site
stats
Menu

Motions denied & granted by the AZ State Circus

in Latest News by

.
Check out the info & PDF documents below. They relate to the motions denied & granted today by the AZ State Circus:

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

CHANGE OF VENUE – DENIED

The Court has no basis for finding the publicity about this case has been so outrageous that it will turn the new sentencing proceeding into a mockery of justice or mere formality. The mere exposure to publicity resulting in knowledge of the case does not create a presumption of prejudice when jurors can set aside the acquired information and render a verdict based upon the evidence. This Court will not be in a position to make such a determination until the jury selection process commences and potential jurors are questioned. The Court will inquire about a potential juror’s exposure to, and effects of, the pretrial publicity on that juror. Jurors with preconceived notions about the appropriate sentence will be excused. See State v. Greenawalt, 128 Ariz. 150, 624 P.2d 828 (1981).

The Court finds the Maricopa County jury pool is sufficiently large to assure impartial jurors can be found. A change of venue would create logistical issues for the parties, witnesses, court and involve substantial expense to the taxpayers of Maricopa County. No good cause appearing,

IT IS ORDERED denying the defendant’s Motion for Change of Venue

>>> CLICK TO DOWNLOAD COURT MINUTES DOC (PDF) <<<

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

INDIVIDUALIZED VOIR DIRE – DENIED

A new trial on the penalty phase is pending. In the experience of this Court, the procedure followed at the first trial affords the Court and counsel an ample opportunity to explore relevant areas of inquiry and to evaluate “cause” and “preemptory challenges”.

During jury selection for the first trial of this case, there were very few requests by the prosecutor or defense counsel for individual voir dire of prospective jurors.

For the retrial, the jury questionnaire can be comprehensive enough to cover subjects that would otherwise be the topic of individual voir dire. While the

Court acknowledges there are unique concerns that have arisen because of the substantial publicity surrounding the case, the revised jury questionnaire may be expanded to address these issues. Since jurors will be questioned in small groups, the defendant’s concern that one juror’s statement might color an entire jury panel’s outlook is minimized. The Court acknowledges that it may be necessary to question some jurors individually. The Court’s procedures will allow for that to occur as deemed necessary by the Court.

The Court finds it is not in the interest of justice to permit individual voir dire of all potential jurors. The procedures used to select the jury in the first trial will be followed in the second trial, with minor revisions

For the reasons stated herein,

IT IS ORDERED denying Ms. Arias’ Renewed Request For Individualized Voir Dire By Counsel filed August 21, 2013.

>>> CLICK TO DOWNLOAD COURT MINUTES DOC (PDF) <<<

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

MOTION TO PRECLUDE OR LIMIT LIVE MEDIA COVERAGE OF SENTENCING PHASE RETRIAL – GRANTED

For the reasons stated in this Court’s sealed minute entry dated November 14, 2013,

IT IS ORDERED granting Defendant’s Motion to Preclude or Limit Live Media Coverage of Sentencing Phase Retrial. Still photographic coverage will be permitted unless an objection is made by a specific witness prior to testifying. Use of electronic devices will not be permitted in the courtroom. Any media coverage must comply with Arizona Supreme Court Rule 122 and the policies of the Maricopa County Superior Court. Consistent with this ruling, FTR disks of the trial proceedings will be available to the media and public after the jury has reached a verdict.

>>> CLICK TO DOWNLOAD COURT MINUTES DOC (PDF) <<<

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Remember…

WE ARE TEAM JODI – AND WE WILL BE VICTORIOUS in our quest for JUSTICE FOR JODI!

Make no mistake.

Believe it.

Prepare for it.

Be part of it.

Leave your thoughts & comments below.

SJ
Team Jodi

If you would like to help Jodi by way of a financial donation to the official JAA APPELLATE FUND, click the Team Jodi link below for further details. All donations go directly to the fund for assisting with the legal fees associated with appealing Jodi’s wrongful conviction. Thank you for your support!

We Are Team Jodi ---- And We Will Be Victorious!

.

169 Comments

      • Yes, Eli – THANK YOU! I’ve just come back from reading those. I look forward to the day when Washington can speak out. I hope she gets the chance to be heard.

        • Wow! It doesn’t sound like Judge Pickles is willing to listen to anything Jodi’s attorneys have stated. Her inability to see fact from fiction is unbelievable. This whole trial has been a circus. Does she not see what a mess she has made of this trial? Martinez has really done a number to be able to spin his yarns and come out with gold every time. Can they pull jurors from another state or planet? The jurors will fill out a questionnaire in be interviewed in groups??? Oh my.

          • Change of Venue -denied.

            Why? one reason, it is too costly. If it is too costly, why go for the death penalty?

            Most states do not retry the penalty phase of a death penalty trial, if the jury hangs,
            the defendant get life.One bite of the apple is enough.

    • Hi geebee2! Have you sent any of your findings to the Authorities anywhere else than on your site? Could they be sent on to the higher ups? You have done such an amazing job documenting all of this nightmare. I wish someone in the FBI or even higher could research your findings.

  1. Journee, do you think Zach, Amanda and Enrique sleep (sleeping?) with their boots on. Apparently, they all were in the bedrooms (?) when everyone came in to discover Travis was dead. One would think they would have heard all of the commotion of the friends trying to get in the house. The crime scene was tampered with and I believe they know who is responsible, how about you.

    • I believe you are right.

      Never made sense to me that three people were in the house and no one answered the door. Enrique – whose room shared a wall with Travis’ room, did not respond to all the yelling when the guys went in and found Travis, did not so much as stick his head out of his door until Mimi was on the phone with 911 and the 911 operator told them all to get out of the house. THEN Zack knocked on Enrique’s door and said they all had to get out.

      • Yeah…It never sat right with me that Travis’ roommates appear to have a weak sense of smell AND hearing. Too much of a coincidence don’t you think?

    • R. Love & Journee, you’re so right! wtf? They were probably told to remain in their rooms until they were told to go out. They were probably scared shitless to do otherwise…

      • It is also interesting that they were all there when the body was discovered, then it was “Jodi is a stalker, Jodi is jealous Jodi, Jodi Jodi . . . hmmmm.

    • I
      agree, something is wrong, with the roomates. MiMi Hall went to
      Travis’s 2x, The first time, nobody answered the door. { said a dog was
      jumping up and down.}
      MiMI, goes home, calls Travis, but it was the “wrong Travis..oops” THEN
      she calls a friend, or her mom, ,GOES BACK TO TRAVIS”S with these
      friends she called. {they} gave MiMI
      garage code, which is 0187, number cops use to call in a murder//??
      ANYWAY< MIMI walks by bedroom ,hears music on ,and Zach came out.
      Zach was off that day.[ Running errands with his girlfriend,] now wife.
      Zach lied about when he last saw`Travis,He told Nancey Grace ,it was the
      Sunday before the murder. Zach told police, a few different times,. AS
      well as SAYING HE DID LAUNDRY??? but could'nt remember when.
      Travis had another male roomate, that couldn't remember doing laundry.
      That shared a wall with Travis, and said he just noticed a smell ,that
      very night TRAVIS was found. { he was in his shower, when MiMI and
      friends showed up.
      I smell a rat, from the judge, jurors, policemen , ALL PROB GO TO CHURCH
      with one another!!!!
      MY mom spent 2 yrs. in jail, due to a driving while intox.. She got 5
      yrs.suspended after 2.
      SHE SAID JODI IS SAFE IN JAIL!!! Stay strong JODI< I can feel a
      miracle is coming SOON !!!!!!
      DIVA FROM C.T.
      Madeline

  2. Call it sour grapes on my part, but IMO the only reason Stephens granted the motion to limit media was to hide HER OWN SHAME.

    After all, the only thing both sides of the public audience agree on is the incompetence of Judge Sherry Stephens. She’s been taking hits from every direction from the get-go.

    Of course, we were not privy to what arguments may have been made by the state on that motion. Could be they didn’t argue at all (although I find that difficult to believe, just because I don’t think Martinez can stop himself from objecting to anything the defense wants). I have a feeling the county attorney is less than pleased with the scrutiny of his own office that has come up because of this trial.

    • If we have come up with all of the mistakes,problems and injustices with everything . . .then why didn’t the jurors? Were they drugged or put in a coma during most of this ridiculous trial? How did they not see all of the inconsistencies? Makes no sense to me. Bless Jodi and her family for all they have been through. OMG!

      • The jurors didn’t get to watch things over and over and pick up new things each time they watched. They weren’t even given transcripts to review during deliberations. They heard each word of the trial only once. And at the end of five months they had to piece together the notes they had collectively taken to pull all the information together.

            • I don’t know.

              I know transcripts are expensive, so it doesn’t surprise me that they aren’t just offered to a jury.

              And I know that if the jurors have some question or dispute over some bit of testimony, they can go back into the courtroom and have the testimony read to them again.

              But in five months of testimony, it was easy for Martinez to bury the tidbits he wanted buried. Lisa Perry saying ONE time that the palm print wasn’t in blood didn’t hold up against Martinez’ repeated references to the bloody palm print…. even people HERE refer to a bloody palm print that never existed.

              • You’re absolutely right about the palm print. I was confused too and mad at myself for having imprinted in my head Martinez’ BS instead of the actual evidence. Grrrr….

                • LOL, don’t feel bad, Maria – I went round and round with some airhead over at HuffPo about that palm print. I kept telling her to go back and watch Lisa Perry’s, that it was right there on video that the state’s own witness said the print wasn’t in blood.

                  Airhead kept coming back at me saying she didn’t need to watch the testimony, she had seen that bloody hand print for herself in the crime scene photos, and I should go look at those photos.

                  Nevermind that the photo she wanted me to look at showed absolutely nothing recognizable, Airhead saw a HANDPRINT. And when I tell her the print collected looked nothing like a hand at all – it was just the outer edge of a hand – she said I was obviously a deluded Jodi-ite, or I would see that handprint too.

                  Can’t fix stupid, I guess.

                • In Picture Perfect Flores called it a bloody hand print at the the beginning and then very carefully called it the hand print and left bloody out. I believe he would have investigated more of this crime had it not been for the lies from roommates,friends and family and the Hughes.After talking with them he was pretty cut and dry, ready to be finished with it. Is there anywhere when we have heard or read when they read her rights to her? I would think she would have asked for a attorney early on but did she?

                • In Picture Perfect Flores called it a bloody hand print at the the beginning and then very carefully called it the hand print and left bloody out. I believe he would have investigated more of this crime had it not been for the lies from roommates,friends and family and the Hughes.After talking with them he was pretty cut and dry, ready to be finished with it. Is there anywhere when we have heard or read when they read her rights to her? I would think she would have asked for an attorney early on but did she? I can’t remember.

                • In the first 10-15 minutes or so of the first interrogation tape, Flores explains that she is in custody now and that before they can talk he has to read her these rights, she’s probably seen it on TV, yada yada , and he reads the Miranda warning.

                  But two things I thought he was supposed to do that he did NOT do –

                  He did not ask her if she understood those rights as he read them to her.

                  And he did not get her to sign a Miranda card.

                  I really thought they were supposed to get a SIGNATURE waiving rights to an attorney before questioning. But I didn’t see Flores ask for one.

                • Well that’s just dandy. Looks like those 2 facts right there would close this trial out for good. Wouldn’t it?

                • You’d think so. But remember, I am only taking my knowledge of what is supposed to happen from watching Law and Order, lol.

                • That’s a pretty good degree to have a. . .Bachelor’s of Law and Order Degree!!! Mine is Bachelor’s of Life Lessons. You impress me 🙂 LOL

              • Martinez is good at concealment! His intricately woven tapestry of deception will be exposed.
                I’ll probably make a video juxtaposing Lisa Perry’s testimony with Martinez’s lies about her testimony, just to expose Martinez.

      • A vile German leader (I don’t want to write his name) would scream and yell and gesticulate wildly, flinging his arms this way and that, the indelible picture of anger…..he knew that people were more impressionable at night, so he tried to give speeches after dark. He would denigrate and diminish a group, striking fear in the hearts of one and all, thus setting in motion the psychological impulses that would incite the hatred he wanted to direct and use for his evil purposes.

        Martinez must understand something about the hypnotic power of this kind of ugly behavior. He used it continually throughout the Jodi Arias trial. There is a psychology to holding the attention of crowds. Certain individuals study it; others instinctively know how to hold the attention of groups and influence them. To gain mental control over a seated group, a person has to perform somewhat differently from the way one would in a one-on-one situation. Most people are simply not prepared to withstand a (group) mental hijacking of this type.

        The jurors were a captive audience. They eventually must have had, on some level an impulse to want to appease the one who was causing all the pain and humiliation day after day. It was a variation on Stockholm Syndrome. Most importantly, it would have appeared to them that Martinez’s raison d’etre in that courtroom was to kill Jodi. It must have frightened them on a visceral level at the very least, setting them up to an unfortunate degree to be overpowered by the sheer force of his negative position and by his obvious and shameless lack of respect for anyone present.

        Four individuals resisted the sweep of the negative energy. They voted against the death penalty, but I can’t help but feel that in these death penalty cases, a jury concludes from the outset that the defendant must guilty, since they know they are being qualified as a death penalty jury before the evidence is formally presented to them. They know that the charges being brought against the defendant could “warrant” a penalty of death. They might feel that their greater obligation is to decide life or death rather than to determine guilt, which they may be influenced by the qualification process to falsely embrace as a foregone conclusion. In a confusing, “connect-the-dots” case such as this one, did the jury feel that they could ethically tune out details that didn’t fit the State’s version of events, given that the possibility of having to impose the death penalty was whispering “guilty” in their ears throughout the proceedings?

        Martinez’s belligerence toward all of the witnesses and his intimidating courtroom tactics, including his various and supposititious interpretations of the charges brought against the defendant in this case amount to behavior that decent societies have tried to place safeguards against through the ages in order to protect their citizens from abuses of authority.

        • Nicely said! “The jurors were a captive audience” : I absolutely agree. It’s a damn shame that most of them were pussywinkles and didn’t speak their mind, instead tried to avoid being in the eye of the haters’ hurricane and just went with the flow..

          • I think the Casey Anthony trial and what happened to the jurors after they found her not guilty had a lot to do with the way this jury worked. They didn’t want to be the target of the haters the way the jury in CA trial were.

            Ray in H-burg Va.

            • Of course, if they’d been abiding by the admonitions, they’d have had no way of knowing the tsunami of hatred they’d face if they didn’t return a guilty verdict.

              I really believe that if not for the neck wound, and the AZ stipulation that intent (premeditation) can be formed in the instant before the act, the jury would have hung in the guilt phase. I think those five jurors who voted premeditation only – you know, the ones who weren’t buying every bit of nonsense Martinez spewed – would have voted for Murder 2, crime of passion. They just couldn’t see that neck wound as something done in self defense.

        • whichtrial?,

          You have great skill and I appreciate your sharing with us. I read your comment to Mark, a page back, and I hope everyone reads it. I know many are improperly tried and convicted, and so do the spineless ignoramuses that were on Jodi’s jury. They only cared that they would be pariahs if they helped Jodi. Arizona is the same place that gave the the multimillionaire killer james ray, 2 years for killing 3 and injuring 18. So, if you have money, as always, you have a chance. With no money, you get a defense that still manages to get millions, and does a shoddy job. Someone with money AND brains AND skills needs to take up Jodi’s mantle.

        • What is a real travesty is that the pundits in the media hold this spectacle of a prosecutor up as something to admire and strive to mimic. The one good ruling that Judge Stephens did for Jodi was to shut down the haters at HLN during the sentencing phase.

          • Hey there Carol! Nous vous avons oublié! Where have you been girlfriend?

            HLN must still be crying over their losses! That alone makes me happy! I wonder if nancy and jane have been whining like bitches in heat about this…

            ((((((((Canada Carol))))))))) ♥

    • Journee, I thought the exact same thing: it’s their OWN shit they need to hide and hush up, that’s why they only granted the no cameras motion. Shame on them!!! I am disgusted… 🙄

      • I am with everyone. I thought the same thing. The judge makes decisions on the judges needs. This trial is about the ego’s of the judge and the prosecutorial team. That trial was not about Travis Alexander. It gets more pathetic every day.

  3. Hi everyone, SJ and Jodi,

    Forget mariscopa. The whole world knows Jodis case, after the movie from Jodis story in the internet. á la JM style… The whole world is infected with the publicity circus !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    Justice for Jodi in a fair way!!!!!!!!!!
    Good luck for the whole Jodi team.

  4. Hey there everyone! Hope you guys enjoy your weekend.

    So, everything is denied except for the live media coverage… what a hoax!

    They seem to think that an impartial jury will be found in shitzona! For the love of all Gods! Are they smoking datura down there or puff-ing the magic dragon??? FFS, they really must be hallucinating and tripping! ~Peace out!

    ((((((Jodi))))

    • Yes and even in Maricopa County even! They need jurors from another State like maybe the east coast. If they want to spend millions of dollars on this fiasco then why not another state? What’s another million or two?

  5. You know what? I think deep down we all knew that Jodi’s motions would be denied.

    Not because it is legally valid or rightful but because when it comes to this case (and dreading to think how many others), it is the Judge’s, the Prosecutor’s and the whole damn corrupted county’s political interests, personal vanities or ambitions and insidious purposes that are apparently much more important than allowing people to do their duty, to honour the oath they took when deciding to serve Justice and the people.
    The separation of Powers (Legislative, Executive, Judicial) in the United States Consitiution just like in the Greek Consitution was done to prevent abuse of power. Isn’t tragic to see that in the 21st century things have turned not only the other way round but so desperately wrong? When will we stop allowing corrupted individuals manipulating and abusing whatever power was given to them?
    Reading: ” The Court has no basis for finding the publicity about this case has been so outrageous that it will turn the new sentencing proceeding into a mockery of justice or mere formality” GRRRRRRR!!!!!!
    I am indignant and majorly pissed right now. I’d rather they had denied all motions! The mere fact that they only granted what would serve THEIR purposes makes me even sicker! Why all the need to preclude the media suddenly? Why the need to conceal what will take place? Isn’t this contradicting the denial of the Change of Venue motion???? It’s as if they are admitting to the case getting too much media attention, thus their ”enough is enough” granted motion but on the other hand they refuse to ackowledge anything else.

    I hope Stephens is proud,pimping herself out to Martinez’ commands! 😉

    • Q: “When will we stop allowing corrupted individuals manipulating and abusing whatever power was given to them?”

      A: When money and status stop being their priorities… thus: When hell freezes over… It is very dangerous when power is given to the wrong people that don’t use it in good will.

      ((((((Maria))))))) ♥

    • You would think the mass audience standing on the courthouse steps and lawn watching a big screen projector??? Didn’t they also block off the street?? HLN crazies also held a mock trial downtown with all people who believed their crap and if they didn’t pretended too so they didn’t get killed themselves! Hi everyone I miss you all!! (((((To all of you and Jodi))))) love you all!!

      • Thanks Kara, I forgot about all of that going on out in the streets!!!! HOLY COW!!!! No, Judge Pickles is assured she can get a good jury with no preconceived notion about Jodi’s trial. Duh? We shouldn’t worry, should we!!???????? EEEEEEGADS! Bless Jodi! FREE JODI!!!!!

  6. Is anyone really surprised that most of Jodi’s motions were denied? After reading the AZ Central article on the AZ courts and prosecutors being given carte blanche to say and do whatever they want without fear of punishment and with a pat on the back I don’t know how anyone on trial in AZ is found not guilty. If the prosecutor wants to nail you, you’re nailed.

    They flaunt the unfairness they show in their courts. It has nothing to do with fairness or the law. It’s about agenda’s.

  7. Geebee2, I wish you or someone would ask Victoria Washington what she means by saying Nurmi “chose” self-defense over heat of passion. How does heat of passion fit Jodi’s testimony? Is Victoria saying that Jodi perjured herself at Nurmi’s request?

    • Chris, many have said this about the defense. The reason he chose self defense is because the burden is on the prosecution in AZ when it comes to self defense. NO, jodi did not perjure herself. When I heard her testimony, it sounded like self defense or heat of passion. She describes defending herself and then the fog. Due to the throat being slashed, the act could also be construed as heat of passion. Personally, I think it was both. She started out defending herself, there was a struggle and she lost it. Also, she submitted a heat of passion plea deal so obviously she acknowledges her crime was such.

      • Sorry, Alexis, my comment just below was in composition when you replied to my first.

        I did not know anything about a heat-of-passion plea deal (which would be to manslaughter). One can plead guilty to an offense while asserting innocence — an Alford plea — but I’m unclear on its status in Arizona. My info was that a plea to M2 was offered, and I don’t see how her testimony fits that at all. (Btw, I believe her testimony too.)

        Victoria Washington seemed to be talking about heat of passion as an alternative to self-defense. That’s why I raised the issue. What you are describing is combining the two. Actually, as I recall, Nurmi referred to something like heat of passion right at the end of his closing, though he didn’t elaborate at all.

        It also seems to me that if Jodi legitimately inflicted other fatal wounds in self-defense before the throat wound, as Martinez for one claimed, to convict her of homicide for the throat-cutting would be absurd.

        • 95% of what Martinez claims is absurd. I went to FB and read MS. Washington’s posts. My sense is that she has reached her boiling point and was verbalizing a lot of anger/steam. She was very much pro Jodi and would have fought for Jodi’s rights. It must be much more difficult for her to watch all this happening then even us major Jodi supporters. Think of how angry we are that Jodi doesn’t get the chance to change her attorney. Ms. Washington must be livid at this point. We see everything clearly. She sees everything even more clearly.
          I followed the link to the blog. Someone writes about all this. The writer is a Jodi hater and nasty things to say about Jodi’s side. Then she had an argument for everyone on Jodi’s side. Most of her arguments were stupid. I was impressed by only one.
          Also, it is not our place to say whether self defense or crime of passion. That is the Lawyer’s argument. It must have been just 2 lawyers with different opinion.
          But Ms. Washington knows how much we help them out.

            • We’ve only had the vaguest explanation:

              conflict of interest

              Maybe if the day comes that she can speak out, she can offer a little more clarity on the matter – although I guess it would still be limited, I think ethics would prohibit her naming the party with the conflicting interests.

              • Maybe Journee Maybe. I hope so. I feel more like Marianne said that; Nurmie and Washington had different ideas on how to represent her. . .but of course I know nothing. Poor Jodi. She is in a pretty helpless position right now. It really is amazing isn’t it!!!! 🙁

                • My understanding of “conflict of interest” (in the case of an attorney) is that the interests of one of an attorney’s clients collides with the interests of another client OR the attorney has some prior relationship/affiliation with someone connected to the client’s case.

                  I don’t think it applies to one attorney disagreeing with the other. At any rate, it would have been up to the lead attorney to direct the case and second chair would go along with it. I’m not positive but I believe Washington was lead attorney before she left.

                  There is a reference to Washington’s departure in the court docs. I’ll see if I can find the exact wording this evening.

                • VICTORIA E. WASHINGTON #018183 Deputy Public Defender
                  620 W. Jackson, Ste. 4015
                  Phoenix, Arizona 85004-2302
                  (602) 506-7711
                  PD_Minute_Entries@mail.maricopa.gov
                  Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court *** Electronically Filed ***
                  Lisa Smith Filing ID 1110081
                  12/16/2011 3:18:31 PM
                  THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF MARICOPA
                  STATE OF ARIZONA,
                  No. CR2008-031021-001 DT
                  Plaintiff,
                  JODI ARIAS MOTION TO WITHDRAW
                  Defendant. (Hon. Reyes)

                  Jodi Arias moves this Court for an order, pursuant to E.R. 1.6, 1.7, 1.9 and 1.10, Arizona Rules of Professional Conduct, to allow the Maricopa County Public Defender’s Office (“Public Defender’s Office” or “the office”) to withdrawal as counsel for the accused. This motion is based upon the grounds that the office has previously represented an individual in this case and further representation of Ms. Arias would run the serious risk of violating and/or disclosing confidential information obtained from our former client, may be directly adverse to the former client and may involve the use of information relating to the representation of the former client that would be to their disadvantage.
                  This motion is further based upon the Memorandum of Points and Authorities attached to this motion, confidential files in the Public Defender’s Office and oral argument to be presented at the hearing on this motion if required.
                  DATED this 16th day of December, 2011.
                  Maricopa County Public Defender
                  By___________________________ Victoria Washington
                  Deputy Public Defender

                • I find the second paragraph, here, especially interesting.
                  But the date at the bottom blows what I said above about Washington withdrawing right after the battle of the letters. This all happened over a year later. I would LOVE to know who Washington’s former client was… fits right in with what we’ve known all along: somebody out there knows something they’re not saying!

                  MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITES
                  I. LEGAL DISCUSSION:
                  E.R. 1.6 provides that a lawyer has an ethical obligation not to disclose confident
                  information received from clients. A fundamental principle of the client-lawyer relationship is that a lawyer maintains confidentiality of information relating to his representation. A lawyer may disclose certain information relation to representation only in special situations, none of which are applicable to this case, e.g. revealing information concerning a future criminal act.

                  E.R. 1.7 prohibits a lawyer from undertaking representation directly adverse to a former client without the client’s consent. In this case, any representation of Ms. Arias would be directly adverse to our former client and neither Ms. Arias nor the other client have granted consent to any such representation or disclosure of information.

                  In any interview or trial of this case the accused’s counsel would have access to information adversely affecting the former client’s credibility. E.R. 1.8 prohibits a lawyer from using information gained from previous representation to the former client’s disadvantage.

                  E.R. 1.9 provides that a lawyer who has previously represented a client in a matter shall not thereafter:
                  (b) Use information relating to the representation to the disadvantage of the former client except as ER1.6 would permit with respect to a client or when the information has become generally know.

                  In this case, the information at issue is not generally known and in fact is confidential. Additionally, this does not impact Co-counsel Mr. Nurmi. Mr. Nurmi is no longer with this law firm and he has no imputed knowledge under E.R. 1.10.
                  Lastly, our Arizona Supreme Court has held that when a conflict of interest exists, counsel must promptly reveal it to the Court. Rodriquez v. State of
                  Arizona, 129 Ariz. 67, 628 P.2d 950 (1981). Counsel became aware of this conflict on December 15, 2011 and could not have known of it at an earlier time.
                  II. CONCLUSION:
                  For the foregoing reason, undersigned counsel respectfully requests the Office of the Maricopa County Public Defender withdraw from continued representation in the instant case.
                  RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED this 16th of December, 2011.

                • I’ve been pondering it, and there are surely many people surrounding Travis and Jodi that we’re completely unaware of. That said, only two names (that *I* am aware of) come to mind. The first is so obvious it should have jumped at Washington earlier on, because it was in the police report – that would be Dustin Thompson. But that’s too obvious – Washington should have caught that name right off the bat.

                  The other name, though, the name that never got mentioned at trial because, apparently, the guy had never been *legally* connected to the deeds JM blamed on Jodi, would be Stephen Bell. Former boyfriend of Lisa Andrews and likely candidate for the tire slashing and the anonymous letter sent to Lisa. Bell was a shady character who had supposedly had a few run-ins with the law. He’s the only one I can think of, in Maricopa County, that *could* be connected to the case and might have had need for the services of a public defender.

                • Gus Searcy stated he in no way thought Jodi would have slashed Travis’s tires. It really takes a lot of strength to cut tires. He said he would have thought Dustin Thompson had done it before he would believe Jodi had. I don’t know about the Bell guy. He could be the one. Wasn’t there a roommate who did not like Travis and moved out suddenly. Also, seems like Travis needed money from Jodi frequently. That’s what is so funny about Dave Hall talking about how well off he was. Dave made Jodi sound like a gold digger but she wasn’t. I believe that she loved Travis but was trying to break away from him. She was addicted to him. Maybe he owed someone big time and he hadn’t paid them, they came in and finished him off. Gosh who knows.

                • Any of these nut jobs could have had a run in with the law. or maybe it was someone in jail with Jodi like Marianne said. Who knows.

            • It’s interesting to note, though, that Washington’s departure seems to have come very shortly on the heels of the arguments and rulings about the famous letters.

              I get the impression from Washington’s words shared here that she did not want to leave the case, and I do wonder whether it was another bully tactic of Martinez, drawing some nebulous line between Jodi and someone Washington represented (or even some expert Washington used in another case?) in order to force Washington to remove herself from Jodi’s case.

              Sounds like a very Martinez thing to do, but I probably shouldn’t be sitting here getting mad at him about it since he may have had nothing to do with it at all, lol.

              • Journee,

                I believe you are thinking too much into Ms.Washington’s departure. Let me see if I can find where I read about it. Will be right back.

          • I just want to clarify. Nurmi and Washington had two different opinions on how Jodi’s case should be won. Ms. Washington also believed strongly and positively for Jodi. It is ok for 2 Different attorneys to have 2 different ways to win a case. The most important thing is that whatever way the attorney picks, that he/she wins.
            Ms. Washington has to be beside herself, knowing the law, and
            repeatedly seeing how corrupt the Arizona Judicial system continues to treat Jodi.
            These last three motions opened our eyes to see nothing is going to be fair for Jodi. Ms. Washington verbalized also. The blog that went on about bs and brought beegee2 into it did have minimal relevant points. The majority was unnecessary. Bottom line is Arizona judicial system is corrupt.

            • Journey,

              In response to all you posted and then my response that I can not find. I want you to know I read initially Washington had a conflict of interest because she also was the attorney for one of Jodi’s cell mates. I believe that is how it started. What it blew up into, I don’t know.

        • I wonder if Nurmi switched defenses because of the sequence. Martinez changed his theory to the bullet coming last to make it look like cold-blooded murder. So heat of passion wouldn’t have worked in that case? Would it have with that theory? With choosing self defense the burden is on the state where heat of passion would be on the defense. Generally speaking, I could see a person defending themselves and then losing it when it doing so. Kind of like when you whack a spider 10 times knowing it’s probably dead. LOL

          • Like what Alyce said about when battered women finally fight back:

            “They don’t know when to stop.”

            They don’t know when they’re finally SAFE.

            Sarah Wright’s husband was dead and buried in her back yard and she was still terrified that he was coming after her.

            • That makes complete sense to me. I’m sure you would always be looking over your shoulder after going through such abuse. You remember how Jodi called Travis after she left? It was believable to me that she just wasn’t sure if he was alive or dead. Martinez made a big to do of it. . .but I found it believable. Of course, I believe (know) Jodi is innocent also.

      • I think Nurmi needed to hit harder with that – hit harder and repeatedly that the claim of self defense meant the state had to PROVE it was not self defense. Because the way he played it (or failed to) he gained no advantage by using that defense.

        • BTW, many people are laboring under this misapprehension: that somehow the burden of proof is on the defendnant. I’ve heard this argument a lot as I’ve gone toe to toe with haters. They don’t comprehend that the burden is on the prosecution and the prosecution did not meet it to our satisfaction. Nurmi definiely should have driven this point home to the jury!
          This trial was a war of attrition, Martinez kept repeating the same point over and over.

        • Apparently Nurmi did need to get into dramatics like Martinez. It seemed to hypnotize them into a trance of ignorance. Maybe he should carry a giant sledge hammer in over his shoulder and hammer it down on his desk and say ” The truth will be told here and now!” It might at least wake them up. I feel the attorney should believe without a doubt in his client and fight with all his might to protect them. Nurmi for some reason he did not give it all he had, that’s for sure.

            • ((((((((R. Love)))))))

              Had Nurmi put half the passion martinez showed (even if that meant for him to act like a total dick – just like martinez did) and half the heart and soul that Jennifer showed, I think Jodi would have been sentenced – at the most – with manslaughter.

              Nurmi’s attitude was ‘Damn it… do I have to get up from my chair? Nahhhh, I’ll just talk from here… Excuse me, misssss… do you have any coffee and donuts? I’ve got the munchies and can’t seem to focus on the trial’ kinda attitude.

          • Iournee,

            Huge agree with Nurmi needing to hit harder. I remember how mad I was with Jodi getting M1. Nurmi didn’t even tap, let alone hit!. The man himself stated he didn’t want the case. Jodi didn’t want him. Eventually she had do deal with the fact that he was the lead person in control of her life.
            Then look at the construct of Nurmi’s witnesses. Dr. Samuels was reported to the APA to investicate his license by Martinez. Samuels supposedly should have used more updated psych testing with Jodi. Again, I see this as a smoke screen for Martinez. But, then again, Samuels whole approach was also bodily mimicking Nurmi. The difference between the psych person Martinez put on the stand and Samuels was age. In todays Psychiatric world much about diagnosis, medication, intervention, symptoms change rapidly. For someone coming right out of school, they know all the brand new teachings. They know what new testing is going into place in the coming year. Samuels practicing for many years, hung on to what he was comfortable with. He wasn’t archaic but he wasn’t going to use a new testing system until he had to and was sure of it.
            Nurmi was going after the Doctor with the multiple years of experience. Martinez put the new PHD on the stand who new the book work but in life couldn’t help an ant. Anyone can look up book work.

            So here is this other smokescreen Martinez is throwing up. Every body Nurmi put on the stand Martinez had a huge smoke screen to blow about.

            Martinez needs to get reported to law bar. Martinez needs his license taken away. He is a murderer. He wants to kill. He is a serial murderer. Smoke screen: I am a lawyer.

            Nurmi did not fight back for Jodi. He is going through a process of filing the whatever is expected. What ever law he settles in to, I hope he doesn’t have to argue or fight for a client.

    • On second reading, I guess you did raise that with Victoria and her reply was “If you say so.” Rather mystifying.

      According to my criminal-law text (LaFave), it’s certainly possible for heat-of-passion manslaughter to be provoked by a physical attack (a battery). But that kind of scenario doesn’t fit the story Jodi told. Also, according to my text, even if you called her an aggressor (by virtue of the shooting), which seems silly, as soon as she “withdraws” from the encounter she regains her full right of self-defense. So it seems to me that “heat of passion” as an alternative to self-defense presupposes that Jodi’s testimony was false.

      I haven’t checked what specific rules Arizona has on these issues, however.

      • Chris – remember to factor in the battered woman’s defense. I guess you should probably look up the exact wording, but my impression when Stephens read it is that it sort of applies an overlay, colors all of the actions and reactions with the perceptions of one who has been battered, who is now *always* afraid of what their abuser might do.

        To my mind, that sort of folds self defense and heat of passion together. I remember LaViolette, in response to a juror question, saying what can happen when a battered woman fights back.

        “Sometimes they don’t know when to stop.”

        I will never forget the look on Jodi’s face when she said that.

        • Yes, Journee, I don’t disagree with anything you say in this thread. My problem is that Victoria Washington is a lawyer, and in law “heat of passion” is a term of art. Heat of passion (as the jury instructions explain) is what can reduce M2 to manslaughter. But in my view, Jodi had an entirely adequate claim of self-defense, bolstered as you say by the instruction on domestic violence — entirely adequate in that JM did nothing to disprove it beyond reasonable doubt, as he needed to do, except to try to prove premeditation instead, in which he failed utterly, in my opinion.

          So, if VM is saying Nurmi ought to have chosen a heat of passion defense *instead* of self-defense — in which case manslaughter, not acquittal, would have been the best possible outcome — that sounds to me as if she doesn’t believe Jodi’s testimony. Hence my query.

          I’m also not completely convinced Jodi was the one who cut TA’s throat, for reasons mentioned here some time back.

          • Chris, you said the claim of self defense was

            ” entirely adequate in that JM did nothing to disprove it beyond reasonable doubt, as he needed to do, except to try to prove premeditation instead, in which he failed utterly, in my opinion.”

            Martinez only barely made note of the self-defense plea, in his argument that she had time to get away after she shot him. Otherwise, he ignored it in such a way as to suggest it wasn’t worth talking about. Artful of him, I have to admit.

            IMO, ONE of the biggest failures of the defense team, especially in closing argument – tho it should have been hammered at in opening statements as well – was their failure to hammer at the jury with WHAT A BATTERED WOMAN’S DEFENSE MEANS, and how a defendant’s claim of self defense means the STATE *MUST*PROVE* IT WAS NOT SELF DEFENSE! Must prove it beyond a reasonable doubt… and then they needed the Baez/Cheney visual aid about reasonable doubt.

            They left it to Stephens to, basically, drone those little factoids to the jury during jury instruction. Martinez knows, and I’ve no doubt Stephens also knows, that a flat reading of text goes in one ear and out the other. It was up to the defense team to make sure the jury heard those messages and took them to heart, and they just didn’t bother.

      • Chris,

        Here is why I believe that Martinez has asserted that Jodi used a knife on Travis’s back nine or more times while he stood passively, and why Martinez needed the jury to accept that. It wasn’t only to convince them that Travis never attacked Jodi. The prosecutor insisted that there was never a pause in the fight as part of his argument to “prove” premeditation on Jodi’s part, but he also needed the jury to believe that the attack was unrelenting for another reason.

        If you can imagine that the fight did stop for a few seconds, then you have to wonder why it resumed, ending in death. Martinez did not want the jury to even consider that the shot was accidental. He did not want the jury to ever consider that Jodi was concerned about Travis’s gunshot injury.

        I believe the prosecutor was trying to take attention away from the evident pause in the fight while Travis was at the sink. The blood spatter on the mirror and in the sink – which would have taken more than just a few seconds to produce – proves that Travis was there coughing it up. So, rather than having to account for the fight STARTING UP AGAIN, which would mean that JODI HAD ALSO CEASED to fight, the prosecutor conjured up the scenario that Jodi was in a continual frenzy.

        If the laws in AZ do state, effectively, , “as soon as she withdraws from the encounter she regains her full right of self-defense”, then Martinez had to address, by some means, the evidence that suggests that she DID WITHDRAW from the fight for those several seconds. Martinez addressed that pause by claiming that it never happened but those particular wounds could not have been inflicted the way they were by someone standing directly behind Travis. Geebee has wondered here more than once whether it was during that pause that the linen closet door was opened and if she might have been getting a towel to help him.

        That is where the idea of “heat of passion” might come in, I suppose – after the fight resumes, but i have a hard time not believing that Jodi was in the most danger after Travis realized that he had been wounded. (Jodi’s stepping away from the sink toward the closet would also explain why she testified that she did not even know that he had been hit. But she would have seen the blood and been shocked by it even if she does not remember that now.) A glancing shot would have given Travis a motive to attack Jodi so of course Martinez wants to insist that it came last, AND was incapacitating – in case a juror might go in the direction of believing Jodi’s testimony about the gunshot.

        Martinez used the “timeline” produced from the timestamps on the camera to try to discredit Jodi’s version of events, but it was clear that his own version didn’t add up. His main objective throughout the trial was to insist at every turn that the defendant was a liar. It worked, up to a point, with the shell-shocked jury. It was obvious to many others that he was out there skipping stones while Jodi’s life is at stake.

        • 4th paragraph correction because the brackets I used didn’t “take”.

          If the laws in AZ do state, effectively, (as you wrote), “as soon as she ‘withdraws’ from the encounter she regains her full right of self-defense”

  8. IMHO it was totally self defense. It was not a heat of passion crime. Jodi was defending herself from start to finish. She was being attacked with even more fury after she shot him which only served to anger him even more. He looked at himself in the mirror spewing or blowing the blood out of his nose and/or mouth and became even more enraged at Jodi and attacked her with even more fury grabbing her and attacking her. This is where Jodi picks up the knife to defend herself and to get Travis off of her. She was in a knife fight and all the wounds on Travis point to the fact that it was Travis that was attacking her, not the other way around. If any of you haven’t already read a very good explanation by an expert trained in hand to hand combat you may find the following link interesting reading to help put into perspective the knife wounds including the neck wound: (www.herrspeightsventures.com/Innocence_Essay_Report.php) The neck wound is the most misunderstood wound in this case and the one that the jury simply could not get over and the reason she was convicted unjustly of premeditated murder. The defense failed to bring in any expert to explain these wounds and were utterly cowardly in avoiding the biggest problem for Jodi – the neck wound. Jodi did not slash Travis’s throat as a hunter might slash the throat of his prey purposefully to end its life. No, it was part of a frantic attempt on Jodi’s part to get away from Travis and to defend herself. This case is so obviously self defense but the jurors were not able to see this because the defense made no effort to explain the wounds. It is ineffective assistance of counsel of the highest degree and Jodi must win her appeal and be granted another trial, one where the jurors are sequestered and she has a full vigorous defense by an attorney who really cares and one where the judge and the prosecutor are not in cahoots and where truth is the ultimate goal of both sides. The truth. That didn’t even figure in the prosecutors mind. He could care less about the truth. He wanted a win at any cost and he got it. Perjured testimony of his key witnesses – Det Flores and Dr Horn. Threatening witnesses and suppressing and withholding evidence. In the end the truth will be heard.

    • Although I do believe that Jodi was defending herself; I still believe someone else came in after she left and finished him off. I tend to believe the intruder story. Flores and Horn perjured themselves and should be held accountable. It appears they have a different set of laws for Flores and Horn than they do for Jodi. Also, a jury not sequestered is a JOKE! Only in AZ.

      • IMHO That is possible that there were intruders but after understanding how all the wounds on Travis could be inflicted I tend not to believe that anyone else was involved in the killing itself. I am baffled however at how all the roommates could have missed the smell of the decomposing body in the middle of an Arizona summer even though there was AC in the house. And I do believe that there are people who circled the wagons so to speak around Travis to protect his reputation as best they could in the aftermath of his death. His religion is quite strict and undoubtedly the leaders do not want it cast in a bad light. Travis was living a double life and hid it well. But I believe that there are other women out there that may have been victim to his rages and degrading behavior. And if there are, again I have to ask how do they sleep? Putting an innocent woman on death row while you sit silent with the truth is unthinkable. If there were others involved I believe it was in the aftermath of the killing in order to protect Travis’s reputation and the reputation of his church.

    • That’s to say I agree it was self-defense and not heat of passion.

      But there is a long delay before the knife fight starts… that has to be after the picture 62 seconds after the shower ceiling photo.

      • I still say ‘heat of passion’ can fold into self defense, when you factor in ‘battered women’s syndrome”…. as the jury was supposed to.

        • Yes, Journee, I too agree. Defending your life and ‘heat of passion’ go hand-in-hand, IMO.

          But, I will always believe that there were others involved in travis’s death. I don’t know what their ‘role’ was but some things do not add up if someone is to think that Jodi pulled this off all by herself (I am specificly talking about travis ending up in the shower and that damn boot print).

      • IMHO I believe you are right in that there was a delay before the knife fight starts. Jodi undoubtedly tried to help Travis after she shot him and saw that he was hurt. She may have tried to retrieve towels or something to stop the bleeding all the while Travis was examining himself in the mirror while spewing blood out of his mouth and/or nose and becoming more enraged at Jodi. 62 seconds or whatever the pause amounts to is very very important and was never explained to the jury by the defense because the defense never bothered to explain fully all the wounds on Travis and what actually happened. The pause in action along with the blood spatter spray around the sink proves that Travis was shot first and proves that the shot did not stop him or impede him so greatly that he couldn’t continue attacking Jodi. The prosecutor did everything in his power to ignore this pause in time telling the jury that Jodi was stabbing Travis in the back as he stood at the mirror and claiming that the blood spatter around the sink was due to a stab wound to Travis’s chest. Impossible to have that type of blood spatter/spray from the deep chest wound. And if the defense had hired an expert in blood spatter along with other medical experts to explain this Jodi would have had a fighting chance to be acquitted. If Jodi had been stabbing him in the back the stab wounds would be far different and much deeper. Jodi was telling the jury the truth at least the parts she could remember. It just shows the lengths to which the prosecutor would go to win this case. How does he sleep at night? This case is ala Ryan Ferguson from Missouri who was just released after spending 10 years in prison for a murder he did not commit b/c the prosecutor didn’t let the jury hear the truth. What is wrong with these prosecutors? They lose all sense of seeking the truth and justice and instead seek their own glory. The truth will be heard. IMHO

        • I agree that it was a lapse of judgement on Nurmi’s part not to hire a blood spatter expert!
          The expert would have blown Martinez’s “gun shot last” bizzare theory.
          .
          As to what is wrong with prosecutors – they are looking to score more points with their bosses to get a promotion / bigger salary. I don’t think for a moment that they are in it for justice. They are driven by money and power. Martinez is as money-grubbing and power-hungry as the next prosecutor.

        • A blood spatter expert and an ME were imperative, why the hell the defense team did not hire their own makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

      • I think during this delay Jodi maybe tried to help Travis, seeing as he was bleeding profusely from his nose. Maybe she was asking if he was OK, if she needed to call 911.
        But after a moment of silence, he turned on her with a vengeance and that’s how the knife fight came about.

  9. I hope everyone will flood jodi with Christmas postcards this year. It is tragic that she has to spend yet another Christmas behind bars, alone! This is not right! Jodi should be free with the family she loves. I pray the truth will come out soon. Do not forget her as you spend time with the ones you love.

    • Do the post cards still have to be plain and no stamps? (Even at Christmas) I think and pray for Jodi and her family always!

    • Already done!
      (Ray, by the end of this week I will be sending you the postcards so you can then sent them to Jodi! 😉 )

      (((((Jodi)))))
      ((((Ray))))

    • Of course WE WILL, Jay! Flooding it is 😉 😉
      Spending X-MAS in jail must suck, so anything we can do to keep our girl a bit cheerful and to soothe the pain of loneliness.

  10. Here’s an interesting thinking process: Judge Stephens, giving her reason for not granting a change of venue said that “Jurors with preconceived notions about the appropriate sentence will be excused.” I guess she’s either expecting prospective jurors to tell her that they have preconceived notions or the judge is also some kind of friggin’ mind reader.

    • Personally, I just love how she says “The Court has no basis for finding the publicity about this case has been so outrageous that it will turn the new sentencing proceeding into a mockery of justice or mere formality” – and then she sees fit to turn off the cameras.

      • Exactly What’s with her??? There is no way a juror will not have a preconceived notion about the sentencing!!!!! Jurors from Maricopa County, AZ. PLEASE! No way No how! Judge Pickles could care less; she will do what ever Martinez tells her to do. She has proved that. How do they all sleep???? If they all are even a little bit human they should have such guilty consciences for the injustice they have done to Jodi. Shame on them all! GRRR

      • YES! Journee that’s exactly what I wrote up thread. Can’t they see how ridiculously contradictory their own statements are?????????

    • sherry thinks that the jurors will be 100% honest???… Especially jurors coming from shitzona!… Ya right… she convinced me…NOT! In what fairytale can I read about that?

      Ironically, she thinks that the jurors will be unbiased when at the same time she, martinez and their whole circus team was reeking of misconduct, deception and dishonesty. Pffffff…. shaking head and rolling eyes (just like samantha did it in court all through the trial – seeee! we all can do that too, sammy!).

  11. Hey everyone – Jodi Supporters! This WHOLE trial is nothing but a JOKE!!! The real criminals aren’t even arrested yet let alone put in prison and brought to trial!!! Jodi doesn’t even belong in prison let alone having had to go through this whacky so called trial – not! I have never seen anything like this in my life and it is SO frustrating that no one can seem to budge that judges mind on ANYTHING!!! That in itself is WEIRD, VERY WEIRD!!! Doesn’t anyone in authority notice this and everything else that is going on in Maricopa County Court??? Why won’t somebody there do something??? I even emailed President Obama about Jodi’s trial and all the corruption going on hoping mine would be one of the ten emails picked for him to read, but I guess not! Well, eventually the truth WILL come forward! I just wish it was sooner than later! Until then we will stand behind Jodi and fight our best for her justice that is long over due!!! TEAM JODI!!! Jodi Supporters!!! The TRUTH WILL come out and prevail!!!

    • Way to go Mary!!!! Maybe we should send emails or snail mail to President Jimmy Carter also. He is fighting against the death penalty so maybe he would be a good one to contact. President Carter seems to want to help people who are in real need. We must all think of everybody and everything we can do to help Jodi. We will never give up!!!!! FREE JODI AZ!!!!

      • R. Love, that is an excellent idea to send emails to President Jimmy Carter!!! I didn’t know he was fighting against the death penalty, thanks for the info!!!! I am going to email him!!!

    • That is absolutely ridiculous. Now they blame Jodi because she talked to the media too much; so there for it is all her fault that HLN swooped down on AZ and stirred up this hornet’s nest! Jurors would not be sequestered because it would be a hardship on them (plus too expensive). Screaming here!!!!!This is an outrage! !Pickles is an idiot. Never mind trying to conduct a fair and honest trial for anyone in AZ. Who really is in charge of the AZ justice system. They are in big trouble.

    • “This jury, like the last jury, will be monitored closely by the Court to assure the jurors
      follow the Court’s admonition to avoid media coverage and not converse among themselves, or
      with anyone else, on any subject connected with the sentencing phase retrial. See Rule 19.4,
      Arizona Rules of Criminal Procedure. The Court will admonish the jury, verbally and in writing,
      not to access internet information, read newspapers, listen to the radio or watch television
      accounts about the case. The last jury complied with the Court’s admonition for approximately
      five months. The Court has no reason to believe the jury selected for the sentencing phase retrial
      will not also follow the Court’s orders.”

      Is this ‘Court’ refering to another trial or just plain in denial?

      • So, I guess they will just do the same stupid thing all over again: simply telling them to raise their hands when asked if they watched or heard anything. Yeah, pretty effective. NOT!

        • Oh shoot no Maria!
          They will be put into small groups and then everyone must fill out a questionnaire, don’t worry that will make it ALL right! Then I believe if they find out they have a mind of their own; they will be discarded quickly so no one will be the wiser. You act like things aren’t done above board in AZ! BLAH BLAH BLAH! ~~~~~~~~iiiiiiii 🙂

        • Yes Maria! Exactly the same stupid way… it was a success the first time around (sarcasm) so why do things differently??? I wonder what the jury would do if they were asked: “Please raise your hands if you DIDN’T watch or hear anything and are idiots”. I am almost sure that they would raise their hands… LOL!

  12. Mass media bamboozle….
    Hatred internet sites promoted by Alexander family and friends….
    Threats to witnesses….
    Movies made before trial is over….
    Books written and sold before trial is over….
    Jurors tweeting, fbing while under oath and before trial is over…
    Crowds outside the courthouse spewing their hatred…
    Prosecutor taking ‘rock star’ pics with ‘fans’… FANS???? REALLY??!!!! WTF?
    Just type ‘Jodi Arias’ in any search engine. i.e.:
    Google: About 37,100,000 results (0.34 seconds)
    Bing: 11,700,000 results

    So, the court believes that there was not enough publicity made for a Change of Venue or Individualized Voir Dire??? No need to sequester the jurors? Coming soon: Circus act No.2 – After the show, signed autographs from Mr. RockStar himself!

    • Okey Doke RASNA! I believe you covered it all . . .what a JOKE! Come on AZ People are watching you!!! Arizona will be held accountable for all their nonsense!!!!! Shame, Shame on them!

    • How dare they do this. They treat Jodi like she is less than an animal. This has to stop. They were wrong the first time around. They are going to repeat stupid!

  13. Michael Kiefer’s tweets today:

    Michael Kiefer ‏@michaelbkiefer 4h
    Greetings from Judge Sherry Stephens courtroom. She’s going through the morning calendar. Jenn Willmott has a different client right now.

    Michael Kiefer ‏@michaelbkiefer 4h
    2 questions: Will Judge Stephens set a trial date for Jodi Arias today? And will she kick out the media as usual when Jodi’s case comes up?

    Michael Kiefer ‏@michaelbkiefer 4h
    Yup, the Arias hearing is already over. I will let you know what happened as soon as I find out.

    Michael Kiefer ‏@michaelbkiefer 4h
    So what happened in the Arias case today? Nothing. It was continued until 11-26.

  14. As for the schizoid, allegations, actually, for, as opposed to, AGAINST, jODI, BEING, PREDICATED, UPON, THE SOCALLED, HANDPRINT; ALLEGED, TO CONTAIN JODI, AND, TRAVIS’S BLOOD… DO, NOTE, THAT, WHATWITH, NO, GUNPOWDER, PARTICULATES, in the socalled, handprint, evidence, against… IT, IS, PROOF, THAT, NEITHER OF THEM, FIRED A GUN… SO… HOW DID MIGHTY MOUSE, BEAT UP ON, GODZILLA, WITHOUT, SHOOTING, HIM, FIRST…??? She, at 130 pounds, and, he, a weightlifting, bodybuilder, school wrestler, martial arts, kickboxer, with nearly a hundred pounds, weight advantage ??? The fact is, she, did, none of it…. Then, there’s the prayer mode, duct taped, hands, proving the quasireligious, bearing, of, this, blood oath, blood atonement, sacred, ritual, and, the proof, or, not, that, when the crime scene was laundered, the tape was removed; as to, pulling the hairs out of Travis’s hands, and, wrists; if, so; So, where’s the complete, forensics’ report, considering, the 180, aboutface, u-turn, by the prostitutor, as to, proof, that the gunshot, was done, four or five days, after, the ritual sacrifice, AS PROVEN, BY, THE DAYS, IT TOOK, FOR THE BLOOD TO DRY, by, no wet blood smear, upon the careening, ejected, shell, landing, on a blood island, not, a blood puddle…instead of, a gunshot, first, to, gain an advantage, which, would, have, poured blood, upon the brass; which, of course, it, didn’t, because, Jodi, never fired a gun; as proven by the socalled, combined blood handprint; containing, no, gunpowder, particulates… So, where’s the case, except, for the whirling dervish, shucking and, jiving, prostitutor, traipsing all over his stage, doing his spastic, dancing with the stars, strobe show, hypnonauseating, carnival act, side show, comatoasting, the jury,…..and, concealing, exculpatory, evidence; forensics, proves, of, her innocense…. Also, whatwith, being so, premeditated, she, never, did the Eternal Soul Saving, blood atonement, ritual suicide, then, sat there, four four or five days, waiting for the blood to dry, when, she could have torched the place, with one can of gasoline, and, or, just, driven, away… in a car, carrying cans of gasoline, so she wouldn’t be discovered, yet, removes one license plate, and, turns the other one, upside down; to, avoid, detection…. Is Rod Serling, on duty, here in this twilight zone…??? And, this eternal soul saving self sacrifice, can be better explained, in the book, “The God Makers,” and, the admonitions of, Brighamist Young, and, the suicide by sacred ritual, of, Anderson, and, the exacting parallel to, Alexander… Who, dared to, desecrate the site, of such, solemnity, with the separate, days later, feeble, attempt, to set Jodi, up for the precision heart plunge, ear to ear, throat slice, ritual, then, desecrate, with, a , stabfest, and, final, bullet; as proven, by, “wounds,” that, wouldn’t bleed.. because the heart had stopped working, five days ago…making sure in the second days apart, crime, to make it look hysterical; of course, that, disproves the cold and calculating, premeditation, doesn’t it .??? Edgrrr…

  15. And, what if, Jodi, refuses to testify, because, Sir Spazalot, twisted her words and thoughts, so bad, she got, convicted for a crime, she, didn’t do, and, there’d be no point in letting the State kill another innocent person, so, let’s just, sit this “trial,” out; swear in the prostitutor, and, let him, testify, under oath. He, is, after all, trying to commit a murder, without any danger to himself… ??? This is, exactly, what, I’d do, to spare the jury being, comatoasted, and, nauseated, by, another, spastic, road show, carnival act… and, to avoid being, hypnonauseated, by another strobe show, penguin, in a tutu, stage performance… Mark my words; no good can come of Jodi, subjecting herself to another, hypnosis, session; and, this, paragraph, should be incorporated, into, the process; along with the dozens of reassonable doubts, posted, in five years; none of which were put, to the jury… Why’s that, and, who, scammed the authority, to decide what, evidence, wasn’t pertinent to the Prostitutors’ noncase. And, who, concealed proofs of evidence to clear, Jodi, while pandering, to, all those voters…??? So, what if, she, can’t be forced to testify, against herself, particularly, in light of all the concealed, exculpatory, evidence, and, aboutface, charge, reversal, while still, claiming, jurisdiction, based upon a perjured, extradition, by, disproven, allegations, whereby, it’s impossible, for the prostitutor, to have been right, either way… Put the penguin in a tutu, under oath, and, let’s watch his deflated, ego, whine… Edgar…

    pro

    • TWO penalty phases in and of themselves constitute “cruel or unusual punishment”.

      Further complication, further injustice (for those who need to catch up): The first jury did NOT understand that if they could not agree on the sentence, that another jury would be selected to make the decision. Then, if that second jury could not agree, and ONLY THEN, would the Judge decide the sentence and NOT be allowed to impose the death penalty. So, to repeat for those new to the case: The first jury did not know that their indecision would NOT take the case to the judge, i.e. take the death penalty off the table!

      Why did the state and/or the judge not make this clear? Why the obfuscation by omission? How can this bungling result in a fair and proper application of the law?

      So it was not only the prosecutor skipping stones in his sandcastle case, the judge was winging it too, in the most cavalier, unintelligent, inhumane way possible.

      Jodi Arias is innocent of premeditated murder. The prosecutor never proved that she wasn’t defending herself. All he could do is SUGGEST, (without full disclosure on ways merchandise can be returned and how the “paperwork” has been handled over the years by the stores’ employees, and without regard to the fact that since 2008 a Walmart store has closed in Salinas) that she MAY have lied about returning a kerosene can.

      Personally, I’ve not found the cans to be incriminating. I see the manner in which she openly procured them from her friend and then went about filling them, (regardless of how many there were) with credit card payments – to be exculpatory. It is obvious to any sensible person that Jodi was NOT trying to hide her gas supply for the trip. Perhaps the defense should have opened their arguments with a “hypnonauseating” slide show of desert landscapes, a series of shots that each depict ONE tiny vehicle in the vastness.

      I can also GRASP that Jodi was more preoccupied with protecting Travis’s reputation than in saving her own skin – blaming him for what had happened was an emotional and spiritual impossibility for her when she was arrested, and so she lied.

      FINALLY: The accidental photograph of the bathroom ceiling said more to me than an intentional and flagrant gasoline supply.

      Edgar, yes, in our dreams, Jodi remains silent in the second penalty phase, while the prosecutor is sworn in and attempts to testify on the shifting sands of his “noncase”. How shrill would he sound then?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

*

Go to Top