Retrial for Sentencing of Jodi Arias - Day 6

[Love Never Fails]

@monicalindstrom: The #JodiArias court just decided a defendant’s right to a fair trial trumps the public’s right to an open courtroom and to know

Of course. Just like her having a fair trial trumps Travis's right to be alive.

 

[MeeBee]

I think it's Alice.

The defense would be crazy to put her up again after the first trial.

 

[LinasK]

It must be Alyce LaViolette. She must have said that she fears for her safety. Jmo
http://www.hlntv.com/video/2013/08/26/alyce-laviolette-testimony

Nope, Juan's already destroyed her credibility and reputation. She'd be stupid to go up against him again, and they wouldn't kick out the Arias family for her.

 

[geevee]

Where did the mention of her putting a blazer on come from? I see a pic on the twitter feed when the media attorney was talking (seems to be after lunch and just before the media were booted) and you can see Arias is still in shirt sleeves.

 

[Hope4More]

Hmm that Jodi had come to him and told him about Travis? Could that be the betrayal Travis talked about ?

He would have been called to testify in the first trial if that were so. Though I wouldn't put it past her to have included lying to a bishop as part of her premeditation.

 

[franquerolane]

Since Aunt Sue has been absent from the retrial, my vote is it's her, as witnesses can't be in there before testamony. It makes sense.

 

[Love Never Fails]

Hmm that Jodi had come to him and told him about Travis? Could that be the betrayal Travis talked about ?

So what if she did? It was all a lie. No one believes a word out of her mouth. And her family would not leave the courtroom for that.

 

[Quester]

He would have been called to testify in the first trial if that were so. Though I wouldn't put it past her to have included lying to a bishop as part of her premeditation.

BBM - Yep! Agreed!

 

[LinasK]

I think it is her.

Her team is saying that she NEEDS to testify to save her own life but she refuses ("against her lawyers advice") unless she gets her way essentially making it impossible for her to get a fair trail, thus creating cause for a mistrial.

Just my theory. I know nothing about the law really.

I think you're right. Let's see what AZLawyer thinks.

 

[Hope4More]

She may have already talked to her mom about making the abuse more serious than originally testified to. If JM goes after her changing story, if it happens, all she has to say is she didn't want to testify in front of her family like originally, that's why she had them removed now so that she can tell all.

Just speculation, of course.
fran

Sounds evil and twisted enough to be accurate.

 

[Love Never Fails]

Since Aunt Sue has been absent from the retrial, my vote is it's her, as witnesses can't be in there before testamony. It makes sense.

What is she going to say? That Jodi had bruises? That she saw more messages on the phone? That she kows Jodi's family abused her? What? Oh to be a juror right now! I would fry her. Can they really add evidence that wasn't in first trial?

Where are the attorneys????? Come on AZ, we need you here! Get out of court today!

 

[MeeBee]

Where did the mention of her putting a blazer on come from? I see a pic on the twitter feed when the media attorney was talking (seems to be after lunch and just before the media were booted) and you can see Arias is still in shirt sleeves.

After a break it was tweeted Jodi returned with a blazer on.

 

[fran]

How did the counsel get the jude to agree to essentially shutting the courtroom down for her testimony?

When it's a death penalty case, I would imagine it's easier to get the judge swayed toward extra treatment for the defendant so as not to get caught after trial and have another court throw the verdict out. We had two murder cases under one court that the verdicts were overturned by a higher court for technicalities. One was because an expert witness wasn't certified under what he was going to testify to so the judge didn't allow them to testify, yet the higher court felt they should have let him testify anyway. Who knows, a higher court could say by not letting the defendant testify in a closed court room violated the def Constitutional Rights.

JMHO
fran

 

[Nosey Parker]

I still think it's her. She has a reputation to uphold, you know. Wouldn't want common, ordinary folk listening to her private tales of woe.

 

[Brattinella]

If she is testifying to abuse from her family, don't they have the right to confront their accuser?

 

[ohreally]

The only part of this I like is that the jury doesn't know why there is a delay and the VI statements are fresh in their mind and are having an even bigger impact with the delay. Huge mistake for defense IMO.
I think it is AV because she is the type that would threaten the court IMO. Juan won the last round with her and she must win at all cost. She will loose this round too.
Can the media appeal to a higher court on the decision to be banned?
Can the court put a gag order on Travis' family to not be allowed to say who is testifying?

 

[TexMex]

Is it safe to assume HLN, CNN, et al had advance warning of this tactic and that is why they got out of town?

I am berating myself for getting involved with this circus yet again. But it was either this or the laundry...

HLN is there today

 

[Zuri]

I think the solution to that would be to clear the public, allow the media to stay in overflow room, disallow live tweeting and warn them to not reveal the person's name. They keep this person under seal in the courts and we'd never know who he/she was and we could still know what's happening and what's being testified to.

But I don't think the judge really had a choice. If this is what the witness said and Jodi needs them for their defense then she must acquiesce. Hopefully this is the only witness who pulls this.

Even if the media was not allowed to tweet and could only bear witness, chances are someone would blog or talk and the identity and the testimony of this witness would be revealed. IMO this witness is very afraid of repercussions. If we learn later that the witness was CMJA, that would be quite interesting IMO.

If the witness was terrified of disclosure, it seems odd that it would be a professional as they make their living doing this type of thing. Confounding to say the least IMO.

 

[dog.gone.cute]

IF there is a leak...here is is....coming from the defense...moo

:seeya: Yep ... and the Defense will be screaming for a mistrial !

 

[JSR]

No!!!!!!!!! There is no way to "support" that despicable lie because it IS a lie. Not even Nurmi would stoop so low as to train a child to show up in a court room and spew disgusting lies.

I wouldn't count on Nurmi stooping to any low.