Discussions on Formal Sentencing Hearing - Jodi Arias #3

[RadarLuv]

A liar and saboteur only assassinates their own character. She has no one to blame but herself.

Sounds like character assassination of the juror.

 

[Boytwnmom]

I have no doubt MDLR and DT were monitoring social media for all jurors...certainly their "right" since they are monitoring for juror misconduct.

If the County is going to open an active investigation (vs just saying they're reviewing the situation), they can subpoena FB for J#17's account and activity.

I am really interested to see when she "Liked" The Secret and The Laws of Attraction. Nancy Grace and HLN don't bother me as much as the Laws of Attraction.
And I know it was mentioned/rumored yesterday that she also "liked" certain media channels during this trial; what ones, and when?


Also, I'm sure they've been tickled pink, knowing all this time that J#17 liked The Secret and Laws of Attraction!!!! Gold!

I had been thinking the same thing about liking ng not being a big deal. But then I realized the big deal was the fact ng was all over the first trial 24/7 so if #17 was watching ng she was getting way more info about the case than she likely disclosed.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

 

[dog.gone.cute]

One thing that was puzzling me yesterday, more than anything, was how could this juror have been summoned and seated on this jury if this was a setup by the defense ? After reading 20 pages of the forum this morning, I think I may have it figured out....... She wasn't.

Re: MDLR-- Maria DelaRosa _______RDLR ---her sister

The big question in my mind, when exactly was it that RDLR (Maria's sister) became friends on Juror #17 husbands Facebook ? Was it in the last few weeks, a couple of months, a year ago ?

This is my line of reasoning: Initially, maybe this juror was nothing more than just a stealth juror with an agenda and a bias, but nobody knew about her and there were no red flags. It might even be possible that this juror really DIDN'T have a lot of bias and truly believed she could be objective during the voir dire process..

However, after the jury was picked and seated, MDLR would have had access to the list of jurors names and could have researched them on social media. I have little doubt in my mind that Nurmi would have authorized a social media search to try and dig up dirt on these jurors and dig into their pasts. What she found was a possible weak link. She is a mitigation specialist, part of her job is to reckognize weak and vulnerable people.

To avoid the appearance of wrongdoing, MDLR could have had RDLR sign up as a friend on the husbands Facebook account, with the mistaken premise that nobody would ever notice. There are posters that have stated there are pictures of RDLR with juror #17's husband. That information certainly needs to be documented and saved if possible. I have yet to see such a picture, so it is speculation at this point. She was shown on his Facebook "friends" list however.

Now, what does that mean ? Well, that means through backdoor channels MDLR could have had access and influence on juror #17. Did MLDR, Nurmi, Wilmott or anybody else have anything to do with her being summoned and seated on the jury ?? Nope.

Could juror #17 have been influenced and star-struck by having an "in" to MLDR ?? You Betcha' !!
Could there have been interaction and "off-the-record" conversations either taking place or being passed along ? Yeppers.

What does this equate to ? ------> Influence peddling and jury tampering.

The problem MDLR and RDLR have is that this couple was leaving a trail of bread crumbs a mile long as they walked along the electronic pathway known as social media. They almost flaunted it.

If RDLR was the one that had an intimate relationship with the couple, then that would have eliminated the appearance of impropriety on the part of MDLR, or at least that was the plan. There could have been phone calls, dinner dates, e-mails, social drinking parties, etc.........none of which were attended by MDLR, but all of which were overseen by her.

There has to be some reason why MDLR and Jodi's family seemed to be of the opinion that they had this thing wrapped up, prior to the verdict. Her mother stated "It only takes ONE PERSON to do the right thing, We've got this ! " I was struck by the defense teams complete lack of emotion when the hung-jury was announced, I got the impression that they already had a good idea what was going to happen.

This is just me pondering while drinking drinking my coffee.....nothing more.

:seeya: I am going to get another cup of :cup: and respond to some your great points here ...BRB !

Okay ...

1st BBM: Agree ... the pool of jurors are selected by the County, and the Summons are issued to those potential jurors a certain amount of time in advance.

Now, what I would like to know is HOW it is done in Arizona ?

I know how it is done in my state Louisiana -- which may be different -- but here, when the pool of POTENTIAL jurors are selected and jury summons issued, a list of names are compiled and it is a matter of public record. So you can start investigating your "possibilities" -- see if you know anyone -- etc.

2nd BBM: That is important -- was it after #17 was selected -- or before #17 was selected.

3rd BBM: NO doubt, Maria researched every juror on social media.

4th BBM: Exactly -- she is "SNEAKY" -- and she learned a lot of this from JA !

5th BBM: I agree ... but they "hit the jackpot" getting a "stealth juror" ... and the defense needed ONE -- 1 juror to hang the jury!

6th BBM: Absolutely ! She probably told her $$$$$ -- book deals -- whatever bs to get her on board :gaah:

7th BBM: Yep ... Jury Tampering !

8th BBM: Yep ... and no doubt they were busy trying to delete all their social media accounts ... but hahaha -- that ain't gonna work because they are retrievable.

9th BBM: And at 9:32 am -- BEFORE the Verdict was read -- Maria posted : "I told you to have faith." She knew, but what I want to know is what Nurmi and Wilmott knew because they could be disbarred for even knowledge of Jury Tampering !


:goodpost: steelman ! Very well done !

I hope my responses made sense !

:cheers:

 

[Buttercup117]

If they knew, could they have made in roads to this juror? Just wondering.

I'd love to know what Jodi's PI was really investigating all that time .

 

[turaj]

In voir dire she claims they met online and were only together for six months before they married, whic was 2-3 years after the divorce. Who knows though, she might lie about that also. :thinking:

i think the state of az owes many people an explanation of how she got on the jury at all. She gave them more than enough reasons to not accept her and that is just what we know...it is the state that should explain the process and I doubt they will. Just on a more personal note....what her personal life that is known and was shared with the court (at least one part) is that she has a very high tolerance for being on the wrong side of the law...not one husband but two and this is just what we know and her abuse history....most lay people could see the handwriting on the wall and I'm sure the defense then could tailor even more to certain themes to make sure they had her. I think with the events of wed. night they knew going in it was hung.

 

[Boytwnmom]

Very helpful article. I think #17 and her dh are safe unless they try to profit in any way. Someone posted the MC court citation of her current husband, and iirc he was sentenced to 2 years but released in 4. Hmmm....

I thought it might have been 2 yrs for each of 2 charges. But, He also had 3 "convictions" while incarcerated, 2 for crimes of violence and 1 for something about a tattoo. Not sure how that impacts a sentence.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

 

[turaj]

I know, I totally agree. It made me really sick to read they were doing that. What they are doing is calling the court house and asking for JSS's office and leaving messages. Improper in all ways!

that is a waste of time...she is not going to get those messages.

 

[fifteen89]

This was posted on twitter, it was on her Husband's Facebook Page yesterday before he took it down. Those who saw it before he de-activated it, contend he himself openly admitted it was his wife who was the lone holdout on the jury, and that he was soliciting paid interviews. My disclaimer is I personally did not see it, but it was also alleged he himself called the TV station that showed up to talk to him (and most of us have seen the tv station video that was posted yesterday).

If true, they may have had another hidden agenda, or perhaps wished to receive some *secondary gain* as a result of her being the lone holdout. I'm sure those investigating will be able to find out what he posted.

Wow. Just wow. So they maybe even invited the camera to their doorstep. Hopefully no one will pay them a penny for anything she or her husband have to say.

 

[dog.gone.cute]

JSS said videos could be shown now, right? Why hasn't video of voir dire been released?

:seeya:

BBM: Not sure why it has not been released -- BUT -- let's hope the authorities are reviewing it regarding Juror #17 !

 

[Steve44]

You're right Steve, I'll put myself on a self-imposed, 30 minute timeout, as a penalty for an incomplete and poorly thought out assessment.

Don't be so hard on yourself. I don't fully disagree with your assessment, perhaps her judgment was clouded by the qualities you mentioned. Sometimes the qualities we are born with or cultivate rise to the level of habit and can then interfere with unbiased judgment when it is required. It's not a de-facto result however, and someone in JSS's position should be intellectually capable of giving place to the innate qualities of her character as well as providing sound judgement in matters relating to law.

 

[turaj]

Jurors mad

http://www.fox10phoenix.com/clip/11208848/juror-speaks-out-about-juror-17s-link-to-juan-martinez

You know I honestly think juror 17 did not even dream that each and every one of the other jurors would hold that press conf. I mean it is never done like that and I have never seen them go after one juror like that. She no doubt thought the 11-1 would get out and she would be sought out for interviews...I don't think she expected this.

 

[kimi_SFC]

One thing that was puzzling me yesterday, more than anything, was how could this juror have been summoned and seated on this jury if this was a setup by the defense ? After reading 20 pages of the forum this morning, I think I may have it figured out....... She wasn't.

Re: MDLR-- Maria DelaRosa _______RDLR ---her sister

The big question in my mind, when exactly was it that RDLR (Maria's sister) became friends on Juror #17 husbands Facebook ? Was it in the last few weeks, a couple of months, a year ago ?

This is my line of reasoning: Initially, maybe this juror was nothing more than just a stealth juror with an agenda and a bias, but nobody knew about her and there were no red flags. It might even be possible that this juror really DIDN'T have a lot of bias and truly believed she could be objective during the voir dire process..

However, after the jury was picked and seated, MDLR would have had access to the list of jurors names and could have researched them on social media. I have little doubt in my mind that Nurmi would have authorized a social media search to try and dig up dirt on these jurors and dig into their pasts. What she found was a possible weak link. She is a mitigation specialist, part of her job is to reckognize weak and vulnerable people.

To avoid the appearance of wrongdoing, MDLR could have had RDLR sign up as a friend on the husbands Facebook account, with the mistaken premise that nobody would ever notice. There are posters that have stated there are pictures of RDLR with juror #17's husband. That information certainly needs to be documented and saved if possible. I have yet to see such a picture, so it is speculation at this point. She was shown on his Facebook "friends" list however.

Now, what does that mean ? Well, that means through backdoor channels MDLR could have had access and influence on juror #17. Did MLDR, Nurmi, Wilmott or anybody else have anything to do with her being summoned and seated on the jury ?? Nope.

Could juror #17 have been influenced and star-struck by having an "in" to MLDR ?? You Betcha' !!
Could there have been interaction and "off-the-record" conversations either taking place or being passed along ? Yeppers.

What does this equate to ? ------> Influence peddling and jury tampering.

The problem MDLR and RDLR have is that this couple was leaving a trail of bread crumbs a mile long as they walked along the electronic pathway known as social media. They almost flaunted it.

If RDLR was the one that had an intimate relationship with the couple, then that would have eliminated the appearance of impropriety on the part of MDLR, or at least that was the plan. There could have been phone calls, dinner dates, e-mails, social drinking parties, etc.........none of which were attended by MDLR, but all of which were overseen by her.

There has to be some reason why MDLR and Jodi's family seemed to be of the opinion that they had this thing wrapped up, prior to the verdict. Her mother stated "It only takes ONE PERSON to do the right thing, We've got this ! " I was struck by the defense teams complete lack of emotion when the hung-jury was announced, I got the impression that they already had a good idea what was going to happen.


This is just me pondering while drinking drinking my coffee.....nothing more.

There are times when the "Thanks" button simply does not suffice...

:goodpost: (stellar, in fact!) :star:

:coffeews: :cupcake:


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[RadarLuv]

Prezi by #17 https://prezi.com/o_cymetvi7li/death-penalty/

https://prezi.com/o_cymetvi7li/death-penalty/

 

[turaj]

I have no doubt MDLR and DT were monitoring social media for all jurors...certainly their "right" since they are monitoring for juror misconduct.

If the County is going to open an active investigation (vs just saying they're reviewing the situation), they can subpoena FB for J#17's account and activity.

I am really interested to see when she "Liked" The Secret and The Laws of Attraction. Nancy Grace and HLN don't bother me as much as the Laws of Attraction.
And I know it was mentioned/rumored yesterday that she also "liked" certain media channels during this trial; what ones, and when?


Also, I'm sure they've been tickled pink, knowing all this time that J#17 liked The Secret and Laws of Attraction!!!! Gold!

it is also so very obvious that she spoke about the deliberations and trial with husband...otherwise he would not have been so cool and calm talking about his "respect" for her.

 

[Beccaboo]

Prezi by #17 https://prezi.com/o_cymetvi7li/death-penalty/

https://prezi.com/o_cymetvi7li/death-penalty/

So if I am reading this right, she was vocal about being anti-death penalty just 2 years ago and she posted under her maiden name? This just keeps getting worse. Only in the Arias trail. smdh

 

[RadarLuv]

She has probably had the Prezi account for many years, so likely she opened her account with her maiden name. It was obviously for some sort of presentation, possibly for school?

So if I am reading this right, she was vocal about being anti-death penalty just 3 years ago and she posted under her maiden name? This just keeps getting worse. Only in the Arias trail. smdh

 

[turaj]

I have no doubt MDLR and DT were monitoring social media for all jurors...certainly their "right" since they are monitoring for juror misconduct.

If the County is going to open an active investigation (vs just saying they're reviewing the situation), they can subpoena FB for J#17's account and activity.

I am really interested to see when she "Liked" The Secret and The Laws of Attraction. Nancy Grace and HLN don't bother me as much as the Laws of Attraction.
And I know it was mentioned/rumored yesterday that she also "liked" certain media channels during this trial; what ones, and when?

Since she could have been struck down during voir dire I really think all one can say for sure is the defense hit the lottery with this juror!!!

Also, I'm sure they've been tickled pink, knowing all this time that J#17 liked The Secret and Laws of Attraction!!!! Gold!

Since she could have been struck down during voir dire I really think all one can say for sure is the defense hit the lottery with this juror and before the internet no one would have ever known after the fact.

 

[Beccaboo]

She has probably had the Prezi account for many years, so likely she opened her account with her maiden name.

True, but the post itself is from 2013. I have a hard time believing she suddenly changed such a strong opinion in the year and 10 months between that post and her being questioned for this jury.

 

[Buttercup117]

It has entered my head that Juror #17 might be experiencing DV currently and was coerced into getting on that jury no matter what it took. The behavior of her Husband #2 in speaking for her at the press conference (IIRC) and explicitly soliciting interviews, etc. for them both through social media could be understood as very controlling behavior vis à vis his wife.

If she is not persecuted for jury tampering/ obstruction of justice or whatever, ( which I doubt) in a year or so she will be calling the Police and prosecutors office for relief from this man.... JUST my opinon

 

[turaj]

While we're pondering, any guesses why JSS not only didn't learn from her mistakes in the first trial but compounded them in this one? I think JSS is risk-averse to a crippling degree; i.e., generally speaking, she's incapable of making quick rulings in court. Her written rulings are very well-done imo, as she's had time to reflect, research, consult, etc. But there's something lacking judicial-wise in JSS that can't be fixed and which should disqualify her from overseeing another major trial imo, because I don't think the root cause is a fear of being overturned by the Appeals.

I have heard/read that her background is family court and this was first dp case...if that is true it does explain some of the excess caution used to avoid appeals...she took it so far it became impossible to run a court and be fair to anyone really...clearly she was not a good choice for a high profile case. I also think some of the things that happened such as jurors not being able to deliberate as long as they want seem to be the result of a court system that is strapped for cash and space.