Retrial for Sentencing of Jodi Arias - Day 19 - Shortest Court Day, EVER

[NashBridges2]

(1) I think that's what he's asking for, yes. They could take a day, a month, a year, whatever.

(2) Nurmi never made any such motion that I know of. It would be up to JM to make a motion to keep it out. It seems like JM did make a motion, but perhaps based on the theory that there was no on the computer? I'm not sure about that. Certainly, it appears now that there was on the computer all along, although the type and source of the may be in question.

Oh good god. A month or a year? Let's hope whoever is in charge of the Supreme Court has been following this case and already had their mind made up before he officially filed his appeal.

 

[Hatfield]

I'm behind so apollies if this has been covered. RE: Request for Stay states JA's rights outweigh media's. Ok, but what does sealing her testimony have to do with the mitigation witnesses? RE: Petition for Review arguments about witnesses death threats are, um, questionable and false in some cases, eg, Womack and Brewer. So, how does the Court verify these statements, and why didn't JSS look further into these matters when DT first alleged them?

This has been one of my biggest pet peaves with the way the judge is handling this infinite phase of the trial. Practically every single stupid motion and allegation from the DT goes unchecked and not questioned by the judge. I thought there needed to be PROOF supplied with the allegations that Nurmi keeps throwing out there. Its like the judge just automatically and erroneously is allowing all these motions and allegations as if they are fact.

I honestly think a very large portion of the motions and allegations could have been squashed and denied right up front because Nurmi was not supplying any proof that his allegations are even true.

A perfect example is in the latest one. He claims witnesses are afraid to testify and wont testify because they received life death threats. The judge needed to have sworn witness statements to that affect and I dont think that was the reason for most of them. The real reason was they saw how embarrasing it was to stick up for the murderer Jodi and they saw the backlash from the public. Which by the way is totally legal and expected to have the public get outraged by supporters supporting a known murderer of the likes of Jodi with all the lies she has claimed about Travis.

So the real reason most did not want to testify had nothing to do with death threats IMO. I concede there was 1 or 2 witnesses that may have gotten a threat but those were already dealt with and they already testified. These other witnesses Nurmi is now alleging is BS about his reason.
JSS needed to get sworn statements to prove him wrong and then she could have denied and thrown out his motion.

There are many other examples of this same sort of thing. The judge is not asking for proof of the allegations and they must be proven before you derail a trial for days, months, years. Most all of his actions could have been denied straight away with no proof.

And for MOST of the rest of them, they should have been CLASSIFIED as an "Appeal against the original Verdict", and has nothing to do with senticing phase and could have been thrown out for that reason. Let him file appeal after sentencing.

 

[elementary]

The circus atmosphere definitely does NOT continue to this day. Seriously, no one in Phoenix is talking about this case, and certainly the courthouse is not surrounded by TV cameras and trial tourists. IMO JSS would have been better off sticking to her guns, though. Changing her mind only telegraphs that she thinks her original decision was in error.

I agree that, as with the original trial, JSS does not maintain order in the courtroom, does not demand respect from witnesses or counsel, does not consider the rights of the public to know what's going on, and does not keep things moving at a reasonable pace.

I wasn't clear- I meant the circus atmosphere in the court, thanks to the DT. So, it's all the media's fault? I am not sure how that affected the guilt phase of the trial. It also doesn't explain the secret sidebars, the sealing of almost all testimony, etc. etc. in the penalty phase. Agreed, that whatever her reasons/motives, she has compounded the problems.

 

[elementary]

This has been one of my biggest pet peaves with the way the judge is handling this infinite phase of the trial. Practically every single stupid motion and allegation from the DT goes unchecked and not questioned by the judge. I thought there needed to be PROOF supplied with the allegations that Nurmi keeps throwing out there. Its like the judge just automatically and erroneously is allowing all these motions and allegations as if they are fact.

I honestly think a very large portion of the motions and allegations could have been squashed and denied right up front because Nurmi was not supplying any proof that his allegations are even true.

A perfect example is in the latest one. He claims witnesses are afraid to testify and wont testify because they received life death threats. The judge needed to have sworn witness statements to that affect and I dont think that was the reason for most of them. The real reason was they saw how embarrasing it was to stick up for the murderer Jodi and they saw the backlash from the public. Which by the way is totally legal and expected to have the public get outraged by supporters supporting a known murderer of the likes of Jodi with all the lies she has claimed about Travis.

So the real reason most did not want to testify had nothing to do with death threats IMO. I concede there was 1 or 2 witnesses that may have gotten a threat but those were already dealt with and they already testified. These other witnesses Nurmi is now alleging is BS about his reason.
JSS needed to get sworn statements to prove him wrong and then she could have denied and thrown out his motion.

There are many other examples of this same sort of thing. The judge is not asking for proof of the allegations and they must be proven before you derail a trial for days, months, years. Most all of his actions could have been denied straight away with no proof.

And for MOST of the rest of them, they should have been CLASSIFIED as an "Appeal against the original Verdict", and has nothing to do with senticing phase and could have been thrown out for that reason. Let him file appeal after sentencing.

My favourite example is Darryl Brewer who did not want his face shown at the trial, but had no problem being shown in a TV interview immediately following his testimony. So much for good faith.

 

[Hatfield]

(1) I think that's what he's asking for, yes. They could take a day, a month, a year, whatever.

(2) Nurmi never made any such motion that I know of. It would be up to JM to make a motion to keep it out. It seems like JM did make a motion, but perhaps based on the theory that there was no on the computer? I'm not sure about that. Certainly, it appears now that there was on the computer all along, although the type and source of the may be in question.

Hello AZ

I have never heard of a trial being suspended mid-trial while an appeal is written and filed and sent to a Supreme Court of any kind. This alone is beyond silly, and surely standard courtroom procedures and processes have an "out" to allow this trial to continue and not have to wait.
Something doesnt sound right with the way JSS is holding up the trial for Nurmi to file this appeal and then wait on a Supreme Court to first hear it and then make a decision on it..

Im not sure if that is what is happening but it sure seems like it is. JSS already made us wait for the COA. Are we now going to wait for Supreme Court. ? There has to be a legal "out" for this nonsense.

 

[Mrs G Norris]

I read on the Alexanders fb page that they've posted a ph # for JSS boss/supervisor for those who want to call him to complain about her 'miscarriage of justice' (borrowed that) being done. Not only to the Alexander family, but the taxpayers and jurors as well. Wonder if anyone's called yet???

OK I just found where it was posted and it was the State Vs Jodi Arias FB page (nuff said), and by some regular poster (who did call the number) and not an Alexander. Really idiotic to think this judge will be taking any of these calls or take anything they say seriously FGS.

 

[Quiet Time]

What's going on here is just part of Nurmi's master plan. Create chaos and set up a situation that is so hopeless that eventually the legal system just says "enough already" and take the death penalty off the table. This is his strategy. It appears to be working pretty well. Half the people in here are to that point already, and the other half aren't far behind.

I don't think the jury will ever get to decide this case.....Nurmi is going to make sure of it one way or the other. Those jurors will fall out one at a time until there is a mistrial.

My only hope is that the State of Arizona puts a target on Nurmi's back for disbarment, and then changes a few things in their system so these types of legal abuses can't happen again.

I'm sorry, I just can't agree w/all of this. I do agree that Nurmi is causing chaos and confusion and stalling. But, I'm staying positive in that the jurors are there for the long hall and that justice will be served. I think the prosecution has enough energy and gumption to remain on course and fight to the end. I don't see these people as quitters. I don't think they'll cave...imo Sending positive energy to the Alexanders and the prosecution.

On another note, I'd like to see Steven A. write a book. His would have the most impact to me...

 

[ShadyLady]

It might be, if you had the gun and the other person was naked and wet.

But yes, I think the defense argument with "gunshot first" was that she tried to kill him quickly and mercifully and was surprised by his reaction. Therefore no "cruelty" as that is defined under the law and no DP.

ETA: Obviously, as someone said above, that does raise the question of why she had the knife in the first place.

But, even if intent was different than the outcome. She should be judged on outcome not intent. She could have called for help after shooting him.....she did not. She killed him ruthlessly and painfully.

 

[rose222]

Please god, I hope nobody calls, this is the kind of nonsense that happened in the first trial with defense witnesses, and it was beyond stupid IMO. Let the people do their jobs in peace. I hope it wasn't an Alexander, but some IDIOT who thinks JSS's boss/supervisor has time to be taking calls from people who should be doing better things with their time.

Someone on the Facebook page wanted to start a petition a few months ago but the admin (who is known to Travis' family) made it very clear that she does not approve of any such petition. Travis' loved ones are not involved in anything of the sort. Besides, they are close to Juan and would never act against his wishes.

 

[Mrs G Norris]

Someone on the Facebook page wanted to start a petition a few months ago but the admin (who is known to Travis' family) made it very clear that she does not approve of any such petition. Travis' loved ones are not involved in anything of the sort. Besides, they are close to Juan and would never act against his wishes.

Agree, it's the people ON the page, not the Alexanders.

 

[AZlawyer]

This has been one of my biggest pet peaves with the way the judge is handling this infinite phase of the trial. Practically every single stupid motion and allegation from the DT goes unchecked and not questioned by the judge. I thought there needed to be PROOF supplied with the allegations that Nurmi keeps throwing out there. Its like the judge just automatically and erroneously is allowing all these motions and allegations as if they are fact.

I honestly think a very large portion of the motions and allegations could have been squashed and denied right up front because Nurmi was not supplying any proof that his allegations are even true.

A perfect example is in the latest one. He claims witnesses are afraid to testify and wont testify because they received life death threats. The judge needed to have sworn witness statements to that affect and I dont think that was the reason for most of them. The real reason was they saw how embarrasing it was to stick up for the murderer Jodi and they saw the backlash from the public. Which by the way is totally legal and expected to have the public get outraged by supporters supporting a known murderer of the likes of Jodi with all the lies she has claimed about Travis.

So the real reason most did not want to testify had nothing to do with death threats IMO. I concede there was 1 or 2 witnesses that may have gotten a threat but those were already dealt with and they already testified. These other witnesses Nurmi is now alleging is BS about his reason.
JSS needed to get sworn statements to prove him wrong and then she could have denied and thrown out his motion.

There are many other examples of this same sort of thing. The judge is not asking for proof of the allegations and they must be proven before you derail a trial for days, months, years. Most all of his actions could have been denied straight away with no proof.

And for MOST of the rest of them, they should have been CLASSIFIED as an "Appeal against the original Verdict", and has nothing to do with senticing phase and could have been thrown out for that reason. Let him file appeal after sentencing.

There's no reason to believe that the judge accepted these allegations as fact without question (or indeed at all, since we haven't seen her sealed ruling). JM was in all these secret hearings, and it was his job to tell the judge about, e.g., DB appearing on TV after he was supposedly terrified to testify because of the TV coverage. Presumably he did his job, although of course we can't be sure because everything's sealed.

 

[Love Never Fails]

Updated Case Documents:

Case Documents

Filing Date Description Docket Date Filing Party
1/6/2015 023 - ME: Order Entered By Court - Party (001) 1/6/2015
1/6/2015 023 - ME: Order Entered By Court - Party (001) 1/6/2015
1/5/2015 ALT - Appeals Letter Of Transmittal - Party (001) 1/6/2015


https://www.superiorcourt.maricopa....rtCases/caseInfo.asp?caseNumber=CR2008-031021

AZlawyer help! What is an appeals letter of transmittal?

 

[AZlawyer]

Hello AZ

I have never heard of a trial being suspended mid-trial while an appeal is written and filed and sent to a Supreme Court of any kind. This alone is beyond silly, and surely standard courtroom procedures and processes have an "out" to allow this trial to continue and not have to wait.
Something doesnt sound right with the way JSS is holding up the trial for Nurmi to file this appeal and then wait on a Supreme Court to first hear it and then make a decision on it..

Im not sure if that is what is happening but it sure seems like it is. JSS already made us wait for the COA. Are we now going to wait for Supreme Court. ? There has to be a legal "out" for this nonsense.

The trial has not been suspended due to the appeal. It seems to have been suspended due to JM's request to interview the next witness (Sue Doe Nimh) and to have time to assess that person's proposed testimony. JSS stated on the record weeks ago that the trial would not be suspended for the Supreme Court appeal. The Supreme Court could suspend the trial proceedings, of course, but no one has asked them to do so.

But, even if intent was different than the outcome. She should be judged on outcome not intent. She could have called for help after shooting him.....she did not. She killed him ruthlessly and painfully.

That's not how it works under the law, though. You don't get the death penalty for "cruelty" if you didn't mean for the victim to suffer.

 

[AZlawyer]

AZlawyer help! What is an appeals letter of transmittal?

