SIDEBAR #7- Arias/Alexander forum

[SusieD]

What you you think about selecting another jury?
Are these jurors expected to know nothing of the case? If thats the case...That leaves a bunch of folks that live under a rock!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

There is no requirement that potential jurors know nothing abput a case. THey'll be asked if they've formed opinions that likely won't be changed.

Being on this board can give a skewed impression as to how (not) important this case has been to many people and that not all people are set-in-stone opinionated about it.

 

[kpm]

Wendy Murphy has a couple good articles on her site....

http://wendymurphylaw.com/jodi-hannibal-lecter-arias/

http://wendymurphylaw.com/jodi-aria...ays-and-failure-to-call-mitigation-witnesses/

 

[AZlawyer]

What you you think about selecting another jury?
Are these jurors expected to know nothing of the case? If thats the case...That leaves a bunch of folks that live under a rock!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The jurors will be instructed that they must accept premed 1st-degree and cruelty as given. IMO that means that there would be no problem seating jurors who are "prejudiced" on these issues. JSS might not agree with me, though.

But really, it isn't that hard to know nothing about this case. Lots of people I know don't know anything about it. I myself knew nothing about it until halfway through trial when I heard my friend Lonnie Dworkin was on the stand, at which point I went looking for the WS forum for the case.

 

[Midnight Meddler]

I wonder if that stare down convo wasn't behind #5 getting booted?? Maybe she asked #10 what that was about & MAYBE she said something about her being creepy, evil looking or something that caused DT get her 86'd as bias??

Just speculating IMO

Juror #17 tweeted that #5 was overheard stating a 'fact' about the case.
Another tweeter, not her, said #5 was overheard by a court official (?) saying - paraphrasing - "If they make $300/hr for testimony, you'd think they could get the juror's more comfortable chairs" Juror #17, Ponytail to us, confirmed that that IS what she said. So that's why she was booted...

It doesn't take much when you're being watched intensely.

 

[JusticeJunkie]

Yes! I can't fathom how a new jury decides 'penalty only.' I think it's nuts. I think this part of the AZ death penalty trial process is archaic.

I think the problem is the jurors don't get the make the entire decision themselves. Only if they choose death is it truly "their" decision. Leaving the final decision up to the judge if they choose life.
It's a strange set up for that alone, beyond retrying the penalty phase only. It seems so convoluted!!

 

[DebinGA]

But in gen pop...she has access to.ppl...manipulating, spinning stories, wah wah wah...access to privileges by being a model prisoner. Yeah she is happy with attention and ppl giving it to her

Sent from my SGH-T989 using Tapatalk 2

Yes, but at least she wouldn't be getting national attention and attracting groupies the same way she would as one of the few females on death row. I just hope she finds herself in a place where she'll be very unhappy, whereever that is.

 

[Linda7NJ]

Wendy Murphynhas a couple good articles on her site....

http://wendymurphylaw.com/jodi-hannibal-lecter-arias/

http://wendymurphylaw.com/jodi-aria...ays-and-failure-to-call-mitigation-witnesses/

I really like Wendy!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[marlap]

But when it comes to the penalty phase, the jurors are supposed to examine their consciences, not just coldly look at the facts.

I agree...

Say...All the jury is DP qualified.

One of them can't give Death in a case like Jodi's because Jodi didn't kill a child, for that juror they are following their conscience, but another juror might not have any problem giving Jodi a DP.

They are both voting how they think is right and both voting within the law.

 

[aa9511]

I think Jodi is evil, but I also think that life in prison is adequate to deal with her, and that is consistent with the jury instructions.

It's not age or gender. It's an issue with vague instructions that can be interpreted in different ways by different people.

It would be unconstitutional to sentence every murderer to death. If you believe in the death penalty, then you also must accept that not every murderer will be executed. Getting upset over this will only lead to the death penalty being banned altogether. moo.

She is not "every murderer." I'm sorry, but this wasn't a gunshot wound or even a single stab wound. Every time we begin to get numb to the horrific nature of what she did, we should imagine a kitchen knife and stabbing that knife somewhre in our body. Now imagine that 29 TIMES OVER. With some very deep, deep wounds. Imagine how much the first stab wound to the vena cavae must have hurt. Not to mention you can see the blood coming out of your own body....your own blood everywhere. And that's before the slitting of the throat.

I feel pain and hate the sight of my blood just from cutting my finger a little bit accidentally! I don't think we can even imagine the pain Travis felt, knowing this was his end. I'm pretty sure he knew, especially at the start of the hallway, that he wasn't going to be able to get away from her.

Ugh. Just think about a knife and geting stabbed with it over and over again. I don't think it's a stretch to ask for the death penalty for her.

 

[ElleElle]

What you you think about selecting another jury?
Are these jurors expected to know nothing of the case? If thats the case...That leaves a bunch of folks that live under a rock!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'd say there is more people who don't know about this case, then people who know about it.

With that being said, what kind of evidence is re-admitted, if any, in the PP?

 

[Jax49]

Are you OK with retrying the guilt phase after a hung jury? Because that's done all the time.

What do you think about a defendant being found 'not guilty' by a federal jury and then charged by the state for the same offense?

I understand the logic of it not being double jeopardy (state law vs. federal), but it just doesn't seem right.

 

[TXProfessional]

Thank you for raising important points:
Firstly, the science of Forensics tell the story. Travis naked, defenseless & vulnerable in the shower.
Secondly, he would most likely have been stunned & in 'shock' having been stabbed.
Thirdly, the evidence shows that his response was 'flight' not fight.
Three very important points IMO. :ditto:

Fuskier very succinct and excellent post.

The third point you made, is one that I believe should have been hammered home by the prosecution in closing. For example, JA wants you to believe that he was abusing her but the forensic evidence shows that TA was trying to escape and you chased him down throughout this brutal stabbing ALL THE WHILE never receiving a serious injury.

 

[Squirrel Whisperer]

Hi there smart and savvy sleuthers!
This is my first post, so excuse me if I'm posting in the wrong thread.

I believe I may have heard about this from a sharp-eyed sleuther (sorry I can't remember to give you credit!) During Det. Flores interview with JA's mom, she talks about friends calling her, even in the middle of the night, to tell her that Jodie needed help. A bit later she says "thats why we moved her back up here" (to get her help?) Was this TRAVIS??!! It just makes COMPLETE sense to me. It doesn't seem like JA HAD any friends that would make that kind of effort by calling her mom in the middle of the night no less. With all her stalking behavior prior to the murder and whatever blackmailing horrific scheme that prompted kindhearted Travis to send her that "angry" email-it just seems to fall into place that he was desperate to not only get away from her, but get her help. And if it WAS Travis who made that "middle of the night" call, then Jodie's mom must know it was Travis.

Maybe it's not an important issue at this point, now that we have a hung jury. I guess it just gnaws at me now that we know at least one juror thought she was just a normal girl until she met Travis.

Does anyone have any insight into this? And I hope the original sleuther steps forward to claim their "eagle eye award"!

Nice to meet everyone!! :seeya:

 

[cosmos]

On a lighter note.

The mistrial reminds me of when the lights went off during the Super Bowl. I was impatient and also somewhat worried that the delay would affect the outcome. But the lights came back and it ended the way I expected.

Only one thing is different about this trial. When the lights come back on there will be different teams on the field, the players will not know the rules or anything that happened in the first half, and there will be coaches running around on the field with them trying to teach them the plays they were supposed to have learned in training camp that they missed.

 

[Boodles]

Juror #10 has NOT tweeted about this case.

oops! Who's the alternate who tweeted over the weekend - a tons of tweets - including the announcement that she was flying to LA to be on Dr. Drew? Maybe I got them mixed up...

 

[ElleElle]

education system has nothing to do with it...or else a school that was teaching it would turn out entire graduation classes with kids who had "Logic, critical thinking skills, common sense and the inability to apply them in a meaningful way".... or you would have entire graduation classes completely lacking. and that just is not reality.

may sound mean but some people just don't have what it takes...they are lacking something in their brain....you can teach them until you are blue in the face and some still wont "get it".

BBM~ That's right. That's why people fail within the education system and there is a lack of support for students with special needs.

 

[AZlawyer]

What do you think about a defendant being found 'not guilty' by a federal jury and then charged by the state for the same offense?

I understand the logic of it not being double jeopardy (state law vs. federal), but it just doesn't seem right.

It wouldn't be the "same offense," if it were a different law and a different jurisdiction. It all goes back to that sovereignty thing again.

 

[Madeleine74]

What I especially love about AZlawyer (and her posts) is not only does she present the law clearly, she is calm and rational, and the emo arguments and responses melt away because like it or not the law is the law.

And when citizens don't like the law, then their course of action is straightforward: work to change the law(s)!

 

[Linda7NJ]

I'd say there is more people who don't know about this case, then people who know about it.

With that being said, what kind of evidence is re-admitted, if any, in the PP?

Well if there are people left in that county that still know nothing about the case or any left that have not formed an opinion after hearing about it,.,.They're not the kind of people I would trust with watering my plants for a weekend.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Quester]

I'm not seeing the secrets... Can you paraphrase ? Please

:lol: Nope! Must be the "stare down story" plus massive JMV [most obnoxious woman award] hype! Juror #10 did rat out all of the older people as being the ones who voted for life.