Jodi Arias Trial - Dirty Little Secrets Or Dirty Little Lies?

The Lifetime movie based on the murder of Travis Alexander, "Dirty Little Secrets: The Jodi Arias Story" is reportedly set to air on June 22, 2013 on the Lifetime Movie Network.  The cast and crew who have been filming for several months halted the filming to watch as the verdict aired live in mid May.  The ending is being re-worked to include the guilty verdict.  

Actors Jesse Lee Soffer and Tania Raymonde are playing the lead roles and are pictured below in character as Travis and Jodi:

Photo From NY Daily News

What do you think of the casting? Some believe Raymonde to be a ringer of Arias. Appears close enough, although I believe Travis was a little heavier than Soffer appears in this photo.  Nonetheless the docudrama airs in around a month.  I think a more appropriate title would be "Dirty Little Lies: The Jodi Arias Story", but that's just my opinion!

The Arias defense team takes center stage tomorrow as the sentencing phase of Jodi Arias' trial resumes in Phoenix.  As mentioned in previous postings, the only two witnesses in addition to Jodi Arias are expected to be childhood friend Patti Womack and former boyfriend Darryl Brewer.  Seemingly absent from the witness list are Arias' immediate family members and longtime trusted friend Matt McCartney.

The question on everybody's mind is whether the defense will be able to sway the jury into granting Jodi Arias the mercy that was absent when she killed Travis Alexander.  Arias is big on quoting other people.  I'd say to her, "mercy is given where mercy is shown", in other words - too little and much too late.  She has had many chances to show remorse and to accept responsibility for her heinous crime, yet she refuses to acknowledge the life she took or the lives that she forever ruined.  She seems to have never looked back on the wreckage left in her destructive path.  Will she be able to find the words that may now convince the jury of her sorrow and remorse over her actions?  More importantly, will anybody believe her words? Her own lies have destroyed her credibility and her actions before, during and after the killing make her appear more of a sociopath than someone who snapped and made a regrettable mistake.

Looking at her behavior during the trial, and through what we have learned about her through her own testimony and expert witness testimony, she certainly appears to have many of the traits sociopaths display.  Some of the key interpersonal traits of sociopaths identified in a checklist by Dr. Robert Hare, PhD (from www.lovefraud.com's Protect Yourself From Sociopaths: Learn To Recognize The Traits - Then Stay Away) :

• Glib and superficial
• It has been observed that sociopaths can be witty and articulate.  They are often amusing and entertaining conversationalists who tell unlikely but convincing stories that often cast themselves in a positive light.  They can be very effective in presenting themselves well and are often likable and charming. Typically sociopaths attempt to appear experts in sociology, psychiatry, medicine, psychology, philosophy, poetry, literature, art or law.  A signpost to this trait is often a smooth lack of concern at being found out that they are not.
• Egocentric and grandiose
• Psychopaths have have a narcissistic and grossly inflated view of their self-worth and importance, a truly astounding egocentricity and sense of entitlement. They see themselves as the center of the universe, as superior beings who are justified in living according to their own rules. 
• Lack of remorse or guilt
• Psychopaths show a stunning lack of concern for the devastating effects their actions have on others.  Often they are completely forthright about the matter, calmly stating that they have no sense of guilt, are not sorry for the pain and destruction they have caused and that there is no reason for them to be concerned. Psychopaths lack of remorse or guilt is associated with a remarkable ability to rationalize their behavior and to shrug off personal responsibility for actions that cause shock and disappointment to family, friends, associates and others who have played by the rules. Usually, they have handy excuses for their behavior, and in some cases they deny it happened at all.
• Lack of empathy
• Psychopaths display a general lack of empathy. They are indifferent to the rights and suffering of family members and strangers alike. Because of their inability to appreciate the feelings of others, some psychopaths are capable of behavior that normal people find not only horrific but baffling. For example, they can torture or mutilate their victims with about the same sense of concern that we feel when we carve a turkey for Thanksgiving dinner. 
• Deceitful and manipulative
• Lying, deceiving and manipulation are natural talents for psychopaths. Given their glibness and the facility with which they lie, it is not surprising that psychopaths successfully cheat, bilk, defraud, con and manipulate people without the slightest compunctuation about doing so. 
• Shallow emotions
• Psychopaths seem to suffer a kind of emotional poverty that limits the range and depth of their feelings. While at times they appear cold and unemotional, they are prone to dramatic, shallow and short-lived displays of feelings. Careful observers are left with the impression they are play-acting and that little is going on below the surface. 

• Impulsive
• Psychopaths are unlikely to spend much time weighing to pros and cons of a course of action or considering the potential consequences. More than displays of temper, impulsive acts often result from an aim that plays a central role in most of the psychopaths behavior: to achieve immediate satisfaction, pleasure or relief.  Psychopaths tend to live day-to-day and change their plans frequently. They give little serious thought to the future and worry about it even less. 
• Poor behavior controls
• In psychopaths, inhibitory controls are weak, and the slightest provocation is sufficient to overcome them. As a result, psychopaths are short-tempered or hot-headed and tend to respond to frustration, failure, discipline and criticism with sudden violence, threats and verbal abuse. It's not unusual for psychopaths to inflict serious physical or emotional damage on others, sometimes routinely and yet  refuse to that they have a problem controlling their temper.
• Need for excitement
• Psychopaths have a need for excitement - they long to live in the fast lane or on the edge where the action is. Psychopaths are easily bored and you will not likely find them in occupations or activities that are dull, repetitive or that require intense concentration over long periods.
• Lack of responsibility
• Psychopaths are frequently successful in talking their way out of trouble. They are almost as successful in convincing the criminal justice system of their good intentions and their trustworthiness. Although they frequently manage to obtain probation or early release from prison, they simply ignore the conditions imposed by the courts.
• Early behavioral problems
• Most psychopaths exhibit serious behavioral problems at an early age. These may include persistent lying, cheating, theft, fire setting, truancy, class disruption, substance abuse, vandalism, violence, bullying, running away and precocious sexuality. Early cruelty to animals is usually a sign of serious emotional and behavioral problems. Cruelty to other children, including siblings is often a part of the young psychopath's inability to experience the sort of empathy that checks normal people's impulses to inflict pain, even when enraged.
• Adult antisocial behavior
• Many of the antisocial acts of psychopaths lead to criminal convictions. Even within prison populations, psychopaths stand out, largely because of their antisocial and illegal activities are more varied and frequent than those of other criminals.

Do any of these sound familiar when reflecting on what we know about Jodi Arias?  I see a lot of symptoms that seem fitting. In particular, the lack of responsibility, lack of remorse or guilt, lack of empathy, deceitful and manipulative and shallow emotions seem spot on. Will Kirk Nurmi and Jennifer Willmott now try to paint Jodi Arias as a mentally flawed individual who was not capable of understanding the implications of her actions, or will they continue to portray her as a victim of abuse - shifting blame to her parents and away from Travis Alexander?

What would you do? Is there anything Arias can do or say that will even come close to swaying the jury to spare her life, or was this crime too vicious for any such mercy? Does Jodi Arias truly have a death wish, preferring a death sentence to living her life in prison?

 Arias' court room behavior, the jury's perception about the honesty or dishonesty of her testimony, the brutal nature of the murder, her lack of genuine remorse and her continued refusal to accept responsibility for what she has done are things that may put her on Death Row. These factors will be weighed against those mitigating factors Kirk Nurmi outlined on Thursday. Will it be enough? Could it ever be enough? We are very close to finding out.

Enjoy your Sunday!

The Arias Defense Witnesses - Sentencing Phase

The sentencing phase of the Jodi Arias murder trial is expected to resume on Monday following the sudden cancellation of the Thursday afternoon court session.  The reason for Thursday's delay is still unclear, but rumors point to a potential issue with defense (character) witness Patti Womack not wanting her face to be shown during testimony.  Womack is one of two known witnesses who are expected to speak on Arias' behalf - former Arias boyfriend Darryl Brewer is the other.  I didn't know who Patti Womack was, but when I did some digging around, I quickly recognized her from her telephone interview with HLN's Nancy Grace.

In case you don't watch the HLN News lineup, Patti Womack is described as a "close childhood friend" of Jodi Arias.  When interviewed by Nancy Grace recently, Womack shared childhood photos of the pair and video of her wedding in which Jodi Arias was a bridesmaid.  This is Arias and Womack in an undated photo from HLN's website.  Womack described the Jodi Arias she knew and grew up with - naturally, she was shocked to learn her friend was involved in the murder of Travis Alexander.

From HLN News

There are some rumors on the web that one of Arias' character witnesses may have some issues of her own to contend with, reportedly a DUI arrest involving drugs. I'm not trying to fan the flames around Arias' character witness, however there is a  clip on You Tube where Womack is seen sitting in the court room with Sandy Arias back in late January - the two are laughing and Womack appears to be under the influence of something.  You can check out the clip and judge for yourself! Womack is the woman with the black and white zebra-striped shirt with numerous tattoo's on her left shoulder and arm. I'm not implying that tattoos are in any way associated with substance abuse, just pointing out the tattoos so you don't miss Womack in the short clip!  I'm having issues trying to post the clip on this page, but it's easy to find on You Tube.  

Patti Womack/Sandy Arias, YouTube

I'm not implying that Jodi's friend is a drug addict or a criminal. I simply find it interesting to look at the back story of this cast of characters because it's usually interesting and surprising what we find. Is anybody else curious as to why the mysterious Matt McCartney won't be testifying on Jodi's behalf?  During the trial, Arias described McCartney as somebody who would never betray her - she told the jurors what a great post-relationship friendship they maintained. So what gives?  Does Matt McCartney know too much, and would his testimony become a liability given that Juan Martinez would get to cross examine him? I sense that is the case. Could that be who Arias referred to as having let her down, in her post-conviction interview?

So many twists and turns - this trial has taken on a life of it's own.  It feels like Jodi Arias is handling her infamy almost as if this was a career. Have you ever seen a person facing the death penalty plan a media blitz, selling t-shirts, tweeting and "fund raising" in the manner Jodi Arias has? It's got to be a first. I know I have posted some of her tweets here previously, but I'm constantly astonished at her shameless self-promotion.  She is definitely a case-study in sociopathy.  I have yet to see or hear a single word of apology, regret, sorrow or remorse from the convicted killer.  Any empathy or understanding she may have garnered from people who are against the death penalty is quickly dissolving as her true nature is revealed through her own actions and words.  

Her Twitter activity has slowed down considerably since she was convicted, but her words are reflective of her greed, denial and refusal to take responsibility for the crime.  How fitting that she had these t-shirts printed up, as many people will always suspect Arias herself had the "Travis Alexander's" t-shirt and shorts printed up herself.

"JodiArias.com and Jodiariasisinnocent.com are the only 2 sites where my art is guaranteed authentic" 1hr

"God's love is so great that He loves even the proud, the selfish, the arrogant,and the wicked" - Dieter F. Uchtdorf  May 15

"If you preorder at "Survivor" tee, shipping began Mon. Thx for furthering the cause" May 15

"Any donations to my family or me are made only at Jodiariasisinnocent.com. Any other source asking for donations is fraudulent. Thank you"  May 13

"N DisGrace has set back the cause of all women who have survived domestic violence. Her circus makes a mockery of something very serious"  May 6

"RE: commissary, many of the items I didn't receive were for indigent girls less fortunate then me. I thankfully have a mini surplus of food"  May 6

"I wanted so much to avoid trial but the State forced it. My only other option was suicide and well..."  May 6

"I would have signed a plea deal years ago to avoid this disaster, but I was refused a plea as the State and the family refused to settle"  May 6

The victim impact statements read by Samantha and Steven Alexander on Thursday will be hard to follow on when the defense returns to court to beg the jury to spare Arias' life on Monday. With only two (known) character witnesses and Jodi Arias expected to testify on her own behalf, the sentencing phase may not take as long as anticipated.  Many legal analysts believe having Arias on the stand for an unheard of 18 days was a crucial mistake on the part of the defense. Daniel Gibb, dismissed Juror #8 told Dr. Drew that he found much of what Arias said "too far out there". He clearly felt she spent too much time on the witness stand.

Will we see a different Jodi Arias when she makes her final plea to this jury? Will she show any genuine remorse, or do you believe she is incapable of real emotion around this murder? We know she is sorry she got caught, but is she really sorry she did it? How will Arias handle being cross examined by Juan Martinez one last time?  Expect the unexpected with this trial.

Have a great weekend!

Arias Defense Team Wants Off Case

Yesterday the third and final phase of the Jodi Arias death penalty murder trial got under way with opening statements and victim impact statements in the sentencing phase.  Jodi Arias has not been silent since the reading of the guilty verdict, and it's become more apparent that her attorneys are frustrated with their lack of control over their client.  Arias, famous for giving media interviews before and after her trial seems to want to continue talking despite her attorneys advice.

The differences between Jennifer Willmott, Kirk Nurmi and Jodi Arias reached a peak last week when the defense team petitioned Judge Sherry Stephens and asked to withdraw from the case.  Apparently Arias wants to run the show, and I suppose it IS her trial - but despite what we may think of her distasteful defense, these two attorneys have gone to battle for her.  And how does she repay them?  Not an hour into her conviction of first degree murder the finger pointing began, or as I like to say the broken-finger pointing began!  By the time Jodi Arias sat down with Fox's Troy Hayden she was already proclaiming her innocence and alleging that her attorneys chose not to introduce key evidence that may have helped her at trial.

Per the Superior Court of Arizona, Maricopa County website's minute entry from 5/14/13, Judge Stephens ruled on several outstanding issues:

IT IS ORDERED there shall be no further media interviews with the Defendant pending further order of the court.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED the Maricopa County Sherriff's Office shall not approach the Defendant with any media requests pending further order of the court.

Discussion held regarding Defendant's Request that Victim Impact Evidence be Presented via Videotape.

IT IS ORDERED denying the Request for reasons stated on the record.

Discussion held regarding the Defendant's Motion for Discover of Victim Impact Evidence.

IT IS ORDERED denying the Motion.

Discussion is held on Counsel for the Defendant's Motion to Withdraw.

IT IS ORDERED denying the Motion

10:59 a.m. Status Conference concludes

http://www.courtminutes.maricopa.gov/docs/Criminal/052013/m5770706.pdf

You can read all of the court minute entries at clerkofcourt.maricopa.gov.  Although the reasons for the request to withdraw as Counsel is unknown, we do know they have tried to withdraw from this case at least twice.  So what gives, are Nurmi & Willmott just plain sick of Arias' hijinx and thirst for media coverage? What do you do with a client who refuses to listen to your advice? At this late stage of the trial, apparently there is nothing they can do.  The trial will go on, and there's nothing Arias can do to stop it. Maybe she believes if she causes enough disruption she will get a do-over?  Perhaps her defense team are just the latest victims in her trail of destruction and wreckage.

Meanwhile, Jodi Arias seemingly isn't letting a little thing like a murder conviction slow down her tweeting and self-promoting.  Just hours after the jury concluded the aggravating factors were proven by prosecutor Juan Martinez, making her eligible for the death penalty, Arias took to Twitter (through friend Donovan Bering) to announce the arrival of her "Survivor" t-shirts.  Arias tweeted a link to her website, where the t-shirts are on sale for $15.00 - a disclaimer on the site claims "a portion of the profits generated from the sales will support other survivors of domestic violence, and go to non-profit domestic violence organizations selected by Jodi". Also noted on the site "no refunds or returns are accepted". Yes, you heard it right. I think if she replaced "Survivor" with "Murderer", I might buy one myself.

In another tweet, Arias quotes Dieter F. Uchtdorf - "God's love is so great that He loves even the proud, the selfish, the arrogant and the wicked". Looks like Arias has her Book of Mormon in her cell.  When the sentencing phase continues next week, we should hear again from former boyfriend Darryl Brewer and an old friend of Jodi Arias named Patty Womack. Womack is the witness who didn't want her face to be broadcast during her testimony.  That was cited as one of the reasons the trial did not resume after the afternoon lunch break - perhaps they had technical difficulties or needed to make adjustments to accommodate the request? 

Naturally we will hear more from Jodi Arias next week as well. She is expected to tell the jury about the person she was prior to 2006 when she met Travis Alexander.  I'm not sure what the logic in that time frame is, it seems to me that the jury should be looking at the person she is now, not 7-10 years ago! They need to decide if the person before them should be given the opportunity to live and spared the death penalty.  That requires that they consider who she is now, not who she used to be! Just my opinion.

In the meantime, enjoy your weekend and talk to you next week!

Emotional Victim Impact Statements Given By Alexander Siblings - Jodi Arias Trial

Today the final phase of the Jodi Arias murder trial began, the sentencing phase where the jury will decide whether Jodi Arias is sentenced to death or life. Today's proceedings began with Judge Stephens discussing matters of the law around the sentencing process.  Kirk Nurmi's opening statement included the mention of 8 mitigating factors the jury should consider and weigh against the aggravating factors. He told the jury they would hear from two of Jodi Arias' friends (Darryl Brewer and Patty Womack) as well as Jodi Arias herself. Does this mean her family members are not testifying? That in itself seems shocking to me.

Kirk Nurmi wants the jury to know who Arias was prior to meeting Travis Alexander in 2006, and he will attempt to convince the jurors to spare her life by discussing these 8 mitigating factors. He reminded the jury that they had all stated during jury selection they could consider a life sentence if Arias was found guilty, even with aggravating factors - he stated this twice. He talked about "fairness and mercy". 

Here are the 8 mitigating factors he referenced (in summary):

1)  Jodi Arias was 27 at the time of the crime (she was born 7/9/1980, so she was MUCH closer to 28 than 27, but whatever!)
2)  Jodi Arias has no prior criminal record
3)  Jodi Arias was a "good friend" (just not to TRAVIS)
4)  Jodi Arias had a lack of family support as a child and adult
5)  Jodi Arias suffered from neglect and abuse as a child and adult
6)  Jodi Arias tried to make the best out of her life
7)  Jodi Arias tried to improve herself
8)  Jodi Arias has artistic talents (can Martinez talk about the sale of this artwork for profit during the trial??)

Juan Martinez began his opening statement by telling jurors that Arias' age and the other "mitigating circumstances" were flawed. "There is no connection between her being 27 years old and the fact that she stuck a knife in Travis Alexander's chest", Martinez said. He talked about fairness, as Kirk Nurmi did during his opening statement. Martinez said fairness goes both ways, to Jodi Arias but also to the victim, Travis Alexander - the person who is no longer here.

This is just a quick update during the court lunch break, so my apologies if this feels thrown together. What I really wanted to talk about are the victim impact statements that we heard from Travis' younger brother Steven and younger sister Samantha. They were so full of emotion, so heartfelt - each of them struggled through the words, tears streaming down their faces. It becomes so clear this family has been profoundly effected by the loss of their brother.

Steven went first. I've noticed that Steven has appeared angry through most of the trial. He looks like he hates Jodi Arias, and I can't say I blame him. You can sense the toll this ordeal has taken on him - but to hear him talk about some of what this family has been through really drives home how large of a loss this will always be for each and every one of them. His voice was cracking, he held back tears as he described being asleep, after a 12 hour graveyard shift and he was awakened by his crying wife. She handed him the phone, it was Samantha. Samantha told him "Steven, Travis is dead".  Steven told the jury how much he looked up to Travis. "I thought my brother was bulletproof", he said as he described Travis surviving through two motorcycle accidents as well as rolling a snowmobile. He thought he was unbreakable.

He went on to discuss the impact Travis' murder has had on him, particularly the nature of his murder. He has nightmares about somebody coming after him and his family with a knife, he has dreams about Travis curled up in that shower. He admitted that he is now afraid of the dark. In one of the most emotional moments, he said "I don't want to see my brother's murderer any more. I want this to be over". "I don't want to hear his name being dragged through the mud", he stated. Steven went on to tell the jury about the toll this has had on his personal and family life. The stress and anguish caused him to seek professional help, and he admitted to having to try various anti-depressants and anxiety medications. The stress and anxiety caused he and his wife to separate briefly. 

For the first time, we've heard about all of the positive attributes Travis Alexander had. He had a big heart, he was funny - he wrote his life out on flashcards. Steven told jurors on the last flash card Travis wrote before he was killed, he wrote "call Steven". He never got that phone call. Steven then read that last entry from Travis' blog, his "Affirmation for 2008", where Travis wrote about his goals for 2008 and beyond. Sadly, 2008 was the last year of his life.

Samantha Alexander was next. She, too was very emotional, and fought through tears to deliver her family's message to the court and the jury. She said they were tortured over the loss of Travis. Travis was that person in their family who people went to when they needed to talk, if they needed inspiration - he seemingly was the glue that held the family together.  Samantha talked about the disbelief she felt when she received the voicemail from her grandmother on June 10, 2008 - telling her to call immediately. She knew from the tone in her grandmother's voice that somebody had died. She never considered it could be Travis.

Their father passed away on Travis' 28th birthday, and shortly thereafter their mother passed away.  Samantha said Travis got the family through these losses. She talked about the ill-effects Travis' death had on their grandmother, who was so extremely close to Travis and raised him.  Her health went downhill after Travis was killed, and sadly she passed away before jury selection began in this case. "Travis was our strength, our beacon of hope, our motivation and our lives will never be the same", she said. Travis worked hard for everything he had, he took nothing for granted. His greatest attribute, Samantha said was his ability to make other people feel good about themselves.

Samantha last saw Travis in late May of 2008, when he visited her in Southern California and shared with her the introduction to the book he was writing called "Raising You". Juan Martinez displayed a photo of Travis and Samantha on the large courtroom screen that was taken during that trip. Samantha said she didn't want to take the photo because she was still in her pajamas. "I'm so glad I let him talk me into taking the picture", she sobbed. Samantha is a police officer in Riverside California. She told the jury that her brother's crime scene photos are among the worst she has seen in her 11 years in law enforcement. That's saying a lot. "Our minds are stained with the image of Travis' throat, slit from ear to ear", "our minds are stained with the image of Travis' body in that shower", Samantha said.

The Alexander family is large, there were 8 siblings - 4 boys and 4 girls. They haven't all been together as a family since Travis' murder. "It's too hard to see that empty chair where Travis should be".  As Samantha told the jury how their family has been forever changed by their brother's murder, it was so clear their pain has not subsided with the passage of time. It's just as painful today for them.  As Samantha finished and walked back to her seat in the gallery, she looked directly at Jodi Arias as she walked by the defense table. HLN's Jean Casarez reported that Samantha looked at Arias "with daggers in her eyes". She reportedly gave Jodi's mother Sandy Arias the same look before taking her seat with her family.

It was very emotional and powerful testimony. The jury is not supposed to allow emotion to effect their decision in sentencing, but I don't see how it can't. The Alexander kids all shared a difficult upbringing, yet that doesn't seem to have effected them in a negative way. They appear to be a very bonded and close family. Thank God they have each other and their faith to get them through this.  I hope with the conclusion of this trial, they can find some peace and take comfort in knowing they will see Travis again when the time comes.

Who will the defense call to the stand first? How will they try to counter those emotion filled victim impact statements? I'm so glad the jury got to hear about the wonderful qualities Travis Alexander possessed after hearing 5 months of trashy sex talk.  

Jodi Arias Faces The Death Penalty

It's been nearly 5 years since Travis Alexander was viciously attacked and killed in his Mesa Arizona home.  Justice for Travis Alexander and his family is finally in sight as 32 year old Jodi Arias was found guilty of first degree murder with aggravating circumstances that make her eligible for the death penalty.

The aggravation phase of the trial was brief, lasting only a day and the outcome was widely expected as even Arias did not appear to be surprised the same jury that convicted her last week found Alexander's death was especially cruel, heinous and depraved.  Her attorneys did not put up much argument yesterday - arguing that 27 stab wounds, a slashed throat and a gunshot to the head wasn't cruel would seem futile. The jury took around 90 minutes to reach their "proven" verdict, meaning the state had provided sufficient evidence to justify the death penalty. 

This morning the defense is expected to begin arguing why the jury should spare Jodi Arias' life.  I've been scouring the web for a witness list but came up empty.  Potential witnesses for the defense could be Arias' family members and friends, ex-boyfriends, psychiatrists - anybody who has known Jodi Arias and could sway the jury that she could have a meaningful life behind bars.  I heard Alyce LaViolette's name mentioned as a possible witness for Arias.  Would the defense call LaViolette back to the stand after the jury seemingly rejected her opinion that Travis Alexander was physically and emotionally abusive to Jodi Arias?  LaViolette's testimony during the guilt phase of the trial set off a firestorm of public backlash from domestic violence victims as well as trial watchers who wondered how a woman with three decades of service in area of battered women could side with Arias given the complete and total lack of corroboration.  Her books were largely trashed on Amazon.com and petitions were created to remove LaViolette from speaking engagements.

I personally don't feel that further testimony from LaViolette would be of any help to Jodi Arias' defense!  What about the Arias family? If the defense calls mother Sandy Arias, she's sure to face a fiery cross examination from prosecutor Juan Martinez - at which time, she would surely be questioned about the "wooden spoon" Jodi Arias testified she hit her with when she was growing up, as well as an incident where Jodi kicked her. Jodi's father William was portrayed at trial as an imposing man who was critical of Arias from a young age.  During a 2008 interview with Detective Esteban Flores, Bill Arias described his daughter as "a strange person" who treated her mother poorly and lashed out at his wife often. He told Flores that Jodi had serious trust issues with both he and his wife and was very secretive about her life. Both interviews were telling, in that neither parent seemed above suspecting that their daughter may have been involved in Travis Alexander's murder - her mother went as far as asking her if she had gone to Arizona when she was supposed to be in Utah. Jodi Arias has four siblings, including two younger brothers, one sister and an older half sister as well as the grandparents she was living with in Yreka at the time of Alexander's murder.

It's anyone's guess who will take the stand to speak on behalf of Jodi Arias during this last phase of the trial. The defense will likely put up as many people as they can find, and this phase of the trial could take weeks. During this phase, we can also expect to hear from the Alexander family. I've heard that Samantha and Steven will be representing the Alexander siblings in reading the victim impact statements, which may or may not be accurate. This will be one of the most widely anticipated moments of the trial, aside from the guilty verdict - as you know, the Arias defense filed a motion with Judge Stephens asking for the victim impact statements to be delivered via videotape versus being made live to the jury and to Jodi Arias! I'd be shocked if this motion were granted - the Alexanders have every right to confront their brother's killer in court, and to look her in the eyes (if they choose to) and tell her exactly what she has taken from them.  No court in the world would take that right away from a family who has suffered so much.

I have a feeling we will hear from Jodi Arias as well during this last phase of the trial. Despite her public statements that she does not wish to live out the rest of her life in prison, and she'd prefer the death penalty ("death is the ultimate freedom", she said) - I seriously doubt that is in fact the truth.  So little of what we've heard from Jodi Arias is the truth, this is widely seen as another manipulation on the her part.  According to Stephanie Grisham, spokeswoman for Arizona Attorney General Tom Horne, if Arias really wants death, she could be executed in as little as four years. She told the phoenixtimes.com that the state grants one automatic appeal to inmates who are sentenced to die regardless of their wishes. If the appeal fails and an inmate continues to want death, the state would then order a psychiatric evaluation to ensure the person is mentally competent. In theory, the process could take as little as four years.

Does Jodi Arias enjoy her infamy too much to really have a death wish?  Throughout her 18 days of testimony, I lost count of the number of times that suicide was mentioned either by Arias or via her journal entries. She's had access to a gun on at least two instances that we are aware of, the .25 caliber she shot Travis Alexander with, and the .9 millimeter handgun she purchased before her arrest.  If she really wanted to die, wouldn't she have taken action when she had these opportunities?  I don't want to minimize a suicide threat, I do realize there are people out there that contemplate it and grapple with the decision, and people at times do not seek professional help when they are having suicidal thoughts.  With Jodi Arias however, her actions do not match her statements. Coupled with her credibility issues and her complete lack of remorse, I just don't believe she really wants to die. I believe she doesn't want to spend the rest of her life in prison! 

What will happen during the sentencing phase? Who will take the stand on Jodi's behalf? Will Arias finally apologize for the life she has taken and accept responsibility or will she continue to claim she was wrongly convicted?  Will the jodiariasisinnocent people put a file in a cake as a last ditch effort to free her from the Estrella jail before she heads off to prison?  In this trial, anything is possible! Have a great day......

Arias Jury Deliberating Aggravating Circumstances - VERDICT WATCH

In an Phoenix courtroom the aggravation phase began today to decide whether Travis Alexander's murder was conducted in an unusually cruel, heinous and depraved manner.  After a 5-day delay in proceedings, prosecutor Juan Martinez began his opening statement after Judge Sherry Stephens instructed the jury in matters of the law.

Juan Martinez's opening statement was brief - but within a minute of beginning, Kirk Nurmi fired off a series of objections and there were several sidebars! Martinez went on to describe the mental anguish and physical pain Travis Alexander suffered as he was attacked in the shower stall of his home. Seated and without much room to move, he described the pain he likely suffered as Arias drove the knife deep into his heart. Martinez reminded jurors of Arias' alleged suicide attempt while she was being held in a California jail - Nurmi objected.

Martinez continued and described how Arias aborted her suicide attempt with the razor taken from a disposable razor blade because it "stung" too badly. He made comparisons to what Arias described as too painful to what Travis Alexander likely felt after the first knife blow was delivered. I counted 5 objections during Martinez's 5-10 minute opening statement, leading to several sidebars. Attorneys will normally allow one another to deliver their opening and closing statements with limited interruptions, but none of the normal court decorum seems to be followed in this trial!

Juan Martinez described the terror Travis felt, and argued it was Travis who would have went into fight or flight mode - not Jodi Arias as her defense team and "experts" argued at trial. Travis managed to escape the initial knife attack, his hands severely and deeply cut - and his chest bleeding internally and externally as he staggered out of the shower to the sink area. At the point where Travis is holding on to the sink, he was bleeding heavily into the sink - Juan Martinez described the anguish and terror he would have experienced as he watched his chest and hands bleeding as he looked into the mirror. He would have also seen the reflection of Jodi Arias standing behind him, and he may have witnessed her raising the knife to continue the attack where the cluster of wounds to his back were inflicted.

Martinez described Travis Alexander's desperate attempt to get away from  his attacker - how he left the bathroom, his body pressed up against the hallway wall as he slid town and fell to the floor. This scenario is evidenced by the crime scene photos the jury has seen. When Travis could no longer walk or stand, he fell to the floor.  Arias is following and there is no way for Travis to escape at this point. Travis was gravely wounded but still alive when he fell to the bedroom floor, and then Arias took the knife and cut his throat with such force it severed his windpipe.  Martinez's last statement was to say "only death relieved his pain and suffering.

Kirk Nurmi opened by telling the jury "the question before you is not cruelty - the law recognizes 1st degree murders are cruel". He argued the question was if the state proved the death was especially cruel. Was the pain unusually great or significant is the question before you, he stated.  His opening was brief, but he claimed that the state had not proven beyond a reasonable doubt the killing was done in an especially cruel manner. He made some vague references to Dr. Samuels and Dr. DeMartes testimony before he concluded his opening statement.

Medical examiner Dr. Kevin Horn was the state's only witness. Martinez and Dr. Horn discussed each of the injuries inflicted on Travis Alexander. Dr. Horn explained how severing nerve endings causes pain. The first injury to Travis Alexander is believed to be the deep stab wound to his chest. Dr. Horn described this would have been very painful, and the victim may have felt symptoms similar to a heart attack, he would have had trouble breathing because the same nerve endings are effected. They talked about the deep wound to the torso and the nerve endings involved. The stab wounds to his back impacted his ribs and spine - described as shallow, but painful.

The  stab wounds to the back of Travis' head were so deep they impacted his skull and caused "divots" marks in the skull. Dr. Horn described the wounds to each of Travis' hands, calling them defensive wounds - some of them were very deep and would have been painful. Martinez asked Dr. Horn if he believed Travis Alexander was alive through the entire attack, until the point of having his throat slashed. "Yes", Dr. Horn answered. Dr. Horn described that it takes a good deal of force to sever a person's windpipe, and the knife wound to his neck severed his windpipe, his jugular and carotid artery. The medical examiner testified after his throat had been slashed, he would've died fairly rapidly after that mortal wound was inflicted. Travis likely was dead when he was shot in the head.

In perhaps the most dramatic moment of the testimony was when Juan Martinez had the courtroom sit in silence for a full 2 minutes - to demonstrate how long 2 minutes can feel like if a person is under constant attack. The silence in that courtroom was eerie. 

Jennifer Willmott cross examined Dr. Horn - she talked to him about the effects adrenaline has on the pain a person feels. She tried to argue that the adrenaline running through Travis Alexander's body would have effected his ability to feel the pain being inflicted on him. The defense also fell back on the old which came first theory - as they reminded the jury that Detective Flores originally testified that Travis Alexander was shot first, and if the jury believed that was a possible scenario, any pain inflicted after that would have been minimal.

The jury only had two questions for Dr. Horn (I'm paraphrasing):

Question:  Did you testify previously that Travis had 3 rapidly fatal wounds?
Answer:  Yes, the stab wound to the heart, the throat wound and the gunshot wound.

Question:  Which was more likely of the throat wound, "scalloping" or multiple wounds to the neck?
Answer:  I really could not tell due to the decomposition.

During Juan Martinez's closing argument, he told the jury "the defendant made sure that Travis Alexander did not go peacefully into the night". And she made sure he went nude". He argued that Arias killed him with a knife, in his own home - a place he was supposed to be safe. She got him in a vulnerable seated position, with water running down his face and he was completely unaware of what was about to happen. He further argued that she stabbed him in the chest, knowing the area contained his heart. "We don't know if he saw it coming, but we know he felt it by the defensive wounds to his hands", Martinez told the jury this in itself caused extreme emotional anguish, with or without the effects of adrenaline - it was painful.

Martinez pondered what Travis Alexander was thinking about, having been stabbed and having seen himself bleeding in that mirror. "Was he thinking about his family, his grandmother - who received 20 irises from the defendant", Martinez asked. This prompted another objection from Kirk Nurmi. At one point, Nurmi was objecting to nearly each sentence out of Juan Martinez's mouth. The defense clearly does not want the jury to think about what Travis was thinking as he tried to understand what was happening to him, as he realized she was going to kill him. 

Martinez used the words terror, agony, anguish and pain to describe the feelings and emotions Travis likely felt as he was being attacked by the person he had just been intimate with hours earlier. Throughout Martinez's closing argument, members of the Alexander family struggled to contain their emotions as Arias bowed her head and held a tissue, her nose turned red but I didn't see any real tears on her face. Martinez described the last thing Travis saw before he lost consciousness and died - Jodi Arias, coming towards his throat with that knife. He referred the jury to their instructions and told them that adrenaline or no adrenaline - Travis endured enough suffering to last 2 lifetimes.

Kirk Nurmi began his closing by instructing the jury that they cannot let their emotions impact their decision. "Has the state given you proof beyond a reasonable doubt", he asked. "You must be firmly convinced beyond a reasonable doubt, and Jodi Arias must be given the benefit of the doubt if you are unsure".  He argued the state has now changed their theory about the timeline around Travis' death, arguing now the attack lasted for 2 minutes while arguing 62 seconds at trial. He also referred back to the conflicting initial sequence of wounds by Detective Flores, based on his conversation with Dr. Horn in the days following the murder.

Kirk Nurmi tried to further convince the jury that adrenaline stops the body from feeling pain! They don't have much to work with, granted - but when he began to recall the testimony and diagnosis from Dr. Janeen DeMarte and Jodi's borderline personality disorder as something that prevented her from realizing the effects of her actions, that went to show how desperate this defense team has become. It's exceedingly difficult to argue that Travis Alexander's death was not especially cruel, heinous and depraved - given the number of wounds inflicted on him and the forensic evidence that proves he was alive through most of the attack on him that night. We can only pray that Travis did not feel the gunshot to his face.

Judge Stephens gave the jury some final instructions and they went back to the jury room to begin their deliberations.  The entire proceeding went much faster than I was anticipating, despite a flurry of defense objections and sidebars. The Judge sent the jury out of the room twice following such objections, once for 10 minutes and once for 2 minutes.

This is in the hands of the jury once again folks.  We are once again on verdict watch. How long do you think it will take for them to decide on the aggravating circumstance?  I don't think it will take very long at all.  Update to follow!  Have a great day -

What's Next For Jodi Arias - Aggravation & Sentencing Phases

Convicted murderer Jodi Arias has been returned to the Estrella jail and taken off suicide watch yesterday after doctors deemed she was no longer a threat to herself or others.  She is reportedly being housed in a cell alone; I'm not sure if she has been in a single-cell situation prior to her stint in the jail's Buckeye psych ward. Out of an abundance of caution following her post-conviction interview with Fox reporter Troy Hayden in which Arias claimed that "death is the ultimate freedom", jail officials placed Arias under suicide protocols.

More of Arias' 45 minute interview with Troy Hayden has been released. She told Hayden there was evidence crucial to her defense that was not admitted. She described a photo she had of murder victim Travis Alexander "chasing a naked 4 year old boy" around the room - while holding a Bible. Arias explained that her attorneys felt the photo was irrelevant and therefore it was not submitted into evidence. In addition to the photo, she claimed several family members were never called to testify about visible bruises Arias had at various times during her relationship with Travis Alexander.  I find it highly unusual that no family members were called during the guilt phase of this trial!  Could it be that the defense did not want to risk more of Arias' lies, exaggerations or untruths be uncovered?  Had Sandy Arias been called to the stand, she would have been subject to a fierce cross examination from prosecutor Juan Martinez. Would Sandy Arias substantiate her daughter's claims that she was beaten with a wooden spoon? What about Jodi's father? Would his testimony have done more harm than good for his daughter's defense?

Despite what Arias claims, there has to be a very good reason or reasons that none of her immediate family members took the stand on her behalf. Maybe some members of the Arias family takes perjury more seriously than others? After a 5-day delay, the aggravation and sentencing phases are set to move forward tomorrow at 10:00AM PST. I found a good source on the aggravation factors in Arizona death penalty cases and am posting the link in case you have any interest in seeing the list in it's entirety:
http://deathpenalty.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=1363

As you are aware, the state is seeking the Death Penalty under the following aggravator:  "the defendant committed the offense in an especially heinous, cruel or depraved manner"

The state will present evidence and as in the guilt phase, the burden of proof is on the prosecution. Per the resource listed above:

"At the aggravating phase of the sentencing proceeding that is held pursuant to section 13-703.01, the admissibility of information relevant to any of the aggravating circumstances set forth in subsection of this section shall be governed by the rules of evidence applicable to criminal trials.  The burden of establishing the existence of any of the aggravating circumstances set forth in subsection F of this section is on the prosecution.  The prosecution must prove the existence of the aggravating circumstances beyond a reasonable doubt."

"At the penalty phase of the sentencing proceeding that is held pursuant to section 13-701.01, the prosecution or defendant may present any information that is relevant to any of the mitigating circumstances included in subsection G of this section, regardless of its admissibility under the rules governing admission of evidence at criminal trials.  The burden of establishing mitigating circumstances included in subsection G of this section is on the defendant.  The defendant must prove the existence of mitigating circumstances by a preponderance of the evidence.  If the trier of the fact is a jury, the jurors do not have to agree unanimously that a mitigating circumstance has been proven to exist.  Each juror may consider any mitigating circumstance found by that juror in determining the appropriate penalty."

"Evidence that is admitted at the trial and that relates to any aggravating or mitigating circumstances shall be deemed admitted as evidence at a sentencing proceeding if the trier of fact considering that evidence is the same trier of fact that determined the defendant's guilt.  The prosecution and defendant shall be permitted to rebut any information received at the aggravation or penalty phase of the sentencing proceeding and shall be given fair opportunity to present argument as to whether the information is sufficient to establish the existence of any of the circumstances included in subsections F or G of this section".

"In determining whether to impose a sentence of death or life imprisonment, the trier of fact shall take into account the aggravating or mitigating circumstances that have been proven.  The trier of fact shall impose a sentence of death if the trier of fact finds one or more of the aggravating circumstances enumerated in subsection F of this section and then determines there are no mitigating circumstances sufficiently substantial to call for leniency."

I find the Arizona judicial system to be very effective and efficient in that not only are jurors able to ask questions of witnesses, but they have such a key role in deciding sentencing in death penalty cases. Only if the jury does not agree that an aggravating circumstance was proven by the state and the death penalty is rejected as a potential sentence would Judge Stephens decide on Arias' fate or either natural life or life with the possibility of parole after 25 years is served.

Naturally there are numerous appeals that will follow any death sentence imposed on Jodi Arias. Kirk Nurmi and Jennifer Willmott have been creating their own paper trail in the form of mistrial motions in anticipation of future appeals. The appeal process could stretch out for years.  What can we expect to hear during the next phase of this trial? Will Jodi Arias' family break their silence and beg for their daughter's life? Will Arias take the stand and accept any responsibility for her crime and finally show a little humility and respect for the many people she has harmed over the last 5 years? Or will she continue the mud-slinging we have seen throughout the trial?

The Alexander siblings have hired attorneys to bring forth a wrongful death suit against Jodi Arias - having secured a guilty verdict against Arias will be greatly helpful in their quest to put an end to Arias' shameless profiteering at the expense of their brother Travis.  I was happy to hear they were moving forward with the legal action. They have shown great restraint, faith and they have patiently and silently sat in the courtroom while the rights of Jodi Arias have been closely guarded and their brother's rights seemingly disappeared in the fog of Arias' field of lies. How will Arias play the cards she has been dealt now are anybody's guess. Will she double down, and play the role of the wrongly convicted and misunderstood martyr or will she try to muster up some genuine regret, remorse and sorrow for the life she ended?

What are your thoughts? Will Arias remain defiant - and will her attorneys continue down the path of painting Travis Alexander as the monster? Will they ignore the jury's obvious disbelief in Arias' stories of being abused, battered and treated like a prostitute?  Self-defense has always been a poor choice for Arias' defense in this case.  One look at the injuries Travis Alexander sustained tells you that he was likely ambushed and this killing was pure-rage. Classic overkill and not self defense.  Again, Arias seemingly went for all-or-nothing and pinned her hopes on being able to con the jury with nothing but her words to corroborate her allegations against the man she murdered. She greatly overestimated her acting abilities, her charm and her intelligence. More importantly, she greatly underestimated the common sense of these 12 reasonable citizens who spent more than 4 months of their life hearing the evidence and rendering a verdict.

While our system of justice isn't perfect, I am thankful that in this case it worked.  Far too often, criminals are able to wiggle out of horrific crimes through trial errors, errors made in the collection of evidence, questionable lab procedures etc. etc. etc.  I still cringe when I think of OJ Simpson walking out of that California courtroom a free man.  While he may never be held accountable for his crimes in this lifetime, I truly believe Nicole Brown Simpson and Ron Goldman will receive justice when Simpson meets his maker. Until then, we'll have to settle on a little Vegas-style karma!  Simpson made headlines again this week when he appeared in court to appeal his 2008 conviction.