According to Court Chatter, Juror No. 17 made a speech against the death penalty just 11 months before she was chosen to serve as a juror on the Jodi Arias trial. To me that proves she lied and said she believed in the death penalty to get on the jury. The other jurors said they believed she opposed the death penalty because when they asked her what crime would deserve the death penalty, she wouldn't answer.
Here's the transcript of her speech:
Death Penalty
Persuasive Speech by: xxxxxxx xxxxxxx
MORALITY
Since 1973, over 130 people have been released from death rows throughout the country due to evidence of their wrongful convictions.
RELIGION:
If God chose to give us life, then we do not have the right to decide on whether someone's life must be ended.
MORALITY
"I cannot support a system which, in its administration, has proven so fraught with error and has come so close to the ultimate nightmare, the state's taking of innocent life...Until I can be sure that everyone sentenced to death in Illinois is truly guilty,until I can be sure with moral certainty that no innocent man or woman is facing a lethal injection, no one will meet that fate."
-Governor George Ryan of Illinois
MONEY
A study in 2003 showed that a death penalty case costs 70% more than a non-death penalty case.
In California, the current system costs $137M per year; it would cost $11.5 M for a system without the death penalty.
The cost of the death penalty in California has totaled over 4 billion since 1978.
SPENDING $ MEANS:
Less money to be spent on resources for crime prevention, mental health treatment, education, and rehabilitation services.
Observer, if Juror 17 did give this speech, she clearly is against the death penalty and thus lied (I suppose) if asked during voir dire if she could vote for death if it was warranted. Surely each potential juror was asked that. People are not supposed to lie during that process. Guess what. She is a stealth juror in my opinion. I can't help but wonder if she wasn't somehow a supporter of Arias before this re-trial.
Nern, I have never looked at the supporters of Arias thing. I have read what others have said though. And it tells me that the supporters are nuts. Period. These are like those people Dr. K talked about in that one article she did about people who cannot believe actual facts. They are simply mentally ill.
I think that there are people in this world, like Arias, who for some reason I cannot fathom, have an ability to pull people to them and this is still happening with her. Actually Travis was pulled towards her and defended her to his friends who tried to warn him about her. It is just a phenomena and will continue. These kinds of people have some sort of hypnotic effect, maybe. I don't know. I only know I see that seductive quality that she has.
Maybe when Dr. K does her book, she will address this phenomena. I hope. I also hope Dr. K goes into deep detail about Arias and what types of psychological things she has. I think there is more to her than Borderline Personality Disorder. I would love to know more about these things with this murderer. Doctor, if you read this, please consider this.
I would like to say that I oppose the death penalty for several reasons. I have said that before here. If I was ever called to be a potential juror though and asked if I could vote for death, I probably could if my state had the death penalty and that was the law. I think. I would not lie about my opposition though and surely wouldn't be picked.
I agree that there are horrible murderers who should probably be killed by law. I guess I am saying that I don't really know what I am saying.
I would be okay with a hung jury or a life sentence, if it was achieved fair and square but when a juror deliberately hangs the jury because she doesn't believe in the death penalty or she is a Jodi Arias supporter, that is a violation of the law and she should be arrested and convicted of jury misconduct.
Unfortunately, she will probably never be arrested or prosecuted for jury misconduct unless she admits it and she will never do that. It is hard to prove that she lied when she said she supported the death penalty even if she gave that speech 11 months before. She could say she had changed her mind. Also, prosecutors hesitate to prosecute hold out jurors because it may discourage jurors from serving on a jury.
In their media interviews, most of the 11 jurors voting for the death penalty said they believed Juror No. 17 had an agenda from the beginning.
Before deliberations they took a vote and only 6 were for the death penalty, some undecided and the one juror for life. At that time, Juror No. 17 said she wanted to tell the bailiff they had a hung jury.
They refused saying they wanted to look at the evidence to see if it changed any of their minds. They asked her what evidence they should look at and she said the journals. Some of the jurors said they decided to vote for death after reading the journals and text messages because they saw that none of the things the defense portrayed in the trial about Travis Alexander and the relationship between Arias and Alexander was true.
After looking at the evidence and expressing their personal views, by the end of the second day, the vote for death was 11-1. They continued on for two more days and she refused to change her vote but wouldn't tell them why.
When they asked her if she believed in the death penalty, she said yes but this case does not call for the death penalty because the Lifetime movie made Arias out to be a monster but she is a normal girl. When they asked what case would call for the death penalty, she wouldn't answer. She instead said, "You just want revenge" which is exactly what Jodi Arias had said on her twitter account. The autopsy pictures which convinced all of the other jurors to vote for death did not affect the juror in anyway. The jurors said she seemed to take pride in hanging the jury.
The Lifetime movie was fictionalized and was not part of the evidence so she should have been removed for considering it in her vote for life. The jurors sent a question to the judge saying one juror was discussing the Lifetime movie and not deliberating and asked for an alternate not knowing how the alternate would vote. They said they were not upset that she wasn't voting their way, they were upset because she apparently had an agenda and opposed the death penalty. Apparently, the holdout juror also sent a note to the judge explaining her position. That's when the judge said they had an obligation to talk to the other jurors and see what areas they disagree in without compromising their views.
If Jury No. 17 didn't believe in the death penalty, she couldn't vote for it and had no business being on the jury and was only on there to hang the jury.
Jodi wanted the ability to follow Jurors social media pre-jury selection and JII released the 11 jurors information at trial conclusion calling them attempted murderers.
The Juror 17 speech tells us she wasn't DP qualified 11 months prior to trial, so if she changed her mind at time of getting DP qualified it was a lie, and actionable, I believe its a book closed but hope for a conspiracy connection' just one other persons involvement' courts or civilian!
This was discussed in the hallway away from court records so JSS should be suspended from judging the new DP case tabled: until all the facts can be exposed!
From our "Trial day 4" thread that may not coincide with other dates =trial day!
Posted October 28 at 9:26 it is a recap of the days events!
Slim Wrote:Court started off this morning with Judge Stephens listening to Nurmi complain about Det. Flores commenting publicly on information from sealed hearings, specifically his disclosure that Juror 17 was not dismissed at the end of the last court session. Judge Stephens admonished Flores not to make any comments pertaining to sealed proceedings.
Arias' mother was in court, but no other known family members. She was seated with another woman reported to be Donavan Bering's mother.
The morning consisted of Martinez continuing to question Flores under direct examination. Martinez attempted to use video taped testimony of Darryl Brewer regarding the gas cans for a trip to Mesa, but was met with an objection by Nurmi, who cited case law regarding the use of video. Objection was sustained and Martinez relied on court transcripts. Gas and car rental receipts were also shown. For the rest of the morning, the jury heard recorded phone calls between Flores and Arias, as well as voice messages and emails from Arias to Alexander after he was dead. Journal entries were also introduced.
Monica Lindstrom, a legal analyst tweeting from court says that if Martinez is relying on court records to introduce the testimony of Brewer, this means he will not be testifying in the retrial.
When the morning session was dismissed for lunch, Juror #12, an older man, was asked to stay behind in the jury box and the courtroom was sealed.
[/quote]
From what we call "trial day 3" it is the beginning of Nurmi using the kitchen sink defense argument = say and do anything and everything while screaming mistrial and delaying at every opportunity, bellows about Juror 17 in chambers and JII smoke screening the discussion!
Slim Wrote:Today brought with it a bombshell in court, and that was Nurmi suggesting that Travis was shot while he was still in the shower, which completely tosses aside any mention of a dropped camera, body slam, race to the closet to grab an unloaded gun that accidentally discharged when Travis came at Arias like a linebacker. Oh me, oh my, whatever can Geebs be thinking now.
This came about during the cross of Det. Flores by Nurmi, who set off to impeach Flores for his 2009 testimony that paved the way for the death penalty. By impeaching Flores, the defense hopes to cast doubt on the State case. During this exchange, the jury was attentive and taking a lot of notes. Nurmi then went onto the series of shower photographs, displaying them one by one and having Flores take note of the time stamps on each one. Nurmi argued that Arias had many opportunities to kill Travis while his back was to her or when his eyes were closed. He ended this part of the cross by suggesting that Arias shot Travis while he was in the shower.
There was no re-direct from Martinez. From my perspective, Nurmi took a big chance by saying Arias could have attacked earlier. Thinking the worst of the worst, Arias had Travis sit down in that shower and held him there for almost a minute before beginning her attack and it was a very sick cat and mouse game that she played with her victim.
The next witness called was Amanda Webb, from Walmart, to reinforce the State's case of premeditation regarding gas cans. Martinez was brief in direct. In cross, Nurmi made an issue of the fact that there was no store address on the receipt and ended up eliciting an answer from Webb where she said she did not know which building the receipt came from. Nurmi slammed down some papers at the end of his questioning, which caught the attention of the courtroom.
Not to be outdone, Martinez mimicked Nurmi, not once but twice by slamming down papers close to the court microphone. Martinez then went through a tedious til by til daily report from Walmart. It seems to me that Martinez could have squelched the whole issue by just referencing the store number on the records and receipts for that day, but he did not.
Kevin Freedman, Yreka PD was called to testify about the burglary at Arias's grandparents home during which a 25 caliber handgun was stolen. On direct, Freedman noted that only this handgun was stolen while there were still many other firearms which could have been taken. The burglary was also unusual in that cash and a TV was left behind and each room seemed to have only one item stolen. On cross, Nurmi attempted to dismiss the TV as being old and bulky to carry. He doubted that burglars would take the time to gather up loose change, but the witness disagreed.
It was then time for the lunch recess. Surprise, surprise when Judge Stephens dismissed the jury after lunch. All except for Juror 17, that is. Off to chambers for a brief time, with everyone all atwitter once again. Flores is reported to have said to one courtroom reporter that the juror was not dismissed.
Guess we'll find out more about this later.
jojo999 Wrote:Seems that the defense heard that Juror #17 was to appear on HLN - UH OH another motion for mistrial - TOO BAD Juror #17 was Tara Kelley from the original trial!
Slim Wrote:A link to another recap of the day in court:
https://www.facebook.com/notes/understanding-the-travesties-of-unexpected-murder-trials/comprehensive-round-up-of-day-3-admins-of-news-site-10222014/601540656617794
cheryl1958 Wrote:I heard that one of her minions misinterpreted the fact that juror 17 from the previous trial was being interviewed on Nancy Grace, and reported it to defense as being this trial's number 17. So all the stops were bought out and new number 17 was seen in chambers. Nothing gets past her minions, they're watching and listening and are on the lookout for any tiny thing that could cause a mistrial.
Next day Sunshine said,
Nurmi filed another motion to dismiss the DP yesterday. What a surprise.
@ It needs understood' JII uses assorted private chat rooms, and blog misinformation on its main page. That's the Juror 17 comments source, from a minions misinformation posted!
Observer and all' I was told my post of juror #17 speech was questionable, read cheryl's post at the bottom!
Since the other jurors said they believed she opposed the death penalty' because when they asked her what crime would deserve the death penalty, she wouldn't answer.
At Jury selection the Jodi request for jurors socal media scrutiny, Was only for her and JII to Out and Influence, because obviously Arizona never took action investigating jurors use of social media!
Juror 17's husband is reported to have Arias family friended on facebook (she uses maiden name on Facebook) that I can't say confirmed, only because I cannot/donot Facebook!
I pray for a mitigation specialist connection to jury tampering, in selection of the 400 jurors and in the private in chambers meetings, especially the meeting that was just prior to secreted Jodi testimony!
Juror 17 also posted anti Sheriff Joe, stuff who deserves' but theirs reason to review, by CIA or DOJ who Twitter claims is now investigating! I hope!
So
Monday 10 /21 opening statements by Martinez and Nurmi.
A juror dismissed for family health issue!
Tuesday morning 10/22 juror dismissed.for asking Beth if she was Nancy Grace!
Wednesday late afternoon 10/23 Juror 17 in in chambers discussion and remaining jurors sent home, had she been dismissed that would have three jurors dismissed by day three!
And the secret testimony by Jodi was next, being discussed!
Or day one jury lost a juror, day two lost a second juror and on day three juror #17 was in chambers not being sent home!
See link below = day 2 and 2 jurors dismissed!
Thanks Cheryl' I'm editting-out the anti-DP Juror #17 speech due to your post below, that I assume has become questionable!
http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/mesa/2014/10/01/prospective-jurors-vent-arias/16570903/
cheryl1958 said'
Lunar court chatter has taken that speech down.
The Jodi Arias jurors will be speaking out on Good Morning America on Sunday. I am going to watch because I just saw snippets of their interview on ABC after the hung jury.
Juan Martinez Prosecutor Support Page shared Kevin Samantha's post.
4 hrs ·
by Kevin Samantha
I know that many, many people are angry yet I hope you take some solace in the fact that JAA will never get out of, and will spend her entire natural life in prison. As well, whoever got their mittens on the names of all the jurors, may well be facing criminal prosecution. The names had to have come from the court records as their middle names were released. We know it wasn't Juan Martinez, it wasn't JSS, it wasn't the Bailiff, which leaves only 3 other plausible parties. Maria DeLaRosa, Kirk Nurmi or Jennifer Willmott and if I were betting on this, I'd put my 5 cents on MDLR. Either way, the release of those names is a federal offense. I hope they have enough monopoly money to hire a darn good, and very expensive, attorney as whoever did this is in boiling hot water. As well, Juror 17 did disclose her husband (s) served time but when asked if she knew any of the counsel or court staff, she replied "no". The word for that is perjury.
.
Here's the link to Court Chatter where Cathy Russon states that the anti death penalty speech may not have been given by Juror No. 17 and she shows the court document pertaining to Juror No. 7's ex husband with Juan Martinez's name on it. Juan was the prosecutor on that case where he received probation. She can say she forgot or deny she ever knew the name of the prosecutor since it happened in 2000 and her ex got probation on that case but was later prosecuted on another crime by another prosecutor. If this woman truly got on the jury to hang it, she is a criminal and criminals know how to lie to get away with their crimes. I think it is most likely that this woman was one of those who followed the case and believe Jodi Arias was abused by Travis Alexander and she wanted to make sure she got on the jury so she could hang it. Even before deliberating when the jurors voted 6-6 for death, she told the jurors to call the bailiff and said they were hung. Most of the jurors had never even been in a courtroom and didn't even know what a hung jury meant but they knew the law dictated they had to have an open mind and look at the evidence and see if they would change their mind. She only wanted to look at the journals which to her showed Arias was a nice normal girl and she wouldn't even consider changing her mind. The others had open minds and were willing to change their minds based on the evidence and testimony they went over. She wouldn't even consider it.
http://www.courtchatter.com/
I'm reserching if #17's now or exhusband had court on same day with Martinez, their were many hearings with her husband's, one a 'drive by shooting' its hard to get qualified proof!
.
And Juror #3 being outed to get arrested then dismissed after asking good question is another confusion = who told police a 2006 ex husband's bad check on closed account' reported on jury form crime, became a arrest and release, We have our suspicions!