Discussions on Formal Sentencing Hearing - Jodi Arias #2

[DEPUTYDAWG]

I'm like someone else...help me put the tweets from her into context please?

Monday and ???

 

[kimi_SFC]

I saw Dr Drew yesterday when Marc was on and saw that. I dont think Marc knew the extent of what was being alleged at that point. He did go overboard without doing enough research.

I think he assumed people were just in an uproar just because the juror voted differently. But it was much more than that and I dont think he did enough research before the Dr. Drew show.

Hes usually pretty fair and Ive come to like him but yesterday I think he was guilty of not researching enough before the Dr. Drew show. It will be interesting if he changes his tune if he is on tonight.

Here is his updated written Op-Ed:

@MarkEiglarsh: RT @DrDrewHLN: Op-ed via @MarkEiglarsh: Making sense of the #JodiArias hung jury verdict. Do you agree? Weigh in:

http://t.co/mynDfBe0dt/s/DTgx

(snip)

First, let me make clear that how I feel about the verdict is irrelevant to what I have to say in this article. I may believe passionately that Arias should be on death row. I also may believe that life without parole is an appropriate sentence. What I am about to share has nothing to do with what I believe should happen to Arias.

Let’s start with potential juror misconduct. If there’s proof beyond a reasonable doubt that the lone hold out juror lied when she swore under oath during jury selection that she could impose the death penalty under the right circumstances when she really couldn’t, then she should be prosecuted. Additionally, if there’s proof beyond a reasonable doubt that she intentionally engaged in juror misconduct, she should be prosecuted for that as well. That’s been my position toward all jurors who engage in misconduct, not just this one. As a trial lawyer for over two decades, having prosecuted and now defending criminal cases, I am especially passionate about the jury process being fair and free of misconduct.


------
^^^^^
This is the intro before he gives his actual opinion of j#17

FWIW, I didn't get to see him last night. Going to see if the transcript is available now. :lookingitup:


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[TartLemon]

I am not sure that I understand your point. I have not heard anyway say that she should just "get on board". Instead, I hear "please explain your stance to us"

I understand your point, but don't agree that the juror owes anyone an explanation. Not the other jurors and NOT us. Perhaps it was not #17 who would not deliberate, but the others who did not want to really hear what she had to say. the other jurors do not have any right, IMO, to degrade and insult the decision of another juror.

 

[MsJoni]

Jodi's sister, Angela, said the verdict would be on Monday...

 

[Gin]

It is also IMO the vehemence spewed against the decision of the jury is no less abhorrent as those at the JAII site. What's the difference?

The jury is a WHOLE body in it's final decision.

Ideally, of course. But that is assuming the entire jury is actually actively deliberating in good faith.

 

[RadarLuv]

Susan King ‏@sking1958 10m10 minutes ago

@News20Chopper @ernie_leduc yes and there is talk of her having a connection with MDLR.... It's going to get real ugly, real quick

 

[UESwifey]

OK .. well it's probably safe to say it then .. the Juror's profile pic from her now deleted Twitter account (she took it down yesterday) was a little quote that said 'Monday you *advertiser censored*' ..

If this is true then how in the world can the verdict stand - especially since she was THE ONLY holdout. It's not like 5 were against DP and whether or not she was there it wouldn't have mattered. She is THE only reason CMJA isn't headed to death!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[~Lyric~]

Joe Arpaio ‏@RealSheriffJoe 22m22 minutes ago
Trying to put a stop to #jodiarias social media antics which she conducts from jail. May hit legal road block.

https://twitter.com/RealSheriffJoe/status/573946170877194240

hmmmmm wonder what that means?

 

[Mindmatters]

I don't understand. If it took the internet 10 minutes to find this stuff out about juror 17 how did the prosecution team miss it for 5 months? Not knocking them I mean I fully support them but it didn't take much digging to find out, change of name or 15 years ago dont they look into this. And if not why not? Surely they knew this already. If they didn't they should have and again not bashing the prosecution just wondering how this was missed.

Not being snarky to you Jojo as you bring up a very good point but maybe the fact that the defense team had unlimited funds,which equals resources, while the state did not--Mr. Montgomery's full disclosure during his press conference yesterday that the State spent a mere pittance, approximately $132,000, of the nearly $3 million of taxpayer money that was spent during all of the trials. Essentially the DT billed the state for $2.7 million.

Not to mention, it is MHO, that JM was clearly limited and looked as if his hands were tied at times during this retrial, and we won't know to what extent until all the info pertaining to the trial is released to the public.

 

[Shelby1]

I've had to be gone all day and have been skimming trying to catch up. All I can say is WOW, just WOW!

I'm blown away.

Am I correct that #17 is being investigated? Who is investigating? The state? Am I correct that even if she's found to be guilty of perjury etc. that it still won't change the outcome? No new trial for penalty phase?

 

[ShadyLady]

http://www.courtchatter.com/2015/03/jodi-arias-just-when-you-thought-it-was.html?spref=tw

Bumping up. Has some of the docs.

I'd like to see more feet to the fire. Like to see MDLR under oath as well as #17.

Was Juan at the questioning of #17 behind closed doors, it's not clear?? And the hallway get together? He might have wanted this person off, but since so much of this trial was behind closed doors, how would we know.

 

[Tesstruhart]

Hello everyone, I have been off the site since the first trial. I have tried to read up somewhat but there is copious amounts to catch up. I was wondering if replacing the problem juror would be strictly up to the judge once concerns are raised. I seem to remember in the Scott Peterson case that there was a juror replaced mid-deliberation. JSS was a big disappointment to me in this case.

 

[Nosey Parker]

It is also IMO the vehemence spewed against the decision of the jury is no less abhorrent as those at the JAII site. What's the difference?

The jury is a WHOLE body in it's final decision.

Sorry - not understanding you. Do you feel there is vehemence against the decision of the jury being spewed here, or on social media? Have you heard the jurors' press conference? It does explain a lot about Juror #17's position., and then there is the subsequent MCSO current investigation.

 

[Mindmatters]

Jodi's sister, Angela, said the verdict would be on Monday...

OMG that really is a great catch MsJoni--surely all of these things cannot be a coincidence:notgood:

 

[sammie]

It is also IMO the vehemence spewed against the decision of the jury is no less abhorrent as those at the JAII site. What's the difference?

The jury is a WHOLE body in it's final decision.

Each juror has their own oath to uphold. Each juror filled out their questionnaire INDIVIDUALLY. It's already been ascertained that this juror had a tie to the prosecutor that SHOULD HAVE disqualified her from serving. I for one feel it is a serious enough allegation, that it needs to be investigated. If there was a rogue juror, and she was the lone holdout, it wasn't the WHOLE BODY in it's in final decison, it was one stealth juror who hijacked the entire process. If you don't see the distinction between a potential serious breach of conduct here and name calling on the JAII site, I don't know what to tell you, because what I have to say would be <modsnipped> by me.

 

[MeeBee]

Joe Arpaio &#8207;@RealSheriffJoe 22m22 minutes ago
Trying to put a stop to #jodiarias social media antics which she conducts from jail. May hit legal road block.

https://twitter.com/RealSheriffJoe/status/573946170877194240

hmmmmm wonder what that means?

Meaning he can't legaly stop her from tweeting from jail through her conduits.

 

[Buttercup117]

BBM: But it's quite obvious now that she did have "ill feelings" -- especially towards Juan !

:gaah::gaah::gaah:

Maybe not the police but maybe she had ill feelings against the prosecutor..

 

[Curious Me]

Learned enough here yesterday to have suspicions. Catching up today.
Daily Share on HLN is avoiding, for now, the mention of any connections, or bias, Juror #17 might have to players in this trial. Wow, they showed a clip of Juror #17's husband at his front door telling the reporter how Juror #17 felt picked on or whatever. He said she stands by her decision.

 

[sammie]

Jodi's sister, Angela, said the verdict would be on Monday...

ANd those on twitter say she just set up a new twitter account a few days before to get ready to spar with the "haters".

 

[Gin]

Not being snarky to you Jojo as you bring up a very good point but maybe the fact that the defense team had unlimited funds,which equals resources, while the state did not--Mr. Montgomery's full disclosure during his press conference yesterday that the State spent a mere pittance, approximately $132,000, of the nearly $3 million of taxpayer money that was spent during all of the trials. Essentially the DT billed the state for $2.7 million.

Thank you a million times over for explaining this. That kind of disparity seems unthinkable, but it happened.