Retrial for Sentencing of Jodi Arias #4

[MeeBee]

In addition to my post above about JA staring at jurors, I can "stare" at someone without being obvious about it. Anyone can check someone out thoroughly without out and out staring at them. IMHO JA is trying to intimidate. She has been in jail where staring can probably get your butt kicked, so I am convinced she is aware of body language and the trouble it can get you into. She is showing those jurors something by staring at them. She owns them. They are hers. She isn't scared. Something.

An interesting thing I've read about is the psychopathic stare. I read it's because while normal people use their eyes to see and to express emotion, psychopaths use them for different reasons: to study, to size up their prey, to glean. There's nothing behind them. Jodi very much has this stare and she's not very good at hiding it. The reports of her staring down jurors or Katie Wick were interesting. Robert Hare called the stare reptilian. Also watch her as Ryan Burns testifies or watch her eyes after JM finishes catching her in her gas can lies. There's something seething underneath them.

 

[Tssiemer]

Can we just give her the lethal injection ourselves and move on?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[josie1986]

Just browsing Twitter and this popped up...this guy has to be a troll right?[emoji2][emoji15]

 

[Hatfield]

Agree, he was fabulous to watch in action. No notes, and can change direction on a witness as fast as those bumper cars at the county fairs. I will definitely be doing an 18 hour straight viewing on the web once released. We'll need to have a viewing party for sure here at WS after the verdict opcorn: I know I can do it as I was in the scanner thread for almost 24 hours during the boston bombings iykwim

That would be fun. We can set a good time on a Friday or Saturday night and hit "START" on the video at exactly the same time.

 

[AZlawyer]

Just watched JVM interview JA's investigator and here are my thoughts on what is going on. I posted this one bit on side bar and I'm just going to put that over here too… and also what has occurred to me.

She's claiming one of her appealable issues is she didn't get a speedy trial and it has dragged on and on and on and she's blaming that on first chair… Nurmi. This detective said that several times so that seems to be what they have decided will benefit her the most. She didn't get a timely trial.

And I hate to say this but he comes across as very professional. Ack.

What has just also popped into my head is this. I've seen for over a year so many people on here complaining about the judge and how slow she is. We saw yesterday that JA tried to say something and JSS said another judge is handling it. And the jury selection is speeding right along, in fact jurors were selected today. In fact, one of the reporters tweeting today said that this time around jury selection took one less day than last time. There was the part of instructions that the judge forgot to tell the jury. I think she is claiming that the judge has hurt her ability to have a speedy trial. Things have certainly "sped" up compared to how they were handled in the past. No delay, on time etc.

The investigator seemed very confident. He also blamed the cost of the trial on Nurmi. Said that this trial wouldn't have cost millions if she had had a timely trial. And he reiterated several times that she asked to have Willy named first chair, even went so far as to represent herself to get away from Nurmi… all things they are going to use to claim she had an unfair trial. Yep…. Me thinks JA is going to hang the judge and Nurmi out to dry.

AZ Lawyer…. what do you think of this tactic?

[video=youtu;MCq8Ru0bNGY]http://youtu.be/MCq8Ru0bNGY[/video]

I think it's ridiculous. I guarantee she waived her right to a speedy trial long ago, and IIRC most of the delay requests have come from the defense. I also think Nurmi has done the best he can with the hand he was dealt, and JA has never come up with a decent reason why she wants so badly to get rid of him.

Not sure this jury has to be impartial. A jury has already convicted her of a crime they considered cruel because it went over and beyond self-defense, as she claims. The new jury just have to decide if she should be put to death or given LWP/LWOP. Is there anything that shows she is remorseful up to this point? It is easy now to say she is. Too little, too late. That should be a big issue for consideration, IMO.

The jury does need to be impartial about whether to impose life or death until they hear the penalty phase evidence.

:tyou: Thank You, AZlawyer ... but a couple of questions :


BBM:

1. Will this Minute Entry be sealed -- or made public ?

I was wondering about this because the jurors have not be sworn in yet.

Also, IF this M.E. is public, would it be a concern for Juan ? Sorry, do NOT trust the CMJA and her DT to be "twittering" who made it and who did not because no doubt, CMJA KNOWS which jurors her attorneys kept and which jurors were struck.


2. WHEN will the jurors know that they ARE a juror or have been stricken -- when they show up on the next scheduled court day for potential jurors -- or -- will they be notified that they do not have to show up because they were stricken ?


I hope my questions and explanations made sense.

Again, :tyou: AZlawyer!

The minute entry should be public, but I noticed the strikes weren't mentioned in the minute entries from yesterday. It sounds like the attorneys just handed the sheet with the strikes on it to the bailiff but nothing has been put on the record yet. I'm thinking they are going to keep it secret from everyone including the remaining jury pool until the jurors return.

 

[dog.gone.cute]

The minute entry should be public, but I noticed the strikes weren't mentioned in the minute entries from yesterday. It sounds like the attorneys just handed the sheet with the strikes on it to the bailiff but nothing has been put on the record yet. I'm thinking they are going to keep it secret from everyone including the remaining jury pool until the jurors return.

Respectfully Snipped & BBM:


:tyou: Thank You very much, AZlawyer, for the explanation!

Oh, I hope they keep it "secret" . . . just do not want to see any more problems with this case !

And thanks again !

 

[PenElaine]

Under the defense attorney names, it says, "CAPITAL CASE MANAGEROFFICE OF PUBLIC DEFENSE SERVICES JUVENILE" - does this mean the witness is a juvenile?

Maybe brother Carl? Sacramento is about 2 hours from Redding so possibly closest international airport to Yreka......

 

[AZlawyer]

Regarding JA's alleged speedy trial issue, I checked the early minute entries, and it looks like this case was all set to go to trial in Feb. 2010 until JA filed a motion for change of counsel. The judge ordered her then-counsel to discuss the issue with JA, and after speaking with JA her counsel filed a motion to withdraw, which was granted. I think all these things were sealed. The judge tried to keep the trial date but ultimately granted the new counsel (Nurmi's) motions to continue on the ground that he had only had the case for a few months and was unable to prepare in time. So that delay was clearly JA's fault for insisting on getting rid of her first lawyer.

Other big delays were due to trial conflicts of defense counsel, a defense expert witness having to back out due to health reasons, and the withdrawal of Victoria Washington as co-counsel (replaced by Jen W). I don't see how any of those things can be blamed on the State, or on any alleged incompetence by Nurmi.

 

[rose222]

Agree, he was fabulous to watch in action. No notes, and can change direction on a witness as fast as those bumper cars at the county fairs. I will definitely be doing an 18 hour straight viewing on the web once released. We'll need to have a viewing party for sure here at WS after the verdict opcorn: I know I can do it as I was in the scanner thread for almost 24 hours during the boston bombings iykwim

That would be fun. We can set a good time on a Friday or Saturday night and hit "START" on the video at exactly the same time.

That's a great idea you guys! :happydance:

If I had all the money in the world I'd buy each and every one of us a week long (two weeks for our lawyers and moderators :loveyou vacation at a choice destination. Following this trial has been more exhausting than paid work! :sigh:

 

[Reagan]

AZLawyer,

She didn't seem to have any real problem with Nurmi until he said that '9 out of 10 days' stuff.
Even then, she gave him this extremely bizarre and heartfelt (???) smile. She's the weirdest freakiest "human" I have ever seen.

ETA: http://youtu.be/nNjuS1MUNOE
She's freaking nuts

 

[Nali87]

Regarding JA's alleged speedy trial issue, I checked the early minute entries, and it looks like this case was all set to go to trial in Feb. 2010 until JA filed a motion for change of counsel. The judge ordered her then-counsel to discuss the issue with JA, and after speaking with JA her counsel filed a motion to withdraw, which was granted. I think all these things were sealed. The judge tried to keep the trial date but ultimately granted the new counsel (Nurmi's) motions to continue on the ground that he had only had the case for a few months and was unable to prepare in time. So that delay was clearly JA's fault for insisting on getting rid of her first lawyer.

Other big delays were due to trial conflicts of defense counsel, a defense expert witness having to back out due to health reasons, and the withdrawal of Victoria Washington as co-counsel (replaced by Jen W). I don't see how any of those things can be blamed on the State, or on any alleged incompetence by Nurmi.

Oh I wonder (as in I really really want to know) why she wanted to change counsel.

 

[AZlawyer]

AZLawyer,

She didn't seem to have any real problem with Nurmi until he said that '9 out of 10 days' stuff.
Even then, she gave him this extremely bizarre and heartfelt (???) smile. She's the weirdest freakiest "human" I have ever seen.

ETA: http://youtu.be/nNjuS1MUNOE
She's freaking nuts

I can just about guarantee you that Nurmi cleared that sentence with her before he said it. He would have explained it was a strategy to get the jury past the "I don't like that girl" issue. Now, they may have argued about it, if she was under the delusion that the jurors liked her, but I don't think he would have followed that strategy without talking to her.

 

[Tuba]

There is a psychological expert, from what we know of the killer's mitigation plans. Thinking of possibilities in such testimony, three concepts struck me. Psychological defect, remorse and contribution. Does Arias have mental issues that go toward explaining the crime she committed and both the premeditation and the cover up? Is she capable of the remorse we expect from a criminal & which in some measure checks the enormity of her offense? Lastly, would she fill a useful or beneficial rôle as an inmate?

Although Arias balked at the notion of mental illness with great resistance, over time she has come round to the point of alluding to her borderline personality, which represents more than the "shortcomings" she admitted to in her motions. She seems to now yield to this diagnosis.

Psychologists find and report that these personalities have lots of regrets as criminals: their loss of freedom, the fact that a judge has power over them, that they had a lousy jury, that they endure punishment and it is greater than anticipated, that they did not plan carefully enough to avoid detection. However, they are never remorseful, let alone contrite. They simply never accept that the issue is in them, not others.

We have indeed heard Arias express regret & there it ends. We hear her complain in person & on paper that so & so did this, and he committed this wrong and she drug this out and the list is endless and ongoing. She conspicuously blames everyone, even in social media. This is part of her borderline personality but she also realizes she advertises herself as victim of abuse and so, wishes to place all responsibility upon the man she savagely murdered. Whereas, she drops the Survivor tee shirt over her front.

Even if she were capable of remorse, moral anguish & repentance for her
misdeed, that contradicts her claim of self-defense and she knows it. Borderlines explode in intense, inappropriate rage. Very noticeably, that exactly describes her act on June 4, 2008. This is responsible for what she did, not anything outside herself which justified it.

I believe she is paranoid as well. Given to interpreting the actions of others as deliberately demeaning or threatening. (Remember her t.v. interview?) Prone to angry or aggressive outbursts without justification because they see others as unfaithful, disloyal, condescending or deceitful. Jealous, guarded, secretive, scheming. The portrait of Jodi Ann Arias.

So lastly, we consider whether she will be a valuable member of prison society. If you want a ticking time bomb over in the corner, for prison control perhaps.

 

[lonetraveler]

I'm not sure I am posting this on the correct thread/forum but this is too good not to share:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Amk8UNPu-UE&index=10&list=PLYe2dWgF7z52WtA2M0YXQksDII13sL5ZN

Thanks, I really needed a good laugh! ROFLMAO

 

[Steft50]

Just browsing Twitter and this popped up...this guy has to be a troll right?[emoji2][emoji15]

LOL This guy must have missed the part where she has already been convicted so there aren't any "charges" to drop!

 

[fifteen89]

Regarding JA's alleged speedy trial issue, I checked the early minute entries, and it looks like this case was all set to go to trial in Feb. 2010 until JA filed a motion for change of counsel. The judge ordered her then-counsel to discuss the issue with JA, and after speaking with JA her counsel filed a motion to withdraw, which was granted. I think all these things were sealed. The judge tried to keep the trial date but ultimately granted the new counsel (Nurmi's) motions to continue on the ground that he had only had the case for a few months and was unable to prepare in time. So that delay was clearly JA's fault for insisting on getting rid of her first lawyer.

Other big delays were due to trial conflicts of defense counsel, a defense expert witness having to back out due to health reasons, and the withdrawal of Victoria Washington as co-counsel (replaced by Jen W). I don't see how any of those things can be blamed on the State, or on any alleged incompetence by Nurmi.

Well, I can think of 18 days I'd love to have back. She could've spared the world that much time at least.

 

[LinasK]

Just browsing Twitter and this popped up...this guy has to be a troll right?[emoji2][emoji15]

Wouldn't do the idiot any good. Our US justice system does NOT work by referendum to the government!

 

[krkrjx]

AZLawyer,

She didn't seem to have any real problem with Nurmi until he said that '9 out of 10 days' stuff.
Even then, she gave him this extremely bizarre and heartfelt (???) smile. She's the weirdest freakiest "human" I have ever seen.

ETA: http://youtu.be/nNjuS1MUNOE
She's freaking nuts

She smiled because she understood his comment, even though she did not expect it. She was amused by it. But then later on she thought about it and decided she could use it against him and in her favor. She tends to do that with things people say...turn it around against them later on as it suits her need.

 

[Love Never Fails]

It's awesome! Oh, that moment when Judge Stephens said 'Mr Martinez, you may cross-examine the witness' and Juan got up and ready was epic greatness! I love him. We could have not found a better and more passionate advocate for Travis if we had searched this world 10 times over!

awesome! Some people are so talented.

 

[rose222]

She smiled because she understood his comment, even though she did not expect it. She was amused by it. But then later on she thought about it and decided she could use it against him and in her favor. She tends to do that with things people say...turn it around against them later on as it suits her need.

That was the only time in the trial that she smiled a genuine smile (genuine as possible for her, that is). It was the 'Yeah, I can be a pain in the neck' sort of smile.
(I remember Baez saying something similar about Casey during trial and Casey smiled as well. I forget what was said and when.)