While we wait, I just have an observation I have been wondering about.
Is this phase going along where the Prosecution gets to go first and bring in all their witnesses first, and then the defense will get their turn, and then the Prosecution gets to call final rebuttal witnesses?
The reason I am wondering is it seems Juan is bringing in a lot of witnesses that are going through lots of the same things from the first trial and couldnt some of that have waited until he saw what the defense was going to bring into the trial and then just bring his in on rebuttgal?
Maybe he knew the witness list from defense first and then maybe it makes sense because he knew where defense was heading and was cutting them off at the path.
This phase sounded so simple a month ago. She is guilty. Decide her punishment and try not to rehash the guilty/not-guilty part. But we all knew it would be a rehashing of the 1st trial and I am wondering why the proscution is getting roped up in bringing in so many witnesses that are heading down the path of rehashing the trial.
I love Juan and am just confused how the trial is proceeding if its the prosecution doing all the calling of witnesses.
The prosecution was just presenting evidence regarding the nature of the premeditation and cruelty. That part was necessary because we have a new jury. Now we are truly into the mitigation phase and the defense is calling witnesses.
A few questions for AZL:
- If some 'normal' person was the super secret witness and they were within's the court's jurisdiction, they would need to offer some sort of proof of why they needed a closed hearing, correct?
- And JSS would scrutinize that, e.g. if a witness said, "I fear for my life if I testify," then the Judge would say something like, "Show me the police report that was filed and the evidence you turned over to them." Right?
- Can you imagine what JA could offer that would suffice in lieu of the above?
- Would you guess that JM was aware in advance that this request would be made? I mean well in advance, not five minutes before.
- Since JSS is trying to do everything possible to avoid appeal issues, are you expecting to see "surprises" like witnesses that violate discovery coming from the defense? It seems quite obvious that the judge would allow such testimony no matter how egregious the violation seems to be.
1. Yes.
2. Yes.
3. No.
4. No, because if he had been aware of it there would not have been so much chaos and contradictory rulings--the issue would have been decided previously and not while the jury was waiting.
5. I expect JSS to continue to try to avoid appeal issues, but not to give in to the defense where no successful appeal would be possible.
I edited my post to add the two tweets I saw, JM did object but it's really neither here nor there as JSS denied the stay motion. I do think as an emergency appeal the court will hear it soon, where did the 25th date come from, do you know?
The 25th is the date on the Ct App scheduling order for consideration of the merits of the special action (appeal). Today they just heard the argument for a stay of the secret testimony.
AZLawyer, sorry, it's probably going to be a busy day for you!
Question - what difference is there between the DT accusing Ms. Flores of releasing sealed material on SM as prosecutorial misconduct, and the Arias family and justus4usall releasing the supposed secret witness name? TIA
EBM: to clarify, does the prosecution have any recourse here?
First of all, we don't know if Justus did release the correct name. The Arias family as far as I know did not, and claimed not to know who was on the stand. The judge is not going to waste time IMO trying to track down any leak unless the defense accuses the prosecution of the leak and demands a mistrial.
My 2 cents...
<respectfully snipped>
Question... if something happens during the retrial that actually leads to a mistrial... does that only affect the retrial? or does it affect the conviction also? TIA
MOO
Just the retrial.
If she gets death it certainly wont be anti-climatic for me or for the Alexander family who has waited for 6 long years.
From what I have read if she gets death the State of Arizona pays for the first appeal........then she is on her own.
Maybe AZL can clear that up.
imo
Either way she would get a "free" appeal, plus I believe free counsel for post-conviction relief proceedings, which are like appeals but address different issues (e.g., ineffective assistance of counsel).
When they said they are standing out in the hall waiting, that is what they mean.
Every time I have had jury duty they call you from the jury pool area to the courtroom.
And every time I have been called there are NO seats out in those halls that I have ever found. I mean NO place to sit except the floor. So give these people some credit for doing this.
I always dressed for jury duty. I no longer do so because you are sitting on the floor after you have waited to be called into the courtroom. You can only stand so long.
There are benches in that hallway. Or chairs--I can't remember. But I think long benches.
@TrialDiariesJ: Lawyers need to be at the appeals hearing so #jodiarias is postponed till 1:15pm MST
That's one way to get a stay.
Does JSS go to the Appeals Court as well, since it was her decision?
How does an Appeals Court overturn a sitting judge's order, when they are not there?
Did JSS anticipate this would happen when she ruled on the closed court issue? TIA.
No, trial judges are not allowed to defend their rulings on appeal.
So ... the appellate court will either agree with JSS's decision -- or -- they will overturn it ...
But ... IF the appellate court overturns JSS's decision, will Nurmi appeal that decision to the Arizona Supreme Court ?
:gaah:
He could, but they could decline the case, and when they do it often takes them less than a day to say so.
How many attorneys are representing the media, and every citizen of the country? I am curious how well versed they are in this type of trial case. Especially with the C.O.A which from what I understand is a different type of litigation. I am also curious how many times KN has been in front of COA
David Bodney is like a 1st Amendment god around here. Rest assured he made the best possible argument that could have been made.
Does it sound like Judge Howe has already made a decision? Not an absolute? Hmmm
No, he just likes to play devil's advocate.
From WAT:
Wild About Trial @WildAboutTrial · 56s 56 seconds ago
Judge Howe "closing the courtroom is a very drastic thing" he says to Nurmi.
Wild About Trial @WildAboutTrial · 5s 6 seconds ago
Judge Howe doesn't seem to like the idea of a closed proceeding for a witness. #jodiarias
See?
@TrialDiariesJ: Judge Orozoo says he's troubled by this argument because witnesses could be harassed after trial #jodiarias #3tvarias
Judge
Orozco is female. lol
Steve Krafft ‏@SKrafftFox10 2m2 minutes ago Phoenix, AZ
#JodiArias defense attorney says he wants media out of courtroom to protect expert witnesses testifying about Jodi.
Are you serious? If this is an expert, I...just...:gaah:
