Retrial for Sentencing of Jodi Arias - 1/20 Sizzle Break

LambChop · Jan 20, 2015

Other thread is getting full so this one is open until court tomorrow afternoon. :silly:

MaryND · Jan 20, 2015

I have a question - if any of the people supplying affidavits have criminal backgrounds, can Juan point this out somehow? Is there anyway to refer to the person's reputation, as they are not there to answer? Sorry if this doesn't make sense.

AZlawyer · Jan 20, 2015

MaryND said:
I have a question - if any of the people supplying affidavits have criminal backgrounds, can Juan point this out somehow? Is there anyway to refer to the person's reputation, as they are not there to answer? Sorry if this doesn't make sense.

Yes, he could have Flores testify as to any criminal history.

RickshawFan · Jan 20, 2015

Maybe JM could reintroduce the smuggled magazines to discredit McGee's affidavit?

ICit · Jan 20, 2015

RickshawFan said:
Maybe JM could reintroduce the smuggled magazines to discredit McGee's affidavit?

I would love for this jury to see those magazines! I would also love it if Juan could play a tape from one of JA's jail visits where SHE was telling the visitor what to say.
So far all the affidavits sound to me like they came from the JA support sites, where nobody really knows her or has even met her!

Nali87 · Jan 20, 2015

ICit said:
I would love for this jury to see those magazines! I would also love it if Juan could play a tape from one of JA's jail visits where SHE was telling the visitor what to say.
So far all the affidavits sound to me like they came from the JA support sites, where nobody really knows her or has even met her!

And yet this crap is allowed in. With names being withheld. For all we know half of it is some made up ****.

oceanblueeyes · Jan 20, 2015

I know I have seen in other cases where additional witnesses were added in a rebuttal case that weren't on the original rebuttal list.

Iirc, this was because the defense brought up something new in their part of the case and the Judges allowed the state to rebut it with additional witnesses in their rebuttal case.

So will Juan also be afforded the same by JSS or will he be hamstrung leaving the DT to get away with having witnesses say anything they want without Juan having any way to rebuke them?

If so, how in the world can anyone say this is about fairness and justice?

decemberbee45 · Jan 20, 2015

I'm worried. JSS has let enough foolishness in front of this jury for some numbskull on the jury to say "hell, I 'm worn out. I don't know which way is up, I'm so confused. But where there is smoke, must be a little bit of fire. He picked the wrong girl to mess around with. Give her life."

That makes me sick to my stomach, but I'm for real worried.

katydid23 · Jan 20, 2015

Nali87 said:
I'm sorry but this is total ********. The reason we so readily disregarded the stuff Matt from New Zealand said is because we know his history of crazy. This jury does not. Will they accept the fact that someone will actually LIE like this? These are very serious things to lie about - domestic violence and pedophilia. If I were on this jury I might go "Well what reason does this witness have to lie? The ex girlfriend might be lying to protect Travis' memory". So my question is can JM bring up some of the ******** Matt has been typing and saying online or is he limited by the fact that this coward didn't reveal his name?

I think Juan will be able to refute it based upon it's total implausibility. It is laughable. The jury will see that and wonder why the guy wouldn't face them and tell the odd story. They know he has his own computer in his own home. They know he was concerned with staying in the good graces of the temple. Why would he assault his gf in the Bishops livingroom in front in witnesses, and download child *advertiser censored* on the Bishops computer and put it in a file with his own name? And why didnt this witness warn the Bishop that he had illegal *advertiser censored* on his computer in his home? Why wouldnt the bishop himself come forward , in support of Jodi, if travis really did all of these evil deeds? JMO

Nali87 · Jan 20, 2015

I am seriously done with this retrial now. I mean it. To think I ruined my sleeping pattern and got insomnia for this BS. And JSS sucks. :steamed: I'll see some of you occasionally over at the Boston bomber thread. Have a good night. :steamed:

katydid23 · Jan 20, 2015

Originally Posted by katydid23
I think he will be able to use past testimony to refute current accusations brought up by the DT.

Nali: He doesn't have any testimony of this Matt guy. None.
==============================================================================

I didnt mean past testimony of Matt. I meant past testimony of Deanna. I think I remember her talking about her missionary travels and how it affected their relationship. So he can get in her travel dates at least. And her statements that TA never mistreated her.

dog.gone.cute · Jan 20, 2015

LambChop said:
Other thread is getting full so this one is open until court tomorrow afternoon. :silly:

:seeya: Thank You, WAT -- I mean LambChop !

Just saw WAT's word "Sizzle" on the Title of this Thread and couldn't resist !

:happydance:

oceanblueeyes · Jan 20, 2015

decemberbee45 said:
I'm worried. JSS has let enough foolishness in front of this jury for some numbskull on the jury to say "hell, I 'm worn out. I don't know which way is up, I'm so confused. But where there is smoke, must be a little bit of fire. He picked the wrong girl to mess around with. Give her life."

That makes me sick to my stomach, but I'm for real worried.

I am not worried but I am mad as hell.

I wont get worried until I see that Juan has been given no way to rebut these claims.

I have total faith in Juan. There have been times in this trial I was worried because the DT has played gutter ball from the beginning but once Juan had his chance to set the record straight I realized I didn't have to worry after all.

I am keeping the faith that Juan can and will bring the truth forward.

IMO

katydid23 · Jan 20, 2015

ElleElle
Alternate Reality

If this occurred in November, she may have been home for Thanksgiving?
==========================================================================================

I may be wrong about this, but I don't think that missionaries typicallly return home for holidays. My friends were always gone the entire duration of their mission. No returning home unless some kind of emergency.

Madeleine74 · Jan 20, 2015

decemberbee45 said:
I'm worried. JSS has let enough foolishness in front of this jury for some numbskull on the jury to say "hell, I 'm worn out. I don't know which way is up, I'm so confused. But where there is smoke, must be a little bit of fire. He picked the wrong girl to mess around with. Give her life."

That makes me sick to my stomach, but I'm for real worried.

That could happen, sure. Even when a case is presented well and moves along at a good pace with no major weird games being played and the phase ends with few or no distractions, a jury could still come back with a decision not to give a defendant the DP. Or a jury could hang with no unanimous decision, that too is a possibility.

Worst case scenario: she gets LWOP in prison.

KPinMN · Jan 20, 2015

I know we're supposed to not talk religion, but I'm thinking this factual question would be okay...because it's just a yes or no.

Bernina - Can people come home to visit (for holidays or otherwise) while on their mission?

shajon123 · Jan 20, 2015

oceanblueeyes said:
I know I have seen in other cases where additional witnesses were added in a rebuttal case that weren't on the original rebuttal list.

Iirc, this was because the defense brought up something new in their part of the case and the Judges allowed the state to rebut it with additional witnesses in their rebuttal case.

So will Juan also be afforded the same by JSS or will he be hamstrung leaving the DT to get away with having witnesses say anything they want without Juan having any way to rebuke them?

If so, how in the world can anyone say this is about fairness and justice?

Maybe the 3 way call, the one her side kick set up, the one that was suppose not have happened. I would luv for Jaun to present that one. It would be interesting to see how they react to that.

dog.gone.cute · Jan 20, 2015

decemberbee45 said:
I'm worried.

JSS has let enough foolishness in front of this jury for some numbskull on the jury to say "hell, I 'm worn out. I don't know which way is up, I'm so confused. But where there is smoke, must be a little bit of fire. He picked the wrong girl to mess around with. Give her life."

That makes me sick to my stomach, but I'm for real worried.

:seeya:

BBM: Exactly the defense's strategy because they have zero -- no mitigating factors !

And it all it takes is one juror -- another Zervakos :gaah:

And yes, I am worried also because ya never know with a jury !

:moo:

Hatfield · Jan 20, 2015

decemberbee45 said:
I'm worried. JSS has let enough foolishness in front of this jury for some numbskull on the jury to say "hell, I 'm worn out. I don't know which way is up, I'm so confused. But where there is smoke, must be a little bit of fire. He picked the wrong girl to mess around with. Give her life."

That makes me sick to my stomach, but I'm for real worried.

Me too. Honestly worried here that this sort of thing that happened today is enough to sway 1 of the jurors to go against the DP.

See, this is why a lot of us have been so adamant about this judge. She is going way too far again and today is right on par with sectret witnesses and throwing away the constitution again.

You just can't do this!! You cannot let your personal fear of appeals tilt your decisions to where you let the DT break courtroom rules. Because the end result is the victim loses and the trial's outcome is not a fair and just trial.

Also and maybe even more importantly is this is the sort of thing where the DT can bring this up on appeal down the road and claim the judge allowed affidativs to be erroneously brought into the trial.

I am convinced the DT has been trying to break the rules and if they somehow are allowed to, then turn around and use their own breaking of the rules in a future appeal.

5bigfish5 · Jan 20, 2015

oceanblueeyes said:
I am not worried but I am mad as hell.

I wont get worried until I see that Juan has been given no way to rebut these claims.

I have total faith in Juan. There have been times in this trial I was worried because the DT has played gutter ball from the beginning but once Juan had his chance to set the record straight I realized I didn't have to worry after all.

I am keeping the faith that Juan can and will bring the truth forward.

IMO

I expected about as much out of today as we got. The ONLY thing I am upset about IS: Juan not catching that little game Willmott was playing with what was "ON" the overhead projector and what was visible to the jurors.

SHAME on the DT and Juan.

TRIPLE Shame on Sherry for doing, as usual...NOTHING!

Retrial for Sentencing of Jodi Arias - 1/20 Sizzle Break

Former Member

New Member

Verified Attorney

Verified Outdoor Recreation Specialist

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Kyron Horman - Missing Since 6-4-10

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Knower of Things

New Member

Member

Kyron Horman - Missing Since 6-4-10

Well-Known Member

New Member

DNASolves

Online statistics

Forum statistics