Retrial for Sentencing of Jodi Arias - Day 26, Part 2

[KathrynL]

I missed the early juror questions when they were selecting the jury. But isnt it true that a juror could have some basic knowledge of the case so long as they hadnt made up their mind on the sentence?

I think Mike is getting confused with the rules of the guilty verdict part where jurors would not have been expected to know anything about this case.

I may be wrong but I dont think that rule applied here because some of the jurors caught general knowledge of the case and I think that was ok so long as they had not made up their mind on a sentence and so long as they dont follow news as this phase goes on.

I think you are correct that the rules about prior knowledge are different, just like the rules of evidence are different from the guilt phase. Even for guilt phase jury selection, the question is not what you know, but if you can put it aside and make a decision based on the evidence presented at trial. I really don't think that the "court watcher" is accurate in his/her assessment about the jurors asking questions based on something besides the testimony they have heard.

"One veteran court watcher" could be just about anyone. Someone who watched the OJ trial? The Michael Jackson trial?

I too did not see anything that shows any prior or on-the-side knowledge. I saw that one or more jurors is familiar with liars.

I noticed that too, I think there are some smart cookies on the jury.

 

[Kamille]

LOL this was also when she believed "mark my words, no jury will ever convict me"

Technically she hasn't been convicted yet. Maybe that's the whole point of the delays. She's still trying to build up the courage to kill herself? Or she's just magically thinking one of the motions will work and the verdict will be overturned?

MOO

 

[Meemaw12]

I'm voting Jodi will get back on stand.

Oh gosh that gives me chills

You are probably right hope not


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Kamille]

Jodi didn't need an alibi for when the gun was stolen. Nobody would have thought to look for it until she staged that little burglary. Trust me, that gun was already hidden and ready for use before she went shopping with her sister. And Sherlock Einstein doubtfully would have told anybody what she was planning, even MM. Not even DB probably. She had the perfect plan that didn't need embellishment from others.

I agree and if she did call MM from the Hoover Dam, it was to ask him for directions because...silly Jodi...she got lost for hours doncha know? Or he himself had called and left a voicemail while her "charger was missing" and she loved answering all her messages. Even from her abuser. SMH

MOO

 

[Katharine]

I liked the question about whether the killer is right or left handed. I think a juror has deduced that the broken finger incident is a lie, based on the unchanged writing patterns in her journals before and after said incident. We all know that finger was damaged on June 4, 2008 when she killed Travis.

What I am wondering though is how a left handed person injures the left finger during this killing with a knife? If someone could please explain? I know that we know that supposedly she is ambidextrous but this jury so far does not know that. I do want all of them to think of course that the injury to the left finger occurred on June 4, 2008 just as most of us do believe. Is it possible to be injured on left finger if killing the person with the left hand? Thank you. (JMO)

 

[Meemaw12]

What I am wondering though is how a left handed person injures the left finger during this killing with a knife? If someone could please explain? I know that we know that supposedly she is ambidextrous but this jury so far does not know that. I do want all of them to think of course that the injury to the left finger occurred on June 4, 2008 just as most of us do believe. Is it possible to be injured on left finger if killing the person with the left hand? Thank you. (JMO)

TA tried to get knife out of her left hand and it slipped cutting her finger and he had defensive wounds on his hand/hands trying to get it from her.

Imo


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[mydirtysecret]

What I am wondering though is how a left handed person injures the left finger during this killing with a knife? If someone could please explain? I know that we know that supposedly she is ambidextrous but this jury so far does not know that. I do want all of them to think of course that the injury to the left finger occurred on June 4, 2008 just as most of us do believe. Is it possible to be injured on left finger if killing the person with the left hand? Thank you. (JMO)

If I understand your question, she would have been using her predominant hand during the murder. Almost most commonly with a murder and a knife is involved the perps hand will slip down the handle onto the knife slicing a finger open when their hand slides down in a gripping motion down the blade mixed in with blood

 

[Kamille]

So what's the dufense going to do tomorrow?

Rest
Put ja on the stand
Call another witness if so Who would that be?

Not a clue is my answer


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I want to know how they are going to get the other 8 or so affidavits in. What would be the point in bringing them up in court if they had no plan to use them? Or did JM pretty much have them all thrown out except the 3 that the Geff used in his testimony?

 

[MeeBee]

What I am wondering though is how a left handed person injures the left finger during this killing with a knife? If someone could please explain? I know that we know that supposedly she is ambidextrous but this jury so far does not know that. I do want all of them to think of course that the injury to the left finger occurred on June 4, 2008 just as most of us do believe. Is it possible to be injured on left finger if killing the person with the left hand? Thank you. (JMO)

That's where the injury would be, her dominant had. She was stabbing him and the blood caused it to slip through her hands and the blade sliced her finger.

 

[KathrynL]

Good night peeps. See ya tomorrow!

 

[MeeBee]

I want to know how they are going to get the other 8 or so affidavits in. What would be the point in bringing them up in court if they had no plan to use them? Or did JM pretty much have them all thrown out except the 3 that the Geff used in his testimony?

They were probably inadmissible JAII fluff about the trial being a witch hunt and Jodi being innocent and the public being biased and yadda yadda. Irrelevant mitigation stuff written by her supporters. We probably won't be seeing them. Who cares what some internet knucklehead thinks?

 

[WhoaIsMe]

I want to know how they are going to get the other 8 or so affidavits in. What would be the point in bringing them up in court if they had no plan to use them? Or did JM pretty much have them all thrown out except the 3 that the Geff used in his testimony?

Can't they just enter them and let the jury read them in deliberations? Idk but that was just what I thought would happen all along and was put off by them being read like an Audible featured title.

Sent from my SCH-S960L using Tapatalk 2

 

[mydirtysecret]

They were probably inadmissible JAII fluff about the trial being a witch and Jodi being innocent and the public being biased and yadda yadda. Irrelevant mitigation stuff written by her supporters. We probably won't be seeing them. Who cares what some internet knucklehead thinks?

That's what I've also been able to deduce from Twitter meebee. Iirc jm also brought up that more than a few aff were from people who knew her after the murder which were inadmissible, some like you said called into question her innocence so I do think however many originally there were was dwindled down to the 3.

 

[Kamille]

What I am wondering though is how a left handed person injures the left finger during this killing with a knife? If someone could please explain? I know that we know that supposedly she is ambidextrous but this jury so far does not know that. I do want all of them to think of course that the injury to the left finger occurred on June 4, 2008 just as most of us do believe. Is it possible to be injured on left finger if killing the person with the left hand? Thank you. (JMO)

Holding a slippery knife handle covered in blood and repeatedly stabbing could cause your hand to slip, allowing the blade to slice your own finger(s). We don't know if she had another cut on the pinky finger of her left hand that was not as damaging as the one to her ring finger but I do believe that Ryan said she had a couple of bandages on her finger(s). So a quick slip might have caught the first two fingers that were at the top of the blade before she dropped the knife when she realized her hand slipped. She also mentioned gloves to Detective Flores so she may have been wearing gloves but the slice got through on the one finger if only that one was cut.

As a matter of fact, she does mention dropping the knife on the tile floor and can remember that clanging sound in the midst of the fog.....

MOO

 

[Hatfield]

That's where the injury would be, her dominant had. She was stabbing him and the blood caused it to slip through her hands and the blade sliced her finger.

Agree. Especially if there was a cut on that hand.

And with a struggle of any sort there would be multiple ways she could injure either hand. For example if he grabbed her dominant hand with the knife then she could have reached and took the knife with the other hand to begin stabbing him with the free hand. And knife could have cut either hand in the transfer.

Just so many variables I dont think a dominant hand indicates where an injury could occur during a violent attack.

It was mentioned that the jury would not know about her being left handed. That would be one of those "common knowledge" type things that even a person who is just basically familiar with this case could have picked up in the news. And I am not so sure it was or wasnt mentioned during this phase either.

 

[geevee]

I want to know how they are going to get the other 8 or so affidavits in. What would be the point in bringing them up in court if they had no plan to use them? Or did JM pretty much have them all thrown out except the 3 that the Geff used in his testimony?

They may have finished with the affidavits, I recall one tweet that mentioned witness #7 or 9, maybe someone with access to Beth's site could look and see if she elaborated on how many affidavits were read that day.

 

[RickshawFan]

salacious: [adj.] relating to sex in a way that is excessive or offensive [Merriam-Webster]

Today JM said to Geffner that the exchanged messages between JA and Ryan Burns "were salacious". I hope that means we'll see them during rebuttal. I bet JA was sexually "aggressive" with RB, like with Abe and probably numerous others. I'd like JM to call Ryan Burns during rebuttal to illustrate JA's cold-hearted manipulations.

"Salacious" can be a synonym for the slangier word "racy." I always think of Cosmopolitan magazine as salacious. However, I'm betting JM is deliberately sandbagging and the truth is way more lusty than that, and now the jury's left to ponder that little tidbit expectantly along with wondering why it's impossible for TA to have been masturbating while kneeling. JM likely also is playing vocabulary games with Geff. Geff had tried unsuccessfully to dismantle JM by using SAT-level vocabulary ("conflate" comes to mind, but there was some other stuff); IIRC this went along with Fonseca's strategy of talking down to JM by saying/implying "you wouldn't know this, but......." Geff might not in fact know the word "salacious": it is considerably rarer than "conflate", and I haven't noticed social science folks use it much at all (it's a literary word, in my experience). Maybe JM used some other high brow vocabulary on Geff as well: hard to tell with tweets. Plus, he kept snagging Geff with his imprecise usage for even elementary school words, like "believe", which would mean "not an analysis based on fact." BOOM! It's all delicious....

I'm always amazed at JM's facility with language, and he does this on the fly. I'll bet he can do it in Spanish on the fly as well. Extraordinary talent!

JM's command of urban slang sex words and close-to-medical sex terms, and how he can switch between them on a dime, I always find hilarious as well as impressive. He can go from raunch to politely doctor-ish from one sentence to the next, from BJ's and j..... (rhymes with fizzle) to "tumescent". He flustered ALV with this strategy: for all ALV's career focus on DV, she wasn't at all comfortable talking about sex, medical, raunchy, 3-hole (well, maybe 5 if you count both partners), inventive, or otherwise. (So the DT had a key expert in the guilt-phase who was out of her comfort zone on the bulk of the subject matter the DT kept focusing on, namely the sex!). How could you possibly be a DV expert without talking about sex on a regular basis; same with Fonseca; JM didn't even go the sex route with Geff, gosh, wouldn't that have been a wonder.... I think ALV's education in this area ended with the "birds and the bees" conversation.

 

[Meemaw12]

I want to know how they are going to get the other 8 or so affidavits in. What would be the point in bringing them up in court if they had no plan to use them? Or did JM pretty much have them all thrown out except the 3 that the Geff used in his testimony?

That's a great question. Seems if they were going to put them in they would have through Geffner. Just don't know who else would do it.

 

[ElleElle]

Don't forget the motion filed today guys. :lol:

"Defense motion requesting a mistrial based on prosecutor disclosing mitigation witness name in open court, revealing the name of an expert witness & accusing Dr. Geffner of "smearing" the victim"

Click on link ----> http://www.courtchatter.com/2015/01/jodi-arias-defense-motion-requesting.html?m=1

 

[Kamille]

Can't they just enter them and let the jury read them in deliberations? Idk but that was just what I thought would happen all along and was put off by them being read like an Audible featured title.

Sent from my SCH-S960L using Tapatalk 2

I would think that however they get in, the prosecution would have some opportunity to rebut them?