Welcome Guest Search | Active Topics | Members | Log In | Register

I am hung up on the Jodi Arias murder trial... Options · View
Guest
Posted: Monday, March 11, 2013 2:05:36 AM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 537,338
Kitanica wrote:


I agree with doll, strongly disagree

In an interview with his friends they all said she was stalking him, not collectively, individual 1 on 1 interviews by them selves, they all have the same opinion, she was listening through the door when they were telling him to leave her, that even after he broke up with her she drove past his house watching him. One claimed she went threw his backdoor while he had a girl after they came in the front and she was watching (though I have no idea how'd they know that unless they were there as well) but I haven't heard anything about him being abusive.. That just doesn't make sense. they were into kinky sex from the start, and they kept at it after breaking up. They talked to her old ex too and he said she was the same way. she stalked him, took photos..

There's just absolutely no basis for him being abusive or taking advantage, if anything she was the abuser. It's a crazy made up defense because she's so guilty that's the only defense they can make. There's no wiggle room for her team to do anything plausible so they have to go for the long shots lol

If she shot him once yeah okay, that's a gray area self defense is possible.. But that goes out the window when he was shot and stabbed on the high end of 20+ times (29?) and cutting his throat. taking photos of him before she did it.. just no. It logistically doesnt work.

Not to mention whoever said dildo with a heartbeat is taking that out of context. His IM said "I think I was little more than a dildo with a heartbeat to you" aka you only used me for sex.
If i was his friend i would want to see her dead and do evrything i could to see that carried out. The people that have testified favorably for the defense side have nothing to gain from doing so.

The only justifiable defense she could have for killing him the way she did is that she was so scared of him, she was gonna make sure he couldn't get up. She hasn't shown that in evidence nor demonstrated that with her behavior.

I've watched enough 'Judge Judy' Lfunny when she has a problem believing somone's testimony, she always states " If you are telling the truth, you don't have to have a good memory" and "If it doesn't make sense,you're not telling the truth" words to live by imo.
Guest
Posted: Monday, March 11, 2013 2:10:45 AM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 537,338
I do not think the prosecution has even come close to proving premeditation however.

Don't forget people, the burden of proof lies with the prosecution, they have to 100% convince each one of those jurors in order to obtain a guilty verdict.

So far Jodi has made over $10,000 selling jailhouse art on ebay . You never know, maybe one of those jurors is gonna get paid.
Kitanica
Posted: Monday, March 11, 2013 2:15:11 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 4/16/2011
Posts: 881
Location: The Sprawl, United States
Yeah I say it's a slam dunk she's guilty.
There's two sides to every story but she took photos from her perspective. That's about as close as you can get to her side. words can lie and authentic photos cant, it's difficult to make a case for her with everything pointing against her. It's more insult to injury than putting him down 158% because she's afraid of him in my opinion.
Dancing_Doll
Posted: Monday, March 11, 2013 8:37:07 AM

Rank: Alpha Blonde

Joined: 2/17/2010
Posts: 6,274
Location: West Coast
lovewhenuswallow wrote:
From what i gather, couples from Prepaid legal accompanied them on some of thier trips. There was testimony that stated he became very angry and verbally abusive because Jody packed too many items into HER backpack before a hiking trip.They testified that they couldn't believe he reacted that way over something so trivial. (Never saw that side of him) I guess Travis and Jody didn't speak to each other for a half hour afterward, then it was forgotten about. If i remember right they might even have mentioned the word 'rage' in thier testimony regarding that particular incident. Also, there was mention that Travis pushed/shoved. her in another incident where he was very angry (verbally abusive) with her. It's been well noted that he did not reciprocate her public displays of affection but, look what went on behind closed doors. dontknow
Back to the 'Dildo with a heartbeat' text, among other insulting texts towards her? I guess prosecution tried to have those omitted from the case.


If any time this guy became angry or frustrated with Jodi is proof of abuse, then then probably 95% of relationships should be considered abusive. So he got momentarily pissed off that she overpacked a bag. Maybe he sent her some angry emails or text messages (possibly after obsessing over him, slashing his tires, hacking his bank account and crawling in through his doggydoor to spy on him). That would make most guys pretty pissed off. Couples argue. I think that's pretty standard stuff. She certainly wasn't an endearing kind of girl with all her clingy behaviour and subsequent stalking.

I have not heart of any pushing incident (from an actual witness) on the stand - even surrounding the stories you've mentioned. Just stuff about them arguing. Not sure where that one is from.

Also - the reciprocation of PDA needs to be put to rest. How has it been well noted, other than coming out of her mouth? There are plenty of photos like this on their holidays:






And also further documentation like this video that shows her laying in his lap with his arm around her in front of a room filled with his friends. They were a formal couple at one point. There is plenty of evidence of them being affectionate in public. I don't know how much more PDA she wanted in front of a social community where you're not supposed to be fucking before marriage.

She wasn't his 'dirty little secret' until the relationship was over and they were just 'hooking up for sex'. It's not like she was being led on (other than in her own head). He told her he was dating other girls. They weren't together. I can easily understand his desire to not be rolling out the PDA with her at that point. That's not the way 'friends with benefits' work.


Dancing_Doll
Posted: Monday, March 11, 2013 8:52:36 AM

Rank: Alpha Blonde

Joined: 2/17/2010
Posts: 6,274
Location: West Coast
lovewhenuswallow wrote:
I do not think the prosecution has even come close to proving premeditation however.



Really? So all of these things *have* to be just a series of random coincidences.

1. Renting a car an hour out of her hometown and insisting it not be a noticeable red car. Why rent a car over an hour away when there are tons of rental spots closer to her house? Oh, must have been an error blip on Expedia, she says. That wasn't intentional - purely a coincidence.

2. A .25 caliber gun goes missing from her grandparents house. One week later, Travis is shot in the head with a .25 caliber gun. There is no evidence of him ever having owned a gun (no ammo, no gun box, no supposed holster, no paperwork). Same caliber too. Heh... coincidence.

3. Filling gas cans so she doesn't have to buy gas in Arizona and be traceable as having gone through that state to see him. Filled before the trip (in Cali) and then refilled in Utah. So she used the gas in Arizona. Heh, must be another coincidence.

4. The third gas can - bought from WalMart. She says she returned it to that same Walmart when she changed her mind that same day. Walmart has no proof or documentation that any gas can was ever returned to them on that day. Even her original receipt doesn't have any black line drawn through the item or stapled to it. Yet she still insists it was returned. Must be coincidence #3.

5. Her license plate being taken off her car on the roadtrip. Her explanation - some mischievous skater kids at Starbucks must have removed it just for kicks. Coincidence #4.

6. Her phone turned off as she enters Arizona and not turned on until the next day when she's in the dessert so that her phone won't ping off any towers and trace her to being in that state when the murder is committed. Jodi says she just ran out of battery power. Ahhh... simply another coincidence, surely.

7. There happened to be a butcher knife in the bathroom on the day when she was taking pics of him, which she then used to slaughter him (oops, I meant 'defend herself'). Jodi says it was from cutting rope earlier. Right. Another coincidence!

Those are just the points I can think of off the top of my head. I will buy 1-2 'coincidences' in any given story by a person (just to be reasonable), but this is like a clusterfuck of coincidences that show premeditation.


Guest
Posted: Monday, March 11, 2013 1:42:07 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 537,338
Dancing_Doll wrote:


If any time this guy became angry or frustrated with Jodi is proof of abuse, then then probably 95% of relationships should be considered abusive. So he got momentarily pissed off that she overpacked a bag. Maybe he sent her some angry emails or text messages (possibly after obsessing over him, slashing his tires, hacking his bank account and crawling in through his doggydoor to spy on him). That would make most guys pretty pissed off. Couples argue. I think that's pretty standard stuff. She certainly wasn't an endearing kind of girl with all her clingy behaviour and subsequent stalking.

I have not heart of any pushing incident (from an actual witness) on the stand - even surrounding the stories you've mentioned. Just stuff about them arguing. Not sure where that one is from.

Also - the reciprocation of PDA needs to be put to rest. How has it been well noted, other than coming out of her mouth? There are plenty of photos like this on their holidays:




And also further documentation like this video that shows her laying in his lap with his arm around her in front of a room filled with his friends. They were a formal couple at one point. There is plenty of evidence of them being affectionate in public. I don't know how much more PDA she wanted in front of a social community where you're not supposed to be fucking before marriage.

She wasn't his 'dirty little secret' until the relationship was over and they were just 'hooking up for sex'. It's not like she was being led on (other than in her own head). He told her he was dating other girls. They weren't together. I can easily understand his desire to not be rolling out the PDA with her at that point. That's not the way 'friends with benefits' work.
OK short and sweet,she doesn't have to demonstrate to you that she was abused in any way. What she has to demonstrate that she felt abused. Secondly, impartial witnesses testified under oath that his behavior towards her in thier opinion was inappropriate (abusive)
Guest
Posted: Monday, March 11, 2013 2:16:37 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 537,338
Dancing_Doll wrote:


Really? So all of these things *have* to be just a series of random coincidences.

1. Renting a car an hour out of her hometown and insisting it not be a noticeable red car. Why rent a car over an hour away when there are tons of rental spots closer to her house? Oh, must have been an error blip on Expedia, she says. That wasn't intentional - purely a coincidence.

2. A .25 caliber gun goes missing from her grandparents house. One week later, Travis is shot in the head with a .25 caliber gun. There is no evidence of him ever having owned a gun (no ammo, no gun box, no supposed holster, no paperwork). Same caliber too. Heh... coincidence.

3. Filling gas cans so she doesn't have to buy gas in Arizona and be traceable as having gone through that state to see him. Filled before the trip (in Cali) and then refilled in Utah. So she used the gas in Arizona. Heh, must be another coincidence.

4. The third gas can - bought from WalMart. She says she returned it to that same Walmart when she changed her mind that same day. Walmart has no proof or documentation that any gas can was ever returned to them on that day. Even her original receipt doesn't have any black line drawn through the item or stapled to it. Yet she still insists it was returned. Must be coincidence #3.

5. Her license plate being taken off her car on the roadtrip. Her explanation - some mischievous skater kids at Starbucks must have removed it just for kicks. Coincidence #4.

6. Her phone turned off as she enters Arizona and not turned on until the next day when she's in the dessert so that her phone won't ping off any towers and trace her to being in that state when the murder is committed. Jodi says she just ran out of battery power. Ahhh... simply another coincidence, surely.

7. There happened to be a butcher knife in the bathroom on the day when she was taking pics of him, which she then used to slaughter him (oops, I meant 'defend herself'). Jodi says it was from cutting rope earlier. Right. Another coincidence!

Those are just the points I can think of off the top of my head. I will buy 1-2 'coincidences' in any given story by a person (just to be reasonable), but this is like a clusterfuck of coincidences that show premeditation.



1) I heard the service at that place was excellent. She said 'red' is to loud. Red is actually a very popular color for cars. Maybe she doesn't like red.

2) A gun, $30, a stereo, and dvd player? were stolen from Grandma's house. The investigating officer found it odd/unusual that a substantial pile of quarters and the other guns were not taken. the burglar only thought only one gun missing would be less noticeable? Didn't take the quarters because change makes noise?dontknow Fact is that she was never charged with anything pertaining to the burglary.

3) She is traveling long distances and doesn't want to risk running out of gas in the middle of nowhere.

4) According to 'experts' this is the only piece of evidence the prosecution has in proving premeditation. You could very easily argue human error on walmarts part. Someone didn't do thier job. Someone's life hinges soley on walmart? Strongly disagree.

5)She tampered with her own plates so she could get pulled over? i don't get the whole license plates deal and mention of needing a screwdriver, i've taken my plates off using a quarter.

6) yep! fuckin phone died, someone gave her that piece of shit.

7) Not familiar with the knife testimony, no comment


All these coincidences are widespread it's not like they happened in an isolated area. Also, there is video of him shooting an assault rifle in the desert so, they did indeed prove that he at least had an interest in guns.

LOL after all those points that you made i only have 2 significant ones.

1) Nobody goes to the police department and volunteers thier finger prints and DNA if they plot/plan on doing somthing like this.
2) She never tried to evade the police, They found here where she lived, grandma's house.

I also want to point out that this is not a Drew Peterson 'hearsay' case.

Dancing_Doll
Posted: Monday, March 11, 2013 2:26:05 PM

Rank: Alpha Blonde

Joined: 2/17/2010
Posts: 6,274
Location: West Coast
lovewhenuswallow wrote:
OK short and sweet,she doesn't have to demonstrate to you that she was abused in any way. What she has to demonstrate that she felt abused. Secondly, impartial witnesses testified under oath that his behavior towards her in thier opinion was inappropriate (abusive)


An "impartial witness" is a person that doesn't know or have a pre-existing opinion of either party and therefore has no bias (in this case Jodi or Travis) - eg. a bystander that happened to see something going on or the guy who rented her the car. You're saying that there were multiple "impartial witnesses" that took the stand and stated they saw abusive behaviour taking place? What are their names. I have not heard any such testimony from 'impartial witnesses'. If you're talking about the friend (ie. character witness) who said Travis raised his voice about the backpack argument, then ok - it suggests that this couple had verbal arguments. I don't call that abuse. You and Jodi may though. :)





Dancing_Doll
Posted: Monday, March 11, 2013 2:42:33 PM

Rank: Alpha Blonde

Joined: 2/17/2010
Posts: 6,274
Location: West Coast
lovewhenuswallow wrote:



1) I heard the service at that place was excellent. She said 'red' is to loud. Red is actually a very popular color for cars. Maybe she doesn't like red.

2) A gun, $30, a stereo, and dvd player? were stolen from Grandma's house. The investigating officer found it odd/unusual that a substantial pile of quarters and the other guns were not taken. the burglar only thought only one gun missing would be less noticeable? Didn't take the quarters because change makes noise?dontknow Fact is that she was never charged with anything pertaining to the burglary.

3) She is traveling long distances and doesn't want to risk running out of gas in the middle of nowhere.

4) According to 'experts' this is the only piece of evidence the prosecution has in proving premeditation. You could very easily argue human error on walmarts part. Someone didn't do thier job. Someone's life hinges soley on walmart? Strongly disagree.

5)She tampered with her own plates so she could get pulled over? i don't get the whole license plates deal and mention of needing a screwdriver, i've taken my plates off using a quarter.

6) yep! fuckin phone died, someone gave her that piece of shit.

7) Not familiar with the knife testimony, no comment


All these coincidences are widespread it's not like they happened in an isolated area. Also, there is video of him shooting an assault rifle in the desert so, they did indeed prove that he at least had an interest in guns.

LOL after all those points that you made i only have 2 significant ones.

1) Nobody goes to the police department and volunteers thier finger prints and DNA if they plot/plan on doing somthing like this.
2) She never tried to evade the police, They found here where she lived, grandma's house.

I also want to point out that this is not a Drew Peterson 'hearsay' case.



All the 'coincidences' happened within a one week period, with everything except the gun going missing occurring during the 24 hr period leading up to his death. That's not very 'scattered'.

Re your two points:

1) Nobody goes to the police department and volunteers thier finger prints and DNA if they plot/plan on doing somthing like this.
Are you talking about this being related to the robbery at the grandparents? I don't see how it factors in - she would already assume her prints and DNA would be all over Travis' place because she was sexually involved with him so that's a non-factor as she would have seen it.

2) She never tried to evade the police, They found here where she lived, grandma's house.
Well - they had to move in and arrest her because they found her on route - moving out of the Grandparent's house on the day of her arrest. They found in her rental car - many boxes of her belongings, two knives and a 9mm handgun she'd purchased after she killed Travis hidden inside the car. But more priceless than this - she had her multiple fake stories organized to tell them. lol

I'm sure there will be at least one or two people like you on her jury if the defense has picked em well.

I don't expect her to get the death penalty. Personally I wouldn't vote for that myself - I don't really believe in it except for extreme cases like child murderers or serial killers. I do believe it was first degree though.




Guest
Posted: Monday, March 11, 2013 3:40:37 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 537,338
Dancing_Doll wrote:


All the 'coincidences' happened within a one week period, with everything except the gun going missing occurring during the 24 hr period leading up to his death. That's not very 'scattered'.

Re your two points:

1) Nobody goes to the police department and volunteers thier finger prints and DNA if they plot/plan on doing somthing like this.
Are you talking about this being related to the robbery at the grandparents? I don't see how it factors in - she would already assume her prints and DNA would be all over Travis' place because she was sexually involved with him so that's a non-factor as she would have seen it.2) She never tried to evade the police, They found here where she lived, grandma's house.
Well - they had to move in and arrest her because they found her on route - moving out of the Grandparent's house on the day of her arrest.
Quote:
They found in her rental car - many boxes of her belongings, two knives and a 9mm handgun she'd purchased after she killed Travis hidden inside the car. But more priceless than this - she had her multiple fake stories organized to tell them. lol
I'm sure there will be at least one or two peopl like you eon her jury if the defense has picked em well.

I don't expect her to get the death penalty. Personally I wouldn't vote for that myself - I don't really believe in it except for extreme cases like child murderers or serial killers. I do believe it was first degree though.

Trust me, if you walk were to walk into a police station and offer up your prints and DNA? they would run that shit on every unsolved case that they have on file. You're telling me she thought that she was gonna fool them? If anything she made it easy for them.

Where did you get the info on the 9mm gun, knives, and all that. All i heard was she answerd the door, and asked if she could get her purse so she could put her makeup on.

What do you mean? 'people like me'



Dancing_Doll
Posted: Monday, March 11, 2013 4:03:02 PM

Rank: Alpha Blonde

Joined: 2/17/2010
Posts: 6,274
Location: West Coast
lovewhenuswallow wrote:
Trust me, if you walk were to walk into a police station and offer up your prints and DNA? they would run that shit on every unsolved case that they have on file. You're telling me she thought that she was gonna fool them? If anything she made it easy for them.

Where did you get the info on the 9mm gun, knives, and all that. All i heard was she answerd the door, and asked if she could get her purse so she could put her makeup on.

What do you mean? 'people like me'


Well, she said she felt compelled to call the police and talk to them because she had heard her name being mentioned to them by many people as a possible suspect (I think her name was even mentioned on the 911 tape when they found his body as someone to look into). So she wanted to throw them off by appearing open and honest. Even when they challenged her on her DNA, she said "oh that's because I was always at his place" - so she obviously thought the DNA thing wasn't an issue. She spent over 2 years lying to the police with her stories, even in the face of obvious evidence against her - not being there at all, then being there and watching other people kill him and then being there and 'having to do it' to save her life. So no, I don't think her intention was to make it 'easy for them' or be cooperative. LOL

Re the 9mm you can google her arrest details in various articles but here's one Link I found about the gun she bought. "At the time of her arrest (7-15-08), Jodi was moving out with her rental car loaded with boxes, two knives and a 9mm handgun hidden inside."


Guest
Posted: Monday, March 11, 2013 4:11:03 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 537,338
Dancing_Doll wrote:


An "impartial witness" is a person that doesn't know or have a pre-existing opinion of either party and therefore has no bias (in this case Jodi or Travis) - eg. a bystander that happened to see something going on or the guy who rented her the car. You're saying that there were multiple "impartial witnesses" that took the stand and stated they saw abusive behaviour taking place? What are their names. I have not heard any such testimony from 'impartial witnesses'. If you're talking about the friend (ie. character witness) who said Travis raised his voice about the backpack argument, then ok - it suggests that this couple had verbal arguments. I don't call that abuse. You and Jodi may though. :)
yes, and abuse can be physical and or psychological. I've been with women that can't handle even being yelled at due to past abusive relationships. This one woman would cover hear ears and curl into a fetal position when i raised my voice to her. Later she would tell me " I've been thru this shit before and i'm not going thru it again" I brought my points to an older female co worker at the time , seeking her advice. She pointed out to me that even though we may be a couple, the fact is that i don't own this woman, she's not my property, i don't have the right to treat her anyway i want. Get the picture?

But, i wouldn't expect uneducated, pipefitters, carpenter's, roofers, other tradesman, and the type of women that would date these types to understand this.

Normal people discuss concerns,issues in a calm rational manner. Not yelling and screaming in each other's faces.

There's more goin on with this case than what's been presented thru the media. You probably think the prosecution is doing this more for Travis Alexander, MY guess is that his priorities are more focused on his own agenda.





Guest
Posted: Monday, March 11, 2013 4:27:58 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 537,338
Dancing_Doll wrote:


Well, she said she felt compelled to call the police and talk to them because she had heard her name being mentioned to them by many people as a possible suspect (I think her name was even mentioned on the 911 tape when they found his body as someone to look into). So she wanted to throw them off by appearing open and honest. Even when they challenged her on her DNA, she said "oh that's because I was always at his place" - so she obviously thought the DNA thing wasn't an issue. She spent over 2 years lying to the police with her stories, even in the face of obvious evidence against her - not being there at all, then being there and watching other people kill him and then being there and 'having to do it' to save her life. So no, I don't think her intention was to make it 'easy for them' or be cooperative. LOL

Re the 9mm you can google her arrest details in various articles but here's one Link I found about the gun she bought. "At the time of her arrest (7-15-08), Jodi was moving out with her rental car loaded with boxes, two knives and a 9mm handgun hidden inside."
Any of these crime related shows always point out it's never a good idea to talk to police without an attorney present. Time and time again suspects mouths are thier own undoing.

I'm saying that criminals who plan thier crimes aren't going to make it easy for the police and put themselves in a position that would benefit police. No way you're keeping lines of communication open with the law and freely giving up DNA and prints. Telling them to get a court order would not make her look any different. Evryone is a suspect in the eyes of the police. They will do whatever they can to get a a confession, and not necessarily from the right person.
Buz
Posted: Monday, March 11, 2013 4:34:12 PM

Rank: The Linebacker

Joined: 3/2/2011
Posts: 5,812
Location: Atlanta, United States
I don't believe for one second that Jodi Arias was abused. She made that up out of desperation. She is a vindictive premeditated murderer. I almost always oppose the death penalty but in her case I would vote for it if I were on the jury.

Guest
Posted: Monday, March 11, 2013 5:19:28 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 537,338
Buz wrote:
I don't believe for one second that Jodi Arias was abused. She made that up out of desperation. She is a vindictive premeditated murderer. I almost always oppose the death penalty but in her case I would vote for it if I were on the jury.
OK, well let's see what the mental health professionals that are due up after she's off the stand say.
Buz
Posted: Monday, March 11, 2013 5:24:51 PM

Rank: The Linebacker

Joined: 3/2/2011
Posts: 5,812
Location: Atlanta, United States
I am sure that the defense and the prosecutor will each have their own professional 'testify to whatever for whoever is paying' quack psych expert counter each other's opinion. Always a wash for me.

Dancing_Doll
Posted: Monday, March 11, 2013 5:25:19 PM

Rank: Alpha Blonde

Joined: 2/17/2010
Posts: 6,274
Location: West Coast
lovewhenuswallow wrote:
yes, and abuse can be physical and or psychological. I've been with women that can't handle even being yelled at due to past abusive relationships. This one woman would cover hear ears and curl into a fetal position when i raised my voice to her. Later she would tell me " I've been thru this shit before and i'm not going thru it again" I brought my points to an older female co worker at the time , seeking her advice. She pointed out to me that even though we may be a couple, the fact is that i don't own this woman, she's not my property, i don't have the right to treat her anyway i want. Get the picture?

But, i wouldn't expect uneducated, pipefitters, carpenter's, roofers, other tradesman, and the type of women that would date these types to understand this.



Seeing two people have a 15 minute argument over a backpack being too heavy isn't proof of abuse, as a psychological condition. It's proof of an argument. You cannot extrapolate that incident (especially as it was described) to imply she was being psychologically abused by the guy. You need to look at the evidence as it's presented.

By applying the same logic, if I was standing there that day and saw you yell at that woman, by virtue of witnessing that event, it's reasonable for me to extrapolate that you are an abusive man, right? I could even testify to this moment in court if it ever came up and it would look pretty damn bad for you. Although really, if you needed to have it explained to you by an outside party that yelling at a woman while she curls into the fetal position and covers her ears is a bad thing, you're hardly the one to throw stones at 'carpenters' and 'pipefitters'... I'm glad you got help for your problems though.







Guest
Posted: Monday, March 11, 2013 5:53:46 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 537,338
Dancing_Doll wrote:


Seeing two people have a 15 minute argument over a backpack being too heavy isn't proof of abuse, as a psychological condition. It's proof of an argument. You cannot extrapolate that incident (especially as it was described) to imply she was being psychologically abused by the guy. You need to look at the evidence as it's presented.

By applying the same logic, if I was standing there that day and saw you yell at that woman, by virtue of witnessing that event, it's reasonable for me to extrapolate that you are an abusive man, right? I could even testify to this moment in court if it ever came up and it would look pretty damn bad for you. Although really, if you needed to have it explained to you by an outside party that yelling at a woman while she curls into the fetal position and covers her ears is a bad thing, you're hardly the one to throw stones at 'carpenters' and 'pipefitters'... I'm glad you got help for your problems though.




From what i understand she never argued back, Doll. You would be more accurate to say 'i was once capable of being an abusive person' ( verbally). That was from watching my Dad, being a blue collar grunt, reacting instead of thinking. I'm the Man you're the woman i'm the boss, what i say goes. Actually, it was a one time incident with her, she made her point and i accepted it. Some girls out there seem to not have a problem witgh being yelled at, ridiculed, and slapped around by thier husbands , boyfriends.

I wouldn't say i got help for my problems, i would say that i grew and devloped into a better person through the concept of thought and understanding. Give it a try and see how it goes for yourself if you like.

Ps. that article that you refered me to? with the boxes and 9mm? also said she's a witch and reminds the journalist of Regan McNeil.



evil5 Demons made her do it.
Dancing_Doll
Posted: Monday, March 11, 2013 6:13:30 PM

Rank: Alpha Blonde

Joined: 2/17/2010
Posts: 6,274
Location: West Coast
lovewhenuswallow wrote:
From what i understand she never argued back, Doll. You would be more accurate to say 'i was once capable of being an abusive person' ( verbally). That was from watching my Dad, being a blue collar grunt, reacting instead of thinking. I'm the Man you're the woman i'm the boss, what i say goes. Actually, it was a one time incident with her, she made her point and i accepted it. Some girls out there seem to not have a problem witgh being yelled at, ridiculed, and slapped around by thier husbands , boyfriends.

I wouldn't say i got help for my problems, i would say that i grew and devloped into a better person through the concept of thought and understanding. Give it a try and see how it goes for yourself if you like.

Ps. that article that you refered me to? with the boxes and 9mm? also said she's a witch and reminds the journalist of Regan McNeil.


evil5 Demons made her do it.


I didn't really read the article. Just wanted to find a fact point about the gun to show you because you asked. It was randomly selected.

And... I've done some charity work in the realm of violence against women, child abuse and battered women. I'd be the first person to back her if there was credibility to her claims. I've also read similar sentiments coming from experts in the field of battered women and battered women's syndrome (as it's used as legal defense). Show me the evidence. Until then, coming from a proven pathological liar like her - sorry, cry me a river.


Guest
Posted: Monday, March 11, 2013 7:36:53 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 537,338
Dancing_Doll wrote:


I didn't really read the article. Just wanted to find a fact point about the gun to show you because you asked. It was randomly selected.

And... I've done charity work in the realm of violence against women, child abuse and battered women. I'd be the first person to back her if there was credibility to her claims. I've also read similar sentiments coming from experts in the field of battered women and battered women's syndrome (as it's used as legal defense). Show me the evidence. Until then, coming from a proven pathological liar like her - sorry, cry me a river.
When i first started watching this trial i felt the same as everyone else, she's a murdering bitch! Hang her now!. Today, after everything i've reviewed i just think this shit could have been avoided had the correct course of action/decisions been taken/made. As far as intent to kill? i think the evidence they have would be a lot more definitive than what it is, as far as proving premed. I would not find her guilty of premeditated murder, sorry.

Out of curiousity, how would you feel if this was your older sister on trial?
Guest
Posted: Monday, March 11, 2013 7:49:14 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 537,338
Buz wrote:
I am sure that the defense and the prosecutor will each have their own professional 'testify to whatever for whoever is paying' quack psych expert counter each other's opinion. Always a wash for me.
Still have to go thru the motions though Buz.Read it I'm interested in how they describe her sociopathic mindset and tendencies, for future reference. Think
Dancing_Doll
Posted: Monday, March 11, 2013 9:28:18 PM

Rank: Alpha Blonde

Joined: 2/17/2010
Posts: 6,274
Location: West Coast
lovewhenuswallow wrote:
When i first started watching this trial i felt the same as everyone else, she's a murdering bitch! Hang her now!. Today, after everything i've reviewed i just think this shit could have been avoided had the correct course of action/decisions been taken/made. As far as intent to kill? i think the evidence they have would be a lot more definitive than what it is, as far as proving premed. I would not find her guilty of premeditated murder, sorry.

Out of curiousity, how would you feel if this was your older sister on trial?


Re premeditation. It's on record that her defense team tried to plea bargain her down to second-degree murder to avoid trial and Martinez rejected the offer. Plea bargains mean that you're willing to cop to a lesser offense than what you actually did and what you think can reasonably be proven in court. Whether they can prove first degree with the evidence they're allowed to bring into trial is another matter, but let's be real - if her story was legit on any level, you're not going to try to plea bargain up to a worse charge than what you know you're actually guilty of.

If she was my sister, I would quietly support her in her process through the judicial system because she was my blood. That wouldn't change regardless of premeditation or not.

I also don't have a witch hunt mentality with her, I knew nothing of the case until recently and didn't really have a vested interest in either side. To me, looking at the facts, I believe it's first degree (but not death penalty). I started paying attention to the case because it's rare to see a defendant take the stand in a trial like this so that's when I picked it up on youtube when I get a bit of time. I find the art of cross examination fascinating (although not a huge fan of this prosecutor's style). As well, my 'non-erotic writing' deals with themes of female sociopathy and crime so the psychological dynamic of this case is interesting to me for other reasons. But on a human level, it's a tragic story for all parties involved.


Kitanica
Posted: Tuesday, March 12, 2013 3:33:35 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 4/16/2011
Posts: 881
Location: The Sprawl, United States
Stealing the gun along with other stuff is the perfect cover. it makes it look like a run of the mill smash and grab, take some little stuff get out, pawn it, rinse repeat. She could have taken the 30$ and stereo to throw it off her own trail.

Not to mention if they were hiking and she was overpacked. he was right to get mad cause we all know how that trip ends. She just "had" to pack so much and in a few hours when she gets tired guess who's going to be carrying it? The boyfriend if he's not an asshole. I'd be mad too. Except I'd throw the crap she didn't need in the car. I ain't carrying extra stuff through the grand canyon. Not happening. So it's not abuse— it's common sense and foresight. She didn't listen and overpacked and in a few hours it's gonna be on his back not hers. Same with high heels. after a few hours they don't feel that comfortable, at the end of the night they're not wearing them. So either they carry them or the guy if he's a gentleman. I'd rather someone just where comfortable shoes and then no one has to carry them.

Both of those points defending her and calling her abused are both completely debunked by logic and a little thought. If a couple argues for an hour before a trip instead of thirty minutes is that man or woman twice as abusive as Alexander? That's hardly a defendable position in a court

And as far as premeditated murder goes she contacted investigators first and lied to them right off the bat in the first few calls. She claimed "oh I heard rumors and that there was a lot of blood" when she talked to them again. That's all I needed to hear. Preemptive deception = premeditation.
Sloppy premeditation at best. She was more likely to get off if she claimed she was framed from the beginning. no person in their right mind would leave that much evidence or carry out such a flaw-ridden murder scheme. Better odds with that then self defense/abuse
Guest
Posted: Tuesday, March 12, 2013 2:02:35 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 537,338
BREAKING NEWS: Travis Alexander has a criminal record stemming from theft and battery conviction back in 2002. Reporters for HLN, a sister station of CNN network have commented " So he pushed a guy that was trying to stop him a little " It's also been said that it's a case of 'identity theft', it wasn't travis it was his brother. However, the conviction till this date remains in travis Alexander's name. HLN has downplayed this into no big deal. Maricopa county has stated that they have no interest in this current case, because he's a victim not a defendant.

Shit gets better and better. Mug shots should clear this up, don't you think?


Kitanica
Posted: Friday, March 15, 2013 8:16:12 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 4/16/2011
Posts: 881
Location: The Sprawl, United States
What does that have to do at all with Jodi arias murdering him? The real update would be shes leaving the stands soon for experts, CNN is currently airing a short special on it starting from the beginning. Jodis lied twice already.

•First story: I was not at his house. Could those photos be older? Cop says no, she says oh..

•Second story: Okay I lied, so I was there, but I'm a witness, two men came in and killed him and threatened to kill me but I escaped. Jury WILL NOT convict me because I'm innocent.

•Third story shes gone to trial with: Okay so I lied.. again.. I kIlled him but it was a life or death situation. Self defense. But I don't actually remember what happened.

so yeah... there's no real reason to be hung up that I can see.
Users browsing this topic
Guest 


Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Main Forum RSS : RSS

Powered by Yet Another Forum.net version 1.9.1.6 (NET v4.0) - 11/14/2007
Copyright © 2003-2006 Yet Another Forum.net. All rights reserved.