Arias files motion to fire lead attorney Kirk Nurmi

[MeeBee]

Trying to be objective here about Kiefer. He clearly has an agenda. I'm not convinced that agenda is just about Travis' murderer. I would have to know a great deal more than I do about local politics in AZ, about possible bias he might have about the DP, the defense bar, and about State prosecutors in general and in AZ.

What this trial has demonstrated to me is the blindness advocates can demonstrate. We all see what we are predisposed to see. The difference is that few of us are in the position to help determine another person's life or death. LaViolette, I'm sure, genuinely cares about DV. Unfortunately, her take on it opened her up to the lies and manipulations of a murderer, and unable to defend herself with facts, she went personal and closed herself off to reason and logic.

I see the same with Kiefer. I'd guess that he believes he's on the side of virtue and good, that his crusade against JM is about seeking more perfect justice and holding power accountable. At least that's what he tells himself.

The older I get the more I allow for the reality we are all flawed and merely mortal. I don't like Kiefer's slant, and I think he is acting blind in his pursuit of JM. I don't think his obsession has much to do with this murderer, tho. He'd be using whoever and whatever was on hand as a weapon against JM. Sigh.

This is a good point. Perhaps you are right. But he is supposed to be an impartial trial reporter. He is not. He's a joke amongst his colleagues now.

 

[MeeBee]

What I see is a journalist slanting the truth. Accusing prosecutors of misconduct is defense strategy 101. That JM has had this accusation levelled at him repeatedly just means he graduated from law school and is an active trial Atty.

If Kiefer cared about presenting a balanced view he would have given equal time to the ethically challenged defense attys in AZ. But, nooe, just prosecutors. Nary a word about that other side. Hmm.

No, you are right, that is exactly the truth and that is exactly what I was trying to say. That he has had numerous accusations and issues is not unique to him or any prosecutor. Accusing prosecutors of misconduct over every tiny issue is what defense attorneys are supposed to do. He acts as though this reveals a history of misconduct but none of them were ever seen through because they were revealed to be, like I said, defense shenanigans.

Being aggressive in the courtroom or hitting criminals hard instead of pleading out (which he almost never does) does not constitute misconduct. It's a stylistic and professional choice. It's how he's chosen to handle his job. He does it ethically. He doesn't hide evidence or act shadily. He just plays hardball. Indeed, Kiefer put a slant on the whole thing and has zeroed in on Juan. He doesn't like the guy. My question is, did it start recently with Jodi, or has he always disliked him?

 

[Ricki]

I would like to know what his beef is with Juan myself. He has been up Juans butt since this trial. If you remember correctly, Kiefer also turned on KCL during the court proceedings.

 

[MeeBee]

I am fairly certain MK is in cahoots with this DT and is giving them ideas. Their blaming Juan for the circus atmosphere and threats against witnesses seems to stem from him.

He also acts as though any decision in Juan's favor is a demonstration of corruption and a lack of punishing Juan for being unethical. For instance, the defense filed several misconduct motions against Juan and Judge Stephens denied them all? Is he serious? Does he even know the law? A judge deciding to throw out a trial based on prosecutorial misconduct is an extreme one and it is a rare one, because they know what games defense attorneys play. Juan did nothing that would warrant a mistrial. The defense acted very shadily in their own right. Funny how MK never reported on that. For instance, trying to get in testimony from Dr. Samuels that had previously been ruled against. She told them that he could not talk about premeditated vs. crime of passion and they tried to get him to anyway. They also didn't show Juan a slide show he was planning to use until the morning he was supposed to be called to testify. Again, Keifer never addressed that.

He also seems to passively criticize Montgomery for not criticizing Juan or blaming him for the circus atmosphere of the trial. That is a slant if I ever heard one. How is Juan to blame for that? And what does he expect Juan's boss to say?

 

[MeeBee]

Does anyone remember Auntie's FB status about not agreeing to giving up Jodi's right to appeal because "too much has come out?" Think it had something to do with this hit piece Michael Kiefer was planning? I am certain now more than ever that Kiefer has been feeding Jodi and the family lines about Juan and his "misconduct" and his "lies." What has come out exactly? All this stuff is public knowledge. I have heard of all this in previous articles. Anyone can google Juan and his previous cases and find all the accusations made against him. A prosecutor being accused of misconduct is nothing new and often unfounded which is why it usually leads to nowhere.

This is a very complex effort to make records for future appeal purposes. They are good. Slick as they come. I doubt it will work.

 

[katiecoolady]

I am fairly certain MK is in cahoots with this DT and is giving them ideas. Their blaming Juan for the circus atmosphere and threats against witnesses seems to stem from him.

He also acts as though any decision in Juan's favor is a demonstration of corruption and a lack of punishing Juan for being unethical. For instance, the defense filed several misconduct motions against Juan and Judge Stephens denied them all? Is he serious? Does he even know the law? A judge deciding to throw out a trial based on prosecutorial misconduct is an extreme one and it is a rare one, because they know what games defense attorneys play. Juan did nothing that would warrant a mistrial. The defense acted very shadily in their own right. Funny how MK never reported on that. For instance, trying to get in testimony from Dr. Samuels that had previously been ruled against. She told them that he could not talk about premeditated vs. crime of passion and they tried to get him to anyway. They also didn't show Juan a slide show he was planning to use until the morning he was supposed to be called to testify. Again, Keifer never addressed that.

He also seems to passively criticize Montgomery for not criticizing Juan or blaming him for the circus atmosphere of the trial. That is a slant if I ever heard one. How is Juan to blame for that? And what does he expect Juan's boss to say?

Montgomery doesn't need to criticize Juan...Kiefer does that for all of the state of AZ. the vendetta is creepy at this point. there are so many fishy things like:

- how did Kiefer know who the foreperson was, and report it, before it was released during sentencing deliberations?
- why did he redact this detail from his report that day?
-why did he report a hung jury before anyone knew this for sure around this same time?

Also the Darryl Brewer interview was totally suspect. They pulled him from testifying, gave some lame reason why (sentencing phase) yet he miraculously shows up in a few short hours in an online video interview with Kiefer in the background asking questions. It was clear to me it was all choreographed and an opportunity for Brewer to give his testimony via media.

Very very fishy dealings between Kiefer and the defense team. He's not even very good at hiding it now.

 

[katiecoolady]

This is a good point. Perhaps you are right. But he is supposed to be an impartial trial reporter. He is not. He's a joke amongst his colleagues now.

This is an absolutely true statement. MOST other journalists in the courtroom who spoke to me about him consider him a joke, a yippy Chihuahua barking about Martinez, someone to be avoided. One said to me "I hate it when he comes to sit next to me because he never shuts up about this stuff". He's like a woman with PMS, venting, spewing. :tantrum:

But he's more dangerous.

 

[katiecoolady]

No, you are right, that is exactly the truth and that is exactly what I was trying to say. That he has had numerous accusations and issues is not unique to him or any prosecutor. Accusing prosecutors of misconduct over every tiny issue is what defense attorneys are supposed to do. He acts as though this reveals a history of misconduct but none of them were ever seen through because they were revealed to be, like I said, defense shenanigans.

Being aggressive in the courtroom or hitting criminals hard instead of pleading out (which he almost never does) does not constitute misconduct. It's a stylistic and professional choice. It's how he's chosen to handle his job. He does it ethically. He doesn't hide evidence or act shadily. He just plays hardball. Indeed, Kiefer put a slant on the whole thing and has zeroed in on Juan. He doesn't like the guy. My question is, did it start recently with Jodi, or has he always disliked him?

He has hated him for years. At least that's my impression. This case put him over the edge and he just started making stuff up to make Juan look bad.

 

[katiecoolady]

Just one more thing. Did anyone note Kiefer tweeted after last week's hearing that the Alexander family had no comment? Oh really? As if they would EVER talk to that lunatic! That's hilarious! They bolt the other way whenever they see him...as one of the sisters said to me about half way through the trial "why were you talking to him? you know he hates us, right?". He probably feels proud about that...getting a victim's family thinking he hates them.

 

[gcharlie]

Does anyone remember Auntie's FB status about not agreeing to giving up Jodi's right to appeal because "too much has come out?" Think it had something to do with this hit piece Michael Kiefer was planning? I am certain now more than ever that Kiefer has been feeding Jodi and the family lines about Juan and his "misconduct" and his "lies." What has come out exactly? All this stuff is public knowledge. I have heard of all this in previous articles. Anyone can google Juan and his previous cases and find all the accusations made against him. A prosecutor being accused of misconduct is nothing new and often unfounded which is why it usually leads to nowhere.

This is a very complex effort to make records for future appeal purposes. They are good. Slick as they come. I doubt it will work.

MeeBee, I picked up on that FB post by the aunt and have been watching things. There is no doubt in my mind that things are being orchestrated right now and that MK is in the thick of it.

I cannot come up with any legitimate way that MK could have obtained CMJA's motion including the MCSO certification page before it had been recorded as an official court document. Unless I am missing something, MK got the document by either paying off someone from MSO or from the County Clerk office or they leaked it to him.

What am I missing? How could MK have gotten a copy of the handwritten motion including the MCSO certification page? Would it be legal for this document to be leaked?

BTW, I have contacted various individuals in the media or with possible connections to the media in the hopes that they will follow through on this story.

 

[katiecoolady]

MeeBee, I picked up on that FB post by the aunt and have been watching things. There is no doubt in my mind that things are being orchestrated right now and that MK is in the thick of it.

I cannot come up with any legitimate way that MK could have obtained CMJA's motion including the MCSO certification page before it had been recorded as an official court document. Unless I am missing something, MK got the document by either paying off someone from MSO or from the County Clerk office or they leaked it to him.

What am I missing? How could MK have gotten a copy of the handwritten motion including the MCSO certification page? Would it be legal for this document to be leaked?

BTW, I have contacted various individuals in the media or with possible connections to the media in the hopes that they will follow through on this story.

I have no doubt whatsoever, based on my observations during this whole trial and after, that the defense team was handing documents and other information to MK to publish it for them. Trial by media. He should have been on their payroll. And should be now. He's doing it probono because it feeds his venomous hatred of Juan Martinez. He lives off of that. It's disturbing.

 

[fifteen89]

From page 7:
"Kirk Nurmi does not listen or respond to my concerns. If anything, he is deaf to them. I am requesting an opportunity to give the court a specific example of this in an ex-parte fashion due to its nature and to show the court how Mr. Nurmi's failure to listen and respond, and even properly advise me, adversely affected my testimony at trial."


Any ideas wth she thinks (operative word) Nurmi didn't advise her properly about or what she would have testified differently about that would've changed the guilty verdict?

Yeesh. Mizz Thang is a piece of work.

 

[Ricki]

JA pens a motion to get rid of Nurmi because she feels he didn't do her justice and Kiefer, just a few days later writes an article about Juans supposed misconduct. Is the timing to convenient? Seems like they are trashing both sides here. What outcome are they expecting from this? I really don't see anything changing.

 

[katiecoolady]

JA pens a motion to get rid of Nurmi because she feels he didn't do her justice and Kiefer, just a few days later writes an article about Juans supposed misconduct. Is the timing to convenient? Seems like they are trashing both sides here. What outcome are they expecting from this? I really don't see anything changing.

It's all a desperate choreography to avoid the DP. Kiefer is driven by wanting to humiliate Juan...Jodi's driven to, basically, save her life (which means have a better lifestyle until she perishes in prison).

 

[LinasK]

It's all a desperate choreography to avoid the DP. Kiefer is driven by wanting to humiliate Juan...Jodi's driven to, basically, save her life (which means have a better lifestyle until she perishes in prison).

Neither will succeed. Both Nurmi and Juan did their jobs and did them well.

 

[katiecoolady]

Neither will succeed. Both Nurmi and Juan did their jobs and did them well.

Ya got that right LinasK. This is all blowing smoke to avoid the DP and set up appeals to waste taxpayer money for decades. I predict at least a couple appeals with Kiefer's name all over them!

 

[LambChop]

I think it is strange MK mentions "circus like atmosphere" when that is almost always associated with what the media puts out there. Camera or no camera, the State would have presented their case the same. jmo

 

[gcharlie]

From page 7:
"Kirk Nurmi does not listen or respond to my concerns. If anything, he is deaf to them. I am requesting an opportunity to give the court a specific example of this in an ex-parte fashion due to its nature and to show the court how Mr. Nurmi's failure to listen and respond, and even properly advise me, adversely affected my testimony at trial."


Any ideas wth she thinks (operative word) Nurmi didn't advise her properly about or what she would have testified differently about that would've changed the guilty verdict?

Yeesh. Mizz Thang is a piece of work.

No idea, other than it must be a lollapalooza for her to want to tattle to the judge. Not just closed session, but one on one.

Hard for me to understand "adversely affected my testimony at trial". She took an oath to tell the truth, so shouldn't her testimony be the truth? How can counsel affect her testimony, other than "keep your answers brief", "take time before you answer", etc?

Is she going to say that Nurmi knew she was lying and he encouraged her to do so?:floorlaugh:

 

[Hope4More]

He also seems to passively criticize Montgomery for not criticizing Juan or blaming him for the circus atmosphere of the trial. That is a slant if I ever heard one. How is Juan to blame for that? And what does he expect Juan's boss to say?

IMO, from reading the hit piece on JM, Kiefer would like to take Montgomery down too, but doesn't have the umm... bells to go straight after him like he is with JM. He takes the coward's route instead, smearing Montgomery with innuendo. As in, Montgomery is withholding JM's personnel file to cover up JM's "misdeeds," therefore he is complicit. Not subtle and downright ugly.

 

[Hope4More]

It's all a desperate choreography to avoid the DP. Kiefer is driven by wanting to humiliate Juan...Jodi's driven to, basically, save her life (which means have a better lifestyle until she perishes in prison).

Do you know why Kiefer loathes JM?