Discussions on Formal Sentencing Hearing - Jodi Arias #7

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
The Legal issues surrounding a Trust fund should become clearer in the days ahead. I pray there is not a Legal loophole of any kind. She deserves nothing. I pray it was bad advice and that Karma is finally rolling her way.
 
oceanblueeyes said:
I feel your disgust.

I tried to watch it but only got through about 10 minutes and clicked it off.

To me she is undoubtedly one of the most boring people to listen to that I have ever witnessed.

Her lies aren't even interesting. I was so bored within 10 minutes that I was already zoning out. I don't know how the jury got through two days of it either.

So I am going to skip her secret testimony altogether.
Click to expand...
I see the bolded part as a viable book title: "I feel your disgust: unraveling the Jodi Arias trial"
 
MeeBee said:
Also, Jodi wants a fancy appellate attorney, which she believes is the key to her freedom as opposed to a public defender. She doesn't want to have to give that money back to the state and she doesn't want to have to give the money to the Alexanders. But if she is claiming indigency with $30,000+ somewhere then she should be ordered to pay the Alexanders and give the rest to the state and take her public defender like everyone else.

You are not special Jodi.
Click to expand...

If she had that money socked away, she should have been paying her DT's fees for the penalty phase. She wasn't indigent.
 
Bravo said:
Yes it was there as well. Troy's spot was just a confirmation for me that even Mom was not allowed. I wonder if her Team has been in communication with her since this came down.
Click to expand...

I really wish Troy Haden had gotten the interview with shadow gal #17.

He seems to be the only one that really asks hard questions.

I feel tonight the interview will be a softball type with no hard hitting questions. I think all they plan to do is give her a venue so she can cry victim.

I wonder how much the interviewer has even looked into all the back story of #17?
 
Wysteria said:
I wasn't going to post due to the copy and pasting of some of our members to Twitter accounts.
I've changed my mind because I don't want to feel fear and I have nothing to hide.
I think that most of us can agree that something(s) have/has happened in the 2nd penalty phase of the premeditated murder of Travis.
Something dark, dank, dirty, illegal, unprofessional, dishonest etc...involving the tippy top of the list of people that have been intimately involved with this trial.

For now, I am going to post about the 2nd penalty phase, because I am easily confused.
(I do, however; enjoy the information shared about the guilt phase and 1st penalty phase of this trial.)

My question is this: what I can do about it?
I know it is against TOS to put links to petitions' and whatnot and I completely understand why.
I am stunned about the (non)verdict. I am stunned about the information that has come to light regarding juror 17.
I am not unhappy with the verdict, but I am very alarmed about the vote, the holdout juror, as I've stated the information that has come out about the holdout juror.
Is there nothing I can do?
If I know beyond a shadow of a doubt that something illegal has occurred, is it not my duty to act?
I feel as though I must do something, but I don't even know where to start.

please pardon spelling, grammar and my poorly written post, I am not good at conveying what is in my mind into words.
Click to expand...

Not poorly written at all, bravo! I completely understand and agree with something dark, dank and dirty. I would suggest if you have information, you contact the State Attorney. Or maybe katiecoolady?
 
RickshawFan said:
I have been saying all along that I believe there are problems with her money and that it is not in fact protected. A trust account to benefit Jodi (i.e. one where someone else couldn't just help themselves to the money) would have Jodi's name on it. No problem at all for investigators to find an account titled in this way. IIRC, OJ would have had his money taken away if it was in trust. He had it put into an annuity. He also kept his house, which he had newly bought in Florida. Under Florida law, presumably, OJ was able to use these two provisions to sock his wealth away and not have to use it for restitution.

The OJ experience tells me Jodi is getting very bad "legal" advice if she thinks a trust will protect her resources. This is IMO (I used to work in financial services).

Plus, now Jodi has been caught overtly trying to shelter money in advance of her trip to Perryville. She also has no opportunity to communicate further with anyone who is handling her funds before the white bus with slit windows hauls her away.

Also, if JA wants any access to this money (e.g. for commissary), presumably it would have to be reported to prison authorities. Using a counter example, if a person has to report owning a trust account in order to get Medicaid or any kind of state-provided low-income benefits, you can almost guarantee that a prisoner would be subject to that kind of rigor. Too much money in trust (>$2,000?), means no Medicaid or low-income benefits. I can't think JA can get herself a more privileged financial position than an honest person of limited means who is going through a rough patch.

PS I hope MDLR gets a come uppance for helping Jodi shelter her funds.
Click to expand...

Thank you so much for this! I have been looking for info about finding a loophole... It has been a big concern for me that it wouldn't be used for restitution to the Alexanders...

What if they formed a non-profit, corporation, or some other sort of entity (w/o JA's name) to hide the money... Would this money still be able to be used for restitution to the Alexander family?

The fact that they donated money to St. Jude makes me wonder if it could be a corporation and they made the donation maybe for a tax write off...
 
I
Hope4More said:
It's not necessarily true that a trust to help JA would have her name on it per se.

From what I can gather, the trust being referred to is the infamous "Appellate" fund. A trust could theoretically have been set up in such a way that it is not in her name, and executors put in place to dispense funds on her behalf without her participation.

From personal experience I know that trusts involving real assets are fairly complicated. I doubt the Appellate fund was set up very well, and from the hints that have been floating about for months, trust deposits and dispersals probably won't hold up to legal scrutiny.
Click to expand...

Found some interesting restitution info - https://www.azag.gov/sites/default/files/documents/files/Restitution.pdf
 
RadarLuv said:
Doxing-Rx ‏@DoxingRx 25m25 minutes ago

There is 2 big stories coming out on #JodiArias - I can not release THEM however; @juanstie has pieced them sorta together
7 retweets 21 favorites
Click to expand...

:censored:
 
Juan asks #138 what her ex husband was sent to prison for, she responds Robbery (weakly), then Juan asks was it also aggravated assault to which she said "Mmm, it may have been" and then went into explaining how he and his cousin stole verizon phones. She also told Juan that they were split up when he (ex-husband) went to prison.
 
Janet is JSS assistant . I was there and met her. She is the one who takes you from the waiting room up to the court room.
 
Mindmatters said:
And for those who want to know who Janet, JSS's court assistant is, I believe she is the woman in black with long blonde hair at the beginning of the video.
Click to expand...

Just when I think this case cant be more bizarre, I am mistaken.

I don't understand how someone can say these cruel things about another human being who was doing his job and she receive no repercussions from it. And isn't there a rule that no one can talk to the jury and try to influence them? Isn't that jury tampering? Why wasn't she charged or at least fired immediately?

If I was Ms. Pittman I would be sorely ticked because in essence what JSS implied is she believes Janet over her. There would be no reason JP would make up such a thing.

It seems in this particular case unethical behavior has no accountability in JSS courtroom. It doesn't matter if it is a judicial assistant or the DT or their hired guns. They are able to do the most unethical things imaginable and nothing happens to them.

And I don't think they are going to do anything to #17 either although they certainly should because it sends a strong message that someone who is biased and has an agenda can lie to get on a high profile case. But I am sure the DA feels it will make others not want to serve on a DP case which is ridiculous thinking. All potential jurors should be expected to be honest and forthright at all times though and if they aren't then there should be someway they are legally punished since the stakes are so high.

Imo, many of the DTs antics were unethical practices and they should have been reported to the bar association.
 
P.J. said:
Yes she is. I was there and met her. She is the one who takes you from the waiting room up to the court room.
Click to expand...

Hi PJ and :welcome6:.

I was wondering if you could tell us who is the she you are referring to, thanks.
 
P.J. said:
Yes she is. I was there and met her. She is the one who takes you from the waiting room up to the court room.
Click to expand...

Well hello there, P.J.! :greetings:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Staff online

Members online

... and 171 more.
Total: 3,920 (members: 172, guests: 3,748)

Online statistics

Members online
172
Guests online
3,748
Total visitors
3,920
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,581
Messages
17,971,275
Members
228,825
Latest member
JustFab
Back
Top