Discussions on Formal Sentencing Hearing - Jodi Arias #7

[Mindmatters]

What is so impressive to me, especially after listening to Voir Dire of juror #17 by Juan is that he NEVER misses anything, he tried during this process to eliminate her based on what he correctly identified about her, and then he tried again when the 11 jurors sent for help about J17 refusing to deliberate.

This man is one impressive and brillant prosecutor.

 

[MeeBee]

Wow!! That's so great he said that!! Makes me think he might be an unbiased reporter... But I don't want to get my hopes up...

What do we know about him already, anything?

He said it sarcastically.

@brahmresnik: .@drfessel @chriswnews @annehillebrand2 OK, Perry Mason, one more time: She got nothing. Nada. Bupkis. Not even a souvenir pencil.

@brahmresnik: .@ZoeyWatson2014 @jeffgoldesq Everyone's Perry Mason tonight. Again: She got nothing & sold nothing. Nada, Bupkis.

 

[elementary]

@juanstie
#JodiArias had a mental breakdown and had to be put in restraints. #Confirmed #SorryNotSorry
3:46pm - 15 Mar 15

Just recently? Meh, Drama Queen, milking her giant sized tantrum for all its worth. Restraints sound very good. I hope they stay on for weeks. Big baby.

 

[Bernina]

Oh, okay, now I get it! Gosh, it looks like visitors have to walk like a mile to get to their visitees!

There are buses that take you from the front office to the visiting areas/buildings of the specific unit you need to go to. It's REALLY a bad place.

 

[Steve44]

I am hopeless. I'm JAed out. It is over. My stomach hurts and I'm tired, yet I'm glued to jury selection video! Is there treatment for this?

Watch five minutes of Nurmi. You'll come to with your computer in pieces and a heavy object in your hand, but you'll be free!

 

[Hope4More]

One question answered. JM tried to remove her for cause and was denied...he saw those tears and thought she'd be biased by DV. That was BK's take too, after the fact- DV, not animus towards JM.

What should have been more worrisome than it seems to have been was her response as to why she was crying. Embarassment? That doesn't mean she was strong, JSS. It just means another facet of her emotionalism about DV.

 

[Nancy_Drew]

Hahaha!! When Juan Martinez asks J17 if she knows why her current husband went to prison she says, "yes, I looked it up. I wasn't going to allow just anyone to be around my kids"!!!

Meanwhile, they go visit their own father in PRISION who has done WORSE things that the current husband!!!

She is SO full of lies!!

 

[TexMex]

What is so impressive to me, especially after listening to Voir Dire of juror #17 by Juan is that he NEVER misses anything, he tried during this process to eliminate her based on what he saw, and then he tried again when the 11 jurors sent for help about J17 refusing to deliberate.

This man is one impressive and brillant prosecutor.

I hope Juan writes an autobiography someday: The Prosecutor

 

[Bravo]

There are buses that take you from the front office to the visiting areas/buildings of the specific unit you need to go to. It's REALLY a bad place.

Can you elaborate on just how bad. TIA.

 

[Mrs G Norris]

Question: how desperate was JSS to fill the jury, it's not like they didn't have other better options!

 

[ShadyLady]

JSS questions #17 at 30:00.....then when she asked counsel to approach JSS flashes big smile at Nurmi....how ominous.

 

[zebra]

Listening to JM question Juror 17.

One thing jumped out at me: She described her ex as "an idiot" for his crime. When asked to elaborate, she states that he was "28 or 29" at the time of the crime so he was "old" and thus, she doesn't know what he is thinking (i.e., he should have known better).

This is interesting to me because IIRC, Juror 17 found that JA's age (age 27) was a mitigating factor.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n7jqGuEniFA

 

[Hope4More]

What is so impressive to me, especially after listening to Voir Dire of juror #17 by Juan is that he NEVER misses anything, he tried during this process to eliminate her based on what he correctly identified about her, and then he tried again when the 11 jurors sent for help about J17 refusing to deliberate.

This man is one impressive and brillant prosecutor.

JM clearly didn't use one of his 10 strikes to remove her the next day. He also didn't object when JSS said she was good with 17. He did say a quick something I couldn't catch--did anyone else hear it?

 

[Mindmatters]

One question answered. JM tried to remove her for cause and was denied...he saw those tears and thought she'd be biased by DV. That was BK's take too, after the fact- DV, not animus towards JM.

What should have been more worrisome than it seems to have been was her response as to why she was crying. Embarassment? That doesn't mean she was strong, JSS. It just means another facet of her emotionalism about DV.

Or it could have been a calculated answer intended to avoid being excused--I know, I know this trial has made me so cynical of everyone's motives.

 

[daisydomino]

Just recently? Meh, Drama Queen, milking her giant sized tantrum for all its worth. Restraints sound very good. I hope they stay on for weeks. Big baby.

Someone here posted that it turns out this is a hoax, not actually confirmed. I have no idea which is true.

 

[Hope4More]

Listening to JM question Juror 17.

One thing jumped out at me: She described her ex as "an idiot" for his crime. When asked to elaborate, she states that he was "28 or 29" at the time of the crime so he was "old" and thus, she doesn't know what he is thinking (i.e., he should have known better).

This is interesting to me because IIRC, Juror 17 found that JA's age (age 27) was a mitigating factor.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n7jqGuEniFA

I caught that too. Odd, eh?

 

[Nancy_Drew]

Listening to the way that J17 talks about her ex husband and then calls him an "idiot" in the video, backs up my feeing that she's not a DV victim...

 

[Beccaboo]

If I am hearing this correctly Juan DID try to get rid of her with cause and JSS said no? She said no?!? Am I the only one who sometimes fees the urge to beat their head against the wall after hearing the lasted on this case? How did this happen? Frankly, I think LWOP is a better punishment because it removes her star status and victim status all at once, but the circus that has been this case is a travesty to the system as a whole. What has been allowed to happen in that court room makes a mockery of justice, a mockery of true victims of abuse both DV and sex crimes against children, and worst of all it made a mockery of Travis Alexander. He, like all victims, deserved so much better! His name should not have been allowed to tarnished but secret witnesses who don't testify and hired gins who never stopped to look past the lies of a murderess at who this man really was. People have allowed themselves to reached new and interesting levels of depravity in an effort to defend, support, or wft ever MDRL did for this woman. And now this. A juror with an agenda. For whatever reason she had, she derailed the whole thing adding a whole new ring to the already 7 ring circus. This can't not be allowed to go unchecked. If the harsh message isn't sent than dangerous precedent in a very public way will have been set.

 

[Nancy_Drew]

Listening to JM question Juror 17.

One thing jumped out at me: She described her ex as "an idiot" for his crime. When asked to elaborate, she states that he was "28 or 29" at the time of the crime so he was "old" and thus, she doesn't know what he is thinking (i.e., he should have known better).

This is interesting to me because IIRC, Juror 17 found that JA's age (age 27) was a mitigating factor.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n7jqGuEniFA

Lol! Good catch!! ...I missed that one... I was too busy doing the math to see if I could catch her in another LIE!!

 

[Hope4More]

[/B]

Or it could have been a calculated answer intended to avoid being excused--I know, I know this trial has made me so cynical of everyone's motives.

That's not cynicism, and even if it were, one cannot have too much of that good thing when it comes to this trial. What I'm saying though is her show of embarassment would have caused me MORE concern, not less. Who cries from embarassment in voir dire? And has a judge think the tears of embarassment mean she's strong? It is weird.