Sunday, December 21, 2014

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

The Jodi Arias Death Penalty Retrial (Sentencing): Day 13 - "A Juror's Perspective".
The Courtroom is seated as soon as the Jury sits down. It is quiet. I look to my left and see only eight or nine reporters present. Normally, the media seating is very full. I took that as a bad sign after seeing Dr. Fonseca walk past me. It was a sign that she would be on the stand most of the day. There was no camera on the left side, it's telephoto lens normally jutting outward.
Juan Martinez was dressed in a dark gray suit with a light blue shirt complimented with a gray patterned tie. His hair was perfect. He looked focused. Expectations were high after his pursuit of Dr. Fonseca at the close of Day 12. 
He walked over to his table and looked at his legal pad, waiting a moment for Dr. Fonseca to get settled. She always looked over to the Jury as if they were good friends. She nodded her head at them and straightened her clothes. She looked ready to tackle this Prosecutor named Mr. Martinez.
Juan walks in short steps back and forth as he questions her. He does not look at the Jury but does face toward them at times. He paces four feet forward and then four feet back. Sometimes, his hands are in his pockets, his suit coat folds resting over his wrists. He looks to the ground a lot. Other times, he crosses his arms across his chest as he asks questions. Sometimes, while he is waiting for an answer, he rests his chin in the crook of his hand. His brow is slightly furled in intensity.
He speaks clearly and succinctly. His questioning is pointed and directional. He does not show empathy for anyone he questions. Even his own witnesses are not spared empathy. He is sharp and quick witted. His questions are a foundation to a piercing question. He knows the answers to the questions he asks. He is direct. He goes after the truth. He always gets the answer he expects. He never goes down a dark hallway into unknown territory and always goes up a lighted stairwell toward the sunlight of information. 
He is like watching a great tennis player as he serves the ball.
He imperceptibly takes a breath, looks at his target and swings with his eyes in the distance at where the ball will land. The snap of the ball on the racket is much like when he fires a question. It is crisp, clean and directional.
Dr. Fonseca reminded me of someone on the stand today and I couldn't put my finger on who it was.
"You were able to review all the documents in this case?" Juan Martinez asks her.
"I reviewed voluminous amounts of information," she answers. "I saw video tapes, read documents and studied...."
Juan cut her off. "You went on the internet? Am I correct?"
"Well," she said looking at the Jury instead of him. "In my line of work, you have to consider a lot of information. Now what I found..."
"Yes or no!" Juan barked.
"Well, yes," she answered.
"You reviewed some photographs?"
"Yes."
"You also reviewed testimony of witnesses who have testified?"
"Objection," Kirk Nurmi interrupts.
It was the first of many sidebars all day long. Juan would ask a question. There would be a sidebar and the cycle would continue through almost all the ensuing questions. 
"Do you remember when you last testified in Court?" Juan Martinez asks her.
"I really can't respond to that, Mr. Martinez," she answers. She lets the "r" in Martinez roll from her tongue as if to emphasize a Latin influence,a showing respect. She always rolls the "r" to the point where it almost sounds condescending.
She continues while looking at the Jury. "I find that it would be a mis-characterization of what I might say or have said. It is...."
"So, you don't remember when you last testified," Juan remarks as he goes to the Prosecution table and pulls out a document. "Let's listen to what you said."
"Objection!" Nurmi says. 
Back to the sidebar, sometimes called a bench conference. White noise plays over our heads so that we can't hear what is being discussed.
"You did see an interview with the Defendant, did you not?" Juan continues after the break.
Dr. Fonseca curls her brow in thought. The Court waits while she thinks about it. "I think I might have seen two interviews from 2009...."
"You seem to be having problems with your memory," Juan points out.
"Your questions are unclear, Mr. Martinez." She rolls the "r" again.
"I can't be expected to remember everything," she answers. "There were thirty one boxes of evidence. I believe I went through thirty of the boxes. There were the interviews and, at least, twenty to thirty CD's. It's difficult for anyone to remember exact dates. I can give months or dates, more or less, but I can't be accountable to every date and time,"
Juan would let her do that at times. She would ramble on and on about things that had nothing to do with the question. I think he did this to show that if he didn't force an answer, she would ramble on forever. I felt that it drove him crazy to listen to her misdirection and mumblings.
"Would it be important to know when their relationship started? The relationship between the defendant and Travis Alexander?"
"Can you repeat the question, Mr. Martinez?
Juan moved on. "Do you think dates on documents are important?" he asks her.
""Well, Mr. Martinez, that misrepresents my response. You have to understand that the documents were voluminous," she responds looking toward the Jury.
"Are you saying you can't remember if a document is at the beginning or end of month?"
"No, I really can't."
Juan looks at her and crosses his arms on his chest. He has stopped pacing. "Didn't you testify to dates and times on documents?"
Dr. Fonseca goes into a litany of nothingness. They are thoughts spoken aloud that have no end. The Jury looks at her but no one is taking notes. Even the second Juror down is not taking notes and she always can be seen buried in her legal pad, pen scribbling.
"Your research experience is mostly of Juveniles, is it not?" Juan asks.
"No, Mr. Martinez. It is of all ages. The kernel of my research has a substantive base of juveniles but I research all aspects of sexual deviancy and its relevancy in certain situations. There are times when one must take this knowledge and work toward an identifiable goal..."
Juan paces back and forth while she says nothing.
Judge Stevens looks on in rapt interest.
I am in my seat taking notes but there are no notes to be taken on what she says because it is not only subjective, it has no substance. They are meaningless words and answers to questions never asked. I am getting frustrated and I can bet the Jury is doing all they can do not to show an expression.
"You created a risk assessment tool, did you not? You created MEGA?" Juan asks.
"Um, I don't want to go down slime highway," she answers as if Juan had asked some horrific and sleazy question.
Juan shows no emotion despite the answer she gave. He is going in a direction. "Isn't MEGA an acronym for a very long term?"
"It's complicated," she answers. "It stands for Multiplex Empirically Guided Assessment. I just stick with the term MEGA because I find that people can understand it and I don't need to write it all the time because there is a kernel of reasoning that supports using other terminology."
Juan has a look in his eye as if he is wondering when she will complete her thought and hoping it will be sometime before lunch. "Your assessment involves juveniles from the age of 4 - 19?"
"Yes," she answers.
"But Arias and Travis were not of that age, were they? Isn't that assessment your specialty?"
"I wouldn't use that tool," the Doctor answers smartly.
For awhile, we went down "slime alley". 
There were pictures of Travis on the screen at one point. Juan asked her how she knew the said pictures were actually of Travis' anatomy. She didn't have a response worth taking note.
At another point, we read the texts between Travis and Arias pointing to the one where Jodi wanted to be a little girl for him. We got to listen to Arias reach orgasm on a tape. We read more dirty emails.
Dr. Fonseca at one point said that people might find these things as distasteful but collectively, it would not mean the same thing.
I scratched my head while writing it down. 
"You are here to give your professional Psychological opinion, is that correct?" Juan asked.
"Well, I'm not licensed to do that in this state," she answers carefully. "I have limitations to what I can..."
"But didn't you give an opinion on what you thought was going on between Arias and Travis?" he asks.
"I've answered the question," she says.
"So you are not going to answer?"
Sidebar. Dirty Jodi Arias text message. Sidebar. Dirty picture on the screen. Sidebar. Another question. Sidebar. Banter. Rambling. Sidebar.
Still, Dr. Fonseca has managed to say nothing the length of the day. She was like a caged animal going in circles while Juan Martinez toyed with her. He would poke at the cage and she would go in another circle in her cage. 
Juan attacked and she deflected. 
Every time she said "Martinez" with the roll of the "r", it got on my nerves.
I watched the Jury the whole day and by early afternoon, no one was taking any notes.
Juan's questions destroyed her credibility. Her fact finding didn't exist. Her memory was wishy-washy. She would show anger and contempt by responding with such statements as "I couldn't be expected to know everything."
It was interesting that she could remember all the details of the Mormon Church when she had been a witness with Kirk Nurmi only days before. It was odd that she thought nothing of sequencing and the importance of dates such as the fact that behavior of Travis came out long after he had been murdered. It was bizarre that suddenly nothing had anything to do with the dynamic of their relationship.
Dr. Fonseca was combative and hostile throughout the day. She had memory problems. She couldn't understand what Juan Martinez was driving at. She looked at the Jury as if to receive empathy for her position but only saw stoic faces in return.
Juan Martinez continued his tirade the whole of the day. He never let up. He never showed sympathy and he never apologized. He attacked like a shark coming out of water.
Her opinions laid on the floor bleeding and squirming.
The Jury saw all of this. I know they tired of it deep in the afternoon as I saw Juror's rubbing their eyes. Another Juror straightened a crook in his neck. One reached over and got a glass of water from in front of her. Others had their heads facing the witness but their stares were blank. I saw a couple them take sneaky looks toward the clock that is behind us.
There is one thing in Arizona that is different from many states. The Jury is allowed to ask questions via a Juror questionnaire form. They complete the form and it is passed to the empty black mesh basket that is available for them.
I was recently on the DeVault Hammer Killing murder case as a Juror for the first half of this year. We used that box almost everyday. Some questions were asked by the Court, others were disregarded. We filled the box when certain Psychologists were on the stand.
It is a bad sign for the defense that the Jury has not asked Dr. Fonseca one question. 
The box lays empty everyday at the end of her testimony because they have already made up their mind about this witness. She virtually impeached herself with every nonsensical answer that she bantered at Juan Martinez.
We wrapped up for the day as Dr. Fonseca sat reading a document for fifteen minutes in open court. She read it to herself and we all watched and waited. Scant coughs could be heard about the courtroom. It was almost comforting because nobody wanted to hear any more from her.
Judge Stevens looked at her and waited.
At 4:30, Judge Stevens called it a day. 
On the way home, I was trying to think of who Dr. Fonseca reminded me of...
Of course, I thought, she reminded me of when Jodi Arias got on the stand to defend herself in the first trial...
In either case, not one bit of their testimony helped the defense.
At all.
Justice 4 Travis Alexander
Justice for Dale.
Feel free to share, like and comment!
Paul A. Sanders, Jr.
The 13th Juror MD @The13thJurorMD (Twitter)

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