In court this morning judge Stephens once again pushed back the date to set a retrial for the penalty phase- it is now set for September 16th. Apparently the judge wants to read over the motions first. The motions are about getting the Twitter handles of the jurors and not allowing cameras in the courtroom. According to Jeffrey Gold, esq., the Twitter request may be allowed but to eliminate the cameras would “Be acknowledging error.” As usual we will have to wait and see.
(Thanks to Twitter- @jeffgoldesq and @WildAboutTrial for the info)
Jodi’s Defense Attorneys have filed more motions regarding keeping cameras out of the courtroom. They cite the death threats aimed at their witnesses as the problem. (Though, if you recall, the lovely ‘Pot-Head Patti’ admitted there were no death threats.). They also want to get the twitter addresses of the jurors to make sure they are not manipulated by media- they imply that the alternate juror, Tara K., was on Twitter during the trial. From what I saw of her account I believe she started it AFTER the trial. She was new to Twitter. (Of course, as we all know Jodi is on Twitter). Oh, and of course, they still want to delay the rest of this trial. Will it ever end? Stay tuned–we have her in court this coming Monday morning at 8:30 a.m. Arizona time! Here is a link to the article, provided by my favorite Twitter source- @WitchyTweets (thanks!): http://www.kpho.com/story/22848146/judge-sets-another-hearing-before-penalty-phase-of-jodi-arias-trial
The motion for a mistrial (because Patty was supposedly threatened) has been denied. Martinez pointed out that Patty refused to answer his questions regarding her and the defendant’s drug use. She then left for a few minutes with Nurmi and Wilmott (who are NOT her attorneys). When she returned she ‘took the 5th.’ This means she most likely wouldn’t have testified anyhow. She also apparently never claimed the income from pictures she sold to the Nancy Grace show.
Right after the judge denied the motion Nurmi stated he and Willmott wanted off the case…again. This was also denied. Then when the judge asked to call the witnesses Nurmi informed her they were not going to call ANY witnesses. The judge then asked if the defendant was ready to allocute and this resulted in the parties going back into chambers. We are now waiting.
The court adjourns for the day. Then the judge asks about telling the jury about Patty- apparently the defense wants a jury instruction regarding Ms. Womack. Martinez says it would not be proper as we don’t really know- it could be that the defendant had a ‘bad background.’ Nurmi mentions the jury will wonder why no witnesses as they said there would be two. The judge will indicate to the jury that Ms. Womack is ‘unavailable.’ Martinez asks to approach. Nurmi asks for a stay of these proceedings- it is denied. The jury is brought back in. Judge tells jury they cannot continue today and will resume tomorrow.