Retrial for Sentencing of Jodi Arias - 11/3/14 Hearing - Part 2

[Brattinella]

Torturing of pets?? WHAT?

 

[Hatfield]

Morning Everyone!

So Nurmi can willfully do this and cant be disbarred for throwing the case?

OMG another instance where the justice system is being held hostage.

That just doesn't seem right and its downright unethical.

IMO

As we have seen other cases where judges use their power to threaten an attorney with contempt, we have not seen the judge use her power to control him. There were numerous times the judge should have threatened Nurmi with contempt or theaten to report him to the attorney oversight board.

JSS is not using her power effectively as a judge to control him or her courtroom. The article has this part...

" tactics aimed at creating errors on purpose should be prohibited and that judges should report such actions to attorneys’ ethical oversight boards."

 

[Hatfield]

Torturing of pets?? WHAT?

During the police interrogation, Jodi admitted to kicking a dog. She downplayed the incident but most of us think it was a very violent kick to the dog. The dog disappeared after that day and a lot of us speculate she may have killed the dog with that kick or multiple kicks. She may have took the dog away and buried him and then claimed he ran off after being kicked.

JA is evil.

I think it may have been her own family pet if i am not mistaken. The interview with the police is available as I have seen this part. Just dont have a link handy.

I am so glad she did not stab Travis dog to death. I bet it crossed her mind after she stabbed Travis to death.

 

[Miss Judy]

As we have seen other cases where judges use their power to threaten an attorney with contempt, we have not seen the judge use her power to control him. There were numerous times the judge should have threatened Nurmi with contempt or theaten to report him to the attorney oversight board.

JSS is not using her power effectively as a judge to control him or her courtroom. The article has this part...

" tactics aimed at creating errors on purpose should be prohibited and that judges should report such actions to attorneys’ ethical oversight boards."

I supported Judge Stephens' restraint throughout the first trial, but I'm not behind her on this retrial; she's just taken a deep, deep dive into strange waters, IMO. Standard disclaimer, not a lawyer, etc., but...WHY in the world would she let Nurmi run roughshod over her like this? The Mom/Grandma in me wanted her to grab him by the ear and say "LISTEN young man, you can't just stamp your feet and declare that you're not going to play in MY courtroom! Now BEHAVE yourself or I'll send you to your room...errr, find you in contempt!" Geez Judge Sherry, do the Judge thing please.

He can defend her without all of these shenanigans. Well, I guess he really can't, because they have NOTHING. Hence the circus, it's all they've got.

 

[ShadyLady]

When the victim's rights conflict with those of the defendant, the defendant's rights are superior. I'm floored. Wow.

If this link has been posted already I apologize...I try to follow closely

http://www.examiner.com/article/con...on-jodi-arias-trial-bill-and-sandy-arias-talk

Here I thought she was a Convicted Felon!

Nurmi sounds like she is an innocent librarian. Does Jodi write what comes out of his mouth now?

 

[Brattinella]

During the police interrogation, Jodi admitted to kicking a dog. She downplayed the incident but most of us think it was a very violent kick to the dog. The dog disappeared after that day and a lot of us speculate she may have killed the dog with that kick or multiple kicks. She may have took the dog away and buried him and then claimed he ran off after being kicked.

JA is evil.

I think it may have been her own family pet if i am not mistaken. The interview with the police is available as I have seen this part. Just dont have a link handy.

I am so glad she did not stab Travis dog to death. I bet it crossed her mind after she stabbed Travis to death.

As if I didn't hate her enough. Kicking a pet to death is just, no words.

 

[Hatfield]

As if I didn't hate her enough. Kicking a pet to death is just, no words.

Just to be clear. She downlplays it during the interview and only admits that she kicked the dog and then the dog disappeared after that.

But putting 2+2 = 4, and knowing how she also downplayed the stabbing of Travis, it seems pretty obvious the kicking episode was most likely much worse than she made it out to be.
And the odds of the dog disappearing right after that indicates to me at least that she most likely killed the dog that day.

 

[Dmacky]

Here is a 20 + minute interview of JA that I had not seen in it's entirety.
This was after she was arrested. She's UPSET that her freedom had been taken away, for something she didn't do :furious:
I swear I have never seen anything like this woman in all my life. She is absolutely cray cray.




http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HaJmaW6YxuE

 

[daisydomino]

Could that explain a lot? Do you think they are intentionally sabotaging their own case?

No, I don't think so. They're doing the best they can with what they have. The rest of Ms. Murphy's article reminded me why everything this time seems so familiar.

 

[LinTX]

First, I meant to thank AZLawyer yesterday for correcting the info re: mitigation specialists and attorney/client privilege.

Next, it may just be that for some reason a big old tinfoil hat made it's way to my head overnight, but something is bothering me - please feel free to tell me I'm paranoid, way too cynical, and I'm overthinking this!

I think we were all pleasantly surprised, maybe shocked is a better description, to see that court video posted and rushed to watch it, etc. Several observations about JA & MDLR's little gab fest followed, because we've seen shots of JA talking at her table a lot, but this was different. The camera zoomed into their conversation longer, much closer and more clear than we've seen in the past. I remember being irritated about it because the trial twitter media had said the sidebar got heated and I wanted to see that. But instead we watched MDLR's conversation w/JA and comments were posted all over the internet about it. Nurmi had a fit. I mistakenly thought that camera guy had to know the rules and that the rule didn't cover her, so I just assumed Nurmi was overreacting (again).

One question I'm wondering about has to do with the video being released - we've been having to make do with trial by twitter forever. Why did we suddenly get video? I know originally JSS said video could be played at the end of the day, but thought she changed that and video was not going to be available until after sentencing? Was it because it did not involve testimony? Hopefully that is the reason, but I haven't seen anyone questioning that or any explanations given. Maybe I missed it?

OK, so for whatever reason we get video and it's slapped up on azcentral's website. It causes a lot of buzz, quite a bit about the MDLR section, because unlike other trial videos we really got a good, long look at MDLR talking to JA. I even read a few comments about the fact that MDLR seemed to be aware of the camera and looked right into it, arguing that it must not have been a violation of that rule. Cue paranoia here: we get that video just at the exact time that Nurmi needs reasons to show the COA why the courtroom needs to be sealed? He's even given time off so he can write his response to the media's appeal. Guess the guy is just very lucky, my tinfoil hat needs to be retired and I need to find something other than this to occupy my time? Am I the only one that thinks this incident will be mentioned in Nurmi's response to COA?

eta: Just remembered this part. We knew ahead of time that the day would be basically JSS dismissing the jury, but JA shows up anyway. I think I posted questioning about why she'd do that earlier, but figured she just wanted to get out of her cell.

 

[bznbear]

In a regular criminal trial, I wouldn't doubt it. I'm sure she's fairly competent. But with her first death penalty case, she comes across as extremely unsure of herself, unseasoned in the sense that she will go back and forth on her decisions, and she constantly appears to walks on eggshells instead of putting her foot down (i.e allowing a million unnecessary sidebars).

I agree, and the sharks smell the blood in the water, imo.

 

[daisydomino]

EXCLUSIVE: Behind the Jodi Arias trial - what you didn't hear

"It was one of countless sidebars in the Jodi Arias trial: Domestic-violence expert Alyce LaViolette was on the witness stand, facing withering cross-examination from prosecutor Juan Martinez, and defense attorney Jennifer Willmott asked to approach the judge to talk out of earshot of the jury.

“If he will just let her answer, he will get an answer,” Willmott said.

“I can get more aggressive with her as need be,” Martinez said."

http://www.azcentral.com/community/mesa/articles/20130620jodi-arias-sidebars-exclusive.html



ETA - It's as if we're talking about 2 different judges - then & now.

I wish there were more of these. They were unsealed, then sealed again. Grr!

 

[mydirtysecret]

First, I meant to thank AZLawyer yesterday for correcting the info re: mitigation specialists and attorney/client privilege.

Next, it may just be that for some reason a big old tinfoil hat made it's way to my head overnight, but something is bothering me - please feel free to tell me I'm paranoid, way too cynical, and I'm overthinking this!

I think we were all pleasantly surprised, maybe shocked is a better description, to see that court video posted and rushed to watch it, etc. Several observations about JA & MDLR's little gab fest followed, because we've seen shots of JA talking at her table a lot, but this was different. The camera zoomed into their conversation longer, much closer and more clear than we've seen in the past. I remember being irritated about it because the trial twitter media had said the sidebar got heated and I wanted to see that. But instead we watched MDLR's conversation w/JA and comments were posted all over the internet about it. Nurmi had a fit. I mistakenly thought that camera guy had to know the rules and that the rule didn't cover her, so I just assumed Nurmi was overreacting (again).

One question I'm wondering about has to do with the video being released - we've been having to make do with trial by twitter forever. Why did we suddenly get video? I know originally JSS said video could be played at the end of the day, but thought she changed that and video was not going to be available until after sentencing? Was it because it did not involve testimony? Hopefully that is the reason, but I haven't seen anyone questioning that or any explanations given. Maybe I missed it?

OK, so for whatever reason we get video and it's slapped up on azcentral's website. It causes a lot of buzz, quite a bit about the MDLR section, because unlike other trial videos we really got a good, long look at MDLR talking to JA. I even read a few comments about the fact that MDLR seemed to be aware of the camera and looked right into it, arguing that it must not have been a violation of that rule. Cue paranoia here: we get that video just at the exact time that Nurmi needs reasons to show the COA why the courtroom needs to be sealed? He's even given time off so he can write his response to the media's appeal. Guess the guy is just very lucky, my tinfoil hat needs to be retired and I need to find something other than this to occupy my time? Am I the only one that thinks this incident will be mentioned in Nurmi's response to COA?

Alot of things would have had to of transpired with unknown outcomes to be setup. I think it's a coincidence

 

[Brattinella]

I think after reading that article from the first trial, I think the Defense will do ANYTHING AND EVERYTHING they can, no holds barred, to get their client LWP.

 

[bznbear]

Out of all of them, Juan is the only one with experience in DP cases.

JSS is caught in the middle. She wants a to do this in order :ie Jodi has been convicted of 1st degree murder, sentencing phase, appeals etc. But Nurmi and Co. are blowing this way out of proportion and causing havoc, so she is trying to not risk a mistrial, because that will force her to make a ruling.
She seems to have lowered confidence compared to the first trial.

All JMO.

Respectfully, Elle, JSS isn't caught in the middle. She's in charge of the courtroom. Her hesitancy is pretty evident to me. I do cut her some slack as it's her first DP trial, and that's just not a valid reason for letting this trial run amok. Just like the COA told Nurmi, threats go with the job, so do DT threats of mistrials/appeals go with the judge's job. If she's fearful of her own decisions, then she's not in the right position. Just speculating.

 

[Hatfield]

First, I meant to thank AZLawyer yesterday for correcting the info re: mitigation specialists and attorney/client privilege.

Next, it may just be that for some reason a big old tinfoil hat made it's way to my head overnight, but something is bothering me - please feel free to tell me I'm paranoid, way too cynical, and I'm overthinking this!

I think we were all pleasantly surprised, maybe shocked is a better description, to see that court video posted and rushed to watch it, etc. Several observations about JA & MDLR's little gab fest followed, because we've seen shots of JA talking at her table a lot, but this was different. The camera zoomed into their conversation longer, much closer and more clear than we've seen in the past. I remember being irritated about it because the trial twitter media had said the sidebar got heated and I wanted to see that. But instead we watched MDLR's conversation w/JA and comments were posted all over the internet about it. Nurmi had a fit. I mistakenly thought that camera guy had to know the rules and that the rule didn't cover her, so I just assumed Nurmi was overreacting (again).

One question I'm wondering about has to do with the video being released - we've been having to make do with trial by twitter forever. Why did we suddenly get video? I know originally JSS said video could be played at the end of the day, but thought she changed that and video was not going to be available until after sentencing? Was it because it did not involve testimony? Hopefully that is the reason, but I haven't seen anyone questioning that or any explanations given. Maybe I missed it?

OK, so for whatever reason we get video and it's slapped up on azcentral's website. It causes a lot of buzz, quite a bit about the MDLR section, because unlike other trial videos we really got a good, long look at MDLR talking to JA. I even read a few comments about the fact that MDLR seemed to be aware of the camera and looked right into it, arguing that it must not have been a violation of that rule. Cue paranoia here: we get that video just at the exact time that Nurmi needs reasons to show the COA why the courtroom needs to be sealed? He's even given time off so he can write his response to the media's appeal. Guess the guy is just very lucky, my tinfoil hat needs to be retired and I need to find something other than this to occupy my time? Am I the only one that thinks this incident will be mentioned in Nurmi's response to COA?

With all the games we know are being played by the DT, you have a right to be concerned.

I would even go a step further and wonder if perhaps the DT set this whole thing up.

It would be interesting to know the specific cameraman and whether that person had discussions beforehand with a certain media person that seems to get the inside scoop on things before other media people.

 

[mydirtysecret]

Question, who is footing the bill for MDLR and who is her boss? Does she have any license what sui ever or part of an association that has a code of ethics? If I were a taxpayer in Arizona I'd be mighty upset to be paying MDLR to play BFFs with CMJA on my dime

 

[bznbear]

thank you to all the lawyers who have answered so many questions. You guys rock.

Absolutely!!!!! They've been so awesome and informative, and taught me so much I've decided to take the bar exam next week, and I've never been to law school, lol!!!!!

 

[Hatfield]

Question, who is footing the bill for MDLR and who is her boss? Does she have any license what sui ever or part of an association that has a code of ethics? If I were a taxpayer in Arizona I'd be mighty upset to be paying MDLR to play BFFs with CMJA on my dime

Excellent question. The taxpayers should be very concerned if she is being payed by the state.

If she is being paid by the state, shouldn't it be publicly available the number of hourse she has billed the state and what specific services she has provided for the hours billed.

From the surface, it appears all she has done is joke around with JA during the trial.
If it is found out she has billed the state for an exhorbitant number of hours, then it seems the public has a right to know what did she actually do for all those hours.

Very good question.

 

[ElleElle]

Respectfully, Elle, JSS isn't caught in the middle. She's in charge of the courtroom. Her hesitancy is pretty evident to me. I do cut her some slack as it's her first DP trial, and that's just not a valid reason for letting this trial run amok. Just like the COA told Nurmi, threats go with the job, so do DT threats of mistrials/appeals go with the judge's job. If she's fearful of her own decisions, then she's not in the right position. Just speculating.

Yes, I was using a figure of speech, because, I do agree she is too weak to take control of the attorneys. IMO, she is focusing too much on appeasing both parties, instead of just saying a big fat NO to the DT's frivolous antics.