Debunking the Bathroom Blood Spatter Claim

Thank you to Mike LeBlanc for your valuable input.

Some Jodi Arias supporters manipulate the facts of her case in such a way that permits them to maintain the fantasy that she is innocent.  They claim those who believe she is guilty ignore evidence but it is they who are participating in such an act.   They tend to ignore factors that support guilt, change the evidence in the case,  create evidence which doesn't exist, and ignore what is reasonable.

These supporter's version of events are the work of their imagination.   Some have even suggested that the reason why people find Jodi guilty is related to a lack of imagination.   Imagination - the part of the mind that imagines things. Imagine- to speculate or assume;  make stuff up.   Imagination has no part in the determination of justice;  justice needs to be based on facts and evidence, not the baseless assumptions of the biased.

One such theory created to "make Jodi innocent" claims Jodi's version of what occurred on June 4th is supported by the blood spatter evidence. The only way to come to this conclusion is to ignore the evidence (exhibits and testimony) from the case,  change the science behind blood spatter analysis, use imagination, and make stuff up.   The supporter's version of events is not cohesive with itself and Jodi's testimony;  all parts cannot be true at the same time.

 The supporter's version is in blue.  The facts are in red.

THE FALL AND TUMBLE

Evidence that has to be ignored:  Jodi's testimony.    People who believe Jodi is guilty have the luxury of accepting Jodi was not credible.  Those who believe she was telling the truth and innocent  must accept her testimony as true.

"Travis was lunging at Jodi when the gun accidentally went off.   Travis continued to lunge and he and Jodi fell towards the scales.   This is supported by the blood pool by the toilet room created by Travis laying there for a moment as his head wound bled"

Jodi's testimony:

• She was in the middle of the bathroom,  he lunged, and they fell back towards the scales. They wrestled, he was trying to get on top of her.  She finally broke away.
• Defense direct
• They both fell backwards towards the trash can. He was to her right, on the side of the tub but not near it.He was grabbing at her clothes.
• Prosecution cross.
• After he lunged, they went some distance close to the scale but not quite there. More like next to the sinks.
• Juror question

"We fell with pretty good force, down in the corner near 15 but not quite that close it was kind of near the sink and sort of that area."

29:24

Jodi indicated six components related to the place she claimed they fell:  Towards the corner, by the trash can, by the scales,  near "15", by the sinks, and not next to the tub.  The supporter only paid attention to one of the criteria when he created his story:  by the scales.  He chose to ignore the rest of what she stated.  His lack of considering all of the evidence allowed him to say the fall was to the tub side of the darker scale. He wanted her story to fit his version so he considered only the portion of the evidence that fit it (confirmation bias). His confirmation bias caused him to incorrectly conclude that Travis fell next to the blood pool location.
Jodi's testimony indicates they fell away from the blood pool by the toilet room, not towards it.  The supporter's version of what happened on June 4th is immediately debunked as soon as it begins.

Jodi's testimony must be changed to make it possible they landed next to the blood pool.

TRAVIS FELL NEXT TO THE TOILET ROOM DOORWAY:  FALSE

THE POOL OF BLOOD

Evidence that has to be ignored:  Jodi's testimony
OR
Opinion that has to change:  Water washed away the blood.

"They landed by the door and Travis was bleeding.  It created the blood puddle seen in the picture. " 

Does not match Jodi's testimony.

Of course it's always possible that Travis could have fallen in the spot Jodi claimed he did and then crawled over to leave the blood pool next to the  door frame.  However,  there is not enough blood in the area and per the supporter's "logic",  the lack of sufficient blood means no injury occurred in the area. According to the supporter's other statements,  Travis was bleeding severely enough from the gunshot wound to result in two large blood pools, spatter on the low door frame,  spatter on the East wall,  spatter on and in the sink, blood pouring down his shoulders (picture 162), spatter down the hall, the large blood pool into the carpet, and spatter back up the hall.  Such severe bleeding would have resulted in a lot more blood spatter on the floor if he went from the sinks, to the toilet room, and back to the sinks along the same path.

"Travis could not have been stabbed or shot in the shower because there is not any blood trail leading out of the shower to either the sinks or the toilet room"

Per the supporter's reasoning,  Jodi has to be lying out where she said they fell. Or, he has to change the evidence once again and change her testimony into something else (confirmation bias). There simply was not enough blood in the area to account for a trip to the toilet from the sinks and back to them again. Coincidentally enough, neither Juan, Flores, or the spatter expert attempted to use the lack of blood in the area to claim Jodi was lying about where she fell. It's because they have enough experience with crime scene investigations to understand that there were signs of contamination in the area so the floor evidence was not reliable.  The only other alternative the supporter has to avoid claiming Jodi is lying and avoid confirmation bias is to change his opinion about water contamination of the area.



  
   (animated photo by the talented Gray Hughes)


The supporter's scenario also lacks reason.  If Travis fell near the sinks,  why would he head towards the toilet room just to return to the sinks a few seconds later? The reasonable response would be to head directly towards the mirror to inspect the damage and to try to wash away the blood. Jodi had access to the crime scene photos and other evidence for two years before she created her self-defense story.  It's likely why she claimed to land where she claimed they landed and the scenario she was trying to present.

Besides the awkward situation of not being able to explain the knife attack,  the blood evidence fits Jodi's version of where they fell a lot better than the supporter's version.  A flood to the floor to wash away any bleeding related to the gunshot wound or his movement to the sink assists her. Jodi's version of the gunshot incident would work for her and be collaborated by the evidence except for that pesky business of the knife attack and her ability to escape. So, she creates the fog story and hopes the jury will believe she went into an emotional and mental state beyond her control related to the severe abuse she alleged.  Jodi was going for a defense related to battered person's syndrome.  It failed because her allegations of severe abuse were unfounded.

Jodi's testimony must be changed for the blood pool to be from the gunshot,

OR

the supporter must take back his claim that water did not effect the scene

Reason must be ignored.

Evidence that must be disregarded: Jodi's testimony, spatter expert testimony

Facts that must be changed:  blood spatter science

BLOOD POOL FROM GUNSHOT WHEN TRAVIS FELL:  FALSE

THE DOOR SPATTER

Evidence that must be disregarded: Jodi's testimony, Spatter expert testimony
Facts that must be changed:  Blood Spatter science

Reason that must be ignored: Spatter cannot go through walls.


"Travis bled and caused the blood pool"

 AGAINST THE TESTIMONY - WHERE THEY FELL

"Then, Travis either coughed or sneezed and caused the blood spatter on the low door frame and it went as far as the toilet."

According to Jodi's  testimony,  they fell near the sinks.  If Travis expirated blood from this area, it would have to travel more than four feet and then through the wall to hit the toilet. According to the spatter expert, the small drops at the bottom of the base board would not travel that far due to air resistance.   And,  blood spatter cannot go through walls.

The blood spatter on the low door frame is not expiration spatter. It lacks the misting associated with it.

"The stains that I see on the toilet and the bottom of this door jam are from impact to a blood source.  Because they are small blood droplets at the bottom, those don't travel very far due to the effect of air resistance upon them so the blood source was in close proximity to it.  Those stains are all about 12 inches and down.  The stains that I was looking at are all round which means the blood source was low and those blood stains flew to the side and impacted the wall at a 90 degree angle they made essentially circular drops."

Expirated blood spatter is the result of air force from the lungs pushing the blood droplets from behind and propelling it to a surface.  The air force breaks up the blood particles as it passes through them and a spray or misting pattern usually occurs similar to that which is shown in the mirror shot.

UNDERSTANDING EXPIRATED SPATTER

Forensic Science Simplified

Expirated blood can occur through various methods:  Sneezing, coughing or sputtering, spitting, and breathing. 

• Coughing:  
• 50 MPH 
• The air force passing through the blood particles breaks it up into smaller pieces.
• 3,000 particles expelled
• results in misting pattern.
• Sneezing
• Up to 200 MPH 
• higher the air force, the more the particles break up as the air pushes through it.
• 40,000 particles expelled
• results in misting pattern.

Characterising the dynamics of expirated bloodstain pattern formation using high-speed digital video imaging

Expirated blood is considered a projection spatter in that air force projects it out of the mouth or nose and onto the surface.  The above mentioned journal article discusses experiments using high speed videos.  Expiration spatter related to breathing, spitting, and coughing mechanisms where examined. In each, the majority of the droplets expelled onto a surface were less than 0.5 mm in diameter (mist-like).  With each mechanism, the initial droplets were expelled at a high velocity resulting in very fine droplets which make up the mist/ spray pattern in an expiration spatter.  Larger lower velocity droplets followed as well as spatter strands held together by saliva.


The toilet spatter was 4.5 feet away from where the supporter claimed Travis formed the blood pool and coughed blood onto the door frame.  To expel a droplet that far, a large enough amount of air force to cause misting would have been used.  There was no misting on the door frame;  the spatter is impact.

JODI'S TESTIMONY WOULD HAVE TO BE IGNORED
or
THE SMALL DROPLETS WOULD HAVE HAD TO TRAVEL 4.5 FEET.
THE SPATTER WOULD HAVE HAD TO PASS THROUGH THE WALL

THE SPATTER EXPERT WOULD HAVE TO BE DISCREDITED
THE CHARACTERISTICS OF EXPIRATION SPATTER WOULD HAVE TO BE IGNORED.

DOOR FRAME IS EXPIRATION SPATTER: FALSE

THE EAST WALL STAINS

Evidence that would have to change:  Jodi's testimony about landing by the sinks.

Science that would have to change:  Nature of blood spatter.

Reason to be ignored:  Travis leaving the sinks to return to them a few seconds after.

"Next, Travis started to move over towards the sinks.   He was coughing up blood along the way and it got on the (east) wall and up high on the blinds.  Or it could be arterial spurting."


Jodi stated they landed by the sinks. It is not reasonable that Travis would move away from them to return a few seconds later.

"On this wall I observed blood stains that were traveling down and south.  (from) an impact to a blood source that was in close proximity"

The spatter stains on the east wall are not expiration stains.  They lacked the telltale misting.   Additionally,  the spatter stains are not arterial spurting.  Even the most novice blood spatter investigator would know that.  If arterial spurting was on the wall, it could not have come from the gunshot wound.  There are no major arteries at the wound site to result in spurting or spray.

The blood spatter would not be "cast-off" from a gun shot wound. There is no such thing.  Cast-off is from a bloody object being swung back and leaving the blood pattern on the surface - such as what might be seen when a knife is being pulled back to strike again.

Forensic Science Simplified

Jodi's testimony would have to change.
The characteristics of arterial spurting, expiration spatter, and cast-off spatter would have to change.
Reason would have to be ignored.

THE EAST WALL SPATTER IS TRAVIS COUGHING UP BLOOD, CAST-OFF FROM THE GUNSHOT, OR ARTERIAL SPURTING:  FALSE.

PHOTO 162

EVIDENCE TO BE IGNORED:  Nature of the gunshot wound,  the position of Travis' head, and the amount of blood.

"Travis walked along the east wall coughing along the way until he reached the sink. He stood at the sink for a few seconds and sneezed or cough.  Then he fell next to the linen closet.  But, the knife attack did not attack yet.  The blood on his shoulder is from his gunshot wound.  

If the blood on his shoulder is from the gunshot, it could only be from one of two mechanisms:

1. Bleeding from the sinuses out the nose.
2. Bleeding directly from the entry point of the bullet.

Travis' head is tilted back at an angle.  The majority of sinus bleeding would go down his throat, elicit a cough reflex, and send the spatter flying away from his neck.  The blood on the shoulder was not from the sinuses.

The bullet wound was an 1/8 inch wide opening with an 1/8 inch rim of marginal abrasion around the opening.  There is too much blood on his shoulder going out to far to come from the small hole in such a short amount of time.

TIME LINE OF GUNSHOT WOUND TO FLOOR PHOTO

1. JODI'S VERSION:
   
   "I was  showing him the photos and we were deleting some. At one point as I was deleting some the camera slipped out of my hand.... I was crouched by the shower"
• Pictures cannot be taken in delete mode with the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-H9.  
2. "The picture of the ceiling shows Jodi's story is true"
• Pictures cannot be taken in delete mode with the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-H9. 
• look it up.
3. Ceiling shot at 5:31;14 
4. "At that point, Travis flipped out again.  And, he stood up, stepped out of the shower and he picked me up,  I was crouching but he lifted me up, as he was screaming that I was a stupid idiot, and he body slammed me again on the tile.  When I hit it I rolled and ran down the hallway ................................ he told me a five year old could hold a camera better than I can....  
• 10 seconds = 5:31:24
5. "As I was lying there on the tile, I was scared. I was thinking crap because it was everything I was trying to avoid.... so he's freaking out, I'm freaking out, I rolled......  it knocked the wind out of me.....I hit my head...it really hurt"
• If Jodi was body slammed by an angry wrestler, had the wind knocked out of her, bumped her head, was thinking "crap, I was trying to avoid this", and it really hurt  it indicates that she paused for a few seconds before rolling and getting up.
• 5 seconds = 5:31:29
6. " I rolled over to my side and started running down the hallway"
• 8 seconds = 5:31 37
7. "So I ran into the closet and slammed the door. I intended to run through to the opposite door. As soon as I got in there I began to run and I remembered where he kept the gun so I jumped up on the shelf, he kept it at the very top.  Then I ran out the other door as he was opening the door.  And he ran chasing me, and I turned around pointing it at him so he would stop chasing me. I turned around and we were in the middle of the bathroom and I pointed at him with both of my hands. As he was lunging at me the gun went off."
• 8 seconds - 5:31:45
8. "I didn't even know that I shot him. It just went off and he lunged at me.  And we fell really hard against the tile toward the other wall, like kind of near the scales or whatever those things are.  At this point, I didn't even know if he was shot.  I didn't see  anything different.  We were struggling and wrestling - he's a wrestler, he wrestled in high school.  he was getting on top of me, and I didn't want him to get on top of me because when he did that in the past I couldn't get out of those holds.  So he's grabbing at my clothes and I got up... and after I got away from him he said "Fucking Kill You Bitch....  after he said that, and he had almost killed me before, I .....  don't remember.... . fog, etc, etc....  "
• 15 second struggle; 5:32
  
  SUPPORTER ASSUMPTIONS/  IMAGINATION TO FILL IN THE BLANKS
9. "They land by the toilet room.  Travis is bleeding on the floor and the pool forms.  He coughs on the low door frame"
• 5 seconds for pool to form;  5:32:05
10. "He gets up and moves along the wall by the scales and then over to the sinks."
• 5 seconds,  5:32:10
11. "He pauses at the sinks and coughs on the mirror"
• 5 seconds 5:32:15
12. "He is on the floor near the linen closet.  The bleeding is from the gunshot."
• Picture 162 at 5:32:16 - There is not enough time left in the scenario to allow a large amount of bleeding to come out of the 1/8 inch hole.  The blood flowed almost to the far shoulder which indicates it was a large volume of blood.  The positioning of the blood on the shoulder does not correlate with the 1/8 inch gunshot wound.  Blood can be seen mid neck as well which is likely from the opposite shoulder dripping down when he was flat on his back..

It's probable the situations Jodi described would have taken a lot more time than I attributed to them. However, even with attributing such a small amount of time to the,  the scenario would not work.  There simply would not be enough time to account for the amount of bleeding on his shoulder from a 1/8 inch opening.

The following video per Gray Hughes shows Jodi's defense story minus her statement about getting the wind knocked out of her.   A few seconds of inactivity would be expected if Jodi was body slammed by a wrestler onto a hard surface resulting in getting the wind knocked out of her, pain, and a bump to her head.  Especially if stressful situations tend to make her brain freeze as per her other testimony.  It is likely that such a situation would cause a period of inactivity much longer than 10 seconds.

PHOTO 162 = GUNSHOT WOUND:  FAIL

THE HALLWAY BLOOD TRAIL

IGNORES EVIDENCE OF A CLEAN-UP/ WATER CONTAMINATION
IGNORED TESTIMONY OF SPATTER EXPERT
IGNORES SCIENCE OF SPATTER ANALYSIS

"The hallway blood spatter shows Travis walked along the left wall, fell on the carpet where he bled from the gunshot wound, and then walked back up the opposite side towards the bathroom."

The supporter created his theory based on the blood accumulation on the floor.  The blood drops are not in a discernible pattern due to water contamination and activity in the area.  Thus, they cannot be relied upon to tell a story.

"In looking at these along the wall here,  is it a circumstance that the source is bleeding as it goes along there or are any of those related to strikes or is it just the situation that the source as it passes through there, however it passes through there, is just depositing the blood?

"It could be, they're really not in a pattern for me to tell "this is where an impact occurred,  this is where something else occurred."  They're just a bunch of blood stains in some accumulations and the dilute factor so I couldn't really talk about a specific incident down that hall."  --- she could not determine shapes and edges due to the activity and contamination.  

It is impossible to tell the type of drops if the shape and edges are disturbed by water.  To see the edges,  either a high quality close up photo needed to be taken or the investigator had to be on the scene.  The shapes and edges cannot be determined from the pictures so it's not accurate to call them passive drops related to movement.  This determination can only be assessed by seeing the edges and the shapes through an actual physical inspection at the scene.  Additionally,  due to the color of the tile and quality of photos,  the dilute factor and water contamination or the lack of it cannot be positively determined from photographs unless someone at the scene provided an opinion to back it up.  The spatter expert was there;  she indicated water dilution was present and the spatter was not discernible.  The supporter was not and was working from photos.

THE HALLWAY BLOOD SHOWS TRAVIS WENT DOWN THE HALL AND WALKED BACK UP IT:  FALSE






THE CARPET BLOOD

"The bleeding on the carpet is from the gunshot wound.  The knife attack did not occur at this time"  

The absorbent nature of the carpet changes the shape, size, and characteristics of the blood accumulation.  The direction of movement cannot be determined by the blood stain.  What can be determined is the collection is from a large amount of blood coming from a wound much larger than a 1/8 inch gunshot wound.    The blood was in such a great amount that it soaked all the way down thru the carpet, thru the pad, and into the wooden floor underneath.

The blood spatter with the multiple trails is too wide to be from the 1/8 inch opening left by the bullet.  In his scenario,  the supporter ignored the multiple "trails" coming from the carpet stain. He had too,  they didn't work in  his scenario.

Water contamination on the carpet also disrupted the pattern.  There were signs that either Jodi tried to clean up the blood or water contaminated the scene.  Both the carpet and the wood underneath have water rings. The top of the carpet has faded blood like someone tried to scrub it up. There was also a large void on the tile in the area which could have been from a clean up attempt.

BLEEDING ON CARPET SHOWING DIRECTION:  FALSE

BLEEDING ON CARPET FROM GUNSHOT: FALSE



CLEAN-UP/  WATER CONTAMINATION


"I don't even think there was water contamination.  The floor evidence is reliable."

The supporter didn't always think that the floor evidence was reliable. In fact, he indicated that much of the evidence was destroyed;  the same thing people have been recently telling him.  His opinion only changed so his theory of what could have and could not have happened would be supported.  It's reflective of his desperate attempt to "make her innocent"  since the evidence shows she is not.

Now, the supporter is claiming the CSI team and blood spatter expert were incorrect about water contamination at the scene. He also claims the floor has lots of clues as to what happened.  However, evidence shows both a clean up and water contamination occurred. 

Signs of water contamination/ clean up:

1. Box in the closet
2. Irregular dilution areas in the hall.
3. Water stains on the carpet top, underside, and the wood underneath.
4. The entire underside of the bathmat testing positive for blood,
5. The void in the hall
6. Lack of bloody drag marks to the shower
7. Lack of blood on the shower lip from dragging him in
8. Lack of foot prints from either Jodi or Travis in a very bloody crime scene
9. bleached towel in washing machine
10. cleaning cabinet under sink was open
11. the scale placed squarely over the blood drop.

There was a notable lack of foot and shoe prints at the scene, save one.  According to the supporter,  Jodi decided to remove all the foot prints and left the rest of the blood there.  It is another unreasonable suggestion the reeks of desperation.  Jodi did not have a reason to remove Travis' footprints since she left his body in the shower.   Either a clean up attempt or a flood removed the foot prints along with destroying other clues on the floor.

Bloody water has wicked up into the box from an accumulation of water and blood.  I can't comment on the volume of blood but as you can see the demarcation line is very dark so it is more than just a drop of blood and water.

"Jodi washed the body by the linen closet and that's how the box got wet"

The statement is illogical and demonstrates the desperation of the supporter as he has jumped to unreasonable scenarios to maintain his fantasy.   The idea behind washing Travis' body was to remove blood and DNA.   Washing it out of the shower meant extra clean up of that blood and DNA.  Moving it to the shower washes the blood and DNA down the drain.  It also meant Jodi would have to make many trips back and forth to the water source, using the little cup to wash away all blood from his body.  Then, when she finally got it in the shower, she would have had to wash it a little more to remove any blood that drained out from gravity.

There also is the issue of washing the blood off of herself too.  It's obvious she did due to the lack of a large amount of blood on the bedroom carpet, the door, the hallway, the hall stairs, etc. The reasonable scenario is Jodi stuffed the body in the shower and washed herself off at the same time.  Any blood transfer on surfaces would be related to the bloody items she stuck in the washing machine.

The shower floor and lip was void of the bloody drag marks that would have occurred from Jodi dragging the body to it.  Blood would have spilled out the multiple slashes as she drug his body and lifted it into the shower.  Other than a few random spots, the floor and shower edge was void of blood. The lack of blood and wet box in the closet supports the shower overflowed as Travis' body plugged the drain, washed away the blood evidence, and flooded the bathroom.

"Travis could not have been attacked in the shower, there is no blood trail."

The supporter alleges that if there were water contamination, it did not reach the area between the shower and the toilet room or the shower and the sink.  However,  much of the floor was not shown in great detail to be able to come to a solid conclusion that there were not any signs of blood in the area.  However, some of the pictures appear to point to the presence of blood in the area. The pictures are corroborated by other evidence.  The impact spatter on the low door frame,  the spatter on the inner divider wall next to the shower, and the bathmat. The underside of the bathmat tested positive for blood throughout.  The discolored area in the pictures is in line with the bathmat.








Evidence supports the area by the toilet room would have been included in the flood. The box in the closet is just over 10 feet away from the shower;  the toilet room is roughly five feet away.  If water reached the box, it is highly probable it reached the area between the toilet room and the shower. Without knowing the slope of the floor, it's not possible to rule out the flood reaching area between the toilet room and shower.  If the water was able to wash away the bloody drag marks,  it was able to wash away drops.

  

If the supporter truly believes it is not possible for water to have washed away blood and blood on the floor must be present where Travis was injured,  then Jodi's story is not possible!


"Jodi used the bathmat to move Travis' body"

The statement is not logical and shows an inability to form deductive reasoning. The bathmat was not large enough to equally distribute Travis' weight to make it easier to move him.  The nature of the bathmat is to prevent slipping.   The bathmat would have made the job more difficult.  And, if Jodi used the bathmat on a bloody body,  the top would be a lot more bloody from either transfer from the floor or the body.

The evidence shows Jodi cleaned up the area.   There was only one bloody footprint shown despite the fact a chase occurred.   The scale was put back in place over a blood drop. The drawer under the sink housing cleaning products was left open.  And, a bleached out bath towel was recovered from the washing machine.

The evidence of a clean up attempt and water contamination makes the floor evidence unreliable to determine movement. If Jodi cleaned one area, it's possible and likely she cleaned others.

NO WATER CONTAMINATION:  FALSE

NO CLEAN-UP: FALSE

THE FLOOR EVIDENCE IS RELIABLE:  FALSE

 LAYMAN SUPPORTER VERSE EXPERT:

"The expert was wrong about the type of blood stains.  I am able to say that because blood spatter analysis is easy and I have a high IQ of 160"

Only about 2% of people have IQ's at 160.  A supporter who claims it would be smart for a criminal to borrow a gun from the family home, use it, and place it back before it was noticed missing -- (so it would be there when the police seized items in the search warrant) ----   is not one of them.

To understand blood spatter analysis and accurately classify stains, training is needed.  Anyone who thinks a proper analysis can be completed via the photograph of the Mesa crime scene does not understand it.   Those photographs do not show enough detail to determine the actual shape, spines, satellites,  and the direction each are going.  For an accurate assessment,  the analyst needed to be at the crime scene and have training.

Blood Spatter Analysis

The need for training  is obvious by the supporter's many mistakes:

• labeled the impact spatter on the door frame as expiration spatter when it lacks misting and traveled 4.5 feet (to travel that far means high air propel = misting).
• labeled the east wall as possible arterial spurting when it is not even close
• lack of understanding of anatomy - claimed the head wound could have arterial spurting
• labeled the east wall as possible expiration spatter when it lack misting 
• suggesting cast-off could come from a gunshot
• labeled the hallway trial as a passive drip trail when the drops are not clear enough to see
• suggesting the tails on the carpet where from the gunshot wound as Travis left the carpet.
• believing a layman who is untrained in blood spatter with no on the job experience can do a better job at blood spatter analysis through looking at one to two pictures of each than a trained specialist with years of experience who was on the scene could.

Background of Each

• Layman Supporter:
• Experience only in computer and IT
• No background in biology,  anatomy, chemistry, or medical
• Lack of training - minimum of 240 hours of education required
• Requirements for Certification
• does not remember learning physics in University over 30 years ago and has not studied it since.
• a knowledge of physics is a requirement for BPA certification.
• Lack of understanding of basic anatomy and relation to spatter
• believed head wound could cause arterial spurting.
• Lisa Perry,  BPA expert
• Trained in BPA
• 40-hour course in basic blood stain analysis from Miami-Dade Metro PD
• 40-hour course in advance blood stain analysis from Miami-Dade Metro PD
• 80-hour lab course as it relates to fabrics specifically
• attended over 200 hours of educational conferences and training associates with blood stain pattern analysis.
• Experience in crime labs
• Miami-Dade PD
• Mesa PD.
• Responds to crime scenes
•  forensic scientist in the biological unit
• Biology/ chemistry background.
• experience classifying blood spatter
• on the 2011 committee for IABPA (International Association for Blood Pattern Analysis) regarding the structure of BPA testing.

THE SUPPORTER KNEW MORE THAN THE EXPERT: FALSE


JODI STAYED TO HELP

"Travis is lying on the floor.   Jodi stays or returns because she wants to help him but gets the knife to protect herself."

If Jodi's version of events and the supporter's theory was true, there were several times when Jodi could have gotten away and run out the door.

1. When they fell to the ground after Travis had a bullet enter his head and she was able to get away
2. When Travis was laying on the floor near the toilet room bleeding
3. When Travis paused at the sink.
4. When Travis was laying on the floor next to the linen closet bleeding (picture 162 5:32:16)
5. When he was photographed at 5:33:32 still bleeding from the neck.
6. When Travis was laying on the floor on the carpet.

"That picture at 5:33:32 is not him and nothing shows that it is so she didn't stay."

"Au contraire, mon cher."   The later photograph has the same pattern on the shoulder as the one immediately before it.   However, the supporter already knows this as it was a fact he conceded to per a previous conversation.  However, at the time of the conversation he had not yet created his gunshot scenario.  Now, the second picture does not work in his theory so he's changed his opinion to fit it (confirmation bias).

Per the supporter's current theory,  Travis was lying on the floor at 5:32:16 and the photo was inadvertently snapped about 40 seconds after the gunshot.  Jodi was on her way out the door and left.  After all, it would not be reasonable for Jodi to hang around after a man who almost killed her before was trying to do it again.  According to the supporter,  Jodi returned a little while later after she believed Travis calmed down because she wanted to help him.  The photo shows she stayed for another minute and sixteen seconds despite her alleged mortal terror and wishes to escape the man who was supposedly trying to kill her.   The only reason for her to stay is if he was already dead which does not work for either her version or the supporter's.

The photograph did not fit the supporter's version  so he ignored his previous conclusion based on fact and denied it.  He needed to change how he views the evidence to make his hypothesis work (confirmation bias).  Even without the second photograph, it still fails.  He has no choice but to believe Jodi's testimony and she testified that she was in mortal fear, running for her life, and trying to get away.

1. "I just remember trying to get away from him......,It was like mortal terror."
• Per Jodi's own testimony, she was trying to get away from him, not trying to "help him."
2. "I pissed him off more than I ever seen him pissed off.(the alleged body slam and chase) I tried to stop him (pointing a gun) and then I pissed him off even more. I thought shit, I really really pissed him off."
• her fear for her life would have been increased after the alleged gunshot.
3. "We were struggling and wrestling ......  So he's grabbing at my clothes and I got up...He's screaming angry and after I broke away from him he said "Fucking Kill You Bitch"
• "FKYB"  only increases her fear- if she try to escape before,  the urge is stronger now.
• She got away,   she could have ran away and did not
• ~ 10 seconds later,  he is standing at the sinks
• "I was the one trying to get away"
• she stayed
• ~ 20 seconds later she is standing over him with his neck bleeding (see section 162)
• "I was the one trying to get away"
• She stayed
4. "And, he was angry at me, and he wasn't going to stop.  He wasn't going to stop, he wasn't stopping."
• Per her version, Jodi believed he wasn't going to stop.  
• a 20 second pause in action does not change that perception when someone is in mortal fear.
5. KN:  "Did you think he was going to kill you?"JA: For sure, when he said kill you,  yes. He almost killed me before and now he is saying he is going to."
• Per Jodi's story +supporter's
• more pissed than she ever seen him,  she runs
• She shoots, he is more pissed now - she still would run.
• He threatens to kill her and she believes he almost did before - the need to flee is stronger. she is in mortal terror and afraid for her life
• 10 seconds later she has the opportunity when he is at the sinks, but stays to "help him" - 10 more seconds pass and she is photographed standing over his body.
• The statement she stayed to help him goes against the evidence and all reason and logic.
6. KN: Why did you believe him when he said kill you bitch?
   JA: Because he never said that before and he's almost  taken me to that point without that threat and now he was clearly making that threat 
• According to her testimony,  at this point Jodi is in mortal terror.   She believes Travis had it in him to kill her because he almost did before without making the threat and now he was.
7. " I do remember the moment when the knife went into Travis' throat and he was conscious.  He was still trying to attack me.  It was I who was trying to get away, not Travis and I finally did.  
• Per Jodi's statement,  Travis would not stop, was continuing to try to attack her,  and she was trying to get away and finally did when she cut his throat.

"Jodi thought Travis calmed down so she stayed to help him.  She was concerned about getting in trouble for shooting him"

JM: "You slammed the door ... you can't see through the door... So how do you know he's still mad?"
JA: " Because Travis never calmed down that quickly"

Jodi would not have stayed or went back a couple of moments later.

Jodi also testified that she did not know she hit Travis when she shot at him.  She stated they were struggling and she did not look at him or know if he was bleeding (prosecution cross).  Jodi stated she got away from him, heard him say "Fucking Kill You Bitch",   she believed it to be true and then the fog rolled in.   Her terror would have caused her to run without any reason to look back.

"She returned because she wanted to help him.  She took the knife to protect herself. Or, she picked it up to stop him from getting it."

The statement is against all logic.  According to Jodi, Travis was more pissed than she ever had seen him and he didn't calm down quickly. Why would she return to a room that included a pissed off abuser who tried to kill her before, was trying to do it again, and had two deadly weapons within his reach?  She wasn't able to see through doors to determine what state of mind he was in.  A simple phone call could have solved that but there was no evidence she tried.

If Jodi took the knife to protect herself, it would mean she still felt there was a possibility her life was in danger.   And, if she thought she needed to pick it up to prevent Travis from grabbing it, it meant she still thought he might hurt her.  Either scenario meant Jodi still feared a great deal for her safety would not have returned to the room.

The fact is, per the supporter's version of events, Jodi had time to leave at 5:32:16 and was still there a minute and sixteen seconds later.  If she was in mortal fear, she would have ran off at 5:32:16 and not returned until she was positive the threat was over. Picking up a knife meant she was not.

"It's reasonable that Jodi would have stayed because she didn't want to get in trouble for the gunshot wound.

Per her statement, Jodi didn't realize she even hit him. If she looked at him after getting up and realized she did, she would have seen blood coming from his forehead.  A bullet wound to the brain is not treatable by basic first aide.  Whether she went back to help him, called 911 from outside, or ran away the inevitable would have happened.   Travis would have had to go to the ER to get the bullet in his head tended to. Not calling 911 immediately or running off would have been a much worse scenario for her.  According to Jodi, Travis was moving about and talking so it would have been likely he would have sought help for the bullet in his head after she left.

A trip to the ER and Travis saying she shot him would have been inevitable no matter her actions. Per her story, going back inside could have only risked one thing:  harm to herself.  The gun and knife would have been in the room and she would not have known if Travis was still pissed off.  It's not reasonable to claim Jodi would have taken such a risk when the outcome of someone learning about her shooting him would remain the same.

"Maybe Jodi stayed and watched from a safe distance while he crawled around to see if he was going to settle down"

And, we are right back to the part where only 40 seconds passed after Jodi claimed to go into a state of mortal fear. She said she believed Travis was going to kill her and was trying to get away.  That type of fear does not go away in 45 seconds.  Once he was down, she would have been out that door to safety.  Especially if she was allegedly afraid enough to pick up the gun before he supposedly threatened her life.   No matter the scenario,  the gunshot wound being at 5:32:16 gave Jodi an opportunity to leave and her alleged fear would have kept her way from the murderous man behind  door number one with two deadly weapons.  The picture at 5:33:32 shows she did not.

JODI STAYED TO HELP:  FALSE

CONCLUSION

The evidence has demonstrated the supporter's theory about June 4th fails on multiple levels. It is neither cohesive to itself or Jodi's version of events.  And, it ignores evidence, reason,  and facts.  There is not any real evidence to corroborate his theory.  He made up his own and ignored science to maintain his fantasy Jodi is innocent. He was not able to find a spatter expert to support his theory so he created one in himself.

 When his theories fail, the facts he once accepted are no longer accepted if they do not fit his theory.  It's confirmation bias at it's finest.  His method of proving innocence is being able to imagine a scenario and manipulate the evidence to fit it.  Imagination has no place in the determination of justice;  only facts and evidence should be used or true justice can never  be achieved.  

ADDENDUM:

To support his theory,  the supporter decided to focus on one small part of the entire picture of what is wrong with his theory:

1. Wrong fall area
• He failed to identify why there is not any blood spatter in this area per his theory that the GSW made Travis bleed severely.
• Fall area to blood pool =  ~ 5 feet.
• Per Jodi's version,  Travis was in between her and the blood pool.  Per her version, he was moving away from the blood pool towards her to try to get on her.  She was trying to get away from him, not go towards him.  
2. incorrect door frame spatter identification
3. incorrect identification of spatter on the East wall
4. Too much blood for picture 162 to be from the GSW
5. Jodi still present for the next picture and his admission it was Travis
6. The multiple times Jodi had to escape but didn't
7. The claim she would have stayed not correlating with her testimony.
8. His admission the evidence on the floor was destroyed and how his opinion about that changed so his hypothesis could be true.
9. ignoring the signs of water contamination and a flood on the floor.
• how did the flood travel roughly 13 feet to the closet without reaching 4 feet to the side?
10. Ignoring the fact not enough of the floor is shown 
11. Labeling the spatter arterial spurting.

He focused on the door frame and attempted to use a journal article to support it.  This attempt shows the supporter has either a confirmation bias, or lacks proper training in BPA. Possibly both.

"This article shows that expiration spatter cannot be ruled out on the low door frame because they look similar"

Actually,  the article shows that misting is present in  both expiration and impact spatter so a stain with misting cannot definitely be indicated as expiration or impact.   A stain without misting can.

The stains in the case  where small, mist-like drops: "150 microscopic-drops."  The prosecution stated these drops where impact spatter.  The defense stated they could have been expiration spatter.   According to Sion's later statements,  he said he held Billi-Jo's head and noted a small air bubble come from her nose.   The defense stated the 150 microscopic drops were the result of expiration spatter associated with that breath.  Since there was no positive methods at the time to determine if those 150 microscopic drops where related to impact,  the conviction was quashed.  However,  had the microscopic or spray-like nature of the drops been lacking,  it would not have been.

The high-speed video experiment discussed earlier showed the presence of misting in expiration spatters associated with coughing, spitting, and breathing.  Any spatter on June 4th associated with expiration would have had the spray effect.

Expirated blood can be confused with high velocity spatter/ medium velocity spatter that includes multiple drops of 0.5 mm or less.   However,  impact stains that do not include multiple drops of 0.5 mm or less cannot be confused for expiration spatter.  It's that easy.

CONCLUDING A STAIN IS EXPIRATION AND NOT IMPACT

"When interpreting bloodstain patterns at crime scenes, identifying the presence of saliva in possible expirated blood may assist in determining whether a pattern has been caused by the blood being expirated or from impact spatter. Expirated blood patterns are typically formed by a person suffering from a serious head wound or internal injury,coughing or sneezing blood droplets onto nearby surfaces. The resultant spray pattern can consist of distinct small stains or spots. A similar pattern of small blood droplet stains can be formed on nearby surfaces when a blunt force such as a weapon impacts a bloodied surface resulting in impact spatter."

"Possible expirated blood" = stains that have a spray pattern, IE misting.   If there is not a spray pattern, it's not expirated blood.  At times, impact can look like expirated blood but expirated blood does not look like impact.  This is something the BPA expert  would have known when she classified the door frame as impact.  Her classification of the mirror as "either impact or expiration" shows she did.

THE ARTICLE SHOWS EXPIRATION SPATTER CAN BE MISTAKEN FOR IMPACT SPATTER:  FALSE

The supporter admitted the pictures were not of enough quality to give anyone an advantage over someone at the scene.

"I say the spatter pictures are not of sufficient quality to see the very fine drops.  Whereas it's hard to tell for sure, I think you can see the very fine drops in this picture"

If the supporter cannot see the "very fine drops"  throughout the spatter stain, he cannot classify it as expiration.  The spray/ misting is noticeable throughout an expiration spatter stain.  The door frame spatter has definite voids in it that can be seen in the photo:



Additionally,  Lisa Perry who had hundred of hours of training in spatter analysis determined the door frame spatter stain was impact, not expiration.  She was present on the scene to see if there was a misting pattern throughout the door frame pattern as seen in the sink/ mirror pattern.   She did not see misting,  evident by her classification of the door frame as impact.  She did see misting  on the mirror, evident by her classification of the mirror/ sink pattern as either impact or expiration.   Her lack of labeling the mirror/ sink as definite expiration showed her understanding that sometimes impact stains can look like expiration stains and demonstrated a competency to accurately label the low door frame stain as impact.

THE DOOR FRAME DOES SHOW SIGNS OF EXPIRATION SPATTER:  FALSE

"I would say the mixing of different size drops is more typical of expiration than impact"

This is only true in the fact that expiration spatter typically contains misting between the bigger drops.  This misting was lacking in the lower door frame as can be determined per LP's ability to classify it as impact.  (remember, the other stain with misting she stated "Either/or" as was necessary).

The supporter's suggestion that impact spatter drops do not typically differ in sizes shows his lack of understanding of spatter stains.  It is just one more item to add to the growing list that shows he is not competent in BPA or has confirmation bias.  The following pictures show the different size drops associated with impact spatter.

MIXING OF DIFFERENT SIZE DROPS IS NOT TYPICAL IN IMPACT SPATTER: FALSE

"I would say that there are some signs of saliva mixed in here. One larger drop has appeared to be diluted with saliva and dribbled down as a result. I circled it"

 The supporter's focus on a dripping spot so he can call it an expiration stain shows either he lacks an understanding of BPA,  a confirmation bias, or both.   The lighter areas where the blood stain dripped can be associated with the dripping itself as indicated in other parts of the photo.  All characteristics of expiration spatter have to be present to classify it as so. Misting must be present.

There was not any misting and this is supported by Lisa Perry's ability to classify it as an impact stain when  she had a direct view of it.  Her classification of the mirror/sink stain indicated she knew a stain might be impact or expiration if misting was present.

THE LIGHTER AREA PROVES IT IS EXPIRATION: FALSE