For you, Yes/No....... Juan's interview with Troy: (not exact quotes)
Time comes into my mind, it took a long time, affected a lot of people. Don't hate her, it's the acts or crime that drives you and guides the prosecution.
I was never frustrated with her. It appeared she had all the answers to the questions I was posing, so you try to go into it a little further.
on being Soft-spoken: You do what is required in courtroom, make sure your point is made and the jury hears it, and perhaps add some inflection to carry your voice across.
on being a bully?: I don't think I bullied anybody. There are set rules and the judge adminsters those rules. Perhaps she said my voice was loud, but it needs to carry across that courtroom.
on ALV, "who had to get some sort of treatment during the hearing": I don't know too much about that, only what i read in the papers and first thing came into mind was HOW it got in the papers. Perhaps it was a condition she brought in before trial. Trying to get to the bottom of whatever her theories were.
on things Jodi said during sentencing statement, going after the Alexander family: Nothing JA does surprises me. She is an individual who will do what she thinks is right for herself, egocentric, and at that point she said what probably she believed was best for her. (ON THE FOG): Well, that's it, maybe the fog lifted for her just in time to say whatever she wanted to say and perhaps it was more of a situation where she could make it look better for herself.
It is what it is and you do move on. You can't go back and think you can change the past.
On having a rogue jury: Jury was sworn in, fulfilled their duties, will abide by their decision. . Not going to worry about it, it is done and time to move on.
On juror 17 not being removed: It is something in the past, no real value in rehashing something like that. There were rulings and I will abide by and not go back and criticize anybody. There is a process in place, satisfied with the process, satisfied with what we did with the process. Second guessing yourself is not very productive.
Why retry this case the second time, was it Juan's decision?: No, ultimately Mr. Montgomery's decision. (Did you lobby for it?) That should remain private/confidential. IF 11 of 12 believe it was an appropriate decision, then there was merit in going back and doing it again.
Not more of an expense for him, as he would have been doing some case and being paid for it if not this one.
Unusual case; convicted and then 20 min. later doing an interview: Agree it was an unusual defendant; she used camera and interviews to try to gain something (not sure what she was attempting to gain). The crime was so horrific, I don't know what she could have done to hurt herself or not hurt herself (by these interviews).
Comparing Wendy Arianno (sp.?) and Jodi Arias: both exceptionally violent, both involved a supposed loved one, similarities in teh amount of violence inflicted. Why death for Wendy and not Jody, "it just depends on what the jury thinks."
Some days harder for Alexanders than others, what was it like spending time with them: An experience we will say we are better for it, create a relationship, learn what makes them hurt and upsets them and that brings you closer. Bonding that goes on, but see the suffering. For them it was very difficult for them to hear that their brother was a pedophile. They knew and believe it was not true. That was very difficult, and probably the most difficult for them in his impression. The horrific nature of the photos was very difficult for them. In the room outside the courtroom with the family it would be somber and them attempting to deal with whatever had happened in the courtroom.
On many sidebars: Lot had to do with evidence re-issues, whether certain questions could be asked, items introducted. Don't think I ever wehnt at it with any of them, the sidebars were adequate. Will not judge what kind of job KN and JW did, that is up to them to think about.
on Media attention: Attention of the world was focused on that courtroom, esp. in first trial.: Doesn't think it has an impact on him, but it makes it so people know him more; flattered that people come up to him and recognize him, are happy to meet him, talk about where they are from.
On putting the celebratory/notoriety to use: don't know how I would put it to use.
On pursuing politics, governor, attorney general: No, I don't think I would do it that way. Nothing like that has entered my mind, have been approached, but not entered my mind.
Got the case by being on-call the night before and was called the next day when the body was found. (not on call that particular day). Issue was whether he would take it or say he was not on-call. Decided to take it. "Obviously I believe that every call I make is probably the right call (said with a slight grin) and this was also the right call." If had to do it over again, he would, without hesitation.
Influence of A family on retrial: consulted with them, made sure to understand their views, then the decision was made. If they want to talk about it, they can, those meetings are best left confidential.
Defense made big deal about computer during retrial, that pros was tampering with comp.: yeah they made those, adn that's what they were ---- allegations. Perhaps they should have looked at what happened when the computer was in their possession. Obviously they were wrong, that computer was in their possession (at police station) of defense on that date. Her lawyers can do whatever they want, and that's what they chose to do (blame the pros. for computer tampering)
Why was *advertiser censored* was such an issue: I didn't either; thought perhaps an individual having looked at an image of a woman might somehow make the murder OK.
Restitution in June: allows victims to recover whatever expenses they have laid out over course of the trial. Travel to and from, living arrangement/renting. There is an amount, but amounds always change. Amount is not public record at this time.
Do they hope to get this money?: never know what may happen down the road, maybe a situation where she comes into some money. They are not being vindictive about it, they are entitled to getting these expenses covered to come to the trial for their brother.
People planning to give JA money for defense, a man back-east terminal illness may give her moneh: Has heard those rumors, won't comment on it.
Sheriff ready to release list of infractions behind bars: I am not privy to that. Insulated myself from anything going on at Sheriff's office. Job was to present the case, anything at the jail was something others would deal with.
People who put money into commissary account, can 30 percent go to the restitution account?: I don't know about that.
She gets to appeal. They can deny in total; they can say there was error and remand a new trial.
If retrial: will not engage in hypothetical. Don't believe there was any error committed.
Do anything differently: going back does not accomplish anything. With the info I had at the time, that is the decision I made. Not productive to go back over it. Used whatever information I had, the decisions were all mine. No one else to blame or take the credit.
News at night, did not watch. It is entertaining and it serves a purpose. ADvocate4 for wanting media for court hearings, there is value there to seeing what happened. Different people see things differently, but the camera rolling perhaps they can make up their mind. Increases the community learning process and the betterment of society.
Overwhelming sense of social media for JA: did not affect me, jurors did not see that, beileves none of them heard or saw, so what diff does it make what is going on around them. I can't change what she did, the way she testified or the things she said. There are consequences for her actions, words. Never will please everybody all the time. Even a negative opinion is an entitlement. She fostered that sort of environment. She complains about it, but out of the other side of her mouth she attempts to use it .
How do you keep from detesting the defendant in the middle of a case?: Because I look at what they have done, and am focused on what they did. I detest what they have done. Horrific as in this case to stab an individual in shower after they engaged in presumably the most intimate thing two human beings can engage in and then follow him around the bathroom stabbing him and then as this individual is dying, cause 0 that is what is happening- he is bleeding out, and then he starts to crawl down the hallway and as she said yesterday he was still conscious..... I don't know. How do you do that? It's not that you focus on the individual, you focus on the act.
I think about what is the best way to present this.
At first trial, did you think "I've got her now"?: . You would be a fool to think that. You never know what a defendant is going to come up with. I knew she was probably going to use self-defense, and the way to do that is to take the stand, so I was not surprised.
Did it surprise you that she came up with the story about the gun in the closet?: As she was telling it, was the first Juan had heard it. All of that was new, have to think on your feet, how to ask the questions, may want to ask the questions a little louder to make sure she can hear you :giggle: , I wanted her to hear me not to have a problem later saying she did not understand a question. NO one had a problem hearing me, not even in the back.
Anything you want to say?: No, anything I had to say was said in the courtroom. Anything I wanted to say was spoken by the jury's verdict and that is all that needs to be said.
Kind of a soft-spoken guy?: Everybody has different facets and roles to play in life. My career is I present cases at trial, my private life is not like that. It is not a role, it is something I believe in, different facets and goals.
So many things came together at one time, I don't think I will professionally see anything like it again. Do you feel that way?:
Yeah, I do. I don't think I have seen a case like this. OJ case had a large amount of publicity but tgere was not the social media. The difference is so much social media got involved, and how much interest the public had in. I don't think I will ever see anything like it again.
Is it the first social media trial, probably?: Perhaps it could be that.
When you got home and knew JA was in Perryville, was there a satisfaction: There is a general satisfaction after every case, not particular to this one.
Seven years of my life and ;;;; it is not that yhou put it aside, I just don't think about it. I do other things that are my private life. Sure I have hobbies, but they call it private life for a reason (chuckle). People do different things in their private life and I am no different that any other person. Favorite restaurant? Has favorites, but not willing to share it.
That's it!!
Forgive any errors, spelling or otherwise. I am tired and off to bed very soon.
