When court is done for the day, the conversation is only just beginning. Watch HLN’s newest hit show "HLN After Dark: The Jodi Arias Trial" nightly at 10 p.m. on HLN.
Prosecutor Juan Martinez ended another day of cross-examining defense expert Alyce LaViolette with another shocker on Tuesday.
Martinez accused Arias of being a stalker. He said Arias' refusal to "let go" after she broke up with her several boyfriends was evidence of her stalking behavior.
LaViolette has testified that physical and sexual abuse by Arias' ex-boyfriend Travis Alexander culminated in a fight that forced Arias to kill him in self-defense.
On Tuesday, Martinez asked, "Actually what we’re really talking about is that, that is a pattern of stalking, isn’t it?"
"No, it isn’t," said LaViolette.
Martinez asked, "Well, she’s gone and contacted Bobby Juarez on the telephone two times after the break-up, right?"
"She has," said LaViolette.
Martinez asked, "And she left things at his door after they’ve broken up, correct?"
"Stalking implies fear," said LaViolette.
Martinez asked, "Yes or no."
"Stalking implies fear," said LaViolette.
Martinez asked, "Yes or no."
"Incorrect," said LaViolette.
Willmott objected, saying, "She clearly cannot answer the question with a yes or no answer."
"Alright, overruled. Restate your question," said Judge Sherry Stephens.
Martinez asked, "Isn’t it true that she, with regard to Mr. Juarez, she left things in a, at his doorstep? Correct?"
"Yes," said LaViolette.
Martinez asked, "And isn’t it true with regard to Mr. McCartney, one of the things she did is that she went and spoke to the person that she believed that he was seeing, correct?"
"Correct," said LaViolette.
Martinez asked, "And then she slept in his bed, right?"
"She did," said LaViolette.
Martinez asked, "And with regard to Mr. Alexander, isn’t it true that one of the things that you know with regard to the Reagan Housley, uh,
Instant Messaging, was the Mr. Alexander was exceedingly afraid of the defendants stalking behavior?"
Willmott objected, and Judge Stephens overruled Wilmott.
"I don’t know that he was exceedingly afraid. I don’t get…" said LaViolette.
Earlier Tuesday, Martinez accused LaViolette of subjectively picking and choosing the evidence she believed in evaluating Arias' case. The aggressive prosecutor even mocked LaViolette, calling her a "human lie detector."
Martinez said Monday that LaViolette ignored police interviews with Arias' family, friends and co-workers that said Arias was a liar, manipulative, and "liked to play the victim."
LaViolette stuck to her guns, and said, in light of all the materials she reviewed in the case, Arias was not a manipulative person.
_ HLN is live-blogging the Jodi Arias trial. Read about LaViolette's testimony from Monday here, her sixth day on the stand here, her fifth day here, her fourth day here, her third day here, her second here and her first moments on the witness stand here. Read below for minute-by-minute updates from the trial. (Best read from the bottom up):_
7:34 p.m. ET: Martinez just accused Arias of not only displaying a pattern of jealousy but said she was a stalker. The judge has recessed court until tomorrow. Court will also be held this Friday, April 26 and May 3.
7:29 p.m. ET: The attorneys are at a sidebar with the judge.
7:28 p.m. ET: Martinez is asking LaViolette about Arias' inability to letting go of another ex-boyfriend and if it establishes a pattern of jealousy. LaViolette said it doesn't because she is not trying to control anyone with her jealousy.
7:25 p.m. ET:
7:23 p.m. ET: LaViolette is reviewing some of her notes she took during her evaluation of Arias' case.
7:18 p.m. ET: Martinez said after Arias broke up with her high school boyfriend and he moved to Oregon, she continued to visit him. The attorneys are at a sidebar with the judge.
7:17 p.m. ET: LaViolette said its common for people to have problems letting go after relationships.
7:15 p.m. ET: Martinez is asking LaViolette about Arias' behavior with her high school boyfriend after they broke up and how she had diffculty letting go of him.
7:13 p.m. ET:
7:11 p.m. ET: Martinez began to ask LaViolette about Arias' relationship with her high school boyfriend, but Willmott objected. The attorneys are at a sidebar with the judge.
7:09 p.m. ET: LaViolette said a pattern of jealous behavior is a negative thing, and it would go against the "Law of Attraction." LaViolette said that no one has indicated that Arias had a pattern of jealously.
7:07 p.m. ET: Martinez is demanding LaViolette give him an example of something positive coming from jealous behavior. LaViolette said people can step back and learn from their jealous behavior.
7:04 p.m. ET: Martinez is arguing whether the reason why Arias didn't write about being jealous in her journal, because it would be a negative thing and against the "Law of Attraction."
Martinez asked, "Let’s assume the defendant has a pattern, a hypothetical pattern of jealousy. You don’t see a hypo, a pattern of jealousy in the journals do you?"
"No, I don’t," said LaViolette.
Martinez asked, "But that lack of pattern in these journals could be because of the law of attraction because that is a negative energy kind of emotion or pattern right?"
Willmott said, "Objection, speculation."
"Sustained," said Judge Stephens.
Martinez asked, "Well this law of attraction, this energy you talked about, you’re saying that a pattern of jealousy is a positive thing under the law of attraction?"
"I never said that," said LaViolette.
Martinez asked, "It’s a negative thing, isn’t it?"
"A pattern of jealousy is a negative thing," said LaViolette.
Martinez asked, "Right and so that goes against the law of attraction. Doesn’t it? Where you put out positive vibes, right?"
"Yes," said LaViolette.
Martinez asked, "And so if the defendant exhibited a pattern of jealousy throughout her life and didn’t write about it in those journals, the reason could be because of the law of attraction that you’ve talked to us about right?"
"Nobody has indicated she has a pattern of jealousy," said LaViolette.
Martinez asked, "I just indicated it to you."
"You indicated it in a hypothetical," said LaViolette.
Martinez asked, "I indicated it to you. My point is this. This pattern of jealousy, if there is one, would not show up in those journals because she wouldn’t write about it. Right?"
"Probably not," said LaViolette.
7:00 p.m. ET: Martinez asked if LaViolette believes everything that is written in Arias' journal entry about her trip to Havasupai with Alexander. LaViolette responded, Yes, she does believe that entry as being true.
6:57 p.m. ET: The attorneys are at a sidebar with the judge.
6:56 p.m. ET: LaViolette said she did not think this journal entry and the fight was very important to her analysis.
6:54 p.m. ET: LaViolette said if Arias started the fight, it could change her opinion about the accuracy of her journal entry.
6:51 p.m. ET: Martinez wants LaViolette to assume that Arias started the fight, because she was unreasonable about what items she was going to bring on a hike.
6:50 p.m. ET:
6:48 p.m. ET: LaViolette agrees with Martinez that Arias' journal entry doesn't discuss who started the fight or details fight so it is incomplete.
6:44 p.m. ET: Arias wrote in her journal she got into a fight with Alexander on their trip to Havasupai. She also wrote Alexander was 90% responsible, and he eventually apologized. Martinez wants to know if that story was a lie if it would change how LaViolette viewed the accuracy of Arias' journal. LaViolette said it would be a problem for her.
6:41 p.m. ET: Martinez is asking LaViolette about what Arias wrote regarding a trip Arias took with Alexander to Havasupai.
6:39 p.m. ET: Martinez is having LaViolette review Arias' journal.
6:38 p.m. ET: The jury is being seated.
6:36 p.m. ET: The defense team is back in the courtroom, and testimony should begin shortly.
6:28 p.m ET: Our producer in the courtroom says the defense team has disappeared behind closed doors with the judge without Martinez.
6:03 p.m. ET: Martinez asked LaViolette to explain what she knows about a fight Arias had with Alexander in Havasupai. The judge is asking the jurors if they can attend court this Friday, April 26 and May 3. During the afternoon break, they will check their calendars for conflicts. The judge has recessed court until 6:30 p.m. ET.
5:58 p.m. ET: Martinez asked LaViolette if would change her opinion if Alexander wanted Arias to move back home to Yreka, because he didn't want to have anything to do with her. LaViolette said she would have to check out that new information and weight it.
5:56 p.m. ET:
5:55 p.m. ET: LaViolette said Arias never wrote in her journal about Alexander ever physically abusing her.
5:53 p.m. ET: Martinez is pointing out that LaViolette said the reason Arias did not write about Alexander's physical abuse, because she was following the "Law of Attraction." Therefore, Arias did not write about those negative things in her journal.
5:51 p.m. ET:
5:49 p.m. ET: Martinez is now moving on to Arias' journals and how she wrote about the "Law of Attraction."
5:48 p.m. ET: Martinez is arguing that LaViolette's notes indicate that she was introducing questions to Arias that were written in advance to interviewing her.
5:45 p.m. ET: Martinez is accusing LaViolette introduced Arias to the idea of quelling Alexander's anger with sex. He said she gave her a leading question according to her own notes. The attorneys are at a sidebar.
5:42 p.m. ET: Martinez is showing LaViolette some her notes where she wrote about how Arias supposedly used sex to calm Alexander's rage.
5:39 p.m. ET: LaViolette looks tired while she stares off into space during the sidebar.
5:36 p.m. ET: Martinez is asking LaViolette about how see testified Arias was uncomfortable the first time she had oral sex with Alexander. The attorneys are at a sidebar.
5:34 p.m. ET: Martinez is accusing LaViolette of being biased in favor of Arias, because every time she has made a judgment call in this case she has taken Arias' side.
5:32 p.m. ET: LaViolette said she couldn't tell if Arias had a real orgasm on the phone sex recording. Martinez is asking why she believes Alexander had an orgasm and not Arias. LaViolette said she is not an expert in orgasms.
5:30 p.m. ET: LaViolette just told Martinez that if he was in her group, she would ask him to take a time out. Judge Stephens admonished the witness for her outburst.
Martinez asked, " I’m not talking to you about that right now. We’re talking about secondary gain. Just itself, correct?"
"Well, secondary gain, secondary gain is not only part of whether somebody is going to get something from an expert witness or an attorney. Secondary gain also implies what you’re going to get when you’re having a sexual encounter with somebody so there’s…" said LaViolette.
Martinez asked, "So you’re equating, in the case, an individual who is charged with a very serious crime with somebody who maybe, maybe talking about masturbation. You’re equating that and saying, well they both have the same reason to be deceitful?"
"I did not say that," said LaViolette.
Martinez asked, "Well, that’s what you indicated."
"If you were in my group I would ask you take a time out, Mr. Martinez," said LaViolette.
Martinez said, "Judge, would you please admonish the witness."
"Yes. Ladies and gentlemen, please disregard the witness' last statement," said judge Stephens.
5:29 p.m. ET:
5:27 p.m. ET: Martinez asked LaViolette what is more important in her analysis text messages between Arias and Alexander or a recording of them having phone sex. Martinez is arguing that the recording of the phone sex is better evidence.
5:23 p.m. ET: Martinez accused LaViolette of already being in the defense's pocket in November 2012.
5:21 p.m. ET: Martinez is asking LaViolette if she had formed her opinion about domestic violence in this case when he interviewed her in November 2012. He is accusing her of already having an opinion in November 2012. LaViolette said she continued to gather information in the case to support her opinion after her interview with him.
5:17 p.m. ET: LaViolette said anybody can be wrong, and even her. Martinez asked if she could be wrong about the importance of Arias' history of anal sex. LaViolette said anything can be "hypothetically correct."
5** :15 p.m. ET:** LaViolette said she won't look at an aspect case if it is irrelevant to domestic violence.
5:13 p.m. ET: LaViolette said she does not know if Arias had anal sex with her high school boyfriend. She also said it is not important to her evaluation of whether domestic violence was present in Arias and Alexander's relationship.
5:12 p.m. ET:
5:11 p.m. ET: Martinez is asking LaViolette about how she asked Arias about anal sex. LaViolette said she asked Arias about who introduced lubricant for anal sex.
5:06 p.m. ET: Martinez is asking LaViolette if she has reviewed statements from Arias' father about her inability to tell the truth after the age of 14. The attorneys are now at a sidebar with the judge.
5:05 p.m. ET: The jury is being seated.
5:04 p.m. ET: Judge Stephens said the video will not be played for the jury, but Martinez can ask LaViolette about the content of the tape and whether statements from Arias' father would have impacted her opinion in this case.
5:01 p.m. ET: Martinez said he believes the jury should see the video of the interrogation, because it is relevant to whether Arias is truthful.
4:59 p.m. ET: Judge Stephens announced the hearing about the video of the police interrogation of Arias' father. The jury is not present. Willmott asked LaViolette if after watching the entire video of the interrogation if changes her opinion about whether domestic violence was present in Arias and Alexander's relationship.
4:54 p.m. ET: The judge is on the bench, and testimony should begin any minute.
4:41 p.m. ET: Testimony should begin shortly. Our producer in the courtroom says LaViolette is watching the police interrogation of Arias' father behind closed doors right now.
3:07 p.m. ET: On the recording, LaViolette said she didn't ask if Arias' anal sex with her high school boyfriend was consensual, because she is old-fashioned. Judge Stephens has recessed court for lunch. The live blog will pick back up when testimony resumes at 4:30 p.m. ET.
3:00 p.m. ET: Martinez is about to play a tape of LaViolette saying she was "old-fashioned" when it comes to anal sex. The attorneys are now at a sidebar with the judge.
2:56 p.m. ET: Martinez is asking LaViolette if she did not ask questions about Arias' sexual relationship with Alexander, because she is "old-fashioned." LaViolette said she changed her standard and ended up asking Arias sexual questions after Martinez confronted her in an interview about many sexual issues involving Alexander and Arias. The attorneys are now at a sidebar with the judge.
2:52 p.m ET: Martinez is asking LaViolette if Arias sent fake manipulative text messages to Alexander to make him pay attention her. LaViolette said hypothetically that is possible.
2:49 p.m. ET:
2:48 p.m. ET: The attorneys are at a sidebar.
2:47 p.m. ET: Martinez just accused LaViolette of being a "human lie detector." LaViolette said she believes that mischaracterizes her.
2:45 p.m. ET: LaViolette said after reviewing all the materials in the case she believes Arias was not manipulative.
2:41 p.m. ET: Martinez asked LaViolette if she took comments about Arias being manipulative into consideration when evaluating Arias' case. LaViolette said there was no evidence Arias was manipulative with men before her relationship with Alexander.
2:38 p.m. ET: Arias' manager said Arias would use and manipulate men, according to LaViolette.
2:35 p.m. ET: Martinez is pointing out LaViolette wrote in her notes that one of Arias' managers when she was a waitress said Arias was manipulative when it came to men. The attorneys are at a sidebar with the judge.
2:32 p.m. ET: Martinez is asking LaViolette if Arias was manipulative with men. LaViolette said a waitress that worked with Arias said she was only nice to good-looking men. Martinez is having LaViolette review some of her notes.
2:31 p.m. ET:
2:30 p.m. ET: The attorneys are at a sidebar with the judge.
2:28 p.m. ET: Martinez is asking LaViolette her to define manipulative. LaViolette said it is when someone deceives, changes data, and tells lies.
2:25 p.m ET: LaViolette said she believes she confronted Arias about her playing a victim of abuse in her youth, but nothing stands out in her mind about what Arias said when confronted.
2:22 p.m. ET: LaViolette said it was only one source that said Arias liked to "play the victim," and the source only knew Arias as a young girl. It was not very important to her analysis.
2:20 p.m. ET: LaViolette took notes about an interview with Arias' high school friend. Arias' friend said Arias "liked to play the victim."
2:17 p.m. ET: Martinez is accusiing LaViolette of saying Arias was manipulative, and she wasn't abused. He is now showing LaViolette more of her notes to review.
2:14 p.m. ET: Arias borrowed the gas cans from her ex-boyfriend Darryle Brewer. LaViolette said she didn't interview Brewer, and she doesn't think her analysis is lacking because she failed to interview him.
2:11 p.m. ET: The attorneys are at a sidebar with the judge.
2:09 p.m. ET: LaViolette wrote the following in her notes: "Last week of May of 2008 Jodi told Darryl she needed to borrow two gas cans because she was taking a long trip to Mesa and didn’t want to run out of gas."
2:06 p.m. ET: LaViolette said she had questions about the gas cans Arias borrowed, because she thought it was a last-minute decision to travel to Mesa, Arizona.
2:03 p.m. ET: Martinez was about to read to LaViolette what she wrote in her notes to impeach her, but the defense objected and now the attorneys are at a sidebar.
2:01 p.m. ET: LaViolette said the only thing she wanted to know about the gas cans is why she needed them.
1:58 p.m. ET: LaViolette said the gas cans did not make her question Arias' truthfulness. The attorneys are at a sidebar.
1:56 p.m. ET: LaViolette notes do mention how Arias borrowed gas cans for her road trip.
1:54 p.m. ET: Martinez accused LaViolette of questioning Arias truthfulness when she found out Arias borrowed gas cans from an ex-boyfriend for her roadtrip to visit Alexander in early June 2008. LaViolette is now reviewing her notes about the gas cans.
1:51 p.m. ET: Martinez wants to know if LaViolette read the police report and Arias' police interviews. LaViolette said she did review those materials, but doesn't remember details from them, because it was a long time ago. Martinez said Arias told police four different stories about how she cut her fingers.
1:48 p.m. ET: LaViolette said she did not focus on the story about the apples, because she was only supposed to access whether there was domestic violence in the relationship between Alexander and Arias.
Martinez said, "And so, that’s one of the things that you believed when you were talking to the defendant, that the cuts that she suffered during this killing were a result of her cutting apples? Right?"
"I didn’t believe that.," said LaViolette.
Martinez asked, "So as you’re going along, making assessments as to what you believe and what you don’t believe, right?"
"Oh, wait a minute, I’m sorry, I was unclear. You’re saying I believed she got the cuts from the apple?" said LaViolette.
Martinez said, "No. I’m saying isn’t it true that your notes reflect the fact that your information is that the cuts the defendant had after this killing resulted when she was slicing apples? Right?"
"Right," said LaViolette.
Martinez said, "And you believed that right?"
"I don’t, I don’t um, I don’t recall that I focused on that as much as what I was retained to do which was look at whether or not there was domestic violence in the context of the relationship which was really what I was intending, came on to do," said LaViolette.
1:46 p.m. ET: In her notes, LaViolette wrote Arias told her she cut her hand around the time she killed Alexander when she was cutting apples.
1:43 p.m. ET: The jury is being seated, and testimony should begin any minute.
1:37 p.m. ET: LaViolette said she doesn't think what Arias' father said contradicts what she testified about Monday, but she would need to assess it with more information about Arias and her father. She also seemed to indicate it was common for teenagers to have trouble telling their parents the truth. The attorneys are now at a sidebar with the judge.
1:34 p.m. ET: On the tape, Arias' father says Arias hasn't been honest with her parents since she was 14 years old.
1:33 p.m. ET: Martinez is now introducing the police interview into evidence.
1:31 p.m. ET: The attorneys are now at a sidebar with the judge.
1:29 p.m. ET: Martinez is going to show the court a part of a police interview with Arias' father.
1:28 p.m. ET: The judge has sent the jury out of the courtroom for 10 minutes.
1:25 p.m. ET:
1:23 p.m. ET: Martinez is asking LaViolette about how she said Monday that Arias did not have a history of lying before killing Alexander. Martinez is now asking LaViolette if she talked to Arias' father about her truthfulness growing up. He seems to be hinting that Arias' father told police Arias had trouble telling the truth after the age of 14. The attorneys are now at a sidebar with the judge.
1:20 p.m. ET: Martinez asked LaViolette whoelse she interviewed during her evaluation of Arias' case. LaViolette said she only interviewed Arias and no one else.
1:17 p.m. ET: Arias is paying close attention to LaViolette's testimony today.
1:13 p.m. ET: LaViolette said she did rule out "secondary gain" when assessing Arias's case. "Secondary gain" is a term for when someone lies for their benefit themselves.
1:12 p.m. ET:
1:10 p.m. ET: The attorneys are at a sidebar with the judge.
1:07 p.m. ET: Martinez wants to know how LaViolette assessed whether Arias was lying to benefit herself. LaViolette said she evaluated other corroborating information to verify her stories.
1:05 p.m. ET: LaViolette is on the stand, and Martinez is asking her about how she found Arias to be believable when she was interviewing her.
12:49 p.m. ET: Judge Sherry Stephens announced she will conduct a meeting in her chambers with Arias and her attorneys. It is not clear when testimony will pick back up now.
12:45 p.m. ET: The attorneys are at a sidebar with the judge. Testimony should begin any minute.
Can prosecutor Juan Martinez pull another rabbit out of his hat?
This week in the Jodi Arias trial, Martinez has been aggressively lobbing question after question at defense witness and domestic violence expert Alyce LaViolette, seemingly in an attempt to rattle her. The question is this: Can Martinez keep it up?
LaViolette has testified that Arias' ex-boyfriend Travis Alexander's physical and sexual abuse culminated in a fight that forced Arias to kill him in self-defense.
At the end of testimony Monday, Martinez let loose two surprises that left some court observers speechless: Arias wrote a "manifesto," and she thinks that she is as smart as the father of modern physics, Albert Einstein. Last week, Martinez began his attack on LaViolette's credibility, revealing that she once gave a speech about how "Snow White" is a battered woman. He accused her of being able to find abuse in situations she knows little about, including "myths."
On Monday, Martinez wanted to know how LaViolette reconciled her belief that Arias has low self-esteem with her knowledge that Arias was confident enough to write a manifesto and thinks she is as smart as Einstein. "So the fact that the defendant was happy to have her IQ tested, because she believed she’s on the level of Einstein, doesn’t indicate to you this individual does not suffer from a low self-esteem issue?" Martinez asked.
"Most people who talk about how smart they are don’t feel that they are that smart," she said. "When I did my practice tests [as an undergraduate], people were very interested in their IQ because it’s interesting. So, there could be a number of reasons why she was excited about that. I don’t know, I wasn’t there," said LaViolette.
Martinez asked, "Well, but the bottom line is you had it in your notes, right? You read that. Correct?"
"Yes, I did," said LaViolette.
Martinez asked, "And, you’re saying that, well, all these other people have these reasons why they want to know what their IQ is, you don’t know that’s why the defendant wanted to know about her IQ right?"
"No, I don’t," said LaViolette.
Martinez asked, "Because you didn’t ask her, right?"
"No, I didn’t," said LaViolette.
Martinez asked "And it could be she has a very high self-esteem and she believes it and this is going to be confirmation for her."
Defense attorney Jennifer Willmott objected, saying Martinez's question called for speculation, but Judge Sherry Stephens overruled the objection.