Retrial for Sentencing of Jodi Arias - 11/3/14 Hearing - Part 2

[ILikeToBendPages]

Nurmi filed a joinder motion, correct? Have we figured out what it's about yet?

Maybe just that he wants the trial halted until the court rules about the public and the cameras and the secret witnesses. That's to be heard on November 25th, I believe, with ruling issued then as well. It's all I can think of given he said his case won't end before late January...only way that can happen is if there is somewhat of a delay now, and I mean more than the week long delay they are currently having.

But if it has all been figured out and I am way off base, please just ignore the above and I thank you all very much for your time. :takeabow:

Do you remember back in August/September when a woman wanted an interview with Jodi and Sheriff Joe shut it down? She wanted Jodi to be her next project on her agenda of women who had been wrongly convicted and given the death penalty? so I think thats it. Gang up cases and bog this down in federal court?

 

[wenwe4]

Do you remember back in August/September when a woman wanted an interview with Jodi and Sheriff Joe shut it down? She wanted Jodi to be her next project on her agenda of women who had been wrongly convicted and given the death penalty? so I think thats it. Gang up cases and bog this down in federal court?

I totally forgot about that but now you mention it I do remember Sheriff Joe's interview saying something about her not getting any special priviledges while he has anything to say about it.

 

[atthelake]

My guess is it falls under their right to free speech. Basically, a citizen can say pretty much whatever they want as long as they are not slandering anyone. They would have to be under oath to get away with slander.

:floorlaugh: yes .. The irony where it can only be done on the stand without consequence ullhair:

Sent from my SCH-S720C using Tapatalk 2

 

[AZlawyer]

I have a question AZl. Is it normal for a judge to stop the trial in order that one of the attorney writes an appeal. Will she also close the courts so he may also write the many motions he plans to write. Thanks you for all you do. This case really confuses me. It seems very strange that she would do this.

It isn't normal when the judge has already denied a motion to stay the case pending appeal!

Morning Everyone!

So Nurmi can willfully do this and cant be disbarred for throwing the case?

OMG another instance where the justice system is being held hostage.

That just doesn't seem right and its downright unethical.

IMO

It would be totally unethical and could get a defense attorney in serious trouble.

A question for our Lawyers please: When the DT say their witnesses have conflicting, unshuffleable (love that!) schedules, can the judge ask for proof of said conflicts? TIA!

Sure.

Not an attorney but I believe she was judged by a jury of her peers to be guilty of the crime of murder in the 1st degree, jury also finding extreme cruelty. At the termination of this retrial of the penalty stage Jodi will be sentenced and convicted of the crime of murder in the first degree and sentenced accordingly. So she is guilty, just not sentenced yet. Maybe one of the attorneys can explain it in better terms. jmo

Why bother, when you did it so perfectly?

AZL....is it possible for CMJA to request a mistrial herself? If so,what would she have to demonstrate and how would she go about it?

Not while she's represented by counsel. But I think Nurmi's doing a great job of moving for mistrials without her help! Is there a motion you think he missed??

I don't think that's the case....but dunno. AZL would know. I'll ask my DH too- he does civil trial litigation.

There are tons of these "honors." All the websites say that they are not like the others and are based on third-party nominations and surveys, but IMO about 90% of them are really, at bottom, pay-for-play. I'm not familiar with the specific one at issue, though, so it could be part of the 10%. IMO the only one I trust is the Martindale-Hubbell rating -- and not the "client" rating but the "peer review" rating.

Motion to joinder

Alright, someone has come up with a move to joinder as many pending death penalty cases as they can for a motion to dismiss the death penalty. Right now, arguments are slated for February 2015

http://www.courtminutes.maricopa.gov/docs/Criminal/102014/m6541879.pdf

Oh, interesting! I hope someone posts the motion.

 

[Spycraft]

How long did the penalty phase go on last time? Nurmi spoke. Juan spoke. VIS statements. There was a closed hearing. A witness did not testify. JA gave her power point presentation. The judge gave some instructions. The jury deliberated, passed some notes back and forth with JSS, deliberated more, for a total of about 14 hours and deadlocked. May 16 to May 23.

IIRC didn't Nurmi pull a stunt back then too? After the heartfelt VIS we thought the process with the defense would start. But Nurmi said, no we have no mitigation witnesses because the state threatened them so now we have no one to call. So a huge Nurmi orchestrated delay after the powerful impact of the VIS. Then the judge basically said fine, if you have no witnesses is the defendant ready to allocute? Then another foot stomping "we want off the case" tantrum. And then how many days passed before arias actually presented her junior high campaign speech? If I recall, it was several days, giving them time to perfect the PowerPoint and more importantly to create a ton of space between the VIS and autopsy photos. It was IMO yet another calculated and manipulative move.

 

[atthelake]

I read this as making sure to wipe my car keys........which, as careful as I am about controlling the spread of germs, I had neglected wiping my car keys......which I did just after reading your post!! A second read just now makes a bit more sense......but I would bet I have the cleanest, germ free, disinfected car keys!

:floorlaugh:

Then again, if you are following the ebola thread here ..you might be disinfecting all types of stuff these days.

Sent from my SCH-S720C using Tapatalk 2

 

[Boytwnmom]

truthful with the court, it would be very unsual in jurisdictions I'm familiar with, to demand proof in such cases. Techincally, the witnesses are under subpoena and are thus commanded to appear at a certain date and time, but courts always make accomodations, especially for experts who are busy and witnesses out of state etc. A witness is not a party and is thus generally treated "nicer" than the parties and their lawyers who have to show up.

Generally, there is a great deal of professional courtesy extended, even where repeated continuances are granted. I'm not supporting that, just saying it's been my experience that things would have to go incredibly "off the rails" to actually have any negative impact on the party unable to go forward for a reason involving witness availability. It's just like, in the trial, the rules about tuning over written reports of an expert by a certain date, weren't "enforced" in any way as I recall docs being dumped on JM and him just being given a short time to review them. Especially in a DP case and with this Judge, she is going to be very unwilling to sanction the DT by precluding use of evidence or witnesses that violate rules.

That was actually one of the things that most amazed me when I first practiced in a litigation firm shortly after I was admitted. I was filled with rightious indignation at the fact that opposing party was repeatedly violating various rules concerning disclosure and meeting dates set by the court. Yeah, that didn't last long.

The same with adherence to Rules of Professional Responsiblity which all jurisdictions have. If you read them I'm sure you could pick out more than one or two you'd think KN violated. But attorneys and judges seldom report attorneys or at least not for anything less than criminal behavior, and even then, it's not a certainty. In my experience professional responsibility complaints come from disgruntled clients and from situations where the lawyer has committed a serious crime. Most cases I've seen involve misappropriation of client funds or ignoring a legal matter.

AZL would know better how it is in AZ. I'm in merry old New England so her experience may be different. I think it was around 2000 that MA adopted a rule, which is in the Model rules and most states have one, about reporting the serious misconduct of other attorneys. That caused quite a ruckus as aptly demonstarted by this official comment from the MA Board of Bar Overseers which is the licensing and enforcement body in MA:

That Mass. R. Prof. C. 8.3 is sometimes called the “snitch” rule tells us all we need to know regarding the popularity of the requirement to report another lawyer’s professional misconduct to bar counsel. A “code of silence,” however, does nothing to enhance the profession, preserve the privilege of self-regulation, or protect the public. A good faith adherence to Rule 8.3 is essential to preserving the integrity of the bar and protecting the public.

A question for our Lawyers please: When the DT say their witnesses have conflicting, unshuffleable (love that!) schedules, can the judge ask for proof of said conflicts? TIA!

 

[AZlawyer]

http://www.courtminutes.maricopa.gov/docs/Criminal/092014/m6477369.pdf

Here's the order consolidating all the (apparently identical) motions to dismiss the death penalty in numerous cases to be decided by a single judge. I have no idea what the motion's about.

 

[atthelake]

I saw a post that transcripts were requested to be expedited today .

Can you imagine if they were released in the next week!

Sent from my SCH-S720C using Tapatalk 2

 

[daisydomino]

IIRC didn't Nurmi pull a stunt back then too? After the heartfelt VIS we thought the process with the defense would start. But Nurmi said, no we have no mitigation witnesses because the state threatened them so now we have no one to call. So a huge Nurmi orchestrated delay after the powerful impact of the VIS. Then the judge basically said fine, if you have no witnesses is the defendant ready to allocute? Then another foot stomping "we want off the case" tantrum. And then how many days passed before arias actually presented her junior high campaign speech? If I recall, it was several days, giving them time to perfect the PowerPoint and more importantly to create a ton of space between the VIS and autopsy photos. It was IMO yet another calculated and manipulative move.

