SIDEBAR #7- Arias/Alexander forum

[bettybaby00]

i found it - this is the motion that precludes juan from arguing lack of remorse during the penalty phase

http://www.courtminutes.maricopa.gov/docs/Criminal/092012/m5404143.pdf

:seeya: morning!

How does so much seem to happen in such a short time :lol:

I remember being blown away by this when I first found out about it. I get why it was done from a technical standpoint, but emotionally it makes no sense to me.

IMO (note to self: post on legal thread) if the DT runs with the BPD, aka crime of passion, then the motion Re: remorse should be challenged.

 

[Emmi]

Didn't click but GOOD for her - She didn't kill herself did she, like that Perryville woman claimed? What is the temperature getting up to right about now for CMA? :floorlaugh:

What a thing to say and to laugh about. A woman died a prolonged and excruciating death while locked up in a cage.

 

[bettybaby00]

I think when JA heard that question she must of figured that if she said yes the jury would know she was lying through her teeth. She had no intention of ever getting caught. But if she said no they would know what an un-remorseful murderer she was. So she said she didn't know. Which was a lie. She knew damn well that if she could have gotten away with it she would have happily. That was the plan all along. She had nearly 6 weeks to turn herself in if she was going to. Instead, even when asked point blank she told one bold faced lie after another. Does that sound like a person that would have even considered turning herself in?

ITA...I also think with that answer to a juror question, she felt her "I honestly don't know," would come across as "so honest." At this time, between juror questions, and Juan's cross her honesty was challenged several times. My first impression of that was her thinking...I mean manipulating, "look at how honest I am...just like I said, I'm not lying anymore."

Perhaps more telling, was her answers in her post verdict interviews. She was asked this question 2 additional times (not exactly phrased the same way, but pretty much the same question) and she never replies that she would never hurt him, or that she would do something that would have changed the outcome....put another way, she never states any sort of scenario where Travis doesn't end up dead!

 

[Curious Me]

Watched that interrogation video again to catch the statement she made about reading
"The Road Less Traveled" and what liar said about reality. Funny, Detective Flores is so on
the ball, he softly challenges her with the fact that she is refusing to "embrace reality" by
not admitting to the crime. I love the way he handled that interrogation of slippery her.

Ah, Detective Flores. . .

...............................................................................fftobed:

 

[ncgramma]

BBM - I would like to have documentation of this

Here's at least one:
Phoenix, Az-
Inmate Lasasha Cherry, ADC#244426, died Monday, September 6, 2010 while in Arizona Department of Corrections custody Monday after apparently committing suicide. Cherry, 23, came to ADC on July 20, 2009 after a conviction from Maricopa County for abuse and unlawful use of means of transportation. She was serving 1.5 years and housed at the Lumley Unit of ASPC-Perryville.

 

[sdmike1974]

I can paste a link on my new Ipad tablet but I can't embed a picture of the YouTube song like everyone else can.....it's driving me nuts!

Have you tried using the INSERT LINK icon? A popup window will prompt you
for the URL -- e.g., http://www.youtube.com/myvideo.

 

[gauntlet]

Rockefeller Shank.....

http://youtu.be/1WrVi_CLAV0

I can paste a link on my new Ipad tablet but I can't embed a picture of the YouTube song like everyone else can.....it's driving me nuts!

The problem, at least with the link you've pasted above is that you've pasted a shortcut link youtu.be and not a normal URL address from Youtube.

--

To post Youtube songs instead of just the address, make sure the url says http://www.youtube.com/moreletters

- Not https
- No additional code at the end of the address. Sometimes you'll see an & and additional code. http://www.youtube.com /watch?vv=ZWGxoFjfSGg&feature=artistob&playnext=1 &list=TLIfylIGdcymc It can vary.
- Not a shortcut address ie http://youtu.be

The address shouldn't look anything more than this:

http://www. youtube.com/watch?v=ZWGxoFjfSGg

Also some videos are set so they can't be embedded

And you need to mkae sure you press the insert link (globe/link) button first. Don't just paste the address.

 

[bettybaby00]

You don't premeditate a mistake

OMG this...

It's why I feel this case warrants consideration for the DP...per-meditation adds a level of devious, heinous intent. It's methodical, and cold blooded, especially when compared to a heat of passion situation. Of course, self defense is a whole other issue, and her claim that she needed to protect her self was clearly not credible with this jury.

 

[Arabian Girl]

:seeya: morning!

How does so much seem to happen in such a short time :lol:

I remember being blown away by this when I first found out about it. I get why it was done from a technical standpoint, but emotionally it makes no sense to me.

IMO (note to self: post on legal thread) if the DT runs with the BPD, aka crime of passion, then the motion Re: remorse should be challenged.

I'm a bit confused by the last statement here "if the DT runs with BPD, aka crime of passion..."

Isn't Crime of Passion Defense strictly related to the guilt phase?? How would this be any evidence in sentencing? I can see where Stabby's mental health may be a mitigating factor, but seems "crime of passion" is a defense to the killing and she's already convicted of M1?

:jail:

 

[bettybaby00]

I'm a bit confused by the last statement here "if the DT runs with BPD, aka crime of passion..."

Isn't Crime of Passion Defense strictly related to the guilt phase?? How would this be any evidence in sentencing? I can see where Stabby's mental health may be a mitigating factor, but seems "crime of passion" is a defense to the killing and she's already convicted of M1?

:jail:

Somehow your quoting me looks messed up, and confused me!!!

You could very well be right...I guess in my limited knowledge of how this all really works, embracing the BPD diagnosis is closely tied to abandoning the self defense defense, which the motion was based on...so to me they go together, and I believed it was pertinent to this phase of the trial....like I said, I'm clearly wrong......I think :lol:

Eat: with is up with the quote function???

 

[Mare10]

Oh Wow...CANNOt ARGUE LACK OF REMORSE??? WTF?????? I'm blown away that he can't argue that even in the PENALTY PHASE. ugh. Now I get it. And CMJA talked about being "sorry" in her allocution, which Juan couldn't rebut. So it all makes sense now.

CKja did a good job of showing she had no remorse without any help. Even though she did the best she could, 99% did not believe her. Juan did a great job of saying it without saying it when he asked her if she cried when she stabbed him, if she cried when slit his throat and if she cried when she shot him. All the killer could say is, I don't know. No Remorse. With every word she uttered she screamed No Remorse. With every smirk and moronic action she screamed No Remorse.

 

[Mrs G Norris]

If I want to past a YouTube vid from my iPhone or iPad I just go to email the link from YouTube (it's an option at the vid) then when my new email message opens, I copy paste the link and drop it in here, and that works fine

 

[NIN]

Watched that interrogation video again to catch the statement she made about reading
"The Road Less Traveled" and what liar said about reality. Funny, Detective Flores is so on
the ball, he softly challenges her with the fact that she is refusing to "embrace reality" by
not admitting to the crime. I love the way he handled that interrogation of slippery her.

Ah, Detective Flores. . .

...............................................................................fftobed:

I also thought it was interesting that she read that book by Scott Peck. She should have read People of the Lie by the same author -- it is about narcissism and the nature and psychology of evil.

 

[DebinGA]

Juror Marilou Allen-Coogan: "Mitigating circumstances are very personal. It's not something that has to be proven by the defendant. It's something you feel based on your past, your conscience, your thought process and your heart that could warrant leniency and mercy," said Allen-Coogan.

I would love to know where she got this from - mitigating circumstances are something you feel. I remember a post where an attorney (I believe) said they do not want jurors who say "I feel"; they want jurors who say "I think"!

I think she meant that judging whether someone's life is worth saving is a subjective thing, and each juror's life experience is different and affects his/her decision. Mr. Foreman's reasoning was clearly faulty, but so far the other three have wisely refrained from publicly sharing their thinking. Until they do, I view the unknown lifers as misguided, but not unprincipled.

 

[Hope4More]

I also thought it was interesting that she read that book by Scott Peck. She should have read People of the Lie by the same author -- it is about narcissism and the nature and psychology of evil.

Absolutely. People of the Lie gives great concrete examples of how narcissists operate and the damage they do. I remember one story about a son who felt suicidal; his evil mother gave him a gun for his birthday, professing when confronted that she couldn't understand why anyone thought the gift wasn't a loving gesture, because her son loved guns. This mother appeared normal in her day to day life, btw.

:what:

(I don't agree with Peck's ideas about evil, but thought the book was grest otherwise).

 

[Mare10]

Over a 1000 people in China were arrested last year for smuggling milk, double the amount of people smuggling drugs. In China, the baby milk was, at one point, contaminated with melamine. Babies died.

This is the crazy world we live in where people are arrested for smuggling milk! Things never cease to amaze me! Let them have the milk FGS.

 

[tss]

Riiiiigggggttttthhhhh....in my best Juan voice.....he lead the jury, he steered the boat, he handed in a verdict form....

ETA: and curiously every friend and relative for Travis was there for a so called question and not one person was there for her....why, did they know? Did they avoid the backlash of being there?

"""""not one person was there for her....why, did they know? Did they avoid the backlash of being there? """""

that's exactly what i thought....remember they had the benefit of knowing the preceding question from the jury, that was oddly placed under SEAL ...another "never seen that before" item of the many in this trial

 

[kpm]

"""""not one person was there for her....why, did they know? Did they avoid the backlash of being there? """""

that's exactly what i thought....remember they had the benefit of knowing the preceding question from the jury, that was oddly placed under SEAL ...another "never seen that before" item of the many in this trial

So we have them mysteriously missing for the question, which turns out to be the verdict and shocks everyone including the jury.
First Troy tweets they are visiting the Grand Canyon, then after an influx of WTF's from around the globe, he tweets he was been informed that they are actually in town.
Next enter Donovan who talks to NG to "clear" up any misconception and she ends up contradicting herself.
Very odd, but then again it fits with JA's world, 2+2 never equals 4.....
People are intuitive, everyone was like where are her parents....
When they realized it was so glaringly odd they were missing, they all of a sudden blame it on faulty info...sounds familiar huh?
Not their fault they were told it was just a question right, funny how the Alexander side and the rest of the world could tune in....

 

[LambChop]

Re: Finding new, unbiased jurors --

I think they can definately do it. I mean, look at Juror 9 (older guy with white ponytail walking out to the light rail). He doesn't strike me as the type who would normally watch HLN or something. Seems like he probably does stuff during the day, listens to NPR, and goes to sleep. Maybe PBS news also.

I'm sure there are others like him, or like Jurors 6 and 16. 6 and 16 definatley seem like they could keep an open mind even if they saw something in the news.

let's just hope for the best. WHOEVER THE JURORS ARE THEY SHOULD PICK THE FOREMAN BASED ON WHOEVER LEAST WANTS IT. Please PLEASE NEXT JURY, DO NOT PICK THE PERSON WHO NOMINATES THEMSELVES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

This is a death penalty case so the fact that this juror had already made up his mind and formed an opinion on life long before he was picked as the foreman he should have pasted this position by. It takes a special person to be a foreman. They really should have some type of background in comprehension and understanding instructions such as: a medical professional, supervisor, teacher of studies, social workers, etc. Maybe juries need instructions on how to pick their foreman as well. His comment about visiting her in jail was inappropriate and he never should have accepted the position of foreman. Nothing wrong with him feeling he wanted her to serve life, just that he should not have been the foreman when the majority found for death. It makes it harder to deliberate when he was so biased about JM. Many people do not realize it is JM's job to get the truth out under questioning so the trial is fair to victim and defendant and JM has to do what he has to do. Handing Jodi's type takes someone like JM to catch her in her lies. jmo

 

[Fuskier]

**My apologies for being way behind and there for this post likely landing amidst unrelated topic and discussions**

<Respectfully snipped by me>

Perhaps you are right, ElleElle, in your saying that it actually was both who each brought out the worst of the other in regard to both Travis and Jodi..but I truly feel and believe that the evidence shows that the "ugly" or the "worst" of Jodi was absolutely there all along and did not just appear whenever Travis entered her life.. IMO the narcissistic and psychopathic traits of Jodi were very much a part of who and what she was long before Travis ever had the misfortune of crossing paths with her in Nevada, 2006.. My opinion is that we have seen proof positive evidence that not only were the narcissistic and psychopathic traits already present in Jodi ..so, too were the narcissistic and psychopathic traits being acted out as well..all long PRIOR to Travis Alexander's having entered the picture..

The pattern was already well established IMO.. The same exact pattern that would once again be established by Jodi in her "relationship" with Travis, just as the pattern had played itself out in relationships PRIOR to Travis.. IMO as with any type of malignant behaviors they all escalate with time..with each development of the pattern we see the escalation that Jodi is becoming more sinister, more determined, more bold in her developing of the pattern of behavior and actions that were played out in her intimate relationships..

The evidence of the pattern having long since been established waaaaay prior to Travis entering the picture even came into the courtroom as well.. The pattern that Juan IMO successfully established wrt Jodi's history of inappropriate, obsessive, stalking, and boundaryLESS actions and behaviors that she had already long since established prior to Travis Alexander ever coming into the picture..

So, for me that is why I do not necessarily see it as they each brought out the worst IN EACH OTHER(Jodi and Travis)...In my very strong opinion the worst was already long since alive and well in Jodi Arias and had been building and escalating for a long period of time before Jodi even knew that a Travis Alexander even existed..

I do NOT at all see this a the perfect storm, so to speak, as in all of the variables had to be present and those specific variables were each necessary for the perfect storm to come together resulting in the deadly end result... IMO that is NOT the case here...

IMO Travis Alexander is not and does not represent any of the absolute necessary variables that must be in place for the perfect storm to have been created.. Travis is not the catalyst for which was needed in order to have the deadly end result.. Travis IMO is the generic factor that can easily be interchanged with another individual.. While it is Jodi and Jodi's very much escalating narcissistic and psychopathic behaviors and actions that are NON variables..it is Jodi and Jodi's actions and behaviors that CANNOT be substituted or interchanged for they are the catalyst of the entire deadly end result.. It is Jodi and Jodi's escalating behaviors and actions that are the deadly mix, here..and when the already dangerous mix of who and what Jodi is, is then combined with any number of interchangeable variables..it is that combination that leads to the fatal end result ..

IMO Travis did not create, nor did he even "bring out" those already present extremely pathological traits in Jodi Arias..they were already present and they were already lethal and they absolutely would have lead to a fatal end result with SOMEONE..if it had not been Travis Alexander, I have zero doubt that it just would have been SOMEONE else whose fate ended in death at the hands of Jodi..

Without doubt that very dangerous and lethal pathology was already long since present in Jodi Arias way before Travis Alexander ever had the misfortune of crossing paths with her.. Take away that unfortunate crossing of paths with Travis and IMO the fatal end result would still be the same, it just being someone else who would be dead by the hand of Jodi.

All moo of course

:goodpost:

IMO Well articulated SmoothOperator. I have similar opinions about this case, so it is welcoming to see other similar opinions posted. I do not believe the tenet put forward by the Defense that "they brought out the worst in each other". I hold the opinion that the murderer's psychopathy was being acted out before she ever met Travis. I have even wondered about development of this scenario in her mind and possible 'rehearsal' of the shower scene with previous boyfriends, the camera lens providing a view into her psychopathic inner world. Didn't she coax a previous male friend into the shower to take pictures also? I too hold an opinion that this psychopathy was building up over time. Unfortunately Travis's trusting & sheltered life caused him to underestimate how dangerous she actually was becoming. Travis became the victim. The murderer showed significant 'calculation' before and after the murder. All just my opinion of course. :twocents: