VERDICT WATCH - Sentencing of Jodi Arias - Retrial Day 44

[raisincharlie]

Thanks AZLawyer for clarifying that for me. Good to know, I hope the jurors take advantage of reviewing some materials as some testimonials are quite telling.

 

[MeeBee]

Also the amount of money spent on this trial is not unusual. The people on both sides of the fence crying about their tax dollars are being over the top and short sighted. What about aaaalllll the trials they don't see?

 

[LambChop]

Only reason I would think if there was an issue that needed to be addressed in court with the media locked out might be a personal issue with the Alexander's and what happened yesterday with the seating. That would not be something for public knowledge if the Alexander's felt they were being harassed. I think the judge would try to handle that privately. For the protection of the Alexander's and also JA's Mom. That could be why the extra security was called into the courtroom. Were there any issues today with JA's supporters? Just a guess on my part but I can't imagine why the doors were locked with both sides inside the courtroom and no jury.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

Yes I want to know that too. How long can a Jury deliberate?

There is no specific timeline.

I have seen some jurors deliberate for 10 days or more before coming back with a verdict. One case in NY and I cant remember what it was about. Racketeering maybe but they deliberated 30 days. That is unusual though.

As long as they aren't returning to the Judge telling her that they are at roadblock again they must think they are making some progress.

 

[flyerguy77]

Yes I want to know that too. How long can a Jury deliberate?

AS long they want..

 

[decemberbee45]

Another day! I was just sure today was the day. But then I have to remember this is not about me...it is about justice for Travis. I'll wait as long as it takes. (Guess I don't really have a choice, eh?)

 

[BetteDavisEyes]

Is this a good sign that they're coming back tomorrow? Any thoughts?

To me, it is a sign that the jurors are not finished deliberating and/or throwing in the towel. There is still a chance that they can and/or will render a unanimous verdict. :moo:

 

[tlckgram]

If Arizonians don't like this law then they need to tell the lawmakers to change it. Personally I think this jury heard about more things in this penalty phase than in the last one. Juan seem to get in more and was able to stress certain things that were brushed over in the first trial.

From what I read earlier.... since the law was enacted stating there would be a second sentencing phase if the first jury was hung.... they have been more successful in getting the death penalty than not getting it. I believe I read out of the four cases with second sentencing phases three out of four ended in a death sentence and one wound up to be LWOP.

But I imagine those convicted defendants were males instead of females.

The problem seems to be that when a female commits premeditated murder with cruelty they rarely get the death penalty no matter how evil and depraved their crime is. If JA was a male the verdict of death would have been returned by the first jury last year...which would have been the correct sentence. IMO

I have been listening to one of the online live youtube new sites and some very interesting things were said about JSS. It seems even other Judges and other lawyers from that area frown on how she has conducted this case throughout. Many said they had never seen another Judge try a case there like she has done. One guy said a Judge told him that if he had been the presiding Judge it would have been over last year. They also mentioned the secrecy which none of them have ever seen before.

I got the impression some of her peers don't agree with what she allowed into the trial nor the way she has handled it and caused it to move slower than a snail's pace.

So it isn't just online opinions. The same opinions are being expressed right there in Mesa. Interesting.

IMO

Well, that seems believable but if they cant name names, I would just call this more fodder for the rumor mill. Somehow, I think it is unlikely that any judges are openly critiquing JSS during the trial. After maybe, but I sure hope not during.

 

[lonetraveler]

Sheriff Joe better make sure he takes away all her stuff before sentencing, especially paper. Don't want her to slit her wrists before she hears her fate

Nice to see you posting again!

 

[Nali87]

Thanks AZLawyer for clarifying that for me. Good to know, I hope the jurors take advantage of reviewing some materials as some testimonials are quite telling.

Maybe that's exactly why it's taking so long.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

Each state has their own set of rules and laws regarding jury trials. I don't know how many other states allow jury questions, but I really like it. I agree with retrying the sentencing phase, as you can have a modsnip who refuses to deliberate, like we had in the first sentencing phase. No state is perfect, but I really do like some of the stuff Arizona does. JMO

I don't like Juror questions. I know a lot of people do but I don't. I think that the people who know the law and the rules of law should be asking the questions.
I think the dp should be tied to the trial and one shot. To me it kind of feels like double jeopardy. They were tried the jury says no dp and then the prosecutor goes for it again. I know that is not the law but it feels that way to me.

 

[lithgow1]

Yes, everything admitted in the guilt phase will be available to them.



Yes, the media made a stink and got the biggest error (letting JA testify in secret) overturned. But I doubt they can afford to pay Dave Bodney $450/hr to address every secret decision JSS makes with the appellate courts!

Hi AZlawyer - I've enjoyed your insights and knowledge here. May I ask a question that has probably already been asked and answered - how come Juan didn't cross Arias on the couple of days secret testimony she was able to enjoy? Was it because she didn't really say anything that he could work with? I'd of thought he'd have relished the chance to go another round with her and in the conviction trial his cross certainly gave me an insight into how much of an act she was putting on. TIA for your thoughts.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

Also the amount of money spent on this trial is not unusual. The people on both sides of the fence crying about their tax dollars are being over the top and short sighted. What about aaaalllll the trials they don't see?

You are right, MeeBee, it isn't.

In Guy Heinz Jr. murder case Georgia taxpayers spent over 4 million dollars on that case.

I didn't ever hear one person complain about it either.

My hubby and I are taxpayers and we would rather pay for justice to be done rather than pay for some frivolous giveaway entitlement program.

 

[TexMex]

Maybe that's exactly why it's taking so long.

It could be. They may feel that if they are deciding someone's life/death they need to look at everything available no matter how long it takes

 

[Luvrosco]

To me, it is a sign that the jurors are not finished deliberating and/or throwing in the towel. There is still a chance that they can and/or will render a unanimous verdict. :moo:

Thanks, that's what I'm thinking,too.

 

[Summerfun]

I think in a death penalty case the jurors should be sequestered. In this day and age I have no idea how they could not hear anything about the case, especially with their 3 day long weekend.
I live in Toronto and in my office building there is a tv that reports daily about this case.

 

[Nali87]

I wonder... Because of JSS allowing even the defense team's expert witnesses names to be withheld, how can the jury when accessing the guilt phase's testimony even recognize when that expert is being quoted?

Or does the jury know the real names?
Or was Dr. Crap's name withheld last time as well?
Won't the jury get freaking confused?

 

[Shadowboy]

Only reason I would think if there was an issue that needed to be addressed in court with the media locked out might be a personal issue with the Alexander's and what happened yesterday with the seating. That would not be something for public knowledge if the Alexander's felt they were being harassed. I think the judge would try to handle that privately. For the protection of the Alexander's and also JA's Mom. That could be why the extra security was called into the courtroom. Were there any issues today with JA's supporters? Just a guess on my part but I can't imagine why the doors were locked with both sides inside the courtroom and no jury.

BBM. Do we know the jury wasn't present today during the "lock down?" I'm trying to catch up.

 

[Steve44]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W-EBgUIsznU

 

[AZlawyer]

Hi AZlawyer - I've enjoyed your insights and knowledge here. May I ask a question that has probably already been asked and answered - how come Juan didn't cross Arias on the couple of days secret testimony she was able to enjoy? Was it because she didn't really say anything that he could work with? I'd of thought he'd have relished the chance to go another round with her and in the conviction trial his cross certainly gave me an insight into how much of an act she was putting on. TIA for your thoughts.

She refused to get back on the stand, so JSS gave JM the opportunity to have her testimony stricken from the record and he said no. The reason he said no, IMO, was because he was happy to have the opportunity to say whatever he wanted about her testimony with other witnesses/exhibits and in closing. If her testimony had been stricken from the record, he would not have been allowed to rebut it.