Sentencing and beyond- JA General Discussion #6

[Steve44]

Thing is, it didn't have to be a catch-22, and she didn't have to reveal her motivation. What tripped her up was her insistence that she not be held accountable. I wasn't there. The ninjas did it. Travis made me do it.

Second degree snapped was a story Nurmi was prepared to tell. A chaotic relationship, pushed and pulled by Travis, Travis emotionally and psychologically abusive, she forgave him May 26 and let her guard down, they had sex on June 4 then he raved to her about what a good time he was going to have with Mimi and she snapped.

As it was, to get to self defense she had to explain why she had to defend herself against a man who no one else in the world had experienced as violent. So he had to have a terrible secret only she knew about, one that he would use violence to keep secret. The pedo lie. Which also served as a reason for the jury to loath the victim, and to extend their sympathy to her, rather than to Travis.

The pedo lie was to be a 3fer. Explained self defense, made her the victim instead of Travis, and served to torment his family and friends.

BBM. But that was always the sine qua non. The idea of being held accountable in any way was always unthinkable to her. It had to be all his fault. I agree the pedo lie was the way to tip the scale of public opinion in her favor, but the public didn't see it as credible, only desperate and despicable.

 

[Hope4More]

The media here in NY and my colleagues thought the same... she hurt herself because she chose to get on the stand.

Personally, I’m not the type of person who would feel ‘her flipping out,’ merits any less LWOP. You’d hope they’d bring the diary entries in as they did, which to me, prove she premeditated for quite a while. Her wonky hormonal ups and downs don't cut it for me. The borderline rage hurts her too, IMO, so seek therapy, you knew it was wrong, it isn't an excuse. Why instead did you pursue a relationship clearly when you are unstable? Men kill their significant others all the time, whatever the 'dysfunction.' We don't find disordered minds excused from culpability, thank god. It's not subconscious insanity. And with the slashing of his tires and the such, I’d see her as aggravating. Pun intended.

The all- but-one- for -DP jury liked Dr. Samuels and Dr. Fonseca, and believed their testimony that Travis had emotionally abused the . That's pretty telling, IMO, and suggests the 1st jury might have gone for second degree or hung had the not insisted upon a justification defence. jmo

 

[Steve44]

I never cared what she wore or even how inappropriately she acted in court. What I did care about was her role as enabling liason to the 's whackadoodle fans. MDLR is a credentialed mental health worker. She has a professional code of conduct she is obligated to honor, and exploiting and encouraging those fans in the way she did IMO violated every rule in the book.

I suspect she liked the drama, and the only positive attention she was getting came from that quarter.

 

[Hope4More]

BBM. But that was always the sine qua non. The idea of being held accountable in any way was always unthinkable to her. It had to be all his fault. I agree the pedo lie was the way to tip the scale of public opinion in her favor, but the public didn't see it as credible, only desperate and despicable.

I was just pointing out that she could have opted for telling a different lie, one that might well have been more effective.

What the public thought about her pedo lie is secondary IMO to the fact neither jury believed that lie. Nurmi was well aware the pedo lie was more likely to earn her the DP than it was to somehow exonerate her.

Thing is, her insistence on going with that lie opened the door to all kinds of damning evidence about HER that would otherwise never have come in.

 

[Steve44]

I was just pointing out that she could have opted for telling a different lie, one that might well have been more effective.

What the public thought about her pedo lie is secondary IMO to the fact neither jury believed that lie. Nurmi was well aware the pedo lie was more likely to earn her the DP than it was to somehow exonerate her.

Thing is, her insistence on going with that lie opened the door to all kinds of damning evidence about HER that would otherwise never have come in.

I was including the jury when I said public, I should have been more clear. I don't think she could foresee losing - had too much confidence in her ability to manipulate, which manifested in an inability to take sound legal advice.

 

[Hope4More]

I was including the jury when I said public, I should have been more clear. I don't think she could foresee losing - had too much confidence in her ability to manipulate, which manifested in an inability to take sound legal advice.

Yep. JM has said repeatedly that from beginning to end the seemed positive she'd be home for Christmas.

She clearly was shocked by the verdict, lol. And felt "betrayed" by the jury, that they didn't understand she, not Travis, was the victim.

 

[Steve44]

The all- but-one- for -DP jury liked Dr. Samuels and Dr. Fonseca, and believed their testimony that Travis had emotionally abused the . That's pretty telling, IMO, and suggests the 1st jury might have gone for second degree or hung had the not insisted upon a justification defence. jmo

I never understood how the jury couldn't see their obvious bias, Fonseca being the worst of all, and attribute credibility to their narrative. In the end it wasn't enough to mitigate her actions. Maybe the vacuum they were in, and the solemnity of the environment, lent them an air of credibility that was invisible from the outside.

 

[Hope4More]

I never understood how the jury couldn't see their obvious bias, Fonseca being the worst of all, and attribute credibility to their narrative. In the end it wasn't enough to mitigate her actions. Maybe the vacuum they were in, and the solemnity of the environment, lent them an air of credibility that was invisible from the outside.

According to the foreman, all but 17 were pissed when they read the full Hughes -Travis email exchange, the TA-JA texts, and her journals in full and realized the DT's portrayal of Travis was a lie.

For whatever inexplicable reason, though, they didn't seem to hold that against Fonseca or Samuels.

 

[Madeleine74]

I never cared what she wore or even how inappropriately she acted in court. What I did care about was her role as enabling liason to the 's whackadoodle fans. MDLR is a credentialed mental health worker. She has a professional code of conduct she is obligated to honor, and exploiting and encouraging those fans in the way she did IMO violated every rule in the book.

Well the killer certainly does have her 'fans' and I know that started even before MDLR came upon the case. The ones who love the killer and the ones who loathe her are equally passionate about her. The killer's biggest fear was fading away into obscurity, to be forgotten forever as she was warehoused in Perryville. The killer could not survive being completely ignored and that will likely never happen; her followers (both sides) will see to it.

MDLR could only get away with what others allowed her to, including the court system, the jail, her bosses, the lawyers who use those services, and case followers. MDLR started the ball rolling, and the ball keeps on rolling and rolling even without MDLR to push it in 2016.

 

[Madeleine74]

The all- but-one- for -DP jury liked Dr. Samuels and Dr. Fonseca, and believed their testimony that Travis had emotionally abused the . That's pretty telling, IMO, and suggests the 1st jury might have gone for second degree or hung had the not insisted upon a justification defence. jmo

Juan, in his book, also conceded that some of Travis' words (texts, emails) were 'abusive' and he talked about that because it was a factor JM would need to deal with. That doesn't mean it's ok to kill someone who speaks to you like that, and Travis certainly had his buttons pushed, but it was "abusive language," no doubt about it, and I appreciated JM saying it like it was.

 

[Hope4More]

Anyway, stuck my toes back in these waters to try to figure out why and how the DT interviews were turned over to JM. Still don't understand why Shaffer disclosed them to JM, but am glad she did, and not just because they led to JM's Perry Mason moment.

I know that the gas cans and gun and knife and brutal slaughter were everything that mattered to JM, but not so for me. Other than the day of verdict, for me DeMarte's turn on the stand during PP2 remains the most satisfying day of trial. The piece by piece revelations about she dished out, all from those interviews: the smelling like a goddess, the busboy seducing, the cousin who called her arrogant and condescending, the grandmother who described the as a know it all and mother abuser....

Those interviews were supposed to demonstrate why the should be spared the DP. Instead, JM used them against the , to reveal her as someone so nasty and arrogant and unlikable that even when they knew the 's life was on the line, her own family couldn't think of anything nice to say about her.

 

[Steve44]

Well the killer certainly does have her 'fans' and I know that started even before MDLR came upon the case. The ones who love the killer and the ones who loathe her are equally passionate about her. The killer's biggest fear was fading away into obscurity, to be forgotten forever as she was warehoused in Perryville. The killer could not survive being completely ignored and that will likely never happen; her followers (both sides) will see to it.

MDLR could only get away with what others allowed her to, including the court system, the jail, her bosses, the lawyers who use those services, and case followers. MDLR started the ball rolling, and the ball keeps on rolling and rolling even without MDLR to push it in 2016.

Her supporters will gradually fade away, as the prospect of a payoff gradually fades. The first and biggest payoff, to see her walk free, is all but gone, living on only in the hopes of a successful appeal, which if reality-based is not something to be hopeful about.

Those who loathe her remain interested because their hope for justice has been fulfilled, and there is interest in seeing what exactly that looks like, aside from the momentary event that secured it, it really is a process, and there is curiosity to see how it plays out, the effect it will have on the person in question; does its establishment have any effect on her conscience, will she acknowledge the responsibility that is now so obviously reflected in her circumstance? I don't see anything wrong or perverse in these questions.

 

[Hope4More]

Juan, in his book, also conceded that some of Travis' words (texts, emails) were 'abusive' and he talked about that because it was a factor JM would need to deal with. That doesn't mean it's ok to kill someone who speaks to you like that, and Travis certainly had his buttons pushed, but it was "abusive language," no doubt about it, and I appreciated JM saying it like it was.

IIRC, the May 26 exchange is the only one JM thought crossed the line and that caused him a great deal of concern.

I respected what JM said in his book about how he chose to handle it- that he wasn't going to make excuses for Travis about that day, or any other, for that matter.

But...I still don't agree that what Travis told her on May 26 was abusive. As far as I'm concerned, everything he said to her was the truth. He'd tried for months to say some of those same things in a much nicer way. She hadn't listened. Don't blame him in the slightest for resorting to words she couldn't ignore.

 

[Steve44]

IIRC, the May 26 exchange is the only one JM thought crossed the line and that caused him a great deal of concern.

I respected what JM said in his book about how he chose to handle it- that he wasn't going to make excuses for Travis about that day, or any other, for that matter.

But...I still don't agree that what Travis told her on May 26 was abusive. As far as I'm concerned, everything he said to her was the truth. He'd tried for months to say some of those same things in a much nicer way. She hadn't listened. Don't blame him in the slightest for resorting to words she couldn't ignore.

I agree. Harsh but true words do not equate to abuse. The appearance of abuse only stood when taking his words completely out of context, and that context was that of a genuinely good man trying patiently and lovingly to bring the good out of a person who had no good to bring out. His words were only the frustrating reflection of that realization.

 

[Hope4More]

Her supporters will gradually fade away, as the prospect of a payoff gradually fades. The first and biggest payoff, to see her walk free, is all but gone, living on only in the hopes of a successful appeal, which if reality-based is not something to be hopeful about.

Those who loathe her remain interested because their hope for justice has been fulfilled, and there is interest in seeing what exactly that looks like, aside from the momentary event that secured it, it really is a process, and there is curiosity to see how it plays out, the effect it will have on the person in question; does its establishment have any effect on her conscience, will she acknowledge the responsibility that is now so obviously reflected in her circumstance? I don't see anything wrong or perverse in these questions.

Read some of "hashtag " on Twitter and it's difficult to conclude anything so innocuous as curiosity drives -loathers. Those still tweeting about her want to hear that she's suffering, and they never seem to tire of mocking everything about her.

The JAII crew seems to be making one last effort to scam fans into contributing to an appellate fund I suspect has no more than a few thousands of dollars in it.

The , IMO, will for some years to come still have "suitors" she can manipulate into keeping her in colored pencils and Beano.

For myself, I'm interested in how the appeals play out, and in her PCR proceedings if she opts for that. I've never followed a capital case all the way from the very beginning to absolute finish, and I'm fascinated by the entire process.

And, full disclosure, yes, I'm looking forward to the day when she's forced to realize she's never going to be home for Christmas. O holy night.

 

[krkrjx]

Her defence was ludicrous from the start. That's what first caught my attention. The 48 Hours interview chilled me. A barking mad, egotistical liar, smiling - almost glowing with happiness as she described Travis. Like she was claiming him in death - attributing a special status to herself that she couldn't do when he was alive. It was an international stage for her to get attention re Travis on.

I agree with GigiG that the truth would have been a much better defence than the smug, shameless, grotesque lies. The truth was as ugly as Arias' personality but it would have been based on something real. It would have been confirmation to his family of what they had already guessed. Her ego wouldn't allow honesty. Arias wanted recognition over Travis and to walk free from slaughtering him. Declaring that she was an obsessed stalker - crazed and crazy about Travis - unable to sleep or breathe without him - unable to see him with anyone else - that would have been recognisable as human emotions. Albeit, murderous, vengeful, hate-fuelled calculated, vile emotions.

Instead, Arias showed us what a monster she is on top of murdering a blameless man. In doing so, she almost was sentenced to death and will never get out of prison. Quite the criminal genius, huh?

I will always wonder if the killer might not have gotten a life with possibility of parole sentence had she not claimed self defense, not taken the stand, not tried to make Travis the villain...but instead had come clean about her guilt and shown remorse. Even if her psychopathy does not understand the concept of remorse...it does understand being able to act, to manipulate, to con. She could have very well faked remorse well enough to be believed by many people...not most people, but many more than had ever been in her camp or even on the fence. I cannot completely negate the possibility that the judge might have allowed for release one day has this killer conducted herself differently and had her defense been put to the court differently. Killer needed to show contrition at every opportunity, with her defense team constantly pointing out those showings.

I agree with everyone that it would always have been a verdict of first degree murder...but I think the sentence could have turned out differently.

 

[Steve44]

Read some of "hashtag " on Twitter and it's difficult to conclude anything so innocuous as curiosity drives -loathers. Those still tweeting about her want to hear that she's suffering, and they never seem to tire of mocking everything about her.

The JAII crew seems to be making one last effort to scam fans into contributing to an appellate fund I suspect has no more than a few thousands of dollars in it.

The , IMO, will for some years to come still have "suitors" she can manipulate into keeping her in colored pencils and Beano.

For myself, I'm interested in how the appeals play out, and in her PCR proceedings if she opts for that. I've never followed a capital case all the way from the very beginning to absolute finish, and I'm fascinated by the entire process.

And, full disclosure, yes, I'm looking forward to the day when she's forced to realize she's never going to be home for Christmas. O holy night.

It's the same sentiment, only some (most) people 'think with their emotions', and it gets raw.

LOL @ holy night...

 

[Steve44]

I will always wonder if the killer might not have gotten a life with possibility of parole sentence had she not claimed self defense, not taken the stand, not tried to make Travis the villain...but instead had come clean about her guilt and shown remorse. Even if her psychopathy does not understand the concept of remorse...it does understand being able to act, to manipulate, to con. She could have very well faked remorse well enough to be believed by many people...not most people, but many more than had ever been in her camp or even on the fence. I cannot completely negate the possibility that the judge might have allowed for release one day has this killer conducted herself differently and had her defense been put to the court differently. Killer needed to show contrition at every opportunity, with her defense team constantly pointing out those showings.

I agree with everyone that it would always have been a verdict of first degree murder...but I think the sentence could have turned out differently.

I have no doubt she could at least have gotten the possibility of parole if she had played all the cards right, but her misplaced confidence in her ability to manipulate and her innate sense of superiority disallowed that possibility.

ETA: This is not to say she deserved any leniency, only that she could have played on the necessary ambiguity of recreating the actual crime and circumstance to her advantage. As it was she made it clear enough that justice required LWOP.

 

[Hope4More]

I will always wonder if the killer might not have gotten a life with possibility of parole sentence had she not claimed self defense, not taken the stand, not tried to make Travis the villain...but instead had come clean about her guilt and shown remorse. Even if her psychopathy does not understand the concept of remorse...it does understand being able to act, to manipulate, to con. She could have very well faked remorse well enough to be believed by many people...not most people, but many more than had ever been in her camp or even on the fence. I cannot completely negate the possibility that the judge might have allowed for release one day has this killer conducted herself differently and had her defense been put to the court differently. Killer needed to show contrition at every opportunity, with her defense team constantly pointing out those showings.

I agree with everyone that it would always have been a verdict of first degree murder...but I think the sentence could have turned out differently.

She was incapable of even acting remorseful, IMO. The best she could do in her secret testimony was to say " I wish I had that day to do over again." And the best she could offer up at sentencing was "I'm disgusted with myself."

I think DeMarte explained the best, and especially, what the had to do internally to prepare herself to murder Travis. DeMarte said the had to devalue Travis so completely as to convince herself that she was completely justified in taking his life.

The did that. I have no doubt at all she still believes Travis deserved to die. One of her tweets as she waited to hear whether or not the first jury was going to sentence her to death said it all. She quoted lyrics from whatever song that said- why did you have to say goodbye, why did you do this to me, I'm crying now (and it's all your fault).

 

[Hope4More]

Happy Mother's Day to the moms here. . Going now to celebrate the remainder of mine.