As Jodi Arias awaits her re-sentencing, her defense attorneys have been hard at work filing motions to protect her right to a fair trial.  They are currently asking for several measures including potential jurors Twitter accounts, in light of an alternate jurors activity during trial and the prejudicial and opinionated nature of social media.  Richard Gabriel has been a jury consultant for 28 years and has worked on many high-profile cases.

“[Social media is] incredibly powerful because it is a juror interacting in their natural environment. It’s them unedited, uncensored and not trying to couch things in way that’s politically correct. So you have a candid view of the juror, and it allows you to see how they view the world and how they express themselves,” he says.

Often lawyers ask for social media account information in order to ensure potential jurors are being honest during voir dire or jury selection.  In this case, Arias’ lawyers are going a step further and would like to monitor their accounts to ensure they are sticking to the rules of court.  Arias’ defense attorneys justified their request in a motion filed with the court, saying that, during her first trial, they caught an alternate juror posting on Facebook about the defendant and conversing on Twitter with an HLN regular.

“If she [Arias] does have Latina blood, it may explain a temper lol,” Tara Kelley, Juror No. 17, wrote in the comment, posted May 14, during the sentencing deliberations.

This juror was still under the admonition not to speak about the case at all.  As an alternate, you have no idea when you may be called to step in for someone.

The next hearing is at 11:30 a.m. EST on September 16th.

  1. Lon Spector says:

    Jodi was “Latina” enough for half the male population of America (Not excluding Travis.)
    to lust after so she certainly is entitled to a fair trial at least.


    • Vanessa says:

      Do you know for a fact the alternate juror made the comment or are you taking the filing as valid. Beth Karras verified the inflammation was not correct. Pretty shoddy journalism not to check your facts


      • I am not a journalist and wouldn’t want to be. I didn’t get any facts wrong. I blogged what the filing said. If you didn’t want to know what it said then don’t read the article. I merely said that saying those things are wrong and that jurors whether alternate or not should not be doing it. That is a fact. I didn’t yet do my update on the story. I do know that multiple sources are reporting that someone tweeted that to her, which is still irresponsible for her to read it. Jurors should be away from social media completely. The admonition says to not listen to any outside sources about the case or anyone involved because outside people have agendas that have nothing to do with justice. I wouldn’t use Beth Karas as a sole source given her previous employment. The hearing on this and other motions has not yet occurred.


Join the Discussion

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

You are commenting using your 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