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

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
wenwe4 said:
AZL . . . I have been wracking my brain trying to come up with something that Nurmi might be doing that could actually have a potential of not being laughed out of court @ COA, and then asking you if there is any possible angle he could be trying (given what little snippets we have been afforded). First, thank you so very much for answering and being so patient!

Second . . . what possible angles do you think Nurmi might be trying given what ya know? There has to be some pattern of behavior or some filing or specific thing that he would need to support his seemingly irrational behavior - no?
Click to expand...

From the Ct App argument, it seems that he's really just making a general argument that the witnesses might be attacked. If so, there is just no way this can override the public's right to know what is going on inside that courtroom.

Hatfield said:
Thanks AZ. You covered what I was trying to understand.

I keep forgetting that the defendent is more than willing to commit perjury on the stand.

For any improper allegations that are alleged by the defense team besides witness testimony, I just hope the judge doesnt immediately take them at their word before really checking out the allegation.
Click to expand...

It is JM's job to check out such allegations, object where appropriate, and present rebuttal evidence where available. The judge cannot do this.
 
Charterhouse said:
Did you get this one Nurmi? It is worth a try. Maybe we should all start charging KN a fee for advice.
Click to expand...

I remember the initial trial where posters would mention things, and, boom, next day in court DT would use them. I've no doubt whatsoever, they read and use what's posted here.
 
bsk said:
So for those of you expecting testimony next Wed, instead I guess we'll have arguments over the motions Nurmi will have no no doubt piled up by then:
- Motion for mistrial because someone saw JA in stripes.
- Motion for mistrial due to juror misconduct (defied her court appearance)
- Motion to dismiss that juror when the previous motion is denied
- Any others he can dream up in the next 7 days while scanning twitter etc.
Click to expand...

And, I believe JA will take up some of his time with her demands to correct the wrongdoing done to her because of the ridiculous (snark alert) COA stay.
 
legal basis seems to be but a "nice to have" in this proceeding. I can't wait for the Ct of AP argument on the merits as it seems Nurmi ain't gonna lie down for any "lesser restrictions". I can't wait to see him cite the cases supporting his "due process" means secret stuff argument.



AZlawyer said:
I think it's OK since this idea had no legal basis lol.
Click to expand...
 
So, basically, JSS and KN are saying they don't trust this jury. That this jury will follow along on twitter, FB, etc. Sooooo....why not sequester? What a mess....
 
AZlawyer said:
From the Ct App argument, it seems that he's really just making a general argument that the witnesses might be attacked. If so, there is just no way this can override the public's right to know what is going on inside that courtroom.



It is JM's job to check out such allegations, object where appropriate, and present rebuttal evidence where available. The judge cannot do this.
Click to expand...

This was the 1 specific thing where I think the judge just took the defense at their word and admonished the video people in court today, when if she would have first carefully looked at the ruling, she may have realized that the ruling did not specifically cover what actually happened.

The ruling said ---- "(3) No attorney conferences: Audio recordings or broadcasts of bench conferences between a judge and counsel, or off-the-record conferences between attorneys and their clients, or between attorneys, anywhere in the courthouse are prohibited."


I think what actually happened was video was taken of the defendent and the mitigation assistance during a sidebar, so technically it isnt covered here. I realize that is just my interpretation and I could be wrong.

Mainly just trying to point out that I hope the judge is very careful with whatever the defense claims because they could be lying about things.
 
Boytwnmom said:
legal basis seems to be but a "nice to have" in this proceeding. I can't wait for the Ct of AP argument on the merits as it seems Nurmi ain't gonna lie down for any "lesser restrictions". I can't wait to see him cite the cases supporting his "due process" means secret stuff argument.
Click to expand...

But can he really stall until the COA appeal on the 25th? That seems insane.
 
KPinMN said:
And of course she got carpal tunnel from writing endless handwritten motions since she was convicted.
Click to expand...

Or from the repetitive motion of stabbing her victim almost 30 times.
 
Hatfield said:
If she is the secret witness, then this could be the main reason she wanted this hidden from the public. Perhaps she has been told how most people feel she failed miserably on the stand and Juan tore her to shreds. Perhaps she is finally realizing that she is not so loved by the public like she may have thought at one time.

It does make you wonder if she was isolated and filtered from reality during the time of those early post 1st trial interviews and she could have had a very wrong understanding of what people really thought of her. With her arrogance, I can see her making that mistake. :)

Someone finally told her the truth. :)
Click to expand...

No doubt it was Zervakos, the jury foreman of Trial 1, who set her straight, lol. Ironies! IIRC he advised the DT that JA was her own worst enemy.
 
Hatfield said:
This was the 1 specific thing where I think the judge just took the defense at their word and admonished the video people in court today, when if she would have first carefully looked at the ruling, she may have realized that the ruling did not specifically cover what actually happened.

The ruling said ---- "(3) No attorney conferences: Audio recordings or broadcasts of bench conferences between a judge and counsel, or off-the-record conferences between attorneys and their clients, or between attorneys, anywhere in the courthouse are prohibited."


I think what actually happened was video was taken of the defendent and the mitigation assistance during a sidebar, so technically it isnt covered here. I realize that is just my interpretation and I could be wrong.

Mainly just trying to point out that I hope the judge is very careful with whatever the defense claims because they could be lying about things.
Click to expand...

I think you mean the rule, not the ruling. But I do think mitigation specialist-defendant conferences are supposed to fit within that rule, even though the rule is not written in a way that the media would have known that.
 
NotMyselfNEMore said:
I never thought of that! I sure hope you're not right, but that's an excellent point - I wonder if that's exactly what he's doing?
Click to expand...

I HOPE she tries to claim he raped her. That is such an obvious LIE, Juan would rip her a new one. A claim as ridiculous as that would be a great thing to hear, with her under oath, for a death penalty trial.
 
Nosey Parker said:
Well ... as it was Mr. Nurmi's earlier contention that his client had no mitigating factors, I believe Cougarlicious found her job redundant, and agreed to remain as a paid babysitter/warden/courier, whose responsibility now is to keep the client a) occupied b) amused c) out of trouble and d) out of Nurmi's hair.
Click to expand...

I need an explanation here. Is Cougarlicious name calling or is it a tweet name?
 
So basically, Nurmi's tactics are only rooted in delay of trial that anyone can figure out. When JSS asked him about the 12/18 date he reminded her that he never agreed to that date previously and wanted a minimum of trial through end of Jan if not longer. If the whole defense is to delay court, while blaming anyone and everyone, in an effort to cause a mistrial - I think this should be addressed sooner better than later.
 
katydid23 said:
I HOPE she tries to claim he raped her. That is such an obvious LIE, Juan would rip her a new one. A claim as ridiculous as that would be a great thing to hear, with her under oath, for a death penalty trial.
Click to expand...

The jury already knows of some of her egregious lies, because they have been told of her history of lying by Martinez and they have seen her interview by Flores.

This jury is now trying to decide if she should get the death penalty. So is being a liar enough to get it, or does it have to do with the "quality" of the lies?

Martinez job is to make the jury find absolutely nothing redeeming about her so that she gets the death penalty. This has gone beyond catching her in lies, and extends now to painting a picture of a person so evil that they deserve the ultimate punishment of death.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is DeKalb County John Doe (2022)?

Members online

... and 120 more.
Total: 2,246 (members: 121, guests: 2,125)

Online statistics

Members online
121
Guests online
2,125
Total visitors
2,246
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
601,780
Messages
18,129,762
Members
231,141
Latest member
Little boston
Back
Top