Jodi Arias Legal Question and Answer Thread *no discussion*

[tlckgram]

Hi...regarding the alternate jurors (10, 15 & 17)...is there a way to find out which side selected them, Prosecutor or Defense?

Neither. They were randomly selected by lot that was drawn by the staple lady while she stood near the judge.

 

[Itsy]

Hi...regarding the alternate jurors (10, 15 & 17)...is there a way to find out which side selected them, Prosecutor or Defense?

Neither. They were randomly selected by lot that was drawn by the staple lady while she stood near the judge.

I think (s)he meant at the beginning of the trial...as in, which side wanted to keep them on the jury..

 

[AZlawyer]

Hi...regarding the alternate jurors (10, 15 & 17)...is there a way to find out which side selected them, Prosecutor or Defense?

Neither. They were randomly selected by lot that was drawn by the staple lady while she stood near the judge.

I think (s)he meant at the beginning of the trial...as in, which side wanted to keep them on the jury..

Neither side gets to select any jurors. Both sides get to "strike" jurors, so any juror who is left at the end of the strikes was OK with both sides.

 

[AZlawyer]

ty for your help legal eagles! are there any legal or ethical ramifications for nurmi lying in his closing arguements saying jodi didn't return the gas can to the same wal mart - contrary to her testimony?

No, not unless someone could prove that he knew he was wrong.

 

[AZlawyer]

How do they handle Jodi during deliberations? Does she have to be brought to the courthouse every day and sit it out in a cell?

I would think they would wait to bring her until a verdict is announced--unless the logistics of transportation would be too difficult to arrange with all the other inmates who need to be moved around every day.

 

[AZlawyer]

Are the laws different for Supreme court cases? I found this:

Requests for particular exhibits or partial read backs of transcripts generally ought to be met. Since the jurors are the decision-makers, they ought to have the right to decide what evidence they need to rehear, and that decision ought to be respected. However, the judge should inform the jurors that the meeting of their request does not mean the judge feels one way or the other about the exhibit or particular testimony, and that they should consider all of the evidence in the case in making their decision
********************************************

and wondered if the supreme court would honor it, why wouldn't JS?
I really hope the jurors ARE able to visit past testimony, either by transcript, or audio tape.

I forgot the link for my last question:
http://www.supreme.state.az.us/jury/jury/jury1l.htm

I tried to edit my last post, but messed up somehow, so I hope you see it in this one! lol

What you linked are not rules--it is just the report of some committee making recommendations to the AZ Supreme Court for how the AZ Supreme Court should tell the trial court judges to run things.

 

[Angelina Frost]

Any pre-verdict predictions, AZ?

 

[AZlawyer]

The latest minute entry by the Defense is for the Office of Public Defense to pay Maria for 100 hours during the Guilt Phase of the Trial.

MINUTE ENTRY
The court has conferred with a representative from the Office of Public Defense.
Based upon information provided by the Office of Public Defense and at the sealed
hearing,
IT IS ORDERED the Office of Public Defense shall pay the mitigation specialist, Maria
De La Rosa, compensation for 100 hours of services rendered during the guilt phase of the trial.
This case is eFiling eligible: http://www.clerkofcourt.maricopa.gov/efiling/default.asp.
Attorneys are encouraged to review Supreme Court Administrative Order 2011-140 to determine
their mandatory participation in eFiling through AZTurboCourt.

Have any of you observed Maria much? I was wondering your thoughts on her
http://www.courtminutes.maricopa.gov/docs/Criminal/052013/m5750389.pdf

ETA And is it always called the guilt phase post verdict?

I haven't paid any attention to Maria. But yes, it is always called the guilt phase even pre-verdict.

 

[AZlawyer]

after the sentence will the court release stuff from closed hearings like the magazines and that court hearing that went along with that ..or is everything sealed because of appeals. thank you

The magazines were not sealed, and neither was the court hearing re: the pedo letters (the one in which JA apparently wanted MM to change his story). $20 per day to order the video.

Nothing is sealed because of appeals. Everything that is sealed is supposed to be sealed for some good reason, but frankly I think things have been over-sealed in this case.