Nothing. Just one clerk letting another clerk know about the appeal.

 

[Dmacky]

AZ, Do you think KN is stalling until February in order to get into that motion "pool" to make inmates ineligible for the death penalty in Arizona? Something about it being improper notice from the state? << sorry, I don't know the right language Obviously

 

[Hatfield]

There's no reason to believe that the judge accepted these allegations as fact without question (or indeed at all, since we haven't seen her sealed ruling). JM was in all these secret hearings, and it was his job to tell the judge about, e.g., DB appearing on TV after he was supposedly terrified to testify because of the TV coverage. Presumably he did his job, although of course we can't be sure because everything's sealed.

True that there is quite a bit we have not been able to see or witness.

I do recall Juan bringing up some points along these lines during the COA fiasco and he was ignored by the judge. In that 1 instance the judge treated Nurmi's accusations more importantly than Juan's valid objections and I was gobsmacked as it happened.

 

[Mrs G Norris]

Gosh, I'm not sure. His name is Judge Welty. I'll wait for an ok to list his number. Or can I pm you?

I very much advise against calling or listing the number.

 

[Love Never Fails]

It might be, if you had the gun and the other person was naked and wet.

But yes, I think the defense argument with "gunshot first" was that she tried to kill him quickly and mercifully and was surprised by his reaction. Therefore no "cruelty" as that is defined under the law and no DP.

ETA: Obviously, as someone said above, that does raise the question of why she had the knife in the first place.

AZl, it also raises the question to me of how she could claim self defense in her trial? How does anyone say that murdering someone by gunshot is merciful? Being merciful means allowing that person to live, right? She took his life! How was that merciful? It wasn't as if he had a terminal disease and they had been married for 60 years and she thought she would lessen his agony!! For any attorney to stand before a jury and say she was trying to be merciful, well...if I was on the jury I would laugh out loud. I don't mean to offend you, but the antics of lawyers defending a murderer and claiming she was being merciful by shooting him is horrible.

Arguments aside, JA slithis throat and stabbed him repeatedly. There was no self defense involved. All she had to do was to run nd get help next door, call 911, but no. She cleaned up, showered him, left him there, called and left him a voicemail, grinder Ryan Burns and covered her tracks. No self defense in any of that. I hope JM wins his case, in spite of crazy lawyering and insane judges.

 

[Love Never Fails]

The trial has not been suspended due to the appeal. It seems to have been suspended due to JM's request to interview the next witness (Sue Doe Nimh) and to have time to assess that person's proposed testimony. JSS stated on the record weeks ago that the trial would not be suspended for the Supreme Court appeal. The Supreme Court could suspend the trial proceedings, of course, but no one has asked them to do so.



That's not how it works under the law, though. You don't get the death penalty for "cruelty" if you didn't mean for the victim to suffer.

LOLOLOLOLOL! You shoot and kill someone because you hate them and want them dead but....oh, your honor, I didn't mean for them to suffer. Right.

 

[AZlawyer]

AZ, Do you think KN is stalling until February in order to get into that motion "pool" to make inmates ineligible for the death penalty in Arizona? Something about it being improper notice from the state? << sorry, I don't know the right language Obviously

She's already part of that motion. No need to delay.

AZL, it also raises the question to me of how she could claim self defense in her trial? How does anyone say that murdering someone by gunshot is merciful? Being merciful means allowing that person to live, right? She took his life! How was that merciful? It wasn't as if he had a terminal disease and they had been married for 60 years and she thought she would lessen his agony!! For any attorney to stand before a jury and say she was trying to be merciful, well...if I was on the jury I would laugh out loud. I don't mean to offend you, but the antics of lawyers defending a murderer and claiming she was being merciful by shooting him is horrible.

Arguments aside, JA slit his throat and stabbed him repeatedly. There was no self defense involved. All she had to do was to run and get help next door, call 911, but no. She cleaned up, showered him, left him there, called and left him a voicemail, grinder Ryan Burns and covered her tracks. No self defense in any of that. I hope JM wins his case, in spite of crazy lawyering and insane judges.

The argument is really more that the murder was not-cruel rather than that it was merciful. Sort of like the difference between being not-disrespectful and being delightful, which I tried to teach my daughter repeatedly lol.

But both the self-defense and the cruelty issues were resolved by the prior jury. This jury will be instructed to accept that the murder was premeditated and cruel.