Author Archives: edimminger

Juror 17 Answers Questions

Tara Kelley, one of the alternate jurors has been tweeting answers to peoples questions via twitter. Here is some of what she has to say:

1. Do you believe she was abused in any way?     Definitely not!

2. Did you believe her “fog” story?      Absolutely not!!! Was definitely not believable!

3. Regarding the jury ‘betraying’ her:      It’s all about her!!!

4. What did you think of LaViolette’s testimony?      Didn’t like her! I found her rude trying to spar with a prosecutor!

5. Regarding Nurmi wanting off the case:      Definitely can’t blame him for not wanting ti represent her!!

6. Regarding the juror who got kicked off for a comment she made- Tara confirmed the comment was about how if they can $300/hr for an expert you would think they’d get us more comfortable chairs. She also indicated that the jurors were not the ones who turned her in.

7. How did you feel about the pedophilia accusation?      Disgusting and ridiculous! I asked her for proof in my questions to her! Of course she said she didn’t have any!

8. Did anyone buy it (the pedophile comments)?     I don’t think anyone bought it!!! Too far out there!

9. What did you think about her claim of ninja skateboarders?     Ridiculous! And then Juan kept referencing the hoard of skateboarders and it was sooo hard not to laugh out loud!!!

10. How did you feel about the 2 minutes of silence?     Brilliant!!!

11. How did they ask you about the media issue with Juan (Signing/ photos)?     They didn’t mention it was Juan! Just asked a general question!

12. Do you feel Juan was too aggressive?      He definitely had moments but I think it was passion!!!

13. Have you seen the killer laughing and doing headstands in the interrogation?      What made me most mad was when she said: ‘Gosh Jodi you could have at least done your makeup.’

14. What did the jurors think about ‘child abuse’ claims?     She was probably spanked but weren’t we all?

15. Do you think the trial dragged on too long?      Definitely!!!!

16. (Nurmi) was basically calling you all liars and that you were going home at night reading, watching, etc.      I heard enough in court! No interest in goin home to hear more and we weren’t supposed to anyway!

17. Was Bill Z. the foreman throughout the trial or just the guilt phases?      Foreman was chosen at the guilt phase.

18. Travis’ anger all sounded normal relationship to us. You too?      Yes and I really hope to be able to explain what I think happened and what that May 26 text was about!!

And it looks like we will get a chance to hear Tara’s theory as she is scheduled to talk with HLN’s Darren Kavinoky and Dr. Drew this coming Tuesday.

 

Juror 6 Speaks

Juror 6 was the juror who mouthed the words ‘I’m sorry’ to Travis’ family. She sat down with Chris Williams of azcentral in an exclusive interview. Here’s some of what she had to say:

“How did I vote? with a lot of pain and angst, for the Death Penalty.” When asked if it as an easy decision she said: “Absolutely not. When you watch TV you have additional information…we don’t have; not privy to that information, we only heard what was in the confines of the courtroom.” She was surprised at the world wide attention this case has garnered.

When asked if she thought Jodi was a monster she said: “Not a monster-a lot of concern (with) very untruthful, very manipulative.” She also said she was on the stand “An awful long time. There were some benefits- the ability to watch body language and how they phrase things.”

Chris then asked: “When you look at Jodi what do you see?” Her answer: ” A very sad, sad girl. She concerns me because I think she’s very manipulative. I personally feel sorry for her. I’d like to know why… I don’t think we’ll ever know why.”

Chris went on to mention that the jurors agreed not to tell who voted which way. they can reveal their own vote if they want to. It was said that it did not break down gender lines and that the jurors worked well together. This is just the first part of the interview, more to come.

Link: http://www.azcentral.com/12news/

Another Juror Speaks

Alternate juror #17, now identified as Tara Kelley is speaking out via Twitter. She was the juror who asked: “After all the lies you have told why should we believe you now?” She said: “I really wanted to see if she could answer that with a good response.” She also said that she asked about 75 questions and all of the ones about ‘No jury will convict me’ were hers. She mentions she still had to go to court when she had migraines, a reference to Jodi canceling court for her migraines.

With regard to the toughness of the prosecutor she said: “…I loved Juan!!! I knew he was very passionate for the Alexander family. His reaction to the hung jury said it all. He was Travis’ voice.” About Jodi’s comment that the jury ‘betrayed’ her: “What a bunch of crap! Of course she feels betrayed, she really thought we were all fooled by her!” When asked about the comments from the foreman: “I am very disgusted with what our ‘foreman’ has said! Please know that we didn’t all feel this way!!!”

Tara is scheduled to be on the Dr. Drew show Tuesday and a Twitter interview with Wild About Trial on Wednesday.

More From The Jury Foreman

We’ve all heard by now the comments from the jury foreman from the Good Morning America interview. You know – that she was ‘emotionally and verbally abused.’ That she was ‘not a good witness’ and being on the stand ’18 days hurt her.’ What follows are excerpts from another article by Brian Skoloff (Wild About Trial).

 

Here are some of his comments:

“The system we think is flawed in that sense because this was not a case of Jeffrey Dahmer or Charles Manson” Zervakos told the Associated Press. “It was a brutal no- win situation…I think it’s kind of unfair, ‘ the 69-year-old added. “We’re not lawyers. We’re mere mortals. And I will tell you I’ve never felt more mere as a mortal than I felt for the last five months.”

He also said the most difficult time was hearing from the Alexander’s.

“There was no sound in the jury room for a long time after that because you hurt so bad for these people but that wasn’t evidence. That’s what made it so hard…this wasn’t about them. This was a decision whether we’re going to tell somebody they were going to be put to death or spent the rest of their life in prison.”

Zervakos mentioned Aria’s age at the time of the killing and lack of criminal history causing them to show mercy. He also said: “You’ve got Travis Alexander’s family devastated that he was killed, that he was brutally killed. You’ve got Jodi Aria’s family sitting in there, both families sitting and seeing these humiliating images and listening to unbelievably lurid private details of their lives, and you’ve got a woman whose life is over too. “I mean who’s winning in this situation? And we were stuck in the middle.”

Regarding her age at the time: “You heard (the prosecutor) say she was only 27… she’s old enough she should have known better. I didn’t look at it that way. I’m looking at 27 years of an absolutely normal everyday young woman that was living a life that was perfectly normal. Then something changed the trajectory of her life after meeting Travis Alexander and it spiraled downhill from there.”

Final Closing Arguments

Willmott

  1. “People are far better than their very worst deed.” Each of you has to make your own decision. Does her life have value? You were asked if when you gave her 1st degree murder if you could still give her life. The state doesn’t require an execution for 1st degree.
  2. The burden is not beyond a reasonable doubt but beyond the preponderance of the evidence. We have to prove the mitigators are more true than not true.
  3. Each juror can choose a different mitigator. You don’t have to agree to find a reason to find value in her life, to find a reason to punish her with life in prison. Stand by your decision. You don’t have to explain it to anyone else.
  4. The state’s case is all about lies and manipulation. That somehow lying equals the death penalty. That’s not even a crime. Not even an aggravating factor.
  5. Mitigators are reasons to believe there’s something of value. Not excuses for what she did. You already convicted her for that. Are the mitigators substantial to call for life in prison? Mitigators are separate from the crime. They don’t have to be connected. Life in prison is appropriate.
  6. As an example- anyone under 30 I don’t believe should get the death penalty. If sufficient for you then that’s your vote.
  7. There was good and bad before (Travis). The trajectory of her life changed.
  8. Good things of value:

–       She was 27 when she killed Travis with no prior criminal record. We’re not talking about lying. She’s not like a criminal who commits a crime, 1, 2, 3 times. She has none. A reason to show mercy- life in prison instead of executed.

–       A good friend. People care about her. Darryl – 4 years he loved and trusted her with his son. Her friends were shocked – they didn’t expect this to happen, like Leslie Uty who said she was ‘sweet.’ Ryan Burns said that people enjoyed her, she got along well. What does it matter considering what she did to Travis? The state wants to paint her as a one-dimensional character. So it’s easier for you to execute. She’s not. She has made so many people happy in her life. The Freemans took trips with her and Travis. Enjoyed spending time with her. Had dinner and treated her like family, like a sister.

–       Her family has been here day in and day out. They are here for her now. She asked you to consider them.

–       Her value- she tried to improve her life; make the best of it. Gus said she was the utmost professional and worked hard. Darryl and her had a house together. If given the chance she will continue to improve. She’s already donated her hair 3 times. She doesn’t have to do that. She has goals. Teaching Spanish, reading and writing. She’s an amazing poet and artist and excellent writer. She wants to use these talents and dedicate them to domestic violence. This is for behind bars- not to get out.

