Retrial for Sentencing of Jodi Arias - Day 31

[bettybaby00]

I don't know if I missed it or not, but did Juan ask Dr. D about CMJAs 18 page missive to travis's family?

 

[Hope4More]

I am not sure about that. She even admitted to TA that she acts out physically. And she KNEW she was lying in her phony journal. She did not think that was normal. She knew it was deceitful. I think that people say that those with BPD often learn to mirror 'normal' emotional behavior by mimicing others. That would mean they KNOW they are not normal themselves, imo.

JA expressed at least several times in her journal that she understood her "dark fantasies" were wrong and disturbing, even. Her solution , as written, was to will what she wanted into reality..voila...no more need for the dark thoughts.

 

[Night-owl]

<snip for space>
And rabies is not a bad example of you think of the movie Cujo- that St. Bernard was infected with rabies, that was the premise of the movie.

That is scary! I had a Mal lunge at my cat while at the vets office. I told the owners if my cat gets hurt, they'll be glad they are already at the vet to get their dog's head stitched back on.

The Rabies is a bad example because that will kill the dog. There is no doubt you have to put that animal down.

Jodi is more like a animal with a dangerous temper. Tho again not a great analogy, because I don't think animals get vicious quite the same way she did.

 

[LambChop]

If I were a juror, I'd be thinking JA had two choices:

1. Admit she was wrong to kill him, tell the truth about why and let the jury know she is remorseful; or

2. Continue to attack her victim.

One would probably get you LWOP. The other would more likely than not get you DP. I would not be willing to gamble on the death part.

If this continues I would say she is still trying to kill him in the most vile way that she can and she really isn't concerned about whether or not she gets put to death as long as she has the last word. My 2 cents.

 

[Hope4More]

I don't know if I missed it or not, but did Juan ask Dr. D about CMJAs 18 page missive to travis's family?

Yes, but briefly. I was surprised he didn't ask her more questions about it.

 

[ILikeToBendPages]

Maybe AZ should send her to Texas death row. Texas has executed 3 females in the past 18 months. Just got a news alert that a male was executed tonight.
If a state has a death penalty it should be used

And we did one of the Texas seven this evening. Four down - three more to go. it's been fourteen years since the escaped and killed an Irving police officer . He had fifty four major infractions in those fourteen years and extra guards were on hand. They didn't know what he'd pull.


Dallas Morning News


A man who was in a group of seven inmates behind one of the biggest prison escapes in Texas history is set to be executed on Wednesday for taking part in the murder of a suburban Dallas police officer on Christmas Eve 2000.

Donald Newbury, 52, is set to be executed by lethal injection at the state's death chamber in Huntsville at 6 p.m. CST. If the execution goes ahead, it will be the 521st in Texas, the most of any state since the U.S. Supreme Court reinstated the death penalty in 1976.

Newbury was part of what was known as the "Texas Seven," a group that overpowered 14 prison employees, tied them up and then broke out of the Connally Unit, about 60 miles southeast of San Antonio.

Group members then went on a crime spree for the next several weeks that included the armed robbery of a sporting goods store in the Dallas suburb of Irving.

Irving Police Officer Aubrey Hawkins, who had just finished a Christmas Eve dinner with his family, pulled up to the store in response to a call of suspicious activity. He was shot in his vehicle, pulled out of the car and shot again repeatedly, dying on the pavement, court papers said.

The group then fled to Colorado, where its members were eventually apprehended. One member of the group committed suicide rather than be captured.

 

[JSR]

IMO some relationships are based solely on sex, and the sexual chemistry can be strong, almost irresistible. I think it depends on what really was said in the phone calls immediately prior to the visit, what state TA was in at the time, whether it's possible that he only agreed to let her visit with no intention of having sex, and whether her mere physical presence tipped his scale into mojo overload and he made another bad judgment. I don't see it as very likely that, with the photo evidence, they did not abstain that day.

See I still believe with every fiber of my being that Travis had ZERO clue Jodi was barreling down the highway headed for Arizona to "visit" him. I think she showed up unannounced that day/night and he just didn't, unfortunately, kick her out. And I also believe that she intended come hell or high water to have sex with him before she killed him not just to ensure he was vulnerable but it make sure he sinned right before he died and would not have time to repent. Yes I think she's that twisted.

 

[Smarty Jones]

I'm guessing you're talking about this one?

View attachment 68756

Indeed. It's not an odd look - the beast shows its face. Stunning. I'll never forget it.

 

[TexMex]

IMO some relationships are based solely on sex, and the sexual chemistry can be strong, almost irresistible. I think it depends on what really was said in the phone calls immediately prior to the visit, what state TA was in at the time, whether it's possible that he only agreed to let her visit with no intention of having sex, and whether her mere physical presence tipped his scale into mojo overload and he made another bad judgment. I don't see it as very likely that, with the photo evidence, they did not abstain that day.

"Watch and pray so that you will not fall into temptation. The spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak."

 

[oceanblueeyes]

The only reason JSS has allowed all the "bad stuff" about JA to come into this phase is that it rebuts all the "good stuff" the defense witnesses were saying in "mitigation." The jury gets to weigh aggravation vs. mitigation. Aggravation is ONLY the cruelty of the murder. If the jury decides that JM has sufficiently rebutted all the mitigation, then they won't weigh any mitigating factors against the cruelty. They will be instructed NOT to consider any of the "bad stuff" as additional aggravation.

Thank you, but this leaves me very confused. Why is it different in other states I wonder. And how in the world do you let something into evidence and then tell the jury not to consider it? That not only seems unfair to jurors but highly confusing.

All the other cases I have seen didn't even have to have good character evidence submitted by the DT for those things to be allowed into evidence by the state. After the conviction all the things that were deemed too prejudicial in the guilt phase were let in including any and all arrests and conviction records of past crimes. Also any other bad character flaws resulting in prior bad acts.

By this I interpret it to read the state can bring in the character of the defendant or ...propensities etc. It doesn't say it can only be done if the DT puts in character evidence first.

A.R.S. § 13-751(G). The trier of fact shall consider as mitigating circumstances any factors proffered by the defendant or the state that are relevant in determining whether to impose a sentence less than death, including any aspect of the defendant's character, propensities or record and any of the circumstances of the offense

I promise I am not being contrary. I really am trying to learn why it is different in AZ than from other cases I have seen in other states. And A.R.S 13-751(G) makes it even fuzzier for me to understand why.

 

[grammieto5]

Well of course I'm confused, so Borderline Personality is a mental illness, (I think) so I always believed the mentally Ill could not be put to death, or even be put on trial for whatever it is they have done. Could someone explain this to me. I think I understood Dr. DeMarte said the murderer has Borderline Personality, I could be mistaken

 

[TexMex]

Can we send 'ya Scott Peterson???

Only if you send that <modsnip> Westerfield with him

 

[ziggy]

In California (different for other states- think it's the Baker Act in Florida), it's called being 5150'd, which is the Police code for it. Someone will call LE and they will cuff them and personally escort them by ambulance to a Psych Hospital for a 72-Hour emergency hold. The person must be a danger to themselves or others. I've personally witnessed it on more than one occasion. I think Jodi's family and Matt knew her threats weren't serious so noone bothered to call for a 5150 for her.

Just last summer we tried to have someone held on a 5150, after they literally kicked our door in and were threatening us - mainly me. You could hear it happening on the 911 call. The police took forever, which is inexcusable for such a small town.

Apartment security got him to leave before police arrived. 20 minutes earlier, he had battered my stepdaughter and bashed a mirror with his fist at her mom's house, which is why she ran 2 miles to us and why he ended up beating on our door and, ultimately, breaking the frame by kicking it in.

LE was not willing to do ANYTHING but allow a citizens' arrest for misdemeanor trespass and he was out in 5 hours. Mostly the reason we left the state. Just stay far away from scary people! Not so EZ to Baker Act someone.

 

[khaki]

If she really wanted to off herself , she would of have did it the day she killed Travis. She chose to go grind Ryan. She uses the suicide card as one of her many manipulation tools.

Totally agree. She even tried to use this little tool of hers with the first jury. When she started her 18 day testiphony, she gave it as the reason for why she said no jury would ever convict her...lol.

 

[Truth Detector]

It's a pleasure to join my kindred WS'ers after a day away.

Reading the Tweets, it appears that instead of testifying on her behalf, her family members decided to do something that she herself never would. They told Dr. DeMarte the truth.

If JA had any honor, any shred of common decency, any semblance of Mormon or any other 'holiness' -- albeit feigned for Court and public consumption -- she would have made a full confession and entered a plea of guilty, throwing herself on the mercy of the Court after butchering Travis in 2008.

We all remember what she did instead. The vile killer demanded that infamous 'extortionary' plea deal.

Next, she did what she's always done after being rejected. She threw herself into full banshee mode.

In so doing, she decided to risk exposing her true self to the Court.

A dishonorable and ill-advised gamble...

Yet, knowing what we now know about her, would we have expected anything less from the especially cruel lying torture murderess?

 

[5bigfish5]

Indeed. It's not an odd look - the beast shows its face. Stunning. I'll never forget it.

That's her holier than thou look.

 

[RickshawFan]

You can feel however you feel. It's not a simple situation.

Does it give you more to think about if you realize that anyone committing first degree murder would show problems on a psych test? No one kills their love interest out of an abundance of mental health and life balance.

Jodi has known for sure that she has BPD since the last trial. She cites it as a category for mitigation, even. But has she acted on that information and found ways to address it? NO. Someone who has BPD as viable mitigation would have to show remorse for it to be mitigating.

 

[ICit]

Thank you, but this leaves me very confused. Why is it different in other states I wonder. And how in the world do you let something into evidence and then tell the jury not to consider it? That not only seems unfair to jurors but highly confusing.

All the other cases I have seen didn't even have to have good character evidence submitted by the DT for those things to be allowed into evidence by the state. After the conviction all the things that were deemed too prejudicial in the guilt phase were let in including any and all arrests and conviction records of past crimes. Also any other bad character flaws resulting in prior bad acts.

By this I interpret it to read the state can bring in the character of the defendant or ...propensities etc. It doesn't say it can only be done if the DT puts in character evidence first.

A.R.S. § 13-751(G). The trier of fact shall consider as mitigating circumstances any factors proffered by the defendant or the state that are relevant in determining whether to impose a sentence less than death, including any aspect of the defendant's character, propensities or record and any of the circumstances of the offense

I promise I am not being contrary. I really am trying to learn why it is different in AZ than from other cases I have seen in other states. And A.R.S 13-751(G) makes it even fuzzier for me to understand why.

Your post has me wondering if the first jury would have handed down a death penalty if they had heard all the testimony that we have in this penalty phase retrial!

 

[bettybaby00]

See I still believe with every fiber of my being that Travis had ZERO clue Jodi was barreling down the highway headed for Arizona to "visit" him. I think she showed up unannounced that day/night and he just didn't, unfortunately, kick her out. And I also believe that she intended come hell or high water to have sex with him before she killed him not just to ensure he was vulnerable but it make sure he sinned right before he died and would not have time to repent. Yes I think she's that twisted.

I really believe he let her in based on whatever pathetic excuse she conjured up, and said she should sleep on the couch. Later however, I believe she snuck into his bed, and "woke him up." Very few men are gonna push a woman off them at that point, no matter how much they might want to.

And it wouldn't surprise me in the least to learn that thise pics we've never seen are the result of her setting up the camera prior to crawling in bed with him. Yes, I believe she's that evil and manipulative.

 

[ziggy]

See I still believe with every fiber of my being that Travis had ZERO clue Jodi was barreling down the highway headed for Arizona to "visit" him. I think she showed up unannounced that day/night and he just didn't, unfortunately, kick her out. And I also believe that she intended come hell or high water to have sex with him before she killed him not just to ensure he was vulnerable but it make sure he sinned right before he died and would not have time to repent. Yes I think she's that twisted.

Yes I think that's possible. I'm not up to speed on the evidence of the phone records re: her call to him telling him she decided she would take him up on his offer for her to swing by Mesa on her way to Utah (as JA described in TV interview), as to the date and time or how long it lasted etc.