SIDEBAR #7- Arias/Alexander forum

[LambChop]

No, but you do have to weigh the mitigation factor against the aggravation factors in deciding DP. That's not misleading. No matter if you think Jodi is talented or was abused, it doesn't mean she didn't commit an especially cruel crime.

Besides the point, because I doubt that's why the juror said that in the first place.

It is possible the BDP may have been a mitigating factor for them. Maybe they thought she could be "cured". Unless they say what held them back we will never know.

 

[Just Sailing Thru]

Does anyone think ..that IF the cmja gave juror #18 a "visit" that she would tell him the truth..because , ya know he can relate????:floorlaugh::floorlaugh::floorlaugh:

 

[MeeBee]

Does anyone think ..that IF the cmja gave juror #18 a "visit" that she would tell him the truth..because , ya know he can relate????:floorlaugh::floorlaugh::floorlaugh:

Oh please. He seems blind to who Jodi really is. Ryan Owens already tried that and she turned on him in a hot second.

 

[Sweet Fox]

Question ... If they continue with a new Penalty jury, does that mean the sealed court documents from part 1 and 2 of the trial will remain sealed?

 

[BetteDavisEyes]

Jurors do not take intelligence or aptitude tests. They simply have to have a driver's license now. You don't even have to sign up to vote.

Everyone goes in there with their own mind, their own experiences. Even with that, some cannot separate facts logically. Some do not even think logically. Logic is not a given, it is earned. Anyone can be a juror. We cannot blame for their inability to process, or inability to separate logical facts from their own issues. It is the way this system works. You can draw a jury that is good for you if you are facing jail, or what that is not. It is the luck of the draw...

<respectfully snipped>

I suppose that juror questionnaires vary from state-to-state or county-to-county, but in Michigan the juror response form requires a lot of detailed information: highest level of education, employment history, etc. When prospective jurors are summoned for jury selection, the court already has access to a lot of information about potential jurors. As each group of prospective jurors is taken to a courtroom for jury selection, the questionnaires have been previewed by attorneys representing the parties involved in each case.

I posted earlier about one of my jury experiences and how jurors openly talked about the various parties involved until I mentioned that the Judge had instructed us not to discuss any aspect of the case. During voir dire in that jury selection, the plaintiff was very involved in the process. It was obvious (to me, at least) that she wanted a blue collar, middle class, uneducated jury who knew nothing about the legal profession and would likely never be able to afford a good attorney even if they needed a lawyer. I would not have been selected for the jury if the Judge had not admonished the attorneys that they were not going to get a second group of prospective jurors and would have to seat a 7-member panel from the current group. The plaintiff looked at me with utter contempt several times during voir dire because she did not want someone who was educated, a former teacher, well-coiffed, well-dressed, upper middle class, etc. on her jury. I was the last member of the panel to be seated, and that woman was not a happy camper.

Given that Jodi Arias was very involved in her defense case, I'm sure that she had a significant role in jury selection. She probably had a mental profile of the type of individuals she wanted on the jury, i.e. those who were likely to believe her tales of abuse and feel sorry for her, and those that she would be able to manipulate. Jodi studied the jury throughout the trial and no doubt brought to her DT's attention any juror whom she feared might be unfavorable to the final outcome of the trial. I'm sure that JA was instrumental in having Juror #5 dismissed for whatever reason. If a second trial moves forward, I'm sure that Jodi will again be driving the defense bus and striving for a better outcome when the process concludes. :moo:

 

[21merc7]

Let us not forget JA's interviews with the very, very, extremely patient LE official. I don't even know how many there are, but she asked, PERSISTENTLY, to see Travis' death photos. This was her art, her curiosity, her last statement to the world.

I am Jodi, I did this.

(Anyone else can link, I don't have them available.)

 

[Garlandy]

Juror 18 could have easily have said that in his opinion there were mitigating issues and that's why he could not vote DP...

BUT WHY HIT Juan Martinez BELOW THE BELT??????

What purpose?

I call Bull**** on him. Still.

He sat the whole time with his arms crossed [per Katie]. He was not open to prosecution argument.

And as I mentioned last night on this subject, he should have bowed out once he realized he wasn't able to do the job he signed up for. ie. he said in the interviews a few days ago something to the effect that it shouldn't be up to the jury to decide if someone lives or dies. Regardless if he went into the process thinking that he could sentence someone to the DP if it was warranted...when ever he came to the conclusion he couldn't do that, whether it was the moment he first saw JA or when they started deliberating during the sentencing phase he had a right to speak to the judge and tell her about the conflict...imho that would have been the right thing for him to do.

 

[kpm]

Agree to disagree on the misleading part. If the prosecutor tells me that there are "no mitigating factors relating to the crime" and I go back to the jury room and read my instructions that tell me the mitigating factors don't need to relate to the crime - I'm wondering why he bothered to add "relating to the crime" since it's totally irrelevant. The only thing I can come up with is that the prosecutor wanted me to think it was relevant. jmo

I don't know what the juror was thinking, obviously, but it's as reasonable a speculation as any, imo. Especially since he apparently thought Juan was treating the jury as though they were stupid.

IIRC, there is a list of 5-6 mitigating factors for a crime that are boiler plate, BK went over them.

I assumed JM meant none of those boiler plate factors related to JS's crime.

The DT then put up their factors in hopes of one of them getting through to a juror.

 

[LambChop]

Whether or not there were mitigating factors unrelated to the crime is a separate issue, imo. Based on your post, Juan could simply have said there are no mitigating factors, period. jmo

Juan does not get to decide what Jodi claims are mitigation factors. The jury gets to weigh those as they see fit. He just pointed out those she listed were not mitigation factors worth considering when comparing them to the crime. That was my understanding of what he said.

 

[Elley Mae]

http://abcnews.go.com/US/jodi-arias-jurors-sentenced-death-matter/story?id=19259867

Arias, 32, had been branded a liar by the prosecution because she initially denied killing Alexander, then claimed two years later that she killed him in self-defense, citing Alexander's physical and emotional abuse.


Am I missing something here, the 2 ninjas?

 

[TigerBalm]

Question ... If they continue with a new Penalty jury, does that mean the sealed court documents from part 1 and 2 of the trial will remain sealed?

The case isn't over yet, so they will remain sealed.

 

[kpm]

Isn't the juror on the far left the one JC kept saying was "defiant," looks like CMja's mother, and a possible hold-out? Oops, Jean!:scared:

She possibly displayed defiance towards what has been going on now that we know from 18 and the hung jury, it was just read the wrong way at the time?

 

[MsJosie]

Please can some one answer a few questions for me....my earache of 1 1/2 years decided to flare up and I have not been reading.

or send me to the right area to find answers...

Thanks so much

1. What happened to Donovan?

2. Why were FJA family not at final court hearing?

3. Where is FJA now.....in solitary? can she give interviews? Can she have visitors or is she under the rules of a murderer and has limited phone, snack, etc. privileges?

4. Does FJA keep the same attorneys?

5. How long before the new hearing/trial starts? Televised or not?

Again...thank you very much

 

[MeeBee]

Please can some one answer a few questions for me....my earache of 1 1/2 years decided to flare up and I have not been reading.

or send me to the right area to find answers...

Thanks so much

1. What happened to Donovan?

2. Why were FJA family not at final court hearing?

3. Where is FJA now.....in solitary? can she give interviews? Can she have visitors or is she under the rules of a murderer and has limited phone, snack, etc. privileges?

4. Does FJA keep the same attorneys?

5. How long before the new hearing/trial starts? Televised or not?

Again...thank you very much

1. she is being looked into by her parole officer for possibly violating parole after Jodi was convicted. She is not allowed to communicate with convicted felons.

2. They were in the Grand Canyon...

3. Arpaio put her on lockdown. She is in solitary and she can't do anymore interviews.

4. dunno, but I think so.

5. it's scheduled for July 18th, but many think it'll be much later than that.

 

[LambChop]

IIRC, there is a list of 5-6 mitigating factors for a crime that are boiler plate, BK went over them.

I assumed JM meant none of those boiler plate factors related to JS's crime.

The DT then put up their factors in hopes of one of them getting through to a juror.

Well we all know she is not going to be involved in revamping the prison system. Nor will she be a photographer or a DV advocate even if she were to get life. Her history of abuse was a lie. Her parents restricted her, wow. Call DCF. Her life as a adult, abusive. Don't think so. If she were truly abused by Travis her comment recently would have been she never would have continued to see him.....not I'd document it. What a stupid, stupid thing to say. DV victims want to get away from their abusers and if they don't they certainly are not going to write it down for the abuser to find it and continue the abuse. These victims think they can stop it. She has no clue what it's like to be a victim.

In this same interview she claims something to the effect that she would never do this again, unless she were abused. Wow, if that does not say it I do not know what will. So, yes she would kill again which is why she packed a 9mm gun and knives in her get away car.

 

[Mrs G Norris]

Please can some one answer a few questions for me....my earache of 1 1/2 years decided to flare up and I have not been reading.

or send me to the right area to find answers...

Thanks so much

1. What happened to Donovan?

There's an investigation (by her parole officer or department) going on as she is not supposed to have contact with a convicted felon.

2. Why were FJA family not at final court hearing?

Some were at the Grand Canyon, Donovan insists the mother at least was in town but they were told it was just a question.

3. Where is FJA now.....in solitary? can she give interviews? Can she have visitors or is she under the rules of a murderer and has limited phone, snack, etc. privileges?

Yep in solitary .. no interviews. 23 hour a day lockdown.

4. Does FJA keep the same attorneys?

Yes, but they'll probably try to withdraw again ..

5. How long before the new hearing/trial starts? Televised or not?

July, probably televised .. 6 weeks ..

Again...thank you very much

Hi, I answered to the best of my knowledge above ..

 

[KandyKane]

Yes, and I wonder WHY did they make a "deal" that they wouldn't release the names of the 4 who didn't vote for death - how did they know that would be "against' Public opinion???

They decided together that they would not reveal other jurors' life OR death decisions but that each juror was free to say what their own vote was. They didn't specifically agree to not reveal which jurors voted for life. I suspect that none of the 4 that voted life are going to be willing to publically say so because they know they will be vilified unmercifully.

It was very telling that the foreman didn't reveal what his vote was, and I believe he was lying when he said it was because he thought it should be as private as his vote for president. I absolutely believe that not only does he not care to keep private who he voted for for president but that he decided to not reveal what his juror vote was because he voted for life and didn't want to be vilified for it.

 

[ElleElle]

Yup. I agree. It took my awhile but I figured it out. :seeya:

:floorlaugh: Yes, gf.

And some people never ever make that distinction.

 

[TigerBalm]

Please can some one answer a few questions for me....my earache of 1 1/2 years decided to flare up and I have not been reading.

or send me to the right area to find answers...

Thanks so much

1. What happened to Donovan?

2. Why were FJA family not at final court hearing?

3. Where is FJA now.....in solitary? can she give interviews? Can she have visitors or is she under the rules of a murderer and has limited phone, snack, etc. privileges?

4. Does FJA keep the same attorneys?

5. How long before the new hearing/trial starts? Televised or not?

Again...thank you very much

1. 2. Interview with Donavan can be seen in the media/timeline thread.
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=195462&page=31

3. She is being held in closed custody, in her cell for 23 hours a day.

4. Yes, media reported Willmott told them her and Nurmi would stay on

5. Per Judge Stephens:
Retrial for penalty phase, set for July 18, 2013
Status conference for penalty phase matters, set for June 20, 2013, 8:30am

 

[21merc7]

Please can some one answer a few questions for me....my earache of 1 1/2 years decided to flare up and I have not been reading.

or send me to the right area to find answers...

Thanks so much

1. What happened to Donovan?

2. Why were FJA family not at final court hearing?

3. Where is FJA now.....in solitary? can she give interviews? Can she have visitors or is she under the rules of a murderer and has limited phone, snack, etc. privileges?

4. Does FJA keep the same attorneys?

5. How long before the new hearing/trial starts? Televised or not?

Again...thank you very much

1. Donovan will break probation if Donovan speaks with the now felony convicted inmate, but Donovan said something on t.v. That does not break probation.

2. No one knows for sure about the family not being there that day. They either had a planned vacation or were just told there was no need to show up.

3. The Sheriff said no more interviews and 23 hour lock down, but who knows. We shall see.

4. Yes JA keeps the same attorneys, unless she - herself - asks for new ones.

5. It will be in June for status, no trial likely July as the Judge set. Most likely it will be a while and it depends on the Courts schedule, the attorneys scedules, and perhaps any overload due to this trial. Don't hold your breath for July.