Jodi Arias #4

papapi wrote:

Gizmo711 wrote:They should let him in to see Jodi, maybe they can become pen pals. Maybe he was the one that Jodi was talking about when she said she felt betrayed. They may have been giving each other the eye.

He messed up the entire trial. If he does have a record, how come this wasn't noticed prior to him becoming a juror. I thought you couldn't become a juror with a record?

A record? Wow, I guess I need to do some more reading. I was rejected from jury duty once because I had a failure to yield right-of-way twenty years prior and it was a misdemeanor.

I'm only repeating what I heard, it could be wrong, so don't go to any extremes to search for it. I thought someone said that up thread.

I also wonder if this guy was against the death penalty to begin with and lied to get on the trial and knew from the get go that he wasn't going to impost it?

Madara200 wrote:An inmate from Jodi's new home. Maybe she will be JA's cellmate at some point. Scary, very scary, except this is Jodi without the mask.

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

such nice company for the she-debil

Madara200 wrote:[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Jury foreman wants to reach out to Arias and ask her what really happened. Does he have a crush on her????

OMG, WTF is wrong with juries these days? And also him having a criminal record? WTH? No wonder he hung the jury. MOO

his attitude explains why the jurors did not deliberate longer ...he knew he would not change his mind ... but, my sqwack is with the other jurors who would not go to the LIFE side, as well. A definitive decision is better than "we give up" ... for whatever reason.

owlsharkny wrote:

Madara200 wrote:[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Jury foreman wants to reach out to Arias and ask her what really happened. Does he have a crush on her????

OMG, WTF is wrong with juries these days? And also him having a criminal record? WTH? No wonder he hung the jury. MOO

his attitude explains why the jurors did not deliberate longer ...he knew he would not change his mind ... but, my sqwack is with the other jurors who would not go to the LIFE side, as well. A definitive decision is better than "we give up" ... for whatever reason.

I dunno what to think about that opinion. I think if I was on a death penalty qualified jury, and I thought the criteria for issuing the death penalty existed, I would be firm in my conviction and opinion to stand fast or hang it.

But like I said earlier, I think the way this happens in AZ really, really sucks.

papapi wrote:

owlsharkny wrote:

Madara200 wrote:[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Jury foreman wants to reach out to Arias and ask her what really happened. Does he have a crush on her????

OMG, WTF is wrong with juries these days? And also him having a criminal record? WTH? No wonder he hung the jury. MOO

his attitude explains why the jurors did not deliberate longer ...he knew he would not change his mind ... but, my sqwack is with the other jurors who would not go to the LIFE side, as well. A definitive decision is better than "we give up" ... for whatever reason.

I dunno what to think about that opinion. I think if I was on a death penalty qualified jury, and I thought the criteria for issuing the death penalty existed, I would be firm in my conviction and opinion to stand fast or hang it.

But like I said earlier, I think the way this happens in AZ really, really sucks.

I can understand your point of view on remaining steadfast; but, for a real verdict to come in, one side or the other usually has to compromise their position. Usually its the DP side because so many people find it difficult to send someone to death row unless the crime is beyond the pale of imagination.

But, the point I was really trying to make was that because the Foreman was for LIFE, he refused to continue deliberations and maybe that was premature. There was a possibility that if they continued after the holiday, that they could have come to a unanimous decision for life - if they could not for death. Spending five or six months listening to the garbage from dt and the brutality of the crime from the pros, to toss in the towel that soon during the decision on the penalty was weak.

re: the AZ rules of procedure in this case - is weird and I'm not sure that it has ever been attempted to be applied - the second penalty phase redo. I wonder if they have a clue what will and will not be allowed and what can and cannot come into the hearing. It sucks.

Gizmo711 wrote:

papapi wrote:

Gizmo711 wrote:They should let him in to see Jodi, maybe they can become pen pals. Maybe he was the one that Jodi was talking about when she said she felt betrayed. They may have been giving each other the eye.

He messed up the entire trial. If he does have a record, how come this wasn't noticed prior to him becoming a juror. I thought you couldn't become a juror with a record?

A record? Wow, I guess I need to do some more reading. I was rejected from jury duty once because I had a failure to yield right-of-way twenty years prior and it was a misdemeanor.

I'm only repeating what I heard, it could be wrong, so don't go to any extremes to search for it. I thought someone said that up thread.

I also wonder if this guy was against the death penalty to begin with and lied to get on the trial and knew from the get go that he wasn't going to impost it?

I believe it was Ellejay that posted the link about him being a convicted felon, but I did see it.

The jury foreman has a criminal record??? Is this accurate???

Should we now be concerned about the legitimacy of the conviction? A convicted criminal can serve in a criminal trial's jury?

Aren't folks with contacts to law enforcement, attorneys and the like typically excluded from serving on juries? By the same reasoning, wouldn't the foreman have similarly been excluded???

How is it that this is coming out now??? They do all kinds of vetting and background checks on potential jurors during the selection process.

If the above is true, how do we explain the foreman's participation in the trial?

(See you guys on Monday... and have a great holiday! I work double shifts on weekends.)

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

Jury Service Information

Jurors are the heart of the judicial system in the United States. In all serious criminal cases, defendants are entitled to a trial by a jury representative of the defendant's community.
All U.S. citizens are qualified for jury service if they are at least 18 years old, are residents of the jurisdiction in which they have been summoned to serve, have had their civil rights restored if previously convicted of a felony, and have not been determined by a court to be mentally incompetent or insane.

BBM

We are down in chat having a very open discussion on Trayvon's case.

If anyone wants to drop in, you will be more than welcomed!

Here is the link:

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

Hope to see you there!

The jury foreman says he is giving interviews as he feels Jodi was "crucified in the court of public opinion"

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

You know, if this POS is really doing interview's for that reason he need's to be investigated for being a stealth juror.

Madara200 wrote:The jury foreman says he is giving interviews as he feels Jodi was "crucified in the court of public opinion"

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

I've been meaning to bring this up and keep forgetting.
From the judge's reaction yesterday (to me sounding emotional with the heavy sigh and long pause) she wont be able to sit as judge if this last phase is redone. I hope someone has a clear mind so that she isn't on this case again as it will be a huge appelate issue that JA will win.

I also noticed JW's face yesterday and was surprised that she didn't jump up and down with her pompom's cheering. Ya know something like Dot Simms did after FCA's disgustingly gross verdict.

Madara200 wrote:The jury foreman says he is giving interviews as he feels Jodi was "crucified in the court of public opinion"

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

I wonder how he knew that, he wasn't supposed to be watching the media?

I believe that he knew from the start that he wasn't going to impose the DS on Jodi (for what ever reason). He should have never been on that jury, because I also believe that it was him that a few (3 others) may have looked up to or became friends with and they didn't want to go against him. If there was ever a death penalty case this was it.

I agree with another poster, that I would have preferred that they all voted LWOP than to hang the jury like this. At least the family could get back to their lives. They would have eventually accepted it and moved on. Jodi is not worth Travis' family having to go thru this all over again, I'm sure (after what we have heard about Travis) that he wouldn't want them to hurt continually. Jodi will never walk a free woman again, and if she thinks for one minute that prison will be a piece a cake, she needs to watch some of those shows that show life behind bars.

One Wonders wrote:I've been meaning to bring this up and keep forgetting.
From the judge's reaction yesterday (to me sounding emotional with the heavy sigh and long pause) she wont be able to sit as judge if this last phase is redone. I hope someone has a clear mind so that she isn't on this case again as it will be a huge appelate issue that JA will win.

I also noticed JW's face yesterday and was surprised that she didn't jump up and down with her pompom's cheering. Ya know something like Dot Simms did after FCA's disgustingly gross verdict.

I noticed that as well, it was as though she almost came to tears. A lot may have had to do with the fact that the jury (the foreman) didn't think enough respect for her to again state that they couldn't reach a verdict, but instead gave that as their verdict. It was as though the jury (foreman) spoke loud and clear that he himself was not going to bend so lets just end this now. He (the foreman) wasn't about to have to come back again on Friday and go thru, what was going to be the same outcome.

This foreman should never have been leading the rest. In that sense I'm happy that the rest didn't give in to him (as I feel happened in the CA case) . But having to go thru this portion all over again is just too much for the family to endure.

The scary part of this whole thing is that we all know Jodi will not accept LWOP because it would mean that she wouldn't be able to appeal any part of her sentence. She will have to accept that fact that she will never walk a free woman again. Even though we know she wont, I believe that Jodi has it in her head that she stands a chance to get out of there.

Which means that Jodi may be in the ball park, if the state doesn't want to go thru this all over again and settles for the 25 years, which would mean that Jodi can get out while she is still a young woman.

Jodi was in tears for a reason yesterday. This "hung jury" wasn't exactly what she was expecting. Jodi had a look of confidence when giving her " motivational presentation" to that jury. It all left when she heard that they were dead locked, why? One would think she would have been happy with that, unless of course she was expecting something much better. What could that be?

LorenzoG wrote:The jury foreman has a criminal record??? Is this accurate???

---snipped ---

Aren't folks with contacts to law enforcement, attorneys and the like typically excluded from serving on juries? By the same reasoning, wouldn't the foreman have similarly been excluded???

-snipped-

(See you guys on Monday... and have a great holiday! I work double shifts on weekends.)

those groups involved with law or officers of the court including paralegals and relatives of any of those above are usually excused by the attys in the case not by law.
How else would they slip dumb-down pills into the jury lunch?

Gizmo711 wrote:The scary part of this whole thing is that we all know Jodi will not accept LWOP because it would mean that she wouldn't be able to appeal any part of her sentence. She will have to accept that fact that she will never walk a free woman again. Even though we know she wont, I believe that Jodi has it in her head that she stands a chance to get out of there.

Which means that Jodi may be in the ball park, if the state doesn't want to go thru this all over again and settles for the 25 years, which would mean that Jodi can get out while she is still a young woman.

Jodi was in tears for a reason yesterday. This "hung jury" wasn't exactly what she was expecting. Jodi had a look of confidence when giving her " motivational presentation" to that jury. It all left when she heard that they were dead locked, why? One would think she would have been happy with that, unless of course she was expecting something much better. What could that be?

while the rest of us are wondering how could they have 4 dummies on the jury that fell for the JodiSpin, and upset because we think she won .. you're right Giz, she probably thinks she lost and is devastated that 8 dummies did not believe her. Imagine the nerve of those guys!
The THs keep suggesting that she might accept LWOP if she waives all appeals - that they combine with the issue of how much it would cost the state. LWOP won't get her state paid appeals so there would be no reason to waive them to save the state money. Jose Baez might agree to take her appeals pro bono just for the publicity but even he made CA pay out the nose. And, I don't see her accepting anything less than Lw/25.
After all, she is still the one who thinks the jury should have found for manslaughter or 2d murder at most - and believe it was self defense.

angiefly2 wrote:

Gizmo711 wrote:--snip---


I'm only repeating what I heard, it could be wrong, so don't go to any extremes to search for it. I thought someone said that up thread.

I also wonder if this guy was against the death penalty to begin with and lied to get on the trial and knew from the get go that he wasn't going to impost it?

I believe it was Ellejay that posted the link about him being a convicted felon, but I did see it.

--nope, it wasn't me. I haven't heard anything like that about him.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Jodi Arias juror interview: Foreman speaks out about trial, trouble in sentencing phase

--video clips @ link.

Juror 18, foreman Bill Zervakos, explained how, in the end, the trial for Arias ended up with a hung jury when deciding on life in prison or death.

"None of us knew what would happen if we were unable to come up with a verdict," Zervakos admitted.

Zervakos told ABC15 the jury believed Stephens would decide whether to give Arias life in prison or life with chance of release.

According to Zervakos, the jury believed their instructions were ambiguous and they had no idea the judge would declare a mistrial.

-----how on earth is it, that their foreman of all people didn't know that their verdict had to be 12/12 either way ...

Zervakos says he can't speak for the other jurors, but after almost 14 hours of deliberation it was the two sides of Arias that swayed him.

