Wow!
So I just got finished listening to juror 3's q and a interview. It was amazing but also disappointing. She was a little more comfortable revealing more of her opinion without revealing TOO much. Disappointing because I have CATEGORICALLY changed my mind about her. She was onto Jodi and I think the post release researche she has done has confirmed what she was feeling about her. She would have voted for death, I think.
First off, she did not ask to be dismissed. They were told the trial was running long and the jury was asked to give dates that might be in conflict for them. She had ONE DAY in January and she was trying to reschedule (she had already rescheduled two previous commitments). Not good enough. She was let go. The defense's doing, no doubt.
I think she likes Juan. She said she liked that, while the defense covered so much in the hopes of planting doubts, Juan would bring it back to the important things. That's also what I love about him. She said his treatment of Fonseca was brilliant, in that he didn't cut her off when she would get feisty. He let her show her *advertiser censored* and that spoke to this juror.
Speaking of Fonseca, she took a dig at her use of the word "voluminous." She found Fonseca unprofessional. It's exactly like we've said, when you act that way you reveal that it is personal for you and the only reason to act like that is if you are hiding something or you've some something wrong. Fonseca focused on the wrong things i.e. Too much victim bashing. I do not think that resonated with her.
She was asked about her trigger question. I think this was something that was bothering her. She KNOWS there is a trigger and she KNOWS Jodi is the only one who knows what it was. She watched Jodi's testimony and was disappointed to find, like us, that Jodi never revealed it and it was never discovered.
She found some of Jodi's behaviors telling. Changes of demeanor in court and the head stand in her interrogation, to name a couple. She also found it telling that in her first sentencing no one came forward to testify for her. She also found Jodi's reactions to the sex call that SHE recorded "ironic" (covering her ears, for instance). She was also very surprised to learn the defense has tried to quit on her.
She was asked what stuck out about the two opening statements. For Juan-he said at the end there are NO mitigators for her (she also said these mitigators did not negate the nature of the crime though there were two that she was focused on). It was objected to by Nurmi but it sticks in your mind. For Nurmi-nothing.
She believes it is Nurmi's goal to get jurors to drop off (and here, it seems like it was a premeditated effort, IMO). She said she believes he is "underestimating" this jury. She says the more he tries to get them removed the more pissed off and determined they will become to stick around. That's refreshing.
She was asked if she believes Jodi staked Travis: "ABSOLUTELY."
She was given NO admonitions about talking to the media or about what she can say. What she refuses to discuss is her choice. She doesn't want it to help anyone out.
She believes the state wanted her on jury.
In her opinion, the issue of Travis watching *advertiser censored*, what she heard in trial and what's going on now with the computers, is a waste of time. It wouldn't have affected her decision.
Her BF is confused at how long this is going on and at some of the DT's strategies.
So that's what I got. It was a great interview but at the same time disappointing. Her dismissal is frustrating as hell. Nurmi can delay the trial for days, weeks, but one juror has one day that is in contention and she's gone? Has JSS gone mad? With how long this is going to go, she should not be too gung no about releasing jurors over nothing. IMO.
