SIDEBAR #26- Arias/Alexander forum

[Tuba]

Arias asked the judge if she could complain of ineffective counsel and was answered, NO. We're not undoing the guilt phase, which rendered a severe verdict (could not be more so). We're just looking at how Arias should be punished for what has been decided she did. What might aggravate penalty, what might mitigate penalty. Will she stray into forbidden territory as you fear? I think she will try, yes, but both prosecutor and judge will be scrutinizing her every attempt to do so. Maybe she is working right now on some tortuous subtle slippage into the concept of guilt but she will fail. She could harm or damage proceedings by taking a stab at that. I think you're right to put nothing past her.

 

[Tuba]

How would you like to be a prospective juror questioned by the impudent murderer? We know by heart she underestimates everyone (but herself), so she could easily alienate those who will sit in judgment of her. Of course, she is not ONLY insulting, she is also argumentative and that manner of quizzing people will not go down well. She may also dance around the idea that these people harbor bias against her, informed by media coverage of her crime & trial and thus she can come over as suspicious.

 

[krkrjx]

I would not want to be in the same room as her. And particularly not for hours, days, weeks. She will probably try to win them over right away, but I hope the jurors can see any of her kissing up for what it is. Maybe she thinks they will be so impressed with her intelligence that they will let her live on that alone.

I am OK with LWOP though. I know TA's family wants the ultimate penalty but I cannot help but think how that will affect their lives for decades to come. And there is always a chance the DP could be done away with legally in AZ (you never know with these things) and her sentence be commuted to life with chance of parole. To me, LWOP seems more final and less likely to be "tampered with" legally at any point in the future. But my main goal is to see her put away for good one way or the other--that this kind of evil is never set free on society again.

 

[Tuba]

Family & friend informants will have told Arias the foreman pitied her. Maybe that has inspired her to host a pity party in this penalty phase. Worse luck, I think she will be able to get away with a certain amount of that.

 

[geevee]

I wonder how she'll handle it when the first prospective juror avers to her face 'I cannot be impartial, I think you deserve the death penalty for all of your crimes against Travis". Deflate or double down?

 

[TexMex]

The inmate will get extra visits and phone time while she pretends to be a lawyer

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=x-AQifJgNR4

 

[krkrjx]

I keep popping in and out here because I am watching the giraffe cam. I hope she gives birth today, she certainly is pacing a lot.

 

[Kensie]

TexMex I was actually just thinking abou you. I am super hungry and I thought I bet TexMex has cooked up some really good food!!

 

[TexMex]

Hey there Kensie...today I made some courtboullion with shrimp and some trout I caught Thursday night.

Tonight some redfish I think, can't decide if I'm gonna cook it half shell style or fry it up with some good old onion rings

 

[Tuba]

Jen Wood will be a great addition to trial coverage. JVM has turned down the volume, thank God. I hope HLN can afford to give up the truncated programming but I'm not optimistic. We could even use weekend commentary on the trial. Wild About Trial will surely return? Is In Session gone for good? We need some eyes & ears in the hallways of Justice, since we can't use our own.

 

[AZlawyer]

I want to know what the jury will be allowed to consider in deliberations. My understanding is that they will have to be apprised of what occurred in the guilt phase, not the entire proceedings but more than just telling them she was found guilty. So...if all they can by law consider is what is brought up in the penalty phase (which will obviously have to include some of what went on in the guilt phase) can they consider any unanswered questions they might have regarding the guilt phase? Basically, if things are brought up in this retrial that show how this is a DP case but those things are not elaborated on any more than necessary, can the jury ask for further elaboration or are they just stuck having to deal with unanswered questions about something that occurred in the guilt phase but was brought up in the penalty phase?

Sorry if this is confusing. I guess I want to know what kind of jury instructions might rule this retrial.

It will depend on whether the things they want elaboration on are relevant to mitigation issues.

One of the things that has concerned me all along is that the defense would basically try to "retry" the entire trial. I still don't understand exactly how this retrial is going to work. Even for the prosecution, I don't see how JM can show that Jodi deserves the death penalty without going into the planning, etc. involved in the murder.

JM's part (proving that Jodi deserves the death penalty) is already finished. A unanimous jury found that he had proved cruelty beyond a reasonable doubt, so she is eligible for the death penalty.

Exactly!

Seems to me that each side will have some specifics that they need the jury to hear. For the state it is that she was convicted of premeditated murder with aggravating factors so it is easy to state that fact to the jury. I think JM can do this very well even in an abbreviated form. For the defense I assume abuse will play in, and Jodi will take every opportunity she can to hammer home that Travis was abusive. If she can state he did this or that to her, will she be limited in what she can say or can she just run full throttle with this once again? Because I do not see how JA can be precluded from going into detail about TA abuse given that was and probably still is her primary mitigating factor.

By law what can happen during a retrial of only a penalty phase? I have never seen anything like this and in this instance we have the convicted murderer doing her own research, potentially calling witnesses, directly questioning all witnesses, giving a closing argument, etc. Add to that the fact that her main mitigator is something that was not proven in the first phase and since it did not happen cannot be proven now. Yet, she will be allowed to hammer at this at least to some degree. Are there laws regarding how far either side can go with something that was such a huge part of the guilt phase or could we end up having basically what amounts to a guilt phase redo of everything but the guilty verdict? Lord help us all if that is a go.

I think the abuse theme will be big.

During this phase, the jury may consider "any aspect of the defendant’s character, propensities, or record and any of the circumstances of the offense that might justify a penalty less severe than death."

 

[YESorNO]

"About the Show ( if anyone is interested ) : :jail:

Discover what life is like on death row, following a story about capital punishment told through the eyes of the people whose lives have been shaped by it. With unprecedented access, learn about the lives of the victims as well as the convicted and their families, revealing a rigid dichotomy of what life is like with the looming threat of the death chamber. Each part of the three-part mini series focuses on a key aspect of the capital punishment system: execution, trial, and appeal....

http://channel.nationalgeographic.com/channel/life-and-death-row/

Tonight's episode:

"Episode: Execution:

SUN AUG 10 8PM ET- The day has arrived for two young men on death row in Texas, Richard Cobb and Anthony Haynes, to be put to death. Cobb murdered a 24-year-old man in a botched kidnapping, and one of his surviving victims, Nikki Ansley Daniels, reflects on her kidnapping and battles with her conflicting desires to forgive Cobb. Haynes is on death row for killing an off-duty officer, and his mother fights to save his life and halt her son's execution during his last 72 hours..."

http://channel.nationalgeographic.com/channel/life-and-death-row/episodes/execution/

 

[ILikeToBendPages]

evening all, hope you day was good



Today is the 244 day of the year, We have 144 days till New Years Day.


612 BC - Killing of Sinsharishkun, King of Assyrian Empire, and the destruction of Nineveh.


1519 - Magellan's 5 ships set sail to circumnavigate the Earth


1776 - American Revolutionary War: word of the United States Declaration of Independence reaches London.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=y3KCvMyazj


1831 - William Driver of Salem, Massachusetts, is the first to use the term "Old Glory" in connection with the American flag, when he gives that name to a large flag aboard his ship, the Charles Daggett.


1885 - America's first commercially operated electric streetcar began operation in Baltimore.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=rRcktKcJBJA


1922 - Franklin D. Roosevelt was stricken with polio at his summer home on Campobello island.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=ivlyBOvL5U4


1927 - Mount Rushmore was formally dedicated. The individual faces of the presidents were dedicated later.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=qx4wu8gzTaM


1948 - Allen Funt's "Candid Camera" TV debut on ABC

[video=youtube;yGkMhGqbJhY]https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=yGkMhGqbJhY[/video]


1960 - NASA launches Discoverer 13 satellite; it would become the first object ever recovered from orbit.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=VhXq0Ehxg3M


1969 - Leno and Rosemary LaBianca were murdered in their Los Angeles home by members of Charles Manson's cult, one day after actress Sharon Tate and four other people were slain.


1977 - Postal employee David Berkowitz arrested in Yonkers NY, accused of being "Son of Sam" 44 caliber killer

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=dH1ZIhRNJDE


1993 - Ruth Bader Ginsburg was sworn in as the second female U.S. Supreme Court justice.

 

[G&AMom]

JM's part (proving that Jodi deserves the death penalty) is already finished. A unanimous jury found that he had proved cruelty beyond a reasonable doubt, so she is eligible for the death penalty.

Respectfully snipped by me.

I'm still kind of confused, though.

Imagine I have been called for jury duty. I've just moved to Arizona from Outer Mongolia where I've been living in a yurt for 3 years with no internet service. The defendant is Agnes O'Houlihan. I've never heard of her, have no idea who she is. I'm told she has been convicted of first degree murder and is facing the death penalty. Just like last year, two members of the Alexander family talk about what a great guy the victim is. Then Jodi puts forth whatever it is that she's going to present.

I have a really hard time picturing myself giving someone the death penalty when I know next to nothing about them or the crime. That's why this whole thing is so perplexing to me.

 

[krkrjx]

It will depend on whether the things they want elaboration on are relevant to mitigation issues.

Thank you. I have been trying to put myself in the place of a juror hoping to get an idea of whether they might feel frustrated due to limited information on certain issues and if this proceeding has to be more about mitigating and less about aggravating factors.

 

[Tuba]

Don't worry, J.M. will bring you up to date on the crime. All the sordid details will be revisited. And aggravators in the penalty phase will be as important as mitigators.

 

[Love Never Fails]

Don't worry, J.M. will bring you up to date on the crime. All the sordid details will be revisited. And aggravators in the penalty phase will be as important as mitigators.

Having watched the first trial I have no doubt JM will come fully prepared. It is always the unknown of what JA is scheming that intrigues me. I wonder how far JSS will allow JA to go and how much bs she can spue before the judge takes control. I can't help but remember this is a person who planned and premeditated the death of Travis and likely obsessed about it for days before taking action. Tuba, do you think the witness they want to depose is really Deanna Reid?

 

[LinTX]

They do have to accept the fact that she was found qualified for the death penalty, but the state and the defense now basically have to present evidence (from what was entered into evidence in the first two phases) that argues whether or not she has "mitigation that is sufficiently substantial to call for leniency". From 2013 Capital Instructions (http://www.azbar.org/media/58847/3-capital_case_instructions_revised_2013.pdf):

In reaching a reasoned, moral judgment about which sentence is justified and appropriate, you must decide how compelling or persuasive the totality of the mitigating factors is when compared against the totality of the aggravating factors and the facts and circumstances of the case. (Bolding mine) This assessment is not a mathematical one, but instead must be made in light of each juror’s individual, qualitative evaluation of the facts of the case, the severity of the aggravating factors, and the quality of the mitigating factors found by each juror.

In order for them to compare one against the other, they have to know the facts that led the 1st jury to vote on the cruel/heinous aspect of the crime. so the state will be able to present much of their case - not to redo the aggravation phase but to enable the jury to have enough evidence to compare mitigators against aggravators.
AZ Supreme Court denied an appeal last year involving a 2007 murder (STATE V. REEVES) where a mistrial was declared during penalty phase. In this case, the 2nd penalty jury actually found another aggravator that the lst jury hadn't agreed on and voted death , so obviously they heard evidence related to the crime that proved the aggravators. The decision by the court on the appeal is IMO worth a read:
http://supremestateaz.granicus.com/...z_a1e9e27e0880b4f6a658f273183ea04d.pdf&view=1

 

[Love Never Fails]

They do have to accept the fact that she was found qualified for the death penalty, but the state and the defense now basically have to present evidence (from what was entered into evidence in the first two phases) that argues whether or not she has "mitigation that is sufficiently substantial to call for leniency". From 2013 Capital Instructions (http://www.azbar.org/media/58847/3-capital_case_instructions_revised_2013.pdf):
In order for them to compare one against the other, they have to know the facts that led the 1st jury to vote on the cruel/heinous aspect of the crime. so the state will be able to present much of their case - not to redo the aggravation phase but to enable the jury to have enough evidence to compare mitigators against aggravators.
AZ Supreme Court denied an appeal last year involving a 2007 murder (STATE V. REEVES) where a mistrial was declared during penalty phase. In this case, the 2nd penalty jury actually found another aggravator that the lst jury hadn't agreed on and voted death , so obviously they heard evidence related to the crime that proved the aggravators. The decision by the court on the appeal is IMO worth a read:
http://supremestateaz.granicus.com/...z_a1e9e27e0880b4f6a658f273183ea04d.pdf&view=1

Thanks. Interesting and appreciated the capital instructions. I do not see how any mitigators we have heard of to date could stand up to the aggravators of her crime. I don't see her getting out of this, regardless of what she tries to pull.

 

[geevee]

"About the Show ( if anyone is interested ) : :jail:

Discover what life is like on death row, following a story about capital punishment told through the eyes of the people whose lives have been shaped by it. With unprecedented access, learn about the lives of the victims as well as the convicted and their families, revealing a rigid dichotomy of what life is like with the looming threat of the death chamber. Each part of the three-part mini series focuses on a key aspect of the capital punishment system: execution, trial, and appeal....

http://channel.nationalgeographic.com/channel/life-and-death-row/

Tonight's episode:

"Episode: Execution:

SUN AUG 10 8PM ET- The day has arrived for two young men on death row in Texas, Richard Cobb and Anthony Haynes, to be put to death. Cobb murdered a 24-year-old man in a botched kidnapping, and one of his surviving victims, Nikki Ansley Daniels, reflects on her kidnapping and battles with her conflicting desires to forgive Cobb. Haynes is on death row for killing an off-duty officer, and his mother fights to save his life and halt her son's execution during his last 72 hours..."

http://channel.nationalgeographic.com/channel/life-and-death-row/episodes/execution/

Tonight's 2nd episode (on now) is the Guy Heinze Jr. case, here's the thread at WS if anyone is interested:

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...rk-Aug-2009-sentence-LWOP&highlight=Guy+Heinz