SIDEBAR #6- Arias/Alexander forum

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
I have a confession as to why I like Juan, his "if I told you I was 6' would I be lying a little or a lot" was awesome. But he also reminds me of Monk, which is kinda why I like him even more... No rocks...tomatoes are ok! ;)

Love Monk..no toms here..or rocks

Sent from my SGH-T989 using Tapatalk 2
 
Chris Williams ‏@chriswnews 3m

I'm sitting with #JodiArias juror number six and she's willing to take a question from you. What do you have? #TravisAlexander
 
:juanettes::juanettes::juanettes::juanettes:

Juan did his job.
JA is in jail soon to go to prison - one way or another!
 
Juan is like that tough, gruff cop. You don't like him. He seems hard and unfeeling. He seems that way until you need him to save your life... If it was my family member dead, I'd want Juan because he fights for those without a voice and that's not easy. He's not there to have people like him. He's there to bring out facts. I don't think he's tough because he's a "little man". I think he's tough because you have to be to get justice. my opinion.

I think what went wrong in the OJ and Anthony trials were that the prosecutors didn't want to come across as mean or picking on the defendants. They were afraid it would alienate the jury. I saw call them what they are...liars and murderers. I'll take a Buglioso or a Martinez any day.
 
Chris Williams ‏@chriswnews 3m

I'm sitting with #JodiArias juror number six and she's willing to take a question from you. What do you have? #TravisAlexander

6.Nancy-Lady in her 50's, lovely face, reminds me of Nancy Reagan with glasses, short sassy haircut.
I called her Spikey Hair. Anita's description is better. She was the only one I saw look at Jodi when the jury first walked in. She took a lot of notes.

Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - Verdict is in! GUILTY of MURDER ONE - Hung Jury On Penalty Phase
 
I'm pretty embarrassed to say this, but I'm really, really missing the trial. Do I have a loose screw or two?


Um .............. NO .............. you don't ............. but i know someone who does. It rhymes with "hate-teen"

You're good to go. There are many on here and elsewhere who are having withdrawals from this trial. I sooooooooooooo want it to be over, though.
 
So Mr. Foreman preferred to keep to himself and read a book at lunch. I bet he flew under the jurors radar the whole time, and only revealed his true self when it was too late to be voted off the island.

It was a very interesting read.

Interesting that she saw him nodding in agreement when the testimony was about how a child's emotional abuse will affect them, or could affect them, later in life as an adult. (Not verbatim).


---------

http://www.camillekimball.blogspot.com/2013/05/jury-foreman-for-jodi-arias-crime.html

Like most of his fellow jurors, Zervakos resembled a statue most of the time during testimony. But one day I tweeted to my followers that I saw a juror nodding in agreement with a witness. I can now disclose that the juror I watched nod his head positively in concurrence with a witness was number 18, William Zervakis. It came when one of the trial's psychologists was saying that what happens to us as children, especially abuse, shapes who we become as adults.


He did it in a most definite way, not just one vague dip of the chin but a clear series of nods to several statements from the stand. My twittles were instantly panicked, engaging with my tweet, feeling it meant he "bought" the defense theory that Travis was abusive to Jodi.
 
Chris Williams ‏@chriswnews 3m

I'm sitting with #JodiArias juror number six and she's willing to take a question from you. What do you have? #TravisAlexander

Jella thanks so much. I'm a little of a ludite when it comes to social media, if you don't mind could you tell me how to find and participate in this? tia
 
Lawd, have mercy! Glad I was outside playing at working!:floorlaugh:
I have NOT watched anything from Mr. Foreman....but been catching a few things on this thread and others on WS's.

So, if I have this right, and anyone correct me if I'm wrong.........

Mr. Foreman said JM talked to the jurors like they "were stupid", but this same Mr. Foreman said he believed CMja was "verbally abused".

Ok, I don't get it?

If one believes CMja was verbally abused, wouldn't that kinda make them...........?

I will NOT risk a TO to finish that last sentence! Just BBM to emphasize the obvious.

Back to reading the thread...........:truce:
 
When asked if he believed Arias' claims of domestic violence, Zervakos admitted he did believe some of her allegations.

"I believe she was verbally and mentally abused by Travis. I think she has a mental problem."

http://www.abc15.com/dpp/news/regio...ial-trouble-in-sentencing-phase#ixzz2ULwjyi34


He said he believes that JA was verbally & mentally abused by Travis.

I noticed that he said nothing (at least in that particular interview) about believing that JA was physically abused by Travis.

Since JA's primary defense was a claim of self defense, I find it quite curious that this juror didn't mention the alleged physical abuse against her that JA claims occurred on the day she murdered Travis (the body slam onto the bathroom floor).

It seems that he doesn't believe the claims of physical abuse, but he believes that she was verbally & mentally abused, which, in my mind, translates into:

If he rightfully discounted JA's unfounded allegations that Travis choked her, that Travis back-handed her in the car, that Travis body-slammed her on a previous occasion, and that Travis body-slammed her onto the bathroom floor on June 4 2008, perhaps that's why (among other evidence-based reasons) he voted guilty of premeditated murder.

But, based on his above statement (regarding verbal & mental abuse), does this mean he believes JA's claim that Travis called her an idiot & became enraged for supposedly dropping his camera? Does this mean he believes JA's claim that Travis threatened to kill her on June 4 2008? Did he cherry-pick which allegations of verbal & mental abuse to believe? Of course, only he can answer these questions.

If he doesn't believe the unfounded allegations of physical abuse, why in the world would he believe that Travis had verbally & mentally abused her? Because of a few angry text messages in which Travis was justifiably responding to JA's over the top, infuriating behavior after he'd had enough of her lies & manipulations???

Try as I might, I can't make complete sense of this guy's thought processes.

"I tried to keep my feelings as neutral as possible," he admitted.

I suspect he believes that he arrived at his conclusions based 100% on evidence (and he may have, in part). Despite his insistence that he "tried to keep his feelings as neutral as possible", his following statement suggests otherwise:

"The only thing that I can hope for her is that she comes to peace with herself, that she comes to grips with herself."

IMO, the above statement is evidence that he DID NOT keep his feelings neutral regarding the defendant. IMO, if his attitude toward her was neutral, he wouldn't care whether or not "she comes to peace with herself or whether or not "she comes to grips with herself".

The fact that he chose the word "feelings" points to a lack of neutrality. There is no such thing as a "NEUTRAL" feeling. Neutrality is the absence of feeling, by definition, ergo, feelings are evidence of the absence of neutrality.
 
I work in the lovely state of Delaware. I was born and raised in the Bronx, in NYC. I am a scientist by trade. If there is ANYONE on the planet that tells it like it is, it is ME. I don't do subtlety, I don't do nicely-nicey, I don't know how to mince garlic, nor my words. It's the facts, ma'am, and just the plain old facts, you either like me, or you don't. I don't try to win hearts or minds, but I do expect people to be swayed by facts when I give them facts. That's me, who I am, to the core.

Having moved down here, to me, the "almost south", I had a very rude awakening. I was coached, my first year down here, on how to improve my performance at work. I needed to "soften" my approach. Say things like "it would be better if...." And "I think it is...." Instead if my usual, "do it like this it works better" or "you're wrong, it is like this.."
In any case, I get Juan, and I cheer him at times when I am angry at JA. But that approach, like my approach, does turn off some people. And in his case it may bring out the protectiveness in the protective type older men with daughters. Another thing about Martinez's approach, it gave me agitata to listen to for long stretches, and I would find I would just end up tuning it out, spacing out, and having to read what I had missed on WS. The jurors can't go back and read WS - so if they tune out for a while, they miss it, period.
For those of you who watch the TH on HLN, we heard, over and over, that The defense kept JA on the stand for days and days so that jurors would form a bond with JA. The jurors didn't come into watching the trial preloaded with hate for her like most of us did. So they may have bonded a little, even before Martinez got her on cross. They didn't know what we knew before he crossed on her. And it may have worked well enough to make 4 jurors not able to give her the death penalty.

Anyhow, possible lessons to be learned going forward. I don't dislike Martinez, nor his style, all the time. I do think he should become more judicious at using it, and he would become more effective. JMO. I am a better manager now that I live in the almost south. I have learned how to be less direct when I need to be.

Move to NJ! We are much more blunt here and we like it that way;)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Jella thanks so much. I'm a little of a ludite when it comes to social media, if you don't mind could you tell me how to find and participate in this? tia

Here is Chris Williams' twitter account. :)

https://twitter.com/chriswnews



ETA: When asked how she thought Juan did, Juror #6 said she was very impressed

Chris Williams ‏@chriswnews 9m

She was very impressed
 
That was so amazing and pivotal, but iirc that came several months ago when JA was still on the stand and subsequently got lost in the mists of time imo. I wish JM had gone through things like that in more detail in his closing, because the constant sidebar interruptions disrupted the narrative and impeded the flow of info to the jury.

Oh gosh, he would get fuming mad at those approaches sometimes, He knew why they were doing that.
 
Wow! So he was nodding in agreement with which psychiatrist that said our childhood shapes what we become? Whose testimony was that? ALV or Samuels? Does anyone know (sorry if this is asked/answered).
Me thinks Mr Zervakos might be wishing he kept the pact and kept his mouth shut!!!

I think the naughty bits photos of Jodi got him thinking with the wrong part if his anatomy. I'm serious, especially after saying he wants to visit her!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I'm not clear on Jodi's lifestyle and living arrangements in jail before and during the trial.

Before the trial, she was part of the general population and had a roommate. Is that correct?

Then, when trial began, I understood she was moved to a single cell and was no longer able to socialize with others, right?

b4 and during the trial she was in a pod, where she could - but didn't have a room mate - and there are i thik 10 cells in the pod, and they have an open area w/ tv tables chairs and can talk and play cards - now she is in solitaire in the cell 23 hrs a day, w/ 1 hr to walk outside in the yard, but i think she has to do that alone too

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hR7kE-sOyVw

this documentary on her jail shows a lot
 
Um .............. NO .............. you don't ............. but i know someone who does. It rhymes with "hate-teen"

You're good to go. There are many on here and elsewhere who are having withdrawals from this trial. I sooooooooooooo want it to be over, though.
I guess I'm missing the trial because I felt it was taking us to a finish. Now, there is much unfinished business and no real sense of closure...except thankfully for the M1.

LOL!!!!! Just caught on to the reference to 18....LOL!!!! I'm 68 so my brain is slowing down...
 
Why are some people angry with the jury foreman? I appreciated what he had to say. Is there a concern that his remarks will further taint the next jury that is going to be impaneled?

I know that there are VERY strong feelings on our board that this case was a slam dunk for the Death Penalty and given that is was in the state of AZ, I am surprised that it didn't happen.

Jodi murdered Travis Alexander. The jury found her guilty of first degree murder and found the killing to be especially heinous.......I agree that the killing was horrific with a rage and cruelty that is unbelievably disturbing and truly sickening.

However, I have never understood how anyone on our board here could deny that Travis was verbally abusive to Jodi. That is NO WAY excuses her behavior. I thought that the superman/spiderman underwear and rapist allegations were preposterous and reprehensible but the verbal and emotional abuse were indisputable. It was there in black and white in emails, text messages, and recorded conversations....we heard and read the ups and downs of the toxic relationship.
I thought that what the foreman had to say was sensible.....he like you didn't buy that it wasn't premeditated. He saw the epic pain of the family and the tragic killing of a young man.....but he also was able to acknowledge that she was emotionally abused. That isn't an excuse, but it is a factor to consider in the sentencing phase IMO. All of the sum and substance of the prior jury decisions would have been served with a Life Sentence without possibility of parole.
MOO
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
148
Guests online
2,007
Total visitors
2,155

Forum statistics

Threads
601,143
Messages
18,119,317
Members
230,994
Latest member
truelove
Back
Top