Men As Stalking Victims, Part 1: How the Arias Defense Got It All Wrong

Would  male stalking victims Travis Alexander and/or Ryan Poston be alive today if everyone was duly informed about stalking behavior?

by Susan J. Elliott, J.D., M.Ed.

There is a fine line between serendipity and stalking. ~ David Coleman

Before I delve into the subject of male stalking victims, let me explain who I am.I am a former DV victim and an author who recounts my abuse in my first book. I had at least two restraining orders taken out on two different abusers, testified in front of a grand jury against one in an attempted murder charge and many of my medical issues were documented.  In other words, unlike Jodi Arias, there was evidence of DV.

I am a DV counselor and former psychiatric clinician. In my early days of therapy, I was diagnosed with PTSD after suffering decades of abuse. Before I went to graduate school for Counseling Psychology, I ran (on a volunteer basis) women’s groups for DV victims. In my later years as an Emergency Psychiatric Clinician, I saw a disproportionate number of people diagnosed with Borderline Personality Disorders in my practice.  I am also an attorney.  I currently do counseling and running women’s groups (paid) on a part-time basis.  I donate a portion of my revenue ) from the books and groups to DV organizations and I have a matching book program where I match any books donated to shelters for DV victims (see more about that HERE). I am also an attorney.

I only keep a portion of my published articles (about 2200 at last count) up at any one time, so if you want a repost of articles about stalking or abuse, please let me know. I have also written on my experience with abuse (here is one of the abuse articles). Another “Leaving The Abusive Relationship” is HERE. I wrote about my own experience with a stalker years ago HERE.  I wrote about obsessive “love” HERE. I hope to write more on this subject of male stalking victims.  If you have questions or comments, email me and I will answer in upcoming articles or videos.  To subscribe to our mailing list go HERE.  

The Jodi Arias Capital Murder Trial

With my personal and professional background, I found the Jodi Arias trial to be fascinating and instructive, although so much of it (like the defense) angered me and made me crazy.  I mention the Poston case only briefly here and in Part 2, but the similarities are a bit chilling.   When Shayna Hubers goes to trial again, I will publish more on that case. I don’t want to add to articles which may taint a possible jury pool. For now, this is mostly about the Arias case.

In the Arias trial, whether they were talking DV or law or personality disorders or PTSD, I had the education and the experience to relate to what they were saying.  I watched the Dr. Drew show whereby guests discussed the trial.  Dr. Drew is one of the few television experts that I truly admire and respect.  I know that Alyce LaViolette has shredded him for his advocacy in the Arias case.  But there’s a warmth and honesty about him that is missing in so many other talking heads. He also had such compassion for the Alexander siblings that came across as genuine and not rehearsed. I also like his co-hosts and the commentators that make up his “Behavior Bureau.”  It is usually a rich and fascinating mix of personalities. I’ve also appeared on local (NYC), national and international television and radio and know how hard it is to get a complex opinion into a soundbite.

But there were evenings on the Dr. Drew show that made me feel like a ping pong ball when he had the “Behavior Bureau” made up of lawyers and therapists who took opposing sides from each other.  As a therapist and lawyer, I understood each side. Whether talking Axis II disorders or the rules of evidence, I knew what they were talking about. I made copious notes on every aspect of the trial – whether it was DV or PTSD or law or evidence or the defense and the judge – I wrote mountains of opinion on the trial – from every perspective – DV victim,DV advocate, PTSD survivor, stalking victim, diagnostic clinician, attorney and on and on and may one day share them with the world.

I was not only a DV victim and a DV therapist for years, but when I left mental health to go to law school, I volunteered with Professor Nancy Lemon, a leading authority (and all around wonderful human being) on Domestic Violence at the University of California, Berkeley.

I volunteered to do research and case cites for Professor Lemon’s law review article (you can read it HERE including her lovely mention of her research assistants) because I believed that people who work in the DV field are inherently “good.”  I have always believed that we’re on the side of justice and right.  I have written and done videos castigating people crying domestic violence to get a legal leg up and how reprehensible I find that.  We all fought long and hard for the rights of DV victims and for non-DV victims to hijack the rights afforded DV victims makes me crazy.  But the worst, the very worst, is when so-called DV experts cross the line to the other side and enable this hijacking.   This is what I saw happening in the Arias trial with Alyce LaViolette.

Before this trial I was aware of her reputation to have done important work.  I also know she had been tormented on social media to the extent that she had to go to the Emergency Room for anxiety.  That is a terrible thing. I don’t believe in threats or name-calling.  That is simply NOT okay.  

It was not my intention to pile on Ms. LaViolette.  But as I listened, over and over to her direct and cross, whereby she defended Arias’ nonsense claims and mischaracterized Travis Alexander, I felt compelled to say something.

Listening to her made me sad, mad and sometimes completely enraged.

I’ve also heard her speeches and interviews AFTER the Arias case where she takes NO responsibility for what happened AT ALL.

This is a DV expert who was clearly falling for the manipulation and lies of a borderline and going so far as to testify that said borderline was NOT manipulative and said dead murder victim was the abuser and a liar.  This was a prime example of someone enabling a non-victim to hijack the hard won legal gains of actual victims.  I do not believe, in any way, shape or form that Jodi Arias is a domestic violence victim.  Like Juan Martinez said in his closing arguments: she is liar and a killer.  

The jury showed some of their hand when questioning LaViolette on her relationship with Arias.  They seemed to believe the prosecution portrayal that LaViolette was biased.  Though she was tasked with evaluating the case and not advocating for the defendant, her advocacy was fairly transparent.  I’ve listened to her cross-examination over and over again.  It amazes me she was as clueless as she was. From the START she would not and could not answer a question with a simple yes or no.  She stated on her first full day of cross after being admonished by the judge for the first (but not the last) time, “I’m trying to give a more effective answer.”  Effective?  Who gets to decide effective?  You’re an expert…supposedly a seasoned expert.  You don’t get to answer in a more “effective” way when the prosecutor is saying, “Yes or no?”

She said, “We spent a lot of time on that…” the reason they spent A LOT of time on many things was her inability to give a straight answer.  You answer, you move on…if you damage the defendant’s case, it’s up to the defense attorney to clean it up, not for you to be bobbing and weaving.

I don’t think that all her denials did the defense any favors.  They not only didn’t prep her well but she was on the stand for days and the stonewalling never stopped. It had to have ticked off the jury.  It just had to.

It also amazes me that in post-trial interviews she never addressed the fact that she LIED to the jury.  She never addressed the fact that she approached Samantha Alexander – the victim’s sister – and said, “It’s not personal.”  For someone to be a SEASONED expert and to approach a member of the victim’s family when they are testifying for the defense, she had to know that was WRONG.  She made a big deal – post-trial – that Janeen DeMarte had no compassion…that is not what DeMarte said and it’s nonsense that she mischaracterized it that way…but where was ALV’s compassion when she approached the victim’s family in an absolutely insanely inappropriate way?  Compassion for murderer Arias but no compassion for the murder victim’s sister?  Interesting.

You can’t come into court, charge $300 and hour to sit on the stand for days and refuse to answer questions straight up (another judge would have fined her or held her in contempt of court for how many times she was admonished) and then whine that you are a victim. No. You. Are. Not.

But the misinformation coming from Alyce LaViolette (“ALV”) really made me upset. She couched many of her opinions with, “The materials I was given…”  “From what I know…” “I made a mistake…” “I misspoke…” “I was inaccurate…” as if her ignorance of facts of the case would somehow save her from blistering cross examination (it didn’t).  She spent 44 hours with Arias.  That ALONE garnered her $11,000.  And that was without the many hours of reading journals and doing interviews and spending 3 weeks on the stand.  Who knows how much money she was paid?  And she was paid by the defense who were paid by the taxpayers of Arizona.  But the fact that it was A LOT of money is one of the reasons people were so angry.  Her stonewalling and obfuscation kept her on the stand for much longer than she should have been. And that was adding coins to the till. And to the anger.

I know she felt attacked on social media and was upset by that, but one of the reasons she was so attacked is that she failed to see what it was about her testimony that caused many of us, especially those of us who have actually experienced domestic violence, to turn against her. When I was a psychiatric clinician, we had to rate a patient on “personal insight” (meaning how much of a clue they had about their own issues).  For ALV I would rate her personal insight as hovering close to zero.

ALV’s defense of Arias – fake DV victim – weakens all of us.  The social and criminal issues of domestic violence are harmed whenever a non-victim manages to hoodwink anyone – be it an attorney, a judge, a counselor, friends, family, or an expert.

Jodi Arias, enabled by her “defense” experts – re-victimized Travis Alexander, victimized his family, and victimized REAL DV victims.  Arias is a narcissistic, lying, manipulative, sociopathic borderline who had her lies and BS co-signed by a nationally recognized DV expert who appeared utterly clueless and firmly ensconced in the web of deceit that Arias spun. And that is just NOT OKAY. 

No wonder everyone was so angry.  It’s JUST NOT OKAY.

To have some idea of how difficult it was for me to criticize in this matter, you can read My Own Experiences with Internet Hate and Social Media / Cyber Bullying HERE.

Why Did I Just Tell You All That?

My personal history with internet savagery is to preface this fact: before I take a swing at anyone, let alone someone who seemed to be on the same side, I think about it very carefully. I have a lot of personal experience with attacks from internet bullies who then want to turn around and call me the bully when they found ME and attacked ME and now lie about ME.  I get it.  I truly do.

I want to be fair to anyone I openly criticize, especially anyone who has worked in a realm I consider incredibly important. It feels unfair when you are out there, and anonymous bullies who hide behind screens and spew garbage about you feel entitled to do that. Why try to ruin someone’s life because you disagree with them?  Thankfully I am never going to operate in that capacity.  Unlike my own internet bullies, I have a rich and full life and can’t be bothered trying to ruin their sad little lives.

Name calling and threats fail to add anything to the discussion.  All the name calling and wishing bad things upon her does not address the actual issues with her testimony. It’s not okay to call anyone names or to wish terrible things upon them or threaten them.  So that part of what she endured is wrong. But it still does not make her contribution to the Arias trial right.  Not at all.

But internet bullying does feel scary and unreal. Being called names from anonymous people is frustrating.  You think to yourself, “I’m out here, the real me – exposed – and these miscreants are hurling insults.  You don’t know me. You haven’t lived my life, what the hell is your problem? Why don’t you do something constructive with your time?”  So I do not take the responsibility of adding to public ire lightly.

The Defense of Jodi Arias and Assassination of Travis Alexander

I listened many, many times to ALV’s testimony – both direct and cross.

I did not want to be one of the lying liars who say things about people they don’t like or disagree with and then try to destroy that person “just because.”  I didn’t want to be like those cretins who have attacked me with misspelled emails and misguided attempts to discredit me. I wanted my own criticism to be fair and well-thought out.  And something I can sign my own real name to.

When I first felt driven to join the anti-ALV mob, I spent a long time analyzing my feelings toward her.  I felt an anger that I normally reserve for those trying to game the DV laws and non-victims who attempt to hijack important laws passed in order to protect actual victims.  But my anger is very real and there was a source to it.

Even worse than these villains is a supposed DV expert who a) defended someone who was a psychopathic lying Borderline (while I absolutely agreed with Janeen DeMarte and her diagnosis of Arias, I think Arias had some sociopathic/psychopathic/narcissistic traits mixed in there as well) and b) tossed her own credentials out the window to save said psychopathic lying Borderline.

I think another thing that upset the crowd on this one is that she was paid handsomely for her time and many felt it was overpayment for her complicity in Arias’ fake defense and her attempt to destroy the reputation of the murder victim.  She spent a lot of time on the stand refusing to answer the prosecutor’s questions as the Arizona taxpayer was spending $300 an hour to see her stall and obfuscate. I do see where the internet’s anger was coming from.

However, instead of sitting behind a screen hurling insults anonymously as some do, I decided to look at her testimony and write, under my own name – bullies be damned – what it is that needs to be written. I have written several pieces on it, but this is the first to be published. I think it’s important.

To own and examine my anger,  I  created a document which I may or may not publish at some later date, which analyzes a lot of her testimony and how it, with respect to both Arias and Alexander – is misguided. To quell my own lynch mob mentality when I was listening to her testimony, I created the document whereby I typed in much of what she said and then what I disagreed with or why I don’t think it’s accurate.  It kept me from losing my mind, lighting up the torch and polishing the pitchfork.

Why Are We Not Talking More About Male Stalking Victims?

The first issue that I’m writing on is the matter of male stalking victims. There is so much that the public should know about male stalking victims and how being stalked affects them.  The Arias trial actually was an opportunity to bring that issue to the forefront, but it was – instead  – relegated to the back burner and misunderstood and mischaracterized by ALV.

In round after round with Juan Martinez, the prosecutor – ALV claimed that that murder victim Travis Alexander did not demonstrate fear of Arias’ stalking behavior.  It was said over and over again.  In her opinion, Mr. Alexander did not exhibit fear – therefore Jodi was not a stalker. And it upsets me to no end that both of these conclusions are so very wrong.

ALV also called Juan Martinez a bully in post-trial speeches.  This is someone she sparred with, avoided answering questions, and had to be admonished more than once due to the inappropriate things she said (“timeout” and “are you angry with me?”) to Mr. Martinez. She made a silly grin at him a few times.  She did not seem to be bullied. If we apply her OWN METRICS (“he didn’t behave like someone who was in fear therefore there was no stalking”), SHE did not behave as someone who was bullied. Especially with the snarky grins. No one grins like a lunatic at someone who is bullying them. She didn’t behave like someone who was being bullied, therefore there is no bullying.

As an attorney I know the defense had a difficult job to do with a difficult client. They did what they were assigned to do: keep her off death row. I’ve written countless articles that I may republish someday on my analysis of the defense. (Hint: It will be entitled, “Objection. May We Approach?”) There were some things they did that I took extreme objection to and other times I felt they were doing the best they could under difficult circumstances. Overall, in rating their strategy, I had more minuses than pluses on my scorecard.

In some ways I can justify their strategies but in other ways it really upsets me. There were things they did that were sloppy and other things that were stupid. It’s understood that Arias was most likely a horrible client and if they didn’t let her tell her story – including the charges of abuse and pedophilia, she could have filed an ineffective assistance of counsel charge and the trial would have been thrown out…NO ONE WANTS THAT. So if you criticize some of the defense methodology, think if you want Arias to win an “ineffective assistance of counsel” action and get a new trial.  No, you do not.  So please think about that BEFORE you criticize the defense.  Yes, I absolutely believe that they “over” objected.  They “over” side-barred.  They “over” sold her story but it was all good because it avoided an appeal and a case for ineffective assistance.

But that doesn’t excuse some of their inexcusable strategy, most notably HAMMERING HOME the pedophile accusation. As an attorney I have considered this in every way I could. I still can’t get right with it as part of the “defense.”  No one believed it and it didn’t make a dent in the clamor for justice for Travis. It made Arias and the defense look desperate and despicable.

I understand that if a client says, “I want to talk about this…” and won’t be dissuaded, you HAVE to put it on even if you think it’s the biggest bunch of malarky in the world.  Since the trial, Kirk Nurmi has indicated he thinks a lot of her stuff is made up (without saying that)…and yes, as a defense attorney, especially in a capital case…you HAVE to let them tell the story…but as the attorney you are in charge in HOW things are presented.

If I were the attorney I would say,”Look, juries don’t like when you smear the victim relentlessly.  Let’s drop a few references to this – leave out the ‘papers on the bed’ incident and move along…”  And even if she insisted on talking about it on direct, I would have just dropped it there…not hammer it over and over again.  It was the most unbelievable part of the case.  I’m certain it worked against her. It was unnecessary.  She’s not going to skate because of it anyway and it made everyone around her look bad and caused a lot of the hatred directed at her, the defense attorneys and the defense experts.

The other thing that irked me was the “body slam.”  I have been in several abusive relationships with men much larger than me and much larger than Travis. I am smaller than Jodi Arias (by some 4 inches).  No man ever body slammed me.  Yet alone in a bathroom when he was soaking wet and I was clothed.

I’ve been thrown, kicked, punched and kneed in the solar plexus (where I truly had the “wind knocked out of me” and it’s nothing like Arias described – so she’s full of it there too).  Two of the men were wrestlers and one was a Golden Gloves boxer.  Yet none of them ever picked me up and body slammed me.  Yet alone naked and  wet.  I imagine someone with wet feet trying to pick anyone up would be sliding all over the place.

Did she just stand there like a statue when this naked wet man was trying to pick her up? There was no struggle?  No attempt to get away? It’s simply implausible.   One of my criticisms of the prosecution was that this wasn’t picked apart more.  But it may not have played high on Mr. Martinez’s hit parade.  Overall, he did a very good job but I kept waiting for him to do a micro evaluation of the body slam and it never came. Maybe it would be helpful to the prosecution in future cases to have actual DV victims testify as to the nature of DV relationships and run through the alleged events.

I also ran anytime I could.  The fact that she didn’t just run out is so telling.  When you are in a domestic violence situation, you RUN whenever you can.  Her entire retelling of the abuse simply did not ring true.  AT ALL.  And for ALV to be a domestic violence expert and not question it and not pay attention to her lies is to enable her bs and this is why the people were so angry and she’s oblivious to her part in this notorious charade.

Yes, the names that Travis called Jodi were wrong…again, name-calling is wrong, but the jury was immune to it by the end.  They just said it way too many times.  Also the overselling of the pedophilia charge and abuse charges simply overshadowed anything he did wrong.  And, oh yes, the fact that he was MURDERED.

As much as they upset me, my biggest issue with the defense, however, is in their parade of experts – everyone seemed biased in favor of the defendant and everyone was complicit in the unfair and untrue characterization of Travis Alexander. (And to be completely fair to ALV Dr. Fonseca was much worse as their DV “expert” than ALV ever was.)

At first, I felt a pang of sympathy for ALV when, teary-eyed, said she felt sad at the hate directed at someone they don’t know. THEN she said, “I’m not talking about just me, I’m talking about Jodi.” Excuse me, WHAT???? You don’t understand how people hate this lying borderline psychopath who is dragging her victim’s reputation through the mud and torturing his broken-hearted family? And you’re a DV expert? Excuse me, WHAT??? All sympathy for her left the building. FOREVER.  Ms. LaViolette, you were PLAYED my dear.  Totally played.

The defense experts were not well prepped. If you want to listen to an expert who was well prepped on how to handle cross examination, look no further than Janeen DeMarte. Instead of relying on endless objections and requests to approach, Martinez prepped his witness thoroughly. You may need to be an attorney to understand how witness prep is done, but the results are clear in contrasting DeMarte with any one of the defense experts.

Contrast her cross with that of any of them. Not only does Martinez remain hands off but she answers as a witness should on cross…just yes, yes, no, yes. She did not engage in the obfuscations and dizzying, needless diatribes that got almost every defense witness in trouble (Geffner appeared to be knowledgable, likable and not overly biased and manage to escape the wrath of the internet for the most part). DeMarte sparred with Willmott a time or two (about how memory works) but in the end she said, “Okay…”  By that time the jury got that she was just going along because Willmott wouldn’t budge. But I digress.

Some day I may clean up my trial files and publish all my opinions on every aspect of the case (it would be a book) as an attorney, DV expert, psychiatric clinician, actual DV victim and actual PTSD sufferer, but for now this is something that I think deserves airtime:

10 Things That Really Irked Me With Regard to ALV’s portrayal of the Arias/Alexander stalking issue:

  1. The thing that bothers me the most about this is that ALV did to Travis Alexander the thing that was done to actual abuse victims long before DV laws were passed. She decided what his behavior should look like if he was really afraid.  It was how people spoke to us in days long ago…well if he really hits you, why don’t you leave?  As if it were ever that simple.
  2. Conversely she talked about the FEAR Arias had and the abuse SHE sustained without a shred of evidence of anything, let alone a pattern. As Martinez hammered home again and again, the ONLY source she had was the defendant herself. ALV made much hay about an email Chris Hughes wrote to Travis calling Travis’ treatment of Jodi into question long before they realized how sick Arias was. ALV ignored the subsequent opinions of the Hughes’ and how spooked Arias made them.
  3. In fact, there was much more proof that  Travis Alexander DID tell friends he was afraid of Arias. Arias did not tell a single person she was abused by Travis. The night he was found murdered, her name flew out of the mouth of his friends reporting the blood bath to the police. Alexander had not only suspected that Arias had slashed his tires – (and who else would have done it?) – not once, but twice-  but he did make a police report, but it was never brought up in court.  I assume it hadn’t come in because it wasn’t naming Arias so it was hearsay and prejudicial with no proof. But the fact that he made a police report about the slashed tires is something that most people don’t know.  It does exhibit fear of being stalked.
  4. Arias was found sleeping on his couch – having come in via the doggie door and also found sleeping under the Christmas tree.  ALV kept talking patterns but ignored these stalking patterns to concentrate on what she saw as an absence of fear on the part of Travis Alexander.  She characterized Arias behavior as “having a hard time letting go.”  Stalking?  No, just having a hard time letting go.  What a bs rationalization that is.
  5. It irritated me to no end that ALV characterized Travis Alexander as a liar but had no issues or suspicions of Arias as a liar even when Juan Martinez asked her not just about all the lies Arias told to the police (ALV had plenty of justification for those) but also about Arias’ claim that she knew a boyfriend was cheating on her because “friends” came to her restaurant in Oregon where she was working to dime out said boyfriend (Matthew McCartney). Then – almost the exact same scenario in Mesa Arizona – many, many years later – ..some “friends” (as Martinez said about friends of Arias, “Whoever they are…we don’t know who they are…”) came into the restaurant and told her Travis was seeing some woman. ANY therapist worth his or her salt – who can’t TELL that this is nonsense (most likely Arias, famous snooper was snooping on both of them) as the two stories are just way too similar to be accurate and none of these people were ever identified.  That didn’t raise her suspicions that Arias was a bald-faced liar?  Really?  How can you be so easily duped?
  6.  Travis Alexander had a very difficult childhood.  He did not have a reasonable view of his doubts and fears.   Most children who grow up in the circumstances that he did don’t know what the “norms” are for anything, let alone what they are perceiving about another person. His antenna was down and she mixed up the signals with lies and sex.  Who knows what his actual perception of her was?  He was struggling with that himself.  He thought she was a sociopath and he was more right than not.  But his background may have led him to later question that characterization of her.  She was a manipulator.  She probably spun his head all the way around long before she tried to – literally – cut it off.
  7. People who grow up homeless with drug addict parents minimize hurt and pain. They are in SURVIVAL mode and part of that survival is to minimize the danger and the fear.  They don’t know that the world does not have to be a scary place.  But when your parents are incapable of protecting you, you become immune and closed off to the fear and other emotions.  No one tells you that being in survival mode isn’t normal.  People with traumatic childhoods aren’t sure what to do when they feel attacked.  Travis tried to rise about his erstwhile beginnings and make a life for himself. He had a positive outlook and a positive plan for his life.  He could have never imagined what would befall him that awful June evening.
  8. When he finally exploded at Arias, weeks before the murder, and told her how he felt about her and called her a sociopath, that was to move her away from him, not a clue to move closer.
  9. When the attorney suggested to me that I report the Ohio guy to the FBI, this seemed extreme to me.  The FBI?  Don’t they have better things to do?  Internet stalking and harassment is very real.  Even if it’s a complete stranger, you have to be vigilant.  Many times an extreme suggestion will make you back down or not want to appear to be crazier than the stalker for bothering police with this, but you have to make a record. You don’t know who else they are stalking or harassing.
  10. Travis Alexander did not drive to Yreka California to tell her off. He told her via text message to leave him alone.  And a week later, she’s on her journey to murder him; four years later she decided to murder his reputation.  And ALV was complicit in that.

After the trial she derided Juan Martinez – he asked her if she wanted to spar with him, and it seemed like she did.  How many times did she say, “I misspoke….”  or “I wasn’t given that information…” and when faced with a scenario that would result in an answer she didn’t want to give, she would say,  “Well I’d have to ask for clarification…”  She did not budge on so many things.  It was maddening.

Then there’s the “little” issue of HAVING LIED TO THE JURY.  How many men?  Criminal?  Who?  No?  Yes?  What? Keynote speaker?  When? Where?  What?  The amount of time wading through that stuff (again, that she was paid very well for)…added to the anger of the crowd.  Wait?  Jodi is not a liar, you’re not a liar, but TRAVIS is a liar.  Are we in an alternate universe?  What the holy hell?

When Mr. Martinez asked her about the police report she stated she didn’t notice or didn’t pay attention or something…always excusing her own mistakes in preparing for the case.  A DV expert in a capital murder case who didn’t pay attention to the POLICE REPORT?  Really?  That is sloppy and inexcusable work RIGHT THERE.

ALV said that some man called her up and said that the way Juan Martinez spoke to her was the way he spoke to his wife when he was a verbal abuser.  That is SUCH CRAP.  I have been in verbally abusive situations and it’s nothing like that.  I have watched her cross over and over again (it’s in the DOZENS how many times I’ve watched it) and she failed to answer questions, avoided answering hypotheticals, skated around facts (“the materials I was given” ) and obfuscation and meandering away from the question was the name of her game.  What an absolute charade.   Had she answered questions, she might have been OFF the stand and home in time for dinner, but nooooooooo

She also blamed Nancy Grace, Jane Velez-Mitchell and Dr. Drew for the mob anger directed at her.  I’m not a huge fan of Nancy and Jane (I was on the radio in-studio with Jane a few years ago and nearly went deaf…I know she’s loud and overbearing but she didn’t CAUSE the anger toward ALV…ALV caused that).  And I AM a fan of Dr. Drew who is not “insidious because he sounds sane” (an ALV quote).  Dr. Drew IS sane and his criticism of ALV was spot on. Sorry, ALV, but Dr. Drew was right (and I am not a fan of most television therapists, but he is good).

In deference to what happened to Travis Alexander – in order to make something positive out of the tragic events, it’s important to  educate and to assist male stalking victims.  Everyone should know the following see Part 2.

This entry was posted in featured, Jodi Arias, male talking victims, Travis Alexander and tagged , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.