Discussions on Formal Sentencing Hearing - Jodi Arias #7

[Mrs G Norris]

And pregnant again before marrying...added: I am old fashion I guess...

To another felon .. I mean .. yeah let's just be nice about it and call her 'unstable'.

 

[Mindmatters]

All of the information that finally coming out/being released is shining a light on some truly disturbing things that need to be addressed with DP cases. No it will not undo the injustice that clearly occurred in this trial but hopefully legislation will be introduced to ensure that justice is truly served in future DP trials. And I hope one day to see a Travis' Law enacted.

 

[Mrs G Norris]

I'm starting to wonder if I'm talking to some of you on Twitter .. because there are a lot of very similar conversations happening right now

 

[ShadyLady]

JSS didn't think 17 was suspect. Or overly emotional. Or incapable of separating her own feelings from the facts of the case, etc. That, IMO, is worse in a sense. She's THAT bad at assessing people,and she's a JUDGE? Eek!

JSS came from family court, right? So she knew better then Juan....

 

[LambChop]

OK what about how she says she wouldn't just let anyone around her kids, after she met her second felon on an online dating site .. even though their FATHER is a freaking con .. WTF!! Poor judgement or what .. doesn't all of the above show shocking poor judgement? Isn't part of being on a jury having good judgement?

I'm so miffed by all this.

J138 said he was arrested for robbery and assault. As a DV victim why did she continue to see him, much less expose him to her children. That should have been a big red flag.

 

[FelicityLemon]

I have had this happen to me numerous times over the years. I don't know if the law has changed but back then I was told by the Moderators that all of our posts are copyrighted and cant be copied and pasted by someone else to another site without our permission.

Several times when it was happening, I didn't even know it was being done, and found out from other posters who PMd me to let me know where it was located. On each of the sites I contacted the Administrator and they were removed immediately.

I have also had my moniker name used by others pretending I was the one posting garbage when it wasn't so. Some of the sites I had never even heard of much less posted on them.

It is quite frustrating and should be illegal.

IMO

I absolutely agree with you! And I don't want to be misunderstood that my post was anything condoning copying our comments - YIKES! I meant it only as a reminder that because we're not hidden from public view (like a secret site or back end thing) anybody who comes across these has the ability to misuse our stuff. It stinks, but it's a reality. It's one of the reasons I most likely can drive mods or techies nuts because of my typetypetypedeletedeletetypedeletepostdelete... ad infinitum. :/

And it already is illegal to do it, but people *obviously* do it anyway

This site and a private group on fb are my big forays into social media. I think this is as far as I'll go in that respect.

 

[MeeBee]

I'm starting to wonder if I'm talking to some of you on Twitter .. because there are a lot of very similar conversations happening right now

I wonder that too! You'll recognize me if you see me I have the same Twitter name as on here followed by a 23.

 

[Mrs G Norris]

J138 said he was arrested for robbery and assault. As a DV victim why did she continue to see him, much less expose him to her children. That should have been a big red flag.

Co-dependent type. Big time red flag .. I cannot believe they let her stay on the jury, someone like this was going to cause issues no matter what happened in the jury room, she wasn't emotionally equipped to serve IMO.

 

[Hope4More]

The big question is what she said in the questionnare she filled out, and that we will never know if the DA doesn't tell us. Does anyone have the facts, or a link to the facts, about her ex-husband's charges? Is it accurate that JM tried her ex for robbery? Because that's the only charge she mentioned when asked.

 

[turaj]

Juan asks #138 what her ex husband was sent to prison for, she responds Robbery (weakly), then Juan asks was it also aggravated assault to which she said "Mmm, it may have been" and then went into explaining how he and his cousin stole verizon phones. She also told Juan that they were split up when he (ex-husband) went to prison.

I just finished watching part 4 and am so disturbed...I guess I don't under stand jury selection...JM clearly wanted her off ...probably for many reasons....the tolerance of criminals in her life...her frankly sounding not smart at all...even laughing about her ex...and the domestic abuse where she was crying...of course Nurmi wants her in and ultimately very clearly JSS says she is on....could JM not strike her? was he out...is this a different system? After watching this I can no longer hold the state accountable on this juror...JSS made the decision that saved JA life. I am so angry after watching this and have zero faith in this jury system.

 

[Mrs G Norris]

I wonder that too! You'll recognize me if you see me I have the same Twitter name as on here followed by a 23.

OK I'll go find you and say Hi!!

 

[elementary]

I agree, I truly believe that she was a monster when she entered the criminal justice system, and the special treatment of her has only fed this monster and her sense of entitlement, which up until Arpaio called her on her shizit, has not been challenged so rage was absolutely bound to come spewing out once she was held accountable in any way. If she did have a "breakdown", it was a rage filled explosion not the meltdown of mentally ill person IMO.

Wouldn't surprise me at all if they were forced to use other measures to control (tasers or pepper spray) her in order to get her physically restrained JMHO which is based on my experience in providing contract psych services in correctional settings for decades. FWIW they know how dangerous inmates like her type are, so they will have video documentation of any and all incidences with her to protect the innocent from false allegations of abuse.

BBM--Can you tell me a little more about this--did her DT make statements about her and money?

Totally. It's narcissistic rage.

 

[Boytwnmom]

untruthful statements about her ex's criminal history. The bigger lie to me is the fact that she told the court both her husbands had criminal records but only before or after they were with her, never during the time they were together. That was a lie. The most serious criminal charges against her ex were while they were together and included 1st degree murder, drive by shooting. And those charges had Juan as the prosecutor.

IMO, this has nothing to do with the meaning of the word "know".

I will say though, she has gotten herself into a big predicament... All the "Clintonism" posters could be right... it really could boil down to the definition of the word "KNOW"...

Which is very interesting b/c something has been on my mind. In Spanish there are TWO words/verbs for the English word "KNOW". "Conocer" and "Saber".

To someone who speaks Spanish, "KNOW" encompasses BOTH of the Spanish words "Concer" and "Saber".

"Conocer" is the verb used to ask if you personally KNOW someone through friendship, business, any kind of personal interaction... and "Saber" is the verb used to ask if you KNOW of someone, or about them through any kind of media, book, TV, etc...

When JSS was asked if anyone "KNOWS Juan Martinez", she asked it in English, and her intent was to find out if anyone personally knew JM, and if anyone knew of JM. The English word "KNOW" means both "Conocer and Saber".

I understand that most 2nd generation Mexicans don't speak Spanish, but they usually understand it. I also know that non of this really means anything... I just wanted to share it b/c it's been on my mind...

 

[Nancy_Drew]

I think both of J17's husbands were in PRISION at the same time!! I wonder if "know" each other!! "homies"!! Lol!

 

[TexMex]

Are we sure she isn't required to use that money for "rent" and restitution? The fellow with the difficult name who used to be in Arizona Corrections says inmate money gets diverted for "rent". I'm guessing Jodi will have to rely on Securepak's for goodies, but she'll have to earn that privilege.

Page 15 covers inmate money. Money earned at prison can be withheld for court ordered purposes. Other money is put into their account so they can buy food, fans, TV etc


https://corrections.az.gov/sites/default/files/guidebook_2013_inter.pdf

 

[Beccaboo]

I really hope we'll be able to see video of the next day, and who was struck for what. 10 isn't very many. JM's ability to read jurors is one of his greatest strengths....I was impressed by it from the guilt phase and have ever since. He saw a problem with 17, so he must have seen bigger problems with 10 other potential jurors.

I wonder if JSS lost any sleep over not dismissing 17 for cause on October 7th, as JM requested?

BBM
I have been asking myself this question for days. Now that I know JM want this juror dismissed and she said no way back then I would imagine the answer is yes. I am in no suggesting JSS did anything improper, however with the outcome I am sure that this ruling from Oct 7th will haunt her.

 

[Mrs G Norris]

The big question is what she said in the questionnare she filled out, and that we will never know if the DA doesn't tell us. Does anyone have the facts, or a link to the facts, about her ex-husband's charges? Is it accurate that JM tried her ex for robbery? Because that's the only charge she mentioned when asked.

Yes, this is what I think we need now .. we need to get our heads around everything that happened with her ex-husband .. what dates, when he got probation, when he committed crimes, dates he was sent to jail etc .. I tried to access the docs, but couldn't (maybe because overseas) .. but if we could get a timetable of what happened, when, that's indisputable then it would be really easy to pull apart her version to see exactly where she lied.

 

[prima.facie]

I was going to go back and edit and say that my post was NOT meant to say this writer could not be trusted - as I dont know her at all - but for those who dont know, to take the site in general, with a grain of salt. There is a lot of crap on there

and this is prime example why i warned about the examiner.....the 'writer' claims she got confirmation. oh really? well, she lost all credibility IMO.

I just read that the reported meltdown is a hoax. Go figure.

i also have been reading on twitter that it was a hoax....

oh well. lesson learned

 

[Hope4More]

untruthful statements about her ex's criminal history. The bigger lie to me is the fact that she told the court both her husbands had criminal records but only before or after they were with her, never during the time they were together. That was a lie. The most serious criminal charges against her ex were while they were together and included 1st degree murder, drive by shooting. And those charges had Juan as the prosecutor.

IMO, this has nothing to do with the meaning of the word "know".

Is it a fact that her ex was charged with 1st degree murder? If so, was that before or after the robbery and shooting at police?

 

[Mrs G Norris]

I think both of J17's husbands were in PRISION at the same time!! I wonder if "know" each other!! "homies"!! Lol!

Is the first one there again now?