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

[MeeBee]

MeeBee you are right in what you wrote as far as I understood it. The Judge is able to change her mind/ruling especially if another decision comes into play, which it did with the Appellate Court. Honest, KN, needs some refresher courses. KN could not even site another trial as a reference....but then the Judge let that go through....bad lawyering and judging there.

So does anyone know where KN and JW graduated from or what their class standing was?

And does anyone find it strange that JW has been real quiet through all of this?

I will check back for some answers...have to go check on another trial, more important, and deal with window contractors and bug guys.

Yes, the judging is where this could have stopped. The judge created more problems than she prevented.

I'd even be okay if live tweeting was prohibited. As long as the media is not kicked out and is able to report on what the testimony is at the end of the day.

Willmott graduated from the same law school as Juan, Arizona State University.

 

[memoriesbymichelle]

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

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

But would they really reprimand him since the judge is allowing his behavior? There is a phone number that consumers can call to report an attorney in that article. The judge is the one IMO, that needs to be reprimanded. I would love it if another judge "could" step and in and deny Nurmi any silly requests he has about secret witnesses and NO to sidebars. I would love to witness THAT tantrum from Nurmi LOL

 

[geevee]

But also, (sorry for multiple posts, lol) you are so right geevee. He wanted his whole case sealed so I don't even think his issue is calling them out of order so much as it is that he does not, under any circumstances, want to proceed with the media there. He's just stalling until he can figure out what to do next.

I still think the judge is trying to put her foot down. She was ready to go with shortened hours so Nurmi could have time to write his brief. But I'm sure he whined about needing all day. That was another stall tactic.

I guess I just don't understand the point in fighting this one little issue so hard at this point. Is it really SO crucial? His argument is that their presence interferes with Jodi's rights. But it doesn't and a court of appeals found the same. What more does he need? Does he really care or does he just want to win? What is he trying to hide?

BBM

I think that is the pertinent question, why the need for secrecy at all? What is he trying to get before this jury that the last one (and the public at large) didn't hear? It makes me feel like it's something(s) that when it does become known it will be too late to refute. I too think the out-of-order-witness stuff is a red herring, and he's willing to blow any small point up to appealable size but I don't see it working.

One thing that's occurred to me is with the type of crimes he specializes in, sex charges, he's probably familiar with closed hearings/testimony because of the nature of them so he's already figured ways to get a judge to agree with him for the need for 'privacy', but this isn't a case like those, JSS should be able to see the difference and rule accordingly.

I still wish JM's boss would pull the plug on the DP and just let her be sentenced, too much money, heartache and frustration have already been invested in this for very little gain. Most of us will be in our graves before she's in hers no matter what the sentence will finally be.

 

[HarvestMoon]

http://www.hlntv.com/article/2014/11/04/jodi-arias-parents-bill-sandy-break-silence-youtube

Jodi's parents break their silence.
You can pledge your support for the convicted slaughterer.

Breaking their silence? More like, asking for money.

 

[gcharlie]

I can't even begin to imagine what a family goes through in these situations. There are a number of WSers who have lost loved ones to murder and my heart goes out to each and every one of you.

First there is the absolute shock of learning a loved one died at the hands of another person. Wanting the killers caught, and wanting to know why.

For some, the killer is never caught. Even worse, the body may never be recovered.

When someone is charged, we have to put our faith and trust in LE that they have been diligent in their efforts and have the killer in custody. That faith and trust extends to the judicial system.

My heart breaks for the Alexanders and other families who have been subjected to this torturous process. May you all find some bit of peace some day.

 

[daisydomino]

But also, (sorry for multiple posts, lol) you are so right geevee. He wanted his whole case sealed so I don't even think his issue is calling them out of order so much as it is that he does not, under any circumstances, want to proceed with the media there. He's just stalling until he can figure out what to do next.

I still think the judge is trying to put her foot down. She was ready to go with shortened hours so Nurmi could have time to write his brief. But I'm sure he whined about needing all day. That was another stall tactic.

I guess I just don't understand the point in fighting this one little issue so hard at this point. Is it really SO crucial? His argument is that their presence interferes with Jodi's rights. But it doesn't and a court of appeals found the same. What more does he need? Does he really care or does he just want to win? What is he trying to hide?

IMO he's just going for maximum delay time. I'm not sure there is anything to hide—other than all the reasons his client deserves the death penalty and the lack of any reason for the jury to be lenient.

 

[krkrjx]

Here's the thing: on Thursday when the media was asking for a stay the judge said no because calling witnesses out of order would be too "problematic."

But now the stay is granted and Nurmi and the judge have few choices here. Juan was pressuring her to make him call witnesses out of order and Nurmi was saying you can't back on what you said before, which was that it was problematic. The judge had changed her tune, which she didn't really have a choice, but she was now saying yes, some of these witnesses need to come before others, but I now don't see a problem if you call this witness first. And I did wonder about her saying it was "problematic." Sure, there may be some witnesses that will need to lay foundation for others. But surely they can't all be like that?

That's what Nurmi's problem was. He wanted her to delay the whole thing until the ruling because she said before he shouldn't call witnesses out of order. Now she is saying he can and it pretty much looks like she said he will because she said witness testimony will continue next Wednesday. She did give him a whole week to plan his next attack lol. So we'll see what comes of it because there's no way he's going to take this quietly.

That was my assessment of the argument. He did say something about not wanting to continue with media present and she said you don't have a choice. I could be off because, again, I didn't watch the whole thing (gonna do that now).

Hope this makes sense.

I believe 100% that Nurmi wants court halted (either by JSS agreeing to a continuance or by him dreaming up ways to cause delays) until the AC rules on the 25th. I understand why he wants this (I don't agree with it but understand his thinking on this) but here's a "what-if" that he may not be prepared for: What if the appeals court's ruling on the 25th goes totally against any kind of secrecy/sealed testimony/banning of public or media, etc.? IOW, what if after the final ruling on this issue Nurmi does not get his way, not even in part? What will he do then--file a supreme court appeal? And if he does, is this retrial on hold until that ruling comes out? IMO, it is up to JSS to keep things moving along as best they can...that in itself is pretty scary, isn't it?

 

[concernedmother]

Breaking their silence? More like, asking for money.

Thats what I thought too.

 

[Nore]

But would they really reprimand him since the judge is allowing his behavior? There is a phone number that consumers can call to report an attorney in that article. The judge is the one IMO, that needs to be reprimanded. I would love it if another judge "could" step and in and deny Nurmi any silly requests he has about secret witnesses and NO to sidebars. I would love to witness THAT tantrum from Nurmi LOL

------------
Many States would not allow the carp going on here. Many sentence on the day the verdict c omes down. Mitigation does not last in others either. Mitigation is done fast and overwith. This is why I cannot understand how they are able to drag this out as they have. She is guilty beyond a doubt, I cannot see her ever being paroled due to heinous crime. They should just learn to say no and sock her away. She leads this court by the nose and every person with a brain sees it. I am shocked the people of AZ. do not rise up. This is over 2 million $$$$$ already and nurmi talks of Jan.. someone needs a brain to stop this chit. give her LWOP and have it over with. I'd rather die than live like that for years. IMOO..

 

[Nore]

I believe 100% that Nurmi wants court halted (either by JSS agreeing to a continuance or by him dreaming up ways to cause delays) until the AC rules on the 25th. I understand why he wants this (I don't agree with it but understand his thinking on this) but here's a "what-if" that he may not be prepared for: What if the appeals court's ruling on the 25th goes totally against any kind of secrecy/sealed testimony/banning of public or media, etc.? IOW, what if after the final ruling on this issue Nurmi does not get his way, not even in part? What will he do then--file a supreme court appeal? And if he does, is this retrial on hold until that ruling comes out? IMO, it is up to JSS to keep things moving along as best they can...that in itself is pretty scary, isn't it?

--------
Hi krkrjx, they had better watch close how they handle this. What is done here will be available to other prisoners also. They are opening :worms: in my estimation. Can anyone see them telling the next guy he doesn't have the right? I cant. She has no right to supreme court etc. she should have thought of that before she butchered Travis. She has no mitigation, different if she did. She is a piece of Ch*t that needs placing that's all. People of AZ. should be heard on this. Think of the good this money could due in the right place. I am ullhair: and I don't even live there. IMOO.

My similies do not work.. Can you tell I am pizzed?

 

[daisydomino]

Did Daryl Brewer and/or Patricia Womack ever say to the media that they did not testify on behalf of JA last year because they were afraid for their lives?

I'm sure they did receive lots of harassment and even death threats. I have no doubt about that. However, I can't find any direct quotes from them that they did not testify because they were genuinely afraid for their lives.

I'm only finding Nurmi's words. Nurmi and Wilmott wanted JSS to tell the jury "Ms. Arias had intended to present the testimony of Ms. Womack to you. Ms. Womack would have testified regarding the abusive environment Ms. Arias grew up in as well as the abuse she suffered as an adult. However, Ms. Arias will no longer be able to present the testimony of Ms. Womack because her life has been threatened merely because she seeks to testify on Ms. Arias' behalf." JSS did not tell the jury that. She said "...we can only speculate."

Juan Martinez had a number of other reasons Ms. Womack did not testify, but I'm not sure I believe all of those either. She is not on trial, anyway.

I found an actual quote here:
http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/201...as-pulls-out-citing-threats-and-inner-turmoil

Besides the threats, she said that her heart went out to the family of Travis Alexander, whom Arias was convicted of killing.
"I couldn't do it," she told NBC News in an email. "I feel there is so much good in Jodi to be saved but then also someone's dear life was taken."

Last month Troy Hayden reported that Daryl Brewer will testify on JA's behalf this year.
https://twitter.com/troyhaydenfox10/status/524623376585732096
Last year, Daryl Brewer did a TV interview the very same day Patricia Womack did not testify in court:
http://www.azcentral.com/12news/articles/20130520jodi-arias-darryl-brewer-interview.html

Just as it was last year, I think the whole "our witnesses will only testify in secret" argument is just smoke again this year; a delay tactic, and nothing more.

MOO

 

[Zuri]

My 21 yo daughter was just arguing with me because I said she could do something, and due to unforeseen circumstances, I had to tell her no, she could not.

Well, her argument sounded like a less educated Nurmi.

It was basically a more adult version of her 6 yo self:

You said I could. Now you say I can't. You changed your mind and I don't like it. I am going to whine and wheedle until you change your mind back. I am going to wear you down. If that doesn't work, I am going to Dad. And if he says no, I am going to go in my room and slam the door and sulk. I am going to pout. And if you ask me to do something for you, I am going to take my sweet time until I feel like doing it.

Can anyone else see a parallel between their children's argument and actions and Nurmi's?

 

[Hez]

Did Daryl Brewer and/or Patricia Womack ever say to the media that they did not testify on behalf of JA last year because they were afraid for their lives?

I'm sure they did receive lots of harassment and even death threats. I have no doubt about that. However, I can't find any direct quotes from them that they did not testify because they were genuinely afraid for their lives.

I'm only finding Nurmi's words. Nurmi and Wilmott wanted JSS to tell the jury "Ms. Arias had intended to present the testimony of Ms. Womack to you. Ms. Womack would have testified regarding the abusive environment Ms. Arias grew up in as well as the abuse she suffered as an adult. However, Ms. Arias will no longer be able to present the testimony of Ms. Womack because her life has been threatened merely because she seeks to testify on Ms. Arias' behalf." JSS did not tell the jury that. She said "...we can only speculate."

Juan Martinez had a number of other reasons Ms. Womack did not testify, but I'm not sure I believe all of those either. She is not on trial, anyway.

I found an actual quote here:
http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/201...as-pulls-out-citing-threats-and-inner-turmoil


Last month Troy Hayden reported that Daryl Brewer will testify on JA's behalf this year.
https://twitter.com/troyhaydenfox10/status/524623376585732096
Last year, Daryl Brewer did a TV interview the very same day Patricia Womack did not testify in court:
http://www.azcentral.com/12news/articles/20130520jodi-arias-darryl-brewer-interview.html

Just as it was last year, I think the whole "our witnesses will only testify in secret" argument is just smoke again this year; a delay tactic, and nothing more.

MOO

Patti Womack didn't testify because her credibility would have been ripped to shreds, after she appeared on every news station that would have her (and received 'licensing' fees). Darryl testified during the guilt phase without the camera showing his face. He was scheduled to testify in the penalty phase too, but the defense decided not to put him on the stand. Conveniently, that very evening he gave an interview to say 'what he couldn't in court' and allowed his face to be shown. The hypocrisy of this defense team knows no bounds. :gaah: Brewer's credibility would have also been ripped to shreds if he testified again. That is the real reason why they wouldn't testify, not because of any credible threats, imo. The only threats they received was the threat of being charged with perjury. :moo:

 

[krkrjx]

Did Daryl Brewer and/or Patricia Womack ever say to the media that they did not testify on behalf of JA last year because they were afraid for their lives?

I'm sure they did receive lots of harassment and even death threats. I have no doubt about that. However, I can't find any direct quotes from them that they did not testify because they were genuinely afraid for their lives.

I'm only finding Nurmi's words. Nurmi and Wilmott wanted JSS to tell the jury "Ms. Arias had intended to present the testimony of Ms. Womack to you. Ms. Womack would have testified regarding the abusive environment Ms. Arias grew up in as well as the abuse she suffered as an adult. However, Ms. Arias will no longer be able to present the testimony of Ms. Womack because her life has been threatened merely because she seeks to testify on Ms. Arias' behalf." JSS did not tell the jury that. She said "...we can only speculate."

Juan Martinez had a number of other reasons Ms. Womack did not testify, but I'm not sure I believe all of those either. She is not on trial, anyway.

I found an actual quote here:
http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/201...as-pulls-out-citing-threats-and-inner-turmoil


Last month Troy Hayden reported that Daryl Brewer will testify on JA's behalf this year.
https://twitter.com/troyhaydenfox10/status/524623376585732096
Last year, Daryl Brewer did a TV interview the very same day Patricia Womack did not testify in court:
http://www.azcentral.com/12news/articles/20130520jodi-arias-darryl-brewer-interview.html

Just as it was last year, I think the whole "our witnesses will only testify in secret" argument is just smoke again this year; a delay tactic, and nothing more.

MOO

I never heard any comment from either of them directly, only Nurmi claiming they had received threats. MOO is that they might have received a few but I doubt they received as many as we have been led to believe. Anyway, if they were not planning on lying through their teeth no one would have been outraged. People say unkind or even vicious things when they are angry. Usually there is never any follow through on such threats. MOO also is that the threat claims began with JM saying he would not let anyone get away with perjury. That is what scared the witnesses away, but they could not be open about that so they morphed it into something else. All IMO.

 

[krkrjx]

My 21 yo daughter was just arguing with me because I said she could do something, and due to unforeseen circumstances, I had to tell her no, she could not.

Well, her argument sounded like a less educated Nurmi.

It was basically a more adult version of her 6 yo self:

You said I could. Now you say I can't. You changed your mind and I don't like it. I am going to whine and wheedle until you change your mind back. I am going to wear you down. If that doesn't work, I am going to Dad. And if he says no, I am going to go in my room and slam the door and sulk. I am going to pout. And if you ask me to do something for you, I am going to take my sweet time until I feel like doing it.

Can anyone else see a parallel between their children's argument and actions and Nurmi's?

That's priceless!

 

[BritsKate]

My 21 yo daughter was just arguing with me because I said she could do something, and due to unforeseen circumstances, I had to tell her no, she could not.

Well, her argument sounded like a less educated Nurmi.

It was basically a more adult version of her 6 yo self:

You said I could. Now you say I can't. You changed your mind and I don't like it. I am going to whine and wheedle until you change your mind back. I am going to wear you down. If that doesn't work, I am going to Dad. And if he says no, I am going to go in my room and slam the door and sulk. I am going to pout. And if you ask me to do something for you, I am going to take my sweet time until I feel like doing it.

Can anyone else see a parallel between their children's argument and actions and Nurmi's?

Um, yeah. This whole convoluted trial aside...thanks for making me realize I need to get my 14 year old daughter moved out asap! Somehow, I thought the door slamming, sulking, 'I hate you more than ever', years might be over by the time she was 21.

Hope fading fast. Gonna search out a nice deserted island she can live on until she's, um, about 35 should do. :biggrin:

 

[TartLemon]

Hey wait... What's this about Jodi's sentence being vacated?:scared:

What's going on?

 

[lisalei321]

Hey wait... What's this about Jodi's sentence being vacated?:scared:

What's going on?

What?

Sent from my Galaxy S4, using Tapatalk Blue.

 

[Miss Judy]

I never heard any comment from either of them directly, only Nurmi claiming they had received threats. MOO is that they might have received a few but I doubt they received as many as we have been led to believe. Anyway, if they were not planning on lying through their teeth no one would have been outraged. People say unkind or even vicious things when they are angry. Usually there is never any follow through on such threats. MOO also is that the threat claims began with JM saying he would not let anyone get away with perjury. That is what scared the witnesses away, but they could not be open about that so they morphed it into something else. All IMO.

Patti *specifically* said that she never received any death threats in her telephonic interview with Dr. Drew:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=--6YSPMKvIc

Patti's portion of the show begins at the 5:26 mark, and her complaints of harassment (including her own admission of the lack of actual death threats) begin at 8:08. The admission is just after the 9 minute mark.

 

[LinTX]

Trying to find out if she's seen the motion, or where she got this info re: what the joinder motion is about:

Cathy ‏@courtchatter 1h1 hour ago
@SuzanneFleming9 @starknightz They are joining with others facing DP to ask it to be dropped due to State not giving proper notice

On her webpage, she says:

Kirk Nurmi has requested to join multiple parties in a motion to dismiss the death penalty, citing the State erred in giving proper notice when seeking the death penalty