I am seriously riveted right now! I have never seen a trial like this. Not only is this the longest trial I have ever seen, it has the longest testimonies and the most fireworks I've ever seen!

Martinez, sparring with LaViolette about Snow White?? Not even John Grisham could keep my attention this long.

So a couple of observations:
I don't like Juan Martinez! He's waaaay too combative and I worry he's hurting the prosecution. He seriously needs to take a Valium.

And the defense witness is so likeable/knowledgeable I find myself hanging on her every word.

Jodi's parents creep me out. I can't help but feel like they contributed to her becoming this monster. The physical violence that has been testified to which she endured is telling, however, the witness's claim that 'An abusive background contributes to becoming an abuser' in reference to Travis' drug addicted parents, can be turned right around on Jodi! (Chances are, IMHO, both Travis and Jodi had abusive traits -- after all, water seeks its own level -- perhaps not with the same traits, but both are/were dysfunctional). Alas, the witness is too good and Juan Martinez is losing it. I can't look away!

Ok, here's where I need some annagrammy input (and anyone else who is interested):

I'm very sure this was a premeditated murder, but I'm having a hard time believing she did this by herself. Sure there's the adrenaline factor, but even when HLN recreated the scene with a grown, strong man acting out Jodi's part, he was very winded and couldn't even do it in the same amount of time that was indicated.

What do you think? Just adrenaline, or maybe another perpetrator?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/05/2013 05:22PM by FormerLatterClimber.

Nah, she did it by herself.

Yeah that's probably right. It just seems superhuman though for a five foot four woman of her build. I mean, I've heard of mothers picking up cars from an adrenaline rush to save their babies, but geez. Stabbing him that many times, dragging him around, I don't know. Seems physically difficult to say the least. This case is really disturbing.

I think her rage gave her energy.

As I'm watching her I see that she has no emotion. But after watchimg a while, in her eyes, I see contempt, anger, and she even seems smug. At first I thought the lack of emotion was because she was coached that way, which I'm sure she was, but I see a bit more to it.

Even Casey Anthony had emotions. With Jodi, she pretended to cry during testimony of the act. There were no tears, and her brow never furrowed. I'm to understand by body language experts this was completely faked.

It is said a sociopath feels no emotion except anger and rage. For such a subdued person it's hard to see any expression. Now it makes sense to that aspect of sociopathy.

I try to keep up with it at night on HLN. But sometimes it is just too much. Martinez screaming... Riigght?...about every 5 seconds.

I agree he is being way too combative. The witness is holding up pretty well under his nastiness.

I saw interrogation clips of each of her parents and they seemed to act-- or re-act in a pretty normal way to being told about Jodi being responsible for the murder. Jodi's father had also started dialysis the day he heard that his daughter was the main suspect.

Jodi may just be hard wired differently than her parents. Possibly did not suffer any significant abuse as a child.

As of now, I think she first stabbed Travis in the back and head 7 or 8 times while he was kneeling down in the shower. (Maybe symbolizing how he stabbed her in the back by inviting another girl to Cancun. She may have given him one last chance to change his mind).
He stood up and chased her, while starting to have breathing problems. She ran into the closet where she had put a gun earlier (in case he refused to take her to cancun) and shot him in the head.
The rest was just total awful rage, stabbing him in the heart, abdomen and then the throat slitting. I would not rule out influence of LDS temple rituals and penalties that she may have read about.

I think she had an accomplice all right.

I know that's not a popular opinion, but this gal could suck a golf ball through a garden hose, if you get my drift. She could work the men, no doubt about it.

The reason I think she had one or two accomplices was because Gus Search just happened to be in Santa Cruz the day that Jodi Arias met Matt there. We know that Matt traveled with Jodi that day.

Why? Why would she meet with Searcy and Matt unless Matt had to give her the gun and DVD player which she was going to give to Daryl in exchange for the gas cans. She goes off to dye her hair to Salinas and later that day makes several bank deposits. She's borrowing money right and left because she has to make an emergency visit to Arizona- and she tells Daryl this.

Jodi needed accomplices because she had no money and had to have help, not knowing if she would be injured and would need help getting away. She needed someone to control Travis if he got control of the knife. Who would tackle a man who weighed almost 200 lbs by themselves in a knife fight?

One bullet in the gun meant she planned to kill herself (if she couldn't get away). No one brings one bullet to kill someone--you might miss!

You can find Gus Searcy's calendar posted on the regular court thread #123 and you'll see that it intersects with Jodi/Matt/Gus in a few places. The prosecution isn't focusing on them as part of their strategy. There may be great surprises in the rebuttal phase of the trail. We all think her former boyfriend Matt may be called to testify,having been given a deal. Some think he's in witness protection program to keep him from the media. He has dropped off the face of the earth.

This case has me hooked because it has more turns and twists than the gospel according to Joseph Smith.

Anagrammy

LOL "suck a golf ball through a garden hose" Ewws!

Wow, so perhaps there is more to it. I had no idea about these other dudes' and their schedules.

OMG, even now as I write this they're reading her diary where it talks about her "dream" where two people were charged in the case of Travis Alexander. One person was arrested waiting murder charges and the other was still at large for "conspiracy." Oh wow, she's inadvertently tattling on herself!

You're not kidding annagrammy, this has more twists and turns than Broseph's Gospel.

Sadly, this is real with a real victim; I am fascinated by murder mysteries. This has almost all of my big interests: mystery, fireworks, Mormonism, legal stuff, and sociopaths...I almost feel guilty for being so riveted!

Thx for responding!



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 04/05/2013 09:06PM by FormerLatterClimber.

I agree that an accomplice makes perfect sense from a physical standpoint. The problem with that theory is, why wouldn' t Jodi squeel and blame him to save her own sanctified skin?

Briefly:
What do I think: I like that fire ball Martinez! He is amazing to watch. No notes. What a mind.

Jodi is a very skilled liar, and manipulator with possible borderline mental disorder.

As an adult, I certainly cannot and would never hold her parents responsible for anything to do with her.

I am so over the witnesses - busy making a diagnosis on known lies. Unbelievable.

I am 100% convinced this is a premeditated vicious over-kill murder. I am convinced she took her grandfather's gun, where she was living. There is plenty of evidence for premeditated murder. She did this alone. She threw out the knife, gun in the dessert. They won't be found.
It is not self-defense. The "fog" is a bunch of nonsense.

I doubt she will get the death penalty.

It gets a bit tiring listening to the defense throwing anything and everything at the wall hoping something will stick.

I think: the jury is not buying anything Arias says.
I think: Arias will be found guilty and get life with no parole.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 04/05/2013 08:51PM by SusieQ#1.

Agree with everything you said except the opinion of Juan Martinez, and one thing about her parents.

I feel a little sorry for him. It's like he's suffering from exhaustion. I wish he had a partner. He's actually a big reason it's so hard to turn away, but the way he is just nitpicking and yelling back and forth, practically degrading this witness on the stand, I find him, oh what's the word? Gauche.

As far as her parents are concerned, if what you say is true about her being borderline, well they could have done something about it.

The father was all too willing to throw her under the bus. He called her a "Strange Person." Well yeah, really strange! And so is he imho for doing that so eagerly. In the very least it's going to generate sympathy for the defense. ("Oh look at that poor girl, see how her father just hates her, etc.")

I agree that she is perhaps borderline. As does that silver fox, Dr. Drew (raawr!), but again, in those interrogation tapes, we see her mother just breaking down, and crying about how her daughter has had mental problems since she was a little girl. The thing is, if that were the case, why didn't she get her professional help? Borderlines can be treated, and I agree with Dr. Drew, this could have possibly been prevented had she had early intervention.

Edit to add: although she shows signs of BPD, we mustn't forget that it is possible to be comorbid with NPD or sociopathy -- that is she could have two forms, in which case, as I understand, is almost impossible to treat.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 04/05/2013 09:26PM by FormerLatterClimber.

I'm surprised at the number of professionals that are not talking about the difficulty of getting "help" for children with "problems."

How often do parents of children understand the gravity of their children's behavior and are able to recognize they need help, and even if they do, to find the kind of help they need.

Often they do get some kind of "help" but it's not until the teenage years when mental illness really manifests. That is probably the worse time for kids to accept "help" in many instances. If medication is prescribed, how often are kids compliant? And it gets worse when they are adults.

As an adult? What can a parent do, short of report a crime?

The reality is in many areas, there is very little "help" available.

IF... is a huge word in this case. IF she had had some intervention... IF...IF...IF...
IF her parents had recognized what she needed and IF they could have gotten the help she needed, and IF she would have been compliant, and IF...

My view is that this woman is the least likely to recognize she has any problem and needs any help, and would not be compliant if medication was prescribed.
That's just my opinion, of course.

But it's based on some volunteer help with social services in the past and what I saw happening in a variety of families.

IF IF IF. Yes. And I understand young patients can rebel against their medicine.

But did they even try???

I agree. Where are the professionals talking about the lack of available mental health assistance. Between Jodi, and all these shooting sprees in our country lately, doesn't it seem like we're experiencing a kind of mental health crisis?

There are no medications for borderline personality disorder or psychopathy. They're personality disorders, not brain diseases or chemical imbalances.

I agree with Anagrammy on almost everything. I have an older brother just like the son you described Anagrammy. Blaming the parents is the easy and lazy way of reaching a conclusion on what is beyond our ability to explain. Individuals are not created by their parents. Environment and nurturing are very important but there are many other influences and factors. Many people severly deprived in childhood become amazing so that cannot be the cause.

Also keep in mind when judging Jodi's father that he was on DIALYSIS when talking to Det Flores! The man was and is dealing with life threatening disease and exhausted from it. I believe he has cancer. His "detached" appearance is because he is gravely ill and his body does not have the kind of energy of a healthy person.

When Jodi was arrested she had a new gun, a 9 milimeter, and two knives hidden in a rental car as she was about to leave town again. I wonder if she was going to kill other people. Having a gun and knives again tells me she uses the gun to subdue and the knife to enjoy the sadistic personal up close nature of doing the killing in revenge. She's pure evil. Not mentally ill.

I am not blaming her parents. They creep me out and I feel strongly that they may have been abusive in childhood attributing to the depravity that leads to BPD. That is not placing blame, merely possible acknowledging attributing factors.

I'm no professional so but I understand there is a difference between personality disorders and mental illness. I agree that she is evil. Forgive m if I'm wrong, but isn't it true that BPD is sometimes treatable?

Cristina Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I agree with Anagrammy on almost everything. I
> have an older brother just like the son you
> described Anagrammy. Blaming the parents is the
> easy and lazy way of reaching a conclusion on what
> is beyond our ability to explain. Individuals are
> not created by their parents. Environment and
> nurturing are very important but there are many
> other influences and factors. Many people severly
> deprived in childhood become amazing so that
> cannot be the cause.
>
> Also keep in mind when judging Jodi's father that
> he was on DIALYSIS when talking to Det Flores!
> The man was and is dealing with life threatening
> disease and exhausted from it. I believe he has
> cancer. His "detached" appearance is because he
> is gravely ill and his body does not have the kind
> of energy of a healthy person.
>
> When Jodi was arrested she had a new gun, a 9
> milimeter, and two knives hidden in a rental car
> as she was about to leave town again. I wonder if
> she was going to kill other people. Having a gun
> and knives again tells me she uses the gun to
> subdue and the knife to enjoy the sadistic
> personal up close nature of doing the killing in
> revenge. She's pure evil. Not mentally ill.


You filled in a few details I didn't catch in watching the coverage. Thanks..

My concern has been, all along, what more would she have done if she was not caught? And notice how she got the ladies in jail to become emotionally attached to her !!

I don't think she is mentally ill either. The doctors need to use the DSM (4 or 5!) to attach a diagnosis to get paid. I think she plays whatever part she thinks is needed...!Diabolical !

My view is that she was calculated, knew exactly how to lure Travis into the positions she wanted to do the most damage initially and to finish him off...

Blaming parents for not getting her help is absurd.There is no help for some people and how they think.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/06/2013 11:28AM by SusieQ#1.

Again, I am NOT blaming her parents! It's absurd that I have to point that out so many times.

They're creepy. And I'm sorry that you seem to want to treat them with kid gloves but as I'm sure you know, I HAVE a borderline mother! She is JUST AS evil a Jodi! Not even kidding. I have been through pain because of her that you could never possibly be able to imagine. I'm sorry that I won't treat Jodi's mother with kid gloves. According to all the professionals, BPD is possible to treat if caught EARLY and treatment is thorough and lifelong. My mother never got help. Now she's like Jodi: Evil incarnate. I also look down on my grandmother (sorry but I do) for not getting my mother help early on. Try to understand having a mother like Jodi. For a moment, please try to understand the pain and anger someone like myself feels hearing from professionals that she could've changed, but now it's too late. She is now comorbid with NPD, and I will NEVER get to know what it's like to have a loving mother. I hate hate hate that I was deprived of this.

(Go easy on me today guys...it's my birthday today and I'm having a hard time with feelings of what I missed out on. If I could have one wish in the world it would be to have a mother who loves me). This case hits a very personal nerve.

There is a lot of help available for kids, but many times the parents are in denial. Sometimes the parents have mental health issues as well and this clouds their thinking. Sometimes they are opposed on principle to any sort of mental health counseling. And sometimes the parents don't fully understand how different their child is from the norm.

Counseling services are available through schools, and school-based counselors work together with psychologists and psychiatrists when necessary. I know that psychiatrists have written prescriptions on school sites and that children have been addmited to hospital mental health units directly from school. Unless the child is an immediate threat to himself or others, though, parental cooperation is a necessity.

SusieQ#1 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I think: Arias will be found guilty and get life with no parole.

I agree with you. Isn't it rare for women to get the death penalty? But I'm not sure about the culture of Arizona regarding that.

Jodi should never again be set free. She represents an ongoing threat to others.

Several thoughts.

First, I disagree that there was a second person involved. Jodi had Travis at a disadvantage in the shower, either sitting down or with his back to her. She was probably stupid to think that she could definitely kill him this way; if it had not been for that strike to the heart, he might well have escaped. But someone not experienced with hand-to-hand combat might have thought that the scene in Psycho was realistic. The truth is she was lucky that one of her first blows was fatal.

I imagine him struggling out of the shower, breaking her finger in the process, staggering across the bathroom, perhaps with her stabbing him in the back, then fleeing down the hallway. He fell over either because of blood loss or being tackled from behind and she then cut his throat. She must have been panicked out of her mind as she chased him down that hall. But the tough part, dragging his body, would have happened after his death and required pulling 200 pounds across tiles lubricated by blood. The distance was not more than 10 or 15 feet. Difficult? Yes, but perfectly possible for a healthy woman of 120 pounds even if not enlived by adrenalyn.

Why do I think no one else helped? Because the scenario I just outlined seems reasonable. Also, two perpetrators mean two people who must remain silent for nearly five years. That rarely happens in real life unless the perpetrators are experienced and disciplined. And do we really think that Jodi would not have turned in her partner, probably claiming that he forced her to participate in Travis' murder? Jodi clearly used other men to get the gas cans, etc., and in trying to create her story after the fact. But I see no evidence that anyone traveled with her or participated in the murder or helped in the getaway.

I also disagree with Anagrammy on the gun. Maybe I missed something, but is there any evidence that the gun contained only one bullet? Isn't it more reasonable to assume that she had the gun with her--not necessarily in the closet--and used it to "finish him off," thinking that a single shot would do the trick? She then threw the gun away. I don't see any reason to believe that she planned to use it to kill herself or was not prepared to shoot Travis several times if necessary. Like professional assassins, who often shoot a person in the head a second time, she was just removing all doubt.

On the psychology and abuse, I don't believe anything Jodi says. But the fact that her brother confirmed her particulars is surely significant. The bizarre behavior of her parents, too, is important. Does anyone believe the father has normal feelings of love and empathy for his daughter? Is it natural for a mother to voice such fears instead of trying to defend her daughter? That family is not right.

We don't really need to know if Jodi's mother used a spoon on her children. But consider who Jodi is. She is a borderline, lacking her own identity, able to assume different religions and identities to please others, unable to respect others' boundaries, "bipolar" in her emotions if not in brain chemistry, incapable of taking personal responsibility, manipulative, and rageful. But she is more than a borderline, since borderlines lack control over their emotions and do have some empathy for others. Put simply, she is also a sociopath, someone who feels rage and anger but also sadness and regret when her own interests are harmed. Remember when she was crying to the detective, saying, "I'm thinking of all the things in life I am going to miss." That is precisely how a sociopath functions, and comorbidity between these two disorders is fairly common.

Now, what produces sociopaths and borderlines? There is some evidence that genetics contribute to both and that sociopaths can be created in part through brain damage. But the vast majority of both categories suffered intense abuse or neglect in the first 36 months of life. Borderlines, like narcissists, are almost uniformly produced by primary caregivers who neglect their babies, fail to mirror their emotions, and punish individuation in the first 24 months of life. These forms of abuse are also very common among people who become sociopaths, which is why the comorbidity figures are so high. So even if we discount everything Jodi and her brother say and the way her parents behave, her very character suggests with a high degree of probability that she suffered abuse and/or extreme neglect.

I think Jodi's mother is entirely sincere in her grief. She loves her daughter, regrets their estrangement, and has no clue what went wrong. Jodi may well not know either. Why would one expect her to recall things that happened to her when she was, for example, 9 months old? But this is the sort of thing that flows naturally from terrible parenting in the earliest and most vulnerable years of life. I'm willing to bet that Jodi grew up in horrific conditions regardless of whether the stories she now tells are factual or not.

First, I disagree that there was a second person involved. Jodi had Travis at a disadvantage in the shower, either sitting down or with his back to her.


She was probably stupid to think that she could definitely kill him this way; if it had not been for that strike to the heart, he might well have escaped. But someone not experienced with hand-to-hand combat might have thought that the scene in Psycho was realistic. The truth is she was lucky that one of her first blows was fatal.

SHE TOOK TWO PHOTOS OF HIM SITTING, ARMS ON HIS KNEES, PROTECTING HIS CHEST. SHE WAS AMBIDEXTROUS/LEFT HAND DOMINANT. AN ENLARGEMENT OF THE CLOSEUP FACE SHOT DEFINITELY SHOWS THE CAMERA FLASH ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF A FIGURE STANDING. THAT MEANS THE KNIFE WAS IN HER LEFT HAND. HE WAS FACING PERPENDICULAR TO HER WITH HIS BACK ON HER LEFT, FEET/HANDS ON RIGHT. A STAB TO THE HEART WOULD HAVE BEEN IMPOSSIBLE IN THIS POSITION. SHE COULD HAVE STABBED HIS HEAD, HOWEVER. THESE (3) BLOWS WERE OF GREAT FORCE, THE MEDICAL EXAMINER SAID, TAKING DIVOTS OUT OF HIS SKULL. THERE WAS BLOOD IN THE DRAIN IN PHOTO NUMBER 2, WHERE HE APPEARS TO BE COLLAPSED AND STUNNED, WHICH IS ALSO CONSISTENT WITH HEAD BLOWS.

I imagine him struggling out of the shower, breaking her finger in the process, staggering across the bathroom, perhaps with her stabbing him in the back, then fleeing down the hallway.

THERE IS TESTIMONY FROM THE MURDERER THAT HE LUNGED AT HER FROM THE SHOWER LOW LIKE A LINEBACKER. THE CAMERA FLEW INTO THE AIR AND TOOK A PHOTO OF THE CEILING. THEY FELL TO THE GROUND GRAPPLING OVER THE KNIFE, BUT HE WAS BLINDED BY ALL THE BLOOD FROM THE HEAD WOUNDS. THIS IS WHERE SHE MAY HAVE STABBED HIM IN THE HEART. SHE RUNS DOWNSTAIRS TO THE OTHER BATHROOM AND PULLS OFF HER RUBBER GLOVES AND WRAPS HER BROKEN FINGER. SHE LEAVES A DROP OF BLOOD.

TRAVIS GETS UP AND GOES TO THE SINK TO CLEAR HIS EYES. HE IS SCREAMING FOR HER TO GET HELP. HERE IS BLOOD SPRAY EVIDENCE AT HE BATHROOM SINK WHERE SOMEONE COUGHED AND DRIPPED BLOOD.

THE MONSTER COMES BACK AND TO HER HORROR TRAVIS IS STANDING AT THE SINK SCREAMING FOR HER TO GET THE NEIGHBORS, TO GET HELP FOR HIM. (He thinks she is also a victim because he can't see) HE SAYS HE CAN't FEEL HIS LEGS AND FALLS TO THE GROUND. HE IS IN SHOCK

He fell over either because of blood loss or being tackled from behind and she then cut his throat. She must have been panicked out of her mind as she chased him down that hall.

HE CRAWLS AWAY FROM HER AND SHE IS STABBING HIM OVER AND OVER ON THE BACK, LEGS, NECK AND HE WILL NOT DIE. SHE STRADDLES HIM, PULLS HIS HEAD UP AND CUTS HIS THROAT WITH THE KNIFE IN HER RIGHT HAND.

But the tough part, dragging his body, would have happened after his death and required pulling 200 pounds across tiles lubricated by blood. The distance was not more than 10 or 15 feet. Difficult? Yes, but perfectly possible for a healthy woman of 120 pounds even if not enlived by adrenalyn.

THE CAMERA TAKES A PHOTO OF HER DRAGGING HIM. THE AREA WHERE SHE CUT HIS THROAT IS CARPETED SO SHE HAS TO TURN HIM AROUND. SHE DOES THAT BY PUTTING A BATH MAT UNDER HIS SHOULDERS AND TURNING HM IN A CIRCLE SO HE GOES HEAD FIRST INTO THE SHOWER. THE CAMERA ALSO TAKES A PHOTO OF THAT. SOMEWHERE IN THIS EFFORT SHE LEAVES A HANDPRINT IN BLOOD ON THE WALL AS SHE STEADIES HERSELF.

Why do I think no one else helped? Because the scenario I just outlined seems reasonable.

WHY WOULD SHE DO IT ALONE WHEN SHE COULD SO EASILY GET HELP?

Also, two perpetrators mean two people who must remain silent for nearly five years. That rarely happens in real life unless the perpetrators are experienced and disciplined.

OR VERY AFRAID OF HER. AND THERE IS PLENTY OF EVIDENCE OF THAT.

And do we really think that Jodi would not have turned in her partner, probably claiming that he forced her to participate in Travis' murder?

NO BECAUSE EVEN ONE ACCOMPLICE FINGERED MEANS PREMEDITATION, WHICH MEANS THE DEATH PENALTY.

Jodi clearly used other men to get the gas cans, etc., and in trying to create her story after the fact.

THE GAS CANS BORROWED AND GUN STOLEN ARE BEFORE THE FACT. MONEY BORROWED FROM ANOTHER GUY AT A BAR "for a trip to Arizona"

But I see no evidence that anyone traveled with her or participated in the murder or helped in the getaway.

ONE OF HER OLD BOYFRIENDS WILL BE TESTIFYING FOR THE PROSECUTION. THE MOST LIKELY ACCOMPLICE. SHE TRIED TO SEND HIM A CODED MESSAGE ON A MAGAZINE WHICH WAS INTERCEPTED. SHE WAS TELLING HIM HOW TO TESTIFY. I THINK HE HAS TURNED STATE.

I also disagree with Anagrammy on the gun. Maybe I missed something, but is there any evidence that the gun contained only one bullet?

NO. OTHER THAN HER TESTIMONY SHE DIDN"T KNOW IT WAS LOADED.

Isn't it more reasonable to assume that she had the gun with her--not necessarily in the closet--and used it to "finish him off," thinking that a single shot would do the trick?

YES. THE GUN WAS USED BECAUSE SHE WAS CREEPED OUT BY HIS EYES. SHE WAS CLEANING BLOOD OFF HERSELF AND THOUGHT SHE SAW CONSCIOUSNESS STILL THERE - PLUS HE WAS GURGLING AND STILL TRYING TO BREATHE. I AM SURE IT WAS A SCENE FROM A HORROR FLICK. SHE DIDN"T NEED TO SHOOT HIM AGAIN, SHE WAS CONFIDENT HE WAS DEAD.

