Jodi Arias--Trial for the murder of Travis Alexander #23

olivier57 wrote:18th, JW is doing a demonstration of the law of fecal adhesion... She throws every idea to see what sticks on the wall

Oh, bad news, bad news - jury can't come to unanimous decision -- heartbreaking! I am not surprised - just takes one person, but just horrible!

Hopefully, with further instruction, this will be overcome.

If jury will not agree, Juan has to decide if he will ask for a new jury. That jury will have to listen to an entire penalty phase. Some lawyers saying it could almost be like a new trial.
This sucks. I feel so terrible for the Alexanders.
God damn this jury. There were NO mitigating factors! She slaughtered this guy!
Why can't they apply what Juan told them yesterday.
If the jurors come back again and still don't agree, that's it.

Well, does anyone know how Arizona works - if they do empanel a new jury do they have to find people who know nothing of the case?

Because that doesn't make sense, really.

What would the new jury be informed about?

Here's the case - read all this stuff - take your time. And uh, yeah it was especially cruel - another jury before you deemed it so.

So, uh, whattya say? Death? or Life?

weird.

like said before, if not for cases like this then for what kind of cases? what women can't be vile b!tches that deserve to die? I beg to differ...

Before making the decision on empaneling a new jury, I would want to know the split.

If its 11 to 1, or 10 to 2, then yeah - call for a new panel.

If its any more spread, then let it be.

I don't know any history on this with respect to Arizona - have there been other cases where the second jury panel actually gave the death penalty???

carlakay wrote:I dont understand what this means? Wish HLN would quit commercials and reruns and explain this shit to me already!

Absolutely effing sick to death of HLN and their idiotic "Newsmakers" and tons of commercials. Lost the end of the "concise" description by Jodi of the murder while she was on the stand, lost the last of what she said yesterday, and now this. Just disgusting.

The mitigators must be substantially stronger than the aggravator for leniency otherwise the DP must be levied...Mari posted this yesterday. Her point was that it was unlike in FL whereby they could still use their personal feelings when rendering a verdict.

So which mitigator could possibly be not substantially strong or there is just someone who dug in their heels.

This is where the Foreperson needs to be the Compass and get them to focus. I am still hopeful, but puzzled. Never expected this.

Well, folks, I am finished with this jury, and following the case. I can't watch anymore this summer. I will hang in there until we hear if this jury will get it together or not.
If not, I'll just find out what happens down the road as far as what Jodi's sentence will be.
I have lost faith in these jurors, and I am very angry. I can't watch any more of HLN, or seeing Jodi holding court at Estrella, tweeting, and doing interviews.
I really have a lot on my own plate and have to get on with my own life at this point.
Such a huge disappointment that these jurors came all this way and can't see it through....
I am sick inside for the Alexanders, just sick.

Weeziethm wrote:The mitigators must be substantially stronger than the aggravator for leniency otherwise the DP must be levied...Mari posted this yesterday. Her point was that it was unlike in FL whereby they could still use their personal feelings when rendering a verdict.

So which mitigator could possibly be not substantially strong or there is just someone who dug in their heels.

This is where the Foreperson needs to be the Compass and get them to focus. I am still hopeful, but puzzled. Never expected this.

Remember the Scott Peterson trial? While deliberating his sentence, they lost some jurors. They were excused because they refused to deliberate. Would not discuss the mitigating factors - just dug in their heels. You can't do that either.

You MUST discuss, explain your reasons, deliberate. If you just sit there and say "I simply can't do it. I know she deserves it but I just don't want to do it"

Then, really, you can be kicked off the jury.

I don't know if that's happening - I would call that a rogue juror.

But really - these people listened to her for 18 days - they saw her mother laughing in the court room - they saw her chewing gum - they saw her family NOT take the stand in her defense - AND JODI DID SAY HER FAMILY NEGLECTED HER EMOTIONALLY.

THAT just might be the mitigating factor for one of these jurors.

Schitt - I would never want to be in their position.

What was the jury question? what did the judge say??

justanopinion wrote:What was the jury question? what did the judge say??

