I agree with you 100% on this one.
From the motion:
"Before the penalty phase began Ms. Arias moved to dismiss the death penalty due to the fact that she could not present a complete mitigation case. On May 20, 2013, during the argument on that motion, Ms. Arias advised the court that Patricia Womack was not willing to return to Arizona to testify on Ms. Arias behalf because she had been threatened. Of note is the fact this comes on the heels of record being made of the threats made to Ms. LaViolette, an expert in the field of domestic violence and another key mitigation witness. Due to Ms. Arias inability to present a complete picture to the jury Ms. Arias then chose to present no witnesses. In contrast to this state of affairs, it is Ms. Arias desire to call witnesses during the re-trial of her sentencing phase, if and only if a full picture can be painted."
and
"In Ms. Arias case, the Defense mitigation investigation was completed and she was ready to present said evidence at trial up until the point in time when mitigation witnesses felt too intimidated to come forward. Thus, in essence Ms. Arias needs the requested time to find alternative means of painting the picture of Ms. Arias life that defense counsel must present and the jury must consider."
http://media2.abc15.com/html/pdf/ariasmotion.pdf
The DT clearly does not have a strategy at this point in time, just as they were winging it with the previous mitigation phase. Interesting to note that they threw ALV's name into the motion; the DT didn't even bring up physical abuse in their remarks to the court. They knew the jury did not buy it.
Can't see ALV, Womack or Brewer making a compelling argument on mitigating factors. ALV is less than credible and if the DT dared to call her, Martinez would rip her to ribbons. Womack still has not come to terms with the fact that her BFF murdered this man; she broke down in tears talking about it with JVM the other night and she cannot justify it. She also cannot offer any testimony to support CMJA being abused as a child.
Must be some interesting temper tantrums going on right now between CMJA and her counsel.
I'll be interesting to see how JSS rules on this; barring attorney time conflicts, it would seem the other argument has no merit. The convict has had five years to prepare for this and five months of trial time. Preparation for this phase should have been included in the overall defense strategy.
Motion denied. IMO