The Stabby Arias Penalty Phase Re-Trial – The Superbowl Stopped the Wheels of Justice From Turning

January 30, 2015

The Superbowl. I’m totally serious – Arizona

Hai Everybody. Sorry I’m tardy. So, as you can see by the title, there was no court today because of the Superbowl. At least that is what Not a Judge Stephens told everybody. Court will resume on Monday.

Court started late yesterday. (really? said nobody anywhere.) Deanna Reid retook the stand. Jenny From the Cell Block obviously hit the bong extra hard before court started because she was much more mellow than her claws out cat fight self from the day prior. She took a shot a Deanna about refusing to answer questions the day before. It was pretty clear that Deanna did not trust the defense’s transcripts of the interview and Jenny was trying hard to undo that. You didn’t want to answer questions because you wanted the audio right? Once again Jenny was trying and failing spectacularly to emulate the mighty pitbull who sat quietly munching goodboy treats with a slight smirk on his face. You could tell by his submissive calm state that he had absolutely no worries about what might or might not come out of Deanna’s mouth. Do you hear your own voice on this tape? Jenny asked as she played an audio clip Yes Deanna answered in a much less hostile tone than the day before. It was pretty obvious that Juan had spoken to her about the amount of venom that had come out of her previously. On the tape someone asked Would it surprise you to know that Travis Alexander was having sex with women other than Stabby? Deanna answered on the tape “well, I don’t know.” The tape continued. “If you were asked, is it more disappointing that he was having sex with other women or are you more surprised?” On tape Deanna stated very matter of factly that nothing surprised her anymore, she was just disappointed that Travis hadn’t told her. She had thought they were closer than that.

Jenny shut off the player. You could tell she was starting to lose her buzz. She stomped back to the table that held her legal pad and looked at it briefly to check and see what time she was supposed to hook up with her dealer. She then looked back at Deanna. Miss Reid, you have been having sexual relations years before 2011, haven’t you? Yes Deanna answered. She still seemed fairly comfortable and non combative. Jenny continued. You didn’t know that there were multiple girls that Travis was having sex with aside from Stabby right? I was not aware of that Deanna answered and her back went up a little bit. The next question that Jenny asked had me wanting to punch her in the head. You were not married to Travis were you? I am positive that was said more to hurt Deanna than for any other reason. Deanna held her ground like a star. I was not she answered. Still politely. You were having sex with him though right? Deanna answered. For a time, and the tension slowly started to creep back into the room. The other idiots of the apocalypse watched in rapt attention as Jenny went in for what she thought would be the question that impeached Deanna Reid. You never admitted that did you she snarled at the witness. Deanna still had complete control of her composure and calmly replied that she had never been asked. Jenny changed gears. Does the Mormon religion prohibit sex before marriage. Deanna said it did. Next she asked if the law of chastity regarded that. Yes she replied. If the Bishop knew about it you could lose your temple recommend right? Deanna answered carefully. You could she said, but it is the Bishop’s discretion reagarding those matters and I’m not a Bishop. Jenny didn’t seem to like that response as it stopped her dead for a moment. The pitbull was at the prosecution table playing with his chewtoy.

Jenny next asked a ton of questions about the LDS church that have been asked about a bajillion times before. She went into Deanna and Travis’ relationship while she was on her mission in Costa Rica. Deanna’s mission began in June of 2000. Her 18 month no going home can only communicate by snail mail mission. Bye Bye Affidavit. We once again got to go over the fact that she and Travis stayed in touch via snail mail and that they had spoken of marriage through them. Jenny knew she was losing, badly and it obviously pissed her off since the next series of questions were very obviously for no other reason than to hurt Deanna Reid. They served no legal purpose, they offered no help to Stabbykins for mitigation in fact they hurt her, so that is the only motive left.

So you exchanged letters long distance. Did Travis speak often of marriage through them? Yes Deanna answered still rocking the calm she had come into court with. And he told you how much he loved you? Many times. Was there talk of your coming home in November? Jenny was poking Deanna with a stick now and it was noticeable. Yes. You were going to get married right? Yes, Deanna answered. You got a letter from Travis before coming home. This was a statement, not a question. I don’t understand that about American courts, Lawyers aren’t allowed to do that here. In August or September you read the letter and found out he was dating someone else right? Deanna answered in the affirmative. Although I was positive that these questions were ripping her in half on the inside, she never let it show. She was definitely there to try and get her friend some justice and she remained focused on that. The letter said he had been dating someone through the summer of 2001 right? Yes Deanna answered while still remaining stoic. He said he was dating Linda Ballard correct?. Yes she replied. Jenny asked if Travis lost his temple recommend again in 2008. Deanna said she didn’t know. So having tons of sex would be a big concern for a bishop correct? Deanna stated that she didn’t think it mattered. If you broke the law of Chastity you broke it. Jenny seemed disappointed but perked up at the thought of the portable vaporizer in her purse.

The pitbull looked up, dropped the shredded chew toy and took walked quickly towards Deanna while simultaneously asking for an exhibit to be entered. Not a Judge Stephens quickly agreed and looked nervously around for the Vet or the goodboy treats. He barked out were you asked about your sexual relationship with Travis during the defense interrogation…er interview. Deanna said an emphatic NO!! He played a part of the audio transcript which said that she did not know if Travis was having sex with anyone else. Was she asking about you he snarled. No she wasn’t Deanna replied. Did you testify during the first trial he asked her next. She said yes and he immediately moved to have the trial transcript admitted. Jenny was too busy packing a bowl and Nurmi’s mouth was full so nobody objected. He smacked the document down onto the overhead and asked Deanna to look at it The Jury was once again engaged and taking notes. Juan read out the words on the screen. And did you and Travis have a sexual relationship? We were dating for a long time and we were in love. That is what happens when you are in love. Are those your words? Yes she said. Once again the seasoned pitbull began to pace back and forth as was his way. What are the sanctions for having premarital sex? It was one sanction and it was ordered that there be no more sex. Did you ever have sex again? Travis and I kissed at one point but we did not have sex. He cocked his head and asked if they both had the same bishop. NO she answered. He asked that she explain sanctions again. She said it was a paper issued by a Bishop and it is meant to teach them how to get the sanction released by going to meetings and things. Juan stopped pacing and asked almost gently if she and Travis were friends until the day he was murdered. It was the one question were Deanna lost her composure just for a second and I felt her pain radiating through the computer. She looked down and answered yes. Juan was different now. He was as gentle as he had ever been when he said he was trying to show her closeness to him. What was the name of Travis’ dog he asked? Napoleon she answered. Alfred E. and Jenny jumped up like they were both sitting in electrified chairs and their objection resonated throughout the courtroom. Not a Judge Stephens and the attorneys went through the jury questions.

Jury Questions for Deanna Reid.
“Did you tell your Bishop about all your sexual contacts with Travis Alexander?” “Yes.”

The question had a second part that Stevens read aloud. “Did you also tell him with whom?” “I did.”

“Was there any sexual contact after you lost your Temple Recommend?” “No.”

“Did Travis Alexander tell you anything about being sexually abused as a child?” No

“Who confessed to the Bishop first?” “I really can’t be sure”

With that Deanna Reid was released. She seemed so strong, her purpose had been to dispel the bullshit spewed by the defense and she had done so admirably.

Everyone held their breath as Bishop Parker was called to the stand. Well everyone but the 4 idiots who all gathered into a prayer circle and prayed for an earthquake or some other natural disaster to stop the Bishop from getting on the stand.

Juan began to pace again in short back and forth patterns as he walked the Bishop through when he had become a Bishop, where he lived, his duties and the fact that he had created the singles ward in 1999 where Travis and Deanna had met. He seemed like a very straight forward man.

The little pitbull stopped pacing and looked at the Bishop as he asked if it was the Bishop who was in charge of any problems in the Church. The Bishop said that yes you could say that was one of his responsibilities. Are you in charge of sanctions he continued. In extreme cases was the reply. What is a sanction. A sanction is something that is done as a disciplinary action. It is a piece of paper signed by myself and the goal is to get to get the person back to a Temple Recommend state. What is a Temple Recommend? It is also a piece of paper signed by a Bishop after a person goes through a number of steps. Does one have to be a Temple Recommend to do Baptisms Juan asked. No the Bishop stated. Anyone can go to Baptisms and anyone can baptize as long as they are a member of the church.

Juan trotted back to the prosecution table for a quick drink and to look briefly at his legal pad. He returned to his normal position in front of the Bishop, arms crossed but standing still for the moment. He asked if the Bishop knew Travis. He answered in the affirmative and said they had met in March of 99. You met in Riverside, California shortly after you became a Bishop? Yes he answered. I was in charge of a singles club that he participated in. The pitbull began to pace again and his voice became stronger as he got to the reason the Bishop was here, and it wasn’t to talk about sanctions. You had a house as well? The Bishop said that he did. He lived there with his wife, and his son David. There was also a spare room for those that needed it. So, many different people went through your home. Where did Travis live when he came back from his Mission in 2000? He lived with us for about six weeks the Bishop answered. Did anyone move in after Travis left was the next question. Someone named Jake had moved in. Do you, or did you have a computer in the house during that time. I believe Travis was already gone but I had a computer there in September of 2000, he said confidently. Did you ever know Travis to use that computer? Juan asked. Not that I recall. Did Jake have access to the computer? “Yes, he did. Juan walked over to the projector and he put Exhibit number 438 back on the screen for everyone to see. It was the affidavit statement from Marc McFulloshit. Everyone buckled their seatbelts. Juan was now getting his growl on. It was almost as if the very idea of this person daring to send in this affidavit was giving him fits. Since Witness 1 had a relationship with the woman staying at your house would you say he was there often between December 2000 and March 2001. The bishop said he was there ever day. Was your son living there as well? Yes. Had Jake moved out at that point? He moved out in December the Bishop replied. Was there a time when pop-ups showed up on your computer? Yes. Did witness 1 have permission to use the computer? He did. Do you remember what field he was in? Cars and computers the Bishop said. Can you describe the pop-ups the little pitbull snarled and you could see what little hope that Stabby may have been clinging to that she could malign Travis into anything other than the DP for herself get chewed up, and spit out by Juan Martinez. The Bishop said that he had learned that they were from a virus and that they were scantily clad women. What did you do when you discovered them Juan asked. He said he took it to a shop and had the virus removed. Did anyone get sanctioned? Oh, no the Bishop said, mildly amused. Who told you about the pop-ups? The man you call witness 1 he said. Did he mention any files or folders with child porn? No. No he did not. Did the shop that repaired it report any child porn on the computer? NO! They did not. Who was responsible for the pop-ups the pitbull asked as the freight train coming to run over the mitigation picked up speed. The Bishop said that his son had learned that Jake picked up the virus and could not get rid of it. Mark McFucksticks bullshit was still on the screen for everyone to see. Juan asked the Bishop to look at it. Did witness 1 come to you and admit to being dishonest about the origins of the porn? He said that this was a great concern because he would have been disciplined by sanction and that would have disrupted his marriage plans. Did anyone come to you when the computer crashed and discuss being dishonest? No the Bishop answered succinctly. Did you discipline anyone at this time or think of disciplining anyone because there was supposed child pornography on the computer. No, I did not. Juan stopped pacing for a moment and moved a little closer to the Bishop. If you had seen child pornography on the computer, would you have disciplined Witness 1 for that and would it have affected his marriage plans? A simple no was the answer. Juan took two more steps forward and smiled slightly as he asked his last question At any time Bishop Parker, did Witness 1 tell you that he found child porn anywhere in your household, computer or otherwise? No. the Bishop answered. With that, Juan Martinez threw goodboy treats high into the air and caught them all the way back to his table. He sat down and waited with a very self satisfied look on his face. Alfred E. Nurmi asked to approach the Judge and got a sidebar. The Judge abruptly called court and said that there would be no court Thursday because of Traffic due to the Superbowl. Expect a motion to be filed for the death penalty to be removed because of the Superbowl. Also one because Napoleon was not made available to testify.

Have a great night. Again sorry it was late.
RBMD peacing the fuck out!!

The Stabby Arias Penalty Phase Re-Trial – Whip Your Hair Back and Forth Edition

January 28, 2015

Deanna Reid for President! – Arizona
(I will apologize for the video now, but it is the one that really sums Stabby up the best today so…Sorry.)

Hai everybody. The verdict is in for the Vandy Trial.  Guilty on all charges  for Vandenburg and Gatey!!  YAY!!

Court started with a bang today. It started without the Jury since Alfred E. had his panties all up in a bunch about Deanna Reid and Abe A and the Bishop testifying. He said they were only told about Deanna and the Bishop last week and Abe yesterday. Of course he had to know that Juan was calling them so this is all just for the record bullshit. Not a Judge Stephens succinctly denied the motion to preclude but said she would limit Abe’s testimony and give them time to interview him.

Not a Judge Stephens then turned to Stabby and asked if she was planning on continuing the magical mystery testimony to which Stabby said naw. Then she put a really sad face on and told the Judge she would like too, but for the reasons given in chambers she won’t. Juan grinned as he informed the room he would NOT be striking Stabby’s testimony. Ahahahahahahaha. Nurmi then freaked the fuck out again and told Not a Judge Stephens that he doesn’t want the jury hearing that Stabby will not finish her testimony…because the jury isn’t going to wonder why Juan never cross examined her right? Not a Judge Stephens rolled her eyes and recessed court so that Abe could be interviewed.

All the lawyers trooped back to chambers for a moment and then came back because good ole’ whiney pants wanted to be on the record. Alfred E told the court that due to the late disclosure and lack of time with the witness Stabby wants to be present during interview. He then mumbled “because she is totally running this show” under his breath. Not a Judge Stephens booted the gallery and closed the courtroom. She said that Stabby could stay so her feelings didn’t get hurt. Alfred E says he doesn’t want Travis’ family present. Juan says they have a right to be there. Judge Solomon compromises and says Travis’ family can listen from jury room. Juan is cool with that.

Alfred E. still objected to having the victims family being able to listen to the interview but not a Judge Stephens was over it and told him to move on. Nurms looked like he might be headed for a stroke. Next he said he was concerned with the character assassination of Stabby by Abe and I put pop through my nose. So…POINTS for Alfred E.

(no Jury)
Abe discussed making out with Stabby (barf)and putting his hand down her pants in a parking structure.(I have to dig out the Pretoria puke bucket, be right back.) Nurmi didn’t want Abe’s testimony allowed because he didn’t want Stabby to be considered promiscuous. Wait what? AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Juan wants to discuss manipulation of Travis Alexander by Stabby. Stabby’s defense doesn’t want this heard. Alfred E. looks pleadingly at the Judge and asked if the court would pretty please with sugar on top reconsider allowing Abe to testify. Nope, nuh uh. Stabby called Abe and asked him to lie about their physical contact if Travis asked according to Juan. Juan brought up the magic panties and Stabby suddenly and creepily smiled. The bailiff saw it too and immediately started biohazard procedures on his eyes. Stabby is making googoo eyes at Abe and she flipped her hair. TWICE. Not a Judge Stephens asked why Juan wanted to ask Abe about Stabby asking him to lie to Travis? Juan said it was to discredit her honesty. Stabby started furiously whispering to Jenny who was hitting her bong as hard as she could. Juan kept insisting that this was relevant to credibility. Stabby looked totally disgusted that Not a Judge Stephens was allowing her fake mitigation to be destroyed. Alfred E. huffed and puffed and said credibility is not relevant in penalty phase. Wait what? Nurmi demanded a chance to recall Abe after looking through all of his interviews and blog once the state has completed their direct. The Jury is finally brought in. The defense officially rested with no other mitigation witnesses. None of her family testified. Abe is officially on the stand.

(jury present)
Juan wandered up to the overhead or whatever it is and displayed the email from Stabby to Abe on screen and asked if he was that Abe. Yes he answered. Abe looked like he was not amused that he had been dragged into this any deeper than he already was. Jenny was poised to spit the word “Objection” the second that she got a chance. I hope the objectomatic was oiled during the break. It is learned that during their 3rd date over dinner Stabby made the statement that she “dabbled in Mormonism.” In Stabbyland that means you call yourself a Mormon and do whatever you want.

After the date Abe walked Jodi back to car and they had physical contact. Abe said they kissed and got into it. It was passionate for about 15 minutes. (glad I found the bucket!!) Juan asked about Abe putting his hand down her pants and Jenny deployed the objectomatic for leading. It took her a second to find the button through the cloud of weed smoke. Jury still heard it though. Stabby called Abe days after their date to tell him she was getting back with her ex. Stabby complained about Travis not committing for most of 2007, to which Abe said he told Stabby that it sounded like Travis Alexander was not as interested in her as she was in him. (Ladies and gentlemen give the man a prize for the understatement of the decade.) Stabby called Abe & said “We have a problem because she told Travis about their date…THAT HAPPENED A YEAR BEFORE. Abe responded, WE don’t have a problem. He said he was pretty mad that she made such a big deal out of it and that they were no longer friends after that point. The email that she sent to Travis and allegedly to Abe was brought up. Abe said he did not get the email. The Jury was asked to exit stage left momentarily. Jenny began her cross. She asked Abe if he’s using Stabby to market himself and his business. I’m totally serious, she asked him that. Abe just sighed loud enough for the microphone to pick up and said a sardonic uh no. Jenny then asked Abe if Stabby was wearing capri pants on their date because I don’t know why. Maybe she thinks Capri’s ARE the look. She next asked if Abe was 13yrs older than Stabby and he corrected her to say 17years. He was very cocky as he said it. Alfred E was the one that requested that the magic panties not be mentioned so of course Jenny brought them up knowing that Abe could not explain himself. If she was going for making him look bad, I don’t think it worked. Jenny snapped “You don’t recall reading this email, correct?” Abe fired back that he never received it. Juan just sat back, smiled slightly and munched a goodboy treat. So, you don’t recall reading this email she tried. Abe was not the one today though because he snapped back again “I never received this email.” He drew it out like maybe Jenny would understand better if he spoke slowly. Jenny said well it could have bounced or gone to spam. It was meant to be a statement but she was rattled enough it sounded like she was trying to reconcile it in her own mind.

Juan was up and as usual he has fire coming out of his nose. It isn’t the witnesses I have finally decided. He is furious that he has to deal with this amount of stupid and he takes it out on whatever is in front of him. Juan asked if Abe had some special email that didn’t contain his email address and magically got to his email anyway? Abe chuckled slightly and said no. Juan asked if this was a homing pigeon email that gets to him without an address listed in the TO: section. I’d like to request a sidebar because I just peed a little. Abe, trying desperately not to start laughing said no and added that he got all the other emails from Stabby. Juan asked about Stabby asking him for advice regarding Travis. Abe told Stabby not to be so attached to Travis and go meet another guy when she would complain.

No Jury questions. Abe was dismissed with an admonition because he will be recalled.

Deanna Reid takes the stand!! Deanna left for Costa Rica in June 2000 and didn’t come home for over a full year. She came back in Nov 2001 Deanna said she kept in touch with Travis while she was gone via snail mail. After awhile Travis told Deanna he was seeing someone else. Deanna didn’t know the name of the person. She said she had been to Bishop Parker’s house and that she has never met witness 1 AKA Marc McFuckstick. After her mission Travis wasn’t even living at Bishop’s house. The Objectomatic was deployed but way too late. And the last shred of mitigation witness testimonyaffidavit went right out the window. Deanna said that Travis never touched her in any way and that incident never happened. Juan apparently wanted to drive the point home and barked at Deanna. This never happened he queried. Deanna repeated very strongly that Travis never harmed her or shouted “get it through your fuckin head I will never marry you. Stabby will not look at Deanna right now. Juan asked about Marc McFucksticks fiancé or whatever consoling her. He was dripping sarcasm, or maybe it was the rabies I’m not sure, but he was foaming. Deanna said no one ever consoled her because this never happened. It came out like a gunshot. Jenny from the cellblock put down the joint she was rolling and tried to do damage control. Good luck with that Jenny. Jenny started by asking Deanna if she wasn’t exactly truthful when it came to Travis. Deanna said I’ve always told the truth.” Jenny asked well weren’t you misleading when the defense interviewed you? Deanna answered back sharply “the only one misleading here is you!” Jenny completely lost her shit and asked for an approach. Juan pretty much skipped up to the bench. Deanna got a quick reprimand from the Judge to just answer the questions and not interject anything. I think Deanna should interject away personally. If Dr.(notadoctor)Geffner can ramble on, Deanna should too. A transcript was produced and Jenny wanted Deanna to read it. Deanna said there was audio and she would rather have that. Deanna is mad! If she was any hotter she would be on fire. Jenny tried desperately to get Deanna under control. She told Deanna to just read the transcript “You can read can’t you?” Deanna looked at Jenny like she’d like to punch her directly in her face and said yes. Deanna said she wanted to hear the audio of what she said in this transcript. Jenny requested sidebar number (I don’t know I lost count days ago) Deanna won’t answer Jenny. Apparently Deanna is harshing her mellow because she said “Well you had no problem answering Mr Martinez questions” The pitbull managed to object without bursting out laughing and said “I didn’t ask her about an audio” like an innocent little lamb. Alfred E. started bitching about having Deanna declared a hostile witness.(Oh, she was fucking hostile all right.) Since Not a Judge Stephens only noticed in that minute that the courtroom had pretty much been reduced to pandemonium court was called for the day. Late start tomorrow and due to scheduling conflicts no court on Thurs or Friday. BEST COURT DAY EVER!! I cannot wait for tomorrow.

The Stabby Arias Penalty Phase Re-trial – I Have No Title For This Edition

January 27, 2015

Are we there yet? – Arizona

Hai everybody. Today’s Edition is brought to you by the letter G.

We started the day with a side bar because of course we did. Juan apparently had raw meat for breakfast and is right back to mauling Dr.(OMG HOW IS HE A DOCTOR) Geffner. He started out about the PTSD test, asked a couple of other questions and then all of a sudden he asked how many answer sheets Geffner has in the file for Stabby. Geffner did not want to answer. Juan ordered him to look and said you told us last week there was only one and there are two. Dr.(How much longer do I have to write Dr. about this guy) said one was a copy. Going over the DAPS tests a very foaming at the mouth Juan told(gogogodzilla) Geffner he influenced Stabby when she chose what her most traumatic event was. Juan paced and snarled and said (Gettagrip) Geffner constantly referenced the murder and didn’t let Stabby decide for herself. Juan changed gears again and suddenly whipped out the coded magazines and stated that Stabby changed her story. Aaaaand the objectomatic was deployed. Not a Judge Stephens called a 10 minute recess. The vet she had hidden behind her bench popped up, successfully deployed darts 1 AND 2 and quickly took cover under the court reporters chair. Juan and Jenny From the Cell Block were arguing like a married couple (see what I did there) and Not a Judge Stephens told them to not talk over each other.

Obviously the sidebar was about whether or not the magazines were going to be admitted this time around because once the recess was over Juan slammed the magazine up on the overhead or whatever you call it. Juan told (getthefuckout) Geffner to peruse the magazine and see if he saw any writing in it. (Godicantbelievehesadoctor) Geffner says yes but he can’t follow the code. Juan helps him out. “You Fucked up. What you told my attorney the next day directly contradicts what I have been saying for a year.” Juan asked ((gwordsarehardtocomeupwith)) Geffner if this gave him pause. And with a completely straight face (gonnaregrettheletterg)Geffner answered that he didn’t know what it meant or who it was to. Just as an aside, I think the Dr. might actually be working for the state. Just sayin’. Juan barked out that Stabby wrote it in a tone that suggested that he thought he might be talking to a moron. (greatanothergword)Geffner double checked the buckles on his attack suit and retorted that it had no context and it did not change his opinion.

The Jury was asked to retire to the scenic hallway for a few minutes. The fairly raging pitbull asked him about the tests Stabby took, he didn’t want to be specific with the questions because of copyright issues. Wait what? Well, it’s an original way not to have stuff entered into evidence. Juan was having a yelly and grilly moment and Jenny decided to object to the yelly behavior. Stabby was staring at Dr. ((gladididn’tpicktheletterz))Geffner with a look that totally said it’s not for nothing that they call me Stabby. He seemed to get the message and tried to get his shit together.

The mighty pitbull continued the complete shredding of the witness as he said that Stabby answered the tests differently instead of the same as she should have. The Dr. told him that it was because one was pre-jail and one was during jail. Juan asked to approach and Not a Judge Stephens shuddered a little. They came back and Juan and the witness continued to argue about the tests. Juan continued to point out inconsistencies in the tests Stabby took. Specifically, Stabby answered never to a question about whether a partner forced her to have sex on one, and answered sometime on the other one. The Dr. was becoming more distressed by the second and said Test 1 only dealt with the murder. Juan continued to hammer home all the inconsistencies in the tests until ((gianttool)) Geffner was a stammering mess. At that point lunch was mercifully called. (I’m out, I’ve been defeated by the letter G)

Court reconvened and the Vet with the Tranquilizer gun popped out from behind the seal of the State of Arizona and deployed darts 3 and 4. He then barrel rolled to the left and hid behind the first bailiff he could find. The darts had no visible effect.

Juan started his pace again and for a moment I thought of a shark circling a wounded fish. Juan brought up the magazines and the codes again and the witness said he had never seen them. Juan looked at Geffner and explained that he’d written down and reviewed them this past summer. The Geff said sorry it had slipped his memory. (BARF)

Next on Juans shred till you’re dead tour was the fact that Geffner didn’t want to release the data to Dr. Demarte unless she provided proof that she was licensed in AZ. He pointed out that Geffner knew she was licensed and he answered that she could have had complaints against her or her license could have been revoked. Apparently Geffner thinks he is the State licensing board. Geffner wouldn’t let the test be released because of a federal statute. Jenny dropped the bong long enough to ask for a sidebar. This statute that Geffner was referring to only applies to drug and alcohol issues. Geffner (WHO IS A DOCTOR) thought this was any information disclosure. He didn’t understand that it was only for drug and alcohol which doesn’t apply here. So he’s an idiot or he withheld the test results as long as possible. You pick.

Juan switched gears and started in on the letter that Stabbykins wrote to Travis’ family. He was frothing as he asked Geffner if he knew she had written it on Travis’ Birthday. Geffner did not know that. With that Juan was finished the complete dismemberment of Dr. Geffner.

Jenny From the Cell Block sighed, put down her bong and made an attempt at damage control as the Jurors continued to write down questions. She started to ask about the porn on the computer again and the pitbull looked up from his box of goodboy treats and objected. A sidebar commenced. Witness one said that Travis denied it but it was his screen name. He starts to break down about the photo’s. At that point Juan objected again and headed to another sidebar. Not a Judge Stephens decided that was a good time to call a recess. Jenny asked questions out of the jury’s presence. When the Jury came back she got a couple of questions in about the alleged child porn and moved on to the letter that Stabby wrote. Jenny was desperately trying to get in why Stabby made up that story and Juan roaringly objected. The objectomatic should have been his today no shit. Apparently as Stabby looked back at the night she was trying to put things together, and could not reconcile that she had killed someone so she gave the ninja story.(don’t ask me I just report this shit.)

Jenny moved on to the journal and asked Geffner to define noteworthy. Next Jenny said that Stabby could have burned her journals if she knew they were going to hurt her. She then asked Geffner obout the cases he worked on before. He blamed the bad judge in one. OMG this is never going to end. Okay. So then Jenny proceeded to go over the text messages again and blaming Stabby’s actions on Travis. Blah blah blah Juan objected and it was overruled, blah blah blah Havasupai blah blah blah objection. Overruled. Jenny then tried desperately to get in that writing only good things in a memorial book was totally normal, to which the pitbull roared objection and was sustained. Not a Judge Stephens called for a 15 minute break.

During the break, Juan was mad, the jury was bored, Alfred E was napping, Judge Stephens was checking the buckles on her own attack suit, Stabby stared at Geffner, Jenny called her dealer and ChaCha ordered a pushup bra on the La Senza website.

Back from the break, Jenny asked a couple more questions and then Jury Questions were up. (Thank you baby Jesus)

Juror Questions.

Q: PTSD, depress, anxiety would manifest after murder and being in jail, how can you tell if there were signs before? Geffner sayid yes these symptoms can occur after, but interviews were done with those around her/ knew her.

Q: How likely is it that Stabby scored low on test scores knowing they would be shared in court. Geffner said it’s not easy to manipulate tests and it’s unlikely.

Q: Is Stabby right or left handed? Geffner: Left (Stabby is ambidextrous according to Marc McFuckoffanddie) Just sayin’

Q: Are there entries in the journal after the murder? Geffner: Yes

Q: How long can someone stay in a disassociated state of mind? Geffner: It can vary. It can be as short as 5 minutes or much longer

Q: How many days did the first female psychologist interview Stabby? Geffner: 2 days.

Q: Speaking to allegation of the masturbation of male child, other than verbal word from Jodi that was reported far after the incident is there anything else that references it? Geffner: No

Q: In your professional opinion don’t you find it odd someone that journals like this has nothing in it about these incidents? Geffner: It’s not typical but we looked at her after thoughts

Q: I understand the cycle of abuse but how is Jodi choosing to hang out and continue to have sex Geffner: That is the cycle

Q: Do records show other significant things that happened she didn’t journal on? Geffner: It’s not a blow by blow its a summary

Q: Were the 2007 IM messages in her journal where he is calling her pure evil? Geffner: I can’t remember

Q: Why does Jodi use T-Dogg and Travis in the journal Geffner: It was the macho part of him

Q: Who was the recipient of the coded magazine message Geffner: I don’t know

Q: Did you find anywhere a supported documentation of the DV from Travis Geffner: Just Jodi’s word

Q: It may seem to common lay person this could be a consequence of committing the murder. Are there symptoms for Jodi’s problems pre murder? Geffner: Some pre murder but we look at history too

Q: In your opinion of a heterosexual male is it normal for them to view girls and boys? Geffner: Yes we can have non exclusive that are attracted to kids and adults (and there went the DP)

Q: You as an expert…don’t you find this surprising she would have sex with Travis after this masturbation incident? Geffner: I’m not surprised anymore. Jodi said she felt bad for Travis. Okay, you know what hold the fucking phone. Stabby felt bad. For what she says was a pedophile. So she had sex with him. (and the DP just came back)

juror questions over Jenny was back up and asked Geffner if it is nearly impossible to fake a psych test? Geffner agreed that it is nearly impossible. Next she asked Geffner about Stabby’s ring finger, and Geffner who just got his Orthopedic degree said it was broken. She sat down, Juan got up and went for the throat of Geffner one last time. Juan broght up learned behavior re: the first trial and what Stabby had retained to retake the tests. Juan brought up she learned about PTSD from what Dr. DeMarte and Samuels said, and it was a 5 month long trial. There is no evidence other than her word that Travis ever masturbated to pictures right. Geffner had to concede that he was right. And do you believe that physical abuse took place? Geffner took umbrage with the word believed and said in his opinion there was. Different thing apparently. The pitbull took today out with a mighty bellow. No where in the journal does it says she was physically harmed does it. It is all based on Stabby, isn’t it. Geffner went out like a mouse as he answered yes.

That is it (finally) for tonight. Court reconvenes at 10am tomorrow

RBMD peacing the fuck out!!!

Apparently It Was Take Twitter To Work Day In Arizona.

January 23, 2015

ChaCha better hope forever 21 is still hiring when this is over-Arizona

Hai everybody.  Well it was definitely an interesting day in court today.  We won.  Want to know how I know? No, not because my in house psychic told me.  I know we won because Alfred E. Nurmi asked for a mistrial today.  Now I know that you probably think that is what lawyers are supposed to do right?  Well, in most cases I would tend to agree, but this is a special case and Alfred E. would not in any way request a mistrial unless he was fairly positive that his clients goose was well and truly cooked.  Remove the death penalty?  Yup.  Dismiss with prejudice?  Absolutely.  But he would no way ask the judge to grant him the right to do this alllll over again unless he was fully convinced it was all but over.   The defense rolled over and showed its belly today and I was very happy.  So, to the defense team from me, eat a dick mmmmmkay!!

So this happened during court today. ChaChaisafucktard The ever professional Cha Cha Delarosa tweeted this charming thing while in court supposedly working. A copy of course has been forwarded to everyone I could think of in the Arizona court system because that is just how I roll. Please feel free to do the same. I sent one to the court and to the DA’s office. Oh and to Troy Hayden just because the Stabbyites seem to hate him so very much. I’m hoping he can use it for something.  So, Stabbyites, you can also eat a dick.

This is what Stabby wore to court today.

stabbynotappropriate  Nice to see that ChaCha is also aware that the ship is going down and trying to coerce the mens vote along with a lovely tank top.  Kind of like putting lipstick on a pig isn’t it?  Just sayin’.  I’d tell Stabby to eat a dick, but that ship has way sailed.

Now, on to court.  Juan was in full pace mode even before court started. Flores was ready and tried distracting him with some goodboy treats while Jenny from the Cell Block finished getting the attack suit on Geffner. Juan was quick to attack. God help Geffner if the attack suit gives out before court does.

Juan asked if the statements about the alleged masturbation incident were made years after her arrest. Geffner said yes. Then the pitbull said this isn’t documented in her journal anywhere. Juan asked if it’s true that Stabby told Geffner’s associate that Travis was viewing the offending material on a computer. Geffner answered that the associate must have typed it wrong. He said he didn’t know why she would have typed internet. The pitbull lunged and said because Stabby told the associate that!! Jenny picked that moment to try out the new ejection seats that have been installed and went three feet strait up as she screeched objection, speculation. Overruled. That seemed to make Juan madder and he asked if Geffner was SPECULATING that the associate made a mistake. He was still bristing as he said Geffner gave Stabby the benefit of the doubt instead of considering she was lying about the bullshit she was spewing. He asked again why associate 1 said internet and then said you just assumed that your associate, the trained associate made a mistake? Geffner said yes. Again, how is this man a doctor? Anybody?

The pitbull continued to pace as he said you weren’t even at the jail when Stabby made this statement so you are making assumptions because you are a hired gun. The Defense objectomatic 3000 was promptly deployed and that last remark was stricken from the record. Next the pitbull brought up the fact that Geffner has made over $100 000 off of testifying. Guess what? SIDEBAR.

Back from the sidebar Juan launched again and the attack suit started to look a little frayed. He ripped apart a ton of cases that Geffner had “worked” on, and then brought out that Dr. Sexpert was a speaker at one of Geffner’s non profits. Then he said so was Jenny from the Cell Block. OMG Jenny fired herself halfway up the aisle while screeching objection sidebar. Apparently that one was sustained, but no matter. The mighty pitbull had made his point that these people were all in collusion. He waited patiently for his goodboy treat before moving on.

Stabby seemed to think everything was all good. She had a slight smile on her face and chattered incessantly to Jenny who ignored her and took another bong hit as she watched the ship begin to sink. Juan asked Geffner why there was no mention in his notes that Stabby is a sick stalker peeping tom fuck? Geffner said he was not provided with that information and it was not an interaction between Travis and Stabby. Wait, what? He was never provided with that information. Wow defense!! Good job!!

Oh goody another definition. Dr. DOCTOR!! Geffner said that they needed to define “dating”. They kept having sex and seeing each other. Juan Snarled. While they were dating Stabby lived in California true? Geffnew answered true. After they broke up did she move to another place in California. Geffner had a mistake in the Stabby Anal Einstein this is your life timeline. Juan was fairly foaming at the mouth as he brought up the co worker from Big Sur that said Stabby’s personality changed in an affidavit. Once again Geffner cannot see the trap being laid so masterfully by the pacing Juan. He said you can’t say it had anything to do with Travis can you? Geffner answered “I can’t say nothing, it had something to do with it.” Juan continued. So you are blaming this change in personality on Travis? It’s more complicated than that Geffner said somewhat shakily. So, you are basing this on Travis and Stabby’s interactions? It involved their relationship and was a key factor in this personality change. A key factor to is a large factor right? the pitbull roared. Geffner answered It’s important. Juan continued to lead Geffner down the path of destruction. Couldn’t this personality factor be due to the fact she just lost her house?! What about her financial problems. Her house was being repossessed? Geffners answer was only that he was not sure about the house. He was looking and sounding decidedly shaky. Juan was very aggressively asking next about the breakup with Matt and Bobby and how Stabby was definitely assertive while hunting down the chick Matt was screwing around with. Isn’t that aggressive he snarled. Geffner’s psychological opinion was no, because that is totally an honest answer. yuwholwnhgtolewa…sorry my head hit the keyboard. Juan is driving home the point that Stabby was very aggressive as he brought back up the peeping tom incident. Travis was entitled to sit on his couch and kiss whoever he wants correct? he was broke up with Stabby? Geffner said the definition of broke up was an issue. Now we are rapidfire back to the timeline and Geffner admits that his timeline may not be 100% accurate.

Next the pitbull pulled out Stabby’s honest and for true journals and began to chew them up like a pair of Louboutins. He brought up the Havasupi trip. Stabby was droning on about it in her journals. She wrote that the day had bad and good parts and that Travis apologized to her saying it was 99% his fault. Geffner can’t remember about the fight and we were mercifully at lunch.

Back from lunch the mighty pitbull got one last ear scratch from Flores and trotted back out to the floor. He was all over Geffner like he was a porterhouse steak. Juan snarled that there was an incomplete picture in the journal. Geffner tried to fight back saying regarding the fight, yes. He next brought up that Stabbykins had written about when Dan called telling her Travis was dead and that everything she had written was basically bullshit. Geffner said she may have been disassociating aaaaand I threw up in my mouth a little. The bullshit that this man is spewing, I wonder how he ever gets the taste out of his mouth. Juan continues the carnage he started before lunch and rips Stabby’s diary to shreds. Every lie that she wrote down to try and cover her ass is being exposed in beautiful hi definition for the Jury to see. I bet if you threw holy water on that journal it would ignite.

Juan knew he had Geffner right where he wanted him and decided that this would be a good Tercio de Muerte. This is a great picture of Alfred E. and Jenny From the Cell Block as they watched their witness go down in flames. nurmiwillmuttPlease note the looks on their faces!  Isn’t it beautiful.

Nurmi picked this moment to request the mistrial because he knew what was coming and he knew if it got in it was going to be game, set, match. Not a Judge Stephens told him to eat a dick and testimony continued. Poor little Stabbykins bullshit PTSD came in. AND THEN THE BULLSHIT LIES SHE TOLD ABOUT THE NINJAS THAT GOT HER THE PTSD DIAGNOSIS CAME IN!!
AND THEN THE LETTER SHE WROTE TO TRAVIS FAMILY ABOUT THE NINJAS CAME IN!! And I peed a little. The story she wrote to the family was pretty close to what the prosecution alleges happened except for the Ninjas, so my guess is this is a fairly accurate representation of what happened except where ever she writes ninja replace that with Stabby.

From Jens Trial Diaries. Jodi says in letter she woke up on bathroom floor and heard Travis screaming in the shower. She goes onto to talk about the intruders attacking her and Travis Jodi says a girl came at her with a knife and she grabbed her wrist. She says she kicked her repeatedly in the knees Jodi says she was at an unfair advantage being barefoot Jodi says she had bleeding feet she didn’t notice until later Jodi says Travis was lying down in the hallway and the female was yelling at him Jodi says sorry about her handwriting she’s shaking Jodi get’s away and runs out the door.

Juan roared as he said, and every answer on the PTSD test are based off of this lie. And at that moment Not a Judge Stephens ended court till 9:15 Monday morning so the Jurors get the added bonus of thinking about that all weekend long.

Well done mighty pitbull!!

Oh and this is pretty much what Geffner looked like at the end of that cross.


RBMD peacing the fuck out!!

The 13th Juror Guest Blog. Regular Blog Will Follow This Evening

January 22, 2015

Hai!! Paul Sanders is up, and the regular blog will follow this evening. Since Paul is such a great guest, he has been invited to post his articles here daily. So whenever there is a 13th Juror article it has a home here at the dogpound.  Please remember that Paul is in court every day so his articles are a night behind.  Thanks Paul.  Everybody enjoy.  See you tonight.

The Jodi Arias Death Penalty Retrial: A Juror’s Perspective

by The 13th Juror MD

DAY 25


Dr. Geffner smiled at the jury when he returned to the stand for his fifth day of testimony. He was comfortable in the witness chair wearing a gray suit, light blue shirt and blue striped tie. He crossed his fingers in his lap and smiled toward Jennifer Willmott as she gave him a friendly greeting to start the day.

The timeline that Dr. Geffner had created was displayed for all to see. It was based on Arias’ journal entries, text messages and emails. Blue arrows pointed to significant dates, dates that the Doctor had deemed important in his evaluation of the defendant.

“…and May 18, 2008 is significant, as well,” the Doctor explains as he turns to the jury. “Jodi Arias writes in her journal that she is looking forward to the visit of Travis Alexander but has reservations because she feels he only wants one thing. This is consistent with what I have said all along.”

Jennifer Willmott nods her head as she looks toward the projection screen. She is wearing a black business skirt suit with high heels. “Thank you. You said that May 18, 2008 is important. What is important to you, Doctor?”

“This is the day of the sex tape and we are seeing more signs of aggression by Travis Alexander. He is becoming jealous as can be seen by his saying he wanted to “whoop a vibe” on a gentleman named Abe with the intent of beating him down. I also think it important that Travis thinks Miss Arias sounds like a twelve year old girl. This is consistent with his entertaining child pornography interests,” the Doctor explains.

“Thank you, Doctor,” Willmott responds. “Why did you create the timeline that we are looking at?”

The Dr. laughs. “The amount of information we had to go through was quite intimidating. There are sixteen full binders and we had to condense sixteen thousand words into something manageable. We were able to glean it down to a summary of one hundred and twenty pages and that was still a lot of information to consume. In order to get a big picture of what was going on, I built the timeline.”

“So, in talking about your timeline, you identify five instances of physical abuse. The first is in March of 2007 when she notes that he grabs her wrist because he is angry. Is it unusual that she did not make a big deal of this?” she asks him.

“She demonstrates classic qualities of a domestic violence victim and therefore she minimizes the importance of this,” the Doctor answers.

Jennifer Willmott looks at the screen and back at Dr. Geffner. “In October of 2007, another incident is reported when she says she is pushed down by Travis Alexander and he restrains her. It is noted that he rapes her. Do you consider this physical violence?”

“I don’t think there is a question this is physical violence. It’s important to know that this incident has a higher intensity level than the incident in March.”

“Very good,” Willmott says moving to the next target date on the timeline. “We see that in January of 2008, Travis Alexander body slams Miss Arias and screams at her that he is sick of her. Is this physical violence?”

I look to the Jury as they watch Willmott and Geffner. I note that two are taking intermittent notes and their faces tell me nothing further.

“This is definitely physical abuse,” he says with a soft chuckle. “A person is being body slammed, as Miss Arias refers to it, and demonstrates a violent confrontation.”

“If I can draw your attention to March of 2008, a year after their first physical confrontation, it is noted that Travis Alexander slaps Miss Arias in the face. Is this physical violence?”

“Yes,” Dr. Geffner nods in agreement.

“Finally, on April 1, 2008, we see that they have a violent argument which results in a body slam and back handed slap. She is choked out and it results in her losing consciousness. This, too, would be considered physical?”

Dr. Geffner turns toward the jury. “This is certainly physical and the thing that makes alarms go off in my head is the fact that she is choked to unconsciousness. It shows that the situation has escalated and the time periods are closer together. This is a dangerous situation for Miss Arias although she continues to minimize its importance.”

Jennifer Willmott pauses and looks toward Dr. Geffner as if she wanted to give the jury a moment for it to sink in. “Now, Doctor, is there any documentation that she received medical care for these violent incidents?”


“What of counseling? Is there any report that she received counseling?”

“No, she did not.”

“Don’t you find that unusual?” Willmott asks.

“Absolutely not. This is characteristic of domestic violence to minimize and hide cases of domestic violence. They do want to admit to themselves that these things happened,” he explains. “Victims of domestic violence rarely report these cases and they rarely go to shelters. There is a sense of learned helplessness and a general feeling that they cannot get out of these destructive situations. Miss Arias’ behavior after the fact is consistent with how victims of domestic violence handle their situations. It is a family secret and kept behind closed doors.”

“To your knowledge, has she spoken of these situations?” Willmott asked.

“Miss Arias only spoke of two of these incidents. I think it took her four or five years to recognize that she was a victim. Again, she minimizes these situations she found herself in,” the Doctor explains, his attention turned toward the jury.

“How can we corroborate these incidents aside from what Miss Arias wrote in her journals?”

“I looked at indirect evidence, those things that lined up with her journals. I looked at outside witnesses as well as the history of the parties involved,” he explained. “Victims of child abuse or early domestic violence when they are young tend to make themselves more susceptible to being in these situations later in life. I also used testing results to put the pieces of the puzzle together.”

Jennifer Willmott marched to the defense table, picked up a sheet of paper and placed it on the screen. She still had the same black nail polish with silver sparkles on her fingernails. “This is Exhibit number 787. It is a statement from a co-worker of hers in Big Sur, California. He says that he found Jodi Arias to be confident, kind, never sexual. She was always upbeat and very happy until she broke up with Daryl Brewer. The co-worker says that he felt that Miss Arias had been brainwashed by Travis Alexander. Do you see that?”

“Yes,” the Doctor answers affably. “This is important to us because it shows how she began changing after she met Travis Alexander and people around her were witness to it. Even though they minimize domestic violence, it is hard to hide signs that it is happening and this is clearly seen by the comments of her coworker.”

“What are other ways to corroborate her journal entries?”

“There are a host of tests that revealed problems with domestic violence and trauma,” the Doctor answers.

“What of her history growing up?”

“That is extremely important,” he says. He looks to the jury. “You see, victims of child abuse, where it is not recognized, increases the chances for a victim to be re-victimized in later relationships. They have low self-esteem and by themselves, may seem minor, but in the big picture, it has lasting impacts.”

“Okay. Going back to the journal entries of Miss Arias, what is important in the big picture?”

Dr. Geffner smoothed his tie and looked toward the jury. “The history of the journal is from August of 2007 through mid-2008. I can identify a change in personality from her arguments with Travis Alexander and the abuse she suffered. She makes many references to being suicidal. The situation gets worse in the escalation of violence.”

“These journal entries have matching emails and text messages?” Willmott prodded.

“Yes,” he answered. “The messages focus on their relationship and is consistent with her abuse. I saw many consistencies. Almost too many to really count,” he answers in a slightly goofy laugh.

“Did you interview Jodi Arias at some point?”

“I interviewed her three times, actually. I needed to get a diagnostic impression of her and spread these interviews over nine months from October of 2013 through July of 2014.”

“Was this counseling?”

“I was there as a forensic evaluator,” he explains. “It was not counseling. I was there to get information for the court and the jury.”

“What were your observations?” Jennifer Willmott asked.

“Miss Arias had a tendency to be very close lipped about all of it. She showed signs of disassociation. She was also very tangential, not being able to stay on one subject, going off in other directions,” he said. He got comfortable in his chair as he faced the jury. “She was minimizing the incidents she experienced throughout her life as is expected with victims of domestic violence. Miss Arias kept everything inside. In fact,” he said, “she only showed emotion two times and for very brief periods during our interviews. She became emotional in talking about her mother, tearing up for thirty seconds or so. The other time she was emotional was when she spoke of Travis Alexander and how she missed him in her life…”

“Objection,” Juan Martinez suddenly said. It was nice to hear from him and although he did intermittently object through the Doctors testimony, I could almost feel his discomfort in hearing it. “Residual doubt,” he stated firmly.

The sidebar completed with Jennifer Willmott returning to her position six feet from the Doctor. “Did she get remorseful?” she asked.

“Oh, yes,” Dr. Geffner answered. “She cried and got very emotional. She was trying to apologize to him on a spiritual level.”

Jennifer Willmott moved to the psychological test results that we had last seen in Dr. Geffner’s first appearance before the Christmas holiday break. Results of the MMPI 2 (Minnesota Multi-phasic Inventory) and a host of other test results were exchanged on the screen one by one.

We had seen these results and the jury had seen the results before the break. These various pages had shown her to be in the highest of categories in some areas and also featured the results of documents with Sharpie scratched markings on the top. They had struck me as subjective, as I am sure they did to the jury, and somewhat messy in their presentation.

I could not help but notice that not one juror was taking notes at this point.

The Doctor explained that these results in the big picture showed Arias to suffer from depression, emotional problems and being traumatized. He explained that she felt persecuted and did not have positive emotions. She had elevated scales in bizarre thinking and suicidal thoughts. These issues were created because of her childhood abuse and abusive relationships.

“What is your overall opinion of her mental condition?” Willmott asked, after Dr. Geffner had seemed to go on for hours with random speculation and subjectivity in his assessment.

“Clinically,” he began, “She suffers from Post-Traumatic Stress Syndrome brought about by her experience with child abuse and domestic violence in all of her relationships. She shows severe signs of dissociation and detachment “

“Is that your complete assessment?” she asked.

Dr. Geffner laughed in response. “You want me to continue?”

“Well, yes,” Willmott answered. “is there more?”

“She is in deep and major depression. Plus, I saw signs of manic depression as well as bipolar characteristics. I actually assessed these characteristics because of some who had been in relationships with her.”

“Doctor?” Willmott asked, pausing. “Is Jodi Arias a victim of domestic violence?”

“Yes,” he answered. “Both from her childhood and her boyfriends.”

“So it is more likely than not that she is a victim of domestic violence?”

“Oh, yes,” the Doctor answered resolutely.

“I am finished with questions for this witness,” Jennifer Willmott said as she strutted back to the defense table and sat down.

The court and the jury waited in silence. There was a communal realization that the game was about to change. I could see jurors sitting slightly forward. I saw one turn a page on his notepad. I could see others with pen in hand. The pause was perceptible and the silence loud as the court waited.

Watching Juan Martinez in action on the stage in front of the jury and witness is like watching a great a seasoned prize fighter as he steps into the ring. His body is clothed in a suit but is like the glistening sweat of a fighter ready for contact. His words and questions are not tender blows but are like punches to the face and vulnerable areas of the body. His thoughts move as quick as the constant moving feet of a boxer. Each step is on purpose and each phrase is important. The aura is that of the excitement of a sold out house with everyone anticipating but not seeing every blow that strikes with imperceptible speed. His next move can never be anticipated

In the moments that Juan Martinez commands the audience, he becomes the voice of the victim who can no longer speak: Travis Alexander. The jury and participants in the court room were waiting for the bull to come loose.

Juan Martinez stepped to the center of the room. He does not look at Dr. Geffner. Instead, he looks to the floor and makes a quarter turn on his feet. He puts a hand in his pocket and with the other he gesticulates.

“One of the things you talked about was the affidavits we saw yesterday. Do you remember that?” he asks.

“I’m not sure which one you are…”

Juan cuts him off piercingly. “Yes or no!”

“Yes,” he answers.

“And one of the things you said is that you used these affidavits to make an assessment of the defendant. You said these were one of the things that you used to, as you put it, put the pieces of the puzzle together. Right?” Juan Martinez asked as he raised an open hand.

“Yes,” he answered. One could not help feeling that he was walking into a trap.

“You made the assessment that Travis Alexander was the owner of a file folder with pornographic photos of children from a computer in the Bishop’s house in 2001. Am I right?”

“Well, no,” Dr. Geffner answered. “My co-worker actually made that determination.”

“But you used that information in your testimony yesterday to say that it was true that Travis Alexander owned those pictures, Am I right?”

Dr. Geffner faltered. “I don’t know.”

“Your coworker that you’re referencing is Stephanie Platte?”


“Isn’t it true that witness number one told you something different than what was in the original interviews?”

“I’m not sure what you’re referring to,” Dr. Geffner answered.

“Let me make it clear for you. Didn’t witness number one in the affidavit say that Travis Alexander owned pornographic pictures on a computer shared in the Bishops house when Deanna Reid, his bride to be and Travis Alexander lived there?!”

“Uh, I don’t know exactly,” he answered uncomfortably.

Juan Martinez walked over to his desk and walked a sheet of paper to him saying “May I approach?” along the way. He handed the sheet to Dr. Geffner and walked back toward the prosecution table and turned around while the witness inspected the exhibit.

“Don’t you see that it says ownership by Travis Alexander right there?”

“Uh, yes,” the Doctor answered. “But I’m a little confused.”

Juan stared at him in the eye. “Isn’t it true that you did not review the statement made by Stephanie Platte before the trial?”

“I did,” Dr. Geffner defended. “I saw this before the trial.” He is inspecting the document.

“You don’t need to look down,” Juan Martinez barked. “Answer me here!” Juan demanded as he pointed toward his own two eyes with two fingers.

“Objection!” Willmott shouted, jumping up from her chair. “Argumentative!”

The Judge calls them to a sidebar and Juan Martinez casually walks toward the bench, his hand still in his pocket. They a have a few minute discussion and everyone returns to their seats but Juan. He takes position in the center of the room with his focus on the witness.

“Isn’t it true that when Stephanie Platte spoke with the witness, he denied they were his photographs?”

“Um, I’m not sure,” the Doctor answered.

Juan marches over to the Judge’s assistant seated next to her behind a computer. The court waits patiently while she copies an exhibit that Juan promptly takes and hands to the defense team and has it admitted as exhibit number 821. A copy is put in Dr. Geffner’s hands.

“Do you mind looking at the first page, Sir?” Juan Martinez commands. “Look at the second page and the third page.”

The witness waves the paper without looking at it. He looks toward the judge and the defense table.

Juan looks nowhere but at the witness. “Put your eyes to the paper and look at it!”

“Argumentative!” Willmott says jumping up. One can tell she is getting flustered.

The jury’s attention is gripped on Juan.

“The very first page you see,” Juan directed. “Isn’t this an accurate account of what Stephanie Platte wrote down?”

“Yes,” Dr. Geffner answers softly.

“According to this,” Juan explains. “Witness number one says that he put a Post-It on the Bishops computer that it had crashed. He then confronted Travis Alexander about the crash due to pornography being in a folder. Did he not say that Travis admitted it was his pornography?”

“Yes, at two AM,” Geffner concedes.

“Look at the second page of that document,” Juan says. “This document is dated February 7, 2014 after Stephanie Platte made another contact with Witness number one. Am I right?”

“Yes?” the Doctor answers in more a question than answer.

“The date is February 7, 2014. Right?”


“You remember this because you had her type the interview because you said she types faster than you write. Do you remember that?”

Dr. Geffner laughs. “She does type fast. Yes, I remember that.”

“Does it not say that Witness number one put a note on the computer and talked to Travis at two in the morning and Travis Alexander, in fact, denies anything to do with the pornography which is not what you told us in earlier testimony. Isn’t that right?” Juan asked pointedly.

Dr. Geffner stares at the paper as if confirming what Juan said. “Well, it looks like it.”

“You were wrong, weren’t you?” Juan Martinez states loudly.

The Doctor looked away from the jury and down at his lap and then back toward Juan Martinez. “I really can’t answer that.”

Juan did as we are accustomed to and changed gears without warning. I, and the jury, actually liked that about him. He keeps the mind busy. He keeps the juror searching for answers down a darkened hallway where one does not know what is around the corner. He keeps the room mentally charged with grace, perception and commanding authority.

Juan begins to pace. “Did you speak to Deanna Reid?”

“No,” Geffner answers.

“One of the things we talked about was, according to Witness number one, was that he was in the area to get married in December of 2000. Am I right?”

“Yes, Deanna Reid was staying at the Bishops house,” he answered.

“He courted his future bride by the internet . Do you remember saying that they had never met?”

“I don’t really recall,” Dr. Geffner says as he looks toward the ceiling. “I can’t remember.”

“Isn’t it true he didn’t meet his bride to be until he went to California? And during that time, she had been staying at the Bishop’s house. She kept a diary, right?” Juan says as he stops his pacing.

“It’s my understanding that they met in December 2000.”

“Yes,” Juan Martinez responds. “They were engaged in January of 2001 and married in March of the same year. You saw that in Dr. Platte’s notes, right?”

“Yes, I think so,” he answers falteringly. One thinks that he is feeling the tightening of a noose.

“This was a communal computer shared by his future bride, Travis, Witness number one and the Bishop. Right?”

“That is my understanding.”

“But witness number one was not living with the Bishop, right?” Juan asks.

“Yes,” the Doctor answers quietly.

“Witness number one was having a relationship with his future bride, though. Witness number one had access to this computer, right?”

“I would imagine so.”

“And Mark McGee got engaged with his bride in January of 2001 and married in March of 2001. They then moved to California. Right?”

“Yes,” Geffner acquiesced.

“Let’s talk about some other letters. The affidavit marked as number 819 said that Witness one may have erred and the events actually took place in November and December of 2001. Right?”

“Yes. Witness number one submitted a new affidavit recently and noted events were from November of 2001.”

“Correct,” Juan said. “This event happened in the household where Deanna Reid was living. Right? Witness number one told you that, right?”

Juan paused, looked at the witness, looked at shoes and back up at the witness. “Didn’t Deanna Reid serve on a mission for her church from January of 2000 until June of 2001?”

“Yes,” he answered. The noose had gotten tight.

“Isn’t it true that Mark McGee admitted lying to the Bishop about this incident?”

“No, no,” Dr. Geffner responded quickly. He was trying to escape. “He said he was not honest about what happened that night with the computer. I don’t have much more information on that.”

Juan marched over to the Judge’s assistant and had a new exhibit copied which he promptly marched to the defense table. It was admitted as Exhibit number 825.

“Take a look at Exhibit 825,” Juan commanded the flailing witness. “I want you to read it with me. It states in quotes ‘I was not honest with Bishop Parker how it went down’. Do you see that?”

“Yes,” Geffner answered.

“Witness number one got married on March 10, 2001. He remembers when the computer crashed and he would have been in trouble with the church and the Bishop. Isn’t it true that it was his pornography and not that of Travis Alexander?!”

There it was staring at the jury straight in the face. A reasonable man could see exactly what happened with witness number one. He was not afraid to testify because of online bashing or fear of supporters of Travis Alexander. His story did not fit. Deanna Reid was gone on her mission so she could not have been present in January of 2001. Further, witness number had self-impeached himself in not only a conflict of dates but having motive to hide the pornography from knowledge of anyone.

Witness number one had thrown Travis Alexander under the bus to be trashed like the lies of Jodi Arias. It reeked foul in intent as well as lack of truth and that truth would resonate with the Jury. The Jury would discard this segment of pornography and the words of witness number one like a boxer would throw a sweat laden towel into a spit bucket in the corner of the ring.

The downhill slide of Dr. Geffner continued as Juan Martinez dissected the incident where Arias claimed she had seen Travis Alexander masturbate to little boy pictures on the bed. It had caused her such mental trauma and PTSD.

“Didn’t you point out that there was a significant discrepancy between what Jodi Arias claimed on one date and then on another?” Juan Martinez highlighted.

“I did,” Dr. Geffner stated.

“What was that discrepancy as detailed in Exhibit number 827?”

Dr. Geffner was silent and his laughs had disappeared the moment Juan Martinez went on the attack. He looked tired and worn. It is not an easy task to suffer the wrath of Juan. He showed the wear and tear. Slowly he admitted, “In one instance, she stated she had seen him masturbating to multiple pictures of little boys with the pictures spread on the bed.”

“And what did the other instance say, in the words of the defendant?” Juan Martinez asked.

“She said that he was masturbating to pictures on the internet…”

“They contradict each other, don’t they?” Juan asked.

The seed of destruction had been planted as Judge Stevens closed the Court for the day.

Travis Alexander was in the room in the words of Juan Martinez. He would be back tomorrow to witness the seed grow into full bloom as Juan’s cross examination of Dr. Geffner continued…

“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)

“Brain Damage: A Juror’s Tale” also available on:

Barnes and Noble Booksellers

And That’s When The Pitbull Slipped His Collar.

January 22, 2015

Guess we are all going to find out what happens when the goodboy treats run out – Arizona

Hai!! I am still sick, but I can’t not write anymore so here we go.

For everybody that is asking why affidavits are being allowed in place of actual people, the simple answer is it covers the NOT A JUDGES ASS.  The long answer is that hearsay, which is technically what this is, cannot be used in court except under certain circumstances.  Technically the ME’s reports are hearsay.  True story.  Most expert witnesses could be considered hearsay, hence the exception to the rule.  NOT A JUDGE has decided to allow the affidavits to help support the experts position.  It’s bullshit and an improper reading of the law as far as I am concerned.  However, Juan did not file any motions to disallow it, so he must not care.

Court continued today down the lets see if we can Kill Travis one more time trail and Marc McFuckstick’s  or as he is called in court “Witness 1’s” affidavit was used to allegedly confirm the pedophilia and that Travis had been abusive to Deanna Reid and Marc McFuckstick had witnessed it.

For the eleventy billionth time we got to go over the May emails.  I was shocked to learn that those have still not magically changed form. They are exactly the same.  Geffner says Stabby said in her journal that it was the pattern to get upset, make up and get upset again.  So…They argued and made up. Just like every other couple on the planet. She also tells Geffner that SHE recognized the cycle of abuse.   Jenny from the Cell Block brought up that in March of 07 Travis forcefully grabbed Stabby’s wrist and Stabbykins did not report this to the psychologist as abuse.  Aaaand we have a sidebar. Juan is up and he is not amused.  Annnnnd we’re back.  Looks like it was overruled since Geffner was allowed to continue that it would not be unusual for Stabby not to think of that as abusive.  In October of 07 Stabby alleged that Travis pushed her around.  Then in January of 2008 he allegedly asked her for $250 dollars, body slammed her, kicked her in the ribs and hurts her finger.  (oh for fucks sakes I remember why I was so damn mad yesterday now.) You know what.  Fuck this.  I’m not delivering a blow by blow of what that lying bitch said unless it is really important.  Lets just say that Geffner spent a long time corroborating her testimony using Marc McFucksticks affidavit.  He also said that she gets migraines from her issues, has a distrust of others and has depression.  He also pulled out the PTSD card again and said that he cannot rule out Bi polar disorder tests and his own observations point to it.  BARF!!


  Juan asks Geffner if he remembers the affidavits and says yes. He is seething already and he has only spoken one sentence. Next he started talking about how Marc McFuckstick didn’t want to testify in court. He snarls out this is something you would consider as part of the puzzle. Geffner answers in the affirmative and trembles slightly. Detective Flores is in the background saying several prayers that somebody can find a case of goodboy treats or the vet with the tranquilizer darts. Neither seemed to be forthcoming however and Juan was quickly amping up to a full roar. He snarled out did you consider this when he said Travis admitted to the child porn? Next he asked if someone that worked for Geffner interviewed Marc McFuckstick? Geffner said yes. Juan who is now pacing like a lion in a very small cage roars at Geffner that there were three pages of notes from your associate and in them Fuckface McBullshit told a different story. And BAM!! Faster than anyone could have anticipated the pitbull had ripped apart lie 1. Not only did he rip it apart, turns out that Pigdog McVomit is actually the pedophile. I’ll be filing that away for after this is over. Anybody know what the pedophile laws are like in NZ? He did admit in an affidavit that he was the one looking at them. Just sayin’. Geffner was visibly shaken but he did admit that the notes were true and accurate.

Next the snapping and snarling pitbull asked Dr. Geffner (how is this man a Dr. of anything?) if he even interviewed Deanna Reid. Geffner shakily admitted that he had not. So, expect Deanna on the rebuttal train and I’m betting she is gonna be mad. Juan is pacing in ever shortening lines and his snarl is ever present. He yelled at Geffner to put the notes down while he is being questions. Juan was so mad he forgot himself and said Douchebag McDouchy’s name in court. And then he said crap. I almost fainted when Nurmi did not immediately whip out a motion form and have ChaCha rush it over to the court house. Don’t worry though, his record stands. He filed it right after court.

Apparently Douchbag McFuckstick is a little less than intelligent than Einstein because in his original statement, the dates he said he SAW Travis assault Deanna she was in Costa Rica. The DT caught it in time to get him to send an amendment and those dates didn’t work either. I peed a little as the pitbull very succinctly put the smack down on lie number 2.

Now we are talking about the day Stabby says she caught Travis with the childporn. Remember how she said it was photos of young boys in their underwear and when she came in he dropped them and they floated to her feet? Please remember that, it’s about to be important. Juan asked if a Female psychologist interviewed Stabby in 2010 and it made statements about the masturbation? Geffner affably said yes. Juan then snarled was that an accurate statement taken down by the psychologist? Geffner is thick enough that he didn’t sense the smackdown that was about to commence and he once again happily answered yes. Poor man. Juan roars Note from psychologist #1 Child porn pictures of little boys…she walked in on him viewing this on the INTERNET. Geffner was even nice enough o make an un-redacted not about it. “I thought he was looking at printed pictures?” The only answer Geffner had was those two statements contradict each other. And Stabby lie infinity plus 3 came tumbling down. And with that we saw Juan’s ears perked up as Detective Flores opened the box of good boy treats. The pitbull snapped one out of the air as he made his way back to the prosecution table with a very satisfied look on his face! And we are in recess until 9:15 tomorrow.

Everyone now please stand, face Arizona and clap for Juan Martinez.

See you tomorrow lovelies
RBMD peacing the fuck out!!

While I’m Fuming, I Mean Working A Guest Blog From The 13th Juror. Day 24

January 21, 2015


Hai.  Regular blog is in the process of being prepared.  It will be posted sometime before midnight.  Here is The 13th Juror’s latest.

The Jodi Arias Death Penalty Retrial: A Juror’s Perspective

by The 13th Juror MD


DAY 24





There is a decision that the jury will one day have to consider. The law that is given to them when they enter the deliberation room states, in part, “If there have been past acts of domestic violence against the defendant by the victim, the state of mind of a reasonable person shall be determined from the perspective of a reasonable person who has been a victim of those past acts of domestic violence.”


The defense team will do everything it can to prove domestic violence to keep the defendant out of the Arizona death chamber.


Judge Stevens smiled at the jury as they took their seats to begin the day. Martin Luther King Day weekend did much to leave the people in the courtroom refreshed and ready to attack the task at hand. She first asked the jury if they had heard anything from the news or if anyone had contacted them or spoke with them regarding the case. Heads nodded negatively as she told the jury that the lunch recess would be shortened to accommodate a half day scheduled for tomorrow. Court would not start until one o’clock for a conflicting court issue. Heads in the jury box nodded that it was fine.


Dr. Robert Geffner, the defense team’s second psychologist, appeared on the stand to complete his testimony he had begun last December. He was wearing a conservative, loose fitting gray suit with white shirt and a shiny soft blue tie. He looked toward the jury as he sat and smiled at them enduringly as if he was happy to see them again.


“Good morning, Dr. Geffner,” Jennifer Willmott said in greeting. “The last time we were up here, we were talking about the journals of Miss Arias and we had gone up to June 1, 2008. Do you recall that?”


“Yes,” he answered.


“You are aware that the Travis Alexander attack was on June 4, 2008?”


“Yes, I am.”


“When you reviewed this case, you said you wanted to consider not only the account of Miss Arias but that of other people as well?” she asked.


“Of course,” he answered affably. “I like to put all the pieces of the puzzle together and I like to get a well-rounded account.”


“You looked at texts from other women?”




“You also looked at Instant Messages from Travis Alexander to others?”


“I did.”


“Let me ask you, Doctor, do you see consistencies between statements of Miss Arias and that of other people to support them?”


The Doctor looked toward the jury. “I looked at domestic violence and the relationship with Travis Alexander. I look for such things as abuse, power, control and a pattern of behavior. At the same time, I have to recognize that victims of domestic violence have a tendency to minimize actions in a relationship.”


Jennifer Willmott was dressed in a black business skirt suit. She walked toward Dr. Geffner as if trying to be closer to hear him. “Are you looking for patterns that play a role in this relationship?”


“Certainly. I looked at two to three years of reactions in their relationship so I did not rely on one source. I really took a look at Travis Alexander and his multiple relationships with other women and identified consistencies between all of them. There was a lot of manipulation, sex and control displayed. I had to ask if these things fit into a pattern of abuse. Mostly, I wanted to know if these things were consistent with the things that Jodi Arias has said.”


“Can you tell us what exploitation means?” Willmott asked.


Dr. Geffner looked toward the jury again. “Exploitation is how one person uses another to get their needs met. This is something similar in all of his relationships”


“Okay,” Willmott responded. She moved her perfect hair off the front of her shoulder. “So, you looked at relationships with other women. Did you also look at how Miss Arias was with other men?”


“I did,” Dr. Geffner answered. “I looked for those corroborating patterns that made her relationships. I also referred back to her childhood.”


“You said earlier that domestic violence victims do not see themselves as victims. What kind of problems can this create?” Willmott asked.


“Oftentimes,” Dr. Geffner explained toward the jury, “Behaviors in a relationship will reveal what domestic violence victims won’t say.”


Willmott walked back to a table next to the podium and glanced at her notes. She picked up a sheet of paper and put it on the projector. The timeline of Jodi Arias appeared on all the screens for the court to see. I do not think there was one person in the room except for the defense team and Dr. Geffner who wanted to see its reappearance from before the Christmas holiday break. Jennifer Willmott’s fingers straightened the timeline on the screen. One could see sparkles reflect from her black painted fingernails as they adjusted the paper.


“We see here that Jodi Arias begins dating Travis Alexander on February 2, 2007. Exhibit number 814 is an email of Travis to women.” Will you explain for us the overall picture?” she asked. “Travis and Jodi were formally dating at this time?”


“Yes, I would say they were formally dating.”


Jennifer Willmott marched over to defense table and put number 814 on the screen over the timeline. “This is an email to Jacqui Jardine. Is it not?”


“It is,” Dr. Geffner said.


“What conclusions can you draw from this?” Willmott asked.


“Dr. Geffner looked toward the large projection screen that hangs down across from the jury. “We can see here that Travis is good at manipulating women and exploiting them. For example, in this document, he tells this woman to pick five qualities and to come over and make out with him. He mentions such things as having been stabbed in the chest five times and was once trapped under water for three minutes. He boasts of having never been to jail and simultaneously communicates that he has read the Book of Mormon seven times.”


I look toward the jury as he is speaking and am surprised that I do not see one juror taking notes. This sent me an interesting message.

Doctor Geffner continued. “He notes that he is writing a book, owns a clothing company and that he reads two hours a day. He also mentions he doesn’t own an alarm clock and he was an orphan. He uses these things to entice this woman and to exploit her.”


The jury can read that Jardine answers the email from Travis by saying, “Oh my God, I feel so close to you.”


Jennifer Willmott nods her head. “But this isn’t the only girl while he is with Jodi Arias, is she?” she asks as she struts back to the defense table for another document. The sparkles on her black fingernails reflect in the light as she places a black and white photo of a girl on the screen. “Do you recognize this woman in the photo?”


Dr. Geffner opened his mouth to speak.


“Objection!” Juan Martinez suddenly said. “This is not in evidence. The witness could not have seen this evidence.”


One of many sidebars is called as Judge Stevens motions the attorneys to the front of the courtroom. They discuss the legal issue as white noise hisses in the background over our heads. Finally, the Judge releases the attorneys after admitting Exhibit number 572.


“This email was written on September 11, 2007. It reads, “Send me pictures. I need something to drool over all day.” The picture you see was sent by this lady the next day. What does this tell you, Doctor?” she asks.


“I think this particular girl was from Sweden. Travis Alexander was contacting other women while he was dating Jodi Arias. He was also dating Miss Andrews. This is a pattern of seeing a lot of women at the same time,” he explains to the jury.


“In reviewing your records, you see other similarities and patterns, don’t you?” Willmott asks.


“Well, yes,” Dr. Geffner answers. “He has continual contact with at least a dozen other women while being with Jodi Arias for sexual contact.”


Jennifer Willmott goes back to the defense table, obtains another document, removes the black and white picture and puts an email text on the screen. “I am showing you exhibit number 385. This is an email from Miss Andrews to Travis Alexander dated September 23, 2007. This is only twelve days after his contacting the woman in Sweden. Can you tell us the gist of this particular email?”


Dr. Geffner straightened himself in the witness chair and peered up at the screen. “She’s saying that she kissed Travis too soon and that they had made out for too long. She is feeling guilty and realizing the depth of Travis’ care. Miss Andrews felt she was being used for her body. She even mentions that she did not like him touching her behind. She feels like a sex object and she is now demonstrating her discomfort with her relationship with him. She is feeling exploited by him.”


“Are you aware that he was having sexual contact with other women from your research?” Willmott asked.


Dr. Geffner chuckled. “It depends upon how you define sexual interaction.”


“Can you define it for us?” Willmott asked motioning toward the jury.


“It could be anal, oral or vaginal,” the Doctor explains. “Kissing is not necessarily sexual contact.”


“Let’s look at the timeline again,” she said as she removed the email from the screen. The timeline was exposed underneath. “Can you explain what is important for us to see in reference to what we just spoke about?”


“Sure,” he answers. “Travis Alexander shows a number of emails sent over a two week period. He has contacted at least three women for a sexual interaction. They do not know about each other until Miss Arias and Miss Andrews figure it out. This leads to Miss Andrews breaking up with Travis.”


“On this timeline, it shows that he was also travelling with Jodi Arias as seen from September 2007 through December. Albuquerque trips and so on. Do you see that?” Willmott asks.


“Yes. That is right.”


“But Miss Andrews is still in the picture, isn’t she?”


“She is. These are some of those puzzle pieces that I try to put together. It shows there is a dichotomous interaction between the two. She wants to break up with him and then gets back together with him. She sees no future with Travis Alexander but continues to get back together with him. It is as if she cannot get away. This is the same interaction we see in his relationship with Miss Arias,” he explained as he looked at the jury.


“There is another break up with Miss Andrews on December 7, right?” Willmott asks as she changes the exhibit on the screen. Her black fingernails disappear from sight after she straightens it.

“If I recall,” Dr. Geffner answers.


“I draw your attention to Exhibit number 794,” Willmott continues. “This an email from Miss Andrews to her parents regarding Travis. She tells her family not to be alarmed as she professes her love to Travis Alexander only weeks after they were broken up. What does this mean to you, Doctor?”


“Again, this is an on and off relationship. It may be an example of one woman but it mirrors his relationship with Jodi Arias. He was still having multiple contacts at one time and he was manipulating and exploiting women for his own needs without regard to their feelings.”


I was furiously taking notes, much like I did for six months as a Juror in a similar trial. I took a second to glance at the Jury and noted that all were staring straight ahead yet not one juror was documenting the evidence they were seeing. I wondered if the defense was aware that they were losing the jury the longer they continued to hear the testimony of the psychologist.


“I am showing you exhibit number 815 dated February 10, 2008. This an email from Travis Alexander to Talle Gluff. They are talking about sex and Travis states he is horny. Can you explain why this is important?” Willmott asked.


“Again, there is a pattern with him of reaching out for sex. He is also conveying that he is a thirty year-old virgin on multiple occasions with multiple women. It is this repeating pattern of manipulation and exploitation of women,” he explains.


We spent the rest of the morning reading texts and emails from Chaitanya Lee and their brief relationship. The Doctor points out that she was snared into many conversations of sex. Of course, it was generally the same repeating stories of the other women and how he was dating Jodi Arias at the same time. He draws attention to his saying he is a virgin and that he gave her the Book of Mormon to read early in their three month relationship. This is a replication of what he did with Jodi Arias.


There is a point in time when Jennifer Willmott makes a point of Travis saying, “What if I promise not to be dead in the garage when you get here.” She and Dr. Geffner share an exchange where it is drawn out that Travis is making multiple suicide references. She brings an example of his saying that he told Jodi Arias that “he wanted to put a gun to his head” and Jodi Arias began crying.


“What does this tell you, Doctor?” Willmott asks.


“It clearly demonstrates an issue that continues to surface. The question I have to ask is, was Miss Arias the victim of domestic violence and abuse? Domestic violence is always kept in secret to the victim. The control and sexual abuse by Travis Alexander is a pattern repeated over and over again.” He straightens himself in his chair and focuses on the jury.


“I must see if we can put the puzzle pieces together based on all these accounts of relationships. I look at the abuse Jodi Arias suffered as a child and it conveys itself in her behavior in her adult life. It created a vulnerability in her future relationships.”


Judge Stevens interrupted and broke the courtroom for a shortened lunch. She had said earlier that she wanted to make up for lost time.


The courtroom reconvened from lunch an hour later and the Jury waited in the deliberation room. Juan Martinez stood and looked toward Judge Stevens. He was slightly bent over as he looked at some papers in front of him on the prosecution table. He would look down and then back at the Judge. He did not look happy even from the view of his back.


“I am objecting to the affidavit of these four witnesses,” Juan stated.


“Please continue,” Judge Stevens said.


Juan raised a packet in the air and pointed to paragraphs. “Paragraphs number one, two and three are objected to based on relevancy. Paragraph five needs to be eliminated with reference to the witness who claims fear of social media. Also, on witness number two, with regards to paragraphs number one, three and nine, threats from Travis Alexander supporters is not founded,” he said as he placed a stack of papers down and picked up another stack.


“We cannot accept paragraphs number one, three, four, five, seven, eight, eleven and fourteen. These need to be excluded. There is lack of foundation and speculation. I want the word, “brainwashed” removed. Also, paragraphs seventeen, eighteen, nineteen and twenty three must be removed.”


Judge Stevens nodded her head and made notations from her seat.


Juan Martinez dropped the packet down and picked up the next one. He was no less kind in his objections to having a multiplicity of paragraphs removed. “Maria de la Rosa affidavits are irrelevant. She is the mitigation specialist and this cannot be admitted. If we do admit it, then we need to remove paragraphs one, two, three, seven, eight and twelve. These are all residual doubt,” he stated emphatically.


“It appears that all these witnesses are afraid to testify?” he questioned. It was clear that he was irritated with the affidavit approach.


“Anything else?” Judge Stevens asked him.


“Nothing for now,” Juan answered. He remained standing when Kirk Nurmi presented his short and brief argument.


“Your honor,” Nurmi began. “We object to these deletions. The state is asking us to preclude mitigation! Apart from hypocrisy, rules of evidence do not apply. These witnesses are afraid of repercussions when testifying.” He looked toward the prosecution table and then back at Judge Stevens after taking a breath. “As this applies to assertions, the witness’ credibility stands to the veracity of their statements. Rules 401, 402 and 403 are not a proper foundation,” he said looking back toward Juan Martinez.


He continued. “Maria de la Rosa’s background is relevant in finding grounds for mitigation. This jury has a right to know why witnesses will not appear!” he demanded.


“Please approach,” Judge Stevens said to the attorneys.


Nobody knew it then but we would be going into the longest sidebar of the trial. It was continuous and unending as they discussed what would remain on the affidavits and what would not.


Dr. Geffner sat in the witness chair and occasionally turned his chair looking toward the empty jury box. Finally, he looked at the Judge. He wanted to excuse himself. The Judge nodded it was okay to step off the stand and he left the courtroom. He returned five minutes later after an apparent restroom visit and made his way back to the stand. He straightened his jacket and made himself comfortable in the witness chair while the sidebar continued.


At one point, I saw Detective Flores glance at his watch and leave the courtroom.


I knew the jury was on the other side of the door behind the jury box wondering what was happening. For the jury, the good thing was that they were in the jury room allowing them to be relaxed in each other’s company. I am sure many of them wondered why they were asked to return for a short lunch only to wait seventy five minutes for the unending sidebar to terminate. They would entertain themselves by making small talk amongst each other. Some would play games on their I-Pads while others would partake in the snacks that are always left in the jury room by the Judge. It was better to be in the jury room than to suffer in silence in the jury box where the juror is always on stage.


Dr. Geffner was listening to the sidebar and casually turning in his chair filling his idle time. I saw Juan Martinez look at him and raise his hand. He looked at the Judge and Judge Stevens looked toward the interested Doctor. She excused him from the stand and told him to take a seat by the defense table.


The sidebar ended after an hour and fifteen minutes and Judge Stevens finally called the jury back in. They filed to their seats remarkably devoid of emotion on their faces.


The demolition of Travis Alexander continued for the rest of the short afternoon with the presentation of the defense affidavit witnesses. Their testimonial statements were shown on the projection screens. Most of the papers had the witness names blacked out with black Sharpie lines. Some of the sheets had blank spaces where witness names should have been.


Jennifer Willmott spent most of the time reading the affidavits to the jury with a periodic question to Doctor Geffner. His answers did not vary from the morning and became repetitive and tired.


One witness statement claimed that he had seen Travis holding Deanna Reid down with a restrained wrist and a knee in the stomach by Travis. He had screamed at her that he was not going to marry her. The witness then confronted Travis about what he had seen and Travis had run away.


In another affidavit, it was claimed that the witness had been on a shared computer with Travis. The witness was looking for some engagement photographs and discovered Travis had made a child pornography folder which caused the computer to crash due to attached viruses. He said he had confronted Travis or Travis had told him that he owned the photos because he was sexually abused by a man when he was twelve.


Another witness in hiding, who worked as a dishwasher for Arias’ father, said that when Jodi Arias worked there she was friendly as well as artistic. He claimed he saw Arias’ father be abusive to her brother, Carl, at this restaurant. He further claimed to corroborate Bobby Juarez and his coming out with a Samurai sword when confronted about hurting Arias.


I looked toward the family who always sits in the front row, who are masterful at not showing emotions on their face despite what they are hearing. Their body language displayed that of being uncomfortable in their seats as they constantly adjusted their positions. Samantha always sits on the end and can usually be seen jotting some notes in her book. I did not see her jotting notes today.


I observed the jury and still no one was taking notes. They looked forward and their faces looked emotionless but I know what they were feeling inside. A jury almost expects that time when the defense is going to throw the victim under the bus. They were served a plate of evidence that did not look like evidence. It looked like witnesses who were hiding from them.


The jury has been tired of the psychological testimony. Dr. Geffner’s opinion sounded nothing like evidence and reeked of subjectivity. Further, they are hungry for information on Jodi Arias and have long sickened of victim bashing.


This jury is composed of reasonable men and women. They are starving for mitigation factors but only receive factors that strengthen aggravation. They care for Travis Alexander and they cannot connect the puzzle piece of why this murder was so heinous in nature. They are also wondering why Jodi Arias was called to the stand without the presence of public or media but four witnesses for the defense could do nothing more than appear in edited affidavits. They do have the option of considering all, some or no part of witness testimony. They wonder why these witnesses could not appear over a telephone speaker if they did not want to testify. As a former Juror, I can comfortably say that the witnesses will be discarded like a candy wrapper in the wind. It does not seem like evidence and instead feels suspect.


Their opinion of Dr. Geffner is the same as that of Dr. Fonseca. They hear words but lack the evidence that juries love to touch, see and feel.


The Judge closed the day with the jury by asking them to stay later for the next day’s proceedings along with a shortened lunch the day after. They are irritated by the slow pace and the delays. They are weary of abiding to a schedule that seems to constantly change. They are most irritated by the attempted destruction of Travis Alexander and the words of the defense continually defiling him and making it seem like murder all over again in a different context.


There is a great hope on the horizon that the jury does not realize. Juan Martinez has not stepped to the plate to present his case. It will be passionate and it will be without deference to human emotion except for the rebirth of Travis Alexander and who he was. Juan knows the defense has built a wall but it has the strength of a house of cards once the verbal wind of Juan Martinez blows.


The jury will know when they go into the deliberation room that the law states, “The State has a burden of proving beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant did not act with (Domestic Violence) justification. If the State fails to carry this burden, than you must find for the defendant.”

This story has not reached its conclusion. Juan Martinez will carry the flag of Travis Alexander and raise him from the dead for the jury to see. He will attack artfully and powerfully. Juan understands the burden on his back and he is responsible to not only Travis Alexander but to the survivors of his murder who resolutely sit in the front row. He knows he has Dr. DeMarte in his corner and he has one hundred and fifty pieces two pieces of pictorial evidence that the jury has not forgotten from Day number two.



The fact that I saw no jurors taking notes for almost the entirety of the day tells me they are learning nothing new as they walk down the path of justice.


A good number of Jurors are not going to sleep well tonight because the images of Travis Alexander will not leave their minds eye and they know it is he who they are responsible to more than the fate of the defendant…

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)


Almost Too Mad To Type

January 21, 2015

Seriously? WHAT THE FUCK!

Your queen is NOT AMUSED!!  I had my appt today.  10 days of antibiotics and cardiologist rescheduled.  FML!! And then I get home, I get on the computer and get to read all the BULLSHIT that DEFINITELY NOT A JUDGE STEPHENS pulled from somewhere out of her ass today.

Just wanted to check in with you all.  There will be blog tomorrow. OH, THERE WILL BE A BLOG!!

RBMD peacing the fuck out!!

Yes I’m Still Sick, So a Guest Blog From Mama Via.

January 20, 2015

OMFG just kill meeeeeeee. I HATE THIS FLU!! My Bedroom

Since I think this may be bubonic plague or ebola or  something, here is Mama Via and I’m going back to bed.  I love you all, but man this is a killer flu.


Why people with Borderline Personality Disorder are Fukkin Crazy and Why The AntiSocial Personality doesn’t Give a FUK!
The first degree I attempted was in “Anthropology”…but, after my dad died in an auto accident, I realized I needed to get an education in something a little more immediately lucrative…there weren’t many ads in the paper that read “Anthropologist Wanted”!  My second attempt at higher education was in “Childhood Education”…until I realized I would be nothing but a glorified babysitter to a bunch of someone else’s undisciplined brats…and the school had this crazy law that you couldn’t “beat some sense” into those little fukkers!  So, I changed to “Special Education”…during my “student teaching” stint, I was placed in a classroom with SEVERELY abused children, children with no shoes or socks, children with bruises, cuts and contusions, children who would wet their pants in fear every afternoon when it was time to go home, children with limps, lisps and stutters, children so traumatized they couldn’t or wouldn’t speak…after 13 weeks, I decided “special education” was not a viable career field for me!  So, my third attempt was to train as an Accountant…you must remember that this was all when a “computer” was only owned by the Government, were the size of a large warehouse, and the “operator” fed it punch cards…all so it could print out a spreadsheet!  In Accounting I, II and III, your handwriting made up 40% of your grade!  After I finished my degree and became a “contributing member of society”, I realized that although I was able to support my son and myself in my earnings, “Accounting” was too restrictive for my more “artistic” temperament, so I continued taking college classes…I worked in an Art degree and an Abnormal Psychology” degree. (I’ve always been drawn to Abnormal Psychology…ever since Igor gave Young Frankenstein “Abby somebody’s” brain…(Abby who?  Abby Normal, I think!  Yes, that’s it! Abby Normal!)) And then, my final degree was in “Architectural and Interior Design”.  The wonderful thing about being a professional student is that you become a bit of a “Jill-Of-All-Trades” and everyone wants you on their team during a game if Trivial Pursuit because of the wealth of “Useless Information” held between your ears! Because if my age, I am now able to attend the University of North Florida for FREE, as long as I don’t want to matriculate! (How was that, for a $10 word?)
So, without further ado, I now present:
BPD is ACTUALLY called “Emotional Unstable Personality Disorder” but it’s easier to say BPD than it is to remember EUPD, although, in Stabbikins case, EUPD is a better definition!
The essential features of EUPD is a “pattern of marked impulsivity and instability of affects, interpersonal relationships and self-image.” (is anyone but me hearing “jodi arias” in those words?)  Symptoms include (intense) fear of abandonment, intense anger and irritability which friends and family have difficulty understanding.  The person diagnosed with EUPD will often “engage in idealization and devaluation of others,, alternating between high positive regard and great disappointment.”  Other symptoms include: out of control emotions, unstable interpersonal relationships, impulsivity accompanied by depression, anger and anxiety, feeling stressed and severe dissociation.
Those suffering with this disorder have INTENSE emotions, both positive and negative. They are highly sensitive; slights are magnified, and overwhelming, they feel GRIEF instead of sadness, HUMILIATION instead of embarrassment, RAGE instead of annoyance, feel VICTIMIZED easily, and feel intense pain with the smallest criticism. Feelings of LOVE become deeper more quickly and persist LONG after a relationship has ended, but fear of abandonment (and need to control) keeps them from “letting go”. They can be exceptionally idealistic, positive, loving and happy, but they can very easily be quickly overwhelmed by negativity.  Rejection, isolation and perceived failure are feelings that always lurk behind every happiness, they suspect “betrayal” and actively look for “proof” of rejection. The word “PERCEIVED” is important with EUPD, this disorder is “all about how they PERCEIVE the world around them and how they PERCEIVE the actions of others.)
Folks with EUPD are extremely sensitive and feel intense joy and gratitude for the smallest act of kindness, and often interpret the kindness they are given as intense love.  Often they become “clinging vines”, and while they desire intimacy, their actions, the need to be in control is often off-putting.  They can quickly shift from extreme love to extreme hate after a disappointment, or a perceived loss of esteem in the eyes of the one they “adore”.  Like a roller-coaster, they can fly from idealizing  to demonizing the person they “love”, especially if they fear or perceive any type of rejection!  There are no “Greys” in their world, it’s black or white.  One extreme or the other.
Impulsive and self-defeating behavior is common with this disorder; substance/alcohol abuse, risky behavior such as unprotected sex, indiscriminate sex with strangers or a string of multiple partners, reckless spending, reckless driving, impulsively leaving a job and/or relationships and reckless confrontational behavior.
Out of control emotions
Unstable interpersonal relationships
Fear of abandonment/rejection
No clear identity
Difficulty in regulating their emotions, fear and anger
Difficulty concentrating, maintaining focus
Hostility toward Family Members
These individuals have difficulty in knowing who/what they are, and try to fill the feelings of emptiness and loss by adopting others values and beliefs.  They have no clear goals for relationships and careers, they “float” along.
Additionally, there are two “types”, I’m prone to accept the “impulsive type” for our princess:
F60.30 Impulsive type

At least three of the following must be present, one of which must be (2):

  1. marked tendency to act unexpectedly and without consideration of the consequences;
  2. marked tendency to engage in quarrelsome behavior and to have conflicts with others, especially when impulsive acts are thwarted or criticized;
  3. liability to outbursts of anger or violence, with inability to control the resulting behavioral explosions;
  4. difficulty in maintaining any course of action that offers no immediate reward;
  5. unstable and capricious (impulsive, whimsical) mood.
Additionally, there are four sub-types, so I believe “Petulant” applies as does “Impulsive”!
Negativistic, impatient, restless, stubborn, defiant. Sullen, pessimistic, resentful, easily slighted and quickly disillusioned.
Capricious, superficial, flighty, distract able, frenetic, seductive, fearing loss becomes agitated, gloomy and irritable.
Second, let’s review Anti-Social Personality Disorder (ASPD)
My first experience with ASPD was with my third (or was it my fourth) ex-husband and also with my fourth (or was it the fifth) ex-husband.  (I had a broken “man-picker” for a while…but, I diagnosed myself, and fixed it!)
At first, I thought that both of these men would have won awards for being the most Selfish, Self-Centered Men in the Universe, but, as it happened, they were both clinically ASPD.  (It’s easy to confuse, I guess)
But, let us just focus on #3/maybe 4.   The doctor explained it to me with four words.  “He has no conscience!” He exhibited a pervasive pattern of disregard and violation of the rights of others, he displayed an “impoverished’ moral sense, no conscience, a history of crime (he had been in prison, convicted of child molestation; he forced his best-friend’s 11 year old daughter to orally copulate while holding a knife at her throat….but, it wasn’t “his” fault…SHE made him do it!  And it wasn’t HIS fault that he lied to me…it was MY fault for finding out!….when I asked him “why didn’t you tell me this before? “Because I knew that if you knew, you wouldn’t date me…or marry me!”), a slew of legal problems, impulsive and aggressive behavior, including verbal, emotional and physical abuse.  (But, it wasn’t HIS fault…*I* made him do it!)
1.  Failure to conform to social norms in regard to lawful behaviors, repeatedly performing acts that are grounds for arrest.
2.  Deception, repeatedly lying, use of aliases, conning or manipulating others for profit or pleasure.
3.  Failure to plan ahead, impulsivity
4.  Irritability and aggressive behavior, assaults, physical fights
5.  Reckless disregard for others, or self.  Risky behavior, no fear of consequences
6.  Irresponsibility, inconsistent behavior, failure to keep a job, failure to honor financial or personal obligations.  Failure to learn from negative consequences.
7.  Lack of remorse, indifference to actions, rationalizing actions after having hurt, mistreated or stolen from another
8.  Callous disregard for the feelings, wants and needs of others. Lack of empathy. Abusive behavior, abusive relationships.
9.  Irresponsibility, disregard for “rules” (rules don’t apply to them)
10. Inability to maintain relationships, yet has no difficulty in establishing them.  Sociopaths are “VERY charming”
11. Low tolerance to frustration, easily moved to aggression/violence.
12. Inability to feel guilt, cannot learn from experience, punishment means nothing.
13.  Blames others or rationalizes behavior
14.  Use “charm” or wit to manipulate others for personal gain, or sheer personal pleasure.
15.  Intense egocentrism, sense of superiority and exhibitionism
16.  Uses intimidation, dishonesty, misrepresentation to get his way.
17.  Cruelty to animals, bullying, explosive anger.
18.  Unnecessary risk-taking, living on “razors edge.

Although considered a lifelong disorder, some symptoms — particularly destructive and criminal behavior and the use of alcohol or drugs — may decrease over time, but it’s not clear whether this decrease is a result of aging or an increased awareness of the consequences of antisocial behavior.

Psychopathy is usually defined as a personality disorder characterized by antisocial behavior, an incapacity for remorse and poor behavioral controls.
MALEVOLENT: including Sadistic and Paranoid features:
Belligerent, mordant, rancorous, vicious, malignant, brutal, resentful, anticipates betrayal and punishment, desires revenge, callous, fearless, guiltless.
Feels intentionally denied and deprived, rapacious, begrudging, envious, seeks retribution, greedy, pleasure in taking more than having.
RISK-TAKING including Histrionic:
Dauntless, intrepid, bold, audacious, reckless, foolhardy, impulsive, unbalanced by hazard.
REPUTATION-DEFENDING including Narcissistic features:
Believes s/he’s infallible, invincible, indomitable, inviolate, intransigent when questioned, over active to slights.
There are ten subtypes listed (partially overlapping with the above) – covetous, risk-taking, malevolent, tyrannical, malignant, unprincipled, disingenuous, spineless, explosive, and abrasive, but the list of “10” is not necessarily comprehensive.

The following conditions commonly coexist with ASPD:

  • Sadistic personality disorder
  • Anxiety Disorder
  • Depressive disorder
  • Impulse control disorders
  • Substance-related disorders
  • Somatization disorder
  • Attention Deficit Disorder
  • borderline Personality Disorder
  • histrionic Personality disorder
  • Narcissistic Personality disorder.
There were four subtypes, referred to as “reactions”; antisocial, dyssocial, sexual and addiction. The antisocial reaction was said to include people who were “basically unsocialized””always in trouble” and not learning from it, maintaining “no loyalties”, selfish, irresponsible, frequently callous and lacking responsibility, with an ability to “rationalize” their behavior and an inability to feel “guilt”.  They are repeatedly in conflicts with society, and blame others.
These people are adept at “finding your weak spot” and “working you” (manipulation) until they get what they want.  They are adept at maneuvering their “victim” into a situation where all the control is in their hands.  In the case of my ex, I was coerced into allowing him “joint” rights on my checking/savings/retirement accounts…then, he blocked me from my own money.  As long as he controlled the money, he knew I had no way to leave!  (But I managed to leave anyway! But, it cost me a fortune to do so…but…THAT was only MONEY…what I KEPT was my self-respect and my freedom!)
I’m sure that as you read thru this, you were able to see Arias in the symptoms!  I know I did!  Unfortunately, psychopaths like Arias, look for people  just like Travis: an easy-going, laid-back gentleman, who will good-naturedly succumb to her demands for control…for a while anyway…but, there are several things a person with these disorders cannot accept: not being in control, rejection (they MUST get “even”)  and not getting what they want!  (In both of the psycho-relationships I was in, I “paid” for my “sins”…and with one of them, specifically, I truly felt that my life was in danger!) But, sometimes the better part of valor is being a yellow-bellied chicken!  Travis, being young, didn’t know what he was dealing with, didn’t realize that he needed to be almost as manipulative and deceitful as Arias is!
I learned in my first marriage that giving the impression that I couldn’t think my way out of a paper sack would save me a lot of pain, suffering and bruises!  Therefore, when dealing with numbers 3/maybe4 and 4/maybe 5, because they believed I was a “SPESHUL snowflake” instead of an intelligent woman, I survived the marriage/divorce a lot better than I would have otherwise.
And, for the life if me, I do not understand exactly why Arias didn’t do as millions if others have done…and just get pregnant to trap her man!  It would have saved serving “natural life” at Perryville, with Auntie Angela (Simpson) as a “Cellie”!
Have a great night everyone.
RBMD peacing the fuck out!

The Motion Ruling I Promised You I Would Fix.

January 16, 2015



Don’t act surprised, we all knew I couldn’t help myself.











The Court has considered the defendant’s  COMPLETELY RIDICULOUS AND FRIVILOUS Motion to Dismiss the State’s Notice of Intent to Seek the Death Penalty Due to Defendant’s Inability to Present a Complete Case for Life (WHATEVER THE FUCK THAT EVEN MEANS) filed September 26, 2014 (with attachments BECAUSE WHY NOT), the defendant’s Motion to Dismiss State’s Notice of Intent to Seek the Death Penalty Due to being whiny bitches October 1, 2014, the State’s Objection to Motion to Dismiss State’s Notice of Intent to Seek the Death Penalty Due to defendant’s Inability to Present a Complete Case for Life filed October 6, 2014, the State’s Objection to Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Notice to Intent to Seek Death Penalty Due to Continue State Misconduct filed October 10, 2014, Motion to Dismiss State’s Notice of Intent to Seek the Death Penalty Due to still being whiny bitches Supplement #1 filed October 24, 2014, the defendant’s Motion to Dismiss All Charges with Prejudice and/or in the Alternative to Dismiss the State’s Notice of Intent to Seek the Death Penalty BECAUSE THAT SOUNDED REALLY FUCKING COOL WHEN ALFRED E. NURMI THOUGHT OF IT AND HE HAD A BLANK MOTION FORM HANDY both filed on November 10, 2014, the State’s Motion for Discover (Compaq Presario Computer)filed November 13, 2014, the State’s Motion for Sanctions (Compaq Presario Computer) filed November 16, 2014, the State’s Motion to Strike (Compaq Presario Computer) filed November 18, 2014, the State’s Objection to Defendant’s  Motion to Dismiss All Charges with Prejudice and/or in the Alternative to Dismiss the State’s Notice of Intent to Seek the Death Penalty because it sounded really fucking cool and a bunch of other horseshit that doesn’t matter anyway(NOTE TO SELF, FIND OUT IF NURMI THINKS HE IS GETTING PAID BY THE PAGE.) filed November 20, 2014, the Defendant’s Motion for Reconsideration: Motion to Dismiss State’s Notice of Intent to Seek the Death Penalty Due to Defendant’s Inability to Present a Complete Case for Life(SERIOUSLY DOES ANYONE EVEN KNOW IF THAT IS A THING) filed November 26, 2014, Objection to Defendant’s Motion for Reconsideration: Motion to Dismiss State’s Notice of Intent to Seek the Death Penalty Due to Defendant’s Inability to Present a Complete Case for Life filed December 1, 2014, YOU KNOW WHAT, LETS JUST MAKE THIS A LOT EASIER FOR EVERYONE READING AND SAY WE ARE GOING TO DEAL WITH A BUNCH OF STUPID TIME WASTING MOTIONS THAT I CAN ONLY ASSUME COME TO ONE OF THE 4 IDIOTS OF THE APOCALYPSE IN THIER DREAMS AND ANSWERS FROM THE STATE TO SAID MOTIONS.

Prosecutorial misconduct is not merely the result of legal error, negligence, mistake, or insignificant impropriety, but, taken as a whole, amounts to intentional conduct which the prosecutor knows to be improper and prejudicial. State v. Aguilar, 217 Ariz. 235, 172 P.3d 423 (App. 2007). To prove prosecutorial misconduct, the proponent must show : (1) the State’s action was improper; and (2) a reasonable likelihood exists that the misconduct could have affected the jury’s verdict, thereby denying the defendant a fair trial. State v. Ramos, 235 Ariz. 230, 330 P.3d 987 (App. 2014); State v. Montano, 204 Ariz. 413, 65 P.3d 61 (2003); State v.Atwood, 171 Ariz. 576, 832 P.2d 593 (1992). To prevail upon a claim of prosecutorial misconduct, a defendant must demonstrate that the prosecutor’s misconduct so infected the trial with unfairness as to make the resulting conviction a denial of due process. Prosecutorial misconduct sufficient to justify reversal must be so pronounced and persistent that it permeates the entire atmosphere of the trial. State v. Edmisten, 220 Ariz. 517, 207 P.3d 770 (2009). There is a distinction between simple prosecutorial error and misconduct that is so egregious that it raises concerns over the integrity and fundamental fairness of the trial. AND ONE THAT ANY FIRST YEAR LAW STUDENT SHOULD PROBABLY KNOW State v. Minnitt, 203 Ariz. 431, 438, 55 P.3d774 (2002); Pool v. Superior Court, 139 Ariz. 98, 105, 677 P.2d 261, 268 (1984). Conduct is egregious when the material at issue was highly significant to the primary jury issue with the potential to have an important effect on the jury’s determination. Donnelly v.DeChristoforo, 416 U.S. 637, 647 (1974). The prosecutor has a duty to learn of any favorable evidence known to others acting on the government’s behalf in the case, including the police. It is the duty of the State as a whole to conduct prosecutions honorably and in compliance with the law. Kyles v. Whitley, 514 U.S. 419, 437 (1995). The trial judge is in the best position to determine the atmosphere of the trial, the circumstances surrounding the incident, the manner in which any objectionable statement was made, and its possible effect on the jury and trial. Statev. Nelson, 229 Ariz. 180, 273 P.3d 632 (2012): State v. Koch, 138 Ariz. 99, 673 P.2d 297 (1983). The prosecutor has wide discretion in deciding whether to seek the death penalty. Allowing prosecutors the discretion to seek the death penalty is constitutional. State v. Roque, 213 Ariz. 193, 226, 141 P.3d 368 (2006); State v. Spears, 184 Ariz. 277, 291, 908 P.2d 1062(1996).

Each BULLSHIT allegation of prosecutorial misconduct claimed by Defendant STABBY ANAL EINSTEIN will be discussed below AND WE WILL FIND OUT EXACTLY HOW EINSTEIN-Y SHE IS.

1. Potential mitigation witnesses will not testify. Defendant claims possible(PLEASE NOTE THE WORDS POTENTIAL AND POSSIBLE, THEY ARE KIND OF IMPORTANT. JUST SAYIN’) mitigation witnesses will not speak with defense counsel and others will not testify at the penalty phase retrial for fear of reprisal and/or “cyberbullying”. Defendant provided PROBABLY FORGED AND OR COERCED affidavits to support her claim in the attachments to the Motion to Dismiss State’s Notice of Intent to Seek the Death Penalty Due to Defendant’s Inability to Present a Complete Case for Life(WE NEED TO CHANGE THAT IT JUST SOUNDS WRONG) filed under seal(BECAUSE THE DEFENSE ARE A BUNCH OF BIG FAT PUSSIES)  on September 26, 2014. In addition, the Court has reviewed the information provided in the sealed supplements filed on January 5, 2015 and January 7, 2015. In the defendant’s motion to reconsider filed November 26, 2014, Defendant STABBY ANAL EINSTEIN argues the decision made by the Court of Appeals on the special action has inhibited her ability to present a complete defense of her life since potential defense witnesses cannot testify in sealed proceedings. This Court disagrees BECAUSE  WE HAVE A FUNCTIONING FRONTAL LOBE. The ruling issued by the Court of Appeals does not address the testimony of any witness other than the defendant.  There are many ways to address the concerns expressed by these potential witnesses.

For example, it is possible that testimony of a potential defense witness could be provided through the testimony of another witness. (See A.R.S. § 13751(C), which provides the prosecution or defendant may present any information that is relevant to any mitigating circumstance regardless of its admissibility under the rules governing Docket Code 019 Form R000A Page 3

the admissibility of evidence in criminal trials.) In fact, that has occurred during the penalty phase retrial. During the testimony of the defense expert witnesses, Dr.SEXPERT and Dr. Robert GOOFY, the defendant elicited information obtained from some of the witnesses listed in the Motion to Dismiss State’s Notice of Intent to Seek the Death Penalty Due to Defendant’s Inability to Present a Complete Case for Life, filed under seal on September 26, 2014. Other options are available if a witness is reluctant or refuses to appear and testify. Defendant could subpoena a witness to appear in court. See A.R.S. § 134071(A)(D). The name of a witness could be sealed to protect the privacy interests of that witness. Defendant could present information from potential witnesses through the mitigation specialist.(THIS IS TOTALLY THE ONE I SAY WE GO WITH JUST BECAUSE IT WOULD BE FUNNY TO WATCH MR MARTINEZ RIP APART CHA CHA.)  The testimony of witnesses who testified at the first trial could be provided to the penalty phase jury through transcripts or the video recording made by the court’s For the Record (FTR) system. Alternatively, affidavits and videotaped statements of a witness could be presented to the penalty phase retrial jury.  The Court finds the defendant has failed to establish any misconduct by the State throughout the course of these proceedings(BECAUSE THERE WAS NONE) that has impaired or hindered the defendant’s ability to present mitigating evidence and/or prove mitigating factors pursuant to A.R.S. § 13751(C). The Court finds no ground for dismissal of the indictment or the Notice of the Intent to Seek the Death Penalty based upon this claim. DENIED

2. Text messages were not timely disclosed. The State provided text messages sent or received OR JUST MADE UP by the victim in October 2010 after initially indicating to the defendant that these text messages were not available DUE TO TECHNICAL DIFFICULTY. Defendant argues there was exculpatory content within these electronic messages which was contrary to the testimony of Detective Flores at a hearing conducted in June 2010. As noted in the defendant’s motion filed October 1, 2014, many of the victim’s text messages and emails were admitted in evidence during the first trial. The defendant has reviewed many of the victim’s emails, text messages and gmail messages in great detail with her expert witnesses during the penalty phase retrial(MOSTLY BECAUSE SHE GOT SUCH A HUGE BUZZ OUT OF THE ONES SHE JUST MADE UP). Defendant has failed to establish the failure to provide the victim’s electronic messages earlier than October 2010 was for any reason other than the messages were not available due to technological issues. The Court finds no ground for dismissal of the indictment or the Notice of the Intent to Seek the Death Penalty based upon this claim. DENIED

3. Defendant’s rights were violated by the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office. (REALLY? I HAVE TO DEAL WITH THIS SHIT TOO? FINE!) Specifically, Defendant alleges three incidents support her claim. First, Defendant alleges her jail cell was searched(LIKE OMG THEY ACTUALLY SEARCH PEOPLE WHO ARE IN JAIL FOR CONTRABAND AND WEAPONS? I’M TOTALLY SHOCKED BY THIS BIT OF INFORMATION) by jail personnel in February 2014. Second, in February 2014, the mitigation specialist was denied entrance to the jail after SMUGGLING the defendant’s drawings with her after a jail visit. Jail personnel deemed the  drawings to be contraband. Finally, in May 2014, a legal document (a photocopy of a book) was taken from the defendant’s cell during a jail search. Defendant “suspects” the book was copied and provided to the prosecutor. These matters were previously addressed by the Court. Defendant cannot show the searches were other than  routine searches conducted as part of security protocols at the jail. Defendant cannot show any prejudice to her case as a result of these jail searches. Defendant failed to provide any evidence to support her allegation that the book taken from her cell was photocopied and/or provided to the prosecutor. With regard to the mitigation specialist, the matter was resolved within a one week period and the mitigation specialist was permitted to resume visits with the defendant(EVEN THOUGH IN MY OPINION THE BITCH SHOULD HAVE BEEN ARRESTED ON THE SPOT. STILL THINKING ABOUT IT CHA CHA, WATCH YOUR STEP IN COURT.) See minute entry dated May 27, 2014. The Court finds no ground for dismissal of the indictment or the Notice of the Intent to Seek the Death Penalty based upon these claims. (MAN THEY REALLY ARE GETTING DESPERATE AREN’T THEY?) DENIED.

4. Inconsistent testimony was given by Detective Flores regarding the sequence of  injuries sustained by the victim. (IS THIS EVER GOING TO GO AWAY. CHRIST I WANTED TO WATCH TV SOMETIME THIS WEEK, ERR I MEAN)The defendant argues it was prosecutorial misconduct for the prosecutor to elicit testimony from the case agent, Detective Esteban Flores, regarding the sequence of injuries sustained by the victim at the Chronis hearing knowing his testimony was inconsistent with the testimony of the medical examiner. In January 2013, the defendant sought a new probable causing hearing (Chronis hearing) arguing that the testimony of Detective Flores at trial warranted a new probable cause finding on the aggravating factor alleged by the State. The Court denied the request for a new finding of probable cause by minute entry dated January 10, 2013. Defendant filed a special action with the Arizona Court of Appeals.(BECAUSE SHE THINKS SHE IS A SPECIAL LITTLE SNOWFLAKE.) The Court of Appeals declined jurisdiction. During the guilt phase, the defendant cross examined both Detective Flores and the medical examiner about the sequence of wounds and the detective’s testimony at the probable cause hearing in August 2009. During the penalty phase retrial, the defendant examined both Detective Flores and the medical examiner about these issues FOR ABOUT 700 HOURS. SOMEBODY CHECK THAT. . Detective Flores has testified and explained to both juries the reasons for his testimony in August 2009. The medical examiner has testified regarding his expert opinion on the sequence of wounds. It is for the jury to determine the credibility of witnesses. The defendant fully explored and argued her position on the sequence of wounds. The Court finds the defendant has failed to show any State misconduct with regard to Detective Flores’ testimony. The Court finds no ground for dismissal of the indictment or the Notice of the Intent to Seek the Death Penalty based upon this Claim. DENIED.

5. There was a delay IN JENNY’S WEED DELIVERY…NO WAIT, SOMEBODY READ THAT LAST PART BACK. OK, MY BAD.  in providing STABBY with the mirror image of the hard drive to the victim’s Compaq Presario computer created on June 11, 2008. The victim’s body was discovered in his home on June 9, 2008. The victim’s Compaq Presario laptop computer was found in the office of his home during the search that followed.  Detective Flores touched a key on the computer with a pen which awakened it from sleep mode. The computer was impounded as evidence on June 10, 2008. On June 11, 2008, the Mesa Police Department made a mirror image of the Toshiba hard drive that was on that laptop computer. The State disclosed the laptop computer to the defense. On June 19, 2009, the laptop computer was turned on and accessed at the Mesa Police Department during a review of evidence meeting attended by attorneys representing the defendant. The case agent, prosecutor, and defense investigator were also present during that meeting.  On January 31, 2013, Lonnie Dworkin, an expert witness for the defendant, testified at the guilt phase trial that he had reviewed items at the Mesa Police Department, including item #390633, the Compaq Presario laptop computer that belonged to the victim. Mr. Dworkin testified he received a mirror image of the Toshiba hard drive for that computer from the Mesa Police Department. According to Detective Perry Smith, who testified at the evidentiary hearing on December 11, 2014, that mirror image was created in December 2009. This mirror image contained changes made to the hard drive when it was awakened from sleep mode by Detective Flores on June 10, 2008 and changes that occurred when it was turned on for review by defense counsel on June 19, 2009. At the guilt phase trial, Mr. Dworkin explained to the jury the procedure he followed to forensically examine the hard drive he received in the E01 file format, including the steps he took to recover lost or deleted folders. He also explained the method he used to retrieve the internet history. Mr. Dworkin provided testimony regarding when the laptop computer was accessed on June 4, 2008. See R.T. January 31, 2013. On February 4, 2013, during cross examination at the guilt phase trial, Mr. Dworkin testified he recalled seeing some pornography on the victim’s computer AND THIS IS SO IMPORTANT I AM ABOUT TO HAVE TO WRITE FOR AN HOUR BECAUSE A GROWN MAN HAD PORN ON HIS COMPUTER. ARREST EVERY MALE AGE 18 AND UP RIGHT NOW.  but he was not asked to look for that type of information. See R.T. February 4, 2013, page 52, line 3 through page 54, line 3. During an interview with a Mesa Police Department detective on December 10, 2014, reference was made to a mirror image of the victim’s hard drive made by the Mesa Police Department on June 11, 2008. Defense counsel requested a copy of that mirror image. The State provided a copy of that mirror image to the defendant in December 2014. According to one of the defendant’s expert witnesses, Bryan Neumeister(WHO IN THIS JUDGES OPINION IS A TOOL. JUST SAYIN’), when the victim’s laptop computer was awakened from sleep mode on June 10, 2008, the computer downloaded updates that were not installed until it was turned on again. This did not occur until June 19, 2009. Thus, the mirror image created on June 11, 2008 should contain the changes made to the hard drive after it was awakened from sleep mode on June 10, 2008 prior to those changes being installed. There is also an issue regarding files being overwritten. The computer experts working with the parties are still analyzing the mirror image of the victim’s hard drive made in June 2008. On January 8, 2015, John Smith, a computer forensic expert witness hired by the defendant, testified at the penalty phase retrial. Mr. Smith examined the mirror images of the hard drive created on June 11, 2008 and December 12, 2009 as well as the original hard drive seized by the Mesa Police Department on June 10, 2008. He testified he had only 3 or 4 days to conduct a review of the June 11, 2008 mirror image of the hard drive. He testified he found data sites containing pornographic links to websites on the Toshiba hard drive. Mr. Smith testified if he had more time to analyze the hard drive it was possible he could have found more pornography links. Mr. Smith testified that none of the images he reviewed were an exact image of the Toshiba hard drive before it was awakened from sleep mode on June 10, 2008. However, the June 11, 2008 hard drive is the closest exact image. The source evidence and mirror images of the hard drive created on June 11, 2008 and December 12, 2009 contained the same pornographic data sites. These data sites provide the historical record to the pornographic sites visited or accessed by that computer. Mr. Smith testified he found artifacts or remnants of porn in the logs and history files. He testified he found no pornographic photographs, videos or other pornographic media on the hard drive. There was no indication data had been manipulated on that hard drive. Mr. Smith also testified the mirror images of the hard drive he reviewed were automatically modified or altered by the computer on June 10, 2008 and June 19, 2009 but the data files containing the pornographic links were still present after the alterations. Mr. Smith testified that the victim’s laptop computer contained numerous cleaner programs. The goal of these programs is to clean the computer and make it run more efficiently. These programs clean the registry and internet history and can be set to run at a regularly scheduled time or can be run manually. REALLY ALFRED E. YOU JUST MADE ME WRITE ALL THIS WHEN IN THE END IT ALL AMOUNTED TO A BIG BUNCH OF NOTHING. I’M RECONSIDERING THOSE SANCTIONS. On January 14, 2015, Mr. Smith testified that a modification to a hard drive does not change the data on the registry tables. No evidence files were deleted and the history or cookies were not affected when the hard drive was accessed on June 10, 2008 or June 19, 2009. The files that were modified or overwritten were the operating files. Defendant claims the failure to provide the defendant with a copy of the mirror image created on June 11, 2008 prior to December 2014 was an intentional disclosure violation. Further, Defendant claims that mirror image contains exculpatory evidence. No testimony was provided at the evidentiary hearing to explain why the Mesa Police Department provided Mr. Dworkin with a hard drive of the victim’s computer created on December 12, 2009. The Court has no basis to find the Mesa Police Department withheld evidence or refused to provide a copy of any evidence to Mr. Dworkin. To the contrary, a mirror image of the victim’s computer was given to Mr. Dworkin. As he testified at the trial, the focus of the defense at that time was not on the pornography contained on the victim’s computer. Rather, the focus was on the timeline of events that occurred on June 4, 2008. Mr. Dworkin was able to testify about those matters at the guilt phase trial. During cross examination at the guilt phase trial, Mr. Dworkin testified he had been interviewed by the prosecutor about the pornography on the victim’s computer but it had been two years earlier and he could not recall specific details or what he had stated during that interview. Exhibit 9 from the evidentiary hearing conducted on December 4, 2014, the Chain of Custody log maintained by the Mesa Police Department, shows that Detective Melendez and Detective Rios removed the computer from the evidence room on June 11, 2008, stating the evidence was out for investigation. Defense counsel and their expert witnesses received a copy of this log. Mr. Dworkin discussed protocols he followed for examining hard drives. As a computer forensic expert, he would have been aware that it is routine for law enforcement to make a mirror image of the hard drive. Detective Melendez was interviewed by defense counsel prior to trial and testified at the guilt phase trial and the penalty phase retrial. He was examined about his review of the laptop computer hard drive. There is no evidence he intentionally hid the existence of the June 11, 2008 mirror image or failed to provide a copy of the mirror image created in June 2008. According to the defense expert, John Smith, the content on the original hard drive (the “source evidence”) and all mirror images is the same with regard to the pornographic data sites to which Mr. Smith testified. In fact, the source evidence and June 11, 2008 mirror image are the same. Defendant argues that failure to provide the June 11, 2008 mirror image could have affected the jury’s verdict in the guilt phase trial because the State argued during closing argument that there was no corroboration for the defendant’s claim that she saw the victim viewing child pornography on his laptop computer. That issue is not properly before this Court. However, Mr. Dworkin testified at the guilt phase trial he had seen pornography on the laptop. Thus the defendant had the opportunity to pursue the issue during the guilt phase trial. The defendant has an expert witness who testified at the penalty phase retrial about the pornography links he found on the victim’s computer. The State may present evidence disputing the findings of that expert. However, the penalty phase retrial jury will have the benefit of the testimony about the contents found on the victim’s computer hard drive in evaluating the defendant’s testimony about what she says she observed the victim doing on January 21, 2008 as well as the testimony of the defendant’s expert witnesses. (OMFG I’M STILL NOT DONE WITH THIS. SOMEBODY IS GETTING TICKETED NEXT TIME THEY HIT GOLDEN CORRAL.)  The original laptop computer and hard drive were disclosed by the State and available for analysis by defense expert witnesses. The evidence at issue was on the source evidence (the original hard drive) and mirror images created from the source evidence. The penalty phase retrial is ongoing. If the defense expert finds additional evidence after further review of the 2008 mirror image, he can be recalled as a witness. Dismissal of the notice of intent to seek the death penalty is not an appropriate sanction for a discovery violation of this nature. The Court finds no ground for dismissal of the indictment or the Notice of the Intent to Seek the Death Penalty based upon this claim. DENIED DENIED DENIED AND I AM SO PISSED OFF RIGHT NOW

6. Social media postings by the case agent’s wife prejudiced the defendant. (,./MZ CBV XM,. .AS.,MAXNF.ADMN JT, SORRY MY HEAD HIT THE KEYBOARD) Defendant  alleges the case agent, Detective Flores, provided nonpublic details about the case to his wife who “tweeted” her opinions on social media. In addition, Detective Flores’ wife supposedly posted a video on You Tube which Defendant Arias describes as a mock movie trailer about the case. Defendant also provided copies of other social media exchanges in which the parties discussed trial matters including a claim that the defendant had a buddy write for her “in prison to create evidence for her story.”See EVERY PIECE OF WASTED PAPER THAT WAS ATTACHED TO THIS ASSININE MOTION. No testimony was provided at the evidentiary hearing regarding these claims BECAUSE WHO NEEDS TESTIMONY WHEN  ONE OF STABBY’S SUPPORTERS SAYS SO IN A LETTER TO THE DEFENSE. STABBY relies on the attachments to her motion filed on October 1, 2014 as support for her allegations. The Court has reviewed those attachments. The Court finds the defendant has failed to establish THAT DETECTIVE FLORES’ WIFE EVEN ACTUALLY EXISTS, NEVERMIND THAT IT WAS HER TALKING ON SOCIAL MEDIA. The attachments to the motion indicate SOMEONE WHO PROFESSED TO BE DETECTIVE FLORES WIFE stated there “was much condemning evidence and situations that most people never heard by watching the trial,” discusses the dismissal of a juror, and discusses a court assistant who allegedly made a derogatory statement about the prosecutor. The Court previously made a record about the matter involving the court assistant. The statement supposedly occurred in the courtroom, not a sealed proceeding. The court assistant denied making the statement. Whether there is any truth to the other statements purportedly made by the detective’s wife in her posts is unclear. The Court does not take lightly the allegation that Detective Flores provided nonpublic information to his wife about the case. Detective Flores has ROLLED HIS EYES SO HARD AT THIS MOTION I’M SURPRISED THEY DID NOT BOUNCE JAUNTILY ACROSS MY COURTROOM.  Defense counsel has not questioned him about these matters or provided any other evidence BECAUSE THERE ISN’T ANY that would permit this Court to find he violated any court orders. Additionally, some of the information referenced in the attachments may have been discussed in open court and thus there was no violation. There have been numerous court hearings on this case, including hearings in chambers and sealed hearings. This Court cannot recall all of the details of those hearings SINCE THIS TRIAL HAS BEEN GOING ON SINCE THE INCEPTION OF TIME. Without transcripts or testimony by individuals present at those hearings, this Court has insufficient information to find a violation of the court’s orders. The Court is unaware of any legal reason the detective’s wife should be restricted from providing her opinion or commenting about the case on social media. Even if the court had evidence that Detective Flores had discussed matters from a sealed proceeding with his wife, Defendant has failed to show that it affected her case in any way. The penalty phase retrial jurors were questioned about any prior knowledge of the case including information obtained through the media. None of the jurors indicated any knowledge about these social media exchanges. Defendant does not allege how her case was prejudiced by these incidents. The Court finds no ground for dismissal of the indictment or the Notice of the Intent to Seek the Death Penalty based upon this claim. DOUBLE DOG DENIED THE COURT ALSO HIGHLY RECOMMENDS THAT THE DEFENSE STOP LETTING A CRACKPOT WHO WANTS TO BE STABBY’S BESTEST FRIEND INTERFERE WITH THE DIRECTION OF THIS TRIAL.

7. Detective Flores allegedly commented or provided information to the press about the dismissal of a juror. BECUASE SOME CRAZY BITCH ON SOCIAL MEDIA MADE IT UP,  no testimony was provided at the evidentiary hearing about this claim. Exhibit G to the defendant’s motion filed on October 1, 2014 contains a social media message allegedly from the detective’s wife referencing a conversation with a juror that occurred in chambers. It is unknown how the information was provided to Ms. Flores. Defendant presumes the information came from the detective. Defendant does not allege how her case was affected by the social media statement. Even if the detective had discussed a sealed matter with his wife, Defendant has not shown that her case was affected in any way. The jurors empanelled for the penalty phase retrial were questioned about any knowledge about the case and none of them referenced any knowledge of this incident. Based upon the information provided, the Court finds no ground for dismissal of the indictment or the Notice of the Intent to Seek the Death Penalty based upon this claim. TRIPLE DIP DENIED

8. The Maricopa County Sheriff(REALLY? THE SHERIFF AGAIN?) made harassing comments about POOR MUFFIN, I MEAN STABBY  to the media BECAUSE HE IS A YELLY, GRILLY, BAD MAN JUST LIKE JUAN. STABBY claims (A LOT OF THINGS, NONE OF WHICH HAVE BEEN PROVEN TO BE TRUE) the Maricopa County Sheriff responded to media inquiries about a pleading allegedly filed by the defendant and those responses were intended to harass the defendant. A document was filed with the federal court alleging violations of law relating to Defendant EINSTEIN. The document, purportedly filed by or on behalf of the defendant, alleged various ways(NONE OF WHICH WERE ACTUALLY DESCRIBED,  STABBY had been improperly treated while in custody. The media apparently contacted the Maricopa County Sheriff seeking his response to the allegations. The sheriff denied the allegations in the document. It is unclear whether the sheriff viewed any document prior to speaking with the media. However, the sheriff told the media that inmates are not required to state the pledge of allegiance in order to receive meals. The sheriff also stated he had no knowledge of a Hepatitis C infection at the jail. He denied that the defendant was videotaped while in the restroom and that he or his staff had intercepted letters from or to the defendant and provided them to the media. The sheriff also denied the allegation that the defendant was denied medical treatment while in the jail.  SINCE SHE KNEW NONE OF THAT WAS GOING TO FLY, Defendant now asserts she was harassed by the sheriff’s comments.(HMM, I WASN’T THERE/THE NINJA’S DID IT-THE SHERIFF HARASSED STABBY/HIS COMMENTS HARRASED ME) This situation occurred after the first trial and before the penalty phase retrial began. Defendant does not suggest that any information provided by the sheriff was inaccurate or misleading. During jury selection, the potential jurors for the penalty phase retrial were questioned about their knowledge of the case and any media coverage of the case. The defendant had an opportunity to question each potential juror about this incident. Knowledge of this incident was not reported by any of the jurors selected for the penalty phase retrial. Defendant has not shown any prejudice to her case from this incident. The Court finds no ground for dismissal of the indictment or the Notice of the Intent to Seek the Death Penalty based upon this claim.  NEGADO

9. Detective Flores “awakened” the victim’s computer from sleep mode on June 10, REALLY, WE’RE BACK TO THIS AGAIN? FUCK IT DENIED.

10. Evidence was possibly destroyed when the victim’s computer was accessed on June 19, 2009. Detective Flores and the prosecutor were present when former defense counsel for the defendant viewed the victim’s computer on June 19, 2009. REALLY, SHE’S BLAMING HER OWN DEFENSE NOW? WELL, AT LEAST IT’S A NEW IDEA.  Turning on the computer at that time changed the hard drive on the victim’s computer. The Mesa Police Department made a mirror image of the victim’s computer on June 11, 2008, the day after the victim’s computer was seized. Any changes that were made to the hard drive as a result of turning on the computer without a write blocker on June 19, 2009 will not affect the content of the mirror image created on June 11, 2008. The Court finds no ground for dismissal of the indictment or the Notice of the Intent to Seek the Death Penalty based upon this claim. JE REFUSE’

11. Prior attorneys for the defendant were ineffective. Defendant claims her former attorneys were ineffective on June 19, 2009 when they permitted the victim’s computer to be turned on without proper precautions being taken to preserve evidence on that computer. WAIT A MINUTE, DID I NOT JUST RULE ON THIS ONLY WORDED SLIGHTLY DIFFERENTLY? [あらがう

12. Detective Melendez testified at trial and the penalty phase retrial that he found no pornography or viruses on the victim’s computer. Detective Melendez testified at the guilt phase trial on April 23, 2013 that he examined the internet history on the victim’s computer and found no adult sites. He testified he looked at the computer files and found no images of children. At the penalty phase retrial, Detective Melendez testified he found no pornography or viruses on the victim’s computer. The defendant has one or more expert witnesses who analyzed the mirror image of the hard drive to the victim’s laptop computer. Lonnie Dworkin examined the hard drive to the victim’s laptop computer and testified on behalf of the defendant at the guilt phase trial. See paragraph 5 above. John Smith testified at the penalty phase retrial that there were pornography links found on data sites. In addition, he found viruses or malware on the victim’s computer. Detective Melendez was subject to cross examination at all proceedings at which he testified and can be recalled by the defense at the penalty phase retrial. Defendant could have called witnesses to dispute his findings at the guilt phase trial. The defendant presented evidence to the penalty phase retrial jury on this issue. It is the role of the jury to resolve any factual disputes, evaluate the credibility of witnesses and determine the significance of the evidence AND I STOPPED GIVING A FUCK 4 MOTIONS AGO. The Court finds no ground for dismissal of the indictment or the Notice of Intent to Seek the Death Penalty based upon this claim. BESTREITEN

13. Comments by the prosecutor during a bench conference were PRETTY MUCH DEAD ON.  Defendant alleges the prosecutor made a comment to Defense Counsel during a bench conference that was insulting and unprofessional. WAIT. WHAT? HOW THE FUCK DID MY CLERK EVEN LET THIS MOTION THROUGH. THEY ACTUALLY WANT ME TO CONSIDER REMOVING THE DEATH PENALTY BECAUSE POOR MUFFINS LAWYERS FEELINGS GOT HURT? DID SOMEBODY SLIP ME A MICKEY. AM I BEING PUNKED? FIIIINE!! BLAH BLAH BLAH LEGAL STUFF. DEFUCKINGNIED

14. The prosecutor harassed a defense witness BY DOING HIS JOB. THE MORE INTELLIGENT THAN EINSTEIN-Y ONE alleges the prosecutor harassed an expert witness at the guilt phase trial by suggesting the witness had inappropriate feelings toward the defendant. This matter was addressed during the guilt phase trial. The State suggested an expert witness for the defendant had Developed personal feelings toward the defendant and lost his professional objectivity. The prosecutor referred to a gift the witness gave to the defendant and the number of visits (12) the witness made to see her as the basis for his questions. See cross examination of Dr. Samuels on March 18, 2013. PLEASE PAY ATTENTION TO THIS PART. A party is entitled to explore the bias, credibility and motive of witnesses. The prosecutor zealously cross examined the defense expert on these matters. Defense Counsel questioned the witness about these issues on redirect examination. The Court finds no basis to conclude there was prosecutorial misconduct. The Court finds no ground for dismissal of the indictment or the Notice of the Intent to Seek the Death Penalty based upon this claim.  CAN I ACTUALLY DENY THIS TWICE? SOMEBODY HAVE MY CLERK LOOK THAT UP.

15. The prosecutor signed an autograph OMFG DENIED.

16. Reluctance of witnesses to testify at penalty phase retrial. Defendant claims that potential defense witnesses have refused to participate in the penalty phase retrial because they fear the prosecutor may make “improper personal attacks in court and inspire others to attack them outside court.” See page 19, defendant’s October 1, 2014 Motion to Dismiss. ONCE AGAIN PLEASE PAY ATTENTION A party has the right to challenge the credibility, bias and motive of a witness unless the court determines the probative value of the evidence is outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice or will confuse the issues. See Rule 403, Arizona Rules of Evidence. If the challenge is objectionable, the opposing party has the right to object and the court will rule. In this case, the prosecutor has zealously cross examined the witnesses. The courtroom is open to the public. The court cannot control what the public and media report about what they observe in the courtroom. OKAY YOU KNOW WHAT? MY HAND HURTS, I NEED A STABBY STRENGTH TYLENOL AND I ALREADY COVERED THIS SHIT. OTKAZ


IT IS ORDERED denying the defendant’s ridiculous, monotonous, and complete waste of time never mind all the dead trees that have resulted from all these motions.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED denying the State’s Motion for Sanctions (Compaq

Presario Computer) filed November 16, 2014 and the State’s Motion to Strike


PayPal Donate Button

Hai! If you enjoy my blog please consider a donation. All donations are hugely appreciated.

Varmt News Network

It's the Internet.


Just another site

Asleep in Left Field-My Life

4 out of 5 Friends recommend this site

Out in left field

(Totally fictional) Drama Queen Stories


sometimes, there are monsters walking amongst us