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.
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.
I agree I think in the abstract a jurror might believe they could sentence someone to death...but really doing it is a whole nother matter...
As much as I'd like to see the prosecutor compromise on the case, I don't see Jodi Arias taking the plea deal and life without parole, even under advice of her attorneys.
A younger selection of jurors may not have followed the case, have more understanding about the dynamics involved in their relationship, however, their age has no bearing nor indicate they'd choose DP.
They may get a new judge too since the current one broke down crying today. It would be a travesty if a new soft judge gave her 25 years and an opportunity for parole.
I have asked that question and received no reply ... Judge Stephens knows the case and I just wanted to know if she would be on the bench for this penalty phase case. She got emotional at the end and that might not be acceptable.
Quote:
Originally Posted by markg91359
It would be a highly responsible act for the prosecutor in this case to announce publicly that he is willing to forgo the death penalty if JA will agree to a sentence of life without parole. Such a public announcement would put pressure on JA and her counsel to accept this arrangment. They would have to worry that new jurors might have heard of the offer and this might make them pretty angry that she didn't take the deal when it was offered her.
That is what I think they should do too ... take the death penalty off the table and offer Arias the deal of Life Without Parole. She whined so often that she offered to take a deal ... yes she did in July 2011 she wanted 2nd degree and the prosecution said no deal. Make the deal public and see how she handles that. Right now she is facing the death penalty or life and I am sure she is hoping for life -25 with her 5 years deducted.
Quote:
Originally Posted by don1945
If it is the Judge's decision as to life or 25 to life I am not too worried. This judge seems fairly reasonable to me , and she has seen all that came out in this trial, so I think she would be fairly tough in her sentencing. I can't imagine any reasonable judge not deciding the possibility of parole would be way too good for Jodi. This judge has to be very fed up, as we are, with all the interviews and obvious lies told in court.
Don
Only problem is ... will Judge Stephens be on the bench for the penalty portion when they impanel a new jury???? What if they bring in a new judge???
Quote:
Originally Posted by banjomike
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.
The jury could have come back yesterday with the Death Sentence or Life ... then it places the sentencing on Judge Stephens and the judge has two choices ... Life Without Parole or Life-25 with time serve deducted. If the jury had chosen Life they would not have had to make a decision on LWOP or Life -25 it is totally the judge's call. Same with the next penalty trial ... if the Prosecution doesn't take death off the table and pursues the penalty trial ... the new jury can go with the Death Penalty or Life and if Life it's in the Judge's hands to determine which life sentence LWOP or Life-25. The judge cannot issue a death penalty.
Quote:
Originally Posted by iluvcatnip
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.
We have that legal link somewhere in this 200 + pages. LOL You are right the if she had received Life or if the next jury gives her Life ... the Judge will schedule the sentencing at a later date and then announce LWOP or Life-25 .... I hope they don't bring in a new judge. The judge cannot give a death penalty only one of the two life options. I think Judge Stephen would give Arias LWOP.
... like she apparently is now in the Maricopa jail.
When not in court, Arias is in her cell 23 hours a day, cannot talk to other inmates and in the hour she is out, she can use the phone, attend to her laundry and bath. She is no celebrity in jail
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.
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.
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.
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.
That is usually the case. I don't see any need to change the judge
Quote:
Originally Posted by banjomike
The judge committed no errors that I ever saw. Unless a higher court dismisses her, it's still her trial. Emotions don't count as errors.
Thanks ... I think she needs to stay there to the end. On May 20, Nurmi a filed "stay to seek emergency relief" ... which means that the trial proceedings would be halted while Nurmi & Willmott goes to a higher court to ask for one or more of Judge Stephen's rulings to be overturned. The motion was denied.
Do both you think Nurmi and Willmott will still be Arias defense team?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greatday
When not in court, Arias is in her cell 23 hours a day, cannot talk to other inmates and in the hour she is out, she can use the phone, attend to her laundry and bath. She is no celebrity in jail
Arias was formally held in a 'pod' of 32 inmates at Estrella Jail, they had their meals together and socialized. This is the group that appeared on camera when the trial started cheering for Arias. She had 3 hours telephone time at night. When she won the "Idol" contest she won dinner for herself and all the pod mates.
Thursday night is when Sheriff Joe announced Arias would be confined in her cell 23 hours a day. Arpaio said that he would not permit Arias to give any media interviews as she is a closed-custody inmate
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.
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.
Last edited by fruitlassie; 05-25-2013 at 02:18 AM..
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.
