Discussions on Formal Sentencing Hearing - Jodi Arias #3

[Boytwnmom]

so they were together during the Juan involved crimes. He later had new charges in 2008 after they were separated. Those were the only charges she disclosed per BK's notes. Nothing about the 2000 case.

We need a timeline for #17 :thinking: She is supposedly in her twenties so at the oldest- 29. She suffered abuse for 11 years with her ex, then after her divorce she remarried but was separated whenever the present or ex committed their crimes?

 

[kimi_SFC]

It's not, from the article she is one of those whose name of the 11 that was leaked, is what I got from it:

Meanwhile, a pro-Arias website published names of 11 people it said were the jurors who voted to sentence Arias to death for the 2008 killing.

Arizona law prohibits the public release of juror names. It's unknown how the identities were leaked, but information appeared online after jurors who favored the death penalty expressed frustrations over the holdout.

Juror Emily Cova said she was relieved to hear that authorities were looking into the leak.

"I was a little nervous last night. But I'm feeling better now," said Cova, who agreed to be named.

Aaron Nash, a spokesman for the clerk of Maricopa County Superior Court, said no member of the clerk's staff reported being approached by anyone seeking the names of jurors.

Read more: http://www.azfamily.com/news/Husban...uted-by-Martinez-295429721.html#ixzz3TfFMDBjH

My apologies - I misunderstood :blushing:


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Sweet Fox]

case, after they separated. That's the only criminal activity for ex #1 that she disclosed. And the 2008 case was about stealing cell phones. She never mentioned the earlier 1st degree case where she was with the guy. Even without Juan being involved there's no way she'd be kept on a jury involving another 1st degree murder!

She had been dating him since she was 16 and the relationship lasted 11 years.

 

[Val1]

With all due respect, I'm fairly certain the interviewed juror (EC) is not j#17.

This article doesn't make that clear

My fellow WSers who are dialed in to the other sites can probably confirm this for us. I remember her initials were different, but I haven't sleuthed her myself.

HTH....




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No, that is not the same juror under scrutiny, just one of the 11 that was concerned because all of their info was posted on JA's innocent site, everyone but this 17th was there...

 

[~Lyric~]

It's not, from the article she is one of those whose name of the 11 that was leaked, is what I got from it:

Meanwhile, a pro-Arias website published names of 11 people it said were the jurors who voted to sentence Arias to death for the 2008 killing.

Arizona law prohibits the public release of juror names. It's unknown how the identities were leaked, but information appeared online after jurors who favored the death penalty expressed frustrations over the holdout.

Juror Emily Cova said she was relieved to hear that authorities were looking into the leak.

"I was a little nervous last night. But I'm feeling better now," said Cova, who agreed to be named.

Aaron Nash, a spokesman for the clerk of Maricopa County Superior Court, said no member of the clerk's staff reported being approached by anyone seeking the names of jurors.

Read more: http://www.azfamily.com/news/Husban...uted-by-Martinez-295429721.html#ixzz3TfFMDBjH

BTW she EC is Juror #16

 

[WhoaIsMe]

I can't remember who kept mentioning it (sorry) but I've finally gone ahead and purchased The Slumber Party From Hell. Even though that last article says she gets yet another delay in finally occupying her cell there.

 

[concernedmother]

http://www.fox10phoenix.com/story/2...-husband-has-ties-to-prosecutor-juan-martinez
FOX 10 has also learned that the jurors ex-husband has a connection to prosecutor Juan Martinez, and it is raising some serious questions about the outcome of the trial.

The County Attorney's office confirmed they are trying to sort all of this out. FOX 10 is not identifying the who juror # 17 is, or her ex-hsband, but it is clear from court documents obtained that Juan Martinez was the prosecutor assigned to the case and it appears the couple got married just before he was sentenced.

 

[~Lyric~]

My apologies - I misunderstood :blushing:


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Hugzzzzzz My Friend!!!

 

[RickshawFan]

I wonder if Juror #17 could have been "bought"? As in, after jury selection. She has some sketchy associates, in addition to absolving herself of any knowledge of what they were doing when they committed their felonies.

The county already has an expert team with plenty of experience in unraveling this stuff: Dworkin, Melendez, Flores..... And, as for the defense, they're going to be relying on who? Let's see.......Neumeister, the hush hush undercover agent who pretended he knew what he was doing, Geffner with some BS to cover their asses (maybe they got PTSD as the result of this trial), Fonseca to serve up a nameless someone or other's alter ego (t-juror, perhaps?), and........ha! it might cost all of Nurmi's $2 million to get a defense team for his defense team.

You forgot the PI that JA personally hired to assist her... was that before or after this jury's selection?

Ha! I also forgot Witness #1 who they could pay to lie for them. Oh, and his mom: some BS about how Juror #17 couldn't possibly have been present on her marriage day. And then there'll be ALV who could read "behind the words" to testify to Nurm et al.'s innocence, victims of "Juan-abuse", because, as you know, if Juan were in one of ALV's men's groups, she'd, er, slap him down?

 

[ShadyLady]

I wonder if Juror #17 could have been "bought"? As in, after jury selection. She has some sketchy associates, in addition to absolving herself of any knowledge of what they were doing when they committed their felonies.

Has Beth commented on this? Is that Micheal person still criticizing Juan? I might have to go sign up if she helps solve this mystery, but I really don't feel like hearing any nastiness against the prosecution. imo, I think JSS tied his hands once too many times.

 

[DEPUTYDAWG]

http://www.fox10phoenix.com/story/2...-husband-has-ties-to-prosecutor-juan-martinez
FOX 10 has also learned that the jurors ex-husband has a connection to prosecutor Juan Martinez, and it is raising some serious questions about the outcome of the trial.

The County Attorney's office confirmed they are trying to sort all of this out. FOX 10 is not identifying the who juror # 17 is, or her ex-hsband, but it is clear from court documents obtained that Juan Martinez was the prosecutor assigned to the case and it appears the couple got married just before he was sentenced.

And THIS is what needs to happen...let the experts investigate it. While it won't change Jodi's verdict, for the greater honor of the justice system, it's important to find out what happened, and how.

For those who have criticized us for discussing these concerns, apparently there is enough to have the County investigate it further.

 

[ICit]

I read elsewhere she is actually around 34.

Husband # 1 was convicted in January 2000. IIRC they already had children. How old is she really?

 

[~Lyric~]

Thanks Goodness it's Friday. Tomorrow is my mom's birthday and we are celebrating, and I am not going to think about all this, not for a minute this weekend.

My DH will be home in a couple of hours and I'm gonna watch a "chick" flick before he gets here.

I hope you all have a wonderful weekend~ Enjoy the air of freedom~

 

[RickshawFan]

Perhaps the pool from which to hire is too small to toss her back?

I hardly think so: IIRC almost the only significant qualification was to be some kind of a social worker. So many social workers in the bread lines! And Phoenix is the 6th largest metro area in the country: it's got to be teeming with them. Plus, from my perspective, the pay (undoubtedly with costly benefits) was very attractive.

 

[Val1]

RBBM: Sounds like Jen is back-pedaling here ...

So WHEN did Jen find this info out ?

Yesterday, like the rest of the world -- or -- during the re-trial, because if she found out then, she would have had to report it.

And if she did not report it, she would be disbarred.

These questions may have been answered but I have not finished the thread yet ... so back to catching up !

This is what was reported via TH, though yes it does seem some footinmouth was being quickly rinsed out:

FOX 10's Troy Hayden weighs in on aftermath of hung jury
http://www.fox10phoenix.com/Clip/11...n-aftermath-of-hung-jury#.VPnoLWtIN90.twitter

Troy Hayden @troyhaydenfox10 · 17m 17 minutes ago 3:48pm March 6,2015.
To clarify: Willmott said both sides knew #juror17's 1st husband had "a past." But says she did not know Juan Martinez prosecuted case.

Troy Hayden @troyhaydenfox10 · 47m 47 minutes ago
#jodiarias def atty Jennifer Willmott told me she did not know #juror17's husband was prosecuted by Juan Martinez. #Fox10Phoenix

Troy Hayden @troyhaydenfox10 · 1h 1 hour ago
#jodiarias atty Jennifer Willmott, "We all knew (#Juror17's) 1st husband had a past. If Juan didn't check it out, that's his fault."

Troy Hayden @troyhaydenfox10 · 6h 6 hours ago
ALERT: J. Martinez prosecuted ex-husband of holdout juror 17. They married day before his 2000 sentencing. #jodiarias

 

[Boytwnmom]

that's for sure. The only problem here is this is from BK's notes so you have no idea what was being asked. She would also have had to do the written questionnaire which generally gets into all that stuff. But to really evaluate the exchange fully you'd need the transcript or video or whatever of the dialogue. But let's just say that a potential juror who has a romantic partner/spouse who was involved in a 1st degree murder case prosecuted by the same prosecutor in the current 1st degree murder case is not going to get on the jury, even in JSS's court. I mean, she does amaze me, in the worst way, but this is just too clear cut. The notes seem to show a clear intent to separate herself from the criminal activity of her husband(s), admitting only one was charged with a crime after they separated and the other only before they knew each other. That was obviously not true.

That said, I have to say, based on just those notes I'm amazed she remained on the jury. Do so many people in AZ have criminals in their life that it's normal?

That's it right? Proof she lied?

 

[ICit]

so they were together during the Juan involved crimes. He later had new charges in 2008 after they were separated. Those were the only charges she disclosed per BK's notes. Nothing about the 2000 case.

Do they ask for information in the last ten years have you or someone...? That may be the loophole?

 

[ShadyLady]

Where oh where is AZL? She left too early.

If something hinky went on, that is vindication. Jodi won carp. Hear that Mr Nurmi.

 

[MeeBee]

Has Beth commented on this? Is that Micheal person still criticizing Juan? I might have to go sign up if she helps solve this mystery, but I really don't feel like hearing any nastiness against the prosecution. imo, I think JSS tied his hands once too many times.

I think that Michael guy needs to eat crow. It was Juan who held the jury in the palm of his hand, not Nurmi. He would have gotten the death penalty if not for the stealth.

 

[Amster]

Then that must be how they define it. I was recently accused here of being a RABID ANTI-DP activist. For the record, I am not an activist, nor am I rabid. I do not believe in the DP so I would never have been a juror in a DP case. I'm comfortable with LWOP in this case, but I still question the motive of the stray juror because she was DP qualified. I was also suspected of being a troll from the Jodi website....I have never been there and do not support JA. But I DO have opinions, which may differ with the majority of WS posters. I DO believe in free speech. Others?apparently, not so much. JMO

But, were you ever accused of crucifying someone?