Skip to main content

Did Expert Witness Testimony Effect Sentencing in Jodi Arias Trial?

What effect did the expert witness testimony ultimately have on the outcome of the Jodi Arias murder trial?  Although Arias was found guilty of first degree murder, in the end the jury was split on sentencing 8-4 in favor of the death penalty – in Arizona, even a 11-1 split equals a hung jury.  The jury rejected the self defense claims and agreed an aggravating factor existed making this case eligible for capital punishment.  That much we know.  But how is it that those same jurors could end up so divided on punishing Travis Alexander’s murderer?

Jodi Arias spent an unprecedented 18 days on the witness stand, and post verdict interviews with jurors confirmed the defendant didn’t make a good witness.  She contradicted herself, butted heads with prosecutor Juan Martinez, and tried her best to paint Travis in the worst light possible while claiming to want to preserve his memory and character.  She was caught in numerous lies and inconsistencies by the time Martinez got his shot at her.  But it seems at least one juror believed that Arias had in fact been the victim of some type of abuse at Alexander’s hands.  Although there was no documented reports of the abuse incidents Arias spun into her testimony, her journals and personal diaries made no mention of being kicked, body slammed or slapped, the defense brought in a maverick for the cause of domestic violence in Alyce LaViolette to testify on Arias’ behalf.  She told the jury she believed Travis did abuse Jodi, while discounting any direct evidence that Arias engaged in stalking behavior with Travis.

How did this impact the jurys ability to hand down the death penalty?  Dr. Richard Samuels was another defense expert who was clearly in the Arias camp and testified to her favor that she suffered from PTSD.  However, prosecutor Juan Martinez effectively neutralized Samuels testimony by pointing out numerous errors and omissions in Samuels scoring of critical psychological tests that supported a PTSD diagnosis – he also was effective in suggesting Samuels was “taken” by Arias, bringing her gifts in the form of books during his jailhouse interviews with her.  Dr. Samuels failed to sway the jury and was criticized for his sloppy reporting methods as he was unable to explain why he hand scored the tests multiple times until he achieved the desired results.

Alyce LaViolette initially appeared to be a good witness for the defense. Her credentials and legitimate early work in the field of domestic violence gave her credibility and she was a likeable character during her first few days on the stand while being questioned by the defense.  LaViolette became combative during her cross examination with Juan Martinez, refusing to answer questions in a yes/no manner, talking over the prosecutor and she grew increasingly more defensive of her interview tactics as her days on the stand stretched into weeks. The biggest problem I had with LaViolette is that she firmly formed an opinion on Arias being abused based only on the written and spoken words of Jodi Arias.  She didn’t interview close friends or family members of Arias or Alexander who may have provided her with a way to prove or disprove her findings or corroborate what Arias told her about the complex relationship she had with Travis.

Then we learned that LaViolette had spent more hours with Arias than was clinically necessary, and had also given her books and reading materials that could have furnished her with a blueprint to support her in court performance as a domestic abuse survivor.  LaViolette refused to entertain the thought that Arias may have played her like a fiddle, she told the jury she fully believed everything Arias told her without question.  That’s where she lost all credibility in my book.  Believing the words of a woman with everything to lose is a dangerous proposition and to this day, I don’t understand why LaViolette would jeopardize her standing in her field for Jodi Arias.  Many of the jury questions seemed to ask these same questions regarding the methods of both expert witnesses, and there was no evidence to indicate there was any physical abuse. 

I read an article recently written by Michael J. Perrotti PhD that outlined some of these problems in psychcentral.com (link provided below).  Perrotti has served as a clinical and forensic neuropsychologist expert for more than 20 years and he wrote of many omissions of crucial standards in the Jodi Arias trial. He points to the lack of collateral interviews of third party informants such as family and friends, who could have provided valuable perspective on the person being evaluated.   He states “collateral parties can help confirm or disconfirm the evaluators impressions.  This did not appear to be done in the Arias’s trial”.   An evaluation of only the defendant can be weighted towards the defendant’s self-report.

He wrote “it is difficult to understand how Arias was considered a victim of abuse when there did not appear to be any police reports or documented incidents of domestic violence.  Additionally, there did not appear to be any consideration of her abusive behavior (for example, she was alleged to have slashed the tires on the victims car and peeked into the window of the victim’s house).”  He also pointed to the experts focus on PTSD and memory issues and not neuropsychological issues.  Perrotti also believes the purchase and filling of the gas cans were a sign of her pre-meditation.   “It is important to integrate the physical findings at the crime scene with the psychological profile of the defendant”, he wrote. “None of the experts appeared to have evaluated or considered crime scene evidence with their findings”.

