U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > True Crime
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 05-24-2013, 01:15 PM
 
Location: USA
313 posts, read 351,661 times
Reputation: 527

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by mandavaran View Post
Why would she accept such a deal?
She didn't look in control when the (non)verdict came in yesterday. She showed more (possibly real) tears and emotion than she did with the other 2 verdicts. She looked incredibly relieved and in disbelief that she didn't get DP.

She's scared, IMO. That gives Martinez some leverage. By allowing her to go on a media blitz, it's really screwed things up even more and taken away some of DA/Martinez's control/leverage.

Anyway, it seems DA has already decided to go forward w/ retrial. That gag order better stay in place, or she'll be up to her old tricks again before, during, and after her retrial of phase 3.

 
Old 05-24-2013, 01:19 PM
 
Location: Old Mother Idaho
21,482 posts, read 14,398,691 times
Reputation: 15888
Apparently, as long as the death penalty is sought, life without parole is off the table.

The second jury will get an abbreviated summary of the first trial and will decide only on the penalty. The first jurors convicted her of 1st degree murder. The death penalty can only be handed down by a jury in Arizona, and the jury has to be in 100% agreement for the verdict to be reached.

If the second jury deadlocks, the judge then determines the sentence. She cannot give life without parole. Her choice is life with a fixed term of 20 years, or life with the possibility of parole after serving 15 years.

These choices makes it hard for the prosecutor and for Arias. If the prosecutor persists, Arias could go free in as little as 13 years, or could go straight to death row, where she will be executed in about 20 years.

Given the costs of another trial, combined with the costs of the death penalty (which costs the state 3-4 times more than a life sentence), the expense adds another factor for Martinez to consider. If he offers Arias a plea bargain- life without parole instead of a death sentence, he still wins. If the second jury deadlocks, it will be a massive blow to his career and possible future ambitions.

Arias faces an even greater risk if she doesn't take an offered plea bargain. She could go straight to death row, and no possible jury would be unaware of the trial proceedings. With the 75% majority of second juries' finding for death, th odds that she escapes a second time aren't in her favor.

But Jodi is a narcissist. She never fully lost her confidence in the first proceedings. She may be foolish enough to bet it all again. I guess we'll all know soon enough how it plays out.
 
Old 05-24-2013, 01:52 PM
 
32,532 posts, read 30,681,510 times
Reputation: 32349
Quote:
Originally Posted by iluvcatnip View Post
She didn't look in control when the (non)verdict came in yesterday. She showed more (possibly real) tears and emotion than she did with the other 2 verdicts. She looked incredibly relieved and in disbelief that she didn't get DP.

She's scared, IMO.
But we don't know why she was in tears.

For all we know she was in tears because she didn't get Life and she was "hurt" that any of those mean ol' hater jurors actually voted for death. Meaning: How could they do that to her? How could anyone vote for death? Don't they know she's a victim of domestic violence?

IMO She's so un-normal it's hard to tell what's going on with her.
 
Old 05-24-2013, 01:56 PM
 
1,257 posts, read 4,064,612 times
Reputation: 1018
Quote:
Originally Posted by don1945 View Post
We can't fault HLN for capitalizing on this and other trials either........that is how they make their money and how they pay heavy hitting Attorneys to be part of the panels. Just like Pepsi makes soft drinks to sell, HLN has these issues as their product to sell to us, and they are evidently doing a good job as we will even put up with Nancy Grace to get updated information.......and THAT is saying something !!

Don
I am sorry I have to disagree with you. It is okay to cover a trial, and it is okay to sell soft drink. But to profit off someone's death with their style? yes, they have their right and yes, they have their followers. I simply give my opinion. Without those interviews, would JA be treated like a star? Give me a break!

Last edited by LingLing; 05-24-2013 at 02:08 PM..
 
Old 05-24-2013, 01:59 PM
 
Location: South Carolina
2,800 posts, read 1,770,745 times
Reputation: 1732
This jury was Jodi Arias best case for life in prison the next jury will for the most part of heard and watched the trial and will out for blood.
 
Old 05-24-2013, 02:14 PM
 
Location: USA
313 posts, read 351,661 times
Reputation: 527
Quote:
Originally Posted by banjomike View Post
If the second jury deadlocks, the judge then determines the sentence. She cannot give life without parole. Her choice is life with a fixed term of 20 years, or life with the possibility of parole after serving 15 years.
Are you sure about this? Every article I've read on this says judge can give any life option, including LWOP if this next jury deadlocks. I'll see if I can find a legal link or two.

Interview with the jury foreman who sounds like he was one of the 4 "life" group:
Jodi Arias Jury Foreman: '18 Days of Testimony Hurt Her' - ABC News
Quote:
Zervakos, for one, believed Arias' story that she was abused in the relationship, but not that she killed Alexander in self-defense.

"When I looked in the courtroom for the first time and looked who the defendant was, it's hard to put that in perspective when you look at a young woman and think of the crime and then think of the brutality of the crime," Zervakos said. "It just doesn't wash so it's very difficult to divest yourself from the personal, from the emotional part of it."
 
Old 05-24-2013, 02:16 PM
 
18,852 posts, read 31,737,753 times
Reputation: 26119
Honestly, I don't see death penalty here, from my point of view. The only way I ppersonally could have someone put to death, is in a heinous crime against a child.

Putting someone to the DP is pretty serious. In the case of CA, iI would have had no problem.
 
Old 05-24-2013, 02:31 PM
 
Location: New Jersey
12,764 posts, read 7,830,480 times
Reputation: 13083
Quote:
Originally Posted by trinity1111 View Post
this Kangaroo court completely lost control of this trial....the Judge crying on the reading of the sentence, just for starters...
Wow, I guess you have never put your heart and soul into anything, have you?
Talk about a lack of empathy...jodi style!
 
Old 05-24-2013, 02:57 PM
 
1,817 posts, read 2,760,193 times
Reputation: 3527
Now that I've seen and heard from the foreman, I suspect that the older jurors are the ones who had a problem voting for the DP. I'm not saying all older people are out of touch like LaViolette, but if they are, then they're giving far too much weight to a handful of text messages and don't know that it is extremely common these days for young men AND women to have "booty calls" and use each other for no-strings-attached sex. Out of some 80,000-odd text messages, only a tiny handful were angry in nature. The defense team cherry-picked the worst they could find, and those messages were all in reaction to horrible things JA was doing at the time (which she was careful not to record).

Anyway, let's hope they get some more "with it" jurors who understand the dynamics of modern young relationships for round 2.
 
Old 05-24-2013, 05:03 PM
 
12,303 posts, read 18,425,337 times
Reputation: 19205
Quote:
Originally Posted by jasper12 View Post
Honestly, I don't see death penalty here, from my point of view. The only way I ppersonally could have someone put to death, is in a heinous crime against a child.

Putting someone to the DP is pretty serious. In the case of CA, iI would have had no problem.
Since your personal beliefs do not correspond with the laws of Arizona you would have, in theory, been disqualified from the jury. Lack of jury honesty during the appoitment phase may be the reason she was not given death.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > True Crime
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top