Jodi Arias Trial Verdict IS IN: GUILTY Of MURDER In The Slaying Of Travis Alexander
Image courtesy Arias
Phoenix, AZ- In the 4 month long trial of Jodi Ann Arias for the murder of her brief boyfriend Travis Victor Alexander, the jury deliberating since last Friday has arrived at a verdict in her case. Arias was found guilty of the pre-meditated murder of Travis Alexander on June 4th, 2008.
Related Posts
Related Posts:
1,859 Comments
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
Wouldn’t it have taken the 2 SIM cards to make the sex romp pics appear as though they were taken the day JA murdered Travis? If yes, both sides know and are ok with this sleight of hand, if you will. Not sure I understand your question FriendLY- but if you mean from a storage capacity perspective- no.
B
Who IS Tony…and sorry opinion this has been covered….
http://www.courtchatter.com/2014/11/court-of-appeals-puts-slap-down-on.html
who knows what photos were on
the cell phone sim cards? of
Arias, or others…
how could the defense let it go
not to receive them?
I don’t see why anyone criticizes Judge S for her ruling closing
Arias’ testimony to media. She ruled cautiously for defense imo to remove
one more appealable (of the sentencing) trial question, knowing full well media would
appeal, & the Appeals Court would adjudicate the issue to
open the trial. Her ruling imo intentionally passed the buck up
& will save the taxpayers one additional litigation
controversy when sentencing trial is appealed.
Rose writes:
Her ruling imo intentionally passed the buck up
& will save the taxpayers one additional litigation
controversy when sentencing trial is appealed.
——-
I agree- and I can’t imagine what it is like for any of the participants in this thing.
I think what we are watching is a justice system that is predicated on all participants- and at the very least- the defendant- telling the truth- and then allowing the lawyers to argue the law.
But without truth as the basis, we are left with.. what we have in the Arias trial.
Not from a storage capacity,friendLY. I didn’t word that post very well.
Are we talking about 2 sim cards from 2 different items ie: 2 different cameras or 2 different iPhones , that sort of thing. ..or just being interchanged from one device from another. I’m confused by the fact that some images are time stamped and others are not. One SIM card used between 2 different digital cameras?
Does that make more sense?
…..and Happy Thanksgiving everyone!
Just based on my knowledge of the cards- one was a sony duopro (proprietary to Sony devices that use them) and the other SD card, no- they are not interchangable- HOWEVER.. it is possible to use the computer to transfer images between the cards or download from a program ( I own a SONY camcorder so I know this is possible) it was transferred to (or uploaded). On the issue of why some images are time stamped and some are not- the EXIF data must be analyzed and this becomes an answerable question- but my instincts tell me it is because it is a combination of images from 2 different sources.
The bottom line is that I cannot say for sure WHAT explains these discrepencies without a proper report and chain of custody log. We already know that protocol was breached at least twice on the computer- and I flat out do NOT believe that Mesa PD (Melendez) is qualified to analyze or present this information considering same.
Let me put it this way- he would not survive a vior dire challenge on his credentials to be admitted as a professional opinion under similar circumstances in any capital case jurisdiction I am aware of. This is likely why Martinez did not attempt to refute Neirmeister with the State’s own professional witness.
If Nurmi/Wilmott knew this (and I believe they had to- because if they agreed to that stipulation sans that knowledge then Neither of them has any business defending cases with electronic forensic evidence admissions.) this has everything to do with preserving a new evidence issue for habeas. Unless I am giving them way more credit than they deserve, this is my belief. The alternative is that Jodi Arias is smarter than everyone of them and I don’t believe that is the case.
My opinion has not changed since it started forming while watching/analyzing her 8 hours of interview/interrogation with Flores and the female detective. Jodi was very plain in her strategy to defend this case until Flores LED HER into her story. The absolute dumbest thing he ever did was inform her of those images. Here’s why- she knew way more about them than he did- that is LE 101 on the list of “never”.
I DO NOT believe that Arias was an invited guest in his home the early morning hours of June 4th. I believe she always intended to sneak in for whatever her true agenda was ( which I believe was to upload images and/or audio/video) to humiliate him and stop his trip or in her whack-ness blackmail him to take her with him.
The State has the burden for a reason. That also means the State “owns” it’s evidence prior to discovery- for Martinez and Flores to be sitting in a room where a breach of protocol ON THEIR END compromises evidence in a case can only be considered willful when you juxtapose Flores comments during the interview as Mom3.0 reminded us.
B
@ Rose
Totally agree. This is nothing but media getting their hackles up aka panties in a wad.
Rose answered my question about the sim cards. Thanks, friendy! That was what I was trying to unsuccessfully convey with my question .
Heads up…..on an ad my better half handed down to me. Holy cow. It’s bad enough my sitting skills are non existent…but this lil doodad is NOT helping. I see my posts appear cryptic; like I have my own universal language. I LOVE that Rose caught on…LOL.
Bless your hearts <3
SEEI!!!! It should have said that I’m on an iPad my better half handed down to me. I’ll work on this before posting useless crap.
Please accept my apologies for these time wasters. My sitting skills are better than ever, btw. My editing skills, notsomuch.
aside from video & camera cards, Neumeister testified he was
given one than one cell. Iirc he said Alexander had 2-3.
Likely another was Arias’. Sim cards were missing from
all phones, he testified. http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/mesa/2014/11/21/jodi-arias-expert-miss-porn-computer/19369563/
Frankly, I’m more interested in the cell sim cards than the camera’s.
Ragdoll- thanks for the encouragement-
Frankly all of the electronic evidence in this trial is worthless and should be excluded-
Sad to say but its the truth-
Because of LEs handling noone can verify the accuracy of this evidence noone can verify it wasnt manipulated and tampered with
Melendez testified and Florez said we can not touch the original – we work with copies-
Yet Melendez said that the card was in the camera- others testified it wasnt- now we know there is a real question of 2 different cards with the camera in the washer
We know from Blinks piece on the camera and from research and testimony that unallocated space can be rewritten by newly added info we know timestamps exif data can be manipulated-
that camera those pics mean nothing and LE had to know that-otherwise why the seeming subterfuge?
Did LE erase evidence of selfdefense- or worse we cant know
and that makes me angry for Travis and sad for his family- that now we are second guessing and JA may get a second go-
truth and justice suffer-
as do we all because this case is the reason why so many have a hard time trusting LE’s work-
AJMO Peace
Just wondering why the state didnt charge Arias with lying to the authorities in the same manner that Casey Anthony was charged( and convicted of same) Was there some loop hole that prevented the State from doing that in Arias case?
Yes, Casey Anthony voluntarily asked for LE help, and in the process of that investigation intentionally lied and misled them.
B
@ Mom3.0 says:
November 30, 2014 at 11:12 am
Big hugs, friendy! I know you’re right, Mom3.0. No doubt it will become an appellate for the very reasons you offer. How unfortunate. Those pics are part of the evidence that gives insight into the murder and JA’s mental state.
Ecccht. No offense, but I wish I couldn’t agree with you on this one, Mom. This whole case is slanted from top to bottom. No high hopes from my end.
Love y’all and appreciate your posts xo
blink writes:
Yes, Casey Anthony voluntarily asked for LE help, and in the process of that investigation intentionally lied and misled them.
B
—
I understood that the first contact between Arias and Arizona LE was when she called them to offer information.
But even if that first contact was LE seeking Arias out, she stated she was not in Arizona at the time of the murder and hadn’t spoken to him since earlier in the week.
She also maintained that she had nothing to do with the murder – either not there or the ninjas did it- for at least two solid years before trial began. She even underwent assessments with the experts while maintaining the ninja story, as Martinez pointed out during first trial..
ANYWAY
In My opinion, I think that the State has to make it crystal clear that although domestic violence, and all psychological repercussions from it exist, the circumstances of THIS murder are very VERY different.
This is not a scenario where the statistics of women who kill their husbands, women who are “stuck” for financial reasons, with children involved, social obligations etc, and unable to leave. neither is there any evidence of physical violence on Travis part as his response to Arias leaving.
The relationship that existed was basically one of two people pursuing each other for sexual contact. This is otherwise known as dating casually or, if secretive, having booty calls spread out over a long period of time with the same person. Emotional involvement always comes with sex.But Arias and Alexander acknowledged that there was no future in it, no matter what they may have felt outside of sexual attraction. Not only was Jodi Arias able to leave Travis, she did so physically, TWICE- and at no time was victimized physically for doing so. The defense is therefore placing all bets on the concept that Arias was so psychologically enmeshed that she felt compelled to respond to every text and every desire that she inferred Travis had.
To believe this, one has to attribute Travis Alexander with AMAZING powers of persuasion and personal powers.
YET, the defense is saying he was a scumbag, unable to keep his finances together and of weak moral character.
So how exactly does this inept morally struggling person have the potency to make Jodi do everything he wants, alledgedly against her own free wil???
According to the defense, he could not even balance his check book, didnt tell his friends everything, and couldn’t follow the rules of his religion. They are saying he was a reprehensible weakling in every area of his life, but when it comes to Jodi, he has rock star abilities…..
It was Jodi herself who made him omnipotent. The responsibility is all hers.
But even this may not make any difference if the lack of truth permeates all the way to the bottom of this case, from the minute that washer was cleaned out….
Through her Mother’s original call, Casey Anthony became the “reporter” of her missing daughter- which was not true, so it was fraudulent- Fla statute charged her appropriately. Incidentally, her conviction on 4 counts was overturned because it was considered “1 incident”.
Arias was contacted, however, it is not a crime to lie to LE in a criminal investigation unless it can be proven one is deliberately obstructing an investigation- pretty hard to ever charge her with that considering how long she spoke with them, agreed to meet and FLores told her upfront about all his subpoenas and warrants ( good lord).
I think you may be looking at this from a perspective other than Jodi’s. This was about rejection- a final rejection. She wanted the life she created in her mind with Travis and it seemed person after person saw through her. She lost her home, left a long term relationship and was now sitting back in her room/craft closet in Cali with no car. She blamed all of this on Travis and none of it on herself. But then, I do not believe- nor have I ever, ESPECIALLY after reviewing the interrogation and the audio recording from her VM ( or however she recorded it) that Jodi went there to do anything but humiliate him very publicly, and likely during his trip or in advance so that everyone saw “it was really him” that was the one to be ostracized.
I am hesitant to close my comment here to say that Travis was abusive to Jodi at times. I think Travis struggled with a very difficult childhood, the temptations and trappings of early success, and the untreated versions of what that can do to a man that had seen what he had. Not knocking any one religion here- more promoting therapeutic sessions, lol, but I am not a fan of any one spiritual belief or pattern being touted to be the be-all and end-all for any person suffering from things that in my view Travis did as a result of his childhood. In other words, I am not a fan of the self-healing through God strategy without what I would call the therapeutic strategy or road map as guidance.
OT that reminds me of someone who compared
her child to Anthony’s on another thread.
pity there are no statutes criminalizing lying to the public
wrt a criminal investigation.
If one lies with the specific intent of garnering donations or using same for purposes other than it’s stated intent, it definitely can be.
B
Blink writes:
I think you may be looking at this from a perspective other than Jodi’s
—–
First of all, thank you so much for your response, I just snipped a bit for me re-post, but it is really well written and once agin I thank you for the education!
As far as perspective,my point is that there is no evidence that Travis saw himself in relationship to Arias as Arias saw him, that it was her perspective that was skewed, not his. There are no promises, no pleadings to come back , no threats of harm to her if she left him. There is resistance, name calling, hot and cold responses to her actions and words. Arias feasted on the crumbs thrown. Travis got to have a sexual relationship with a minimum amount of out put emotionally. I am not trying to be facetious, but except for the context that he was a Mormon and was murdered, his actions and words are , dare I say it, not so different from anyone who doesn’t want a relationship with someone who will stop at nothing to continue it.
There is no evidence that Travis asked Jodi to move to Mesa, ever. Arias herself testified that the reason she moved to Mesa after the brief “acknowledged by others” dating scenario ( jan 2007 to March or Apirl 2007) was because she herself wanted to be there and moved in with a roommate she had met through the church. That roommate then announced she was getting married, and rather than return to California, Arias chose to stay. The truth is that it was all about being near to Travis, always. Travis did not move her into his house, and did not continue to date her openly, he continued a clandestine sexual relationship.. IMO simply because she was there to be available to him. So as far far as “losing her home”,
her home was in California, and she was attempting to have a home in the town the object of her desire lived in. To make the point further, there have been no mitigation witnesses from Mesa, no one who has shown that she had a life and social network, i.e. home, in Mesa.
You are absolutely correct that I am viewing this whole thing from a different perspective in general.
I see this as – to refer to Fonseca’s opinion- two people in an undefined and somewhat devious sporadic sexual scenarios. I just can’t buy self defense, no matter how you connect the dots,and neither did the first jury. No matter what Travis’s background was, it did not lead him to murder anyone.
Re: Defense current motion to take death off table because Arias now has three mitigation witnesses who will not testify in open court- The basis of that filing is evidently that these mitigation witnesses would testify that Travis told them he was interested in children sexually. More “substance” to create a perspective where Arias killed a bad guy, so she shouldn’t be judged so harshly…. not buying it. And why couldn’t those witnesses be subpoenaed if their testimony is crucial to the verdict?
I will say this however:
I could never sentence someone to the death penalty. I do think a just sentence for Arias is LWOP.
finally- absolutely in line with your stance on the inadequacy of organized religion as a heal all.
I agree that responsibility for one’s life rests squarely on one’s shoulders.
My guess is that Arias would get somewhere if she stopped blaming and truly threw herself at the mercy of the court.
@whodunnit. I never disagree with anything you say.
I don’t think it worth the trouble myself to think about this “relationship.”
Good thing those experts are well paid.
wrt “My guess is that Arias would get somewhere if she stopped blaming
and truly threw herself at the mercy of the court.”
True, but she still has to put on a legal defense to the DP and provide
evidence of mitigating factors to escape it, and there are only 2 ways to do that:
intrinsic evidence about herself (psychological deficits due to x y or z;
extrinsic factors related to TA’s character substantiating self defense of some nature,
and/or to the nature of the relationship
(psychologically abusive). Did Nurmi give a roadmap to mitigation and specific
evidence in his opening? He should have.
————–
Can you refresh me in a few words on exactly what her self defense claim was? (the specific act?)
Apparently Jury 1 didn’t buy it.
His “attack” which she defended against would have to be directly before the act of murder
& have led to it. Her snapping pics of a dying T in the shower belies any claim he was out
of the shower & attacking her before his death. Imo
doesn’t matter about camera cards, chain of custody, and reliability. Whatever the
card source, the picture speaks for itself. He wouldn’t have attacked her,
been stabbed & shot, & leapt back
in the shower to have his demise photographed.
It seems to me Defense strategy is to get J Stephens on the record with as many rulings as possible
offering grounds for appeal of a DP verdict. Perhaps an appellate lawyer is coaching him.
I saw a pic yesterday of the family on the front row weeping their way thru another day of testimony in
front of the jurors. Imo that inflammatory “testimony” is appeal grounds no 1 wrt the DP.
I think I better apologize up front for posting so much, and for being repetitive or saying what you already know!!!
but here goes:
https://www.azag.gov/sites/default/files/sites/all/docs/Criminal/ccc/section2.PDF
The above link provides the list of factors that must be proven in the sentencing phase in order to vote for DP, as well as list of factors that must be proven for mitigation.
The State only has to prove one of the factors for DP. Heinous and cruel is a factor for DP.Hence the photos.
The defense only has to prove one for the DP to be considered mitigating. ” Under duress” is a mitigating factor. Thats why all the Travis bashing.
rose writes:
It seems to me Defense strategy is to get J Stephens on the record with as many rulings as possible
offering grounds for appeal of a DP verdict.
—–
Here is the skinny on how appeals work in arizona:
https://www.azag.gov/sites/default/files/documents/files/CriminalAppealsProcess.pdf
The things that defense is putting before this court may serve as basis of appeals down the road.
The same way that Stephens initial ruling was then appealed by the appellate court.
So if for example, Defense puts forth that Arias can’t get a fair trial because their witnesses don’t want to testify in open court, and Judge Stephens declines that, defense can then take that into their appeal in the event of death penalty conviction.
The link I sent earlier ( dec 2 11:19 a.m. also address procedure for appeals.
I think defense is aiming to get as many things on the table for appeal as possible. Which doesn’t seem out of the norm in this increasingly outside of the box trial!
Ragdoll- you are such a kind and gentle soul- thank you for being you and for always being my friendly. mucho Hugs
whodunnit dont apologize- you have alot to say yes, but thats a good thing IMO it gets us thinking and reviewing- I may not always agree – but have never dismissed yr pondrings as offbase -
ajmo peace
-snipped
The State vs Jodi Arias ~ Travis Alexander murder trial shared a link.
December 1 · Edited
“SECRET WITNESS” – #JodiArias will have to testify in open court…
Judge Stephens was correctly overturned…
Remember, Judge, the courtroom belongs to the people. You are a branch of the government… created by the people for the people… sorry – no secret court in the USA for CONVICTED MURDERERS!
~ Vinnie Politan, Facebook
http://www.facebook.com/Justice4Travis
Mom 3.0
I want to respect this board and not turn it into a chat room by being too personal, but I just had to say thank you for your kind words.
OT
whodunnit You are most welcome and thanx for the note of gratitude- much appreciated-
—
PS No worries about respecting BOC-
If we first caution “OT” (off topic)- then others can scroll by- that better safeguards the board against becoming chatroom like- I unfortunately sometimes forget to do this- I apologize for the oversight
I look forward to reading more of yr ponderings who-
ajmo Peace
In todays news-
snipped:
Arias’ lawyers have filed a motion to have the convicted killer’s murder conviction overturned.
At issue Thursday was the alleged deletion of thousands of pornographic files from the computer of Travis Alexander, the man Arias murdered.
The defense claims that the images were removed from Alexander’s computer while it was in police custody.
Prosecutor Juan Martinez is arguing that the defense’s own IT expert is the one who erased the files in question.
http://www.wave3.com/story/27549917/day-17-of-jodi-arias-trial
cont-
Legal expert Beth Karas, with http://www.karasoncrime.com, said that it appears that mistakes were made handling the evidence, but doesn’t think it will lead to Arias’ conviction being overturned.
“I don’t think that there is any reason to upset the integrity of the guilty verdict,” Karas said. “This is something I think the first jury should have heard, but is it the type evidence that would have swayed them to vote not guilty, I don’t think so.”
—-
This is something the jury should have heard….but it wouldnt have effected the guilty verdict?
I dont think anyone can say that with any confidence- a jury learns that there are major concerns on LEs handling and preservation of evidence possibly willful mishandling inorder to sway facts or obscure to the benefit of prosecution and we are to believe this wouldnt effect the jurys deliberation of the weight and integrity of that evidence?
How could it not?
IDk
AJMo peace
Totally agree- and btw, that would have to be true 12x- no way in the world anyone can say that. Bottom line- if this is misconduct- she will get a dismissal or vacate at this juncture and God forgive me for saying this- but she should. Not because I don’t think this moonbat should ever see a day outside of a cell- but because law is law- we don’t get to decide who gets to operate outside of it. They will re-charge her immediately, she will get no bail, and these impudent Pep Boys clones will get replaced with a new team.
I truly wish someone who knew what they were doing would force a sit-down to review the forensics and go that route. I have been saying this since day one. This is a highly forensic case, and they have this all wrong- and the right assets will prove out what I am saying.
B
Here is a tweeter recap of the evidentary hearing from yesterday/today:
https://twitter.com/michaelbkiefer
Mr martinez is either playing dumb or he like Meledez is just not that savy IRT computers-
He accuses the expert of erasing evidence expert states no just deletedremoved viruses on clone.
Florez actually got on the stand and again claimed no memory except when he pointed to the defense or at least(definitely not him) plugging in the computer and turning it on and rifling thru it- and then on simcards again ignorance- doesnt know anything – except when he does….
It seems He claimed ignorance about any damage that would be incurred thru turning on /plugging in the computer-”Im not an expert”
yet he himself told Arias-
snipped July 15, 2008 interview
Flores: we did not modify anything. Say like a computer, we take a
mirror copy of it, and we don’t even touch it…. That’s exactly what we
do with the photos. We don’t work with the originals and we make an
exact duplicate copy and we work with the copy..And our guys are so
good, that every case that I know of, has never been lost in court
then this from link:
—
whats going on here-?
Why so many discrepancies and what appears to be cover ups of blatent disregard for preservation of evidence-
They already had her- she confessed- why not make every attempt to safeguard chain of custody etc inorder to safeguard any verdict?
i just dont get why they would do this why they would all lie about absolutely no porn found on computer and all the rest…
I dont get it.
AJMO
Peace
I do. They effed up royally on multiple issues and are trying to not get sanctioned or worse-
The PROSECUTION maintains the burden in every case. ( yes, I know in certain hearings/motions that can shift in criminal law, not talking about that).
I don’t believe any one of them is qualified to say what the hell really happened, or produce a report that could answer that question. Everything they needed to know Arias told them in that paint-dry 8 hours I spent analyzing that interview. They just had a better story. Those must some colorful office meetings or carpools these days.
B
Flores reminds me of that detective in OR who pled & git 18 mos probation,
who tampered with, as well as hid, evidence in an
otherwise slam dunk capital case just because he could within his LE/DA system
and just due to arrogance + ignorance.
I could see that perspective for sure- but I truly believe the entire “case manager” concept is flawed in that state in the first place, and I also believe he is taking the hits for the team Martinez in hindsight. He knows Travis was shot first, he knows it did not suit their case in chief and the rest is history. I truly get that- it’s not like anyone does not believe she is guilty- so liberties were taken. The operative word here is liberties- they are not for anyone to take, let alone permanently mark our precedent based justice system.
My Mother used to say to me ( by way of her Dad, my Poppa saying to her). If you cannot find the time to do it correctly the first time- where do you suppose you would find the time to do it twice? Bottom line- Martinez thought for sure this case would plead. The eggs in that basket are rotten indeed.
B
@Blink. I forgot Martinez was
in the room with the computer (nod to Clue)
at the same time
as Flores.
Why mess with a slam dunk lwop case?
And any juror woukd believe the shot first narrative.
It makes the most sense.
Easy- because it was the difference between a defensible case or not so much. The problematic forensic evidence does not start and end with the storage media in this case. There is a significant lack of collection ( I have never seen a full inventory which in itself is odd) and testing of highly probative evidence. As an example- the ropes believed to be from Travis’s pillows and some believe Arias used to drag him were never tested at all- fiber evidence, fiber evidence encased in blood from the bathroom, etc. Blood spatter/spurt patterns in any detail. That’s the tip of the iceberg from my memory alone, really. I have never seen any reporting protocols, lab or bench notes that are required to correspond to accredited field and lab work. They were never admitted at trial and I am beyond flummoxed as to why that was allowed.
Flores actually gave an interview prior to trial ( I want say Dateline or 48 hours) where he expressly stated Travis was shot first- and he maintained at trial that Dr. Horn told him that ( or he misunderstood) and Horn testified he had no memory of it. Giving the State the benefit of the doubt for a while on this, I would seek to know exactly when their entire case in chief shifted- but I strongly suspect it was when JA found the phone, and when that evidence supported ( in their mind) her earlier assertions that TA was deviant in some areas and therefore abusive. That was never the way to try this case and has backfired.
Conversely, this may ultimately be seen as a wash because Jodi’s defense did not raise these issues at trial effectively either- although I admit I have not recently reviewed all pre-trial actions prior to this set of counsel. They still matter as part of the entire record. Stephens also interpreted prior rulings- so there’s that.
Bottom line- Did the defense use these prosecutorial errors to preserve grounds for reversible errors for some reason during the trial instead of exploiting them in their defense of the client willfully as a strategy- or were they so inexperienced in a capital case with mountains of forensic evidence they simply did not understand it’s relevance and feared the junk science label? Right now, I would suggest they at least started out of that block based on work product. Ineffectiveness of counsel when the Judge will not allow you to withdraw at least 4 times, one of them including a 12 page letter from the defendant, is a lock in this case.
My bestest guess about how this went off the rails for the prosecution ( and I actually can understand this thinking for sure, but then I would have ordered the right testing and analysis instead of his actions)is that Martinez feared what his defendant knew that they did not. Which in my view is two critically important factors- 1. whether or not she was alone at the scene, which to this day I question. 2. That she was never an invited guest, broke in for nefarious purposes, Travis was shot first and then attacked Arias and was concerned that whatever that encompassed might reduce a charge or verdict from first degree or from a capital case based on removal of aggravators. The thing about being a defendant of a crime you actually committed is that you know the truth and the associated evidence- if that can tell a different story, but your lead detective says he has a better one that is more manageable and in your view, your ticket out of the slammer, you go with theirs with the knowledge that you have a plan B.
B
Blink thanks for the indepth responses of late- brilliant
HERES SOMETHING ELSE-
During the evidentary hearing Martinez brought up spybot- or porn directly being accessed June 4th at 1:22 pm on June 4th…
I do not like having to find things via tweets
- But according to this tweet it has people remembering earlier testimony of the camera shots-
Nicole Goodman Esq @msesquirette ·
#jodiarias How could TA access a porn cite or his computer at 1:44pm on 6/4/08? Isn’t there a pic of him lying in bed with JA at 1:44pm?
—
If true and I cant recall…the time of pic would not back up the computer experts testimony UNLESS the camera times/exif data was wrong-or manipulated-
as you brought up several times the trist photos were most likely NOT from that day- (I agreed pointing out that Travis looks younger in some) – and that we cant be sure if set for vacation time or cali time vs Arizona time…
camera times could have been wrong or totally manipulated-r uploaded via the simcards not “shot” that day
Martinez is calling all of this into question with his cross
Might this be the beginning of yr concerns being proven true?
BTW
I totally agree
“My bestest guess about how this went off the rails for the prosecution ( and I actually can understand this thinking for sure, but then I would have ordered the right testing and analysis instead of his actions)is that Martinez feared what his defendant knew that they did not. Which in my view is two critically important factors- 1. whether or not she was alone at the scene, which to this day I question. 2. That she was never an invited guest, broke in for nefarious purposes, Travis was shot first and then attacked Arias and was concerned that whatever that encompassed might reduce a charge or verdict from first degree or from a capital case based on removal of aggravators. The thing about being a defendant of a crime you actually committed is that you know the truth and the associated evidence- if that can tell a different story, but your lead detective says he has a better one that is more manageable and in your view, your ticket out of the slammer, you go with theirs with the knowledge that you have a plan B.
B
—
and this might come back to bite Arias in the behind- as if pics/times are thrown out the prosecutions theory goes out the window and arias’ “invite” blows away with it……
AJMO Peace
It will come back. Here’s the problem with her story ( a sociopath chronicle, if you will)- she thinks it vindicates here or gets her out of jail. That will never be true, imo. I am not sure that matters to her as much as people think. I am starting to believe that in her mind, the truth of the matter ( not from her, but from facts with her fantasy embellishments intact) is more important than her freedom.
B
“…believe that in her mind, the truth of the matter
(not from her, but from facts with her fantasy
embellishments intact) is more important than her freedom. B ”
highlighting — yes, imo. she has a skewed mental picture
of “truth” that overrides not just reality but also her self-advocacy
Rose writes Dec 2.
Can you refresh me in a few words on exactly what her self defense claim was? (the specific act?)
———
Arias pled guilty . The defense put forth forth it was self defense. As I understand it, when you claim self defense, you do have to prove it to the jury. Arias put forth that when Travis knocked the camera from her hand and said a five year old could take better pictures and when Travis said ” gonna kill you bitch” that she feared for her life. Her experts alledged that Arias was a victim of domestic abuse in that the things he said to her were so emotionally abusive that she believed she was in mortal danger that day in the bathroom and responded not just to the incident but to the whole gestalt of their relationship. Defense’s position was to show how Travis had been so awful that her belief she would be killed if she didn’t kill him was justified.
Jury didnt buy it. The glitch was that they couldn’t decide if the manner in which she murdered him rose to the ” worst of the worst” and called for death penalty.
ONE of the mitigating factors recognized by Arizona is that the defendant was under duress. ( I posted qualifiers for dp and mitigating factors in earlier post). So to my eyes at least, the testimony bashing Travis is all about convincing the jury that Travis had emotionally abused this woman to the point where she had no choice but to ” defend” herself.
at least thats the simplest answer I have drawn from this whole thing.
thank you WDI. So the precipitator per Arias was he knocked the camera from her hand and verbally threatened to kill her, so she flipped out. which vics of DV do, but she didn’t even live in his State & chose to be there.
The Dr F testmony about “the relationship,” even if Travis viewed child porn daily and treated her severely
say, is totally irrelevant in my mind.
In defining what constitutes a relationship that would serve as basis for domestic abuse charges, Ariazon has this to say:
http://www.azleg.state.az.us/ars/13/03601.htm
cutting to the chase, Arizona recognizes a domestic relationship as having dated or currently dating, and a sexual relationship in past or currently.
So defense is emphasizing sexual relationship, its the only thing that everyone will agree on.as existing
though I wish some fanatic would figure out the exact times and number of sexual romps. If the contacts were few and far between, it may not look like much of a relationship at all.
also
Mom 3.0
YES the computer access and time stamps on the photo son June 4th… hope that comes up, though I think we know what can of worms is looming…
Mom 3.0 writes:
HERES SOMETHING ELSE-
During the evidentary hearing Martinez brought up spybot- or porn directly being accessed June 4th at 1:22 pm on June 4th…
I do not like having to find things via tweets
- But according to this tweet it has people remembering earlier testimony of the camera shots-
Nicole Goodman Esq @msesquirette ·
#jodiarias How could TA access a porn cite or his computer at 1:44pm on 6/4/08? Isn’t there a pic of him lying in bed with JA at 1:44pm?
———
could the computer have been used to load images onto the camera at that time, thus making the time stamps on the photos?
Arias claimed that she was snapping pics and then showing them to Travis while he showered. Maybe the truth is that she lay in wait til the roommate was gone, used computer to transfer photos previously taken, went upstairs and showed him what she had loaded on his camera with a threat to give the camera to someone else…….. and putting it in the washing machine at the last minute was an act that reflected her conflict.
speaking of washers, am I spinning out here?
Harro… LOL. This has been my sticking point and the reason I wrote the piece calling the e-dence into question. I do not believe those pics were taken that day, I do not believe the evidence is credible to support that and actually contradicts it and that is how Arias miraculously finds her phone and audible recording located therein. She knew that the “permission” for her to be in the home in the first place would disappear (if) they analyzed the data properly.
Their story helped hers because she absolutely was lying in wait, she broke in that house and what ensued was “in the commission of”. Keep in mind this critical point- Flores missed a critical snafu ( well, several) when interviewing Arias. She DID NOT KNOW about the 3rd roomie. AND.. he was never called to the stand. I prolly sound like a broken record at this point, but this case needs a DOJ/AG review in a big way.
B
blink writes:
she broke in that house and what ensued was “in the commission of”.
———————————————————–
walks like a ducks, quacks like a duck……
the window screen on the office where the computer was located was off. . Has evidence ever indicated fingerprinting of that screen?
Arias claimed she came to the house at 4:00 am, and said that Travis was waiting for her,and together they watched a music video on his computer in the office. She says she left the house after the sex in the afternoon, but then came right back in to give Travis a disc of photos that she just happened to have in her purse. She said that a fight ensued then and they had sex in the office, and then decided to take the photos of him in the shower because he was trim and looking good for his cabo holiday.
If Arias did not enter the house til after the roommate was gone, accessed the computer at 1:42 p.m. she would be able to see that Travis had been on it at 4 a.m., and incorporate all of that into her lies about that day.
I do think that what the state had=s been trying to prove all along is that arias did break and enter while armed with a weapon. The original felony charges by the state support that. The state had only circumstantial evidence for this however, and that was ” cancelled out” by defense claim that arias got the gun from Travis closet.
I do believe the fight was over the camera, which is the grain of truth in Arias concocted story. I don’t think the camera was put in the washer by accident in the gathered sheets.I think that after the murder, Arias was on fast forward to destroy as much evidence as possible, which would include any evidence of her presence in the house- and since she had transferred the photos, she wanted to destroy that. her response to Flores interrogation had been ” are you sure the time stamps are right?, can’t they be manipulated?” was based on the fact that the photos were taken earlier.
Slightly off topic:
Fonseca laid out Travis secrecy and the nature of his disdain for Arias by citing emails where Arias is asking for recognition. Fonseca presented this as a general plea from an oppressed woman. In fact , Arias was miffed that she had helped Travis with his book, and wanted to at least be thanked for it. She claimed she had edited it.We will never really know exactly what Arias input was into that book he was writing, because Travis can’t speak to that.
It could easily be that Arias saw she was not mentioned as having any part of his life in any way, for editing , for emotional involvement, etc, and Fonseca had that as her take away as opposed to Arias being angry that she had not been acknowledged, and fomenting a response from Travis, flipping the scenario if you will from Arias being the provoker to Travis being the abuser.
If they get through this computer mess, I think the state really does have to emphasize that Arias had one goal and that was to make a dollar out of 99 cents. There is nothing to support that Alexander had any intentions of having any on going relationship with Arias, and that it was always Arias who made the contact possible. Their is no evidence of pursuit by Travis, there are ample examples of Arias pursuing Travis. There is nothing complicated about the way that Arias became increasingly desperate for Travis, and feats on crumbs in her pursuit of more with him. Women in the same scenario do this everyday. What is different about Arias is that she calculated to murder him, and that is on her- not because she was pushed to her wits end, but because she has a criminal mind. Having her diagnosed with borderline won’t change her mindset and doesn’t justify the murder. If everyone who was diagnosed with borderline personality murdered people, if every woman in a sexual relationship who was rejected and alternatively ” embraced” killed their sex partner,MAYBE then that could be an excuse, but that’s obviously not the case.
She came armed with a stolen gun, and threatened blackmail- not because she wanted to go to mexico and was jealous, but because Travis was pursuing another woman who didnt want to marry him, and this was her last straw. I do think she premeditated the murder in the sense that she came with a gun, and I do believe that she hadn’t really thought through exactly what she would do with that gun, except that as she claimed, pointing a gun at someone gets them to stop what they are doing ( her response to State asking,” if you thought it wasn’tloaded, what were you going to do were you going to throw it ( the gun) at him?”.
The State is burdened by the fact that they do not have the murder weapon. And the case is totally fouled up by lack of forensics- as you have pointed out since day one.
BUT it still comes down to heinous and cruel- which is what the sentencing trial is supposed to be about.
Testimony about porn sites and state calling Arias a liar is not relevant.There was proof of lying outside of the porn viewing claim. There is no way to prove that if a jury had been given evidence of Travis viewing porn that their verdict of guilt would have been altered. Defense has to prove that State was aware and willfully withheld evidence. Too long to go into now, but Neumeister’s claims can be countered with facts.
There is a way to determine if the jury would have rendered a different verdict had they been provided accurate evidence (my shorthand term). It is called a habeas whereby the defendant asks the Supreme Court for application of the reasonable man standard ( juror) in light of clear and convincing evidence. If nothing else, she will get another bite at that apple- of that I am positive.
B
@WDI. You would be a fine criminal lawyer, as the devil is in the factual details, & you call them up.
She has been convicted. If she gets a retrial, I have no doubt–same result. As to sentencing, heinous is slam dunk.
Mitigators are extrinsic (the relationship which is a bad fit ) or intrinsic (flaws based on
childhood insults). So I expect a parent was to be a witness. I think a retrial could come out for her.
blink writes:
the defendant asks the Supreme Court for application of the reasonable man standard ( juror) in light of clear and convincing evidence.
——–
Clear and convincing evidence is the key terminology. Clear and convincing evidence is something that is more true than not. http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/clear_and_convincing_evidence
This is not a situation where they have suddenly found DNA or been able to confirm that she stole a gun, and have the weapon with fingerprints to prove, eyewitness etc etc etc. ( and no one is touching the time stamps… yet)
In their claim,The defense is saying that porn on computer is relevant because State called Arias a liar for claiming he was masturbating to boys whose images were on his computer. Even if that were true, this ” evidence” would be used as circumstantial to allow the jury to draw the conclusion that BECAUSE he had these images, Arias is NOT a liar, and that therefore, she should be believed in all her claims. It could also be used to support concept that Travis was a bad man who made her do bad things. This, imo is not clear and convincing evidence.
As far as reasonable man, you would have to show that a reasonable man would consider porn on the computer in general as mitigating evidence that overturned pre mediation.
If it in fact exists, this is evidence against Travis’s character, but doesn’t enhance Arias character ( aside from illustrating ONE instance in which she didnt lie out of many)- one could then argue that discovering him masturbating to these images is another ingredient in a list of incidents of HER escalating fury that she ultimately acts on by stabbing and shooting him to death.
Or not. Just when I think I am out, they pull me back in again.
Oh we agree at this juncture “who”. I am just telling you in my view where this is going.
They are simply GPS’ing the path the trojan horse will take. I openly admit I may be giving more credit than this defense deserves-
B
my last post dropped a word:
a retrial could come out **Worse ** for her
—–
I suppose the benefit to her is the years she’d stay the
center of attention.
Blink
what I am trying to say is that according to the motion filed by the defense the issue is multi faceted:
1. the state willfully and knowingly hid evidence by deleting porn files on Travis computer on purpose.
2. That porn evidence on the computer refutes the fact that State called Arias a liar.
3. If there is prone on Travis computer, Arias is not a liar.
4. because the jury was told that arias was a liar, their verdict was affected by lack of proof that she was not a liar.
5.The defense offered an alternative to addressing the computer at all would be to just taking the death sentence off the table.
So I just don’t see how this can go immediately to habeus without concrete proof that state knew about the porn and puporsely deleted it to hide evidence that is , to a reasonable man, clear and convincing evidence that Jodi is not guilty of premeditated first degree murder.
sorry for the verbosity, you are extremely gracious!
Well it can’t go to habeas ever until the matter is fully adjudicated. Nurmi knew his reach with Stephens was not going to get a dismissal. No way no- how was she going to do that as the sitting judge in this case. He has enough going on in this case (in my view )for reversible error as it is. He does not and will not get the berth he needs to prove the issues he really should be on appeal with this in limine motion.
So in effect, he has laid the the foundation he needs for appeal, and not tipped his hand as to much he actually knows about what will be considered prosecutorial error, whether willful or not, which once discovered is clear and convincing and (new) evidence that can be presumed a reasonable standard would render a different verdict. This was a strategy call or he really would be subject to an ineffectiveness of counsel habeas.
B
Blink
agreed-
IF defense proves that State willfully withheld evidence, it doesn’t really matter WHAT the evidence is, and yea, game change deluxe.
Bottom line is there are many ways that a computer can access sites, and no way to prove it was done by Travis’s fingertips. There is only Neumeisters claim that it couldn’t be done any other way. So State has to show that yes, it CAN be done in other ways.
If State can illustrate instances of a computer generating traffic on it’s own, it destroys Neumeister’s claim at it’s core. Although Neumiesters testimony is automatically called evidence,the claims that the defense makes based on his testimony have be more true than not to qualify as clear and convincing.
again, the existence of porn is a separate issue from concealing evidence.
@Who. nice list. #3 is a syllogism that does not flow from 1&2.
Read in OR where Clackamus Cty had to throw out 10 cases after
a detective pled he’d intentionally incorrectly logged in evidence as well
as altered it to benefit a States’ case in a slam dunk conviction
where his acts were not necessary. (He got a mere wrist-tap sentence.)
The prosecution held up and testified there was no porno on the travis computer None zip nada-
This was not true-
The expert looked thru the registry he testified to doing so he said there was none-
That was not true-
IRT tampering….
Florez did not handle the evidence correctly he did not follow protocol-
he did not corner off Travis/computer he did not stay clear of it-
There are safety protocols in place- he was supposed to call in the c.forensics unit -
The forensics unit was then supposed to secure the computer if it was deemed important to immediately establish the “wake” mode it was the forensic specialists call not Florez’s
Ask yrself this question when reviewing todays tweets from the evidentary hearing-
If the prosecution had solid evidence on travis computer showing JA as the brutal murderer- perhaps a video or a letter saying I killed him watch this- or heres how i did it …do you think for ONE SECOND that the prosecution Mr martinez-or Florez would have allowed the defense to touch the evidence to plug it in- to rifle thru it?
Hell no they wouldnt have-
Was it willful….
Both Florez and Martinez claim there is no protocol for allowing or looking the other way whle a a defense team “tampers” with evidence… perhaps it isnt written- But Florez and Id assume Martinez KNEW what the defenses handling would result in-
A further destruction of evidence a further masking of any missteps deliberate or accidental that occurred with Improper handling of the evidence from day 1 ON
A reasonable person must ponder the reasons why they obscured or blatantly LIED about no porn- and if a reasonable person does then IMO it brings to the forefront REAL concerns over what this prosecution and LE team + “experts” did or did not do in each and every case EVER prosecuted by them-
Even brings into question that “1″ case where Smith thought it best to “awaken” the computer at crimescene….
Again Florez KNEW that he nor LE was never supposed to touch the evidence- – He knew it yet he didnt warn martinez (if u nelieve that he wasnt blissfully unawre) and he didnt warn the defense team that day
Yet he knew-
he told JA they never do it (touch/ manipulate the originals) they work with clones- yet we are supposed to believe both Florez and martinez thought oh well…Defense wants to look we might as well let them?
im thinking…get real
AJMO Peace
Mom 3.0 thank you so much for updating us on this- so far I agree with your take entirely ( no surprise, this is horsepoop).
few things:
1. If this were my motion I would have asked Flores if he forgot what he had explained to the defendant during his interview/interrogation and asked him his understanding of that portion of the exchange. Then, I would have played it for him in open court and asked him to explain the disparity between his understanding of protocol a full year previous to the incident in question as he sat at that very table ( argument as to who turned the power on).
Regardless of his comments I would have asked him if he has a memory problem or if he has ever been diagnosed with a hiccocampus deficit. End point-this is not the first conflict of his public comments ( certified as he is case agent) and what he says before the court.
I would have argued that the custodian of evidence in a criminal trial is always the State, period. It just is. It is their job and burden to protect latent evidence even when discoverable- I would seek to know why they did not receive a copy of the hard drive and how it was presented to the defense that day- my guess is they knew it was corrupt and were like- here is the on switch- it sticks so press it for a full 3 seconds, lol.
Where is the reporting that files were deleted as exculpatory submissions to the defense required by law? Nothing Stephens does would surprise me except for maybe the very slightest change of her hairstyle but mark my words- this girl will get a new trial in this case and it is preferable to get the hot poker in the eye than admit this- but she deserves one. The law is the law for everyone in this country that is a citizen.
Then- for Martinez, I would ask him what reporting he reviewed prior to the incident in question and did he already know that files were deleted? Then I would ask him a gazzillion questions in detail about how he was alerted and prolly impeach him from memory.
Lastly I would ask him if he was certain that he did not accidentally turn the computer on by tossing it on the floor as he had similarly with the camera.
He likes to do that with electronic evidence apparently. Or was it more sinister- did he already know there was going to be an issue with the computer evidence so now he could say the same about the camera so as not to reproduce it’s images as one would- to “recreate an experiment exactly”. If he answered no I would then ask him if it was possible that he stood on it in his closet to reach his ties.
He is the Jose Baez of prosecutors and before I hear a smidge about hispanic roots Juan is Mexican and it has nothing to do with that. It has to do with drawing circles around squares and hoping you sufficiently distracted with your other hand. Adding to injury- he could learn from Baez.
B
Here are some of the tweets Ive assembled-
First-
https://twitter.com/michaelbkiefer
then some from WS as they happened:
Wild About Trial @WildAboutTrial · 7s 8 seconds ago
Page 6 shows the guidelines on how to impound computers. All officers should be familiar with this explains Willmott. #JodiArias
Wild About Trial @WildAboutTrial · 11s 11 seconds ago
1) secure area around cpu
2) do not turn cpu on/off, attempt to open/close files, run directories, access cpu diskettes/cd/dvd #JodiAriasMichael Kiefer @michaelbkiefer · 27s27 seconds ago
The policy clearly says to secure the area and not to turn computers on or off or open files or access registries or discs.From WAT:
Wild About Trial @WildAboutTrial · now
Smith: There are reasons to waken a CPU from sleep at a crime scene.
He did it once without a writeblocker. #JodiArias
Wild About Trial @WildAboutTrial · 7s 7 seconds ago
Willmott wants to know if Smith wants to add “It can be woken up out of sleep” to the guidelines.
Smith says “yes” lol. #JodiAriasMichael Kiefer @michaelbkiefer · 2m2 minutes ago
Willmott presses Smith on whether it’s ok to wake up a computer from sleep mode at a crime scene. He says it is under some circumstances.
Jen’s Trial Diaries @TrialDiariesJ · 2m2 minutes ago
Willmott asks how many times have you done that?
Perry- once
Willmott- Without a write blocker?
Perry- Yes #jodiarias #3tvarias
Michael Kiefer @michaelbkiefer · 57s57 seconds ago
Smith admits that the best course of action is to take the battery out and cord off the computer. Michael Kiefer @michaelbkiefer · 19s20 seconds ago
Willmott gets Mesa PD computer guy Smith to admit that waking the computer changes files and deletes cache files, among other things. Jen’s Trial Diaries @TrialDiariesJ · 1m1 minute ago
Perry- Waking up a computer isn’t the best course of action. Contacting forensics is #jodiarias #3tvarias
Jen’s Trial Diaries @TrialDiariesJ · 29s30 seconds ago
Willmott- If TA computer was woke up out of sleep mode it was modified correct?
Perry- Yes #jodiarias #3tvarias Michael Kiefer @michaelbkiefer · 3m3 minutes ago
Willmott then gets Smith to say it’s a violation of policy to turn on the computer and presses him as to letting “civilians” do it. He balks
Jen’s Trial Diaries @TrialDiariesJ · 2m2 minutes ago
Willmott- If someone from Mesa PD turned on computer does that violate policy?
Perry-Yes but it doesn’t include defense turning it on
Jen’s Trial Diaries @TrialDiariesJ · 1m1 minute ago
Willmott- Without a write blocker and the computer is turned on it is modified correct?
Perry- Yes #jodiarias #3tvarias
Michael Kiefer @michaelbkiefer · 53s53 seconds ago
Willmott gets to the copies. “They’re not the actual evidence are they?” Smith: “No, they’re not.” From WAT:
Wild About Trial @WildAboutTrial · 6s 6 seconds ago
Willmott points out these copies or clones are meant to be worked on. Smith agrees. #JodiAriasJen’s Trial Diaries @TrialDiariesJ · 57s58 seconds ago
Willmott- When you talk about these 9,000 modified files & the incinerator it is just on the copies that have been worked on correct?
Yes Michael Kiefer @michaelbkiefer · 39s40 seconds ago
Willmott asks if porn was found on the 2008 image. Long pause, then Smith says yes. And that it’s not the same as the clones.Jen’s Trial Diaries @TrialDiariesJ · 43s44 seconds ago
Perry- It’s a describing link and Det. Brown did find some pornography on the computer.#jodiarias #3tvarias From WAT:
Wild About Trial @WildAboutTrial · 41s 41 seconds ago
Smith goes over the registry, and that they are commands and doesn’t indicate that a person went to that link. #JodiArias
Wild About Trial @WildAboutTrial · 4s 4 seconds ago
Juan wants to know if the general guidelines address defense attorneys and them handling computers.
No it does not says Smith. #JodiArias
—
To Be cont after lunch recess
Peace
question
are there any other death penalty cases in which computers were integral to the investigation?
I ask this because it occurs to me that even just 6 years ago, the regard in which personal computers were held, and the potency of their value for investigative purposes, has changed radically – and we are truly in a new day.Is lack of experience, lack of expertise the same thing as misconduct? I am not trying to provoke, I am really wondering.
Six years ago, computer forensics simply couldn’t be as developed as it is NOW,because it is a new playing field technologically. It was pointed out today that protocol for handling computers was updated as of 2013.
But like the way that blood evidence was once identified only by type, but now can be identified by dna, It is absolutely valid to re examine the computer situation, the protocol, the contents.
also wondering if it was Arias who found porn on Travis computer during her hacking expeditions, and if she fabricated the masturbation story to get the info out there, without having to say that she had gotten into his computer without his knowledge.
Blink-
After reading yr response I have to say- You are going to make a fine attorney- Wow-
I cant say if Nurmi made these same arguments or tried to..or not-
reading the trial thru tweets leaves alot out-
From what i read nurmi did not make the best argument-
You know I like to follow the evidence and make up my own mind-
If someone is found guilty i expect to be able to follow the evidence trail and determine for myself just as the jury did the defendants guilt-
Unfortunately in this case I can not trust the evidence– which makes me question everything-
Jodi killed travis-
and all the evidence should back the prosecutions telling of the hw the when the why and the who-
I keep asking myself-Can we be certain of anything?
Can we trust the evidence
can we trust the blood evidence as presented? no
the camera evidence as presented? No
the computers evidence as presented no
the phones evidence as presented no
the sim cards evidence as presented no
the who the why and the how? no
although I agree Jodi deserves another chance- I do not think she should go free- and all this could ahve been prevented had LE and the Prosecution followed protocol-
please let me know if yr thoughts change Blink
AJMO Peace
Thank you. We shall see if I ultimately choose that practice.
I wanted to append my thought to say that although I believe under the law Arias is “deserving” of a new trial in my view- Morally, I could care less if she rots in a cell with only her BPD to keep her company.
Legally, I would like to see Ms. Arias tried and convicted for this crime so there is no question of appeal.
B
Yeah Blink I cringed when writing the word deserves
Perhaps its better to say Jodi deserves to have the complete truth told showing just how brutal and conniving she really was-
If the evidence is presented in full I think this will all become abundantly clear just as you have said in yr earlier pieces
Martinez has now agreed there was porn on travis’ computer-
He has agreed the computer had viruses-
he makes it now seem as if these were not two very important points bolstered wrongly in the trial. illustrating just how much of a liar Arias was showing she could not be trusted at her word
yet now we have those same two important issues showing the prosecution lied or obscured or the experts were woefully ignorant -
yet we are all still supposed to trust their word their “truth” and we are to assume that these points would not have effected the outcome… yet he thought they did when it pointed towrd Arias lying…
Interestingly enough after all of yesterdays testimony
It is Florez who seems to live in a self preservation fog one that conveniently shields his memory from recalling any possible damaging actions or inactions by himself and by Martinez-
If it was just this one instance I could give the benefit of the doubt but since the fog conveniently blew in while trying to back away from the shot first …I have to say the benefit of the doubt is wearing mighty thin… as the fog grows thicker
Martinez asked one question of Florez-during redirect :
Jen’s Trial Diaries ?@TrialDiariesJ ·
Juan get’s up and says “Is it your job to tell defense how to view evidence?
Flores – NO
—-
Its not his job? really? Since when is it not the job of LE to protect- to note to preserve and to “keep” the evidence pristine?
many a case has been lost over LEs inability to do so- but it has ALWAYS been their duty to safeguard the evidence – and they should always be held accountable when it is not.
According to testimony Florez would have stopped Defense from using a sledgehammer to destroy evidence…but I guess that protection doesnt extend to use of anything but a sledgehammer …
yesterday we learned that there was never any note made IRT the phones sims cards missing or not- (some are now said to never had one or used one although we know the pocket pc needed one-)
we learned the video camera was smashed by Florez because he gave Melendez permission to “force” the tape door open- he did not offer the defense a chance to look at it before this
We learned that Florez thought it really important to not touch the computer- inorder to protect finger prints…but that he felt it was perfectly fine to use a pen to push spacebar to “wake” it and then called forensics- who took up to an hour to get there
-Evidence lost
- But none of it is willful since its not his job to protect evidence secure the scene use his common sense…
No worries guys nothing to see here.
Just another day at the office.
AJMo peace
I’m sorry- do you have that right about the videocamera? That they recovered it, ruined it, and alerted the defense before trial? We are talking about the videocamera which was never entered into evidence at trial? That camera was what used the duopro. I will await your response but does anyone else see the obvious effing evidence tampering here? This is not misconduct- someone is going to need to tell me how every single electronic device and subsequent storage media the prosecution took into evidence is now ruined or altered in some capacity was ever usable for trial?
I am telling you Martinez tossed that camera willfully. Any respectable journalists picking this up?
B
How do I already know the answer. If Jody Arias
Blink thats what I can gather from tweets:
Jen’s Trial Diaries ?@TrialDiariesJ · 4m4 minutes ago
When the video camera was collected it wasn’t broke. Melendez says he had to force the door on the camera open to get to tape. #jodiarias
Jen’s Trial Diaries ?@TrialDiariesJ · 3m3 minutes ago
Willmott- But you never contacted defense to see if they wanted to view it?
Flores NO #jodiarias #3tvarias
@michaelbkiefer · 4m4 minutes ago
Flores gave permission to force the door on a digital camera to “get tape out.” #JodiArias
===
So yep Blink- it appears that you are correct it seems every single electronic device and subsequent storage media the prosecution took into evidence is now ruined or altered in some capacity
AJMO Peace
I am getting the feeling there is some confusion between the digital camera and the Sony camcorder. What is critically important (outside of the fact that in the States custody 100% of their e-evidence has been altered or compromised).
This is once again referring back to my piece on the matter, and that the SONY camcorder (again, I own one) only used SONY duopro- that format is NOT interchangeable with any other SD card. I know this because without paying attention once I put it in my laptop and had to have the geek squad remove it, lol. The camcorder also has a small internal hardrive which can be set to record to first- and then use the card as needed, or bypassed directly to the card. In the thousands of documents we reviewed we found no notation of the intake of the camcorder being taken into evidence whatsoever. I recall having that conversation with an editor specifically. Bottom line we have evidence that was submitted with knowledge that it was altered, compromised, possibly unusable under forensic protocol and not one State asset alerted the defense as to it’s interpretation ( because under law it must be perceived as favorable to the defendant) as exculpatory. I strongly suspect if I were to string the dates together as to when this occurred, there could be no doubt the State was aware and the question to Martinez once again as to why he threw the camera in open court the way he did is entirely in order.
B
Adding the earlier tweet discussing the video camera damage-as smashed
@jeffgoldesq: “@michaelbkiefer: Sounds like at least 3 phones were missing cards. video camera was smashed, but Neumeister was able to extract videos.”
then where the eff are the videos in evidence? Where’s the camcorder?
It is true that a prosecution can choose not to present evidence but they cannot omit or willfully withhold it’s existence from a defendant.
B
So who cleans up the Martinez-Flores possible evidence tampering & destruction?
Iirc the Clackamus DA only acted with a Clackamus detective when there was outsideLE investigating.
Here an ADA is involved and should be independently investigated.
Who does that? State police or FBI & local US Attorney?
I am on that hamster wheel at the moment- I will post as appropriate.
B