Perrotti specifically points to Alyce LaViolette’s testimony that the report of Arias peeking into Alexander’s window while he was with another woman was not stalking as “difficult to understand” given the research of “The Reference Manual For Scientific Evidence”, which defines stalking as “to annoy or harass, with fear being a main component”.  What I found most important in Perrotti’s article was his take on the importance of an the evaluator being an objective expert and avoiding the appearance of bias.  Having two separate experts giving Arias books is seen as problematic, and one expert apologizing to the defendant for reading her diary/journals as another potential conflict.  “It is difficult to understand how this occurred when contraband is not allowed in correctional facilities”, he wrote.  The RMSE provides guidelines for what evaluators should do when deception is detected from a defendant.  He firmly believes there were significant omissions by the defense experts in the Arias case.  I think it’s important to note that the prosecution’s expert, Dr. Janeen DeMarte seemed to follow the guidelines in making a fair and impartial assessment of the defendant.  She spent enough time to evaluate Arias, but not enough time to form a relationship with her.  She made no apologies, and she didn’t feel the need to bring her any reading materials to pass her time in jail!  In my opinion, she was the only expert who was credible whatsoever.  Thankfully, the jury found her guilty of first degree murder – but it’s fair to wonder if the sentencing phase outcome was effected by Alyce LaViolette’s firm belief in Arias as an abuse victim.

As the August 26th status hearing approaches, I wonder if Arias’ post guilty verdict jailhouse ventures will figure into the mitigation case.  She appears to be trying to make good on her campaign speech to jury #1 by starting an online book club of sorts – more of a book review website in reality.  But I have faith in Juan Martinez, and I’m hoping he will quickly point out the same website is accepting donations for Arias’ commissary account and has links to other supporter run sites where donations are taken for her families travel expenses to and from court, and she has made an undisclosed amount of money from her artwork and those Survivor t-shirts.  Such the humanitarian.  With two new books based on Arias’ life and the trial, a Lifetime movie that already came out and reports of a new made-for-tv movie in the works, I’m afraid Jodi Arias isn’t disappearing from the spotlight any time soon.  The penalty retrial could take weeks, if not months. I’m not familiar enough with a penalty do-over to make an educated guess on how long this could run, but the sooner this case is put to rest the better.

Judge Sherry Stephens, do the right thing and get this retrial scheduled and keep it moving.  The victim may not be here, but he has rights too.  The link to the Michael Perrotti article is listed below.  While it’s nothing new, it’s an interesting read nonetheless.  Have a great weekend!

Comments

  1. There's really no telling if Alyce LaViolette got through to at least four of the jurors on Arias having been abused, but we do know the foreman thought she had been. We also know he said she had had a perfectly normal life prior to TA! He may have formed this opinion independent of ole Alyce. However, Samuels and LaViolette were just a part of the lies fed into this case...and they both sat there and lied...and 'bent the truth' on Arias' behalf, as if they thought they were too crafty to ever be caught in it. Like I said, and have always said, very simplistically, 4 jurors fell under her spell during that sentencing phase...and at least 2 witnesses fell under her spell prior to that trial ever beginning, and she played them like a fiddle which, to me, is quite obvious...Richard Samuels and Alyce LaViolette! Janeen DeMarte for the prosecution, although criticized for her lack of experience, was truly the only professional of the three!

    I am a very simple person. I am not eloquent. I communicate very simply and I see things very simply...just straight to the heart of the matter, in my simple way of looking at things. I've only a nursing education in my past. So, anyway, I saw Samuels and LaViolette as Arias' 'puppets'....I call what she does as 'puppeteering!' Something she had become quite adept at that even they fell victim to. But, Did Expert Witness Testimony Effect Sentencing in Jodi Arias Trial? Again, hard to say, as the jurors could have formed their opinions apart from those witnesses simply because they fell for Arias. We will never know, and they will never admit that!

    Have a nice evening.

    ~M. Bethnae~

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Thank you for commenting!

