SIDEBAR #6- Arias/Alexander forum

[Tenaciousdae]

This was posted in Chat House News. Intersing perspective on the reality of life that JA will be facing in prison.

Jodi Arias Rose colored glasses - Revised and Narrated - YouTube

Sorry, that it's a copy and paste. Still new to posting and couldn't figure out how to imbed the URL.

Great job, I fumble every time! I'm this video was made!

 

[DebinGA]

JM told the jurors iirc that it's not their responsibility to be sleuths, but to refer to the evidence presented. One clear mitigating factor was there imo - a severe mental disturbance (BPD + even more pathologies via DrD). JW grabbed onto that life preservor in her final closing, and I think it worked with 1 or more. JA wasn't your typical woman scorned. She was a hate-filled psycho scorned. The overkill reflects that. Her calm "Let's go see Othello" post-mayhem call reflects that. Her enthusiastic grinding session with RB reflects that. Dr. Kristina Randle's statement that she'd move away if JA moved next door reflects that. I'd have voted for death because then JA couldn't harm future innocents, but I can understand a juror/s finding she didn't deserve to die since her brain really is scrambled. LWOP, next week via JSS, would be much preferable to a futile, further pursuit of the death penalty.

 

[Just Sailing Thru]

My memory recalls that all 12 jurors voted pre med and an additonal 5 voted both pre med and felony murder. Am I correct that in the penalty phase 8 jurors voted DP and 4-Life? With the alternate, juror #8 personally saying they would vote DP..I think that there is a pretty fair chance this new jury will be open to DP. And in the event this next seated jury cannot decide or give life..CMJA will in the least be sentenced by JSS to LWOP..I cannot see JSS do otherwise..she did listen and hear all the evidence allowed and excluded, including the JA antics and interviews..I can't wait for the info to be unsealed...JMO

 

[Emmi]

Perhaps it's educating a whole bunch of people that the public educational system has failed!
The population needs education. Apparently, the media is doing the job (oftentimes poorly) that the educational system isn't.

The educational system as it stands now is turning out sheep.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Oh, the irony! Who are the sheep?

 

[ElleElle]

And say what? I'm sorry? *sorry i'm not trying to be snarky

If it were me, I think i'd just want to get prepared for the next PP, and thank this jury for convicting her of M1. I wouldn't want any apologies.

if nothing else, i'm HOPING some of these jurors have contacted the alexander family.

 

[Maryann123]

No, but it should require........A VERDICT.

And don't say you can apply the death penalty, and then say you can't. If you only believe in the death penalty for serial killers, then say it! They knew this was involving Jodi Arias, and they knew she had only killed one person. I don't care who you are, you had to know that name!

 

[aa9511]

I can't find his exact words but the foreman did indicate that there was some confusion regarding their question.

Had this foreman known that there would be a trial he would have tried harder to come to a verdict of life. I think he wanted life real bad. He thought a hung jury = life.

At this point if the family wants LWOP I'd be ok with it too although I prefer a retrial and death.

Yeah, but here is what I have issue with : the Foreman takes it upon himself to speak for everyone in the room, b/c he kept saying "we" shouldn't have been told to decide, "we" shouldn't have been given the burden for life and death...basiclaly saying it was too much for them. Then he says, yea, there was confusion b/c we thought the judge would now decide LWP or LWOP.

So I am terribly confused...b/c IF what he is saying is true and THEY AGREED that they are going to say not unanimous and basically put it on the judge to decide the life sentence....then WHY didn't they just vote unanimously for life? It's the same thing. I believe right here is where the Foreman is pulling a JA and making things up.

If they knew it would go to JSS and she would decide a life sentence, what he says is not true then, because otherwise the 8 jurors for death would have just signed the verdict form for "life." The end result would have been the same...either they did it or JSS was gonna do it.

I think, and if this is true it's pretty despicable...that the Foreman was the one who independtly thought that the judge would decide Life if they didn't decide. I beleive that he in a way, deceived his fellow jurors, by saying okay we will say we're not unanimous, because he knew that way JSS would decide life.

I believe this Foreman, and the whole way this thing went down at the end, is being very shady. What he says does not make sense about the end confusion part. I also believe with others, that that is why he got up 4am his time to do the GMA interview and did the press tour yesterday, b/c he wanted to get his side out there before the others contradicted him.

 

[Linda7NJ]

No, but it should require........A VERDICT.

Agreed!

I would have either excused myself from this jury after I discovered I was unable to sentence her to death for personal reasons or hopefully before I was seated.

But they ALL said they could, swore they could. They each had an obligation to quit if they discovered they couldn't because of personal reasons and let an alternate take their place.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[kscornfed]

No, we've listened to him explain his reasoning, and it's not believable. Calling Jodi a 3 hole wonder, was a compliment to her. She's the one that came up with the sex play, etc. Travis just played along with her, because he liked it too! I saw no abuse on his part, until she did all the crazy stuff that made his life hell, and even then, he didn't call her the names I would have. I bad mouth him because he sounds ridiculous with his excuses for his verdict. He doesn't owe me anything, but he shouldn't be on national TV telling us the general public doesn't know what they know! 8 other people know exactly what he knows, and they got it right! It's just sad that 4 people over rule 8.

and there was NO pattern of abuse, verbal or otherwise. dr. de marte made that very clear. there was no EVIDENCE (other than from JA and she doesn't count) that he was abusive to her in any way with the exception of ONE string of text messages where she had done something that provoked his response.
that's what bugs me the most. that's not abuse. it's a heated argument but it's not abuse.

 

[Emmi]

BBM~ I am very concerned over this. Maybe Nurmi is right with regards to the witch trials. :facepalm:

Nurmi was right in that regard.

 

[sacrablue]

Mitigation factors that hurt you
Age over 35
At least one prior offense equal in nature to the one committed
No remorse or emotion
Parents must have been killers as well
Have a really ugly face with scars
Male sex is preferable

 

[Tenaciousdae]

And say what? I'm sorry? *sorry i'm not trying to be snarky

If it were me, I think i'd just want to get prepared for the next PP, and thank this jury for convicting her of M1. I wouldn't want any apologies.

I have to agree, let them have peace. These interviews are cruel enough, there is no going back to change it now. :seeya:

 

[Linda7NJ]

Not from my classes.

I'm speaking of high schools specifically.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Angelina Frost]

And don't say you can apply the death penalty, and then say you can't. If you only believe in the death penalty for serial killers, then say it! They knew this was involving Jodi Arias, and they knew she had only killed one person. I don't care who you are, you had to know that name!

ITA. There should be a provision somewhere that allows for a death penalty qualifier. Like....yes I could, but only in the case of mass murder or a serial killer or a child killer. If you are referring to the death penalty in general, then no, I cannot say I support it.

 

[elementary]

Wow, just waking up to this too. Thank you for the link.

I am NOT a fan of Judge Larry Seidlin, but he was on "After Dark" as the guest judge and although I AM for the DP in this case, I am coming to agree with his assessment. (Did I just type that?) He said the AZ system is flawed. In his opinion the jury DID decide. He said they were not unanimous for the DP so it's over... PERIOD...she gets life and the judge decides LWP/LWOP.

I still do not like the "must be unanimous" rule. I wish a 10/12 majority could be implemented instead, and in this 8/4 case I would accept the jury's decision...but couldn't if it were 10/1 or 2.

Back to your link....
Although his statements about CPreMMja disturb me...I keep going back to that ONE sentence of his "We didn't know..."

I agree with most of you that they should have asked about it a 2nd time, but honestly when the jury asked the question at the 2 hour mark...JS did not clearly answer it. She gave suggestions for them to try....i.e:
Q - "What if we are unable to come to a unanimous decision?" Remember... it appeared JS "interpreted" the question as a statement (paraphrasing) "I have been told that you are unable to come up with a unanimous verdict. Here are some suggestions to try."

If the jury went back to try the suggestions without a real answer to their question (if this mistake was truly made), then maybe it's not too farfetched to accept that they tried JS suggestions, they didn't work, so they agreed to submit the no unanimous verdict...(with no other knowledge or written information about what the possible outcome would be) and perhaps thinking the judge would then decide.

Now what if the question had been read correctly? i.e:
Q - "What if we are unable to come to a unanimous verdict?" And, JS answered with something like: "If no unanimous verdict is reached, a mistrial will be declared for this portion of the trial, and a new jury will be empaneled to decide this phase. If the new jury is also unable to reach a unanimous verdict...the decision would defer to me and the defendant could be sentenced to either LWP or LWOP." She could still offer the "suggestions" but this would have truly answered their question.

I searched for the jury instructions in the penalty phase to see if all the "what ifs" were listed for the jury, but could not find it. (If this has been made public and someone has a link to the jury instructions for this phase that would clear up my assumptions above.)

I also searched for a copy of the jury "question" page and the jury "verdict" page, to see what was explained on those.

Would really like to hear your opinions on this

Good post!

But think about this, if the foreman did have an agenda, he knew all he had to do is remain stalwart, and even if he were the only holdout, could single handedly force the judge to declare life.

Of course it could happen the second time, but at least you get 2 shots at it. Perhaps the second time is more of a fail safe feature, to stop wholesale manipulation. Which makes it brilliant, IMO.

 

[Gin]

Mitigation factors that hurt you
Age over 35
At least one prior offense equal in nature to the one committed
No remorse or emotion
Parents must have been killers as well
Have a really ugly face with scars
Male sex is preferable

I would add '' wrong'' race

 

[Steely Dan]

As far as Juror #18, that's fine. Let him speak.

From their perspective, i've mentioned it originally when I joined WS.

They can't be too emotionally attached to the players in this case... it's hard, but really they should look at the facts.

Was Travis abusive? Doubt it. Did he live a double life? Yes. imo.

I think, and this is only my opinion, that Travis broke up with Jodi but Jodi wouldn't let him slip away. I think she did anything to make him happy and keep her in the marriage race. She's probably very good in bed and knows how to use her feminine charm. Unfortunately Travis allowed himself to become addicted to her. I think she recorded the phone call and threatened to release it to his friends. That's what prompted the angry email. The angry email led to his death. She probably felt like she had put a lot of time into seducing him into marriage and now all of her work was about to be blown to hades.

She probably felt like she had at times allowed herself to be used while simultaneously using him (She probably didn't look at it as using him though.) She wanted a guy with power like Travis had in PPL, and wanted to be just as powerful and married to a well off man.


When she first took the stand she didn't seem that bad. If I had met her at a party for 20 minutes I'd have left with a positive opinion of her. More than 20 minutes and I'd have had her pegged.

Perhaps it's educating a whole bunch of people that the public educational system has failed!
The population needs education. Apparently, the media is doing the job (oftentimes poorly) that the educational system isn't.

The educational system as it stands now is turning out sheep.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think a lot of it was that the jury wasn't allowed to see a lot of what we saw. If the parents statements to Det. Flores had been let in with a lot of other stuff we saw the verdict may have been different. JMO

 

[Sleuth5]

I'm speaking of high schools specifically.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

:blushing: Never mind.

 

[Emmi]

Agreed!

I would have either excused myself from this jury after I discovered I was unable to sentence her to death for personal reasons or hopefully before I was seated.

But they ALL said they could, swore they could. They each had an obligation to quit if they discovered they couldn't because of personal reasons and let an alternate take their place.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No. That's not true. They swore they could sentence someone to death (Jodi Arias was not part of the picture at this point) if the evidence convinced them that was the right thing to do. Not everyone on the jury was convinced. They were under no obligation to quit. Their obligation, in fact, was to follow through on their convictions concerning this case.

 

[Hope4More]

Nurmi was right in that regard.

Spare me. If it was a witch trial she'd be dead. Justice then was to throw a suspected witch into the water. If she drowned, she was innocent. If she lived, she was guilty and killed on the spot.

Adding...suddenly did feel a flash of nostalgia....