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

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
memoriesbymichelle said:
I think this is an organization that Attorneys can join. They have to pay a fee. This is not saying he is the cream of the crop. It reminds me of The National Honor society for my kids in HS. I could pay a fee for them to be in some book that no one will ever look at. BTW where did you find the judge's record. I would be interested in looking at that myself.
Click to expand...
I just checked the site out and there are numerous attorneys from Arizona (listed alphabetically) in the same category as Nurmi. So he's just not that special.
 
Hatfield said:
I wonder if that "association" is one of those things you get in the mail where they say "Congratulations, you are listed in this Association of your peers, and you can receive a hardback copy for only $29.99".

I am the proud member of some no-name "Poets Society" and my poem is listed on page 793 of the 1987 hardback copy edition. Basically a pay-to-play organization.

Wonder if Nurmi did the same sort of thing and just joined something so he can list it on his resume. :) LOL
Click to expand...

I don't think that's the case....but dunno. AZL would know. I'll ask my DH too- he does civil trial litigation.
 
Spycraft said:
I'm generally okay with the judge not threatening nurmi with contempt, in open court. He would have on the record, on audio tape, on video (not to mention photocopied tweets, photocopied entries from numerous online blogs, comprehensive list of every single print or television media that mentioned Arias in any way) to then use on one if his many "I don't like your decision so I'm taking it to a higher court, so there", complete with a dozen 10 page motions addressing not just the issue at hand but including EVERY SINGLE gripe he has had since before he was even on the defense team, rehashing everything ad nauseum.

I so agree with you that she has not, in my opinion and from my completely non legal background, used her authority to control him. He has been an insistent bull charging to the sidebar, head down ready to ram his words down the judge's throat. He's been a bully to the court and to Martinez. He's mocked state witnesses, actually laughing at them (Dr. DeMarte comes instantly to mind).

He's (and I include Wilmott in this, just as much) have made egregious accusations against Travis, with absolutely no corroboration except that from his lying client. And as I've said often, I will never, ever, ever believe that he and Wilmott believe the garbage they are spewing for their client. Although I have had derogatory remarks and even worse thoughts about that team, I do not believe they are stupid, and one would have to be stupid to fall for Arias' web of malicious, every changing, laughably outrageous detailed account: her turning her head SW while her body faced north, 17 inches from the bathtub, while lunged upon with her left arm at a 64 degree angle, her right arm extended elbow bent 11 inches above her head while making a 3/4 westerly rotation of her lower body, with all of Travis' weight on her, but with miraculous speed and agile manipulation (although she wasn't "thinking" at that point, just reacting to this nightmarish and death defying danger)...... and ludicrous, made up detail after ridiculous detail.......I don't believe Nurmi/Willmott believe her garbage, despicable stories, yet they perpetuate them every freaking day, as often as possible, uttering every salacious word, every sex act, every stinking lie.

As much as I have screamed at my TV/computer at the defense, and at the judge for " allowing" the flying manure feet, I have come to understand that unless the state objects, the judge isn't going to say anything. However, she could in my opinion, use forceful words and recommendations to control his obnoxious recitation. I don't need to give any of the thousands of examples where the defense has acted, in court, like recalcitrant children. Why hasn't the judge admonished any of it: the uninvited races to the sidebar, the open arguing with the judge's rulings, the bizarre and uncooperative (not to mention blatantly dishonest) witness testimony. Surely this judge could exert control, without the state having to ask for it, and such control that might just tick Nurmi/Willmott off........but grow the heck up!

I've never had a job where I was the sole person responsible for my actions, my words, my decisions, my relationships and attitudes. Thankfully I've not had to be admonished for much, but that's only because I am exemplary (OH GOODNESS, THAT WAS HILARIOUS TO WRITE!!!). I have been told I should pursue another direction, try another tactic, spiff up my knowledge and attend workshops and seminars. During all my years as a teacher, the staff was almost always encouraging, helpful, realistic in goals. But every teacher had to, out of not just respect but out of wanting to keep the atmosphere friendly and productive, give special consideration to ALL support staff because we could only do our job well with their help. Then there were the bosses. A whole different story, learning early on that to be successful you have to choose your battles and always, always, always be on your best behavior when supervisors were around. I look at the courtroom similarly, although perhaps that's not judicially correct. To me, JSS is the courtroom boss. She has the right, the duty and the responsibility to uphold the law, all the time, and to expect counsel to do the same, all the time.

Someone posted many pages ago when we were discussing who was more at fault, the judge who IMO is woefully falling down on the judge duties, or Nurmi and team for using her to their advantage. The point was made that if a classroom is out of control, you can't blame the students. Yes they may be obnoxious, they may be 6' tall bullies, they may have no parental support, they may be mentally or physically challenged. But that's where the teacher comes in, the one to set the emotional , physical, and educational climate for every single student, to show preference for no one despite their needs or poopheadedness. The teacher will have to get stern, will make students mad and worry the rest of the day knowing the 6'5" logger father of the 6' bully will charge in after school and try to intimidate the teacher, threaten to call the principal, the superintendent, and even write a letter to the school board. And to that dad I listened, as calmly as possible explained my position (that stealing a 3rd graders crutches, throwing them out the window, slapping that child on the back of the head hard enough to cause him to fall, calling him unimaginable cruel names, before refusing to leave the building during a fire drill, calling me names I had not heard before) ......and then handed him the business card for all district personnel and told him to feel free to contact anyone and would you like to use my phone right now?

The boss, in my case other school personnel, has a job to insure each employee works their hardest, within the scope of all the laws, federal and state, school district policies, adheres to mandated curriculum, maintains a standard of professional conduct at all times that will bring swift recourse should this not be followed. The boss in the courtroom, IMO, is the judge. She has the right to insist on courtroom decorum, one immediate fault I have observed, both in the gallery, at the defense table, and through witness testimony. It is her job, again IMO, to follow judicial law, to make lawful and appropriate decisions and to insist and expect the same from the attorneys. Her flip-flopping indecision is startling. Her obvious and oft used cone of silence/secrecy is disturbing on so many levels. Although a good teacher adapts her teaching to the needs of all students, providing additional instruction and practice to students needing that, it doesn't mean she tells the rest of the class, all the support personnel and parents waiting for their kids to go out in the hall and wait. She learns how to do it all! PFFFFFT on the judge for giving the time management challenged Nurmi DAYS OFF from a trial already terribly bogged down with delays to pen his newest complaint/motion. Pooey on her for believing she can set aside the constitution for any reason at all, regardless of any of the hundred reasons Nurmi had for demanding super secret testimony. Poo poo on her for taking a huge risk losing more jury members by dragging the trial on long past the Christmas holidays, something that if they don't already know officially from the judge they must be getting an inkling of after being given an entire week off after only a few days of testimony. Boo to the judge for not stepping in to even politely admonish combative witnesses. I don't see why it requires Martinez to say something before the judge will intervene. Again, it's her courtroom. A witness in her courtroom is deceptive, refusing to answer, looking to defense counsel for hints and cues. Her courtroom. (The classroom analogy again: when a speaker, professional, amateur, volunteer parent, or school personnel would come to my class, the rules still applied. A student disrespecting or being disruptive was dealt with. I would wait just long enough to see if the speaker wanted to handle it his/her own way without me butting in, but I wouldn't wait long because despite who was speaking to the class the expectations of student behavior ruled. Immediately, swiftly, and fairly. I didn't wait for the speaker to ask me after trying himself a half dozen times to control the class. I spoke up, and firmly.)

So I apologize for the rant, and for the rushed and unedited rambling nature of my rant.
Click to expand...


Excellent Post !!!

And great analogies to the teaching profession. We need more teachers in the world like yourself that have a great grasp on how to run a classroom and create a learning atmosphere for the kids.
 
I just saw this regarding the latest motion.

MaryEllen Resendez‏@maryellenabc15·6m6 minutes ago
@xxxxx We have motion but are waiting for confirmation-appears 2join 6 other AZ cases to dismiss DP for all.


https://twitter.com/maryellenabc15
 
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:
 
LinTX said:
First, I meant to thank AZLawyer yesterday for correcting the info re: mitigation specialists and attorney/client privilege.
Click to expand...

SBM
I missed that AZL post - is she not a lawyer so it's ok that they filmed her or is she part of the "defense team" and should not have been filmed?
 
LaLaw2000 said:
BBM:

Snapped is a term I do not believe in. First of all; I believe those dark thoughts of killing had been building up over time. I just don't believe a person can 'snap' and brutally murder someone all of a sudden. They either have the propensity or capability toward murder or they don't.
Click to expand...

SBM
Plus Jodi certainly planned ahead in CASE she snapped once she saw Travis. To me that = not snapped.
 
JSR said:
The point is to get as much distance and time as the defense can from those autopsy photos. The defense WANTS to drag this out. The more time the better and they think the more time will also increase the likelihood of loosing jurors. Bonus points if they are female jurors.
Click to expand...

BBM
Did we ever learn the sex of the other 3 that voted with the foreman in the guilt phase?
 
Judge Stephens had warned Arias that she would not be permitted to represent herself in pro per again, when she gave up that right after five weeks. Yet on October 20, HLN Morning Express reported Arias "appeared, to provide an oral motion to act as her own attorney." That conforms to what we saw in the minute entries. I guess we already knew she doesn't take NO for an answer but this NO came from the bench. My question to the board here at Websleuths is why you think she wanted shut of her defense team, once again. This may or may not be a hint: when she complained in 2014 that her character was being defamed by Nancy Grace & Sheriff Arpaio precluding her from receiving a "fair court hearing", that filing was not signed by Nurmi nor Willmott.
 
fifteen89 said:
BBM
Did we ever learn the sex of the other 3 that voted with the foreman in the guilt phase?
Click to expand...

Yes I believe all but one were male. So three out of 4. But I cannot remember where I read that tidbit but if I recall correctly that was the makeup. Which makes sense. Men are far less likely to sentence her to death. Women can see right through Jodi's BS.
 
gcharlie said:
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
Click to expand...

I was a little concerned that KN would use this as a means to get another delay but in the order by Judge Kreamer he states "It is further ordered that the resetting of this oral argument may not be relied upon as a reason to continue the trial in any matter."

So while KN may be allowed to join, he can't use it as reason to hold off JA's trial until after Feb. Though I wouldn't be surprised to see him try.
 
Tuba said:
Judge Stephens had warned Arias that she would not be permitted to represent herself in pro per again, when she gave up that right after five weeks. Yet on October 20, HLN Morning Express reported Arias "appeared, to provide an oral motion to act as her own attorney." That conforms to what we saw in the minute entries. I guess we already knew she doesn't take NO for an answer but this NO came from the bench. My question to the board here at Websleuths is why you think she wanted shut of her defense team, once again. This may or may not be a hint: when she complained in 2013 that her character was being defamed by Nancy Grace & Sheriff Arpaio precluding her from receiving a "fair court hearing", that filing was not signed by Nurmi nor Willmott.
Click to expand...

I've had a theory about why Jodi wanted to represent herself. I don't think she ever intended on following through with her pro se status. She only wanted it temporarily to get the privileges that come with it ... Like visits that aren't monitored and phone calls that aren't monitored. Jodi is a very sneaky woman. Her magazine stunt with the coded messages and her sneaking out artwork to sell proves she knows how to beat the system. I think she had a very sinister motive for the pro se status. I just can't prove it and I don't have any specific reason it's just a gut feeling. If I had to guess it was to drudge up the pedo claims regarding Travis.
 
fifteen89 said:
SBM
Plus Jodi certainly planned ahead in CASE she snapped once she saw Travis. To me that = not snapped.
Click to expand...

ITA!

I really hate the word 'snapped' even being used in the same sentence with Arias. She in no way snapped. She very cunningly planned this entire murder out for 6 days before carrying it out. That is not snapping. That is full blown premeditation at its worst.

While I do watch 'Snapped' on Oxygen the title to the show has always bothered me. The female murderers on the shows, whether they were one lone killer or was a co-conspirator with another female or male almost every one of them premeditated the gruesome murders they did.

By using the title 'Snapped' it is misleading and deceiving. Snapped is when someone murders in a heat of passion without any aforethought or premeditation involved.

To know what all she did to make sure this murder happened in her stealth mode of travel is not about snapping.

It is about a murderer on the road who traveled hundreds of miles with full intentions all along to murder a man who no longer wanted her in his life.
 
oceanblueeyes said:
Juan, may even know a lot more about that subject than we are aware of....... I think he found out it was more than kicking a dog and that is why he wanted to ask AVL about JA torturing pets.
Click to expand...

Maybe we'll hear about it yet.....
 
fifteen89 said:
SBM
I missed that AZL post - is she not a lawyer so it's ok that they filmed her or is she part of the "defense team" and should not have been filmed?
Click to expand...

IIRC, AZL said that yes, she should be considered part of the defense team, but the media probably weren't aware of who exactly the rule covered.
 
oceanblueeyes said:
I really hate the word 'snapped' even being used in the same sentence with Arias. She in no way snapped. She very cunningly planned this entire murder out for 6 days before carrying it out. That is not snapping. That is full blown premeditation at its worst.

While I do watch 'Snapped' on Oxygen the title to the show has always bothered me. The female murderers on the shows, whether they were one lone killer or was a co-conspirator with another female or male premeditated the gruesome murders they did.

By using the title 'Snapped' it is misleading and deceiving. Snapped is when someone murders in a heat of passion without any aforethought or premeditation involved.

To know what all she did to make sure this murder happened in her stealth mode of travel is not about snapping.

It is about a murderer on the road who traveled hundreds of miles with full intentions all along to murder a man who no longer wanted her in his life.
Click to expand...

The title of the show bothers me, too, only because it implies that when a woman kills something must have happened to her to cause her to 'snap' or that women who kill are just trudging along with their lives normally before something eventually boiled over. Sometimes that's true. Most of the time it's not.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Members online

... and 71 more.
Total: 217 (members: 72, guests: 145)

Online statistics

Members online
72
Guests online
145
Total visitors
217
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
609,262
Messages
18,251,465
Members
234,585
Latest member
Mocha55
Back
Top