Originally Posted by
cityslick 
At some point yesterday after the verdict I had to get off the forum. I understand the disappointment, anger and especially sorrow for the Alexanders. But there were a number of posts that were more than that, attacks/namecalling/hate on the jurors. I'm disappointed in that, because I thought this forum was better than that. There are some that are truly treating this like she was aquitted and I'm sorry but I don't understand that frame of mind. The woman was convicted of murder one. The cruelty aspect of it pretty much insures (IMO) that she wouldn't get parole. But reading on here yesterday, I saw comparisons to Casey Anthony. Let me say, Anthony is sipping lattes' right now in the comfort of whatever home she's in. Tell me how that compares to Arias, who
at bare minimum will be stuck staring at bars for very likely the rest of her natural life?
I also keep seeing people say 'well they agreed to cruelty, why not dp' and 'they agreed to dp on the juror form'. One has nothing to do with the other IMO. When a juror says they are open to the DP, that means they are open to
consider the DP. When the jurors agreed to cruelty, that meant that the crime warrented
consideration of the DP, not automatically she deserved the DP.
It very easy and convienent to throw stones and hurl insults at the jurors from the luxury of sitting behind a computer monitor or mobile device when you weren't in that room. Those 4 people believed, in their opinion, that there was mitigating factors and because their opinion doesn't jive with the majority, they all of a sudden are subjected to all sorts of nasty comments. One of these days every one of us will have a strong opinion or conviction that doesn't not agree with the majority, whether that be among a group of friends or a jury deliberation room. I challenge anyone to stand by their convictions, even if others are screaming their head off at them, because it's what
they believe. That takes a lot of courage and I applaud all the jurors for taking to time to discuss it and take their time until it was obvious there was no movement.
I've said it before and I'll say it again, there is something fundamentally wrong with the way this country decides how to determine the DP. Perhaps more scutiny should be directed at that instead of the people who are subjected to the process. It's very easy to say 'why didn't they just cave in and agree' but doing that on a murder conviction versus doing that on a life/death situation is apples and oranges. We are brought up in a society where life is taught to be precious to get some guy/gal off the street and give them the ultimate decision on condemning a person, so matter who it is, is not an easy thing, nor is it an easy decision. Hopefully many people, especially those who want to cast stones, never have to go through that.
