SIDEBAR #8- Arias/Alexander forum

[josie1986]

One email does NOT constitute "abuse".

Unless you are alyce LaViolette :innocent:

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 4 Beta

 

[lisasalinger]

I think it's funny that we haven't heard from any of the jurors, other then the foreman, who wanted life for JA. And the foreman never even came out and admitted it, it is just assumed (correctly I am sure) that he voted that way. Even if they came out and didn't say how they voted it would be obvious just because they wouldn't admit it and of course the process of elimination.
The Juror on DD says that the reason they wanted life was because they believed that JA was verbally and emotionally abused by Travis. Maybe they are embarrassed that they bought into that? It is like the Anthony jurors. None of them, to this day, has been really vocal. I think one or two may have tried to justify their verdict but was met with such a backlash that they ran back into their cave.
I really would like to hear from the other three that wanted life. Not to condemn them but to try to see what they saw. How could 8 rational people (plus alternates it seems) have been so convinced that JA deserved to die and were not swayed by Travis's "abusive words" and these people, who were apparently older, not seen the big picture. BTW, I am older, too, and while in another context Travis's words could have been construed as abusive, when you looked at everything it was clear that this was a person at the end of his rope, who most likely was very betrayed by a person he had tried so much to help. His words about how she hurt him even worse then when his father died tell me that it was extreme whatever she did. Travis didn't seem like the type to exaggerate. When you look at all she did to him (and would ultimately do to him) his reaction was not that unreasonable, and certainly not justification for what she did.

I totally understand your curiosity.. and I'm right there with you, always want to know why to everything.

But realistically those 4 people don't have to explain themselves. We may not like it or agree with their decision, but I don't blame them for staying quiet in light of the criticism that they will open themselves up to. (For the record, I think people that want to criticize them are within their rights to do so, provided the jurors make their statements in a public forum, and that the criticisms are not attacks. So I'm not opposed to the criticism of the foreman, and have made some of my own.)

The jurors are in a no win situation... If they talk, then some people say they are just media hungry. If they don't talk, then some consider them to be "hiding" and ashamed of their decisions.

 

[LambChop]

Well, IMO, hopping back in the sack with JA didn’t do much to end the sick attraction they had for each other either.

According to Sky Hughes Travis was very concerned that Jodi had threatened suicide and Travis was fearful she would do something to hurt herself. Knowing that it's just not too hard to believe that he treated her with kid gloves while she was there on the 4th and cooperated by doing whatever she wanted while she was there. I do believe he thought she was gone when he got into that shower and this is why the front door was locked.

 

[rose222]

One email does NOT constitute "abuse".

There are instructions to follow when deciding life versus death, right? I don't know about the other pro-life jurors but the foreman did not follow those instructions. He also did not know or did not carry out his duties as a foreman. I found this online:

"A jury foreman has the responsibility of performing a number of duties such as:

1. Ensuring that each jury member is present in the jury room when deliberations begin.

2. Confirming that each juror understands the deliberation procedures and knows that each member is allowed to ask questions s/he may have concerning the case.

3. Ensuring that deliberations are conducted in an orderly manner and that the discussion is open to each member.

4. Ensuring that a jury member does not bully another.

5. Confirming that each juror is aware of his/her responsibilities and that each juror is allowed to state their views and reasons as to their verdict.

6. Communicating on behalf of the jury with the judge.

7. Announcing the verdict. "

http://definitions.uslegal.com/j/jury-foreman/

I don't think he followed instructions 2 and 3. It doesn't seem like even he even understood what 'deliberations' mean.

There are instructions to follow in the penalty phase. If not why even bother with them? Just tell the jury 'You say you can vote for death. Go ahead and vote for life or death based on whatever you like. No instructions. No explanations.'

 

[Love Never Fails]

Court Date 6/20/2013 @8:30am

Case Event: Jury Deliberations Cont.

Judge Sherry Stevens

Defendat: Jodi Arias

**

Camera Ruling-In Session-Pool Camera/Still Cam-APPROVED

Prosecutor Juan Martinez

Defense Attorney-Kirk Nurmi,Jennifer Willmont

Justice, isn't this just a hearing for the two sides to set up timelines for the new penalty trial? I hope JA won't get to attend.

 

[Emmi]

Emmi, I've got to go the other way here. I can see the point you're making, but unless you feel that no matter what a person in a realtionship does, they NEVER deserve to be called out on it, there is a place for a verbal taking-down, even if it gets really nasty.

The fact that the texts in question are so sensational is because they're NOT normalized and I'm with the rest wondering what the heck she did to provoke that.

People CAN and do provoke "abuse." But I don't even like the word "abuse" here. What do you call it when they deserved it (and she did, let's not forget what she's capable of) Let's call it an angry reaction. People deserve those when they do something horrible.

To me those words would be abuse if there was no context, if they were words he just called her at random, there are men like that and they are disgusting. "Hey *advertiser censored*, get me a ****ing beer" was the last thing I heard a guy say to his wife at a party the other night. He wasn't joking, she cringed and I don't doubt it's an abusive situation. (I left because I might have hit him. Abuse? You make the call.)

Agzain, when people do horrible things to someone, they deserve to be called out. It's not abuse, it's a reaction to abuse.

I was not taking issue with angry reactions, calling people out on their BS, using swear words (verbal abuse, by the way, does not require obscenities, and obscenities are not, by default, abusive) or telling someone they are the worst thing ever to happen to them, or telling them to go to hell and how to get there. That's a different animal.

Concerning context, I've already made a post earlier about why the context argument doesn't convince me in this case, and I'm not going to re-write it.

And, of course abuse can be provoked--when you're provoking someone who has an abusive orientation.

 

[MidwestMama]

Divots.
That’s what changed my mind about the death penalty. I watched this trial from beginning to end and I missed the divot issue the first go round. I think it was because as all of you, I was on overload or I may have even stopped listening by the time Dr. Horn got to the divots.

Or maybe because at the beginning of the trial when he first testified about them, it was embedded in so much horror that over time, throughout the trial it began to fade into something manageable.

During the penalty phase, I had to go back and find everything. I had to read it all then listen to Dr. Horn’s testimony again so I’d know exactly what disturbed me for so long. I think just after the penalty phase, I took a weekend off to just think about that.

Even the first part of his testimony way back in January or February, there was sadness in the matter-of-fact way that he described how he came to examine Travis Victor Alexander.

[/b]

To the first mention of the divots that we all blocked out for sanity’s sake:

[/b]

His penalty phase testimony wasn’t anything he hadn’t already outlined in his direct. The chilling matter-of-factness was still front and center but he was less clinical this time around, revealing more detail and confirming beyond all doubt that Travis was alive through 98% of it and that he suffered unimaginable pain and terror.



I always told myself when there are murders that the victim was instantly knocked out or the adrenaline racing through their bodies knocked any fear or terror out of their systems or it just happened so quickly, the victim never knew what hit him/her, thus feeling no pain. Call me naïve but this is what I always believed. Ok, it’s what I always wanted to believe because there was nothing to convince me otherwise.

It now makes me wonder if Rachel was awake and aware when the AHMF entered their bedroom with the gun. Did she knew she was about to die? Did she try to convince him to put the gun down? Did she squeeze Lillian tightly to her chest and beg for him to stop? I convinced myself from the beginning that Rachel was asleep, never saw it coming and never knew she was married to an evil diabolical murdering .

After reading these transcripts, I now know better. I’ve never read Rachel’s or Lillian’s autopsy reports. And I never will.

For CMja to see that what she was doing was causing unbearable agony and torture but continued because it only fueled her rage and satisfaction makes us all dizzy.

The realization that she didn’t care about the people who would find his battered, mutilated and broken body exposed in a freaking shower stall sucks the air out of any room I’m in and makes my head swim. And CMja thinking somehow that her dumb a$$ tracings and recycling and offensive t-shirts and willingness to teach people to read in any way helps outweigh the carnage she callously left behind in that Mesa bathroom is proof positive she has no value to offer civilized society.
So thanks so much Jodi Ann Arias for removing the last shred of a shield called “HOPE” that our friends, family members, loved ones never suffered.

I’ll be ok with LWOP but … issuing a death warrant … walking her to the death chamber … that is what she deserves. My feelings based only on my own experiences.

BBM
InALand,
I totally agree. The divots really made me stop and consider the amount of rage and power she used in trying to kill him. Very disturbing to think of the amount of force that took.

And we think 100% alike in the fact that she left him in that shower. She KNEW it would be a roommate and/or friend that would find him. How could she be so callous as to just leave him there AND to know that it would be someone who cared about him that found him? Ugh.

I don't know who Rachel and Lillian are, but obviously someone you care about very much. Words cannot take away your pain, but I am so sorry for your loss and pain. *hugs*

 

[SusieD]

One email does NOT constitute "abuse".

Well it possibly did for some. If they thought it was abuse, then by definition, it was. Because they had a vote. Not you, them.


Their eyes didn't need to be opened and they didn't need to be convinced only your opinion was right.

They made a decision different from the one you think you would have made. Implying they didn't pay attention or need their "eyes opened" is offensive IMO.

However I do agree that plenty of eyes need to be opened to the fact that the justice system isn't their personal entertainment and something they control. Jurors have control. Their opinions on the death penalty being warranted in this case are unassailable. Period.

There's someone here who finds those emails abusive and while I don't necessarily agree, and told her why, I sure see how she got there. And I certainly wouldn't try to show some sort of superiority by putting down her opinion on abuse.


ETA: after a subsequent post from someone who found the emails abusive, I don't know if my last statement is correct anymore. I may have done just that.

 

[TexMex]

BBM

You just got me thinkng...do you think Travis threated to tell RYAN BURNS about her stalking ways???? Didn't Travis and Ryan know each other? And didn't Travis know she was talking to Ryan B?

I know many on here think Ryan B was just an alibi, but I have had this nagging feeling that JA thought he was the (next) ONE. Something about the way she talked about him in the interrogation tapes -- example, she said she had researched Salt Lake City, and it seemed lke a wonderful place with many museums, many hiking trails, etc.. Sounded to me like she was planning to move there!! And in the text messages with him, she seemed VERY interested in him and willing to please him. I think she had put all her hopes into Ryan B. by the time of that May 26th text message. Perhaps Travis was threatening to do something that JA knew would derail this future relationship with RYan????


I honestly think this is the reason for her attack on Travis. Not only had he dashed her dreams of a life with him, but he was also threatening to damage her NEW HOPE and new dream of life with Ryan. I saw a pic of him from before, he was really handsome.

IMO, there was more to the attack then just that she couldn't have him, so no one could. By that point, she had TOTALLY de-valued him. She hated him thoroughly as she made her road trip down from Yrecka. It wouldn't matter to her if someone else had him, b/c she viewed him as disposable by that point. I really, really don't think that was the reason for her killing.

Her saying "i had to move on" in his interrogation tapes - that was her saying Travis wouldn'd LET me move on with Ryan. She felt his would threaten any future relationships she had. That's why she hated him so much.

I agree with this. Maybe with Ryan or with some other PPL/Morman man. She knew Travis was moving on..said so to Flores...thought it was with Marriage Material Mimi. She knows she must move on as well and she's pissed. She turns 28 in July...she's wasted a year and a half with Travis...they had been 'official'! He took her traveling, met his grandmother but then refused to commit. She went back to California, small town Yreka, tiny room in grandparents modest home. Part time waitress, car being repossessed and owner of a trashed BMW. She hated this. It was unfair to someone, Einstein like as Jodi, to live like this at age 28. She wanted a man to give her a better life, kids etc. but not much time. She figured her next target should be another guy like Travis, as in Morman and PPL where she knew of success stories for late 20 something men. Ryan fit that description. But Travis had threatened to expose her. She got it in her head that for Jodi to move on, Travis had to die. It was justified to her because it was his fault for rejecting her then for daring to threaten to expose her scam as a pretend Morman.

 

[Wishbone]

According to Sky Hughes Travis was very concerned that Jodi had threatened suicide and Travis was fearful she would do something to hurt herself. Knowing that it's just not too hard to believe that he treated her with kid gloves while she was there on the 4th and cooperated by doing whatever she wanted while she was there. I do believe he thought she was gone when he got into that shower and this is why the front door was locked.

What the hughes have to say is just, IMO, hearsay. They are not my favorite people and it wasn't part of the evidence so what they have to say carries no weight in my eyes.

 

[aa9511]

Just watched re-play on HLN of the non-verdict - IMO CMJA is NOT RELIEVED at the decision - IMO she can't believe some jurors wanted to give her death!! You can see her look imploringly at the jurors, then she turns her head and you can see HER JAW CLENCH = ANGER. We have all seen that jaw clench from her before. She is angry and she was trying to figure out WHICH jurors voted death based on their faces/reactions.

 

[MidwestMama]

Morning all. I'm really hoping this is fake, but if not..I'm grossed out beyond belief. If real, this is some of KMJA's artwork...a sketch of Jon Benet Ramsey...dead with a rope around her neck. Really?

https://twitter.com/cammi113/status/336927528772050945/

UGH! Whoever drew that, JA or not, is a real piece of carp. Sickening.

 

[kaRN]

Thanks, kaRN. It's nice to have an expert onboard!

There was an incident when I was young. I believe a neighborhood kid got bitten by a squirrel, and it was running around like a maniac. One of the neighborhood dads got a board and hit it, right there in front of all us kids, so he could take it to be checked for rabies.

I believe the child got shots, just in case. As a child, I didn't follow up, and don't know if the squirrel actually had rabies. You certainly couldn't tell from their behavior, as squirrels always act crazy (when they're not just standing there being cute)!

Poor kid- those shots are awful! Poor squirrel!!!! :facepalm:
You can't really blame the Dad though. A wild animal bite is scary and the first thing your mind wanders to is the worst case scenario. Weird thing is a cat bite even from an immunized one, is far worse than a bite from a small wild mammal and a human bite will always require antibiotics and more.
It's hard to think of what would constitute a squirrel acting strangely LOL!! My thought is it would be a squirrel who looks sick and lethargic or one doing crazy squirrel things after dark when it should be home safe from hawks, owls or other nightime predators. :seeya:

 

[Anbud]

Decode the hidden messages in these, please. What are they? Anagram puzzles?

pure *advertiser censored*

three-hole wonder

If he knew what I know about you he'd spit in ur face. So would everyone else.

You`re a laughing stock

you have *advertiser censored*`s job

Who freaking cares about you? You`re worthless

rotten lunatic

corrupted carcass

And, with all due respect, many people appear to be launching a defense of blatant verbal abuse, apologizing for it, and attempting to re-define it, simply because they despise the target. Easy to do when the target is an incarcerated convict, but these are not sound arguments.

I understand what you saying. but this was not a everyday,week,month thing. they were not married or dating . this happened after she moved back home and Travis Alexander and her was done with each other. whatever happen on the day he wrote this ,she must have said something real deep to the core to him,for him to also say she hurt him so bad it was a worst pain then when his father died. so far Travis Alexander was kind to her he had to put up her stalking and he never reported her cause he was gaving her a chance to move on. but she kept coming back again and again. he was fed up and tired of her nonesense and called it a day with her. he might have tried everything in a cool manner to get rid of her ,but she took it for love. in the end he had enough of protecting her(he could have thrown her in jail for all I know) so he told her his feelings for her and it was hate. did she leave him alone ? nope, she came and slaughtered him.

 

[my_tee_mouse]

Certainly don't go all soft hearted, but maybe a little bit more rational and logical about things. Not quick to react but think things through.

Oh and btw what is older? Older than what???? jmo

Older than dirt.

 

[ladonna]

http://www.azcourts.gov/Portals/21/A...M_05292013.pdf

Arizona Supreme Court [ Id: 3885 ]
Agenda
Motions
Wednesday, May 29, 2013

CV-13-0049-PR JODI ARIAS v HON. STEPHENS/STATE ex rel MONTGOMERY
(F) Court of Appeals Division One 1 CA-SA 13-0026
22-Feb-2013 Petition for Review (Petitioner Arias)

 

[molly333]

Found guilty of 1st degree Murder. Received 20 years for "sudden passion". Parole denied.
http://www.chron.com/news/houston-t...ed-for-Friendswood-s-Clara-Harris-4430944.php

Thanks. It wasn't murder one. It was some kind of 'sudden passion' murder charge, they're calling it manslaughter here, with a maximum of 20 years. But, it sounds very similar to the overkill in this case. That's assuming you do not believe premed was proven, which I don't. IMO


The Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles made the decision Thursday, citing the nature of the offense as the reason.

"The record indicates that the inmate committed one or more violent criminal acts indicating a conscious disregard for the lives, safety or property of others; or the instant offense of pattern of criminal activity has elements of brutality, violence or conscious selection of victim's vulnerability such that the inmate poses a continuing threat to public safety; or the records indicates use of a weapon," according to a release from the parole board.

"That sounds like boilerplate language," Detoto said.

She acknowledged the odds were stacked against Harris being paroled on her first attempt.

"But, we always remained hopeful," Detoto said.

Harris has served half of her 20-year sentence for the July 24, 2002, manslaughter of 44-year-old David Harris

 

[Night-owl]

that was a mistake, no doubt. BUT she moved back to CA. i think he thought he WAS rid of her, and didn't see the harm in talking to her---including a little phone sex. he cancelled plans to go see her----twice. who knows if he would have made any effort to see her again?

Yes, he was not savvy at all about people. And he wasn't ready to totally call it quits for whatever reasons. But people like Jodi are harder to get rid of than a case of the crabs. A more experienced person would have recognized that. And one that was less worried about being "a nice guy" would have taken the actions needed.

 

[Tenaciousdae]

Sorry don't mean to go all squirrelly in this thread again. :floorlaugh: I do believe that there has never been any evidence of squirrels having rabies. They can be pretty aggressive when protecting babies or their stashes of food. I like to give my girl a hazelnut & laugh at her when she growls at me & chases me all over the room.

:seeya: You know what else I have never seen any evidence of... squirrel poop... sure there's goose poop, and bird poop, occasionally my dog's:blushing:, and horse poop everywhere. Nobody complains about stepping in squirrel poop, just my thought for the day...

 

[SusieD]

I was not taking issue with angry reactions, calling people out on their BS, using swear words (verbal abuse, by the way, does not require obscenities, and obscenities are not, by default, abusive) or telling someone they are the worst thing ever to happen to them, or telling them to go to hell and how to get there. That's a different animal.

Concerning context, I've already made a post earlier about why the context argument doesn't convince me in this case, and I'm not going to re-write it.

And, of course abuse can be provoked--when you're provoking someone who has an abusive orientation.[/QUOTE]

bbm

Have to flat out disagree with that statement. Wrong. I bet I could provoke you to physical violence, much less verbal. Would you say you are abuse-orientated? If not I'll pick someone else. ANYONE can provoke ANYONE under the right circumstances. I've never "abused" anyone. But hurt my dog, my kid, my friends and you'll get your share of "abuse" if that's what you want to call defense.

That's just wrong, mean and demeaning on so many levels. It's also unrealistic and represents, to me, a very juvenile attitude.

I tried for you, but you lost me forever with that statement.

ETA: I've got some emails from after I caught my then BF with another man. They probably make TA look like a saint. I guess in your book, I'm abusive. You're soooooooo wrong