Retrial for Sentencing of Jodi Arias - 1/29 thru 2/2 - Break

[Hez]

It is so frustrating. Just because he was mormon doesnt meant he should be held to a higher level of scrutiny than the next murder victim. It appears BECAUSE of his religion he is being MARTYRED for it in the court room for it.

The defense has tried to portray Travis as this horrible, religious hypocrite from day 1 because they have absolutely NOTHING else to work with, thanks to their seriously disturbed client. I'm glad the jury has these next few days to let the truth sink in, as it was presented to them by real, living, breathing witnesses. :happydance:

 

[NashBridges2]

Since Abe took the stand, I am not one bit worried about the juror questions.

As someone posted above, since this week, I think jurors on the fence have now chosen DP as the best sentence.

JMO

I agree. They've learned a lot of real info in one day from Juans 3 witnesses. In 1 day. Real people. Who knew Travis. Not experts who are just giving their paid opinions. Not opinions from Jodi. Not opinions from scared witnesses written on paper. Real, live human people who actually know Travis and can speak for themselves to clear up the BS the defense tried to sell. I don't think it gets any better. The only way she's not getting death is if there is an anti-death on the jury and then, there's nothing else that could have been done anyways.

A win for me in this case isn't necessarily a DP sentence. A win for me, is having his name cleared. And Juan made sure that happened this week. I'm good now.

 

[Hez]

Since Abe took the stand, I am not one bit worried about the juror questions.

As someone posted above, since this week, I think jurors on the fence have now chosen DP as the best sentence.

JMO

I'm not worried about the questions either. The fact that they didn't ask one question about Witness #1 and his spurious allegations about Travis, tells me that they have completely discounted his affadavit. :happydance:

 

[Paintr]

I agree. They've learned a lot of real info in one day from Juans 3 witnesses. In 1 day. Real people. Who knew Travis. Not experts who are just giving their paid opinions. Not opinions from Jodi. Not opinions from scared witnesses written on paper. Real, live human people who actually know Travis and can speak for themselves to clear up the BS the defense tried to sell. I don't think it gets any better. The only way she's not getting death is if there is an anti-death on the jury and then, there's nothing else that could have been done anyways.

A win for me in this case isn't necessarily a DP sentence. A win for me, is having his name cleared. And Juan made sure that happened this week. I'm good now.

My thanks button is still not well. So :goodpost:

 

[krkrjx]

The questions to DR also bothered me because they had nothing to do with the lying statement giving by that MM creep. they were about the religious aspects of her faith and sex questions. So I believe someone on that jury is a stealth juror and is trying to get information to use at deliberation. One of the former jurors on the first trial said one of them submitted a lot of questions and a lot of them didn't submit any. They cant talk to each other so these bad questions could be coming from only one juror. The former juror said you can submit as many as you want, no limit per juror.

In every trial there is the possibility of stealth jurors. There is not a whole lot that can be done about that because some people are really good at sneaking in under the radar. However, I really was not too concerned with questions asked of DR by jurors. Remember, JW took DR all the way down a path while she tried to steer clear having DR speak of anything claimed in MM's affidavit. So juror questions were more likely to be about the subject of cross. Also, it could be that the jurors totally understood everything DR said about the incident MM claimed he saw, and they believed DR that it never happened and did not have any questions about it.

I did not see any "bad questions" from jurors. Some can have me wondering about where it is coming from but I always try to consider that it is possible they might ask if something happens a certain way in order to clarify that it in fact does not happen that way or does not happen at all.

As for stealth jurors...they probably would try to ask questions in a way that would allow them to remain stealth for the duration. Maybe. I would probably try not to tip my hand if I were stealth.

 

[ShadyLady]

... Be careful what you wish for! She'll have one more chance in front of the jury; what you describe might be her only option by the time Juan's through with his rebuttal.

I really doubt anyone would believe her....and she will never eat crow. She might throw the defense under a bus.....but, she is incapable of showing any real remorse.

 

[bsk]

I am not sure I understand your post bsk. Are you saying Travis dragged the LDS through the mud and made the Bishop testify about child *advertiser censored*? Travis was murdered and the child *advertiser censored* was in Jodi and Marc's lies. It never happened so how can Travis be responsible, did I misunderstand you, sorry if I did.:facepalm:

I agree. Someone had wondered about a Mormon juror possibly feeling negative about Travis's transgressions whatever they might have been. But it seems clear to me that the defense has gone out of its way to try to be negative about the LDS. Introducing all these vile lies of LDS-hating MM was the final straw in that regard for me. You see a real flavor of that at the pro-Arias site as well.

Sorry if I wasn't clear that I was blaming the defense for being the ones slinging all the mud just out of spite and hate.

 

[ElleElle]

Is there something you want to tell us????

My right orbital bone broke. It's been repaired but that eye appears a little higher than the other because of scar tissue.

 

[samspace070]

http://www.courtchatter.com/2015/01/jodi-arias-letter-analysis-with-former.html?spref=tw

And interesting listen re: JA horrible letter.

I have never seen or heard about this letter before. I just finished reading it. Thank you shadowboy for posting it. This woman is unbelievable. Did the jury see this? I can't imagine <modsnip> would allow it in. Or for that matter the judge. She keeps all the damaging stuff out. The monster wrote this letter in 2009 when she was still saying the Ni's did the killing. I wonder what Ryan thought of that letter or did he even get it. I can't see the jail letting it be mailed to Ryan because it is an attempt to influence a witness in a criminal trial. I bet the jail gave the letter to the prosecution. Since Ryan was a prosecution witness. Too bad she didn't give it to her lawyer to mail. But then they would have been committing a crime to mail it also but this DT would do anything. Does anyone know how the letter came to be in public domain?:thinking:

 

[fillymj]

Ok. Here is my completely random thought for the day. I hope it doesn't sound too out there like some of the ideas posted on the JA support page.

We had Neumeister say that he, "Tony", and Computer Guy #3 looked at Travis' hard drive and founds tons of *advertiser censored*. Neumeister refused to name Computer Guy #3 in court and would only write his name down on a piece of paper to hand to Juan. If I recall correctly, we figured out that Sue D. Nihm was neither Tony nor Computer Guy #3.

We know that Secret Witness #1 (coughMarcMcGeecough) worked in computers.

Does anyone think that perhaps Computer Guy #3 is really Marc McGee? :escape:

WOW Never thought of that. Great thinking. :detective:

 

[AZlawyer]

Ok. Here is my completely random thought for the day. I hope it doesn't sound too out there like some of the ideas posted on the JA support page.

We had Neumeister say that he, "Tony", and Computer Guy #3 looked at Travis' hard drive and founds tons of *advertiser censored*. Neumeister refused to name Computer Guy #3 in court and would only write his name down on a piece of paper to hand to Juan. If I recall correctly, we figured out that Sue D. Nihm was neither Tony nor Computer Guy #3.

We know that Secret Witness #1 (coughMarcMcGeecough) worked in computers.

Does anyone think that perhaps Computer Guy #3 is really Marc McGee? :escape:

I think Juan's brief made it very obvious that Sue D. Nimh was Computer Guy #3.

The physical description of Sue D. Nimh was also not at all similar to that of Marc McWitness #1.

And Juan would have cross-examined the heck out of Sue D. Nimh if he had been Marc McWitness #1 as well lol.

 

[tlckgram]

http://www.courtchatter.com/2015/01/jodi-arias-letter-analysis-with-former.html?spref=tw

And interesting listen re: JA horrible letter.

Ok, fascinating take on the letter. Much of this has already been figured out on WS. Sorry all, but I have an issue with this guy dragging the Ramseys into his evaluation. I believe they were cleared, the woman is dead and unless he has something new to offer, they shouldn't be accused. JMO.

 

[MeeBee]

https://m.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=777377245671753

Just saw this on state vs JA page. It appears her supporters are trying to dig up info on Deanna Reid.

 

[rose222]

The only question that seriously worried me was from the last trial. Remember the bear versus tiger one? :scared: Oh, and also the one about DV victims snapping and killing their abusers. And the jury still came back with a murder 1 verdict.

This is a retrial of the penalty phase so this jury is going to be under tremendous pressure to reach a unanimous verdict. And there is no way that 12 jurors will vote for life.

 

[atthelake]

Thing is, the massive destruction she thinks she's causing is another of her grandiose delusions. Her lies don't have the power to change anything, other than the votes of jurors who might otherwise have voted for LWOP.

If she had expressed insincere remorse and offered her hair forever, she'd at least have kept her Big Lie uncovered. Besides most likely earning the DP, her twisted campaign to humiliate everyone she hates has only served to strip away her foundational lie that Travis ever thought her worthy. He didn't. Their relationship only existed in her own twisted mind.

She murdered him to keep him from telling the truth about her. Now she's ensured that everyone who is still paying attention knows that truth.

Yes, she's put those who loved Travis through hell. All of them, though, from the very beginning , have been clear that the DP is the justice they seek, and that they were willing to endure the evil they all knew her to be capable of if that's what it took.

In every sense of the word, JA has lost. She just hasn't realized it yet.

And for this trial, with Juans rebuttals just now especially, it is showing she has NO REMORSE ... a 180 from it indeed. Much more so that the first trial where guilt was on the line.

:thinking: does the jury see so clearly as we do now?

 

[Dmacky]

It looks like to me that there are more than one Mormon on the jury, since all questions but one are questions about TR. I might have missed some of the questions, or maybe they're are in there twice. :blush:

Jen's Trial Diaries &#8207;@TrialDiariesJ 2m2 minutes agoPhoenix, AZ
Did Travis tell you he was assaulted as a child Deanna- No

Did you tell Bishop about all the sexual contacts? yes
How often did you tell him-
Deanna- I told him once and continued to go talk throughout the year

*******************************************
What is the process members go through when joining a new church? Do they know if he new comers are temple worthy?
Deanna- New comers would meet with the Bishop and discuss temple recommends
Deanna Reid says member would go to new bishop and talk about whether they are temple worthy or have a temple rec
*******************************************
Juror asks if sexual activity stopped after she confessed, answer: yes.

 

[LinTX]

I did not get a chance to post today. So, I am going to leave you with my opinion regarding the tweets that came from JAs Twitter today regarding Deanna lying and not being credible and the Bishop. I won't repeat them I am sure most of you saw them. Cha Cha Cha or whoever tweets for her, and it seems to be Cha Cha Cha, has to keep the minions stoked. Heaven forbid they get a clue. JA and Cha Cha Cha do not want the minions to even remotely think that JA could not be guilty. They would start dropping off like flies, if they were smart. So, Cha Cha Cha acts like the cheer leader, who says JA is winning. Those minions are important. They are there to do the dirty work, like walk up and try to talk to jurors or maybe even steel a computer, get messages out for the killer, sneak out her drawing. What would JA do if they began to think for themselves? Cha Cha Cha would be left with the bulk of the dirty work.

I've thought for awhile that a lot of the misinformation spread on her twitter acct and from support forum leaders is aimed at keeping the ranks ignorant and donating - so many of them have no clue about the actual case/trial details, testimony, etc. Originally maybe it was mostly about donations, but now the different groups seem to have become a source for the DT's actual 'evidence'. MM was found posting in some of those forums and IMO was 'recruited' by one of her supporters to testilie. They have admitted being involved in baiting Det.Flores wife, which showed up in that motion, and I wouldn't be surprised to find out that SueDNihm was supplied to BN as well. Some of the affidavits that didn't make it into court are possibly from the 'inside' group people. MDLR 'friends' and communicates w/them, along with Aunt Sue. A couple of them have bragged about something big coming in the past, and I do think they had some advance knowledge about what the DT was doing. I suspect we'd be horrified at what goes on behind the scenes within her supporter groups and what has been dreamed up (or attempted) in order to save their poor abused defendant in this case. JA doesn't scare me personally too much because she will always be in prison, but what is scary is knowing some of these desperate supporters - and many like them from other cases - are out there walking among us. <shiver>

 

[Shadowboy]

I have never seen or heard about this letter before. I just finished reading it. Thank you shadowboy for posting it. This woman is unbelievable. Did the jury see this? I can't imagine <modsnip> would allow it in. Or for that matter the judge. She keeps all the damaging stuff out. The monster wrote this letter in 2009 when she was still saying the Ni's did the killing. I wonder what Ryan thought of that letter or did he even get it. I can't see the jail letting it be mailed to Ryan because it is an attempt to influence a witness in a criminal trial. I bet the jail gave the letter to the prosecution. Since Ryan was a prosecution witness. Too bad she didn't give it to her lawyer to mail. But then they would have been committing a crime to mail it also but this DT would do anything. Does anyone know how the letter came to be in public domain?:thinking:

Yes, this letter has been entered into evidence and portions of it were revealed in court during (IIRC) Juan's cross of Geffner. The jurors will have it to review. Wouldn't be surprised to see it again during DeMarte's direct, but what do I know ...

 

[samspace070]

Travis moved to Mesa in 2004 and didn't lose his temple recommend until 2005 per the tweets, so I don't see how a juror would have been thinking he moved to avoid the temple recommend loss "following" him to a new home.

It is hard for these jurors to keep so much information and dates in their heads, unlike us that can just look it up. Juan heard these questions and now knows what they want to know, if the question about when he lost the recommend and when he moved wasn't answered in court this go round then Juan needs to reaffirm those dates and times for them to assure them he didn't move to avoid anything, just like DR didn't move to follow Travis. Thanks AZlawyer for posting that

 

[Shadowboy]

Quick AZL question: JA said she wants to testify but is unable to for reasons given in chambers (or something to that effect).

Does this mean she is STILL not relinquishing her constitutional right to testify? If so, what are the ramifications of that, given the appeal to the AZ Supreme Court?

If the Supremes say, &#8220;We&#8217;re not taking up this appeal;&#8221; or if they decide to hear it, then rule against JA/DT, can the DT file another appeal on the Federal level, maintaining their client&#8217;s constitutional rights were violated?

Sorry. This little nugget still bothers me.