Retrial for Sentencing of Jodi Arias #1

[janx]

Ok. Here is the thing. If JM must go through the defense to set up interviews with witnesses just what do you think will occur? I predict delay...delay...delay and asking for trial to be continued. So I don't know if JSS will stick with the trial date of 9/29/14 but she hasn't stuck with anything before, and she rules in favor of defendant about 99% of time. So why should I trust that what she does is in the best interest of society at large? I never want the killer out of prison. She would kill again. I am not sure JSS would agree. This is MOO, JMO.

The judge knows that, and so she ordered a deadline. The interviews must be completed by the end of next week. The delay tactics will continue, no doubt, but the judge is well aware of them.

 

[geevee]

Ok. Here is the thing. If JM must go through the defense to set up interviews with witnesses just what do you think will occur? I predict delay...delay...delay and asking for trial to be continued. So I don't know if JSS will stick with the trial date of 9/29/14 but she hasn't stuck with anything before, and she rules in favor of defendant about 99% of time. So why should I trust that what she does is in the best interest of society at large? I never want the killer out of prison. She would kill again. I am not sure JSS would agree. This is MOO, JMO.

JSS ordered that all interviews (except JA's expert) be completed by 9/8 and raw data given to the State by 9/9 so delay because scheduling is going through JA doesn't appear likely. Her expert will be interviewed on 9/22, so it'll be nice and fresh in JM's mind when retrial begins.

 

[janx]

JSS ordered that all interviews (except JA's expert) be completed by 9/8 and raw data given to the State by 9/9 so delay because scheduling is going through JA doesn't appear likely. Her expert will be interviewed on 9/22, so it'll be nice and fresh in JM's mind when trial begins.

I'm with you, geevee. :seeya: It looks as if things are finally progressing, and as Hope4More pointed out, these tit-for-tat tactics of JA's aren't going to make a difference. They may be a nuisance but are ultimately inconsequential.

 

[Love Never Fails]

The judge knows that, and so she ordered a deadline. The interviews must be completed by the end of next week. The delay tactics will continue, no doubt, but the judge is well aware of them.

Janx, you are right. The judge realizes what JA is doing and is capable of. But I am not so sure which side the judge is on. She has quite a liberal history. I mean, in watching the last trial I liked the judge's demeanor but not her rulings. I am sure I would like her as a person but not so sure I can appreciate her judicial rulings. :fence:

 

[Love Never Fails]

JSS ordered that all interviews (except JA's expert) be completed by 9/8 and raw data given to the State by 9/9 so delay because scheduling is going through JA doesn't appear likely. Her expert will be interviewed on 9/22, so it'll be nice and fresh in JM's mind when retrial begins.

I like your last part....it will be fresh in Juan's mind.

 

[Love Never Fails]

I'm with you, geevee. :seeya: It looks as if things are finally progressing, and as Hope4More pointed out, these tit-for-tat tactics of JA's aren't going to make a difference. They may be a nuisance but are ultimately inconsequential.

I hope so. You guys are all optimistic today!!

 

[geevee]

I'm with you, geevee. :seeya: It looks as if things are finally progressing, and as Hope4More pointed out, these tit-for-tat tactics of JA's aren't going to make a difference. They may be a nuisance but are ultimately inconsequential.

I agree, she's just playing games and it's not going to get her far, more like that mosquito buzzing around your head that you finally squash flat just when it thinks it's gotten the upper hand. Reminds me of the Seinfeld episode 'I've got Hand, I've got Hand!'. hahahaha

 

[Love Never Fails]

Let's all remember that on the 15th there is a final ruling about cameras in the courtroom live, or at least a one day lag. Won't it be a great day if JSS rules in OUR favor once?
:loveyou:

 

[krkrjx]

I don't think it matters. JA was forced to turn over the contact info, including addresses, which means JM's investigators can dig deep before interviewing the witnesses. He wouldn't have contacted them directly to question them outside a court ordered interview anyway.

If getting her way on what amounts to a petty and childish petty play against JM makes her feel smug and overconfident, better yet.

I agree. It does not matter for the very reasons you stated.

In her motion to not allow JM the addresses JA probably stated she fears he will harass her witnesses. JSS ordered that JM cannot contact them directly but that does not mean he cannot use those addresses for the reasons any attorney might use a witness' address. He can mail documents to the witness address and he could use the address to serve a subpoena if he needed to. Neither action is precluded by the order that he may not contact directly.

JA didn't win anything with this, IMO.

 

[Ricki]

Awesome typo given the context of your post! :laughing:

I just saw that and fixed it. He he. Should of left it alone. Lol


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[AZlawyer]

JSS ruled in favor of the State's Motion To Preclude Lingering Doubt as a Mitigation Factor in this minute entry (8/15/2011):

http://www.courtminutes.maricopa.gov/docs/Criminal/082011/m4852390.pdf

I wonder, in light of Arias' recent attempts, if he'll file a motion to preclude residual doubt, or if it's unnecessary given the ruling on the above motion? We need input from AZlawyer on this one.

As you said, the motion has already been considered and granted.

WYH?? Where is AZlawyer? How did the killer get away with this? Can AZ folks petition to remove JSS from the bench? I have heard enough. Her decisions are NOT in the best interests of society at large.

As a number of others have already said, this is no big deal. JM wants the interviews--he doesn't care if his secretary or JW's secretary schedules them.

