Trial Sidebar audio, transcripts released! *Discuss here*

[Linda7NJ]

ITA, but I fear that by comparing the convicted lying torture murderess to them, you just insulted mad dogs.

Totally agree, I like dogs

 

[AngelWings444]

Guess we won't be seeing anymore transcripts. So, Kiefer picks and chooses a couple that are against the prosecutor and the victim, then they are all sealed up again. Why did they ever unseal them in the first place, it's not like they didn't know the sentencing phase was a mistrial.

The Court finds dissemination of transcripts and recordings of bench conferences and in chambers hearings could potentially affect a future jury pool, therefore,
IT IS ORDERED (re)sealing all bench conferences and in chambers hearings until further order of the Court.

http://www.courtminutes.maricopa.gov/docs/Criminal/062013/m5812262.pdf

 

[Liebchenmutti]

Guess we won't be seeing anymore transcripts. So, Kiefer picks and chooses a couple that are against the prosecutor and the victim, then they are all sealed up again. Why did they ever unseal them in the first place, it's not like they didn't know the sentencing phase was a mistrial.

The Court finds dissemination of transcripts and recordings of bench conferences and in chambers hearings could potentially affect a future jury pool, therefore,
IT IS ORDERED (re)sealing all bench conferences and in chambers hearings until further order of the Court.

http://www.courtminutes.maricopa.gov/docs/Criminal/062013/m5812262.pdf

I'm so grateful to Michael Kiefer for discerning what sidebar conferences we should be allowed to read. :stormingmad:

His hatred for Juan Martinez is becoming comical.

 

[elementary]

Guess we won't be seeing anymore transcripts. So, Kiefer picks and chooses a couple that are against the prosecutor and the victim, then they are all sealed up again. Why did they ever unseal them in the first place, it's not like they didn't know the sentencing phase was a mistrial.

The Court finds dissemination of transcripts and recordings of bench conferences and in chambers hearings could potentially affect a future jury pool, therefore,
IT IS ORDERED (re)sealing all bench conferences and in chambers hearings until further order of the Court.

http://www.courtminutes.maricopa.gov/docs/Criminal/062013/m5812262.pdf

I am convinced that the DT lobbied for this so we wouldn't see what went down with the liar, LaViolette. I think they want her back weaving her magic BS for the mitigation phase now that she was able to convince more than one juror of the abuse claim. And she can throw in more sympathy for the devil with the BPD as "mental illness'.

 

[popsicle]

I feel like the defense should have to get a continuance on their other cases in order to finish this case.

 

[elementary]

I feel like the defense should have to get a continuance on their other cases in order to finish this case.

One would assume that it would take precedence since it is 'unfinished'. And has been going on for over 5 years.

I loathe the DT.

They are lying blaggards and they continue in kind.

 

[bobloblaw]

So Zervakos has to break her out of prison to have personal feelings for her?

Since when?

Doc 'Scamuels' certainly didn't...

So are you saying the murderers non stop sexual references etc during trial had an effect on the two female jurors that voted agianst the DP? Or was it just the men that are so dumb they can't have any common sense or objectiveness while doing their civic duty during the 6 months they had to sit there?

 

[AuburnSchnauzer]

http://www.kpho.com/story/22595974/...al-reseals-bench-conferences-chamber-hearings

Snip:

"The motion and order filed on Thursday morning stated the court found that allowing the release of transcripts and recordings of bench conferences and in-chambers hearings could "potentially affect a future jury pool."

 

[scubagrannie]

Devout catholics are opposed to the death penalty. I'm not going to debate religion. They were all death qualified, but it makes me wonder. Agree with everything you said about the killer. :seeya:

IMO, your first sentence is purely speculation and a generalization. While you may not want to debate religion, you indeed threw it into the discussion. As I am quite familiwr with catholocism, mormonism and a scant few other religious systems, it brings me to ask where in the doctrines of Catholicism you find the basis for your statement, "devout catholics are opposed to the death penalty." I don't recall Vatican II addressing the issue, nor any papal writings.. Not trying to debate religious tenets with you, but I certainly and honestly would like to know where you found this. Feel free to PM me with the source, as I agree with you that religion should not be a topic of discussion unless it applies to the evidence in this case.

 

[Niner]

http://www.kpho.com/story/22595974/...al-reseals-bench-conferences-chamber-hearings

Snip:

"The motion and order filed on Thursday morning stated the court found that allowing the release of transcripts and recordings of bench conferences and in-chambers hearings could "potentially affect a future jury pool."

Darn... guess we will have to wait until maybe August - end of July? New DP trial to start July 18th... :fence:

 

[ncgramma]

IMO, your first sentence is purely speculation and a generalization. While you may not want to debate religion, you indeed threw it into the discussion. As I am quite familiwr with catholocism, mormonism and a scant few other religious systems, it brings me to ask where in the doctrines of Catholicism you find the basis for your statement, "devout catholics are opposed to the death penalty." I don't recall Vatican II addressing the issue, nor any papal writings.. Not trying to debate religious tenets with you, but I certainly and honestly would like to know where you found this. Feel free to PM me with the source, as I agree with you that religion should not be a topic of discussion unless it applies to the evidence in this case.

http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/para/2267.htm

 

[Tulessa]

IMO, your first sentence is purely speculation and a generalization. While you may not want to debate religion, you indeed threw it into the discussion. As I am quite familiwr with catholocism, mormonism and a scant few other religious systems, it brings me to ask where in the doctrines of Catholicism you find the basis for your statement, "devout catholics are opposed to the death penalty." I don't recall Vatican II addressing the issue, nor any papal writings.. Not trying to debate religious tenets with you, but I certainly and honestly would like to know where you found this. Feel free to PM me with the source, as I agree with you that religion should not be a topic of discussion unless it applies to the evidence in this case.

My SIL, before marrying my brother, was working towards being a Nun. She was very committed, but fell in love with my wonderful brother. She lives in Blythe and was appalled, when Charles Manson's DP was commuted to LWOP. She FIRMLY believes in the DP, and the way our justice system works.

ETA. I agree that it's speculation, and she is still a devout Catholic.

 

[Truth Detector]

So are you saying the murderers non stop sexual references etc during trial had an effect on the two female jurors that voted agianst the DP? Or was it just the men that are so dumb they can't have any common sense or objectiveness while doing their civic duty during the 6 months they had to sit there?

I wouldn't know.

I'm not the one with personal feelings for the convicted lying torture murderess.

 

[bobloblaw]

I wouldn't know.

I'm not the one with personal feelings for the convicted lying torture murderess.

Do you think the women that voted against the DP had a sexual attraction to JA?
My point is that generalised statements that men are so dumb, any sort of sex talk will sway them away from rational thought or debate on especially critical decisions like DP seems silly, especially while we had two women make the same decision...

 

[MeeBee]

I thought it was 3 men 1 woman?

 

[screecher]

Do you think the women that voted against the DP had a sexual attraction to JA?
My point is that generalised statements that men are so dumb, any sort of sex talk will sway them away from rational thought or debate on especially critical decisions like DP seems silly, especially while we had two women make the same decision...

BBM


critical being the operative word. One would think, given the decision that was to be decided, the practice of critical thinking is imperative. I believe the four did not exercise critical thinking. Perhaps they lack the skills it takes to exercise critical thinking? I don't know.


Critical thinking negates biased, distorted, partial, uninformed or down-right prejudiced thinking. Shoddy thinking is costly.


IMO, had the four possessed and exercised a high level of critical thinking skills, there would have been a different outcome during the penalty phase.

I strongly believe, a mechanism should be in place to screen all potential jurors as to their level of critical thinking skills. It would insure a just and true verdict in 99.9% in all cases.

MOO.

 

[MistyM]

Lol...yes, MeeBee I know what you mean. I think more of her physicality, it's the mental part that he's maybe attracted to. Like they could sit up all night talking about the case and legal terms, etc.. Speaking all legal dirty talk. hahahahha. And I do think she's attractive in her own way, and she sure likes to, ahem, enhance her body with the figure-hugging suits. Which Juan had to basically stare at her backside for the extremely loooonnnngggg time she was up there. :facepalm:

But I know what you mean.

starting to sound like martinez/wilmott fan fiction haha.

 

[Linda7NJ]

Lol...yes, MeeBee I know what you mean. I think more of her physicality, it's the mental part that he's maybe attracted to. Like they could sit up all night talking about the case and legal terms, etc.. Speaking all legal dirty talk. hahahahha. And I do think she's attractive in her own way, and she sure likes to, ahem, enhance her body with the figure-hugging suits. Which Juan had to basically stare at her backside for the extremely loooonnnngggg time she was up there. :facepalm:

But I know what you mean.

She reminded me of Sweet Polly Purebred with Minnie Mouse's voice.

 

[Truth Detector]

Do you think the women that voted against the DP had a sexual attraction to JA?
My point is that generalised statements that men are so dumb, any sort of sex talk will sway them away from rational thought or debate on especially critical decisions like DP seems silly, especially while we had two women make the same decision...

It obviously doesn't seem silly to those four jurors who manufactured mitigating factors to offset what they had already unanimously determined was an especially cruel first degree murder.

At least bumbling Doc Samuels and perjuring ALV made a boatload of money off their personal feelings, gifts, apologies, etc...

 

[ncgramma]

Just my thoughts. When someone is asked during voi dire if they'd be able to give the death penalty, it's an objective statement. When one gets all the way through a trial, it becomes both an objective decision and an emotional decision. Even Juror #9 said she had to wrestle with it in the end. She was able to put the emotional considerations aside. Four of the jurors weren't. Perhaps attorneys need to consider asking that death penalty question differently.

And, yes, I would have given her the death penalty. ....at least as I sat in my nice comfy chair, typing anonymously on my computer. Who can say how I would have felt if I was sitting in that courtroom, looking at both innocent families, knowing I was ACTUALLY sentancing someone to be executed. I hope I'd have the same courage to vote for death.