UPDATE: 2/14/2016 - From the beginning of my interest in the Jodi Arias trial and the investigation of the death of Travis Alexander, I felt compelled to look at the other side. I don't believe true and complete justice was served by the sentencing of Jodi Arias to spend the rest of her life in jail with no chance at parole. Essentially a death sentence, however prolonged. As one juror said about the prosecutor, "Juan Martinez is hiding something". Besides the glaring holes in the investigation, whether willful or through incompetence, or a combination, the gross prosecutorial misconduct, and Jodi Arias' convoluted testimony, interviews, and written communications, there are the financial profiteers. Here's my take on things from 2013. An interesting development with Chris Hughes is that his wife, Skylar Hughes, filed for divorce. From what a few close to the Hughes have sent me, things are not what they appear behind Chris Hughes "motivational speaker" image. Of course, I always consider that sources may also have their own agendas.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
C.S. aka Chris Hughes, was Travis Alexander's alleged "best friend". Hughes knew Travis for 8 years or 10 years or for his whole life, depending on which version of the story he's telling. Hughes, using the power of the internet and the bobble heads at Headline News, and the repetition of a limited number of "Jodi and Travis" stories, punctuated by the words "freaky" and "creepy" orchestrated one of the largest, if not the largest, hate campaigns, against a single person, criminal defendant Jodi Arias, through social media, that I dare anyone to try and disprove. The hate, threats, and damage by over zealous followers of Hughes reached into the personal lives of many.
To believe that the jury in the State of Arizona vs. Jodi Arias was not affected by this massive campaign, whether by watching HLN or going onto the internet themselves, or through the influence of family and friends who no doubt felt obliged to inform their loved one with a warning as to what happens to those who disagree with the lynch mob, is to put one's head firmly and deeply into the sands of the Arizona desert.
The hate campaign by Hughes started well before the verdict of guilty came down last week. I believe his hate campaign contributed largely to the lynch mob coverage by HLN and commentators, Nancy Grace, Dr. Drew, Jane Velez-Mitchell, Vinnie Politan, Mike Brooks, Joey Jackson, Ryan Smith, Mike Galanos, and their many "expert guests", and "friends of Travis". Or more accurately, that each fueled the other. HLN obliged by gratuitously showing the photos of Travis Alexander's naked, dead, mutilated body and basically making a circus out of the HLN set, with commentators acting like playground bullies, and likely getting heftier and heftier bonuses the meaner and gnarlier they became.
Where Travis' family sits among this rubble of hate, revenge, obstruction of justice, and bullying, I have not quite figured out. I lean towards them being victims of the much larger, more powerful goals of HLN and of Chris Hughes. Though, the family has certainly profited from donations directly and indirectly solicited by HLN and its commentators, and the Chris Hughes tribe, I believe those profits may pale in comparison one day, against the full and true picture of what really went into securing a first degree premeditated murder conviction against Jodi Arias. And what was sacrificed for that.
The hate campaign by Hughes, I submit, was a direct attempt to quell any suggestion or confirmation that Travis Alexander was anything but a Saint, an angel on earth, and had never even masturbated until he met Jodi Arias. Maintaining Travis' reportedly pure and chaste and honorable reputation within the Mormon church and within the ranks of Legal Shield, formerly Pre-Paid Legal, was the clear and undeniable goal. Whether that has been securely achieved remains to be seen.
Since the trial began, the HLN nightly line up has included, almost every single night, at least one Hughes brother (there are 5 and all involved with Legal Shield), or Legal Shield Associate, along with HLN's various "experts", all amazingly and almost identically supporting the complete guilt of Jodi Arias, and the absolute pristine image of Travis Alexander, even in the face of the direct evidence of Travis' own filthy, abusive, vile words to Jodi.
Jodi Arias' defense for killing Travis Alexander was that she was defending her own life, which she perceived he intended to take after he exploded in a fit of rage. Travis Alexander was abusive, mostly verbally and emotionally according to Jodi's testimony, and the same was the conclusion of domestic violence expert witness Alyce LaViolette. This defense was fought back at viciously by mass cyber bullying, including falsely reporting any facebook page that supported Jodi Arias, or that even supported her having a fair trial, and in many cases having those pages disabled for days at a time. LaViolette's book rating on Amazon plummeted thanks to the thousands of "reviews" entered on Amazon, actually violating policy, but nonetheless allowed, disparaging LaViolette for testifying for Jodi's defense. Mostly saying that Jodi did not ever suffer abuse at the hands or through the words of Travis Alexander, and that LaViolette knew not of what she spoke, despite her 30 years of experience which directly contradicted Dr. Janeen Demarte's indecipherable number of years experience.
Sources have told me, sources who allegedly witnessed Travis' explosive temper from his past that they were too afraid to come forward because they have seen what happens when anyone dares tell a story that illustrates the abusive behavior Jodi described. Hughes, HLN, and prosecutor Juan Martinez first cast the spell of "St. Travis", and only recently have they allowed Travis-Who-Did-No-Wrong-Okay-Maybe-A-Little-But-That's-Okay, as the Saint image has managed to fall just a tic by way of his own vile,disgusting, character assassinating words, both spoken and written revealed at trial and his dalliances with a string of women.
What about Travis' alleged addiction to internet pornography of a certain age group shared by unrevealed sources to this writer? Evidence allegedly exists to this support this allegation. The jury will never hear that, though. Certainly this is not to say that any abuse or addictions or even pedophilia justifies Travis' killing. Only that Jodi was defending her life and took his in that defense, as she pleaded, would justify his killing.
So, who is the person or persons who might suffer the most, financially and socially, should Travis Alexander's behaviors, including alleged pedophilia and alleged abuse of other women, including Mormon women, be revealed, or worse, testified to in court?
I offer that it is C.S. aka Chris Hughes and wife, Sky Hughes. Hughes describes himself as "Husband, Father, Infoprenuer, Author, Speaker, Excavator of Human Potential, Personal Development Jedi-Master, Legal Shield Associate & all around nice guy." He appears on over a dozen websites, promoting videos such as, "How to Master Everything" and "How to Make Money" and "How a Penny Can Help You Get Rich". His talent seems to be speaking. A lot. And selling what he has spoken about. Both Hughes and his wife, Sky, testified in a hearing before Judge Sherry Stephens as to the existence of letters allegedly handwritten by Travis to Jodi.
The letters described deviant behaviors of Travis Alexander, that were they to be made public, could seriously harm the reputation of Hughes, since Hughes takes credit for finding and developing Travis Alexander into the exemplary motivational speaker he was becoming. Hughes asserts the letters were forged. He even says he hired his "own expert" to verify that they were forged. Yet, the court never made such a finding. The court motions reveal a convoluted effort by the State to keep the letters out, and as was so often the case, the state won. The Hughes also couldn't seem to make up their minds on emails that they themselves sent to Travis calling him out on his bad behavior with Jodi and other women.
They apparently wished to simply "retract" those written words now and had figured out a way to cast their words in a light disparaging Jodi instead. They didn't get a chance to. Neither was called to testify. That seems to have not sat so well with C.S. , if we choose to believe his own words.
The exploitation of both the life and death of Travis Alexander seems to have no bounds. We have now reached the point that the masses, and again, I say, led by C.S., Chris Hughes, master motivator, public speaker, and salesman extraordinaire, will stop at nothing less than having Jodi Arias put to death. Hughes says he speaks for the family and believes they all also want her death. He rarely misses a chance to reiterate his desire to see her death, nor it seems do any of his 4 brothers, and a sampling of Legal Shield associates. He most recently tweeted, "Some people deserve the death penalty. Jodi Arias is one of those people." Jodi was also a person both he and Sky Hughes at one time wanted Travis to marry.
