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

[gemini2727]

So sorry, what is the Allen Charge?? It gives us hope?

 

[usnuzuloose]

So sorry, what is the Allen Charge?? It gives us hope?

That means the judge will instruct them to go back and keep working at it until they can come up with a verdict or they honestly can not come to the verdict and declare a mistrial. If that happens I think they will retry her again.

 

[Uncle Remus]

Remus, do we know if bullet point lady was chosen? She would be the type to dissent just for the sake of it, IMO, just to hear herself talk some more...

I kinda doubt she was chosen, but I'd take her for the Defense.

Good point, this one made me very angry as well.

I thought that might jar ya.

 

[usnuzuloose]

I kinda doubt she was chosen, but I'd take her for the Defense.




I thought that might jar ya.

Pass the advil please....

 

[Uncle Remus]

I wonder if the fact that this jury requested a transcript of the State's closing argument will become an issue should they convict Dippolito.

 

[usnuzuloose]

I wonder if the fact that this jury requested a transcript of the State's closing argument will become an issue should they convict Dippolito.

They were told there was no transcripts for the closings and it is not evidence. So I don't think that would have any bearing on it.

 

[Uncle Remus]

They were told there was no transcripts for the closings and it is not evidence. So I don't think that would have any bearing on it.

I know that part, but they asked for it. Obviously they did not pay attention when the judge instructed them before deliberations even started that opening and closing arguments are not evidence. I'd certainly argue they were attempting to use outside resources to deliberate since they wanted the closing argument of the State.

 

[usnuzuloose]

daliadippolito - Did the State make a huge mistake not putting Mike Dippolito on the stand = no motive for the jury?

 

[usnuzuloose]

I know that part, but they asked for it. Obviously they did not pay attention when the judge instructed them before deliberations even started that opening and closing arguments are not evidence. I'd certainly argue they were attempting to use outside resources to deliberate since they wanted the closing argument of the State.

I was trying to remember what her closing was to the end. But she kept getting objected to so much. I had a hard time keeping up with her. Do you remember what she said at the end?

 

[Uncle Remus]

I was trying to remember what her closing was to the end. But she kept getting objected to so much. I had a hard time keeping up with her. Do you remember what she said at the end?

Simply closing words from state: "She did it. Find her guilty."
#Dalia soon to begin deliberations.
Cathy ‏@courtchatter 1m1 minute ago
#daliadippolito - State ends: Remember her words when she says she's going to do something she's going to do it and she did. She's guilty

 

[usnuzuloose]

No wonder I couldn't remember, worst closing ever.

 

[lorimay]

If bullet point lady was on the jury, she will be the first one talking....we will ALL hear her story.

I just hope its a mistrial and not a not guilty, so they can try her again.
The state really screwed up with their "less is more "strategy".

 

[usnuzuloose]

If bullet point lady was on the jury, she will be the first one talking....we will ALL hear her story.

I just hope its a mistrial and not a not guilty, so they can try her again.
The state really screwed up with their "less is more "strategy".

I agree, they didn't bring much in. I know mike has a shady past, but I think his testimony may have helped. And it would be better to have a mistrial and give them a do over.

 

[lorimay]

Did you watch the jury selection Snuz? The defense was looking for people that hate or mistrust police, I am guessing they may have found someone.
I just don't see how after listening to her and HER words, they can hold out. IMO, if they do they are not following the law.

 

[usnuzuloose]

Did you watch the jury selection Snuz? The defense was looking for people that hate or mistrust police, I am guessing they may have found someone.
I just don't see how after listening to her and HER words, they can hold out. IMO, if they do they are not following the law.

I am still trying to figure out what they or which one wanted to review the video and the voice calls. We don't even know how many for and against this jury is. I guess we will find out today.

 

[Uncle Remus]

If bullet point lady was on the jury, she will be the first one talking....we will ALL hear her story.

I just hope its a mistrial and not a not guilty, so they can try her again.
The state really screwed up with their "less is more "strategy".

I laughed out loud with your comment that we will ALL hear her story. So true!!

Did you watch the jury selection Snuz? The defense was looking for people that hate or mistrust police, I am guessing they may have found someone.
I just don't see how after listening to her and HER words, they can hold out. IMO, if they do they are not following the law.

But you said it above, the States strategy of "less is more" was lacking. They should have included some motive as to why Dippolito wanted her husband killed.

And unfortunately the State had lousy witnesses. The lead detective and the public information officer both came across cocky which implies they had little regard for policy or protocol in building a case. The foundation of the Defense's case (coercion and entrapment) is bolstered by the fact Dippolito's boyfriend was told he'd be charged if he didn't assist the police in their case. The cops should have followed the law. This is what happens when they don't, guilty people go free.

 

[Uncle Remus]

Thank goodness this judge is going to ask the jurors individually as to whether they've spoken to the press or watched any news.

Then again, is he naming them?

 

[Uncle Remus]

Well, it's a mistrial.

I wonder if the State will file again and how long that will take to come to trial.

 

[Uncle Remus]

So it was a 3-3 split.

I hope someone talks to the press and gives us the details.

 

[MaryAnnDVC]

I laughed out loud with your comment that we will ALL hear her story. So true!!



But you said it above, the States strategy of "less is more" was lacking. They should have included some motive as to why Dippolito wanted her husband killed.

And unfortunately the State had lousy witnesses. The lead detective and the public information officer both came across cocky which implies they had little regard for policy or protocol in building a case. The foundation of the Defense's case (coercion and entrapment) is bolstered by the fact Dippolito's boyfriend was told he'd be charged if he didn't assist the police in their case. The cops should have followed the law. This is what happens when they don't, guilty people go free.

I haven't watched after the first couple days but I cringed with every question to and answer of the lead detective. It must be a Catch-22 for the jurors to see such a lousy investigation but evidence of guilt.

I do wonder if they'll retry her. Nothing about the lousy investigation is going to change.