Discussions on Formal Sentencing Hearing - Jodi Arias #3

[cady]

If they knew, could they have made in roads to this juror? Just wondering.

Yes. Possibly through the mitigation specialist. JMO

 

[sammie]

I am gong to wait, until all the facts are known, to voice my opinion completely, on juror #17. (for now, innocent until proven guilty)

I have been thinking about the 11 jurors saying that in the beginning there was a 50/50 vote or how they stood. So since that being stated, by them, 5 other jurors voted for life. It bothers me that those 5 believe since they changed their way of thinking, well, that #17 should have also. Every vote counted, everyone should have been able to decide for themselves without too much pressure. Who she was, how her life was, her past experience, maybe they were different than everyone else and those things effected her vote. I know they didn't think she tried to deliberate to their expectations and they wanted to have a unanimous verdict. That being said, unless she is proven to be a juror with an agenda, she had her right to vote how she felt and still be treated with respect. JMOO

With all due respect, they never said 50% were for LIFE. They said the initial poll said it was somewhere around 50% for death (with a few undecideds). Big difference imo.

 

[HarvestMoon]

Sheriff Joe is trying to shut down Jodi's twitter account but he is hitting road blocks. I say just print them off and include
them in the report to Judge Sherry before sentencing. The tweets from the past few days show how evil she is.

My goodness, all of it, the aftermath, just keeps growing and growing. (huge sigh)

 

[TexMex]

Troy
#jodiarias def atty Jennifer Willmott told me she did not know #juror17's husband was prosecuted by Juan Martinez. #Fox10Phoenix

 

[LinTX]

Troy on fox10 Phoenix right now talking about 17, he spoke to jw about it, also talks about the juror list posted on jaii site saying the courthouse said only 6 copies of the names were printed and given out being investigated because on the site the names included middle names and appears to be legal copy, you might have to scroll back a few


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Let's see:

1. JSS
2. Court Reporter
3. Nurmi
4. Wilmott
5. JM
6. Shott (sp?)

 

[Mindmatters]

Yeah thanks Jen...but if Juror #17 knew Juan and didn't disclose it...isn't that the issue?

Right Sammie, I thought the issue at hand was directly related to whether or not the juror was knowingly deceptive/willfully engaging in misconduct--on any and all levels, as indicated by her fellow jurors. Always so much deflection and game playing with this DT, and goodness is their hatred of JM illogical and rabid, I mean really they need to at least try to hide their bias.

 

[Nosey Parker]

I just wanted to say to everyone that I know most are upset or disappointed in the retrial verdict. I deeply feel for you all. I hope I'm not viewed as hard but I learned my lesson following the CAnthony trial and I was so involved and was so emotionally troubled that I just can't allow myself to get that emotionally involved again. Now, I stay more just to the facts looking at both sides. Hope everyone understands.

I understand, Wizzy. CA result left me shell shocked too. I think, though, right now very few here are expressing disappointment at the verdict. I, for one, am fine with LWOP, but not fine with a possibly dishonest juror, especially if anyone else was involved. Time will tell.

 

[steelman]

let's see:

1. jss
2. court reporter
3. nurmi
4. wilmott
5. jm
6. shott (sp?)

mdlr ...... ?

 

[sammie]

quoted from prior thread: posted in last thread by sammie:
An allegation of juror misconduct, and perjury is serious enough to warrant an investigation, and evidently the media agrees. I don't see that as lynch mob mentality, I see it as wanting to ensure someone didn't illegally hijack the process and single-handedly alter the results of the trial. If it turns out there is nothing to to it, she goes on with her life, and we accept it was a fair process. How is that different than any other potential criminal who is investigated and/or charged and subsequently cleared?

And she was more than willing to come forward yesterday, according to her husband for the right price. But that was before this information was discovered.

In terms of the sweatshirt, this is a sleuthing website. My comment was that it would definitely be considered circumstantial evidence, but one piece of the puzzle. That one shred of information
wouldn't get her convicted of anything, but it is interesting, to say the least.

BBM
What??? The snippet I heard was her husband saying she felt assaulted and stands by her vote. What did I miss?

My response to fifteen89:

This was posted on twitter, it was on her Husband's Facebook Page yesterday before he took it down. Those who saw it before he de-activated it, contend he himself openly admitted it was his wife who was the lone holdout on the jury, and that he was soliciting paid interviews. My disclaimer is I personally did not see it, but it was also alleged he himself called the TV station that showed up to talk to him (and most of us have seen the tv station video that was posted yesterday).

If true, they may have had another hidden agenda, or perhaps wished to receive some *secondary gain* as a result of her being the lone holdout. I'm sure those investigating will be able to find out what he posted.

 

[memoriesbymichelle]

It's ALWAYS Juan's fault!

Never passing up an opportunity.

Right? And I think she thinks she's smarter than Juan now. Like nanny nanny boo boo, I knew something you didn't know. Neither she, nor Nurmi will EVER be half the lawyer Juan Martinez is, so take that Wilmott!

On the State vs. Jodi Arias page on FB our friend Maria (Hi Maria ~waves~) posted "We won!" yesterday. Isn't that special? The only thing they won was no DP but they just got lucky or something with the juror that couldn't vote.

 

[Mrs G Norris]

Troy
#jodiarias def atty Jennifer Willmott told me she did not know #juror17's husband was prosecuted by Juan Martinez. #Fox10Phoenix

^^ this is the piece of info that I think should have been easy to discover .. all anyone had to do was check his court records .. I mean they're already right there, like at the courthouse and stuff .. and they must have known it was in the same county .. I mean ..

 

[Shelby1]

Troy Hayden ‏@troyhaydenfox10 13m13 minutes ago#jodiarias def atty Jennifer Willmott told me she did not know #juror17's husband was prosecuted by Juan Martinez. #Fox10PhoenixTroy Hayden ‏@troyhaydenfox10 27m27 minutes ago#jodiarias atty Jennifer Willmott, "We all knew (#Juror17's) 1st husband had a past. If Juan didn't check it out, that's his fault."---------------I'm confused.

 

[memoriesbymichelle]

Troy
#jodiarias def atty Jennifer Willmott told me she did not know #juror17's husband was prosecuted by Juan Martinez. #Fox10Phoenix

Troy Hayden ‏@troyhaydenfox10 46s47 seconds ago
#jodiarias atty Jennifer Willmott, "We all knew (#Juror17's) 1st husband had a past. If Juan didn't check it out, that's his fault."

OK so they only knew about the 1st husband's past but not the connection with Juan? Doesn't make sense to me

 

[JudyBolton]

Bringing this over from the last thread..



Yeah, right. She wouldn't (couldn't) even do that in the jury room during deliberations, where that type of dialogue is fundamental to the process. No way would she join the press conference to explain her reasoning to the public.

That said, the remaining 11 agreeing to talk to the media collectively as a unified group was awesome. By that point they were all so emotionally drained, no one would blame them if they chose to decline the presser and silently and invisibly return to their lives. But they saw it through to the bitter end and joined forces to publicly express their disappointment and divulge their concerns regarding #17. Had only a few agreed to talk we probably would have still learned what we now know, but boy was it powerful that all 11 did it together.

Plus the alternates!! Yes - they were drained, had gone without sleep, some were audibly weeping, they were tremendous!!

 

[LinTX]

Troy
#jodiarias def atty Jennifer Willmott told me she did not know #juror17's husband was prosecuted by Juan Martinez. #Fox10Phoenix

If that's true, then why the first statement about it being his own fault if JM didn't know? Those two statements don't make a lot of sense alongside each other...

eta: reading comments, it sounds like several of us had the same thought about these comments. Interesting.

 

[ShadyLady]

^^ this is the piece of info that I think should have been easy to discover .. all anyone had to do was check his court records .. I mean they're already right there, like at the courthouse and stuff .. and they must have known it was in the same county .. I mean ..

A 3million dollar defense knew, imo. Didn't they ask for social media info on jurors? I wonder if at some point Juan didn't try to get this juror off the jury. Hard to know.

 

[bettybaby00]

Troy Hayden ‏@troyhaydenfox10 46s47 seconds ago
#jodiarias atty Jennifer Willmott, "We all knew (#Juror17's) 1st husband had a past. If Juan didn't check it out, that's his fault."

Wow....I mean I get it, but the arrogance that comes through her dismissive statement is shocking to me, it shouldn't be, but it is.

 

[Mrs G Norris]

All I know is some lowly paralegal is going to lose their job over this.

 

[Gin]

Troy Hayden ‏@troyhaydenfox10 13m13 minutes ago#jodiarias def atty Jennifer Willmott told me she did not know #juror17's husband was prosecuted by Juan Martinez. #Fox10PhoenixTroy Hayden ‏@troyhaydenfox10 27m27 minutes ago#jodiarias atty Jennifer Willmott, "We all knew (#Juror17's) 1st husband had a past. If Juan didn't check it out, that's his fault."---------------I'm confused.

Hmmm...Seems like the comments are kinda different if if W is commenting, or if W the attorney is speaking.

 

[Luvrosco]

Maybe Demi Moore can play the part of juror #17 when the movie comes out............. They can call it, The Juror- Part 2

Lol! You crack me up.