SIDEBAR #6- Arias/Alexander forum

[gauntlet]

Here's my take: They agreed to friends with benefits. Jodi thought she could sleep her way to her mans heart .. he thought she was cool with 'keeping things casual' there's a lot of reasons why he should have seen that she was full of it .. when he did, he tried to pull away and used the church, desire for marriage as an excuse .. Jodi felt like her last thread of hope had been pulled away, then she got angry, then she felt used, then she got revenge JMO.

I agree with all that up to the last line. I don't think the CM murdered Travis for revenge. She did something which they only ever allude to that text. I don't believe it was the sex tape but whatever it is is why she had to stop him. If it wasn't for "that", the CM would have moved on. Ryan Burns is a very very lucky man.

 

[ElleElle]

The reason why this case is so unique. Why did Jodi kill? Was she abused? Most people don't think so.

BY

If the genders were reversed few would be blaming JA for her death. Women are never abusive and when a woman kills a man it means he has to have been mean and abusive. Men are never supposed to be naiive and are dumb and are always ruled by their second heads. Men are always supposed to pick signals on women that are dangerously crazy. They are cruel and mean if they are only friends with benefits...because only men want that and not women. If a woman goes along with that that means he must be lying to her and leading her on because no "decent" woman would ever want that. No way could men and women use each other for pleasure only-only cruel sex-crazed men do that and women are always the naiive victims. /ALL OF THE ABOVE IS SARCASM ONLY

I have followed many crimes where women are killed by their husbands/boyfriends/exes and there is often much sadness and outpouring of grief and speaking well of the victim and the dynamics of an abusive (any type of abuse) relationship are hashed and rehashed and ones feel bad for the victim. Not often do we see that with regards to Travis or other male victims. I am so burned out of the double-standards.

Sent from my SGH-T989 using Tapatalk 2

 

[Mrs G Norris]

I'm just catching up .. but here's a sneak peak of Dirty Little Secret :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dIcRfFEBomg&feature=youtu.be

 

[polleypockets]

re: Investigating any of the jurors who were hung
I am pretty sure that once the judge declared a "Mistrial" for this phase of the proceedings, it becomes "as if it never happened". Same as when a jury gets hung at the end of the guilt/non-guilt portion of a proceeding. A mistrial means it is as if there was never a trial. They start over again.

So I don't think anybody is going to waste the time and/or effort to investigate anything about these jurors. They didn't reach a verdict. They are done.

Second time around on a trial is usually much shorter. Phil Spector's first trial was months long, and the jury hung. Second trial was much, much shorter and was not televised. He was convicted.


I like the track record for Maricopa County on the trials where they've had to repeat the penalty phase.

her supporters are trying to sleuth them to try to get the M1 conviction thrown out = and there are some TA's supporters doing it to thinking that the comments from the foreman, thinking he maybe refused to deliberate = but i wish they wouldn't let the first 2 guilty verdicts stand and just wait for the retrial at the penalty phase - rather than causing un needed problems

 

[aa9511]

<snipped by me to remove video>

IF this trial proceeds as currently planned, I am curious if we will see a very different Jodi. She will have had a couple of months preview of what her life will be like when trial is over. I wonder if she will be even more defiant, or will it have broken her spirit? :what:

More defiant and uglier. I think she will be like when we saw her after the M1 verdict, after the weekend at the psych ward. She looked very run down, but also angrier. I think this break in trial is very, very good for Juan. I think we are going to see a new CMJA, with a much more "killer-type" look, a la what Jury Foreman wanted. We will see more of her looks like she was in some of the run-down days in the trial.

 

[aa9511]

I still have a major problem with the master of jurors...Greek - Doesn't even understand our justice system. Goes out on all the talk shows to support CMA.

Tainting, if you will.

You're really stuck on the Greek thing, huh? He didn't "sound" very Greek to me. Sounded like a pretty American accent to me.

 

[ElleElle]

I wish Juan would get a male DV expert.

More defiant and uglier. I think she will be like when we saw her after the M1 verdict, after the weekend at the psych ward. She looked very run down, but also angrier. I think this break in trial is very, very good for Juan. I think we are going to see a new CMJA, with a much more "killer-type" look, a la what Jury Foreman wanted. We will see more of her looks like she was in some of the run-down days in the trial.

 

[Mrs G Norris]

I agree with all that up to the last time. I don't think the CM murdered Travis for revenge. She did something which they only ever allude to that text. I don't believe it was the sex tape but whatever it is is why she had to stop in. If it wasn't for "that", the CM would have moved on. Ryan Burns is a very very lucky man.

Yeah .. you could be right .. add that to the mix for the perfect storm

 

[Dana]

I agree with all that up to the last time. I don't think the CM murdered Travis for revenge. She did something which they only ever allude to that text. I don't believe it was the sex tape but whatever it is is why she had to stop in. If it wasn't for "that", the CM would have moved on. Ryan Burns is a very very lucky man.

ITA Gauntlet! I think if Travis wouldn't have called her out with that text message about being scammed and he'd tell the world about her, he'd still be alive. So so sad. I'd love to know what she did that hurt Travis worse than his own father's death did. It must have been huge.

 

[ElleElle]

:facepalm: This movie should not be released until this trial is over imo

I'm just catching up .. but here's a sneak peak of Dirty Little Secret :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dIcRfFEBomg&feature=youtu.be

 

[Tenaciousdae]

:seeyaana - which book was boring?

 

[Mrs G Norris]

Can I just ask .. how is it that the jury did not know that if they could not come to a decision that it would be a mistrial and not got to the judge to decide .. that to me sounds like the people who were with the jury as advisors messed up here .. how can that happen?

 

[Dana]

:seeyaana - which book was boring?

War and Peace? lol

 

[Myvice]

I just can't get the strange comment Jodi made out of my head when she was asked if she would kill again.

When she replied she wouldn't unless someone tried to "kill her life" it just reminded me of Travis threatening to expose her for something.

Sorry I'm behind as usual lol!

 

[Tenaciousdae]

I wish Juan would get a male DV expert.

I just want Juan to ask the next DV expert how many survivors have killed their abusers 3x over...

Fortunately we are only repeating the aggravation phase...

 

[InALandFarFarAway]

Can people REALLY call that abuse??? Seriously???

At what point is Jodi responsible for the way she is treated? In the sex tape Travis asks her if she thinks what they are doing is wrong and she says if it is she doesn't want to be right, (paraphrasing). Yet he is to blame for it.

If the sexes were reversed in this case it would have been a done deal. MOO

I just loved how convenient it was that everything in the world just conformed to perfectly excuse all of CMja's behavior and allow her to shirk any semblance of responsibility for herself.

ALV coming up with two different stalking definitions, one for her precious little friend CMja and the other for everyone else.

Her whole purpose there was to excuse CMja. I mean, CMja could have jumped up in the middle of the trial and said, "You know, he didn't abuse me. I made it all up" and ALV would have said, "Well, based on the 4 pages of text messages I handpicked and read from the ream of 80,000 sheets I didn't bother with, he certainly did abuse you."

Nauseating.

When she doned on and on and on and on and on about contemplating her navel or whatever, then she said, "The victim is always blamed ... the victim is accused of being a liar ... the victim takes the brunt of blame ..."

I sat up, alert and said, "Well hell's bells, you finally got something right. Travis is being blamed. Travis is taking the brunt of all of this."

And with that I'm going to bed because the very remembrance of ALV is ticking me off again. lol

Nighty night.

 

[mka237]

Can I just ask .. how is it that the jury did not know that if they could not come to a decision that it would be a mistrial and not got to the judge to decide .. that to me sounds like the people who were with the jury as advisors messed up here .. how can that happen?

In the Legal Question thread this was answered as it could happen because a hung jury subject is not part of the jury instructions (by design)-- it is more fully explained how it could happen on that thread --

 

[Myvice]

I wonder if the defense strategy will change. Wilmott seemed to be pushing BPD at the end.

 

[gauntlet]

Can I just ask .. how is it that the jury did not know that if they could not come to a decision that it would be a mistrial and not got to the judge to decide .. that to me sounds like the people who were with the jury as advisors messed up here .. how can that happen?

The jurors weren't told specifically what would happen if they couldn't come to a decision. It wasn't in the jury instructions and as Linda pointed out, if this info was in there it may have forced them to come to a decision. Of course we know the way the majority stood but I bet the FP wouldn't have changed his mind so 8 people would have had to given into their convictions.

 

[aa9511]

Can I just ask .. how is it that the jury did not know that if they could not come to a decision that it would be a mistrial and not got to the judge to decide .. that to me sounds like the people who were with the jury as advisors messed up here .. how can that happen?

There is something strange there that we don't know. What my question is, is that if all the jurors thought that the judge would decide (LWP or LWOP) if they couldn't be unanimous, then why didn't they all just vote life? There is something there that we don't know. I thought maybe the Foreman was being deceiptful, but then Juror 6 apparently said all the jurors got along really well and are a team, and she apparently didn't say anything negative about Foreman.

To me, there is something very fishy about the fact that 2 hours in or so into deliberations, they asked the judge what form to use if they couldn't come to a unanimous agreement. Then the Foreman through the media has said that in the end "they" didn't think it was a fair burden to put on them deciding life/death b/c they are not legal minds or versed in the law.

Could it be that they had already discussed this scenario in earlier deliberations? For example, perhaps the earlier deliberations were very tiring and wore them out (which Foreman admitted), and he also said they had heated discusssions. Could it be that they somehow had made an agreement that during the life/death phase, they were going to defer the decision to the judge? I am trying to understand....I hope someone interviews a juror about exactly what happened during those deliberations....