SIDEBAR #8- Arias/Alexander forum

[rob]

A couple of things I'm wondering about, how much of this trial will have to be redone? She is already guilty of premediated 1st degree murder, with agravating circumstances ( or whatever the legal terms are). That won't change, just the penalty, Life or death. Surely nothing new can be said, and hopefully not all the wasted breath of the previous 4 months. How does this work?
I'm afraid I can see Nurmi and Jenny trying to do the whole thing over, IF princess Jodi will agree to it. And at this point, what would she have to lose.
They are probably reading everything on the internet and watching tv round the clock.
The may really be the trial of the century, that lasts a century!

 

[writer7]

I have to disagree. Travis was enraged alright, he was livid, but he was doing more than telling it like it is. His response to her was not merely harsh but vitriolic, and the words and expressions he used were designed and intended to objectify, dehumanize and annihilate.

Vitriol like that cannot be taken out of context; its very source is toxic; its voice betrays someone very at home, learned, and practised with the language of hatred and abuse. It has a second-nature quality--it flows. This kind of abuse may need a trigger, but it is not a one-off, born-full-grown kind of thing.

I tend to disagree, too, that he intended, at the moment of his abusive tirade, to get her out of his life once and for all. He was dismissing her as a human being and, at the same time, paradoxically and actively engaging her. Neither of them were just going to walk away.

I do think the email was over the top, but there is another possible motive for using those words that I've done myself. Sometimes foul language is sincerely used to convey the amount of importance or emphasis behind the words. It can be seen as abusive, so I don't recommend the technique, but the motive is true enough.

With my amazingly aggressive and stubborn (when she's in a mood) BPD sister, you can't just say, 'Stop it, please!'. She doesn't even hear those words. Honestly, she doesn't register anything other than a more aggressive demeanor as being even the slightest bit miffed. Any 'please' or similar qualifiers mean she won't even hear your complaint.

Basically, she doesn't begin to pay attention until it's all very blunt and rude. If I have a serious complaint that she needs to listen to when she's angry at all, I have to take a tone with her. It's like she thinks folks don't really mean it unless they are prepared to stand up strongly (and unreasonably) for what they are saying.

Mainly I don't engage with her on any complaints at all anymore, which is what Travis should have done, imho. But I can't fault someone for a very pointed email to a BPD sufferer, after trying other ways of communicating for 80,000 emails. Folks do try the 'very pointed' way of expressing themselves sometimes (at the end of their rope, hopefully), and the motivation doesn't have to be hatred. They might just be trying to get their main point across, which is incredibly difficult with BPD and/or stalkers.

 

[TigerBalm]

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

http://offender.tdcj.state.tx.us/POSdb2/offenderDetail.action?sid=06928382

 

[rose222]

Despite the attempts to trash the victim in order to help the murder someday walk among us, this was the only physical piece of evidence they could find, this and the email exchange with the Hughes. Considering there was over 80,000 text, email and IM messages I would say they really were grasping at straws but it also shows how even the lamest accusation a DT could possibly use to help their client may be believed by someone on the jury

Yes. It breaks my heart that even one juror believed the abuse story. Given a choice I'd prefer 12 pro-life jurors who do not believe the abuse allegations to 12 pro-death jurors who do. Travis was a wonderful man. He was exceedingly kind to JA.

 

[Love Never Fails]

Not me! This was a comment about what a juror disclosed. That the four non DP votes were ALL the oldest impaneled jurors. The comment I replied to was they thought perhaps this is why the defense called older expert witnesses, to appeal to an older jury. Samuels, Alyce and Geffner. I would never say every person over 65 would think one way only but it seems that the four on the jury did for whatever reasons

TexMex, I apologize. I have not heard that the four oldest voted against the DP.
I don't know their reasoning if it is true, but I have to think something else was in play. Maybe there was a camaraderie of sorts during the trial and the other three just followed the lead of the foreman? But if that is so, they weren't using independent thought process.

 

[aa9511]

A couple of things I'm wondering about, how much of this trial will have to be redone? She is already guilty of premediated 1st degree murder, with agravating circumstances ( or whatever the legal terms are). That won't change, just the penalty, Life or death. Surely nothing new can be said, and hopefully not all the wasted breath of the previous 4 months. How does this work?
I'm afraid I can see Nurmi and Jenny trying to do the whole thing over, IF princess Jodi will agree to it. And at this point, what would she have to lose.
They are probably reading everything on the internet and watching tv round the clock.
The may really be the trial of the century, that lasts a century!

You are right, JW and Nurmi will purposefully go slooowwwllly, after all that's how they got this first jury!! I think time played a BIG part in it....just like the TH's say that they formed some sort of bond with CMJA whether they knew it or not.

 

[Paintr]

It's true. A squirrel did propose to me once.

This story I've just got to hear!

Oh, Sleuth, were you saying that a 'nut' proposed to you or an actual squirrel? :floorlaugh:

 

[gauntlet]

hdear:Sad thing at the moment is the jurors who the DT need to hear from have spoken but the ones JM would be helped by haven't.

 

[Linda7NJ]

(I've seen squirrel poop.) :floorlaugh:

Do you have a link or photographic evidence?

Squirrels don't poop! lol


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[JSR]

FYI according to Dr Drew he is airing the stalking special tonight!! Should be fascinating to hear the two doctors dissect Jodi's stalking behaviors with Travis!

 

[JSR]

hdear:Sad thing at the moment is the jurors who the DT need to hear from have spoken but the ones JM would be helped by haven't.

But the ones who have talked are slipping little snippets that ARE very useful for JM.

 

[molly333]

http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/02/14/harris.trial/

Harris gets 20 years for Mercedes murder
Jury chooses upper limit of sentencing guidelines

Let's just disagree.

Yes it was murder but they have a type of murder charge called 'sudden passion' which allows the Jury to just release her or give her a maximum of up to 20 years. This Jury gave her the maximum, 20 years. Manslaughter is murder, it's just different circumstances than murder one.


Jurors found that Harris acted with "sudden passion," which could have reduced the jurors' recommendation to probation. Instead, the jury said Harris should be fined and sentenced to prison at the upper limit of the sentencing guidelines for the special circumstance.

 

[deedee21]

Someone asked what was the difference between Clara Harris who killed her husband after she snapped and jodi. The difference is jodi did not snap. The murder was planned. Jodi was angry Travis would not marry her. Also Travis became aware of something jodi did and was going to expose her. I wonder if it has anything to do with the pictures of Patty and jodi JM spoke about in court. JM did not say what they were doing in the pictures. He only said it was a unreported income. Im sure hes not referring to tips made at a restaurant. IMO this is not really about not reporting an income. Its another way of saying income do to illegal activity. Patty has legal troubles in Ca. If jodi was not in jail in Arizona would jodi be her co- defendant in Ca?

m the restaurant. Nurmi and Wilmer did not want this to come out during the penalty phase. P

 

[KMouse]

I thought I read that Diane Schwartz (Juror 6? I believe) is 64 yo. I just love her! She said "no redeeming values" when asked about JA mitigating factors...

My Mom and I wish Diane had been the jury foreperson.

 

[Love Never Fails]

:tyou:
Thanks for your warm welcome last night! It took me awhile to realize that the whole squirrel thread began because of my username! :floorlaugh:

Here's my abbreviated squirrel story (then I'll stop, I promise):
So I buy this funny sticker and slap it on my car. It reads "I have animal magnetism. When I walk outside, squirrels stick to my clothes." THEN, it started HAPPENING! (Well, CLOSE! Maybe it's like JAs "law of attraction"!! :floorlaugh
Ever since, I always seem to be at the right place, right time. I've rescued and released several and its very rewarding. Everyone who knows me, knows the squirrel thing. It gives me comfort and laughter to know that after I die, my kids, family and friends will all burst out laughing when they see a squirrel.

I'm still a WS rookie and don't yet know how to respond to anyone (pull quotes, etc.) so I'm thanking you here. I loved all the funny & cute squirrel responses etc.
Now I'm off to read WS how to forums to figure out what I'm doing!
:seeya:
P.S. If I've posted this twice...ooops!!

What a great story. Made me smile!

 

[katydid23]

hdear:Sad thing at the moment is the jurors who the DT need to hear from have spoken but the ones JM would be helped by haven't.

True.

But from what the others have said it seems the holdouts believed that Jodi was verbally abused by TRavis. So if Nurmi tries to play that heavily edited tape again, where he ONLY plays Travis's words, then JM should put together another version. He should play the words said by Jodi, that Nurmi left out. JMO

 

[Prime Mover]

But we are looking at it from the viewpoint of we feel that Travis was completely innocent. Personally, Mr. Foreman didn't sound to me like he had REAL sympathy for Travi's family....seemed to be he said it in a disingenuous way just like CMJA does. He talked about CMJA with more sympathetic overtones than he did Travis or his family.

I'm coming it at it from someone like Mr. Foreman's viewpoint.

I see what you're saying but I don't think it would have mattered who gave the VIS's when speaking of the Jury Foreman. I think we can safely assume Juan, and the DT for that matter, are paying very close attention to what these jurors are now saying and will definitely adapt their strategies when this Penalty Phase resumes starting with picking the new jury. However, I do not think that TA's familys VIS's will factor into said strategy at all. Just MO.

 

[gngr~snap]

A couple of things I'm wondering about, how much of this trial will have to be redone? She is already guilty of premediated 1st degree murder, with agravating circumstances ( or whatever the legal terms are). That won't change, just the penalty, Life or death. Surely nothing new can be said, and hopefully not all the wasted breath of the previous 4 months. How does this work?
I'm afraid I can see Nurmi and Jenny trying to do the whole thing over, IF princess Jodi will agree to it. And at this point, what would she have to lose.
They are probably reading everything on the internet and watching tv round the clock.
The may really be the trial of the century, that lasts a century!

I was thinking that too.
I wish that all the new jury could see is tapes of the parts of the trial they need to hear.
No new stuff at all, so that they vote on what the first jury heard.

Too bad the defense gets to fine tune everything for a new jury.

It doesn't seem right.
If JA has been running the show and continues to do so, I still have hope that she will be given the DP.

I LIKE THAT SHE IS IN HER CELL ALONE 23 HOURS A DAY.

I know it is tough on the family but
if it were me.... I'd be happy with any delays at this point... Let JA sit there and stew!
Let JM have a JA break and come at her full speed ahead in time.

I'm still praying for the Alexander's, I hope this turns out the way they want and JA does get death.
Moo
Sent from my SGH-T679 using Tapatalk 2

 

[TexMex]

TexMex, I apologize. I have not heard that the four oldest voted against the DP.
I don't know their reasoning if it is true, but I have to think something else was in play. Maybe there was a camaraderie of sorts during the trial and the other three just followed the lead of the foreman? But if that is so, they weren't using independent thought process.

No problem CII. I don't know their reasoning. The juror 6 looks to be 55-60 and she did vote DP...I think the jurors who have spoken believed the non DP jurors felt Jodi had suffered verbal/emotional abuse and also her age and no prior convictions were mitigators

 

[SusieD]

Not me! This was a comment about what a juror disclosed. That the four non DP votes were ALL the oldest impaneled jurors. The comment I replied to was they thought perhaps this is why the defense called older expert witnesses, to appeal to an older jury. Samuels, Alyce and Geffner. I would never say every person over 65 would think one way only but it seems that the four on the jury did for whatever reasons

I am really proud of the jury for standing up for their friends and following through with the agrreement not to discuss who voted for life and their exact reasons.

bbm

Those posts were right next to each other. I don't know who's right but either "they were the oldest jurors who voted life " is a rumor with incredible legs or the jurors didn't stand up for their "friends" at all.