Jodi Arias is innocent *Fall Tier Tournament- round 2*

My opponent is playing damage control at the moment. He's failed to forward his own case and is now focusing on minimizing the impacts of mine. I've given a scenario of events that are not only a plausible alternative to how the events played out (the only thing I need to prove) but are also more likely to have happened than what my opponent has to offer. You'll read through my opponent's last round and you'll see that he is just trying to switch the BOP. Let's take this point by point. "Because if Alexander had been killed by hollow point bullets, it would have been almost certain proof the gun used was the one stolen from the Arias household. Moreover, police could determine the exact brand of bullet used, and compare it with the police report or question the Arias family on it. Basically, by using regular bullets instead of the hollow points, Arias demonstrates premeditation - she carefully thought through the murder. " There is no winning with my opponent. If the evidence doesn't point towards my opponent it's a sign of premeditation. If it does Than "Checkmate". My opponent correctly points out that over 5000 guns a year are stolen in Arizona. That's a big number. There is the same amount of evidence connecting Jodi to that gun as there is connecting Travis Alexander, which is none. "First, he argues that if she used the gun was used after the stabbing, then it would not be indicative of premeditation. He argues that it wouldn't make sense for her to plan a murder where she stabs him first, and then shoots him - to that, I strongly disagree. The mere fact she brought a gun (with no concealed carry license) to a situation like this is clear evidence she planned to use it. " First of all if the only thing my opponent has indicating premeditaion is this gun, he's in trouble. There is absolutely no evidence connecting Jodi to this gun. Second of all my opponent's scenario is stupid. Why would a premeditated murder involve stabbing somebody repeatedly and risking getting yourself killed in the process then after Travis is already dead or close to it shooting him in the head. This plan is dumb and would definitely not be something premeditated. If Jodi Arias wanted him dead, she'd shoot him in his sleep. It's as simple as that. "Additionally, he argues that Travis Alexander might have owned a gun, even though there is no evidence he did. This is a silly argument - this is a serious debate, and my opponent has no evidence that Alexander owned one. " I don't have to prove Travis owned a gun. I merely have to show reasonable doubt. It's possible that Travis owned an unregistered handgun. I've owned an unregistered handgun at one point. Lots of people own guns with no evidence of doing so existing. When I did own the gun, it's not like I went around advertising the fact that I did. It is an arrestable offense. So it's really no surprise that you wouldn't find anyone to testify that Travis Alexander did own a gun. Also since turnabout is fair play. .. .. .. . Additionally, TNO5 argues that Jodi Arias had brought a gun with her to Alexander's residence although there is no evidence she did. This is a silly argument - This is a serious debate and my opponent has no evidence that Jodi had one. "having the camera throughout the killing (during and after) shows more or less that she was not defending herself, as no person defending themselves would have time to take a picture of the dead body. " Clearly after Travis started beating the crap out of Jodi Arias, a lot of photographs were taken accidently. I don't know what you're trying to prove with this. "if she stabbed (shot) first, she would have incapacitated him well before she started stabbing him in the back, and she would have had no need to further stab or shoot" People survive shot's to the head, they often times can move around and are fully conscious after shots to the head. It's no gauruntee that the second it happens you'll die or be incapacitated. "Of course, as I established in my opening statements, there is no evidence that Arias had even the mildest defensive wounds, while Alexander had defensive wounds on both hands. " The defensive wounds have all been explained by how the fight played out. Jodi Arias had the upper hand the whole fight. Travis was wet and angry slipping and bumping into things, while trying to attack Jodi Arias. when he tracked her down to the bedroom, he had already body slammed her twice. The gun accidently discharged already and hurt Travis, making it even harder to get the upper hand. Regardless of who had and mantained the upperhand, it doesn't change the fact that It was completely in self defense and other than the slice to the throat every single wound could've been Inflicted on Travis Alexander while in defense mode. The only aggressive cut was to his throat in the one moment that Jodi was actually able to create some seperation. "After she killed Alexander, she sent several voicemails to his phone to make it appear like she was out of state. [3] I've already established Arias did not have PTSD, and on the topic of the camera, the images were indeed deleted, but the camera was also thrown into a washer - presumably to render it further unusable. " This is absurd. I've already explaied that Jodi Arias was a photograper and that she knew deleting the photos wouldn't erase them. She knew that removing the flash card would've did the job. She stuck the camera in the dishwasher to wash away the horror of the situation. "My opponent has not established any conclusive link between the broken finger and domestic assault. Additionally, my opponent gives texts sent by Alexander to Arias. Contrary to showing domestic abuse, however, these seem to show simply anger - not abuse. During any break up people say things like this all the time. People fight. Words are not evidence of domestic abuse" As I've already addresssed an expert on domestic abuse did read all the messages, including ones we aren't privy to and has concluded that Jodi was likely in an abusive relationship. She certainly has a broken finger which isn't to be disputed. It's certainly reasonable to assume it could be the result of domestic abuse. I've read a lot of those messages. I've posted some of them here' I've never been so mad at an ex that I would say those things. If you were hurt about things. If you cared about a person, youd wish them the best or just wallow in your own self pity. His response considered a person who had a lot of hate in his heart and was a user and abuser. Let's say he didn't have an abusive history, breaking Jodi's finger and forcing her to dress up like a little boy because he was attracted to children Even had this stuff not happened he is still capable of being violent in this situation. He is capable of chasing of body slamming her then chasing her in a moment of anger. "On the topic of PTSD, my opponent asserts there is no reason to dismiss the PTSD theory. However, there is - my his own admission, the defense lawyer admits his diagnosis was flawed. The test was conducted while Arias was lying and insisting she knew nothing about the test (murder). In other words, the diagnosis is worthless, and the prosecution's expert has far more credibility at this point" My argument was that he exmined the prosecutions evidence and concluded that the same evidence they looked at could also lead to the conclusion that Jodi Arias was suffering from PTSD. Samuals never said the diagnosis was flawed. He did say he should've administered the test at a later point as well, when she was being more honest but that is far from saying it was flawed. This is from my opponent's source. "These tests, which I administered early, did confirm the presence of post-traumatic stress disorder. Although, I was in error by not re-administering the [test],". http://www.businessinsider.com... My opponent can't refute my version of events and fails to show why his version of events is any more reliable. Further more the whole gun argument is a double edged sword for him. If the gun went off first, then he has to accept my version of events. If it went off last it completely destroys his premeditation argument as that is the dumbest murder plot ever and just plain inconcievable. This poor girl had no reason to murder Travis Alexander. She is a beauitiful girl that can get any guy she wants. The whole jealous stalker narrative is outrageous . Why is it that when a girl is trapped in an abusive relationship people always blame the victim or make excuses. She is a stalker. She hit him first. You know how angry he gets, she shouldn't get mouthy with him. Jodi Arias was lucky and survived her situation, and even after her abuser is dead people are still trying to make excuses for him. It's clear that Travis had temper problems, even e-mails to his friends proved that. It's clear he viewed Jodi as less than human just read the end of my last round. The guy was either beating the crap out of her or a ticking time bomb to do that. Acts taken after a murder don't show premeditation. Jodi Arias covering up what happened because the police might misunderstand what happened proves nothing. In fact, judging by how things played out she was justified in doing so.