Jodi Arias #4

Sea Ray wrote:I have said all along that she should have gone for manslaughter. She should have said that they got into a fight (maybe about her announcing to the world that he's a pedophile) and then both of them lost it. It's too late now. It's going to come back murder one but I was interested that it doesn't have to unanimous as to the categories of murder one. There's three different categories of murder one. I have no idea how they sort out the conviction if the 12 jurors are split as to what kind of murder one they come back with. The judge told them to write down the number of jurors who vote for each category of murder one.

1. The defendant [and another person] [and other persons] committed or attempted to commit [insert one of the offenses listed in A.R.S. § 13-1105(A)(2)]; and
   
2. In the course of and in furtherance of this crime or immediate flight from this crime, the defendant or another person caused the death of any person.

Gizmo711 wrote:Not only that but he wrote on the ticket that there were no passenegers in the car...I had my 15 year old granddaughter in the car, sitting right next to me, I was out due to her dance performance. I will bring all proof with me. Mind you he didn't stop me when I supposedly pass this light at an intersection that he claimed but at least 15 blocks away. On the ticket it says that if I fight it and lose an additional 500.00 dollars will be imposed. It's a way of intimidating people, I refuse to be intimidated, I am going to fight it.

The Washington Post | Jurors start deliberating in Jodi Arias murder trial, panel resumes work Monday

The murder case against Jodi Arias in the death of her onetime boyfriend has gone to the jury, which is weighing weeks of evidence and the defendant’s ever-changing version of events.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

When the Arias trial is over, Martinez will move on to another high profile case, prosecuting former Phoenix Police officer Richard Chrisman.

The ex-cop is accused of shooting an unarmed man and his dog in 2010.

That has 3TV asking why does Martinez always get the high profile cases?

"Cases are assigned by the MCAO Homicide Bureau Chief based on a range of factors including relevant experience, current caseload, and familiarity with the investigation (our homicide prosecutors are on call 24-7 and respond on a rotating basis to every homicide investigation within the County)," Cobb said via email.

Top prosecutors with MCAO make more than $100,000 a year.

According to Cobb, Martinez also has "multiple cases he's continually working on" but get's "support from a team of senior attorneys, paralegals and staff."

Sea Ray wrote:

gpw wrote:JM has law and some facts on his side.
But they totaly botched the sequence of events.
It all started with Dr. Horn and his report, misleading and not accurate.
JM closing statements of knife first makes no sense and was full of holes.
JM did not have logic or common sense when it came to crime sequence. So will be interesting to see if this is thought through.

There's no concensus on what came first, knife or gun. Some experts say knife others say gun but JM has to go with what the Medical Examiner says. I think his explanation makes the most sense but I understand those who argue otherwise. The fact that the shell casing is not covered in blood tells me that it came last. Surely a drop would have splattered on it if it was the first thing. But I don't think it's material as to guilt or innocence. Most implausible of all scenarios is that Travis spent his energies chasing Jodi around the house with a bullet in his head rather than calling 911. As Juan put it, she killed him three times. We can differ on the order but she still killed him twice unnecessarily

jdny1174 wrote:I agree completely, it doesn't matter in whether or not she is guilty, but with the shell casing being blood free to me that makes it quite obvious she shot him last. In my opinion she stabbed him first, he struggled to get a footing and fight back and fell on the sink for support and she attempted stabbing him in the back as he tried to get away from her (hence why the stabs in the back aren't deep), and then she cut his throat, and out of fear, and to make sure there was no chance he could survive and call 911 after her departure, she then shot him in the head to make sure he was dead. That's how I see it.

Gizmo711 wrote:

ellejay wrote:
MC Superior Court ‏@courtpio
Jury will deliberate next week from 9:00 am to 4:30 until they reach a verdict. #JodiArias

MC Superior Court ‏@courtpio
@xxx those are the hours they picked.

@courtpio Do we know how long we will have from the time they announce there is a verdict til the actual reading of the verdict?

MC Superior Court MC Superior Court ‏@courtpio
@xxx about 45 minutes or until family arrives

I'm surprised that the defense didn't demand that the jury be sequestered. I would think that he would want to wear them down until they chose a lesser offense. This way they get to go home and rest and come back fresh and ready to deliberate.

But I'm sure that when Jodi is found guilty Nurmi will appeal and use that as one of the reasons.

LiveLaughLove wrote:

Gizmo711 wrote:

ellejay wrote:
MC Superior Court ‏@courtpio
Jury will deliberate next week from 9:00 am to 4:30 until they reach a verdict. #JodiArias

MC Superior Court ‏@courtpio
@xxx those are the hours they picked.

@courtpio Do we know how long we will have from the time they announce there is a verdict til the actual reading of the verdict?

MC Superior Court MC Superior Court ‏@courtpio
@xxx about 45 minutes or until family arrives

I'm surprised that the defense didn't demand that the jury be sequestered. I would think that he would want to wear them down until they chose a lesser offense. This way they get to go home and rest and come back fresh and ready to deliberate.

But I'm sure that when Jodi is found guilty Nurmi will appeal and use that as one of the reasons.

As I heard it yesterday, Arizona hasn't sequestered a jury in over 80 years..why, I don't know but that seems a little odd to me..

Also heard Juan Martinez had a case for a man for felony murder, the jurors came back with a verdict in 15 minutes...wish this would be the case for Jodi..they have all the info and based on the juror questions, I don't think they believe her story..

CherokeeNative wrote:For those who work in the prosecutorial side of criminal law there comes a moment of initiation. It is an occurrence which is usually insignificant in itself, like reading a police report or listening to a witness, but it has the power of revelation. At this moment, a person realizes, this is different; this is not like anything I have experienced.

For me this rite of initiation occurred in an elevator in the criminal courts building as I rode in an elevator up to a courtroom where I was assisting two states attorneys in a trial. The elevator was crowded, and as it moved slowly upwards, I inhaled a vile odor. I realized that the stench was coming from a cardboard box being held by one of the investigators in the case. The box contained evidence in the case, a bunch of clothes. The clothes were all heavily blood-stained. The smell of dried blood is nauseating. It was that sensation, that sickening smell that marked my passage into the world of the prosecutor's office.

Most deputy prosecutors only remain prosecutors for a few years - usually lasting no longer than their contractual agreement of 3 years. By that time, they are burned out and ready to move on to another practice of law - either as a criminal defense attorney or changing directions entirely and going into civil litigation practice.

Those that stay on in the prosecutor's office and become senior deputy prosecutors are given the high profile cases as well as difficult murder cases. By the time they reach this level, they have seen more than their fair share of death and mayhem in every form imaginable. Having worked a few years in a California district attorney's office, I assure you that it is very easy to start seeing our world in a completely different light. In fact, I left that office simply because I was too young at the time to be able to cope with the paranoia that working around so much crime was causing me.

The reason I am going through this is to just give a little insight into the eye of a prosecutor and what they feel when they are given a case to prosecute after so many years of seeing the blood, smelling the blood - one where a child has been cut down early in life or a young man who has lost his life at the hands of a sociopathic stalking girlfriend. He's up against defense counsel whose case is so weak as to resort to accusing the victim of pedophilia or a young boy of being a thug. He may be aware of information that we are not privy to that proves the expert has alterior motives or a witness is less that reputable but unable to admit it into trial. It may be that the only way to show this jury that this witness is not to be trusted is by demonstrating his loath and disgust through his exmination. I can't imagine the defeat and total resign I would feel if I had to spend months prosecuting a case only to have a jury return a verdict such as it did in the Casey Anthony trial. I can't imagine the utter sense of failure I would feel if I had to look Travis' siblings in the eye if the jury fails them. So, while Juan was abrasive in his examinations of some of the witnesses, I sort of understand where his heart is.

littlemisspriss wrote:

CherokeeNative wrote:For those who work in the prosecutorial side of criminal law there comes a moment of initiation. It is an occurrence which is usually insignificant in itself, like reading a police report or listening to a witness, but it has the power of revelation. At this moment, a person realizes, this is different; this is not like anything I have experienced.

For me this rite of initiation occurred in an elevator in the criminal courts building as I rode in an elevator up to a courtroom where I was assisting two states attorneys in a trial. The elevator was crowded, and as it moved slowly upwards, I inhaled a vile odor. I realized that the stench was coming from a cardboard box being held by one of the investigators in the case. The box contained evidence in the case, a bunch of clothes. The clothes were all heavily blood-stained. The smell of dried blood is nauseating. It was that sensation, that sickening smell that marked my passage into the world of the prosecutor's office.

Most deputy prosecutors only remain prosecutors for a few years - usually lasting no longer than their contractual agreement of 3 years. By that time, they are burned out and ready to move on to another practice of law - either as a criminal defense attorney or changing directions entirely and going into civil litigation practice.

Those that stay on in the prosecutor's office and become senior deputy prosecutors are given the high profile cases as well as difficult murder cases. By the time they reach this level, they have seen more than their fair share of death and mayhem in every form imaginable. Having worked a few years in a California district attorney's office, I assure you that it is very easy to start seeing our world in a completely different light. In fact, I left that office simply because I was too young at the time to be able to cope with the paranoia that working around so much crime was causing me.

The reason I am going through this is to just give a little insight into the eye of a prosecutor and what they feel when they are given a case to prosecute after so many years of seeing the blood, smelling the blood - one where a child has been cut down early in life or a young man who has lost his life at the hands of a sociopathic stalking girlfriend. He's up against defense counsel whose case is so weak as to resort to accusing the victim of pedophilia or a young boy of being a thug. He may be aware of information that we are not privy to that proves the expert has alterior motives or a witness is less that reputable but unable to admit it into trial. It may be that the only way to show this jury that this witness is not to be trusted is by demonstrating his loath and disgust through his exmination. I can't imagine the defeat and total resign I would feel if I had to spend months prosecuting a case only to have a jury return a verdict such as it did in the Casey Anthony trial. I can't imagine the utter sense of failure I would feel if I had to look Travis' siblings in the eye if the jury fails them. So, while Juan was abrasive in his examinations of some of the witnesses, I sort of understand where his heart is.

I have no doubt Juan Martinez is passionate and only wants justice.... that being said for me personally there is no excuse for attacking peoples sexual orientation simply because you don't like their expert opinion.... it doesn't excuse many of the things he said to witnesses.... especially his own.... being passionate...and even in the right doesn't excuse the kind of repulsive behavior he displayed towards human beings....

Jodi Arias deserves every bit of his ire, our ire, disgust, and the feeling of repugnance..... there were many, many, many witnesses that testified in that horrendous trial.... many of them deserved respect.... the basic respect one human being shows to another..... in MY opinion Juan Martinez didn't have respect for ANYONE..... yes he fought a good hard fight for justice for Travis..... but what a damn shame it will be if that jury returns with a verdict that is anything less than first degree murder..... The Casey Anthony trial should have taught prosecutors a lesson..... some of those jurors weren't ashamed to admit that Jeff Ashton just flat out turned their stomachs and they stopped listening to him or trusting him.... they felt it was all a game to him.... as a result a child murderer is free..... how impressed will we all be with Mr. Martinez if the same kind of things are said about him after they give that black widow a lesser sentence?

LiveLaughLove wrote:

Sea Ray wrote:

gpw wrote:JM has law and some facts on his side.
But they totaly botched the sequence of events.
It all started with Dr. Horn and his report, misleading and not accurate.
JM closing statements of knife first makes no sense and was full of holes.
JM did not have logic or common sense when it came to crime sequence. So will be interesting to see if this is thought through.

There's no concensus on what came first, knife or gun. Some experts say knife others say gun but JM has to go with what the Medical Examiner says. I think his explanation makes the most sense but I understand those who argue otherwise. The fact that the shell casing is not covered in blood tells me that it came last. Surely a drop would have splattered on it if it was the first thing. But I don't think it's material as to guilt or innocence. Most implausible of all scenarios is that Travis spent his energies chasing Jodi around the house with a bullet in his head rather than calling 911. As Juan put it, she killed him three times. We can differ on the order but she still killed him twice unnecessarily

jdny1174 wrote:I agree completely, it doesn't matter in whether or not she is guilty, but with the shell casing being blood free to me that makes it quite obvious she shot him last. In my opinion she stabbed him first, he struggled to get a footing and fight back and fell on the sink for support and she attempted stabbing him in the back as he tried to get away from her (hence why the stabs in the back aren't deep), and then she cut his throat, and out of fear, and to make sure there was no chance he could survive and call 911 after her departure, she then shot him in the head to make sure he was dead. That's how I see it.

Dr. Horn made a typo, big deal.

You would have to believe the gunshot to the head was last, since he said there was no blood, his heart already stopped pumping after the slit to his throat.

This was so heinous, so horrendous, so egregious that I can't imagine her getting anything less then the top murder charges. I believe it's warranted and even if she gets sentenced to death, she'll spend a decade there while her appeals process goes through.

Gizmo711 wrote:

angiefly2 wrote:Jodi Arias Trial Day 56 Defense Closing and Prosecution Rebuttal Closing

Part 1
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Part 2
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Part 3
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Part 4
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Angiefly, thank you for two things, One, for the library, it allowed me to see what I missed last night. Two, for your quote on the bottom of your post "there should never be a time that we shouldn't protest an injustice".

I am fighting the ticket I got last night because I did NOT pass that light. If I was guilty, I would pay it willingly, but I am not guilty and I will prove it.

The Star | Jodi Arias: How sex and murder created a tabloid trial and killer ratings

Do you know who Jodi Arias is? No? Then you don’t watch HLN. Or CNN. Or ABC News, Dateline, 48 Hours or Inside Edition.

You don’t read People.com, or the National Enquirer or the Huffington Post. You don’t follow the #JodiArias hashtag.

In short, you have a life.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Gizmo711 wrote:Thanks one, for your kind words, I actually think that he may have mistaken me for someone else. He also wrote on the ticket that I had no passengers in the car when my 15 year old granddaughter was sitting right next to me. I raised her and she lives with me, and I have the program with her name in it as well as my entrance ticket, so I think that should prove that she was in the car with me. It was also raining and I was going about 30 miles an hour and I would never pass a light especially at an intersection. I know they have cams in their car and I will ask to see a picture of me passing that light. Thanks again, and I will certainly try and get that book you mentioned, sounds like good read.

I am waiting patiently for this verdict, I will be glued to the TV. I just know they will be back quick. This jury asked some good questions and really made it appear that they were paying strict attention. I doubt that they will be able to get past the three vital attacks that either one would be fatal, the heart, the throat and then the shot to the head. I think this is why Nurmi through in there that she just snapped (how convenient for her to have a gun and knife just when she decides to snap). I do hope that the jury is smarter than that.

LiveLaughLove wrote:Wondering why Jodi wasn't charged with perjury or forgery?

Heard on Friday that Jodi forged a letter detailing the alleged pedophilia that Travis was allegedly into. Not that I buy it for a second. I believe Jodi is just an evil beast who truly felt scorned that Travis was not taking her to Cancun. She can deny that all she wants but I still feel that was the driving force behind her. She put out, she felt used and abused, she wouldn't take the fact that Travis was soooo over her, he was done. Don't think that's ever happened to her, seemed she always left the relationships for another man..

I can't wait for the jurors to get back to deliberations tomorrow..hoping they come back with a fast and righteous verdict..

Nan11 wrote:

Gizmo711 wrote:Thanks one, for your kind words, I actually think that he may have mistaken me for someone else. He also wrote on the ticket that I had no passengers in the car when my 15 year old granddaughter was sitting right next to me. I raised her and she lives with me, and I have the program with her name in it as well as my entrance ticket, so I think that should prove that she was in the car with me. It was also raining and I was going about 30 miles an hour and I would never pass a light especially at an intersection. I know they have cams in their car and I will ask to see a picture of me passing that light. Thanks again, and I will certainly try and get that book you mentioned, sounds like good read.

I am waiting patiently for this verdict, I will be glued to the TV. I just know they will be back quick. This jury asked some good questions and really made it appear that they were paying strict attention. I doubt that they will be able to get past the three vital attacks that either one would be fatal, the heart, the throat and then the shot to the head. I think this is why Nurmi through in there that she just snapped (how convenient for her to have a gun and knife just when she decides to snap). I do hope that the jury is smarter than that.

BBM - Exactly, Giz.

It reminds me of the saying: "If you believe that, I've got a bridge to sell ya."

There was a lot of talk that the male juror who got thrown off was responsible for many of the 'good' questions. If that is true, it leaves me a little concerned.

I don't think we have long to wait, though--so, we'll see soon enough.

Gizmo711 wrote:As desperate as Nurmi is I wonder if he had that juror followed? This is the first case where I have seen 2 juror's already knocked off (the third was due to illness). I know that the attornies know which juror's are asking questions. I just wonder.