(wrote this for last thread and then it was gone so bringing over)
I was just looking at some info on murder trials in AZ. There was an interesting chart on page 4 of this link which had info about charges, arrests, time to trial, length of trial etc.
trial lengths ranged from four to 18 days, with a median of seven days.
The purpose of this article was to discuss the impact of forensics on trial. This case is not a whodunit, we have all kinds of forensics and this is just a ridiculous use of time, even in a DP case. I found this article about Capital Cases in AZ. https://www.azag.gov/sites/default/f...0Set%20III.pdf
Now, it's from 2001 I believe but studied 30 cases. Length of trial info:
Hrs: Median = 55.7 hrs.
Range = 19.6–71.2 hrs.
Days: Median = 11.5 days*
Range = 4–19 days
Obviously, this case is way outside the normal parameters. The judge has no DP experience and does not seem to have a firm hand in the courtroom which lets the DT run roughshod over her as she is so afraid of doing something to cause them to file a motion she denies which will provide the basis for an appeal that they might win. She's like a hostage.
The DT is loving the never ending trial as it increases their ability to get a mistrial. The longer this goes on, the more the jurors are stressed, the more likely is that they will get their wish. This judge displays ZERO interest in keeping this trial on track, in holding attorneys to the time they indicated was required to present their case. I honestly don't know if these defense attorneys are as bad as they seem or if they are deliberately acting incompetent. I've never seen a trial attorney take as long as Nurmi to ask a question. No one would hire this guy for trial work. Seriously. Wilmont acts as though she never asked a question in a courtroom before or learned what a complete sentence was. There is no real evidence of self defense in this case. Yet they have multiple people dissecting a murderers journals like they are the font of some sort of wisdom. They have experts discerning the motivations of the dead victim from random e-mail snippets. Why don't we just break out the Ouiji board?
Neither of the defense attys acts as though they have a clue or care about capturing the attention of their audience, the jury and not boring them to death or making them hate their guts. I'm beginning to think they have some multi-faceted plan to actually get a mistrial-cause there is no way they are "winning" this case they way they are handling it. I am just truly befuddled...and not in a good way!
Originally Posted by justsharing
I don't know if it would be the correct thing to do but I would have liked to see the judge question Ms. L about her illness, in a stern tone. The judge is getting walked all over because she's allowing it. I have never seen a case with so little respect for the jury