Discussions on Formal Sentencing Hearing - Jodi Arias #6

[Nancy_Drew]

Looking at the cheap commissary prices and the amount of money she'd been spending per week, she should weigh 300 lbs. In my opinion, she's bartering (another rule breaker) for services rendered such as the video chat circumvention, who knows what else, but she sure isn't eating that much in junk food, I'm pretty sure.

Now how about that person who broke the rules for giving ja the videochats - isn't that person in trouble, too? Is she mad at ja?

ja won't be able to get as many dupes if she can't pay via meat sticks and cheetos - sosadtoobad - although I haven little doubt that there are still some wimpy girls who would do it just because ja is so "nice" and *cough choke* "innocent"

blech.

You mean "bartering" for services such as jury tampering??!! ;0) If inmates can arrange murder for hire from inside jail, why not jury tampering??!

 

[bznbear]

Oh, I wasn't inferring any wrong doing, nor was the post I was responding to. The post started "I've read everything I could find regarding juror #17, and enjoyed the numerous opinions here. While I don't know what went on in that deliberation room nor what was in her heart and mind, I do find several things odd."
I added my question to the list of things I find "odd". And it seems reasonable to wonder why she didn't seem to want the jurors to go with her on the Life side.

Exactly. It's entirely possible J17 just didn't know how to deliberate or persuade, but coupled with her omissions during voir dire et al, I'm needing more answers.

 

[GigiG]

I wish there was video of Judge Stephens sentencing someone. I would like to see her in action prior to April 13. I wish I knew how to research her record too but alas I don't.

I've only read the tweets about her finishing up other cases in the morning before the Arias trial (which is why it always started late). She is pretty tough with her sentencing.

 

[FelicityLemon]

Excellent post with your questions. May I add- Why didn't she explain to the rest of the jurors to get them to go to Her side for Life? Think about it, if you were the only one standing firm, why not try to get the rest of the jury to come to your side?

ESPECIALLY since at the first count there were others against the DP - did she try to appeal to them to remind them?

 

[Val1]

:seeya: Good points !

:hilarious: "Belle of the Ball" ... LOL !

No more "field trips" ... No more of Jen and Maria's 'hand-me-downs' and dry cleaned clothes for Princess ... No more of a lot of things !

She is going to have a really rude awakening ! Oh well !

I'm waiting to see if she shows up for her sentencing in pre-murder regalia... golden crown(hair), low-cut or form-fitting purple sweater, full make-up, whitened teeth... all courtesy of quick rinse MDLR...

 

[Nancy_Drew]

I've read everything I could find regarding juror #17, and enjoyed the numerous opinions here. While I don't know what went on in that deliberation room nor what was in her heart and mind, I do find several things odd.

During voir dire she stated she could give the death penalty. What evidence did she see/hear to change her mind - the autopsy photos, the incessant lies, the DT witnesses?

She stated the killer was not the monster the LMN movie portrayed her as. What did she see/hear that actually caused her opinion of the killer to improve?

Why did she claim the 11 harangued her yet she accused them of using the DP for revenge?

Were all her questionable SM likes and visits purely coincidental and innocent? What are the odds?

Why didn't she fully disclose her husbands' criminal records? Why didn't she raise her hand when asked if she knew any of the court officers?

Why did her husband offer her story to the media for a fee, instead of granting an interview?

I don't question these things because of the verdict because I'm satisfied LWOP will be a horrible existence for decades to come. I'm frustrated with the possible manipulation of the justice system. How many of us would want to be a juror knowing one individual could interfere with due process? IDK if #17 did anything wrong, but I do hope there's a full investigation.

ETA: I see #17 and husband have closed FB and MS accounts, at least in their names. Are they afraid? If so, of whom - the public or the State?

It is very odd that j17 accuses the others of "revenge". "Avenge" would be a better term to use for the other jurors, I.e, "the juors wanted to avenge the murder of Travis".

Revenge is such a personal term, it's almost as if j17 was projecting. Here is the dictionary definition for "revenge".

REVENGE

rəˈvenj/
noun

1. the action of inflicting hurt or harm on someone for an injury or wrong suffered at their hands.
"other spurned wives have taken public revenge on their husbands"

synonyms: vengeance, retribution, retaliation, reprisal, requital, recrimination, an eye for an eye (and a tooth for a tooth), redress, satisfaction

"she is seeking revenge"

 

[GigiG]

http://tucson.com/news/local/crime/...cle_f9486231-e76d-5c35-abcd-22919cd4fcfe.html

Reading that article, I was initially encouraged that AZ serious crime inmates aren't earning college degrees in prison, only to see that a guy on death row for 25 yrs. for killing an 8 yo girl has earned 2 associate degrees, a bachelor's in English/Law, and a master's in Literature. Sheesh.

Plus, do you have any idea the $$$ of student loans law-abiding people have to take out to get degrees? My son is working a FT job and going to graduate school. Even with FAFSA, the costs are 5-digits. It's insane that our "good" young people have to go into major debt to get college degrees, but prisoners get them paid for by the state. Something's wrong with this picture!

ETA: Especially in regard to felons serving life/death sentences. What purpose does it serve to indulge them with educational opportunities? We don't "owe" them; they owe us; society. That's why they're incarcerated.

 

[La-Cooks]

I'm over J17, but I definitely want the outing of the other 11 jurors investigated/prosecuted.

 

[waltzingmatilda]

http://www.worldstarhiphop.com/videos/video.php?v=wshh2EVEq3hYPw43Xu0d

Angela Simpson video interview - it's probably been posted here before, but I just found it and I think it's interesting in many ways as it will relate to ja's future community.

She's almost hate to say oddly likable for her directness. Please, please, please, if someone has a better descriptor than likable tell me!! That's not a challenge, it's that I know it's not quite the right word, but that's all I have for now. She's very open about what she did and oops, there was a racial component to it, too - so watch out ja. Beginning 11:00 (approx) pay particular attention. She would never kill a black individual. Her victim was white and a snitch. If she had the opportunity to kill again she said "absolutely".

She said it's only right that she's so honest and direct because that's what she expects from others. That's going to be a real problem considering ja's barely nodding acquaintance with being honest or direct about much of anything.

When asked, she says her sentence wasn't fair. It wasn't fair because she deserved the Death Penalty. She said she deserved it, but she's okay with her life sentence. She's not complaining.

As far as interviews with convicted ADMITTED murderers, I think this rates as an amazing interview. Chilling, but amazing. Throw rocks at me if you like, but you can't ask for anything more than honesty from a convicted murderer as to why they viciously murdered someone. I've never seen anything like this.

ja has much to be worried about from this one.

Wow! I don't know what to think about that. Honest, is the word that comes to mind. Refreshing is another word after years of listening to JA lies even tho she admitted the crime. Blatant Truth. It's a bit disarming that she speaks so frankly about her horrible crime. She owns it. She doesn't deflect or blame anyone nor takes blame because in her mind, he deserved it. She also has crazy eyes, very piercing gaze. :scared:

JA, welcome to Perryville. Meet your new B!tch M@st3r! I agree, JA should be worried about this one! Whoa! Going to take a shower now.

 

[FelicityLemon]

That could be explained as just lacking the intellectual resources to do so, not in itself an indication of wrongdoing.

Wow! Smacking myself in the forehead that I didn't think of it this way because that's the way I am in person. I'm fine on paper (mostly, lol), but in person especially in stressful situations, I freeze and often can't explain myself well. I got called for jury duty, began voir dire process, had a mini meltdown trying to explain I could do jury duty just fine if it was from another room and not in the actual courtroom in front of the (admittedly stabbed someone) violent defendant and was excused. Totally understandable. Sad, because I would have loved to do jury duty.

Steve44: thank you for this. Sometimes the most simple thing is it.



okay, was I just hacked or something? OUt of the blue while typing this, some odd audio thing shouting "meat sticks? meat sticks? oh, yeah! Meat sticks! Slim jim party" wth

 

[Steve44]

9 hours of video chatting in one day (and there were probably many days like that); She was on a roll, gaming the system, and relying on it to continue. I bet that's why she requested the 30 day delay. The fact it was taken from her so completely and so quickly I think is a lesson she will be learning over and over again in the coming months and years, and with viable prospects of a new trial or parole diminished to practically nothing by her exclusion from the DP club, I bet she's finally feeling the concrete walls closing in.

 

[TartLemon]

I've only read the tweets about her finishing up other cases in the morning before the Arias trial (which is why it always started late). She is pretty tough with her sentencing.

That's pretty much my thoughts, too. All those delays in the JA trial weren't for JSS to go on vacation or put her feet up and lounge. There were other docket items to be handled. The court system of AZ didn't stop everything for this 'celebrity' trial. JSS, Nurmi, Wilmott and JM had other issues to deal with as well.

 

[Hope4More]

MK blather for your entertainment.


http://www.azcentral.com/story/laurieroberts/2015/03/12/jodi-arias-juror-no-17-threats/70228416/

That was actually written by someone else, though I grant you it surely does sound like a MK piece.

 

[FelicityLemon]

Her victim wasn't a snitch though she just claimed he was. He was a disabled man. Judging by her prison record she'll be in solitery for a long time and won't be anywhere near Jodi.

Her victim had a family just like Travis did. I'm not throwing rocks but please have a look at what this woman did.
http://blogs.phoenixnewtimes.com/valleyfever/2012/04/angela_simpson_gets_life_in_pr.php

I'm tired of hearing people talking about this monster like she's going to be some sort of avenging angel who will make Jodi pay. With any luck Angela Simpson will spend her days locked away from all human life.

I know what this woman did. Not sure that one precludes the other - disabled people can't be snitches? I'd be a "snitch" in a heartbeat if it was the right thing to do.

I don't care if her victim was a snitch or rescued puppies and kittens - he was a victim of unimaginable horror and terror.

I've also posted before that whatever her victims did or didn't do - what she said was merely an excuse like all serial killers have to justify in their minds that what they're doing is okay.

As far as her being an avenging angel - not sure what you mean since I didn't say anything of the kind. My comment addresses angela's comment that race was a factor, her victims would never be black and she expects honesty.

ja is white, ja is dishonest. My comment meant nothing more, nothing less than ja should watch out.

 

[FelicityLemon]

MK blather for your entertainment.


http://www.azcentral.com/story/laurieroberts/2015/03/12/jodi-arias-juror-no-17-threats/70228416/

LOL, "get a life" says the website that covers all things jodi.

I still haven't heard or seen death threats. Anyone have links? Normally threats are published all over MSM.

 

[ohreally]

Nurmi asked for thirty days so that Jodi can get her affairs in order, or something close to that. Haha she wont be doing that now.

 

[jojo87]

I know what this woman did. Not sure that one precludes the other - disabled people can't be snitches? I'd be a "snitch" in a heartbeat if it was the right thing to do.

I don't care if her victim was a snitch or rescued puppies and kittens - he was a victim of unimaginable horror and terror.

I've also posted before that whatever her victims did or didn't do - what she said was merely an excuse like all serial killers have to justify in their minds that what they're doing is okay.

As far as her being an avenging angel - not sure what you mean since I didn't say anything of the kind. My comment addresses angela's comment that race was a factor, her victims would never be black and she expects honesty.

ja is white, ja is dishonest. My comment meant nothing more, nothing less than ja should watch out.

I believe LE stated her victim wasn't a snitch.

 

[LinTX]

I think you are right about this. When I worked for probation & parole department we had what was called a Pre-Sentence Investigation in which many factors were considered for the purpose of imposing sentence (in our case, considered for purpose of parole revocation on someone out on parole who had gotten into new trouble). It was mandatory and not optional for the perpertrator. I think this report re Arias has a similar purpose and is mandated to determine which life sentence is appropriate.

I do not think it is because there is any question of the sentence--I think it is just a formality.

As I posted upthread today, JSS is not doing a presentence report. From the latest minute entry:

LET THE RECORD REFLECT that a Presentence Report was initially ordered but then cancelled later this date and a PSR will NOT be prepared for sentencing in this matter.

 

[FelicityLemon]

I believe LE stated her victim wasn't a snitch.

I know. I never said otherwise.

One of my points is that it doesn't matter if he was or if he wasn't. It was an excuse for her to tell herself it was okay to do what she did. Like a rapist saying his victim "was dressed provocatively." It doesn't matter.

Another point was to the comment of "he wasn't a snitch, he was disabled". I was being a wiseguy, by saying they're not mutually exclusive because of the way that poster's comment was worded - it read like "he was disabled so he couldn't be (fill in the blank with whatever).

To repeat, it doesn't matter what he was or what he wasn't. Nothing justifies what she did to him. That was on her and had nothing to do with him, he was her victim and he was available.

 

[Caylee Advocate]

View attachment 70992


compliant inmate







non compliant inmate