I have questions regarding The Penalty Phase.
What exactly is the jury deliberating? I know that the jurors are deliberating Arias' sentence (Life / Death). However, what is there to deliberate?
The jury has found Arias Guilty of First Degree Murder.
Is the question (for the jury) now:
The State has proven at least one aggravating circumstance. Therefore, Arias Guilty of First Degree Murder combined with the proven aggravating circumstance(s) requires the jury to sentence Arias to Death.
or
The State has not proven at least one aggravating circumstance. Therefore, Arias Guilty of First Degree Murder requires the jury to sentence Arias to Life in Prison.
or
The State has proven aggravating circumstances. However, the mitigating factors of the defendant are greater than the aggravating circumstances. Therefore, the jury is required to sentence Arias to Life in Prison.
I am confused as to what the jury is deliberating. The State of Arizona is not tasking the jury to make case law. In other words - the jury is not deliberating on whether or not the Death Penalty is fair, wrong, barbaric, corrosive, ect. Currently, The Death Penalty is recognized as a viable punishment. The State of Arizona is not asking the jury to use individual ideologies, or, their feelings regarding the sentences.
The State of Arizona is asking the jury to follow instructions to determine a sentence to a defendant found Guilty of First Degree Murder.
Please correct me - however, aren't the instructions straight forward? Isn't it like following a map? For example:
***One or More Aggravating Circumstances Have Been Proven By The State. If Yes, move to Section One. If no, move to Section Two.
Section One: The Defendant Has Mitigating Factors. If Yes, move to Section Three. If No, move to Section Four.
Section Three: The Aggravating Circumstances Are Greater Than The Mitigating Factors. If Yes, move to Section Five. If No, move to Section Six.
And so on. I can understand the jury needing time to deliberate Guilty / Not Guilty. This requires going over the evidence.
The jury has rendered their verdict - now they have to follow The State of Arizona's instructions to decide sentencing.
I have read, and, heard debates regarding the Death Penalty. For example, that the jury may not sentence Arias to Death due to the fact that some jurors may feel as though the Death Penalty is wrong, one or more members of the jury may feel as though that the Death Penalty goes against their individual morals.
How is debating the Death Penalty possible during Sentencing? Again, The State of Arizona is not asking the jurors to make a decision on individual belief systems regarding the sentences. Plus, this jury is "Death Qualified," correct?
I do not know how the jury could debate if the defendant has mitigating factors - or, if the the defendant's mitigating factors are greater than the aggravating circumstances.
The jury has found the defendant Guilty of First Degree Murder - how would being able to copy pictures, donating hair to Locks of Love, creating a book club - be a mitigating factor for a defendant found Guilty of First Degree Murder?
I would not anyone I love having Arias' hair for a wig (Locks of Love). Arias, IMO, is evil. It is more than likely not rational - but having Arias' hair would make me uncomfortable. Arias being able to sell her art - show her art - IMO would continue to cause more pain. Knowing that Arias is selling / working / showing her copied pictures would be a constant reminder that Travis Alexander was slaughtered by Arias' hand, Travis Alexander's life was taken away from him, and Arias continues to pursue her happiness.
Travis Alexander being slaughtered in his own home - walking over to his bathroom mirror and seeing blood flowing out of his body as his murderer is stabbing him in his head so hard that his skull breaks - had to be so painful, scary, horrifying, agonizing. The extreme cruel nature of Travis Alexander's murder does not leave "room" for mitigating factors. Although I do not consider any of Travis Alexander's murderer's listed mitigating factors credible - the unimaginable horror of Travis Alexander's murder does not permit mitigating factors. Due to this, even if Travis Alexander's murderer did have valid mitigating factors - the cruelty of his murder would cancel out even the highest quality mitigating factors.
I do not understand what the jury is deliberating on. Again, it should not be "how do I feel as a juror sentencing Arias to death." The jurors are responsible for answering: "Are there aggravating circumstances proven by The State? Does the defendant have any mitigating factors?" Correct????
These questions seem very straight forward and easy to answer.
Even if a person is against Capital Punishment - being on a jury that is deciding sentencing is not the time to exercise individual ideologies. It is about following the instructions, and, laws that are in place. The possible sentences that are being sought in The State of Arizona vs. Arias include The Death Penalty. Currently, The Death Penalty is a punishment for a crime.
It is not about being for or against the Death Penalty. This is not an issue during the Sentencing Phase of The State of Arizona vs. Arias. Jury members should not be saying, "She is guilty and her crime is horrifying - but I cannot give her the death penalty because of how I feel." If someone in the jury is against the death penalty - then after the trial - after they are not working to render justice for The State of Arizona - they can work to end Capital Punishment.
It seems as though when following the instructions set forth by The State of Arizona - reaching a sentencing agreement would be straight forward.
It seems as though that there could not be much discussion on Arias' mitigating factors - as there are none.
I want Travis Alexander's family and friends to have a chance to have peace. It seems very clear that Travis Alexander's family want Travis Alexander's murderer to be given the Death Penalty. Considering Arias' lack of remorse - the fact that she has not taken advantage to get help over the las five years - the fact that Arias is still so cruel that she was able to hold up the "Survivor" t-shirt - shows how evil she is.
Arias is a survivor - we get it. Arias is alive, and, because of her planning & actions Travis Alexander is dead. Life in Prison will give Arias a lifetime to continue to torture Travis Alexander's family - and it is obvious that she will.
Just looking at the law - the aggravating circumstances - the mitigating factors - what is this jury deliberating on?
I totally agree. I admit I didn't want to watch her interviews, but I did >< You know...morbid curiosity! Jodi is just a disgusting, vile insect that needs to be squished on the concrete. Is it wrong for me to wish a cell mate would just do her in early?? (If she gets life...(shudder!!)