Discussions on Formal Sentencing Hearing - Jodi Arias #7

[Mrs G Norris]

It's so interesting that all of these defense witnesses are "refusing to participate" because of "death threats". Please.

IKR .. I've seen some disgusting things said on FB about witnesses too, but none of those people have acted out, if they had there would have been charges .. all I am aware of was a few nuisance phone calls, petitions, and other go-nowhere boo-hoo-ings. If these witnesses firmly believed in what they were going to testify to, nothing would stop them standing up in court .. long story short, any mitigators for Jodi Arias were invented.

 

[Moonchime]

Been doing some digging in some nasty places uke: The jury began deliberations on February 24th. On February 23rd SJ (owner of JAII) messaged Pandora (cohort):

View attachment 71097

Strange coincidence, or is it?



Lamby, forgive me if I have erred in posting this.

After all that has been revealed about Juror # 17, it seems undeniable that she went into this trial with her mind set against giving the convicted killer the DP. It would be interesting to know whether or not she did this on her own accord, and because of her own agenda. Sadly, like many things in this trial, we will never know the truth.

Thankfully, Jodi was found guilty of first degree murder. Her crime was a vicious, horrific one. I'm thankful that she is going to be spending the rest of her life behind bars. Otherwise, I feel certain that she would kill again.

If this hold out juror thought she was doing CMJA any favors, well, maybe she did and maybe she didn't. I'm a fatalist. I believe everything happens the way it is supposed to and happens that way for a reason.

It's just a real shame that Jodi and her DT were allowed to sully and slander Travis Alexander the way that they did. At the end of all this though, the outcome they wished to accomplish was unfruitful. Travis Alexander will be remembered for his kindness and for the sunshine he sparked in the lives of those who knew him. Perhaps laws will now be changed over the way court rooms handle the slandering of victims. One can only hope. MOO.

 

[Fuskier]

Thanks Felicity Lemon for the link to www.shrink4men.com on previous thread. Good commentary on JA's attempt at self-mitigation and overview of some tricky, dark subject matter IMO.

 

[Madeleine74]

It's all moot now that the murderess will be given life in prison. Mitigators pffft. The majority of folks now seem to feel that LWOP is perhaps the best outcome for JA and have realized that getting the DP would have afforded the killer with some additional resources when they don't want her to get any special favors or resources. Once she's sentenced and gone to prison, people who have followed the case over time and wanted this over, will have the necessary end point to leave Arias back in the dust, where she will always be.

 

[Nosey Parker]

It's all moot now that the murderess will be given life in prison. Mitigators pffft. The majority of folks now seem to feel that LWOP is perhaps the best outcome for JA and have realized that getting the DP would have afforded the killer with some additional resources when they don't want her to get any special favors or resources. Once she's sentenced and gone to prison, people who have followed the case over time and wanted this over, will have the necessary end point to leave Arias back in the dust, where she will always be.

So true, Madeleine, although I think the majority of folks here felt that all along - not all, but the majority.

 

[Shadowboy]

Excellent quotes...and from the last thread..is the Judicial Asst. referred to "Janet"? This is really would like to know!

KCL, IIRC the judicial asst's name was never mentioned during the hearing. Janet (something ... can't remember the last name) was the court deputy who overheard the comments by the judicial asst.

Most of this info is in the last 10 minutes (or so) of the hearing.

 

[Mrs G Norris]

I am a bit behind, but listening to the first actual trial day .. and notice we have audio for SIDEBARS

Juror number 138 is now juror number 17 ..

 

[TexMex]

The judicial asst situation is the last 10 min of the Oct hearing. A court deputy (who is named) claims to have overheard JSS judicial asst say those things. JSS questioned her asst who "adamantly denies" any of this occurred

 

[wendiesan]

It's so interesting that all of these defense witnesses are "refusing to participate" because of "death threats". Please.

Ah. But just who is authoring those death threats?
And when were they made?
And were they made by a super secret murderer?

 

[ShadyLady]

The judicial asst situation is the last 10 min of the Oct hearing. A court deputy (who is named) claims to have overheard JSS judicial asst say those things. JSS questioned her asst who "adamantly denies" any of this occurred

Well, of course they did.....now why would Jennifer make that up? And something about the last foreman too.

 

[Greater Than]

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


I listened to pretty much the entire pre-trial hearing that was posted earlier.

I heard them banter back and forth and discuss what would be entered and what wouldn't. I heard Judge Stephens jump in there and discuss what she would allow and what she wouldn't. It seemed like a pretty thorough back and forth conversation.

Of course this is only one pre-trial hearing among probably many. It appears they got a lot of things discussed and taken care of during these hearings.

So............why all the sidebars ?? Why was more time chewed up in a day on sidebars than on actual testimony ?

Each day started with a sidebar, each day ended with a sidebar, and it appeared sometimes they had a sidebar to discuss when the next sidebar would be.

I don't get it.

:floorlaugh:

 

[Boytwnmom]

which would be worse, therefore better. I vacillated and was glad I didn't have to decide.

In the end, the only reasons I had for the DP was that the family wanted it and perhaps that the sentence itself would appropriately display society's disgust with the defendant.

But knowing the actual reality of the DP, it seemed clear in terms of attention, LWOP would be the better choice. And more than anything the convict will continue to crave attention. As a youngish woman on death row I'm sure she could easily attract lots of attention in addition to the taxpayer funded attention in the form of endless fully funded appeals.

So, at this point, my only concern is the family and the fact that a mini Arias may have manipulated the result. Obviously, she's not a murderer. But I see the same deceptive manipulation and claim of victim status in her. And if we could see her we might seem that same smirk of duper's delight we've seen so often with JA.

So true, Madeleine, although I think the majority of folks here felt that all along - not all, but the majority.

 

[ShadyLady]

which would be worse, therefore better. I vacillated and was glad I didn't have to decide.

In the end, the only reasons I had for the DP was that the family wanted it and perhaps that the sentence itself would appropriately display society's disgust with the defendant.

But knowing the actual reality of the DP, it seemed clear in terms of attention, LWOP would be the better choice. And more than anything the convict will continue to crave attention. As a youngish woman on death row I'm sure she could easily attract lots of attention in addition to the taxpayer funded attention in the form of endless fully funded appeals.

So, at this point, my only concern is the family and the fact that a mini Arias may have manipulated the result. Obviously, she's not a murderer. But I see the same deceptive manipulation and claim of victim status in her. And if we could see her we might seem that same smirk of duper's delight we've seen so often with JA.

I assume JA's last appeal will be done in short order [hopefully]. Then JA's only contact with the outside world will be 15min skype once a week...and what? a couple phone calls?

The end is near. So JA's family can return to CA, and slowly forget her.

 

[Gin]

I assume JA's last appeal will be done in short order [hopefully]. Then JA's only contact with the outside world will be 15min skype once a week...and what? a couple phone calls?

The end is near. So JA's family can return to CA, and slowly forget her.

JMO--I'd bet good money those may not happen too often. ja isn't exactly a co-operative rule follower.

 

[MissHaley]

KCL, IIRC the judicial asst's name was never mentioned during the hearing. Janet (something ... can't remember the last name) was the court deputy who overheard the comments by the judicial asst.

Most of this info is in the last 10 minutes (or so) of the hearing.

yes, and just how was this 'judicial asst.' been able to talk to the foreman? this was in deliberations as the foreman is picked after. And she talked to him so that Janet was able to hear what she was saying? did other jurors over hear? this stuff is outrageous!!!!!

 

[Greater Than]

which would be worse, therefore better. I vacillated and was glad I didn't have to decide.

In the end, the only reasons I had for the DP was that the family wanted it and perhaps that the sentence itself would appropriately display society's disgust with the defendant.

But knowing the actual reality of the DP, it seemed clear in terms of attention, LWOP would be the better choice. And more than anything the convict will continue to crave attention. As a youngish woman on death row I'm sure she could easily attract lots of attention in addition to the taxpayer funded attention in the form of endless fully funded appeals.

So, at this point, my only concern is the family and the fact that a mini Arias may have manipulated the result. Obviously, she's not a murderer. But I see the same deceptive manipulation and claim of victim status in her. And if we could see her we might seem that same smirk of duper's delight we've seen so often with JA.

The foreman saw it. In his trial diaries interview, he discussed how he submitted the question regarding #17 to JSS on behalf of the 11 and how #17 submitted her own secret question. He said when JSS called them each individually into chambers, "As Juror 17 walked by me to see the judge she smiled at me and I smiled back."

With tensions at their highest, I sincerely doubt #17's emotion behind that smile was kindness or warmth.

http://thetrialdiaries.com/exclusivethe-foreman-from-the-jodi-arias-trial-speakshear-his-story/

 

[MeeBee]

which would be worse, therefore better. I vacillated and was glad I didn't have to decide.

In the end, the only reasons I had for the DP was that the family wanted it and perhaps that the sentence itself would appropriately display society's disgust with the defendant.

But knowing the actual reality of the DP, it seemed clear in terms of attention, LWOP would be the better choice. And more than anything the convict will continue to crave attention. As a youngish woman on death row I'm sure she could easily attract lots of attention in addition to the taxpayer funded attention in the form of endless fully funded appeals.

So, at this point, my only concern is the family and the fact that a mini Arias may have manipulated the result. Obviously, she's not a murderer. But I see the same deceptive manipulation and claim of victim status in her. And if we could see her we might seem that same smirk of duper's delight we've seen so often with JA.

Same. As things were winding down I was torn between what I thought would be the better outcome. Death would have signaled to her that she was not believed and did not get away with her lies. But the death penalty does give her more to work with and LWOP would cause her to become forgotten.

I'm glad the way things played out. She didn't get death but she still received a loud and clear message that she was not believed. And the obly juror who supported her had gone mum and peope will always believe she simply had an agenda rather than come to a genuine decision that Jodi deserved life.

I'm good with that. This juror's actions leave a bad taste in my mouth and I do think in this case some charges or course of action are warranted. Sometimes the state doesn't have enough and feels they should let these things go. But I think they have enough here. If this wasn't as clear cut as it seems I can see the state moving on. But there must be some ramifications for this woman. It doesn't seem fair that the state can be railroaded like this, that a person can just waltz in, lie, and then walk away scott free and there is nothing they can do about.

If she did lawyer up as was reported then I think we know why now.

 

[daisydomino]

KCL, IIRC the judicial asst's name was never mentioned during the hearing. Janet (something ... can't remember the last name) was the court deputy who overheard the comments by the judicial asst.

Most of this info is in the last 10 minutes (or so) of the hearing.

They don't say her name in the hearing. Janet's last name is Weiblehaus. How many judicial assistants does JSS have?

 

[Val1]

I am a bit behind, but listening to the first actual trial day .. and notice we have audio for SIDEBARS

Juror number 138 is now juror number 17 ..

Yes and the pertinent video that has JSS asking the potential jurors if they knew JM is:

The Penalty Retrial Jury Selection, 1 of 3, Sept.29,2014.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5s2EVE9N1tc

Starting @8:40 where she introduces the PT.

 

[Mrs G Norris]

Yes and the pertinent video that has JSS asking the potential jurors if they knew JM is:

The Penalty Retrial Jury Selection, 1 of 3, Sept.29,2014.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5s2EVE9N1tc

Starting @8:40 where she introduces the PT.

Saw that .. I think they've already got her for perjury where she skips her ex-husband's case Juan prosecuted entirely. I'm sure if we saw more of her voir dire we'd find other lies.