Arias files motion to fire lead attorney Kirk Nurmi

I'm so behind on CKJA show just happened to look on WS site today came across this... 'nugget of insight' on what CKJA vs been up to since trial ended...

Having watched& posted on this trial I found it interesting that she states KN told her to stop having a tantrum.. that day court cancelled abruptly was due in fact as we surmised was because she was having a grandiose chit fit!!

She clearly has been sitting in her cell going over the trial again and again trying to figure out a way to change the outcome it's a repeated pattern in her life demonstrated with her continued attempts to reconnect with men that had the bad fortune to have showed romantic interest in her. Btw speaking of word 'demonstrated' was it just me or did her printed word demonstrates almost read demon strates??

I think just a hunch CKJA tried to apply her feminine wiles on KN and didn't fly and ever since it's been HER not cooperating. Looks like lil miss still harbors anger against EF and KH but then again how can she not it's THEIR fault not hers she's in this situation had they been perjured she'd be painting the nursery for the baby her and her jailhouse paramour planned to have to complete her family dreams!

Clearly she is continuing to play the victim card but sadly doesn't realize from here on out she's actually the perp and that's not going to change no matter how many neatly printed handwritten 'woe is me' letters she writes.

Lastly.. am I the only one who found her use of hyphens kind of amusing considering the letter is handwritten not typed so she could clearly have started for one example the word Began she wrote "be-" at end of one line then "gan" on the next line I just found it odd she didn't just write began as first word of next line.. hmm maybe she was just copying from another source you know she has great copying and tracing talents! ;)
 
Lastly.. am I the only one who found her use of hyphens kind of amusing considering the letter is handwritten not typed so she could clearly have started for one example the word Began she wrote "be-" at end of one line then "gan" on the next line I just found it odd she didn't just write began as first word of next line.. hmm maybe she was just copying from another source you know she has great copying and tracing talents! ;)

Her literary attempts NEVER fail to amuse and irritate me. :facepalm:

I appreciate anyone trying to better themselves and educate, but in her case (to me) it is not for "self" but to just add more facets to her many facades.
 
Her literary attempts NEVER fail to amuse and irritate me. :facepalm:

I appreciate anyone trying to better themselves and educate, but in her case (to me) it is not for "self" but to just add more facets to her many facades.

How de-edifying...
 
In perusing L. Kirk Nurmi's August change of venue motion I had to admit (much as I hate to) that the lying torture murderess has a point.

At $225/hour, Arizona's not getting their money's worth.

LKN's filing contains this 'gem': "Marixopa County [sic]", and these two chucklers: "Bearing in mind that by in large [sic], the publicity regarding the trial was highly inflammatory with Ms. Arias frequently being referred to as a stalker, a lair [sic], crazy and a seductress."

"Marixopa County [sic]" -- I guess "x" marks the spot - where the "c" should be, that is.

"by in large [sic]" -- Is this a veiled reference to Costco, as in "[buy] in large" quantities?

"lair [sic]" -- Yet another veiled reference, this one to JA's workout apparel shown to the jury when they viewed the crime scene photos on the big screen, especially the one with her leg in the foreground of the infamous dragging photo, as in "Lair, lair, pants were there"?
 
In perusing L. Kirk Nurmi's August change of venue motion I had to admit (much as I hate to) that the lying torture murderess has a point.

At $225/hour, Arizona's not getting their money's worth.

LKN's filing contains this 'gem': "Marixopa County [sic]", and these two chucklers: "Bearing in mind that by in large [sic], the publicity regarding the trial was highly inflammatory with Ms. Arias frequently being referred to as a stalker, a lair [sic], crazy and a seductress."

"Marixopa County [sic]" -- I guess "x" marks the spot - where the "c" should be, that is.

"by in large [sic]" -- Is this a veiled reference to Costco, as in "[buy] in large" quantities?

"lair [sic]" -- Yet another veiled reference, this one to JA's workout apparel shown to the jury when they viewed the crime scene photos on the big screen, especially the one with her leg in the foreground of the infamous dragging photo, as in "Lair, lair, pants were there"?

You are just too, too funny :floorlaugh: :floorlaugh:


:floorlaugh: :floorlaugh: :floorlaugh:

Thanks for the laugh- it's a breath of fresh air. :seeya:
 
There was an oral argument scheduled for this morning at 8:30, was it held? Haven't seen anything on twitter except that she's now cost the AZ taxpayers 2 million bucks. I wonder how much that is per lie?
 
wonder what this is about - sounds like it's a totally different criminal case which requires a portion of the Arias transcript from her hearing 1/13/14. ?? Maybe it deals with that guy that threatened the reporters or something

1/22/14 Minute entry
MINUTE ENTRY



The Court is advised there is a hearing scheduled before the presiding criminal judge on
an unrelated matter and a portion of the transcript of the hearing conducted on January 13, 2014
is needed for that hearing. At the Court’s request, the court reporter has transcribed the portion
of the hearing which is needed by the presiding criminal judge. Good cause appearing,

IT IS ORDERED unsealing the portion of the hearing conducted on January 13, 2014
which has been transcribed by the court reporter.

This case is eFiling eligible: http://www.clerkofcourt.maricopa.gov/efiling/default.asp.
Attorneys are encouraged to review Supreme Court Administrative Order 2011-140 to determine
their mandatory participation in eFiling through AZTurboCourt.
 
wonder what this is about - sounds like it's a totally different criminal case which requires a portion of the Arias transcript from her hearing 1/13/14. ??

1/22/14 Minute entry
MINUTE ENTRY



The Court is advised there is a hearing scheduled before the presiding criminal judge on
an unrelated matter and a portion of the transcript of the hearing conducted on January 13, 2014
is needed for that hearing. At the Court’s request, the court reporter has transcribed the portion
of the hearing which is needed by the presiding criminal judge. Good cause appearing,

IT IS ORDERED unsealing the portion of the hearing conducted on January 13, 2014
which has been transcribed by the court reporter.

This case is eFiling eligible: http://www.clerkofcourt.maricopa.gov/efiling/default.asp.
Attorneys are encouraged to review Supreme Court Administrative Order 2011-140 to determine
their mandatory participation in eFiling through AZTurboCourt.

I saw that when I was looking for the ME dated 1/27 that's not posted yet. No idea what case that refers to but it's interesting, with everything sealed is there any way to know what the hearing on the 13th was about? Was that when the retrial date was set?
 
There was an oral argument scheduled for this morning at 8:30, was it held? Haven't seen anything on twitter except that she's now cost the AZ taxpayers 2 million bucks. I wonder how much that is per lie?

For her?

About thirty-four cents per, give or take.
 
Maybe that ME dated 1/22 is the one referred to on the docket dated 1/27?
 
I saw that when I was looking for the ME dated 1/27 that's not posted yet. No idea what case that refers to but it's interesting, with everything sealed is there any way to know what the hearing on the 13th was about? Was that when the retrial date was set?

The only case that is coming up next week that might be related, and I say might, would be the DeVault case which starts February 5th. MD and JA have been reported on MSM as being friends while in jail. No secret, it has been reported. Just speculation on my part but it's the only other criminal case that we know of that could be related to information that might have been revealed in the sealed courtroom hearing on the 13th.

I don't think the timing of the MD case and JA's case is making the defense happy. jmo
 
I saw that when I was looking for the ME dated 1/27 that's not posted yet. No idea what case that refers to but it's interesting, with everything sealed is there any way to know what the hearing on the 13th was about? Was that when the retrial date was set?

yep, the 13th is when the retrial was set.

and on 2nd thought - don't think it's related to David Simpson's (the guy who threatened reporters, etc) criminal case.
 
The only case that is coming up next week that might be related, and I say might, would be the DeVault case which starts February 5th. MD and JA have been reported on MSM as being friends while in jail. No secret, it has been reported. Just speculation on my part but it's the only other criminal case that we know of that could be related to information that might have been revealed in the sealed courtroom hearing on the 13th.

I don't think the timing of the MD case and JA's case is making the defense happy. jmo

Marissa Devault did have a pre-trial conference 1/22/14. That's interesting.
 
Marissa Devault did have a pre-trial conference 1/22/14. That's interesting.

Oh yeah, I forgot about that one coming up, seems likely though quite curious as to what may be relevant from the hearing in her case.

I looked through her docket and only saw a note about still pics and camera and couldn't find a minute entry about whether or not cameras will be rolling, anyone see anything in msm about it?
 
Oh yeah, I forgot about that one coming up, seems likely though quite curious as to what may be relevant from the hearing in her case.

I looked through her docket and only saw a note about still pics and camera and couldn't find a minute entry about whether or not cameras will be rolling, anyone see anything in msm about it?

haven't found anything about the media at Devault's case but it says the AZ prosecution is using the same expert to refute her PTSD claims that testified in Arias case.

http://www.theepochtimes.com/n3/472758-new-arizona-trial-draws-comparisons-to-jodi-arias-case/
 
Looks like another lulu of a trial.
 
Looks like another lulu of a trial.

And it appears that JA may not have revealed the pedophile charges until after MD was already in jail. I don't know but it appears that way. If there are no cameras I hope we get some good reporting from the court room on both these cases. jmo
 
Looks like another lulu of a trial.

*BBM*
That made me giggle....I like it :)

Following Amanda Hayes right now, but hoping DeVault is live streamed also, I would like to check out that trial.


ETA- Still irked that JA likely will not be streamed. I feel like I put in so much time waiting for this to end I should get to see it!
I understand WHY they don't want the cameras though, and respect it.
 
JM's last case (Chrisman) was off and on live streamed, the problem with that was, when it wasn't live streaming, we almost never got video afterwards even if the court cameras were rolling. The sentencing video has still not been released to my knowledge (I gave up searching for it a couple weeks ago). That is my fear with JA's retrial, no live streaming will equal no visuals at all, no electronic devices in the courtroom will mean almost no first-hand reporting of daily events.

And I don't buy that the public seeing the trial/retrial impacts the jury's decision regardless of how much attention it garners. They have legal means to put blinders on the jury, sequestration, and if what the public says sways what the attorneys do in court, then that is something for the judge to handle, secrecy in proceedings is not the solution.

The Arizona public has a very large financial stake in this, it's a shame they can't appear before JSS and request their money back, as she has effectively cancelled their purchased tickets.
 
There was no hearing on the 28th.

JM requested a delay:

"At the request of the State,
IT IS ORDERED vacating Oral Argument set this date and resetting same on 02/19/2014 at 9:30 a.m. before this division."
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
185
Guests online
837
Total visitors
1,022

Forum statistics

Threads
589,938
Messages
17,927,928
Members
228,007
Latest member
BeachyTee
Back
Top