Retrial for Sentencing of Jodi Arias - Day 6

[ScarlettScarpetta]

Just wondering what u peeps think. What if when CMJA came to TA's house on that last day and TA professed his undying love for her and proposed marriage- where and when after that would she have killed somebody? I think not long.....

Personally I think she should not pass go and not collect $200, step immediately up to the noose, place around neck and jump off platform. This horrible murder was definitely premeditated!

Im not sure this is the only person she ever killed.

 

[AZlawyer]

I asked the same question about JM awhile ago. Haven't seen any tweet from observers about his response.

Any tweeters here who could ask Jen or another observer??

Of course, he probably stated his objection/agreement at the bench, and in this trial ALL BENCH CONFERENCES ARE SEALED, which is totally improper. When the jury's not in the room, they should never be approaching the bench.

I think Mr. Parker may be the mystery witness. I had read that he was the Bishop of the Riverside, Ca. ward where TA and Deanna Reeves attended. Deanna Reeves testified that she and TA confessed their affair to their Bishop, who was probably Parker. He might want to keep details as confidential as possible, so closed court. Just speculating. MOO MOO

Could this be Travis's bishop. I believe Jodi spoke with him at Travis's memorial. (or while she was there in Az.) Could he be asked to testify about private talks with Travis? Or Jodi could have been telling him about the phone sex and whatever she wanted to lie about.
He would want his testimony to be private and sealed or people would be afraid to come for counseling.

Ok so in some trials they protect the witness' face by not showing it on camera. I don't recall a trial where the witness entire identity was being protected. Imean this isn't the mob and a witness protection program situation. Is this highly unusual or is it just my experience? If it's gonna get weird, it's gonna get weird in this trial. That's a given.

The problem with the bishop theory is that there would be no reason whatsoever to agree to keep his name secret, as KCL says.

 

[katiecoolady]

http://www.azcentral.com/story/laur...dge-locks-public-out-of-arias-trial/18201641/

A New low...Judge locks out....

 

[wenwe4]

A Bishop should not be testifying in court (IMO) as he would have to be subpoenaed and are subject to clergy clauses.

 

[LinasK]

Administration of Justice....WTH does this mean????

But there is hope that maybe she will unseal it after.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

Ok so in some trials they protect the witness' face by not showing it on camera. I don't recall a trial where the witness entire identity was being protected. Imean this isn't the mob and a witness protection program situation. Is this highly unusual or is it just my experience? If it's gonna get weird, it's gonna get weird in this trial. That's a given.

Beth Karas tweeted the same thing. It is beyond bizarre.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

Sorry if this has already been answered, but who is Vernon Parker? I don't recall his name from the first trial.

I think he was Travis' religious leader.

 

[ilovewings]

I cannot believe a judge can actually do what sherry is doing. Even terrorist trials that occur in our criminal courts are open--- no secret
Witness testimony- unbelievable

 

[Hope4More]

I think Parker the Bishop is a great guess, because sealing the courtroom to protect privileged confidences actually makes some kind of sense.

Also, as I recall, Bishop Parker made it clear he was a very reluctant witness. Maybe he is the mysterious elderly gentleman Nurmi shook hands with a thousand years ago earlier today.

 

[aa9511]

Yeah, cause nothing says "justice" like a secret death penalty trial:gaah:

OMG post of the day!

 

[Wolfpack Fan]

http://tamaratattles.com/2014/10/30/jodia-arias-trial-my-guess-on-the-mystery-mitigation-witness/

http://tamaratattles.com/2013/05/11/jodi-arias-says-she-has-no-mitigating-factors/
Read the bottom here. This was after the guilt phase, I guess. She says she wasn't molested.

 

[RadarLuv]

Except for the fact he (bishop) would be out of this jurisdiction. Plus the fact that almost everything seems to be protected by ones religion. So if he demanded it as a part of his testimony under the premise of religion, confidentiality, etc, it seems like it COULD be possible.

The most likely scenario outside of it being JA, IMO.

The problem with the bishop theory is that there would be no reason whatsoever to agree to keep his name secret, as KCL says.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

I just can not believe all the breaks this whackadoo gets. She murdered a man. And lied about it 293832002 times.. She did not just kill him she Slaughtered him.
And here she is again so people can decide if her life is worth saving???

This is so Arse Backwards.

 

[ILikeToBendPages]

I'm not sure what you mean here, ILikeToBendPages.

BTW, I just noticed there is a username "Jinkasaurus"! HAHAHAHA! I love it!

On May 21, 2013 Websleuths had a hiccup and crashed . Everyone thought they had done something and had been sent to banned (LOL) camp. It was down for several hours and everyone was in a panic.

 

[katiecoolady]

May I also add that in this case of apparent unconstitutionality of this ruling, if Arias wins in terms of avoiding the DP, the State would not be able to appeal on this. If this unconstitutional ruling helped the State and she lost, she could possibly gain a new trial over it.

Fair?

No.

 

[AZlawyer]

A Bishop should not be testifying in court (IMO) as he would have to be subpoenaed and are subject to clergy clauses.

JA could waive any privilege if she told him something, and if it had to do with someone else perhaps there would be a reason for closing the courtroom (maybe). But there would be no reason at all for concealing his identity.

 

[katiecoolady]

Travis family just left with Martinez and FLores.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

Wasn't there some friend that was supposed to testify for her in the first trial who bailed out of fear?

 

[Wagara]

If JA had a meeting with the bishop is the bishop required to keep it confidential? And if the bishop was suppose to keep it confidential but was being pushed somehow into testifying, would this cloak of silence make sense?

 

[bznbear]

:seeya: NOT cynical at all, rose ! I totally agree !

Hmmm ... MAYBE -- MAYBE Nurmi is going to use something along the lines of Baez's "Opening Statement" from the CA trial ?

:gaah:

JMO but I believe that CA's family was totally and completely involved in JB and CA's "scheme" that she was molested by GA ...

And this could be what CMJA and the DT are going to use because they are DESPERATE !

:moo:

I actually considered Baez may have been guilty of suborning perjury during that other trial. I found it difficult to believe he wasn't aware of the duplicitous family's testimony, even at their expense. This time, while I doubt KN has conspired with the Arias family to let JA lie under oath, I do believe he's fully aware of her total lack of veracity. But, like the famous Sgt. Schultz (am I showing my age?), he hears, sees, nuthink!