Retrial for Sentencing of Jodi Arias - 11/14/14

[katydid23]

Nurmi has accused Juan of prosecutorial misconduct dozens of times so far. NONE have been shown to be true. Hard for me to believe this one is true either. jmo

 

[Caylee Advocate]

Well, I have gotten my vein/artery lessons for the day :gaah:, so off to do some shopping. Have a good night everyone, and remember.... justice is one day closer than it was yesterday. :seeya:

 

[Tuba]

BBM: That's crazy to me because I thought it was one of the strongest points in the case against her.

A pile of coincidences always makes me uneasy, not to say suspicious. The more so, when it involves a known liar. Another oddity was the Wednesday walk in the woods supposedly with sister that took just enough time to stage the burglary, including wrecking the door jamb. Put that together with what the burglar took, one item from each room and where those items ended up & this convenient crime was not credible. As usual with Arias, she greatly underestimates people who will inspect her handiwork. And wouldn't you just know this would occur when she is assembling the parts of her murder trip!

 

[MeeBee]

I agree, the theft of the murder weapon from Arias' grandparent's house was outlined convincingly by Juan Martinez. As the weapon had never been recovered, he could only provide strong markers leading to Arias. His mocking of the 'burglar' and taunting CMJA with the recorder given to Brewer was as close as he could skate. He made the point powerfully. I haven't heard any jurors claim the gun ownership was a sticking point.

I agree. I think a sticking point have been if Juan was claiming Jodi brought the gun with her but had no explanation for where it came from or who she got it from. Not a huge sticking point, no, but the burglary is very helpful in proving her levels of premeditation and manipulation as well as accounting for something that is very important. Otherwise the reasonable doubt part would have come in where it comes to the gun. Then, you'd have to wonder.

 

[neesaki]

Blue was a response by me to the bolded "I have decades of experience under my belt with this kind of thing."

Skipped a groove, apologies! :facepalm: ...and went back and clarified it! :floorlaugh:

I've been reading so much my eyes are crossing and my brain is getting fried, thanks for clarifying, Bernina.

 

[Love Never Fails]

Right. This thread is for discussion of the penalty trial that is currently happening. All involved have accepted that Arias is guilty of first degree premeditated murder with cruelty. IMO, the possibility of innocence or of multiple perpetrators is a discussion for a completely different thread, should there be members who wish to have such discussion.

Thanks. I had to leave earlier because the discussion, for me, was of no value. It was as if some were trying to decide her guilt. I like your honesty and clarity. Looking forward to Monday.

 

[TrialWatcher]

Small picture is I would allow reasonable doubt about the gun being stolen IF THAT HAD BEEN JM's ONLY PROOF OF PREMED, which is the point that keeps getting missed in replies.
.

Hope4More - I didn't see your point speculating on reasonable doubt if the gun had been the only proof of premed. I spend most of my time trying to navigate the forum on a jumpy iPad :blushing: if it had been the only premed factor, the reasonable doubt element would indeed have tested the jurors further. Thanks.

 

[LambChop]

It is against TOS to cut and paste information from Facebook.


Social Networks

Regarding Facebook, MySpace, Twitter, and other social networking or blog websites: Links may be used to direct posters to view something on a social networking page. But postings on social networking sites are not considered fact; they are rumor. Copying and pasting, or taking screen caps, directly from these pages is not allowed. Paraphrasing is okay. (Exception: If the Twitter or Facebook post belongs to a verified news station, it may be copied. But a link should still be provided.)

Also, social networking pages may only be linked if they are directly related to a case, i.e. the victim or suspect. We don't want to post to someone's mother, brother, employer, milkman, or postal carrier just because they know the main player. We also NEVER link to minor's pages (unless they are the victim). And be sure that the page actually belongs to the person being discussed. Do not link to someone if you are not 100% sure it is the correct person. And if a social networking is set to private and you get in the back way, you may not post what you find. Private means private!

 

[K-kitty]

I have been reading here since the first trial but rarely comment. I have to say that I am thoroughly confused by the DT version, or interpretation of this relationship. According to them now, all Jodi was to Travis was a "booty call". Yet, there are many photos of them spending time together in the light of day, with friends, going on trips, etc. How is this the behavior of a man using a woman for sex? According to this expert, Jodi was in true love with Travis but he rejected her. But didn't Jodi herself testify that Travis proposed marriage to her and she said No? I don't believe for a second that Travis did that, but still there is so much inconsistency in the Defense's version of the relationship. I think that Jodi's pathological ego wouldn't allow her during testimony to aknowledge that she wanted more from Travis and he rejected HER. Yet, isn't that what this expert is saying? Jodi insisted that she wanted to move on and that Travis wouldn't let her go. Now the expert is saying that Jodi wanted marriage and Travis didn't.

Another thing that has me scratching my head...why do Nurmi and their experts keep acting like Travis keeping his sexual relationship with Jodi a secret is so horrible? Wouldn't it have been far more abusive for him to tell all his friends exactly what they were getting up to in the bedroom? I mean, I prefer to keep my love life private. It is called discretion. Should he have shouted from the rooftops that he was having anal sex with Jodi Arias? Would that have been preferable to his keeping it a private matter between the two of them? They were BOTH Mormon, too. So, in my mind, his keeping those intimate details private protected her as well as him. If he would have told everyone then they could both be in trouble, and their reputations may have been tarnished. It may have even effected her chance of finding a proper Mormon husband in the future. I was raised a Jehovah's Witness, and that religion has a similar strict moral code to Mormonism. A girl with a tarnished reputation might have a harder time finding a spouse in the religion. Sex outside of marriage was more detrimental on a girl than on a guy when it came to marriage prospects.

Sorry to be so wordy! After my first post I was sort of ridiculed for writing too much so I stopped commenting. But Jodi Arias and her band of twisted liars make me angry. I didn't think it was possible for me to hate a person I have never met. And I am person who can usually see something redeeming in everyone.

I was raised the same as you so I know exactly where you are coming from. Even if Travis told everyone what was going on in his personal life with that <modsnip>, she would've used that against him in this trial too. She is the core of evil. And I don't believe for a second that she was a "true" Mormon. My friend was at her "baptism" and said even then everyone thought there was something not quite right about her... Poor Travis... His poor family...

 

[K-kitty]

:doh:

 

[Hope4More]

I agree. I think a sticking point have been if Juan was claiming Jodi brought the gun with her but had no explanation for where it came from or who she got it from. Not a huge sticking point, no, but the burglary is very helpful in proving her levels of premeditation and manipulation as well as accounting for something that is very important. Otherwise the reasonable doubt part would have come in where it comes to the gun. Then, you'd have to wonder.

So funny that our positions are precisely reversed. I think there's some wiggle room for doubt on the burglary, you think the burglarly is particularly solid circumstantial evidence.

You think JM having to account for where she obtained a gun is a potential sticking point, I think the where of it is completely irrelevant.

Likewise, JM never did prove where she dyed her hair. Didn't have to. She left blonde and arrived brown. The brown is what's key, not where it became brown.


The fact she came with and used a gun is what's relevant for proving premeditation. Where she obtained it is immaterial for proving premeditation, though yes, quite telling for other reasons if one believes she staged a burglary.

 

[MeeBee]

So funny that our positions are precisely reversed. I think there's some wiggle room for doubt on the burglary, you think the burglarly is particularly solid circumstantial evidence.

You think JM having to account for where she obtained a gun is a potential sticking point, I think the where of it is completely irrelevant.

Likewise, JM never did prove where she dyed her hair. Didn't have to. She left blonde and arrived brown. The brown is what's key, not where it became brown.


The fact she came with and used a gun is what's relevant for proving premeditation. Where she obtained it is immaterial for proving premeditation, though yes, quite telling for other reasons if one believes she staged a burglary.

I'm not saying it's important for premeditation, I'm saying it definitely helps and it gives Jodi very little wiggle room for trying to claim the gun came from elsewhere, i.e. It was Travis'. And I think there's little doubt she did it, given the tremendous coincidence of her leaving a DVD and remote with Daryl Brewer, things that were also stolen in the burglary and the weirdness of hiding her lap top in the laundry hamper.

 

[shana]

Sitting in the Court of Public Opinion, I personally concluded that JA committed the tire slashings and the theft of gun resulting from a burglary at the home of her grandparents. Neither incident was charged and both are still open cases, afaik.


The following sentence in the State's Motion in Limine filed 11/11/14 caught my eye (typed from doc and bbm):


It is also coincidental that the victim allegedly only began to access these sites on May 28, 2008, the same day defendant staged the burglary at her grandparents' home.


Will this statement of fact re the burglary cause problems for the State in any way, and/or will the Defense make a big and imo unnecessary deal out of it?

~jmo~

 

[ShadyLady]

I'm not saying it's important for premeditation, I'm saying it definitely helps and it gives Jodi very little wiggle room for trying to claim the gun came from elsewhere, i.e. It was Travis'. And I think there's little doubt she did it, given the tremendous coincidence of her leaving a DVD and remote with Daryl Brewer, things that were also stolen in the burglary and the weirdness of hiding her lap top in the laundry hamper.

Darryl should have admitted he ended up with the stolen DVD player. After his testimony he lied in an interview and said Jodi did not tell him she was going to Meza. What a putz.

 

[Miss Judy]

Interesting (IMO) posts on FB today. One is found on the Juan Martinez Prosecutor Support page. It's a view of the current retrial written by a Juror from the Marissa DeVault trial. He's been in the courtroom. I felt that he offered a different perspective which focuses on the jury in the Arias trial.

https://www.facebook.com/JuanMartinezProsecutorSupportPage/posts/316748258518757

The second post is on Jen's FB page (The Trial Diaries), and is someone attempting to explain (in their opinion) the mess with the hard drives and the mirror images:

https://www.facebook.com/thetrialdiaries/posts/510355412434325

 

[TexMex]

The fact that Jodi came up with an elaborate explanation for the gun IMO further proves she took it from grandpa. The staging of robbery was bad enough. She knows how damaging it looks. Can't claim self defense if you brought a gun along with your KY. So...now it's Travis who had a girl gun. She found it "cleaning". It had a holster...then it didn't. She is running from a wet, naked guy who says he's gonna "f'n kill you" and doesn't run out the door, down the stairs and out of the house...she retrieves this tiny gun which could have been moved since she "saw" it months ago, which may or may not be loaded and in a holster without disturbing anything including the shelving in the immaculate closet. What a crock

I did enjoy how Juan says, if you believe the defendant, that she found a gun then took it with her when she fled then use that to convict her on the felony murder part of the charge

 

[gcharlie]

The fact that Jodi came up with an elaborate explanation for the gun IMO further proves she stoke it from grandpa. The staging of robbery was bad enough. She knows how damaging it looks. Can't claim self defense if you brought a gun along with your KY. So...now it's Travis who had a girl gun. She found it "cleaning". It had a holster...then it didn't. She is running from a wet, naked guy who says he's gonna "f'n kill you" and doesn't run out the door, down the stairs and out of the house...she retrieves this tiny gun which may or may not be loaded and in a holster without disturbing anything including the shelving in the immaculate closet. What a crock

I did enjoy how Juan says, if you believe the defendant, that she found a gun then took it, then use that to convict her on the felony murder part of the charge

Think back to that testimony from her on the stand, which was changing as she spoke.

For me, the totality of the evidence and the combined implausibility of what she claimed nailed it. Some of her more outspoken and fanatical supporters try to focus in on one particular detail to refute the State's case. Here is where they are misguided. There were way too many pieces of her puzzle that just did not fit together, leading reasonable people to conclude that even under oath, she lied and her version of the events that day and the preceding days were not possible. For that reason, she was found guilty.

We don't know how many individual jurors thought her premeditation began before arriving at Travis' house on June 4. In the end, it doesn't matter. The victim's body certainly shows many more wounds than can be justified by self defense, especially when two distinct weapons were involved. I'm satisfied with the verdict and truly hope that no technicality of law pops up along the way to put it in jeopardy.

I can barely wait for her to be sentenced and for this whole abuse of the court system to end. The family needs to be able to distance themselves from this so that they can begin to mourn the loss of their brother and put the trial behind them.

 

[Caylee Advocate]

Would anyone happen to know why my "thanks" button only works on about every other post? It just started today. Not that I need to thank every post, but some I do. :dunno:

 

[Hope4More]

I'm not saying it's important for premeditation, I'm saying it definitely helps and it gives Jodi very little wiggle room for trying to claim the gun came from elsewhere, i.e. It was Travis'. And I think there's little doubt she did it, given the tremendous coincidence of her leaving a DVD and remote with Daryl Brewer, things that were also stolen in the burglary and the weirdness of hiding her lap top in the laundry hamper.

I think cleaning my toaster is more productive than this splitting the split ends of hairs....Peace.

 

[TexMex]

Think back to that testimony from her on the stand, which was changing as she spoke.

For me, the totality of the evidence and the combined implausibility of what she claimed nailed it. Some of her more outspoken and fanatical supporters try to focus in on one particular detail to refute the State's case. Here is where they are misguided. There were way too many pieces of her puzzle that just did not fit together, leading reasonable people to conclude that even under oath, she lied and her version of the events that day and the preceding days were not possible. For that reason, she was found guilty.

We don't know how many individual jurors thought her premeditation began before arriving at Travis' house on June 4. In the end, it doesn't matter. The victim's body certainly shows many more wounds than can be justified by self defense, especially when two distinct weapons were involved. I'm satisfied with the verdict and truly hope that no technicality of law pops up along the way to put it in jeopardy.

I can barely wait for her to be sentenced and for this whole abuse of the court system to end. The family needs to be able to distance themselves from this so that they can begin to mourn the loss of their brother and put the trial behind them.

It is time. She needs to be sentenced and taken away to Perryville. Life or death, I don't really care that much. The more she further abuses the victim and his family though the more I hope she gets death.

Premeditation doesn't have to be several days (as it was in this case) it can be formed almost instantly. But this girl staged a burglary, stole a gun, rented a car, dyed her hair, bought/borrowed gas cans, turned off her cell phone and headed to Mesa.