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

NEW ARTICLES – Jodi Arias Wannabees (Feb 6, 2016)

Monkey See, Monkey Do, Monkey step in a big steaming pile of wet Monkey-Poo.

Past and Present Female Murderers

Fact-based reporting by

Rob Roman

 

monkey 1

Okay, so there is a little more to say about Jodi Arias, and there are 3 more articles on the way. One is an article about Jodi’s Support. Are there any supporters left and if there are, who are they? There will be one article in particular about one ardent supporter named Kareem “Lefty” Williams and his high-jinx and adventures with ‘the Joadster’. There will be one article about a new theory I have come up with called the 6-6-6 theory of Jodi Arias.

There is not going to be much more to say about Jodi Arias for a while, so here at Spotlight On Law, we are going to move onto other things. What we will be moving on to will be called Jodi Arias Wannabees Past and Present.

The sub-title will be “Monkey See, Monkey Do, Monkey step into a big steaming pile of wet Monkey Poo”.

bad girls jodi wannabees
All suspects, accused, and defendants are to be considered innocent until proven guilty in a Court of Law.

Can you identify any of the above by either first or last name (both is even better)?

No cheating, now (No Googling or looking for articles allowed).

The thing about the fairer sex, the life givers and nurturers, being involved in murders is that it’s much more rare and it’s usually very varied as to motive and circumstance. Instead of patterns of criminal activity and violence, there seems to be more of a pattern of relationships and mental illness or mental breakdown.

Are any of these women just plain evil and born as a demon? We will take a deeper look at the facts, the crimes, and the circumstances to find out.

We will look at some older cases, some famous cases, but mostly recent cases either in court or recently committed murders. What are the known facts, what are the disputed facts, what evidence is there, and who will the witnesses be?

Did the defendant have good representation? How were the Prosecutors? Was it a fair trial? Was it a fair sentence or a just outcome? Any chance they are not guilty as charged?

As a warm up, no cheating now, can you name at least six of these accused / suspects / defendants? Can you name at least 6? For bonus points, can you name at least one victim each? Can you name more than 5 off the top of your head?

numbers

Use the comment Section to give your answers.

What happened to each of these women that possibly made them flip their burgers and kill a human being? Do they regret their activities after they realized that they had stepped in a big pile of fresh poo?

step in poop 2
Yeah, that’s not gonna work out too well for this person, will it?

 

Okay, so we’ll be coming back at you with a new article on Jodi Arias, then one of these Jodi Wannabees of the past, and then we will bring you a present day Jodi Wannabee. We’ll take it from there and see what other cases we can find. Hopefully some lesser known cases as well as the more interesting of the well known cases.

Okay, have a happy! But, don’t make a rash decision then step in some Crappy.

Promise?  🙂

 

Penalty Retrial: Two Craters Traversed, One Giant Chasm Left

Fact-based reporting by

Rob Roman

The jury questions and the back and forth by the prosecution and defense completed computer expert witness “John Smith”s testimony today. Former Mesa Detective Steve Flores was called back to the stand to testify a little more about what happened with Travis Alexander’s lap-top computer. The two sides have finally gotten to the bottom of what happened with the computer and who did what.

The court had been grappling with two giant crater issues in the Jodi Arias Penalty Phase Re-trial. The first was Judge Sherry Stephen’s decision to clear the court room for the testimony of Jodi Arias. This decision must have everyone stumped. Be aware that that decision ONLY pertains to Jodi Arias, and not any other mitigation witnesses. 

 

Giant Crater #1

Can Jodi Arias continue to testify in secret?

No. Many prosecution supporters were incensed with that ruling and have lashed out at the Judge, claiming that she is on the defense side and some have implied that she has been that way throughout the proceedings. jodi jan 1It doesn’t seem so, yet they cite this ruling as a major example that Stephens is rooting for the defense.

Yet, the Judge must have had a reason, other than sending the decision to a higher court to take the blame for making the decision. The media was the most upset about the ruling, citing the Constitutional 1st Amendment right of the public to be present, especially in high profile and high consequence trials.  They already can’t broadcast until after the trial, and they’re not about to be pushed any further. It’s difficult to think of a compelling reason for the Judge to have made that decision, but we should be fair in believing that she did have an important reason.

The only one I can think of is that Jodi Arias was going to talk about the other mitigation witnesses in her testimony and integrate them into her testimony. This means she would have to name them or otherwise expose them. The only way to keep the witnesses who did not want to be identified protected would be to also make Arias’ testimony secret.

Giant Crater #2

The Porn on the computer issue.

The second Large Crater in this penalty retrial is the issue of porn on the computer. How did it get there? Was it purposely accessed or was it automatically accessed due to malware?bryan jan 14 Did the prosecution try to hide porn found on the laptop hard drive, or was automatic actions of the computer creating that appearance? Canadian Deborah Maran has a good set of articles explaining the inner workings of computers, site-blockers, viruses, and malware, etc. It’s a good background on the issues surrounding Travis’ lap top computer.

http://jodiariastrialtruth.blogspot.ca/2015/01/the-truth-about-porn.html

http://jodiariastrialtruth.blogspot.ca/2015/01/the-truth-about-porn-part-two-case-of.html

 

shery jan 14Judge Stephens waited for Bryan Neumeister and his assistant, “John Smith”, to complete their testimony before issuing her ruling on lots of motions pertaining to the defenses’ desire that the court reverse the conviction or remove the death penalty from the proceedings. These rulings were released today. Boom!

“IT IS ORDERED denying the defendant’s Motion to Dismiss State’s Notice of Intent to Seek the Death Penalty Due to Continued Misconduct filed October 1, 2014,

the defendant’s Motion to Dismiss the State’s Notice of Intent to Seek the Death Penalty Due to Defendant’s Inability to Present a Complete Case for Life filed September 26, 2014,

the defendant’s Motion to Dismiss State’s Notice of Intent to Seek the Death Penalty Due to Continue State Misconduct Supplement #1 filed October 24, 2014,

the defendant’s Motion to Dismiss All Charges with Prejudice and/or in the Alternative to Dismiss the State’s Notice of Intent to Seek the Death Penalty due to Recently Discovered Purposeful and Egregious Prosecutorial Misconduct filed on November 10, 2014,

the Defendant’s Motion for Reconsideration: Motion to Dismiss State’s Notice of Intent to Seek the Death Penalty Due to Defendant’s Inability to Present a Complete Case for Life filed November 26, 2014,

and the Defendant’s Supplemental Motion to Dismiss all Charges with Prejudice and/or in the Alternative to Dismiss the State’s Notice of Intent to Seek the Death Penalty Due to Recently Discovered Purposeful and Egregious Prosecutorial Misconduct filed December 14, 2014.”

http://media2.abc15.com/html/pdf/AriasJan14motion.

 

Judge Stephens ruled that nothing the defense brought up, including the computer evidence, can be construed as prosecutorial misconduct, and nothing the defense brought up justifies any sanction including the removal of the death penalty. Also the tweets by Steve Flores’ wife may or may not have been leaks from sealed meetings, however the Judge rules that the defense presented no evidence that the information tweeted came from closed meetings.

juan 3 jan 14As to the hard drive evidence, it was determined that no pornographic photos were found, that much of the accessing of porn sites was the automatic workings of malware, as Deborah Maran stated in her article, and that the prosecution did nothing wrong that would change the outcome of the trial. The court also determined that differences between the different clone copies of the hard drive created on different dates were the result of waking and inspecting the original computer, and only system files were overwritten. The computer did not overwrite any registry files or porn information.

The court also determined that a porn site was accessed purposely by a user on June 3, 2008, one day before the killing.

This should put an end to the computer porn issue, and it’s doubtful that this could be deemed to be a legitimate appeal issue by a higher court. Deborah Maran also reported in her article that she felt the defense violated their “duty of candor” by purposely filing accusations and allegations they knew to be false. Juan Martinez also filed a motion to sanction the defense for the issues and allegations regarding the hard drive. That motion was also denied.

“ IT IS FURTHER ORDERED denying the State’s Motion for Sanctions (Compaq Presario Computer) filed November 16, 2014 and the State’s Motion to Strike (Compaq Presario Computer) filed November 18, 2014.”

These two Huge Craters in this elongated penalty re-trial seem to be traversed, but there’s one huge chasm left.

 

The remaining Giant Chasm

The remaining giant chasm is will Jodi Arias agree to continue her testimony in open court? Will her mitigation witnesses agree or refuse to testify in open court?

jennifer jan 14The Judge has ruled that there are many options available to protect the identity of witnesses short of clearing the courtroom. This is true, and we have already seen this in action with Darryl Brewer not showing his face in the original trial, and most recently, a computer expert who was given the pseudonym of “John Smith” to protect his identity. Maybe “John Smith” was fearful of what his participation in this trial would do to his prospects of being hired by “major corporations” as a private contractor.

That’s one of many reasons Arias’ mitigation witnesses are reluctant to testify. Another is cyber-stalking by over-zealous social media followers. Witnesses from the main trial had their books disparaged in reviews by trial activists on sites such as Amazon.com. Others have found photos of their children and maps to their home, as well as phone numbers publicly displayed on Facebook. juan jan 14Alyce LaViolette has had her speaking engagements seriously curtailed as a result of backlash from her participation and opinions in this trial. Other participants have had their safety and their life threatened.

The media appealed Judge Stephen’s decision to close the court to the Arizona Court of Appeals. The Court ruled in favor of the Media, and stayed the ruling. Arias had to stop testifying until the defense gets a chance to appeal that ruling. The Appeals Court also ordered Arias’ sealed testimony to be released to the public which happened yesterday.

http://archive.azcentral.com/ic/pdf/arias-transcript.pdf

http://archive.azcentral.com/ic/pdf/arias-transcript2.pdf

 

Here are a few samples from Jodi Arias’ secret testimony:

(Click to enlarge)

Childhood and alleges parent's drug use
Childhood and alleges parent’s drug use
writing and journaling began at age 8
writing and journaling began at age 8
Teens, choked by Bobby Juarez
Teen years, choked by Bobby Juarez
Executive Dinner with Travis, borrows Sky's dress
Sept 2006 Executive Dinner with Travis, borrows Sky’s dress
Early 2007. Travis and Jodi hook up at border motel room
Early 2007. Travis and Jodi hook up at border motel room
Evidence on record that the fight over the mitigation witnesses will continue
Evidence on record that the fight over the mitigation witnesses will continue

 

Many people theorized that Arias wanted the testimony to be secret because she was going to make wild and outrageous new allegations of abuse, sexual abuse, physical abuse and pedophilia, either by the victim, Travis Alexander or someone in her family when she was a child, or both. We have yet to see an indication of this yet.

 

The released transcripts reveal no real shockers, but there was some talk of drug use and more details of physical abuse by her parents when Arias was a child.  The Appeals Court ruling put an jodi jan 3abrupt end to Arias’ testimony, which covered her childhood and previous relationships all the way up to her first meeting with Travis Alexander and their initial motel rendezvous at a truck stop in Ehrenberg, Arizona, on the California border.  Perhaps any anticipated shockers were yet to come? Perhaps there were not going to be any shockers at all?

 

The released testimony had more color and detail than in the original trial. Arias seemed to be very eloquent and comfortable and she revealed new information in terms of different friends she made and how she came to move to the different places she lived. For example, Jodi did not just cruise down to the California Coast and find the Ventana Inn job. A man named Richard Molay from Oregon worked there and she actually got a recommendation from him.

 

She also revealed that when living with Bobby Juarez in Montague, 6 miles outside of Yreka, Jodi owned a Samurai sword. After Bobby allegedly choked her, and then convinced her to hang up on the 911 call, she told her brother Carl that Bobby had choked her. Carl showed up with a posse at Juarez’ place to intimidate Bobby, who came sailing out the door with the Samurai sword and chased Carl and his friends away. There are interesting details like that, but no real exploding bomb shells.

 

Now, the big question is, will Jodi Arias continue her testimony in open court, or will she refuse to testify? maria jan 14Also, the Court of Appeals is under no obligation or time limit to respond to Nurmi’s appeal of their decision to stay Judge Stephen’s ruling to clear the courtroom. The Arizona Court of Appeals also said that the defense could not use their decision as a basis to put the trial on hold or to delay the trial further.

 

Will the defense work with the court and the prosecution to find creative ways to protect witnesses and information while still having an open court? Will Jodi Arias continue her testimony or refuse to return to the stand? If she testifies, will other mitigation witnesses refuse to testify now that the promised anonymity may not be available? Will they agree to modifications so they can testify in open court? These are the big questions coming up soon.

 

A witness can be given a pseudonym, a witness can ask not to be identified, a witness can testify on video or by affidavit. Another person, such as mitigation specialist Maria De La Rosa or another suitable person can testify in the place of a witness. The witness can also be subpoenaed and compelled by the defense to testify. There are many ways a witness can testify and protect their identity without going to the extreme solution of clearing the courtroom, and Judge Stephens has explained this in her ruling.

 

So, if witnesses make a personal decision not to testify, this most likely cannot be an appealable issue at this point, because the prosecution and the court have offered many ways for witnesses to testify without having to reveal their identity.

 

This is not such a simple issue, because the Judge is reluctant to force Jodi Arias or her mitigation witnesses to testify in open court, because Nurmi has appealed the ruling. Should Jodi Arias be sentenced to death, and afterwards, Nurmi’s appeal is granted, then the retrial becomes a mistrial and Jodi Arias’ sentence would possibly need to be converted to life, especially if some witnesses refuse to testify. Anything done in open court cannot be undone, so it is questionable how this trial will proceed or even if there will be a postponement of the trial pending the ruling on Nurmi’s appeal.

 

Some prosecution supporters believe that this “witnesses are afraid” claim is just a ruse by the defense to find an excuse not to present mitigation witnesses. This is because some death sentences have been stricken down by the 9th Circuit Federal Court of Appeals, based on ineffective assistance of counsel for failure of a defense attorney to present mitigation witnesses. They claimed that this was what Nurmi did in the first penalty trial, also.

 

If this is his strategy, it’s not going to work at this point. So, it will be interesting to see what happens next. Will the defendant and her mitigation witnesses testify or not?

Another notable thing that happened on Tuesday the 13th was that Jennifer Willmott finished re-direct questioning of Mesa Detective Steve Flores about the chain of custody and what he witnessed about the computer in the evidence room. PNI Arias MonSome evidence favorable to the defense was elicited from Detective Flores. Juan Martinez  got up on re-cross and went after him in a fury and with as much ferocity as he has displayed with any defense witness. Fireworks in the courtroom. Juan Martinez also referred to himself as “Mr. Martinez”. “Objection to what Mr. Martinez thinks”.

 

Two Giant Craters have been traversed. Many prosecution supporters blamed the defense and Judge Sherry Stephens for all the delays and for throwing this crazy train retrial off the tracks, but that’s not the only perspective. The defense did not threaten and intimidate witnesses in the original trial and the defense did not put the porn on the computer. Theses two issues could not be ignored, they had to be confronted and worked out one way or another. The final Giant Chasm is what will the defense do now? Court is out until Tuesday after the Holiday, and we may or may not find out then.

Lilburn_Sketch_t300U1677888

14-356489-composite-drawingWhat do YOU think?

Comments from all perspectives are welcome. You can also comment on our FB page:

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

All Rights Reserved

 

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

 

 

 

 

Jodi Arias Trial – Jury Selection / Media Clown Reunion

Jodi Arias Case – Jury Selection / Media Clown Reunion

by Rob Roman

 

The Jodi Arias Murder Trial, the OTHER side of the story

Many people believe that much of the media storm against Jodi Arias was due the the results of the Casey Anthony trial.
Many people believe that much of the media storm against Jodi Arias was due to the results of the Casey Anthony trial.

 

The Jodi Arias trial is back on the front burner again with what is usually a mundane process, but hope springs eternal that some controversy or drama can be somehow squeezed out of this situation. Tweeters in the Phoenix, Arizona courtroom are experimenting with different titles for Ms. Arias Such as “Convicted Killer Arias” or “the Murderess”. A woman named “Jen”, and others are joking about the slowness of Defense Attorney Kirk Nurmi, especially after lunch. They’re questioning if he is being slow on purpose in order to add to the trial’s tremendous tab. Now slimmed down and reportedly sporting hair, Nurmi has written yet another voluminous motion to dismiss the Death Penalty, based on previous accounts of “prosecutorial misconduct” along with some new allegations. It’s like a high school reunion of class clowns as all the celebrities start gearing up and jockeying for position during the jury selection of the Jodi Arias 2nd penalty phase. HLN is coming on strong and is the current media fave among potential jurors, according to tweets coming from reporters inside the courtroom.

Jen from the Trial Diva’s fame is now back with her Trial Diaries website, tweeting every occurrence in the courtroom. CNN has made sure to cozy up to her as she has great popularity on Twitter. Earlier rumors reported that Jen and Prosecutor Juan Martinez had become good friends. Vinnie Politan is gone form HLN, which is no big loss, but Nancy Grace and JVM have more than made up for his absence with their powerful vilifications of Jodi Arias and her defense. There’s no need to pretend there is any objectivity or to try to hide their favoritism in the case, like they tried to do at least in the beginning of the guilt phase. Beth Karas is basically a free agent now after possibly having refused to go along with HLN’s completely one-sided reporting. She stayed at HLN too long until they finally decided to try to humiliate her in the process of dumping her.

Jodi Arias and Casey Anthony
Jodi Arias and Casey Anthony

Today, on the fourth day of jury selection, for example, reporters are tweeting about the clothing and hairstyle of Arias. Ms. Arias is wearing a “royal blue top” and a “mid-high ponytail” according to Tweeters inside the court room. It’s a different court room and the reporters can get much closer to her. The prevailing sentiment of potential jurors has been that Jodi Arias should get the Death Penalty. Of course, most of these jurors have been dismissed. There was at least one who thought that all 1st degree murders should get the DP. Other potential jurors are saying that they could never vote for anyone’s death, no matter what they have done, but that they could still be fair? What?? You have to hand it to Arizona jurors, they seem to be a special breed, truly. Some jurors have been victims of murderers and one potential juror has had co-workers who were stalked and murdered.

Look-it what this special breed of media moron Tweeted:

Jeffrey Evan Gold ‏@jeffgoldesq  5m5 minutes ago

Sitting behind #JodiArias today and much closer than usual. With her hair up, her creamy neck and shoulders beckon…the hangman’s noose.”

This perfectly exemplifies the tone and tenor of reporters as they gear up for this story, attempt to ramp up the hatred, and try to find a way to wrangle up some drama at the start of the final courtroom scenes and acts. This is what JVM has on tap for tonight. Oh, that voice of her that sounds just like an air-raid siren!

 

Jane Velez-Mitchell ‏@JVM  8m8 minutes ago

TONIGHT at 7p @LisaBloom @claycane @LukeBurke @TrialDiariesJ @janegarrison join me tonight to discuss #DanielCrespo #RavenSymone #jodiarias

 

Of course there are the Travis watchers and Tweeters who need to be heard from (This one appears to be the reincarnation of @HodiHo69:

 

superdooperday ♥ ‏@AnneWyattanne7  1h1 hour ago

Happy 2see potential jurors r taking precautions be4 entering court with that disease ridden whore #jodiarias there

 

A group of nearly 400 potential jurors has been whittled down to 82 finalists, with 12 that have just made it to the 3rd round, or pre-emptive elimination round where attorneys for the defense and the prosecution will dismiss jurors without cause. They have so many of these (10 each, instead of the usual 3, I believe) and then they must give reasons for cause for dismissing any potential jurors who make it past the 3rd round.

Of the Tweeters in the courtroom, Jen, from Trial Diaries recommends Jeffrey Evan Gold and Monica Lindstrom in her absence. As above, Jeffrey Evans Gold seems to show what he’s all about. Monica Lindstrom seems to be much more fair and normal, so-far.

 

Monica Lindstrom ‏@monicalindstrom  26m26 minutes ago

The juror that had a family member who grew up with #JodiArias is the one that seems like she is trying a bit harder than most 2b on jury

 

Monica Lindstrom ‏@monicalindstrom  42m42 minutes ago

I think #Nurmi is doing a good job questioning potential jurors, calm, understandable, prepared and methodical #JodiArias

 

I Haven’t seen any reporting like that from anyone else. Someone actually complimented the Defense, imagine that! Nice to see at least one person attempt to present both sides reasonably fairly and accurately.

 

Jen’s Trial Diaries ‏@TrialDiariesJ  32m32 minutes ago

Juror 82 sister in law knew #jodiarias and she is also juror that knew people killed by stalker

 

This one juror incredibly has family who knew Jodi Arias and has co-workers who were murder victims of a stalker. This does not by any means indicate that this juror will be good for the prosecution, but it’s so doubtful this juror will survive the later rounds.

 

Well wonder of wonders, Jeffrey Evans Gold Tweeted something that actually makes sense:

 

Jeffrey Evan Gold ‏@jeffgoldesq  10m10 minutes ago

Death penalty juries are special because they decide the ultimate human sentence. In #JodiArias there’s complication of prior media circus

 

Jeffrey Evan Gold ‏@jeffgoldesq  4h4 hours ago

Sort of funny the way #JodiArias Pros Juan Martinez style is bombastic whether def on stand or a juror in box.

 

Maybe I should take back what I said about him earlier. So this should be easier to report from a media-bias view, as the two sides are no longer about guilt or innocence, but about whether the convicted should spend life in prison or be executed. Prosecutor Juan Martinez will be sure to drum into the jurors heads that it’s a fact that Jodi Arias committed pre-meditated murder and that that murder was especially cruel. You can expect him to make that absolutely clear.

 

Jen’s Trial Diaries ‏@TrialDiariesJ  3h3 hours ago

Juan tells this woman “not only is she guilty of murder it was especially cruel” Nurmi objects but Judge overruled #jodiarias

 

Another cut-and paste blog with little to no original content “Wild about Trial”, is also on the scenes trying to drop a new bombshell

 

Wild About Trial ‏@WildAboutTrial  23m23 minutes ago

I have a surprise that will drop in a few days. #JodiArias.

 

Translation: I’m late to the party and I desperately need to distinguish myself as a top reporter on this penalty phase re-trial before I’m left behind in the dust and forgotten. Let’s see if that “SURPRISE” will ever really materialize.

Update: There was no surprise.

 

Here a mock-up of Jodi Arias is surrounded by so-called supporters (Clockwise from the top) Webmaster Jason Weber, Some guy who wanted to attack Nancy Grace, Friend Donovan, The foreman from the original trial, William Zervakos, Defense expert Dr. Robert Samuels, and Humanitarian from England, George Barwood.
Here a mock-up of Jodi Arias is surrounded by so-called supporters (Clockwise from the top) Webmaster Jason Weber, Some guy who wanted to attack Nancy Grace, Friend Donovan, The foreman from the original trial, William Zervakos, Defense expert Dr. Robert Samuels, and Humanitarian from England, George Barwood.

Here a mock-up of Jodi Arias is surrounded by so-called supporters (Clockwise from the top) Webmaster Jason Weber, Some guy who wanted to attack Nancy Grace, Friend Donovan, The foreman from the original trial, William Zervakos, Defense expert Dr. Robert Samuels, and Humanitarian from England, George Barwood.

We wonder how the trial is going to go, yet, below the surface we know how the trial is going to go. Juan Martinez will try to force his opinion every step of the way and the defense will try to oppose this at every opportunity. Juan will argue that the jurors should, with objectivity and without emotion, apply the facts to the law. The defense will argue that life in prison is an appropriate punishment and they will argue the value of a human life in general, and of Jodi Arias’ life in particular. The defense will try to personalize Jodi Arias while Juan Martinez will call her “it” and “that thing” who chopped up Travis Alexander without a thought, then giddily rushed to Utah to perform mating rituals on Ryan Burns.

As the new penalty phase re-trial has abandoned the question of guilt or degree of guilt all together and now only asks about life or death, so too the blogs and Facebook pages have for the most part abandoned any discussion or debate about the guilt phase. A secret Facebook Page called “Jodi Arias Both Sides” is run by Brad Justda, who now is calling himself Brad Smith. He seems to be a good guy, but I wonder what he means by “both sides”. Both sides of what, you may wonder? On that page, which is a secret page to begin with, are a large variety of a mixture of decent people, ignoramuses, and mad zealots, who do not tolerate any hint of the guilt and aggravator phase of the trial not having turned out exactly right. In their view, it was a fair trial logically worked out and all allegations about Jodi Arias were proven to be true.

A Prosecution supporter uses a famous comic strip to mock Jodi Arias Supporters.
A Prosecution supporter uses a famous comic strip to mock Jodi Arias Supporters.

In the world of the mad zealots of the prosecution supporter pages, no one is allowed to question the verdict or to bring up any question which may reflect unfavorably on Travis Alexander. If you do, you are met by almost hysterical personal attacks. On that page, if you allow someone to voice their minority opinion, you are a traitor to the Travisites and you have let down your idol and your team. You must launch a personal attack on anyone who doesn’t believe the same things as you, you must block anyone who is a Jodite and who has a different opinion than you do. You must insult that person, fabricate false evidence against them, obstruct and divert the conversation, spam the thread, and do whatever it takes to repel the agitator off of the page.

king juan

This is what alternate juror Tara Kelly was told by fellow Tweeters when she showed up on Twitter so shortly after the trial. Her wise friends advised her to not have discussions with people who have opinions that are in opposition to hers and to just block them. Then you can live in the peaceful bliss of unanimity. It hardly seems American, but free speech has no place in the Travisite world, where speech is only free when people are being told what they need to hear.  On a page that is 99% prosecution supporters, any voice in opposition is not able to be heard. Yet, on some Jodi Arias support pages, prosecution supporters are allowed to speak their mind and air their opinions freely. You have to wonder why that’s so?

Here are some sentiments of some prosecution supporters on Twitter:

 

TeamTravisUnited retweeted 7h7 hours ago

@yours917 @mitchiepoo46 @jodimustdie @bunnykittenpupp @ClubLove13 I Sooo want it to get DP!! It on death row…Priceless!!

 

Juan football

juan gloves are off

 

Retweet3 retweets3 Favorite3 favorites3 More· Oct 6

TeamTravisUnited

@mitchiepoo46

The grim reaper is waiting! #jodiarias

 

Arias Reaper

Jodi Arias supporters are thought by prosecution supporters to be every bit as vile and as guilty as they suppose Jodi Arias to be. This means if you support Jodi Arias, you are a lying, murdering scum. You are a felon and a deviant. You are no better than a murderer and you are hypnotized and controlled by Jodi Arias and her crew of foreign fiends. Actually, the truth is that some people will always gather to support someone who has been rejected by society. Some people will always see that no matter what Jodi Arias has done, there have also been some injustices done by the other side. Some people will always rise up to support the oppressed, the underdog, the downtrodden, and the hopeless. The truth is that HLN helped to create Jodi Arias supporters, prosecution supporters helped to create Jodi Arias supporters, and Juan Martinez especially helped to create Jodi Arias supporters.

The real, true support for Jodi Arias comes from very quiet people who do not talk about, discuss or debate the case, who say absolutely nothing derisive about the victim or his family, and who strive every day in their secret groups to give well wishes, words of encouragement, strength, prayers and love for Jodi Arias. Some people can’t stand that fact but it’s a fact. Some Jodi Arias supporters are counting on a type of Stockholm Syndrome where people have come to know and perhaps hate Jodi Arias so strongly that perhaps they will also want to see her life spared.

abc_2020_arias2_130510_wg

People we know never use the word “Travis supporters”, because actually, most Jodi Arias supporters feel badly about what happened to Travis Alexander and support him as much as anyone else. We don’t hear much of anything positive or supportive towards Travis and his family coming out of the other side at this time. Not to say it’s not there, just that it hasn’t been very visible. It seems more a sport or a game, a spectacle of entertainment as many fervently hope that Jodi Arias will get the Death Penalty and they can call it a day.

This can be the final victory for Travis as the Defense team of Kirk Nurmi, Jennifer Wilmott, and mitigation specialist Marie De La Rosa and Jodi Arias herself are finally, publicly vanquished and the world can see that there is no mitigation for such an atrocity. However, many Jodi Supporters and also many prosecution supporters as well are hoping that at least some of the jury will see that there is value in a human life, that this case has been somewhat overblown, and that life in prison is an appropriate punishment. It’s really in the hands of this new jury. Only time will tell.

Here’s a sentiment that we at SpotlightOnLaw  can identify with:

Rain Shine ‏@RedTailspin  3h3 hours ago

Iranian woman facing death penalty may b spared, officials say. If only #JodiArias was in Iran, instead of #Arizona. http://www.latimes.com/world/middleeast/la-fg-iranian-woman-death-penalty-20141006-story.html …

 

Other people may feel this way:

Beth Karas ‏@BethKaras  10h10 hours ago

The final juror on the third panel being questioned. “What’s good for the goose is good for the gander.” Not an Arias fan here. #jodiarias

 

Opposing viewpoints are welcome. Please comment.

You can also comment on Facebook at “Spotlight on law”

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

Sources:

Twitter feed on #JodiArias Oct 1st through 8th, 2014

Photos and Memes courtesy of Twitter

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: