I think if there is a mistrial, this judge would set the sentence. AZlawyer knows for sure.Question:
If this circus goes on for so long that we start losing jurors and a mistrial has to be declared due to that...could the next retrial be with a different judge or is there some reason why this judge would have to preside?
What a contentious and intense court hearing! I’m sure I am not alone in experiencing significant spikes in blood pressure, and a rabid like desperation to keep up with tweets. BTW, a huge thank you to all who compile tweets for us. I hope you know how appreciated you are!
Now for a brief OT, which I will move to Sidebar after this: I recently found out I will be housebound for several weeks, unfortunately spoiling holiday plans as well as generally contributing to the insanity of forced and solitary recuperation.
I am reaching out to anyone who could give me some great reading suggestions. I must have books. If I am to survive this confinement, I must have books! I loved Gone Girl by Gillian Flynn, Michael Connelly books, Jodi Picoult. Any suggestions would be appreciated! I don’t even have a day to go library “shopping” so Amazon it is. (I have Amazon all queued up, ready to accept an overburdened credit card.) I have tried unsuccessfully to read from kindle or a tablet, so old fashioned books it must be. Thanks in advance!
I think if there is a mistrial, this judge would set the sentence. AZlawyer knows for sure.
I think if there is a mistrial, this judge would set the sentence. AZlawyer knows for sure.
Thanks AZ. I'm really surprised that this is normal procedure that an expert who is supposed to be unbias be allowed to shake hands with the client. Please correct me if I am wrong but didn't ALV get into trouble at the trial for speaking to one of Travis's sister.
Bringing this over from last thread. Response to AZlawyer saying it is normal for an expert to shake a defendants hand:
Well, Nurmi has succeeded in dragging out the penalty phase, leaking what goes on in the courtroom, sealing the courtroom proceedings from the public and media, having a secret witness, causing this hearing on motion for mistrial and removal of DP, bringing in a computer expert on *advertiser censored*, and delaying this hearing until December. Oh yes, and bringing in a sexpert who doesn't know what she is talking about and therefore lying to the jury.
Maybe, possibly, with any kind of luck at all, we will STILL have a jury next year who will decide her punishment.
Disgraceful!! Thanks Judge Stephens for giving Nurmi the go ahead.
Thanks Curious...I thought so too but then remembered that if the state does not take DP off the table, she can't sentence. For DP it has to be a jury trial.
But, but, but......he's a computer expert who is supposed to be objective. What am I missing here?
Yes, the same judge would preside.
From Joan (Canada) on the other thread:
The expert is not supposed to be unbiased. He is a paid witness for the defense.
ALV got in trouble for speaking to the victim because she's part of the defense team and they are not supposed to directly approach the victims.
Objectivity does not apply here sadly...paid experts are just that....paid to give a schpeel for a side.From elementary on the other thread:
No, he isn't. He's a paid witness for the defense.
I find that confusing. Computers are things, not people. Computers can be analysed without bias. Why shake the hand of the defendant then?
So what was the upshod of today's hearing??
I find that confusing. Computers are things, not people. Computers can be analysed without bias. Why shake the hand of the defendant then?