a view from the inside: observations from our own court observers #5

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
megmono said:
Looking at JA old pics versus today in that pale awful blouse:

She has come undone.

Any other person w pics like this I would not believe its the same. At all. Can't imagine how large her hands look in person w what she weighs now.
Click to expand...

Her hands and feet are huge. In the video of her doing the head stand I was shocked at how large and dirty her feet were. Her hands are manly and long boney fingers.
 
Wow, I totally missed most of that day's testimony because I fell asleep and had a nice little catnap. If anyone has a link to that particular testimony, I sure would be grateful for the link. I think they should not medicate to mask JA's true personality. Just gag her, and tie her to the chair like they do in other trials.


LambChop said:
I think it is something to keep her calm to avoid outbursts. Jodi had one the other day about "kicking her mother" and JW had to calm her to stop her from coming unglued. My guess is she did not take her meds today and it was too dangerous for defense to let her sit there because Nurmi is not about to touch Jodi to keep her calm while JW is doing her cross. Nurmi is certainly not likely to do what I have seen JW do to calm Jodi down when she is clearly agitated. My guess is Jodi is melting down. If defense can't control her they will have to do something. jmo
Click to expand...
 
A bit biased don't ya think Steve?? Thought you were a journalist who SHOULD be impartial.. guess not!

(Posted on Steve Irvin's Facebook page)

Steve Irvin ABC 15 News
Maricopa County taxpayers have now spent 1.4 million dollars defending Jodi Arias. Now, our bulldog prosecutor can't resist getting his picture taken with the tall blonde adoring fan outside the courthouse. So, let's see, if a juror sees that, it's grounds for a mistrial. And we get to do this all over again... really? Will someone please tell Juan Martinez to try the case and sign autographs later?
 
FrvrShl said:
A bit biased don't ya think Steve?? Thought you were a journalist who SHOULD be impartial.. guess not!

(Posted on Steve Irvin's Facebook page)

Steve Irvin ABC 15 News
Maricopa County taxpayers have now spent 1.4 million dollars defending Jodi Arias. Now, our bulldog prosecutor can't resist getting his picture taken with the tall blonde adoring fan outside the courthouse. So, let's see, if a juror sees that, it's grounds for a mistrial. And we get to do this all over again... really? Will someone please tell Juan Martinez to try the case and sign autographs later?
Click to expand...

Here's your reality check STEVE:

If a juror had seen that photo being taken they would be questioned by the Judge who,would ask them if this would prohibit them from rendering a fair and impartial verdict. If they said no, no change. If they said yes, they would be tossed and 5 more alternates left. Mistrial wasn't even a consideration. Dumb dumb.
 
Optics said:
Thank You kaRN, I've actually read here for a long long time, but everytime I'd try register it wouldn't take my email, thanks to Tricia she was able to get me registered in. So yes my first 'official' post LOL.
Click to expand...
Well it was a great first post! Glad you joined us!!
 
I found this about the jurors, it was on HLN. thought I would post it here. Maybe someone can put the names given here by their number to see how they compare to HLN's observations.

Per HLN/IS producers observations...

Juror No. 1

She is a white female in her 60s and sits closest to the witness stand. She doesn't look at Arias often during her testimony. People in the gallery observed her yawning once during an emotional part of Arias' testimony.

Juror No. 2

He is a white male in his 50s. He takes few notes and usually has his head cupped in his hands as he listens to testimony.

Juror No. 3

She is a white female in her 40s. She takes a lot of notes and often watches prosecutor Juan Martinez as he moves around the courtroom. She has been seen submitting questions.

Juror No. 4

He is a white male in his 60s, and he takes few notes.

Juror No. 5

She is a married, white female in her 30s. She sits on the edge of her seat and is the most visible juror from the gallery because she has a “unique hair style.”

Juror No. 6

She is a white female in her 60s and is also seen taking many notes.

Juror No. 7

He is a white male in his 30s, and he is married. He takes notes and often bites his nails.

Juror No. 8

He is a white male in his 50s and is married. He also takes notes and has been observed submitting questions.

Juror No. 9

He is a white male in his 60s. He wears denim on most days and sits at the end of the jury box. He sits close to the first row of the gallery where Alexander's family sits.

Juror No. 10

He is a white male in his 70s and is married. He has a tattoo on his right arm. He rarely is seen taking notes. He sits the furthest away from the witness.

Juror No. 11

She is a married, white female in her 30s. She takes a lot of notes. She does not look at Arias during testimony. She tends to look straight ahead or down at her notes.

Juror No. 12

She is a white female in her 40s and also takes lots of notes. She swiveled her chair toward Arias during her testimony.

Juror No. 13

He is a white male in his late 60s to early 70s. He wears an audio-enhancing headset provided by the court. He does takes notes.

Juror No. 14

He is a white male in his early 60s who often swivels in his chair. He does not appear to be taking notes.

Juror No. 15

He is a white male in his late 20s or early 30s. He appears to be the youngest member of the jury and takes very few notes. He smiled when Martinez asked Arias if she could predict the future.

Juror No. 16

He is a white male in his 40s.

Juror No. 17

He is a Hispanic male in his late 20s to early 30s. He dresses casually and sometimes slouches so far down in his chair that he is hardly visible to the gallery. He does not appear to be taking notes.

Juror No. 18

She is a white female in her 40s. She is an occasional note taker and she often looks at the gallery during sidebars.
 
???????

Some of us are new to all of this and may be missing...

um... something.

If the jurors are questioned about the photo/autograph, then are they not in the same exact position that the defense didn't want for them to be in? Which is to now have knowledge of it?


What was the point?



Please set the alarm clock to go off when this trial is over.

Signed,

I have a headache.
 
Meemaw12 said:
I found this about the jurors, it was on HLN. thought I would post it here. Maybe someone can put the names given here by their number to see how they compare to HLN's observations.

Per HLN/IS producers observations...

Juror No. 1 - Church Lady

She is a white female in her 60s and sits closest to the witness stand. She doesn't look at Arias often during her testimony. People in the gallery observed her yawning once during an emotional part of Arias' testimony.

Juror No. 2 - Trump

He is a white male in his 50s. He takes few notes and usually has his head cupped in his hands as he listens to testimony.

Juror No. 3 - Housewife

She is a white female in her 40s. She takes a lot of notes and often watches prosecutor Juan Martinez as he moves around the courtroom. She has been seen submitting questions.

Juror No. 4 - Grandpa

He is a white male in his 60s, and he takes few notes.

Juror No. 5 - tri color

She is a married, white female in her 30s. She sits on the edge of her seat and is the most visible juror from the gallery because she has a “unique hair style.”

Juror No. 6 - Nancy Reagan

She is a white female in her 60s and is also seen taking many notes.

Juror No. 7 - Paul Rudd

He is a white male in his 30s, and he is married. He takes notes and often bites his nails.

Juror No. 8 - CEO

He is a white male in his 50s and is married. He also takes notes and has been observed submitting questions.

Juror No. 9 - Willie Nelson

He is a white male in his 60s. He wears denim on most days and sits at the end of the jury box. He sits close to the first row of the gallery where Alexander's family sits.

Juror No. 10 - The Artist

He is a white male in his 70s and is married. He has a tattoo on his right arm. He rarely is seen taking notes. He sits the furthest away from the witness.

Juror No. 11 - Ponytail

She is a married, white female in her 30s. She takes a lot of notes. She does not look at Arias during testimony. She tends to look straight ahead or down at her notes.

Juror No. 12 - Maureen

She is a white female in her 40s and also takes lots of notes. She swiveled her chair toward Arias during her testimony.

Juror No. 13 - headphones

He is a white male in his late 60s to early 70s. He wears an audio-enhancing headset provided by the court. He does takes notes.

Juror No. 14 - CPA

He is a white male in his early 60s who often swivels in his chair. He does not appear to be taking notes.

Juror No. 15 - Wrestler

He is a white male in his late 20s or early 30s. He appears to be the youngest member of the jury and takes very few notes. He smiled when Martinez asked Arias if she could predict the future.

Juror No. 16 - Neil

He is a white male in his 40s.

Juror No. 17 - Poquito Mas

He is a Hispanic male in his late 20s to early 30s. He dresses casually and sometimes slouches so far down in his chair that he is hardly visible to the gallery. He does not appear to be taking notes.

Juror No. 18 - Barb

She is a white female in her 40s. She is an occasional note taker and she often looks at the gallery during sidebars.
Click to expand...

See above ;)
 
Flowerrgirl said:
???????

Some of us are new to all of this and may be missing...

um... something.

If the jurors are questioned about the photo/autograph, then are they not in the same exact position that the defense didn't want for them to be in? Which is to now have knowledge of it?


What was the point?



Please set the alarm clock to go off when this trial is over.

Signed,

I have a headache.
Click to expand...

My guess is that the judge questioned them in a broad way... "Have you seen any of the attorneys outside of the courthouse? If so, who did you see and what were they doing?"

