Return to Transcripts main page


Battered Women Expert Faces Hostile Questions from Jury; Jodi Arias Juror Released Due to Illness; Defense Expert Targeted by Cyber Bullies

Aired April 12, 2013 - 19:00   ET


JANE VELEZ-MITCHELL, HOST: Tonight, breaking news. Defendant Jodi Arias`s key witness, Alyce LaViolette, who argues victim Travis Alexander was abusive to Jodi, is now coming under attack herself for backing Jodi`s version of events.

Jodi admits she stabbed Travis 29 times, slit his throat ear to ear, and shot him in the face, but said, "Oh, I did it all in self-defense. I`m a battered woman." Well, tonight, a petition with more than 6,000 signatures says this defense battered woman expert should be banned from speaking at abuse seminars.

And more drama in and outside court. "The Arizona Republic" reports this famed defense witness, Alyce LaViolette -- you`re going to hear from her in a second -- had to be sent to the hospital because of anxiety attacks caused by alleged harassment from angry trial watchers. We can`t independently confirm that, but later we`re going to talk to the reporter who broke that story.

Still, Alyce LaViolette back on the stand today, facing a slew of skeptical, hostile questions from jurors. Listen to her.


JUDGE SHERRY STEPHENS, PRESIDING OVER TRIAL: "Would you characterize your knowledge of June 4, 2008, as light or incomplete?"

"Explain why you feel Jodi is not manipulative, is not the perpetrator of the greatest domestic violence."

"Isn`t it likely Travis never hit her that day?"

"Would your analysis of this relationship change if, hypothetically speaking, you found out that the stories about physical violence and Travis`s masturbating to children were made up?"

"Do you consider someone who says, "No jury will ever convict me" to be a person with low self-esteem?"

"Where was her fearful behavior? There is no proof, other than name- calling on paper and Jodi`s word."

"Are you aware that Jodi threatened Travis? We have heard Jodi`s side of the story. Can you tell us Travis`s side of the story?"


VELEZ-MITCHELL: All right. So all those questions directed to Alyce LaViolette.

OK, I`m also going to talk to someone who works for the very same company that victim Travis Alexander did about the trip to Cancun that the prosecution says sparked Jodi`s jealous rage.

Plus, I`ll also talk to Travis`s former roommate, Brent Hyatt, about Jodi`s frantic phone calls the night Travis was found dead. Did he sense any red flags that Jodi was the killer?

But first, there is Alyce LaViolette. She is at the center of a storm. Let`s debate with my expert panel. Over 150 questions asked to Alyce LaViolette. And we`re going to show you Alyce LaViolette as we talk about her. And the general consensus is, most of these questions were very hostile toward the defendant, Jodi Arias. What does it mean? Let`s debate it. Is this very bad news for the defendant? Starting with Fred Tecce for the prosecution.

FRED TECCE, ATTORNEY: Is it very bad news? This lady is D-U-N, done. This jury`s questions for this woman were over-the-top. And I`ll tell you something, Jane, the one question about is some woman who says "no jury will ever convict me" suffering from low self-esteem, that phrase is going to hang Jodi Arias. And it should.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: All right. We`re going to go to Rene Sandler for the defense.

RENE SANDLER, ATTORNEY: Absolutely not. This jury is thirsty for information about the dynamics of this relationship. And this expert is providing the information that this jury needs to know to understand abuse and domestic violence, and she`s doing a great job.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Joey Jackson for the prosecution.

JOEY JACKSON, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Question No. 20 says it all: "How can you make an evaluation without all the information that you need to do it?"

Question No. 50: "Who did you speak to face to face?" She`s drawing these conclusions based upon e-mails and text messages? What about speaking to people who might know the parties involved? Travis`s friends, Jodi`s family. The assessment is incomplete. Her information is incomplete? Her opinion is flawed.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: The victim`s own words.


SANDLER: Joey, those people only know one side of Travis. They don`t know the side that`s...

JOHNSON: Actually.

SANDLER: ... actually the one...

TECCE: That`s because Jodi made sure that they`d never learn about it.

JOHNSON: So did Travis.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Look at this woman. She is sitting there on the stand, hit with approximately 150 hostile questions. She is the expert witness who argues Jodi is the victim here; Jodi was the battered woman. And the man that she killed, Travis Alexander, is the abuser, was the abuser in the relationship.

Now this woman has been hit with questions like, "Is it possible for the survivor to be the perpetrator?" "Couldn`t a perpetrator be a `she`?" "Are you able to confirm whether or not Jodi abused Travis?"

So again, I want to bring in Dr. Dale Archer, clinical psychiatrist, out of New Orleans. Great to see you, Dr. Dale.

As I hear these questions, remember, jurors are not supposed to talk to each other about the case. There are 17 individuals, the one, "Two- Tone," got thrown off. We`ve got 17 people who are now not supposed to talk to each other, but they are asking questions of this defense expert.

Is it possible, Dr. Dale, that they`re also signaling to each other? Are they perhaps telegraphing, "Hey, here`s how I feel, and you better get ready for the deliberations, because you can tell from my question she`s going down"?

DR. DALE ARCHER, CLINICAL PSYCHIATRIST: Yes, I think that as an expert witness, you have to have credibility. And it seems to me, based on these questions, that Ms. LaViolette has lost her credibility with the jury. Because when you have that many questions -- to an expert, about something they should know and be able to tell you and educate you about, you`re basically questioning everything that she said.

So I think that the jurors are all on the same page here. I think that they do not buy a lot of what she said, and I think this does not bode well for the defense at all.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: OK. But here is my question. These are not questions from necessarily every single one of the 17 jurors, and five will be taken out at the very end and be turned into alternates.

So let me go to Fred Tecce. You`re a former prosecutor. Only three states allow jurors to ask questions of witnesses. Is it possible that, in the course of asking these very hostile questions, these jurors are communicating with each other in a way that they can`t do verbally, because they`re not allowed to? Sort of setting the tone, for example, for the deliberation to come.

TECCE: You hit the nail on the head, Jane. They`re doing two things. They may very well be communicating, but what you`re seeing an insight, too, is what`s going to happen during -- during the deliberation.

It`s one thing to sway a juror, but you have to get that juror to lock in, like Jodi Arias and then hold on against what`s going to be an onslaught from the people who have asked these questions. And they are clearly hostile to this person, clearly hostile to this witness, who basically -- Jodi lies, she swears to it, and they`re not buying it. I`m sorry. You can spin -- the defense lawyers can spin it any way they want, but you know, that`s like saying that the "Titanic" is a moonlight cruise followed by an invigorating swim. It`s over.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: But Rene Sandler, isn`t it also possible that there are one or two jurors in there who aren`t asking questions and will form their own little faction, nonverbally, that, "Mmm, I`m not necessarily going to ask a question to reveal how I feel"?

SANDLER: Absolutely. And that`s -- that`s what`s difficult sitting here, trying to analyze this information. We could all be right; we could all be wrong, or somewhere in the middle here. It`s the quiet, silent jurors who didn`t submit a question for everybody to be concerned about. But this -- these jurors are interested in this relationship. They`re trying to understand it.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Arizona, one of the very few states where jurors can ask questions, and they might reveal what jurors are thinking.

Today, several juror questions centered on Jodi`s claim that she caught Travis Alexander, the victim, masturbating to pictures of young boys. Again, no evidence except Jodi`s words.


STEPHENS: "Do you believe that Travis making comments about a 12- year-old girl while having a phone sex conference with Jodi is fundamentally different than Travis allegedly masturbating to photos of young boys?"

TRAVIS ALEXANDER, MURDER VICTIM (via phone): The way you moan, baby, it`s like a 12-year-old girl having her first orgasm. It`s so hot.

ALYCE LAVIOLETTE, DOMESTIC ABUSE EXPERT: I think it`s different. It`s just an unusual comment to make from a 30-year-old man.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: Dr. Dale Archer, clinical psychiatrist, we know that these two played kinky sex games. You heard from the sex phone call that they just played right there, that Travis did like the idea that she wore braids and sounded like a 12-year-old girl during some of her moaning and groaning. I don`t want to be too graphic.

But is that a leap, then, to try to marry that or wed that to this claim by Jodi that she caught him masturbating to photos of young boys? Is that how pedophiles work?

ARCHER: That -- that`s a leap. That`s a leap comparable to the Grand Canyon. I mean, those two aren`t even in the same universe, making an off- hand comment about a 12-year-old girl and then masturbating to 12-year-old boy pictures.

So I mean, the only thing they have in common is the 12 years of age. We have no other evidence whatsoever that Travis was a pedophile or that he was gay. We don`t have any evidence along those lines.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well, gay, that never even came into it. Pedophilia and gay have nothing to do with each other. Zero to do with each other.

ARCHER: If you`re masturbating to pictures of 12-year-old boys, Jane.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: That`s a pedophile. That`s not -- a heterosexual who`s masturbating to pictures of little girls is a pedophile.

ARCHER: I`m talking of boys.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: OK. It doesn`t matter. It`s pedophilia. That`s what it is.

ARCHER: It`s pedophilia, but it`s -- there is a difference.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: We`re just getting started. On the other side of the break, what we`re going to talk about is Alyce LaViolette, this very controversial witness. What`s happening to her? Is she being targeted by cyber bullies? Stay right there.


STEPHENS: "Would you characterize your knowledge on June 4, 2008, as light or incomplete?"

LAVIOLETTE: I think some of the details of, like, where something happened, I`m clearer on it now. But I knew in general what happened.






WILLMOTT: Lied about his virginity to his church?


WILLMOTT: Is there deception there?


WILLMOTT: Is that same deception something that went on, with his own friends believing that he was a virgin?


WILLMOTT: And did that same deception go on with his own family, believing that he was a virgin?

LAVIOLETTE: As far as I know.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: Yes, that defense expert trashing, you might say, the victim, Travis Alexander. She`s getting blowback for that. We`re going to talk about that in a second.

But first, out to Selin Darkalstanian, our senior producer, who has been in court. We understand there`s some breaking news involving another juror. Tell us.

SELIN DARKALSTANIAN, HLN PRODUCER: That`s right, Jane. The judge has just announced that juror No. 11 has been released from the jury due to illness. We don`t know anything more than that.

But I can tell you that juror No. 11 is an Hispanic guy. He`s in his -- probably in his 30s. He wears a long ponytail, and he`s always slouched down in his chair in the back, so you can barely see him when you`re sitting in the gallery. But we have just learned that he has been released.

So now we are down to 16 jurors, because we started out with 18. Juror No. 5 was excused last week and now this week juror No. 11. So that`s two jurors that are -- that are off.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: And one female, the one who was excused last week for mystery alleged misconduct. We call her "Two-Tone." She has a two-tone color hair, and now this male. So again, they are starting to drop as this trial extends on.

Meanwhile tonight, a stunning -- another stunning development. Testifying for Jodi Arias has now made defense witness Alyce

LaViolette an apparent target for cyber bullies. People trashing her books in online reviews, calling her a sellout. More than 6,000 people have signed a petition to ban Alyce from future speaking -- speaking engagements. And the petition organizer says that Alyce is getting what she deserves.

Listen to this.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I don`t feel bad for her if she`s getting negative reactions from her testimony, because she went in her own free will to testify.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: Alyce is also the target of angry tweets during her testimony. Quote, "Ms. LaViolette`s belief is just as slippery as Jodi Arias. She can sit on her context and go bleep herself," end quote.

"The Arizona" -- "The Arizona Republic" is reporting Alyce had to go to the hospital over the weekend because of extreme anxiety.

So let`s debate it. Is this free speech, expert panel, or is this harassing or even tampering with a witness? And I`ll start with Joey Jackson for the prosecution.

JACKSON: Well, it certainly isn`t tampering. You could argue that people are over-the-top on it. But let me just say this.

The point is that people are allowed to freely express what their views are. People are engaged in this trial. And when you have an expert that gives an opinion that`s so divorced from reality, it affects people, and they want to know why. And then you question the bias with regard to a jury question, "Why are you looking and smiling at her? What does that have to do with the trial?"

And the final point to it, Jane, is her responses to Mr. Martinez. Be appropriate. Don`t say, "I`m going to give you a time-out." Don`t say, "You should talk to me as I speak to you."

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well, OK. But is it appropriate...

JACKSON: Answer the question.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: ... Rene Sandler, to harass an attacker and say she shouldn`t be able to do speaking engagements for abused women?

SANDLER: Look, this is not a sporting event. And we have to remember that people`s lives are at stake here. This is a paid expert; she`s a professional. It`s disgraceful.

And so is speaking about her medical issues. Who released that information that she went to the hospital? She has a right to privacy. It`s really outrageous and disgraceful.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: I don`t think there`s anything outrageous and disgraceful about reporting somebody going to the hospital. I mean...

SANDLER: But for the purposes of going?

VELEZ-MITCHELL: ... that`s a fact of the case.

SANDLER: No, it`s not a fact of the case.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: She called in sick. She called in sick. That is relevant to this trial.

Well, let`s get Fred Tecce for the prosecution involved in this.

TECCE: Well, look, I can`t condone what this woman is facing. I didn`t like her testimony. I don`t like her approach. I don`t think she`s done a good job. Quite frankly, I think she`s hurt the defense. But I also don`t like cyber bullies. And I don`t like bullying this person.

I will say this: the fact that she went to the hospital and suffers from anxiety, that -- as much as it pains me to say this, that could go to her credibility. I mean, if she`s not really committed to this, and you know, that could go to whether or not she`s telling the truth.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Janet Johnson for the defense.

JOHNSON: It makes her credible, because they`re trying to say, "You`re doing this for pay. You`re hopping on this gravy train." It`s really hard to get someone to testify for the defense because this kind of thing happens. We`re not popular when we defend people. It makes her very credible. She`s not getting anything out of this. And $250 a day, quite frankly, she should be paid a lot more than that for what she`s having to go through.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Dr. Dale Archer, clinical psychiatrist, what`s it like to be on the stand and be grilled like this in front of the entire world on a televised trial?

ARCHER: Well, I`ve certainly been on the stand before as an expert witness, and I`ve certainly been grilled but not in front of the whole world.

But look, come on. she`s a big girl; she`s a professional. Her opinion is not popular, but you have to be able to take the heat if you`re going to work in this arena. So I think you just have to put your opinion out there, and then you have to take the knocks as they come. And part of that on a high-profile case such as this is that the world is going to get involved. Other people are going to not like what you say. And I think she`s not go got to be able to take that. I mean, this is -- it`s just part of the -- part of the game, and you have to deal with if you`re going to be an expert witness.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: You know what? She could have put her career on the line testifying for Jodi Arias, because now there`s this whole movement on to stop her from being able to speak to gatherings of people who are trying to stop domestic violence.

ARCHER: Yes, but Jane, the thing as an expert is, if you do a good job in your work, then you`re going to get further work. OK?

I don`t think she`s done a good job, so I think she may have put her career on the line, not necessarily because she took the wrong side of the Jodi Arias case but because she has not done a good job as an expert in presenting the facts and giving expert opinion.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: We`re going to take...

ARCHER: I think this is way too much personal opinion.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: ... a very short break here. On the other side, somebody who worked for what is now called Legal Shield, was called PrePaid Legal. He`s going to break it down to us -- for us, the Cancun trip, the Las Vegas convention, Travis`s status. Stay right there.


STEPHENS: "Do you think that Jodi could have lied to you to help her case?"

"Is it possible friends and family may have embellished in an effort to help her?"

"Is it possible that Jodi could have also been a perpetrator in her relationship with Travis?"

"Is it possible Jodi could be guilty of psychological abuse toward Travis?"

"Could any of Travis`s actions be considered defensive rather than abusive?"




JUAN MARTINEZ, PROSECUTOR: It`s a little white lie to you; that`s no big deal, is what I hear you saying. Is that true?

LAVIOLETTE: That`s not what I`m saying.

MARTINEZ: Well, isn`t a white lie, a little white lie the same as a big lie, because they both involve misrepresentation?


MARTINEZ: If it can be tainted by the fact that some lies are considered white lies, some are medium-sized lies and some are very big lies, right?

LAVIOLETTE: There`s a difference in lies, the quality of lies. And there`s the difference in the pattern of lies, whether you characterize somebody as a liar or you characterize somebody as occasionally saying something that isn`t the truth, which, by the way, most human beings have done.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: Alyce LaViolette, the domestic violence expert for the defense, arguing that Jodi was the victim, that Travis, the guy who was killed, abused her emotionally and physically. It`s all based on what Jodi told her, though; 44 hours of interviews.

I want to go out to somebody who is a dear friend of Travis Alexander, the victim: Travis`s former roommate, Brent Hyatt.

And you are talking to us from Phoenix, Arizona, where all of this is happening. You say that you have evidence of Jodi`s lies: your own ears from the very night that Travis`s body was discovered. Tell us about all of that.

BRENT HYATT, FORMER ROOMMATE OF TRAVIS ALEXANDER: Well, she called me the night that he was discovered. It was -- I was -- I was one of the people that broke the news to a lot of -- a lot of other people. The friends. And Travis had a lot of loved ones and, you know, throughout -- throughout the U.S. And so I basically had that opportunity to talk to a lot of people. And one of the people who called me kind of frantic was Jodi.

I found out that night that she was suspect in the case, and so the detective advised me, you know, at least at first not to take the call. So she left me a voice mail. And it was kind of frantic.

And I`ll be honest, you know, at the time, you know, I didn`t want to cast any judgments. I didn`t want to decide on her guilt right away, you know. And listening to her, she sounded very scared, very frightened, just wanted somebody to tell her what was going on and wanted to know if her friend was OK.

And so giving her the benefit of the doubt, you know, I finally called her back, talked to her, let her know -- you know, I broke the news to her. So when I saw her, you know, at Travis`s funeral service...

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Let me go back to that she was -- when you, quote unquote, "broke the news to her," news she already actually knew because she killed him, what was her reaction? Was it believable? What did she say; what was her emotion?

HYATT: It was -- mostly, it seemed like shock. She -- she was never very outspoken to me, and it was more of the same. I can`t say that she -- she didn`t like burst out, you know, hysterical in tears or anything, but she was -- she seemed very shocked. She thanked me for the information. She appreciated it. She was crying. And so...

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Did she say things like, "What happened? What happened? Oh, what could have happened?"

HYATT: Well, yes. She asked if we knew anything, what`s going on, if they had any ideas of what had happened. And -- and knowing that she was a suspect, I didn`t give much away. So I just said, they`re still looking into it and, you know, hopefully, they`ll let us all know as soon as they know.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: So in essence, she lied from the get-go, and we know that. We know she lied on the interrogation tapes. But you actually heard her lying. Is she very believable? Is it possible that she just mesmerized this expert witness for the defense and was just so believable with her story that this woman just took it completely and accepted it on face value?

HYATT: I think it`s believable. I know from another experience somebody who believed her also, and somebody who, you know, somebody who I trust very much that believed her, and he believed her for a long time. And when he finally found out that she had lied to him, now -- now he very much regrets believing her.

It`s something where I -- I think that she -- she just seems believable, I guess. The -- I don`t want to say that she`s an actress, but I mean, she did a good job on me.

So when I saw her at Travis`s funeral, she gave me a hug, and I -- again, not wanting to cast any judgments, because I didn`t know. You know, we didn`t know, and it could have been at the time, you know, maybe something else. But you know, she did kind of have me fooled. But at the same time, my heart was warring with my mind, where I didn`t want to believe it, but the evidence was kind of stacking up that there was really nothing else to believe but that she had killed him.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Brent, thank you so much. Stay right there. We`re going to take a short break. And then we`ve got more news coming in about this case.


WILLMOTT: Mr. Alexander portrayed himself as a virgin.

Based on your information, was he a priesthood holder in his church?


WILLMOTT: It`s really graphic about what he wants to do to Ms. Arias, right?

LAVIOLETTE: He was leading a double life.





LAVIOLETTE: You want the truth of this?

MARTINEZ: Yes or no?


LAVIOLETTE: I just said...

MARTINEZ: Yes or no? The person in the blue shirt over there moved over to Mesa, Arizona, correct?


LAVIOLETTE: It is not a yes or no. I cannot give that answer.


MARTINEZ: Is that stalking behavior? I`m over here. You keep looking to your left.



VELEZ-MITCHELL: Breaking news, and then there were 16. Word this afternoon that yet another has been excused due to illness; this one, juror No. 11. He`s described as an Hispanic male who had a ponytail, who often sat in the back row. And he is -- apparently, he got sick, and he has to leave.

So now we have 16 jurors, four of whom will become alternates before they begin deliberating. You know that "Two-Tone" was excused last week. So as this trial continues, on and on and on, jurors are starting to drop off.

And there is controversy surrounding this witness, Alyce LaViolette, the defense domestic violence expert, who has testified that Jodi was the victim of domestic violence at the hands of Travis Alexander. Now word that she is suffering, reportedly, from anxiety due to online harassment.

Let`s go out to a very special guest. We`re delighted to have with us tonight Michael Kiefer, a reporter for "The Arizona Republic." Michael, you`ve been doing excellent reporting on this case throughout the entire trial. You broke this story of what Alyce LaViolette, this defense expert, is going through. What do you know, sir?

MICHAEL KIEFER, REPORTER, "THE ARIZONA REPUBLIC" (via phone): Thanks. Well, I think to me what`s interesting here is that this is a brand-new problem that the -- generally, you know, the outside -- people outside of the courtroom have nothing to do with what goes on. There have been studies that have shown that people tend to sort of lose boundaries on social media.

And so here we have an instance where the public seems not content just to watch the trial, but now they`re actually participating in it by going after a witness that they don`t care for.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: And I understand that she -- you`re the one reporting that she had suffered some physical repercussions. What do you know about a hospitalization? Tell us everything you know, because we can`t independently confirm that.

KIEFER: Well, I was told that -- I was told that she spent some time in the emergency room that weekend. I know we had -- there was one day when she was sick, and the people who told me that didn`t go into -- into a whole lot of detail. But it was stressful. She has had -- it`s gone beyond just Internet hassling.

I spoke to people who had been contacted, places where she was supposed to give -- where she had speaking engagements, where she was being called -- or they were being called and told that they shouldn`t hire her, that she could fire her. And she supposedly is getting phone calls and e- mails at her -- at her business, some of them threatening enough that they called the police.

So it`s more than just -- it`s more than just Internet harassment.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well, I went on Amazon. There were very nasty things being posted about her book, which I believe is entitled "It Can Happen to Anyone," basically a book about domestic violence, battered women syndrome. And these tweets towards her are very hostile.

So let`s talk a little bit about this, bring in our debate panel, I guess we`d have to call them right now.

Fred Tecce, can action be taken? I do understand, according to the "Arizona Republic" story, that there was some discussion with the judge about these issues. What can be done, if anything, if a witness is suffering such anxiety and feels that, "Oh, my God, the world is coming after me," that she`s having anxiety attacks and being hospitalized?

TECCE: Well, I mean, as a judge and the people participating in the trial, what you have to do is make sure that stays outside of the courtroom. What you don`t need, Jane, is a mistrial because of what`s happened with this woman. All right. So that`s all -- you`ve got to keep all that out.

If I am the defense lawyer, at this point I would be renewing my request to have the jury sequestered because of all this stuff that`s kind of floating around.

I mean, look, this woman, LaViolette, you have two things in the courtroom. You have control, and you have credibility. And domestic violence is a very serious issue in this case. And I don`t care...


TECCE: ... who you are. What she`s done has undermined that.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Fred is saying, essentially, Rene, that she sort of deserves to be called to account in social media, because she`s -- some people, critics say she`s made a joke of the battered woman syndrome.

TECCE: No, that`s not what I said. No, no, no. That`s not what I said.

SANDLER: I heard it differently.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well, all right, what did you hear, Rene Sandler? And you can argue about it.

SANDLER: I think that`s all we`re doing is arguing.

Look, I think when you put yourself out there as an expert in the case like this, you will receive some backlash. And she -- she, as a person who put herself out there, needs to deal with it.

When it comes into the courtroom and impacts the trial and the rights of the defendant, which is what I think Fred was saying, it is problematic. So as a defense attorney, you`re thinking appellate record -- make a record, make a record -- but you`re also balancing how it`s impacting the trial and your defendant`s rights. And if it has crossed into that area...

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Has it crossed? That`s what I want to know. Somebody`s having an anxiety attack.


TECCE: Cross is over. OK, what`s happened to this woman is over -- I don`t like her. I don`t like her testimony. But what`s happened to her is over-the-top. People attacking her, arguably threatening her, that doesn`t help. If the jury hears that, and if they get angry and upset about that, they`re going to -- the only way they have to show it is to acquit the defendant.

JACKSON: People have...


JOHNSON: ... testimony.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: The jury isn`t going to...


SANDLER: A mistrial.


JACKSON: People have a First Amendment right to express their views. I don`t think they`re expressing them because they don`t like, you know, the fact that she`s taking the defense side. I think they don`t like what she`s saying.

JOHNSON: Of course they are.

JACKSON: No, I think -- hold on. Let me be clear. I think that what she`s saying is inconsistent with reality.


JACKSON: If you can be an expert and you can state an opinion, if that has a proper foundation and fact, people will respect that. When you`re protecting someone for the sake of protecting them, it`s improper, inappropriate, and you will be held accountable.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Janet Johnson from the defense.

JOHNSON: First of all, hate speech is never protected. It`s not protected if it`s hate speech.

Second of all, it`s not just this defendant that`s affected. My clients will be affected if I can`t get an expert who will take the stand and say the unpopular thing if she thinks it`s true, which she does think it`s true. I think whether we think she`s misguided or not...

JACKSON: She`s protecting Jodi.

JOHNSON: No, she`s doing her job.

TECCE: This isn`t just unpopular. It`s complete fantasy.

JACKSON: Exactly.

TECCE: That`s where you`re getting the backlash from.

JACKSON: That`s the backlash.

TECCE: Not that she`s taking a unpopular position.

JACKSON: It`s that it has no foundation in reality. And she giving opinions about the truth.

TECCE: Exactly.

JACKSON: "And she`s being truthful with me, and I can tell." That`s not expert testimony.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Let me -- let me translate again, probably inaccurately. But I think what you guys are saying is there`s a price to be paid for being a paid expert for the defense in saying something that doesn`t pass the smell test.

JACKSON: Exactly. Thank you.

JOHNSON: There`s a line. There`s a line.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: Hold on. Rene.

TECCE: But it can`t be overcharged.


SANDLER: I agree with what you just said and how you said it, Jane.


SANDLER: But there is a -- but there is a line...


SANDLER: ... that we cannot go over as a nation, as a country. We cannot do that.

JACKSON: People have a right to weigh in and state their views as to what they think is probable.

SANDLER: They do. They do not have a right...

JACKSON: I don`t think they should name call.

SANDLER: They do not have a right to threaten this woman.

JACKSON: That`s a different issue. I`m not supporting them threatening her, but I`m supporting their position that what she`s saying is not true.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well, they`re saying some pretty nasty things. They`re saying some pretty nasty things. I don`t know how you define threat, but -- but they`re -- you know, they`re calling places where she`s supposed to have speaking engagements and saying, "Don`t you let her speak."

TECCE: Well, but a lot of that can be because she`s become such a lightning rod. And you know, you don`t -- a lot of these people make the decision that they don`t want -- they don`t want the chaos that comes now when she shows up.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Everything is a calculation in life. That`s what I take away from it. It`s a life lesson. You do something, every action has an equal and opposite reaction. I read that somewhere.

All right. Short break and then we`re back with more debate, more trial testimony and somebody who worked for what used to be called PrePaid Legal, where Travis worked -- it is now called Legal Shield -- to give us the 411 on how it works. Stay right there.


WILLMOTT: Part of the time that`s during these conversations, is the office (ph) still dating Miss Andrews?


WILLMOTT: And after Miss Andrews, was he pursuing a woman named Mimi Hall?

LAVIOLETTE: Yes, he was.

WILLMOTT: And while he`s pursuing Mimi Hall, was he also having those sexual conversations with these other women?

LAVIOLETTE: Yes, he is.

WILLMOTT: And besides having these sexual conversations with these other women, is he also having a relationship with Jodi?

LAVIOLETTE: Yes, he is.




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


VELEZ-MITCHELL: That is Travis Alexander, a charismatic motivational speaker. And tonight, a very special guest, who works as an independent associate for the very company Travis worked for, used to be called PrePaid Legal, now called Legal Shield.

J.B. Holderness (ph), Legal Shield independent associate, thank you for joining us tonight.

We`re looking at pictures of Cancun, video of Cancun. Travis Alexander, many people believe, the prosecutor believes was killed because he had decided to take another woman with him to Cancun instead of the defendant, Jodi Arias. What was so important about the Cancun trip? How did it have anything to do with PrePaid Legal/Legal Shield?

J.B. HOLDERNESS (PH), INDEPENDENT ASSOCIATE, LEGAL SHIELD: Well, Cancun is basically a trip that -- it`s very easy. Basically, one of the rewards of actually being an independent marketing associate for Legal Shield or at the time PrePaid Legal Services, someone can start with the company, and if they kept consistent with marketing the product, just maybe, you know, stay 10 or more memberships in a month, they could actually earn themselves and their spouse or a significant other or a girlfriend, they could get an all-expense-paid trip to Cancun. And the company would send 550 of the top performers to Cancun.

And they -- what they do is they rent out an entire resort, and the entire trip is paid for. That includes airfare. That includes the hotel. That includes all the drinks and food. They tell you don`t bring your wallet. You don`t even need to tip. The entire trip is covered.

And so I know for a fact that Travis Alexander was that type of top performer. He was listed in the catalog of top performers that the company puts out. So he was definitely eligible and had earned that trip.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: And what about his motivational speaking? How does that work with the company?

HOLDERNESS (ph): Well, I mean, he was someone who had basically worked his way up, you know, within the company to being someone who was respected. I did not know him personally, but I know I had heard of him and had read about his success story with the company.

And he was someone -- the reason you see so many videos of him dressed well and at the front of the room, he was -- he was eligible to be, you know, training people, 200 or more people, and demonstrating the product and demonstration the services of what was PrePaid Legal, and is now Legal Shield.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well, I think it`s fascinating. There he is doing a seminar. And you see him there with a clipboard. And he`s clearly a charismatic man. He is clearly somebody who has a certain attractiveness. You can see it on videotape. And that, of course, is key to succeeding at something like PrePaid Legal or Legal Shield. Briefly, J.B.

HOLDERNESS: That`s correct. Absolutely. You -- when you work for yourself, I mean, this is -- everyone who works for that company is an independent associate.

And one thing that is highly stressed is personal development. That`s why you hear in the trial such things as Jodi Arias was talking about, you know, reading "The Secret" or talking about the law of attraction. I mean, many -- much of the leadership of the company stresses the idea of, you know, you`re going to -- you`re going to read books about business development or you`re strongly encouraged to read books about business development, because you`re working for yourself.

You`re going to want to -- you know, basically the idea of getting out and every day doing the small tasks it takes to actually be successful, it really is up to you. You don`t have a boss when you work for yourself. So to really be motivated and really have a positive mindset is essential to succeeding in this type of business.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: All right. Excellent explanation. J.B., stand by. We`re going to take a short break. More testimony and more explanation of this incredibly intricate and fascinating case. And at the heart of it, Travis Alexander.


ARIAS (via phone): That was surreal. I think -- I mean, maybe with the candlelight has something to do with it. But you were amazing. You made me -- seriously, you made me feel like a goddess.



VELEZ-MITCHELL: Welcome to "pet of the day." Ginger, your mom`s Nancy, my fabulous makeup artist, and you are gorgeous. Sleeping like Sleeping Beauty.

Ozzie, you are also lounging today on some very nice furniture and having a good old time.

And let`s see. Nelson, he says I`m ready to play. I`m all stretched out.

And we love you Nelson and we also love Callahan. Very distinguished.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: We`ve seen so much video of Arias` police interrogation tape. What`s it like to be interrogated? I went to find out, and I found out it`s not like it is in the movies and TV. Check out "NYPD Blue."


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Every time you say something that`s not true you`re going to get hit.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You just want to think about what you`re going to say before you say it, that`s all.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I didn`t rob anybody.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Quit hitting me.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Stop? I just got started.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You`re not allowed to do that.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Who`s going to know? I can even do it without leaving a mark.



VELEZ-MITCHELL: It`s not like that anymore. I went to the Fairfield, Connecticut, police department and was interviewed, grilled about a fake crime by two excellent detectives. We pretended that while walking my dogs in a park, I had a fight with a woman who threw a plastic bottle into a regular trash bin instead of the blue recycle bin.

This interrogation was not what I was expecting. Check this out. I get grilled.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: We just want to ask you questions about something that -- a complaint that came to our attention that we need to clarify.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: OK. Well, you`re making me very nervous.

I would just like a second to just -- I need a glass of water. I`m parched.

(singing): Oh holy night.

Chestnuts roasting on an open fire

(talking): Thank you.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: This isn`t a big deal. Nobody got hospitalized.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We know that you were in Central Park yesterday. So tell us what happened when you got there.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: This woman walked up and she put the plastic in the non-recyclable bin.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: How hard is it for people to have a little respect for the earth is all I`m saying, right?

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Yes, exactly.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: We agree on that. I`m glad.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: I forget that they`re on the opposing team, and they`re trying to get me to incriminate myself, and I get all confused. And I`m like, "Well, she`s my friend." I can tell her.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: How hard would it have been for her to put that bottle in that container? Right? It`s labeled. Right there.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: I did it. I threw that bottle at that lady.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: This is an emotional thing that you went through. This is something that you`re passionate about.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: I can`t believe this is happening to me.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It happens. It can happen to anybody.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: This is a little thing that got out of control, because somebody touched a nerve.

Lieutenant Gagner (ph) and I both have plenty of other cases waiting for us that are probably more significant than this.

You want to try and read body language as much as you can without it being uncomfortable, because you want to try to make a connection with that person, much like I did in the interview. I agree with you. I get the way you feel about that.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: How did Detective Flores do?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: He did an amazing job with that interview. He used a lot of techniques. He mirrored her body language. He used "either/ors." He used "what ifs." He never in the interviews that I saw used the word "murder." He referred to Travis as a "death," which is something that you want to do. You want to minimize the crime.



VELEZ-MITCHELL: What do these hostile juror questions to the defense expert witness say about the upcoming verdict? Starting with Dr. Dale Archer.

ARCHER: I think that the expert here did not do any good for the defense whatsoever. And I think when you lose credibility as an expert, it really hurts your -- your case. I think -- I think we`re looking at a guilty verdict.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: All right, Rene Sandler, criminal defense attorney, for the defense.

SADLER: I think the jury is struggling to understand this relationship. They`re trying to look at all the evidence and consider, in totality of what this expert has said, the whole testimony and put it together and reconcile it. I -- too early to know.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Fred -- Fred Tecce for the prosecution.

TECCE: No. I think Jodi Arias is driving this defense. She`s trying to get acquitted or a hung jury. And I think in doing that she`s going to earn herself a first-degree murder conviction and the death penalty.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: All right. Well, you heard it right there. We shall see. This is an extraordinary trial, and we`re all over it. Back Monday with the very latest, 7 p.m. Easter. Nancy is next.