Day 14 - "A Juror's Perspective" Written by: Paul A. Sanders, Jr. The 13th Juror MD @The13thJurorMD (Twitter)

Photos added by:  Court Chatter. (Link Below)

The Jodi Arias Death Penalty Retrial (Sentencing): Day 14 - "A Juror's Perspective"

(This Perspective is dedicated to all those who have served on a Jury or are serving on one currently.Thank you for your service!)

I have to wonder if the Jury felt the same cloud of irony that I felt at the close of proceedings today.

I watched as the Jury first sat today and I felt there was a sense of order as well as a sense of pep in their step. It was almost as if they marched in and it looked like all were dressed with care and concern. Shirts were pressed and only two Jurors wore jeans. This tells me that they care about what they are doing and becoming more unified. People in the Jury box are following the lead of the example setters and that is a good thing.

They also have a spring in their step with the upcoming Holiday. They are excited to get through the day and get back to a "normal" life, away from murder and evil, to see their families and watch some football. Their minds need a break. 

Juan Martinez made the day flow for the Jury like a river. He was like a fly fisherman who, with grace, captures his fish. I am sure the Jury appreciated it. His questioning kept the mind busy as he flowed from topic to topic. Dr. Fonseca was the bait and he caught her with eloquence.

"Ma'am?" he asked at the opening of proceedings, "One of the things you told us was that you do not do evaluations."

"Good Morning," Dr. Fonseca says directly to the Jury. She smiles at them as she did yesterday. She then turns to Juan Martinez as if no question had been asked.

"Ma'am?" he asks again. He never calls her Doctor or Dr. Fonseca. He only refers to her as ma'am. It is the same with Jodi Arias. He usually calls her "Arias" or "the defendant" with emphasis on "dant." He shows no emotion even though she had ignored his question. "One of the things you told us was that you did not do evaluations. Am I right?"

"Yes, that's right," she answers.

"You said that in your evaluation that it was significant that Arias shaved her pubic region. Did you not?"

She turns in her chair and looks at the Jury. She does look at Juan. "The constellation of variables suggests that shaving the pubic area is a little more common in our society. It may have had something to do with my evaluation, though."

"Are you saying that the way she groomed herself had something to do with Travis Alexander?" Juan asks as he takes a couple of steps forward.

"Didn't you say that engaging in that practice is important to you?" 

"Not necessarily."

Juan looks at her. "Didn't you say it was something worth considering?"

"Well, men and women do it," she answers with a non-answer.

"Ma'am, we're not interested in men," he says firmly. "Didn't you say it was important despite what percentage may shave that region?"

She seems to think about it. She hesitates before she answers and then looks at the Jury. "I didn't look at the specifics of this. It is one of many things I consider. There is an overall dynamic between the two sexually. Every piece had to be considered."

Juan Martinez walks back to the Prosecution table and looks at his yellow legal pad. He picks up some papers from the desk and walks toward Dr. Fonseca, never stopping while he says, "May I approach, Your Honor?"

"Yes," Judge Stevens replies. He hands her the document.

"Did you review document number 440441?" he asks as he hands her the papers over the witness box.

"Thank you, Mr. Martinez," she answers. "I didn't finish yesterday."

The courtroom is completely silent for ten minutes. Nobody moves. Judge Stevens peers over her desk and Dr. Fonseca is reading. Nobody even really coughs. It seemed off-setting. 

Juan stands back at the Prosecution table. He looks toward her. He imperceptibly rolls on his heels. He looks toward the carpet and back at her. He waits without emotion.

"Have you reviewed the document?" he asks stepping toward her a couple steps.

She laughs softly. "Yes, Mr. Martinez." I notice she isn't rolling her "r"'s as she did yesterday.

Juan Martinez begins the dismantling of her. He pursues each prior boyfriend of Jodi Arias in the years around the time that she murdered Travis Alexander. It is revealed one by one that she has a pattern of breaking up with boyfriends, even those whom she has lived with, and then contacting them and demonstrating stalker behavior.

He exposes, with his articulate questioning, that Jodi Arias does not take well to breaking up. It is clear that her behaviors do not show her as suffering in silence. He talks of relationships gone bad and she appears in their boyfriends lives again and it is confrontational in nature every time. She calls them repeatedly at any hour of the day. 

Dr. Fonseca gets foggy on details and doesn't remember what Jodi Arias did after each break up. It is becoming clear to everyone else in the room, including the Jury, that Jodi Arias isn't what she looks to be in the defendant's chair. She is not the meek little girl in the fuzzy sweater. Her dark side is being exposed piece by piece.

"They only dated three or four months, didn't they?" Juan asks her in reference to Travis and Arias.

"Well," the Dr. says, "they broke up in February, or was it June of 2007?"

Juan looks at her and walks forward with his palm out. With the other finger, he counts the fingers in his palm. "So, they dated March, April, May and June. Is that right ma'am?"

"It was the end of June before she discovered his infidelities," she says looking toward the ceiling as if trying to remember. "Well, they dated some months..."

"Didn't she move to Mesa, Arizona from Northern California in July of 2007?"

Dr. Fonseca appears to think. It looks like everything is getting foggy again similar to someone else we know. "Maybe. I can't be sure."

"It was a couple of weeks after they broke up, wasn't it?" he pursues.

"Well, Mr. Martinez, they never really broke up. You have to understand the sexual dynamic of it."

"The dynamic," Juan comments. "She's not "suffering in silence" by moving to Mesa, is she?"

Dr. Fonseca is trapped like a fish on a hook. Everyone can feel it. If I felt it, you can bet the Jury did. 

"Sort of," she answers.

Juan moves another two steps toward her. His eyes don't leave her face. "Wasn't Arias caught peeping into Travis Alexander's home in August of 2007, two months after they broke up?"

I am busy taking notes but I can't help but look at the exchange between Juan Martinez and Dr. Fonseca. The confidence in her voice is gone. She looks at Juan but not at the Jury.

It is these little things that a Jury watches. It is similar to watching a really good movie. One looks at every detail, every feature change. They see the loss of confidence. They hear forward progress in this case. They are learning something and it is challenging for each. They feel the drama that makes a trial. They feel the theater and they feel truths rising. They are engaged.

Then Juan Martinez took us into the creepiness and foreshadowing of the terrible event. He took the Jury on a journey to Travis Alexander's backyard. It was clean and crisp. It brought the psychology of all of it home. It was not the knowledge that Dr. Fonseca may have carried with her 35 years of experience. It was the psychology of what was in Arias' head based, in part, on her prior boyfriend's treatment, in the earlier testimony.

Dr. Fonseca feebly attempted to qualify Arias' behavior. "Well, she saw two people making out but didn't know who they were. She went there to pick up something. She might have seen something."

It's too late for Dr. Fonseca.

"Arias had to stand there and look in his back patio window," Juan states. "They were kissing and her brassiere was off. She was peeping right?"

"I don't know if you would call it that," she answers hesitantly.

"Didn't she know the key code to the garage?"

"Yes."

"Why didn't she use the garage, Ma'am? Why didn't she use the door?"

Dr. Fonseca is suddenly at a loss for words. The words of yesterday were stolen away from her. "I don't know how she could have gotten in. That's not..."

"She didn't ring the doorbell, did she?" Juan Martinez asks pointedly.

"No, I don't know."

"She was in the backyard, right?"

"She went around the side," Dr. Fonseca daftly evades.

Juan wouldn't let go. "She intentionally went in the backyard, didn't she?"

"Maybe."

"That's not suffering in silence. Is it, Ma'am?" he asked, slamming the door.

Dr. Fonseca admits, "It is some intrusiveness."

Juan finished the dismantling of Dr. Fonseca throughout the rest of the morning and into the latter part of the afternoon. 

"We are not talking about Travis Alexander," he said to her at one point. "We are talking about that person over there, Jodi Arias!" he says pointing to the defendant.

"We are finished with this witness," he says as he walks back to the Prosecution table.

I did not realize until then the kind of tension that Juan Martinez had created. There was almost a sigh of relief in the moments he was sitting down. It was as if Travis Alexander had spoken. There had been strength in his arguments. There was a clarity that I had not seen before. This thing had been exposed. Arias looked different in the defendant's chair. Something had changed, something that knowledge addressed. It was subtle.

I know the Jury saw her in a light they had never seen before. There was a darkness to it. There was a victim on the other end who had died a horrific death and no amount of 35 years of experience could explain it away. His name was Travis Alexander and Jodi Arias planned his death. She did it with cruelty. There was evil at the end of this road and Juan Martinez did an exemplary job paving it. 

Kirk Nurmi got up and began his redirect. 

Dr. Fonseca began answering questions as Kirk Nurmi tried to put the house back together again. It took awhile to realize what he was doing. He had set this seed a couple of days ago and I think he has underestimated the Jury. He thinks they are easily maligned. 

The Jury knows this event was premeditated. He is trying to sell a car that no one is buying.

It is Dr. Fonseca's opinion that this event was a culmination of events over time and Jodi Arias somehow 'snapped" and killed him in a fit of rage.

The Jury isn't buying it. It may actually make some of them mad. They cannot talk among each other so they have to dwell on it. It feels like they are being tricked.

Jurors are not dumb. They were selected because they are reasonable men and women. They know he is trying to deflect, hoping they will fall for it.

Kirk Nurmi asked Dr. Fonseca, "Do you think many years of experience in your field is better than only a few years?"

"Certainly," she answers. "Nothing can speak better than many years of experience."

"What do you think of other Psychologists who try to damage the reputation of fellow Psychologists in Court?"

Of course, it was easy for me to figure out this line of questioning that Juan Martinez put an end to. It made me happy. I knew a surprise that the Jury didn't know was coming.

Dr. DeMarte was on the horizon. It was going to be soon. Very soon. The "Psycho-Killer", as I refer to her in my book, "Brain Damage: A Juror's Tale", available on Amazon.com, would be a welcome surprise for this Jury.

Kirk Nurmi asked a final question of the day.

"Dr. Fonseca? What is misogyny?"

The Doctor thinks about it for a moment. "It defines men who are hateful of women..."

This will irritate most of the Jury on their Holiday weekend off...

Judge Stevens ends the proceedings for the day while the attorneys are at sidebar.

The air is thick with irony. The psychology in the room spoke louder than the witness with 35 years of experience...

Justice 4 Travis Alexander!

Justice for Dale!

Paul A. Sanders, Jr.
The 13th Juror MD @The13thJurorMD (Twitter)

http://www.courtchatter.com/2014/11/jodi-arias-day-14-jurors-perspective.html?m=1

Day 15 - "A Juror's Perspective" Written by: Paul A. Sanders, Jr. The 13th Juror MD @The13thJurorMD (Twitter)

This is a Repost of Day 15 to clear an error. Please disregard prior Day 15. My apologies for any inconvenience this has caused. Paul

The Jodi Arias Death Penalty Retrial (Sentencing): Day 15 - "A Juror's Perspective"

"You know the Code of Ethics in Psychology? You're familiar with it?" Juan Martinez pointedly asked of Dr. Fonseca in the last day's testimony.

"Yes, Mr. Martinez," she answered. "I am familiar with the Code of Ethics."

"Under that Code of Ethics, Ma'am," he pointed out while standing his ground, "You are required to give tests and make opinions based on full and detailed research? Am I correct?"

"Well," she started, "there's a voluminous amount of..."

"Do you feel you've been objective, Ma'am?"

Dr. Fonseca looks to the Jury, away from her interrogator. "Well, you see, I use multiple data points, extensive research as well as objective research in the best ways that I can."

Juan walks up to the witness box, saying, "May I approach, Your Honor?" along the way.

Dr. Fonseca looks at the document and appears to recognize it. Juan Martinez walks a few steps toward the Prosecution table and turns around. 

"You recognize exhibit 741?"

"Yes," she nods as she inspects it. 

It is the Gmail chat from May 26, 2008, one of the final conversations that Jodi Arias and Travis Alexander had before his horrific murder.

"You said this was a rant, didn't you?" Juan asks her.

"Well," she laughs, "It was a term."

"It's not a Psychological term is it?" He continues without waiting for an answer. "You said it was a 5-Hour rant, didn't you?

"It was a long time," she answers.

"I want you to look at the pages in your hand. It says from 2:32 AM until 4:47 AM. That's not five hours! Is it, Ma' am?"

Dr. Fonseca appears to inspect the pages, flipping them back and forth. "It's almost three hours," she concedes.

"Actually," Juan points out, "it is two hours and fifteen minutes." He looks down at the carpet while pausing. His eyes look up until he meets hers. He does not accuse but instead simply states, "You wanted to make Travis Alexander look out of control, did you not?"

"No," she answers.

"Five hours is not correct. Is it, Ma'am? You chose five hours and it is not five hours, is it?"

"Well, not quite," she says quietly.

Juan asks her almost as if confused. "Don't you have an ethical responsibility to be accurate?"

"Yes," she answered.

She completed that line of questioning on our last day in Court. 

Juan Martinez would continue that assault today with Dr. Fonseca but not until Kirk Nurmi had to get up and rebuild the house that Juan had so masterfully destroyed. I don't think anyone looked forward to another day with Dr. Fonseca.

Kirk Nurmi speaks with his witnesses as if he is working out a problem with them. Where Juan takes short, fairly abrupt steps, Kirk Nurmi likes to walk. He changes direction slowly. He holds one arm out like a Sherlock Holmes would hold his pipe while expressing a thought. Where Juan asks pointed and directed questions, Kirk Nurmi likes to give a life history of a question. It's as if he wants to encourage his witnesses to say as much as possible.

Dr. Fonseca gladly obliged with discussions about Travis Alexander being two different people, how he and Arias came from abusive families, how he kept her hidden and pointing out that he made her suffer in silence. She went on at length about the six hour rant that Travis had with Arias on Gmail.

"It's debasing," she politely explained to the Jury in relationship to the Gmail exchange of May 26, 2008. "It's insulting and demeaning and really shows their interaction patterns and the dynamics of this sexually charged relationship. This is a written example of his five hour rant and who know how many were not in writing? People might rant for an hour or two but six hours is a long time."

I scratched my head. Was it five hours or six hours?

Kirk Nurmi walked in a semi-circle in front of the eagerly awaiting Dr. Fonseca. "We began by talking about, in general terms, why sexual proclivity is important." 

Dr. Fonseca begins her thoughts without ever having heard a question. "It speaks to the dynamic of these two people. It suddenly exploded. Mr. Travis Alexander spoke to Jodi like the way Juan Martinez speaks to me."

"How does he speak to you?" Mr. Nurmi queries.

"Objection! Relevance." Juan Martinez says while standing up.

It was not the first objection and it wasn't the last. Juan Martinez would not let go of her. It was like pulling in a two hundred pound Marlin from a fishing boat deep in the ocean. It was slow and heavy work but one could feel the forward progress. He was as aggressive as I have ever seen him.

A number of months back, I was a Juror for the murder of Dale Harrell. The trial of Arias and DeVault are not only similar in structure but also in the cruelness of the premeditated murder. We also dealt with days and days of Psychological testimony. We furiously took notes and we cared passionately about what we did in our service. 

I remember sitting in the Jury box, (I talk about this in my book "Brain Damage: A Juror's Tale" available on Amazon.com), and I was positioned out of my normal seating. Instead of sitting on the inside end of the front row, I was on the outside of the top row. Dr. Carp, a Psychologist, was on the stand and she spoke for days much like Dr. Fonseca has. I happened to look in the Gallery, where the public and media sit, and there was Juan Martinez.

Juan Martinez was sitting in the back row alone. He had no notepad and no cellphone. I had never seen him in person but recognized him from Arias' televised first trial. He was wearing a white shirt with a pink tie enveloped by a dark suit. He sat with his hands in his lap and watched as Dr. Carp peered above her books and volumes of reports on Marissa DeVault. He was there on two afternoons. I wondered why he was there. 

Today, I realized that I now knew why he was there in that courtroom this past spring. He was sizing up his adversary. It may not have been the same Psychologist but it was all based on the same general ideas. He was looking for weaknesses and reactions. He was getting ready for the retrial of Arias and it was hard for me to believe we were here. It had been a long time coming.

His homework paid off as he went in for the kill on Dr. Fonseca. She fought like a two hundred pound Marlin, never giving Juan any slack. She deflected and stuttered. At one point, she stopped looking at Juan and only looked at the Jury, her lips pursed. 

"What does it say on the second page?" he asks her pointing at the document in front of her. He turns and says, "Why don't you read it for us?"

Dr. Fonseca maneuvers her glasses and reads aloud, It is written by Travis Alexander. "You couldn't get off your lazy butt to read it, could you? That's the sociopath I know so well. It feakin' figures," she says as she puts the papers down.

Juan points at her as if to say that she wasn't finished yet, motioning her to pick the papers back up. "You see that there? The next one down, Ma'am. What does it say, Ma'am?"

She reads aloud again with little effort in her voice. "I don't want your apology. I want you to understand what I think of you. I want you to understand how evil you are. You are the worst thing that ever happened to me."

The Court is silent for a moment while Juan Martinez lets it sink in. Travis Alexander was able to make a significant appearance. He makes a half turn and looks at her. He had a habit of moving to topics with little notice.
"Do you know what Greenwich Median time is?"

He proceeded to dual it out with her. The time was only two hours and fifteen minutes of a "rant" and not five or six hours. Being this was covered the other day, it showed her resistance to facts.It will ring as "sloppy" to some Jurors. 

Her memory got very foggy again. She kept fighting off his blows by saying vehemently, "That mis-characterizes my testimony!". 

"Yes or no, Ma'am" Juan Martinez would bark at her.

She quibbled over testimony she had given twenty minutes prior and Juan did not let up. He kept pulling at the line. She argued about items she testified about days before. She looked to the Judge and asked if she could help.

Judge Stevens responded, "Please continue..."

Quite unexpectedly, the Jury spoke in more ways than one. They submitted a healthy batch of questions at the completion of her testimony. Arizona is one of few states that allow questioning of a witness via an official Juror questionnaire form. They do not discuss each others questions and no one knows who the questions come from. They are independent Jurors similar to saying "I, the Jury". They submit their question and the attorneys and Judge review them before they are accepted by the Court. Not all questions are accepted and some are not read to the witness.

One Juror asked about Travis' sexual proclivity with other partners. Someone inquired whether it was his sexual habits being hidden or whether it was women being hidden. Another Juror wanted to know if the conversations of death and suicide were a form of manipulation. A Juror asked if experience and events such as pornography could change the dynamics of a relationship.

There was a question about the "trigger" in the Gmail. This Juror wanted to know what made Travis so upset. Why was he angry with her? What had she done? They were not satisfied with any answer because Dr. Fonseca didn't have any answers. 

Still, another Juror asked if Travis Alexander showed off anyone else on Social Media and another asked if there were any other pictures of girls on his Facebook Account. The experienced Psychologist responded negatively to both questions.

One particular Juror asked why her exhibit was marked as starting at 9:30 PM while the record said 2:30 AM. Someone else asked where she had gotten her information from on the internet?

She answered most questions as she gave her testimony. There was nothing particularly stunning about any answer she gave because she liked to talk. 

I was glad to hear the Jury asking questions. It's far too early to tell if they are leaning one way or another because they are still individual Jurors. It tells me they are engaged. It tells me they are doing what they are supposed to do. They have to listen to the completion of both sides before they can lean one way or another. They must withhold judgement until they are released to the deliberation room.

Then, we lost Juror #3. There is no applause and there is no knowledge as to why. The State has alternates for a reason. It is pointless to speculate as it will remain a secret.

There is a dynamic in the background of a Jury that few speak of. The longer a trial, the more each individual Juror vests in time and sacrifice. The serious note takers will feel a tension lurking a little more than everyone else. The thicker the notebook, the less you want to be selected as an alternate.

The alternates are picked the day the Jury goes into deliberation. By losing one Juror, each Juror has just increased their odds of being on the final twelve. They will be sad to see one go but the sadness is short lived. The Trial will go on without her and God Speed to her. I thank her for her service. She was one of the seven note takers.

"Wasn't Daniel Freeman travelling with Travis Alexander as a chaperon because Travis did not want to be alone with the defendant. Isn't that true?!" Juan Martinez asked Dr. Fonseca.

One could see that she was tired. She had darkened circles under her eyes and her fight seemed limp. Her aggressiveness had turned to sarcasm.

"Mr. Martinez, the audio on the recording wasn't very good," she answered.

"I need the Court Reporter to read the question again?" Juan asked.

The older gentleman in the pink shirt with the red tie, the Court Reporter, looked at his machine and then said, "...He didn't want to be alone with the defendant, did he?"

"I don't know. It mis-characterizes what I was saying. Daniel Freeman just went along..." Dr. Fonseca tried to respond.

"Are you saying Travis was surprised Arias came along? He was there," Juan said figuratively pointing to a passenger seat, "because Travis Alexander asked that he come along because he was afraid of Jodi Arias! Am I right?"

"I have a problem with my hearing," she said offhandedly.

"So you have hearing problems?" he said with a slap of the back of his hand on the other.

Then, she went off on him. She turned to the Jury. "You see? Mr. Martinez has memory problems. This is an example of the badgering and the slime highway that I have to go down with Mr. Martinez."

Juan stares at her. "So, Ma'am, you didn't hear it so it must not have been said." he turns and walks to the Prosecution table. "Finished with this witness..."

I think the Jury heard exactly what the Psychologist didn't hear...

Through Juan Martinez, the Jury watched the irreverent and punishing interrogation of his witness and somewhere out of the rubble, they heard from Travis Alexander.

Some Jurors may be impacted by Juan Martinez' aggressiveness. They might even feel sorry for the Doctor with so many years of experience. They may not even like him all that much. But this is not about Juan Martinez and it is not about Kirk Nurmi.

It is about a man who brutally lost his life at the hands of another. It is about the voice that speaks for him because he know longer can. It is about Travis Alexander and those who have survived his death. It is about a path to Justice and sometimes it is paved with passion.

It is about holding Jodi Arias accountable for her actions.

The Court closed today with my hearing a rumor that three defense witnesses were afraid to testify...

Justice 4 Travis Alexander!

Justice for Dale!

Paul A. Sanders, Jr.
The 13th Juror MD @The13thJurorMD (Twitter)

“DR. CHUCKLES AND THE ANGEL’S CHAIR” BY: Paul A. Sanders, Jr. The 13th Juror @The13thJurorMD (Twitter)

The Jodi Arias Retrial: A Juror’s Perspective

DAY 18

“DR. CHUCKLES AND THE ANGEL’S CHAIR”

I am not sure that anyone on the Jury was thrilled to see Dr. Robert Geffner on the witness stand as they filed into their seats. We were moving into his third day of Psychological testimony. The Jury has learned that he has testified in over three hundred trials as a twenty five year experienced Psychologist who also has opened many clinics throughout the country.

Dr. Geffner was dressed conservatively in a dark blue suit with a white shirt complimented with a gray tie. Jennifer Willmott handled his questioning who was sharply dressed in a medium dark blue business skirt suit wearing black stockings and black high heels. The view of her shoulder length hair from the back shows it to be perfect in form and shape. Every hair is in line and she carries herself confident in appearance and in questioning.

“Doctor,” Jennifer Willmott started. “We ended yesterday talking about the childhood of Jodi Arias.”

“Yes,” he offered turning in his chair to look at the Jury, “she came from an abusive family and left when she was eighteen.”

“Thank you, Doctor. I would like to move on and talk about some of the experiences she had after she left home. Are you familiar with her first boyfriend, Bobby Juarez?” Willmott asked. 

“Certainly,” he answered with a chuckle. He had a habit of making small laughs throughout his testimony the prior two days. This was the first time it really started to seem annoying. He may have done this out of being a nervous expression or maybe it was done as a way to bond with the Jury. This, however, being his third day, there was a failure by all to see the humorous inflections as a good thing.
The family of Travis Alexander sits in the front two rows every day and in their same seats. Samantha sits on the end and she carries a small book and takes notes periodically throughout testimony. They are a close group and I feel great empathy for them. The Jury feels empathy for them especially in knowing that the Defendant has been convicted of first degree murder. The Jury feels an enhanced sense of empathy given that the Defendant is Death Penalty qualified in the cruel and heinous nature in the crime. This empathy is unspoken but it is there. I do not think the family of Travis Alexander enjoys these minor attempts at lightheartedness and neither does the Jury.

I speak as a former Juror of the Marissa DeVault Trial in the brutal killing of Dale Harrell. We felt this same empathy for the family and conveyed it as great respect for the family of the victim. We may not have used it in the Jury room but it was there, deep inside, a great sadness in the senseless loss of life and the unending pain that the family would endure the rest of their lives despite our reaching a decision to give the Defendant life in prison without the possibility of parole. I speak of the DeVault Trial in much the same way I construct the daily Juror Perspective on the Jodi Arias Trial in my book, “Brain Damage: A Juror’s Tale,” (available on Amazon.com).

Dr. Geffner turned toward the Jury, “Bobby Juarez was an abusive relationship for Miss Arias at eighteen years old. This set up a pattern in her later boyfriends. I believe, or evidently,” he said correcting himself with a laugh, “I heard he was a big guy.”

“Where did you get this information?” Willmott asked.

“I look at Jodi’s journals and I got this from her brother from his interview.”

“Very good,” Willmott said. She walked over to a projector screen and put up a picture of Arias with Bobby Juarez. The picture came onto the screens throughout the Courtroom. 

The picture was of Bobby and Arias on the floor with Bobby’s arm wrapped around her. He was shirtless and somewhat muscular. One could see a “six-pack” on his stomach. They both looked young and Arias so much so that she was almost unrecognizable as one had to struggle to match her features as she is in the present. They were both smiling playfully in the scene from seventeen years prior.

The funny thing is, Bobby Juarez looked the same size as Arias even though the Doctor had just said he was a “big guy”. The Jury notices little inconsistencies like that and they usually end of in the pile of discarded witness testimony once it reaches the deliberation room. One or two inconsistencies in testimony and objective interpretations will easy dispose of a witness. I noticed five Jurors taking notes.

“How was there relationship abusive in your opinion, Doctor? Can you give us an example?” Willmott continued.

“Certainly,” he answered affably. “There was an incident when they broke up that is corroborated by Jodi’s bother. Bobby Juarez was heavily into martial arts. He was also into control and power. One night, he hit and choked her, twisted her wrist and put her on the floor. When her brother found out, they went to his house because he wanted to scare Mr. Juarez. Well, when Bobby opened the door, he flipped the tables because he was wielding some sort of Samurai sword and they ran away.”

Jennifer Wilmott walks over to the projection machine. One can see her dark blue sparkled fingernail polish as she centers the “Abuse Wheel of Power and Control” document that we had seen the day prior.

“And how does this apply to this document?” Willmott asked. 

“Again,” he said turning again to the Jury, “this is a prime example of what her future was going to be like with her relationships. She falls into situations where the men in her life exercise great power and control of her. She really is a victim as demonstrated by the chart with physical and sexual abuse. It is a cycle with her and Bobby Juarez. It was the first abusive relationship after coming from an abusive family.”

“Very good, Doctor,” Willmott responded cordially. She slides the document off the screen and the Courtroom is introduced to a picture of her and Matt McCartney. The Jury looks at the screen.

The picture shows Matt wearing a white sweater with his arm wrapped around Arias in a posed picture. It looks like the two of them are in front of an aquarium with a large maroon Scallop shell framing them in the background. Matt looks kind and Arias looks much more familiar in relation to her present looks.

“Can you tell us your expert opinion about this boyfriend?” Willmott asks.

“This is another abusive boyfriend,” he answers readily. “In this case it wasn’t physically abusive but it was emotionally abusive. He had been cheating on her and she found out. This was very hard on her psychological make-up. It caused her to distrust people, diminished her self-esteem and was damaging because she had not planned on the relationship to end in that manner. She had to look for answers.”

“Did there come an occasion where she went to see Bianca, the girl he was having an affair with behind Jodi’s back?” Willmott asked.

“Yes,” he said. “She drove to see her, it might have been a somewhat long drive and there are some conflicting stories on what was discussed.”

“Did she go up to confront her?” Jennifer Willmott queried.”

“I wouldn’t say it was a s much a confrontation as it was a validation. She couldn’t understand what happened in their two year relationship. As I understand it, she cried a lot when Matt went to Crater Lake. He had started this relationship while Jodi was living with him and Jodi needed to clear her mind. So, she went to Crater lake to see Bianca and, from what her brother verifies, it was not a nasty confrontation by any means,” he explained.

Jennifer Willmott turns around, away from the Doctor and walks to the defense table, picks up a document, places it on the projector screen and her shiny blue fingernails straighten it out. Her fingers look small. 

“Do you know what this is, Doctor?”

“It’s the results of an interview with the boyfriend, Matt McCartney.”

“Can you discuss the importance of these answers?” she asked.

Dr. Geffner turns to the Jury while Jennifer Willmott uses a cursor to direct the Jury’s attention toward the statements he was speaking on.

The Doctor relayed the answers on the screen saying that Jodi was very affectionate and kind. She was not clingy or needy and the boyfriend and girlfriend had discussed marriage at some point. The attention was directed toward Jodi always having her “moods” which was a sign of early stages of chronic depression. He further explained that Matt had said she would take things the wrong way and cry a lot. He felt she sobbed excessively and she was very emotional.

“Did Matt McCartney think she may have had some issues about that?” Willmott asked.

“Yes,” Dr. Geffner answered with a little laugh. “He was not a Psychiatrist or trained in my field and he felt that she was bipolar. This did not show up in any of the tests but now that I think about it, there could be signs of being bipolar,” he offered.

“Why do you think that?”

“She had severe emotional shifts. She also had some spending issues which is characteristic of being bipolar and these were some pretty bad habits causing her financial problems. This is one manifestation of a complicated condition,” he said. He leaned forward toward the Jury. “She was not manipulative and she did not appear angry by any means after they broke up. She had self-esteem and depression issues which might lead an average person to think it was bipolar. She had identity issues as anyone might have after the collapse of a two year relationship.”

“Did she have a relationship after Mr. McCartney?”

“She did,” he answered. “She met Darryl Brewer a short time after she moved to Big Sur. She was twenty-two while he was forty two and he had a young son. They had a long relationship. There were no signs of abuse or aggressiveness. He was a catering manager for a restaurant she had applied at and they started a relationship very quickly. I believe they broke up in 2006 when he met Travis Alexander.”

Jennifer Willmott put a picture of Darryl and Arias with his son in his arms taken on a sunny and windy day. She looked a lot as she does in the present except that her hair was long and she did not wear glasses. It looked like an All-American family picture of happiness and contentment.

“What do you think important about this relationship,” Willmott asked.

“Objection!” Juan Martinez said. “Calls for speculation.”
“Sustained,” Judge Stevens said.

Juan Martinez had as many objections sustained as he had them over-ruled throughout the three days. I would watch him as he sat in his chair leaning forward with his elbows on the prosecution table with his chin resting in his thumbs. He would look at the screens and sometimes he would quickly jot notes on his legal pad. He was not obtrusive by any means but one felt he was being patient as well as having command at the same time. I expect that the wheels never stopped turning in his head.

Jennifer Willmott recovered quickly without looking toward the Prosecution table. “Based on the interview results of Darryl Brewer,” she emphasized, “What do you make of this relationship in your professional opinion?”

“There are some things that Darryl said that are consistent with what Matt McCartney said,” he explained to the Jury. “For instance, he said that she showed signs of being bipolar. He saw a lot of mood swings and the signs of depression that we have spoken of in her prior relationship. It really made me think twice about a bipolar condition.”

“Was there anything else of importance in your opinion?”

The Doctor, never being short of words, went on and on about the damage Jodi had suffered in her prior relationships and she was looking for something greater. He felt she had limitations in that Darryl wanted no more children and she was looking for children in her future. Darryl could not provide that. She met Travis Alexander and this changed her life.

At one point in the early afternoon, Jennifer Willmott had the typewritten results of the Darryl interview on the projection screens throughout the Courtroom. I mentioned in an earlier Perspective that Jurors not only listen to what is said, they always read beyond what the Defense may draw their attention to. They are continually searching for answers and more information.

The answer to one question did not go past the Jury. Its causal link was obvious but unintended. Jennifer Willmott was very good at removing documents quickly after hearing testimony on a subject whereas Kirk Nurmi had a habit of leaving documents on the projection screens for an extended amount of time.

I looked at the Jury and I saw them reading documents in their entirety. I saw Judge Stevens doing the same thing while Dr. Geffner spoke.

One answer read:

“When they moved to the desert, they weren’t used to the heat. He (Darryl) started keeping a five gallon gas can in the back of the car in case of running out of it and often took a few gas cans on trips.”

The Jury did not miss this and it was not mentioned by the Defense even though it was on the screen for all to see. Its qualification and reason for having gas cans did not make sense. But, even more so, it brought attention to the gas cans. I don’t think the Defense wants to talk about gas cans. I think the Jury wants to know what gas cans have to do with moving to Arizona.

We spent the rest of the afternoon painstakingly beginning the process of going through a day by day and moment by moment timeline of the relationship of Travis Alexander and Jodi Arias. The ill-fated meeting was in September of 2006. The met for the first time at the Rainforest Café of the MGM Grand in Las Vegas, Nevada.

This timeline would continue into Day 19 of the Trial. The Jury would be excused for the day after an extra hour of testimony.

The gas can mention was a seed in the Jury’s head. 

Juries love evidence that they can touch see and feel. They also like dates and times albeit not to the extent of the Doctor’s timeline. 

Somebody on the Jury is trying to remember when she bought the gas cans…

“Every good relationship that develops as a result of this Trial is the manifestation of the Spirit of Travis Alexander.”

Justice 4 Travis Alexander…

Justice for Dale…

Paul A. Sanders, Jr.
The 13th Juror @The13thJurorMD (Twitter)

550 KFYI News Talk (Another source for this trial.)

http://www.kfyi.com/search/jodi%20arias%20trial

Day 20 of Jodi Arias trial: Attorneys continue 'victim' defense

http://www.kpho.com/story/27660084/day-20-of-jodi-arias-trial-attorneys-continue-victim-defense

Day 19 of Jodi Arias trial: "My anger is very destructive"

http://www.kpho.com/story/27649384/day-19-of-jodi-arias-trial-back-to-business-for-jury

"DR. CHUCKLES CHRISTMAS PRESENT" BY: Paul A. Sanders, Jr. The 13th Juror @The13thJurorMD (Twitter)

The Jodi Arias Retrial: A Juror’s Perspective

DAY 19

“DR. CHUCKLES CHRISTMAS PRESENT”

A diamond would not be valuable were it easily discovered. The Defense Team handed one to Juan Martinez. It was wrapped in coal and hidden from sight. It was subtle and became the jewel that the Jury will take with them on their time off until next year.

It would be the fourth day of testimony from Dr. Geffner, the trial experienced Psychologist. It is also the eleventh day in a row of hearing psychological testimony. It has become two Doctors who have said almost the same thing but with different affectations. It can get tiring but Jennifer Willmott kept a good pace today by constantly presenting new documents for the Jury to see. This was a continuation of yesterday’s timeline of the life of Arias and Travis Alexander seen mostly from Arias’ eyes through the continual presentation of pages from her journals.

Simultaneously, Jennifer Willmott would query the Doctor on a timeline he created based, again, on mostly Arias’ journal. It was lightly seasoned with some loose corroboration and a touch of nastily worded e-mails. Much of this had been visited through the testimony of Dr. Fonseca.

It is the note takers that I watch on the Jury since the rest of the Jurors carry stoic faces that reveal nothing of what they may think. I see particularly five note takers. I take notes as I did as a Juror on the capital murder case of Marissa DeVault in the premeditated murder of her husband. Our second of three verdicts reached qualified DeVault for the death penalty. We had fourteen days of Psychological testimony throughout the three phases. My book, “Brain Damage: A Juror’s Tale” (available on Amazon.com) is the story of this recent and similar trial.

The note taker on a Jury, once started, realizes that he or she has to be quick with the pen. They want to make sure that nothing is missed because he or she never knows what is going to become critically important. The note taker learns to write in outlines instead of paragraphs. They find that dates and times are important and they focus on writing exhibit numbers down and what the exhibit refers to. At the time, they don’t realize how important the writing down exhibit numbers is.

The Jury will not get transcripts of the trial in the deliberation room once they are reduced to twelve members. They will, however, have access to all the evidence including that of the previous first and second phases. When the Jury deliberated in the first two phases, the evidence was in the Jury room, at least the pictures and documents. They could always request additional items. The third phase is different because the evidence must be requested by the Jury and requested by Exhibit numbers. 

It is from one of the note takers where the eventual Jury Foreperson will arise.

Throughout the morning, Jennifer Willmott rotated between the showing of Dr. Geffner’s objective timeline and the writings of Arias directly from her hard bound diary. Her writings were careful written and accented by rounded letters. The penmanship was deliberate. It was written with particular care to the styling of the letters and their grace and flow. It was something the Jury would see all day. I think the Defense Team was trying to humanizer her. Days and dates abounded for the note taking Juror even though much of the testimony was tired, worn and redundant.

The Jury was dismissed for lunch and Judge Stevens stayed the Court. We were given a treat that the Jury missed.

Juan Martinez stood up and took a few steps in front of the Prosecution table, facing Dr. Geffner. He wore a gray suit with yellow shirt and a spotted design gold tie. 

“Did you interview Travis Alexander?” Mr. Martinez pointedly asked.

Dr. Geffner nervously laughed. “Well, no,” he said. “I couldn’t do that.”

“Did you speak with Mr. Alexander?” Juan asked as he took a step forward.

“That’s kind of ridiculous,” he answered. “He was already gone.”

Juan Martinez stood his ground as he stared at the Doctor. “Did you use the word ‘Manipulative’ in regards to Travis Alexander?”

The Dr. answered and there was the slightest undertone of nervousness. “No. I don’t remember saying that.”

“Aren’t you labeling his conduct by using the word, ’Manipulative’?” he asked, obviously ignoring the Doctor’s memory loss of testimony he had just given minutes before the Jury was dismissed.

“It could be interpreted that way,” he relented with a shrug of his shoulders.

Willmott stood up in her deep aqua colored business skirt suit. “This is discovery and not a cross-examination!” she said vehemently.

“Go on,” Judge Stevens motioned to Juan. Jennifer Willmott remained standing, waiting to pounce.

Juan Martinez did not look at her. He looked at the Judge before he continued his cross examination. He opened his arms with his palms opened and slightly turned outward, looking at the Doctor. “Is saying a ‘Manipulative’ relationship a diagnosis?”

Dr. Geffner looked toward the Judge and saw no help being offered. He looked back at Juan Martinez as if he understood his semantics mistake. “I was looking at all the information. So, no. It’s a general behavior I may have perceived. It is not a diagnosis.” 

Juan Martinez did not thank him. He turned on his heel and went back to the Prosecution table while Jennifer Willmott glared at him.

Judge Stevens recessed the Court for lunch. It was really an early Christmas gift from the friendly Doctor seeing Juan take a sample of his eventual prey. Dr. Geffner collapsed like a house of playing cards. His confidence seemed weak and his laugh was nervous with an artificial hollowness. It was going to be a bloodbath.

The Defense spent the return from lunch and the rest of the afternoon presenting a line by line repetition of Jodi’s journal entries. The Jury was fed hours of it while it was interchanged with the kind Doctor’s objective timeline. There may have been those who tired of hearing Arias’ words but they worked not to show it in his or her faces.

The Jury heard of trivialities in Arias’ life and the drama she produced. They saw some of the harsh words of Travis and it reminded them that they still did not know what made him so angry with her on May 26, 2008. Certainly, I think the idea was to present her as a victimized angel but something else happened. The date of this Gmail is also the last communication they knew of between Arias and Travis Alexander. 

That was until Jennifer Willmott’s started presenting communications after May 26, 2008. It had my interest and that of the Jury. They still want to know what happened. They will recreate the murder in spite of a decision being reached by another Jury. They need to know themselves because it is natural instinct. It will be an easier path in the Jury room to put it back together. The timeline and her Journals are the closest we get to his death thus far in the retrial phase. Just because the lawyers and the prior verdicts say premeditation existed will not stop them from looking to answer the questions they never got to see in the first phase.

As they sit in the Jury box, they are trying to answer in their minds why the Defendant in the chair, and the words they have heard read aloud, could have done such a horrific act. They become detectives, especially the note takers.

“So, Doctor,” Jennifer Willmott began, “we are reading from her journal of June 1, 2008.”

“Yes,” the Doctor agrees as he reads the projector screen while she reads aloud. It is the same large screen that is in front of the Jury. I notice that Juror # 17 is looking forward toward the screen and I can tell he is writing down quotes just as I am.

“Anyway, after San Diego, I’ll drive to Utah,” Willmott reads from Arias’ journal, written only three days prior to the brutal killing of Travis Alexander. “I’m not sure what we’ll be doing there. It will be nice to get to know Ryan (Burns). I think cuddling is definitely on the list. After some dinner. Maybe after a nap.”

I notice something. It is something about the writing. It was the handwriting. We had seen the bulk of what amounted to two days of seeing her hand written journals. They had always seemed the musings of a teenager of sorts with their care in being written with round and flowing cursive letters. It was something you no longer noticed because you hand seen so much of it.

This journal entry was different. It felt different and its penmanship seemed rushed. There did not seem to be the particular care normally taken in the hand writing. It is speculation and it will be dismissed as speculative that it is different from the rest of her hand writings.

Willmott continued reading Arias’ words, “I mentioned my road trip to Travis. He didn’t sound all that thrilled to me. As far as I know, he knows nothing of Ryan. I asked Zion not to mention it to him so I wouldn’t have to explain anything or hurt him further. It would only be a repeat of our last blowup,” Jodi finishes writing.

“Tell me, what does this mean to you, Doctor?” Willmott asked.

The Doctor rambled on about Jodi moving on in her life but she cannot escape the cycle of abuse. She sees new beginnings while he is exercising control…

I had just finished taking notes of her journal on the screen of June 30, 2008. I stopped writing to ease a cramp in my hand and as I was doing that, my eyes happened to fix on Juror # 17. My Juror acumen from my experience as a Juror kicked in.

He stands about six foot, two inches. He has a shaved head and a long handlebar mustache that runs down the side of his jawline. The mustache is always impeccably trimmed. It takes away from looking at his cleanly shaven head. His shirts are always pressed and he always looks comfortable in his position. He is a note taker but does not work hard at every single detail by writing as furiously as I might. He seems to write when important issues are presented. He flies under the radar but I feel confidence in his walk without being over bearing.

The Doctor was talking but most of the note takers had stopped taking notes. Juror # 17 had his head cradled in his hand. He was looking downward and writing. I could tell he wasn’t listening to the Doctor. He would look up occasionally his look was distant and pensive. It was something I think few would notice unless you have sat in the Jury box.

One can write anything they would like in their Juror- issued folders with legal pads inside. The words in these notebooks are the property of the State and remain in the Jury room for the duration of the trial. Eventually, when the verdict is finally reached, each Juror book is destroyed by the State.

The note taker will sometimes write thoughts that he or she will want to bring up later in the Jury room.

I could tell with his thoughtful looks into space that he was working something out and then writing it on his Juror pad. I saw him flip back a couple pages and then return to writing.

It took one journal entry by Jodi Arias to render the prior two days of testimony as useless. He was putting pieces together. He was looking at dates. I was doing the same thing. It was beginning to dawn on him that the journal entry from June 1, 2008 was manufactured for people who might look at it the future and the future was here.

The letter was staged. There was no trip to San Diego planned. It was a lie. The Journal had impeached itself in the craftily placed words of Arias. The entirety of the journal would be dismissed in deliberations.

The Defense Team wanted to humanize Jodi Arias in the presentation of her journals but instead revealed a killer of the utmost evil.

This is the mitigation and aggravation phase. The Doctor spent four days on the stand and the bulk of this past two days fell into the Prosecution’s hands as the Journal entry gave rise to premeditation instead of mitigation. The Jury will have a Dry Erase board to work with when they get back to the deliberation room at some point. They will draw a line down the center making two columns with one for aggravation and one for mitigation.

Premeditation will go into the aggravation column among many other factors the Jury will see at the start of the New Year. They will see the Cross Examination of Dr. Geffner. They will eventually see Dr. DeMarte when Juan Martinez presents his side of the case.

We may or may not see Jodi Arias on the witness stand but we will eventually see her make her “Statement of Allocution”, as is her right, to the Jury.

We will not see her take ownership of this brutal murder nor will we not see the remorse she needs to show if she wants to stay out of the death chamber.

We close out the year in the Jodi Arias Retrial with hope and not just because of my speculative musings on what a Juror is thinking. It, however, is becoming clearer by the day that there are no mitigation factors.

This Jury will find Justice for Travis Alexander and his family. But, first, Juan Martinez will present the sword as Lady Justice watches…

I wish the family the most blessed of a Christmas Holiday and hope the New Year finally brings them some resolution and the Justice they so richly deserve… 

I wish all of you, my Dear Readers, a rich and warm Holiday Season with great Hope and personal growth in 2015. I am humbled by the great amount of support as we collectively search for Justice for Travis…

“Every good relationship that develops as a result of this Trial is the manifestation of the Spirit of Travis Alexander.”

Justice 4 Travis Alexander…

Justice for Dale…

Paul A. Sanders, Jr.
The 13th Juror @The13thJurorMD (Twitter)

Ex-Jodi Arias lawyer: I didn't delete porn files

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/11/14/jodi-arias-trial-lawyer-porn-files/19033947/