Retrial for Sentencing of Jodi Arias - 12/3 -12/04 In recess w/hearing

Status
Not open for further replies.
  • #121
Huge crisis at work today and then I came here to speed-read and catch up. Sounds like it was a crazy day!

Nothing notable, really, just the expert mitigation witness berating the prosecutor, refusing to answer his questions, and then issuing jury instructions from the stand -- all the while the judge sits by and quietly listens.

You know, same ol' same ol'...
 
  • #122
I wonder why a juror question was something along of the lines of Dr. F not having all the information she needed to testify?
It seems as though at least one of the jurors believed in what she was saying, and not impressed by Juan; or is it because she could not directly answer Juan's questions... IDK, just seemed like an odd question.

BBM

I took that as a semi-sarcastic question. I think they wanted to see if she'd admit to bias. JMO
 
  • #123
And how did I forget this gem.... She looked right at the jury full of grown men and women and said "if you have ever experienced an orgasm....."

I need another drink, a double maybe.
 
  • #124
I agree Tuba. Patti W? refused to testify the first time around because of what JM was armed with to impeach her with. I'm trying to imagine what goes on in the minds of JA's Mother and other family members though. If they aren't willing to go out on a limb to save Jodi's life, that would mark me as a juror.

This is one example of how the defense strategy wasn't the best strategy, IMO.

Because they're claiming Arias "suffered both physical and emotional abuse as a child", her mother can't testify. She'd have to lie, a lot - not something she's necessary able to do, and a red rag to a bull so far as Martinez is concerned. She'd be tossed out of the realms of credibility quicker than Nurmi can say "sidebar!" (One word he can say fast.)

This is a big loss, because a mother's words ordinarily carry a lot of weight, and elicit a great deal of sympathy.

If they'd gone with the "crazy out of control" defense, Sandy Arias could have been truthful, and said "... yes, she's always been odd, and difficult and a handful, and even her friends would call and say she needs help, and maybe we should have done something, and I'll always regret that, because look at where we are today. But even so, she's still my daughter, and as a mother I can't help it that I still love her..."

IMO something like that would have a powerful impact.

What we have instead is a family that's either willfully lying by supporting this abuse defense, or desperately trying to make themselves believe it, as the only way to make sense of what their own daughter has done. Either way, it rules them out as useful or credible witnesses.
 
  • #125
Hmmm...if a court ordered me to release a transcript, I would think they meant NOW. But then again, we are talking about JSS.

I don't feel this jury will vote for the DP when they see expert witnesses speak in demeaning ways to the prosecutor.

They must feel the judge is on the side of the defense.

And if there is a mistrial, I don't feel confident JA will get LWOP from this judge.
I think everyone needs to be prepared. The Florida trial shocked us all.

And even though Jodi isn't going free for now, this judge certainly isn't on the side of justice. Which begs the question....why is she a judge?


:seeya: Great points, and I totally agree !

1st BBM: Yes, and it is very obvious that JSS has given in to almost every demand by the defense.

2nd BBM: God forbid if this happens because I have NO doubt, whatsoever, that JSS will give CMJA life WITH the possibility of parole.

:waitasec: Oh, JMO but JSS will give her credit for time served.

:gaah: All JMO !
 
  • #126
I think she said something like she did not see her signature on it, so she did not know if she said it. Obviously she knew she was giving him a hard time. Wonder what the jury thinks of her stupidity.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Absolutely amazing, it was dumbfounding. She couldn't remember something she said without her signature? :rolleyes:
 
  • #127
Le sigh. I've finally caught up and I'm so thoroughly disappointed in the circus this trial has become. I'm also so disappointed in Judge Stephens for allowing this trial to turn into a three ring circus. I mean even her decision to allow Jodi to testify in secret is so far off the deep end. I can't believe for a second she believed her order would stand up to scrutiny. My heart really goes out to TA family tonight. This trial or retrial is such a hot mess.
 
  • #128
Ya and then low and behold she did notice her sig was there and finally took the credit for whatever it was she said. She did not have an answer for most of the questions or just flat out refused to answer because she said Juan was mischaracterizing what she said. Stubborn old woman.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
  • #129
I just can't anymore. I mean, what was her rationale for letting JA testify in secret? Did that make sense in her own mind? If so, then her mind and mine are very different and I am not qualified to speculate on the inner workings of her mind.

Well said. My only guess is that she's so in the weeds, so overwhelmed, that she's checked out in some fundamental way.

I can only hope that she's still afraid of a mistrial, and that losing another juror stiffens her resolve enough to close Nurmi down whenever appropriate.

Telling him no to a sidebar request was at least one eensy weensy step in the right direction.
 
  • #130
Ya and then low and behold she did notice her sig was there and finally took the credit for whatever it was she said. She did not have an answer for most of the questions or just flat out refused to answer because she said Juan was mischaracterizing what she said. Stubborn old woman.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I wonder why Juan didn't just say to her "How would you characterize what you said?"
 
  • #131
I did pick up on a certain ironic theme in my speed-reading today. It appears that Dr. M-F does not like people taking her words out of context or mischaracterizing them?
 
  • #132
I did pick up on a certain ironic theme in my speed-reading today. It appears that Dr. M-F does not like people taking her words out of context or mischaracterizing them?

Yeah .... The irony is rich indeed ....
 
  • #133
Cathy ‏@courtchatter · 12m12 minutes ago
No way is Juan going to subpoena the defense's crackpot witnesses and Beth Karas has confirmed that she did not report that. #JodiArias
 
  • #134
Well said. My only guess is that she's so in the weeds, so overwhelmed, that she's checked out in some fundamental way.

I can only hope that she's still afraid of a mistrial, and that losing another juror stiffens her resolve enough to close Nurmi down whenever appropriate.

Telling him no to a sidebar request was at least one eensy weensy step in the right direction.

I feel for her because this is a high profile crime and she has to make absolutely sure nothing can be overturned on appeal. However, that being said. This isn't her first trial and she should have developed skills for keeping the defense in line while protecting the defendants rights. JMO
 
  • #135
I did pick up on a certain ironic theme in my speed-reading today. It appears that Dr. M-F does not like people taking her words out of context or mischaracterizing them?

Nor did she want to own her words after uttering them.
 
  • #136
Cathy ‏@courtchatter · 12m12 minutes ago
No way is Juan going to subpoena the defense's crackpot witnesses and Beth Karas has confirmed that she did not report that. #JodiArias

Why not? It would have been a brilliant strategy to avoid the postconviction relief petition complaining that Nurmi provided ineffective assistance of counsel by failing to subpoena the witnesses.
 
  • #137
  • #138
I did pick up on a certain ironic theme in my speed-reading today. It appears that Dr. M-F does not like people taking her words out of context or mischaracterizing them?

What she didn't like was being asked to explain herself. Accusing JM of this and that was petulance on an epic scale, and a pathetic attempt to make JM look like a bullying villain.
 
  • #139
We don't know yet, everything is being done in secrecy. JSS did not give an explanation and it is unknown if the dismissed juror is able to speak to the media.

Seems we are stuck in a holding pattern with this court withholding information.


This trial IS the Twilight Zone of all trials ...

Cueing up the Twilight Zone music . . . doodoodoodooo doodoodoodooo

:ufo::ufo::ufo:

:ufo::ufo::ufo:
 
  • #140
I am reading catching up on posts from tonight. As I am reading the responses of Dr. Fonseca, I can't get over how seemingly out of touch she is with some of her statements. One of the most telling ones to me was Nurmi asking her about CMJA shaving her perineum, implying that it was for TA because he supposedly liked little girls. OMG.

Did it not dawn on Dr. Fonseca that CMJA dyed her hair very light blonde and that she was a natural brunette? and maybe the carpet didn't match the drapes and that is why she chose to shave? Not because of the fabricated reason of TA liking pre-pubescent girls?

If Dr. Fonseca thinks she got over on JM and hit one out of the park for the DT, I don't know that she would be correct. Her testimony at best was tedious, repetitive, disrespectful, and unprofessional. JMV
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
124
Guests online
1,234
Total visitors
1,358

Forum statistics

Threads
632,390
Messages
18,625,688
Members
243,133
Latest member
nikkisanchez
Back
Top