Retrial for Sentencing of Jodi Arias - Day 6 - Part 3

[Love Never Fails]

Gotta give it to Travis - most abusers have to at least live in the same state as their victims, in order to exert and maintain the amount of control necessary to keep victims as victims.

Most victims of emotional abuse who are fortunate enough to move hundreds of miles away never look back. Not stalk their abuser.

Not Jodi though. As ever, I find her claims absolutely offensive and a blight to educating others on emotional abusive relationships. I wish she'd be sentenced so she'd fade into obscurity already.


Please pardon errors as posted via Tapatalk with a less than stellar user.

Excellent post.

 

[AZlawyer]

What are the chances she was seen on the stand but she's still not the mystery witness? Does that question even make any sense at all?

It does make sense. Perhaps her testimony laid foundation for the testimony to come. Not so far-fetched, IMHO.

That's the only way it makes sense to me. I truly can't believe that JSS would have closed the courtroom for JA to testify or even to allocute (which makes no sense because that's supposed to happen at the end). Unless she's just in full-on career-destruction mode.

I also want to say just because I want to say it, in BOTH our death penalty trials the convicts were in court during the sentencing phase of the trial in shackles and prison garb. And visible handcuffs. The entire time.

I think that was before juries were involved in the sentencing phase, wasn't it?

I keep picturing the "mystery" witness rising from a trap door in the middle of the courtroom floor. LOL
Seriously, how can they keep this person a secret? Are they now going to cordon off the courthouse? Establish a perimeter around the neighborhood? So ridiculous.

That's one of the reasons I was thinking it was someone testifying by phone/Skype.

 

[Hope4More]

I think in her mind this is a brilliant strategy. Nurmi didn't, not least of all because it requires her taking the stand- thereby being crossed by JM again.

AND, even more dangerous to her, she risks the jury seeing her manipulation for what it is. If the jurors think she is falsely accusing the man she slaughtered of abuse and pedophilia , I think they won't hesitate to give her the DP.

Maybe this what Nurmi meant when he said his defense would be discussed for years if the transcripts were unsealed and she got the DP.

 

[Nana46]

:blushing: Sorry! Enough reading for me! My eyes are getting blurry... well, the right eye is, anyway.

If, indeed, it was JA on the stand, I'm betting Nurmi will attribute the "3 leaks" to TA's family!

Ahh yes....Mr. Nurmi.....who wants everybody to know he does not want to be there....bull hockey (sorry about that)......if he did not want to be there why in the hello is he fighting so hard for her???????
A piece of work he is.

 

[AZlawyer]

Lamb Chop, please delete if I am not supposed to repeat anything Beth Karas says. But she said she also believes it is Jodi on the stand and that it makes sense to her. You would have to go to her site for her explanation.

So don't tell us her explanation...but can you tell us whether she was saying it made sense legally--or just that it made sense that the people who said it was JA were telling the truth?

 

[Quester]

Jeffrey Evan Gold @jeffgoldesq · 3h 3 hours ago #JodiArias judge way overstepped "witness protection". Jodi cannot close whole court just to testify about parents abuse with out them there

 

[LambChop]

Lamb Chop, please delete if I am not supposed to repeat anything Beth Karas says. But she said she also believes it is Jodi on the stand and that it makes sense to her. You would have to go to her site for her explanation.

I believe you can paraphrase what she has reported. She does have a thread in this forum so I don't see why not.

Social Networks

Regarding Facebook, MySpace, Twitter, and other social networking or blog websites: Links may be used to direct posters to view something on a social networking page. But postings on social networking sites are not considered fact; they are rumor. Copying and pasting, or taking screen caps, directly from these pages is not allowed. Paraphrasing is okay. (Exception: If the Twitter or Facebook post belongs to a verified news station, it may be copied. But a link should still be provided.)

Also, social networking pages may only be linked if they are directly related to a case, i.e. the victim or suspect. We don't want to post to someone's mother, brother, employer, milkman, or postal carrier just because they know the main player. We also NEVER link to minor's pages (unless they are the victim). And be sure that the page actually belongs to the person being discussed. Do not link to someone if you are not 100% sure it is the correct person. And if a social networking is set to private and you get in the back way, you may not post what you find. Private means private!


So, yes. You can't link to the site because it is a subscription but paraphrasing is okay.

 

[Hope4More]

AZL...why would she be on the stand if not testifying? What makes sense about that?? She surely doesnt need any practicing about how to sit there.

 

[gcharlie]

We still don't know for certain that the mystery witness is Arias, but I'm inclined to agree with KatieCool and trust Troy Hayden on this. It really is too big for him to risk spreading false information.

So if it is her, unless she has changed drastically for the better after all this time in closed custody, her testimony is going to go over like a lead balloon with the jury. In the first trial under direct, her affect was flat and did not match what she was describing. Her allocution was even more of a flop. The first jury did not buy her at all.

During cross with Martinez, she showed some really bizarre behavior, smirking at times as if it was a contest. Given everything she has said publicly outside of court, which can be used against her, Martinez has to see this as a golden opportunity. On the opposite site, Nurmi must be cringing.

What if Arias refuses to be crossed by Martinez? Will she try to hamstring the court yet again? She did allude to her witnesses being unwilling to submit to questions by Martinez in August while she was acting pro per.

 

[Hope4More]

Jeffrey Evan Gold @jeffgoldesq · 3h 3 hours ago #JodiArias judge way overstepped "witness protection". Jodi cannot close whole court just to testify about parents abuse with out them there

Now we're being told what was allegedly testified to in closed court? Where did THIS info come from, or is it his speculation?

 

[AZlawyer]

AZL...why would she be on the stand if not testifying? What makes sense about that?? She surely doesnt need any practicing about how to sit there.

If she needed to provide foundation for someone else's testimony. For example, to say, "Yes, I hear this person's voice on the phone and I recognize it as being Mr. X. Mr. X knew me [and Travis?] because [of whatever reason] and was in a position to observe [him/me/us] blah blah blah."

 

[Hope4More]

If she needed to provide foundation for someone else's testimony. For example, to say, "Yes, I hear this person's voice on the phone and I recognize it as being Mr. X. Mr. X knew me [and Travis?] because [of whatever reason] and was in a position to observe [him/me/us] blah blah blah."

A hearty thank you for that plausible explanation!

 

[LambChop]

Now we're being told what was allegedly testified to in closed court? Where did THIS info come from, or is it his speculation?

I'm thinking it's speculation. But he might be right. She is going to lay out a story and the only people who can verify it would be her parents. jmo

 

[Nosey Parker]

I'm thinking it's speculation. But he might be right. She is going to lay out a story and the only people who can verify it would be her parents. jmo

Or Aunt Sue - locked in a holding cell all morning? Still can't see how that would warrant JSS closing court.

 

[Mindmatters]

So don't tell us her explanation...but can you tell us whether she was saying it made sense legally--or just that it made sense that the people who said it was JA were telling the truth?

AZLawyer, it is my understanding that Beth believes that the ONLY reason Judge Stephens would take such extreme measures is to protect the rights of the defendant to testify which would be more important than the public's right to access of the testimony.

ETA: These are my words NOT what Beth Said---And to be honest her rationale provided me with a perspective that actually made sense as to why the Judge made this decision. And while I am very uncomfortable with the rights of defendants becoming so absurdly over the top, it led me to accept that it just might be JA testifying.

I hope this makes sense, and I apologize for the over simpliciation but trying to stay within the rules as well as respect Beth's interests.

 

[Hope4More]

So the two best scenarios (???) are

1. Someone accidentally stumbled into a closed courtroom and accidentally saw her on the stand, where she was validating NZ guy, the secret witness.

2. She was the secret witness, testifying to one pack of lies or another in high drama mode.

 

[Nosey Parker]

So the two best scenarios (???) are

1. Someone accidentally stumbled into a closed courtroom and accidentally saw her on the stand, where she was validating NZ guy, the secret witness.

2. She was the secret witness, testifying to one pack of lies or another in high drama mode.

Given those options, common sense, and past experience of Arias and her trials, tells me to go with #2

 

[RR0004]

Is there any "proof" who this NZ guy is really?

 

[Quester]

So the two best scenarios (???) are

1. Someone accidentally stumbled into a closed courtroom and accidentally saw her on the stand, where she was validating NZ guy, the secret witness.

2. She was the secret witness, testifying to one pack of lies or another in high drama mode.

I'll vote drama/lie packed door #2. :wave:

 

[AZlawyer]

AZLawyer, it is my understanding that Beth believes that the ONLY reason Judge Stephens would take such extreme measures is to protect the rights of the defendant to testify which would be more important than the public's right to access of the testimony.

I hope this makes sense, and I apologize for the over simplicity but trying to stay within the rules as well as Beth's interests.

I think you mean the right of the defendant to a fair trial. Yes, this would have to be the analysis, but then the question is how does allowing JA to testify in secret protect her right to a fair trial? There has to be something more than just "I want to."