Stranger than Fiction: The Real Sheriff Joe

Stranger Than Fiction:

The Real Sheriff Joe

images (2)

Fact Based Reporting by

Amanda Chen & Rob Roman

Sheriff Joe is Jodi Arias’ jailer in Arizona. This article is in response to various posters, who claim that Maricopa County’s Sheriff Joe Arpaio is doing a wonderful job and they have statistics that prove his outstanding job performance.

Claims to Fame

  • Being a Korean War Veteran
  • Inventing the use of tents in a custody setting
  • Pulling over and/or arresting Elvis Presley in Nevada
  • Getting in weekly shootouts as a DEA agent
  • Breaking the famous “French Connection”

elvis-presley-clambake1971 french connection

These are some of  the actual claims Sheriff Joe has made. All these claims have little or no basis in reality.

(Spanish language overview http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Arpaio)

Reality Bites

Real Joe was an unremarkable Army Typist who was stationed in France during the Korean War. He was a mediocre police officer and DEA agent and he would probably also have claimed to have invented the internet, if only former Vice President Al Gore hadn’t beaten him to it.

There’s something about Arizona, where run of the mill, but whacky and ruthless people seem to rise to the top of the heap. Juan Martinez was recently named Prosecutor of the year in Maricopa County. Even a person whose highest educational achievement, a certificate as a radiological (X-ray) technician, from Valley Community College, now sits in the Governor’s seat.

A Tough Nut to Crack

“ He’s notoriously tough — and arguably brutal — towards inmates, too. Sheriff Joe has made headlines for calling his “Tent City” jail a “concentration camp,” and for making the inmates there wear pink underwear, eat only two meals a day, and endure unbearably hot temperatures in the summer.

http://www.businessinsider.com/maricopa-county-sheriff-joe-arpaio-profile-2013-10#ixzz2tOVqhOnH

Somehow, in Maricopa County, this man became a legend.

http://borderlessnewsandviews.com/2012/07/jan-brewer-the-face-of-arizona/

how-arizona-sheriff-joe-arpaio-became-the-most-hated-lawman-in-america

Recidivism Schism

Besides saving the county money, Sheriff Joe’s other main purpose was to make detention and jail so unpleasant, that people would avoid being arrested at all cost. CountyJail would no longer be a home away from home or a cheap hotel for lawbreakers. They were going to tighten up the screws in MaricopaCounty.

But then, wouldn’t fewer prisoners mean a smaller budget and less need for a “legend”? The more, the merrier would be a better rule of thumb.

Known as “America’s Toughest Sheriff”, a moniker Joe modestly bestowed upon himself, Maricopa County’s Sheriff Joe Arpaio has made himself the indispensable top lawman in the greater Phoenix area.

20 Year Sentence

After over 20 years in office as Sheriff, the rate of offender recidivism (repeat offenders) under Sheriff Joe is actually no better than his predecessors and no different from any of his contemporaries.

Additionally, many experts think Sheriff Joe’s practices are harmful to prisoners and the community. His policies border on being unconstitutional, as well as violating the rights of citizens both inside and outside his jails.

http://www.arpaio.com/arpaio-truth/

http://www.vice.com/read/a-reminder-that-sheriff-joe-is-the-worst-lawman-in-america

Here’s a better idea: Run a safe, humane jail system with a certain minimum level of dignity for the prisoners. But that would be expensive, wouldn’t it?

Maricopa+County+Sheriff+Runs+Tent+City+Jail+4wvnKAnhYRsl

Shame Game

He’s known for shaming prisoners by

  • Parading them through public squares in their striped uniforms
  • Publishing the names of everyone who’s been arrested
  • Posting the “mugshot of the day” on his website
  • Forcing prisoners to wear pink underwear
  • Installing cameras and showing live video feeds displaying prisoners in their daily activities on his website

Is Sheriff Joe really the mastermind of ineffective, callous and even brutal policies that harm both inmates and the community?

The FBI says so, so do local Arizona newspapers, so does a leading conservative think tank, so do neighboring communities and states.

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2007/data/table_10_az.html

http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/news/articles/2010/06/21/20100621joe-arpaio-crime-sweeps.html#ixzz0v4kZx8ZQ

http://www.goldwaterinstitute.org/Common/Img/Mission%20Unaccomplished.pdf

http://newmexicoindependent.com/53176/crime-immigration-connection-unclear-justice-dept-statistics-suggest

There are dissenting views, however:

alg-mugshot-arizona-jpg

Joe’s Support Network

  • Some police organizations,
  • Joe Arpaio’s personal Twitter site @RealSheriffJoe
  • www.MCSO.org, his official Maricopa County website …

…and the people of Maricopa County Arizona, who have overwhelmingly re-elected the 81 year-old lawman as County Sheriff five times since he won office in 1992.

Oh dear, he’s such a nice man. Isn’t he that baseball player who married Marilyn Monroe?

http://www.policeone.com/columnists/24seven/articles/113956-meet-americas-toughest-sheriff-joe-arpaio/

http://www.mcso.org/About/Sheriff.aspx

https://twitter.com/RealSheriffJoe

He did do a good job of facilitating Jodi Arias’ interviews and protecting her from potential attacks by crazy people on her way to and from the courthouse.

So in return, I will not mention:

indictarpaioVETPARADE (5)

Armored Vehicle Attack

  •  the armored vehicle SWAT attack on a family
  • the purposeful murder of their puppy (2nd degree)
  • the burning down of their home…
  • …when the man had nothing but some overdue traffic tickets.

http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/2004-08-05/news/dog-day-afternoon/full/

I’ll try to forget about Clint Yarbrough

December, 2005

It was said that Clint Yarbrough was on drugs and combative. No medical services were rendered. Instead, he was strapped into a restraint chair and rolled into a hallway where he was left restrained and unattended for 3 hours. He passed out and eventually died.

Settlement: $2 Million dollars.

http://www.lawyersandsettlements.com/settlements/08460/restraint-chair-death.html

Scott-Norberg lt 2

I won’t mention Scott Norberg…..

June, 1996

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

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

Settlement $8.25 million dollars.

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

I won’t mention the breaking of the neck of a prisoner

while under Joe’s restraint chair and the choking to death of another in the same restraint system.

December, 1996

Richard Post

was a paraplegic. He complained from his cell that he needed a catheter in order to urinate. Instead he was strapped into Joe’s restraint chair and left for four hours. When he begged to be let out of the chair, the guards instead tightened the straps with all their might, breaking his neck. Why would you need to do that to someone with no use of his legs? Now he is practically a quadriplegic.

Settlement: $800,000 dollars.

Don’t these things happen to everybody? There’s nothing special here for people to see.

http://www.lawyersandsettlements.com/settlements/08460/restraint-chair-death.html#.Uv9g1PldWUo

http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/1997-01-23/news/jailers-show-a-paraplegic-who-s-boss/

http://www.laprogressive.com/inside-joe-arpaio-arizona-deputy-calls-him-a-disgrace-to-the-department/

Or Charles Agster,

the man who died in custody mysteriously with 17 times a lethal dose of methamphetamine in his system.

August, 2001

Charles Agster, a special needs prisoner, had a “spit hood” forced over his head and was strapped into a restraint chair, where he had a seizure and lost consciousness. He was declared brain dead and was found to have 17 times the lethal dose of methamphetamine in his system.

Verdict: $ 9 million dollars.

charles agster

http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/2006-03-16/news/death-sentence/

Did anyone in Maricopa County MCSO (Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office) ever hear of a Doctor, or a Nurse, or a Hospital?

In many of these cases there are first hand reports of the guards smiling, joking and laughing out loud during these activities.

Apply Force

It’s a great job for biblical law revenge seekers, every day sadists, and for just ordinary, robust people with a well developed sense of humor and a healthy curiosity.

No arrests were made and no one was held accountable for any of these “incidents”.

Most of the time, there are no witnesses, other than staff who receive their pay, benefits and retirement funds from the County.

I won’t mention the diabetic woman who became seriously ill and died

in jail after begging for and being refused basic medical treatment.

Deborah Braillard lt

Deborah Braillard

was offered no help, even after “moaning and crying out in pain, asking for help, repeatedly vomiting, defecating on herself and having seizures. She shook violently and then her body would stiffen up. Her fellow inmates begged the corrections officers to assist her. They were told “This is jail.” and to “Get over it”. She died soon after.

Key evidence in this case was also destroyed. The County recently settled with her family for $3.25 million.

http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/2010-12-09/news/what-s-mom-worth-when-a-woman-became-deathly-ill-in-sheriff-joe-arpaio-s-cells-guards-and-nurses-ignored-her-agony/

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/09/13/841161/lawsuit-sheriff-arpaios-jail-denied-medicine-to-diabetic-inmate-causing-her-death/

http://www.abc15.com/dpp/news/local_news/investigations/Key-evidence-in-Maricopa-County-Jail-death-suit-of-Deborah-Braillard-destroyed

It’s fun to come to Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s tent city. You can live in the desert and enjoy the great outdoors and you can stretch your legs and get some fresh air on the volunteer chain gangs in the lovely, blazing Arizona sun.

June Weather

Average temperature: 91 (33 C)
Average high temperature: 104 (40 C)
Warmest ever: 122  (50 C)

July Weather
Average temperature: 95 (35C)
Average high temperature: 106 (41 C)
Warmest ever: 121 (49.4)

August Weather
Average temperature: 94 (34.4)
Average high temperature: 104 (40 C)
Warmest ever: 116 (46.7 C)

Should I bring up the case of Juan Mendoza Farias, who was beaten to death by guards?

taser-m18-deployment

December, 2007

Juan Mendoza Farias

BookingPhoto_optFariasNreducedwas a DUI (driving under the influence) intake. He was suffering severe alcohol withdrawal.

The corrections Officers made fun of his incoherence and inability to follow directions and they goaded him into making funny faces for his mug shot in order to win the “mug shot of the day contest”, a source of great merriment for the guards. Then he was surrounded by 12 guards

The correction officers wanted to help him. Eleven of the officers attempted to assist him by handcuffing him behind his back, shoving a “spit hood” over his head and forcing him into a face down position.

Mr. Mendoza fought against suffocation and he was pelted with 6 rounds of “crowd control pepper balls” and shocked repeatedly with tasers. He choked on his own blood and died. He had multiple blunt force injuries on his face and body, ruptured vessels in his neck and even a chunk was missing from his nose.

Settlement: $1 million dollars.

Standard Operating Procedure

Real Sheriff Joe chalked it up to business as usual, after the County settled another huge lawsuit when he said, and I quote:

  •  “It was settled due to the nature of doing business,”
  •  “That (settlement) wasn’t up to us, that was the county that decided to settle it.”
  •  “We have nothing to do with this.”
  •  “We never like to ‘lose’ anybody in jail.”

pepperball-600px

http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/2008-09-11/news/was-juan-mendoza-farias-beaten-to-death-by-sheriff-joe-arpaio-s-guards/

http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2011/11/15/20111115maricopa-county-pay-1-million-over-death-arpaio-jail.html#ixzz2tWGfEvV7

Birds of a Feather

Sheriff Joe’s well-worn, joking answer when various requests or complaints are made? “We are not a hotel.”

When one prisoner was sentenced to prison but remained in the jail, he pleaded to Sheriff Joe to be transferred to the prison, where conditions are better.

Juan Martinez’ response to the prisoner? “We are not a taxi service”, he replied laughingly, echoing his buddy, Sheriff Joe.

I won’t mention the legally blind and mentally disabled man who was beaten to death for fun.

brian crenshaw lt

March, 2003

Brian Crenshaw,

a legally blind and retarded inmate was brutally beaten to death by corrections officers who then claimed he fell off his bunk. The Medical Examiner confirmed that Crenshaw suffered a broken neck, broken toes, and a perforation of his duodenum (1st part of the small intestine leading from the stomach) all from a single four foot (1.22 M) fall off his bunk. That’s what the Correction Officers reported had happened, so hey, why investigate?

The ME performed no autopsy and relied solely on the report given to him by the guards stating that Crenshaw fell off his bunk.

Settlement $2 million dollars.

http://www.rollingstone.com/culture/news/the-long-lawless-ride-of-sheriff-joe-arpaio-20120802

http://backspinmymovie.com/tentcity.html

The Fantastic Four (and More)

Sheriff Joe has to sell himself every four years. So, he needs to make the headlines with new innovations and crowd-pleasing measures. Last election cycle, in 2010, the big crowd pleaser was his announcement that he would enforce Arizona’s newest and highly controversial immigration laws, widely regarded as in violation of The U.S. Constitution.

dick-tracy

Sheriff Joe teamed up with:

  • Dick Tracy (No, he’s just some retired cop type guy who happens to share the same name.)
  • Wyatt Earp (Nephew of the famous lawman by the same name)
  • Peter Lupus (the Muscle man from the original Mission Impossible team)
  • Lou Ferrigno (The deaf Body Builder who was the original Incredible Hulk until he was replaced by digital animation)
  • and Steven Seagal (The actor-martial artist who likes to brag about his mysterious associations with the CIA).

Fantastic Four

These name-brand, quasi-celebrities were made into “Deputies” and joined forces to help form citizen posses to keep the riff raff from crossing over the boarder and/or remaining illegally in U.S. territory.

The Arizona crowds went wild. Joe seems to have a certain fascination with shirtless, male body builders, collecting them with as much enthusiasm as a wide-eyed child collects action figures.

Suddenly, Joe’s mission to force shackled men to wear pink underwear makes more and more sense.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/muckraker/sheriff-joe-s-new-posse-includes-hulk-lou-ferrigno-steven-seagal

Too bad My Hero will not be a member of Joe’s posse

billy-jack-laughlin (1)

“When lawmen break the law, then there is no law. There’s just a struggle for survival”.   – Billy Jack

Election Year

This year, in addition to his possible claim to fame as the dungeon master of the “dangerous” Jodi Arias and other inmates, he is also trying to do the other thing that drives his Maricopa fans wild: saving that money.

arpaioperry28n-1-web (1)

  • Joe has taken all the meat out of prisoners meals, which he estimates will save over $100,000 per year and has already caused a women’s hunger strike.
  • He is also the first jailer to charge prisoners directly for all meals ($1.25 per day) giving an estimated savings of $900,000 per year.
  • This policy is obviously designed to save an additional $1,000,000 dollars per year to make up for all the lawsuits and other budget overruns that voters may be angry about.
  • His other big venture is teaming with a company to provide a sort of pay-per-view Skype type operation where family and friends of prisoners must pay to visit their incarcerated member to communicate via computer video.
  • Last year, right before Christmas, the Sheriff’s Office cut visitations from 3 hours per week to ½ hour. This year, the phone system just happened to be shut down during the Valentine’s Day weekend. How warm and fuzzy!

Augmenting this money saving “War on Christmas: Joe Arpaio’s New Inmate-Visitation Policy is a money making Bonanza.

December 11, 2013

Arpaio_brain

Party Pooper

“Birther Sheriff Joe Arpaio of Maricopa County, Arizona, is not only cutting back on inmate visitation at the county jails, just in time for the holidays, he’s also charging for visitation visits via a new video-installation system which is installed for free but his office gets a kickback of 10 percent, and that fee will go up to 20 percent as more revenue comes in.”

“It’s the only way to visit a prisoner for the holidays and Arpaio will make their families suffer. If a family member or friend wants to have a video visit with an inmate from their own computer, it will cost $12.95 for a 20-minute chat.”

Since video communications via computer such as Skype are virtually free, one can imagine the enormous profit potential in this venture. Watch as prisoners soon are allowed more and more visiting time as this low-cost / high-tech scheme unfolds. Sheriff Joe needs to make up for all the money he’s lost to personal injury and death liability lawsuits.

gty_meals_jp_120302_wb

Eternal Vigilance

Besides showboating, another part of Sheriff Joe’s public relations campaign is to illicit sympathy or show that his job is incredibly dangerous. He needs to be viewed as facing crafty adversaries facing off against him in his fight for truth, justice, and the American way.

Anyone who says anything that in any way can be viewed as a “threat” against Sheriff Joe is gathered by his office, and distributed to the media to garner sympathy and support for “America’s Toughest Sheriff”.

This is true even if the “threat” comes from a facebook posting from some guy in Tennessee or an e-mail from a  16 year-old boy living in Canada.

“Sheriff Joe Arpaio seems to have an obsession with trying to get the public to believe that his life is in constant danger.

And no matter how many times Arpaio cries wolf about the latest “death threat,” there never seems to be any intent of legitimate harm against the elderly, publicity-hungry sheriff. Check out 10 of the most bogus death threats Arpaio has cried about:”

October, 2013

arpaio-gross-2

October 2013

“Sheriff Joe Arpaio announced that a 16-year-old Canadian boy might be facing criminal charges for threatening to murder Arpaio, who’s a “massive d*ckhead,” according to the boy’s alleged e-mail threat.

Adding to the long list of non-credible “death threats” Arpaio has publicized, the boy e-mailed the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office saying that he’d murder the “d*ck sucking sh*tface” Sheriff and his family, and bomb his house.”

http://blogs.phoenixnewtimes.com/valleyfever/2013/07/10_most_bogus_death_threats_against_joe_arpaio.php

Trumped Up Charges

Along with real millionaire entrepreneur Donald Trump, Real Joe was front and center in the “birther” movement, questioning Barack Obama’s legitimacy as President of the U.S. because they claimed he was not a natural born U.S. citizen. They continued this for years, even though Obama’s mother was a United States citizen and her father was a real war veteran of World War II.

They fought a long and unsuccessful campaign trying to prove that Obama’s birth certificate was a forgery, including offering a reward for information proving the President was born in a foreign country. This quest ended abruptly around the sane time that political comedian Bill Maher offered a reward for proof that Donald Trump was not the offspring of an Orangutan.

00033497

Monkey Business

Back to Sheriff Joe’s exploits:

We promise not to mention

Ernest “Marty” Atencio

Mr. Atencio was arrested and booked on suspicion of assault

Mr. Atencio was not on drugs and he was not combative.

The official story line was that Marty Atencio was found unresponsive in his cell, with a weak pulse, and rushed to the hospital.

Ernest marty atencioThe true story is that Marty was shocked with tasers by Detention Officers so many times that he went into cardiac arrest. After that, they put him in a cell and left him there. AFTER it was feared he had died, THEN they got him out of his cell and rushed him to a hospital, where he was placed on life support.

“The family said Atencio had a history of mental illness and that a stun gun was likely not necessary.  They said there were marks from the gun’s barbs on Atencio’s chest.

“They treated him as less than a human being,” said Mike Atencio, Marty Atencio’s brother. “I believe that they took advantage of someone who has special needs.”

The family’s biggest problem, however, was not with the use of a stun gun, but that their brother was not cared for better after he was found not breathing.”

“When a human life is involved, it should be at the highest level,” said brother Eric Atencio. “It does not matter what is going on. It does not matter the circumstances. It does not matter that they are in jail. You are handling a human life.”

BINGO!

Why has the real Joe Arpaio been unable to learn this real simple lesson?

Maybe Eric Atencio should run for Maricopa County Sheriff.

Marty Atencio

Shell Shock

Later, when Sheriff Joe Arpaio found out that Marty Atencio was a disabled Gulf War Veteran instead of just a another ‘lowly Hispanic’, Joe went on a frantic campaign to prevent this news from getting out. Joe suppressed news of the event for months and then tried to prevent news organizations from getting any information about the death.

The Atencio family recently refused a settlement offer of $550,000 for the shocking death of their family member.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/23/sheriff-joe-arpaio-lawsuit-inmate-death_n_2007391.html

http://www.azfamily.com/news/Sheriff-Joe-Arpaio-others-sued-over-inmate-death-175519271.html

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/06/03/jail-death-of-veteran-haunts-joe-arpaio-america-s-toughest-sheriff.html

What’s Sheriff Joe’s latest overcompensating improvement? Placing stickers of the American flag in all prisoner’s cells to evoke and improve patriotism.

IMG_1051

images (4)

Love It Or Leave It (alone)

In an “I dare you to knock this chip off my shoulder” arrangement, Sheriff Joe had the stickers installed in all cells as well as loudly blasting patriotic songs throughout the jails each morning and evening.

What’s the punishment for defacing, tearing, moving, or otherwise interfering with the American flag stickers? The prisoner is put on a diet of bread and water only.

This should teach the prisoners to love their country, or else.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/01/26/arizona-sheriff-joe-arpaio-puts-inmates-on-bread-and-water-for-destroying-us/

http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2011/11/15/20111115maricopa-county-pay-1-million-over-death-arpaio-jail.html#ixzz2tWGfEvV7

stop-the-raids-joe-arpaio-immigration-protest-arizona

Driving While Latino

We won’t mention the many legal American Latinos and Latino U.S. citizens who were pulled over without probable cause other than their skin color and subjected to illegal searches and seizures on suspicion of “trespassing on American soil”.

“How do we know that Joe Arpaio, sheriff of Maricopa County, Ariz., is a racial profiler, an abuser of power who has subjected Latinos for years to unconstitutional arrests, detention and harassment?”

“Judge G. Murray Snow of United States District Court in Phoenix, in a 142-page opinion released on Friday, excoriated the Maricopa Sheriff’s Office for violating the 4th and 14th Amendment rights of Latinos by illegally using race as a factor in questioning. “

“But we also know that Sheriff Arpaio has singled out Latinos for unjustified abuse because the sheriff said so himself, as loudly and in as many ways as he could.”

“He said it in press releases. He said it in news conferences. He said it to Fox News and CNN. He said it to adoring crowds in retirement communities outside Phoenix, who pressed him for photos and autographs of his books.”

“He said it in his books. He said it when he paraded immigrant suspects through the streets of Phoenix, in chains and prison stripes. And he said it every day to the hundreds of thousands of brown-skinned residents of MaricopaCounty, where Latinos have long understood: The sheriff is out to get you.”

main

http://takingnote.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/05/25/arizonas-illegal-sheriff/?_php=true&_type=blogs&_r=0

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/24/arpaio-racial-profiling_n_3333907.html

http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/federal-judge-finds-that-sheriff-joe-aripiao-violated-rights-of-latino-suspects/

*

Does this really say that real Sheriff Joe Arpaio arrested a 6 year-old, for real?

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/06/17/501097/arizona-sheriff-joe-arpaio-arrests-6-year-old-undocumented-immigrant/

Chain Labor

… or shackling pregnant moms

“In some ways, she was lucky. The MCSO’s policy heretofore has been to shackle pregnant women as they give birth.”

“My colleague Valerie Fernandez has previously reported on this MCSO policy for New Times, describing the ordeal of another pregnant Latina who was shackled throughout her labor, despite the wishes of healthcare providers.”

“But during Mendiola-Martinez’s C-section at county, her female MCSO guard cut her some uncharacteristic slack by not shackling her during the actual operation.”

“Afterward, though she was in terrific pain and could barely walk, the male guard who took over for the female officer shackled the new mother to her hospital bed.”

http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/2010-01-07/news/mcso-shackling-pregnant-moms-and-linda-ronstadt-marches-against-arpaio/

u1

Crude Awakening

I almost forgot to mention one of Joe’s guards who went home and stabbed his own father six times or another one of Joe’s guards who went home and smashed his girlfriend’s cell phone, assaulted her with a stun gun, pepper sprayed her vagina, put a loaded gun in her mouth on multiple occasions and sexually assaulted her with a souvenir baseball bat.

Where do you think they got all this pent-up hostility? Where do you suppose he learned all these nasty tricks, hmmm?

It’s kind of difficult to minimize these things, especially when there were eye witnesses.

http://www.abc15.com/dpp/news/region_west_valley/avondale/avondale-father-son-stabbing-mcso-detention-officer-stabbed-dad-6-times-dad-in-critical-condition#ixzz2gBAXI2V4

http://www.kpho.com/story/22845025/avondale-man-accused-of-sex-assault-with-bat

Paper Chase

Now for his best recent legal act: Joe Arpaio feels there is nothing wrong with a deputy snooping through a defense attorney’s papers during open court, removing papers, and attempting to sneak them out of the courtroom.

Sheriff Joe advised his deputy to continue his court duties and to not listen to the judge, who banned him pending a written apology, because to follow the instructions of a judge in her courtroom “would be unconstitutional”, according to “America’s toughest sheriff.

http://www.abajournal.com/mobile/comments/officer_ordered_to_apologize_or_face_jail_after_taking_lawyers_paperwork

http://www.heatcity.org/2009/11/arpaio-to-judge-fat-chance-of-apology.html

ff2

Dollars to Donuts

Did I mention the two thousand lawsuits and the 43 million dollars in payouts against Sheriff Joe?  That’s “50 times as many prison-conditions lawsuits as there were in New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago, and Houston jail systems combined”.

(Sources: Wikipedia and AZCentral.com).

Joe wraps himself in the American flag and fancies himself as a defender of our Constitution. But, he’s an insult to both and should be an embarrassment to most Americans.

Governor Jan Brewer, who just recently broke the record for the most executions in her terms as Arizona’s top official, most likely will not be able to be re-elected due to term limits.

So, I saved the best news for last.

In 2014, Sheriff Joe is talking about running for Governor of Arizona!

tent-cityGovernor would be a safer position for Joe Arpaio. As Governor, how could Joe possibly be responsible for any needless deaths?

What possible harm could he do in this position?

What’s the worst that could happen?

All opinions of all stripes are very welcome.

All Rights reserved

http://killedbypolice.com/victims.html

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:

What’s Going On in Arizona, Maricopa (part 1)

Fact based reporting

By Rob Roman

The State of Arizona is suing the U.S. Government      The U.S. Government is suing the State of Arizona      Juan Martinez is accusing Maricopa police of hiding evidence       Judges are suing Maricopa County and Sheriff Joe      Sheriff Joe is indicting County officials      County Officials are suing Maricopa County      The U.S. Government is suing Sheriff Joe      The ACLU is suing Sheriff Joe      Prisoners are suing Maricopa County     Juan Martinez is accusing the police of obstruction of justice      Juan Martinez is fighting with Judge Janet Barton

flag

What’s going on in Arizona, MaricopaCounty?

(part 1)

azOverview

In order to fully understand the Jodi Arias trial, we must look at the context in which the trial is taking place. Arizona has long been a very conservative “red” state. The conservatives hold sway over Maricopa county and they want to show the rest of America how justice is served. They want to show they can keep the cost of government low and the services effective.

They want to show they can bring criminals to justice and lock them away from the public while staying on a tight budget. Politics are fierce as the leaders fight against the U.S. Justice Department in such areas as law enforcement and immigration. There is tremendous pressure under this system for those in high offices to produce results and advance the conservative causes of their political leaders.

cactusThis is especially true in law enforcement. Certain crimes fit a political agenda. Certain crimes get a lot of play in the media. Law enforcement is pressured to solve the case and make an arrest. The Maricopa Attorney’s Office is then pressured to bring the case to trial and get a conviction.

This works splendidly until there comes a case where there isn’t enough solid evidence to get a conviction. Then the pressure is directed downward, from the CountyD.A. to the prosecutors involved to the detectives, to the forensic technicians, to the cop on the beat. There is an agenda driven push in high profile cases to make an arrest quickly. Once the arrest is made, there is a concerted effort to get a conviction and make it stick.

Of course, these occurrences are not particular to Arizona or conservative states. There are many reasons why suspects can be wrongly convicted. But for the County prosecutors, pressure from above or even self-imposed pressure to get the arrest and the conviction seems to be a primary cause of faulty prosecutions.

justice projectThe Justice Project

Most people have heard of “the Innocence Project” and other agencies like this. They investigate questionable convictions and pursue justice for the wrongfully convicted. In many cases, DNA evidence is re-examined. This can only be a small percentage of cases. There are many more convicts serving time who were wrongly convicted with no DNA involved. It is generally agreed there are many more prisoners who are not guilty of the crime(s) charged.

Organizations like The Justice Project were created to provide assistance and resources to clients who might not be able to afford or have access to such services. The Justice Project has been operating in Arizona since 1998 to help overturn wrongful convictions. The Justice Project “examines claims of innocence and manifest injustice, and provides legal representation for inmates believed to have been failed by the criminal justice system.”

lady-justice “Nearly all of the exoneration cases in the registry’s report came about because of public attention or the efforts of innocence projects. The states with the most exonerations – California, Texas, Illinois and New York each has more than 100 cases.”

University of Michigan Law Professor Samuel Gross said the courts should be more willing to reverse course and overturn previous rulings. “We need to be more ready to acknowledge mistakes were made,” Gross said. “Change in attitude is more important than any policy.” “We don’t think we’ve scratched the surface in wrongful convictions,” Gross said. “This is a tiny number.”

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/05/21/11756575-researchers-more-than-2000-false-convictions-in-past-23-years?lite

In the span of 25 years, eight death row convicts have been exonerated in Arizona. These are only the 1st degree murder convictions resulting in death sentences. This is a problem because it is especially the death row convictions which should be beyond a reasonable doubt. Below are some of the recent Arizona exonerations:

RobisonJamesPC

James Robison **** Aquitted

Convicted: 1977 **** Exonerated: 1993**** (16 years in prison)

“ArizonaRepublic reporter Don Bolles was fatally injured on June 2, 1976 when a six-stick dynamite bomb attached to the vehicle was detonated by remote control.

John Harvey Adamson, confessed to planting the bomb in Bolles’ car. Adamson pleaded guilty and implicated his friend, James Robison, as the one who pushed the button on the remote control device. The sole evidence was Adamson’s word. Robison was acquitted by a jury after three trials.

Here a guilty party implicated his friend because he wanted to make a deal with the prosecutors or because he wanted to limit his culpability in the crime. There was no other evidence to substantiate his claim.

https://www.law.umich.edu/special/exoneration/Pages/casedetail.aspx?caseid=3588

Robert Charles Cruz **** Acquitted

Convicted: 1981 **** Exonerated: 1995 **** (14 years in prison)

In this case, there seems to be a concerted effort to convict Cruz on the top charge, even though it appears evident that prosecutors did not have enough evidence to get or sustain a conviction. Cruz had mafia connections, which were improperly admitted into evidence and were prejudicial to the jury. At his fourth trial on the same charges, the Supreme Court found a violation because four Hispanic jurors were excluded solely due to their race. A special prosecutor assigned to Cruz’s fifth trial was caught bribing two inmates to testify against Cruz. The jury acquitted Cruz and stated they did not believe the prosecutor’s new “star witness”.

http://www.law.umich.edu/special/exoneration/Pages/casedetail.aspx?caseid=3139

David Wayne Grannis **** Acquitted

Convicted 1991 **** Exonerated 1996 **** (5 years in prison)

The defendant admitted he was at the scene but claimed he fled before the murder. Here again, a defendant facing the death penalty feels the pressure and implicates another in order to make a deal and reduce his own culpability. Evidence having no connection to the crime was improperly admitted and was prejudicial to the defendant. There was no physical evidence whatever to corroborate the other defendant’s claim. http://www.victimsofthestate.org /AZ/

Christopher McCrimmon **** Acquitted

Convicted 1993 **** Exonerated 1997 **** (4 years in prison)

In this case, there seems to have not been enough evidence to convict. A”witness” is found among convicts willing to give information to prevent a 25 year jail term. A police investigator committed perjury and a judge even coerced a reluctant juror to find the defendant guilty.

http://www.law.umich.edu/special/exoneration/Pages/casedetail.aspx?caseid=3424

raykrone

Ray Krone **** Charges Dismissed

Convicted 1992 **** Exonerated  2002 **** (10 years in prison)

Defense attorneys for the defendant claimed Maricopa County “obtained the conviction and death sentence… by prosecutorial misconduct, the use of altered and manufactured evidence, expert shopping, a refusal to adequately investigate… through the concealment and destruction of evidence, through perjured documents and statements, and through the unfairly prejudicial inflammation of public opinion.”

“Among other deficient acts, the crime lab failed to test and/or analyze “hair, blood and fingerprints” that when examined years after Krone’s second conviction, excluded him and implicated another person in Ancona’s murder.”

In this case, again, there seems to be not enough evidence to convict. The public was inflamed against the defendant. The investigation was predicated on saving money and time. Tremendous media and political pressure came to bear on the prosecution. There was an inadequate investigation and evidence manipulation. Perjured documents and statements were also used in the attempt to get this conviction.

“Expert shopping” means that there were a number of witnesses the prosecution hired who found fault with the prosecution’s theory of the crime. The prosecution continued seeking experts until they found the one who would say what they wanted.

http://justicedenied.org/issue/issue_32/krone_jd32.pdf

prion000Lemuel Prion **** Charges dismissed

Convicted 1999 **** Exonerated 2003 **** (4 years in prison)

According to the Supreme Court, “There was no physical evidence identifying Prion as the killer,” and the trial court abused its discretion in not allowing the defense to submit evidence that a third party, John Mazure, was the actual killer.

Prion’s conviction was based largely on the testimony of Troy Olson, who identified Prion as the man who was with Vicari on the night of her murder. However, when police first showed Olson photographs of Prion, Olson could not identify Prion. This information was not admitted into evidence.

In this case there seems to be an effort by both the prosecutor and the judge to allow a man to testify as an eye witness even though they knew there was a serious problem with the testimony of this witness.

Debra-Milkedebra milke 2

Debra Jean Milke **** Charges dismissed or reduced to time served ?

Year convicted 1990 **** Year exonerated ? **** (23 years in prison)

Debra Jean Milke is a German immigrant convicted of the murder of her 4 year-old son Christopher Conan Milke in 1990. On March 14, 2013, Milke’s conviction was overturned on March 14, 2013 by the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

debra milke 3“The Debra Milke case out of Maricopa County, Arizona caused a stir earlier this year when the 9th Circuit threw out Milkie’s conviction, citing prosecutorial misconduct.”

“The Court handed down a biting critique of the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office for its failure to disclose evidence that the lead detective in Milke’s case had a long and sordid history of misconduct, including lying under oath and accepting sexual favors for leniency.”

Milke’s alleged confession to Armondo Saldate, was the only direct evidence linking Milke to the crime. The only evidence was Saldate’s word. Saldate had been implicated in the past for lying under oath and other serious violations The prosecution withheld this evidence from the defense.

debra milke“Milke’s roommate, Jim Styers, had Milke’s permission to take Christopher to allegedly see Santa Claus at a shopping mall. Styers and an accomplice took Chrisopher out to the desert and shot him. Styers and an accomplice have both been convicted of the murder and are currently on death row in Arizona. Nether has testified against Milke.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debra_Milke

http://www.prosecutorialaccountability.com/az-milkes-lawyer-says-maricopa-county-attorneys-office-ought-to-be-recused-from-retrial/

There is a significantly higher amount of faulty convictions when there is a higher amount of media attention, political pressure, or a focus on a particular case because of a political agenda. In these cases, more than one tactic is usually applied to get and hold onto a conviction. Different offices will coordinate and cooperate to achieve the conviction.

The reasons for these faulty convictions fall under the following categories:

Other Defendants and Suspects

-Forced or manufactured confessions  (Milke)

-Defendants implicating others

to lessen their culpability and / or make a deal  (Robison, Milke, Granis)

-Inadequate investigation of other suspects

Improper Evidence                                                                                                                  

Improperly admitting evidence more prejudicial to the client than probative (Cruz, Granis) Alltered and / or manufactured evidence (Krone)                                                                     Concealment and destruction of evidence (Krone)                                                               Failure to collect or test crime scene evidence (Krone)                                                             Not allowing exculpatory evidence to be admitted into trial (Milke, Prion)

Misconduct by Witnesses and Prosecutors

Lying by the prosecutor (Arias – Alleged)                                                                                Perjury by prosecution witnesses (Milke, McCrimmon, Arias – alleged)                                   Manufactured “witnesses” (McCrimmon)                                                                         Shopping for experts (Krone)                                                                                               Witness intimidation (Arias – alleged)

Improper Police investigators and technical evidence

Perjured documents and statements  (Krone, Arias – alleged)                                     Incomplete testing (Krone, Arias – alleged)

Faulty testing and investigation (Krone)

Incomplete investigation (Arias – alleged)

Problems with Judges and juries

Judge makes a bad ruling                                                                                                           Judge fails to make a ruling (Arias – alleged)                                                                                   Judge uses coercion (McCrimmon)                                                                                             Jury problem at selection (Cruz)                                                                                                       Jury problem during the trial (Arias – alleged)                                                                             Media bias affects jury (Krone, Arias – alleged)

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/innocence-list-those-freed-death-row

The current District Attorney is pressured to hold onto the conviction and death sentence of Debra Milke even though there is no credible evidence of her guilt. The D.A. wanted to limit embarrassment and the liability of his office by insisting on retrying a case that is unlikely to be winnable. Refusing to take responsibility for past wrongs in this case shows a clear conflict of interest. The continued prosecution of Debra Milke is clearly politically motivated and not in the interest of justice.

grand jury 2Prosecutors, in order to secure a quick arrest and trial will also deliver false or incomplete testimony to a Grand Jury. They will make an arrest without probable cause. The prosecution will depend on wresting the needed evidence out of the defendant after they are under arrest. This is especially true in Arizona when an upstanding Mormon or a child is the victim of a violent crime.

2005GrandJuryThere are other ways of gaining an advantage used by prosecutors over defense attorneys. This includes withholding evidence, offering a mile-long list of witnesses, most of whom will never be called, and delivering witness lists to the defense just days before the trial. The prosecution also uses last minute surprises, evidence dumps and massive paperwork dumps to overwhelm the defense attorneys prior to trial.

In a harsh political climate such as Arizona, all these factors pushing towards faulty convictions are attenuated. In Arizona, they fight amongst themselves. Prosecutors fight against judges, the County, the legislature, and law enforcement. We only need to look at the latest headlines in Maricopa County to see the political outfighting, infighting and constant scandals to see this is fertile ground for the misapplication of justice.

Please see What’s going on in Arizona, Maricopa County (Part 2)

All Rights Reserved

Unlike some Blogs, ALL comments are accepted and will be posted.

Heroes, Zeros, and Geniuses in the Jodi Arias Case (Nov 10)

November Update:

Heroes, Zeros, and Geniuses in the Jodi Arias Case

Fact-based Reporting by

Amanda Chan and Rob Roman

iq-bell-curve 2 new

In anticipation of the upcoming Jodi Arias Murder Trial, 2nd Penalty Phase, we have started a new regular report called Heroes, Zeros, and Geniuses.

heroes 2

 Here we mention some current updates and commentary about anything related to the case in the media and on social media.

kiefer lg

Hero #1

Michael Kieffer
A reporter at the Arizona newspaper, the Arizona Republic, Mr.Kieffer wrote a series of articles on prosecutorial misconduct in Arizona. Kieffer attended the Arias trial daily. One article was specifically about Juan Martinez.
“Martinez helped send seven other killers to death row since he was hired at the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office in 1988.
He was accused by defense attorneys of prosecutorial misconduct in all but one of those cases; the Arizona Supreme Court characterized his actions as constituting misconduct in one of them, and cited numerous instances of “improper” behavior in another, but neither rose to the level where the justices felt they needed to overturn the cases.
Allegations of misconduct by Martinez in the second case and at least two others are pending in state and federal courts.
michael-kiefer-pet-rocks2
Justice Michael Ryan then stepped into the discussion.
“Well, this prosecutor I recollect from several cases,” Ryan said. “This same prosecutor has been accused of fairly serious misconduct, but ultimately we decided it did not rise to the level of requiring a reversal,”
Ryan said. “There’s something about this prosecutor, Mr. Martinez.”
There had been multiple allegations of prosecutorial misconduct against Martinez in Gallardo’s appeal. Ultimately, in its written opinion, the court determined that Martinez had repeatedly made improper statements about the defendant.
During the oral argument before the Supreme Court, the justices fixed on a question that Martinez asked three times, even though the trial judge in the case had sustained a defense attorney’s objections to the question.
But in the end, the justices ruled that Martinez’s behavior still did not “suggest pervasive prosecutorial misconduct that deprived (the defendant) of a fair trial.”
And, as the justices noted, it was not the first time that Martinez had walked away unscathed.”
  http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/20131028jodi-arias-juan-martinez-conduct-day3.html
 Attention is finally being raised about not only the highly questionable practices in Maricopa County and Arizona State, but also the specific bad acts of the Maricopa prosecutor, Juan Martinez.
Here are the other 3 articles in the series:
http://www.azcentral.com/news/arizona/articles/20131027milke-krone-prosecutors-conduct-day1.html
http://www.azcentral.com/news/arizona/articles/20131027wintory-prosecutor-conduct-day-2.html
http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/20131029prosecutor-conduct-can-system-curb-abuses-day4.html

cpi logo

Hero #2

CPI (Center for Prosecutor Integrity)
In response to Kieffer’s article and other information, the Center for Prosecutor Integrity is asking Prosecutors nationwide to hold each other accountable for ethical conduct.
“WASHINGTON / November 6, 2013 – Following revelations that 22% of death sentence cases in Arizona involve judicial findings of impropriety, the Center for Prosecutor Integrity is calling on prosecutors nationwide to take a proactive approach to hold unethical prosecutors accountable and restore public confidence in the criminal justice system.
cptThe finding of widespread prosecutor misbehavior is based on a review of all death sentence convictions in Arizona in the past decade. These sentences are routinely seen by the state Supreme Court. Since 2002, there have been 82 death sentence cases reviewed by the state high court. In 18 of the cases – 22% of the total — the Supreme Court made a finding of impropriety.
Examples of unethical practice include presenting false testimony, resorting to emotional appeals in closing arguments, referring to mitigating evidence as “excuses “, and removing a jacket worn by a victim from a plastic evidence bag for the jury’s “smelling pleasure.””
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
The article also specifically mentioned the conduct of Maricopa prosecutor Juan Martinez in State v. Morris (2005).
Genius that he is, Juan responded colorfully to allegations that there was no proof in State v. Morris (2005) that the serial killer, Cory Morris, engaged in necrophilia with the 5 women he murdered and buried near his trailer.
In open court, he broke open a sealed bag containing a jacket worn by one of the victims and invited the jury to take a good whiff.
Hey Juan, the odor of decomposition on the clothes taken off a corpse yields no evidence whatever of whether or not the defendant engaged in necrophilia (had sex with a dead human body). This is typical of Juan Martinez’ conduct in death penalty trials.
This is the list that CPI offers as the most typical types of prosecutorial misconduct:
 Types of Misconduct
 Prosecutor misconduct can assume many forms, including:

heroes 3

  • Charging a suspect with more offenses than is warranted
  • Withholding or delaying the release of exculpatory evidence (State v. Arias – alleged)
  • Deliberately mishandling, mistreating, or destroying evidence (State v. Arias – alleged)
  • Allowing witnesses they know or should know are not truthful to testify (State v. Arias – Dr. Kevin Horn – alleged)
  •  Pressuring defense witnesses not to testify (State v. Arias – Patti Womack – alleged)
  • Relying on fraudulent forensic experts (State v. Arias – Dr. Kevin Horn – alleged)
  • During plea negotiations, overstating the strength of the evidence
  • Making statements to the media that are designed to arouse public indignation
  • Making improper or misleading statements to the jury (State v. Arias – alleged)
  •  Failing to report prosecutor misconduct when it is discovered
http://www.prosecutorintegrity.org/

Alan-Dershowitz-

 Hero #3

Alan Dershowitz
Famous Appellate Attorney, Law Professor at Harvard, and Constitutional Scholar.
heroes 4On FOX News, while selling his latest book, this famous legal expert said that we need to realize the truth. The pervasive media coverage of crimes makes it a reality that “the public is the 13th juror”. He said that not only the jury feel the pressure of public opinion, but even judges are influenced by this intense pressure.
He went on to say that juries should be sequestered in high profile crimes, Dershowitz said that TV shows, such as HLN, should not be allowed to televise trials, infuse it with thir own opinions, and use them to attract ratings. Dershowitz feels that court cases, including the Supreme Court, should be televised on free public access without comment. He admitted it would be “boring”, but it’s necessary to ensure fair trials.
 Now we introduce our zeroes in the case:

alan-dershowitz

Zero #1

Alan Dershowitz
Famous Appellate Attorney, Law Professor at Harvard, and Constitutional Scholar.
Alan Dershowitz said that Jodi Arias “will not have a successful appeal because she’s guilty”. Dershowitz made this remark this past summer. First of all, a famous constitutional scholar should know that guilt or innocence plays no part in whether a trial was fair and whether an appeal is upheld and a conviction is reversed and remanded back to the court for a new trial.
Is Dershowitz actually saying that he doesn’t see any error that could change the outcome of the trial? If so, I cannot believe he watched the trial. If Dershowitz stated that he DID in fact see legitimate appealable issues in the Jodi Arias trial, how would that affect his popularity, his welcome at FOX News and his ability to sell his books?
gigiMaybe the judge and the jury were not the only ones feeling the pressure. Commentators, other lawyers and potential witnesses feel the heat, too.
Alan Dershowitz learned his lesson well after taking an unpopular stance when he supported OJ Simpson in the 1990’s. He managed to mitigate his support for OJ by splitting the difference and saying that he was right to support OJ because “The police framed a guilty man”.
Want to know how? Buy his new book.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: Dershowitz is nothing but a Smershowitz.

bill montgomery

Zero #2

Bill Montgomery
The elected District Attorney for Maricopa County, Arizona
What’s Not Important, Bill?
zreos 2The Jodi Arias case in general and the settlement conference in particular:
“In his regular news conference Wednesday, Montgomery explained that he did not attend the settlement conference as he had intended because the “case is no different than any other case,” he said.
“I don’t see it as an important enough case to where I have to be personally involved to where I can’t have the prosecutor who’s responsible for the case take care of it himself,” he said.”
http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/2013-11-07/news/bill-montgomery-is-prosecuting-a-medical-pot-patient-for-one-piece-of-thc-infused-candy/
What IS Important, Bill?
A single piece of marijuana candy.
A man was pulled over for driving erratically. In his center console was a pot pipe and a single piece of marijuana candy. Due to his medical marijuana license, the pipe was acceptable. However, the single piece of candy may be a Felony according to Bill.
candy 4“Medical-marijuana users were warned. And now Maricopa County Attorney Bill Montgomery is carrying out his plan to harass qualified medical users for resin-infused edibles.
candy 2Montgomery repeatedly has refused to say whether he is prosecuting patients for possession of marijuana concentrates who otherwise are acting within the boundaries of the 2010 Arizona Medical Marijuana Act.
candy 1New Times has learned that his office is moving forward with at least one such case, a felony prosecution of a medical-marijuana patient for possession of a single piece of infused candy.”
No, the Jodi Arias case is not important to you, Bill. It’s just like any other case, Bill. Would you care to say that under oath, Bill?
candy 3
Way to get “tough on crime”, Bill.

facebook 2

Zero #3

Various and sundry Pro-prosecution Facebook commentors
Judge Stephens recently denied Jodi Arias’ motion to fire her lead attorney, Kirk Nurmi.
No way was Judge Stephens ever going to grant that motion and delay the 2nd penalty phase by 6 months to one year. Judge Stephens could then kiss her job goodbye. Jodi knows this.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/10/24/jodi-arias-files-motions-to-fire-attorney/3183327/
facebook 1Arias believes that the client – attorney relationship with Kirk Nurmi is hurting her case. Jodi Arias is properly preserving this issue for appeal by filing for the second time to have Nurmi dismissed.
Many Facebook commenters smugly suggested that Jodi was purposely trying to prolong the trial in order to do one or more of the following
1) She likes being in Estrella County Jail and wants to stay there. She does not want to go to Perryville Prison.
 2) She is trying to hurt the Alexander family by making them wait and prolonging their suffering.
 3) She is trying to hold up the proceedings out of spite.
zeros 7 None of these “reasons” have any factual basis.
1) Many prisoners in Arizona prefer the Prison to the CountyJail. One County jail prisoner who was sentenced but not yet transferred to prison, complained to Sheriff Joe Arpaio that he wanted to be transferred to prison, where there were better conditions and food. Juan Martinez replied: “We are not a taxi service”.
Here is what the people who know have to say about this:
“Interviewer: What’s the difference between jail and prison? Can you talk about the specific jails in your area?
Acacia Law: Whether you’re in prison or whether you’re in jail you’re entitled in visitation. In Maricopa County, the most populated county jails include the lower BuckEye Jail, Durango Facility, and Estrella, which include the tents.
heroesThere is also a Durango Juvenile Facility. There is also The Towers. Each one of them has their own pluses and minuses, in the viewpoint of someone who is incarcerated.
Interviewer: Isn’t there The Fourth Avenue Jail, and then TentCity as well? Are they crowded?
Acacia Law: In terms of your question as to whether people prefer the county jails to prison they much prefer prison. The Department of Corrections is actually much easier time. Many of my clients who are repeat offenders much prefer going to prison than spending a year in county as a term condition of probation.
That might give you an idea of how bad the jails are here. They are notoriously bad throughout the state at the county level.
Pima County in Tuscon has bad facilities as well. Penal County used to have one of the worst facilities in the state. I don’t know if they still do or not since they made the new jail about eight years ago.”
http://www.acacialawgroup.com/is-there-a-difference-between-jail-and-prison
2) Jodi Arias wants to Harm the Alexander family and prolong their suffering
In her motion to dismiss Kirk Nurmi, Arias claims that it was her desire, as well as the prosecution’s desire to clear the courtroom before playing the “sex tape”conversations between her and Travis Alexander. Kirk Nurmi fought Jodi Arias on this. Nurmi wanted the sex tape played in public. Arias stated that she didn’t want this to be played in public as it would cause pain to her and the Alexander family.
3) Jodi Arias wants to delay the proceedings out of spite
Jodi Arias has no reason to delay her sentencing because this would only delay her appeals, which cannot be filed until after she is sentenced.
As far as public outcry, more time before the second penalty phase will not help Arias. The media and public fury will begin again and will rage just as before as soon as the trial resumes.
Hopefully, Nurmi and Arias will mend fences and join forces for the 2nd penalty phase.

Zero #2

dave hall 5
Dave Hall
dave hall 2Friend of Travis Alexander
Frequent guest on HLN during the trial
Phony Mormon
Slanderer of potential defense mitigation witness Patti Womack
Desecrator of ancient archeological formation
Former Boy Scout Leader
Dave Hall, a close friend of the victim, Travis Alexander, laughed and sang “Wiggle it – Just a little bit” as he filmed his friend, Glenn Taylor pushing over a world-famous, million years old ancient rock formation in a State Park in Utah.
dave hallHis friend, Glenn Taylor, who grunted and groaned like Atlas on camera as he struggled to man handle the boulder, was suing for injuries he incurred in an automobile accident from which he claimed he was severely physically disabled.
This incident caused immediate and vast world-wide outrage.
SALT LAKE CITY –  Two Utah men already facing possible charges for purposely toppling an ancient rock formation in a state park have now been removed from their posts as Boy Scout leaders.
dave hall 2A northern Utah Boy Scouts council announced Monday that Glenn Taylor and Dave Hall will no longer be allowed to lead scouting troops due to what happened Oct. 11 at Goblin Valley State Park, which they filmed and posted on Facebook.
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/10/22/boy-scouts-remove-2-men-who-toppled-ancient-rock/
In typical fake-Mormon dishonesty, Dave Hall said they did it “to protect innocent children”.
dave hall 7
Rock-on, Dave!

Watch the YouTube video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AYFD18BwmJ4

And now, we move on to the Geniuses of the Jodi Arias case.

Genius #1

“Michelle”
Commenter on Facebook
This person gave a rant recently on an a pro-prosecution Facebook page:
facebook 3“Now that I am not looking at or listening to Jodi everyday, as if that were her fault, I can think about the trial with less passion. Before she ever took the stand and started the 17 day marathon of lies, I had some sympathy for her in the sense that she is a girl who probably could have made something of herself and she threw it all away in a jealous rage.
She left home at 17, which is indicative of our troubled youth these days. The I want it all now and I am entitled attitude. Something went terribly wrong in her psyche when she met Travis. His interest in her must have sent her into a fantasyland.
zeros 6Here is this guy who looked and acted very successful, was liked and admired by hundreds of people, owns a 5 bedroom house, drives a Beemer, travels all over…someone with her background must have thought she had landed in Nirvana and then it all fell down!
What a crushing blow to her. THEN THE REAL JODI SHOWED UP FOR ALL TO SEE AND HEAR! End of story for me. She is where she belongs, keeping other male prey safe!”
I will now reply to her rant:
zeros 9Leaving home at 17 is indicative of nothing. Family dynamics run the gamut and there is nothing to be derived as far as murderous tendencies in having left home at the age of 17.
In fact, a female who leaves home at 17, is much more likely to be used and abused than to be an abuser or a murderer.
Travis’ phoniness and shallow interest in Jodi must have sent her into a fantasyland. Shallow Hal and his fake Mormon, Pre-Paid Legal, religious goon friends turned an honest hard worker into a champagne wisher and a caviar dreamer.
More due to his parent’s actions than his own, something was terribly wrong in Shallow Hal’s psyche from the start.
Here was a phony salesman, never honest with Arias or anyone else. His roommates’ rent paid the mortgage, everything else was financed. Arias said that her Infiniti was nicer than his beat BMW.
The trips were tax-deductible “business expenses” = free. He was going to write a book about himself, buy a Prius and thereby save the world.
Instead, he should have sought help from his church or a licensed therapist and saved himself. The PPL legal insurance racket and it’s promises of vast wealth negatively impacted both Jodi and Travis. Someone with his background, who never finished High School, must have thought he landed in Mormon Nirvana, but then it all fell down.
Typical fake Mormon, he blamed it all on the girl.
Who knows what he was capable of doing when he was finally going to have to face his behaviors, be exposed and excommunicated?

Genius  #2

“Michele”
Commenter on Facebook
This is another Michele, with one “L”. Maybe it’s the same Michelle. There’s no way to be sure.
facebook 5Though we welcome any and all opinions and comments on Spotlight on Law, people who have read the article and take issue with it choose not to directly engage us in a fact-based discussion. Michele is a commenter on a Facebook page that discusses the Jodi Arias case. Here is what this genius said about our article, “Why Jodi Arias will get a new trial”:
“I cannot help but laugh when reports like this claim they can set the rules for the criteria to be met for the Appellate Court. When they go even further by misquoting expert testimony to make their point, it’s shameful.
Not the first or the last time this has been done. Junk like this has been written on many cases without results for obvious reasons.
zeros 3Your girl is going to need a lot more than this. First degree murder with especially cruel factor. The bar is VERY high when it comes to grounds for appeals and she doesn’t come close to reaching it.”
Hopefully, Michele, you do not need to be an attorney to understand what is and is not a fair trial and what appealable issues are.
facebook 4When a prosecutor and a Medical Examiner team up to deliberately give the jury false testimony intended to sway the jury to deliver a guilty verdict, this is an unfair trial, gross prosecutor misconduct and an appealable issue. If this one is rejected by the courts, there are plenty of others.
The article is not “misquoting expert testimony”. The article contains no quotes. If you mean “misrepresenting or mischaracterizing expert testimony”, we beg to differ. The article is factual.
Is it possible that you could debate using some facts? We would welcome that.
heroes 5We don’t “set the rules”. The higher courts, existing statutes, and past cases do. “Junk like this” has been written before many convictions were reversed and new trials ordered. The news and the social media are chock full of such cases. In many cases, public outcry played a large part in reversed convictions, new trials, and exonerated prisoners.
Obviously, Michele, you didn’t read the article or other articles on this site. If you did, you would begin to realize that something is rotten in Denmark (Maricopa, Arizona). Arizona’s “especially cruel” aggravator is unconstitutionally vague and arbitrary.
We will see how high the bar is in 5 to 7 years. By that time, you will have forgotten all about this case.

Genius #3

“Brooke”
Commenter on Facebook
zeros 5In response to our article “Why Jodi Arias will get a new trial”, this is her response:
“I’d like to see the degree on law that makes this factual reasons.”
Brooke, what I’d like to see is a simple phrase without so many grammatical errors. “degree on law”?   “makes this factual reasons”?
Come on Brooke, you must be smarter than that. If not, you are not qualified to debate or give an opinion on the facts.
******************************************
zeros 8
We anticpate that there will be more Heroes, Zeros, and Geniuses as this case moves forward. Whenever they occur, as they inevitably do, we will collect them, report on them, and issue another update.

Unlike many blogs, All opinions and any comments are welcome here

All Rights Reserved

Spotlight on Juan Martinez

The Jodi Arias Trial

Shining a spotlight on the Prosecutor Juan Martinezjuan in 2002

Fact based reporting

By Rob Roman

“Mr. Martinez, you keep trying to make this a rational scenario, and it isn’t rational.” – Expert defense witness

For Juan Martinez, there are no “irrational” scenarios about a murder. Murder is against the laws of God and man. There is a victim here. A human being is dead in an unnatural way. The defendant is the accused. Many hours of police work and investigation have been rendered. The defendant has been brought to trial. Juan Martinez is going to trial to put them in a cage. A conviction will slam the door shut. When the conviction survives appeals, the door will be locked. That is the only rational response to murder.

Juan Martinez doesn’t want to hear about any exceptions to the rule. He doesn’t want to hear “this is not what it seems”. The defense always seems to have an excuse, a rationalization, explanations, and alternate scenarios. The prosecution must prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt. All the defense must show is any doubt, any doubt at all. The prosecution needs a unanimous jury to convict. The defense only needs one juror on their side to jam the wheels of justice. If you get a conviction, an appeal can change a sentence, send the case back to trial, or even free the defendant.

jm youngSeeing this from Juan’s perspective, one can see why he may feel like the system is against the victims of crime.  To Juan it’s truly an “adversarial system” and he will fight to win. When the death penalty is involved, the two sides tend to go too far and we might be losing a search for the truth. Winning the conviction becomes more important than the truth. Juan’s black and white way of viewing crime works well most of the time. But sometimes there will be someone in the defendant’s chair who is innocent of the crime charged. Sometimes this person gets stuck in the wheels of justice. Many innocent defendants have been convicted and jailed and some have been executed. So we must always be sure a trial is a search for the truth, even if sometimes the guilty person is set free. The prosecution and the defense both play vital roles in this process. The rights of victims must be carefully balanced with the rights of the accused.juan early yrs

During the final arguments in the guilt phase of the Jodi Arias murder trial, lead Defense attorney Lawrence Kirk Nurmi talked about shining a spotlight on the actions of the prosecution, specifically detective and co-counsel Esteban “Steve” Flores and the sole prosecuting attorney, Juan Martinez. The implication was that Mr. Martinez had acted improperly during the trial. I believe Detective Flores to be an honest man who only followed Dr. Horne’s opinion and he tried to help Jodi at the interrogation.

Of the enthusiastic trial watchers in the Jodi Arias case, there is also a spotlight on Juan Martinez. Prosecution supporters (Justice4Travis), see him as a “bulldog” a hero who tenaciously pursues the defendant until he can wrest a guilty verdict. Defendant supporters (Team Jodi) see him as over the top, going too far, and using a combination of emotionally charged persuasion, some direct evidence and some speculation to sway juries to render a guilty verdict.

There are many ways a prosecutor can win a case. There is hard work, attention to detail, experience, excellent direct and cross-examination of witnesses, and preparation. There is also a fierce devotion to the job of bringing a dangerous criminal to justice. Finally you will need a good grasp of the evidence, and know how to explain and persuade a jury that your evidence is sound. Juan Martinez is all of this and more.

juan 1He is passionate, dedicated, and I believe he sees the defense as having too many advantages in the system. I believe he employs methods normally used by defense attorneys to persuade the jurors to see things his way. Juan Martinez is known for using wild speculation and “facts” not supported by the evidence in his closing arguments.

Maybe the truth is not in the extremes but somewhere in the middle. We can shine the spotlight on past and present cases to try to determine what is motivating the prosecutor with the impressive 19-1 record, Juan Martinez.

Here is what his admirers in cyber space say about Juan:

-Respectfully I’d like to thank Mr. Martinez for giving me the realization there’s someone fighting for victims. My father was brutally murdered in 1990, very similar to what happened to Travis Alexander.

It was very brutal I lost my faith in the judicial system after what my family went thru and watching the way these murderers have all the rights yet the victims do not. Mr. Martinez, as I see it, represents a man who I wish there were more of. He is God’s light and I wish him all the best in this world where sometimes I think our society’s become blind to so many things…

And if anything at all, perhaps some could look at this man and appreciate what he does for so many. He is truly an asset to the state. As for Ms. Arias, I hope for the victims’ family…Justice.

-Juan Martinez is the best. So sick of the trash that is going around surrounding this case. Who is on trial here?

-I think he is the best. If I ever need a lawyer he’s it. No BS with him. Why waste time with guilty killers?

Juan is the second youngest of a family of nine. He came to America at age 6 when his family immigrated and settled in California. He vowed to learn English well and be a success. He participated in many activities, such as running long distance track in high school. He finished college and attended ArizonaStateUniversity where he earned his law degree. Juan did some volunteer legal work and some work defending clients. Then, in 1988, he joined the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office.

What is in Juan Martinez’ heart and mind? We can try to have a better understanding of him by knowing his feeling. In this world and surely in Arizona, there is crime and there are criminals. There are vicious and violent senseless crimes and uncaring evil and cruel criminals. Juan is very aware of this. Let’s take a look at the A B C’s of the convicts now on Arizona’s Death Row.

Atwood, Frank.

\Kidnapped and raped an 8 year-old boy. Kidnapped, raped and Killed an 8 year-old girl and left her in the desert.

Bearup, Patrick.

With three accomplices, beat a man half to death with a baseball bat, threw him in the trunk of his car, cut off his finger, shot him with a shotgun and threw him off a cliff.

Burns, Jonathan.

Kidnapped and raped a woman and shot her twice in the head.

Chappell, Derek.

Choked his girlfriend’s 2 1/2 year-old son nearly to death then later drowned him in a swimming pool.

Cota, Benjamin.

Beat an older man to death with a hammer, then bound his wife and struck her in the head repeatedly with a hatchet. He wrapped them up in plastic, hid in their home, then stole everything they had of value including their car.

Djerf, Richard.

Raped a 17 year-old girl, then shot, stabbed and beat to death the girl, her father and mother and her 5 year-old brother.

Ellison, Charles.

With an accomplice, broke into a couple’s home, bound them with telephone cord and masking tape, then suffocated the husband with a pillow and choked the wife to death.

So, it’s easy to see why Juan grew up believing in law and order, right and wrong, good and bad. He believes that if you intentionally caused a person’s death, you should pay by being removed from society and in many cases, sentenced to death. It’s just so simple. It’s not difficult to see where his sentiments come from.

doug fayleneIt was 1997, ten years after Juan Martinez joined the Maricopa County Attorney’s office. Late at night in an upscale neighborhood in MaricopaCounty, Greg Koons heard screams coming from his neighbor’s back yard. He went outside and peered over the fence. He saw his neighbor, casually pushing his wife into his in-ground swimming pool and holding her head under the water. He sprinted inside and called the police.

Soon after, the neighbor, Scott Falater, opened his door to the police. Confused and not understanding what the fuss was all about, the police went into his backyard and found his wife Yarmilla floating dead in the pool. She had been stabbed 44 times. Scott Falater was a High Councilor in the Mormon Church, and a husband and father of two. He was a successful design engineer and very active in the church. He was a mild-mannered man, had seldom become angry, and had no motive to kill his wife whom he loved dearly.

Juan Martinez went to court to exact justice. It seemed like an open and shut case. There was an eye witness, a direct identification of the perpetrator, and a viciously stabbed and drowned wife. The man was arrested within minutes of the crime. The courtroom was nearly empty. Next door in a crowded courtroom was a high profile case. Teen members of a Crips gang were on trial for a brutal, three hour sexual assault of a fifteen year-old mentally handicapped girl.

Juan Martinez was shocked to find out that the man’s high paid attorneys were claiming their client, Scott Falater, was innocent by reason of sleepwalking! Like the Jodi Arias case, the focus was not on who did the killing, but why. The defense claimed that Scott Falater had no incentive, motive or reason to kill his wife of 20 years. There had to be another explanation for why this would occur. For Juan, there is no why. She’s dead and he killed her and justice will be done. For Juan, you are either a good or bad person. If you do something like this, you are a bad person and the “why” shouldn’t matter at all. Still he needed to give the jury a viable motive.

This is the template case for the Jodi Arias case. Both involved horrific killings where the defendants admitted to horrific acts but claimed no knowledge of the killings or any intent of murder. Both defenses relied on crucial expert testimony. Juan struggled to find a motive for this senseless killing during the trial. He offered many scenarios to the jury. His wife refused to have more children. His wife was moving his family away from the Mormon Church.

scott falaterSure, he was mild mannered, but he took his anger from work home to his wife. Juan argued with the defendant and declared that Falater didn’t even know his wife’s birthday. He told a shocked Falater he had the year wrong. Juan was mistaken due to an incorrect report. He even argued that Falater killed his wife because he thought she was fat and dumpy. Falater made the statement to police that “a terrible sin has been committed”. Falater was referring to the killing. Juan suggested to the jury that Scott Falater killed his wife because SHE committed a terrible sin.

By the end of the trial, State v. Falater starring Juan Martinez had become the new high profile trial in Arizona. The sleepwalking defense became famous around the country. Juan attacked the defense experts. He claimed that the expert’s conclusions were invalid because the expert was not provided with all the details. The defendant recognized his dog but not his wife, and he cleaned up the scene and the evidence.

In closing the defense attorney reminded the jury that Juan Martinez mischaracterized the evidence and made comments not supported by the evidence. The defense attorney implied that the prosecuter violated his duty to see that truth and justice is done. The defense reminded the jury that Scott Falater was a passive and non-violent man, and that the prosecution could not come up with a valid reason or motive for the killing.

The defense attorney tried to explain to the jury that sometimes there are cases were things are not as they seem. There are exceptions when things happen which are difficult to explain. At one point the defense expert witness addressed the prosecutor:

“Mr. Martinez, you keep trying to make this a rational scenario, and it isn’t rational.” At some point in the closing, Martinez slammed the door on all this talk about sleepwalking.

“Do you think that she deserved to die?” he asked. “Look at her. We’ve placed so much attention on him, everything’s about him. Look at her!”

abc_sleep_story1_100421_wmainJuan Martinez then threw a photo up of the victim on the autopsy table. He loudly implored the jury to look at her, to look at the indignity of the victim.  The defense attorney talks about reasons, REASONS? Scott Falater “had 44 reasons to KILL his wife”, Martinez screamed. He was referring to the 44 knife wounds. Only one member of this Arizona jury had a college degree.

He appealed to the nuts and bolts sense of the jury. He had a sound argument for the jury:

“This guy here killed his wife ….. and he’s guilty of first-degree murder.”

Scott Falater was found guilty and sentenced by the judge to life without parole.

Even 15 years before the Jodi Arias case, Juan Martinez was already honing his craft. He was becoming an expert at arguing the details with expert witnesses, discrediting witnesses, questioning the memory of the defendant and defense witnesses, and calling them out as liars. He was becoming better than defense attorneys at weaving speculation into the facts of the case while at the same time, calling defense evidence fictions and  “fantasy”.

He ridiculed defense theories, calling them such things as “The man of La Mancha defense”. Fifteen years before the Arias trial, Juan was already in the habit of yelling at witnesses, including a priest, and ridiculing witnesses. Even in the Falater trial, he questioned the children of the victim and the defendant in a voice laced with irony and sarcasm. Yarmilla Falater In Juan’s view, he had delivered justice for Yarmilla

doug and fayLater, Juan had another case of obvious 1st degree murder. Two divorced Mormons had married. Doug Grant was a very successful in the health products business. He owned a multi-million dollar company. His clients included famous professional athletes and NBA teams. Doug cheated on his wife with his receptionishilary falatert. His wife, Faylene, found out and complained to the church. Here we see the dangerous nexus between the LDSChurch, social life and business. It seems that if Doug Grant did not return to his wife, the church would get involved and this would impact his business. It’s important to understand this dynamic of the Mormon Church in the Jodi Arias trial.

Doug told Faylene he ended it with his girlfriend Hilary, and he wanted to remarry Faylene in Las Vegas. They went for an impromptu  2nd Honeymoon at TimpanogosCaveNational Monument where his wife suddenly and mysteriously fell into trees down a sixty foot cliff.

ht_doug_faylene_090331_msShe survived and they returned home. Faylene took some pain killers and a bath heal from her injuries. She was found dead in the bathtub by Doug Grant in September, 2001. Three weeks after Faylene’s death, Doug Grant married his receptionist, Hilary Dewitt, and they soon became a family aftter Hilary adopted Faylene’s two sons.doug and hil

Another high priced attorney and in Juan’s mind, more excuses, fancy explanations, technicalities, more sure signs of guilt that the court would not admit into evidence.

Imagine Juan’s shock and disbelief when he could not convince the jury of the 1st degree murder he believed was so obvious. The jury was clearly divided and Juan was forced to give instructions for lesser included offenses. Murder one and the death penalty was off the table for Doug Grant. He got away with a 5 year sentence for manslaughter. I can imagine that Juan was devastated, and thought justice had not been done. He had failed to get justice for Faylene. He contemplated his lessons and moved on.

The Grant family still believes Doug is innocent. They list a number of accusations of prosecutorial misconduct in State v. Grant. This includes

-“Losing” key evidence, “throwing away reports”, and failure to turn over key evidence to the defense in a timely manner.

-Convincing the judge to not allow into evidence testimony that the medical examiner was pressured to change his opinion about the cause of death on the victim’s autopsy report from “accident” to “undetermined”.

-Convincing the judge to rule possible exculpatory evidence as inadmissible

-Convincing the judge not to allow into evidence testimony and records showing that investigators were removed from the case when they told their superiors they could not find evidence of foul play.

-Objecting over fifty times during the defense opening statements.

-Preventing defense witness from trying to explain their answers by cutting off their answers and forcing them to answer either yes, or no.

-When these same witnesses were being questioned by the defense, Juan Martinez objected “over 200 times per day”.

-The prosecution case took three and one half months, but the judge ordered the defense to complete their case in two weeks in order to “stay on schedule”.

-Intimidating defense witnesses by accusing them of violating the law without evidence or any record of a law having been broken. The accusation that they broke the law is used to discredit their testimony and truthfulness.

-Accusing defense witnesses of lying but using arguing tactics and word tricks rather than evidence to support it.

-Using the normal and common variations in a witness’ statements and memory to attack their memory of an event, and then to suggest that the memory varies because the witness is lying.

-Also in this trial, jury members who were not a part of the final jury admitted that they had been influenced by the media and they had made up their minds the defendant was guilty before the trial began.

The jury did not believe the prosecution’s theory and did not like the tactics. Do any of these tactics foster a “search for the truth”? Do you recognize any of these tactics from the Jodi Arias trial? Doug’s family feels that truth and justice were not found in State v. Grant. These two quotes appear on their website:

 

“Anybody who understands the justice system knows innocent people are convicted every day.” –Florida Supreme Court Justice, Gerald Kogun (Ret.)

 

“In this country the presumption of innocence is dead, dead, dead.” –John Grisham

Not long after, Juan found himself on the losing side of a case. A man had been found shot dead in the forest. The defendant was David Wayne Carr. The evidence was thin. Juan started fighting back in his own way. With less than two weeks before the trial, Martinez did not give the defense a list of his witnesses and other materials. The defense was angry. They could not properly prepare their defense. They filed a complaint to the judge. This offense was punishable by up to six months in jail. The judge was very upset that his court was delayed.

The County attorney hired a high powered attorney to defend Juan. He fought back against the charge. Juan accused the defense of not giving a list of possible defenses to him until 2 weeks before the trial. He ended up forced to write a letter of apology to the court. The case was delayed and later, the jury found David Carr not guilty.

This is the only case Martinez lost. Strangely, a mysterious friend of Jodi Arias appeared in the courtroom during her trial. He called himself “Bryan Carr”. He claimed to talk to Jodi daily and he had confidential information. He claimed Jodi was telling the truth about the two masked people that were responsible for the murder. The claim was that Travis Alexander’s murder was actually an old Mormon atonement ritual called “blood atonement”. A Mormon who had committed grave sins could still go to heaven if he paid for his sins through this death ritual. Arias claimed she did not know Carr and she did not listen to him. Then, “Bryan Carr” disappeared from the courtroom and the media as quickly as he had appeared.

wendi andrMartinez recovered with the murder trial of Wendi Andriano. Wendi’s Husband was terminally ill. There were changes in his life insurance policy. He was going to win a large lawsuit. The bleach blonde Wendi was neglecting and cheating on her husband and always out drinking. She was never home. There was a question about whether her husband would leave her. Maybe he would cut her out of his will.

az_andriano_wOn October 8, 2000, Wendi tried to poison her husband. She called an ambulance, then she sent the ambulance away. Later she hit him 23 times in the head with a barstool. She stabbed him multiple times leaving the knife in his throat.

Juan cross examined Wendi Andriano ferociously. Wendi claimed that the poisoning was a planned assisted suicide, that her husband accepted her cheating, and that he attacked her and she defended herself.wendi On the stand she said “If I am convicted, it is because of my own bad choices”. Interestingly, Jodi Arias actually mimicked some of the mannerisms of Wendi Andriano and quoted her while on the stand. Wendi’s hair also returned to its natural brown color and she dressed down and wore glasses at her death penalty trial.  But the victim,  xxxx Andriano would win the day. The jury didn’t believe her story and they sentenced her to death only a few days before Christmas, 2004.

*******************************************************

Empowered from his victory, Juan must have felt invincible. Things were going well for Juan, and his record was impressive. Then he ran into a legal buzz saw named Shawn P. Lynch. 206125This may have really hardened him about the justice system.  Lynch and a friend had killed a man and then went on a spending spree with his credit card. There was plenty of evidence and little doubt about who committed the crime. The confusion came from who did what. The jury convicted Lynch of murder but they could not agree on premeditation.

Next Juan would learn about the aggravation of the aggravators. The jury agreed on murder for a money motive, but they disagreed on heinous cruel or depraved. A second mitigation and penalty phase was ordered. During the second phases, Juan instructed the jury that there were four aggravating circumstances: Pecuniary gain (money), heinous, cruel, and depraved. In 2006, the jury found all four aggravators and sentenced Lynch to death. Juan thought he had justice for xxxxx, but the case was far from over.

Shawn Lynch appealed with a barrage of issues, including prosecutorial misconduct on the part of Juan Martinez. The higher court rejected most of the claims. Technically, heinous, cruel and depraved are not three aggravators. They are three “prongs” of a single aggravator. The court stated that since the jury was instructed there were four aggravators instead of two, this was prejudicial to the client. So this crime from 2001 and death penalty sentence from 2006, has yet go back to trial a third time for another sentencing phase. More than 12 years later, there is not a final sentence. There has been no closure for xxxx. I think this experience aggravated Juan and made him feel that the justice needs a little push since the system and appeals process are all on the defendant’s side.

dean glickJuan had better success with State v. Glick. Dean Glick, 41, was a vile and degenerate person by any standards. He lived with his 82 year old mother. He abused her and stole her money. He hired a prostitute and promised her a huge bonus. His mother protested when he tried to use her credit card to pay. The prostitute left with her driver when the argument became heated. They quickly called the police. Dean Glick then beat his 82 year-old mother to death with a plastic flashlight. When the police arrived, Glick had barricaded the front door. There was plenty of evidence and two eye witnesses who saw the beginning of the fight just minutes before the murder.

Imagine Juan’s attitude towards defense attorneys when Glick’s attorneys told the jury that Dean was caring and responsible. He loved his mom way too much to kill her. They simply had an argument. The argument got out of control and the beating was not so bad. Glick broke his mom’s ribs and sternum not while beating her but while trying to perform CPR on her fragile body! It is not difficult to understand Juan’s disdain for the defense. Dean Glick was convicted of 1st degree murder and sentenced to life in prison.

Martinez had further success with a high profile serial killer case. Cory Morris was accused of killing his girlfriend and four other women and burying them next to his trailer. From 2002 to 2003 he had lured the women into his home with promises of money. Then the victims were subjected to beatings, rape, murder and then necrophilia.cory and victims Imagine the disdain on his face when the defense counsel addressed the jury. The defense said that although his client committed 5 murders, he had not premeditated any of them.corry morris Therefore, Corey Morris should get five counts of 2nd degree murder and not the death penalty. The jury did not accept the argument. Morris was sentenced to death in July, 2005.

In 2005, Juan Martinez was the prosecutor in the case of an ArizonaStateUniversity athlete who shot a teammate to death in a parking lot. Juan was not moved by the idea of the popular Arizona Sun Devils running back making some bad decisions and a terrible mistake. In 2007, Loren Wade was found guilty of second degree murder and sentenced to 20 years in prison. Juan had another win under his belt. Most likely Juan doesn’t remember Loren Wade’s name, but he certainly remembers xxxx, the less well known football player who’s life was cut so short.

Then there was State v. Miller. William Craig Miller, 34, was a business owner who committed arson, burning down his own home for insurance moneyarticle-2031633-0DA0CDD700000578-398_233x368. He talked his employee Steven Duffy into helping him. When Duffy and his girlfriend, Tammy Lovell, offered to help the police prosecute him, Miller retaliated. He killed Duffy, his eighteen year old brother, Lovell, and her two children ages 15 and 10. Imagine the ire in the conscience of Juan Martinez when the defense attorney implored the jury to “keep an open mind” and to remember that “things are not always as they seem”.

1234216_GThe defense attorney told the jury that life in prison is punishment enough and showed smiling baby photos of Miller. They said to remember that there was a human being inside the monster and that Miller suffered from bipolar disorder. Juan pounced on this sickening plea. What about xxxxx? Where is their mercy? The jury convicted him of five counts of 1st degree murder and sentenced him to death in 2011.

For Juan Martinez, he will grudgingly provide a “why”. If the jury needs a “why”, he will find one to give them. But for Juan, there is no why. You took a life. We know you did it, and now it is time to pay for your sin. Many murders are straightforward. Juan Martinez doesn’t see that there are rare exceptions and sometimes there are possible explanations for something that seems like a horrible and vicious murder.

jodi juanIn 2013, in the Arias trial, Juan finds himself once again accused of prosecutorial misconduct.  Withholding from the defense text messages, Instant messages, and e-mails recovered from the cell phone of Travis Alexander in time for trial.  Thousands and thousands of messages were recovered and turned over in 2011 shortly before the anticipated beginning of the trial. The trial was delayed many times. Other incidents of misconduct throughout the trial have been alleged by the defense, including suborning perjury in the testimony of the Medical Examiner, Dr. Kevin Horn.

*********************************************************

Juan Martinez was in his usual element,juan 1 berating defense witnesses, attempting to insult and humiliate the defendant and expert defense witnesses. Appealing to the emotions rather than the reason and logic of the jury, trying to shape the testimony of defense witnesses, cutting them off  before they can explain their answers, and questioning witnesses with cynical and aggressive questioning, even screaming, barking and snapping at witnesses in bulldog fashion.juan 3

Nurmi attempted to shine a “spotlight” on the actions of the prosecutor by making accusations of misconduct throughout the trial, an attempt to deceive the jury by making their unlikely order of injuries a scientific certainty which would highly benefit the prosecution’s case. Finally, adding the nonsensical charge of 1st degree felony murder for fear that the jury would not believe the thin and mostly speculative evidence of premeditation. Whatever it took, Juan vowed to deliver justice for Travis Alexander and his shattered family.

Many trial watchers praised Juan Martinez as a hero. In the media and also in social media, victim’s rights were enshrined and Juan’s devices were duplicated. Witnesses were threatened and intimidated by mostly anonymous Facebook and Twitter avengers. Only one side of the story was presented. Anyone who said anything in support of the defendant, her attorneys and witnesses was castigated. Speculations were presented in the media and social media as fact. Exculpatory evidence was not allowed into the public domain. Any opinion in any way favorable to the defendant or the defense was ridiculed, blocked, and deleted. Posters were driven away by swarms of avengers and Facebook pages supporting Jodi Arias were deleted due to false complaints of “pornography”.

Currently, Juan has completed the Chrisman trial where a former Phoenix police officer is charged with 2nd degree murder, assault, and cruelty to animals after shooting a man and his dog in his home during a complaint of violence. Juan had an eye witness and some evidence, but there was a problem with missing evidence from outside the home favoring Chrisman.

chrismanJuan responded in a clever fashion. He suggested to the jury during closing arguments that Chrisman’s fellow officers may have hidden and destroyed evidence as well as altering the crime scene. No evidence was introduced in support of the accusation. The judge gave the jury instructions that what is said in closing arguments is not evidence and that lack of evidence should be seen as favorable to Chrisman. Even so, jury members were influenced by the contention that his fellow officers helped Chrisman by removing and destroying evidence.

Chrisman claimed that he shot the victim because he picked up a bicycle and threatened to assault the officer. Juan told the jury that “no gun residue was found on the bicycle”, proving that Chrisman was lying. In fact, no tests were conducted on the bicycle for gun residue. Juan Martinez had used a defense-style tactic to influence the jury.

chrisman trial 2Chrisman’s defense attorneys have complained that the Grand Jury was not given the evidence it needed to make a sound decision about whether the case should be brought to trial or what proper charges were to be brought.

“Chrisman’s lawyers filed a motion claiming the prosecutors in the case, Juan Martinez and Ted Duffy, omitted certain facts and ignored questions from the grand jury that indicted him”.

“Chrisman’s lawyers say prosecutors never told the grand jury about the victim’s alleged drug use or comments made by Chrisman to the first officer on the scene.”

In the past, these actions were deemed as misconduct by Arizona judges. Now the exact same behaviors are not viewed as misconduct. Here is the response to such behavior in Arizona in a 2006 murder case:

“Mr. Duffy  (the prosecutor) did a lot of things during the trial that in my opinion were just outrageous,” said Raynak (the defense attorney).”

“Raynak says Duffy’s misconduct included introducing evidence after he was told not to, and making statements about evidence that simply weren’t true. Judge Arthur Anderson agreed, and after notifying the bar, Duffy was suspended for 30 days and given probation for a year”. In the Chrisman case, Martinez and Duffy had teamed up to deliver Justice for xxxx Rodriguez and his mother who had called the police to begin with.

Although it seems that ex-officer Chrisman was very wrong in his actions, the jury should be given the sound evidence and be able to make a fair decision based on the evidence and testimony presented. The jury should not be unduly influenced by tricks and tactics designed to influence the jury outside of the facts of the case.

The prosecutors should not mislead the Grand Jury, try to keep out exculpatory evidence, and make arguments to the jury which mischaracterizes evidence. Expert witnesses can be discredited or have their opinions questioned, but character assassination, taunting and ridicule of qualified experts should not be allowed. The prosecution should turn over witness lists and evidence to the defense on time.

http://blogs.phoenixnewtimes.com/valleyfever/2010/11/richard_chrisman_phoenix_pds_k.php

redondoIn his upcoming case, State v. Christopher Redondo, Juan has been sparring with the judge. Redondo has already been convicted for the unrelated murder of Ernie Singh on June 24, 2009.  For this, Redondo was sentenced to life in prison. Now, Redondo is accused of shooting to death Gilbert Police Lt. Eric Shuhandler in January 2010.eric shuhandler

Redondo was reportedly despondent in his cell and refusing to talk to defense counsel. Judge Barton requested that Juan Martinez attempt a plea bargain to life in prison and has ordered a competency hearing. Juan Martinez became incensed and convinced that the judge is trying to stop him from getting Redondo the death penalty.  Juan also feels Judge Barton is “sympathetic” to the defendant and should not be allowed to preside in the competency hearing. I would say she believes the Death penaty should be used judiciously.

He wants a stricter judge to find him competent to stand trial and to be eligible for execution. Juan knows Redondo is already serving life in prison for the killing of Singh. If he is found guilty, this means he will get no extra punishment for the killing of Officer Shuhandler in 2010. So, Juan feels that Redondo should stop playing mentally sick and should just face execution. In his motion, “Martinez accused Barton of being hostile toward the death penalty in three other cases”.

This can be directly traced back to State v. Millermiller victims. The judge in that case was Judge Barton. Miller was the man who killed 5 people as retaliation for testifying against him in an arson case. Even though there were multiple aggravators such as multiple murders, prior felonies, witness elimination, and the murder of two children. Juan still insisted in motions with the judge that the especially cruel, heinous or depraved aggravator be allowed to be used. The judge replied that there were plenty of other aggravators, and that the five were shot in rapid succession, making it difficult to prove significant mental suffering took place.

“Based upon the evidence presented, the state has not shown that any significant period of time elapsed between the killings and that any victim did not die instantly from the gunshot wounds,” Barton responded. “Rather, it appears that the victims were killed in rapid succession and none of them had significant time to contemplate their fate,” the judge said.

Why does Juan Martinez fight so hard to get an aggravator he doesn’t need to get the death penalty? The answer is precedent. If this particular crime is seen as supporting the heinous, cruel, or depraved aggravator, then many more cases can claim this aggravator due to the precedent that can be created in State v. Miller. This allows the prosecutors in Arizona to use the threat of the death penalty more often to force a plea in selected cases. This also widens rather than narrows the number of homicides that can be found eligible for the death penalty. Judge Barton has presided over other death penalty cases where the sentence was death. Judge Barton has also refused to block death sentences from being carried out. So maybe Juan Martinez is being too tenacious in attacking Judge Barton for being reasonable and judicious in the application of the death penalty.

alyce juanIt’s wonderful when you have a tough prosecutor who will fight hard for the rights of victims and victim’s families. It’s a blessing to have a tenacious prosecutor to protect society from serial killers, cop killers, rogue cops, mass murderers, and outlaw murderers with drug habits. The problem comes when you have people such as Scott Falater and Jodi Arias.

These are passive people with no criminal history or history of violence who are claiming that something irrational or not easily explainable happened resulting in a murder. These are cases where the jury really needs to decide on the facts and the evidence without the undue influence from emotional arguments, speculation, and deceptive tactics.

The code of ethics for prosecutors states:

(a) The office of prosecutor is charged with responsibility for prosecutions in its jurisdiction.

(b) The prosecutor is an administrator of justice, an advocate, and an officer of the court; the prosecutor must exercise sound discretion in the performance of his or her functions.

(c) The duty of the prosecutor is to seek justice, not merely to convict.

So to try to discredit an expert Psychological witness with 30 years experience because he made a math mistake, or to try to discredit a domestic violence expert with 30 years experience because of the title she chose for a speaking engagement, seems a little over the top. To withhold evidence and witness lists from the defense in order to put them at a disadvantage in a case where their client faces possible execution also seems over the top.

To try to convince the jury with argument based on speculation and emotion also seems to fall outside the bounds of the ethics of a prosecutor who is supposed to seek justice. To express the sentiment that the defendant is a liar and by extension, all defense witnesses are liars also, falls outside these bounds. To accuse defense witnesses of crimes without evidence and to use these accusations to try and prevent a witness from testifying is a violation of law. For Judges to tolerate these tactics is wrong on its face. Excessive screaming, sarcasm, taunting, and contempt violate the decorum of a capital case.

nurmi juanDo you want to defend a mass murderer? Neither do I. Do you want to defend a child rapist and killer or an outlaw drug induced spree killer? Neither do I. How far over the line would you go to prosecute the bad guy? If you go too far, the scales are tipped, and you st become part of the problem. But if you are falsely accused of such a thing, you would want a prosecutor with ethics. You would not want a Grand Jury to indict you on false, misleading, or missing information. You would not want charges to be brought against you without probable cause. You would not want to be overcharged in the crime.

You would not want a prosecutor withholding evidence that could set you free, manufacturing, destroying or mischaracterizing evidence, influencing the jury with speculation, or shopping for a hanging judge. Deciding whether a person lives or dies should be based on their guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. People who think Juan Martinez is a hero like to ask “What if Travis Alexander was your son, your brother, or your friend? But you also need to ask “What if Jodi Arias was your daughter, your friend, or your sister?”

juan katie wickThere is no “Justice for Yarmilla”, “Justice for Faylene” or “Justice for Travis”. There is only Justice for all. The balance between victim’s rights and the rights of the accused must be carefully maintained. Otherwise, we are only seeking a conviction. We have left Justice far behind.juan cross