SIDEBAR #7- Arias/Alexander forum

[AlwaysShocked]

AWOL for one day here and I am behind!

JUST with what I've have heard so far from jurors, I am DAMN grateful they were somehow able to reach the 1st Degree Murder conviction!

Just saw a short clip from a newly public female juror. She was saying "with the instructions we had". Which instructions, if anyone knows, is she referring to? The written instructions of the court or the instructions of the jury foreman?

I have had the personal experience of having to sit with a certain family member of mine to read "legal type" documents. Insurance policies, a Durable Power of Attorney with a springing clause, an online article about duties and powers of a POA, etc. It is amazing to me how many misinterpretations of what was printed in black and white in front of them this person made. And this is not a stupid person.

I also have had the experience of sitting on the Board of Directors for a homeowner's association where there is a small group of people reading a clause in the recorded By-laws. Again, just amazing to hear the various, different interpretations OF A SENTENCE!

My experience has been that people bring along a lot of "what they want it to say" when they are making a decision on "what something says". And I guess this is why we have the Supreme Court to "interpret" what the Constitution of the U.S. was meant to convey.

At this point, barring juries attending formal instructional classes prior to deliberating, I think they need to be asking a whole lot more questions of the judge. But maybe they didn't understand that they didn't understand.

The 1st question they did pose (after only a couple of hours), however, supposedly had an "if" in it. As in "what IF we can't reach a unanimous decision?" Apparently they were not told that if they did not reach a unanimous decision this phase of the trial would be declared a mistrial? Why not, I wonder?

Bottom line: THANK YOU JURY for the "Guilty" verdict!

 

[kscornfed]

Early in Jodi's testimony, she said the checks written to Travis were loans FROM HER TO HIM. Nurmi got that lie out of the way in a hurry didn't he?

yeah. what ever happened to this? he made it sound like TA was forcing her to give him money. wasn't one of her 'beatings' over her refusing to give him money???
this is so laughable. he helped her out by paying her clean for him (since she apparently couldn't cut it with PPL), gave her the best deal ever on a car----basically, 'pay whatever you can spare whenever you want', and EVEN tried to help her out when she (probably intentionally) ruined his car.
this was never rebutted much either. it pissed me off at the time, and i don't know why THAT happened either.

 

[Becky Sharp]

Description of bacon buddy - please?

Fry as much bacon as the frying pan can hold. Place between slices of bread. Although in my house the bread is an optional garnish.

 

[Hope4More]

Hope - interesting post however one of the things I believe Dr. Horn testified to was that he could not prove that TA had sex prior to his death due to the decomposition.

I wonder if this possibly be another JA lie to paint TA again with her story her lies. I do wish Dr. Horn could have been definitive on this.

I have no doubt that he had sex with her that day. JM said quite plainly that they did, in whatever form. I'm sure he would not have fully conceded that point if he had had the option.

From the photos and from what I believe his mindset must have been that day, I don't think he initiated it or particularly enjoyed it. I have a bad feeling that he was trying to appease her, to do whatever it took to end the surprise encounter and to get her out of the house. I also think he must have a 6th sense that something was not right. That is what I see in his eyes in that last photo of him in the shower. I believe he meant every word he texted her on May 26, and that he had not changed his opinion at all.

Had he been a woman in the same situation I think he might very well have called someone for help, while the killer was out of the room. So much more difficult for a man to do. And, IF she had ever left him out if her sight once in his house, which with a sinking feeling, I'm guessing she never did, just for that reason.

 

[lisasalinger]

IMO, all of us carry around a pretty big store of stereotypes and biases and assumptions, aware of them or not. I followed the Casey Anthony trial-my first- because initially I very much wanted to believe Caylee's death had to be accidental. I just couldn't wrap my brain around how it was she could murder her own precious child for literally no reason.

It took me over a month of reading all the evidence and plenty of articles on narcissism and sociopaths to even begin to get it
8
At the risk of having rotten fruit thrown my way, I'll play devils advocate for a bit.

I can understand how a juror who hasn't ever dug deep into another murder trial or case and who has never had to deal with a BPD person or the like, could have had difficulty understanding how a young woman commit such a savage murder. Enough evidence was excluded for a reasonable person to believe that the killer had lived an ordinary enough life up to the time she met Travis.

Yes she dropped out of school and hit her mother and didn't have much ambition and was extremely nosey and didn't like it when her boyfriends cheated on her. How many thousands of young women like that must there be, though.

It wasn't until she got involved with Travis that she truly went off the rails. That's just a fact.

Equipped with one set of biases, she was normal enough till then. He yanked her chains by saying he didn't want a relationship, but telling her I love you and wanting to have sex. He said awful things to her. He said to friends that she was stalking him and that he was afraid of her, but he kept calling. Whether he knew she was coming or not on June 4, he had sex with her that day instead of calling the police.

He was conflicted. Being conflicted could make him feel angry with himself and angry with her, and cause him to push and pull her.

If she has BPD, maybe that push and pull ultimately pushed her over the ledge. Doesn't make it his fault, but allows for the reality that the events leading up to the murder itself involved two people, not just the killer.

I think you have some valid points, as to why some jurors showed leniency... I bolded your statement from above that I agree with.

Although, I don't personally feel this way at all... this was a one person crime with a very unfortunate, vulnerable victim.

This goes back to a previous post (can't remember who posted it now) about critical thinking being absent amongst many people today. I totally agree that critical thinking is not used nearly enough.

Let's apply some critical thinking right now...

JA is adamant about abuse from Travis, but has no proof of it whatsoever.
JA is an admitted avid photographer who doesn't go anywhere without a camera, and we've seen the pics to prove that.
JA has kept a diary for many years of her life, and we've read the pages to prove that.
In all other facets of her life, she has DOCUMENTED everything. She has documented real stuff, and she has documented fake stuff (lying in her diary after the murder).
The only exception to her documentation is MENTAL AND PHYSICAL ABUSE FROM A PEDOPHILE.
Does that make sense to anybody?
JA has never once in her life taken responsibility for anything. Why in the world would she cover up abuse from a guy who tried to kill her?
Because she's a good person? Really???
This is as brilliant as Casey Anthony allowing her father to dump her daughter's dead body in the woods because she accidentally drowned.
I mean come on... I feel like I'm on another planet.

Not only would I have to throw out all of my critical thinking to believe this, I would also have to be mentally impaired to believe this. I don't mean to be offensive, but really. There is no appropriate thought process here.

Jurors need to sit down and draw out the mental path of what they are being asked to believe. It's clear to me that many don't do that.

 

[katiedid2]

yeah. what ever happened to this? he made it sound like TA was forcing her to give him money. wasn't one of her 'beatings' over her refusing to give him money???
this is so laughable. he helped her out by paying her clean for him (since she apparently couldn't cut it with PPL), gave her the best deal ever on a car----basically, 'pay whatever you can spare whenever you want', and EVEN tried to help her out when she (probably intentionally) ruined his car.
this was never rebutted much either. it pissed me off at the time, and i don't know why THAT happened either.

Would be interesting to,ask the normal jurors what they thought of her saying that.
Her poor waitress self was always broke. Didn't she panhandle money from all her family and x boyfriends.?

 

[Venom]

I just read a very good article by Kim Goldman about the death penalty.

http://www.hlntv.com/article/2013/05/28/jodi-arias-death-penalty-kim-goldman-ron-goldman-oj-simpson

 

[katiedid2]

I think you have some valid points, as to why some jurors showed leniency... I bolded your statement from above that I agree with.

Although, I don't personally feel this way at all... this was a one person crime with a very unfortunate, vulnerable victim.

This goes back to a previous post (can't remember who posted it now) about critical thinking being absent amongst many people today. I totally agree that critical thinking is not used nearly enough.

Let's apply some critical thinking right now...

JA is adamant about abuse from Travis, but has no proof of it whatsoever.
JA is an admitted avid photographer who doesn't go anywhere without a camera, and we've seen the pics to prove that.
JA has kept a diary for many years of her life, and we've read the pages to prove that.
In all other facets of her life, she has DOCUMENTED everything. She has documented real stuff, and she has documented fake stuff (lying in her diary after the murder).
The only exception to her documentation is MENTAL AND PHYSICAL ABUSE FROM A PEDOPHILE.
Does that make sense to anybody?
JA has never once in her life taken responsibility for anything. Why in the world would she cover up abuse from a guy who tried to kill her?
Because she's a good person? Really???
This is as brilliant as Casey Anthony allowing her father to dump her daughter's dead body in the woods because she accidentally drowned.
I mean come on... I feel like I'm on another planet.

Not only would I have to throw out all of my critical thinking to believe this, I would also have to be mentally impaired to believe this. I don't mean to be offensive, but really. There is no appropriate thought process here.

Jurors need to sit down and draw out the mental path of what they are being asked to believe. It's clear to me that many don't do that.

I've always been curious as to how she got acess to the diaries in jail. Is that why she stole all those pens? Hidden in her hair shampoo. We know they are only allowed pencils in jail.
So her attorneys know these were all fabricated stories after the fact and condoned it? Win at any cost.?

 

[sacrablue]

The big question. What in the heck was a successful, nice looking guy doing with JA?
She in not a bomb shell and she is nuts. What on earth was TA thinking about hanging around this piece of work is beyond me.

 

[kscornfed]

I think you have some valid points, as to why some jurors showed leniency... I bolded your statement from above that I agree with.

Although, I don't personally feel this way at all... this was a one person crime with a very unfortunate, vulnerable victim.

This goes back to a previous post (can't remember who posted it now) about critical thinking being absent amongst many people today. I totally agree that critical thinking is not used nearly enough.

Let's apply some critical thinking right now...

JA is adamant about abuse from Travis, but has no proof of it whatsoever.
JA is an admitted avid photographer who doesn't go anywhere without a camera, and we've seen the pics to prove that.
JA has kept a diary for many years of her life, and we've read the pages to prove that.
In all other facets of her life, she has DOCUMENTED everything. She has documented real stuff, and she has documented fake stuff (lying in her diary after the murder).
The only exception to her documentation is MENTAL AND PHYSICAL ABUSE FROM A PEDOPHILE.
Does that make sense to anybody?
JA has never once in her life taken responsibility for anything. Why in the world would she cover up abuse from a guy who tried to kill her?
Because she's a good person? Really???
This is as brilliant as Casey Anthony allowing her father to dump her daughter's dead body in the woods because she accidentally drowned.
I mean come on... I feel like I'm on another planet.

Not only would I have to throw out all of my critical thinking to believe this, I would also have to be mentally impaired to believe this. I don't mean to be offensive, but really. There is no appropriate thought process here.

Jurors need to sit down and draw out the mental path of what they are being asked to believe. It's clear to me that many don't do that.

BBM. i'm right there, on that other planet, with you. :seeya:

 

[lisasalinger]

My hometown favorite Andrea Sneiderman who lives two miles from me.

Sent from my SCH-S720C using Tapatalk 2

Soo... any good town gossip to share?

 

[katiedid2]

My 72 yr old mother watches HLN nitely, from7 to 10 pm. My 82 yr old father will sometimes join her. Till this trial. My dad can't believe a young woman would do all that Jodi does sexually unless someone made her do it, and no way could she do this murder, someone had to help her. First mom told him she didnt' want to hear his opinion, he must be crazy, but he couldn't shut up about it, so she banished him from the room. He has to watch tv alone in the den.
I think older men really can't accept what is real these days.

Oh how funny:floorlaugh:

 

[ShadyLady]

No news is good news?

Talking cats:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k7UhaeWFX8I

 

[Hope4More]

I've always been curious as to how she got acess to the diaries in jail. Is that why she stole all those pens? Hidden in her hair shampoo. We know they are only allowed pencils in jail.
So her attorneys know these were all fabricated stories after the fact and condoned it? Win at any cost.?

I think she did her journal fiction writing before she was arrested. During the police interrogations she all but drew out a map for Flores and the FO about where to find them and what might be in them. Part of her smear Travis show, along with the undies she labelled herself and took a photo of. She planned to drag him in the mud long before she came up with her self defense farce.

 

[SusieD]

:seeya:

It's obvious that the jury foreman and 3 other jurors did NOT pay attention to what Juan said during Closing Argument in the Penalty Phase ...

There were some things I remember him saying -- but could not remember exactly what it was that was "bugging me" ... so I re-listened.

Juan clearly instructs the jury that they are NOT private investigators or advocates when they go into deliberations ...

Another thing he said was they were told about the eligibility for parole after 25 years when they filled out the juror questionnaire ...

Now I understand that this 25 year may be an "issue" -- but just pointing out that Juan stated it was in the juror questionnaire that was filled out back in December 2012.


I tried to transcribe what Juan said ... not a transcriptionist, not a lawyer and not a chemist

But it's obvious IMO that foreman and 3 others totally IGNORED Juan's Closing !



Here is the video link [thanks to croakerqueen] :

Jodi Arias Penalty Phase - Day 3 - Part 3 (Closing Statements) - YouTube



start at appx. 37:28

Juan Martinez:

One of the things that they argued to you . . . is that she is going to spend the rest of her life in prison. Although it is not listed as a mitigating factor, they [the DT] did indicate to you that you could look to the circumstances to see if you find any mitigating circumstances on your own.

The State cautions you that you are not private investigators or advocates when you go back into that jury deliberation, to do your duties as jurors. What you’re back there to do is to find the facts. You don’t advocate one side – you don’t advocate the other. You don’t go out on a limb and you don’t investigate this to see whether or not there are any mitigating circumstances.

…

In terms of this case, there are no mitigating circumstances that you can find with regard to the crime.

…

If you remember when you filled out the juror questionnaire way back on December 10 – or a couple of days after that --


Juan is rudely interrupted by Willmott

…

But I ask you to think back to the juror questionnaire, one that some of you began filling out back on December 10, 2012.

And in it, it explained to you what the parameters or what this life meant.
You were told that life in the State of Arizona meant two things: Yes, it could mean natural life, that the individual who is sentenced does not leave the Department of Corrections until their death. But that juror questionnaire also told you that an individual who is sentenced to life is eligible for release at the expiration of 25 calendar years.

…

The jurors are chastized for not remembering every single word.

Yet you had to go look this up and spend quite a bit of time transcribing and analyzing. And got to watch it as many times as you wanted.

They didn't have that option.

I fail to understand why people expect jurors to act like robots with a hard-drive. They came, they listened, they convicted her of 1st degree muirder.

Any criticism of them is very misplaced, IMO. Unless you've walked a mile in their shoes........

It would be very classy if they weren't accused of "not paying attention." Because they obviously were.

Throw all the tomatoes you want, I am very disappointed in the personal attacks on the jurors from this board, just because it didn't go one way. The jurors did their best job, I doubt anyone here would have done any "better" so again, those throwing out things like "ignored" "didn't pay attention" need to take a good look in somebody's mirror.

And then spend 5 months in trial purgatory before you tell us how much you didn't pay attention. IMO you'd be defending the same actions you are villifying.

You'd be pretty damn insulted to read you ignored evidence and didn't pay attention. Especailly from someone who had unfettered access to all the trial info and a heck of a lot more. Pretty damn insulted IMO.

 

[Jane Jetson]

I think Little Missy was a whackjob for a long time - nobody addressed it.

Mr. F had never met anyone like her - he just didn't have the reference points in his life to understand or believe or grasp that a "normal" looking young lady could do something like that.

But it's not too hard to look at the photos, listen to the evidence presented, and realize that this is one sick ____. The fact that he seemingly didn't want to deliberate means that he was cozy in his little make-believe world, where young ladies that look like this don't commit heinous murders, and Mr. F didn't want to get uncomfortable and be shaken out of it, even though looking at reality was his JOB as a juror.

But I'm sure that happens all the time in our justice system. The important thing is that we got Murder 1 and Extreme Cruelty. Hopefully, CKJA will never set foot on the outside world's streets again. I pray to God that the Alexander family will seek assistance in dealing with the final outcome, whichever way it ends up.

 

[lisasalinger]

Do we know yet which 8 jurors voted for DP?

So far, I am aware of the following:

Juror 6 (female)
Juror 13 (male)
Juror 16 (female)

Also, Juror 17 was an alternate, so she didn't vote, but she has publically stated that she would have voted for DP.

 

[katiedid2]

I think Jodie is pretty bored right about now! In that cell with no windows. Wearing her stripes her only wardrobe, no need for a closet. She has only one outfit and one pair of shoes.
What can she possibly do all day to pass time! Especially now since their is no court and no cameras.
Wonder if mother dearest returned to Yreka. If so there will be not many visitors and especially no visits or calls from Donovan, since her tweets are now probably being channeled by others.

It sucks to be her right now! Pretty maddening since she is a person who thrives on attention. Doesn't matter to her if its positive or negative attention,it's all the same to her.

 

[verbonica]

Hope - interesting post however one of the things I believe Dr. Horn testified to was that he could not prove that TA had sex prior to his death due to the decomposition.

I wonder if this possibly be another JA lie to paint TA again with her story her lies. I do wish Dr. Horn could have been definitive on this.

Juan and Law Enforcement have pictures of them "in the act" (not published in court). Both sides agreed to stipulate to the fact that it happened.

 

[jabberwocky]

the big question. What in the heck was a successful, nice looking guy doing with ja?
She in not a bomb shell and she is nuts. What on earth was ta thinking about hanging around this piece of work is beyond me.

s-e-x