Retrial for Sentencing of Jodi Arias - 1/20 Sizzle Break

[Madeleine74]

Me too. Honestly worried here that this sort of thing that happened today is enough to sway 1 of the jurors to go against the DP.

See, this is why a lot of us have been so adamant about this judge. She is going way too far again and today is right on par with sectret witnesses and throwing away the constitution again.

You just can't do this!! You cannot let your personal fear of appeals tilt your decisions to where you let the DT break courtroom rules. Because the end result is the victim loses and the trial's outcome is not a fair and just trial.

Also and maybe even more importantly is this is the sort of thing where the DT can bring this up on appeal down the road and claim the judge allowed affidativs to be erroneously brought into the trial.

I am convinced the DT has been trying to break the rules and if they somehow are allowed to, then turn around and use their own breaking of the rules in a future appeal.

But it's the defense team who are bringing these affidavits into the trial. Why would they appeal on the very thing they did and got away with doing?

 

[daisydomino]

Deanna Reid already testified that TA was not abusive to her.

http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/video/jodi-arias-trial-victims-deanna-reid-testifies-abusive-19029298

 

[5bigfish5]

That could happen, sure. Even when a case is presented well and moves along at a good pace with no major weird games being played and the phase ends with few or no distractions, a jury could still come back with a decision not to give a defendant the DP. Or a jury could hang with no unanimous decision, that too is a possibility.

Worst case scenario: she gets LWOP in prison.

Not good enough.

 

[KPinMN]

Here's a list of things I learned in trial by tweet today (some funny, some not so funny):

*what it means when someone asks you carpet or linoleum

*TA likes to talk to and flirt with pretty women

*TA was not suffering from ED (erectile dysfunction)

*It's normal for Mormons to gift interested people The Book of Mormon, but when TA does it it's manipulative

*TA was a "giver" in the oral arena

*Suicide humor is manipulation (guess I'm in trouble given how often I put my finger gun to my head reading trial by tweet)

*If the DT claimed their bowel movement from this morning was mitigating evidence it would be admitted and would not be subject to cross examination. Further it's identity would be held secret for fear of threats to "flush" it

Hopefully my learning tomorrow is more along the lines of how JM decimates DT witnesses on cross.

 

[daisydomino]

That could happen, sure. Even when a case is presented well and moves along at a good pace with no major weird games being played and the phase ends with few or no distractions, a jury could still come back with a decision not to give a defendant the DP. Or a jury could hang with no unanimous decision, that too is a possibility.

Worst case scenario: she gets LWOP in prison.

BBM Thank you for reminding us of this again.

 

[Madeleine74]

Not good enough.

That's the system in this country and specifically the one the State of AZ chose. While not perfect by a long shot, it's considered the best system and no one has come up with a better one in the hundreds of years since this country was formed.

 

[daisydomino]

ElleElle
Alternate Reality


If this occurred in November, she may have been home for Thanksgiving?
==========================================================================================


I may be wrong about this, but I don't think that missionaries typicallly return home for holidays. My friends were always gone the entire duration of their mission. No returning home unless some kind of emergency.

It did not happen.

 

[Hatfield]

But it's the defense team who are bringing these affidavits into the trial. Why would they appeal on the very thing they did and got away with doing?

I am convinced the DT has been purposely trying to make JSS slip up and break a serious rule and if they somehow are allowed to do something they really should not have been allowed to do, then they will turn around and use their own breaking of the rules in a future appeal.

Its just been a theory I have had for quite some time this phase. I honestly think they are pushing the limits on purpose to try to make JSS slip up on something bad. Something that could allow them a successful appeal later.

 

[wenwe4]

I am ok with all of this being brought in this way because Jodi will never be able to say she wasn't allowed to present this crap for her mitigation. Juan will tear this stuff up. Geffner is only a pawn in their scheme and it will backfire on them (IMO).

There is not a single person that is willing to stand up and say Jodi's life is worth sparing. I think this speaks volumes.

Can't Juan just subpoena witnesses to testify (ie: Deanna)?

 

[Meemaw12]

Missionaries do not return home, they are allowed to call home on Mother's Day and Christmas and that's it.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[LambChop]

:seeya: Thank You, WAT -- I mean LambChop !

Just saw WAT's word "Sizzle" on the Title of this Thread and couldn't resist !

:happydance:

Every time he posts "sizzle" I think of a nice big juicy burger w/chezzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.

 

[daisydomino]

I am ok with all of this being brought in this way because Jodi will never be able to say she wasn't allowed to present this crap for her mitigation. Juan will tear this stuff up. Geffner is only a pawn in their scheme and it will backfire on them (IMO).

There is not a single person that is willing to stand up and say Jodi's life is worth sparing. I think this speaks volumes.

Can't Juan just subpoena witnesses to testify (ie: Deanna)?

He can play her videotaped testimony from the guilt phase.

 

[Reagan]

I haven't been able to catch up yet because I just got off work but these affidavits are clearly lies. How can defense attorneys legally submit these knowing damn well they're lies?

AZLawyer? Sorry if this has already been answered.

 

[wenwe4]

Every time he posts "sizzle" I think of a nice big juicy burger w/chezzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.

Ha! I think of bacon!

 

[MeeBee]

This was asked by ElleElle

"If this occurred in November, she may have been home for Thanksgiving?"

As I said before, Mormons do not return before the end of their mission, not even for holidays. They are even strongly encouraged to stay on the mission even if a family member dies because once you return the mission is over. Deanna would not have been home for Thanksgiving.

 

[TexMex]

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=3KSpVrL4H7Q

Deanna

 

[Madeleine74]

I am convinced the DT has been purposely trying to make JSS slip up and break a serious rule and if they somehow are allowed to do something they really should not have been allowed to do, then they will turn around and use their own breaking of the rules in a future appeal.

Its just been a theory I have had for quite some time this phase. I honestly think they are pushing the limits on purpose to try to make JSS slip up on something bad. Something that could allow them a successful appeal later.

Well that would be an interesting maneuver and one that would elicit peals of laughter from a CoA. "You object to the judge allowing you to do what you did because you think she shouldn't have allowed that to come in, even though you argued for it to come in and won?" "And the state argued against it but lost and you were allowed to enter your evidence..." "And that hurt your client how exactly?" :floorlaugh:

nahhh just don't see that.

 

[Endora27]

I haven't been able to catch up yet because I just got off work but these affidavits are clearly lies. How can defense attorneys legally submit these knowing damn well they're lies?

AZLawyer? Sorry if this has already been answered.

I asked the same thing on the other thread. Looking forward to AZLawyer's response.

 

[Reagan]

I asked the same thing on the other thread. Looking forward to AZLawyer's response.

I mean, defense attorneys can't ethically (a word I wouldn't equate with Wilmot or Nurmi) or legally put someone on the stand if they know them to be lying, so how is this different? It's obviously unethical, but how is it legal?

 

[Amster]

Do people really think Sherry is going to allow JM to rebut this garbage presented by JA? He's not even allowed to cross exam witnesses! Why in the name of all that is holy would anyone have faith that this jury will be shown the truth? Sherry is incompetent. IMO
Yes, I know I'll now be lectured about how brilliant she is and fair and delightful....:sick: