According to court documents (thank you, NancyB for the link!) the defense has filed a motion to move the trial to January 2014. They site that Jodi wants to find witnesses to stand up for her, the conflicts in dates with both Nurmi and Willmott and the fact that Willmott has 5 other cases coming up, four in August. Here is the link to the document:
According to a court document dated 6-13 the bench conferences, transcripts and recordings are to be re-sealed. The court found this due to the possibility of tainting a jury pool. Thanks, as usual to NancyB for the documents link:
http://www.courtminutes.maricopa.gov/docs/Criminal/062013/m5812262.pdf …
According to Wild About Trial’s Brian Skoloff, Maricopa’s County attorney, Bill Montgomery said that Arias is competent to stand trial and any statement that she isn’t fit for the proceedings “is simply inaccurate.” This is in response to an earlier statement from her defense attorneys that she was mentally ill. (See a previous post). At a news conference today he also said: “We’re continuing to prepare for a retrial.” Apparently both the prosecutor, Juan Martinez and the Alexander family want to pursue the death penalty. A status conference is scheduled for June 20. The retrial date for the start of the penalty phase is scheduled for July 18.
After about six hours of deliberation, Brett Seacat, the former Kansas sheriff’s deputy has been found guilty of 1st degree murder. He also got arson and endangering of a child. Seacat was accused of killing his wife, Vashti, then setting the house on fire. The prosecution said Seacat was a “controlling, manipulative” husband who didn’t want a divorce. The defense said Vashti was depressed and set the home on fire before shooting herself.
Getting inside the minds of the jurors is one of the most interesting parts of a trial. I have transcribed about half of the questions from the pdf- you can use the link at the bottom of this post to read the rest. You will find some of these questions are mixed with ones that were asked. Also there are the handwritten questions delivered to the judge during the deliberations (p.25-27)
1. Considering all the lies you’ve told and admitted to, would you consider yourself a pathological liar?
2. What pets did you have as a child? Did you ever intentionally hurt a pet or animal?
3. If the defendant feels she has a high I.Q – is it possible she would try to outsmart psychological tests?
4. Do you feel you should be punished for what transpired on 6/4/08?
5. For LaViolette: You say Travis gives no indication of being stalked-displays no fearful behaviour and continues his contact w/ Jodi of his own accord. How do you reconcile Jodi’s claim of D.V if she continues her contact w/Travis of her own accord? Where was her fearful behaviour?
6. Is there a type of stalking, or what could be considered stalking, that a person is comfortable around someone in person or when they are speaking with them, but are afraid of what they do or what they or what they are capable of when they are not around? Is this a possibility of this in the relationship between Jodi & Travis?
7. A lot of your testimony has been based on what Jodi has told you. It has been proven that Jodi has lied multiple times since killing Travis. How are you able to know everything she is saying is truthful?
8. Did you ever see any proof that Travis physically abused Jodi?
9. Isn’t it possible that Jodi didn’t write some of those incidents in her journal because they never happened?
10. You stated that you spoke to Jodi’s friends and family early on. Did you ever speak to Travis’s friends and family to find out more about who he was? If no don’t you feel that would have been important?
11. If something is premeditated is amnesia more or less likely to occur?
12. How could you be a sister to Matt, someone you had sex in the past?
13. Why didn’t you read the Book of Mormon to see what you were and weren’t allowed to do?
14. Why did you ask Travis about everything you did?
15. Why did you start a relationship with Ryan Burns when you said earlier ” When I am with one guy I don’t see other guys”?
16. Would it be possible to see what Jodi’s hand looks like when draped over a shoulder now?
17. Were you paid for the interviews with 48 Hours and Inside Edition?
18. You testified that Travis gave you the Book of Mormon at Starbucks. Did you read it thoroughly? If so, when?
19. Does the Book of Mormon go into detail regarding the Vow of Chastity?
20. Where did the information about Travis ‘being a flirt come from?
21. Where do the date and the time stamps on the text messages come from? Are they “send’ dates? Why would he say “Goodnight” at 8:13 am?
22. Was the gun that was used to kill Mr. Alexander found in Ms. Aries posession?
23. In regards to the knife or gun used…was Mr. Alexander’s old BMW searched?
24. Did you feel that Travis’ job interferred with your relationship mainly with regards to travel & phone calls?
25. If you were shocked to hear Travis was a virgin, why did you break up with him after you found out he was cheating on you?
26. Are date and time stamps on photo’s taken by digital cameras able to be manuallly changed and/or manipulated?-1. before photos are taken? 2-after photos are taken?
27. Who was involved in all the tire slashings? ie-Travis, You, Mimi, Lisa. Who’s vehicles were damaged?
28. You stated you were aware that the police recorded the calls because an attorney told you. Can you tell us when you were told this and how the subject came up?
29. After all the lies you have told, why should we believe you now?
30. What happened to the suicide letters you wrote to your Grandmother?
31. Were you kneeling when you dropped the camera?
32. When Travis stepped out of the shower to attack you was he wet? If so, did he slip at all on the tile in the bathroom or hallway?
33. When entering the closet, why didn’t you just go in the door closest to you?
34. Do you know how tall the ceiling in Travis’s closet was?
35. Was the gun in a case or just laying on the shelf?
I will probably transcribe the rest of these questions for a second post, but if you would like to see them now here is the link:
http://www.kpho.com/link/640242/read-jurors-questions-not-asked-in-jodi-arias-trial
In a response to the statement regarding whether to continue the case against Arias the defense said: “If the diagnosis made by the State’s psychologist is correct, the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office is seeking to impose the death penalty upon a mentally ill woman who has no prior criminal history,” they wrote. “Despite Mr. Montgomery’s recent statements to the media, it is not incumbent upon Ms. Arias’ defense counsel to resolve this case. Instead, the choice to end this case sits squarely with Mr. Montgomery and his office. “It is solely for them to determine if continuing to pursue a death sentence upon Ms. Arias, who is already facing a mandatory life sentence, is a good and proper use of taxpayer resources.”
Link to entire article:
http://www.azcentral.com/community/mesa/articles/20130604arias-lawyers-respond-to-montgomery.html
Here are some of the more interesting points from this transcript. (The link to the entire transcript is at the bottom). (Thanks, NancyB!)
1. Here’s one thing we can all be thankful for: According to a comment by Willmott on page 12 there were 2 other recordings that weren’t played in court- they were Jodi singing.
2. Regarding the penis and breast pictures from her phone, (p. 6) Martinez: said: “Quite frankly I don’t think he (the expert witness) can distinguish those, to whose penis those are or whose breasts those are.” As we know now those pictures were allowed into the trial.
3. The bulk of this transcript is about the argument that what is in the tape will be asserted as fact. The defense argues it is not, but if you recall the trial all the fantasies Travis described in that tape were actually presented as fact- like the 12 year old comment, which was actually Travis describing Jodi’s voice sounding like a 12 year old, and the ‘tie you to a tree…’ comment- was said over and over and over again by both Nurmi and Willmott as if it was a fact. Here is the way the defense actually said they would present this evidence:
On page 6 is the first time Willmott asserts: “None of it (the sex tape) is for the truth of the matter asserted, we’re talking about the particular statements. So the statement that he’s going to come and stick it up wherever is not for the truth of whether he was actually going to do that. They’re not assertions.” On page 10 Martinez makes the comment: “In terms of the sexual knowledge, they’re offering it for the truth of the matter asserted. And their experts rely on it as truthful. Also they are being offered as to how Travis broke down Jodi’s boundaries sexually.”
On page 11- Willmott says: “So as it was with the ‘3 hole wonder’ conversation, we’re not putting it in evidence to prove or disprove that Ms. Arias was a quote, unquote ‘3 hole wonder.’ On page 12 Martinez continues to argue that the tape is being offered for the truth of the matter asserted. That regarding the things said on the tape ‘that’s what they want to do.’ Martinez goes on to say: “I don’t see how they can then make the argument later on and say, well, none of this was true. Their argument would then have to be, they never had anal intercourse. They never did any of that.” On page 13 Nurmi says that while Travis said those things “We’re not attempting to prove that he was going to do those things.” On page 14 Nurmi reiterates: “…we’re not using it to prove that he was going to actually do the things on the tape.”
Martinez then goes into the testimony of Dr. Samuels and how he asserts that Travis was ‘the only individual who had anal sex with the defendant. And this is proof of that. It is offered for the truth of the matter. Willmott counters with ‘Dr. Samuels is not considering whether or not Travis was actually going to take Ms. Arias to the forest or whether he did take Ms. Arias to the forest.”
On page 17 Martinez Says Travis wasn’t going past her boundaries. “No he’s not. What he’s doing is he’s responding to her. And so it is being offered for the truth of the matter asserted. He’s not the aggressor, she is.” Both Wilmott and Nurmi respond: “That’s all for cross.” Martinez argues who can he cross? Ms. Arias or Travis? “Neither of which I have access to.” Willmott suggests he cross the doctors. Martinez: “I don’t want to cross the doctors. I want to cross the declarants which is what the rule is designed to allow me to do.”
Next (page 19) Martinez says Travis did not know he was being recorded. He and Nurmi argue the point.
“She (Jodi) can introduce it when she takes the stand.” On page 22 Nurmi says: “This is distinct form of self defense. And how he treated her is germane to that and not hearsay, not being offered for the truth of the matter asserted.”
Finally the judge decides she will have to listen to the tape to see whether or not it should be admitted.
4. Other arguments from the defense as to why the tape should be admitted were:
– On page 9 Nurmi argues the tape goes to ‘The way he treated her’, …degrades her opinion’ – showing a pattern of abuse.
– Willmott adds it ‘goes to his sexual knowledge.’
– On page14 Nurmi claims this is proof that while he was calling her a stalker he was having phone sex with her.
Link to entire transcript: http://www.azcentral.com/ic/pdf/0607arias-sex-tape-proceeding.pdf Thanks again, NancyB!
We are finally getting a glimpse of what was going on behind the scenes in the courtroom. During the testimony of Alyce LaViolette, Willmott was trying to get in an example of Travis telling Jodi he was going to kill himself and Martinez said: ““But the thing is that if Ms. Willmott and I were married, I certainly would say I F’g want to kill myself. That doesn’t mean I want to kill myself. It just means there’s a bad relationship and I want you to leave me alone.” (From an article by Michael Kiefer: http://www.azcentral.com/community/mesa/articles/20130605arias-trial-transcripts-juror-questions-unsealed.html?nclick_check=1z).
In a released transcript during an argument regarding hearsay evidence Martinez tells Willmott: “…maybe you ought to go back to law school.” Nurmi asks the judge to admonish Martinez for his statement about wanting to kill himself if married to Willmott and for the crack about going back to law school. The judge responds: “Council, I know some of this is tongue and cheek, some of it is just the stress of the trial, but let’s try to be as professional as possible when we have these bench conferences.” (Link to transcript: http://www.azcentral.com/ic/pdf/arias-april4-transcript-excerpt.pdf).
Thanks to NancyB for these links!
I am a big fan of Dr. Kristina Randle and would like to share her current post on Jodi’s supporters. I’ll try to entice you to check it out with this one sentence: “By definition, when you believe something to be true in spite of clear evidence to the contrary, you are mentally ill.” You may want to read the comments after the article as well there are several other impressive theories there.
Here’s the link:
Dr. Tara J. Palmatier has written an article on Arias that puts into words everything I am feeling. My favorite part of the article is about half way down, where she lists the ‘mitigators’ and comments on them- you know like the hair donation, teaching Spanish, recycling, book club…enjoy!
Here is the link:
http://www.shrink4men.com/2013/05/31/wtf-fatigue-jodi-arias/
mixedbagblogdotcom 