02-15-2013, 02:59 PM
Thanks, Kid.
I can see men on the jury (and women, for that matter) looking at it similarly.
I agree that Alexander wasn't in love with Jodi and he treated her like a fuck toy. Not admirable. But, he was able to treat her as a fuck toy because she let him and she liked it. She liked it, imo, because she was trying to use sex as a springboard/catch into a more serious relationship with him; a control strategy which failed.
I disagree that she hasn't trashed him though. I think she has done so at every opportunity. She has accused him of being a cheater, an emotional and physical abuser, a pervert with pedophilic desires, a money scammer, etc... There isn't much that she hasn't accused him of, even though there's not one shred of evidence to support any of those allegations. So far, evidence has only shown that Alexander was a randy guy who strayed from his Mormon vows and partook in a weird relationship that was mostly just sexual to him.
But, I do understand your point. While she has accused him of all these things in her testimony, she's done so while acting as though she was in no way angry with him, she was just trying to please him, and she was genuinely forgiving of all of his supposed transgressions. She doesn't come out and directly call him names, she waits for Nuri to pull it out of her. It's textbook demeanor/behavior from the "abuse victim" handbook. Which is precisely what she is basing her behavior upon, imo. All of her accusations and the manner in which she's presenting them are designed to portray her as having been abused, though there's none of the usual evidence to corroborate an abuse claim.
I'm open-minded, I think. I try, anyway. And, I agree sometimes the pundits are quite one-sided in their views. My opinion is based on the evidence presented and my perception of the credibility of the witnesses. There's plenty of evidence that Jodi Arias is a hard-core liar. But, even if Jodi is suddenly being largely truthful, I agree with you that nothing presented so far comes close to a self-defense justification. And, I share your concern and that of heartbreaker; if Martinez is combative during the cross-examination, he could alienate any sympathetic juror(s) and come across as another man bullying poor Jodi. I hope he handles her strategically and sticks with calmly debunking her words with evidence to the contrary.
Seems like there's a lot more to hear; sure hope Nuri takes his client to the actual day of the murder sometime this century...
I can see men on the jury (and women, for that matter) looking at it similarly.
I agree that Alexander wasn't in love with Jodi and he treated her like a fuck toy. Not admirable. But, he was able to treat her as a fuck toy because she let him and she liked it. She liked it, imo, because she was trying to use sex as a springboard/catch into a more serious relationship with him; a control strategy which failed.
I disagree that she hasn't trashed him though. I think she has done so at every opportunity. She has accused him of being a cheater, an emotional and physical abuser, a pervert with pedophilic desires, a money scammer, etc... There isn't much that she hasn't accused him of, even though there's not one shred of evidence to support any of those allegations. So far, evidence has only shown that Alexander was a randy guy who strayed from his Mormon vows and partook in a weird relationship that was mostly just sexual to him.
But, I do understand your point. While she has accused him of all these things in her testimony, she's done so while acting as though she was in no way angry with him, she was just trying to please him, and she was genuinely forgiving of all of his supposed transgressions. She doesn't come out and directly call him names, she waits for Nuri to pull it out of her. It's textbook demeanor/behavior from the "abuse victim" handbook. Which is precisely what she is basing her behavior upon, imo. All of her accusations and the manner in which she's presenting them are designed to portray her as having been abused, though there's none of the usual evidence to corroborate an abuse claim.
I'm open-minded, I think. I try, anyway. And, I agree sometimes the pundits are quite one-sided in their views. My opinion is based on the evidence presented and my perception of the credibility of the witnesses. There's plenty of evidence that Jodi Arias is a hard-core liar. But, even if Jodi is suddenly being largely truthful, I agree with you that nothing presented so far comes close to a self-defense justification. And, I share your concern and that of heartbreaker; if Martinez is combative during the cross-examination, he could alienate any sympathetic juror(s) and come across as another man bullying poor Jodi. I hope he handles her strategically and sticks with calmly debunking her words with evidence to the contrary.
Seems like there's a lot more to hear; sure hope Nuri takes his client to the actual day of the murder sometime this century...