Discussions on Formal Sentencing Hearing - Jodi Arias #5

[steelman]

Didn't the local taxpayers already pay for this? It seems it should be public record, freely available at this point. When did the Courts start selling trials?

I have no interest in seeing a replay of Nurmi, Willmott, MDLR or Stephens in what could be called the most absurd trial of the decade.

Law scholars in the coming years will be using this trial as a training tool for judges on how NOT TO run a trial.

In answer to your question, the court system and law enforcement are almost like their own cottage industries now----as much money as they bring in, they should be listed on the N.Y. stock exchange.

They can keep their videos.

 

[memoriesbymichelle]

Didn't the local taxpayers already pay for this? It seems it should be public record, freely available at this point. When did the Courts start selling trials?

After they spent over 3 mil for the case. Gotta try to recoup some of the costs ya know? Government always sticking it to the citizens. Pay pay and pay some more. I heard here in AZ they are talking about increasing our taxes too. Like we don't already pay enough.

 

[Val1]

Can you imagine finding out your impressionable 15 year old was comingling with this evil incarnate? Horrifying.

Call me suspicious but I'm wondering if these, or any other, young girls or boys have been sending bathtub pics of themselves from about seven or eight years ago to JA and her future DT/Appeals lawyer/s.... I think you can guess what I'm thinking.

 

[Hope4More]

I was actually amazed that Angela went a whole YEAR without an infraction: 2013. I wonder how she managed that. LOL

Was she in solitary that whole time? One broken rule resets the clock back to Phase I Day 1.

 

[memoriesbymichelle]

From the search warrant.....

The gun and silencer were definitely in her room. The torn up photos were found thrown away in outside trash. A digital recorder was found in an inside trash basket, a white long sleeved shirt was being thrown away as well.

Her HD's and all but one of her journals were in a safe under her bed, one journal was found separately, in a dresser drawer.

So she had two guns? One under the bed and one that was found in the rental car one month later? And then there is the one she stole from Gpa. Hmm

 

[RadarLuv]

Oh, if only this was the way it really went down....


[video=youtube;Hz8YR22DduI]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hz8YR22DduI&feature=youtu.be[/video]

 

[Tulessa]

I am going to experiment with these this year. Every time I see them, I think of Travis.

[video=youtube;btO_CP3sqnk]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=btO_CP3sqnk[/video]

 

[Hope4More]

Call me suspicious but I'm wondering if these, or any other, young girls or boys have been sending bathtub pics of themselves from about seven or eight years ago to JA and her future DT/Appeals lawyer/s.... I think you can guess what I'm thinking.

Read JustDaTruth tweets and that doesn't seem off the wall. He says that the JAII folks have allowed their own children, one as young as 10 years old, to join in their video chats to the killer.

One child lost it as the non-verdict was read because she thought JA was going to be taken outside and killed right then and there.

That is flat out child abuse, IMO.

 

[FinallyRegistered]

True. I don't think there's anything to stop from coming to watch? I don't know. What I do know is that if you don't want your name and face out here, don't put it where you know there are dozens of cameras, reporters and curious people

True, very true; however, what if you are a husband of a juror attending court and, in the evenings, having conversations about what is going on in the courtroom when the jury is not permitted in there? Not that I believe this happened, but I just had the horrible thought.

 

[RadarLuv]

[video=youtube;AQ4SFBYfzkY]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AQ4SFBYfzkY[/video]

 

[RadarLuv]

[video=youtube;lw1NfpCIxo0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lw1NfpCIxo0[/video]

 

[Bluewater_Girl]

Was she in solitary that whole time? One broken rule resets the clock back to Phase I Day 1.

I don't know, but her last infraction in 2012 was minor. Maybe you go to solitary if you rack up a certain number of infractions within a given time frame? :dunno:

 

[ZsaZsa]

Good to see that now JSS thinks she is off camera you can really see her exasperation with Nurmi and Arias. You have to feel
a little compassion for her- I would have lost it years ago....

 

[RadarLuv]

[video=youtube;Amk8UNPu-UE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Amk8UNPu-UE[/video]

 

[steelman]

Maria just posted she does not have daughters




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No, she has a sister with the initials RDLR. Back when this story broke about the jurors husband being friends on Facebook, it was stated that he was friends with MDLR's daughter. It was later revised that he had MDLR's sister, not her daughter, saved as a friend on his Facebook page.

I misstated it myself when I first posted about it in here because that's how it was reported.

Is she denying that she has a sister ? Is she denying that her sis was on baldy's Facebook ? Nope.

 

[Val1]

True, very true; however, what if you are a husband of a juror attending court and, in the evenings, having conversations about what is going on in the courtroom when the jury is not permitted in there? Not that I believe this happened, but I just had the horrible thought.

Did that little quote catch your eye too? Yes couples sometimes use the same terminology to describe things but that just seemed odd to me.

http://cdn-static.wildabouttrial.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/arias-minute.pdf
"She further stated she did not socialize at lunch or outside of court with other jurors in an effort to
remain as impartial as possible and followed all instructions “to a T.” "

http://www.azfamily.com/news/jodi-a...jurors-decision-in-Arias-trial-295284251.html
"She did her job to a T," he said.

 

[vallie]

:seeya: I agree ...

First, I think it will be delayed. The scheduled date is 4/13/15 and no doubt, the defense will request a delay, and of course, it will be granted because this is Judge Sherry Delay Stephens' courtroom.

Second, the defense will request NO cameras because JA does not want to be seen in her "prison stripes." Nurmi and Wilmott will request that JA be allowed to wear "street clothes" for sentencing because it would be prejudicial for JSS to see her in prison stripes. And of course, because this is Judge Sherry I Do Not Want An Appeal Stephens' courtroom, expect JA to be in "street clothes."

Seriously ... and my opinion is based on JSS treatment of JA and the defense team.

JMO and :moo:

Every dateline or 48 hours mystery i see, the murderer is cuffed upon "guilty" announcement, and taken away by sheriffs,, WHY oh WHY does CMJA not have the same treatment, I would have LOVED to see that, and was surprised and dissappointed it didn't happen.

 

[ohreally]

For what its worth Jodi testified in the first trial that her dad owned a gun(s) and a silencer. My guess is that her father has claimed them as his, as there was never a second 9mm or Jodi owning a silencer mentioned in any of the trials. In Jodi's parents house there was two adults and at least two older teens, so I am not surprised by the amount of cell phones and laptops found. We probably have around ten cell phones in a closet. Whenever we get a new one we keep the old ones.

 

[Endora27]

Well..... all I know is this.....if Jodi goes in there and starts using big fancy words, and corrects others spelling, and demands special treatment..........she's probably going to find out what it REALLY feels like to be a battered woman.

Karma! All the lies and fabricated stories of being abused and a domestic violence victim is now going to bite her in the rump!

 

[krkrjx]

I think that because the right to a jury trial is held so sacred in this country, nothing will happen to Juror 17 even if the powers that be find her behavior to be questionable. If she has not committed any crime, this will all just blow over. Even perjury, which would be difficult to prove, will not qualify for anything happening to her.

It's too touchy a subject--jury duty. People do not want to serve for the most part yet without a good reason to be excluded, jury duty is not something one can just opt out of. If it is an inconvenience at best, it can be an intrusion of major proportions when one is called to serve in a lengthy, high-profile trial.

If jurors are prosecuted for misdeeds of a non-criminal nature, jury duty will be seen with even more loathing than it already incites in many citizens. That's one reason why I do not expect to see any charges happen against either Juror 17 or the foreman of the first jury in this case. Both apparently had an agenda and both at the very least lied by omission in order to carry out their agenda.

The threat of prosecution for perjury that could rise from taking action against the two jurors involved in this case might serve to send a well-needed message to future jurors, but I think in a high-profile case there has to be more restraint exercised as any action taken would be viewed as prejudice or bias on the part of the state. In such cases, charging a juror with wrongdoing may not be worth risking the tongue-wagging that would ensue. At best, we may have to be satisfied with some type of overhaul of the jury selection process such as potential jurors being screened more carefully before final selection to sit on a jury.

IMO.