 

[AZlawyer]

IF the jury decides premeditation or M1, during the aggravation phase, can the prosecution introduce to new evidence and can you elaborate on what actually goes on during this phase? TIA

Yes, there can be new evidence, but only on the issue of TA's suffering during the murder.

The aggravation phase will be handled just like a mini-trial, except the issue will be "cruelty" (TA's suffering) rather than guilt.

 

[AZlawyer]

Any of the attorneys have an educated guess on why the family didn't file a civil suit within the SOL?

No. Most families don't, though.

 

[AZlawyer]

I apologize if its already been asked and answered, but wondering what "death penalty qualified" actually means. Is it more than that they answered affirmatively when asked if they'd be able to give it if the elements of the crime fit that punishment?

Thanks in advance

No, that's all that is required.

 

[AZlawyer]

Thanks - but............. lol
My original question on the main thread was: why does the jury foreman need to keep track of who votes for premeditation, who for felony murder, and who both - (which I didn't even realize was possible).
Why does the split count matter - and will it effect anything in the rest of the trial?
If it doesn't matter, why keep track of who votes for what?

I don't think the foreman does need to keep track in this case, because there is no Edmund/Tison issue re: whether Jodi actually committed the killing.

 

[AZlawyer]

Your answer spawned another question!! When the DT is presenting it's case in any parts of the rest of the trial, to argue effectively, does that mean they'd have to admit JA's guilt to have a reasonable argument? If that happened, how would that effect the appeal?

Thanks in advance for all attorneys here willing to help us understand. :rockon:

Well, they can admit guilt, but then the jury tends to feel a little used. It's better to say, "even if she did this," blah blah blah.

I don't think it would affect any appeal on the guilt phase even if they admitted guilt for purposes of later phases, but I haven't researched the issue.

 

[AZlawyer]

Any pre-verdict predictions, AZ?

Juries are inherently unpredictable. I'm keeping my fingers crossed for Murder 1 but won't be surprised if we see a Murder 2 compromise verdict. I will be pretty surprised if the verdict is manslaughter, and I will be really surprised if she gets off scot free.

 

[Jax49]

I don't think the foreman does need to keep track in this case, because there is no Edmund/Tison issue re: whether Jodi actually committed the killing.

I don't understand it, but I listened to the last day again, when the judge read jury instructions and she did say that if they convicted of first degree murder they needed to complete three selections. Those being: the number of jurors voting felony murder, those voting premeditated and those voting both.

MOO, of course, but that's what I understood her to read.

 

[Itsy]

Neither side gets to select any jurors. Both sides get to "strike" jurors, so any juror who is left at the end of the strikes was OK with both sides.

That's what I meant to say - which is why I'm not a lawyer! :floorlaugh:

 

[AZlawyer]

I don't understand it, but I listened to the last day again, when the judge read jury instructions and she did say that if they convicted of first degree murder they needed to complete three selections. Those being: the number of jurors voting felony murder, those voting premeditated and those voting both.

MOO, of course, but that's what I understood her to read.

It's probably part of the standard instruction. I don't think it matters in this case legally, though.

 

[Hally]

We are at the end of the trial now. I have to say a big Thank -You - to AZLawyer. We laughed at times, we talked straight talk at times, and I definitely asked you legal questions at times. Each time that I did you answered me no matter what, you took the time out and acknowledged me, and as I can read for myself you did for many others, as well.

I want to thank - you, because I would have never got through the legal BS{my words} without you, and you showed grace, and sense of humor to top it off.

THANK _ YOU AZLAWYER.

 

[polleypockets]

I don't understand it, but I listened to the last day again, when the judge read jury instructions and she did say that if they convicted of first degree murder they needed to complete three selections. Those being: the number of jurors voting felony murder, those voting premeditated and those voting both.

MOO, of course, but that's what I understood her to read.

from what i understood is the jury doesn't have to agree 100% on felony murder vs murder 1 - that the jusry could have 6 votes felony murder and 6 votes premed murder and that works as a M1 conviction - is that right?