Retrial for Sentencing of Jodi Arias - Day 6 - Part 3

[krkrjx]

Eight people nationwide. Now that is funny. You may be overestimating.

Yeah, I was trying to be kind.

 

[AZlawyer]

Why in the heck did she think she was getting a settlement conference??? Isn't that civil trials? She's not getting any plea deal. Shows her delusion. And... she expects him to visit her personally, even though she's twice refused his visits.

They have settlement conferences in criminal cases too. There was one early on in this case.

Then what valid reason could JSS have had to rule they way she did? my arguments have been based on the belief that she did what she did for a good reason, and the only good reason I can come up with is to prevent a successful appeal in the case of a DP verdict.

We're operating from the same assumptions, then. This is why I think it can't have been JA testifying: because there would be no successful appeal if that request had been denied.

We went through some of the possibilities on another thread. My favorite was that there was an out-of-country mitigation witness (not subject to the court's jurisdiction or even to the jurisdiction of a court who could order a telephonic appearance from somewhere else in the US), who agreed to testify by phone/Skype but only if [list of demands].

 

[oceanblueeyes]

"I need my testimony to be kept secret because I'm so afraid of the Alexanders and their supporters. They just blindly attack anyone who tries to tell the real truth in this case."

"Dear Jurors, feel sorry for me because Juan Martinez keeps yelling at me. Also, look at these angry texts from Travis."

Reminds me of one of the favorite tactics of a particularly manipulative person I used to have to deal with. He'd set about being a complete jerk for a period of time, alienating everyone, then whine and complain about how mean and cold we were for not wanting to spend time with him. He was also fond of the "don't blame me for getting angry when you're the person who made me angry" game.

Lol.. I actually just had an image flash through my head of smacking an old TV to get it to work better. (Kids: back in the olden days, we used to smack TV's. I don't think it ever helped, but we did it anyway.) Some people you just want to smack to get them to work better. (I've never smacked anyone, not that the thought hasn't crossed my mind.)

Jodi & Co. are of course waaaaay beyond being jerks. They are shameless, cruel and utterly reprehensible. They are so good at group evil, I can't believe that this is their first go-round. I wonder how many skeletons are in that family's closets.

If she is testi-lying this time rather than allocution I hope Juan is even feistier than he was before. This time this jury knows she is a convicted stone cold cruel premeditated killer. So I hope he lets her have it with both barrels and calls her on every lie she has ever told which will take a long time.

In his closing he needs to put up on the big screen just how many different stories she has told.

I really think she is so vain she didn't want the world to know how badly Juan chews her up and spits her out. Last time she was so sure she had scored points when she sparred with him but she found out she was a dismal failure. She truly was one of the worst so called actresses I have ever seen. She wouldn't even get a part in a d-grade movie.

IMO

 

[T-4-2]

Days? Weeks? Oh please, no. Déjà vu all over again.

 

[RadarLuv]

What if DT said that there was no possible way she could get a fair trial for her life if the jury were swayed by the family and media reactions to her testimony?

They have settlement conferences in criminal cases too. There was one early on in this case.



We're operating from the same assumptions, then. This is why I think it can't have been JA testifying: because there would be no successful appeal if that request had been denied.

We went through some of the possibilities on another thread. My favorite was that there was an out-of-country mitigation witness (not subject to the court's jurisdiction or even to the jurisdiction of a court who could order a telephonic appearance from somewhere else in the US), who agreed to testify by phone/Skype but only if [list of demands].

 

[oceanblueeyes]

They have settlement conferences in criminal cases too. There was one early on in this case.



We're operating from the same assumptions, then. This is why I think it can't have been JA testifying: because there would be no successful appeal if that request had been denied.

We went through some of the possibilities on another thread. My favorite was that there was an out-of-country mitigation witness (not subject to the court's jurisdiction or even to the jurisdiction of a court who could order a telephonic appearance from somewhere else in the US), who agreed to testify by phone/Skype but only if [list of demands].

Then why do you think JAs Aunt is blaming the leak on the Alexanders? Her tweet seems to indicate the leak is true and it is JA.

ETA: A poster said that they read on Jodi's support page that they knew about a week ago she was going to testify once the mitigation started.

 

[LinasK]

They have settlement conferences in criminal cases too. There was one early on in this case.



We're operating from the same assumptions, then. This is why I think it can't have been JA testifying: because there would be no successful appeal if that request had been denied.

We went through some of the possibilities on another thread. My favorite was that there was an out-of-country mitigation witness (not subject to the court's jurisdiction or even to the jurisdiction of a court who could order a telephonic appearance from somewhere else in the US), who agreed to testify by phone/Skype but only if
[list of demands].

AZLawyer, once she's convicted can she still have a settlement conference? This 12-page letter wanting to get rid of Nurmi was written after conviction.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

Days? Weeks? Oh please, no. Déjà vu all over again.

Yeah, if this goes on for days or weeks then we know for certain it is JA.

She is the only one that can tell lies for that long.

IMO

 

[RadarLuv]

OF topic: is there a area on this website where I can figure out how the heck to navigate tapatalk? If so would anyone please do me a solid and PM me to tell me where? xo

 

[Brattinella]

It seems to me there is a possibility we will NEVER KNOW the reason for "sequestering the public" or who it was! The court doesn't have to tell, now or ever.

 

[RadarLuv]

Or do they?........

It seems to me there is a possibility we will NEVER KNOW the reason for "sequestering the public" or who it was! The court doesn't have to tell, now or ever.

 

[east2west]

We still don't know for certain that the mystery witness is Arias, but I'm inclined to agree with KatieCool and trust Troy Hayden on this. It really is too big for him to risk spreading false information.

So if it is her, unless she has changed drastically for the better after all this time in closed custody, her testimony is going to go over like a lead balloon with the jury. In the first trial under direct, her affect was flat and did not match what she was describing. Her allocution was even more of a flop. The first jury did not buy her at all.

During cross with Martinez, she showed some really bizarre behavior, smirking at times as if it was a contest. Given everything she has said publicly outside of court, which can be used against her, Martinez has to see this as a golden opportunity. On the opposite site, Nurmi must be cringing.

What if Arias refuses to be crossed by Martinez? Will she try to hamstring the court yet again? She did allude to her witnesses being unwilling to submit to questions by Martinez in August while she was acting pro per.

Don't forget in her allocution, she attempted to point to her family ( "...them...") but didn't quite hit the mark. She really could have cared less where she pointed her finger.

Sent from my SCH-I605 using Tapatalk

 

[AZlawyer]

What if DT said that there was no possible way she could get a fair trial for her life if the jury were swayed by the family and media reactions to her testimony?

Then the judge would have sent them to the viewing room and not sealed the video recording or the transcript. And not concealed the name of the witness.

Then why do you think JAs Aunt is blaming the leak on the Alexanders? Her tweet seems to indicate the leak is true and it is JA.

ETA: A poster said that they read on Jodi's support page that they knew about a week ago she was going to testify once the mitigation started.

Sue also said that JA's family wasn't told who the witness was. She might be just assuming the leak is true.

AZLawyer, once she's convicted can she still have a settlement conference? This 12-page letter wanting to get rid of Nurmi was written after conviction.

Yes, there could still be a settlement conference re: sentencing.

 

[dog.gone.cute]

Look at this 15 years down the road. A group of lawyers are going over the trial with fine tooth combs and microscopes...

"What's this?

She didn't allow the defendant to testify when all she had to do was close the court temporarily, for a small part of the trial, in order for the defendant to have her full say? and the public would still be able to see the trial in its entirety after the verdict?

What harm would it have done to the public to wait two months.

The defendant never got to be heard!"

:twocents:


What RIGHT does a convicted murderer have to shut down the entire courtroom so that she can have her "say" ?

And WHY NOW ? IF it was CMJA who was successful in getting JSS to shutout the public and the media from the courtroom during her testimony, WHY ? And WHAT is so "secret" that she does not want the public to know ?

CMJA loved the media attention -- even AFTER she was convicted of 1st degree pre-meditated murder, she did interviews !

CMJA has the RIGHT to be heard but NOT behind closed doors !

All JMO and :moo:

 

[AZlawyer]

It seems to me there is a possibility we will NEVER KNOW the reason for "sequestering the public" or who it was! The court doesn't have to tell, now or ever.

Or do they?........

The judge is required to give her reasons, but apparently doesn't plan to do so.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

It seems to me there is a possibility we will NEVER KNOW the reason for "sequestering the public" or who it was! The court doesn't have to tell, now or ever.

I am not sure that is true. I have never heard of sequestering the public from an open courtroom in the sentencing phase. Plus she would have to give a reason for doing so even if that is under seal.

AZL: Does she have to give a reason to the appeal's court for why she locked the media and public out? TIA

 

[RadarLuv]

Oops, I was tring to reply on tapatalk (it's confusing)

Originsl post by AZL;
The judge is required to give her reasons, but apparently doesn't plan to do so.

Radar: Will the Judge be held in contempt? Lol.. Although this sounds funny typing it, in my non-lawyered brain this should be allowed.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

The judge is required to give her reasons, but apparently doesn't plan to do so.

She doesn't even have to give a reason to the appeal court?

tia

 

[Brattinella]

I think judges are pretty autonomous. Is there anyone versed in Arizona law who can weigh in on this?

Whoops, sorry! My post got delayed and you all responded! Thanks.

 

[kimi_SFC]

OF topic: is there a area on this website where I can figure out how the heck to navigate tapatalk? If so would anyone please do me a solid and PM me to tell me where? xo

I found a jump off point that might help:

Forum Finesse

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?53-Forum-Finesse


There are a few Tapatalk-specific threads already going. Take a look around. Hopefully you can find what you're looking for.

Online Tapatalk tutorials are typically generic and not tailored to WS. So, if you aren't able to find what you're looking for, you should be able post onto one of the threads. is the Tech Wizard at WS. I'm certain one of the Mods or will be able be of more help than I am right now :blushing: but at least it's a start

I learned through trial and error :seeya:

Hope this is at least a little bit helpful (and apologies for the O/T yall!)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk