Jodi Arias Trial: In Her Own Words.. How I Killed Travis Alexander With HIS Gun and HIS Knife
Photo Courtesy AP Pool
Phoenix, Arizona- In today’s highly anticipated morning testimony, Jodi Arias finally “gets there”.
After weeks of what can only be described as the dog ate my defense testimony led by Kirk Nurmi, Jodi Arias explains the events leading up to and during the murder of Travis Alexander.
Arias describes an irate and menacing Travis who bounds from the shower, causing her to drop his new camera and pouncing on her, knocking her to the wet tile floor.
“ A five year old can hold a camera better than you.” Arias stated Alexander screamed at her among other threatening expletives while she struggled to break free.
She then ran to the master bedroom closet and apparently using the Spiderman techniques she absorbed via osmosis from the alleged Valentines gift, retrieved a gun she claimed Travis owned over two feet out of her reach while he was sprinting behind her.
She pointed the gun at him, did not realize it went off and then Travis, still coming at her, stumbles to his knees on the now bloody tile beneath him. ( Editors Note: As I have always said, I believe the order of this injury is true and is important to the charges against her)
Enter gratuitous memory gap.
“I have no memory of stabbing him.” – Jodi Arias
Although Arias admits to having flash backs, she states she cannot remember any other details with the exception of her crouched in the bathroom covered in blood and drops a knife she believes was upstairs used by Travis to cut ropes he used to tie her up to the bed.
She did however, have the presence of mind to grab the ropes, the gun, apparently removes and loses her shoes and has no idea what happened to the knife she used to stab Alexander 29 times and slit his neck from ear to ear.
Next memory she is driving in the desert with the gun she alleges was Travis’s when she pitches it out the window at a random location, then puts the ropes in a dumpster behind a gas station and washes blood off her hands.
Pause for Arias innocuous driving babble and road scenery.
“Why didn’t you call 911 and tell them what happened?” Kirk Nurmi asks his sniffling but tearless client.
” …He attacked you, why did you feel You messed up pretty badly?”
“This time it was different, he had done it before and nothing happened, it was heightened.” Responded Arias.
While approaching a check point in Utah, she feels like she will be apprehended there.
Arias decided to do a “whole bunch of things” to cover up she was ever there.
So .. “I called his phone to leave a voice mail”. For nearly 16 minutes she says she tried numerous times to leave a cheery voice mail to ask as if she was not present in Alexander’s home.
“I just thought they would be listening to his voice mail, so I just thought it would throw the scent off for a while.”
– Jodi Arias
Yes, she actually said that on the stand. Defense Attorney Kirk Nurmi was observed writing a note to co-counsel Jennifer Wilmott to send an assistant out to Sam’s for an industrial size supply of Tums.
I made that part up. Testimony continues following jury lunch break.
Related Posts
Related Posts:
2,253 Comments
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
One more thought about the stipulation
Please know up fraont that I do not beleive that there is any proof in anway that the images in the pupil are Arias, period. Baloney and then some.
Having said that.
I do not think the tsp. necessarily supports the idea that Travis agreed to the photo shoot. He could have been unaware he was being photograpghed until that moment. She could have told him she had a gun. He could have seen the gun close to her, on the counter of the sink,at her feet, whatever, before the pic was taken, and sat down to try to reason with her, calm her down…. all speculation, just as the image in the eyeball is speculation.
She could have had the gun in the waist at the back of her pants.
She could have grabbed it from behind her, and Travis could have lunged at her to GET THE GUN or KNIFE.
She could have had the camera at mid body level because she was in the process of getting a gun or knife at her feet. The photo takes a millisecond, and there was an auto foucs on the camera- Arias claims it was auto focus.
the stipulation ONLY says that arias is not holding a weapon in her hands. That does not mean tha the weapon is not close by.
COULD the ” fact” ( ugh I hate this) that Arias was not holding the weapon make her action of going to get a weapon appear MORE PURPOSEFUL? There IS some value that she appears to be standing, because she said she was kneeling…
Does the stipulation mean that no testimony will be submitted as to eyeball shot??
