Interim discussion regarding questions from the jury and Arias on the stand #81

[JaimeInLA]

Which book is that? I would be interested to read it.

Here you go!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/news/foreign-faction-who-really-kidnapped-jonbenet

The author was also on Tricia's radio show a while back. Very compelling evidence, all wrapped up in a nice bow!

 

[Isabelle]

She claimed it didn't have mats.

Anything that comes out of JA's mouth is a lie! She would argue that the sky is green and the grass is blue and she would have the last word too!

 

[Kensie]

:floorlaugh: Oh, my. You and I think SO MUCH alike! Walmart=NIGHTMARE! I'd PAY some Starbucks skaters $12 to return something there for me.

And she parked and went in TWICE?!? JM needs to hammer THAT home!

I guess I am the only one that likes WalMart!! Ha!!

 

[Clue Finder 55]

Arizona Laws that qualify a murder for the death penalty

I would like to say that I have copied Parts of an article and I’m posting it so people might understand how and why a prosecution would try and convict a person charged with a first degree murder which qualifies for death penalty such as with the Jodi Arias trial. I believe one or more of these factors listed below qualify a person for the death penalty and that one or more of these acts were committed in this murder. This is my opinion only and I believe the prosecution on this case will prove this

Especially “Cruel"; (The victim-oriented factor)

To find that a victim suffered mental anguish or physical pain, the Court must find beyond a reasonable doubt that (1) the victim was conscious during at least some portion of the crime and that (2) the defendant knew or should have known that the victim would suffer


A.R.S. § 13-751(F)(6)-HEINOUS, CRUEL OR DEPRAVED
A.R.S. § 13-751(F)(6) provides that it shall be an aggravating circumstance where "[t]he defendant committed the offense in an especially heinous, cruel or depraved manner."




As to physical pain, the victim does not need to be conscious for “each and every wound” inflicted for cruelty to apply. Sansing, 206 Ariz. at 235, 77 P.3d at 33 (quoting State v. Lopez (I), 163 Ariz. 18, 115, 786 P.2d 959, 966 (1990)). Physical pain may be found where a conscious victim physically suffered for at least a short period of time. State v. Schackart, 190 Ariz. 238, 947 P.2d 315 (1997)

To find that a victim suffered mental anguish or physical pain, the Court must find beyond a reasonable doubt that (1) the victim was conscious during at least some portion of the crime and that (2) the defendant knew or should have known that the victim would suffer

Sheldon, 173 Ariz. 143, 840 P.2d 1008 (1992). More recently the court has noted that “few especially cruel findings . . . are predicated solely on an inference that the victim contemplated his or her fate,” especially when no witness can “quantify the length of time between the point at which [the victim] first experienced mental anguish and the moment that [the defendant] shot [her].” State v. Prince, 206 Ariz. 24, 27, 75 P.3d 114, 117 (2003).
As to physical pain, the victim does not need to be conscious for “each and every wound” inflicted for cruelty to apply. Sansing, 206 Ariz. at 235, 77 P.3d at 33 (quoting State v. Lopez (I), 163 Ariz. 18, 115, 786 P.2d 959, 966 (1990)). Physical pain may be found where a conscious victim physically suffered for at least a short period of time. State v. Schackart, 190 Ariz. 238, 947 P.2d 315 (1997
Sheldon, 173 Ariz. 143, 840 P.2d 1008 (1992). More recently the court has noted that “few especially cruel findings . . . are predicated solely on an inference that the victim contemplated his or her fate,” especially when no witness can “quantify the length of time between the point at which [the victim] first experienced mental anguish and the moment that [the defendant] shot [her].” State v. Prince, 206 Ariz. 24, 27, 75 P.3d 114, 117 (2003).
As to physical pain, the victim does not need to be conscious for “each and every wound” inflicted for cruelty to apply. Sansing, 206 Ariz. at 235, 77 P.3d at 33 (quoting State v. Lopez (I), 163 Ariz. 18, 115, 786 P.2d 959, 966 (1990)). Physical pain may be found where a conscious victim physically suffered for at least a short period of time. State v. Schackart, 190 Ariz. 238, 947 P.2d 315 (1997

Gratuitous Violence

The gratuitous violence factor focuses on the intent of the killer as evidenced by his actions. State v. Bocharski, 218 Ariz. 476, 189 P.3d 403 (2008). The fact finder must consider the killer’s intentional actions to determine whether he acted with the necessary vile state of mind. The state must make two showings. The state must first show that the defendant
did, in fact, use violence beyond that necessary to kill. The state must also show that the defendant continued to inflict violence after he knew or should have known that a fatal action had occurred. Id.
The showing of using violence beyond that necessary to kill often involves a “barrage of violence.” State v. Ceja, 115 Ariz. 413, 417, 565 P.2d 1274, 1278 (1977). See Bocharski, 218 Ariz. at 494 ¶ 86, 189 P.3d at 421 (twenty-four knife injuries to head and face, including eight stab wounds that penetrated deep into face and neck, unnecessary to cause death); State v. Detrich, 188 Ariz. 57, 932 P.2d 1328 (1997) (three stab wounds were fatal and thirty-seven others were excessive, constituting gratuitous violence);


I may have not interpreted some of these factors correctly so you can look up Arizona Laws yourself and see what you think

 

[KMouse]

I posted this before (I actually stole it from another poster, can't remember who :blushing. They came up with the following scenario. This is the first theory I've heard that, to me at least, makes sense.

Jodi is on her way to Mesa. She calls Travis several times, finally leaves a message that she wants to apologize. He calls her back, they argue for a little while, and finally, because he is basically a nice guy, he agrees she can stop by to apologize in person.

She gets there, fake grovels about whatever thing(s) she did that inspired that 5/26 text. She says she knows they can no longer have a romantic relationship but hopes they can remain friends. Because Travis is a decent person, he forgives her. Big hug. Big hug leads to more. We know Jodi has slept with all her previous boyfriends after she broke up with them, so she knows this role well. They have sex one last time for old times sake. She pretends to leave, comes back, and kills him.

I think the last hook she had in him was the money for the car.
Once she got the door open on that she used sex.

 

[Zeno49]

I hope they're assessing the evidence. There's really no need to assess her or him in this case. It's obvious that she killed him and lied and that it wasn't in self defense. To the extent the juries' comments reflect Juan's tone and manner of presentation, I think that would be unfortunate. Like the "question" or any sarcasm coming off the jury--that just shouldn't happen. That was the point of my response to your post. I hope they are making a rational assessment based on the evidence and not on Juan's style and sarcasm.

JM has been the subject of criticism regarding his conduct of the JA trial. Many of the Monday quarterbacks and “talking head” attorneys on In Session, NG, JVM shows have been very critical of JM.

I’m of the opinion that doing direct and cross exams in a live trial is very much a matter of style and personal preference. There is NO one way to skin a cat. “One size fits all” does not apply here.
Im sure every District Attorney has his/her preferred methods and these are based on style, personality, effects of past performance, and skill sets in place. This is true in running a business of being a politician and being a doctor. Anybody conducting the prosecution case of JA would be criticized because the observer feels “he knows better”.

JM has a certain style that is unique and for many very effective. JM is very unusual in that he doesn’t refer to notes and he has no legal assistants sitting with him at the table. Unlike Nurmi JM is very animated and passionate. Unlike Nurmi JM moves around and does not read from a pre written script.
JM has an excellent disciplined and highly trained mind. He on occasion gets flustered and gets lost in awkward sentences with tortuous syntax but he usually can take a deep breath and can re- before firing again. JM is able to get into a “zone” where he implicitly knows where he is going and what expects to get out of JA. His use of sarcasm is deliberate since that is what is needed to chasten an overly arrogant JA. His brashness is deployed to counteract JA smugness and insouciance.

Naturally JM’s style is not for everybody. But JM is not competing in a beauty contest either. As a stark contrast to the elephantine, and painfully phlegmatic Nurmi, JM is a breath of fresh air and is likely welcomed by most if not all of the Mesa jury.

 

[suspicious1]

MONEY!!!! i think she got $800 from DB and deposited it in those WAMU accounts right after she left his house.

and i believe JM has some info that matt was with her at DB's house----there's something more to that story, for sure. maybe we'll find out in rebuttal what he's got.

I hope we do find out because that's been bugging the hell out of me..

How far does Matt live from DB?

 

[megmono]

Interesting. And how many 5 gallon gas cans could possibly have been returned to that one WalMart on that particular day?

Also anytime I have returned things at Walmart, they ask for my ID. You are only allowed a certain number of returns per year.

 

[thefragile7393]

A lot of us here are convinced JA is guilty (heard it out of her own mouth) well....any how as avid trial watchers when was the last trial you felt the defendant was NOT GUILTY or were persuaded they were Guilty after watching the trial.

Last time I was not sure was David Westerfield in VanDam case. I was convinced by the evidence at trial at the beginning I was not sure.

Hmmm.....I can't really remember many. Amanda Knox I am still not sure of but i haven't really researched enough. Darlie Routier I suspected was guilty but wasn't sure if it was her husband and her the accomplice or if he was involved at all. Trial transcripts show the true story.

There is a local case that I am still not sure if as regards guilt....someone is on DR (put there in the late 80's) where the only evidence of confession comes from the interrogating detective-it was not videotaped, recorded, nor any confession signed or witnessed. Not sure if this person is innocent completely but I would love to see a new trial at least....putting someone on DR with no hard evidence of a confession does not sit well with me.

Sent from my SGH-T989 using Tapatalk 2

 

[G&AMom]

Good afternoon, good peeps. I hope that everyone had a nice weekend. I'm kind of glad that there isn't courtroom action in the JA trial today because I am following local (Detroit) breaking news in a major Federal case. Enjoy your day :great:

**verdict watch**Feds Indict Former Detroit Mayor - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community

Detroit seems like it's going through the hardest of the hard times. My husband was born & grew up there (went to Cass Tech HS). I always enjoyed visiting Michigan.

 

[DebinGA]

What mitigating factors remain for this jury to consider? Jodi's obviously not mentally deficient. No childhood abuse of note. She was 28 at the time, so not a "youth". She's not only shown no remorse for killing Travis, but she's added to her original offense and his family's pain via vile, false accusations of pedophilia. Other than claims she's been a model prisoner, what mitigating factor/s will the defense cite that even one juror will believe?

 

[nightwatch]

JM has been the subject of criticism regarding his conduct of the JA trial. Many of the Monday quarterbacks and “talking head” attorneys on In Session, NG, JVM shows have been very critical of JM.

I’m of the opinion that doing direct and cross exams in a live trial is very much a matter of style and personal preference. There is NO one way to skin a cat. “One size fits all” does not apply here.
Im sure every District Attorney has his/her preferred methods and these are based on style, personality, effects of past performance, and skill sets in place. This is true in running a business of being a politician and being a doctor. Anybody conducting the prosecution case of JA would be criticized because the observer feels “he knows better”.

JM has a certain style that is unique and for many very effective. JM is very unusual in that he doesn’t refer to notes and he has no legal assistants sitting with him at the table. Unlike Nurmi JM is very animated and passionate. Unlike Nurmi JM moves around and does not read from a pre written script.
JM has an excellent disciplined and highly trained mind. He on occasion gets flustered and gets lost in awkward sentences with tortuous syntax but he usually can take a deep breath and can re- before firing again. JM is able to get into a “zone” where he implicitly knows where he is going and what expects to get out of JA. His use of sarcasm is deliberate since that is what is needed to chasten an overly arrogant JA. His brashness is deployed to counteract JA smugness and insouciance.

Naturally JM’s style is not for everybody. But JM is not competing in a beauty contest either. As a stark contrast to the elephantine, and painfully phlegmatic Nurmi, JM is a breath of fresh air and is likely welcomed by most if not all of the Mesa jury.

the thanks button was not enough. your post conveyed what i was thinking about jm's style.

 

[callyn]

eeek, just had an earthquake - In Calif. just never know when it will continue into "the big one".:what: seems to be over for now :seeya:

eta: sorry for the o/t, got a little shook up and home alone

 

[rose222]

I posted this before (I actually stole it from another poster, can't remember who :blushing. They came up with the following scenario. This is the first theory I've heard that, to me at least, makes sense.

Jodi is on her way to Mesa. She calls Travis several times, finally leaves a message that she wants to apologize. He calls her back, they argue for a little while, and finally, because he is basically a nice guy, he agrees she can stop by to apologize in person.She gets there, fake grovels about whatever thing(s) she did that inspired that 5/26 text. She says she knows they can no longer have a romantic relationship but hopes they can remain friends. Because Travis is a decent person, he forgives her. Big hug. Big hug leads to more. We know Jodi has slept with all her previous boyfriends after she broke up with them, so she knows this role well. They have sex one last time for old times sake. She pretends to leave, comes back, and kills him.

Why would she do so much to have no trace of her in Arizona but then tell Travis about going to see him? Strangers on the road wouldn't remember her but having Travis' roommates and friends know about her presence in his home would mean she did all the gas can/hair dye stuff for nothing at all.

 

[lilyet]

IMO, JM treatment of Jodi. He is treating her like the "killer headed to death row" that she is. He needs to show the jury that she is not worthy of respectful gentle treatment. He has to call her out on her lies and destroy her "poor abused me" posture. He is doing great.

 

[popsicle]

I know nurmi wanted off this case, I know there were others before him, including JA, but I don't know why nurmi could not get off this case, does anyone know why?

Because he didn't file properly and timely. imo

 

[G&AMom]

I know nurmi wanted off this caseW, I know there were others before him, including JA, but I don't know why nurmi could not get off this case, does anyone know why?

Not sure I have every fact correct, but:

Jodi originally had two attorney from the Public Defender's office appointed to her, one of which was Nurmi. Jodi petitioned to be her own attorney, and the two PD lawyers were assigned to advise her. The she wanted her attorneys back. The original primary PD lawyer said there was a conflict of interest (she had represented someone else involved in this case, don't know who, and was also undoubtedly thanking her lucky stars), so that attorney was removed, and Nurmi was put back on the case along with Wilmott. Nurmi asked to be removed because he had left the PD office and was in the process of starting up his own practice. Judge said no, the state will pay you for your services. Nothing Nurmi could do to get out of it.

If I had to guess, I would say the issue with the judge was that every time a new attorney is assigned they ask for a long delay to familiarize themselves with the case. Jodi had already been in jail for two years at this point. People have differing opinions on whether Nurmi really made much of an effort to get off the case: some feel he is genuinely stuck there, some feel he was happy to have the income just when he needed it. Perhaps it's both.

 

[lilyet]

eeek, just had an earthquake - In Calif. just never know when it will continue into "the big one".:what: seems to be over for now :seeya:

o/t coming in as a 5.2 , southern ca.

 

[suspicious1]

It's probably already been discussed somewhere (you guys are MAD posters!), but what did you all think of the juror questions about JA's relationship with her mother and father? I wonder if some jurors are trying to gauge how a death sentence will sit with the folks.

Two cents.

IMO, all it did was show that she was a liar even in her earlier years and her parents disciplined her for it. It seems Jodi was a handful in her teen years and her parents were probably just fed up with it all. IMO, it shows a pattern. Jodi went from LYING teen to a LYING murderer.

IMO, her parents probably tried their best to raise and support Jodi but Jodi wanted to do her own thing....like now..

I did notice that after the parents closed down the restuarants? The money wasn't plentiful like before and Jodi decided to move out.. IMO, they could no longer cater to Jodi and so she moved on....

Jodi wants people to take of her financially and when that falls flat...Jodi is on to the next one.

Just my :twocents:

 

[Gypsy Road]

uh,IDK, WTH? IDK, PLS PM ACRO list, if it's NTMT...TY

RTC
TFS
KLS
DSW
WSD
TRR
UOL
VFD
:waitasec::waitasec:

WTF?:waitasec:

:floorlaugh: