KatieCoolady Holds 'Court' - The Dedicated KCL Thread

[Whisperer]

I hope the prosecution can spend equal amount of time lecturing all of the jury and anyone who will listen what the meaning of "Reasonble "Doubt' is. Most attorneys assume (incorrectly) that is it clear. The majority of cases lost are lost becuase some juror was not going to embarrass themselves and ask for an explanation and ask again if they didnt get it. Many, many people think if the have a doubt, then they must acquit.

A doubt doesn't mean that you can't vote guilty...not at all. People have doubts all the time. The point is...is it reasonble or not? If it is not reasonable, then you must convict.
Oh man...somebody's got to teach this to all the public. Twelve jurors in Tampa got it wrong....totally wrong. They thought it wqs "Beyond the shodow of a doubt".

It you wake up and the streets are wet you don't assume an aircraft just dropped water or over your neighborhood (possible, but not likely because that is not reasonable). you assumed it rained...that is reasonable.

The OJ jury and the anthony jury didn't have any logical thinkers seated. Both could not connect the dots and both said they had doubts so they wouldn't convict. Their doublt were NOT reasonable and they certainly should have convicted. There needs to be an extensive test given to jurors to see if they comprehend the term. Juries need abstract thinkers.

 

[marciec]

I hope the prosecution can spend equal amount of time lecturing all of the jury and anyone who will listen what the meaning of "Reasonble "Doubt' is. Most attorneys assume (incorrectly) that is it clear. The majority of cases lost are lost becuase some juror was not going to embarrass themselves and ask for an explanation and ask again if they didnt get it. Many, many people think if the have a doubt, then they must acquit.

A doubt doesn't mean that you can't vote guilty...not at all. People have doubts all the time. The point is...is it reasonble or not? If it is not reasonable, then you must convict.
Oh man...somebody's got to teach this to all the public. Twelve jurors in Tampa got it wrong....totally wrong. They thought it wqs "Beyond the shodow of a doubt".

It you wake up and the streets are wet you don't assume an aircraft just dropped water or over your neighborhood (possible, but not likely because that is not reasonable). you assumed it rained...that is reasonable.

The OJ jury and the anthony jury didn't have any logical thinkers seated. Both could not connect the dots and both said they had doubts so they wouldn't convict. Their doublt were NOT reasonable and they certainly should have convicted. There needs to be an extensive test given to jurors to see if they comprehend the term. Juries need abstract thinkers.

LOL - No no, not Tampa! They were from Pinellas County; St. Pete / Clearwater! I WISH that jury had been from Tampa; she wouldn't be thinking about bankruptcy right now, that's for sure..
People from Tampa were enraged at the verdict...heck, people from St. Pete/Clearwater were too!
That jury was 'the perfect storm' in many ways...I'm now against sequestration for the duration of a trial. Fine for deliberations, not an entire trial. oh well..

 

[deedee21]

Earlier in this thread it was discused that TA's sister is on a personal quest to look for evidence still missing and how it relates to elephants. I just wanted you, Katy, to pass this on to her.
If JA took I-17 to Flagstaff and then I-40 to Kingman, (Which is the only interstate she could have taken), she had to go through Williams, 30 miles west of Flagstaff. The Elephant Rocks Golf Course & Country Club lies just along the highway.

I wanted to bring bring this post forward so it can be viewed by thosed who missed it . Interesting. You never know.

 

[CarolinaMoon]

Good morning! I am always pleased to wake up and see that the spill on aisle 3 has already been mopped up!

Katycoolady, have a wonderful day today and prayers that Alfonse will be coming home soon!

 

[Liebchenmutti]

I hope the prosecution can spend equal amount of time lecturing all of the jury and anyone who will listen what the meaning of "Reasonble "Doubt' is. Most attorneys assume (incorrectly) that is it clear. The majority of cases lost are lost becuase some juror was not going to embarrass themselves and ask for an explanation and ask again if they didnt get it. Many, many people think if the have a doubt, then they must acquit.

A doubt doesn't mean that you can't vote guilty...not at all. People have doubts all the time. The point is...is it reasonble or not? If it is not reasonable, then you must convict.
Oh man...somebody's got to teach this to all the public. Twelve jurors in Tampa got it wrong....totally wrong. They thought it wqs "Beyond the shodow of a doubt".

It you wake up and the streets are wet you don't assume an aircraft just dropped water or over your neighborhood (possible, but not likely because that is not reasonable). you assumed it rained...that is reasonable.

The OJ jury and the anthony jury didn't have any logical thinkers seated. Both could not connect the dots and both said they had doubts so they wouldn't convict. Their doublt were NOT reasonable and they certainly should have convicted. There needs to be an extensive test given to jurors to see if they comprehend the term. Juries need abstract thinkers.

YES! The prosecution is not expected to produce a videotape of the crime in order for the jury to find she's guilty of the charges. I think you're right--jurors don't always understand the concept of the burden of proof. They're not lawyers--they need it all explained in plain English. If I was the prosecutor, I'd just assume that the jurors needed it all explained. (I don't mean to suggest that any juror is ignorant/simple/unsophisticated)

 

[Renee110]

Thank you Doester. The best part of it was (well the only good part) that it apparently DID have an impact. had I not shown up and "checked" this Judge, who knows what she would have done? This is why it is SO important families are front and center at hearings/trials. It becomes very easy to forget the victim, esp over time.

I will also mention I walked in (with my attorney) and the killer was sitting right there. I had no idea he would attend as he attended none of the main hearing. I saw him for the first time in almost 20 years that day. Ugh.

Wonder what Jodi Arias will look like after 20 years on death row.

BBM

Sometimes I think she has aged quite a bit since the murder, but then I look at earlier days of the trial, and I realize she is wasting away literally. She looked healthy at the beginning, and now she's gaunt, drawn and pale....probably on purpose to make the jury feel sorry for her. I do think that she will age rapidly and look old in 20 years.

 

[Brooke]

BBM

Sometimes I think she has aged quite a bit since the murder, but then I look at earlier days of the trial, and I realize she is wasting away literally. She looked healthy at the beginning, and now she's gaunt, drawn and pale....probably on purpose to make the jury feel sorry for her. I do think that she will age rapidly and look old in 20 years.

BBM
Agree with you! I don't have a link handy, but there is a video of her singing in the Prison Idol contest this past Christmas and IMO, the difference from then to now is quite noticeable.

 

[Steely Dan]

Thank you Doester. The best part of it was (well the only good part) that it apparently DID have an impact. had I not shown up and "checked" this Judge, who knows what she would have done? This is why it is SO important families are front and center at hearings/trials. It becomes very easy to forget the victim, esp over time.

I will also mention I walked in (with my attorney) and the killer was sitting right there. I had no idea he would attend as he attended none of the main hearing. I saw him for the first time in almost 20 years that day. Ugh.

Wonder what Jodi Arias will look like after 20 years on death row.

BBM

I had a 4 hour brunch with a friend on a sidewalk cafe where we (ok I) smuggled in cans of Sofia champagne to turn an ordinary OJ in to a sparkling mimosa. Girltalk for 4 hours...can't beat it.

That's why I love you. You oozes class!

 

[Steely Dan]

The trial starts at 12:30pm EST today.

 

[A_News_Junkie]

I hope the prosecution can spend equal amount of time lecturing all of the jury and anyone who will listen what the meaning of "Reasonble "Doubt' is. Most attorneys assume (incorrectly) that is it clear. The majority of cases lost are lost becuase some juror was not going to embarrass themselves and ask for an explanation and ask again if they didnt get it. Many, many people think if the have a doubt, then they must acquit.

A doubt doesn't mean that you can't vote guilty...not at all. People have doubts all the time. The point is...is it reasonble or not? If it is not reasonable, then you must convict.
Oh man...somebody's got to teach this to all the public. Twelve jurors in Tampa got it wrong....totally wrong. They thought it wqs "Beyond the shodow of a doubt".

It you wake up and the streets are wet you don't assume an aircraft just dropped water or over your neighborhood (possible, but not likely because that is not reasonable). you assumed it rained...that is reasonable.

The OJ jury and the anthony jury didn't have any logical thinkers seated. Both could not connect the dots and both said they had doubts so they wouldn't convict. Their doublt were NOT reasonable and they certainly should have convicted. There needs to be an extensive test given to jurors to see if they comprehend the term. Juries need abstract thinkers.

Whisperer - This is SOOOOOOOO TRUE. I had jury duty last summer and one of the cases I sat on (attempted murder) we had just this type of juror. Even sent the question to the judge to define 'reasonable' for them and the judge came back saying all definitions had been supplied and nothing further would be given. Took all of us to finally get this person to be REASONABLE and listen to logic, not the "beyond any doubt" they knew from TV.
:banghead:

 

[LambChop]

Whisperer - This is SOOOOOOOO TRUE. I had jury duty last summer and one of the cases I sat on (attempted murder) we had just this type of juror. Even sent the question to the judge to define 'reasonable' for them and the judge came back saying all definitions had been supplied and nothing further would be given. Took all of us to finally get this person to be REASONABLE and listen to logic, not the "beyond any doubt" they knew from TV.
:banghead:

I always think of it as all of the evidence presented by both sides leaves you with idea it is reasonable to conclude that the person committed this crime. When the evidence presented by the State makes it more reasonable to believe this person is guilty as charged. Then you have to decide to what degree.

 

[katiecoolady]

Good morning! :seeya:

I'm not going in to court today as I need to leave this afternoon for a little 2 night getaway so I just need to get a few things done before I head out. I'll watch on the feed though with the rest of yous.

I did wake up with some things on my mind about being a homicide survivor all these years and thought I would get them out of my head and on paper (screen).

25 years ago I had no idea what my life would be this far down the road. I couldn't imagine surviving it actually to be honest. Literally the very worst thing I could ever imagine befalling my life happened. The trials actually helped me cope as it gave me a place to focus my attention and a place to be very loudlyl distracted. Like Travis' family I was very active in our trials, got very close to our prosecutor and was as involved as I could be (I was also managing a full time job throughout the whole deal). I testified about 5 different times (they kept calling me back up).

In terms of siblings it was just my brother and me. We handled things completely differently. He didn't even attend the trials. He came out and went to one day I think of the sentencing hearing (to be fair he was living in Minnesota). He had his first serious psychotic break when the trials were over so I think he just knew he wouldn't be able to handle it. He still is sensitive like that.

In this trial there are SEVEN siblings. Each one will handle their grieving in their own unique way. Some will become more "active" in their lives to help themselves feel some kind of "purpose" out of the whole thing (like I do) and some will go on and try to forget it. All are valid ways to cope I think.

Often when people step out on the front lines (like Mark Klass for example) there is a lot of criticism that goes with that. Whether it's in a public way or in a more intimate way. People very close to Travis' siblings I guarantee you as they go along in their lives will tell them to "just get over it". I say this because that's pretty universal . People don't know how to process it or support someone ...it's not easy.

I'm actually kind of surprised that the outburst that happened on here last night didn't happen sooner. Those who were with me during the Scott Peterson trial saw WAY worse than that. There were whole forums dedicated to me and Jordy accusing us of being prostitutes, Mafia members, the most vile human beings on the face of the Earth because we were attending that trial. After we produced that photograph, it went off the charts.

After the trial someone hijacked my "katiecoolady" name and created a hate blog about me including, I hear (never saw it) a comic strip mocking my sister's murder. A lot of pain out there. Sociopaths will be drawn to a trial about a sociopath and they ARE walking among us, not just in a courtroom.

Being on the front lines also includes either being a naturally unaffected person (not me) or developing some teflon to it (that is me). Thankfully this forum doesn't invite much of that due to the snappy moderation system so it can't go on much or for long (thank you).

If any of Travis' siblings do choose to step out on the "front lines" after all this is over, I commend them and they will need our support as it's not always an easy road.

I've said before "murder is not contagious". People will scatter, some will move in close. In many ways, their grieving process will really begin once this trial/sentencing is over.

The ones who choose to fade back in to their lives also need the support of those around them for that choice. No one is obligated to do anything with a tragedy. If it helps you cope and give a sense of purpose, then it's valuable I think..for your own healing. But everyone has their own road.

Sorry for the lengthy PSA here...I just was thinking about the family as I woke up. Fyi I really don't have tons of direct interaction with them. It's a very quiet relationship. Many days the only interaction is a quiet smile and me silently handing them an envelope from a supporter that contains a card and $ that's been sent to me to pass on (and boy does that feel good). And when we do share, the majority of it goes unposted by me unless I think it can help them. Or I'm asked to pass it along.

Let's hope for a good court day today for the State....I think that's all I wanted to say.
Thanks for the love guys...it means more than you know.

 

[CourtsInSession]

I just read in our newspaper that they have set aside 4 weeks for the Aurora theatre shooters trial.

At this point, I feel Travis Alexander's trial is a total sham. The defense should be given xx amount of money to defend someone and work with it. I have no doubt if this were the case in AZ, that this trial would have been over with a loooooong time ago. As I stated previously, in our county a murder trial lasts a few weeks, period. I can see no purpose when a trial is based on lies why ALV was allowed to interview JA for approximately 44 hours and Dr. Samuels for 12 visits. When using a public defender, you get defended, not all the frills that JA seems to be provided with. Why in the world would a murderer in JA's position be entitled to a million dollar defense?

 

[Steely Dan]

Good morning! :seeya:

I'm not going in to court today as I need to leave this afternoon for a little 2 night getaway so I just need to get a few things done before I head out. I'll watch on the feed though with the rest of yous.

I did wake up with some things on my mind about being a homicide survivor all these years and thought I would get them out of my head and on paper (screen).

25 years ago I had no idea what my life would be this far down the road. I couldn't imagine surviving it actually to be honest. Literally the very worst thing I could ever imagine befalling my life happened. The trials actually helped me cope as it gave me a place to focus my attention and a place to be very loudlyl distracted. Like Travis' family I was very active in our trials, got very close to our prosecutor and was as involved as I could be (I was also managing a full time job throughout the whole deal). I testified about 5 different times (they kept calling me back up).

In terms of siblings it was just my brother and me. We handled things completely differently. He didn't even attend the trials. He came out and went to one day I think of the sentencing hearing (to be fair he was living in Minnesota). He had his first serious psychotic break when the trials were over so I think he just knew he wouldn't be able to handle it. He still is sensitive like that.

In this trial there are SEVEN siblings. Each one will handle their grieving in their own unique way. Some will become more "active" in their lives to help themselves feel some kind of "purpose" out of the whole thing (like I do) and some will go on and try to forget it. All are valid ways to cope I think.

Often when people step out on the front lines (like Mark Klass for example) there is a lot of criticism that goes with that. Whether it's in a public way or in a more intimate way. People very close to Travis' siblings I guarantee you as they go along in their lives will tell them to "just get over it". I say this because that's pretty universal . People don't know how to process it or support someone ...it's not easy.

I'm actually kind of surprised that the outburst that happened on here last night didn't happen sooner. Those who were with me during the Scott Peterson trial saw WAY worse than that. There were whole forums dedicated to me and Jordy accusing us of being prostitutes, Mafia members, the most vile human beings on the face of the Earth because we were attending that trial. After we produced that photograph, it went off the charts.

After the trial someone hijacked my "katiecoolady" name and created a hate blog about me including, I hear (never saw it) a comic strip mocking my sister's murder. A lot of pain out there. Sociopaths will be drawn to a trial about a sociopath and they ARE walking among us, not just in a courtroom.

Being on the front lines also includes either being a naturally unaffected person (not me) or developing some teflon to it (that is me). Thankfully this forum doesn't invite much of that due to the snappy moderation system so it can't go on much or for long (thank you).

If any of Travis' siblings do choose to step out on the "front lines" after all this is over, I commend them and they will need our support as it's not always an easy road.

I've said before "murder is not contagious". People will scatter, some will move in close. In many ways, their grieving process will really begin once this trial/sentencing is over.

The ones who choose to fade back in to their lives also need the support of those around them for that choice. No one is obligated to do anything with a tragedy. If it helps you cope and give a sense of purpose, then it's valuable I think..for your own healing. But everyone has their own road.

Sorry for the lengthy PSA here...I just was thinking about the family as I woke up. Fyi I really don't have tons of direct interaction with them. It's a very quiet relationship. Many days the only interaction is a quiet smile and me silently handing them an envelope from a supporter that contains a card and $ that's been sent to me to pass on (and boy does that feel good). And when we do share, the majority of it goes unposted by me unless I think it can help them. Or I'm asked to pass it along.

Let's hope for a good court day today for the State....I think that's all I wanted to say.
Thanks for the love guys...it means more than you know.

You're a great person. Don't worry about the dimwits. It's very easy to sit behind a computer screen and say things you'd never say to someone's face.

Me, and all of my emus think you're a coollady.

 

[Smelly Squirrel]

I wanted to bring bring this post forward so it can be viewed by thosed who missed it . Interesting. You never know.

What's the significance of elephants in that?

 

[LambChop]

What's the significance of elephants in that?

Not sure but I try to explain. It seems elephants are special to some of Travis' family members. One of our posters wanted to do something nice for the family and when going into a shop they were drawn to the back where all of these items with elephant prints were on sale so she purchased them. Turns out the family feels connected to Travis through the elephants. Not uncommon for people to feel this way when someone close dies. Native Americans feel a hawk is significant. Others feel a closeness when they see a certain type of butterfly. Family members who lost members in 911 have experienced the same patterns over and over with an item that shows up unexpected to remind them of a loved on. It's just one of those things that make some of us say, "wow". That's it. Probably more but unlike the elephant, I can't remember. jmo

 

[Steely Dan]

Not sure but I try to explain. It seems elephants are special to some of Travis' family members. One of our posters wanted to do something nice for the family and when going into a shop they were drawn to the back where all of these items with elephant prints were on sale so she purchased them. Turns out the family feels connected to Travis through the elephants. Not uncommon for people to feel this way when someone close dies. Native Americans feel a hawk is significant. Others feel a closeness when they see a certain type of butterfly. Family members who lost members in 911 have experienced the same patterns over and over with an item that shows up unexpected to remind them of a loved on. It's just one of those things that make some of us say, "wow". That's it. Probably more but unlike the elephant, I can't remember. jmo

When I pass you'll all start seeing emus in your houses. :giggle:

 

[Smelly Squirrel]

Not sure but I try to explain. It seems elephants are special to some of Travis' family members. One of our posters wanted to do something nice for the family and when going into a shop they were drawn to the back where all of these items with elephant prints were on sale so she purchased them. Turns out the family feels connected to Travis through the elephants. Not uncommon for people to feel this way when someone close dies. Native Americans feel a hawk is significant. Others feel a closeness when they see a certain type of butterfly. Family members who lost members in 911 have experienced the same patterns over and over with an item that shows up unexpected to remind them of a loved on. It's just one of those things that make some of us say, "wow". That's it. Probably more but unlike the elephant, I can't remember. jmo

Ah, iirc Travis had a painting of an elephant above his bed.

 

[Smelly Squirrel]

Yeah, here it is. http://i2.cdn.turner.com/dr/hln/www...13/01/04/bedroom_evidence_photo_5_-_qp1_0.jpg

 

[A_News_Junkie]

HLN was going off Mike Kiefer's article that was laced with inaccuracies. He's burnt out and/or getting lazy.

That was just one inaccuracy. I've never seen JM leave the courthouse thru the front door. It happened that ONE time caught on tape because he was asked out there by a journalist for some kind of photo op. Thus lots of "fans' were out there also wanting photos. I wasn't there but I have not once seen that and you know I'm in court most days.

On the other hand I've walked out with the defense team, out the front door, more than once. In fact one day, when nancy grace was there and there were lots of fans on the sidewalk, they walked right past the trucks with Nurmi mugging for the cameras. People were holding up their cell phones and he kept looking over and smiling while walking past with Mitigation Specialist Maria Dela Rosa. She's also walked right past me, by herself, while I was sitting outside the trucks on the sidewalk waiting for someone. NEVER have I seen them with "security".

Kiefer is talking out of his A$$.

Also he said that a phone went off in the courtroom was a "donkey braying" and it was a rooster cockadoodle. He also said the woman who vomited did so loudly so everyone could hear. I was sitting CLOSER to that incident than him and didn't hear anything. katie was sitting right in front of her and heard nothing.

So, unfortunately his inaccurate weirdly biased toward jodi article got picked up by USA Today but much of it is false.

Will someone PLEASE put me to bed? Somebody stop me!!! lease:

Here is a little irony - more candid shots of the defense outside the courtroom than prosecution on HLN CNN website.
OH AND DARN ---------------> NO GUARDS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :floorlaugh::floorlaugh::floorlaugh:

Credit: CNN Gallery (sorry, closed link already)