Jodi Arias - Time and Date Stamps of Photos and Roommate Statements - Travis Was Still Alive

During a recent interview on Dr. Phil, Juan Martinez said that he would not have charged Jodi with murder if Mesa PD had not found the deleted photos of Travis and Jodi on a camera, more importantly the photos showing Travis being dragged down the hall which Juan used to "prove" Jodi had killed Travis in a premeditated manner.

But...

There is a contradiction however.

Enrique Cortex, a roommate of Travis, stated in an official police report that on June 10th, 2008, that he, Enrique Cortez, had seen Travis still alive on June 4th, 2008 after Enrique had returned home from work sometime between 6 and 6 : 30 pm. The time and date stamps of the photos show Travis to have been dead by 5:32 pm. At the time that Enrique gave his statement on June 10th, 2008 the crime scene had not yet been processed and the evidence including the camera and the deleted photos had not yet been analyzed. Enrique did not know that the photos existed nor did Mesa PD know that the photos existed of Travis either showing him to be dead at 5 : 32 pm on June 4th. Therefore Travis was still alive on June 4th, 2008 when Enrique had seen him on the phone walking down the stairs.

Juan did not put Enrique on the witness stand to testify for the very reason state above because such testimony would have given the jury a reason to tend to believe that Jodi had not killed Travis. Like Juan said he only charged Jodi with murder because of the photos and no other reason in his interview with Dr. Phil.

Other factors : Enrique had seen Travis alive between 6 and 6 : 30 pm on June 4th, 2008. The photos prove that Jodi was there only based on Jodi telling Mesa PD when she was at Travis'. The camera that Travis used to take the pictures did not have an internal time and date stamp feature that recorded the time and date on the picture. With Jodi being at the crime scene during the time that Enrique had said that he had seen Travis alive, then why didn't Travis tell Enrique that he was being held hostage by Jodi? Why didn't Travis call the police at that time and alert them?

Why didn't Travis complete his phone call that Enrique had said he had seen Travis making?

By Juan not allowing Enrique to testify Juan did in fact hide evidence from the jury to keep evidence from the jury that might have tended to exonerate Jodi.

Since Juan kept Enrique from testifying and the evidence would have tended to contradict Juan's theory of Jodi killing Travis, Enrique's statement would have also have brought into question Jodi's self defense claim in killing Travis as well.

Since Travis was still alive when Enrique had seen him at 6 to 6 : 30 pm and the time and date photos show Travis to have been dead at 5:32 pm and that Enrique didn't know that the photos existed when Enrique gave his statement how is possible that Jodi could have killed Travis in self defense?


With this contradiction the question needs to be asked, Who Killed Travis Alexander?

Based on the contradiction Juan didn't prove Jodi killed Travis nor did Jodi prove that she killed Travis in self defense.

Not putting Enrique on the stand is not hiding evidence. The prosecution doesn't have to put evidence into court that goes against their case, they simply have to tell the defense counsel that there may be exculpatory evidence, and what it is. It's up to the defense to do something with it. So unless he hid Enrique and his statements from the defense then no, he did not hide anything.

a reply to: Dryson

I'm not familiar with this case, but if the only thing that makes the timeline suspicious is the data/time on the deleted photos, then I wouldn't use that as a base for any thing, as that date/time depends on external factors and is easy to get wrong dates.

I watched this case from beginning to end. It was amazing.

Jody got what she deserved.

A narcissistic murderess with life behind bars and no tv cameras on her.

It must be horrible lol.

It's a proven fact our memory can fail us. There is too much evidence, besides the fact she admitted killing Travis, to let one erroneous memory upend a rightful conclusion. There is NO conspiracy here.

originally posted by: StoutBroux
It's a proven fact our memory can fail us. There is too much evidence, besides the fact she admitted killing Travis, to let one erroneous memory upend a rightful conclusion. There is NO conspiracy here.

Ever think she admitted to doing it to avoid a harsher sentence? Coersion is rampant with prosecutors in the US. I t seems th e defense did not get this evidence most likely an d if they did and didnt use it thats mal practice and grounds for a new trial.

a reply to: yuppa

So your theory is that the prosecutor's office hid this evidence.

And the went on Dr Phil to talk about how they hid it?

originally posted by: yuppa
Ever think she admitted to doing it to avoid a harsher sentence?

She was up for capital murder and asked to be sentenced to death, what harsher penalty was she avoiding?

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Read my post above.

a reply to: smirkley

Good point.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: yuppa
Ever think she admitted to doing it to avoid a harsher sentence?

She was up for capital murder and asked to be sentenced to death, what harsher penalty was she avoiding?

Wait a sec. OOPs i was confusing this case with the American woman from Italy who was up for murder of her roommate. Still any evidence that was no tused can be grounds for a new trial if argued properly.

a reply to: yuppa

That is Amanda Knox.