Verdict is in! GUILTY of MURDER ONE - Hung Jury On Penalty Phase #2

[popsicle]

I'm confused who's staying with family in Arizona? ! I've been gone all day! Taking care of business! Going out to lunch and doing some shopping. It's hot here today, my brains fried! I had to,drive 30 miles to,pick something I ordered.so I'm not sure what I'm reading?
.

CKja's family.

 

[Isabelle]

HLN also talking about CMJA"s weird reaction to yesterday's non-verdict. I was also thoroughly confused....I couldn't tell if she was sad, mad, relieved, what???? My first impression was that she was upset!!! I couldn't figure it out. Then I watched again on re-play...then I thought it was a look of relief.

But not that I see it again, I see that my first reaction was right : SHE WAS UPSET AT THIS NON-VERDICT. You can see looking imploringly and a little angrily at the jurors...like okay I'm gonna telepathically go into your brains and I'm gonna find you people who were for death, and I'm gonna do some evil things inside your head. It was like she was trying to figure out which ones were the ones against her.

I really really think she thought that they would come back unaminous on life. I think she had no idea or perception that some might come back with death. That is MOO. And it's also backed by the fact that it was clear that she thought the jury would believe her self-defense claim and let her free.

It was not relief, now that I look on it, she was genuinely upset when she heard the verdict yesterday.

Jodi was upset because the State gets another crack at her. If she thinks this jury betrayed her, she may be in for a rude awakening!

 

[Hatfield]

My 15 year old son is homeschooled. He's super interested in a career somewhere within the justice system. He watched 90% of the trial. He passed on the psy experts...

It was oftentimes awkward to watch it live streaming and unedited with him sitting next to me. Especially the day all the unedited naked photos were shown, But I'm thrilled that we did get through it together.

I'm super confident now he will never become a victim of someone like Jodi, he will think long and hard before getting involved with someone stalkerish or staying involved once its over for booty calls. And I am thankful we had so many conversations about what to do if he finds himself in an abusive relationship.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

JMO
Great Job
I commend you for having an open and honest relationship with your son. This is refreshing to hear. I have heard of too many stories of where parents sometimes shy away from discussing things because it is too embarassing or they think they are too "young".

Just like you indicated, he now has the extra skills necessary to handle real life. This is real life stuff.

I dont want to step on anybodies toes because every parent has a right to teach their kids how they see fit. But one of my pet peeves is when I hear of parents thinking their kids are too young to talk to about "sex" and talk about ways to avoid getting pregnant until ready. Well, IMO, that age has to be very early because otherwise the kids will "learn" from their peers. And worse than that, young kids can get pregnant if not taught early enough. I am sure we all knew of poeple that got pregnant at too early an age. We all have to choose when the time is right, but I just hope people dont wait too long.

I remember well how my friend taught me about the birds and the bees at maybe 9 years old and of course I didnt believe him. About 3 years later when my Dad finally taught me, I had already been trained by the masses.

 

[Curious Me]

omg!! who is this crazy woman on JVM??

You're going to have to be more specific. :floorlaugh:

 

[ElleElle]

Which begs the question how many of you are planning on staying for round number two???

Like this post if you're staying for round two??

Btw providing my workload still allows it I will be here!!!

Me too! There's always good chit chat on here.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[katiedid2]

As horrible as this is gonna sound... I laughed out loud what she said that! I do have a very twisted sense of humor and that cracked me up.
It's just so.....ridiculous to hear that. No normal human being would ever say such a thing.

IMO that's exactly how Jodi feels about murdering Travis. That cold, that detached. Jodi continually showed she was just as indifferent.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Who are you referring to. Who said that please?

 

[fruity]

He should quit talking. It is upsetting to hear some of the stuff he is coming out with. For example (he said stuff worse than this) ...but when he said you have to take into account she had no prior criminal record. What??? I can see that being a factor if you are in court trying to beat a speeding ticket, but a brutal murder like this...imho that should be given zero weight.

Playing the devil's advocate for a minute - re the bolded, that was one of the mitigating factors they put forward for her, so I don't think it's out of the question for him to discuss it.

Here's my prediction.

He got up at 4am to give this interview after being sequestered. He's going to go home and hit google. In 3 or 4 days we're going to get a different kind of interview from him. Maybe he'll even find Websleuths and the "what do we know that the jurors don't?" thread. The next interview will involve him saying something along the lines of "well ... I wish we'd known the full story" and he'll say that he thinks the DP would have been given had they known all of it.

 

[katiedid2]

Me too! There's always good chit chat on here.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm seeing this thru! I want to support the family financially and emotionally. I'm in for the long haul or short.

 

[prima.facie]

PHOENIX — The jury foreman in Jodi Arias' trial says the panel just couldn't decide whether the killing of her boyfriend was enough to merit a death a sentence.

William Zervakos tells The Associated Press jurors struggled with what they called a flawed system, explaining Arias wasn't "Jeffrey Dahmer or Charles Manson." They thought it was unfair that 12 average Americans who aren't lawyers had to make such a crucial decision.

The 69-year-old said Friday the entire panel believed the slaying was no doubt brutal. But he says they had to take into account Arias' lack of a criminal history or any previous violent behavior.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/24/arias-jury_n_3330897.html

and this is why im pissed off that they hardly knew the whole picture (not their fault). she had violent and criminal behavior!!! they just didn't know about it!! :banghead:

and its a sad day when one individual is considered less worthy than if that person had been part of a group of victims.

a slaughtered victim is a slaughtered victim. a murderer is a murderer no matter how many victims they had. they still murdered. I will never get that thought process as much as I try and get it. if she had not been caught and got away with it, there more than likely would be more victims. people like THAT don't just stop at one, IMO.

ugh.

 

[fruity]

Who are you referring to. Who said that please?

[video=youtube;9ngtXPP5krU]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ngtXPP5krU&sns=em[/video]

 

[polleypockets]

wow. she is going to be a police officer....while she is in absolute support of her sister. mmmmkay.


ETA....OT...I love when people keep their facebook pages open

omg!! yea that won't happen in california, the have huge background checks, a friend of mine got his BS in criminal justice, went to police academy, awesome guy, straight arrow and top grade earner in college and the academy, ultimatley was turned down in every department because his brother who he hadn't spoken to in 10 years was in jail on felony drug charges - so no CNJA's sister won't have a law career

 

[fabvab]

Even if it were a question she could have at least seen her daughter. The court called her for a reason.

I don't see how anyone could even leave the area when the jury was deliberating. Her mom was at court every single day...why wouldn't she have come to court when the jury had a question. :waitasec: I feel like she is pulling the victim card just like her daughter.

 

[InALandFarFarAway]

An older interview with her:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=LZi4djvoDqo#!

In comparison to the newer video, she's downright homey and warm in this one.

 

[momrids6]

You raise a good point there. This poses implications for Jury selection - what constitutes a Jury of your peers? Jury selection is not just about attitudes/opinions/values etc, but also about having full cognitive ability to process complex verbal & written information, comprehend it and make a decision i.e. being free of disabilities which could impede cognitive/emotive/analytical comprehension and/or decision making.

I agree. Unanimity is agreement by all people in a given situation. Even with a simple choice, getting 12 very different people to agree is daunting. Life experiences also affect how a person will process/rationalize information as a juror. Add in complex issues, language, higher order thinking, etc.... well- seems amazing a jury is ever truly unanimous. Makes one wonder just how many jurors have voted, or have been led or swayed without complete understanding.

Another problem with "full cognitive ability to process, et al., " is this does not come into play when determining competency to stand trial.

I have problems with defendants' competency as it stands now-it is much more than simply knowing the difference between right & wrong, imo.

Also, the jury instructions as well as "lawyer speak" are too complex for many without disability- just a substandard education or an "average" IQ- without explanation from another person.

There have been people passed through school, others who are very strong mathematically / weak in language, etc. etc.

 

[kkdj]

Right, but that's you. Being DP qualified doesn't mean they share your enthusiasm, it just means that they COULD vote DP.

The jurors didn't lie to anyone or betray anyone. They followed instructions and did their jobs, voting without allowing hatred or sorrow to sway their votes.

Jodi's not going anywhere, she will never be free. This is not that big of a deal! I think those jurors did a bang up job assuring that JA will never get out!

MOO

I agree! They unanimously voted that she is a canditate for the death penalty! Great hard work!
Now another jury will have to reach that final conclusion and they will!
The first jurors gave up months of their lives, had to silently endure looking at extremely unsettling pictures, hear awful stories and loads of lies.....with absolutely nobody to talk to until deliberations! And they brought it home on murder one then extreme cruelty! Which they knew made her a candidate for the death penalty! I applaud them!!!!
Moo

 

[Sydni]

Okay, I'm just gonna say it. I've posted before ... but I just don't understand Sky Hughes' emails to Travis. Why couldn't she just mind her own business and stay out of Travis's life??? She took ownership of Travis and thought she knew better than anyone how to "control" his life. She maybe has a good heart, but she is a very controlling and meddling person. She had NO business to dig into Travis's life as she did. She annoys me beyond anything.

To think that she and Chris had Travis in a room, running him over the coals about Arias (while she was listening at the door). Who does that to a 30-year-old man???? That just makes my hinky meter go waaaay over the top.

Sky and Chris were too intrusive in Travis's life ...and .. too over-the-top controlling/protective. Travis needed guidance, yes .. but he did NOT need a couple of meddling PPL folks trying to control his life. He was 30 years old. Yes they could see that JA was a whacko ....

Where were they when things were going wrong. They didn't seem to know anything else other than that one experience. If they were concerned, why didn't they report things to the authorities ... that's because they didn't really know anything more than that one experience that they were talking about (re her listening outside the door while Chris and Sky were trashing Jodi).

Am I the only one who has a weird feeling about the Hughes's. Why would they NOT be put on the stand. What's up with this??

 

[prima.facie]

I am sitting at home and the directions and understanding of the process was crystal clear to me. However there are some very concerning things the Foreman is saying and it's become pretty frustrating.

He doesn't think it's fair that the Jury decide this (you should have spoke up about that so you could be removed and those who understand their duty could step in.)

He didn't expect it be a mistrial if the jury couldn't agree on a penalty? (!? You thought she would get life, like you wanted? You didn't know the process your decision would cause? MOO)

He believes Jodi was mentally and emotionally abused by Travis Alexander and THEY had to take that into consideration (I worry about what he was enforcing to still talk for everyone when clearly not everyone believed her abuse crud.)

When you look at the crime, then look at the young woman sitting at the table it doesn't wash. (It doesn't wash? Her looks should NOT matter. The law and the directions provided matter. She indeed did and admitted to it, you have photos of her doing it and you even have photos of the after effect. You have the most evidence of one persom commiting a murder then I have ever seen in my life. It's inked in pretty thick, not a wash.)

I knew something was up when this guy put that they were hung on the verdict paperwork. It caused a huge problem. First the courts thought it was a question.. then it turned into a verdict and chaos insued. Then, when it was read off the poor woman was stumbling all over herself becuase the actual sentence made no sense becuase it wasn't a sentence. The foreman seems so into their final say being the FINAL say that he put it on the Verdict form. ??

MOO I don't feel like the one at the wheel should have even been. This was far too serious and important for the things he is saying. Besides that an alternate spoke, those removed spoke. 8 people stuck in that room, all got it. I hope more speak out though so maybe we can get a better grasp on what was going on in that room becuase at this point I am very concerned and pretty frustrated.

BRAVO and agree. the more I hear him speak, the more frustrated I become.
great response!

 

[TXProfessional]

He should quit talking. It is upsetting to hear some of the stuff he is coming out with. For example (he said stuff worse than this) ...but when he said you have to take into account she had no prior criminal record. What??? I can see that being a factor if you are in court trying to beat a speeding ticket, but a brutal murder like this...imho that should be given zero weight.

Garlandy, what is even more disturbing than that he had to take her lack of criminal history "into account", is that he was required by law to weigh the MITIGATING factors against the CRUELTY of the crime. So he what he is actually saying is that her lack of criminal history was more weighty than the cruel way she killed Travis. Seriously, I am really dumbfounded by all of this.

 

[PrincessSezMe]

I hadn't watched all of her interviews, so I'm just watching the ABC interview with Amy Murphy. Amy asks her why it is she appears to break down when she's talking about her nieces, and then in the next moment she is so composed...how does she do that knowing that the jury has her life in her hands.

Without missing a beat the CM says that "she was shaking", blah, blah, blah, and poor me, and that other people commented "that she was almost convulsing". What a fricking drama queen. Really? Almost convulsing? Has she ever even seen a person having a real convulsion? As Juan would say....riiiiiight.

She has lived her entire life, I'm sure, over-dramatizing everything. She wore people out with the constant drama. I'm sure that's why people distanced themselves from her fairly quickly in all of her relationships. Even her own family members were likely tired of the constant theatrics. I wish that her past boyfriends would have come forward and told the truth. DB was the only one the prosecution chose to put on the stand, and I don't believe for a second that he was in any way truthful about their relationship.

 

[Linda7NJ]

This article popped up while I was reading about Angela Simpson.
http://blogs.phoenixnewtimes.com/valleyfever/2013/05/scottsdale_woman_makes_jodi_ar.php



I can't help but think that if this murderer was young and attractive (and if there were pop rocks involved) the case would have been more publicised.

We have a case very similar here in NJ ... Wife dismembered, bagged and stuck him in her closet for YEARS...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk