The State v. Jodi Arias: break in trial until 28 January 2013 #13 *ADULT CONTENT*

[shelley921]

As eager as we all are for a guilty verdict, I am hopeful that the jury does NOT rush back in with ANY verdict. I really want each of them to take their job seriously, take their time, ask questions, discuss, and consider. I hope they take a couple days. I don't want one or 2 outspoken "bullies" to sway the whole group. I don't ever want to see a situation like the Pinellas 12 again.

I don't want to see any issues with the jury verdict that could cause jury nullification, or some such thing. I'd like it to be clean and unanimous. And I hope deeply that it will be guilty of premeditation.

If found guilty of any of the charges, for sure she will appeal. That's part of the process.

And for sure she will (if guilty) continue with her "fragile little girl" act in prison. She may even "genuinely" and publicly embrace her Mormonism, in order to try to get a sentence commutation if she is sentenced to death. It didn't work for Karla Faye Tucker, the small, friendly TX pickax murderer. She was put to death while praising the Lord.

As an aside, does Arizona have a penalty phase if she is found guilty? Or does the jury render a verdict and it's up to the judge? How does it work in AZ system? The simultaneous "felony murder" charge is a little different than in some states, if I understand the explanations, versus a straight forward premeditated first degree murder or a second degree murder.

oh yeah I remember Karla Faye Tucker heh-heh....

Is Jodi still a practicing Mormon?

Haven't the Mormons all turned their backs on her since she killed TA?

 

[miss.krissy]

I found this very interesting reading:
http://www.lindacrystal.com/tag/jodi-arias/

 

[zoey]

oh yeah I remember Karla Faye Tucker heh-heh....

Is Jodi still a practicing Mormon?

Haven't the Mormons all turned their backs on her since she killed TA?

considering that pre marital sex was under murder in sins....I don't know...she would have to come forward and confess and we know that won't happen

 

[BD1]

Hold on, I am pretty sure I am correct in saying Travis and Jodi talked for about 45 mins the night before she arrived, so probably as she was driving. Whether she told him she was coming is still a question, but he told his roomate that he had only slept 45 min the night before and she says (I know, I know) that he waited up for her.

 

[Love Never Fails]

Casey Anthony just had two of the charges for lying thrown out. She wins again.
Will justice ever prevail for ANYONE? Says a lot about Florida.

 

[Love Never Fails]

Don't know if I ever saw this on a post. A lot of truck stops not only have restrooms, they have showers. Jodi may have stopped at a truck stop to shower and color her hair. May have worn a cap in to cover the blonde and when she walked out, no one thought it strange that her hair color was different. LE should check out security video of the truck stops on the route she took.

 

[lil_buddy]

I have seen nothing to prove TA was seeing Jodi after they broke up and certainly nothing that shows he was still taking trips with her. Anyone have a link?? I know they traveled together while they dated but it's unclear as to whether they were within a group or alone. Even while dating she was in CA and he was in AZ. Once they broke up it was Jodi that moved to Mesa. Now why would she do that? There was truly nothing there for her and she continued to insert herself into his life.

I also have not seen anyone painting him as a saint, only a very religious man but he still was a normal male with the same reactions to a beautiful woman as any male would. Normal single men seem to have a very low resistence when a woman sexually pushes herself on them. To me Travis seemed like a typical normal male and while his religious leaders may find fault with any sexual contact he had with Jodi outside his faith most of us cannot.

Who Travis was is not important in this case other than the fact was he an abusive person or not? It appears from all his friends who thought highly of him that he was not. He was their friend and they are only expressing what their experiences were with him and what they felt he was capable of. Their intent was not to put him on a pedestal, they were just being truthful. While it appears that is what they were doing to us it may be just the way he really was.

Jodi kept going to him. Moved from CA right into his neighbor near him. She kept in contact with him. He clearly wanted no part of seeing her again. But I do think he loved her when they first met and wanted to marry her and maybe not after 2 hours, as in the other story of a married member of the church who spent 2 hours in the car with her and wanted to leave his wife. The more he got to know her the more he realized she was not what he originally thought she was, the kind, caring person she tries to project to others.

The focus is on Jodi. There is no proof Travis was abusive. If the doctor claims Jodi suffers from an abusive relationship who is to say it was not a prior relationship. She did not live with Travis, she lived in California while they dated. In Mesa she lived with a friend, who may have been responsible for Jodi moving back to CA and not TA as most of us believe. So how she can claim he was abusive when she was rarely with him lacks credibility. jmo

IIRC, the defense said in opening statements that there are texts/emails/phone calls of a sexual nature initiated by TA even after JA moved back to Yreka, so presumably this evidence will be presented when the trial starts up again.

I don't think anyone can justify JA's behavior because she's evil/nuts, but that is what defense will try to do.

I'm one of the not-a-TA-fan people; he strikes me as kind of a bit jerky.
I will say this again: a bit jerky does not equal abusive and does not equal deserves to die (a phrase I would NEVER use for anyone).
I agree that this is not pertinent to the case at hand. I do not see how the defense will ever PROVE that TA abused JA, it does not appear there is such evidence.

Those two used and manipulated each other; that's what it seems like to me.

MOO

 

[Love Never Fails]

Thanks to all who answered me about defense witness list. You all are the best!

 

[LambChop]

IIRC, the defense said in opening statements that there are texts/emails/phone calls of a sexual nature initiated by TA even after JA moved back to Yreka, so presumably this evidence will be presented when the trial starts up again.

I don't think anyone can justify JA's behavior because she's evil/nuts, but that is what defense will try to do.

I'm one of the not-a-TA-fan people; he strikes me as kind of a bit jerky.
I will say this again: a bit jerky does not equal abusive and does not equal deserves to die (a phrase I would NEVER use for anyone).
I agree that this is not pertinent to the case at hand. I do not see how the defense will ever PROVE that TA abused JA, it does not appear there is such evidence.

Those two used and manipulated each other; that's what it seems like to me.

MOO

I think the texts are being questioned as to whether they actual came from him because she hacked into all his accounts. Should be an interesting week next week.

I also think whether you like him or not it has nothing to do with the discussion of what is happening in the trial. Since it's a victim friendly forum some find it distracting when we go off topic. None of us knew him personally and can only form personal opinions based on what little information we may have. Some people may like him because he reminds them of someone and another person may feel differently for the same reason. But it has nothing to do with the case and why he was killed. jmo

 

[Love Never Fails]

As eager as we all are for a guilty verdict, I am hopeful that the jury does NOT rush back in with ANY verdict. I really want each of them to take their job seriously, take their time, ask questions, discuss, and consider. I hope they take a couple days. I don't want one or 2 outspoken "bullies" to sway the whole group. I don't ever want to see a situation like the Pinellas 12 again.

I don't want to see any issues with the jury verdict that could cause jury nullification, or some such thing. I'd like it to be clean and unanimous. And I hope deeply that it will be guilty of premeditation.

If found guilty of any of the charges, for sure she will appeal. That's part of the process.

And for sure she will (if guilty) continue with her "fragile little girl" act in prison. She may even "genuinely" and publicly embrace her Mormonism, in order to try to get a sentence commutation if she is sentenced to death. It didn't work for Karla Faye Tucker, the small, friendly TX pickax murderer. She was put to death while praising the Lord.

As an aside, does Arizona have a penalty phase if she is found guilty? Or does the jury render a verdict and it's up to the judge? How does it work in AZ system? The simultaneous "felony murder" charge is a little different than in some states, if I understand the explanations, versus a straight forward premeditated first degree murder or a second degree murder.

The jury has seen and heard LOTS of evidence and had a week off to think about it all. The defense case can't be long so no one could say they didn't deliberate and come to the rational, sane conclusion of guilty. Why do ou think there would be a couple of bullies? The Pinellas 12 had all twelve village idiots wanting to go home. I do not believe in sequestering juries. Get it all out there and let the truth be known.

 

[lil_buddy]

yes, I watched it with my (soon to be) 15 year old son last night all the while holding onto him and telling him "PLEASE lease: stay away from the crazies". He and I were both crying by the end. UGH! Such a terrible story, but definatley a cautionary tale.

I am going to be a bit facetious here, so cut me some slack...
If you have ever seen what one of these Cluster B's do in a marriage with children, in a divorce, how they torture their own children to get attention and/or hurt the spouse you might say Travis got off light.

 

[Chanler]

IIRC, the defense said in opening statements that there are texts/emails/phone calls of a sexual nature initiated by TA even after JA moved back to Yreka, so presumably this evidence will be presented when the trial starts up again.

I don't think anyone can justify JA's behavior because she's evil/nuts, but that is what defense will try to do.

I'm one of the not-a-TA-fan people; he strikes me as kind of a bit jerky.
I will say this again: a bit jerky does not equal abusive and does not equal deserves to die (a phrase I would NEVER use for anyone).
I agree that this is not pertinent to the case at hand. I do not see how the defense will ever PROVE that TA abused JA, it does not appear there is such evidence.

Those two used and manipulated each other; that's what it seems like to me.

MOO

Hi, Lil Buddy. I think that like other professionally charismatic people, Travis could be somewhat self-absorbed.

I'm not convinced that given Jodi's history and access to Travis' accounts, any of the supposed overtures from him are genuine. I also think that relationship crises and breakups are more complicated, messy, and imprecise than outsiders imagine them. A friend of our's has repeatedly visited her ex-boyfriend in the Midwest years after their relationship exploded catastrophically. Even she cannot quite explain where it now stands.

Also, Travis had good professional reasons to maintain superficially good relations with Jodi. Her association with other Pre-Paid Legal people and her maliciousness made her a potential dangerous enemy. I wouldn't be surprised if his anxieties raised when she began taking pictures of his naked body.

 

[KMouse]

Don't know if I ever saw this on a post. A lot of truck stops not only have restrooms, they have showers. Jodi may have stopped at a truck stop to shower and color her hair. May have worn a cap in to cover the blonde and when she walked out, no one thought it strange that her hair color was different. LE should check out security video of the truck stops on the route she took.

Unfortunately security videos would be long gone and overwritten.

 

[human]

About "rape culture" and victim blaming--

Of course rape victims weren't "asking for it" and didn't deserve it; and of course Travis didn't deserve to be killed. HOWEVER, every person must take some responsibility in maintaining their own personal safety and security, for using reasonable caution and judgment, and evaluating the riskiness of their own choices and behavior.

If a girl dresses very provocatively and behaves in a very sexual manner around a bunch of drunk makes in high crime areas ...that's very risky behavior; it's consciously putting yourself in a dangerous situation. If the girl gets assaulted, it's not her "fault" and she didn't deserve it -- rape and assault are crimes and the responsibility lies with the one who commits the offenses -- but the girl increased her chances of being a victim by engaging in high risk behavior. If the girl thought nothing bad would happen to her, she did not realistically evaluate the risk.

Somewhat similarly, Travis engaged in risky behavior by continuing a volatile relationship with a clearly unstable young lady. It's not his fault she murdered him and he didn't deserve it. He thought he was safe and that he could keep engaging with Jodi as he did without being harmed, but he did not realistically evaluate the riskiness of the situation he placed himself in.

Bottom line -- criminals are criminals and they are the only ones accountable for their criminal acts. But everyone has a responsibility to themselves to use good judgment and not engage in risky behavior that increases the chances of becoming a victim of a violent crime.

Being a nurse puts you at high risk for being raped because of shifts and parking ramps. A nurse puts herself in a risky situation.

For my job, I went to the homes of criminals. Many DV abusers. Some rapists. I was in neighborhoods that were not desirable. I did not dress provocatively, but 80 year old women get raped as well.

This is the whole underlying rape culture that permeates the world. The woman is there for the taking because.......... Any number of reasons

 

[shelley921]

IIRC, the defense said in opening statements that there are texts/emails/phone calls of a sexual nature initiated by TA even after JA moved back to Yreka, so presumably this evidence will be presented when the trial starts up again.

I don't think anyone can justify JA's behavior because she's evil/nuts, but that is what defense will try to do.

I'm one of the not-a-TA-fan people; he strikes me as kind of a bit jerky.
I will say this again: a bit jerky does not equal abusive and does not equal deserves to die (a phrase I would NEVER use for anyone).
I agree that this is not pertinent to the case at hand. I do not see how the defense will ever PROVE that TA abused JA, it does not appear there is such evidence.

Those two used and manipulated each other; that's what it seems like to me.

MOO

If I was young and single TA would not have been appealing to me for many reasons. heh-heh there was something of a jerk factor about him for sure from my perspective too. Yes they both used each other and manipulated but JA did it to the EXTREME and kept at it after he was done.

 

[txbluesman]

Hi, Lil Buddy. I think that like other professionally charismatic people, Travis could be somewhat self-absorbed.

I'm not convinced that given Jodi's history and access to Travis' accounts, any of the supposed overtures from him are genuine. I also think that relationship crises and breakups are more complicated, messy, and imprecise than outsiders imagine them. A friend of our's has repeatedly visited her ex-boyfriend in the Midwest years after their relationship exploded catastrophically. Even she cannot quite explain where it now stands.

Also, Travis had good professional reasons to maintain superficially good relations with Jodi. Her association with other Pre-Paid Legal people and her maliciousness made her a potential dangerous enemy. I wouldn't be surprised if his anxieties raised when she began taking pictures of his naked body.

Excellent point!

 

[human]

Unfortunately security videos would be long gone and overwritten.

My friend has a gas station and he has disks for his security tapes. But he is a top notch businessman as well. He told me he has stacks of disks

 

[LambChop]

I am going to be a bit facetious here, so cut me some slack...
If you have ever seen what one of these Cluster B's do in a marriage with children, in a divorce, how they torture their own children to get attention and/or hurt the spouse you might say Travis got off light.

TA was not legally bound to her, nor did he have children by her. We have no idea what TA was dealing with before his death. We have no idea what she said to him in private about his family, friends, associates, etc. We do know she threatened to kill herself over TA. To end up dead from a relationship is never getting "off light" no matter what your prior circumstances were. jmo

 

[polleypockets]

hello all,
i may have missed this in other comments, last night on nancy grace she mentioned that jodi a. had beat one of her brothers with a baseball bat. if this is true imo this would show past rage behavior. she is not just a little meek soft spoken woman.

NG had an old babysitter of jodi on her show - IIRC jodi was around 7 babysitter was around 14, she said once jodi hit her brother w/ a bat (didn't even specify if it was wood or plastic) now NG has improved on the story that she beat her brother almost to death ....... NG! :banghead:

 

[K_Z]

The jury has seen and heard LOTS of evidence and had a week off to think about it all. The defense case can't be long so no one could say they didn't deliberate and come to the rational, sane conclusion of guilty. Why do ou think there would be a couple of bullies? The Pinellas 12 had all twelve village idiots wanting to go home. I do not believe in sequestering juries. Get it all out there and let the truth be known.

I think there were at least 2 "bullies" on the Pinellas 12 jury-- from the media interviews they gave after the verdict.

I'm on the fence about the value and wisdom of jury sequestration.

The bigger issue with the jury selection process is, IMO, that the more high profile (and longer) the case, the narrower the slice of the population that is available, willing, and able to serve. Very few employed people can afford to be on a trial longer than a few days or a week duration. Employers seldom provide more than a few days wages to employees on jury duty (if they have compensation at all), and the states only pay $10-20/ day. So what we have is a skewed pool of applicants for jury duty before the voir dire ever begins. And that skewed pool, IMO, excludes most employed people (which includes more educated people, professionals, self employed, etc), people with small children, etc. I am not saying the pool we have left is not good, only that the available pool increasingly represents a smaller slice of the population. I don't think that is a good trend. Combine that with attorney preference for "blank slate" jurors (less educated, less life experience), and the trend is compounded.

In the CA trial, there were people who got excused because they had plants to water and house cats to feed.

In any case, I don't want to derail the thread with discussions about jury reforms, but I do think it is one of our biggest needs in both the civil and criminal trial process. We have a good system of justice, but there are many areas, IMO, that need reforms.