Sunday, December 21, 2014

“DR. CHUCKLES AND THE ANGEL’S CHAIR” BY: Paul A. Sanders, Jr. The 13th Juror @The13thJurorMD (Twitter)

The Jodi Arias Retrial: A Juror’s Perspective
DAY 18
“DR. CHUCKLES AND THE ANGEL’S CHAIR”
I am not sure that anyone on the Jury was thrilled to see Dr. Robert Geffner on the witness stand as they filed into their seats. We were moving into his third day of Psychological testimony. The Jury has learned that he has testified in over three hundred trials as a twenty five year experienced Psychologist who also has opened many clinics throughout the country.
Dr. Geffner was dressed conservatively in a dark blue suit with a white shirt complimented with a gray tie. Jennifer Willmott handled his questioning who was sharply dressed in a medium dark blue business skirt suit wearing black stockings and black high heels. The view of her shoulder length hair from the back shows it to be perfect in form and shape. Every hair is in line and she carries herself confident in appearance and in questioning.
“Doctor,” Jennifer Willmott started. “We ended yesterday talking about the childhood of Jodi Arias.”
“Yes,” he offered turning in his chair to look at the Jury, “she came from an abusive family and left when she was eighteen.”
“Thank you, Doctor. I would like to move on and talk about some of the experiences she had after she left home. Are you familiar with her first boyfriend, Bobby Juarez?” Willmott asked. 
“Certainly,” he answered with a chuckle. He had a habit of making small laughs throughout his testimony the prior two days. This was the first time it really started to seem annoying. He may have done this out of being a nervous expression or maybe it was done as a way to bond with the Jury. This, however, being his third day, there was a failure by all to see the humorous inflections as a good thing.
The family of Travis Alexander sits in the front two rows every day and in their same seats. Samantha sits on the end and she carries a small book and takes notes periodically throughout testimony. They are a close group and I feel great empathy for them. The Jury feels empathy for them especially in knowing that the Defendant has been convicted of first degree murder. The Jury feels an enhanced sense of empathy given that the Defendant is Death Penalty qualified in the cruel and heinous nature in the crime. This empathy is unspoken but it is there. I do not think the family of Travis Alexander enjoys these minor attempts at lightheartedness and neither does the Jury.
I speak as a former Juror of the Marissa DeVault Trial in the brutal killing of Dale Harrell. We felt this same empathy for the family and conveyed it as great respect for the family of the victim. We may not have used it in the Jury room but it was there, deep inside, a great sadness in the senseless loss of life and the unending pain that the family would endure the rest of their lives despite our reaching a decision to give the Defendant life in prison without the possibility of parole. I speak of the DeVault Trial in much the same way I construct the daily Juror Perspective on the Jodi Arias Trial in my book, “Brain Damage: A Juror’s Tale,” (available on Amazon.com).
Dr. Geffner turned toward the Jury, “Bobby Juarez was an abusive relationship for Miss Arias at eighteen years old. This set up a pattern in her later boyfriends. I believe, or evidently,” he said correcting himself with a laugh, “I heard he was a big guy.”
“Where did you get this information?” Willmott asked.
“I look at Jodi’s journals and I got this from her brother from his interview.”
“Very good,” Willmott said. She walked over to a projector screen and put up a picture of Arias with Bobby Juarez. The picture came onto the screens throughout the Courtroom. 
The picture was of Bobby and Arias on the floor with Bobby’s arm wrapped around her. He was shirtless and somewhat muscular. One could see a “six-pack” on his stomach. They both looked young and Arias so much so that she was almost unrecognizable as one had to struggle to match her features as she is in the present. They were both smiling playfully in the scene from seventeen years prior.
The funny thing is, Bobby Juarez looked the same size as Arias even though the Doctor had just said he was a “big guy”. The Jury notices little inconsistencies like that and they usually end of in the pile of discarded witness testimony once it reaches the deliberation room. One or two inconsistencies in testimony and objective interpretations will easy dispose of a witness. I noticed five Jurors taking notes.
“How was there relationship abusive in your opinion, Doctor? Can you give us an example?” Willmott continued.
“Certainly,” he answered affably. “There was an incident when they broke up that is corroborated by Jodi’s bother. Bobby Juarez was heavily into martial arts. He was also into control and power. One night, he hit and choked her, twisted her wrist and put her on the floor. When her brother found out, they went to his house because he wanted to scare Mr. Juarez. Well, when Bobby opened the door, he flipped the tables because he was wielding some sort of Samurai sword and they ran away.”
Jennifer Wilmott walks over to the projection machine. One can see her dark blue sparkled fingernail polish as she centers the “Abuse Wheel of Power and Control” document that we had seen the day prior.
“And how does this apply to this document?” Willmott asked. 
“Again,” he said turning again to the Jury, “this is a prime example of what her future was going to be like with her relationships. She falls into situations where the men in her life exercise great power and control of her. She really is a victim as demonstrated by the chart with physical and sexual abuse. It is a cycle with her and Bobby Juarez. It was the first abusive relationship after coming from an abusive family.”
“Very good, Doctor,” Willmott responded cordially. She slides the document off the screen and the Courtroom is introduced to a picture of her and Matt McCartney. The Jury looks at the screen.
The picture shows Matt wearing a white sweater with his arm wrapped around Arias in a posed picture. It looks like the two of them are in front of an aquarium with a large maroon Scallop shell framing them in the background. Matt looks kind and Arias looks much more familiar in relation to her present looks.
“Can you tell us your expert opinion about this boyfriend?” Willmott asks.
“This is another abusive boyfriend,” he answers readily. “In this case it wasn’t physically abusive but it was emotionally abusive. He had been cheating on her and she found out. This was very hard on her psychological make-up. It caused her to distrust people, diminished her self-esteem and was damaging because she had not planned on the relationship to end in that manner. She had to look for answers.”
“Did there come an occasion where she went to see Bianca, the girl he was having an affair with behind Jodi’s back?” Willmott asked.
“Yes,” he said. “She drove to see her, it might have been a somewhat long drive and there are some conflicting stories on what was discussed.”
“Did she go up to confront her?” Jennifer Willmott queried.”
“I wouldn’t say it was a s much a confrontation as it was a validation. She couldn’t understand what happened in their two year relationship. As I understand it, she cried a lot when Matt went to Crater Lake. He had started this relationship while Jodi was living with him and Jodi needed to clear her mind. So, she went to Crater lake to see Bianca and, from what her brother verifies, it was not a nasty confrontation by any means,” he explained.
Jennifer Willmott turns around, away from the Doctor and walks to the defense table, picks up a document, places it on the projector screen and her shiny blue fingernails straighten it out. Her fingers look small. 
“Do you know what this is, Doctor?”
“It’s the results of an interview with the boyfriend, Matt McCartney.”
“Can you discuss the importance of these answers?” she asked.
Dr. Geffner turns to the Jury while Jennifer Willmott uses a cursor to direct the Jury’s attention toward the statements he was speaking on.
The Doctor relayed the answers on the screen saying that Jodi was very affectionate and kind. She was not clingy or needy and the boyfriend and girlfriend had discussed marriage at some point. The attention was directed toward Jodi always having her “moods” which was a sign of early stages of chronic depression. He further explained that Matt had said she would take things the wrong way and cry a lot. He felt she sobbed excessively and she was very emotional.
“Did Matt McCartney think she may have had some issues about that?” Willmott asked.
“Yes,” Dr. Geffner answered with a little laugh. “He was not a Psychiatrist or trained in my field and he felt that she was bipolar. This did not show up in any of the tests but now that I think about it, there could be signs of being bipolar,” he offered.
“Why do you think that?”
“She had severe emotional shifts. She also had some spending issues which is characteristic of being bipolar and these were some pretty bad habits causing her financial problems. This is one manifestation of a complicated condition,” he said. He leaned forward toward the Jury. “She was not manipulative and she did not appear angry by any means after they broke up. She had self-esteem and depression issues which might lead an average person to think it was bipolar. She had identity issues as anyone might have after the collapse of a two year relationship.”
“Did she have a relationship after Mr. McCartney?”
“She did,” he answered. “She met Darryl Brewer a short time after she moved to Big Sur. She was twenty-two while he was forty two and he had a young son. They had a long relationship. There were no signs of abuse or aggressiveness. He was a catering manager for a restaurant she had applied at and they started a relationship very quickly. I believe they broke up in 2006 when he met Travis Alexander.”
Jennifer Willmott put a picture of Darryl and Arias with his son in his arms taken on a sunny and windy day. She looked a lot as she does in the present except that her hair was long and she did not wear glasses. It looked like an All-American family picture of happiness and contentment.
“What do you think important about this relationship,” Willmott asked.
“Objection!” Juan Martinez said. “Calls for speculation.”
“Sustained,” Judge Stevens said.
Juan Martinez had as many objections sustained as he had them over-ruled throughout the three days. I would watch him as he sat in his chair leaning forward with his elbows on the prosecution table with his chin resting in his thumbs. He would look at the screens and sometimes he would quickly jot notes on his legal pad. He was not obtrusive by any means but one felt he was being patient as well as having command at the same time. I expect that the wheels never stopped turning in his head.
Jennifer Willmott recovered quickly without looking toward the Prosecution table. “Based on the interview results of Darryl Brewer,” she emphasized, “What do you make of this relationship in your professional opinion?”
“There are some things that Darryl said that are consistent with what Matt McCartney said,” he explained to the Jury. “For instance, he said that she showed signs of being bipolar. He saw a lot of mood swings and the signs of depression that we have spoken of in her prior relationship. It really made me think twice about a bipolar condition.”
“Was there anything else of importance in your opinion?”
The Doctor, never being short of words, went on and on about the damage Jodi had suffered in her prior relationships and she was looking for something greater. He felt she had limitations in that Darryl wanted no more children and she was looking for children in her future. Darryl could not provide that. She met Travis Alexander and this changed her life.
At one point in the early afternoon, Jennifer Willmott had the typewritten results of the Darryl interview on the projection screens throughout the Courtroom. I mentioned in an earlier Perspective that Jurors not only listen to what is said, they always read beyond what the Defense may draw their attention to. They are continually searching for answers and more information.
The answer to one question did not go past the Jury. Its causal link was obvious but unintended. Jennifer Willmott was very good at removing documents quickly after hearing testimony on a subject whereas Kirk Nurmi had a habit of leaving documents on the projection screens for an extended amount of time.
I looked at the Jury and I saw them reading documents in their entirety. I saw Judge Stevens doing the same thing while Dr. Geffner spoke.
One answer read:
“When they moved to the desert, they weren’t used to the heat. He (Darryl) started keeping a five gallon gas can in the back of the car in case of running out of it and often took a few gas cans on trips.”
The Jury did not miss this and it was not mentioned by the Defense even though it was on the screen for all to see. Its qualification and reason for having gas cans did not make sense. But, even more so, it brought attention to the gas cans. I don’t think the Defense wants to talk about gas cans. I think the Jury wants to know what gas cans have to do with moving to Arizona.
We spent the rest of the afternoon painstakingly beginning the process of going through a day by day and moment by moment timeline of the relationship of Travis Alexander and Jodi Arias. The ill-fated meeting was in September of 2006. The met for the first time at the Rainforest Café of the MGM Grand in Las Vegas, Nevada.
This timeline would continue into Day 19 of the Trial. The Jury would be excused for the day after an extra hour of testimony.
The gas can mention was a seed in the Jury’s head. 
Juries love evidence that they can touch see and feel. They also like dates and times albeit not to the extent of the Doctor’s timeline. 
Somebody on the Jury is trying to remember when she bought the gas cans…
“Every good relationship that develops as a result of this Trial is the manifestation of the Spirit of Travis Alexander.”
Justice 4 Travis Alexander…
Justice for Dale…
Paul A. Sanders, Jr.
The 13th Juror @The13thJurorMD (Twitter)

550 KFYI News Talk (Another source for this trial.)




http://www.kfyi.com/search/jodi%20arias%20trial

Day 20 of Jodi Arias trial: Attorneys continue 'victim' defense





http://www.kpho.com/story/27660084/day-20-of-jodi-arias-trial-attorneys-continue-victim-defense

Day 19 of Jodi Arias trial: "My anger is very destructive"










http://www.kpho.com/story/27649384/day-19-of-jodi-arias-trial-back-to-business-for-jury

Saturday, December 20, 2014

"DR. CHUCKLES CHRISTMAS PRESENT" BY: Paul A. Sanders, Jr. The 13th Juror @The13thJurorMD (Twitter)

The Jodi Arias Retrial: A Juror’s Perspective
DAY 19
“DR. CHUCKLES CHRISTMAS PRESENT”
A diamond would not be valuable were it easily discovered. The Defense Team handed one to Juan Martinez. It was wrapped in coal and hidden from sight. It was subtle and became the jewel that the Jury will take with them on their time off until next year.
It would be the fourth day of testimony from Dr. Geffner, the trial experienced Psychologist. It is also the eleventh day in a row of hearing psychological testimony. It has become two Doctors who have said almost the same thing but with different affectations. It can get tiring but Jennifer Willmott kept a good pace today by constantly presenting new documents for the Jury to see. This was a continuation of yesterday’s timeline of the life of Arias and Travis Alexander seen mostly from Arias’ eyes through the continual presentation of pages from her journals.
Simultaneously, Jennifer Willmott would query the Doctor on a timeline he created based, again, on mostly Arias’ journal. It was lightly seasoned with some loose corroboration and a touch of nastily worded e-mails. Much of this had been visited through the testimony of Dr. Fonseca.
It is the note takers that I watch on the Jury since the rest of the Jurors carry stoic faces that reveal nothing of what they may think. I see particularly five note takers. I take notes as I did as a Juror on the capital murder case of Marissa DeVault in the premeditated murder of her husband. Our second of three verdicts reached qualified DeVault for the death penalty. We had fourteen days of Psychological testimony throughout the three phases. My book, “Brain Damage: A Juror’s Tale” (available on Amazon.com) is the story of this recent and similar trial.
The note taker on a Jury, once started, realizes that he or she has to be quick with the pen. They want to make sure that nothing is missed because he or she never knows what is going to become critically important. The note taker learns to write in outlines instead of paragraphs. They find that dates and times are important and they focus on writing exhibit numbers down and what the exhibit refers to. At the time, they don’t realize how important the writing down exhibit numbers is.
The Jury will not get transcripts of the trial in the deliberation room once they are reduced to twelve members. They will, however, have access to all the evidence including that of the previous first and second phases. When the Jury deliberated in the first two phases, the evidence was in the Jury room, at least the pictures and documents. They could always request additional items. The third phase is different because the evidence must be requested by the Jury and requested by Exhibit numbers. 
It is from one of the note takers where the eventual Jury Foreperson will arise.
Throughout the morning, Jennifer Willmott rotated between the showing of Dr. Geffner’s objective timeline and the writings of Arias directly from her hard bound diary. Her writings were careful written and accented by rounded letters. The penmanship was deliberate. It was written with particular care to the styling of the letters and their grace and flow. It was something the Jury would see all day. I think the Defense Team was trying to humanizer her. Days and dates abounded for the note taking Juror even though much of the testimony was tired, worn and redundant.
The Jury was dismissed for lunch and Judge Stevens stayed the Court. We were given a treat that the Jury missed.
Juan Martinez stood up and took a few steps in front of the Prosecution table, facing Dr. Geffner. He wore a gray suit with yellow shirt and a spotted design gold tie. 
“Did you interview Travis Alexander?” Mr. Martinez pointedly asked.
Dr. Geffner nervously laughed. “Well, no,” he said. “I couldn’t do that.”
“Did you speak with Mr. Alexander?” Juan asked as he took a step forward.
“That’s kind of ridiculous,” he answered. “He was already gone.”
Juan Martinez stood his ground as he stared at the Doctor. “Did you use the word ‘Manipulative’ in regards to Travis Alexander?”
The Dr. answered and there was the slightest undertone of nervousness. “No. I don’t remember saying that.”
“Aren’t you labeling his conduct by using the word, ’Manipulative’?” he asked, obviously ignoring the Doctor’s memory loss of testimony he had just given minutes before the Jury was dismissed.
“It could be interpreted that way,” he relented with a shrug of his shoulders.
Willmott stood up in her deep aqua colored business skirt suit. “This is discovery and not a cross-examination!” she said vehemently.
“Go on,” Judge Stevens motioned to Juan. Jennifer Willmott remained standing, waiting to pounce.
Juan Martinez did not look at her. He looked at the Judge before he continued his cross examination. He opened his arms with his palms opened and slightly turned outward, looking at the Doctor. “Is saying a ‘Manipulative’ relationship a diagnosis?”
Dr. Geffner looked toward the Judge and saw no help being offered. He looked back at Juan Martinez as if he understood his semantics mistake. “I was looking at all the information. So, no. It’s a general behavior I may have perceived. It is not a diagnosis.” 
Juan Martinez did not thank him. He turned on his heel and went back to the Prosecution table while Jennifer Willmott glared at him.
Judge Stevens recessed the Court for lunch. It was really an early Christmas gift from the friendly Doctor seeing Juan take a sample of his eventual prey. Dr. Geffner collapsed like a house of playing cards. His confidence seemed weak and his laugh was nervous with an artificial hollowness. It was going to be a bloodbath.
The Defense spent the return from lunch and the rest of the afternoon presenting a line by line repetition of Jodi’s journal entries. The Jury was fed hours of it while it was interchanged with the kind Doctor’s objective timeline. There may have been those who tired of hearing Arias’ words but they worked not to show it in his or her faces.
The Jury heard of trivialities in Arias’ life and the drama she produced. They saw some of the harsh words of Travis and it reminded them that they still did not know what made him so angry with her on May 26, 2008. Certainly, I think the idea was to present her as a victimized angel but something else happened. The date of this Gmail is also the last communication they knew of between Arias and Travis Alexander. 
That was until Jennifer Willmott’s started presenting communications after May 26, 2008. It had my interest and that of the Jury. They still want to know what happened. They will recreate the murder in spite of a decision being reached by another Jury. They need to know themselves because it is natural instinct. It will be an easier path in the Jury room to put it back together. The timeline and her Journals are the closest we get to his death thus far in the retrial phase. Just because the lawyers and the prior verdicts say premeditation existed will not stop them from looking to answer the questions they never got to see in the first phase.
As they sit in the Jury box, they are trying to answer in their minds why the Defendant in the chair, and the words they have heard read aloud, could have done such a horrific act. They become detectives, especially the note takers.
“So, Doctor,” Jennifer Willmott began, “we are reading from her journal of June 1, 2008.”
“Yes,” the Doctor agrees as he reads the projector screen while she reads aloud. It is the same large screen that is in front of the Jury. I notice that Juror # 17 is looking forward toward the screen and I can tell he is writing down quotes just as I am.
“Anyway, after San Diego, I’ll drive to Utah,” Willmott reads from Arias’ journal, written only three days prior to the brutal killing of Travis Alexander. “I’m not sure what we’ll be doing there. It will be nice to get to know Ryan (Burns). I think cuddling is definitely on the list. After some dinner. Maybe after a nap.”
I notice something. It is something about the writing. It was the handwriting. We had seen the bulk of what amounted to two days of seeing her hand written journals. They had always seemed the musings of a teenager of sorts with their care in being written with round and flowing cursive letters. It was something you no longer noticed because you hand seen so much of it.
This journal entry was different. It felt different and its penmanship seemed rushed. There did not seem to be the particular care normally taken in the hand writing. It is speculation and it will be dismissed as speculative that it is different from the rest of her hand writings.
Willmott continued reading Arias’ words, “I mentioned my road trip to Travis. He didn’t sound all that thrilled to me. As far as I know, he knows nothing of Ryan. I asked Zion not to mention it to him so I wouldn’t have to explain anything or hurt him further. It would only be a repeat of our last blowup,” Jodi finishes writing.
“Tell me, what does this mean to you, Doctor?” Willmott asked.
The Doctor rambled on about Jodi moving on in her life but she cannot escape the cycle of abuse. She sees new beginnings while he is exercising control…
I had just finished taking notes of her journal on the screen of June 30, 2008. I stopped writing to ease a cramp in my hand and as I was doing that, my eyes happened to fix on Juror # 17. My Juror acumen from my experience as a Juror kicked in.
He stands about six foot, two inches. He has a shaved head and a long handlebar mustache that runs down the side of his jawline. The mustache is always impeccably trimmed. It takes away from looking at his cleanly shaven head. His shirts are always pressed and he always looks comfortable in his position. He is a note taker but does not work hard at every single detail by writing as furiously as I might. He seems to write when important issues are presented. He flies under the radar but I feel confidence in his walk without being over bearing.
The Doctor was talking but most of the note takers had stopped taking notes. Juror # 17 had his head cradled in his hand. He was looking downward and writing. I could tell he wasn’t listening to the Doctor. He would look up occasionally his look was distant and pensive. It was something I think few would notice unless you have sat in the Jury box.
One can write anything they would like in their Juror- issued folders with legal pads inside. The words in these notebooks are the property of the State and remain in the Jury room for the duration of the trial. Eventually, when the verdict is finally reached, each Juror book is destroyed by the State.
The note taker will sometimes write thoughts that he or she will want to bring up later in the Jury room.
I could tell with his thoughtful looks into space that he was working something out and then writing it on his Juror pad. I saw him flip back a couple pages and then return to writing.
It took one journal entry by Jodi Arias to render the prior two days of testimony as useless. He was putting pieces together. He was looking at dates. I was doing the same thing. It was beginning to dawn on him that the journal entry from June 1, 2008 was manufactured for people who might look at it the future and the future was here.
The letter was staged. There was no trip to San Diego planned. It was a lie. The Journal had impeached itself in the craftily placed words of Arias. The entirety of the journal would be dismissed in deliberations.
The Defense Team wanted to humanize Jodi Arias in the presentation of her journals but instead revealed a killer of the utmost evil.
This is the mitigation and aggravation phase. The Doctor spent four days on the stand and the bulk of this past two days fell into the Prosecution’s hands as the Journal entry gave rise to premeditation instead of mitigation. The Jury will have a Dry Erase board to work with when they get back to the deliberation room at some point. They will draw a line down the center making two columns with one for aggravation and one for mitigation.
Premeditation will go into the aggravation column among many other factors the Jury will see at the start of the New Year. They will see the Cross Examination of Dr. Geffner. They will eventually see Dr. DeMarte when Juan Martinez presents his side of the case.
We may or may not see Jodi Arias on the witness stand but we will eventually see her make her “Statement of Allocution”, as is her right, to the Jury.
We will not see her take ownership of this brutal murder nor will we not see the remorse she needs to show if she wants to stay out of the death chamber.
We close out the year in the Jodi Arias Retrial with hope and not just because of my speculative musings on what a Juror is thinking. It, however, is becoming clearer by the day that there are no mitigation factors.
This Jury will find Justice for Travis Alexander and his family. But, first, Juan Martinez will present the sword as Lady Justice watches…
I wish the family the most blessed of a Christmas Holiday and hope the New Year finally brings them some resolution and the Justice they so richly deserve… 
I wish all of you, my Dear Readers, a rich and warm Holiday Season with great Hope and personal growth in 2015. I am humbled by the great amount of support as we collectively search for Justice for Travis…
“Every good relationship that develops as a result of this Trial is the manifestation of the Spirit of Travis Alexander.”
Justice 4 Travis Alexander…
Justice for Dale…
Paul A. Sanders, Jr.
The 13th Juror @The13thJurorMD (Twitter)

Ex-Jodi Arias lawyer: I didn't delete porn files

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/11/14/jodi-arias-trial-lawyer-porn-files/19033947/


Wednesday, December 17, 2014

Appeals court: Jodi Arias testimony must be made public


Appeals judges said they did not doubt the volume or malicious nature of Arias' jail mail, "her concern does not, as a matter of law, amount to an extremely serious substantive evil warranting closing the trial to the public and press."


Media story:

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/12/16/court-jodi-arias-testimony-public/20485865/





 ARIZONA COURT OF APPEALS RULING:  
 
http://cdn-static.wildabouttrial.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/CourtOfAppeals.pdf

“BOULDER OF EVIDENCE” Written by: Paul A. Sanders, Jr. The 13th Juror @The13thJurorMD (Twitter)

The Jodi Arias Retrial: A Juror’s Perspective
DAY 17
“BOULDER OF EVIDENCE”
This is the third phase of the Death Penalty Retrial of Jodi Arias for the premeditated and heinous murder of Travis Alexander. The third phase is sometimes called the sentencing or penalty phase. It can also be called the aggravation and mitigation phase. This phase is different from the first two phases for a Jury. In the prior two phases, they reach a decision “beyond a shadow of a doubt” and this is done collectively and requires a unanimous vote. The verdict in the first phase determines the type of murder. The agreement of a verdict in the second phase is the death penalty qualifying phase.
The third phase requires a Juror to come to his or her own decision in deciding life or death for the defendant. Their path of knowledge and experience does not have to be agreed upon by the Jury as a whole. Each Juror makes their decision influenced by their own personal experiences. It is usually those same experiences that are drawn out of the Voir Dire Questionnaire prior to their final selection.
One of those questions read, “Have you ever experienced Domestic Violence in your direct household? Please explain:”
In the mitigation phase, a Juror must ultimately decide if there is a preponderance of evidence, or it is more likely than not, that mitigating factors will reduce the culpability of the Defendant’s act. For the Juror to give abuse weight as a mitigating factor, they must determine that it was more likely to have existed than not. The Juror may decide that some abuse may have existed but it is not enough to reduce culpability. Or, they may decide it did exist and should be considered as a mitigating factor There is a specific law addendum that focuses on Domestic Violence that the Jury is given.
Juan Martinez has to convince twelve Jurors that the Defendant’s aggravating factors outweigh the mitigating factors in this case.
The Defense team only has to convince one and they win the best possible scenario in their case: the life of the Defendant.
Sometimes, when I go to the Jodi Arias Retrial, I feel like I am walking down a slightly unfamiliar path but know exactly what is around the corner. I spent six months as a Juror the similar case of the brutal killing of Dale Harrell by Marissa DeVault. Our case had similarities that extend to this Jury. It had a similar path of testimony and it required twelve of us to pass through all three phases separated by deliberation periods. The longest period we deliberated was in the third phase of the trial. We deliberated over three and a half weeks to reach a decision in the sentencing phase. It is the most difficult phase of all. The difficulty is entrenched in “a preponderance of evidence” as opposed to a “shadow of a doubt”. It is the decision that requires truth from the soul as well as experiences of life.
Our Jury had three Domestic Violence survivors on it. This Jury is more likely than not, to have two to four Jurors who have experienced Domestic Violence. I am one of the three Domestic Violence survivors. It is not a fact I am proud of and it is not a badge. It is a life experience that requires soul searching in determining if someone else was a victim of a similar experience. There are rarely witnesses. There are rarely those who will stand up and admit they were abusers. There are the people who look away and pretend it does not exist.
I know that the Jurors who admitted on the Voir Dire that they had experienced Domestic Violence all regretted writing the experience down while they were driving home. A Juror completes the Voir Dire without any notice that a question like that will appear. The answer to that question was a big reason they were qualified for the Jury. Its importance will be realized in the deliberation phase and the law recognizes its challenges.
The day opened with Dr. Geffner on the witness stand being questioned by Jennifer Willmott. It was not the most exciting day for many because the day was spent mostly on the education of the Jury on Domestic Violence. It began with some loose and sloppy evidence when Jennifer Willmott put Dr. Geffner’s DAPS (Detailed Assessment of Post-Traumatic Stress) Report on all the screen for the Jury to see.
The Jury saw what I saw. The paper displayed on the screen had been copied about twenty times with little gray flecks all over the documentation. There were a bunch of scribbled dates on the top of the sheet done in Sharpie. The dates were scribbled out and changed. The Doctor claimed he got his paperwork mixed up. The graphs on the screen did not look computer generated although they may have been.
The center of the graph has a thin line going through it. It is the “mean” or average results. Jodi Arias’ results featured a bar graph that was at the very top of the graph. Dr. Geffner stated that her results “profile is extreme with some exaggeration.”
The Jury won’t look at that document in the deliberation room. It impeached itself by its presentation so all the words that may have been spoken to the Jury may as well have been the same white noise we hear in the Gallery when the Judge has a bench conference.
He and Jennifer Willmott continued the education of the Jury on Domestic Violence by putting up a chart that was circular with pie slices.
“If you look at it as a pie,” Dr. Geffner said in a professorial tone, “You will see that each piece is has a name for it and represents a segment of Domestic Violence. Consider the entirety of the pie as power and control. One piece of it is physical abuse. This covers such things as hitting, hair pulling, slapping and generally violent physical behavior.”
The Jury looked at him and I saw two or three taking notes. I would have expected more taking notes. I remember as a Juror that I took notes on everything because I did not have the knowledge to discern what was important or not. There were times I did not take notes because we had either heard it before or the testimony was valueless because the witness had impeached him or herself.
In my book, “Brain Damage: A Juror’s Tale”, one such witness was Stanley Cook who was a direct witness to the murder of Dale Harrell. One would think a Juror would be a voracious note taker when that witness was on the stand. Once you meet the witness in the book, you’ll understand why none of us wasted our time with notes.
The fact that few are note taking tells me many are not appreciating the weight of his testimony as the Defense would like.
The Doctor continued, “There is emotional abuse which includes putting a person down, calling a person names and blaming the other person for many things. We can see another slice enumerating isolation as a form of abuse. The abuser will keep a person hidden away from family and friends.”
Although it was simple to follow, it became tireless in its unending detail of the complete rainbow of the abuse spectrum such as sexual abuse, intimidation, economic abuse, using male privilege to control and threats of suicide.
I felt the air change when Jennifer Willmott began pursuing how these attributes applied to Travis Alexander. I thought this Psychologist affable yesterday and my opinion changed with each question that Willmott asked. I did not feel that this was a foundation of what Travis Alexander was as a person and I did not agree with the Doctor “making the pieces” fit. I don’t think the Jury liked it either because we were back on Travis Alexander with only one day of respite in his character assassination.
The Jury wants to know about Jodi Arias and this argument was deflected in the wrong direction. Juan Martinez objected to much of this testimony’s relevance throughout the day.
The Jurors who have experienced Domestic Violence were not relieved when the Doctor’s focus changed to the upbringing of Jodi Arias.
The Doctor spoke in long paragraphs about the Psychological reactions to being an abused child and how it manifests itself in adulthood. He talked of the loss of identity a victim goes through. He speaks of the fears, guilt, shame, self-blame, depression and suicidal thoughts of victims of child abuse. He was not afraid to speak of the dependency, emotional instability and host of other ramifications of abuse that appear in adulthood.
The Doctor drizzled the knowledge he was conveying to the Jury by randomly connecting it to Jodi Arias and the abuse she allegedly suffered. He spoke of the wooden spoon incident about seven times throughout the day emphasizing its welts. It was because of her upbringing that she became the introverted victim that she was. The results of abuse were conveyed in her cognitive, emotional and social character of being a victim of intimate partner violence.
Jodi Arias’ mother sat in the front row. I wonder what the Jury searched for on her face.
Juan is going to have a field day on this Psychologist. I noticed that the Doctor brought up incidents between Arias and Travis Alexander from 2006, 2007 and 2008. He used these dates more than once. The Jury is wondering how that is possible if they only dated for four months.
The Jury was also introduced to a new “memory gap” from Dr. Geffner. He claimed she had issues remembering anything from when she was twelve to fourteen years of age. I don’t think it got past the Jury to see that it coincidentally lined up with when she was caught growing Marijuana in her room in the seventh or eighth grade. The Doctor offered that she could not remember the trauma she must have suffered.
We are in the middle of the afternoon and no one on the Jury is taking notes.
Her second memory gap surrounds the murder of Travis Alexander but the Doctor does say she is “remembering bits and pieces”. I looked toward the Prosecution table and thought about what Juan Martinez might do with that tasty morsel. Juan loves dates. Dr. Fonseca remembers that much of her interrogation.
This Jury does not care to see this Doctor any more. His evidence is like an artificial boulder made from Styrofoam. It looks big and heavy and when lifted it is weightless.
Those who have survived Domestic Violence, a most horrific thing to go through, can see straight through this Red Herring. There is nothing there and its value lost in paperwork somewhere. Somebody forgot to prove that Jodi Arias experienced abuse whether it was in her childhood or by the hands of Travis Alexander. The rest of the Jurors will dismiss it far faster than those who have experienced it.
The feigning of abuse by partner or parent is particularly personal to those who have been persecuted by an abuser. It makes us angry because it diminishes its great importance and reality that it exists. It exists behind closed doors and to the deaf ears of neighbors. It has many forms and its damage is real. Many survive and some do not survive its effects. We have heard stories of feigned abuse all of our lives which is survivors reminder, and it upsets us.
There is a line between discipline and abuse. If the discipline is physical to a child, the line is defined by the presence of a mark.
The Jury will have an impossible time trying to link abuse to Jodi Arias.
Jodi wore her “poor little me” face all day. I did not see her look at her mother once…
“Every good relationship that develops as a result of this Trial is the manifestation of the Spirit of Travis Alexander.”
Justice 4 Travis Alexander…
Justice for Dale…
Paul A. Sanders, Jr.
The 13th Juror @The13thJurorMD (Twitter)

Tuesday, December 16, 2014

Picture of ja in court. Showing a bit too much for court.

Here she is, once again, trying to use her body to manipulate male jurors by wearing a shirt that doesn't cover up her entire chest.  The Judge needs to take her aside and tell her and Maria De La Rosa what kind of clothing is appropriate attire inside of a courtroom.  Apparently, neither ja or Maria get it.   


ja's attempt to try and manipulate the court.

Reposting:  The motion JM filed to object to ja's request that the court reconsider its order denying dismissal of the State's notice seeking imposition of the death penalty.  

Filed on Dec. 1, 2014 by Juan Martinez.


ja's CLAIMS that her "alleged" witnesses are refusing to testify unless the court proceedings are closed to the public while they are testifying.  ja tried to make up her own "legal reasoning" where no law applies to her BS. JM made it pretty clear that ja's attorneys can subpoena her witnesses and that it'll be the DT's own fault if they don't. Also that the jury can't be faulted for not hearing any evidence that the DT doesn't put out there for them to see/hear.  
   


http://karasoncrime.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/States-Objection-to-Motion-to-Reconsider.pdf

ja tried using this same game of manipulation before during the retrial of her sentencing phase when she took the stand.  The only differences is that before she implicated herself as being the "uncooperative" witness.  Judge SS isn't stupid.  She has got to see the game of manipulation that ja has been playing.  Judge SS needs to put a stop to ja's and the DT stall tactics and BS reasons that ja and the DT come up with in an attempt to take the DP off of the table.     


azfamily.com
Posted on December 16, 2014 at 11:27 AM
Updated today at 1:06 PM



The opinion said Arias did not feel she would be "able to fully communicate what she wants to say, communicate her remorse and go through all the mitigating factors and get them out there in front of the jury with the public here," her lawyers told the judge.

The judge suggested that the public and press be moved to an overflow room, and Arias objected to that alternative despite the judge expressing concern that she was being manipulative. She objected "because of the pressure that I would feel because of these threats," according to the opinion.

Read more: http://www.azfamily.com/news/Court-reveals-why-Arias-wanted-testimony-private-285980661.html#ixzz3M69enS00