long weekend break: discuss the latest here #114

[ElleElle]

We'd be lucky if it took an hour. Probably take the whole day. :twocents:

The biggest annoyance with this juror kerfuffle is that it's gonna take up an hour or more tomorrow before they get the Brady Bunch's housekeeper on the stand. :banghead:

 

[JusticeJunkie]

No but I believe others can obtain a copy. I will try to get a copy tomorrow.

Sorry, I was on the other thread by mistake. Is it the motion you want a copy of?

 

[BeachGirlFromPA]

When I heard about the most recent Motion For Mistrial I got the same feeling I get when watching a pro football game. The kicker misses a seemingly inconsequential one point kick....and I get a sick feeling that THAT one point could determine the entire outcome of the game....
Of course I want a guilty verdict, and I also want Tricolor to be the juror with the most telling questions that we have all heard. And IF she committed misconduct, and IF she is dismissed, there is a chance that one very strong and convincing voice for a guilty verdict will be gone. Trials should be about evidence and justice. Sometimes it's the devil in the technical and strategical details that delivers the verdict.
I hope it's a lot of to do about nothing. My gut tells me that we just might be here a month from now speaking about this juror and this motion and what happened (we speculate) because of it. This is a trial about TA's horrendous murder. Every little bump is like the ripple effect. I hope I'm wrong. Sometimes the bad guys win. If they win because they play fair and square, I have no beef. If they win because of an unplanned utterance of a well meaning but impetuous juror, I will be sick about it. I don't see a mistrial, I just don't like giving up one of the good jurors, especially if her own comment was her ticket out. Justice needs every single juror vote we can get.

 

[SCSam]

Oh wow wonder why

Jurors could have been asked a few imnoctuous questions and just answered without obviously "ratting" someone out... #5 could have been the one who laughed and jurors were asked if they heard her.... or something else as stupid.. IMOO

 

[JSR]

The biggest annoyance with this juror kerfuffle is that it's gonna take up an hour or more tomorrow before they get the Brady Bunch's housekeeper on the stand. :banghead:

THANK YOU Steely!!!!!!!!!! That's who she reminded me of!!!!!!!! It was driving me crazy!!!!!

 

[strawberry]

So I haven't read back through the thread...but looks like the DT thinks Multicolor is biased? This is based on tweets i saw that the juror mentioned in the motion has multi-color hair. Wasn't KCC worried that she was prodefense? LOL

 

[ElleElle]

BBM~ Alice? :floorlaugh:

The biggest annoyance with this juror kerfuffle is that it's gonna take up an hour or more tomorrow before they get the Brady Bunch's housekeeper on the stand. :banghead:

 

[Pensfan]

I'm watching NG and JA is bawling on tv. My doberman is growling and barking at her. LOL This must be caused by some type of instinct about evil, eh?

 

[JSR]

Eh, I always considered it merely advisory

Oye. I'm a Nazi about it. I let some things slide. Except case citations. If I'm working on a brief the citations WILL be cited properly. It's a pet peeve of mine.

 

[JusticeJunkie]

Got some activity on the case history:

Filing Date Description Docket Date Filing Party
3/31/2013 MOT - Motion - Party (001) 4/1/2013
NOTE: MOTION FOR MISTRIAL: JUROR MISCONDUCT
3/31/2013 OBJ - Objection/Opposition. - Party (001) 4/1/2013
NOTE: DEDEFENDANT’S OBJECTION TO ELICITING TESTIMONY OR MAKING ARGUMENT RELATED TO AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES FOR WHICH PROBABLE CAUSE HAS NOT BEEN FOUND

 

[JSR]

Sorry, I was on the other thread by mistake. Is it the motion you want a copy of?

Nope I want the witness list.

 

[JusticeJunkie]

Here's the motion the DT filed about juror 5:

http://media2.abc15.com/html/pdf/AriasJuror.pdf

Given the evidence that came forward on March 28, 2013, it is beyond legitimate dispute that Juror # 5 is not fair and impartial making her unfit to continue as a juror.
The question for legitimate dispute can be raised centers around whether her misconduct warrants a mistrial because of the effect that this misconduct necessitates that this court declares a mistrial.

This is a snippet, and the fact that the sentences don't make sense goes to Nurmi. lol

 

[pip]

The biggest annoyance with this juror kerfuffle is that it's gonna take up an hour or more tomorrow before they get the Brady Bunch's housekeeper on the stand. :banghead:

I bet she wears birkenstocks, doesn't shave, and has a 'woman power' tattoo somewhere on her bod. Not picking up the Alice vibe much. She oozes manhate from her pores. I hope they finish asap and then put her back in the time machine to jettison her back to the 1970's where she lives and does all of her research. :facepalm:

 

[PrincessSezMe]

Hln nancy grace playing interrogation videos. She wants a lie detector test and says she's not a murder, than she tells Flores that he is so weird anyway. Geez

I watched all 18 tapes this weekend, and she is a scary piece of work. Loved where she's stealing paper and trying to decide whether to stick it in her tunic pocket, or stuff it down her pants. And the female LE caught it immediately as soon as she picked up the pad of paper and looked at it! That girl just can't help but snoop and pilfer can she? Into the garbage can, picking up the voice recorder off the table every time someone walked out of the room (Det. Flores finally took it away from her), whatever she can get her hands on.

She is definitely cray, cray. And so am I for subjecting myself to 9 plus hours of her cray, cray :crazy:.

 

[seguek9]

If anyone hasn't read "We the Jury" yet, co-written by seven of the jurors in the Scott Peterson case, you might want to read it in the downtime that this trial offers. It will be like Tums for your soul, especially when you compare the evidence in this case to that in SP's.

:moo:

:great: recommendation!!! Especially for newbie trial followers!

Moo as well

 

[MeeBee]

Here's the motion the DT filed about juror 5:

http://media2.abc15.com/html/pdf/AriasJuror.pdf

Given the evidence that came forward on March 28, 2013, it is beyond legitimate dispute that Juror # 5 is not fair and impartial making her unfit to continue as a juror.
The question for legitimate dispute can be raised centers around whether her misconduct warrants a mistrial because of the effect that this misconduct necessitates that this court declares a mistrial.

This is a snippet, and the fact that the sentences don't make sense goes to Nurmi. lol

I was just about to say, huh? That is a confusing sentence. Someone wrote this in a tizzy! :floorlaugh:

 

[Harmony 2]

Off topic posts have been moved to 'Sidebar' where they belong... so if you are looking for a missing post check there...

 

[panthera]

Got some activity on the case history:

Filing Date Description Docket Date Filing Party
3/31/2013 MOT - Motion - Party (001) 4/1/2013
NOTE: MOTION FOR MISTRIAL: JUROR MISCONDUCT
3/31/2013 OBJ - Objection/Opposition. - Party (001) 4/1/2013
NOTE: DEDEFENDANT’S OBJECTION TO ELICITING TESTIMONY OR MAKING ARGUMENT RELATED TO AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES FOR WHICH PROBABLE CAUSE HAS NOT BEEN FOUND

What exactly did this juror allegedly do that warrants a mistrial?

 

[JSR]

Eh, I always considered it merely advisory

Ugh but my biggest pet peeve is when short form is used before long form. I know it happens. And it's when too many people are working on a brief and paragraphs are being cut and pasted. So sometimes the short form gets put in the beginning of the brief before the long form. It drives me bonkers! That and improper use of signals. Drives me insane.

 

[Softail]

Jodi has already admitted to killing Travis. She claims self-defense but unless this juror commented on something specific I don't see how defense will win this one. Remember Judge Perry asking potential jurors who said they thought KC was guilty if they could put that aside and judge her fairly. Some said yes and were accepted. Some said no and were immediately dismissed. The judge was right there so I would think if it were something this person could not be fair in her judgment the judge would have dismissed her immediately. jmo

Gawd yes! This is why, nobody can possibly know what the jury is going to do. I recall that we were all worried about one juror. This is why, until the verdict is read, I'm not going to pretend I know what they are going to do.

Lambykins! :giggle: