Retrial for Sentencing of Jodi Arias - 2/10 - Break

[LinasK]

Translation: don't waste our time.

WooHoo! That's gotta piss Jodi off, they're willing to spend time on Debra Milke, but not her!!!:great::skip::skip::skip:

 

[Truth Detector]

Good, The final decision has been made, no more super secret testimony, nobody else to appeal too. The Supreme Court has spoken. Put that in your pipe and smoke it Nurmi. Now let's finish this trial and quit wasting so much bloody time.



***RIP TRAVIS ALEXANDER***

***I am a goddess, smell like a goddess, look like a goddess***

BBM

The Law of Olfaction

 

[TartLemon]

Does this mean Jodi must be cross examined now?

 

[Diggin]

If anyone is interested, here is a collection of 108 Easy Mitigating Factors.
http://www.fpdaz.org/assets/panel/108 Easy Mitigating Factors November 1, 2005.pdf

And, FWIW, here is the The Thinking Advocate's List of Mitigating Factors from The Sentencing Project.
http://sentencingproject.org/doc/publications/listofmitigatingfactors.pdf

Probable emotional trigger warning. This is a devil's advocatish kind of rant that may have dire consequences for some readers blood pressure. You may want to skip the next bit entirely and just look at the information in these two sources. I was amazed at how many mitigating factors exist and can understand why the DT would need a specialist in this area.

Rant: The DT is having to fight for every single one of the pitifully few mitigating factors they can offer the court on JA's behalf. It can't be easy, and I can sort of understand why LKN is so angry. He wanted to just get away from JA and was denied by JSS. I'm sure he's thinking he'll be d**ned if an appeals court will find he was ineffective counsel. So, IMO, he's spinning mitigating factors out of spiderwebs and moonbeams in an effort to create the illusion that JA was young and vulnerable at the time of the crime, and, because she is somewhat malleable because of her youth, she is capable of being rehabilitated back into society. He has to, because he has nothing else to offer on her behalf. Nothing.

He can't point to her "excellent employment record"*. He can't tell the jury that his client can be "successfully treated"* for her disorder. He can't direct the jury's attention to documentation of his client's "exemplary"* behaviour following her arrest. The defendant is not "repentant and contrite"*. His client has not by a "plea of guilty aided in ensuring the prompt and certain application of correctional measures"* to her. He can't even claim that "the passing of sentence was unduly delayed"* since the DT has been responsible for most of the delays involved. Claims of her abusive childhood seem sketchy at best, IMO.

So, he has her age (which I still think is questionable as a mitigator) and her lack of criminal record (though, as has previously been pointed out by JM, not a lack criminal behaviour). So that leaves the DT with the most distasteful of options. "The victim(s) provoked the crime to a substantial degree, or other evidence that misconduct by victim contributed substantially to the criminal episode."* That's it. And, it seems to me, that is why the DT keeps implying that Travis Alexander was a pervert (disproven, I think, by JM) and an abusive partner (also disproven, I think, by JM). That's all they've got.

A villain is the hero of his own story. So here, in his story (IMO), LKN is striving against all the odds to get his client LWP or LWOP rather than the DP. He is friendless (JW is not his friend, IMO. The two have been tied to this case by the court, not a mutual desire to offer a defence.) He is unappreciated (JA is ungrateful, irritating, and extraordinarily difficult to deal with, IMO.) He is outmanned (I think his experts are no match for the State's experts). His work will be mercilessly analyzed and judged (in appeal after appeal, IMO). So he is digging into what he has--an understanding of the law. He is looking for loopholes (I think to protect what is left of his reputation. He does not, IMO, want anyone to fault him for missing a technical detail. He does not want to be seen as ineffective.) And, IMO, he's looking for one person to have enough doubt to hang the jury and take the DP off the table. It's a monumental task, and he is JA's only hope. (It's his story, remember?) He's standing between her and the gurney, and the court has assigned him the task to keep JA from execution. He has been ordered to take on the role of advocate for one of the most vile, unlikeable, uncharismatic, unrepentant, pretentious, posturing, hateful liars in existence.

If I understand it correctly, a defence attorney is not just defending his client when he/she takes on a case. A defence attorney is defending the rights of every person in the city/county/state/country by holding the state accountable for every action taken in a court of law. So, Nurmi, by vigorously defending JA, is making sure that the next person in an Arizona courtroom will not have his/her rights trampled. He is upholding the rule of law by not allowing public opinion to influence a decision regarding his client's sentence. In a sense, he's making sure that justice remains blind to any factors extraneous to the crime before the court. It's possible, IMO, that he sees his actions as holding JM and his team, and his witnesses, to the highest standards because only by doing so can he fulfill his obligation as an officer of the court to be sure that the court system will be fair to people who, like his client IMO, are unlikeable. Fairness doesn't mean they are found not guilty nor does it mean that they go unpunished. It's just that their guilt is proven beyond a doubt.

So, although I believe JA is guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt, and I hate the way the DT is treating the State's witnesses and I would have no problem voting in favour of the DP in this case, I sort of see where LKN is coming from. He's no Atticus Finch, but he's fighting a losing battle with everything at his disposal. JMO.

*The Thinking Advocate's List of Mitigating Factors.

Thank you for this insightful post. I totally agree. Although I do get angry at his childish tactics and his many issues about the Prosecutor as being a reason for 'dismissing' the death penalty or dropping the charges. I could understand him better if he stayed with one or two mitigators, but he keeps changing them. It's getting old fast.

 

[5bigfish5]

Great! Proof positive, either Sherry is incompetent or in Nurmi's back pocket.

NOT a single other legal brain in AZ will even entertain the thought of Jodi testifying in secret.

 

[Truth Detector]

Does this mean Jodi must be cross examined now?

Uh, no...

What will JSKS do to her if she refuses?

Find her in contempt of court?

Jail time?

She'll do as she pleases; i.e., refuse to testilie and then claim it's the basis for appealing her eventual sentence after the jury returns their verdict next year.

 

[kaRN]

I'm not proud of our nation's use of the death penalty but I think a lot of citizens are for it only because there is often not an acceptable alternative. We still have many states where Life doesn't mean life and even in the states where it does, those laws can be and often are changed. Time after time violent offenders that we thought were locked up forever are let out into society, some after festering for a dozen or more years behind bars. Just imagine your loved one falling victim to a monster that your community thought had been put away for good, and when you check into how that came to pass you are told it was due to prison overcrowding!

While I do not usually like imposing the death penalty except in extreme cases (such as terrorists who kill or plot to kill many, or monsters who prey on children) I would like to see it handed down for Arias, mostly because the alternatives leave open the possibility (albeit remote) of her being freed someday. And if that happens, she will kill again--I do not doubt that for a minute.

Thanks for your great answer!! I can't really refute it in any way except to say. If all the millions (probably billions nationwide) being spent to obtain the DP were diverted to dealing with prison overcrowding, the problem might be solved. Of course if the powers that be eased up on throwing the book at pot smokers and other non-violent criminals, the prisons might not be so full. LWOP has to be that and Jodi will kill again- ITA.
I believe in JA's case and with all my heart, she will die in prison and much sooner than later. She corrects peoples grammar don't forget I hate to see all these resources and energy dedicated to a single convict at the expense of the common good. I hate to see my friends worrying about something we can't control and I hate, hate, hate seeing her ugly face in street clothes feigning innocence in court while she slaughters Travis again 7 years after the fact. Throw her in the cage already.
That said, I'll have a smile from ear to ear if this ends in JM and the Alexanders favor. I do believe the character asassination we've witnessed, especially during this trial, warrants no mercy. 1500 people die of cancer each day in the USA. They should be so lucky as to die the humane death offered by the lethal injection.

OT but I hugged a Mom as her 3 year old died in her arms of brain cancer last night. I'm a mess right now and probably shouldn't be posting but I am. Thanks for listening krkrjx. F*&%^ Jodi Arias :tantrum:
Justice? WTF is that??? I really really don't know anymore.

 

[MsJosie]

I do remember hearing that one of the jurors had a parent that's a psychologist or psychiatrist...I'm thinking that's probably the case because if it were an actual psychiatrist or psychcologist I think the DT or less likely the PT would have made a big deal of it.

To go with the above remark, any one of the jury members could have taken several classes in psych but did not minor or get a degree in that field. Also, some states let seniors monitor classes without having to pay, so maybe one or more have sat in on psych classes. Then any of these people may have more knowledge of tests, illnesses etc. then the normal person. That may be why we are getting some in depth questions. Or maybe someone is just very smart.

 

[samspace070]

I find LuLu's post rather interesting particularly her choice of words. 'Jody and Travis : The Perfect Storm.' Weren't those very words used this morning in a post?

I found her to be a lot like ALV and stilted/stagnated in her views. She has let her personal experience with her ex-husband cloud her judgment. She comes across as having the same 'hater of all men' attitude that I saw ALV present in court.

She seems to be the type of woman I have seen from time to time over the years who cannot let go of the past and brings the baggage forward with her when deciphering anything to do with another male and another woman who is 'claiming' abuse. Sadly, some women will just believe another woman if they just claim abuse..... especially if they too were abused by another male in their lifetime. They will believe it even though the evidence shows otherwise and doesn't support it.

It is interesting how different human beings process the same things. With JA, she has caused a fury because the majority of women who really have suffered domestic abuse don't believe one thing she has to say, me included.

But of course there will be some that simply believe without proof. It is sort of like the mentality of "I was abused, so you SAY you were abused, so therefore I believe you without question.' To me that clouds someone's judgment. I cant simply believe JA was abused because I am an abuse survivor. In fact I look at her with great disdain that she would dare even use this lying excuse trying to save her pathetic life. Its really a slap in the face for all who have truly suffered from it and never harmed a soul.

I really am sick and tired of the abuse excuses used only by female defendants, anyway. It is like it is tattooed on their hip and if they ever find themselves in the justice system the first excuse they come up with is the abuse excuse without one shred of evidence to support any of it. It is becoming the norm to use this.... than a rarity if it is a female defendant. It doesn't matter if she brutally murders her own defensesless children or happens to murder someone else. Its never a female defendant's fault and the blame someone else game begins. It seems to be there each and every time and the more I see it used the more I want to throw up. If it is a female murderer then its excuses, excuses, excuses. Its reprehensible to me how much double standards are played out in courtrooms simply based on the gender of the murderer.

You are correct Oceanblueeyes, the abuse excuse has been in much demand and use for a number of years. I remember I first heard the phrase "Abuse Excuse" when Alan Dershowitz, Harvard Law Professor, talked about the Lyle and Erik Menendez Murder of their parents. Alan said when these murders do not have a defense for cold blooded, pre-meditated murder they cry abuse, either DV for females or CA for males. It was furious about it. He said everyone was using it with no corroborating evidence and some juries were buying it. Remember the first Menendez jury hung. That blond wild haired defense attorney, Leslie something other was terrible. She painted those parents as vile and cruel to those boys when in fact it was the opposite. The second trial got a LWOP conviction. I don't think CA had the death penalty at the time. Remember when all the death row inmates got their sentences comuted to LWOP, like that awful Manson. Well California brought the DP back sometime after that. But getting back to Dershowitz, he was on some talk show and he was really going after the people who were claiming Abuse with no proof of it ever happening. It said the public had to be educated about this because great injustices were being done in the courts and murder victims reputations were being ruined after they were savagely murdered. Apparently his comments fell on deaf ears. I don't trust juries anymore. Especially after that terrible Wm Zervakos from the first jury went on TV to defend Jodi and insult TA by calling him "that dead guy". I heard he was helping the DT. Is that legal?

 

[Truth Detector]

She's been described as a chameleon:


Before


After​

 

[samspace070]

Sorry about the incorrect pronouns, I get wound up and hurry too much. LOL

 

[geevee]

Petition denied:

View attachment 69107

Thanks very much - anyone know what the 'continued' means for the Milke case?

 

[geevee]

MC Superior Court ‏@courtpio · 24m24 minutes ago
Trial in the State v. #jodiarias will resume tomorrow at 9:30 am.

 

[Truth Detector]

Sorry about the incorrect pronouns, I get wound up and hurry too much. LOL

Did you see all the grammatical, spelling, and omission errors in her latest prosecutorial misconduct amendment?

Do as JA says, not as she, LKN, and JW do.

 

[geevee]

Az Supreme Court ‏@AZCourts · 24m24 minutes ago
Petition for Review in KPNX TV et al v HON. STEPHENS/STATE/ARIAS #jodiarias denied by AZ Supreme Court. Ct of Appeals ruling stands.

 

[samspace070]

Excellent post!:goodpost:

I agree LinasK, Oceanblueeyes, nailed with that post. BEST OF THE DAY

 

[RickshawFan]

For any who might be concerned about LWP vs LWOP:

County Attorney Praises Passage of “Life Means Life” Law

PHOENIX, AZ (July 30, 2012) – Convicted murderers will now be required to serve longer prison sentences for certain first and second degree murder convictions thanks to changes to state sentencing statutes enacted in Arizona’s last legislative session. HB 2373, also known as “Life Means Life,” increases the maximum sentence for second degree murder and eliminates the possibility of early release for those convicted of premeditated first degree murder or first degree murder of a law enforcement officer. Supporters of the bill attended a ceremonial signing by Governor Janice K. Brewer at the State Capitol this morning.

“Victims of crime in Arizona have a constitutional right to a final conclusion of a case after a sentence. Permitting a convicted first degree premeditated murderer to seek release even after 25 years betrays the guarantee of finality,” remarked Maricopa County Attorney Bill Montgomery, who attended today’s signing ceremony. “These changes to our sentencing laws will go a long way toward honoring the rights of victims of crime and safeguarding society from those who commit the worst of crimes.”

Sponsored by Representative Eddie Farnsworth (R – District 22), who chairs the House Judiciary Committee, HB 2373 increases the maximum sentence for second degree murder and from 22 to 25 calendar years and from 25 to 29 calendar years if aggravating circumstances are proven. The legislation also mandates a sentence of death or natural life for adults convicted of first degree premeditated murder or first degree murder of a police officer, thereby eliminating the possibility of release from confinement.

http://www.maricopacountyattorney.o...y-Praises-Passage-of-Life-Means-Life-Law.html

This passage sounds as though LWP would not be a possible sentence for JA. The sentence would be death or natural life.

 

[MissHaley]

Help again, please. This was already denied by the COA. Then Nurms appealed it to the Supreme court, right? Why is it vs. judge stephens? Stephens didn't appeal it? Thanks

 

[RickshawFan]

AT this point I wish we had Judge Judy here..


I can see her saying to Nurmi.. : You are an idiot! Sit down.

Judge Judy wouldn't give a rat's *advertiser censored* about 95% of the drivel that comes from Nurmott's table.

 

[ShadyLady]

She's been described as a chameleon:

View attachment 69108
Before

View attachment 69109
After​

I fear her modeling days are OVER.