• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Do you think Jodi Arias is guilty or not guilty?

Do you think Jodi Arias is guilty or not guilty?

  • She's guilty and will be convicted

    Votes: 24 100.0%

  • She's guilty, but will not be convicted due the state not proving it

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • She's not guilty and will be acquited

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • She's not guilty, but will be convicted anyway

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Total voters
    24
TurtleDude said:
nah I think its a case where she was a lot more into him than he was to her. She was a piece of tail for him and she thought he loved her. Hell hath no fury like a psychotic woman scorned
Click to expand...

Apparently not. Anyone who would react in such a way is definitely a psycho and had major problems with self esteem to begin with.
 
nota bene said:
Do you think this has damaged her account in the eyes/ears of the jury?
Click to expand...

I do. First and foremost, she has already admitted to killing him. She doesn't deny that she stabbed him and slit his throat, though she doesn't agree on the killing sequence. She says she shot him first accidentally, in self defense. The forensic pathologist (I think it was) disagrees. Definitely what killed him were stab wounds to the chest. Some were so deep they chipped bone. At one point, the prosecutor, in a pretty slick move, showed her a picture of the bathroom sink and mirror which were covered with blood. At the time the prosecutor was asking about the cuts on her hands. She had previously said that she cut them on broken glass in the kitchen a few days before. Later, she said it was on a broken glass where she was working as a bartender. He maintained she cut her hands while she was furiously stabbing Alexander.

He asked if she sought medical treatment for the cuts. She replied no that they weren't that bad. BAM! The he says, looking at the picture of the sink and mirror, that indeed the blood wasn't hers, it was his and it was spurting out of him. Why was he standing there looking at himself with mortal wounds? He wasn't. It leads me to believe that she first stabbed him there and not on the floor as she claims.

It's hard to know what the jury is thinking, but judging from the almost 200 questions they asked (the judge read the questions), they aren't buying self defense.

She claims she was taking pictures of him in the shower at his request. That seems to be true. She was using his new camera. She almost dropped it at one point and, she claims, he called her a "****ing idiot" and said that "even a 5 year old could do a better job". Next, she claims, he jumped out of the shower and said, "****ing kill you, bitch." He then grabbed her. They rolled around on the floor. She got away and rather than run out of the house and get in her car - which was already packed and ready - she ran into the closet, climbed on a shelf, grabbed his gun, which she didn't know how to shoot and shot him, in seconds. The shooting, stabbing, throat slitting, whatever the sequence, lasted about a minute.

Why not run down the stairs and out the door?
 
Risky Thicket said:
I do. First and foremost, she has already admitted to killing him. She doesn't deny that she stabbed him and slit his throat, though she doesn't agree on the killing sequence. She says she shot him first accidentally, in self defense. The forensic pathologist (I think it was) disagrees. Definitely what killed him were stab wounds to the chest. Some were so deep they chipped bone. At one point, the prosecutor, in a pretty slick move, showed her a picture of the bathroom sink and mirror which were covered with blood. At the time the prosecutor was asking about the cuts on her hands. She had previously said that she cut them on broken glass in the kitchen a few days before. Later, she said it was on a broken glass where she was working as a bartender. He maintained she cut her hands while she was furiously stabbing Alexander.

He asked if she sought medical treatment for the cuts. She replied no that they weren't that bad. BAM! The he says, looking at the picture of the sink and mirror, that indeed the blood wasn't hers, it was his and it was spurting out of him. Why was he standing there looking at himself with mortal wounds? He wasn't. It leads me to believe that she first stabbed him there and not on the floor as she claims.

It's hard to know what the jury is thinking, but judging from the almost 200 questions they asked (the judge read the questions), they aren't buying self defense.

She claims she was taking pictures of him in the shower at his request. That seems to be true. She was using his new camera. She almost dropped it at one point and, she claims, he called her a "****ing idiot" and said that "even a 5 year old could do a better job". Next, she claims, he jumped out of the shower and said, "****ing kill you, bitch." He then grabbed her. They rolled around on the floor. She got away and rather than run out of the house and get in her car - which was already packed and ready - she ran into the closet, climbed on a shelf, grabbed his gun, which she didn't know how to shoot and shot him, in seconds. The shooting, stabbing, throat slitting, whatever the sequence, lasted about a minute.

Why not run down the stairs and out the door?
Click to expand...

Sounds like she was in some kind of psychotic rage or something. Geesh! :shock: I don't believe her story at all. Too many holes and contradictions. How did his body get BACK into the shower for one thing? Because I think he was found in the shower, wasn't he?
 
ChrisL said:
How is their sex life relevant to the murder case? Sounds like they just want to sensationalize it or something.
Click to expand...

The salaciousness of it all! Frankly, I've become tired of hearing it in testimony. I'm certain most of the jury is sick of seeing crotch shots, erect penis, sex posing. I don't think it has helped her. Of course we have no idea what the jury is like. Some are obviously conservative. You can tell by some of the questions.

But how do you select a jury knowing that the trial will involve graphic sexual testimony.

"Yes, man. Good afternoon. As you've been told I am going to ask you questions that we ask all prospective jurors. Just answer my questions truthfully and don't try to read anything into the questions. OK?

First question. Have you ever had a Tootsie Roll Pop up the ass?" :lamo
 
Risky Thicket said:
The salaciousness of it all! Frankly, I've become tired of hearing it in testimony. I'm certain most of the jury is sick of seeing crotch shots, erect penis, sex posing. I don't think it has helped her. Of course we have no idea what the jury is like. Some are obviously conservative. You can tell by some of the questions.

But how do you select a jury knowing that the trial will involve graphic sexual testimony.

"Yes, man. Good afternoon. As you've been told I am going to ask you questions that we ask all prospective jurors. Just answer my questions truthfully and don't try to read anything into the questions. OK?

First question. Have you ever had a Tootsie Roll Pop up the ass?" :lamo
Click to expand...

:lamo I wonder how many people would answer THAT question honestly?!
 
ChrisL said:
Sounds like she was in some kind of psychotic rage or something. Geesh! :shock: I don't believe her story at all. Too many holes and contradictions. How did his body get BACK into the shower for one thing? Because I think he was found in the shower, wasn't he?
Click to expand...

She dragged him back to the shower. She admitted that or didn't deny it. I think she said she couldn't remember but admitted that no one else was there to drag him. But the guy was dead weight, literally. She is a petit woman. It took no small effort to drag him.

Why did she drag him back? I missed that part of the testimony. I'll bet she said she doesn't remember.
 
Risky Thicket said:
She dragged him back to the shower. She admitted that or didn't deny it. I think she said she couldn't remember but admitted that no one else was there to drag him. But the guy was dead weight, literally. She is a petit woman. It took no small effort to drag him.

Why did she drag him back? I missed that part of the testimony. I'll bet she said she doesn't remember.
Click to expand...

Why on earth would she do that anyway? What would be the purpose? Good Lord what a nut case!
 
ChrisL said:
Why on earth would she do that anyway? What would be the purpose? Good Lord what a nut case!
Click to expand...

I don't know. I can't figure that one out myself. But she was methodical and the prosecution proved that IMHO. The prosecutor was able to get her to admit that after the murder she took the time to delete pictures of herself, even though it was his new camera and not one she was familiar with. That same person who had the forethought and took the time to delete pictures also dragged him back to the shower. There had to have been a reason.

She didn't just kill him and beat feet to Utah - where she made sure that she had prearranged a date with a guy and where they had passionate kissing and rolled around on each other, but no sex. In other words, there is no chance they guy wasn't going to forget that she was there and what time and yada yada. No, this lady knew what she was going to do and she knew what she wanted to do after she killed him.
 
Risky Thicket said:
I don't know. I can't figure that one out myself. But she was methodical and the prosecution proved that IMHO. The prosecutor was able to get her to admit that after the murder she took the time to delete pictures of herself, even though it was his new camera and not one she was familiar with. That same person who had the forethought and took the time to delete pictures also dragged him back to the shower. There had to have been a reason.

She didn't just kill him and beat feet to Utah - where she made sure that she had prearranged a date with a guy and where they had passionate kissing and rolled around on each other, but no sex. In other words, there is no chance they guy wasn't going to forget that she was there and what time and yada yada. No, this lady knew what she was going to do and she knew what she wanted to do after she killed him.
Click to expand...

She was probably always a psycho and it was only a matter of time before she snapped.

Now - does she say that he physically beat her too? Because I don't see the sexual anecdotes equaling abuse if the acts were consensual.
 
ChrisL said:
She was probably always a psycho and it was only a matter of time before she snapped.

Now - does she say that he physically beat her too? Because I don't see the sexual anecdotes equaling abuse if the acts were consensual.
Click to expand...

She claims that he hit her on the neck once. He backhanded her while he was driving and she dodged the shot to her face and he hit her neck - she says. Also, she claims that he choked her once to the point she passed out. I think there were one or two other similar or less instances and claims of verbal abuse.

She kept a daily journal that no one read but her. It was rather mundane as might be expected. Daily journals probably aren't that interesting except for the person who writes them. She does mention sex and Travis this and Travis that. She mentioned petty things, good things and bad things. She never mentioned Alexander choking her to the point that she passed out, though she does have journal entries that day. Her testimony that he choked her was not corroborated in her journal or in any other manner. She didn't tell anyone. She didn't seek medical treatment. She didn't take a picture of the bruise marks. No one remembers seeing any bruises. She didn't tell him to kiss sweet feck all, adios mother****er. She didn't call the police. She didn't text him later and say "I'm getting a peace bond on your violent ass." Nothing. I think the next day she gave him a bj on the front porch.
 
Risky Thicket said:
She claims that he hit her on the neck once. He backhanded her while he was driving and she dodged the shot to her face and he hit her neck - she says. Also, she claims that he choked her once to the point she passed out. I think there were one or two other similar or less instances and claims of verbal abuse.

She kept a daily journal that no one read but her. It was rather mundane as might be expected. Daily journals probably aren't that interesting except for the person who writes them. She does mention sex and Travis this and Travis that. She mentioned petty things, good things and bad things. She never mentioned Alexander choking her to the point that she passed out, though she does have journal entries that day. Her testimony that he choked her was not corroborated in her journal or in any other manner. She didn't tell anyone. She didn't seek medical treatment. She didn't take a picture of the bruise marks. No one remembers seeing any bruises. She didn't tell him to kiss sweet feck all, adios mother****er. She didn't call the police. She didn't text him later and say "I'm getting a peace bond on your violent ass." Nothing. I think the next day she gave him a bj on the front porch.
Click to expand...

Sounds kind of sketchy to me. I don't believe that she was abused, and even if she was she could have always left. She was obviously not a prisoner of his.
 
Cardinal said:
I haven't been following this. What was her reason for stabbing him eighteen hundred times?
Click to expand...

The blood evidence says he was shot in the face last because he did not bleed out of that wound.

Jodi says she shot him first and does not remember a thing about stabbing him. They had taken pictures (some naked) and she took pictures of Travis in the shower minutes before he was killed (according to the clock in the camera). She also took a picture of him dead in the shower stall. Another was taken accidently of her dragging his body back to the bathroom. She deleted the pictures and put the camera in the washing machine. The investigators recovered all the pictures.

You honestly could not make this up it is so bizarre.
 
66gardeners said:
The blood evidence says he was shot in the face last because he did not bleed out of that wound.

Jodi says she shot him first and does not remember a thing about stabbing him. They had taken pictures (some naked) and she took pictures of Travis in the shower minutes before he was killed (according to the clock in the camera). She also took a picture of him dead in the shower stall. Another was taken accidently of her dragging his body back to the bathroom. She deleted the pictures and put the camera in the washing machine. The investigators recovered all the pictures.

You honestly could not make this up it is so bizarre.
Click to expand...

She was smart enough to take the murder weapons and the rope with her and destroy them/hide them. I wonder why she didn't take the camera with her and then burn it in a furnace or bury it in the desert somewhere. I guess she didn't realize a washing machine would not be sufficient to destroy its images.
 
ChrisL said:
Sounds kind of sketchy to me. I don't believe that she was abused, and even if she was she could have always left. She was obviously not a prisoner of his.
Click to expand...
They had broken up almost a year before this happened. Travis had begun a new relationship with someone and he was suppose dto go to Cancun with her in a few days. Jodi called Travis a few times before she went to his house, and it appeared he kept hanging up on her because the calls only lasted seconds. She arrived at his house at 4 AM. She sent him texts after she killed him, saying she was planning on visiting him soon so that shewould have an alibi. She told the guy in Utah she would be there the morning she killed Travis, and then called him after she left the crime seen and told the other guy she got lost and was still on her way. She bought gas in cans so she would have no record of being in Arizona.
 
66gardeners said:
They had broken up almost a year before this happened. Travis had begun a new relationship with someone and he was suppose dto go to Cancun with her in a few days. Jodi called Travis a few times before she went to his house, and it appeared he kept hanging up on her because the calls only lasted seconds. She arrived at his house at 4 AM. She sent him texts after she killed him, saying she was planning on visiting him soon so that shewould have an alibi. She told the guy in Utah she would be there the morning she killed Travis, and then called him after she left the crime seen and told the other guy she got lost and was still on her way. She bought gas in cans so she would have no record of being in Arizona.
Click to expand...

Obviously her plans were not as good or as well thought-out as she assumed. I can't see her getting away with this. It seems like everything she has claimed is coming back on her.
 
Luna Tick said:
She was smart enough to take the murder weapons and the rope with her and destroy them/hide them. I wonder why she didn't take the camera with her and then burn it in a furnace or bury it in the desert somewhere. I guess she didn't realize a washing machine would not be sufficient to destroy its images.
Click to expand...


That was stupid. Why would the absence of the camera even be suspicious to investigators. Those pictures are unbelievable. Her goose is cooked, we hope.

She had also previously slit his tires twice and tires on the car of his new girlfriend. Travis had tried to get her out of his life, but she kept coming back to suck his dick and he was weak. He also would not have vaginal sex with her for a long time because he wanted to save himself for marriage as he was a Mormon. Apparently they think only vaginal sex is having sex.
 
Last edited:
ChrisL said:
Obviously her plans were not as good or as well thought-out as she assumed. I can't see her getting away with this. It seems like everything she has claimed is coming back on her.
Click to expand...

The one thing she didn't plan for - Murphy ALWAYS shows up.
 
66gardeners said:
That was stupid. Why would the absence of the camera even be suspicious to investigators. Those pictures are unbelievable. Her goose is cooked, we hope.

She had also previously slit his tires twice and tires on the car of his new girlfriend. Travis had tried to get her out of his life, but she kept coming back to suck his dick and he was weak. He also would not have vaginal sex with her for a long time because he wanted to save himself for marriage as he was a Mormon. Apparently they think only vaginal sex is having sex.
Click to expand...

Yes, I've heard of people who think if you only have anal sex and/or oral sex, you're still a virgin. I find that line of reasoning bizarre.

This goes to show you that it's really hard to get away with murder. She thought she could and obviously took a lot of preparations to avoid letting her presence be known there, all of which is backfiring on her because it shows premeditation. The Unabomber was one of the most intelligent murderers ever, but even he eventually got caught.
 
ChrisL said:
:lamo I wonder how many people would answer THAT question honestly?!
Click to expand...

I once interviewed for a job with the federal marshals program, and the examiner apologized before I was asked a series of questions. Have you ever had other than a traffic citation, smoked weed, etc. And then, "Have you ever had sex with an animal?"

When I recovered myself, I said, "No, and why would I tell you if I had?!!!!"

"Oh," the examiner said, "You'd be surprised by how many people answer 'yes.'"
 
nota bene said:
I once interviewed for a job with the federal marshals program, and the examiner apologized before I was asked a series of questions. Have you ever had other than a traffic citation, smoked weed, etc. And then, "Have you ever had sex with an animal?"

When I recovered myself, I said, "No, and why would I tell you if I had?!!!!"

"Oh," the examiner said, "You'd be surprised by how many people answer 'yes.'"
Click to expand...

Lol! Who would think that would be an important question? :lol: Crazy.
 
ChrisL said:
:lamo I wonder how many people would answer THAT question honestly?!
Click to expand...

it depends if they want to stay on the jury or not

I have helped pick juries for 6-8 week trials. believe me some people will lie their asses off to get out of serving and others will do the same to stay on a jury
 
TurtleDude said:
it depends if they want to stay on the jury or not

I have helped pick juries for 6-8 week trials. believe me some people will lie their asses off to get out of serving and others will do the same to stay on a jury
Click to expand...

Must have met some interesting people! :mrgreen:
 
TurtleDude said:
it depends if they want to stay on the jury or not

I have helped pick juries for 6-8 week trials. believe me some people will lie their asses off to get out of serving and others will do the same to stay on a jury
Click to expand...

Does the John Grisham thing work? "I already know he did it, your honor. Totally guilty."
 
Cardinal said:
Does the John Grisham thing work? "I already know he did it, your honor. Totally guilty."
Click to expand...

I have seen that in this form

Well your honor I assume if the grand jury indicted Mr. Defendant he must be guilty

or I believe the cops your honor-they wouldn't arrest the defendant if he wasn't guilty
 
ChrisL said:
Must have met some interesting people! :mrgreen:
Click to expand...

one guy kept raising his hand to every question the AUSA and then the Defense attorney asked

after about 15 times the judge looked at the guy and said

Do you get the feeling you probably won't be on the jury?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom