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

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
I would like to JM to ask CMJA this time, or a jury member: "Did you phone TA to let him know you were coming to see him?" I am sure she did not...It would have been on her phone or his.
 
Marking my spot.. Is Jodi going o the stand and act crazy enough to get life? I don't see any of this jury letting her off with any chance of parole. not after seeing Travis's autopsy photos.
 
Nali87 said:
JSS changed her mind so quickly too! She went from kicking the media out - to allowing them to stay - to kicking them out again. It doesn't seem like a well-thought-out decision.
Click to expand...
I think it makes sense if the judge consulted with a peer or some such and decidef to let the appeals court decide the matter...but thats the only way it makes sense to me.
 
Hope4More said:
If that door wasn't guarded, it was really her on the stand, and Nurmi wins a mistrial because that info was leaked, JSS should be removed from the bench.
Click to expand...

And what if nurmi win a mistrial, what would happen then?
 
No way, not even a single percent, did any of the Alexanders leak who is on the stand. I don't believe that to be in any way a possibility. They are never, ever, ever going to risk a mistrial by leaking information. The have been waiting for over 6 years for justice for Travis. There is no way they would risk making it an even longer wait. Whoever leaked it, I would stake everything I own that it wasn't an Alexander.
 
LambChop said:
AZL, I have another question. There was a poll just released by one of the media outlets that said 96% of the people who voted would vote for death for JA. Could she have used that against the media being excluded because she felt they might have an influence on what the jury might hear outside of court? She clearly has no intentions of ever telling the truth as far as what motivated her to kill Travis.
Click to expand...
If this is the case she should have sequestered the jury...I think she should have anyway...may not be the norm but what is in this case.
 
garthmax said:
I would like to JM to ask CMJA this time, or a jury member: "Did you phone TA to let him know you were coming to see him?" I am sure she did not...It would have been on her phone or his.
Click to expand...

I think that was brought up at trial. It listed her calls and the duration from the morning she left Yreka till she got back there IIRC One story Jodi told was that Travis guilted her into coming to Mesa on her way to see Ryan Burns.
 
This guy from NZ...where are his postings to read? I pull up facebook and find nothing.
 
grammieto5 said:
And what if nurmi win a mistrial, what would happen then?
Click to expand...


That would take the death penalty off the table, and Judge Stephens would sentence her with LWOP or LWP. Maybe this is Nurmi and Wilmonts plan to keep her of death row?
 
The cost to sequester a jury for 2+ months is unbelievable. And a sequestered jury starts to feel resentment and feel like they are the ones imprisoned, which makes them bond more with the defendant. Much easier, cheaper and faster to clear a courtroom. We, the public, will survive this.
 
Madeleine74 said:
The cost to sequester a jury for 2+ months is unbelievable. And a sequestered jury starts to feel resentment and feel like they are the ones imprisoned, which makes them bond more with the defendant. Much easier, cheaper and faster to clear a courtroom. We, the public, will survive this.
Click to expand...
Might be cheaper but we are witnessing the defendents rights at any cost as it is...she could sequester them now.
 
Wagara said:
Might be cheaper but we are witnessing the defendents rights at any cost as it is...she could sequester them now.
Click to expand...

Would it make people feel better if there were another Casey Anthony outcome (that jury was sequestered) or an OJ Simpson outcome (that jury was also sequestered)? Would everyone be willing to help fund the cost back to AZ for taking people out of their lives for 2+ months to sequester them?

ETA: The argument is not so much about the jury as it is the allegedly scared 'witness' who doesn't want the media or public to have any access to their testimony. Sequestering a jury does nothing for that argument.
 
Man, I do NOT care for Nurmi....not in the least, but I KNOW he does NOT want to be there with her. He looks.......MISERABLE. Beyond miserable. It is comical, that is if the whole thing weren't so tragic. Did he willingly take this case? I cant remember...


Nana46 said:
Ahh yes....Mr. Nurmi.....who wants everybody to know he does not want to be there....bull hockey (sorry about that)......if he did not want to be there why in the hello is he fighting so hard for her???????
A piece of work he is.
Click to expand...
 
Hope4More said:
I think in her mind this is a brilliant strategy. Nurmi didn't, not least of all because it requires her taking the stand- thereby being crossed by JM again.

AND, even more dangerous to her, she risks the jury seeing her manipulation for what it is. If the jurors think she is falsely accusing the man she slaughtered of abuse and pedophilia , I think they won't hesitate to give her the DP.

Maybe this what Nurmi meant when he said his defense would be discussed for years if the transcripts were unsealed and she got the DP.
Click to expand...


It's exactly what she promised to do if the State rejected her plea deal to second degree murder. She promised if her case went to trial for first degree she would be forced to "expose" the dark/ugly side of Travis
 
Madeleine74 said:
Would it make people feel better if there were another Casey Anthony outcome (that jury was sequestered) or an OJ Simpson outcome (that jury was also sequestered)? Would everyone be willing to help fund the cost back to AZ for taking people out of their lives for 2+ months to sequester them?

ETA: The argument is not so much about the jury as it is the allegedly scared 'witness' who doesn't want the media or public to have any access to their testimony. Sequestering a jury does nothing for that argument.
Click to expand...

From what I have read Arizona hasn't sequestered a jury in 80 years. I don't think they need to be sequestered and certainly not in this phase. When they weren't sequestered they had no problem coming to an unanimous guilty verdict or a verdict of 'cruelty' so this is not going to end like OJ or CA's cases because she has already been convicted of M1. Sequestered jurors also have found the defendants guilty and I would suspect far more often than the anomalies of OJ and CA.

Even if JSS did sequester this jury it wouldn't stop JA from running the show for she has done that from day one.

What I do find ironic though is Arizonians are footing the bill yet they are excluded from seeing this witness testify. That sounds downright ridiculous to me.

I don't believe the jury needs to be sequestered but I also don't believe it is reasonable for the 'secret' (yet known witness) to set a precedence by threatening the only way she will testify is if it is shrouded in secrecy.

While some say it will have no bearing on other cases, I disagree. I see many attorneys get up and argue citing cases that happened in various states or in the same state. If one is allowed to do it and the appeals court upholds JSS then there is nothing preventing it from happening again when another defendant wants to run the show and will only testify on his/her terms.

IMO
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is DeKalb County John Doe (2022)?

Staff online

Members online

... and 177 more.
Total: 2,883 (members: 178, guests: 2,705)

Online statistics

Members online
178
Guests online
2,705
Total visitors
2,883
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
603,641
Messages
18,160,004
Members
231,795
Latest member
CapturedOnCamera
Back
Top