Discussions on Formal Sentencing Hearing - Jodi Arias #9

[memoriesbymichelle]

I think these things she tried in this retrial might be loophole legal tactics she learned in the big house!

But....she's not in the BIG house yet.

 

[Tulessa]

:loveyou: you all, too.

:grouphug:

 

[Mrs G Norris]

More monkey business regarding the fans:

"famed historian on Mormonism, D. Michael Quinn"

Oh wow .. that's a bit of nastiness isn't it? So what do we think, that the art seller lives in Arizona? Doesn't JA have family there .. her mom's cousins .. why do they have to be so nasty? I have always stood up for perpetrators families in general because I believe they are victims too, but I don't see why the Arias clan have to provoke Travis' family and friends so much.

 

[LambChop]

Then why, oh why, do you have a wooden spoon? :biggrin:

But, but, but....it's only a teaspoon. Did I mention that?

 

[Mindmatters]

Was she in restraints for this? Or did they remove them? I cannot remember

No obvious restraints, i.e., shackles and the like. But according to the "I want to walk to the witness stand" drama that played out in the retrial, by law the murderer is required to be in restraints when in the courtroom.

 

[Nosey Parker]

But, but, but....it's only a teaspoon. Did I mention that?

Does it have sugar on it?

 

[WhoaIsMe]

Was the "send cash" tweet a joke? I ask because it isn't linked to a source. Weird nobody even asked where it came from in the comments. One did ask if this was being 'looked at' or something along that line, to which Christine responds that " eyes are on it" . Okay, well yeah, namely everybody reading her Twitter feed at that moment. So that's true but clearly not what was implied. It would just be nice to have some ability to not just take her word on everything. If "they" posted a plea for cash on the internet that , at least, could be linked. Did I miss it?


Sent from my SCH-S960L using Tapatalk 2

 

[mydirtysecret]

I don't really have time to watch them, but I'd be happy to answer any questions. And if I seem to be AWOL despite showing as "present" on the daily thread, feel free to post in the "Legal Questions" thread.



I think this situation is similar to the "secret testimony" ruling--JSS thinks that, if she gives in to defense demands, nothing can be overturned on appeal. But as JM pointed out, the law is more complicated than that. Sometimes the defense might demand something that inadvertently ends up harming the defendant--like walking to the stand and "accidentally" (accidentally on purpose IMO) showing your restraints. As JM said, sometimes even when the defense asks for a ruling, the appellate court can find that the ruling was "fundamental error" and overturn the conviction/sentence anyway.

God forbid jss made such a critical error that would result in relief on direct appeal the worst case relief would be it goes back to square one on sentencing right? I guess since there was two phases there could be fundamental errors found in none, one or both? for appeal purposes on direct they'll look at trial error in both phases right azl? After her direct appeal, cmja could raise issue with either according to rule 32?

 

[Paintr]

Does it have sugar on it?

Nope! Medicine.

 

[Nosey Parker]

Nope! Medicine.

Oh yuk! Not cod liver oil!

 

[audreyparker]

Was she in restraints for this? Or did they remove them? I cannot remember

Not restraints but the stun belt, but you couldn't see it because it was covered by her clothes. But I (along with several others ) think the reason she fought so hard to walk to the witness stand is to accidently on purpose show them to the jury. But as usual, JM saved the day.:loveyou:

 

[AZlawyer]

God forbid jss made such a critical error that would result in relief on direct appeal the worst case relief would be it goes back to square one on sentencing right? I guess since there was two phases there could be fundamental errors found in none, one or both? for appeal purposes on direct they'll look at trial error in both phases right azl? After her direct appeal, cmja could raise issue with either according to rule 32?

Error can be found in either phase, but in this case nothing happened to JA as a result of the sentencing phase, so errors in that phase won't be considered on appeal or in her post-conviction relief proceeding.

 

[Paintr]

Oh yuk! Not cod liver oil!

Worse! Buckley's! :notgood: Just glad she has a sense of humour. (I hope :gasp

 

[atthelake]

How does somebody go about getting a job as a moderator on Websleuths ?

Do you fill out an application ? Is it something offered to longtime users by the current staff ?

Do you go to moderator school ?

I've always been curious about that, but I've never seen anybody talk about it.

Right now may not be the time as ...well ....just saying. Google is your friend for more information.

Sent from my SCH-S720C using Tapatalk 2

 

[Bravo]

Was she in restraints for this? Or did they remove them? I cannot remember

She wasn't in restraints she had the stun belt around her waist. Blazer style jacket hid any hint of it. Gotta say I was hoping one day during Trial especially when Juan was grilling her we might see exactly how those stuns belts perform:happydance:
ETA-speaking to the day she demonstrated the line backer lunge

 

[FelicityLemon]

Oh wow .. that's a bit of nastiness isn't it? So what do we think, that the art seller lives in Arizona? Doesn't JA have family there .. her mom's cousins .. why do they have to be so nasty? I have always stood up for perpetrators families in general because I believe they are victims too, but I don't see why the Arias clan have to provoke Travis' family and friends so much.

Yes, and what really bothers me about this is using her victim's religion against him. I'm not religious, but I respect people's honest and genuine beliefs. I don't believe for a second that the murderer was interested in Mormonism for itself, but as just one more tool to get to Travis. I find it reprehensible to abuse and manipulate this. I wonder what her bishop thinks of Travis Alexander's murder at the hands of this "thing"? Is she still Mormon, btw?

 

[concernedmother]

Since JA didn't get DP she doesn't get an automatic appeal and if she wants to appeal her conviction she has to pay herself. Is that correct? Do we think she will appeal?

 

[Nosey Parker]

since ja didn't get dp she doesn't get an automatic appeal and if she wants to appeal her conviction she has to pay herself. Is that correct? Do we think she will appeal?

YES she will appeal

 

[Bravo]

I attended the Bob Bashara Trial twice and Bob was never shackled in the Courtroom. I wonder/hope he was wearing a stun belt. Never thought of it at the time. Until now. He is a pretty big guy. Yikes!

 

[Bravo]

YES she will appeal

I agree. She has to keep herself relevant. Whenever she is allowed a stubby pencil I picture her writing them up herself. Lordy LOL