It was June 9, 2008, when the Mesa 911 dispatch would receive a call that would begin a chapter in a story that would ultimately destroy two families. A hysterical voice is the first chilling moment from that call. “A friend of ours is dead in his bedroom…there’s lots of blood….it’s all over the place.” When asked if the victim had been threatened recently the answer from the 911 caller was a very quick yes. “A girlfriend that’s been bothering him lately, and um, following him and slashing tires and things like that.” When describing the scene, another friend on the scene later told the dispatcher, “I didn’t go in but from what I heard there’s blood in his bedroom, behind the door, and then, then he said it’s all over, and they went in the bathroom and he’s – he’s in his shower…..” That person also confirmed that the victim, now lying dead in his shower with blood all over had also recently been the victim of stalking. ABC News reported yesterday that after almost 7 years, a chapter closes in this story for these two families, but, as a jury goes into deliberations, each family will experience very different endings.
One of the families destroyed by that phone call is the family of the man found dead in his shower. During the sentencing phase retrial for the person that murdered that man, that family testified they are still unable to take a shower normally. That is because they too have been victimized because of what they now know about the events that led to that 911 call.
In those events their beloved brother suffered an agonizing and torturous death that involved multiple sharp force (stab) wounds, divets of his skull chipped out like golf turf, near decapitation, and a bullet wound to the head. And the other individual named in that call has been doing everything she can to get away with it. Until today.
ABC reports it is now out of the killers hands. Whether the killer will live in prison or be executed for this crime is now in the hands of a jury in Phoenix, Arizona. CBS 5 affiliate KPHO also reported yesterday that the verdict will be aired and delivered via live news stream when the jury reaches their verdict. It is the only phase of this trial that the judge has permitted to be streamed live.
Jodi Arias is on trial for the murder of Travis Alexander, a murder that led to the 911 call shown here. On June 4, 2008, something bad happened between these two lovers and Travis was murdered in a rage that involved multiple wounds all over his body, near decapitation and a gunshot to the head. The first jury believed the State that the killer was a liar and a manipulative cold blooded killer.
They expressed that belief through a first degree murder conviction with a finding of the aggravating factor of cruelty. This finding would make the killer eligible for the death penalty. What that jury could not agree on unanimously was the killer’s sentence.
A retrial of the penalty phase was called and a new jury was impaneled and sworn in October 2014. That jury has been listening to testimony ever since in order to make one determination for this crime. Will the killer be executed for executing Travis Alexander? Or will she live in prison for the rest of her life? The killer has done all that she can to delay the inevitable to this day.
While that is almost understandable given what is on the line in this case, there is a time when the ‘delaying the inevitable’ reaches the ‘enough is enough’ point. Many believe for Jodi Arias, that was a long time ago. Jodi Arias is not exactly known for using honesty and good intentions to get her way, and her tactics used to serve her own gain have done nothing but create more victims along the way.
The prosecution for the State of Arizona told the jury in closing this week that almost everything they heard from the defense was a lie in order to pursue this “secondary gain” of avoiding the death penalty. His arguments were very convincing, and made sense. That is the State’s strength, they have an abundance of facts and truth at their disposal in this case, and they always bring it.
The defense, not so much. But the defense is certainly good at spinning a good yarn. And this particular killer has been spinning them since before the murder even happened in her efforts to keep her culpability under wrap. Like most stalkers who have built an unhealthy obsession on someone, she’s also been weak when it comes to facing the truth and facts in this case, and weak on evidence to support her claims.
Closing arguments this week highlighted these differences. The State’s was emotional and fact based and Juan knocked it out of the park. Kirk Nurmi’s on the other hand sounded weak on evidence, weak on points, and weak on…everything.
Nurmi’s strategy was to go over the list of mitigating factors one by one with the jury in his efforts to convince them to save the killer’s life. When he felt that wasn’t working he went into attack mode. When it was the State’s turn up to bat, Prosecutor Juan Martinez discredited every single mitigating factor.
The State also reminded the jury of their instructions saying, if you can’t find a mitigating factor you have to vote death. Juan’s was a very compelling close. Nurmi’s sounded like he was reaching and he kept reminding the jury he had no evidence.
First came the jury instructions from the judge. We followed many tweeters who were inside the courtroom during closing arguments yesterday and today. In addition to watching media outlets we followed tweets from Jen Wood @TrialDiariesJ, Tammy Rose @News20Chopper, @JarrettSeltzer, Monica Lindstrom @monicalindstrom and Mike Watkiss from 3TV.
Court was packed for the first time in weeks. The Alexander family was in attendance as were the Arias family. Jodi Arias has been claiming abuse at the hands of Travis Alexander since this retrial started in the hopes that someone will believe she has a mitigating factor. When court reporters noted that the Arias family were wearing domestic violence ribbons the public reaction was disgust.
The victim in this case has multiple wounds and can’t speak for himself, but the Arias family wants the jury to believe something different. Other than the Arias family however, the defense side of the court room seemed sparse. Meanwhile, the strong media presence and huge gathering of support for the Alexanders took up the other side of the court room.
Judge Stephens reminded the jury that the defendant is already a convicted killer and they are required to accept that verdict. She reminded them that one jury has already found the murder to be cruel, and explained the law of first degree murder to the jury and how that makes this an “extremely cruel murder which qualifies for death” according to Jeff Gold @jeffgoldesq. Jenn @TrialDiariesJ tweeted other instructions,
“Judge is explaining the aggravating circumstances that TA suffered pain and Jodi should have known he would suffer.”
The judge then went over the list of 9 mitigating factors the defense is claiming. The mitigating factors that Nurmi would address in his closing included that the killer has no priors, is young, remorseful, that she suffered child abuse, that she suffered abuse from Travis, that the relationship was so stressful she had to kill him, Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, Borderline Personality Disorder, and that she is just too mentally ill to be killed. The judge also said that Jodi choosing not to allocate or testify can not be a part of your decision.
The judge also instructed the “cost of any sentence” can not be considered according to Carolyn Sung @CarolynSungCNN. Mary Ellen Resendez from ABC 15 tweeted that when the judge read the word “remorseful” a member of the Alexander camp shook their head. When Nurmi was finally up to bat to address these mitigating factors, he began with a picture of Jodi and Travis in the woods and his “tale of infinite sadness”. Frequently throughout his closing, Nurmi would say as William Pitts @william_pitts tweeted,
“Do you kill this woman? Do you kill #JodiArias for what she did on June 4, 2008?”
Nurmi began reminding the jury of the way the victim impact statements from the Alexander family affected this courtroom. Tammy Rose @News20Chopper tweeted he said, “you heard the pain from #TravisAlexander’s family.” Nurmi reminded the jury that “there is nothing but sadness here.”
Nurmi then presented the, ‘just because she’s eligible for death doesn’t mean she should get it’ defense. He wants the jury to forget the shrieking that Tanisha experienced in that same courtroom when remembering the death of her beloved brother. He wants the jury to forget that Tanisha still can’t take a shower like a ‘normal person’ because a shower was the last place her brother saw alive.
Then, Nurmi moved on into the, ‘No pressure but this decision will follow you forever, no pressure’ defense. Monica Lindstrom tweeted that Nurmi asked the jury to “set aside emotions” in the same breath that he asked the jury to remember the emotional victim impact statements.
His closing statements seemed to bounce off of each other in opposite ways like this. He would say something, and then say something that canceled that out. “Don’t be emotional in your decision but remember the emotional victims” was just one way. He then said “In some ways the choice before you is simple” according to Fox’s Troy Hayden.
Right after that “simple decision” line he bombarded the jury with pressure and guilt. He called their decision monumental, serious, and told them this “simple” decision could haunt them the rest of their life. He said what you decided is not a recommendation, it’s a binding decision, “literally life or death”. But it’s simple. Really?
Then Nurmi told the jury they can not compare decisions with each other. That they each have to make their own decision. He then said, and as far as mitigating factors goes, whatever works, really.
He basically told the jury, as you can see we are stumped on that too, so if you find one, go for it and use that as a mitigating factor. He also reminded them, you don’t need a bunch. One is actually enough, so pick one, and let’s call it a day. Tammy Rose @News20Chopper tweeted he said,
“You can consider anything as a mitigating factor.”
He also emphasized the “young and stupid” defense. She was young, and stupid, and don’t you think that also means she was easily manipulated by the way? Tammy Rose @News20Chopper tweeted,
“You can consider #JodiArias’ age as having the ability to be manipulated. Nurmi says that’s a mouthful, isn’t it?”
All of a sudden Nurmi was feeling love for Dr. Demarte as well, whom he had previously called Dr. Death. Nurmi then presented the ‘the mental illness committed this crime’ defense in support of the youth mitigating factor. Here he made Borderline Personality Disorder look like an affliction that Jodi was born with and that the murder was destined to happen, she had no other choice but to go down this path.
William Pitts tweeted that Nurmi said, “from the day of her birth the cards were stacked against Ms. Arias” because of her borderline personality. Enter ‘The wooden spoon made me do it’ defense and mitigating factor #3, child abuse. Nurmi also acknowledges that they lack evidence on the abuse allegations. He acknowledges this by looking for proof to show the jury wherever he can. Tammy Rose @News20Chopper tweeted that he said,
“When a girl leaves home at 17 before she graduates high school, this may be proof she was being abused.”
Nurmi then went through the many relationships of Jodi Arias. He showed the jury pictures of Jodi Arias in happier times. He showed pictures of when she was young and kept using the word “girl’ whenever he referred to the convicted killer. This was probably to put the jury in a warm and fuzzy place because the drag the victim through the mud defense was lurking around the corner.
But, poor Jodi Arias. This was the tone Nurmi took in his closing. Here was his chance to introduce the jury to the woman that they have only been hearing about until now. Mitigating factor #4, the one that he should have spent the most time over, remorse, was glossed over in this section of his closing.
Instead, he jumped over to number 5 which was the abuse that Jodi claims she suffered at the hands of Travis Alexander. Her entire family was wearing domestic violence ribbons as their “evidence” of Jodi’s domestic violence claims. But even Nurmi knows, there isn’t a lot of that evidence to go around. Nurmi has a reason for that. Tammy Rose @News20Chopper tweeted,
“Nurmi says there may be some dispute about mitigating factor #5 but Dr. Geffner says people don’t report it.”
So Nurmi says, that’s why there is no evidence of Jodi’s abuse claims. Nurmi then moved onto the subject of Travis Alexander and porn. To add credence to these claims in closing, Nurmi referred to expert witness Dr. Fonseca and Bishop Vernon Parker.
Here Nurmi told the jury, sex expert Dr. Fonseca, who is going on Jodi’s words alone, says Travis struggled in this area. Other “evidence” Nurmi had to back up his claim was that the Bishop found pop up ads on his computer when Travis lived with him. Nurmi did not remind the jury that the pop up ads Bishop Parker testified to were also compared to a JC Penney ad, and were not actually identified as porn.
Whenever he had the chance, Nurmi also called Jodi mentally ill. He used the phrase “mentally ill” as an adjective, reiterating to the jury how important this term was to him. “What did the mentally ill Jodi Arias see?” is an example of one statement, tweeted by Troy Hayden @troyhaydenFox10 that Nurmi made.
As Nurmi began to introduce the ‘Travis was a bad boyfriend that deserved to die’ defense, members of the gallery began to react. In this mitigating factor explanation Nurmi disguised his ‘this was all Travis’s fault’ defense by calling it emotional abuse. Examples of alleged emotional abuse committed by Travis Alexander that Nurmi used included how Travis spoke to Jodi on the phone sex tape, the way he spoke to her in general, and how he would tell her one day he loved her and the next he would say don’t speak to me again. Tammy Rose @News20Chopper tweeted,
“Nurmi says emotional abuse is easy to see. It’s in the text messages, It’s in the sex recording phone tape…but what about the physical abuse? This is where Dr. Demarte fails and is out of her league.”
This was an easy in for Nurmi to move from Travis bashing to Dr. Demarte bashing. He told the jury that Dr. Demarte beefed up her experience for the jury. He even said she misrepresented herself on her website.
Will the jury buy Nurmi’s attempts to pass off his lack of evidence as emotional abuse? Or is it a bad idea that he keeps reminding the jury that he lacks evidence? He even said that Dr. Demarte’s approach was “archaic”. That would be the approach that requires evidence, but Nurmi calls it the ‘If you didn’t see it, it didn’t happen’ approach.
Nurmi then compared the relationship of Travis Alexander and Jodi Arias to the domestic violence situation of NFL player Ray Rice. Yes he did that despite the fact that those two relationships couldn’t possibly be any more different from each other than they are. But he did. If he had brought evidence of abuse with him to his closing arguments he certainly would have talked about that instead.
At some point during his closing arguments it dawned on Nurmi that he was going to have to talk about the killer and the night of the murder. Nurmi tries to stay away from that subject point because the facts are very clearly stacked against him. At this point in his closing he began touching on it.
A key point that Nurmi kept sticking on in his closing was that Travis invited Jodi to his house that night. He kept bringing this up like it made any difference in the world. Jodi still chose to kill Travis Alexander 3 different ways.
If he did invite her to his house that night, he wasn’t giving her an open door invite to come and butcher him. He wasn’t giving her permission to do that. And we know the lengths that Jodi went to in order to hide that trip. So whether Travis invited her or not is irrelevant to the level of cruelty she displayed when she mercilessly took his life not once, not twice, but three different times.
After the lunch break, Nurmi used the same line he used in closing during the guilt phase and the same line most criminal defense attorneys make in closing. Enter the ‘my client is not one day in her life’ defense. With this defense, criminal defense attorneys try to get the jury to think of the defendant as a human being, in their entirety.
This is an interesting approach. It is also possibly a dangerous one for Nurmi since Juan’s entire case rests on the fact that in fact, Jodi is the person, in her entirety, that she was on June 4, 2008. Juan has had experts testify that, as a whole, Jodi is a manipulative stalker and a dangerous person.
Juan’s experts have testified that all of this escalated to the point of June 4, and that it was destined to because of who Jodi is as a person. With the whole person picture that Juan has drawn for the jury, Jodi is a dangerous and manipulative person and this will probably happen again unless severe measures aren’t taken to stop her.
Will the jury buy the “Jodi is more than the events of June 4, 2008” statements that Kirk Nurmi made in his closing arguments? The first jury didn’t. They may have been deadlocked on sentencing, but they didn’t buy that one day in time in 2008 was the only time Jodi was a dangerous person. That’s why they unanimously decided she was guilty of the aggravating factor of cruelty. Nurmi used that argument, and the “mentally ill” word, whenever he could in his hopes to lead one juror down the path of mercy.
And, by lunch, a pattern with Nurmi was emerging. Whenever he lacked evidence, he slammed the State’s expert. Jen @TrialDiariesJ tweeted,
“3 [defense] Dr.’s with 30 years experience diagnosed Jodi with PTSD….except Dr. Demarte who had one year experience.”
The problem with this argument that Nurmi makes is that three doctors are not always better than one. When you have three doctors whose credibility and bias reeks to the high heavens, as his have with the court of public opinion, one doctor who wins the hearts of all may actually trump those three doctors.
All anyone needs to believe one doctor over three is to have one credible doctor to believe. Dr. Demarte knocks that out of the park in demeanor, presentation, style, and most importantly, evidence. In the court of public opinion, 3 doctors with zero evidence have been trumped by the one doctor that brought a big pile of it.
And Dr. DeMarte is indeed a doctor in the form of a PhD holder. This means she has several, several years of experience beyond the one technical one that Nurmi points to the jury. He plays a very dangerous game for Jodi by doth protesting too much over Dr. Demarte’s credentials.
As Nurmi began his closing arguments he was agreeing with Dr. Demarte. As his closing droned on he began to slam her. Nurmi then presented the ‘You should trust my expert more because I said so’ defense. He then made a slip when it comes to the infamous PTSD diagnosis. Troy Hayden @troyhaydenfox10 tweeted Nurmi said,
“We don’t know when she got PTSD, but we know she has it now.”
Nurmi has now admitted to the jury that he doesn’t know when Jodi got PTSD. This is a critical moment. Will the jury pick it up? If he doesn’t know, he can’t blame Travis Alexander and the alleged abuse for causing Jodi’s PTSD. That scratches one mitigating factor off of his list right there.
There are only two other possibilities for Jodi’s alleged PTSD then. One is that the murder was the triggering traumatic event. The others is Jodi’s alleged childhood abuse which may or may not have been proven depending on what the jury believes. Juan would later remind the jury in his closing arguments that no evidence had been provided for that either, and you can scratch that mitigating factor off of your list too.
Knowing that was a distinct possibility, Nurmi moved right onto the ‘she is too crazy to be executed’ mitigating factor. He made several hypocritical statements here, some almost right beside each other. One moment he said she had a “mental impairment” according to Jen @TrialDiariesJ. The next he is saying she had many awesome relationships in her life.
It can’t be both. If Nurmi is arguing that her mental impairments are what caused the fractures in her relationship with Travis Alexander, then he is conceding she is responsible for this crime. That’s the first point.
The second one is, if he is arguing this, he must also then concede that her mental impairments of this nature would affect all of her relationships. His point would be more credible if he didn’t keep bragging about how awesome all of Jodi’s other relationships where.
What he is trying to do is make this relationship look isolated, leading the jury to believe the reason it is isolated is because Travis was the bad guy. But his theory getting there doesn’t make any common sense. If Jodi was too “sick” to function in a regular relationship with Travis, and we do know that she was, all of her relationships would show that.
Indeed they did, all of her relationships were seriously messed up. This is what helped lead Dr. Demarte to a Borderline diagnosis. Nurmi’s “she’s too crazy to kill” mitigating factor would be more believable coming from him if he at least agreed with Dr. Demarte on that point.
That’s how the experts for the defense, and the defense in general, always look so biased. They refuse to see any other point but their own. Dr. Demarte has conceded with the defense on many points which is what has helped her look so credible in the court of public opinion.
Which side does the jury fall on? Is this jury like the last?
The judge then warned about graphic pictures entering into evidence signalling to tweeters that Nurmi was winding down, and Juan Martinez was about to go up. Nurmi continued down the slime highway for a few more moments. He would then begin a brief speech that sounded like the way an allocution would sound if a defendant was brave enough to face the victims herself and tell her own story.
Did the jury buy it? The family of the victim didn’t. They couldn’t even stomach being in the same room as the lies of the person that butchered their beloved brother. Troy Hayden tweeted,
“Alexander family just left courtroom when Nurmi began talking about #jodiarias being sorry for causing them pain.”
Nurmi closed his closing with pictures of a young Jodi and asking the jury, “Do you kill this mentally ill girl?” He urged the jury not to do it as he completed his final thoughts.
A brief recess was held for the court to take a break before closing statements from prosecutor for the State Juan Martinez would be up. Jen Wood from @TrialDiariesJ tweeted the Alexander family returned to court after the break. By no means had the tension been broken however, in fact after the break it seemed to increase in intensity.
As Juan took center stage. He started off with a powerful quote “about truth and sacrifice” as tweeted by Troy Hayden. He talked about when men landed on the moon they were “mourned by the nation” according to Jen @TrialDiariesJ. Juan talked about the “brotherhood” of humanity and asked the judge, “so compelling, isn’t it?”
His point would follow soon enough. Any story is compelling, and even believable, if it is told right. Juan Martinez then went into a long list of stories that Jodi Arias has told, none of which were true. The murder victim masturbating to a picture of a child? Not true. The letter from the killer to his family? Juan said “just wasn’t true.”
Juan Martinez, prosecutor for the State of Arizona, in closing said, nobody ever heard anything bad about the victim Travis Alexander, ever, until somebody had something to gain by saying it. He would refer to that kind of gain in legalese as “secondary gain” from that point forward in his closing. He says, the killer has something to gain by slamming him with pedophilia and child porn allegations. Juan’s point was, nobody else does, which is why you never hear anything.
A picture of Travis’s autopsy was then shown. Specifically the picture of his nearly decapitated head. In this picture, Travis’s skin is swollen and discolored and he is unrecognizable almost as a human being. That is how horrific this picture is. William Pitts tweeted that Juan showed this to the jury and said,
“This individual was ‘bad’ because he watched pornography? Look him in the face and tell him it’s bad to look at porn.”
As Juan did this, the Alexander family cried according to tweeters inside the court room. In fact, they have been crying a lot this week. If the public is noticing this, the jury definitely is as well. Juan reminded the jury this trial was not about porn, it was about premeditated murder.
Juan spent his closing reminding the jury that the mitigating factors Nurmi brought up are not factual. Juan brought his own bullet points of 9 mitigating factors on behalf of Travis Alexander. Or rather, one bullet point and a cluster of 9 sharp force wounds to the back, among many others. He then reminded the jury of the one time Jodi claims she tried to kill herself in jail with a razor. Looking at that picture creates a powerful moment one does not soon forget. Comparing that to a razor cut also creates a powerful moment the jury will likely not soon forget either.
The killer testified in the guilt phase of this trial that after her incarceration she tried to kill herself with a razor, but said she stopped because it hurt too much. Juan almost openly mocked her for that while showing the jury the 9 wounds in the back of Travis Alexander, inflicted by the killer. Juan reminded the jury of the pain that Travis suffered during his killing. @WildAboutTrial2 tweeted, “He was conscious. He was in pain.”
Juan then reminded the jury that they were allowed to choose to not believe the experts. He said to keep that mind open when you are going over the expert material. He told them to also remember that everything that Jodi has told you is just an allegation, just a story.
Juan said, not only are they just allegations, but they are hypocritical ones at that. How can you say that you are remorseful and that you loved a man and then in a next breath say but he’s a pedophile? Juan then pointed out that even Jodi’s own diaries were hypocritical.
He said none of the negative stories in Jodi’s diaries began appearing until after she killed Travis. She spoke only of her love for Travis in her diary at that. As Jen Wood @TrialDiariesJ tweeted,
“JM-After JA claims TA abused her she writes in journal TA gave her 3 soft, slow kisses.”
Juan then reminded the jury that not only is the killer a hypocrite, but so too are her witnesses who also have secondary gain to tell her stories. He reminded the jury that Dr. Geffner hadn’t even read the transcripts about the alleged choking incident that Jodi claims happened at the hands of the victim. Here’s a doctor who wants you to believe Jodi was abused, but hasn’t even read the transcripts himself.
Juan then explained where all of the reasonable doubt was lying as far as the PTSD diagnosis. He acknowledged with the jury that they were possibly confused about this because the experts disagreed. This is a very effective strategy that shows that he is not biased. The defense categorically denies anything the State alleges.
The State on the other hand just wants the truth, and are willing to make concessions on facts when…facts are facts. Juan explained the matter of the PTSD diagnosis and why it may appear confusing to this jury.
He said the defense wants you to think that’s an inexperienced psychologists fault, but it’s not. Not only is Dr. Demarte experienced, but it is the defense’s fault there is confusion with the PTSD diagnosis. Why? Because Jodi is a liar. The first PTSD diagnosis was based on a lie.
In fact, Juan said, you will be hard pressed to find anything ever that corroborates a Jodi Arias story. Juan told the jury that Geffner claimed copyright issues when it came to answering questions about Jodi’s answers. The truth is, Juan said, it was because Jodi lied in those answers that Geffner did not want to testify to them.
Juan very effectively painted a picture of a defendant who would lie on anything, and about anything, to get away with this crime. He emphasized that the jury had been played by these lies the whole time, and told them to look at this evidence from that perspective.
Juan kept reminding the jury her experts were as hypocritical as she was. He said the experts that keep throwing the number 30 years in your face are the same experts who tried to convince you that Travis contacted a 9-year-old girl for sexual purposes. He said we know that didn’t happen, you are allowed to not believe those experts.
He reminded the jury that they were required to follow the law. He said it is not Travis who is on trial here, Travis has already lost his life. He said Travis’ character is actually completely irrelevant here. He said the only character you need to question is the killers.
Nurmi didn’t like that too much and objected. That was another notable slime tactic Nurmi used frequently during Juan’s closing to break the pace and interrupt the jury’s train of thought. Everyone that was watching knew why he was doing it, which makes it a strong likelihood that at least one member of the jury did too, statistically speaking.
Juan reminded the jury whose character mattered here. The killer’s. As Jen @TrialDiariesJ tweeted,
“You need to look at the defendant’s character…her record…her history…they are trying to distract you from what she did to Travis Alexander.”
And that may have been the most interesting statement of Juan’s, out of all of his compelling statements. Not once did the defense mention Jodi’s character during his closing arguments. He did not say one good thing about her. Nurmi said a lot of bad things about a lot of people, and he called Jodi Arias a “mentally ill girl” a lot of times. But he did not say one nice thing about her.
That is not going to be lost on the jury, any more than it’s going to be lost that her own parents didn’t testify for her. And, even though they were instructed to not take a lack of allocution into account against her, that fact is not going to be lost on them either. It’s really and truly not looking good for Jodi Arias. Noting her lack of character development to the jury could very well be the home run for Juan.
Juan then went through each of the 9 things Nurmi discussed and categorically ripped every single mitigating factor to shreds. Like he always does. It isn’t difficult, he is dealing with someone who is a pathological liar and has absolutely no evidence to corroborate her claims.
Every time she says something else that isn’t true, he has more to use against her. He started with the age, noting that Nurmi liked to use the word “girl” in his allocutions to the jury. Juan Martinez scratched that one off the list for the jury by reminding them that, if being 27 was an excuse to get away with murder we would all be doing it. Bam. Done. Next?
On the PTSD diagnoses? As William Pitts tweeted @william_pitts tweeted,
“On the [Dr. Geffner calling Dr. Demarte] asinine comment. If he has to resort to name calling, it shows the weakness of his position. And you can ignore his opinion.”
As far as the abuse allegations against Travis Alexander are concerned, Monica Lindstrom reported Juan said, “Is there anything to corroborate? No.” Juan then rattled off a list of things Jodi Arias did that could be titled “Creepy Things Jodi Arias Did.”
That list would include the voice mail she left after she killed him, how she invited him to a play….after she killed him. Juan pointed out that all of these creepy things show that it was not Jodi that was the one that was abused. And, he said, that’s why the defense doesn’t want you to believe Dr. Demarte.
Juan pointed out to the jury that it’s a little weird that the defense only wants you to believe the parts of Dr. Demarte’s testimony that fit their puzzle. The parts that they don’t like they will name call her down to Dr. Death and mock her in court almost to the point of slander. Otherwise, when her words fit their puzzle it is worth gold.
Juan reminded the jury it doesn’t work that way in the legal system. The Gold Patrol tweeted Juan said,
“#JodiArias No domestic violence = no PTSD. The violence never happened.”
The mitigating factor of no prior criminal history was also brought up by Juan. He crossed that one off for the jury pretty quickly as well. According to Troy Hayden @troyhaydenfox10,
“Juan on Jodi Arias. She had no criminal history. That’s an expectation of society. You don’t give her a gold star.”
Juan conceded the mitigating factor of Borderline Personality was correct. But he said, that doesn’t mean she didn’t know the difference between right and wrong when she killed Travis three times. Bam. Next? Juan moved onto the ‘wooden spoon made me do it’ defense. As he did, Wild about Trial @WildAboutTrial2 tweeted,
“JodiArias looked up for a second. Looked pathetic, not in a mean way. Meaning defeated.”
Nurmi had previously stated in closing that leaving the house at a young age could be proof that Jodi is abused. Juan squashed this with one sentence. He said she was grounded and that’s why she ran away, and that does not equate to abuse. Trial Diaries then tweeted,
“Juan says the records show Jodi was a spoiled child…he will leave it to the jury to see if she was an abused child.”
When it came to the mitigating factor that includes the words “remorse” and “Jodi Arias” in the same sentence, the conversation was a short one. Juan simply said, she is not remorseful. How can she be if she is saying she is remorseful one day and the next calling Travis a pedophile. So as far as that mitigating factor is concerned, Bam. Next? At the end of the day, Trial Diaries tweeted that Juan Martinez said,
“If you agree there is no mitigation you shall return a verdict of death.”
That would be the last the jury would hear from Juan before they were given the case and moved into deliberations. That wouldn’t be the last of closing arguments though. Kirk Nurmi would have one more chance up to bat to give final thoughts in rebuttal to the State’s closing. That would be the end for that day though, and the jury went home on the first day of closing arguments thinking about that one.
When Kirk Nurmi went up to bat to rebut the State’s closing the next day, he ticked off a lot of State side supporters. Nurmi’s approach was not to leave lasting words of remorse of the killer with the jury, but rather to convince them the State was the bad guy. Instead of traveling down remorse road, Nurmi took the slime highway with the “let’s forget the murder victim exists and remember the killer is the real victim” strategy.
It was not received well. A lot of what Nurmi presented in his final arguments was attack mode. Just like Juan had said the day prior, when Nurmi doesn’t have evidence, he goes for the personal attack. Nurmi proved Juan right in his closing, leaving no stone unturned.
First, the victim. Nurmi told the jury it was not their duty to remember the victim. He said it is sad that this happened yes, but that’s not what you are being called to remember. He said it’s not, what happened to Travis it is, “Should you kill this girl?” As Troy Hayden tweeted,
“To call the death of Travis Alexander tragic is right, but that’s not what jury instructions ask you to do.”
It’s very strange that Nurmi doesn’t want the jury to remember Travis when it serves the State’s argument. But he does want them to remember Travis when he is making an argument for abuse or pedophilia. Which is it Nurmi? You can’t have both. Either you want the jury to remember Travis all of the time, or you don’t think he is relevant in this case.
Nurmi then called everybody stateside liars. This included the State, Chris and Sky Hughes, Deanna Reid, and Bishop Vernon Parker. Yes, you read that right.
Nurmi wants the jury to believe that everybody, from the State of Arizona to the Bishop, is a liar, unless they are believing the words of Jodi Arias. Nurmi acknowledges he has no evidence for his claims, but asked the jury to just take his and Jodi’s word for it. He also said, any lies that come out of those mouths are just “distractions.”
Nurmi also accused the State of being guilty of “distracting” the jury with pedophilia allegations. Nurmi also wanted to talk about orgasms in his closing, and the statement that Travis made on the phone sex tape that he wanted to hear. Is that relevant to whether Jodi should live or die? Nurmi thought so.
At this point in his closing, now all of a sudden when it came to talk of orgasms, Nurmi wants the jury to remember Travis Alexander. He basically said anything I say is the truth and anything State says is a “distraction.” He really wants the jury to listen to the phone sex tape again from that perspective.
Nurmi then got personal with the jury. As if it was not bad enough that he had already started getting excited about orgasms in front of them, he then wanted to ‘go there’ with them. Referring to Travis’s 12-year-old girl comment, Nurmi asked the women on the jury if any of the men in their lives would ever make a comment about 12-year-old orgasms.
This, after accusing the State of causing distractions. This was objected to by Juan. That objection was sustained and the jury was asked to pretend they were never asked personal questions about orgasms. It would be more attacks from Nurmi before he finished his final thoughts for the Jodi Arias trial.
Remorse, apologies, and the truth about Jodi’s accountability for this crime was not the last thing the jury heard before they went into deliberations. With Nurmi’s closing, the case rested and was put in the jury’s hands. Trial Diaries reported there were “lots of friends and family crying for Travis Alexander” as the case went into the jury’s hands. Jodi supporters reacted in their own special kind of way. As Juan Martinez said, when it comes to this defense when they lack truth and evidence they go into attack mode.
The Jodi supporters are proving him right. A comment that has been made by one of them has been making the rounds online and can be seen in the slideshow. Looks like even the defense knows it’s not looking good for Jodi Arias right now. Soon this chapter of this nightmare will be over for the family of Travis Alexander.
The jury deliberated yesterday for the better part of the afternoon, for a total of 3 hours and 20 minutes according to Trial Diaries. Jen @TrialDiariesJ reported that the schedule for the jurors will be from approximately 9 AM in the mornings until 4:30 P.M. This is their daily schedule until they reach a verdict. They will be returning
The next thing we will know in this case will be the moment the Alexanders have been waiting for since they received a fateful call in June 2008. How will their brother’s killer pay for her crime? The moment the Alexander family has been waiting for can arrive at any moment.
That will be the moment that the jury turns in their forms with one of two boxes checked, [LIFE] or [DEATH] for Jodi Arias. A copy of that form courtesy of Juan Martinez Prosecutor Support Page can be seen in the slideshow. The same support page has also supplied links to CBS 5 and Fox 10 to watch the live stream of the verdict in the Jodi Arias trial. Will it be life in prison, or the death penalty for Jodi Arias?