Jodi Arias: Hell Hath No Fury

Prosecutor calls rebuttal witnesses in Arias trial

PHOENIX (AP) – An ex-girlfriend of the man Jodi Arias says she killed in self-defense testified Tuesday that with her, the victim was never physically or verbally abusive.

Deanna Reid said she dated Travis Alexander for several months before she went to Costa Rica in 2000 to serve a Mormon mission. The couple broke up while she was away.

They rekindled their relationship in 2002, but Reid said they broke up again about three years later because Alexander wasn’t ready for marriage, while she wanted to settle down. They remained friends until his death, she said.

“Would he ever call you names?” prosecutor Juan Martinez asked Reid.

“No he did not,” she replied.

“Did he ever strike you or physically advance on you or inflict any physical violence on you?” Martinez asked.

“No, never,” said Reid, who is now caring for Alexander’s dog Napoleon

Throughout the nearly 2 ½ months of defense testimony, Arias’ lawyers worked to portray her as a victim of physical and emotional abuse by Alexander. Arias claims her lover had grown so abusive in the months leading to his death, once choking her into unconsciousness, that on the day she killed him, she feared for her life.

However, no testimony or evidence at trial – other than Arias’ own account – has supported the defendant’s claims. Martinez sought Tuesday to use Reid in an attempt to show jurors that Arias is lying.

The defense rested its case last week but now wants the judge to allow another expert to testify to help blunt the sting of a prosecution witness – clinical psychologist Janeen DeMarte – who testified during the ongoing rebuttal phase that Arias suffered from borderline personality disorder. The judge hadn’t yet ruled on the matter.

DeMarte also testified last week that Arias doesn’t suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder or amnesia.

A defense expert had testified previously that Arias suffers from the conditions, which explains why she can’t recall much from the day she killed Alexander. Another defense expert testified that Arias was a battered woman, yet DeMarte said she found no evidence to support that conclusion.

Martinez has several more rebuttal witnesses ahead of closing arguments.

Arias faces a potential death sentence if convicted of first-degree murder in the June 2008 killing of her one-time boyfriend at his suburban Phoenix home. Authorities say she planned the attack on Alexander in a jealous rage. Arias initially denied involvement then blamed it on masked intruders. Two years after her arrest, she said it was self-defense.

Alexander suffered nearly 30 knife wounds, was shot in the head and had his throat slit. Arias’ palm print was found in blood at the scene, along with nude photos of her and the victim from the day of the killing.

Arias said she recalls Alexander attacking her in a fury after a day of sex. She said she ran into his closet to retrieve a gun he kept on a shelf and fired in self-defense but has no memory of stabbing him.

Arias’ grandparents reported a .25-caliber handgun stolen from their Northern California home about a week before the killing – the same caliber used to shoot Alexander – but Arias said she didn’t take it. Authorities believe she brought it with her to kill the victim. There has been no evidence or testimony at trial supporting Arias’ claim that Alexander ever owned a gun.

Arias has acknowledged trying to clean the scene of the killing, dumping the gun in the desert and working on an alibi, even attending a memorial service for Alexander and sending his family flowers before her arrest. She said she was too scared to tell the truth then but insists she isn’t lying now.


Follow Brian Skoloff at

Source: AP

Copyright 2013 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Share this post!
Facebook Twitter Linkedin Email Pinterest


Patricia Nelson says:

I hear on HLN that it’s very rare that the defense get’s granted the last say, it’s not going to happen.

Jimmybones11 says:

I’m worried that even if its not in the best interest of the taxpayers of Maricopa County. Their is a strong possibility of a sur-rebuttal in this case. I believe that there will be a sur-rebuttal in this case because the judge would not want to leave any door open for the defense to file an appeal for the non allowance of a sur-rebuttal.
Now I’m curious. Can anyone explain to me why their is even a possibility for a sur-rebuttal. I do know that it is at the discretion of the judge, in the state of Arizona, to allow, or not to allow, the request of a sur-rebuttal. But with that said. The defense has all the time in the world to create a defense. They know everything the state is going to throw at them, so if the defense doesn’t cover all their bases and doesnt completely and accurately prove the defendants case to the best of their ability, yet rests their defensive case.
Why is it that when the state gets their “one” shot to prove their case & does an outstanding job refuting all of the evidence and testimonies by the defense

Linda Stauffer says:

I don’t understand why Jody needed to have 3 different gas receipts for the gas she purchased. If I were filling up three gas cans I would have filled them up at once, thus one purchase 1 receipt. Anyone else think that way?

Rockie says:



Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *