Retrial for Sentencing of Jodi Arias - 2/20 thru 2/23 - Break

[I'mjazzed]

Does anyone believe this killer has actually received "thousands and thousands and thousands of pieces of mail" (her words) in the 16 months between the first trial and this sentencing phase? I mean, they would have to add another wing to the jail and hire more staff to handle that volume if it were true. :facepalm: As abhorrent as I find her and her entire defense team, I know I wouldn't waste the postage to send her anything, ever. I'm sure she has received mail, but no where near the amount she claims. But of course she has to exaggerate to make it appear that she is just sooooo important, which she is not.

I thought someone here said the jail goes through the mail that the inmates receive and if she was getting death threats they wouldn't even allow that mail through. I'm not sure if that's true...Does anyone here know for sure? If it is true her complaint isn't even valid and you would think someone would pick up on that. (Judge, JM, even maybe the DT?)

 

[MeeBee]

I just saw this post on the Sidebar thread and laughed really hard.....so I brought it over here. I had forgotten about reading this in the transcript of the closed in chambers meeting. Jodi thinks she will get Life.

Originally Posted by janx
"...And so given the fact that after trial I will be going to a different facility, a lot more people will have access to me as well."



LOL. Apparently CMJA doesn't believe she'll be going to Death Row.

She wlll be going to another facility regardless of the sentence.

 

[memoriesbymichelle]

I have heard of 3 books already 'out there' (one written/co written) by a member here at WS. Did those authors obtain approval by every member of the A family? Are those books not written for profit?

I am sorry that the Hughes could not take the stand but I do not know the reason any side did not call them. Did either side state that they were not called because they had a book in the works? :dunno:

Dr. G did on the stand the other day and even mentioned Sky being in the courtroom. Maybe it's just me, but if I wanted to write a book about my friend that was murdered, I would want the support of the family otherwise I would not do it if I did not have their blessing. The other books you mention are books about the trial, not about Travis specifically like the Hughes's book. Apples and Oranges IMO.

 

[memoriesbymichelle]

And we do have people pennying up to buy JVM's and Shanna Hogen's book but will be boycotting the Hughes' book? I probably won't buy it either but I don't get it.

Are their books about Travis? Or are they about this high profile murder trial. To me that is the difference.

 

[ICit]

Years ago there was a book called Games People Play. Different 'games' people used were defined and named.

One of the most interesting to me was called 'Let's You and Them Fight'. In this tactic, one person would tell two other people conflicting things and then stand back and watch them argue or fight.

JA used this tactic with the Hughes and Travis. She realized they were important to Travis and lied to them. Sky spoke freely with her and asked JA not to say anything to Travis. Then Sky overheard JA telling Travis everything, before Sky got a chance to even talk to Travis. This caused some communication between Sky and Chris and Travis that got heated. All over JA's LIES! No doubt she has been using this tactic most of her adult life, if not earlier.

I think her ultimate goal was to separate Travis from everyone except herself. That way she would be the only one getting his attentions and more importantly, the only one influencing him. That way she could lie without worrying about him finding out.

She is, and will remain, a very destructive person, harming anyone that she comes in contact with for her own benefit and amusement.

 

[5bigfish5]

I don't think Juan not calling them had anything to do with the book. He called Abe and he had a blog and had given several interviews to HLN. The book is also a new thing and he never called them before either. I think it has to do with the issues they had with the defense before, with Gus and with them believing in the pedophile claim after Nurmi lied to them.

Exactly!

They believed a gal they barely knew, over their best friend Travis.

 

[krkrjx]

Then why bother making the decision at all? If JSS was sure the COA would make the right decision, then she should have known they would make it whether it was brought up to them right away or a year down the line.

This^^^^^ is my main complaint about JSS. I understand completely that a judge needs to be cautious, especially in a DP case. But there is such a thing as overly cautious--even in a DP case!

I do not understand why JSS sees the need to deal with appeal issues during trial. Most judges understand that it is not their job to handle appeals--there are appeals courts for that. Whenever I see this happen the first thing that comes to mind is that the judge is inexperienced and unsure of him/herself.

That's how I see JSS--unsure of herself. She is covering all the possible appeals bases now, in her court, because she lacks the ability to know which issues she should be concerned about and which should be no-brainers. IMO, of course, and I am just fine with those who do not agree with me on this--it's just how I see it. With each passing day I hope JSS will do something that changes my mind but it just doesn't happen! My main gripe in all this is the DT is like a cornered animal that can sense the judge's fear. Now all the DT has to do is whisper the word appeal and the judge caves.

If it is all just judicial strategy, should we expect courts of appeals nationwide to begin overturning verdicts left and right in all cases where judges did not implement this brilliant strategy? Presiding judges actually presiding over courtroom proceedings is the norm, is it not?

What JSS has done and continues to do is an anomaly and while I fully understand why she thinks she has to do it, I question her judgment because it allows this case to drag on and on and on. If she conducts all her cases this way she will seriously gum up the legal process because her cases will take six times longer to complete than they should.

All IMO.

