Jodi Arias -- Trial for the murder of Travis Alexander #8

auman58 wrote:JW has gained a little weight since she last wore those outfits.

tesstruhart wrote:another point by a tweeter: Although not in evidence, JA slashed tires 3 times. With what? did she have knives at the ready all the time?

Mari 68 wrote:I guess some woman blurted out she wished Jodi was dead in the court room.

During the recess. Security removed her.

justanopinion wrote:so what did I miss? anything of any value

Alessandra_Deux wrote:March 21, 2013

Court Schedule for next 10 days Per Judge Stephens



https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=K9J7xEaEmOo

Alessandra_Deux wrote:Jurors question expert witness in Arias trial

BRIAN SKOLOFF | March 21, 2013 08:50 PM EST | AP

PHOENIX — Jurors in Jodi Arias' murder trial paid close attention to an expert witness who diagnosed her with post-traumatic stress disorder and amnesia as many of the panel's questions Thursday focused on specific details of his evaluation and how he could come to any conclusions relying on Arias' repeated lies.

Psychologist Richard Samuels, a defense witness, testified for a fifth day Thursday after telling jurors his diagnosis explains why Arias can't remember much from the day she killed her lover.

Arizona is one of a few states where jurors have a legal right to query witnesses through written questions read aloud by the judge. In most other states, it's up to the judge to determine whether to allow it.

Samuels answered more than 100 questions Thursday, and then was questioned by attorneys on both sides about his answers. He resumes testimony on Monday.

Read more:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/20130321/us-boyfriend-slaying/?utm_hp_ref=politics&ir=politics

Freckles wrote:Re the notes produced and collected by Samuels:

Would these not be regarded as work product since he was PAID to produce these studies on JA, and to provide them to the court at 250$ an hour?

IF so, should the courts not retain these notes until such time as all appeals are over?

Should the courts not retain these notes/studies to preserve the evidence ?

Should the courts not preserve evidence to avoid the potential of tampering with said evidence?

Anyone with knowledge re a PAID witness retaining the work he was paid to produce?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=vTTJ3L8uGxM#t=1880s

I see ALL of his testimony as incomplete, scattered, unavailable, contradictory, undated, unverified ; hence, IMO, he should have been disqualified as an EXPERT witness. He FAILED to share this info with the prosecution in a timely fashion PRIOR to testifying.

Calypso wrote:Can someone post the court schedule per that prior post? TIA

Alessandra_Deux wrote:

Freckles wrote:Re the notes produced and collected by Samuels:

Would these not be regarded as work product since he was PAID to produce these studies on JA, and to provide them to the court at 250$ an hour?

IF so, should the courts not retain these notes until such time as all appeals are over?

Should the courts not retain these notes/studies to preserve the evidence ?

Should the courts not preserve evidence to avoid the potential of tampering with said evidence?

Anyone with knowledge re a PAID witness retaining the work he was paid to produce?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=vTTJ3L8uGxM#t=1880s

I see ALL of his testimony as incomplete, scattered, unavailable, contradictory, undated, unverified ; hence, IMO, he should have been disqualified as an EXPERT witness. He FAILED to share this info with the prosecution in a timely fashion PRIOR to testifying.

R4-26-106. Client Records

A. A psychologist shall not condition record release on a client's or third party's payment for services.

B. A psychologist shall release, with a client's written consent, the client's raw test data or psychometric testing materials to another licensed psychologist. Without a client's consent, a psychologist shall release a client's raw test data or psychometric testing materials only to the extent required by federal or Arizona law or court order compelling production.

C. A psychologist shall retain all client records under the psychologist's control, including records of a client who died, for a minimum of six years from the date of the last client activity, except copies of audio or video tapes created primarily for training or supervisory purposes. If a client is a minor, the psychologist shall retain all client records for a minimum of three years past the client's 18th birthday or six years from the date of the last client activity, whichever is longer.

Alessandra_Deux wrote:HUFFINGTON POST

March 21, 2013

(Jurors' questions for Doctor Samuels)

Read below for minute-by-minute updates from court Thursday:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/21/richard-samuels-faces-jury-questions_n_2923179.html

Freckles wrote:

Alessandra_Deux wrote:HUFFINGTON POST

March 21, 2013

(Jurors' questions for Doctor Samuels)

Read below for minute-by-minute updates from court Thursday:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/21/richard-samuels-faces-jury-questions_n_2923179.html

justanopinion wrote:

WeeBonnie wrote:

Justa- were the letters deemed fraudulent? How awful!!

WeeBonnie this was posted here by Stolat I am copying and pasting.
This is an exceptionally good read and presents details not heard much in the media, it sort of fills in a lot of gaps...

Written 2010, updated 2012

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mobileweb/2011/12/29/jodi-arias_n_1174274.html?icid=hp_front_art

A few items of interest: Jodi submitted forged letters trying to paint TA as a pedophile, a physical abuser, and a sexual deviant - oh and in those letters he just so happens to say he was considering marrying JA.

First off, the court deemed the electronic copies a complete forgery and fabrication. And the judge laughed them out of the courtroom. That alone I would think could serve as hefty evidence. But what is also telling is the psychopath within the words. A shrink (forget which show) pointed out that only a psychopath would insert words into a ded man's mouth and try to convince the world that he found her marriage worthy - when in fact the reality is that everyone who knew him knew he did not. But even after death it was paramount for her to command the perception of others that she had a different persona. In other words, image means more to Jodi than the truth - than reality.

The other interesting thing in this article is that when she filed the motion to preclude her forged letters, it was the same time she fired her lawyers am petitioned to represent herself. So basically, her lawyers were like You're Nuts! We're not filing those letters and she defied them, fired them and said fine, I'll do it my way. The next week her letters were tossed by the court as a fake and she was told she was over her head so she got all new representation. The article details some of her motion where she first introduces the THIRD story, that of self defense.

And also this blurb, which I think sums up JA well:
"She employs a distorted image in explaining how someone else would view the situation. It isn't that Jodi Arias is a psychopath disconnected from reality; it's that ONLY HER reality matters...Arias is an actor in her own drama and as long as she is clapping for her performance, she is happy. If convicted of murder, I can guarantee Jodi Arias will have a great time in prison amusing herself quite nicely as she moves on to Act Two."

_________________

Alessandra_Deux wrote:March 21, 2013

Court Schedule for next 10 days Per Judge Stephens



https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=K9J7xEaEmOo

olivier57 wrote:I didn't know that she fired her lawyers and petitioned to represent herself. This is another evidence that Samuel is completely wrong when he tries to demonstrate that she has a low self esteem. In fact, she his very confident, has a very high self-esteem, thinks that she is more clever than everyone.

My opinion is that it's enough to undermine all Samuel's credibility. It's obvious that he doesn't speak as an expert but as a defense lawyer.

olivier57 wrote:I didn't know that she fired her lawyers and petitioned to represent herself. This is another evidence that Samuel is completely wrong when he tries to demonstrate that she has a low self esteem. In fact, she his very confident, has a very high self-esteem, thinks that she is more clever than everyone.

My opinion is that it's enough to undermine all Samuel's credibility. It's obvious that he doesn't speak as an expert but as a defense lawyer.

carlakay wrote:

Weeziethm wrote:It doesn't matter that she lied.
It doesn't matter that she told 3 different stories.
It doesn't matter that I filled out her answer sheet.
It doesn't matter that I added the numbers wrong.
It doesn't matter that I did not re-test her.
It doesn't matter that I have typos.
It doesn't matter that I gave her a gift.
It doesn't matter that I sent her greeting cards.

YES IT DOES!

no it doesn't because NO ONE actually cares that she got PTSD from killing him!!!! I just can not understand why the hell this man has been up there for so long spewing flipflopping facts on an issue that is not one bit relevant.. she has confessed to being the sole person in that bathroom wt a butchered boy after covering up and lying thru her teeth for what 2 3 years about flippin ninjas doing it..her fog dont matter a tinkers damn to anybody but her..NOBODY expected her to tell the truth now anyway.

I edited it to add the flipflopping because that is exactly what he has done..answers one way then another depending on who is askin the questions

Freckles wrote:I have no sympathy for someone claiming PTSD or ANY mental disturbance when they have premeditated a heinous crime as JA has done. I doubt if she HAS any feelings of guilt or remorse as I don't think she will ever willingly take responsibility for her actions.

As an adult, she had choices to make. She went with the fun and titillating, the least responsible of choices for herself. And her big temper-tantrum killed someone. Her behavior disorders are so gross and outrageous she has, IMO, forfeited the right to participate in society. And we should not have to support her indefinitely! She is getting meals, health care, clean clothing and a bed ALL at the expense of our society. She isn't even a tax payer.

Freckles wrote:Does a non-assertive person:

-confront current gfs of past bfs attempting to reclaim the past bf?
-drive 90 miles, knock on several doors to confront someone?
-invite herself on surfing trips with THREE males and NO females present?
-crawl thru a doggy door to stand silently over a sleeping bf?
-hide in a bf's closet to "surprise" him?
-slash tires on a car... again and again and again?
-invite herself AND a new GUN to go on an all male camp-out in the woods?
-tell your latest bf baby oil won't work; and hand him KY?
-pose for your own GROSS porn shots?
-try to finagle a trip to DC?

- walk up to a stranger, introduce yourself, and strike up a sexual relationship with them, Bobby or Travis or whoever?

-go on a lunch date with John Dixon, dinner date with Abe, and spend the night with John... all in the same day?

auman58 wrote:Get ready for the next "expert" who will explain any and all of her behavior as "what abused women do". Throw up....

Well, at least I know that the next woman I see stuffing 15 gallons of gas into the trunk her rental car with upside-down tags is simply an abused woman and needs the Cowardly Lion to send her some self-help books.

Freckles wrote:IF JA had dropped the gun, wouldn't there have been chipped or damaged tile in the bathroom where SHE (and the evidence concurs ) shot Travis?

Freckles wrote:

tesstruhart wrote:another point by a tweeter: Although not in evidence, JA slashed tires 3 times. With what? did she have knives at the ready all the time?

HJuh?
The only thing JA slashed 3X were the tires; 4 tires slashed on 3 sets on 2 occasions.
ME said the knife was slashed in one move without HESITATION marks.