Jodi Arias Legal Question and Answer Thread *no discussion*

[AZlawyer]

Normally during closing arguments opposing attorneys do not make objections, correct?

What are the odds that we will see this DT do just that anyway, and given this judge's grest deference to the defense, that she will allow the DT to interfere with JM's closing?

I didn't get to see JM's closing, so I assume you know the answer by now.

Objections during closing are normally few and far between.

 

[AZlawyer]

question for the attorneys:

have you ever seen a case where the judge allowed a PSYCHOLOGIST to rebut the testimony of a PHYSICIAN like this? no medical school, no MD, no autopsies-----just dealt with MAYBE 3 cases where people survived a GSW to the head.

ever seen that?

Since the prosecution was going with the "it can never ever happen" theory, I think allowing "it can sometimes happen" testimony was OK.

Also, keep in mind (as one juror apparently did) that an ME would never see any of the tiny percentage of people who do survive a gunshot wound to the head. So there really is a missing "chunk" of experience for Dr. Horn--100% of the people who show up on HIS table with a gunshot wound are dead.

 

[AZlawyer]

Can there be objections during the closing statements? (I think that is what they are called)

Can JA make a closing statement?

Thank you again.

Yes, rarely there can be objections during closing statements.

No, JA cannot make a closing statement unless she fires her lawyers again lol.

 

[AZlawyer]

Two questions. They didn't finish tonight with testimony until about 840 pm and I didn't see any noticeable breaks for a meal for either the jury or the defendant. Could that be grounds for appeal?

The typo or oversight in Dr Horn's autopsy report....can that be grounds for an appeal if interpreted as not a true typo but a tailoring of his testimony to favor the prosecution?

TIA

No, that will not be grounds for an appeal. First of all, I'm certain there was some arrangement made for some type of food. Second, specific harm would have to be shown--not just "people must have been hungry and tired."

No, the typo will not be grounds for an appeal. The jury will have to decide whether it was a true typo or a dishonest change in his testimony. Even if they decide it was a typo, of course, they might be concerned that his attention to detail is not as great as they thought it was.

 

[Sign]

Could you please shed some light on the repercussions of a hung jury at the various stages of deliberation and sentencing? For instance, what are the possibilities moving forward in the event of a hung jury during the verdict phase (i.e the decision re first-degree, second-degree, etc), and/or what rules govern such eventualities? e.g. would the court draw a new random lot of the 15 potential jurors for another deliberation, or would it result in an automatic mistrial? How are these decisions made? If a second jury is selected and it also fails to reach a unanimous decision, what happens then, i.e. how many hung juries can there be from the same pool of alternates?

I read that if the judge declares a mistrial due to a hung jury, it "could" result in a retrial. If a retrial is therefore not a given, what factors govern this decision? If there is no retrial, does that mean the case is simply dismissed and she walks? I'm assuming/hoping that cannot possibly be the case. If conversely the case is retried, would that effectively mean starting from scratch, with an entirely new set of jurors?

Also, are the rules governing the outcome of a hung jury the same during the subsequent aggravation phase (if she's convicted of first-degree)? Finally, if the latter phase results in a finding of cruelty, but a hung jury ensues during sentencing, how is the 'new' jury determined? e.g. is it a new draw from the original 15 potentials, or would 'brand new' jurors be selected from the population?

Thanks for answering my last question re jury selection AZ, and sorry for all these hung jury questions, but I'm getting antsy since I see that as the only likely out for her at this stage!

p.s. I would also love to know your prediction of the verdict now, based on your professional experience, if you wouldn't mind sharing.

 

[AZlawyer]

Yes but does she have it--thats the key and is there a psychological model versus a legal model for the finding of PTSD? Because from a psychological model she does not have it.

While everyone experiences PTSD differently, there are three main types of symptoms: (Why Jodi doesn't have PTSD)
1. Re-experiencing the traumatic event
2. Avoiding reminders of the trauma
3. Increased anxiety and emotional arousal
Symptoms of PTSD: Re-experiencing the traumatic event
• Intrusive, upsetting memories of the event (no)
• Flashbacks (acting or feeling like the event is happening again) (no)
• Nightmares (either of the event or of other frightening things) (Once a week)
• Feelings of intense distress when reminded of the trauma (no)
• Intense physical reactions to reminders of the event (e.g. pounding heart, rapid breathing, nausea, muscle tension, sweating) (no)
Symptoms of PTSD: Avoidance and numbing
• Avoiding activities, places, thoughts, or feelings that remind you of the trauma (NO)
• Inability to remember important aspects of the trauma (Only those that hurt her)
• Loss of interest in activities and life in general (No)
• Feeling detached from others and emotionally numb (No)
• Sense of a limited future (you don’t expect to live a normal life span, get married, have a career) (No)
Symptoms of PTSD: Increased anxiety and emotional arousal
• Difficulty falling or staying asleep (No)
• Irritability or outbursts of anger-----------Does have anger.
• Difficulty concentrating (No)
• Hypervigilance (on constant “red alert”) (No)
• Feeling jumpy and easily startled (No)

--------------------------------------------

Let me add this as well:

PTSD FOG ALERT: Jodi was---
1. ALERT enough to realize Travis was vulnerable, naked, taking shower.
2. ALERT enough to grab knife.
3. ALERT enough to run all the way around to closet to get a gun.
4. ALERT enough to stab him 29-times and NOT get injured herself except for some cuts on hands.
5. ALERT enough to make a devastating deep cut of near decapitation.
6. ALERT enough to remember gun going off, and Travis chasing her, (An impossibility and OBVIOUS lie because she shot in the head and wound was post-mortem).
7. ALERT enough to say she, “did not feel fear” at the time, and then tried to back- peddle.
8. ALERT enough to “Risk going after a gun she thought was unloaded.”
9. ALERT enough to drag him back to the shower and wash off evidence.
10. ALERT enough to grab some towels and clean some things up.
11. ALERT enough to delete the Pic’s. (Takes 4-clicks per per pick to delete, and 5-actual steps for every pic deletion, and several pic’s were deleted).
12. ALERT enough to change sheets, and put camera and bedding in washer).
13. ALERT enough not to leave any blood downstairs to draw suspicion of his roommates.
14. ALERT enough to take gun and knife with her.
15. ALERT enough to get rid of gun, knife, and floor mats of rental care.
16. ALERT enough to keep plate turned upside down as she left Travis’s.
17. ALERT enough to NOT call the police to help Travis.
18. ALERT enough not to tell anyone in Utah what happened.
19. ALERT enough to give excuses/lies to Mr. Burns on why she would be late.
20. ALERT enough to lie and leaves messages on Travis’s phone to cover up. (Why would she call three-days if she remembered by Hoover Dam she did something bad to Travis).
21. ALERT enough that to realize that she had blood on her hands and something bad happened, but told them in Utah she cut her hands bartending.
22. ALERT enough to put gauze on those cuts.
23. ALERT enough to know that everything favored her and nothing was against her in terms of her memory and this trial.

No, there is no "legal version" of PTSD. It is the psychological version we're talking about. Samuels and what's-his-name (the new guy) think she has the symptoms. You, DeMarte, and lots of other people disagree.

 

[AZlawyer]

Could you please shed some light on the repercussions of a hung jury at the various stages of deliberation and sentencing? For instance, what are the possibilities moving forward in the event of a hung jury during the verdict phase (i.e the decision re first-degree, second-degree, etc), and/or what rules govern such eventualities? e.g. would the court draw a new random lot of the 15 potential jurors for another deliberation, or would it result in an automatic mistrial? How are these decisions made? If a second jury is selected and it also fails to reach a unanimous decision, what happens then, i.e. how many hung juries can there be from the same pool of alternates?

I read that if the judge declares a mistrial due to a hung jury, it "could" result in a retrial. If a retrial is therefore not a given, what factors govern this decision? If there is no retrial, does that mean the case is simply dismissed and she walks? I'm assuming/hoping that cannot possibly be the case. If conversely the case is retried, would that effectively mean starting from scratch, with an entirely new set of jurors?

Also, are the rules governing the outcome of a hung jury the same during the subsequent aggravation phase (if she's convicted of first-degree)? Finally, if the latter phase results in a finding of cruelty, but a hung jury ensues during sentencing, how is the 'new' jury determined? e.g. is it a new draw from the original 15 potentials, or would 'brand new' jurors be selected from the population?

Thanks for answering my last question re jury selection AZ, and sorry for all these hung jury questions, but I'm getting antsy since I see that as the only likely out for her at this stage!

p.s. I would also love to know your prediction of the verdict now, based on your professional experience, if you wouldn't mind sharing.

If there's a hung jury at this stage, the case could be retried with a brand-new jury pool, in theory as many times as necessary to get a verdict. In reality, there would probably be a plea deal instead.

If the first jury finds Murder 1 but there's a hung jury at the next stage (the aggravation stage), then the jury will be dismissed and a brand-new jury will be impaneled to decide aggravation (whether the murder was "cruel"). If there is a second hung jury at that stage, the judge will decide between life and natural life. If the jury finds aggravation but hangs at the final penalty stage, the jury will be dismissed and a brand-new jury will decide the penalty. If that jury hangs, the judge will decide between life and natural life.

ETA: I expect a verdict of Murder 1, but there is always a chance of a crazy result with a jury.

 

[K_Z]

During deliberations, what is the process the jury uses if they wish to re-examine a piece of evidence? Do they fill out a form requesting each piece they wish to see?

Do they simply ask the bailiff and it is brought to them?

Do they get to touch the evidence, such as the photographs they saw projected on large screens in court? Does the bailiff remain present while they examine the evidence to make sure it is not damaged (in case it is needed again)?

Can they deliberate at the courthouse "after normal business hours" if they plan to do this ahead of time, or are they confined to deliberations during the hours of 9-5?

Are meals brought to them, or do they recess to go to a restaurant on their own?

Thank you!!

 

[AZlawyer]

During deliberations, what is the process the jury uses if they wish to re-examine a piece of evidence? Do they fill out a form requesting each piece they wish to see?

Do they simply ask the bailiff and it is brought to them?

Do they get to touch the evidence, such as the photographs they saw projected on large screens in court? Does the bailiff remain present while they examine the evidence to make sure it is not damaged (in case it is needed again)?

Can they deliberate at the courthouse "after normal business hours" if they plan to do this ahead of time, or are they confined to deliberations during the hours of 9-5?

Are meals brought to them, or do they recess to go to a restaurant on their own?

Thank you!!

All the evidence will be in the room with them, except anything that could be damaged by handling. For anything like that, they would have to ask the bailiff.

They will have the photos, yes.

I doubt they will be able to deliberate on a regular basis after the security guards go home, but I'm not sure what time that is. If they are close to a decision and ask to stay late one night, though, the judge might be able to get overtime approved for security.

Normally, they would have to get their own food over the lunch hour. Most jurors go to the court cafeteria.

 

[Sign]

Thanks again AZ. Can you please tell me if the jurors will have the witness transcripts with them in deliberation? I ask because Nurmi just denied that his client said she returned the gas can to the same Walmart in Salinas. However she testified to that fact twice under cross by JM.

 

[Jax49]

If there's a hung jury at this stage, the case could be retried with a brand-new jury pool, in theory as many times as necessary to get a verdict. In reality, there would probably be a plea deal instead.

If the first jury finds Murder 1 but there's a hung jury at the next stage (the aggravation stage), then the jury will be dismissed and a brand-new jury will be impaneled to decide aggravation (whether the murder was "cruel"). If there is a second hung jury at that stage, the judge will decide between life and natural life. If the jury finds aggravation but hangs at the final penalty stage, the jury will be dismissed and a brand-new jury will decide the penalty. If that jury hangs, the judge will decide between life and natural life.

ETA: I expect a verdict of Murder 1, but there is always a chance of a crazy result with a jury.

BBM

What's the difference between natural life and life? TIA

 

[bettybaby00]

Learning so much here, thank you so much for offering your expertise
I know that in closing arguments, the order is state, defense, and then state again, and then jurors deliberate.

I'm seeing a great deal of chatter that Nurmi will likely ask (beg lol) to go up again after the state. Is that possible/normal?

 

[AZlawyer]

Thanks again AZ. Can you please tell me if the jurors will have the witness transcripts with them in deliberation? I ask because Nurmi just denied that his client said she returned the gas can to the same Walmart in Salinas. However she testified to that fact twice under cross by JM.

No, they will not have any trial transcripts.

 

[AZlawyer]

BBM

What's the difference between natural life and life? TIA

Natural life is without possibility of parole.

 

[AZlawyer]

Learning so much here, thank you so much for offering your expertise
I know that in closing arguments, the order is state, defense, and then state again, and then jurors deliberate.

I'm seeing a great deal of chatter that Nurmi will likely ask (beg lol) to go up again after the state. Is that possible/normal?

Um, he can ask. I've sure never seen it happen.

 

[KBisMe]

No, they will not have any trial transcripts.

I knew they wouldn't have transcripts with them, but wondered if JM could pull them for his rebuttal closing argument?

She DID say that she returned that can to the same Walmart. I re-watched that part and JM's questions were very clear, as well as her answer.

Is there any way JM can show that to the jury? Or does he just have to hope that they remember or someone took a note?

I am disgusted that Nurmi would flat out lie saying she didn't say it was the same Walmart. The attorneys are allowed to review transcripts, right? He has to know she said that. :banghead:

 

[AZlawyer]

I knew they wouldn't have transcripts with them, but wondered if JM could pull them for his rebuttal closing argument?

She DID say that she returned that can to the same Walmart. I re-watched that part and JM's questions were very clear, as well as her answer.

