Retrial for Sentencing of Jodi Arias #1

[Renee110]

Oh thanks. That looks easy. I never knew that. Now I have to try it. I looked at it just now. So if I type in azcentral.com in the URL address, how would you know to go right to the story? http://Azcentral.com.
I mean, you could get to the main page but then you have to look for the story, right? I am so dumb about those things. I appreciate your help.

I just copy the url of the page the article is on (just go to the top of your page highlight the entire string of characters and select copy) and paste inside the reply box. I think that works. Here is a recipe https://food52.com/recipes/22615-chicken-and-rice

 

[Truth Detector]

I don't know how to post the link about the flooding but it is on AZcentral.com

Probably this link:

http://www.azcentral.com/story/news...hoenix-flooding-monsoon-monday-abrk/15272279/

 

[neesaki]

Thanks AZ Lawyer for the research on the motions! And boy were there a a lot of them... Whew!

She tried to argue everything including the kitchen sink. I can't believe she even had the gall to try and argue that Travis shouldn't be referred to as "the victim" in trial! (3/12/12)

Travis not the victim ?!!! :stormingmad: Yeah, sure. I guess CMJA is the one who was stabbed 29 times and was almost beheaded. I want to say she's delusional, but that would be implying that she has a true mental illness. Which she does not, IMO. This psycho is a just an evil person, a remorseless habitual liar, and absolutely refuses to admit or acknowledge her guilt. She is truly one scary person. :scared: and needs to be locked away for effing ever.

 

[neesaki]

You had me right up until "...pretty girls..." -- surgical enhancements and cosmetic peccadilloes notwithstanding.

Those 'Cinnabons' are frightening if not out-and-out diseased.

Yes, Yes, and Yes. Thank you very much. :yes:

 

[katydid23]

I don't understand how they plan to get this new jury 'up to speed' to be able to decide the penalty. How much of the trial is going to be communicated to them? It seems almost impossible, imo.

 

[T-4-2]

I myself am an absolute idiot -- until I get whatever little nugget of information I need to get over a particular hurdle. There's always another hurdle, bringing with it another opportunity to feel computer illiterate. Experimentation can have unforeseen and catastrophic consequences, resulting in complete emotional meltdowns that are neither pretty nor an efficient use of one's time. I have found that asking for help is by far the most expedient way to solve a problem, just remember to ask before the meltdown starts. You don't want to scare people.

 

[salberg7]

I never particularly saw the murderess as attractive. She is pretty ordinary, in my view. I think her getting breast augmentation was sort of a precursor to her narcissism. Here was a girl with no high school diploma, working at dead end jobs, leaching off different men & decides to spend money (or Darryl's money) on breast augmentation. Really? How about a GED class? Community college? So, before the ripe old age of 26, she decides to spend money on plastic surgery. This to me shows how her priorities were off. She was looking for a guy to take care of her, met Travis, developed a sick obsession with him, he rejected her, she couldn't take that, & decided to kill him. Now "the genius" must pay for the murder of poor Travis. And, the sooner the better, thank you very much.

 

[Hatfield]

I don't know how to post the link about the flooding but it is on AZcentral.com

What I do to post links here in my posts is highilght the entire "web address" of where I am at. Like if you are looking at a news article on the flooding and you want to share in your post. You can go to the very top of your article and in the spot that has the "web address" (which usually begins with "HTTP:/........" OR "WWW......"),
then highlight the entire thing by left clicking on it. Then after you highlight it, then you right-click COPY.

After you have it copied, then you come to your post here and put your cursor wherever you want to insert link and then PASTE it in the post. By right-click PASTE.

Hope this is what you were asking about.

You are basically highlighting the entire "web address" of where you are at and then COPY it, and then PASTE it in post.

 

[Hatfield]

I don't understand how they plan to get this new jury 'up to speed' to be able to decide the penalty. How much of the trial is going to be communicated to them? It seems almost impossible, imo.

I'm expecting a long drawn out re-trial of the sentencing phase. I suspect she will try to drag this out as long as she can and call as many witnesses as she can. The only hope we have for a shorter re-trial is witnesses refusing to testify for her.

Which brings up a question. Wonder if she will be able to subpeona witnesses to force them to testify if they dont want to. Hmmmmmm. This could get ugly.

 

[Hope4More]

I'm expecting a long drawn out re-trial of the sentencing phase. I suspect she will try to drag this out as long as she can and call as many witnesses as she can. The only hope we have for a shorter re-trial is witnesses refusing to testify for her.

Which brings up a question. Wonder if she will be able to subpeona witnesses to force them to testify if they dont want to. Hmmmmmm. This could get ugly.

My understanding is that she can supeona witnesses.

If JSS believes CMJA is deliberately stalling/delaying the process, JSS has the absolute right and authority to revoke pro se (in the interest of " judicial economy.")

CMJA may be delusional enough to believe she is in control of this retrial- and it may seem that way at times to us- but she decidedly is not.

 

[atthelake]

I myself am an absolute idiot -- until I get whatever little nugget of information I need to get over a particular hurdle. There's always another hurdle, bringing with it another opportunity to feel computer illiterate. Experimentation can have unforeseen and catastrophic consequences, resulting in complete emotional meltdowns that are neither pretty nor an efficient use of one's time. I have found that asking for help is by far the most expedient way to solve a problem, just remember to ask before the meltdown starts. You don't want to scare people.

RBBM

:laughcry:

 

[LinTX]

A few days ago, AZLawyer posted a list of motions and rulings, and while I do try to read every post I must have skimmed through the last part. By doing that, I missed her helpful info re: residual doubt. All my error, and apologies to AZLawyer for missing it and confusing the two motions re: doubt! In case anyone else missed it, I'll repost AZLawyer's additional info again:

One of the 7/12/12 rulings contains the following language that may be of interest with respect to recent speculation on this thread:

"In Harrod, the defendant sought to present the results of a polygraph examination and
make statements of innocence during the penalty phase. The Supreme Court deemed this
evidence, which it characterized as residual doubt evidence, to not be mitigation because it did
not relate to the circumstances of the crime. The Court stated that “because the penalty phase
does not determine whether a defendant is guilty, the ‘circumstances of the offense’ language in
§13-7[51](G) does not authorize a defendant to present residual doubt evidence. Rather this
language relates to such factors, among others, as to how a defendant committed first degree
murder.” 218 Ariz. at ¶43. The Court held that the defendant in Harrod did not have a
constitutional or statutory right to present residual doubt evidence at his penalty phase
proceeding and therefore the trial court properly excluded the results of a polygraph examination.
Id. at ¶46.

Although the defendant does not explain exactly what her polygraph evidence will
purport to show, the Court believes its purpose will be the same as that asserted in Harrod - to
express her innocence of the crime. Such evidence is irrelevant in the penalty phase of a capital
case."

 

[AZlawyer]

The motion was about lingering doubt, not residual:


IMO, this issue is going to cause some problems if JSS doesn't make a firm decision with clear instructions to both sides, especially since this jury is only hearing this phase.
I do agree about the "tilted' opinions on that site, btw.

Hi, Lin. What I was saying is that JM may have used the phrase "Lingering Doubt" in the title of his motion, but what the motion was about was what we are calling "Residual Doubt." So the issue has already been decided.

 

[T-4-2]

rbbm

rbbm?

 

[LinTX]

Yes, it's apparently been decided about both. In the motion that geevee posted, JSS precluded lingering doubt from the sentencing phase. In the motion you posted, she addressed residual doubt. So unless JA's been ignoring all of this, I can't imagine what she thinks she can do with any evidence from the earlier trials. Seems what would be left is character, good behavior, etc. As the courts ruled, it has to relate to "how", not "if", and she was convicted on premeditation w/ cruelty - what could possibly be said about her "how" that could mitigate? Guess we'll have to wait & see....

 

[T-4-2]

This could get ugly.

Will all of Jodi's witnesses be hostile? Chris and Sky Hughes for example. I think they did initially feel that Travis was toying with Jodi's affections, and I suppose they'd have to admit that on the stand. But would Jodi want JM to have a crack at them in cross examination? I doubt it very much.

 

[Love Never Fails]

I myself am an absolute idiot -- until I get whatever little nugget of information I need to get over a particular hurdle. There's always another hurdle, bringing with it another opportunity to feel computer illiterate. Experimentation can have unforeseen and catastrophic consequences, resulting in complete emotional meltdowns that are neither pretty nor an efficient use of one's time. I have found that asking for help is by far the most expedient way to solve a problem, just remember to ask before the meltdown starts. You don't want to scare people.

Wow...I think you were inside my mind. Skeery!

 

[AZlawyer]

Yes, it's apparently been decided about both. In the motion that geevee posted, JSS precluded lingering doubt from the sentencing phase. In the motion you posted, she addressed residual doubt. So unless JA's been ignoring all of this, I can't imagine what she thinks she can do with any evidence from the earlier trials. Seems what would be left is character, good behavior, etc. As the courts ruled, it has to relate to "how", not "if", and she was convicted on premeditation w/ cruelty - what could possibly be said about her "how" that could mitigate? Guess we'll have to wait & see....

The ruling I posted was actually in response to JA's motion to allow the results of some polygraph examination she apparently planned to take. But I agree that the judge made it perfectly clear how she feels about residual doubt evidence in her ruling on the polygraph motion. And she granted JM's motion, which was about residual doubt regardless of the title.

I don't think there will be any actual motion about "lingering doubt" defined as it was in the one article someone posted a while back. I believe the article said "lingering doubt" was about any doubt in a juror's mind regarding whether mitigation was sufficient to call for leniency. I think it would be perfectly appropriate for the defense to argue that jurors should resolve any lingering doubt on that issue in favor of JA. But that argument isn't going to allow JA to bring in "innocence" evidence.

 

[Love Never Fails]

You guys are the best. By the way Renee, I love chicken and rice. I grew up in the South and that's a great recipe!

 

[Love Never Fails]

Will all of Jodi's witnesses be hostile? Chris and Sky Hughes for example. I think they did initially feel that Travis was toying with Jodi's affections, and I suppose they'd have to admit that on the stand. But would Jodi want JM to have a crack at them in cross examination? I doubt it very much.

Just from the perspective of a trial watcher (and IF we are allowed to view the trial), I would love to see JA try to tangle with the Hughes. I think they wold rip her apart. JMO.