About JM's closing, that list of mitigators, and jury deliberations:
JM's closing. Looking at the list-- what didn't JM effectively rebut? Nothing. He even destroyed the meaningfulness of her factual mitigators.
Jury deliberations. By instruction the jury is supposed to go down the list, determine if the DT has proven each by a fairly low standard standard of proof, and then decide, individually, which if any are actually mitigating enough to warrant showing her mercy given the aggravator.
In reality, as AZL says, the jury may well draw up their own list of factors for showing her mercy (LWOP) versus showing her no mercy (the DP).
Theoretically, what might that list look like?
?'s/points for mercy: She may have been abused as a child, Travis may have been mean to her by having sex with her at the same time he was sexting other women, Travis seems to have been not the good Mormon his friends thought he was, Travis had some




on his computer but it was adult




, why didn't Travis make her go away if he was really scared by her, why did she kill Travis and not one of her earlier BF's, her BPD-- that make her mentally ill, right?
No mercy: Why didn't she say more about feeling remorse? Were they trying to tell us he was a pedophile?? What does that say?? What in the world was all that computer




business about? They both seemed to be into sex- why are they blaming just Travis for that? Did that expert guy really say all Mormons lie about sex? Did they really call the Bishop a liar? And make him talk about sex? Why didn't witness 1 guy come to court? That was really awful when they called his ex-girlfriend Deanna a liar and embarrassed her. What JA did after the murder was disgusting. That letter to his family! Sending his grandmother flowers! And how she killed him-- a gun AND a knife?