JAII and Simon Johannson violate our U.S. Constitution (March 9)

Fact-based reporting by

Amanda Chen & Rob Roman

Spotlight On Law – The Jodi Arias Murder Case, 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/

Most people are probably aware that Simon Johansson, the entrepreneur of ill-repute, exiled from the UK, was behind the posting of the full names of the 11 jurors on his website JodiArisIsInnocent.com.

They don't call it "#2" for nothin'!
They don’t call it “#2” for nothin’!

This may have been in retaliation for those on Twitter who posted the name, the address and even a map to the home of the one juror who held out for Life. This was tweeted by quite a few on Twitter the same day as the non-verdict. People are wondering how in the heck SJ, living in Switzerland, ever got a hold of those names. Suspicion, of course, falls upon a combination of Jodi Arias and/or her Mitigation Specialist, Maria De La Rosa, and Sj or one of his minions. So, what purpose did it serve other than to tend to incriminate, fairly or not, all of these people?

My sources informed me that Jodi’s mother and her Aunt Sue Allen-Halterman contacted SJ and asked him to take down the list of the 11 jurors names, to no avail. As of today, they were still there.

SJ (Simon Johannson or Sion Hill) The Captain of the Ship.
SJ (Simon Johannson or Simon Hill) The Captain of the Ship.

Many may have seen that move as heroically fighting fire with fire, as “SJ” has done throughout this case. But SJ far overstepped the bounds of decency as well as attacking each and every American and our U.S. Constitution. He cannot be allowed to get a pass on that, especially with everything else he’s done.

The individual, moral choice of the single holdout juror was not a violation of any kind, broke no laws or ethical codes, and her decision was entirely within her rights as a juror to make, for reasons I’ll explain in the next article.

This whole situation with the juror and the leak of the jurors’ names can and should be thoroughly investigated. If there was any wrongdoing by any party, there should be severe consequences. Barring that, the juror was within her rights and her decision was hers to make, keep, and hold fast to without any explanation owed to any of the other eleven. That’s the law for a Life or Death deliberation and verdict, in case you were not aware. More about that in the next article.

jaii minionsOut of all the schemes SJ has pulled, this one is by far the worst, in my opinion, because to threaten jurors and to publish names he obviously had prior to the verdict, strikes a blow to the very heart of our democracy and our Constitution. It’s beyond the pale. Here’s why:

“One of the primary concerns of the founding fathers was preventing the United States of America from developing an oppressive government. Much of the Bill of Rights was born out of that concern, including its prohibitions on unreasonable searches and seizures, the right against self-incrimination, and of course, the right to a trial by jury. The right to a jury trial plays a central role in the justice system and it is important to understand the strengths, weaknesses, and function of the jury in a criminal matter.”

A primary strength of the jury trial is that it acts as a check to unfettered prosecutorial power. Prosecutors have a tremendous amount of power when deciding whether to charge a defendant with a crime, as well as what charges to bring. However, they must make this charging decision understanding that a group of individuals, entirely unknown to them, will be deciding their case after they present the evidence. Prosecutors typically do not want to waste time and resources on unreasonable charges in front of a jury evaluating their case.”

“Another strength of juries is that, if judges decided every case, it could raise a number of concerns about fairness in the judicial process. For example, appointed judges might be beholden to politics and the people who appointed them. Additionally, elected judges could be swayed by public opinion in a given case. pray for deathJurors, on the other hand, are not appointed and instead serve on a jury as part of their civic duties. In cases where public opinion weighs heavily on one side, they can also be sequestered to minimize the amount of influence exerted by the public or media on a given matter.”

“On the other hand, jurors are laypeople who are sometimes asked to understand complicated legal concepts and apply those concepts to the case at hand, without letting emotion clog their decision-making. It’s not an easy task, and can be very time consuming, especially in cases involving serious offenses. Because of both the time and complexity of some matters, it is not surprising to hear stories about jurors falling asleep or failing to pay attention throughout a trial.”

http://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal-law-basics/what-is-the-role-of-a-jury-in-a-criminal-case.html#sthash.bcTzRNpV.dpuf

“It’s easy to forget how important the jury really is to America. “The right to be a juror is one of the fundamental rights guaranteed to all eligible citizens. The right to trial by jury helped spark the American Revolution, was quickly adopted at the Constitutional Convention, and is the only right that appears in both the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. 6th amendament a dt in flamesBut for most of us, a jury summons is an unwelcome inconvenience. Who has time for jury duty? We have things to do.

In Why Jury Duty Matters, Andrew Guthrie Ferguson reminds us that whether we like it or not, we are all constitutional actors. Jury duty provides an opportunity to reflect on that constitutional responsibility. Combining American history, constitutional law, and personal experience, the book engages citizens in the deeper meaning of jury service. Interweaving constitutional principles into the actual jury experience, this book is a handbook for those Americans who want to enrich the jury experience. It seeks to reconnect ordinary citizens to the constitutional character of a nation by focusing on the important, and largely ignored, democratic lessons of the jury.

Jury duty is a shared American tradition. It connects people across class and race, creates habits of focus and purpose, and teaches values of participation, equality, and deliberation. We know that juries are important for courts, but we don’t know that jury service is important for democracy. This book inspires us to re-examine the jury experience and act on the constitutional principles that guide our country before, during, and after jury service.”

http://nyupress.org/books/9780814729038/

JAII bgThis is why, when some vile foreigner punk named Simon Johansson, threatens our Constitutional rights, all Americans and all peoples should be alarmed and disgusted, not only at his latest antic of naming and posting the 11 jurors in the Jodi Arias trial, but all the other mean-spirited and revolting stunts he’s pulled throughout the Jodi Arias case.

SJ pissed all over that tradition, using the social media as a weapon to threaten and intimidate the Arias jurors, and future jurors. Jurors are serving our country and should be thanked and applauded for that service. What will we do if citizens are afraid to step up to serve on juries? They should be treated with the utmost respect and confidentiality. The decisions of jurors should be accepted and only questioned under very rare and unusual circumstances, such as the guilt phase of the Jodi Arias case.

In America, it’s vitally important to our Constitution and our criminal justice system that the rule is HANDS-OFF ALL JURORS, WITNESSES, VICTIMS, FAMILY MEMBERS AND PRINCIPLES IN A TRIAL.

We found the verdicts to be fair and just verdicts, were it a fair trial. But we believe it was an unfair trial and the jurors did seem to be confused about a few things, from listening to their statements. We believe the original jury followed the prosecutor, rather than the facts and the law.

When a juror voluntarily releases his or her name to the public, then and only then should their name become “fair game” for reporting.

One seen as a heroic fortress and refuge against a blizzard of vengeance seekers in this case, JodiAriasIsInnocent.com has far overstepped its bounds, out-lived its purpose and should be shunned and abandoned by any and every true supporter of Jodi Arias.

Jodi Arias continues to cling to SJ and his foreign website, registered in Pakistan, run by a fugitive from the UK, and utilizing outdated, pirated software. These were the people who made her art and book sites possible, who set up a fundraising site for her appeals, and who delivered important information to supporters they could find almost nowhere else. Heroic efforts to be sure. JAII gave a voice to Jodi Arias and her supporters and fought valiantly against a giant and overwhelming opposing force of dedicated and highly motivated pro-prosecution supporters.

But the talented people who fulfilled all these tasks in support of Jodi Arias and the dedicated regulars and commenters on the JAII website are not welded to that website. They aren’t married to it. It’s just one punk and just one website. They can go off on their own, blog on their own, create their own websites, join other decent and civil support groups, communicate with Jodi on their own, and help her in any way they wish. They do not need SJ or JAII any longer.

JodiArias will follow her support and her supporters, not SJ and JAII. SJ is of no use to Arias any longer. He can not gain new, fair-minded supporters to her cause, he cannot help raise money for her appeals, and he cannot help her legally. SJ cannot rally supporters to her aid, because true supporters want nothing to do with him, his sleazy posts and comments, and his unethical schemes.

SJ
SJ

SJ damages Jodi’s cause with his checkered past, his rotten reputation and his inability to see or care how he is chasing hordes of current and potential new supporters away. Ever since the famous “Body bag” post where SJ posted a photo of Travis Alexander in a body bag on his bathroom floor with the caption “Justice Has Been Served” and “It’s In The Bag”, SJ has been losing a steady stream of supporters. Now, with his 2 dozen or so regulars, it’s really more of a trickle.

Two separate sources told me that on the eve of the 2nd penalty verdict, SJ again raised his body bag pirate flag, but then lowered it before the night was through.

My sources have related to me numerous stories of defections after that photo post, initially, but even more so since then and the end of this trial. SJ has built himself a Leper Colony, and the hopelessly infected are the only ones who will remain. People need to make a conscious effort to stop bringing hits to that site, as that is what SJ lives for.

Another source wanted to make sure I knew, after our Jodiland Wars article, that Ben Ernst, reputed to be very close to Jodi Arias, was not a part of JAII and did not comment there. No one wants to be associated with that offensive site or its Captain any longer.

During the Jodiland Wars, I tried to remain somewhat neutral between SJ and JAII and other groups of supporters who wanted Jodi Arias to divest herself from the ill-repute of JAII. But CNN’s HeadLine News does not own the Jodi Arias case and neither does SJ. There are many, much better alternatives, for supporters as well as for Arias and her family.

https://spotlightonlaw.wordpress.com/the-jodiland-wars/

SJ’s crude foul language drives away 1/3 of his audience. His anti-American and anti-Constitutional stance and combative posture drives away another 1/3, and his mean-spiritedness and stunning lack of ethics drives away another 1/3. How many does that leave? Hmmmm. You do the math.

SJ has refused to join forces or share fundraising duties with any other blog, group, or website. How foolish is that? He’s an extremely jealous and competitive man, so much so that JAII will soon be a table for one. Some of his fellow pirates may stay with him, as his warship slowly sinks into the shoals, and no one’s complaining about that.

The only reason SJ and JAII is still afloat, though, is Jodi Arias. My sources tell me her family does not want to be associated with JAII and SJ, but Jodi Arias is demanding they stick with him. Jodi Arias has refused help from Jason Weber, Lisa Schilling. sj 9George Barwood, and others. Unlike the 2 dozen or so supporters at JAII, each of these people have hundreds and hundreds of supporters behind them and new supporters arriving every week. Jodi isn’t budging now, but she will, she will.

Maybe when Jodi Arias realizes that SJ has only manged to raise a few hundred dollars in many months, she will finally see the light.

Maybe there’s some kind of benefit in dealing with a foreign website that has no accountability and is immune from all law. But who needs that particular website? No one at all. If anything, SJ and JAII have prevented Jodi Arias from gaining a solid support base and raising funds for her appeals, only because SJ wants to be the sole voice and arm of Jodi Arias. Well, he’s not.

SJ is the emperor with no clothes. SJ is the little tiny man behind the curtain in the Wizard of Oz. He’s a blowhard with emphysema.

If he truly wanted to help Jodi Arias’ cause, rather than generate website hits, which he can’t do either, SJ and JAII would take the high road.

caution AThat means hands off the victim, the victim’s family and the jurors. That means fighting ignorance, misunderstandings and hatred with patience, intelligence, humaneness, and integrity. Stick to logic and the facts of the case. That’s how to generate a following that can actually assist Jodi Arias and her family.

SJ is a warrior, but the war is over now, he should just fade away like MacArthur. This is a time to heal and to build, for everyone involved on all sides of this case. SJ thinks he has Jodi in his back pocket. But even she will eventually abandon him and follow her rational and humane base of supporters.

pray for deathSJ is a supporter-repellant plain and simple. The jury had an important individual moral choice to make. Now, most fair-minded supporters have made their choice to abandon SJ and JAII. Now Jodi Arias herself has an important moral choice to make. You are known by the company you keep, and there’s no getting away from that. SJ can go gear up for his next Constitution bashing, mean-spirited fight with a new, hopefully foreign, defendant.

Another General Douglas MacArthur, he’s not, He’s more like another General Custer, or a General Nuisance.

MACARTHUR LUZON“We are not retreating – we are advancing in another direction.”

“A better world shall emerge based on faith and understanding.”

“The world is in a constant conspiracy against the brave. It’s the age-old struggle: the roar of the crowd on the one side, and the voice of your conscience on the other.”

– Douglas MacArthur

http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/d/douglas_macarthur.html#okw4S1yGVYteApkb.99

How do you like them Apples?

apples

giraffe

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

Advertisements

36 thoughts on “JAII and Simon Johannson violate our U.S. Constitution (March 9)”

  1. Thank you, Rob for allowing differing voices, unlike another pro Jodi blogger, who apparently wants only a Pro Jodi echo chamber.
    The more vile supporters like SJ (if you could actually call him a supporter) do nothing but make people hate Jodi more.

    It’s also sad that intellectually deep Travis supporters and intellectually deep Jodi supporters can seldom engage each other in intelligent conversation without stooping to rancor and insults.

    I’ve never had a problem with people who think Jodi is innocent, or grossly overcharged, as long as they don’t celebrate Travis’s death, or accuse him of things with no proof.

    I hope there is a thorough investigation of how the juror’s names were leaked.

    1. Didn’t Simon also run a full court press for Casey Anthony? His JAII is all about throwing mud on Travis, his family, the 11 jurors who deliberated the facts of the case, etc. That’s the opposite of supporting someone you feel is innocent. His vulgar language and inability to debate show his lack of intelligence, IMO. His “followers” that are left should be ashamed of themselves for falling for his short-sighted manipulations. He is laughing at all of them. All the way to the bank. Think about it.

    2. Agreed….most of the time I have no issue with an intelligent discussion on the law and what can be proven. But that’s the key word “proven”. That and an ability to truly apply that to the laws of Arizona and the US Constitution. Quite a few Arias supporters get lost in all the “Nurmi-isms” and “The Law According to Nurmi” , which are very different from what real laws involved state.

      Explaining that to some……..well you know……sigh

  2. PZKSLC…………….BINGO! That’s something I forgot to mention. SJ allows no dissent. How can you learn or change or test your ideas and views if you don’t talk to any people with opposing views? That’s called living in a bubble. By discussing and debating the issues with smart people on both sides of this case, my views have changed considerably. I hope some of those on the other side have also changed some views, even if they are minor points.

  3. Rob you really nailed it! I have wondered all along if without characters like SJ and friends being the “official” and “only” site endorsed by Jodi, if the social aspect of this trial could have taken another direction. These people have refused to even believe that her diagnosis of BPD is for real. The single reason juror 17 gave for why she believed in a life sentence (its on the interview) was due to Jodi’s psychological makeup…she couldn’t cope.
    Maybe if they didn’t spew such hate towards Travis and his family and spread the word of her personality disorder, they wouldn’t have drawn as much hate towards Jodi.
    I was hoping for a life sentence but only wish it had been a larger split…even 10-2 would be better than this mess of a juror situation.

    1. I agree, Laurie,
      and a bigger split or a unanimous decision would have been much more palatable for everyone. We were was so excited when an earlier article of ours was featured on JAII, but that’s way over now.

      I saw JA sitting in the witness stand, a 32 year-old woman, and I immediately thought severe mental illness. Jodi Arias will not admit to it, and so her supporters at JAII would not either. Sometimes what’s in a person’s best interst is not what that person wants. I pushed very hard for the mental illness angle, and I got a lot of flack from the JAII people. If you compare JA with a woman of equivalent age like Samantha Alexander, there is no comparison as far as JA’s inability to show emotion, her affect, etc.

      JAII and SJ really had no idea how to build support or how to engage with people of opposing viewpoints. When you are a tiny minority, being combative will get you nowhere. Sj will need to learn this at some point, but not likely.

      1. Did you just compare Jodi and Tanisha? Oh wait, you said there’s “no comparison”… Rob, you fail to consider that Jodi was being grilled under oath and being watched by the entire world. In her interviews with reporters she’s much different. Also, supporters say she is very normal and natural on visits, both in person and on video. Maybe the court thing was a form of stage fright? I don’t think it’s fair to evaluate her mental health on her court appearances alone. And maybe you’re not entirely, but…..Tanisha? Oh dear….THAT woman has major anger issues, imo. And her expressions show this.

      2. No, Sandra, I said Samantha. I was surprised that JA said she was on no medications. I do see her interviews as being very well done and I have heard that she is very normal in visits, but I still think she has a severe mental illness and the state’s and the defenses’ experts all backed that up.

    1. I thought many of the writers from the other website had intelligent comments concerning this case. It is my belief that
      Jodie Arias was overcharged, never said she was not guilty.

      I found that many from the other site were against the DP and
      agreed with me on that point.

  4. If they had the names of the jurors before the verdict, how do we know #17 wasn’t approached before the verdict? I didn’t see her or her husband’s facebook pages but did read enough to think if they were going to approach a juror, she would be the one. Not saying it happened but it sure makes you wonder.

    1. Hi Heather, did you hear that the other 11 jurors are also being investigated? ‘Tis true! From what I’ve heard of their “audio interview” and read on Jen Woods’ site, they might have some splain’ to do. But this is Maricopa, so it likely won’t go anywhere.

      1. Sandra happens to be right. I saw the official word. It has the appearance of impropriety to investigate a single juror. The investigation must look at all 12 to have the appearance of fairness. I say investigate the jurors and the release of the jurors names, and let the cards fall where they may. Right now, I see nothing to suggest any wrongdoing by any of the jurors.

  5. Who knows what would happen if something happened to either one of those jurors, including Juror 17. There will be many finger’s pointed in one direction. And whoever slipped him those juror names will have blood on their hands too. Though I pray nothing like this happens it could happen. No matter which side you are in you are so wrong to do something like this. These jurors will now have to live in fear, their children will have to live in fear and someone needs to pay for this.
    Roman I am so glad you wrote this and you did a wonderful job. Thankyou.

    1. You’re welcome, Geri

      I’m so tired of social media people messing with witnesses, families, jurors, and principles in this case. It’s abhorrent and it has to stop.

      One thing I forgot about is did Pandora, Jade, etc. ever thin about kids reading their web site with all the swearing and abusive language? The truth is that site was dead long ago, except when there’s something for them to sensationalize.

  6. Good article.
    I feel sorry for all the jury members. No one should serve and then leave the court feeling under threat.
    The 11 should not feel threatened by JA supporters.
    The 1 should not feel threatened by TA supporters.
    That’s my 2 cents, and I won’t change it no matter what side of the fence you’re on.

    P.S. Are the names and Facebook links still on JAII?

    1. Amen, Juliegregg, and the names were still up last time I checked. I’m not clear on if the 11 gave their names to the press, thereby making them fair game. I don’t see any evidence that they did so. Hope an investigation finds out who the culprit(s) are.

  7. I don’t agree this was a fair verdict though I am happy she will get natural life, less scrutiny,less chance of verdict being overturned. The idjits at JAII keep quoting the movie “12 Angry Men” as well as some of the talking heads, one huge difference is that he actually spoke to the others, explained the whys and hows of what he believed and slowly brought them to his point of view, Juror 17 refused to do any of these things.
    I do see wrongdoing on the other 11 however in considering her getting out in a few years, they are not to do that, simply weight mitigators vs aggravators.
    A friend saw that Angela Arias stated she did not have the money to video chat with her sister and posted on JAII that maybe someone could set up a call for her before Sheriff Joe takes those privileges away and was banned. This is not a group interested in what is best for Jodi or her family so what is going on with the funds they raise?

    1. D1G, You’re right that 12 angry men has no relevance to the case. Juror #17 did not refuse to deliberate or explain her position, from what I understand. Juror#17, did give her reasons and she wanted to look at the journals. etc.. Just because juror #17 dis not change her moral choice does not mean she didn’t deliberate, she just didn’t deliberate what others wanted her to. On the other side were some very convincing jurors who said they needed to get “Justice for Travis”. This disgusts me, really, because any decision would be justice for Travis. It’s actually better for the Alexanders that JA gets Life in prison, for the reasons you mentioned.

      Not everyone is a communicator or a 1st class debater. Juror#17 may have not been able to clearly explain why she was choosing Life. I do agree, though, with one of the other jurors that Juror #17 should have been able to give a scenario under which she could find for death. I do believe that the fund-raising site for the appellate trust, is totally legitimate. I just wonder how much funds JAII has been able to raise? Probably not much, as the antics of SJ and a few others at JAII drive donors away by the truckload.

    1. And, while we ask where SJ got the list, we also have to ask where the pro-prosecution Tweeters got the list. Perhaps from the very same source?

      If there were at least two separate leaks of the jurors list, from at least two separate people, that’s a lot of corruption at the Maricopa Justice Courts.

  8. Unless those 11 pro-death jurors wanted their names published, publishing juror names cannot be justified. So, I’m in full agreement about the wrongness of what SJ has done.

    (Let’s don’t ignore, however, how quickly juror 17’s name, photograph, address and personal information was tweeted all over the place, thousands of times, and by whom. And let’s also not be disingenuous about who, of those 12 jurors, would be most at risk of vigilante justice.)

    Back to SJ: yes, the body-bag picture he published during the first trial was also distasteful and unethical. Some supporters left, others tried to talk about why it was wrong, but he didn’t allow discussion on the matter.

    However, the issue of SJ and Jodi sympathizers refusing to engage with the pro-prosecution side makes me say: “meh.” I mean, so what? What was, and still is, coming from the Justice-for-Travis social media faction was largely a virulently misogynist, abuse apologist, mob mentality. Simon was right to block them from his site — to not waste his time giving them an inch of space. The ones who were given a chance in the early days of the trial (yes, a few seemingly “balanced” comments squeaked through), usually betrayed everyone by personally, and with profanity, attacking JAii commenters. Moderating comments there must be a nightmare.

    One could argue that SJ could have been more tolerant of dissenting opinion WITHIN a pro-defense context, and that his commenters could have benefited from more debate about what, exactly, “innocence” means in this case. But, in the end, his site is a safe space for a very small minority of people who see things very differently from the majority. He was/is under no ethical or intellectual obligation to be democratic or unbiased when it comes to who he welcomes and who he rejects.

    That website is his own creation, not an open public space. As a majority, the anti-defence people had (and have) practically the whole internet on their side. They are not being silenced or “censored,” for goodness sake! So, they certainly don’t need to be heard by a minority of people who have created a small space free from pro-prosecution verbal abuse, let alone to aggressively demand entry into those marginalized discussions. Talk about arrogance and entitlement!

    1. Morag are you kidding? That site has spewed the most hateful comments I have seen. They are all screen shot. Threats to the prosecutor, threats to the Alexanders, threats to the judge. Saying that it was karma that FLores’s son died! Calling Travis a pedophile when there is absolutely no proof of it, but some comment he made in a phone sex conversations. All the porn on the computer stuff was found NO CHILD PORN. why do you think they didn’t recall the computer people. But now we find JOdi manipulating 15 year old girls to lie and make fake ID’s to chat with her. Sj has made a safe place for you to be the most hateful site on the internet that is for sure. you are 10x more hateful than the states page and that says a lot. I would be ashamed to be apart of it.

      1. Am I kidding about what, Emily? I wrote a pretty long comment, so you’ll have to be more specific.

        “Threats to the prosecutor, threats to the Alexanders, threats to the judge.”

        I’ve never seen anything like that, but I haven’t been following the threads/comments at JAii since 2013. I have looked in there a couple times a day since this recent verdict watch, but, again, I didn’t see any threats to anyone. There are lots of comments, so it’s possible that I missed those ones. Explicit threats against lawyers and judges are taken seriously by law enforcement, aren’t they? What’s being done about this?

        “Saying that it was karma that FLores’s son died!”

        That’s awful, just horrible. You should post a screenshot to shame the person or persons who said that.

        “you are 10x more hateful than the states page and that says a lot.”

        Not sure why you are calling me “hateful.”

    2. morag99, those are some really good points. There was always this division between sites that want to have a discussion and debate on all sides – really difficult, and those who want a one-sided group. Jason Weber, for example, let everyone in, and the majority soon dominated over the minority. There was a lot of back-handed stuff going on. SJ kept a one sided comment section. You’re right, that’s good to have a safe place to chat for people of the minority view. I prefer a carefully monitored 2-sided discussion. You can really learn a lot when you have people on both sides willing to talk to each other.

  9. I’m not sure which came first in Twitter, the chicken or the egg? All I know is I saw the name of juror #17 posted on twitter before I saw the other 11 jurors posted on JAII. The next day after the mistrial, I saw a map with an arrow and the address of juror’ #17’s home.

    1. I know, Rob — it’s confusing. But clear timelines might not clear it up anyway. Who’s to say WHEN the juror list was leaked?

      It’s also odd that none of the 11 jurors have, that I know of, made a statement regarding whether they gave their consent to the media to have their names published. Wouldn’t that be just the kind of sensational story that HLN talking heads would be all over? Wouldn’t dependable Arizonian crime/trial reporters, such as Michael Kiefer, be looking into such an egregious violation of juror’s rights to privacy?

      The lack of official statements on this matter is very strange. It’s all rumour and speculation instead of facts.

      1. Actually, now I see that there was, just yesterday, an official statement from the court that they are “launching an internal investigation into how the identities of Arias jurors were revealed online just hours after the trial ended.” (reported by ABC News this morning).

        I’m sure it will take some time to get to the bottom of this.

        Also, at least one juror has allowed her name to be released by the press. But juror 17 is the only who has received threats and requested protection.

  10. Does it really matter who’s name was released first? The 11 or the 1? It’s beginning to sound like a school yard. *You did it first, so now I’m going to do it!* No ones name should have been released p.e.r.i.o.d. I hope the culprit(s), if found, are punished.
    No wonder people will do or say whatever they can to get off jury duty. It’s very sad.

  11. Rob in your article you talk about how SJ likes to generate website hits do you know if he gets paid per hit and if so who pays him and do you know how much he gets paid per hit ?

    1. Hi Daisy,

      SJ has no advertisements on JAII or CAII, but he’s not maintaining and paying for these websites out of the goodness of his heart. At the very least, they are a tax deduction from the other online businesses he has going on, and there are a lot of them.

      Look at the latest post at JAII – “After 9 million page views & close to 5 millions visitors — today, December 19th 2016, marks the official 4th anniversary of our Jodi Arias Is Innocent .com website launch.”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s