Penalty Phase - Verdict Watch #3

[MidwestMama]

It seems she is really clueless as to how she is perceived by 99% of the population. Has everyone somehow kept that from her?

She thinks they are talking about someone else....of course.

IMO, that is because of who surrounds her.
It reminds me of celebs/sports heroes who are surrounded by "yes men". Yes, you are the greatest. Yes, we will allow you to (do drugs, drive drunk, cheat on your spouse) and not call you out on your behavior. Yes, we think you are the greatest to ever live... Surrounded by total enablers and ego strokers.

Then when the celeb/sports hero happens to get a consequence thru the press or legal system they are stunned!
"What? Everyone I ever associate with adore me and allow me to do these things? How could you be any different?"

Similar with JA:
surrounded by other inmates, family, "friends" etc who tell her they believe all her lies, she's wonderful, Travis deserved what he got, she is the victim...
When someone who isn't an enabler or ego stroker says
"Do you know you are the most hated woman in the US?"
Her reply is"
"What? I am only surrounded by those who love me. I get letters of adoration all the time? How could anyone hate me?"

Enablers hurt far more than they help because they allow the person to live in LaLa Land and escape the realization of the consequences of their action.

 

[Liebchenmutti]

You say balanced, I say greedy :floorlaugh::floorlaugh:

Hey, I know for a fact there are millions of Martinezes out there!:floorlaugh:

 

[21merc7]

Totally VAPING Pina Colada!

Birthday Cake Supreme for me.

Vaping is what you call smoking an electronic cigarette for the poster that asked.

And, I just read that inmates get to eat bacon in jail. Fooey.

 

[Steft50]

Jury: We might be hung.

Later on today: Hey Jodi! We lied. You can relate, right? LMAO[/QUOTE

Exactly what I have been thinking too.

 

[Ladylub]

Is that a claw foot?? Yuck!

My first thought was, I wonder what could be wrong with her joints that cause her finger and toes to be like that. Unless she cut the toe on the same piece of glass... I mean the metal thingy .... I mean whatever her story really is.

 

[G&AMom]

Lol, this is me:

Doctor: Do you drink?

Me: No, I used to...Well, occasionally, on holidays....Sometimes on weekends.....I might buy a bottle of wine after a long day....Yes, I'm a total booze hound.

Honesty with your doctor never, ever pays. That's my policy and I'm sticking to it.

 

[Chelly]

This is a process that must work its course. Strong minds will prevail.
Well, that's what I keep telling myself so I don't throw my lappy through my TV.

 

[corundogs]

OK...I am confused.

I get there was the tweet put out by the courthouse that there was a question about "IF we aren't unanimous, what do we do?" (paraphrased)

But that is NOT what JSS said. At all. She said (not paraphrased) "I got your note that you were NOT able to come to a unanimous decision..."

So I get that it would be really nice to come to the possibility that they were just clarifying jury instructions...that's not what JSS said.

What am I missing???

 

[Rosemary Pierce]

What is vaping? I need to quit too. ty

It's not working for me. Still smoking cigs and the ecig. I blame this fk'n trial!

 

[TXProfessional]

Don't have all the links and can't get them right now because I am ellipticallling (word or not?!), BUT I have a theory about the jury's ? This AM:

If you watch the judge reading jury instructions on YouTube croakerqueen day 3 part 2 starting at 14 min (final jury instructions), she reads the paragraph quoted earlier in this thread about letting the judge know if they are not unanimous.

Then watch when the judge gives the final, FINAL jury instructions about the verdict form on YouTube croakerqueen day 3 part 4 (rebuttal and charge to the jury) starting at 10:44- there she describes three boxes for the jury to choose from to check for their verdict (death, life, or "no unanimous agreement").

iMO the jury was going through these instructions and realized that the first part said to tell the judge if they were not unanimous but the second part said to mark the box on the verdict form if they ended up not unanimous. They wanted clarification.

Also, someone earlier posted that they asked "at this stage" in the note to the judge - I think they may have meant "at this phase" - ie during the PENALTY phase ("stage") do they let the judge know if they are not unanimous as they would have done during the GUILT or AGGRAVATION phase ( verdict forms on those did not have a box for "no unanimous agreement" IIRC) or do they check the daggum box on the verdict form?

I think it is a very detail oriented jury and they stumbled upon the conflicting instructions about what to do IF they ever ended up in a position of not being unanimous. I don't blame them for asking for clarification.

Sorry if this is crazy with typos - hard to elliptical and type on iPad "contemporaneously".

Thanks and thanks again zoozoo :blowkiss: , this is what I was trying to say in my post earlier but you did a much better job :rockon:. Seriously, it just DID NOT make sense to me that this jury who

1. Has asked literally 100's of intelligent and detailed questions,
2. Has hung in with this marathon trial, virtually taking no sick days
3. Has demonstrated careful and considerate deliberation throughout
4. And to Rose222's post, came today ready with food and in comfort.

I does not make sense that this jury would deliberate for a mere 2 hours and then say they are hung. I honestly believe the Judge misunderstood the jurors question IMO

 

[mck16]

Adding to my earlier post below. Added part is in italics

QUOTE=zoozoo;9481108]Don't have all the links and can't get them right now because I am ellipticallling (word or not?!), BUT I have a theory about the jury's ? This AM:

If you watch the judge reading jury instructions on YouTube croakerqueen day 3 part 2 starting at 14 min (final jury instructions), she reads the paragraph quoted earlier in this thread about letting the judge know if they are not unanimous. Here is the quote posted earlier and attributed to azcental although I have NOT been able to confirm it is an accurate quote so please consider that:
The jury sent a handwritten note on an official question form to the judge. It said: “If the jury is unable to come to a unanimous decision @ this stage, do we notify the judge of this on the form (verdict) or do we just tell the judge her instruction on the bottom P. 10 on the final jury Instruction-Penalty phase?”
IMO the "her" in "... tell the judge her instruction on the bottom of P.10" is a typo and should read "per".

Then watch when the judge gives the final, FINAL jury instructions about the verdict form on YouTube croakerqueen day 3 part 4 (rebuttal and charge to the jury) starting at 10:44- there she describes three boxes for the jury to choose from to check for their verdict (death, life, or "no unanimous agreement").

iMO the jury was going through these instructions and realized that the first part said to tell the judge if they were not unanimous but the second part said to mark the box on the verdict form if they ended up not unanimous. They wanted clarification.

Also, someone earlier posted that they asked "at this stage" in the note to the judge - I think they may have meant "at this phase" - ie during the PENALTY phase ("stage") do they let the judge know if they are not unanimous as they would have done during the GUILT or AGGRAVATION phase ( verdict forms on those did not have a box for "no unanimous agreement" IIRC) or do they check the daggum box on the verdict form?

I think it is a very detail oriented jury and they stumbled upon the conflicting instructions about what to do IF they ever ended up in a position of not being unanimous. I don't blame them for asking for clarification.

Sorry if this is crazy with typos - hard to elliptical and type on iPad "contemporaneously".

[/QUOTE]


But, all this was over 4 hours ago. What is the holdup now? It is simple, life or death...just pick a box. jmo

 

[leebee52]

IMO, that is because of who surrounds her.
It reminds me of celebs/sports heroes who are surrounded by "yes men". Yes, you are the greatest. Yes, we will allow you to (do drugs, drive drunk, cheat on your spouse) and not call you out on your behavior. Yes, we think you are the greatest to ever live... Surrounded by total enablers and ego strokers.

Then when the celeb/sports hero happens to get a consequence thru the press or legal system they are stunned!
"What? Everyone I ever associate with adore me and allow me to do these things? How could you be any different?"

Similar with JA:
surrounded by other inmates, family, "friends" etc who tell her they believe all her lies, she's wonderful, Travis deserved what he got, she is the victim...
When someone who isn't an enabler or ego stroker says
"Do you know you are the most hated woman in the US?"
Her reply is"
"What? I am only surrounded by those who love me. I get letters of adoration all the time? How could anyone hate me?"

Enablers hurt far more than they help because they allow the person to live in LaLa Land and escape the realization of the consequences of their action.

Enablers also live in lala land.

 

[G&AMom]

:floorlaugh::floorlaugh:
That's funny..:floorlaugh:
This trial shall forever now be known as "that bother-in-law" who visited...:floorlaugh:
...for about four months or so...:floorlaugh:
Gotta love it!

It's true! I do have a brother-in-law visiting! I'll see him on June 1st. Of course, that doesn't account for my liquor bill since January 2nd, I admit.

 

[ElleElle]

In the early days, we loved and enjoyed the trial. It was entertaining. We enjoyed being outraged by Gus, Dr. Samuels and ALV. We relished and despised Jodi's lying testimony and her narcissism. We suffered for Travis and his family. We came to WS and shared our indignation. Over time, we became so emotionally invested, we got sucked into the drama ..My opinion.

I loathe Jodi and everything about this case (except JM) but can't pull myself away from it. We all need this to be over but there is a process in place that must play out and unfortunately we must go along for the ride. Que Sera Sera.

Excellent post!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[WindyCityGirl]

The seal for the state of AZ is still up on Wild About Trial...are we expecting some answer for today?
What is going on?

 

[NotMyselfNEMore]

Jury: We might be hung.

Later on today: Hey Jodi! We lied. You can relate, right? LMAO

LOL
But if you look at the lies, they were all were directly related to protecting the State of Arizona's reputation - we know you'll understand, Jodi (wink).
Signed, CMJA Jury Survivors

 

[Liebchenmutti]

Lol, this is me:

Doctor: Do you drink?

Me: No, I used to...Well, occasionally, on holidays....Sometimes on weekends.....I might buy a bottle of wine after a long day....Yes, I'm a total booze hound.

I used to totally panic at the checkpoint coming out of Mexico into Texas every single time! The Border Patrol ask you if you're an American citizen, etc. I would always feel like I was hiding something!:floorlaugh:

 

[InALandFarFarAway]

So we waited days and days for show and tell with a cheesy t-shirt. She stood at that podium as if she were running for student body president:
If you vote for me, I'll recycle. I'll teach idiot women in jail to read so I can have stimulating discussions with them. I'll donate my greasy hair. I'll make sure detention is abolished.

And she said she was not looking forward to spending her natural life in prison.

Hey dollface, you're a prisoner, not an honored guest. You are not supposed to look forward to it. You're being punished.

If I were a juror and found out that my definition of "life" in prison isn't necessarily what the judge's definition of life is I would immediately begin doing my own scribbling on the card: DP DP DP DP DP. I would not trust JSS to finish the job for me.

And now she holds court as if she is now some kind of domestic violence ambassador for the united nations. Which amuses me no end because the irony of how many hundreds of thousands want to do her bodily harm totally escapes her.

 

[Jane Jetson]

Don't have all the links and can't get them right now because I am ellipticallling (word or not?!), BUT I have a theory about the jury's ? This AM:

If you watch the judge reading jury instructions on YouTube croakerqueen day 3 part 2 starting at 14 min (final jury instructions), she reads the paragraph quoted earlier in this thread about letting the judge know if they are not unanimous.

Then watch when the judge gives the final, FINAL jury instructions about the verdict form on YouTube croakerqueen day 3 part 4 (rebuttal and charge to the jury) starting at 10:44- there she describes three boxes for the jury to choose from to check for their verdict (death, life, or "no unanimous agreement").

iMO the jury was going through these instructions and realized that the first part said to tell the judge if they were not unanimous but the second part said to mark the box on the verdict form if they ended up not unanimous. They wanted clarification.

Also, someone earlier posted that they asked "at this stage" in the note to the judge - I think they may have meant "at this phase" - ie during the PENALTY phase ("stage") do they let the judge know if they are not unanimous as they would have done during the GUILT or AGGRAVATION phase ( verdict forms on those did not have a box for "no unanimous agreement" IIRC) or do they check the daggum box on the verdict form?

I think it is a very detail oriented jury and they stumbled upon the conflicting instructions about what to do IF they ever ended up in a position of not being unanimous. I don't blame them for asking for clarification.

Sorry if this is crazy with typos - hard to elliptical and type on iPad "contemporaneously".

Makes total sense - very insightful! Thanks, ZZ! :rockon:

 

[Sleuth5]

....got.to.resist.
....hard.not.to.
....make.inappropriate.
....comment.

Can't!

I imagine Sleuth5 would die to hear JSS say this to him.

LOL

Lawdy. You ladies are entirely out of control.