Retrial for Sentencing of Jodi Arias - 12/05-08 In recess

[Hope4More]

Wonder who will testify on Monday?

My absolute best guess? Nobody. Nurmi already implied as much.

 

[Hope4More]

My guess is no one. I don't think Nurmi has any witnesses. And I think Jodi might refuse to testify in open Court.

Jinx. .

CMJA will be given a pass until the computer stuff is finished, and Nurmi already has said he doesn't have other witnesses for next week....

 

[JSR]

I think LWOP or LWP will give her an avenue to speak however. Not sure about death row but I can imagine the number of interviews she'll be giving from inside prison. I can also imagine the people she will manipulate and the following she will garner there. The fan club she'll continue to run on the outside and the letters and gifts she'll receive. Because her fans will have a purpose. To raise money for her appeal. If she receives the DP that "JA appeal fund" will be unnecessary and hopefully that fan club will disband eventually. She'll take courses and do people's hair and nails, make friends and it'll be a much easier time on her in general population than in isolation on death row. It is easier on women in prison. It just is. And she is a chameleon who knows how to manipulate and fit in.

I understand why TA's family wants the death penalty. Too bad the last jury didn't see it.

MOO

I agree that Jodi will thrive in the general population which is why I think death is an appropriate sentence for Jodi. She will NEVER actually be put to death if given the death sentence. She will however be put in isolation and only allowed an hour outside her jail cell, and that type of arrangement will be difficult for Jodi and I'm good with that. The reality and practicality of a death sentence being carried out in Arizona is zero so the next best thing is a reduction in quality of life. And given Jodi's enjoyment of continuing to torture TA's family I have to believe that whatever means are necessary to shut that down needs to happen.
Just look what happened the other day when she stared at TA's family from the defense table after they walked out upset from chambers. Jodi relishes in causing her victims family pain. So I say she needs to be stopped and isolation is the only way to do it.

 

[dog.gone.cute]

Wonder who will testify on Monday?

:shush: :shush: :shush: It will probably be kept "secret" :shush: !

:gaah: Wouldn't want to upset the :dramaqueen: !

:seeya:

 

[JSR]

Jinx. .

CMJA will be given a pass until the computer stuff is finished, and Nurmi already has said he doesn't have other witnesses for next week....

Nurmis goal at this point is to drag this out to get three more jurors to drop. I have a feeling he might succeed. However I don't know the life situations of each of the jurors maybe they will have understanding employers and/or families that will be accommodating. I hope so otherwise this whole thing was a colossal waste of time and money.

 

[Hatfield]

If anyone has any doubt that Nurmi is purposely trying to drag this thing out (with judge helping him along), just notice how he throws in that he has 14 more witnesses.

He threw that in for shock factor and to laugh in the face of the court all while he keeps cashing his checks.

 

[LinTX]

For anyone who heard #3 interview..

I read elsewhere that she saw CMJA as "normal.". Context?

More intriguing, she seemed to suggest that CMJA didn't simply testify, that something else went on that day. Accurate? Any clues?

The second part is accurate. She did seem to suggest Jodi wasn't the only one who testified or there was more to the story, at least.

The first part...well, she was asked if Jodi gave her the creeps. She said she doesn't really look over there but said when she has, Jodi just seems...normal. I don't get the feeling she meant it in a positive way. Just, subjectively speaking, there's nothing outwardly creepy about her. She's just a normal looking person.

I have to disagree with MeeBee about what she said about JA's testimony. When she declined to talk about that, she said "again, it wasn't complete". That comment related to her earlier talk about not revealing her personal views in order to protect the integrity of the case and the remaining jurors' ultimate decision - at this point the info she had received is "not complete" because the trial isn't over, IOW. Also, she was not aware of the COA statement, and since they were probably sworn to secrecy, she only had a reporter/blogger telling her the ID had been revealed. I doubt they even knew about the media's appeal, etc. so she was probably a little confused too.

Her comment about JA seeming normal, was when she did look at her "the weird thing is..she seemed, seemed (repeated and emphasis on seemed) normal".

I will pull my hair out if a single juror believes the pedo lie, whatever the verdict.

I'm glad she's being discrete. I wish she'd kept silent altogether. What's the point in going public if she knows she shouldn't be open about her experience?

I agree, and after listening to her, think the excused juror from the 1st trial was correct in agreeing to discuss only after the trial is finished. If she had only come on to clear up why she was no longer on the jury, that would be OK. But she's even agreed to go on with Jenn again in some "ask your questions" segment, for some reason.

I did, after listening to this interview a 2nd time, figure out what was bothering me about her. First, she's pretty impressed with her own ability to analyse only the facts, and to lead the other jurors to the 'important' issues by her questions. In several areas she talks about avoiding emotion because it has no place in decision making. She avoided looking at the autopsy pics b/c she didn't want to interject emotion that seeing them would bring. She only looked objectively to get info on a question she might have. Same with the VISs, she said that emotion was not appropriate and thought they were told that they could not consider anything re: the VIS. That actually, both families were impacted by this, so it was a wash there. I'm paraphrasing this, but it's like she thinks she's supposed to turn into some robot in order to be fair. Hello, the brutal murder of a person should affect someone. The family of JA was brought into this, but their 'loss' is in no way equal to the Alexanders. The idea of just the facts, only the facts, being considered leaves the human aspect out of the jury and that is exactly why you're tried by a "jury of their peers". They're supposed to be human, they have emotion, this murder was not just a cold fact and being passionless is not necessarily all that useful in a juror, IMO. I'm glad she had other plans, actually. I certainly didn't get the impression as those tweeters did, that she was pro-state. Not at all, and further I suspect she thinks she would have made the perfect foreman.

 

[JSR]

Respectfully also.....
IIRC from Flores' interrogation of JA, TA's friends knew the status of TA's relationship with JA: they were immediately able to state that she was "obsessive, fatal attraction...." The great thing about Dr. "Data Point" DeMarte is that there is no fog, no attempt to obfuscate, and opinions based on evidence. I don't believe adding to or getting sucked into the "fog" aspects of the trial would get TA's case to the goal. But, also, JM in the past has shown a photo of TA with JA in his lap while TA's friends were sitting around. This was not at all a secret relationship, apparently: it's just that TA didn't think of JA ever as his girlfriend, so why broadcast it?

But here's the thing TA and Jodi's actual time being in a "relationship" was very brief and during the time he was in a "relationship" it was broadcast and everyone knew he was dating her. The majority of the time was AFTER they broke up and their time together could be described as an occasional friends with benefits. So "Dr" F's long and rambling testimony is somewhat moot. The majority of the time there was NO RELATIONSHIP. He was hiding sex yes but a relationship no not so much.

 

[Snoopy1]

I personally blame all this retrial crap on the first jury! Had they held out just a bit longer and come up with a sentence, we would have all moved on and Jodi would be rotting away in prison - DP or not....

JMHO

 

[atthelake]

Wonder who will testify on Monday?

:gaah: who knows. But on this upcoming Tuesday, I'll be heading over to watch LIVE STREAM the closing arguments and participate on threads for the Jane Bashara (Master Bob) case. http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?260623-MI-Trial-for-murder-of-Jane-Bashara-5/page3#post11273204. I followed the Bashara case since way back, and :blowkiss: to Darkman who kept us all updated over the years. Only the opening and closings had livestreamed allowed, and like this trial, has been twitters only ullhair:

I do wish that if/when Jodi's trial had closings, that at least we could see that live. :sigh:

Thanks to YesOrKnow for keeping up with who testified on what date so that when the videos are finally released, I'll be able to prioritize and do out of order? Would be fun to all head to the chat room, watch at the same time

 

[JSR]

I personally blame all this retrial crap on the first jury! Had they held out just a bit longer and come up with a sentence, we would have all moved on and Jodi would be rotting away in prison - DP or not....

JMHO

There was nothing the first jury could have done. The foreman was a stealth juror in my opinion. He refused to deliberate. So there was nothing the rest of the jury could do.

 

[Steve44]

I think LWOP or LWP will give her an avenue to speak however. Not sure about death row but I can imagine the number of interviews she'll be giving from inside prison. I can also imagine the people she will manipulate and the following she will garner there. The fan club she'll continue to run on the outside and the letters and gifts she'll receive. Because her fans will have a purpose. To raise money for her appeal. If she receives the DP that "JA appeal fund" will be unnecessary and hopefully that fan club will disband eventually. She'll take courses and do people's hair and nails, make friends and it'll be a much easier time on her in general population than in isolation on death row. It is easier on women in prison. It just is. And she is a chameleon who knows how to manipulate and fit in.

I understand why TA's family wants the death penalty. Too bad the last jury didn't see it.

MOO

I don't care if she gets the DP or LWOP. The DP gives her a legal advantage, and LWOP gives her a social one. Personally, I'd rather she had the latter than the former. Let her play the prison populace for all it's worth, she'll never be as successful as she hoped to be on the outside, she will still live in a cage for the rest of her life, and will be soon forgotten by the public. I don't care about shutting down her sociopathic personality, as long as it's kept within prison walls.

 

[grammieto5]

WTH, juror #3 says this jury has bonded and they are united, and will come up with a unanimous verdict???? What does that mean, I thought jurors were not supposed to talk about the trial??? I wish this juror had not given an interview.

 

[TexMex]

They were basically in a booty call type relationship for 20-21 months. They had oral sex within a couple of weeks of meeting. They would meet at the Hughes. They met at a hotel halfway. They were "official" for maybe 5 months but she saw his texts with other girls on his phone. Once "unofficial" she moved closer to him and they continued occasional sex. She moved back to CA in April and they'd have phone sex. Then sex on June 4. Then she knifes him to death. Such a sad, needless killing

 

[RickshawFan]

Respectfully also.....
IIRC from Flores' interrogation of JA, TA's friends knew the status of TA's relationship with JA: they were immediately able to state that she was "obsessive, fatal attraction...." The great thing about Dr. "Data Point" DeMarte is that there is no fog, no attempt to obfuscate, and opinions based on evidence. I don't believe adding to or getting sucked into the "fog" aspects of the trial would get TA's case to the goal. But, also, JM in the past has shown a photo of TA with JA in his lap while TA's friends were sitting around. This was not at all a secret relationship, apparently: it's just that TA didn't think of JA ever as his girlfriend, so why broadcast it?

Just to add...... since TA was under pressure to have a girlfriend and get married soon, he would have had no trouble broadcasting his relationship with JA far and wide if she had actually been his girlfriend. He would have been making jokes during promotional appearances about how he finally had a girlfriend, not that he was still looking, looking, looking.....

 

[Steve44]

WTH, juror #3 says this jury has bonded and they are united, and will come up with a unanimous verdict???? What does that mean, I thought jurors were not supposed to talk about the trial??? I wish this juror had not given an interview.

I agree. How could she say that if the jurors weren't discussing the case? Her public statements can't do any good at this point. The last thing this case needs is more drama. Two sentences explaining to the public why she left would have been appropriate. More than that, not.

 

[Nali87]

Twitter is definitely not the way to follow something technical like computer forensics. Right now, we only have tech talk from the defense expert, so there is a lot of info that still needs to be cleared up.

I don't get it with these defense "experts". Seems like most of them so far have been long on ego and short on knowledge in their field. For example, BN saying that the three phones were missing SIM cards. Travis used Verizon and at that time, all of their devices were CDMA, which means they never had SIM cards. Same thing for Arias' Helio phone. BN also linked the Zblog virus with a media player for *advertiser censored* sites, with the implication that was the only source of the virus. Another false statement was that Apple QuickTime and Itunes cannot update automatically.

BN, like Dr. Samuels, was not well prepared and could not answer technical questions. But he certainly made some strong claims and used emotional language in delivering his message. He is unequivocal that Travis purposefully visited *advertiser censored* sites. In both hearings, he has made statements by which he appears to be saying he can identify certain entries in the registry as automatic files vs. keystroke files. I have been researching this and cannot find the basis for him to be able to state this so clearly, unless TA's computer had a key stroke logger program installed on it. Last week, BN testified that Travis had 19 AV/scrubber programs on his computer and yesterday that number went up to 22, without any explanation for the difference.

I'm also confused by BN saying that he has not touched Travis' hard drive. Surely he is not playing games up there trying to say that he personally did not touch the drive when his agents may have? Willmott wrote the 11/20/14 Defendant's Response to State Motion...and included a picture of the hard drive after pins had been straightened so that the expert could access the drive.

View attachment 64937

Mr. Expert called previous experts grossly incompetent for not having found *advertiser censored*. It had been previously suggested that the first defense expert, Dworkin, did not find anything because he had been given a tampered copy of the drive. Yesterday it was learned that on 6/3/2008 a newer version of SpyBot was installed and then run on 6/4/08 at a corrected time of 2:44 pm. It may be that because SpyBot was run on 6/4/08, it did quarantine any active virus exe program on the computer, thus leading to Melendez answer on the stand. It may also be that the *advertiser censored* files were encrypted and coded, and as such, did not qualify as *advertiser censored* by forensic examination standards. BN had to do a lot of work to recover these files, and the type of work may not be accepted practice. We have to wait and see.

To me, this is quite simple. There are three distinct dates in question with this computer. By using the same software, a qualified examiner should be able to work from copy A to copy B and finally to copy C, producing the same results. For some reason, the defense expert is balking at providing the State with the unaltered copy, which presumably should be B.

Great post in it's entirety. But BBM is what I found truly hilarious. He's supposed to be this great *advertiser censored* finding computer expert but doesn't even know that for a LONG time iTunes and Quicktime automatically updated your system. He had the nerve to scoff at the question too talking about "apple licensing doesn't allow that blah blah blah".

 

[dog.gone.cute]

Bringing these over from the previous thread regarding Juror #3:

From Meebee:

Okay! Just listened to the juror's interview! It was interesting but not super informative. I now know why Nurmi added more witnesses. She learned it was going past Dec 18 and she couldn't do it anymore. Stuff came up. I do believe this is Nurmi's new goal.

She was a very logical, focused person. Not a lot of emotion. She wasn't overtly pro state or defense. She did ask the "trigger" question. I think she would have been a leader and she would have made a good juror. But after listening to her, I'm still kind of glad she is off the jury lol. Something just rubs me the wrong way about her.

The BEST thing she said though is she is confident the jury will come to a unanimous verdict.

From LinTX:

To add just one thing to MeeBee's comments about juror #3, she was the "book writer" and did ask a lot of questions. She said she did that at times to call attention to something she wanted the other jurors to note or to think about, and since they were not able to discuss things, this was a way for her to do that. That might be why some of the questions didn't make sense, because they weren't really questions? I agree with MeeBee about her though. She was very well spoken and bright, but I'm not sure she was seeing things as most of us do. Of course, she is getting a *very* condensed version and knew very little about the case going in, but still, there was just something there...

From MeeBee:

Glad it wasn't just me. I liked her, I really did. I think she tried hard to, at least, project impartiality and an ability to use logic. But something is telling me she gave weight to things that would have worried me.

I thought she implied she bought into the pedophile thing, in not so many words (don't know if you caught it). I think she did see abuse from Travis. I think she thinks they were both toxic, manipulative people.

Perhaps she would still have been able to give the death penalty, though.

ETA: And she had a frustrating, roundabout way of answering things lol.

Also, I don't know if you heard this, but when Jen was like, yeah, we know it was Jodi on the stand so you can just say it, juror 3 said, um, that isn't the whole thing so I still don't feel confident discussing it.

1st BBM: Whoa ... now how would she know this ?

Could it mean that they are getting along -- which does not mean anything because when it comes down to the nitty-gritty, things may change.


2nd BBM: This is why I am glad she is GONE ! There was absolutely NO PROOF whatsoever that Travis was abusive ... the evidence clearly showed that Travis had just had enough with CMJA and just wanted to be done with her ! Clearly, the abusive one was CMJA -- NOT Travis !

And IF this juror saw "possible abuse" from TA, I am really worried sick that some of the other jurors may have fallen for the LIES by the DT !


3rd BBM: WTH ? She did not feel like discussing it ? Well, the cat's out the bag and we know it was CMJA !

Oh, and Juror #3 did NOT say that she was under a "gag order" - did she ? So what's the big deal ?


JMO but I'm glad she's gone, but I am really worried that this jury will NOT reach a unanimous decision and God forbid, JSS will end up sentencing CMJA !

:gaah: I have absolutely no doubt that JSS will give CMJA life WITH the possibility of parole, and with credit for time served !

:moo:

 

[Amster]

If anyone has any doubt that Nurmi is purposely trying to drag this thing out (with judge helping him along), just notice how he throws in that he has 14 more witnesses.

He threw that in for shock factor and to laugh in the face of the court all while he keeps cashing his checks.

Absolutely agree! Especially JSS joining him in this plan. I truly believe she desperately wants to sentence JA to LWP.

 

[Tuba]

The mitigation witnesses will drag on like the Bataan Death March. Nurmi's oral argument in support of his motion to dismiss or drop the death penalty won't occur until B has complied with J.M.'s demand, "substantiates" his own claims and leaves the stand because that oral argument depends on B's success. After Dr. F. and B, my appetite for what was to be today's presentation is nil. How about yours? If this witness founders, the motion may be withdrawn in the near future.

At least a dozen Websleuths suspect the May 10, 2008 tape Arias stealthily recorded (wherein she is heard asking Travis to repeat or enunciate) was created to blackmail him. I think there is an unmentioned reason she was panicked by the thought of that airing at her trial. When she learned the defense was going forward with it, she "could not speak or be reasoned with or form rational thought beyond the horrors of exposing Travis and myself." In terms of her body, she is an exhibitionist and in terms of her sexual language & admissions, she is raw and blatant. Her testimony left nothing to the imagination. She was in terror of that tape because it was a threat to her case. It is certainly a very real possibility she feared the reason for the recording would be deduced. Websleuths are on it like bloodhounds when they post that her plot began that early in May, not on the 26th. The tape was part of a festering scheme to ruin Travis and eventually take absolute revenge in the manner she did. The "or else" aspect was weak by May because her hatred and his avoidance had reached a point of no return. She had to know it was beyond repair and for his part, he was confiding in friends how dangerous she was, receiving warnings from the French psychic and feeling premonitions himself. By the 26th, he provoked Arias into resorting "to my lawyer", as if. Her urge to destroy him was gaining by the day and out of control. That tape is in no way a jolly to and fro between two experimental lovers, that is an embarrassment to the killer. It is one of the uprights in her plot to demolish her victim and everything he stood for.