"I saw two Jodis; before June 4, 2008 and Jodi after June 4, 2008."
~~~
Zervakos also opened up about his personal feelings about Arias, and whether he "liked" and believed her during her stint on the witness stand.

"I tried to keep my feelings as neutral as possible," he admitted.

But his feelings on Juan Martinez are not as neutral.

"He's merciless," Zervakos said of the lead prosceutor on he case. "I don't like being talked to like I'm stupid and I feel like that happened a few times."

I have only seen comments and interview by the foreman. I will be very interested to get other jurors perspective

--alternate juror #17 will be on HLN dr.drew Tuesday.

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

Tara Kelley ‏@tarakelley320
As an alt on this trial, I am very disgusted with what our "foreman" has said! Please know that we didn't all feel this way!!! #jodiarias

@tarakelley320 there will be other jurors coming out and speaking, including myself! We had all agreed to wait until next week to interview!

Jenny ‏@jdemboyz
@tarakelley320 Why did you agree to that, and more importantly, why didn't the Forman agree to it? PS Feel bad for you.

Tara Kelley ‏@tarakelley320
@jdemboyz he did agree to it! We all thought it was best to just take the wknd to relax! We've been at this so long we wanted a break!

Jenny ‏@jdemboyz
@tarakelley320 I wonder why he broke the "agreement"? PS. That was my favorite juror question, nice job!

Tara Kelley ‏@tarakelley320
@jdemboyz awe thank u! I asked her ALOT of questions! Idk why he broke it...maybe so he could be the first?! It's a shame really!

--more @ link.

WOW WEE! Tara Kelley's timeline is well worth the read! Thank you ellejay for planting that here!

Sooooo, not only was foreman Bill Zervakos a big know it all *it seem's* he's also as much of a liar as JA is. I cannot wait for the other juror's to speak. I also hope that since he double crossed the rest of the juror's they will double cross him and reveal that at least he was a LWOP stinker.
I had also read on WS last night about him *Mr Know It All* thinking that the judge would impose the sentence if the jury deadlocked. Does anyone else hear the huge cop out there as I do?
I wonder if a person like him can be investigated as a stealth juror? If he were to be found to be a stealth juror his punishment should be he pay's for the redo. I can pretty much assure you anyone else that tried to pull a stunt like that in the future would think twice.

ellejay wrote:

angiefly2 wrote:

Gizmo711 wrote:--snip---


I'm only repeating what I heard, it could be wrong, so don't go to any extremes to search for it. I thought someone said that up thread.

I also wonder if this guy was against the death penalty to begin with and lied to get on the trial and knew from the get go that he wasn't going to impost it?

I believe it was Ellejay that posted the link about him being a convicted felon, but I did see it.

--nope, it wasn't me. I haven't heard anything like that about him.

No it was Madara200 on her 5:35pm post yesterday.

One Wonders wrote:Sooooo, not only was foreman Bill Zervakos a big know it all *it seem's* he's also as much of a liar as JA is. I cannot wait for the other juror's to speak. I also hope that since he double crossed the rest of the juror's they will double cross him and reveal that at least he was a LWOP stinker.
I had also read on WS last night about him *Mr Know It All* thinking that the judge would impose the sentence if the jury deadlocked. Does anyone else hear the huge cop out there as I do?
I wonder if a person like him can be investigated as a stealth juror? If he were to be found to be a stealth juror his punishment should be he pay's for the redo. I can pretty much assure you anyone else that tried to pull a stunt like that in the future would think twice.

The state really does need to start cracking down on these juror's, they cost the state more money than the one on trial, because they make the state go thru the whole ordeal when knowing they are going to hang a jury.

When I heard this guy talk, I knew immediately that he was one of the hold outs, and the foreman no less. He wasn't about to sway for anyone, he felt empowered. He didn't even give the judge a chance to send them back for the second time (which she would have done), he wanted to get out of there and he wasn't about to change his mind so he entered it as a "verdict", that was not a verdict, it was a dead lock. He made a complete idiot out of the judge and the court.