Retrial for Sentencing of Jodi Arias - 12/01/14 In recess

[krkrjx]

All JSS would have to do is cite the statute that prohibits JA from benefiting from this situation that she and her DT have purposely created, i.e., she wanted to testify and apparently did so but now is choosing to not continue. It's not like she is being denied the opportunity to speak on her own behalf.

Is it possible AZ does not have such a statute? If they don't, I think this issue could be covered by citing the law that says defendant shall make the decision whether to testify or not.

Regarding her not wanting to be cross-examined, she can refuse to answer questions. But that's gonna send quite a message to the jury...especially if they have questions for her and she refuses to answer in open court.

 

[rose222]

APT, Arias has spoken about going through religious changes. After the Mormon period, she told Flores she was, in the summer of 2008, a believer & follower of only the 10 Commandments. After incarceration, she says she has now relinquished religion for commitment to the spiritual. What's next?

She mentioned in one of her motions that she had written down the similarities between Buddhism and Christianity. Like she knows so much about rebirth, the Noble eightfold path, Nirvana etc. Her understanding of the concept of Karma is woefully inadequate. Typical of a psychopath who considers nothing sacred. Even religion is used to manipulate and control.

 

[NashBridges2]

I notice that Nurmi is requesting an oral argument on this motion, wonder if we'll gain any insight into these witnesses during that?

None of this will stick, he will lose. My only issue is that the good judge better hear arguments on this new motion on a day there is NO COURT OR NO JURY. We only have 2 court days this week. She better not bloody shut it down while she hums and haws over what decision to make.

And as far as I'm concerned good, let these so called witnesses drop out. Maybe we will be done by Christmas after all.

 

[Luvrosco]

She mentioned in one of her motions that she had written down the similarities between Buddhism and Christianity. Like she knows so much about rebirth, the Noble eightfold path, Nirvana etc. Her understanding of the concept of Karma is woefully inadequate. Typical of a psychopath who considers nothing sacred. Even religion is used to manipulate and control.

It always amazes me how convicted murderers find religion and really think that people believe their BS. I live in NY and even the Son of Sam now says he has found Jesus. Yeah ok

 

[BritsKate]

But it's there. And she doesn't want to die. She doesn't want to live the life that comes with being on death row. That isn't about control. No one would want that. It's about self preservation. I still remember the look on her face when the hung jury was announced. It wasn't fake like before, it was pretty genuine. The idea that there are people out there who actually voted for her death is probably pretty harrowing.

She does probably view not getting the death penalty as a win, because every time she loses she has to create a new competition in her mind until she gets a "win."

This is IMO. It's a complicated thing. But basically, she doesn't want to die.

RBBM

Absolutely. Self-preservation is of utmost importance to psychopaths - main reason they adapt so amazingly well in situations that would terrify and intimidate the rest of us. I would have been begging Flores to arrest me already even if I'd done nothing wrong!

Personally, I also think that may have been one of the main factors in why Travis died when he did. He'd exposed her.

 

[krkrjx]

I apologize as I'm sure this has been asked before. If CMJA get LWOP, will she be alone in her cell and confined for 23 hrs. per day like it is on Death Row. At this point, I don't care if she gets that because this is maddening to me. But the thought of her mingling and manipulating other inmates which I'm sure she'll do really ticks me off. I can see her trying to become the head cheerleader and controlling things in prison.

Not everyone in Perryville is going to be a willing follower of Arias the Great. As cruel and heinous as Arias is, there are others there who make her look like a Girl Scout. Oh how I pray for Murderer Arias to have an extremely rude awakening.

 

[BritsKate]

I realized that I don't even want her to die. I don't think she serves any useful purpose what so ever om this earth other than to wreck other's lives but I don't want her to die. I want her gone. If there was a choice between LWOP, LWOP (with the same living conditions as on death row) and DP, I'd go with option 2. Just, ugh, be gone already. Fade away into obscurity.

Preferably with any potential access to future victims extremely curtailed. No mail, no visitors, no human contact, no media access, human rights be damned.

 

[Dr. Know?]

Looks like MM likes to call everyone a pedophile. Gotta snicker when I read the fb comment (linked above) from a mother of 5 children being called one too by MM. There's probably more on social media he's accused of being a pedo too! I had almost forgot about this nut case...

 

[AZlawyer]

AZ Lawyer, could the judge call Nurmi's bluff on this one about material witnesses and compel him to turn over contact info so that the court could subpoena them to testify?

Yes. But the NZ witness would not be subject to subpoena.

It is puzzling that the pedophilia allegation would have any mitigation value for the defence. Firstly, if you take it as fact (which it isn't) that Jodi caught him looking at a naked picture of a young boy, it obviously didn't worry her to the extent of her discontinuing sexual relations with Travis. Secondly, and more importantly IMHO, it has no bearing on the manner of and reason for his particularly heinous murder. The only issues that carry weight in mitigation should be any threats, abuse or violence by Travis towards Jodi at the time of the murder that precipitated his murder....and we all know there were none.

The only way it fits into mitigation is that it supposedly supports JA's story about why TA became abusive (JA learned his secret) and why the relationship caused such stress for her (TA was using her to act out his pedophilic fantasies).

All JSS would have to do is cite the statute that prohibits JA from benefiting from this situation that she and her DT have purposely created, i.e., she wanted to testify and apparently did so but now is choosing to not continue. It's not like she is being denied the opportunity to speak on her own behalf.

Is it possible AZ does not have such a statute? If they don't, I think this issue could be covered by citing the law that says defendant shall make the decision whether to testify or not.

Regarding her not wanting to be cross-examined, she can refuse to answer questions. But that's gonna send quite a message to the jury...especially if they have questions for her and she refuses to answer in open court.

It's not a statute, it's U.S. constitutional case law re: waiving the right to remain silent.

 

[IfIMay]

Suddenly we have a new witness who will testify regarding Travis' interest in children. Oh please. :fishy: I cannot wait for Juan to cross-examine these fools! What a bedlam of a trial this is...

Let me get this straight.. according to the murderer, Travis didn't tell anyone he was having sex with a full grown woman due to his "virginal reputation", but he told a friend he had an interest in child !? :facepalm: Bring it on... I bet it's one of the ninjas. :hiding:

 

[Dmacky]

Gayla Lynch She was on Dr. Drew's show, BUT is afraid for her life to to testify??? I call BS

How ironic that I was googling something last week about JA and happened to come across this "ex coworker" who was on Dr. Drew last year (by phone)

http://edition.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1302/05/ddhln.01.html


Then today I remembered when I saw that an ex co worker was on JA's bull$chit list. Looks like Gayla got a postcard from JA thanking her for speaking on her behalf.

http://www.hlntv.com/video/2013/04/29/dr-drew-mentioned-postcard-jodi

 

[bsk]

Wasn't there talk before round 2 about Juan going to CA to interview someone from Australia (or maybe it was actually New Zealand)? Did that ever happen?

Like I said earlier, I don't care who they are or what their excuses are, JSS has gotten smacked down and should tell KN to STFU and let's proceed without whoever refuses to testify. Or he can get her to issue subpoenas if they live in the US and we'll see how that goes.

 

[RR0004]

Let me get this straight.. according to the murderer, Travis didn't tell anyone he was having sex with a full grown woman due to his "virginal reputation", but he told a friend he had an interest in child !? :facepalm: Bring it on... I bet it's one of the ninjas. :hiding:

So who has she snookered now?

 

[Niner]

Suddenly we have a new witness who will testify regarding Travis' interest in children. Oh please. :fishy: I cannot wait for Juan to cross-examine these fools! What a bedlam of a trial this is...

Question for AZlawyer ??
Now, if the court on Thursday re computer ""/"child " is discredited - can the Judge now say - there is nothing on child - so this witness will not be allowed? Plus IF he is allowed - would that not be heresay??

TIA!! :wave:

back to reading...

 

[krkrjx]

I notice that Nurmi is requesting an oral argument on this motion, wonder if we'll gain any insight into these witnesses during that?

I sure hope JSS deals with this sort of thing while court is not in session due to juror unavailability. IOW, jury unavailability need not necessarily mean a dark courtroom. The case should still move forward as much as possible.

 

[gcharlie]

Let me get this straight.. according to the murderer, Travis didn't tell anyone he was having sex with a full grown woman due to his "virginal reputation", but he told a friend he had an interest in child !? :facepalm: Bring it on... I bet it's one of the ninjas. :hiding:

You nailed it! May I boil this down to 140 characters for twitter?

 

[Hatfield]

It is puzzling that the pedophilia allegation would have any mitigation value for the defence. Firstly, if you take it as fact (which it isn't) that Jodi caught him looking at a naked picture of a young boy, it obviously didn't worry her to the extent of her discontinuing sexual relations with Travis. Secondly, and more importantly IMHO, it has no bearing on the manner of and reason for his particularly heinous murder. The only issues that carry weight in mitigation should be any threats, abuse or violence by Travis towards Jodi at the time of the murder that precipitated his murder....and we all know there were none.

I totally agree and which is why I wish JSS would start to rule against these DT motions much more vigorously than she has been. She should immediately say "denied" and give reason like you mentioned. Its irrelevent to the phase or irrelevant altogether.

She should also threaten the DT with something if he continues with frivolous motions.

 

[AZlawyer]

Question for AZlawyer ??
Now, if the court on Thursday re computer ""/"child " is discredited - can the Judge now say - there is nothing on child - so this witness will not be allowed? Plus IF he is allowed - would that not be heresay??

TIA!! :wave:

back to reading...

No. JA is still saying that TA had child , and if this witness says so too, that would corroborate her story.

Hearsay is allowed during the mitigation phase, but I think the NZ witness was going to say that he caught TA with child , not that TA told him about it. Or maybe it's both. I don't really know.

 

[Nali87]

Preferably with any potential access to future victims extremely curtailed. No mail, no visitors, no human contact, no media access, human rights be damned.

LOL exactly. The way I see it, she forfeited her rights when she decided to slaughter a man.

 

[zoomom]

Really? I'll have to google this and catch myself up. thx!

(and not that a bit of this should make a damn to this convicted murderer's sentencing-- I don't care if Travis had sex with goats, she brutally murdered him and should face the death penalty for it)

BBM - Not to mention the fact that she confessed, on the stand, in front of the jury and the world.