Retrial for Sentencing of Jodi Arias - 1/9-1/12 Break

[Truth Detector]

OK, I'm confused. State said it found no *advertiser censored* but Defense say they did. Then they talk about searches and website URLs typed into address line etc. Are they both talking about "actual" downloads of *advertiser censored*? Did State mean it didn't find any actual *advertiser censored* downloads and Defense found only searches etc.? Are they talking about the same thing or are they both correct? Is it possible this Motion could fly?

Both sides stipulate that the names of pornographic URLs (website addresses) were written to the hard disk drive (HDD).

Neither side claimed that *advertiser censored* images and/or videos were ever found on that Toshiba HDD from the Compaq Presario in evidence.

Defense claims that a human clicked through to one *advertiser censored* site using Amazon's "Alexa" website rankings portal. Prosecution does not cede the point.

The motion should not fly, but I'm not JSKS' biggest fan, so I'm skeptical -- especially about Monday as her self-imposed deadline.

 

[MeeBee]

Lol! It's incredible how he totallly ignored the *advertiser censored* and chose to focus on a silly music video. He's blaming JM but it's becoming clear that he didn't follow through on what his own expert testified to.

He dint follow through because it wasn't relevant at the time! The only *advertiser censored* Jodi said she saw was multiple images of women's *advertiser censored* and there were none of those. She also said she saw a picture of a child Travis was masturbating to but changed her story when none of that was found either. So what the heck is Nurmi saying when he says this will prove she wasn't a liar? She's still just as big a liar as ever.

 

[Hope4More]

Thanks, AZL & Boytwn for explanation of what I was missing about M's *advertiser censored* testimony.

 

[MeeBee]

@brentjkleinman: Reading today's #JodiArias tweets. Sounds like #Nurmi is reaching a bit too far. Finish the trial & let the jury decide her sentence

 

[Love Never Fails]

Did I not issue a warning yesterday about the bickering back and forth about the judge. Everyone has their own opinion, so let's leave it at that. Do not badger another poster over what their beliefs are regarding the judge. This is the retrial thread, not the JSS thread. Let it go and move on. You can still express your feelings, just do not criticize what others are posting.

Thank you

Yay!!!! That's not me today Lambie! But I do have an opinion.
moving on......

 

[AngelWings444]

He was saying if they played video of her testimony from the first trial that would hurt the prosecution. And the only reason that wouldn't be an option is if she lied the first time around.

It's so difficult to say what he meant or what was actually said in the "trial by tweet." At least, we will have video later on from the hearing held today. Or, am I misremembering?

Off topic from your post, but how in the heck can it take a week to get transcripts. That is absurd. I have been around court reporters long enough to know they can get them done in a day, if not a few hours. 400 pages is nothing with the spacing they use and each objection or crossover/talking over each other sentences are on different lines. This is an intentional delay in releasing the transcripts. JMO

 

[Love Never Fails]

William Pitts ‏@william_pitts 1m1 minute ago
Martinez says there's video of the "secret testimony' that could be used. And he even admits it hurts prosecution. #JodiArias

This is the one tweet that has me convinced JA threw someone under the bus! Which family member is it?

Azlawyer, this was the quote I was asking about earlier. How could her secret testimony hurt the prosecution?

 

[AZlawyer]

Azlawyer, this was the quote I was asking about earlier. How could her secret testimony hurt the prosecution?

I really think William Pitts mis-tweeted there. But if there's video later tonight or tomorrow, we can clear it all up.

 

[MeeBee]

Well if JSS will ever let the trial conclude, JA's decision on testifying will be made. As long as KN can stall, then the question remains open.

And I don't think it's an issue for this court anyway. JSS says she can choose to testify or not. The COA won't hear this nonsense while the case is still open, because she could always change her mind and testify. And then afterward they'll say she had the choice and didn't take, so too bad.

The COA also has to think in terms of precedents. Imagine the precedents that KN is trying to get them to agree too. Every defense lawyer would make a mockery of every case afterward.

If he does that this trial will never end. What would stop him from bringing every motion he's ever argued in front of this judge in to the COA? It's bizarre. I've never heard of a case being appealed before it's even finished.

 

[Dmacky]

they were not then concerned about *advertiser censored*. I went back & listened a while ago and made notes from the 1st trial testimony. Nurmi spent his time with M focusing some music video that I guess he thought had a dirty name. And there were all the questions about whether there were "nudes from the waist up". That's why I don't understand how this is an issue now. Nurmi could have asked all about this stuff in the first trial. If he has an issue it is one for appeal. This is supposed to be about mitigation.

This is what I don't understand either. During Trail in 2013, JA was VERY SPECFIC that the picture she saw TA looking at was PAPER images and not on the computer.

When ALV was testifying, she "accidently" said they were on the computer. When JM questioned that, she said she had only assumed they were on the computer. And that was NOT Jodi's words to her.
Not one word about any kind of *advertiser censored* was talked about in 2013
What has changed??

Did JA remember that TA had evicted his roommate Thomas Brown for looking at *advertiser censored* on Travis' computer, and that TA had taken it to his friend to have it all deleted ?

All I know is this crap came up after JA had almost another year to think about how to get DP off the table. Then she went pro se and *advertiser censored*!!!!
***********************************************

PS Are you the mother of twin boys? (your username) I have Identical twin girls :smile:

 

[AZlawyer]

If he does that this trial will never end. What would stop him from bringing every motion he's ever argued in front of this judge in to the COA? It's bizarre. I've never heard of a case being appealed before it's even finished.

It's called a "special action" and it's happened now twice in this case--once by KN regarding the judge's refusal to throw out the DP after Flores admitted he must have misunderstood Dr. Horn, and once by the media regarding the "secret trial" order. It's not unusual, but certainly it would be unusual if one was filed after every motion. There is quite a bit of case law guiding attorneys as to when it's appropriate to file a special action.

 

[AngelWings444]

Azlawyer, this was the quote I was asking about earlier. How could her secret testimony hurt the prosecution?

I am reading Pitts tweets you and I are interrupting it the same way. Secret testimony hurts the prosecution. Using testimony from trial hurts the defendant if she lied and changed story. Using video testimony is also hurtful to the prosecution but JM is ok with it. I think all 3 were referenced today. We shall see when the video gets released. Heck, I was right about JA being the secret witness. Maybe I am correct 2 times this year...oh wait, once last year and maybe once this year. :thinking:

 

[Love Never Fails]

Last note by BK...Nurmi says he may have to take it (upcoming JSS ruling) to a higher court, and that the decision whether she should testify again won't be made until court(s) resolve.

Azlawyer, didn't you say at one time that if JA refused to testify, or Nurmi threatened to holdup trial by taking matter to higher court, that JSS could just continue on and put it on the record that JA refused to testify? Am I making sense? I do not see how Nurmi can keep trying his case at a higher level. Those issues should be for appeal only. Right?

 

[lewcch3]

Reporters tweeted she looked "visibly upset", she left the room, came back and drew and today was wearing a wrist brace. Take it how you will, I think she punched some walls last night!

LMOL!! Thanks for the great laugh! If JA was sporting a wrist brace today, it's a sure bet some walls were punished last night!

 

[LinTX]

I agree about the vagueness of the "*advertiser censored*" references.

JM can't say that the state "misconduct" should be balanced against JA's actions, because legally that's incorrect.

Also, he wouldn't mention insanity because no one has ever remotely suggested that JA would be eligible for an insanity plea that I know of. She clearly is not. The defense has only ever said that her mental issues are relevant to mitigation, which they are.



What's the point? Rule on his motion and let him appeal if he's so inclined.

Well, it would have been nice to hear a reminder of why the DP is appropriate, since today's hearing was about removing it because of 'misconduct' that hasn't been proved. Didn't need to whip out a scale, LOL! As for the mental illness, Nurmi mentioned that a few times in this hearing, which was (again) about removing DP. What I was saying was that mentioning it in this hearing was irrelevant to removing DP and since the higher courts already ruled on the special treatment for her testimony, mentioning it in this hearing made no sense. Agree on the 'let the appeal fly', JSS obviously can't stop him, but hopefully that little attempt at bullying irritated her enough to realize what she should have been doing all along. Be a trial judge and let the higher courts worry about appeals...

 

[Hope4More]

It's so difficult to say what he meant or what was actually said in the "trial by tweet." At least, we will have video later on from the hearing held today. Or, am I misremembering?

Off topic from your post, but how in the heck can it take a week to get transcripts. That is absurd. I have been around court reporters long enough to know they can get them done in a day, if not a few hours. 400 pages is nothing with the spacing they use and each objection or crossover/talking over each other sentences are on different lines. This is an intentional delay in releasing the transcripts. JMO

BK says she expects transcripts Wednesday at the latest.

 

[MeeBee]

It's so difficult to say what he meant or what was actually said in the "trial by tweet." At least, we will have video later on from the hearing held today. Or, am I misremembering?

Off topic from your post, but how in the heck can it take a week to get transcripts. That is absurd. I have been around court reporters long enough to know they can get them done in a day, if not a few hours. 400 pages is nothing with the spacing they use and each objection or crossover/talking over each other sentences are on different lines. This is an intentional delay in releasing the transcripts. JMO

I really think that is what was meant because why would they need to play secret testimony video? It would be a repeat. Juan kept saying you can use the video unless she plans to testify to something she didn't testify to in the first trial. If she doesn't want to testify anymore you can play video of her CIC testimony. Juan was saying if you do that I am taking a hit here but I don't really care.

Like AZ said, Pitts must have misunderstood what Juan was saying.

 

[Hope4More]

I did see the other tweets regarding the other witnesses. I'm not so sure he wasn't talking about JA at the time. I guess we will know on Monday. Maybe it does hurt the prosecution because she was remorseful and begged for mercy. If you believe that one, I have a bridge.... :wink:

BK notes are vastly superior to tweets. That tweet is out of context. JM never said JA's secret testimony harmed the State.

 

[Sweet Fox]

Did the media played the video of today's court hearing yet?

 

[Nali87]

I just don't know where he's going with this? What was the purpose? You know I think KN and JW jumped the gun on all of this. They heard "possible child *advertiser censored*" found and went nuts, not even bothering to find out what exactly was found or who did what. Days of delays, days of hearings and motions to what end? To have some guy testify that a man who was already having sex was also watching *advertiser censored*? And that a prosecutor might have updated itunes by mistake on the victim's computer?

Insanity.

ETA: This was in reply to MeeBee. Websleuths on my phone is a pain.