        9.  She didn’t know she was capable of such violence. We need   to ask why? She could have been a famous artist, a saleswoman an attorney sitting next to me. What changed the trajectory of her life?

      10.  When she was a little girl her and Carl felt the love from her Mom. She treated her scrapes and read to her. They grew apart. Angela was born and things changed. They were no longer getting along. She couldn’t do anything right. She was grounded for inexplicable reasons. Everything changed for Jodi. She watched how her Dad treated her Mom- yelled, ridiculed. She learned that language. And loyalty- you stay no matter what.

      11. Her Psych. Testing-she had low self-esteem, almost no ego. Depression from when a teen. When she met Travis in 2006 she was vulnerable. She wanted a family; kids. Darryl didn’t. She thought he (Travis) was perfect. She was impressed by the executive banquet. Later when he wanted oral she gave it to him – didn’t want to lose him. He sends missionaries. She converts. She put him on a pedestal, she trusted him and loved him. She also saw the other side of him. Whether you believe the domestic violence – we know he was verbally abusive. Hateful one day and loving the next. ‘Corrupted carcass’, ‘worst thing that ever happened to me’ then ‘you’re beautiful inside and out.’ If he was sitting next to me the prosecutor would be using the same hateful words against him.

      12. Jodi lied- told herself a lie about her relationship with Travis. No person wants to be treated like that and called those names. It’s not an excuse to kill Travis. It is absolutely not and you have already convicted her. But abuse is a mitigating factor. Look at her solid relationship with Darryl- and they’re still friends. What changed the trajectory? Verbal abuse is not an excuse for what she did. She handled it the only way she knew how- she lied to herself, the detective, friends, the media, Travis’ family. It doesn’t diminish the abuse. She was once a happy, bubbly little girl, nose in a book. She will be haunted for what she did to Travis’ family, to Travis and to her family. 

13.  What’s so tragic is if either had sought help none of us may never have been here. The trajectory.

14.  Dr. Demarte said she had Bi-Polar Disorder. From a child her feelings weren’t validated. Cut bond with parents, was immature. Prone to violent outbursts- is that what happened? She can’t choose to have a personality disorder. Dr. Samuels also said she had one. Her BPD is not an excuse for what she did to Travis. But a reason substantial for life in prison. Another reason to be merciful.

15.  There’s so much mitigators in this case you can find to be merciful, to get life in prison and not execution. She has just one aggravating factor.

16. Strong mitigator is no criminal history. Jodi took Travis away but two wrongs don’t make a right. Her life still has value and you have a choice. (She quotes someone) ”…all life is worth saving and mercy is (best) attribute.” Her life is worth saving and despite her worst day she still has value. Sentence her to eternal life in prison.

 

Martinez:

  1. “To his family Travis will be forever young.” You’ve seen many photos of him from a child to older. But to his family he’ll be 30 for the rest of his life.
  2. They have tried to remember his life (pic of him smiling) with a twinkle in his eye. But they also told you they couldn’t forget what happened on June 4th, that he suffered immense physical pain, emotional distress and it was especially cruel. It hurt- was painful. And you shouldn’t forget what you saw in (pic of slit throat). An especially cruel crime. Take that back with you.
  3. The mitigators- you are not investigators. Find the facts. Don’t go out on a limb. You could say: ‘Well he’s dead so he’ll never suffer cancer- she saved him from that’- that’s an extreme example. You are not an advocate.
  4. The rest of her life in prison- on your questionairre it explained what it was – she’s eligible for release in 25 calendar years. Consider that.
  5. The 8 factors you looked at- an artist- she showed you pictures- Frank Sinatra, Elvis…so she has a skill, she’s entitled to get an easier path? All it is is a skill. Don’t give her preferential treatment. Not a mitigator.
  6. 27 years old. The age of majority is 18- people got to war at 18. She’s 9 years past that. A great relationship with Darryl. She enjoyed life. Had loving parents when growing up. Was employed, intelligent, had love affairs; a vast array of life experiences. Not a mitigator. If 16 0r 55 you could make the same argument. She had lived a full life. She’s 32 now but Travis is 30. Still. And the person responsible stood before you in court and asked you to look at that- only 27.
  7. Her pics of yesterdays, growing up. He has no more pics. What she will miss- nephew, Christmas with her photo, how’s that a mitigator when you look at the violence on Travis?
  8. No priors, never done this before. When people kill in this fashion they are arrested so they won’t do it again. Without laws there would be anarchy. She sat in the witness chair, took an oath, looked you in the eyes and lied to you. The gas cans- that’s perjury. Just because she’s not convicted doesn’t mean she hasn’t engaged in crime. Lied to the police- that’s a crime. They want you to just look past that. There is a criminal history. Not a mitigator.
  9. A good friend- friendship means you know the person better than most. Leslie said she never thought she would do something like this- but her friendship with Leslie was based on a lie. ‘When we have kids they will play together’? A friendship? When lying?
  10. Ryan – I guess it’s a friendship when you adjust someone, but he’s ‘full of crap.’ She lied to him. A good friend? Not a mitigator.
  11. Most of all this has come from her mouth. When the truth fails she’ll come up with a lie. A mitigator is proved by the preponderance of the evidence. The friend who couldn’t be here, judging from her credibility <Sidebar> The Womack issue raised by the defense- consider her credibility to assess id there is a good friend out there.
  12. Lacks support from family and then talks out the other side of her mouth. Well they’ve been here throughout the trial. The August peeping incident she called her father and he supported her. She spoke of her brother in glowing terms. It hasn’t been proven.
  13. Abuse and neglect as child and adult. When she was a child she liked to play the victim. Manipulative. There’s no records of any abuse. The 911 call with Bobby- no corroboration. There’s no abuse.
  14. Making the best of life/improving- she’s just going through life. Don’t most want to improve their life? She’s doing the bare minimum.
  15. None of these are mitigators. Jury instructions tell you what to do. If all find no mitigators it’s mandatory. A lack of connection may impact quality or strength so an artist? What does that have to do the crime? 27? How does that affect the crime? The horrific nature of the killing? No priors, though we know she has committed crimes- it doesn’t have anything to do with the crime. Same with friends and family. They don’t have a connection to the killing = no weight.
  16. Engage in analysis like the 1st (and 2nd) phase. Look at the facts and the law, then apply. The mitigators (if there are any) must be sufficiently substantial for leniency. Nothing presented here is a mitigating circumstance, but if 1 or 2 are possible mtitigators is it sufficient when you look at what this individual did? Travis will be forever 30. (Pic) That’s as old as he is going to get. No mitigators- even if you find some they’re not substantial for leniency. You have a duty. Do the right thing, the difficult thing. The only thing you can do is to return a verdict of death. Thank you.

Willmott

  1. A single question- Do you kill her? She has done something very bad and you have convicted her of that. The question is now do you kill her?
  2. Does she have value? Something you believe is worth saving her life? Living her life in prison? After 25 years parole- you are not supposed to consider that. The last time someone was paroled was eons <Objection, sustained>
  3. The lack of criminal history does matter. The entitlement because she’s an artist is false. Quite the opposite – she’s fighting for her life. Is it worth keeping her around to provide some type of value in this world? Criminal history- she doesn’t have any. We know she’s lied and manipulated- not a capital offense. You don’t sentence to death because she lied.
  4. The friendships were not based on lies. Several years with Darryl. Shows something happened; changed the trajectory, what she could have been.
  5. Family support- they’re here. Not when she needed them. Bi-Polar disorder- a lack of bonding. That little girl needed someone. A reason to be merciful and give life in prison.
  6. She plays the victim- one statement form someone who knew her from 1st– 5th grade.
  7. Doing the bare minimum- no value- what all of us do. She has something to give to this world.
  8. It’s an awful thing that she did and Travis’ family is suffering. But with your conviction- now they get some peace. It speaks to what she did- it is what it is. Before you is: do you kill her for the one horrible thing she did? Or can you see there’s a reason for her to live? She has value, and love from her family. She won’t be living with them or us but in prison. Can she contribute to this world? I’m asking you to find mercy. These mitigating factors are a reason. I’m asking you to give her life in prison.
  9. The judge gives final instructions. The jury goes into deliberations.

Hung Jury?

The jury just came in and informed the court they could not reach a unanimous decision. The judge had suggestions to help (but not force) a verdict. She wants them to identify the areas of agreement and disagreement and follow the law. She also said that they could define the issue, fact or law they have an issue with and submit questions to help clarify. She then sent them back ti deliberate some more.

New Jury Instruction

The judge called in the jury and read an instruction regarding Life In Prison, Then the sides argued the point- Willmott-Martinez-Willmott. There were no media allowed in, though later they got to see a video. From what I could gather Juan argued she could be paroled in 25 years and Willmott said if the jury was ‘merciful’ and gave her life that she would ‘never get out.’