Discussions on Formal Sentencing Hearing - Jodi Arias #7

[decemberbee45]

I am hopeless. I'm JAed out. It is over. My stomach hurts and I'm tired, yet I'm glued to jury selection video! Is there treatment for this?

Forgive me for self-quoting, but I find this even more painful seeing Detective Flores. It is so poignant knowing what is about to befall him and totally change his life. <3 to the Flores family.

 

[Mindmatters]

JM clearly didn't use one of his 10 strikes to remove her the next day. He also didn't object when JSS said she was good with 17. He did say a quick something I couldn't catch--did anyone else hear it?

I heard it but couldn't understand it. I really trust that Juan had very good reasons for not using a strike and was likely more concerned with saving his strikes for identified DP wafflers--IDK possible lesser of two evils situation, but me, I would have used a strike on this women--she wanted to be on the trial, she cried about DV, and she gave a long winded answer with TMI to a simple question.

 

[prima.facie]

@bychristinebswk: @juanstie @JMartinezUpdate @JodiAriasExcuse it was confirmed to me. I confirmed it to Tie.

Christine Beswick is a journalist for the Examiner.

just an FYI....and FWIW....
I am not sure what qualifies for a 'journalist' these days, but anyone can write for the Examiner . I signed up an account once - when I had a writing bug, but never did anything with it. I am most certainly no journalist. Id take anything from the examiner with a grain of salt (as it tends to be most opinion pieces and little accountability for truth). it can be as reliable as 'before it was news'

in fact, when i was in school there were a few sources we were NEVER EVER EVER allowed to use as a source : wikipedia and the examiner


http://www.examiner.com/article/exa...e-a-tabloid-rather-than-a-credible-newssource

 

[Hope4More]

Question: how desperate was JSS to fill the jury, it's not like they didn't have other better options!

I've wondered that from the beginning of the 17 thing. Jury selection didn't last very long, there was no shortage of potential jurors, and it's not like JSS or the DT were in any hurry to get going or to get the trial over with.

 

[Caylee Advocate]

MCSO conducting "case study" of Arias



http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/mesa/2015/03/13/mcso-doing-case-study-on-arias/70239334/

 

[Sweet Fox]

WTH.....so where are JSS defenders now?? Juan wanted her out for cause, he was RIGHT. Again, sloppy horrible judge, imo.

And when the other jurors sent the question to the judge about #17 Juan again asked JSS to "reconsider" his prior motion to remove her for cause. And again, the judge failed to do so.

 

[Nancy_Drew]

Someone here posted that it turns out this is a hoax, not actually confirmed. I have no idea which is true.

I don't believe it was a hoax... I think it was a JA supporter saying that trying to save face!!

I read something from a JA supporter on Twitter that said something like, "JA is fine, maybe just a little hungry"

 

[MeeBee]

just an FYI....and FWIW....
I am not sure what qualifies for a 'journalist' these days, but anyone can write for the Examiner . I signed up an account once - when I had a writing bug, but never did anything with it. I am most certainly no journalist. Id take anything from the examiner with a grain of salt (as it tends to be most opinion pieces and little accountability for truth). it can be as reliable as 'before it was news'

in fact, when i was in school there were a few sources we were NEVER EVER EVER allowed to use as a source : wikipedia and the examiner


http://www.examiner.com/article/exa...e-a-tabloid-rather-than-a-credible-newssource

Yes I did some reading up on her and on the examiner today and found this bit of info. She's just a lady who writes for them in her spare time. There's a sport site that's like that too. You can work your up with them and such and some people do really well with the work and aren't any less legit than full time reporters. But I don't know much about this lady.

 

[bznbear]

OMG JSS asked her specifically if she could separate her personal experiences, i.e., DV history, from the evidence of the case to which she said YES.

JSS kinda advocated to keep this juror after further questioning...her use of words for why is very bothersome and quite alarming as it seemed rather opinion based IMO.

I'm just freaking sick over this. What a complete and utter SNAFU!

ETA: That means JSS was fully aware J17 was suspect and Juan had issues with her prior to getting the foreman's note during deliberations!

 

[FelicityLemon]

Copyright rules are very strict. Twitter is from a phone. There is nothing regarding copying information off a phone. However Websleuth's has a copyright policy in place so copy and pasting to twitter is a violation. See the rules below:

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?65797-Copyright-Notice

All materials contained on this web site not otherwise subject to copyright of other parties are subject to the ownership rights of Websleuths.com. Websleuths.com authorizes you to make a single copy of the content herein for your own personal, non-commercial, use while visiting the site. You agree that any copy made must include Websleuths.com&#8217;s copyright notice. No other permission is granted to you to print, copy, reproduce, distribute, transmit, upload, download, store, display in public, alter, or modify the content contained on this web site.


So if you are exchanging tweets with someone you might remind them of the copyright here at Websleuths.

I don't have a twitter account - the last few weeks are the most I've ever tried to navigate it to see the good stuff, lol. I only made a facebook page a few weeks ago just to join a group there. I'm not a social media kinda gal. Except here now :blushing: and I'm hooked on websleuths.

I'm a graphic designer who's been ripped off a few times in the past, so I FULLY AGREE WITH AND SUPPORT having and obeying copyright rules and laws!

My DH likes to say there are only two laws: the laws of man and the laws of physics. The laws of physics can't be denied, but that the reality is people circumvent the laws of man (as we all know too well) but you can't get around the laws of physics. *rereading this sentence and Yeah, it's worded awkwardly, but I hope you understand what I'm trying to say.

I was just speaking to the realities of internet life There's lotsa baduns' out there that do what they want to do regardless of the laws of man, ethics or morals.

 

[Mrs G Norris]

One question answered. JM tried to remove her for cause and was denied...he saw those tears and thought she'd be biased by DV. That was BK's take too, after the fact- DV, not animus towards JM.

What should have been more worrisome than it seems to have been was her response as to why she was crying. Embarassment? That doesn't mean she was strong, JSS. It just means another facet of her emotionalism about DV.

OK what about how she says she wouldn't just let anyone around her kids, after she met her second felon on an online dating site .. even though their FATHER is a freaking con .. WTF!! Poor judgement or what .. doesn't all of the above show shocking poor judgement? Isn't part of being on a jury having good judgement?

I'm so miffed by all this.

 

[Hope4More]

I heard it but couldn't understand it. I really trust that Juan had very good reasons for not using a strike and was likely more concerned with saving his strikes for identified DP wafflers--IDK possible lesser of two evils situation, but me, I would have used a strike on this women--she wanted to be on the trial, she cried about DV, and she gave a long winded answer with TMI to a simple question.

I really hope we'll be able to see video of the next day, and who was struck for what. 10 isn't very many. JM's ability to read jurors is one of his greatest strengths....I was impressed by it from the guilt phase and have been ever since. He saw a problem with 17, so he must have seen bigger problems with 10 other potential jurors.

I wonder if JSS lost any sleep over not dismissing 17 for cause on October 7th, as JM requested?

 

[Mrs G Norris]

SA was sentenced to probation the day after their marriage .. LATER sent to prison .. I'm getting this second hand because I can't access the docs, is that right?

 

[Hope4More]

And when the other jurors sent the question to the judge about #17 Juan again asked JSS to "reconsider" his prior motion to remove her for cause. And again, the judge failed to do so.

By then it was too late. Really. JA would have won on appeal if 17 had been removed at that point.

 

[prima.facie]

Yes I did some reading up on her and on the examiner today and found this bit of info. She's just a lady who writes for them in her spare time. There's a sport site that's like that too. You can work your up with them and such and some people do really well with the work and aren't any less legit than full time reporters. But I don't know much about this lady.

I was going to go back and edit and say that my post was NOT meant to say this writer could not be trusted - as I dont know her at all - but for those who dont know, to take the site in general, with a grain of salt. There is a lot of crap on there

 

[ShadyLady]

OK what about how she says she wouldn't just let anyone around her kids, after she met her second felon on an online dating site .. even though their FATHER is a freaking con .. WTF!! Poor judgement or what .. doesn't all of the above show shocking poor judgement? Isn't part of being on a jury having good judgement?

I'm so miffed by all this.

And pregnant again before marrying...added: I am old fashion I guess...

 

[Mindmatters]

MCSO conducting "case study" of Arias



http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/mesa/2015/03/13/mcso-doing-case-study-on-arias/70239334/

Thanks for this CayleeAdvocate. I wondered when the research would start, as it relates to prisons/incarceration, on the advent of social media and it's impact on the CJ system.

 

[GigiG]

Juan at sidebar trying to get rid of 138 for cause because she cried .. am I hearing this right? YEP listen: https://youtu.be/n7jqGuEniFA?t=26m11s

OMG!!! Even before that, Juan asks the whole group if they are willing to deliberate with the others or if they're going to sit in the corner...

 

[Hope4More]

OK what about how she says she wouldn't just let anyone around her kids, after she met her second felon on an online dating site .. even though their FATHER is a freaking con .. WTF!! Poor judgement or what .. doesn't all of the above show shocking poor judgement? Isn't part of being on a jury having good judgement?

I'm so miffed by all this.

Yes. And keeping stories straight. I know we're likely biased by what we know now, but she just didn't feel right somehow, and I don't think it's because she couldn't communicate. She wouldn't win any public speaking awards, but she clearly was capable of explaining to other jurors why she thought as she did, felt as she did. She chose not to.

 

[Hope4More]

I'm just freaking sick over this. What a complete and utter SNAFU!

ETA: That means JSS was fully aware J17 was suspect and Juan had issues with her prior to getting the foreman's note during deliberations!

JSS didn't think 17 was suspect. Or overly emotional. Or incapable of separating her own feelings from the facts of the case, etc. That, IMO, is worse in a sense. She's THAT bad at assessing people,and she's a JUDGE? Eek!