SIDEBAR #29- Arias/Alexander forum

[Love Never Fails]

She doesn't have to do what the defense wants, but she does have to read the case law and make a considered decision. There are two competing constitutional rights at issue (free speech and fair trial), so she needs to be careful. The "safe" decision would be to say NO cameras, because the downside there is only that David Bodney might file a special action and get a quick reversal, while granting Mr. Bodney's motion carries the potential downside of a reversal of any ultimate death penalty sentence. IMO the fact that she is not just picking the safe option is commendable.

AZlawyer, Jodi received a "fair trial". Especially fair when you consider she is GUILTY before it was even proven. I think cameras aren't going to hurt her one bit. She used them to her advantage didn't she? I don't want to see JSS be safe. I don't care how many appeals JA files. I want JSS to be bold. That's just me.

 

[Bernina]

[video=youtube;cSeWZs6pxBE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cSeWZs6pxBE&feature=em-subs_digest[/video]

 

[Tuba]

No cameras = abridgment of Freedom of the Press, a First Amendment Right. The press wants coverage. We, who depend on the press, want coverage.
Here, here!

 

[ILikeToBendPages]

Her family (or at least her parents) could not testify since she sacrificed them by alleging abuse. As for others, you're right, Bernina.

Her parents can at anytime get on the stand and say I hit my child in anger, and I've asked for, and have been forgiven, now please do the same and spare my child.

That would be much better than just sitting there, saying nothing.

Jodi told of animal abuse and neglect, child abuse and neglect, and her father having several business's that failed, and he called her mother fat, to the world. That would be a lot to forgive for them I'd guess. Do you remember the look on Sandy's face when she said it? I'd swear there were daggers in her eyes.

 

[krkrjx]

AZlawyer, Jodi received a "fair trial". Especially fair when you consider she is GUILTY before it was even proven. I think cameras aren't going to hurt her one bit. She used them to her advantage didn't she? I don't want to see JSS be safe. I don't care how many appeals JA files. I want JSS to be bold. That's just me.

OK, here goes...This cameras in the courtroom issue is big. It is of greater importance than just what does he want and what does she want. Justice is a valuable commodity, one that is often difficult to obtain. We have a guilty verdict, which is huge (considering how some cases have gone *cough*cough*) but Lady Justice is still offstage waiting to make her entrance. Meaning, we need a penalty verdict from a jury. Once we get that, we need to hang on to it. That is not always as easy as it sounds. I want transparency in the legal system as much as anyone else but more importantly I do not want a JUST VERDICT overturned by an appeals court on some technicality. I hope the judge thoroughly investigates the options before ruling.

Oh...it's all JMO.

 

[ILikeToBendPages]

[video=youtube;cSeWZs6pxBE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cSeWZs6pxBE&feature=em-subs_digest[/video]

Is she growing more warts and moles? She's got make up on , but it doesn't hide them.

 

[krkrjx]

Her parents can at anytime get on the stand and say I hit my child in anger, and I've asked for, and have been forgiven, now please do the same and spare my child.

That would be much better than just sitting there, saying nothing.

Jodi told of animal abuse and neglect, child abuse and neglect, and her father having several business's that failed, and he called her mother fat, to the world. That would be a lot to forgive for them I'd guess. Do you remember the look on Sandy's face when she said it? I'd swear there were daggers in her eyes.

I think her parents could speak on her behalf even though she accused them of abuse. I have heard it said that family is not very effective in this regard but it seems it would be better than no one.

Makes me wonder, though, if she has found citizens willing to lie for her--hence the Nurmi promise to them of no cameras. If I may jump to a conclusion, I will say it sounds like they would be less willing to play along if they were being filmed/taped, etc.

 

[Dmacky]

[video=youtube;cSeWZs6pxBE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cSeWZs6pxBE&feature=em-subs_digest[/video]

OMG ~~~~~ :lol: :laughing: :floorlaugh:

(((Bernina))) thank you for a much needed laugh today. I have bee down in the dumps/depressed for the past couple of weeks, and seeing Mike again lifted my spirits. When he stuck his fingers through his/JA's :laugh: "prescription" glasses , I just about peed my pants!

 

[Love Never Fails]

Tuba has an excellent post (#93) on the Retrial for Sentencing thread.

 

[Bernina]

OMG ~~~~~ :lol: :laughing: :floorlaugh:

(((Bernina))) thank you for a much needed laugh today. I have bee down in the dumps/depressed for the past couple of weeks, and seeing Mike again lifted my spirits. When he stuck his fingers through his/JA's :laugh: "prescription" glasses , I just about peed my pants!

Mikey Kung Pow has been a great diversion!!!

Same here with the "dumps", today is my late dad's B-day, kinda hard to forget because the numerical code for everything growing up was "9-1-8", his B-day. He would have been 78. Realized the other day I'm not "dealing" with his death, just finding "stuff" to occupy my head with............waiting for the "crash and burn" to hit me after the foal's born, I can just feel it.

Hang in there, Dmacky,

ain't nothin' but a thang, jelly bean!

ETA: Oh crap! Today's the 19, well nix that, guess it ain't half as bad as I thought!

 

[grammieto5]

KrKrjx and Curious, thanks for your posts, I agree with both of you.

 

[LinasK]

I think her parents could speak on her behalf even though she accused them of abuse. I have heard it said that family is not very effective in this regard but it seems it would be better than no one.

Makes me wonder, though, if she has found citizens willing to lie for her--hence the Nurmi promise to them of no cameras. If I may jump to a conclusion, I will say it sounds like they would be less willing to play along if they were being filmed/taped, etc.

BBM. Hey, unfortunately Cindy & George Anthony did testify to help out Casey Anthony and she got off...

 

[Nore]

I think her parents could speak on her behalf even though she accused them of abuse. I have heard it said that family is not very effective in this regard but it seems it would be better than no one.

Makes me wonder, though, if she has found citizens willing to lie for her--hence the Nurmi promise to them of no cameras. If I may jump to a conclusion, I will say it sounds like they would be less willing to play along if they were being filmed/taped, etc.

-------------
In all honesty I want cameras as much as the next person. She had a witness who wasn't shown during the trial, what is the big difference? I think when she originally asked for no show, she thought there'd be a "STOP the trial" and figure this out. But, trial is going forward. Deep down she wants the lime lite and right about now is very P.'O'd. no camera no showing off! What did dumbazz do at last hearing? stare at the camera. I think the Judge will say "no"..ullhair: :seeya:

 

[krkrjx]

BBM. Hey, unfortunately Cindy & George Anthony did testify to help out Casey Anthony and she got off...

JA's parents could speak on her behalf but chose not to last time around. There has to be a reason for that. I am saying now that they could speak for her at this retrial...but that does not mean I want them to or hope they do. It just seems odd the defense (or someone) decided the first time that she was better off with no one rather than them.

 

[krkrjx]

-------------
In all honesty I want cameras as much as the next person. She had a witness who wasn't shown during the trial, what is the big difference? I think when she originally asked for no show, she thought there'd be a "STOP the trial" and figure this out. But, trial is going forward. Deep down she wants the lime lite and right about now is very P.'O'd. no camera no showing off! What did dumbazz do at last hearing? stare at the camera. I think the Judge will say "no"..ullhair: :seeya:

If the law allows it and judge feels comfortable that it will not cause "issues" she will say yes. I think if she were going to say no just to be on the safe side, she would have said it already. IMO.

 

[Nore]

:sumo:

There is a huge call center here in So. Indiana for St. Jude's, where they ask for donations. Something like 60 people there on two shifts. They are definitely making money.

----------
Hi, I wonder if they ( considering the check does not mention her name) may just consider it a donation from whats his name. I don't think the money is from her anyway. How can she claim this when there is no record of it, she has no access to that amount of money, or way to (legally) send It. Juan can show there is no record to prove she sent it. Also may infuriate AZ. public! if she has that kind of money, let her pay a bill. She is not indig
ent!! I'd demand to have an accounting of what that family has considering they are not ( I believe ) working.
They really need to come down on her!ython: :sumo: :gavel:

 

[YESorNO]

BBM. Hey, unfortunately Cindy & George Anthony did testify to help out Casey Anthony and she got off...

BBM Testify? Do you mean lie by any chance? Pftttt

 

[LambChop]

Let me refresh your memory about the rules. These rules also include soliciting for charities, or the appearance of doing so:

Organized Efforts- Email Campaigns-Boycotts-Petitions:

Obviously members are free to take up any and all causes that are important to them in an effort to bring about change. But using Websleuths as a platform to promote organized efforts such as email campaigns, boycotts, letter writing, etc. are strictly forbidden without the consent of the forum owners. If you have written a letter or taken any action in support of a cause, please refrain from posting about it. Support of a particular cause must be approved by the owners prior to posting links or information regarding any such effort. Causes can be questionable in nature, even though they appear to be honorable on the surface. As it relates to using WS as a platform for promotion, the owners investigate the nature and source of such campaigns and make their own decisions as to the legitimacy of each cause. Please do not suggest, directly or indirectly, that members support any type of organized effort without getting approval from forum owners first.

 

[YESorNO]

Jen's Trial Diaries @TrialDiariesJ · 22m
Day 2 Penalty Phase from last year for #Jodiarias

(she forgot to post the YTube- I think it's this one?)

[video=youtube;oDXopWnFUqA]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oDXopWnFUqA&list=PLYEBn4w1XOIeJqIP1FagzgeIrVrCKnf5D&index=7[/video]

 

[LambChop]

JA's parents could speak on her behalf but chose not to last time around. There has to be a reason for that. I am saying now that they could speak for her at this retrial...but that does not mean I want them to or hope they do. It just seems odd the defense (or someone) decided the first time that she was better off with no one rather than them.

BBM: Short answer. Maybe they don't want to commit perjury. I do not believe for one minute Jodi was abused, ever. jmo