SIDEBAR #7- Arias/Alexander forum

[kscornfed]

Yep. As far as we know, the only threat came from Mrs. Foreman reading the reaction the next day and screaming, "I'M GONNA KILL YOU!!!"

:floorlaugh::floorlaugh::floorlaugh::floorlaugh:

 

[Smelly Squirrel]

There was a tweet from CMJA yesterday. Is this really from her? Or just Bering doing it on her own? Someone else take over for Bering?

 

[InALandFarFarAway]

Tara claims that she asked as many as 75 questions. The impression she gives is that these were all snarky. Yeah, those very questions that made many of us say, "I love this jury!!". The questions that gave us hope. And she became an alternate! Same is true with juror number 6, who asked the famous haircut question. We lost them both! If I had somehow known that before the verdict, I'd have been panicking even more, believing even a full acquittal was very likely. Wow, we got lucky.

I thought the haircut question came from Juror #8. Who's #6?

Who's on 2nd? lol

 

[TigerBalm]

Tara claims that she asked as many as 75 questions. The impression she gives is that these were all snarky. Yeah, those very questions that made many of us say, "I love this jury!!". The questions that gave us hope. And she became an alternate! Same is true with juror number 6, who asked the famous haircut question. We lost them both! If I had somehow known that before the verdict, I'd have been panicking even more, believing even a full acquittal was very likely. Wow, we got lucky.

Juror #6 was a deliberating juror.

I believe you are talking about Juror #8, who was dismissed

 

[MeeBee]

Tara claims that she asked as many as 75 questions. The impression she gives is that these were all snarky. Yeah, those very questions that made many of us say, "I love this jury!!". The questions that gave us hope. And she became an alternate! Same is true with juror number 6, who asked the famous haircut question. We lost them both! If I had somehow known that before the verdict, I'd have been panicking even more, believing even a full acquittal was very likely. Wow, we got lucky.

I didn't think it was even possible for you to have been panicking even more than you were... But even up to the last witness the jury was still asking awesome questions, so I don't get that.

 

[Apollo]

I believed the "lack of criminal history" was a mitigating factor. :twocents:

When someone commits a crime of this magnitude, lack of criminal history shouldn't be a facor. She took her sweet time planning this murder, carrying it out and killing him three times over so who cares if she's never had a DUI, bounced a check or stolen a candy bar from the 7-11.

 

[Ammonitida]

Juror #6 was a deliberating juror.

I believe you are talking about Juror #8, who was dismissed

Ah, it was number 8 then, the one who was arrested for a DUI.

 

[Shadowboy]

Personally, I don't think I could sit on a DP case. The concept is something that I struggle with. However, if a jury renders such a verdict I respect it, especially if its what the vicitim's family wanted.

So I doubt I would ever be picked as such a juror, bc I would find it hard to say with conviction that I could sentence someone that way. The fact that this FP said he could do it, while never understanding what that responsibility entailed is crazy...thAt should have never happened.

I'd implant some goofy "cartoon" in response, but it seems inappropriate.

In total agreement with you. FP should have stated his case WITH HONESTY while the jury was chosen.

Truly? If he were to have been more truthful, it probably wouldn't have changed the "hung" outcome.

As for me, I STILL have faith. I don't care about a DP verdict, as long as this holds true and just: JA is a convicted murderer ... she planned to kill; she caused horrendous pain; and she was totally aware of 'right/wrong.'

 

[Angelina Frost]

I didn't think it was even possible for you to have been panicking even more than you were... But even up to the last witness the jury was still asking awesome questions, so I don't get that.

Lots of :scared: going on here, it was nearly worse than watching the trial.

Ammonitida was spot on about having a clear pro-defense juror on the panel though. Hearing from him now, that panic was totally justified because I have no CLUE how the State secured a murder 1 conviction.

Listening to this guy, I am half ready to believe the 15 hours deliberating the guilt phase were talking this guy down from buying manslaughter.

 

[PrincessSezMe]

Hi all :seeya:

Just wanted to say I hope you all are having a wonderful Memorial day weekend. WE are home from that damn hospital! Although he is laying in bed puking.....he is in HIS bed.

My son started out at 125 lbs, and he weighs 107 lbs now. As bad as things are, with my situation, with his cancer, I still can't put it out of my mind that at LEAST he is alive and Travis Alexander is not.

Hope you all have a great Memorial Day.

ETA: You BETTER believe I jumped out of my car to get to my anti-depressants like my azz was on fire!

Hugs Rosemary (((((((Rosemary))))))). I'm sending all the positive karma I can your way.

 

[Apollo]

Sure he could just said no comment but clearly the JF like being in front of a microphone. So much so, he made sure he was the first juror to speak.

Yes, and even if it meant breaking the agreement he had with the other jurors NOT to speak until after the holiday weekend. I'd feel like a big schmuck if I had done that to my fellow jurors but apparently he has no shame. The limelight was more important. Says a lot about his character or lack thereof.

 

[Linda7NJ]

What are your thoughts, Linda? Who voted for life, you think? There were 4 of them.

I have no idea..., if we were starting a pool, I was just gonna pick four numbers and hope I win


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ElleElle]

When someone commits a crime of this magnitude, lack of criminal history shouldn't be a facor. She took her sweet time planning this murder, carrying it out and killing him three times over so who cares if she's never had a DUI, bounced a check or stolen a candy bar from the 7-11.

Yes, did you read the instructions to the jurors?

"The jurors must consider whether there were mitigating factors that would warrant Arias getting life in prison. Here are the factors that Arizona law says the jury can consider as "mitigating factors":

1. Arias' capacity to appreciate the wrongfulness of her conduct or to conform her conduct to the requirements of law was significantly impaired, but not so impaired as to constitute a defense to prosecution
2. She was under unusual and substantial duress, although not such as to constitute a defense to prosecution
3. Arias was legally accountable for the conduct of another, but her participation was relatively minor, although not so minor as to constitute a defense to prosecution
4. Arias could not reasonably have foreseen that her conduct in the course of the commission of the offense for which Arias was convicted would cause, or would create a grave risk of causing, death to another person
5. Arias’ age

They also can consider these points:

• Cooperation with police/investigation
• Lack of prior criminal record
• Difficult childhood or family background
• Family and community ties
• Lack of intent in Felony murder
• Good character prior to murder
• Intelligence and education (often times lack of education is a mitigating factor)
• Good conduct in prison
• If victim's family asks for leniency
• Possibility of rehabilitation, will convicted be a danger in the future
• Shows remorse, grief "

Source: http://www.hlntv.com/article/2013/05/16/what-could-save-jodi-arias-life


We all have emotions, but this is the justice system, the rules must be followed. :notgood:

 

[MeeBee]

Lots of :scared: going on here, it was nearly worse than watching the trial.

Ammonitida was spot on about having a clear pro-defense juror on the panel though. Hearing from him now, that panic was totally justified because I have no CLUE how the State secured a murder 1 conviction.

Listening to this guy, I am half ready to believe the 15 hours deliberating the guilt phase were talking this guy down from buying manslaughter.

I believe this guy was asking most of if not all the questions that were sympathetic toward Jodi that was freaking most of us out. It wasn't just Ammon who thought this. But still...

 

[polleypockets]

I thought the haircut question came from Juror #8. Who's #6?

Who's on 2nd? lol

i think u are right cuz juror 6 was interviewed last night and this morning as one of the jurors who deliberated and voted for DP

 

[pferrin]

There is no proof that any "threats" we're made. We only have the word of the foreman and his son and, frankly? I don't believe either of them.

It's this is the same as ALV threats...No proof

 

[MeeBee]

Yes, did you read the instructions to the jurors?

"The jurors must consider whether there were mitigating factors that would warrant Arias getting life in prison. Here are the factors that Arizona law says the jury can consider as "mitigating factors":

1. Arias' capacity to appreciate the wrongfulness of her conduct or to conform her conduct to the requirements of law was significantly impaired, but not so impaired as to constitute a defense to prosecution
2. She was under unusual and substantial duress, although not such as to constitute a defense to prosecution
3. Arias was legally accountable for the conduct of another, but her participation was relatively minor, although not so minor as to constitute a defense to prosecution
4. Arias could not reasonably have foreseen that her conduct in the course of the commission of the offense for which Arias was convicted would cause, or would create a grave risk of causing, death to another person
5. Arias’ age

They also can consider these points:

• Cooperation with police/investigation
• Lack of prior criminal record
• Difficult childhood or family background
• Family and community ties
• Lack of intent in Felony murder
• Good character prior to murder
• Intelligence and education (often times lack of education is a mitigating factor)
• Good conduct in prison
• If victim's family asks for leniency
• Possibility of rehabilitation, will convicted be a danger in the future
• Shows remorse, grief "

Source: http://www.hlntv.com/article/2013/05/16/what-could-save-jodi-arias-life


We all have emotions, but this is the justice system, the rules must be followed. :notgood:

Just because you find a mitigating factor (Jodi having no criminal history was just a fact) you aren't obligated to vote for life. You have to weigh it against the crime.

 

[Karmady]

This whole threat/death threat meme is getting tiresom. The only proof I saw of any actual threats being made to anyone was the kid that arrested for saying he was going to blow up the court house after Jodi was convicted.

How many threats do you think Juan has gotten from Jodi's supporters, I suppose?

I don't care which side they're coming from -- it's wrong (in fact) and quite a bit insane (imo)

 

[Maryann123]

Proud of the foreman's son for writing that post.

In today's society, people speak their opinions very freely and sometimes much too personally. It is not proper for people to direct any kind of hatred or threats towards this man for fulfilling his civic duty. While some may not agree with his decision, it still should be respected.
Do I think that there was some faulty reasoning on his part, given some of the comments he has made? Yes, and I posted earlier about apparent biases on his part.

I'm sorry that some fools out there (not meaning this site) have made this way too personal for this man.

BBM

I don't agree with anyone being threatened. But I don't have a problem with people expressing their disappointment in this foreman. It cuts both ways. (your BBM comment) You can't ignore the fact there wasn't one iota of evidence that Travis ever abused that woman. How can that be taken in to consideration? Her defense was self defense. Mr Foreman didn't find that when deciding Murder 1, so why does it come in during the sentencing phase? He said he was certain she was abused mentally and verbally. So, one email/text proves that? We have no idea why he was so angry, but we don't see it as a pattern, and he sure didn't call her the names you would expect if it was just him being abusive. Actually, I found the text/email as him expressing his sincere disgust with her. He didn't call her vile disgusting names, just him telling her that he finally realized she had some very disturbing flaws in her character, and he had never been hurt by anyone as badly as she hurt him. Abusive? Not in my book.
And Mr Foreman could have kept his mouth shut, stayed out of the limelight and avoided all the negative comments. His ego put him out there, and it's his ego that's causing the backlash. If anybody thinks we should respect his decision, maybe his supporters should respect our decision that his decision is carp! I'm sure there is "another" site that is giving him kudos all over the place. If I wanted to read great things about him, that's the first place I'd look.

 

[Angelina Frost]

I believe this guy was asking most of if not all the questions that were sympathetic toward Jodi that was freaking most of us out. It wasn't just Ammon who thought this. But still...

ITA. He outed himself. I was really worried when I heard the question about the convicted murderer showing signs of PTSD after having "her privacy invaded." That was really late in the trial. And this guy was the foreman. Still having trouble processing this.... :facepalm: