Return to Transcripts main page


Jodi`s Back-Up Plan: Heat of Passion Defense?; Jodi: Battered or Borderline

Aired April 22, 2013 - 19:00   ET


SUSAN HENDRICKS, CNN ANCHOR: When does the judge have to decide, if they`re going...?

RYAN SMITH, CNN ANCHOR: Could be any time. Could be days. Could be tomorrow. Never know.

Jane starts now.

JANE VELEZ-MITCHELL, HOST: Breaking news tonight, a last-ditch shocker from the defense that could draw out this trial even longer and allow the jurors to conclude Travis`s killing all happened in the heat of passion.


JODI ARIAS, MURDER DEFENDANT: There was a breach of trust in our relationship.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: "Do not call me. And do not text me anything.

ARIAS: He (EXPLETIVE DELETED) on my face and walks away without a word, it kind of felt like he was a prostitute.



WILLMOTT: And slut?


WILLMOTT: Living a life identical to Satan.

Telling her that she`s worthless.

ARIAS: I was in depression.

WILLMOTT: Either fess up or feel his wrath.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: A tendency to overstep boundaries, to be intrusive, spying on him, by being intrusive with his space.

TRAVIS ALEXANDER, MURDER VICTIM (via phone): There`s been many times when you`ve been, like, miserable and I`ve like -- raped you.

WILLMOTT: "After tomorrow, it`s going to get real bad for you."

ARIAS: There was a point in time where we were in love, but it was short-lived.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: Tonight breaking news: a stunning development, a desperate move in the 11th hour as the defense scrambles to keep judgment day at bay.

Good evening. I`m Jane Velez Mitchell coming to you live.

These just-released documents -- I`m holding them right here in my hand; just been going over them -- show that Jodi Arias`s lawyers want yet another chance to convince the jury after the prosecution finishes its rebuttal case. The defense wants the jury, as well, to be allowed to conclude that all of this was just a heat of passion killing.


JUAN MARTINEZ, PROSECUTOR: Now, were you crying when you were shooting him?

ARIAS: I don`t remember.

MARTINEZ: Were you crying when you were stabbing him?

ARIAS: I don`t remember.

MARTINEZ: How about when you cut his throat, were you crying then?

ARIAS: I don`t know.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: It`s another defense switcheroo. First Jodi said she didn`t stab Travis Alexander 29 times or slit his throat. Well, then she said, "Oh, yes, I was there. Masked gunmen did it, however."

Now the defense says she killed Travis in self-defense, but is insisting tonight the jury instructions also include the lesser charge of manslaughter by sudden quarrel or heat of passion. Which is what a man claiming to be Jodi`s good friend says Jodi has always thought she would be convicted of. Listen to this.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: She doesn`t -- definitely doesn`t think she`ll be acquitted. The death penalty, me and her both agree no, there`s no way she`s going to get the death penalty. There`s no evidence.

She believes that it`s going to be a mistrial, all the juniors aren`t going to agree. It`s going to look bad on the prosecution. Where they`re going to have another trial. State of Arizona and six years. And she thinks that she`ll get manslaughter, five years` parole.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: Unbelievable. We`ll debate it tonight. And tonight, we`re exposing the secrets inside Jodi and Travis`s toxic relationship, and we`ll bring you the five most shocking moments of the trial.

What do you think of this so-called back-up plan? Call me: 1-877-JVM- SAYS, 1-877-586-7297.

I want to hear from you tonight. Straight out to "In Session`s" Jean Casarez, who has been poring over these just-released documents. Jean, spell it out for us in plain English. What does it mean: manslaughter by sudden quarrel or heat of passion?

JEAN CASAREZ, CORRESPONDENT, TRUTV`S "IN SESSION": Well, this is interesting. You know, I`ve asked everybody in Arizona, "Heat of passion manslaughter, do you have it?"

"No, we don`t have it."

And I`m finding oh, yes, we have it; nobody uses it. Well, the defense wants to use it here.

And it`s very simple. I looked up the jury instructions. No. 1, that Jodi Arias intentionally killed Travis Alexander. No. 2, the No. 2 element the defendant acted upon a sudden quarrel or a heat of passion, all right, emotional, right? And No. 3, that the adequate provocation was begun by Travis Alexander.

So something happened. Travis began it, so that it has this sudden heat of passion with Jodi. She can`t contain herself, and she kills him. That`s what heat of passion manslaughter is.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: So in essence, this would take Jodi`s version from being, "Oh, I killed him in self-defense" to "He provoked me and I killed him, even though I didn`t have to, but I did it as a result of, oh, a quarrel and he provoked me." In essence?

