After another abbreviated court day yesterday, additional video footage was released from the day Jodi Arias was arrested and handcuffed by Detective Esteban Flores. We have already seen Arias' odd behavior during interrogation videos where she appears to do yoga stretches in her chair, and more recently when she is left alone in the interrogation room she rifles through a garbage can, scolds herself for not applying her makeup, sings a Dido song and laughs to herself in an evil and chilling manner. This is one odd woman.
**UPDATE** I'm trying to locate the piece of footage I described in this post. It was shown on Jane Valez-Mitchell's show last night, and on her webpage they refer to it as "hours of new interrogation video released", but the clip they attached to it is JVM and her guests talking about the new clip. I'm determined to find this online for you, and will post a link as soon as I find it. It was shown last night on JVM and it's worth finding. I had never seen the footage before, and it's the first time she is seen sporting handcuffs.
New video footage emerged yesterday of the moment when Arias is informed by Detective Flores that she has been indicted for first degree murder. She asks Flores "so everybody will know now?" and "will this be reported on the news tonight?" - and she seemed very concerned if the Alexander family knew she was being arrested. She asked Detective Flores if he had spoken to Travis' family - he told her that they had been calling every day, but they had not yet been informed of her suspected involvement.
Arias is handcuffed and left alone in the room. She can be seen sitting indian style on the floor, with her hands cuffed behind her back - when she begins flipping her hair to fluff it up. When Detective Flores returns, during her sobbing she asks him if she can "clean herself up" before they take her to be booked into jail! So here's a woman who has just been informed that a grand jury indicted her on the first degree murder of a person she described as her best friend and ex boyfriend, and her first concern is her physical appearance. This speaks volumes about the narcissistic personality of Jodi Arias. She knows the jig is up, and Travis Alexander's friends and family will soon know the truth about her. Unfortunately, his friends were right to be concerned about Travis' involvement with Jodi Arias. Now they would all know, she could no longer blend in with his grieving family and friends. She was the monster who did this to him.
A woman who worked at Pre Paid Legal and knew Travis Alexander was interviewed last night on one of the HLN shows, and she told a disturbing story of an encounter she had with Jodi Arias at a PPL event. Her name is Clancy Talbot, and she was a colleague and friend of Travis who lives in Salt Lake City. During one of the many PPL events we've heard about during this trial, she and Travis had an innocent interaction in which Travis helped Talbot to her table. The following day, Jodi Arias managed to isolate Talbot in the ladies room, and she told her in no uncertain terms that "Travis was hers" and she wanted her to know that she and Travis were an item. Clancy Talbot said she had always had a bad feeling about Jodi Arias, even prior to this encounter. She says Arias blocked the exit door of the restroom until she was done basically telling Talbot that Travis was off limits.
Clancy Talbot was amazed at how Jodi Arias was able to follow her into that ladies restroom, which was on a floor reserved for "Directors" - Arias clearly was not anywhere near that level in PPL, but Travis was. She claims Arias was very jealous of all of Travis' friends, both male and female but especially his female friends. When asked what she thought about Arias's court room demeanor versus the Jodi Arias she knew before her arrest, she said that the portrayal of Arias as someone who has low self esteem and non-confrontational is false. She referred to her as an effective manipulator who can hold her own. Interesting to hear from people who have interacted with Jodi Arias with Travis Alexander - it gives a more true and accurate description of who she is and how she behaved in their relationship. Talbot was on the Prosecution's witness list, but wasn't called. This may be why we haven't heard from her until now.
It's been interesting to see the new interrogation footage, I'm not sure why it's coming out piece by piece as it has. Each clip seems to be even odder than the last! Why is the jury only seeing parts of this footage? Did the judge deem it to be too prejudicial, with Arias so concerned with the way she looks for her booking photo - and her various yoga poses, standing on her head, rifling through the trash, talking and singing to herself and that evil cackle of a laugh has to be the most chilling part of it all. The footage makes her look like she has absolutely no remorse about what she did, and I don't believe she is remorseful to this day. If she wasn't going to be able to have Travis, there's no way she was going to let anybody else have him. Especially not Marie Hall. She told the detective that "Travis was desperate to get married" during the 7/15/08 interrogation, and she knew by her experience and conversations with him, through the content on his blog and through his friends that she was not a viable option to be his wife.
When she realized that Travis was not going to change his mind about his travel plans and he would be spending time alone with another woman - a woman who was more wife material than she was, she came undone. She wouldn't have been able to handle those days and those nights thinking about what he was doing in Cancun Mexico with a woman she knew he had an interest in. Those thoughts consumed her and drove her to the murderous rage that claimed the life of Travis Alexander. Jodi Arias killed him and never looked back. She continued on her trip to Utah, as if nothing happened. She would likely be on to the next man, had she not been arrested and indicted for murder. Better to have Travis dead and gone than to worry and wonder about who he is sharing his time and his life with. In a way, killing him finally set her free. Her freedom was short lived. Was it worth it?
Amazon banner
Who's Profiting From Jodi Arias Murder Trial?
Another late start in court today, I believe they will begin at 4:00PM EST. **UPDATE** Court is done for the day. The Judge called it a day after somebody in the gallery vomited in the isle in the courtroom! Really, this actually happened. I'm surprised nobody got sick during Jodi Arias's testimony......
After hearing that expert witness Dr. Richard Samuels may be planning to write a book, I began to think of the people who may try to profit from their involvement in this murder trial. It seems wrong on every level. If Samuels does intend on writing a book on his trial experience in general, that would not seem as unethical as writing about his personal dealings with Arias.
Did you know that Jodi Arias supporters have the ability to accept donations "in support of Jodi"? The website clearly states all such donations will be credited to Arias's commissary account by her family (see below). Casey Anthony is another defendant who received many checks, money orders and donations so she could order food and personal products from the jailhouse commissary! People from all over the country sent in their hard earned money to feed Ms. Anthony while she awaited trial.
*All support donations received will be deposited into Jodi’s commissary account by the Arias family.
(From the jodiariasisinnocent.com website)
In addition to Dr. Samuels, I would say that Gus Searcy was another person who actively sought out involvement in the Jodi Arias trial. He had information that was relevant, Arias reportedly called him in the middle of the night on June 5, 2008 to tell him that Travis was dead. Did Searcy dial 911, or have an officer go by the Alexander home to do a welfare check? No, he did nothing. In fact, he went on the same Cancun trip Travis Alexander was supposed to attend. Still, he said nothing. I don't believe withholding this type of information is technically illegal, but it goes a long way towards showing what type of citizen he is. He kept information closely guarded until it became beneficial to him. Once he testified, he wasted no time in booking himself on any/every media outlet that would have him. If you do a search on this guy, you will see that he's peddling a book he wrote called "The Charm". I'm not going to promote anything this man is selling here, but I will say it appears this book is about the power of positive thinking and of making positive choices. Sound vaguely familiar? Is this just another ripoff of "The Law Of Attraction" and/or "The Secret"?
Then there's the matter of Jodi Arias selling her artwork on Ebay. The proceeds of any sales are reportedly being used to help finance the Arias family's travel costs to and from Phoenix so they can attend the trial. I'm pretty sure this constitutes income, and the proceeds from any sales of her original artwork has to be reported as income on her tax return.
What about the Alexander family? They are also traveling from out of town to attend the trial - is there a site to make donations to help them offset the costs? If there isn't, there should be. If the Arias family is receiving help via donations than the Alexander family should be too.
In one of the early interviews between Arias and Detective Flores, she asked him if/when the check she had written to Travis for car payments would be deposited. I remember that because it was such a tacky and trivial question to be asking after a death notification. If the check(s) were not deposited, I believe that would also be considered taxable income. This is taken from the IRS Publication 334 (2012):
"Generally, if your debt is cancelled or forgiven, other than as a gift or bequest to you, you must include the cancelled amount in your gross income for tax purposes. Report the canceled amount on line 6 of Schedule C if you incurred the debt in your business. If the debt is a non business debt, report the canceled amount on line 21 of Form 1040.
If the check that Jodi sent to Travis for the two months worth of car payments was never cashed, it appears this would be considered a non-business (forgiven) debt and should be taxable income.
On her artwork - the paragraph below was taken from eHow.com, and it clearly states that producing and selling art for money is reportable income In addition, this activity constitutes a business. Does Arias even have a business license?
"If you are engaged in the production of art and you sell that art for money, profiting from that endeavor in the process, then you must usually claim that profit on your income taxes for that year. The process of creating and selling art for money constitutes a business like any other, and is subject to the same tax regulations as any other for-profit business".
Read more: Do I Need to Claim Taxes on My Artwork? | eHow.com http://www.ehow.com/info_7999566_do-need-claim-taxes-artwork.html#ixzz2O7XCy6KL
Also from eHow.com, a business license is required if you are selling your own artwork. Business licenses are granted in the City and State where you live. Arias would also need a Employer Identification Number ("EIN") to file taxes on said business. So is Jodi Arias breaking the law while already behind bars? Seems to me that she is.
This may sound petty and trivial in the grand scheme of things. But it's quite possible that Arias is receiving substantial donations. Her "original artwork" would have little to no value if she were not on trial for murder. Was Arias paid for her Inside Edition, 48 Hours and Arizona Republic TV interviews? Has she received money for the photos they show on the various news shows reporting on her case? This became a concern in the Casey Anthony trial - when her parents were being paid for interview and the Anthony's received monies for the "licensing rights" to more family photos to show on the air. In fact, things got so heated around payments to Casey and her family that networks decided it wasn't worth the backlash to pursue getting that first post-acquittal interview with her after all. Wise move.
Testimony finally began this afternoon after another late start. Jennifer Willmott picked up where she left off yesterday, trying to rehabilitate their "expert" with the jury. It's going to be difficult to convince them that the blaring errors and omissions on Samuels reports were "irrelevant" to the diagnosis. For $250.00 an hour, I'd expect a little more out an expert witness.
The price tag to the taxpayers for the Jodi Arias trial is estimated to be upwards of $1,000,000.
After hearing that expert witness Dr. Richard Samuels may be planning to write a book, I began to think of the people who may try to profit from their involvement in this murder trial. It seems wrong on every level. If Samuels does intend on writing a book on his trial experience in general, that would not seem as unethical as writing about his personal dealings with Arias.
Did you know that Jodi Arias supporters have the ability to accept donations "in support of Jodi"? The website clearly states all such donations will be credited to Arias's commissary account by her family (see below). Casey Anthony is another defendant who received many checks, money orders and donations so she could order food and personal products from the jailhouse commissary! People from all over the country sent in their hard earned money to feed Ms. Anthony while she awaited trial.
*All support donations received will be deposited into Jodi’s commissary account by the Arias family.
(From the jodiariasisinnocent.com website)
In addition to Dr. Samuels, I would say that Gus Searcy was another person who actively sought out involvement in the Jodi Arias trial. He had information that was relevant, Arias reportedly called him in the middle of the night on June 5, 2008 to tell him that Travis was dead. Did Searcy dial 911, or have an officer go by the Alexander home to do a welfare check? No, he did nothing. In fact, he went on the same Cancun trip Travis Alexander was supposed to attend. Still, he said nothing. I don't believe withholding this type of information is technically illegal, but it goes a long way towards showing what type of citizen he is. He kept information closely guarded until it became beneficial to him. Once he testified, he wasted no time in booking himself on any/every media outlet that would have him. If you do a search on this guy, you will see that he's peddling a book he wrote called "The Charm". I'm not going to promote anything this man is selling here, but I will say it appears this book is about the power of positive thinking and of making positive choices. Sound vaguely familiar? Is this just another ripoff of "The Law Of Attraction" and/or "The Secret"?
Then there's the matter of Jodi Arias selling her artwork on Ebay. The proceeds of any sales are reportedly being used to help finance the Arias family's travel costs to and from Phoenix so they can attend the trial. I'm pretty sure this constitutes income, and the proceeds from any sales of her original artwork has to be reported as income on her tax return.
What about the Alexander family? They are also traveling from out of town to attend the trial - is there a site to make donations to help them offset the costs? If there isn't, there should be. If the Arias family is receiving help via donations than the Alexander family should be too.
In one of the early interviews between Arias and Detective Flores, she asked him if/when the check she had written to Travis for car payments would be deposited. I remember that because it was such a tacky and trivial question to be asking after a death notification. If the check(s) were not deposited, I believe that would also be considered taxable income. This is taken from the IRS Publication 334 (2012):
"Generally, if your debt is cancelled or forgiven, other than as a gift or bequest to you, you must include the cancelled amount in your gross income for tax purposes. Report the canceled amount on line 6 of Schedule C if you incurred the debt in your business. If the debt is a non business debt, report the canceled amount on line 21 of Form 1040.
If the check that Jodi sent to Travis for the two months worth of car payments was never cashed, it appears this would be considered a non-business (forgiven) debt and should be taxable income.
On her artwork - the paragraph below was taken from eHow.com, and it clearly states that producing and selling art for money is reportable income In addition, this activity constitutes a business. Does Arias even have a business license?
"If you are engaged in the production of art and you sell that art for money, profiting from that endeavor in the process, then you must usually claim that profit on your income taxes for that year. The process of creating and selling art for money constitutes a business like any other, and is subject to the same tax regulations as any other for-profit business".
Read more: Do I Need to Claim Taxes on My Artwork? | eHow.com http://www.ehow.com/info_7999566_do-need-claim-taxes-artwork.html#ixzz2O7XCy6KL
Also from eHow.com, a business license is required if you are selling your own artwork. Business licenses are granted in the City and State where you live. Arias would also need a Employer Identification Number ("EIN") to file taxes on said business. So is Jodi Arias breaking the law while already behind bars? Seems to me that she is.
This may sound petty and trivial in the grand scheme of things. But it's quite possible that Arias is receiving substantial donations. Her "original artwork" would have little to no value if she were not on trial for murder. Was Arias paid for her Inside Edition, 48 Hours and Arizona Republic TV interviews? Has she received money for the photos they show on the various news shows reporting on her case? This became a concern in the Casey Anthony trial - when her parents were being paid for interview and the Anthony's received monies for the "licensing rights" to more family photos to show on the air. In fact, things got so heated around payments to Casey and her family that networks decided it wasn't worth the backlash to pursue getting that first post-acquittal interview with her after all. Wise move.
Testimony finally began this afternoon after another late start. Jennifer Willmott picked up where she left off yesterday, trying to rehabilitate their "expert" with the jury. It's going to be difficult to convince them that the blaring errors and omissions on Samuels reports were "irrelevant" to the diagnosis. For $250.00 an hour, I'd expect a little more out an expert witness.
The price tag to the taxpayers for the Jodi Arias trial is estimated to be upwards of $1,000,000.
Casting Call Goes Out For "Dirty Little Secret: The Jodi Arias Story"
The Lifetime movie about the Jodi Arias Murder Trial is in the works. A casting call has reportedly gone out for the project, tentatively titled "Dirty Little Secret: The Jodi Arias Story" - filming will begin April 13, 2013 in Los Angeles, CA according to reports from New York Daily News. The film is being produced by City Entertainment and Peace Out Productions.
The casting call went out for a white woman in her late 20's, who is "coquettish (huh?), head turning, with a palpable sexy allure and is well aware of the affect she has on men". OK, I didn't write that description of Arias, it's from the NY Daily News article! The Jodi Arias character is further described as a head strong, quick tempered young woman who "emotionally suffocates and controls Travis Alexander". Casting Agent Fern Champion is said to be at the helm. Champion has handled casting on "Police Academy", "Naked Gun" and "90210".
For the role of Travis Alexander, they are looking for a handsome young man with a "winning personality" and a great sense of humor who becomes emotionally undone by the sexually aggressive Jodi Arias. In the movie, when Arias finally realizes that the object of her desire will never fully commit to her, her jealousy drives her to violence. It will be interesting to see what point of view the story is told from - hopefully the producers of this project will take their cues from the evidence and the crime scene photos, and not from the uncorroborated tales from this murder defendant. In this case, the truth is juicy enough to make a good made-for-TV movie, there is no need to give any credence to Jodi Arias' allegations that Travis was a sexual deviant.
According to reports, the move will portray Arias as a cold-blooded killer, who savagely slashes and stabs Travis Alexander "like a fevered animal". Although the ending is still unknown, I've read that the closing scene will show Arias smiling slightly at the camera. Sounds about right to me. A source close to Lifetime confirmed that pre production and casting has begun but no air date has been set.
In other Arias-related news, many of you commented on something that Arias was seen doing in court yesterday. Thanks for all of the comments and YouTube links to these clips! I couldn't believe my eyes when I viewed two of these clips. In a .12 second video clip, Arias can clearly be seen sneaking an entire manila file off the defense table and sliding it under the table and presumably under her rear end. What was in that folder? Was she removing something or adding something to it? In another .32 second video clip, Arias can be seen taking a document and sliding it under the table and out of the view of the camera. What was that document, and what did she do with it?
These clips are being talked about all over the Internet now - will the Judge and Prosecutor try to determine what Arias was up to? Are there any rules around a defendant handling or tampering with their own legal documents, if that's what they were? Perhaps she was trying to get one of her courtroom doodles out to someone in the gallery, to be sold on EBay? Who knows what does on in the mind of this woman.
How do you think Juan Martinez did with discrediting the work of Dr. Samuels yesterday? At the very least, he was able to point out how sloppy this doc's work was in a high profile death penalty case. It's hard to understand how someone can go into court and be so ill prepared - his entire diagnosis should be tossed, based on the realization that Jodi Arias took that PTSD test while still telling the 2 armed intruder lie. If her answers are based around lies, how can the diagnosis be a valid one? How can Dr. Samuels say that her inconsistencies (aka LIES) were not relevant to him? Did he really say that? Jennifer Willmott did her best to rehabilitate the diagnosis of the doctor, but this jury seems fairly bright - we should learn quite a bit about how they viewed this evidence when we hear the jury questions for Dr. Samuels.