Yes! Exactly. That's how I know there are 0 mitigation witnesses this time too.

(I do not know that, really, of course. I'm almost willing to bet money on it though.)

 

[MeeBee]

I saw a post that transcripts were requested to be expedited today .

Can you imagine if they were released in the next week!

Sent from my SCH-S720C using Tapatalk 2

Saw that, too. I thought the judge had already provided the COA with the hearing transcripts from Oct. 30?

 

[Nosey Parker]

Saw that, too. I thought the judge had already provided the COA with the hearing transcripts from Oct. 30?

Who's requesting expedited transcripts - Mr. Bodney?

 

[gcharlie]

http://www.courtminutes.maricopa.gov/docs/Criminal/092014/m6477369.pdf

Here's the order consolidating all the (apparently identical) motions to dismiss the death penalty in numerous cases to be decided by a single judge. I have no idea what the motion's about.

From the minutes linked above:

The Court has received a Motion to Strike Notice of Intent to Seek Death Penalty in each of the above-captioned cases.
The Motions as well at the State’s Response to each Motion are substantially identical.

Evidentiary hearings and oral argument have been requested on each motion. The Defendants have requested that the matters be joined for the limited purpose of determining the pending motion.

This Court finds that joinder of these issues before a single judge promotes justice and judicial economy.


There were six cases listed in these minutes. A minute entry on 10/23 had expanded the number of cases to 13 and set a deadline in January for joining the action.

Subsequent minutes state that this pending motion shall not be used as the basis for continuance.

As of late today, the court calendar for Arias has included 1/23/15 as a status conference date set for this matter as well as the 2/6/15 oral arguments.

How can this be? Does this indicate that Judge Stephens has already ruled and allowed Arias to be joined in this action?

Without seeing the original motion that started this, there is no way of knowing whether the motion and state's argument is in fact substantially identical.

Given that Arias' penalty phase trial is currently underway and the minutes above state that the motion cannot be relied upon as a basis for continuance, how can Arias be joined? Allowing her to join creates a huge potential issue, in that if this jury does find for the death penalty and subsequently a judge on this joined action agrees that the death penalty should be dismissed, what happens? It would seem that her sentence would have to be vacated and the State would not have the opportunity to try her again?

 

[geevee]

Who's requesting expedited transcripts - Mr. Bodney?

Here's the request for the expedited transcripts:

http://www.courtminutes.maricopa.gov/docs/Criminal/112014/m6562553.pdf

 

[Ricki]

YesorNo posted this on the sidebar.

YESorNO
YESorNO is offline The Queen (aka "mrsmuir")

Join Date
Apr 2013
Location
Avalon
Posts
5,705

Brent @ Kleinman Law · @brentjkleinman 1h

The motion filed requests two separate issues. One is #Joinder and the other is for an #OmnibusHearing. Let's deal with the easy one first. The Omnibus Hearing on Motion to Dismiss the Death Penalty is the defense requesting an opportunity to present all new and old reason why #JodiArias should not be eligible for the death penalty. Omnibus simply means a multiple of theories will be presented.

As for the #joinder issue, this one can be many different things. My initial thought is the defense is seeking the joinder of the #media attorney in seeking a stay of the proceedings until the COA decision is reached. Nurmi may be seeking some help in not moving forward and presenting their witnesses out of order. It can also be many other things possibly dealing with multiple motions related to the sealed testimony and witnesses. We will have to wait to find out.

There should be a Minute Entry posting today that may give us some insight.


Brent @ Kleinman Law @brentjkleinman · 24m 24 minutes ago
If minute entry posts tonight I will provide more info based on anything the Judge provides. Looking forward to more info #JodiArias


https://twitter.com/brentjkleinman

and post 193 on the sidebar which I can not seem to bring over to this thread. Maybe someone can.

I have know idea what any of this means. Any lawyers in the house?

 

[gcharlie]

Who's requesting expedited transcripts - Mr. Bodney?

Transcripts are under seal, so Bodney won't get them. I believe it was the Court of Appeals requesting expedited transcripts.

 

[Zuri]

http://www.azbar.org/newsevents/newsreleases/2014/10/brentjkleinmanreprimand

It does happen... Nurmi may be next to receive a reprimand...

 

[~Lyric~]

~Listening to Beth Karas talking on True crime Radio right now~

 

[gcharlie]

YesorNo posted this on the sidebar.

YESorNO
YESorNO is offline The Queen (aka "mrsmuir")

Join Date
Apr 2013
Location
Avalon
Posts
5,705

Brent @ Kleinman Law · @brentjkleinman 1h

The motion filed requests two separate issues. One is #Joinder and the other is for an #OmnibusHearing. Let's deal with the easy one first. The Omnibus Hearing on Motion to Dismiss the Death Penalty is the defense requesting an opportunity to present all new and old reason why #JodiArias should not be eligible for the death penalty. Omnibus simply means a multiple of theories will be presented.

As for the #joinder issue, this one can be many different things. My initial thought is the defense is seeking the joinder of the #media attorney in seeking a stay of the proceedings until the COA decision is reached. Nurmi may be seeking some help in not moving forward and presenting their witnesses out of order. It can also be many other things possibly dealing with multiple motions related to the sealed testimony and witnesses. We will have to wait to find out.

There should be a Minute Entry posting today that may give us some insight.


Brent @ Kleinman Law @brentjkleinman · 24m 24 minutes ago
If minute entry posts tonight I will provide more info based on anything the Judge provides. Looking forward to more info #JodiArias


https://twitter.com/brentjkleinman

and post 193 on the sidebar which I can not seem to bring over to this thread. Maybe someone can.

I have know idea what any of this means. Any lawyers in the house?

Kleinman was speculating, talking off the cuff, about what he thought this might mean. More info came to light after ABC15 got a hold of the motion.

The simplest way to put it is that pending death penalty defendants have joined together in one action to have the death penalty dismissed. A class action if you will, except that this is a criminal matter.

Last count I saw in minutes was that there were 13 defendants involved, not including Arias, who now has submitted a motion to join.

This has far reaching implications for the DP in Arizona. This story is much bigger than just Jodi Arias. The outcome will affect all of those named cases and set a precedent which, if they get a favorable ruling, could be the basis for overturning the death penalty for those already sentenced.

 

[krkrjx]

From the minutes linked above:

The Court has received a Motion to Strike Notice of Intent to Seek Death Penalty in each of the above-captioned cases.
The Motions as well at the State’s Response to each Motion are substantially identical.

Evidentiary hearings and oral argument have been requested on each motion. The Defendants have requested that the matters be joined for the limited purpose of determining the pending motion.

This Court finds that joinder of these issues before a single judge promotes justice and judicial economy.


There were six cases listed in these minutes. A minute entry on 10/23 had expanded the number of cases to 13 and set a deadline in January for joining the action.

Subsequent minutes state that this pending motion shall not be used as the basis for continuance.

As of late today, the court calendar for Arias has included 1/23/15 as a status conference date set for this matter as well as the 2/6/15 oral arguments.

How can this be? Does this indicate that Judge Stephens has already ruled and allowed Arias to be joined in this action?

Without seeing the original motion that started this, there is no way of knowing whether the motion and state's argument is in fact substantially identical.

Given that Arias' penalty phase trial is currently underway and the minutes above state that the motion cannot be relied upon as a basis for continuance, how can Arias be joined? Allowing her to join creates a huge potential issue, in that if this jury does find for the death penalty and subsequently a judge on this joined action agrees that the death penalty should be dismissed, what happens? It would seem that her sentence would have to be vacated and the State would not have the opportunity to try her again?

What bothers me about this kind of thing is not that she can join, but that if it is successful could overturn a death sentence. I am not saying it would, but that it could. I think it would require looking at each case individually even though they are joined for judicial economy. But there is always the possibility that in situations like that any ruling is across the board for all, I just don't know. But in the event that it is, and the joinder were successful (results in the remedy sought) Arias's sentence of death could be commuted to life. Again, I am not saying for certain it would, only that it could, because I do not know for certain. All we know is that if it is successful before she is sentenced, she would not be sentenced to death. The question is what would happen if it were successful after she were sentenced? Is her sentence then overturned?

Now, in the case of a death sentence overturned and commuted to life, it is just that...life. It typically is not LWOP. So it is an automatic possibility of parole (if AZ ever reinstates parole). And that's what I do not like about her possibly getting the DP. If she gets life or the jury hangs, the judge can say LWOP and it will not be overturned no matter what happens with the joinder action. That's only going to affect a death sentence. Some future legal ruling coming along and commuting death sentences to life is what scares me, as I believe Arias to be so dangerous that she must never have any chance at freedom. MOO.

I hope that is understandable; I am really tired.