Wednesday, April 10, 2013

Arias Defense Compares Trial To Salem Witch Hunt

Jodi Arias's defense attorneys Jennifer Willmott and Kirk Nurmi filed yet another motion for a mistrial last Sunday, alleging "prosecutorial misconduct". They are quoted on ABC15.com "the prosecutorial misconduct has infested these proceedings with a level of unfairness that cannot be cured by any other means". What trial are THEY watching? Willmott & Co. contended that prosecutor Juan Martinez has yelled at and attacked witnesses on a personal level, creating a circus-like atmosphere in which Arias cannot present a fair and proper defense.

In addition, they cited Martinez signing autographs outside of the court room and allege that he has "thrown evidence". I'm not sure what evidence has been thrown, has anybody else seen anything flying about the court room? The only thing I've seen being tossed around is the BS coming out of the mouths of Jodi Arias, her attorneys and those $300.00 an hour expert witnesses. This is a murder trial, it's a battle - and the prosecutor's tone of voice has no bearing on the proceedings and is certainly not grounds for a mistrial. He is no more aggressive than Willmott or Nurmi were, he just has a different style than they do. The defense has been presenting their case for more than two months now, and I think most folks would agree that Judge Stephens has been very liberal with the defense, allowing in testimony that is not corroborated, self serving in nature and she has given them an awful lot of latitude.

If they want to talk about unfair, how fair was it to allow Arias to state that Travis Alexander "pleasured himself" while looking at a photo of a young boy? How consistent is that behavior with the other behavior Arias is alleging, that he was constantly wanting and asking for sex with Arias and other women? I'm no shrink, but I think people with those types of tendencies leave proof of their behavior somewhere. Given the fact that Travis Alexander wasn't expecting to be murdered and have the police and the world looking into his computer, phone, journals and his house. I strongly believe there would be some evidence of an interest in children/boys somewhere. There was none. The only source of information for that particular allegation is Jodi Arias. Yet THAT was allowed in. I understand that testimony isn't evidence, but still....In addition, Arias has been allowed to testify about at least four incidents of physical abuse. Again, Arias is the source - no corroboration. Since Arias very well knows that many battered women do not report the abuse, she has taken advantage of this information and used it to serve her own purposes. 

For the defense to say that Arias has not been receiving a fair trial is just not accurate. Did they happen to catch that little trial that took Orlando by storm a few years back? The Casey Anthony case was a bigger media circus than this one has been, and guess what - she walked despite all of the media coverage and the public outrage and disgust with her. Anthony was actually once referred to as "the most hated woman in America", but the jury made their decision based on their interpretation of the evidence and not on public opinion. Their verdict was unpopular and it outraged the nation. My point is, the jury did not let outside factors influence their verdict. Nurmi and Willmott are insulting this jury by continuing to allege or insinuate that they would be influenced by media coverage.

The defense filed another motion last weekend to preclude any and all evidence relating to the shelves in Alexander's closet or any testing that may have been done on the shelves in the closet. Why? What are they afraid of, if Arias really was able to step up and reach the top shelf as she testified in court, under oath? Why are they attempting to keep this evidence from the jury if she is telling the truth? The defense's motion refers to evidence the State collected on March 5, 2013. They took measurements of the closet and took pictures of the shelving unit which includes an image of a person placing weight on or lifting up one of the shelves. The defense motion stated "there has been no evidence that the shelves at issue are indeed the same shelves in the same condition, nor is there any evidence that the current shelving is supported by the same pins that were present on June 4, 2008".

I don't know if the Judge has ruled on either of the defense motions yet. I say let the jury have any and all evidence and let them decide!

9 comments:

  1. Exactly, if it was truly self defense why would the defense be so determined to keep all this evidence out? You'd think they'd want as much of it in as possible. I mean, after all, they've been allowed to completely trash a dead man with zero evidence, other than the word of an admitted lying murderess.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Oh Victoria, you are so right. It doesn't get much lower than the defense has gone. Blaming the victim is a common tactic, but they crossed the line big-time. Offensive, right? Arias is lying through her teeth, and I hope and pray the jury sees through this domestic violence smokescreen when they see those autopsy photos! Thanks for your comments!

      Delete
  2. The photo's of the closet and shelving were taken for evidence by authorities. They clearly are supported with a peg system. I challenge some one to stand on the edge of one one these shelves and reach for "the gun".
    Are they tippy, are they sturdy? Will they support a person

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. From the Island,
      I strongly suspect that's why they do not want this evidence introduced - it will disprove her story! I think the jury can see that NOTHING in that closet was out of place. Certainly not the scene of a frantic fight! Thanks for posting!

      Delete
  3. Hi My Forte, That is exactly what my mind keeps coming back to.....let the jury have ALL the evidence! This defense looks like they will do anything to let a psychopathic murderer go free. I'm sure I've said it before, but how can they live with themselves?!?

    I don't know if this have been talked about, but Dr. Drew had a woman from Jodi's home town on that said that she was a know liar around town. Interesting!

    http://www.hlntv.com/video/2013/04/08/jodis-neighbor-tells-all?clusterId=1303#videoplayer

    Sue

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi Sue,
      How is the jury supposed to come to a decision if they don't have all of the information? Wouldn't it be relevant, if those shelves were found to be unable to support Arias's weight? I'm hoping the jury will view the photo of the undisturbed clothing in that closet. Certainly doesn't look like there was a frantic dash for that gun she claims was there. If the jury doesn't believe Travis had a gun, it's a mute point. Let's all pray the jury knows the meaning of "reasonable" doubt, and not "ALL doubt"! Thanks for your comments, as always!

      Delete
    2. Sue,
      Another thing, I hope that Juan Martinez has some tricks up his sleeve for the rebuttal case. Alyce LaViolette and her smokescreen domestic abuse claims will only take them so far, if the jury believes her at all after hearing how she blatantly discounted Travis writing that he feared Jodi, and how she failed to reach out to others who could have provided valuable input on the character of both Travis and Jodi! It's so one-sided, quite frankly I expected more from this "expert", but have zero respect for her after her combative tone during cross. Juan Martinez just highlighted her bias with a big huge Sharpie!

      Delete
  4. I believe the jury is paying extra, extra attention to every detail because they are aware that not all of the evidence is being allowed in the trial. If I were one of the jurors, that would certainly make me suspicious.

    ReplyDelete
  5. How do you spell desperation? So Mr. Martinez's style is improper and a reason for a mistrial? He's been a prosecutor for how long? I'm sure his style has probably mellowed since he first started his career. If the witnesses testified honestly and answered his questions, not saying to his liking but just answer the darn questions, I'm sure he wouldn't have had to be so fiery.

    Wouldn't it be a good thing for the defense if the jurors actually viewed J.M signing autographs? Wouldn't this display to the jurors that he's not taking his job and this case seriously? I've been a juror and during the trial we would see both sides outside, they would look at us, we would look at them. No words were ever spoken, believe it or not, even with the minimal pay, this is a very serious job and any legitimate jury realizes the seriousness of the proceedings.

    The closet shelves is a major piece of evidence that needs to be introduced simply because she made it part of the case as part of her self-defense testimony. When was the first time that Jodi mentioned stepping on the shelves as part of her defense? If it was when she testified then how could the state have had time to do this test prior? They better have done this testing on the same shelving. I was late to this trial, as I was catching up, looking at all the evidence photos and then hearing her testimony I had a look at the closet pic. If this is how the closet looked on June 9th, untouched, did anyone notice that there was a stool in the middle of the closet? She would have had to evade not only Travis but also the stool, while being chased and in fear. On the plan drawing it looks like there is a lot of room in the closet but the drawing doesn't include the shelving, clothing et al. Just makes no sense but we all know why.

    Great post/site.

    ReplyDelete

Thank you for commenting!