Susan Atkins – Manson’s little Miss Murderess

Susan Atkins really stepped in it

Fact based reporting by

Rob Roman

 

This is the first article in our Monkey see – Monkey do series.

Warning – Some pics may be disturbing to some people.

 

Of course Susan Atkins (Sexy Sadie) saw Charles Manson act violently and she did … just like him. Then she monkey stepped into a big, steaming pile of wet Monkey poo – She got what Charlie got. She got Life (almost 40 years) in prison. She would be there today if she didn’t get brain cancer and die.

atkins 1

 

Many Manson Aficionados will know this information, but I didn’t know all these details until recently. I thought some people would like to know how it all fits together. That’s what we do at Spotlight On Law. We research things and we bring you all the highlights and put them in one place. We are hoping to shed new light on cases, for people who are not familiar with them. But, even if you know the Manson cases really well, we hope you will still find something interesting in this article.

 

How does a sexy and attractive young lady who sings in the church choir, and had her choir members sing Christmas Carols under her dying mother’s window, turn out to be Charles Manson’s little Miss Murderess? How could she watch with gusto and glee as innocent people were massacred? She was a Mom who would go on to show zero mercy to another young mother, 8 months pregnant, and even tell her so.

 

How can that happen?

 

“Bad chemicals and bad ideas are the Yin and Yang of madness” –  according to the late, great author Kurt Vonnegut Jr.

 

Well “Sexy Sadie” (or Sexy Sadist) had a truckload of bad chemicals and bad ideas inside her when she was doing the old Charlie Manson monkey see – monkey doo. So, young Susan Atkins, only 21 years old, went ahead and stepped in a motherload of wet monkey poo. She went to jail and then prison and never ‘saw the light of day’ again.

 

Susan Atkins aka Susan Atkins Whitehouse aka Sadie Mae Glutz aka “Sexy Sadie”

 

“Susan Denise Atkins (May 7, 1948 – Sep 24, 2009) was a convicted American murderer who was a member of the “Manson family”, led by Charles Manson. Manson and his followers committed a series of nine murders at four locations in California, over a period of five weeks in the summer of 1969. Known within the Manson family as Sadie Mae Glutz or Sexy Sadie, Atkins was convicted for her participation in eight of these killings, including the most notorious, the “Tate/LaBianca” murders.

 

She was sentenced to death, which was subsequently commuted to life in prison. Incarcerated from Oct 1, 1969 until her death – a period exactly one week short of 40 years – Atkins was the longest-incarcerated female inmate in the California penal system, having been denied parole 18 times.” – Wikipedia

step in poop 2

She was a middle class girl who sang in her school glee club and in her church choir. Her mother died of cancer when Susan was 13. “Two weeks before her mother was hospitalized for the final time, Susan arranged for members of the church choir to sing Christmas carols under her bedroom window. After Jeanette Atkins’ death, relatives were asked to help look after Susan and her two brothers.” – Wikipedia

 

Susan moved from home to home and was abandoned by her father. In High School, her grades took a nose dive. At the age of 19, she moved in with friends in 1967, but when the house was raided for drugs and shut down, she became homeless once again. Charlie Manson was one of the people who showed up at parties at that house playing guitar, and he told her he was planning a road trip in a school bus and he asked her to join his “Family”. One of Charlie’s people made her a fake ID using the name Sadie Mae Glutz -1.

American-cult-leader-and-mass-murderer-Charles-Manson

 

Flash forward to October, 1968. Susan is 20 and she gave birth to a boy that Charlie named Zezozose Zadfrack Glutz. The father’s name was Bruce White, and they were all living at Spahn’s movie ranch in the San Fernando Valley of Southern California. Flash forward to the Summer of ’69. The heat is on, as too many hot vehicles and underage runaways are showing up at Spahn’s Ranch and the police are starting to get all too curious. Then, an accident happens that really was the catalyst for all the murders.

 

I really never knew where Spahn’s Movie Ranch was, either. Here’s where:

spahn ranch

 

A family member named Charles “Tex” Watson tried to pull a drug scam on a black man named Bernard “Lotsapapa” Crowe. Crowe threatened retaliation and could identify Tex. Manson took that famous long nosed .22 revolver that was used in the Tate killings – the same one that was found by the little boy in the canyon. Manson shot Crowe and thought he killed him, and he thought Crowe was a Black Panther. Crowe was not a Panther and he was still alive.

long nose 22

 

Manson had a number of people with money that he, in turn. supplied with drugs, connections, “party people” and women. One of these was the owner of Spahn’s movie ranch – “old man Spahn” (George Spahn). Another of these people was Dennis Wilson, the drummer from the Beach Boys. Dennis picked up a couple of the Manson girls in his Ferrari as they were hitchhiking, and he brought them home. Big mistake there, because the very next day, more Manson women were coming to live there. More and more Manson flunkies showed up at Dennis’ house, bringing drugs and providing sex.

 

Then Charles Manson would demand that the “Tab” be paid.

 

He also showed up at Wilson’s home playing guitar, which is why Dennis and Manson hit it off in the first place. Charles Manson is an accomplished guitar player and musician. Words were said about Dennis maybe helping Manson record a record.

 

Take a look at this:

“”Never Learn Not to Love” is a song recorded by the Beach Boys, credited to co-founder Dennis Wilson. It was released as a B-side to their 1968 single “Bluebirds over the Mountain” and subsequently appeared on their 1969 album 20/20. It is a rewrite of “Cease to Exist”, a song written by murder-conspirator Charles Manson.” – Wikipedia

 

Yes, Charlie – A song called “Cease to Exist” is a little rough for the entertainment biz, no?

manson_mugs
Charlie, Leslie, Patty, and Suzie

 

Flash forward half a year later – Manson invited Dennis and his record producer friends to a party at Spahn’s Movie Ranch. They never showed, and Manson was piping hot about that.

Manson shows up at a Beach Boys recording session. He wants to know when the f*ck he’s going to get his album. Now the record has become an entire album that Manson is demanding. Dennis and the boys try to pacify Charlie.

Recording producer Terry Melcher, son of actress Doris Day, tells Manson to get the f*ck out of his recording studio session. Manson gets super pissed. He had been at Melcher’s home for a few parties with all those rich Hollywood “big wigs” at 10050 Cielo Drive in Benedict Canyon, north of Beverly Hills, Los Angeles, California.

images
from left – Charles Manson, Dennis Wilson, Brian Wilson

Manson knows that lots of rich “jerks” were hanging out at 10050 Cielo Drive. Manson went there one day to talk to Terry Melcher. Some guy answered the door and told the scraggly bum that knocked on the door to go look elsewhere. Terry Melcher had moved out, and the place was leased to Roman Polanski, a movie producer / director and his pregnant wife, actress Sharon Tate.

 

All these people were young people, in their twenties or early thirties.

10050 cielo drive
The home at 10050 Cielo Drive – Scene of the Tate Murders

 

10050 Cielo Drive was bought by the rock group “9 Inch Nails” and used as a recording studio before it was torn down.

 

A PHD and music teacher and friend of Manson family members, who also purportedly manufactured synthetic mescaline was a man by the name of Gary Hinman. This was another of a long list of people Manson thought “owed” him for “services rendered”. Like he did with Dennis Wilson and old man Spahn, Manson supplied Hinman with party friends, drugs, and women. Manson heard rumors that Gary Hinman had just come into a large sum of money. Now, Manson needed money and he demanded that Hinman’s “tab” be paid immediately.

 

At this stage, Manson needed money, since the police were starting to get very curious about what the hell was going on at this Spahn’s Ranch, and Charlie wanted to move the Family “to the desert”. Also, people were starting to leave the family and Charlie needed a new way to make his followers fear and/or respect him, as he was losing confidence in his magnetism and charm and he was also starting to get paranoid.

 

Charlie Manson sent Bobby Beausoleil, Mary Brunner, and Susan Atkins to Hinman’s home on July 25, 1969 to collect his “tab”.

Murderer Bobby Beasoleil

 

gary hinman
Music teacher Gary Hinman

 

Now Bobby Beausoleil was a very well liked and valuable member of the Manson family. He was high up there in the brains department. He was also a great musician and Leslie Van Houten’s Lover, and they were crazy about each other. Long story short, the Manson crew demanded big money from Hinman– Gary says no, he doesn’t have any. They kind of hold him prisoner in his own home. Manson shows up and nearly cuts Gary’s ear off with a sword and then leaves, giving orders to take care of Hinman. Charlie demands that his “orders” be followed to the letter.

 

Manson’s 3 person crew holds Gary Hinman for two days, forcing him to sign over the titles to his cars. Bobby Beausoleil then stabs Hinman to death. This is where Susan Atkins has big problems with the parole board later on because she would never own up to her part in this killing, saying she wasn’t there, she was there but didn’t participate, she was there but didn’t know what was going on, blah blah blah. Well, after being at least an accessory in at least 8 murders, they were never going to let her out of prison anyways.

 

Bobby put a handprint paw and writings on the wall in Hinman’s blood to try and place blame on the black panthers. They take whatever they can. Off they go.

 

Now, Charlie Manson is upset because of the “messy” killing. He needs his people to now be proficient killers, especially the ladies, because no one will suspect females. Bobby gets caught asleep in one of Hinman’s cars wearing the bloody clothes from the killing. Good thing they didn’t have DNA testing back then.

 

On August 7th 1969, Bobby’s in jail and Manson is worried he might squeal. He also needs Bobby to help run the Family.

st-one
Actress Sharon Tate

 

This all really helps to explain:

 

  • Why the girls participated in the Tate LaBianca murders
  • Why Susan Atkins was a major player
  • Why the “Pig”, “Political Piggy”, “Healter Skelter (sic)” and other writings in blood were left on the walls, the Tate front door, and the LaBianca refrigerator.
  • Why the murders needed to be particularly gruesome.
  • The motive behind the killings – to free Bobby Beausoleil from suspicion in the Hinman murder and to get him released from jail.
  • Why Leslie Van Houten felt so obligated to participate in the murders – Because it was all being done to help free Bobby, and because she felt she owed Charlie.

 

10050 cielo drive 2labianca-fridge

It was also a way for Manson to exert power over the family. It’s a classic violent criminal organization move. You involve your underlings in felonies such as murder, which binds them to the group, and you have something to pin on them and extort them with, should they leave.

 

bobby beausoleil 2
Bobby Beausoleil

 

My personal theory is that Charlie Manson also thought he was such a gifted control freak who could control anyone to do anything – and he wanted to prove it by turning flower children into murderers. He also always wanted revenge against the upper class his entire life for being made a prisoner and an outcast of society.

Therefore, a caper is needed that will look like the Hinman murder. Something big was needed to get the police super involved so they will hopefully drop everything they were looking at related to the Family and go investigate this new frightening series of crimes.

 

10050 cielo drive 3
Far Side of the Polanski / Tate Mansion

 

Hopefully, they would let Bobby out of jail and no longer see him as a suspect. Hopefully, the police will stop nosing around the Spahn Ranch and will stop taking a closer look at the Manson Family.

 

Manson demands a spectacular crime – far from the Manson clans normal stomping grounds, and hey, why not some really rich folks, because they deserve it?

 

tate murders

So just two days after Bobby Beausoleil’s arrest, another Manson crew sets out to follow his orders to kill. Manson sends them to what he thought was Terry Melcher’s home at 10050 Cielo Drive.

 

Tex Watson, Susan Atkins, Linda Kasabian, and Patricia Krenwinkel were sent to murder whoever was there, make it look horrific, and leave signs on the walls to look like the Hinman murder. They wanted to point the finger at black suspects.

 

317d46d912cd1e87965e9062c7dab547
The actual Manson Murder Car
10050CieloDriveAugust91969TateLaBian[23]
A replica of the Manson Family’s Ford Fairlane Murder Car

That rope from the crime scene was brought by the Manson Family crew. Their original plan included hanging everyone from the rafters, removing the vicitim’s eyeballs and smashing them on the floor, or hanging and dismembering them on the front porch. The crew was also instructed to go to the surrounding homes and do the same. Fortunately, this crew was too spooked and paranoid to complete their task, or they ran out of time and it was already starting to get light out, or both.

 

Linda Kasabian was new to the clan and not really a fully drug-indoctrinated member yet. Charlie chose Linda, another young mother, to test her, and also because she was one of the few with a real driver’s license. Linda Kasabian looked very straight and innocent, and she was also in the car for the LaBianca Murders. She would later run away from the Manson family, and go home to her family in New England. She later returned to LA to turn state’s evidence against the Family.

 

before the murders
The Living room before the Tate murders

 

Linda Kasabian stayed outside the Polanski / Tate Mansion as a “lookout” and did not have the stomach to participate in the murders.

 

Linda Kasabian later ruined things for Susan Atkins.

 

At first, authorities could not find Linda and she did not come forward. The state was forced to rely on the testimony of Susan Atkins against the other family members in order to convict Manson, Tex Watson, Pat Krenwinkel, And Leslie Van Houten.

after the murders
The living room after the Tate murders

 

Charlie Manson needed to see Sadie Mae personally in order to try and use his mind control to stop Susan Atkins from testifying against him and the Family. He accomplished this by having his attorney demand that he and his client be allowed to talk to Susan Atkins, since she was a state witness. This was their right.

 

After that meeting, Susan Atkins tried to back out of a deal that could have seen her released from prison decades earlier.

 

Also, Vincent Bugliosi, the prosecutor, thought Susan Atkins was a risky, unreliable, flake of a witness, with her constantly changing stories and her refusal to take any kind of responsibility for any part in the murders. He started looking for a more reliable witness, which is how Linda Kasabian became the state’s chief witness. When finally contacted, Linda Kasabian agreed to return to Los Angeles to testify.

 

Susan Atkins would get no deal.

 

One more thing:

Months and months prior to the murders, one of the “jobs” of Manson’s Family members, besides panhandling, dumpster diving,  drug dealing, prostitution and stealing cars, was to dress in dark clothes and go at night to homes in the richer areas of LA.

Early in the morning, while the occupants were sleeping inside, these Manson crews, 4 or 5 of them together, would go “creepy crawling” through the homes.

 

Leslie-Van-Houten-Patricia-Krenwinkel-and-Susan-Atkins
Guess who is who. They shaved their heads in protest and something else, too.

 

This meant they would take off their shoes and go into the house very quietly to sneak around and take whatever they could. They became very adept at this game, even going into the very bedrooms of the homeowners as they slept to steal their stuff. They had weapons on them just in case someone woke up or heard them. So this was the precursor, the skill sets used in the later murders.

You can say that the two crews Manson selected were the All Stars of these “creepy crawler” escapades. If not for this “practice”, they may never have had the nerve to be ‘successful’ at 10050 Cielo Drive. Even so, Tex Watson, shot 18 year-old Steven Parent four times in his car outside the home, but this noise failed to alert the others inside.

 

Like young Ron Goldman (25) in the OJ murders, Steven Parent (18) was in “the wrong place at the wrong time”.

 

Look at this from Wikipedia:

“In July 1969, Parent picked up William Garretson, who was hitchhiking in Beverly Hills. Garretson was a caretaker at 10050 Cielo Drive in Benedict Canyon, which, at the time, was being rented to director Roman Polanski, and his wife, actress Sharon Tate. After Parent gave Garretson a ride back to the estate, the young caretaker thanked him and invited Parent to stop by anytime he was in the area.

 

5-Tate-Victims-AP-573x226

 

Victims: Voytec Frykowski, Sharon Tate, Steven Parent, Jay Sebring, and Abigail Folger

 

 

On August 8, 1969, after working at both of his jobs, Parent drove to Benedict Canyon and arrived at 10050 Cielo Drive at about 11:45 p.m. He had hoped to sell a Sony AM-FM Digimatic clock radio to Garretson. He demonstrated the clock radio for Garretson, but the caretaker did not want to buy it. Parent then placed a telephone call to Jerrold Friedman, a friend for whom he was going to build a stereo, and hung around long enough to drink the can of beer Garretson gave him. At around midnight, Steven Parent said goodbye to Garretson and left the guesthouse.

Unbeknown to Parent, Garretson, or any occupants of the main house, members of the Manson family were entering the property at that moment, with the intentions of killing the residents. Parent got into his father’s 1966 white AMC Rambler and backed up into the split rail fence. He drove down the parking area and stopped to push the button that operated the electronic gate. As Parent rolled down his window, he was met by a dark figure who shouted, “Halt!”

The figure was Manson “family” member Charles “Tex” Watson with a 22 revolver in one hand and a buck knife in the other. As Watson leveled a 22-caliber revolver at Parent, the frightened youth begged Watson, “Please don’t hurt me. I won’t say anything.” Parent raised his arm to protect his face as Watson swung the knife at him, giving him a defensive slash wound on the palm of his hand (severing tendons and tearing the boy’s watch off his wrist).

Watson then shot Parent four times in rapid succession, hitting him in the face, chest, and abdomen. Watson then ordered Manson Family associates Linda Kasabian, Susan Atkins, and Patricia Krenwinkel to help push the car further up the driveway. After traversing the front lawn and having Kasabian search for an open window of the main house, Watson cut the screen of a window. Watson told Kasabian to keep watch down by the gate; she walked over to Steven Parent’s Rambler and waited. He then removed the screen, entered through the window, and let Atkins and Krenwinkel in through the front door.

On the morning of August 9, 1969, the bodies of Steven Parent, Sharon Tate, Jay Sebring, Abigail Folger and Wojciech Frykowski were discovered by the Polanski housekeeper, Winifred Chapman, when she arrived for work. The only survivor, Garretson, had escaped detection and told authorities he had heard nothing from his cottage. He said otherwise in an interview 30 years later.

As Parent was carrying no identification when his body was found, for a short time he was known to authorities only as “John Doe 85”. The body was identified later that afternoon by the Parent family’s parish priest, who went to the coroner’s office after Parent’s family had informed him that he was missing.” – Wikipedia

“Parent’s father, Wilfred, was highly critical of the way his son’s death was treated. He stated that he was told by telephone of the murder by a Los Angeles Police Department detective. He also criticized the manner in which the media focused on the more famous victims while showing little interest in his son.

In recent years, Janet Parent, Steven’s sister, began attending the killers’ parole hearings. She has also publicly spoken out against Susan Atkins’ and Charles “Tex” Watson’s requests for parole.

William Garretson, the young caretaker at Cielo Drive whom Parent had visited before being murdered, indicated in a television program broadcast in July 1999 on E!, that he had, in fact, seen and heard a portion of the Tate murders from his location in the property’s guest house.

– Wikipedia

 

One thing many people don’t realize is that the “All Stars” or top people in Manson’s Family were not idiotic and robotic “dirtbags” or stooges. Some of these were honor roll students, attractive, and from very good upper-middle class families. Susan Atkins was a glee club and choir member, as I stated earlier.

Leslie Van Houten was beautiful and super-intelligent cheerleader and homecoming queen at her High School.  Bobby Beausoleil was attractive and highly intelligent and an accomplished musician who went on to create critically acclaimed music from behind prison walls.

Charles “Tex” Watson, before he destroyed his mind with drugs, was a star athlete and football player is High School and very popular. He is one of the most unlikely supremely vicious and super violent murderers of all time. Tex is now a charismatic evangelist broadcasting on the web, but from prison.

 

atkins a
Tex Watson, then and now

 

Now, remembering that this article is about Susan Atkins, another thing Susan Atkins never got straight at her many parole hearings was the level of her participation in the Tate and LaBianca murders. It really didn’t matter, because she was there and she participated in the felonies, making her guilty of the felony murders regardless of her level of involvement.

Tex Watson and Leslie Van Houten

She was convicted of the Hinman murder, the Tate and Labianca murders just due to her being “on the scene”. The parole board was supposedly looking for the truth from her, however. Susan said yes she was the one who stabbed Sharon Tate, and no, she only stabbed her a few times and Tex did the rest, and no, she wasn’t sure, and no, she only held Sharon Tate but did not stab her. It was never made clear from Susan exactly what actions Susan actually did. Even so, you can bet that she relished and enjoyed the murders and the excitement factor immensely, and she played a big part in the Hinman murder as well. None of that gore stopped her from being in the car for the LaBianca murders the very next night, either.

 

The Tate murders did not go as planned. It became a bit of a cluster f*ck, as they say. Tex broke a knife and Jay Sebring tried to fight back. He started to defend himself from the stabbings, so Tex shot him.

frykowski autopsy
Wojciech Frykowski Autopsy

 

Wojciech Frykowski started fighting back against Susan Atkins. He was winning. Tex had to come to her aid. Then both Abigail Folger and Wojciech Frykowski took off and ran for their lives out different doors, with Patricia Krenwinkel chasing after Abigail out the back, and Tex chasing after Wojciech out the front door, leaving Susan Atkins guarding Sharon Tate, who was too big with her pregnancy to run.

Susan Atkins said that when they first entered the home, Frykowski was asleep on the couch. Jay Sebring and Sharon were talking in her bedroom and Sebring was possibly smoking pot. Susan passed by an open bedroom and spotted Abigail Folger reading a book. Susan smiled and waved and Abigail waved back. As Susan and Patricia made their way to the back of the home, Sharon and Jay were chatting in the master bedroom.

jpbook2-articleLarge

“Just prior to leaving the residence, Atkins wrote “PIG” on the front door in Sharon Tate’s blood.” – Wikipedia

The LaBianca Murders were also planned to be even more than it ended up to be. They were supposed to split into two groups and create at least two separate murder scenes. Charlie Manson at first stopped by a Convent. He got out and contemplated killing some nuns inside. Anyways, he mooned the nuns, got back in the car, and they left. Charlie was the one who went alone into the home of Leno and Rosemary LaBianca, supermarket chain and dress boutique owners who had recently returned from an all day boating trip with their daughter and her boyfriend. Charlie wanted to show them how to do the job cleanly, without scaring the victims and without them being able to run away.

LaBianca Murders

The LaBianca residence was selected because Charlie knew the area. He had partied with their neighbor and the house was sort of isolated and up on a hill.

3301-Waverly

Charlie threatened the LaBiancas, but he was very polite about it. He made them sit on the couch as he tied their hands and feet. He took their purse and wallet. Then Charlie left with other Family members, including Susan Atkins and Linda Kasabian. This left Tex, Van Houten, and Krenwinkel to complete the murders, “leave something witchy” on the walls, and find their own way back to Spahn’s Movie ranch.

Charlie Manson was possibly enjoying himself and this second crew went to the ocean rather than committing another set of murders. They left Leno’s wallet in a gas station men’s room in the “black side of town”, hoping it would throw the police onto the trail of the Black Panthers. The wallet was never recovered.

labianca family
Leno and Rosemary LaBianca

 

Susan Atkins, aka Sadie Mae Glutz was also the major reason Manson and his Family were finally caught,

because Susan could not keep her big mouth shut. When the family members were arrested for completely other reasons (runaway minors at Spahn ranch and car thefts), they were held for a few weeks.

Susan Atkins, maybe because she was bored and also because she was trying to protect herself in jail, bragged to another inmate that she was one of the murderers at the Polanski / Tate residence. Susan then told this inmate some very horrific details.

 

la bianca
The LaBianca devestation

Susan really stepped in a big, steaming pile of wet monkey poo there, because this fellow cell mate now had some important info she could use to help her get out of her own personal jam. Of course, her fellow inmate told the authorities. Now they had confirmation that the Manson clan was indeed behind the Tate LaBianca murders.

ros4
Leslie’s handiwork on Rosemary LaBianca

 

So,

1) Susan Atkins was the one who blew the lid off the whole thing

2) Patricia Krenwinkel and Tex Watson participated in both murder operations. Krenwinkel had no problem murdering two females (Abigail Folger and Rosemary LaBianca). As for parole, neither was ever going to be released – and never should be.

3) Susan Atkins also participated in both murder operations and the Hinman murder. She was never going to leave prison.

4) The only one I believe should have been shown some mercy and given parole long ago was Leslie Van Houten.

She testified that she did stab Rosemary LaBianca, but only superficially in the back of the thighs and her butt. This bears out in the evidence. Leslie said at first she could not participate and tried not to get involved. She was finally forced to participate by Tex Watson, as Manson demanded everyone have a hand in the killings. Van Houten was also doing this for her love, Bobby Beausoleil, and she felt she owed Manson.

5) Lynette “Squeaky” Fromme, another Manson Family member felt guilty for not having participated and not being jailed in the murders. She felt compelled to try and assassinate President Gerald Ford in order to “help” the Family. She did her sentence and is now back out in the world.

Bobby Beasoleil had been cheating on Leslie Van Houten all along with a 17 year-old.

After all, it was the “Summer of Love”.

 

8d9a76794ac0f477c6d98be7ecc7ed45
ALL MANSON FAMILY “KILLS

(I’m pretty sure that is NOT Gary Hinman, but is actually Bobby Beausoleil, Gary’s murderer)

 

Susan Atkins was the longest serving female in the California prison system, due to her young age when she began her sentence. She became a born-again Christian and was a model prisoner, but none of that helped her to gain her freedom.

 

All the Manson people, including Manson, were sentenced to Death, but all the sentences were commuted to life due to California overturning its Death Penalty statute in the early 1970’s. Many people felt they should have been lucky just to have life, never mind being freed from prison.

Family members of the victims made sure to be at the parole hearings to see that none of them were ever released. Sharon Tate’s mother was an extreme advocate for no parole. Rosemary LaBianca’s daughter, however, lobbied hard for Tex Watson to be released, maybe because he was “cute”. – Incredible.

 

Tex had also become a born again Christian, and a pastor in prison who wrote Christian books. He has a wife and kids due to conjugal visits.

 

Fromme-Hi-Res
The cute girl next door? ….. or ….
fromme
“Squeaky” Fromme

 

Of course Tex Watson, regardless of what he has become, relished and enjoyed the brutal killings and most of the deep, penetrating stabs to the victims, done with a bayonet, were Tex’s handiwork.

 

What more to say about Susan Atkins aka Sexy Sadie aka Sadie Mae Glutz? She contracted brain cancer and was denied a humanitarian release so she could die in peace. She died reciting the 23rd Psalm.

 

Many women imprisoned with Susan Atkins were grateful for her selfless giving, her counsel and her prayers. Susan did a lot of good for many inmates. People in their twenties or younger should not have to pay with the rest of their lives for even really awful mistakes, in my opinion.

 

sharon-tate-1-320
Sharon Tate

 

Here was the state of California saying that Charlie was responsible for all these heinous murders because of his incredible control over the hearts and minds of these young kids. At the same time, the state also wants to put the full responsibility onto these very same kids Charlie had such power over. I don’t think they can have it both ways, …. but they do. Krenwinkel, Watson, Beausoleil, Manson, Atkins, and Van Houten were certainly made an example of.

 

article-0-205D131400000578-475_634x437

 

Manson and his murdering family probably would have been caught even if Susan Atkins did keep her mouth shut. She did it, she bragged about out and she paid dearly for her actions. She had that queezy feel and the sickly smell of that wet monkey poo stuck between her toes for nearly the next 4 decades.

 

10050 cielo dfive today
10050 Cielo Drive today

 

Like Jodi Arias, Susan Atkins didn’t respect human life and they both made a series of bad and fateful decisions. These bad choices caused them both to lose their freedom, earning them both a life sentence in prison.

 

All rights reserved

Comments from all viewpoints are welcome. 

You can also comment on this FB page:

facebookhttps://www.facebook.com/pages/Spotlight-On-Law/189870931203328

spotlight trademark

spotlightonlaw2

SpotLightOnLaw2  <—– (Click on Link)

Famous Murder Cases & Wrongful Convictions?

 

life or death 7

Jodi Arias Life or Death?  <—— (Click on Link)

Some posts on Jodi Arias, Current Murder Cases and Trials, & Matters of Life and Death

 

 

 

zen blog

Zen Meditation Zone  <——- (Click on Link)

Introduction to Buddhism and Zen meditation plus advanced material

 

 

 

 

wrongly convicted

Wrongfully Convicted? Both Sides of the Story  <- (Click on Link)

Famous and not-so-famous cases questioned by some people

This sleuth group investigates convictions to see of they may have been in error

 

 

net friends cover 2

New Net Friends with Benefits <— (Click on Link)

It’s not about Killers, Politicians or Movie Stars. It’s an International facebook page about Y-O-U and your New Net Friends from all over the Globe  🙂

Follow on Twitter:

twitter 2https://twitter.com/TingMingJie

american flag

 

Advertisements

“Tough Love” – Saving Private Jodi

Fact-based reporting by

Amanda Chen & Rob Roman

Spotlight On Law – The Jodi Arias Murder Trial, the OTHER side of the story.

We offer a variety of interesting and well crafted articles on the Jodi Arias case and others:  https://spotlightonlaw.wordpress.com/archives/

Perhaps, we could all learn a lesson from sole Life juror #17 and from disgruntled former Jodi supporters.

First, a little about Juror #17.

Before that, I just wanted to note that Christine Beswick and her pal, “Juan’s Tie” just wrote a really reckless and fact-less article about accounts leading from Marie De La Rosa to SJ at JAII. Christine’s articles have improved a lot in the past months, but I’m afraid she’s reverted to making it all up again.

Christine Beswick wants Jodi Arias executed.
Christine Beswick wants Jodi Arias executed.

I should remind her that if there is a secret source, such as Juan’s Tie, there still needs to be details, of which there are almost none. It’s gossip only, and no facts to back it up whatsoever, We will get back to that later. Really a big disappointment. I was also surprised to learn that prosecution supporters in the know do not trust either Christine Beswick or Juan’s Tie, and for good reason.

Now we are a not for profit blog, so we are basically untouchable no matter what we do. Nevertheless, we are careful about the facts and what we say because we have personal ethics. Not true with the Examiner.com. This is a for-profit site and Christine Beswick is responsible for what she reports. She is subject to lawsuits for her journalistic lapses. She better watch out when she makes it all up, or she depends on bad sources. I suggest a retraction and apologies, but that’s just me :).

OK, we’re a little late on this one, but they can investigate the jurors until the end of time, and people can be sore losers all they want, cause they didn’t secure the Death Penalty for little Honey Boo Boo.

Juror #17 deliberated and tried to convince the other jurors to do the right thing, but the 11 hold-outs refused to budge. The 11 hold-outs are now under investigation for possible coercion charges in attempting to secure a misguided Justice4Travis. Juror #17 is also under investigation.

Is this Chris Hughes?
Is this Chris Hughes during deliberations?

None of this will go anywhere, however. We maintain, as we have all along, that Life is a better outcome for everyone involved including the victim’s family. They will come to appreciate this in due time, I do believe.

I was being facetious about the 11 hold-outs, but there has been a lot of flack about Juror #17, and whether she’s a plant, a stealth juror, or had any kind of agenda. Let me make it easy for you – She didn’t. Just because the other 11 jurors and many people who were praying for state sponsored murder didn’t get the result they wanted, this in no way implies that somebody did something wrong.

This was not a guilt verdict, this was a life or death verdict. That’s a different story, a very different story. The jurors were not trying hard to get a unanimous guilt verdict. They were not deciding between the subtleties of 1st degree and 2nd degree murder, or the complicated differences between manslaughter and acquittal. They were deciding between A) Life or B) Death. There are no subtle differences there.

So if juror #17 made up her mind fairly early in the deliberation process, why is that unusual? Juror #17 was free to make her own personal, moral choice and she was free to hold onto that choice without having to explain it to anyone. People who do not understand that have something to learn. Those are the rules in Arizona.

I was under the impression that jurors were supposed to weigh the single aggravator of cruelty against any of the 9 enumerated mitigators plus any other mitigators a juror could come up with. Demonstrators Protest Against AZ Sheriff Arpaio During His Visit To CAI thought the jurors were supposed to simply see if the mitigators outweighed the aggravator. I was mistaken. Apparently the Arizona jury instructions imply that individual jurors are supposed to weigh the single aggravator and all that entails (the details of the crime) against any possible mitigators they found to be more true than not true.

But even that explanation is not really accurate. If you read the Arizona jury instructions very closely, you will see that what the instructions really say is you can choose Life or Death, for any reason or non-reason you want.

So, if you want to blame anyone for there not being a unanimous sentence of Death, feel free to blame the State of Arizona. They wrote the juror instructions which were actually intended to help increase the probability of achieving a arizona maricopaDeath sentence, just as many strange Arizona statutes pertaining to the DP are designed specifically to facilitate death sentences.

I suppose that’s a great thing when the defendant is a serial killer or a serial child rapist/torturer/murderer who was caught red-handed. But, when it’s much more iffy than that, these statutes and instructions become downright frightening.

The juror instructions actually say that you can decide whatever you want for any reason you want, so there is zero legal recourse for juror #17 (or the 11 hold-outs).

Especially if you are a Justice4Travis supporter, please please please listen to this video. hang in there and watch the whole thing. Don’t say “I’m not interested and I don’t want to hear anything that Willmott has to say”. You really need to see this edited video to better understand why there was absolutely nothing wrong with juror #17’s decision.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=86GP5mIxE_Q

 

This will also show you why, if Nurmi had Jennifer Willmott do at least one of the closing arguments, that it’s a near certainty there would have been more than one Life juror at the end of deliberations.

Simon Hill or Simon Johansson
Simon Hill or Simon Johansson

Naturally, as soon as news of the single Life juror surfaced, her name and a map to her home were all over Twitter in minutes. Simon Johannson (SJ) at JodiAriasIsInnocent.com released the full names of the 11 Death jurors. The deathies wanted to have a unanimous vote so they could get Justice4Travis. Some people who wanted the jurors to vote for Death for Jodi Arias issued death threats against juror #17.

Tanisha Sorenson, a younger sister of homicide victim Travis Alexander, showed her true feelings outside the court house when she made this quote:

Harold Sorenson escorts his wife, Tanisha out of the courthouse after the penalty mistrial.
Harold Sorenson escorts his wife, Tanisha out of the courthouse after the penalty mistrial.
Arias burns in Hell!" -Tanisha Sorenson March, 5, 2015
“The real justice will be in the afterlife when Jodi Arias burns in hell!” -Tanisha Sorenson March, 5, 2015

 

Someone in social media actually said this:

– “Juror # 17 ‘brought this internet wrath on herself'”.

Are you sure about that?

I found it highly amusing when the 11 jurors were being interviewed on the day of the 2nd penalty phase mistrial, they talked about how juror #17 didn’t deliberate, while at the same time describing exactly how juror #17 DID deliberate. Investigate ’till the cows come home, there’s nothing to be found.

jury 9Life is a wonderful choice. It’s almost always a good choice and rarely a bad choice. If McVeigh were still alive and holed up in a Super-Max somewhere, that would suit me just fine. First of all, most reasonable non-Jodi supporters, who know the facts of the case well, did NOT want a death sentence for Jodi Arias.

Deathies willl find no solace, but they need to hear this important fact:

The defense team doubled down on their strategy of attacking the victim and adding insult to injury. This was cited by jurors as one main reason why they selected the Death Penalty. Jodi Arias did Not complete her testimony. She did not offer up ANY personal mitigation witnesses, She did NOT show remorse (that doesn’t mean she has no remorse, just that she didn’t show it), She refused to allocute.

In short, Jodi Arias remained true to her word that if she ‘hurt Travis, she would beg for the Death penalty’. Jodi Arias offered up the Death penalty on a silver platter to the prosecution and their supporters. Still the jurors could not come back with a unanimous decision for Death. Too late now, friend. Case closed.

So, enough with all the hot air about how she should have gotten the Death penalty. This tells me that Life was the correct sentence for this particular case.

My personal theory, both at the time of the original penalty phase of the trial and at this 2nd penalty retrial, is that Juan Martinez took his foot off the gas in both closings. I believe he did this because he secretly personally didn’t want Jodi Arias to get the death penalty. There’s no question in my mind that a Death Penalty would have been reversed and remanded in this case.

perryville prison 2Hey listen, Perryville Prison is a barren blast furnace with just about zero mercy. It’s a living hell. It’s not like Life in prison is some kind of big break or special treat for Jodi Arias. You’ll see.

 

perryville prison

Note: Please, do not be afraid of videos. Youtube Videos from SpotlightOnLaw cannot harm your computer or device. Youtube Videos from SpotLightOnLaw are usually clips or edited versions from other listed sources and they do not profit anyone if you click on them.

Youtube videos from SpotlightOnLaw are very integral to the article and greatly enhance the understanding of the subject matter. Please take the time to watch the video. Here’s a clip from Saving Private Ryan. You will understand this section much better if you view the video.

Saving Private Ryan – “Earn it!”

So what next in this Jodi Arias case Grand Fiasco?

We have said a lot of things about other people and principles surrounding this case. Now it’s time to say something about Jodi Ann Arias. Jodi Arias’ support doesn’t come from SJ or Jade or Pandora or Ben, no matter how much they may believe that. saving ryan 2They are just bizarre people with no real accountability or values.

Jodi Arias’ support actually comes from and will continue to come from reasonable, fair-minded people who understand the prosecution side of the case and the intense pain of the Alexander family, yet still believe the state and media tried to run Jodi Arias down like a freight train. That simply cannot be allowed to stand. Guilty or Innocent or anywhere in between, it  doesn’t much matter at this point.

These are the people who will rise up to support Jodi in prison and see that she finally gets the fair trial that every citizen is guaranteed by the United States Constitution.

saving ryan 1

But they will want something in return, and it’s not a Jodi band, a Jodi chain, a signed painting, a blog byline, a seat on Jason’s Board or a seat in SJ’s secret war room. They will want honesty, facts, and humanity from Jodi Arias. The will want a person who knows how to earn her support. I’m not giving my support for free, and neither should anyone else.

I’m not going to listen to Jodi Arias or do what she says. I’m not going to answer to her pals or follow her commands – ever. Why should I or anyone follow her advice? Look where she has ended up. Life in an Arizona prison? Who in their right mind would follow her advice? LOL.

If Jodi Arias wants any help from me whatever, she had better learn how to EARN it.

Why are you saying this, Rob? (My God, I think I just pulled a Martinez).
In Saving Private Ryan, a small group of soldiers volunteers to go onto the European battlefield to find Private Ryan and return him safely to the USA. Ryan is a Private, the introductory and lowest rank of the U.S. Army.

Ryan is nobody special, but circumsances have made him special. His other 3 brothers have all been killed in combat on various battlefields in WWII. The Army decides it’s a mater of Justice (and PR value), that Ryan is returned home safely.

A group of volunteers under Captain John Miller (Tom Hanks) set out from the beaches of Normandy, through France towards Germany to find and save Private James Ryan (Matt Damon). Saving-Private-Ryan-585x366Along the way, many in the group are wounded or killed, trying to save this one soldier of lowest rank.

When the group finally catches up to Ryan, it’s not really about him anymore. The group of volunteer soldiers have formed a common bond. They have fought with and for each other, and they suffered setbacks and losses together. Their mission brought them closely together and bonded them, but it was now way more than Private Ryan or their mission holding them together.

Private Ryan feels the same way about the men he had been fighting with, and rather than escape in security and safety he fights to protect his new war “brothers”, including the team sent to rescue him. Captain Miller is fatally wounded in that final battle just before completing their mission to save Ryan. Captain Miller grabs Private Ryan and with his dying breath tells Ryan to “Earn it!”.

Here in the same way, volunteers supporting and helping Jodi have taken a lot of flack in her name. They’ve been fired at, sniped at, bombed, banished, attacked and pelted relentlessly.

curious georgeGeorge Barwood had his own daughter harassed at her college. He has been insulted, attacked, pilloried and ridiculed mercilessly, all for trying to save a life.

Jason Weber, another “Jodite”, had his Facebook page, like many, shut down due to false claims of “porn”. His Occupy FB site was just attacked non-stop. His mugshot and DUI convictions were posted in an attempt to humiliate him. He was insulted, harassed and bombarded by a succession of crusading “Travesites”.

Lisa Schilling was made out to be some kind of modern day Ma Barker, willing to run roughshod over common decency and break each and every law and defraud everyone because all she cares about is lies and making money.

LIsa Schilling from Kentucky
Lisa Schilling from Kentucky

She was so villified, that people in a FB group yesterday refused to allow her to even comment in her own defense.

Nothing could be further from the truth, but some Facebook and twitter people have been told these lies about Lisa so many times, they refuse to even be in the same group with her. It’s really crazy, trust me.

Pascal Van Daele was accused of being of course, a foreigner, probably up to no good, and a crook only out to get people’s money.

Sandra Webber got attacked, but she would turn around and hit them back twice as hard, making her by far the most hated of the bunch. How dare she not just sit there and take it? How dare she have the nerve to hit back, hard?

Notice how all these people are using their real names and we all know or can easily find out where they live. And Jodi supporters are outnumbered anywhere from 95% to 99%. That means out of every 100 people, there is one Jodi supporter. But somehow, we are the big threat to them? Yeah, right.

Name one prominent Prosecution supporter who uses their real name? Almost none of them. Why would that be when they are supposedly in the right and they outnumber Jodi supporters 100 to 1?

Anyways, of all these Jodi supporters above, the worst attacks didn’t come from a few isolated and crazed prosecution supporters. The worst attacks came from other Jodi supporters, specifically SJ the criminal exiled foreigner and his band of useless idiots at JAII. They attacked the reputations of these people.

prominent Jodi supporters get ridiculed
prominent Jodi supporters get ridiculed

George Barwood is a gentleman from England with a Cambridge education who supports Jodi Arias. Say what you want about George, most people on all sides of this issue like him. I gave him a hard time too, myself. He is a very humane, polite, and responsible person who put a lot of his own time and money into helping Jodi Arias’ case.

George saw very early that SJ was a really bad character reference for Jodi Arias. Here’s an example of just this: What was SJ doing today? Answer: He was commenting on a Facebook page called “F*ck the Travitard Hypocrites”. That will gain lots of new supporters ans help Jodi Arias, right?

George tried early on to get Jodi Arias and her family to disassociate from SJ and JAII. He saw that what SJ was saying and doing was chasing away current and potential supporters for Arias.

It was very easy for SJ and pals to convince Jodi that George and Jason, two people who had never been about the money, were now suddenly all about the money. But people who know, always knew there was never much money to even begin talking about it. SJ, the person convincing Jodi Arias that Jason and George were out to scam for money, was the only one who had ever scammed people. He’s been run out of the UK for scamming people. So what did George get for his trouble? A letter from Jodi Arias basically telling him to f*ck off and basically calling him an asshat. In spite of this, George Barwood is still hard at work in Jodi’s corner.

Jason Weber has a great deal of experience as a Web designer. An Ivy league graduate, Jason helps companies and individuals set up their own web sites. Jason owns his own multiple servers , and runs a number of websites.

saving 5

This case just happened to coincide with a major interest of Jason’s, which is wrongful convictions, aggressive and media driven prosecutions, and his abhorrence of the Death Penalty. Jason has plenty of ways of making money without any help from Jodi Arias.

To be fair and to give equal time, I wanted to include this criticism of Jason Weber and Elizabeth Schilling and their website Justice4JodiArias.com. This criticism is from a woman I will call “DC Ritz”.

“I think it’s a sophomoric attempt, at best. The website is super slow and most of the information is bad and/or spun with extra rinse.

Either Elizabeth (Lisa Schilling) has been around JW (Jason Weber) too long, or JW is doing the writing. I think it will fail like most of JW’s other ventures.

His ‘style’ is unprofessional and reeks of bias. IMO”
“And oh, I also find their tweets to be even more damaging to their “cause”. In fact, I believe they sent out the 60K of child porn tweet yet again just last week. (A tweet stating that 60,000 pieces of child porn was found on Travis Alexander’s computer) They will never garner donations with their existing style. Again, IMO.”

– DC Ritz March 19, 2015.

Jason got involved in this case mostly through blogging, and he also spent a lot of his own time and money helping on the case. He wanted to get an American based web site going for Jodi Arias which had a positive support framework, instead of the very negative, and combative platform the fugitive foreigner, SJ from Sweden set up.

Jason and Lisa Schilling wanted a site that was accountable and subject to U.S. laws so people would feel comfortable donating to Jodi’s cause knowing the donations would be properly accounted for and utilized.

Jason Weber of Detroit, MI
Jason Weber of Detroit, MI

What did Jason Weber get for his efforts? Jodi Arias basically told him to f*ck off and she allowed SJ to paint Jason and Lisa as frauds. Little does Arias know that the following for both George and Jason is booming, while following for SJ is in the basement. Most of the people following JAII are just curious non-supporter looky-loos. It’s really the same phenomenon as people who stop to stare at a terrible car crash.

Lisa Schilling, a college student from Kentucky, was a star supporter of Jodi Arias. I can tell you for a fact she has a heart of gold, and she worked tirelessly to support Jodi. She’s very smart and likable, and she wanted nothing for herself. What did she get for her efforts?

In a really sleazy situation, unfortunately highly reminiscent of the taped phone call to Travis Alexander, Lisa Schilling was set up by Jodi Arias and taped by a 3rd party without her knowledge as she answered Jodi Arias questions about Jason and her plans to have a web site and to raise funds in support of Jodi.

That single incident, where people I cared about got hurt by Jodi Arias and the sleazeballs at JAII, opened my eyes and forced me to take a second look at Jodi Arias and her behaviors.

 

Friends of SJ and Ben had tried to plant in Jodi Arias’ mind the idea that Jason and Lisa were out to commit fraud and take money.

Fielding a call from Jodi at JAII
The crack Jodi Arias support squad Fielding a call from Jodi Arias at JAII Headquarters

Actually the only one of the three who ever may have actually scammed and defrauded people was SJ himself. Before this case he ran and still runs a Casey Anthony website CaseyAnthonyIsInnocent.com. What was his purpose for that site? No good deed ever goes unpunished, though, and it didn’t here, either, as Lisa was humiliated and made to look like some kind of criminal, when all she ever did was try to help save a life and secure a fair trial for the defendant.

Jodi Arias should go to her book club and pull out a book on cause and effect. She really needs to learn that her actions have consequences, far reaching consequences. You might think if she didn’t learn that from June 4th, 2008, then she may never learn it, but there you go.

What was done to Lisa made me absolutely livid. Jodi Arias lost my 100% support that day, and it’s been spiraling down ever since. Why is that? Well, I already knew about a guy I’ll call Fredd who was very nice to Jodi, talking on the phone and visiting her often. Then I found out from first hand sources how he was treated by her. Badly, very badly.

Courtesy of Robin Rebecca Motley
Courtesy of Robin Rebecca Motley

This was a guy who spent his own time and money selling Jodi Bands at a loss to help raise money for her families’ trial expenses. Fredd was kind of shoved aside when Ben Ernst came along and Jodi’s new adolescent-style love drama began. But there’s good old Fredd, still in her corner and working hard for Jodi, even after she told him to go take a flying leap…..

Then there is another person named Donovan Bering. Jodi Arias met Donovan Bering at the Estrella jail. Donovan Bering is a really nice person with a heart of gold. She did some arson, but hey. you are no angel, either! Donovan was released from the jail and she helped and supported Jodi Arias anyway she could from the outside. When the original trial started, Donovan spent endless hours supporting Jodi Arias every day in the courtroom. She was also one of the few if not the only person who did interviews in support of Jodi Arias and her defense.

Donovan was mercilessly attacked because of her loyalty and support to a friend.

I know for a fact that Donovan, without knowing anything about me, did a favor for me and delivered an e-mail to the defense team during the original trial even though I donated no money to Jodi Arias. In between the first trial and the penalty retrial, supporters began getting concerned that Jodi’s activities on twitter, done by proxy through Donovan Bering, would be used against her at trial and may help her to get the Death Penalty.

Donovan tried to get Jodi to suspend her tweeting. Jodi refused. Eventually Donovan took it upon herself, due to increasing warnings from her supporters, to suspend tweeting for Jodi Arias.

Donovan was pilloried in a classic cybe- stalking manner
Donovan was pilloried in a classic cyber- stalking manner

These were verbatim tweets directly from Jodi and were mostly positive quotes and status updates. For this, Donovan was put on Jodi’s ever -lengthening “sh*t list”, and she supposedly never spoke to her again. In spite of this even Donovan, who is very ill now, stands ready to help Jodi still to this day.

There’s another supporter I will call “Bosco”. Bosco wrote frequently to Jodi and had many phone calls with her. Bosco gave money to Arias funds, and bought her books and acid-free paper for her artwork. At some, point, reading through her letters, Bosco developed a new unflattering view of jodi Arias. Jodi Arias was acting the way Juan Martinez said she was. She wasn’t acting the way the defense portrayed her. Jodi Arias tried to deal with Bosco, but it wasn’t working.

Jodi supporters tried to silence Bosco.

Bosco released a few excerpts from some of Jodi’s letters where Jodi could be shown to behave exactly in the way Juan Martinez portrayed. Some Jodi Supporters started attacking Bosco.

BvB3ZH4IMAASe_FBosco stold the attacking Jodi supporters, if they do not stop attacking her, she would release more unflattering letters from Jodi’s own hand. After a few more releases, we are at a stalemate now, I suppose.

How many supporters has Jodi Arias lost? Well, I’m literally surrounded by former prominent supporters who aren’t supporting Jodi Arias any longer. They’ve retired now! This includes many of the above and lots, lots more. You ought to go up there and tell her about all this.

Here is a comment from Pascal Van Daele of Belgium, a former prominent supporter of Jodi Arias:

“Well: Justice4Jodi was made back in time when things were still good with us and Jodi. After we got “accused” of stealing money and scamming (like some of you still do here now). we took distance as matter of protection from Jodi Arias. That’s how NCDP (National Center for Due Process) was born and made to help the ones really in need of support and deserving of such.”

“We distanced ourselfs from Jodi, NCDP nor any of us 3 (Pascal, Jason, and Lisa) has anything to do with Jodi. Jodi doesn’t want or need help. She is helping herself along with her “true supporters” who are doing great and who are putting Jodi deeper and deeper in solitary.”

– Pascal Van Daele, former Jodi Supporter.

 

I have another quote from someone I’ll call Beverly Rubock Gray, from New York State:

“I’d write to Charlie (Manson) in a heartbeat. I know from my good friend Nancy that he passes the letters to his friend so it’s not worth it but I grew up in the 60s and remember what happened well. I find him a fascinating person. He had to have had a great deal of charisma to get anyone to do his bidding like he did.

He was a cult leader. I don’t LOVE Charlie but love to figure out how he did what he did.

Somehow, and I don’t say this is right, Jodi is detestable, someone you (or I) dislike immensely. Her narcissism and personality disorder make her someone I wouldn’t want to know. That does not apply to all murderers. It’s just the way it is.

If she shut her mouth about 90% of the time, if she stopped goading her culties to do things, if she stopped f*cking with the rules and trying to run a private little cult from jail and sucking money out of people who don’t have it, maybe I’d feel differently, like I do about Charlie and other killers, but alas, she does all these sh*tty things and she creates extreme dislike from the majority.”

– Beverly Rubock Gray, former Jodi supporter.

But Rob, how are you so sure these are actual facts and not rumors? How do you know Donovan was on Jodi’s sh*t list? These are all rock-solid and incontrovertible facts. We have the proof either from Jodi Arias or 1st hand directly from the person involved with her. Like it or not, it is what it is. The only love anyone should be giving to Jodi Arias anymore is Tough-Love.

 

jodi letter to coco

While those JAII peeps keep cheering about who is the first one of the day to write a comment, real supporters will be expecting some gratitude for what’s already been done on Jodi’s behalf.

coco leter b

Real supporters might even be expecting explanations / apologies for all the supporters so far who have been thrown under the bus by Jodi Arias and her mental midget super-fans at JAII.

 

Let’s take a look at verified people burned by Jodi Arias beyond the question of a doubt:

– Bill Arias (physical abuse, emotional abuse, drugs)

– Sandy Arias (physical abuse, neglect, drugs)

– L. Kirk Nurmi (malpractice, refused basic legal services, attitude)

– Maria De La Rosa (Did or did not do something Jodi wanted done)

(Two days after the second mistrial, I have a first hand report Jodi was on the phone saying that she was upset with MDLR over something she did, as if chastising a hand-maiden sold into her majesty’s secret service.)

– Ryan Burns (full of sh*t)

– Dr. Richard Samuels (a disaster)

– Darryl Brewer (alcohol problem)

– Donovan Bering (sh*t list)

– “Fredd” (shoved aside)

– “Bosco” (found JA was not as advertised)

– Lisa Schilling (painted as a crook)

– Jason Weber (painted as a thief)

– George Barwood (basically told to F off)

Is there a probblem with gratitude here? These are just the ones that we are absolutely sure of. There are many other supporters and groups who Jodi may have also done wrong. Let us know, we’ll add you (or them) to the list.

It’s high time to re-align the stars in this case. Jodi has some homework to do if she wants my support:

– Dump JAII, SJ and the charismatic fans because they can’t help you, but they will gladly sink you further than they’ve done already. Dump them, because everyone else in the civilized world has.

-The era of Jodi Arias is Innocent is over. You’ve been proven guilty in a court of law, fair trial or no. You tore a good man up and left a river of his blood all over his own bathroom. You’ve destroyed two families and that’s just for starters.

– It’s time to stop remaining silent while your super-fans malign the victim and his family. They are still doubling down on that course of action as of yesterday. SJ has doubled down on insulting the Alexander family, which he commonly refers to as “the Adams Family”. What kind of strategy to build support is that?

– You know what? It might help your appeal chances if you acted more like the defenses’portrayal of you and less like the prosecution’s portrayal of you.

Just sayin’.

– Jodi Arias, you can’t gain reasonable and sympathetic supporters when you are basically agreeing with the JAII crowd that Travis deserved it and his family are only in it for the publicity and the pay off.

– Earn it.

 

What I found disturbing in this adolescent style note to Arias boy friend Ben Ernst is the secret codes she used.
What I found disturbing in this adolescent style note to Arias boy friend Ben Ernst is the secret codes she used.

 

From here on out, you better realize that you are of the lowest rank (Private) and nobody special. This will help to avoid injuries in your future interactions with other convicts. The supporters who are reasonable people that you haven’t lost (yet) would appreciate that. Normal people who could become your new dedicated supporters might appreciate that, also.

Would you believe I have 1st hand knowledge that Jodi also used special secret codes with "Fredd" from the show Get Smart. Fredd was later pushed aside for Ben Ernst.
Would you believe I have 1st hand knowledge that Jodi also used special secret codes with “Fredd” from the show Get Smart.? Fredd was later pushed aside for Ben Ernst.

 

Since Jodi Arias won’t do the following, I will do it for her:

Thank-You everyone who supported, defended or were otherwise involved in saving Private Jodi in any way, shape, or form. Your efforts did not go unnoticed and were all deeply appreciated 🙂

I will be sure to earn you trust and support going forward as I have such profound gratitude for each and every act of each and every supporter, and all you have endured for my benefit.

Thank-you once more, everyone.

Love, Jodi’s conscience

(come out, come out, wherever you are).

 

So, I’ll say it one more time and then I ain’t saying it anymore. Jodi Arias has an individual moral choice to make. Does she want to stick with SJ, Stankowitz, Fandora, Gem, Crystal, Bobby Juarez III, Krusty Crab, Wavy Gravy and Jaded over at JAII, or does she want to earn real support that can actual help her?

There are plenty of other high profile defendants to support besides Jodi Arias
There are plenty of other high profile defendants to support besides Jodi Arias

If Jodi Arias wants true supporters, then she needs to acknowledge  that she has thrown supporters under the bus. Apologize and try to not do that anymore going forward. She needs to earn trust and show some gratitude. If she wants to maintain the status quo, then good luck playing grab-ass with Ben and phone tag with SJ from Perryville over the next 70 years, cause that’s where it’s gonna end, the way they are doing things over there.

So, Jodi Arias (aka Agent 99) has a moral choice to make, or the people from JAII could do the impossible and straighten up their act. Ultimately, people will need to see some major changes, or else Arias will ultimately lose all legitimate support and end up as just another cult classic followed by just the super-fans and assorted fruits and nuts. Choose wisely. Arias.

Do YOU concur?

saving 3saving 2saving 1

Comments from all viewpoints are welcome. 

You can also comment on our FB page:

facebookhttps://www.facebook.com/pages/Spotlight-On-Law/189870931203328

Welcome to join our new discussion Group: Jodi Arias Life or Death?

life or death

https://www.facebook.com/groups/335173176693377/

twitter 2https://twitter.com/TingMingJie

All Rights Reserved

Decepticon Christine Beswick Transforms Gossip into Gospel

Canadian Decepticon Christine Beswick Transforms Gossip into Gospel

Fact Based Reporting by Rob Roman

Research by Amanda Chen

gospel

Christine Beswick, a “Relationships Examiner” for Examiner.com out of Toronto, makes medical history ….. by talking out her ass.

Here we review Christine’s latest article “Jodi Arias will get a video call for Christmas, Juan Martinez fights back.” Judging from her past articles, Christine Beswick seems to have a visceral and seething hatred for the defendant. Really, she’s just another in a long line of D-list celebs who try to cash in, garner more site hits and attention for themselves by throwing rocks at Jodi Arias.

Beswick, in a Nutshell

decepticon sm

 

 

 

Her so-called articles are generally devoid of fact, give few specific examples, and cite few if any other qualified sources. Beswick is just putting it out there knowing that 95 out of 100 people will tell her “Right-on”. As she goes riding by on her bicycle, triumphantly waiving to her adoring fans, we just had to try and shove a proverbial stick in her spokes, in the name of factual reporting and fairness, of course.

The quoted sections in turquoise are from Christine’s article, followed by our responses. Other sources are in purple.

Victim’s Wounds

“After seeing the evidence that Travis Alexander was stabbed over 25 times, shot in the head, and nearly decapitated from a severed windpipe, the 2013 jury also found that Jodi’s crime included the aggravating factor of cruelty in the murder of Travis Alexander. It was this aggravating factors stage that a jury unanimously found made Jodi Arias eligible for the death penalty.

1359613086_grammar_police_xlargeWrong! (Grammar Police needed)

Travis Alexander had 16 stab wounds. Try reading the autopsy report.

http://murderpedia.org/female.A/images/arias-jodi/travis-alexander-autopsy-report.pdf

He had 29 knife wounds.

– 16 stab wounds – 13 incised wounds, including the slit throat. Many of these wounds were minor.

This does not seek to minimize the wounds, as some were obviously deep and two wounds were fatal all by themselves (the stab to the heart and the neck slash). The wounds were horrific, no doubt.

Everyone likes to say that Travis Alexander was “nearly decapitated” or that his throat was “slashed to the vertebrae”. Wrong!

This would be Nicole Brown Simpson, and we will not go over that again. Nearly decapitated? There is no evidence of that whatsoever. In fact, the official autopsy report states that the throat wound was 2-4 inches short of being ear to ear. His windpipe was severed, yes.

Saying Travis was “nearly decapitated” is like saying in July that it’s “nearly Christmas”.

GoodallJane-Cruelty500px

Extreme Cruelty

It would have been much more cruel, had Alexander been stabbed once in the heart, then left to slowly bleed to death.

As for the cruelty charge, let’s see what USA Today has to say about that:

“In the Jodi Arias case, the jury that convicted her of murder also found that she killed Travis Alexander in an especially cruel manner. The current jury will decide only if there are mitigators that outweigh the cruelty.

The aggravator is called F(6) in the statutes, “especially heinous, cruel or depraved.” In Arias’ case, the trial judge would only allow for cruelty.

All murder could be deemed cruel, but “excessive cruelty” is supposed to refer to great physical suffering or great mental anguish before death.”

This is supposed to mean a prolonged death, a purposely prolonged death, torture, a significant period of mental anguish prior to death, or a significant period of uncertainty about whether or not the victim will be murdered, such as in a rape, a kidnapping, or  a hostage situation.

“But ­prosecutors often rely on the common meaning of the word “cruel” to get juries to believe that the murder they are ­judging is among the cruelest.”

This is a problem of Arizona law. It’s a serious problem.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/10/21/arias-sentencing-retrial-death-penalty/17652153/

a-few-good-men

Jodi Arias ordered a “Code Red” on Travis Alexander. Therefore, Juan Martinez, a few connected polticians, and the LDS Church get to order a “Code Red” on Jodi Arias. Right?

Fair is fair.

Supporters and Defense Think Guilt Phase Still in Progress

“…This (2nd penalty) phase has been in progress since September 2014. Supporters of Jodi Arias, and the current defense strategy of Jodi Arias, suggests (sic) that some people think right now Jodi is fighting for her innocence. She is not. She is still guilty and convicted of first degree murder, and this jury has been ordered to remember that.”

grammar policeWrong! (Grammar Police needed)

I keep hearing this idiotic idea that Jodi supporters and the defense think it’s still the guilt phase. Nobody thinks that, and the jury knows full well what they are there to decide. It’s Life vs. Death.

We have already reported that there is almost zero difference in Arizona between LWOP (Life with no possibility of parole) and 25 years to life with a possibility of parole (Life with an infinitesimally slight, but virtually no chance of parole).

What’s really interesting is that we know for a fact that many Prosecution supporters believe that Life is the correct decision. We thought the battle lines would change from Guilty vs. Not Guilty, to Life vs. Death, with many prosecution supporters coming over and joining us on the side of Life. However, most prosecution supporters are still fighting the Guilty vs. Not Guilty battle.

We wonder how many of these people are hiding the fact that they secretly hope the verdict will be Death? We wonder how many really don’t care whether she gets Life or Death?

 

Swamp_Thing_Dick_Durock mud

Drag the Victim Through the Mud … blat blat blat

“In this phase of the court process Jodi Arias is required to present mitigating factors that may lead a jury to have sympathy for her and decide on life in prison, rather than the death penalty. Instead, the Jodi Arias defense team has decided to drag the victim through the mud with one abuse story after another in their efforts to paint Jodi Arias as an abuse victim, according to Christian Today earlier this week.”

Wrong!

That is Not what the Christian Today article said. The article did not say “drag the victim through the mud with one abuse story after another” nor did it say “their efforts to paint Jodi Arias as an abuse victim”.

To the great credit of Christian Today, their report was much more objective than that. They stated the facts, and they let the reader decide – you know, the old-fashioned way.

The only true citing from Christian Today, other than a quote by Jen Wood of the Trial Diaries, was this:

christiantoday.com

Christian Today reports that the trial wrapped before the holidays with testimony from a Dr. Geffner.”

Chritine Beswick, these are YOUR words:

Defense Attempts and Allegations

“As we previously reported Dr. Geffner was trying to paint the picture of Jodi Arias as an abuse victim, in an attempt to use alleged “abuse” as a mitigating factor. What this means is the defense is trying to say, Travis abused Jodi and so she should get off for this killing.”

They aren’t attempting – they already did it in the first penalty phase. They aren’t alleging anything either.

Is Christine Beswick citing an article from Christian Today because they are an authority on the Jodi Arias trial? Or, is she citing the article on Christian Today merely because it has the word “Christian” in it?

‘We report, –  You decide.’

christian-symbols-14v

Beswick citing Christian Today

That in-depth Christian Today article she cited was a whopping 333 words. Another Christian Today article about the Jodi Arias trial (354 words) was headlined under “entertainment”. This is what it said:

“Last week, the lawyers working on the case started questioning 400 possible jurors in Phoenix’s Maricopa County Superior Court. After the first cut, the number was trimmed down to 176.  Wednesday’s trial resulted to further trimmings, which ended up with 26 people returning for further questioning.

The residents from the area, on the other hand, are not happy with how slow things are shaping up for the trial.  A former Mesa police investigator expressed his strong opinion in an interview posted at the Arizona Central.

He said, “YES! I’m sick and tired of the Jodi Arias murder case. Murders happen almost every day in Arizona. Sadly, murder is no big deal. While most murder cases and trials are handled quietly and with the dignity of brain surgery, the Arias trial has taken on the theatrics of a well-rehearsed circus show, thanks to Maricopa County prosecutor Juan Martinez, defendant Arias and the media.”

That’s what Christian Today reported. They also reported this:

“The prolonged trial to sentence Jodi Arias is also putting a hole in the pockets of Arizona taxpayers. At this point, the defense costs already reached $2.5 million. This is not the final numbers, however, since the tab will continue to grow while the second phase for penalty hearing is still ongoing.

The amount paid for the prosecutors were undisclosed.”

http://www.christiantoday.com/article/jodi.arias.trial.update.as.jury.selection.continues.local.residents.complain.about.slow.legal.process/41657.htm

Looking again at a Beswickism:

“As we previously reported Dr. Geffner was trying to paint the picture of Jodi Arias as an abuse victim, in an attempt to use alleged “abuse” as a mitigating factor. What this means is the defense is trying to say, Travis abused Jodi and so she should get off for this killing.”

Wrong!

How is getting a sentence of Life in prison with no possibility of parole “getting off”? It’s a perfectly appropriate punishment for 1st degree murder. In fact, with no prior police record, LWOP is quite a harsh punishment.

Mitigation Evidence

“Due to an overwhelming lack of evidence, most court watchers aren’t buying it. They are saying, “We’re still waiting to see a mitigating factor. And evidence, please.”

The last two days of the Jodi Arias trial before the holiday season included Jodi using Dr. Geffner to tell about how often she perceived herself to be a victim in her life.”

Wrong!

In the last Penalty Phase trial, there were 8 mitigating factors presented by the defense

1. Ms. Arias has no prior criminal history.
2. Ms. Arias was just 27 years old when she committed her offense.
3. Ms. Arias is remorseful for her conduct,
4. Ms- Arias suffered both physical and emotional abuse as a child.
5. Ms. Arias suffered both physical and emotional abuse during her relationship with Mr. Alexander.
6. The abusive nature of the relationship caused Ms. Arias to suffer extreme emotional stress at the time of the incident.
7. Ms. Arias has been diagnosed with Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder.
8. Ms. Arias has been diagnosed with Borderline Personality Disorder.
9. Ms. Arias’ psychological makeup impaired her ability to cope with the tumultuous relationship she had with Mr. Alexander.

The evidence and testimony currently being presented is covering number 4, number 5, number 6, number 7, number 8, and number 9. It’s actually quite efficient in covering a large part of six listed mitigators.  Numbers 1, 2,  and 3 will be covered later.

Here is one prosecution supporter’s very humorous response to the mitigators, thought it’s full of a heapin’ helpin’ of lies. And a prosecution supporter just asked the other day “Why do they call (some of) us “Haters”? Maybe this is why:

Time Out for Comedy

I guess this commenter on Facebook is called “Ugly Stick” because he/she feels Jodi Arias got hit too many times with the ugly stick by the Creator of the Universe:

ugly stick 1

UGLY STICK

OK LETS START WITH MITIGATING FACTORS SHALL WE?

PARASITE AGE: ( if parasite is old enough to brutally, savagely murder a really good guy in cold blood in a fit of jealous creepy girl stalker rage, by stabbing him 29 times, 9 to back and head, shot to head then after OVER KILL, has the ABILITY to cut an innocent mans head off, then she is old enough to DIE by the good Doc Dr Needle Juice ).

NO CRIMINAL HISTORY: ( with exception of slashing tires, stalking, threatening TA ex-girlfriends, hacking private information in secrecy, attempted black mail, forging documents and fake letters, breaking and entering without authorization multiple times by means of a DOGGY DOOR, etc… )

PARASITE WAS A GOOD FRIEND: ( such a good friend she will stab you in the back, too much of a coward to face you, cant look you in the eye as she pounds a REAL friggen knife in you back ).

LACKED SUPPORT FROM FAMILY: ( her family financially supported her by giving her money to make her go away and shut TFU, parasite refused any other reality, but her own creepy alternate world… parents first instinct told them she did it, what does that tell you ).

SUFFERED NEGLECT AND ABUSE: ( a wooden spoon is not a knife or a gun, and having to live by rules that can not be followed is not abuse it is a selfish immature child who has to go to bed at 8 and not allowed to color on walls ).

TRIED TO MAKE THE BEST OF HER LIFE: ( dropping out of high school to be a menace to society, mooching and hopping from host to host, ( man to man ) *PARASITE* No real ambition or desire to be more than a “GOLD DIGGER* or *TROPHY WIFE* ).

TRIED TO IMPROVE SELF: ( One does not improve themselves with breast implants and hair color and becoming whatever religion her target host is ).

PARASITE IS A TALENTED ARTIST: ( images traced from various magazine does not make art, it makes you look stupid and a fraud…another criminal act. )

http://www.hlntv.com/slideshow/2014/11/14/jodi-arias-death-penalty-retrial-day-11-photos

see comments section.

 

Christine Beswick, Relationshipd Reporter for the Toronto Examiner.com
Christine Beswick, Relationshipd Reporter for the Toronto Examiner.com

Crime Comparison

This is what USA Today had to say about a comparison between the Arias crime, and other murders in Maricopa County:

Cristanos
Cristanos Moroyoqui-Yocupicio

“On the same day Arias was convicted, Crisantos Moroyoqui-Yocupicio pleaded guilty to second-degree murder, and a Maricopa County Superior Court judge sentenced him to 14 years in prison. In 2010, Moroyoqui-Yocupicio, a reputed member of a Mexican drug cartel, ­murdered an associate who had stolen from him, and then cut his head off.”

Cut his head OFF, –  for real.

 

george
Ray George and a sketch of the murdered woman……
george
….. Who turned out to be his girlfriend, Annovedwin Begay-Barakzai

“A month later, Douglas Ray George beat and stabbed his girlfriend to death and left her naked body in the street in Tempe. He also was allowed to plead guilty to second-degree murder and was sentenced to 16 years in prison. Prosecutors said it was uncertain whether the crime was premeditated.”

“A passer-by found the body of Annovedwin Begay-Barakzai, 23, on June 15 An autopsy determined she died from blunt force trauma, and authorities said she had broken ribs, a lacerated liver and numerous stab wounds to her face and chest.”

http://www.abc15.com/news/region-phoenix-metro/central-phoenix/douglas-ray-george-pleads-guilty-in-girlfriends-murder

When he switched from a blunt object to a knife, that wasn’t premeditation?

See what we mean by biblical law double standard? A man in Arizona can do whatever he wants to a woman, but a woman dare not try to assault or kill a man for any reason.

“There was no plea offer for Arias; she went to trial and was convicted of first-degree murder.

 AileenWuornos, admitted "human--hater", who killed 7 men and told her jury "May your wife and children get raped, right in the a**"
Aileen Wuornos, admitted “human–hater”, who killed 7 men in cold blood, and told her jury “May your wife and children get raped, right in the a**”

The death penalty is supposed to be reserved as punishment for the worst of the worst murders, and the Arias ­murder was certainly horrible. But so were the murders committed by ­Moroyoqui-Yocupicio and George.

Who decides which murders are the worst of the worst?

Prosecutors.”

“But it is almost impossible to draw a bright line between murders that should be punished by death and those that should not. So the U.S. Supreme Court, in 1976, approved a “narrowing” system ­using statutory “aggravating factors” to distinguish the extraordinary murders from those that are merely ordinary.

Those factors include killing children or police officers, committing multiple murders or killing for pecuniary, that is, monetary, gain. But since the 1976 ruling, the number of aggravators (in Arizona) has risen from 6 to 14, leaving defense attorneys to complain that every murder qualifies for death.

Prosecutors decide which to pursue”.

“The only narrowing function is ­prosecutorial discretion,” defense ­attorney Eric Crocker said. “You’re at the whim of the prosecutor’s office to ­determine which cases are capital and which are not.”

 http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/10/21/arias-sentencing-retrial-death-penalty/17652153/

 

code-red1

The truth is that somebody made a phone call and made sure that this was to be a death penalty case and that Juan Martinez would be the lead prosecutor.

They made sure that Jodi Arias would be given a “Code Red” Maricopa, Arizona style.

 

Abuse Survivors vs. Jodi Arias

“Using primarily information from Jodi’s own diary, Geffner testified repeatedly that Jodi perceived herself to be a victim against the alleged big, bad murder victim who is unable to speak for himself. Jodi Arias needs to be careful with this strategy because she has already ticked off many abuse survivors in this particular crowd of high profile trial watchers. Most abuse survivors have a funny “radar” for each other, and can spot a fake a mile away.”

battered womanFundamentally Wrong!

This is not about abuse survival. According to her defense, Jodi Arias is a survivor of a sudden, violent conflict. This conflict was brought on by a cyclical abusive relationship. This is not a battered woman’s defense. Arias has never claimed to be a battered woman, or to have battered woman’s syndrome. Alyce LaViolette claimed that, but she meant it in that this relationship fit that pattern – type, not that Arias has any battered woman’s syndrome.

She did claim that a relationship characterized by dominance, emotional, and verbal abuse, began to turn into physical abuse by the time Jodi moved 1,000 miles away and back to Yreka, California. She claims that that violence began again in Alexander’s home in Mesa on June 4th , 2008, beginning to escalate in the afternoon and culminating with a deadly attack in the bathroom.

Out of the 8 mitigating circumstances presented by the defense in the first penalty phase, the most important mitigator, according to the 4 jury members who voted for life in the first penalty phase, was the feeling that Jodi Arias had been abused both before she met Travis Alexander and during her relationship with him.

Jodi, Jack, and Darryl enjoy a birthday party together
Jodi, Jack, and Darryl enjoy a birthday party together

Look at what Darryl Brewer had to say about her and what Travis Alexander had to say about her. He said she was always honest and cheerul. Do the math. It had to be either abuse or mental illness or a combination of the two.

Both are mitigators from the Death Penalty.

The entries in Jodi Arias’ diary do in fact provide evidence of abuse. This evidence was not refuted when Alyce LaViolette testified, although she was attacked personally. This is evidence as testified to by Dr. Fonseca and Dr. Geffner. They are corroborated by e-mails, messages, and texts between Travis Alexander and friends, and the testimony of friends of Travis.

This evidence cannot easily be refuted. She was abused, no doubt.

Within months of meeting her, Alexander was calling Arias a “skank” and “a pathological liar”. Yet more than a year and a half later, he is still suggesting sexual scenarios for the future and having both phone sex and in-person sex with her while still denigrating her to his friends.

 

No Accountability, No Remorse, Manipulator

“Again, Jodi needs to be very careful about this approach because nobody sides with the defendant who never takes accountability, never shows remorse, always manipulates, and has a long history of not telling the truth. Not only that, but juries are instructed to make decisions based on evidence.”

Wrong!

Evidence is being presented by the defense. It’s real and it’s evidence. Jodi Arias has taken accountability for her actions during this trial. Jodi Arias does NOT have a long history of not telling the truth. It was only after the killing that she has a such a history. No evidence to the contrary has been presented.

When Bill Arias said in the police interrogation that Jodi had not been honest with her parents since age 14 or so, what he meant was that she no longer confided in them. She was evasive as to the details of her life after moving out of the home, but this does not mean she lied to them. The fact is she didn’t tell them anything unless absolutely necessary.

 

Biased Expert Testimony

doctored-evidence

“Expert witness testimony does count as evidence… Most juries understand that expert witnesses are biased, for the defense and for the prosecution as well.”

I agree, but when the experts present objective evidence that can’t easily be disputed, on either side, the jury is likely to accept it.

 

Jury-Images-1

Jury’s Perception is What Matters

“What matters at this point for Jodi Arias isn’t even what is or isn’t the truth. It’s what the jury believes. How is the jury perceiving all of this drama? If even one of them is perceiving it the same way the general public appears to be, Jodi is in trouble.”

Agree, however Juan needs 12 out of 12 jurors to get his death sentence.

 

narcissist (1)

Jodi is a Narcissist per DSM V

“Jodi’s been accused of being a narcissist several times. And the funny thing about narcissists is that people always see through them very quickly, but the DSM 5 tells us that they are so oblivious to that because they lack insight beyond their inflated sense of Self. Jodi thinks she’s fooling people. Her supporters are fooled. Supporters for the prosecution call that ‘drinking the Kool Aid'”.

Plain Wrong!

narcissism2Jodi had never been diagnosed as a Narcissist, which means that she is not a narcissist, doesn’t  it?. Please give specific examples of where Jodi Arias is easy to see through. I would agree that Jodi Arias is sometimes oblivious to seeing how she is viewed by others, and she does lack insight. For example, after she gives the “Ninjas” explanation for the murder, even though Detective Flores told her that her story is impossible and unbelievable, she stuck with it and even enhanced it.

 

Congratulations to “Cate”

I will say that “Cate” has given many very specific incidences of Arias’ testimony and journal entries she feels should not be believed. Her arguments are persuasive, and I give her a lot of credit for her arguments. Cate knows that she must provide specific examples to make a convincing argument, how is it that Beswick, a “life and relationships advice” reporter, does not feel the need to provide an example?

 

Jodi has Fooled her Supporters

Strong Wrong!

Jodi’s supporters are not fooled by her. They are in a better position to judge her than non-supporters because they have been communicating with her and they generally know more about her and her positive qualities, which are just flat out ignored by prosecution supporters.

“And her lack of evidence is going to strongly work against her and lead her jury into waffling territory. This is dangerous because waffling territory which plants the seeds of reasonable doubt.”

Way Wrong!

“Reasonable doubt only applies to a burden of proof “beyond a reasonable doubt”. In the penalty phase, the defense only has to prove that the mitigating factors are more true than untrue. Only 51% proof is needed, and this is called a burden of proof “by the preponderance of the evidence”. There is no place for reasonable doubt here. A mitigating factor is either more true than not true, or it’s not.

“You will notice every lie or as Jodi likes to call them, abuse story, is more dramatic than the last. As the DSM 5 shows, that’s an elevation technique narcissists use, especially when they meet with resistance. It is the classic, “Oh ok, you didn’t buy that story? You will have to believe this one, because it’s even more terrible.” The narcissistic defense.”

Do you have any specific examples? You are a reporter, aren’t you? Or are you just telling people what you want them to believe, without providing anything to back it up?

There is NOTHING in the DSM V relating to an “elevation technique” due to “resistance” or anything else.

 

Zero Boundary Defense

“It’s the, “let’s toss out as many of these dramatic stories as we can and see how much we can make stick” defense. She has zero boundaries and will literally stop at nothing to avoid the death penalty. And, since she is too afraid to testify, she gets her expert witnesses to do the job for her. From Travis was a pedophile, to “oh great now I’m getting death threats” nothing is off the table in Jodi’s quest to delay the inevitable.”

Wrong!

If Jodi is getting death threats, as she had alleged, this will be easy to prove or disprove, as the jail has a copy on file of every postcard sent to her and a recording on file of every phone call she has made. Dr, Fonseca believes that Travis did have a sexual interest in underage children. Why would she dare say this if she didn’t really believe it given the evidence she researched?

For the millionth time, it seems, Jodi does not want to “delay the inevitable”. She cannot start her appeals process until after she’s sentenced. I’m very sure she’s eager to get to Perryville prison, where there are better food and conditions (according to the prisoners themselves), so she can begin her series of appeals.

How many boundaries would you have in trying to save your life?

 

Days Of Our Lives

Citing Jeff Gold About the Defense

“It was two very long days of testimony that left many still wondering where the mitigating factors were. As lawyer and expert legal analyst, Jeff Gold from the Gold Patrol tweeted,”

“#JodiArias diary ugh! These are the days of our lives. The court has allowed the defense to go way too far afield of mitigation. #justsayin.”

We have already demonstrated that Jeff Gold is an idiot, a sentiment not only of many Jodi supporters. He is desperate to connect with people under age 60, but he has no idea what these “youngsters” are interested in. He tried to do tweets about such things as a 1970’s soap opera and Britney Spears, not realizing that no has been interested in such things for decades. Just sayin’. LoL.

Wrong!

The reason why he is wrong is because the prosecution disputed that there was any evidence at all of abuse written in Jodi Arias’ journals. The prosecution used Arias’ journals to try and show there was no abuse. The prosecution tried to deny the evidence given by Alyce LaViolette by attacking her character and her qualifications, rather than attacking the evidence she presented.

Therefore the defense should be given lots of latitude by the court to show how the journal entries back up Ms. Arias’ claims of abuse.

 

Citing Jenn Wood

“The defense was hoping this would establish a pattern of abuse, but what it appeared to establish was the pattern of an obsessed girlfriend. As Jenn Wood from the Trial Diaries reported,”

“Day in out #jodiarias eats, sleeps, breathes Travis. Journaling, calling, emailing, and texting.”

I would agree with Jenn in that Jodi Arias was way too infatuated and obsessed with Travis Alexander.

juan jodi jen

Jodi Arias and Jen Wood. Any similarities?
Jodi Arias and Jen Wood. Any similarities?

wolf juan jen jodi

 

Jodi Admitted to Slashing the Tires?

“In addition to stories told to make Travis look manipulative, the jury also heard that Jodi Arias did admit in her own journal that she slashed the tires of Travis Alexander at one point in 2007.

We also heard that Jodi owned a stun gun at one point, which may once again work to negate that she was in an abusive relationship.”

Wrong! Maybe Travis looks manipulative, because he was manipulative? Jodi Arias never admitted that she slashed Travis Alexnder’s tires. How, pray tell, would owning a stun gun negate an abusive relationship?

Citing Jeff Gold, Again

“As Jeff Gold tweeted,”

“#JodiArias court allows defense so far into the weeds you lose site of any view. It’s a DP mitigation case. This minutia can be abbreviated.”

I agree with Jeff here, this may be to Arias’ detriment as her too long testimony in the guilt phase worked against her.

 

No Accountability

“It came up that Jodi hadn’t bothered to mention to her diary the fact that Travis had slapped her allegedly. Geffner says this is “understandable.” Christian Today reports that one message that was read in court that was written by Jodi Arias to Travis Alexander read,”

“I’m very sorry for all the pain we’ve caused each other. Most of it is my fault. I never meant to hurt you.”

Isn’t this an exact demonstration of Arias taking responsibility for her actions that you stated earlier were non-existent?

 

Journals Were Doctored by Arias

“Many reports are showing suspicion around these journals and many are speculating that some of the journals shown in court were written by Jodi Arias after the crime. Jenn Wood from Trial Diaries told KPHO what she thought the defense was doing with these tactics.”

Journal entries were written in after the killing? Prove it! How in the world would she know that her journal entries would become evidence? If she really did this she could have put a lot more damning stuff into the entries.

“They are trying to get compassion for Jodi….What they are trying to do is translate this to the jury, that Jodi is a victim of Travis Alexander….”

Exactly. And isn’t that what actually happened?

 

dr miccio fonseca dr robert geffner

Dr. Geffner Is just Dr. Fonseca 2.0

“By the end of Days 19 and 20 of the retrial of the penalty phase of the Jodi Arias trial it was clear that Dr. Geffner testimony was simply a “2.0” version of previous expert witness for the defense Dr. Fonseca. Like Dr. Fonseca he worked very hard to paint the picture of Jodi Arias as an abuse victim, and the word “manipulated” came up a lot in his testimony.”

Maybe that was the defenses intention. You can discredit a witness and attack them personally, but it’s much harder to attack two witnesses saying the same thing. Now you must attack the evidence they provided and that’s not easily done. It’s an excellent strategy if it was in fact their strategy.

 

Abuse Victims Don’t Kill Due To Manipulation

“What Dr. Geffner, domestic violence expert, does not want to say about Jodi Arias is that, abuse survivors don’t act like that. Even abuse victims don’t kill because they feel manipulated. They only kill when they are in true survival mode.

Jodi is trying to say she was in survival mode the entire time she was in a relationship with Travis Alexander, and there simply is no evidence to date to support that notion. This is a mentality she is trying to convey that is seriously ticking off abuse survivors. This is how the last week ended before breaking for the holidays. “

Right! Either she was in survival mode and fought for her life or she just snapped even if it was days before the killing. There are no other reasonable explanations that I can see. No one has claimed that Jodi Arias was in survival mode the entire time she was in (the) relationship. Just you’re claiming that, Beswick.

 

A18-882471 - © - Norma Jean Gargasz

Jodi Will Go To Perryville Prison

“Regardless of what verdict is reached, when the verdict is delivered Jodi Arias will be transferred to Perryville Prison to carry out her sentence. “

Right! Who is not in agreement with that?

 

Demonstrators Protest Against AZ Sheriff Arpaio During His Visit To CA

Kindness and Benevolence of Sheriff Joe

“We do not know if Sherriff Joe Arpaio will be hosting another talent competition this holiday season, but we do know he is allowing free video visitation as a special treat to inmates over Christmas.

KTAR reported on Dec. 23 that inmates in Maricopa County, including Jodi Arias, will be able to have a free video visit with family members over the holiday season. Generally the video visitation costs $13, but Sherriff Arpaio is providing it free to all inmates this holiday. KTAR reports that Sherriff Joe said,

“It’s very very good to be able to let the loved ones – whether it’s in Mexico or anywhere else that cannot come to the jail – to be at least able to utilize this video equipment.”

Video visitation will last 20 minutes each and must be registered for online. What do you think the chances are that a group of Jodi supporters will try and get in on this one? Will the next step for Jodi Arias be a leaked jailhouse video?

Dead Wrong!

This is all a very nice tribute to that cuddly teddy Bear or Santa of a benevolent jail keeper, Sheriff Joe. But this is the most distasteful thing in the Christine Beswick’s Examiner.com “article”. Can anyone refute that Maricopa County Sheriff Joseph Arpaio is a Monster? I don’t think you can.

We urge you to take a look at some real, factual reporting:

https://spotlightonlaw.wordpress.com/stranger-than-fiction-the-real-sheriff-joe-feb-20/

jail-video-visit

The Video visitation scheme, actually replaces face to face visitation in Sheriff Joe’s jails, meaning that even if you can travel to the jail, you cannot have a face to face visit with a prisoner any longer, only a video visit. Keep in mind that most of the inmates have merely been charged with a crime and have not yet had their day in court.

If you are familiar with Skype and other video conferencing software, you know that this software is virtually free and only requires a computers or smartphone to enable a video chat.

The system in the Maricopa jails works well for jailers because they can record and store each and every video-chat. Prisoners are charged almost $13.00 (65 cents/minute) for a twenty minute “video visit”.

Now, for Christmas, Sheriff Joe is “allowing the privilege of a free video visit for each qualifying prisoner in his jails”. How benevolent of him! Actually it’s entirely self-serving.

Many families who have not yet done a video visit can try one for free. Then they will be much more used to the technology and all set up for future PAID video visits. Though it’s nice that people can visit from a great distance, this scheme is a giant cash cow. The Sheriff gets 20% of all monies generated from video visits as pure profit. They also save money from all the manpower and logistics required to have actual face to face visitation. You do the math.

 

Juan’s Wondrous Motion

“Trial Diaries has reported that a motion was filed dated Dec. 22 with the Maricopa County Superior Court on the case of the State of Arizona vs. Jodi Arias.

In that motion, prosecutor for the State Juan Martinez objects to, well, just about everything the defense has done as of late. Specifically Martinez is objecting to the recent motion filed by the defendant seeking to dismiss the death penalty. So, at the start of this case, Juan filed a motion to seek the death penalty.”

The motion to dismiss the charges or to dismiss the death penalty demands a response by the prosecution. Of course, he filed a motion in response to the defense motion. Ch – Ch – Ch Chia!

 

a-few-good-men_demi-moore_01

Strenuous Objection

“Juan’s motion is a strenuous objection to that. He basically said in his motion, they are claiming misconduct but have failed to show evidence, as usual, thus, no misconduct. In closing he makes sure that the last thing he says about Jodi Arias before the holiday break is, she’s a liar.”

Juan’s response is always “She’s a liar”. However, you do not get sentenced to death for being a liar. Lying is not a capital offense. You need something more substantial than that. Strenuous objection? Remember how far that got Demi Moore’s character in “A Few Good men”?

“The State objects to defendant’s latest request to ‘dismiss all charges with prejudice’ or dismiss the State’s notice of intent to seek death penalty due to recently discovered prosecutorial misconduct. Defendant continues to make unsupported allegations of prosecutorial misconduct and her current request should also be denied.”

Wrong!

The many instances of prosecutorial misconduct are really adding up. Juan Martinez’past misconduct may be finally catching up with him. Chickens finally coming home to roost? Ch – Ch – Ch – Chia!

 

kool-aid

Jodi Supporters Drink the Kool Aid

“Meanwhile, a cursory glance around the Internet would reveal that Jodi supporters, whether they are or are not drinking “the Kool Aid” truly believe she was abused. Some also are living in a universe that has led them to believe she will need a job when she gets out of prison. Those that are not drinking “the Kool Aid” know that Jodi is a convicted murderer whose best case scenario in this lifetime is life in prison.”

Thank-You, Christine, for noting that NOT ALL Jodi supporters are drinking the Kool Aid.

 

Arias Best Case Scenario

Right!

Okay, this is the faction of Jodi supporters I like to call the “Rainbows, Flowers and Unicorns” division of Jodi supporters. They believe she will be set free any day now. Not gonna happen.

Judge Stephens will never dismiss the charges, she would be tarred, feathered and run out of the state if she did that. The Supreme Court of Arizona will not dismiss the charges, they will bump it up to a higher court and let them take the heat. Jodi Arias will not go free.

 

Jodi Arias will go to Perryville Prison.

Realistically, the best case scenario for Jodi Arias and supporters is that she be awarded a retrial. This possibility is more likely than many prosecution supporters dare to believe.

https://spotlightonlaw.wordpress.com/why-jodi-arias-must-get-and-will-have-a-new-trial/

 

be the kool aid

Arias Supporters Are Delusional

“And this group of people calls those that support Travis Alexander “delusional.” Another post about the future of Jodi Arias shows that some people still believe she is getting out of jail sometime, and soon.”

Aren’t many Travis Alexander supporters delusional? What is it they are fighting for? Justice has already been served in this case. Jodi Arias has been unanimously convicted of Murder in the first degree. She will either get life or death, and she will go to Perryville Prison. So what fight is left for them to have? For those who demand death, good luck to you, it’s highly doubtful she will be sentenced to death.

 

Gossip Is Not Gospel

On top of that, there is a cornucopia of evidence to suggest that facts in this case are not as advertised by Juan Martinez, Media, Minions, or a life and relationship reporter from Toronto.

Even if Christine Beswick did make medical history!

 

The CODE RED

Did Juan Martinez order a “CODE RED” on Jodi Arias?

You’re God Damn Right He Did!

What is YOUR view?

Comments from all perspectives are welcome.

 You can also comment on our FB page

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Spotlight-On-Law/189870931203328

All Rights Reserved

 

 

 

Sources:

http://www.examiner.com/article/jodi-arias-will-get-a-video-call-for-christmas-jail-juan-martinez-fights-bac

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/10/21/arias-sentencing-retrial-death-penalty/17652153/

http://www.christiantoday.com/article/jodi.arias.trial.update.as.jury.selection.continues.local.residents.complain.about.slow.legal.process/41657.htm

http://www.christiantoday.com/article/jodi.arias.trial.defense.team.retells.arias.alleged.mental.illness.day.20/44734.htm#ixzz3NCZBKXXJ

http://www.hlntv.com/slideshow/2014/11/14/jodi-arias-death-penalty-retrial-day-11-photos

see comments section.

http://www.psi.uba.ar/academica/carrerasdegrado/psicologia/sitios_catedras/practicas_profesionales/820_clinica_tr_personalidad_psicosis/material/dsm.pdf

DSM V The personality Disorders.

Horn, Corn, and a Truckload of Porn

Horn, Corn, and a Truck Load of Porn: Update on the Arias Penalty Retrial (Dec. 20)

Fact-based reporting

by Rob Roman

713149_LA

Bringing you up to date on the epic battle … the interminable saga … the perpetually stalling Arias penalty retrial. If you’re anything like me, you have been sidetracked, distracted, busy, bored or befuddled by what’s going on in the Jodi Arias penalty phase re-trial, but you want to know what’s gone down and what’s likely to happen next. There’s been plenty of talk about this being a nightmare, a perpetual trial, and an interminable saga. So far, the trial is actually right on schedule and, as we predicted, it would last 3 months AND we said it would go into 2015.

The penalty phase retrial has gone 25 days so far, that’s 9 days for the prosecution and 16 days for the defense … so far. The retrial began on October 21st, and there’s no end in sight, as there are multiple issues to deal with and the defense has 14 potential witnesses.

7f43c28c4fa3f310310f6a706700afa2

Prosecutor Juan Martinez, ever the sit-in-the–front-row teacher’s favorite student, presented his case for why Jodi Arias should be executed with cold efficiency in just 9 days, schnip – schnap. First up was Mesa Detective Michael Melendez, the guy with the New Yawk accent who discovered the deleted photos in Travis Alexander’s camera (a Sony Cyber-shot DSC-H9).

All the recovered photos were shown, and Detective Melendez explained how Jodi Arias needed to use 5 steps to delete each photo. The implication there being that Arias was not in an altered state of mind and was not in a fog with her memory seriously impaired. She calmly and coolly took hundreds of steps to delete all the photos. What was not explained is that just 5 steps can delete ALL the photos taken that day, according to the instruction manual, something an experienced photographer like Arias could do in her sleep.

Sony_H9_3qsony-cyber-shot-dsc-h9_2

“Deleting images

(Index) button
(Playback) button
MENU button
1 Press (Playback) button.
2 Press MENU while display in single-image mode or in index mode.
3 Select [Delete] with v on the control button.
4 Select the desired deletion method with b/B from among [This Image],
[Multiple Images] and [All In This Folder], then press z.
See page 45-46
michael
Melendez, not to be confused with Mendes, you racist you, showed the jury the naked and racy photos of Arias and Alexander, the shower photos, the foot photo with a bloody Alexander, and the mystery final photo.

Next up was Detective Esteban “Steve” Flores, who inexplicably is no longer doing active investigations, but has now become a “Media Relations Officer for the Mesa Police Department”. Detective Flores was the main conduit of all the testimony related to the day Travis’ body was found, the crime scene descriptions, and the investigation of the crime up to and including the interrogation of Jodi Arias. The bloody and gruesome crime scene photos were shown to the jury.

Dr. Horn a.k.a. "super-crepy Rob Lowe"

Dr. Kevin Horn a.k.a. "Super Creepy Rob Lowe"
Dr. Kevin Horn a.k.a. “Super Creepy Rob Lowe”

Dr. Kevin Horn was the next witness up. Horn went over the autopsy findings, describing all the wounds, with many autopsy photos being shown. Dr. Horn again stated his opinion that the gunshot was last and probably post-mortem, in direct contradiction to Arias’ explanation of events. At one point on re-direct, prosecutor Juan Martinez suddenly approached Horn and feigned stabbing him with his pen, stating “that didn’t take long, did it?”. Apparently he wanted to demonstrate that all the stabbings could have happened in seconds. We agree.

After that was Nathan Mendes – the Former Detective, from the Siskiyou County California Sheriff’s Office, who set up surveillance on Arias in Yreka and arrested her, and he was present when the famous mug shot was taken. Detective Mendes testified that Arias asked him how her hair looked before being photographed.

2327119210_48_0118_MUGSHOT_640x360_2327119190 (1)

You will recall that Arias asked if she could take her make-up with her when she was arrested in Yreka at her Grandparent’s home where she was living. She could not. Also she had a rental car packed for travel with 2 knives in her luggage and a 9 mm gun taped to the bottom of the seat that was not found until much later. Mendes also testified that he found receipts in the home from the California to Arizona to Utah trip. None of the receipts were from Arizona and none were from June 4th.

On cross exam, the Defense attacked both Doctor Horn and ex-Detective Flores about the change in the order of injuries as Flores was claiming the gunshot was first early on to numerous media outlets and in pre-trial hearings. Flores also stated that it was Dr. Horn who provided that information to him, but Dr. Horn denied any knowledge of having told that to Detective Flores. Nurmi also suggested it was possible that this murder was not especially cruel, the factor that opened the door to the death penalty in the first place.

22frie11

The State then called Kevin Friedman, a former Yreka police officer who investigated the theft of the gun and other items taken from Arias’ grandparent’s home on May 28th, just 7 days before the killing. Walmart loss prevention specialist Amanda Webb then made her way back on the stand to testify that Arias had purchased a 5 galllon blue kerosene gas can, but there were no records found that one had been returned, as Arias claimed.

A notable feature of the cross examinations by defense lead Kirk Nurmi, besides all the weight he’s lost and his now full head of hair, is that he has been said to be imitiating Juan Martinez. Nurmi was reported to have slammed down a binder of Walmart records during the cross of Webb, and to have asked Detective Flores if he had any memory problems. We have previously reported that this is not imitation, that sincerest form of flattery, but this is tactics. This is Nurmi using different tactics because the penalty trial is a different situation, calling for a different approach.

arias_1028_a

There were 5 days of Flores on the stand altogether, going over the now famous interrogation tapes and the sex tape was played in its entirety. Topping off the prosecution case were the allocutions of Travis’ younger brother Steven Alexander, and his younger sister, Tanisha Sorenson. These were heartfelt pleas to the jury and first-person memorials about the life of Travis Alexander.

357793

“Steven Alexander described nightmares, ulcers and constant trauma from losing his brother, including locking the doors when he showers. Tanisha Sorenson called it a “living hell.”

“When I lay down at night, all I can think about is my brother’s murder,” Steven Alexander said as other family members could be heard crying in the gallery.”

http://ktar.com/22/1778950/Travis-Alexanders-siblings-give-emotional-statements-at-Jodi-Arias-penalty-retrial

The trial ended on the 18th of December and this was the date scheduled to have been the very end of the trial. The trial is now on hold for the Holidays until January 5th. The trial began to get messy even before the defense took the helm, and it has only gotten messier.

Mess number one – The jury

6941.strip

After the prosecution’s concise presentation, things got messy quick.  Messy, messy, messy. First of all, one juror was dismissed on the opening day of the trial for a family emergency. A second juror was dismissed on the 2nd day of trial after she sought out legal reporter Beth Karas and asked her if she was Nancy Grace. Actually, the Judge should have left her in if she couldn’t tell the difference between Beth and Nancy.

“The first was let go Tuesday because of family problems. The second was dismissed Wednesday after she asked a freelance TV journalist if she was CNN superstar Nancy Grace, who has been a vocal crusader against Arias.”

http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/mesa/2014/10/01/prospective-jurors-vent-arias/16570903/

6943.strip

A third juror was dismissed the day after Thanksgiving, as she was stopped for DUI, then it was discovered that there was a warrant on her for passing bad checks. This leaves only 3 alternate jurors to go before the threat of a mistrial if they end up with under the statutory number of 12. Yes, the lady with the multi-colored hair and a few other jurors from the guilt phase volunteered to comeback and serve (just kidding) – although she and others have been spotted in the courtroom.

Mess number two – The family Flores and the Mitigation Specialist

PNI Arias Mon

Media Representative Flores’ wife and daughter have been significantly involved in the Justice 4 Travis campaign. Daughter Angela is on Youtube singing a memorial song for Travis (She has a very nice voice, too) and Mrs. Corinna Flores is said to have been on Twitter under the handle “I’m boss that way” tweeting about the case and reportedly leaking confidential information from closed meetings in the Judges’ chambers. This had been disputed. None of these things would be seen as unseemly if the trial were concluded, but as we know, the trial has not nearly concluded.

Esteban Corinna.jpg Brt
“I’m Boss that way”

Mitigation Specialist Maria De La Rosa, whom I like and have communicated with, is reported to also have gotten too personally involved in the case. She has been tweeting about the case under the Twitter handle of “Cougarluscious”, and has been getting involved with Arias supporters. This is a little harder to discern on the basis of wrongdoing, because part of her job as mitigation specialist IS to ferret out any and all evidence in support of sparing Ms. Arias’ life and this would seemingly include communicating with supporters.

1395144022000-PNI-Arias-trial-date
“CougarLuscious”

Ms. De La Rosa was also stopped at the Estrella jail, and an envelope full of legal documents Arias gave her was searched, revealing an Arias art drawing, now identified as “The Pinwheel”. Stupidly, the County Sheriff’s office, or MSCO, tried to ban Maria from the jail, which would have certainly caused an appeal issue – not allowing the mitigation specialist access to the defendant / convict. They soon thought better of that, though. This lead to our speculation that the County wants to fire Ms. De La Rosa, but must wait until the end of the trial in order to not cause an appeal issue – leaving the Defendant / convict without a mitigation specialist would be in violation of Arizona statutes for a capital trial.

Jodi-Arias-Pinwheel-artwork
The famous Pinwheel. Maria De La Rosa got searched, Jodi Arias got a write-up

Mess number three – Sheriff Joe and the false Arias motion

You may remember that between the guilt phase and the penalty retrial, a motion was made by Jodi Arias asking for a restraining order to be placed on Sheriff Joe Arpaio and crime entertainer Nancy Grace. The idea was that Sheriff Joe was supplying Grace with information about Arias’ leaking breast implant and her hepatitis C condition.

This information and the motion were found to be hoaxes filed by a convict from New Jersey. The trouble was that Sheriff Joe had a press conference where he slammed Arias for her motion, even though it was easy to see that the signature was obviously not hers and the motion was made with materials that Arias obviously had no access to. The defense brought up the fact that anything said about Arias, no matter how pernicious, will be believed because the public is so poisoned against her by the media and this does not allow for a fair trial.

6939.strip

Mess number four – the unsequestered jury

Famous trial lawyer, appellate attorney and Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz has already sounded the alarm about how it is just about impossible for a very high profile defendant to get a fair trial with an unsequestered jury. This is because the atmosphere is just permeated with strong feelings one way or the other.  Juan Martinez’ boss, District Attorney Thomas Horne, is already on record worrying that the unsequestered jury will be an appeal issue. Nevertheless, Arizona Judge Sherry Stephens did not sequester the jury because ‘we have always not sequestered the jury in the past in Arizona’. Well, Arizona bars were always equipped with spittoons, too. Why aren’t they now? Did times change?

7102.strip

Mess number five – The secret witness

The defense, after taking the reigns, stated that they had 3 witnesses who would refuse to testify unless the courtroom was closed to the media and the public. Judge Stephens heard the motion and affirmed it. The court was cleared and the secret witness testified. Rumors abounded that the secret witness was Jodi Arias herself. The media balked and appealed the decision to the Arizona Court of Appeals. It’s insane that the Judge would affirm a motion to have a witness who had never been shy of the media, both before, during, and after the trial to suddenly now be requesting to have the public and media cleared for her testimony. Why on earth would Judge Stephens allow such a motion?

453d347cf83ca9a940f517840bbbc1d0

Even so, no one on the prosecution supporter side would give the Judge credit for possibly having some compelling reason for her ruling. Was it because Jodi Arias mentioned the other secret witnesses in her testimony? Wasn’t there some kind of accommodation the court could make without altogether clearing the courtroom? Prosecution supporters also do not want to blame the reason for this special  request on the people who harassed, intimidated, and attacked Arias’ witnesses during the guilt phase. These are the people threatening our system.

The Arizona Court of Appeals agreed with the media that the public has a 1st Amendment right to know what is going on, especially in a capital trial. The Court stayed the Judge’s ruling, and the defense will appeal that ruling, probably on January 5th. Will the other three witnesses, reportedly a long term boyfriend of Arias – Darryl Brewer, A co-worker of Arias’ – unknown, and a former friend of Travis Alexander’s – possibly New Zealander Marc McGee, formerly of Riverside, California, still expect to testify in secret?

Will they refuse to testify? Also under contention is the media’s request to have the transcripts of Arias’ testimony released. Will that be granted, even though the transcripts of all the other witnesses have not been released? Also, was the secret witness actually Jodi Arias? Most people close to the case are saying so. Maybe this matter was confused, because the Judge will refer to the defense as “Arias” in motions. But, people seem to be sure it was Jodi Arias herself who testified in secret.

Mess number six – The Porn

The defense vowed to fight the stay, but continued the trial by calling up Bryan Neumeister, the private computer, audio and video expert who often testifies for the prosecution. You may remember Neumeister as the guy in the guilt phase who testified that he enlarged the reflection in Travis’ left iris from the “Calvin Klein” shower photo and found it was Jodi Arias, with no weapon. Martinez seems to have a distaste for “science-types”.

1228769101156

Neumeister resisted Juan Martinez’ combativeness, and he stated several times that he couldn’t understand the prosecutors’ questions because Juan had a very limited knowledge about computers. He also accused the prosecutor of lying. But the big thing is that Neumeister made a startling discovery. He said that when he checked the “clone” copy of Travis’ hard drive, he found thousands upon thousands of deleted porn files, supposedly including searches based on the word ”teens” and “tweens”. “Tween” is a word for children on the cusp of being teenagers. They aren’t quite teens, but they are no longer children in the strictest sense. They’re in be-tween. This is exactly the definition of a 12 year-old.

2a5aeab712123f10eaa054762e1dc6cb

Neumeister also intimated that child porn was among the deleted files. This was a bombshell in the case, because Detective Melendez testified in the guilt phase that not one shred of porn was found on Travis Alexander’s computer. Juan Martinez, as he has done in other cases, immediately began blaming Neumseister for somehow contaminating the hard drive copy with porn. Alternatively, he blamed 2 former Arias defense attorneys for turning on the original computer and thereby allowing built-in antivirus programs to eliminate all the porn on the computer.

This could not be possible, because the defense attorneys were always under the watchful eye of the police when they inspected the original computer. Detective Flores was in charge of the computer. It was also reported that an anti-virus program found on Alexander’s hard drive was a program that did not exist in 2008. The implication was that the Mesa Police had tried to remove all traces of porn found on Travis’ computer. Many prosecution supporters responded by saying ‘So what, that’s normal all guys have porn on their computer’.

That’s not the point. The point is that IF someone from the police removed the porn from Alexander’s computer, what else did they remove? What other evidence, possibly exculpatory, could they have hidden? Since former Detective Flores was close to the evidence, it was suggested that Flores was the one who removed the porn. In any case, this is another issue for appeal, and it’s a serious one.

Is this a Beta cassette of Porn?
Is this a Beta cassette of Porn?

Martinez, by blaming the former defense counsel and Neumeister, was conceding that there was in fact porn on the computer, and that it was somehow ‘disappeared’.

That there was porn on Travis’ computer should surprise no one, given his references to porn and his sexual vocabulary in the sex tape, etc. which could only have come from a person exposed to porn. This issue, like many others in this case, is still awaiting further clarification and resolution, because most of the conversation about this matter was held in chambers and is not yet available to the public.

Mess number seven – Court reporters and Legal Experts

Yihun Jeong fron The Arizona Republic
Yihyun Jeong fron The Arizona Republic

As a substitute fro HLN broadcasting the trial live and endlessly giving slanted, biased, jesting and mean-spirited views, we now have reports, blogs, “spree-casts”, and Tweets from reporters and Legal commentators inside the courtroom.  Some of them, like Beth Karas, Michael Kiefer / Yihyun Jeong, and Monica Lindstrom, are reporters and/or legal experts with ethics, integrity, and a sense of objectivity. They realize this is a capital case, a serious affair where a defendant / convict may have her life taken by the State. Others, like Jeff Gold, Jen from the Trial Diaries, and Wild about Trial (a division of HLN), are playing to popularity and the lowest common denominator with little thought about ethics or fairness.

jeff gold

We do note that Jeff Gold stated that this case should not have been a Death Penalty case. He must have taken some heat among his listeners for that.

“The first jury hung (no not that kind of hanging although I know many of you wish so.) Many states end it there. But AZ allows a second bite of the apple.
Moreover, the DP is usually reserved for murdering kids, cops, multiple persons, a particularly heinous murder (chop body up and eat it) or murderers with long records. This is just not a clear case for DP. “

Jeffrey Evan Gold – Court Chatter TV Legal Analyst

http://www.courtchatter.com/2014/09/jeff-gold-weighs-in-on-jodi-arias-on.html

Since then, we’ve heard only a few astute legal observations and almost nothing in any way positive said about the Defense or Arias. Often, his Tweets are rude comments, super-biased comments, comments with sexual innuendos, dumb jokes or self-promoting comments.

Gold often tweeted about “Hodi-Jodi”, with zero evidence that Arias was in any way a “Ho”. He knows his audience is 95% pro-prosecution and constantly plays to that audience with tweets about ‘how dare the defense put up a defense when their client is a sadistic, manipulative, maniacal murderer’? He also enjoys making a big joke out of the whole trial. Wild about Trial seems to be full of high school or college interns, a giggly gaggle constantly spewing corny jokes, many of them laced with 5th grade bathroom humor.

854e4eca-22d1-4a4b-bd53-a17dafbd7a75_170x255

Wild about Trial talking heads
Wild about Trial talking heads

Jen, from The Trial Diaries who reportedly had or is having an affair with the prosecutor, Juan Martinez, has acted basically as a cheerleader and sounding board for prosecution supporters. Jen couldn’t be counted on to give even a sliver of objective news about the defense or Arias. Nancy Grace and former HLN talking head Vinnie Politan also tried to get in on the act inviting brownie points from trial fanatics for throwing stones at Arias and her defense.

With this bunch of block-heads, it’s really hard to get an objective picture of what exactly is going on in that courtroom. Thankfully, a few of them do have integrity.

Mess number eight – The Death Penalty on the table.

Even some prosecution supporters are wondering if it would not be better if the State goes over Judge Stephens and Juan Martinez’ head and takes the Death Penalty off the table. This would effectively end the Arias trial, and the Judge would only decide on Life in prison with no chance of parole, or twenty five years to life in prison with an almost non-existent infinitesimal chance of parole.

The-Death-Penalty-in-2013-335x256Kasab2209a

Along with a number of other motions to remove the death penalty awaiting a decision by the Judge, Nurmi and Willmott earlier filed their most epic motion yet, a 59 page motion to dismiss the death penalty. In it, they review all their charges of misconduct against the prosecution from the entire history of the case, in addition to new allegations from the post guilt trial and the penalty re-trial.

The motion to dismss the charges and the case also includes an alternate plea in the alternative, to remove the death penalty from the table. Here, court reporter and legal expert Monica Lindstrom explains why the death penalty realistically could be taken off the table possibly due to being under pressure from higher-ups and the people of Arizona:

http://ktar.com/305/1787926/Legally-Speaking-Dismissing-death-for-Jodi-Arias-could-be-a-reality

Non-secret Defense Witnesses

In place of Alyce LaViolette and Dr. Richard Samuels, Forensic Psychologist Dr. L.C. Miccio-Fonseca, and Psychologist Dr. Robert Geffner were called to the stand by the defense to interpret the relationship between Travis Alexander and Jodi Arias and Jodi Arias’ state of mind prior to, during, and after the killing. The defense stated earlier that there was good reason to believe that Alexander was shot by Arias in the shower, as it agrees with the evidence, whereas the prosecution’s assertion that he was stabbed first and then shot does not. Nurmi possibly said this because he was not allowed to bring up Arias’ claim of self-defense, since the jury rejected that theory in the guilt phase.

Dr. Fonseca examined the sexual relationship between Alexander and Arias and the dynamics of that relationship, coming up with the same basic conclusions as Alyce LaViolette. She even stated she believes Alexander did watch child porn. On cross examination, Juan Martinez tried to discredit Dr, Fonseca and her testimony.

Dr. Geffner, who was pilloried by trial watchers in the guilt phase, for having a coughing fit, burping loudly, and spilling a large container of water, was next on the stand. His job was to interpret psychological tests and diagnoses of Arias, and to explain other aspects such as Arias’ temperament, propensities toward violence or lack thereof, and her state of mind. Juan Martinez had begun his cross of Doctor Geffner, when the trial ended for the year.

More details of what was in the text and e-mail exchanges between Arias and Alexander were revealed. One interesting detail is that Jodi Arias claimed to own a stun gun in early 2008, and she apparently offered it to Alexander as protection from the person who was slashing his tires.

Reportedly, there were no spills, no mess.

ur-so-corny

Nothing much can or will be done about the Corn going on regularly in this trial. The so-called legal reporters will continue their pandering and catering to the prosecution supporters, and acting like the entire trial is one big joke and an opportunity to try their hands at low-brow comedy and over-dramatic tweeting.

Maybe something can be done about Horn, in that he continues to be adamant that once Alexander was shot in the face, he would not be able to move or defend himself. This seems to be more and more unlikely and more and more contradictory to the evidence.

But something really needs to be done about the Porn, because police and/or prosecutors removing, hiding, or disappearing any evidence should never be tolerated by a court of law. Some remedy for this seeming violation should be offered. Appeal issues are piling up, leading me to make a remark on social media that this case has become a literal Chia Pet of ever-sprouting possible appeal issues. This holds true no matter what you believe about the verdict in the guilt phase of the trial.

More than this, the new claims of removing evidence seem to give even more credence to earlier claims about the 1st degree felony murder charge and the possible switcheroo of the order of injuries by former Detective Flores and Dr. Kevin Horn.

maxresdefault (1)

This may have also included prosecutor Juan Martinez, who is well known for his win-at-all-cost attitude, which then would become collusion or conspiracy. This would be very difficult to prove, but especially if Arias is sentenced to death, all these little allegations could possibly add up to one big and powerful allegation which could change the course of this seemingly never-ending case.

New Advertisement for Kansas
New Advertisement for Kansas

What’s your take? We would really like to know

All comments are welcome

Please also feel free to comment on our facebook page “Spotlight on Law” which functions as a menu of our articles.

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Spotlight-On-Law/189870931203328

All rights reserved

The Felony Murder charge is the Holy Grail in the Jodi Arias case

Why the Felony Murder charge is the Holy Grail

of the Jodi Arias case

Fact based reporting

by Rob Roman & Amanda Chen

 

monty-python-image-1

 

Much has been made of the 1st degree Felony murder charge in the Jodi Arias case. The popular consensus is:

 

1) This is a totally legitimate charge under Arizona law.

2) The prosecution can charge whatever they want. It’s still up to the jury whether or not to convict on each charge.

3) Arias’ defense attorneys are a “joke” and “do not know what the hell they’re talking about”.

4) “F*ck Off, f*cktard!!”

5) Nobody cares / It doesn’t matter, because the jury did not find Jodi Arias guilty of 1st degree Felony Murder.

6) The jury instructions said that jurors can make a finding of both 1st degree AND felony murder, and that’s what some of them did. So what?

7) Jodi Arias butchered Travis Alexander. She was unanimously found guilty of first degree Premeditated Murder by a jury of her peers, so f*ck off!

8) It was Felony Murder, because it was a felony AND it was a murder. – It’s not rocket science – Duh!

“Ladies and Gentlemen: There’s nothing.

It’s silly. It’s fearful. That charge is there out of fear.

It makes no sense …. not under any scenario does that make any sense.

Either she was there to kill him … or she wasn’t.”

– Defense Attorney Kirk Nurmi

 

What does he mean by “Either she was there to kill him … or she wasn’t”?

What does he mean by “That charge is there out of fear”?

 

Law_Society_of_England_and_Wales.svg

Now is a good time to review the different charges for a murder:

 

1st degree Premeditated Murder: A deliberate plan to kill or a “period of cool deliberation”.

It’s deliberate and there is an intent to kill in the person’s mind. It’s also called a “cold-blooded murder”. It’s considered worse than 2nd degree Murder because a person calmly made a decision to murder, reflected on it, and then carried it out.

1st degree Felony Murder: A deliberate plan to carry out a dangerous felony (other than 1st degree murder) and in the course of that felony, a death occurs.

The primary or “predicate felony” is the main intent of the person. The person usually has no premeditation to commit murder. As a result of and in the course of carrying out that dangerous felony, somebody dies.

2nd degree Murder: There is no deliberate plan to kill nor a “period of cool deliberation” or it cannot be proven in court, but the person intentionally caused the death of another person.

There is no provable deliberation, but an intent to kill is formed in the person’s mind. It is a murder born of unplanned circumstances. Often, this would be called a “hot-blooded murder”.

If a jury finds that this 2nd degree murder was committed in the intense emotional turmoil called a “heat of passion”, Arizona law requires that the charge be reduced to Manslaughter.

Manslaughter: There is no deliberate plan and no intent to kill, but the person negligently or recklessly caused the death of another person.

Justifiable Homicide: A murder is justified because a person was defending their life or the life of another person.

martinez-01

We have a situation in a Capital murder case, where the prosecution is pushing hard for a 1st degree murder conviction, this will mean lifetime imprisonment or the Death Penalty.

The defense is pushing just as hard to get, at the least, a 2nd degree murder conviction, where the Death penalty cannot be applied and the defendant has some chance of parole and one day getting out of prison. Of course, a heat of passion manslaughter verdict or an acquittal would be even better for the defense and Arias.

The Defense in the Jodi Arias case had a primary goal or mission to get anything BUT a 1st degree murder conviction for the same reasons.

Can the additional but bogus charge of 1st degree felony murder assist the prosecution to achieve their goal of a 1st degree murder conviction?

 

Now, let’s review the actual instructions that the jury was given and that Judge Stephens read word for word to the jury.

 

“THE CHARGED OFFENSE – PREMEDITATED MURDER

Count 1 charges the defendant with First Degree Murder. Arizona law

recognizes two types of First Degree Murder – Premeditated Murder and

Felony Murder. The state has charged the defendant with both types.

The crime of First Degree Premeditated Murder requires the state to prove the following:

  1. The defendant caused the death of another person; and
  2. The defendant intended or knew that she would cause the death of another person; and
  3. The defendant acted with premeditation.

“Premeditation” means that the defendant intended to kill another human being or knew she would kill another human being; and that after forming that intent or knowledge, reflected on the decision before killing. It is this reflection, regardless of the length of time in which it occurs, that distinguishes First Degree Murder from Second Degree Murder.

While reflection is required for First Degree Murder, the time needed for reflection is not necessarily prolonged, and the space of time between the intent or knowledge to kill and the act of killing may be very short. An act is not done with premeditation if it is the instant effect of a sudden quarrel or heat of passion.

The crime of First Degree Premeditated Murder includes the lesseroffense of Second Degree Murder. You may consider a lesser offense if either:

  1. You find the defendant not guilty of First Degree Premeditated Murder; or
  2. After full and careful consideration of the facts, you cannot agree on whether to find the defendant guilty or not guilty of First Degree Premeditated Murder.

You cannot find the defendant guilty of any offense unless you find that the State has proved each element of that offense beyond a reasonable doubt.

 

SECOND DEGREE MURDER

The crime of Second Degree Murder requires proof of one of the

following:

  1. The defendant intentionally caused the death of another person; or
  2. The defendant caused the death of another person by conduct which the defendant knew would cause death or serious physical injury; or

Under circumstances manifesting extreme indifference to human life, the defendant recklessly engaged in conduct that created a grave risk of death and thereby caused the death of another person. The risk must be such that disregarding it was a gross deviation from what a reasonable person in the defendant’s situation would have done.

The difference between first degree murder and second degree murder is that second degree murder does not require premeditation by thedefendant.

 

CHARGED OFFENSE – FELONY MURDER

As stated earlier, Count 1 also charges defendant with First Degree Felony Murder. The crime of First Degree Felony Murder requires the state to prove the following two things:

  1. The defendant committed or attempted to commit Burglary in the

Second Degree; and

  1. In the course of and in furtherance of committing Burglary in the Second Degree, or immediate flight from it, the defendant caused the death of any person.

An “attempt” requires the state to prove that the defendant intentionally did something which, under the circumstances she believed them to be, was a step in a course of conduct planned to culminate in the commission of the offense. The crime of Burglary in the Second Degree requires proof that the defendant:

  1. Entered or remained unlawfully in or on a residential structure; and
  2. Did so with the intent to commit any theft or felony therein.

Residential structure means any structure, movable or immovable, permanent or temporary, that is adapted for both human residence and lodging whether occupied or not.

“Intentionally” or “with the intent to” means, with respect to a result or to conduct described by a statute defining an offense, that a person’s objective is to cause that result or to engage in that conduct.

There are no lesser included offenses for First Degree Felony Murder.

http://archive.azcentral.com/ic/pdf/arias-jury-instructions.pdf

 

18calq4ybym0sjpg

 

 

Okay, I hope you lived through that. If so, you may have noticed a few things. First, it seems as if juries were very confused about how if they decide it’s a second degree murder, then they must decide if it was a “sudden heat of passion” killing. If the jury decides it is, then the 2nd degree murder is reduced to manslaughter. The instructions repeat so many times on this that it seems that there was trouble with the comprehension of this instructions.

The 1st degree pre-meditated murder charge includes the lesser offenses of 2nd degree murder, sudden heat of passion murder, and manslaughter. The Felony murder charge has no lesser included offenses.

The jury is informed that all can vote for premeditated M1, or all can vote for felony M1, or all can vote for both, or there can be any kind of mixture, as long as they are all unanimous that it’s a first degree murder.

In order to make a finding of Felony murder in this case, the jurors need to find that the defendant committed or intended to commit 2nd degree burglary. In Arizona, this only means that a defendant entered or remained unlawfully in a residence with the intent to commit any other theft or felony.

 

holy-grail

 

Can two people both be guilty of felony murder with one victim? Yes they can.

Example: Joe Blow and Lou Blew go to rob a horse track. Lou Blew blows away a cashier. Both Joe Blow and Lou Blew are guilty of felony murder.

Can one person be guilty of felony murder with two victims? Yes they can.

Example: Snidely Whiplash is in his Humvee being chased by the police. The police car smashes into a motorcycle, killing Hairy Ryder. Snidely runs over Midge, a little old lady with a walker who was trying to cross the street. Snidely Whiplash is guilty of two counts of felony murder.

Can one person be guilty of both felony murder and premeditated murder with two victims? Yes they can.

Example: Robin Redrum plans on killing Bumptious Q. Bangwhistle in his home a month in advance. She goes to his home and shoots him dead. Bumptious’ brother, Sumptious Z. Bangwhistle, is visiting that day. He hears the gunfire and comes out of the bathroom and Robin shoots him dead. Robin Redrum is guilty of one count of 1st degree Premeditated Murder and one count of 1st degree Felony Murder.

Now, can one person be guilty of BOTH felony murder and premeditated murder with a single victim? Only rarely, and it would take some doing and some verbal gymnastics to explain how this could be so without a separate felony.

 

Premeditated murder is a planned murder, or at the very least, the person had a moment of cool reflection.

 

Felony murder is an unplanned murder. The person plans another felony, and in the course of and in furtherance of this felony, a death occurs. (The victim could have a heart attack, your accomplice could murder the victim, the police could shoot the victim by mistake when trying to shoot you, or you could be surprised by an unexpected victim and kill them, or you could just suddenly decide to kill somebody. All these are examples of felony murder).

 

8xHJTl8MUuU1dL1rXHmjX9OK6nG

 

How does one person commit BOTH a planned and an unplanned killing with a single victim? Not very easily, BUT Arizona law does allow jurors to find both pre-meditated murder 1 and felony murder 1 concurrently under certain circumstances.

Doesn’t that seem like a blessing for prosecutors?

 

A) Let’s say Horatio Hornblower plans to tie up and rob little Billy Pilgrim. He ties him up and steals his computer and big screen TV. He drives away, then he thinks again and drives back to Billy Pilgrim’s house and kills him with a George Foreman 3 minute hamburger grill. Now, is this felony murder or premeditated murder or both?

B) Let’s say Horatio Hornblower again plans to tie up and rob little Billy Pilgrim. He ties him up and steals his computer and big screen TV. Billy tells Horatio that he’s a useless cowardly thieving dirt bag. Horatio Hornblower then brains Billy with a George Foreman 3 minute hamburger grill. Is this example felony murder, pre-meditated murder, or both?

C) Let’s say Robin Redrum has NO intention to kill Sweet Polly Purebred in her home by suffocating her with a plastic bag. Robin is a welcome guest. A fight breaks out. She puts a plastic bag over Polly’s head, but she’s not dying. She’s injured, but not dead. So Robin stabs her with Polly’s knitting needle 99 times until she dies. She takes the bag and the knitting needle with her. Is this premeditated murder or felony murder or both?

D) Now, let’s reverse that and say that Robin Redrum plans for months to stab Sweet Polly Purebred to death in her own home with Robin’s knitting needle. She stabs her 99 times, but she doesn’t know if she’s dead or not. She puts a plastic bag over her head just to be sure and takes her own knitting needle. Is this felony murder or premeditated murder or both?

 

The last example is the equivalent of the prosecution’s theory in the Jodi Arias case (gunshot last, pre-meditation, Jodi brought the gun). The one before that is the alternate theory of murder in the Jodi Arias case (gunshot first, no pre-meditation, Jodi used and stole Travis’gun).

 

Now, can you apply the jury instructions to these 4 cases? What do you come up with?

 

A) Under the laws of California and many other states, this would be premeditated murder. It starts out as a felony, but Horatio leaves, then deliberates and after cool reflection, decides to go back and kill Billy Pilgrim. For me, this would be 1stdegree premeditated murder plus separate kidnapping and burglary charges.

In Arizona, however, this fulfills all the requirements for a finding of BOTH Pre-meditated M1 AND Felony M1.

B) I would call this felony murder. Horatio intended to commit a felony. While engaged in the felony, he becomes enraged at Billy Pilgrim and, without a plan or cool reflection, murders him. I would charge felony murder and add on the kidnapping and burglary charges.

C) This would seem to me to be premeditated murder or it could be 2nd degree murder, depending on the details. Robin Redrum didn’t plan the murder. There was no intended felony. A fight broke out and Robn went wild. If there was a cooling off period proven, then it’s 1st degree premeditated murder. If there was no time for reflection, then it’s 2nd degree murder. If the jury finds it’s a sudden heat of passion killing. (Robin and Polly had an intimate relationship of some kind), then the charge could be reduced to manslaughter.

D) This would also seem to me to be premeditated murder. Robin Redrum planned the murder and carried it out. There doesn’t seem to be any intended felony or further felony other than the murder itself.

 

Did you come to the same conclusions as I did?

In the Jodi Arias case, there were 7 out of 12 jurors who found that it was BOTH a felony murder and a premeditated murder. How did that happen? There were also 8 jurors out of 12 jurors who voted for death. Since I do not know, I think it’s a very good educated guess that the 7 who voted for both felony and premeditated murder AND 7 of the 8 jurors who voted for death are the same people.

I would love to hear their explanation as to how this is BOTH. I would love to hear anyone’s explanation as to how this can be both a planned AND an unplanned murder.

UPDATE:

In Arizona, there IS an explanation:

If the prosecution proves that a death occurred “In the course of, and in furtherance of, another intended felony”,  a juror can make a finding of Felony Murder 1, even if that same juror also made a finding of Pre-meditated M1.

images (3)

monty_python__the_holy_grail_by_eleth89Kirk Nurmi argued that since there is no predicate felony, there is no Felony Murder. So, it is either 1st degree premeditated murder, which the prosecution argued almost exclusively, or it is a LESSER CHARGE, such as 2nd degree murder or heat of passion manslaughter. Here’s what he said about this in the guilt phase part of the trial in 2013:

 

“Remember when we heard the charge of Felony Murder yesterday and the state making an argument that was….incomprehensible? This idea that well…if you believe Jodi’s version of events she’s guilty of felony murder because she went to Travis’ home, and she decided to steal his gun, and in the course of trying to steal his gun, she shot him. She went there, they had sex, they did all these things, then she decided she wanted his gun, and decided to take it, and wanted it so bad that she was willing to kill him.

That’s the theory of felony murder they have put forward. That shows a little fear, and we’ll talk about some of the fear that the state has demonstrated throughout this case, but that’s just some of it – alright? We also heard this idea that….well, she was unwelcome once she put the weapon upon him and she was there to commit a burglary or another felony ….. there’s no other felony.

Ladies and Gentlemen: There’s nothing. It’s silly. It’s fearful. That charge is there out of fear. It makes no sense …. not under any scenario does that make any sense. Either she was there to kill him, because the state said “Hey this is a plot that began in May”. Either she was there to kill him … or she wasn’t, and that’s ultimately what we’re here to determine.”

– Defense lead attorney Lawrence “Kirk” Nurmi in the guilt phase closing argument.

Start at 9:15

 

So, in his closing statements, what does Kirk Nurmi mean by “Either she was there to kill him … or she wasn’t”?

What he means is that this is either a deliberate pre-planned, cooly reflected upon murder, or it should be a lesser charge.

The reason why he’s saying this is because he doesn’t see an underlying felony in the felony murder charge. Martinez’ answer during Nurmi’s motion to dismiss the felony murder charge is that the underlying felony can be any lesser offense of Premeditated Murder. This is after he states once again the reasons why this is clearly a premeditated murder. Then Martinez offers up “assault” as the underlying felony in the felony murder charge.

We are well on our way up the hill to the Holy Grail, I promise. But first, let’s take a small detour and look at the genesis of the felony murder charge. It never changed from the time of the indictment, although premeditated and felony murder are clearly stated as ALTERNATIVES.

Here’s the relevant wording from the original indictment on July 9th 2008 (Jodi Arias’ birthday):

 

“The Grand Jurors of Maricopa County, Arizona, accuse Jodi Ann Arias on this 9th day of July, 2008, charging that in Maricopa County, Arizona:

Count 1:

JODI ANN ARIAS, on the 4th day of June, 2008, intending or knowing that her conduct would cause death, with premeditation caused the death of TRAVIS V. ALEXANDER, in violation of A.R.S. $$ 13-1101, 13-1105, 13-702, 13-703, 13-703.01 and 13-801.

The State of Arizona further alleges that the offense charged in this count is a dangerous felony because the offense involved the discharge, use, or threatening exhibition of a .25 caliber handgun and/or knife, a deadly weapon or dangerous instrument and/or the intentional or knowing infliction of serious injury upon TRAVIS V. ALEXANDER, in violation of A.R.S. $$ 13-604 (P).

OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE

JODI ANN ARIAS, on or about the 4th day of June, 2008, acting either alone or with one or more other persons, committed or attempted to commit Burglary, Second Degree, and in the course of and in furtherance of such offense, or immediate flight from such offense, JODI ANN ARIAS or another person caused the death of TRAVIS V. ALEXANDER, in violation of $$ 13-1105, 13-1101, 13-702, 13-703, 13-703.01 and 13-801.

The State of Arizona further alleges that the offense charged in this count is a dangerous

felony because it involved the discharge, use, or threatening exhibition of a .25 caliber handgun and/or knife, a deadly weapon or dangerous instrument and/or the intentional or knowing infliction of serious physical injury upon TRAVIS VICTOR ALEXANDER in violation of A.R.S. $ 13-604(P).

http://jodiariasisinnocent.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/Jodi-Arias-Court-Docs-1.pdf

 

Did you see that? Premeditated Murder OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, felony murder. Not both, how could it be both? You either planned a murder or you didn’t, right? In Arizona, for whatever reasoning, a juror can find both if the pre-meditated murder happened “In the course of, and in furtherance of, another intended felony”.

In Arizona, you get to

have your cake and eat it too

I’m going to throw out a word to you now – Boilerplate. It’s a legal term meaning a standard way of wording things such that there are few problems understanding it. The exact same, time-tested phrasing is used every time. July 9th was just a month after the body was found.

JODI ANN ARIAS, on or about the 4th day of June, 2008, acting either alone or with one or more other persons, committed or attempted to commit Burglary, Second Degree”. This standard boiler plate language should be narrowed down to exactly what the evidence shows by the time of the trial.

 

ravenAt that point, Jodi could have been hiding and protecting an accomplice who actually did the killing while she just watched. She would still be guilty of 1st degree felony murder, because she was a willing accomplice. Someone could have assisted her, even if Jodi did the killing. Maybe it would turn out that either Jodi didn’t premeditate the murder OR there was not enough evidence of premeditation.

winchester .25 auto

So that boilerplate wording on the indictment including the felony murder charge are there as a catch-all or a just in case. They’re basically a one size fits all. Three or Four years later, you would think the prosecution would know if it was felony murder or a premeditated murder. Everyone knows what they are going to try to prove and what their theory of the case will be.

 

– But they left the defense guessing.

Kirk Nurmi made two major points in his closing about the Felony Murder Charge. It makes no sense, and it’s only there because of “fear”.

“Either she was there to kill him, or she wasn’t”.

 

In Arizona, there are 16 statutory (witten in the law) predicate felonies for felony murder. These are:

1) Sexual Conduct with a minor

2) Sexual Assault

3) Molestation of a child

4) Terrorism

5) Marijuana offenses

6) Dangerous drug offenses

7) Narcotics offenses

8) The use of minors in drug offenses

9) Drive by shooting

10) Kidnapping

11) Burglary

12) Arson

13) Robbery

14) Escape

15) Child abuse

16) Unlawful flight from a pursuing law enforcement vehicle”

 

Jodi’s predicate felony is burglary? You’ve got to be kidding me. Incredibly, Juan Martinez sold that B.S. To the jury, or to many of them, anyways. I don’t think you can stretch, mutilate, and warp a law any more than Martinez did here. Then he sold it to them, because he is the fireside story teller. There were five astute jurors, though, who weren’t buying it at all.

The State has put forth that the felony predicate is burglary. In Arizona statutes, burglary is akin to trespassing with the intent to commit any felony. Jodi Arias at some point became an uninvited guest in Travis Alexander’s home. When, exactly did Jodi Arias become an unwelcome guest in Travis’ home? According to the twisted logic of the State, Jodi Arias became an unwelcome guest as soon as she began her premeditated murder of Travis Alexander.

According to the state, when Jodi Arias began killing Travis Alexander, at that point in time, she is no longer welcome in Travis’ home and is now guilty of 2nd degree burglary.

 

Monty_Python_Holy_Grail

 

“The crime of Burglary in the Second Degree requires proof that

the defendant:

  1. Entered or remained unlawfully in or on a residential

structure; and

  1. Did so with the intent to commit any theft or felony therein.”

– Arizona 2nd degree burglary statute.

Here there is a situation where, as soon as Jodi Arias starts killing Travis Alexander, she is now guilty of second degree burglary, because Travis obviously would not want her in his home at that time = remaining unlawfully in a residential structure. That same act of starting to kill Alexander also serves as the further felony Arias intended to commit. So the killing of Alexander serves as the reason why she is guilty of 2nd degree burglary, plus it is the further felony Arias intended to commit, plus it is the killing that was committed in the course of the burglary.

 

resized_philosoraptor-meme-generator-circular-logic-is-the-best-logic-because-it-is-circular-fa4a24

 

Do you see why this is insane circular logic? As a matter of fact, that’s what Kirk Nurmi argued when he asked the court to drop the Felony Murder charge after it became clear that the State was arguing just about exclusively for 1st degree premeditated murder. He said this is circular logic. The murder and the predicate felony and the further intended felony cannot be all the same thing.

Not only is it circular logic, but also, there’s a law against it:

 

circular_logic_by_mestafais-d5vm1d1

 

Felony-murder cannot be charged if all the elements of the felony are included in the elements of murder. This is known as the merger doctrine, which holds that if the underlying felony merges with the killing, the felony cannot constitute felony-murder. For example, all of the elements of the crime of Assault and Battery with a deadly weapon are included in murder. If a killing, therefore, occurred during the course of this crime, the accused would be charged with murder.”

Yet this is exactly what Martinez is putting forth. He wrongly divides a stabbing murder into a series of assaults with a knife, and calls the intended further felony “assault”.

 

Update: It has come to my attention that, In Arizona, Martinez and Judge Stephens correctly cited the law when stating that the intended felony defining the burglary can be assault even if the victim was murdered.

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Felony-Murder+Rule

Again, the predicate felony = remaining unlawfully in the home (via killing Alexander) with the intent of committing any further felony (killing Alexander) and the murder part of the felony murder is (killing Alexander).

For this charge of Felony Murder, aren’t all of the elements of the felony predicate “merging” with the murder?

 

You cannot do that. Yet, Martinez and the state of Arizona did do it. Sound familiar?

It seems that in the Bizarro world of Arizona, a murder can be divided up into a series of assaults.

 

Raven1

Now, let’s entertain the theory that it was Travis’ gun that was used in the killing. Besides the fact that this significantly weakens the State’s case for pre-meditation, this scenario doesn’t work so hot either. That’s because the State would have to prove that Arias’ stated intention was to remain in Alexander’s residence with the intent to steal that gun, and in the course of committing this felony, she was willing to kill Alexander.

He would have to prove that Arias intended to steal the gun prior to, rather than after, the murder.

Following this theory, the death occurred while she was in the process of stealing Travis’ gun, which was her primary intention. This is absurd. Since she got rid of the gun, one can then be confident that her main purpose was not to be in the home unlawfully in order to steal his gun.

 

 

Travis Alexander as Eddie Snell from Alabama
Travis Alexander as Eddie Snell from Alabama

There’s a much better argument for that:

What if, she broke into the home, was in there without Alexander’s consent or knowledge, and then he caught her with the gun in her hand? She shoots him and kills him because he identified her in his home when she was supposed to be 1,000 miles away in Yreka. This is a much clearer case of felony murder. But, as we know, Travis let her in the home, Jodi knew what he was watching on his computer (You tube: “Harder Better Faster Stronger”).

We know they took pictures of each other, and we know they had sex a number of times. One could have confidence that she was welcome in the home (at least, at first).

Neither theft of the gun, nor “assault”, nor the killing of Alexander can fulfill the “intent to commit any felony” part of the Felony Murder Statute, according to Nurmi. The intended felony must be separate from the killing.

scoob1Update: It has been brought to my attention that Arizona does not recognize the merger rule in all instances, meaning if a person is murdered, you can break down that murder into a series of assaults and you can use assault as the felony defining the felony predicate of burglary.

 

 

6a014e88d37c32970d01675f27d23c970b

The prosecution, after being asked over and over again by the defense about their intentions with the felony murder charge, in 2010, finally stated what they would be using “any of the lesser included offenses” (murder 2, manslaughter). Later, they added “aggravated assault” and “theft” as the intended offense beyond 2nd degree burglary (remaining in the home unlawfully). Doesn’t this show that they have no clear theory?

Nurmi brought up a motion to dismiss the felony murder charge on the ninth day of trial, in open court minus the jury, on video. There he states that there is no underlying felony for the felony murder charge (video below). Nurmi said “The essence of the argument, your honor, is that there was nothing facilitated, at all. There was no distinct offense for this burglary….and the assertions of felony murder based on that should not stand.” Here he is saying that there was no intent to commit a theft or any felony other than the killing itself.

HolyGrail051

Juan Martinez states that the further felony is assault, now her status has changed to an unwelcome guest, the assault, and the stabbings that happened after that become the felony. Nurmi responded that it is either a premeditated murder or it’s not, and the felony murder burglary charge is just an “empty vessel” in order to seek a first degree murder conviction. (The motion was denied by Judge Sherry Stephens).

 

 

The defense motion to dismiss the felony murder charge.

Start at 47:15

 

Do you remember this? Jodi must have forgotten her glasses or something and is wearing a different pair. Nurmi and Martinez fight it out over the felony murder charge

 

At SpotLightOnLaw, we have talked about the felony murder charge a lot. Now, we hope you will soon understand why. Who gives a hoot about the felony murder charge when it’s old news? It’s over and done with, the jury was unanimous for pre-meditated murder anyways, and Nurmi is a blooming idiot!

 

Tim-monty-python-and-the-holy-grail-591629_800_441

 

No, there’s something to this. Either this is Martinez’ trick, or it’s just bad common law. Not the first time we’ve seen a poorly worded statute interpretated poorly in Arizona.

Nurmi seems to feel internally that this is incorrect. He’s not wrong, but his argument is not persuasive enough. He didn’t invoke the merger rule and he couldn’t find any case law specific enough to this issue. He’s a really good attorney, but he’s lacking as a trial lawyer.

 

images

 

I will reiterate this now in a visual format, so I hope you can see that this felony murder charge is ridiculous. It’s ludicrous. It makes no logical, practical or legal sense, does it?

Juan's interpretation of the law is on the left and Kirk's interpretation is on the right. Who is correct?i                                                                Click to Enlarge
Juan’s interpretation of the law is on the left and Kirk’s interpretation is on the right. Which is correct?
Click to Enlarge

 

Stay with me, now. I hope you will see that this is at the root of what’s wrong with the Jodi Arias case. The Holy Grail is in sight!

What do you believe is the theft or felony that Jodi intended to commit or committed? No, Juan Martinez and Judge Stephens, it cannot be the murder itself.

But, wait. According to Arizona law, and only Arizona law, Juan Martinez and Judge Stephens are correct in saying that assault CAN be used as the the felony defining the burglary. 

 

Martinez in closing arguments of the guilt phase discussing the felony murder charge

Starts at 23:30 then he picks it up again at 37:30

Now, if you don’t believe me, look at what a very good attorney in Arizona has to say:

 

Vladimir Gagic, Criminal Law Attorney

Phoenix Arizona

“That, for the moment, leaves the felony murder charge, which is count two in the indictment. At common law, felony murder meant that someone could be charged for murder even if they never intended to kill a person, so long as the a death was the foreseeable result while the defendant was committing a dangerous felony.

The classic example of a felony murder is when a kidnap victim dies from a heart attack while stuffed in the trunk of a kidnapper’s car. Thus, even though the kidnapper never intended to kill his victim, he is still guilty of felony murder because the death of his victim was a foreseeable consequence of the underlying predicate felony, kidnapping.”

“Another example is when during a bank robbery the police shoot and kill a bank robber’s accomplice. Even though the bank robbers certainly never intended the police to kill one of them, that result was foreseeable, and thus felony murder. Other common law predicate felonies included rape and burglary. Assault is not a predicate felony in Arizona for the felony murder rule.”

The important point with the felony murder rule is that the predicate felony is different from intent to murder, depraved indifference murder, manslaughter, or any other homicide charge because the goal of the felony murder rule is to deter the predicate felony itself, while non-felony murder homicide and murder laws deal with homicide charges directly.”

 

Monty-Python-and-The-Holy-Grail-monty-python-16580771-845-468

 

As most of you are aware, the government has charged Ms. Arias with felony murder, with the predicate felony being burglary. The important point here is that while even though common law burglary required breaking and entering with the intent to commit a theft therein, in Arizona, which follows the model penal code, defines burglary more broadly as (see “Arizona Revised Statute ARS 13-1506 and 13-1507):

Entering or remaining unlawfully in or on a nonresidential structure or in a fenced commercial or residential yard with the intent to commit any theft or any felony therein; and A person commits burglary in the second degree by entering or remaining unlawfully in or on a residential structure with the intent to commit any theft or any felony therein.”

“The prosecutor does not allege Ms. Arias entered into Travis Alexander’s home with the intent to kill him or commit any felony, for that matter, at the moment of entry. How could he when all the evidence shows Mr. Alexander invited Ms. Arias into his house? The evidence is clear she spent at least 8 hours in his house, and during that time together they had sex multiple times.”

 

mqdefault

 

“Instead, the prosecutor’s argument is that felony murder applies because at some point Mr. Alexander revoked permission from Ms. Arias to be in his house, and at that point, she was “remaining unlawfully in… a residential structure”. This is where things get quite silly for the government’s felony murder allegation:

if in fact at some point Jodi Arias was still in Mr. Alexander’s house without his permission (we can call that point T1), what felony was Ms. Arias’ intending to commit at T1? If she was intending to kill him at T1, then that would be the exact same thing as count one, murder in the first degree intent to kill, premeditated murder.”

“The defense filed a motion to dismiss the felony murder charge, stating quite correctly the allegation makes no sense. In response, Judge Stephens ruled Ms. Arias’ intent at T1 could have been assault, not intent to kill Mr. Alexander. I believe that ruling is in error because of something called the merger rule.

 

arias22n-1a-web

 

To count any death that occurred during the course of an assault as felony murder would obliterate the distinction between assault and murder. And even more importantly, there would be no distinction between second degree depraved indifference murder and first degree intent to kill murder.”

“P.S. What I mean by merger rule is that the predicate underlying dangerous felony, the dangerous felony of felony murder, must be different from the actual murder charge itself; that is why assault is not a predicate in felony murder. If it was a predicate, then every murder would automatically be felony murder because every murder involves an assault. In other words, proving the murder would automatically prove the assault as the evidence is circular. And thus, there would be no degrees of murder charges (first degree, second degree) as there are now.”

http://www.azcriminallawsexcrimes.com/violent-crimes/why-the-felony-murder-allegation-against-jodi-arias-is-nonsense/

 

There’s more to it. Let’s move on to the other pieces of the puzzle.

This explanation makes good sense and it’s the law in most states. Here is another instance, like the F(6) cruelty aggravator, where the statute is poorly written, coupled with illogical jury instructions or case law, that leaves Nurmi and Gagic and I, feeling like something is not quite right. That’s my overall feeling about the Jodi Arias case, too.

 

BxsIIEpCcAAKfba

 

What did Kirk Nurmi mean by “That charge is there out of fear”?

Now, we are getting to what Kirk Nurmi said about the prosecution’s ”fear”. What’s the distinction between 1st degree Felony Murder and 2nd degree Murder? Both involve no pre-planning, and in both, the person must have an intent.

The difference is that in Felony Murder, as normally observed, there must be an intent to commit another dangerous felony (where a death is foreseeable). There must be a primary or “predicate felony” OTHER THAN THE KILLING, with no pre-planned intention to kill. In the course of committing this dangerous felony, a death occurs.

Martinez argued premeditation throughout this case. He even argues a short moment of cool reflection in the bathroom was also possible, in case the jurors don’t accept the long premeditation theory. The – Travis was “killed three ways” argument is also meant to show deliberation and premeditation. He argued throughout the case that Travis didn’t own a gun, and that Jodi brought the gun with her from Yreka.

Now, Martinez is telling the jury that according to Arias’ version of events, Travis did own a gun and he’s arguing that she did steal it and that makes theft the felony defining the burglary. He’s arguing that Travis Alexander was murdered, and in the process of the murder he was assaulted, making assault the felony defining the burglary.

Martinez is telling the jury that yes, you can find that this was both a felony murder and a pre-meditated murder if the premeditated murder happened in furtherance of the burglary. He’s telling them that as soon as Arias first assaulted Alexander, that at that point, she was now unwelcome and unlawfully in the home. He’s telling them that this fits the Arizona burglary statute.   

Who’s right and who’s wrong?

 

Holy_Grail_tapestry_The_Failure_of_Sir_Launcelot

Why is he doing this? What is going on here?

Imagine there are 4 rooms, like motel rooms. Imagine there is a door to each of these rooms. The first room is 1st degree pre-meditated murder, the second room is 2nd degree murder, the 3rd is manslaughter and the 4th is justifiable homicide. Which door will the jury walk through?

 

holy_grail_png_by_erdmute-d1nodd1

If some jurors are unsure about premeditation or if some feel it’s a heat of passion homicide, they could have a compromise verdict and choose to walk through the door of 2nd degree murder. But what if the state is allowed to add the door of 1st degree felony murder? In this motel scenario, that extra door would lead into the same room as the 1st degree pre-meditated door, (or they could be connected rooms). In any case, it’s another choice for the jury.

It’s another choice which gives the prosecution another opportunity for the jurors to go into the room they want. That’s only fair, Martinez would say, because the defense has 3 doors and 3 rooms and we only have one. Now, it’s more fair because they have 3 doors and we now have 2 doors.

That’s what’s really going on here. He wants it to be as ambiguous as possible.

 

images (1)

 

Whether Jodi Arias is  completely innocent or whether she is a cruel and evil, cold-blooded murderer shouldn’t even matter. Does what Jodi did give officials the right to do what they’re doing here, or what they have done and continue to do in the State of Arizona?

Maybe the statute and/or the interpretations of the statute is just plain wrong.

In the beginning of this case, Juan Martinez had much less information about the gas cans than he did by the end of the trial. The major evidences of pre-meditation at the beginning of the trial were the license plates being tampered with, the car being rented 90 miles from Yreka, the borrowed gas cans, the hair coloring, the phone being off, and the recovered bullet being the same caliber as the gun stolen in Yreka.

All these occurrences could have nefarious explanations, but all these could have innocent explanations. If I were the prosecutor on this case, I would have been a little worried. Maybe that explains, both the change by the prosecution in the order of injuries from gun first to gun last (with the help of Dr. Horn), AND the retention of the felony murder charge. Is it just a coincidence that both of these absurd assertions help to dramatically increase the odds for the prosecution?

The biggest untold embarrassment of this trial is that there was division in this jury. They could not agree on the essentials of this case, and they disagreed 8 to 4 over the death penalty. Seven jurors voted for BOTH felony murder and premeditated murder.

Just because the boiler plate jury instructions state that you can vote for both felony murder AND premeditated murder doesn’t mean that voting for both in any way applies to this particular case.

 

monty_python_and_the_holy_grail_blu_ray_disc_5

 

These 7 people were following Juan Martinez’ interpretations while the remaining 5 were at least considering some of the defenses’ arguments.

 

All this is the Holy Grail of the Jodi Arias case.

 

Remember the list of 16 predicate felonies?

If you or someone with you causes the death of a person in the course of one of these dangerous felonies, the killing is elevated to 1st degree murder. You could say that 1st degree Felony Murder is when a person commits a 2nd degree murder in the course of one of these dangerous felonies.

 

Law-School-Dojo-1-2-3-Play-Smart-Build-Muscles-Win-Big

 

Notice that 1st degree premeditated murder is not on that list. Premeditated murder cannot be the predicate felony for felony murder. Assault with a deadly weapon also is not on this list. Assault can be the further intended felony that’s required in 2nd degree burglary, but it cannot be the predicate felony for felony murder.

So, 2nd degree murder and 1st degree felony murder have A LOT in common. Also, 2nd degree murder and 1st degree premeditated murder have A LOT in common, particularly when the period of cool deliberation or reflection is very short.

 

This caused a legal expert to say:

expert_in_60_days_big

“The point is that in jurisdictions where no time is too short to support a finding of actual thought and reflection, sufficient to establish premeditation, the dividing line between first and second degree murder is extremely murky, to put it mildly”.

http://books.google.com/books?id=f9vrpYcRBAAC&pg=PA137&lpg=PA137&dq=example+of+premeditated+murder+brief+period+of+reflection#v=onepage&q=example%20of%20premeditated%20murder%20brief%20period%20of%20reflection&f=false

 

brrLHMC

 

They could fear that they would lose the case. Remember, Juan Martinez, as shown in his prior and current cases, will cheat even when he has a slam dunk case. (State vs. Morris, State vs. Dixon, State vs. Gallardo, State vs. Lynch). But we know that Juan will cheat even more when he fears he may lose the case (State vs. Falater, State vs. Grant, State vs. Carr, Robert Towery commutation hearing, State vs. Chrisman).

 

dt_monty_python_1026

 

For Juan Martinez, not getting a 1st degree murder conviction would be a LOSS in the Jodi Arias case. The Death Penalty would be off the table and Jodi Arias would get out of prison one day. That’s unacceptable to the prosecution. This case has been widely viewed throughout the United States and the world. People are getting a good look at Arizona Justice, and this trial was on live TV. Also, the 2nd penalty phase will be available on video and transcripts after the sentencing.

 

460x

 

This case is a very big deal in Arizona. There are plenty of biblical law types, who demand the most severe punishment possible when a woman kills a man. The Mormons are a very powerful political base of themselves, and they support the ultra conservative right which reigns supreme in Arizona. Woman’s Death Row just lost one woman (due to a wrongful conviction), so there are now only two women on Death row in Arizona. Isn’t it awful expensive to run a maximum security Death Row for only two women?

 

Monty Python

Remember that Juan does not like to lose a case, and anything less than 1st degree murder would be a loss. Remember also that Juan did not really have a handle on the gas can situation until late in the trial. As things stood in 2011, this is too risky for a guy like Juan. He wants every advantage possible. He got that advantage by changing the order of injuries and not dropping the felony murder charge, for starters.

Now, I hope you can understand this just a little better and we hope you will start to see why we consider the retention of the felony murder charge, along with the one-two switcheroo of the order of injuries to be the Holy Grail of wrongdoing by the prosecution.

What is YOUR opinion?

Comments from all perspectives are welcome.

You can also comment on our FB page

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Spotlight-On-Law/189870931203328

All Rights Reserved

 

 

 

 

Arizona Justice: The very strange case of Patrick Bearup

Arizona Justice: The very strange case of Patrick  Bearup

Fact-based reporting

by Rob Roman

research by Amanda Chen

dancing bears 2

 

In the midst of the Jodi Arias trial, people tend to forget that this case is happening in the state of Arizona. There are 18 states without the Death Penalty and there are 32 states plus the Federal Government that have the Death Penalty. The Federal Government, mostly due to acts of international and domestic terrorism, has dramatically increased the qualifications for and the use of the Death Penalty.

 

Among the states with the Death Penalty, there are states that rarely use it, there are states that use it, but are reluctant to carry out executions, and there are states that actively use and carry out the death penalty. Texas is a very prominent user and enforcer of the D.P., so is Ohio, Florida, Oklahoma, and, of course, Arizona.

 

STATES WITH THE DEATH PENALTY (32) ·
Alabama
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Delaware
Florida
Georgia
Idaho
Indiana
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
North Carolina
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Virginia
Washington
WyomingALSO
– U.S. Gov’t
– U.S. Military
STATES WITHOUT THE DEATH PENALTY (18) (YEAR ABOLISHED IN PARENTHESES)
Alaska (1957)
Connecticut** (2012)
Hawaii (1957)
Illinois (2011)
Iowa (1965)
Maine (1887)
Maryland*** (2013)
Massachusetts (1984)
Michigan (1846)
Minnesota (1911)
New Jersey (2007)
New Mexico* (2009)
New York (2007)#
North Dakota (1973)
Rhode Island (1984)^
Vermont (1964)
West Virginia (1965)
Wisconsin (1853)ALSO
Dist. of Columbia (1981)

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/states-and-without-death-penalty

 

constitution

Furman vs. Georgia was the landmark 1972 U.S. Supreme Court decision making the Death Penalty as practiced unconstitutional and saved the lives of the Manson family, for one. The decision paved the way for Capital punishment, formerly used for crimes like rape, to be used only for 1st degree murder. The decision caused all states using the Death Penalty to employ some sort of guidelines to narrow the types of cases which could qualify for the Death Penalty and make these qualifications uniform and fair.

The idea was to prevent prosecutors from using too much discretion to be able to unfairly target any particular individual with the Death Penalty. Many states used statutory guidelines called “aggravating circumstances” or “special circumstances”. For example, O.J. Simpson was charged with murder with the special circumstances of “lying in wait” and “multiple murders” (Ron Goldman and Nicole Brown Simpson). The prosecutor made the decision to take the D.P. off the table for the football star and celebrity, even though the crime qualified for this penalty in California.

Most states have similar aggravating circumstances such as the murder of a child, multiple murders, prior violent felonies, conspiracy, murder for monetary gain, or the murder of a police officer. Arizona has all these aggravators, but they have added more and more to the list until now, many people believe there is almost no murder that cannot qualify for the Death Penalty if the prosecutor chooses to use it. This seems to go against the entire purpose of Furman vs. Georgia.

mahatma-gandhi-quotes-036

The Arizona statutes now have 14 aggravating circumstances to qualify a defendant for the death penalty.

  1. Prior offense for which a sentence of life imprisonment or death was imposable.
  2. Prior serious offense even if committed at the same time as the murder.
  3. In the commission of the offense the defendant knowingly created a grave risk of death to another person besides the murdered person.
  4. The defendant procured the commission of the offense by payment, or promise of payment, of anything of pecuniary value (conspiracy).
  5. The defendant committed the offense as consideration for the receipt, or in expectation of the receipt, of anything of pecuniary value (murder for hire).
  6. The defendant committed the offense in an especially heinous, cruel or depraved manner.
  7. The defendant committed the offense while in custody, or on parole for a violent offense.
  8. Multiple murders.
  9. Murder of a child or unborn child or a person over the age of seventy.
  10. Murder of a Police Officer.
  11. Murder as part of or to join a street gang or syndicate.
  12. Murder of a witness or Police informant.
  13. Cold and Calculated.
  14. Use of a stun gun during the murder.

This caused some public defenders in Arizona to make this statement:

“Two public defenders in Arizona’s Maricopa County contend that the state’s death penalty law is unconstitutional because its aggravating factors allow for a death sentence in virtually every first-degree murder case.”

The statute, they argue in the motion filed in February, “has no method of meaningfully distinguishing the few cases in which death is deserved from the many cases in which it is not.” The New York Times mentions the motion in a story about less culpable defendants who draw harsher sentences than co-defendants.”

http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/pds_argue_arizonas_death_penalty_law_is_unconstitutional_because_it_is_indi/

20140802texas-race-death-sentence

Most of Arizona’s 14 aggravating circumstances are the same as most other Death Penalty states. The use of a stun gun (Number 14) doesn’t seem to make too much sense. “Cold and Calculated” sounds good, but the interpretation of exactly what that means could cause problems. Numbers 2 and 3 are unique to Arizona.

Number 2, like most states, provides that a prior violent felony can qualify a murderer for the death penalty. But in Arizona, that “prior” violent felony can be committed at the same time as the murder. This means that if the defendant is not guilty of the murder, then they might also be not guilty of another felony committed during the murder. So there is then a scenario in which an innocent person can be found both guilty of the murder AND qualify for the Death Penalty. Arizona has used this aggravator to impose the Death Penalty on defendants whose crimes would not normally qualify at all.

Number 3 seems reasonable, that a defendant who created a grave risk of death to another person besides the murdered person qualifies for the Death Penalty. This aggravator however, also seems to be wide open to interpretation.

heinous

The gold standard in Arizona, though, is number 6, the “especially heinous, cruel and depraved” aggravator. This aggravator has 3 “prongs”. There can be a finding of any combination of the three. The prong that is the most wide- open to interpretation is the Cruelty prong. As a matter of fact, 6 of the 8 most recently executed prisoners in Arizona had “especially cruel” as one aggravating factor.

That is the aggravating factor used in two out of three of the most recent Death Penalty cases in Arizona, Jodi Arias and Marissa DeVault. Cruelty stands out in Arizona as being applicable to almost any murder. There is no “especially” in “especially cruel”. According to the statute and the jury instructions, the prosecution has to show that the victim suffered, either mentally or physically, and the defendant knew they would suffer.

Why is this a problem? The problem is that almost every murder victim suffers. Even people who die a natural death suffer. There is nothing in the statute or jury instructions which make the distinction of extreme, extraordinary, or above average suffering, it is simply any suffering at all. On this basis, not just most murders but most natural deaths, even death by lethal injection, fit this definition. The Arizona aggravating circumstance, as written and as explained in the jury instructions, can be made to fit almost any murder. Defense attorneys have claimed this, Kirk Nurmi filed an appeal on this basis in the Jodi Arias case, and we have claimed this here at SpotightOnLaw.

So between this cruelty aggravator, the 14 Arizona Death Penalty Aggravators, and the other 3 strange aggravating circumstances, it seems clear that Arizona has a scheme to make any murder fit the Death Penalty qualifications if they want it to, thus violating at least the spirit of Furman vs. Georgia.

Maricopa County Prosecutor Juan Martinez even tried, unsuccessfully, in State vs. Miller to make execution style murders fit under the especially cruel aggravator.

More than this, the actions of Arizona prosecutors show that they target specific individuals with the Death Penalty, while not invoking the Death Penalty for other defendants whose crimes are as bad or much worse than those targeted.

 

Robert Towery - Executed March 8, 2012
Robert Towery – Executed March 8, 2012

SpotlightOnLaw showed the large disparity between the punishment of Robert Towery (Death), and his accomplice, Randy Barker (10 years) in the strangulation murder of retired philanthropist Mark Jones. We also showed the large disparity in the punishment between Richard Dale Stokley (Death) and his accomplice, Randy Brazeal (20 years), in the rape and murder of two 13 year-old girls.

Mandey Meyers, 13. Raped and murdered by Dale Stokely and Randy Brazeal.
Mandey Meyers, 13. Raped and murdered by Dale Stokely and Randy Brazeal.
Mary Snyder, 13. Raped and murdered by Randy Brazeal.
Mary Snyder, 13. Raped and murdered by Randy Brazeal.
Randy Brazeal, released back into society July 2011
Randy Brazeal, released back into society July 2011

Sometimes it’s necessary to give a sweetheart deal to one of the defendants in a murder case in order to get needed testimony and evidence against the other(s). We saw this with the Manson family, as first Susan Atkins and then Linda Kasabian, were given sweetheart deals in exchange for testimony that would help convict the other Manson defendants.

Usually, you have the least culpable defendant testify against the more culpable defendants. Randy Barker was Robert Towery’s accomplice, but Towery is the one who strangled the victim to death. Linda Kasabian was with the Manson murderers, but she was the designated driver and she did not participate in the actual killings. But in Arizona, they needlessly give co-defendants a sweetheart deal in order to get the Death Penalty for the other.

In the case of Robert Towery, Robert knew Mark Jones and devised the home invasion robbery. Robert Towery was the one who strangled the 68 year-old victim to death. While Towery was executed, his accomplice received 10 years and is now living among us. Towery was a meth. addict and had been severely abused as a child. It was prosecutor Juan Martinez who prevented Towery’s sentence from being commuted to life by falsely claiming there was no evidence of childhood abuse and falsely claiming that Towery injected the victim with battery acid (a claim that had been disproved 20 years earlier). It was Juan Martinez who made sure Towery was executed 6 days after his commutation hearing. Robert Towery was the more culpable of the two, yet the disparity in sentencing was massive.

In the case of Richard Dale Stokley, the opposite occurred. Two young girls were kidnapped, raped and murdered. Stokley couldn’t live with his guilt and went to the police the next day and confessed. Randy Brazeal knew the sister of one of the 13 year-old girls. He devised the kidnapping, rapes and murders. It was his car and entirely his plan. Most of the evidence pointed at him and he raped both girls.

Richard Stokely, executed December, 5, 2012.
Richard Stokely, executed December, 5, 2012.

Richard Stokley was more or less just along for the ride. But Randy Brazeal claimed that Richard Stokley was the mastermind of the murders. He made a deal to testify against Stokely before DNA tests came back showing Brazeal had raped both girls. As a result, Stokley was sentenced to death and executed in 2012. Brazeal served 20 years. Brazeal was released in 2011 and was recently arrested (July 2014) in Arkansas for “urinating on Horseshoe Lake City Hall”.

http://www.kpho.com/story/26096822/convicted-murderer-urinates-on-city-hall

http://murderpedia.org/male.S/s/stokley-richard.htm

Similarly, Daniel Wayne Cook was sentenced to death in 1988 and executed in 2012. He and an accomplice, John Matzke, brutally murdered Matzke’s 26 year-old roommate and a 16 year-old co-worker. The murders included sodomy, torture, strangulation, purposely prolonging the murders and the burning of the victims genitals with cigarettes. John Matzke, received only 20 years for these heinous murders and is reported to be living in Tucson, Arizona, under an assumed name. We could not even find a photo of Matzke, who’s identity has been carefully hidden by prosecutors. Did prosecutors really need to give these sweetheart deals in order to convict their accomplices? Not really, but they needed them in order to achieve the Death Penalty for their accomplices.

Without the Death Penalty being involved, all these murderers would likely still be behind bars. Arizona prosecutors didn’t seem to mind that equally culpable or even more culpable defendants were allowed to plead to 2nd degree murder and get relatively short sentences, as long as one of the defendants got the Death Penalty. Sure, it’s great for the prosecution that one of the defendants was sentenced to death, but the other vicious and dangerous murderers were released out into the public.

Patrick Bearup. Sentenced to death on February 5, 2007, for the Februeary 2002 slaying, with 3 accomplices, of Mark Mathes.
Patrick Bearup. Sentenced to death on February 5, 2007, for the February 2002 slaying, with 3 accomplices, of Mark Mathes.

It didn’t seem to matter either, to Arizona prosecutors, if the more culpable defendant got a sweetheart deal as long as somebody was made to pay and sit on Death Row. This leads us to the very strange case of Patrick Bearup.

Four “skinheads” were arrested for the murder of Mark Mathes. Mathes was the roommate of Jessica Nelson, who thought Mathes had stolen $200 from her room. She called her “skinhead” friends and the four murdered the roommate. They were soon arrested as suspects in the murder.

 

 

Deadheads
Deadheads

 

Skinheads
Skinheads

“One of those defendants was Patrick Bearup, who helped three co-defendants in the murder of a man they accused of stealing $200 from his roommate. By all accounts, the Times says, Bearup was not directly involved in the killing, though he did help dispose of the body and severed one of the victim’s fingers to retrieve a ring. Bearup was the only defendant in the Maricopa County case to receive the death penalty. The three others, including a defendant who shot the victim, accepted plea deals and avoided execution.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/06/us/in-many-capital-cases-less-culpable-defendants-receive-death-penalty.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

 

Patrick Bearup
Patrick Bearup

Patrick Bearup didn’t beat the victim nearly to death with a baseball bat, he was not in the car that concealed the victim in the trunk. He didn’t shoot him twice with a shotgun, and he didn’t throw him over a cliff. His co-defendants did. Yet they all were allowed to plead guilty to 2nd degree murder while Patrick Bearup was sentenced to death.

Not coincidentally, Patrick Bearup is the son of Tom Bearup, a man who worked for Maricopa County and was Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s right hand man.

That is, until they had a big falling out. In fact, Tom Bearup was a born and bred local who gave support and legitimacy to Sheriff Joe, a transplant from Massachusetts . Tom Bearup rationalized Joe’s eccentricities to co-workers and assured the others that Sheriff Joe was a good leader. It wasn’t long before they had a falling out and became enemies.

Tom Bearup
Tom Bearup

Tom Bearup didn’t like how Joe Arpaio was making lots of money on the side selling pink underwear to the public (mimicking the pink underwear he forces all prisoners, men and women, to wear) and diverting the money to his personal “posse”. Tom Bearup started sounding the alarm that Sheriff Joe had crossed the line from eccentricity to being a very dangerous person. He clashed with Arpaio over the wrongful death of Scott Norberg, which cost the county 8.25 million dollars. Tom stopped supporting Sheriff Joe, claiming Joe had “turned into a monster”.

 

sheriff-joe-arpaio-pink-boxers brt

“In 1992, Arpaio, a longtime DEA agent, was elected sheriff in Maricopa County, the largest in Arizona, which includes Phoenix and its suburbs. Bearup was raised in Phoenix, and besides having been a police officer in and mayor of Soldotna, he was a longtime Republican operative. He worked with the Reagan administration, and was once nominated to be the U.S. ambassador to South Korea. His reputation and connections helped Arpaio secure his position.

After Arpaio was elected, Bearup became an executive officer in the new sheriff’s office. He was Arpaio’s right hand man, the buffer between underlings and the big guy. He managed the sheriff’s publicity and media relations—no small task for a lawman obsessed with seeing himself on television. In the process, Bearup helped forge Arpaio’s mythic persona—that of “America’s Toughest Sheriff,” a title later made famous by a January 1996 profile in Penthouse magazine (and also the title of Arpaio’s 1996 book).

Arpaio is known for many things: his “Tent City” jail, constructed of Korean War-era tents on concrete in a city that’s temperature reaches more than 110 degrees (43.,3 degrees C.) for long stretches; male, female, and juvenile chain gangs; dressing inmates in stripes and feeding them green bologna; and, not least of all, inmates dying in his jails. In 1997 Amnesty International issued a condemnation of many of these practices.

 

Joe Arpaio - "America's Toughest Sheriff" - according to Sheriff Joe Arpaio.
Joe Arpaio – “America’s Toughest Sheriff” – according to Sheriff Joe Arpaio.

“I’m so embarrassed that I’ve ever had the relationship I had with Joe Arpaio, because I helped him get to where he’s at,” Bearup tells Kelley. “I think a lot of it was my credibility that got him to where he’s at, because people trusted me when I told them about him. ‘Don’t worry about that, he’s a little bit eccentric, but his heart is in the right place. He wants to do the right thing.’ And I know there was something in my heart that said maybe there’s something wrong there… the guy’s a little wacky in some areas…He became a monster. And that monster is not anything that I could be with.”

Bearup ended up running against Arpaio after leaving the MCSO. His opposition to Joe earned him retaliation in the form of wiretaps and being tailed by undercover deputies. Bearup and his wife Adele eventually gave up on Arizona, heading north to Alaska, and freedom from fear.

adult-grateful-dead-green-dancing-bear-costume

But there’s another, sadder part to Bearup’s life, his son Patrick’s involvement with neo-Nazi skinheads here in Sand Land and with the brutal 2002 skinhead slaying of 40-year-old Mark Mathes. Papa Bearup contends his son is innocent, but his son was convicted for his part in the killing, which according to testimony involved Patrick cutting Mathes’ ring finger off while Mathes was still alive. Patrick is currently the only one on death row for the murder, though all parties agree he did not strike any of the fatal blows in Mathes’ beating death. Two others involved copped pleas. Ringleader Sean Gaines is still awaiting trial.

I’ve read about Patrick’s story before, and though he may not deserve to be on death row, it’s hard to feel any sympathy for him. Bearup’s die-hard belief in his son’s innocence seems borne of a father’s willful blindness more than reality.”

 

http://www.arpaio.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=272&start=0&postdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight=&sid=85a2a3c4a6e37a07075946fcfe8b449b

http://www.arpaio.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=947

 

June, 1996

scott-norberg-lt-2 (1)

Scott Norberg was a local football star who got drunk and got in trouble with the law.

Amnesty International believes Scott Norberg was shocked multiple times with a stun-gun while he was handcuffed and forced into a face-down position. He was then transported to a restraint chair and strapped in with a towel over his face. He was surrounded by a gaggle of Corrections Officers.

After some time working on him, they quickly dispersed, laughing. Norberg wasn’t moving. There were allegations that the scene was washed down and evidence destroyed. After he was found dead, detention officers accused Norberg of attacking them.

Settlement $8.25 million dollars.

http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/1999-01-14/news/the-8-million-victim/full/

 

patrick bearup

Bearup, Patrick

With three accomplices charged with beating a man half to death with a baseball bat, throwing him in the trunk of a car, cutting off his finger, shooting him twice with a shotgun and throwing him off a cliff.

“The three men got out of their vehicles and approached the Mathes home. Gaines carried a loaded shotgun, Johnson had an aluminum baseball bat, and Bearup had a folding knife with a nine- or ten-inch blade. They advanced across the backyard toward Mark, who was sitting on the rear patio with Nelson.

Bearup, Johnson, and Gaines surrounded Mark. Johnson attacked Mark with the baseball bat, striking him in the head and upper torso as many as twenty-five times. Bearup maintained his location throughout the assault, preventing Mark from leaving.

The witnesses disagreed about whether Mark was alive following the beating. Nelson was certain that Mark was killed on the patio, while Johnson claimed that Mark was still conscious and groaning. After the attack, Johnson and Bearup dragged Mark to one of the cars and stuffed him in the trunk. Bearup kicked Mark’s head to make him fit into the trunk.

The four perpetrators got into two vehicles – Bearup and Nelson in Bearup’s car and Johnson and Gaines in the vehicle containing Mark’s body – and drove to an isolated area near Crown King. Johnson testified that he heard Mark mumbling and moaning in the trunk during the drive.

When the cars stopped on Crown King Road, Bearup pulled Mark from the trunk. Gaines and Nelson stripped him to make the body more difficult to identify. Nelson was unsuccessfully attempting to remove Mark’s ring when Bearup approached and cut off the finger with a pair of wire clippers. Mark was then thrown over the guardrail and, as he lay in the ravine below, Gaines shot him twice.”

http://murderpedia.org/male.B/b/bearup-patrick.htm

 

“Mr. Bearup’s case was one of 135 pending capital cases in Maricopa County in 2006, more than the combined number of cases in the next three jurisdictions at the top of the list: Los Angeles County, California and Clark County, Nevada., each with 36; and Harris County, Texas, with 17”

 

“The highest number of pending cases was 149 death penalty cases.” This is in Maricopa County alone.

http://www.omlaw.com/uploads/publications/2012-04%20-%20LAH%20-%20ARTICLES%20%20Capital%20Case%20Crisis%20in%20Maricopa%20County%20Arizona%20and%20A%20Response%20From%20the%20%20(4).pdf

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/documents/2011__Year__End.pdf

http://www.abajournal.com/magazine/article/pending_death_penalty_cases_weigh_against_maricopa_county/

 

Is it just a coincidence that the least culpable of 4 perpetrators of a horrendous crime sits on death row when the 3 people most responsible and who caused the death of the victim directly got sweetheart deals?

What kind of justice is this? All three should have gotten life sentences.

 

charles-manson

Well, you might say, Patrick Bearup was the leader who, like Charles Manson, didn’t get his hands dirty. However, it’s undisputed that Sean Gaines was the leader of the gang.

 

The 3 others will all be up for parole between 2019 and 2028 and could be out of prison and living in your neighborhood in 5 to 14 years.

 

Sean Gaines, 22, Jessica Nelson, 27, Patrick Bearup, 26, and Jeremy Johnson, 20, were arrested by Phoenix police on September 10 and 11, 2003 on charges of the murder of Mark Mathes.

 

jessica nelson

Jessica Nelson (14 years) –

Instigated the murder of her roommate. Mark Mathes, accusing him of stealing $200 and calling her skinhead friends, asking them to exact revenge

 

Eligible for parole 2019

 

jeremy johnson

Jeremy Johnson (14 years) –

Beat Mark Mathes nearly to death with a baseball bat, tossed him in a trunk and helped throw him off a cliff.

 

Eligible for parole 2019

 

sean gaines

Sean Gaines (25 years) –

Blasted Mark Mathes twice with a shotgun, and helped throw him off a cliff.

 

Eligible for parole 2028

 

bearup

Patrick Bearup

– Helped stuff Mathes into the trunk of a car and cut off Mathes’ ring finger to retrieve a ring.

 

Sentenced to Death

 

To his credit, Sean Gaines is reported to have denounced racism and his skinhead association, saying,  “I’m tired of living a lie. They can kill me, but at least they kill me with all of this off my shoulders.”

http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2008/spring/the-transformation

 

Jessica Nelson and Sean Gaines.
Jessica Nelson and Sean Gaines.
Sean Gaines
Sean Gaines

 

 

“Superior Court Judge Warren Granville chastised the County Attorney’s Office at the time over the disparity in sentencing in the Mathes affair. “Granville was not pleased that Bearup was the only defendant facing the death penalty.”

 

dancing_bear_serbian-in-bulgaria

 

 

“He wrote in a 2007 minute entry:

The County Attorney, as the law allows, made a unilateral decision not to withdraw the death notice for Mr. Bearup, a defendant who, even under the State’s theory of the case, did not cause the physical death of Mr. Mathis.[sic] Under the State’s theory of the case, Mr. Bearup acted only as support for Mr. Johnson as he baseball batted Mr. Mathis [sic] to death or to near death, and helped drag Mr. Mathis [sic] to a car trunk and the desert. Under the State’s theory, Mr. Bearup’s act of cutting off Mr. Mathis’ [sic] ring finger while cruel and heinous, was not a cause of the death.”

“Granville further noted:

“This Court, nonetheless, finds that Mr. Bearup’s death penalty sentence for Count 1 was not justified in the context of the relative responsibility of the co-defendants whom the County Attorney chose to withdraw the notices of death and reduce their sentencing range. It is the County Attorney’s motto that `let justice be done.’ This, of course, coincides with a prosecutor’s unique ethical responsibility. This Court finds that justice was not done for Mr. Bearup in Count 1.”

 

“Patrick Bearup was no angel, by all accounts. I know his father was upset when I said in my 2008 column that I figured Bearup probably deserved to spend the rest of his life in prison. But to face execution, when the ringleader and the main protagonists cheat death? That’s more than a little whack.”

“Which is why I regard the death penalty as an obscene joke, one that should be banned. The Mathes murder is but one example. There are a plethora of cases just like it, where justice is a card sharp’s game. But they receive little or no attention.”

The jurists and attorneys involved are all playing their assigned roles. I wouldn’t argue that they shouldn’t.

But if Bearup is executed while those more responsible for Mathes’ slaying live on with the hope of eventual release, that just further proves that capital punishment should be abolished, because our criminal justice system is not capable of meting out such draconian judgments equitably.”

http://blogs.phoenixnewtimes.com/bastard/2010/12/sean_gaines_gets_25_years_in_s.php

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/06/us/in-many-capital-cases-less-culpable-defendants-receive-death-penalty.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

 

 

Protesting Arizona corruption
Protesting Arizona corruption
Arizona Governor Jan Brewer.
Arizona Governor Jan Brewer.

So, is there some kind of connection between the large number of Arizona wrongful convictions, the lack of the use of good forensic science, the tight budgeting of law enforcement in Arizona, the targeted use of the death penalty, more culpable defendants getting sweetheart deals, the secret deals and unexplained deaths in the jails of Sheriff Joe Arpaio, the omnipresence of corruption in Maricopa County, the checkered history of prosecutor Juan Martinez, and the Jodi Arias case?

 

Or are these all mere coincidences?

 

spotlighonlaw

At SpotLightOnLaw, we have been trying to demonstrate to you that there is such a connection. Please take a look at our past articles (especially “Spotlight on Juan Martinez”, “What’s Going On in Arizona, Maricopa?”, “Stranger than Fiction – The real Sheriff Joe” “The Executives and the Executed” and “Spotlight on Dr. Kevin Horn”)

 

It seems as if Arizona likes to run things on the cheap, ignore and avoid a lot of forensic science, target certain people with the Death Penalty, make a lot of under the table money with schemes such as taking the meat out of all prisoners meals, “video visitation” at 65 cents per minute – no more face to face visits allowed, and the sale of pink underwear, and corruption just seems to permeate all areas of their “justice system”. We all know the Jodi Arias case could have been settled long ago, but instead it goes on ad infinitum, along with the suffering of the Alexander family.

http://www.prisonpolicy.org/blog/2014/11/10/sheriff-joe-phases-out-in-person-visits/

 

Letter from Patrick Bearup (click to enlarge)
Letter from Patrick Bearup (click to enlarge)

Even though there is effectively zero evidence remaining against Deborah Milke in the shooting death of her young son, the D.A. still refuses to drop the charges against her after she wrongfully spent 23 years on Death Row. They cannot admit they were wrong and will not accept responsibility for the egregious error.

http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/20131206mcso-to-allow-video-jail-visits-price.html

 

Why is the state more capricious about who lives and who dies than most murderers?
Why is the state more capricious about who lives and who dies than most murderers?

Whether the Jodi Arias case is as it appears to most people, or the truth of it has been carefully hidden, we do have her case to thank for shining a spotlight onto the very odd occurrences, the very strange case of Patrick Bearup as well as all the other really strange goings on which many people have helped to uncover in Maricopa County, Arizona.

 

Do YOU concur?

i-dont-know

Comments from all perspectives are welcome.

You can also comment on our FB page

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Spotlight-On-Law/189870931203328

 

dancing-bears-fleece-blanket

Interesting sources about the article above:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2024664/They-said-monster-Casanova-Meet-woman-married-man-death-row.html

https://www.facebook.com/FreePatrickBearup/photos/a.444896288941973.1073741826.340851069346496/444896292275306/?type=1&theater

Lies and Juanipulation: The Mirror Crack’d

Lies and Juanipulation:

The Mirror Crack’d

The mirror and dual sinks in Travis Alexander's master bathroom
The mirror and dual sinks in Travis Alexander’s master bathroom

Fact Based Reporting by

Amanda Chen and Rob Roman

His broad clear brow in sunlight glow’d;

On burnish’d hooves his war-horse trode;
From underneath his helmet flow’d
His coal-black curls as on he rode,
As he rode down to Camelot.

Juan Night witness Stand
Juan Knight Stand

From the bank and from the river
He flash’d into the crystal mirror,
“Tirra lirra,” by the river
Sang Sir Lancelot.

mirror sm

She left the web, she left the loom,
She made three paces thro’ the room,
She saw the water-lily bloom,
She saw the helmet and the plume:
She look’d down to Camelot.

369245-jodi-arias sm

Out flew the web and floated wide;
The mirror crack’d from side to side;
“The curse is come upon me,” cried
The Lady of Shalott.

jodi vamped sm

From The Lady of Shalott, by Alfred Lord Tennyson

“This individual, the defendant, Jodi Ann Arias, killed Travis Alexander. And even after stabbing him over and over again, and even after slashing his throat from ear to ear, and then even after taking a gun and shooting him in the face, she will not let him rest in peace.

But now instead of a gun, instead of a knife, she uses lies” – Juan Martinez

It’s important to remember that the prosecution has the burden of proof. It’s not a popularity contest and it’s not about which side has a better story. It’s about a search for the truth. We review Mr. Martinez’ efforts towards a search for the truth in his final argument.

“After all the lies you’ve told, why should we believe you now?” – Alternate Juror #17, Tara Kelley,  questions Jodi Arias during the guilt phase of the trial.

white lie 1

White Lie

This is a “white lie”. Typically a white lie is a harmless lie that is often done to be polite. Here it is a lie that plays into Martinez’ themes and theories, but it’s immaterial to the murder charge. These white lies are far from harmless.

fish story 1fish 2 lt

Exaggeration

This is an exaggeration. It’s a fish story where a mountain is made out of a mole hill.

misrep 3

Misrepresentation

This is a misrepresentation. It’s a deliberate effort to skew a fact to align it with other facts in the case.

mirror 4

Mirror

This is a mirror. It’s a manipulation of the jury. Juan Martinez is projecting his own or other’s feelings, motives and behaviors onto the defendant.

whopper 5

Whopper

This is a Whopper. It’s an obvious untruth in light of the facts. It’s deceitful and a breach of integrity

 

misrep 3The Ninja Intruder Story

For Juan, Jodi’s intruder story illustrates how well she can lie and manipulate and how she can turn this situation into one where she’s the victim who then plays the hero. On the surface, this appears correct, but a deeper look reveals a far more salient truth.

Juan tells the jury that Jodi said “I wish I stayed and fought more”, showing how she plays the hero. Juan shows the jury how Jodi manipulates the story to make her look better. He tells them “Her lying does not stop. She lied to the jury, she lied to the medical professionals, the police, and the media”. “She lied and made herself look like a person who could not do it (murder Travis).”

Juan likes to dwell on the interrogation videos as evidence in the murder trial, yet Arias has admitted that she lied, and explained why she did it. The main thing about the intruder story is there is no way Arias could have thought that her story would be believed by anybody. It’s a really bad lie. She failed to manipulate Detective Flores and no one could possibly believe her story, including Jodi herself.

She claimed it was merely a stalling tactic, and there is no reason to believe otherwise. She’s still counting on the law of attraction to fix everything at that point. That’s what you see in her early interviews. So there are two remaining hypotheses. One is that Jodi is mentally ill (which has been proven), and the other is that she had a diminished capacity, was in an altered state of mind, and her self-defense story is true. Both of these remaining hypotheses are in favor of the defense.

misrep 3Jodi Has “Violent Tendencies”

Juan claims that Jodi had violent tendencies because she wrote that in an e-mail to Travis.

Note to Juan Martinez: Writing in an e-mail that you once became violent is not displaying “violent tendencies”, it is exactly the opposite. Juan highlighted an e-mail Arias wrote to Travis Alexander where she admits to having broken a door and a window at some vague time in the past.

Juan and his Psychologist witness both seized on this single report of violence in 15 years of journal entries and 80,000 communications as proof of both Borderline Personality Disorder and 1st Degree Murder.

Knowing that she has had violent episodes in the past (probably in her high school days), and acknowledging them is great therapy. It’s something known as telling the truth. It shows she has insight into her feelings and behaviors, she’s trying to improve them, and she’s acting on her feelings in a socially appropriate way by writing them down. If only Travis Alexander, or Juan Martinez, for that matter, had that kind of insight and honesty about their inappropriate behaviors.

white lie 1Travis Did Not Give Jodi the Underwear

There’s some attention given by Martinez about there being no mention in that same e-mail of the chocolates, T-shirt and underwear that say “Travis Alexander’s” and “Travis’”, and the boys Spiderman underwear Travis was supposed to have given Jodi for Valentine’s Day 2007. We do know for a fact that Travis wanted to dress up as a park ranger, for example, and he wanted Jodi to dress up in a schoolgirl outfit.

Now, maybe Travis gave her these things and maybe he didn’t. Maybe Jodi bought those things for herself and maybe she didn’t. Maybe they both thought the Spiderman underwear was sexy and maybe they didn’t.

underwear ltHow are Juan Martinez’ accusations any different than those he condemns Jodi Arias for making? Jodi Arias and Travis did not exchange e-mails or text messages about the Valentine’s gifts. They still might have talked personally or called each other. Nothing was proven one way or the other. Juan Martinez does not get to say that Jodi Arias and her entire defense are liars, so therefore his baseless accusations are true, does he?

Obviously, Travis became very upset by something Jodi allegedly did or was going to do by May 26, 2008. But there is nothing about that in their communications. This, according to Juan, must not have happened either. They must have talked over the phone, or communicated some other way. So why doesn’t this apply to Valentine’s Day? Just because there is no mention of gifts by text message or e-mail doesn’t mean there were no communications about the Valentine’s gifts.

mirror 4Jodi Attacked Travis’ Reputation

How do you apply a justifiable homicide defense without saying anything negative about the victim?

Travis has left us his reputation independently of what Arias said. But that sex tape really helps us to see that Arias was telling the truth about Travis. In just 45 minutes, he mentions orgasms and a 12 year-old girl in the same sentence, and talks about taking the virginity of a little girl, reveals his overbearing personality, his love for talking about himself, and his callous use of Arias solely for sexual gratification.

At least one former friend has finally come forward and talked about the Travis he really remembers as opposed to the sympathetic denial of anything bad Travis has done because of his awful death.

misrep 3Jodi Lied about Travis’ Sexual Interest in Children (that he displayed on the sex tape)

The pedophilia claims do not help her case in any way, except one. It’s a very dangerous claim to make in a death penalty case. The jurors will retaliate if they don’t believe you.

As a juror, even if the victim was a convicted pedophile, it would make zero difference to me as far as my sympathy for the victim or the guilt or innocence of the defendant. The only reason Arias brought up the pedophilia claim is to show what happened in January 2008, and why the abusive relationship may have quickly escalated into physical violence.

If Travis Alexander had a dark secret, he may well have confided in Jodi Arias. Her story about catching him in the bedroom with pictures of young boys also illustrates Travis’ open-door policy. She typically let herself in and she went right up the stairs and into his room.

Talking about a “twelve year-old having her first orgasm” and “corking the pot of a little girl” is just role playing and fantasy talk, says Juan Martinez, the apologist.

Pedophilia “is termed pedophilic disorder in the DSM-5 (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders), and the manual defines it as a paraphilia in which adults or adolescents 16 years of age or older have intense and recurrent sexual urges towards and fantasies about prepubescent children that they have either acted on or which cause them distress or  interpersonal difficulty.”

Travis Alexander just happened to casually and spontaneously  mention these things in the only sex conversation that happened to be recorded. Draw your own conclusions.

misrep 3Nothing Noteworthy To Report

The Law of Attraction + my lies +  my word + Alyce LaViolette = It did happen. – Juan Martinez (paraphrase)

Dr. DeMarte, when questioned by Juan Martinez , told the jury that she would take this entry in Jodi’s diary at face value. What he didn’t ask her is if she would take a client’s claim of domestic violence on the same day at face value.

Go ask Alyce, I think she'll know.

Martinez wants to say that nothing bad happened between Jodi and Travis, like Alexander kicking her in the ribs, slapping her, or choking her into unconsciousness, if it’s not written down in Jodi’s journal.

Jodi did not write negative things about Travis in her journal, and besides a few carefully worded entries, we saw at the trial that there were none. We do know that Travis and Jodi had a large number of violent arguments and caustic break-ups, and that Travis was cheating on Jodi. Entries about these incidents are rarely found in her journals. These incidents must not have happened as well.

About the “three tender kisses”, when does Travis ever get romantic with Arias? When he’s leaving her or when he’s in trouble with her. So yes, the three soft kisses in April, 2008 could have been a sweet goodbye like Juan says, or they could have been an apology for physical violence like Jodi and Alyce LaViolette claim.

Remember, the defense only has to show that it’s possible. The prosecution must prove their case to the exclusion of any other possibility. This may also explain why Travis could not break it off for good with Jodi in January, like he told Dan Freeman he was planning on doing, because he felt too badly about what he had done.

Are there any other entries in 15 years of journals where Jodi writes that there was “nothing noteworthy to report”? That is something we would need to know. We didn’t see other entries like this. Martinez proved nothing here, and maybe it’s time for Juan to actually prove something, because this is a Capital murder case.

white lie 1Jodi Was Not Physically Abused Because She Didn’t Call 911

Juan’s big contention that Jodi would have called the police on Travis just isn’t realistic. She wasn’t going to do that and it has nothing to do with the 911 call with Bobby Juarez. She was remaining loyal to Travis and she did so even after his death.

The idea that if there is no documentation, no photos, no journal entry, and no police report, then there was no physical violence is insulting. This is the reason that Jodi is working now on helping to get the message out that if you are physically abused, you should tell someone, document it and call the police.

fish 2Jodi Told Darryl Brewer She Was Going to Mesa

Juan seizes on any minor inconsistency he can find, and then magnifies it into a major piece of evidence. Here is a big lie from Martinez: After Darryl Brewer testified in court that Jodi never told him she was going to Mesa, here is Martinez lying to the jury in closing arguments, and telling them that she did tell Darryl Brewer that she was going to Mesa, because it was in his notes.

darryl jack jodi partyHere is what really happened. Darryl, at the time he was questioned, knew that Jodi had gone to Mesa and killed Travis. What he was saying at the questioning incorporated what he knew then, not what he knew in June, 2008.

Juan jumped on this and tried to use it as proof of premeditation. Even after the witness said under oath that Jodi did not tell him she was going to Mesa, he still uses it in his closing argument.

This is the prosecutor who claims that even an exaggeration, a failure to tell the complete truth to everyone you  know, or even a little white lie, is a shocking breach of trust.

fish 2Jodi Lied Because She Didn’t Use Priceline

“The only reason Jodi Arias went to Redding airport was to kill Travis Alexander.” – Juan Martinez

How does Martinez know this? Because, he says, Jodi lied about Priceline. This is a fact from Juan, so we better be sure. This happened in 2008 and the trial was 4 ½ years later. Jodi did make a purchase for air tickets on Priceline a few weeks later.

Jodi did use her records to refresh her memory and she did state she used Priceline to scout locations and prices. At no time does she say she purchased the rental through Priceline. If she did intend to say that, she could have been mistaken. After all, Jodi was on the stand all day for 18 days.

Here’s the thing: IF Jodi planned on killing Alexander, and the trip to Utah was only for purposes of an alibi, then the California, Nevada, Utah part of her trip would need to be very visible. Therefore, there is no reason whatever to hide a car rental. There’s better deals at the airport, whether you use Priceline or not.

fish 2Jodi Is Guilty Because She Brought the CD’s

Juan likes to make a lot out of the fact that Jodi brought the CD’s from her vacations with Travis.  This tells Juan she knew she was going to see Travis. Jodi did say it was a possibility and she planned too many things for the amount of time she had.

These CD’s were never entered into evidence and we don’t know if they just have the trip photos on them or if they have all kinds of pictures on them. Many people, including myself, have CD’s and DVD’s in their laptop carrying case. They go with us wherever we bring our laptop.

There was no evidence to suggest that Jodi brought those CD’s because she knew she was going to murder Travis Alexander. It was merely an unsupported allegation presented to the jury with nothing to back it up. Think how stupid this idea is. I want to murder you, but before that, let’s reminisce about our lovely vacations together and let me give you those photos I promised you.

white lie 1Jodi Violated the Law (of attraction)

Here, Juan Martinez is trying to revive the blown theory that Jodi dyed her brown hair brown as part of some kind of plot rather than doing it to improve her appearance for Ryan Burns. This is the real law of attraction: Improve your appearance to attract a new boyfriend.

fish 2Jodi Is Lying Because Other People Misunderstood Her

As far as the knife story with the apple and the rope and whether her ankles or wrists were tied, this doesn’t mean anything. There is no specific statement by Jodi which says the knife was for cutting an apple or her ankles were bound. These came from Alyce LaViolette’s notes.

Jodi Arias has a habit of talking about a subject generally instead of a specific incident. So when she spoke to Detective Flores at the interrogation about her fingers, she talked about other times she cut or hurt her fingers besides on June 4th. When she was asked about Travis shaving, she talked about other days that she saw Travis shave, besides June 4th. This is one source of inconsistencies Juan Martinez likes to seize upon.

This can easily be attributed to a misunderstanding or error of the person documenting the story.  LaViolette specifically stated that she was hired to look into the question of whether there was domestic violence in the relationship and she was specifically not hired to be a detective or look into any of the events of June 4th.

About the sleigh bed, there is nothing about the bed which means you cannot have a rope. The rope could be behind the head board or looped around the head board. This can also explains why the rope was more than 20 feet long.

misrep 3Jodi Is Lying Because She “Staged the Scene”

Juan Martinez told the jury that if Jodi were in an altered state of mind, she would have not taken off her socks and she would have left bloody footprints all the way out of the house. Martinez also stated that in an altered state of mind, Jodi would have left bloody footprints near the bed, when she went to retrieve the rope. Martinez offered no scientific evidence to substantiate his claims other than his own statements and a general assessment by Dr. DeMarte..

Sometime before the shower and photos incident, the bed sheets were removed and thrown in the wash by either Travis or Jodi. At that time, the rope could have been taken downstairs. Self-preservation is automatic and it extends to removing evidence. Juan’s repeated contention that Jodi would have to leave bloody footprints through the house or to get the rope are nonsense.

whopper 5Jodi Lied about the Gun Being First Because Martinez Lied First About the Gun Being Last

There is no forensic evidence saying the gun was last. Every bit of logic and evidence, forensic and otherwise, suggests the gun was first, except for the photo of the bullet casing on top of a 2 inch spot of blood at the edge of the floor and the highly questionable testimony of Dr. Horn.

white lie 1Jodi Lied Because the Shell Casing Defied the Laws of Physics

bullet-casing-grey-thingarticle-2258479-16CAC976000005DC-704_634x358

We know there was a large amount of water on the floor. We know there was a cleanup and a lot of hectic movement in the bathroom after the killing. We know the roommate went into the bathroom and found the body and the police went in after that. We know there is an unexplained foot print in blood near the closet door and things were moved around.

It would be far more likely that the shell casing was not in it’s original position than that it remained exactly where it landed after the gun was fired on June 4th, 2008.

whopper 5Jodi Is Guilty Because She Was Not Random and She Was Goal Directed

Juan Martinez points out that someone in an altered state of mind would behave randomly, not “striking to kill”, but stabbing someone all over, like a blind robot. Where is the science for this? That’s not the experience of documented homicides in an altered state of mind.

The blood on the carpet appears more like Arias wiping her feet than stomping and hovering over him. This says nothing about what happened. Arias also left the camera in the washing machine. This is all chaotic activity. Here, Juan is saying that Jodi is both goal directed and chaotic. But you can’t have it both ways, can you, Juan?

Juan states that in an altered state, there would be knife wounds all over instead of a strike to kill. There were knife wounds all over and the idea that someone in an altered state of mind cannot have directed behavior such as aimed stabs and some clean up is a fallacy. There is no evidence for that.

Juan’s contention seems to be that if this happened the way Arias says it did, then Travis would have stab wounds randomly all over his body. He would not have a slit throat, he would have been found at the end of the hallway. There would be bloody footprints going out the bedroom and down the stairs. There would be bloody footprints around the bed as Arias retrieved the rope. There would have been no cleanup and all the incriminating evidence would be left behind.

Scott Falater - Ex-Mormon High Councilor and mild-mannered Engineer for Motorola

This is the same argument he used in the Falater case. But there is no evidence, facts or testimony and no serious source which can prove that this is what would have happened if a killing took place by a person with an altered state of mind.

“It takes time and takes thinking to chase and kill. In front of the sink, in the mirror, Travis can see ‘that thing’ deliver the strikes to his back.” – Juan Martinez

That Alexander can see Arias coming at him with the knife in the mirror is totally unsupported speculation. There is nothing to support the idea that Travis was stabbed in the shower or in the back at the sink. A person under attack would not support themselves on their severely wounded left hand as Martinez claims. A person under a knife attack would not be able to  stand at the sink for that length of time.

A hand cut as severely as Alexander’s left hand would have left much more blood than that at the sink. If Alexander were stabbed in the shower, he wouldn’t have taken a left and headed for the sink, trapping himself in the bathroom. He would have gone right and out the closet door or down the hallway immediately. He wouldn’t have gone to the sink at all. The prosecutor’s theory makes no logical, scientific, common, or intuitive sense at all.

A “strike to kill” has no bearing on state of mind. This is not blind man’s bluff or a blindfolded girl striking at a piñata

mirror 4Jodi “lied in this sacrosanct place of finding the truth” – Juan Martinez

Here is a crystal clear instance of projection by a dangerous sociopath and Maricopa County’s “Prosecutor of the Year”.

Like the Falater case, the Grant case, the Carr case, the Lynch case, The Morris case, the Miller case, the Towery case and the Chrisman case, Juan has once again badgered witnesses, misrepresented facts, made exaggerations, given incomplete or distorted facts, told white lies, told regular and ornate lies, and presented mere speculation as fact.

123 lies

The Falater Case:

Juan suggested no less than six competing motives for why Mormon high Councilor Scott Falater killed his wife. None of the six motives were supported by any facts, testimony, or evidence. Juan badgered and ridiculed defense experts, yelled at a priest, and intimidated child witnesses.

Martinez produced a highly biased expert witness who was chosen for his rapport and communication skills rather than for his knowledge on the subject. Martinez misled the jury by suggesting, that people in an altered state of mind cannot engage in goal directed behavior and do not clean up or remove evidence . There was only one college graduate on the jury.

2 lies

The Grant Case:

Juan withheld evidence from the defense, objected over 50 times during the defense opening statements (something that is just not done), pressured the judge to not allow evidence into trial, wouldn’t let defense witnesses fully answer questions, and then objected constantly when they were being questioned by the defense.

Juan accused defense witnesses of lying but offered no supporting evidence. Juan intimidated defense witnesses by claiming they had violated the law in some way. Juan’s theory of the crime was fashioned out of whole cloth.

The jury did not believe his theory of the crime, and Doug Grant was found guilty of manslaughter instead of 1st degree murder.

mirror 4The Carr Case:

Juan withheld evidence, was admonished by the judge for an offense punishable by jail time, and refused to admit wrong doing. He was provided with a top attorney by the County. He blamed the defense for his actions, was forced to write a letter of apology, and lost the case.

2 lies

The Lynch Case:

Juan told the jury there were four death penalty aggravators when in fact there were only two, forcing a retrial.

misrep 3

The Morris Case:

Juan unsealed an evidence bag containing the jacket of a victim who had been buried near Morris’ trailer and invited jurors to take a good whiff. Juan lied to the jury by trying to convince them that Morris had sex with his dead victims because the dead bodies smelled badly.

white lie 1

The Miller Case:

Juan is still angry at Judge Bartlett for not doing something that no judge has ever done: Charging Miller with the cruelty aggravator for execution style shootings. He argued with the Judge even though Miller already had four other death penalty aggravators (prior violent crimes, pecuniary gain, multiple murders, and the murder of a child).

Juan never forgot this, even though Judge Bartlett was protecting him from being over-zealous. To this day, Juan declares that Judge Bartlett, who has presided over numerous death penalty convictions, is soft on crime and the death penalty. He is continuing to try to get Judge Bartlett thrown off the pending Redondo case in favor of a “hanging judge” .

misrep 3

The Towery case:

Juan suggested to the commutation board that Robert Towery injected his victims with battery acid and his claims of severe childhood abuse had no foundation – two obvious and and glaring lies.

white mirror

The Chrisman case:

Juan told jurors that Officer Chrisman was lying because gun powder residue was not found on the bicycle, proving that the decedent, Danny Rodriguez, did not threaten him with the bicycle before Chrisman fired his weapon. In fact, no gunpowder tests were ever performed on the bicycle. How is this not a lie?

Juan did not get the 2nd degree murder conviction he wanted, but he blamed that on the police and he told the jury this was because the police must have somehow hidden his evidence and obstructed justice. Juan, as usual, offered no facts, testimony or evidence in support of this allegation, other than the allegation itself.

4 liesmirror 4

The Arias case:

Juan purposely dropped the camera on the floor, then denied any wrongdoing.  Juan invited Alyce LaViolette, a completely non-violent therapist working with the victims and perpetrators of violent domestic crimes, to spar with him.  Juan badgered defense witnesses, threatened at least two of them with criminal prosecution if they testified, and made baseless accusations. Juan personally attacked the defense attorneys on such things as their knowledge of the law, their appearance, and whether or not he would kill himself if married to one of them.

Juan once again withheld evidence until shortly before the scheduled start of the trial and there is reason to believe he suborned perjury in the testimony of the medical examiner. Juan bent the law and logic to the breaking point by insisting that if it is not a 1st degree premeditated murder, then it’s a 1st degree felony murder because Arias entered or stayed in the home with the intention of committing 1st degree premeditated murder.

This carefully planned and concealed surprise intimidation of defense witness Lisa Andrews- Daidone, which also needlessly shocked and emotionally traumatized members of the Alexander family, is typical of Martinez’ courtroom decorum in a capital murder trial:

(The video itself contains more lies about Arias’ reaction to the photo. She was looking at the judge, not at the video screens.)

Juan Martinez sees everything in black and white. In a rare case where things are not as they appear, Juan insists on seeing things only as they appear on the surface. Juan is the mirror in this case, projecting his own flaws and inner demons onto Jodi Arias.

Juan Martinez is a certified liar.

juan crackd newJuan Martinez is a sociopath per DSM – 5 Anti Social Personality Disorder with the following characteristics:

  • Superficial charm and good intelligence
  • Untruthfulness and insincerity
  • Lack of remorse and shame
  • Poor judgement and failure to learn by experience
  • Specific loss of insight
  • Pathological egocentricity and incapacity for love

Juan projects the behaviors of a typical hardened criminal or psychopath onto Jodi Arias. She is proven to be neither of these. His closing arguments, on the shallow surface, make sense and are logical, but a closer, deeper look, coupled with a history of Juan’s behavior in other cases, shows that once again, Juan told a pack of lies, and the mirror crack’d from side to side.

All comments are appreciated and opposing views are welcome!

All Rights Reserved 

Sources:

http://www.psychologytoday.com/articles/201305/how-spot-sociopath

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedophilia

http://jodi-arias.wikispaces.com/Closing+Arguments

http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/criminal_mind/psychology/automatism/6.html

http://www.prosecutorintegrity.org/media/cpi-calls-on-prosecutors-to-root-out-misconduct-after-az-report-of-widespread-unethical-practices/

http://www.prosecutorintegrity.org/wp-content/uploads/EpidemicofProsecutorMisconduct.pdf

*

*

http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/20131028jodi-arias-juan-martinez-conduct-day3.html

http://blogs.phoenixnewtimes.com/valleyfever/2010/11/richard_chrisman_phoenix_pds_k.php

http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/2002-08-29/news/justice-delayed/full/

http://murderpedia.org/male.M/m/morris-cory.htm

http://www.azcorrections.gov/inmate_datasearch/newDeathRow.aspx

http://www.azcourts.gov/

*

*

http://murderpedia.org/male.S/index.S.htm

http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/2002-08-29/news/justice-delayed/

http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/2002-02-14/news/the-big-sleep/

http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/local/articles/20121102prosecutor-files-motion-vs-judge.html#ixzz2eoadFt00

*

*

http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/1999-07-01/news/wake-up-call/7/

http://murderpedia.org/male.M/m/morris-cory.htm

http://www.abc15.com/dpp/news/region_phoenix_metro/central_phoenix/scottsdale-man-sentenced-in-arson-case

http://news.gila1019.com/delays-in-the-death-penalty-trial-for-christopher-redondo-in-the-shooting-death-of-gilbert-police-lt-eric-shuhandler/

http://www.azcentral.com/community/mesa/articles/20110531mesa-craig-miller-murder-death-penalty0531.html#ixzz2f7LDhTin

Share this: