49 responses

  1. Gray/ Dr. Puffy: This is amazing. As with all of your videos Gray, I find myself mesmerized and unable to even pause for a moment. Your work is flawless. Thank you for sharing. This is amazing.

    • thanks you! I do take a lot of time to get the details. I think the gunshot was first, but after that I thought I had it all worked out, but things keep popping up that bother me. Like she moved the floor mat. one drop on top but the bottom was covered. Jodi also moved the one clear scale on top of blood. on the toilet door frame there is an impact blood battern down low at 12 inches and one on wall around the corner. So, at this point, Travis was being engaged.

  2. Gary, you have true talent and are most definite asset to TPP. After watching your newest recreation video, I can see exactly what you are saying. That being said, I tend to agree with you with regard to gunshot being first. With the ominous music, it totally creeps me out to think of what Travis went through before he took his last breath.
    On a personal note, if you are not currently doing recreations such as the ones you’ve made in this case, then you should be. You’ve got such an eye for detail and don’t seem to leave any stone unturned.

    • Thank you. I enjoy making them. I have sent links to HLN and they never respond. NOt sure they even look at them. Instead they use stick figures.

      • Sorry but this is reference women in military.

        How about the Women’s Army Corps?

        I am a female retired Chief Warrant Officer Four, Blackhawk pilot. I was enlisted for six as an air traffic controller.

        In 1977 as a WAC, we were an entirely separate entity within the US Army, all female chain of command, up to MG Mary Clarke, and female uniforms at Ft. McClellan, AL, an all female Basic Training base.

        I applaud your enthusiasm, but it’s not as it seems. I had three friends in 1978 in advanced individual training, AIT, who were raped. How did it happen? Not like you think or implied. Not in the least.

        I even investigated an alleged rape, an AR 15-6 investigation, handed down to the military chain of command from the military police. I see why they turned it over to chain of command because lack of evidence for charges, eight months post facto. My commander gave it to me since I was female.

        I’ll tell you why I don’t believe or endorse many of the rape stories. The four rapes that I’m familiar with we’re all where the female squarely placed herself, fully intoxicated, into the wolves den.

        I have a Master’s Degree in education. One of my classes was on environments. Different environments elicit different behavior like comparing a church to a bar.

        I fully contend and believe that if you play around with alcohol, to that extent, all bets are off. All four females were intoxicated as I mentioned and were all in a remote location or in an isolated place of opportunity.

        Of my three friends, two were completely passed out. The other two cases were where the drunk girl and the drunk guy were voluntarily at the onset of intercourse, and the girl suddenly decided to back out. Well, I can tell you from experience, there’s practically no stopping a drunk bull. Really.

        My point entirely, and this is extremely important, is that females should not get that drunk and place themselves in a place of opportunity. Hello?! It just doesn’t pass the logic test. I’m all for women’s rights, but I’m also a realist. Drunk behavior is just that, totally irresponsible at some point in that process as we may all testify truthfully, those that have so indulged.

        Like the command sergeants major (CSM) case (McKinney) where the female csm entered voluntarily, late at night, the csm’s hotel room.

        Now give me a break. As a savvy high ranking enlisted woman and any woman for that matter, that’s not appropriate behavior, unless you’re going there for action, agreed?! Now that’s the impression of the csm. Hitting on a woman that just came to your hotel room at midnight is not inappropriate behavior. Can you blame a guy for trying?

        In my 24 years in that Man’s Army I saw cases of injustice, but not the sexual harassment to the level you speak.

        There are too many people around. If anyone had a reputation for over-stepping boundaries, they were counseled and there was always peer pressure.

        I saw cases of overzealous female commanders same as overzealous male ones. I saw dweeb leaders not practice what they preached, and get away with it. Like a dumbass captain handing out counseling statements to enlisted for being a few minutes late when this idiot didn’t even show up sometimes. Total double standard there. But that was rare.

        I’m sorry to disagree on your perception, but I was there for 24 years as a female enlisted, flight candidate then warrant officer. It’s just not the same as real rape, not when alcohol is involved.

        It’s just like women purposely getting pregnant in a deployment or combat zone. They should be punished for endangering their fellow soldiers. It’s not allowed and when they get pregnant and sent home, now the unit is short. That’s not right.

        Same for drunk females, they should be punished for placing themselves in that situation. It’s conduct unbecoming, even before it gets to the naked stages.

        The investigation I conducted was incredible. I read the female’s statement about how she and the married sergeant, both drunk as skunks, went back to the barracks room for a little tiddlywinks. Her statement read like a page right out of Hustler Magazine. The further you read, the more it sounded like this girl was fully invested for the ride. Again, both intoxicated, at the point of intercourse, and she allegedly stated she said stop, and this statement was eight months after the fact. Eight months after he deserted her and wasn’t going to leave his wife. Give me a break. I ask all of society to judge a drunken man who is also placed in this position voluntarily, is it reasonable or logical to ask that man to somehow possess logic at that moment?

        I say no it is not reasonable. I have told my daughter this, don’t ever put yourself in that situation, along with other tidbits like don’t walk alone at night, take your cell phone everywhere, lick doors when you get in your car and double-check them when you come to a red light, etc. Common sense, right?

        I hope you can see my point. I agree if a girl says stop, but u can’t agree when both are voluntarily drunk and went that far. It’s like don’t get in a car with someone who’s been drinking.

        That is all.

      • Donna – Surely you jest!! :( I do not care how drunk or stoned a female is, no one has the right to force that person to have sex, actually, the fact that she is that intoxicated would lean more toward her inability to make a decision of consent (if the man claimed that). No one should take advantage of an impaired woman…NO ONE. And, if in an impaired state, I did start leading to intercourse and then came to my senses and changed my mind…the too bad would be on the part of the man. If I change my mind, and he did not respect that, there would be no stopping THIS crazed bull.

        As for the different behavior in church as opposed to bars…. Many a woman has been raped by a priest. I wonder how many little boys were molested in bars as opposed to church.

        I am stunned at your stand on this. Also, I have been assaulted, I was actually assaulted by a boss at work and while I did not take it to his superiors (I did not want him to lose his employment), I guarantee you, he was sorry for having made that advance. I have also been approached in bars and whether I started necking or whatever, when I wanted to stop…stop it was.

        I read you post in total disbelief.

      • Donna. although I can appreciate some of the points you have made I gotta go with Marcianna on this issue. Didn’t we already go through the Steubenville rape case which covered this issue. She was drunk and the boys assaulted her and put it on the internet. I get what you are saying about personal responsibility, how women need to protect themselves. But are you are saying if women are intoxicated they deserve to get what might be coming which might be rape?

  3. Just heard on HLN that Jodi’s lawyers are requesting that the penalty phase re-trial be postponed til January 2014!! Hope this request will not be granted!

  4. Gray-you are spot on! I do not think I could argue with you,this is truly enlightening and I am so impressed with the sheer genius of your work! Thank you for sharing this with us! And Janet, yes,I just heard that about Jodi too-hopefully that will not fly with the judge !

  5. Gray your work now has me thinking that the gun shot came first. Dang it I holding on the fact that the bullet was found on top of blood and that she stabbed him first and cut his throat and then shot Travis :/ Did Travis get up from the shower and then go to the sink to see what the hell happened to him and then she stabbed him 27 times and he finally crawled down the hall to try to get away but Jodi cut his throat and that was it for him? Yeah this murderer needs the DP. Sayonara and Good Ridden!

    Now I feel all nervous again about how Travis died. It’s just how can a person just slaughter another person like that and a few hours later make out with another person, sleep, drive home like nothing, cry on cue when she learned Travis was killed, have the bocce balls to show up at his memorial with his family and friends there and acting like she was sad he was killed. Just feeling disgusted by this Trick and her lies and games. YUCK!

    • Pretty freaky stuff. Yeah. I have Travis going to the sink after the shot. I think he possibly went left out of the shower, meaning his left towards the bathtub and toilet then around by the scales then to the sink. He was very dazed and groggy and bleeding from the nose and mouth as the bullet went through his nasal cavity. I believe the bulk of the knife activity started at the sink and continued down the hall. For me, it was more cruel with the shot first because Travis was unable to defend himself.

  6. Excellent recreation! I totally agree with you and have been saying that the gunshot had to come first. Between the trajectory, and the logic I believe you are exactly correct. I recall watching Jodi shaking her head in disagreement every time the prosecution talked about the gunshot being last. If we want a pretty good idea of what was happening (as you describe) just take out the intruders. She’s telling Flores half truths to align her story with the facts.

    It’s pretty disturbing that the prosecution is likely changing their story for the purposes of presentation to the jury. Obviously, they don’t know for an absolute fact, but it sure appears that Martinez twisted their arms to rearrange the story. I also agree that the location of the bullet casing is practically meaningless. My bet is that it got kicked during the struggle. If Jodi had kicked it during her hurried clean up, she would’ve heard it and would have picked it up. No casing, no caliber, no gun, no knife. Then without the photos, what would they have been left with. The bloody print, and a little bit of her hair. It would have been a much different case.

    Again, fantastic piece of work…

    • Yes! This is forensic expert Randolph Beasley’s testimony as well on the Dr. Drew show. I saw that head shaking too by Arias and know she was confirming 100% that the gun came first. And of course, the weaving between lies and truth makes sense.

      “To be a great detective, you have to place yourself in the criminal’s mind,” a quote from a Dennis the Menace show, where he cracked the case, stating that if he had stolen $30 his first place would be the ice cream shop…which the thief was.

      If you were a 125 lb female going against a 180 lb kick boxer, would you use a knife first? Hell no!!!

      Gun had to go first. She didn’t shoot him initially upon arrival at house because she wouldn’t have known who was at home.

      She lured him into a vulnerable position through sex, but couldn’t shoot him in bed because her DNA would be all over him; remember the plastic cup in shower? Solution: the shower scene photo shoot. She didn’t expect him to still be alive after first shot.

      I fully believe gun misfired on second shot. Perhaps she checked magazine and reloaded incorrectly. I think she pulled trigger with camera in right hand, which caused an incidental simultaneous squeeze of the camera which was the lower abdomen photo with shower door open.

      I think second shot after she realized first shot didn’t do the job was when she did another incidental simultaneous squeeze of camera shooting the ceiling this time with camera and having a misfire.

      She then ran to get knife to keep him and his DNA inside shower, but he apparently crawled around floor disoriented till he finally got to sink.

      The rest is obvious, stab wounds smearing down the hallway till the ultimate main artery slit in hallway. Just follow the blood trail.

      For the police, prosecution or anyone logically to think a 125 lb woman would initiate a knife fight is ludicrous, in my humble opinion.

      Please, please notice the of all the shower scene photos, the final face shot of Travis. It stands out like a sore thumb. Why? It’s the only one with bright white shower tiles in background, where Arias used a flash to “blind” him before administering her form of revenge.

      Btw, I do believe Arias has a stunted emotional development which stopped growing into maturity around age 14 where she is stuck. Her twisted sense of reality reminds me of a maniacal version of the girl from “Clueless.”

      • You are correct. Compare any 33 yr old woman with JA. She is absolutely boring – unable to engage in a normal conversation. The female interviewer who spent time with her after the Jury decision of cruel treatment, stated that “Jodi Arias is insane”.

        She will always be 14. 5 years in jail has not matured her. In fact, she was in a fight in jail last week! Hopefully, JA will enrage a prisoner and get the death penalty with the taxpayers having to pay for a trial.

      • YOu could be totally right about the simultaneous sqeeze. Great call. I have another video on youtube that shows right where that image was taken and it as in almost the same location that Jodi is standing. 16mm wide angle lens.

      • One burning question I was hoping Juan Martinez would have asked Arias though is, “So if you are claiming to be a battered woman, did it give you a sense of relief when you killed him?”

        Some how trip her up.

    • Thank you. I saw that too. I remember specifically in the closing argument when Jodi shook her head in disagreement about JM’s order of events. But how can she do that? She has no memory right? She was in the fog. JM could say aliens did it from mars and she wouldn’t know because she was in the fog. So, when she shook her head she admitted knowing.

  7. I belive this happened too… that would be why she was so sure she would win. But either way whay she did was a cruel heinous premeditated murder. The order it happen didnt matter, Surprise convicted murderer!!!!

  8. Exceptional work, Gray!!! I completely agree with every part your theory. I questioned the “gunshot first” theory from the beginning. I actually posted most of this on Juan Martinez’s FB page early on and received some negative feedback by many who, obviously, believed I was trashing Juan Martinez and Kevin Horn by questioning their professionalism. I simply disagreed with the sequence of events. I also wondered why the ME changed his statements and felt bad that Flores had to take the heat for it.

    Your work on this puts everything into perspective! This theory makes much more sense, considering the stolen gun, the position of TA’s body in the photos, TA’s wounds, the inadvertent shots, and especially, the blood spatter. Most importantly, it proves how much Travis actually suffered before dying at the hands of this crazed killer!

    With the “gunshot first” theory, the jury would have had a greater understanding of the unimaginable suffering Travis experienced. Surviving a gunshot to the face then enduring all the especially heinous, cruel,and depraved acts that followed, while still alive and conscience, I believe the jury would have been unanimous on the death penalty.

    JA would be on death row right now! Instead, she’s getting more attention by attempting to further delay this process, causing the family more pain, costing the state more money, etc. to produce a mitigating factor of insanity!

    I hope Martinez, Flores and Horn all see your video! I’m especially grateful I did.

    Thank you for your brilliant work and for sharing it with all of us!!!

    • Welcome we love having you here. Those peeps or actually the admin of the Juan Martinez page said my page is nothing but a blog that promotes MY drug use.i told her she needs to smoke one because she is uptight. She really didn’t like it when I said her Juan was a substandard attorney. Which he is.

    • Hi there Karie & fellow TPPers!
      (LOL–I LOVE saying T T P-ers; get it? LOL!)
      Sorry Dr. P! Though I’m sure you DON’T mind the “joke”! LOL!
      Anyway–The gunshot HAD to have happened OUTSIDE the shower–AFTER TA had moved/stepped into the little bathroom area–where the tub & toward the scales location–Because, there IS Tiny/Small flecks of “Blood Splatter” on the base to the toilet! Very close to the floor, but they ARE there in the crime scene photos.
      My study has convinced me that Stabella DeVILE hit him 1st with the knife (& Chest wound puncturing the Vena Cava) & as he was stumbling around getting to the mirror to “see” his injuries–she was stabbing him in his back.
      I’m fairly certain he turned to fight back, thus geting some more chest wounds (& defensive wounds) & those “Slashing/Superficial” cuts on his shoulders.
      Then, he would have collapsed to the floor–from blood loss (as well as O2 loss to his Brain)–STILL CONSCIOUS but in a “weakened” condition. His brain would divert MOST of the oxygenated blood to his “core” organs–limbs & fingers/toes are sacrificed first. (Like in Frostbite situations.)
      Remember when Stabby told Flores in that Interview–he was on all 4s & “crying–NOT ‘like a girl’ but just moaning & struggling breath sounds? (Ever hear someone who has had the “wind knocked out of them”?)
      Well–I think THAT’S When she SHOT him! Stabby would have been standing over him. She most likey had her hand ON his back then–Stabella even told so! (Accounting for the Blood Pooling on that floor & the shell casing landing there.
      Trust me–there is NO “Ping” sounds IF it lands in a “puddle” of blood–or mud–so Stabby wouldn’t have thought about the spent cartridge having NO auditory trigger. (I’ve done MANY “tests” & used weapons–NOT 25s!–on varmints often!)
      At that point I think she straddled TA like a horse; figuring her direct weight would put him down to the floor–but REALLY trying to keep him in the bathroom.
      He fell down in the hallway–turning over on his back TRYING to KICK her away–Feet & Legs being a STRONG defense option. It’s taught in MMA fighting for the Octogon cage–use your legs & DON’T let the opponent get behind you; you can lose to a “Naked Rear Choke” hold. (I’m not certain IF TA had any “professional” MMA coaching, but I seem to remember testimony that he DID take some lessons.)
      Anyway–THAT is when she SLIT his throat “finishing” him–Silencing that “noise” he was making(!) & dragging TA BACK to the/his shower.
      Stabella De-VILE had to RUSH & start cleaning up!
      Remember when she told Flores in a “Shocked” tone of voice: “Travis wouldn’t Die–He just stayed Alive & talking–He was Conscious”!!!
      Anyway–that is just MHO!
      Gray IS Right about her telling “Half-Truths” in everything! Just listen to her police interrogation tapes & she says ALL these statements–& MORE!

      • not enough blood and the spatter on the toilet door frame was an impact pattern from an already existing blood source as per the spatter expert at trial.

  9. Hi there Gray!
    I Love your creations–GREAT Editing! I do have a few things about your theory:
    First, the item you say is an “artifact” close to the shell casing. It is NOT. What you are seeing is a process called “Fracturing”; when a very moist/wet substance drys out–sections break up & takes on the appearance of a mosaic patterning. (You can get a good idea of this by looking at a “dry” riverbed/playa in the desert.) What is in the photo is a part of the bathroom floor showing through.
    Second: If the shell casing had been “kicked/knocked about” by the roommates when they went searching through TA’s bathroom–there would have been a “track pattern” marked on top of the “dry” blood. (Though blood Never really “dries”–there is a tackiness to it LONG after the main event to cause a blood pool.)
    Third: The Coroner described TA’s brain matter as “somewhat” decomposed. Truthfully there are ONLY 3 stages of decomposition in an autoposy or necropsey:
    Minimal–meaning Little, NONE or a “Fresh” death state.
    Moderate/Medium/”Somewhat”–meaning that one can tell an organ tissue by “Gross” examination (“Seeing it visiually); Although it doesn’t necessarily mean you can slice & mount specimens of said tissue/organs. This is the classifications of MOST deaths that at least 12.5 hours have passed before the discovery of a body. There is “Liquidfaction” associated with this state. One is able to move the brain matter around & it hasthe consistency of a “thick” pudding.
    Advanced: meaning there is NOTHING left of the organs/tissues–the body is totally & completely skeletonized.
    What they should have done with TA’s body upon discovery is FROZEN it in a “Flash” cooler. That would have halted the decomposition & the Coroner would have been able to track the bullet path much better & seen any bleeding in the brain. Please know that “Traumatized areas of a body decompose First & the Quickest. This is NOT COMMONLY done though because this process alters the blood chemistry–& looking for poisons & drugs are negatively affected. (Though–seeing the condition & manner of the injuries onTA’s body–I WOULD HAVE made that call!)
    Pleasetell me if I saw this correctly in you re-creation: the DATE of the autopsy report is August 8 2008?? (A MONTH AFTER TA WAS FOUND???)

  10. Gray Hughes, these videos are outstanding! And you have done an amazing job with the commentary also. You, in my opinion, should go into Forensics.
    Like you I never bought into the “knife first” theory. I agree in your assessment in why would she steal a gun to get into a knife fight. And there is no doubt Travis could have taken her down if she had a knife. He was a strong man who had been working out.
    I can see through the sequence of the photos that she has him backed up to the wall and he looks like he is trying to talk to her. He has a worried look on his face. And then you see a picture of him on the ground. I can see her saying, “Get the fuck on the ground! Now who is the three-hole wonder!”
    The shell casing was weak evidence to base the whole case on. There was a lot of moving around. It could have rolled on to the blood when she was moving him to the shower.
    The evidence by the prosecution wasn’t presented well and that is why they can’t come up with a punishment. Yes and Jodi told half truths. Great videos Gray!

  11. Excuse the length to come but I’d like to make some points after reading all the comments.
    First, I’ve watched the entire trial. The ME testified the shot was last based on HIS evidence. (IMHO, and lack thereof) I’m assuming all of you saw JM explain the difference between direct evidence and circumstantial evidence in his closing? I was so happy to see him do that because most jurors don’t know how to analyze evidence to base conclusions on. But let me use that analogy to explain the ME’s opinion. .. Someone comes up to you on the beach and asks if anyone else has been on the beach? So you didn’t see anyone, so you have NO DIRECT evidence, and you see no tracks, so there is no circumstantial evidence. You state that you believe no one else has been on the beach. Your opinion would be correct as to your knowledge of what you are looking at. But what if there is a boardwalk? Now you might not state your opinion as strong. Because there is a chance someone may have been there. The ME stated this logic in his testimony. A “lack of hemorrhaging “, (no footsteps) and made the clarifier of “decomposition” (a boardwalk) I’m amazed how many people choose to totally accept his opinion without the qualifier. Then try to rationalize and defend his stance by adding other opinions into the mix. I.e., she wanted to make Travis suffer, she was full of rage, why didn’t she shoot him more times if that was first? How did the shell have no blood on it if it was a shot first scenario? That one makes me laugh! OK, did she throw the scales at him last because it was on TOP of blood? Of did they get moved?
    If you made it this far, maybe you might be interested in a little logic lesson. I took logic in college and was taught the first rule of logic by a detective story I’ve told many times in my life…
    You are a detective, I will state some evidence. It is your job to figure out what happened. You can ask me questions that I can only answer yes or no. If you’ve heard this before, you could figure it out in 1 question. If you think very logical, you can figure it out in about 3 to 5 questions. I’ve given it to people who have taken hundreds of questions and days. Most give up and make you tell them. Here goes:
    John and Mary are dead on the floor of a room that has only a table and chair in it. There is broken glass and water on the floor also. There is only a single window half open to the outside. You walk in and this is the scene before you.
    OK, play Juan and ask me questions that I can only answer yes or no…
    I’ve had people ask questions to the point that they figured out they were naked, in a horizontal position before dying. LOL. (whoops, that is a hint)
    I’ll post the answer later on.
    Now for shooting first. Let’s look at the evidence and apply logic. This is what a detective would do and why EVERY single one that I’ve seen on TV give an opinion, states they believe the shot was first.
    After the email Travis threatens to expose her, and is livid she scammed him, called her psycho, etc., she stews and steals her grandpa’s gun.
    We know she already carries a knife. She used it to slash tires on more than one occasion. That is a serious knife. She also, after the murder, because she got rid of the gun and knife, replaced them to go on a camping trip with other guys. Found by the police in her car!
    So we know, one shell casing on top of blood. One bullet in cheek, and all the stab wounds. Then we have all the blood evidence. Gray did a fantastic job, not being a blood splatter expert of at least taking where, how much, and what kind of spatters were photographed. It was awesome work. The ME testified the spatter at the sink was from spitting/coughing. You don’t have to be an expert to see that.
    The most blood was at the end of the hall, and is agreed by EVERYONE that is where the throat was slit.
    The inadvertent photographs show timelines and events as evident.
    Based on this evidence alone, the sequence isn’t obvious. So now we have to apply two other angles. The ME findings (or lack thereof) AND the logic a detective would use to analyze.
    The ME was looking at the body (beach). The detective doesn’t have any direct evidence. No one has seen anybody. He doesn’t see any footsteps either. Maybe he sees water on the boardwalk that doesn’t fit with coming from water washing up. Maybe there’s a hot dog stand open, or a boat at the edge of the water on the sand. Logically, he might conclude, due to the tide, the boat shows recently coming to rest there, likely not on its own, maybe someone walked along where the water washes up and smoothed out footprints? Hmmmm. Maybe there could have been somebody on the beach the ME didn’t see at that moment?
    Logical questions then:
    Why kill him in the shower? That question alone shows premeditation. Even the defense says, if she wanted to kill him, why not when she got there? Why not in bed? Those are not logical questions. Used by a defense to get you to NOT think logically. Have you guys seen the similarity to the psycho movie poses? He called her a “psycho”, she wanted to taunt him about that. She mentioned the movie at some point in all her talking too much. This taunting is actually evidence for a knife. But she wouldn’t risk him fighting her with only a knife. But she knew, (we’ve seen Travis’s video) he cowered at a gun pointed at him. You don’t think she’d heard that story many times? She was bored in the video because she likely heard it before.
    IMO she PLANNED on killing him in the shower. That is the logical answer. Why? By her planning, she wanted NO evidence she was there! That was her 1st story. She’s been there before, so hair, DNA etc, in the house was not a concern. But anything tied to the murder would be very bad. This wasn’t plan B like others have opinionated. She knew it was over. She didn’t go there hoping to have sex and get him to take her to Cancun. The tickets had already been changed from her to Meme. Her little blackmail didn’t work and in her mind, she had to take out Travis for whatever reason her twisted mind came up with. We know that because of all the premeditation evidence. If he was slain in the shower, there would be no “direct evidence” and except of a bullet, no “circumstantial evidence”.
    Why drag him back to the shower? Because… that is WHERE she wanted to kill him, for the purpose of no DNA. After she crammed him back into the shower, she used it to wash away DNA and guess what else? Blood! Lack of blood would be a result of bleeding from sinuses, heart and throat AND washing. In her premeditation, she would have to get back to the plan to try not to leave any evidence she was there.
    Why No Hemorrhaging?
    Now I’m not an expert and have only assisted in an autopsy. I’ve done taxidermy work and when an animal is killed in a very short time, and bled out, there is very little tissue hemorrhaging, if any. While bleeding out, there is no pressure to contribute to hemorrhaging either. Butchers understand this also in order to produce quality meat. The ME couldn’t confirm a path of a bullet through brain tissue, for the reasons he stated. Lack of footsteps on the beach doesn’t mean no one had been there.
    OK… more questions:
    What does no “Stippling” tell us?
    Again, keeping footsteps on the beach in mind, when there IS stippling, we know the shot was fired at a close range, within a couple of feet. When there isn’t, it falls to within the category of two possibilities. It was not a close shot, or… if it was a close range shot, something else had to have absorbed the stippling that the bullet would have passed through. There was no evidence of such, but that doesn’t eliminate a curious possibility. Especially that the power of the bullet wasn’t strong enough to pass completely through.
    Let’s also see if what seems logical in a bullet last sequence including that there is NO stippling. Travis’s throat was already cut at the end of the hall and she, by the photos, was dragging him back to the bathroom. Then before she stuffs him back into the shower, she shoots him in the head in the bathroom. Where was the gun produced from? If she had it with her, then she had a knife, a camera, AND a gun with two hands. Would a cold calculating murderer, with planning, (even JA) risk him fighting her using a knife and him grabbing the gun not being used? Possibly maybe, but it is probable? I like how shot last believers bolster their claim by non-logical questions themselves. Well, she wanted to torture him first, or she’s crazy so ANYTHING is possible. She did it because the body was maybe doing spasms. The MOST illogical comment is she wants to finish him off. This one really shows ignorance. Really? How can anyone think that cutting a throat until it is almost a decapitation doesn’t accomplish that? I’ve heard people say she went and got the gun to finish him off. Again… really? So what would this take to go get a gun and leave no bloody footprints across the carpet? This fact of evidence also intrigues the logical thinking of the crime. At the end of the killing, (forget the BS of the fog) she removed her footwear to be very careful not to leave bloody footprints out into the bedroom or down the stairs. What thinking does that take? So an illogical thinking would submit, she had the gun close at hand. Handy on a counter or something, I doubt it. It would have had to be on her or Travis, who has shot guns but not owned one, might have had access to it during the murder. One last point, after she dragged him back into the bathroom, she then would have to either stand back to shoot him (no stippling) or produced something to muffle or absorb the stippling up close. Neither of which makes logical sense at that point. And please, one last point that doesn’t make any sense, she did not put the body back in the shower and then shoot him there. The path of the bullet would be next to impossible.

    There were some defensive wounds to hand but why not a lot, or evidence of more fighting off?
    Even the defense tried to meekly use this to bolster JA’s self-defense, shot first, story. He would be either stunned or somewhat incapacitated to not have either or both of them have more defensive wounds. There were only cuts to JA fingers and anything else unnoticeable in SLC. Do you really believe she had a bump on the head from the made up body slam?
    A big one! Why, if he were being stabbed, especially in the heart first, would a man go stand facing a mirror, while his attacker still is wielding a knife?
    Why turn your back on an attacker? Did she go to get a gun? Or… if a gun was first, and it wouldn’t fire again, would it be more logical to run and get a knife? Almost everyone says that many stab wounds can only be rage! More on that in a moment…
    Finishing up the John and Mary case… The first rule of logic I was taught in college is: DON’T ASSUME ANYTHING. Our thinking can be influenced and flawed by our experiences, believes, irrational thinking, excuses, etc., (used as an argument concerning the jury foreman on the DP). So, let’s apply that to the very first statement about John and Mary being dead. And it doesn’t mean to apply it to them being dead. It means to apply it about John and Mary! Did you assume John and Mary were human?
    Well, I don’t doubt rage was involved. But JA has a weird way of controlling it. I know a BPD person that will sometimes experience it and throw things in a reactionary way, but when they are really ticked off at someone, they will be scarily devious and scheming.
    Did the actions of JA just before and just after the murder show signs of rage?
    What footprints do people use to support that? Many many stab wounds, slitting of the throat, gun shot last, and even that you would logically have to be enraged to do that to another human being. Some people’s opinion is they believe she probably snapped when maybe Travis said it is totally over between them. She couldn’t handle that. This one does make sense, as I mentioned above as a reaction event. I initially leaned this way. But there became a hurdle in the logic supporting this theory…
    Another rule of logic is, keep the mind open to receive and analyze and don’t let human character traits interfere. This point was the basis of the Spock character in Star Trek.
    Let’s apply more logic to JA’s state of mind before the murder. If you think this through, she was cold and calculating. Look at the footprints in the beach of that. She wanted to kill him enough to stage a burglary to acquire a gun that was not purchased by her, to take off work, in a hurry, to travel hundreds of miles across 3 states to do it. She was devious and scheming to an extreme effort to hide that she was even going there. Gas cans, receipts, rented car, license plates (more on that later), hair color and style, time of arrival, calling ahead to make sure he would be there, turning off cell phone, etc… Planning the exit and absence of evidence applies to this state of mind going in. In my mind, if there was the slightest case for “one last chance”, it might have been he would have to show NO hesitation in convincing her he loved her and lets go to Vegas, get married, and honeymoon ourselves in front of everyone in Cancun. I don’t believe that any more than any of you or even JA did. It was over, but she took advantage of Travis’s good nature and sexual weaknesses as part of her plan. Her controlling behavior is remarkable. We saw it on the stand using/acting meek, sorrowful, upset, arrogant, defiant, etc., all for control. She would get angry, never have an outburst, but use digs in her comments. When she accosted Travis friend in the women’s restroom, she was scarily under control, she didn’t just go in there and lash out or attack.
    So, as I’ve pointed out, she wanted to kill him in the shower. She planned it that way. I believe she did want to taunt him before she did it. She would want him to know why she was upset. Human emotions, (like Spock said) are the hardest to figure out logically. So that being applied to a person with a mental disorder, not insane, but cunning and devious, for whatever reason, she wanted to spend intimate moments with him. Maybe one last time for them both? Maybe knowing that afterward, he would need to take a shower? Could it be there was motive in it towards the murder even then? Would you put it past JA to do that?
    Consider then, with this much cunning and planning, if it was that calculated that if it wasn’t rage at the moment, what could cause the excess and cruelty of the killing?
    The sequence plays a huge part in this question. I’ve had to draw on several details to consider. JA’s interrogation videos are very valuable for “clues”. Her first story is what she had planned it to be. Even including some of her own tidbits while fishing for clues from the detective to what they knew. She didn’t realize until that interview that she did make mistakes. She wasn’t totally surprised, I think, because the killing didn’t happen exactly as she planned. What happened? If we don’t assume rage, we could open our minds to suspect maybe panic. If John and Mary are not human, maybe they could be something else.
    JA told the detective that “if” she were to kill Travis, she would do it humanely with a gun. It could be that she used the term humane to replace efficient or planned. She also did a similar “fishing” with wearing gloves. Probably wore gloves and was perplexed how her print was found at the scene.
    So, if we think about wanting to kill him in the shower by shooting him with a gun, let’s play it out. A .25 caliber gun, that she used, is known to sometimes have jamming issues. Sometimes, depending on the ammunition, can also maybe misfire. It is not unreasonable to deduct that this could have likely been the situation with finding only 1 shell casing. It could also be as stupid as seeing a bullet in the gun and assuming the magazine was full? For whatever reason, the angle of the bullet, done so well by Gray in his animation, not only fits while being in the shower, but also logically makes sense for another reason discussed below.
    What does the path of the bullet tell us?
    Which sequence sounds logical with the bullet path? If, even a JA, wants to make sure her victim is dead, which is what can be concluded, you shoot them in the head with the intent of the bullet “blowing their brains out”, a shot to the head, NOT the face. If it was last, it would be easier to believe if the shot was more squarely into the head. Could she be that bad of a shot to a person only twitching? Not likely. But if the shot was first, while he was sitting in the shower, would it seem likely, Travis might, in grimacing for the blow, at the last second, turn his head in an attempt to dodge/defect/avoid the shot? That could definitely account for the trajectory angle and missing the middle of the head.
    What other details did JA utter to the detective that might also suggest shot first?
    So the “I wasn’t there” story didn’t hold water. JA had to invent another story. She had tidbits of information from the detective, but not details. She knew the details and she would have to craft her lie to “fit” what she figured the forensic evidence showed. So what can we glean from the Ninja Story? The intruders shot Travis in the head but he wasn’t dead and was screaming. The gun jammed and they couldn’t shoot her. He was crawling on the floor on his four knees. She misstated hands and knees or all fours. She gave many other detail clues hidden in her lie. There had to be truth mixed with the lie in an effort to make it believable. And there it had to be significant because if not, it would be too obvious for a lie. Read it carefully, you can find it online, and if you set aside the ME’s opinion, gives a strong indication for shot first.
    Also, when the ninja story wasn’t going to pan out and JA became aware of all the crime scene evidence, she and her attorney’s went with the self-defense story. AND THEY KEPT TO THE SAME SEQUENCE THAT THE SHOT WAS FIRST. In my mind, JA absolutely knew this and felt the ME and detectives would deduce the same because that part WAS FACTUAL to her. How ironic the court found otherwise.
    Why, would a man, in a shower, be sitting? What made him get in that position?
    When I first saw the shower photos, it really struck me that what would he be doing sitting? A man does not just sit in the shower without reason. At first I thought maybe he was distraught with having to finalize their relationship. Then I thought maybe distraught because of guilt, being Mormon, and having sex after he’d likely repented from before. Maybe going further than he had before. The only time in my life I’ve sit down in a shower was when I was sick. In the “poses” he wasn’t using soap. JA told the detective Travis would never allow pictures like that. Then said it differently in the trial. Putting all the clues and hints together, it is not farfetched that he was being made to “pose”. He may have been appeasing her, we don’t really know. If he was being ordered at gunpoint, would he obey? Would he possibly get fed up and sit, stare, and not give in to her game anymore? If she escalated threats and taunts, would he slide down to sit? Would he do any of this more likely with a gun pointed at him or to the same obedience with a knife?
    What if it went as planned and what about panic?
    Panic happens when something isn’t going the way you want it to. What if, she planned on shooting and killing him in the shower and it worked? No blood anywhere except in the shower that is easily washed away. If she shot him and he was dead in the shower, she could carefully make sure all her stuff was gathered and slipped out to get to Utah. No palm print on the wall. Maybe pick up a shell casing obvious on the floor? No photos of dragging the body. The gas cans could have been an indicator of premed, but without being able to place her at the scene, would she maybe have gotten away with it or a lesser charge? She thought so, but what she didn’t think is that Travis would survive the gun shot and she wouldn’t get any more shots to happen. Would you panic? Would you stay in the room if he was able to start pulling himself up off the floor of the shower and the gun wouldn’t go off anymore? Would you go get a frying pay? Or something to use for a club? What if you had a habit of carrying a knife in your bag? Would you resort to it? Would YOU panic and say “crap” to yourself like she did? Or stronger words? If your victim was standing at the sink and able to scream “You tried to kill me bitch!” Would you panic? Would panic explain the overkill? Did she know any of the wounds she inflicted would be fatal while in the process of killing him? She wasn’t trying to get away, she wasn’t waiting for him to bleed to death like a hunter would. No, she needed to get him to die, and put him back in the shower. What an intervention to the plan that he survived long enough to leave evidence to convict his killer of 1st degree with cruelty. What if he could have made it to a phone? What if he could have made it down the stairs and outside? What if anyone heard his screaming? What if he was able to regain strength and consciousness’ to possibly fight back? She wanted him dead and she wanted him in the shower, all those stab wounds didn’t make him stop fighting for life. It wasn’t until she was able to get behind him, grab his head and cut his throat was she able to feel she finally completed the deed. I think she way underestimated what it took to kill someone when you feel shooting them in the head would suffice. She said in her penalty phase speech, she didn’t know she was capable of such violence. I believe what she didn’t say is that it took that much violence to kill her victim.
    Last pieces of logic for shot first.
    She planned on going to Utah, she needed the alibi she had planned and worked on. She wouldn’t want to mess that part of her plan up by a bloody mess of stabbing him to kill him. A gun shot is a LOT riskier that a stabbing. Most likely a person could survive stabbing enough to fight back, but a lot less chance of a gunshot to the head. You can’t say this wasn’t a consideration when there is sooooo much evidence of her methodical plan from the outset to the return. You think she would think out all she did and leave out the purpose for the whole trip? If you think that, you also think John and Mary aren’t fish, the water and glass didn’t come from a fish bowl, and a cat didn’t come through the open window to know the bowl off the table. And nobody saw any footsteps on the beach…

    Now information about the gun.
    A 25 caliber is a weak caliber. It didn’t even have enough power to force the bullet through the head. There was no exit wound. It was a single bullet, not like an exploding or splintering bullet used for hunting or wars to kill people and animals. It doesn’t kick much. I’ve shot one. It is slightly bigger than a rinky-dink 22. A creature could be killed with a 22, or a 25, if hit fatally, but it is NOT a high caliber weapon. You can find evidence of people being shot with low caliber weapons and not know it. They can still function, sometimes a bit hindered, sometimes almost without external evidence they were even shot.

  12. wow just read it, agree about shot first and in the shower, does look like his expression is on the tired side, tired of being jodies travis, didn’t like himself around her, but the flesh made him weak, sad such a bright kid lost his life so young feel for his family, your opions about what took place was very good reading, I’ve watched the trial, the interviews, could see right away she was the one, little stuff like you stated, truths come out amongst the lies, sociopath thanks for your insight, agree with a lot of what you stated

  13. Post Script on the women in military.

    That whole segregation post is so unfair. We women have struggled for so long for equal rights, for equal treatment, not separate!

      • The current system in the Army is great! There are amazing opportunities and many, many good men in all ranks out there. There are also small percentages of idiots/psychopaths as in the civilian world. Don’t persecute the whole for a few.

        Most did not understand my previous post. I agree that no means no. Of course drunk doesn’t give men rights. Of course it’s your right to your body as in the abortion issue, which I agree with both sides on that issue as well. While I personally don’t think abortion is a good idea, no one has the right to tell a woman what she can or can not do with her body.

        As for the drunk issue, my point is that you have to be completely honest and look at intoxicated behavior. Truly, truly it is not in any way, shape or form, responsible behavior ON BOTH PARTS.

        Therefore, when of course, “No means no,” is a rule, how many drunk people follow rules? Not many, be honest. They are NOT 100% in control of themselves is my point. Not, “men are men,” or “boys just being boys” is acceptable. But add alcohol or drugs and again, I state emphatically, all bets are off. When I state that all bets are off, I am stating, to all women, and some men, that the outcome cannot be guaranteed, of what may happen, so why take the gamble?

        In a dream world, you may say you can control yourself or control your aggressor friend at high levels of intoxication, but I say, both parties judgment and outlook on reality is out the window. Is that not true?

        Of course it does not give anyone the right, ever, but women, or anyone, should not put themselves intoxicated in an isolated situation and have Tinkerbell expectations. Really? What do you realistically think will happen when you mix horny adults and alcohol? Again, I stress this point, I do not believe rape in any situation is right.

        However, I do think women should accept some responsibility in this matter when it comes to alcohol and hormones, that is all.

      • Terry (Donna?) – Again, it is all about the “women’s responsibility”. I did not see one word about the “men’s” responsibility. Booze, drugs, whatever, where does any man get off thinking he has a right to that woman. “Horny” is for teenagers who are immature and lack control and sense, but horniness is even less of an excuse. If women should not have “Tinkerbell” expectations, then why is it okay for the men to have honry “Cavemen” expectations.

      • Again, men or any gender or person does not have the right to rape, period! Yes, they should be held responsible to the highest degree.

        All I’m saying is, as a female, that women should be more wise, that is all. Do you trust all men, especially if they, and you, are drunk? No I do not. Therefore…BE MORE CAREFUL!
        Horny isn’t just for irresponsible teenagers. Hormones are so powerful they can squeeze a ten lb baby out a very small orifice! That’s the power of hormones. So when it comes to the intoxicated male species, who has thousands of times the testosterone as a female, beware.

        Should women take some responsibility in what happens to their bodies, hell yes. That’s why I tell my daughter to not drink and put herself into that isolated situation. Be alert and stop, STOP before it gets to that point. Yeah?

      • Terry Donna – Finally… I believe we have reached an agreement. I too have daughters, both over age 25 and I have always told them not to place themselves in any position where they no longer have their own control. I am sure at some point I was told the exact same thing. I know I have been intoxicated to the point of not having control – and I am not proud of that, but when you are young, you feel nothing can happen to you. Fortunately for me, I never was raped, abused or left stranded. Maybe it was the company I kept, maybe it was plain luck. Because of what I have done in my youth, I may preach even more to my daughters because I do know what I did and I am not sure they will have the same luck.

        I will also say, I never just walked into a bar that I did not know the patrons, or if I did, I was not alone. I’m sure that has a lot to do with my past “luck”. We were all acquainted and/or friends. And lastly, and I am fortunate for this, I have always had the good fortune of living in what society would refer to as “nice” areas where there is a little less violence, or at least less publicized (not a good thing) but violence happens anywhere.

        Yes, we should all be aware of the positions we place ourselves in, but I just cannot compromise my position that no MAN has the right no matter what the circumstance or the condition of the female, to touch her or approach her. I actually have an ex-relative (from my first marriage) who was arrested for rape (his name is Alex Kelly and there was even a movie made “Rape in Connecticut”) and he and his family seemed to think the girls put themselves out there and “wanted it”. Disgusting.

        Have a great weekend Terry Donna. We are probably more on the same page than I originally thought. :)

      • Btw, the females back in ’78, were all raped by acquaintances or friends that started out as a party. That’s probably why it didn’t get reported. I do believe one of them got a “blanket party,” though.

        Sorry for initial confusion.

        I do strongly support the awesome Army male colleagues, supervisors and subordinates with whom I worked throughout my 24 years, the majority who did support women in the military and helped suppress the few “oppressors.”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s