SIDEBAR #7- Arias/Alexander forum

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Question for the mods: will there not be another thread in which to discuss this case until it picks up again on June 20th?

Some of us (perhaps most of us) don't want to go to an off-topic sidebar thread to discuss the case.

There needs to be a new/dedicated thread where people who want to discuss the case (and only the case) can post.
 
But when it comes to the penalty phase, the jurors are supposed to examine their consciences, not just coldly look at the facts.

I thought they had to examine their concience before they agreed that they were capable of delivering the DP during voir dire...
 
I'm very interested in seeing if the referee's whistle using is markedly different. I want to see a whole lot more penalty flags thrown against the DT next time.
 
oops! Who's the alternate who tweeted over the weekend - a tons of tweets - including the announcement that she was flying to LA to be on Dr. Drew? Maybe I got them mixed up...

Different alternate juror. The tweeting one is Tara Kelley, juror #17
 
oops! Who's the alternate who tweeted over the weekend - a tons of tweets - including the announcement that she was flying to LA to be on Dr. Drew? Maybe I got them mixed up...

No. 17 Tara Kelley.
 
I thought they had to examine their concience before they agreed that they were capable of delivering the DP during voir dire...

Yes, that too. And they also had to agree they were capable of delivering a life sentence even if they had found premed 1st degree murder and cruelty.
 
What you you think about selecting another jury?
Are these jurors expected to know nothing of the case? If thats the case...That leaves a bunch of folks that live under a rock!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Apparantly Maricopa Copunty is the largest population county in the USA with over 4 million people...
 
Hi there smart and savvy sleuthers!
This is my first post, so excuse me if I'm posting in the wrong thread.

I believe I may have heard about this from a sharp-eyed sleuther (sorry I can't remember to give you credit!) During Det. Flores interview with JA's mom, she talks about friends calling her, even in the middle of the night, to tell her that Jodie needed help. A bit later she says "thats why we moved her back up here" (to get her help?) Was this TRAVIS??!! It just makes COMPLETE sense to me. It doesn't seem like JA HAD any friends that would make that kind of effort by calling her mom in the middle of the night no less. With all her stalking behavior prior to the murder and whatever blackmailing horrific scheme that prompted kindhearted Travis to send her that "angry" email-it just seems to fall into place that he was desperate to not only get away from her, but get her help. And if it WAS Travis who made that "middle of the night" call, then Jodie's mom must know it was Travis.

Maybe it's not an important issue at this point, now that we have a hung jury. I guess it just gnaws at me now that we know at least one juror thought she was just a normal girl until she met Travis.

Does anyone have any insight into this? And I hope the original sleuther steps forward to claim their "eagle eye award"!

Nice to meet everyone!! :seeya:

Nice to meet you too Squirrel Whisperer and welcome to the group!

:wagon:
 
Hi there smart and savvy sleuthers!
This is my first post, so excuse me if I'm posting in the wrong thread.

I believe I may have heard about this from a sharp-eyed sleuther (sorry I can't remember to give you credit!) During Det. Flores interview with JA's mom, she talks about friends calling her, even in the middle of the night, to tell her that Jodie needed help. A bit later she says "thats why we moved her back up here" (to get her help?) Was this TRAVIS??!! It just makes COMPLETE sense to me. It doesn't seem like JA HAD any friends that would make that kind of effort by calling her mom in the middle of the night no less. With all her stalking behavior prior to the murder and whatever blackmailing horrific scheme that prompted kindhearted Travis to send her that "angry" email-it just seems to fall into place that he was desperate to not only get away from her, but get her help. And if it WAS Travis who made that "middle of the night" call, then Jodie's mom must know it was Travis.

Maybe it's not an important issue at this point, now that we have a hung jury. I guess it just gnaws at me now that we know at least one juror thought she was just a normal girl until she met Travis.

Does anyone have any insight into this? And I hope the original sleuther steps forward to claim their "eagle eye award"!

Nice to meet everyone!! :seeya:

WELCOME SQUIRREL WHISPERER :seeya::seeya:. Sorry no nice graphics but my access to all smilies is currently broken.

Good post and actually an interesting suggestion that TA would have called SA
 
Hi there smart and savvy sleuthers!
This is my first post, so excuse me if I'm posting in the wrong thread.

I believe I may have heard about this from a sharp-eyed sleuther (sorry I can't remember to give you credit!) During Det. Flores interview with JA's mom, she talks about friends calling her, even in the middle of the night, to tell her that Jodie needed help. A bit later she says "thats why we moved her back up here" (to get her help?) Was this TRAVIS??!! It just makes COMPLETE sense to me. It doesn't seem like JA HAD any friends that would make that kind of effort by calling her mom in the middle of the night no less. With all her stalking behavior prior to the murder and whatever blackmailing horrific scheme that prompted kindhearted Travis to send her that "angry" email-it just seems to fall into place that he was desperate to not only get away from her, but get her help. And if it WAS Travis who made that "middle of the night" call, then Jodie's mom must know it was Travis.

Maybe it's not an important issue at this point, now that we have a hung jury. I guess it just gnaws at me now that we know at least one juror thought she was just a normal girl until she met Travis.

Does anyone have any insight into this? And I hope the original sleuther steps forward to claim their "eagle eye award"!

Nice to meet everyone!! :seeya:

:welcome: :seeya:

Yes ITA. I totally 100% believe/feel it was Travis who called Jodi's mom to come get Jodi!!!

That's why the u-haul, Jodi kicking her mom incidents. She couldn't be away from Travis!

Then something happened from Apr08-May25. WHAT?! Argh
 
Saying you 'could' vote for the DP in a case does not mean you 'will' vote for the DP in a specific case if you happen to find mitigating circumstances and determine those mitigators override the aggravating circumstances. It's a qualifier, but not a promise. And it's not a lie either.
 
We didn't need to be in the room with them. The JF told us what his thought processes were and what he relied on and what he rejected. He stepped into the spotlight and opened himself to criticism, negative comments, critiques, roses as well as thorns.

Regardless of how long they were impaneled, if the juror puts him/herself out on a limb, s/he should expect to have it sawed off behind him.

There are no sacred cows when it comes to public figures.

The jury did have very select information.

We, the general public also do not have a full picture.

IIRC, both JA's parents and former boyfriend DB said that she started to change about 2 years prior to her arrest/the spring of 2008. This was a good four to six months before she met Travis.

JA and Travis were an official couple for only 5 months and during this time, it was a long distance relationship. She moved to Mesa after they broke up in June 2007 and Travis was very upset with her plans to move. Friends related overhearing his phone conversation with her, trying to dissuade her from moving to Mesa because her only reason for doing so was to be closer to him.

We do not know how often they saw one another once she had moved closer to him, nor do we know whether she was wanted company or not.

I do view JA as having been obsessed with Travis. This, combined with her known propensity for lying, leads me to believe that the defense tried to paint their clandestine relationship as much closer than it was in reality. Was she the one who was constantly interjecting herself into TA's life?

According to the Hughes, Travis had seen his bishop sometime before his death for counseling regarding his breach of chastity. This leads me to believe that the sexual encounters were much less frequent than the DT would want people to think.

Where are the "friends" that would call Sandy, sometimes during the night, to tell her Jodi needed help? Doesn't sound like it happened during her time with DB or we would of heard about it. Jodi did mention a nervous breakdown when she wasn't getting her way with DB, went to her bedroom, hyperventilated and went in a fog.

Sandy said she had gone to Mesa to get Jodi back to Yreka so they could help her. I wonder if Sandy will tell us about during the next trial?

We've heard that Jodi stalked Bobby and Matt,( and very likely had a hand in DB marriage/divorce) but not one of them sought any help for her. This all didn't just happen because of Travis. She'd kicked a defenseless dog ( and it went away) because she was mad, and that was at the age of fourteen. About the same time she was growing pot on the roof. No Jodi was a problem long before she hit her teens. You don't just start smacking and carrying a wooden spoon when your kid was seven.
 
Well if there are people left in that county that still know nothing about the case or any left that have not formed an opinion after hearing about it,.,.They're not the kind of people I would trust with watering my plants for a weekend.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

:floorlaugh: I mention it to people and they look at me and make a comment which I will not post here. :blushing:

I think it's just some people don't care. I wouldn't these people on a jury because they'd rush to get it over with. moo
 
education system has nothing to do with it...or else a school that was teaching it would turn out entire graduation classes with kids who had "Logic, critical thinking skills, common sense and the inability to apply them in a meaningful way".... or you would have entire graduation classes completely lacking. and that just is not reality.

may sound mean but some people just don't have what it takes...they are lacking something in their brain....you can teach them until you are blue in the face and some still wont "get it".

They lack comprehension. And there are skill builders out there in the world that can help with understanding. I think it is a big problem in the US today.
 
It wouldn't be the "same offense," if it were a different law and a different jurisdiction. It all goes back to that sovereignty thing again.

Understood, but I was asking (because I respect your opinions so much) if you think it is right to be able to do that? Guess what I'm questioning is not the legality (I know it is legal) but the fairness to the defendant.

For example, say he is accused of bombing a post office and is charged first by the federal government and when they don't get a guilty verdict the state tries the person for the same bombing and gets a guilty verdict. It is legal, but is it right?

ETA: Same offense was a poor choice of words on my part.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
208
Guests online
411
Total visitors
619

Forum statistics

Threads
608,365
Messages
18,238,389
Members
234,359
Latest member
BrookebbSATX
Back
Top