Sentencing and beyond- JA General Discussion #9

New Posts

pocketaccent said:
Haha, Thanks for the nuggets. I haven't read the brief. So she wanted to run away only after a day of cross, huh?

Not defending LaV at all, but sometimes I think she may have been given materials (journals, texts, emails etc) that were carefully cherry picked and out of context by Nurmi and Wilmott. Otherwise how could she get it so very wrong on every aspect!!

LOL at accidentally defending -self. I remember that portion of her testimony too. That it was the gun's fault, not her.
Click to expand...

True that Nurmi spoon fed LaV case info, excluding much. But even Nurmi later admitted (in his bitter book) that LaV was disastrous for the defense. She was flat out unqualified to testify as the defense's key witness, not least because she was clearly incapable of viewing or the evidence with any objectivity.
 
Niner said:
@pocketaccent & @Hope4More and anyone else interested:

AZ - Navneet Kaur (30), March 30, 2007, Phoenix
Click to expand...

Thanks for opening that thread. :)

BTW, the link you provide over there (about JM prosecuting Grewal's case) also leads to interesting info about JM's bar complaints & hints about whether or not his boss Bill Montgomery remains supportive.

*Looks like Montgomery formally disciplined JM over internal MCAO sexual harassment complaints, and that he did so BEFORE Karen Clarke filed her tawdry, ridiculous bar complaint against JM largely relating to sex sex sex.

*Montgomery's 5 page reply to those demanding that he resign (for " protecting" JM) is well worth reading, especially for his take down of Michael Kieffer (unnamed, but Montgomery is obviously referring to that t-wat).

*Montgomery clearly believes JM is being targeted because he is an effective DP prosecutor (I agree), not because of actual & actionable legal or ethical transgressions.

* Another key link included -and worth reading- is to the Bar's reasoning about why the Disciplinary Committee so quickly dismissed the (2017?) Complaint against JM that is now under appeal (the one the ACLU & others have piled onto).

Early on in the appeal, the AZ Supreme Court required the Disciplinary Committee to submit the legal basis/reasoning for their decision, which they were obligated to do as part of the original discplinary process, but hadn't.

From my reading of the Committee's reasoning, the defense bar is going to whiff yet again on having JM tarred & feathered, and the ACLU's ill-advised intervention will be for naught.
 
IMO, there are likely other instances of unprofessional sexually-problematic behavior on Montgomery's staff—this might be quite routine, in fact—we just don't happen to know about it, since personnel stuff is confidential. I say this because it may be in the personality of prosecutors to tend in this direction.

I feel like I'm white-washing sexual harassment, but this is a thought. I don't think we can make assumptions that this isn't more common than we know, in part because aggressiveness is in the DNA of prosecutors.

The media—and JA, who only ever thinks about sex—may be making this situation out to be unique, when it really isn't exceptional. It's just convenient for them.

I'm not saying the behavior is okay.....
 
RickshawFan said:
IMO, there are likely other instances of unprofessional sexually-problematic behavior on Montgomery's staff—this might be quite routine, in fact—we just don't happen to know about it, since personnel stuff is confidential. I say this because it may be in the personality of prosecutors to tend in this direction.

I feel like I'm white-washing sexual harassment, but this is a thought. I don't think we can make assumptions that this isn't more common than we know, in part because aggressiveness is in the DNA of prosecutors.

The media—and JA, who only ever thinks about sex—may be making this situation out to be unique, when it really isn't exceptional. It's just convenient for them.

I'm not saying the behavior is okay.....
Click to expand...
RickshawFan said:
IMO, there are likely other instances of unprofessional sexually-problematic behavior on Montgomery's staff—this might be quite routine, in fact—we just don't happen to know about it, since personnel stuff is confidential. I say this because it may be in the personality of prosecutors to tend in this direction.

I feel like I'm white-washing sexual harassment, but this is a thought. I don't think we can make assumptions that this isn't more common than we know, in part because aggressiveness is in the DNA of prosecutors.

The media—and JA, who only ever thinks about sex—may be making this situation out to be unique, when it really isn't exceptional. It's just convenient for them.

I'm not saying the behavior is okay.....
Click to expand...

Trial lawyers are, to generalize, overly self-confident, even egotistical. It goes with the territory.

JM has also played the starring role in multiple high profile cases. He's had legions of adoring fans, nationwide, who rave that he's brilliant, sexy, awesome.

He's human. I'd be surprised if he has remained entirely immune to that level of fame & flattery.

But, bottom line, yah. Of course his critics are trying to use what appears to be his workplace transgressions (whatever they are/are presented as being) against him. Throw it all against the wall, hope some sticks.

The "fact" that JM may have made a female colleague or underling uncomfortable in the workplace has absolutely nothing to do with with how he conducts himself as an attorney. And the AZ Bar has no business or right to police the conduct of attorneys outside their practicing of the law.
 
A general update on where 's COA stands and what comes next.

1. Her appeal has been (randomly) assigned to Dept J, a panel of 3 judges.

2. The 3 judges will be/have been given the opening briefs written by 's appellate attorneys & the appellate attorneys representing the State.

3. Her appeal will be scheduled on the Court's calendar, and at least one month ahead of when the judge's meet to review her appeal. The COA's calendar through much of July is already posted online. Her case isn't on the calendar yet.

4. The judges will hear oral arguments on the same day they meet in conference to review/discuss her case.

5. BOTH THE AUDIO & VIDEO OF ORAL ARGUMENTS ARE MADE PUBLIC. :). (usually within 48 hours; videos are posted to YouTube & oral recordings online ).

6. Appeals are typically resolved/decided on the same day they are discussed.

7. The panel's chief judge drafts a decision, then gives it to the other 2 judges to review. Each can make suggestions etc. about the draft & sign off, or choose to dissent.

8. Complex cases often mean a looooong time passes between a panel's conference and a completed written decision.

If (please no) 's panel decides to use her case to establish new legal precedent/resolve existing conflicts in legal issues revelant to her appeal, the wait will be long indeed, as every single COA judge will be brought into the process of writing a formal opinion.

9. The COA has extended the time it sets as a goal to clear a criminal appeal (from filing date through written decision): their goal now is 600 days, and in 2018, that goal was met in 95% of their criminal appeals.

('s notice of appeal was filed 4/30/2015; the appeal itself was filed 5/7/2015. So, heck, the COA is running ahead of schedule on her appeal. Who knew? ;)).
 
Last edited:
Hope4More said:
A general update on where 's COA stands and what comes next.

1. Her appeal has been (randomly) assigned to Dept J, a panel of 3 judges.

2. The 3 judges will be/have been given the opening briefs written by 's appellate attorneys & the appellate attorneys representing the State.

3. Her appeal will be scheduled on the Court's calendar, and at least one month ahead of when the judge's meet to review her appeal. The COA's calendar through much of July is already posted online. Her case isn't on the calendar yet.

4. The judges will hear oral arguments on the same day they meet in conference to review/discuss her case.

5. BOTH THE AUDIO & VIDEO OF ORAL ARGUMENTS ARE MADE PUBLIC. :). (usually within 48 hours; videos are posted to YouTube & oral recordings online ).

6. Appeals are typically resolved/decided on the same day they are discussed.

7. The panel's chief judge drafts a decision, then gives it to the other 2 judges to review. Each can make suggestions etc. about the draft & sign off, or choose to dissent.

8. Complex cases often mean a looooong time passes between a panel's conference and a completed written decision.

If (please no) 's panel decides to use her case to establish new legal precedent/resolve existing conflicts in legal issues revelant to her appeal, the wait will be long indeed, as every single COA judge will be brought into the process of writing a formal opinion.

9. The COA has extended the time it sets as a goal to clear a criminal appeal (from filing date through written decision): their goal now is 600 days, and in 2018, that goal was met in 95% of their criminal appeals.

('s notice of appeal was filed 4/30/2015; the appeal itself was filed 5/7/2015. So, heck, the COA is running ahead of schedule on her appeal. Who knew? ;)).
Click to expand...

Woohoo Hope is back and we'll get to see the oral arguments! It doesn't get much better than that. :D
 
geevee said:
Woohoo Hope is back and we'll get to see the oral arguments! It doesn't get much better than that. :D
Click to expand...

((We need a few more sisters of other misters to have a true reunion. Perhaps here, on Appeal Denial Day?))

Correction to my dismally incorrect note that the COA is running ahead of their 600 day completion schedule for appeals....

Basic math: It has been 4 years since 's appeal was filed (rounded off).

* 4 years= 1,460 days. And counting.
* 1,460 is muy ( > ) than 600.
* The COA is muy behind schedule.
 
Hope4More said:
((We need a few more sisters of other misters to have a true reunion. Perhaps here, on Appeal Denial Day?))

Correction to my dismally incorrect note that the COA is running ahead of their 600 day completion schedule for appeals....

Basic math: It has been 4 years since 's appeal was filed (rounded off).

* 4 years= 1,460 days. And counting.
* 1,460 is muy ( > ) than 600.
* The COA is muy behind schedule.
Click to expand...

I'll bring the balloons! :D

What's a mere 860 days? She can do that standing on her head. lol
 
pocketaccent said:
Haha, Thanks for the nuggets. I haven't read the brief. So she wanted to run away only after a day of cross, huh?

Not defending LaV at all, but sometimes I think she may have been given materials (journals, texts, emails etc) that were carefully cherry picked and out of context by Nurmi and Wilmott. Otherwise how could she get it so very wrong on every aspect!!

LOL at accidentally defending -self. I remember that portion of her testimony too. That it was the gun's fault, not her.
Click to expand...

Poor Jodi. Even the gun was out to get her. SMDH I hope she’s having a nice hot sweaty time in prison!
 
Are most appeals scheduled for oral arguments? I really hope this is the norm and they are not lending her tripe any credence!!

Oral arguments hahaha - so apropos for the !

Welcome back @Hope4More!!
 
Hope4More said:
True that Nurmi spoon fed LaV case info, excluding much. But even Nurmi later admitted (in his bitter book) that LaV was disastrous for the defense. She was flat out unqualified to testify as the defense's key witness, not least because she was clearly incapable of viewing or the evidence with any objectivity.
Click to expand...
I felt that LaV was as disastrous for the defense, if not more-so, than ’ testiphony. I anticipated would lie and have come to expect it from most defendants but didn’t think an “expert” witness would risk her career by lying. She was so obviously out of her depth and JM easily tore apart her one-sided BS.
 
Bringing over this article from Travis' Sidebar thread:

Prosecutor in Jodi Arias trial faces disciplinary hearing amidst misconduct allegations

Prosecutor in Jodi Arias trial faces disciplinary hearing amidst misconduct allegations (with clip)

Jul 24 2019

"...Juan Martinez is accused of lying about leaking information to a blogger he was having an affair with, communicating with a dismissed juror, and sexually harassing several female co-workers. Martinez could face a range of punishments, including losing his law license, over the allegations in this ethics complaint, which was filed in March 2019.

Around a dozen witnesses expected to testify against him, including the blogger and several women who claim they used to hide in the bathroom to get away from Martinez at work.

Martinez gained national notoriety after getting a guilty verdict in the Arias trial and sending her away to prison for life for the gruesome killing of boyfriend, Travis Alexander. There is, however, a new narrative emerging about the high-powered prosecutor.

Martinez denied leaking information to blogger Jen Wood during the sentencing phase of the Arias trial, while also denying the two were having a sexual relationship. The complaint says both of those claims are false. Martinez is also accused of leaking information on the identity of juror number 17. the lone holdout against giving Arias the death penalty, and he is accused of communicating with dismissed juror number three, who tried to initiate a sexual relationship with him, including sending nude pictures.

The complaint says Martinez told juror number three he could get into trouble, but went ahead and asked her how other jurors might view evidence or aspects of the case.

In the allegations, several co-workers apparently compiled a "JM List" of Martinez's sexually predatory conduct. An investigation by the Maricopa County Attorney's Office found that clerks would hide from Martinez in the bathroom. and that he often made inappropriate comments, including telling one woman he could guess the color of her underwear. and telling another that he wanted to "climb her like a statue".

Martinez's attorney, Donald Wilson Jr., told FOX 10's Brian Webb by phone Wednesday afternoon the hearing "will give Mr. Martinez a fair opportunity to present his side of the case, and we look forward to the opportunity where we will exonerate Mr. Martinez."

The hearing is set to start on August 27."


Jodi Arias prosecutor will face accusers over sexual misconduct allegations

Jodi Arias prosecutor will face accusers over sexual misconduct allegations

"...Martinez is scheduled to go before a disciplinary hearing panel Aug. 27 through Aug. 29, with about a dozen witnesses expected to testify.

12 News has learned that the trial blogger, Jen Wood, is among those witnesses and is expected to testify against Martinez.

The August disciplinary hearing follows up on an ethics complaint filed in March by the State Bar of Arizona.

If the complaint is upheld, Martinez could face a range of disciplinary actions, including losing his law license.
The ethics complaint accuses Martinez of lying repeatedly to investigators. It covers Martinez's behavior during the Arias murder trial, a sensational case that transformed the deputy Maricopa County prosecutor into an international celebrity...."

Read complaint here:
MartinezEthicsComplaint03012019

and 2 videos - go to post #1191 here:
https://www.websleuths.com/forums/threads/travis-sidebar-friends-26.449631/page-60
 
This Juan Martinez thing is nothing more than the “fiend” that is Jodi Arias out to annihilate another man for having crossed her. In ALL the trials I’ve watched, heard of ( and I’m a bonafide trial junkie) including Casey Anthony, Pam Smart (who I despise) this JA is the most evil and scary. Think of the carnage she leaves behind, I still find it heartbreaking and weird that detective Flores loses his young son during her trial. Nurmi (who I still despise and will NEVER give a pass to) her counsel who didn’t bow to her demands winds up with cancer and ultimately loses his ability to practice law which he willingly paid the price because he was so desperate to let it out what a horror show she is. and now the one she despises the most, who she’s burning to absolutely crush, is Juan Martinez. It killed her that he got murder 1, as she thought she outfoxed him on the stand, you know being Einstein and all. He then writes a book about putting her away and gets gobs of public adoration and fans. It was akin to Travis asking Mimi to Cancun. The last straw, so to speak. I truly believe her main goal, is not even to free herself, like any other normal prisoner Juan successfully prosecuted, it is to do emotionally and publicly to Juan what she did to Travis physically. Make them suffer enormous pain while she watches with glee. Her mother has a go fund me for this professional and personal take down of Juan, and even admits as such, states it’s not for the appeal. How twisted is that? I mean, who takes an opportunity to get money to fund their appeal to get out of jail and instead uses it To destroy the prosecutor and humiliate him? As much as Juan knew how truly evil she is, I don’t think even he, could have seen this coming. I mean, who does this? Most convicts want out and that’s their ONLY QUEST, sure, they always put prosecutor misconduct in the appeal, cuz they may have nothing else to try to free their guilty asses. But this devil wants revenge first. Sick sick sick.
Travis loses his life, Flores loses his son, Nurmi gets deadly cancer, then because of her twisted case, drops his law license and now this with Juan. She LIVES for revenge.
She should NEVER EVER EVER be let out because their would be a revenge killing spree and I would bet the house on it. I really HATE this, whatever she is, demon I guess.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 103 more.
Total: 3,618 (members: 104, guests: 3,514)

Online statistics

Members online
104
Guests online
3,514
Total visitors
3,618
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
591,857
Messages
17,960,123
Members
228,625
Latest member
julandken
Back
Top