SIDEBAR #37 - Arias/Alexander forum

[Bernina]

I see nothing on Twitter from the supposed court "meeting".

"Pseudonym" was in court all day being interviewed.

Still unsure about court on Wednesday and Thursday this week.

Petition to Review (the stay) filed in Az Superior Court is going up on BK's site.

 

[YESorNO]

Jodi Arias delayed again: Weaving our way through the secret courtroom of Judge Sherry Stephens

"...Dr. Geffner was never scheduled to return to the stand today. When will he be cross examined? Don't ask me. I'm just a member of the public. I have no rights in this public trial. According to the motion filed, Bryan Neumeister was scheduled to be on the stand today. Yes, THAT Bryan Neumiester. To date, he has only testified in hearings outside the presence of this jury relating to a defense motion to throw out the murder conviction or dismiss the death penalty due to prosecutorial misconduct relating to pornographic material the defense claims was found on Travis Alexander's laptop...."

http://www.courtchatter.com/2015/01/jodi-arias-delayed-again-weaving-our.html?spref=tw

 

[YESorNO]

I see nothing on Twitter from the supposed court "meeting".

"Pseudonym" was in court all day being interviewed.

Still unsure about court on Wednesday and Thursday this week.

Petition to Review (the stay) filed in Az Superior Court is going up on BK's site.

And I won't be able to see it as I'm not subscribed

 

[Bernina]

The Petition to Review was filed by the defense TODAY in Superior Court.

 

[Bernina]

And I won't be able to see it as I'm not subscribed

Once it hits the rest of the net, ie, Court Chatter/ Trial Diaries, I'll post them (cause they're *free* sites)

 

[janx]

The Petition to Review was filed by the defense TODAY in Superior Court.

I understand what that is, but what is a "request for a stay of enforcment (sic) of the Court of Appeals's Order" ? The defense apparently filed one of those as well. This is maddening.

 

[Rhozwen]

From what I remembered:

This AM, they were suppose to discuss unsealing the "mystery witness" testimony and releasing that to the press

and then Dr. G was back on the stand.

But JM's new motion changed all that because of the problems with who was going to testify????

I'm just as confused as everyone. kay:

I think I figured it out with what you just said. They were going to have the porngate hearing this AM and then continue with sentencing trial after.

BUT Nurmi threw a wrench in all of the plans because he decided to change the order of the witnesses by have pseudo guy testify this AM in the porngate hearing. The state was prepared to question Neumeister (sp?) today, but then found out over the weekend that pseudo guy was going to testify instead. So DT arranged an interview for the state at their request, but delayed it two hours knowing that the state wouldn't have enough time to be ready for the hearing today.

So the sentencing trial was put on hold today so that the state could finish the process with the new pseudo guy witness today for the porngate hearing.

Now that brings me to wonder why they have canceled court for tomorrow! How irritating! I'm sure the DT is doing everything they can to be as unhelpful to move this process along.


http://www.platowa.com/images/CC_cartoon-12.jpg

 

[janx]

It sounds as if it's a request to allow the killer to testify in secret again...? Or to delay the release of the transcripts?

 

[Bernina]

Oh man, this petition is truly unbelievable..........:scared:

Here's a snippet:

"In another sealed hearing on October 30, 2014, the court conducted aWaller analysis (RT 10/30/14, p10) and considered Arias’ ability, due to her
documented psychological disorders, to present her own testimony in mitigation
with the pressure and constant media broadcasting of what she was saying and how
she was saying it and the additional factor, in her case, of the threats she endures as
a part of her testimony. The court found this to be intimidating, (RT 10/30/14, p7,
9-10) Further the court found that specific people were attempting to visit Arias to
threaten her. (RT 10/30/14, p15-16, 21)"

 

[Katharine]

It is so nice to know that I am not alone in being confused. Just when I think I might have it figured out in the computerized section of my brain (is that considered my hippocampus?), another tweet, another post, another discussion, another situation, etc and that fog just rolls right in. (JMO) & (IMO)

 

[Bernina]

I understand what that is, but what is a "request for a stay of enforcment (sic) of the Court of Appeals's Order" ? The defense apparently filed one of those as well. This is maddening.

The defense wants a stay til the Superior Court gives an answer? No transcripts or public attendance.

 

[Bernina]

In a nut shell:

Conclusion
Based on the foregoing, petitioner asks this court to review the decision of the
Court of Appeals vacating the trial court’s ruling to close the courtroom during
parts of the mitigation phase of this trial. Petitioner asks that this court reverse the
Court of Appeals and reinstate the trial court’s ruling.

 

[YESorNO]

I understand what that is, but what is a "request for a stay of enforcment (sic) of the Court of Appeals's Order" ? The defense apparently filed one of those as well. This is maddening.

I think it just means that Nurmi wants the COA "verdict" stayed- put on hold? until the Supreme Court can decide what to do :thinking:- I don't know :scared::scared:

 

[janx]

I just read it and should have done so before asking that question--thanks to you both. I am so tired of the defense's separation of "the media" from the First Amendment that I could scream. It's the rights of "the media" versus the right of the killer to a fair trial, according to them. I can't see how the AZ Supreme Court would do anything but punt this request immediately.

 

[Bernina]

Oh give me a break! They're comparing CMJA' on the stand in "secret" to...........


...a courtroom could be closed for the
testimony of an undercover officer

....closing of the courtroom for a
minor victim’s testimony of a defendant’s sexual abuse against her to guard against
her psychological harm

.....sentencing proceedings when a defendant cooperates with the government, to protect him
from being treated as a snitch in prison where he would be set up to be murdered or
hurt by those who find out he testified against a co-defendant

.....sexual matters in which a victim is molested can be held in
camera not just to protect the defendant, but to protect the victim from testifying in
public to embarrassing sexual information

............sentencing for financial crimes can
be held in camera where exposure would further harm the victim and his business
or charity that the defendant embezzled from

 

[Bernina]

I just read it and should have done so before asking that question--thanks to you both. I am so tired of the defense's separation of "the media" from the First Amendment that I could scream. It's the rights of "the media" versus the right of the killer to a fair trial, according to them. I can't see how the AZ Supreme Court would do anything but punt this request immediately.

..........and CMJA destroys a possible appeal idea before the trial is even over.

Duh, you're supposed to wait til after sentencing to hit the higher courts, not only are they re-trying the entire case, they're filing any possible appeal issues that CMJA can think up.

I think she's going to be stuck with "Speedy Trial" and "Ineffective Counsel" by the time the appeals process gets underway, IF she gets the DP. And those 2 are slam dunks, she caused the long drawn out trial process, and $3mil is a pretty hefty price tag for ineffective counsel.

 

[YESorNO]

Oh man, this petition is truly unbelievable..........:scared:

Here's a snippet:

"In another sealed hearing on October 30, 2014, the court conducted aWaller analysis (RT 10/30/14, p10) and considered Arias’ ability, due to her
documented psychological disorders, to present her own testimony in mitigation
with the pressure and constant media broadcasting of what she was saying and how
she was saying it and the additional factor, in her case, of the threats she endures as
a part of her testimony. The court found this to be intimidating, (RT 10/30/14, p7,
9-10) Further the court found that specific people were attempting to visit Arias to
threaten her. (RT 10/30/14, p15-16, 21)"

BBM had to look this up:

"C. The Waller Test

In 1984, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the broad
courtroom closure of a seven-day suppression hearing during a
criminal trial was unconstitutional. 37 Waller v. Georgia synthesized
prior holdings to provide a clear rule for all alleged First and Sixth
Amendment public trial violations. 38 Writing for the majority in
Waller v. Georgia, Justice Powell outlined the current four-part test. 39

He held that
the party seeking to close the hearing must [1] advance
an overriding interest that is likely to be prejudiced,
[2] the closure must be no broader than necessary to
protect that interest, [3] the trial court must consider
reasonable alternatives to closing the proceeding, and
[4] it must make findings adequate to support the
closure. 40

The Court held that a violation of the public trial guarantee does
not necessarily require a new trial. 41 “Rather, the remedy should be
appropriate to the violation.”

42 The Court reasoned that automatic
reversal would give defendants unfair windfalls that would not be in
the public interest, 43 but reiterated that the defendant does not
need to show actual harm. 44..."

http://web.wmitchell.edu/law-review/wp-content/uploads/Volume40/documents/7.Cronen.pdf

10/20/2014 COA:

http://thetrialdiaries.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/Opinion-.pdf

 

[YESorNO]

..........and CMJA destroys a possible appeal idea before the trial is even over.

Duh, you're supposed to wait til after sentencing to hit the higher courts, not only are they re-trying the entire case, they're filing any possible appeal issues that CMJA can think up.

I think she's going to be stuck with "Speedy Trial" and "Ineffective Counsel" by the time the appeals process gets underway, IF she gets the DP. And those 2 are slam dunks, she caused the long drawn out trial process, and $3mil is a pretty hefty price tag for ineffective counsel.

BBM And whose fault is that!!!! The defense!

 

[Rhozwen]

BBM had to look this up:

"C. The Waller Test

In 1984, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the broad
courtroom closure of a seven-day suppression hearing during a
criminal trial was unconstitutional. 37 Waller v. Georgia synthesized
prior holdings to provide a clear rule for all alleged First and Sixth
Amendment public trial violations. 38 Writing for the majority in
Waller v. Georgia, Justice Powell outlined the current four-part test. 39

He held that
the party seeking to close the hearing must [1] advance
an overriding interest that is likely to be prejudiced,
[2] the closure must be no broader than necessary to
protect that interest, [3] the trial court must consider
reasonable alternatives to closing the proceeding, and
[4] it must make findings adequate to support the
closure. 40

The Court held that a violation of the public trial guarantee does
not necessarily require a new trial. 41 “Rather, the remedy should be
appropriate to the violation.”

42 The Court reasoned that automatic
reversal would give defendants unfair windfalls that would not be in
the public interest, 43 but reiterated that the defendant does not
need to show actual harm. 44..."

http://web.wmitchell.edu/law-review/wp-content/uploads/Volume40/documents/7.Cronen.pdf

She is grasping at straws. The media makes her nervous my eyeball! IF that were true, then why the media tour after her first trial, and the 48 hours mystery interview, and the never ending BS tweets done on her behalf that are broadcast TO THE WORLD!!??

She was offered to have the media placed in the overflow room, if she really had "stage fright" that would be good enough for any reasonable person.
What we are dealing with here is an immature woman who is afraid of the consequences for her actions and is fighting tooth and nail to delay the process as much as she can and is succeeding.
Hopefully someone will pass her the memo that she's only delaying the inevitable. Which, in a perfect world, would end up with her being placed in the same pod as Angela Simpson.

JSS never had a proper reason to close the court and the Supreme Court will uphold the Court of Appeals decision. imho
Nurmi knows that, Wilmott knows that, heck even CMJA's mom knows that, but that won't stop them from throwing another stumbling block in the way of the process.

 

[janx]

FIRE DOWN BELOW!

:fireworks: