Retrial for Sentencing of Jodi Arias #1

[krkrjx]

The house TA lived and died in still stands but the crime scene is no longer there. Seems the entire suite has new paint, carpet and baseboards, new shower doors installed. I doubt they will lift carpet or remove baseboards, etc., to look for any physical evidence. So it stands to reason that they will take measurements of the area perhaps, look at the closet shelves and possibly measure/weigh those. This all sounds rather "Columbo" to me and there may be a method to such madness but I can only see it pertaining to guilt issues, not mitigation. So I am still wondering how it all fits in to the current venue...the penalty phase. And I think maybe it does not fit in at all...maybe the judge granted the request because no harm will come of a PI visit to the crime scene, but denying the request might matter to an appeals court.

 

[AZlawyer]

Found an article re: why a forensic psychologist or psychiatrist (i.e., an expert witness) might want to visit the crime scene.

http://forensis.org/PDF/published/2013_CrimeSceneVisi.pdf

 

[krkrjx]

There is a LOT of info in that article.

Maybe the plan is to mitigate the cruelty factor (the many stab wounds) by saying it started in a location where she could not escape (she was cornered) and he kept coming. That's the only thing I can think of to explain away why one feels it necessary to stab a person over and over and over...and over.

It's anyone's guess what excuse can be dreamed up that will sound plausible to a juror.

I still think they should just give up this death wish and go for LWOP. I believe she will get that anyway and see no sense in putting everyone including the taxpayers through further ordeal.

 

[Gryphon610]

The house TA lived and died in still stands but the crime scene is no longer there. Seems the entire suite has new paint, carpet and baseboards, new shower doors installed. I doubt they will lift carpet or remove baseboards, etc., to look for any physical evidence. So it stands to reason that they will take measurements of the area perhaps, look at the closet shelves and possibly measure/weigh those. This all sounds rather "Columbo" to me and there may be a method to such madness but I can only see it pertaining to guilt issues, not mitigation. So I am still wondering how it all fits in to the current venue...the penalty phase. And I think maybe it does not fit in at all...maybe the judge granted the request because no harm will come of a PI visit to the crime scene, but denying the request might matter to an appeals court.

Something just keeps nagging me about the connection with Det. Flores' testimony about the closet shelving (though I don't really remember what he stated at trial) and Jodi's request to see his personal notes/files. Jodi is obsessed with Det. Flores being charged with perjury. Between his first thoughts that the gun was used first and then testimony in court that most likely the gun used last and the confusion of whether he based his initial theory after speaking to Dr. Horn or not, Jodi is intent on finding something that proves that Det. Flores lied and committed perjury. I agree that a lot of what she is attempting to do is for a bigger picture in her evil mind. To her it's always been about the "win". And that win can be as big as winning Travis when he was alive, killing him because she didn't win created another win for her, and now maybe getting to Deanna Reid, the Hughes, Det. Flores and DR. Horn during the resentencing trial. And on and on and on. She just keeps moving the bar on what a win is for her. And it will never stop as long as she is alive. And poor Travis and his death at her hands really truly means nothing to her.

 

[grammieto5]

I read the article, it was interesting, I could see this happening during the trial, before she was found guilty, but why now? I still don't understand why she's doing this, but then I'm still trying to figure out how CMJA was defending herself against Travis Alexander by stabbing him in the back? I'm starting to feel the same way about LWOP. I understand Travis' family wanting the DP, but maybe it's time to just end this circus.

 

[janx]

Has anyone see this yet?

https://www.superiorcourt.maricopa....rtCases/caseInfo.asp?caseNumber=CR2008-031021

8/21/2014 064 - ME: Trial Continued/Reset - Party (001) 8/21/2014
8/21/2014 REQ - Request - Party (001) 8/21/2014
NOTE: REQUEST FOR CAMERA COVERAGE AND MODIFICATION OF MAY 21, 2014 RULING

 

[MeeBee]

Has anyone see this yet?

https://www.superiorcourt.maricopa....rtCases/caseInfo.asp?caseNumber=CR2008-031021

8/21/2014 064 - ME: Trial Continued/Reset - Party (001) 8/21/2014
8/21/2014 REQ - Request - Party (001) 8/21/2014
NOTE: REQUEST FOR CAMERA COVERAGE AND MODIFICATION OF MAY 21, 2014 RULING

Is she asking for the cameras back?

 

[Tuba]

But we do know that Arias, far from being cornered in the bath-bedroom part of the Travis home, had two ways to exit the hall. One would have taken her out of harm's way and the other, which she chose, took her into the closet and then the bath. She was unable to give a reasonable answer as to her choice not to leave the residence.

 

[janx]

Is she asking for the cameras back?

My guess is that it's the media trying again.

 

[Hope4More]

Found an article re: why a forensic psychologist or psychiatrist (i.e., an expert witness) might want to visit the crime scene.

http://forensis.org/PDF/published/2013_CrimeSceneVisi.pdf

But CMJA is sending a PI, not a psych "expert."

 

[krkrjx]

But we do know that Arias, far from being cornered in the bath-bedroom part of the Travis home, had two ways to exit the hall. One would have taken her out of harm's way and the other, which she chose, took her into the closet and then the bath. She was unable to give a reasonable answer as to her choice not to leave the residence.

She was unable to explain that and I think once her expert gets to the "crime scene" she may see that there is no reasonable answer for it. It remains to be seen whether this expert is truly an expert in her field or one who will say/do whatever she is paid for.

After reading AZlawyer's posted article I can see the reason for wanting the scene visit: It will be easier to speak of what might have happened once she has "experienced" the scene for herself rather than just via hearsay. I must say that after reading the article I feel a bit better about this expert wanting to visit the scene. It feels now more like a professional doing a job correctly and completely rather than a PI hoping to disprove reality. IMO.

 

[AZlawyer]

But CMJA is sending a PI, not a psych "expert."

I don't think we know that at all. I think the implication was that she was sending the same witness who was performing an "evaluation" of her at the jail, which would be a psych expert.

ETA: Also, I thought the reference was to a "witness," and the PI would not be testifying.

 

[geevee]

Has anyone see this yet?

https://www.superiorcourt.maricopa....rtCases/caseInfo.asp?caseNumber=CR2008-031021

8/21/2014 064 - ME: Trial Continued/Reset - Party (001) 8/21/2014
8/21/2014 REQ - Request - Party (001) 8/21/2014
NOTE: REQUEST FOR CAMERA COVERAGE AND MODIFICATION OF MAY 21, 2014 RULING

Can't believe I missed that when I was at the docket earlier today, thanks for posting it. Since the media already asked for reconsideration of JSS's first rejection of their request (and was re-rejected), I wonder if they could ask again, or if it's coming from the defense (Miss Side Show herself)?

 

[RR0004]

Something just keeps nagging me about the connection with Det. Flores' testimony about the closet shelving (though I don't really remember what he stated at trial) and Jodi's request to see his personal notes/files. Jodi is obsessed with Det. Flores being charged with perjury. Between his first thoughts that the gun was used first and then testimony in court that most likely the gun used last and the confusion of whether he based his initial theory after speaking to Dr. Horn or not, Jodi is intent on finding something that proves that Det. Flores lied and committed perjury. I agree that a lot of what she is attempting to do is for a bigger picture in her evil mind. To her it's always been about the "win". And that win can be as big as winning Travis when he was alive, killing him because she didn't win created another win for her, and now maybe getting to Deanna Reid, the Hughes, Det. Flores and DR. Horn during the resentencing trial. And on and on and on. She just keeps moving the bar on what a win is for her. And it will never stop as long as she is alive. And poor Travis and his death at her hands really truly means nothing to her.

I see her wanting to do nothing more than inflict pain. I wonder if she's even concerned with saving her own life.

 

[MeeBee]

Can't believe I missed that when I was at the docket earlier today, thanks for posting it. Since the media already asked for reconsideration of JSS's first rejection of their request (and was re-rejected), I wonder if they could ask again, or if it's coming from the defense (Miss Side Show herself)?

Yeah, I wondered if it was the media again, but usually there is some indication along with the motion that it's coming from the media like it says CNN before it or something else. There's no indication here as to who it's coming from.

Guess we'll find out.

 

[LinTX]

I don't think we know that at all. I think the implication was that she was sending the same witness who was performing an "evaluation" of her at the jail, which would be a psych expert.

ETA: Also, I thought the reference was to a "witness," and the PI would not be testifying.

The minutes refer to issues re: 4 types of people: experts, witnesses, jurors and "her Investigator". In every mention of the witness that was at the jail, she is referred to as either "Ms.Arias' expert" or "Defendant's expert". First saying she appeared telephonically & was questioned, once when JM says he has no issue with delay as long as dates are set to interview both "Defendant's expert" and civilian witnesses, and finally when a date was set for State to interview "Defendant's expert".

The entry re: visitation of crime scene is at the end and set apart from business of setting interview times of expert, availability of witnesses, number of jurors, etc. and specifically says Arias requests State to set a time for "her Investigator" to observe crime scene.

I think it is actually her P.I.

 

[krkrjx]

I believe the crime scene visit is for one purpose regardless of who it is that is going in. The scene has changed enough that they are probably not going there looking for physical evidence; it seems they instead want to get a "feel" of the space, perhaps dimensions of specific areas. One of the biggest hurdles for the defense remains the number of wounds inflicted which makes it appear as a crime of rage, almost completely negating any claims of self-defense. "Why didn't you run when you had the chance?" is one question the murderer has never been able to answer to anyone's satisfaction. Maybe the expert and/or PI need to see firsthand why this question still haunts.

 

[FigTree]

There is a LOT of info in that article.

Maybe the plan is to mitigate the cruelty factor (the many stab wounds) by saying it started in a location where she could not escape (she was cornered) and he kept coming. That's the only thing I can think of to explain away why one feels it necessary to stab a person over and over and over...and over.

Good thoughts. I think the PI is there to confirm something which gives JA an advantage -
I wondered if the viewing will take place at night where light levels are minimal and vision compromised.
I also wondered if the request has come about due to some new witness JA has - maybe its not to do with JA, but someone else's heresay that the PI has to confirm something.
Im waiting for it to backfire.

 

[Ricki]

Regarding the camera coverage, I read on the st vs jodi arias that it might be CNN's sister station that filed but who knows. They seem just as confused as us. It remains to be seen.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Love Never Fails]

Yeah, I wondered if it was the media again, but usually there is some indication along with the motion that it's coming from the media like it says CNN before it or something else. There's no indication here as to who it's coming from.

Guess we'll find out.

Request submitted by Party 001, that is the defendant, Jodi Arias.