Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2
docyabut2

Jodi Arias Trial

842 posts in this topic

... a person like charles manson would be salivating!With todays media and love of the famous charlie may have got 10 years max!This woman will get a few years at the most,to much attention has been given to it.

Hi there CK - I found myself feeling concerned that all this attention was going to end up working in favor of the defendant in the long run, so what then of justice? I'm becoming more and more convinced that media has no place in a court of law, broadcasting trials like this to the world at large.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really getting sick of this trial, but I might have a analysis of the problems involved in the case, I think Travis was afraid Jodi was going to expose his dirty little secret and wanted to break it off with her. Why would just a few weeks before would he write emails saying he loved her and could`nt live with out her, but later emails saying to her she was evil, a three hole wonder, a hore and all kinds of verbal abuse. I do think she went there to hurt him, and get back at him.By looking at all the photos Travis never made it off the floor. The last photo before in the shower was of him sitting posing. She then shot him because the gun shot spatter was on the shower`s wood worked. He fell out of the shower on the floor She then started stabbing him, because the next photo was him lying just ouside the shower of him with blood running down his neck and hands up like he was trying to fight her. I believe he crawl to the sink trying to lift himself up not standing because the blood spatter was just above the sink and fell back down while she kept stabbing him,and try crawling got down the hall the camera was kicked along, where the next picture of his shoulder is of him lying by the hall`s base board .He stuggled and crawl to the end of the hall where she finish the stabbings by the neck, a horriable way to go,but I think Jodi anger and rage was over him breaking it off with her and from all of his verbal abuse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We're allowed to follow this case in the courtroom, and above all else, I think it's definitely a good thing to have transparency in our judicial system, that is, cameras in the courtroom.

I think a trial can be a fascinating process...tedious for sure, but at times, riveting.

I'm still looking forward to the rebuttal phase of this trial because I'm anxious to have a clear understanding of what that's all about.

Just for clarification, when I said that I think cameras in the courtroom is a good thing, I certainly didn't mean for the sake of entertainment.

I think video is additionally beneficial- another record of the event- not for the sake of spectators so much, but for court officials.

Now, as a follower of a case- as a court observer- I definitely prefer to see and hear directly rather than have to rely on information from a reporter.

Edited by regi
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You just nailed it!I stopped following this case about 3 weeks after it really started being all over the news....For 1. its not that damn interesting,pretty clear cut as to someone took anothers life brutally no matter the supposed circumstance....2.The media and fans of this story (no offense to any here,just look at the kind of attention casey anthoney got) have made this person a public figure.So anyone who turns on the news,net,paper or anything else has had to see and hear about her every single day for months to years on end,now she's selling her artwork (any here care to buy a media "stars" art?) ;) In this day and time a person like charles manson would be salivating!With todays media and love of the famous charlie may have got 10 years max!This woman will get a few years at the most,to much attention has been given to it.

I agree with *almost* all of that. I think that this woman likely will be sentenced to close to life in prison. Other than that point, you and I are not just on the same page. We're on the same word. These crime stories come in cycles. All channels and programs cover the exact same stories for a few months until they find the next ubiquitous, universal flavor of the season. Not only do they ignore other crime stories. They ignore other *news* stories. Much of the uncovered crime news and regular news are much more important than the Arias case. Look at how they ignore the abortionist's mass murder of babies. Their lame excuse is that it's a local story. What is the Arias case, an international incident?

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know if others have looked closely at it, but the relationship between Arias and Alexander was a relatively short one. I've tried to gain a clearer picture of it, and correlate dates with events, and that phone interview helped a lot.

First, realize that they knew each a total of 21 months. They met in September of '06, but weren't a 'couple' until February of '07. They broke up the following June, so it's closer to 4 months that they were actually a couple.

Also, Arias didn't move from California to Mesa until AFTER they had broken up.

Now, there's texts from Jan '08 which reveal a physically intimate relationship, and apparently they traveled together in March of '08.

(I would assume this was at least part of the time period when Arias cleaned house for Alexander. She said in the phone interview that he paid her 'monthly' to keep his house clean.)

From the phone interview:

Arias told the detective that she purchased Alexander's BMW around the time when she was about to move back to California.

She said she was supposed to be moved on or about April 1st.

(Apparently), it was when she was moving that she said she towed the BMW in gear which trashed it, and that it was taken to a service station in Mesa and it sat there until liability could be established. She said she didn't know the current status, or if the BMW was still located at that station.

She volunteered about not having anywhere to sleep...that she'd been sleeping on a borrowed futon, and that the owner retrieved it and she went on to say that she stayed the next 5 days at Alexander's with her U-Haul parked around the corner from his house.

(The precise reason for staying at Alexander's the next 5 days wasn't clear.)

She told the detective that her current vehicle was soon to be repossessed.

Since it's believed that Alexander's voice-mail was activated after his death, Arias was asked about her knowledge of his pin number. She then rattled off all of the numerous pin numbers Alexander had used; she knew the pins to his garage, his ATM, and others I don't recall, but that alone makes it evident that Arias had access to a lot of Alexander's sensitive information.

Arias asked about the check she'd written and what would become to it.

The detective then asked about the check amount because Arias had already told him that the minimum payment was 100.00 a month, and that it was her first payment, but it had been only a couple of months.

The reason for the amount (500.00) wasn't clear, and the detective didn't press the issue.

I found it very revealing when Arias answered the detective about the nature of their relationship- that it was physically intimate. She expressed embarrassment/shame on Alexander's part because "He's Mormon".

Of course, Arias completely disregarded the fact that she was also Mormon, and had been since 2 months after she'd met him.

And... she inadvertently revealed that she was indeed aware that that type of relationship was not approved of in the Mormon faith.

(She'd testified that she hadn't known any better. :whistle: )

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now hold on a cotton pickin' minute.

Where's that 500.00 dollar check? Is it not in evidence?

I viewed testimony from the trial, Day 2. (Bless someone named David Lohr for uploading on YouTube the trial in it's entirety and without sidebars!)

There's a check #3059 (Exhibit #222) from Arias to Alexander in the amount of 200.00 dollars, dated 5-28-08 and the notes on it read that it's for "car payment April & May".

So, where the heck is the 500.00 dollar check dated May 26th?! I saw a photo of that check on another board... I know it exists!.... but I'm still listening to more evidence being presented, so maybe it has yet to come up in further testimony.

Another revelation...there's no pieces of rope. The evidence is described as 'fabric' by two different witnesses. One piece was collected from the bathroom floor, and the other was collected from on the stairs.

They're very small pieces and each one has a tassel on one end.

The testimony about that evidence is on Day 2 of the trial and both Det. Flores and lab tech, Heather Conner, describe it the same way.

The evidence is described as consistent with those on a pillow in a chair which was positioned next to Alexander's bed.

I'm at a loss about the whole thing because testimony was that that particular pillow didn't appear to be missing any tassels, and I haven't figured out what those items could say (or suggest) about the scene.

Edited by regi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another revelation...there's no pieces of rope. The evidence is described as 'fabric' by two different witnesses. One piece was collected from the bathroom floor, and the other was collected from on the stairs.

They're very small pieces and each one has a tassel on one end.

The testimony about that evidence is on Day 2 of the trial and both Det. Flores and lab tech, Heather Conner, describe it the same way.

The evidence is described as consistent with those on a pillow in a chair which was positioned next to Alexander's bed.

I'm at a loss about the whole thing because testimony was that that particular pillow didn't appear to be missing any tassels, and I haven't figured out what those items could say (or suggest) about the scene.

The defence said the rope that Jodi claimed Tavis had cut and tied her up with is the kind that is used to tie back curtains, that soft twisted robey kind of rope that has tassles on the ends.

http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=curtain+rope+with+tassles&qpvt=curtain+rope+with+tassles&FORM=IGRE

I can believe that as to why the knife Jodi used was so near by or in the bathroom. In the 62seconds of the photos, she would`nt have had time to run to the kicthen to get a knife.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The defence said the rope that Jodi claimed Tavis had cut and tied her up with is the kind that is used to tie back curtains, that soft twisted robey kind of rope that has tassles on the ends.

http://www.bing.com/...ssles&FORM=IGRE

They said Alexander took a piece of rope- which would have to have been about 20' in length- from curtains?! :lol: And from which curtains... his curtains?! :lol::no:

Now, I don't recall testimony about rope from curtains... or curtain tie-backs, or whatever, but even if I did, it wouldn't matter because I'm still not buying that rope story!

The testimony I recall is from Arias' cross and it was re: a piece of rope about 20' in length! :whistle:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

She's not not-guilty yet? :unsure2: Seriously, when is this trial over?

The media will have to float to the next story that has all the right elements to gather a loyal audience: Sex. Controversy. Celebrity. Violence. When this story is over, the media will move onto questing for the next cutie in trouble that meets their criteria.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now, I don't recall testimony about rope from curtains... or curtain tie-backs, or whatever, but even if I did, it wouldn't matter because I'm still not buying that rope story!

The testimony I recall is from Arias' cross and it was re: a piece of rope about 20' in length! :whistle:

I'm surprised you buy this piece of JA's testimony, as much lying as she's done, or that it has significance overall. What role might it have played in the murder? Did TA have rope marks? I don't recall that. It's likely that once upon a time in their sex play they used a 20" rope and she incorporated it into this 'story' as a detail to enhance its believability. She's cunning like that IMO. .

A few days away has been refreshing. This thing just won't end, will it?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

some of you don't seem like you know many of the details that have not come out in court. the ones where she's stalked Travis along with whoever he has gone out with, slashed their tires a few times. there also is NO evidence other than Jodi's words that he was abusive towards her.

when Travis was killed the first thing his friends said to the police was Jodi did it, to check her out. he may have said (wrote) some things to her that i will definitely agree weren't very nice. but i also believe he was getting so frustrated with her actions (ie the stalking, slashing tires and such) that he was reacting to that. was it correct...no. but definitely not equal to being stabbed 29 times, throat slashed and shot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm surprised you buy this piece of JA's testimony, as much lying as she's done, or that it has significance overall.

What perplexes me is what the significance could be of those two pieces of 'fabric'.

I located Arias' testimony on direct re: the rope (Day 19), and she described the rope as "decorative". Well, that describes those two pieces of fabric, but the pieces themselves don't fit her story.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Geez. Maybe I should add that I don't believe the rope story! (I want to make that clear.)

The thing is, re: this issue, Arias is attempting to associate those 'tassel-fabric pieces' with her rope story.

My point is, there's ANOTHER EXPLANATION for their presence at the scene, and I can't figure out what it could be.

Edited by regi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They said Alexander took a piece of rope- which would have to have been about 20' in length- from curtains?! :lol: And from which curtains... his curtains?! :lol::no:

Now, I don't recall testimony about rope from curtains... or curtain tie-backs, or whatever, but even if I did, it wouldn't matter because I'm still not buying that rope story!

The testimony I recall is from Arias' cross and it was re: a piece of rope about 20' in length! :whistle:

Here the defence`s statements about the rope 38.02.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here the defence`s statements about the rope 38.02.

First of all, remarks in opening statements aren't evidence.

Evidence has to be brought out in testimony, otherwise, it's unsupported.

So, here we have in their opening, the defense telling the jury that Alexander had the kind of rope "people use to tie back curtains".

Well, they certainly didn't prove it in testimony.

1) The story itself doesn't make sense the way Arias described it in her testimony.

2) There's no other evidence of rope.There's no rope present in any of the photos taken during the time period when it would be present if it had been there

3) The evidence is two pieces of fabric and they DO NOT fit the rope story.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

some of you don't seem like you know many of the details that have not come out in court.

If anyone's read Detective Flores' Investigative Report, then they should be aware of most of what hasn't been presented in court, and indeed, it offers quite a bit of perspective!

I've been reviewing testimony and connecting the dots and the picture reveals a definite pattern.

Arias continued relationships with men she'd been intimate with after they had broken up.

Also, she went from one relationship to another, most often meeting the next man through the one she was with, or while she was still with him.

She always suspected cheating (although, Darryl Brewer seems to be the exception) and acted on her suspicion by snooping and then usually dealt with it in the same way- twice confronting the other girl.

(There's statements from Alexander's friends (in the investigative report by Flores) that she harassed whomever Alexander was seeing, which is a third instance of that behavior.)

Arias lived with Bobby Juarez and after they broke up, she followed him to Oregon where she moved in with him and that Matt guy. (She met Matt through Juarez.)

Arias eventually hooked up with Matt and when Matt got a place outside of his dad's home (where they had been living), Arias moved in with him at his new place.

I don't know the time period but it had to have been relatively short (Arias testified that she was 22) that she hooked up with Brewer- the 42 year-old divorced man with a son whom she then lived with. (I've heard it stated that they were together for 4 years, which seems to be a little bit of an exaggeration.) Anyway...

Arias was living with Brewer (which appeared to me to be more of an arrangement of convenience for a certain period of time for both because that situation was tanking quick) when she met Alexander.

Arias continued to live in the same home with Brewer after she met Alexander.

I don't know when Arias moved to Big Sur, or what that living situation was, but she couldn't have lived there long. I think that's where she was living immediately prior to moving to Mesa, where she lived for 9 months before moving in with her grandparents in Yreka.

Near the end, Arias set her sights on Ryan Burns, whom she met in March or April of '08.

(Btw, in case anyone has taken it to the bank- which is doubtful, but anyway- I goofed in an earlier post. Alexander and Arias did not travel together in March of '08. That would have to have had been March of '07. Sorry. :blush: )

Edited by regi
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If anyone's read Detective Flores' Investigative Report, then they should be aware of most of what hasn't been presented in court, and indeed, it offers quite a bit of perspective!

I've been reviewing testimony and connecting the dots and the picture reveals a definite pattern.

Arias continued relationships with men she'd been intimate with after they had broken up.

Also, she went from one relationship to another, most often meeting the next man through the one she was with, or while she was still with him.

She always suspected cheating (although, Darryl Brewer seems to be the exception) and acted on her suspicion by snooping and then usually dealt with it in the same way- twice confronting the other girl.

(There's statements from Alexander's friends (in the investigative report by Flores) that she harassed whomever Alexander was seeing, which is a third instance of that behavior.)

Arias lived with Bobby Juarez and after they broke up, she followed him to Oregon where she moved in with him and that Matt guy. (She met Matt through Juarez.)

Arias eventually hooked up with Matt and when Matt got a place outside of his dad's home (where they had been living), Arias moved in with him at his new place.

I don't know the time period but it had to have been relatively short (Arias testified that she was 22) that she hooked up with Brewer- the 42 year-old divorced man with a son whom she then lived with. (I've heard it stated that they were together for 4 years, which seems to be a little bit of an exaggeration.) Anyway...

Arias was living with Brewer (which appeared to me to be more of an arrangement of convenience for a certain period of time for both because that situation was tanking quick) when she met Alexander.

Arias continued to live in the same home with Brewer after she met Alexander.

I don't know when Arias moved to Big Sur, or what that living situation was, but she couldn't have lived there long. I think that's where she was living immediately prior to moving to Mesa, where she lived for 9 months before moving in with her grandparents in Yreka.

Near the end, Arias set her sights on Ryan Burns, whom she met in March or April of '08.

(Btw, in case anyone has taken it to the bank- which is doubtful, but anyway- I goofed in an earlier post. Alexander and Arias did not travel together in March of '08. That would have to have had been March of '07. Sorry. :blush: )

Hey regi! What a user loser JA is! The review of this week's trial shows them talking to Psychologist Janeen DeMarte about the IQ test she gave JA. JA, of course, thinks she is as intelligent as Einstein. But instead of using her brain to help the world, she uses it to control and manipulate and ultimately destroy people. She is despicable. Thank goodness her narcissism caused her to leave behind clues and makes her draw the police's attention to her. Who's tired of all the migraines and mistrial requests? Me, for one! If that's the best the defense can do, it seems as if they, too, believe she did it and she is going to be found guilty.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey regi! What a user loser JA is! The review of this week's trial shows them talking to Psychologist Janeen DeMarte about the IQ test she gave JA. JA, of course, thinks she is as intelligent as Einstein. But instead of using her brain to help the world, she uses it to control and manipulate and ultimately destroy people. She is despicable. Thank goodness her narcissism caused her to leave behind clues and makes her draw the police's attention to her. Who's tired of all the migraines and mistrial requests? Me, for one! If that's the best the defense can do, it seems as if they, too, believe she did it and she is going to be found guilty.

Hey, boos2u! :st

If anything bothers me, it's that the trial's been too long, and that circumstance seems to benefit defendants; it's suggested that the jury might hold the prosecution responsible (and resent it), and/or, that earlier testimony by prosecution witnesses is too far in the backs of their minds.

However, in this case, the prosecution was essentially done presenting it's evidence in mid Jan. and it's appeared to me (for various reasons and in different ways) to be the defense that's kept the trial long, so I don't see the jury resenting the prosecution for a long trial.

(If Nurmi could have sped up his dialogue just a tad, I think that alone could have saved days! I've reviewed testimony, and it's been e x c r u t i a t i n g getting through his examinations!)

I really like DeMarte. And after those two 'expert' defense witnesses, how utterly refreshing (among other things) it is to finally see an expert witness present themselves in a professional manner!

DeMarte's direct and precise with her information...she's prepared...clearly, a no-nonsense type. She's courteous, but obviously NOT a pushover. She's confident in her opinions and has shown NO BIAS; she recognizes that there are indeed, professional boundaries, and she clearly respects them!

I don't think could be more impressed, and I think she's nailed Arias with the results of her evaluation.

Yeah, Arias believed she was gonna get away with murder, and when it was clear the police were onto her, she still believed she could talk her way out.

Can you believe she actually called the detective to offer her assistance in the investigation?! But of course, that's classic, right?!

You know, Arias' dx is what makes her extremely dangerous- she's entirely self-centered and has no conscience. She's shown what she's capable of, so the only thing that could keep her from murdering again is the fear of getting caught. Apart from that, it wouldn't bother her, but...since she also thinks she's smarter than everyone else, then she would certainly believe that she could get away with it if given another opportunity.

Edited by regi
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey, boos2u! :st

If anything bothers me, it's that the trial's been too long, and that circumstance seems to benefit defendants; it's suggested that the jury might hold the prosecution responsible (and resent it), and/or, that earlier testimony by prosecution witnesses is too far in the backs of their minds.

However, in this case, the prosecution was essentially done presenting it's evidence in mid Jan. and it's appeared to me (for various reasons and in different ways) to be the defense that's kept the trial long, so I don't see the jury resenting the prosecution for a long trial.

(If Nurmi could have sped up his dialogue just a tad, I think that alone could have saved days! I've reviewed testimony, and it's been e x c r u t i a t i n g getting through his examinations!)

I really like DeMarte. And after those two 'expert' defense witnesses, how utterly refreshing (among other things) it is to finally see an expert witness present themselves in a professional manner!

DeMarte's direct and precise with her information...she's prepared...clearly, a no-nonsense type. She's courteous, but obviously NOT a pushover. She's confident in her opinions and has shown NO BIAS; she recognizes that there are indeed, professional boundaries, and she clearly respects them!

I don't think could be more impressed, and I think she's nailed Arias with the results of her evaluation.

Yeah, Arias believed she was gonna get away with murder, and when it was clear the police were onto her, she still believed she could talk her way out.

Can you believe she actually called the detective to offer her assistance in the investigation?! But of course, that's classic, right?!

You know, Arias' dx is what makes her extremely dangerous- she's entirely self-centered and has no conscience. She's shown what she's capable of, so the only thing that could keep her from murdering again is the fear of getting caught. Apart from that, it wouldn't bother her, but...since she also thinks she's smarter than everyone else, then she would certainly believe that she could get away with it if given another opportunity.

I like DeMarte, also, for many of the reasons you stated. I like that she didn't let the defense attorney corral her into saying anything she didn't want to say. JA NEEDS to be in prison, death penalty or not. If she isn't sent there, she will think she really can get away with anything and possibly do it again. I laughed when I heard that she called police and offered to help! As I'm sure you know, this is what serial killers often do. They, too, think they can outsmart law enforcement. Good thing so many of them are wrong. You're right, it has gone on too long. I just hope the jury sees that its mainly the defense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's not forget the rule of law here, folks. Jodi Arias is innocent!

ht_jodi_arias_myspace_2_nt_130125_wg.jpg

I know our resident prosecutors say they want this trial to be over in a hurry, because apparently life and death isn't a good reason to take our time and get all the facts out. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do believe Travis was shot frist to weaken him, because I think he could have stopped her from comming at him with a knife, he appears to be much stronger, Jodi did planned to killed him.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're right, it has gone on too long.

Just the length of individual testimonies might have set records, and I don't know if it's ever happened that a defendant was on the stand as long as Arias!

You know, the transcriptionist will have this case on their plate for quite a while...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's not forget the rule of law here, folks. Jodi Arias is innocent!

ht_jodi_arias_myspace_2_nt_130125_wg.jpg

I know our resident prosecutors say they want this trial to be over in a hurry, because apparently life and death isn't a good reason to take our time and get all the facts out. ;)

No, she is guilty of killing him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Deanna Reid, ex-GF of TA's before JA., is on stand today testifying to her relationship w/ TA. HLN host said during break that this testimony is a big score for the defense. The host says it shows how shabbily TA treated women overall. How does that help the defense? To me, it only underscores the obvious point that if a women is involved with a guy who is kind of a douchebag, the thing to do is get out of the relationship (which Miss Reid did when she concluded the relationship w/ TA had no future), not butcher the guy. So what if TA didn't treat the women he dated respectfully? If it was legit for a woman to off a guy who treats her like crap, more than half the men in the USA would be dead by murder probably. I think this witness hurts JA. It shows what a sane way to handle a troubled relationship is vs. dicing him up with a knife and putting a few bullets in him.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Deanna Reid, ex-GF of TA's before JA., is on stand today testifying to her relationship w/ TA. HLN host said during break that this testimony is a big score for the defense. The host says it shows how shabbily TA treated women overall.

If you'd heard Reed's testimony, you'd know that host is grossly mistaken. Reed's testimony did not benefit the defense in any way I can think of. In fact, the prosecution owned the day because each witness reinforced the state's evidence- and in the process, severely undermined the defense's- in several different aspects.

This is the rebuttal phase of the trial, and Reid was a prosecution witness. The prosecution breezed through 4 of their witnesses yesterday; Jacob Medford- a friend of Alexander's who'd made a video which showed Arias and Alexander together and his video was entered into evidence; Amanda Webb, a Wal-Mart employee who testified how all returns and refunds are recorded in the computer and that there was no return for a gas can on June 4th (there were no returns that day, period, and no return for a gas can any time during the following weeks; Chelsey Young, manager for a gas company, who testified how credit card payments are processed (this was in ref: to the individual gas purchases- at one pump and then inside- at a station in Utah); Diana Reed, a former girlfriend of Alexander's who met Alexander in '98 when they both lived in Riverside, Ca. As I recall, they began dating in '00.

Reed's a life-long Mormon, and while she and Alexander were dating, she went on an 18 month mission in Costa Rica. (On missions, missionaries communicate with loved ones through letters only, and they don't receive visitors from home... so that their focus can be on their mission. Reed testified that at some point, Alexander wrote her a letter to say that he wanted to date other people. She returned from Costa Rica in November '04, and within a few weeks began dating Alexander again.

Reed's job took her to Phoenix, and Alexander wanted to buy a home. Since homes were more affordable in Mesa, Alexander bought a home there (the home where he was murdered), and Reed had her own apartment in Phoenix, about 45 minutes away. Eventually, in '06, Reed wanted to marry, but Alexander 'wasn't ready'. She said she sat him down and explained to him that she was moving on. She said he cried...that they both cried.

She testified that Alexander never yelled at her, that they rarely argued; that they had a fun relationship....that they loved each other and liked each other and enjoyed being together. He supported her in her goals. He never hit her, or threatened her in any way, and never called her any names. She said he never disrespected her.

She testified that their relationship during '05 included sex, and they continued to have sex for about a year after which time they discussed it and individually went to their church leaders, and confessed to their transgressions (my word).

She said she knew that Alexander had a rough childhood; that his parents were addicts. There was no physical abuse, but neglect, and living conditions were poor.

She said that his father had died before she met him, and that he was proud of his father when near the end of his life, he tried to straighten out. Reed Had met Alexander's mother, and said that Alexander had fond memories of birthday parties she'd given him. (This testimony was especially emotional for Alexander's family.)

The cross-exam of Reed? Well, cross was unnecessary, and all I remember about it is that it was utterly disgusting.

Nurmi repeatedly used vulgar language..."did he call you 'this or that'?......did he tell you this...did he tell you that?" despite Reed's prior direct testimony that Alexander never used any such language with her, in any way shape of form.

Whatever points Nurmi was trying to make with such an offensive tactic was completely lost on me.

Edited by regi
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.