Discussions on Formal Sentencing Hearing - Jodi Arias #5

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
I don't understand how a 15 yr. old knows how to make a video call....don't they have to pay by a credit card? Is that how they got caught by the parents? Then.....they do it again and get coached by the killer how to get fake ID's? How does that happen? I thought all jail calls except to lawyers are recorded.....they were in the Haleigh Cummings case in Florida

I'm confused about this too. I wasnt aware they could make calls out to unapproved phone numbers. Prisoners can buy phone cards from their money In their books to Do outcalls BUT i didn't know it could be to unapproved. They USUALLY do this so that an inmate can't just call pizza hut or harass coerce victims from inside. Plus the illegal aspects. I just don't get it
 
I'm confused about this too. I wasnt aware they could make calls out to unapproved phone numbers. Prisoners can buy phone cards from their money In their books to Do outcalls BUT i didn't know it could be to unapproved. They USUALLY do this so that an inmate can't just call pizza hut or harass coerce victims from inside. Plus the illegal aspects. I just don't get it

People call in. They fill out an application on the Estrella web site. If it's approved, they pay $5 (to the jail, not to the inmate) and the inmate then can either accept or deny the call. The video phone is wheeled up to the cell door. The inmate had the handset inside and talks through the glass of the door. The video calls are monitored, but not recorded.

ETA http://www.mcso.org/JailInformation/InmateTelephones.aspx

http://www.mcso.org/JailInformation/VideoVisitation.aspx

What a bad idea.
 
But after that it says:

The Court found that without more specific information the Court could not conclude the Juror 17 improperly viewed information about the case. The Court acknowledged the juror had the opportunity to read about the case on her Facebook page, but all jurors have that opportunity every day to read or see or hear something about this case if they wish to do so. See R.T. March 4, 2015, pages 27, 28. It is presumed the jurors will follow the court’s instructions. There is no presumption a juror will betray his/her trust. It is in the sound discretion of the trial court to determine whether a juror should be interrogated about violating the admonition.

I agree daisydomino. JSS ruled properly with the information she had at that time. The death penalty is off the table for CMJA, but IMO, Juror 17 is not off the hook. I'm sorry if I wasn't clear. All I'm saying is that the unusual juror will be exposed as a stealth when the subpoena results are obtained and vetted. MOO
 
I agree daisydomino. JSS ruled properly with the information she had at that time. The death penalty is off the table for CMJA, but IMO, Juror 17 is not off the hook. I'm sorry if I wasn't clear. All I'm saying is that the unusual juror will be exposed as a stealth when the subpoena results are obtained and vetted. MOO

Okay. I read the minute entry to say that it was a done deal, the judge ruled, move along there is nothing to see here. I guess we'll know for sure in a week or so.
 
Do you folks know that book, Slumber Party...is on arias book 'club' on her site? People were laughing about her 'review' of the book that it sounded like she copied it. You know, like she copies everything else?

I have thoughts about those 15 yr old girls from Ohio & did a video chat with her. Too late tonight. See you all tomorrow.
 
Juan tried to have the <unusual person> juror removed....Sherry trembled like a chihuahua and refused. Travis was never going to get justice and the family was never going to see justice served in that courtroom. I think J17 watched the entire trial, knew who Juan was, talked about him with ex and current mates, read/watched The Secret and Law of Attraction and the movie because of the trial and cheered for Jodi to beat JM. When she was called for jury duty it must have been like a dream come true. Never, ever will I be convinced she wasn't a stealth juror.

I also believe J-17's main goal going into the trial was to retaliate against Juan for convicting her ex-husband. That Jodi just happened to be the beneficiary of 17's hidden agenda was (I think) pure luck and good fortune. I would, however, be curious to know exactly when 17 "liked" The Secret and The Laws Of Attraction on Facebook -- before or after JA's first trial? If during or after, what a tongue-in-cheek winky, winky coincidence. If before, what a huge coincidence!

But enough of all this coddling the Princess. I want to see her in her black and white UNSENTENCED outfit on sentencing day, and walk out of the courtroom in handcuffs. Two things that would humiliate her! I doubt Sherry has the ovaries to make that happen. JA will no doubt walk out of court looking like the Queen she believes herself to be.
 
IMO.....defense knew something about #17, or why would they fight to keep her on, especially since the defense was going after a mistrial due to loosing jurors. That is the best proof for me they knew where she stood.
 
Really well written post.

I also believe that JA does feel attacked by the Alexander family because they wanted her put to death. They did not want the death penalty taken off the table. When the plea bargaining was going down, JA wanted to plead guilty to second degree murder which would have had her out in twelve years. She warned everyone at the time that if they did not give her what she wanted that she would destroy Travis's reputation. So that is what she and her supporters and the DT set out to do. They repeated the lies ad nauseum using the advice of that master manipulator and propagandist, Joseph Goebbels: "If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it."

The eleven jurors, contrary to the DT's efforts to persuade them through their vindictive falsehoods and insulting cross-examinations, were not swayed. They saw through to the truth of Travis Alexander's character. Just like the Alexander family, they spoke the truth as they had realized it through their court experience. And, as a result, they were targeted by JA's supporters.

To paraphrase Geobbels: It thus became vitally important for the Defence Team to use all of its powers to ridicule and denigrate the Prosecution's witnesses, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth about Travis Alexander is the greatest enemy of Jodi Arias.
Bested by your own.
 
IMO.....defense knew something about #17, or why would they fight to keep her on, especially since the defense was going after a mistrial due to loosing jurors. That is the best proof for me they knew where she stood.

Maybe they checked out her ex husbands case docs, and her Facebook during selection .. As you would :)
 
Young girls can be so foolish and easily led. If girls that age will run away to join terrorists in a foreign country...

Someone should do a workup comparing ja to manson. Who'd win in that smackdown?
I'd have to say Manson; getting other people to kill for you is a level of manipulation that is not available to Arias.
 
What does she have?! I wish there was a ban on all things Arias. After sentencing everyone of the threads should be called the TRAVIS ALEXANDER thread and her name should be removed.
You should also ask what she will have. A successful suit will also prevent her from keeping any money from, say, a 'documentary' telling her side of the story.
 
Why didn't Sherry talk to all of the jurors? Did only 2 sign the note to her?
She has to tread carefully so as not to be seen as interfering with or injecting herself into the deliberation process.
 
I don't like Civil cases as a second shot after a criminal one. To me that is the one that matters, I get that people don't agree with me, I just don't see an upside and in the end I think she hurts them over and over again. JMO
It's not a second shot. It involves the unrelated issue of seeing to it that she does not profit from her crime. That was not addressed in the state's case.
 
Hayden suggested that they may have stolen their parents credit cards and that literally anyone could make a call without any problems as there is no real screening process. As for fake ID's....I altered mine and all of my friends when I was round 17 which permitted us into clubs. That's probably the worst "crime" I ever committed, lol. I still can't even, for the life of me how anyone would want to talk, much less worship her. I mean all I wanted to do at that age was go to dance class, obsess over 90210 and the go to the mall. Still can't figure out what is wrong with kids now. Honestly, I think the internet plays a huge part in anti-social behavior these days.

I'm confused about this too. I wasnt aware they could make calls out to unapproved phone numbers. Prisoners can buy phone cards from their money In their books to Do outcalls BUT i didn't know it could be to unapproved. They USUALLY do this so that an inmate can't just call pizza hut or harass coerce victims from inside. Plus the illegal aspects. I just don't get it
 
Plus, what a sh##ty caliber firearm. I would never use that as personal carry due to the the odds of it being completely ineffective should you not get an accurate shot off . It doesn't sound like she had experience with a firearm either, like you mentioned. It's very possible that it wasn't very loud as I have shot .22 just for target practice and it is not loud, relatively speaking. Anywho, if the shot did happen first, I am sure he fought back and frantic plan 2 went into effect. It really doesn't matter to me the sequence of events and they wouldn't have convinced me otherwise as either way was overkill.

I agree that she tried the gun first. The angle and location of the bullet shows (in my opinion) that she tried to shoot him when she forced him to sit in the shower after brandishing that gun. Clearly she wasn't used to handling a gun because her aim was off. Firing the gun in that small space would have been deafening and she may have been shellshocked briefly. She likely tried to fire the gun again when he did not die but 1) the gun was old 2) it was probably wet 3) she may have tried to shoot him with the muzzle against his skin. .25 semi automatics aren't entirely reliable or effective, which is why they are pretty hard to come by new.

The knife was definitely back up. Same reason she brought knives along in her getaway-mobile the day she was arrested.
 
OH OH yes yes yes!


OT: I have only been called for jury duty once in Houston and was released shortly after I got there. I am so bummed as they NEVER contact me. What's up with that? I have joked to my friends that if there was such a thing as a professional juror I would so be all over that!


I'm going down to the Maricopa Cty Courthouse tomorrow for my divorce records. I'll have a wait and a court computer so maybe I'll see if I can snag any records on JA. At least looking will help pass the wait before my number is called. :D
 
IMO.....defense knew something about #17, or why would they fight to keep her on, especially since the defense was going after a mistrial due to loosing jurors. That is the best proof for me they knew where she stood.

They knew something about her because the attorneys and the family and the jurors and the judge were all together when JSS read the juror questions.
 
I remember at the beginning of the retrial, before the jury was selected that Nurmi requested that the jurors not be allowed to be on social media. JSS turned him down saying it was too restrictive. Does anyone else remember this? My memory could be wrong on this.
 
I remember at the beginning of the retrial, before the jury was selected that Nurmi requested that the jurors not be allowed to be on social media. JSS turned him down saying it was too restrictive. Does anyone else remember this? My memory could be wrong on this.

Yep. Your memory is correct.
http://www.azcentral.com/community/mesa/articles/20131204jodi-arias-jurors-tweeter-accounts.html

The Republic | azcentral.com
Wed Dec 4, 2013 10:48 AM

A judge has denied a motion requiring jurors for the Jodi Arias re-trial to disclose their Twitter accounts.
Arias' defense team had argued that jurors need to reveal their Twitter handles so they could be monitored for any inappropriate comments or communication with each other on the case.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
162
Guests online
241
Total visitors
403

Forum statistics

Threads
609,344
Messages
18,252,986
Members
234,637
Latest member
Karma398
Back
Top