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

[atthelake]

I don't either, but someone here posted that she could be heard yelling at her attorneys in the hallway. I don't know who heard her or what exactly she was yelling about.

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...-Arias-1-9-1-12-Break&p=11376084#post11376084

:thinking: Didn't it come out later that this was the :bigfight: about having the media interview - she wanted to do it and counsel didn't want her to do it.

(My recollections are often wrong so take it with a grain of salt... I have to depend on logs to refresh my recollection :biggrin

 

[Nali87]

So this is where we stand..
Nurmi says "my witnesses are scared and won't testify" (Nevermind the fact that the trial is not being televised, public attention is at an all time low and the deaththreats aren't credible)

JM says, well then you can..
1. Subpoena them
2. Show a video
3. Play audio
4. Read the affidavits
The state wont get to cross but we'll deal with that.

The state seems to be willing to accept alternatives that can hurt its case even though there are no deaththreats.

Nurmi refusal to even consider any of these options show his true intent.


(ugh typing on here on my phone is so annoying)

 

[Truth Detector]

IIRC, JA's face was calm, then crestfallen as "guilty" sank in, then teary but not sobbing as jurors were polled, no hands over face or crying out, etc.

By this time, she had seen the jurors file in without making eye contact with her.

It was interesting to me that she didn't even react until after the audible gasps.

I remember recalling her words at the time because -- as the especially cruel murderess had bidden us -- I had marked them: "No jury is going to convict me ... because I'm innocent and you can mark my words on that one -- no jury will convict me."

[video=youtube;fLwJcVXYyUo]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fLwJcVXYyUo[/video]

 

[Katharine]

Who on earth is testifying on Monday with the trial beginning at 9:30 am? John Smith not due to testify until Wednesday and Dr. Geffner unable to return to testify until Jan 20th. Surely, the jury is not arriving on Monday to find out no testimony until Wednesday. Does anyone have any sleuthing abilities to determine this? Or any thoughts?

 

[Nali87]

By this time, she had seen the jurors file in without making eye contact with her.

It was interesting to me that she didn't even react until after the audible gasps.

I remember recalling her words at the time because -- as the especially cruel murderess had bidden us -- I had marked them: "No jury is going to convict me ... because I'm innocent and you can mark my words on that one -- no jury will convict me."

[video=youtube;fLwJcVXYyUo]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fLwJcVXYyUo[/video]

I never got the breakdown I was hoping for. Oh well there's still sentencing.

 

[Nali87]

What does JA says to JW before the verdict is read? Any lipreaders?

 

[Hope4More]

What does JA says to JW before the verdict is read? Any lipreaders?

She asked who the foreperson was.

 

[AZlawyer]

I think Nurmi is saying that the State was obligated to turn over the 2008 mirror image whether or not the DT requested it. The DT never requested it. The original DT instead asked for access to the HD itself, in 2009, which of course altered what was on the HD because it wasn't protected.

During the evidentiary hearings we learned that the DT never requested or accessed the 2008 mirror image. Nurmi cites AZ criminal procedure to say the State was obligated to have turned over that original 2008 mirror image without the DT requesting it.

Whether or not having the 2008 image would have changed anything the DT did is a separate question. First is the question, is Nurmi correct in his interpretation of what was required?

He is only right if there wa something materially different about the 2008 image and the defense was unaware of the difference. IMO there was no material difference and the defense knew just as much as the State did about why there might be a slight immaterial difference.

 

[Reagan]

IIRC, JA's face was calm, then crestfallen as "guilty" sank in, then teary but not sobbing as jurors were polled, no hands over face or crying out, etc.

Also a lot of lizard lip-licking, from what I remember.

 

[ShadyLady]

Who on earth is testifying on Monday with the trial beginning at 9:30 am? John Smith not due to testify until Wednesday and Dr. Geffner unable to return to testify until Jan 20th. Surely, the jury is not arriving on Monday to find out no testimony until Wednesday. Does anyone have any sleuthing abilities to determine this? Or any thoughts?

Good point. Should be interesting. If transcripts come out at the same time it will give me a headache!

 

[Truth Detector]

I never got the breakdown I was hoping for. Oh well there's still sentencing.

She's incapable of breaking down.

The only truly sincere, un-contrived expressions I've ever seen out of her were these few:

 

[Nali87]

So this is where we stand..
Nurmi says "my witnesses are scared and wont testify" (nevermind the fact that the trial is not being televised, public attention is at an all time low, the deaththreats arent credible)

JM says..
1. Subpoena them
2. Show a video
3. Play audio
4. Read the affavadavits
The state wont get to cross but we'll deal with that..

The state seems to be willing to accept alternatives that can hurt its case even though theres no deaththreats.

Nurmi refusal to even consider any of these options show his true intent.


(ugh typing on here on my phone is so annoying)

LOL. WTH are "affavadavits"? :shame:
*Affidavits

 

[Amster]

If, on Monday, Sherry drops the DP that means she is saying that Juan is guilty of misconduct, right?

 

[Nali87]

She's incapable of breaking down.

The only truly sincere, un-contrived expressions I've ever seen out of her were these few:

View attachment 67148

Hmm. And the moment when JM asked her "Would it surprise you that Walmart has no record of this gas can being returned?", KN called a sidebar. Her face was FROZEN while that sidebar was going on.

 

[Ruby]

Who on earth is testifying on Monday with the trial beginning at 9:30 am? John Smith not due to testify until Wednesday and Dr. Geffner unable to return to testify until Jan 20th. Surely, the jury is not arriving on Monday to find out no testimony until Wednesday. Does anyone have any sleuthing abilities to determine this? Or any thoughts?

Maybe Jodi herself :hilarious::floorlaugh:
But seriously there's no reason it could not be her.
Except that she does not want to :snooty:
But COA and AZSC said too bad :boohoo:

 

[ElleElle]

She's incapable of breaking down.

The only truly sincere, un-contrived expressions I've ever seen out of her were these few:

View attachment 67148

WERE YOU CRYING WHEN....??

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gM_8BEriEeI&channel=kauaiskeptic

 

[atthelake]

Maybe Jodi herself :hilarious::floorlaugh:
But seriously there's no reason it could not be her.
Except that she does not want to :snooty:
But COA and AZSC said too bad :boohoo:

[video=youtube;gcjZgPgm6aU]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gcjZgPgm6aU[/video]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gcjZgPgm6aU

 

[ladonna]

I have always thought the suntan lotion purchase was either an impulse buy, maybe it was on sale, it was summer, blah blah blah, or, that she bought it because she knew she was going to be spending time in the hot desert sun out in the middle of no man's land, burying/burning weapons, clothes, etc, and cleaning her disgusting self up after committing the premeditated, evil, sociopathic murder. IDK, JMO. With this piece of work, anything is possible.

I think Jodi purchased those items that would be allowed on air travel. She still hoped Travis would take her to Cancun.

 

[Hope4More]

He is only right if there wa something materially different about the 2008 image and the defense was unaware of the difference. IMO there was no material difference and the defense knew just as much as the State did about why there might be a slight immaterial difference.

Getting into the weeds here, but into it I go.

There WAS, technically, a material difference between the two clones (2008 and 2009), as the 2009 clone had many files accidentally deleted. That's Nurmi's point about the importance of the 2008 clone.

The defense WAS unaware of the difference, because according to Nurmi, the DT wasn't even aware that a 2008 clone existed until very recently.

It wasn't until very recently that either the State or the DT became aware of the differences between the clones, material or otherwise, because neither had made a comparison between the two.

Nurmi seems to be implying that had the DT been in possession of the 2008 clone from the very beginning they could have seen the differences between the 2 clones, recognized that files were deleted, and pursued porngate early on, enough to have changed the course of the first trial. ( of course, if they had the 2008 clone, why would one have been created in 2009 at all?)

So is he technically correct? And if so, is the fact that the State didn't turn over the 2008 clone significant?

 

[Truth Detector]

If, on Monday, Sherry drops the DP that means she is saying that Juan is guilty of misconduct, right?

That would depend on what she rules on the prosecutorial misconduct motion.

LKN threw out so many things unrelated to it, that I could have sworn the hearing covered about a dozen motions.

I'd say that Nurmi set his bar unnecessarily high by stating that the Prosecution had:

1. Identified *advertiser censored*,
2. Intentionally didn't disclose it,
3. Willfully deleted it, and
4. Deceitfully lied about it.

He batted 0 for 4.