Discussions on Formal Sentencing Hearing - Jodi Arias #5

Status
Not open for further replies.

WichitaFalls

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 1, 2013
Messages
889
Reaction score
4,943
Ditto on Beth!!! :moo: IMO she has integrity and is precise with her facts when reporting. A difference of opinion on bits and pieces doesn't change that for me.
 

krkrjx

The answer is blowin' in the wind.
Joined
May 4, 2010
Messages
11,148
Reaction score
29,026
Just a query, maybe I missed the early part of the trial process - but how did JA get two lawyers i.e. KN & JW and a $3 million defense? Some explanation would be helpful please.

Nurmi was with the public defender's office when assiged to the case. He was in the process of leaving to set up private practice and when this case took so long to proceed to trial he requested being let off the case to pursue his private endeavor. Judge denied his request but allowed him to be paid the going rate of his private practice rather than what he would have earned as a public defender. Willmott came along for the ride because as a death penalty case the defendant was entitled to two attorneys.

The three million dollar price tag is outrageous even with private practice payment considered and I hold the judge responsible for much of that expense. She did not have control of her courtroom, allowed even miniscule issues to be discussed in lengthy and numerous sidebars, and granted delay after delay after delay. All of that added to the taxpayer expense and on top of it she allowed a lot of testimony that was irrelevant and/or repetitive.

The trial was too long. Period. This was a case with a lot of evidence against the perpetrator that was allowed to be hijacked into a trial of the victim. I found the whole thing appalling and my voice is not loud on the subject only because I am not an Arizona taxpayer.
 

lauraoh

Active Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2011
Messages
378
Reaction score
39
All it takes is a vote from the state legislature to pass such a change. What states have it already and which ones would top your list to change (besides AZ)?

Florida has it now as a simple majority, so as few as seven jurors can find for the DP. Unfortunately, the US Supreme Court is reviewing FL's law this year because of an appeal by a (sentenced to death but not by a unanimous vote) death row inmate. So who knows how it will end up.
 

ILikeToBendPages

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2010
Messages
24,264
Reaction score
43,994
From what I know the calls from prison or jails are outgoing and the person receiving the call has to be approved. The video visits are paid for in advance.
I'd be unsure if all 27 calls made on that one day were video calls because they normally have to be scheduled in advance.
It seems Jodi was able to call people who were unapproved. This could be because they had given false information or 3 way calling.
All jmo as I don't know this for fact.

Back in August ? there was a lot going in the Arias camp between a woman named Sandra Weber and Geebee (George Barfield from England? a con man who thinks he's Robert De Niero and did the you taking to me from Taxi Driver to WS) and in there was a message for MDLR asking if there were any repercussions 4 phone call. Seems Jodi made a three way call to Weber and Weber taped it and released it. Jodi also told Gayla (can't remember last name) on a postcard that she'd try to make a three way phone call to her. Jodi sent her the postcard while she was on the stand.
 

FelicityLemon

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2015
Messages
3,302
Reaction score
5,969
Everyone can check up on her as much as they want. You can view all of the details regarding an inmate at Perryville. Infractions, work history (if they have a job), etc. I have pulled up Angela Simpson. She already has 15 infractions.

https://corrections.az.gov/public-resources/inmate-datasearch

I was trying to figure out what her latest issue means: Attempt to Commit Class A Felony, but the closest I could come to was finding the document below and it has them by the number not by letters :( If Class A = Class 1, then maybe she attempted to kill someone?

https://corrections.az.gov/glossary-terms-0
 

oceanblueeyes

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2004
Messages
26,446
Reaction score
43,593
Just curious -- is there any legal reason for anyone owning a silencer for a gun. I understand guns for protection and hunting, but a silencer? I just don't get it.

I have grown up around guns all my life and purchased my own handgun when I was 21 years old. I don't know anyone that has a silencer or would even want one.
 

Fuskier

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 26, 2010
Messages
4,355
Reaction score
252
Nurmi was with the public defender's office when assiged to the case. He was in the process of leaving to set up private practice and when this case took so long to proceed to trial he requested being let off the case to pursue his private endeavor. Judge denied his request but allowed him to be paid the going rate of his private practice rather than what he would have earned as a public defender. Willmott came along for the ride because as a death penalty case the defendant was entitled to two attorneys.

The three million dollar price tag is outrageous even with private practice payment considered and I hold the judge responsible for much of that expense. She did not have control of her courtroom, allowed even miniscule issues to be discussed in lengthy and numerous sidebars, and granted delay after delay after delay. All of that added to the taxpayer expense and on top of it she allowed a lot of testimony that was irrelevant and/or repetitive.

The trial was too long. Period. This was a case with a lot of evidence against the perpetrator that was allowed to be hijacked into a trial of the victim. I found the whole thing appalling and my voice is not loud on the subject only because I am not an Arizona taxpayer.

BBM: Thank you krkrjx. I knew Nurmi's situation, but not the reason for two defense attorneys. As to the rest of your post, agreed. Well said IMO.
 

oceanblueeyes

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2004
Messages
26,446
Reaction score
43,593
I was trying to figure out what her latest issue means: Attempt to Commit Class A Felony, but the closest I could come to was finding the document below and it has them by the number not by letters :( If Class A = Class 1, then maybe she attempted to kill someone?

https://corrections.az.gov/glossary-terms-0

Dang, she is one mean arse woman. Yes, I would think that would be the only thing that would be a ClassA felony. Attempted murder or it can be a Class A Felony if she attempted to assault one of the officers there.

Gee Miss. Goddess better tread lightly around Angela.
 

aa9511

New Member
Joined
Mar 24, 2013
Messages
6,639
Reaction score
7
Oh, if only this was the way it really went down....


[video=youtube;Hz8YR22DduI]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hz8YR22DduI&feature=youtu.be[/video]


Are these from the re-trial or the original trial?
 

oceanblueeyes

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2004
Messages
26,446
Reaction score
43,593
Florida has it now as a simple majority, so as few as seven jurors can find for the DP. Unfortunately, the US Supreme Court is reviewing FL's law this year because of an appeal by a (sentenced to death but not by a unanimous vote) death row inmate. So who knows how it will end up.

I sure hope the USSC upholds it. And if it does I think all states need to adopt this rule of law.

It is costing so much money and time wasted when death penalty cases are sabotaged by one lone holdout usually. I have never seen a death penalty case from Florida have a 7-5 vote for death. I have seen some which were 10-2 for death or 11-1 for death.

I believe in the Joseph Smith kidnapping, rape, and murder trial of Carlie Brushia (sp?) ended in a 10-2 decision for death and the Foreman was a Minister who also voted for death.

Has there been a case in Florida that had a 7-5 split on a death penalty case, if you know?

Someone put up an article earlier talking about rogue jurors on high profile cases and it seems to happen a lot more than we might think.

I don't think it even makes sense that one holdout completely demolishes the other 11 jurors' vote. We have always been a majority rule country and I think that should also include our justice system when it comes to death penalty cases.
 

aa9511

New Member
Joined
Mar 24, 2013
Messages
6,639
Reaction score
7
Hi all -

Have not posted on here in a long time and I did not follow the re-trial (mostly due to difficulty because of no cameras, stop/start of trial, etc.)......

I just want to tell you guys how sorry I am for the result!!! It must have been so devastating to learn of the final: 11-1.

I saw the "breaking" on HLN and so watched the verdict being read, and then the juror speaking sessions. I felt so bad for those jurors, you could hear the sorrow and anguish in their voices. It was not their fault. They tried their best. What can you do if one juror refuses to discuss?

IMO, JSS shoudl have had the GUTS to throw that juror OUT for NOT DELIBERATING and put an alternate in. It is clearly against the rules to NOT DELIBERATE, that is what all the experts said.

I am also disappointed with Juan's office that they did not (seemingly) vet the jurors thoroughly. I am sure the defense would have investigated all of the jurors and caught onto something like that if it hurt their side. I think the prosecutor's office dropped the ball on that one, but then I think well they do not have infinite resources and they probably did the best they could. With the high publicity of the trial, there were bound to be people like this trying to get onto the jury.

Anyway, I just wanted to say this to get it off my chest. I know the Alexander family was very upset, but hopefully after the sentencing they will have some finality regardless, and FINALLY be able to move on with their lives in whatever way they can. The important thing is the sentencing, which has AGAIN been delayed, when JSS COULD HAVE just done it and gotten the whole dang thing over with.

Did the defense team not have years and years to prepare for this moment???? What is the use of putting it off for 30 more days?? It's just CMJA being CMJA. She wants to hold everybody hostage for as long as she can.

I really admire those of you who have kept of with all of this trial - you have shown such dedication. I really appreciate you all!
 

Bernina

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 9, 2013
Messages
11,444
Reaction score
6,064
Nurmi was with the public defender's office when assiged to the case. He was in the process of leaving to set up private practice and when this case took so long to proceed to trial he requested being let off the case to pursue his private endeavor. Judge denied his request but allowed him to be paid the going rate of his private practice rather than what he would have earned as a public defender. Willmott came along for the ride because as a death penalty case the defendant was entitled to two attorneys.

The three million dollar price tag is outrageous even with private practice payment considered and I hold the judge responsible for much of that expense. She did not have control of her courtroom, allowed even miniscule issues to be discussed in lengthy and numerous sidebars, and granted delay after delay after delay. All of that added to the taxpayer expense and on top of it she allowed a lot of testimony that was irrelevant and/or repetitive.

The trial was too long. Period. This was a case with a lot of evidence against the perpetrator that was allowed to be hijacked into a trial of the victim. I found the whole thing appalling and my voice is not loud on the subject only because I am not an Arizona taxpayer.

The $3mill was taken from funds in the Public Defender's Office, via the County Attorney. It was already part of those yearly budgets.
Do the math, cost of trial divided by the population of Maricopa County (over 4 million as of 2013), and then split it up over 7 years.
It did NOT come from funds that "could" have been spent in any other county department, not education, law enforcement, roadways, etc., etc., etc.

The people who are REALLY going to be angry are the gals in Perryville, who had Public Defenders, were told the "budget" couldn't afford experts at that time, and ended up taking a plea bargain because their Public Defender said they didn't have a solid case without all the bangs and whistles.
Those gals with 15-20 years on pleas aren't going to be happy campers. Not One Bit. CMJA won't be anyone's special snowflake.
 

ILikeToBendPages

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2010
Messages
24,264
Reaction score
43,994
Manual Vasquez a Mexican Mafia hit man convicted of beating and strangling a San Antonio woman for not paying the gang's 10 percent tax on her illegal drug sales was executed Wednesday evening.

His execution leaves Texas with enough phenobarbital to carry out one more execution. He was the fourth Texas inmate put to death this year, and six more are scheduled in the coming weeks.

I'm tired of whining about how inhumane it is to execute a convicted killer by lethal injection.
 

RadarLuv

New Member
Joined
Feb 5, 2013
Messages
2,556
Reaction score
1
A good friend of mine told me that Louisiana also has a simple majority for the DP. She thought they were the only state, but I knew FL also played by those rules. ,

Florida has it now as a simple majority, so as few as seven jurors can find for the DP. Unfortunately, the US Supreme Court is reviewing FL's law this year because of an appeal by a (sentenced to death but not by a unanimous vote) death row inmate. So who knows how it will end up.
 

GigiG

New Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2015
Messages
2,567
Reaction score
1
All it takes is a vote from the state legislature to pass such a change. What states have it already and which ones would top your list to change (besides AZ)?

I could be wrong, but I believe that in Florida, a 7-5 majority is all that's needed for sentencing.
 

Caylee Advocate

RIP TARA
Joined
Mar 15, 2009
Messages
3,925
Reaction score
10,957
Just curious -- is there any legal reason for anyone owning a silencer for a gun. I understand guns for protection and hunting, but a silencer? I just don't get it.



Some states have recently passed bills that allow hunting with silencers. I don't get it either, but I guess the bigwigs don't see it as problematic. I can see all kinds of problems myself, and I am a proud member of the NRA, as well as having a CCP. So, dunno.
 

lauraoh

Active Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2011
Messages
378
Reaction score
39
I sure hope the USSC upholds it. And if it does I think all states need to adopt this rule of law.

It is costing so much money and time wasted when death penalty cases are sabotaged by one lone holdout usually. I have never seen a death penalty case from Florida have a 7-5 vote for death. I have seen some which were 10-2 for death or 11-1 for death.

I believe in the Joseph Smith kidnapping, rape, and murder trial of Carlie Brushia (sp?) ended in a 10-2 decision for death and the Foreman was a Minister who also voted for death.

Has there been a case in Florida that had a 7-5 split on a death penalty case, if you know?

Someone put up an article earlier talking about rogue jurors on high profile cases and it seems to happen a lot more than we might think.

I don't think it even makes sense that one holdout completely demolishes the other 11 jurors' vote. We have always been a majority rule country and I think that should also include our justice system when it comes to death penalty cases.


It actually was 7 to 5 in the FL case that's being appealed. The killer's name is Timothy Lee Hurst.

The case is here: http://www.murderpedia.org/male.H/h/hurst-timothy-lee.htm

SCOTUS news here:http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Justic...hallenging-Florida-s-capital-punishment-rules
 

oceanblueeyes

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2004
Messages
26,446
Reaction score
43,593
Nurmi was with the public defender's office when assiged to the case. He was in the process of leaving to set up private practice and when this case took so long to proceed to trial he requested being let off the case to pursue his private endeavor. Judge denied his request but allowed him to be paid the going rate of his private practice rather than what he would have earned as a public defender. Willmott came along for the ride because as a death penalty case the defendant was entitled to two attorneys.

The three million dollar price tag is outrageous even with private practice payment considered and I hold the judge responsible for much of that expense. She did not have control of her courtroom, allowed even miniscule issues to be discussed in lengthy and numerous sidebars, and granted delay after delay after delay. All of that added to the taxpayer expense and on top of it she allowed a lot of testimony that was irrelevant and/or repetitive.

The trial was too long. Period. This was a case with a lot of evidence against the perpetrator that was allowed to be hijacked into a trial of the victim. I found the whole thing appalling and my voice is not loud on the subject only because I am not an Arizona taxpayer.

And boy did the DT milk it for all it was worth and JSS brought the cash cow into the courtroom for them to do it. I blame her for it costing millions for the DT who in the end did nothing but put on a smear campaign against Travis for months on end.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top