The following is one person’s response to 20 of my 25 questions. I am posting this as a stunning example of confirmation bias, where people start with what they already believe and then work backwards to get answers that fit. Although these are the answers from just one person I assure you these are very typical of those given when individual questions were asked of numerous people who base their guilty verdicts on such things as hypotheses, suppositions, guess work and a whole lot of mind-reading.
My responses are italicized.
1. Why stage the gun theft as a burglary (as the State contends) such that the police are immediately called and a record is created? Why not just “borrow” it? It might not be discovered missing for months and it probably wouldn’t be known exactly when it went missing.
Answer: A valid Question, but the answer is probably as simple as Jodi lacked the resources to get a gun. She had enough sense to change the bullets as they would easily trace back to her grand parents. Lets not forget that $30 was taken as well a DVD player. If you remember her testimony – she left Daryl Brewers house, only to return to give him the remote to his DVD player. In his deposition, Daryl stated that he bartered the gas cans with Jodi, for a DVD player that she gave him. Why would she do this rather than just return them? Perhaps to dispose of the cans to better cover her tracks and be able to maintain her original story that she was never in Arizona.
Note that there is no evidence that a barter was ever conducted between Darryl and Jodi. There is no evidence Darryl ever received a DVD from Jodi. (And you can be sure if he had and it proved to be her grandfather’s, Martinez would have presented it during trial.) There is no deposition where Darryl ever claimed such an event occurred. Jodi did accidentally end up with remote to Darryl’s DVD when they had separated and she was intending to return it to him on this visit. After she departed she realized she still had the remote so she returned. All the rest is somebody else’s (Brad “Justda Truth” Smith’s) unproven hypothesis that apparently has become a “fact” in the minds of people who want it to be.
In addition, if she was going to steal a gun to commit a murder, why didn’t she “stage a burglary” at her parents’ house where her father kept numerous guns, including a 9mm, a gun with a silencer and several that were even unregistered? But the State would have us believe that among all the murder weapons available she chose the least powerful. And then, to make the killing even more difficult, she supposedly changed out the more powerful hollow point bullets in this already wimpy gun for less powerful round point bullets.
4. Why visit friends in the rental car if its purpose was to travel in a car not connected with her?
Answer: Jodi was attempting to hide from those who knew her and her car in Arizona. That’s why she traveled at night, and left in the evening. No one knew much about Jodi in Utah, and she was driving a non descriptive car.
Apparently this respondent believes it would never occur to Jodi that police might cross state lines to question possible witnesses.
5. Why borrow gas cans from someone who will mention them to someone, should he ever be questioned? Why not buy gas cans with cash in no-man’s land or in some large store where she’d be just one of many customers?
Answer: She lacked the funds to do so… further in her plan she never intended to admit that she was ever in Arizona.
There is no evidence that Jodi lacked the $25 needed to buy two gas cans. She spent plenty more than that on the trip. So why go out of her way to create an obvious witness?
6. Why tell her supposed alibi she’s on her way if she’s already planning a six hour trip to Mesa and then at least another 10 hour trip to Salt Lake City? What kind of alibi is that?
Answer: Her lie is the answer – she told Ryan that she got lost and fell asleep. She hoped that would be something the police would be able to question and dismiss.
Why create the problem to begin with??? What could possibly be the purpose of intentionally sabotaging her own alibi???
7. Why would she supposedly go to the trouble of removing license plates to hide her presence at Travis’ house when it would have been infinitely easier to just drape something over them or park down the street? Wouldn’t missing license plates draw even more attention to the car?
Answer: Anyone who has driven the interstate into Phoenix knows about the red light cameras all over the freeways. Her intent was to have that photo ticket thrown out if she was accidentally flashed by one of these cameras. It is also easier to say that someone tampered with her plate than placing something over the plate itself.
Note that red light cameras are on various surface streets (where red lights actually exist) and not along the freeways (where red lights do not exist). And how ridiculous to intentionally turn her license plate upside down in an attempt to somehow obscure her presence by drawing even greater attention to the car. The misguided logic here is that in her master plan to commit a murder, Jodi was supposedly plotting a way to beat a ticket in case she should get one. And to top it all off, according to this line of reasoning, Jodi apparently thought that no one would ever think to simply turn the photo upside down to read the license plate? (Shaking my head in utter disbelief!)
8. Why didn’t she kill him upon arrival at 4 am? She’s already going to be late getting to her so-called alibi.
Answer: Jodi needed to know at the time that she got there that none of Travis’s roommates were home and able to detect her.
So instead she waited until 5:30 the following evening when anyone could be walking through the front door, when anyone could be walking by the sidewalk near the front of house where the bathroom is? This is Jodi’s brilliant plan?
10. Why have sex with him and leave her presence all over the crime scene?
Answer: As she said in her police interview, her “presence” is there because she has been there numerous times. She thought that answer would stick.
Again, why intentionally create the problem if her mission was to commit murder and get away with it?
11. Why have him take time-stamped photos of her and then not think to take the camera with her? While he was taking those pictures, was she really supposedly thinking “I’d better throw that camera in the washing machine before I leave”?
Answer: She couldnt take anything out of the house that belonged to Travis, including a new camera that he just purchased. Everyone knew that she was a photographer, and that was too close a link to her. The washing machine was a way to try and destroy the camera without taking it. She knew his body was going to be discovered and so would the camera.
The fact that the camera ended up in the washing machine is an indicator that Jodi was in a frenzied, non-rational state (post-traumatic stress?) at the time. (Here’s a good place to note the amount of mind-reading going on in these answers, what Jodi knew and what she was thinking. This is what happens when there is no evidence but one needs to fit square pegs into round holes.)
12. Why would she first attack a man who has 16-1/2 inch biceps, and at least 70 pounds on her, using a knife if she supposedly came with a gun?
Answer: Her intention was to kill him. Firing multiple times into him could be heard by neighbors or roommates. She figured to stab him while the water is running and when he was the most vulnerable; naked and wet.
So, again, instead she supposedly intentionally shot him at 5:30 in the evening, in a room in the front of the house, when he’s supposedly already dead, when any neighbor could be walking by or any roommate could be walking through the front door, for no other reason than as a final “fuck you”?
13. If she planned to stab him in the shower, why does she not do it during the 40+ seconds he is standing with his back to her?
Answer: She stabbed him when she felt best that the opportunity presented itself.
Let’s see. She didn’t slit his throat when she first arrived (when he had his back to her and didn’t even hear her come in). She didn’t slit his throat while he slept. She didn’t attack him during the 40+ seconds he had his back to her in the shower (like put a bullet straight through his heart). Instead she waited until he was seated in the shower facing her with his arms crossed in front of his chest, her supposed target. This was when she thought the opportunity best presented itself?
14. Why after supposedly stabbing him in the shower does she let him go stand at the sink?
Answer: I believed she continued to stab him as he staggered to the sink. That entire movement took seconds.
This respondent is apparently an eye witness that the prosecution failed to call. Or could this just be a lot of guess work, based not on evidence but rather on first deciding she was attacking him and then conjuring up a story that fits, all the while dismissing the most obvious answer?
15. If Travis had enough in him to go from the shower to the sink, stand there turning the faucet on and off while Jodi is supposedly stabbing him in the back, why didn’t he just turn around and smash her a good one?
Answer: The medical examiner report says that the stab in his chest was ultimately fatal. Shock and disorientation would have kicked in immediately He didn’t leisurely walk to the sink, he was struggling with a woman who was trying to kill him. He was trying to fend her off. He lacked the strength and power to “smash her a good one”.
There is no evidence that any struggle occurred between the shower and sink. There is no evidence of blood on the floor between the shower and sink. There was plenty of blood up and down the hallway so he apparently still had the strength, after standing at the sink turning the water on and off, to move all the way down the hallway. Why didn’t he use those kickboxing legs that were apparently still functional to just kick her? (More extreme hypothesizing deeply rooted in confirmation bias.)
16. How would anyone, except the one who is controlling the attack, have the option to stop, stand at the sink and mess with the faucet?
Answer: Again – you are making this seem as though a matter of minutes occurred between the first stab and the walk to the sink. The distance to the sink from the shower is about 3 steps. This entire murder took 64 seconds.
Why he was even going to the sink and turning on the water is a mystery. Who does that in the middle of being attacked?
17. If he still had enough energy to travel down the hallway to the bedroom, why didn’t he just use that energy to stop all the stabbing she was supposedly doing during that time period?
Answer: He was being ATTACKED by Jodi, the wounds on his hands and arms shows that he did defend himself.
There are NO wounds on his arms and only five relatively minor cuts to his hands. See next question.
18. Why did Travis have only five relatively minor wounds on his hands, only one on his dominant hand, and none on his lower arms if he was supposedly defending himself against a knife attack for more than a minute and perhaps up to two minutes?
Answer: Jodi’s intent was to stab him where it could do the most fatal damage, hence the amount of wounds to his back. It is more than likely that he crawled on all fours down the hallway to the bedroom, where he collapsed. It was there, with very little struggle that she slit his throat.
The wounds on his back are relatively superficial compared to what one would expect if someone was attempting to “do the most fatal damage”. Those wounds appear to be Jodi attempting to get Travis off of her and jabbing around him. And you don’t have to conjure up some grade B movie scene, with Travis crawling down the hallway on all fours, in order to envision it.
20. Upon leaving why wouldn’t she have noticed the license plate was upside down while supposedly screwing in those little fasteners? Wouldn’t it be more possible for someone to notice her squatting behind the car thus drawing even greater attention to her presence? Certainly more likely than anyone noticing and remembering a license plate.
Answer: She placed the plate on long before she got to Arizona, more than likely in the desert to avoid the red light cameras.
Ridiculous. See question #7 above.
22. Why does she make cell phone calls in Arizona heading north from Kingman toward Hoover Dam, thus negating the supposed reason for borrowing the gas cans and turning off her cell phone?
Answer: This negates nothing…. Kingman to Nevada border is about 30 minutes. She was at the dam when she began calling Travis to tell him that she would not make it to his house, thus covering her tracks. There is a sign at Hoover dam that tells you that you are entering Nevada, but you dont for another 10 miles.
Kingman to Hoover Dam is 76 miles or at least one hour driving time, not 30 minutes. And the sign at Hoover Dam telling you that you are entering Nevada is there because the Colorado River, directly upon which the Hoover Dam is built, is the border between Arizona and Nevada, not some imaginary border 10 miles away. This respondent is just conjuring up “facts” to make the story fit.
23. Why does she fill the cans in Salt Lake City if their purpose was to hide her trip into Arizona? Was she also hiding her trip from her so-called alibi home to Yreka?
Answer: Having gas cans is not evidence of a crime, it shows evidence of hiding ones presence in the state. Jodi’s intent was to continue with a story that she was in Utah during the time of the killing, that is why the elaborate cover up and phone messages and emails, as well as traveling to Utah and acting as if everything was normal. I believe the flaw in her plan was she stayed too long in AZ. She had to claim she got “lost” on her way to Utah, which didn’t work.
Right. Having gas cans is not evidence of a crime. Nor is renting a car or turning off one’s cell phone to conserve the battery. The only event that might remotely point to planning a murder is the theft of the gun and there is no evidence that Jodi was the thief.
24. How is it Jodi supposedly came up with the most idiotic murder plan in history (a twelve-year-old could have devised a more intelligent plan) but was also supposedly able, with all her “caginess”, to fool three experts with more than 90 years of collective experience in their respective fields?
Answer: Jodi’s plan was very simple: Deny, Deny, Deny. That is what she did, even up until the time that she was interviewed by police. She is not a criminal mastermind, and like most, underestimated the power of a police investigation. DNA, Blood Splatter, Medical Examiners, all those things we see on Television that she thought she could talk herself out of this by saying things like… “of course my fingerprints are all over her house, I was always over there…” and of course when faced with her OWN pictures… “That’s not me!” Jodi, like most idiot’s thought she could get away with murder and didn’t.
There is no evidence that Jodi is an “idiot” and much evidence to the contrary. but this is the typical answer when no other makes any sense: “Because she’s stupid.”
25. If Jodi was planning to lie about the whole thing under oath on the stand, why during those 4+ years didn’t she come up with a reasonable scenario about what happened during those final moments? (I came up with one within about ten minutes of viewing the crime scene. And I wasn’t even there.)
Answer: Jodi was cut off from information from the police after she was arrested, as she tried to gain information during the initial investigation. She called Detective Flores several times to garner whatever information she could to mold her story. When she finally abandoned her ninja story, she was faced with telling her version of the murder, based upon an assertion by Flores that the shot came first. She created her self defense story based on the shot coming first, but when the detective and prosecutor were corrected by the medical examiner that the shot came last, she couldn’t change her story again and thus showing her that she could not out smart the investigation that had her dead to rights.
Interesting ramblings about how Jodi needed information from others in order to devise a story, even though she was the one who was actually there. And please note that, according to the documented autopsy report, it was not the medical examiner who corrected the prosecutor but more likely the prosecutor who “corrected” the medical examiner.
But none of this answers the question posed: Why during her long jail stay, while supposedly devising a long elaborate lie about what happened, does she not simply continue the lie with a scenario about those final moments? Why would she instead *supposedly* make up a lie about having no memory of it? That has to be the worst lie one could possibly contemplate, a lie just begging not to be believed.