Retrial for Sentencing of Jodi Arias - 1/15 thru 1/20 Break

[ElleElle]

I do wonder what will happen if Nurmi has the ability to subpoena witnesses, take audio or video interviews and he doesn't. We have seen posted links to verdicts that were overturned for not putting on a mitigating case. Nurmi has stated on record that he has fourteen mitigating witnesses l, and that he has done nothing to compel them to testify. I may be wrong, but IMO, I would think there is a strong case for ineffective counsel. IMO if he doesn't present evidence to the court that he has tried to compel these witnesses to testify then he has dropped the ball, and it would be big chance of retrial.

BBM ~ Nurmi may have had 14 witnesses, but if they won't testify in secrecy, that is their issue. Juan has offered alternatives such as subpoena, video testimony etc. I think the DT is just causing more drama and won't hold much water. JMO

 

[Madeleine74]

Respectfully snipped to address the above.

I have seen the arguments on here, that Jodi hasn't killed anyone else and probably won't...we can't predict the future and can't punish her for something she may not do.

My husband and I were just talking about this and something occurred to me.

WHAT IF, Travis had lived. What if Jodi did all the planning, subterfuge and things had just worked out a little different. Suppose she lost the will once the blood started flowing, abbreviated her attack and left him for dead, but he somehow survived.

Once we got to court and heard from Travis about all the stalking, tire slashing, social media hijacking, etc., PLUS the "ATTEMPTED MURDER".....

Followed by Jodi and her "abuse"/self-defense/pedophilia accounts. What would a jury do?

Would they want Jodi to have the option of being released, to pick up her stalking obsessive behavior again, or would they want her behind bars FOREVER, to protect every young man out there?

I think, having seen the pattern throughout her life, they would have no choice, but to give Jodi LWOP.

Having said that, Travis didn't live.

Jodi Ann Arias deserves AT least more punishment, than she would have gotten, had her attempt on Alexander's life failed. MOO

The tire slashing was never proved to be Jodi, so that wouldn't be allowed to come in at trial. Social media hijacking--I don't recall seeing any evidence of that nor was anything reported to authorities, though there's been discussion on here. So that might not have come in either. The stalking was never reported to the police so not sure what would happen there. Stalking is not a charge she was given, so a jury wouldn't be considering her fate based on that though they would hear about her obsessiveness for sure.

As for her claims about TA's abuse or whatever else, he would be able to testify to refute it all. His mistreatment of her via rude texts or whatever else wouldn't take away the attempted murder charge. Plus, Arias didn't report his abusive behavior to anyone so she'd be S.O.L. on that. There is no proof about any pedophlia, nothing on his computers, and so none of that would be a factor. Not sure his computer(s) would ever have been seized had he lived.

There would be no DP on the table so the case would be simpler from that angle too.

The attempted murder would be the big charge and the one that would get her and keep her in prison and it's the one thing there would be the most evidence of. Maybe 25 yrs to life? Maybe more than 25 yrs. She'd be put away for a good long time, perhaps for life. Going to... Perryville!

 

[ElleElle]

But it's not the poor defendant's fault her atty is stubborn. In fact she tried to get him removed and the judge refused, so she would certainly have grounds.

In general, I don't think a defendant that tries to fire her attorney, it is grounds for mistrial. Besides, Jodi has called most of the shots in this case. JMO

 

[MeeBee]

Okay, but that doesn't answer my previous question. So Juan's strategy might be to preempt them and discredit the "Phantom 14" including her family, but... how does Juan calling them have anything to do with avoiding the appeal issue of Ineffective Counsel by the DT not having called them as mitigating witnesses???

Becusse then you can't say the defense didn't do their job by not calling the witnesses because they were called, it negates the complaint. Unless you're just a slouch on cross the DT would be forced to elicit favorable and mitigating testimony. I think even back when the false report of Juan subpoenaing witnesses happened, AZL thought this was a brilliant move. He can still do it but only as a last resort.

 

[Val1]

Great article Rose. I wish JM could incorporate some of these thoughts into his closing.

What I truly found chilling was the article mentioned on his/her twitter(anyone want to send a copy to JA's mom/dad, perhaps it will resonate...):

"This may be what #JodiArias family was dealing with, to a greater or lesser degree"

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/13/magazine/can-you-call-a-9-year-old-a-psychopath.html?pagewanted=all&_r=1&

 

[Madeleine74]

BTW, for those of you who watch Dateline, this past Friday night was the story I had mentioned a couple times, about the 17 yr old foster daughter (Sabrina Zunich) who stabbed her foster mother 178 times with the couple's 13 yr old daughter seeing this and on the phone with 911. The foster daughter was having an affair with the foster father, who she said is the one that pushed her to kill his wife. The episode is on the NBC Dateline web site if you missed it.

 

[ElleElle]

I hope your right that she has crossed her t's and dotted her i's.

I'm confident the CoAs is familiar with JA, and so far they have done nothing for her.

 

[loveschows]

can it be called ineffective council when the dt has been offered by the court that the witnesses may keep their names private, and keep their faces from the cameras? and also that the courtroom spectators and media would be moved into another courtroom and watch video from there. let alone the first and foremost to subpoena them? it seems the court has made the dt aware of other possibilities, but im afraid cmja is calling the shots and the dt obeying. would this be the same circumstances as ineffectual council? doesnt seem like it, but i dont know.

 

[LinasK]

Becusse then you can't say the defense didn't do their job by not calling the witnesses because they were called, it negates the complaint. Unless you're just a slouch on cross the DT would be forced to elicit favorable and mitigating testimony. I think even back when the false report of Juan subpoenaing witnesses happened, AZL thought this was a brilliant move. He can still do it but only as a last resort.

BBM. How? They weren't the ones who called them. The Prosecution was.

 

[Hope4More]

Okay, but that doesn't answer my previous question. So Juan's strategy might be to preempt them and discredit the "Phantom 14" including her family, but... how does Juan calling them have anything to do with avoiding the appeal issue of Ineffective Counsel by the DT not having called them as mitigating witnesses???

There is zero chance she'd win an appeal based on ineffective counsel. The DT has already presented a legally adequate mitigation case and they're not done. There is no set number of witnesses that the DT must present to meet a legal definition of effective counsel. Collectively, their witnesses have already testified to all her listed mitigating factors, except BPD.

 

[MeeBee]

The tire slashing was never proved to be Jodi, so that wouldn't be allowed to come in at trial. Social media hijacking--I don't recall seeing any evidence of that nor was anything reported to authorities, though there's been discussion on here. So that might not have come in either. The stalking was never reported to the police so not sure what would happen there. Stalking is not a charge she was given, so a jury wouldn't be considering her fate based on that though they would hear about her obsessiveness for sure.

As for her claims about TA's abuse or whatever else, he would be able to testify to refute it all. His mistreatment of her via rude texts or whatever else wouldn't take away the attempted murder charge. Plus, Arias didn't report his abusive behavior to anyone so she'd be S.O.L. on that. There is no proof about any pedophlia, nothing on his computers, and so none of that would be a factor. Not sure his computer(s) would ever have been seized had he lived.

There would be no DP on the table so the case would be simpler from that angle too.

The attempted murder would be the big charge and the one that would get her and keep her in prison and it's the one thing there would be the most evidence of. Maybe 25 yrs to life? Maybe more than 25 yrs. She'd be put away for a good long time, perhaps for life. Going to... Perryville!

Actually if Travis were alive he'd be able to testify to all that, the stalking the tires, etc. His testimony would be the evidence just as Jodi is able to testify to things there is no proof of. And based in Travis' testimony they probably would be able to charge with something like stalking in addition to the attempted murder charge.

 

[ElleElle]

can it be called ineffective council when the dt has been offered by the court that the witnesses may keep their names private, and keep their faces from the cameras? and also that the courtroom spectators and media would be moved into another courtroom and watch video from there. let alone the first and foremost to subpoena them? it seems the court has made the dt aware of other possibilities, but im afraid cmja is calling the shots and the dt obeying. would this be the same circumstances as ineffectual council? doesnt seem like it, but i dont know.

Nope. No one is preventing the DT from calling its witnesses except the DT itself. JMO

 

[MeeBee]

BBM. How? They weren't the ones who called them. The Prosecution was.

It doesn't matter. If the jury heard the mitigating testimony it doesn't matter which side called them. You can't complain the testimony would have affected the jury's decision because they heard it anyway.

 

[ElleElle]

BBM. How? They weren't the ones who called them. The Prosecution was.

:waitasec: I'm confused. Who called the witnesses??

 

[MeeBee]

:waitasec: I'm confused. Who called the witnesses??

Lol no one it's just a hypothetical based around the DT's refusal to call witnesses and if Juan decides to call them himself. I don't think he will do that. But he will do his damnedest to make sure the defense is aware of every avenue they can take.

 

[LinasK]

It doesn't matter. If the jury heard the mitigating testimony it doesn't matter which side called them. You can't conplain the testimony would have affected the jury's decision because they heard it anyway.

Okay, but isn't the claim that the DT was ineffective because they didn't call them??? :waitasec: Just trying to understand here.
Still think Juan shouldn't have to do their job for them.

 

[MeeBee]

Okay, but isn't the claim that the DT was ineffective because they didn't call them??? :waitasec: Just trying to understand here.
Still think Juan shouldn't have to do their job for them.

No the claim would be the DT didn't present evidence that might have affected the jury's decision. That's the ineffective assistance. If the jury hears the evidence because the witnesses are called by Juan and mitigating testimony is elicited by the defense, it, once again, negates the claim that the jury didn't hear all the possible mitigating evidence.

 

[TartLemon]

Does she fear that William and Sandra will be as truthful as they were in their initial interviews with Det. Flores?

Perhaps they aren't the kinds of reliable liars the Defense feels it needs at this stage.

I'm just waiting for another Perry Mason moment like we had with the gas cans.

I don't care who blurts it, takes the bait, falls into it, etc...

I remember those Bill/Sandra interviews. They didn't doubt for a single moment she was guilty. Even before the arrest, when Jodi pretended to find out about the crime from 'friends', Bill/Sandy asked Jodi if she had anything to do with it. THEY KNEW.

IMO, Jodi is bored with this phase. Emotionally, mentally she's moved on to what's next. In her mind it's what's to come AFTER she's released back into the wild. Jodi already has her next CRIMES planned, but to her it's not a CRIME, but earned retribution.... payment for what she's been put through.

 

[Caylee Advocate]

IIRC, Darryl B. testified that he moved out of the home that he and CMJA shared, sometime in December, 2006. If that is true, how in the hell on 11/26/06 (date she was baptized by Travis) was she able to take Travis back to her home and he forced (yeah right) anal sex on her? If DB still lived there, I doubt TA even went to her house, and I also remember a Bishop saying he thought Travis had went back to Mesa following the baptismal. The lies just keep being uncovered. There is also this juicy morsel > SEE BELOW.




"Another woman, who wanted to only be known as, “Debbie,” said that her daughter “Ashley,” met Arias in October, 2006. Later in January, 2007, when Arias claimed that Brewer, “left her high and dry”…Ashley moved into Arias’s home, to help out with expenses. Ashley found it extremely troubling that Arias had a constant and steady stream of men in and out of her bedroom, at all hours. When these men would show up, Arias would order Ashley to her room, and tell her to shut the door. Ashley could clearly hear them, having sex. Arias would call these encounters “bible studies.” Ashley lasted all of three weeks, living with Arias but as many do, she found it difficult to extricate herself from Arias. Debbie had to step in and threaten Arias with a restraining order, in order to get Arias, to leave her daughter, alone. The same Arias that was trying to woo Alexander!! (Ashley met Alexander, as he visited, too) The same Arias, that wanted the world to know that, she wasn’t promiscuous!"

 

[ElleElle]

Lol no one it's just a hypothetical based around the DT's refusal to call witnesses and if Juan decides to call them himself. I don't think he will do that. But he will do his damnedest to make sure the defense is aware of every avenue they can take.

Yes, I don't think that State can call witnesses during this trial. AZL? Or anyone with an opinion.

Juan has given them every possible option for witness testimony. Being scared of him shouldn't be a reason. They shouldn't be scared of him if they don't lie. :lol: The interwebs making you look bad? Deal with it. It's a free society.