It is currently Mon May 19, 2025 10:29 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 1065 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44 ... 54  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri Apr 12, 2013 2:50 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2012 11:28 am
Posts: 3672
2:47 p.m. ET: The judge has dismissed court for 10 minutes.

2:45 p.m. ET: The attorneys are at a sidebar.

2:44 p.m. ET: LaViolette says she should have said she didn't remember how many men she testified for in the past. She didn't remember exactly how many because she didn't have her resume in front of her.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 12, 2013 2:56 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2012 9:11 pm
Posts: 1376
Location: Arizona
Remote wrote:
Wow. She only had ONE case and she "can't remember" what she did or didn't do. What did she even do to "prepare" for this case, then? This is so transparent, I know the jury is getting all this. She is NOT doing her client any favors.


I think she only wrote a report on that case and did not testify. :D


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 12, 2013 2:59 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 22, 2012 6:47 pm
Posts: 301
Surprise! She testified for one man?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 12, 2013 3:01 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 22, 2012 6:47 pm
Posts: 301
I hope he asks her how many lesbian couples she worked with in a criminal case.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 12, 2013 3:02 pm 
Offline
ADMIN
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2012 5:30 pm
Posts: 57118
Location: Pomeroy's Wine Bar
forensicpsy wrote:
Surprise! She testified for one man?


She ALMOST testified for one man. (in criminal case)

"And one or two" now means "none but I almost did once"

_________________
Image Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 12, 2013 3:03 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2012 9:11 pm
Posts: 1376
Location: Arizona
She says she testified for a police officer. Unknown name. She won't say if it was in criminal court. She is talking about an appeal. Police officers get administrative appeals within the police department. She is lying through her teeth. The real answer is NONE!!!

LOL he is getting her good.

I think the jury is loving this!!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 12, 2013 3:09 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2012 11:28 am
Posts: 3672
Bet it will break for lunch when they get back into court. :roll


3:03 p.m. ET: Our producer inside the courtroom says the defense attorneys have been summoned to the judge's chambers.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 12, 2013 3:10 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2012 11:28 am
Posts: 3672
forensicpsy wrote:
Surprise! She testified for one man?

From what Juan Martinez was saying, it sounded like he was trying to get her to admit it wasn't actually "testifying" that it was only a report but Willmott kept objecting and finally won out. :roll


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 12, 2013 3:10 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2012 9:11 pm
Posts: 1376
Location: Arizona
Remote wrote:
2:47 p.m. ET: The judge has dismissed court for 10 minutes.

2:45 p.m. ET: The attorneys are at a sidebar.

2:44 p.m. ET: LaViolette says she should have said she didn't remember how many men she testified for in the past. She didn't remember exactly how many because she didn't have her resume in front of her.


The prosecutor said there is nothing in her CV about criminal trials. :26


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 12, 2013 3:12 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2012 11:28 am
Posts: 3672
murderbythebook wrote:

I think she only wrote a report on that case and did not testify. :D

Oh, I was reading backwards on the thread and just saw this, MBTB - yes, it was only a report!

I agree with you that the jury must find this highly entertaining to see Alyce squirm around in her mud pit of lies.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 12, 2013 3:13 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2012 11:28 am
Posts: 3672
murderbythebook wrote:
The prosecutor said there is nothing in her CV about criminal trials. :26

Surprising, because she's got EVERYTHING ELSE under the sun in her 20 page sham of a CV!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 12, 2013 3:13 pm 
Offline
ADMIN
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2012 5:30 pm
Posts: 57118
Location: Pomeroy's Wine Bar
3:03 p.m. ET: Our producer inside the courtroom says the defense attorneys have been summoned to the judge's chambers.

2:47 p.m. ET: The judge has dismissed court for 10 minutes.

_________________
Image Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 12, 2013 3:15 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2012 9:11 pm
Posts: 1376
Location: Arizona
I can't believe she said it is just the way teenagers are to the kicking and slapping her mother. OMG


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 12, 2013 3:17 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 22, 2012 6:47 pm
Posts: 301
http://alycelaviolette.com/Women-Who-Hi ... rtners.htm


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 12, 2013 3:19 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 22, 2012 6:47 pm
Posts: 301
She appears very partial towards women. lol


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 12, 2013 3:23 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2012 11:28 am
Posts: 3672
forensicpsy wrote:
She appears very partial towards women. lol

That's very understandable. But my problem with her is that she has thrown all professionalism out the window by blatantly ignoring the fact that she was not given the full scope of the case regarding Jodi. She has said as much and that is a big red flag.

Her "protecting" of Jodi when she doesn't have to is also a hugely unprofessional move. She forgets she is supposed to appear unbiased and that she is supposed to be evaluating - not defending or protecting. That is the job of the defense.

Appearing condescending, recalcitrant. argumentative, snarky, dissembling is sinking her client.

And if all that and more isn't enough, she has basically given us the reason she is going through this torture, especially when she is so obviously and woefully unqualified to be testifying in a criminal trial - for her retirement fund. Who was it that said, "when someone shows you who they are, believe them."


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 12, 2013 3:27 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2012 11:28 am
Posts: 3672
WildAboutTrial WildAboutTrial 1m
No, not much chance of that happening. Trial is supposed to end at 12:30 which is 5 minutes from now

WildAboutTrial WildAboutTrial 3m
Supposed to end at 12:30 from what the judge said yesterday.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 12, 2013 3:29 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2012 11:28 am
Posts: 3672
They are on feed, now. Another side bar!! :roll



WildAboutTrial WildAboutTrial 1m
Everyone is back in the courtroom. Counsel is at the bench. Valerie is waiting to get the jury


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 12, 2013 3:29 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2012 9:11 pm
Posts: 1376
Location: Arizona
Remote wrote:
That's very understandable. But my problem with her is that she has thrown all professionalism out the window by blatantly ignoring the fact that she was not given the full scope of the case regarding Jodi. She has said as much and that is a big red flag.

Her "protecting" of Jodi when she doesn't have to is also a hugely unprofessional move. She forgets she is supposed to appear unbiased and that she is supposed to be evaluating - not defending or protecting. That is the job of the defense.

Appearing condescending, recalcitrant. argumentative, snarky, dissembling is sinking her client.

And if all that and more isn't enough, she has basically given us the reason she is going through this torture, especially when she is so obviously and woefully unqualified to be testifying in a criminal trial - for her retirement fund. Who was it that said, "when someone shows you who they are, believe them."


Doesn't an expert witness have to be qualified by the court to testify in trial? Maybe in Arizona they don't.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 12, 2013 3:31 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2012 11:28 am
Posts: 3672
murderbythebook wrote:
Doesn't an expert witness have to be qualified by the court to testify in trial? Maybe in Arizona they don't.

I don't know the answer to that one, MBTB.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 1065 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44 ... 54  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 31 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group