In more bizarre news on Friday, there was a hearing due to a motion by the defense that alleged the prosecution deleted porn off of Travis Alexander’s laptop. I completely forgot to recap this yesterday but I am going to do a whiz bang short version really fast. (I hope). We started out with Jodi’s old attorney, Maria Schaffer, on the stand to testify that Detective Flores was the person who turned on the laptop which somehow caused all the porn to be erased from the laptop. (Yes I know that makes no sense. I’m just reporting to the best of my understanding. Willmott is handling this witness. She asks about who turned on the laptop. She claims Detective Flores did. Juan is up next. He argued back saying SHE is the one who turned the laptop on and it was against his better judgment. These two don’t like each other. There was a lot of back and forth between the two. Martinez was very animated and heated. Both recall the other as the person who fired up the computer. Maria says she was there to get an idea of how much evidence was on the computer so she could put in a request for money to pay a forensics expert. Juan points out that she has to turn the devices on to do that. They had laptops and cell phones in the review room, both defense and prosecution team were in the room together. Eventually, it seems to me that Juan got Maria to say that she turned on the computers and that caused evidence to be destroyed. On Willmott’s redirect Maria says, “If Mr. Martinez had told us that turning on the computers would destroy evidence, we would not have allowed that.” Basically, whoever turned on the computers is potentially responsible for lost evidence so no one is willing to admit who did it. Lots of finger-pointing on all sides. Maria claims that the only person who looked at files was Martinez. I thought it was Flores. This is hard to follow. The big takeaway is both sides are adamant that it was not them.
Next witness was Bryan Neumeister.he’s a computer forensics expert. He has previously worked with both prosecutors and defense attorneys. He works for a company that specializes in retrieving lost files.He says that the laptop should have been turned on once to make a mirror image and never again. Bryan says that it should have only been turned on with a write blocker. It was instead turned on and off twice while in police custody losing 50 megs of data. Again, I don’t get it, how does turning on a laptop make it lose data?
Ah, answer, it doesn’t. On June 10, 9:27 am, the computer was turned on and “quite a few files were gone through and modified.” The first thing the computer did was ping Southwest Airlines. Ew. I’d get a new laptop. I’d rather (insert really bad thing here) than fly SouthWest Airlines. Anyway, the laptop started running Windows updates and installing a new version of iTunes. Okay, so some old windows files were overwritten. Can we get to the porn, please? The laptop was on and clearly hooked up to wifi for 45 minutes. It seems that he is trying to imply that the windows updates wrote over space that could have had naughty stuff! Seriously? Then he says when the computer was shut down, the cache was dumped automatically. Maybe. If it was set that way. It doesn’t always function properly on that setting though. Seriously, is there is or is there ain’t evidence of porn on the damn laptop?
The second time the computer was turned on was June 19, 2009, the day Juan and Maria were arguing about, again without a write blocker. Apparently this time the laptop began installing the updates from the last time it was turned on. This does not happen in my universe. The laptop asks permission before installing shit. Perhaps this too works differently in Arizona. Oh I spoke too soon. Bryan says someone would have had to manually click the pop up box to start the install. 2500 files were modified. Yes, Bryan that is what happens when programs are installed WTF is your point, poindexter? The prosecution claimed there were no viruses in Jodi Arias 1.0 but he says the machine was loaded with viruses! LOADED I TELL YOU! Bryan also said that Travis had 19 different programs to guard privacy, fight Trojans, clean registry and so forth. Bryan says that despite all the viruses he can tell that Travis manually searched for porn and escort sites since 2007. BOO YAH! Um wait. who cares?
This is such a waste of the court’s time. The defense needs to prove that the prosecution intentionally destroyed evidence and that the evidence was exculpatory. If watching porn and hiring escorts makes a case for justifiable homicide then we need to open the jails and let out anyone accused of killing men between the ages of 13 and 93.
Bryan says Travis went to teen slut porn sites. I’m shocked and appalled. Really. #eyeroll. He talked about receiving phones but not the SIM cards so he could not investigate. There was an external hard drive with no operating system on it. So? Was there one when the police initially grabbed it? The expert says he cannot believe that all of this was missed six years ago. It’s tons of viruses and porn! It could not possibly be missed. It was all right there!
It’s Juan’s turn. He says that Bryan never looked at the 2008 clone. He said there was no need to. “It was PACKED WITH PORN, JUAN!” With regard to the SIM cards being missing, he implies that Jodi removed them before leaving the murder scene. Defense objects. Bryan says that whoever imaged the laptop initially didn’t do a complete job and should not be working in forensics. Bryan is giving it to Martinez and Martinez is becoming angry. Bryan suggests that Juan doesn’t know how computers work. He says his line of questioning is ridiculous. Juan suggests that Bryan broke the laptop. Bryan replies, “That’s just slimey…Juan.” Bryan calling Martinez, Juan seems to be fucking with, Juan. I mean Mr. Martinez.
Things are heated so they take an afternoon break. The judge calls the attorneys all back into chambers. Someone is going to get a stern talking to. The Public Information Officer got called back into chambers next. The media are nervousing about getting tossed out again. Then a bench conference with the attorneys. Judge Stephens is pissy about something. Probably Juan.
Juan reels himself in. He gets Bryan to admit he sent the wrong clone to the prosecutors (AKA some guy named Tony’s Dell. Tony must be thrilled.) The judge tells Bryan to get the right clone to the prosecution. She tells him to send all the copies of the clones. Bryan says he already has. He asks if he is supposed to send everything, because Juan already has everything. He and Willmott both say Juan doesn’t understand computers or what he is asking for. She sends everyone home and this fiasco will resume on December 4th. Because, Arizona. The center ring action will resume on Monday.
You forgot to mention the part where Bryan walked over and shakes Jodies hand as he was leaving … Red flag much ?
There was no real consensus that that happened. You have to be careful reading tweets. Some of them have great sense of humors and get bored and make jokes.
“quite a few files were gone through and modified.” Holy Christ- when you power up the computer it makes a record of all of the processes also registry is modified- so I’m sure this is true. This dude is using techno ignorance to manipulate the case. Jodi must have promised him a BJ…
Really I think this witness detests these lawyers and blatantly saying they are both intellectually inferior to him- sound familiar?
*sigh* does it really matter if Travis looked at porn? Aren’t they supposed to be deciding whether or not his death was cruel and unusual, not whether or not he looked at porn?! Damn. It. This trial is cruel and unusual punishment for all of us who follow. Just be done with it already.
Shelle, this is not part of the trial proper. This is a hearing to determine if the prosecution intentionally destroyed evidence that would have been exculpatory for Jodi. It’s a big deal if proven. However, I personally don’t see porn on a computer to be exculpatory evidence… but I don’t live in Arizona.
On Sat, Nov 22, 2014 at 10:44 PM, Tamara Tattles wrote:
>
So upon shutting down the cache clears, according to the “expert”. If that’s the case then why didn’t the cache clear when the computer was obviously shut down before the cops even got their hands on it? Makes no sense. And yes updates can automatically install if you have them set to but they update Win files, not your porn shit. Ugh. This expert is no expert. I think my 60yr old mom who only knows how to play on pogo could do a better job than this guy.
I don’t get it either. If you have your laptop to automatically clear your cache it does so when you SHUTDOWN not when you POWER UP. None of his testimony made any sense. I have a feeling things were lost in translation. This hearing may have been videoed. Check out CroakerQueen on Youtube she may have a copy.
On Sat, Nov 22, 2014 at 11:43 PM, Tamara Tattles wrote:
>
@ Karma It does every time the Comp is powered up the cached info is useless OS information. THIS IS BULLSHIT- SMOKE. It doesn’t matter as to who powered it up Arias’ lawyer was the likely one- it’s a he said-she said.
Wow, you’re like way slow. If you read my entire comment you’ll understand that I was calling bullshit on it and that my 60yr old mother who only knows how to play pogo is more of an expert on computers than the expert who testified.
Wow, this really IS the trial of the century! I am so pissed that this absolute soap opera isn’t being televised. If I was one of Travis’ siblings, I’d be boiling mad right now at Jodie’s insistence on smearing her victim’s name before she’s sentenced. She is evil. I can’t believe Judge Stevens is allowing all this crap. Juan is probably shaking with righteous anger. And wow-Nurmi looks so different with hair!
Why is the Judge allowing all this banter to go on? Why is the Judge allowing the witness address the prosecutor by his first name? Why doesn’t the Judge tell the witness to answer the question, instead of arguing? Why is the Judge not reprimanding the witness when he said the prosecutors questions were ridiculous? I have never seen anything like this, and I have watched many of trials. It seems so unprofessional. It seems like anything goes, and isn’t it the Judges duty to keep the trial in a timely & orderly fashion?
Another thing, so what if Travis is looking at porn? Is that Jodi Arias defense on why she murdered him? Of course it isn’t, so what’s the point? I’m looking at Nurmi the same way I viewed Jose Biaz, in the Casey Anthony trial, they are both slimy.
OMG! This is friggin torture!! Let’s review that we are suppose to be evaluating….mitigating circumstances. Mitigating means to lesson the gravity of the offense. Factor 1: Age…no; Factor 2: ability to appreciate the wrongfulness of her actions…no…she has above average intelligence and there for has the mental capacity; Factor 3: Under unusual stress…no …. Travis was not attacking her or holding her hostage forcing a day of sex and picture taking on her; Factor 4: Degree of participation was minor….no … Bawhahaha; Factor 5: Remorse….no ….. no shown remorse unless dragging your victim’s good name and reputation through the mud demonstrates remorse; Factor 6: Love of family/concern for parents…no …. she does not have children and sorry but I do not think Jodi gives a damn about anyone but herself; Factors 7 & 8: Criminal and Work histories….yes …. these are in her favor, but big deal; Factor 9: Disparity between sentencing….no …. she acted alone; FACTOR 10 (the big one I suppose): prior sexual/emotional abuse….NO! …. IMO the defense has failed to prove in sexual abuse. I do not believe Jodi ever said no to anything she thought would bind Travis to her. Physical abuse has not been proven in regards to Jodi, however they have proven that TRAVIS WAS A VICTIM OF CHILD ABUSE YET NEVER COMMITTED A MURDER. Emotional abuse is what I guess they are trying to prove. Jodi IS NOT a child or a vulnerable adult. As define by Arizona law “Emotional abuse” means a pattern of ridiculing or demeaning a vulnerable adult, making derogatory remarks to a vulnerable adult, verbally harassing a vulnerable adult or threatening to inflict physical or emotional harm on a vulnerable adult. “Vulnerable adult” means an individual who is eighteen years of age or older and who is unable to protect himself from abuse, neglect or exploitation by others because of a mental or physical impairment. The defense is trying to portray Jodi as a victim of emotional abuse under domestic violence laws but the two people have to be “tied” to one another. They are arguing the tie is a romantic relationship. However I believe that Jodi ended this “tie”, packed up her stuff, and moved to another state. So, any contact she had with her “abuser” is on her! Adults have to take responsibility for their actions that led to the tragedy. IN CONCLUSION, WTF DOES PORN, ADULT OR CHILD, HAVE TO DO WITH?
This ends Professor Angel (?)’s lecture entitled Jodi Arias has no mitigating factors; so just hand down the DP already!
HEAR! HEAR!!
If Arizona allows you to kill a guy for name calling, breaking up, and watching porn, I’d bet there’s a lot of guys packing bags and making a run for it.
If he was watching child porn , which evidence says he was, then good riddance to the bastard.
‘Teen porn’ is not the child porn searches that they accused him of. Am I missing something here? Barley legal, and 18 teen girl sites are the among the highest searched for porn sites and completely legal. Nothing new here. A waste of time, money and everyone’s patience.
So…I wonder what the trial will dish up today….because, you know…Arizona..
You mean the State might be corrupt? You don’t say? Really? The state will stop at nothing to get a conviction, it’s politics. All prosecution/state are corrupt. The entire government is corrupt in this country. You know why? They know they can get away with it. The state hiding evidence makes me rethink my whole opinion about this trial. If Travis was watching kiddie porn, and it appears as thought he was, then I have no sympathy for him, AT ALL.
You spelled idiot wrong. I assume that is the name you were trying for…
On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 4:29 PM, Tamara Tattles wrote:
>
Okay that made my afternoon.
Please cite the facts and your source that support your statement “…and it appears as thought (sic) he was,…..” Because even the DT expert admitted while PORN was found, NO kiddie porn was. S