Verdict is in! GUILTY of MURDER ONE - Hung Jury On Penalty Phase

[ncgramma]

wont load for me on any browser :scared:

Try this one on YouTube:
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FGN4qAvK7wU"]Jodi Arias Trial FOREMAN Interviewed on GMA after Deadlock | Jodi Arias Hung Jury - YouTube[/ame]

Foreman interview starts at about 1:50.

 

[outofstatelawyer]

That's because the DP is subjective. What exactly are the qualifiers for DP? I'm pretty sure if you ask 10 people, you'll get 10 different answers.

But in a DP trial, those factors (which are spelled out in statutory law) should be made clear to the jury, and with 12 people one should get the same 12 answers. I think JM got screwed early on in this case when a different judge limited aggravation in this case to only one factor: extremely cruel.

 

[MidwestMama]

I am going to bump my own post from last night. As long as we are within TOS, everyone is free to express their own opinion. Including anger or frustration with the jury. We dont have to be impartial. We arent serving on this jury. We all watched the same trial. We all saw it through our own lens. I support those of you who feel that the jury did the right thing. I dont agree, but I support you. I would appreciate it if I were allowed to express my beliefs as well.[/QUOTE]

Hi Believe09,

I support your opinion also. I stayed off the boards until late last night because there was too much name calling, etc. (I am not saying it was you. I ducked out so I couldn't say who it was.)

Even those of us who feel the jury did the job they were required/expected to do, are still disappointed. I REALLY wish the Alexander family would have received the DP they were looking for. I believe DP an appropriate sentence for what JA did and how she did it. My heart dropped when I heard they were hung and I am sick to think the family may have to sit through more testimony, more graphic pictures, more of JA's lies. That verdict does not change my belief that the jury was intelligent, determined and took their responsibility seriously. It hurts that even with all that, they were a hung jury.

The part I bolded above is why you believe other's should allow you to have and express your own point of view. I TOTALLY AGREE!

Those are also the reasons why I feel we should respect the jury.

*they all saw the trial (but WAY LESS than we did)
*they all saw it through their own lens
*I feel we should support their decision, even when we don't agree with it.

I am not trying to make you agree with the jurors verdict or to agree with anything I post. I just really think that if we are asking for the above bolded respect from each other than we should be willing to extend that same courtesy to the jury after the time, effort and sacrifice they made when they agreed to be on this jury.

 

[azwriter]

Maybe he's a free spirit? Maybe he had had enough of his fellow jurors and didn't want to ride the bus with them? Maybe he didn't really think it through or realize that the media would be pouncing on him? Who knows. I don't feel sorry for him. He made the choice to walk out on his own and get his own bus. He should know by now that the media are like vultures and would be after him.

OR
It could have been like this: The bus the jurors took is provided by the county court system and takes them to the parking garage where they can get into their cars and drive home.

Maybe he doesn't have a car parked at the garage and he boarded a city bus for the ride home.

You think?

 

[TXProfessional]

I want the info on Jodi's hard drive unsealed :twocents:

Do we know it was sealed and by who?

 

[Tuba]

La Louve, you will want to read post #1538, page 62 in the Verdict Watch #4 Thread. Maybe I can bring it over.

 

[iSleuth]

I really think a law should be passed that when it comes to a jury deciding on sentencing, all evidence involving the defendant comes in. There is no such thing as too prejudicial.

I could not agree more. For instance - the jury should have been able to see what she was up to in the media immediately following sentencing. I sound like a broken record. ( I still haven't seen any of the videos fully- i refuse- i am enraged)

I don't know about professional juries. I think that could be interesting and it could be a disaster. Lord knows - good people - and qualified people - do need jobs. But I would be afraid it would be a new mode of vigilanteism. ( sp?)

 

[camcneishg]

I think we need a thread just for what the jurors have to say.....

 

[scorpio24]

Jodi was the worse thing that ever happened to Travis. At the end of the day, this is what I walk away with.

She also continues to be the worst thing that ever happened to his family and friends. :twocents:

 

[Tipstaff]

I can understand the foreman's statement about connecting the brutality of the crime when looking at Jodi. Sometimes I look at her and I just can't believe she slit another person's throat. Just imagine what it takes to do that to someone?

There was nothing to imagine she admitted it. And there were pictures to prove it.

Not a critique here just confusion. But I do applaud them for getting the murder 1 correct.

 

[raisincharlie]

In my opinion, I think the BPD diagnosis is what stave off the DP. I wish that it was explained better or that the word 'psychopath' was used. To me, during the trial, it almost sounded like a mental illness and that Jodi wasn't fully responsible because of it. We had the opportunity to talk about BPD and research it - the jury didn't. Too bad Juan or Dr. Demarte couldn't clearly spell out the traits of BPD and explain how it pertained to KA, or give names of other infamous people w/ BPD so the jury could get a nice clear picture of that thing they watched for 5 months. (self centered, destructive, evil, not curable, etc.)

I agree with this - there could have been better definition to the BPD, better explanation. This is one area where I felt JM streamlined a bit too much. The other area, more research, more delving into the May 26 text from Travis - such as finding out the reason why Travis said what he said. What made him say those things. There was no context to the text message - there were only angry words in black and white. What Travis went through with the little murderer was not defined, presented in the front. The buttons she pushed were not referenced or ever made known. This may well be due to evidence the judge ruled was too prejudicial. But this issue, the things Travis had to put up with, needs to be presented somehow. Case in point - where the murderer claims Travis was smacking his head against a closet door after words with her - she ran up there to confront him again.

It is possible if somehow JM can bring in post convistion videos, the jury might well see the murderer for who she is and how she passively/aggressively manipulates - this needs to be clear in front of a jury. What better way than her own interviews.

 

[TXProfessional]

But in a DP trial, those factors (which are spelled out in statutory law) should be made clear to the jury, and with 12 people one should get the same 12 answers. I think JM got screwed early on in this case when a different judge limited aggravation in this case to only one factor: extremely cruel.

With a new phase they cannot revisit the aggravating factors, right. tia

 

[Garlandy]

I just really, really hope there will be no more interviews. I just watched part of the interview with Troy and JA actually had a sparkle in her eye. Compare her eyes in her interview with Troy to her interview with Amy...totally different demeanour. That's how incredibly talented CKJA is - she can change her look, everything on a dime. Just like during the final days of the trial when she looked drugged, there is not a doubt in my mind she was not drugged up, it was just another way JA can change it up in a heartbeat. This is one very, very dangerous woman. Enough, she needs to go away one way or the other.

 

[kscornfed]

I will disagree on part of what you said. I am a prime example of losing touch with technology. I am also out of touch to a point with how the generation after me views relationships etc. Just last night my oldest was texting somebody. I asked her who and she said some boy's name. Back in my day, boys called the house.

I got a new phone. Took me a week to figure out how to answer it. I had to get my teenager to figure some stuff out for me. I do get how people do not communicate by telephone anymore but text, Twitter, and Facebook inbox more.

I'm not saying anybody is stupid. I am saying that times have changed and it is hard to keep up and there are big differences in the way the different generations operate. It's all that Gen X, Y, etc stuff.

i guess i don't see what difference the technology gap made to this case, if that's what you're saying. i KNOW times have changed since i was JA's age----that's clear. but human behavior hasn't changed at all, IMO.

 

[dog.gone.cute]

Exactly!! That's why I think the jurors made a deal during the first verdict, and some jurors agreed to murder one in exchange for not coming back with a DP verdict.

Think about it. For the first two verdicts, the jury took much longer than we thought, but for the last phase, they said they were split right from the beginning. It doesn't seem possible that a jury that was detail oriented and took their time, would become deadlocked from the beginning without methodically going through the evidence.

Something doesn't smell right.

BBM: I totally agree ... and I think you are "right on" here -- MOO !

And IF -- IF that's the case, they were only supposed to be discussing the GUILT PHASE during the deliberations for the GUILT PHASE -- NOT the PENALTY PHASE ...

They came back after 2 hours for the Penalty Phase stating they were NOT unanimous -- which is NOT long at all considering this was a DP case.

And I'm going out on a limb here -- MY OPINION -- I think Judge Sherry understood that and that is why she sent them back to deliberate more -- it was too quick -- but she KNEW !

It's starting to make "some sense" now ...

:moo:

 

[nawd68]

You might have a point there, and what's really ironic about this possibility is that the DT ripped Dr. DeMarte's diagnosis during the guilt phase of the trial but spun around and used the BPD as a mitigating factor in the penalty phase. JW is sneaky, for sure. :moo:

My guess is her gender may have played a role too. I truly hope some of the jurors wanted to give mercy to a human being, that happened to be Jodi. I will be very sad if they believed any of the nonsense Jodi spewed on Monday.

 

[elementary]

ITA. Abuse is the buzzword.
JMO I think it might have been quite hard to steer the jury in another direction when the foreman had such views. It takes patience and openness to continue an authentic dialog, discussion. I don't think they deliberated enough, but as bits and pieces come out, I see why they gave up.

I'm guessing he wasn't going to budge, his mind was made up, and therefore was not willing to promote further debate.

 

[The Farm]

Back for a little while and reading up. Still pizzzzzed. I can't help it.

 

[TexMex]

Do we know it was sealed and by who?

Defense request sealed by the court. Months prior to trial. It's in the court records on the court web page

 

[aa9511]

You know what? If she had done this to a total stranger, there is NO WAY she would have gotten anything less than the death penalty.

So is that the "standard" for death penalty? It has to be cruel AND be done to a total stranger? Becaues I guarantee, any two people who have some kind of association with each other, especially a closer one, you are gonna be able to find SOMETHING between those two. For example, my husband and I , yes there are angry text messages which would be in our phones. Yes, there are outside people we will have vented to in moments of tension/anger. But you know what? that's normal. that's reasonable. That is not something abnormal. Even the words in Travis' texts, to me they are not that far out there considering what they wree having was AN ARGUMENT. THe jurors are supposed to see the evidence through the lens of reasonable people. So are we to believe that the jury foreperson has NEVER SPOKEN OUT IN ANGER TO ANYONE, in the heat of th moment? I don't believe that. I highly, highly doubt that. They are supposed to see things based on their own life experiences and common sense.

I wish I had never heard his interview.

It shouldn't matter that there were some angry text messages there. What she did was CRUEL, and if Travis had been a stranger, she would have gotten the death penalty.