The Jodi Arias Trial--Fatal Attraction – The Murder of Travis Alexander

[HairOfTheDog]

^ That one completely flew over my head; too busy nodding it in agreement.

According to HLN, the woman who's expected to testify as an expert witness for Jodi Arias is Alyce LaViolette.

Her website starts off by highlighting her work with battered women. Her 20 page CV is linked at the end of the home page; kinda sparse on education (MS in Community/Clinical Psych) but a lot of domestic abuse counseling experience within the general and criminal communities, including as an expert witness.

LaViolette's "Experience" listing includes being a consultant and expert witness for a Death Penalty case in Arizona from 2011 - 2013. Wonder if she conferred/consulted directly with Samuels; not sure if that's allowed between experts or if they have to go through the lawyers only.

If she's as likeable and credible as she initially appears, Martinez might be wise to adjust his style some while she's on the stand (not likely), despite the fact that I think her expected claim of Jodi Arias being a battered woman is pure bullshit. Or, she could turn out to be another quack.

LaViolette's Website:
http://www.alycelaviolette.com/

[BlueTiki]

I'm catching bits and pieces of the trial and it seems to me that Martinez is much more reserved with his continued questioning of Samuels.

[HairOfTheDog]

I'm catching bits and pieces of the trial and it seems to me that Martinez is much more reserved with his continued questioning of Samuels.

Martinez does seem more low key today.

I don't understand why he keeps going so deep into details with Samuels; get Samuels off the stand. All major points already made and the expert has been discredited. Why keep giving him a chance to explain and talk? It's not helpful to the prosecution, imo.

I heard on HLN this morning that a PPL employee has confirmed that Jodi Arias was originally booked to attend the Cancun conference with Travis; then he changed his plans to instead take Mimi. IF that's true, wonder why Martinez hasn't presented it as evidence in the trial thus far. He argued in opening statements that jealousy and anger about Travis taking Mimi was a motivator for the murder.

Guessing there's either no proof to back that PPL claim or Martinez is saving it for some kind of finale.

[username]

Jodi and her attorney color coordinated their outfits again.

[BlueTiki]

Yup.

But only one has a killer wardrobe.

[HairOfTheDog]

Jodi and her attorney color coordinated their outfits again.

The similar dress, similar hair, similar expressions looks SWF creepy. I don't know why her lawyers keep with the matching.

I'm fickle. Now, that he's off the score sheet, liking that Martinez is pushing Samuels on the details of his PTSD diagnostic criteria.

Jodi sometimes can't focus when reading. She sleeps less well in jail than when free. And, being locked up makes her irritable. Geez, the vast majority of incarcerated suspects and hospital patience must have PTSD.

Jodi kicked her mom. That, I believe.

Dick Samuels

[BlueTiki]

I love the fact that Samuels just stated that Arias created an alternative reality when she described that two home invaders did the killing.

Martinez asks if the alternative reality (two killers commiting the murder) is a lie.

Samuels states he wouldn't necessarily characterise it as one!

[username]

Jodi and her attorney color coordinated their outfits again.

The similar dress, similar hair, similar expressions looks SWF creepy. I don't know why her lawyers keep with the matching.

I'm fickle. Now, that he's off the score sheet, liking that Martinez is pushing Samuels on the details of his PTSD diagnostic criteria.

Jodi sometimes can't focus when reading. She sleeps less well in jail than when free. And, being locked up makes her irritable. Geez, the vast majority of incarcerated suspects and hospital patience must have PTSD.

Jodi kicked her mom. That, I believe.

Dick Samuels

Samuels should be saying that Jodi's giggling at inappropriate times are indicative of her bland affect or whatever he calls it. I'm not a psychologist but I would think you could spin that.

I keep waiting for Martinez to say something like "don't sociopaths typically have bland affects too"? I suppose he can't but it would be a wowzer.

[HairOfTheDog]

I don't know if Martinez can call a psych rebuttal expert to claim Jodi's a sociopath.

Probably risky as some jurors might take a mental illness diagnosis to mean that Jodi couldn't control her actions. I think the Defense team would have been wise to claim a mental defense, but Jodi probably wouldn't go for it since she is indeed a sociopath (imo) and would never concede that she's defective.

I think Martinez is trying to show that all of Samuels's diagnoses can be attributable to lying and malingering. And, since Jodi's a known liar of epic proportions, it's much more likely that she's simply lying again. Imo, Martinez is making these points one by one; but he needs to tie it all together cohesively for the jury, to be safe. There's been lots of minutia brought forth in the process of hitting the major points.

P.s. "hospital patience" ; I meant to do that!

[BlueTiki]

I think Martinez is trying to show that all of Samuels's diagnoses can be attributable to lying and malingering. And, since Jodi's a known liar of epic proportions, it's much more likely that she's simply lying again. . . . he needs to tie it all together cohesively for the jury, to be safe.

I'll fist bump that!

In my mind, it's the only logical explanation, too.

As an aside - Today's Arias-side gallery has got to be home to some of the ugliest people I have seen outside of Tole . . . errr . . . WalMart.

FFS - Diet, exercise and groom.

[Duchess]

Is Travis sister still there everyday?

[BlueTiki]

Yup.

[HairOfTheDog]

Question:"Isn't it true that you had feelings for the defendant!?" - Martinez

Answer: "I beg your pardon, Sir!!!!!!" - Samuels

I don't know if Martinez should have gone there. I don't think it's clear that Samuels had inappropriate feelings for Arias. It's possible, but it's certain that he's a diagnosis whore - that was all Martinez needed.

Ah well, it made me laugh anyway. I half expected Samuels to start belting out Lynn Anderson.

[BlueTiki]

The abuse "expert" looks as if she's been belted by Lynn Anderson.

[username]

The abuse "expert" looks as if she's been belted by Lynn Anderson.

I'm listening on the radio but from what she's said so far she sounds a little elderly and fragile. I think Juan is going to have to rein it in for her or risk pissing off the jury.

[HairOfTheDog]

Hey, she never promised us a rose garden!

She's just getting started, but so far I don't find LaViolette to be an impressive presence on the stand. She seems like a rambler and possibly a little gullible. Lots of "um"s.

I'm anxious to hear how the hell she can justify a battered woman diagnosis with no physical evidence aside from the finger of a thousand stories, the words of a proven liar, and some heated sex talk and text/email arguments between lovers. There's just nothing there to substantiate any physical or mental abuse by Travis.

She'll probably fare about as well as Samuels. Hoping she doesn't end up on the stand for 6 days like he did; fast forward...

[BlueTiki]

I'm listening on the radio but from what she's said so far she sounds a little elderly and fragile.

She's a good sized woman of unfortunate appearance.

I'm with HoTD . . . not "an impressive presence on the stand".

[FAHQTOO]

I have what is probably a stupid question. Are witnesses who are waiting to take the stand allowed to watch this on TV or read the paper/internet before they're called to the stand?

[username]

Bark, bark?

A talking head just speculated that she won't be trying to make the case that Jodi was battered. More, she'll be trying to use the voicemails, texts etc. to show that Travis displayed traits that are common among abusers. Hence the focus on her work with men, I suppose.

[username]

I have what is probably a stupid question. Are witnesses who are waiting to take the stand allowed to watch this on TV or read the paper/internet before they're called to the stand?

I'm 95% sure the answer is no. I don't think they impose that although most would probably say they avoid it. Some of them are probably telling the truth.