UnderGround Forums
 

OtherGround Forums >> Jodi Arias Trial


4/9/13 10:41 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Rhymenoceros
292 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 14796
I'm getting caught up.

This dolt thinks Martinez is arguing that she shouldn't have apologized, and she is arguing that the apology was totally the best thing she should have done.

Martinez is using the apology as evidence that she was on Jodi's side from the jump, and therefore not objective. She is arguing right into his trap.
4/9/13 10:43 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
angryinch
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 3/14/04
Posts: 98671
Rhymenoceros - I'm getting caught up.

This dolt thinks Martinez is arguing that she shouldn't have apologized, and she is arguing that the apology was totally the best thing she should have done.

Martinez is using the apology as evidence that she was on Jodi's side from the jump, and therefore not objective. She is arguing right into his trap.

lmao

Martinez is like Wile E Coyote and she's like the roadrunner.  He's not smart enough to set any kind of trap for her.

You have to take into account the context of the apology.  She has explained it several times but he's trying to turn it into something it's not. 

4/9/13 10:46 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Rhymenoceros
292 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 14797
Wait, Jodi said she was as smart as Einstein? ahahahaaha.
4/9/13 10:55 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
disbeliever
395 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 9/27/03
Posts: 22243
Mixed Martial Arts LLC, Moderator
angryinch - 
Rhymenoceros - I'm getting caught up.

This dolt thinks Martinez is arguing that she shouldn't have apologized, and she is arguing that the apology was totally the best thing she should have done.

Martinez is using the apology as evidence that she was on Jodi's side from the jump, and therefore not objective. She is arguing right into his trap.

lmao

Martinez is like Wile E Coyote and she's like the roadrunner.  He's not smart enough to set any kind of trap for her.

You have to take into account the context of the apology.  She has explained it several times but he's trying to turn it into something it's not. 


What trial are you watching?
4/9/13 11:00 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
angryinch
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 3/14/04
Posts: 98672
disbeliever - 
angryinch - 
Rhymenoceros - I'm getting caught up.

This dolt thinks Martinez is arguing that she shouldn't have apologized, and she is arguing that the apology was totally the best thing she should have done.

Martinez is using the apology as evidence that she was on Jodi's side from the jump, and therefore not objective. She is arguing right into his trap.

lmao

Martinez is like Wile E Coyote and she's like the roadrunner.  He's not smart enough to set any kind of trap for her.

You have to take into account the context of the apology.  She has explained it several times but he's trying to turn it into something it's not. 


What trial are you watching?

Same one you're watching.  Except I'm watching it objectively.  I realize that Jodi being guilty and Martinez being an asshat are not mutually exclusive. 

4/9/13 11:02 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Zwingli
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 5/8/08
Posts: 932
Rhymenoceros - Dude, she wouldn't even admit that she didn't give the keynote address at that conference.

She tried to claim she was the keynote speaker of a breakout session. Bitch - there is no such thing. By definition, the keynote speaker addresses the plenary, not the breakouts. It's obvious her friend let her put "keynote" as a way to bolster her CV. She could have just said, "No, that piece of paper does not say I was the keynote speaker." Instead she tried to split hairs and it made her look bad.

Now Martinez is going to demonstrate that the context upon which she makes these diagnoses is interpreted solely by her, and that there is no factual basis behind it.

Your last sentence deals with one of Juan's problems here.He basically attacks the entire field of psychology,trying to discredit the witness.He did the same thing with Samuels.

It's going to leave him looking like a moron to the jurors when he calls his own "expert"with a whopping 3 years of experience.
4/9/13 11:04 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
disbeliever
395 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 9/27/03
Posts: 22244
Mixed Martial Arts LLC, Moderator
angryinch - 
disbeliever - 
angryinch - 
Rhymenoceros - I'm getting caught up.

This dolt thinks Martinez is arguing that she shouldn't have apologized, and she is arguing that the apology was totally the best thing she should have done.

Martinez is using the apology as evidence that she was on Jodi's side from the jump, and therefore not objective. She is arguing right into his trap.

lmao

Martinez is like Wile E Coyote and she's like the roadrunner.  He's not smart enough to set any kind of trap for her.

You have to take into account the context of the apology.  She has explained it several times but he's trying to turn it into something it's not. 


What trial are you watching?

Same one you're watching.  Except I'm watching it objectively.  I realize that Jodi being guilty and Martinez being an asshat are not mutually exclusive. 


You're being "objective"?
4/9/13 11:08 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
angryinch
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 3/14/04
Posts: 98673
disbeliever - 
angryinch - 
disbeliever - 
angryinch - 
Rhymenoceros - I'm getting caught up.

This dolt thinks Martinez is arguing that she shouldn't have apologized, and she is arguing that the apology was totally the best thing she should have done.

Martinez is using the apology as evidence that she was on Jodi's side from the jump, and therefore not objective. She is arguing right into his trap.

lmao

Martinez is like Wile E Coyote and she's like the roadrunner.  He's not smart enough to set any kind of trap for her.

You have to take into account the context of the apology.  She has explained it several times but he's trying to turn it into something it's not. 


What trial are you watching?

Same one you're watching.  Except I'm watching it objectively.  I realize that Jodi being guilty and Martinez being an asshat are not mutually exclusive. 


You're being "objective"?

Absolutely.  I've already said that I think Arias is most likely guilty as hell and killed him as she has been charged with.  That doesn't prevent me from being able to see that Martinez is a blithering dickhead who is more interested in playing word games and splitting hairs over minutiae than he is about presenting a fact based case.   He'd rather pick fights with witnesses instead of getting accurate info from them.  

As I have said before, and many of the "professional" commentators agree with, if she gets convicted it will be despite him, not because of him.  

4/9/13 11:09 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
angryinch
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 3/14/04
Posts: 98674
verdum - you always go too far AI, i think martinez is royally fucking this thing up too, he has good points mostly but the way he goes about it is just convoluted and gets inane.

but you saying that this woman is some genius running circles around him just makes you look foolish.

and that is probably why you get the vote downs that you seem so concerned about.

She's simply not playing his game and not letting him mischaracterize her testimony by asking yes or no questions that if answered that way would lead to mischaracterizations of what she actually said.  

4/9/13 11:19 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
angryinch
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 3/14/04
Posts: 98675
verdum - i think it will be a miracle at this point if they can come to a verdict, i have very little faith that there is not at least one knucklehead on that jury that doesnt like martinez and will mention that after the trial as being an important factor in not being able to convict.

listening to juries talk about how they came to their verdicts is some frightening shit at times lol

Just listening to some of the questions the jury was asking earlier was frightening.  There are some genuine clinical retards on that jury. 

4/9/13 11:54 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
thembones
62 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 10/27/06
Posts: 1179
Martinez could be doing a better job for sure, but anyone who thinks that she's doing a good job defending her "analysis" is as biased as she is. He's absolutely crushing her.

She's just so unwilling to admit that anything should ever be interpreted in favor of the man, which is how she came to her lopsided analysis in the first place. Every time she goes "Mr. Martinez, I don't know what you want me to say", she's really saying, "I know exactly what the logical conclusion is here, but it doesn't support Team Jodi so I ain't gonna say it."

I mean, she literally said:
"The only person I see who has a history of lying is Mr. Alexander"


4/9/13 1:02 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
angryinch
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 3/14/04
Posts: 98676

Someone's already whining today and they haven't even started yet.  Are they going to call it off today?

4/9/13 1:03 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
angryinch
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 3/14/04
Posts: 98677

ah, here they go. 

4/9/13 1:09 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Zwingli
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 5/8/08
Posts: 934
She knows jodi is guilty and juan's almost getting her to admit it.
4/9/13 1:11 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
angryinch
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 3/14/04
Posts: 98678
Zwingli - She knows jodi is guilty and juan's almost getting her to admit it.

Well of course.  There's no question she killed him.  But again he's back to trying to twist her testimony by asking her to answer yes or no to questions that if answered in that manner would not accurately represent what she's testifying about.  

4/9/13 1:16 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Zwingli
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 5/8/08
Posts: 935
angryinch - 
Zwingli - She knows jodi is guilty and juan's almost getting her to admit it.

Well of course.  There's no question she killed him.  But again he's back to trying to twist her testimony by asking her to answer yes or no to questions that if answered in that manner would not accurately represent what she's testifying about.  


guilty of premeditation, and it would be pretty bad for the defense if juan can get that out of her.
4/9/13 1:17 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Rhymenoceros
292 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 14800
Ok, I'm changing my tune a bit. He asks her specific questions, she answers with vague generalities that have nothing to do with the case. Unless the judge finds her in contempt, which is possible (because every objection from Martinez is sustained), I have to say she's beating his line of questioning.
4/9/13 1:19 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Zwingli
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 5/8/08
Posts: 936
being an obtuse bitch again.
4/9/13 1:20 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Combat Sport Fan
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 4/28/05
Posts: 14959
angryinch - 
verdum - you always go too far AI, i think martinez is royally fucking this thing up too, he has good points mostly but the way he goes about it is just convoluted and gets inane.

but you saying that this woman is some genius running circles around him just makes you look foolish.

and that is probably why you get the vote downs that you seem so concerned about.

She's simply not playing his game and not letting him mischaracterize her testimony by asking yes or no questions that if answered that way would lead to mischaracterizations of what she actually said.  


Why do you take offense to this? and not when the Defense does the same exact thing. Its called framing. You frame a question to get a certain answer, you dont want their full statement. Why the hell would you want that...this isnt fact finding this is cross examination its all about destroying the witness. You really question the profession, any prosecutor would be doing this.
4/9/13 1:22 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
angryinch
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 3/14/04
Posts: 98680
Rhymenoceros - Ok, I'm changing my tune a bit. He asks her specific questions, she answers with vague generalities that have nothing to do with the case. Unless the judge finds her in contempt, which is possible (because every objection from Martinez is sustained), I have to say she's beating his line of questioning.

Told ya.   And she's not going to be held in contempt for not answering martinez's questions with the answers he would like her to give.  

But again, his "specific" questions are designed to mischaracterize her testimony.  

Hell, now he's making shit up and claiming she said something she didn't.  He's desperately trying to mischaracterize what she's saying. 

4/9/13 1:23 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
angryinch
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 3/14/04
Posts: 98681
Combat Sport Fan - 
angryinch - 
verdum - you always go too far AI, i think martinez is royally fucking this thing up too, he has good points mostly but the way he goes about it is just convoluted and gets inane.

but you saying that this woman is some genius running circles around him just makes you look foolish.

and that is probably why you get the vote downs that you seem so concerned about.

She's simply not playing his game and not letting him mischaracterize her testimony by asking yes or no questions that if answered that way would lead to mischaracterizations of what she actually said.  


Why do you take offense to this? and not when the Defense does the same exact thing. Its called framing. You frame a question to get a certain answer, you dont want their full statement. Why the hell would you want that...this isnt fact finding this is cross examination its all about destroying the witness. You really question the profession, any prosecutor would be doing this.

Sure, that's fine.  Has nothing to do with what I'm saying which is that she's not having any of it and is handing him his ass on a platter and making him look like a jackass, at least for now. 

4/9/13 1:25 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Zwingli
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 5/8/08
Posts: 937
does this line of questioning imply jodis dad will be put on the stand?
4/9/13 1:27 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Ruthless Rye
2 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 6/18/12
Posts: 790
Once again, Juan Martinez is going to own this witness.
4/9/13 1:28 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
angryinch
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 3/14/04
Posts: 98682
Ruthless Rye - Once again, Juan Martinez is going to own this witness.

When it happens, I'll let you know.  So far it hasn't happened. 

4/9/13 1:28 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
angryinch
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 3/14/04
Posts: 98683
Zwingli - does this line of questioning imply jodis dad will be put on the stand?

That would be something. 


Reply Post

You must log in to post a reply. Click here to login.