Retrial for Sentencing of Jodi Arias - 11/26 -12/02/14 In recess

[dog.gone.cute]

I'm guessing today or Monday at the latest,
but before the trial re-starts,
or before the re-trial re-starts,
or before the re-trial re-re-starts.
Oh never mind.

BBM: LOL !

:seeya: So confusing, isn't it ?

 

[janx]

I appreciate your wonderful analysis. I am glad to say, however, it is not always like this. In the Mark Jensen trial for the murder of his wife, Julie, the defense brought up a "suicidologist" to testify that she had killed herself. On direct, he was presented with facts by the defense. All the facts came from Mark's family. His analysis was that she was suicidal.

Prosecution attorney Jambois then did the cross. He presented information from Julie's family and friends. When finally asked his opinion, he said that IF he had known the information from her family as well as the information from the defendant's family, he would have decided that Julie Jensen was NOT suicidal.

There is an honest defense witness.

When I saw that Fonseca was wiffling and waffling with vague language, when she suffered from a poor memory for dates, events, and facts, I could not help of think of the Jensen case. She was presented with facts that totally contradicted her conclusions, she crumbled. Her voluminous documentation became a paltry few pages, Travis became NOT a pedophile, and JA became "intrusive" (cough, stalking). BUT, she would not admit she was wrong! Go figure!

It seems to me that these hired witnesses always have to balance the pay they are receiving against their professional reputation. How far will they go, in a case like this one, to earn $275 an hour? Is it worth the lies that might well end their careers? And what kind of deal do they make with the defense before testifying?

 

[daisydomino]

We can watch for the COA decision here
http://apps.supremecourt.az.gov/aacc/1ca/1capartyindex.htm
The case is 1 CA-SA 14-0213, or you can just go down the list and look for the name Arias.

Here's the current PDF, no news yet
http://apps.supremecourt.az.gov/aacc/appella/1CA\SA\SA140213.pdf

 

[Zuri]

Dr. Fonseca testified that there were 30 boxes of material for her to peruse. How would she know which material to read? If not all of it? She seemed to cherry pick what she read. The only plausible explanation I can think of is that the DT gave her what they wanted her to review.

If I were an expert witness, I think I would have watched the entire first trial. At $275 or whatever amount per hour, she could have charged for reviewing it. Do experts ever work for a flat fee?

 

[Love Never Fails]

Courts in AZ open at 9 AM right? That's five minutes. Maybe they open at 8AM.
Wonder if any of the media or attorneys are at the Court of Appeals? I know it is the day before Thanksgiving but goodness, I hope the COA doesn't make us suffer by having to wait until next week.

 

[MaryND]

We can watch for the COA decision here
http://apps.supremecourt.az.gov/aacc/1ca/1capartyindex.htm
The case is 1 CA-SA 14-0213, or you can just go down the list and look for the name Arias.

Here's the current PDF, no news yet
http://apps.supremecourt.az.gov/aacc/appella/1CA\SA\SA140213.pdf

Looking at the document, it indicates that 12/8 is the date the response is due... hope it's earlier!!

 

[pinkandgreenmom]

It seems to me that these hired witnesses always have to balance the pay they are receiving against their professional reputation. How far will they go, in a case like this one, to earn $275 an hour? Is it worth the lies that might well end their careers? And what kind of deal do they make with the defense before testifying?

Judging by some of the things this so called expert has said, she seems pretty out of date. Either a "has been" or possibly a "never was". Getting her last kicks before she slinks off into retirement is my guess. Same with the others in the first trial. And when Juan asked her during cross when the last time she testified was, she couldn't remember. That tells me she is not in demand and her opinion is not all that highly valued in the first place.

I note too that as soon as Juan asked that question, Nurmi asked for a sidebar (shocking, I know :facepalm so I wonder if things didn't quite go her way the last time she was testifying as an expert.

 

[Steve44]

A witness like this one doesn't need to ask the other side for evidence. By law, the prosecution has to give copies to the defense of everything they have. That's why this witness is so ridiculous. Wilmott and Nurmi had copies of all the documents JM showed her, they just chose to withhold them.

As to your other question, I assume they are always paid unless for some reason they decline their fee. I doubt if it happens very often. Maybe AZ Lawyer has a better idea.

Sent from my KFSOWI using Tapatalk

I agree. Both sides have access to the same evidence. It's up to the expert to ask questions and explore what they feel is important. They don't have to be biased, but if they want to be, who's gonna stop them? I'm sure that if Juan had provided her with anything she would have ignored it.

 

[bznbear]

Hugs to you bznbear. I feel your pain and I am so sorry you experienced this in the therapist's office. Over the past 32 years, I have been to several therapists, seeking help for what I know now is PTSD. I finally found an expert in the field of PTSD and he has helped my brain re-format the trauma. I hope you can find the "right" person to help you. Xo

Hugs back at ya Zuri!

 

[ShadyLady]

Exactly. The people who come up with all these derogatory ideas about Juan and Flores - babysitting, reprimands, demotions, lies, misconduct, etc. - think that their careers revolve solely around Arias, and persecuting Arias. They don't. They have lengthy careers, a wealth of experience and expertise, and reputations to suit. For them, Arias may be one of the worst criminals they've encountered, but ultimately she's just another evil doer in a long series of evil doers, past and future whose own actions are all that's needed to convict her - no persecution required. Once she's disposed of, on to the next...

But, I bet a million dollars, that Arias obsesses about Flores and Martinez for every second as long as she lives. That's just HOW she ROLLS.....:jail::jail::happydance::happydance:

 

[geevee]

We can watch for the COA decision here
http://apps.supremecourt.az.gov/aacc/1ca/1capartyindex.htm
The case is 1 CA-SA 14-0213, or you can just go down the list and look for the name Arias.

Here's the current PDF, no news yet
http://apps.supremecourt.az.gov/aacc/appella/1CA\SA\SA140213.pdf

Thanks for those links, Daisy!

 

[Love Never Fails]

We can watch for the COA decision here
http://apps.supremecourt.az.gov/aacc/1ca/1capartyindex.htm
The case is 1 CA-SA 14-0213, or you can just go down the list and look for the name Arias.

Here's the current PDF, no news yet
http://apps.supremecourt.az.gov/aacc/appella/1CA\SA\SA140213.pdf

I hate when it won't let me post. As of yesterday it was listed as "under advisement". AZlawyer said the judges were discussing case in the afternoon, so could the clerk of the court file their decision today sometime or is the clerks office closed today? Waiting....

 

[ShadyLady]

A Scenario...

It's the day after Thanksgiving, three years post-sentencing for Jodi Arias. She wakes up in her cell on Death Row and plans the days activities. The ever-present dampness of the environment is not so noticeable anymore, but now she must work on the smell. She's heard from the prison brain-trust that a sinus rinse with a weak bleach and water solution will deaden her sense of smell permanently. It will also kill her sense of taste, but with the food they serve in this place, does it really matter? She will have to give it careful consideration. After composing her letter to prison officials complaining that her Thanksgiving biscuit was moldy, she receives notice that there has been a ruling on her first appeal for a re-trial. She's handed a manilla envelope by the prison mail carrier and tears into it, hopeful, almost certain, that the beginnings of her richly deserved freedom are contained within its folds. As she reads, though, her cell begins once again to close in on her, the dampness if felt keenly now, and the smell is worse than ever. It reads:

"We find no reason to grant the motion for a re-trial in this case, since the convict has already received eight re-trials the first time around."

Wonderful!!! I hope she gets plenty of letters in jail that paint a nice rosy {not} picture of the future for her. She can focus her razor mind on that!

 

[Susza]

I'm glad you listened to your gut w/ that therapist. I firmly believe many MANY people in the Psych field are nuttier than the patients (I can say this from experience having been raised by two of them--don't get me wrong, I love my father dearly but, ya know--and I WAS a nutty psych RN at one point having been driven nutty from working too long w/ that population with too much of my own avoided crap going on ). Anyway, long winded way to say I'm glad you didn't go back and walked away. Sometimes the whole opportunity in a relationship is the one we take when we walk away from it.

I sense a lack of compassion for MEN from this Dr. as I did from LaViolette. How anyone could look at that crime scene, know what she did and decide she was some victim, something is screwy there. Hugs for your situation too.

BBM - Absolutely!

By the way, I love to see your happy smile on that pic!

Oh yeah, and I wonder wether that Dr. just misspoke:

JUAN IS ON THE SMILE HIGHWAY!

 

[Love Never Fails]

Looking at the document, it indicates that 12/8 is the date the response is due... hope it's earlier!!

Maybe Ididnt understand. It looked to me that Nurmis response was due by the 24th and had been filed and that other party (media) response was due by Dec 8th but has also already been filed.

 

[MaryND]

Maybe Ididnt understand. It looked to me that Nurmis response was due by the 24th and had been filed and that other party (media) response was due by Dec 8th but has also already been filed.

My guess is that the 12/8 date might be when the COA needs to respond by - but I am not an attorney, and this is just my opinion. I'm sure AZL can clarify!

 

[katiecoolady]

BBM - Absolutely!

By the way, I love to see your happy smile on that pic!

Oh yeah, and I wonder wether that Dr. just misspoke:

JUAN IS ON THE SMILE HIGHWAY!

I love that! And he should be! My text to him was basically just congratulating him on his good week and he thanked me back. He uses exclamation points in his texts. lol
I had totally forgotten about that pic but went looking for this, then found it during my search. LMAO

 

[katiecoolady]

Dr. Fonseca testified that there were 30 boxes of material for her to peruse. How would she know which material to read? If not all of it? She seemed to cherry pick what she read. The only plausible explanation I can think of is that the DT gave her what they wanted her to review.

If I were an expert witness, I think I would have watched the entire first trial. At $275 or whatever amount per hour, she could have charged for reviewing it. Do experts ever work for a flat fee?

I wonder how much of Alyce Laviolette's testimony she watched. Ya know?

 

[MeeBee]

I love that! And he should be! My text to him was basically just congratulating him on his good week and he thanked me back. He uses exclamation points in his texts. lol
I had totally forgotten about that pic but went looking for this, then found it during my search. LMAO
View attachment 64308

It's funny because I remember this pic of you and Juan very well! And how you ran into him on your way back from a retreat you went to to relax (read your blog too) and there he was! Lol.

 

[tandt]

I just really wish the trial would get back to TA's murder and focus on the sentencing-- does she have remorse or not. Why should the jury spare her life?

What's happening is just kabuki theatre.