intelligence to come up with a plan, take her time with it, then execute this plan by slaughtering Travis. However, her intelligence didn't come through for her and she has been convicted of his murder and now they must decide if it warrants the death penalty for her.
What B.S.
So Nurmi is saying that the defense (Arias) can say everything vile they can come up with about Travis, which they have done and continue to do BUT....because this is a mitigation case, the State cannot rebut these accusations by showing the true behaviour of the defendant and showing that she was the instigator!
In fact, Martinez was only bringing in hearsay - which is allowed - just as the defense (Arias) did.
Absolute B.S.!!!
They want to recall Geffner and F. (cannot remember her name and that says a lot, doesn't it?) to rebut DeMarte. Should be interesting because DeMarte has the facts to back her up whereas Geffner for example, only has the bogus test results of Samuels and his own tests where he led Arias to give the answers he (they) wanted.
It is too bad that the State's witness regarding computers will drag this case on for a while longer. Seems to me that it has been proven definitively that there was no porn on any computer that was Travis' but rather put there by a virus and in the case of the Bishop's computer, it was pop ups put on by someone else. I guess it is better to be safe than sorry in the end.
As far as I am concerned, the jury will see that Arias' testimony and timid demeanor was an act given the testimonies that have been entered by the State in their rebuttal. Too many people have seen the true and real side of Arias and now the jury has heard it. Put that together with the horrendous slaughter of Travis committed by Arias AND why the jury is even there and they will not buy what Arias is dishing out - in her testimony and her coming allocution. They will see that it is true evidence of her manipulation to get what she feels she deserves. Jurors are not stupid people.
The jury will also couple this fake act with the fact that Arias has been proven to be very intelligent and is able to come up with a way that she thinks she can fool them.
But again, the issue at hand is .......she used her intelligence to come up with a plan, take her time with it, then execute this plan by slaughtering Travis. However, her intelligence didn't come through for her and she has been convicted of his murder and now they must decide if it warrants the death penalty for her.