Jodi Arias Trial Part 3, STILL in redirect of Jodi, Mar 5

[klj27]

I thought they said the time article was from January 2013. If that is the case, how can the defense argue that the expert uses these articles to do his research. That was less than two months ago.

 

[usnuzuloose]

It is their way of bringing things in and trying to get away with it. A few of recall this situation in the CA trial. Now poor Juan needs to try and interview this guy.

 

[Thumper_Man]

I think the main purpose for this witness is to prove that JA has PTSD and that's why she don't remember any of the details of the murder. They may also try and say since she was fearing for her life, that's why she did what she did. Her brain function caused her to act the way she did when TA started to attack her. It's a ploy to get the jury to side with her and not the defense.

I agree though that it should not be allowed. Especially since it provides scientific evidence. The defense would need time to analyze these findings with their expert witness.

 

[MaryAnnDVC]

I'm not surprised the DT is claiming PTSD. I think it's been discussed on InSession and HLN shows.

As far as this Dr...it sounds like he's going to present the criteria for types of murders, but isn't going to come out and testify that Jodi fits one particular type. However, it sounds to me that the way he presents the types, particularly the type that they're claiming Jodi fits, it's going to be obvious where he's pointing his opinion. I mean, why else testify about any of these types of murders if none of them are related to Jodi? So whether he comes out and says JODI fits a particular type of murderer, or he talks about that type of murderer and it fits the way the DT has presented their case, he's still stating his opinion about Jodi.

No?

 

[MaryAnnDVC]

I think the main purpose for this witness is to prove that JA has PTSD and that's why she don't remember any of the details of the murder. They may also try and say since she was fearing for her life, that's why she did what she did. Her brain function caused her to act the way she did when TA started to attack her. It's a ploy to get the jury to side with her and not the defense.

I agree though that it should not be allowed. Especially since it provides scientific evidence. The defense would need time to analyze these findings with their expert witness.

 

[PebblesMK]

I just went and put the clean dishes away. I have so much to do, but I don't want to do any of it.

Yeah, I put the dirty dishes in the dishwasher and cleaned the bathroom. Then I decided it was too much work and sat back down.

Did you see the "re-enactment" of the events that happened in 62 seconds that Mike did on HLN? If you run through and say things, of course it doesn't take too long, but doing those things actually takes time. Gah, dumb.

 

[BearcatsFan]

Yeah, I put the dirty dishes in the dishwasher and cleaned the bathroom. Then I decided it was too much work and sat back down.

Did you see the "re-enactment" of the events that happened in 62 seconds that Mike did on HLN? If you run through and say things, of course it doesn't take too long, but doing those things actually takes time. Gah, dumb.

No. I may have to see if I can find that on youtube while I'm avoiding vacuuming.

 

[PebblesMK]

I'm not surprised the DT is claiming PTSD. I think it's been discussed on InSession and HLN shows.

As far as this Dr...it sounds like he's going to present the criteria for types of murders, but isn't going to come out and testify that Jodi fits one particular type. However, it sounds to me that the way he presents the types, particularly the type that they're claiming Jodi fits, it's going to be obvious where he's pointing his opinion. I mean, why else testify about any of these types of murders if none of them are related to Jodi? So whether he comes out and says JODI fits a particular type of murderer, or he talks about that type of murderer and it fits the way the DT has presented their case, he's still stating his opinion about Jodi.

No?

Those who have suffered or do suffer from PTSD will be able to see that she does NOT suffer from this. The whole problem with anything that the defense brings up is that it's not applicable the whole time. So she doesn't remember the murder (which is a defense mechanism our brain uses when something is traumatic) but then she did so many things to cover up what she did. And I don't buy her claim "I just knew I did something bad but I didn't even know I shot him! ::gasp::", she remembers it all. She has challenged JM on his timeline saying "It didn't happen in that order", when asked how she knows she says "Oh, I don't remember". C'mon jury, just see through everything.

 

[usnuzuloose]

I'm not surprised the DT is claiming PTSD. I think it's been discussed on InSession and HLN shows.

As far as this Dr...it sounds like he's going to present the criteria for types of murders, but isn't going to come out and testify that Jodi fits one particular type. However, it sounds to me that the way he presents the types, particularly the type that they're claiming Jodi fits, it's going to be obvious where he's pointing his opinion. I mean, why else testify about any of these types of murders if none of them are related to Jodi? So whether he comes out and says JODI fits a particular type of murderer, or he talks about that type of murderer and it fits the way the DT has presented their case, he's still stating his opinion about Jodi.

No?

The defense said she won't ask, she knows better. But I believe he will bring that into play as part of his opinion.

 

[Thumper_Man]

Can we trust this psychologist and the articles he's going to use?

http://ideas.time.com/2012/07/17/can-we-trust-psychological-research/

 

[usnuzuloose]

Those who have suffered or do suffer from PTSD will be able to see that she does NOT suffer from this. The whole problem with anything that the defense brings up is that it's not applicable the whole time. So she doesn't remember the murder (which is a defense mechanism our brain uses when something is traumatic) but then she did so many things to cover up what she did. And I don't buy her claim "I just knew I did something bad but I didn't even know I shot him! ::gasp::", she remembers it all. She has challenged JM on his timeline saying "It didn't happen in that order", when asked how she knows she says "Oh, I don't remember". C'mon jury, just see through everything.

Lets see , if you can't remember , why are we confessing anything? How do you remember a gun? Then you a holster, a box. She keeps referring to things as this was my hope. A complete fog , but heard the knife drop on the floor. Oh in a fog but I took pictures of a crime I committed. Sorry her only memory loss is a knife, not the whole crime.

 

[Thumper_Man]

Forgot to mention, I wish I could send that article to JM.

 

[MaryAnnDVC]

Yeah, I put the dirty dishes in the dishwasher and cleaned the bathroom. Then I decided it was too much work and sat back down.

Did you see the "re-enactment" of the events that happened in 62 seconds that Mike did on HLN? If you run through and say things, of course it doesn't take too long, but doing those things actually takes time. Gah, dumb.

I saw that. But honestly, I have to wonder how it all happened the state's way. I do believe that her explanation would take longer, because Travis is bodyslamming her, chasing her, fighting back, she has to get the gun, find the knife, etc. And I believe the real way things happened is that she had the gun and the knife, if not actually in her hands the whole time, then handy. Still seems like it all happened so fast!

Those who have suffered or do suffer from PTSD will be able to see that she does NOT suffer from this. The whole problem with anything that the defense brings up is that it's not applicable the whole time. So she doesn't remember the murder (which is a defense mechanism our brain uses when something is traumatic) but then she did so many things to cover up what she did. And I don't buy her claim "I just knew I did something bad but I didn't even know I shot him! ::gasp::", she remembers it all. She has challenged JM on his timeline saying "It didn't happen in that order", when asked how she knows she says "Oh, I don't remember". C'mon jury, just see through everything.

I don't know too much about PSTD...if it means you don't remember and event from beginning to end, or just parts of it. Or if he can do what you have to do during the event, and then when it's all over your mind blocks it out (which is what she's basically claiming). I think those things CAN happen in certain circumstances. I don't think it's what's happening here tho.

Here's info about Dr Richard Samuels, this next expert:
http://svpexpertwitness.com/evaluations.asp

Richard M. Samuels, Ph.D., FACCS, ABPP is a practicing Clinical and Forensic Psychologist with over thirty years of experience. With an extensive background in evaluation, analysis, report writing and testimony, Dr. Samuels specializes in Sexually Violent Perpetrator evaluations, Psychosexual Risk Assessments, Sexual Harassment and Gender Discrimination Matters for Defendants and Emotional Trauma from Medical Malpractice for Defendants and Plaintiffs.​

Working closely with public defenders and private attorneys, he will determine the facts of the case and any special circumstances and mitigating factors involving the trial process. An extensive evaluation of the respondent, in depth case analysis and research contributes to a succinct report which often will result in a more favorable outcome for your client. His clear and strong testimony in support of the report can help to educate juries and judges.​

When you need a verified expert in the field of Sexually Violent Perpetrator commitment hearings, Psychosexual Risk Assessments for sentencing, Sexual Harassment and Gender Discrimination Matters for Defendants and Emotional Trauama from Medical Malpractice for Defendants and Plaintiffs, Dr. Richard Samuels has the experience, education and prestige to help you support your vital arguments.​

 

[usnuzuloose]

Can we trust this psychologist and the articles he's going to use?

http://ideas.time.com/2012/07/17/can-we-trust-psychological-research/

That is the problem, these articles are not his and relying on some one else's research? He can not verify any thing in the articles. It will be interesting to hear what Juan says when they return. If I were on a jury and hear something that was published and not by that person, I would say no way ain't buying it.

 

[usnuzuloose]

I saw that. But honestly, I have to wonder how it all happened the state's way. I do believe that her explanation would take longer, because Travis is bodyslamming her, chasing her, fighting back, she has to get the gun, find the knife, etc. And I believe the real way things happened is that she had the gun and the knife, if not actually in her hands the whole time, then handy. Still seems like it all happened so fast!I don't know too much about PSTD...if it means you don't remember and event from beginning to end, or just parts of it. Or if he can do what you have to do during the event, and then when it's all over your mind blocks it out (which is what she's basically claiming). I think those things CAN happen in certain circumstances. I don't think it's what's happening here tho.

Here's info about Dr Richard Samuels, this next expert:
http://svpexpertwitness.com/evaluations.asp

Richard M. Samuels, Ph.D., FACCS, ABPP is a practicing Clinical and Forensic Psychologist with over thirty years of experience. With an extensive background in evaluation, analysis, report writing and testimony, Dr. Samuels specializes in Sexually Violent Perpetrator evaluations, Psychosexual Risk Assessments, Sexual Harassment and Gender Discrimination Matters for Defendants and Emotional Trauma from Medical Malpractice for Defendants and Plaintiffs.​

Working closely with public defenders and private attorneys, he will determine the facts of the case and any special circumstances and mitigating factors involving the trial process. An extensive evaluation of the respondent, in depth case analysis and research contributes to a succinct report which often will result in a more favorable outcome for your client. His clear and strong testimony in support of the report can help to educate juries and judges.​

When you need a verified expert in the field of Sexually Violent Perpetrator commitment hearings, Psychosexual Risk Assessments for sentencing, Sexual Harassment and Gender Discrimination Matters for Defendants and Emotional Trauama from Medical Malpractice for Defendants and Plaintiffs, Dr. Richard Samuels has the experience, education and prestige to help you support your vital arguments.​

Sexually violent perpetrators? Jodi is only claiming self defense in battery, she is not claiming any thing for any thing sexual. She kept testifying she enjoyed the sex.

 

[MaryAnnDVC]

The problem with Jodi's "memory loss", as JM has said, is that she remembers things that help her case, and forgets things that might hurt it. If it was truly about the trauma of it all, she'd remember or forget things related to the murder, not the trial.

Does JM have experts to debunk the DT's experts? The DT's experts both analyzed Jodi, but can JM put on experts to speak in general terms without having spoken to Jodi?

 

[usnuzuloose]

The problem with Jodi's "memory loss", as JM has said, is that she remembers things that help her case, and forgets things that might hurt it. If it was truly about the trauma of it all, she'd remember or forget things related to the murder, not the trial.

Does JM have experts to debunk the DT's experts? The DT's experts both analyzed Jodi, but can JM put on experts to speak in general terms without having spoken to Jodi?

I thought they had experts on their behalf to examine Jodi. No?

 

[MaryAnnDVC]

Sexually violent perpetrators? Jodi is only claiming self defense in battery, she is not claiming any thing for any thing sexual. She kept testifying she enjoyed the sex.

But the trial started out with the DT claiming that Jodi was Travis' dirty little secret. And Travis was controlling and was Jodi's spiritual leader and abusive, physically and sexually. WE feel a certain way, and I have NO doubt that we're right, but defense attorneys can always find SOMEONE to testify to whatever. Who knows how they're going to spin this. Expert witnesses do this for a living....they're good at it. Whether anyone buys it or not remains to be seen. I do think a lot of it is going to fall on deaf ears, for the reason you stated (and many others reasons)....she certainly came off as enjoying the sex and that it was consensual. BUT...they could put a spin on that too. We'll see.

 

[Thumper_Man]

That is the problem, these articles are not his and relying on some one else's research? He can not verify any thing in the articles. It will be interesting to hear what Juan says when they return. If I were on a jury and hear something that was published and not by that person, I would say no way ain't buying it.

And as the DT stated, this witness is relying on those articles for his testimony. Which may or may not be accurate.

I'm hoping the judge don't allow the PPP and makes RS testify strictly on his knowledge and professionalism. With this judge, I doubt it, but one can hope right?

 

[Brit17]

OMG ... I was just watching HLN and someone called in and said that she believes that TA was a pedophile because he would only have a*** sex ... I really hope the jurors have more intelligence than that ...