03-13-2015, 06:27 AM
Tuesday, March 10, 2015 Court Chatter
Jodi Arias: New information released regarding jury deliberations and Juror #17
@ Court Chatter's comments;
Bobbie SmithMarch 10, 2015 at 10:36 PM
oh no she could not let juror #17 go with the hung jury she wanted. The judge has shown bias towards Jodi all along. removing juror #17 would mean a death penalty and a possible appeal and she does not want her first capital case appealed. 17 should be in jail for contempt of court how can she say she did not see much of the news about this case when she watched the movie. LIE LIE LIE!
Skeeter skeetMarch 11, 2015 at 2:57 AM
I have to agree with Bobby Smith on this one. The judge bent over backwards for Stabby even during the lst trial. And it was more evident during the penalty phase. She needs to be investigated, hell, she might have been bribed by the defense, they got 3 million f___ing dollars for this case. Where's all the money. I think an investigation is in order.
NaturalBorn ScorpioMarch 12, 2015 at 11:03 PM
I agree with Skeeter skeet and truly believe that Judge Stephens has a soft spot for JA and JA makes it hard for her ..you just have to read between the lines to feel it
AnonymousMarch 10, 2015 at 4:10 PM
JSS is like JA, i.e. she is very manipulative, and in her ruling, she provides her own “spin” on events, which is very self-serving. Juror #17 did not participate in good faith in the deliberations. JSS let her stay on anyway, but it was clear that this juror had an “agenda”, and was not honest in engaging with the other jurors. Juror #17 refused to look at the evidence. According to the other jurors, she didn’t want to look at the evidence or discuss the case in-depth:– i.e. she had her mind made up. Juan Martinez tried to get her dismissed from the jury, but JSS would not do so… I would have taken Juan Martinez & Det. Flores’ word over Juror #17′s “word”– and, hopefully jury tampering by JA & Co. will be investigated. Yet, JA & Co. prevailed, when it really counted. Alas.
AnonymousMarch 10, 2015 at 5:02 PM
JSS didn't ask the right questions... What about a judge with wit (which JSS lacks) asking Juror #17:--
@ Wit was a bad choice of words, courts use laws, people use wit!
(1) Were you the juror who made a "connection" with Jodi Arias, whom she was having "eye-sex" with during the last few weeks of the re-trial? She kept smiling over at somebody... Was that you?
(2) What was your relationship to Maria "Smuggler" De La Rosa? Are your off-spring "friends"? Did your husband and/or ex know De La Rosa's daughter on his FB page? Have you had any contact either directly or via telephone or via e-mail with De La Rosa or any of De La Rosa's cronies? Have you had any contact of any kind via any communications media with Jodi Arias? Have you had any contact of any kind via any communications media with Jodi Arias' cohorts, including but not restricted to her PI Dorian Bond, Donavan Bering, Sandy Arias, Auntie $hrew, or anybody else?
(3) Why didn't you reveal that your ex was prosecuted by Juan Martinez? What is your "skin in the game" vis-à-vis any of your relations' past or future involvement in any criminal prosecutions by the State?
If there was jury tampering by JA & Co. with Juror #17, all of the parties need to be prosecuted. And, since JSS chose to turn a blind-eye to Juror #17's obvious corruption in refusing to deliberate in good faith... she went into the jury room with her "mind" (what little brains exist) made-up, JSS needs to be investigated for her own incompetence & bias towards the convicted murderer & her unethical defense team. When will those over 120 sealed documents; the transcripts from the many sealed hearings & secret "ex-parte" meetings be released for public scrutiny???
AnonymousMarch 10, 2015 at 4:12 PM
...juror 17 stated she had not been getting on her Facebook page recently because she did not think it was a good idea. However, she did get on her Facebook page the other day... What part of her statement is a lie?
OhgorshMarch 11, 2015 at 12:20 PM
Willnut also said other jurors could of done so ,They had time to investigate they stalled how many days a week on this case that should of been long over with ,And porn till people actually were sick of it ,I know this will all be white washed but would be interesting to find out the truth for all the people that watched this trial from the start. They said on news sticking up for the juror if they removed her ,then people would not do Jury Duty ,but we all know they get a card go to court ,,if not found to be a good juror they go home ,Nothing is going to stop people from not doing their duty as a juror ,The statements made by the bias news people is not true.
@ Nurmi just argued his mis-trial card!
AnonymousMarch 10, 2015 at 4:16 PM
Due to the nature of this being such a high profile death penalty case, juror 17 should have been replaced with an alternate, there were too many unanswered questions and possibilities. If they could dismiss a juror in the murder phase of this trial for getting a DUI during a holiday break then this one should have definitely been replaced.!! If the juror was on the side of the prosecution and refused to deliberate with the other 11 you better believe that the defense would have been granted the motion to dismiss this juror.!!
AnonymousMarch 11, 2015 at 11:36 AM
She dismissed a juror in the 1st trial for stating the chairs were uncomfortable….
@ And 2 just before deliberations "Let's fry the Bitch" was reported, question is did both say it, and who heard or reported it? Plus a juror dismissed late last year? Less jurors better chance of not being a alternate juror!
OhgorshMarch 11, 2015 at 12:25 PM
And I am sure they had a reason knowing they could not sway that one ,And the lady that lost her mother .that was just wrong saying she was kicked off ,felt sorry for her ,,,
AnonymousMarch 10, 2015 at 5:33 PM
Like who? Did Wilmott even hint at a name? No. Name the person if you want to remain credible. She lost any ounce of credibility when she flat-out lied in this trial. That is not the remit, nor ethical practice, within the Legal community. Good luck with your peers Wilmott. And don't be so fucking rude if you want to be taken seriously. <---- Sarcasm, which you should get if you read this properly.
OhgorshMarch 11, 2015 at 12:22 PM
I read the article and well know no names were said ,and no names were investigated ,that right there tells me it a lie ,,just to add blame to the 11 that did their jobs right and decent
AnonymousMarch 10, 2015 at 4:47 PM
"These plans culminated on January 13, 2015, when HLN underwent a major revamp in its programming and on-air presentation, with a larger focus on major headlines, lifestyle stories, and other user-generated content that is trending online. The network also introduced several new social media-themed programs, including the new afternoon program The Daily Share..." So she liked THE DAILY SHARE after becoming a juror!!!!!
AnonymousMarch 10, 2015 at 5:00 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HLN_(TV_channel) for above
AnonymousMarch 10, 2015 at 8:13 PM
Now that is pertinent info... Detective Flores should have Facebook records confirmed soon! Two weeks was mentioned, but will likely not be released until the investigation is complete.
AnonymousMarch 11, 2015 at 2:33 PM
Wow!! You are in the wrong profession- YOU should be a detective/P.I.!! Excellent job, my friend! As that is a new show, I HOPE Det. Flores has begun looking into the FB accounts in question. I'm now certain there is much information to be found there...
AnonymousMarch 10, 2015 at 4:58 PM
I hope this is investigated but seriously doubt it will be. The damage is done. All that can be done is learn from the experience as hard as it is. If there was no facebook problems then why all the deleting parties ?
OhgorshMarch 11, 2015 at 12:29 PM
I do hope they run with the money that is left and go away for good ,that would teach JA a good lesson ,that she is using them minons and she is the one duped ,,
Bobbie SmithMarch 10, 2015 at 10:44 PM
It is never too late when an investigation is under way and it most assuredly is. iT may cause a retrial of the penalty phase. This next time it will not be a complete retrial like this judge allowed.
OhgorshMarch 10, 2015 at 6:52 PM
And one decent juror gets kicked off because he mother died ? what justice
AnonymousMarch 10, 2015 at 7:11 PM
JSS can't rule properly in "real-time". When she took Nurmi's ludicrous motions "off-line", and Juan Martinez's legal force of arguments was overwhelmingly stronger, JSS had no choice but to overrule JA & Co.'s laughable, repetitive motions. Those who care about the Rule of Law and the US Constitution are not impressed with JSS's unethical behavior over this last few years, since the hung jury in May 2013, which clearly was biased towards Jodi Arias, a convicted murderer.
I think it was mainly JSS... an incompetent, biased, and corrupt judge who let JA & Co. run-amok... JSS spent the last two years coddling Skank, a psycopath-- a pathological liar-- a convicted murderer. JSS granted Skank approx. 30 "ex-parte" meetings in the aftermath of the hung jury, in May 2013, in violation of the AZ Code of Judicial Conduct; resulting in undue deference in the way of delay after delay after delay, in violation of the AZ Victims' BIll of Rights; and, unconstitutional secrecy, in violation of the US Constitution, such that the AZ Court of Appeals & the AZ Supreme Court had to step in to restore the Rule of Law to JSS's sordid & squalid courtrooom.
Juror #17 might have committed perjury during the Voir Dire, and apparently, she is under investigation. JA & Co. need to be investigated for jury tampering due to Juror #17's possible relationships with Maria "Smuggler" De La Rosa and Skank's PI Dorian Bond... and, JA & Co. should be investigated for fraud, in tampering with copies of Travis Alexander's lap-top computer... and, filing perjurious affidavits... but, the "buck stops" with JSS-- an incompetent, biased, and corrupt judge, who pissed all over the 11 honest, ethical jurors who tried to do their duty-- whilst trampling the Alexander family asunder. An honest Foreman took evidence to JSS showing Juror #17 refused to deliberate, and this stupid, unethical judge did NOTHING.
JSS isn't fit to sit on a criminal bench... she is better suited to Traffic Court, such that when she "fixes" traffic tickets for her cronies, it is not so destructive and costy, albeit, still unethical. JSS's lack of ethics have caused so much misery to the Alexanders; so much cost to the AZ taxpayers; and, has undermined the criminal justice system, to such an extent, that she should be forced to step down from the bench, until the AZ Commission on Judicial Conduct can carry out a full & thorough investigation into her grotesque mis-management of the sentencing phase of the JA trial. She is a disgrace and she has made a mockery of the courtroom. The farcical final penalty re-trial was a travesty of justice. The AZ Judiciary might let her fix traffic tickets-- she should never again be allowed to rig criminal trials!!!
AnonymousMarch 11, 2015 at 5:11 PM
Thank you for such a well written response. I pray that a judicial conduct inquiry will be carried out regarding her handling of this trial.
AnonymousMarch 11, 2015 at 10:35 PM
So do I. Nothing has gone right since day one...seems she always comes out the better(JA), that is.
AnonymousMarch 10, 2015 at 9:56 PM
Where are all the minutes from February 26th, the first full day of deliberations where the jury had 4 questions, including switching out a deliberating juror, all before 10am?
"Jen's Trial Diaries @TrialDiariesJ
The jury also wanted a certain set of written instructions...#jodiarias #3tvaria
Jen's Trial Diaries @TrialDiariesJ
Sounds like a deliberating juror wants to switch with an alternate. Nurmi is on his way #jodiarias #3tvarias
Cathy @courtchatter
I'm hearing that a sitting juror wants to switch with alternate juror #2. CRAZY! #jodiarias
Cathy @courtchatter
#jodiarias asked to speak to Nurmi in person"
@ I don't see any pieces missing from the puzzle, Jodi had to know #17's vote, #17 was likely a Victim of DV living with her convict husband' her first husband abused her and someone wanted off the jury early the first day, what put Florez on the alert to check her social media!
And if some of the 11 jurors were using their internet - facebook who, when, where and how often, the quotes are subjective of perjury being recorded in chambers, instead of voicing an argument pleading a case / argument directly to jury! All 11 should sue her for slander!
Jodi Arias: New information released regarding jury deliberations and Juror #17
@ Court Chatter's comments;
Bobbie SmithMarch 10, 2015 at 10:36 PM
oh no she could not let juror #17 go with the hung jury she wanted. The judge has shown bias towards Jodi all along. removing juror #17 would mean a death penalty and a possible appeal and she does not want her first capital case appealed. 17 should be in jail for contempt of court how can she say she did not see much of the news about this case when she watched the movie. LIE LIE LIE!
Skeeter skeetMarch 11, 2015 at 2:57 AM
I have to agree with Bobby Smith on this one. The judge bent over backwards for Stabby even during the lst trial. And it was more evident during the penalty phase. She needs to be investigated, hell, she might have been bribed by the defense, they got 3 million f___ing dollars for this case. Where's all the money. I think an investigation is in order.
NaturalBorn ScorpioMarch 12, 2015 at 11:03 PM
I agree with Skeeter skeet and truly believe that Judge Stephens has a soft spot for JA and JA makes it hard for her ..you just have to read between the lines to feel it
AnonymousMarch 10, 2015 at 4:10 PM
JSS is like JA, i.e. she is very manipulative, and in her ruling, she provides her own “spin” on events, which is very self-serving. Juror #17 did not participate in good faith in the deliberations. JSS let her stay on anyway, but it was clear that this juror had an “agenda”, and was not honest in engaging with the other jurors. Juror #17 refused to look at the evidence. According to the other jurors, she didn’t want to look at the evidence or discuss the case in-depth:– i.e. she had her mind made up. Juan Martinez tried to get her dismissed from the jury, but JSS would not do so… I would have taken Juan Martinez & Det. Flores’ word over Juror #17′s “word”– and, hopefully jury tampering by JA & Co. will be investigated. Yet, JA & Co. prevailed, when it really counted. Alas.
AnonymousMarch 10, 2015 at 5:02 PM
JSS didn't ask the right questions... What about a judge with wit (which JSS lacks) asking Juror #17:--
@ Wit was a bad choice of words, courts use laws, people use wit!
(1) Were you the juror who made a "connection" with Jodi Arias, whom she was having "eye-sex" with during the last few weeks of the re-trial? She kept smiling over at somebody... Was that you?
(2) What was your relationship to Maria "Smuggler" De La Rosa? Are your off-spring "friends"? Did your husband and/or ex know De La Rosa's daughter on his FB page? Have you had any contact either directly or via telephone or via e-mail with De La Rosa or any of De La Rosa's cronies? Have you had any contact of any kind via any communications media with Jodi Arias? Have you had any contact of any kind via any communications media with Jodi Arias' cohorts, including but not restricted to her PI Dorian Bond, Donavan Bering, Sandy Arias, Auntie $hrew, or anybody else?
(3) Why didn't you reveal that your ex was prosecuted by Juan Martinez? What is your "skin in the game" vis-à-vis any of your relations' past or future involvement in any criminal prosecutions by the State?
If there was jury tampering by JA & Co. with Juror #17, all of the parties need to be prosecuted. And, since JSS chose to turn a blind-eye to Juror #17's obvious corruption in refusing to deliberate in good faith... she went into the jury room with her "mind" (what little brains exist) made-up, JSS needs to be investigated for her own incompetence & bias towards the convicted murderer & her unethical defense team. When will those over 120 sealed documents; the transcripts from the many sealed hearings & secret "ex-parte" meetings be released for public scrutiny???
AnonymousMarch 10, 2015 at 4:12 PM
...juror 17 stated she had not been getting on her Facebook page recently because she did not think it was a good idea. However, she did get on her Facebook page the other day... What part of her statement is a lie?
