Retrial for Sentencing of Jodi Arias - Day 7

[fifteen89]

No, that is not in front of them to rule on today.

Not today but it sure sounds like it's on KN's wish list.

 

[mydirtysecret]

Sure, someone's gotta represent these kinds of people, but the way KN does it is sickening.

He can only really advise his clients on strategy, as we have seen in many of the times both JA and KN have requested to be removed from the case it was because they had a dissenting opine on how they wanted the strategy to go. In round 2, we are CLEARLY seeing he has went with JA's strategy.

 

[RadarLuv]

Is Jodi there?

She went to brunch.

 

[AZlawyer]

AZlawyer, please help me understand the process. If the judges rule in favor of a stay, when will they hear oral argument to open the courtroom to the public?

Nov. 25, unless they grant Bodney's request to hear it sooner.

And are they likely to rule that the media has to stop tweeting live during the trial?

No, that ruling has not been appealed.

and, AZ, could they make a decision on the whole thing now - i.e. opening up the courtroom - or just the stay?

Almost certainly just the stay, but they may say things in the stay ruling that will suggest how they feel about the merits of the appeal. It sure sounds like the merits were being argued by both counsel.

LOL I know that. But what does that have to do with this mess about the threats?

If they've already lost 2 jurors, a stay would mean risking losing more (due to, e.g., nonrefundable tickets for Christmas trips) and having to declare a mistrial.

 

[dog.gone.cute]

Thanks for the welcome, everybody :toast: Greetings from chilly London.

My opinion on this whole closed court nonsense: FREE press, PUBLIC justice, OPEN court. Even more so in a death penalty case. This is dangerous.
.
If Jodi doesn't want to testify: Diddums. She was quite happy to stick her face (and everything else) in front of every camera available before now.

If Nurmi doesn't want criticism: Diddums. It's your job. You're getting paid for it. Suck it up.

If an expert witness doesn't want to testify: Diddums. You get PAID for expert testimony. It should be open to public scrutiny.

:goodpost: And luv "Diddums" !

:seeya:

 

[gerard11]

diddums = something you say to show that you feel no sympathy for someone who is behaving like a child: He called you a bad name, did he? Ah, diddums! [Cambridge Dictionary online]

Diddums - definitely a keeper. TY, gerard11.

Yep - that's exactly what it means! And you're welcome!

 

[kantoo]

I haven't read all the posts, so this may have been answered, but I'll ask anyway. Can anyone tell me why KN said "we've already lost two jurors" ?

that was something of a lie on his part....intimating that 2 jurors have been lost due to media coverage of the trial.

one juror was excused at the beginning of the trial due to a serious family illness

then one juror decided to walk up to Beth Karas during a break and ask her if she was Nancy Grace....and she also had removed her juror badge.....baaaaadd juror! so she got bounced.

 

[Karma28]

Aren't the taxpayers, the public, of Arizona paying for JAs defense? Thus, paying any experts that KN can find to defend his client? And, paying the DT's salaries?

The DT couldn't even find local experts either... so taxpayers also had/has to foot the bill for transportation and hotel fees.

 

[Love Never Fails]

Right now, they're only deciding whether to declare a halt to the secret testimony (the "stay" request) pending their decision on the actual question before them (the "please reopen the court" request). It's possible that they will say no to the stay request, because ultimately the public will get to see the transcript if they say yes to the "please reopen the court" request. So there is no permanent harm to the public's right to know to refuse the stay request.

I hope they issue the stay, though.

Does the court already have the request to open the court already in front of them then? I thought this was only for a stay. I am confused AZL.....

 

[Hope4More]

Diddums. How apt.

 

[Nali87]

I have that Monty Python "Judges" skit in my head now! Oh dear!

(Heads over to google.)

 

[G&AMom]

Even Watergate was public and there were many death threats in that one IIRC.

Wenwe, I'm glad you get to be here just following along like the rest of us, even if I'm p******d we can't watch the trial live! :seeya:

 

[AZlawyer]

Does the court already have the request to open the court already in front of them then? I thought this was only for a stay. I am confused AZL.....

The request to open the court has been filed, but is not scheduled for consideration until Nov. 25. Today's argument was supposed to be just about the stay, but it seems like the judges immediately directed the conversation toward the merits of the "open court" request itself.

 

[Tuba]

Definitely, cherchez notre femme. Remember the ROOTS of this whole secrecy fury & demand. Arias! It dates to August and her shock & horror when she learned her top secret witness list would have to be produced and delivered to Juan Martinez. Her special private secret turnstile at the jail for her conferences with said witnesses spun away from her control as well & she filed on that. The secrecy was The Element for which she wanted total protection. Total, demanded this stalker who spied & snooped into others' words and movements. When the list was exposed & the jail visits were known as to all parties, she collapsed as her own legal representative. She sat on her defeat for a day and then planted the security demands on her familiar, weary lawyers. We know she is nothing if not truculent with a T for tantrums. And when I quote her as "could not be reasoned with or form rational thoughts" and say inflate that 25-30%, I mean how she behaves is not something we would want to see. It beggars description. So trace the roots of this nonsense & find Arias with a smirk on her face. Certainly her paranoia could have infected her team but some of this is merely yielding to her screaming demands. They will recover from it. She won't.

 

[Love Never Fails]

Yep - that's exactly what it means! And you're welcome!

I love it too! Thank you!!

 

[gerard11]

Diddums. How apt.

I've been shouting it often at my laptop during this trial - whenever the DT throws one of their toddler tantrums.

 

[Dmacky]

I have a strong feeling you're right. Wish we could find out if she booked a flight to AZ.

She's probably already booked a flight back home to Cali. by now. She's afeared :scared: she might actually choke on a chicken bone if she testifies ? Wasn't that the threat

(I do know that afeared is not a word, I'm just funning with yall)

 

[Love Never Fails]

Definitely, cherchez notre femme. Remember the ROOTS of this whole secrecy fury & demand. Arias! It dates to August and her shock & horror when she learned her top secret witness list would have to be produced and delivered to Juan Martinez. Her special private secret turnstile at the jail for her conferences with said witnesses spun away from her control as well & she filed on that. The secrecy was The Element for which she wanted total protection. Total, demanded this stalker who spied & snooped into others' words and movements. When the list was exposed & the jail visits were known as to all parties, she collapsed as her own legal representative. She sat on her defeat for a day and then planted the security demands on her familiar, weary lawyers. We know she is nothing if not truculent with a T for tantrums. And when I quote her as "could not be reasoned with or form rational thoughts" and say inflate that 25-30%, I mean how she behaves is not something we would want to see. It beggars description. So trace the roots of this nonsense & find Arias with a smirk on her face. Certainly her paranoia could have infected her team but some of this is merely yielding to her screaming demands. They will recover from it. She won't.

Great post. This is Arias one hundred percent.

 

[rose222]

:goodpost: And luv "Diddums" !

:seeya:

Yep - that's exactly what it means! And you're welcome!

The 'official' word for the drama that this Defense creates every single day in this retrial ...Diddums!

 

[Renee110]

Nov. 25, unless they grant Bodney's request to hear it sooner.



No, that ruling has not been appealed.



Almost certainly just the stay, but they may say things in the stay ruling that will suggest how they feel about the merits of the appeal. It sure sounds like the merits were being argued by both counsel.



If they've already lost 2 jurors, a stay would mean risking losing more (due to, e.g., nonrefundable tickets for Christmas trips) and having to declare a mistrial.

BBM. If judges say things in the ruling that suggest how they feel, then what?