Jodi Arias Legal Question and Answer Thread *no discussion*

[josie1986]

Is there anything this doctor cant do?
Now hypnosis? ??

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2

 

[AZlawyer]

Do you think that, if requested by the DT, that ribbons be taken off, the family should oblige? Is it really factor when it comes to an appeal?

Not being a lawyer, but reading on other trials where there were appeals due to that sort of thing (ribbons, pictures, buttons), would you just urge the family to take them off and not let emotions cloud the final result?

IMO no AZ appellate judge will give a hoot about the ribbons. IMO the picture buttons were also too small to be a problem. You can't see the picture unless you are about three inches from the button. There is nothing here that could reasonably be influencing the jury. The appellate problems come when people wear matching T-shirts with pics of the victim, hold up signs ("Justice for ___"), etc.--things that the jury could actually see from the jury box and by which they could actually be influenced to make decisions out of sympathy for the family rather than after careful consideration of the evidence and instructions.

That said, if I were a family member and the DT was fussing about the ribbons, I would say, fine, we will take them off. One fewer paragraph for the appellate brief.

 

[AZlawyer]

I'm thinking that HLN misspoke. I was on Jury Duty only once, and for only a few days before the litigants settled. I was paid way more than $12 per day. I remember being paid hourly, and it being above minimum wage.

No, I think it is something like $12 per day for AZ.

 

[Hally]

What is the punishment for a defendant - that is busted slipping notes while a trial is on - their own trial? Can't they cuff her to the chair, and give the reason why to the jurors? Surely, the judge cannot allow this to happen without punishment, otherwise, well you know ALL defendants can do the same.

 

[Jax49]

No, I think it is something like $12 per day for AZ.

Apparently if the juror can prove hardship, additional compensation is available.

http://www.superiorcourt.maricopa.gov/JuryServices/GeneralInformation/altfJurorHandout.asp

"You are employed and can show the Court that you are losing income, and how much that loss is – You can receive your daily loss up to $300, plus your mileage reimbursement, for each day of your service beginning the first day until the end of the trial once you have complete the sixth day of service."

 

[Hally]

What is the punishment for a defendant - that is busted slipping notes while a trial is on - their own trial? Can't they cuff her to the chair, and give the reason why to the jurors? Surely, the judge cannot allow this to happen without punishment, otherwise, well you know ALL defendants can do the same.

AZlawyer answered , and many thanks to you.

 

[valleypeach]

Hi, can you give a refresher here on what the actual charges are and how the reduced charge(s) would come into play.

also, are you familiar with the AZ sentencing guide for capital cases and how a judge might use it.

http://www.azcourts.gov/Default.aspx?alias=www.azcourts.gov/ccsguide

Lastly, am I correct that once a verdict is rendered, the jury is excused, and if the verdict is guilty a sentencing date is set at which time the judge alone will hand down the sentence (after hearing from family members, etc)?

Thanks!

Vall

 

[AZlawyer]

Hi, can you give a refresher here on what the actual charges are and how the reduced charge(s) would come into play.

also, are you familiar with the AZ sentencing guide for capital cases and how a judge might use it.

http://www.azcourts.gov/Default.aspx?alias=www.azcourts.gov/ccsguide

Lastly, am I correct that once a verdict is rendered, the jury is excused, and if the verdict is guilty a sentencing date is set at which time the judge alone will hand down the sentence (after hearing from family members, etc)?

Thanks!

Vall

She was charged with one count of first-degree murder (either premeditated murder or felony murder based on causing the death in connection with the commission of second-degree burglary).

Lesser-included offense instructions may or may not be given, depending upon whether the parties request them, whether any party objects, and whether the evidence would support a jury verdict of guilty on the lesser-included offenses. Lesser-included offenses would be second-degree murder, manslaughter and negligent homicide.

The judge does not decide the sentence. If there is a guilty verdict on a 1st-degree murder charge, the sentencing phase is divided into two parts. First, the state attempts to prove beyond a reasonable doubt at least one aggravating factor. These are specified by statute, and IIRC the state in this case has only alleged one factor (cruelty). If the jury finds that one or more aggravating factor exists, then there is a separate penalty phase to determine whether the death penalty should be imposed. This is when the defendant presents evidence of mitigation. Mitigation can be basically anything that a reasonable juror could consider as a reason not to put someone to death. Victim impact statements may be given by immediate family members to rebut the mitigating evidence.

 

[minor4th]

She was charged with one count of first-degree murder (either premeditated murder or felony murder based on causing the death in connection with the commission of second-degree burglary).

Lesser-included offense instructions may or may not be given, depending upon whether the parties request them, whether any party objects, and whether the evidence would support a jury verdict of guilty on the lesser-included offenses. Lesser-included offenses would be second-degree murder, manslaughter and negligent homicide.

The judge does not decide the sentence. If there is a guilty verdict on a 1st-degree murder charge, the sentencing phase is divided into two parts. First, the state attempts to prove beyond a reasonable doubt at least one aggravating factor. These are specified by statute, and IIRC the state in this case has only alleged one factor (cruelty). If the jury finds that one or more aggravating factor exists, then there is a separate penalty phase to determine whether the death penalty should be imposed. This is when the defendant presents evidence of mitigation. Mitigation can be basically anything that a reasonable juror could consider as a reason not to put someone to death. Victim impact statements may be given by immediate family members to rebut the mitigating evidence.

AZ - I've been meaning to ask you your opinion about second degree murder instructions. I believe Jodi's testimony was crafted to get instructions on manslaughter and negligent homicide (waving a gun at Travis, not meaning to shoot him) but I have not heard evidence that would support second degree murder. What do you think?

I still think the defense will request the instruction, but I don't see how the judge can give that instruction based on the evidence we have so far.

 

[gcharlie]

Given where things left off on Thursday with the expert witness, Dr. Richard Samuels, it appears that the integrity of the witness may be questionable.

Are the any circumstances under which the judge would advise the jury to disregard testimony of a witness? If so, what would they be?

 

[AZlawyer]

Given where things left off on Thursday with the expert witness, Dr. Richard Samuels, it appears that the integrity of the witness may be questionable.

Are the any circumstances under which the judge would advise the jury to disregard testimony of a witness? If so, what would they be?

No, it will be up to the jury to decide if they want to give any weight to his testimony and, if so, how much.

 

[AZlawyer]

AZ - I've been meaning to ask you your opinion about second degree murder instructions. I believe Jodi's testimony was crafted to get instructions on manslaughter and negligent homicide (waving a gun at Travis, not meaning to shoot him) but I have not heard evidence that would support second degree murder. What do you think?

I still think the defense will request the instruction, but I don't see how the judge can give that instruction based on the evidence we have so far.

AZ second-degree murder (from jury instructions, not from statute):

1. The defendant intentionally caused the death of [another person] [an unborn child] [ADDED BY ME: without premeditation, because that would be 1st degree]; or
2. The defendant caused the death of [another person] [an unborn child] by conduct which the defendant knew would cause death or serious physical injury; or
3. Under circumstances manifesting extreme indifference to human life, the defendant recklessly engaged in conduct that created a grave risk of death and thereby caused the death of [another person] [an unborn child]. The risk must be such that disregarding it was a gross deviation from what a reasonable person in the defendant’s situation would have done; or
4. The defendant intentionally, knowingly or under circumstances manifesting extreme indifference to human life recklessly engaged in conduct that created a grave risk of death and caused the death of another person and thereby caused the death of an unborn child.

How about if the jury believes Jodi that the gunshot was first and also that she had no intention of shooting him at all. (P.S. which also means she had not developed any belief that deadly force was necessary so where are we on self-defense?) Suppose they believe her that she only intended to point the gun at him...not knowing whether or not it was loaded...and with her finger apparently on the trigger...and then the gun "went off"? Could a reasonable juror determine that was reckless conduct creating a grave risk of death and manifesting extreme indifference to human life?

The ME said that the gunshot alone would have ended his life, so I think the judge could give a 2nd-degree instruction based on Jodi's story. 2nd degree murder followed by crazy excessive overkill.

 

[MeeBee]

I am wondering: if the defense knowingly gave the state the wrong raw data, can any action be taken against them?

 

[AZlawyer]

I am wondering: if the defense knowingly gave the state the wrong raw data, can any action be taken against them?

Yes. But that didn't happen.

IMO, JMO, MOO, etc., but really. No. It didn't happen.

 

[Dr. Know?]

This was posted today by GulfCoastMom. It's a notification they received. It says the event is charge(s). Is this where the defense will ask for lower charges possibly? It was sent via AZ Public Notification Website. tia

Case Numer S-0700-CR-2008031021
Stat of AZ v. Jodi Arias on 3/22/2013
Event(s) --> Charge(s).

GCM's original post. (tyvm GCM)

Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - long weekend break: discuss the latest here #101

 

[AZlawyer]

This was posted today by GulfCoastMom. It's a notification they received. It says the event is charge(s). Is this where the defense will ask for lower charges possibly? It was sent via AZ Public Notification Website. tia

Case Numer S-0700-CR-2008031021
Stat of AZ v. Jodi Arias on 3/22/2013
Event(s) --> Charge(s).

GCM's original post. (tyvm GCM)

Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - long weekend break: discuss the latest here #101

No, I don't think so. First of all, lesser-included offense instructions are not charges. Jodi is charged only with first-degree murder. Second, it is very unlikely that the judge would want to discuss lesser-included offense instructions in much detail before all the evidence is in. Third, if she did, it would just be listed as a general oral argument and probably lumped in with all the other jury instruction issues.

"Charges" most likely just means that the court billed someone for something.

 

[KBisMe]

Can someone please explain to me how she will/might get a manslaughter instrucion included? I am just not getting it. Maybe I'm not understanding the definition of manslaughter, but isn't it:

Copied from http://law.justia.com/codes/arizona/2005/title13/01103.html

A. A person commits manslaughter by:

1. Recklessly causing the death of another person; or This makes me think of driving drunk or someone trying to spin a gun on their finger and accidently shooting a friend. Doing something reckless knowing it could possibly cause death, but still doing it.

2. Committing second degree murder as defined in section 13-1104, subsection A upon a sudden quarrel or heat of passion resulting from adequate provocation by the victim; or This is pretty self explanatory, obviously, but there has been no evidence supporting this. Would this be something like TA telling JA he got what he wanted from her, thinks she's disgusting, blah blah and she snaps into a rage?

The others listed are about coersion, unborn babies, etc.

I get that she's saying she "didn't mean to shoot him" and all, but his autopsy report says he died of blood loss due to the knife wounds. I don't know what it says specifically, but basically, the gun shot isn't what killed him. Even according to her testimony, the shot didn't kill him. How can it still be manslaughter? Just because she "fogs out" and doesn't remember slaughtering him? I don't get it. She didn't ACCIDENTLY slaughter him with the knife.

Anyway, I'm just not understanding how manslaughter could possibly be an option.

Thanks again to all of you for answering our questions! It's all fascinating to me. I wanted to be a lawyer when I was younger, but faced the fact later that I'm just not smart enough. :giggle:

 

[AZlawyer]

Can someone please explain to me how she will/might get a manslaughter instrucion included? I am just not getting it. Maybe I'm not understanding the definition of manslaughter, but isn't it:

Copied from http://law.justia.com/codes/arizona/2005/title13/01103.html

A. A person commits manslaughter by:

1. Recklessly causing the death of another person; or This makes me think of driving drunk or someone trying to spin a gun on their finger and accidently shooting a friend. Doing something reckless knowing it could possibly cause death, but still doing it.

2. Committing second degree murder as defined in section 13-1104, subsection A upon a sudden quarrel or heat of passion resulting from adequate provocation by the victim; or This is pretty self explanatory, obviously, but there has been no evidence supporting this. Would this be something like TA telling JA he got what he wanted from her, thinks she's disgusting, blah blah and she snaps into a rage?

The others listed are about coersion, unborn babies, etc.

I get that she's saying she "didn't mean to shoot him" and all, but his autopsy report says he died of blood loss due to the knife wounds. I don't know what it says specifically, but basically, the gun shot isn't what killed him. Even according to her testimony, the shot didn't kill him. How can it still be manslaughter? Just because she "fogs out" and doesn't remember slaughtering him? I don't get it. She didn't ACCIDENTLY slaughter him with the knife.

Anyway, I'm just not understanding how manslaughter could possibly be an option.

Thanks again to all of you for answering our questions! It's all fascinating to me. I wanted to be a lawyer when I was younger, but faced the fact later that I'm just not smart enough. :giggle:

How about...Travis went into a sudden rage and "body slammed" Jodi because she dropped his camera, so Jodi ran and got a gun and pointed it at him with her finger on the trigger and "accidentally" but recklessly shot him. Which is pretty much what she said happened.

If the gunshot alone would have killed him even without the stab wounds--which IIRC the Medical Examiner said it would--or if the stab wounds resulted from a continuing "heat of passion" type of fight stemming from the gunshot--I think a reasonable juror who believed Jodi's ridiculous story could find her guilty of manslaughter.

ETA: Really, since she completely failed to mention making any determination that deadly force was necessary against Travis, and in fact said she had no intention of shooting him at all, it seems like the purpose of putting her on the stand was not to raise a self-defense argument but rather to get a manslaughter instruction.

 

[KBisMe]

How about...Travis went into a sudden rage and "body slammed" Jodi because she dropped his camera, so Jodi ran and got a gun and pointed it at him with her finger on the trigger and "accidentally" but recklessly shot him. Which is pretty much what she said happened.

If the gunshot alone would have killed him even without the stab wounds--which IIRC the Medical Examiner said it would--or if the stab wounds resulted from a continuing "heat of passion" type of fight stemming from the gunshot--I think a reasonable juror who believed Jodi's ridiculous story could find her guilty of manslaughter.

ETA: Really, since she completely failed to mention making any determination that deadly force was necessary against Travis, and in fact said she had no intention of shooting him at all, it seems like the purpose of putting her on the stand was not to raise a self-defense argument but rather to get a manslaughter instruction.

Thank you!! As ridiculous as I think that is, I do understand now.

 

[Nova]

Jodi may argue ineffective assistance of counsel, simply because that is one of the arguments often made by death penalty convicts. She will be unsuccessful, however. This was not the fault of the defense attorneys - this was the fault of the defendant lying to her evaluator. It may also be the case that this expert, with his past ethical problems, was the only expert they could find who would render the opinions they were looking for - and despite yesterday's debacle, the expert did get in his opinion about the memory loss and its plausibility.

ETA: I see this question was answered previously by one of the other lawyers. We agree on this issue.

(Emphasis added.) I hope our greatly appreciated legal experts won't worry about overlapping answers.

In the first place, nobody expects you to exam the entire thread to make sure the response you are posting wasn't covered somewhere else.

In the second, an explanation from one of you may "click" for some of us, while the same response in different words from one of your colleagues is more edifying for others.

Many thanks, as always.