Discussion in 'Travis Alexander Trial - The State vs. Jodi Arias' started by LambChop, Nov 21, 2014.
Please continue posting here:
I feel so..Mad.
A witness, disrespectful of the process, exhibiting Alpha one-upmanship.
This toxic person, and her emotional vampirism, fed on Travis and heartlessly consumed his family.
She feeds on all of us watching, slowly chewing our hearts.
Her powers grow, and I don't understand it at all.
I thank God for the small favor she was placed in a small concrete box BEFORE she multiplied.
K, I feel a little better..
200 posts before I catch up..
Reading is going to make me get scrunchy eye-brows, I just know it...
If this circus goes on for so long that we start losing jurors and a mistrial has to be declared due to that...could the next retrial be with a different judge or is there some reason why this judge would have to preside?
Bringing this over from last thread. Response to AZlawyer saying it is normal for an expert to shake a defendants hand:
Well, Nurmi has succeeded in dragging out the penalty phase, leaking what goes on in the courtroom, sealing the courtroom proceedings from the public and media, having a secret witness, causing this hearing on motion for mistrial and removal of DP, bringing in a computer expert on porn, and delaying this hearing until December. Oh yes, and bringing in a sexpert who doesn't know what she is talking about and therefore lying to the jury.
Maybe, possibly, with any kind of luck at all, we will STILL have a jury next year who will decide her punishment.
Disgraceful!! Thanks Judge Stephens for giving Nurmi the go ahead.
I think if there is a mistrial, this judge would set the sentence. AZlawyer knows for sure.
Defending Jacob by William Landay
I wish you a speedy recovery!
Thanks Curious...I thought so too but then remembered that if the state does not take DP off the table, she can't sentence. For DP it has to be a jury trial.
Yes, the same judge would preside.
From Joan (Canada) on the other thread:
The expert is not supposed to be unbiased. He is a paid witness for the defense.
ALV got in trouble for speaking to the victim because she's part of the defense team and they are not supposed to directly approach the victims.
So much for objectivity. He's a computer expert. Shouldn't he present himself as an unbiased professional given his role?
Oh, I see what the question was now--sorry.
If there is a mistrial due to a hung jury or prosecutorial misconduct that doesn't affect the guilt phase verdict, the judge would sentence her to LWOP or LWP. If there is a mistrial due to whatever else, I believe the state could restart with another jury and try again for the DP. If the state takes the DP off the table, the judge would sentence her to LWOP or LWP.
So, what do we really know about the computer guy? What cases has he testified in (I know that he was questioned on his "expertise" in the guilt phase). I'm thinking he's just another one that has been caught in the web of JA - but does he have the ability to manipulate the data? Why would someone do that? I'm so confused as to how the "porn" was or wasn't on the computer (I do get the browser thing...) but, if he (or someone) was actually at a site, wouldn't they have seen it previously - both State and DT experts?? :gaah:
From elementary on the other thread:
No, he isn't. He's a paid witness for the defense.
I find that confusing. Computers are things, not people. Computers can be analysed without bias. Why shake the hand of the defendant then?
Objectivity does not apply here sadly...paid experts are just that....paid to give a schpeel for a side.
So what was the upshod of today's hearing??
Who knows. I guess he likes her. I have no explanation lol.
I assume if the jury had been in the courtroom he would have had the common sense to at least try to look objective by not approaching her.
Computer expert basically called Juan ignorant and slimy...well, ignorant about computers and asking slimy questions.
Judge allowed such disrespect, after which she ordered the expert to hand over copies of hard drive he worked with plus list of software used in making his analysis to prosecutor, and then hearing continued to December 4.
He's hot for the especially cruel lying torture murderess.
I just don't get the defense team experts. They must realize that their careers as expert witnesses are in the tank. No prosecution team will hire them and their credibility is so badly shot that any defense team that hires them would be guilty of malpractice. If I were a prosecutor I would drool at the prospect of cross examining them. Why is this worth it to them, for 5 minutes of fame (going down in flames)? I just don't know about folks.
I know I have had malware, porn etc...trying to follow cases over the years. Wrong site, click on the wrong link, you get it. My vp would block it though. And MalwareBytes etc...to have so many registery cleaners on it, that's how it starts and keeps getting worse, at least when it happened to me several times. jmo