OhgorshMarch 11, 2015 at 12:20 PM
Willnut also said other jurors could of done so ,They had time to investigate they stalled how many days a week on this case that should of been long over with ,And porn till people actually were sick of it ,I know this will all be white washed but would be interesting to find out the truth for all the people that watched this trial from the start. They said on news sticking up for the juror if they removed her ,then people would not do Jury Duty ,but we all know they get a card go to court ,,if not found to be a good juror they go home ,Nothing is going to stop people from not doing their duty as a juror ,The statements made by the bias news people is not true.
@ Nurmi just argued his mis-trial card!
AnonymousMarch 10, 2015 at 4:16 PM
Due to the nature of this being such a high profile death penalty case, juror 17 should have been replaced with an alternate, there were too many unanswered questions and possibilities. If they could dismiss a juror in the murder phase of this trial for getting a DUI during a holiday break then this one should have definitely been replaced.!! If the juror was on the side of the prosecution and refused to deliberate with the other 11 you better believe that the defense would have been granted the motion to dismiss this juror.!!
AnonymousMarch 11, 2015 at 11:36 AM
She dismissed a juror in the 1st trial for stating the chairs were uncomfortable….
@ And 2 just before deliberations "Let's fry the Bitch" was reported, question is did both say it, and who heard or reported it? Plus a juror dismissed late last year? Less jurors better chance of not being a alternate juror!
OhgorshMarch 11, 2015 at 12:25 PM
And I am sure they had a reason knowing they could not sway that one ,And the lady that lost her mother .that was just wrong saying she was kicked off ,felt sorry for her ,,,
AnonymousMarch 10, 2015 at 5:33 PM
Like who? Did Wilmott even hint at a name? No. Name the person if you want to remain credible. She lost any ounce of credibility when she flat-out lied in this trial. That is not the remit, nor ethical practice, within the Legal community. Good luck with your peers Wilmott. And don't be so fucking rude if you want to be taken seriously. <---- Sarcasm, which you should get if you read this properly.
OhgorshMarch 11, 2015 at 12:22 PM
I read the article and well know no names were said ,and no names were investigated ,that right there tells me it a lie ,,just to add blame to the 11 that did their jobs right and decent
AnonymousMarch 10, 2015 at 4:47 PM
"These plans culminated on January 13, 2015, when HLN underwent a major revamp in its programming and on-air presentation, with a larger focus on major headlines, lifestyle stories, and other user-generated content that is trending online. The network also introduced several new social media-themed programs, including the new afternoon program The Daily Share..." So she liked THE DAILY SHARE after becoming a juror!!!!!
AnonymousMarch 10, 2015 at 5:00 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HLN_(TV_channel) for above
AnonymousMarch 10, 2015 at 8:13 PM
Now that is pertinent info... Detective Flores should have Facebook records confirmed soon! Two weeks was mentioned, but will likely not be released until the investigation is complete.
AnonymousMarch 11, 2015 at 2:33 PM
Wow!! You are in the wrong profession- YOU should be a detective/P.I.!! Excellent job, my friend! As that is a new show, I HOPE Det. Flores has begun looking into the FB accounts in question. I'm now certain there is much information to be found there...
AnonymousMarch 10, 2015 at 4:58 PM
I hope this is investigated but seriously doubt it will be. The damage is done. All that can be done is learn from the experience as hard as it is. If there was no facebook problems then why all the deleting parties ?
OhgorshMarch 11, 2015 at 12:29 PM
I do hope they run with the money that is left and go away for good ,that would teach JA a good lesson ,that she is using them minons and she is the one duped ,,
Bobbie SmithMarch 10, 2015 at 10:44 PM
It is never too late when an investigation is under way and it most assuredly is. iT may cause a retrial of the penalty phase. This next time it will not be a complete retrial like this judge allowed.
OhgorshMarch 10, 2015 at 6:52 PM
And one decent juror gets kicked off because he mother died ? what justice
AnonymousMarch 10, 2015 at 7:11 PM
JSS can't rule properly in "real-time". When she took Nurmi's ludicrous motions "off-line", and Juan Martinez's legal force of arguments was overwhelmingly stronger, JSS had no choice but to overrule JA & Co.'s laughable, repetitive motions. Those who care about the Rule of Law and the US Constitution are not impressed with JSS's unethical behavior over this last few years, since the hung jury in May 2013, which clearly was biased towards Jodi Arias, a convicted murderer.
I think it was mainly JSS... an incompetent, biased, and corrupt judge who let JA & Co. run-amok... JSS spent the last two years coddling Skank, a psycopath-- a pathological liar-- a convicted murderer. JSS granted Skank approx. 30 "ex-parte" meetings in the aftermath of the hung jury, in May 2013, in violation of the AZ Code of Judicial Conduct; resulting in undue deference in the way of delay after delay after delay, in violation of the AZ Victims' BIll of Rights; and, unconstitutional secrecy, in violation of the US Constitution, such that the AZ Court of Appeals & the AZ Supreme Court had to step in to restore the Rule of Law to JSS's sordid & squalid courtrooom.
Juror #17 might have committed perjury during the Voir Dire, and apparently, she is under investigation. JA & Co. need to be investigated for jury tampering due to Juror #17's possible relationships with Maria "Smuggler" De La Rosa and Skank's PI Dorian Bond... and, JA & Co. should be investigated for fraud, in tampering with copies of Travis Alexander's lap-top computer... and, filing perjurious affidavits... but, the "buck stops" with JSS-- an incompetent, biased, and corrupt judge, who pissed all over the 11 honest, ethical jurors who tried to do their duty-- whilst trampling the Alexander family asunder. An honest Foreman took evidence to JSS showing Juror #17 refused to deliberate, and this stupid, unethical judge did NOTHING.
JSS isn't fit to sit on a criminal bench... she is better suited to Traffic Court, such that when she "fixes" traffic tickets for her cronies, it is not so destructive and costy, albeit, still unethical. JSS's lack of ethics have caused so much misery to the Alexanders; so much cost to the AZ taxpayers; and, has undermined the criminal justice system, to such an extent, that she should be forced to step down from the bench, until the AZ Commission on Judicial Conduct can carry out a full & thorough investigation into her grotesque mis-management of the sentencing phase of the JA trial. She is a disgrace and she has made a mockery of the courtroom. The farcical final penalty re-trial was a travesty of justice. The AZ Judiciary might let her fix traffic tickets-- she should never again be allowed to rig criminal trials!!!
AnonymousMarch 11, 2015 at 5:11 PM
Thank you for such a well written response. I pray that a judicial conduct inquiry will be carried out regarding her handling of this trial.
AnonymousMarch 11, 2015 at 10:35 PM
So do I. Nothing has gone right since day one...seems she always comes out the better(JA), that is.
AnonymousMarch 10, 2015 at 9:56 PM
Where are all the minutes from February 26th, the first full day of deliberations where the jury had 4 questions, including switching out a deliberating juror, all before 10am?
"Jen's Trial Diaries @TrialDiariesJ
The jury also wanted a certain set of written instructions...#jodiarias #3tvaria
Jen's Trial Diaries @TrialDiariesJ
Sounds like a deliberating juror wants to switch with an alternate. Nurmi is on his way #jodiarias #3tvarias
Cathy @courtchatter
I'm hearing that a sitting juror wants to switch with alternate juror #2. CRAZY! #jodiarias
Cathy @courtchatter
#jodiarias asked to speak to Nurmi in person"
@ I don't see any pieces missing from the puzzle, Jodi had to know #17's vote, #17 was likely a Victim of DV living with her convict husband' her first husband abused her and someone wanted off the jury early the first day, what put Florez on the alert to check her social media!
And if some of the 11 jurors were using their internet - facebook who, when, where and how often, the quotes are subjective of perjury being recorded in chambers, instead of voicing an argument pleading a case / argument directly to jury! All 11 should sue her for slander!