Jodi Arias Trial Rebuttal Winds Down: Fog, Fugue, Freed or Fraud- Are The Sex Pics From Months Before Travis Alexander’s Murder? Do They Show Arias Broke In?

Special Appearance Announcement: S. Christina Stoy, Editor In Chief,  www.blinkoncrime.com,  investigative journalist and criminal analyst will be a guest on this evenings THE DANA PRETZER SHOW- Host Dana Pretzer, discussing the Arias case LIVE.  Click Here To Listen To The Podcast

  ...” Why does most human violence occur between those who are emotionally involved, or more technically, within an attachment paradigm?

Dr. J. Reid Meloy from Violent Attachments

Phoenix,  AZ- Arguably the best psychological witness presented at trial, Dr. Janeen DeMarte, clinical psychologist, took the stand last week as the first witness in the State of Arizona’s rebuttal case in the trial of Jodi Arias for the murder of Travis Alexander.

In stark contrast to her previous behavior in court, Jodi Arias refused to look at Dr. DeMarte on the stand, and feverishly took notes or whispered to her attorney Jennifer Wilmott through the State’s direct examination of their witness.

With one exception.  When Dr. DeMarte was asked by Prosecutor Juan Martinez if Jodi Arias was a victim of domestic violence resulting in battered woman syndrome,  Ms. Arias looked up for DeMarte’s answer.  “No.”

After a battery of psychological tests were completed and scored, and approximately  12 hours of clinical interview with defendant Arias- Dr. DeMarte diagnosed Jodi Arias with Borderline Personality Disorder.  Dr. DeMarte had the added luxury of having her home vandalized and her laptop stolen following the start of the trial.  That information was not shared in open court.

Significant from a psychological evaluation perspective, Jodi Arias’ expert witnesses Alyce LaViolette and Dr. Samuels felt Arias was suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) as a result of the killing of Travis Alexander on June 4, 2008 at his home in Mesa, Arizona.  Only Samuels was licensed to test Arias similarly to DeMarte, and it appears the results were very different.   Samuels testified that he never re-tested Arias after he learned her accounts of June 4 were fabrications and that was an error on his part in his finding Arias suffered from PTSD.

Cross examination of Dr. DeMarte induced a migraine headache suffered by Arias (her 3^rd since trial) although she is taking Imitrex for the condition.   Earlier in the day, Wilmott began her cross by repeatedly stating that DeMarte was practicing therapy without a license prior to her licensing exam, to which DeMarte responded “That is not correct, it is permitted under the supervision of a licensed psychologist, which I was.”

Wilmott went on to question DeMarte’s credentials specifically related to expertise in domestic violence and her current knowledge of the practices of Dr. Lenore Walker- largely considered the pioneer of domestic violence research and testing.  Walker’s work is novel within the psychological community in the area of the battered woman syndrome diagnosis.

Wilmott unsuccessfully tried to trip up DeMarte by suggesting that Walker no longer uses her own 6 point scale to include the possibility of battered woman syndrome to which DeMarte replied, “I would say that you are being inaccurate.”

DeMarte completed her testimony with very limited juror questions, although it was clear that a juror or two was not sold that Arias’ only disorder is BPD.

While DeMarte represented the State well in my opinion; Jodi Arias remains the round peg in the jello rhomboid to me.  Too many unanswered behavioral observations from a criminal profiling perspective to fit into the BPD mold.

Prior to the start of the State’s rebuttal case, defense counsel Kirk Nurmi recalled a witness for the defense who never made it into the witness list for trial, Mr. Bryan Neumiester.

In previous hearings where Neumiester appeared as an expert for the defense in the authentication of the May 10, 2008 phone sex recording made by Arias, the State agreed to a stipulation that it was indeed Travis Alexander’s voice on the tape, and that it was made on May 10.

In earlier testimony Juan Martinez elicited from Jodi Arias, Martinez accused her of recording the tape without Alexander’s permission or knowledge.  Arias was forced to admit that at no time is the fact that the conversation is being recorded heard mentioned by either party during the recording.  More on that recording in a bit.

Neumiester was able to magnify the very haunting last image of a live Travis Alexander’s face in the shower, specifically his iris, and gain agreement via stipulation that the reflective image contained therein is that of Jodi Arias.  She was not holding a gun or knife and the image was time-stamped correctly.

This was the second time Juan Martinez agreed to a stipulation from the same expert witness regarding the recorded media, both digital and audio in this case- outside the presence of the jury.

Mr. Neumiester is an expert witness for colleagues in Mr. Martinez’s own office as well as the Mesa Police Department.  Might suggest offsite meetings going forward.

The final witness listed for the State’s rebuttal case is an investigator for the Mesa County Police who specializes in computer forensics, Detective Robert Brown.    Detective Brown describes himself as a Computer Forensics Detective:

As a Digital Forensics expert, I possess attention to detail in my forensic capability, as well as the ability to explain complex technical concepts in a non-technical manner.

In the course of my regular duties, I also perform the following:

-Support ongoing internal investigations and litigation matters
-Utilize a variety of forensic tools (Encase, FTK, Helix, Cellebrite, Wireshark, etc.)
-Perform storage forensics (for example, hard drives, phones, USB storage)
-Perform network captures for traffic analysis
-File-system analysis and file carving (for example, to extract email, documents, and other trace evidence)
-Identifying , collection and analyzing electronic information, relevant to a case, incident or event of interest
-Establish timelines and patterns of activity of individuals and electronic devices and software
-Following forensically sound practices, including preserving chain of custody
-Efficiently and effectively report progress, risks and issues associated with assignments to varying levels of management

Following sound practices including preservation of chain of custody is looking like a welcome addition to this case.

In testimony from Detective Michael Melendez where the images allegedly taken by Travis’s camera were recovered from the deleted or unallocated portions of the memory stick via Encase software we learned that the infamous afternoon of highly graphic sex images of both Travis and Jodi that were dated and time-stamped on June 4^th took place that afternoon prior to Travis’s murder.

Thus, making Jodi Arias an invited guest.

As an invited guest spending the day indelicato delicto, it certainly makes it difficult to prove the felony murder charge she is facing- and does not help the pre-meditation or murder in the first degree allegation because the basic motive is that Jodi went there to murder Travis because he was not going to take her to Cancun.   While certainly a possibility, I would offer that just about every psychological professional who sat across from Arias missed the fact that she literally saw her old boyfriends more than once along her trek that ended up with her last breakup.  Weird, yes.

Otherwise known as a raging sign of dependent personality disorder.

…” You are the worst thing that has ever happened to me…”

-Travis Alexander

 According to the text messages back and forth between Jodi and Travis the weeks prior to his murder, it was patently clear that Alexander wanted Arias out of his life for good.

Has what the state since learned after having Jodi on the stand under oath and repeated in cross examination opened the door to further investigation of the electronic media in this case in preparation for rebuttal?  Looks that way.

Keeping in mind that the phone sex recording was May 10^th.  About a week later, Arias testified, she thought the phone was stolen.  She alleges it was found by her Aunt in 2010 in her grandfather’s car.  This would be the same aunt that she pointed out in court, and who has not been seen in court in weeks although she had attended daily.

Arias writes in her journal entry May 22, 2008 that there are several explicit photos on her stolen phone, and 2 recorded sex tapes.   In 2010, Arias though her attorneys, deliver this phone into evidence with no chain of custody information in a then 2 year old case.   Miraculously, this occurs just as Arias is moving from the “maybe not the ninja’s” defense.  From the defense perspective it has some statements from Alexander on it that they feel support’s their defense.  From the State’s perspective it proves that Arias was certainly very open to the sexual practices of the couple and never felt abused, nor was she put off by the comments by Alexander.

A win-win for both sides so why not agree to its stipulation, right?

Is this why Juan Martinez was hammering home the journal entry written about the “fruitful imaginations” the two explored, causing Arias to miss Lonnie’s christening?

The infamous sugar fest that takes place just before Arias allegedly walks in on Alexander in masturbatory behavior where some image of a boy lands at her feet on January 21^st?  I note that one of the pictures allegedly from the June 4^th date seems to show Alexander engaged in some self-satisfaction that ended with a surprise photo taken from the point of view of the chair next to him.

You’ll see where I am going with this momentarily.

Zulu Time Sex Chat

I have listened to the recording more times than one should have to,  and I note that within that conversation ( which is clearly edited, you can hear the fast forwards or dead time during the recording) the sexual tryst they discuss sounds very much like what was captured on the images as presented previously as occurring on June 4^th.  If you have no concern about losing your lunch, it can be found here. Because of the nature of the material I am not quoting directly.

Graphic Warning, Sexually Explicit Material

Points in Conversation that Match Images

1. Jodi discusses her fresh Brazilian and her being unsure if Travis would like that.  She mentions Travis wakes her up after she fell asleep in the chair by preforming a sex act on her.  There is no question that Jodi is freshly waxed in those images.
2. Travis discusses the point of view shots of her “anatomy”.
3. Jodi mentions that her hair was IN BRAIDS.   In the police interview Flores refers to them as pigtails and Jodi responds “Are you sure it’s me, pigtails?  They are not pigtails, they are braids and it is through this verbiage I believe we see Jodi restate that the pics are from another time.  She is adamant on that until unfortunately Flores gives it up he has those 2 pics taken from the scene accidently.
4. Jodi asks Travis to check out her new profile pic, he does, tells her how photogenic she is, and at no time says… O, you changed your hair color to brown.  We know she took pics from her own camera May 10 and she was a brunette.  Arias testified her hair was brown prior to leaving Mesa.
5. Travis mentions the introduction of KY into the relationship.  It is laying on the bed in the images, however, he says during the call when he is masturbating he is using Vaseline.
6. Jodi mentions next time they have a photo session that she would like to have makeup on.  She has no makeup on in these images.
7. In a very close-up point of view shot, it appears Ms. Arias is using her vaginal canal as a tootsie pop holder.  The tootsie pop incident occurs only once and prior to June 4^th as it is discussed during the tootsietape.

I am aware that Det. Melendez says that the timestamps are from the image files, however, he never offers any explanation as to why some have it and many do not.  Nor is he asked how if Neumiester was able to pull EXIF data identifying the shower image as taken from Travis’s camera from a similarly deleted image, why he was not able to.   Likely why Mr. Neumiester was kept off the stand via the State’s agreement to the stipulation that has the legal community scratching its collective head.

My current thought bubble: Why would the prosecution take the murder weapons out of the hands of the suspect and in one fell swoop support her account of events as opposed to allowing Judge Stephens to rule on the Daubert hearing?

My current thought bubble response: Because it opens the door that has a little bottle labeled drink me on the other side.

Exhibit #215 Is Fat

No, not a person.  The blue SD card labeled exhibit #215, confirmed by the State by its two witnesses Heather Connor and Det Melendez to be the card where all deleted images were extracted.

There’s just one problem with that.  Well, maybe two.  Connor stated it was located in the bottom of the washer along with the camera battery cover, which were separate from the camera itself.  In fact, one can see the battery pack in the camera from the image taken into the washer.

Melendez stated he found the card or memory stick inside the camera when he opened its cover door.

Duo v SD blue

How did it get there if he was the only one who handled it, and how does he account for the fact that it is definitely not compatible with Travis’s camera a Sony (insert model).

Travis’s camera used a proprietary Sony duopro memory stick which is thinner and rectangular, and included notches for locking the data contained on it.   The blue SD card cannot and does not fit inside the camera.

SO….

How does one account for the fact that there is only one card located in exhibit #215 and it is indeed now a Sony duopro, and it is NOT the same card pictured in the envelope presented by Thomas through prosecutor Juan Martinez.

As much as it pains me to say this- Jodi told them that herself and Det. Flores confirmed it during their interview on July 15, 2008.

Excerpted in pertinent part, my actual case bench notes from 4/2/13:

1:57 starts discussion on card- notes for review, upload and feedback

JA: To me pictures are very compelling but I know they can be modified, altered and I don’t know but I think date and time stamps can be tampered with.

Flores: we did not modify anything.  Say like a computer, we take a mirror copy of it, and we don’t even touch it…. That’s exactly what we do with the photos.  We don’t work with the originals and we make an exact duplicate copy and we work with the copy..And our guys are so good, that every case that I know of, has never been lost in court

(Note b: That sounds dangerously like no jury will ever convict me, ugh.)

8:34

Arias begins to ask Flores if they have her camera from storage.

Flores responds do you remember taking these pictures?

Arias: we took many pictures, vaguely

9:00

Arias in response to Flores saying they both deleted everything off both or all devices (sic) says prior to Travis getting his camera, all those pictures were on her camera.

Flores: All these same pictures?

Arias: I dunno, we took a bunch the week before I left

Arias: What I am asking is it possible that my memory card is in his camera? They are interchangeable.

(Note b: This may be why she needed the software and cord found in office.  Ref my observations that the cord image appears to have red staining, but was not marked for testing.  Imo, this is why she states they had sex on the desk. She knew her DNA from the cut would be there.)

Flores: How do you know they are interchangeable?

Arias: That’s why I am asking.

Flores: Just a regular ole standard SD card.

Arias: That’s why I am asking, cause I’ve got one that is like, this big (Note b: draws on his pad lefty)

For my professional camera it is like long and think like a cracker.  My other one is more like this big (note b: Draws but in context shown to be larger than the first.  She is indicating they are 2 different sizes.)

Flores: they are not interchangeable…His camera was here and your camera was there, why would those be on his camera?

Arias: My camera in storage that is broken but it is still there, I had several memory cards for it that I don’t have any more, and I guess what I am saying.

Flores: so are you saying all these pictures are on that camera?

Arias; no, it’s so farfetched but I guess it’s possible my card fits

Flores: So you’re saying maybe somebody took your memory card?

Arias: No, what I am saying is that if I left my memory cards at his house he could have used it in his camera. (Note b: This is prior to the trip to the big house.  Please note how incredibly detrimental it is to call your suspect on the phone and tell them about all your subpoenas and warrants coming her way six weeks earlier- tends to lead to destruction of evidence, witness tampering,  I could go on.)

Of particular interest, was Flores’s commentary that the experts on the hard drive and imaging testing (Melendez et al) have never lost a case where they presented evidence?

While that may be true, there was more than a few things he got wrong in that exchange.

1. While on the stand initially calling the duopro card a SIM card, Melendez stated that SIM cards are smaller and primarily used in phones.   This is an incorrect explanation.  The storage format Martinez was referring to as a SIM is actually Micro SD.  However, no micro SD cards have been admitted into evidence at trial.
2. In Flores’s interview,  he expressly stated that the analysts DID NOT work with the original card or cards in the case that they only make a copy, a mirror copy and work with that.  Again, incorrect as we heard Melendez testify that he could not read the card removed until he placed the card directly into his “forensic machine”.  No copy was ever made and the images recovered consisted then of deleted and non-deleted items from the card Melendez testified he removed from Travis’s camera himself.

Is it possible Jodi is correct, and Travis had an SD card from her camera and that was the camera used to shoot the tawdry tryst? Whereby he subsequently loaded the amateur effort himself onto the duopro card via the USB attachment and software loaded on his computer?  If indeed Melendez was able to recover the deleted images from the duopro card, this would account for why the romp images were on his camera card although Travis and Jodi had not seen each other since its purchase.

Travis also had a Sony video camera that would also use a Sony duopro card enabling him to use the one he had in both.  Travis’s video camera has not been referenced as evidence or an exhibit in the trial to date.

Potentially solving the dilemma of how the images get on Travis’s camera- if in fact they predate June 4^th  unfortunately does not address either how two of the state’s own witnesses testify differently about the same pieces of evidence that cannot possibly be the same storage device or the problems in chain of custody of same.

If Jodi was not the invited guest she claims she was as evidenced previously by the pictures thought to be taken on June 4^th, what was she doing there exactly?

Did Travis Alexander even know she was in the house before he spots her holding something other than a gun or knife as he looks out of the shower for the last time?

Travis’s roommate Enrique’s statement to Flores seems to support the theory that at the very least, he was not aware Jodi was in the home when he spoke to Travis that morning and Travis shared he had not gotten any sleep.  During her interview Jodi knew nothing of the new second roommate (until Flores outright told her about him and that he was at work) but she definitely would have if she came in through the garage because his car was parked in it.

Does this lend credence to the screen outside being removed by Jodi to the office window laying on the ground for entrance purposes?

Court resumes tomorrow after a closed hearing today.  With the general public consensus after a nearly 4 month trial that most are no closer to the truth about what actually happened at casa de alexander on June 4, 2008 other than the outcome, this jury has its work cut out for them.

Please join me this evening discussing this case on THE DANA PRETZER SHOW- LIVE at 9PM EST.

Contributing Editor: Jacqueline Beaufort