Discussions on Formal Sentencing Hearing - Jodi Arias #6

[MeeBee]

Because he ex-husband was a felon. Once he heard that he should have looked into it, especially once the field was narrowed down and it looked like she would make the final cut.

This is just not the state's fault. Asking for his name would seem like prying and I'd also be curious as to what Juan is allowed to ask of her. I've never heard a prosecutor ask for the name of the person a juror knows who's been charged/convicted of a crime. Never.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

I have a hard time with this as well. Imo, CMJA at 27 had - very little education , was unable to maintain a steady job, no home of her own, an ok car, no savings and very little interaction with family. At 27, I was college educated, employed full-time at a respected company, had a full family life, owned my home, and was married and pregnant with money in the bank.

I don't get how her age is a mitigating factor at all.

Neither do I, Audrey.

And especially since her victim was only a little over two years older than she was at the time he was murdered.

If #17 thought that was a mitigating factor then she should have also factored in that the victim wasn't much older.

By 27 almost 28 years of age plenty of people have had an honorable career in the military for 10 years.

With #17 using that as a mitigating factor it just shows she was grasping at anything and everything so she could vote for life instead of death.

It would have been different if Arias had been a teen at the time but we all know that wasn't the case.

So what #17 puts forth as mitigating factors really doesn't make a lot of logical sense, imo.

 

[Bravo]

Not me. It was taken in their secret "vent" room...
me-thinks someone in her support group is NOT there to support :giggle:

That's a scream!

 

[krkrjx]

That is weird because I've seen her in person and always thought her hands appeared monstrously out of proportion in the large department. :huh:

I thought her hands were strangely large also. Every time I have seen them, actually, so it's not just a matter of lighting or the wrong angle. It's in all light and from all angles. I wonder sometimes about things Troy says. Don't get me wrong...I think he is a good journalist who remains unbiased in a case where the word bias is thrown around daily. I just think some of his perceptions on little things (like her physical appearance and mannerisms, etc.) are not just off but really odd.

(Unless, of course, his 13 year old also has strangely huge hands.)

 

[Hope4More]

He could have asked what her ex-husband's name was, done a quick search of his court records, and seen his own name or even remembered the case.

IIRC, resident attorney Boytown has said that and more about what should have been done when those red flags started flying. She was baffled why the State allowed 17 on/didn't chase down info on every last red flag.

 

[Amster]

LOL....everyone else is at fault....sounds just like JA! IMO, J17 not only watched the movie, she watched the trial.

 

[memoriesbymichelle]

If juror 17 was so set in her belief system, why didn't she try and sway everybody else in the room into imposing a life sentence ?

She didn't even make an attempt to show ONE person in that room why a life sentence would be more appropriate.

It's called deliberating. She didn't, she wouldn't.



Stealth juror with a pre-set agenda......just like the foreman suspected.

I thought of that today too, that if she was for life surely she would want everyone to want life, right? It makes NO sense that she wouldn't at least explain her position. Oh well whatever will be will be, and even though at first I was upset, I now believe this is the best sentence for her. Especially because she didn't want it.

 

[TartLemon]

LOL....everyone else is at fault....sounds just like JA! IMO, J17 not only watched the movie, she watched the trial.

12 jurors watched the trial in 2013. Only 8 of the 12 deliberating jurors voted for DP.

 

[krkrjx]

Neither do I, Audrey.

And especially since her victim was only a little over two years older than she was at the time he was murdered.

If #17 thought that was a mitigating factor then she should have also factored in that the victim wasn't much older.

By 27 almost 28 years of age plenty of people have had an honorable career in the military for 10 years.

With #17 using that as a mitigating factor it just shows she was grasping at anything and everything so she could vote for life instead of death.

It would have been different if Arias had been a teen at the time but we all know that wasn't the case.

So what #17 puts forth as mitigating factors really doesn't make a lot of logical sense, imo.

My take based on what other jurors have said is Juror 17 did not want to deliberate the issues they were all in that room to deliberate. She wanted to talk about movies and Arias's physical appearance (she looks like a normal girl, not a monster) and other irrelevant things that were not mitigators and thus not issues open for deliberation.

 

[krkrjx]

Why is it wrong to "assume" anything about J17 but ok to "assume" what JM did or didn't do in regard to J17? Maybe he wanted her tossed but JSS refused? Remember Perry in the Anthony trial and his handpicked jury?

All.too.well.

 

[Hope4More]

My take based on what other jurors have said is Juror 17 did not want to deliberate the issues they were all in that room to deliberate. She wanted to talk about movies and Arias's physical appearance (she looks like a normal girl, not a monster) and other irrelevant things that were not mitigators and thus not issues open for deliberation.

Seriously. Please read what the foreman said in Jen's interview. I have even posted cliff notes of the interview up thread. Sorry, but nothing of this post is accurate.

 

[Amster]

Nurmi has got to be loving this!! See!! It was all Juans fault! Juan is a failure! Juan screwed up! Juan is incompetent! Juan is a liar! oooops....think JW is the one who said that.....

He and his sidekick are laughing all the way to the bank. Probably the same one that Maria has the secret password to JA's account!!

Juans fault! :happydance:

 

[Caylee Advocate]

The post was from prior to trial over the unapproved sale of jodibands

I remember that...blue wristbands vs. white ones if I remember it correctly. Does anyone know who the "Juan's Tie" guy is? I have a strong suspicion and he used to post over there and got booted. Nope, they DO have a few that access the "secret" vent room, LOL.

 

[Amster]

12 jurors watched the trial in 2013. Only 8 of the 12 deliberating jurors voted for DP.

Juans fault....he should have known Mr. Z would be smitten with Jodi. Juan should have known!!!

 

[memoriesbymichelle]

it's hard to find things about JSS that don't relate to JA, but here are two examples:

http://blogs.phoenixnewtimes.com/valleyfever/2012/06/dominic_chagolla_will_spend_hi.php

http://www.fox10phoenix.com/story/2...oenix-mother-accused-of-abusing-her-young-son

Wow thank you for finding those. I wonder why the one that stabbed his mom to death wasn't a DP case? Hmmm. It did give me a little comfort though, and I appreciate the links. Very kind of you to do that.

 

[krkrjx]

Seriously. Please read what the foreman said in Jen's interview. I have even posted cliff notes of the interview up thread. Sorry, but nothing of this post is accurate.

Seriously. It's his opinion. But other jurors have also spoken and they say she wanted to bring in the movie and other irrelevant things and would not participate in things that were either aggravators or mitigators.

I was not in the room, nor were you. We can only go on what we see reported. If the foreman thinks J17 did just fine, that's great for him. He can sleep at night knowing that. Other jurors might not agree with him, though. His being foreman does not give him more credibility, imo.

 

[Hope4More]

I thought of that today too, that if she was for life surely she would want everyone to want life, right? It makes NO sense that she wouldn't at least explain her position. Oh well whatever will be will be, and even though at first I was upset, I now believe this is the best sentence for her. Especially because she didn't want it.

I'm happy with LWOP, and don't really care about juror 17, to tell you the truth. I started off just playing devil's advocate, knowing what the vast majority of active posters on this thread think. But I have to say after I actually read what the foreman said and did an outline of what happened, I am less inclined to see the foreman as a hero and 17 as a conniving evil liar intent on saving JA or finding fame and fortune.

Finding oneself in the minority isn't for sissies when the majority is convinced they're right and that either you'd agree with them if you just tried harder, or that you're just flat out wrong, period.

 

[Nancy_Drew]

VERY INTERESTING!!

Wikipedia page "STEALTH JUROR"

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stealth_juror

A stealth juror or rogue juror is a person who, motivated by a hidden agenda in reference to a legal case, attempts to be seated on the jury and to influence the outcome.[1] Legal scholars believe that lawyers can identify stealth jurors by paying close attention to non-verbal behavior connected with deception and identifying discrepancies between answers to oral voir dire and written questionnaires.[2] A potential stealth juror may be hard to read and excessively reserved.[3] The potential for stealth jurors to nullify death penalty statutes has prompted calls to eliminate the requirement of a unanimous verdict in jury trials.[4] On the other hand, the argument has been raised that stealth jurors can serve as a defense against bad laws.[5]

Clay Conrad has stated that libertarian-minded venire members can and should increase their odds of getting on a jury by telling the prosecutors what they want to hear, without actually lying.[6] Jurors who lie to get on a jury can be charged with such offenses as contempt of court and obstruction of justice. Background checks are increasingly being used to catch jurors who lie about their criminal records.[7]

 

[Dmacky]

If you have the fortitude, read even one of her journals cover to cover. She sounds like an adolescent. A not very bright, overly emotional, very hormonal adolescent. Maybe that's what 17 was thinking about the age thing. Pretty sure MF spoke to just that, and according to the foreman, the jury LIKED and LISTENED to her.

And I can't even wrap my head around that! ^

1.The dynamics of the relationship shows how devious TA was....
2.Texting after 11pm shows devious behavior from TA
3.Him calling Jodi a "shank" ....devious

Gosh there's so much more she testified about with her 30 years worth of experience :thinking: that my hippocampus became damaged after 2 days daze. :wink:

 

[memoriesbymichelle]

This is how they instruct her supporters on how to donate money so that they can keep Jodi's finances in order and it is assured to go to the right place. It's why Jodi does not support independent donations because she won't be able to put that money in the trust and keep it. It's very important to her that the money goes to the right place.

It all makes sense now.

"Her" money that she only "earned" by killing someone? She never worked for any of it. Makes me sick. I work 2 jobs to make ends meet and she murders someone and has crazy people send her zillions of dollars. What a whacky world we live in.