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

[ahi]

Morning all.

Last night I dreamed that Vinnie Politan took me and my parents out for Chinese food then drove us all home in a big white van, which we later had sex in. What does this mean?????? anic:

Great...now I want Chinese...

 

[Schuby]

The Jury foreman has been on tv. He looks like a very smart man to me.

I'm sure he could pass any test without a problem.

The verdict had nothing to do with tests, common sense, or misunderstanding the law.

This case should have been plead out from day one at murder two.

It was never a DP case.

IMO

The jury disagrees with you, they convicted her of murder 1.

 

[aa9511]

Bringing in age as a component in this trial keeps it real. Advertisers use demographics to tailor to their targeted audience. It isn't a dig, just the fact of life.

ALV not understanding what she was looking at and that what she did have were snippets of a larger conversation escaped her and a few members of the jury. Those jurors looked to her for guidance when other jurors would have instantly understood that Travis not responding for 3 hours did NOT mean he was angry during that time. It simply meant he didn't get back to his phone and look at the message for three hours. Then he picked up the conversation and responded.

ALV didn't get that partly because she had no clue what texting was all about and partly because as she pointed out, in HER generation things weren't done like that. People didn't speak to each other like that. The words held a different meaning for her because she was basing it on her social culture.

Yes. I still don't get what the big deal of those text messages were. I mean, as I recall, he never even said the actual bad words, like F***, didn't he say freakin'? He didn't actually curse. He said some mean things, like corrupted carcass, etc., again JUAN NEEDS TO SHOW MORE CONTEXT NEXT TIME. I don't know, I do not understand why those even "mean" words were a big deal BECAUSE THEY WERE IN THE MIDDLE OF AN ARGUMENT. AND SHE HAD DONE VERY BAD THINGS TO HIM.

Ok, well we will never completely know probably what went on in the jury room. I mean, come one, GMA interviewed the foreman for all of 5 minutes. Some show like 20/20 needs to do a sit-down interview with one or all of them. THat is when we will begin to understand fully what was going through their minds.

 

[carnnell]

I was floored that the jury believed there was emotional and verbal abuse based on extremely limited texts. Who hasn't made a person mad and been called every name in the book??? I guess I am extremely emotionally and verbally abused.
This whole trial has been one upset after another except for Murder 1 with extreme cruelty.

This was my first trial I ever followed and I don't think I can stomach another one for a while.

I can truly understand how you feel. I am so glad they did not find the abuse was a reason to slaughter Travis and his murder was "especially" cruel!!! He did say that Arias "was not a good witness" LOL Loved it!!!

I have watched trials since the mid 90's. Trials take a life of their own. Anything can happen whether in Arizona or in New England or one's own back yard.

As my father says (attorney and Federal Law Enforcement) "There is legal truth and there is moral truth". We are dealing with legal truth and very different way of thinking than moral truth that most of us are use to framing our perceptions.

In spit of the frustration, there is always something to learn from the laws of each state, the prosecutors and defense attorney styles of executing their case in chief, to the regional thinking of the wonderful folks, the beauty of the court house and surrounding city/town, etc. There is always something to learn. Most of all to learn about human nature.

I love watching trials!!! Hang in there..

JMHO

 

[Elley Mae]

The Jury foreman has been on tv. He looks like a very smart man to me.

I'm sure he could pass any test without a problem.

The verdict had nothing to do with tests, common sense, or misunderstanding the law.

This case should have been plead out from day one at murder two.

It was never a DP case.

But this Jury gave us murder one. We should count our lucky stars.

IMO

bbm, Which case would be a death penalty case to you?

 

[raisincharlie]

I just listened to the jury foreman. Some thoughts are that of course he thought Travis was verbally abusive. If all you knew was what he said, especially on May 26, he does come off pretty rough. We know what preceded it and no one (but JA) knows the real trigger. In context, while still not appropriate, it didn't mean Travis was abusive. It just meant he was human and he lost it. At least when he lost it no one was dead. We all have our breaking point and no one is at their best when they get there. To be judged on a whole from a very small part is sad. I am grateful that she got murder 1. I am grateful that she will never walk among us again, God willing. We all know the DP doesn't mean the DP. No woman has been executed since 1930 in Az. Yes, she could earn some privileges to have more time out of her cell but she will never be free. That is all that matters.
I know how badly Travis's family wanted the DP and still does. I pray they get what they need to move on.

BBM - I think perhaps that Travis' family should take some time and think about how some ending would help them overall. Having the luxury I have of Travis not being my family member and a night to sleep on things, LWOP might be the best remedy for their pain. An ending might not be as bad as having to go through this even longer. With this murderer, she isn't going to stop. If a plea could be arranged for LWOP and waiving appeals, this might do more to help than they might think. Closure is just a word, it is never achieved for the brutal murder of anyone, no matter what the end result may be. Closure is just one of those political correctness things which is as imaginary as the Law of Attraction.

I send them my prayers and hope that they can achieve what it is that they need to regain their lives.

 

[Linda7NJ]

It won't be long folks until we find out which guards she's banging for favors. (Do the male staff get to watch her go potty?) The sherriff seems to be enamored of her as well! It's truly a sad commentary how so many bend over backwards for her!!

Maybe she's the one bending over backwards ....and standing on her head.

I have zero doubt that she will be having sex with men in prison. She will manipulate guards.

My only hope is she never spawns....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[shygrl]

The jury forman NEVER blamed Travis. He said he beleived there was emotional abuse but never said it was Travis' fault he was murdered. They voted for 1st degree murder and that it was cruel. I don't know what interview you guys are watching but half the stuff I have read was never said by him.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk 2

 

[mytime]

This is probably a repost but definitely worth a repost!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YJTBLd-72fg&feature=youtu.be

 

[Litigatrix]

Good job, Litigatrix. "The decision 'we' made," no, the decision that four of you made. I agree -- this language is troubling. Suggests a rather entitled, elitist attitude. Perhaps later revelations will temper that tone, but he sounds like he's talking about people who work for him, not jurors with whom he was collaborating on a verdict. I'm agreeing with you on the tenor of his comments leaning toward some preconceptions. Again, I think he might have found some notes extremely useful. :moo:

I completely agree with you. I work with lawyers like him everyday and they can certainly sway people who are less savvy by giving their (often uninformed) opinion as gospel.

Perhaps he is also the reason that they were hung...I can't imagine the majority of them wanting to quit without a resolution.

 

[HarvestMoon]

Maybe she's the one bending over backwards ....and standing on her head.

I have zero doubt that she will be having sex with men in prison. She will manipulate guards.

My only hope is she never spawns....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yup, she'll be giving and getting favors for sure.

 

[molly333]

Also just thought of something you know how enraged and horrified we were at Jodi holding up her "survivor" shirt?? Well if what the foreman just said in his interview then it appears the jury would NOT have had the same reaction we did to the shirt. They did believe she was abused and as such WAS a survivor. So maybe her statement to them actually worked and didn't come across as it did to the rest of us???

All I can say is thank god we got the guilty murder 1 verdict. Looks like it could have gone the other way. At least a little.

That's right.:seeya:

IMO

 

[rose222]

bbm, Which case would be a death penalty case to you?

Ohh Elley Mae...dontcha know? :silenced:

 

[Ransom]

Yes she had a jury consultant. Why do I think the nickname given to the jury consultant during the commentary here was Salmon or wild salmon?

lol. Ummmm.... not even. :floorlaugh:

 

[Linda7NJ]

bbm, Which case would be a death penalty case to you?

John Couey

After thinking about the DP and Jodi .... And much soul searching. I don't believe I could sentence her to die.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[robc]

Morning all.

Last night I dreamed that Vinnie Politan took me and my parents out for Chinese food then drove us all home in a big white van, which we later had sex in. What does this mean?????? anic:

that depends alot on who the "we" are...

 

[LambChop]

The Jury foreman has been on tv. He looks like a very smart man to me.

I'm sure he could pass any test without a problem.

The verdict had nothing to do with tests, common sense, or misunderstanding the law.

This case should have been plead out from day one at murder two.

It was never a DP case.

But this Jury gave us murder one. We should count our lucky stars.

IMO

If cutting someone's throat, stabbing them 29 times and shooting them in the head is murder two, what would be considered murder one???? They all voted that it was extremely cruel. Murder two does not have a description of the crime as "extremely cruel".

 

[gauntlet]

Evening lovely Sleuthers. It looks like it's that time to remember we don't have to reply to all people's posts if you know what I mean. Some people come on here and post very controversial views. God, well Adnoid invented an ignore function for that reason if someone is bothering you. You can access it by pressing http://www.websleuths.com/forums/profile.php?do=ignorelist

Love,

Gauntlet

 

[Gin]

That mothering instinct is strong. If any juror has a daughter of similar age, it's entirely possible that could play a role.

This is embarrassing to admit, but when they caught the 19 year old Boston bomber, my first instinct was "oh no, don't hurt him" because, and ONLY because, he strongly resembles my 16 year old son. As heinous and horrific a crime as he committed, I saw my son in him and was actually feeling bad for him at one point. Not anymore, but that initial image of seeing my son's image was heartbreaking for me. I don't think I could be a juror on his trial for that reason alone.

I think we all react differently. I am the mom of a son around Travis's age.
FWIW, I was horrified by the actions of the Boston Bomber. I was up the night the security guard was shot and killed. This was before we knew for sure it was connected. All I could think was how terrible for his family. He went to work, and will never come back.

Mothering instinct works a lot of ways. JMO-part of that instinct is being able to assess, look at a situation, figure out what seems hinky, and what doesn't. What squares with the truth?? (Most parents who've raised teens understand this, I think. Obviously, normal teen issues aren't anywhere near what goes on with ckja, but it's a similar process as you look at a situation.)

I am so, so sorry that Travis was murdered. As a mother, I see the pain of his family. It is beyond sad, and I wish I (or someone) could provide comfort to them. I have zero empathy for his killer. Her callous cruel ways are depraved.

 

[Sleuth5]

I completely agree with you. I work with lawyers like him everyday and they can certainly sway people who are less savvy by giving their (often uninformed) opinion as gospel.

Perhaps he is also the reason that they were hung...I can't imagine the majority of them wanting to quit without a resolution.

If his comments are any indication, and he's your foreman, yes, I can't help but think that pretty much ended any possibility of reconciliation. He does not come across as having been open to "his" juror's opinions. :moo: