Please don't throw rotten eggs at me due to the source of the motion I discuss below. As we banter about the "hard drive" issue, IIRC, several forum members thought the"voice" of the DT motion was "off." Then, in the course of TRYING to find the official evidence/search warrant results collected when JA was finally brought into custody (NOTE: Somebody send me a hammer, so I can rid myself of OCD misery) …
Anyway, while poking around for police files, I ran across a comedic gem. It's motion for mistrial filed 4-7-2013
The mid-section of this motion for mistrial attempts to back-fill with case law. But the opening is so clearly JA, flashing her “Einsteinian” IQ.
No wonder Nurmi wants off the case. As lead, he has no choice but to file his client’s legal justifications (right AZL?). Since this doc is a court filing, I’m pasting portions of it here (with my comments). Hope that’s OK, mods.
Filed with the Court 4-7-2013 Filing ID 5196778a
COMES NOW, Ms. Arias, (SERIOUSLY?) “Bring out your dead!!” by and through undersigned counsel to request that a mistrial be declared based on the prosecutorial misconduct that has infested like fleas these proceedings with a level of unfairness that cannot be cured bacon comes to mind … and the sizzle bar by any other means. Ms. Arias bases this assertion on the fact that the circus like atmosphere inside the courtroom that to date has included counsel for the State yelling at witnesses, attacking witnesses on personal level and throwing evidence.
Not content with confining his misconduct to inside the courtroom counsel for the State, pursuant to his own admissions, chose to release evidence that was not coming into evidence at trial to the media and to pose for pictures with his so called fans on the courthouse steps has turned what is supposed to be trial that comports with the rights due Ms. Arias pursuant to the 5th, 6th and 14th Amendments to the United States Constitution and Art. 2, §§ 4, 15, 23, and 24 of the Arizona Constitution into something that more closely resembles a modern day equivalent to the Salem Witch Trials which ended in 1693. Wish we had an Amendment to the Constitution against run-on sentences.
This State like Minnesota?of affairs has placed counsel for Ms. Arias in a position that they cannot fulfill the duties they owe Ms. Arias, pursuant Arizona Rules of Criminal Procedure, Rule 6.8. Counsel’s inability to fulfill these duties would thus result in Ms. Arias not having the benefit of the rights she is due pursuant to the 5th, 6th and 14th Amendments to the United States Constitution. Support for this Motion can be found in the attached Memorandum of Points and Authorities that is incorporated herein by reference. Like, from the REAL lawyers.
I. RELEVANT FACTS
Opening statements in this matter were made on January 2, 2013. Since that time the State has thrown evidence and his pen, yelled at nearly every witness who took the stand in support of Ms. Arias and has hurled personal insults at defense counsel. Juan: Next time, don’t throw your pen. In response to this behavior Ms. Arias has had to make several oral motions Oh. Nevermind. for mistrial that have been summarily denied by this court. More recently Ms. Arias has had to make mistrial motions because the State has not confined its misconduct to inside the courtroom. Most prominent amongst this extra-curricular misconduct is his decision The State is a “he’? to pose for photographs with his “fans” outside the courthouse steps where jurors could potentially see him so doing. In further efforts to prove his case in the court of public opinion rather than a court of law on April 4, 2013, the State unapologetically admitted that it had released a plethora of damming Oh my. I can think of only ONE thing in this trial I’d like to see dammed, "unapologetically," and it ain’t the Columbia River, although it’s almost as wide. evidence that would not otherwise come into trial to the media. Pending before this court is a motion for mistrial based on the former, Ms. Arias’ motion for mistrial based on the latter was summarily denied. [B} What? [/B] Note should also be made of the fact that the conduct described above has ramifications that effect the word you want is “affect,” but who cares in yet another run-on sentence. the ability of Ms. Arias to present her defense as the public response to this unprofessional conduct has involved berating witnesses via e-mail, telephone and in various internet forums. Said action has not only caused personal distress to these witnesses but has made it difficult for them to provide effective testimony for Ms. Arias.
And there ya have it, folks. The poorly written, half-wit argument for most everything happening in this sentencing phase.