Personally, I've never seen an expert witness who was as sloppy with his work as this one was. When Martinez pointed out that Samuels report had several errors that directly effected the PTSD diagnosis, Samuels was quick to say that he accidentally omitted these pieces of information, yet he didn't feel it was important to update his own report? How unprofessional can one be? His face appeared very red while Juan Martinez was grilling him on Arias' inconsistencies as well as his OWN inconsistencies. He looked like his head was about to explode. How will the jury view his diagnosis of PTSD and amnesia for Jodi Arias? It seems fairly clear that this man found out that Arias had been lying, yet he failed to re administer the test. Was he afraid of that the new results would not show what the defense wanted them to show, so he simply chose to ignore the lies as "irrelevant"? I doubt the jury will see lying as irrelevant - just goes to show that Arias is lying to everybody - even her own experts and her attorneys.
Her demeanor while the jury is not present is completely different than when they are present. She is just one odd and creepy woman. I always wonder what's going through her head as she stares blankly ahead during testimony. She almost looks bored, now that she's off the stand and out of the spotlight. I truly believe she enjoyed all of the attention she received during her time on the witness stand. Will the jury get their opportunity to question this expert witness today? Will Jodi Arias try to sit on additional office supplies today, or will she up the ante and swipe something from Jennifer Willmott's briefcase or purse? This has to be the most bizarre behavior seen in an American Courtroom in recent history.
Updates to follow......
The casting call went out for a white woman in her late 20's, who is "coquettish (huh?), head turning, with a palpable sexy allure and is well aware of the affect she has on men". OK, I didn't write that description of Arias, it's from the NY Daily News article! The Jodi Arias character is further described as a head strong, quick tempered young woman who "emotionally suffocates and controls Travis Alexander". Casting Agent Fern Champion is said to be at the helm. Champion has handled casting on "Police Academy", "Naked Gun" and "90210".
For the role of Travis Alexander, they are looking for a handsome young man with a "winning personality" and a great sense of humor who becomes emotionally undone by the sexually aggressive Jodi Arias. In the movie, when Arias finally realizes that the object of her desire will never fully commit to her, her jealousy drives her to violence. It will be interesting to see what point of view the story is told from - hopefully the producers of this project will take their cues from the evidence and the crime scene photos, and not from the uncorroborated tales from this murder defendant. In this case, the truth is juicy enough to make a good made-for-TV movie, there is no need to give any credence to Jodi Arias' allegations that Travis was a sexual deviant.
According to reports, the move will portray Arias as a cold-blooded killer, who savagely slashes and stabs Travis Alexander "like a fevered animal". Although the ending is still unknown, I've read that the closing scene will show Arias smiling slightly at the camera. Sounds about right to me. A source close to Lifetime confirmed that pre production and casting has begun but no air date has been set.
In other Arias-related news, many of you commented on something that Arias was seen doing in court yesterday. Thanks for all of the comments and YouTube links to these clips! I couldn't believe my eyes when I viewed two of these clips. In a .12 second video clip, Arias can clearly be seen sneaking an entire manila file off the defense table and sliding it under the table and presumably under her rear end. What was in that folder? Was she removing something or adding something to it? In another .32 second video clip, Arias can be seen taking a document and sliding it under the table and out of the view of the camera. What was that document, and what did she do with it?
These clips are being talked about all over the Internet now - will the Judge and Prosecutor try to determine what Arias was up to? Are there any rules around a defendant handling or tampering with their own legal documents, if that's what they were? Perhaps she was trying to get one of her courtroom doodles out to someone in the gallery, to be sold on EBay? Who knows what does on in the mind of this woman.
How do you think Juan Martinez did with discrediting the work of Dr. Samuels yesterday? At the very least, he was able to point out how sloppy this doc's work was in a high profile death penalty case. It's hard to understand how someone can go into court and be so ill prepared - his entire diagnosis should be tossed, based on the realization that Jodi Arias took that PTSD test while still telling the 2 armed intruder lie. If her answers are based around lies, how can the diagnosis be a valid one? How can Dr. Samuels say that her inconsistencies (aka LIES) were not relevant to him? Did he really say that? Jennifer Willmott did her best to rehabilitate the diagnosis of the doctor, but this jury seems fairly bright - we should learn quite a bit about how they viewed this evidence when we hear the jury questions for Dr. Samuels.
Personally, I've never seen an expert witness who was as sloppy with his work as this one was. When Martinez pointed out that Samuels report had several errors that directly effected the PTSD diagnosis, Samuels was quick to say that he accidentally omitted these pieces of information, yet he didn't feel it was important to update his own report? How unprofessional can one be? His face appeared very red while Juan Martinez was grilling him on Arias' inconsistencies as well as his OWN inconsistencies. He looked like his head was about to explode. How will the jury view his diagnosis of PTSD and amnesia for Jodi Arias? It seems fairly clear that this man found out that Arias had been lying, yet he failed to re administer the test. Was he afraid of that the new results would not show what the defense wanted them to show, so he simply chose to ignore the lies as "irrelevant"? I doubt the jury will see lying as irrelevant - just goes to show that Arias is lying to everybody - even her own experts and her attorneys.
Her demeanor while the jury is not present is completely different than when they are present. She is just one odd and creepy woman. I always wonder what's going through her head as she stares blankly ahead during testimony. She almost looks bored, now that she's off the stand and out of the spotlight. I truly believe she enjoyed all of the attention she received during her time on the witness stand. Will the jury get their opportunity to question this expert witness today? Will Jodi Arias try to sit on additional office supplies today, or will she up the ante and swipe something from Jennifer Willmott's briefcase or purse? This has to be the most bizarre behavior seen in an American Courtroom in recent history.
Updates to follow......
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!
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!
Jodi Arias Defense - Going, Going, GONE!
You know the defense is in trouble when they have to count on the testimony of "expert witnesses" who have had ethics complaints lodged against them, former cell mates and ex-boyfriends (who are still alive). I suppose Arias defense attorneys Jennifer Willmott and L. Kirk Nurmi are doing the best they can, given their client is a proven liar and having little to work with to mount any type of effective defense against a murder that was so savage and brutal that it's difficult to believe the defendant has no memory of shooting, stabbing and slashing the life out of another person. Those are the type of memories that people pray will go away.
As with the earlier testimony about Arias and Alexander's sexcapades, much has been made about Jodi Arias and her memory issues - the infamous fog that seems to roll in at the most opportune times for Arias. The memory issues are really a non-issue. She knows what she did, I have no doubt that she remembers it all. The jury knows it too - judging by the 200+ questions asked of Arias by the jurors. Arias was aware, alert and had enough composure to attempt to clean up the crime scene and remove articles that could be linked back to her. The defense theories have been transparent.
For example - on redirect, Nurmi asked Jodi Arias if she had access to other guns that were not her grandfathers, and she named off several people who she believes would have loaned her a gun. What did that prove? Was Nurmi stating that Arias didn't need to steal a gun from grandpa? Given that he didn't ask further questions other than "did you have access to firearms", it would seem his point was just that - access = no need for theft. Did Nurmi think the jurors would miss the point, Arias needed access to a gun that could not be linked back to her? Let's take a look at Nurmi's scenario. Arias asks Darryl or Matt, "hey, can I borrow your handgun for my road trip to Utah, just in case my car breaks down and/or I need it for protection because I'm traveling alone"?
A gun is used to shoot Travis Alexander, and the police question the friends and family of Arias and Alexander - do you think Darryl or Matt would be willing to lie and get involved as an accessory in a murder case? If Arias had borrowed a gun, would she have returned it to the lender of said gun? If she did return the gun, a ballistics check would reveal the borrowed gun was used in the commission of a murder. If the gun was used but not returned, Darryl or Matt would have to account for where their guns were during the time of Alexander's murder. Arias may believe these men would not betray her, but I don't believe either men would be willing to take the rap for a murder they did not commit. Arias had to steal a gun. Nobody could know she brought a gun with her on her road trip. That was one of the weaker line of questioning from L. Kirk Nurmi during redirect, and it did little to bolster her story about the origin of the gun. If the jury doesn't believe that Travis Alexander owned a .25 caliber gun and kept it in that closet, Arias is all but done.
The expert witness the defense brought in to testify that Arias suffered/suffers from PTSD and amnesia ended up blowing up in their faces. Juan Martinez wasted no time in revealing Dr. Richard Samuels dirty laundry for the jury. It seems that back in the year 2000, Dr. Samuels was sanctioned by the New Jersey State Board of Psychological Examiners after two people lodged complaints against him. In one of the cases, Samuels actually made a recommendation on a child custody issue without ever examining the child's mother! In addition, Samuels was caught in a "bartering" scheme in which treatment was traded for dental work. I don't have additional details on these individual issues but I do know that he was fined $2,500.00 and ordered to undergo special training on ethics and boundary issues. He as also ordered to "cease crossing boundaries" with patients/clients or entering into relationships that could create conflicts of interest.
This is the best expert they could get? It would be interesting to know how many experts they approached about testifying and how many turned them down - and the reasons why they took a pass on this case. Juan Martinez questioned Dr. Samuels on the actual PTSD test he administered to Jodi Arias. In a dramatic moment, Martinez got Samuels to admit in open court that the test results he used for his diagnosis were based on Arias's 2nd story of two armed intruders killing Travis! Although the test and the results should have been nullified because the answers were based on a story he knows to be false, and another test should have been administered based on her third/current story of self defense, but it wasn't.
When Martinez asked him why he hadn't re-tested Arias, Samuels looked like a deer in headlights. He said "that probably would have been prudent to do". I couldn't believe what I was hearing. Based on these facts, his testimony isn't worth the paper it's printed on. Scratch another witness for the defense. Who's left? A convicted felon who used to share a cell with Arias, and Alyce Laviolette, who has some expertise on domestic violence issues. Will the defense call any other witnesses or is this their case? Arias should be afraid, be very afraid....her lies have finally caught up with her, and nobody can save her now. She may have signed her own death warrant by choosing to shoot dirty pool with the allegations of pedophilia against Travis. The jury may find this so distasteful and disgusting that any sympathy/empathy they may have otherwise felt for her has been wiped out with the smear campaign on the murder victim.
What will today's court day bring? Will today's forecast include fog and/or clouds? Tune in later for an update. Enjoy your morning and your day!
As with the earlier testimony about Arias and Alexander's sexcapades, much has been made about Jodi Arias and her memory issues - the infamous fog that seems to roll in at the most opportune times for Arias. The memory issues are really a non-issue. She knows what she did, I have no doubt that she remembers it all. The jury knows it too - judging by the 200+ questions asked of Arias by the jurors. Arias was aware, alert and had enough composure to attempt to clean up the crime scene and remove articles that could be linked back to her. The defense theories have been transparent.
For example - on redirect, Nurmi asked Jodi Arias if she had access to other guns that were not her grandfathers, and she named off several people who she believes would have loaned her a gun. What did that prove? Was Nurmi stating that Arias didn't need to steal a gun from grandpa? Given that he didn't ask further questions other than "did you have access to firearms", it would seem his point was just that - access = no need for theft. Did Nurmi think the jurors would miss the point, Arias needed access to a gun that could not be linked back to her? Let's take a look at Nurmi's scenario. Arias asks Darryl or Matt, "hey, can I borrow your handgun for my road trip to Utah, just in case my car breaks down and/or I need it for protection because I'm traveling alone"?
A gun is used to shoot Travis Alexander, and the police question the friends and family of Arias and Alexander - do you think Darryl or Matt would be willing to lie and get involved as an accessory in a murder case? If Arias had borrowed a gun, would she have returned it to the lender of said gun? If she did return the gun, a ballistics check would reveal the borrowed gun was used in the commission of a murder. If the gun was used but not returned, Darryl or Matt would have to account for where their guns were during the time of Alexander's murder. Arias may believe these men would not betray her, but I don't believe either men would be willing to take the rap for a murder they did not commit. Arias had to steal a gun. Nobody could know she brought a gun with her on her road trip. That was one of the weaker line of questioning from L. Kirk Nurmi during redirect, and it did little to bolster her story about the origin of the gun. If the jury doesn't believe that Travis Alexander owned a .25 caliber gun and kept it in that closet, Arias is all but done.
The expert witness the defense brought in to testify that Arias suffered/suffers from PTSD and amnesia ended up blowing up in their faces. Juan Martinez wasted no time in revealing Dr. Richard Samuels dirty laundry for the jury. It seems that back in the year 2000, Dr. Samuels was sanctioned by the New Jersey State Board of Psychological Examiners after two people lodged complaints against him. In one of the cases, Samuels actually made a recommendation on a child custody issue without ever examining the child's mother! In addition, Samuels was caught in a "bartering" scheme in which treatment was traded for dental work. I don't have additional details on these individual issues but I do know that he was fined $2,500.00 and ordered to undergo special training on ethics and boundary issues. He as also ordered to "cease crossing boundaries" with patients/clients or entering into relationships that could create conflicts of interest.
This is the best expert they could get? It would be interesting to know how many experts they approached about testifying and how many turned them down - and the reasons why they took a pass on this case. Juan Martinez questioned Dr. Samuels on the actual PTSD test he administered to Jodi Arias. In a dramatic moment, Martinez got Samuels to admit in open court that the test results he used for his diagnosis were based on Arias's 2nd story of two armed intruders killing Travis! Although the test and the results should have been nullified because the answers were based on a story he knows to be false, and another test should have been administered based on her third/current story of self defense, but it wasn't.
When Martinez asked him why he hadn't re-tested Arias, Samuels looked like a deer in headlights. He said "that probably would have been prudent to do". I couldn't believe what I was hearing. Based on these facts, his testimony isn't worth the paper it's printed on. Scratch another witness for the defense. Who's left? A convicted felon who used to share a cell with Arias, and Alyce Laviolette, who has some expertise on domestic violence issues. Will the defense call any other witnesses or is this their case? Arias should be afraid, be very afraid....her lies have finally caught up with her, and nobody can save her now. She may have signed her own death warrant by choosing to shoot dirty pool with the allegations of pedophilia against Travis. The jury may find this so distasteful and disgusting that any sympathy/empathy they may have otherwise felt for her has been wiped out with the smear campaign on the murder victim.
What will today's court day bring? Will today's forecast include fog and/or clouds? Tune in later for an update. Enjoy your morning and your day!
Juan Martinez Squares Off Against Dr. Samuels
Another day, another battle between Arizona Prosecutor Juan Martinez and a defense witness. This time, he took on "expert witness" for the defense, Dr. Richard Samuels. Dr. Samuels is an individual who interviewed Jodi Arias twelve times over a period of 4-5 years, and who has diagnosed her as having PTSD and amnesia. Arias attorney Kathleen Willmott continued questioning Samuels today in an effort to explain away the memory issues (aka "the fog") Jodi Arias has relating to the actual stabbing/slashing of Travis Alexander.
Samuels is a paid witness - make no mistake about it, his report more than likely was tailor made to fit the Arias defense theories. Her memory issues are the least of her problems. Just because she claims to not remember what she did to Travis Alexander, that in no way relinquishes her responsibility nor does it alter the absolute savage nature of this murder.
Dr. Samuels has explained the function of various sections of the brain, and how some areas will shut down and effect a persons memory because they essentially do not create memories of stressful events. Could it really be that simple? No memory created and therefore nothing to remember? Arias' amnesia is very convenient - since she does remember things immediately before and shortly thereafter, it's the actual stabbing/slashing she doesn't remember. She admittedly remembers removing items from the crime scene that would implicate her, so I have a hard time believing she was in some "dissociative state" of mind.
This testimony sickens me, attempting to create sympathy and give Arias excuses for lying and covering act this brutal act. What about Travis Alexander? We haven't heard one word from the defense on how terrified he must have been being trapped in the shower and/or the bathroom while being shot, viciously stabbed and having his throat slashed by a woman he allowed into his life and into his home. I can't imagine how painful his death was or how confused he must have been once he realized what was happening. We are supposed to feel empathy for Jodi Arias because she shakes when people raise their voices at her?
Arias could not fool Detective Flores or the Mesa Police Department - it's hard to tell if Dr. Samuels actually believes what Arias told him, or if he is giving the opinion he is being paid handsomely for. They could parade 10 experts to the stand and it wouldn't change the facts of the case or make her less liable. The facts of the case reveal that Jodi Arias had minor injuries immediately after this "life and death" struggle she had with Travis Alexander. The crime scene and autopsy photos tell any reasonable person that this was never a fight or struggle between two people fighting for their lives. It was a blitz attack on Travis, and it appears he never had a chance. She had him relaxed and with his guard down in that shower, and the first stab wound probably sent him into shock, but Arias was far from finished.
She incapacitated him and while he was unable to protect himself, she unleashed a rage that had been building up inside of her for months. She didn't stop until he was no longer moving. If he ever did have a chance to fight back, I'm certain Jodi Arias would have been injured. He was stronger and bigger than she was.
Juan Martinez finally got his shot at Dr. Samuels today, and he wasted no time in discrediting many things Samuels said and did during his appointments with Jodi Arias. Among the highlights: Samuels administered the PTSD test to Arias BEFORE she admitted to killing Travis Alexander. When he found out that she had taken the test while still sticking with the two armed intruder story, did he re administer the test? No. He didn't. Martinez got him to admit that it would've been the prudent thing to do!
In addition, Martinez pulled some of Samuels dirty laundry out of the hamper. It seems he was fined and/or censured for conflicts of interest involving some women he previously treated. He has a history of "crossing boundaries" with people he has treated or done assessments on. He also gave Arias a self-help book, another no-no since he wasn't technically treating Arias, just assessing her. Martinez also questioned Samuels as to why he used a pencil while testing or grading Arias's PTSD test instead of a pen. Did he use a pencil so he could alter Arias's answers? He denied altering anything.
By the time Juan Martinez was done with Samuels, he didn't seem like such a great witness anymore. Good job Mr. Martinez!! Until tomorrow.....
Samuels is a paid witness - make no mistake about it, his report more than likely was tailor made to fit the Arias defense theories. Her memory issues are the least of her problems. Just because she claims to not remember what she did to Travis Alexander, that in no way relinquishes her responsibility nor does it alter the absolute savage nature of this murder.
Dr. Samuels has explained the function of various sections of the brain, and how some areas will shut down and effect a persons memory because they essentially do not create memories of stressful events. Could it really be that simple? No memory created and therefore nothing to remember? Arias' amnesia is very convenient - since she does remember things immediately before and shortly thereafter, it's the actual stabbing/slashing she doesn't remember. She admittedly remembers removing items from the crime scene that would implicate her, so I have a hard time believing she was in some "dissociative state" of mind.
This testimony sickens me, attempting to create sympathy and give Arias excuses for lying and covering act this brutal act. What about Travis Alexander? We haven't heard one word from the defense on how terrified he must have been being trapped in the shower and/or the bathroom while being shot, viciously stabbed and having his throat slashed by a woman he allowed into his life and into his home. I can't imagine how painful his death was or how confused he must have been once he realized what was happening. We are supposed to feel empathy for Jodi Arias because she shakes when people raise their voices at her?
Arias could not fool Detective Flores or the Mesa Police Department - it's hard to tell if Dr. Samuels actually believes what Arias told him, or if he is giving the opinion he is being paid handsomely for. They could parade 10 experts to the stand and it wouldn't change the facts of the case or make her less liable. The facts of the case reveal that Jodi Arias had minor injuries immediately after this "life and death" struggle she had with Travis Alexander. The crime scene and autopsy photos tell any reasonable person that this was never a fight or struggle between two people fighting for their lives. It was a blitz attack on Travis, and it appears he never had a chance. She had him relaxed and with his guard down in that shower, and the first stab wound probably sent him into shock, but Arias was far from finished.
She incapacitated him and while he was unable to protect himself, she unleashed a rage that had been building up inside of her for months. She didn't stop until he was no longer moving. If he ever did have a chance to fight back, I'm certain Jodi Arias would have been injured. He was stronger and bigger than she was.
Juan Martinez finally got his shot at Dr. Samuels today, and he wasted no time in discrediting many things Samuels said and did during his appointments with Jodi Arias. Among the highlights: Samuels administered the PTSD test to Arias BEFORE she admitted to killing Travis Alexander. When he found out that she had taken the test while still sticking with the two armed intruder story, did he re administer the test? No. He didn't. Martinez got him to admit that it would've been the prudent thing to do!
In addition, Martinez pulled some of Samuels dirty laundry out of the hamper. It seems he was fined and/or censured for conflicts of interest involving some women he previously treated. He has a history of "crossing boundaries" with people he has treated or done assessments on. He also gave Arias a self-help book, another no-no since he wasn't technically treating Arias, just assessing her. Martinez also questioned Samuels as to why he used a pencil while testing or grading Arias's PTSD test instead of a pen. Did he use a pencil so he could alter Arias's answers? He denied altering anything.
By the time Juan Martinez was done with Samuels, he didn't seem like such a great witness anymore. Good job Mr. Martinez!! Until tomorrow.....
Former Cell Mate Of Arias To Testify?
Who's left on Jodi Arias' defense witness list? Far as I can tell, Dr. Samuels, Kimberly Ross and possibly Alyce Laviolette are on that list. Dr. Samuels, who we saw last week is expected to continue his testimony today, once the attorneys and judge duke it out over what he is qualified to say and whether or not he will be able to use the PowerPoint presentation Juan Martinez objected to last week. He also had an opinion on whether the murder was premeditated based on the crime scene photos he reviewed! Ah, no - what qualifies him as an expert on crime scene photos? Does he use a Magic 8 Ball to tell him if the murder was premeditated?
Jodi Arias's former cellmate, Kimberly Ross may also testify on her behalf. I did some digging around on Kimberly Ross, and I found it very interesting that while she was incarcerated, from 4/6/09 - 10/5/09 she was a "Clerk in Library", and from 5/16/07 - 3/17/09 she was listed as "Library Aide". I found this information on Mugshots.com, looks like she has at least two mugshots on file (see below) and it's not clear to me if she held these jobs in the library during her time in jail or during her prison stint. It would be interesting to know if she worked in the jail library, and it would be even more interesting to have a look at what books Arias may have checked out! What will Ross have to add to further Jodi Arias's version of events leading to the murder of Travis Alexander? What Jodi Arias told her while they were sharing a cell is not evidence - I always wonder why they call these type of witnesses to the stand. They have such a weak case that apparently they are hoping the jurors find their witnesses credible. Here are the two (undated) mugshots of Ross:
Hard to believe these are the same person - quite a different look between the two photos. I can't imagine why they are calling her as a witness but just because she is on the witness list doesn't mean she will ever be called.
Alyce Laviolette is another person who has been mentioned during the trial. Her website lists her as a specialist in Anger Management, Domestic Violence Counseling for Survivors and Perpetrators, Gender Issues, and Expert Witness. Laviolette is located in the Long Beach area and it's unclear how she became involved in this case but I've heard Juan Martinez mention her several times during his cross examination of Arias.
So what do these "expert witnesses" charge for their services? I found a website (http://www.seak.com/expert-witness-fee-study/) that will give you an idea of what these people are making for trial time etc:
Not a bad hourly rate! Does anybody else feel this is unethical, to be paid for giving testimony? It certainly would seem to give an expert the incentive to say what the defense/prosecution needs them to say. I can understand why experts are useful in certain cases but any form of compensation other than travel costs and reasonable reimbursement seems excessive.
What will happen in the courtroom today when Dr. Samuels resumes his testimony, and when will Juan Martinez finally get to his rebuttal case? This trial has had so many breaks and 3-day court weeks that it seems there is no end in sight. Over the weekend, I was thinking about that check that Jodi Arias was so worried about - if you recall after she was informed of Travis's death, she asked Detective Flores if he knew when the check she wrote Travis would be deposited. I believe the check was dated either 5/25/08 or 5/28/08 and it was either money she borrowed or a few car payments, because I remember it listed two months on the "memo" section of that check.
Now that we believe Arias staged the break in to steal her grandfather's gun, traveled to Mesa without telling a single soul - I began to wonder if she KNEW that check would never be deposited because Travis Alexander would be dead? Wasn't she broke during that trip? Would that $525+ dollar check have cleared her account had Travis lived to deposit it? I would love to see her bank records to see if she wrote the check knowing it would never clear her bank. If she had to borrow money to take that trip, what are the chances she had more than $500 sitting in her account to pay Travis back? Just another one of those little things that only Jodi Arias knows.
Jodi Arias's former cellmate, Kimberly Ross may also testify on her behalf. I did some digging around on Kimberly Ross, and I found it very interesting that while she was incarcerated, from 4/6/09 - 10/5/09 she was a "Clerk in Library", and from 5/16/07 - 3/17/09 she was listed as "Library Aide". I found this information on Mugshots.com, looks like she has at least two mugshots on file (see below) and it's not clear to me if she held these jobs in the library during her time in jail or during her prison stint. It would be interesting to know if she worked in the jail library, and it would be even more interesting to have a look at what books Arias may have checked out! What will Ross have to add to further Jodi Arias's version of events leading to the murder of Travis Alexander? What Jodi Arias told her while they were sharing a cell is not evidence - I always wonder why they call these type of witnesses to the stand. They have such a weak case that apparently they are hoping the jurors find their witnesses credible. Here are the two (undated) mugshots of Ross:
Hard to believe these are the same person - quite a different look between the two photos. I can't imagine why they are calling her as a witness but just because she is on the witness list doesn't mean she will ever be called.
Alyce Laviolette is another person who has been mentioned during the trial. Her website lists her as a specialist in Anger Management, Domestic Violence Counseling for Survivors and Perpetrators, Gender Issues, and Expert Witness. Laviolette is located in the Long Beach area and it's unclear how she became involved in this case but I've heard Juan Martinez mention her several times during his cross examination of Arias.
So what do these "expert witnesses" charge for their services? I found a website (http://www.seak.com/expert-witness-fee-study/) that will give you an idea of what these people are making for trial time etc:
Expert Witness Fees By Area of Expertise
Thesurvey includes responses from over 1,000 expert witnesses in over 300 areas of expertise, from Accident Reconstruction to Wound Care. This is the most comprehensive study ever conducted on expert witness fees.
The
There was significant variation in fees amongst different areas of expertise. Medical expert witnesses are on average better compensated than non-medical expert witnesses. The average hourly fee for in court testimony for all non-medical experts is $248. The average hourly fee for in court testimony for all medical experts is $555. Medical expert witnesses on average earn more than double (124% more) what non-medical expert witnesses earn. 45% of all responding experts were medical experts and 55% of all responding experts were non-medical experts.
Surprisingly, less experienced experts generally charge more than experienced experts. The median hourly rate for all experts for in court testimony was $300. The median hourly rate for experts who have been testifying 1-5 years was $350 and the median hourly rate for experts who have been testifying 26+ years was $275.
Not a bad hourly rate! Does anybody else feel this is unethical, to be paid for giving testimony? It certainly would seem to give an expert the incentive to say what the defense/prosecution needs them to say. I can understand why experts are useful in certain cases but any form of compensation other than travel costs and reasonable reimbursement seems excessive.
What will happen in the courtroom today when Dr. Samuels resumes his testimony, and when will Juan Martinez finally get to his rebuttal case? This trial has had so many breaks and 3-day court weeks that it seems there is no end in sight. Over the weekend, I was thinking about that check that Jodi Arias was so worried about - if you recall after she was informed of Travis's death, she asked Detective Flores if he knew when the check she wrote Travis would be deposited. I believe the check was dated either 5/25/08 or 5/28/08 and it was either money she borrowed or a few car payments, because I remember it listed two months on the "memo" section of that check.
Now that we believe Arias staged the break in to steal her grandfather's gun, traveled to Mesa without telling a single soul - I began to wonder if she KNEW that check would never be deposited because Travis Alexander would be dead? Wasn't she broke during that trip? Would that $525+ dollar check have cleared her account had Travis lived to deposit it? I would love to see her bank records to see if she wrote the check knowing it would never clear her bank. If she had to borrow money to take that trip, what are the chances she had more than $500 sitting in her account to pay Travis back? Just another one of those little things that only Jodi Arias knows.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
My Apologies for Yesterday's Offensive Photo
I wanted to apologize for the photo posted with yesterday's story about a large mural that appeared suddenly on Christmas Eve in NYC. I...
Most popular posts
-
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 th...
-
As the defense finishes questioning their star witness, domestic abuse expert Alyce LaViolette, many are disillusioned by her choice to take...
-
Marie "Mimi" Hall was the first prosecution witness to take the stand in the Jodi Arias Murder trial. She took the stand on Janua...
-
Yesterday, as Dr. Richard Samuels finished up his testimony the Jodi Arias defense team called their next expert witness to the stand, Alyce...
-
Episode 3 of TNT's Cold Justice uncovered a 31 year old blunder, or a mystery - depending on how you look at it. In last night's e...

