Retrial for Sentencing of Jodi Arias - Day 22

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Am I the only one that feels that when accusations are made- such as the ones that were made about a respectable detective and prosecuting attorney, in motions and arguments made public- that if they are found to be unsubstantiated (which in my world means they are found to be untrue) then it should be the responsibility of the presiding judge to make that clear- to everyone... just like she stated in open court that she WOULD?
 
So he can advertise that is was used in a high profile case? Seriously that make sense.

Is KN or JW or BN an investor in this software co? Or JSS?????

I bet he's attached to Cougarloucious in some way. This is really sad.
 
Am I the only one that feels that when accusations are made- such as the ones that were made about a respectable detective and prosecuting attorney, in motions and arguments made public- that if they are found to be unsubstantiated (which in my world means they are found to be untrue) then it should be the responsibility of the presiding judge to make that clear- to everyone... just like she stated in open court that she WOULD?

Absolutely not Frigga, I find the allegations egregious and very serious. I couldn't agree more that she should render her decision in open court.
 
I still do not understand why the jury is hearing all of this testimony about the computer *advertiser censored*. Is this about pros. misconduct or is it about mitigation?

Something about righting a wrong from the trial....about something to do with something Nurmi decided was prosecutorial misconduct.....and Sherry is paralyzed with fear over there being an appeal.....so, she wants this jury to decide if Travis owned *advertiser censored*, especially child *advertiser censored*, that JA deserves to be given a break for slaughtering him. :thinking:
 
Am I the only one that feels that when accusations are made- such as the ones that were made about a respectable detective and prosecuting attorney, in motions and arguments made public- that if they are found to be unsubstantiated (which in my world means they are found to be untrue) then it should be the responsibility of the presiding judge to make that clear- to everyone... just like she stated in open court that she WOULD?

No. It doesn't matter how she releases. All that matters is what it says. When she releases it will have her reasons why she thought there was no misconduct. The COA didn't read out their decision in open court and we still got the gist. Judges choose how to do these things.
 
She should deny all the Misconduct and Death Penalty motions, and tell the DT not to visit those issues again in her court. IMO


AMEN !!!

And ... tell the DT Mitigation ONLY !

:waitasec: Oh wait -- JA has NO mitigating factors !
 
Probably. But I hope all this testimony didn't do any damage to the prosecution's case in the jurors eyes.

I have been thinking about that too. But I can't come up with any damage so far. They claimed someone apparently looked up 'you *advertiser censored*' url on June 1st. Ok, does not seem like much of a big deal. No one can say for sure it was TA, and the lame audio tape they played did not prove anything. And even if it was TA, big feakin deal. Especially if it was the Siamese *advertiser censored* site. Imo, that sounds like more of a jokey thing than a *advertiser censored* thing. { My husband and his brother play a really silly game of sending the grossest weirdest links to each other...:slap: ]

And the other somewhat confusing allegation, imo, did no damage so far. They did nothing to show it was actually Flores that downloaded anything. And it was far too tenuous, and flimsy an allegation. JMO
 
Am I the only one that feels that when accusations are made- such as the ones that were made about a respectable detective and prosecuting attorney, in motions and arguments made public- that if they are found to be unsubstantiated (which in my world means they are found to be untrue) then it should be the responsibility of the presiding judge to make that clear- to everyone... just like she stated in open court that she WOULD?

You aren't the only one!! But, all we get is silence from Sherry.
 
hahahaha they have never had a full day

Well this should really make you laugh--According to BK the judge actually told the jury they will work full days on not just Tuesday, but Wednesday and Thursday as well.
 
VVelcome, Hope, to the vvorld of fritzy keyboards! Enjoy the frustration!!

LOL vvorld and fritzy. You know what frustration is!
Small though compared to this JW today!
Notice I'm all fixed up now, thanks to daughter. (Kids really can teach their parents things) :laughing:
 
Am I the only one that feels that when accusations are made- such as the ones that were made about a respectable detective and prosecuting attorney, in motions and arguments made public- that if they are found to be unsubstantiated (which in my world means they are found to be untrue) then it should be the responsibility of the presiding judge to make that clear- to everyone... just like she stated in open court that she WOULD?

ITA Frigga!! I'm just wondering if she might sense it's the DT who have projected all their dirty tactics onto the respectable detective and prosecuting attorney. If she rules in a way today that disparages the defense to the jury on motions that have absolutely nothing to do with penalty or mitigation, before they render a verdict , we win a small battle at the expense of the war. Does that make sense? I can wait for Karma to smack KN and JW and their monster client if it means they don't get to derail this trial. The jury knows which side is fighting for the best interests of the State.
JM (uneducated in law)O
 
Well this should really make you laugh--According to BK the judge actually told the jury they will work full days on Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday.

Defense has nothing. The only way they work full days for those 3 days is if they leave Geffner on the stand to drone on and on and on.... It is either that or Juan starts rebuttal. As wonderful as that would be I just don't feel like this defense is going to give up that easy. They will complain some more about mitigation, the AZ Supreme Court, secret testimony, fearful witnesses, etc.
 
If I was on the jury after all the statements this judge has made I don't think many have actually come true. I would start to seriously doubt anything the judge says. Especially if they don't work a "full day" Tuesday.

Although it looks like my definition of a full day and hers are completely different.
 
What a palaver! No ruling on the removal of the death penalty or anything of note today? Just garbage in, garbage out. What a waste of time and taxpayers hard earned dollars.
 
Well this should really make you laugh--According to BK the judge actually told the jury they will work full days on not just Tuesday, but Wednesday and Thursday as well.

Maybe that's a warning to the DT to put up or shut up regarding their ability to put witnesses on the stand. Hopefully????
 
To know we're going into Feb. Nurmi must have told JSS that JA will retake the stand. Of course not tomorrow because regardless of JW's protestations that 'this trial has gone on long enough', enough is never enough for JA and the whole defense crew.

Just moo
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
135
Guests online
587
Total visitors
722

Forum statistics

Threads
608,267
Messages
18,236,981
Members
234,327
Latest member
EmilyShaul2
Back
Top