long weekend break: discuss the latest here #114

[Liebchenmutti]

Does anyone know why the stuff about prior hearings is included in this filing?

The alleged incident with the juror happened while jurors were being questioned by the judge in a separate filing.

 

[Tulessa]

Hilarious and who's that masked woman tonto!

Trigger's Mistress. :floorlaugh:

 

[gcharlie]

Everyone was there when the questioning took place including the defendant. It's her right to be at all hearings. Including in-chambers.

IIRC, JA was not in the presence of the jury when this questioning took place. She was present for the hearing for the motion of prosecutional misconduct in front of the judge when the media testified.

 

[Maryann123]

Juan Martinez talked with them before it was played in court. Because they agreed to have the whole tape played in open court. The judge asked them if they wanted to stay in the courtroom. All agreed.

There was no question by either side that this was Travis.
There was also the verification by the audio engineer that the voice on the tape matched known voice samples of TA.

That doesn't mean anything. They could still have questions that it's their brother. You just can't argue with the experts.

 

[gngr~snap]

If juror #9 (Willie) is the first to file out he is followed by
8- CEO
7- Paul Rudd
6- Nancy
5- Tricolor
4- Grandpa
3- Housewife
1-Church lady

 

[katiedid2]

Am I the only one that thinks Jodie has aged a lot in the last 5 years. Is she allowed to wear makeup, as she did in the 48 hrs taping?

 

[JusticeJunkie]

Who reported this and do you have a link. tia

Here's the motion the DT filed about juror 5:

http://media2.abc15.com/html/pdf/AriasJuror.pdf

Given the evidence that came forward on March 28, 2013, it is beyond legitimate dispute that Juror # 5 is not fair and impartial making her unfit to continue as a juror.
The question for legitimate dispute can be raised centers around whether her misconduct warrants a mistrial because of the effect that this misconduct necessitates that this court declares a mistrial.

This is a snippet, and the fact that the sentences don't make sense goes to Nurmi. lol

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[oceanblueeyes]

View attachment 31448
Here's Remmer v. US for you to all read. Interesting. It's possible that the juror in question hasn't said anything but that SOMEONE else said something to this juror and she repeated it.

But again I'm ENTIRELY speculating. The Motion was just too vague to get any sort of context.

Vague is an understatement but it was submitted by Nurmi. lol

Could it be as trival as the media and others commenting on Ms. Tri-Color?

I don't know why I feel it is way overblown. Maybe its because I don't trust KN.

They have been desperate from day one trying to get a mistrial and most of the motions including the many for prosecutorial misconduct have been downright nonsense and foolish.

IMO

 

[Donnareit]

Maybe a motion is needed?

I'd like to file a Motion Against the Defendant for Frivolous Defense. Do you think I can find that one in the Rules for Criminal Procedures? Oh, stop it. Now you're just cracking yourself up. :laughcry:

 

[katiedid2]

Yes. And they have the stomach to defend people that are accused of awful crimes...and God bless 'em for that.:jail:

If they don't someone needs to tell them.:floorlaugh::floorlaugh::floorlaugh::floorlaugh::floorlaugh::great::great::great:

 

[crime cases addict]

Remember the Scott Peterson trial? There was talk about 1 juror and how everybody was sure she was pro Scott... She was the juror with the pink hair and spoke out after the verdict how guilty she knew he was. Just goes to show no matter what color hair they have no one is ever sure about anything until after the fat blue haired lady sings :great:

That was the juror that NG names Strawberry shortcake:floorlaugh:

 

[ZsaZsa]

Here's the motion the DT filed about juror 5:

http://media2.abc15.com/html/pdf/AriasJuror.pdf

Given the evidence that came forward on March 28, 2013, it is beyond legitimate dispute that Juror # 5 is not fair and impartial making her unfit to continue as a juror.
The question for legitimate dispute can be raised centers around whether her misconduct warrants a mistrial because of the effect that this misconduct necessitates that this court declares a mistrial.

This is a snippet, and the fact that the sentences don't make sense goes to Nurmi. lol

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

He and Jose Baez went to the same Motion writing classes...

 

[luvtenniss]

View attachment 31448
Here's Remmer v. US for you to all read. Interesting. It's possible that the juror in question hasn't said anything but that SOMEONE else said something to this juror and she repeated it.

But again I'm ENTIRELY speculating. The Motion was just too vague to get any sort of context.

And I can see JA getting her jail buddy to approach one of the jurors outside of court. Especially one that JA views as siding with the prosecution.

 

[justsharing]

I wonder why Juan sort of hinted at the assumption that MM was waiting on Jodi outside DB house? So do you think that Juan knows that MM was with Jodi when she went to visit DB? If so, why would MM need to accompany her on that trip? I just don't get it.

What I'm really wondering is why has DBs sister Laura not testified for either side. I think it's more proof of premeditation than the gas cans. Jodi first tells Flores that she did visit Laura but when asked for her number, Jodi quickly says she waited for Laura to get back to her and when she didn't is when her plans changed and she decided to visit Travis.
If there was proof that she tried to get a hold of Laura but couldn't why wouldn't DT bring her in to testify? I don't think she's on Juans rebuttal list, why? It's really bugging me as I believe this is essential either way. Any body agree with this?

 

[Liebchenmutti]

That doesn't mean anything. They could still have questions that it's their brother. You just can't argue with the experts.

The family has not said one word about the voice NOT being Travis'.

The playing of it in court was a battle between the defense & Martinez--Martinez fought for the ENTIRE TAPE to be played, not just excerpts which the defense wanted.

He then spoke privately with the family that morning in court, making sure they would be fine with him playing the tape.

The judge then asked them if they wanted to stay.

JM fought for the INCLUSION of the tape.

The sound engineer VERIFIED it was Travis.

Think whatever you want--this happened at the beginning of the trial. There has been no side questioning the authenticity until today on WS.:facepalm:

 

[JSR]

Vague is an understatement but it was submitted by Nurmi. lol

Could it be as trival as the media and others commenting on Ms. Tri-Color?

I don't know why I feel it is way overblown. Maybe its because I don't trust KN.

They have been desperate from day one trying to get a mistrial and most of the motions including the many for prosecutorial misconduct have been downright nonsense and foolish.

IMO

No although his Motion IS very vague what isn't vague is that it's certain that he is submitting his papers based off what Juror No. 5 said in the sealed interview. Juror No. 5 said something that makes the DT want Tri Color off the jury. Like yesterday.

 

[lonetraveler]

:floorlaugh: I was serving as a juror on a capital triple murder and rape trial and was rushing to get to the juror room prior to the start of trial one morning, ran to catch the elevator, jumped in and hit my floor and turned to apologize to everyone in the elevator and saw to my horror, that I was sharing the elevator with the accused, his parents and the defense attorneys. Very awkward! I was wondering why there was dead silence as soon as I entered the elevator.

 

[pip]

What I'm really wondering is why has DBs sister Laura not testified for either side. I think it's more proof of premeditation than the gas cans. Jodi first tells Flores that she did visit Laura but when asked for her number, Jodi quickly says she waited for Laura to get back to her and when she didn't is when her plans changed and she decided to visit Travis.
If there was proof that she tried to get a hold of Laura but couldn't why wouldn't DT bring her in to testify? I don't think she's on Juans rebuttal list, why? It's really bugging me as I believe this is essential either way. Any body agree with this?

Is there a rebuttal list with names we can view?

 

[katiedid2]

Here's the motion the DT filed about juror 5:

http://media2.abc15.com/html/pdf/AriasJuror.pdf

Given the evidence that came forward on March 28, 2013, it is beyond legitimate dispute that Juror # 5 is not fair and impartial making her unfit to continue as a juror.
The question for legitimate dispute can be raised centers around whether her misconduct warrants a mistrial because of the effect that this misconduct necessitates that this court declares a mistrial.

This is a snippet, and the fact that the sentences don't make sense goes to Nurmi. lol

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jodie requested to have her removed,for some reason or other.

 

[Softail]

Vague is an understatement but it was submitted by Nurmi. lol

Could it be as trival as the media and others commenting on Ms. Tri-Color?

I don't know why I feel it is way overblown. Maybe its because I don't trust KN.

They have been desperate from day one trying to get a mistrial and most of the motions including the many for prosecutorial misconduct have been downright nonsense and foolish.

IMO

Ditto on that! I feel like after all this discussion and speculation, it is going to end up being a big pile of nothing!