Tuesday, March 19, 2013

Juan Martinez Delivers Knockout Blow To Dr. Samuels

There was some heated testimony in the courtroom today, as prosecutor Juan Martinez continued to cross examine defense "expert" Dr. Richard Samuels about his examination and diagnosis of murder defendant Jodi Arias.  Martinez picked up right where he left off yesterday, firing questions at Samuels and bringing several very important factors to light. After hearing the answers to some of the questions he was asked, I am shocked that this doctor qualifies to be an expert witness. I've always been against paid expert witnesses and have been very vocal about the issues that come with someone who is essentially paid to say what they are needed to say.  To me, that equals corruption of the legal system.

This isn't true in all cases or circumstances, but things are coming to light during Samuels cross that seriously bring his own ethics back to the forefront for good reason.  Yesterday, Martinez got Samuels to admit that there was information that came to light about Jodi Arias and what she was telling him that was false - yet he failed to alter the results of the examination he prepared, nor did he add an addendum to memorialize the new information. How can we trust a report to be accurate if it's based on a client who is lying? It cannot be trusted, pure and simple. We've come to expect Jodi Arias to tell self-serving lies, but we should never have to doubt whether a doctor is telling the truth, or omitting facts that would render a diagnosis as faulty.  This happened in this case.

Today, Juan Martinez discussed some additional inconsistencies in Jodi Arias's statements to Dr. Samuels. For example, during one of their sessions, Arias told Samuels that Travis's computer had numerous photos of women's breasts on it.  Juan Martinez asked him if he looked at any of the forensic reports that were done on Travis Alexander's computer, to verify there were in fact photos of women's breasts. Dr. Samuels answered "no". Martinez asked him why he didn't feel it was important to verify this and the doctor said he believed it to be "irrelevant" and "not important".  Irrelevant,not important, really?  Martinez drilled on, asking him why it would not be relevant to know if a person you are assessing is telling you the truth.  The doctor didn't seem to know how to answer that question. 

Another inconsistency found in the report by Martinez is that Jodi Arias told Dr. Samuels that Travis Alexander was the only man she had engaged in anal sex with. Even the viewing public knows that is not true, but the good doctor didn't do any fact checking there either. She also told Samuels that performing oral sex on Travis made her "uncomfortable", not true - according to her direct and cross examination testimony. Didn't this doctor refer to any reports at all to verify what Arias was telling him? How can he possibly prepare a true and accurate report on Jodi Arias without performing at least some due diligence? 

Doesn't this doctor have a duty to prepare a report that is as accurate and factual as possible? He IS testifying in court. How can inconsistencies in her statements NOT be important? Dr. Samuels said if Arias had lied about something relevant, it would be important to know she was telling the truth. Martinez to Dr. Samuels:  "so what you are saying is that if somebody lied to you 40 or 50 times about things you considered to be "irrelevant", that would be just fine with you? Dr. Samuels to Martinez: No, that's not what I'm saying. To my knowledge these are the only inconsistencies in her story. 

Keep in mind, Dr. Samuels gave the jury his opinion and report or assessment of Jodi Arias based on answers she gave while she was still telling the two armed intruder story! He had already written his report by the time he was notified of this, so instead of actually re testing Arias, he simply added an addendum to the report. Why didn't he follow the same procedure once he found out there were other inconsistencies (the anal and oral sex issues)? At the very least, he could've added another addendum or even amend the entire report. Why? Because the defense was paying him to have a favorable opinion of Jodi Arias, and he didn't want to bite the hand that was feeding him. It's already been rumored that he plans on writing a book about his experience in this case - he needs to have continued access to Ms. Arias and the defense team to get the information he will need to pen the book.

This is blatantly unethical, pure and simple. His entire report should be invalidated and his testimony should be struck from the trial records and transcripts. He knows better. When Juan Martinez was asking him why he chose to ignore the new information about Arias's statements about anal and oral sex (and the "breast photos"), Samuels again said he felt it was irrelevant and it was a clinical judgement call on his part. There were more inconsistencies - Arias told Samuels that the shower photo shoot was Travis's idea, not hers. Martinez asked him if he viewed the interrogation video between Det. Flores and Jodi Arias where she was adamant that she had to talk him into the photo shoot, and he admitted he hadn't reviewed it.

Juan Martinez played parts of an audio file containing a conversation between himself and Dr. Samuels. At one point, Dr. Samuels begins to tell Martinez that Arias told him that on 6/4/08, Travis caught up with Jodi in the closet and grabbed onto her sweater....what sweater? This is the first I've heard about any sweater being worn or discussed. And the final straw was this - this "expert witness", a doctor who was hired to interview and compile a report t be presented in a court of law DID NOT bring the actual "set" of questions that he used to test Arias. His explanation? "It's not necessary". He said that he uses several sets of test questions, and instead of making a copy for the client/patient file, he doesn't feel it's important to do so - is he THAT cheap, or does he not want the prosecutor to have a copy of these test questions and any notes?

Something isn't right with this doctor and his report. He and Martinez were hostile towards each other, even more so than the Arias vs. Martinez arguments we witnessed. Martinez has really wiped the floor with this doctor and his unprofessional handling of this assessment. How could he walk into the courtroom without copies of these documents? How could he ignore and omit critical information that came to light, and pointed to a lying client/patient? How can this happen in a court of law?

This all happened before the lunch break. Can only imagine what will happen after lunch. It's not looking good for this expert witness. So very unprofessional with such a high profile case. It's hard to describe!




15 comments:

  1. Look at this!!

    She's doing this in OPEN court.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=QbHnjrh-ASA

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What did Jodi just do with the paper??
      Go to Youtube search and enter:
      jodi arias during sidebar
      scroll down to the :32 second video

      Jodi Arias swipes yellow folder & sits on it
      she sneaks "something" into the folder

      Go to Youtube search and enter:
      Jodi Arias swipes yellow folder










      Delete
    2. NancyB & Anonymous,
      OMG, I can't believe what I just saw on YouTube! Thanks so much for pointing this out. There appears to be 2 video clips where Arias is doing something to paperwork. A .12 second clip where she removes an entire file and puts it under her rear, and another .32 second clip where she removes a piece of paper and sits on it. I wonder if the Judge and Prosecutor can review these clips and try to determine what she was trying to hide? I can't think of one good reason for her to be taking paperwork and removing it from the defense's table! Good eyes NancyB and Anonymous! Will have to write a post about the mystery documents.....thanks for contributing!

      Delete
  2. Samuel's testimony will be judged by the jury.
    Anyway have a great day.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous (3/19/13 at 3:23PM),
      You bet he will be judged by the jury. I hear the jury question box is once again filling up. Will this trial ever go to the jury for deliberations?
      Enjoy your day too!

      Delete
  3. In Arizona, I hope the judge can give the instruction to the jury that if a witness (in this case JA) lies on the stand that the jury can dismiss her entire testimony.

    ReplyDelete
  4. JODI ARIAS SONG
    written by Poppy Harpman
    (copyright 2013 - all rights reserved)

    Eighteen days on the stand in the Arizona sun
    They tried Jodi Arias for murder one
    She claimed self defense when she used a gun
    But stabbed him with a knife to make sure the job was done........

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=pN14VPAbmaY#!

    http://www.wfsb.com/story/21653024/arizona-musician-performs-song-on-jodi-arias-murder-trial

    ReplyDelete
  5. Jodi Arias swipes yellow folder & sits on it
    she sneaks "something" into the folder

    https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCGss9Kx4QSnRR6yUOBA8Fqw?feature=watch

    What did Jodi just do with the paper??
    Go to Youtube search and enter:
    jodi arias during sidebar
    scroll down to the :32 second video






    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Correction for:
      Jodi Arias swipes yellow folder & sits on it
      she sneaks "something" into the folder

      Go to Youtube search and enter:
      Jodi Arias swipes yellow folder

      Delete
    2. More on:
      Jodi Arias Sneaks & swipes, sits on Folder during Trial
      http://www.cayleedaily.com/2013/03/jodi-arias-sneaks-swipes-sits-on-folder-during-trial/comment-page-1/

      Read the Comments!
      She is up to something weird.

      Delete
  6. RE: Comment from:
    http://www.cayleedaily.com/2013/03/jodi-arias-sneaks-swipes-sits-on-folder-during-trial/comment-page-1/


    Missy from IL.

    March 19, 2013 - 9:29 pm

    (Referring to the video) If you look at the video from the beginning and just look a when the camera is looking at her you can see their are 2 small pencils on the desk.( Before she moves the note book) . Then she takes the one pencil with her middle and ring finger and puts it in her hand as she is sliding the note book Towards her . Then under her. Posted on another thread. But I kept going over it and that’s what I see.

    Via Yahoo answers:
    Are you allowed to have pencils in prison?

    It depends on the prison and the custody level of the inmate. A higher custody level inmate may not be allowed to have a regular pen or pencil in their cell. There are alternative writing tools like safety pens (bendy, flexible plastic pens).

    Jodi is up to something.....

    ReplyDelete
  7. I was most impressed w/ Dr. Samuels' illustration of the "brain fog". Seriously, he couldn't hop on his laptop & put SOMETHING together instead of a penned squiggly line w/some chicken scratch next to it? Who IS this kook? He was so OBVIOUSLY blindsided by Martinez regarding the timing of Jodi's assessment tests. That fact on TOP of the discovery that she...wait for it...lied (again. shocker) to the shrink, nothing, and I mean NOTHING Jodi says can be trusted, as she's now been proven to have lied to EVERYONE she spoke to about this murder. Besides, unless you're willing to believe her story that the gunshot came 1st which the defensive knife wounds to Travis' hands contradict. (if he'd been shot, he'd have been unable to move, let alone raise his arms to fend off the knife) Oh yeah, the ME said there was no bleeding around the wound, a sign he was likely already dead when shot.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Jenniferlyn,
      I can't believe how unprofessional and/or sloppy Dr. Samuels reports have been - and his explanation's about the errors, omissions and "typos" don't hold water. For one thing, when he lists only 1 characteristic on the report he submitted under "section C", while the test subject needs 2 characteristics, he told Martinez it was simply a typo that he noticed when he was preparing for trial. Well if I'm not mistaken, a typo would be typing a B instead of C - he was MISSING a characteristic that was necessary for the PTSD diagnosis. Sorry, I'm not familiar with the terminology, calling it a "characteristic" is the best I can come up with! Martinez found another score that Dr. Samuels changed - something that he didn't disclose until Martinez brought it up! The jury should not believe a word that comes out of this "expert's" mouth.

      Delete
  8. The jury should just ignore all the talk, and look at the evidence. It's the one thing that never lies. It can be interpreted in different ways, but in this case it says Jodi was PISSED OFF, and she SLAUGHTERED Travis Alexander, essentially killing him 3x's over. (overkill) Yet, despite Jodi's assertions that Travis' alleged "sexual deviance" was unwanted and harmful mentally, physically, emotionally, (blah blah blah) No wounds to the groin. In the heat of the frenzied "fight for her life", when she's supposedly acting out her subconscious rage, she didn't go near his penis. (ironically, the one time she DIDN'T)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Jenniferlyn,
      AMEN! I couldn't agree with you more. Who cares if Dr. Samuels diagnosed her with PTSD? If she does in fact have it, she got it by savagely murdering another human being! I honestly believe she has no remorse and is relieved that she no longer has to think about Travis being with another woman. Killing him set her free from those thoughts that she was obsessing over. All the jury has to do is look at those crime scene and autopsy photos. They tell the real story. If Jodi hadn't trapped Travis and began the attack in that shower stall - where his movements were limited, she would've had injuries other than the few cuts to her hand. There's no way a woman of her size takes down a man of Travis's size without the element of surprise. She attacked him while he was confined to that small shower stall, and disabled him enough to where she could continue the attack on him and not get hurt herself. I don't care about her "fight or flight" instincts, whether she was beaten with a wooden spoon on a daily basis by Mom or anything else! What she's done to Travis Alexander after killing him is nearly as bad as the killing itself. Calling him a pedophile, a sexual deviant - nobody believes her allegations. There is no corroboration, it's her word only - and we all know her word doesn't mean much. She's been sitting in a cell surrounded by other people accused of or convicted of crimes, she's had 4 1/2 years to think up these tales and they still don't make sense. She showed no mercy for Travis, so I don't believe she deserves to be shown any mercy by this jury. Travis didn't get a trial, attorneys or expert witnesses. He was executed because he didn't want to marry Jodi Arias! Thanks for your comments, I completely agree with what you said.

      Delete

Thank you for commenting!