Jodi Arias Legal Question and Answer Thread *no discussion*

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Um...apocalypse? JA's death in jail? Did you have any particular circumstance in mind?

No particular circumstance, but do we already know the Judge will not put this second phase off so that nurmi and wilmot can enjoy their vacation days or that they are now trying to invent some witnesses that have anything good to say about the defendant? As far as the DT' court schedules, I think it has been determined that those cases can be put off. I don't feel the Jiudge will allow the DT to "Paint That Picture"....Just wanted to know as far as Arizona law is concerned, is there something else that could hold this up? It's my opinion according to AZ law that the Alexander Family is allowed a speedy trial.
 
No particular circumstance, but do we already know the Judge will not put this second phase off so that nurmi and wilmot can enjoy their vacation days or that they are now trying to invent some witnesses that have anything good to say about the defendant? As far as the DT' court schedules, I think it has been determined that those cases can be put off. I don't feel the Jiudge will allow the DT to "Paint That Picture"....Just wanted to know as far as Arizona law is concerned, is there something else that could hold this up? It's my opinion according to AZ law that the Alexander Family is allowed a speedy trial.

The judge will almost certainly delay the final phase to accommodate the attorneys' trial and/or vacation schedules. This is normal, and really it's already happened, because of the delay just to argue the motion. As for finding new witnesses, the defense team (1) has had 5 years to do that, and (2) didn't even say in their motion that they wanted/needed to do that. They said they needed to find another way to "paint a picture." I have no idea what that means or how much time it takes. If the defense team can't explain it better at oral argument, then the judge will not give them more time to do whatever it is they want to do.

Victims are not entitled to a speedy trial.
 
I had just finished reading Every Breath You Take by Ann Rule and Alan Blackthorn was facing a new federal law of traveling interstate to cause domestic violence, and didn't know if that would apply to Jodi and could be prosecuted under it that in the event of Jodi getting off or would it be double jeopardy to try her on those charges?
Thank you for mentioning this. That federal law has been around for awhile. They looked into using my dv case as a possible test case years ago. But, the DA at the time took a job out-of-state and it went by the wayside.
This is exactly what came to my mind when talking Federal charges. Is that possible, AZ?
 
I realize that antagonism exists between this site and "jodi arias is innocent". But there is an interesting post there today on the legal reasons why the trial was "unfair". It certainly may be factually correct that despite whichever of those items actually hold water, JA still committed M1. But, it would be informative for the lawyers to go over these and give us their opinions. For me, the felony murder stuff has always seemed bogus....

http://************************/

EDIT: I see that the link is not appearing, for whatever reason. :( not pleased! So just go there and check it out. June 22 entry.
 
Thank you for mentioning this. That federal law has been around for awhile. They looked into using my dv case as a possible test case years ago. But, the DA at the time took a job out-of-state and it went by the wayside.
This is exactly what came to my mind when talking Federal charges. Is that possible, AZ?

No, because JA didn't reside with TA, so she doesn't "qualify" for prosecution under that law.

I realize that antagonism exists between this site and "jodi arias is innocent". But there is an interesting post there today on the legal reasons why the trial was "unfair". It certainly may be factually correct that despite whichever of those items actually hold water, JA still committed M1. But, it would be informative for the lawyers to go over these and give us their opinions. For me, the felony murder stuff has always seemed bogus....

http://************************/

EDIT: I see that the link is not appearing, for whatever reason. :( not pleased! So just go there and check it out. June 22 entry.

The felony murder charge made no sense, and should have been omitted from the indictment IMO. But who cares--she wasn't convicted on that charge (thank god, or it would have been an appeal issue).

The rest of that article is defense team spin IMO. If you have a specific question about it, let me know.
 
The judge will almost certainly delay the final phase to accommodate the attorneys' trial and/or vacation schedules. This is normal, and really it's already happened, because of the delay just to argue the motion. As for finding new witnesses, the defense team (1) has had 5 years to do that, and (2) didn't even say in their motion that they wanted/needed to do that. They said they needed to find another way to "paint a picture." I have no idea what that means or how much time it takes. If the defense team can't explain it better at oral argument, then the judge will not give them more time to do whatever it is they want to do.

Victims are not entitled to a speedy trial.

First off thank you so much for doing this here for us. My question, the defense essentially is getting a 2nd bite at the penalty phase apple. If they were ready to go when trial started last Jan. they should be ready to go now. Why do they get to use the fact that a jury deadlocked to possibly re-do a strategy maybe even perhaps because they've heard the jury speak about what worked and what didn't. I know the victims never get speedy trial but that is quite frankly very prejudicial in the defense favor no? All this delay to " get it right". Why isn't it that you were ready then, be ready now, jury selection in a month.
 
First off thank you so much for doing this here for us. My question, the defense essentially is getting a 2nd bite at the penalty phase apple. If they were ready to go when trial started last Jan. they should be ready to go now. Why do they get to use the fact that a jury deadlocked to possibly re-do a strategy maybe even perhaps because they've heard the jury speak about what worked and what didn't. I know the victims never get speedy trial but that is quite frankly very prejudicial in the defense favor no? All this delay to " get it right". Why isn't it that you were ready then, be ready now, jury selection in a month.

Because the defense claims that something changed in between (witnesses were intimidated and now they need a new plan).

http://media2.abc15.com/html/pdf/arias.pdf

Does this mean the DT is trying to throw out the extreme cruelty verdict?

Yes, but it's just a form motion to preserve issues for appeal. The defense team does not expect it to be granted by JSS, nor really by the AZ Supreme Court. It's quite a good motion, actually, but I don't think it will work.
 
Hi everyone.

I have a question..once a witness has started to testify.. can the State or the Defense Attorney's ( off the stand) tell that witness how to act different on the next round of questioning? Or would that be considered a No No? Thanks
 
Hi everyone.

I have a question..once a witness has started to testify.. can the State or the Defense Attorney's ( off the stand) tell that witness how to act different on the next round of questioning? Or would that be considered a No No? Thanks

Sure, there's nothing wrong with telling a witness that they came off as too [fill in the blank] and should cut it the heck out for Round Two.
 
No, because JA didn't reside with TA, so she doesn't "qualify" for prosecution under that law.



The felony murder charge made no sense, and should have been omitted from the indictment IMO. But who cares--she wasn't convicted on that charge (thank god, or it would have been an appeal issue).

The rest of that article is defense team spin IMO. If you have a specific question about it, let me know.
You're right. :) I had an order of protection.
Thanks, AZ! You're the best!!
 
Were the jurors options life with a release date in @27 years or natural life with no release OR death or did they just have the option of life or death and then if they went with life the judge would decide the rest?
 
Were the jurors options life with a release date in @27 years or natural life with no release OR death or did they just have the option of life or death and then if they went with life the judge would decide the rest?

Their options were death or life. If they chose life, the judge's options were natural life (no parole) or life (no parole for at least 25 years--and still no parole even then, because Arizona has abolished parole, but maybe one day if the laws change).
 
This question is more to the Zimmerman trial, but it could apply to Arias as well. They played a police interview audio and read his written statement during testimony of a police officer under prosecution direct. Can any of his exculpatory statements be considered by the jury as evidence of the claims he makes, or are they to be considered all hearsay only and not to the truth of the matter? For example, if he says "I was in fear for my life" in one of those statements, is it considered evidence for the claim? Or does he have to testify himself to that for it be considered?
 
This question is more to the Zimmerman trial, but it could apply to Arias as well. They played a police interview audio and read his written statement during testimony of a police officer under prosecution direct. Can any of his exculpatory statements be considered by the jury as evidence of the claims he makes, or are they to be considered all hearsay only and not to the truth of the matter? For example, if he says "I was in fear for my life" in one of those statements, is it considered evidence for the claim? Or does he have to testify himself to that for it be considered?

Technically, whether something is hearsay has to be decided on a sentence-by-sentence basis with knowledge of the purpose for which the sentence is being offered as evidence. But as a general rule, the prosecution can use his statements against him (under a hearsay exclusion for statements of an opponent), but he can't use them to help himself.
 
Jodi Arias trial date has been vacated. And now a status conference is scheduled for 7/16.

what could that mean AZLawyer?
 
AZlawyer, I see that the status conference is scheduled for Tuesday. Do you have any idea when jury selection will begin? (in a few weeks, a few months) A week or two ago, I think someone mentioned that Juan is in another trial now. Some people also mentioned vacation time for the lawyers.
 
Stupid question or not, what exactly happens during a "Status Conference" in the State of Arizona? TIA
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
56
Guests online
3,127
Total visitors
3,183

Forum statistics

Threads
602,664
Messages
18,144,715
Members
231,476
Latest member
ceciliaesquivel2000@yahoo
Back
Top