Discussions on Formal Sentencing Hearing - Jodi Arias #5

[Hez]

Interesting comments from the 3 jurors in the GMA interview! I noticed 2 of the jurors said they went into the deliberation phase ready to vote for death. Only the cowboy said he came to the conclusion death was the appropriate sentence during deliberations. In fact the other 2 jurors mentioned how their opinion on death vs life swung during the penalty phase.

The admonition from the judge is that jurors are not to form any conclusions and are expected to keep an open mind until they've heard all the evidence in the case and only then as they deliberate with their fellow jurors. I'm sure this is a difficult task as people are human and humans do form conclusions in their mind. This admonition is given by the judge at least once every day of trial, and sometimes multiple times.

I wonder if it wasn't only J#17 who went in to the deliberation phase with their mind already made up. The difference is that J#17 was the contrarian holdout who wasn't going in the right direction. Along with that it appears J#17 was inarticulate at a minimum or stubborn and oppositional at the other spectrum, which just made the whole process of deliberations moot. And frankly J#17 sounded dumb, using a made-for-TV movie to create the persona of JA in her mind. Well duh, of course the reality would be different. Sitting in a courtroom, shackled under her clothes, already incarcerated for years, the reality of the killer would be much less visceral than what was portrayed on TV, accompanied by crescendoing dramatic music.

BBM - I thought this admonition was only given during the jury instructions. The only admonition I'm aware of that they were given on a daily basis by the judge was to not watch any news/social media regarding the case and to not discuss the case with anyone, including fellow jurors. :thinking:

 

[Sweet Fox]

View attachment 70869

View attachment 70870

View attachment 70871

Arizona Prisons Commissary List
ADOC.com

Thanks for the post. The commissary list is much more extensive than I thought. Even if she’s at Level 5, she’ll still have access to a lot of items. Since she must buy all paper products from the commissary, I was particularly interested in finding out what was available so I looked it up. I didn't see anything on the stationary list that’s suitable for her artwork. Ha, Ha - maybe that will put an end to her business.

 

[Madeleine74]

God help us as a society if people form any real life opinions from a lifetime movie. :shudders:

Sadly people form opinions from things they see in the media or read in the media every day, all day long. People form opinions from everything they see and hear, even if it's not totally accurate. Jumping to conclusions is very common, you might say it's the most practiced form of mental aerobics! It takes a lot of discipline to not form an opinion and to not jump to conclusions. Look at how things posted on Twitter become 'factoids.' It's like constant whack-a-mole to get at the truth. I struggle with this myself and try hard to be aware of it.

 

[deedee21]

Not sure yet but her Twitter page says she has received notice the Az Judicial review board has started investigation of JSS re her complaint
Stay tuned......t

When she gets to Perryville, she will complain that her cell is smaller than Travis's closet and she cant fit through the doggie door.(that would be the slot for food trays)

 

[Madeleine74]

BBM - I thought this admonition was only given during the jury instructions. The only admonition I'm aware of that they were given on a daily basis by the judge was to not watch any news/social media regarding the case and to not discuss the case with anyone, including fellow jurors. :thinking:

Along with what you mentioned, a full admonition includes verbiage about not forming opinions, keep an open mind, you haven't heard all the evidence, blah blah. Very standard instructions used in trials.

 

[daisydomino]

The argument about this being a "DV" case is kind of ridiculous in that the 2 of them didn't actually live together and by even JA's accounts, were not really in a relationship while they were even living in the same town. JA moved to Mesa after they had broken up but then she kept on seeing him even while knowing it was just sex (or so she said).

It's just a homicidal violence case. Not "domestic." Why does it matter? Because JA absolutely was not under TA's control. He had no control over her finances and ability to work, he had no control over her housing, he had no control over who she socialized with and when. It was a choice to be in a sexual relationship/"friendship" with him.

The obsession she formed is really the tragic part here (along with her decision to deal with obsession by murder). If you've never experienced the feeling of obsession, I can tell you from personal experience it feels absolutely awful. There is nothing pleasurable about it. It's a chemical reaction in the brain involving decreased serotonin (not an excuse, just the science side of it). Couple that with personality disorder(s) and a big dose of evil, and it's a disaster. I am not excusing her behavior, not one bit, nor do I feel sorry for her. There were productive ways to deal and she chose none of those and embraced the most evil thing she could.

The DV thing is a problem in so many ways. They were not family. They didn't share a house. There was abuse*, but it had nothing whatsoever to do with domestic anything. I wonder if this bothers Jodi the hyper-verbal grammar cop. Nah.

source: http://i.imgur.com/NEM0osr.png Google the word "domestic"

 

[Rocco]

Interesting comments from the 3 jurors in the GMA interview! I noticed 2 of the jurors said they went into the deliberation phase ready to vote for death. Only the cowboy said he came to the conclusion death was the appropriate sentence during deliberations. In fact the other 2 jurors mentioned how their opinion on death vs life swung during the penalty phase.

The admonition from the judge is that jurors are not to form any conclusions and are expected to keep an open mind until they've heard all the evidence in the case and only then as they deliberate with their fellow jurors. I'm sure this is a difficult task as people are human and humans do form conclusions in their mind. This admonition is given by the judge at least once every day of trial, and sometimes multiple times.

I wonder if it wasn't only J#17 who went in to the deliberation phase with their mind already made up. The difference is that J#17 was the contrarian holdout who wasn't going in the right direction. Along with that it appears J#17 was inarticulate at a minimum or stubborn and oppositional at the other spectrum, which just made the whole process of deliberations moot. And frankly J#17 sounded dumb, using a made-for-TV movie to create the persona of JA in her mind. Well duh, of course the reality would be different. Sitting in a courtroom, shackled under her clothes, already incarcerated for years, the reality of the killer would be much less visceral than what was portrayed on TV, accompanied by crescendoing dramatic music.

I was on a jury a couple of years ago and the admonition you've stated is what we were told when court concluded every day. It wouldn't make any sense to wait to tells jurors not to form any opinions or come to any conclusions until all the evidence was presented at the end of the trial because then all the evidence HAS been presented.

 

[Madeleine74]

The DV thing is a problem in so many ways. They were not family. They didn't share a house. There was abuse, but it had nothing whatsoever to do with domestic anything. I wonder if this bothers Jodi the hyper-verbal grammar cop. Nah.

DV was just something she latched onto later because she learned from her defense team it can be used successfully as a defense and has a lot of support. In her case it wasn't DV, but that's what they tried because they had no other strategy with which to get support and try to get her acquitted.

 

[Hope4More]

Not sure yet but her Twitter page says she has received notice the Az Judicial review board has started investigation of JSS re her complaint



-------------------------------

I don't see any mention of this there or anywhere. It's a ridiculous thing anyway, so maybe it poofed along with her JW calling "Juan" a liar.

She may or may not have sent off a whine-o-gram about JSS. Before JSS has even sentenced her. Hope she WAS that stupid. But even if true, there is zero possibility a judicial review board would have looked at it yet, if they ever would deign to, much less started an investigation.

 

[Hez]

Along with what you mentioned, a full admonition includes verbiage about not forming opinions, keep an open mind, you haven't heard all the evidence, blah blah. Very standard instructions used in trials.

Right, but I'm not aware of this judge giving the full admonition every day during this trial, you know because of trial by tweet and all that.

 

[Madeleine74]

Right, but I'm not aware of this judge giving the full admonition every day during this trial, you know because of trial by tweet and all that.

Go back to the guilt phase then and you might find video showing her giving admonitions. These are standard jury admonitions. Judges make these admonitions in every trial, during every phase, every day the jury is convened, in every state. They can probably recite them in their sleep, and juries on long cases can probably do so as well by the end, after hearing it scores of times.

ETA:

Here are part of the actual instructions given to the jury in Arizona:

Do not form final opinions about any fact or about the outcome of the case until you have heard and considered all of the evidence, the closing arguments, and the rest of the instructions I will give you on the law. Keep an open mind during the trial. Form your final opinions only after you have had an opportunity to discuss the case with each other in the jury room at the end of the trial.

 

[FelicityLemon]

The argument about this being a "DV" case is kind of ridiculous in that the 2 of them didn't actually live together and by even JA's accounts, were not really in a relationship while they were even living in the same town. JA moved to Mesa after they had broken up but then she kept on seeing him even while knowing it was just sex (or so she said).

It's just a homicidal violence case. Not "domestic." Why does it matter? Because JA absolutely was not under TA's control. He had no control over her finances and ability to work, he had no control over her housing, he had no control over who she socialized with and when. It was a choice to be in a sexual relationship/"friendship" with him.

The obsession she formed is really the tragic part here (along with her decision to deal with obsession by murder). If you've never experienced the feeling of obsession, I can tell you from personal experience it feels absolutely awful. There is nothing pleasurable about it. It's a chemical reaction in the brain involving decreased serotonin (not an excuse, just the science side of it). Couple that with personality disorder(s) and a big dose of evil, and it's a disaster. I am not excusing her behavior, not one bit, nor do I feel sorry for her. There were productive ways to deal and she chose none of those and embraced the most evil thing she could.

BBM - because these simple facts, FACTS, are the antithesis of domestic violence.

I had to make that statement as in-your-face as possible because I was hoping that people like laviolette and ja supporters might understand the true nature of domestic violence. But, I guess that's just like shouting at a person who can't hear anything. The facts are the facts and can't be fluid, bastardized and CHANGED to fit someone's fantasy defense of being a victim. That whole sordid bit of selling t-shirts proclaiming her victim status turns my stomach even remembering that bit of manipulation. I feel sadness for those true victims who bought into her version when they know in their hearts and guts that ja was the abuser not the victim.

And oh yes, the feeling of obsession...me, too. It really is a visceral, all-encompassing state of being, not just thought or emotion. Funny though, mine never involved the thoughts of manipulation, violence or murder. More self-destructive than outwardly projected. As opposed to ja.

Madeleine74: Thank you for your altogether excellent post. Thank you very much.

 

[ICit]

Anyone know why the jurors gma interview didn't air? I recorded both Sunday and Monday, but never saw it. Did I miss it?

I posted on the last board that I believe because of all the hoopla surrounding JUROR17, the UNUSUAL PERSON, the court has issued a gag order on all the jurors and everyone legally involved with this case.
To me, that is the only explanation.

 

[ICit]

There was a Good Morning America interview with jurors, it was just very short and it possibly did not make it onto the national broadcast on TV. You can see it here: http://youtu.be/-9MUb3-IwCE

[video=youtu;-9MUb3-IwCE]http://youtu.be/-9MUb3-IwCE[/video]

ETA: http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/video/jodi-arias-jurors-express-anger-regret-murder-trial-29435095

Daisy. This is the first one we saw with only three jurors. They made an announcement that they would air the next day an interview with eleven jurors, but that was never aired. I smell a gag order because of the investigation.

 

[Nosey Parker]

Quoted by Hope - I don't see any mention of this there or anywhere. It's a ridiculous thing anyway, so maybe it poofed along with her JW calling "Juan" a liar.

She may or may not have sent off a whine-o-gram about JSS. Before JSS has even sentenced her. Hope she WAS that stupid. But even if true, there is zero possibility a judicial review board would have looked at it yet, if they ever would deign to, much less started an investigation.

... and much less send her a notice of same!

 

[katydid23]

Joins in :happydance:

Me too....:happydance: :happydance:

 

[sumbunny]

JA has a new tweet , putting Chris Hughes in a poor light *sigh* can't they make her stop?

 

[IfIMay]

JA has a new tweet , putting Chris Hughes in a poor light *sigh* can't they make her stop?

as long as she has an audience reading and reporting on her tweets? Nope. Best thing is to ignore. Let her tweet out only to her darkness.

 

[Gin]

JA has a new tweet , putting Chris Hughes in a poor light *sigh* can't they make her stop?

It is annoying, but I totally believe Sheriff Joe. I'm certain he carefully documents all past and current JA issues.

 

[dog.gone.cute]

JA has a new tweet , putting Chris Hughes in a poor light *sigh* can't they make her stop?

:seeya: Thanks, sumbunny !

:facepalm: I just had to go read it ... :couch:


Here it is:

Jodi Arias Updates @JodiAnnArias · 48m 48 minutes ago
Flores: "Was there ever a violent relationship between those two?"
C. Hughes: "I WOULD GUESS THERE WAS, but not that we know of."-- 10/28/08


:gaah: