Post Verdict -Working Out The Unresolved Questions

[MrsPC]

Minute entry yesterday:

MINUTE ENTRY
The parties have agreed the pretrial hearings/oral arguments scheduled for October 4,
2013 and October 18, 2013 should be closed to the public. The court finds an open proceeding
for these pretrial hearings presents a clear and present threat to the due administration of justice,
specifically the right of the parties to a fair penalty phase trial by an impartial jury. The court
finds there is a compelling interest that overcomes the right of public access, specifically, there is
a substantial probability that publication of information provided during these court hearings
(through evidence or argument) could taint the jury pool and significantly impact the parties’
ability to effectively present matters at trial. The court also finds that, in light of the intense
media coverage of this case, there is no less restrictive means to achieve these compelling
interests.

 

[Ricki]

I suppose next cameras will not be allowed during the penalty phase.

 

[Sweetiemom]

I suppose next cameras will not be allowed during the penalty phase.

I don't think Miss Thing would like that-she needs to be seen and heard by all her fans dontcha' know. :drumroll:

 

[gcharlie]

Arizona has a strong precedent for allowing media coverage in trials, so a lot of this comes down to Judge Stephens and the strength of the arguments presented in the motions. I would expect that the lawyer for the press has a strong argument, citing a lot of relevant case law, as well as breaking down the arguments in Nurmi's motion (which IMO was very weak). That being said, I am prepared for the possibility that Stephens will err on the side of caution and grant the motion to limit media coverage, meaning no cameras in the courtroom.

I guess that I am biased in terms of cameras in the courtroom, because in order for this to influence the outcome of the trial, to me it all boils down to individual honesty and integrity. Either the jurors aren't abiding by the admonishment or the witnesses aren't upholding the sworn oath for camera coverage to influence the outcome.

As for the upcoming Conference Settlement, I wonder if it will be over before it even starts? Travis's family will be there and I don't see either side even beginning a dialogue towards negotiating a deal. I expect the longest discussions to be from the family on why they consider the death penalty to be appropriate; this would come out if the judge tries to see if there is any crack somewhere to open for negotiation.

 

[Hope4More]

I honestly hope there won't be cameras next round. Deprives the murderer of the attention she craves, spares T's family having to grieve in front of a national audience yet again, strips away the DT's favorite whines about unfairness and the like, and maybe hastens the day the murderer is sent off to Perryville. All to the good.

 

[janx]

Will the judge be ruling on motions today? If so, does anyone know what those are?

 

[gcharlie]

Will the judge be ruling on motions today? If so, does anyone know what those are?

There are two days set aside for motions, today and 10/18. CNN has submitted a request to have an open hearing presumably to argue their objection to the motion to limit media coverage.

Motions pending:

Motion to limit media coverage
Motion to compel jurors twitter accounts
Motion for change of venue
Motion to sequester jury
Motion for individualized voir dire

The media is not reporting this as part of the hearings, but I have not seen or heard of a ruling on the motion to vacate aggravation phase verdict.

WSers, help me out if I omitted anything in error.

 

[janx]

Thanks GC. I have the day off today and thought I would check. I found that interesting CNN tidbit on Trial Divas via Twitter:

http://thetrialdivas.com/2013/10/04/new-request-in-jodi-arias-case/

 

[janx]

I also found this on FB:

https://www.facebook.com/JuanMartinezProsecutorSupportPage/posts/172579969602254

 

[janx]

I've posted some tweets in the sidebar thread. People are tweeting about it--are they in the courtroom?

 

[gcharlie]

I have a specific question about the gunshot last theory, not the whole argument.

If Travis was shot last after his throat was slit and he was presumably dead, how was this accomplished given the gunshot wound? The bullet left a penetrating wound, entering on the left side of his forehead and then traveling downward, with the bullet lodging in his lower right jaw.

As far as I can recall, no ballistics/firearms expert testified.

It would seem that for this wound to occur, the shot had to be fired from above at a downward angle. More importantly, wouldn't the head have to be in an upright position?


BBM...this is where I get stuck on the gunshot last theory. Travis's body was positioned in the showed so that the right side, not the left, of his face was positioned for such a wound. If my thinking is correct in terms of the head being in an upright position for such a wound to take place, that would mean CMJA had to prop his head up before shooting him? Given that the bullet casing was found in the bathroom, it is most likely that he was shot in the bathroom?

Too bad they did not have an expert testify.

While the defense did create some doubt about the accuracy of Horn's testimony, specifically his error with the dura mater which was not picked up on until the aggravation phase, I am inclined to accept the gunshot last theory. It make sense with the ME's findings and perhaps most importantly, if there was a strong enough reason to believe that the gunshot came first, the DT most certainly would have produced their own expert to testify to that effect.

 

[MrsPC]

IMO, the gunshot was not the first wound, just based on the one big blood spatter on the wall next to the shower by Travis's robe. It's approx 4 ft off the floor. And everything I'm reading states that this type blood spatter is arterial - resulting from blood exiting the body under pressure from a damaged artery. If Travis was exiting the shower when this blood spatter occurred, his left cheek would have been facing this wall where the blood spatter is, so the gunshot could not have caused that blood spatter. It's another one of those unresolved questions in this case though...what wound caused this blood by the robe.

Here's the pic of the blood on the wall by the shower

https://picasaweb.google.com/Politigal/Arias#5934426462022267058

and here's another shot of the robe so you can get a better feel for the height of the blood spatter.

https://picasaweb.google.com/Politigal/Arias#5934428554492368178


and here are some links on blood spatter analysis:

http://www.bloodspatter.com/bloodstain-tutorial-page-2

http://www.wired.com/magazine/2010/02/st_bloodstains/

http://hemospat.com/terminology/index.php?cat=projected&sub=arterial

 

[Tuba]

We also know that his head was visibly elevated in the hall photograph, the one where we also see the murderer's sport pant leg.

 

[gcharlie]

We also know that his head was visibly elevated in the hall photograph, the one where we also see the murderer's sport pant leg.

Thanks, Tuba. I had never thought of her positioning him that way to fire the gunshot, which then could have left the wound of which we know. Especially if she fired left handed.

 

[geevee]

IMO, the gunshot was not the first wound, just based on the one big blood spatter on the wall next to the shower by Travis's robe. It's approx 4 ft off the floor. And everything I'm reading states that this type blood spatter is arterial - resulting from blood exiting the body under pressure from a damaged artery. If Travis was exiting the shower when this blood spatter occurred, his left cheek would have been facing this wall where the blood spatter is, so the gunshot could not have caused that blood spatter. It's another one of those unresolved questions in this case though...what wound caused this blood by the robe.

Here's the pic of the blood on the wall by the shower

https://picasaweb.google.com/Politigal/Arias#5934426462022267058

and here's another shot of the robe so you can get a better feel for the height of the blood spatter.

https://picasaweb.google.com/Politigal/Arias#5934428554492368178


and here are some links on blood spatter analysis:

http://www.bloodspatter.com/bloodstain-tutorial-page-2

http://www.wired.com/magazine/2010/02/st_bloodstains/

http://hemospat.com/terminology/index.php?cat=projected&sub=arterial

My thinking is she pinned him on the floor/against the open shower door and it's cast off from the knife. I think it was around the time of the ceiling picture.

I think, either intentionally or not, his head was propped up against the wall when she shot him, likely after having drug him back near the bathroom area.

 

[Zinvestigator]

Of course they are. She will end up there in any case, but the defense is trying to save her from going to death row. They know she's going to Perryville eventually.

The delays and extensions are also probably the result of the defense's inability to find someone who will speak up for the defendant. No one would speak in her defense during the penalty phase last time, so who will do so in the retrial of the penalty phase this time?

Have you all seen this video? Very enlightening about Perryville and gives me hope that CMJA will suffer a fate possibly worse than death! [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YJTBLd-72fg"]Jodi Arias Rose colored glasses - Revised and Narrated - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Love Never Fails]

Have you all seen this video? Very enlightening about Perryville and gives me hope that CMJA will suffer a fate possibly worse than death! Jodi Arias Rose colored glasses - Revised and Narrated - YouTube

The video is terribly sad.....not for CMJA....but I was thinking more of innocent people who are convicted of crimes they did not commit. It happens. With CMJA though, I tend to think she will function better than most in isolation or even harsh prison conditions. She mirrors others and is a true nutcase, so I think she will adapt.

 

[noonie]

Hearing tomorrow! No Camera's in courtroom.

 

[rose222]

Hearing tomorrow! No Camera's in courtroom.

I don't expect any significant news. Secret meetings. More delays. The only thing the Judge will decide on is that there will be another hearing in a month or so. Same old thing every month. Don't expect a trial till after Easter. I'm being the negative Nelly as usual but the Judge hasn't proved me wrong so far!

 

[gcharlie]

I recently ran across something regarding Daniel Freeman's testimony that was new to me and I found it interesting. I was not watching the trial at that point in time.

Freeman testified under questioning by Nurmi that after CMJA moved to California, they would talk on occasion, they would talk when she came into town and she would sometimes swing by the house.

In one of her early TV interviews, while still sticking to the Ninja story, CMJA was asked when she last saw Travis and she replied that it was a few weeks before his death.

When interrogated by Flores, she insisted that she had last seen Travis in April.

I had always wondered about her remark in the interview and now learning of Daniel Freeman's testimony, it becomes clear that CMJA did go back to Mesa, most likely a number of times before Travis was murdered. Strange that this was not pursued further in the trial. It also puts into better perspective the friends immediate suspicion of CMJA as the killer...if it were not known that she had been back in Mesa regularly, people would have been less likely to suspect her.

Did I miss something, or were her return visits to Mesa after she moved to Yreka just a footnote in the trial?

ALV certainly did not mention this. I have a feeling that these were not welcome visits and the DT was successful in keeping out any evidence which would support this.

The other thing that I picked up from Daniel Freeman's testimony was that she was very close to his family, including his mother. Yet another person who could have been a mitigation witness, but did not speak on CMJA's behalf.