I don't know. That would probably make them wonder what happened Lol. I doubt they were flat out asked if they saw JM take pics and sign an autograph though.
 
katiecoolady said:
Here's your reality check STEVE:

If a juror had seen that photo being taken they would be questioned by the Judge who,would ask them if this would prohibit them from rendering a fair and impartial verdict. If they said no, no change. If they said yes, they would be tossed and 5 more alternates left. Mistrial wasn't even a consideration. Dumb dumb.
Click to expand...

I just thought he isn't being very impartial for a news reporter. Of course I unfriended him. I don't have any respect for him after his post.:banghead:
 
DebbieDaily said:
Her hands and feet are huge. In the video of her doing the head stand I was shocked at how large and dirty her feet were. Her hands are manly and long boney fingers.
Click to expand...

Lol!!! Oh my gosh...her DIRTY feet...hahahaha...I almost died when I saw them! ...that's so funny you noticed that too.. I'm still traumatized over seeing them...
 
mikeysmommom said:
I am not sure but it seems like no one is testifying to help jodi,not family or friends.
Click to expand...

They may not have anything relevant/helpful to say as it pertains to the slaughter of TA. I would expect to see some people ask for leniency during the penalty phase, though. In the David Westerfield (Danielle Van Dam) trial (he was 50 or so), they actually put his PROM DATE on the stand to talk about what a nice boy he was in high school. She hadn't seen him in at LEAST 20 years. He got the DP, despite being a nice prom date in the early 1970s.
 
I'm having PTSD from JA abusing her Mom and a dog. For real.
 
A couple of things:

1.) I also noticed the filthiness of those feet on Jodi Arias during the headstand. Based on this, along with the appearance of certain other parts of her body, I'm surprised she didn't give poor Travis a disease before she killed him.

2.) I am not nearly as impressed with this witness as many others (talking heads) seem to be. She may be a real nice lady, but to me there is something "off" about her professionalism. She apparently has the education, yet her speech patterns, for one thing, are decidedly - well, I'll just say "unsophisticated". That is off putting to me.

In addition, I feel her testimony is way too laden with anecdotes. "I once treated a man who...." I'm to the point where I am silently saying to myself "So what? What does this have to do with THIS trial?" And yet when there was talk of a study, she was weak in her testimony. Said it had been years since she had looked at that study.

Can't wait to see what Juan does with her.

3.) I don't think Juan Martinez gives a "chit" about any kerfluffle about a photograph. As someone else said, it is not his first rodeo. If it was inappropriate he would not have done it. Simple as that.

Perhaps I'm just burned out with the days upon days of these two defense "experts". And I would bet the jury members are too. The "defense" needs to just get on with it. They are really milking it at this point. For the money? Who knows? Maybe it will make Nurmi's book a better seller.

And for whoever asked: Yes, the jury members can write a book after the trial is over. Several jury members from the Scott Peterson trial got together and wrote a really good book called "We the Jury".
 
AlwaysShocked said:
A couple of things:

1.) I also noticed the filthiness of those feet on Jodi Arias during the headstand. Based on this, along with the appearance of certain other parts of her body, I'm surprised she didn't give poor Travis a disease before she killed him.

2.) I am not nearly as impressed with this witness as many others (talking heads) seem to be. She may be a real nice lady, but to me there is something "off" about her professionalism. She apparently has the education, yet her speech patterns, for one thing, are decidedly - well, I'll just say "unsophisticated". That is off putting to me.

In addition, I feel her testimony is way too laden with anecdotes. "I once treated a man who...." I'm to the point where I am silently saying to myself "So what? What does this have to do with THIS trial?" And yet when there was talk of a study, she was weak in her testimony. Said it had been years since she had looked at that study.

Can't wait to see what Juan does with her.

3.) I don't think Juan Martinez gives a "chit" about any kerfluffle about a photograph. As someone else said, it is not his first rodeo. If it was inappropriate he would not have done it. Simple as that.
Perhaps I'm just burned out with the days upon days of these two defense "experts". And I would bet the jury members are too. The "defense" needs to just get on with it. They are really milking it at this point. For the money? Who knows? Maybe it will make Nurmi's book a better seller.

And for whoever asked: Yes, the jury members can write a book after the trial is over. Several jury members from the Scott Peterson trial got together and wrote a really good book called "We the Jury".
Click to expand...

Agree with you. JM knows what to do and what not to do! He's been at this for decades and decades! A little faith in him won't do us any harm!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 91 more.
Total: 1,380 (members: 92, guests: 1,288)

Online statistics

Members online
92
Guests online
1,288
Total visitors
1,380
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
591,783
Messages
17,958,819
Members
228,606
Latest member
wdavewong
Back
Top