JA’s allegations of TA’s physical and sexual abuse, alleged pedophilia, and her claims of self-defense are all uncorroborated . Thus, they rise or fall solely on JA’s testimony. An examination of her behavior before trial is essential to deciding whether or not she is believable.
Jodi told numerous lies to various people which can only be interpreted as an attempt to cover up her involvement in the killing of TA. Below are only the “whoppers”.
a. She left both a voice mail and an email for TA saying that she was sorry that she had not been able to visit him (though she had just killed him) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=maTShvROLX4 0:46:0 0and looking forward to him coming to visit her.
b. She told everyone in Utah that she had gotten lost, run out of gas and driven the wrong way which is why she was so late.
c. She told Ryan Burns that she cut her finger at Margaritaville.
d. She told a girlfriend in Utah that she hoped that her kids and Travis’ kids would be able to play together.
e. She sent flowers (Irises) to TA’s grandmother.
f. When she was informed of TA’s death she made a grand dramatic display of anguish http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=maTShvROLX4 1:19:22 and then “lied” to her own journal. http://grahamwinch.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/jodi-arias-blog-journal.pdf (pp. 9-10)
JA’s interactions with Flores and the media were recorded so that one can compare her “performance” to how she appeared on the stand. There is no real discernible difference.
Interactions with Flores
Without any prompting, after the murder, she called Det. Flores and attempted to get information on the progress of the investigation under the guise of “assisting” him. Those tapes were played at the trial and can be listened to here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NmXxck9IiFQ
When she was arrested and interrogated by Flores, she strenuously and repeatedly denied ever being in Arizona at the time TA was murdered. When presented with clear evidence that she was not only in Arizona but was in TA’s apartment at the time of his death, she blamed Ninjas for the murder. This was despite Dets. Flores and Blaney “begging” her to explain why she killed Travis, i.e. giving her an opportunity to allege abuse or self-defense. However, she stuck to that story for two years, through media interviews and even told her expert Dr. Samuels the “Ninja” story before deciding, in court documents to admit she killed TA but alleging self-defense and domestic abuse.
Remember both Flores and the female detective pleaded with her to tell them what had happened and even “invited” her to attribute the killing to some kind of reaction to domestic violence. She insisting she was not involved. Excerpts of these interviews were played at trial. The unedited interviews are available on You Tube courtesy of David Lohr uploaded all 16. This is the first one. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vE_Ue5rF8QM In her direct testimony, she claims she did not tell the truth because she was ashamed of what had happened and was told to simply deny everything. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=maTShvROLX4 – 1:58:02
She gave three interviews after her extradition to Arizona. One to the Arizona media in 2008. – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WdvRQ5cjFg4 Another to 48 hours – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fB9TVIyHfBE Another to Inside Edition – excerpts from the interview are here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jaSD8tfbYlU (I have not been able to find an unedited, full version)
In each of these interviews, she brazenly and repeatedly denies killing Travis and/or claims that “Ninjas” did it. When presented with opportunities to speak negatively about Travis or even imply that he might have been abusive, she instead extols his virtues.
The interviews are important is because they are recorded so you can examine her affect while she was lying to Flores and the media. She lied repeatedly and seamlessly and when compared to her testimony on the stand when she is supposedly telling the truth there is no difference in her affect!
Now, considering the weight of her lies, why should we believe that suddenly, after two years, she is telling the truth? From the stand point of an objective person someone who has lied publicly and consistently, and over such a long period simply cannot be easily believed. She claims she is now telling the “truth” though she spurned countless opportunities to do so, even though the “truth” would have potentially exonerated her.