Retrial for Sentencing of Jodi Arias - Day 27

[Val1]

In every trial I have watched, the judge insists on decorum in their courtroom. Which includes witnesses not calling the prosecuter by his/her first name, witnesses not instructing the jury what to believe, defense team sending tweets, messages, etc. to the convicted killers SM accounts. I won't even get into the unconstitutional action by Sherry and all the secrecy....but, I have been told, by Az. attornies that this judge is brilliant and fair and charming and totally "with it"....so, maybe it's an Arizona thing. Just how courtrooms are run. :dunno:

I'd just like to know if JSS had any moment of clarity while admonishing DR today, after having let all the DT's "experts"(except for "Sue", he's the only one that actually seemed to have performed in a proper courtroom manner!) talk out of turn, instruct the jury, make disparaging comments about both the deceased victim and the PT, etc etc with nary a frown, all within the last few weeks.

In fact, I wish DR had blown up and straight out said(spelled out to leave no doubt) a few things about JA that she was actually witness to(JA essentially breaking and entering TA's house, using his laptop, etc) or that TA had perhaps confided in her about JA, that JSS seems to think are too prejudicial for the jury, like the truth!

 

[katydid23]

I have read that she lied about having sex with TA. I have no first hand knowledge of this. Don't tell me what to post. She was interviewed by the DT yes? Did their transcriber lie? How did the rumor start that DR said she never had sex with TA?

That was MY fault. I read that in another forum, that she had lied and denied being with him. But that is NOT TRUE. I fell for the disinformation. Epic Fail on my part, as my kids would say.

 

[GigiG]

Who are these Arizona attorneys you're talking to? Anyone can see she makes odd decisions about courtroom management


It seems like the rumor started with people posting inaccurate things on public forums. From what was tweeted from court today, it appears the actual transcript shows she never said any such thing.

Bravo!

 

[LinasK]

I'm behind but if Det. Smith is filling in for Det. Flores, the DT is actually going to take advantage of that tragedy to stall.
JMO, but it pi$$es me off.

Nah, Smith is a computer guy, different from John Smith.

 

[Hope4More]

I feel awful because I took the bait and saw it in another public forum that she lied in the interview but told the truth on the stand. I should not have believed it. :blush: It was disinformation.

(((Katy))))). Its impossible to keep track of every last thing that's been said over the past years of this trial, or to remember if and how every one of thousands of lies were rebutted.

 

[MeeBee]

Agree with your post and just adding to it.

You know I wasn't there today and I only have the tweets and the fantastic posts by our own WS member ziggy, but I seriously can not believe what JW tried to pull today. I bet even Nurmi can't. She is NOT Juan Martinez. She is a defense attorney so she will rarely be considered someone who is in there fighting for truth and justice (and lord knows they've both gone so far afield of that in this very public secret trial that neither will ever be considered trustworthy again) so why on earth does she try to pull this stunt repeatedly. I think even Nurmi, who I do believe tried it a couple of times without success, has backed off that obvious tactic. I swear that JW has spent WAY too many hours listening to the viper sitting beside her and has formed her own hatred of JM and anyone who would DARE to dispute their carefully thought out web of deceit just from being brainwashed by her client. Did she attack Deanna for JA's sake? Because she knew that would please her. Or did she do it to get back at JM for doing it to her obviously questionable witnesses and she just has to go there? Whatever the reason, one thing's for certain, she did not do it because she is anywhere near a good attorney and it is not at all helpful to her client's case. Oh wait...




MOO

This too. Prosecutors and defense attorneys are viewed differently in general. When I first saw juan in action before I knew of the criticism he she of being to aggressive I thought nothing of it. I thought it was normal for a prosecutor to act that way. Too much law and order maybe. But when a sweet prosecution witness gets on the stand and you start messing with her it just doesn't come off as well. I get Willmott had to question her a certain way to make her look like the dishonest one, but she, again, has to pick her moments and know what she can get away with.

 

[GigiG]

In the meantime she's training new trial attys how to be the best they can be.

God help the folks in AZ.

 

[dog.gone.cute]

:gaah: She is at it again :


Jodi Arias Updates @JodiAnnArias · 2h 2 hours ago

WOW! Deanna Reid has the balls to tell Willmott she's "misleading?!" #guiltyconscience. #jodiarias.


https://twitter.com/JodiAnnArias

 

[Hatfield]

And if the jurors think Jodi Ann's magazine messages were directed to W1, we have a poetic justice. It just doesn't get better than that. I don't think Jodi Ann will be having sweet dream tonight.

Wrist brace tomorrow from punching her cell wall again.

 

[AZlawyer]

Thanks. If he has the audio, then this was a huge setup and JW walked into a trap.

Well, but I assume JW asked for the early release so she can have the audio ready tomorrow lol.

I think this was from defense that she lied. It does not appear they can say she is lying because it's not clear how she is answering. The question was: "Would it surprise you Jodi wasn't the only one TA had sex with", and DR's answer was "I don't know". So was she answering the part of the question "would it surprise you".... because it's not clear which part of the question her answered pertains to and it seems as if DR might have been cut off without being able to explain what she does not know about the question. Obviously DR does have an answer but wants to explain that she was not lying. DT would never give her that opportunity. So the answer would be from the audio so let them play it. DR seems fairly confident that she did not lie with her answer. jmo

If those quotes tweeted today (and IIRC they included quotation marks) are accurate, it seems to me like she was saying "I don't know" as in "I might be surprised if you tell me there were 5 other girls, and I might not be surprised if you're just counting me, so I don't know whether I'm surprised until you tell me what you're getting at" lol.

 

[bsk]

This is when he starts shaming Deanna in the first trial. Video is cued up to the part where he asks her about having sex with Travis, about them both going to their respective bishops in 2005 and both losing their temple recommend. He continued with asking her twice how many times/over what time period they had sex, and if they had it after they visited the bishop (no)


[video=youtube;zAWE0iXS9nc]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zAWE0iXS9nc&feature=youtu.be&t=2h1m13s[/video]

youtu.be/zAWE0iXS9nc?t=2h1m13s

The part I was talking about earlier runs from 2:13:15 to 2:15:45 - toward the end of his disgusting questioning. Then he gets into Travis's family background.

 

[Kamille]

They'll claim she was abused, she just didn't realize it.:doh:

Nah...they'll claim that it did happen just as secret witness #1 said it did and, like Abe and the email, she "alleges" it didn't happen because she just doesn't remember it. It was so long ago and all. Or..she lies, just like she lied about whether she had sex with Travis. But of course secret witness #1 cannot be exposed as the actual lying liar that his is. That would be prejudicial to the client because it counts towards her mitigation...somehow...credibility from the DT isn't at issue in this phase....

Okay I got nothing here...

:notgood:

MOO

 

[LambChop]

Well, but I assume JW asked for the early release so she can have the audio ready tomorrow lol.



If those quotes tweeted today (and IIRC they included quotation marks) are accurate, it seems to me like she was saying "I don't know" as in "I might be surprised if you tell me there were 5 other girls, and I might not be surprised if you're just counting me, so I don't know whether I'm surprised until you tell me what you're getting at" lol.

That is what I was thinking, too.

 

[Hatfield]

This too. Prosecutors and defense attorneys are viewed differently in general. When I first saw juan in action before I knew of the criticism he she of being to aggressive I thought nothing of it. I thought it was normal for a prosecutor to act that way. Too much law and order maybe. But when a sweet prosecution witness gets on the stand and you start messing with her it just doesn't come off as well. I get Willmott had to question her a certain way to make her look like the dishonest one, but she, again, has to pick her moments and know what she can get away with.

Very good point.

Probably from TV and movies, the jury has a natural expectation for the Prosecution team to come across more aggressively and for the DT to win their cases by uncovering "breaking news" that frees their client. The style Wilmcott is trying to use just leaves a sour taste and the only breaking news they have uncovered is when we find out the DT has been lying. LOL

 

[Hope4More]

:gaah: She is at it again :


Jodi Arias Updates @JodiAnnArias · 2h 2 hours ago

WOW! Deanna Reid has the balls to tell Willmott she's "misleading?!" #guiltyconscience. #jodiarias.


https://twitter.com/JodiAnnArias

Silly girl.

 

[GigiG]

Agree with your post and just adding to it.



You know I wasn't there today and I only have the tweets and the fantastic posts by our own WS member ziggy, but I seriously can not believe what JW tried to pull today. I bet even Nurmi can't. She is NOT Juan Martinez. She is a defense attorney so she will rarely be considered someone who is in there fighting for truth and justice (and lord knows they've both gone so far afield of that in this very public secret trial that neither will ever be considered trustworthy again) so why on earth does she try to pull this stunt repeatedly. I think even Nurmi, who I do believe tried it a couple of times without success, has backed off that obvious tactic. I swear that JW has spent WAY too many hours listening to the viper sitting beside her and has formed her own hatred of JM and anyone who would DARE to dispute their carefully thought out web of deceit just from being brainwashed by her client. Did she attack Deanna for JA's sake? Because she knew that would please her. Or did she do it to get back at JM for doing it to her obviously questionable witnesses and she just has to go there? Whatever the reason, one thing's for certain, she did not do it because she is anywhere near a good attorney and it is not at all helpful to her client's case. Oh wait...




MOO

--------------------

How much credibility can she have is JA is her #1 advisor?

 

[RickshawFan]

IIRC Nurmi handled Deanna in the original trial and he was very gentle with her while eliciting her testimony. He even gave a big sigh when he was finished with her testimony and walking back to his chair because he knew he was outing her as to having had sex with Travis. I actually liked him at that moment. I am surprised JW is going at Deanna with teeth bared.

I beg to differ on this. IIRC, Nurmi was awful to Deanna in the guilt phase. He went out of his way to shame and humiliate her. He asked her all kinds of questions that were completely unnecessary to make his point. But she sat on the witness stand and took whatever came at her. Brave woman.

 

[Wing Ding]

Amen. Zervakos claimed the jurors (presumably at his direction) weighed whether or not JA's actions were comparable to Bundy/Manson/Dahlmer iirc, which was a bizarre standard. I think it became evident to jurors almost immediately that Zervakos had an immovable "My way or the highway" personality that no amount of deliberations could or would affect.

I think Juan has effectively proved to this jury that nothing is true about anything that Jodi, her "expert" defense witnesses or her lawyers have said about her, or any of their claims that Travis was mentally, physically, emotionally or sexually abusive towards Jodi, or that Travis had a penchant for innerweb pr0n or pictures of little boys.

Her entire defense is a sham. There is not one good reason she brutally slaughtered Travis. I can't even call him her ex-boyfriend anymore because Juan has convinced me they were never even in a mutually exclusive, boyfriend/girlfriend relationship together. She has no redeeming qualities. Their decision should be an easy one.

 

[Hope4More]

:gaah: She is at it again :


Jodi Arias Updates @JodiAnnArias · 2h 2 hours ago

WOW! Deanna Reid has the balls to tell Willmott she's "misleading?!" #guiltyconscience. #jodiarias.


https://twitter.com/JodiAnnArias

Reply: Yes she does! Wasn't it AWESOME?!!

 

[Frigga]

:gaah: She is at it again :


Jodi Arias Updates @JodiAnnArias · 2h 2 hours ago

WOW! Deanna Reid has the balls to tell Willmott she's "misleading?!" #guiltyconscience. #jodiarias.


https://twitter.com/JodiAnnArias

Aaahahahahahahhhhaaaa! Jodi Ann is so silly, could even call her a little rediculous.

You are going to prison honey, for at least the rest of your natural life. I wouldn't be so worked up over something as silly as this. I'd be getting worked up about the fact that Deanna is free, and is loved and adored by Travis' family and friends, I'd be worked up over the fact that she has his (and according to you- your) beloved Naps. Honestly sweetie, you have much more pressing concerns. Don't be so silly- silly!