Lawyers Preparing For Jodi Arias’s Upcoming Status Hearing

We are beginning to see a flurry of activity regarding Jodi Arias’s status hearing set for September 16, 2013.Jodi7 According to the Maricopa County Criminal Court Case website, Juan Martinez has filed a number of objections including:

1) objection to the motion to preclude the penalty phase rebuttal evidence related to expert witness Dr. Cheryl Karp;

2) objection to the motion for change of venue.

CNN also recently filed a response in opposition to the defendant’s motion to preclude or limit live media coverage of sentencing phase retrial.

You may recall from the trial that Dr. Cheryl L. Karp interviewed Jodi Arias at length. Her name was mentioned quite a few times during the trial but she never testified. It’s unclear why she did not testify at that time.

Dr. Karp is the Vice Chairperson for the State of Arizona Board of Psychologist Examiners. Dr. DeMarte, when preparing her clinical assessment of Jodi Arias, reviewed the evaluation performed by Dr. Karp. On the stand, Dr. DeMarte said that Jodi indicated, to Dr. Karp, that there were more episodes of alleged abuse than she had alleged to other defense experts.

It’s unclear precisely what role Dr. Karp might have in the resentencing trial.

On Monday’s hearing, the hope is that Judge Sherry Stevens will rule on some of the aforementioned motions.

It is anticipated that she will set a date for the retrial.

Having a definitive date for the retrial, however, does not ensure that it will begin in a timely manner. I have spent a great deal of time extensively reviewing the court records that led up to the trial in January 2013.

The trial was supposed to take place years before it actually did.

Let’s hope we don’t have to wait years to learn the fate of Jodi Arias but like it or not, it will take as long as it takes.

Update: Jodi’s lawyers just filed another new motion to “continue evidentiary hearing scheduled for September 16, 2013.”

At this rate, we might not see a retrial until 2015.

85 thoughts on “Lawyers Preparing For Jodi Arias’s Upcoming Status Hearing

  1. I haven’t decided how I feel about the change of venue motion. Part of me says do it just to make sure a verdict sticks. The other part asks what’s the point? With all the national attention, where would you go?

    • Linda K, where would the trial be moved? Tucson? Phoenix? A surrounding town around Phoenix? Flagstaff? I can’t see that it would make the slightest difference. This murder trial is known all over Arizona and surrounding states (I am next door to Arizona). If Jodi is lucky, they will move it to Florida and they can sentence her to time served. I really am getting interested in seeing if the trial will be held even next year!!! Is that possible, I wonder? After all this time, I really do have doubts.

  2. I look so forward to seeing if the judge delays the trial until next year which is what I am thinking. I wonder how many times in all the first trial was delayed. Not that it matters. But still it is something I can’t wrap my head around that all these years later this is still an ongoing trial. Thanks, Dr. R.

  3. I cannot understand and wrap my head around why, when this person has been convicted of pre-meditated first degree murder with extreme cruelty, the sentencing of her is taking so long. Why must almost a whole new trial be done again. I understand that this is a new jury but … the conviction is clear and the only thing that I see that needs to be done is a plea from Arias why she should live and a plea from the prosecution for why she should die GIVEN THE ALREADY CONVICTION!! A new jury could have reviewed the evidence by now and a date could be set. Short and sweet.
    Naïve on my part – maybe – but this is absolutely ridiculous. NO sentencing should take this long.

    • Nern, I too am amazed. Not only with this case, but also the Trayvon Martin case and the Casey Anthony case and others. Not only with the trials, but the juries. Sometimes things just seem to work out to justice and sometimes they don’t. I can’t figure it out. I keep trying to learn, believe me, but it just eludes my particular brain power. If nothing else, possibly the Arias case will influence the lawmakers in Arizona to rethink how they bring about the penalty phase in case the original jury doesn’t agree. I would think at that point to save time and monies, maybe they should let the judge just go ahead and decide the sentece. Is that unjust? I don’t know. I know so little. It is scary how little I know. I want justice. But I am ruled by emotions. I feel so bad for the victim and the victim family. It sometimes seems like the law is not at all concerned about the victim but only for the murderer’s rights over the victim’s memory which sometimes seem so bizarre. I do hope in the Arias case, the judge just sets her mind to getting the Arias penalty phase going and makes good calls. In a timely manner. Other death penalty cases don’t take years and years, do they? Why is this one so different? I do not understand. I know people say the judge is doing the right thing but maybe she needs a little help from a more experienced judge? I would like to know what Jodi Arias’ penalty will be hopefully before too many more years pass. And yes, I am being cranky here! I would like to see this convicted butcher have to really serve some hard time in a prison rather than being the hero of the jail with all her phone privileges. Will she be treated that way in prison? I hope not. But probably. Isn’t prison harder on the prisoner than jail? I don’t know to be honest.

    • @NERN,

      Well, you may not like this answer but it is what it is. The purpose of the Sentencing Phase (which ended in a mistrial) is for the Defendant to present their mitigating circumstances to the jury. Perhaps you recall the previous jury was instructed they were not (a) restricted to choosing a mitigating factor from the list presented by the defense during the sentencing phase or (b) prevented from choosing any other factor presented in any other phase of the case which they believed was a mitigating factor. So, in order for a brand new jury to give Jodi her “day in court” they are going to have to hear a significant amount of evidence presented during the Guilt Phase.

      • Linda K, will the defense (or the prosecution for that matter) be able to change any of the previous testimony or bring in new witnesses and have a different ‘theory’? I have never seen it done like this will be so I know nothing about what is possible.

        • @nance,

          As I understand it, only four states use this particular system of allowing a retrial for the sentencing phase. This is the first time for me to watch this process (and I’m wondering whether or not it’s a precedent) so I’m very curious to see how it plays out. I don’t see how either side can present a whole new theory of the crime because that part of the process has been completed: Arias has been found guilty of especially cruel premeditated murder. THAT’s not going to change. But I wouldn’t be at all surprised to see “new” witnesses.

      • I understand all that Linda K. but the evidence is already there and by now could have been reviewed by a new jury. Then, as I have said before, both sides can plead their case for living or dying.

        • The Defense would argue the evidence is not all there. Jodi’s mitigation case was derailed by (a) Patti Womack backing out and (b) Nurmi refusing to call Darryl Brewer as a trial strategy. Then, too, there’s the whole ALV issue.

          • Linda K.
            You are absolutely correct – I know all this but it all sticks in my throat just like everyone else.
            I believe that Patti Womack had her own personal reasons for not testifying.
            Nurmi didn’t call Darryl cause Arias knew it would probably backfire (IMO).
            ALV – she is now in her own little world thinking about her survival now.
            Am I wrong – can witnesses just refuse to testify in the mitigation phase?
            If no witnesses willing to get on the stand – then carry on. It speaks volumes that there are none. Searching for someone who is not there is a stall tactic, plain and simple.
            I believe there should be something in place in the legal system to stop lengthy proceedings when all the facts are in and the perpetrator is convicted.

          • @NERN,

            I think I understand your frustration but I don’t personally share it. Put me in the mildly annoyed category. Quoting Nurmi, I want Jodi to have a “full and fair” mitigation presentation in hopes that if/when a DP verdict is handed down, it sticks like Krazy Glue. I’m in no particular rush — Jodi’s in lockdown 23 hours a day. I want Judge Stephens to do whatever it takes to preserve Jodi’s rights and to not screw this up in haste — if these repeated postponements are legally prudent in her opinion, then sobeit.

            Patti has some legal issues that I believe will keep her off the stand. Darryl took the stand in the Guilt phase so I sincerely doubt he has anything to offer that would hurt her (or even help her much) during Mitigation. All he’s going to say is how wonderful she “was” and how much he loved her.

            The DT always intended to call Alyce as a mitigation witness, but somehow she wound up testifying in the Guilt phase. Her testimony could be extremely helpful to the “abuse” mitigation [don’t laugh, she only has to convince one juror]. I have no idea what’s going on behind closed doors with regard to her refusal to return, but Maria assures us she can be compelled to testify if the DT issues a subpoena. The DT may choose not to compel as part of their trial strategy. Or they may choose to compel and Alyce could (maybe?) fight the Arizona subpoena in a California court where she lives.

            Don’t pull your hair out over this, my friend. Jodi’s not worth it.

          • Once again you are absolutely right and I will take your advice.
            Instead, I am off to my son’s who is 3 hours away to meet my new granddaughter – born on Tuesday.
            Arias isn’t worth it!!!!

          • As for me, Linda K and Nern, I am actually laughing at all the delays. And certainly, I will not pull out my hair worrying about the judge acting in haste and don’t you either, Nern. I don’t think haste is her style. Very slow motion seems to work for her. There has to be some strategy to what she is up to and I don’t have an idea what it would be but I think it is more than preserving Jodi’s rights. It is working for the defense, I think. For me, these delays are becoming humorous but maybe people who know legalese think she is wise. I wish her the best. And no matter what I say, I am learning a little each posting.

          • P.S. I think any witness can be compelled with a subpoena but, in the case of Patti, the DT won’t compel her because it would hurt rather than help Jodi’s case. Patti’s very likely to plead the 5th if compelled to appear (i.e. refuse to testify on the grounds it may tend to incriminate her).

        • I have never heard of any other case then jodi’s that has had this many delays and sidebars. I think judge Sherry needs advice from a judge that knows what to do in these cases because she sure doesn’t. For me it isn’t just about Jodi it is any case that takes this much time and tax money. It’s a crock of BS

  4. Judge Stevens needs to put a stop to all of the motions. I believe that she can do that….set a date for final motions and end it once and for all. Otherwise Jodi and her Defense Team can play this game forever. I’m getting old and may not live long enough to see the end of this! :>)

    • Hi, Jamie – totally agree. I have always believed that it is a major function of a trial judge to take control of the trial and to demonstrate a responsibility to the victim and his/her family to ensure the pace of the trial, as well as to confine both the prosecution and the defense to efficient courtroom procedures. Such does not appear to be the case here, and one simply cannot imagine the continuing trauma these postponements must be having on the already sorely tested Alexander family. Can’t imagine the Zimmerman trial judge allowing her trial(s) to be prolonged in such a fashion.

      • I am glad someone agrees with me about judge Sherry. She has let this go on way to long and has no control over the courtroom. People are posting she is making sure for appeals but I don’t feel that is the case at all. I do feel she has leaned towards defense since the beginning. And NO Zimmermans judge would not have taken this long.

      • I was just watching day 22 of Juan cross examining Jodi on youtube and he objects to the judge for Jodi refusing to answer a question about meetings at the church (and being snotty to him as well), and the judge asks Jodi if she can answer the question and she says no. So the judge tells Juan to ask another question, in other words, leave Jodi alone. She did that a lot for Vilette too. It makes me think she is scared of upsetting those two women and because of that, she grants them the option of not answering questions by the prosecutor. Is that typical in these types of trials? She speaks so softly to Vilette and Jodi that it appears that she is apologizing that the two women have to even be cross-examined by the prosecution. I am just now picking up on these things because during that trial, I didn’t have the ability to just sit there and listen all day long whereas on youtube you get to hear all of the testimony without commercials and hearing what the talking heads said which was mainly that Juan was a disgrace to the profession. The judge is appearing very biased from what I am now seeing. I used to think judges made the witnesses answer the questions but here she asks them if they can answer and if they say no for whatever reason, she tells Juan to ask something else – in other words, don’t make them answer what they don’t want to answer. I know this is off the point, but I had to say this. Now I am wondering if I am imaging these things. But it does seem like she treats Vilette and Arias with kid gloves like she is almost afraid of them. Okay. I just had to vent, people.

        • Nance this whole trial is a joke. She has handled the defense with kid gloves from the beginning. Yes the judge can tell them they have to aswer with a yes or a no. Doesn’t mean they will but judge does have the authority to make that statement. Thought all trials were supposed to be swift justice innocent or guilty. Some how that went out the window.

      • Although I still feel that the judge is following the boundaries that are set for her by the law and making sure all her ducks are in a row with this trial, Now that there is a definitive conviction and it is just the penalty/sentencing stage yet to be done, she CAN set a trial date and move this issue forward.
        There is no new evidence that will change the conviction.
        She can rule on the motions promptly and get a jury selected and finish this.
        Arias has been convicted and the only new evidence that could be presented is through any mitigation witnesses for the defense. Let Arias have her second 15 minutes of fame and plead her case and let Juan do his job. I rather doubt there will be anyone who will stand up for her even in this second round.

  5. I noticed Juan also filed an objection to compel juror twitter accounts.

    The 2nd objection you mention Dr Randle is confusing because as I see it, it was originally filed July 9th. Wouldn’t it have been addressed already? It seems like some of the info was redacted from the case history page from when I looked at it earlier today because I thought I saw it filed recently too and it’s not there now. I’m no lawyer but it appears as though he wants to use her to rebut the pysch experts that the defense used.

    In any case, one of the people who visit the hearings on a regular basis asked Juan Martinez at the last hearing when this sentencing phase would be getting underway. He replied, October. Maybe he has info we don’t or maybe it was hopeful on his part.

    Nurmi could make a career out of filing motions. Stephens will have to put an end to it and set a retrial date. Monday’s hearing will most certainly go on and not be continued, it’s one of his most common filings. Nurmi’s famous last minute effort to stall won’t work in my opinion. Anything’s possible though.

    • “If not for the victim’s family” ?? Blame the family? Really? It was Jodi who played games with this case, trying to get in falsified pedo claims, trying to represent herself, hiring and firing attys, tampering with a witness, the list is endless. It was one thing after another leading up to the actual trial. I first learned of this case right after the murder because of HER initial interviews and I live far from AZ. She changed her defense (lies) several times.

      The victim’s family wanted justice from day one, as every victim’s famlies do, they never wavered. It’s up to the County Prosecutor to decide whether it’s a capital case. Sure the state receives input from the victim’s family but it’s not their decision. It’s a death penalty case and always has been.

  6. @Walter This is a DP case. Yes the family has an input to what they want but even if they decided LOP would the court go along with that. I’m not even a family member but I want to see her get DP. Judge Sherry could have made this a speedier trial but she didn’t. Don’t blame the family.

    • I did know better, Tracy. I am not at all surprised. I will be surprised if the hearing actually happens in October. I don’t think the judge will hold any hearings until 2014. I do not understand the reasons for why these delays have happened in this case and I know lots of the commentators say the judge is so good and is being cautious, I feel like there have been dp murder trials that have been completed in … say, five years. Will anybody explain to me so that I can understand it what this judge is doing? I think this is a joke. I actually laughed when I heard this on HLN this afternoon but like I said, I knew it would be cancelled and I think the October 4 hearing will be cancelled. She might do a hearing in 2014. But since she is such a good judge, she might not allow any hearings until 2015. And are Nurmi and Willmot making $300 an hour all week long ‘working on this case’? Am I being shallow thinking maybe this is why they want to keep delaying any hearings for the next couple of years? Maybe they do have other cases, but surely they spent hours each working on this case. Shouldn’t Arizona be a little concerned about the monies being spent on the defense? Travis was murdered in 2008 if I remember correctly. There might be a hearing in 2014. And then again, there might not be. Yes, I am exaggerating but really don’t other judges just keep things moving along or is this a common thing? Or is this common practice for judges in dp cases?

        • Nern, thank you saying it is BS. It is BS. I know so little of the legal aspects of all of this, and I am the first to admit this, but even I know BS when I smell it. I can’t cite a particular case but I have a sneaking suspicion that there have been dp murder trials that took fewer years to get to a jury and penalty phase parts that were brought to a jury sooner AND the judge had enough fortitude to say we are going to set a date to pick a jury, motions or more motions. Read the motions, rule on them, get this show on the road. This motions thing will go on into the new year. Just because a judge sets a date I don’t believe will make a superior court overthrow any verdict. Surely trials have come to conclusions sooner than this one has even come up for second breath. Legal experts say on the TV and on this blog that oh, no, this is what a judge is supposed to do. Really? This is happening because everybody except maybe Juan is shaking in their shoes for fear of the wrath of Arias. And yes, I agree that she is scary. Very scary. But even serial killers’ trials reach a conclusion at some point.

  7. Stalling for the sake of stalling. I hope they are actually working to get her to agree
    to a life sentence. The odds of her getting the death penalty are extremely low,
    and the more time that passes will only lower the odds even more.
    Enough is enough,get her and her lawyers to make a deal and end this madness.

    • The odds is the reason these dirtbags are stalling. The despicable horror that is Jodi Arias lessens in the minds of potential jurors as time goes on. I agree and hope somebody as horrific as she is does a Dahmer on her in prison. And I hope it hurts. A lot.

      • Dalmer with all his demons and his horrific crimes was broken at the end.
        Arias thinks far to highly of herself to do anything hurtful to herself. She threatened in the past for attention knowing full well that she would never, EVER follow through
        She sees herself as winning right now and will continue with these tactics as long as it is working for her..

        • What I meant by doing “A Dahmer” on her was not a comparison of Dahmer to Arias. It was a hope that they do to her what they did to him. Remove her from the planet and carry her out in a body bag to be dumped in whatever hole somebody volunteers for her biodegradable self.

          • A body bag for Jodi is even to good for her. Light her on fire and let her burn in her little cell then shovel her ashes up and throw in the trash.

  8. Does anybody know anything about how Jodi treated Bobby Juarez or Matt? I do wonder why Juan didn’t bring one or both of them to the stand. I bet she stalked one or the other of them. I also bet Juarez, Mat, and Daryl are feeling mighty lucky about now. I hope Dr. R delves into these relationships in her book. Also I have to say about that video where Travis is telling all those people sitting around about having a gun pointed at him and his arm is around Jodi that the expression on Jodi’s face is so aggravated and it is my belief (because I know someone like this) that she is aggravated because she is not the object of conversation – that if it isn’t about HER, it isn’t worth talking about. Anybody have anything to say about this?

      • I can imagine, Nern, that the three guys I have mentioned must be feeling so lucky. Daryl spoke highly of Arias, but surely he thought that he was lucky, lucky, lucky that it wasn’t him butchered. Or his son. And I would love to know more about Matt and what he really thinks. And what their families thought of her. Maybe in the future, we will hear something because somebody who knew her will speak the facts. Also – how does Don know you don’t look old enough to have a grandchild? Do you see each other? I think you don’t look old enough either, but that is my imagination because I haven’t ever seen you!!

    • @nance,

      I haven’t read it but Jane Velez-Mitchell wrote a book (Exposed: The Secret Life of Jodi Arias) which reportedly has little-known information on Jodi’s relationships with Bobby and Matt. In promoting the book, Jane hinted that Bobby was frightened of her. As for Matt, I believe we learned that he may have been complicit in forging the pedophile letters. Darryl is loyal to the bone — he still loves her although he’s no longer “in love” with her. Jodi visited both Matt and Darryl in the days just before Travis was murdered.

      • Here’s something I can’t figure out – what was the point of Gus Searcy’s testimony? He said that when she was visiting with him in his RV in Vegas she got the abusive phone call from Travis and when she came back into the RV, she was ‘shaking’ and crying. Was his testimony to show that she actually shakes when Travis was allegedly abusive? I know Jodi kept saying people like Juan and Travis make her shake when their voices are loud. Also – am I being far-out by wondering if she maybe was being intimate with Gus so that she would get phones or whatever she needed? Probably I am being far-out but Jodi kept saying she was monogamous and I think that is probably another one of her untruths because she was so insistent about that. I think she was probably manipulating this Gus character to get things she might want. Anybody have any thoughts?

        • @nance,

          I think pretty much along the same lines as you. In particular:

          (1) I don’t believe Gus and Jodi were intimate although he may have been open to it and, perhaps, hoping for that type of relationship.

          (2) Gus is a rather ugly piece of work, himself. I wouldn’t go so far as to say he’s narcissistic but he’s certainly full of himself. He was likely too busy stroking his own ego to notice Jodi sneaking up to take advantage of him. To be honest, I thought she was stalking Gus.

          (3) Jodi was the one to solicit his aid in furthering her career at PPL. She knew he was one of the top earners (earning more than Travis) so it’s possible she had an eye on his wallet. More likely, IMO, she had other ambitions — such as getting Gus to side with her against Travis (to manipulate Travis) or to use Gus to hurt Travis’s career or even simply to make Travis jealous. Regardless, Jodi had a reason for latching onto Gus.

          (4) The reason the defense called Gus was as a “witness” to Jodi being verbally abused by Travis. Gus didn’t hear what Travis said to Jodi and I doubt he would have been permitted to testify to it even if he had (hearsay). The key point of his testimony was to relate how Jodi was upset, crying and shaking after the phone call with Travis.

          (5) The defense would have us believe Jodi was shaking in fear [of Travis] because that fits their theory of the crime. Shaking can also be triggered by anxiety and anger. Perhaps Jodi was feeling fear, anxiety and anger if Travis was confronting her about [blank] during that call. I’m thinking in particular about the unknown act that triggered his May 26th text messages where he accuses her of betrayal and calls her a sociopath. “You are the worst thing that ever happened to me.”

          • Thanks, Linda K, for your posting. That is what I am thinking also except I will say that I do think Arias was going out of her way to ‘seduce’ Gus which probably wasn’t hard to do. I am thinking Arias seduces almost everyone she wants something from. By seduce, I don’t necessarily mean sexual. But I do think she uses seduction in her manipulations. Another thing I can’t figure out is what Chris Hughes was put on the stand for. I know he had to read something that allegedly was written by Travis (I think) and Nurmi says that an expert said it was almost certainly written by Travis hand, yet I can’t find anything where Juan is questioning Hughes. I think Nurmi is suggesting (without follow-up proof) that maybe Travis is saying something about having pedophilic tendencies and at some point, Chris Hughes says Skye responds to someone ‘what ages does he prefer’. Do you remember any of this part of the trial? I am trying to really really watch the trial again on youtube and I find that I am more confused by some of the things than I was during the televised trial which was confusing as well because ….. I don’t even know why, now. Maybe because of the talking heads. If you can tell me anything about this letter that Nurmi makes Chris Hughes read, please do so, so maybe I will be able to understand what it is all about. My thought is that Nurmi is trying to suggest that Travis is admitting to pedophilia and I also seem to remember talk about Jodi’s mother trying to sell letters written by Travis to that newspaper and that this was all forgery. Help me! hahaha

          • @nance,

            I know the testimony you’re referring to. The defense team called Chris Hughes to the stand in a special hearing (outside the presence of the jury) to address some “issues” they had with him talking to other potential witnesses. The mention you heard about the letters was in reference to the infamous purported letters from Travis wherein he claimed interest in little boys. I’ve never seen the contents of the fake letters so I have no idea what they actually say, but apparently that’s the gist.

            The authenticity of those letters were examined by experts as part of a pre-trial investigation and proven to be forged — it’s believed Jodi and Matt teamed up to create them. As forgeries, the letters were not permitted at trial so Jodi gave them to her mother to peddle to the National Inquirer [they of course smelled a rat and turned them down].

          • Okay, Penny. I almost fell out of my chair laughing. I LOVE your posting. You have no idea how I detest VILEtte and Jodi. I don’t have the words. Thanks so much for what you said!!!!! I am now re-watching Day 2 of the trial and I am hearing from a family member that there were 2 memory cards found (for the camera) and that therefore there is something fishy going on with the prosecution so I am trying to find the second memory card testimony. The theory is that the sex pictures were done at a different time than the killing and something about messing with the time line on the camera. What? I do not remember about a second memory card for the camera. Is this a conspiracy theory or is it for real? What would be her point of doing that? I do not know. Help me if you know. And thanks so much for making me laugh out loud.

          • Nance if I remember correctly they were ones Jodi thought she erased but didn’t. Believe one showed her shoe. So many trials I can’t keep them straight anymore. Now I’m getting pissed about M.J. and his kids getting 2 billion $. That’s bullshit. He chose to be a single dad, did drugs and hired a Dr. that would give him any drug he wanted. He killed himself. I feel sorry for his children but they are no different then any other kids that parents have died from drug addiction. What are your thoughts on this?

          • Penny, I didn’t watch the Jackson trial. I am assuming then that the family won that case. From what I know which isn’t really much, I think Michael Jackson is responsible for taking the drugs. Clearly he wanted the drugs. We do live in an age where the person isn’t responsible for his/her own willing actions and the blame goes to someone/something else. It is too strange for me from my era where we were held responsible for our own actions. And the rich Jackson family simply aren’t rich enough so they will go after anything to get more money. I didn’t watch the Zimmerman trial because I found it so painful to think of that young man being murdered. I do think he was murdered. I think Zimmerman is a Dirty Harry wannabe and took the chance to get to kill that young boy because he thinks he is soooo cool and wants to kill. I have grandsons, quite a few, who wear hoodies in the winter. I actually wear hoodies in the winter. I am so sick of people saying that is some sort of costume for black men. I am anglo and I wear them. Remember all the comments about the hoodie? Well, enough said. I am sticking with the Arias trial. I pick and choose. I find these things so emotionally painful, I don’t know why, but the Trayvon Martin thing, I knew they wouldn’t convict Zimmerman, I knew it in my bones. I will always believe Trayvon was murdered. Period. I heard on Dr. Drew where Ann Coulter said Trayvon was a mugger. That is probably what Fox News was putting out there. I haven’t watched Dr. Drew since then and will never watch again if he is so stupid as to have people of her caliber say her hate-filled crap on his show. He actually laughed when she said it. I think Zimmerman should have been charged with stalking Travon and that Travon thought he was a sex predator which is what I would have used in the trial if it was up to me. I like the thought of justice, whatever that is. And I think too that some juries in Florida are very ….. I don’t know what to say. I have said before that Arias should have murdered in Florida and she would be walking the streets today. I also hope Arias lives the rest of her life in a dark place alone. We’ll see. I can only do one trial at a time. And maybe this one will be my last one. But then maybe not. And now you know how I feel about certain trials and cases!

          • Nance I agree with most of what you said. I do think Zimmerman was quilty but Trayvon played a part in it to. I love my hoodies and won’t stop wearing them. Yes in our era we had to take responsiblity for our actions. but now days it is all about suing. M.J. family has not won yet. It is the hands of the jury.

          • Penny
            I have my own thoughts on Michael Jackson – but then I have my own thoughts on most of the topics posted here.
            Michael Jackson’s genius came from his ability to make music. That is his legacy.
            Unfortunately, he was troubled in his personal life for most of his time here on earth.
            Many people choose to be single parents just as he did.
            We will never know what ailments he really had, either physical or just in his head, that warranted having a personal physician around all the time.
            I do believe, strongly, that even with all his problems, he was a devoted father to his children and would not want them to suffer in any way in their lives.
            His doctor was charged with manslaughter and for me, that speaks volumes. Whatever his so-called addiction, he trusted the doctor attending him and I feel that he did not die by his own hand but by the hand of another who was out for any gain for himself.
            I am sure that he did not want to leave his children. He had people around him taking advantage of their own position and had someone acted responsibly, he may very well be still alive.
            He lived in the extreme – he could – cause he had the means to do so.
            His children are not, IMO, just like any other who’s parent has died from drug addiction. Their lives were “extreme” too but they loved and were loved. Someone else acted irresponsibly and now their beloved father is gone.

          • Michael Jackson’s Dr belongs in jail he did kill him but M.J. wanted the drugs he took. I’m sure that most addicts that overdose love their children also just as his children loved him. There is help out there for anyone who wants it but M.J. chose the life he lived. He picked drugs over his kids. He may have needed help but with his money he could have gotten it. His children will always be taken care of and do have money. They do not need 2 ml. more.

          • I would be hard-pressed to believe anything other than she was acting for Gus and in fact, true to form, she was angry with Travis, so angry in fact, that she was trembling (unless that was an act as well).
            Once again, it is only her word and we all know what that is worth.

          • Nern, once again – I agree with you. I do think Arias whole demeanor depending on who she is playing is a play. I think she is disgusting and I can see through her and I think you can too. This Searcy guy, though, is …. I don’t have the words to explain. Weird. Bizarre. Where did he come from? And why did he come here? I guess Nurmi knows but isn’t telling.

          • Jean Casarez interviews Gus Searcy here saying Jodi called him at 3:30am the “night” Travis was killed & that she told him Travis was dead. I suspect the prosecution would have used that testimony IF the phone records supported it — and I assume they did not, that Gus misremembered the date of the phone call (if it happened at all).

            Another interesting interview with Gus, here, shows how drunk he was on Jodi’s Kool-Aid. She was definitely working an angle with Gus, telling him all her woes with Travis… and yet they had a strictly professional relationship. Hmmmm.

          • This “Gus stuff” is a moot point for me at this stage. Arias is a convicted murderer and should be treated as such.
            I am here for the long haul to see this person sentenced and put away. Speculation on all this “stuff” well after the fact and well after her well deserved conviction serves no purpose for me. For others, as they wish to examine all aspects of this case, they would find it interesting and so be it.
            I want her sentenced and out of the public eye. She needs to be shut away and forgotten. Time to let Travis shine.

          • Obviously it isn’t a moot point to me and ‘speculation’ on the trial does serve a purpose for me. I crave learning the whys and wherefores of what happened. Sorry. I can’t stop. I want to understand some of these things.

          • Nance
            I absolutely respect your position and my comments were pertaining to me only and where I stand on the Arias scenario. I too learn from all the comments and obviously read them.

          • Penny, I’ll be damned if I know who he is. He is the guy who said Jodi called him at 3:30 allegedly the night after she murdered Travis and that he called the prosecutor who never called him back. Go to youtube and type in jodi arias trial gus searcy and watch this guy. He seems bizarre to me. He actually told Juan when questioned ‘who was in the car with you’ – not relevant. Like he makes the rules. He is strange, I think. I do not have the slightest idea what he has to do with this except that maybe when he said Jodi came back into his RV ‘shaking’, it is re-enforcing Jodi’s claims that when men yell at her she shakes. The whole thing is making me confused. Linda K has some sensible ideas though. Also – apparently he is very wealthy from PPL according to him. That is probably why Jodi put her claws his direction. I am watching bits and pieces on youtube and learning more and becoming more confused!! My natural state. Please let me know after you watch this bizarre testimony what you are getting out of it.

          • Penny, he is with PPL and made a point of saying that he makes lots of money and is a ringer which means he makes $100,000 a year and I think an executive director which is a big deal. He has some sort of problem with Chris Hughes and I don’t know why. Jodi latched onto this weird guy no doubt because she knew he made lots of money and he dumb …. that he is, decided to ‘help’ her even though she was signed up with Chris Hughes on PPL. So they talked every week and she went to see him and he gave her a helio phone which I suspect is a very expensive phone. It was that phone that she made the sex recording with Travis that we heard ad nauseum at the trial and on HLN which conveniently got ‘stolen’ until 2010 when Jodi’s aunt found said phone in Jodi’s grandfather’s car while cleaning it. The whole thing is bizarre and I think Jodi sought after this weird Gus dude because of his money and clearly he was more than willing to share some of his wealth and time with her. I can only speculate why but I won’t say what I speculate in this posting. It is just a bizarre thing and it all ended up in the trial and I think so that Gus would say that Jodi ‘shook’ after talking on the phone with Travis because he yelled at her while Jodi was staying in his RV with him in Vegas. I am now wondering if Gus had prior knowledge of the premeditation. There is more to this odd guy than we see on the trial, I do think. Jodi is repulsive and I am so glad the jury could see through her lies even though Vilette still swears she believes her which of course she doesn’t, but nobody wants to hear me rant about that!!! But thank you for letting me vent. Watch some of the youtube things on this Gus guy. You will probably end up like me saying “what is this to do with anything”!

  9. Anyone see Gus Searcy on an episode of Judge Judy? My son watches the show and I don’t take much notice of it but quickly did when I realised who it was being successfully sued by his daughter. He did not come across too well, particularly as a parent, during the course of he program.

Leave a Comment