The FINAL (?!) Jodi Arias thread (Penalty Phase retrial verdict)

[usnuzuloose]

I think this case has taken a tole on a lot of people. I can live with her staying for life. And I hope and pray that JSS see it that way as well.. The Alexanders need to move on. It will be the prison who will have to contend with her for life. Threats should never be tossed around to anyone who votes the way they do. All we can do is wait and see what the judge does in April. But I suppose Nurmi will try and stretch that out as far as he can as well.

 

[usnuzuloose]

If someone knows how to research, might be worth looking up and seeing about it. But the woman who was the hold , her husband was prosecuted by Juan back in 2000 and put in prison. Makes me wonder if that is some sort of revenge.

 

[maccagerl]

If someone knows how to research, might be worth looking up and seeing about it. But the woman who was the hold , her husband was prosecuted by Juan back in 2000 and put in prison. Makes me wonder if that is some sort of revenge.

Interesting! I wonder how that slipped by in the jury selection process!

 

[crz4mm2]

Huge breach of due process! Generally when that is thrown around in criminal cases it's assumed to mean due process for the defendant. Actually the People have rights of due process under the law and inability to cross examine is definitely a violation. If one of our judges allowed that situation to develop I'm sure the sanctions would be severe, pretty good likelihood for removal from the bench.

I understand why people are upset this woman appears to have manipulated her way out of the death sentence, but I cannot help thinking somehow that a lifetime behind bars in ever diminishing spotlight, stewing in her own juices will be a very fitting punishment here. She's no Charles Manson. He does manage to pop up in the news every few years, but how relevant is he really overall today? This woman doesn't have that cult status and will be relegated to virtual obscurity rather quickly is my guess. She's a young woman, likely with a loooong time behind bars ahead of her.

I pray you are right, that sh never sees the light of day and stews in her own juices. We shall see.

 

[crz4mm2]

If someone knows how to research, might be worth looking up and seeing about it. But the woman who was the hold , her husband was prosecuted by Juan back in 2000 and put in prison. Makes me wonder if that is some sort of revenge.

This makes my head explode!

 

[2Kds2K9]

Gees, if that's the case, then Arizona really needs to work on their jury questionnaire.

If someone knows how to research, might be worth looking up and seeing about it. But the woman who was the hold , her husband was prosecuted by Juan back in 2000 and put in prison. Makes me wonder if that is some sort of revenge.

 

[cabanafrau]

If someone knows how to research, might be worth looking up and seeing about it. But the woman who was the hold , her husband was prosecuted by Juan back in 2000 and put in prison. Makes me wonder if that is some sort of revenge.

I have a hard time thinking that's credible on first glance. Standard juror questioning has inquiry about knowing any parties to the case in preliminary questioning. Guaranteed that involvement of self, family or even close friends with the justice system, law enforcement, etc. was probed as well.

The juror could have concealed this fact, to her peril. A case of this profile, duration and expense and the juror deceived the Court? Incarceration and heavy fine would be expected.

 

[crz4mm2]

Is there a transcript of the jurors interview? I just saw a clip, but can't be the whole thing.

 

[MaryAnnDVC]

Here's a link to some info about the juror's husband being prosecuted by Juan Martinez. It was her ex-husband, not her current husband. And apparently at some point shortly after this retrial began, this juror was questioned in chambers. The current husband also has done time, but not prosecuted by JM. I'm super busy at the moment but saw it on FB and only skimmed through it, so I'm not totally sure of facts and if I got all of that right. But take a look.

http://www.courtchatter.com/2015/03/jodi-arias-just-when-you-thought-it-was.html

 

[MaryAnnDVC]

I Haven't looked at the crockpot's Twitter, but he/she (not sure of the crockpot's gender, LOL) surely didn't divulge any jury deliberations. The crockpot comment was just a laughing about the account, nothing really said except I understood it that the jury knew about it and hopefully it was after the verdict was read.

I don't know if this was the abusive husband or not, Jen turned HLN off at 4, she said she'd had enough and I'm a firm believer in happy wife, happy life. LOL

I think I got a little too focused on the crockpot account! LOL

If my DH had known what was good for him, he at the very least would not have allowed me to SEE him rolling his eyes when I tried to update him on this case two days ago. He's paying for it.

Good Morning,

After reflecting for the evening, I have to take back my prior comment, and see that the jury did do their job. I'm not sure what the "true" story is with juror 17, but I do not support they lynch mob mentality that exploded on social media. If there are valid claims, they should be investigated.

I wonder if we should have a jury decide the sentencing phase of a trial. Maybe that should be exclusively left up to judges, or a panel that has some type of training. Or maybe this outcome will lead to a larger debate on the DP.

I do hope that JSS imposes LWOP.

I read a good piece this morning by Mark Eighlarsh, that I found helpful. Here it is;

http://www.floridacriminaldefensela...king-sense-jodi-arias-hung-jury-decision.html

Some time away helps give a different perspective.

Social media make is SO easy to threaten people...it's scary.

Huge breach of due process! Generally when that is thrown around in criminal cases it's assumed to mean due process for the defendant. Actually the People have rights of due process under the law and inability to cross examine is definitely a violation. If one of our judges allowed that situation to develop I'm sure the sanctions would be severe, pretty good likelihood for removal from the bench.

