Even though the trial is not over and all the evidence is not in, I believe that an extremely important piece of testimony occurred, that more than likely will lead to a 1st degree murder conviction.  The testimony was as follows:

LaViolette said she wrote in her notes that Arias wrote a manifesto to distribute if she became famous. She also said she did not mean that the fact Arias wrote a manifesto means she had high self-esteem. Martinez said Arias autographed copies of the manifesto while in jail in Yreka, California.  LaViolette said a woman named Amy told her that Arias had her print out the last two pages of her manifesto so she could sign it in case she became famous.

The manifesto, as Juan Martinez called it, has never been entered into evidence or explained.  It doesn’t matter though.  Research has shown, as does common sense, that capital case jurors tend to be pro-prosecution.  This is because due to the death penalty being an option prosecutors can use this to seat people more likely to trust authority.  You usually have to be able to sentence another human to death.  Kill them and be okay with it, basically.  People who can do this tend to have certain other beliefs that compliment prosecutors.

I believe that this bit of information will tie in a few things for the jury that they won’t be able to ignore.  Her interviews with the media could be seen as fame mongering.  A pro-prosecution jury, as their name implies, starts out believing the prosecution.  Non-capital juries aren’t usually like that, they are more unbiased because they aren’t blocked from being on the jury if they aren’t okay with killing people with tax dollars.  Many jurors who have been interviewed by the media following capital cases have described “looking” for evidence to help the prosecution, especially when the case is not extremely clear.  This manifesto testimony may be that thing that they looked for and found.

The fact that the physical evidence isn’t being used largely by either side, but most importantly not to prove self-defense, isn’t helping either.  All the jurors keep hearing day after day are the text messages, the emails, the recording, and the competing views of Jodi Arias and Travis Alexander.

The fact that she had “Amy” print out the last two pages, so she could sign them while imprisoned in Yreka means that she did this after being arrested, but before being extradited and this is also the same time she did some interviews.

The premeditation “evidence” is extremely flimsy, it is an assumption to believe that she robbed her grandfather of a gun, DVD player, stereo, and cash in order to kill Travis Alexander and not only did she just bring a gun, but also a knife.  However, why would she say she was going to become famous?  The jury may infer that because she killed him in the manner he died, her story could easily be sensationalized by the media, and become a national obsession.  On top of that, the Prosecutor showed that Jodi Arias said that she was interested in her IQ test because she thought she was as smart as Einstein.  This may cause the jury to think about the statements made in the media about how no jury would convict her.

The case is not over and you can never predict what a jury will do.  I do not believe that there is evidence of 1st degree murder, but maybe 2nd degree.  I do not see an acquittal, perhaps a hung jury.  But more likely than not, 1st degree murder.  I have not made up my mind yet, but this evidence is hard to reconcile.

Whatever the jury decides is respectable, deliberations are a unique experience in which 12 people get to have meeting of the minds to analyze all evidence.  We can be sure that advocates and appeals courts will help us discover if anything uncouth was done, at least in a lot of cases they are able to do that.  Considering what the detective said at the aggravation hearing and what was said about that at the trial**, a death sentence would be an appealable issue.  If this case is completely lost by the prosecutor, it would be because of Juan Martinez’ unbelievably unprofessional and childish actions and his disregard for that fact that he is a representative of Arizona’s people and Travis Alexander’s family.

** Footnote:  At the aggravation hearing, Detective Flores testified in court that his investigation showed that Travis Alexander was shot first and that the M.E. explained to him that his findings showed that as well.  At trial, the M.E. denied telling the detective that and the detective stated that he had made a mistake when he testified to that.  Thus, Jodi Arias’ eligibility for the death penalty is based upon testimony that is in fact wrong.

Advertisements
Comments
  1. LOUISE CARLSON says:

    JODI IS HER WORST OWN Enemy AND HAS ADMITTED BEING GUILTY WITH HER OWN WORDS AND ACTION, SUCH AS: STAGING A ‘ROBERY’ FROM HER GRAND PARENTS HOUSE TO STEAL A 25 CALIBER GUN…… DETAILING HER TRIP TO/FROM YREKA-MESA WITH RECEIPTS….OUTLINING EACH STOP SHE MADE…. GIVING TWO VERSIONS OF THE ‘CRIME’ TO DETECTIVE FLORES…. ADMITTING TO DARRYL BREWER SHE WANTED GAS CANS TO VISIT ‘MESA’…. PURCHASING A THIRD GAS CAN IN SELINAS, CA TO USE FOR GAS…SO SHE WOULDN’T SHOW ANY EVIDENCE IN BEING IN ‘MESA’… SHE DELETED PHOTOS FROM THE CAMERA OF HER AND TRAVIS ENGAGED IN SEX, AND SHOWING HER ENVOLVEMENT IN THE CRIME… THINKING ‘BLEACH’ WOULD DESTROY ALL FROM THE CAMERA…WRONG!!!!! SHE CALLED TRAVIS’S VOICE MAIL MESSAGES AFTER THE DEATH… SHE CALLED TRAVIS AFTER KILLING HIM… SHE VISITED RYAN BRYNES AFTER THE DEATH HOPING TO HIDE HER GUILT… SHE KEPT NAPOLEAN AWAY WITH A FENCE IN THE LIVING ROOM SO HE COULDN’T GO UPSTAIRS TO SEE HIS OWNER…TRAVIS… HOW CALCULATING IS THAT!!!! THE TRUTH CAME OUT THAT JODI NEVER HELPED TRAVIS PLACE CHRISTMAS ORNAMENTS IN THE ATTIC… THAT JODI COULDN’T HAVE STOOD ON THE SHELF IN TRAVIS’S CLOSET TO GET AN IMAGINERY GUN HE HAD WITHOUT FALLING AND/OR MAKING HIS SHOES FALL TO THE FLOOR… THE LIST GOES ON…. LET’S HOPE THE JURY SEES THROUGH JODI’S LIES AND CONVICTS HER OF FIRST DEGREE MURDER!!

    Like

  2. Alf London says:

    I do not belief that the evidence of premeditation is flimsy. There is not only the robbery of the same caliber gun that killed Alexander, but the renting of a car, the renting of a car in Redding, the dying of her hair, the desire for a low profile car, the taking of three gas cans, the upside down license plate, and the fact that her cell phone turned off all through Arizona. Who carries three gas tanks with them on any trip. According to her it was to save on gas, however, she filled them up in California negating any savings, moreover, carrying that much extra weight would also negate any savings not to mention the safety hazard involved. Can you imagine being a single woman driving alone and carrying gas cans so as not to run out of gas, but traveling without the benefit of a cell phone? That is ridiculous. Once she lost her charger she would have stopped and bought one!

    Like

  3. BloodMeridien says:

    I don’t see how her interviews can be seen as fame mongering in terms of being a notorious killer, since she used these platforms to say she was innocent. They were certainly symptomatic of self-denial on a grand scale. By the time AL interviewed her she was already ‘famous’ for being a predetermined psycho bunny boiler. Autographing her manifesto sounds like irony or an acceptance notoriety was thrust upon her and she would indeed be famous for the wrong reasons.
    But, what do I know 😉

    Like

  4. Pascalswager233 says:

    I am not sure why I don’t find this as grave as it seems everyone else does. I have not completely made my mind up about this, either, however, let me play Devil’s advocate for a moment. Jodi seems to have lived a (fairly) normal life, prior to this incident. Surely she would have been exposed to media sensationalism. She knew she was, at the very least, a suspect in a very provocative murder case. One with all of the hallmarks of a potential media storm, (ie. attractive people, sex, religion, etc…). Factor in that Amy was the only one who actually heard those words spoken. What was her tone? Inflection? Perhaps it was said sarcastically? With foreboding? And, surely she was aware that she was going to need legal counsel, soon and would need money. Maybe she thought she could use this signed ‘manifesto’ to raise some? I am still learning more about this case, everyday, so, please if my logic has holes, point them out.
    Also, does anyone else feel that her twitter account is hurting her, more than helping? I know it’s not admissible, but surely it sways public opinion. For me, it doesn’t make me sympathetic, at all.

    Like

    • Public opinion was against her from the beginning because the media was against her from the beginning. They started their campaign 5 years ago, starting on Nancy Grace and spreading from there.

      The manifesto doesn’t seem to be important to the jurors at least if you look at the juror questions. If you factor in the fact that you have a death penalty qualified jury, the evidence, the prosecutors disregard for decorum (including mischaracterizing testimony), and the jury is not sequestered, she seems doomed.

      When you get into a high-profile case and you are not only against the government, but against the media, you are really in a position where no matter what you do or how you act, they will turn it into something bad.

      Like

  5. Robin Kelly says:

    When was this manifesto written? Did she already have legal counsel and was she into her 3rd story of self defense already? And what in this whole world went through LaViolette’s mind when she found out? Because we both understand it’s importance. And did Aria’s actually say the words “for when I become famous?” Or would that be considered heresay? I assume if it was mentioned in court there is some truth to the statements made meaning Martinez read directly from LaViolette’s notes. This whole thing is boggling my mind.

    I have to say for a defense team busting their humps and working their very hearts out, at least Wimott, she must be very frustrating to deal with in light of this.

    Like

    • As best as I can tell, the manifesto was written after Travis Alexander died. The story about Amy was while she was incarcerated in Yreka, California, which would be before she was extradited to Arizona (while she had an extradition attorney, but not a defense attorney), but after she was arrested (2008). This is not when LaViolette evaluated her, she said she started evaluating her in 2011. The words are not considered hearsay because they were written in the notes of the person who was testifying (LaViolette), so she has first-hand knowledge of the topic (when she learned the information as an expert, etc.). Hearsay is usually someone without direct knowledge. He did take the phrases directly from her notes, but we cannot say with certainty that the words were exactly Jodi’s. Usually when a person is evaluating someone (i.e. a psychiatrist, etc.) they summarize and do not quote. We don’t know much about the manifesto at all. We don’t know the contents, why she thought it would be published and make her famous, why she signed copies, why then, etc. We also don’t know if LaViolette learned it from Jodi herself or this Amy woman (I’m guessing this Amy woman or at least that was my impression). The content really isn’t important it is the famous part and the questions that surround that.

      I’m guessing what she was thinking was the totality of circumstances pre-June 4th. Her expertise is domestic violence in a relationship, what level it is, and whether or not it was occurring, who the perpetrator was, etc. So, she would be looking at things pre-June 4th. The manifesto may not have been important to her in her assessment, simply becuase it did not occur before. In addition, the manifesto doesn’t change the fact that Travis Alexander was clearly, to say the least, a bad guy to women (information important to LaViolette). But, it definitely affects the overall picture of the case.

      In other words, just because there was domestic violence doesn’t mean that it was self-defense, on the other hand, just because there was an unjustifiable murder doesn’t mean there wasn’t domestic violence. The two do not depend on each other, however, Jodi’s self-defense defense does depend on whether or not it is believable that Travis Alexander would have physically attacked her that day.

      I agree that the defense team is doing their job and they are extremely competent. They may not have known this or they may have. Like Jose Baez said, you can’t change the facts.

      Like

  6. JanCorey says:

    Clearly, if the jurors actually follow their instructions, an acquittal is eminent in this case. If they don’t follow their instructions, well, that’s another matter but not true Justice. Jose Baez demonstrated on HLN that the crime scene does allow for Jodi’s version of the assault from her attacker and justifiable homicide is the proper result.

    Like

  7. Tenacity216 says:

    Arias apparently does not like to be called crazy. Playing a video of her parents interview was blocked in which both her parents said she needed help.

    Like

    • No one likes to be called crazy, but the videos were blocked for legal reasons. Jodi Arias is the defendant, she does not rule the proceedings. The judge and attorneys control the proceedings (in this case, more the prosecutor). The statements are hearsay, which may or may not be true. They have no knowledge of the actual occurrences of the case. The judge did rule that the videos were inadmissible. Unlike the media, who can play edited versions of any sort of thing they buy from any person, the court has rules.

      Like

  8. JanCorey says:

    I fully expect an acquittal if the jurors follow their instructions and the Law. It can not be anything but an acquittal and criminal charges levied against the prosecutor.

    Like

  9. Robin Kelly says:

    I believe LaViolette dubbed it the “manifesto” in her notes yes? LaViolette did not correct the word manifesto and I’d bet my son’s first born she totally would have if he re’titled it in some nefarious faction. So it would not be what “Juan is calling it” but her own DV expert, the person who discovered that it existed. Odd her own defense team either A. wasn’t aware of it, B. stupidly tried to ignore it or C. tried to pretend it didn’t exist altogether.

    I agree that this along with everything else could very well be “all she wrote”, so to speak.

    Like

    • When I said that I didn’t mean to imply that LaViolette hadn’t said it, I just meant that at that time it is what he said. Clearly, whether the defense knew about it or not, they did not object to it, so it is out there now. And it is a major issue.

      Like

      • Genie Gee says:

        Do you STILL believe jodi arias did not plan and carry out Travis’ murder? And what I mean is the PREMEDITATION portion more than anything else, because jodi has said she did murder him.

        The multiple stabbings alone seem to indicate RAGE. And she has said that she hacked into Travis’ email and other accounts.

        she has admitted to sending out text messages to Travis’ female friends from Travis’ own phone.

        I see this as a premediated murder. An “if I can’t have him, no one can” type situation. she knew Travis was DONE with her after he found out all the things she had done to him and others.

        YOU will probably defend her and say she was abused by Travis, BUT YOU COULD BE WRONG, right?

        jodi presumably slashed Travis’ tires TWICE, and he suspected she did it. He never did anything or said anything to her.

        jodi STOLE an engagement ring out of one of Travis’ drawers, and when he asked her about it, first she DENIED taking it, then admitted she had taken it. she asked if he was mad at her for taking it, he said no, he was not mad.

        In every instance of jodi doing something to try and harm Travis, he never lashed out at her or even laid a hand on her. And for all that she DID do, I say that he displayed ENORMOUS patience with her. Another man would have probably reported her, had her arrested, or beaten the *mean* out of her.

        THAT in itself should be a testiment of his *goodness* even though she certainly deserved a boot in the arse for all she did to him, hacking his private into, and SO much more.

        And even now, she continues to trash Travis, refusing to take ANY responsibility for HER actions.

        I hope you will consider the fact that in your defense of jodi, YOU could be wrong instead of seeing and portraying her as some kind of an innocent little angel.

        Like

        • I don’t know what you are talking about. Either you misread my blog or your commenting on the wrong site. My followers know that I never give my personal opinion except in the comments section. None of what you said is actually proof of premeditation and it either wasn’t presented in the trial or was such a minuscule part of the presentation it shouldn’t be considered evidence. It was never proven that Jodi Arias slashed his tires, it was conjecture on the part of the prosecutor. Vandalism and reputation smears are common after toxic relationships fall apart. It also isn’t uncommon for a person to get angry when they find out that their “significant other” is sleeping with 50 other people and pretending to be a “choir boy”. He used his position in the Church to get women to sleep with him, he was a con man. His shtick was to woo women and have them believe that he was in a single relationship with them. He lied to them. Which engagement ring did she steal? Because he acted like he was going to marry all of his girlfriends, but he never intended to be with any of them. He went to the Church meet and greets pretending like he was looking for a wife and he used women who just wanted to be loved by a husband. The text messages prove that he was juggling 5 women at once. What kind of good man does that? Do I believe Travis Alexander was a pig? Unequivocally, YES. Do I believe he should have been killed? No. Do I believe it was premeditation? No. Do I believe that she should go to jail? Absolutely. Do I believe that she had issues from her relationship with Alexander? Yes. The point of this blog is not for people with preconceived notions to be smart alecks it is to look at both sides of the issue to see whether you could be wrong. It is about a healthy dose of skepticism and challenging the evidence. It’s about getting it right. Also, you seem to have a low bar for what makes a good person. Not committing dating violence doesn’t automatically make you good. He had to know that at some point his double life was going to blow up. It couldn’t have blown up any bigger than millions of viewers for the Jodi Arias trial. All of the sudden, people who knew he was a pig behind closed doors came out in public all over the news and social media proclaiming he was the greatest guy that ever lived. It is ridiculous that most people can’t see that he was a pig and she still deserves to do jail time. The mass sheeple have a hatred for Jodi Arias for personal reasons I don’t understand since none of them have ever met her, so because of this Travis Alexander must be the opposite: an angel. It’s ridiculous. No one deserves to be murdered including Jodi Arias.

          Like

Join the Discussion

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s