Jodi Arias Legal Question and Answer Thread *no discussion*

[AZlawyer]

I mean, the earliest that an appeal will be heard by a court and decided on.

Oh, OK. The first appeal will probably take a year at least. Then there will be other appeals. I think the average time in AZ to carry out a death sentence is 15 years or so.

 

[Linda7NJ]

Oh, OK. The first appeal will probably take a year at least. Then there will be other appeals. I think the average time in AZ to carry out a death sentence is 15 years or so.

I bet Jodi will request it be a "pay per view" event!




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[tlckgram]

In the VIS Is the family allowed to talk about things that weren't allowed into evidence? For example, to say how sad and sick it makes them that Jodi did particular things like try to submit fake letters or other things that the jury isn't aware of? I know they can't attack her personally since you already said that, but can they bring those things up to emphasize the pain of all this? TIA

 

[Paintr]

Quick question...

This next phase of the trial, JM will have DR Horn testify, from a medical standpoint, just how much pain TA suffered with this attack. What else could the prosecution offer to prove this crime was 'cruel'?

What could the DT offer to rebut this? Could they claim that JA, in her fog, is not responsible/did not intend cruelty? Who would testify to that?

Thank you kindly, in advance.

 

[K_Z]

Now that JA has had an official "psych admission status":

1. Will this be admissible (they jury hears) at any point in aggravation/ penalty/ sentencing phase?

2. Is there any way that this psych admission could affect the "guilty" verdict? (To cause the guilty verdict to be overturned?)

Second phase of questions, lol!

1. If her current attorneys step down/ or are fired, how long (roughly) would the judge allow the delay for her, or newly appointed attorney/s to get up to speed, before the aggravation phase commences?

2. Can you briefly summarize or outline what the relevant issues may be if Jodi decides to fire her attorneys and represent herself at this point in the trial?

TIA!

 

[AZlawyer]

In the VIS Is the family allowed to talk about things that weren't allowed into evidence? For example, to say how sad and sick it makes them that Jodi did particular things like try to submit fake letters or other things that the jury isn't aware of? I know they can't attack her personally since you already said that, but can they bring those things up to emphasize the pain of all this? TIA

They won't be allowed to reference evidence that wasn't admitted, no.

Quick question...

This next phase of the trial, JM will have DR Horn testify, from a medical standpoint, just how much pain TA suffered with this attack. What else could the prosecution offer to prove this crime was 'cruel'?

What could the DT offer to rebut this? Could they claim that JA, in her fog, is not responsible/did not intend cruelty? Who would testify to that?

Thank you kindly, in advance.

Dr. Horn will probably be the only witness re: cruelty. JA could testify that she never intended for him to suffer, but more likely her attorneys will just make that argument based on her prior testimony.

 

[pinkie60]

No. IMO there is about a zero percent chance of that happening.

jodi wants the victim impact statements videotaped. she had no problem looking at them when on the stand for 18 days, and all thru the trial.

 

[pinkie60]

:

I mean, the earliest that an appeal will be heard by a court and decided on.

when she appeals, what is it for? i assume it's for a new trial, is that right? so far, do you see any grounds she woud be granted a new trial?

i assume she makes an appeal, then it takes a long time for the court to review it, then it is either granted or denied. i kind of think she is up against a brick wall and none of her appeals will be granted, but for her i guess there is always hope.

 

[AZlawyer]

:

when she appeals, what is it for? i assume it's for a new trial, is that right? so far, do you see any grounds she woud be granted a new trial?

i assume she makes an appeal, then it takes a long time for the court to review it, then it is either granted or denied. i kind of think she is up against a brick wall and none of her appeals will be granted, but for her i guess there is always hope.

Yes, the appeal would request a new trial. I don't see any good grounds for appeal yet.

Now that JA has had an official "psych admission status":

1. Will this be admissible (they jury hears) at any point in aggravation/ penalty/ sentencing phase?

2. Is there any way that this psych admission could affect the "guilty" verdict? (To cause the guilty verdict to be overturned?)

Second phase of questions, lol!

1. If her current attorneys step down/ or are fired, how long (roughly) would the judge allow the delay for her, or newly appointed attorney/s to get up to speed, before the aggravation phase commences?

2. Can you briefly summarize or outline what the relevant issues may be if Jodi decides to fire her attorneys and represent herself at this point in the trial?

TIA!

Phase One:

1. No.

2. No.

Phase Two:

1. Zero days IMO. I think the most the judge would allow at this point would be for Jodi to represent herself with the same attorneys as advisory counsel.

2. The relevant issue would be whether or not she's competent to make that decision.

 

[Lark2]

2. Can you briefly summarize or outline what the relevant issues may be if Jodi decides to fire her attorneys and represent herself at this point in the trial?
TIA!

(inserted by by, answer to firing her lawyers)
2. The relevant issue would be whether or not she's competent to make that decision.

AZ Lawyer, could two things be going on consecutively here?:

1) Suicide watch
2) Competency evaluation because she wants to replace her counsel.

 

[Keyra6]

Can the jury ask either family or the mitigation specialist questions

 

[Keyra6]

Can the jury ask either family or the mitigation specialist questions?

 

[AZlawyer]

AZ Lawyer, could two things be going on consecutively here?:

1) Suicide watch
2) Competency evaluation because she wants to replace her counsel.

I believe that the Sheriff's Office announced she was on suicide watch. That wouldn't slow down the trial proceedings IMO.

I believe there is also a competency evaluation going on, either because (1) she wants to represent herself or (2) she wants to waive the right to present mitigating evidence--maybe both.

 

[AZlawyer]

Can the jury ask either family or the mitigation specialist questions

Only if they are testifying as witnesses. I don't think the jury can ask the family questions following the victim impact statements, because those are not treated as witness testimony (for example, there is no right of cross-examination). The mitigation specialist should not be testifying as a witness for any reason that I can possibly imagine.

 

[4Jacy]

Why can't laws be changed that those who receive the death penalty can actually receive it in a timely matter? I realize that those who were/are convicted have rights, but some of these death row inmates have served VERY long terms.

I am thinking specifically of Scott Peterson. It broken my heart (as it did so many others) what he did to Laci and Connor and her family/friends. Knowing he is still alive and pretty much enjoying his "life" in prison is just horrible.

Isn't there any way the laws can be changed so that the process can move along at a swifter pace, and justice can truly be done?

TIA

 

[AZlawyer]

Why can't laws be changed that those who receive the death penalty can actually receive it in a timely matter? I realize that those who were/are convicted have rights, but some of these death row inmates have served VERY long terms.

I am thinking specifically of Scott Peterson. It broken my heart (as it did so many others) what he did to Laci and Connor and her family/friends. Knowing he is still alive and pretty much enjoying his "life" in prison is just horrible.

Isn't there any way the laws can be changed so that the process can move along at a swifter pace, and justice can truly be done?

TIA

I believe there have been some recent steps taken to streamline the process, but there are still an awful lot of constitutional "hoops" that the government has to go through to make sure that there are no mistakes made. Killing someone is pretty serious, after all, even if it is being done for purposes of justice.

 

[GetToTheTruthNow]

All I know is that Beth Karas said the state has proof Jodi wrote the letters in her cell. I don't think she'd say that unless it were true. My understanding is that Juan has some sort of tangible proof but I don't know what it is, which means to me she wrote them and then passed them along to be either typed up or copied via copier. We probably will not know what it is until the whole trial is over, but it makes sense since the DT has not even tried to use them anymore.

Well I agree with most of that and maybe Beth has more info and I am not sure what the proof was that she wrote them in jail. However I do know that he said they were retyped and/or photo-copied, that Arias could not produce originals, and he hand an expert look at them before the trial and determined they were forgeries. The defense team can't use them because Juan made a motion to exclude them. I did find this:
----------------
"It was revealed that Arias and her cell mate had forged the letters in which Travis confessed to abusing Arias and being a pedophile.

The pair were caught writing secret messages in magazines using pens smuggled into a shampoo bottle. Arias managed to get the letters out of jail through her cell mate's mail and had someone electronically send them to her defense team. A guard found pieces of paper in Arias’ trash where she was practising to write like Travis.

"[The] Defendant had previously attributed the crime to intruders. She now argues that all of the letters must be admitted to support her domestic violence defense," prosecutors wrote in a motion to preclude the letters. "Defendant argues that the letters are relevant to her claim of self-defense and that she was a victim of previous 'sexual and physical abuse' by Mr. Alexander."

 

[GetToTheTruthNow]

BBM - IIRC she said she would speak to her attorney on Monday. I don't recall anything about "cops".

Not sure who BBM or IIRC are? I am talking about the email messages she was sending Travis before she killed him. I thought Chris said one message was about "going to the cops on Monday" before she killed him. Did she even have a lawyer before the murder?

 

[Itsy]

Not sure who BBM or IIRC are? I am talking about the email messages she was sending Travis before she killed him. I thought Chris said one message was about "going to the cops on Monday" before she killed him. Did she even have a lawyer before the murder?

BBM = Bolded By Me
IIRC = If I Recall Correctly

HTH :seeya: (Hope That Helps)

 

[GetToTheTruthNow]

The judge did not rule against the letters coming into evidence. The parties were in the middle of a hearing regarding the letters, with Jodi acting as her own counsel, when she asked to have her counsel reappointed. The first thing her lawyers did was to withdraw the request to have the letters admitted as evidence. IMO that suggests that her lawyers knew something that triggered ethical duties prohibiting them from introducing the letters as evidence.

Well, fair enough, maybe the Judge did not rule on them, but it was in Juan's legal brief to the Court--http://twitdoc.com/view.asp?id=87950&sid=1VV2&ext=PDF&lcl=JA-Forged-Letters.pdf&usr=zou2&doc=131073659&key=key-1ki5ktzu5xr8tpa2341t

"[The] Defendant had previously attributed the crime to intruders. She now argues that all of the letters must be admitted to support her domestic violence defense," prosecutors wrote in a motion to preclude the letters. "Defendant argues that the letters are relevant to her claim of self-defense and that she was a victim of previous 'sexual and physical abuse' by Mr. Alexander."

Juan goes on to say they could have been "forged, photo-shopped, or cut and pasted." Of course it appears now she practiced Travis's handwriting, had them smuggled them out, and electronic copies were sent to her defense team. (Or she handed 10-letters to them). Like you said, her lawyers knew something and that was likely what was in Juan's brief and the guards saying she was practicing Travis's handwriting (based on waste basket evidence).