VERDICT WATCH - Sentencing of Jodi Arias - Retrial Day 43

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Perhaps she needs the attorneys to be ready to argue a legal point and is giving them 1 hr to look up authority on the issue.

Jodi's family is not there. Could she have had a fit in the back because enough time was not allowed for her Mom to get there?
 
From Erickson:
Dave Erickson ‏@ericksonvision · 2m2 minutes ago

My sources tell me the #JodiArias jury is divided. Hopefully that's not the case. Stay tuned. #VerdictWatch

:thinking: Is Erickson "friends" with Kiefer ?

:gaah:

I was wondering where MK and his super defense snooping was today.
 
If Jodi wasn't present and only attorneys were then the victims family cannot attend.

Tr alexander family can attend anything when Jodi is in attendance.

They can attend any criminal proceeding where the defendant has the right to be present, not if she is.
 
From Erickson:
Dave Erickson ‏@ericksonvision · 2m2 minutes ago

My sources tell me the #JodiArias jury is divided. Hopefully that's not the case. Stay tuned. #VerdictWatch

:thinking: Is Erickson "friends" with Kiefer ?

:gaah:

So then why can't the judge just handle it now? Is she not going to give the Allen Charge?
 
Yes....all I want to know is if it is even a possibility. Not just ones opinion, but is it possible no matter how remote.

I doubt it too, but remember during the 1st trial they said it was a "jury question" when it was indeed the verdict
 
AZL, lots of predictions of this being the verdict. Could they be discussing how to make this happen? Is it at all possible that this is not a jury question and is, in fact, the verdict?

It's not normal activity for a verdict, but there has been a lot of abnormal activity in this case, so I suppose it's possible.

Oh AZL, since you're here - once this is over, verdict, hung, whatever, will all the sealed minute entries be unsealed and appear on the Court's minute website in fairly short order? Or at least is that how it's supposed to work?

Supposedly, yes.

Are there any other grounds for being let off/kicked off besides refusing to deliberate? For example- what if this is about the juror who asked to be released days ago and was refused. She's given it her best try but realizes she just can't return a DP verdict, even of that's what she thinks is the right thing to do, and no amount of time is going to make it possible for her. Does that count as refusal to deliberate? Can a juror be released for not being able to cope emotionally?

And if that is what's going on, how problematic is it that the juror asked for a specific replacement?

If a juror realized he or she was not, in fact, "death-qualified" after all, he/she could be replaced and deliberations could start over with an alternate. The fact that the juror requesting to leave asked for a specific alternate would be no big deal--that part of the request would just be denied.

If a juror refused to deliberate would that be contempt?

No.
 
There are currently 642 users browsing this thread. (309 members and 333 guests)

Wow. What is the highest that's ever been on the same thread?
 
This is so disheartening AZLawyer :(

I know LadyJustice is supposed to be blind, but does JSS really think she can take Her (and all Courtroom procedure, and us for that matter) for total fools? :moo:

:thud:


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


This is the same judge who thought it was completely ok to let CMJA testify in secrecy. :facepalm:
 
Are there any other grounds for being let off/kicked off besides refusing to deliberate? For example- what if this is about the juror who asked to be released days ago and was refused. She's given it her best try but realizes she just can't return a DP verdict, even of that's what she thinks is the right thing to do, and no amount of time is going to make it possible for her. Does that count as refusal to deliberate? Can a juror be released for not being able to cope emotionally?

And if that is what's going on, how problematic is it that the juror asked for a specific replacement?

Along those lines...what if the juror says she can't impose DP; thought she could at time of voir dire but now realizes she just can't even though DP is (per the instructions they were given) the only sentence that can rightfully happen. ???

ETA:

Nevermind...looks like AZL answered this question already. Thanks AZL.

I think this could actually be what is going on.
 
How would a "source" know?

Dave Erickson ‏@ericksonvision · 2m2 minutes ago
My #JodiArias trial sources have never been wrong on facts. Ever. But re: the jury... I believe it's conjecture not necessarily fact.
 
NO you should not. Trust me having spent 40 years trying to quit. Friends don't let friends stink up their worlds. :)

Def not! Don't start. I just finally quit (after the 100th time) after smoking about 35 years. Its been almost 10 mos this time. But it has been tempting the last few weeks. Plus seeing my butt grow exponentially.

Although, I did go buy a pack a couple of weeks ago after taking sleeping meds. So now I had to give those up too. Dangerous to drive in a coma..........
 
I was wondering where MK and his super defense snooping was today.


:seeya: I got his twitter up and nothing from Kiefer today ... zippo !

Oh how I wish he would get on twitter and let us know what's going on !
 
Wouldn't the judge send them back again? If this is the case, why take a break just to send them back in to try again?

I'm not really sure what's going on. Whatever it is, it doesn't look good.

JMHO
fran
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
80
Guests online
2,739
Total visitors
2,819

Forum statistics

Threads
601,233
Messages
18,120,992
Members
230,995
Latest member
MiaCarmela
Back
Top