Penalty Phase - Verdict Watch #2

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
No. We would have to have a mini trial as the evidence has to be explained to them. This has got to be brutal for the Alexanders.
I feel that a lot of the tears from the Alexanders was from the shock that this may not be over very soon. Of course, they want the death penalty but the thought of another trial and jury must have really shook them.
 
:twocents::twocents:

If a juror is holding out because he/she all of a sudden is opposed to the death penalty, then he/she was not honest during the jury selection process, and therefore needs to be RELEASED and REPLACED with one of the 3 alternates. Problem solved. :moo:
 
Sigh...Just saw that the jury cannot come to a unanimous decision. If they are hung, what happens?

:notgood:

If they are hung, then a new jury is picked for THIS phase only and they deliberate again. If THAT jury hangs, then the DP is taken off the table and the judge decides if jodi gets LWP or LWOP.
 
no.
the jury asked the judge what happens if they cannot come to a unanimous decision.
that is all that happened.

I did not hear that. I heard from the judge, We are not able to reach a unanimous decision. I hope you are right, but ....
 
no.
the jury asked the judge what happens if they cannot come to a unanimous decision.
that is all that happened.

IMO, JSS didn't answer the question. She just told them to keep deliberating. Why can't she just tell them what would happen? I do not understand this judge or why so much information was kept from this jury. How can we expect anyone to be fair when they don't know everything?
 
I am trying to be fair with Judge SS, but I don't care what's what - there is no way she should have lifted that ban until this trial was over. And now if the jury comes back with life I will be very angry. Sorry I am a fair person but the brutality of what CMJA did to Travis is something his family will never get over. Their only hope is if she was gone. Now she will have a celebrity status and give interviews and so forth. Poor them, I feel so bad for the ALexander family. I wish them strength.[/QUOTE
I absolutely agree. She should NEVER have allowed those interviews to have happened until the verdict was in. It was just madness. To allow someone who had committed such a terrible, terrible crime to sit and hold court with the media of the most powerful nation on earth ... picking and choosing who she spoke to, demanding they supply her with cosmetics, insisting they didn't show her prison garb and so on and then having the nerve to call one of them a 'hater' simply because he wasn't pandering to her every whim.

All this BEFORE a decision has even been made as to her sentence. She is a convicted murderer not a Hollywood movie star .. and yet it seems she can hold court like the Queen of England as and when, she chooses.

I don't quite know what has gone wrong with the justice system - but it appears something has. It is all about the murderer, the accused and their rights and privileges ... and there seems to be almost no rights or protection for the victims.
 
Sorry, I'm from Canada and following this online. So the jury was hung on the death penalty so she gets life in prison? This doesn't mean a mistrial right? In Canada, I think it qualifies as a mistrial so thats why I'm confused. Thanks!

From what I know the Judge will likely send them back to deliberate a few more times. If they still cant reach a verdict they are hung. A new Jury can be brought in. Or the State can choose to take the Death Penalty off the table.
 
Color me surprised and rather shocked. I don't mean this lightly, but maybe they need to see the autopsy photos again? Murdered three times over? I guess I'm not understanding the hold out.
 
I said before that the Murder One conviction was what really mattered. Anything else (dp) was just icing on the cake.

I take it back. I'm now begging for the dp like I was begging for Murder One.

try not to be disappointed. this may be a big split----it may not be just one or two jurors. i'm not going to second guess them. in fact, if i was voting for the DP, at this point, i'd go with life, just to get it over with. i'd want MY jury to be the one who decides this.

JM needs to concede to LWOP and be done with this. all i want is for her to go away, stay away and shut the hell up. forever. she's going to be a number and nothing more very soon because those girls at perryville don't give a chit about the 'jodi show.'
 
Off-topic, but I just found out there was an alleged terrorist attack here in London today. Gonna have to go off verdict watch for a while to follow the news. I hope justice is done. :(
 
According to court tweet, It was not that the jury was completely deadlocked. The question was "What happens IF they can not come to a unanimous decision. "
So if that was their question and not a firm stance.. Don't lose hope...

Come on Jurors!! Come on!

OK WAIT......THIS CHANGES EVERYTHING!!!

HUGE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN:

"What happens IF we cannot come to a unanimous decision..." (question)

"We can't come to a unanimous decision" (statement)

WHICH IS IT???!!! :banghead:
 
The jury sent note saying they are unable to reach a unanimous verdict. The judge sent them back with what we call in the US the dynamite charge...and instructions that they may ask for clarification if they have a question, they may ask to see evidence or have testimony read back, etc. The judge and both sides would be available to help them. To try to go back and get it decided.

Everyone remaining on standby in the courtroom. NG said that approximately seventy percent of the time, when a judge gives a jury this dynamite charge, they do reach a verdict. Let's pray.

Chris Hughes ‏
"Calling all friends of #TravisAlexander. Please pray that A jury will be unanimous & get the sentencing right for #JodiArias."

BBM

Thank you for the optimism!
 
Bumping

Just a reminder of what the Andriano jury went through

"They gathered in the jury room Dec. 16 to consider whether there were reasons for sparing Andriano's life.

It took four days.

The sometimes-heated deliberations dramatically changed the case's outcome, with a split jury gradually shifting toward the death verdict.

When the deliberations began, the nine women and three men took a vote. Only three supported a death sentence, with four favoring a life sentence and the others undecided, said juror Mary Fobes, 74, of Mesa.

Catalano said he wasn't sure.

"I still hadn't made up my mind. I was giving her the benefit of the doubt," he said.

After one day, the jury went home for a three-day weekend that some called full of soul searching.

When they reconvened, Catalano gave a pivotal speech outlining his reasons for supporting a death sentence, and the vote swung to 11-1 in favor of execution, Fobes said.

"It was very passionate on why he thought she deserved the death penalty," Fobes said. "The more I thought about it, how could she be so brutal? She must have totally flipped her wig. I don't know how anyone could do that."

But the jury was on the verge of a deadlock, with one holdout, a senior citizen from Gilbert, saying he was adamantly against the death penalty.

On the third day of deliberations, jurors took turns discussing each of 23 reasons listed by the defense for sparing Andriano's life, the mitigating factors, weighing whether they were sufficient cause for leniency.

They included that Andriano was a good mother to her children and had signed up at age 19 for missionary work when in Mexicali, Mexico, for the 91st Psalm Church, now the Harvest Family Church in Casa Grande.

Catalano said he gave all the mitigating factors some weight, but in the end, they were not enough.

"Does a good mother brutally murder her husband?" he said.

Percy said she also considered the arguments against execution, but on balance, "we could not find mitigating factors that overwhelmed the cruelty. To me, to everybody there, the knife wound was the crowning blow. She had three chances to back off."

While jurors were discussing whether to execute Andriano, they considered that they would have no control over whether the trial judge, Brian Ishikawa, would give her life in prison with or without parole, she said.

Jurors did not want to see a 25 years to life sentence.

"We also knew with the death penalty that she has an automatic appeal," Percy said.

Different parts of the case resonated with jurors. Some said they were moved by Andriano's plea for life during the mitigation phase on Dec. 16, just before the final deliberations, while others considered it an Academy Award acting job. "

http://www.nlada.org/DMS/Documents/1106668066.47/0124deathjurors24.html

Praying the jury find a way to talk this through. It's been a long long trial for them.
 
I hate to say this, but, looking at Jodi's demeanor, especially with that guard and her DT this morning - and all through the trial, really - coupled with the strange goings on with this trial, it almost seems as if Jodi "knew" she would not get the death penalty, no matter what happened.

For some reason, the phrase "bread and circuses" comes to mind. :facepalm:
 
It sounds like, no matter what, the jury wants to make sure she can never get out. Since it sounds like with life there is always a possibility, they will vote death.

I think they're all worried about whether or not if they give her life she can be free in a few yrs. That's the trouble here, it's up to the judge once they give her life. The judge can do anything she sees fit at sentencing.
This also means that we and the family will always have to listen to her from behind bars as she rules the prison for the next half century.
She will always gloat that the jury caved. + She will likely remain in the cushy jail for ever how much longer, doing interviews.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
78
Guests online
183
Total visitors
261

Forum statistics

Threads
609,408
Messages
18,253,670
Members
234,649
Latest member
sharag
Back
Top