Retrial for Sentencing of Jodi Arias - 11/26 -12/02/14 In recess

Status
Not open for further replies.
  • #181
@william_pitts
COA ruling re: #JodiArias testifying in secret. @12News
B3ZBtY9CcAAGDCv.jpg:large

um, color me confused, why does that say october 2013????????? should it instead say 2014?

am I to giddy from smelling turkey fumes from my oven? lol
 
  • #182
Re: COA ruling
No court til Tues, but I hope she gets a call from Nurmi or Wilmott about this and just sulks about it all weekend.

I can't wait for Dr. DeMarte to get on the stand. Her professionalism and ability to answer a yes or no question with an actual YES or No will just makes Fonseca look worse than she already does.

Happy Thanksguving to everyone & an extra thanks to those who posts tweets & comments everyday so I can follow along. It is very appreciated.

Off to read the ruling...
 
  • #183
@ericksonvision: For those who've asked... today's ruling from the Court of Appeals regarding closing the court for "secret" testimony http://t.co/mIU4iQvLAc

image.jpg
 
  • #184
Seriously, did JSS seriously allow the defendant to testify in secret? For what reason? The only thing Nurmi mentioned at the Ct App was that witnesses felt threatened. Well, who at Perryville is watching this damn trial? What is he talking about?

ETA: I am just so mad. I will have to refrain from typing everything I'm thinking due to my own opinion of what it means to behave professionally. Hopefully you all will release the steam on my behalf.

Have no fear, AZL. I'm sure we will. :floorlaugh: But yes, it appears that the judge did allow JA to testify in secret. Maybe she got so used to bending over backwards to avoid appeals that she went too far.

Could she have known that this would prompt the media to go to the COA?
 
  • #185
Lol, they messed up, it's a typo. They meant 2014.
 
  • #186
Seriously, did JSS seriously allow the defendant to testify in secret? For what reason? The only thing Nurmi mentioned at the Ct App was that witnesses felt threatened. Well, who at Perryville is watching this damn trial? What is he talking about?

ETA: I am just so mad. I will have to refrain from typing everything I'm thinking due to my own opinion of what it means to behave professionally. Hopefully you all will release the steam on my behalf.

I'm mad, incredulous but also relieved that it's not some sudden mystery-witness that would proceed to destroy TA's reputation and that it is not some child testifying that TA did something to him/her.

For the life of me I can't understand how/why JSS allowed this. If Jodi threw a tantrum and said she wasn't go to testify, then JSS should have been like "Oh well, it's your life." Jodi WOULD have backed down.
 
  • #187
I can't copy & paste tweets but here is Dave Erickson's recent tweets:

"It is ordered "the court grants relief by vacating the superior court's order of 10/30/14 and closing the courtroom to the public and press...
".....during any testimony by Jodi Arias".

"OK gang, there's my gift to you on this Thanksgiving eve. Have a great Turkey Day"

It really pi$$es me off that it was her. Why on Earth did JSS close the courtroom to begin with? The only thing that makes me feel better is knowing it must s*ck to be JA right about now.
 
  • #188
But that can't be the whole order is it? Where are their arguments in support of their decision? Will that be released later?
 
  • #189
This was a bad, bad week for the killer. Yes, I've adjusted my calendars with appropriate adjustments from my marking pen. A week is what we used to know as "two days". Of the killer's reactions to examinations of testimony, observations of those in court are all we have. That includes a very few observations by eye of the camera. What perceptions leak through seem odd. Dr. Samuels testified that Arias has a jail psychiatrist & a therapist who prescribe anti-depressants and tranquilizers for her. He knows that from her medical records and because she told him so. The jurors wanted to know about that on March 21, 2013 & he answered their question. Under the influence of meds to cheer her, I believe the way she judges if her mitigation is going well is whether her attorneys & her witness are complying with her wishes.

Although it's tempting to guess Nurmi found Dr. Fonseca due to his clientele concentration, it would seem Arias located her. While she represented herself, she created her support list for mitigation and it did not remain secret. Included was a psychologist who visited her at the jail. (There was also a p.i., Dorian Bond.) She had access to the internet & again, someone may have referred her to Dr. F. during her search. We know Arias, so pedophilia would have been her interest when looking for an expert.

There's a trap in store when you're a liar & a deceiver. Arias cast about for someone to reinforce her allegations, a mouthpiece. The evidence was not there to support Arias nor the opinion of Dr. F. Arias failed to learn from her experience with Dr. Samuels. She claimed she was in traumatic stress a year after the murder and that it was an event she witnessed. His findings were shredded on the stand & he had failed to administer the ancillary deception probe. The further she exerts her will, the more she is exposed as a relentless killer. A crafty trick, with folders.

A nicely laid out theory, Tuba. But IIRC, Fonseca testified that she interviewed the murderer twice, once in May as well as once in August.
 
  • #190
This is going to be interesting. Jodi really gambled on this one and lost big. I think with the entire new strategy of the defense in the mitigation phase she wanted her testimony "secret" because she has changed her story AGAIN and did not want public scrutiny. Anyone following this case will tear a NEW version of her relationship with Travis apart.

She also has, IMO, put herself in a very precarious situation. I am sure the previous jury foreman, in his consultations with the defense, let them know that when Juan was questioning her, her behavior on the stand hurt her. She cannot act defiant and rebellious with Juan and play word salad games for hours without giving the jury a glimpse of who she really is. And yet, I don't believe she will be able to help herself.
 
  • #191
I remember her testimony well from the first trial. She is going to be a breath of fresh air.

She comes across as a very intelligent and confident and strong person. She really knows her materials and I can't wait until she gets her chance on the stand.

The jury will be glad to see her as well. Juan needs people like her to vouche for the correct analysis of Jodis obsessive relationship with Travis.

Nurmi will no doubt try to twist things around, however she can handle anything he tries to throw at her. She will speak the truth and show the truth to the jury.

IMO, I think after Juan's cross the other day the jury's eyes have been opened to the whole DT shenanigans and now the jury will be able to recognize the real truth when they hear it from Janene. We will most likely see a lot of affirmation head nodding from the jury when she gets on the stand.

Maybe we will get lucky and get some good questions too from the jury that can help us to see that the jury understands the real truth.

http://www.***************/show/n_1sio6rd

Dr. Janene DeMarte is like a ray of sunshine and truth #JodiArias
The #jodiarias trial is about to take a turn towards the truth, thanks to the very bright Dr. Janene DeMarte. Every member of the jury in original trial that opined said they found her very credible.

Snipped
RBBM

I think she's more like a hot shower to wash away all the slime. ;)
 
  • #192
@ericksonvision: For those who've asked... today's ruling from the Court of Appeals regarding closing the court for "secret" testimony http://t.co/mIU4iQvLAc

View attachment 64319

Didn't JSS give a ruling in Oct 2013 regarding secret witnesses that Nurmi used in his appeal filing to the COA? I thought I read that somewhere earlier.

Could be wrong...
 
  • #193
Have no fear, AZL. I'm sure we will. :floorlaugh: But yes, it appears that the judge did allow JA to testify in secret. Maybe she got so used to bending over backwards to avoid appeals that she went too far.

Could she have known that this would prompt the media to go to the COA?

She must have known they would appeal. But if she were setting up the appeal, she would have stated openly that it was JA testifying.

But that can't be the whole order is it? Where are their arguments in support of their decision? Will that be released later?

It looks like the whole order to me. Sometimes they issue a "short and sweet" order followed by a longer opinion, but in those cases they say "opinion to follow."

Maybe they didn't need to give their arguments because everyone with a law degree already knows that if it was JA testifying there would be no possible argument to justify it. Who would they need to convince? :gaah:
 
  • #194
Didn't JSS give a ruling in Oct 2013 regarding secret witnesses that Nurmi used in his appeal filing to the COA? I thought I read that somewhere earlier.

Could be wrong...

I think that was in November of 2013. In any case, that's not what this ruling or the appeal was about so it stands to reason it was a typo. The day JSS closed the courtroom was October 30, 2014.
 
  • #195
Lol, they messed up, it's a typo. They meant 2014.

I bet Nurmi is going to call for a mistrial because of this typo.
 
  • #196
But that can't be the whole order is it? Where are their arguments in support of their decision? Will that be released later?
I think their arguments in support of not allowing a defendant to testify in complete secret at their own trial, consisted of "Really?!", followed by "As if!", and then finally "Pffft!". :laughing:
 
  • #197
She must have known they would appeal. But if she were setting up the appeal, she would have stated openly that it was JA testifying.



It looks like the whole order to me. Sometimes they issue a "short and sweet" order followed by a longer opinion, but in those cases they say "opinion to follow."

Maybe they didn't need to give their arguments because everyone with a law degree already knows that if it was JA testifying there would be no possible argument to justify it. Who would they need to convince? :gaah:

I think that if she actually wanted the media to appeal and knew she'd be overturned, then I think she would have granted the stay the media asked for. She would have not let testimony continue, knowing that the courts of appeal would overturn her decision to grant a stay, that would result in the Defense's testimony being put to a stop abruptly and witnesses testifying out of order! All things that ultimately confuse a jury.

Oh, well then, if I were JSS right now, I'd feel plenty silly. The court of appeals didn't even bother explaining why her decision made no sense!
 
  • #198
@william_pitts
COA ruling re: #JodiArias testifying in secret. @12News
B3ZBtY9CcAAGDCv.jpg:large

Holy cow, the rumours were true! It was the murderer! What argument could there possibly be to make her testimony secret when she had publicly spent 18 days on the stand testifying?

I wonder if we will ever know what arguments were made to sway Judge Stephens and the COA.
 
  • #199
I think their arguments in support of not allowing a defendant to testify in complete secret at their own trial, consisted of "Really?!", followed by "As if!", and then finally "Pffft!". :laughing:

:laughing: I snorted juice out of my nose. TMI? :p
 
  • #200
I think that was in November of 2013. In any case, that's not what this ruling or the appeal was about so it stands to reason it was a typo. The day JSS closed the courtroom was October 30, 2014.

Thanks I reread it, you are correct.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
135
Guests online
1,483
Total visitors
1,618

Forum statistics

Threads
632,299
Messages
18,624,497
Members
243,081
Latest member
TruthSeekerJen
Back
Top