verdict watch 5/8/2013 #3

[Bernina]

Good question.

Many observers have weighed in on this seeming puzzle.

*JA was up for over 36 hours and had driven all night in order to get to Mesa after departing Pasadena at around 9PM. Hence she needed to sleep!!! She could not have shot him upon arrival then slept nor could she have decamped immediately after being awake so long.
* Need for sleep takes her to 12Noon or 1 PM. Now she needs to sort out the lay of the land. Who was in the house? When would roommates be back in the house? Was there any activity outside the house?
* A gunshot makes a lot of noise that could be heard.That's WHY she stole the .25, it doesn't make a "Blast" noise, it makes a "Pop"
*It is likely JA had her weapons concealed in the purse or backpack.
* She needed TA in vulnerable position AND she needed access to the weapons.
*The idea of a clean kill in the shower is a good one. In this position she could clean him and her up at the same time. A murder in TA bed or bedroom would have been messy and bloody.
*JA planned for a quick clean kill. The fact that TA did not die quickly wrecked her initial plans and caused complications.
*It is possible that JA dressed and then declared she was leaving in order to drive back home or to SLC. Then she performed her JA Act – reentered the bedroom dressed but this time armed.
*The Calvin Klein shower photo set was a pretty good ruse to maneuver TA into a vulnerable position.
*It is a persistent mystery why she did not put a bullet squarely between his eyes or through the temple to kill him instantly.
*JA wanted the up close and personal murder. Knife him to death while watching him squirm in pain. That's why she didn't knife him in the back in the beginning
* The window of opportunity for JA presented itself between 1PM and 6PM. It is possible as many observers speculate that JA had allowed for TA change of heart hence she had a Plan A or Plan B in mind. The 1PM to 4PM sex and negotiations turned out poorly for JA.I think it was part of the plan, no A or B, she wanted to "disarm him", put him at ease to set the stage for a "blitz attack", how else could he have been "comfortable" having pics taken of him in the shower. I also think she wanted to be "his last".
* JA needed 2 primary things to execute this crime 1) lethal weapons in place 2) TA in a vulnerable clean kill position. Those 2 elements came together around 5PM on June 4, 2008.

Text and color added....

 

[Litigatrix]

This is funny and very true w/r to HLN....

@RyanPritch87 Jurors spotted walking...a few of them even thought to be breathing. HLN reporting that they seemed to be alive. #jodiarias

 

[Thurston]

Arias is an evil, manipulative, animalistic murderer - this we all know.

What was Arias mindset when she wrote a letter to The State in December 2010? Did Arias believe that the Church of Jesus Christ Latter Day Saints was going to step in send in LDS powerful church attorneys that would say, "STOP! This trial cannot move forward. President Thomas Monson has sent us here to stop this trial - Our prophet and church president will use the ENTIRE $30 Billion that the LDS church is worth to PREVENT YOU FROM MOVING FORWARD WITH THIS TRIAL!"

Arias has to believe that Travis Alexander and the other Mormons that she met were "special." Arias has to believe that the LDS church is extremely invested in Travis Alexander, and, his LDS (PPL) associates / friends. I do not know why Arias would believe this - why she would have the impression that the LDS church would stop The State of Arizona from moving forward with their case against her?

Really, why? It does not make any type of sense to me - for Arias to write "the amount of collateral damage to other individuals that would occur duing the trial. Mr. Alexander carried on numerous relationships. When you consider them in the context of all parties' relationship and affiliation with the Church of Jesus Christ, Latter Day Saints, they become a very big deal. Marriages would be affected, standing within the religious communities would be affected, personal friendships would be affected, and most of all the very poignant and cherished memories of Mr. Alexander would be tarnished," Arias would have to believe that - even though she murdered Travis Alexander - even though the State of Arizona had "built" a case against her - her trial would be stopped, or, by writing this words the State of Arizona would realize that they have no choice but to give Arias what she wants.

I do not know if Arias believed that the Mormon church was in the business of covering up murders similar to the Catholic Church covering up priests raping children.

But why would Arias think that the LDS church would concern themselves with her? So, did she believe that Travis Alexander and his LDS associates / friends were part of a LDS secret leadership that guarded the 13th Gold Plate - and if Travis Alexander's "poignant and cherished" memories were tarnished by Arias' trial the LDS Church would be destroyed? The "General Authorities" beginning with the Presiding Bishopric would fall causing a "domino effect" until Thomas Monson "fell" causing total destruction of the church?

Let's say that Arias murder victim was Thomas Monson - Arias had secret (possibly fabricated) audio recordings of Thomas Monson saying (or fabricated by Arias to say) things such as "12 year old girl." I do not think that the LDS Church would intervene with The State of Arizona's criminal trial of Arias.

Arias wrote about the "collateral damage" her trial would have on the Church of Jesus Christ Latter Day Saints - she must have thought someone would be too afraid to expose the "goods" she had on Travis Alexander.

If the previous is true - that Arias wrote about the "collateral damage" her trial would cause to the LDS church - then her strong belief that The State of Arizona would be forced to give her wants she wants under pressure from the LDS Church would have HAD TO COME from Travis Alexander - her murder victim.

Travis Alexander gave Arias the impression that their sexual was so wrong - then that tells me that Travis Alexander was guilt ridden by being with Arias.

I do not know if Arias misunderstood Travis Alexander's guilt - and took it to mean that he was of extreme importance to the LDS Church, and, the LDS Church would use their power, money and influence to get The State of Arizona to drop the charges against Arias / offer Arias a plea deal because the LDS Church could not survive if Travis Alexander's "secrets" came out.

Arias' letter that she sent the state in December 2010 is very bizarre - meaning I do not have any idea why Arias would think: "I am going to write this letter to the state - when this letter is read those people are going to be shaking in their boots - they think that they can put me on trial with the stuff I have - No, no, no! When they put together the significance of the relationships and affiliations with the Church of Jesus Christ Latter Day Saints they will see what a big deal, what a BIG THREAT I am. There is no way that the First Presidency will allow the state to move forward without offering me a plea deal, or, even letting me walk out of here."

Why would Nurmi include the letter Arias wrote - all of it or part of it - in the Plea Bargain Document? Did Nurmi think, "Arias has some good points here - the LDS Church will force the state to give Arias what she wants."

 

[Ladylub]

I am going to upset some people, but if this jury comes back with anything less than M1 than the system needs to be changed. Do we even know what type of people we are dealing with on that jury???

In the future all jurors need to be fingerprinted, background checks need to be done, and an MMPI needs to be performed.

I will lose faith in the judicial system along with mankind if it comes back with anything less then M1. I would want the system to change b/c not everyone is smart enough to be on a jury.

 

[Zeno49]

The judge from Anna Nicole's trial on HLN said he read Juan's closing a "few times" and it was "all over the place" and also he thinks jury could be hung up on this part in the jury instructions: (paraphrasing) if they are unsure as to which it is b/w 1st degree, 2nd degree, crime of passion, they have to go with the lowest one. Jean C is agreeing with him.

I agree with this potential source of confusion.

It seems that juries in high profile cases feel it incumbent to be murder sleuths and thus to reason through the cause of death, the sequence of death, sort out motives, and evaluate carefully all the forensic evidence etc. “Reasonable doubt” takes on undue proportions thus jettisoning common sense. Reasonable doubt soon becomes any sort of doubt or possible doubt. The jury feels that no rock must be left unturned in their search for answers. The jury’s journey into the weeds will tie them into knots as was demonstrated by shadow juries on HLN After Dark.

We have all seen juries far and wide – not illuminated by bright klieg lights of notoriety - convict with M1 verdicts just based one piece of circumstantial evidence. The reason is that common sense compelled them to this conclusion. The murder scene was staged. The alibi turned out to be a lie. A cell phone ping belied the testimony. The gun could not have been in that position. The 911 call was phony. And these are cases where the defendant pleaded innocent.

I believe this jury is hung up on M1 vs M2 and will feel compelled to issue an M2 verdict OR will be deadlocked.
I believe an alternate jury hearing and pondering this case in complete anonymity would have issued an M1 verdict in 4-6 hours.

Mere simple common sense screams M1

 

[dani]

While we are waiting for the verdict we are all thinking, thinking, thinking. Thinking about what could have been done differently during the trial. Thinking about why the jury is taking so long. Thinking about how stoic and patient Travis' family has been.

I've been thinking, too. I wanted to add to "Gauntlet's List" the plea deal Jodi offered to plead GUILTY to 2nd degree in exchange for not trashing Travis, but someone had already put it on the list.

Do you realize how differently the trial would have gone had the jury known about that one detail? There would have been no reason to have Samuals, ALV, Dr. DeMarte, or Jill Hayes testify because Jodi was admitting she murdered Travis, just not admitting it was premeditated because her whole point was to avoid the DP or LWOP.

Trying to prove she had some "disorder" that caused her to snap would have been a moot point because she was admitting it was more than 3rd degree murder (aka Manslaughter). And any thought of acquittal would have been off the table.

I even think there would have been no need for all the "sexy talk" for the same reasons, but I haven't entirely thought that part thru.

Of course we would have missed some of the funnier aspects of the trial without Samuals or ALV, and JW's excessive droning, but I digress.:floorlaugh:

But, the jury didn't get to know about that so I'll shut up now.

…except for this addition to Gauntlet's List: I would like for the jury to know that one of the violations Jodi was cited for in jail was possession of 19 prohibited photographs. Were these warm and fuzzy photos of her family, or her cat, or her car, or her friends? Nope! These were 19 bloody photographs of Travis! (That's how DEMENTED this woman is!)

 

[Novice Seeker]

5/7/2013 MFD - Motion For Discovery - Party (001) 5/8/2013
NOTE: DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR DISCOVERY OF VICTIM IMPACT EVIDENCE

http://www.superiorcourt.maricopa.go...=CR2008-031021

So the DT feels they are entitled to these statements before the victims testify? For what purpose does the DT need them other than to object,approach, sidebar and then sealing the transcript of this sidebar?

IMO, the DT shouldn't have ANY right to influence what the victims want to convey nor should they be entitled to search under the cloak of "Discovery" to determine what the victims are going to testify about.

 

[JustMeDeb]

On a positive note re: DT's motion this morning, sounds like they are expecting a M1 conviction and want to prepare JA

 

[polleypockets]

nurmi filed this

DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR DISCOVERY OF VICTIM IMPACT EVIDENCE - what's this?

what does it mean?

 

[corundogs]

Not all that many here...why the slow load? I was unable to get on for about 5 minutes! Server overload! LOL!!

 

[janx]

:floorlaugh: So true about the reading. In the main, they seem to find it 'quaint' at best, corporal punishment at worst. Compounding the problem are the educational publishers, all pushing 'online content', which is just a more convenient way for them not to do the reading -- and not have a physical copy in front of them in class. Try having a discussion with them 'accessing the reading via smartphone.' LOL Oh well, the truth is that college education is not compatible with the technological revolution in some ways and can benefit from it tremendously in others.

Agreed. And I love what technology has done for libraries--online databases for research, etc..

 

[leebee52]

Hi....gosh I had the hardest time getting on to WS today.

 

[LotusPawprint]

Good day everyone!

Ready for justice, anxious but prepared to wait here with you all.

 

[Mrs G Norris]

Just loving HLN again, I feel for them I really do .. they've got NOTHING TO SAY!

 

[Thurston]

I will lose faith in the judicial system along with mankind if it comes back with anything less then M1. I would want the system to change b/c not everyone is smart enough to be on a jury.

I agree! I remember after Caylee Anthony's murderer was found not guilty - the 'talking heads' said "to get a guilty verdict these days a jury will have to have pictures / recordings of the murder taking place." Here we are thirteen and half hours into deliberations where the jury has pictures of Arias murdering Travis Alexander.

 

[megmono]

larry sidlin (spelling) has huge hands good lord

 

[GoAskAllie]

I've just always felt her clean up job was interrupted, that she would have done a much more thorough job, through the panic, given the opportunity to continue. I don't think she meant to leave those things there

She was pressed for time knowing that one or both roommates could come home. We can agree to disagree about her "intentions" since we can only go by what she did. What really matters is that her attempts to clean up prove that she wasn't in a fog. She had the presence of mind to pick and choose the photos she deleted from the memory card--deleting 22 and leaving 90 that she didn't care about.

 

[SusieD]

That would be a huge invasion of privacy. If they lie to get on a jury; they will be found out. If anyone on the jury attempts to read about the case, THAT info would also come out in deliberations and would be an auto kick off the jury.

I too doubt our judicial system has caught up to our technology...it's more than rusty I agree it's broken. Casey's case proved that. They didn't even find child abuse. GMAFB! So; most of the time we hope to see justice Done; in almost every case and usually that is what we see. Have hope! They may be lining up four MONTHS of testimony and they are sitting in there with the EVIDENCE of her slaughter. Think about that. Know it. They are sitting with her crime. They will do the right thing; according to the LAW.

Why is it when people talk about a broken justice system, the 1000+ post conviction exonerations by various types of Innocence Projects is never mentioned?

I think CA walking around is pretty minor compared to the number of men (and some women) who have been railroaded by bad prosecutors, bad judges and bad juries and languished in prison for decades.

That's "broken." IMO

 

[dog.gone.cute]

From WAT:


8 m Wild About Trial @WildAboutTrial

The juror "Captain O'Neil" just came in with red tee and flip flops. He was with two other jurors. They were smiling. #JodiArias


15m Wild About Trial @WildAboutTrial

At the courthouse for another day o' delibs. #JodiArias

 

[Queen Bee]

i got kicked off:scared:

it's scary out there in the real world:floorlaugh:

but back now i hope..........

would so appreciate the link for watching HLN on my laptop....

thanks and it's a great day for justice :jail: