Jodi Arias Legal Question and Answer Thread *no discussion*

[Born Curious]

Thanks to all the attorneys participating in this thread!

I have been following this case since before the trial and I am curious about the time when Jodie Arias represented herself (early 2011, I believe). This period lasted approximately four weeks and during this time she tried to introduce 10 letters from Travis that supposedly corroborated her pedophilia story, all of which were ultimately precluded by mutual agreement between counsel. My question is: Does anyone know the extent to which she would have had special access to phones, etc. during this time period? Would she be granted special privileges in relation to privacy as well?

Thank you in advance!

 

[gcharlie]

How does discovery work in terms of electronic devices?

Is it enough for one party to turn the device over to the other party, or do they have to turn over everything recovered from the device as well?

I'm thinking in advance of the forensic computer expert testifying for the prosecution.

 

[AZlawyer]

How does discovery work in terms of electronic devices?

Is it enough for one party to turn the device over to the other party, or do they have to turn over everything recovered from the device as well?

I'm thinking in advance of the forensic computer expert testifying for the prosecution.

The prosecution would have to turn over the device for testing, as well as anything to be used as an exhibit, as well as anything helpful to the defense case.

 

[AZlawyer]

Thanks to all the attorneys participating in this thread!

I have been following this case since before the trial and I am curious about the time when Jodie Arias represented herself (early 2011, I believe). This period lasted approximately four weeks and during this time she tried to introduce 10 letters from Travis that supposedly corroborated her pedophilia story, all of which were ultimately precluded by mutual agreement between counsel. My question is: Does anyone know the extent to which she would have had special access to phones, etc. during this time period? Would she be granted special privileges in relation to privacy as well?

Thank you in advance!

I don't know the details of what she would have been allowed to do differently. I assume she would have been allowed private phone time, at the very least. But in case this is what you were getting at, the 10 letters existed and had been disclosed to the prosecution long before her self-representation time.

 

[AZlawyer]

Twice, I have heard this judge ask counsel to meet with her out in the hallway. The latest was Thursday, when Mr. Martinez reminded JSS of a matter (which we think involved ALV approaching Sam). How can she conduct the court's business outside of the court, without it being preserved for the record by the court reporter?

That would be very odd. I haven't been watching the video lately, though. Are you sure she said "hallway"? Not "chambers"? :waitasec:

 

[AZlawyer]

Re: closing arguments:
Which side normally presents last?
Thanks in advance.

The prosecutor goes first and last. Just like with the presentation of evidence.

 

[Jax49]

That would be very odd. I haven't been watching the video lately, though. Are you sure she said "hallway"? Not "chambers"? :waitasec:

She said "hallway" and I believe she let the court reporter know he wasn't needed.

 

[swanna]

This may have been asked but how do they figure out who will be the alternate jurors? Just curious? Also is this decided before they deliberate?

 

[katiedid2]

Is illegal for alyce violet to approach Samantha ?

 

[AZlawyer]

She said "hallway" and I believe she let the court reporter know he wasn't needed.

Weird. I have no clue.

This may have been asked but how do they figure out who will be the alternate jurors? Just curious? Also is this decided before they deliberate?

It will be decided by random lot just before deliberations.

Is illegal for alyce violet to approach Samantha ?

It depends what she was doing. If she just wanted to say "I'm sorry for your loss," it was legally OK, although insensitive. If she wanted to say, "I'm sorry I had to say all those things about your brother, but that's my job, what can I do," then it was probably legally OK, and definitely unprofessional and insensitive. If she was saying, "Look, Mr. Nurmi would really like to talk to you about a plea deal that the prosecutor won't accept without your approval," then it was illegal.

 

[katiedid2]

Weird. I have no clue.



It will be decided by random lot just before deliberations.



It depends what she was doing. If she just wanted to say "I'm sorry for your loss," it was legally OK, although insensitive. If she wanted to say, "I'm sorry I had to say all those things about your brother, but that's my job, what can I do," then it was probably legally OK, and definitely unprofessional and insensitive. If she was saying, "Look, Mr. Nurmi would really like to talk to you about a plea deal that the prosecutor won't accept without your approval," then it was illegal.

Thank you for your response.

 

[Goodanuff]

I'm not sure what your question is. Prejudicial and incriminating are not the same.
It was a poorly written question,I was trying to understand how a Judge decides
what is can be considered prejudicial when it comes to deciding what evidence is allowed.

i.e. slashed tires
Thanks for all or your knowledge.

 

[AZlawyer]

I'm not sure what your question is. Prejudicial and incriminating are not the same.

It was a poorly written question,I was trying to understand how a Judge decides
what is can be considered prejudicial when it comes to deciding what evidence is allowed.

i.e. slashed tires
Thanks for all or your knowledge.

I don't think that the judge decided that the tire-slashing was prejudicial. I think JM decided he didn't have enough evidence that it was her.

 

[Nhic]

Is a defense attorney obligated to put forth a defense concocted by his/her client even if the defense attorney knows it to be untrue?

 

[a/k/a me]

AZ, thank you for sharing your knowledge with us. It's fascinating, yet complex, to those of us who didnt major in this field.
.
One more question if you dont mind. If a mistrial were to occur, could a different defense be presented i. e. not self defense, but crime of passion or something, where she would not have to take the stand ?

 

[AZlawyer]

Is a defense attorney obligated to put forth a defense concocted by his/her client even if the defense attorney knows it to be untrue?

Defense counsel is obligated to put on the defense claimed by his/her client even if he/she strongly suspects it is untrue. Defense counsel can certainly try to convince his/her client first that a jury will likely see it the same way he/she does.

Counsel cannot put a witness on the stand knowing that the witness intends to commit perjury. Strongly suspecting that the witness is a lying liar who can't tell a story twice the same way and whose story violates all known rules of common sense and physics is not the same thing as knowing that the witness intends to commit perjury.

 

[AZlawyer]

AZ, thank you for sharing your knowledge with us. It's fascinating, yet complex, to those of us who didnt major in this field.
.
One more question if you dont mind. If a mistrial were to occur, could a different defense be presented i. e. not self defense, but crime of passion or something, where she would not have to take the stand ?

Sure. But crime of passion is not a defense.

 

[Nhic]

Defense counsel is obligated to put on the defense claimed by his/her client even if he/she strongly suspects it is untrue. Defense counsel can certainly try to convince his/her client first that a jury will likely see it the same way he/she does.

Counsel cannot put a witness on the stand knowing that the witness intends to commit perjury. Strongly suspecting that the witness is a lying liar who can't tell a story twice the same way and whose story violates all known rules of common sense and physics is not the same thing as knowing that the witness intends to commit perjury.

Thank you.

What if the defense counsel knows the client's concocted story is untrue, as opposed to suspecting it to be untrue? Are they still obligated to put forth the known concocted story?

(Knowing that perjury is very difficult to prove)

 

[Nhic]

AZ another question for you.

If defense counsel attempts a plea bargain with the state (in this case 2nd degree murder which was refused), does defense counsel have to tell the state why? For example, would the defense counsel in this case have to have told the state our client will plead guilty to 2nd degree murder because she was a victim of DV?

 

[AZlawyer]

Thank you.

What if the defense counsel knows the client's concocted story is untrue, as opposed to suspecting it to be untrue? Are they still obligated to put forth the known concocted story?

(Knowing that perjury is very difficult to prove)

If the client tells counsel that the story is untrue, then counsel would not be able to present it.