Discussions on Formal Sentencing Hearing - Jodi Arias #2

Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
and, I would be PISSED that #17 sabotaged FIVE months, almost HALF a year of MY life! Likely causing work, relationship and financial problems, knowing all the while that my sacrifices and presence meant nothing!

Yes, if I were one of them, I would feel validated that I was right in reading this juror...but I would be SICK that Travis and family did not get a legitimate trial. (Heck, it could have been an alternate that would have been the 12th juror and not voted for DP, but it's the dishonesty that makes this sooooo wrong)
 
A woman that chooses to marry a man the day before he's sentenced would remember. That's one weird day of wedded bliss.

Absolutely!!! Plus we've all witnessed how vociferously JM prosecutes - so I imagine he said some things about her beloved that didn't make her happy....
 
You can't prove it and like I said nothing will come of this.

But it's all just a little to coincidental. Her seeming undisclosed connection to Juan. Oh, maybe she didn't remmeber him. Come on, how do you forget that voice? B.S. Her liking the Secret and The Law of Attraction on Facebook, things Jodi talked about many, many, many times in her trial as reasons she didn't write down or report her abuse. Oh lots of people like those things. Come on. Admitting to watching "bits and pieces" of the Lifetime movie and news of her seems as if she under reported her knowledge of the case. I'm gonna wager she did not just watch "bits and pieces" of it seeing how she spoke about it. Using the movie and news clips in deliberations, stating it made her look like a monster but Jodi isn't a monster, as if her being misrepresented matters. That doesn't sound like an epiphany she had upon entering the courtroom and seeing Jodi. That sounds like a predetermined opinion. The other jurors used actual evidence and trial notes to determine that Travis was not who the defense said he was. The holdout used a movie that was already sensationalistic and short on facts and had nothing to do with this trial. Saying the death penalty would be revenge. Again, just a coincidence I guess.

I know it doesn't matter. Nothing can be done about it now. But what a disappointment. This was the worry, that a stealth juror who supports Jodi would tell some fibs to get on and hang it all. It's amazing. They lost what, five jurors before delibs, had two alternates and still she made it all the way to the end. I guess that's just the way the cookie crumbles.

And like mind matters said, how disheartening it is that the whole thing was futile from the get go by someone with an agenda.


Maybe the outcome of the sentencing phase can't be changed, but I would feel a WHOLE lot better if this juror was guilty of lying or being a stealth juror, that she was caught and faced consequences. At the very least it might deter future jurors from thinking about even trying it.
 
I'm still having a really hard time understanding how this juror having a connection to Juan, allegedly being involved to some extent with players in the case, seeing the movie/potential news coverage and seemingly not interested in deliberating - how can all that not affect the outcome of the trial?? In other words, all those things make the verdict bogus. So how is it possible that the verdict will stand if reached with a liar in the jury box? Only if it hurt the DEFENSE??? Wth is up with that??
Where oh where is AZLawyer???


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
You can all throw rocks and me and I don't care. I do believe there was jury tampering. And it all goes back to MDLR. If they start with her, the truth will come out.

:seeya: NO rocks from me, Curious ! I totally agree !

The more we learn as the day goes by, the more and more obvious it is that there was some "jury tampering."

MDLR should have been IMMEDIATELY REMOVED as JA's "mit spec" when she was SNEAKING JA's artwork in and out of the jail -- the 3-way phone call with MLDR, JA and the 3rd person -- Tweeting from the courtroom -- etc.

I sure hope they are at least NOW investigating her ... but the way that entire courtroom was run, I doubt it !

:gaah: and :moo:
 
No doubt in my mind that she followed the guilt phase of the trial....none. She knew and does know who JM is.

The question wasn't "do you know who JM is" the question was, "do you know anyone in the Prosecutor's office." I know the name of my county's DA but I don't know her, nor have I ever spoken to her.
 
Once the sentencing is completed will the transcripts of all those secretive side bars and in chamber meetings become available to the public?
 
I'm also waiting for Troy Hayden to confirm or otherwise, that Juror #17 posted on the 'Jodi is Innocent forum' on 11th March 2013, on a thread titled 'Has the Government proved Murder One........

The title of JAII forum March 11th 2013 topic thread is "Jose Baez discusses the Jodi Arias trial". Is this the one you are referring to or is it another date?
 
Did JSS rule all secrets were to be released "after sentencing" or "after verdict"?
 
So are you all saying that this juror may have known Juan from her ex being prosecuted by him 15 yrs ago. HMMM...Seems possible IMO..and I would doubt she would forget his name if he was the reason her ex got locked up etc.

And just "speculation" on my part...but wouldn't it seem reasonable that if you got married the day before your new hubby went to court...ummm, wouldn't you attend court with your new loved one? (Just also wondering why they got married the very day before, LOL...was it pure coincidence, or was there a reason to hurry up and get married before he gets hauled away? Guess it doesn't matter, just seems strange to me). And it's 2000, not 30 years ago.

If that is the case, would it be that hard to remember Juan Martinez, either by looking at him or listening to him? He's a pretty strong personality, ya know?
Anyone ever even received a speeding ticket and remember the name of the ticketing officer, LOL????
 
Maybe the outcome of the sentencing phase can't be changed, but I would feel WHOLE lot better if this juror was guilty of lying or being a stealth juror, that she was caught and faced consequences. At the very least it might deter future jurors from thinking about even trying it.

Deleted--double post.
 
I guess Maria must have stayed in a Holiday Inn last night because she was twitter-vising anyone harassing juror17 that they were guilty of "jury tampering".

Wait -- did I read this correctly ?

Is this for real because if so, the jury has been "dismissed" so how can it be "jury tampering" ?

OMG ... seriously ...
 
If this juror and her husband tie into MDLR, this thing is gonna blow up like an atom bomb.
 
I agree. Completely agree. The distrust of what has gone on with this case is squarely upon JSS shoulders with all of the ridiculous secrecy. Courts should be public for good reason.

Yes, if the case were not held in secrecy from the public, I think many of the shenanigans the defense played would have come to light, and there would have been a more just verdict. I hope to see more prosecutions....our LE system was designed as it is for good reason. Hope JSS learns something!!

As for Jodi, I repeat myself, she is in line for a rude awakening.
 
My post, My opinion.

So who had a list of Juror's names and addresses.
It was pointed out in another Ws'ers post that the defense wanted all the juror's social media accounts.

Then I remember this little nugget from not to long ago, the DT motion for more money for their "investigator".
We know the DT was investigating every single juror in the penalty phase, they were looking for who they could get kicked off.
We were all on pins and needles everytime there was a hint of possible jury misconduct.

Now, we know, with Nurmi's final closing remarks. He wasn't addressing all the jurors, he was speaking to this one.
They knew. Who all knew? MDLR? "Investigator" the whole DT? We may never know that.

MDLR posting all over the place, still showing her true unprofessional self.
(heck I even seen a tweet that she posted at 9:32 yesterday, "I told you to have faith"). We didn't even know because they were running behind.

I personally don't want anything to happen that will cause a total retrial. Could that happen? sheesh the way this whole penalty phase went on, wouldn't surprise me.

Was the jury actually allowed to say "do you want her out when she is 50?" during deliberations. I shudder the thought that they were not.

If #17 committed perjury, let that be brought forth when we know it's actually true. Personally, the now husband sure is playing a part.

I just want the Alexanders to be able to one day, lay their heads down at night, and be able to smile at the thought of Travis, and not the horrible way he was slaughter.

I said I would stand by the jury's decision and I still think that, for any jury. Whether I agree with them or not.

Today, I think the DP would have been too good for CMJA. Soon she will wilt in the hot Arizona Sun. She will feel what it is to die a slow and painful death.
 
Troy Hayden ‏@troyhaydenfox10 3m3 minutes ago

ALERT: J. Martinez prosecuted ex-husband of holdout juror 17. They married day before his 2000 sentencing. #jodiarias

It's official.

Oh yeah. NO way she doesn't remember him.
 
If this juror and her husband tie into MDLR, this thing is gonna blow up like an atom bomb.

I would think MDLR would be scrubbing her computer tracks as Jodi probably taught her (LOL)...but then again, MDLR hasn't been real bright all along. Oh, JMO MDLR :)
 
I would think MDLR would be scrubbing her computer tracks as Jodi probably taught her (LOL)...but then again, MDLR hasn't been real bright all along. Oh, JMO MDLR :)

It was probably on her to do list once she was done with all her trips back and forth to the dry cleaners... Procrastination. It'll bite ya.
 
You all have me curious about MDLR. Was the Court aware of her shenanigans all this time? Or was it so secretive that no one knows? Did Juan know and make the Court aware? How did she sneak artwork out of the jail? Sounds like she is the culprit here. JMO
 
Maybe the outcome of the sentencing phase can't be changed, but I would feel WHOLE lot better if this juror was guilty of lying or being a stealth juror, that she was caught and faced consequences. At the very least it might deter future jurors from thinking about even trying it.

Absolutely, Sammie .

I mean, golly gee whiz, what would it all mean if there were no consequences for doing things that are wrong/unlawful, particularly in the pursuit of Justice.

I think this is what bothered me so much about Mark Eiglarsh's all but hysterical response to other commentators suggestions that this Juror may have engaged in deception/misconduct--I mean he totally freaked out and basically accused the public and these other commentators of doing something wrong by questioning her motives, despite that fact that all of the jurors made statements that this juror failed to deliberate and that she even went so far as to introduce information from a Lifetime movie into the deliberations.

It was bizarre and irrational to me and I wondered why a representative of the law would not take a measured approach and work to ensure that something detrimental to justice did not occur.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
142
Guests online
261
Total visitors
403

Forum statistics

Threads
606,067
Messages
18,197,657
Members
233,719
Latest member
Clm79
Back
Top