I understand why people are upset this woman appears to have manipulated her way out of the death sentence, but I cannot help thinking somehow that a lifetime behind bars in ever diminishing spotlight, stewing in her own juices will be a very fitting punishment here. She's no Charles Manson. He does manage to pop up in the news every few years, but how relevant is he really overall today? This woman doesn't have that cult status and will be relegated to virtual obscurity rather quickly is my guess. She's a young woman, likely with a loooong time behind bars ahead of her.

Judge Stevens really blew it with the "secret witness" testimony. I have no idea what her background is with the types of cases she has tried, but I thought she was awful and should, at the very least, never preside over another capital murder case.

The thing about Jodi is that she has been able to be vocal from prison, either through interviews or tweeting. If the interviews are taken away, and if she still wants to do them, she'll fight it to what ever extent she can, if that's at all possible. If she's allowed any contact with people, she'll have them do her bidding, as she has in the past with her tweeting. She'll fight conditions, she'll fight whatver she possibly can, just to fight. She'll do SOMETHING. somehow. She'll find some way to stay (her idea of) relevant. We didn't have social media when Charles Manson relevance was at its peak. We've lived through every aspect of JA's crime and case. She's a manipulator...it's one of the characteristics of Borderline Personality Disorder, and she was damn good at it, with everyone, including this judge. Maybe her situation will be such that she absolutley cannot manipulate anyone, or the system, ever again, but Jodi's not going to become irrelevant without a fight. JMHO, of course.

 

[crz4mm2]

I think I got a little too focused on the crockpot account! LOL

If my DH had known what was good for him, he at the very least would not have allowed me to SEE him rolling his eyes when I tried to update him on this case two days ago. He's paying for it. Some time away helps give a different perspective.

Social media make is SO easy to threaten people...it's scary.Judge Stevens really blew it with the "secret witness" testimony. I have no idea what her background is with the types of cases she has tried, but I thought she was awful and should, at the very least, never preside over another capital murder case.

The thing about Jodi is that she has been able to be vocal from prison, either through interviews or tweeting. If the interviews are taken away, and if she still wants to do them, she'll fight it to what ever extent she can, if that's at all possible. If she's allowed any contact with people, she'll have them do her bidding, as she has in the past with her tweeting. She'll fight conditions, she'll fight whatver she possibly can, just to fight. She'll do SOMETHING. somehow. She'll find some way to stay (her idea of) relevant. We didn't have social media when Charles Manson relevance was at its peak. We've lived through every aspect of JA's crime and case. She's a manipulator...it's one of the characteristics of Borderline Personality Disorder, and she was damn good at it, with everyone, including this judge. Maybe her situation will be such that she absolutley cannot manipulate anyone, or the system, ever again, but Jodi's not going to become irrelevant without a fight. JMHO, of course.

Totally agree.

 

[usnuzuloose]

Here's a link to some info about the juror's husband being prosecuted by Juan Martinez. It was her ex-husband, not her current husband. And apparently at some point shortly after this retrial began, this juror was questioned in chambers. The current husband also has done time, but not prosecuted by JM. I'm super busy at the moment but saw it on FB and only skimmed through it, so I'm not totally sure of facts and if I got all of that right. But take a look.

http://www.courtchatter.com/2015/03/jodi-arias-just-when-you-thought-it-was.html

Thank you for the link Mare, I knew someone could locate it. I will read it later. Good grief I am so tired of cleaning.

 

[MaryAnnDVC]

@troyhaydenfox10: ALERT: J. Martinez prosecuted ex-husband of holdout juror 17. They married day before his 2000 sentencing. #jodiarias http://t.co/ZuR5wELH27

@troyhaydenfox10: #jodiarias atty Jennifer Willmott, "We all knew (#Juror17's) 1st husband had a past. If Juan didn't check it out, that's his fault."

@troyhaydenfox10: #jodiarias def atty Jennifer Willmott told me she did not know #juror17's husband was prosecuted by Juan Martinez. #Fox10Phoenix

@troyhaydenfox10: To clarify: Willmott said both sides knew #juror17's 1st husband had "a past." But says she did not know Juan Martinez prosecuted case.

 

[MaryAnnDVC]

I record The Today Show so I can fast forward through the BS, and from what I could see, they didn't mention the outcome of the JA penalty phase retrial. However, they DID report on the oh so important news about Kim Kartrashian's new hair color. Hence, the reason I record it and FF. smh

 

[pigletgirl]

Man.. feeling just as gutted today as I did yesterday.

 

[crz4mm2]

Man.. feeling just as gutted today as I did yesterday.

Yup

 

[crz4mm2]

I have a direct sales meeting this am so hoping that will take my mind off it.

 

[usnuzuloose]

Look at it as something new and exciting to come before April. It is like a good soap opera, never ending.

 

[lorimay]

WOW!
We were in Disney last week and I missed the circus. Only this piece of garbage gets these breaks. I cannot believe this juror didn't have her mind made up already from the get go. I just hope this judge gives her LWOP. I have been shaking my head since I heard the outcome. Only Jodie......

 

[usnuzuloose]

I don't know, and don't want to make to much of it, but I wonder if this could have been this a revenge on Juan.