Retrial for Sentencing of Jodi Arias - 12/3 -12/04 In recess w/hearing

[Boytwnmom]

since your client has already been convicted of first degree murder with special circumstances. Does the DT think they are such magicians the jury will forget about all that "unpleasantness" if they distract & delay sufficiently? Cause that's a pretty tough thing to forget-being an especially heinous murder and all.

I've got to think that, to most normal people, these messages would be more illustrative of how much she tormented him while he was alive, prior to viciously murdering him. Not seeing how this is mitigation. I've never heard of DP mitigation being approached in this rather novel way. Not even sure what the point is-seems to veer between he deserved to die because he used her for sex, was mean to her, wouldn't emotionally commit to her, liked little boys, no, little girls and between him allegedly wanting to commit suicide which I guess means she somehow helped him or just sped his death up as he was going to die soon anyway so it's not THAT bad. But never about Jodi and how she realizes she made poor choices and is remorseful about killing and lying and lying and lying. No, nothing about Jodi, the actual convicted killer. Novel. Really.

I agree, Hope. And I imagine as the Dr. was reading these messages where Travis says horrible mean things about Jodi, they have to be thinking, but he was RIGHT about her being evil, and a liar, and the worst thing that ever happened to him, so maybe all the rest of this was justified as well. These are not really such mean things to say to a person who would travel 1000 miles to kill you three times over in an especially cruel manner and then lie about it repeatedly with a smile on her face.

 

[bsk]

A smart defense lawyer would try and get this case to the jury a few days before Christmas. We know what happens when jurors are forced to make decisions right before the holidays.

The defense lawyers have it easy. Focus on mental illness, show a little remorse, complete the case right before Xmas...so many things they can do to try and convince the jury to spare the defendant's life but no, they have to go down 'Slime Highway' (cough cough) and trash the victim, spar with the prosecutor and generally present themselves as blood-thirsty individuals. Fools.

BBM - Well there's always a few days before Easter as a possibility.... :noooo:

 

[Adress]

Great post and I hope you're right. OT I apologize because this was probably asked before. Just how many DP cases has JSS presided over?

This is her first one.

 

[rose222]

BBM - Well there's always a few days before Easter as a possibility.... :noooo:

Easter or....the Fourth of July? That would get us to the two year anniversary of the first-degree murder verdict. If Arias is given life, then the Judge and lawyers will need some time to prepare for the sentencing proceedings. :scared::hills:

 

[krkrjx]

I don't approach my front door with bell/knock unless I'm expecting someone either. It's the times I guess. All my neighbors and friends know it is southern *polite* to call first. But more for me, it's more likely that it is noon, and I'm still in my jammies watching a trial and not presentable that is the real reason I don't answer the door :floorlaugh: :floorlaugh:

My experience was a long time ago and in a podunk-like area of the state; nothing much happened there and people came to your door unannounced. It's just the way it was there at that time.

Now, I never answer the door unless I am expecting someone, or can see in advance who it is. If I don't know the person, I let them knock and I do not respond. I don't even pretend to not be home. I leave the TV audio up or music playing. People who know me know my rules on this, that I am no longer comfortable just opening the door.

So if I were to be served today, they would have to catch me out and about somewhere to do it. And then it wouldn't be easy because I would not identify myself just because someone asked. I wonder how many others have changed their ways in this regard, making serving a subpoena more difficult than it once was. And possibly signature is required now when it wasn't back then because the process has had to change. Still, I do not think subpoenas come by FedEx--at least not in my neck of the woods.

 

[RickshawFan]

Thanks here's a jury question and answer I find particularly appalling:

Q: If Jodi saw Travis looking at child *advertiser censored* would it change their relationship?

A: Yes. yes it would change. It's like finding your husband cross-dressing.

I think the better analogy would be It's like finding your husband molesting a little boy. After all that's almost what CMJA saw, right? I don't put cross dressing in the same area code as a child molestation. It's actually offensive to use that as an analogy.

BBM. Agreed: Dr. F is equating a form of sexual expression with a serious crime.

 

[TrialWatcher]

I don't think she had to bother telling that to JA. Jodi NEVER would have told the truth about what really sparked that rant. She will take that to the grave because that tidbit, I believe, indicates just how sick and twisted she really is.
Personally I think she told Travis that she recorded their phone sex conversations and planned to use it against him. But I have no proof of that.

That is exactly what I suspect happened. It is probably why we never heard what the argument was about in any great or convincing detail. Arias planned to blackmail Travis using the sex tape. That would spark anger in a saint. It also explains the sexual terms used in the exchange. The sex tape was to hurt him, perhaps even control him but it backfired. Then CMJA brought her main plan into play. Operation Slaughter. My heart breaks for Travis.

 

[daisydomino]

Those two times weren't for capital cases, I hope.

This is her first capital trial.