 

[MeeBee]

Exactly!

They believe a gal they barely knew, over their best friend Travis.

That's different. Nurmi told them he had proof. That's not their fault.

 

[pacnwgal]

I just saw this post on the Sidebar thread and laughed really hard.....so I brought it over here. I had forgotten about reading this in the transcript of the closed in chambers meeting. Jodi thinks she will get Life.

Originally Posted by janx
"...And so given the fact that after trial I will be going to a different facility, a lot more people will have access to me as well."



LOL. Apparently CMJA doesn't believe she'll be going to Death Row.

BBM Sigh... how typical of JA! As if everyone is wringing their hands over her personal safety. This isn't something I would have said pre-conviction, but now - no kidding Jodi?!? That's what happens when you commit a heinous murder, you get thrown in a big cage with dangerous people.

 

[ZoeyW]

I tweeted about the problems the judge was causing many months ago. With the transcript release indeed all roads lead back to her decision and offer to seal. Here is the transcript , courtesy of Courtchatter.com https://docs.google.com/file/d/0ByBlLbpcgb3wNzJONE9BWmY0VkE/view

ZoeyWatson · @ZoeyWatson2014
31st Oct 2014

May 20, 2013 Judge Stephens said she'd seal #JodiArias penalty phase witnesses
Listen very closely to what Judge Sherry Stephens says in this clip. This was over a year and a half ago.

http://youtu.be/RzS_cE09XH8?t=12m26s

"This court has indicated to defense counsel that ANY WITNESS THEY WISH TO CALL FOR PURPOSES OF THIS SENTENCING PHASE COULD BE CALLED IN A SEALED PROCEEDING AND THIS COURT WOULD SEAL THOSE PROCEEDINGS. THAT SHOULD ADDRESS ANY CONCERNS ABOUT INTIMIDATION OR THREATS AS SET FORTH IN THE DEFENDANT'S MOTION." That is a direct quote

My question is , respectfully, if the media and the media attorneys knew so very long ago that this was an offer she made the defense,
THAT LONG AGO,
in open court,
on the record....
why is everyone locally seemingly shocked that indeed that is what is going on? It seems almost as though they didn't hear her or catch it when she said it the first time. That is what they get paid the big bucks for isn't it?



Trust me, I want Jodi Arias to get the death penalty, and I am NO fan or Kirk Nurmi, on his skinniest day. I just want to know what is going on that she said a year and a half ago they could do this, they took her up on it and now everyone is shocked.

Also, in February 2014 like subjects were argued in pre trial hearings. One may discern that by the clerk's summary of documents filed. Am I to understand the media attorney basically isn't following the case, and only if as and when they get the emergency tweet do they review in haste the document pushed in front of them by their reporter, who has their hand on their hip with a look on their face of DO SOMETHING?

Any stall in this matter is hard on the Alexanders and it seems this one was foretold as clear as the Hebrew prophecies.

 

[AZlawyer]

Jumping off from your post, AZL -- I've wondered for a long time if JSS might be really bothered by the amount of media and social network attention in this case and felt somewhat sympathetic to the idea of removing the press and public because of that. In addition to the concern about appeals. Do you think that's possible?

Yes, but I think the two issues are connected. I think she's worried that one appeal issue will be that she allowed the media circus in the guilt phase, instead of, e.g., allowing only still photos and transcripts, or sequestering the jury.

AZL since you are here :biggrin: I have a quick question. I was surprised that they released this secret transcript of why the court was closed BEFORE JA could make her speech about how the jury should let her go...er...I mean save her life. Can the DT now file a motion based on this release and would it have any chance of being heard?

They can file whatever they want, but there's no problem here. The transcript should never have been secret in the first place.

AZLawyer, how is it legal that the jury had three questions for Jodi and she refused to answer them? How can she just "refuse"? Isn't that contempt of court and contempt of the jury? Same question about her refusing to complete her testimony. I mean believe me, she saved us days of hearing her lies again and for that I am grateful. I just don't understand JSS's thinking in allowing this.

OK, remember it wasn't legal for her to testify in private anyway--so anything that's done to jerry-rig a solution to that mess is likely to involve some illegalities as well. Other than striking the testimony, of course, but JM really didn't want that.

JA has certainly waived her 5th Amd right to remain silent in this case. So, yeah, she has no right to refuse at this point. But what do you want to do? Throw her in jail for contempt of court until she agrees? :floorlaugh: Not laughing at you BTW; the whole thing is just ridiculous. I think JM made the best decision to keep the secret illegal testimony on the record. And keep in mind that the attorneys saw the jury Qs, so they know what they need to cover with other witnesses or in closing to make sure the jurors get the info they want.

Not to get all semantical on you but I mean she thought she was right in that her caution was founded because Jodi had not waived her right testify and was refusing to do so, not that she thought she was right in that Jodi had a right to request the media be removed.

I thought that was different but you got me all confused now lol

She thought Jodi had not voluntarily waived her right to testify because she thought Jodi had a right to request that the media be removed first, so Jodi would be kinda-sorta forced not to testify against her will if the media was allowed to stay.

It's the same! You and Hope agree! Yay! :happydance:

I just saw this post on the Sidebar thread and laughed really hard.....so I brought it over here. I had forgotten about reading this in the transcript of the closed in chambers meeting. Jodi thinks she will get Life.

Originally Posted by janx
"...And so given the fact that after trial I will be going to a different facility, a lot more people will have access to me as well."



LOL. Apparently CMJA doesn't believe she'll be going to Death Row.

She wlll be going to another facility regardless of the sentence.

I think the funny part is that she assumes a lot more people will have "access" to her in the new facility. If she's on death row, that won't be happening.

 

[5bigfish5]

That's different. Nurmi told them he had proof. That's not their fault.

I don't think that's really true. Their early emails with Travis, show that they were concerned with Jodi's feelings.

 

[AZlawyer]

I don't think that's really true. Their early emails with Travis, show that they were concerned with Jodi's feelings.

It's possible that they had not been sufficiently exposed to psychopathic behavior in the past and never really considered that they were being set up.

 

[5bigfish5]

It's possible that they had not been sufficiently exposed to psychopathic behavior in the past and never really considered that they were being set up.

Of that, I have zero doubt!

 

[Paintr]

Years ago there was a book called Games People Play. Different 'games' people used were defined and named.

One of the most interesting to me was called 'Let's You and Them Fight'. In this tactic, one person would tell two other people conflicting things and then stand back and watch them argue or fight.

JA used this tactic with the Hughes and Travis. She realized they were important to Travis and lied to them. Sky spoke freely with her and asked JA not to say anything to Travis. Then Sky overheard JA telling Travis everything, before Sky got a chance to even talk to Travis. This caused some communication between Sky and Chris and Travis that got heated. All over JA's LIES! No doubt she has been using this tactic most of her adult life, if not earlier.

I think her ultimate goal was to separate Travis from everyone except herself. That way she would be the only one getting his attentions and more importantly, the only one influencing him. That way she could lie without worrying about him finding out.
She is, and will remain, a very destructive person, harming anyone that she comes in contact with for her own benefit and amusement.

BBM

Is this not one of the tactics used by people who are domestic abusers. I am firmly convinced there was DV in this relationship but JA was NEVER the victim.

 

[My-Future-Ex-Husband]

I don't think so LinasK. If she was so sure that the COA would overturn her ruling on banning the media, why DENY the media's request for a stay? If all she wanted was a ruling to stop a succesful appeal, she would have granted the stay and not confuse the jury with testimony she knew she'd eventually have to strike (or deny cross on), potential jury questions etc. Granting a stay wouldn't have given JA any grounds for appeal.

JSS was convinced she was right.

BBM That reminds me, how are they going to do that?

 

[luvmygarden]

BBM

In an earlier post, IIRC Hope, listed TA's journal entries. One of the last ones stated (not exact quote) that his journal was missing, he believed it stolen, and his thoughts/feelings about Lisa were in there. I wondered just how angry JA must have been while reading over and over again how much TA said that he loved/missed Lisa, how lonely he was without her.

He repeats these thoughts in the replacement diary, so it is reasonable IMO to assume he said something similar in the stolen diary. He probably showed how happy he was when he was with Lisa and how much he loved her in the stolen journal (before things went downhill between them.)

JA must have been livid. Probably why his ring disappeared and maybe why JA was so well armed when leaving. Just something to ponder...:thinking:

I wonder who has it for safe keeping for her. Whoever should be sniffed out asked for them to turn it over.

 

[Amster]

I don't think the judge is being applauded, or should be applauded, but I don't think she has a crystal ball that would tell her exactly how the COA would view this, especially in a case that has featured many issues of first impression. The judge made an (awful IMHO) decision, parties used the available channel to seek potential relief and they achieved it. It's the system, not a game.

Agree to disagree....she is being applauded and giggle, giggle she put one over on the defense! Gaming the system?

 

[MsJosie]

Couldn't the judge have called the jail to verify this "story" about this crazy pretend attorney? I am just not buying their story. These guards have guns don't they? Camera's? I wish the judge would have said I need proof of this incident.

The felon gets away with alot of things because no one asks for proof. Show us the threatening letters, show us the xrays of the finger, there needs to be proof and everyone is afraid to ask for the proof. That makes no sense to me. If the felon or her team makes certain remarks they should beable to back them up, especially to the judge. The judge should ask for proof, set an appointment up for xray fingers, doctors to exam the felons mental issues since they now hinder her ability to testify, have the jail show proof of the threatening letters or postcards since this stuff is supposedly read by the jail. If the letters come to her lawyer, then he needs to show proof. The felon gets away with too much, however, her time is short and soon she will be in prison. A whole different life awaits her and it will not be to her liking. She will be low 'woman' in the ranks.

 

[memoriesbymichelle]

She wlll be going to another facility regardless of the sentence.

right but she (JA) said people would have access to her, which to me, says that she thinks she will be in general population, not solitary like she is now.