CASAREZ: Which raises the question, will they get it, because does the evidence show that? The defense theory has not been that, as the trial has gone on.

But you`re exactly right. It had to happen right in that bathroom area, right in that shower area, and there can`t be a cooling off period. It`s got to be just one after the other, so that you have that impulse and you just kill because of that heat of passion.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well, let`s debate it with our incredible team of lawyers tonight. Jodi`s lawyers trying to give the jurors the option of giving something much less than death. Even though Jodi, when she was being interrogated -- we all remember this -- went so far as to say she would beg -- beg for the death penalty if, indeed, she had killed Travis.


ARIAS: If I`m found guilty, I don`t have a life. I`m not guilty. I didn`t hurt Travis. If I hurt Travis, if I killed Travis, I would beg for the death penalty.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: All right, let`s consider the options. If Jodi`s convicted of murder one, she`s facing either the death penalty or natural life to 25 to life.

If she`s convicted of murder two, she`s looking at 10 to 22 years behind bars, and this manslaughter, that`s just 7 to 21. That`s manslaughter with the option for manslaughter by sudden quarrel or heat of passion.

So I want to start with Wendy Murphy, prosecutor and author of the fabulous "And Justice for Some." Should the jury be allowed to consider this manslaughter by sudden quarrel or heat of passion?

WENDY MURPHY, PROSECUTOR/AUTHOR: Well, you may think this is an odd answer, because there`s absolutely no evidence of that. So technically, legally speaking I wouldn`t allow it.

However, because I want her to fry, I would allow it, because it`s going to make the jury even more upset because it`s completely inconsistent with self-defense. You can`t have self-defense and heat of passion. If both are offered to the jury, they`re going to go "Woo, what the hell? Was this like a menu at a bad restaurant?"

When you can`t figure out your single real defense and you throw six fake ones at jury and they already think you`re a liar, you`re just going down faster. So I`d let her have it, to watch her be found guilty real quick.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Evangeline Gomez for the defense.

EVANGELINE GOMEZ, DEFENSE LAWYER: Look, this is where this case was going. There are plenty of people who have actually been on this show who have said, "You know what? I don`t think she has a self-defense claim. I think what she has is manslaughter."

And under Arizona law, you can include a lesser-included offense if there is evidence to prove it. And the evidence is there, Jane. It`s been there throughout the trial. People were wondering when is the defense going to propose this as the alternative?

So I think what the defense has done is they`re seen that, as their case has played out over many, many months, that they do have enough evidence to support it, and based on the jury questions, there are jurors who may believe that this is more of a manslaughter case.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Stacey Honowitz for the prosecution.

STACEY HONOWITZ, FLORIDA PROSECUTOR: Well, listen, I agree with Wendy. The fact of the matter is, it`s a premeditated first-degree murder charge. This judge has let everything in but the kitchen sink. There is no way that she`s going to keep them from that jury instruction, although there is no evidence of it.

And Wendy`s correct: lots of times, if you don`t have a defense and they see that their defense is going south, the self-defense claim, they need to present something to the jury, but it`s not going to work. But I do believe the judge is going to give the instruction.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Drew Findling, for the defense.

DREW FINDLING, ATTORNEY: The judge is going to give the instruction. But everybody`s wrong about one thing. This isn`t to the jury going to come from the defense attorneys. This instruction is going to be coming from the judge. They`re not going to know that the defense asked for this. This is going to be the judge saying, as Wendy said, "Here is your menu, and one of the alternative choices is manslaughter." He`ll give the charge.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Look, Jon Leiberman, if this does provide the jury -- let`s say they`ve got two factions, one who think she`s absolutely guilty, she`s premeditated. The others, like, well, look at all those nasty e- mails, look at the sex tape. This is a middle ground. Is that dangerous for the prosecution? Because anything less than murder one will be considered a victory for the defense.

JON LEIBERMAN, HLN CONTRIBUTOR: Look, I really don`t think it is a middle ground. I think it`s an 11th-hour grasping at straws. I mean, come on. This wasn`t self-defense. You have 29 stab wounds, slit ear to ear, two gunshots. But what it does do this...

VELEZ-MITCHELL: But that`s what -- what I`ve said. Listen, you just proved my point. Yes, it`s not self-defense. But, oh, well, maybe it was a sudden quarrel or heat of passion. You see what I`m saying?

LEIBERMAN: No, I think it`s going to further anger the jury, an already frustrated jury. And what these papers do show, Jane, is it gives us a glimpse into the defense. I mean, the fact is they want language in the jury instructions about past acts of domestic violence.

So -- but if the jury doesn`t believe Jodi Arias`s testimony, and there`s no reason to because there`s no corroborating evidence, then the whole thing gets thrown out the window. It`s not going to work.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: We have a graphic we created, because this is a complicated story. Let`s put it up again. It shows that jury instructions, what the defense wants on the jury instructions, is along with murder one and second-degree murder, manslaughter by sudden quarrel or heat of passion.

Now, Jeff Gardere, I have seen plenty of jurors get so confused by the 40, I don`t know, plus, pages of jury instructions. And I`ll bring this to Jean Casarez, because you`ve seen it so many times as I have. Forty-plus, 50 pages of jury instructions. They`re all gobbledy-gook that I can`t make heads or tails of, and it`s enough to make the jurors throw up their hands. And when they see something simple -- oh, sudden quarrel or heat of passion -- "oh, that makes sense. I can wrap my brain around that one."

CASAREZ: That`s right. And the No. 1 reason that cases are overturned are because of jury instructions. They can be very, very confusing. That`s right.

But in closing argument, the defense will try to give that road map to that heat of passion, saying that Jodi believed in the law of attraction. She held everything inside. And finally, when that camera dropped and Travis lunged at her, it all came out. So they will try to provide the factual scenario for it.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well, on the other side of the break, more debate over more shockers, and we`re also going to tell you about the five most shocking moments in this trial. And I want to hear from you: What`s your most shocking moment?

Stay right there. More on the other side.


ARIAS: He wanted to drive up to the home. He wanted to get out of the car, have me come out of the house, give him oral sex. And he wanted to ejaculate on my face and wanted to get back in his car and drive away without saying a single word.




ALEXANDER (via phone): Is it wrong that I`m glad that we started (EXPLETIVE DELETED)?

ARIAS: Well, if it`s wrong, then I don`t want to be right. Because I`m glad, too.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: Tonight, we`re exposing the toxic secrets in Jodi and Travis`s spiraling relationship, leading up to the killing. Jodi and Travis -- are you sitting down -- reportedly exchanged 82,000 messages: e- mails, texts, IMs, et cetera. The defense is trying to prove some of them show Travis was verbally abusive.


ARIAS: "I sent you a response to your dire conversation that I hope you read because you need to read it. Maybe it will spark human emotion in you, something that only seems to exist when it comes to your own problems. But everyone else is just a part of your sick agenda.

"I have never in my life been hurt so bad by someone. But why do I even say it because you don`t care? It doesn`t serve your evilness.

"I don`t want your apology. I want you to understand what I think of you. I want you to understand how evil I think you are. You are the worst thing that ever happened to me.

"You are a sociopath. You only cry for yourself. You have never cared for me, and you have betrayed me worse than any example I could conjure. You are sick, and you have scammed me."


VELEZ-MITCHELL: Those are messages read by Jodi Arias, but they were actually from Travis, and she was told to read them in open court. They were sent about a week before Jodi killed him. Sources says this was around the time Travis started to fear Jodi.

Again, 82,000 messages between Travis and Jodi. Critics say the defense seems to be using the same few examples of verbal abuse over and over began, and that`s why the prosecution psychologist said last week that he wasn`t abusive; he was angry and calling Jodi`s -- names, in reaction to her being a stalker.

So let`s debate it with our expert panel. Does their toxic relationship show both were at fault? Not that he deserved to die, but that both were at fault. Or does their toxic relationship show that she was a stalker and he was a pure victim, 100 percent victim? Starting with Wendy Murphy for the prosecution.

MURPHY: Well, you know, my sense of this case is that, if you believe what Jodi Arias says -- and nobody does -- you could answer that question, "They both were problematic to the other."

But because she`s a liar and Travis is dead, and the jury is going to feel like nothing she says truthful, you can`t help but agree with the prosecution`s most recent expert, who said the reason he was saying those things to her is because she wouldn`t go away.

And you know what? I think the jury will understand. If you just want to be let alone, and this pest of a stalker keeps hunting you down, you might just lash out. I mean, they`re probably going to think she`s lucky he didn`t kill her.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Wendy Murphy, there are those who have said, why would you allow your stalker into your home and have sex with the stalker and continue to communicate with the stalker? So what -- what do you say to that, because I`m interested to hear that -- that angle.

MURPHY: Because, look, Jane, he`s dead. So you can judge him all day long. He shouldn`t have...


VELEZ-MITCHELL: I`m not judging.

MURPHY: He wanted -- look, he wanted to have sex with her. He wasn`t -- you know, a sexual animal who was looking at a naked cute woman. He wanted to get laid, he got laid. He treated her with disrespect because she forced herself into his life, and he succumbed to his sexual urges. I don`t think the jury cares or thinks that that`s relevant, because he`s dead.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Drew Findling for the defense.

FINDLING: Well, I got to tell you, I think Wendy just not only got them the manslaughter charge, but probably got them the manslaughter conviction when she said she`s lucky that they -- that she -- she`s lucky he didn`t kill her.

And it`s this type of toxic relationship and this type of passion that goes back and forth between the two of them, whether it`s telephonically, in person, sexually, by virtue of text messages, that is part of why this jury should get this charge. And Wendy Murphy did a great job of arguing why...

MURPHY: Passion is not what I said. I said rage.

FINDLING: She`s lucky -- she`s lucky.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Jon Leiberman.


LEIBERMAN: It took years -- look, what everybody -- what Drew is forgetting is it took years for Jodi Arias to get to this defense, the fact that it was self-defense in the heat of passion.

Come on, now. She`s been through three to five iterations of the truth. She has no credibility on the stand, and to put Travis Alexander now to re-victimize the victim, which is exactly what the defense is doing, it`s disgusting.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Evangeline Gomez for the defense.

LEIBERMAN: You`re defending your case.

GOMEZ: It`s not re-victimizing the victim. He allowed this to happen. The prosecutor knew full well where this case was going, and the prosecutor allowed this to happen.

LEIBERMAN: He allowed what to happen? He allowed himself to be slaughtered in cold blood?

GOMEZ: You`re saying that she was a stalker. You`ve had a rebuttal witness who, frankly, should have been testifying in the case in chief. OK? I don`t know why we`re including her testimony. OK?

LEIBERMAN: What? The jury heard her testimony.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: Stacey Honowitz. Stacey Honowitz for the prosecution...


GOMEZ: ... inexperienced psychologist.

HONOWITZ: Oh, my God. I can`t even believe you just said that. Inexperienced? She was able to...


GOMEZ: Her testimony.

HONOWITZ: You talked. I let you talk.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: All right, let Stacey talk for a second.

HONOWITZ: She was able to explain to the jury exactly. She was able to take the facts of the case and put it directly into what her personality is.

I don`t know why everybody is so shocked by a stalker who wouldn`t leave somebody alone. How do you account for the gas cans, the gun, the knife? That is heat of passion? She brought it all with her to his house to premeditate this murder because he blew her off. He didn`t want to be with her. That`s the end of the discussion.


HONOWITZ: So talk to me about all these tests and these scales. It`s clear as a bell what happened in this case.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: All right, let`s take a short break. We`re back with calls and more debate on the other side.


KIRK NURMI, JODI`S DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Did you still love him?

ARIAS: Yes. I did.

NURMI: Do you still love him now?

ARIAS: Yes, it`s a different love, but, yes, I do.




ARIAS: He bent me over the bed. He lifted up my skirt, and he pulled down my underwear. He unzipped his pants. He began to have anal sex with me.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: Travis was an inspiration to a whole lot of people. He was a successful businessman and a charismatic motivational speaker.


ALEXANDER: The first thing I would hear a lot of was "By the way, he`s single." And that`s right. I am. Ladies, come get me.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: We`ve seen a lot of the happy-go-lucky Travis, but we also know he had a terrible childhood. On his blog post from May 5, 2008, less than a month before he was killed, Travis in his own words writes about his troubled childhood.

He says, quote, "My childhood, unfortunately, was very much like any child`s that had drug addict parents. My father was never around, which left my siblings and I to the fate given by my mother. As she progressively got more involved in drugs, she progressively got less capable of raising children. Most commonly was a beating for waking her up. You see, when you are high on meth for a week, when you eventually come down, there`s a lot of sleep to catch up on. When you sleep for four days with a house full of kids, there isn`t any food cooked."

Jodi`s defense team has tried to use Travis`s troubled past against him, claiming, because Travis was abused as a child, he was more likely to become an abuser.

