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

[NotMyselfNEMore]

So does anyone think that JA is now claiming that TA raped her and she is claiming rights to testify in secret because she is a "victim" of his abuse? That is the only tiny crack that I could imagine Nurmi could possibly argue in front of the COA that might be of merit.

I never thought of that! I sure hope you're not right, but that's an excellent point - I wonder if that's exactly what he's doing?

 

[SwampMama]

My take on KN causing this problem is his tactic of questioning the secret witness
(JA). KN asks her everything that she wants the court to know in depth, knowing JM will
Get to do cross. He knew media would fight it so he counted on the ruckas. When weds. comes he will just say my withness refuses to continue and she walks off the stand. JM doesn't get to do his cross and she has won her side of the story getting out. Even if they strike all her incomplete testamony the jury heard it and will have to try to forget it.
Does that theory make sense to anyone?
I am not wanting to walk away from this trial till TA gets justice although it is hard
Listening to the defenses craziness. I feel so bad for Travis whole family to have to deal with his killer for so many years after they lost their wonderful brother.

BBM. That would be just like something Jodi would want to do - to refuse to do the cross examination because she is no longer a "secret witness", But can she just suddenly refuse to be cross examined? Can't JM just ask that she be forced to finish and have her declared a "hostile witness" (since she doesn;t want to cooperate). I jusy don;t think she should be able to pick and choose like that but then again, with JSS at the help of the SS TrialThatNeverEnds, ya just never know.

 

[Nosey Parker]

Her expressions, movements, etc, gave me the impression she wasn't at all interested in Juan's reasoning, was impatient for him to be done, and really had already dismissed everything he had to say.

That was my impression too, bznbear. I'm surprised she didn't cut him off mid-stream. She certainly looked as though she wanted to.

 

[TartLemon]

I don't understand how anything pertaining to Jodi post the GUILTY verdict is pertinent to the sentencing trial.

 

[AZlawyer]

BBM. That would be just like something Jodi would want to do - to refuse to do the cross examination because she is no longer a "secret witness", But can she just suddenly refuse to be cross examined? Can't JM just ask that she be forced to finish and have her declared a "hostile witness" (since she doesn;t want to cooperate). I jusy don;t think she should be able to pick and choose like that but then again, with JSS at the help of the SS TrialThatNeverEnds, ya just never know.

No, she can't refuse to be cross-examined.

There would be no point in declaring her a "hostile witness," because all that means is that you get to ask leading questions. Which you can already do on cross.

 

[MeeBee]

Idealizing...

...to devaluing.

The media was once her medium for for getting her story out and winning adulation from pitying women and adoring men.

Now that she sees it as a source of negative sentiment toward her, she wants no part of it and they will be punished by having no part of her unless it's on her terms.

 

[MeeBee]

I never thought of that! I sure hope you're not right, but that's an excellent point - I wonder if that's exactly what he's doing?

It'd be nothing new. She accused him of raping her before, she just didn't use the word.

 

[Nosey Parker]

No, she can't refuse to be cross-examined.

There would be no point in declaring her a "hostile witness," because all that means is that you get to ask leading questions. Which you can already do on cross.

Juan declaring her 'hostile' would be somewhat of an understatement!

 

[wenwe4]

AZL, not sure if you saw my previous post about possiblity of JA claiming to be a rape victim and afforded the rights of a closed hearing under that premise . . . any thoughts?

 

[blefuscu]

It'd be nothing new. She accused him of raping her before, she just didn't use the word.

Yeah. Despite her telling 48 hours (I think it was) that the sex was always consensual and Travis never made her do anything she didn't want to

 

[TartLemon]

I want Jodi to testify.

 

[TartLemon]

AZL, not sure if you saw my previous post about possiblity of JA claiming to be a rape victim and afforded the rights of a closed hearing under that premise . . . any thoughts?

Wouldn't that be new evidence not allowed since i was not introduced in the GUILT phase?

 

[MeeBee]

Yeah. Despite her telling 48 hours (I think it was) that the sex was always consensual and Travis never made her do anything she didn't want to

She said it was always consensual while on the stand, too.

 

[AZlawyer]

AZL, not sure if you saw my previous post about possiblity of JA claiming to be a rape victim and afforded the rights of a closed hearing under that premise . . . any thoughts?

Under what premise? There's no law that rape victims can testify under seal.

Wouldn't that be new evidence not allowed since i was not introduced in the GUILT phase?

No, the whole point of this phase is to introduce new evidence.

 

[SwampMama]

No, she can't refuse to be cross-examined.

There would be no point in declaring her a "hostile witness," because all that means is that you get to ask leading questions. Which you can already do on cross.

Thank you AZlawyer!!! You are such an awesome resource here and you help to educate us and answer our questions which really helps us have intelligent conversations about what it going on and not just have to deal in speculation and not knowing how things work!! You are so very appreciated here!!

So basically if Jodi is the secret witness, she is gonna be pretty irate that the cross by JM won't be a secret -oooh, that's gotta burn, lol!

 

[Nosey Parker]

What ever happened to the motion Arias attempted to speak to at the beginning of this debacle? Remember when Juan shut her down as she was not representing herself anymore, and JSS mentioned it was to be addressed by another judge? Was that yet another secret issue?

 

[Hez]

It'd be nothing new. She accused him of raping her before, she just didn't use the word.

Didn't she say in one of the interrogation videos with Flores that Travis did not do anything like that to her? My memory is failing. :thinking:

 

[MeeBee]

Didn't she say in one of the interrogation videos with Flores that Travis did not do anything like that to her? My memory is failing. :thinking:

Yes.

But on the stand, there were a couple incidences, and one specifically on the day of the murder, where she told a couple of stories with the strong implication that Travis raped her. She did contradict that by saying the sex was always consensual and she always enjoyed it. But it happened.

 

[DebinGA]

Didn't she say in one of the interrogation videos with Flores that Travis did not do anything like that to her? My memory is failing. :thinking:

IIRC JA specifically said to Flores that TA never raped her or did anything else to her beyond "some mean words". But my memory is fuzzy too.

 

[DebinGA]

Yes.

But on the stand, there were a couple incidences, and one specifically on the day of the murder, where she told a couple of stories with the strong implication that Travis raped her. She did contradict that by saying the sex was always consensual and she always enjoyed it. But it happened.

Aha! IIRC JA testified about waking up to TA already having sex with her... And it was uncomfortable.