Jodi Arias Legal Question and Answer Thread *no discussion*

[MsJosie]

I was not here at the start of the trial, so I probably missed this...

if JA's lawyers have their own private practice, can they still be Public Defenders paid for by the state...or is JA paying for them? I am confused by some comments I recently read that the lawyers had a private practice, then "our taxes are paying for her" type comments.

The supposed drawings, portraits that JA is doing during the trial....of the people in the court room
1. Can she, as a defendant, sell these portraits without approval of the person (s)
2. Can she sell these, as a convict, by giving them to someone else to sell, again without the approval of the person (s)
3. Can she, if found Innocent, can she sell these drawings
4. What happens to them if she is found guilty?

Thank you in advance.

 

[TexasLassie]

What happens on Tuesday? Is JD finished with her testimony? Will there be any more witnesses? TIA

 

[gitana1]

I was not here at the start of the trial, so I probably missed this...

if JA's lawyers have their own private practice, can they still be Public Defenders paid for by the state...or is JA paying for them? I am confused by some comments I recently read that the lawyers had a private practice, then "our taxes are paying for her" type comments.

The supposed drawings, portraits that JA is doing during the trial....of the people in the court room
1. Can she, as a defendant, sell these portraits without approval of the person (s)
2. Can she sell these, as a convict, by giving them to someone else to sell, again without the approval of the person (s)
3. Can she, if found Innocent, can she sell these drawings
4. What happens to them if she is found guilty?

Thank you in advance.

Private attorneys like my law partner can contract with the county and/ or be appointed by he court. In such a situation, they are paid a rate equivalent to the public defender.

Unless the portraits can be connected to profiting for her crime, she can sell them. Also, anyone can draw and sell drawings of anyone else, without their permission.

I see rumblings that the Judge in this case made a mistake by allowing the 'ring, xmas tree and airplane number' stories in during cross. Some feel this was beyond the scope and could be damaging come appeals time-- is there any truth to that?

I don't. Remember all the allegations brought up by Laviolette about Travis which were not based on admitted evidence? Like tons of hearsay? Well, they can mention it because it was what she based her opinion on. So it doesn't matter if it's admissible or not.

It to me was well within the scope of the defense presentation because it had to do with her mental state and that was brought up in the defense rebuttal, heavily.

Why didn't the prosecution explore the possibility that JA is a psychopath and have her tested for that?

The MMPI, which Dr. Demarte used, is not directed to one diagnosis. It is a diagnostic exam that tests a person and helps determines what the diagnosis in. The state expert just went in open minded and tried to figure out if jodi has a disorder. She found it was borderline. She didn't say anything about finding markers for antisocial personality disorder, which is as close to psychopath or sociopath as the DSM gets.

This question is driving me crazy.

In questioning JD today, JW prefaced it by saying something like, "When Travis attacked Jodi on ...". But I don't recall JM prefacing a question by with, "During the time Jodi was stalking ...". Shouldn't the word 'alleged' be inserted instead of stating something as a fact? Isn't the Jury supposed to decide what is fact and what isn't?

It seems to me that if the Jury keeps hearing the fictitious story that JA tells, it's going to sound like a fact. Shouldn't JM object when the word 'alleged' is not used? And why hasn't JM questioned any of the witnesses as if his story is fact? It seems as if he is deferring to the fictitious story line.

Hope this makes sense. And TY for your answer!

It does. It bothers me but it is permissible as long as evidence/testimony has been admitted or offered regarding these statements.
JM has somewhat challenged this bUt not at much as I would like. For example, he has said "alleged pedophilia" when questioning witnesses. But his entire line of questioning and his rebuttal is geared toward refuting the defense theory about Travis attacking Jodi. JM will really make it clear in closing.

 

[nells]

I think it's easy for non-lawyers to make critiques of Willmott. As practicing lawyers, what are your thoughts on how Willmott has performed in the case, if you feel comfortable saying so? Do you think, perhaps, as in most professions, a woman is being more highly scrutinized?

(This is not to excuse some of the things that the defense team, to me, a non-lawyer, seems problematic -- I think this question is a little about how you think female lawyers are perceived, evaluated by the legal community in your geographical area and legal specializations).

 

[buggsmom]

Will the jury get any information that explains, gives details and/or describes the characteristics of Borderline Personality Disorder and PTSD? (DSM-IV or other publications)
Or will they just have the testing information and lists of criteria?

With a diagnosis of a "personality disorder", does that tend to change the way jurors view the defendant…ex. will they have a hint of sympathy for her (it's not her fault she has a disorder)?

TIA!

 

[Kel2000]

Someone brought up as a comment on YouTube the fact that Jodi's finger was allegedly "broken" 2-3 days(?) before her "nothing to report" journal entry. Given that Jodi used home spun remedies to heal her finger one could assume that it would be at least physically difficult for her to write that entry and a) people who truly have a broken finger and no pain meds for it probably wouldn't want to write as it would be painful or b) their writing would be significantly altered if they did.

Barring JM's ability to prove this, could he have alluded to it in his questioning with Jodi as an aside like "here it says 'nothing to report' yet you wrote this with the hand with the broken finger for which you sought no medical attention?" or would he need a good faith basis to do so?

 

[Words2Serve]

Is a juror allowed to borrow books from the library on PTSD, BPD, DV, etc. or is that covered under the admonition?

 

[gitana1]

I think it's easy for non-lawyers to make critiques of Willmott. As practicing lawyers, what are your thoughts on how Willmott has performed in the case, if you feel comfortable saying so? Do you think, perhaps, as in most professions, a woman is being more highly scrutinized?

(This is not to excuse some of the things that the defense team, to me, a non-lawyer, seems problematic -- I think this question is a little about how you think female lawyers are perceived, evaluated by the legal community in your geographical area and legal specializations).

She's doing fine. She is professional. I don't like her because of my personal feelings about the case, her professional decision to participate in such a disgusting defense- one she knows is b.s., and because she has gotten away with smarmy little tricks like speaking objections to coach her witness while feigning outrage at things she feels cross the line on the other side.

But putting my emotion aside and just looking at her performance, she has been professional and has done well with what she's got to work with, which is absolutely nothing.

Will the jury get any information that explains, gives details and/or describes the characteristics of Borderline Personality Disorder and PTSD? (DSM-IV or other publications)
Or will they just have the testing information and lists of criteria?

With a diagnosis of a "personality disorder", does that tend to change the way jurors view the defendant…ex. will they have a hint of sympathy for her (it's not her fault she has a disorder)?

TIA!

Besides what was entered into evidence, they won't get anything else. Such a diagnosis could potentially act to mitigate against the death penalty.

Is a juror allowed to borrow books from the library on PTSD, BPD, DV, etc. or is that covered under the admonition?

They can't do that. It's covered.

 

[AZlawyer]

Someone brought up as a comment on YouTube the fact that Jodi's finger was allegedly "broken" 2-3 days(?) before her "nothing to report" journal entry. Given that Jodi used home spun remedies to heal her finger one could assume that it would be at least physically difficult for her to write that entry and a) people who truly have a broken finger and no pain meds for it probably wouldn't want to write as it would be painful or b) their writing would be significantly altered if they did.

Barring JM's ability to prove this, could he have alluded to it in his questioning with Jodi as an aside like "here it says 'nothing to report' yet you wrote this with the hand with the broken finger for which you sought no medical attention?" or would he need a good faith basis to do so?

Yes, he could have asked that, and he would have had a good faith basis, because she had testified that her finger was broken at the time.

 

[AZlawyer]

I think it's easy for non-lawyers to make critiques of Willmott. As practicing lawyers, what are your thoughts on how Willmott has performed in the case, if you feel comfortable saying so? Do you think, perhaps, as in most professions, a woman is being more highly scrutinized?

(This is not to excuse some of the things that the defense team, to me, a non-lawyer, seems problematic -- I think this question is a little about how you think female lawyers are perceived, evaluated by the legal community in your geographical area and legal specializations).

I think female lawyers have to be really good in order not to be criticized. I think JW is average in her skill in examining witnesses. As gitana has pointed out, it is difficult to criticize the substance of her arguments, because she has very little to work with.

 

[AZlawyer]

What happens on Tuesday? Is JD finished with her testimony? Will there be any more witnesses? TIA

I didn't watch all the video, but it sure seemed to me like she was done.

I would expect a few more rebuttal witnesses, yes.

I was not here at the start of the trial, so I probably missed this...

if JA's lawyers have their own private practice, can they still be Public Defenders paid for by the state...or is JA paying for them? I am confused by some comments I recently read that the lawyers had a private practice, then "our taxes are paying for her" type comments.

<respectfully snipped>

Thank you in advance.

Jennifer W is a public defender. Nurmi was a public defender when he was assigned to Jodi's case, but then left and opened a private practice. He tried to get off the case at that time, but the judge ordered him to stay on. She did, however, order that the county pay him a higher rate (closer to what a private attorney would charge).

Why couldn't the pros. disclose the fact that the ring JA stole was an engagement ring?

What makes a ring an engagement ring? Most likely, Dr. DeM did not have or rely upon any specific information regarding Travis's intentions with respect to the ring.

I understand Martinez won't be allowed to dispute that the defendant has no knife in her hands. But will he be allowed to ask the witness: "Does the pupil show whether or not the defendant is holding a knife in her pocket? on her waist? on her leg? in her mouth? anywhere else other than in her hands?" (Just in case there's 1 juror with iq below room temp)

The jury will not see any close-up picture of the pupil. I'm not sure who you're referring to when you say "the witness."

 

[Angelina Frost]

AZ, in the unfortunate event of a hung jury, what do you think is the most likely scenario after that? Does the State retry?

 

[Chester_from_THM]

When JW is taking notes while Juan is questioning a witness, do our lawyers think she is actually writing out her cross exam questions?

She seems to write almost constantly when Juan is up.

It is just so interesting to see these different styles, where Juan seems to take no notes. It is hard to imagine he could keep all his points in his head, especially when some of these defense witnesses are on the stand for (17!) days.

I am sure there is a strategic plan on both sides about generally how they think they will approach each witness, but I would think you'd have to adjust your tactics based on what the witnesses actually say.

For example, Juan knew what to ask Darryl based on interviews before the trial. But then Darryl sometimes answered differently and Juan pointed that out and probably had to adjust some of his questioning.

Is either one of these styles typical of trial lawyers, or are they just a range of styles?

What do you lawyers do, if you care to say?

 

[AZlawyer]

AZ, in the unfortunate event of a hung jury, what do you think is the most likely scenario after that? Does the State retry?

I think the state would really have to look at plea options at that point.

When JW is taking notes while Juan is questioning a witness, do our lawyers think she is actually writing out her cross exam questions?

She seems to write almost constantly when Juan is up.

It is just so interesting to see these different styles, where Juan seems to take no notes. It is hard to imagine he could keep all his points in his head, especially when some of these defense witnesses are on the stand for (17!) days.

I am sure there is a strategic plan on both sides about generally how they think they will approach each witness, but I would think you'd have to adjust your tactics based on what the witnesses actually say.

For example, Juan knew what to ask Darryl based on interviews before the trial. But then Darryl sometimes answered differently and Juan pointed that out and probably had to adjust some of his questioning.

Is either one of these styles typical of trial lawyers, or are they just a range of styles?

What do you lawyers do, if you care to say?

She is definitely writing notes for cross. JM is presumably doing the same, although perhaps he just writes a word or two as a reminder while JW writes more complete thoughts.

Obviously, the lawyers have to adjust questioning based on what the witnesses actually say.

Many lawyers write out questions for direct and, if they have time, for cross. I tend to write a list of subject areas and maybe a couple of questions if I need to be very careful of the wording regarding a particular issue. I find that a "script" impairs my ability to listen and respond to the witness testimony.

 

[kscornfed]

i know they write notes for cross, but during redirect, JW was still writing notes furiously and she wasn't asking more questions. why does she do that?

have you ever seen a judge allow so many sidebars? she doesn't even make them voice an objection first. they ask, they get it. what's up with that and do you approve of it?

 

[Nezumi]

She has almost certainly been told to avoid those topics by the prosecutor if indeed those topics are still off the table.

Minor - this is one if the things I find so incredibly frustrating about our justice system. If we're going to trust the jury system with people's lives and freedom, why can't we trust them enough to have all of the available facts before them?

 

[Liar]

Is it too late for JM to question the following people?
JA's Aunty
JA's younger sister
MM

 

[ChinaBlue]

If Dr. D got information from the interrogation tapes, has she been told ahead of time not to mention stalking or tire slashing as data points?

She has almost certainly been told to avoid those topics by the prosecutor if indeed those topics are still off the table.

bbm

Is that because there is no proof and only hearsay? Or is there another reason?

She did mention JA stealing a ring from TA and I can only assume that she got that from interrogation tape - or perhaps a tape from one of TA's friends. I can't believe that JA admitted to this in her interview with Dr. DeMarte and/or in her journals although I do remember hearing about this before - I just can't remember where.

And I'm curious - do you think Dr. DeMarte watched the interrogation tapes and used them as part of her evaluation of JA?

 

[Nhic]

Originally Posted by TXProfessional
For anyone interested in JA MMPI-2 "elevated" scores on the 10 Clinical scales. She was elevated on 7 of the 10 clinical scales.

I was most interested in the one she was the most elevated on and thought you might be too. Her T-score on the Psychopathic Deviate scale was a 105 (highest of all of her elevated scores)



BBM

Apparently this information is deemed too prejudicial to have been brought out in this trial (although why I still don't understand LOL).

Can this information be presented to the jury during the penalty phase of this trial?

 

[womblek]

Originally Posted by TXProfessional
For anyone interested in JA MMPI-2 "elevated" scores on the 10 Clinical scales. She was elevated on 7 of the 10 clinical scales.

I was most interested in the one she was the most elevated on and thought you might be too. Her T-score on the Psychopathic Deviate scale was a 105 (highest of all of her elevated scores)



BBM

Apparently this information is deemed too prejudicial to have been brought out in this trial (although why I still don't understand LOL).

Can this information be presented to the jury during the penalty phase of this trial?

I still mostly lurk :lurk:
I'm sorry if I missed out on earlier discussions that answer my question. I can't keep up! Was there an earlier motion to suppress this information (elevation on the Psychopathic Deviate scale) or was there an objection at some point during the testimony that suppresses it?
On a second, separate point, when did the missing (stolen) ring first come up? Before yesterday the only talk I had "heard" about it seemed like speculation. What did I miss there?
TIA