She then threw the gun away.

IT WAS BUNDLED UP WITH OTHER EVIDENCE AND TAKEN WITH HER TO DISPOSE OF.

I don't see any reason to believe that she planned to use it to kill herself or was not prepared to shoot Travis several times if necessary. Like professional assassins, who often shoot a person in the head a second time, she was just removing all doubt.

RIGHT

On the psychology and abuse, I don't believe anything Jodi says. But the fact that her brother confirmed her particulars is surely significant. The bizarre behavior of her parents, too, is important. Does anyone believe the father has normal feelings of love and empathy for his daughter? Is it natural for a mother to voice such fears instead of trying to defend her daughter? That family is not right.

YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHAT IT IS LIKE TO RAISE A CHILD WITH MENTAL ILLNESS. YOU KNOW YOUR VIOLENT SOCIOPATHIC CHILD ENJOYS THE SUFFERING OF OTHERS AND HURTS ANIMALS FOR FUN, SETS FIRES, ETC. YOU KNOW WHAT THEY ARE CAPABLE OF. YOU HAVE STRUGGLED FOR YEARS TO GET HELP FOR THEM AND HAVE GOTTEN ADVICE LIKE "WHY DON"T YOU REMARRY?" OR "PRAY MORE AND GOD WILL HELP EASE YOUR FEARS" OR "HE'LL GROW OUT OF IT."

FURTHERMORE, MY MORMON HUSBAND WAS A SOCIOPATH AND WAS NOT VIOLENT - HE JUST HAD NO NATURAL FEELINGS OF AFFECTION AND WAS RATIONAL AND COLD ABOUT IT. HE TOLD OUR CHILDREN HE NEEDED A NEW WIFE AND NEW CHILDREN. HE TOLD SEVERAL OF OUR CHILDREN "I DON'T LOVE YOU" YET NONE OF HIS OFFSPRING ARE THAT WAY. HE DID TERRIBLY NEGLECTFUL THINGS TO THEM, HURTFUL THINGS, ENDANGERED THEIR LIFE BY LEAVING THEM PLACES, BUT WAS NOT VIOLENT. JODI'S FATHER IS DETACHED, FOR SURE, I THINK BOTH OF THEM ARE STUNNED BY THIS NEWS AND I DON"T JUDGE THEM FOR HOW THEY REACTED.

We don't really need to know if Jodi's mother used a spoon on her children. But consider who Jodi is. She is a borderline, lacking her own identity, able to assume different religions and identities to please others, unable to respect others' boundaries, "bipolar" in her emotions if not in brain chemistry, incapable of taking personal responsibility, manipulative, and rageful. But she is more than a borderline, since borderlines lack control over their emotions and do have some empathy for others. Put simply, she is also a sociopath, someone who feels rage and anger but also sadness and regret when her own interests are harmed. Remember when she was crying to the detective, saying, "I'm thinking of all the things in life I am going to miss." That is precisely how a sociopath functions, and comorbidity between these two disorders is fairly common.

Now, what produces sociopaths and borderlines? There is some evidence that genetics contribute to both and that sociopaths can be created in part through brain damage. But the vast majority of both categories suffered intense abuse or neglect in the first 36 months of life. Borderlines, like narcissists, are almost uniformly produced by primary caregivers who neglect their babies, fail to mirror their emotions, and punish individuation in the first 24 months of life. These forms of abuse are also very common among people who become sociopaths, which is why the comorbidity figures are so high. So even if we discount everything Jodi and her brother say and the way her parents behave, her very character suggests with a high degree of probability that she suffered abuse and/or extreme neglect.

ARE YOU IN THE CAMP THAT SAYS AUTISM IS CAUSED BY "REFRIGERATOR MOMS"? I AM SORRY BUT I COULD NOT DISAGREE WITH YOU MORE. BLAMING THE PARENTS IS THE EASY WAY OUT. SINCE I LOVE BABIES AND WAS A STAY AT HOME MOM, I CAN TELL YOU ABOUT MY SONS FIRST 36 months OF LIFE. He cried as an infant constantly. Something was wrong with him from birth. Once he cried for ten hours straight--nothing could console him. You might say he was born angry and never got over it. I always wondered if he suffered brain damage in the birth canal because they held him back, waiting for the doctor to get there. In those days, the doctor didn't get paid unless he was present for the birth, so they just held my legs together until he arrived. So there could have been some injury there. When I took my baby to the doctor they said, "Maybe his urethra is too small. We could enlarge it and see if that helps." No thanks.

I think Jodi's mother is entirely sincere in her grief. She loves her daughter, regrets their estrangement, and has no clue what went wrong. Jodi may well not know either. Why would one expect her to recall things that happened to her when she was, for example, 9 months old? But this is the sort of thing that flows naturally from terrible parenting in the earliest and most vulnerable years of life. I'm willing to bet that Jodi grew up in horrific conditions regardless of whether the stories she now tells are factual or not.

SHE HAD A CAREGIVER SINCE HER MOTHER WORKED WITH HER FATHER AT THE RESTAURANT. I DIDN"T HAVE TO WORK BUT HAVING A CHILD WHO STABS BOXES IN THE GARAGE AND FLINGS DRESSER DRAWERS ALL OVER IS VERY HARD ONA MARRIAGE. MINE ENDED.

I TOOK MY SON TO STANFORD AND THEY TOLD ME HE WAS THE MOST VIOLENT CHILD THEY HAD EVER TESTED. I CAN SAY THAT HIS CHILDHOOD WAS UNSTABLE BECAUSE WE MOVED A LOT AND I WAS SINGLE (LATER I DID GO TO SCHOOL AND WORK) HOWEVER, OTHER CHILDREN IN THE FAMILY WITH THE SAME STRICT MORMON UPBRINGING/GENETICS DID NOT DISPLAY THE SAME SYMPTOMS.

It's great to have a fellow exmo who shares my interest in this fascinating case. It is a springboard for discussion on so many levels. You literally never know what's going to happen on any given day.

One factor that points to an accomplice is the effective cleanup, including wiping of bannister rail and elimination of all but the one drop of blood in the downstairs area. A load of wash being done (sheets/bedding) and moved to the dryer, another load put in, dishwasher run, tons of cleaning up. And she has a broken finger. The murder ended at 5:30ish and roommates were due home at 6:00pm.

I think she went to Gus Searcy's motorhome in Las Vegas to clean up and drop off Matt. I think Matt was the one in the car when Jodi called to see if they disposed of evidence (not to announce Travis' death like GS says)

What do you think of the domestic violence expert who last Friday declared Jodi the victim and Travis the perpetrator?


Anagrammy



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/06/2013 12:23AM by anagrammy.

There's a lot in your post. I'll reply here to your psychological points and then, if I have time, take up some of your views on the crime itself in a separate post.

I know a fair bit about psychology, so I'm not entirely speaking out of my nether regions. First, sociopathy. Obviously, I don't know anything about your situation and can't say anything intelligent about it. In general, as I wrote above, sociopathy can be primarily genetic--and if one sibling is socopathic, the others usually are not. If a person has a first-degree relative who is sociopathic, the odds are twice as high as normal that he will be too--but that is still well south of 20% probability. Gary Gilmore was a sociopath but his three siblings are not. In his case it was a combination of vulnerable genetics and abuse.

BPD is much, much more likely to be from childhood neglect/abuse. There is plenty of research on this, so I don't feel any need to defend it. But the pattern is for problems in attachment due to the behavior of the primary caregiver in the first two years. It does not matter who the caregiver is, but every child needs a warm, empathetic, present parent figure. So if you have a father who works and a stay-at-home mother who is depressed, borderline herself, dissociative, or a drug addict, the odds that the child will develop BPD is much higher than normal. This pattern accounts for the vast majority of BPD cases.

When I wrote that Jodi almost certainly suffered maltreatment as a child, I was speaking of the combination of APD and BPD since both are more common in bad homes--and in the latter case the incidence is very, very high. So can a person become a sociopath without abuse? Yes. Can someone become a borderline without abuse or severe neglect? That is much, much rarer. That is the basis for my conjecture about her childhood home. Seeing the interviews with her parents offers somewhat more evidence in support of that position, in my opinion, although I think Jodi's personality disorders are far more dispositive.

Finally--and I hope this is not offensive in any way--I'm sorry to hear about your family difficulties. I'm not going to say much, but my family has been touched by some of these issues and I do know how horrific they can be. One of the reasons I ultimately took my family out of the church was the way in which the one set of problems interacted with the other.

Rereading our conversation in preparation for writing about the crime itself, I realize that I did not distinguish between the role of childhood in sociopathy and BPD. Apologies. In my mind, if not my post, I was relying on the very high correlation between abuse in the early years and BPD. But that nuance didn't make it into my post.

Several points.

First, you may be right about the shower. I don't have a clue whether he was sitting or standing, which way he was facing, the order of the injuries, etc. My guess is that the strike to the heart occurred in the shower because of his inability to get down the hallway seconds late. It could easily have been that she stunned him and he dropped his guarde, enabling her to get the chest shot in. But that particular angle would be hard to get if he were fully aware and either defending himself or capable of running away.

Second, I don't buy the linebacker story. My opinion is that he did indeed lunge at her when he realized what was happening--I don't think he was blinded by blood and thought she was on his side--and that that was when he broke her finger. But that word "linebacker. . ." She says it every time she is asked, which suggests to me that the word is very important to her. Why? Because that crouching position is the only one that could explain how she shot him at that angle before he was dead. Without the "linebacker" pose, her justification of the overkill collapses and she becomes a cold-blooded killer.

Third, a question. Do we know that Jodi went downstairs before cutting Travis' throat? Could it be that she cut his throat, shot him, and then went downstairs? When did she lock up the dog because perhaps that was also when she took off the gloves? I ask because I'm not sure of your argument about his being "stunned" and then going to the sink. In my opinion it would have been difficult to inflict all those injuries within the allotted time even if there were no interruption. Going downstairs, removing the gloves, and running back upstairs would have taken a minimum of . . . 15 seconds? 30? I think that if you add that delay to the timeline, things can't possibly be finished by the time the post-death photo is accidentally taken.

Fourth, the question of accomplices. I'm still skeptical. I agree that she used men all the time, but when it came to her illegal stuff--stalking, slashing tires, breaking and entering, the computer accounts--she did that by herself. And I'm not sure how far the fear narrative can go. Saying that two men helped her and then were too fearful to tell the police might work in the short term, but once she's in jail and sure to receive a minimum of life in prision. . . I agree that the cleanup would have been easier with another pair of hands, but I suspect that she knew the place and could have worked fast. Also, the cleanup was not that good. And do you think Gus and/or Matt are evil enough people that they could have helped clear up such a horrific scene without losing their emotional stability? Neither strikes me as sufficiently evil, or sufficiently strong, to do something so hideous without cracking when talking to the police.

Fifth, you said that Matt is going to be called as a witness. Is that so? The prosecution has rested, so Matt can't be part of the case in chief. Has Martinez announced that he will be called as a rebuttal witness? I'd love to see that.

Sixth, LaViolette. This one is tough for me to answer. I think she is both a good witness and a very experienced and wise social worker. Over time, though, I think her performance has deteriorated because she relies so much on what Jodi said, so consistently calumniates Travis, and apparently fails to apply her own criteria to Jodi--which would of course show that she is at least as likely to be the abuser. Perhaps she is sticking to her instructions by the defense, or perhaps she is biased against Travis. In either case, the longer she testified the more obvious I thought her prejudice became--and the less credible.

She really is the key. If she prevails, Jodi gets life rather than death. I think Martinez went overboard on the Snow White thing. He could easily have gone from impugning her credentials to a broader attack on why she failed to consider Jodi's behavior. Just mentioning Snow White might have been enough to support an allegation that she favors women, if that is what he was trying to do. But I think he should not get bogged down in that particular issue and instead move on to the application of her principles to Jodi, Jodi's lying, stalking, cover-up, etc. LaViolette would then be forced either to admit that Jodi could have been an abuser or to deny that possibility in spite of the abundant evidence, which would of course thoroughly discredit her testimony.

Thanks again for the discussion and insights!

Another question.

Do we know that she had the gloves on when she killed him? Is there clear evidence?

Because it makes more sense to me that she killed him first, including dragging his body back to the shower. It was then, when she started to worry about cleaning up, that she gets the gloves. I'm not convinced that she would start with gloves on--wouldn't that look strange to Travis as she took the photos?--then take them off, then put them on again for the cleanup. Or did she try to clean up without gloves, which I think would increase the odds of her leaving bloodly finger and hand prints?

There is no evidence she was wearing gloves during the murder other than the absence of fingerprints on places that should have them, such as the glass left on the body.

Incidentally, people who loved their victim usually cover the face, or pose the body for eternal rest, etc.

Washing off her DNA and leaving trash on him signifies contempt.

What is established is that she wore long pants and socks during the murder (based on the dragging photo). Socks so as not to leave shoeprints which could be traced back to her, and which can be discarded later. Long pants to absorb blood spatter, later to be discarded also.

Arias stated in one interview that Travis pulled her sweater. Wearing a sweater and long pants in Arizona in the summer is so odd at that hour that anyone seeing you dressed like that would immediately think you were on your way to or from a burglary.

Considering that every surface in the house had been wiped, including the bannister, and no fingerprints were found in laundry room, kitchen, hallway, etc. PLUS the limited amount of time available for cleanup, IMO, points to an accomplice and rubber gloves. As Jodi said to the detective, "If I were to kill him, I would use rubber gloves--I have lots of them--and I would shoot him."

(Which is a weird thing to say for an innocent person, isn't it?)

I agree with you that it may be more likely she put them on for the cleanup.

Another note on the accomplice - Jodi didn't want anyone to know she was going to Arizona, right? So why would she tell the men in California she needed money for a trip to Arizona, gas cans for a trip to Arizona, etc? Because she needed their help and could threaten them later that they are "already involved" because they knew she was going to Arizona and did not report it to the police. They reply, "But you never said you were going to kill him" and she answers, "but I'll say I did"..and she smiles and says "I've never told anybody about XXX (your cocaine habit, your stealing money from the company, your affair with another man, etc...)

And regarding emotional stability- Gus Searcy became the suspicious witness when he became much too helpful much too early in the case. He sounded like Willy Loman from Death of a Salesman on the stand, a pathetic loser who is delusional about his own importance based on his early sales successes at PPL. He clearly was flattered to have the blonde bombshell on his arm and loved being thrust into the spotlight as her mentor, her confidant, her important one. He failed to motivate her to success yet stayed her friend for one reason only--she was using him. Naturally she showed him her garden of sexual delights and she had that on him.

Right on the stand he cracks, after offering to testify for the defense, he refuses to identify the person riding with him when he receives a phone call. Now he needs a lawyer. I think he is NOT the one who helped her at the house. I think that was Matt and the tradeoff was that she was never to bother him again. He knows what she is and that she has the ability to continue to ruin a man's life. He wanted to be free of her forever and if he helped her murder Travis, or helped her get rid of the evidence, she promised she would never bother him and his girlfriend again. He knew she couldn't pin it on him because that would be premeditation for her, so why not? Why not be rid of the monster and never have to worry about the safety of his future wife and children?

And finally - she lived a parasitic lifestyle mooching from men, jumping from one to another like a flea. Why would she suddenly become independent? Suddenly want to take responsibility for herself and all her actions? No....she even had a guy with her when she rented the rental car. Why hasn't he stepped forward? He is AFRAID.

I say she is very charismatic and intimidating. Why she even got one guy she just met in the bar to loan her some money for her trip to Arizona. If you believe that. Come on, you know she got paid for services, IMO.

Anagrammy

Ana

Juan's initial aggressive cross with LaViolette is for the purpose of establishing control. Think of dog training. The first thing you do is walk with the dog, teaching them the basics, i.e.,

*We go where I want to go, not where you want to go.
*You cannot guess in advance where I am going.
*You will regret it if you try to attack me.

LaViolette started off refusing to answer the most simple questions yes or no. Apparently this is the technique the defense teaches its witnesses to prepare them for trial. Juan's response to them was pretty successful with Arias. He asks them if that was he question he asked. It shows - not tells - shows the jury something about the witness. It sends a message from the prosecution "This witness is evading answering the question. They have something to hide."

This rattles the witness and his other technique, the parallel question one, leads them to make incriminating admissions. He was successful in getting a prominent well-known expert in domestic violence discredit herself by stating that her seminars were not about Snow White being a domestic violence victim (even though they were so titled). He got her to pleasantly share her conclusion that, based on her considerable experience, she considers Travis Alexander the perpetrator of violence and Jodi the abused victim.

Her publisher was forced to disable reviews on her forthcoming book because of the vitriol that was seeking expression through that avenue.

Her seminar was canceled either due to withdrawals of angry registrants or her own exhaustion, depending on who you believe.

Now she has a weekend to view the wreckage of her career and to develop a new respect for the public's ability to separate truth from fiction using common sense. And she still has no idea what direction Juan Martinez is taking his cross examination.

Not bad for thirty minutes.

Anagrammy

I love Juan Martinez on this case.

His aggressive style is perfect for dealing with Jodi since she is the queen of tangents and irrelevant details. Somebody has to keep her on track.

I also think he has some great stuff coming up for the current witness, but he got cut off til next week.

I'm hoping he tries to trap her into admitting that Travis was a victim of domestic violence.

Yeah he really had it right with Jodi. She was like trying to nail down a slippery soap in the bathtub.

Not such a good approach for the respected professional witness IMHO.

I don't know. I think his style works for a snappy expert witness too.

Oh, here I missed her being snappy. I thought she had been professional but so much happens who has the time to catch it all lol? That's why it's good us trial junkies can compare notes.

I still think he's suffering exhaustion and anxiety, who wouldn't after going on so long? I don't know. I think he was very argumentative with the witness to the point of unprofessional, again I think exhaustion comes in here. I sense a little breakdown going on with him. Oh well that's just me.

I think a three inch stab wound to the heart would debilitate a man of any size enough that he couldn't fight back. They said he was covered in defensive wounds, which makes sense in a scenario of someone who is weakened to the point that all he can do is try to protect himself.

What really floored me today were some of Jodi's journal entries they showed on HLN that I hadn't seen before, in which she actually pretended to be curious about who could have killed Travis and why, proving that even her so-called journal was made up, as part of her carefully calculated plan to get away with the murder. The prosecution hasn't used them yet. I'm hoping they'll be part of the rebuttal case and haven't been thrown out by the judge, as so much other incriminating evidence has.

Martinez does need to remember to use his inside voice a bit more and save the yelling for crucial points, but I'm much more unahappy with the judge. If this were a case of any man who had stalked an ex-girlfriend, slit her tires, broken into her house, spied at her through her windows, confronted/emailed and threatened any man who tried to associate with her, and then killed her, all of that evidence would be a huge part of the case, but this judge has thrown out nearly every bit of that evidence of Jodi's threatening behavior toward Travis.

I'm also unhappy with the judge for not allowing the evidence of Jodi's stalking and threatening behavior in court, since if this were a case where the woman was the murder victim and a man was on trial, similar evidence would have been allowed in court. I still hope that Jodi does get convicted, as I think she's a dangerous person who should at least spend the rest of her life in prison.

I think this judge is one smart lady and she's not going to let anything into the trial that might become cause for appeal. Jodi has already admitted to the murder. This is simply a case of life in prison without possiblity of parole, or death. And I think Juan Marinez will do his job well, even without a lot of the evidence that shows Jodi to be a sociopath.

Additionally, her defense team is really no match for Juan Martinez and the judge, in my opinion.

I seriously doubt that the girl is a monster.

She was simply a young woman with lots of personal issues who came across the wrong Mister Right who also had lots of mental problems.

He lured he into the Mormon web by misrepresenting himself - a skill which he no doubt learned on his mission.

When she realized that he had been using her all along, she offed him.

I'm not saying she had the right to kill him, but figuring out the motivations that drove each of them is not rocket science.

Too bad their paths crossed.

Yes, he used her badly, but most women walk away from such situations, lick their wounds, and find a better man.

Been listening to this trial off and on now for weeks, as many others are.

Something that I have observed: I've come to the conclusion that Travis was having a little fun with his own porn-sex-fantasy girl that he could play with and then go on to his life as an upstanding LDS man looking for a wife to take to the temple.

It was my understanding that she joined the LDS Church as she thought it would make her marriage material for Travis. When he didn't want to play her sex games anymore and wanted a different kind of lady friend, it seems to me that set her off on a revenge attack: stalking, slicing tires, etc. then killing him. If she couldn't have him, nobody would.

Nothing really unusual about this if it was turned around. Males do this more often than females.

A few more thoughts on the judge, Martinez, etc.

First, I agree that if the victim were a woman, the evidence of stalking would have been allowed. There are areas of law--child custody, stalking, domestic abuse--where the presumptions are still in favor of women. Another would be the way that juries are much more likely to send men to Death Row than women and, for that matter, more likely to condemn African American men to death than caucasian men. Travis is the victim of this sort of legal and societal prejudice.

Second, I have mixed feelings about the judge. She's better than Lance Ito, but still. . . She should have let the stalking evidence in. She should have sequestered the jury from Day One. But even if you agree that she needs to bend over backwards to avoid the possibility of successful appeal, allowing Juror #5 back into the court was a huge error. Given the judge's reluctance to harm the defense, I can conceive of her removing that juror from the jury for less-than-compelling reasons. But if her presence on the jury could be prejudicial, surely her presence in the courtroom could too. #5 established a rapport with the jury merely by being with them for 40 days. When she arrived in the audience, some of the jurors smiled at her and she at them. Can they look out at the audience, see her, and view her as just another member of the public? I doubt it. The jurors also know that she took her assignment very seriously and that she now has much more information than they do. She may in the end provide them with no hints about anything beyond the courtroom, but I don't know how the prosecution could prove that in an appeal. If she needed to be struck from the jury, she should not be in the room at all. The appearance of impropriety matters here.

Martinez. I like Martinez a lot. I think most men, physically larger men, could not be as aggressive as him without looking really bad. But for him it works. I do, though, think LaViolette got him on the wrong foot. I would definitely have brought up Snow White, since that shows that she may see conspiracies everywhere. Also, the angry responses to the publication, the closure of the seminars, etc., are all good points. But when he got into the details about the Seven Dwarves, I think he looked silly.

An expert witness is not the same as a regular witness. You can be a lot rougher on the latter than on the former. That idiot male therapist was a slightly different matter because he was so obviously biased in Jodi's favor. LaViolette is more dangerous. She is credible on domestic violence. She is not condescending. She has that smile that she throws into her answers that makes her likeable. If she listens patiently, quietly insists on answering the questions with more than "yes" or "no," as experts are generally allowed to do, and flashes that smile, Martinez looks more bullying than with any other witness. My view--take this with a grain of male salt--is that she doesn't like men and is biased in Jodi's favor. Martinez's getting her to say that Jodi was the victim in this case hurt her, as do implications that she's biased against men. But I think he should take the weekend and review his performance, then come back into the courtroom with a more precise focus and a less uniformly combative approach.

Finally, I think Ana may be wrong to assume that Jodi is sleeping with people like Gus. I fully agree that she uses men shamelessly and that she still has sway over Matt, Daryl, and other former lovers. But it would be a mistake to assume that a woman like that needs to provide sexual favors to turn men into zombies. The truth is that when a beautiful woman who oozes sexuality walks into a room, a lot of men lose all self-control and self-respect. Someone like Gus--or that male therapist--would fall for her simply because of who and what she is. You saw her attempt the same sort of control over the detective when she said that the Ten Commandments don't prohibit fornication. With that lower tone of voice, that shy glance to the side, and that embarrassed smile, she was flirting, trying to manipulate him through the promise of sexuality, not its substance. To his credit, the detective knew exactly what she was doing and, unlike a lot of men, was not influenced by it.

I'd go further: sometimes a woman's power is actually enhanced by the implicit refusal to act on what she is implicitly promising. Someone like Gus Searcy or that therapist could be hooked for life by that allure. I'm sure that Jodi can judge very quickly whether a man is susceptible to her charms in that way. That detective, and the experienced and cynical Abe, are rare in their instant recognition of the pattern and disgust regarding it.