03-20-2013, 12:24 PM
(03-20-2013, 11:47 AM)BlueTiki Wrote: Regarding Martinez . . .
During Martinez's aggressive and confrontational style, she demonstrates remarkable recollection to his questions and illustrates his semantic flaws after he protests her evasive and unresponsive demeanor.
If he was utilizing this particular style to demonstrate that Arias is fully capable of remembering minutiae while under stress, then it is genius.
Unfortunately, I think it's his typical procedural persona and NOT genius.
Too bad . . . I believe it would be an effective point to make during closing.
Good points. I've been wondering if Martinez was employing his aggressive over and under and roundabout style when he questioned Arias in order to fluster the sociopath and put a wrench in her ability to quickly develop and spew a new lie. At first, I assumed that must be so. But, he does seem to be using the same style with all witnesses.
Martinez got a lot of admissions out of the sociopath; I don't think he would have gotten so much if he'd followed a linear script or line of questioning. If he did in fact adjust his style intentionally and it's not just his standard M.O. (and he's able to make the jury aware of it), I agree that it's genius. Either way, I think overall he's been effective so far.
(03-20-2013, 11:47 AM)BlueTiki Wrote: As to Samuels being called before the "abuse" expert, I believe the defense feels this is the stronger of the two and wants an abused woman as the last image in the jurors' minds before deliberation.
Makes sense; they'd definitely want to end testimony with as strong/credible a witness as possible - credibility is their biggest challenge to overcome with Arias. The abuse expert must be something; Samuels is one tough act to follow!
Last night, I heard one of the talking heads mention that battered woman syndrome isn't recognized as a legal medical/psych condition. Did a little reading; "low self esteem" was a buzz phrase in the literature describing battered woman syndrome. Could be that the defense also figured Samuels would come across convincingly regarding his low self esteem observations and diagnosis of PTSD (a legitimate/recognized medical condition) and put him up first to pre-bolster their stronger abuse expert.
I think I'm gonna miss the jury questions today; was hoping they'd have gotten to them yesterday. This is the first trial that I've followed with jury questions - one of the most interesting and revealing aspects of the trial so far. Curious as to what the jurors have in store for the Doc.