The prosecution counters Travis was a hero, a man who overcame adversity and really turned into a successful businessman who then fell victim to this stalker with a borderline personality disorder.

So let`s bring in political psychologist Jeff Gardere. How do you balance those two arguments out?

GARDERE: Well, you can balance them. Because here is a situation of someone who I`ve always said had some sort of a borderline personality hooking up with someone who was in some ways -- not blaming the victim -- behaved in a way that pushed her particular buttons. Maybe someone else wouldn`t react that way to Travis Alexander, but she did, and that was the perfect storm that perhaps led to his death.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: And any time we discuss this toxic relationship, it is certainly not to, in any way, blame the victim. This man you`re looking at here, Travis Alexander, he is the victim. He did not deserve to die.

But it`s also incumbent upon us to try to learn from these tragedies, and if we do, then Travis will not have died in vain. And I think that`s a very important point. And I want to throw that out to Selin Darkalstanian, senior producer with our show.

You`ve covered this from the start. It`s a gut-wrenching case. It`s sad. It`s tragic. But I think that, if we learn from it, then Travis will not have died in vain.

SELIN DARKALSTANIAN, HLN PRODUCER: That`s right. And I think even just sitting in the courtroom and listening to other reporters talking during this trial and all the other producers, everybody can relate to the story in one way or another. Not everyone has had to have every single thing like this done to them, but everyone`s been in a toxic relationship. Everyone`s been -- has been hurt by somebody or been a perpetrator. So I think that definitely everybody can take something away from it.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Yes, I agree. Let`s go to the phones. Denise, New Jersey. Your question or thought. Denise, New Jersey.

CALLER: Hi. First of all, I think Jodi Arias is a sociopath. I don`t believe she deserves the death penalty because of the mitigating circumstances. However, she brought that gun to that crime scene, so it`s definitely not manslaughter.

She deserves murder one. She seduced Travis. OK, he knew things were going on with her, and she kept bringing him in with seduction. And that happens to a lot of people.

But I do believe when I watched her interviews before I started watching the trial, I would have believed her. She`s articulate, convincing, and if she can lie that good on those interviews, everything she said when she got in the courtroom I don`t believe. She changes like a chameleon.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Yes. Denise, you`ve made an excellent point. She proved to be such a good liar on the interrogation tapes that when she took the stand, that ability to lie really undermined her credibility on the stand.

Let`s take a short break, and we`ll be right back with more.


MARTINEZ: What factors influence your having a memory problem?

ARIAS: Usually when men like you are screaming at me or grilling me or someone like Travis doing the same.

MARTINEZ: So that affects your memory?

ARIAS: It does. It makes my brain scramble.




UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Do you solemnly swear the testimony you are about to give will be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you God?


I walked in and Travis was on the bed (EXPLETIVE DELETED). It was a picture of a little boy.

TRAVIS ALEXANDER, MURDER VICTIM: Tie you to a tree and put it in your (EXPLETIVE DELETED).

ARIAS: Oh my gosh, that is so debasing. I like it.

JUAN MARTINEZ, PROSECUTOR: Show me the linebacker pose.

ARIAS: He got down.

MARTINEZ: Well, show me -- show me the pose, that`s what I`m asking for you to do.

ARIAS: No jury is going to convict me.

MARTINEZ: You`re saying that you`re innocent, right?


MARTINEZ: And you believe that no jury would convict you because you`re going to lie your way out of it, right?


JANE VELEZ-MITCHELL, HLN HOST: Tonight, the five most shocking moments in the Jodi Arias trial. The jury has heard some sexually explicit stuff straight from the victim Travis, thanks to that phone call -- that sex phone call recorded less than a month before Jodi kills him.

Let`s listen to the fifth most shocking moment of the trial. By the way, call me I want to hear what you think are the most shocking moments. We`ve got to warn you the language is very graphic.


ALEXANDER: The way you moan, it sounds like you`re this 12-year-old girl having her first orgasm. It`s so hot

I just want to zip-tie your arms around a tree, blindfold you and put the cam on a timer while I (EXPLETIVE DELETED) you.

ARIAS: Oh, it`s like -- it just -- it just moves and it goes so (EXPLETIVE DELETED). It felt so good. You went where I needed it. Just went right where I needed it. You (EXPLETIVE DELETED) me so right.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: Jodi claims Travis was the one who asked her to record their kinky role-playing sex tape, but the prosecutor says no way, Jodi is lying. She recorded it secretly.

Let`s debate it with our expert legal panel, the impact of this phone sex tape, starting with Jon Leiberman, contributor, "Wild about Trial".

JON LEIBERMAN, HLN CONTRIBUTOR: Well, first of all, why would Travis record this if Jodi was his, quote, "dirty little secret"? I mean it defies logic. He didn`t record this. She clearly recorded this in secret. What it shows me is simply that she was complicit in it. They were having a relationship -- or they had broken up, but they were still having sex. She didn`t raise any objection during that tape at all as to what was going on.

And furthermore, it is such a leap to go from any sort of allegation of that tape to this brutal, brutal murder of Travis Alexander. It just doesn`t -- the two don`t connect.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: And by the way, you`re looking at some of the sex pictures that were introduced as evidence -- photos of the victim Travis Alexander and the suspect, Jodi Arias, taken right before she kills him after they`ve had sex.

Well, I think you make a good point.

Evangeline Gomez, this shows she was a willing participant. One of the things that`s seared into my brain, "That`s so degrading, I like it."

EVANGELINE GOMEZ, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Jane, what this shows is this is the entire problem with this case. The prosecutor has made Travis out to be a saint -- this devout Mormon. And here you have all this evidence that shows otherwise. He`s a sexual deviant, potential pedophile. So this doesn`t look good for him.

The defense on the other hand had shown --

LEIBERMAN: Potential pedophile?

GOMEZ: -- the good, the bad, the ugly of Jodi Arias. And at the end of the day the jury is going be stuck with do we believe that he`s this devout Mormon, or do we believe the defense that she`s not perfect, but she is who she says she is. so that`s the problem with it.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: All right. Wendy Murphy for the prosecution --

LEIBERMAN: If you`re not --

WENDY MURPHY, FORMER PROSECUTOR: Look, I have no doubt that in every state in this country the law against murder doesn`t have an exception for it unless you think the guy is lying when he says he`s a devout Mormon. It`s irrelevant, and the jury is going to hate that she has tried to smear him.

I`ll tell you what I think -- and that her team had tried to smear him -- they`re going to hate her for that because he can`t defend himself. I`ll tell you what I think she was doing with the tape because she is so evil and so manipulative, I think she did it on purpose because she was getting so desperate that she was going to call him one day and say "You better marry me or I`m going to play this tape for the king of all the Latter Day Saints or whatever they call the boss of that religion.

I think she was going to use it to extort him.


MURPHY: Right. (inaudible) She was going to use it to extort him and that`s how evil she is.

GOMEZ: Women don`t have to play games with a sexual deviant. They don`t.

MURPHY: Oh, please. Oh please.

STACEY HONOWITZ, FLORIDA PROSECUTOR: When he`s not going to marry them, they do. If the guy is not going to marry you, you have to play games.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: All right. Let me see my panel. Let me see my panel. Ok, what did you say, women don`t have to play games with --

GOMEZ: Games of a sexual deviant because --

HONOWITZ: Yes, if readily available. If she wanted to get married she will. If readily available.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: One at a time -- ladies. Stacey Honowitz.

HONOWITZ: Listen -- wait a second. It doesn`t matter if he was a sexual deviant, he wasn`t going to marry her, and that`s what she wanted. He would have sex all day long hanging from the rafters or whatever he wanted to do. He wasn`t going to marry her and that`s the bottom line. He wanted out. He wanted out of the relationship.

GOMEZ: It`s a false story the prosecution --


VELEZ-MITCHELL: Jeff Gardere. I want to bring in the clinical psychologist Jeff Gardere, because as we`re debating this, when it comes to these kinky sex games, is it possible that somebody enjoys them, let`s say the woman, while they`re going on, but then develops a deep and bitter resentment after? It`s almost like you come out of a blackout and go whoa, what did I participate in?

JEFF GARDERE, CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGIST: Well, if we`re talking about a personality disorder here, as we are. Whether borderline, whether dependent, of course, she may enjoy the sex. It`s not deviant because both of them consent to it.

But after a while, and as your panel points out, he wasn`t going to marry her. So she puts up with a lot of it, it`s not as pleasurable. It`s not what she wants. It`s not going in her direction. So she was happy with the sex because she thought it would lead to marriage.

When she realized that it wasn`t, she just wasn`t into it as much anymore, and then she became extremely resentful and was just not feeling it.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: All right, as we go to break, I`m going to read you the number four most shocking moment of this trial. And on the other side, we`ll have number three.

But number four is when Jodi claimed she walked in on Travis masturbating to a photo of a little boy accusing him of pedophilia. The prosecutor says this is completely made up. It`s a lie. It`s a fiction, designed by a pathological liar who wants to get off on murder.

Listen to this.


ARIAS: I walked in and Travis was on the bed masturbating. It was the picture of a little boy, five, six -- I`m not a good judge of age. I felt nauseated. I ran inside and threw up in the bathroom.



VELEZ-MITCHELL: More on the Jodi Arias trial, but first the suspected Boston bomber, Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, has been officially charged and could face the death penalty. In a dramatic showdown Friday night, the suspected bomber opened fire on police after he was discovered hiding in a boat in Watertown, Massachusetts.

And today we got to see these extraordinary, extraordinary videos. They`d do whatever they can to take him alive. Authorities sent in a robot and threw two flash bang grenades -- those are the explosions you see -- into the boat. And after a tense standoff, they were able to arrest him.

Officials say despite being severely wounded and placed on a ventilator, he is answering his questions by nodding his head. Look at what technology allows us to see. Such heroic work by those responding, putting their own lives at risk.



UNIDENTIFIED MALE: There`s pictures of you laying on the bed in pigtails.

ARIAS: Pigtails?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes. I`ve got pictures of you that I`ve blown up, and you`ve got that little mole right there, it`s the same one. It`s you, it`s obvious.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: The third most shocking moment of this trial -- those photos, they were sexually graphic photos. And I got to say, this was one of the most sexually charged trials in history, especially when broadcast. The graphic fantasies that were discussed during testimony and the phone tape -- they amount to the number two most shocking moment of this case. Check this out.


ARIAS: He wanted to get out of the car, have me come out of the house, give him oral sex, and he wanted to (EXPLETIVE DELETED) on my face, and then get back in his car and drive away without saying a single word.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: You know, nearly every day Jodi was on the stand, there was some testimony of a very sexual nature, but Selin Darkalstanian, you were in there watching the whole thing. That moment we just played, where she talks about that kinky sex game that they`re acting out in the shrubs outside her house, that he throws chocolate at her after, it was shocking. You know, just when I thought I`d heard everything, when I heard that, I was like I haven`t heard everything until just now.

SELIN DARKALSTANIAN, HLN SENIOR PRODUCER: And imagine, while she was telling the stories, her mom was sitting on one side of the courtroom, and Travis Alexander`s family was on the other side, and the mom was not showing any emotion, looking straight ahead.

At one point, Jodi even made a reference to her mom saying that this is embarrassing for it to be played out in front of her mom, much less national television. And then Travis Alexander` family, every time we heard those tapes or we -- remember they actually left the courtroom when those tapes were being played because it was too difficult for them to hear. And then when the photos were shown, they would always look down and cover their faces so that, you know, they wouldn`t have to see these things about their brother.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: What is a wild card? Sex is always a wild card in any situation. What role will it play in this trial? This is one of the only trials that I have covered where you see the genitalia of the victim and of the suspect.

So let`s debate it with our expert legal panel, starting with Stacey Honowitz for the prosecution. You`re also very involved in sex crimes in your career. What impact will this wild card sex have?

HONOWITZ: Well, I know that everybody is shocked, but because I`ve been supervising that unit for so long nothing shocks me. So hearing the sex talk is nothing for me to have to listen to. And I really don`t think it`s going to have an impact on this jury because the fact of the matter is, the prosecutor is going to argue, it doesn`t matter about the kinky sex life, it doesn`t matter that he called her a skank or a whore or everything else, she didn`t have a right to kill him, to murder him, to premeditate this murder.

And that`s what it`s all going to boil down to. I think the defense is trying to make it a feature of this case when quite frankly, it`s not a feature of this case at all.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Drew Findling for the defense.

DREW FINDLING, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Well, you know, Stacey makes kind of a good point because she`s one of the premier prosecutors of crimes against children, but this isn`t a crime against children. It`s a death penalty case. And this prolonged trial that this judge let testimony in that she never would have let in only because it`s a death penalty case.

And when jurors decide your fate, they`re going to look at the improprieties, the sexual issues, and it`s the kind of thing that makes them go, you know, she`s guilty, but I`m not going to kill her this time around. This is not going to happen because of the yuckiness factor that`s involved here. It will help her but mostly if it goes to a sentencing phase.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Jon Leiberman.

LEIBERMAN: I actually agree with Drew. I mean I think it`s a salacious side show for the actual trial and figuring out guilt or innocence. But I do think that it could help Jodi in the penalty phase if the jury, you know, starts to think of the sex talk and starts to feel bad for Jodi, and she was on the stand for 18 days, and how are we going to put her to death? That`s where I think it plays in. But it has nothing to do with what I believe is a first degree, premeditated murder case.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well, it`s funny you should mention feeling sorry for Jodi. I wonder whether the diagnosis that the prosecution psychologist came up of borderline personality disorder will also be a mitigator in the minds of the jurors. They`re thinking well, if this woman is not clinically insane to the point where she doesn`t know right from wrong like that she`s hearing voices or something of that nature. But that she has this disorder, borderline personality disorder, the implication is, is it something beyond her control and therefore does she deserve to have some leniency because of the diagnosis that the prosecutor gave her? Or the prosecution`s team gave her?

Something to think about. On the other side of the break, the most shocking moment in this trial. Stay right there, we`ll bring it to you in a moment.


MARTINEZ: Did you see any behavior that you would characterize as aggressive that involves stalking?




VELEZ-MITCHELL: Time for pet of the day, send your pet pics to Griffin -- look at you Hollywood movie star. Jose or Jose -- Jose. Now, Jose was easy by comparison Chukchi and Lukchi. I wanted a little advance notice fellows. But I love you. I love you. Willow -- Willow is simple and classic. What a look Willow`s got. It`s perfection.



UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I think that you`re absolutely obsessed. Obsessed is the word that they used. That is the word I hear from everyone. Fatal attraction -- I don`t know how many times I have heard that.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: And now for the most shocking moment in the Jodi Arias trial, at least according to me, when Jodi actually got out and took the stand her is one of her greatest hits if you might call it that.


ARIAS: We were struggling and wrestling. He is a wrestler. He is grabbing at my clothes. I got up and he is just screaming angry. After I broke away from him he said (EXPLETIVE DELETED).


VELEZ-MITCHELL: Of course, the prosecutor says that is all made up. But one thing we can all agree on, this is one very rare case when a defendant in a high profile trial took the stand. Michael Jackson didn`t do it. O.J. Simpson didn`t do it. Casey Anthony didn`t do it.

Jodi Arias took the stand and she talked for 18 days. So first I want to go to Selin Darkalstanian, what was it like -- because I remember I went, oh my God, she is taking the stand. What was it like to be in that room when all of a sudden she gets up and they call her and she takes the stand?

DARKALSTANIAN: I will never forget it. Nurmi, her defense attorney and said we would like to call the defendant and the entire courtroom went silent. Everybody was looking towards her as she slowly got up. And it was our first time seeing this walking towards the stand and taking that stand and listening to her tell us about her childhood. You remember Jane, we went through her entire life story.

I think the best moment was when Juan Martinez got up there and started cross examining Jodi Arias.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Yes. It was absolutely extraordinary. And these trials are one of the few places where we get to peer into somebody`s life and see things that they don`t tell their psychiatrist, their doctor, their best friend, their spouse. Trials really pull back the curtain.

Now trial resumes tomorrow. We are all over it. So please join us here because you know there`s going to be some more shockers tomorrow. There always are.

Next A-list Hollywood star, Reese Witherspoon`s showdown with the cops -- you will not believe what she told the police officer and why she is deeply embarrassed tonight.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: More of the Jodi Arias trial, top of the hour. But first actress Reese Witherspoon known for her girl next door and America`s sweetheart personas, well, the girl got in trouble. Her latest antic had everybody talking. Witherspoon was handcuffed and hauled off to the slammer early Friday morning -- and that`s her hubby right there -- after allegedly mouthing off to an officer while her husband was being arrested for DUI.

And there she is hanging her head in shame during her mug shot. Get this -- it seems Reese tried to play the celebrity card allegedly telling officers, "Do you know my name? You are about to find out and you are going to be on national news." The officer was not impressed charging her with disorderly conduct.

So she laid low? No. She immediately -- almost immediately appeared on the red carpet for a movie screening -- there she is. Although she wasn`t talking, she did issue a statement apologizing saying, "Clearly I had one drink too many and I am deeply embarrassed for my behavior."

But look at the bright side Reese. Even though you have to go through a pre-trial intervention program and you were avoiding prosecution and maybe you have a new script idea for a new movie like "Illegally Blonde". That could be a good concept so think about it.

We have a lot more on "SHOWBIZ TONIGHT" at 11:00 Eastern. Nancy is next.