site stats

Motions denied & granted by the AZ State Circus

Published on

.
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!

.

Gus Searcy’s interview continued [w/Pitchforks] — RE-POST

Published on

.
Check out the re-post below from June 16th.

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

Following from my last post, here’s the next installment of Gus Searcy’s recent interview with Pitchforks.

In this recording, Gus discusses “The Secret”, CASH, the Cancun trip, the suicide of Dan Freeman’s brother (the day of Jodi’s arrest), the suicide a few days later of one of Jodi’s friends, the supposed suicide of Ashley Reed, the Dustin Thompson “tip”, thoughts on the “Ninja theory”, John Hepworth & the bathroom shoe print, plus a bunch of other stuff too.

It’s well worth listening to.

*CLICK HERE TO LAUNCH THE MP3 PLAYER FOR THIS AUDIO IN A NEW WINDOW*

With specific regard to the bathroom shoe print, I firmly believe law enforcement know who it belongs to, but the information has been purposefully suppressed.

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!

..

Oral arguments scheduled for 1-30pm today

Published on

.
Ok peeps! Today’s closed hearing in the never-ending AZ State Circus judicial farce kicks off @ 1:30 pm, with Pickles once again presiding.

As far as we know, it’ll be covering several issues, including the monitoring of jurors social media accounts, possible jury sequestration, whether or not jurors can be questioned individually – and whether any live media coverage of any future re-trial will be allowed.

We can only speculate on the above as we’re still not aware what happened in the previous hearing on 10/24.

We plough on nevertheless.

In the meantime, click the links below to check out some recent posts – just in case you missed them the first time around:

Unanswered Questions (10/14)

In Defense of Jodi (10/7)

Innocence: An Argument for Jodi Arias (9/6)

Proof of Perjury by Horn, Flores & Martinez (9/2)

Chris & Sky Hughes – The Mormon Cover-up Continues (7/8)

The Kinds of Unfairness in the Jodi Arias Trial (6/22)

Ratings, Lies & Edited Tape – Gus Searcy audio interview (6/14)

Gus Searcy’s interview – continued (6/16)

And if you missed Michael Kiefer’s recent 4-part investigation into countless instances of prosecutorial misconduct in AZ over the past 11 years, here are the links

Prosecutorial misconduct alleged in half of capital cases (Part 1/4)

Prosecutors under scrutiny are seldom disciplined (Part 2/4)

Objections raised to Juan Martinez’s conduct in Jodi Arias trial (Part 3/4)

Can the system curb prosecutorial abuses? (Part 4/4)

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

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!

.

Can the system curb prosecutorial abuses? (Part 4/4)

Published on

.
After highlighting countless instances of prosecutorial misconduct in AZ over the past 11 years, here’s the final part of Michael Keifer’s series. Today he takes a detailed look at what can be done to curb future prosecutorial abuses.

You can keep up with all Michael’s tweets right here in his Twitter page.

The previous 3 parts in the series can be access by clicking the links below:

Prosecutorial misconduct alleged in half of capital cases (Part 1/4)
Prosecutors under scrutiny are seldom disciplined (Part 2/4)
Objections raised to Juan Martinez’s conduct in Jodi Arias trial (Part 3/4)

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

Can the system curb prosecutorial abuses? (Part 4/4)
by Michael Kiefer:

“For three days, The Arizona Republic has examined prosecutor conduct and misconduct, citing cases in which prosecutors stepped over the line without suffering consequences to themselves or the convictions they win.

The question remains: What can be done about it?

Options already are in place.

When a prosecutor steps over the line, it’s up to the defense attorney to call it to the court’s attention, and it’s up to the judge to decide whether an offense has been committed and whether it affects the defendant’s right to a fair trial.

Yet, neither likes to do so.

Prosecutors are arguably the most powerful people in the courtroom: They file the charges and offer the plea agreements. They determine whether to seek the death penalty, and, given mandatory sentencing, predetermine the consequence of a guilty verdict.

Defense attorneys worry that if they cross a prosecutor, future clients could be treated more harshly the next time they face that prosecutor in court. Judges worry about prosecutors who use court rules to bypass those judges who rein them in. Both know that prosecutors are rarely sanctioned by the court or investigated by the State Bar of Arizona for ethical misconduct.

So overly aggressive prosecutors continue to have their way in the courtroom – as long as they win cases, experts say.

“It comes from this ‘end-justifies-the-means mentality,’’’ said Jon Sands, the federal public defender for Arizona. “We’ll do anything we can to bring someone to justice.

Part of the problem of reining in prosecutorial misconduct is defining it.

When a defense attorney does something wrong while defending a criminal client, it’s called “ineffective assistance of counsel.”

When a judge does something wrong, it’s called “judicial error.”

But when it’s the prosecutor who is under scrutiny, it’s called “prosecutorial misconduct.” It’s a fuzzy concept rooted more in constitutional law than in rules of professional conduct: A “term of art,” according to the American Bar Association.

“The vast, vast majority of prosecutorial misconduct claims go to inadvertent slip-ups rather than calculated interference with the wheels of justice,” said Judge Peter Swann of the Arizona Court of Appeals…….”

>>> CLICK HERE TO READ PART 4 IN FULL AT AZCENTRAL.COM <<<

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

Remember…

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

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!

.

Objections raised to Juan Martinez’s conduct in Jodi Arias trial (Part 3/4)

Published on

.
Here’s part 3 of Michael Kiefer’s new series, which highlights & fully details countless instances of prosecutorial misconduct in AZ over the past 11 years… where winning is invariably far more important than the truth.

As I said yesterday — Kudos to Michael Keifer for his highlighting of this issue too. He’s already taking flak on his Twitter account from delusional pedo-huggers & people with a necrophilia fetish… and long may it continue. After all, everyone else’s fuck-ups get highlighted. Why should prosecutors fuck-ups be treated any different?

You can keep up with all Michael’s tweets right here in his Twitter page.

Today, the well documented prosecutorial misconduct, lies & deception of Juan Martinez is highlighted in great detail.

Here’s the latest installment:

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

Objections raised to Juan Martinez’s conduct in Jodi Arias trial (Part 3/4)
by Michael Kiefer:

“Juan Martinez was Arizona Prosecutor of the Year in 1999, more than a decade before he became a media darling with his performance in the Jodi Arias murder trial.

This year, Martinez convinced a jury to find Arias guilty of first-degree murder, but the jurors could not reach consensus on whether to sentence her to death or life, and Arias likely faces a new trial to make that decision.

Martinez helped send seven other killers to death row since he was hired at the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office in 1988.

He was accused by defense attorneys of prosecutorial misconduct in all but one of those cases; the Arizona Supreme Court characterized his actions as constituting misconduct in one of them, and cited numerous instances of “improper” behavior in another, but neither rose to the level where the justices felt they needed to overturn the cases. Allegations of misconduct by Martinez in the second case and at least two others are pending in state and federal courts.

It is not uncommon for defense attorneys to allege misconduct against prosecutors. A study by The Arizona Republic determined that it was alleged in about half of all death-penalty cases since 2002, and validated in nearly one-quarter of them.

But it is rare for Supreme Court justices to call out a prosecutor’s conduct in open court.

One day in mid-2010, the Arizona Supreme Court was on the bench as lawyers presented arguments during the direct appeal of a first-degree murder conviction and death sentence for a man named Mike Gallardo, who killed a teenager during a Phoenix burglary in 2005.

Transcripts show Justice Andrew Hurwitz turned to the attorney representing the Arizona Attorney General’s Office, the prosecutorial agency that handles death-penalty appeals.

“Can I ask you a question about something that nobody’s discussed so far?” he asked. “The conduct of the trial prosecutor. It seems to me that at least on several occasions, and by and large the objections were sustained, that the trial prosecutor either ignored rulings by the trial judge or asked questions that the trial judges once ruled improper and then rephrased the question in another improper way. … Short of reversing a conviction, how is it that we can… stop inappropriate conduct?”

The assistant attorney general struggled to answer.

Justice Michael Ryan then stepped into the discussion.

“Well, this prosecutor I recollect from several cases,” Ryan said. “This same prosecutor has been accused of fairly serious misconduct, but ultimately we decided it did not rise to the level of requiring a reversal,” Ryan said. “There’s something about this prosecutor, Mr. Martinez.”

There had been multiple allegations of prosecutorial misconduct against Martinez in Gallardo’s appeal. Ultimately, in its written opinion, the court determined that Martinez had repeatedly made improper statements about the defendant. During the oral argument before the Supreme Court, the justices fixed on a question that Martinez asked three times, even though the trial judge in the case had sustained a defense attorney’s objections to the question.

But in the end, the justices ruled that Martinez’s behavior still did not “suggest pervasive prosecutorial misconduct that deprived (the defendant) of a fair trial.”

And, as the justices noted, it was not the first time that Martinez had walked away unscathed…….”

“Arias admitted that she killed Alexander and claimed that she shot him after he attacked her. For four years, police and prosecution maintained that Arias first shot Alexander and then stabbed him and slit his throat. But days before jury selection, Martinez changed the facts of the case, saying that Arias had shot Alexander last instead of first; Arias’ attorneys, Kirk Nurmi and Jennifer Willmott, protested that the rationale for seeking the death penalty had been based on the first theory.

They filed a motion for mistrial alleging prosecutorial misconduct when Martinez appeared on television, signing autographs and posing for photos with fans.

Martinez verbally attacked Arias and her witnessess. He painted Arias as a sexual predator. He asked compound questions and then accused witnesses of being non-responsive when they would not answer yes or no.

“I would not have let the cross-examinations go on for that long,” said Fields, the retired judge. “It was just badgering and bullying the witnesses in an attempt to ruin their credibility. It crossed the line.”

As video and transcripts later showed, many of the trial’s most contentious moments took place in the judge’s chambers or at the bench, out of earshot of the rest of the courtroom and the cameras. Etiquette is a given during court proceedings. Martinez was frequently insulting.

The first question he posed to Arias during cross-examination set the tone, when he displayed a photograph to the courtroom and described it to her as a “picture of you and your dumb sister.”

One day at the bench, as the attorneys debated whether to admit a statement about whether Alexander wanted to kill himself, transcripts show Martinez said, “But the thing is that if Ms. Willmott and I were married, I certainly would say, ‘I fucking want to kill myself.’”

Willmott objected, and two days later at another bench conference, Martinez said to Willmott, “Well, then, maybe you ought to go back to law school.”

Nurmi asked Judge Sherry Stephens to step in, but she did not.

“In my view, that would have been a fine,” Fields said. “I probably would have reported him to the Bar. It shows his bias. It’s just inappropriate.”

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

Remember…

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

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!

.

Prosecutors under scrutiny are seldom disciplined (Part 2/4)

Published on

.
Here’s part 2 of Michael Keifer’s new series, which highlights & fully details countless instances of prosecutorial misconduct in AZ over the past 11 years… where winning is invariably far more important than the truth.

Kudos to Michael Keifer for his highlighting of this issue too. He’s already taking flak on his Twitter account from delusional pedo-huggers & people with a necrophilia fetish… and long may it continue. After all, everyone else’s fuck-ups get highlighted. Why should prosecutors fuck-ups be treated any different?

You can keep up with all Michael’s tweets right here in his Twitter page.

Kermit’s antics will be featured in Part 3, tomorrow. Should be interesting.

Here’s the latest installment:

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

Prosecutors under scrutiny are seldom disciplined (Part 2/4)
by Michael Kiefer:

[hdplay id=247 width=500 height=300]

“Richard Wintory was Arizona Prosecutor of the Year in 2007. Wintory had spent 20 years as an assistant district attorney in Oklahoma, another seven in the Pima County Attorney’s Office, and by 2010 had moved on to the Arizona Attorney General’s Office, where he continued to try criminal cases, especially death-penalty cases.

Now he is chief deputy in the Pinal County Attorney’s Office.

He is also the focus of an investigation by the State Bar of Arizona because a Pima County Superior Court judge referred him to the State Bar of Arizona for improper contact with a member of a murder suspect’s defense team.

Prosecutors are frequently accused of misconduct during criminal cases, and even if a trial judge or a court of appeals agrees that they acted badly, it rarely affects the conviction or sentence of the trial defendants.

Wintory calls himself an “impassioned” attorney; others might say he pushes the envelope.

“In the 30 years I’ve been a prosecutor, I’ve had many people file complaints and lawsuits against me, but I’ve never been disciplined,” he said.

In Arizona, prosecutor misconduct is alleged in half of all capital cases that end in death sentences.

Half the time, the Arizona Supreme Court agrees that misconduct occurred in those instances, but it rarely throws out a conviction or sentence because of it.

The Arizona Republic reviewed all of the Arizona Supreme Court opinions on death sentences going back to 2002.

Of 82 cases statewide, prosecutorial misconduct was alleged on appeal by defense attorneys in 42 and the court found improprieties or outright misconduct in 18 instances. But only two of those death sentences were reversed because of the improprieties, and only two prosecutors were disciplined.

The offenses varied in seriousness from excessive sarcasm and vouching for the sincerity of witnesses to introducing false testimony and failing to disclose evidence that might have helped the defendant.

But overwhelmingly, even when misconduct was found, the high court determined that it was “harmless error.”

The most serious examples did not appear in those cases because the misconduct caused a mistrial or the prosecution offered a favorable plea agreement to avoid mistrial, as in Wintory’s case.

It is rare for prosecutors to be referred to the Bar for misconduct, let alone be disciplined by the Bar or sanctioned by trial judges. And whether Wintory will be disciplined remains to be seen…….”

>>> CLICK HERE TO READ PART 2 IN FULL AT AZCENTRAL.COM <<<

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

Remember…

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

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!

.

Prosecutorial misconduct alleged in half of capital cases (Part 1/4)

Published on

.
As we all know, we witnessed enough prosecutorial misconduct during Jodi’s trial to sink several ships.

Following on from that, check out part 1 of 4 in Michael Kiefer’s new series, which highlights & fully details countless instances of prosecutorial misconduct in AZ over the past 11 years… where winning is invariably far more important than the truth.

Sound familiar?

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

Prosecutorial misconduct alleged in half of capital cases (Part 1/4)
by Michael Kiefer:

[hdplay id=247 width=500 height=300]

“Noel Levy was Arizona Prosecutor of the Year in 1990 when he convinced a jury to convict Debra Milke of first-degree murder for allegedly helping to plan the murder of her 4-year-old son.

A year later, he convinced a judge to send her to death row.

It was a scandalous case: Prosecutors charged that in December 1989, Milke asked her roommate and erstwhile suitor to kill the child.

The roommate and a friend told the boy he was going to the mall to see Santa Claus. Instead, they took him to the desert in northwest Phoenix and shot him in the head.

But neither man would agree to testify against Milke, and the state’s case depended on a supposed confession Milke made to a Phoenix police detective.

Milke denied confessing.

The detective had not recorded the interview, and there were no witnesses to the confession.

When Milke’s defense attorneys tried to obtain the detective’s personnel record to show that he was an unreliable witness with what a federal court called a “history of misconduct, court orders and disciplinary action,” the state got the judge to quash the subpoena.

“I really thought the detective was a straight shooter, and I had no idea about all the stuff that allegedly came out,” Levy recently told The Arizona Republic.

But in March of this year, after Milke, now 49, had spent nearly 24 years in custody, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals threw out her conviction and sentence because of the state’s failure to turn over the detective’s personnel record so that Milke’s defense team could challenge the questionable confession.

The 9th Circuit put the onus on the prosecution.

“(T)he Constitution requires a fair trial,” the ruling said, “and one essential element of fairness is the prosecution’s obligation to turn over exculpatory evidence.”

The 9th Circuit judges ordered that Milke be retried within 90 days or be released.

The chief circuit judge referred the case to the U.S. Attorney General’s Office to investigate civil-rights infringements. Under the 9th Circuit order, prosecutors must allow the detective’s personnel record into evidence if they use the contested confession.

Prosecutors are responsible for the testimony of the law-enforcement officers investigating their cases. Cops and prosecutors are the good guys. They put criminals in prison, sometimes on death row. Juries tend to believe them when they say someone is guilty. They don’t expect them to exaggerate or withhold evidence. They don’t expect their witnesses to present false testimony.

Yet The Arizona Republic found that, when the stakes are highest — when a trial involves a possible death sentence — that’s exactly what can happen.

In half of all capital cases in Arizona since 2002, prosecutorial misconduct was alleged by appellate attorneys. Those allegations ranged in seriousness from being over emotional to encouraging perjury.

Nearly half those allegations were validated by the Arizona Supreme Court.

Only two death sentences were thrown out — one for a prosecutor’s tactics that were considered overreaching but not actual misconduct because a judge had allowed him to do it.

Two prosecutors were punished, one with disbarment, the other with a short suspension…….”

>>> CLICK HERE TO READ PART 1 IN FULL AT AZCENTRAL.COM <<<

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

Remember…

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

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! .

Settlement Conference scheduled for 10am

Published on

.
Jodi’s Settlement Conference is scheduled for 10 am today, and will be handled by retired Judge Jim Keppel. Hopefully the exclusion of Pickles from the equation will eliminate any of the customary Kermit bias.

The hearing will also be closed to the public and the media, as per the court docket filed 10/21:

“The parties have agreed the settlement conference scheduled for October 24, 2013 should be closed to the public and the media. The settlement conference was scheduled by agreement of the parties and is subject to the provisions of Rule 17.4, Arizona Rules of Criminal Procedure, and Rule 410, Arizona Rules of Evidence.
.
The court finds an open proceeding for the settlement conference presents a clear and present threat to the due administration of justice, specifically, the right of the parties to a fair penalty phase trial by an impartial jury. See Rule 9.3, Arizona Rules of Criminal Procedure.
.
The court finds there is a compelling interest that overcomes the right of public access. Specifically, there is a substantial probability that publication of information provided during this settlement conference could taint the jury pool and significantly impact the parties’ ability to effectively present matters at trial.
.
In addition, the presence of the public or media may inhibit the free flow of information, including statements by the victims and/or the defendant. This is especially important here since the only issue for the jury will be penalty.

.
The court also finds that, in light of the intense media coverage of this case, there is no less restrictive means to achieve these compelling interests. Good cause appearing,
.
IT IS ORDERED closing the settlement conference scheduled for October 24, 2013 to the public and the media.
.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED any agreement reached by the parties will be entered in open court with prior notice to the public and the media.
.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED sealing the transcript of the settlement conference pending further order of the court.”
.

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

To make a donation to Jodi’s Official Appellate Trust Fund, click here for further details.

In the meantime, click the links below to check out some recent posts – just in case you missed them the first time around:

Unanswered Questions (10/14)

In Defense of Jodi (10/7)

Innocence: An Argument for Jodi Arias (9/6)

Proof of Perjury by Horn, Flores & Martinez (9/2)

Chris & Sky Hughes – The Mormon Cover-up Continues (7/8)

The Kinds of Unfairness in the Jodi Arias Trial (6/22)

Ratings, Lies & Edited Tape – Gus Searcy audio interview (6/14)

Gus Searcy’s interview – continued (6/16)

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

So while we wait for the next installment of BS from the AZ State Circus — always 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.

Together we can make it happen…

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!

.

Support Jodi with a donation to the JAA Appellate Fund

Published on

.
Ok folks. Here are the details we’ve all been waiting for.

The official Jodi Ann Arias (JAA) Appellate Fund is now launched.

Donate Today and let’s finally get JUSTICE for JODI!

Donations are now being accepted for imminent appellate proceedings.

>>> Click here for further details <<<

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

Thank you for your ongoing support.

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.

Together we can make it happen…

SJ
Team Jodi

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

Unanswered Questions

Published on

.
There have always been more questions than answers in Jodi’s trial… and many things that just never added up. 9 months on, and nothing has changed really…

Read my post below and let me know your thoughts:

The Camera/Memory Card: Heather Conner (CSI) testified that she found the camera and the memory card as separate items in the washing machine. Michael Melendez (Mesa PD) testified that when he got the bagged up evidence for analysis, the memory card was already in the camera. So who put it in there and what did they actually do between both events? More importantly, how many pics do we think they deleted? And which ones?

Jodi’s Abs: Ryan Burns went out of his way to describe Jodi’s awesome strength, and how easy it would have been for her to overpower TA and move him around at will. He even went as far to highlight her “abs” and her “six-pack”. However, in the bedroom pics from June 4th, Jodi’s abs are non existent, thereby negating his BS story.

The License Plates: Another BS-filled red herring smokescreen from Kermit.

The Gas Cans: Much ado about nothing, once again. A moot point from start to finish. Zero relevance. Here’s why.

The Walmart Receipt: Same as the gas cans. No big deal, despite Kermit building his piss-poor closing arguments around it. It’s explained right here.

TA ending up in the shower: How did that happen?

The much trumpeted “27” stab wounds: In actuality, there were only 3. Details here.

The Roommates: Not withstanding the unmissable (but evidently missed) stench of decomp throughout the whole house… all the roommates turned out to be a very tight-knit & very deceptive bunch to say the least. No wonder none of them ever made it to the witness stand.

As demonstrated multiple times already, their respective stories & recollections changed many more times than Jodi’s ever did. The Flores Report covered it all in great detail. For example, when asked when he did the washing that week, Zach Billings even gave 3 different days, and still wasn’t sure on the specifics… even though he knew the exact days & times of all his other activities in & around the house that week, including knowing the color of TA’s underwear. Odd? Not really.

Gus Searcy: Remember Gus pleading the 5th during his testimony? It turned out he was trying to protect Charmaine Juban, after Chris Hughes threatened her with all manner of unpleasant repercussions if she testified regarding what she knew. Mormon-Pedo cover-up? Had she witnesses TA’s temper? Did she know about TA & Sky? More than likely on all 3 counts.

The Closet Shelves: Gloria Esteban must have spent all day locked away & playing with himself in TA’s closet. All he finished up with were a few pics of the shelves and “absolute certainty” that Jodi couldn’t have stood on them to grab the gun. Duh! An “After Dark” reenactment (on HLN of all places) disproved that theory in less than a second.

The Bedroom Key: Zach Billings proudly announced that he was the only key holder to the bedroom door. Only he knew where it was hidden. So who locked the bedroom door behind them on June 4th or 5th or 6th… or 7th? The same person that magically “discovered” the body and left their shoe print at the same time?

The Bathroom Shoe Print: Shown during the trial and even highlighted, but only the one time. I still beleive law enforcement know who the shoe print belongs to, how it got there, and when…  but that information (along with a lot of other stuff) has been conveniently suppressed. When you already have your sights fixed on a suspect, it’s standard law enforcement procedure not to confuse things by introducing anyone else into the equation. Yuri Melich proved that in Casey’s trial too, remember?

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

Throw in witness intimidation, death threats, bomb threats, sexual innuendo, evidence tampering, Snow White, the lying lead detective, the typo-ridden ME’s report, the proven Perjury by Horn, Flores & Martinez, attempted suppression of key evidence, enough prosecutorial misconduct to write a Hollywood movie around… and you have all the makings of one of the most enormous judicial cluster-fucks ever.

The fact is, there was a lot of speculation, wishful thinking, supposition, hype, lies & BS — both inside and outside of the courtroom — but there was never anything to prove pre-meditation beyond and to the exclusion of all reasonable doubt. There never has been, and there never will be. Period.

In the cold light of day, this is what it all boils down to folks:

After watching the trial and reviewing all the respective testimonies & evidence (or lack thereof), anyone that still thinks this was pre-meditated 1st degree murder, and that Jodi somehow “pre-planned” this whole event, well, they’re a cunt. Plain & simple.

Even if they live in a double-wide or a mansion, and whether they’re black, white, Hispanic or any other permutation… they’re still a cunt… and a clueless one at that.

As always, feel free to leave your thoughts & comments below.

And 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.

SJ
Team Jodi

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

 

1 … 37 38 39 40 41 … 65