If so, this has saved a lot of meandering obfuscating discussion.
Not having the weapon in her hand at the time of the shot does not alter whether or not she planned to kill him, but yes, it does seem to allow the defense to say that she wasn’t trying to kill him at that moment… but without a witness to atlk about the eyeball, it becaomes just another claim by the defense…oh I can’t even continue thinking on this, it is too crazy making.
FORENSICS FORENSICS where for art thou forensics…
@Blink:
“Are you guys kidding me you are not talking about the stipulation that this murder defendant was not holding a weapon at the time the picture was taken of Travis’s face in the shower when he is sitting down?
B”
——————————————————————–
To clarify, the testimony I saw today was the pic of Travis looking out the shower door not the one of him sitting down.
He is sitting in that pic according to prior testimony by the state witness.
B
In my post at 8:38 p.m., in line 5 of my post, it says ” tsp.” where I had written ” pic” . Sorry about that my computer filled in the blanks.
The photo expert stated that he would always take the digital data to 16 bits if possible. This gives him 256 times the resolution available with 8 bits. The camera used was new in 2008 and may have been capable of 16 bits or more. Without knowing the exact make and model of the camera, one cannot look up the specs and be certain of the capability.
It appears to me that JM needs to spend some time learning about the digital world in which we live.
Travis Owned a Sony Cyber-shot DSC-H9. Only model with a night vision mode, and featured the Carl Zeiss lens, with lotus attach.
B
@ATG
(snipped)”Is the photo enhancement good enough for identification? I could not determine from the TV view of the court screen.”
===============================================================
I couldn’t make heads or tails (no pun intended) out of the eyeball enhancement.
JM said it looked like a dog wagging its tail…
So, JM is fine with the stipulation knowing he can revisit/rebuttal? I say bring in the man that indicates there are two people in the reflection. Premeditation much? Even if that is not the truth and JM is not going there, and irrespective that it adds confusion, it would definitely prove this corneal reflection voodoo (lol) is a fishing expedition, open to subjectivity (German shepherd, chihuahua, gerbil, murder scene body chalk outline, a giant armadillo or saskwatch) and nothing more than a Rorschach test.
I do believe that, despite Einstein’s counsel and pencil prodding, Nurmi and JW have no more dogs in this fight.
I’ll skip the defense closing and hope that JM’s is epic. What I would give to be there…
62 seconds seem reasonable to you?
B
———————————————————————-
No it does not. I do not think her version could be pulled off in 62 seconds. From the accidental ceiling photo to the photo of Travis at her feet is 62 seconds. I am not sure of the time between the last pic of him alive and the pic of him at her feet (forgetting for a moment the ceiling pic) but…I also do not know if all of the wounds had been inflicted oh him in the pic of him at her feet. It is my understanding that the defense claimed the ceiling pic was the one taken when she dropped the camera that started the whole attack. Mistake on their part??? That locked them into 62 seconds for her version of events. Back to the stipulation and that pic she had a camera took a picture and did not have weapons in her hands at that time. I do not think this will be that harmful. The point in my prior post was if we are to believe she was body slammed, got up, ran down the hall into the closet, grabbed a gun, went into the bathroom shot him and then somehow ended up with him at her feet 62 seconds later, that it is not a far stretch to believe that she could have gotten a weapon from the eye pic to when the attack began.
What if Arias was wearing a gun holster? He sees her standing there packing heat, she orders him to sit down and says effing kill you and then snaps the infamous haunting shot. I ran this by the husband and asked what he would do, lunge or sit. He said he would sit down, thinking she wouldn’t really use the gun.
That’s where my mind goes with this, Nurmi. Arias planned this months in advance. Of course she had forethought as to how to kill and photograph (contemporaneously). That was the main part.
He broke it off. She threatened to blackmail him, expose their sexual encounters, ruin his reputation. Once in receipt of the sociopath email, she began methodically killing him including the prompted sex tape, photos, and texts. The build-up to, so you think you’re going to Cancun with MiMi? Not on my watch. Rage.
Pam writes at 9:44 p.m. :
…I also do not know if all of the wounds had been inflicted oh him in the pic of him at her feet.
———————–
I have never felt that the photo of Travis on the ground with Arias leg showing was a photo of travis dead.
So I am in the camp that the killing did NOT occur within 62 seconds. I think the photos show what hey show- But obviously after the last shot we have as evidence, the camera was taken out of the equation. The camera could have stopped taking pictures because someone picked it up or kicked it out of the way, or there could have been photos that were unretreivable. But I don’t see how the phots can lock in a point oif death. Where is the zillion times enhancement on that photo of Travis on the ground with Arias leg showing?
Has anyone ever said that there were more photos in that camera that could not be retrieved? is it possible to know?
Yes, there are images on the camera that have not been presented, and imo, there are enhancement capabilities.
B
What was Jodi wearing June 4th as she snapped pics of Travis in the shower? Were there pockets to easily hide weapons?
just to drive everyone nuts. The angle of Travis vision in the full face shot ( withthe reflective eyeball) is apparently straight on into the lens.
And according to Neumeister ( sp?) the reflection in the eyeball shows a womans face looking straight ahead, not down into the camera.
That is a really weird way to take a posed shot.
Thanks B
That, at the time, was not an everyday camera. The internal memory was 31MB and the memory stick could have been as large as 32GB. It had a 15x optical zoom and a host of features. The price from Amazon was approx. $1,500.00.
Travis may have indeed raised his voice if she dropped it on the tile floor. He was living big on borrowed money and that would have been a big loss if it were damaged.
I am still looking for the actual internal specs, but with the available light feature operating in total darkness they will be pretty powerful.
The fog story by Jodi is IMO pure BS and was concocted by the defense team to remove the death penalty. I believe the gun was the one she stole from her grandfather and the knife may have been the same that she used to damaged the tires. Jodi came prepared to take him out for all the imagined things he did to her. She could not control him as she wanted so he had to die. She took pictures and then decided that was a bad idea so they were deleted or so she thought. Since it was Travis’s camera she didn’t want to have it in her possession so she put it in the washing machine to destroy it.
All the telephone calls were just her way of keeping tabs on Travis. She wanted to know exactly what he was doing. She made certain that people thought she was going to Utah and hid her trip to Mesa.
Jodi was addicted to sex and she had to try one more time with Travis when she arrived. This reminds me of the scenes in the movie “The Sting” where Robert Redford’s character was almost taken out by the “hit woman”.
The shower pics, was Travis showing off his body to Jodi or did he believe she had left and was surprised when he saw her taking photos of him?
adding to my post at 10:56 p.m.
papparazzi will often just hold the camera up and away from themselves- positingthe camera in a way that they hope will capture an image, but without looking into the screen of the camera to see what it is.
If Arias was holding the camera at chest height, pointing directly at Travis face, was she just guessing at the image she was taking? Was travis looking at the flash>
Is there testimony that proves there was flash used-
I recall she said NO flash was used- am I dreaming? ( please don’t make me watch testimony again- but if this is worth looking into I will.
I would like to know if the camera she used provided a way of seeing the shot other than through the viewfinder for the lens directly or on the screen at the back of the camera.
What I am getting at is the ” furtive” method of taking this particular photo, that Arias was doing so without Travis full corporation.
Are there any photos of JA with the camera strap around her neck?
Are we sure the photo of TA’s eyes is when he is sitting down? Wow. That means JA had to have been kneeling on the floor.
and also..
Arias has referred to making a sex VIDEO on June 4th- on feb 19th, in her testimony I recall she said she took that on her camera because she didn’t know fully how to operate his camera- does that sex video exist. Does her camera exist., is anything fromit in evidence. What about her computer etc.
What proof is there that Arias and travis actually had sex on june 4th?
if they didn’t this could support that she didnt get what she wanted in any way.
I could see that happening – on May 26th he wrote to her that he never wanted to see her again. And from the explicit pics that we have seen of Travis, – please pardon this- but he was not in a full state of arousal…
There were TEN calls from her cell to his between june 2 and june 3, ten to him ( brief in length) before he called her twice on the evening of June 3. at least two more from her cell to his after killing but before she got to Salt Lake City. 10 calls is a lot of calls to make to someone you had no plan of seeing.
But I am digressing.
Waiting for next witness or rebuttal and closing statements.
There is a saying that when you practice family law, you see good people on their worst behavior, and that when you practice criminal law, you see bad people on their best behavior.This trial has illuminated the worst aspects of what it is to be human, set in an amoral world. I think bringing the whole Mormon aspect into things has pretty much been quashed by the prosecution. But we have seen all sides push the limits of respect. I think we are fascinated because out of instinct we yearn for order, we yearn for a spiritual code, we yearn to have clearly defined lines of right and wrong- and this case has devolved into so many grey areas, we are compelled to define ourselves by aligning one way or the other.
to be accurate- may 26 he wrote essentially that he never wanted to see her again
JM was smart to agree on the stipulation. This jury is SICK of the defense’s case. If they’d had to do all the stuff whodunnit listed, I think it would have put them over the top. JM knows what he’s doing. This isn’t his first rodeo!
JA did not need to have a weapon in her hand at this pic for Travis to realize he was in danger. We cannot know what she is telling him at this point. It is not proven that even if she had two hands on the camera the defense chronology of event is true because she could have brought a weapon with her in the bathroom wich was on the ground near her feets.
My prayers for the people and victims impacted by this tragedy in Boston. It is so sad and scary <3
I believe Travis did not know JA had come back in his home. I believe he thought she had got back on the road& he was getting ready for the conference call he was hosting @ 7pm. I believe that full face picture was when he realized she came back, the camera ‘s flash caused him to be temporarily blinded, & contemporaneously she stabbed him in the heart at his point & next pic shows him sliding, not willfully sitting, down. She had just stabbed him in the mid sternum, knicked his pericardial sac & cut his superior vena cava. He realizes he is bleeding, he is stunned, goes to the sink to steady himself & coughs up blood. JA continues to stab him in the back as he coughs @the sink. Travis is horrified, his fight or flight kicks in, tries to get out of the bathroom to escape, he trips, falls from losing all his blood volume, JA straddles him from behind & slits his throat.
IMO JM agreeing to the stipulation was a consession to the courtroom move things along. There is enough evidence without i. It is absolutely garbage science, shows the DT desperation.
Would love to see Alyce’s testimony impeached today. Then the defense has the testimony of Dick Samuels only. Good Grief! Let’s get this case to the jury, where hopefully Travis can get Justice. Noone deserved that kind of death. Jodi is responsible for taking his life. This is her last stand, she’ll be locked away. You see her tears the other day? Those tears weren’t for Travis, those tears were for herself, as she knows she is going down.
I just hope Juan can prove premeditation & 12 jurors concur.
The part that I am having trouble with is if blackmail were involved, why would Travis be posing for more nude pics on the bed with her? I could understand him letting her in the house, perhaps she turne on the charm “I dot want this to en on a bad note, you have been a positive influence in my life, can we agree to be friends,..” In order to get him to let his guard down. But why would he agree to have sex again?
Sorry for typos above,… Fat thumbs and an iPhone don’t mix well.
I really,really really would like to go to the lab and see what that iris picture looks like with the special technical equipment. Love a good mystery. I can’t see why the prosecution thinks it will help them to show the defendant taking that picture-unless they’re hoping that someone thinks it doesn’t look like her. Those dog comments by both sides were too funny. What color hair did Jodi have-blonde or brown Irises.
I am having a hard time focusing on this picture because I can not get the picture of the smoke from a bomb pluming up behind all those national flags in Boston. Evil in Boston, evil in Mesa. I would like to be a critical thinker today but unfortunately my brain is in a state of sorrow. Prayers to all that were in Boston yesterday. Prayer to those that were injured and killed and to their loved ones.
whodunnit says:
April 15, 2013 at 10:32 pm
(SNIPPED)
But I don’t see how the phots can lock in a point oif death.
———————————————————————-
The defense locked themselve into 62 seconds for her version of events to occur. In my post I siad that it was my understanding that the defense claimed the ceiling pic was taken when she dropped the camera that started the attack. From that pic to the pic at her feet is 62 seconds.
This slaughter took more than 62 seconds. So we are in the same camp. Although I do disagree with you re the pic with him at her feet with her leg. I do think he is dead in that pic.
That pic is pre-neck slice, he could not have been deceased.
B
These are the specifications of Travis’ camera.
This type of camera is commonly referred to as a “bridge camera”, that is, a transitional camera between a simple point-and-shoot and a DSLR.
Sony’s marketing is a little confusing. When the “Zeiss” name is used on it’s DSLR lenses, it implies a very high grade and very expensive lens. When used on its non-DSLR cameras, it is more of a marketing move than a quality indicator.
The “NightShot” feature involves using infrared light, not real night vision technology. These images are arbitrarily tinted green (even though the actual data is black-and-white). Sony intentionally limits the night-shot capabilities due to: 1) IR tends to penetrate light cotton clothing, and 2) Many fabrics are actually structurally “see-through” but have color dies to prevent this and the color dyes are not picked up by the IR sensor). If night-shot had been on, the image would be green, and the iris of the eye would be bright green, not black..
The camera features 8.1 megapixels, which is more than adequate for most uses (cameras with more pixels are not necessarily any sharper). Like most cameras in its class, but, it does NOT save photos in “RAW” format. All photos are saved in “lossy” .jpg format which is limited to 8-bit color (8-bit and 24-bit are actually the same in common usage). The sensor in the camera probably functions at 10-12 bits, but all that extra information is PERMANENTLY discarded when saving to 8-bit JPG images. What this means is that converting to 16-bit color adds absolutely no detail, and adds no color information. There may be trivial advantages to converting to 16 bit prior to editing to try and reduce the amount of “banding” in the image when manipulated (Banding is where the sky appears to be a “rainbow” of different shades of blue , for example). It doesn’t seem that this camera was capable of accurately capturing the detail implied by the witness.
In addition. these photos were apparently taken in a bathroom with the shower on. The resulting mist would make capturing ultrafine detail even less likely.
When I look at the photos, all I see are three blobs of white. There appears to be a large blob centrally which I suspect is a camera flash, another smaller blob above it which I think is an overhead light, and another blob to the side which I suspect was a bathroom vanity light.
check out the testimony of Arias desceribing the events of June 4th.
You can find it by going to youtube and entering Arias trial feb 19th- NOT to be confused with day 19 of the trial. She describes how she packed her stuff and left, then came back in because she had cd’s in her breifcase ( yes she says breif case) that had ” been there for months” that Travis wanted to see. hard to beleive that if he had been asking to see them for months that she had not already giventhem to him- she says they were scrtached, this led to the argument that was culminated with more sex with her over the desk ( desk undisturbed in evidence photos) then she says they decided to take shower pics and ” hang out”
very strange testimnoy when you go back and look.- and it also makes even less sense that she would have feared for her life….. and to me, it could just give more feul to fire that after the desk incident she would be even angrier at him… ( though I still dont know if she even had sex with him at all that day)
I found this link for a camera as described by blink in earlier post- note that the reviewer says it is easy to accidentally trip the thingie for automatic pics.
Sony Cyber-shot DSC-H9. Only model with a night vision mode, and featured the Carl Zeiss lens, with lotus attach.
to add to my post at 9:53 a.m.
link to camera that fits description given by Blink
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/H9/H9A.HTM
with comments by user describing how it is easy to trip automatic photo shots, as well as fosuing abilities, falls features etc.
That pic is pre-neck slice, he could not have been deceased.
B
———————————————————————-
IIRC Jodi alluded to his neck not being sliced in that pic during her testimony. I do think she remembers more than what she claims to. Still not sure what injuries he had at the time of that photo. If he was not deceased in that pic, than he sure was no longer in a position to fight back. I am going to look back at her testimony for Feb 19th.
Aside from the fact that you would be able to see the injury, imo, both strap muscles on both sides of the neck are severed. In that position his head (apologize for the visual not being glib, but illustrating my point in the simplest of terms) would resemble an open pez dispenser. I do agree that he was at least unconscious and near death.
B
I didn’t see anything much in that eye
That pic of Travis is haunting it is hard to read his expression
I get confused as when exactly it was taken before or after Jodi
Did her damage
Hi, Maribeth, I agree with much of what you wrote, because at one point, Arias stabbed Alexander in the chest with a fatal wound resulting. I just don’t think that happened in the shower.
I believe he didn’t know she was in the house until he saw her when he was sitting in the shower. Travis may have occasionally sat in the shower; this time it was due to the exhaustion of Jodi, day of sex, getting ready for the trip, work commitments, the enervating water temperature.
The reason the Defense is SO eager to prove Arias took that photo without a weapon in her hand is because SHE DID have a weapon in her hand! In her freakin’ left hand! It’s a small gun, the camera with strap around her neck, she can hold the camera and .25 caliber pistol and click the shutter button (on the right side, righties). She snapped the photo, walked steps forward, opened the shower door and shot him in the head. The GSW in the left temple didn’t kill him–she was surprised of the gun’s impact and that he didn’t just flop down and die.
Retrieving the knife is still a puzzle to me. Fleet-footed, she could have run to the kitchen and back while he stumbled to the sink. The blood streaks on the left side, rear, of sink are fairly broad where, I believe, he braced his hand while he coughed blood from his throat. The pin-dots of blood spray are the clue to the hemoptysis.
Clearly, if JA had left the scene and returned from her vehicle, she could have picked up the knife from the kitchen on her way upstairs. Wasn’t the photo of the kitchen knives showing one missing from the steak knife set? However, in my lay view, there is no sign of a serrated blade. Any thoughts on the type of knife used?
A couple of impressions upon seeing Dr Dermarte for the first time and her only being on the stand for a few minutes.
Jodi will not look up from what she is writing even for a second. She has not looked up since Dr Demarte has walked in the door that I have seen.
Dr Demarte seems like exactly the type of person Jodi would be unable to ‘enchant’ or mislead. A strong steady attractive female.
JMO. Looking forward to this testimony.
As far as IQ testing, if Jodi scored 119 she has (according to the Stanford – Binet scale) she has a superior intelligence.
According to Stanford-Binet scale, IQ is classified as following:
Over 140 – Genius or almost genius
120 – 140 – Very superior intelligence
110 – 119 – Superior intelligence
90 – 109 – Average or normal intelligence
80 – 89 – Dullness
70 – 79 – Borderline deficiency in intelligence
Under 70 – Feeble-mindedness
http://www.iqtestexperts.com/iq-scores.php
well, Blink. You nailed one thing on Arias.
I missed the name of the IQ test; was hoping it wasn’t Stanford B which imo would weaken her credentials. I began listening at “domains,” so figure it was appropriately WAIS.
My own opinion was the cumulative effect of some LD (plus mj) led to
school drop out. Iirc, witness (sorry missed name) said overall IQ was 119 (heh my LD kid did that good once & coukdn’t do sqat in the classroom independently); but Verbal scale was 136. That means there’s plenty variation in the subscales which is where the diagnostic ballgame is played. She said working memory was OK (love to see the subscales). I’m willing to bet based on stand answers her processing speed was high like the verbal. So to me that leaves the Nonverbal domain to have the significantly varying lower scores on the subtests. Notice JM didnt touch that domain. Imo, I’m disappointed in her as a professional failing to incorporate what I infer are significantly variable subtests on the WAIS into her “diagnosis.” What we may have here is a Nonverbal neurocognitive disability. Not that Willmot will know enough from her “experts” to make anything of it.