As for the verdict, nevermind that the case for premeditation was unbelievably flawed by both an incomplete investigation, perjury by Detective Flores, and the unconscionable constant shenanigans of Juan Martinez. Martinez withheld evidence,manipulated, bullied, and intimidated the defense witnesses so much so that the truth was rarely told more than a half sentence at time because of his compulsive objections.
Nevermind all that. Chris and Sky Hughes want Jodi Arias dead. That way she can never speak another damaging, albeit truthful word about their "best friend". The "best friend" who Hughes had allegedly had a "very important conference call" scheduled with June 4, 2008. That conference call never happened. Five days later, Travis' nude, mutilated, dead body was found slumped in his shower. The Hughes, according to Hughes himself, were planning on meeting Travis Alexander and Mimi Hall in Cancun Mexico. When asked where he was the night Travis was killed, Hughes said he didn't remember.
He had to ask his wife. Hughes has repeatedly told HLN, tweeted to the masses, and probably told every taxi driver and taco stand worker in Mesa that Travis was "very fearful" of Jodi. This creepy Jodi, who acts in such a way, to hear him tell it, defines all laws of human nature and decorum. This woman who he stated might burn his house down in the middle of the night. Yet, not Hughes or anyone at his direction checked on Travis for five days?
Hughes and his posse like to say Jodi dragged Travis' name through the mud. I'd offer that Travis drug Travis' name through the mud. And the defense only hit a few of the deeper mud holes. Jodi Arias, and not just her name, got dragged through the mud though. Like a dog that gets hit by a car on a rainy night and limps home to an owner who decides to beat the dog for going out in the rain, the mobs have kept after Jodi, assassinating every bat of her eyes, every swipe of her brow. In the courtroom, Juan Martinez badgered, yelled, manipulated, bullied, and ranted like a lunatic trying to unnerve Jodi. She held up like a champion though. Almost five years in jail and out of the abusive clutches of Travis Alexander or any other man had grown her self-confidence. But in the court of public opinion, which her access to is limited, the slaughter on the internet with words, photos, and "art" depictions has been merciless and the effects of that will linger on. I think sometimes, about the children of these haters and how one day they will be able to see what their parents created. Chris and Sky Hughes' children, too.
Jodi Arias has been described, drawn, painted and photographically depicted as a lying whore, when any tangible evidence of such, by any reasonable standard, simply does not exist. No one could even be found to testify that Jodi ever lied before June 4, 2008. She had 4 boyfriends in 15 years. Dr. DeMarte, the barely licensed psychologist tried to portray Jodi as having more than 10 jobs in those same years as incorrigible. Nevermind that Jodi worked in restaurants, and was also a talented, budding photographer and artist. Hughes on the other hand, goes on endlessly about his "rags to riches" story, his litany of low wage menial jobs, his ducking the repo man when he couldn't pay for his car, making himself sound like a real life Horatio Alger character.
This hate campaign, this vile disgusting lynch mob of agendas is now beating the drum for Jodi's lethal injection. The most marketed of those agendas, is "Justice for Travis". I call it the "Justice for Travis" train. And I'm fond of saying that train left the station a long, long time ago. No justice for anyone has been served. And most certainly it will not be with killing Jodi Arias. "Justice for Travis" is the thin veneer hiding the agendas of a few larger forces, unbeknownst to the masses of followers, followers who will do without a needed item to send $10 to one of the Travis Alexander funds, or maybe $5 for a Travis Alexander trinket of some kind. Hate sells. And it sold a hell of a lot of advertising space on HLN. Which in turn gave air time to the Hughes brothers and Legal Shield associates to both promote their business and rev up the St. Travis choir. Which in turn seeks to assure that Chris Hughes is not thought of as the man who brought Travis Alexander, a woman abusing, chastity law breaking, alleged pedophile or hebophile to a podium or a stage in his town.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
C.S. aka Chris Hughes, was Travis Alexander's alleged "best friend". Hughes knew Travis for 8 years or 10 years or for his whole life, depending on which version of the story he's telling. Hughes, using the power of the internet and the bobble heads at Headline News, and the repetition of a limited number of "Jodi and Travis" stories, punctuated by the words "freaky" and "creepy" orchestrated one of the largest, if not the largest, hate campaigns, against a single person, criminal defendant Jodi Arias, through social media, that I dare anyone to try and disprove. The hate, threats, and damage by over zealous followers of Hughes reached into the personal lives of many.
To believe that the jury in the State of Arizona vs. Jodi Arias was not affected by this massive campaign, whether by watching HLN or going onto the internet themselves, or through the influence of family and friends who no doubt felt obliged to inform their loved one with a warning as to what happens to those who disagree with the lynch mob, is to put one's head firmly and deeply into the sands of the Arizona desert.
The hate campaign by Hughes started well before the verdict of guilty came down last week. I believe his hate campaign contributed largely to the lynch mob coverage by HLN and commentators, Nancy Grace, Dr. Drew, Jane Velez-Mitchell, Vinnie Politan, Mike Brooks, Joey Jackson, Ryan Smith, Mike Galanos, and their many "expert guests", and "friends of Travis". Or more accurately, that each fueled the other. HLN obliged by gratuitously showing the photos of Travis Alexander's naked, dead, mutilated body and basically making a circus out of the HLN set, with commentators acting like playground bullies, and likely getting heftier and heftier bonuses the meaner and gnarlier they became.
The hate campaign by Hughes, I submit, was a direct attempt to quell any suggestion or confirmation that Travis Alexander was anything but a Saint, an angel on earth, and had never even masturbated until he met Jodi Arias. Maintaining Travis' reportedly pure and chaste and honorable reputation within the Mormon church and within the ranks of Legal Shield, formerly Pre-Paid Legal, was the clear and undeniable goal. Whether that has been securely achieved remains to be seen.
Jodi Arias' defense for killing Travis Alexander was that she was defending her own life, which she perceived he intended to take after he exploded in a fit of rage. Travis Alexander was abusive, mostly verbally and emotionally according to Jodi's testimony, and the same was the conclusion of domestic violence expert witness Alyce LaViolette. This defense was fought back at viciously by mass cyber bullying, including falsely reporting any facebook page that supported Jodi Arias, or that even supported her having a fair trial, and in many cases having those pages disabled for days at a time. LaViolette's book rating on Amazon plummeted thanks to the thousands of "reviews" entered on Amazon, actually violating policy, but nonetheless allowed, disparaging LaViolette for testifying for Jodi's defense. Mostly saying that Jodi did not ever suffer abuse at the hands or through the words of Travis Alexander, and that LaViolette knew not of what she spoke, despite her 30 years of experience which directly contradicted Dr. Janeen Demarte's indecipherable number of years experience.
Sources have told me, sources who allegedly witnessed Travis' explosive temper from his past that they were too afraid to come forward because they have seen what happens when anyone dares tell a story that illustrates the abusive behavior Jodi described. Hughes, HLN, and prosecutor Juan Martinez first cast the spell of "St. Travis", and only recently have they allowed Travis-Who-Did-No-Wrong-Okay-Maybe-A-Little-But-That's-Okay, as the Saint image has managed to fall just a tic by way of his own vile,disgusting, character assassinating words, both spoken and written revealed at trial and his dalliances with a string of women.
What about Travis' alleged addiction to internet pornography of a certain age group shared by unrevealed sources to this writer? Evidence allegedly exists to this support this allegation. The jury will never hear that, though. Certainly this is not to say that any abuse or addictions or even pedophilia justifies Travis' killing. Only that Jodi was defending her life and took his in that defense, as she pleaded, would justify his killing.
So, who is the person or persons who might suffer the most, financially and socially, should Travis Alexander's behaviors, including alleged pedophilia and alleged abuse of other women, including Mormon women, be revealed, or worse, testified to in court?
The letters described deviant behaviors of Travis Alexander, that were they to be made public, could seriously harm the reputation of Hughes, since Hughes takes credit for finding and developing Travis Alexander into the exemplary motivational speaker he was becoming. Hughes asserts the letters were forged. He even says he hired his "own expert" to verify that they were forged. Yet, the court never made such a finding. The court motions reveal a convoluted effort by the State to keep the letters out, and as was so often the case, the state won. The Hughes also couldn't seem to make up their minds on emails that they themselves sent to Travis calling him out on his bad behavior with Jodi and other women.
They apparently wished to simply "retract" those written words now and had figured out a way to cast their words in a light disparaging Jodi instead. They didn't get a chance to. Neither was called to testify. That seems to have not sat so well with C.S. , if we choose to believe his own words.
The exploitation of both the life and death of Travis Alexander seems to have no bounds. We have now reached the point that the masses, and again, I say, led by C.S., Chris Hughes, master motivator, public speaker, and salesman extraordinaire, will stop at nothing less than having Jodi Arias put to death. Hughes says he speaks for the family and believes they all also want her death. He rarely misses a chance to reiterate his desire to see her death, nor it seems do any of his 4 brothers, and a sampling of Legal Shield associates. He most recently tweeted, "Some people deserve the death penalty. Jodi Arias is one of those people." Jodi was also a person both he and Sky Hughes at one time wanted Travis to marry.
As for the verdict, nevermind that the case for premeditation was unbelievably flawed by both an incomplete investigation, perjury by Detective Flores, and the unconscionable constant shenanigans of Juan Martinez. Martinez withheld evidence,manipulated, bullied, and intimidated the defense witnesses so much so that the truth was rarely told more than a half sentence at time because of his compulsive objections.
Nevermind all that. Chris and Sky Hughes want Jodi Arias dead. That way she can never speak another damaging, albeit truthful word about their "best friend". The "best friend" who Hughes had allegedly had a "very important conference call" scheduled with June 4, 2008. That conference call never happened. Five days later, Travis' nude, mutilated, dead body was found slumped in his shower. The Hughes, according to Hughes himself, were planning on meeting Travis Alexander and Mimi Hall in Cancun Mexico. When asked where he was the night Travis was killed, Hughes said he didn't remember.
He had to ask his wife. Hughes has repeatedly told HLN, tweeted to the masses, and probably told every taxi driver and taco stand worker in Mesa that Travis was "very fearful" of Jodi. This creepy Jodi, who acts in such a way, to hear him tell it, defines all laws of human nature and decorum. This woman who he stated might burn his house down in the middle of the night. Yet, not Hughes or anyone at his direction checked on Travis for five days?
Hughes and his posse like to say Jodi dragged Travis' name through the mud. I'd offer that Travis drug Travis' name through the mud. And the defense only hit a few of the deeper mud holes. Jodi Arias, and not just her name, got dragged through the mud though. Like a dog that gets hit by a car on a rainy night and limps home to an owner who decides to beat the dog for going out in the rain, the mobs have kept after Jodi, assassinating every bat of her eyes, every swipe of her brow. In the courtroom, Juan Martinez badgered, yelled, manipulated, bullied, and ranted like a lunatic trying to unnerve Jodi. She held up like a champion though. Almost five years in jail and out of the abusive clutches of Travis Alexander or any other man had grown her self-confidence. But in the court of public opinion, which her access to is limited, the slaughter on the internet with words, photos, and "art" depictions has been merciless and the effects of that will linger on. I think sometimes, about the children of these haters and how one day they will be able to see what their parents created. Chris and Sky Hughes' children, too.
 |
This hate campaign, this vile disgusting lynch mob of agendas is now beating the drum for Jodi's lethal injection. The most marketed of those agendas, is "Justice for Travis". I call it the "Justice for Travis" train. And I'm fond of saying that train left the station a long, long time ago. No justice for anyone has been served. And most certainly it will not be with killing Jodi Arias. "Justice for Travis" is the thin veneer hiding the agendas of a few larger forces, unbeknownst to the masses of followers, followers who will do without a needed item to send $10 to one of the Travis Alexander funds, or maybe $5 for a Travis Alexander trinket of some kind. Hate sells. And it sold a hell of a lot of advertising space on HLN. Which in turn gave air time to the Hughes brothers and Legal Shield associates to both promote their business and rev up the St. Travis choir. Which in turn seeks to assure that Chris Hughes is not thought of as the man who brought Travis Alexander, a woman abusing, chastity law breaking, alleged pedophile or hebophile to a podium or a stage in his town.
 |
| The Hughes will be appearing on the Dr. Phil show on Monday, February 15. It is my understanding guests are not to speak about the content of the show prior to airing and that in fact an agreement is signed.UPDATE: Sky Hughes did not appear. According to Chris Hughes public statements, she divorced him. |
KUDO's - keep up the good work! I think this whole case has brought some good people together and will eventually make some changes in the current judicial process. It has definitely shed some light on trial by media and lynch mobs. Today's process has allowed major money mongers (e.g. HLN, Legal Shield, etc...) to make a 'PROFIT' off the tragedy of victims. It also precluded an individual their Sixth Amendment rights! May the 'Truth' of the future not be so 'Inconvenient'
ReplyDeleteWhat will it take for Americans to see that the jury system does not work? We rely on a system that allows justice to be weighed not in balance by evaluation of the facts but on the basis of what each jurors own personal self believes. Jurors will say "we just did not believe it.....we felt the defendant was lieing" OMG it is not about what is believed but what has been proven. We need a system of educated, professional jurors who know and understand the law and decide according to the law.
DeleteGreat question! What will it take? Maybe their own personal experience reflective of what has gone on in this trial? Yes, at the least, there should be an "qualifying exam" of some sort to sit on a jury. Although, with Juan Martinez in charge, and Judge Stephens as the ref, how could anyone ever expect to get a fair playing field?
DeleteThank you for commenting. Sorry it took awhile to reply!
i fully agree with your analysis of the story... i dated a mormon once ... he was married, had probably been married several times ... and he never told a word about his situation.... i met him a few times afterwards and he was always saying that he woudl not stay with his current wife/girlfriend, that she was jealous.
DeleteI thought he had a big problem ;;;; but then i learned about Joseph Smith life and how he married under aged girls, and forced them to do so using the name of God, so he was just doing what the mormon prophet did all along and considered a doctrine .....
Just look at what Jeff Warens did in the name of the same mormon religion and all the abuse, incest and force marriage of young girls to much older men and you will understand mormon mindset ...
And i bet Travis Alexander was just that kind of man ...... and certainly not a saint by any standard..
So i fully agree with you, that the trial was a mockery of justice and Martinez a master of lies, deceith and an obstructor to any kind of justice that would conduct an investigation properly and show all the facts and not hide the true personality and action of Mr. Alexander...
It would be a good idea that women stay away from that type of men and double standard religion for their own safety of mind, body and soul... unless they want to be destroyed
Are you serious?
DeleteI agree the jury should have been sequestered, but, with all the overwhelming evidence against this defendant the outcome would have been the same.There is no evidence better than DNA evidence, and to think the gun being stolen from the grandparents house was a coincidence is the same as believing in fiary tales. And by the way, surely you don't believe this defendant was actually carrying gas cans in her car so she wouldn't run out. There are gas stations everywhere. Oh, I need to correct myself, I kept saying defendant when it is actually Convicted Murderer. Sorry. Have a nice day.
DeleteYes, the poster above is "serious"! Ask a rhetorical question and I'll give you a real answer!
DeleteDNA evidence is good, true. However, dating a hand or palm print is not so reliable. Just saying. The gun being stolen could indeed be a coincidence, and certainly indicates a not so smart "plan", since she could have easily gotten an unregistered, larger caliber gun without going through so much trouble. Gas? So why didn't she buy all the gas with cash, and the gas can from Wal-mart with cash? Pretty inconsistent "plan" if you ask me. Plenty of people take cans of gas across the desert! You want a large scale "study"? Sorry, but I can't direct you to one. I would take your comment seriously, but your glee at writing "convicted murderer" is evident. So I would ask you, why bother to comment at all? Why do you and so many feel it necessary to state the same old tired arguments every day? The answers don't really change, do they? Oh well. Yeah, you have a "nice day", too.
DeleteIt's hilarious to me how people seem to think there is a connection between the stolen gun and the one that shot TA (or was it JR?). Anyone with half a brain and the capacity to do even the most basic research would clearly see how the stolen gun has nothing to do with TA being shot.
DeleteHi Sandra, Pascal here. Recent study's on jury trial showed that this is a system wich doesn't work. Thanks to lack of knowledge on law jurors have a tendency to rule on their own life experiences and their believes. Wich is indangering the "spirit of thd law" wich has no emotions and wich was made to protect and help all parties in either what case. However sometimes outdated articles can not be put to stand the test of time, coz they dont apply anymore to the spirit of time these days. So in Belgiumm they are considering to change the jury trials in to a judge jury.
DeleteLets see what this will bring..
Anyway congrats on the blog a d keep it up girl. THE SAGA CONTINUES.But what here above is filling me with contempt and more feelings of injustice. Butterfly's fly so elegant and proud, untill they die and their colors fade. Then we will realize how nice it was to look at them
I think Belgium's got the right idea. Growth is painful, and this country has outgrown the jury system, as I see it. And a lot more. Or am I just getting older and becoming jaded? A little of both, probably.
DeleteSuch a beautiful metaphor, Pascal. Butterflies are indeed one of nature's best teachers.
Thank you , Pascal, for your thoughtful and insightful words.
I agree about the Hughes'... They're definitely profiteers. But the handprint? It was mixed with her blood and his so in what other incident could that have occurred? I'm truly interested in what u think. She said in response to a jury question that she was never formally trained w guns so that indicates to me that to her a gun is a gun and enough to get the job done w out giving much thought to caliber. Furthermore, had she gone looking for an unregistered gun, first she wld have to know a person that could obtain that for her, pay a lot of $ for it which she said she didn't have, and doing things that way creates a witness that no doubt bc of the publicity of the trial would've come forward to testify that he/she sold JA the gun. Stealing it from her residence creates no witness, only an unprovable "coincidence." It matters not if she used cash at Walmart bc they found the receipt of the gas can purchase and when JA tells me she returned it, but then a Walmart employee gets on the stand and tells me they checked EVERY register for a return the day of and the day after the purchase and there was no record of return that indicates to me she was lying about the return or we have another "coincidence." Having the gas cans alone doesn't mean squat to me bc like u said plenty of ppl do it but she made it the whole way through AZ w out stopping for gas so yet another "coincidence" that she had enough gas to drive straight thru the state w out stopping for gas. The hair color change..nothing major to me but another coincidence. The license plates at Starbucks...could be true but here we have yet another coincidence. Renting the car 90mi away from her home...ok. Possible but there were rental places in Yreka so it COULD point to Premeditation but it's still possible that renting in Reading was cheaper, just coincidental. I personally never rent a red car bc they DO get more tickets..so that means nothing to me. But her cell phone is off during her entire time in AZ...it cldve died, but she worries about running out if gas and took extra provisions for that but wasn't worried about her cell phone, the ONLY lifeline should she get lost, being fully charged at all times? Losing the car charger in the car isn't an excuse that works for me bc if I'm traveling on roads I dont know in a desert and my phone is about to die n I know the charger is SOMEWHERE in the car, I'm pulling over to find it, takes 2 seconds. So cell phone being dead the whole time in AZ, possible but coincidence. You see my theme here and the word I keep using..... coincidence. If there were only 1 or 2 coincidental acts consistent with premeditation I could believe they were both coincidence. But when you have 5 or 6 acts that all point to premeditation and all have to be a coincidence in order to discount premeditation, that's no longer believable to me. It's not one or two specific acts of premeditation that the state mentioned that convinces me she planned it. Its the fact that when i look at all of the acts of premeditation put forth by the state and am being asked by the defense to believe they're all coincidence, it's just not probable or even likely to me bc there are just too many "coincidences" to be coincidence. This is just the way I see it; you authored this site for open debate I assume so I'm interested in how you or any other readers view these statements bc I'm still on the fence with guilt or innocence. The things I listed are sticking points for me so I'd love to hear another view point. But wonderful site, great analysis of the Hughes' bc on that point I TOTALLY agree with you.
DeleteExcellent post.
ReplyDeleteThank you!
DeleteHughes has stated that the money raised from the TA Fund he has set up will go in full to the family until the end of the trial. After that, he says, the funds will be used to provide 'the kind of books that Travis read' or something similar, to schools in TA's name. What's the bet these books will include CS Hughes materials, paid for by fund monies?
ReplyDeleteHughes is a charlatan of the worst kind, and I hope his prayers for Ms Arias' death go unanswered.
Well said, Anonymous. I could not agree more.
DeleteThat's terrible. The kind of books Travis read are useless and can be very damaging. The school system has standards that they must meet and the majority of the crap book that Travvy read are nothing short of garbage. Of course, Mr Hughes really wouldn't know anything about 'standards' in education as he is nothing more than a drop out turned con artist, hiding behind a cloak of Mormonism.
DeleteMarc
By seabird:
DeleteMarc, Mr. HUGHES must know something about education. He founded a charter school called Soldier Hollow Charter School (in Utah?) It was investigated by the FBI for complaints of child sex abuse (maybe a year or so ago). Chris was removed from the Board of Directors. The award winning, popular principal was pulled out and moved out of town. Carpet lifted; broom applied. Kiddies didn't miss a beat of their above average education. My take would be that the school was a "business venture" on the part of C. Hughes.
Theres something that I noticed while watching the guilt phase of the trial- anytime JA made a comment that Samantha Alexander didn't like, she rolled her eyes. That's a display of emotion in the courtroom and they were RIGHT beside the jurors, don't tell me the jurors didn't see it. I mean I lost count how many times that girl rolled her eyes and she herself is an officer of the court as a police officer. Sky Hughes, same thing. The men sat there w stone cold looks on their faces and that's how the women should have been as well. ANY gesture is violation of the court order and it's happened so many times but I've never heard anyone mention it anywhere.
DeleteMaybe someone can shed some light on this for me. There's this website Jodi Arias is Innocent (JAii) and they constantly bash the Alexanders. This JAii site has shown arrest records of those Alexanders that have them, accuse one or more of using meth... I mean are these allegations or fact? I just don't understand why any of that matters because the family isn't on trial, they're present to support another member of their family that's been murdered. (I say that bc I mean JA herself admitted she killed him, regardless of the circumstances he died by her hand which is then considered murder). Wy does the past of any of the Alexander siblings or anything about them matter? They did lose a brother. I can't find much about them online other than these maligning characteristics so I was wondering if anyone could explain why it even matters who the family members are as people and why their backgrounds matter at all? Thanks.
DeleteExcellently written, mirroring my thoughts exactly. Keep up the good work.
ReplyDeleteThank you so much, SheWeeSmile NP!
DeleteSorry for the delay in saying thank you to you and the other commenters!
How I wish this article would get some TV airtime and just go viral everywhere. It's just incredibly thorough, logical, intelligent, and humane. From the start of this trial, I have felt and just knew somehow that "something wasn't quite right". So glad I found you and your group. Thank you for what you're doing because the mob of hating sheeple need this kind of thing to wake them from their "witch hunt" that has become Jodi Arias.
ReplyDeleteOh thanks so much, LightSeeker!
ReplyDeleteYes, I had that feeling that too much was not making sense from the beginning. And since then, everything I find, and much of it I'm not even looking for, leads me to that conclusion! Hope you'll stop by my facebook and twitter pages! Please feel free to post and pass on anything you see on my sites!
Thanks again,
Sandra
Yes this story does need to air on television. Whoever is able to finance the show will certainly magnify their cost in doing so. One thing I worry about though, is the large corporations that are said to be keeping the truth from being told and how safe anybody would be to interfere with such plans.
ReplyDeleteI love that you said that much of what you find you are not even looking for. All one has to do is listen to that tiny voice of doubt we all so often ignore. The next step is to just dare yourself to venture out even just a little to explore that nagging feeling that something isn't right. Thank you for gathering what you've learned, and putting it out there for our consciousness. I pray that people break free from the mind control spell that has been cast upon us.
ReplyDeleteSo true How can he sleep at night. He may as well have stoned her. KARMA is a bitch someday its going to get them. Nobody gets out for free. Live with that on your shoulders. What a burden to carry inyour life. Sky looked freaky when the verdict was read. Did you see her face wow almost insane with worry. They are not free anymore.
ReplyDeleteFirstly, thanks so much for your thoughts and writings Sandra <3 I do believe the truth will be told, but it's very unfortunate that mob mentality rules. That will quell one day and your story, our story, JODI's story, will seek it's way out from the plethora of weeds to reach the sunlight. We will witness news media across the land come into full bloom of the truth. I have faith, that is the one thing that no one can take from us.
ReplyDeleteThank you all for your comments and support. Sorry if it took me a bit to get around to replying. My interest in Jodi and Travis' story started when I became appalled at the magnitude of character assassination by HLN. In a way, I suppose that was a gift. Because the more I looked into the known facts of the case, and into the unanswered questions, the more I was and am compelled to keep going.
ReplyDeleteONWARD!
Sandra
Well, it looks like I have finally found the one who knows the truth!
ReplyDeleteWilhelm Voigt
Wilhelm, so glad you have arrived! Do I? Does anyone? Do you?
DeleteI certainly hope you do. I've been thinking about this concept of yours that 'hate sells'.
ReplyDeleteI was riding the train in the morning and seriously contemplating how this can change my life. Perhaps I could sell some hate trinkets myself, my current situation is less than desirable. You are a great writer by the way- Wilhelm Voigt
Hope I do what? Anyway, I would not suggest you try selling hate trinkets, if you're interested in my opinion, and obviously you are or you wouldn't be here!
DeleteI'm not a great writer. You probably need to read more. In fact, I'm sure of it.
From what I've gathered, the hate business does indeed produce quite the profit. It seems to allow entire families,and extended families to survive months on end without work, or worry of home-life. These late night train rides tend to give me plenty of time to ponder. Will death for Jodi bracelets, or Love for Travis bracelets sell best? Perhaps the best seller would be the "Kill em Juan" model. Silver,or stainless? Wilhelm.
DeleteWhat is an inappropriate comment? I should imagine that it is one that questions anything you have written!
ReplyDeleteGlad you reminded me that I need to re-word my admonition as to comments....thanks!
Delete"What about Travis' alleged addiction to internet pornography of a certain age group shared by unrevealed sources to this writer? Evidence allegedly exists to this support this allegation."
ReplyDelete"Factually oriented?" Any commentator who makes allegations like that and can't back them up, name the sources AND offer up the proof, shouldn't publish them.
Tell you what. You don't come here and read my blog, and then you won't get all pissy about what I publish. K?
DeleteExcuse me, for LMAO over that. There is more than ample evidence and it's not hard to find either. However, to a person who is not a specialist in anything other than spewing rubbish I would suggest that some *commentors* attempt to attain an education and say, twenty or so years of experience behind them so that then, someone might actually think that they have some credibility. OK, in simple English. You follow the evidence. Unlike Flores, DeMarte, Martinez etc who manufacture evidence, the 'real' evidence is right there in plain sight. Travis was more than just addicted to pornography or sex or masturbation and he was more than a simple co-dependent with chronic unresolved morbid grief issues, anger and outbursts of rage and like his bum buddy CS Hughes, a con artisit and neurotic individual. People like Travis are incapable of genuine empathy and their world revolves around themselves. Not to worry though, all this evidence is just sitting there, piled up waiting for the dam to burst and shatter the delusions of countless sheeple.
Delete"Waiting for the dam to burst and shatter the delusions of countless sheeple"
DeleteOh, I do love the thought of that! So many layers of delusion.....
Keep up your good work. I feel you have "hit the nail on the head" many times!!!! Hope your research will benefit Jodi. Thank you.
ReplyDeleteThank you. Every word of support means ALOT!
DeleteSandra can you tell us the truth... Do you have a drinking / drug problem?
ReplyDeleteI've read it in a few places... We all know Jason does, you have pointed that out.
Be truthful:)
You sound sincere, so I'm going to answer you. No, "Anonymous", I do not have a "drinking problem". Of course, why would anyone believe anything anymore?! How about I say, "Yes, I have a drinking problem. The problem is that you're not buying!" Haha! And no, that is not using humor to deflect a serious issue. Not saying I've never used humor to deflect an uncomfortable issue, of course, but sorry, nope, no issues with alcohol. Love a glass of Cabernet Sauvignon on occasion, or even two! But rarely beyond that, since the after effects would clearly cut down on my time to rule the world!:)
DeleteNo, thankfully, I don't have any addiction issues, except maybe to fighting against injustice and bullies?
It's really weird, being just a little bit "known": not enough for an entourage, and just enough to bring the haters out...!
Thanks, "Anonymous"!~
That 'anonymous' person is using my alias LOL
DeleteZ
OMG!! Smart and Gorgeous too!!
ReplyDeleteWell, please do introduce yourself sometime soon! Thank you....
DeleteI'll remove my mask soon :D
DeleteZ
I will look forward to it, Z!
DeleteThe mask will come off when you get your Christmas card in the mail... yes, snail mail :D Actually, we wanted to wish you a warm and wonderful Christmas full of all the love and happiness you deserve :) And that is a lot!!!
DeleteZ
Aha! I had a sneaky suspicion of who "Z" might be! Yes, I received your lovely card....I of course, opened it very gingerly, since well, I'm on a few folks' "naughty list" this year!
DeleteI will not publicly unmask you here for my thousands of readers. I CAN keep a secret, once in awhile!
You guys are the best! Hopefully by next Christmas or before, we'll have even more to celebrate!
Sandra
Here's a thought you might like to keep in mind.
ReplyDeletehttp://strikelawyer.wordpress.com/page/2/
We have consistently held that a police officer who manufactures false evidence against a criminal defendant violates due process if that evidence is later used to deprive the defendant of her liberty in some way. In Jones v. City of Chicago, we upheld a jury’s imposition of damages against a variety of defendants, including police officers and a crime lab technician, who “were determined to put away George Jones regardless of the evidence.” 856 F.2d 985, 993 (7th Cir.1988). We have since said that there “is no disputing that such conduct [fabricating evidence] violates clearly established constitutional rights.” Dominguez v. Hendley, 545 F.3d 585, 589 (7th Cir.2008). Indeed, in this very case, the police defendants admit that the allegations that they fabricated evidence — the same allegations as those against McFatridge — state a due process claim…In Mooney v. Holohan, 294 U.S. 103, 55 S.Ct. 340, 79 L.Ed. 791 (1935), Pyle v. Kansas, 317 U.S. 213, 63 S.Ct. 177, 87 L.Ed. 214 (1942), and Napue v. Illinois, 360 U.S. 264, 79 S.Ct. 1173, 3 L.Ed.2d 1217 (1959), the Supreme Court held that a prosecutor violates due process when she knowingly uses perjured testimony to secure a conviction. The question before us is whether that principle also covers the predicate step of creating the false testimony. In Napue, the Court condemned something even more innocuous — a prosecutor’s failure to correct a witness — while pointing out that it was not as bad as affirmatively “soliciting false evidence.” 360 U.S. at 269, 79 S.Ct. 1173. It is hard to see how the more egregious step of crafting false evidence is any less of a violation. That creation, whether by police officers or by a prosecutor acting in an investigatory capacity, would not happen unless the investigatory personnel intended to serve it up to the prosecutor for use at trial — which, we note, is exactly what happened here. As the First Circuit has put it, “if any concept is fundamental to our American system of justice, it is that those charged with upholding the law are prohibited from deliberately fabricating evidence and framing individuals for crimes they did not commit. Actions taken 582*582 in contravention of this prohibition necessarily violate due process (indeed, we are unsure what due process entails if not protection against deliberate framing under color of official sanction).” Limone v. Condon, 372 F.3d 39, 44-45 (1st Cir.2004).
Yes, indeed! Strikelawyer is an excellent blog! And this is great information! But if only I had a law degree.....or perhaps soon would stumble over someone in Arizona or California willing to dig through the layers and layers of complete and utter ......sorry....bullshit.
DeleteSandra ... Heinz created that bit strip because you are a fucking idiot!!
ReplyDeleteI have seen your name in various groups and posts , people don't like you.... You are a very sad person, you are the joke of Facebook ...we all know you are mentally ill... It wouldn't bother any of us if you crawled under that rock you came from..you are the constant butt of jokes... You even managed to piss off George... Haha
You must tell yourself in a mirror your a good girl ....
YOU are officially off my Christmas card list!!
DeleteToodles!
Some people are just so brave hiding behind their computer screen. I know one thing for sure, people like him haven't got the sense God gave a jack ass.
DeleteZ
Please do not insult the humble jack ass, Z. :)
DeleteYou bitch are the biggest exploiter of Jodi all you want is to write some stupid book you think people are going to read...don't think for a second we all don't know you have Estrla working for you... Take your pills or cry or whatever you need to do you are still the biggest piece of shit... Oh did I misspell anything ??
ReplyDeleteI have "Estrla" working for me? How so? When's the last time you visited Jodi? YOU are also off my Christmas card list, "Ms. Anonymous"!
DeleteLol your side kick is a bimbo ... A loser needs a loser sidekick I guess... She's not a supporter she's a fan ... You share one small brain, everyone knows .... No one wants to see her boobs while she should be working.
ReplyDeletePeople actually do want to see her boobs. I'm pretty sure of that.
DeleteIt looks like all the fruit loops are out just in time for Christmas. I wonder if they all get their pass from Bellevue at the same time. LOL
DeleteTalking about 'fruit loops'... I noticed a similar bunch of things going on elsewhere. This is interesting reading and might seem off topic for some people, but the parallels are more than simple coincidence. You decide. I noticed it right away.
Deletehttp://blogs.villagevoice.com/runninscared/2011/04/when_scientolog.php
Z
PS Happy New Year!! <3
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteSandra, you seem like a well educated, very intelligent,and from what I've read here I believe you are sincere in your quest for justice. However, I think you sweep alot of things under the rug when it comes to Jodi Arias. What I mean is, you seem to have an answer for everything no matter how far fetched it seems to be. Anyway, I admire your enthusiasm for what you do. My question to you is, why this defendant and why not someone who was truly wrongfully convicted. I'm sure you know there are so many out there who have actually been wrongfully convicted and would surely like to have help from someone like yourself .I understand your passion, I just don't understand where you're going with it. Do you have any other defendants that you are fighting for? Please, if you have time to answer these questions and maybe I will be able to understand better. And i'm sure there are others (anonymous others) who would also like to know. Thanks, Marty Meade
ReplyDeleteWell, Marty Meade I would like to first say thank you for stopping by, and writing a very thoughtful post!
DeleteI really, really need to write another essay and explain more of my thoughts and opinions on Jodi and Travis, but instead I have been swept up in the twitter and facebook world of 140 characters and such! As for "where" I'm going with blogging and posting and such on this subject, I can't tell you. Because I don't know! All I know is that I am compelled by many aspects of this whole debacle. And I hope that my words will cause others to think about both Jodi and Travis in a more compassionate, truthful light. I also hope my words will cause others to see Juan Martinez and Sheriff Joe and the other "players" in a more truthful, DISpassionate light!
As for "other defendants wrongfully convicted", and the suggestion I fight for them instead of Jodi, I will tell you that I have not examined any other cases in such detail as I have Jodi's, so I don't feel qualified to do so, at this point anyway. I only happened upon Jodi and Travis' story on HLN, and the more I watched the HLN whoredom and their veracity in convicting her pre-trial, the more my 'they doth protest too much" radar went off! I expected to find support for what HLN was saying on line, but guess what? I didn't. Every tiny aspect of Jodi and her life was magnified 100 times and a dark, sinister light cast on it. Anyway, enough or I'll end up writing that essay right here! And I have urgent household matters to take care of at the moment! :)
Oh, but I will say that Judge Sherry Stephens is a huge reason for this debacle. This was her first murder trial, although she has been a judge for a number of years. She was like the substitute teacher and Juan was like the bad kid who ran out of ritalin and his mom wouldn't come pick him up! If the judges from the George Zimmerman trial or the McNeil trial had been in charge of Jodi's courtroom, I don't believe Juan would have been allowed to cheat as he did. Yes, cheat. Call it prosecutorial misconduct if you wish, but it's good ol' fashioned cheating as I see it. It happens in many courtrooms, I know, but I don't know how anyone of any intelligence could watch him for any length of time and not say his behavior was unconscionable in the light of seeking true and lasting justice for the victim. As you probably know, I am not a "Jodi groupie" or a "Travis hater". I also feel sincere sympathy for the Alexanders. I think they've been played by Chris Hughes and gang, and by Juan Martinez.
So thank you, Marty Meade, for asking your question and for the compliments! I hope this helps your understanding a bit, and that you'll stop by again! You must have heard the rumor that I am more apt to publish a comment that includes a compliment, yes? Haha! Well, it's true! )
Sandra
I'd also like to say, I think it's diengenuous for people to comment under anonymous. Stand up for what you believe in. I feel if you are anonymous your opinion doesn't mean that much if your not willing to stand behind it. Anyway, my real email address is meademarty38@yahoo.com. I'm not afraid to voice my opinion. I suggest others to do the same. Thanks, Marty Meade
ReplyDeleteNot everyone feels comfortable posting under their real name. To each his/her own. No one will ever know the truth in this case except for the fact that Travis was murdered. By whose hand I am not 100% convinced.
ReplyDeleteI prefer "real", personally. I tried a pseudonym for a bit when I first started following the trial, but it was just not satisfying at all. So my real name, and pretty much everything but my DNA analysis has surfaced somewhere since then.
ReplyDeleteI am not 100% convinced of anything either. Except maybe that Juan Martinez has a really large.....ego. Oh, and here's a "fun fact": did you know Juan's only 5" 4" tall?
Thanks Marty and Anon!
Sandra, when are we gonna get to see the other side of your face? You're obviously a pretty woman, so, out with it Sandra, come on. lol.
ReplyDeleteI bet my post wont show up here! ;)
ReplyDeleteMy gut tells me that Chris Hughes has do much more he is hiding. Was he into c porn, maybe? Me thinks he protests too much. Or is he just projecting his own self-hatred?
ReplyDeleteRain Shine @RedTailspin 9 mins9 minutes ago @LiseLasalle @abby_kn Travis borrowed a big chuck of money from a plastic surgeon (a Mormon bigwig) around noon on the day he died, too. .
ReplyDeleteIf this proves to be true as well as the fact of Chris Hughes arriving on scene to take into possession certain items that belonged to him then I would have to say that the real reason that Chris Hughes arrived on the scene was to gather up the money that Travis had recently borrowed that day from the plastic surgeon.
To Dryson: by seabird
DeleteWoah; I had heard about the alleged $7,000 of borrowed money; allegedly from Dr. Carl B. Hiaat; but the info that the money transaction took place around noon on the very day TA died is a jaw-dropper to me. Then C.H. showed up to claim his personal property (also on this same day?) If this is the case, it would place C.H at THE SCENE OF THE CRIME.) showing up to take evidence out of TA's residence? (Who would have permitted that?)
But, I'm not clear when you are saying C.H. arrived, because supposedly all these mormons did not become aware that TA was dead until June 9, 2008; the date of actual death having been fixed by detectives as June 4, 2008. THIS COULD BE A VERY IMPORTANT CLUE. Please post again and flesh out this picture.
So, Jodi is reported to have arrived at TA's at about 4:00 am June 4. They went to sleep and supposedly would have been taking pictures of each other when they woke up at about 1:00 pm on June 4. That would place both Jodi, and her rented white Ford Focus on the premises when the money transaction took place, if that happened around noon. Doesn't it also imply that she and the car were still there when C.H. arrived? According to time stamps on pictures, Jodi was supposedly still there at about 5:30 pm when a room mate was expedted home (Enrique?)
My "suspect list" includesC.H., because he's scum
and Dr. Carl Hiaat, because I think they would need a skilled throat cutter.
If I'm not totally confused, I have just placed my top two "suspects" at the scene of the crime, at the same time, on the day that TA died; June 4, 2008. My gut tells me that this just can't be. Somebody please scrutinize my line of thinking, and make corrections. Also, one of the two suspects, C.H.. has been publicly saying that "he can't remember" where he was when TA died; (sounds like a lie to me).
Very compelling comments, Dryson and Seabird! Great blog, Sandra!
ReplyDeleteRe-visiting blog Sandra. Excellent work!!
ReplyDeleteEnjoying your work! I detest Juan Valdez/whatever-his-name-is (I'm too tired to remember or care), and it wouldn't surprise me if he DID hide something. And way to be so professional, Mr. "Prosecutor", by SIGNING AUTOGRAPHS, raging like a madman in court, and--well, good God, he's just fugly. My main question for the day: when did Sky Hughes bail out on Chris? I thought that marriage would last....well, till the man in the marriage cheats on his wife and then divorces her or kills her, then himself, then the kids. Mormon style, dangit. >:( I've NO fondness for Mormons, or TA's crazy, crime-ridden family, either. It makes it hard to be sympathetic to them when supposed Jesus followers spew vindictive and act like pathetic 13-year olds. Then again, they're follows of that damned Cult of MORON/MORMON, so what can you expect?
ReplyDeleteThank you. I like your synopsis. Ahh, and then "13-year olds" comes up yet again.
DeleteYour name calling is is so "bad to the bone." Kinda reminds me of the students I would see while teaching the 6th grade. Many of them act like you while out at recess on the playground. Cheers to you! Your mom must be so proud she taught you how to how to name call and make fun of a religion you're not a part of. Another brilliant commenter. Kudos 10G!
DeleteLOL....ok, how about toddlers? ;)
ReplyDeleteIn all seriousness, does anyone know anything about when and why Sky left Chris Hughes? Because I just did NOT see that coming at ALL. I thought THEY portrayed themselves as the perfect Mormon couple!
I know your comment is 5 years old so it’s likely you won’t see this but I too want to find out mote about why Chris and Sky split up and can’t find anything about it anywhere! I think he’s also already remarried. Have you heard anything about the divorce since?
DeleteI began reading this in the hope that it would be a truthful examination of the situation that Jodi planned the murder of Travis. However about one third of the way through reading it, I realized that this is nothing more than another "story" that was created in the attempt to distract the public from the truth.
ReplyDeleteI knew this was rubbish when I read that you said no one checked on or found Travis for 5 days. You claim that if Chris Hughes were such a great friend, then why didn't he go over to check on his friend. If you know anything, then you know Chris lived in CA and Travis in AZ. Chris has been calling Travis for days because at the time of Travis' murder, Chris was already in Cancun waiting for Travis to arrive. So think about your statement? Truly. How on Earth could Chris physically go to Travis' house to check on him if he were in Cancun waiting for Travis to get there. If you know anything, then you also know that Chris left several messages for Travis and in fact, the last message said something like "bro, you better be dead" when he could not reach him. So, your attempt to tarnish the friendship between Chris and Travis is nothing more than an attempt, all fluffed up with lies.
So, this rambling on the pretty pottery laden and gold background is again, just rambling. When you don't reveal all sides of the story, then you're biased. Where is the mention of all the planning Jodi did in preparation of Travis' murder? Where's the fact written that Jodi discarded all receipts having to do with AZ and the third gas can, with Jodi shutting her phone off, with her bringing the gun that she stole from Grandma, etc. Don't forget, she admitted to many of these things on the stand! She admitted to fabricating an alibi in Ryan Burns. She admitted to washing the blood off her hands after killing him. She admitted to so many things on the stand, all thanks to that very thorough prosecutor JM. Without Mr. Martinez, Jodi may have had a lesser sentence and that would be a VERY dangerous thing for society.
If only Jodi had put her efforts into going to college and forging a career for herself, instead of trying to tie down a guy, she would've been so much better for it. Her desperation in seeking a husband so she could have kids truly took over her entire existence. She was 27 and panicked. If she let it happen naturally, she may have had a chance at a normal life. Her mother said in her letter to the judge "one thing we didn't teach our daughter was to walk away from an abusive relationship" and I believe that's a bunch of hogwash. Those parents couldn't control her and when she moved out at 17, they were relieved they didn't have to put up with her.
PART 2. Jodi was having sex by the age of 15, according to her. So her parents may have missed the mark on teaching her that she did NOT have to open her legs to every guy that presented himself in front of her. Desperation does not suit anyone. It's ugly. Jodi knew she was attractive, in fact, she said she was thankful for the shape of her body and her lovely hair. Most people wouldn't really be grateful and thankful for such vain things, but I give her a pass on that. However, she used those attributes in an attempt to get a guy, completely ignoring the fact that if a guy loves a girl, he won't care what size or shape she is or what color her hair is. Jodi confused love with sex and sex with love. That's always a dangerous thing to do. I believe she was way too forward and too into the "kinky" things in the bedroom and most men want that from their fantasies, not from their wife. So, back to her parents, they didn't teach her to respect herself and covet her body so she did what she knew how to do and what she thought would hook a guy. She had 4 documented boyfriends, but we know that she had sex with more men than just those four. She gave her body and her sex away for free and that's never a good thing.
ReplyDeleteHer defense made a FOOL of her on the stand, first by having her wear her hair like I did when I was six years old and in first grade. Making her LOOK the part of a little girl on the stand was almost laughable, mainly because we'd all already seen the photos of her dressed in Travis' dress shirt and looking "hot." So, you have to think, styling her hair like a 6 year old only INSULTED the members of the jury. Her defense tried to make the entire trial about sex, ooooh like that's a bad thing. It's a normal part of life. And you can't say "oh but she was Mormon" because Jodi changed religions like most people change clothes. They wear the outfit that suits them on that particular day. Poor Jodi was confused and Dr. DeMarte spelled it out perfectly when she described her actions in relation to a teenager. The jury had a very hard time trying to put these two things together in their mind. We see Jodi on the stand, looking bashful and timid, but we know she has another side to her that is bold, assertive and daring in the bedroom. So, her defense took that way over the top thinking if they could get just ONE juror to buy into their "I'm just a girl" story then they did their job. Well, as we know, they did get ONE juror to buy into it and THAT is why Jodi is on LIFE ROW and not DEATH ROW. Jodi wouldn't have even been charged with the DP if she didn't go bat-shit crazy on 6/4/08 and murder Travis three different ways. You know it and the public knows it. The full blast of her anger came pouring out that day when she did not get the answer she wanted.
PART 3, SADLY THIS IS THE REAL INCONVENIENT TRUTH: Comparison....If Travis got so mad about the camera allegedly being dropped, then WHY on EARTH didn't he get angry over his BMW being destroyed when Jodi left it in 1st gear when she was going to have it towed back to California??? Think about that. The "story" that he got that angry over a $500 camera makes no logical sense, but Jodi FORGOT she already wrote in her journal that Travis was so nice to her when she destroyed his BMW. Does that logic make any sense to you? No. It doesn't. So for these reasons and a multitude more, I found your story to be nothing more than another attempt to reveal more juicy things about Travis and Jodi's sex life. Who really cares about all that? Not when the real focus is that she planned his murder and this 30 year old man will forever be 30 years old. That's what truly matters, frankly.
ReplyDeleteI recently saw a picture of Jodi, she no longer has that innocent rounded baby face. Those looks have long gone by the wayside, she's been in prison for more than a decade (her entire 30's) and she now has a hardened look to her expression. A much older version of herself, with streaks of grey hair throughout her basic brown color. If only she could've looking into the future and saw where her life would end up if she murdered a human being, perhaps she'd be on the outside. All those wonderful attributes she loved about her body and herself are gone, they fizzled out along with her story. Her breast enhancement was all for nothing, no one but Jodi got to enjoy the fruits of them from the age of 27 and up to her current age of 41. Wow, look at that number! Jodi is 41 years old now, eleven years older than Travis will ever be. Potentially she could live another 41 years in a 12 X 8 foot space, not at all unlike the 3'X 8'X 6' foot space Travis will rest in for the remainder of time.
PART 4 THE REAL INCONVENIENT TRUTH: There were even times throughout this trial that I almost wished I had known Jodi, like as a big sister. I would've taught her so many things, things that apparently her own big sister did not teach her. But I'm more than sure I would've had an impact on her, a positive impact. Dr. DeMarte was so spot on with her impression of Jodi, despite her being a newer psychologist. It's obvious that Dr. DeMarte is an incredibly talented doctor, probably graduating at the top of her class. I was watching them during the trial and realized that Jodi and Janeen are roughly the same age, but they're worlds apart in terms of maturity. If only Jodi had a mentor in her life, someone who could've taught her to be patient and slow down and that there's no need to rush through life, she may have had a chance. Jodi's own intelligence was her worst enemy. She did not know HOW to put those smarts to good use, rather she used her smarts to try to outsmart the police and the entire world. When I watch those television interviews she did, I wondered if she had any idea that the REST of the world knew she was lying? Did that even dawn on her?? It was like they were interviewing a child who was caught with her hand in the cookie jar and had cookie crumbs all over her mouth and lap, but was in complete denial that she was the person who had touched or eaten any cookies! Didn't she have just ONE person in her life that could've advised her to STOP talking? STOP telling these fantastical stories because you look silly and foolish! Why didn't she have anyone come to her rescue? In watching those interviews, Jodi was so confused on WHY she was being interviewed, that much is obvious. She fully believed she was being interviewed as "the friend that was closest to Travis and knew him the best". She thought the interview was about her, her life and her relationship with Travis. Jodi didn't see that the interviewer was trying to get info from her and get answers from her. There are so many social skills that people learn just by going to college and if Jodi had done that, she would've eventually caught on. But, she quit school in the 11th grade and never had any higher education and that's where these social skills are taught and develop in a person. I wanted to reach through the television set and put some real duct tape across her mouth! I say real because she mentioned that she felt she had the proverbial duct tape over her mouth and that's why she wanted to get her side of the story out. If I or someone could've helped her prior to that awful case of diarrhea of the mouth, she wouldn't be in the situation she's in. But, I digress. The clock cannot be unwound, the words can't be unheard.
ReplyDeleteOne post script to my rant....why does anyone care that the Hughes got divorced? Why is that important to this story? Sure, be curious, look for answers on line, but why on EARTH would anyone care about their marital status? That had nothing to do with Jodi killing Travis.
I Think You Are So Full Of Shit That It Isn't Funny. She Was A Deviant and Got Him Into This Behavior. There Is NO EVIDENCE That Travis Is A Pedophile, or anything You Have Said.
ReplyDeleteI Think That The Alexander Family and The Hughes Family Should Sue Your Ass for All These Lies.
Jodie obviously Has Pulled The Wool Over Your Eyes!!
This Has NOTHING To Do With Religion, AND You Should Be Ashamed Of Your Self For Bringing It In.
That Alice Lavollete or However You Spell Her Name Was Caught In So MANY Lies. You People Just See This Supposedly Beautiful Woman and Can not believe That Someone Like That Could Kill Someone. WELL Guess What, She Did It and I Hope That She ROTS in Hell. I ALSO Fell So Sorry For Her Father, And Her Lies About Him Sexually Abusing Her. You Could See In Her Mother's and Aunt's Faces as Well as Her Father's That This NEVER Happened.
You People Who Stick Up For This Murderer, Should Be Ashamed Of Yourselves And Your Behavior!
Grow Up, Read A True Book And Get A Friggen Life