Jodi Arias Legal Question and Answer Thread *no discussion*

[minor4th]

Does anyone know how many murder defendants Juan has cross examined and how many of those were convicted. I ask because very few defendants in a murder trial choose to testify and I can only think that this could be Juan's first time.

I don't know how many he's cross examined but I was reading some stats the other day, and I believe he has only lost one case as a prosecutor.

 

[minor4th]

I would give him a 9. There are definitely things I would have done differently, but as I said on another thread I'm sure he would have some critiques of my cross-examination technique too.

I am a trial lawyer too, yes. You don't have to pick a specialty in law school, although in the last year or so you can choose your classes to some extent, so you can study what interests you.

In AZ, except in the very rural counties where judges are still elected, you have to go through a merit selection committee process and be appointed by the governor to become a judge.

Interesting about how judges are selected in AZ. All of our judges are still elected.

 

[Nali87]

Hi lawyers! I have another question. How exactly is the "felony murder charge" applicable in this case?

 

[forb8182]

I can't find if this has been asked yet or addressed but here is my question:

I read Det. Flores investigative report posted on debate thread and it is full of damning information about JA, especially from April 2008-June 2008 that was not testified to and/or allowed. My question, if you know, Does the jury get his report in its entirety as part of the evidence? For instance, If they would not allow the slashing of tires to be introduced into evidence, I wonder if they would have to redact any mention from his report if they are allowed to have it.
Thanks

 

[minor4th]

I can't find if this has been asked yet or addressed but here is my question:

I read Det. Flores investigative report posted on debate thread and it is full of damning information about JA, especially from April 2008-June 2008 that was not testified to and/or allowed. My question, if you know, Does the jury get his report in its entirety as part of the evidence? For instance, If they would not allow the slashing of tires to be introduced into evidence, I wonder if they would have to redact any mention from his report if they are allowed to have it.
Thanks

The jury does not get this report as evidence. It's hearsay. They heard from. Flores directly on whatever issues he was able to testify about. Much of his report is hearsay within hearsay and contains uncorroborated speculation -- such as the tire slashing and email to Lisa. Those things would not be admissible because they are speculative

 

[AZlawyer]

Hi lawyers! I have another question. How exactly is the "felony murder charge" applicable in this case?

"Felony murder" gets you a first-degree murder conviction without the need to prove premeditation. It applies where a murder takes place in the course of committing another felony. In the indictment, the felony that was listed as the basis for the felony murder charge was 2nd degree burglary, based on Jodi entering TA's home without permission or remaining there after she was no longer a welcome guest with the intent to commit another felony. I think JM said in argument that the other felony she intended to commit was aggravated assault? But I'm not sure.

 

[Sustained]

Question please and apologies if the answer has already been given ...

When cross-examining Arias, would JM been allowed to have Arias' testimony on direct read back to the court ? It seemed that he went on memory a lot of times and did it very well. But I felt he missed a couple of lies that he could have pounced on, had the relevant section of the Arias direct testimony been read back.

Thanks !

 

[RadarLuv]

How is it possible to find an impartial jury in a high profile case like this or that of CA? I mean I KNOW that there can be a change of venue, but come on, this has been national news for at least a year now. I am sure it was local news for the many years before being picked up by the TH's.

Criminal trial lawyer.....would you rather.....defense of prosecutor? Advantages/disadvantages?

And, as a personal opinion, based on what you have seen of AZ v. JA, If you had to GUESS, based on what you know on the history of juries in DP cases, not to mention, pretty mousy women, who will prevail?

 

[Jinkasaurus]

What are the possible choices this jury has in terms of final verdicts?

Can they give her manslaughter?

And if they think she killed him in self-defense, can they ignore the other injuries to him? Or do they have to consider those?

Hope that makes sense! I have been confused about what the possible outcomes could be in this case.

 

[gitana1]

Question please and apologies if the answer has already been given ...

When cross-examining Arias, would JM been allowed to have Arias' testimony on direct read back to the court ? It seemed that he went on memory a lot of times and did it very well. But I felt he missed a couple of lies that he could have pounced on, had the relevant section of the Arias direct testimony been read back.

Thanks !

Yes. Well, he could have had a copy of the transcript and impeached her with it. The court reporter would not be able to read back testimony from a day in the past. They only have on their computer, testimony for the day, usuAlly.

I did want JM to impeach her on various occasions and I did wonder why he didn't. I think there were two reasons he didn't. One, it would be consuming to find the exact part of the transcript and use it to imPeach her maybe he thought it might interrupt his rhythm too much.

Second, the jury likely remembers even better than us, exactly what she said.

 

[Jinkasaurus]

This was posted on a different site - http://azcapitoltimes.com/news/2012/06/01/arizona-juries-can-consider-lesser-charges-court-says/

the article says: "A new court ruling says Arizona judges can tell trial juries to consider lesser charges against a defendant even if the defense and prosecution object."

 

[ExigentPlan]

Is it correct that in Az. with a Self Defense plea, the burden of proof falls completely on the Defense? Does that mean that if they can't prove the self defense claim then it would automatically receive the 1st Degree conviction since they don't have lesser included charges?

And it the burden of proof is on the Defense side, to what standard? Is is "Beyond A Reasonable Doubt" or "Preponderance of Evidence"?

 

[AZlawyer]

Is it correct that in Az. with a Self Defense plea, the burden of proof falls completely on the Defense? Does that mean that if they can't prove the self defense claim then it would automatically receive the 1st Degree conviction since they don't have lesser included charges?

And it the burden of proof is on the Defense side, to what standard? Is is "Beyond A Reasonable Doubt" or "Preponderance of Evidence"?

No, the defense does not have the burden of proof on self defense. The defense must produce some evidence of self defense, after which the state has the burden of proving the absence of self defense beyond a reasonable doubt.

There are lesser included offenses to her charges. I'm not sure why everyone keeps saying there aren't any. :waitasec:

 

[ExigentPlan]

No, the defense does not have the burden of proof on self defense. The defense must produce some evidence of self defense, after which the state has the burden of proving the absence of self defense beyond a reasonable doubt.

There are lesser included offenses to her charges. I'm not sure why everyone keeps saying there aren't any. :waitasec:

Thank you for clarifying. I knew it didn't sound right.

 

[AZlawyer]

How is it possible to find an impartial jury in a high profile case like this or that of CA? I mean I KNOW that there can be a change of venue, but come on, this has been national news for at least a year now. I am sure it was local news for the many years before being picked up by the TH's.

Criminal trial lawyer.....would you rather.....defense of prosecutor? Advantages/disadvantages?

And, as a personal opinion, based on what you have seen of AZ v. JA, If you had to GUESS, based on what you know on the history of juries in DP cases, not to mention, pretty mousy women, who will prevail?

It would be easy to find an impartial jury. If I had been called at the time of jury selection, for example, I would have been able to say, truthfully, that I had no recollection whatsoever of the case. If I heard a few details, I would have said I sort of remembered some girl killing her boyfriend and leaving the body in the shower, but that's it. I don't think I heard any news about the case at all in between the murder and the time of the trial starting.

Are you asking if we would rather be on the defense or prosecution side in this case, or in general? For me the answer is prosecution either way lol. You win a lot more, mostly because most defendants are, in fact, guilty.

I think Jodi was pretty in her pictures from 2008. I don't see even a scrap of prettiness now. In any event, my guess is that she will not get the death penalty, just because most of the jurors will not look at her as a terrifying monster. The only hope would be if some mother of sons is in that jury room saying, no, she IS a terrifying monster to me.

 

[AZlawyer]

What are the possible choices this jury has in terms of final verdicts?

Can they give her manslaughter?

And if they think she killed him in self-defense, can they ignore the other injuries to him? Or do they have to consider those?

Hope that makes sense! I have been confused about what the possible outcomes could be in this case.

Manslaughter would be a lesser included offense. Whether the jury gets an instruction on manslaughter depends on whether either party requests one (my guess is that the defense will), whether either party objects, and whether the evidence at the end of trial justifies the instruction. My guess is that the jury will get a manslaughter instruction.

Which injuries would be the "other" injuries? Seems like she killed him until he completely stopped moving. And if the jury is considering self defense, presumably they will be looking at her own story, which is that she shot him and he kept moving. So at that point, the question is, once you've shot someone in the head, is it necessary in self defense to stab him in the back and slit his throat? Or at that point is he incapacitated enough, while also naked and wet and trying to "run" on a tile floor, that you could run outside and call 911?

 

[Vresia]

Does AZ require a defendant to testify if they claim self-defense ?

 

[Jinkasaurus]

Manslaughter would be a lesser included offense. Whether the jury gets an instruction on manslaughter depends on whether either party requests one (my guess is that the defense will), whether either party objects, and whether the evidence at the end of trial justifies the instruction. My guess is that the jury will get a manslaughter instruction.

Thanks - if this article is correct, it seems the judge may be able to override any objections to lesser charges by either side?

http://azcapitoltimes.com/news/2012/...es-court-says/

the article says: "A new court ruling says Arizona judges can tell trial juries to consider lesser charges against a defendant even if the defense and prosecution object."

 

[AZlawyer]

Does AZ require a defendant to testify if they claim self-defense ?

No, but the defendant is required to produce some evidence of self-defense, and a lot of times the only other potential witness has been killed, sooooo....

 

[AZlawyer]

Thanks - if this article is correct, it seems the judge may be able to override any objections to lesser charges by either side?

http://azcapitoltimes.com/news/2012/...es-court-says/

the article says: "A new court ruling says Arizona judges can tell trial juries to consider lesser charges against a defendant even if the defense and prosecution object."

Yes, I mentioned that case somewhere upthread.