Much as I like Dr D, I am very suspicious of the
black hole in her WAIS testimony entirely
omitting the Nonverbal domain results if she is
purporting to use the WAIS as an objective diagnostic data point
(her mantra). She has been well prepared although I
thought her calling Arias a liar was teaching a
conclusion for jurors to make. I hoped the first words at
sidebar out of this beneficient Judge’s mouth were: Mr M, how
badly do you want that mistrial?
Lol, I have to believe those words are the reason he is calling “Mr. Samuels” Dr. Samuels today. Nobody is mistaking anyone for canine’s. I like where this is going.
B
reaching a conclusion, not teaching-sorry
Having some experience in the ophthalmic industry I have observed some interesting reactions Jodi has to her eyeglasses.
First, on the stand she stated she has 2.50 diopters of power in her lenses. Folks, any person besides a very young child would know they are in need of eyewear long before they reach the need for that much power. She claims she didn’t know she needed glasses, that she thought her vision was fine, but that simply cannot be true. Jodi would have been unable to see the television, a teleprompter in church, a clock across the room, road signs, any details (numbers, letters, even facial expressions) further than three to five feet away. As an example, if other people she is with are able to see the score during a game while she cannot that would clue her and those people she is with in to the fact that she cannot see. Considering the traveling she did by car over the years I cannot ignore my suspicions.
I suspect Jodi gave false answers during her eye exam making it seem as if she needs more power than she actually does. I don’t know why she would do this except she may have felt that information would bolster her case in some way or because wearing eyeglasses makes her look more innocent or abused to the jury or because she is unable to ever give an honest answer to anything.
I know the glasses she is wearing are overpowered because of her need to remove them to read. A person her age would still have the muscle power within the eye to accomodate meaning the muscles would be able to focus up close while her distance vision is set to 20/20. It is VERY rare to find a person her age who needs a multifocal lens design and those who do generally need them due to occupational reasons (ie… they work at a computer all day or are a jeweler) and even in these cases the younger person is wearing their occupational glasses only to give their eyes a rest, not because they need them… they would still be able to easily see a computer or notebook or the attorney to their left with distance corrective eyewear on.
There is little doubt in my mind Jodi skewed her eye exam and as a result is overcorrected in her eyeglasses. No optometrist would over-correct to that degree without a patient giving false answers.
I don’t believe she used S-B. I thought domains were wais, but i havent looked it up.
Around here neuropsychs have said any colleague who used a S-B diagnostically,
they would have to ask Why?
Jodi does seem so immature as she sits on the side of wilmont today Her writing next to wilmont she looks as if a school girl doing her homework on the side of her teacher who has given her instruction. Listening to the dr today she explains arias exactly as she looks in court today.
@Rose, she used the WAIS. Far more relevant and interesting than that, imo, are the MMPI results.
B O R D E R L I N E
Saw that coming, didn’t we? Excellent witness today, and I am floored by Jodi’s behavior during this. Won’t look at her, does not don her glasses, and is scribbling like a child – respectfully, this is a product of inexperienced counsel or poor lawyering.
B
Coming here to bask in the relief that I know is in the Blink House today. Loving’ this witness! Now to go back and read your comments!
Jodi would have. Een much better off if she would have sat as if she was in a fog today. All the writing isn’t doing her any good with the witness on the stand. This is amazing. She is intelligent and delegent in her work. She has come prepared. To bad Jodi couldn’t have gotten this dr on her side.
Yes, the MMOI is highly relevant in this case.
For once JM can relax & act normal. Dr D will have a
distingished career as a prosecution witness due to
her competence & demeanor. Did you notice, Grace,
under the Borderline check offs, the only 2 Dr D denied she had–altogether–
impulsivity and paranoid ideation under severe stress–were the very
two apt to undercut pre-med (impulsivity) or mitigate (paranoid reading
of the conflict at the moment of physical altercation).
Imo, you’re not gonna have a Borderline like Jody without plenty of
impulsivity, whether it’s sexual partners & “dates” or a hair rainbow. So, frankly, I
find Dr D intellectually inconsistant in the service of the prosecution. Not that I
don’t applaud JM for huring her.
Would anyone agree that with all the destructive descriptors in the email to Travis that she could have possibly broke her own finger in that kind of behavior.
Most effective prosecution witness yet.
Best overall witness in the case.
There is hope.
As effective as she was, and she definitely was, I think Jodi’s behavior in front of this direct was not lost on jurors.
So who do we think stole her laptop?
B
God help those MSW students at her 2 year Agency Directorship
several layers down the supervision food chain from a Director
with a CV like hers. Imo they were billing fodder.
——
I don’t know it now, but 25 years ago MSU was where a psychologist went
if they wanted to learn BF Skinner & only BFSkinner. It was notorious among
UM students anyway for being Behaviorism to the max when that was in disrepute at
sister schools.
———
Imo Dr D will shine one day, but she needs to work 2-3 years in a clinical inpatient setting
starting with the Admissions Unit on a psych residents’ teaching ward. Ideally in a
forensic psych setting like Butner or John Howard. She will also learn there the PhD staff hates
to do testing & gives it to students. And that testing a population likely to qualify for SSD
is really different from testing an Arias. She is clueless about about what she doesn’t know, but she’s
the perfect saleswoman for the prosecution. After she went over “battered woman”
criteria, I thought Houze better snap her up fast before Underhill does.
So O/T- do you already have the DSM V memorized pre-publication? Impressive, lol. I would only ask that for the psych discussions we use as little abbreviation as possible so others not in the field can follow along and participate from their view if you please.
Thought the same thing on Ky case. Sigh.
B
@Blink. Jody’s behavior reflects what you previously wondered about (seen on 9 tapes) & the NonVerbal part of the wais (NV-LD?) Dr D didn’t comment on probably reflects. It’s symptomatic, & her lawyers probably coukdn’t take away if they wanted to. It looked driven, didn’t it?
Did Dr. Demarte have the jail interviews for observation does anyone know?
I am wondering if there is some former court order dealing with the non-verbal issue or it’s periphery, but overall, couldn’t she just be smart enough to try and skew the impulsivity ?
If not, I would disagree that she was not impulsive based on her own words and deeds, of which their are plenty.
B
Amys Sister
Your analysis of the condition of JOdi’s eyes is probably very accurate. She would not be able to see anything at 2.5 diopters closer than 10 feet. This is another falsehood that she is telling about herself. Even at my age, I don’t need but 2.0 diopters for close up reading and I don’t need glasses to drive. My music glasses just have a longer focal length.
We don’t have any knowledge of how the glasses were obtained. In jail they may or not have used an optometrist. I would think that a good optometrist could not be fooled to that degree.
Thanks GeorgiaDad for the camera clarification. This particular camera has an ISO rating out to 3200. If Jodi was using auto-focus, she may not have needed the flash.
I am impressed by the prosecution’s witness today. She does not ramble and keeps her explanation very short and to the point. She has totally destroyed the methods used by the defense witnesses and she has the credentials to back up her position.
Jodi is like a little seven year old who has been caught in a lie and does not have a way out of it. Therefore, she will not make eye contact with the witness who represents authority. She is just ignoring the testimony because it is exposing her bad behavior and lies.
GraceintheHills says:
April 16, 2013 at 3:52 pm
@Rose, she used the WAIS. Far more relevant and interesting than that, imo, are the MMPI results.
B O R D E R L I N E
Saw that coming, didn’t we? Excellent witness today, and I am floored by Jodi’s behavior during this. Won’t look at her, does not don her glasses, and is scribbling like a child – respectfully, this is a product of inexperienced counsel or poor lawyering.
B
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Bingo! Was there ever any doubt?
I honestly don’t believe KN or JW have any idea of the level and intensity of psychological and/or physical abuse this defendant likely perpetrated on Travis before she murdered him.
I totally agree with that. I have always said not only do I not think this happens in this neat little bow, but I think it is worse, I do not believe Jodi was an invited guest in that home on that day. In terms of my own experience, training and education, this case is the poster child for analytical growth, imo.
B