Verdict is in! GUILTY of MURDER ONE - Hung Jury On Penalty Phase #2

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sydni said:
Okay, I'm just gonna say it. I've posted before ... but I just don't understand Sky Hughes' emails to Travis. Why couldn't she just mind her own business and stay out of Travis's life??? She took ownership of Travis and thought she knew better than anyone how to "control" his life. She maybe has a good heart, but she is a very controlling and meddling person. She had NO business to dig into Travis's life as she did. She annoys me beyond anything.

To think that she and Chris had Travis in a room, running him over the coals about Arias (while she was listening at the door). Who does that to a 30-year-old man???? That just makes my hinky meter go waaaay over the top.

Sky and Chris were too intrusive in Travis's life ...and .. too over-the-top controlling/protective. Travis needed guidance, yes .. but he did NOT need a couple of meddling PPL folks trying to control his life. He was 30 years old. Yes they could see that JA was a whacko ....

Where were they when things were going wrong. They didn't seem to know anything else other than that one experience. If they were concerned, why didn't they report things to the authorities ... that's because they didn't really know anything more than that one experience that they were talking about (re her listening outside the door while Chris and Sky were trashing Jodi).

Am I the only one who has a weird feeling about the Hughes's. Why would they NOT be put on the stand. What's up with this??
Click to expand...

I so agree with this. I think they like the limelight and found it on this case. I know you will all disagree with this. I think the first information she told Jodi about Travis being a player is what she really thought. She argued with him about his relationship. Who does that?

After her information was found about her e-mails to Travis she had to make up some kind of excuse. So she said it was just really trying to get Jodi away from Travis by telling Jodi that Travis was not good for her. BS IMO.

Don't kill me for this guys. This is just what I think.
 
KPinMN said:
He clearly fell for the DT's strategy of dressing her and having her style her hair like a virginal sophmore at a Catholic high school. She is not a "girl" she is a WOMAN a woman who brutally and without remorse murdered a wonderful man in the prime of his life. Unfortunatly, the jury foreperson couldn't see the truth through the DT created fog.
Click to expand...

How in the h..ll did he get m1? It sounds like this guy would happily have acquitted her? She does not need a PR person..he needs to take up another cause!

He is most likely torturing the family! :banghead:
 
polleypockets said:
no XXXXXX way!!:stormingmad:
Click to expand...

Somehow I am beginning to doubt that he found out that she was being vilified "only afterwards of course." He's said that in several interviews now...perhaps he doth protest too much. Having seen a little HLN prior to the penalty phase might explain his "night in shining armor syndrome" now as opposed to his 'give her Murder 1' before.

This is, as always, MOO.
 
In the end, this is a feeling worse than that produced by the Pinellas 12. They didn't champion for CA. They didn't want to go visit her and find out what really happened. They screwed up bigtime but they never publicly championed for her. I can't watch or think about one more word from this man. He's a disgrace and he's creepy. What trial did he watch? Certainly not the one we watched.
 
Quester said:
I want to hear from the pony tail man juror who, after the non-verdict, rather than taking the bus with the rest of the jurors, walked alone to public transportation. He looked pissed and was stalked by a media woman all the way onto the train.

I'd like to hear his perspective on what went down in that jury room!
Click to expand...

i do too - and i am wondering if he was a "lone wolf" because of the foreman trying to push his views to hard???? and he didn't agree??
 
nwmouse said:
The jury foreman says he is giving interviews as he feels Jodi was "crucified in the court of public opinion"
http://radaronline.com/exclusives/2013/05/jodi-arias-jury-foreman-interview-video/
Click to expand...

The more he talks, the more I think he should not have been jury foreman and should not have been on this jury. His thinking doesn't make sense to me. Presumed innocent...she admitted it and you convicted her of first degree murder. He states she is a "human being" - did he forget she heinously killed another human being - a man is dead here and what's left of his legacy has been tarnished by a liar and his murderer. You already found her guilty, decided the murder was especially cruel...you just needed to agree on a sentence. What he is talking about now seems as if he doesn't agree with the verdict they rendered in the first two incidents...I'm so confused...I wish some jurors if they felt the same as me- confused- would have sent the judge a note like the jurors in Scott Peterson trial. Maybe his "ideas" would have come out during deliberations and the judge could have replaced him with an alternate.

I'm basing my opinion on the sound bites released by the media...hopefully there is more to his interview that makes more sense...bc right now he sounds a little off. He actually wants to talk to her....:banghead:
 
DAWN TREADER said:
What's not fair? That it's going to be brutally difficult or that the state has to even go down that road as a result of the jurors being unable to come to a unanimous verdict?

======================

Now the penalty phase will have to be done all over again with another jury. Bill Zevakos says finding another impartial jury will be almost impossible.

“I just think it's going to be brutally difficult and quite frankly i don't think it's fair.”

http://www.insideedition.com/headlines/6389-jodi-ariass-juror-opens-up-about-trial
Click to expand...

Since Bill Zevakos already said he didn't think it was fair to the jury and they needed to be lawyers, I think it would be wise for him to leave the legal thinking to the lawyers. IMHO, he's in no way qualified, per his own words, to opine about the possibility of finding an impartial jury. MOO
 
Litigatrix said:
Somehow I am beginning to doubt that he found out that she was being vilified "only found out afterwards of course." He's said that in several interviews now...perhaps he doth protest too much. Having seen a little HLN prior to the penalty phase might explain his "night in shining armor syndrome" now as opposed to his 'give her Murder 1' before.

This is, as always, MOO.
Click to expand...

Which would put the M1 conviction out the window on appeal. I do NOT trust this guy.
 
I sure hope the alexander family has not caught word of what this jury is saying because it will destroy them further.

he also made a comment to one of the media outlets that he is not doing much media. but damn, he sure seems to be talking left and right and the crapola is just spilling from his mouth.
 
Prime Mover said:
This guy is scaring me big time. I can see him being an appellate issue, perhaps saying that he watched coverage/read a newspaper etc. He sounds far too fishy to me. I don't trust this guy at all.
Click to expand...


I never expected one of the jurors to be her "cheerleader". OMG this is unreal!
 
This has probably already been posted so sorry if it's a double post. This is an interview with the guy that did the 48 hours interview. I knew Jodi was vain, but dang this really put it into perspective. She states she and Travis used to argue about her driving because the rear view mirror was usually pointed to her rather than the road.

Extra: Meeting Jodi Arias - 48 Hours - CBS News
 
By the way, I hated how CMja spoke Samantha and Steven's name during her Vote for Me for Student Body President Speech.

She said it in such a familiar way, as if prior to this little bit of unpleasantness, she and the family were tight, chummy, with a special relationship.

Made me want to throw things at the monitor.
 
prima.facie said:
wow. um. wow. I think I have to walk away from this case altogether. the more that is coming out from this juror, the more my blood pressure rises.

its hard to walk away, but I should :banghead:

sounds like the only site he has visited is JAII....
Click to expand...

OMG am I really hearing this guy for real? I feel sick.. Now I know why I ask my hubs what's wrong with people.
 
LolaBaby3 said:
The more he talks, the more I think he should not have been jury foreman and should not have been on this jury. His thinking doesn't make sense to me. Presumed innocent...she admitted it and you convicted her of first degree murder. He states she is a "human being" - did he forget she heinously killed another human being - a man is dead here and what's left of his legacy has been tarnished by a liar and his murderer. You already found her guilty, decided the murder was especially cruel...you just needed to agree on a sentence. What he is talking about now seems as if he doesn't agree with the verdict they rendered in the first two incidents...I'm so confused...I wish some jurors if they felt the same as me- confused- would have sent the judge a note like the jurors in Scott Peterson trial. Maybe his "ideas" would have come out during deliberations and the judge could have replaced him with an alternate.

I'm basing my opinion on the sound bites released by the media...hopefully there is more to his interview that makes more sense...bc right now he sounds a little off. He actually wants to talk to her....:banghead:
Click to expand...



apparently he is doing a zillion interviews and I have not seen them all.

has he mentioned travis at all???? has he talked about or to (via the media) the alexander family telling them how horribly sorry he is for their loss? has he made any effort to contact them and show them support for their loss?

it seems his only platform is to defend Jodi.
 
TigerBalm said:
I have seen an interview with GMA, AZCentral and Inside Edition

Someone should have handed him a dvd of her interviews post verdict and said, watch these and then we will come back to see if you have changed your opinion.

ETA: AP to the list as well
Click to expand...

What the heck!!! Was he on the same media blitz as jodi was during the penalty phase.
 
nwmouse said:
Ya know, when JVM mentioned last night that Jodi used her feminine 'wiles' to influence men on the jury I thought it was a crock of you-know-what. Now I'm thinking that maybe JVM is correct, and this foreman could not see beyond her face to the evil inside her. I think it's sickening.:stormingmad:
Click to expand...

How much you want to bet that the DT realized that Mr. F was possibly taken with JA? Betcha he didn't do a very good job of hiding it, since he's so transparent right now, in the "court of public opinion."
 
KPinMN said:
Since Bill Zevakos already said he didn't think it was fair to the jury and they needed to be lawyers, I think it would be wise for him to leave the legal thinking to the lawyers. IMHO, he's in no way qualified, per his own words, to opine about the possibility of finding an impartial jury. MOO
Click to expand...

Maybe he should be a getting a lawyer now.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 132 more.
Total: 3,110 (members: 133, guests: 2,977)

Online statistics

Members online
133
Guests online
2,977
Total visitors
3,110
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,176
Messages
17,964,661
Members
228,715
Latest member
hannahdunnam
Back
Top