Originally Posted by yorkietalkjilly (Post 4183924)

Juan Martinez does have a way of even making a highly seemingly credible expert witness like LaViolette vulnerable on the stand and he is making it very clear she fell hook, line 'n sinker for Arias' story. He's slowly making is fairly apparent that LaViolette thinks of Arias as if she were one of her private patients and not someone on trial for life that she needed to assess as to her credibility, psychological state now and at the time of the crime and testify as to her conclusions. I cannot see from the testimony of hers that I've heard that she ever even considered that Travis could have been a victim of a "Fatal Attraction" type situation - with a far worse ending than the movie. She doesn't seem to have any ability to ever look at the relationship between the two as anything but Alexander in the role of male-abuser - period. I thought JM would use a different method of handling Alyce LaViolette than the last expert but he's just bulldogging right ahead relentlessly exposing this lady's seeming bias. I'll have to admit I'm grudginly admiring that! He treats her like the for-hire witness she's turning out to be. But if she just once or twice would ever see any of the issues from Alexander's point of view, she might seem more open-minded and fair to me but she never ever seems to give any credence to anything Travis Alexander typed, said or reportedly said that doesn't pigeon-hole him only one way - the aggressor and the abuser. I would think a so-called psychologist would be more center-of-the-road and consider that her current client might be presenting her with a very one-sided view of any relationship, particularly if that client's life could be at risk unless they can successfully impress a single juror that the client was the "real" victim in this situation; and that largely achievable through that same psychologist's court testimony. But she always sees every issue discussed from only Arias' POV and I think to be more credible she would need to tailor her assessments with slightly less defense prejudice. That extreme prejudice is very hard to accept and still see her as a totally professional and clinical expert, able to equitably assess any situation from all sides. She's coming off as just what she really is - a bought-and-paid-for defense witness whose job it is to further sell Arias' story to that one juror that could be leaning Arias' way. I wonder if she ever admits to herself at home at night that she could have been expertly lied to, hoodwinked and circle-talked, too?

When I see an expert witness for the defense on the stand, I fall hard for those that are clever enough to appear clinical and cold and rigidly impartial. Those that can come off that way, though they may be a soul-less sold-out shill and putting 3 kids through Harvard on their defense-testimony dollars, really do impress me the most - even when I can see right through them. :)

Originally Posted by ladyjane (Post 4183990)

I think she took it for money. She does not impress me at all. Someone said that she has only testified in 6 trials...and she thought she could do this one? I believe she bit off more than she could chew...she is not an expert witness and is in over her head.

Originally Posted by ladyjane (Post 4183990)

I think she took it for money. She does not impress me at all. Someone said that she has only testified in 6 trials...and she thought she could do this one? I believe she bit off more than she could chew...she is not an expert witness and is in over her head.

Originally Posted by Nancy1999 (Post 4184011)

She says that she's testified at around 8, but under 10 murder trials, but lots of civil case trials, I can't remember the number but it was large. She really is considered an expert witness in the area of domestic violence. I don't understand why the expert witness is so limited as to what they can look at, this doesn't seem right. I don’t think she’s doing a good job because she showing too much of her frustration. She should just answer the questions yes or no and allow the defense to clear up any misunderstandings on cross. I’m anxious to hear the jury’s questions.

Originally Posted by yorkietalkjilly (Post 4184016)

Thank goodness it's not just me! Those talking heads on television seem to think she hung the moon and to me she is so wildly one-sided and narrow-minded that she's almost laughable as an expert witness. I think that's why Juan is letting her have it. Even the gullible shill should be able to disguise their purposes and motives a little better than this!

Originally Posted by yorkietalkjilly (Post 4184084)

Oh dear - did I just hear that Miss Jodi Arias had a manifesto??? You know I was in the kitchen the other day and thought I'd heard that word come up but the phone rang and from that point on I forgot about it. But they just mentioned it again on HLN and some talking head just said something about "What's a terrorist? A murderer with a manifesto"!!!!! Dear goodness, going to have to go google that and try to find out about that little nugget!

Casual question: How many people do you know even casually who have written a manifesto?

Originally Posted by ladyjane (Post 4184093)

And gave out autographed copies of it!?!??!?!? :eek::eek::eek:

Originally Posted by ladyjane (Post 4184100)

Somehow I missed this.....Jodi was at his house, peering through the window, watching him with another woman??????
OMG.....if that is not a bunny boiler :eek::eek::eek: , I don't know what is.

Originally Posted by yorkietalkjilly (Post 4184084)

Oh dear - did I just hear that Miss Jodi Arias had a manifesto??? You know I was in the kitchen the other day and thought I'd heard that word come up but the phone rang and from that point on I forgot about it. But they just mentioned it again on HLN and some talking head just said something about "What's a terrorist? A murderer with a manifesto"!!!!! Dear goodness, going to have to go google that and try to find out about that little nugget!

Casual question: How many people do you know even casually who have written a manifesto?

Originally Posted by Nancy1999 (Post 4184156)

Did you read she thought she was smarter than Einstein? That really struck with me, because I believe she did thinks she was smarter than the rest of us, sociopaths usually believe they are more brilliant than the rest of us peasants. The girls in jail says she’s just brilliant and so articulate. :rolleyes: I have a feeling that’s the caliber of girls who have hung around with Jodi, and while she does use a lot of big words, she often uses them inappropriately.

I do think Jose is making some good points today, I really feel like he has shown Alyce to be biased on a point by point basis.

Originally Posted by ladyjane (Post 4184268)

I cannot believe this "expert" is saying that a person being stalked would not converse with the stalker and/or have sex with him/her.

Even IF he was not afraid, it does NOT mean she was not stalking him. WTF .. this is making me crazy.