Verdict Watch 05/04/ and 05/05/2013

[websurfer]

Travis DID NOT deserve this...but she does deserve to die..she is a horrible cold blooded fiend...her eyes are like a snake's eyes dark and lifeless...

 

[Boodles]

When JA tried to cop a plea for 2nd degree using blackmail threats as leverage, you know that only fueled Juan's fire to convict her! In addition to committing murder, she thought she could screw with the justice system? Bad move....

 

[katydid23]

Respectfully, I don't think it was humiliating. It was probably embarrassing for her, but i hope she did not find it humiliating. There is no reason for her to feel humiliated in any way.

That woman is a class act and very courageous.

I agree she was classy and courageous. But I do think it was also humiliating for her because she had to publicly discuss her sex life. She is a practicing Mormon, and it was difficult to have to admit that she and Travis were having sex. Her family was watching the testimony, and her friends and her Bishop too, perhaps.

 

[rose222]

I remember watching that and loving her on sight.

I still think she is all about the victim and she still lives and breathes these cases. She can't compartmentalize and it's making her bitter and shrewish. It's sad because she could still be Amazin' Grace.

I watched another video of her with Larry King. Larry asks her how is it that her favourite character of all time is Atticus Finch (Defense lawyer). She says "Larry he spoke the TRUTH."

Isn't that what it's all about? I don't understand how anyone can prosecute or defend a person if it's not TRUTH he/she is after!

 

[JusticeJunkie]

E[n]dmund(sic)/Tison Requirement

Best practices as documented by AZ Supreme Court and instructions thereto (excerpted) with relevant cites:

"Guilt phase: Premeditation Findings can Satisfy Enmund/Tison

Prosecutors often charge first degree murder in a single count that alleges both premeditation and felony murder. This practice is constitutional because a jury need not be unanimous on the theory of first degree murder as long as all agree that the murder was committed. Schad v. Arizona, 501 U.S. 624, 645 (1991); State v. Tucker, 205 Ariz. 157, 167 ¶ 51, 68 P.3d 110 (2003). However, the Arizona Supreme Court has long encouraged trial courts to inquire of the jury their numerical vote on each theory because it can resolve the Enmund/Tison issue. State v. Smith, 160 Ariz. 507, 513 (1989);State v. Garza, 216Ariz.56, 163 P.3d 1006, ¶46,n.11 (2007) ("this is the better practice").See also, State v. Hardy,230 Ariz. 281,283 P.3d 12, (2012) (although finding no error in trial court’s refusal to use separate verdict forms or instruct the jury to indicate their numerical vote, the Court once again stated that the best practice is to submit alternate verdict forms to the jury when the State presents alternate theories of first degree murder).

A unanimous finding that the defendant premeditated the murder necessarily means the defendant intended to kill, and that finding satisfies Enmund/Tison.State v. Anderson (Anderson II), 210 Ariz. 327, 345, 111 P.3d 369 (2005).

An excellent way to determine the numerical split of the jury is to add the following text to the guilty verdict form:

____ Number of jurors finding ONLY premeditated murder

____ Number of jurors finding ONLY felony murder

____ Number of jurors finding BOTH premeditated murder and felony murder

If the jury properly fills out this verdict form, then the total of these three numbers will always be 12. If “12” appears on the first or third lines then the jury necessarily found the defendant intended to kill and Enmund/Tison is satisfied. If a number other than 12 appears on the first and third lines then Enmund/Tison needs to be resolved in the aggravation phase."





Full Source: Arizona Capital Sentencing Guide

I am off to look up the Enmund/Tison at this very moment. THANKS. Looking at your explanation, I'm wondering why I just didn't goggle it myself, but... I don't know if I would have known the words to enter in Google to find this, and secondly, I was sure it would be in some sort of legalize that I wouldn't be able to understand.
I knew there would be someone here smart enough to answer - thanks Truth Detector!

 

[rose222]

I actually appreciated both equally. His cross exams WERE brilliant, but I thought his closing was particularly effective. I expected the same JM I had seen since JA took the stand: a man on overdrive, angry & spitting fire. I'm sure the jury did, too. Instead, he was almost reverent. I found myself transfixed by his demeanor and the pacing of his argument.

I thought the closing showed a great deal of restraint on JM's part. I also thought it showed a great deal of respect for Travis and his family as well as the jury. He let them know that he believed them to be reasonable people. He simply laid out the facts based on the evidence and put his trust in them. It was a far cry from Nurmi replaying the sex tape and saying he didn't even like his client.

JM DID show emotion when the circumstances dictated. For instance, when he described the chain of events by showing the crime scene photographs, I wept. I thought he was brilliant throughout the trial, but I thought his subdued approach during closing was absolutely magnificent. He rocks! :rockon:

Yes! I'm going to watch JM's closing all over again and will keep in mind what you've said. JM is awesome!

 

[RR0004]

Did you notice JM got a crack in about Nurmis hair? Nurmi had a physical reaction. JM must of been pizzed at him for something. You can see this in part 4 day 56. Its within the first minute .

Perhaps he was making reference to what he (JM) had read online as well (lol)...just like Nurmi had obviously read commentary about ALV.

 

[Nali87]

I have some questions.....

Will we get to see all trial transcripts, side bars, jury discussions/notes, etc? If so, where would we find this stuff.

No jury discussions/notes unless the juror releases it to the public.
Trial transcripts, sidebars etc will be made public eventually. (AzLawyer mentioned this in the legal thread.) I'm sure we'll see them all over the news online. Maybe here as well:
http://www.superiorcourt.maricopa.gov/docket/criminalcourtcases/

Would we ever get to see notes/discussions between arias and her attorneys?
I'd say no. Those would fall under attorney/client privilige.

Would we ever get to see notes/discussions from the Prosecution team?
If they decide to release it to the public.

I'm assuming probably no discussion with attorneys because of appeals but it would be great to see that info.

Will the Alexander family and friends get to speak at all?
We don't know. But they can. "Victim impact statements ("VIS") are used in a number of jurisdictions, during the sentencing phase of a trial, to allow the victim (or the victim's family in capital cases) to express the personal and emotional harm suffered as a result of the defendant's actions."
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/legal-issues-states-allow-victim-impact-statements

How long until sentencing? Days? Weeks? Months?
Well, we have to have a verdict first. But AzLawyer said they will move to the next phase quickly afterwards. Days.

Do you think we'll ever see the manifesto?
Oh yeah, sold on ebay.

Can the state demand any money made from her, ahem, artwork be used to pay for her defense?
No.
I was hoping the Alexanders had sued her but that doesn't seem to be the case.

Bolded by me

 

[Nezumi]

He was pissed. Nurmi called Martinez a liar. Stood by Prosecution table and said "someone here is lying and it isn't Jodi Arias".

I laughed out loud when he said that because my first thought was "thats right, she's not lying at the moment - you're doing it FOR her.

 

[ShadyLady]

Smokey, you aked for the plea deal on the last thread. Here it is:

http://grahamwinch.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/jodiariasngfile.pdf


I was just rereading it last night. The original plea deal was Oct 26, 2010,and Juan didn't bother to answer them. lol So they sent another letter in Dec, which Juan also didn't bother to answer.
The plea deal in this link in in July 7 of 2011 , is their third try, and they are saying they now have even MORE blackmail material, so Juan had better cave. LOL
It talks about the family's response to the earlier plea deals, and warns that the collateral damage to "others" will be even worse. What dirty blackmail - and all to save a lying murderer.

Does anyone remember the dates ALV and Samuels got involved? Did they help model her defense?

 

[RR0004]

Travis DID NOT deserve this...but she does deserve to die..she is a horrible cold blooded fiend...her eyes are like a snake's eyes dark and lifeless...

You know what I find REALLY REALLY scary? I think she's glad that Travis is dead.

 

[makayla]

You know what I find REALLY REALLY scary? I think she's glad that Travis is dead.

Sadly, I think that's true - it's almost like she is saying "I won!"

Jodi is a sick, evil individual with no soul.

 

[PPKik]

The PPL theory is interesting, but I cannot imagine TA not reporting that immediately.

I've always thought that she told him she had gotten pregnant with his baby and aborted it. That would make him furious, for sure. It seems this line of lies is being floated to the National Enquirer now.

The biggest problem I have with that (sort of) reasonable theory is that Travis knew she was a pathological liar and sociopath, among other worse and dangerous PD's, which he understood.
Why would he have believed that from an email or text from her? Also, she would have used a pregnancy/ baby against him. Why get an abortion if you are JA?

 

[rose222]

Buddha said "Believe nothing no matter where you read it or who has said it, not even if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense."

Nurmi says " Believe nothing that agrees with your own reason and your own common sense unless I have said it."

:giggle:

 

[Nali87]

I hope Jodi cannot drag TA's name and play the victim during the sentencing phase.

 

[MrW]

after looking at a map with the Hoover Dam location , if this liar was in a fog it was a darn good one. Look at how many curves the road has to and on the Hoover Dam. Even a thinking person would have to be very alert to drive near there considering tourists and all.

How true! One thing that never made sense to me was that she ever admitted to being on highway US93 that went over Hoover Dam. Coming from southern California, that route is really not the most efficient. It is, however, the direct route from Las Vegas to Phoenix! I live in southern NV, and frequently have driven to Kingman, AZ. I usually fly if going to Phoenix on business, so haven't done the whole LV to Phoenix route in years. Now, that the by-pass bridge is open (opened in 2010), the Kingman to LV route is much easier, but there is still a major bottleneck in the Boulder City area after crossing the bridge. Of course, if I'm going to southern CA, I take the I-15. No worries about finding gas along those routes either...LOL

Amazingly, there is not an interstate highway between LV and Phoenix (talk about it, but no action yet).

Unless she was to use being on US93 as a part of her "getting lost" story, it made no sense. But, that's just me. It never got to be an issue since it was quickly determined she was at TA's house. Had she not been so quickly linked to the crime scene, I believe this part of her route would have helped catch her up.

I gave up a long time ago trying to "make sense" out of many things this <unusual person> did/does. It's all moot now, but it's just another one of those things that made me go "hmmmm".....and an another example to show she isn't as smart as she thinks she is... :moo: IMHO

 

[kayice]

I have often wondered how jurors cope when they go home, learn what we know, and then go on with their lives. Does it stick with them?

I watched Juan Martinez live but I swear every five minutes the phone rang or someone came to the door. I had no idea I had such a full life!

I had to detach some because it is just too easy for me to slip back to reliving my own experience with my son's death and my father's as well. People get away with murder quite often, apparently.

One thing I have noticed is that Jodi must have been extremely jealous of the love and admiration Travis Alexander had earned. He was the real deal, a person trying to be better, a person with compassion for others. Over years he had accumulated friends who all loved him dearly, who were not afraid of him. His friends didn't violate each other's privacy.

He lived in a world that Jodi Arias could NOT be part of-- because of her lack of character. It became really obvious, even to him, that he could do much better because she was a fake Mormon, a fake photographer, a fake Law of Attraction believer....after all, isn't she about to attract the Death Penalty????

She scammed Travis. Meaning, imo, when he said he was finally really through with her, he went to his finances and realized that the advances in commissions he had been giving her were against PPL sales which she never made. The names were bogus, etc, something like that.

I got this idea from his threat to tell Chris and Skye, who were her upline. Why tell them instead of the bishop? Because it was a PPL scam where she used her information she snooped to enter his PPL account and transfer his sales to herself, and he found out she had been doing whatever it was for some time.

And Travis was such a kind person he didn't immediately call the police or call Chris himself. He tried to use the info to get her to leave him alone. Maybe he knew how useless restraining orders can be with seriously crazy violent people.

Also, I'll bet she threatened him physically, something like, "You don't know who you are dealing with - you will regret this, Travis, I promise you. You can mark my words, if you are still alive."

That would be a provocation for his fear of her (in addition to the stalking).

Anagrammy
__________________
Anagrammy

"We see things not as they are but as we are" ~ Anais Nin

Anagrammy replied to my post on the previous thread, but my sister called me which sometimes takes hours...ha. Still not getting much today.

Oh my, thank you Anagrammy. This makes a lot of sense on what Travis said about Jodi, I just knew she was somehow stealing from him. Scamming...somehow, along with all her other 'behaviors'.

I agree Jodi was jealous of everything Travis was and had, her words and tone drip with it in interview tapes at times...right down to his bed. The hate shines through, the chameleon wanted to absorb his very being, but she could not. Travis was one of a kind.

One thing I picked up on---Jodi's mom said to Flores about Jodi reading all these books and he should see the titles. I imagine Travis had a broader variety of books than Arias.
But did anyone hear Chris Hughes talking about Travis believing books was the way for inner-city kids to raise themselves up...part of the Travis Alexander Fund is to go for starting a Foundation for that very cause? Jodi berating her mother to read and why she didn't go to college, Jodi this high school drop-out... trying to be Travis-like to read more books (mom) and failing miserably and being just plain ugly.

 

[Colt46]

I would enjoy reading it. I apologize if you already posted a link to it.

Here ya go!!!

It's in TWO parts: Scroll down to #177 and 185:
I hope everyone gets a chance to read this post - it's brilliant, IMO.

http://callsforjustice.wordpress.com/2013/05/03/jodi-arias-murder-trial-day-fifty-seven/#comments

 

[Tuba]

Websurfer, the snake eyes were on full display in the photo of Arias on Travis's bed, June 4, don't you agree? Hard, cold snake eyes, staring.

 

[Truth Detector]

I am off to look up the Enmund/Tison at this very moment. THANKS. Looking at your explanation, I'm wondering why I just didn't goggle it myself, but... I don't know if I would have known the words to enter in Google to find this, and secondly, I was sure it would be in some sort of legalize that I wouldn't be able to understand.
I knew there would be someone here smart enough to answer - thanks Truth Detector!

I am humbled.

I am also routinely amazed at the insightful thoughts and perspectives expressed by my fellow members here.

I am not an attorney, but I have stayed at a Holiday Inn Express, and I have managed teams of corporate legal-types at the Fortune One company (at the time) for a decade or so.

This is why I quietly chuckled at the 'discount-store-which-was-frequently-and-prominently-named' element of this case.

Amanda Webb was a local store associate employed by the Salinas, California Supercenter in question. Corporate Legal/Loss Prevention/Asset Protection should have suggested to JM that they provide a corporate witness as Tesoro did. However, Amanda, unfortunately, did the return research herself -- manually. Another blunder, IMO. And that's why she was most qualified to personally testify. That research task was easily 'automatable' and its results are somewhat suspect due to the potential for human error because it was not. I and my staff automated these and many other more data-intensive tasks routinely. However, the store undertook this task at its own expense and it wasn't my call to make this time.

Key point: If the DT had believed their client's claim, then they should have had WMT provide all the raw transaction data to them and hired an expert -- ahem -- to automate that analysis. Had they done so, of course, the results would have conclusively proven what Amanda testified to; i.e., JA made the purchase, but she did not initiate a return transaction. That is precisely why they didn't waste their time undertaking a futile task whose accurate outcome would have served to reinforce the jury's view of the defendant as an unmitigated, self-serving liar.

What would have made the research extremely simple in its automation is that it would require only milliseconds to know that ZERO items with that gas can's UPC were returned to that store on June 4, 2008.

In fact, you could have expanded it to include stores in variable radii of even unreasonable driving distances of say 500 miles to determine how many returns of those items there were, which locations (if any), what price points, tax rates (helping to prove locality), times of day, etc... If you've read this far you get the point.

In the case that I haven't already bored you, suffice it to say that Amanda did not know, but most of us do, the difference between skew and SKU (stock keeping unit).

In Amanda's defense, JM's computer forensics witness didn't know the difference between Universal Time Standards and this fictionalized persona:

Carry on.