Discussions on Formal Sentencing Hearing - Jodi Arias #3

[AZWatcher]

I'm sorry you chose to take my comments personally. My intention was not to disqualify your status as a family member of a murder victim. I was simply pointing to the fact that this juror chose NOT to speak out on her feelings, which are hers and hers alone. I think it unreasonable for strangers to "warn" her and ascribe implications that may not apply to her. No offense intended.

Edited to address katiecoolday

 

[culliac]

If you are addressing me and my blog, there is nothing threatening in it toward this juror. Nor is my style "passive aggressive" as it's pretty direct and clear. I believe her fellow jurors who have a clear read on her and her refusal to actually explain her position or look at the evidence much less deliberate. Her consequences will be her own throughout her life which is what I wrote about. And there is time for outrage and this is it. Someone manipulating the system to further some personal agenda, which is very seriously in question here is something we should all not take lightly. But threats? I guess I've not seen them.
Who's place I can put myself in is the Alexanders as i've been there so that's the position from where I speak.

I am a canadian and dont know hardly anything about your justice system....but I have so much respect and admiration for you and what you are doing.. It has boggled my mind how this defence was presented and allowed to be presented...Thank the World for people like you who are doing something about it....I commend you and all the websleuthers on this board who work so tirelessly to dig up the truth.

 

[cady]

I admit that I am suspicious that something was amiss. I just hope that all the sleuthing being done truly uncovers the correct perpetrator at this point, because if #17 turns out to be innocent of the accusations, she will have been irreparably harmed. She, too was away from her family for as long as the others for all these months. I am particularly interested in the activities of MDLA being carefully scrutinized. If that leads to #17, so be it. JMO

 

[MissHaley]

i am not certain if she had even gotten home and was inside? The other jurors said she took her stuff and left without even a good bye so she had a clear exit as all media were either following the family or getting set up for the presser. Some have said he informed media of address etc. this is all just so odd. i want to hear more from the 11 and alternates...how did she act up to deliberations? Did anyone bond with her...smoke or lunch breaks etc. were they surprised once deliberations began or did she send signals before that of knowing more than she should? These jurors can talk but right now I am guessing they are being asked some of these questions and more by the county officials.

BBM- yes, some have posted that they read on his FB (before he took it down) that he posted that his wife will take interviews "for the right price" & he was calling media for her. That's probably how the media shown up but when they wouldn't pay, she wouldn't come out. IMO

 

[culliac]

double post

 

[katiecoolady]

KCL you bring up an interesting point: If judges impose sentence it is more likely to fit the crime.

We are entitled in this country to a jury of our peers but that was never meant to mean for sentencing.

I think the jury should be totally removed from the penalty phase of trials in this country--in all states.

Another rant, sorry. (At least it was short this time.)

Hi krkrjx...board is a little wonky for me today so hoping this goes through.
Yes it always was that Judge's sentenced DP murderers until I don't know, the mid 90s I think when the Supreme Court ruled it has to be juries. MANY death row inmates across the country were granted new trials. Imagine conjuring up all those witnesses decades later. I attended one here in AZ and sat with the family and his sentence was commuted to Life as in one of our cases. Some were "grandfathered" as my sister's killers were, thankfully, so we didn't have to go through all THAT again. But we had to go through a long appeal where one was released. It goes on and on as I've written about...

The whole thing is a mess and far too expensive by those who are fighting it while crying it is too expensive while being the ones draining the dollars. It's insane. I'm for reform and if execution has to come off the table, then so be it. But then where will these people go who have made their lucrative living working in this high dollar industry--freeing death row murderers. Will they then just transfer to whatever fills it's place and fight that too?
There has to be a punishment for our worst of the worst...beyond what a non violent crime would garner like LWOP for a drug charge or something....
No answers but it's good I think to pose questions to keep a dialogue going. This trial proved it's NOT WORKING. Period. The system did NOT work in this case on about every single level. So let's change it.

 

[RadarLuv]

I did send it to NG. I am quite sure that they are likely already on EVERY. POSSIBLE. CONNECTION to this juror already. I don't think anything we are finding is new as they are paid to investigate and I am sure had ALL of this info within 30 minutes, no 15 minutes upon learning this jurors identity.

Since this is a sleuthing forum I would assume all speculation would be welcomed and investigated.

But I must say....what a f'ing coincidence if not, right?

I'm not convinced that this is hers. Is there any more proof other than the name? Is there a profile on that site with her location as AZ or any other indication it is in fact #17?

She only has two things posted on there and both were in 2013. She hasn't gone by that name since 2000. Why would she set up the account in 2000 and make her first post in 2013? I'm not making the connection.

 

[Madeleine74]

Defendants Rights vs Victim's Rights- Does it bother anyone else that if jury misconduct is found in a case that is against the defendant, the verdict can be thrown out & retried. But, if it's against the State, they have no recourse? I believe in defendants rights but things have gone way too far, especially if the defendant is guilty! Victims have gotten lost & now it's become a game of 'winning'. Gone too far.

Been this way for decades. The burden is totally on the government when it comes to prosecution and punishment. People like to quote the bible ("eye for an eye", etc) but the bible has absolutely nothing to do with it. Start with the U.S. Constitution and then read the decisions of the Supreme Court for perspective. This isn't anything new btw, what's new is that people are following criminal cases more than ever due to 24/7 news cycles and crime as entertainment, and there's a lack of understanding of how the courts really function. Cases that get cited in courtrooms are sometimes more than a decade old. Decisions in the past by high courts affect rulings in courts across the country.

I hope everyone will take the time to become informed about the laws that govern, because higher court decisions do affect what happens in the cases we all follow.

 

[Steve44]

Not sure exactly what is kosher to post here right now but just wanted to share that I wrote a long letter on my blog yesterday to the jurors in this last phase. It's getting a lot of play (over 6000 hits so far) and more importantly, it's having the impact I intended without violating any confidences. I'm being contacted on it. I won't link it but if you go to my blog in my signature line here, it is the first post. I hope it helps. It's my honest response to this non-verdict. I'm feeling better about things today and hope the rest of you are as well.
Love and blessings to all involved.

I read it Katie, and I agree. I also want to say that seeing your selflessness and your valuable contributions, both moral and material, to the victims throughout this trial, and learning of your own personal tragedy and the battles that followed, when I learned of your engagement I was so happy for you! He looks like a wonderful and fun person, and as a heterosexual male, and without implicating myself in anything controversial, he is beautiful.

 

[Amster]

I sincerely hope I'm reading this wrong, but many of these posts and blogs feel like passive-aggressive, veiled threats directed at or about juror 17. I'm thinking you are nice people with good intentions who may need to take a deep breath and understand that no matter your own life experiences, you can NEVER put yourself in juror 17's place.

Lots of accusations flying around.....want to back them up? Veiled threats? Who?
I don't need to take a deep breath! I need to see a wrong righted. And, it's absolutely true....I could NEVER put myself in J17's place. I'm not a liar with an agenda to place myself on a jury to "save" a killer.

 

[SuzDuJour]

I sincerely hope I'm reading this wrong, but many of these posts and blogs feel like passive-aggressive, veiled threats directed at or about juror 17. I'm thinking you are nice people with good intentions who may need to take a deep breath and understand that no matter your own life experiences, you can NEVER put yourself in juror 17's place.

You're right about never being in the juror's place. I would NEVER lie under oath, nor misrepresesent myself in a court of law...

 

[katiecoolady]

I believe that you may be mis-interpreting the outrage. Juror 17, would certainly be entitled to her opinion. That is not the issue. The fact that she evidently didn't want to deliberate, review evidence, explain to her fellow jurors her point of view...etc. is a big problem. When you swear to uphold the law and deliberate in good faith it means just that. Our entire judicial system depends on people being honest. If you have bias' or preconceived notions that are unshakeable, then be honest and state that when you are being vetted. It remains to be seen, but at this point it appears that #17 had issues and other perhaps questionable contacts that would have disqualified her. The perversion of the system is a big deal. All that being said no one is threatening #17 just wanting the truth and wanting a system we can trust. JMO

EXACTLY! And the ONLY thing up for debate in that deliberation, the ONLY question to be decided in sentencing was simple: do aggravators outweigh mitigators. As clearly she had no argument for lining those things up in a checks and balances sheet like for example "well she was only 27 so slitting his throat is excusable" she refused to do it. That is NOT deliberation. It is NOT following the rules. Her fellow jurors knew it and reported it. And on top of that all kinds of other things coming out about her lying in voir dire.
I went up for a jury once years ago. I happened to know the prosecutor because, don't laugh, I had done a "Trading Spaces" bathroom remodel weekend with her the year before on another prosecutor's house. We were simply part ofthe same team remodeling a bathroom over a weekend. I was excused for that reason. The very FIRST question, in that very courthouse Arias was tried, posed to me was "do you know any of the parties in this case" by the JUDGE. I answered honestly and it was kind of funny cuz I did say the words "Trading Spaces" (lol) and I was immediately tossed. I doubt this process has changed. Which leads me to think she lied during voir dire. NONE OF THIS should be taken lightly in this case, the most serious one our courts can see. arrrgh

 

[katiecoolady]

I read it Katie, and I agree. I also want to say that seeing your selflessness and your valuable contributions, both moral and material, to the victims throughout this trial, and learning of your own personal tragedy and the battles that followed, when I learned of your engagement I was so happy for you! He looks like a wonderful and fun person, and as a heterosexual male, and without implicating myself in anything controversial, he is beautiful.

Ok I almost choked on my coffee there on that one. LMAO thanks for the levity. And I will tell him that...he will love it (because he is also vain LOL). Thanks for making my morning! And yes he is beautiful inside and out.

 

[Nosey Parker]

You know, I hope they investigate Juror 17 to the full, because I think it's becoming obvious that she had no right to be on that jury. Nothing will be done, I'm sure, because the outcome only affected the State's position, not the defence's, and who would want another mistrial anyway! The odds of getting a unanimous death sentence are virtually nil. Hopefully the investigation will scare her, and other potential jurors who would like to bring their agendas into the deliberation room.

But - it's the leaking of info, especially the posting of the Arizona Eleven's names, that really needs to be dealt with. That list is still up on the JAII site, but was modified. Juror 17 reads "The juror that saved Jodi's life" where the name would be. IMO the source is glaringly obvious. I'm also reminded of the day there was a tweet "Jodi is to speak to the jury tomorrow" right at the Secret Testimony time. Remember that one? I can't recall if it was that tweet, or another, that appeared and was quickly moved to the Vent Room. Anyone recall that?

 

[katiecoolady]

BBM- yes, some have posted that they read on his FB (before he took it down) that he posted that his wife will take interviews "for the right price" & he was calling media for her. That's probably how the media shown up but when they wouldn't pay, she wouldn't come out. IMO

What what what? The Alyce LaViolette "I'm being stalked while I waltz in to the media hotel for dinner" claim? Maybe the two of them will team up for a media blitz. Now I need a barf bag.

 

[MaLou]

Now she's trashing Tanisha


And still kicking Travis


"The real justice will be in the afterlife when Jodi burns in hell." As w/ TA, Tanisha is untrue 2 LDS faith. Mormons don't believe in hell.

#JodiArias case wasn't mass murder, baby-killing or senseless. TA was an abusive, womanizing pedophile. Those who voted death are MONSTERS.

https://mobile.twitter.com/JodiAnnArias/tweets

View attachment 70710
http://www.travisalexanderjustice.com/apps/photos/photo?photoid=176969453

I don't know why this kind of disgusting behavior still shocks me, but it does. However, even though I know JA is not tweeting and these may not be her words, all of the tweets post retrial display a lot of anger. This tells me that JA and her camp aren't happy at all with this outcome. Maybe it is a blessing in disguise. Maybe JA wanted the DP so that she could have unlimited appeals because she sure believes she is going to have a successful appeal.

With life, I know she gets one appeal, at least. What happens after that? Can she pay for more herself or ??? I've tried to find this answer on my own and have been unsuccessful.

 

[Boytwnmom]

bad in so many ways that it ends up being the perfect bad example you need to affect change. And it continues. Now you have this additional facet. The lying juror with an agenda. The JSS who wouldn't listen to the 11. The result being the waste of the millions of dollars spent, primarily by the slimy defense, on this trial. I still think they may uncover actual wrongdoing by someone associated with the defense. The secrecy of this trial which may have worked in favor the agenda of that juror. The inability of JSS to manage the proceedings, to keep to a schedule, to appropriately limit evidence, to freaking follow the constitution. You've got a beauty of a case here to work with. It's just so sad it ended up with creating more victims in the 11 jurors and continuing the victimization of the family. This trial should horrify anyone. Seven years and millions of dollars should not have been needed to put this clearly guilty killer away forever. She still hasn't been sentenced....

I doubt it BUT I like the way you think...I am hoping some creative consequences come from this debacle to assure it can NEVER happen again. My personal crusade has to do with the way the ONLY victim in this case was trashed over and over in court with some degree of "success". This should never be allowed, esp on all of our taxpayer $$$. I keep hammering the money part because I know that's what gets politician's attention. I've been tweeting about this nonstop and hoping it falls on someone's ears who can actually make a difference. It's happened before in my life and can happen again. At this stage it feels like the best I can offer--that mouthpiece--so none of this was in vain.

 

[LambChop]

Unless the juror's names have been released we are not going to put them up here. Especially, J17, unless her name is released by the media or LE.

 

[MissHaley]

Honestly our posts here are not threatening her, passively or otherwise. The criticisms of her are fair ones. What non members do with their blogs is different but here, no one is threatening her in any way.

Agree, the only thing I think people are perceiving as a "threat" is that she be investigated & charged for juror misconduct/perjury?

 

[katiecoolady]

You know, I hope they investigate Juror 17 to the full, because I think it's becoming obvious that she had no right to be on that jury. Nothing will be done, I'm sure, because the outcome only affected the State's position, not the defence's, and who would want another mistrial anyway! The odds of getting a unanimous death sentence are virtually nil. Hopefully the investigation will scare her, and other potential jurors who would like to bring their agendas into the deliberation room.

But - it's the leaking of info, especially the posting of the Arizona Eleven's names, that really needs to be dealt with. That list is still up on the JAII site, but was modified. Juror 17 reads "The juror that saved Jodi's life" where the name would be. IMO the source is glaringly obvious. I'm also reminded of the day there was a tweet "Jodi is to speak to the jury tomorrow" right at the Secret Testimony time. Remember that one? I can't recall if it was that tweet, or another, that appeared and was quickly moved to the Vent Room. Anyone recall that?

I definitely remember that one...I saw it on twitter and hammered away at it. They had inside sources of course. The top of my list are MDLR and her little dog Kiefer.