The very first episode of 48 Hours that I ever watched was titled “Picture Perfect.” It just so happens that this episode was what got me hooked on 48 Hours and started my sick and ridiculous obsession with these types of stories. This story was captivating and it was interesting. The symbolism in it is chilling, especially when it comes to pictures and photography. And now, four or so years after I saw this episode, Jodi is standing trial for the murder of Travis Alexander. (In fact, I have it streaming live as I write this.)
I’m not going to explain this case in detail and try to paint a picture (pun intended) of Jodi and Travis because frankly I believe it is more complicated than any of us could ever try to explain. However, I do want to discuss the problems with Jodi and why I think there is a large chance that she will be found guilty. Despite her “no jury could ever convict me, mark my words on that” claim she has sworn up and down, I believe that a jury could convict her. Why? Well, to say that there is a problem with Jodi would be a lie. There are many, many problems with Jodi, but let’s talk about what Jodi has done since Travis was murdered. (I’m recalling all of this from memory so please bare with me.)
Travis’s friends discovered him dead in his house a few days after the crime took place. Jodi was already long gone by then. She was living in California at the time, Travis was living in Arizona, and they were this on-again, off-again couple that was at the time, off-again. Travis had called it quits with Jodi once and for all and then suddenly Jodi rents a car to supposedly go visit a friend in Nevada or Utah or whatever it was, and decides to make a “stop” at Travis’ house…in Arizona.
Oh wait, let’s rewind even further. Jodi is arrested after the crime scene is analyzed. She is found in Yreka, California (a small town at the very top of the state, in case you were wondering) after her DNA was found at the scene and a bloody palm print was found on Travis’ wall believing to belong to Jodi.
Let’s not forget the expensive digital camera that was found in the washing machine of Travis’ house. Whoever placed that camera there thought that making it go for a swim in the washer could and would erase any and all photos. Turns out, even when you ‘delete’ a picture from a camera, it’s not really gone. Detectives were able to uncover pictures and what do they find? Pictures of Jodi. Oh, and the date and time stamp on the picture? The date that Travis was believed to be murdered. (Through this they were also able to determine an exact time of day to the second of when the crime took place, but that’s another soapbox that I don’t want to get on!)
OK, back on track here. So detectives arrest Jodi in CA based on the above and then this is where the first “problem” happens with Jodi. She says she was not there. Denies having seen Travis. Said it had been months since they last saw each other. Had no idea he was dead. Couldn’t believe it. Look, there’s pictures of the crime scene Jodi. There’s nude pictures on this camera. Oh my, this looks like you, Jodi.
“No, no, that could not be me. I was not there.” Jodi denies being there.
The police show Jodi a picture which must have been a full nude shot. She turns her head and says “oh, oh that does look like me.”
Let’s not forget the handstand that Jodi does when the detective leaves the room. Singing and talking to herself, too. “Gosh, you could have at least done your make-up Jodi,” she says. Strange?
So now we run into problem number two. Jodi decides to say that yes, she was there. And intruders killed Travis. Masked intruders burst into the home around 1:00 that afternoon and fought Travis, shot him, slit his throat, stabbed him 27 times, nearly decapitated him, left him for dead in the shower, and left Jodi completely unscathed. She “got away” from them, managed to grab her purse, and ran out the door and started “driving into the desert.”
If Jodi had actually stuck to this story, there could have been a possibility of her innocence. “Possibility” being the key word here. But then there’s that question that Maureen Maher asked her that keeps ringing in my head over and over again. Something along the lines of the following:
“If masked intruders just broke into your boyfriend’s house and you manage to get out alive and he was still alive when you left the house, why didn’t you call the police?”
WHY. WHY DID YOU NOT CALL THE POLICE JODI?!
Jodi said she was just so scared she just kept driving. No. No. There is no way any sane, real person, no matter how scared, would leave their boyfriend, ex-boyfriend, whatever he was to her, for dead in his shower at the hands of some supposed murderous intruders. If that had been what really happened, no matter how scared, she would have called someone or told someone. But she didn’t. She didn’t say a word. In fact, she drove hours away to her friend’s house in the desert and acted completely normal.
(Not calling police should be considered a problem in itself but, apparently this story is not the truth says Jodi so that’s a moot point.)
Now we have problem #3. And I can’t be sure if this is another one of Jodi’s elaborate stories or if this is the work of her lawyer realizing that she had no leg to stand on as far as a defense is concerned. Who knows at this point. But, here we have her defense.
Jodi did kill Travis. (!!!!)
There were no intruders. (!!!!)
Jodi killed Travis in self-defense because Travis was abusive and she was afraid for her life. (?????)
There are many problems with this defense strategy. I could probably write about this until I exceeded my [unknown to me at this point] character limit but I will try to keep it short and to the point.
The first problem with this new story is the obvious — Jodi has already told two stories. What makes this one suddenly believable ? What makes this one different from the others? Why should anyone believe this and not one of the others, or vice-versa? That is probably the biggest problem when it comes to the question of, what is the jury going to believe? If you can’t gain trust with any story because you’re constantly changing, your words have no value. Therefore, what Jodi is saying is just another story that yes, could be true, but also could be made up. Would she make up another story? Only God knows, literally.
The second problem with this is that there is simply no evidence to support this claim that Travis was abusive. Evidence meaning prior police reports, photographs, etc. If there had been a domestic violence issue, again, Jodi, why did you not call the police? If it was really this bad, why did you not do anything to stop it? If it really was this bad, why did you continue to go back to him? If it really was this bad, why do we have no proof except for people (and you, Jodi) suddenly coming out of the woodwork? Oh and suddenly Travis is this mean, manipulative, horrible person? Please. I don’t believe that for a second. Travis was a good-looking, charismatic, successful person. He had worked hard to get where he was and I do not believe he was abusive to Jodi or any other woman he dated.
This story is simple: Jodi was jealous and did not like that Travis called it quits with her for good. She figured if she could not have him (the great, amazing, wonderful Travis), then no one could. So she stole her grandparents’ gun (which to me proves premeditation) and drove to Arizona with the intention to kill him. I absolutely believe she planned this.
OK. I guess I’m getting ahead of myself here. I still have one more point to make regarding this alleged defense story. Now, since we have no prior evidence to Travis’ supposed abuse, we can assume that it either didn’t happen (that’s just a wild guess, since Jodi has always been known to tell the truth) or was so minor or perhaps a one-time thing that she could have construed into the word “abuse.” So, would either of these situations REALLY warrant killing someone because you were “afraid for your own life”?! I just don’t believe whatever it was that happened, if anything happened at all, was so horrible that she needed to kill to defend herself. (And that is me giving her the benefit of the doubt here.) If he was getting physical with her, let’s say, to the point that she didn’t like it or it wasn’t consensual or whatever (since she claims they had rough/crazy sex but not sex, “Bill Clinton sex”?!), if you wanted to prove your point and defend yourself to get the person to stop, would you REALLY stab someone 27 times, shoot them, and nearly decapitate them? Wouldn’t you, if anything, just want to tell them to back off and in defense MAYBE one stab would do the trick? (Again, benefit of the doubt.) She obviously wanted him dead and I do not think this crime proves that she was just trying to defend herself. Stabbing someone 27 times is considered a crime of passion — which most likely means, you are stabbing someone you’re close to because you want them dead. Nearly decapitating Travis, too, tells me that she wanted his “perfect” looks to be gone forever. If Jodi had anything to do with it, Travis would not even look good as a corpse.
So yes, there is a problem with Jodi Arias. That problem has ballooned into many, many more and I do not believe this jury would find her “not guilty.” I believe her own words tell the story of what happened and the real truth lies in the facts — Travis is dead because of Jodi. Not because he was harmful to her. So, “mark my words.”
No jury could ever find Jodi Arias “not guilty” of first-degree, premeditated murder.