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

[katiecoolady]

If Jodi was sentenced to death and it was discoverd a juror watched media during the trial then shed have a big appeal issue.

If one of the jurors now leaked they saw say, the Daryl Brewer testimony via interview without cross examination, what happens? Nothing.

 

[Lilly12]

I can see why some people bought the issue that Travis mentally or emotionally abused Jodi. Remember, the judge let EVERYTHING come into
trial that helped Jodi and vetoed so much critical information that would
have painted Travis in a better light.

I don't blame the jury for the non verdict, I think the judge played a large part in it.

I am surprised reading about the jury forman that the state got a M1. Boy how scary, that it could have gone the other way, NG. That is why it is so UNFAIR not to let in all the evidence against Jodi, e.g. the fake pedophile letters, the gun and knives in her car. Wonder what the forman (if he gets to hear it) will think of Jodi (that demure little thing) having a gun and knives in her ESCAPE CAR. moo

 

[desert]

I never saw him take a note I don't think but he was attentive.

Katie, what number was the jury foreman?

 

[prima.facie]

I have such up and down emotions over all of this. One moment I feel hope that the next jury will get it right. Other moments, im just like WHAT THE FUUUUUUUUUUUU and feel defeated and hopeless.

I am not an attorney, though I have studied criminal law to an extent but more specific than general. I do not know the full depth of court procedures and the why and hows....esp in AZ where things are a bit different than most states.

what really bothers me is that the jury was given a very selective portion of the entire picture. there was so much evidence and testimony that just was not put out there for them to see that would show that Jodi was NOT abused in any way shape or form and that she truly was a manipulative psychopath who really only deserves death. they saw all meek and mild Jodi in court. we have seen what she is really like. :/

I now feel the word A B U S E is just as widely misused as L O V E. it can mean anything and everything from nothing to the worst. that is very very worrisome for all the innocent people out there who encounter crazy people in their lives. there is no standard for what abuse means. as long as one can claim it, it is. as long as one can claim it, innocent people will suffer. just like there are standards for what qualifies as murder 1, murder 2, manslaughter, homicide, etc etc....there needs to be for anyone who claims abuse of another. while people are truly abused, there are way too many people who are falsely accused. travis was not abusive in ANY way. there is no pattern. there is no proof. those texts were NOT abusive. they were angry and angry does not equate abuse. im very bothered that the jury only saw only this tiny tiny portion of communication between travis and Jodi and while taken out of context it looks daming, it does NOT show travis' breaking point of having enough of her lying and manipulation and crazy ways. the "mean" things he said were not mean. sorry, but they were not. they were TRUE. every single name he called her - she literally was that. she was deserving of his "mean" words! she needed to hear the truth and she got it. yet, its being called abusive. UGH!

next, the foreman saying that he mentally abused her. again, a misuse of the word - abuse. single men hook up with various women at he same time all the time. did travis lead Jodi on? I doubt it. I think they just used each other like zillions of couples do every day. that is NOT abuse. however, we don't know what convos went on face to face. we also don't know the conflict he felt with a woman he had been attracted to but eventually showed signs of instability. many people are stuck in relationships like that where you loved someone, but you know you need to move on and cant. that is NOT abuse.

the jury was NOT given the full picture and that is not a fair justice system. that is NOT fair to them!! every damning piece of information about Jodi should have been able to be used, and my lack of knowledge in that area leaves me asking............why wasn't it?

I do not believe the foreman's excuses were good enough for her not getting death. in fact, they were worrisome and show that jurys are not perfect. but they are his opinions and nothing I can do about it. I mean, look at us here. there are many varying opinions on how we interpret things or what we feel about things - so if we were all on a jury, we would have been hung too.

today im back to feeling extreme disappointment. im sure I will read some posts and feel better, but damn the emotions are so up and down...

 

[nawd68]

one thing that really bothers me is that a complete picture of TRAVIS was never really presented. until steven read his blog, i don't know that the jurors understood what kind of person he was. they'd been saturated by the DT with all the tawdry sex crap, and they repeated the names he called her over and over and over again.

this guy was NAIVE. he was not worldly. he was an idealist. i think he saw her as someone he could HELP at first, and for awhile. his friends warning him only made him feel MORE that she was someone who needed him to help her----with work, with her life, with her spirituality, etc.

she saw all this in him and reeled him in with sex, threatening suicide if he left her, and appealing to him as sort of a life coach or mentor, which he wanted to be. she knew he was wiggling off her hook for good and she killed him.

i just don't know if they understood HIS motivations that well, other than the sex angle, which was real and powerful, but certainly wasn't the whole story.

I was hoping JM would make him more human in his closing. I'm not sure how much he was allowed to do. I thought it would be nice to see a video of Travis. Let the jury see a moving, breathing human being.

 

[Isabelle]

A prosecutor's demeanor while in the court room should be seen as an "on stage" persona. I have been married to a man who did that same job at one time and believe it or not, I was his rehearsal audience in our home!

 

[KMouse]

Let the ***** starve to death I don't care. If the judge doesn't have the b*lls to confine her from Donanvan and the interviews shes doing, shame on her! Everyone ought to treat CMJA like a on their shoes.

Problem is people and the media feed into JA's narcissistic and manipulative personality.

Watching her in court all frail with her ugly Betty look and minutes later given an interview with her hair down, no glasses, smiling with makeup on. It was disturbing and sickening, yet it worked for her in that courtroom.

 

[rose222]

This makes me sad Rose, although I understand. I do hope however that come July when this picks back up again (if it does I'm sure Jodi and her team will request a continuance and I'm sure Stephens will give it to them so maybe it won't be July) you will return with us to see this thing come to a complete close

Thanks, JSR. I'll be here till we have our new trial. Staying put! :seeya:

 

[kaRN]

As soon as you have professional juries you will have corruption. It would never work as well as the 'duty' option.
JMO

I feel the same way about elected judges.

 

[Maryann123]

Jury foreman says he is very "sure in his own mind that JA was mentally and verbally abused. Is that an excuse? Of course not. Does that factor in to the decisions we make? It has to." He also said she 'doesn't look like a killer'!!!!!!

Nurmi and ALV kept pounding home the fact that this monster, Travis Alexander, verbally abused the innocent little virgin by calling her a '' and a 'three-hole wonder'. They turned the May 26 text message into an indictment against Travis for expressing his rage about JA scamming and betraying him. He said she hurt him more than the death of his father. He called her a sociopath. All of this is a result of what the evil killer did to Travis - not vice-versa.

Travis finally discovered the truth about JA and expressed himself. How could any juror mis-construe this evidence so badly??? Everything contained in the emails, text messages and voicemails was an indictment against the killer herself!!! She orchestrated the sex tape; she recorded it without his knowledge; she planted the pedophilia lies; she stole money from him; she hacked into his bank accts., phone, and computer. She stalked him. She slashed his tires. She wrote threatening letters to ex-g/f's. Her final act was to cover her tracks and drive 1000 miles to slaughter him!

How this jury foreman can get it so wrong is beyond comprehension. Travis was the victim of DV, not Jodi Ann Arias! And then to say JA didn't look like a killer is the coup d'etat!!!! This is a travesty for Travis!!!!

You absolutely nailed it! How could anyone not see through that BS? What you said is exactly what I believe. Thank you!

 

[Tenaciousdae]

I think it's like this...imagine if someone came to you and said the young daughter of your neighbor commited a horrific, horrific crime where she stabbed her boyfriend to death. You would understanably be shocked, and WANT TO FIND A REASON AS TO WHY. What happened, did she snap? Did she have a mental breakdown? And keep in mind you had never heard anything bad about this girl, and she seemed really sweet and innocent. SO SOMETHING MUST HAVE GONE WRONG.

Yes, I would want to know what made her snap. However after learning that it was premeditated and calculated, I would be sick.

Then I would be glad that I didn't have a son she fancied!

 

[katiecoolady]

Katie, what number was the jury foreman?

18

The same one Michael Kiefer leaked before it was released.

 

[kscornfed]

I don't want this to come across as an insult or anything. It is not meant that way.

This is MOO. When I saw the jury getting on the bus after the verdict I was stunned to see the age demographics. To me they looked like they were getting on a seniors casino weekend bus. Honestly, that was my first thought and my second was that may have been part of the problem there. That generation may not "get" how relationships are these days or how people text each other. They may have looked at Jodi as somebody who could be their daughter.

i'm not going to get into the age debate again, although it still rubs me the wrong way since i'm 64.

AZ is FULL of older people. when my friend moved there at 55, all the women in the neighborhood thought she was a threat to their marriages because she was so young! LOL. they would barely speak to her for a long time.

but i STILL maintain that us antiques have lived life and have learned things those in their 40's have yet to learn. we've seen the world change in miraculous ways----i remember getting our FIRST tv!! we're not stupid and we're not out of touch with what's going on in the world.

i know you didn't mean that as an insult---i get it. but i felt i had to respond to it.

 

[neesaki]

This was the jury foreman, not a dismissed juror.
Please watch the interview here

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/jodi-ari...-gma-how-they-reached-verdict-and-then-didnt/

That is not really what he says. He is talking about JA on the stand for 18 days and says Juan is aggressive, basically implying he wouldn't want to be up against Juan for 18 days.

Wow. After watching that, I think it's a great accomplishment that this jury was able to reach a verdict of Murder 1, then Cruelty.

 

[cityslick]

I am going to bump my own post from last night. As long as we are within TOS, everyone is free to express their own opinion. Including anger or frustration with the jury. We dont have to be impartial. We arent serving on this jury. We all watched the same trial. We all saw it through our own lens. I support those of you who feel that the jury did the right thing. I dont agree, but I support you. I would appreciate it if I were allowed to express my beliefs as well.

I agree, but I saw some name calling last night I don't think that's right or even within the TOS. Being angry is one thing, calling those who don't agree with you cowards or dumb, not so much. Today has been a whole lot more civil as people have calmed down.

 

[La Louve]

Good morning sleuthers, I see the jury is talking.

I've never been in favor of the death penalty, but also have never sat on a jury and had to make that decision for real.

However, this crime and the evidence and the ensuing trial have convinced me that this murderer should be put down for the greater good of society. It is not quite human, and never will be, and is a danger to the community. I would put it down like a rabid animal. Quickly and humanely.

Now with the jury's inability to agree on the penalty, I again have mixed emotions. Disappointment for sure, despair for Travis's family and friends, anger for some of the tactics of the DT. I hold no malice towards the jury though. They performed admirably in this trial and consistently did the best they could. I thank them for their service and wish them well as IMO they are now collateral damage of the murderer's actions.

As for the murderer, I tend now to think that LWOP is the better way to go, because it will then become one of many, nothing special, just another murderer in prison for the rest of its life. To put it on death row would keep the media-abetted infomercial going, keep it feeling like it's special and pretty and seductive.

Prayers for Travis's family and friends, may they find peace, may they remember their brother with love and open hearts, may they find the strength to continue their pursuit of justice for Travis.

 

[rose222]

Now that I believe the foreman was at least partially taken in by the murderer's spin and appearance, I feel a lot of pride for the 8 jurors who held firm against the foreman's determination to lead them down the path of CMja's manipulation. It will be very interesting to hear from "Trump" or someone like that. Of course, I have no idea how they leaned. MOO

At this point I'm just grateful that we got:

A first-degree murder conviction (7 for premeditated and felony!)

An especially cruel conviction

Like you said, eight jurors stood by their convictions for death. Thank you to those eight jurors!

 

[jojomonkey]

I'm trying to catch up from yesterday. Does anyone know if Tuba weighed in (astrologically) on the verdict yesterday? I'd like to know her take on what happened.

edited because I misspelled Tuba.

 

[sammie]

The DP is so controversial and polarizing, it makes it more difficult for juries to reach a verdict, and it is apparently a huge weight on the system considering the extensive appeals process when it is imposed. I'm wondering if it's really worth it. Then there are the numerous cases in which the convicted was found to be innocent, such as Kerry Max Cook that I mentioned earlier. AZWatcher is right, the DP definitely has baggage.

The DP isn't even legal in 18 states. If Jodi had committed this crime in one of those states, we wouldn't even be having this discussion.

Given how much evidence was kept out, I am so grateful this jury convicted her of 1st degree murder. The sentence she ends up getting is secondary. After reading about Perryville I think either sentence is just for her. Her life will be hell....she won't be starting book clubs or recycling programs. In fact, I'd bet after a couple years at Perryville, Jodi will regret not asking for the DP. She is in for a rude awakening.

The Estrella jail, her residence for the past five years, will seem like a country club, compared to Perryville.

I know this is emotional for everyone, but remember these jurors did their jobs. We are all individuals and have different opinions and perceptions. Even if we don't agree with their vote, it doesn't make them wrong. One third of them did not think the DP was warranted, for whatever reason. We have to respect that, it's our system. They did not see everything we did, it's impossible for any of us to know how we'd have seen things if we had only seen what the jurors did.

 

[BetteDavisEyes]

I agree with 100%. In my opinion, he stood in the way of Lady Justice!

I sure would like to know how the jury selected the foreman. Did everyone think that he had good leadership skills? Was he popular and had a lot of personality? Did he promote himself or volunteer to be the foreman if no one else wanted the task? This would be interesting information because a jury foreperson can be an influence - positively or negatively - on the rest of the panel. :moo: