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.
What a circus this trial was! The fact that it took nearly five years to even start the court process was disgusting enough. After the rightful conviction of first degree murder, the jury is hung on sentencing. I don't see why it couldn't have been a unanimous decision to send her to death row. The murder was extremely heinous, and she admitted to killing him. To me, there would have been no reservation about imposing the death penalty. Any cold blooded murder is deserving of capital punishment!
Why were some jurors hesitant about the death penalty ... because she's a woman??? I think that had a lot to do with it. If the same murder was committed by a man, it's hang him high time, but the fact that she's a woman somehow qualifies her as the "weaker sex" & makes people more sympathetic. Such b.s.! A murder is a murder regardless of who committed the crime. Things like gender, race, or age should not matter under any circumstances.
The cost of this three ring circus is ridiculous. Now it's going to cost Maricopa County taxpayers even more money for the new trial slated for July. What a mess! Since she admitted to the killing, that alone should be an instant sentence for the ultimate punishment. And for those who say it costs more for the death penalty than for life in prison, there's a very good reason for that: it's the way we utilize the death penalty cases these days. Criminals on death row still get their freebies like any other prisoner, and they often stay on death row for 10 years or longer before yet another appeals process is under way by the shyster lawyers trying to halt the execution. By the time the person on death row is finally executed, it is often 20 years or longer after the crime was committed, and the execution itself is a mere needle in the arm. The entire process is ineffective and costly. I sure wish we could go back to the old style of capital punishment: hangings, electric chairs, gas chambers, firing squads, etc. ... and not wait 20 years or more to carry out the punishment!
I am these people's age from the largest party city in America, Miami and it's not common for young men to call women they sleep with three hole wonders or tell them that they should be charging for oral sex. I don't know what kind of people you hang out wih that you think booty calls are "extremely" common and that most people go around sexing each other like animals. By the way before you reach another "conclusion" I don't associate with religious people. Maybe religion allows lower standards and I didn't get the memo.
Sugah Ray ... I just hope you don't ever hook up with a psycho like Arias! I don't think religion had anything to do with this ... when Arias was with Bobby Juarez she was into witchcraft, another one she was into Buddism, another a fundamentalist ... so it was not the religion it was whatever the male was into was what she would become ... Travis was Mormon ... so if he had been Catholic or Presbyterian that is what Arias would have tried.
Quote:
Originally Posted by fruitlassie
I'm in the same age group and if you don't think sexting, dirty talk, or booty calls have become more common over the past 10-20 years you're living under a rock. Does that mean everybody does it, of course not...but don't pretend like it doesn't happen.
My point was that the foreman sounded just like Alyce LaViolette...old-fashioned, extremely biased (he didn't think JA looks like a killer, what's a killer supposed to look like???) and out of touch. In a trial where so much of the evidence was based on texts, emails, etc. it's bothersome to have jurors that think you can look at a handful of messages out of context and jump to any conclusions. Who can say that JA didn't enjoy being called names? Many people get off on that...this is the same girl who squealed with delight when Travis said he was going to tie her to a tree.
I am not in the same age group ... I am old ... but believe me I am not like Alyce LaViolette nor Docquacksalot either. The jury foreman sounded to me just like what Darryl Brewer said on his taped interview of what he planned to tell the jury in the mitigation phase. How Arias was before PPL and Travis. The jury foreman might have watched that video ... who knows. But it was about verbatim. I think the jury foreman was into art too. People present in the courtroom gave nicknames to each jury member ... his nickname was "The Artist."
I am not in the same age group ... I am old ... but believe me I am not like Alyce LaViolette nor Docquacksalot either. The jury foreman sounded to me just like what Darryl Brewer said on his taped interview of what he planned to tell the jury in the mitigation phase. How Arias was before PPL and Travis. The jury foreman might have watched that video ... who knows. But it was about verbatim. I think the jury foreman was into art too. People present in the courtroom gave nicknames to each jury member ... his nickname was "The Artist."
There's definitely a big difference between 'older person' and 'old-fashioned'...I know plenty of older people who keep up with social media and whatnot, but then there's the LaViolette/Samuels types who seem like they spent the last 20 years in mothballs, lol. Here in AZ the population skews older and that's probably why the jury did as well. I would have been interested to see a slightly younger average mix closer to JA's true peers. Actually, I wish Juror #8 hadn't blown it and had become the foreman instead...he sounded very objective and more logical when I heard him on Dr. Drew.
I don't get the argument that she wasn't psycho before PPL/Travis. All murderers have to start somewhere. She didn't get obsessed with the other guys she dated because they weren't a "catch" the way she thought he was...he was the ideal specimen for a parasite like her.
I agree that Travis was her first real catch...specially after seeing the other man who had a child and comes across like an old man compared to Travis. Travis was young, successful, funny, had lots of friends but was also vulnerable due to his upbringing with parents who were on drugs.
That made him the right person for Jodi to pray upon! Very sad and even more sad that this jury now will figure out what they have missed about Jodi and how she really is and I think the 4 jurors who hold out on DP will regret their hold out.
Sugah Ray ... I just hope you don't ever hook up with a psycho like Arias! I don't think religion had anything to do with this ... when Arias was with Bobby Juarez she was into witchcraft, another one she was into Buddism, another a fundamentalist ... so it was not the religion it was whatever the male was into was what she would become ... Travis was Mormon ... so if he had been Catholic or Presbyterian that is what Arias would have tried.
I am so glad to hear somebody finally say this. And let me add one more thing... Had Travis been Lutheran, for instance, and Jodi become Lutheran, their religion would probably have never even been mentioned.
I don't see why that poster wouldn't qualify. Not qualifying is when you won't use DP under any circumstances. There was no lack of honesty, just 4 people who didn't agree with YOU.
You contradict yourself - the poster is indeed saying "I won't use the DP under any circumstances" in this particular case. Jury selection during death penalty case endure a lengthy process called "death qualification". They must be prepared to decide to follow the law - not their own law, but the laws of the state, in deciding capital punishment. If they answer "no, because she is not charged with murdering a child" they would clearly be disqualified from serving on the jury for this case.
We can only speculate why the 4 of them did not impose the DP, but speculation is allowed in this forum.
Some here misunderstand the process through which juries are selected in capital cases. The questuon that is asked is whether a juror is totally against the death penalty or if there are some circumstances in which he could vote for it. Specifics of the case are not first explained. That is what the trial is for. A person is entitled to a trial by a jury of their peers or one that represents a true cross secfion of the community. We already exclude from service about 20% of all people because they oppose the death penalty in all cases. If we reject all people who oppose it in any circumstances what we really have is not an impartial jury, but a hanging jury instead
Those who are upset by this verdict need to understand thereis more than one respectable viewpoint about what occurred.
I think people could answer honestly, that they would be able to vote for a death penalty. But, when faced with actually making the decision, could change their minds.
In that case, the judge should accept that, and make a determination of life in prison. Paneling another jury, with the single intent of getting a death penalty verdict, is almost a fools errand. INMO.
The county attorney has already stated he intends to retry the penalty phase, so unless something changes it's going forward.
Two of the female alternate jurors have spoken up now and stated they would have voted for the DP. One of them, Juror #17, is on Twitter...don't know if it's ok to post her handle, but she says she is disgusted with the foreman and that she loved Juan. It sounds more & more like the foreman grabbed the reins and took control. He's a radio personality in Phoenix so he probably thought this would be a good way to promote himself...big mistake. This juror said that she & some of the others will be doing interviews next week.
Wow, I guess you have never put your heart and soul into anything, have you?
Talk about a lack of empathy...jodi style!
This is a trial, not a soap opera. It was highly unprofessional for Judge Sherry to cry during the reading.
The judge is the pillar of the justice system, personal feelings must be put aside in the courtroom.
Juan Martinez did not cry during the reading of the sentence.
Interesting to note, Larry Siedlin the judge in Anna Nicole Miller Trial, cried during the verdict. He reigned immediately after the trial.
I'm not saying none of them should have emotions, or nor should they not feel them,I'm saying they should not show them.
I'm simply stating the obvious, that this may be fodder for the defense, possibly interpreted as bias, if Judge Sherry were to head the retrial.
Interesting that when spotted blowing her nose on TV during the reading of the sentence, Jean Kasuarus from HNL was quick to clarify that she "was insulted that the public was thinking she was that unprofessional"..those were her exact words. She then went on to explain that she suffers from bad alleregies....
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.
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.
