Sentencing and beyond- JA General Discussion #9

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Hope4More said:
((((((Sister Geevee))))))

From memory (you've been warned ;)), I think JM has 20 days to respond after the probable cause order is filed with the Bar's disciplinary clerk. As far as I know, the order hasn't even been filed yet.

The most likely reason why the order hasn't been filed yet (if that's accurate) is Henley is giving JM time to consider his "offer" of sanction, and/or JM is considering/has decided to accept the discipline & put an end to this bar complaint (no matter that his atty is quoted as saying he "couldn't imagine" this not going to "trial" (a full disciplinary hearing).

If JM is insisting on a full hearing, best guess is that we won't know the initial result for several months down the road (perhaps longer, since holiday season is approaching). And, JM can appeal to the AZ Supreme Court whatever is handed down.
Click to expand...

((((Sweetest of Sisters Hope))))

Thanks! I guess I won't wait with wormy breath for any rapid conclusion. I don't envy him having to make this decision, either give up more months of his life fighting this made up bunchabull or take the sanction, get on with his life and career and let Princess Pain win even the tiniest of victories.

My fear is if he does take a sanction (or even fights it all the way and still loses), could it help her in her appeal? We've seen how Clark can twist reality and ignore facts, the whole thing just worries me.
 
geevee said:
((((Sweetest of Sisters Hope))))

Thanks! I guess I won't wait with wormy breath for any rapid conclusion. I don't envy him having to make this decision, either give up more months of his life fighting this made up bunchabull or take the sanction, get on with his life and career and let Princess Pain win even the tiniest of victories.

My fear is if he does take a sanction (or even fights it all the way and still loses), could it help her in her appeal? We've seen how Clark can twist reality and ignore facts, the whole thing just worries me.
Click to expand...

((Sweetest sister of them all; Sister Geevee)). I checked in just in time to see you here. Maybe. :)

Whatever happens with the bar charges against JM will not affect 's appeal of her conviction. Really. Will. Not. Legally impossible. None of the bar charges have ANYTHING legally relevant to do with the guilt phase of 's trial. is not going to get a retrial.

As to an appeal related to her sentencing? How would that work? She didn't get the DP. And the PP2 jury hung. What more favorable outcome for her could there have been?

In other words, even if Clark & the Bar nail JM to the wall (unlikely), & her appellate attorneys gain nothing meaningful, as they cannot demonstrate was deprived of due process, nor harmed.

(I don't envy JM's choices either, for other reasons as well. To fully fight the Bar charges, he'll be forced to open up his private life, on the record, and likely wouldn't be able to prevent the Clark ghoul from further dragging in his long-term girlfriend. What agony that would be for a man who is intensely private, and for no greater reason than a butchering, sociopathic wants yet more revenge, and the greed of a fiercely jealous wannabe (Tammy Rose).
 
Last edited:
Hope4More said:
((Sweetest sister of them all; Sister Geevee)). I checked in just in time to see you here. Maybe. :)

Whatever happens with the bar charges against JM will not affect 's appeal of her conviction. Really. Will. Not. Legally impossible. None of the bar charges have ANYTHING legally relevant to do with the guilt phase of 's trial. is not going to get a retrial.

As to an appeal related to her sentencing? How would that work? She didn't get the DP. And the PP2 jury hung. What more favorable outcome for her could there have been?

In other words, even if Clark & the Bar nail JM to the wall (unlikely), & her appellate attorneys gain nothing meaningful, as they cannot demonstrate was deprived of due process, nor harmed.

(I don't envy JM's choices either, for other reasons as well. To fully fight the Bar charges, he'll be forced to open up his private life, on the record, and likely wouldn't be able to prevent the Clark ghoul from further dragging in his long-term girlfriend. What agony that would be for a man who is intensely private, and for no greater reason than a butchering, sociopathic wants yet more revenge, and the greed of a fiercely jealous wannabe (Tammy Rose).
Click to expand...

Okay, I believe you. :) Kiefer's article just gave me the willies, I know how much he despises JM and would cheer even a murderess going free if it meant JM was booted from the profession (or even just smacked on the wrists with a feather), I just don't want anything to happen to endanger her conviction and lifetime sentence.

He really is up against hard choices. :(

P.S. Season 16 of Top Chef begins tonight, check YouTube later to see if anyone has posted the episode (I've already seen videos that say they are tonight's episode (not sure how they could be since it hasn't aired yet) but it's completely possible the episode will be posted for a while (until YT takes it down if Bravo complains).
 
geevee said:
Okay, I believe you. :) Kiefer's article just gave me the willies, I know how much he despises JM and would cheer even a murderess going free if it meant JM was booted from the profession (or even just smacked on the wrists with a feather), I just don't want anything to happen to endanger her conviction and lifetime sentence.

He really is up against hard choices. :(

P.S. Season 16 of Top Chef begins tonight, check YouTube later to see if anyone has posted the episode (I've already seen videos that say they are tonight's episode (not sure how they could be since it hasn't aired yet) but it's completely possible the episode will be posted for a while (until YT takes it down if Bravo complains).
Click to expand...

I don't know if JM is safe from the onslaught of nastiness that's been waged against him for years, even before . From my deep dive into the bar complaint materials, it's even more clear that Kiefer hates JM & is intent upon bringing him down. His fingerprints are all over behind the scenes manuevers against JM during both trials, on through encouraging Tammy Rose.

But...I still have zero doubt that 's conviction & sentence will stand, no matter what more destruction the wreaks.

(Thanks for tip about Top Chef. :))
 
Hope4More said:
I don't know if JM is safe from the onslaught of nastiness that's been waged against him for years, even before . From my deep dive into the bar complaint materials, it's even more clear that Kiefer hates JM & is intent upon bringing him down. His fingerprints are all over behind the scenes manuevers against JM during both trials, on through encouraging Tammy Rose.

But...I still have zero doubt that 's conviction & sentence will stand, no matter what more destruction the wreaks.

(Thanks for tip about Top Chef. :))
Click to expand...

Yeah, he'll probably endure battles for the rest of his career, maybe that's one of the reasons he wrote the book, to give himself a financial pad in case, after the trial, they did succeed in forcing him out. Defenders of the truth tend to make some powerful enemies.

You're welcome sweet Sis, hope you can find the weekly episodes (and watch Last Chance Kitchen, that's available on Bravo dot com to everyone). :)
 
Fortunately I agree, there is nothing in these complaints that will lead to a retrial for the .
Who knows? Juan may choose to retire at this point. After 30 or so years doing the same job he may just retire. If I were him I’d seriously consider it.
I don’t know his age but he’s still young enough to travel and live his life.
 
Colie said:
Prosecutor Juan Martinez being punished

KPNX 12 NBC Phoenix | Valley
December 11, 2018, 08:17 pm
Prosecutor Juan Martinez being punished
STORY POSTED 1 HOUR AGO
Jodi Arias prosecutor, Juan Martinez, is being punished by Maricopa County Attorney Bill Montgomery, but Montgomery won't say why. Montgomery will say it is related to a ethics investigation into Martinez.

Prosecutor Juan Martinez being punished (Central Arizona)
Click to expand...


Thanks for keeping up with JM news & for taking the time to post it here. :)

Montgomery's public comments on the video link you posted said it all: JM was "punished" for violating Maricopa County Attorney Office's (MCAO) INTERNAL OFFICE POLICIES (most likely policies related to after hours non-MCAO visitors).

Montgomery says JM was given "administrative" (example- a written reprimand in his personnel file) and "training" discipline.

Big whoopidy. The discipline relates to KC's bar charges only in the sense that one or more of those charges imvolve whatever office policy JM violated.

Example: her charge that JM disclosed confidential trial info to an after-hours visitor to MCAO (Jennifer Wood).

Because JM may have violated office policy by having Wood there several times after-hours does not mean or prove that JM disclosed confidential information to Wood while she was (allegedly) there.

Montgomery would NOT protect JM if he uncovered actual evidence that JM violated either his ethical or legal obligations.

JM was given internal, adminstrative '"punishment"

PLUS

the files Montgomery turned over to the Bar were apparently sealed because they are legally protected, confidential personnel records

EQUALS

yet another Kiefer article about nothing new or more than trying to sully/attack JM.
 
Personnel files are the property of the employer (MCAO) and are confidential. I’m no expert but would think any request under the Freedom if Information Act for personnel records on anyone would be denied. Juan is no exception.
Still the question remains, will Montgomery’s disciplinary action given to Juan satisfy the Bar complaints that are pending?
I think that yes, it will- thus a ray of hope for JM. Justice moves slowly.
The fact that JM is still on the docket confirms my theory on this.
But Juan still has that hurdle in front of him - will he accept a Bar discipline or fight on?
Tough choice for our Juan. What a mess! End it by accepting some sort of punishment and a negative mark on his reputation or fight it?
The financial cost will be high - will MCAO continue to pay his legal fees or cut him loose and have Juan pay for his defense out of pocket? Is it worth it for Juan to do so? He hasn’t been fired & it doesn’t appear he will be. Hasn’t been suspended either. In my history as a manager the process is after two written warnings, next is suspension and then termination. If the employee then worked a few years with no other infractions, the written was dropped.
There is a new governor in Arizona; not sure if the Governer’s office will willingly spend yet more money on anything associated with the or any money to defend a prosecutor when the complaint cites his behavior in past cases as well. Does the state have an obligation to do so? I personally think since Juan was employed by MC they should continue to pay his legal fees, but who knows?
Juan is not perfect. There were a few times during the trial where his actions made me cringe - for example, in PP2 while questioning Lisa Andrews he pulled out the picture of Travis with his throat wound & the entire courtroom was shocked. Totally unnecessary in my mind and done simply for shock value. I know it was to achieve the death penalty for but this wasn’t the guilt phase & Lisa was as pure as fresh fallen
snow.
I personally think the fame and international interest in this trial had to be overwhelming for him.
I just hope he wins and the complaint resolved so Juan can do what he does best and finish out his stellar career. was convicted and will never get out of prison. She’ll never get a retrial. PCR will be denied. Her conviction will stand.
And get the out of the news forever!
 
Last edited:
GarAndTeed said:
Kiefer makes me ill; total sleazebag, IMO.
Click to expand...

Kiefer is anti-DP in a state with peeps who overwhelmingly still favor the DP. That reality has clearly frustrated and angered Kiefer for many years.

IMO, his obsession with bringing JM down, though, long ago became less about the DP than about a personal hatred of JM.

Tammy Copter Rose's texts with Jennifer Wood reveal that Kiefer deliberately and persistently tried to poison Wood against JM. And Rose (in her depo with Karen Clark) states that Kiefer encouraged Rose to go after JM via a bar complaint that JM had outted juror 17.

The man has zero integrity, and zero credibility as a journalist.
 
Boy, the way Kiefer styled it, you'd think Montgomery tarred and feathered JM and tied him to a fire ant mound. He probably got a write up in his file and had to watch a CD on office policy. And his crying over not getting the documents requested (because they're sealed), he seems to think state secrets are being kept only from his eyes. His hated colors every word he writes.
 
IMO Keifer had something to do with the original jury names being released to the JAII site right after the first verdict.
How else could that have happened?
I think that MDR had a hand in this as well and she and Keifer conspired to do this on the “down low”. Why hasn’t anyone answered or even pursued how that happened?
You would have thought Mr “Seeking Justice “ Keifer would have been on that story like white on rice.If Keifer even thought for one iota of a second that Juan facilitated this boy oh boy, articles would still be written about that.
That’s a huge mystery to me - how did that happen? No one seems remotely concerned about that. Unless MCAO did their own internal investigation and didn’t release it.
Having the jury names published was despicable yet no one has been made accountable for it.
Sandy’s acct is a bust & I’ll be the first to say I don’t feel bad about this at all.
Why run up attorney bills with no intention or means to pay them?
I will bet KC abandons ship when she sees that her bill may not be paid (unless her work going forward is pro bono).
I had a lot of respect for Bill Arias during the trial but never SA. She outright lied on the courthouse steps right after verdict 1 when she said she “saw bruises” on JA then was directly contradicted by Wilmott in her post conviction interview.
I can’t wait until the killer’s Appeal is denied. Can’t wait.
 
BILL MONTGOMERY, MARICOPA COUNTY ATTORNEY & JM'S BOSS, REMAINS 100% SUPPORTIVE OF JM.


November 25, 2018. AZCentral (article is about Bill Montgomery, isn’t by Kiefer, and mentions JM Bar charges because, well, because it’s Kiefer’s paper).


Key quote: “Montgomery believes the Supreme Court findings (the Bar’s October 2018 Probable Cause Order ) against JM were not based on a full evaluation, do not reflect lower court determinations and involved prosecutorial error rather than misconduct.”

----------------------------------------------------------

December 11, 2018. Bill Montgomery on the Bar charges against JM, and the sealed records relating to JM he sent to the Bar.

https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/phoenix/2018/12/11/bill-montgomery-explains-why-juan-martinezs-records-sealed/2282024002/


Key quote: ”…(Bill) Montgomery--both in the email from his public-information officer and in his statements to the media on Tuesday--suggested he was not concerned about any impending Bar charges (against JM), noting that an earlier case against Martinez had been ’resoundingly rejected by the Presiding Disciplinary Judge.’”

-------------------

On what was sent by Montgomery to the Bar, and sealing (explanation from MCAO spokesperson Steele's email to AZRepublic):


“At the beginning of April 2018, the Arizona State Bar subpoenaed the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office for material relating to bar complaints filed against (Deputy County Attorney) Juan Martinez (note: including any records of internal MCAO investigations of JM, as well as MCAO visitor logs, JM’s phone records, etc. that I’ve listed/discussed in earlier posts relating to Clark’s 2017 record requests to MCAO).

  1. MCAO complied with the subpoena and is cooperating with the Arizona State Bar’s review. We are limited by the protective order from explaining more, however if you have been told or have seen records that are under that protective order then there is a cause for concern that the order was violated."
(Note: that last bit was likely directed at whoever leaked to Kiefer, because he HAS published info he couldn't have obtained without the protective order being violated.)

“On June 6, 2018, the (Presiding Disciplinary Judge) issued a protective order for material MCAO provided in response to the subpoena, and which the State Bar provided to MCAO in early September, along with a copy of the motion for the protective order, when it followed up on the request for the internal investigation.

According to an order provided by you, the State Bar received a subsequent protective order on September 20, 2018, which MCAO views as a supplemental order based on the Bar’s previous motion. If the September 20 order was the result of a new motion filed by the bar, MCAO does not have a copy and has not seen it."
 
A FWIW about AZ Bar sanctions ....

I read through all the sanctions issued by the Chief Disciplinary Judge (O'Neill) and the Chief Bar Counsel (Henley) for 2018.

Henley offered JM a "discipline by consent," which would mean JM accepting Henley's proposed sanction, rather than going forward with a formal disciplinary hearing/trial.

Henley proposed the exact same sanction in close to 100% of the bar cases in which attorneys agreed to discipline by consent: a reprimand (public censure, stiffer than an admonishment); 2 years probation (can still practice law); and reimbursement of Bar costs, typically about $1,200.

Since JM fought (and won) last time, when the sanction was admonishment and one year probation, and since he still has Montgomery's support, it still seems likely he'll fight rather than settle.

One consideration, though, is that the Bar's appeal of that earlier dismissal is playing out now too, with briefs due this month. Since prior sanctions are considered as "aggravators," it will work against JM if the Bar wins on appeal and JM enters a disciplinary hearing while on probation and with an admonishment.

Thinking Henley hasn't yet filed a formal complaint with the disciplinary clerk, and in any case, the Disciplinary Committee's calendar doesn't note any scheduled hearing on the charges......
 
Happy New Year everyone!
Wonder which month the ’ appeal will denied? I’ll take a guess and say by March 2019.
Keifer still trying to take Juan down with his bare “writing skills”. I think Keifer is essentially jealous of Juan. I don’t understand the vitriol against a man who is dedicated to putting the bad guys (& gals) away. Is his style at times brash? Yes of course. But obviously his technique works as he successfully presents facts to juries who end up agreeing with the State’s case and Juan gets a conviction.
And the beat goes on in & family’s world. Talk about being brash - nothing like a page asking to pay a murderer’s lawyer fees.
Hope everyone’s Holidays were great ....me, struggling to get back into the work groove - I will start Monday Jan 7!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Members online

... and 202 more.
Total: 454 (members: 203, guests: 251)

Online statistics

Members online
203
Guests online
251
Total visitors
454
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
608,545
Messages
18,240,957
Members
234,395
Latest member
Emzoelin
Back
Top