Ok. Here is the thing. If JM must go through the defense to set up interviews with witnesses just what do you think will occur? I predict delay...delay...delay and asking for trial to be continued. So I don't know if JSS will stick with the trial date of 9/29/14 but she hasn't stuck with anything before, and she rules in favor of defendant about 99% of time. So why should I trust that what she does is in the best interest of society at large? I never want the killer out of prison. She would kill again. I am not sure JSS would agree. This is MOO, JMO.

The judge has given a short deadline for the interviews--someone gave the details above--and has already denied JA's request for an extension of that deadline due to the supposed difficulty of setting up the interviews.

The judge absolutely does not rule in the defendant's favor 99% of the time. In fact, if you focus on the rulings that are of any importance at all, the defense is on a long losing streak. Mostly she rules in favor of JA when she has to, or when JM doesn't object (he seems not to care much about the "small stuff").

 

[geevee]

Thanks AZ.

 

[Dmacky]

I can see JA defending herself now, in her "linebacker pose" when JM asks a question she doesn't like yelling "SIDEBAR" :judge:

I guess she's auctioning off her "for the jury only glasses," now that she's an attorney and can miraculously see again.



PS ~ I've missed you guys! Thanks for all the information, and laughs
Great to know AZlawyer is still here, to answer all legal questions.
Oh and you might want to copyright your user name AZlawyer,
before JA's steals it :wink:

 

[LinTX]

AZlawyer, maybe it's only me that is confused by your answer above, but geevee's question had to do with a motion on residual doubt. Are you saying that there has already been one, in addition to the one on lingering doubt?

 

[Tuba]

Petty indeed. The killer indulges herself as well. She likes creating the implication that Juan Martinez is an ogre on a tear, in the misbelief that the public will react the way her delusional supporters do. The Jodi Is Innocent crowd are all sympathy & pity at the mere hint their martyr is threatened or disadvantaged. Wouldn't it be choice if she could feel the discrepancy between them and rational, normal people exposed to her machinations? This fall she may experience such an awakening. (She would claim a second jury "betrayed" her, of course.)

 

[Niner]

I agree, she's just playing games and it's not going to get her far, more like that mosquito buzzing around your head that you finally squash flat just when it thinks it's gotten the upper hand. Reminds me of the Seinfeld episode 'I've got Hand, I've got Hand!'. hahahaha

Let's all remember that on the 15th there is a final ruling about cameras in the courtroom live, or at least a one day lag. Won't it be a great day if JSS rules in OUR favor once?
:loveyou:

Yes! Marking my calendar for the 15th - keeping fingers and toes crossed that we DO get this LIVE!!!

 

[T-4-2]

Jodi's explanations for an unfavorable outcome:
• first and foremost, JM is a jerk
• Nurmi is an incompetent jerk who neither likes nor understands her
• "damage done" by media coverage
• ME and Flores perjured themselves
• minor-league expert witnesses hired by DT
• DeMarte is a snooty, know-it-all "mean girl"
• being incarcerated makes it hard to represent herself
• no really, JM is an angry little man who is totally out to get her
• society is just looking for a scapegoat and unfortunately it's her
• people want to believe the worst about her, and...
• ... can't accept that Travis was a violent, abusive pedophile who tried to kill her
• nobody likes her, everybody hates her, guess she'll eat some worms

Noticeably missing from Jodi's list
• She is guilty of first degree murder, eligible for and deserving of the death penalty

 

[AZlawyer]

AZlawyer, maybe it's only me that is confused by your answer above, but geevee's question had to do with a motion on residual doubt. Are you saying that there has already been one, in addition to the one on lingering doubt?

JM's motion was about residual doubt as a mitigating factor IIRC. I know someone posted a link to that page on the AZ Supreme Court website trying to say that residual doubt is about guilt vs. innocence and lingering doubt is about doubt as to the balance between mitigation and aggravation, but I remember reading this motion a long time ago and my recollection was that it was about doubt as to guilt vs. innocence.

And I would take with a grain of salt any legal analysis on the AZ Supreme Court pages about capital sentencing--looks like it's out of date as well as somewhat "tilted" in its presentation due to the author's opinion. My personal guess would be that this was written by one of the temporary law clerks. I'm not knocking them--I was one myself--I'm just saying that the fact that something appears somewhere in the depths of the AZ Supreme Court website doesn't mean that the AZ Supreme Court would actually rule consistently with what that page says.

 

[Love Never Fails]

As you said, the motion has already been considered and granted.



As a number of others have already said, this is no big deal. JM wants the interviews--he doesn't care if his secretary or JW's secretary schedules them.



The judge has given a short deadline for the interviews--someone gave the details above--and has already denied JA's request for an extension of that deadline due to the supposed difficulty of setting up the interviews.

The judge absolutely does not rule in the defendant's favor 99% of the time. In fact, if you focus on the rulings that are of any importance at all, the defense is on a long losing streak. Mostly she rules in favor of JA when she has to, or when JM doesn't object (he seems not to care much about the "small stuff").

Thanks AZlawyer. I appreciate you being on the thread with us. I am not a lawyer, nor am I that knowledgeable about JSS but it seemed to me that she was very much in the favor of the defense. And we don't know yet what went on in those MANY ex parte hearings. Just guessing. Thanks you for your expertise.

 

[Tuba]

I'll admit it, only a little embarrassed. With no direct access to the courtroom, I do turn to Jane Velez-Mitchell. I celebrate the effort to turn down her volume. Now that HLN is on the block, the afternoon line-up on Friday has been dumped. One more motivator for cameras in the courtroom. I am suspecting Vinnie Politan saw HLN's $ figures running into the red and chose to leave because of that.