Monthly Archives: March 2013

Arias Trial 3/29

**UPDATE**

After speaking to each juror separately the court will rule that there was no misconduct on the part of the prosecution. Sources in court yesterday afternoon said the jury is still ‘intact’. This may have been a result of a paralegal (on the defense side) who watched HLN the night before and thought Jean Casares said she saw a juror watching the prosecutor signing autographs and taking pictures in front of the court with his fans. Jean was called to the stand and questioned by Nurmi and Martinez and said she had only suggested that she was ‘concerned’ that a juror might see the prosecutor with fans. Turns out it was a waste of time (except for Mr. Nurmi who gets $225.00 an hour). I have heard the Nurmi will still be bringing in pictures and video to push this issue.

Also to those who follow this blog- I am new to blogging and just realized that every time I edit you get another update.  One day I edited four times…oops. To avoid filling your e-mail with my blog I will try to only post once a day, and usually only when there is court, unless there is an update like today.  Thanks for understanding.

Arias Trial-3/28 summary

***The Defense is saying there is Prosecutorial Misconduct due to JM having pictures taken and signing autographs outside the courtroom.  He brings up Dr. Drew’s juror- Katie (who is in the court…Dr. Drew should be interesting tonight). JM says it is outside the court and therefore not misconduct. They are saying a juror saw JM with his fans. Jean Casarez has now been called to the stand. Nurmi is questioning her. The claim is she saw a juror watching JM and fans. Jean now says she DID NOT see a juror watching JM. Jean now says she meant she was concerned a juror might see that as she has seen a juror outside. She says she never saw JM with fans personally- just on video. JM asks her how many times she has seen him walk out the front doors…she says never.  Council approaches the bench. Jury comes in…

 

Dr. LaViolette/Jennifer Wilmott (defense)

  1. Back to the Continuum. It’s just a framework. Relationships don’t always fit ‘nicely’ into this framework.
  2. Do victims face scrutiny? Yes…media portrayals like ‘The Burning Bed’,  ‘Enough’ with popular actresses portrayed as saints and lesser-known male actors as purely evil. Doesn’t really fit. Not realistic. More judgemental on the woman- why didn’t she leave or if he got better why didn’t she go back.?<Sidebar> She found Probation officers and other groups have judged the victim more harshly than the Perpetrator. Victims feel judged.  
  3. THIS CASE: She reviewed paperwork. She didn’t immediately take the case.  Then she spent 8 hours with JA one day and a few more hours the next day.

<S> Then she took the case. Then sent more stuff…48hrs, journals, i-m’s, texts, e=m’s, interviews (20), 44 hrs with JA, Dr. Samuels and Dr.Demartes, Crime scene autopsy photos.

  1. She does not do testing. Just talks. Connects with the client, builds trust. Does this mean that you like them?  I find people interesting and very few are not likable. Cloud your judgment? No they tell me more.  Spends a lot of time investigating. 
  2. Did you ever give her anything? Sent 4 books, magazines. <S> Why? Because I think jail is boring and get her educational stuff for trial. She has done this in other cases. Not about helping herself (the Dr.). Any rules against this? No.
  3. JA’s family. <S> Based on interview she read. There was physical discipline- some went over the line, like leaving welts. Too strict, too harsh. Father was jealous and controlling and manipulative. He made statements about her weight, didn’t want Mom to be with sisters/family. He was inappropriate with Jodi…he screamed at a little boy she liked…said her boobs were too small-sexually inappropriate. She said JA learned about loyalty but also giving up things she loved for someone else. Stay through thick and thin even with abuse. Actions speak louder than words-we learn from observation. Issue with her Mom. Grandparents say JA is angry Mom didn’t protect her from Dad. When little sister and brother (11 years younger) were born the 2 older kids became invisible (when in teens-important).
  4. Relationship with JA and Travis. JA and Travis meet in Vegas. Went to Banquet- Travis borrowed a dress for her. Then JA sat in preferred seating with Travis. He pursued her. Told her he was Morman- she was impressed with the family values. There is a power difference. JA ends relationship with Darryl within a week. Travis is calling her. She meets Travis at the Hughe’s.
  5. Weekend at the Hughes. Travis ignores her at first. They watch videos. He sneaks into her room…kissing, oral sex. She was uncomfortable. Many women don’t know how to stand up for self and say no. Church the next morning. (JA is not a Mormon yet). Sees Travis a few days later at Starbucks, got the Book of Mormon. He says he’s horny, she performs oral on him in the car. He leaves. She’s vulnerable and her boundaries are ‘fluid’. Missionaries come to JA’s house.
  6. Erinburgh. (So they could meet half way). She thought it would be romantic but it was all about sex. But she stayed. Then they leave and he doesn’t call- she feels stupid and used. He finally calls and she is happy that he cares. It speaks to hope. Sex is a powerful way to connect.

10. JA is baptized within 2 months of meeting Travis…he baptizes her. It was important to her – spiritually and because Travis did it. He is a spiritual mentor. (Break). After they had anal sex. JA said anal and oral weren’t sinful. The conflict is she is in a sexual relationship, which she is not supposed to be, but her mentor says it’s ok. He leaves.

11. Surprise visit from Travis. Late at night. Jan. 2007.

12. E-mail from 1/7/2007. JA wants Travis to define the relationship, she is monogamous. <S> Seeds of jealousy. Travis says it’s okay to date. <S> She feels she shouldn’t go out. She doesn’t like to hurt others feelings.

13. E-mails- The Hughes’ to Travis. (1/2007). They were important to Travis. <S> First e-m is ‘you crossed the line’. The summary… <S> Travis has responded to the Hughes and they have indicated to advise JA to move on from the relationship…that Travis had been abusive to women <O> That is important. There were issues (with Travis) with women.  How Travis is treating Jodi. His prior treatment of other women. Info about his childhood and how it effects him now.  Ms. Hughes said she would forbid her sister to date Travis. Travis refused to look at his childhood and wouldn’t get counseling. Info about manipulating women, calling JA a ‘skank’ and acting like it was a joke, not allowing pictures of them to be posted. They called it abusive. <S> Does she consider any of this abusive? Within a context…it’s significant because these are people he values.

14. END

15. The judge tells the jury they want to speak to each of them. I assume this is to find out if any of them saw JM with fans outside the courtroom.

People- don’t get too worried about her getting in the ‘abuse’ claim, I am sure JM has it handled and will clear Travis’ name.

Arias Trial 3/27

Court is canceled today. Court resumes tomorrow at 9:30 pacific time. According to several sources Jodi Arias is sick.  She was present for the hearing this morning but at the end J. Wilmott poured her some water then took her aside and insisted she take her medicine.  I also heard Samantha (Travis’s sister)  ran out of the courtroom in tears today after  hearing the victim impact statements regarding a case being tried in the same court. The man was sentenced to life without parole (he stabbed someone repeatedly with a screwdriver and killed them).

Arias Trial-3/26-summary

Dr. LaViolette/Jennifer Wilmott (defense)

Still establishing work history:

  1. She has worked with: Police, on a board, Military, and Corporations.
  2. She uses humor to deal with a serious topic.
  3. She faced some discrimination early on partly due to enacting new laws.
  4. She does (and has) always worked with men and women.
  5. In Court: On the Defense side 16 times, prosecution 9. She has turned down cases due to time restrictions- she won’t do a case unless she has the time to do a good job. She has testified 18 times. She has represented men and women. She started on this case in Sept./Oct. 2011 and is paid $250 for research and $300 to testify per hour.
  6. Exhibit- Continuum about DV (Domestic Violence).  About varying degrees of abuse, including verbal and physical. Strong point: There can be an isolated act of aggression even with someone with no history of abuse.
  7. Name calling (she asks if she can swear) ‘Bitch’, ‘Bastard’, swearing.
  8. Character assassination (considered worse) ‘whore’, ‘slut’, ‘ugly’, ‘worthless.
  9. Abusers often were abused themselves when young.

10. Another type of threat (besides killing) is threat of abandonment.

11. Abusers can have fear of being found out, losing their job.

12. Jealousy…abuser doesn’t want you to spend time with other sex, family…

13. Verbal and emotional abuse is much more frequent (weekly) than physical (over months). No magical number as to when it happens.

14. Aggression (like kicking a car), Controlling (calling during the day to see where you are), submitting to sexual acts, checking e-m’s, facebook, gps.

15. Jealousy is a controlling behavior. They control, interrogate, put down friends or family. More extreme: destruction of property- first general (like punching a hole in the wall) then personal (the victim’s property). Sexual abuse, changing the victim’s personality. Occurs over time.  At the end more violent – road rage, bar fight. Lastly Terrorism: extreme stalking, violating protective orders hostage situations monopolization of perception (you see through the perpetrator’s eyes- like subtle mind control (like you get a new job and hey say ‘well I guess they’ll hire anyone. Money, wealth and sex can all effect the balance of power.

16. Threats- to kill self or a well thought out murder (of the victim), torturing pets.

17. Extreme isolation from families, etc. and not talking to anyone about what’s going on. They don’t want people to think they have a bad partner, not being able to write bad things, dismantling the car. Believe what the abuser tells you (like you’re fat…). Your choices and your world are narrowed. The abused does not want to make the abuser lose their job or mar their reputation.

18. Balance of power shifts.

19. You can have a terrorist who never lays a hand on you.

20. Sexual humiliation and degradation. Abused sometimes blame themselves for the abuse.

21. Exacerbating factors (the perpetrator)-your family history (neglect, abuse), previous abusive relationships, substance abuse, psychological issues.

Done with the Continuum!

Afternoon Session:

  1. Has she used the Continuum in court before? Yes…
  2. There is a range of behaviors.
  3. The Continuum was peer reviewed and published.
  4. Batterers instill fear in families and others who care about them.
  5. Most rage aimed at intimate partner, sometimes children. The intimate partner probably won’t tell, and if married may stay. This is why they don’t act out at the workplace. No witnesses.
  6. Intimate violence is the new term.
  7. Asks the Dr. to do a walk through of an abusive relationship. Starts with being in love. First relationship. (Most could live with an abuser for a year…). Dates—meeting family…gets mad…silent treatment…then ok…then gets mad and they call you names…you don’t leave…now you’re more serious with each other… they break something of yours…still don’t leave…now together 1-2 years…another argument, one where you are slapped…are you going to stop loving because they hit you?  Clash of values- I shouldn’t be mistreated but should be compassionate and forgiving…I have made promises in this relationship. This clash can make you stay- there is a possibility of change. Learned helplessness- they feel helpless. Two main reasons they stay- hope and fear. Hope backfires in an abusive relationship. Fear takes longer to develop.  Back to the slap- most still would not leave.  Plus shame attached to those who don’t leave even if they have the financial ability to. Often women in shelters have few resources. Couples without kids still have the emotional bond. Belief systems- women still feel if the relationship fails they fail…men are less likely to stay. Religious beliefs, green card dependent, gay, poor, all could have issues. Difficult to leave. A lot of women have no proof of the abuse or may lie about it. Become more isolated as you feel you can’t talk to people. Self esteem suffers – things they said they would never stand for they now do.  Feel terrible about themselves. Often say they’re not afraid…until abuse escalates. You become another person- even the abuser loses more respect for you. The longer together the more invested you are- buying things together, traveling. Victim blame- why victims tend to be flaky- don’t show up for court, etc…blame selves for being victimized. In sexual assault and DV often the victim is blamed. Batterer will externalize the blame. Abusers self esteem isn’t vey good either though it may not appear that way. Behavioral self blame- you change what you do- don’t smart mouth back. Blame self for car robbery because they left their door unlocked. Character logical self blame- what did I do to provoke it…if I’m a good person why do I get treated this way- what’s wrong with me? Difficult to leave as you’re not worthy, you’re ashamed.
  8. The Hostage syndrome- Stockholm Sweden.  The tellers were held hostage and 2/3 testified for the robbers. First you perceive a threat, the believe it can happen, then it stabilizes- you’re allowed to go to the restroom, so perception of kindness, then monopolization of perception…isolated- then perceive you cannot escape. How it applies to DV situation: Perception of emotional and physical violence. If you have been harmed they are capable of hurting you.  Then there are periods of kindness and good times. Eventually you can stop the hope.
  9. Chronic Apprehension- ‘substance abusers get a break, but those who live with them never get a break’…same with DV. You begin to develop the apprehension because you know it will happen again.

10. The relationship usually starts out good (in DV).

11. Cycle of violence. At tension building phase, then an incident, then the honeymoon phase. Some people never get a honeymoon or it diminishes over time. There is no magic number as to how long these phases last. The incidents escalate in intensity and frequency and the honeymoon can diminish. Normal relationships can also be cyclical but not violent.

12. There’s a difference in the way men and women fear. Women know they’re more likely targets…so more cautious the men who are not that way. TV shows where women are being stalked, DV, etc. It’s more difficult to abuse a man. Unless a woman has a weapon. Women are scared more rapidly and will tend to retain fear and become more cautious.

13. There’s a difference in anger too.  Women are not praised for their anger, unless defending their kids.  What do people call angry women? Men are less harshly judged.

14. Difference in brains too. <Sidebar>

15. Women she has treated tend to over empathize. (Battered men too). Women after a little time will sympathize with their men. It can keep them in a relationship longer.

16. Empathy and brain scans. Women’s brains <Sidebar>

17. Men groups. Goal to change belief systems about using aggression and developing empathy. Empathize for self (when they were children), other men in the group, their children then their partner.

18. Hypothetical- Man who as a boy had extreme neglect, homeless, dirty, parents were drug addicts. He would see/hear violence between Mom and Dad. He would have a number of issues in a relationship. <Sidebar> Though child not hit, still abusive childhood. Child could blame self.  They learn negative coping skills. Sometimes you do what your parents did. When you grow up fearful you grow up fearful. You can still have a successful job, but not relationship. When feeling powerless they will become more powerful, bigger. Don’t have the skills to deal with a personal relationship. Things happening to older kids can be tolerated better.

19. Chronic combat readiness- kids from abuse…you grow up in a basic war zone so you’re hyper vigilant. Operating from their reptilian brain. A lot of bullies come from abusive families. The degree of abuse in the environment will directly effect the degree of severity of abuse later.

Afternoon Break

  1. Regarding victims when they come to testify <Sidebar>
  2. Abused women and whether they seek the police, medical, testify.  Many don’t make police reports. Some change their minds, some follow through. When called to testify many recant. Sometimes it takes a long time to get to court, so some reconcile. They don’t want partner to lose job, have a record, or pay fees/fines, be put on probation, etc. It effects the entire family. About 80% recant. Victim can feel blamed.
  3. Men’s group. She invites the victim (female) for an interview to get a bigger picture. If there’s DV the truth is usually worse than either side will admit. Women tend to be protective.
  4. She won’t counsel couples in DV situations together. That is a conflict. Also safety of the survivor is important.
  5. She looks for the balance of power. While separated she will question them. (I can’t list all of these…she is very wordy! Trust me it doesn’t apply to this case.)
  6. Cycle of violence -1979. The descriptions in the book were extreme. It’s not used as much today because controversy over the honeymoon phase (it doesn’t always happen).
  7. She lists some more current books on DV.
  8. She works with childhood trauma.
  9. Battered women have the full range of family history.  Men abusers tend tom have a violent history or are exposed to DV. Women who come from chronic abuse do tend to repeat abusive relationships. Women generally say emotional/verbal abuse is worse than physical, maybe because it happens more frequently. Hurts worse from someone you love.

10. History of the abuser—mostly it’s exposure. <Sidebar> Children who grow up in an abusive family don’t always grow up abusers…we don’t have all the information…<Objection>

FYI: I left out some case studies and examples because it was just too much!

Tomorrow Court resumes at 10:45.

Arias Trial summary 3/25/13

Dr. Samuels vs. Juan Martinez

  1. JM brought up the different scores the Dr. had on his PDS. Test. He says he re-did the scoring while he was in Palm Springs and he did not have the original score sheet with him and this was not intended for publishing. (The scores were different). JM calls him ‘sloppy’ the Dr. syas the criteria was met either way.
  2. JM asks if he re-scored the MCMI also- he says: “No”.  Then JM brings out another test and the Dr. has to agree there was a second scoring.
  3. JM brings up the criteria for PTSD, the D section.  He points out PTSD means Post or after the event.  D1 is about difficulty sleeping. D2 is about anger/outbursts.  JM points out JA (Jodi Arias) has had these before the event, and the Dr. is basing this upon a few phone calls to her Mom also based on just her word.  However JM gets in that she was very angry with her mom in her teens and hit and kicked her Mom for no reason. The Dr.says it got worse after the event (again based on JA’s word, JM points out she is a proven liar).
  4.  D3- difficulty concentrating- apparently reading was one example- but JM points out she read the Book of Mormon cover to cover the Dr. says he wasn’t privy to that testimony. Again JM points out this is based on her word. JM points out she also re-read her Journals beginning to end…and does that call this into doubt- Dr. says No. The second example from the Dr. is her trouble with staying on images when she is trying to relax. He does say something about it being difficult because she is in (a loud) jail and JM jumps on this, as it would not then be related to the trauma. JM points out that she had no trouble sleeping though. (Plays a recording with the Dr. actually saying this).
  5. D4-hypervigilance-Dr. says she had trouble sleeping. He does say something about it being difficult because she is in (a loud) jail and JM jumps on this, as it would not then be related to the trauma. JM points out that she had no trouble sleeping though. (Plays a recording with the Dr. actually saying this). Also she felt her personal space was invaded and the sounds and lights were intensified. JM pointed out that could be because it’s her first time in jail. The Dr. admits she had no startle response, but based on his opinion she still meets the criteria.
  6. C7- foreshortened future.  Dr. bases this on her talking to him about suicidal thoughts, though he adds she never had a plan. JM points out according to her Journals she was suicidal three other times- in High School, with Matt and in 2007, all before June 4th.JM also gets the Dr. to admit she has never been on suicide watch and this is all based on her word.
  7. C6- flat affect. Dr. based this on his conversations with her, that when talking about emotional charged events she lacked the corresponding emotions.JM points out in many of her interview- like with the detective and 48hrs she was smiling, laughing and giggling.  The Dr. said it was when describing the crime she had a flat affect. He brings up she made up an alternate universe during the interviews and JM pointed out an ‘alternate universe’ is just another lie. The Dr. said: “in your words”.  The Dr. maintains this universe was a psychological way to dis-associate from the truth.
  8. C5- detachment from others. The Dr. says she is not tuned in to to what’s around her. JM asks about personal relationships. He says she was detached from other cellmates and people in the jail. JM points out this could be as it is her first time in jail. The Dr. says that is ‘your conclusion.’
  9. JM brings up the original report submitted that did not have enough criteria to establish PTSD.  The Dr. claims the omissions are just a typo.

10. C3- inability to recall an important aspect of the trauma.  The Dr. points to the amnesia. JM asks if the fog restricts her recall and the Dr. says yes. JM brings up the Dr.’s meteorite/crater explanation (the meteorite being the stressor and the crater being the PTSD) and points out Jodi has no ‘crater’ that can be measured- no way to see inside her brain to find something wrong. The Dr. argues a bit and finally admits it can’t be measured.

Afternoon Session:

  1. C2- JA did not have.
  2. C1- persistent avoidance of anything associated with the trauma.

JM asks what efforts she took to avoid.  The Dr. says her story (ninjas) was an avoidance technique. JM points out that it was a lie.  The Dr. says it’s a defense mechanism. JM asks: “It is a story?” Dr. “Yes.” JM list the following a as things which show she did not avoid the trauma: The 20 irises to the Grandma, went on 48 hrs twice to discuss the crime, talked with Leslie about her and Travis’s kids playing together, sent a letter to the family, e-m’s to Travis right after the death writing about Travis over and over in her Journal up til the arrest, attending the memorial, driving by the crime scene (I can’t believe he got that in!).  The Dr. fought him on every point saying she was in denial that she did it so she was acting like she didn’t do it.

  1. JM went over the idea that the trauma wasn’t different according to the Dr.  between a Cop, a war vet and JA.
  2. JM gets in that JA was trying to stage the scene ‘is what she told us.’ The Dr. says that is not what she told me.
  3. JM points out that in the e-mail with the ‘3 salacious words’ Travis also said to her he was just a ‘dildo with a heartbeat.’  JM gets the Dr. to agree this sounds like Travis was used for sex.
  4. JM gets the Dr. to admit in ‘flight or fight’ after the winner is determined it is over.  (Unlike this case).
  5. JM straight out accuses the Dr. of not being objective.  The Dr. says he is trained in empathy. They go back and forth.
  6. JM points out that he is supposed to also be trained in accuracy. The Dr. said: “Well absolutely.” But JM brought up all his errors on the test scores- The Dr. still says it was typos.
  7. JM ends by saying the Dr. has ‘lost objectivity’ and the Dr. (loudly) states back : “Absolutely not!”

JW (defense) /the Dr.:

  1. Goes back to the ‘dildo with a heartbeat’ comment and asks the Dr. after hearing the sex tape if he felt Travis was being abused and he said no.
  2. JW goes over the avoidance of things regarding the trauma, like the irises, the Memorial and the nice Journal entries about Travis and the Dr. syas it’s all about avoidance.
  3. She goes into the suicides and tries to get in the letters again, and has the Dr. explain at length what happens to someone under a suicide watch in jail. (As a reason JA never told the Dr. about her actual attempts).
  4. JW talks about the clip JM played about her ability to fall asleep and now points out she had to take tranquilizers for 6-8 months first.
  5. Back to the PDS scoring again…Dr. says despite the different numbers the criteria is still met.

Jury questions: (paraphrased)

  1. In your practice do you offer patients books for free?  Yes.
  2. Have you viewed any media re: this case? I have avoided any contact.
  3. Did JA tell you about buying a gun? No.
  4. A plan with a razor? No.
  5. What’s the difference between covering up and an alternate universe? Covering up is creating an alibi and an alternate universe is a defense mechanism.

JW (defense)/The Dr:

  1. Defense mech. is part of alt universe- yes. Helps with dealing with acute stress. When JA finally told the real story how did she feel? …a weight was lifted.”
  2. JW goes into why JA wouldn’t have mentioned the suicide attempts- due to the harsh actions at the jail under suicide watch.
  3. Has he given books to patients? Yes…

JM /The Dr:

  1. JM takes him to task for all of a sudden knowing so much about what the jail does re-suicides.  He actually corrects the Dr. at one point for having the name of the jail JA is in wrong. He also h=goes back into the Dr. previously saying he gave her the book because she was ‘suicidal’.  The Dr. denies it.
  2. They go back and forth over the self help books being therapy or evaluation. JM says: They’re not for assessment?  Dr: “No.”
  3. JM says: “Covering up involves not telling the truth?” Dr.…”Yes.”

NEW WITNESS: Dr. Alyce LaViolette (and JW-defense)

Basically going over education and Credentials.  Some ‘highlights’:

  1. School in NJ, then AZ, the Ca.  Has a Masters.
  2. Worked in a battered women’s shelter and soon started a men’s group (for the batterers)- a new concept at that time.
  3. Other work: Volunteer work, training, churches, child custody, Domestic Violence, lawyers, speaking engagements from high school to representing the State Department in several countries.
  4. Has her own practice in Ca since 1984 where she counsels singles, couples and groups.
  5. Has been a key note speaker many times.
  6. Has won several awards, including Lifetime Achievement Award.
  7. Published the book: It Could Happen to Anyone” about why women go back to abusers.  This is used as a text in many schools.  She has also written many articles.
  8. She has also done a lot of forensic work (in the courts as consultant and as expert witness). She has worked for both the Defense and the Prosecution.
  9. She has been involved in legislation.

Court begins again tomorrow at 10:30.

Arias Trial-Funny Blog

The best sarcastic blogger I have read regarding this trial is at: “Eggtreenews”- you won’t regret it…

An example from the post on that site called “New Bat$hit Crazy Sociopath….”:

“Shut your piehole and go away, Arias. You butchered a human being because he dumped you, and now you want to soak up the spotlight with your outrageous abuse claims that you think provide a license to kill. Youre a malignant sociopath, and your fake glasses and librarian costume fool nobody. How Travis’ family can sit in the same room with you and maintain any composure while you slaughter him all over again is beyond me. I would have to be pumped full of thorazine in a pseudo-coma to share oxygen with you.”

Awesome!

Arias trial- after the questions 3/21

Wilmont/Dr. Samuels:

Goes over test and how scores would remain the same. Asks about her plans to see Ryan before the trip was planned. She wasn’t jealous about Travis going to Cancun with another. Talked about JA being like a cornered animal–she fled but had to fight. She made up stories to avoid the horrible truth. Review of MCMI…again…She only had seconds to make decisions therefore no time for a phone call. Travis would punish her by not calling her–she had low self-esteem and always went back. Her memory returned around Hoover Dam.  Now 25-30 hours is goo for an evaluation. There were 2 different times she was ties with a rope. He never crossed the line to therapist with her. Unlikely for there to be trauma if the killing is planned.

Juan Martinez vs. Dr. Samuels:

“Do you have problems with your memory?” I have no more problems than you do! “Have you evaluated this prosecutor?” OBJECTION, SUSTAINED
Your initial impression after visiting her, was you felt sorry for her, right?” Not sorry for her, she was alone and isolated. I felt she could benefit from the book. I’ve been trained to disconnect any feelings I would have
“So when you said you had compassion, you told us that you had sympathy for the defendant, didn’t you?” Well that’s Webster’s definition, I used the word compassionate “Are you saying that you have a different definition of compassion than Webster’s?”  I’ll go by Webster’s definition “So Webster’s talks about sympathy for the distress of another?” That’s correct . “Didn’t you say she had a break through?” I said if she was in therapy, it would have been considered a breakthrough. “During the 2nd meeting, you still had feelings of sympathy for her didn’t you?” No, my feelings were of no concern. “Did Miss Arias’s story change after you gave her the book?” I don’t know if the book had anything to do with it
Dr. Samuels says he doesn’t know if he has Jodi’s original answer sheet, he needed to have a copy in front of him to review, so he filled out another one for himself. “Isn’t that an ethical dilemma for you?” SIDEBAR

Court resumes Monday- the judge asked the jurors to be there at 10 but I assume they actually will begin at 10:30.