Most popular posts

Dr. Janeen DeMarte - A Look At The Prosecution's Expert Witness

Dr. Janeen DeMarte is expected to take the stand in the Jodi Arias murder trial as a key witness for the prosecution. Think of DeMarte as the State's response to Dr. Richard Samuels and potentially Alyce LaViolette. It's unclear when DeMarte will testify, but with Alyce LaViolette's testimony wrapping up, I thought it would be helpful to take a look at who the State's expert witness is.




Dr. Janeen DeMarte is a licensed clinical psychologist who has a private practice in the Phoenix area. She holds a master's degree and PhD in clinical psychology. with a concentration on forensics - and graduated from Michigan State University and fulfilled her doctoral residency at Arizona State Hospital.  Her clinical training was done at outpatient clinics, correctional facilities and inpatient unit settings. She has served as the Clinical Director of a large outpatient behavior health clinic in Phoenix and "oversaw the practice of numerous multidisciplinary treatment provide…

Is Alyce LaViolette Cashing In On Murder Trial?

As the defense finishes questioning their star witness, domestic abuse expert Alyce LaViolette, many are disillusioned by her choice to take the stand to portray murder defendant Jodi Arias as a battered and abused woman.  Maybe I'm the one who's crazy, but wasn't Travis Alexander the one who had the life stabbed, slashed and shot out of him at the hands of Jodi Arias? Who battered whom here?  Are Travis Alexander's not-so-kind text messages to Jodi Arias PROOF that he was a womanizing batterer and bully who held all the power in the relationship between Arias and Alexander?

Alyce LaViolette seems to think so. Does she have any idea the feelings of outrage she is bringing out in the hearts and minds of the real victims of domestic abuse all over the country? Before LaViolette began testifying, I kept asking myself "why would a woman who is so well respected in her field choose THIS case, defend THIS woman?"  Could it be the money? I suppose $250-$300 an hour c…

Was Trip to Cancun Catalyst to Murder? Jodi Arias Murder Trial

Marie "Mimi" Hall was the first prosecution witness to take the stand in the Jodi Arias Murder trial. She took the stand on January 3, 2013. Hall told jurors that she met Travis Alexander through the Mormon Church. Although they initially went on a date, it was quickly recognized that they were a great match as friends, and they remained such good friends that Alexander invited Hall to accompany him on a work retreat to Cancun, Mexico. The trip was to begin on June 10, 2008. Travis wouldn't live to see that day. Friends found him murdered in his home in Mesa, AZ on June 9, 2008. Coincidence, or catalyst? Travis's close friends have told investigators that Arias had been engaging in stalker-like behavior in the months preceding the murder. Twice, Alexander had his tires slashed after going out with other women. He told close friends his Facebook account had been hacked into. Arias even reportedly would use the doggie door to gain entry to Alexander's home. …

A Look At Alyce LaViolette And More Strange Video Footage of Arias Arrest

Yesterday, as Dr. Richard Samuels finished up his testimony the Jodi Arias defense team called their next expert witness to the stand, Alyce LaViolette. LaViolette is a very legitimate expert on the subject of domestic violence, having been one of the early leaders back in the 1970's when this was not a topic that was spoke of often. Jennifer Willmott had LaViolette introduce herself and her educational background, and list her many accomplishments helping battered women and even helping the men who battered them, hoping to return these women to a safer environment. She is likable, and she is a legitimate voice on this topic. The prosecution should not expect this witness to be as sloppy in the trial casework and reporting as Dr. Samuels was. 

While it's unknown exactly how far out on a limb LaViolette will go for Jodi Arias, she is expected to testify about some of the characteristics of battered women, why they return to their abusers - and what some of characteristics are of…

"Cold Justice" Heats Up Unsolved Murder Cases

This is my third blog post on TNT's new reality show, "Cold Justice".  Cold Justice pairs former Texas prosecutor Kelly Siegler with former Las Vegas CSI Yolanda McClary, who travel to small rural towns across America to look at unsolved murder cases.  Their first episode which aired Tuesday has already delivered results - the arrest of Ronnie Hendricks (see yesterdays post for details) for the murder of Pam Shelley. TNT lists an episode guide online, and 
I couldn't resist taking a peek and looking for details on those cases.  I was astonished at what they have accomplished in their first season.  This is more than just another crime drama, these ladies are committed and determined to bringing justice to those who may have escaped it previously in small towns that may lack the resources to bring a suspect to trial.

You can see the episode guide on their website. They give a brief description of the victims and circumstances of their deaths. Here is a list of this seas…