 

[Nali87]

This is her first capital trial.

Sigh. I know there has to be a "first" but boy, do I wish it wasn't this one. An easier/simpler case should have been her first DP case.

I feel silly criticizing judges because man she's a JUDGE and I'm sure she has tons of experience snd is tremendously capable but from the outside looking in it seems like she's lost control. If she ever had it.

 

[5bigfish5]

A smart defense lawyer would try and get this case to the jury a few days before Christmas. We know what happens when jurors are forced to make decisions right before the holidays.

The defense lawyers have it easy. Focus on mental illness, show a little remorse, complete the case right before Xmas...so many things they can do to try and convince the jury to spare the defendant's life but no, they have to go down 'Slime Highway' (cough cough) and trash the victim, spar with the prosecutor and generally present themselves as blood-thirsty individuals. Fools.

Oh, I agree.

People get all sappy around the Holidays, not an unknown Courtroom tactic. But with Jodi at the helm....

I do feel for the jurors, I am sure they are hearing Doo-doo-doo-doo, doo-doo-doo-doo, doo-doo-doo-doo, instead of Christmas carols running through their heads.

 

[runningwater]

I absolutely agree....The inmates have taken over the asylum...

 

[MsJosie]

For the lawyers please...I did ask on the side bar but not many people there right now.

The jail and prison inmates are allowed reading material. As I remember in the Caylee Anthony case when FCA was caught passing a note in a 'library' book, there was a comment made that only certain reading materials were allowed. Is this the case in Arizona? Is the rule the same for prison and jail? Would material such as a book written by Jose Baez, about the case be allowed? I know the inmates can read cases to help with their case, I am talking about fiction, non fiction, sciences, mysteries etc.

thank you in advance

 

[Marshmallow]

someone up above me mentioned this, I forgot to quote them.

re: remorse.
that's the one thing we've heard absotootly nada about. where's the remorse? where's the feeling horrendous for taking a life? where's the taking responsibility for what she's done?

 

[Boytwnmom]

in perspective. This is not about mean words, messages, sex habits, *advertiser censored* or any of the other distractions they're throwing off the back of the turnip truck. That's why Juan is not going over each line of minutia like the DT is-he's not going to get the jury lost in the weeds. They will be reminded of what this is about-murder with special circumstances and whether the convicted first degree murderer gets to spend the rest of her life in prison or whether she gets sentenced to death. Faced with yet another kooky defense "expert" he quickly exposed her to the jury and sat down. The defense can keep anyone they want on the stand for the next 365 days and Juan will still bring it back to the murder and murderer. Let's remember their brilliant plan to have Jodi on the stand for 18 days and how much that helped her. In the end the jury remembered the murder and we have the same prosecutor reminding this jury.

All I can say is if I were a juror I would be onto Dr. F like white on rice. She focused on Travis' faults exclusively. Everything was his fault, none was Jodi's. We all know relationship 'dynamics' don't work that way. Her use of idioms like 'gutted' and 'snuffed out' I would find blatantly disgusting in the 'context' of this trial, and finally, her stonewalling of Juan would have removed the last dying embers of respect I could possibly have mustered. If this is the face and character of Jodi's mitigation, I would be more convinced than ever that she deserves the DP.

 

[garthmax]

Does anyone know when TA went to his Bishop? When was TA expelled from the Temple? Is this same Bishop scheduled to testify? I am thinking (not a good thing) that TA went to his Bishop before CMJA could give the Bishop TA nude photo's, CMJA nude photos, his journal entries, possible phone sex tape, or her writing a letter describing TA calling CMJA the three hole wonder, etc. or CMJA sent the Bishop letters describing the relationship, the Bishop called TA and held a meeting and he was expelled from the Temple. Now that would send me on a rant for sure.

 

[Val1]

Well he's got the computer expert thing going on, and writing songs for rock and rollers, playing his drums and guitar, winning all his EMMY AWARDS.....there is just not enough time in the day :wink:

PS he thinks very highly of himself

Ta Da !! Recipient of numerous EMMY AWARDS – National Association of Television Arts & Sciences for Technical Excellence


Written & Recorded music with Blue Oyster Cult, 24,000,000 (24 Million) albums sold - Gold & Platinum records) & Credence Clear Water Revival recording artist Tom Fogerty (Movie Score). I have Mixed / Engineered for numerous top recording acts; Jazz, Rock & Classical.

Written music for hundreds of commercials including music cuts for Super Bowl *advertiser censored* & Music/SFX for 5 popular Video Games.

Worked "Live" sound as sound mixer for concerts with crowds up to 35,000. Challenging live mixes like: Chick Corea, Return to Forever, Ronnie Laws, Gerald Wilson's 24 piece Big Band etc.

Recently won an Emmy Award for best music on a Television series (Written & Performed).

I have Mixed and Mastered hundreds of National, International & Regional Television Shows.

Take a peek
http://www.skymeister.com/bryan neumeister.htm

Scroll down to the bottom and you can pick any button and she how great he is.

http://www.skymeister.com/bryan neumeister.htm

Sounds like a perfect resume if you're looking for someone to help put together a tape.

Speaking of a "tape", I wonder if the reason there wasn't background music(none that I recall hearing anyway) on the sex tape was so as to not be liable for any copywrite violations, or just to make it easier to hear when TA followed JA's script... :/

 

[Truth Detector]

I have trouble with this concept of some forms of sexual expression being "clean" and some "dirty". Dr. F has been trying to force us to make this value judgment. Dr. F is trying to blast TA for the sexual expression he chose to share with JA. And she is trying to use her "expert" voice to define "good sex" and "bad sex", when there is a huge variety of sexual practices out there in the universe, because people have different ways of expressing themselves. Let's not fall into the judgment trap that Dr. F is trying to force on us!

BBM

I suspect it was the sexual expression that she chose as much as or more than he did -- see KY lubricant.

I also wonder whether all the projecting JA did onto TA was mostly a window into her own soul.

I can easily picture her talking him into more and more physical intimacy -- he trying to remain temple worthy and she trying to convince him as she rationalized that it didn't violate the Law of Chastity (which by then she had been taught) because it was underwater, or in the back door, or oral, etc.

But then again I don't know how common it was to get/give a goodbye Lewinsky in the car on a first date circa 2007.

Either way, there's probably not much Toblerone tossing happening in the Estrella lockup.

 

[TrialWatcher]

I wonder whether they know that Travis and Arias exchanged thousands upon thousands of text messages. The number of times that Travis sent Arias 'mean' messages is minuscule. I love Juan but I wish he'd make this crystal clear.

I'm confident Juan will emphasise this at an appropriate point. He did so in the first trial. Perhaps he will use an expert to focus on that issue. Dr DeMarte would make sense of it all.

 

[salberg7]

This case SHOULD be easy, that's the problem. Cases filled will circumstantial evidence are tried and finished more quickly than this snail's pace of a trial. There is numerous evidence of CMJA committing this crime,minimal doubt, and she confessed! IMO the judge is the weak one here. She sort of kept the trial on track during the guilt phase - although she wasn't perfect like Judge Perry- but she has totally dropped the ball in this phase. I didn't bash her performance so far, but Ithink she has zoned out. Maybe she is ill? If those few days of the "emergency" were b/o her health, it was almost the beginning of the retrial, couldn't she have recused herself if she were ill? It IS a travesty of justice at this point, for the jurors, court staff etc but especially for the Alexander family. She is allowing time to stand still for every whim of this defense team and convicted murderer and what really gets me the most angry is that she is allowing the DT and the killer to shred the victim's character over and over and over again. Travis isn't on trial here. And the killer has no remorse! Yes I understand a person's life is at stake, but come on, really? Get a grip. It's not the guilt phase, that is over. CMJA belongs to the State of Arizona now, and let a jury of her peers decide her fate based on the US Constitution and the laws of our land. This retrial has no leader, noone steering the boat, and boy is it off course.

 

[krkrjx]

How about whether the DT hid evidence, re JA's "broken" pc that the DT apparently were able to recover some evidence from, or missing knives that may or may not have found their way to DB or MM during the month following the murder, or a cell phone that went "missing" for two years and then showed up with no chain of evidence but with what sounded like a pieced together sex tape?

Heck, whatever happened to TA's car that JA was supposed to have bought from him, where's the money for that, did JA ever pay it back to TA's estate?

Where's the missing engagement ring, where's the evidence backing up that JA had hacked into TA's gmail, facebook, myspace, etc and possibly destroyed or stole his book notes?

So much I either missed or just wasn't addressed that goes directly to why TA would have been upset with JA. As for her being upset with his "infidelity", I noted she was dating others after she broke up with him, where was her "fidelity", talk about a dog in the manger mentality... then there was the guy she hit on on that flight, where did he go?

Ugh, I'm remembering why I stopped following this case...

Inquiring minds want to know about it all, and IMO the jury should know about it all. Heck, if the DT can go through Travis' actions, words, thoughts, conflicts, and what-have-you that have really nothing to do with his cruel murder and what penalty the killer should pay, why can't the killer's actions, etc., be fair game?

How sad it is that a victim's life is not off limits in any way in court but the perpetrator's actions are limited to the crime she is charged with, and all the rest is not allowed because it is considered inflammatory. IOW, if how the killer acted or what she may or may not have said, etc., makes her look bad, it can't come in at trial.

I really think the jury has a right to know but if it has nothing to do with the crime I have no problem with it being kept out as long as the same consideration is given the victim.

Here we have what is potentially faked evidence...if it is allowed in without proof of its origin, then heaven help us all.