Jodi Arias Legal Question and Answer Thread *no discussion*

[AZlawyer]

from what i understood is the jury doesn't have to agree 100% on felony murder vs murder 1 - that the jusry could have 6 votes felony murder and 6 votes premed murder and that works as a M1 conviction - is that right?

Yes, that's correct.

 

[Hope4More]

I genuinely do not understand why the DT was allowed to make its accusations of pedophilia. I thought that the rules of evidence insist that any such allegations must be supported by demonstrable fact in order to be allowed in?

Although I found it incredibly offensive that the DT focused so much on sex and thst it used sex to trash Travis, I understand how most of that slime was allowable, since it is demonsrably true that JA and Travis had sex.

But the pedophilia? Not only was there not a single scrap of a fact to support the allegation, but there was a huge flashing red neon sign that indicated the allegation was a lie.....the forged letters, of which the judge was quite aware.

Under what legal reasoning, then, was the allegation of pedophilia admissable in court?

 

[bparsons]

If there is a Murder 1 guilty found, during the Aggravation phase of the trial; can the Motion that was filed by defense for no Murder 1 or we will trash Travis be brought to the attention of the jurors? What are some things that the jurors do not know about can be let in during this phase if any?

 

[bparsons]

I sent this email to James Logan, Director, Maricopa County Office of Public Defender Services... Maria makes $55/hr

To: jlogan@mail.maricopa.gov
Date: Mon, Apr 8, 2013 9:36 pm
Subject: Maria De La Rosa


As a mitigation specialist, Maria needs to be reprimanded for her extreme lack of court etiquette. It is disgusting. The worst was her loud laughter when the defense witness challenged Mr. Martinez last Thursday. She should KNOW BETTER. She is paid over $50/hr and acts like a teenager laughing and whispering with the defendant when the jurors leave the courtroom. This should STOP immediately. The slaughtered murdered victim Travis Alexander's family is there. She insults them by acting so disrespectful. This family deserves deference. I ask you... how would you feel if your son, brother, dad, cousin.... any family member had been stabbed 29 times, nearly decapitated, and shot in the head? Would you like laughter and rude behavior displayed in front of you in a courtroom????

 

[rosalinda777]

Hi all, I have a question about the comment made by nurmi " 9 days out 10 not liking Jodi" since Martinez asked it be stricken from the record can it be used as grounds for an appeal? For that matter can any stricken comments be used for appeals? Or inadequate defence?

 

[Midnight Meddler]

If she is convicted of M1, can a juror still be dismissed for some kind of misconduct during the penalty phase? (I think the juror's are being followed by DT..)

Thank you!!!

 

[AZlawyer]

If she is convicted of M1, can a juror still be dismissed for some kind of misconduct during the penalty phase? (I think the juror's are being followed by DT..)

Thank you!!!

Sure, they are still subject to the same rules.

 

[AZlawyer]

Hi all, I have a question about the comment made by nurmi " 9 days out 10 not liking Jodi" since Martinez asked it be stricken from the record can it be used as grounds for an appeal? For that matter can any stricken comments be used for appeals? Or inadequate defence?

Yes, stricken comments could still be mentioned on appeal or in a post-conviction relief proceeding regarding inadequate assistance of counsel. But this comment in particular would not be grounds for appeal/IAC. In fact, I'm quite sure it was an intentional strategy to get the jurors to believe that Nurmi would be "straight" with them.

 

[AZlawyer]

If there is a Murder 1 guilty found, during the Aggravation phase of the trial; can the Motion that was filed by defense for no Murder 1 or we will trash Travis be brought to the attention of the jurors? What are some things that the jurors do not know about can be let in during this phase if any?

No, the aggravation phase is only about "cruelty," which concerns Travis's mental and physical suffering during the murder.

Also, the document filed was not a motion but rather a settlement conference memorandum, and under the rules settlement discussions can not be used as evidence (with a bunch of exceptions that don't apply here).

 

[AZlawyer]

I genuinely do not understand why the DT was allowed to make its accusations of pedophilia. I thought that the rules of evidence insist that any such allegations must be supported by demonstrable fact in order to be allowed in?

Although I found it incredibly offensive that the DT focused so much on sex and thst it used sex to trash Travis, I understand how most of that slime was allowable, since it is demonsrably true that JA and Travis had sex.

But the pedophilia? Not only was there not a single scrap of a fact to support the allegation, but there was a huge flashing red neon sign that indicated the allegation was a lie.....the forged letters, of which the judge was quite aware.

Under what legal reasoning, then, was the allegation of pedophilia admissable in court?

The rules require such accusations to be supported by EVIDENCE. Jodi's testimony was evidence, as is the testimony of any witness.

Also, IMO there was no "proof" presented to the judge that the letters were forged. My best guess is that there were expert witnesses on both sides, but the defense team withdrew its request for the letters to be admitted because the lawyers learned information suggesting that they were forged.

 

[AZlawyer]

We are at the end of the trial now. I have to say a big Thank -You - to AZLawyer. We laughed at times, we talked straight talk at times, and I definitely asked you legal questions at times. Each time that I did you answered me no matter what, you took the time out and acknowledged me, and as I can read for myself you did for many others, as well.

I want to thank - you, because I would have never got through the legal BS{my words} without you, and you showed grace, and sense of humor to top it off.

THANK _ YOU AZLAWYER.

Thanks, Hally. :blushing: And I would like to thank minor4th and gitana for stepping in whenever I had too much going on at work, and also for answering questions for the weeks (months?) before I got interested in this case!

 

[Sign]

ETA: I expect a verdict of Murder 1, but there is always a chance of a crazy result with a jury.

Juries are inherently unpredictable. I'm keeping my fingers crossed for Murder 1 but won't be surprised if we see a Murder 2 compromise verdict. I will be pretty surprised if the verdict is manslaughter, and I will be really surprised if she gets off scot free.

Hi AZlawyer,

1) I noticed when I asked you Fri morn (pre Nurmie's closing) what your expectations were regarding verdict, you replied with the 1st quote above, however when replying to another poster last night, you wrote the 2nd. So I have to ask, has your confidence in a Murder 1 verdict waned at all since your first reply and if so, is it a result of Nurmi's closing arguments and/or the State's rebuttal?

2) Can you also please give me your take on the following? I thought Nurmi (surprisingly and much to my consternation) raised some strong points in closing, namely a) why steal a gun and then engage in a much more dangerous and ultimately messy knife-battle as a first option of killing a larger, stronger male? b) why not attack Travis when he was most vulnerable, e.g. when he had his back to her when she first arrived, when he was sleeping, or when by the evidence alone he was naked and facing away from her in the shower pics just mins before she killed him? My question to you is, do you think it was a mistake for Martinez not to address these ostensibly reasonable questions in his rebuttal? (he made no reference at all to b), and only repeated his one-sentence line from closing re a), namely "whether the gunshot was first or last, it's still premeditated")

3) Going back to the transcripts/3rd gas can issue I had asked you about early Fri, I personally am amazed and appalled that Martinez did not manage to obtain, and read, the 10 seconds of testimony during his rebuttal that would have nailed shut the issue of not only the defendant perjuring herself, but her lawyer at best misstating things at at worst lying. Unless all jurors happened to have taken notes during that particular part of the testimony, I can picture scenes in deliberation like "She said it, I have it here..." "Oh really, I remember it a bit differently" etc etc... Again, do you think this was a mistake on the part of Martinez, or is there any other legal issue that may have prevented him reading this to the jury?

Thanks again, and if you'd rather not answer 2) and 3) because it requires you to comment on a fellow-lawyer's performance, I completely understand.

 

[AZlawyer]

Hi AZlawyer,

1) I noticed when I asked you Fri morn (pre Nurmie's closing) what your expectations were regarding verdict, you replied with the 1st quote above, however when replying to another poster last night, you wrote the 2nd. So I have to ask, has your confidence in a Murder 1 verdict waned at all since your first reply and if so, is it a result of Nurmi's closing arguments and/or the State's rebuttal?

2) Can you also please give me your take on the following? I thought Nurmi (surprisingly and much to my consternation) raised some strong points in closing, namely a) why steal a gun and then engage in a much more dangerous and ultimately messy knife-battle as a first option of killing a larger, stronger male? b) why not attack Travis when he was most vulnerable, e.g. when he had his back to her when she first arrived, when he was sleeping, or when by the evidence alone he was naked and facing away from her in the shower pics just mins before she killed him? My question to you is, do you think it was a mistake for Martinez not to address these ostensibly reasonable questions in his rebuttal? (he made no reference at all to b), and only repeated his one-sentence line from closing re a), namely "whether the gunshot was first or last, it's still premeditated")

3) Going back to the transcripts/3rd gas can issue I had asked you about early Fri, I personally am amazed and appalled that Martinez did not manage to obtain, and read, the 10 seconds of testimony during his rebuttal that would have nailed shut the issue of not only the defendant perjuring herself, but her lawyer at best misstating things at at worst lying. Unless all jurors happened to have taken notes during that particular part of the testimony, I can picture scenes in deliberation like "She said it, I have it here..." "Oh really, I remember it a bit differently" etc etc... Again, do you think this was a mistake on the part of Martinez, or is there any other legal issue that may have prevented him reading this to the jury?

Thanks again, and if you'd rather not answer 2) and 3) because it requires you to comment on a fellow-lawyer's performance, I completely understand.

(1) I think I just answered your question faster than the second one and without thinking about it so much.

(2) The things Nurmi raised have been raised by others here numerous times. This is why I keep trying to make "gunshot first" work in my mind. It seems to me that Jodi would not have gotten away without a scratch (OK, one scratch) in a knife-fight with Travis, and even if she did, it seems to me that she would not have felt confident about the result. And she is a woman who likes to be in control. I don't think JM could have said much about this issue--the point, as he realizes, is not to figure out exactly what happened but to figure out if Jodi killed him on purpose. And it's not like he has any answers to offer to the questions Nurmi was asking.

(3) I don't think JM would have been prevented from reading that part of the transcript for the jury, and I can't think of any strategic reason that he wouldn't have done it.

 

[katiewonders]

Just curious, while waiting for a verdict, is the defense attorney usually with the defendant, waiting? Is the prosecutor doing other tasks as assigned or is he/she pacing in the office nervous for the verdict?

 

[Hope4More]

I genuinely do not understand why the DT was allowed to make its accusations of pedophilia. I thought that the rules of evidence insist that any such allegations must be supported by demonstrable fact in order to be allowed in?

Although I found it incredibly offensive that the DT focused so much on sex and thst it used sex to trash Travis, I understand how most of that slime was allowable, since it is demonsrably true that JA and Travis had sex.

But the pedophilia? Not only was there not a single scrap of a fact to support the allegation, but there was a huge flashing red neon sign that indicated the allegation was a lie.....the forged letters, of which the judge was quite aware.

Under what legal reasoning, then, was the allegation of pedophilia admissable in court?

AZLawyer?

 

[mollyf]

Do the jurors have 600 pieces of evidence in the room with them? How does that affect the chain of custody, presuming all of this evidence will be needed down the line for appeals?

 

[Suzanna in Arizona]

UH OH. The jurors just left for the day and Jean Casares reported that they looked very stern, and very different from how they have been previously. She insinuated that they may be at odds. Or at least, that is what I thought she was implying. JMO. YIKES.

 

[cosmos]

I just heard about this today. Apparently Arizona has a Lengthy Trial Fund for trials that last six or more day that can compensate jurors up to $300 per day for lost income, plus mileage, if they are employed and lose income as a result of their service, and also jurors who are unemployed or retired can get $40 plus mileage instead of the usual $12 per day.

Would this apply to jurors in the Arias trial?

http://www.superiorcourt.maricopa.gov/juryservices/generalinformation/altfjurorhandout.asp

 

[rosalinda777]

Yes, stricken comments could still be mentioned on appeal or in a post-conviction relief proceeding regarding inadequate assistance of counsel. But this comment in particular would not be grounds for appeal/IAC. In fact, I'm quite sure it was an intentional strategy to get the jurors to believe that Nurmi would be "straight" with them.

Thank you for taking the time to answer my question's. I truly thought if a comment was sustained, stricken from the record, its like it never happened. I've learned so much from reading your post and the way you explain things so some of us can understand must take a lot of patience. Thank you once again AZ Lawyer!

 

[Katie-L]

I have a question regarding some discussions over plea bargains in a dp case (I don't live in a dp country - so I have no knowledge of how it works).

If the state charges murder 1 with the death penalty, and will not resolve in a plea to a lesser charge, is there any option for the defendant, other than a trial?

For example - can the defendant plead guilty to murder 1 and not get dp?

I'm assuming that a person can't just plead guilty and accept the dp without some type of trial. Is this correct?