Discussions on Formal Sentencing Hearing - Jodi Arias #3

[LambChop]

Not sure exactly what is kosher to post here right now but just wanted to share that I wrote a long letter on my blog yesterday to the jurors in this last phase. It's getting a lot of play (over 6000 hits so far) and more importantly, it's having the impact I intended without violating any confidences. I'm being contacted on it. I won't link it but if you go to my blog in my signature line here, it is the first post. I hope it helps. It's my honest response to this non-verdict. I'm feeling better about things today and hope the rest of you are as well.
Love and blessings to all involved.

I read it Katie. Very well written. Good point that juries suffer though this as well as the families of the victim/victims. Thank you for sharing that with us.

 

[turaj]

I noticed the same thing. Didn't he also say, "It just wasn't there", as in there wasn't enough evidence to merit the DP. Maybe if she actually LOOKED at the evidence, i.e. the autopsy photos she refused to look at, she may have felt differently.

i am not certain if she had even gotten home and was inside? The other jurors said she took her stuff and left without even a good bye so she had a clear exit as all media were either following the family or getting set up for the presser. Some have said he informed media of address etc. this is all just so odd. i want to hear more from the 11 and alternates...how did she act up to deliberations? Did anyone bond with her...smoke or lunch breaks etc. were they surprised once deliberations began or did she send signals before that of knowing more than she should? These jurors can talk but right now I am guessing they are being asked some of these questions and more by the county officials.

 

[krkrjx]

KCL you bring up an interesting point: If judges impose sentence it is more likely to fit the crime.

We are entitled in this country to a jury of our peers but that was never meant to mean for sentencing.

I think the jury should be totally removed from the penalty phase of trials in this country--in all states.

Another rant, sorry. (At least it was short this time.)

 

[MissHaley]

Not sure exactly what is kosher to post here right now but just wanted to share that I wrote a long letter on my blog yesterday to the jurors in this last phase. It's getting a lot of play (over 6000 hits so far) and more importantly, it's having the impact I intended without violating any confidences. I'm being contacted on it. I won't link it but if you go to my blog in my signature line here, it is the first post. I hope it helps. It's my honest response to this non-verdict. I'm feeling better about things today and hope the rest of you are as well.
Love and blessings to all involved.

I read it & it's awesome! I've read your blog from the beginning & I'm glad your doing it. I can feel your heart in every post/story. You should submit it to the local papers! I hope that the 11 jurors read it. Hugs.

 

[katiecoolady]

I sincerely hope I'm reading this wrong, but many of these posts and blogs feel like passive-aggressive, veiled threats directed at or about juror 17. I'm thinking you are nice people with good intentions who may need to take a deep breath and understand that no matter your own life experiences, you can NEVER put yourself in juror 17's place.

If you are addressing me and my blog, there is nothing threatening in it toward this juror. Nor is my style "passive aggressive" as it's pretty direct and clear. I believe her fellow jurors who have a clear read on her and her refusal to actually explain her position or look at the evidence much less deliberate. Her consequences will be her own throughout her life which is what I wrote about. And there is time for outrage and this is it. Someone manipulating the system to further some personal agenda, which is very seriously in question here is something we should all not take lightly. But threats? I guess I've not seen them.
Who's place I can put myself in is the Alexanders as i've been there so that's the position from where I speak.

 

[turaj]

I noticed the same thing. Didn't he also say, "It just wasn't there", as in there wasn't enough evidence to merit the DP. Maybe if she actually LOOKED at the evidence, i.e. the autopsy photos she refused to look at, she may have felt differently.

i am not certain if she had even gotten home and was inside? The other jurors said she took her stuff and left without even a good bye so she had a clear exit as all media were either following the family or getting set up for the presser. Some have said he informed media of address etc. this is all just so odd. i want to hear more from the 11 and alternates...how did she act up to deliberations? Did anyone bond with her...smoke or lunch breaks etc. were they surprised once deliberations began or did she send signals before that of knowing more than she should? These jurors can talk but right now I am guessing they are being asked some of these questions and more by the county officials.

 

[Madeleine74]

Nice and even-tempered are qualities admirable in anyone, judges included, and I don't think those qualities alone should disqualify JSS to her position. The fact she has shown poor judgment in matters of law again and again in this trial are issues worth taking a closer look at, and should apply directly to her ability to hold her position with the integrity and reliability it requires.

And yet the killer was still convicted of 1st degree murder, thankfully.

Judge Belvin 'Blowhard' Perry? His killer defendant is walking the streets free as a bird.

Judge Lance 'Hollywood' Ito? His famous killer defendant got away with butchering 2 people due to the horrible decisions of this judge.

 

[katiecoolady]

I read it & it's awesome! I've read your blog from the beginning & I'm glad your doing it. I can feel your heart in every post/story. You should submit it to the local papers! I hope that the 11 jurors read it. Hugs.

That would be interesting to submit it to the AZ Republic, where Michael Kiefer writes who I've been, ahem, quite vocal about my views on. He trashed Travis so horribly to me privately that he ...ok enough about that. I chuckle at the thought of my letter being anywhere near his paper which has leaned so heavily on the side of Jodi...blech.

 

[Greater Than]

She has probably had the Prezi account for many years, so likely she opened her account with her maiden name. It was obviously for some sort of presentation, possibly for school?

I'm not convinced that this is hers. Is there any more proof other than the name? Is there a profile on that site with her location as AZ or any other indication it is in fact #17?

She only has two things posted on there and both were in 2013. She hasn't gone by that name since 2000. Why would she set up the account in 2000 and make her first post in 2013? I'm not making the connection.

 

[FLmom777]

Not sure exactly what is kosher to post here right now but just wanted to share that I wrote a long letter on my blog yesterday to the jurors in this last phase. It's getting a lot of play (over 6000 hits so far) and more importantly, it's having the impact I intended without violating any confidences. I'm being contacted on it. I won't link it but if you go to my blog in my signature line here, it is the first post. I hope it helps. It's my honest response to this non-verdict. I'm feeling better about things today and hope the rest of you are as well.
Love and blessings to all involved.

Thank you so much Katie. This was wonderful.

 

[thefragile7393]

I sincerely hope I'm reading this wrong, but many of these posts and blogs feel like passive-aggressive, veiled threats directed at or about juror 17. I'm thinking you are nice people with good intentions who may need to take a deep breath and understand that no matter your own life experiences, you can NEVER put yourself in juror 17's place.

Honestly our posts here are not threatening her, passively or otherwise. The criticisms of her are fair ones. What non members do with their blogs is different but here, no one is threatening her in any way.

 

[Tesstruhart]

I believe that you may be mis-interpreting the outrage. Juror 17, would certainly be entitled to her opinion. That is not the issue. The fact that she evidently didn't want to deliberate, review evidence, explain to her fellow jurors her point of view...etc. is a big problem. When you swear to uphold the law and deliberate in good faith it means just that. Our entire judicial system depends on people being honest. If you have bias' or preconceived notions that are unshakeable, then be honest and state that when you are being vetted. It remains to be seen, but at this point it appears that #17 had issues and other perhaps questionable contacts that would have disqualified her. The perversion of the system is a big deal. All that being said no one is threatening #17 just wanting the truth and wanting a system we can trust. JMO

 

[Mindmatters]

Those jurors were organized and had a message they wanted to get out...even the alternates...I don't ever recall all of the jurors being willing to talk after a verdict or being hung....never all of them...that says alot about them really thinking this was a big problem with juror 17. They said they liked JSS but I guess I would have been pretty frustrated that she could not or would not deal with the situation...it seems that if she tried to "dynamite" them again some were going to leave...must have been awful...I am a bit surprised that no media noticed this juror who I assume must have left alone most often as it sounds like this started right on first day of deliberations.

BBM--The media (some but not all) reported that a juror was crying during Nurmi's closing, now I wonder if it was J17

 

[bettybaby00]

You know I honestly think juror 17 did not even dream that each and every one of the other jurors would hold that press conf. I mean it is never done like that and I have never seen them go after one juror like that. She no doubt thought the 11-1 would get out and she would be sought out for interviews...I don't think she expected this.

Good point. I've never seen all the jurors speak out like this either. Although if I have my math right, a couple werent part of the q&a right???

Also, it's probably pretty rare that when a jury hangs it's 11-1 either.

 

[deedee21]

At first I thought this juror was paid off. Now we know what happen. I think there is more to come. HELLO PANDORA.

 

[turaj]

And yet the killer was still convicted of 1st degree murder, thankfully.

Judge Belvin Blowhard Perry? His killer defendant is walking the streets free as a bird.

Judge Lance 'Hollywood' Ito? His famous killer defendant got away with butchering 2 people due to the horrible decisions of this judge.

so true....at any time along this road something could have happened to totally derail the trial...the first verdict or many other things...just get her sentenced.

 

[bettybaby00]

Needs to run for Saturday errands, but just a random thought....

Nothing from Keifer????? Interesting to say the least!

 

[turaj]

Good point. I've never seen all the jurors speak out like this either. Although if I have my math right, a couple werent part of the q&a right???

Also, it's probably pretty rare that when a jury hangs it's 11-1 either.

as i understand it the court even waited for the alternates to get there for the "verdict" and they were there and indicated no question they would have voted dp...this is a very unusual situation.

 

[Buttercup117]

One thing that was puzzling me yesterday, more than anything, was how could this juror have been summoned and seated on this jury if this was a setup by the defense ? After reading 20 pages of the forum this morning, I think I may have it figured out....... She wasn't.

Re: MDLR-- Maria DelaRosa _______RDLR ---her sister

The big question in my mind, when exactly was it that RDLR (Maria's sister) became friends on Juror #17 husbands Facebook ? Was it in the last few weeks, a couple of months, a year ago ?

This is my line of reasoning: Initially, maybe this juror was nothing more than just a stealth juror with an agenda and a bias, but nobody knew about her and there were no red flags. It might even be possible that this juror really DIDN'T have a lot of bias and truly believed she could be objective during the voir dire process..

However, after the jury was picked and seated, MDLR would have had access to the list of jurors names and could have researched them on social media. I have little doubt in my mind that Nurmi would have authorized a social media search to try and dig up dirt on these jurors and dig into their pasts. What she found was a possible weak link. She is a mitigation specialist, part of her job is to reckognize weak and vulnerable people.

To avoid the appearance of wrongdoing, MDLR could have had RDLR sign up as a friend on the husbands Facebook account, with the mistaken premise that nobody would ever notice. There are posters that have stated there are pictures of RDLR with juror #17's husband. That information certainly needs to be documented and saved if possible. I have yet to see such a picture, so it is speculation at this point. She was shown on his Facebook "friends" list however.

Now, what does that mean ? Well, that means through backdoor channels MDLR could have had access and influence on juror #17. Did MLDR, Nurmi, Wilmott or anybody else have anything to do with her being summoned and seated on the jury ?? Nope.

Could juror #17 have been influenced and star-struck by having an "in" to MLDR ?? You Betcha' !!
Could there have been interaction and "off-the-record" conversations either taking place or being passed along ? Yeppers.

What does this equate to ? ------> Influence peddling and jury tampering.

The problem MDLR and RDLR have is that this couple was leaving a trail of bread crumbs a mile long as they walked along the electronic pathway known as social media. They almost flaunted it.

If RDLR was the one that had an intimate relationship with the couple, then that would have eliminated the appearance of impropriety on the part of MDLR, or at least that was the plan. There could have been phone calls, dinner dates, e-mails, social drinking parties, etc.........none of which were attended by MDLR, but all of which were overseen by her.

There has to be some reason why MDLR and Jodi's family seemed to be of the opinion that they had this thing wrapped up, prior to the verdict. Her mother stated "It only takes ONE PERSON to do the right thing, We've got this ! " I was struck by the defense teams complete lack of emotion when the hung-jury was announced, I got the impression that they already had a good idea what was going to happen.


This is just me pondering while drinking drinking my coffee.....nothing more.

I agree it sounds like a very good possibility...

 

[elementary]

These comments under her Prezi on the DP, likely from school, account opened before she was married I'd assume (ETA THIS WAS WRITTEN IN 2013). I am working on Prezi for a school project as we speak. It should not be hard to find which Prezi she is commenting about. It is a persuasive speech prezi about the cons of DP. Off to look for her original Prezi now.

Not only does it appear she had anti-DP bias before she was married, it was only enhanced by the prosecution on her 1st winner husband.

Good find!


The link would be Prezi.com


ETA: Here is the link to her complete prezi https://prezi.com/o_cymetvi7li/death-penalty/

I'm shocked. If she was anti-DP in 2013, then she LIED to get on the jury (more than once). Considering how rabid and vocal the DT has been about jurors and social media, and their endless and intense scrutiny of said jurors, every single day, how did the DT miss this information? Curiouser and curiouser.