Discussions on Formal Sentencing Hearing - Jodi Arias #3

[FelicityLemon]

BBM: we certainly don't want that to happen.

Drat - I can't find the emoticon that yells "Aw, H*LL no!" :drumroll:

 

[ZsaZsa]

For those that subscribe to Beth Karas' site- another forum has posted the voir dire on 17- c&p from her site.

 

[bettybaby00]

Isn't he given the op to exclude certain jurors, isn't that the point of jury selection .. wouldn't that info have been useful? I bet they do it from now on.

My understanding is they only have a certain amount of strikes (for some reason I have 3 or 5 in my head). When an initial jury pool starts out with 100s of possible jurors, I'm sure those alloted number of strikes go pretty quickly. That's why I said earlier that perhaps certain things should mean automatic disqualification. Being married to a CONVICTED FELON should IMO be one such circumstance. A felony conviction is pretty dang serious. Not only is it serious as far as sentencing, but it follows you for the rest of your life. It preludes you from many jobs, you can't hold a passport, and IIRC you cant even vote. Meaning it breeds a heck of a lot of resentment.

 

[Wysteria]

Troy Hayden ‏@troyhaydenfox10 47m47 minutes ago
@blefuscu74 agree. we are working on it. county atty is working on it, mcso working on leaked jury info. big mess.

I wasn't sure exactly who was involved, but this is seriously being looked into it seems

Good.

 

[La-Cooks]

One thing that stands out in my mind regarding the J-17 issue, is that J-4 was interviewed, and when asked directly if the jury wanted a specific alternate to switch places with J-17, he said that was not the case. J-4 said that they asked that J-17 be replaced, but they did not ask for a specific alternate. JSS, iirc, stated that the jury wanted Alternate J-2 as the replacement.

That is a huge discrepancy. It would be nice to see the actual question from the jurors.

ETA: It could be 2 separate questions. If the courtroom wouldn't have been held in such a secret manner, maybe these questions wouldn't linger.

 

[steelman]

Do you remember how most people were shocked to see how MLDR came dressed for the courtroom? That was one of the 1st things people commented on when we started watching. Then we noticed how she was on her phone constantly thru the proceedings. Unprofessional from day one. And now we know so much more about her & how close she was with the support site.

This juror problem is going to tie back to MDLR.......almost guaranteed.

 

[MeeBee]

Troy Hayden ‏@troyhaydenfox10 47m47 minutes ago
@blefuscu74 agree. we are working on it. county atty is working on it, mcso working on leaked jury info. big mess.

I wasn't sure exactly who was involved, but this is seriously being looked into it seems

Right now, since I know nothing will happen to 17, I'm much more interested in what they find regarding the leaked names on the JAII site, especially since the only people who had that info were legal people. It had to be a member of the defense team. The site has been obtaining this kind of information for a while now

 

[cady]

I asked because they both stated that the DP would be revenge, not justice.

Then that must be how they define it. I was recently accused here of being a RABID ANTI-DP activist. For the record, I am not an activist, nor am I rabid. I do not believe in the DP so I would never have been a juror in a DP case. I'm comfortable with LWOP in this case, but I still question the motive of the stray juror because she was DP qualified. I was also suspected of being a troll from the Jodi website....I have never been there and do not support JA. But I DO have opinions, which may differ with the majority of WS posters. I DO believe in free speech. Others?apparently, not so much. JMO

 

[MeeBee]

One thing that stands out in my mind regarding the J-17 issue, is that J-4 was interviewed, and when asked directly if the jury wanted a specific alternate to switch places with J-17, he said that was not the case. J-4 said that they asked that J-17 be replaced, but they did not ask for a specific alternate. JSS, iirc, stated that the jury wanted Alternate J-2 as the replacement.

That is a huge discrepancy. It would be nice to see the actual question from the jurors.

The judge didn't say anything about juror 2. This was reported on SM. It's possible that juror 17 mentioned juror 2 in her secret note to the judge.

 

[Meemaw12]

WHO got the six copies?

He said

Judge
Defense
Prosecution
3 others that had something to do with the court

Also he said whoever he talked to in the courthouse noticed the list from jaii site had the jurors middle name leading them to believe the list was a legal paper like the 6 copies given out



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[LinTX]

BBM: we certainly don't want that to happen.

No, and that was why I said this morning that the sentence we're already almost certain to get is probably best. Especially b/c I think it will be harder for her than the DP would have been. But *if* this juror lied to get onto the jury, and caused the other jurors to feel as if they wasted their time, something is owed to them. If a member of the DT was complicit or even had a hint of it, then I'd want their feet held to the fire. I would hate it to come to a retrial of the penalty phase, but I wouldn't want to see it ignored either and don't think it has to be both.

 

[FelicityLemon]

Imo so I could be off base but when a woman won't speak for herself and a husband who has an axe to grind shows up on an interview singing praises for his lone wife hold out.. It gives me pause..

Well, now *that* would be an interesting thing to ponder. Hypothetically speaking: a victim of domestic abuse is accepted as a jury member of a trial being prosecuted by Mr. X. who prosecuted her loved one years before. She has since divorced and remarried. Her new husband also was previously prosecuted by the same Mr. X (NOT SAYING THIS IS TRUE) and harbors feelings of wanting revenge and the opportunity may be presenting itself. Husband browbeats or manipulates wife to somehow throw a monkey wrench into the works...

Hard to know what goes on in someone else's mind. I can only say what's going on in my own imaginative mind. This is my opinion only, not really an opinion, but random meanderings based somewhat on recently learned facts that may or may not have any bearing on my idea.

 

[Myvice]

One thing for certain, this is definitely overshadowing the defenses hollow "victory".

 

[RR0004]

OK so they only knew about the 1st husband's past but not the connection with Juan? Doesn't make sense to me

...so I guess that means she (JW) didn't check out this guy's past either?? Why would she be giving Juan cr@p then?

 

[Nosey Parker]

Makes total sense. What are they going to do, cancel her contract 7 days before the verdict was read ?

What choice did they have ?

Apparently they could have kept her on an hourly basis until sentencing. Then she's done.

 

[tcrockett]

Right now, since I know nothing will happen to 17, I'm much more interested in what they find regarding the leaked names on the JAII site, especially since the only people who had that info were legal people. It had to be a member of the defense team. The site has been obtaining this kind of information for a while now

Copies said to have been released to Judge, 2 assistants, court reporter,
prosecutor, and defense

 

[turaj]

One thing that stands out in my mind regarding the J-17 issue, is that J-4 was interviewed, and when asked directly if the jury wanted a specific alternate to switch places with J-17, he said that was not the case. J-4 said that they asked that J-17 be replaced, but they did not ask for a specific alternate. JSS, iirc, stated that the jury wanted Alternate J-2 as the replacement.

That is a huge discrepancy. It would be nice to see the actual question from the jurors.

ETA: It could be 2 separate questions. If the courtroom wouldn't have been held in such a secret manner, maybe these questions wouldn't linger.

i wonder if that specific request came from j 17 in her note? I noted that discrepancy too. Also I think the voir dire for 17 should be put out for all to see.

 

[RR0004]

One thing for certain, this is definitely overshadowing the defenses hollow "victory".

Thank G-d for small favors.

 

[RadarLuv]

Tammy Rose ‏@News20Chopper 17m17 minutes ago

And the plot thickens with Juror #17. Now she could be facing her own trial. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9hu2-_FPjHI&list=UU0a7s9PLqwIDZLkjF4OpwOg … #JodiArias

 

[sammie]

He said

Judge
Defense
Prosecution
3 others that had something to do with the court

Also he said whoever he talked to in the courthouse noticed the list from jaii site had the jurors middle name leading them to believe the list was a legal paper like the 6 copies given out



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

A large pro Travis social media site is reporting the six copies were

1. Judge Stephens
2/3 Her assistants
4. Court Reporter
5. Defense team
6. Prosecution