VERDICT WATCH - Sentencing of Jodi Arias - Retrial Day 44, Part 2

[Steve44]

Good Point.

Also i think she is really sweat'n it now. Most of us are accepting that the jury is likely to hang and then JSS will decide on some form of life sentence. But imagine what JA is having to go through with that chance that it could actually be DP any minute of any day and she has to wait it out.

I think she may finally be just sweat'n a little bit. But then again we are dealing with the professional narcistic JA so you never know.

Either way the jury decides I am just glad they are now making her wait it out like the rest of us. Its about time something isnt being controlled by her or her DT.

As I posted above, she may actually be hoping for the DP. Gives her hope. LWOP "not so much".

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

Bringing this over from the previous thread...



But the people who know the law and the rules of the law aren't the ones who need to ask questions. It's the laypeople on the jury who sometimes need clarification of the law so that they can accurately apply the law to the case they are rendering a verdict on. IMO it's always a positive sign when a jury asks questions. It indicates that they are taking their role seriously and not just haphazardly checking off a box on the verdict form. I fail to see how a jury asking questions to ensure they have a clear understanding of the law can be considered a bad thing.

To be clear, the first jury didn't say "no DP." They hung. There's a big difference. And double jeopardy doesn't attach until a unanimous verdict is reached.

I just feel like the jury should not be interactive but observers. That is just me.

If they hung then to me that is no DP. So here we are trying again. I just don't see the value. If the first jury who sat through it all couldn't do it, I don't see how a subsequent one could.

 

[ElleElle]

Ok ... there is over 350 peeps waiting. What's the delay? Learning from JAs DT?

 

[neesaki]

Ooooh first!!

Go Mrs G ! :wave:

 

[Steve44]

I just feel like the jury should not be interactive but observers. That is just me.

If they hung then to me that is no DP. So here we are trying again. I just don't see the value. If the first jury who sat through it all couldn't do it, I don't see how a subsequent one could.

I disagree. Their actions are the only ones that ultimately count.

 

[neesaki]

No Way !!

I think I was here first, but what I was typing took a lot longer than yours. Let's ask JSS for a secret sidebar ruling away from Websleuths

Speaking of sidebars, Any restaurant entrepreneurs here ? I keep thinking that would be an excellent name for a bar / pub, particularly one located in / around the courthouse and legal community. Would be even more fitting right there in Phoenix, lol.

The Sidebar Pub

Or

The Sidebar
Bar & Grill

 

[MeeBee]

I just feel like the jury should not be interactive but observers. That is just me.

If they hung then to me that is no DP. So here we are trying again. I just don't see the value. If the first jury who sat through it all couldn't do it, I don't see how a subsequent one could.

But again, the rate of a successful finding of death on the second try in AZ is high. So it may seem odd but it happens a lot that a new jury can do what a first jury couldn't. There clearly is value there.

 

[neesaki]

If they weren't making any progress at all I think they would have already notified JSS by now.

So evidently since they have continued to deliberate they think they are making some progress.

IMO

I find that encouraging also, have nothing but respect for this jury thus far.

 

[Wing Ding]

Ok, I'm marking my spot too. Now what do I do?

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

But again, the rate of a successful finding of death on the second try in AZ is high. So it may seem odd but it happens a lot that a new jury can do what a first jury couldn't. There clearly is value there.

Yeah, I know I am alone in this.. Im good with that.

 

[wendiesan]

I just got sent this by them: http://www.spreecast.com/events/the-gold-patrol-sky-hughes-tells-all

Sadly, it won't work for me unless I can figure out how to upgrade the browser that was just upgraded two weeks ago for the upgrade two weeks before that. And, in return for upgrading, I get glitchier renditions of videos. Do you know if there's a more universal version of this interview? Thx.

 

[AZlawyer]

$20 per day sounds OK .. if the digital version is a similar cost then that's not going to be too bad, and considering the amount of time spend in sidebars and in chambers it might be reasonable to open a YouTube channel if we're allowed to broadcast it!

You could ask WS'ers to "sponsor" a particular day of testimony on a calendar and only order the $20 videos as the $$ for each day comes in.

I think my issue is that one jury sees the whole trial and decided guilt and they could not even decide for death. Do you know if there are any statistics on how many times the second dp jury comes back with death?
I know that my feelings have nothing to do with law but It just feels hinky to me.

I think it's only happened a tiny number of times (3? 4?) and most of those came back for death. To me, the sample size is way too small to draw any conclusion.

 

[MeeBee]

Yeah, I know I am alone in this.. Im good with that.

I don't think you are.

But I'm having trouble understanding what the qualms are. Are you saying it's wrong for the state to retry the sentencing phase, almost amounting to double jeopardy, or that it's wrong to ask a new jury who wasn't present in the guilt phase to make the decision between life or desth?

I personally don't see the problem. A hung jury is not a decision either way. It's a mistrial. In the guilt phase mistrials allow the state to try again and again until a unanimous verdict is reached. Here they are limited anyway. You wouldn't make the state call it if there was a mistrial for any other reason.

I also fail to see the issue with jury questions. They are the ones who are making the decisions and need all the facts and as much information as possible and if they feel there is something that wasn't addressed that they want to know I think it's a good thing to allow them to ask about it. If they are asking for something that they aren't allowed to know, their question just isn't asked so there is no problem there. I think it's a valuable thing.

 

[Steve44]

Speaking of sidebars, Any restaurant entrepreneurs here ? I keep thinking that would be an excellent name for a bar / pub, particularly one located in / around the courthouse and legal community. Would be even more fitting right there in Phoenix, lol.

The Sidebar Pub

Or

The Sidebar
Bar & Grill

But then, JSS would try to get it sealed. :sigh:

 

[Mrs G Norris]

Go Mrs G ! :wave:

Hey Neesaki!! :daisy:

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

I don't think you are.

But I'm having trouble understanding what the qualms are. Are you saying it's wrong for the state to retry the sentencing phase, almost amounting to double jeopardy, or thsts it's wrong to ask a new jury who wasn't peesent in the guilt phase to make the decision between life or desth?

I personally don't see the proglem. A hung jury is not a decisions either way. It's a mistrial. In the guilt phase mistrials allow the state to try again and again until a unanimous verdict is reached. Here they are limited anyway. You wouldn't make the state call it if there was a mistrial for any other reason.

I also fail to see the issue with jury questions. They are the ones who are making the decisions and need all the facts and as much information as possible and if they feel there is something that wasn't addressed that they want to know I thibknits a good thing to allow them to ask about it. If they are asking for something that they can't ask, their question just isn't asked so there is no problem there. I think it's a valuable thing.

LOL.. I am kind of all over on this aren't I?

I don't know. Ignore me until I get more coffee..
The juror questions just bother me. I don't know why but it irritates me for no logical rational reason.

 

[TexMex]

Sky is crying when asked about how Nurmi used her email in his closing

 

[Hatfield]

Sadly, it won't work for me unless I can figure out how to upgrade the browser that was just upgraded two weeks ago for the upgrade two weeks before that. And, in return for upgrading, I get glitchier renditions of videos. Do you know if there's a more universal version of this interview? Thx.

JMO and take this advice at your own risk because browsers are large applications that can be a pain to install sometimes.

I have to use 2 different browsers because I can only play videos on my Internet Explorer for some reason. I also have and use Firefox but it dont play videos anymore for me, but it used to and it broke...LOL.

Both should be free. They are a large install but you may have to install a different browser to get certain videos to play.

If that fails, you may consider de-installing totally the one you have and then re-installing the whole thing over again.

 

[Mrs G Norris]

Hey can others see the chatroom on this Spreecast? I can't see it, and they just referred to it!!

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

Sky is crying when asked about how Nurmi used her email in his closing

I feel so bad for her. I just feel like the dt tried to use them against Travis and they had no way to stop it. It must feel horrible.