DISCLAIMER:  [**DISCRETION ADVISED**]  [Read Day 1 Questions Here  |  Day 2 Questions Here]

One can never know what is in the head of a jury member.  Their question can be fueled by many things from the mundane to the pivotal.   You cannot tell with any certainty where the juror who asked the question is at in the case.  Any analysis that states the contrary is false.  The media analysis is often effective to viewers because they are “experts” and the jury is shrouded in “mystery”.  Therefore, they have wide lee-way with what they can say about them, including:  their looks, actions, reactions, interest or boredom, amount of notes, etc.  We cannot see any differently, so they can say whatever they want about them.

Here is a list of most to least questioned topics from the jury:

  1. What happened on June 4, 2008 (48 questions)
  2. Relationship between Jodi Arias and Travis Alexander (25 questions)
  3. Memory problems, shaking, etc. (24 questions)
  4. Other relationships in Jodi Arias’ life (19 questions)
  5. General (15 questions)
  6. Telling the truth or lying (12 questions)
  7. Gas (11 questions), Incidents of abuse testimony (11 questions)
  8. Interviews (media, police) (9 questions), Religion/Philosophy (9 questions)
  9. Guns (grandfather, Travis Alexander, etc.) (8 questions)
  10. “Documenting” abuse (7 questions)
  11. Journals (6 questions), After June 4, 2008 (6 questions), Phone recording (6 questions)
  12. License plate (3 questions)
  13. Glasses/Vision (2 questions)
  14. Blonde Hair (1 question)

TOTAL # OF QUESTIONS: (abt.) 213 questions

  1. JanCorey says:

    If Jodi does not receive the death penalty for her self-defense actions against perpetrator-Travis, I expect there may be a dramatic sudden increase in number of nation-wide murders where similar claims are noted by future defendants claiming the same defense. That alone may persuade the jury to convict Jodi on the death-penalty issue, not on the facts of the abuse by Jodi’s former-partner.


    • It has been proven in studies that punishments are not a deterrent. This is probably due to thinking “I won’t get caught!” regardless of what happens to others. I don’t believe it is ever appropriate to punish someone or find someone guilty purely to make sure no one else does it. If we used that principle I can imagine an increase in innocent people in prison, quite easily. Self-defense and BWS has seen some play in courtrooms starting more popularly in the 80s and 90s. It rarely succeeds due to the negative media treatment and misunderstanding of mental conditions in society at large. Each case is different and each defendant could be innocent (they are presumed innocent of course). At trial is when we are supposed to find out the truth (not just agree with the prosecution no matter what).


  2. JanCorey says:

    For any jury to have that many questions only proves how poorly the prosecution presented their case.


    • Ms Davita says:

      I disagree with you JanCorey, in fact the jury’s questions were focussing on the murder itself and not on the sex like the Defence wanted the focus to be on. Who do you think is now smiling after all these questions? The Defence or the Prosecution?


      • I think the prosecutor also wanted the focus on the phone recording, he played it enough times! The prosecutor should have focused on his own case. Strategically, in this type of case, it is better for the prosecutor to go with their own case and not recognize the defense. It gives an impression, to the jurors (who are already pro-prosecution because it is a capital case), that there is no credence to be given to the defense. I don’t think either side should be smiling because you never know what a jury is thinking. I’m sure Martinez is always thinking he’s winning though. He started out with a strong case and only he can really ruin it. The defense’s case doesn’t have a strong basis, so it’s a fight to the finish. The defense attorneys are very good on the indigent budget and considering the facts of the case. I did see some juror questions that were clearly for the prosecution and some that were iffy. There isn’t a lot of good news in there for the defense if you are taking a straight analysis, which might not be appropriate since we have no idea what motivated the questions. The defense’s case was much more detailed, so there probably would logically be more questions anyway. In addition, the defense still has more of their case left. Arizona is a rough place for abuse defenses anyway, so they already start out in an uphill battle. Can they completely win? I’ll never say never. Can they save her life? We shall definitely see.


Join the Discussion

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Google+ photo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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


Connecting to %s