SIDEBAR #26- Arias/Alexander forum

[janx]

AZlawyer, I understood Nurmi walked out of the court after his ex parte with JSS and before court was over. Of course, since I didn't see it first hand, I wouldn't know. If he left before it was over, isn't it possible she allowed him to be removed as counsel? That's a part of why I was angry. The rest is obvious. JA saying if he leaves, then she would change her mind about representing herself. Oh and then asking for a delay. And then the poster (I guess Jens Diaries) stating the request for delay would be continued on August 22nd. I know I am not quoting that right. Anyway, can't the judge just make her mind up at one hearing once and for all? This has been going on for years.

I just got back from vacation and am catching up. But what I see here is JA trying to manipulate the judge. She wanted to fire Nurmi and the judge said no, so now she's trying to make a deal by saying that she won't represent herself (the judge doesn't want her to but relented) if Nurmi is gone. I don't see any judge liking that tactic much...

 

[krkrjx]

Can AZ Attorney confirm this?
If the Jury decides for Life, then does that guarantee no parole ever?

Here is what a news link has and it is not clear if the jury does decide life will that guarantee no parole.
--------------------------------------------------------------
at bottom of link below, it says...
"If the new jury fails to reach a unanimous decision during the second penalty phase set for Sept. 8, the death penalty will be removed from consideration. The judge would then sentence Arias to spend her life behind bars or to be eligible for release after 25 years."

http://www.dcourier.com/main.asp?SectionID=1&SubSectionID=1&ArticleID=134671

The only way a convicted person can be sentenced to death in Arizona is if a jury votes for it. If they vote for life, it is LWOP because AZ no longer allows LWP. The only reason LWP can be considered in this case is because it was an option at the time Jodi did the crime. So given that, if this jury wants life, the judge will then have to decide if it is LWP or LWOP. But the judge cannot impose death sentence if the jury votes against that. I believe this is how Debra Milke got off Death Row--her jury voted for life but the judge disregarded it and imposed DP.

What I am not sure of is whether the judge can impose a life sentence if the jury votes for death. I do not know why she would do this but wonder whether that option exists for any judge in any case in AZ.

If this jury cannot decide one way or the other, it goes to the judge to impose LWOP or LWP. I do not believe there would be another do over.

Again, I am going by my understanding of AZ law so correction requested if I am wrong.

 

[geevee]

Jen's Trial Diaries @TrialDiariesJ · 48m

Pic of Nurmi but not a very good one #JodiArias

https://twitter.com/TrialDiariesJ

 

[Love Never Fails]

I saw on the tweets posted here that he walked out, and that the hearing was over. I didn't see anything saying he walked out before it was over.

I don't think it would have been a good idea for her to deny a motion for a delay without investigating Jodi's supposed reasons for the motion (the witness who hasn't been interviewed and the deputies who are allegedly stopping Jodi from doing what she needs to do). Appeal-wise, I mean.



"Considering" motions is her job. Seriously, the appeal would be a nightmare if the judge just pounded her gavel and said "motion denied" to everything Jodi asks for. That might work on TV but not in real life.

Thanks AZlawyer, I'm laughing now because I would like it the way it is on television. Okay so maybe I got mad too fast. Maybe JSS will make the right rulings. I am all for a fair justice system for that one person who was wrongly convicted. That isn't Arias. They have evidence and she admitted it and lied and lied. And it would be fun if they investigate only to find out she is lying yet again. I am glad you are here posting. Like I said, I post from my heart and i am pretty angry at her and her defenders. And I did think I read where he got up and left the courtroom. Thought he left after his ex parte and before end of hearing. Again,I don't know.

 

[Love Never Fails]

Jen's Trial Diaries @TrialDiariesJ · 48m

Pic of Nurmi but not a very good one #JodiArias

https://twitter.com/TrialDiariesJ

Doesnt look too slender. Well, his hands are. I could have done without this. Lol. And the one of the killer also.

 

[dog.gone.cute]

Jen's Trial Diaries @TrialDiariesJ · 48m

Pic of Nurmi but not a very good one #JodiArias


https://twitter.com/TrialDiariesJ

:tyou: geevee !

I posted a photo of JA that was in a news link that I found from today's Hearing.

Is that photo from today of JA ? Just wanted to make sure !

TIA !

 

[krkrjx]

I believe this case will end in LWOP. Jury will not impose death and judge will not allow parole.

JMO.

I would not object at all to her getting DP but would not be upset if it ends with LWOP. I just don't want her getting out. Or winning an appeal on even a small issue if it is enough to get her some attention. I want her to fade away, alone and forgotten, until she dies in prison.

 

[rose222]

An interesting article...

Voices from Solitary: A Sentence Worse Than Death

http://solitarywatch.com/2013/03/11/voices-from-solitary-a-sentence-worse-than-death/

 

[janx]

I believe this case will end in LWOP. Jury will not impose death and judge will not allow parole.

JMO.

I would not object at all to her getting DP but would not be upset if it ends with LWOP. I just don't want her getting out. Or winning an appeal on even a small issue if it is enough to get her some attention. I want her to fade away, alone and forgotten, until she dies in prison.

Agreed--all points.

 

[AZlawyer]

The only way a convicted person can be sentenced to death in Arizona is if a jury votes for it. If they vote for life, it is LWOP because AZ no longer allows LWP. The only reason LWP can be considered in this case is because it was an option at the time Jodi did the crime. So given that, if this jury wants life, the judge will then have to decide if it is LWP or LWOP. But the judge cannot impose death sentence if the jury votes against that. I believe this is how Debra Milke got off Death Row--her jury voted for life but the judge disregarded it and imposed DP.

What I am not sure of is whether the judge can impose a life sentence if the jury votes for death. I do not know why she would do this but wonder whether that option exists for any judge in any case in AZ.

If this jury cannot decide one way or the other, it goes to the judge to impose LWOP or LWP. I do not believe there would be another do over.

Again, I am going by my understanding of AZ law so correction requested if I am wrong.

You got it all right, except that Debra Milke's conviction was overturned because of suspicions of perjured testimony by a police officer.

If the judge says life with possible parole, Jodi still won't get parole unless Arizona puts some system into place in the future for her to request it. Which, possibly, they might have to do if she sues over it in 25 years.

The judge can't overturn the jury's decision, but she could always grant a motion for mistrial for any number of reasons if she doesn't like it.

 

[YESorNO]

This is the law of sentencing in Arizona:

"1st Degree Murder Sentence of death or imprisonment for life or natural life, as determined in accordance with the procedures provided in § 13-752. Note, life is only available if the offense is committed by a person under eighteen years of age or the person is convicted of felony murder.

A person who is sentenced to natural life is not eligible for commutation, parole, work
furlough, work release, or release from confinement on any basis.

If the person is sentenced to life, the person shall not be released on any basis until having served 25
calendar years if the murdered person was 15 or more years of age and 35 calendar years
if the murdered person was under 15 years of age. A.R.S. § 13-751.

http://www.azcourts.gov/Portals/0/CriminalSentencingCt/2013_2014SentCharRev.pdf
---------------------

So- either DP or Natural Life (since Missy :jail: is over 18) Do I read this correctly?
-------------------------

(This is Criminal code 13-752:

http://law.onecle.com/arizona/criminal-code/13-752.html:

13-752. Sentences of death, life imprisonment or natural life; imposition; sentencing proceedings; definitions

A. If the state has filed a notice of intent to seek the death penalty and the defendant is convicted of first degree murder, the trier of fact at the sentencing proceeding shall determine whether to impose a sentence of death in accordance with the procedures provided in this section...)

 

[seattlechiquita]

Even the Media is reporting that the judge said no more delays and yet she is considering this. I'm scratching my head here.

Judge has to follow the law in spirit and procedures. So, she is sort of stuck having to consider motions and whatnots. I don't think we should blame her for that: this would give JA way less chances at an appeal later don't you think?

 

[Hatfield]

I just got back from vacation and am catching up. But what I see here is JA trying to manipulate the judge. She wanted to fire Nurmi and the judge said no, so now she's trying to make a deal by saying that she won't represent herself (the judge doesn't want her to but relented) if Nurmi is gone. I don't see any judge liking that tactic much...

I agree and Jodi is basically threatening or blackmailing the court.

I would like to see the ruling be something like this:
"Jodi please stand. Nobody threatens or tries to blackmail the court. You have just proven you are unfit to represent yourself as an attorney. Nurmi stays and he is re-instated as your primary lawyer for the proceedings. Jury selection begins on XX/XX date.
Slams gavel down. Dismissed. "

 

[salberg7]

I can't believe JSS will allow any further delays. I predict Nurmi will not be allowed to quit. I think JSS should just get on with the trial date. Let CMJA pay for appeals, this is CMJA last chance on the dime of Arizona taxpayers. Too much state revenue spent on this trial, need to move on. Just send her to Perryville already.

 

[janx]

I agree and Jodi is basically threatening or blackmailing the court.

I would like to see the ruling be something like this:
"Jodi please stand. Nobody threatens or tries to blackmail the court. You have just proven you are unfit to represent yourself as an attorney. Nurmi stays and he is re-instated as your primary lawyer for the proceedings. Jury selection begins on XX/XX date.
Slams gavel down. Dismissed. "

She wants more time. She's doing everything possible to delay going to prison. More time also means more opportunity to beg for appeal money via social media. It's almost unbelievable.

 

[salberg7]

I don't see any other attorneys waiting in the wings to take CMJA's case. Who would ever represent her? CMJA knows her number's almost up, & she is playing the stall game. The judge is not very strong, however, but she too has obligations to the taxpayers to move this along. No more Estrella.... Off to the big house. She'll be in Perryville by Thanksgiving. What an arrogant fool she is. She has no remorse for what she did. What a nightmare for the Alexander family. The fountain is running dry for CMJA. Juan will make her speechless, can't wait to see it.

 

[seattlechiquita]

I don't see any other attorneys waiting in the wings to take CMJA's case. Who would ever represent her? CMJA knows her number's almost up, & she is playing the stall game. The judge is not very strong, however, but she too has obligations to the taxpayers to move this along. No more Estrella.... Off to the big house. She'll be in Perryville by Thanksgiving. What an arrogant fool she is. She has no remorse for what she did. What a nightmare for the Alexander family. The fountain is running dry for CMJA. Juan will make her speechless, can't wait to see it.

bbm. I imagine if Nurmi is allowed to withdraw, and then JA recuses herself as her own counsel -lol- then the PD office would appoint someone. Which then gives entry to a motion for continuance and bla bla bla here we go again.

 

[TexMex]

Wilmott is a death qualified lawyer. Can't she either just take over or supervise Jodi if she continues to represent herself. Who needs Nurmi at this point?

 

[LinTX]

No avenue for parole now, but AZ could bring it back if they become concerned about costs, overcrowding, etc. JM told the 1st jury that it could happen, and JW objected because she didn't want the jury to know that - in her closing she had made it sound like there was no way she could ever get out, period. The DOC said there was little being discussed about it now because it won't be until 2019 that the first person would become eligible for parole, so it's not urgent for the legislature, but it could happen by the time she's served 25 years. It says eligible, but that certainly doesn't mean the parole board would let someone out did what she did either.

YESorNO, that is the 2012 law. They have to use the law in effect at the time of the crime which reads:
A. If the state has filed a notice of intent to seek the death penalty and the defendant is convicted of first degree murder, the trier of fact at the sentencing proceeding shall determine whether to impose a sentence of death in accordance with the procedures provided in this section. If the trier of fact determines that a sentence of death is not appropriate, or if the state has not filed a notice of intent to seek the death penalty, and the defendant is convicted of first degree murder, the court shall determine whether to impose a sentence of life or natural life.


"life" is LWP, "natural life" is LWOP

 

[krkrjx]

Well of course there could be legitimate reasons for an occasional delay and even though any delay is frustrating some things cannot be foreseen. Anyone involved could become ill--I actually have a bet going with some friends locally on how many times the soon-to-be-condemned one will claim to be too ill or otherwise unable to continue. And that's a bet I hope I lose!

I do hope the judge allows only those delays that cannot be avoided. And more importantly, the judge must take charge of her courtroom so that a lot of unnecessary "stuff" does not get in, dragging out the proceedings. Sometimes that is a way to get a word in that doesn't belong but sometimes it is done as a delay tactic. Neither should be allowed. Under no circumstances should a witness be allowed to testify to anything that is irrelevant to this phase of the trial and whenever that happens I hope the objections are quick and judge equally quick to sustain.

IOW, Judge, just get down to business and as things start to derail get them back on track immediately.

Taking charge of her courtroom is something that JSS could do better, IMO.