Jodi Arias Trial Truth

On June 30th, KPNX-TV 12 news announced a new flavor of Kool-Aide, The Juan Martinez Jen Wood Affair. The beverage is often served with straws, which the creators encourage all to grasp and mindlessly slurp up the libation just as it is served.

"Experts" who are currently working on identifying the secret ingredients of this new flavor-of-the-month have uncovered what they believe to be bits of vindictiveness, jealousy, anger, revenge, pain, and perceived justification. The creators of this new but old product refuse to share what they describe as the prime ingredient; it makes it impossible to verify if it is their ingredient or others that make up the main substance of this bubbling new brew.

Now, to our reporter..... er.. um... I mean blogger in the field who has created a time line that may help to identify the ingredients hiding out at the bottom of the barrel of this convoluted concoction.

The beginning of this very complex Kool-Aide recipe goes back a few of years. The base ingredient took form in 2014. At that time, many who sampled it claimed it had a strong taste of green-eyed monster with a hint of frustration from failure. The individual building blocks of this recipe can be traced back even further.

2005 - 2009: Tammy Rose is employed as a reporter for KPNX-12 news.
2009: Tammy Rose begins her employment for the company she's referred to in her social media statements: Helicopter Inc.

H.I is an agency that leases helicopters and provides staff to fulfill the short-term aerial coverage needs of news organizations across the country.

March 2009: Jen Wood begins her Twitter account, Jen's Trial Diaries, to tweet about trials. Her popularity grows to 14.3 K current followers.
July 2011: Sharee Ruiz begins her Twitter account, "TrialQnSharee", which she later renames around May 2015. Earlier tweets are still available via the all-seeing eye of the Twitterverse. Sharee's account grows to just over 3,000 followers, less then 1/4 of the success Jen achieved.

A "TrialQnSharee2" account was started in October of 2013, achieved 116 followers, and then stopped. The 34 tweets involved remain protected. Even though the account includes Sharee's picture, it is unknown if she is the owner.

2012: Tammy Rose starts her own production business, Chopper Rose Productions. She continues to work for Helicopter Inc.

January 2, 2013 The Jodi Arias Trial begins
March 2013: Tammy Rose starts a professional Twitter account and uses it to report on news, including trials. Her popularity grows to almost 2,000 current followers
Arias trial, 2013: Tammy Rose's coverage of the trial is limited to reporting on crowd size from the air. At the time, she is employed by the same news chopper leasing agency. The air coverage gets much less recognition than those covering it from the ground.

In Tammy's blog, she made the statement she "was the helicopter reporter for 3 television stations" to describe her position. Per her standards, it would look like 'lying' if, as it appears, at the time she actually 'worked for' H.I. who leased helicopters and provided aerial reporters to news stations. She turned a similar circumstance where Jen said she appeared on news stations into Jen saying she "worked" for HLN and others and used it as an example of Jen "lying." However, according to an excerpt from a book written much earlier, Jen stated she "appeared on." Why is this situation important? Because such actions show that despite her claims, Tammy Rose has an issue with Jen that is obviously helping to increase the amount of the bitter ingredients discovered in the brew.

Arias trial, 2013. Jen and Sharee attend the Arias trial and take note of the amount of people interested in watching it. The decision is made to launch a trial coverage website they had been considering for years: The Trial Divas.
May 8th, 2013: Jodi Arias is found guilty of first degree premeditated murder. The penalty phase is pending.
May 23, 2013: The penalty phase ends in a hung jury. Over the next many months, coverage of the case drops greatly.
June 18, 2013: The Trial Divas post the first entry on their newly started blog page: Witness selection in the George Zimmerman trial. Updates on Jodi Arias only make a very small percentage of their articles. The site would end in late April, more than one month prior to when the Bryan Hulsey trial would begin.
July 11, 2013: The Trial Divas are featured on ABC15 Arizona. They announce that they are getting 7,000 hits on a daily basis. The Divas are overjoyed at the success they are experiencing. Donations begin to pour in.

Tammy would later use the ABC15 interview as another "example" of Jen lying. She claimed that Jen told her she had a Bachelor of Science degree in criminal justice. To corroborate her claim, she included the video of ABC 15 featuring the Trial Divas. In it, it is the reporter's voice over, not Jen, who stated "both" had a degree in criminal justice. It was not the only thing he got wrong. He also stated the Trial Divas website had been started " a few months" ago when their first post was less than a month before the interview.
There is not any evidence available online of Jen stating she had a degree in criminal justice from Northern Arizona University. On her website, she does state she has education in "criminal justice" but does not state she has a degree.

The Trial Diaries:

And, in an interview she did in 2015, she stated she was a criminal justice student, not that she had a degree.

Could Jen be guilty of padding her profile with the truth but not elaborating that she didn't have a degree? Yes. Is this a lie? No. It's a common practice on many resumes.
There is evidence that Sharee did claim to have a degree in criminal justice.

When the Mr. Smith scenario hit, one person alleged she had lied about the degree.

July - August 2013: According to both Sharee's and Tammy's scenarios, Jen and Juan began the alleged affair.

In her blog piece, Tammy has alleged this affair could have resulted in a different outcome of the case:

The alleged affair would have began July/ August 2013; months after the guilty verdict.
The retrial jury was hung, resulting in Judge Stephens sentencing Jodi Arias.

Even if everything Tammy alleged were true, the case could not have turned out any differently. When this issue has been brought up to Tammy, she either refuses to address it or states something like "It's up to the bar to decide" or "You'll see."

The situation suggests there is a possibility the goal for making that claim is more about getting Jodi Arias supporters fired up against Juan and Jen than to get to the truth of the matter; the truth is it's not going to change the verdict for Arias.

October 2013: The short-lived "TrialQnSharee2" twitter account appears.
April 25, 2014 : The Trial Divas have broken up and gone their own way. Who the fans will follow with their 7,000 daily hits is unknown.

Sharee announces her new trial coverage business, "Trial Queen"

April 25, 2014:

Sharee registers her new "Trial Queen" site online

April 28th, 2014

Jen begins The Trial Diaries, named after her popular Twitter account.
she announces that she will soon be starting to cover the up coming Bryan Hulsey trial.

April: Sharee's husband Nick starts a Twitter account. Attached to his Twitter account is a now defunct webage, "TrialQueen.com."

Nick's account is short lived

The last direct Tweet was on August 28th, 2014
His last retweet was on 8-1-14. He retweeted a tweet from the same Jodi Arias supporter who was responsible for reinvigorating the affair rumor that started with Sharee's phone. The tweet was insulting Jen.
His last reply is on 12-11-14

All the evidence suggest that after the break-up, Sharee did not experience the same level of success that she had with The Trial Divas or that Jen was finding with The Trial Diaries.

June 8th, 2014: The Bryan Hulsey trial begins

June 16, 2014 : Using the same Twitter feed she used for her #TrialQueen business, Sharee announces that her cell phone is missing. She hints that there is a lot of information in it.

June 16th, introduces the idea that her phone was probably stolen

June 17th, Sharee expresses that there was a large amount of information in her phone and despite not knowing if she lost it or if it was stolen, she states someone took it.

June 19, 2014: Sharee brings up the phone again and turns the discussion to hint it was not only her information in the phone; others personal info was stored in it as well.

June 24, 2014: ~ 4 pm "Mr. Smith", an account later suspended in mid-July 2014, shows up and says he has Sharee's phone. He sends her texts that appear to be veiled threats to release her private photos.

FYI - having the actual device with incriminating evidence would have been much more beneficial to someone to use in a case determining if someone would be put to death. It would have been unusual for Mr. Smith to follow through on his promise to give it back.

FYI - some of the tweets involved in the June/ July Mr. Smith incident have disappeared from Twitter.

June 24,2017: 5:30 pm Others encourage Sharee to call the police. There is not any indication that she ever filed a report for her missing phones or the alleged attempts at extortion.

June 24, 2014: 6:07 Sharee claims that Mr. Smith "emailed" her some pictures he downloaded off of her phone.

Some emails can be traced. An unknown person had access to Sharee's personal information, was making veiled threats of extortion, and had Sharee very concerned. Yet, there is no indication she involved the police despite others advising her to do so.

After Mr. Smith popped in, loyal followers of Sharee started to become suspicious. The Kool-Aide was starting to taste like green-eyed monster and frustration-laced failure. They soon make their feelings known.

June 24, 2014 ~ 11 pm: Sharee's husband gets involved.

King claims that chatter and false accusations were always coming from the "other one." He is referring to Jen. At the time of the break up, Jen's actions were far from chatter and false accusations. Jen avoided discussing anything about Sharee or the break-up. When she started her new blog page, she addressed the break-up in a very professional manner. And, when approached about the affair allegations, she only stated she had a good idea as to where they came from. And, in interviews, she only referred to it as a "split" but did not elaborate.
Trial Diary start-up:

June 29th, 2014: The phone is still missing. It is unknown if a police report was ever filed. Trial King reaches out to Mr. Smith with a request to talk about his intentions.

July 1st, 2014: The phone is still "missing." The Trial King makes it known that he "saved these from a few days ago" after posting several texts from Sharee's phone. What is odd is why "Mr. Smith" would decide to block out the phone number or the name of the refundee in the texts.

It is unknown if the texts are real or fake. There are not any dates on them but other statements show that the Trial Divas broke up at the end of April and closed down the business by April 25th. Thus, the texts can not be any later than the end of April. The Bryan Hulsey trial did not begin until June 2, which makes the statement about "sitting in the Hulsey trial" appear to be out of place and gives weight to the claim that the texts were fake. The "Hulsey trial" part isn't the only thing that is odd about the pictures Sharee's husband posted. According to Sharee, she had the phone turned off on the day it was missing yet the pictures he posted show it was still attached to service.

Whereas the validity of the texts is unclear, it is quite clear that part of the purpose behind making the information public was to harm Jen. That part was made clear as soon as Sharee's husband decided to repost the texts. The decision gave even more weight to the claim that the texts were fake or the posting of them was a vindictive act. Many people didn't care if Jen and Juan had an affair as if they did, it was their personal business. And, given the time Sharee expressed it started, around June/ July 2013, the alleged affair would not have had any influence on the Jodi Arias guilty verdict; the trial had already ended.

The affair allegation soon died down only to be reinvigorated by Jodi Arias supporters. This time, it was clear that the purpose was to cause harm to Juan Martinez because he sent Jodi Arias away.

July 14, 2014: A Jodi Arias supporter using the alias "J.S. Anonymous" posted a comment regarding the alleged affair on the blog patch of another. .

July 15th, 2014: The Blog owner posts comments from Mr Smith and some of the texts on her blog. As with the man who posted the JS anonymous tip on her blog, she is focused on the affair and tried to push the idea that it was a case for the Arizona bar because having an affair with a married woman would be considered a violation of professional ethics. It is not.
July 15th, 2014: A third Jodi supporter gets involved and sends a Facebook message to Sharee, asking her if it were true that she and Jen broke up due to the alleged affair. Despite The Trial King claiming there were several things that transpired, he claims Sharee states it was the affair. The supporter reports it on her blog.

Followers of The one-time Trial Divas doubt the validity of the Arias' supporter's claim. They imply it is a lie. He attempts to get Sharee to confirm it publicly on Twitter, but she will not despite the many people implying he lied. It appeared the the creators of the Kool-Aide found their patsy to run through the wall and shout "Oh Yeah!"

July 16th, 2014: The affair rumors are sent to JA media darling and Martinez critic Micheal Kiefer. He expresses strong doubt to their validity and adds if it is true, so what? They are adults. Which is exactly true. To spread the rumor is done to disparage those involved. The third JA supporter makes a futile attempt to convince, once again invoking Sharee's name. The vindictive additive in the Kool Aid only grows stronger.

July 19th, 2014: The third Jodi supporter emails a bar complaint to the AZ state bar suggesting that the alleged affair with the married woman should be grounds for discipline of Juan Martinez. He, like the others, continues to suggest that the interaction with a married woman was grounds for discipline per the Arizona bar.

The claim is considered ridiculous by the State bar. They either stored it away in the circular file or told the man his sense of Arizona law was bullocks.

June 16, 2014: Sharee's account goes 'underground'

August 1st, 2014: Sharee's husband retweets the blog owner who posted the alleged affair on her blog patch, again showing that issues with Jen go beyond any alleged affair with Martinez. Add one part jealousy, a pinch of vindication, some perceived justification, and a lot of anger to the recipe.

*** Now, here is where it gets 'tricky' -- The majority of the following is based on Tammy Rose's version of event as told her Chopper Rose Blog page. The same site she is using to sell $25.00 videos of her coverage of the Jodi Arias trial.

October 16, 2014: Tammy Rose announces she will be covering the Jodi Arias retrial from the courtroom. According to a later statement, the trial was also going to be the subject of her first "Obsessed Trial Watchers" episode which she currently has both available on her webpage for sale or on YouTube for free.

October 21, 2014: The Jodi Arias penalty phase retrial begins.
~ October 27, 2014: Per Tammy Rose, she sees Jen Wood in the courtroom cafeteria involved in her work. Per Tammy's explanation, she already knew who Jen was, knew she had a lot of knowledge regarding the Arias trial, and it was Tammy who sought out, or as Tammy worded it, "ran into" Jen that day.
Nov - Dec 2014: Per Tammy Rose:

Jen told her that one of her sources was a CNN reporter named "Keri Lee" who was an online only friend of hers. Tammy asked to see some of her work so Jen showed her a Facebook page that as Tammy described it, "Looked fake.'

January 9th, 2015: Per Tammy Rose, she received an electronic message from Samantha Williams urging her to help Jen "get ahead."

The introduction of Samantha Williams into the story served a purpose. Tammy was setting it up to try to create a scenario that Samantha Williams was Jen Wood's alter ego and the one responsible for leaking the name of Juror 17 or someone Jen had doing so to her benefit.

Why would SW ask for Tammy's help to get Jen ahead if, allegedly, she knew Jen had all the help she needed with super secret information being leaked to her from Juan? Jen had a bigger following than Tammy did when it came to things Arias.

According to Tammy, Jen told her Williams was a crazy stalker. And according to the text, it does appear that way.
Tammy also said Jen told her she was her "good CNN reporter friend "Keri Lee."
She also claimed that Jen told her Samantha was also known as "Juan's tie" in the Twitterverse. Finally, claimed Tammy, Jen gave her a phone number and when she checked it out, it lead back to Samantha Williams who was currently the admin on the Trial Diaries fan page.

What Tammy doesn't elaborate on is when did Jen find out this alleged information herself? For example, was she in contact with the various profiles for awhile before she realized they were likely all one-in-the-same and then try to distance herself from each? Or, was there even a need to do so?

January 9th, 2015: Tammy Rose claims Jen Wood told her that she had been having an affair with Juan Martinez for the past year and a half.

January 16th, 2015: The Cassanda Collins vs Jen Wood hearing.

Collins claimed Jen Wood was harassing her and filed an injunction against her. Her evidence was based on others making nasty comments about her online. The Juan affair rumors only fueled Collins' anger against Jen as she thought Jen told people she had an affair with Martinez but was lying.
According to Tammy Rose, Jen Woods lied during the hearing about working for television stations. As shown earlier in this time line, other evidence indicated things were not as Tammy presented them to be.
Rose also claimed Woods lied under oath about her affair with Juan Martinez. When Tammy was asked why another person attending the trial didn't bring up the alleged affair in his book, she claimed that he didn't know about it. When pressed about the fact that this man was in attendance in the trial with her, she beat around the bush and would not provide a direct answer to the question.

(Unfortunately, this conversation is no longer present on the page. Tammy started deleting those things that shared facts contradictory to her story.)

January 16th, 2015: Per Tammy:

Following the hearing, Tammy told Jen that she would never lie for her about the affair.
After the hearing, she was filming Jen leaving court and into the car. When Juan called, Jen instructed Tammy to "turn off my camera and be quite [sic]. It was one of five conversations I would hear between Jen and Martinez. They usually talked about what went down that day in court, how much they missed and loved each other, and how they couldn't wait to see each other."

January 24th, 2015: Per Tammy: She was aware of a date Jen and Martinez had on this day.
Feb 8th, According to Tammy Rose, Jen met Martinez in his office.
Feb 15th, According to Tammy Rose, Jen met Martinez in his office.

February 24th, Closing arguments end in the Jodi Arias trial. The Jury begins to deliberate.
March 1st, According to Tammy Rose, Jen met Martinez in his office.
On either 2-8, 2-15, or 3-1 Jen was supposed to have sex with Martinez when meeting him in his office and later tell Tammy Rose about it.

Per Tammy Rose: "Jen said she met with him in his office on at least three occasions that I am aware of during the Jodi Arias sentencing trial, February 8th, February 15th, and March 1st."

all Sundays.

Per Tammy Rose: "Juan called....... turn off camera....usually talked about... On another occasion I heard them making plans to meet on a Sunday at Juan's office to which according to Jen confessed they had sex, and helped him prepare for court."

Prior to the March 3rd hearing: Per Tammy Rose: Jen texted her Juror 17's name before a March 3rd sealed hearing.

When Tammy was asked about the date and time of this text, she refused to answer the question. She later expressed that she could not release things because she was protecting witnesses. However, the date/ time of the alleged text was associated with Tammy, not other witnesses. The date/ time of the alleged text would have helped to determine if it really did eliminate other possibilities leading to the juror leak as she alleged.
In another comment made the next day, Tammy Rose stated only that the text was received before the jury was hung, not prior to the sealed hearing to eject juror 17. She would delete this statement as well.

March 3rd early: Judge Stephens receives a note signed by eleven members of the jury. It is the first time any one in the court, including Juan Martinez, learns that Juror 17 is the hold-out. The jurors alleged 17 was "ineffective in deliberating" and had watched the Jodi Arias move on Lifetime. They request she be ejected from the jury. A bit later, a second note is received. This time it is from Juror 17; she alleges she is being bullied and harassed by the other jurors. J. Stephens interviews the jury and denies their request.

note - From a moral standpoint, I agree with Juror 17's decision to vote against the death penalty as I don't believe in it. However, from a legal standpoint, I believe she made an incorrect decision that was based on her opposition to the death penalty. Even so, I stand by her right as a juror to vote what she believed was the correct legal course of action. The time to remove her was during the voir dire process. Neither her name, nor the name of the eleven jurors who voted for the death penalty should have been released. It's a threat to the core values of our legal system.

March 3rd- Martinez files a motion to have juror 17 removed. In a closed court hearing he introduces her FB page and claimes certain activity on it was evidence she was seeking outside information related to the trial -- which was not permitted. The judge, her staff, Martinez, Flores, Arias, Nurmi, Wilmott, and the Alexander family are all present for the closed hearing. His motion is denied and both the hearing and the documents are ordered sealed. However, the screen shot of the Facebook page remains open to public access for a brief period
March 4th - Nurmi filed for a mistrial based upon the judge questioning the jury the day before. Martinez again files to have juror 17 removed based on the reasons from the day before. Another closed hearing occurs and both motions are denied.
March 5th, The jury announced it could not reach a verdict. A mistrial is declared.
March 5th, The name of the lone juror who held out is leaked on social media after the mistrial. At the same time JAII leaks the other 11 juror names
March 6th, 2015: Tammy uses the controversy around Juror 17 to try to sell her DVD

Sometime between March 5th - 31st: Tammy is suspicious, she sends her information to the attorney investigating the leaks, and ends her friendship with Jen.

If the details of Tammy Rose's version are true, her suspicions regarding the alleged affair being linked to the jury leak would have begun relatively soon after the mistrial.
Per Tammy:

Jan 9th, Jen tells her about the affair.
Before the hung jury is announced Jen sends her a text with 17's name included
March 5th, the Jury is hung
March 5th Juror 17's name is leaked.
March 6th: Tammy is aware of the Juror 17th issue. She tweets about a related story.
Tammy's blog statement:

Thus, if Tammy's version is to be believed, she would have given her texts to Baker, the only attorney investigating the leaks. Additionally, she would have ended her friendship with Jen in March or April at the latest.

Remember, this is based upon Tammy's version of events as she wrote it in her blog post and from her statements.

Arizona attorney Katherine Baker, a civil litigation attorney, was hired to investigate the origin of the leaks.

May 6, 2015: Tammy and Jen are still friends but per Tammy's scenario, they shouldn't be.

May 13th, 2015 Tammy and Jen are still friends

May 21, 2015: Tammy is still supporting and friendly with Jen.

It's unclear as to why Tammy would push someone to write a book who she believed was using unethical methods to get her information and then encourage others to buy it to make money for that person.

May 29th, 2015 The press reports on Baker's summary of the leak. It can not be pinpointed:

In the leak of the lone juror's name, she determined

The lone juror's name was first leaked by a Twitter account that posed sympathetic messages about Travis Alexander.
The juror's name along with a screenshot of her Facebook page was available to the public before they were sealed.
The possibility that her name was leaked by another juror angry at her for her hold-out could not be ruled-out.

In the leak of the 11 other jurors, she determined:

JAII leaked the information
It was unclear as to how they obtained it.

Despite allegedly being given the texts, Baker doesn't bring up Jen supposedly knowing 17's name before the March 3rd hearing.

At this point, Tammy and Jen's friendship should have already ended.

May 30, Tammy and Jen are still friends

June 2015, A bar complaint is filed against Juan Martinez in relation to the Jodi Arias trial for "violating the rules of professional conduct." It is dismissed prior to the end of the year.
Two additional bar complaints related to the Jodi Arias case are filed and dismissed in 2015.
July 4th, 2015: Tammy and Jen are still friends

July 9th, 2015: Tammy and Jen are still friends; Tammy retweets in support of Jen's "Unbiased reporting"

Later, Tammy would criticize Jen for using the word "reporter" to describe what she did.

July 12, 2015: Still friends.

July 18th, 2015 Tammy uploads her Obsessed Trial Watchers Arias episode to You Tube.

Per her blog:
Per her "Obsessed Trial Watchers Video" 18:46
Setting: Leaving the Collins hearing:
Deb: Is it true that she said something about you getting a vibrator and leaving Juan Martinez alone?
Jen: She did tweet that! Yeah!
Tammy cut in: "Juan Martinez, Troy Hayden... Really? Like Jen has the time (for affairs with these men)"

July 21st, Still friends. It is the last post that shows the friendship.

What happened in the friendship after July 21st is unknown. Two days later, Tammy announced she had plans to move back to WI.

July 29 - August 1

Tammy starts breaking down her accounts for "personal reasons." She implies that either she or someone else has fake accounts making up their followers.

August 1st - Tammy responds to a post about bullying.

A trend appears to be beginning that just prior to moving away from AZ, an unknown person started to harass her. Tammy leaves AZ in the first week of August.
August 10, 2015

The harassment appears to be coming from more than one account

August 11th

August 13th, 2015

Tammy had someone trying to get into her account

Sept 2015: A fourth ethics complaint if filed against Martinez. This time is is about his book claiming that he was in violation of ethical rules by sharing "the existence and contents of certain exhibits previously closed by court order." The complaint would not be as quickly dismissed as others but when it is, the allegations would be proven incorrect.
November 17th, 2015 Someone had hacked or tried to get into Tammy's account. The identity is unknown.

Jaanuary 5th, 2016:

Tammy retweets a friend's tweet regarding stalking and her upcoming story on the subject.

January 26th, 2016

The NG segment involving NG and Kareem "Lefty" airs. Prior to it, Tammy announces to Twitter that Kareem gets "bashed"

January 29th, 2016

Despite the online harassment Tammy alleges she has been facing, she played a part in the harassment of Kareem by retweeting insults aimed at him. It is an usual step for someone to take when they are being unrelentingly harassed.

January 30th, 2016

February 9th, 2016

Tammy is having problems with other people on the internet. As the Kareem incident had just occurred, it is likely related to that. It is not unusual for reporters or others who cover a controversial subject and "take sides" to receive backlash from people who support the opposite side of a controversial subject.

February 20, 2016:

Tammy retweets and thus, promotes Juan's book. It is unclear as to why she would want to help someone profit off of a case she claimed he took unethical steps in.

Tammy did cover "news" subjects on Martinez during this time. However, the attacked link was to Amazon to purchase Martinez's book.

February 24, 2017: Per Tammy: Ethics Attny Karen Clark files a bar complaint against Juan Martinez. Like the July 19th supporter complaint, it alleges Juan had an affair with Jen Wood but also claims it may have compromised the Jodi Arias case. However, as the alleged affair began after the guilty verdict and Juan lost his chances at the death penalty following the retrial of the penalty phase, there was nothing to compromise.
April 2nd, Tammy Rose's tweet mimics words similar to those she would later express about Jen Wood. At the same time, she tweets a link to purchase her Arias DVD, which had been available on YouTube since July 2015.

April 7, 2017: the press announces the bar complaint about Juan's book is dismissed. It is determined that:

He had permission from his superiors to write the book.
Whereas he referred to sealed files, he did not identify them.
He did not release any information not already known in the public eye.

4/10/2017: Tammy Rose files a police report for harassment.
June 30th, 12 News KPNX is the first to report that an ethics complaint was filed against Juan Martinez alleging he had an affair that may have compromised the Jodi Arias trial.

State bar reports are confidential as to who filed them, when they were filed, or what they are about.
KPNX had more details than what the bar shares. Brahm Resnick, the reporter covering the story, knew who the witnesses were and how to find them; He knew details of what the case was about.
The story included names of witnesses, that Tammy Rose filed a sworn statement with the complaint, and a quote from Tammy. Later, Tammy states she only answered questions posed to her. She also implies that she was contacted because of her earlier involvement in providing her phone records to help the March - May investigation of the juror name leak.

Attached to the story was a response letter from the state bar to Jodi's attorney:

"As I explained by prior e-mail, that State Bar received a written response from Mr. Martinez regarding your bar charge. I am enclosing a copy for your records.
As you can see, Mr. Martinez has denied any ethical misconduct. You should also be aware that both Ms. Wood and ________ have denied participating in any of the misconduct alleged by your client.
Accordingly, I would like you to provide the following documents and information so that I may complete my investigation.
1. Any and all texts, electronic messages, emails, correspondence, or other written evidence purportedly prepared or transmitted by Mr. Martinez, Ms. Wood, or _____ which support your client's allegation of wrongdoing;
2. Contact information for Sharee Ruiz and ______ and
3. Any and all witnesses (other than Tammy Rose, Sharee Ruiz, and ________), willing and prepared to provide testimony supporting your client's allegation of wrongdoing.

If you do not have any of the above requested information, please identify any independent sources supporting your client's allegation of wrongdoing.

July 5th, 2017: Tammy Rose's blog on the alleged affair is published on line.

The ethics attorney bringing forth the allegation has the burden of the doubt to prove the charge. She must provide the witnesses and evidence to back up her allegation. When it comes to the witnesses, credibility and motive will be assessed.

Proving the affair would be the first step. As noted, Sharee Ruiz is listed as a witness. This makes sense as she was involved in the 2014 allegations. But, unless Sharee has the cell phone the posted text messages allegedly appeared on, she may find that her story is not believed.

A rumor of an illicit affair and misappropriation of donations would be an effective way to harm Jen's reputation. But, was there motive for Sharee to try?

The business had broke up and they each were trying to draw clients in. Portraying Jen as using unethical measures and lying held promise to pull the Trial Divas clients Sharee's way.
According to the tweets of Nick Ruiz, Sharee's husband, she felt animosity towards Jen for several incidents.
Nick Ruiz made many disparaging comments about Jen Wood.
Nick Ruiz posted texts that gave the appearance Jen Wood had an affair and was using company funds to support it.

Was there any evidence that would support a claim that the information about the affair was purposefully spread on line?

Sharee built up the scenario:

tweeted to all her phone was missing.

She felt "violated' even tho she did not know if it was lost or stolen
lots of info on it
phone had been deactivated
think someone stole it.

brought the phone up the next day

Someone took it.
hinted lots of info on it.
has "all that info" backed up
doesn't know who has that info now.

brought it up again two days later

Brings up phone and missing packages
steers conversation away from missing packages to info on phone.
Concerned about info on phone and what someone might do with it.
Other people's info involved.

Was there any evidence she tried to warn "other people" their information may have been compromised? No.
Was there any evidence she filed a police report regarding the phone: No.

She was "concerned."
the alleged thief contacted her
he made veiled threats to release her info.
He emailed her.
she was advised to contact the police.

The texts had to be from before the business ended in April yet they discuss Sharee sitting in a trial that didn't begin until June.
The phone was supposed to be deactivated yet the pictures show it was still actively connected to service.
If the phone had damning evidence against Martinez, it would not be likely a Martinez detractor or Jodi Arias supporter would give it back to someone who kept it a secret.

If Sharee has the phone for evidence, it could be useful in proving the affair. But, given the other circumstances, it would support that the phone was not stolen and it was a set-up to be able to release the information without appearing to have a reason that was less than honorable. This would reduce the credibility of Sharee as it would show a past history of having negative feelings towards Jen and taking steps to harm her reputation.

Tammy stated that she too has texts to show the affair. They could be used to corroborate Sharee's claim that an affair existed. However, the mere existence of an affair would not matter. It does not break the rules of professional conduct. Martinez would have had to share non-pubic trial information in the course of that affair. According to Tammy, she has evidence he did. She's also alleged, as does the complaint, that the affair may have compromised Jodi Arias' case.

However, the facts betray her story. Some of these facts she has erased from her Facebook page or prevented from being published in the comment portion of her blog.

The alleged affair began after the guilty verdict. Juan lost his bid for the DP in the retrial. The affair could not have compromised Jodi Arias' case.

Tammy claimed she told Jen that she would never lie for her about the affair. And, even though one long-term friend had put the alleged affair into the public eye, Jen continued to display the alleged affair in front of this reporter that she only knew for 3 months. Not only that, she told her details of going on dates with him and even confessed having sex. In the light of other evidence, the behavior does not seem believable.

Tammy stated she was sent information before the hung jury that showed Jen knew juror 17's name. At that time she would have known Jen had non-public information. She also had stated it was when she became suspicious that Jen and Juan were linked to the juror leak is when she sent her records to "an" attorney investigating the leak. This concerned her.

Her scenario sets the time in March. Yet:

The day after the leak, Tammy retweeted a negative story about Juror 17
Katherine Baker was the attorney investigating the leak

she did not find anything linking the situation to court staff, including Martinez.

Tammy has openly stated that there were only 6 people who had access to Juror 17's name. She was made aware that this is not true. A closed hearing occurred on 3-3-17 in which a Facebook page with her name on it was introduced. There were more than 6 people involved in this hearing. The FB page involved was supposed to be sealed but remained open for a bit of time. Jodi Arias supporters had the names of 11 jurors which meant they likely had Juror 17's name too which raised the possibility the released it in a false flag attempt to open up a chance at an appeal for Arias. These situations left many suspects.

She replied that the text with Juror 17's name on it was sent before the March 3rd hearing. When she was asked what the date/ time of the text was, she refused to answer. Later, she would state only that the text was received before the hung jury which meant that there were plenty of other people who could have been involved. She consistently ignored the possibility that a member of the jury, angry at Juror 17, could have released her name to the press as well. She also ignored the possibility of a false-flag operation so she could stick to the scenario that it had to be Juan who told Jen who released juror 17's name.

When Tammy was asked about the situation with Baker's report, she stated the leaks were an inside job and she did not give her phone records to Baker. It was "another" attorney.

Katherine Baker was a "outside" attorney. She is/was a civil litigation attorney who is a partner in Green & Baker.
Baker was the only person hired by Maricopa County Supreme Court, the only person identified by the news to be investigating the leaks, and the only person who presented a summary of what occurred.

When these facts were introduced to Tammy on her blog piece, she would not allow the comment to be posted despite having allowed insults directed at her such as Kareem's to be posted. She was controlling what could be shared and preventing facts from being posted.

Tammy has reported that the harassment she has received links back to "Samantha Williams." She and an online friend have claimed that Samantha Williams and Jen are one in the same because the accounts link back to a "Jenny" but no last name is included. Her friend admitted she concluded that it had to be Jen Wood because of the same first name.

This means that the identity of whoever had been harassing Tammy, whether it was one or many, can not be confirmed and there is no legal recourse.
Was the same sort of coincidence-based investigation used in linking the harassing profiles to one person? If so, how factual are they?

The evidence shows that Tammy was definitely harassed at some point, which is complete crap for anyone to do to her. But , it also shows that she does not know who the true identity of the harassing party. Nonetheless, she has convinced herself that the profiles all link back to "Samantha Williams." And, she's convinced herself that Jen is either Samantha Williams or knows who Samantha Williams really is and is either supporting or encouraging her to stalk and harass Tammy.

Tammy has stated that she "likes" Jen and her role in the recent ethics complaint is aimed at Juan Martinez. Yet, it is her words which continue to disparage Jen that show things are not quite as she is trying to present them

"She [Jen] may have had access to sealed documents"
"I suspected Jen and Juan's affair could be tied to these [juror name] leaks"
"One of the first person to leak Juror 17's name was Samantha Williams on Jen's fan page"

Her allegation was based upon what Justice for Jodi said -- a site known for twisting the truth in Jodi's favor."when she talked about her so-called 'sources' things didn't add up"

"[she told me] she got some information from a good friend of hers .... a CNN reporter named Keri Lee.... I thought that was odd since the person hired by CNN to cover the trial was Mitchell Pietz"
"I asked to see some of Keri's work. She [Jen] showed me a Facebook page which looked fake."
"I noticed another white lie of hers. She said she had a Bachelor of Science degree in criminal justice and she attended Northern Arizona University, both facts I confirmed from a school rep to not be true."
"I didn't think of anything of these small white lies until...."
"she told me Samantha Williams was a crazy internet stalker...she told me Samantha Williams was Keri Lee... she gave me a number linking back to Samantha Williams... she said she never talked to Keri Lee on the phone."
"As the trial progressed Jen continued to push the envelope and eventually crossed lines that I could not be part of" (then why months later push her to write a book and encourage others to buy it if written?)
"I was shocked to hear Jen lie under oath. She denied the affair with Juan and said she worked for KTVK, KPHO, & HLN.... the media has interviewed Jen as a court watcher."
"She may have had access to sealed documents"
"She was busy manipulating the trial world and swaying things the way she wanted it."
"I always felt she was a shining star on her own... wish she didn't resort to so many tactics I could no longer support."
Criticizing Jen for using the word "reporter" to do what she does when many others have done the same despite a lack of education in the industry
Criticized Juan for "wasting tax payer dollars" for allegedly having sex with Jen in his office. However, Juan gets paid salary and gets paid the same whether he works 38 hours a week or 53. He works form both home and his office. Unless she can prove he logged any pleasure time as work hours, there is not any violation.

Tammy has presented her evidence in a confirmation bias manner and it is likely why to many, there seems like stuff is missing from the story. There is. She has experienced harassment, but the source is unknown. It has to be considered that Tammy is hurting and has a need to strike out at the source of her torment. And, for whatever reason it appears that she believes the person behind it is Jen Wood. Hopefully, she will find out the actual culprit and that person can be brought to justice no matter who it is.

The best course of action at this point, is to stress the facts and be open to validated and credible evidence as it comes in. And, the current evidence does not allow Tammy's story as she has told it to be factual. The only way to do that is to block out the facts that exist and fill in the blanks with speculation.

Update: July 16, 2017:
Allegations have been thrown around that I am a "fake" profile; just another among the "Jenny/ Sam/Tie/ Keri" profiles. I heard people are willing to "bet on it." Well that's a wager I'll bet against and sure I will win.

To answer some questions:
Q: "Who has the time to do this.?"
A: "Someone who is trying to get to the truth no matter what it may be. A person who finds it interested to untangle the multiple different threads associated with an investigation and allows the evidence to take the lead. As for "hobbies", unfortunately physical limitations limit as to what those can be so yes, I end up with a lot of free time.
Whereas my body is limited, my brain is not. I find research on topics to solve a situation interesting and try to be thorough by posting links, shots, and facts. This should be evident in the details if the articles I've done before this one. (See Shawna Forde).

Q: "Why would they do this?"
A: I have a respect for facts. For any accurate investigation, it's important to be candid as to all the facts. It is the only way to keep out confirmation bias and get to the truth. Thus, even facts that do not confirm an allegation should be allowed to be shared.

I grew concerned because knowing as much as I do about the Arias trial (see my blog articles), the time line as explained was not adding up. I started seeing facts which were contradictory to the story as told get deleted from a FB page and other ones not be allowed to be published on the blog page. So I searched for the truth and posted it as fully as I could.

If any verifiable facts are available that would support the allegations, I will post those too. It's about truth; not the people involved. I have no loyalty, allegiance, or association with Jen,.Juan, "Samantha", Tammy, nor Sharee. That truth could be that the allegations are true but the facts just don't fit the story as told ---and there has to be a reason for that.

*Thank you to everyone who helped with data in putting this together. Facts are important. If there is something that is incorrect in this time line or you have credible and verifiable pertinent information to share, please email it to: KoolAidBrewTipLine@outlook.com

Jodi Arias Trial Truth

Saturday, July 15, 2017

The Ethics Complaint: Is the Kool Aid Jodi Arias Flavored?