Retrial for Sentencing of Jodi Arias #3

[Nali87]

Hi everyone,

It's good to be back to WS and read all your thoughts. While I'm busy mixing your fancy drinks (dang! I just ran out of those little paper parasols), can I please share some of my thoughts about today's posts on this thread? I really, really don't intend to criticize anyone, but I'm troubled by all the criticism of Judge Stephens, in particular, and the justice system in general.

The judge has frequently been criticized as too lenient and/or too cautious. And the judicial process has been criticized as too slow. And some have even suggested Judge Stephens is therefore incompetent. But I think she's being very careful to foreclose any future appeals from the DT. In other words, she wants this trial to be concluded with no grounds for appeal. And that necessarily means a lengthy trial with drawn out and tedious processes. Shouldn't we respect that? And shouldn't we also applaud her efforts to see that JA has no grounds for appeal?

I was also troubled by the eye-rolls today about the judge's scheduling. Some here seem to assume that the JA trial is her only trial and therefore assume that she must devote all of her time to it. Others, who recognize that she is busy with other trials as well as JA's, seem angry that she "quits" at 4:00 and does nothing on Fridays. C'mon. As AZLawyer has repeatedly pointed out, much of her work is done in chambers. That is, just because she is not sitting at her official judicial bench, in her judicial robes, doesn't mean she's not working or that the legal process has the day off. In fact, I suspect she works well beyond a "regular" 40-hour week (or even a 60-hour week).

In other words, Judge Stephens strikes me as a very competent judge who knows the law and knows the legal system. She deserves our respect, not our scorn.

I didn't intend this as a pro-JSS post, but I get very troubled when citizens vacate their civic duty by not pausing to think.

I actually think it's troubling when cases drag on for this long. Not only the rights of the family and friends of the victims are violated, but also those the accused herself specifically her right to a fair and SPEEDY trial according to the US Constitution. It seems to me that the best way to avoid "an appeal issue" would have been to wrap this case up in a timely manner. I don't think it benefits anyone when trials drag on for so long. I can imagine that the judicial system as a whole can't function properly if trials start taking this long to be concluded.

I think that speaking up and (constructively) giving criticism on a judicial system/case/judge is part one's civic duty.Democracy demands the people's opinion on the way government/judicial system works.

 

[Hez]

Bah Humbug #3: It's only a shame that a few of the defense "experts" couldn't be sentenced to some lengthy together time with JA in her tiny cell after their performances in the guilt phase. JMO

Where's that drink? :hills:

Don't forget to save a seat for the most unprofessional mitigation specialist in the world. I bet she's glad there are no live cameras to catch her passing notes between the convict and her family. :facepalm:

 

[ADoyle90815]

While it's true that no woman has been executed in a while, I think receiving the DP will send a huge message to JA that her peers believe that she does not deserve to live. :happydance:

I agree, it will send her the message that not only did a jury of her peers convict her, but that her peers thought that her crime was so heinous, she should get the most severe punishment she can get, which is the DP. Even if she ends up dying from natural causes on death row, she would remain where she really needs to be for everyone's safety. :happydance::jail:

 

[Quester]

Don't forget to save a seat for the most unprofessional mitigation specialist in the world. I bet she's glad there are no live cameras to catch her passing notes between the convict and her family. :facepalm:

There's only one available seat (the commode!) and very limited floor space .... but, we will squeeze them all in!

 

[lisalei321]

Is this enough? :floorlaugh:

(I might join you- even tho' I don't drink, but they look so pretty :facepalm: )

Have you been hitting the tiki bar in the basement?


Sent from my Galaxy S4, using Tapatalk Blue.

 

[Quester]

Here's how I imagine justice being best served in this case and throwing in a couple of others ...

JA, CAnthony and JVDSloot placed in one tiny cell a la Jean-Paul Sartre's "No Exit". :applause:

... The play is a depiction of the afterlife in which three deceased characters are punished by being locked into a room together for eternity. It is the source of Sartre's especially famous and often misinterpreted quotation "L'enfer, c'est les autres" or "Hell is other people", a reference to Sartre's ideas about the Look and the perpetual ontological struggle of being caused to see oneself as an object in the world of another consciousness. ...

... She refuses to believe that they have all ended up in the room by accident and soon realizes that they have been placed together to make each other miserable; she deduces that they are to be one another's torturers. ...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_Exit
​

 

[LinTX]

BBM - IMO, she already handed the defense an appeal issue on a silver platter by reversing herself and not allowing this portion of the trial to be televised. The defense will say that because she allowed the guilt and aggravation phase to be televised, she denied the defendant her rights to a fair trial and whole a new trial should be granted. So, yeah, I definitely paused to 'think' about that and the potential impact of her decision to ban live cameras from the courtroom for this penalty phase re-trial. And yes, we have a right to be annoyed that the victim was killed over 6 years ago and his family is still waiting for justice to be served, thanks to the interminable delays in this case. Meanwhile, the Michael Dunn 1st degree re-trial is scheduled to conclude today and be handed over to the jury for deliberation, and that entire process including jury selection took around a week, which demonstrates that the wheels of justice don't have to turn painfully slow. With the news that this case has already cost Arizona taxpayers 2.5 million dollars and counting, I'm sure those people will also exercise their civic duty to ask why this is happening and how it could be done better in the future.

Thanks just wasn't enough for this fellow civic minded thinker! JSS has never even come close to having control over the courtroom, the attorneys, the witnesses or the defendant. The way the defense experts disrespected the prosecutor was disgraceful. A defendant testilying for longer than most DP trials last was ridiculous. Allowing the defense to trash the victim with only a known liar's word for it was outrageous. The normal "Objection (reason)" followed by an immediate ruling is standard procedure but rare with her - it's sidebar, after sidebar. Which tells me they think they can persuade her and don't believe she is secure in her rulings. She allowed the defense to repeatedly interrupt the prosecutor's flow of questioning with their nonsensical objections, and that should have been stopped the first time they pulled that. In a way it's probably better for my health to not have to watch this disgrace of legal process again until after the verdict, but I agree with you that changing to no live feed for this phase was a gift to the defense appeal process.

While it's true that no woman has been executed in a while, I think receiving the DP will send a huge message to JA that her peers believe that she does not deserve to live. :happydance:

Not sure that she will ever accept that anyone that doesn't see her as a victim is anything but a "hater", but DP will keep her in solitary, with no interaction with others. That's what I want to happen.

 

[Hez]

Thanks just wasn't enough for this fellow civic minded thinker! JSS has never even come close to having control over the courtroom, the attorneys, the witnesses or the defendant. The way the defense experts disrespected the prosecutor was disgraceful. A defendant testilying for longer than most DP trials last was ridiculous. Allowing the defense to trash the victim with only a known liar's word for it was outrageous. The normal "Objection (reason)" followed by an immediate ruling is standard procedure but rare with her - it's sidebar, after sidebar. Which tells me they think they can persuade her and don't believe she is secure in her rulings. She allowed the defense to repeatedly interrupt the prosecutor's flow of questioning with their nonsensical objections, and that should have been stopped the first time they pulled that. In a way it's probably better for my health to not have to watch this disgrace of legal process again until after the verdict, but I agree with you that changing to no live feed for this phase was a gift to the defense appeal process.

Not sure that she will ever accept that anyone that doesn't see her as a victim is anything but a "hater", but DP will keep her in solitary, with no interaction with others. That's what I want to happen.

BBM - Exactly! She needs just needs to say Overruled or Sustained and get on with it, but she keeps letting the defense badger her. If the defense can't say in open court why they are objecting, then she needs simply needs to overrule them on the spot and move on! :gaah:

 

[rose222]

I too am confused about the Judge not allowing this penalty phase of the trial to be televised. Perhaps her decision had everything to do with protecting the mitigation witnesses. Since mitigation was not relevant in the guilt/innocence/aggravation phases the Judge saw no reason to ban live TV coverage. Since (supposedly) Arias' witnesses did not testify during penalty phase #1 due to threats etc. (Remember Nurmi threw a hissy fit regarding the safety of Arias' friend Patricia) the Judge decided to be extra cautious this time around to ensure their protection. It still doesn't make sense. If she had decided to have their testimonies heard behind closed doors then that would afford the witnesses a little extra protection. In this case however, I think the witnesses' names will be revealed via twitter. I really don't understand what this censorship offers to anyone apart from the defendant who courts the media when it suits her.

 

[YESorNO]

Have you been hitting the tiki bar in the basement?


Sent from my Galaxy S4, using Tapatalk Blue.

:floorlaugh::floorlaugh: I rarely visit the "basement"- like to stay above ground myself (although we did have a bar and hot tub in the Sidebar when it first opened- with lots of YTube music :facepalm.

 

[Kensie]

I remember drooling over TexMex's food. Sorry to be o/t.

 

[YESorNO]

I had posted these articles in the Sidebar this past Summer, written by a former prosecutor, about JSS's performance in the courtroom and thought I'd post this here today since there is talk of JSS ( he opened my eyes a bit):

The Jodi Arias Trial: Justice Run Amok

"Forgive me, as a former federal prosecutor for 17 years, it is hard to watch the Jodi Arias trial, not because she is guilty and deserves the death penalty but because of the incredibly poor performance by Judge Sherry Stephens...."

http://corruptioncrimecompliance.com/2013/05/the-jodi-arias-trial-justice-run-amok/

Jodi Arias Trial: Prediction

"...As a former prosecutor, it pains me to watch a criminal trial so poorly managed. It is not an accurate reflection of day-to-day criminal trials, and no matter what – the trial judge bears the responsibility for this chaos...."

http://corruptioncrimecompliance.com/2013/04/jodi-arias-trial-prediction/

More articles on the trial thru this former prosecutor's eyes:

http://corruptioncrimecompliance.com/?s=jodi+arias&submit=

:seeya:

 

[YESorNO]

I remember drooling over TexMex's food. Sorry to be o/t.

:seeya: Are you hungry, my dear? :facepalm:

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

I had posted these articles in the Sidebar this past Summer, written by a former prosecutor, about JSS's performance in the courtroom and thought I'd post this here today since there is talk of JSS ( he opened my eyes a bit):

The Jodi Arias Trial: Justice Run Amok

"Forgive me, as a former federal prosecutor for 17 years, it is hard to watch the Jodi Arias trial, not because she is guilty and deserves the death penalty but because of the incredibly poor performance by Judge Sherry Stephens...."

http://corruptioncrimecompliance.com/2013/05/the-jodi-arias-trial-justice-run-amok/

Jodi Arias Trial: Prediction

"...As a former prosecutor, it pains me to watch a criminal trial so poorly managed. It is not an accurate reflection of day-to-day criminal trials, and no matter what – the trial judge bears the responsibility for this chaos...."

http://corruptioncrimecompliance.com/2013/04/jodi-arias-trial-prediction/

More articles on the trial thru this former prosecutor's eyes:

http://corruptioncrimecompliance.com/?s=jodi+arias&submit=

:seeya:

I think they are wrong about the good Judge. They may not like it but she has taken away all JA's chances at appeals except for the automatic ones. She had every right considered and taken care of, She was clear and made sure JA got a fair trial. In the end that is what matters.

 

[Hez]

I too am confused about the Judge not allowing this penalty phase of the trial to be televised. Perhaps her decision had everything to do with protecting the mitigation witnesses. Since mitigation was not relevant in the guilt/innocence/aggravation phases the Judge saw no reason to ban live TV coverage. Since (supposedly) Arias' witnesses did not testify during penalty phase #1 due to threats etc. (Remember Nurmi threw a hissy fit regarding the safety of Arias' friend Patricia) the Judge decided to be extra cautious this time around to ensure their protection. It still doesn't make sense. If she had decided to have their testimonies heard behind closed doors then that would afford the witnesses a little extra protection. In this case however, I think the witnesses' names will be revealed via twitter. I really don't understand what this censorship offers to anyone apart from the defendant who courts the media when it suits her.

Nurmi basically blackmailed the judge into banning live cameras because he promised these witnesses that there wouldn't be cameras and that's why they agreed to testily for the convict. BBM - Lol, did he throw his fit before or after Patti appeared on Nancy Grace and Dr. Drew? Darryl Brewer was all set to testify in the penalty phase (after he already testified in the guilt phase, out of the view of the camera, well except for his hands, lol), then the defense turned around and wouldn't put him on the stand for reasons unknown. Then, that very evening, he gave an exclusive interview (orchestrated by Michael Kiefer, blech) and appeared on TV for everyone to see. :facepalm: All the judge had to do this time was allow the witnesses to testify without the camera on them, just like they did for Darryl Brewer. Banning cameras isn't going to prevent their names from getting out. Especially when all the court tweeters will hear, "The defense calls______ to the stand". 140 characters later and it will be out there.

 

[cindymac]

I've never smelled decomp, but evidently it's both horrible and distinctive. If I shared a house with someone and I noticed an increasingly awful smell coming from behind their locked door and permeating the entire house, I seriously doubt I'd think dead body right off the bat, if at all. I read somewhere (who knows if it's true) that the space cadet housemates thought Napoleon must have pooped in Travis' bedroom and that Travis left for Cancun without cleaning it up. Right. That sounds likely. No one would leave a pile of poop on their bedroom floor and just take off. Especially not a neatnik like Travis. And dog poop would smell less over time, not more. They have my sympathy, but they should have realized that something was way wrong in that room and gotten that door open way sooner.

Totally agree with all the above. Having smelt it (very "ripe", as you put it, body) I'm unfortunately able to affirm that decomp really is unlike any other smell - and most definitely different from, and far worse than, any other smell. Definitely not the same as a rotting animal, or anything else. And 'sticky' too - You just can't wash your hair or your clothes enough, let alone get it out of carpet, etc. So, yes, I think a touch of denial going on so far as the roommates were concerned. Possibly exacerbated by the "can't be bothered" "best leave it to someone else to worry about" factor. Of course that's a terrible shame. Knowing that Travis was left as he was, for as long as he was, must figure heavily in his family's nightmares.

 

[Becky Sharp]

Bah Humbug #3: It's only a shame that a few of the defense "experts" couldn't be sentenced to some lengthy together time with JA in her tiny cell after their performances in the guilt phase. JMO

Where's that drink? :hills:

What can I fix ya?

 

[Tuba]

A navy grog, please!

 

[TexMex]

Cheeseburgers tonight Kensie

And a cold beer ��

 

[Nore]

This is among the reasons that I won't follow the case in earnest like I did last time. I doubt there will be a unanimous DP verdict, and JSS' loosey-goosey courtroom control convinced me that she would not sentence JA to LWOP. Jodi's counting on it, I'm sure. :moo:

-----------
BetteDavisEyes, me too! I watched beginning of Micheal Dunn trial. I cant believe it is going to the jury already. This is also a retrial on part of the case. Good work Judge, DT., and Prosecution. :cheers: something seems wrong with this case, they no sooner start and a day off~:thinking: