Trial Sidebar audio, transcripts released! *Discuss here*

After ALV was caught in her various lies and exaggerations, I don't get why she was allowed to continue testifying. It's scary to think we had a liar testifying and affecting the outcome of a murder trial of all things. What are people thinking?? Dangerous and scary.

I agree-the jury was told

they can believe some or all of people's testimony or throw it all out if not believable

The jury should have thrown all of her testimony out due to all the lies

but.....

it looks like the FP believed all of ALV's testimony & took that to the PP with him & I believe voted for Life
 
I highly doubt he made comments about marriage to Nurmi. Wouldn't make sense nor would it make Juan's point. Was it snarky? Sure. JW had it coming IMO, after all their constant interruptions and sidebars.

I meant comments like "go back to law school," comments that question a person's competence and intelligence.
 
I meant comments like "go back to law school," comments that question a person's competence and intelligence.

those comments are unprofessional. period. Everyone knows it.
 
if he hung his hat on abuse she would not be convicted unanimously of premed murder and most of them also voted for felony murder.

I think the crux and argument was over death.

:twocents::twocents:

I am anxiously await the status conference on the 20th to see if the state wants to go another round for death. After seeing all the evidence (despite the outcome of the SC) what judge in their right mind would let Arias have parole.? The big win was the conviction. I feel very badly for the jurors that have to find out all the evidence that was left out of the trial after the fact. I thank them all for their selfless service.

Some of us saw the handwriting on the wall when five jurors couldn't find a single felony violation committed by the lying torture murderess at 11428 East Queensborough Avenue in Mesa, Arizona on June 4, 2008 -- not one.

(And one of those 'Flaccid Five' was apparently turned back from the dark side by the time Zervakos et al hung the others.)

The 'Solid Seven' members of the jury had it right, to be sure.
 
After ALV was caught in her various lies and exaggerations, I don't get why she was allowed to continue testifying. It's scary to think we had a liar testifying and affecting the outcome of a murder trial of all things. What are people thinking?? Dangerous and scary.

One of a number of crucial errors allowed by JSKS.

The illegal sex recording should not have been allowed.

There was ZERO evidence of pedophilia, yet the judge let the murderess, her DT, and their perjuring 'expert' witness testify to it as fact.

Blue Oyster Cult's Neumeister and his cockamamie 'lie in the eye' charade was some of the most ridiculous courtroom theater we'll ever see.

But JSKS gave them the big stage upon which to wax completely loony for half a day.

I could go on, and on, and on...

Actually, I did, while JSKS was helming the SS Maricopa County Superior Court, loosest ship in Arizona's fleet.
 
I deleted my last post b/c it came out wrong what I wanted to say

I believe Juan did not call his own DV experts b/c he really thought he didn't need to

People testified that Jodi was the stalker,tire slasher.doggie door bandit etc etc
He also had DD who got those behaviors across to the jury who IMO was way more creditable than ALV
So I think he thought he didn't need to bring a DV expert to counter what ALV said-I mean seriously..who would have thought ANYONE on the jury would believe ALV after the way she was caught in lies & her own behavior on the stand.None of us did!!
But it looks like the FP believed ALV & believed Jodi was abused-SMH
So in hindsight-he should have brought one in to spell out all the behaviors posted by MEEBEE that Jodi went to Travis etc etc
I don't know if it would have changed the 4 lifers,but its obvious the FP believed them both and that is why he voted for life probably-JMO

I wasn't joking when I said that I believe Zervakos has personal feelings for the lying torture murderess.

Like Richard M. Samuels, something happens to these guys when they butt up against the seventh decade.

Obviously, the DT understood this clearly -- it's the reason they made this trial about virtually nothing at all but sex.

In order to spare her flesh, she had to bare her flesh.

The old guys would hit that, but even they aren't into necrophilia.
 
I wasn't joking when I said that I believe Zervakos has personal feelings for the lying torture murderess.

Like Richard M. Samuels, something happens to these guys when they butt up against the seventh decade.

Obviously, the DT understood this clearly -- it's the reason they made this trial about virtually nothing at all but sex.

In order to spare her flesh, she had to bare her flesh.

The old guys would hit that, but even they aren't into necrophilia.

Oh where do I start?

You think a jury member was trying to hook up with the murderer? Was he gonns break her out of prison first or ???
 
Nope. There were no ad hominems coming from the defense that I know of. If you know of one, please share it.

Their attitude was palpable. Wilmott seemed offended by TA's family cried. They were horrible to the victims and prosecution throughout the trial.
 
Found the jury questions. Have the closed chamber things been released yet?
 
Found the jury questions. Have the closed chamber things been released yet?

To one Tiger from another Tiger - Not much has been released yet. Everything that has been released so far is included in this thread...War Eagle! :seeya:
 
I think the jury foreman was completely the wrong person to have taken that position. I don't know if he took it because he was overbearing and wanted to from the start or what ,but he would have irritated me if I was one of the jurors. Regardless of what anyone else thought I would have wanted to make my own mind up based on what evidence I heard and in my opinion he was not what was needed in a jury foreman.
 
I think the jury foreman was completely the wrong person to have taken that position. I don't know if he took it because he was overbearing and wanted to from the start or what ,but he would have irritated me if I was one of the jurors. Regardless of what anyone else thought I would have wanted to make my own mind up based on what evidence I heard and in my opinion he was not what was needed in a jury foreman.

I'm guessing that when they were deciding on who the JF would be, he was standing up - Pick Me! Goin' on about whatever experience he had, etc. and I suppose the other jurors let him get away with it...I wish Ms. Strickland was the JF - She was eager to speak out afterwards, but she made sense. Strictly my opinion only but we will probably never find out how this process went.
 
Nope. There were no ad hominems coming from the defense that I know of. If you know of one, please share it.

Yeah? Well I think they called the victim a pedophile and an abuser.

An I think that foreman, zarvakos, whatever, was sweet on ALV (shudder) - after all they resemble ea other quite a bit. Makes for empathy.

Plus which these judges always think the case is so obvious any jury would max out - so they let in garbage, and often blow the case. Ast Chris Darden, or Marcia.

They are state employees after all so likely to under perform.

Judge was just awful.
 

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
173
Guests online
4,315
Total visitors
4,488

Forum statistics

Threads
592,463
Messages
17,969,337
Members
228,774
Latest member
truecrime-hazeleyes
Back
Top