This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
How do they pick the 12 because from what I gather at least 1 of the 18 is definately not 100% against her. We need that juror on the final 12 for deliberations in the hopes of a hung jury. Info gathered from her testimony, Jodi craves a hung jury. Then we get to go thru this again. If we can get Nancy Grace's head to explode on live TV, it's well worth it.
I missed that day's circus. What was the response from the doctor?
I got selected for a murder trial once, they case lasted a month. Every day we didn't have to report until 10 am. Every Friday the judge let us out at 12:00 pm. The case was in June, it was awesome. Plus, I was a salaried employee and my employer let me keep the jury check which ended up being well over $700.My employer pays in full for jury duty. Hence my ongoing efforts NOT to get off jury duty... One 6 week case of reporting at noon and getting out at 5:00 = one of best vacations ever...Speaking of another three weeks and jurors, how does the juror vs employment come into play. Can an employer terminate based on someone being on jury duty for this length? I know this might be elementary, but I have no clue how that side of this works. I'm just amazed how they can take that much time of work and sit through this whole thing.Oh great, make that at least 3 weeks to go then!I can't imagine any logical human being could get past the "perhaps I should have re-administered the test" and take this guy seriously. I am really anxious to see the jury questions. I hope the defense doesn't keep going until the end of the day today. Court is off Thursday and Friday.
I'm going from being entertained to disgusted fast. Let us hope all 12 jurors are logical. All it takes is 1 dingy to ruin Travis's justice being served..
My case was during the OJ trial. While heading out to a lunch break on one of our few "long" days one of the deputies apparently overheard one of the jury say, "...he's guilty as hell." We returned to an empty courtroom and each one of us had to meet individually with both councils and the judge in chambers. The implication was that we were discussing the case. The reality was that a couple of the jurors were discussing the OJ case. As each juror went in and came out we were separated in the courtroom and monitored by marshals so as not to discuss what was going on...THAT was an interesting day.
I think the 12 know who they are and the other 6 know they are backup. The thing is we don't know which juror(s) are asking the questions.If there is a hung jury and next time around, is everything wiped clean and we literally start all over again (sigh...) or will for example psych dude's screw ups still be admissible in court?
He tried a clinical response I believe when he probably should have just said 'no'.
No idea and I don't know if the defense can try an insanity plea if there is a 2nd go around. I speculate that they bailed on that idea because I think recent high profile insanity killings by women haven't gone too well for defendants.Apparently they will draw 12 names out of a hat to set the jury so says HLN.
I've been a juror on 2 trials and we've always known who were the jurors and who were the alternates.
Maybe her narcissistic and histrionic thinking will lead her to represent herself if there is a mistrial. Who knows with this chic!
More and more judges are at least giving the option to the parties of not telling the jurors who the alternates are, or perhaps even determining who the alternates are, until the case goes to the jury. The thinking is that people who know they're alternates might check out mentally during the trial and not pay attention thinking they're not going to be needed. I actually like doing it this way.I'm just going by what I heard on tv so who knows.
It probably varies by state. I think I have heard in criminal trials like this, they do not tell them who the alternates are to make sure they are all completely paying attention the entire time. I could be wrong. And it probably does vary by state.ETA: Nevermind. I see T Bell actually knows the answer.
I tend to associate that initial sentiment as reflective of narcissism. Or, the incredibly poor public perception that public defenders are terrible and one is better representing himself.
Why won't Juan just stop already and if he has a witness himself, have that person shred him? At this point I think Juan is doing more harm than good.
Seems to be the consensus right now but we will have to wait for Nancy Grace to drop the bombshell for verification. Stay tuned.
So more Juan vs psyche dude on the tests!
Unfortunately so is the jury...for it going on and on... I wouldn't be surprise if it's a juror or 2 who wrote the questions today. There weren't many..Finally after 6 days, psyche is gone!! Next!Juan's all fired up.
I think this is way overkill. The guy is obviously a lying ### clown. It just seems like he's frustrated that this guy keeps lying over and over again and can't let it go.Unfortunately so is the jury...for it going on and on... I wouldn't be surprise if it's a juror or 2 who wrote the questions today. There weren't many..Juan's all fired up.
Who is this on the stand. I'm at work and can't watch. I saw it was some lady. I'm assuming a battered woman expert.
I don't think we'll be able to see any measurable toning down from him.. the witness may allude to him having dv type of problem with the way he attacks!
Her name is LaViolette or something like that and she is a domestic violence "expert" who is going to testify that Jodi exhibits symptoms of a woman who has suffered from domestic abuse.The one thing that intrigues me about all this nonsense, how exactly do you get domestically abused by someone who lives in a different state from you? It's mind boggling.
I'm cringing thinking about how this may go down....I don't think we'll be able to see any measurable toning down from him.. the witness may allude to him having dv type of problem with the way he attacks!
That's all there is. There is online streaming during the day but the trial is over now for the day. I think you can watch it live on CNN.com.
Ok, thx.
And and.... I drove to his house in the other state even though he didn't invite me there and crawled through his doggy door so I could get into his house and spy on him. But that's because he abused me and I couldn't quit him.You couldn't quit him because you are a stalking psychopath you ####.He called and it was scary. And when I drove to his house, it was scary.
Well she was forced to sit on the phone with Travis who was abusing her mentally and emotionally with all his s & m sex talk. She didn't want to disrespect his fantasies.. I hope the juror who asked the question if a bad haircut could cause ptsd asks some questions for the dv chic.
This second defense witness just started yesterday. She's been answering questions about her credentials for a couple hours.
She won't get the death penalty or even life imo. Our best hope imo is she gets murder 2 and a lot more years behind bars without parole.Why do you think they won't decide Murder 1? I feel like this is a slam dunk and you could tell at least a few members on the jury were definitely leaning that way based on their snarky questions.This second defense witness just started yesterday. She's been answering questions about her credentials for a couple hours.
I would love nothing more and feels she deserves murder 1 and to fry but I'm thinking there's going to be 1 who is going to have trouble with reasonable doubt.The big problem imo is the prosecutor is hounding on little things rather than the slam dunk stuff. I mean why grill the doc dude on test scores forever, which I'm sure the jury tuned out. The more chance that dude for example has to explain things (via the defense, not Juan's yes or no options)the more it may cast a doubt in a jury's mind.Also, the history of slam dunk cases with OJ and Anthony shocked me enough not to hold my breath.Why do you think they won't decide Murder 1? I feel like this is a slam dunk and you could tell at least a few members on the jury were definitely leaning that way based on their snarky questions.This second defense witness just started yesterday. She's been answering questions about her credentials for a couple hours.
Agree with the history of slam dunk cases.But DV isn't an option for me in this case. She lived in another state and there is proof she stalked him. But Juan should focus on the important stuff and may lose out if he doesn't reign it in.I would love nothing more and feels she deserves murder 1 and to fry but I'm thinking there's going to be 1 who is going to have trouble with reasonable doubt.The big problem imo is the prosecutor is hounding on little things rather than the slam dunk stuff. I mean why grill the doc dude on test scores forever, which I'm sure the jury tuned out. The more chance that dude for example has to explain things (via the defense, not Juan's yes or no options)the more it may cast a doubt in a jury's mind.Also, the history of slam dunk cases with OJ and Anthony shocked me enough not to hold my breath.Why do you think they won't decide Murder 1? I feel like this is a slam dunk and you could tell at least a few members on the jury were definitely leaning that way based on their snarky questions.This second defense witness just started yesterday. She's been answering questions about her credentials for a couple hours.
I have a feeling his closing arguement is going to be the slam dunk.Agree with the history of slam dunk cases.But DV isn't an option for me in this case. She lived in another state and there is proof she stalked him. But Juan should focus on the important stuff and may lose out if he doesn't reign it in.I would love nothing more and feels she deserves murder 1 and to fry but I'm thinking there's going to be 1 who is going to have trouble with reasonable doubt.The big problem imo is the prosecutor is hounding on little things rather than the slam dunk stuff. I mean why grill the doc dude on test scores forever, which I'm sure the jury tuned out. The more chance that dude for example has to explain things (via the defense, not Juan's yes or no options)the more it may cast a doubt in a jury's mind.Also, the history of slam dunk cases with OJ and Anthony shocked me enough not to hold my breath.Why do you think they won't decide Murder 1? I feel like this is a slam dunk and you could tell at least a few members on the jury were definitely leaning that way based on their snarky questions.This second defense witness just started yesterday. She's been answering questions about her credentials for a couple hours.
I agree that after seeing things go down like Casey Anthony going free, the skepticism is there. But I think this case is really different than those. In the Casey Anthony case, a lot of jurors came out and said that they believed she was guilty of murder, but there wasn't enough evidence to find her guilty (which is ironic considering the reason there was no physical evidence was because she lied to the cops for 6 months after dumping her baby in the woods). In this case, there's no question that she did it. This is all about the jury believing the abuse stories and her lack of memory of what actually happened, which I think is pretty far-fetched and JM has done a good job (albeit overkill at times) to squash and doubt that her story is a pile of poo. My money's on Murder 1 with DP at this point. But.... ya never know.I would love nothing more and feels she deserves murder 1 and to fry but I'm thinking there's going to be 1 who is going to have trouble with reasonable doubt.The big problem imo is the prosecutor is hounding on little things rather than the slam dunk stuff. I mean why grill the doc dude on test scores forever, which I'm sure the jury tuned out. The more chance that dude for example has to explain things (via the defense, not Juan's yes or no options)the more it may cast a doubt in a jury's mind.Also, the history of slam dunk cases with OJ and Anthony shocked me enough not to hold my breath.Why do you think they won't decide Murder 1? I feel like this is a slam dunk and you could tell at least a few members on the jury were definitely leaning that way based on their snarky questions.This second defense witness just started yesterday. She's been answering questions about her credentials for a couple hours.
1st degree is possible and should be the verdict but all it takes is one holdout to prevent it. Right now HLN polls have been around 5-10% for every survey they have posed. With 18 jurors, there is real possibility that 1 is thinking less than Murder 1. If that one is sympathetic or has had a bad relationship, anything is possible.This second defense witness just started yesterday. She's been answering questions about her credentials for a couple hours.
Who goes 1st? Prosecution? If so, by the time the defense quits talking (3 weeks after Kermit gives his closing arguments) the jury may have forgotten the prosecution's case. Maybe even what they are deciding on? Something like 'meh, innocent of whatever, get me outta here, I've had enough'.
My understanding is prosecution always goes first.1st degree is possible and should be the verdict but all it takes is one holdout to prevent it. Right now HLN polls have been around 5-10% for every survey they have posed. With 18 jurors, there is real possibility that 1 is thinking less than Murder 1. If that one is sympathetic or has had a bad relationship, anything is possible.This second defense witness just started yesterday. She's been answering questions about her credentials for a couple hours.Who goes 1st? Prosecution? If so, by the time the defense quits talking (3 weeks after Kermit gives his closing arguments) the jury may have forgotten the prosecution's case. Maybe even what they are deciding on? Something like 'meh, innocent of whatever, get me outta here, I've had enough'.
I can't believe there wouldn't be 1..I don't know. I really feel like there is another one coming to refute that Samuels guy. JM might be holding his cards close? Or maybe he just feels he did a good enough job and doesn't want to introduce any more confusion into the mix.No one is mentioning a prosecution witness. They give an itinerary of what's to come and nada. If there is one, wouldn't it be known by now??
But this also isn't Florida, right? There's actually a chance some of the jury members have functioning brains?I agree that after seeing things go down like Casey Anthony going free, the skepticism is there. But I think this case is really different than those. In the Casey Anthony case, a lot of jurors came out and said that they believed she was guilty of murder, but there wasn't enough evidence to find her guilty (which is ironic considering the reason there was no physical evidence was because she lied to the cops for 6 months after dumping her baby in the woods). In this case, there's no question that she did it. This is all about the jury believing the abuse stories and her lack of memory of what actually happened, which I think is pretty far-fetched and JM has done a good job (albeit overkill at times) to squash and doubt that her story is a pile of poo. My money's on Murder 1 with DP at this point. But.... ya never know.I would love nothing more and feels she deserves murder 1 and to fry but I'm thinking there's going to be 1 who is going to have trouble with reasonable doubt.The big problem imo is the prosecutor is hounding on little things rather than the slam dunk stuff. I mean why grill the doc dude on test scores forever, which I'm sure the jury tuned out. The more chance that dude for example has to explain things (via the defense, not Juan's yes or no options)the more it may cast a doubt in a jury's mind.Also, the history of slam dunk cases with OJ and Anthony shocked me enough not to hold my breath.Why do you think they won't decide Murder 1? I feel like this is a slam dunk and you could tell at least a few members on the jury were definitely leaning that way based on their snarky questions.This second defense witness just started yesterday. She's been answering questions about her credentials for a couple hours.
I was going to say at least the trial wasn't in Florida, but I didn't want to offend anyone because I'm new and stuff.But this also isn't Florida, right? There's actually a chance some of the jury members have functioning brains?I agree that after seeing things go down like Casey Anthony going free, the skepticism is there. But I think this case is really different than those. In the Casey Anthony case, a lot of jurors came out and said that they believed she was guilty of murder, but there wasn't enough evidence to find her guilty (which is ironic considering the reason there was no physical evidence was because she lied to the cops for 6 months after dumping her baby in the woods). In this case, there's no question that she did it. This is all about the jury believing the abuse stories and her lack of memory of what actually happened, which I think is pretty far-fetched and JM has done a good job (albeit overkill at times) to squash and doubt that her story is a pile of poo. My money's on Murder 1 with DP at this point. But.... ya never know.I would love nothing more and feels she deserves murder 1 and to fry but I'm thinking there's going to be 1 who is going to have trouble with reasonable doubt.The big problem imo is the prosecutor is hounding on little things rather than the slam dunk stuff. I mean why grill the doc dude on test scores forever, which I'm sure the jury tuned out. The more chance that dude for example has to explain things (via the defense, not Juan's yes or no options)the more it may cast a doubt in a jury's mind.Also, the history of slam dunk cases with OJ and Anthony shocked me enough not to hold my breath.Why do you think they won't decide Murder 1? I feel like this is a slam dunk and you could tell at least a few members on the jury were definitely leaning that way based on their snarky questions.This second defense witness just started yesterday. She's been answering questions about her credentials for a couple hours.
