Discussions on Formal Sentencing Hearing - Jodi Arias #2

[ZsaZsa]

Troy Hayden also looking into Juror #17 re stealth accusations.

http://www.fox10phoenix.com/clip/11206107/fox-10s-troy-hayden-weighs-in-on-aftermath-of-hung-jury

 

[sammie]

Morning all :seeya:

I see lots of controversy is coming out!!!!

My 2 cents
*no system is perfect. If one problematic issue is addressed, it often creates a new issue
*majority rules for sentencing...should rely on an 8/4 or better split IMO
*im not overly familiar with jury selection process, but certain things should be automatic disqualification, #17 had issues that should have automatically disqualified her instead of relying on one side or the other "striking" the juror
*#17 should have immediately been disqualified when issue was brought up to JSS. That she wanted to "review" JAs journals should not have been considered a form of "deliberation. That falls woefully short of full participation. Plus she watched "bits" of the movie FGS. And although that's not a problem in and of itself, the fact that she certainly had a bias coming in based b/c of it is a problem.
*people with her previous history with "the courts" should be immediate disqualification.

Jurors are kicked off for the most insignificant of reasons. Remember last time,the one juror was dismissed b/c he got a DUI????? JSS should have kicked her off, as she had at least 3 reasons that were more than likely appeal proof. I strongly believe if JSS made the decision to boot her it would have held up. It wasn't just one issue, it was several.

Part of me believes the DP should be abolished. I'm not against it, I just feel that there's so much wrong with the process (endless appeals, it doesn't seem to deter crime, etc., etc.) that it doesn't seem worth all the effort and conflict. Perhaps revamping sentencing is a better way to go. For example, only in the rarest of cirmcumstances should a killer get less than life in prison.

Whew....more than 2 cents worth!!!!

I saw a rumor that one of the jurors was kicked off because he complained about the uncomfortable chairs. I had to laugh at that one, I can't believe that would be grounds for dismissal though.

 

[Mrs G Norris]

OK it does seem to be true that Juror 17's ex was prosecuted by Juan as she was asked about it in voir dire .. um hello .. ?? No idea why they let her through knowing that. However, BK says that the connection to a friend of Jodi's is incorrect and relates to a different juror who was excused.

 

[MaLou]

OK I just had a flashback to something someone said to me when I was young .. this guy was from a family that had been involved in organised crime for generations. He said if he ever got on a jury he'd give the prisoner a wink to let him know this was his lucky day as it'd be 'not guilty' today etc. So what I'm thinking is this .. if someone has grown up around people outside the law they become culturally indoctrinated to it, so would almost on principal go against the state no matter what and would not need to have a personal connection to the case.

I really think when it comes to Juror 17 the court itself is to blame, she shouldn't have been there.

You explained this very well. I agree that the BBM definitely has something to do with her decision not to cooperate. And you're right, she really shouldn't have been there. This single person has caused a lot of people extreme heartbreak and changed the course of a convicted murder's life forever.

 

[bettybaby00]

I was just about to post the same. There's also this:

Troy Hayden @troyhaydenfox10 · 58m 58 minutes ago
Developing: MCSO looking into websites releasing personal information of #JodiArias jurors.

and

@xxxxxx
@troyhaydenfox10 Are u looking into Maria's daughter being friends with #Juror17 husband on FB? #jodiarias

@troyhaydenfox10
@tammyharper02 looking into many things

Ok dumb question....what is MSCO????

And whoa the MDLR connection. If true, I don't see how Nurmi and wilma come out unscathed???? It's going to be pretty hard for them to deny any knowledge.....especially as this seems like a house of cards, and more than a few cards appear to be wobbling!

 

[GigiG]

Here is the Maricopa County website information on jury names. BBM:

'Your home or mailing address is known only to the court. Only the judge can order the release of jurors' addresses, usually to the lawyers in the case, and only for a good, legal reason. This very rarely happens. At the conclusion of the trial, should you be contacted by the lawyers in a case in which you sat as a juror, remember that you are not obligated to divulge any information concerning the deliberations, the verdict, or your opinions about anything concerning the case unless ordered to do so by the court.'

Gosh, if true that all jury names and info has been released, the guilty party needs to be pursued.

RBBM
As I recall, the jurors were asked if they spoke to the attorneys after the (non)verdict. They said the defense had requested to talk to them and that they declined. They added that no one from the State had asked to talk to them.

 

[wenwe4]

Troy Hayden is reporting investigation into Juror #17

http://www.fox10phoenix.com/clip/11206107/fox-10s-troy-hayden-weighs-in-on-aftermath-of-hung-jury

 

[sammie]

Attention seeking. Bet she writes a book.

Her husband was said to have put her information out there on Facebook himself yesterday, along with a solicitation for paid interviews.

 

[La-Cooks]

At this point, I just pray that the Alexander family finds peace. JA is of no importance as long as she is confined for life and can no longer harm anyone. I did want the DP, but I didn't pray for that. I prayed for God's will and for the family to somehow find peace. Maybe the DP appeals and the harm she could still inflict upon the family would be too much for them to endure. I don't know. I do know that I never want to see her evil face again after JSS sentences her. Further, after sentencing, I hope the Alexander family never has to endure another moment with her.

 

[bettybaby00]

Im trying to understand the law, as it relates to personal information on jurors That quote says addresses, nothing about names. Once the jury has been excused, is it illegal to print the jurors' names on websites?

My understanding is it would against some sort of statue. Jurors are supposed to remain anonymous unless THEY are willing to release info.

 

[dog.gone.cute]

Here is what I am sure of related to the jurors desire for privacy--during the Juror Presser yesterday they (all but Juror 17) indicated emphatically that they DID NOT want their identities released period and would participate in the Presser under the condition that only audio could be used.

I do not think for one minute that the website that released their very private information had any other intention than to punish these jurors for their overwhelming vote to sentence JA to death. Hence, I think it absolutely imperative that MCSO investigate and charge the person/persons who provided this information because if it is true that only the Court, JM, DT, MDLR and JA had this information, this is a very serious problem that warrants complete prosecution.

As for J#17, I don't know what her request was regarding privacy as she did not participate in the Presser, however, her information should not have been released either

but the snag with her is that her husband gave an interview about his wife,

and posted, if stories are accurate, on social media.

RBBM: Yep ... Juror #17's Husband spoke to the media and since HE chose to speak to the media even though it was "anonymously," he is open to just as much scrutiny as her.

Here are some snippets from husband's interview:

Juror's husband: 'She felt like she was being assaulted'

CBS 5 News' Greg Argos: Are you her husband?

Husband: I am

Argos: And she was part of the jury?

Husband: She was.

Read more at: http://www.kpho.com/story/28274746/...lt-like-she-was-being-assaulted#ixzz3Td1KlSav

 

[smeck]

I also think the death penalty should be abolished. There must be another sentence that would serve the purpose of making sure the criminal can never hurt anyone else.

 

[Mindmatters]

You know what .. if it was MDLR who gave the JAII site the names of the jurors, or if she is as friendly there as people say, her days as a mitigation person could be over.

Yes, if they find that MDLR was responsible she should be fired immediately, and IMO brought up on charges. Honestly, I absolutely abhor how everyone in this country is so litigious but if I were one of the jurors that EXPLICITY refused to reveal my identifying information and MDLR (or any of the named possible people) did so anyway I would sue.

 

[sammie]

You know what .. if it was MDLR who gave the JAII site the names of the jurors, or if she is as friendly there as people say, her days as a mitigation person could be over.

Just seeing her posting on social media, I think that should be the case regardless.

 

[dog.gone.cute]

You know what .. if it was MDLR who gave the JAII site the names of the jurors, or if she is as friendly there as people say, her days as a mitigation person could be over.

:gaah: It should have been over a long time ago for her UNprofessional behavior !

:gaah: Even worse is that the State just renewed her Contract on 3/1/15 -- it's on a previous thread here ... Sorry, don't have it handy

 

[DEPUTYDAWG]

Im trying to understand the law, as it relates to personal information on jurors That quote says addresses, nothing about names. Once the jury has been excused, is it illegal to print the jurors' names on websites?

Good specific question.
My understanding has always been that a juror has the right to remaining anonymous to the public.

I guess my concern is that here, someone on the DT (sorry, in my opinion at this point, it has been someone-somehow related to the DT team) leaked names...and then others not specifically on the DT took it further and did further investigating through public info and found the addresses.

JMO, obviously not factually known.

 

[josie1986]

All the Jurors names are posted on the 'Jodi is Innocent' website, with the exception of #17.

isn't that just a coincidence :sigh:

 

[concernedmother]

At this point, I just pray that the Alexander family finds peace. JA is of no importance as long as she is confined for life and can no longer harm anyone. I did want the DP, but I didn't pray for that. I prayed for God's will and for the family to somehow find peace. Maybe the DP appeals and the harm she could still inflict upon the family would be too much for them to endure. I don't know. I do know that I never want to see her evil face again after JSS sentences her. Further, after sentencing, I hope the Alexander family never has to endure another moment with her.

Thats pretty much how I feel too. The A want to get rid of Jodi and now they have. They would have to go through all the appeals, the trashing of TA would continue and most likely on death roll she would never get executed. I hope alot is made and published about what the 11 jurors thought about TA.Clear up his name. Its time for A's to move on now and try to heal, not be consumed with this cancer called Jodi that will destroy them. Thats when she wins.

 

[mck16]

At this point, I just pray that the Alexander family finds peace. JA is of no importance as long as she is confined for life and can no longer harm anyone. I did want the DP, but I didn't pray for that. I prayed for God's will and for the family to somehow find peace. Maybe the DP appeals and the harm she could still inflict upon the family would be too much for them to endure. I don't know. I do know that I never want to see her evil face again after JSS sentences her. Further, after sentencing, I hope the Alexander family never has to endure another moment with her.

Family will have to endure more of JA if they file a civil suit or if JA gets an appeal. I think they can most definitely win a civil suit. Hopefully no appeals will be granted. If there is one it could be a worse outcome for JA.jmo

 

[floridagld]

Just read that Juan prosecuted one of Juror 17's husbands in 2000.

I am way way behind!
But, what? NO freaking way..is this true? IF so, I don't think she should have been en-paneled AND if true is there any recourse. If nothing else she was not forthcoming. I recall during Caylee's murder trial juror selection the question was posed from both attorneys do we know each other (something like that) was this not done in this trial? I am stunned if true..
I could NOT sleep last night and I don't feel any better today. Have more to post about my thoughts/speculation later, now I have to get back to work..Later.