seattlechiquita
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2011
- Messages
- 5,791
- Reaction score
- 260
I'd bet 10$ that 11 juror's are trying to convince 1 stand-off.
I'm thinking there is more than 1 juror who is in disagreement with the rest.
I'd bet 10$ that 11 juror's are trying to convince 1 stand-off.
Great shot of her cloven hooves. :floorlaugh:
I saw my doctor yesterday and he said, "you don't drink, right?" I said, "No. Well, wait I can have an occasional drink, right? Cause I have this brother-in-law visiting soon . . ." He said that was okay. So I didn't tell him about this trial.
Lawdy. You ladies are entirely out of control.
It's true! I do have a brother-in-law visiting! I'll see him on June 1st. Of course, that doesn't account for my liquor bill since January 2nd, I admit.
OK...I am confused.
I get there was the tweet put out by the courthouse that there was a question about "IF we aren't unanimous, what do we do?" (paraphrased)
But that is NOT what JSS said. At all. She said (not paraphrased) "I got your note that you were NOT able to come to a unanimous decision..."
So I get that it would be really nice to come to the possibility that they were just clarifying jury instructions...that's not what JSS said.
What am I missing???
I always answer that I only drink socially. And, since I'm talking to all of you, that's social, right??
Jury: We might be hung.
Later on today: Hey Jodi! We lied. You can relate, right? LMAO
Lol, this is me:
Doctor: Do you drink?
Me: No, I used to...Well, occasionally, on holidays....Sometimes on weekends.....I might buy a bottle of wine after a long day....Yes, I'm a total booze hound.
Only when Juan demands "Yes or No!"
Don't have all the links and can't get them right now because I am ellipticallling (word or not?!), BUT I have a theory about the jury's ? This AM:
If you watch the judge reading jury instructions on YouTube croakerqueen day 3 part 2 starting at 14 min (final jury instructions), she reads the paragraph quoted earlier in this thread about letting the judge know if they are not unanimous.
Then watch when the judge gives the final, FINAL jury instructions about the verdict form on YouTube croakerqueen day 3 part 4 (rebuttal and charge to the jury) starting at 10:44- there she describes three boxes for the jury to choose from to check for their verdict (death, life, or "no unanimous agreement").
iMO the jury was going through these instructions and realized that the first part said to tell the judge if they were not unanimous but the second part said to mark the box on the verdict form if they ended up not unanimous. They wanted clarification.
Also, someone earlier posted that they asked "at this stage" in the note to the judge - I think they may have meant "at this phase" - ie during the PENALTY phase ("stage") do they let the judge know if they are not unanimous as they would have done during the GUILT or AGGRAVATION phase ( verdict forms on those did not have a box for "no unanimous agreement" IIRC) or do they check the daggum box on the verdict form?
I think it is a very detail oriented jury and they stumbled upon the conflicting instructions about what to do IF they ever ended up in a position of not being unanimous. I don't blame them for asking for clarification.
Sorry if this is crazy with typos - hard to elliptical and type on iPad "contemporaneously".
Only when Juan demands "Yes or No!"
Here's how I'm comforting myself:
1). The jury is still deliberating hours after that note, so they are not giving up
2). IF the jury gives her life, the judge will give her LWOP, no way she'll ever get out.
3.). Cocoa Krispies, bacon, and toast with grape jelly for dinner
4). I have total faith in the jury. Even if they give her life, I think she will have a real hard time in prison given her arrogance. I personally think she'll get cut down to size pretty quickly. Her arrogance and big mouth will get her in trouble. Unfortunately, there will be weaker prisoners that she will torture too.
If the jury gives her life, I'm going to be very sad for the Alexanders, but I will still respect their decision.
Still hoping for DP....
IMO, that is because of who surrounds her.
It reminds me of celebs/sports heroes who are surrounded by "yes men". Yes, you are the greatest. Yes, we will allow you to (do drugs, drive drunk, cheat on your spouse) and not call you out on your behavior. Yes, we think you are the greatest to ever live... Surrounded by total enablers and ego strokers.
Then when the celeb/sports hero happens to get a consequence thru the press or legal system they are stunned!
"What? Everyone I ever associate with adore me and allow me to do these things? How could you be any different?"
Similar with JA:
surrounded by other inmates, family, "friends" etc who tell her they believe all her lies, she's wonderful, Travis deserved what he got, she is the victim...
When someone who isn't an enabler or ego stroker says
"Do you know you are the most hated woman in the US?"
Her reply is"
"What? I am only surrounded by those who love me. I get letters of adoration all the time? How could anyone hate me?"
Enablers hurt far more than they help because they allow the person to live in LaLa Land and escape the realization of the consequences of their action.
Absolutely! So, how ya been?