Is there any way JM can show that to the jury? Or does he just have to hope that they remember or someone took a note?

I am disgusted that Nurmi would flat out lie saying she didn't say it was the same Walmart. The attorneys are allowed to review transcripts, right? He has to know she said that. :banghead:

Yes, I have used transcripts in closing, and have put them on the exhibit display system for the jurors to see.

Most attorneys I know order trial transcripts every night from the court reporter. Maybe Nurmi doesn't, but I'm pretty sure he has access to YouTube just like the rest of us!

 

[KBisMe]

Yes, I have used transcripts in closing, and have put them on the exhibit display system for the jurors to see.

Most attorneys I know order trial transcripts every night from the court reporter. Maybe Nurmi doesn't, but I'm pretty sure he has access to YouTube just like the rest of us!

Thank you!!! That makes me feel soooo much better! I'm surprised Nurmi said that then. No way JM doesn't jump all over that to prove to the jury that she did say it.

 

[GetToTheTruthNow]

Wondering what the Legal eagles thought about Nurmi's defensive strategy or if they would have picked a different one? It looks fairly weak to me in my opinion---but he didn't have much to work with I guess.



1. Nude Pics?---She wanted to be the last one to sleep with Travis, blackmail, make him feel relaxed to murder him, or to send to his girlfriend/women in his life---and why isn’t he smiling?
2. June 3rd Photo was in Cali and trying to provide an Alibi.
3. NO PROOF of being tied to the bed.
4. Didn’t kill him in bed because that doesn’t match the Psycho movie photos she wanted—photo for photo in her thrill killing.
5. Waited until she could confine him to shower so he would be vulnerable—wet, slippery, etc.
6. CD’s as an excuse to come by to see him unannounced to give back?
7. There is enough time between EACH picture to get gun and knife.
8. Back facing her is actually worse time to strike— he could just swing around and defend himself. If he is sitting in on the ground he is restricted and has no legs to pivot.
9. Also this makes sense of the ‘down to up motion of the knife if he is sitting down’, standing up doesn’t.
10. The scene is messy because she tried to contain him in shower and it got messy and he fought back and tried to get down hallway and out door.
11. Broken finger not credible.
12. Journaling and not recording going to the bathroom was a BAD analogy---who would record that, but they would record something significant.
13. DeMarte with one year of experience is STRETCHING beyond belief when she starting testing back in 2004. Plus Dr Hayes backed her up.
14. The 12-year old fantasy comments were related to her wearing pigtails/Spidy pants (Cameron Diaz) and probably something she talked about or tried to draw out of him.
15. Is Nurmi saying it was a Vigilante murder because he liked sex, and because of unproven domestic violence or sex abuse and he deserved it? Is that his defense of a psychopathic stalking killer who the FBI has compared to Ted Bundy in cunningness (with a dose of Manson thrown in)?
16. Rehab ALV? Good luck with that.
17. A former wrestler likes cage fighting? Well, off with his head! LOL
18. Stalking evidence is overwhelming and fear doesn’t come to the end.
19. Premeditation is overwhelming:
20. PREMEDITATION:

1. Faked Journal entries.
2. Broke into TA’s face book, sent messages to herself.
3. Hacked into his ATM, Bank Records, and E-mails.
4. Robbed Grandparents of 25-calibre GUN, $30 cash, and a stereo.
5. Dyed her hair a different color.
6. Drove 90-miles out of her way away from home town to get rental car.
7. Used rental car, specifically asked for not red, so she could presumably not see any stains/blood to clean.
8. Borrowed two gas cans, and bought a third.
9. Turned off cell phone so it wouldn’t ping off towers.
10. Turned her license plate upside down.
11. Brought gun and knife to crime scene.
12. Showed up at Travis’s house early in morning.
13. Locked Travis’s dog in a closet so he wouldn’t get in blood.
14. Waited until he was in vulnerable position in Shower and naked.
15. Arranged for date with Ryan Burns and was to arrive same night as murder.
16. Malice: “Intent to kill or harm.”
17. PREMEDITATION:
“Wrongfully causing the death of another human being, after rationally considering the TIMING---OR---METHOD of doing so in order to increase the likihood of success or to evade detection or apprehension.”

 

[Sign]

Yes, I have used transcripts in closing, and have put them on the exhibit display system for the jurors to see.

Most attorneys I know order trial transcripts every night from the court reporter. Maybe Nurmi doesn't, but I'm pretty sure he has access to YouTube just like the rest of us!

Ok, I'm also relieved to hear that and I'm hoping JM will use that in a couple of hrs. However just to clarify, are jurors not even allowed to request specific transcripts during deliberation (understanding that as you said, they will not have them as a matter of course)?