BBM
Do I sense some confusion on how a jury deliberates in the penalty phase?
IMO, juror number 16 phrased things very well in terms of deliberation,mitigating factors and respecting one fellow jurors and their votes:
http://www.kpho.com/story/22428063/arias-juror-no-16-says-she-feels-relieved-satisfied
Apologizes in advance for getting up on a soapbox, but it was clearly spelled out in the jury instructions that mitigating factors are not limited to those presented by the defense.
People have their own individual beliefs and opinions when it comes to justice and the severity of the penalty, and these can be considered mitigating factors in deliberation.
To throw it out there, does every person who kills another human being deserve the death penalty? If not, why not? This is the kind of question that each and every one of those jurors pondered when they decided as individuals what was the appropriate punishment for CMJA.
I would like to hear from all jurors in this case. I have concerns that some may be reluctant to speak freely about their experience, especially in light of the bashing of the foreman. To me, it would be interesting to learn how they viewed the facts of the case and arguments presented, their theories about events, opinions about witnesses and counsel, and the deliberation process.
