Discussions on Formal Sentencing Hearing - Jodi Arias #6

[Bravo]

I've seen enough in here this morning.

It's obvious we just need a brand new trial, from scratch.

Same defendant, same lawyers, same sex stories, same psychiatrists and psychologist, different jury.

Let's get it started bright and early on Monday.

You get right on that LOL

 

[FelicityLemon]

Do we even know if it was legal for Juan to background check prospective jurors without court permission? I have been trying to research this and cannot come up with an answer. From what I have found it seems (but I haven't found the actual law) that in federal cases the judge has to give the ok for attorneys to do a background check. I have also seen where in state courts problems have come about by doing background checks on jurors such as discrimination issues. I am wondering what the law is in Arizona. Just my guess, but I think we will find that attorneys need permission from the court to do so.

Ha! cool, just learned how to do something by accident with a shortcut. I hit Ctrl I by accident (fat fingers on laptop) and it auto-inserted the code for Italics

I was wondering that myself about being allowed to background check potential jurors. Say, they're not allowed to. What if someone else does and gives the information to the attorney? How would that be handled? As the court saying goes: you can't unring a bell. The attorney would KNOW it, but could he use it or could he then use the fact that someone gave him information that could affect the case- use that to ask the court for permission to investigate further?

Great question ohreally!

 

[FelicityLemon]

LOL, I had sex with the prosecutor, but I didn't KNOW him.

 

[Hope4More]

I was Facetiming with my fiance this morning and thinking this convicted murderer was getting NINE HOURS of that. It's just mind boggling and the only satisfaction about it is the cliff she just fell off of and the withdrawals she will definitely experience. But still......

I know. I've concluded (though I forget every other day) that the only way to live with the injustice of that (and so much else) is to know, 100% and absolutely, that there is no justice on earth that could be meted out to her that would be just enough. Nothing. Not death (I'm being cruel in saying that, not kind) and nothing short of death.

The very people we most want to punish and to suffer are the very people least likely to be genuinely affected by what we feel or what can be imposed upon them. Their inaccessibility is what maddens many of the rest of us.

What I also know for 100% though, for myself, is that the things that make these unusual people beyond reach are the same reasons they will NEVER feel actual joy, or love, or simple content. Is that good enough? Nah, but it's a start.

 

[Hope4More]

snipped by me

Who is the judicial assistant that was overheard saying JM should have been stabbed 27 times?

I'm pretty sure that was proven to be untrue. Likely a rumor spread for bad reasons....

 

[cricket49]

I'm pretty sure that was proven to be untrue. Likely a rumor spread for bad reasons....

I wonder why JM would have brought it up in court? He of all people would have overlooked a statement that seemed to be a rumor.

 

[Wing Ding]

Originally Posted by ScarlettScarpetta
I just can not for the life of me understand why The judge allowed the super secret testimony??? She was getting death threats from who??? The other inmates are not going to see her testimony. No one is going to kill her in the court room, So why would that even been considered.

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

I'd surely love to hear the answer to this question as well. Who is/was such a threat to CMJA?

Oh, just more fictitious people like all the other ones her entire life who have been grabbing her by the wrist, spinning her around and either holding a knife to her throat, choking her to the point of passing out, throwing her around into furniture, kicking her, body-slamming her, yelling at her or threatening to kill her or her family. She must be a magnet for that sort of treatment. I swear if the poor little princess didn't have any bad luck in her life, she wouldn't have any luck at all.

Speaking of kicking... she mentioned being kicked once or twice, but she's the one who likes to kick. I do like that she weaves some truthful elements of her life into her poorly fabricated tales of woe. It may take two years to figure it all out, but it's there. I wonder why ALV and Geff didn't see THAT pattern?

 

[MeeBee]

I wonder why JM would have brought it up in court? He of all people would have overlooked a statement that seemed to be a rumor.

In the Marc McGee hearing did JM mention MM had been online for a while and had been harassing people himself including making veiled threats towards JM?

 

[Amster]

(Respectfully snipped) If you have the time, this hearing is an interesting example of the contentious relationship between JM and LKN.

After watching that.....and Juan guaranteeing he can prove that MM is a liar.....Sherry allows him to testify!!! Not in person, of course! My contempt for her grows daily....

Stab Juan 27 times!!!!! Was it Maria who said it?? Who is the judges assistant?? OMG

 

[Hope4More]

I wonder why JM would have brought it up in court? He of all people would have overlooked a statement that seemed to be a rumor.

He did for sure? When? It's been too long ago that i read about it being a rumor. Have no memory of where I saw that, just that it seemed to be a reliable source. If JM did reference it then the source was mistaken.

 

[SweetT]

LOL, I had sex with the prosecutor, but I didn't KNOW him.

I call this the Clintonesque way of talking some folks are really good at it. "NO I never slept with that woman" Real meaning (We were up all night doing it so of course we didnt sleep). My ex was like this, you had to ask the correct way, with the correct words or it wasnt lying it was manipulating the words..I hate people like that.

 

[cricket49]

He did for sure? When? It's been too long ago that i read about it being a rumor. Have no memory of where I saw that, just that it seemed to be a reliable source. If JM did reference it then the source was mistaken.

Here it is

http://bluesharp1911.wix.com/courtchatter#!jodi-arias-pretrial-hearing-10062014/c1bdz

It is located at the end of the video - last 10 minutes.

 

[cricket49]

In the Marc McGee hearing did JM mention MM had been online for a while and had been harassing people himself including making veiled threats towards JM?

No but he should have. I think JM does not like to get into the back and forth with Nurmi, seems childish to him.

 

[ShadyLady]

Still listening to hearing....so Dr G has a sexual abuse charge against him....LOL.

As far as I know....Mcgee outed himself.

 

[MeeBee]

Still listening to hearing....so Dr G has a sexual abuse charge against him....LOL.

As far as I know....Mcgee outed himself.

He definitely did. Everyone already knew who witness #1 was before his affidavit was even read due to him being from New Zealand. Nurmi knows this and knew he could use it after the affidavid was read. JM just helped it along by accidentally blurting his name out.

 

[cricket49]

After watching that.....and Juan guaranteeing he can prove that MM is a liar.....Sherry allows him to testify!!! Not in person, of course! My contempt for her grows daily....

Stab Juan 27 times!!!!! Was it Maria who said it?? Who is the judges assistant?? OMG

BBM

That is what I want to know. This is the first time I heard about this.

 

[bznbear]

You know Lambchop, I was thinking about that too. After the foreman sent the note to JSS, J17 sent her note as well, and we don't know what she said. After JSS spoke to 2 of the 11 DP jurors, and J17, J17 started "particpating" (which could just mean she was going through the motions as a CYA).

IMHO, Jodi did feel abused by Travis in her warped perception of reality. Most of us see that she wasn't abused, but thankfully we don't think like her. Travis did not want to share his life with her, and leading up to his death, he started calling her out on her escalating intrusive behavior. She felt extremely threatened that Travis would expose the person she really is to the world, and her mind, killing him was justified.

What if J17 relates to that, as in she thinks the same way as Jodi? We're already hearing she feels attacked and assaulted, with no credible threats against her. She doesn't like people questioning her thought processes, or motivations, even though her posture and words while deliberating are suspicious. She wants to be a victim now, but IMO she is devious. It's all for naught now, but that's my opinion with what we know at present.

B&RSBM: The killer will always be a victim when she doesn't get her way, imo. That's just how narcissists roll. Interestingly, you pose a very real possibility in J17. IF what we've read about her is accurate, and I'm staying open-minded for now, you may just have hit the proverbial nail on the head.

The thing with narcissists is they will inevitably portray themselves as the martyr, the sufferer. What better way to gain the limelight and the sympathy of the masses than to be the one lone holdout on a high profile jury; a matter of life or death? And then go very public with the trauma they endured because of their unpopular decision? This reeks of the ultimate manipulation.

I will say though, it could be the husband who is at the root of this, but I'm skeptical of J17's actions in the deliberation room. Why the separate note to JSS? Instead of working with her counterparts, she chose to set herself apart from them, and make herself the sacrifice. I think she way underestimated though the backlash and possible legal ramifications of her not so well thought out choice.

Here's an article on narcissists playing victims of narcissists, A couple of good articles imbedded within, too.

https://anupturnedsoul.wordpress.co...victims-of-narcissists-who-is-the-narcissist/

 

[Boytwnmom]

just like a case with circumstantial evidence. We often criticize juries who can't put the pieces together. Same thing here with #17. You can't isolate one part. Like, well, after the judge talked to her she did deliberate. Why would anyone believe she did? I don't because it's one piece of the puzzle.

You start from the beginning. She lied, misled and deceived the court regarding her history with the prosecutor, with felons, with criminal activity by romantic partners etc. Why did she do it? Well, in this context it can only be because she wanted on the jury and knew if she disclosed too much of the truth she would be dismissed.

Why did she want to be on the jury? Should we believe it was because she had such a strong desire to fulfill her civic duty? No, because if duty were relevant she wouldn't have lied as she also had an overriding duty to be truthful and withhold nothing that might impact her fitness for service. So, she had some other reason she wanted to be on the jury and she lied to make it happen as there was no other reason to lie. So, none of this leads to a logical conclusion that she merely wanted to deliberate just like the other jurors did.

And, lo and behold, all the other jurors and the alternates evaluated the evidence differently than her. OK, that could happen without malfeasance. But, all the jurors in the room felt from the beginning she had her mind made up, that she refused to discuss the evidence, aggravating factors, how the mitigating weighed against the aggravating. She separated herself from the group, refused to explain her reasoning. Again, this could happen without wrongdoing. But, when you put the whole picture together and not each element in isolation, I feel pretty much hit upside the head with the conclusion she had an agenda from the time she was called for jury service or at least from the time she knew it was for the JA trial.

IMO, to conclude that this was all completely kosher and this poor juror just came to a different, but equally valid conclusion from the other 11 + the alternates, requires me to suspend the kind of disbelief I only suspend for fiction. And this was all too real. And after following this 7 year extravaganza of manipulation I am not going to now fall for juror #17's follow up manipulation.

I don't pretend to know the why. Whether it's because she likes Jodi, hates the DP, hates Juan, hates society for sending felons to jail, is manipulated by her current felon husband, is delusional and has visions, I don't know or care. All I know is what the circumstantial evidence tells me. The kind of evidence that is all that is usually available to convict someone and I trust circumstantial evidence in the absence of any contrary evidence.

 

[Amster]

Here it is

http://bluesharp1911.wix.com/courtchatter#!jodi-arias-pretrial-hearing-10062014/c1bdz

It is located at the end of the video - last 10 minutes.

So....some nice company bought the trial tapes is allowing everyone to use them? Awesome!!

 

[TexMex]

After some beachin' it's time for some fresh fish and cold beer
Hope your Arpaio slop is awesome today Arias
#SnoopysPier
#padreisland