No question. They said they were hung.

i guess i just cold and harsh because i'd have no problem putting my name on the DP Yay list... I'm very black and white and nobody has time for the kind of BS that JA is...

weeziethm...maybe they need to look up in the dictionary what substantially means.....there is NO substantially stronger mitigator than the aggravators in this case....IMO

the fact that the standout/s voted on the other 2 that would kind of take them to having to vote yes here since there are not mitigators... can you say well duh?

and remember we have alternate jurors....so hopefully they go there before releasing this one...if it's only 1 hold-out

Weeziethm wrote:The mitigators must be substantially stronger than the aggravator for leniency otherwise the DP must be levied...Mari posted this yesterday. Her point was that it was unlike in FL whereby they could still use their personal feelings when rendering a verdict.

So which mitigator could possibly be not substantially strong or there is just someone who dug in their heels.

This is where the Foreperson needs to be the Compass and get them to focus. I am still hopeful, but puzzled. Never expected this.

Yes, Mari was very correct, and they all should be able to weigh the mitigation against the sentence. It seems very obvious to me that the aggravator of the heinousness of the crime far outweighs the almost non existent mitigations presented by Jodi. Some on this jury are NOT accepting or understanding the instructions given to them...

18thcenturylady wrote:Well, folks, I am finished with this jury, and following the case. I can't watch anymore this summer. I will hang in there until we hear if this jury will get it together or not.
If not, I'll just find out what happens down the road as far as what Jodi's sentence will be.
I have lost faith in these jurors, and I am very angry. I can't watch any more of HLN, or seeing Jodi holding court at Estrella, tweeting, and doing interviews.
I really have a lot on my own plate and have to get on with my own life at this point.
Such a huge disappointment that these jurors came all this way and can't see it through....
I am sick inside for the Alexanders, just sick.

I hear ya. I am sick of her. But - Jodi lost. Please remember that.

She has been convicted of M1. She is NOT getting parole.

And really, we've yet to discuss the REAL victims of domestic violence who are in Arizona prisons. They will SNAP Jodi right out of her games.

Jodi is not good with her games. She's just bold about it. Prisons are FULL of psychopaths. Smart ones. Very clever ones.

Jodi is no match for that. She's unstable.

She will NOT be a queen bee.

Bo wrote:and remember we have alternate jurors....so hopefully they go there before releasing this one...if it's only 1 hold-out

Bo, that is what I was wondering...If the jury has one or two hold outs, couldn't they be released and the alternates brought in? IF they are just digging in their heels with regard to the DP that goes against what they agreed to when chosen for this jury, and they are not following the instructions.

Mari 68 wrote:

18thcenturylady wrote:Well, folks, I am finished with this jury, and following the case. I can't watch anymore this summer. I will hang in there until we hear if this jury will get it together or not.
If not, I'll just find out what happens down the road as far as what Jodi's sentence will be.
I have lost faith in these jurors, and I am very angry. I can't watch any more of HLN, or seeing Jodi holding court at Estrella, tweeting, and doing interviews.
I really have a lot on my own plate and have to get on with my own life at this point.
Such a huge disappointment that these jurors came all this way and can't see it through....
I am sick inside for the Alexanders, just sick.

I hear ya. I am sick of her. But - Jodi lost. Please remember that.

She has been convicted of M1. She is NOT getting parole.

And really, we've yet to discuss the REAL victims of domestic violence who are in Arizona prisons. They will SNAP Jodi right out of her games.

Jodi is not good with her games. She's just bold about it. Prisons are FULL of psychopaths. Smart ones. Very clever ones.

Jodi is no match for that. She's unstable.

She will NOT be a queen bee.

Awww, c'mon now, JA will be appointed Recycling Adminstrator, dontcha know....

They were not allowed to see news about the trial but perhaps one of them saw "12 angry men" and is trying to replay...

Kurt Nurmi and J. Wilmot were already chomping at the bit to be off this case. I bet a hung jury now will freak them completely. I really don't think they want to see that. Would the judge force them to stay on if a new jury has to be selected and a new penalty phase has to take place?

At this point I just pray that the jury comes to life or DP for Travis's family. Months more of jury selection, etc... could damage them even more. They may not like a life sentence but at least they can have faith she will never be released, Juan and his successors will make sure of that. It is not ideal, but at least they could return to their lives. I just feel them. And, I could not stand the smug look on the troll's face if it is a hung jury!

18thcenturylady wrote:Kurt Nurmi and J. Wilmot were already chomping at the bit to be off this case. I bet a hung jury now will freak them completely. I really don't think they want to see that. Would the judge force them to stay on if a new jury has to be selected and a new penalty phase has to take place?

Poetic justice.

Mari 68 wrote:

Weeziethm wrote:The mitigators must be substantially stronger than the aggravator for leniency otherwise the DP must be levied...Mari posted this yesterday. Her point was that it was unlike in FL whereby they could still use their personal feelings when rendering a verdict.

So which mitigator could possibly be not substantially strong or there is just someone who dug in their heels.

This is where the Foreperson needs to be the Compass and get them to focus. I am still hopeful, but puzzled. Never expected this.

Remember the Scott Peterson trial? While deliberating his sentence, they lost some jurors. They were excused because they refused to deliberate. Would not discuss the mitigating factors - just dug in their heels. You can't do that either.

You MUST discuss, explain your reasons, deliberate. If you just sit there and say "I simply can't do it. I know she deserves it but I just don't want to do it"

Then, really, you can be kicked off the jury.

I don't know if that's happening - I would call that a rogue juror.

But really - these people listened to her for 18 days - they saw her mother laughing in the court room - they saw her chewing gum - they saw her family NOT take the stand in her defense - AND JODI DID SAY HER FAMILY NEGLECTED HER EMOTIONALLY.

THAT just might be the mitigating factor for one of these jurors.

Schitt - I would never want to be in their position.

Well, here is hoping that if someone is digging in their heels, they are replaced, instead of having a complete do-over. Maybe someone is thinking she is wrong in the head (lots of evidence for that) and therefore not entirely responsible for her actions.

I would not want to be in their position, either. Don't want to dump on them, even though this whole circus of a trial has been an exercise in lunacy, except for Juan, and the jurors thus far. I have to allow a person their conscience as long as they did not lie about how they felt about the DP when they were selected.

Crap, here comes Newsmakers. I could spit on Comcast and HLN over this nonsense.

auman58 wrote:

Mari 68 wrote:

I hear ya. I am sick of her. But - Jodi lost. Please remember that.

She has been convicted of M1. She is NOT getting parole.

And really, we've yet to discuss the REAL victims of domestic violence who are in Arizona prisons. They will SNAP Jodi right out of her games.

Jodi is not good with her games. She's just bold about it. Prisons are FULL of psychopaths. Smart ones. Very clever ones.

Jodi is no match for that. She's unstable.

She will NOT be a queen bee.

Awww, c'mon now, JA will be appointed Recycling Adminstrator, dontcha know....

It doesn't surprise me that she wants to be re-cyling queen .... trash attracts trash!!

Bmore....agree...DP yay list...NO BS from this anymore...I mean WHAT does it take...this trial had a SLEW of evidence...and their actually having problems in THIS case....I feel for victims/families(and quite frankly the public-and public with children because we have to live amongst these people when their paroled) seeking justice where there is NOT this much evidence. Like i said WHAT does it take anymore???!!!!!

How can this jury do this to the Alexander family AFTER THEY HAVE ALREADY AGREED ON GUILT AND THE CRUELTY OF THE CRIME???

18thcenturylady wrote:Kurt Nurmi and J. Wilmot were already chomping at the bit to be off this case. I bet a hung jury now will freak them completely. I really don't think they want to see that. Would the judge force them to stay on if a new jury has to be selected and a new penalty phase has to take place?

That is a really good point, had not thought of that. You are right Jodi would kick and scream to keep them because they know her case.

My state just got rid of the DP... It's not like we punish anyone anyways... Oh armed robbery at 17? there i smacked your hand, here's your unregisted gun back and some pot for good luck... uggg.... lol

18thcenturylady wrote:How can this jury do this to the Alexander family AFTER THEY HAVE ALREADY AGREED ON GUILT AND THE CRUELTY OF THE CRIME???

I think that it's because even if all is done to have a logical step by step decision, there are still some subjectives thinkings on the run.

This jury has already said she killed Travis in a pre-meditated and especially cruel way.

Period.


She's a lying monster. And she WILL be in isolation for YEARS. And assuming she does get to medium security, she WILL BE AMONGST OTHER PSYCHOPATHS

She won't be the one manipulating - or at least successful at it. She will be the one USED and ABUSED.

She will be constantly in agony.

renatae wrote:

Well, here is hoping that if someone is digging in their heels, they are replaced, instead of having a complete do-over. Maybe someone is thinking she is wrong in the head (lots of evidence for that) and therefore not entirely responsible for her actions.

I would not want to be in their position, either. Don't want to dump on them, even though this whole circus of a trial has been an exercise in lunacy, except for Juan, and the jurors thus far. I have to allow a person their conscience as long as they did not lie about how they felt about the DP when they were selected.

Crap, here comes Newsmakers. I could spit on Comcast and HLN over this nonsense.

I wish the jury knew that if they accept she has Borderline Personality Disorder- it is not treatable/curable. She will never be a safe person to be around.

Also I hate Newsmakers too!

Bmore wrote:My state just got rid of the DP... It's not like we punish anyone anyways... Oh armed robbery at 17? there i smacked your hand, here's your unregisted gun back and some pot for good luck... uggg.... lol

So funny but sad and true. My Dad is in Balt. I'm only a couple hours away in DE.

olivier57 wrote:

18thcenturylady wrote:How can this jury do this to the Alexander family AFTER THEY HAVE ALREADY AGREED ON GUILT AND THE CRUELTY OF THE CRIME???

I think that it's because even if all is done to have a logical step by step decision, there are still some subjectives thinkings on the run.

Somebody on the panel THOUGHT they could vote death - way back when. And now finds they can't.

Whether that juror is outed and called a rogue juror who refuses to deliberate with the rest of us is in question.

Could be the one juror sees Jodi's upbringing (and Jodi's parents kinda PROVED it by sitting there chewing gum and not testifying on her behalf) as substantially outweighing the murder itself.

WE all know the truth as to why her parents didn't take the stand. WE all know Jodi is a lying victimhood oh woe is me bullschitter.

But the jury doesn't know that back-ground stuff. They didn't watch the media.


I know for sure we won't hear "I voted for life cuz of her really awesome recycling program"

I hope there is a strong foreperson. Go over the law. Go over the instructions. Take it one by one. Remind them of their oath.

Bmore....exactly....I read in the paper practically every day that a crime that has just been commited...has been commited by an individual that has done THE SAME THING 5 other times...???? and on those 5 other times they got sentences that should have kept them for 10 years cumulatively...BUT yet their out in 3 Cumulatively....OUR excuse is...well prison space is lacking...so we let out the less violent crime individuals...disgusting/pathetic/unfair system to victims..

Borderline Personality Disorder


Will it be what saves her????


F'k!

Could be.

I remember very well the jurors in the Scott Peterson case who were replaced for failing to deliberate. IF this split is heavy to one side, it would be best if that could happen here as well. Put an alternate or two in and take the ones off who refuse to discuss WHY they are holding out.

I would think that IF the jury comes back ultimately unable to agree, Juan will have a very serious pow wow with the Alexander family and ask them what THEY want. Do they want a new jury and a new penalty phase, or do they want to have the judge give Jodi life and be done with it?
I feel Juan will do what the Alexanders wish.

Still, I feel that this is very selfish and immature at this point on the part of the jury. This is a group of people who have already agreed that they could give the death sentence. They SHOULD be able to at this point look over the jury instructions and follow them. This should lead all of them to the correct decision. All personal hang ups about giving a death sentence should be put aside.

Mari 68 wrote:
snip

I know for sure we won't hear "I voted for life cuz of her really awesome recycling program"

I just don't accept a hung jury in such a short amount of time.

Make them go two full days of discussing the mitigating (whatever they have deemed them to be) and then how substantial they are.

That is the only fair way.

I would like an answer to my question of IF there is only one or 2 hold outs on this jury who are digging in their heels and refusing to discuss it, could they be excused and alternates brought in?
I have been listening to HLN all day, and no one has discussed that option, or if it even IS an option.
They also have commercials every 5 min. which is annoying in the extreme.

18thcenturylady wrote:How can this jury do this to the Alexander family AFTER THEY HAVE ALREADY AGREED ON GUILT AND THE CRUELTY OF THE CRIME???

For sure - but I am not surprised if someone was wavering with some sympathy for her, went along with the majority in believing she was guilty, probably agrees with extreme cruelty but still is having a problem with DP. I think the problem is between DP and LWOP - I doubt there is anything else on the table.

Mari 68 wrote:I just don't accept a hung jury in such a short amount of time.

Make them go two full days of discussing the mitigating (whatever they have deemed them to be) and then how substantial they are.

That is the only fair way.

Mari, I agree. That is also what Beth Karas is saying. It is up to the judge however, as to how long she will ask them to try, but I hope she makes them take at least several more days. They should go through tomorrow. If still no agreement, they should be made to come back next Tuesday after the holiday. They might have had time to cool off and think over the long weekend.

We are assuming that it is leaning towards DP. It could be the hold out is for the DP and the rest of them are for life. We don't know.

Maybe once someone is selected as a juror...they should be given a test to see if they understand the rules....What reasonable doubt means to them...what Substantially stronger means to them....etc....

renatae wrote:

18thcenturylady wrote:How can this jury do this to the Alexander family AFTER THEY HAVE ALREADY AGREED ON GUILT AND THE CRUELTY OF THE CRIME???

For sure - but I am not surprised if someone was wavering with some sympathy for her, went along with the majority in believing she was guilty, probably agrees with extreme cruelty but still is having a problem with DP. I think the problem is between DP and LWOP - I doubt there is anything else on the table.

Yes, but the jury instructions clearly state that sympathy for Jodi is NOT to be considered or allowed to be a factor in their decision! Someone or few are NOT following the rules given them if this is the case!

Bmore wrote:yeah but where on God's Green Earth where they possibly get these people? they'll never find 12 that don't hate her...

I will volunteer..I dont hate her and know NOTHING of this case..

There was an interview Tanisha and Steven did with Nancy Grace a few years ago.

Tanisha said, and I'm paraphrasing, "we want her to get death, we know she probably won't get it, but we don't want her to have friends and be around people in prison and have any happiness"

Travis' family knew/knows getting this verdict was a difficult one.

I can see how they are now EXPECTING it - just like the rest of us - since all of Jodi's nastiness is out and examined.

There's a reason Tanisha said "probably won't get it"

Because its just the way it is - with death penalties and women getting them.

Bo wrote:Maybe once someone is selected as a juror...they should be given a test to see if they understand the rules....What reasonable doubt means to them...what Substantially stronger means to them....etc....

Agree! I think all potential jurors should be given tests. I know some suggested that after that disastrous Pinellas co. jury, and that debacle probably would have been avoided had they been given testing.

Junebug wrote:

renatae wrote:

Well, here is hoping that if someone is digging in their heels, they are replaced, instead of having a complete do-over. Maybe someone is thinking she is wrong in the head (lots of evidence for that) and therefore not entirely responsible for her actions.

I would not want to be in their position, either. Don't want to dump on them, even though this whole circus of a trial has been an exercise in lunacy, except for Juan, and the jurors thus far. I have to allow a person their conscience as long as they did not lie about how they felt about the DP when they were selected.

Crap, here comes Newsmakers. I could spit on Comcast and HLN over this nonsense.

I wish the jury knew that if they accept she has Borderline Personality Disorder- it is not treatable/curable. She will never be a safe person to be around.

Also I hate Newsmakers too!

I really don't think any of them is thinking anything less than LWOP - because that would be lunacy. At least I certainly hope and pray no one is that blind.