771 replies to this topic

[coolguy]

i saw this on the news last night she is crazy. she even looks  likeshe is not playing with a full deck lol.
  i did not know what happend unit i read this post thanks

[pallidin]

Yeah, that woman has a very serious problem, to be sure.

Very dangerous mentality in general public society, in my opinion.

[spayneuter]

When does the trial continue?

[docyabut2]

spayneuter, on 11 March 2013 - 05:49 PM, said:

When does the trial continue?

Wednesday, I believe the defense is bringing in the psychologists.

[regi]

Yeah, the defense expert(s) will tell the jury that Arias' behavior/fog is classic of abused women. There's always an expert....

I recently learned of a phenomenon called 'undoing', and it's where a remorseful perp attempts to undo what they've just done... they try to 'fix it'. The primary thing they do is to pretend that it didn't happen, and part of that is to make the victim comfortable; by placing the victim in a comfortable position, and maybe using pillows and blankets...that sort of thing. They will clean up the scene, but the attention is focused on the victim because that's where the remorse is.

In this case, Arias' attention was to the scene, and all of her actions were to her benefit. There was no show of remorse as Alexander's body was left crumpled in that shower stall! She didn't even cover up his naked body, which would have been the very least she could have done for him.
No remorse, indeed.

You know, if the prosecution had used an expert, I think it should have been a criminal profiler.

Edited by regi, 12 March 2013 - 12:56 PM.

[Leftcoastgal]

Iron_Lotus, on 27 February 2013 - 02:50 PM, said:

... edit: either way im stepping oot of the thread id rather discuss this case on webslueths than here.

that's disturbing  I was over there today ... read about 30 pages of their new thread (redirected off original  site) and decided it wasn't the place to follow or discuss the trial.  Nothing but cat-fights between b****y women going on over there,  on this case anyway..  One newcomer posted that she was afraid to post because of the way they treat each other in the threads.  Name calling, baiting, the whole nine-yards... talking about needing 'thick skin to post here'.  **** that. Gimme some good debate, a thoughtful discourse, or even arguments like adults, but the bullying going on and the "reputation voting feature' over there... no thanks.  Even the moderator seems to blind-eye  some of the stupid **** going on.   It's a solid mess, a scandalous trial for bored housewives who love to hate Jodi Arias,   Was hoping to find some discussion here... No?

[Leftcoastgal]

docyabut2, on 09 March 2013 - 11:34 AM, said:

To add I believe the last photo of Travis alive, was of of the photo of him sitting in the shower with his legs cross like he`s posing, but you can`nt see his head and there no blood.

Pardon me, may I jump in here with a question?  I keep reading this statement about the photo you reference above, saying this was a photo of him alive, but you can't see his head nor any blood.  If you can't see his head, why/how do you assume he's not already been shot in the head, with the bullet not exiting but lodging in his right cheek I believe it was.  Are you sure the angle of his head, that you can't see, is not actually one that would not lend visibility to the head injury?  Entered at temple (right or left?) and no exit.  I'm wondering how much blood there would be... a .25,  very small caliber yea... in a running shower to boot, so blood washing away as it appears....  I am stuck on his having HAD to be shot first to stun/disable him.  She, stunned herself that she shot him in head and only injured him,  goes into hyper drive and holy crap, it got crazy then apparently.

Help me out with this idea that photo of him in sitting position, (which looks odd as for his 'pose' and slumped, like injured to me), is considered pre-attack or pre-injury? .Anyone?  I must be missing some clue or evidence the rest of you are aware of.  Thanks.  Leftcoastgal

Edited by Leftcoastgal, 13 March 2013 - 04:40 AM.

[missterri]

Leftcoastgal, on 13 March 2013 - 02:29 AM, said:

that's disturbing  I was over there today ... read about 30 pages of their new thread (redirected off original  site) and decided it wasn't the place to follow or discuss the trial.  Nothing but cat-fights between b****y women going on over there,  on this case anyway..  One newcomer posted that she was afraid to post because of the way they treat each other in the threads.  Name calling, baiting, the whole nine-yards... talking about needing 'thick skin to post here'.  **** that. Gimme some good debate, a thoughtful discourse, or even arguments like adults, but the bullying going on and the "reputation voting feature' over there... no thanks.  Even the moderator seems to blind-eye  some of the stupid **** going on.   It's a solid mess, a scandalous trial for bored housewives who love to hate Jodi Arias,   Was hoping to find some discussion here... No?

I agree.. I have been to a few discussions that are way out of control...so unreasonable & childish. The JODI  lovers & haters... not sure which is worse. I think the haters probably are, with their lust for the DEATH ... sickening really to read their words of HATE.. Neither  group tho, will even attempt to listen to a normal debate on a specific issue if it is not glorifying who they  are "FOR". Ridiculous! This is not a game of which one wins or loses... BOTH have already lost.

I do enjoy reading people who have a CLUE about the case in general. Opinions are great.. we all have them. Guilty of premeditated murder BEYOND a reasonable doubt?? I dont see that at all, YET. There is still alot left in this trial.

Now they are saying he had a battery charge at one time in the past.... we shall see if that comes to fruition or fizzles out....It seems most folks feel she will be charged with 2nd degree.. most likely, dont you think?. Cant wait for more tommorrow.. it is very interesting to see how things develop!  Im hooked:)

[missterri]

Leftcoastgal, on 13 March 2013 - 04:36 AM, said:

Pardon me, may I jump in here with a question?  I keep reading this statement about the photo you reference above, saying this was a photo of him alive, but you can't see his head nor any blood.  If you can't see his head, why/how do you assume he's not already been shot in the head, with the bullet not exiting but lodging in his right cheek I believe it was.  Are you sure the angle of his head, that you can't see, is not actually one that would not lend visibility to the head injury?  Entered at temple (right or left?) and no exit.  I'm wondering how much blood there would be... a .25,  very small caliber yea... in a running shower to boot, so blood washing away as it appears....  I am stuck on his having HAD to be shot first to stun/disable him.  She, stunned herself that she shot him in head and only injured him,  goes into hyper drive and holy crap, it got crazy then apparently.

Help me out with this idea that photo of him in sitting position, (which looks odd as for his 'pose' and slumped, like injured to me), is considered pre-attack or pre-injury? .Anyone?  I must be missing some clue or evidence the rest of you are aware of.  Thanks.  Leftcoastgal

Im not sure but I think the time stamp on that of him sitting  is before the one where he is very much alive, facing the camera. THAT one of him facing the camera was the last one of him before the one of her dragging him.. at least that is what I have thot... ??

[docyabut2]

Leftcoastgal, on 13 March 2013 - 04:36 AM, said:

Pardon me, may I jump in here with a question?  I keep reading this statement about the photo you reference above, saying this was a photo of him alive, but you can't see his head nor any blood.  If you can't see his head, why/how do you assume he's not already been shot in the head, with the bullet not exiting but lodging in his right cheek I believe it was.  Are you sure the angle of his head, that you can't see, is not actually one that would not lend visibility to the head injury?  Entered at temple (right or left?) and no exit.  I'm wondering how much blood there would be... a .25,  very small caliber yea... in a running shower to boot, so blood washing away as it appears....  I am stuck on his having HAD to be shot first to stun/disable him.  She, stunned herself that she shot him in head and only injured him,  goes into hyper drive and holy crap, it got crazy then apparently.

Help me out with this idea that photo of him in sitting position, (which looks odd as for his 'pose' and slumped, like injured to me), is considered pre-attack or pre-injury? .Anyone?  I must be missing some clue or evidence the rest of you are aware of.  Thanks.  Leftcoastgal

Not sure what photo was last, some say the one standing in the shower, some say the sitting one. Can`t really go by the net, one would have to review the trial over to get it right. but if he was shot already in the sitting one, I`m sure there would have been some trickle of blood.

[docyabut2]

I changing my opinion all the time on what really happen.I ve come to a some what conclusion.I think Jodi did plan to murder travis with the gun she got from her grandmother`s, or even if it was travis`s gun.In her interview with the detective, when she was frist question of Travis death, she said she was no where in Arizona of which hints to me she may have tied to cover up. I do believe she planned to shoot him, however after all the love making and while in the shower some thing made her go beserk and she decided to make Travis suffer instead by stabbing him so horriablely.The frist stabbed in the heart would have weaken him and as he continued to fight and run out of the bathroon, she just kept stabbing him all the way down the hall where she then ened it by cutting this neck then dragged his body back in the shower where she did shoot him. She hated him so for using her as a sex toy, with no commitment to ever married her and then going off on another trip with another women.I do believe it was Travis that wanted to do all the role playing in the sex acts and Jodi just wanted to do every thing and anything to please him.The killing to me, she wanted him to really suffer, to which I believe she may get the death pentaly.

[regi]

docyabut2, I know those photos have given you fits!
They're a very strange aspect of the case.
The fact that there's no hint of even a grin from Alexander in any of the photos has always bothered me. And that the last two are of Alexander in a sitting position...I just find that reeeealy weird.
I wonder if by the time Alexander was in the shower, if he wasn't under the impression that Arias had already left.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I seem to remember the camera bag pictured on the floor in the game-room.
That strikes me as a very odd place for it to be...the camera was new and expensive, and that's not the way Alexander showed to care for his belongings.
It's out of place while everything else in his home appeared very organized.

[docyabut2]

[docyabut2]

This vidio states these photos were in order, so the one sitting down must have been the last one of Travis alive.

[docyabut2]

Ok guys, the comentator on HLN just said unfortunately they did`nt not have a blood expert at the scene, so I going to try a new scenario. I believe  blood from a gun shot blast  speckles the blood, where as blood  from a stabb wound would be more of a drip. The photo at the sink, it appears to me travis may had his head down at the  lelf side of the sink when he was shot. The stabbings were the drips. What do you think if you were a blood expert?