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

[CarolinaMoon]

I hope post trial to hear why JM doesn't want Sky or Chris Hughes to rebut Dr. F's blather about their emails.

It seems like their testimony would be the simplest way to gut 90% of Dr. F's faux analysis and to demolish her credibility. There must be a very excellent reason why JM is choosing not to call them.

One big problem with the Hughes' is that they were all over the media and Twitter, if not other sites prior to and possibly during the trial. (I'm a bit fuzzy after reading the rest of the last page.) They have also written a book about Travis to come out after this penalty phase is over. Perhaps JM won't use them since they will then be questioned about it by Nurmi.

My hope is that there are later e-mails JM can use instead. Since most of them were hearsay for the guilt phase, we only saw a few in trial. Now, there is more of an opportunity to present more e-mails, as Nurmi has been doing.

 

[dog.gone.cute]

No. JM will be allowed to cross-examine the secret witness.

:happydance: And God help the Mystery Witness when Juan Martinez gets a hold of them ... :hilarious:

JMO but I still think the "mystery witness" is CMJA ...


:tyou: AZLawyer for the all the legalese translations !

:tyou: To all who posted the Tweets this week !

 

[dog.gone.cute]

I'm hoping JM is able to play the post conviction interview where JA is asked if she would kill again and she says only if someone makes me mad or something like that. Not sure it would be admissible but I'd love to see it.

Yes ... I remember that, and I hope JM can play this for THIS jury !

 

[MeeBee]

I know MeeBee. And I know they are horrified by what KN is doing. I just have to wonder why JM didn't call them or Dave Hall? There must be soooo much we don't know about!

I think it has to do with the hearing involving Chris and Sky Hughes and Nurmi.

 

[Reagan]

What does IANAL mean? It's not something I'm willing to Google :facepalm:

 

[Zuri]

One of the most important things in a trial like this is to know your audience, the jurors. This appears to be one of KN foibles. I understand that he wants to make a point and drive home that point, but in the meantime, he appears to be losing the attention of all the jurors.

Going through emails line by line and having them interpreted by a third party and asking the witness to draw conclusions is seemingly baseless and a waste of time. The emails were based on interpretations by 3 people: Chris Hughes, Skye Hughes and Travis. The Hughes were outsiders in the relationship between JA and TA. To give these emails so much weight by Nurmi may very well backfire.

How many times have we posted on here, trying to get a POV across or render an opinion on a tweet or statement, and the delivery is misinterpreted, misunderstood, misconstrued? How cannot the same be true here? JMV

 

[Zuri]

What does IANAL mean? It's not something I'm willing to Google :facepalm:

I am not a lawyer

 

[daisydomino]

What does IANAL mean? It's not something I'm willing to Google :facepalm:

LOL I am not a lawyer

 

[Dmacky]

September 2006 Jodi meets Travis

February 2, 2007 they began dating or (pick one below)
1. a couple
2. girlfriend/boyfriend
3. exclusive
4. official

**keep in mind that the whole time they were *exclusive* Jodi lived in California, and Travis lived in Arizona


June 29, 2007 Travis and Jodi break up.


After they breakup, Jodi does what any grown woman would do in that situation. She quits her job and moves to Arizona. NOT

So they only "officially" dated long distance for about 5 months.

Ironically, Jodi Arias' murder trial for violently, inhumanely killing Travis lasted 5 months.
The same exact amount of time that they were "officially" a couple. Eerie

 

[Nosey Parker]

I know MeeBee. And I know they are horrified by what KN is doing. I just have to wonder why JM didn't call them or Dave Hall? There must be soooo much we don't know about!

Weren't the Hughes involved in a hearing before the guilt phase, where they were accused by Nurmi of feeding information to Juan? I think that was the original reason they were not called to testify about the emails; not being on the list they became active on social media, and started their book. That book would present a further problem at this stage. IMO.

Dave Hall has been on HLN often, really only with the information that 'he never liked Arias' and 'Travis didn't own a gun'. Not much there to help.

Please someone correct me if I am wrong on this.

ETA: Sorry, I see MeeBee beat me to it.

 

[zoey]

After each court day, I'm going to keep posting Tweets from court in my blog here on WS, organized by Tweep and date and time stamps, going forward. http://www.websleuths.com/forums/blog.php?115109-daisydomino . I formatted them so that it should be pretty easy to read and find the time stamp you're looking for. The end of the day is at the bottom of the post.

I don't know about everybody else, but Twitter is hard on my ADHD and I have a hard time finding things on Twitter— ooh shiny...

Do I have to subscribe to each blog entry?

 

[Love Never Fails]

I think it has to do with the hearing involving Chris and Sky Hughes and Nurmi.

Oh you are right! I had forgotten about that. There is so much for us to learn from this trial. Thanks so much. Well, I know they would testify if they could.

 

[Dmacky]

LOL I am not a lawyer

:lol: The abbreviation does look nasty

 

[Love Never Fails]

Weren't the Hughes involved in a hearing before the guilt phase, where they were accused by Nurmi of feeding information to Juan? I think that was the original reason they were not called to testify about the emails; not being on the list they became active on social media, and started their book. That book would present a further problem at this state. IMO.

Dave Hall has been on HLN often, really only with the information that 'he never liked Arias' and 'Travis didn't own a gun'. Not much there to help.

Please someone correct me if I am wrong on this.

ETA: Sorry, I see MeeBee beat me to it.

Yes and I had forgotten all about it.

 

[Love Never Fails]

September 2006 Jodi meets Travis

February 2, 2007 they began dating or (pick one below)
1. a couple
2. girlfriend/boyfriend
3. exclusive
4. official

**keep in mind that the whole time they were *exclusive* Jodi lived in California, and Travis lived in Arizona


June 29, 2007 Travis and Jodi break up.


After they breakup, Jodi does what any grown woman would do in that situation. She quits her job and moves to Arizona. NOT

So they only "officially" dated long distance for about 5 months.

Ironically, Jodi Arias' murder trial for violently, inhumanely killing Travis lasted 5 months.
The same exact amount of time that they were "officially" a couple. Eerie

Great post.

 

[BritsKate]

:lol: The abbreviation does look nasty

Rather appropriate for this case, no?

 

[daisydomino]

Do I have to subscribe to each blog entry?

I don't think so—I'm not sure how it works though. If you subscribe to the blog, I promise this is all I'm going to post there (no crazy political or religious rants.)
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/blog_subscription.php?do=subscribe&u=115109

 

[dog.gone.cute]

Does anyone think she will actually break out the Power Point again? That was so very ridiculous.

Yep ... :gaah:

And what a JOKE that was !

:seeya:

 

[ShadyLady]

Bringing over Curious in Indiana's post from the last thread.

For something to be relevant, it has to make some fact at issue more or less likely to be true.

So what can the jury consider in this phase? (1) The circumstances of the offense (just how premeditated and cruel was this, etc.)--Travis's feeling that he might turn up dead is not relevant to the circumstances of the offense. (2) Other things that could justify a life vs. death sentence for Jodi--Travis's feeling that he might turn up dead also has nothing to do with whether Jodi's life is worth sparing.

Doesn't Jodi's stalker MO become relevant? Past history of escalating aggression against men she wants and that dated other women. Darryl seemed faithful, but she left him.

 

[Zuri]

I know MeeBee. And I know they are horrified by what KN is doing. I just have to wonder why JM didn't call them or Dave Hall? There must be soooo much we don't know about!

I would be surprised if JM called any of the above. The Hughes are seemingly vulnerable as their writing a book about TA may give them the appearance of impropriety. Dave Hall has been in legal trouble for posting a video of he and 2 other men rolling boulders in a state park IIRC, that should never have been touched.