Jodi Arias Death Penalty Off The Table: She Might Even Walk After Prosecution Collapses In Final Arguments!!

Jodi Arias Death Penalty Off The Table: She Might Even Walk After Prosecution Collapses In Final Arguments!!

Sad to say, Jodi Arias’ defense team’s closing argument today punched real holes in the State’s case. By real holes, I mean they raised questions that REQUIRED a response from the prosecution. They were plausible, the strongest arguments thus far levied against the prosecution, and were more than the usual “let’s shovel more dirt on Travis Alexander theme the DT has been spewing the past several months.

1) Kirk Nurmi asked a straightforward question – if Jodi Arias PLANNED this all out, put so much forethought into murdering her ex, why not simply kill him when she arrived at his house, and he had his back to her watching youtube videos? Or when he slept briefly after she got there? He was also vulnerable shortly before she actually attacked him – there are shower pictures of a naked Travis with his back to the camera, leaning against the shower wall, just minutes before he was murdered. If she wanted him dead, and was going to strike first with a knife (as the prosecution contends), well, why not do it then, with his back to her? Why wait for him to be facing her, albeit seated, and therefore better able to defend himself from at least the initial

There ARE good answers to all these questions, e.g. even if we believe the pathological liar that his back was turned to her when she arrived at his house, his roommates were home at the time. Ditto with the sleeping. As for the back-to-camera in the shower, not only could it be argued that a seated Travis WAS more vulnerable to a murderous attack than a standing one, regardless of head orientation, it would not be a stretch to assume that she WANTED him to see what was about to befall him. She wanted him to experience the horror that he was about to be murdered, for spurning her.

However, amazingly, incredulously, the prosecutor Juan Martinez, who delivered such a magnificent closing argument himself only yesterday, did not even address these questions in his rebuttal. They were left hanging, for a jury to now determine their importance.

2) Nurmi also reasonably asked – if Jodi stole the .25 caliber on May 28th from her grandparents for the purpose of murdering Travis, why on earth would she begin her attack with a knife? Travis was a fit young man, who had been a high school wrestler, and was now into kickboxing. However brazen and self-deluded Jodi was, why would she attempt to overpower a larger, stronger male with a knife in hand to hand combat, when she could just shoot him? Moreover, why would she have shot Travis LAST, after he was already dead? Why stage a break-in at her grandparents’ house, only to kill Travis with a knife and use the gun as a final ‘F-U’ now that he was already dead? As Nurmi said, “doesn’t make sense.”

Again, the prosecution did not adequately respond to this problem. Part of the reason is that the State has claimed, in large part because of the medical examiner’s testimony, that the gunshot was the last of the three fatal injuries Travis suffered during his horrific murder. The ME argued that the gunshot would have been immediately incapacitating, and that within a second or two Travis would have been incapable of defending himself, speaking, or ambulating. Given that the attack began in the shower, and that Travis then made his way to the sink, then all the way down the hallway to the threshold of his bedroom, he couldn’t have been shot first, right?

WRONG! Many medical experts have noted that some frontal lobe injuries do not necessarily result in immediate incapacitation, even those caused by bullet wounds resulting in greater ostensible damage than the one Travis suffered. So it’s medically possible that Travis was shot before an ensuing struggle. More importantly, others, including forensic crime scene expert Randolph Beasley, have argued that not only the injuries but all the evidence at the crime scene suggests it was the gunshot that began the assault. See video below:

And remember Jodi’s original “ninja” story, where the two made-up intruders murdered Travis and she managed to fend them off and escape, the little hero? Well, in that scenario she claimed that the gunshot came first. She naturally wanted her story to match-up as closely as possible with the forensic evidence, in order to convince the police that she was (now) telling the truth. So why would she alter ANYTHING about the order of the injuries Travis had truly sustained? She wouldn’t! The gunshot WAS first, just as Jodi said in her ninja story!

Juan reluctantly paid some lip-service to this dilemma the last couple of days, effectively saying it wouldn’t matter whether the gunshot was first or last. Regardless of the order of events, Jodi deliberately and knowingly butchered an unarmed and unsuspecting man = murder 1. HOWEVER, we are dealing with juries here. Casey Anthony roams free. Spell it out for the jury for goodness sake!

3) The most bewildering moment, or moments, of the closing arguments revolved around the 3rd gas can. Einstein had admitted, TWICE, to returning the 3rd gas can (the only one she had purchased, having borrowed two from a friend) to the SAME WALMART STORE SHE HAD PURCHASED IT FROM, IN SALINAS CA. This was a lie, as Juan had painstakingly proven earlier in the trial by showing the gas can was never returned.

When Juan reminded the jury of this FACT yesterday in his closing arguments, Nurmi woke up and objected, claiming Juan was “mischaracterizing” Jodi’s testimony, and that she had never said she returned it to the same store. The judge overruled, directing the jury to rely on their own memory of the witnesses’ testimony. Then today,Nurmi HIMSELF repeated this and lied in court, saying his client had never said she returned it to the same store. Juan didn’t even object. During Mr. Martinez’s rebuttal, he repeated his truthful statement and Nurmi again objected, and was overruled. But here’s the thing – why didn’t Martinez simply READ THE TESTIMONY TO THE JURORS!!!??? He is allowed to do this under Arizona law.

There is no excuse for failing to do so, sorry. Here Jaun has not only the defendant, but now her LAWYER, lying to the jury about a pivotal fact concerning premeditation (she used the gas cans to avoid filling up ANYWHERE in Arizona, thus padding her expected future alibi that she was not there when Travis was murdered). Martinez himself positioned this as the centerpiece of his closing argument, THE prime example that this nutjob will lie to anyone, at any time, to save her hide: that her credibility is worthless, that all her other testimony, all the rubbish about being an abused woman, how Travis has masturbated to pictures of young boys, all her made-up alibis and victimhood, all came from the mouth of a relentless, repulsive liar. HOW, how, could he have not obtained the testimony to read for the jury. Why on earth would he leave this critical piece of information up to the memory of the 12 who will decide her fate, and whether there will be justice for Travis?

I unfortunately have to quote the liar who defended a liar – “it makes no sense.”

You can see the psycho-einstein perjure herself at 3:40 – 3:50 of the following video:

And if you aren’t already sickened enough by the incompetence exposed above, here’s one more example – I can’t believe the prosecutor didn’t make this point: Nurmi argued in closing that the pedophilia rap against Travis was NOT without evidence (Martinez has said it only came from the mouth of the liar). And what evidence did Nurmi claim there was? Well the murderer secretly recorded a phone sex conversation with him less than a month before she killed him. Nice. In it, he says that when she came, she sounded “like a 12 year old having her first orgasm”. Nurmi went on to say, “who says that? That’s sick. Only a person with interests like that says that.”

But wait. Jodi claimed she had ‘sprung’ Travis one time masturbating to pictures of young boys in Jan 2008. It led to a HUGE fight according to her, one of the incidences of domestic abuse she later claimed (even though her journal entry that day began with “nothing out of the usual to report of late“, and phone records indicate she had made many phone calls to Travis, even though she testified that Travis “kept calling her” and she wouldn’t pick up). She claimed Travis later told her it was a side of him he wanted help with, he realized it was evil, bla bla bla.

So here’s the thing – this deep dark secret of theirs, this huge problem for Travis, was discovered by her in Jan 2008, and we’re supposed to believe that a few months later, when she recorded this phone sex without his knowledge, he THEN, supposedly after exposing his lust for young boys, made reference to Jodi sounding like a 12 year old, after all that? And he’s going to REPEAT that in the call? And SHE’S gonna LAUGH about it on the phone with him, and sound all titillated – all of which she did? What rubbish!

THAT’S your ‘evidence‘ of pedophilia, Nurm the worm? WHY didn’t Martinez point out the absurdity of this for the jury?

We’ve seen brutal unrepentant murderers escape justice in the last couple of decades – murderers found NOT GUILTY by stupid juries assisted by incompetent prosecution and dishonest defense lawyers – O.J. Simpson got off – murder mom, Casey Anthony is free – and now we face the very real prospect of Jodi Arias being found not guilty. Too bad they can’t do a blood test to determine guilt because when left to human judgement nothing is certain.