Retrial for Sentencing of Jodi Arias - 1/9-1/12 Break - Part 2

[Amster]

Never about Travis.....it's all about JA or Sherry. Both secretive....

 

[Madeleine74]

BBM

The Court of Appeals might know what's going on beneath the surface, and they've reversed the judge.

And now she's finally obeying the law.

Their opinion seems to hold some sway.

The Court of Appeals knows their decision on this particular issue subverts an appealable issue for Arias in the future (that's a good thing). The judge knew it too. Nurmi of course attempted to take the issue all the way to the supreme court and they said NO! This issue is now well and truly dead. It cannot be used by Arias in the future, it will not be used by any defendant in the future. The delay in this phase to litigate this issue means it.is.handled.forever since it went to CoA and then SC.

 

[mydirtysecret]

FTR, the DT did not file their motion for a stay with tge SCOA until Monday 01/05/2015. Stephens and the defense were told back on 10/30 that what they were doing was unconstitutional, and to remedy that to immediately release the testimony. From 10/30 until 01/05/15 there was nothing in front of the judge compelling her to defy the COA ruling, nothing. Not a stay, not a motion. Just an argument from the DT that at some juncture in time they planned to appeal that ruling.

 

[Madeleine74]

FTR, the DT did not file their motion for a stay with tge SCOA until Monday 01/05/2015. Stephens and the defense were told back on 10/30 that what they were doing was unconstitutional, and to remedy that to immediately release the testimony. From 10/30 until 01/05/15 there was nothing in front of the judge compelling her to defy the COA ruling, nothing. Not a stay, not a motion. Just an argument from the DT that at some juncture in time they planned to appeal that ruling.

Yeah... ? She knows this chess game being played. She knew the DT was going to appeal the decision. She knew what the outcome would be (she had to). So let them play their games. In the end they lost (as expected) and no judicial errors to be raised on Arias' future appeals. This is not just about this phase, but also they are playing the future appeals chess game too.

Again, what other death penalty case in AZ has ever has to contend with this issue before? From what I can tell, this is a first. And now it's been smacked down forever and by the highest court in AZ.

 

[dog.gone.cute]

:seeya:

Just checking in to see IF there is any news ... I know, it's the weekend, fat chance !

So awaiting the following:

- The Infamous Mystery Witness Transcript.

- Rulings from JSS on removing the DP and whatever other frivolous motions that were pending from the DT.

JMO but there is no doubt that someone had a little talking to JSS to get this Re-Trial moving ! JSS let those Motions pile up -- AND -- she repeatedly ignored the COA -- AND -- SC rulings on that super secret testimony.

She said Friday that should would have all these motions ruled on by Monday -- AND -- that Transcript needs to be ready for distribution ASAP !

Again, JMO but am preparing for the worst ... This entire Re-Trial has been nothing but a slap in the face to Travis, his Family, and Juan Martinez :gaah:

:moo:

 

[mydirtysecret]

Yeah... ? She knows this chess game being played. She knew the DT was going to appeal the decision. She knew what the outcome would be (she had to). So let them play their games. In the end they lost (as expected) and no judicial errors to be raised on Arias' future appeals. This is not just about this phase, but also they are playing the future appeals chess game too.

Again, what other death penalty case in AZ has ever has to contend with this issue before? From what I can tell, this is a first. And now it's been smacked down forever and by the highest court in AZ.

She's a judge. There is no way in hades she should've saw that as an appealable issue, ESPECIALLY after being slapped down by the COA. In order to run for judgeship, one must have experience as an attorney. That means a judge and justice is not supposed to be held hostage by the whims of defense attorneys and their antics because they have case law on their side. And any GOOD judge would know after being slapped down by the COA for allowing a murder defendant to take the stand in secrecy when not meeting the waller test BUT BECAUSE SHE WAS MANIPULATIVE is not now, our in the forseeable future an appealable issue.

 

[geevee]

BBM

JSKS hasn't merely forgotten the laws of the state, the CoA says that she has violated them.

I think what this adds up to for many WS'ers is that in the course of running her court -- it is her court, and she's in charge of it; a big job with no one else to hide behind -- she has unnecessarily delayed justice and unconstitutionally perverted it.

She has granted special rights to this one convicted murderer that no other similarly situated defendant enjoys.

I think what tipped the scales for some was her accommodation of the killer's demand to secretize witness names, witness lists, evidence, and actual testimony.

At the behest of this one killer, JSKS hides testimony from the public in violation of the laws of Arizona.

My significant dissatisfaction with the judge is less about her human imperfection in the job and more about the unconstitutional favoritism she shows to this guilty, especially cruel, lying murderer.

But she isn't accountable to me.

It's up to legislators to impeach her or voters to replace her -- or not.

As concerned as I am about this unconstitutional secrefying of public information, I am even more worried that once trial is finally finished that KN/JW will ask (and receive) that all previously sealed documents/hearings, etc. remain sealed throughout the appeals process, to of course "protect JA's rights". I do hope that once she's out of the spotlight the media will remain vigilant about ensuring all proceedings are made public. But I'm worried.

 

[Madeleine74]

BBM- it is precisely why we do not hold secret star chamber courts in this country. Our judicial system is constitutionally protected to be transparent for public and press to see. It is for this exact fact that you outlined that the public may not understand what's going on beneath the surface. In our country there is no surface in the judicial system, it is to be held in the most public manner possible so that the public doesn't have to look under veils of secrecy, we aren't supposed to guess what is going on under seal and in secret. This is a problem for every citizen who enjoys their constitutional freedoms. The way the entire trial had been conducted, which you agree is THE problem. If motions were able to be read, if testimony were able to be seen or at least heard then secret Stephens wouldn't be dealing with the theories we are seeing now. Every scrutiny she received, she earned when choosing to conduct Herr court room like she was in the KGB in cold war USSR

In theory yes. In practicality, there are always aspects of trials that the public doesn't know or doesn't find out until some future time. In-camera hearings, as one example, those happen in every case, or motions that get sealed. That too happens.

This trial really is an anomaly, with a defense team trying everything they can think of to get their client from getting a DP sentence, pulling stuff that other attorneys might never pull, and trying everything they can to set the killer up for her appeals later on. The judge is *so scared* the DT might get some of that spaghetti thrown to stick on the courtroom walls in the future, she is simply not taking any chances. All judges take some chances here and there. But in this case and with this judge the dynamics are such that this judge will not do anything that she feels might create a possible judicial error that the killer can later use, no matter how angry everyone gets and no matter how unfair it is to the public. And yes, I agree, it is totally unfair to the public, the media, and the interests of the public.

 

[mydirtysecret]

That's like saying, a judge should throw out the entire PT from a murder trial and be unable to present any evidence on a ludicrous motion by the defense that the prosecution in itself is unconstitutional, and the judge granting it because they are super smart to let the defense play their "games" and to prevent any future appeals issue. That sounds ridiculous. A judge can't bend and break to play their games, they are there to mediate In the pursuit of justice, make rulings based on decades of jurisprudence. Not play tickle totes with either side

 

[Madeleine74]

She's a judge. There is no way in hades she should've saw that as an appealable issue, ESPECIALLY after being slapped down by the COA. In order to run for judgeship, one must have experience as an attorney. That means a judge and justice is not supposed to be held hostage by the whims of defense attorneys and their antics because they have case law on their side. And any GOOD judge would know after being slapped down by the COA for allowing a murder defendant to take the stand in secrecy when not meeting the waller test BUT BECAUSE SHE WAS MANIPULATIVE is not now, our in the forseeable future an appealable issue.

Clearly that's just not true since the judge, in her ruling, laid out exactly what the issue was she was worried about and from what I read, could be a bit of a sticky gray area when the defendant did not (and perhaps refused to) waive her right to testify.

 

[mydirtysecret]

From the attorneys I've spoken with, the judges opine herself that she was worried that ja was just being manipulative, but that she was going to allow it since our delicate flower threw an adult sized temper tantrum. JSS knew she was wrong by her actions that day with doing exactly what jurisprudence instructed Her to do. Only after cmja threw the temper tantrum she blacked out court. There was no grey area. Jss didn't believe there was on 10/27 and didn't believe it now. Only cmja thought it was a grey area. She also thinks murdering her lover in cold blood is a grey area

 

[ElleElle]

FTR, the DT did not file their motion for a stay with tge SCOA until Monday 01/05/2015. Stephens and the defense were told back on 10/30 that what they were doing was unconstitutional, and to remedy that to immediately release the testimony. From 10/30 until 01/05/15 there was nothing in front of the judge compelling her to defy the COA ruling, nothing. Not a stay, not a motion. Just an argument from the DT that at some juncture in time they planned to appeal that ruling.

It's possible JSS was waiting for this to backfire. It did backfire, and her hands are now clean of this. The transcripts will be released, Jodi nor other witnesses will testify, the trial will come to a close, and she will be sentenced.

JMO

 

[Madeleine74]

That's like saying, a judge should throw out the entire PT from a murder trial and be unable to present any evidence on a ludicrous motion by the defense that the prosecution in itself is unconstitutional, and the judge granting it because they are super smart to let the defense play their "games" and to prevent any future appeals issue. That sounds ridiculous. A judge can't bend and break to play their games, they are there to mediate In the pursuit of justice, make rulings based on decades of jurisprudence. Not play tickle totes with either side

That's absolutely not what I am saying nor what I implied in any way. This particular issue has never (to my knowledge) been raised before in Arizona. There was actually an issue within an issue going on. It was that inner issue that the judge seemed to be most worried about. Having the CoA *and* the SC rule removes it from ever being an issue in this case and it won't become an issue in any future case. It sucks that this issue was ever raised, it sucks that the judge was askeered, but this was shot down not just for Arias but for every other defendant who might try this in the future in AZ. I'm trying to see the silver lining in this, which I know is kind of verboten in this trial.

 

[Madeleine74]

From the attorneys I've spoken with, the judges opine herself that she was worried that ja was just being manipulative, but that she was going to allow it since our delicate flower threw an adult sized temper tantrum. JSS knew she was wrong by her actions that day with doing exactly what jurisprudence instructed Her to do. Only after cmja threw the temper tantrum she blacked out court. There was no grey area. Jss didn't believe there was on 10/27 and didn't believe it now. Only cmja thought it was a grey area. She also thinks murdering her lover in cold blood is a grey area

Yes, we should discount what the judge actually wrote in her opinion to the motion (about the potential outcome legally if a defendant has not actually waived the right to testify) and go with the opinions and assumptions of people not involved in the case, who have no dog in the fight.

 

[daisydomino]

From the attorneys I've spoken with, the judges opine herself that she was worried that ja was just being manipulative, but that she was going to allow it since our delicate flower threw an adult sized temper tantrum. JSS knew she was wrong by her actions that day with doing exactly what jurisprudence instructed Her to do. Only after cmja threw the temper tantrum she blacked out court. There was no grey area. Jss didn't believe there was on 10/27 and didn't believe it now. Only cmja thought it was a grey area. She also thinks murdering her lover in cold blood is a grey area

What temper tantrum is this? I'm not trying to be argumentative here, I am genuinely asking because I really don't recall reading or hearing anything about JA's temper tantrums until lately. I probably just never noticed. Can you help bring me up to speed?

 

[AngelWings444]

Transcripts do not take a week or more to do, period. The transcript for that day is only 400 pages. That is nothing. Each objection and word from the other party goes on a separate line and the lines are double spaced if not more, for easy reading. IF the court wanted them released, they would have been released. A court reporter could have this done overnight if the judge asked/ordered them to do so. Since it was already ordered to be prepared, it should have been done a long time ago. Lawyers will ask for a transcript at the end of the court day and have it in their hands by the morning. It's not that hard and it's common practice during trial, except this one. This is a another delay, no doubt in my mind.

 

[MeeBee]

IF JSS is against the DP, as some have opined, then why did she deny the defense's multiple (at least 20 or more) motions to dismiss the DP from consideration?

I don't know how many times AZLawyer has told us the reasons for various decisions by the judge, not all of which make sense, but certainly many of them are a result of the judge either not having a choice at all (her hands are legally tied by the laws of AZ) or she is trying not to provide any reason for a successful appeal by Arias in the future, when everyone knows with 100% certainty Arias will be appealing regardless.

But little of what AZLawyer informs seems to be believed and spectators continue to insist JSS rules as she does because she either secretly supports the killer, or is against the DP, or hates the prosecutor, or wants to subvert justice, or any other number of reasons, none of which have any factual basis behind them. JSS is a weak scaredy-cat judge, but I don't see where she's on the side of the defendant.

Perhaps it would make people feel better if JSS ruled exactly how they themselves want, laws of the state and future appeals be damned.

Well, not only that, but she's a former prosecutor turned judge in a pro DP state. There's no way she is against the death penalty and let it stand in this trial this long. Perhaps when she denied all motions Monday people will be convinced but...not holding my breath.

 

[AngelWings444]

If it turns out JSS pulled a "long con" on JA and basically forced her & team to take their secretPrivateNoMedia issue all the way up the AZSC with the media appealing and KN filing, which is exactly what has happened, and this issue gets decided and the supreme court smacks down Arias and says "no you cannot secretly testify," which is exactly what has happened, and thus this issue can never successfully be raised on Arias' appeal, will the opinion on this (maneuver by the judge to force defense's hand) change? Why or why not?

JSS's job is not to "con" anyone. She is the judge in this case. Judges normally don't play games as you suggest, and it would be highly illegal if she did. You are suggesting she knew ahead of time that once she ruled, the media would take it to court, then COA would deny it, then it would be taken to the AZSC. NO judge would play such games, even JSS.

 

[ohreally]

I do think JSS got this one right. If JSS had released the secret testimony because of the COA ruling and then the ASC overruled the COA there certainly would of been a mistrial declared. I believe that is what she meant when she said the damage could not be undone, or something to that affect.
I agree she ignored the COA ruling, but are there procedures (besides a stay) for her to legally do this to protect the trial should the ASC overrule their decision?

 

[MeeBee]

Several days ago I suggested that one of the holdups is that the court reporter has to do the transcripts and it takes more time than the average person may realize. I also said that court reporters often have other work/other cases they are doing as well and that can add to a delay. That suggestion was poo-pooh'd in favor of the judge must be lying, the judge wants to subvert justice, the judge wants to defy the AZ supreme court, etc, etc, etc.

Turns out there was a pending appeal at the supreme court, which had to be decided first, and the court reporter does indeed have to do the work and transcribe/scope/verify the testimony and (gasp) it takes more time even though everyone insists it absolutely shouldn't. But yet it can.

The judge told the court reporter back in December to transcribe the testimony. Either there was a communication error or the CR ignored the judge.

We already knew about the appeal in the SC.