Jodi Arias-From the Archives

(I wrote the following post back in September, 2012.)

Jodi Arias/Fatal Attraction/Stalker/Murderess

Remember this name, Jodi Arias

I just finished reading about Jodi Arias and the information I garnered was chilling. When you combine a ‘fatal attraction’ with ‘stalking’, it only spells one thing, trouble.

You may find a lot of similarities in this case with one that we were obsessed with for over three years. A young, attractive, woman with an outgoing personality does not fit a cold, callous, calculating murderess who would premeditate a vicious murder. Was the motive, “if I cannot have him, I am going to make sure that no one else will have the chance?”

Here is a video of the Dr Drew show that I think you will find interesting.

An Arizona judge has set a new trial date for Jodi Ann Arias, a California woman accused of brutally killing her ex-boyfriend. Tuesday morning, Judge Sherry Stephens set Nov 19th as the date jury selection will begin.

Originally slated to begin on Feb. 21, the trial has been delayed because Arias’ lawyer, Victoria Washington, asked to withdraw from the case.

Judge Stephens appointed Jennifer Willmott, a death penalty-qualified defense attorney, to represent Arias. Willmott will have roughly 10 months to get up to speed on the case.

Travis Alexander had a blog. I just read one of his posts. He was decribing why he was not married and what he expected in a wife , if he ever found the right girl. I can fully understand why Jodi Arias tried to fit that bill and challenged him to choose her. You can tell by her actions, that she thinks highly of herself. When Travis Alexander rejected Jodi’s advances, this is when she did the unthinkable. You may find the following quite interesting….

Here is just one excerpt…People fall in love for too many reasons to count. Usually it is a combination of reasons. But I want someone to fall in love with me because I am a man of ability and achievement. Not because I have a lot of friends (not saying I do) but for the reason people want to befriend me, not because I have tons of money (not saying I do) but because I have the ability to earn a ton of money. Not because of my accomplishments but because I am a man of accomplishment. In fact I wouldn’t want to marry anyone if they loved me and these were not at least some of the reasons why.

Travis Alexander’s Blog

Jodi Arias is charged with shooting and stabbing her ex-boyfriend to death in his Mesa, Arizona, home in 2008. Prosecutors say the 31-year-old went to Travis Alexander’s home, shot him in the face, stabbed him 27 times and slit his throat from ear to ear.

Some of his closest friends found Alexander’s body in his shower. Taylor Searle told Jane Velez-Mitchell that he immediately suspected Jodi of the murder. “That was the first thing to my mind is that, ‘oh my gosh, Jodi actually killed him.'”

Searle described a confrontation between Arias and Alexander just days before his murder. “He had caught her breaking into his Facebook account, and he read back to me his response to her, and it was a pretty harsh response,” he said. “I just remember my response to him was, ‘are you afraid she’s going to hurt you?’ and four days, five days later, he goes missing and then we find him dead.”

Arias initially told investigators that she wasn’t at the home. Then she changed her story, saying two people broke into the house and attacked them. Finally in June 2010, Arias admitted to killing her ex out of self defense, according to court documents.

Police say they found a camera in Travis’ washing machine that had two sets of photos: a series of nude shots of Jodi and Travis together, and photos of a bloody Travis as he reportedly lay dying.

Source

*****************************************************************************
(The following is new information from today, March 31, 2013)

The narcissist is often considered a therapist’s nightmare

The narcissist believes that they are among the elite that walk this earth and that they deserve to be recognized as such and treated as such. They also have little compassion for those beneath them and that can often include their therapist. They are incredibly demanding. They expect to be treated like the royalty that they believe themselves to be. They can believe that they are not only attractive but the most attractive person in the world. They expect to be recognized as such by the therapist and seek admiration from the therapist.

Narcissists have fantasies of unlimited success, unlimited power, and unlimited achievement. When in love, they will describe it as “a love never before felt by a human being.” It’s not that they consider themselves to be the best, the highest one in the world, etc. but that they believe that they belong to a very special class of the elite. They belong to a group that is few in number and is superior to the rest of the human race.

Source

Thanks goes to ‘gramared’ for this contribution in the last thread which I just swiped as it is very informative!

I’m not sure if any of you have seen these or are interested, but the info below is taken from the Arizona Statutes which define self-defense as well as use of deadly physical force.

I’m fairly certain the jury will receive these definitions, along with a number of other instructions from the judge both verbally and in written form, before they begin deliberating.
The reason I say this is that I was foreman on a jury in AZ a number of years back. The defendant was arrested for murder and claimed self-defense. The crime was committed some nine years earlier, and the jury was never told why the defendant was finally arrested.
It wasn’t a death-penalty case, but it would mean serious jail time for the defendant, if he were convicted.
The strange part was the jurors. The women were quite involved, and the men, not so much. A number of the men didn’t even sit at the table, just stood back against the wall?? We had been deliberating for a while, and it was a Friday afternoon. The jury was leaning toward a not guilty verdict, and a number were anxious to finish and not have to return. I kept reading and rereading the definition of self-defense to the jurors because it was extremely important that we interpret it correctly when making our decision. The problem was the way the crime was committed and why the victim ended up dead.
I decided that we would think about it over the weekend and come back on Monday to deliberate further. The women, once again, obviously spent a great deal of time over the weekend giving a great deal of thought to the case. They came prepared on Monday with copious notes and were ready for some serious deliberation. The men seemed to have little interest but did return! (Should we be concerned about the number of men on Jodi’s jury??)

The bottom line was, however, that there was a gun on the table, and the defendant got the gun and shot the victim, claiming the victim was going to shoot him. However, once the defendant got the gun in his possession, the threat ceased because the other man was unarmed. What was he defending. He could have just as easily shot the victim in the leg to stop him from coming toward him or run out of the room and fled the scene. The victim had no way of harming him once the defendant had the gun. His claim of self defense to kill the victim fell flat. We took another vote, and the defendant was found guilty.

Here are the statutes. The “key” phrase is “reasonable person.”

13-404. Justification; self-defense
A. Except as provided in subsection B of this section, a person is justified in threatening or using physical force against another when and to the extent a reasonable person would believe that physical force is immediately necessary to protect himself against the other’s use or attempted use of unlawful physical force.
B. The threat or use of physical force against another is not justified:
1. In response to verbal provocation alone; or
2. To resist an arrest that the person knows or should know is being made by a peace officer or by a person acting in a peace officer’s presence and at his direction, whether the arrest is lawful or unlawful, unless the physical force used by the peace officer exceeds that allowed by law; or
3. If the person provoked the other’s use or attempted use of unlawful physical force, unless:
(a) The person withdraws from the encounter or clearly communicates to the other his intent to do so reasonably believing he cannot safely withdraw from the encounter; and
(b) The other nevertheless continues or attempts to use unlawful physical force against the person.

13-405. Justification; use of deadly physical force
A. A person is justified in threatening or using deadly physical force against another:
1. If such person would be justified in threatening or using physical force against the other under section 13-404, and
2. When and to the degree a reasonable person would believe that deadly physical force is immediately necessary to protect himself against the other’s use or attempted use of unlawful deadly physical force.
B. A person has no duty to retreat before threatening or using deadly physical force pursuant to this14. “Deadly physical force” means force that is used with the purpose of causing death or serious physical injury or in the manner of its use or intended use is capable of creating a substantial risk of causing death or serious physical injury.

Here are a couple more “definitions.”
14. “Deadly physical force” means force that is used with the purpose of causing death or serious physical injury or in the manner of its use or intended use is capable of creating a substantial risk of causing death or serious physical injury.
15. “Deadly weapon” means anything designed for lethal use, including a firearm.

I’ll be anxious to hear thoughts from the Yakkers! Sorry this was so long.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Please do your best to stay on topic in this thread. Use the Coffee Café for any off topic or personal issues you want to discuss. I will be putting another Yakkers thread up for April 2nd when the trial resumes. Enjoy!

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Casey Anthony and tagged , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

34 Responses to Jodi Arias-From the Archives

  1. gramared says:

    Snoopy… I wrote this late last night and just reread it and realized that I pasted #14 in two places! Also, I’m no spring chicken any longer, and the trial I mentioned was in California, not Arizona. I have lived in AZ for over 30 years and have been involved in the court system in a civil matter since 1999. The law is the law, however, when it comes to giving the jury instructions that they MUST follow. Let’s just hope this jury follows those instructions, especially when it comes to Jodi using force beyond what is necessary to stop Travis from harming her. Of course we all know she was the perpetrator, period. Everything Jodi has said is a lie, and her 18-day “Jodi Show” on the stand was tailored to match the experts’ testimony to come. I’m sure Martinez rebuttal will poke enough holes in the experts ramblings to negate whatever they have said. It’s still of great concern, however, because we remember the unbelievable verdict in the CA case.

    What I would like to see is Martinez end his closing with just one picture, though he would need to warn Travis’ family in advance to look away. It would be the one of Travis with his throat slit from ear to ear, lying dead in that shower. Pause, ask each juror to take a long look whether they want to or not, pause again until it is completely uncomfortable, giving them time to digest every horrible detail. Martinez could then ask the jury if any “reasonable person” would think that such an act of violence was necessary under any circumstance, pause again, and then simply say, “I rest my case.”

    gramared~~I am no spring chicken either and if I go trying to fix it, I will mess it up. lol It looks fine to me. ~ ~SS

  2. gramared says:

    SS…Maybe all the spring chix (like that better) on this blog won’t notice!

  3. grmared~ ~Friday nite, I listened to the medical examiner’s testimony again. The stab wound to the chest (which he determined came first) would have rendered Travis incapable of attacking Jodi with any force. He would have been able to put his hands up to try and fend off the knife. Travis would have been coughing up blood as we can see in the sink while Jodi continued to stab him in the back. Without medical attention, that stab wound to the chest alone would have rendered death to Travis but not immediately.

    Let’s just assume that the gun shot was first. The bullet penetrated the skull, right frontal lobe and lodged in the cheek. Due to the brain damage caused by the bullet exploding in his brain, he would not have been able to defend himself and death would occur within minutes.

    The slashing of the throat severing the trachea and the jugular vein, death was instant.

    I cannot see where Jodi has a leg to stand on with her claim of self-defense. We do not have the death penalty in my country and normally I am against it but not in this case. This was a hard kill and Travis had to have gone through sheer hell before he finally breathed his last.

    I just wish the jurors were privy to all the info we are. I would like to see that Jodi was a stalker being discussed more but I believe this cannot be proven and considered prejudicial.

  4. NancyB says:

    Thanks for posting the Az statutes for deadly force! Jodi has testified to the so-called Domestic Violence, so there is already evidence of DV before the jury. Now, Jodi is a big old liar, of course, so the jury might choose to disbelieve her. And LaViolette is going to say (probably) that Jodi’s behavior is consistent with that of a victim of DV, and that a reasonable victim of DV would have interpreted Travis’s alleged “body slam” on June 4 as requiring a response with deadly force.

    The reason for trying to prove this is that Arizona has a special self-defense law for victims of DV. If you are a victim of DV, your response to an attack is judged by how a reasonable victim of DV would react rather than how a reasonable “person” would react.

    ONE BIG PROBLEM. Jodi never SAID that she interpreted Travis’s attack as requiring a response with deadly force. She said she never intended to shoot him at all, and thought the gun was unloaded! She believed that his actions justified a “scaring him off with a gun he would have known was unloaded” response, not a “shooting him in the head response.”

    So hopefully Juan will object to her testifying to how a reasonable DV victim would respond since Jodi never claimed to have responded that way. Frankly, I hope that he wil object to her testimony in its entirety as irrelevant, for the same reason.

    Your experience as a jury foreman sounds very interesting.

  5. gramared says:

    Nancy B…I agree. There is NO proof that Travis was violent, and if the jury want to believe Jodi, welllll, all bets are off.

    Here’s additional info from the statutes.
    13-415. Justification; domestic violence
    If there have been past acts of domestic violence as defined in section 13-3601, subsection A against the defendant by the victim, the state of mind of a reasonable person under sections 13-404, 13-405 and 13-406 shall be determined from the perspective of a reasonable person who has been a victim of those past acts of domestic violence.

    Here’s the link to 13-3601, if you’re in the mood to read it. It’s fairly lengthy.
    http://www.azleg.gov/FormatDocument.asp?inDoc=/ars/13/03601.htm&Title=13&DocType=ARS

  6. gramared says:

    Nancy B…. It was an interesting experience. I just wish my “older” brain would permit me to remember more of the details. We had diagrams of the room the two were in, info about the gun, all kinds of details from the defendan’ts point of view since the victim was dead (just like Jodi’s case).

    You could more or less guess that the defendant was picked up on another charge and then hauled in for the murder. I think he had skipped before his scheduled court appearance for the crime, probably out on bail. There was no one in court to support him, and the suit he was wearing looked like the best they could buy from Good Will (not that you can’t find some real bargains at GW!) The judicial system continues to leave much to be desired.

  7. Newbie says:

    http://www.hlntv.com/video/2013/01/29/documents-jodi-arias-tried-plead-guilty-second-degree-murder
    I just got thru reading the first filing for a plea deal submitted by Arias’ attorney. It is more interesting after hearing testimony. To me at this point it looks like more of a “blackmail” attempt than preparation for negotiating a plea deal.

  8. Newbie says:

    P.S. Forgot to mention that link will take you to HLN article. If you scroll down a tad you will find info and a link to click to see the Court Document filed by Numri.

  9. Newbie says:

    Suzanne, interesting photos. Makes it even more difficult to know he was butchered by the witch. Friends, good income and looking to do right after slipping away from one of his core beliefs. What a price he paid. I don’t care about what he did in his sex life and how he treated or didn’t treat women. He overcame a lot and imo, would have found his way in relationships with women.
    I sure hope there is a death penalty verdict.

  10. Karen C. says:

    Oh, Newbie, that is just disgusting blackmail- basically says that the trial will break up good Mormon marriages, so don’t do it, State! Never mind the egregious nature of the crime, and the hideous cruelty inflicted by the b$tch. Funny, today HLN is doing prior testimony- and here we have poor live-in Dude- she financially destroyed that man! God, what a useless, awful sub-human she is!

  11. Newbie says:

    I didn’t realize HLN was doing prior testimony today. After reviewing that settlement document, I think I better leave the tv off for today. I do wonder what the jury would think if they read the “first step” of the proposed settlement. I know the jury isn’t to know an agreement was even proposed but my mind still runs to what if they knew about the proposed terms. I am so glad JM is fighting for Travis !!!
    At this point I would like to unload about her terms and disguised threats yet am not even going there. Just anxiously awaiting JM’s cross at this point. I can’t even imagine what he thought when receiving that document !!!!!

  12. From HLN~~~Juror #5, a female may be ousted for making a comment… more to come…

  13. Karen C. says:

    …Which is why we have all those nice extra jurors. Frankly, I’m amazed this hasn’t happened before here- recall OJ? I think they were down to maybe one alternate left when said and done. Considering these folks are not sequestered…

  14. Karen C ~~it looks like the trial will be late getting under way tomorrow again. The defense filed another motion for a mistrial… the comment must not have been pro Jodi…lol

    This is another act of desperation!!

    Jodi Arias defense lawyers seek mistrial

    Jodi Arias’ defense lawyers are seeking a mistrial in her murder case due to juror misconduct.

    In a court filing Sunday, her attorneys claim the misconduct was discovered during closed proceedings last week. They did not cite specifics but note that removing the juror would also be an option. That would leave five alternate jurors, in addition to the 12 who will decide the case.

    Read more here…..

    http://www.postbulletin.com/news/nation/jodi-arias-defense-lawyers-seek-mistrial/article_3d50ee46-ba8b-5f9b-ae42-bf3d4bc987e0.html

  15. margaret says:

    Snoopy and Gramared ,after protecting Travis family from them, I wish Martinez would post the Nine pictures of Travis on the screens in court room, while he gives his closing argument..Those pictures prove just how vicious jody was. They would touch the coldest heart. Martinez would also need a photo of the gun ..I am talking about the nine photos on Caylee Daily..

    I have a feeling that Martinez might do just that!!~~SS

  16. Jodi Arias Trial: Defense Attorney Accuses Juror of Misconduct, Asks for Mistrial

    Numri claims that one of the jurors made inappropriate statements, possibly related to the Martinez flap, that were overheard by other jurors. According to RadarOnline, Numri stated in his motion that “statements Juror 5 made in front of her fellow jurors amounts to misconduct that inserted partiality in what is supposed to be an impartial body.”

    http://blogs.phoenixnewtimes.com/valleyfever/2013/04/jodi_arias_trial_defense_attor.php

  17. gramared says:

    Margaret…I don’t know how anyone could see those pictures and determine self-defense under any circumstance. The wounds are savage. They never recovered the gun or knife because Jodi disposed of them somewhere in the desert, but those photos would be enough. I’m sure Martinez has plenty up his sleeve for rebuttal and closing. I hope JM gets to cross LaV this week. It’s time to put some truth to this story.

  18. snowynyte says:

    Hi Snoopy, margaret, & gramared,
    Last yakking before I go, here is the motion filed to remove Juror #5:
    http://media2.abc15.com/html/pdf/AriasJuror.pdf

    I didn’t get to read it myself but I will do so when my eyelids are not so heavy lol

    Nyte-nyte!

    Thanks so much, Snowynyte. I wonder if juror #5 couldn’t take any more of Nurmi and wanted off the case. If this trial doesn’t get moving faster, there will be more jurors opting out.~~SS

  19. gramared says:

    Snoopy…The trial was supposed to begin at 9:30 a.m. all week (or at least the days they’re in session). You mentioned it’s going to start late – any idea when?

    Wouldn’t it be nice if we knew the sequence of Travis’ injuries. Unfortunately, the only one who does is Ms. Evil. The slashes to his back show such rage. Of course, they all do, but you know he had to suffer such pain.

    Any thoughts on whether JM will call Travis’ mentor (don’t know his name)? Please see the link below, if you haven’t already, and you’ll know to what I’m referring.

    I am assuming the trial will be late starting due to the mistrial motion Nurmi filed. I hope I am wrong but I think that issue will have to be taken care of in order for the trial to proceed.~~SS

  20. gramared says:

    SS – You’re probably right. With this trial, most time is spent waaaaiiiiitttttiiiiiiinnnnnggg for Martinez to bring us to life!

    Thanks, Snowynyte for the motion. The def is doing it’s job, but they drive me nuts. I suspect the judge will just dismiss the juror.

  21. gramared says:

    This is interesting. The jurors may actually get paid for sitting through this trial. Personally, you couldn’t pay me enough to be part of this “captive audience.” I would be bursting at the seams wanting to talk about it, and I suspect many of these jurors feel the same. Do you honestly think they are all following the “admonition.” Juror #5 probably just flipped!

    http://www.azleg.gov/FormatDocument.asp?inDoc=/ars/21/00222.htm&Title=21&DocType=ARS

    Of course there is always this:

    http://www.azleg.gov/FormatDocument.asp?inDoc=/ars/21/00221.htm&Title=21&DocType=ARS

  22. Redrelaxed says:

    Good morning Snoops & Yakkers…

    The TH’s are confident that the judge won’t declare a mistrial, as there is so much money invested in this trial to date, plus it would have to something very very serious to cause a mistrial.

    Gramared, I think it would nearly impossible to adhere to the judges admoniton. Juror #5 couldn’t contain herself and said something that made some of the other jurors uncomfortable enough to rat her out. Everything happens for a reason, so in retrospect perhaps this attempt by Nurmi for a mistrial will show these jurors that is imperative that they keep their mouths shut.

    Although sequestering juries is becoming passe, I believe that this jury ought to have been. It would be nearly impossible NOT to see, hear or read something by accident as these high profile trials are flogged to death by the media. Emotions are running high, and the jury is likely bored out of their collective minds. Thank heavens Maritnez is up soon…he keeps the nuerotransmitters flushed out.

    And sadly…

    Poor Martinez is reduced to wearing Groucho Marx glasses to escape the back door of the courthouse.

  23. Redrelaxed says:

    I see I’m sequestered agian..lol…are you trying to tell me something Snoops? Lol…

  24. Red, I cannot understand why some of your comments end up in mod… ??

  25. Karen C. says:

    Yuh, “If”!

  26. gramared says:

    Maybe today we’ll just be the Yakkless!

  27. gramared says:

    Redrelaxed…I think it’s just too tempting and there is tooooo much available for the jurors to avoid any info or discussions regarding this case. Plus, it’s human nature to want to discuss that which you are being consumed with on a daily basis, and there are always those who will do whatever they want, regardless of what they admit to the judge. In the “old days” we didn’t have the computer calling us late at night to “just take a peak, no one will know”!! Juror #5 was just the first to go over the edge. I suspect there will be more before all the rotten dust settles.

  28. Tommy'sMom says:

    I’m in the process of watching the interviews of JA on youtube they’re by David Lohr,it’s taken me days and I’m still not finished. They are very hard to listen too but they given a very clear picture of JA. She is IMHO truly a sel-centered monster.
    Need to get cookin’,two casseroles and a cake for a ladies brunch at the church Saturday and a pasta salad and cake for a lunch at church on Sunday.
    Ya’ll have a great week-end.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s