jodi arias' defense ptsd my keester
hybridlment

Louisville, KY

#21 Mar 19, 2013
It's court. The defense attorneys are fighting for their client's life, and the State is fighting for the life of the deceased. I would hope they all believe their truth and are passionate about proving it. Martinez is angry about what happened; I am, too. He's raising his voice and pacing when standing, but blank face at the table. Willmott is more passive in her aggression, rolling her eyes and making faces at the table, but sweet when she stands up.

Nurmi appears to want to be just about anywhere else than where he is (which he tried to do prior to trial. I tend to like him.

The physical appearance nor the style of court performance means little to nothing to me. I do, however, like Ms. Willmott's attire.

Since: Mar 13

Location hidden

#22 Mar 19, 2013
I get it this is what can happen in court. Agree the defense is fighting for their client's life and should be passionate about it. It appears ridiculous to me and have failed to see the purpose of Samuels continuing to be questioned.(I am not legal expert but am tired of the bickering.) I also understand that Nurmi did not want this case in the first place but had no choice in the matter. I think Willmott got it last.

I believe Martinez is passionate about his case. He is quite animated when he is questioning witnesses. If he did not pace and walk around like he does, can you imagine his voice level?! He has his own style even though I may not care for it but that is just my opinion.

I do not care to hear more of Samuels' testing or how he arrived at a conclusion because he has already proved he does as he wishes (the ego comes in to play, rather than following directions). He seems inept to me but paid well for it. Could that be grounds for Arias to file for inappropriate representation?

I saw on the Facebook page that Arias swiped a legal folder and sat on it. I do not know what that is all about. Reminds me of the video of her rummaging through the garbage in the interrogation room. Sneaky thing she is.

As for Willmott's attire, I think she picks good attire as far as I have seen. I like black.

Since: Mar 13

Location hidden

#23 Mar 19, 2013
*YELLOW folder, not legal.
hybridlment

Louisville, KY

#24 Mar 19, 2013
Jody is a chameleon. She becomes involved, animated and spits fire when the State is speaking, feverishly mouthing to Willmott and showing visible anger and defiance on her face. At one point she's mouthing something at the judge in response to her ruling. I think this is a normal (if immature) reaction to opposition. She flips back into passive with a blank, long face as if she's wounded internally and eternally when "her side" is speaking. This is her poor little hurt girl act.

She just can't sustain it when she becomes indignant, and for that reason I can't buy her being emotionally impaired except as she sees fit for the situation.

Since: Mar 13

Location hidden

#25 Mar 19, 2013
Arias being a chameleon may be how she has gotten through in life. She will adjust to the situation that fits. Had to laugh to myself when she rolled her eyes as Martinez asked Samuels if he had memory problems. She must be so tired of hearing that question, whether to her or anyone else (especially those on her "side.").

She is doing all she can to save her life (as is her defense team). The issue I have is that she has not taken any responsibility or accountability for her actions. Yes she has admitted she killed Alexander, but in self defense. I do not believe it for one second since no evidence supports her claims. Only her words and it is an absolute fact she lies.

If she truly did not want to put the Alexander family or hers through all this, she could have pleaded guilty in the first place. Instead, it is my opinion she thinks she can make it easier on herself (or get away with premeditated murder) which is why we are where we are today.
hybridlment

Louisville, KY

#26 Mar 19, 2013
It would be interesting to see what the total cost of this trial was at the conclusion. This was one expensive, strange relationship these two had if you count the investigation, her incarceration, legal defense, expert witnesses, reporter costs, etc.

I've just figured my tax for 2012; I'm not in a very generous mood :)
hybridlment

Louisville, KY

#27 Mar 19, 2013
One old standard court question that doesn't have to be asked of Jodi is "Were you lying then or are you lying now?"

One question the jury will ask of themselves and each other is "What does she have to gain, what is her motivation for lying both then and now?"

It's a death penalty case. That one's easy.

Since: Mar 13

Location hidden

#28 Mar 19, 2013
When it comes to taxes, I usually think I have to pay too much. Being an independent contractor (health field, but not medical), it is not like I make that much to begin with but enough to get by. However, I do love what I do and I especially like making my own schedule. Always a trade off.

The cost of this case is probably already too much. Samuels stated he is paid $250/hr. To be incompetent and get paid that much? I wonder what his future as a defense witness will be like?

There really is not telling at what verdict the jury will arrive. Also, I wonder if all of them are adhering to the admonishion of not talking about, discussing this case or reading about it? That would seem to be hard (not impossible) given it still makes national news (at least on Google News). I hope the jury will arrive at a fair and just verdict.

A few nights ago, I saw about coffee beans fed to elephants. When they defecate, that's when the beans are harvested, roasted and then sold. Sounds a little gross but no different than that of beans gotten from civets. I have tried that coffee, and I must say, it is damn tasty! How do you roast your beans?
hybridlment

Louisville, KY

#29 Mar 20, 2013
Morning, Rose! I roast with a hot air popcorn popper. I've considered getting a home roaster but the lower end models are unreliable and I can't justify the cost of the high end ones for the amount I roast. The popper works great.

I don't visit the Justice site often. I read through a few comments and the uneducated and misguided venom made me cringe. Ditto with the Jodi supporters. This trial is interesting and the whole thing was tragic, but what it's brought out in humans is just ugly. I enjoy the opinions of others but it's gotten out of hand when it becomes personal. I don't like internet acronyms much but SMH applies here.

Since: Mar 13

Location hidden

#30 Mar 20, 2013
Ingenious using a popcorn popper to roast your coffee beans! That is a great idea, should I or anyone else I know would want to do the same thing. I am too lazy and just buy the roasted beans then grind them myself.

This case, I believe, gives people a chance to let out their venom, be it justified or not. It is not just this case that interests me but also the behaviour of people who follow it. I have seem it time and time again, the ignorance and hate people have. Mind you, I am not above making personal attacks but I do try not to. However, I will call BS when I see it. I especially love those on the Facebook site who have some type of religious symbol as their avatar/photo then post things like "Kill the bitch!" I do not understand it.

People, indeed, are a very peculiar species.

Here is an interesting article relating to Martinez. Gave me a little insight in to his style that I do not always care for. I see some similarities to the Arias case. http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/1999-07-01/new...
well

London, KY

#31 Mar 20, 2013
breaking,vinnie the poo wets his pants when he sees jodi popping pills in court,has his foolish coworkers moving at breakneck speed to find out what she's taking

Since: Mar 13

Location hidden

#32 Mar 23, 2013
Excerpts from an article:

http://communities.washingtontimes.com/neighb...

The Jodi Arias case: Juris imprudence!
Friday, March 22, 201
Paul Mountjoy

In the Jodi Arias trial, the so-called ‘expert witness’, Dr. Richard Samuels, has declared Arias did not process her “trauma” from short term memory (STM) to Long term memory (LTM) with any degree of success due to Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). When cross examined of his knowledge in the area of memory and PTSD, Samuels loudly explained “I have been studying test results for years!”.

Yet his ‘expertise’ is sex therapy.

Most every modern American Psychological Association (APA) reported study suggests the greater the emotion associated with a new memory, the greater the ability to recall such a memory.

Every study this author viewed on PTSD and the amnesia Samuel claims has Arias in its throes, dissociative amnesia, or the loss of memory, perception or awareness, is a temporary disorder.

The most significant aspect of PTSD is the inability to forget a traumatic experience. Regardless of Samuel’s psycho-nonsense, the issues of PTSD and amnesia are written from the standpoint of victim of trauma-not perpetrator.

The defense team should have vetted Samuel a bit more. Almost one million dollars in taxpayer’s money after five years of billable hours and they get a sex therapist with a dubious background. I suppose no other psychologist could present such a thin and novel explanation of the Arias mind.

(Paul Mountjoy is a Virginia based writer and a member of the American Psychological Association and the Association for Psychological Science.)
hybridlment

Louisville, KY

#33 Mar 23, 2013
Good morning, Rose! We were in Chicago visiting my daughter and I was under a self-imposed ban from the trial - catching up now.

Since: Mar 13

Location hidden

#34 Mar 24, 2013
Hello hybridlment! Hope you had a good visit with your daughter.

Not much going on in the trial other than Samuels still on the stand doing his best to answer questions that makes him not seem incompetent (in my opinion). The last issue I remember from last Thursday was him wanting to have his paperwork back so he could study them before court resumes on Monday (I think). He has had those papers for over two years! Why does he have to study?

The biggest issue I have with him is the fact that he received new information (when Arias finally told the 'truth') and he did not feel it was important enough to have her take the test again because it would not have changed the results of the PTSD >he< had decided she suffers. Was he afraid to change his assessment to say she did not have it?

I suppose if he did, he would not have been much of a defense witness (as if....). All remains to be seen.

Have a great week!
hybridlment

Louisville, KY

#35 Mar 25, 2013
Good morning. It's always nice to be with her and catch up, and our guys were off in their own little world.

From what I got at the end of his testimony, there was some controversy over copies he made (3 hole punched original, copy without?) and it appeared he wanted to take the paperwork and the judge ordered it to be left with the court.

Should be interesting when it starts back up. I think today?

Since: Mar 13

Location hidden

#36 Mar 25, 2013
Good evening hybrid. Yes, there was the issue of one set of papers not having the punch holes and the other set having them. I can understand one set being photo copied prior to having the holed punched in them. I have not seen today's proceedings so I do not know if anything came from that issue.

Samuels has lost so much credibility with me that the hole punch thing is not that big of a deal to me. The Facebook page for Alexander had a link posted to a great article in Mental Health and Criminal Justice. It pretty much scored the fact Samuels did not do enough testing (and was incorrect in some of his testimony) and relied a lot on his "35 years professional work experience." It was a great article! But then you called it early on that from your research from the Mayo Clinic that the TGA (or having to do with memory) was temporary, not permanent as Samuels indicated.

I hope Samuels is not on the stand long because I am interested in hearing another defense witness, and even more so to hear rebuttal and closing arguments.

Now, off to catch up on today's proceedings.....

Since: Mar 13

Location hidden

#37 Mar 26, 2013
Good morning hybrid. I am glad Samuels is no longer on the stand. Yay! Although I can understand what he was trying to bolster for the defense, I think he did a very poor job of doing it simply by being so lackluster with his work (forgetting papers, typos, mistakes, oversight). I think he really boxed himself in with the PTSD assessment and did not look for anything else outside of it.

Got to see LaViollette take the stand yesterday. I do not know what all she will testify to but she seems far more credible than Samuels. At least she does not promote herself to be a defense or prosecutor "expert witness" for business like Samuels who will give "testimony most favorable to you client" (as per his website). How impartial is that?!

I have a jury summons to tend to today so I likely will not be able to watch the proceedings again today. Am thankful for videos so I can watch it at a later time.

Good day.
A Reader

Utica, NY

#38 Mar 26, 2013
RamblingRose253 wrote:
Good morning hybrid. I am glad Samuels is no longer on the stand. Yay! Although I can understand what he was trying to bolster for the defense, I think he did a very poor job of doing it simply by being so lackluster with his work (forgetting papers, typos, mistakes, oversight). I think he really boxed himself in with the PTSD assessment and did not look for anything else outside of it.
Got to see LaViollette take the stand yesterday. I do not know what all she will testify to but she seems far more credible than Samuels. At least she does not promote herself to be a defense or prosecutor "expert witness" for business like Samuels who will give "testimony most favorable to you client" (as per his website). How impartial is that?!
I have a jury summons to tend to today so I likely will not be able to watch the proceedings again today. Am thankful for videos so I can watch it at a later time.
Good day.
any defendent should be scared with you on a jury, Rose. lol
hybridlment

Louisville, KY

#39 Mar 27, 2013
Morning Rose. This week is crawling! So ready for the weekend and some sunshine.

Samuels failed. Alyce is a great speaker and I admire her studies and help for battered women, but I'm not sure she's helping the defense at all. I want to feel she's impartial but she inserts a lot of what she's been told about Jodi and Travis' relationship into her testimony. It's obvious she's been "briefed".

There are so many truly battered women. It's a shame to attempt to equate this case with them, and I feel at times she's subtly doing that. I've known of men from abusive families who were abusers themselves, but I've known many who weren't. Some great families have produced abusers, too. It's hard to assess when the supposed abuser is dead, so the testimony seems slanted to me.

Since: Mar 13

Location hidden

#40 Mar 27, 2013
A Reader wrote:
<quoted text> any defendent should be scared with you on a jury, Rose. lol
Why?(I see the "lol" at the end of your comment, but I would still like to know.)

I was excused by the prosecutor.:( Oh well.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Peoria Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
hi 21 hr Dumpster Brain 8
come on mclame - vote to repeal obamacare Tue Bloodonhishands 1
Review: M&P Venture Partners LLC (Mar '13) Sep 18 Informant 29
Anyone know a Vicky Leswick, she says she is a ... Sep 17 Donna 2
Boycott Goodwill Stores During Holidays (Nov '10) Sep 17 ThomasA 1,056
News 'Historic' Arizona convention on changes to U.S... Sep 17 Solarman 3
Peoria Corruption includes Police Abuse and Ste... (Jun '08) Sep 1 Dodgenbullets 4

Peoria Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Peoria Mortgages