Advertisements
 

A Sea Of Blue

April 13, 2015

Travis Alexander you were loved by an entire nation.

The courtroom in Maricopa County Arizona was a sea of blue today.  The family, the jurors who came back and sat in the jury dock to see the final chapter of this travesty of a trial, everywhere you looked there was blue.  Blue in memory of a man that almost none save the family knew, but a man who an entire nation had come to love.  Ten of the jurors plus an alternate from the retrial and several from the first trial all wearing blue and blue ribbons and blue wristbands because this is how much this mans life and death has affected them.  Conspicuously absent was Juror 17.

The family of Travis Victor Alexander walked up to the podium one last time this morning, one by one sobbing as they begged “Today I am a Judge” Stephens to give them at least some modicum of peace and throw the evil entity known as Stabby Einstein in jail for the rest of her hopefully exceedingly long natural life.  Stephen did not speak, my guess being that he is at the very end of his frayed emotional rope.  The strain on his face the last time he spoke was a live thing.

Travis’ sisters went up one at a time and spoke poignantly of the brother they loved so very much, now long dead.   They spoke through tears that threatened to spill over into gut wrenching wails of torment at any moment and it was only by sheer force of will that they held them back.  They brought us back to the memory of Travis, dead and decaying in his shower for five days and relayed that they felt his spirit was screaming for someone to find him.  They went through once happy and now gut wrenching memories of their big brother, so good, so kind, so giving and what a large part of their lives they were.  There was anger at Stabby, anger at a judicial system that they felt had let them down and rage at the rights afforded the murderer as opposed to those of a dead man.

Hillary spoke of how she has had to completely block Travis from her mind in order to continue to function.  It was perhaps the most heartbreaking thing I have ever heard.

Tanisha spoke eloquently but the heavy sadness she carried with her conjured images of Sisyphus having to push that huge boulder up the mountain only to watch it roll down and have to start all over again.  The futility of it was not lost on anyone I don’t think.  She said she and the family had tried to get Stabby to take a deal of natural life and no appeals and Stabby refused.  It would have saved them the second trial and millions of taxpayers money but no, Stabby would not have it.  The Judge began to nod in agreement as Tanisha continued to speak.  I watched with rapt attention as a seasoned Jurist worked very hard to keep her face neutral and not react to the pain laid out before her.

They went through the lies that Stabby had told and how she had killed Travis not once, but three times with the lies she had told and how she had dragged the name of a good and decent man through the mud.  They told the judge that they understood all of the delays she allowed the defense and actually apologized to her that she too had had to go through this again.

Samantha went last and spoke of how she had seen Travis only a couple of weeks before his death.  How he had been excited about his book. She expressed her disgust at Stabby using that book as part of her completely ridiculous defense.  She told the Judge of Stabby being at the memorial, having the same smirk on her face as she did in her booking photo.  She expressed her appreciation to Judge Stephens for seeing this through to the end.

The Judge paid rapt attention to what these poor broken women had to say and I saw her quickly dab at her eyes twice.  The pain they all share and the pain they shared with all of us this one last time was almost to much even for the judge.

Juan Martinez this one last time spoke for Travis.  He was subdued but his words, so passionate reverberated throughout the hushed courtroom.  Gone was the pitbull and in his place was a man who felt the pain of this entire family and chose to bear some of that weight on his own shoulders.  The fire was out and in its place was an earnestness that the Judge needed to do what was the right and decent thing to do.    He spoke of hope and how that hope had been dashed by a lone holdout, but that now there was hope that Stabby would never see the light of day again.   Gone were the wild hand gestures and the pacing.  He spoke of the butchery of Travis because that is what it was.  He spoke of how his screams and his cries of pain ring in their ears.  How they hope he was unconscious when the knife was used to slash his throat, how it was something they held on to.  He told the judge how they could not get the brutality out of their minds and the extreme distress their brother must have felt.  How that two minutes must have been an eternity.  He said he hoped that the judge would remember that out of one side of her mouth she praised him and out of the other side she called him a pedophile. How she fabricated evidence, how she tormented the family.

There was a 10 minute recess so that the Judge could read whatever Stabby had to say since she didn’t appear to want to say it in public.

THIS WILL BE THE CURSE LADEN PORTION OF THIS BLOG

Mom of Satan’s most beloved child got up to address the court.  She stated that she was the only one from Jodi’s family there today because of financial hardships. Gotta get the puke bucket, hang on.  Mom of Stabby said that her daughter tried to be a good and wonderful fucking human being until she met the worst mistake of her life and had to fight for her life because Travis was abusive.  Oh you fucking cunt.  As a mother she felt like she should have been able to protect her.  The can cage her, and strip her of her rights but they cannot take away her beautiful soul.  You know that beautiful soul that slaughtered a man.  Mom does not condone what stabby has done but she totally gets stabbing a man 27 times and shooting him and slitting his throat.  Stabby has touched so many lives with her story. BARF.  Although stabby is still alive they have lost their daughter although she has dreams of seeing Stabby walk free.  Stabby has always helped people less fortunate than her, she has written letters for people and sang for people and done many things to help inmates.  Oh she is now praying for judge Stephens.  Awwwww. BARF.

OMG IT IS GOING TO SPEAK.

She wants to respond to a few things that have been said.  Travis’ family refused to settle not her (I WOULD JUST LIKE TO POINT OUT  FOR THOSE THAT MISSED IT THAT STABBY WANTED TO SETTLE FOR SECOND DEGREE AND 10 YEARS, THAT WAS HERE IDEA OF SETTLE) The Alexanders wanted natural life with no appeals.

She said that it would hurt her wittle family if she got the death penalty.  She is actually standing there talking and not only is she not remorseful she is fucking mad.  OMFG she is SATANS DAUGHTER.  The cunt just said she does remember the moment the knife went into Travis’ throat and he was conscious. He was still trying to attack her. Wait what?  he had all those stab wounds and he was still trying to attack her so she slit his throat?  Way to take that little bit of solace away from the family you fucking whore.  She then said the gunshot wound did come first and Juan and Detective Flores got together and changed the story.  Welcome to the beginnings of story number 4 for the state funded appeal.

Willmott went on for about a hundred hours but nobody cared.

Well, what do you know.  Judge Stephens picked today to be a Judge.  Judge Stephens just looks pissed off.  I’d be pissed off too after that little tirade by Stabby.

“The aggravating and mitigating factors have been considered. As aggravation the court finds the crime was especially cruel, the crime involved at least two deadly weapons, the crime took substantial planning and preparation, the defendant did not render aid to the victim, the defendant went to great lengths to cover up her crime, the defendant destroyed evidence at the crime scene and has also found as an aggravating factor the emotional and financial harm on the family of the victim.   The court finds any mitigation presented is not sufficiently substantial to call for leniency and a NATURAL LIFE SENTENCE IS APPROPRIATE. IT IS ORDERED THAT THE DEFENDENT BE INCARCERATED FOR THE REMAINDER OF HER NATURAL LIFE. Just let that sink in for a moment.  I hope the cunt lives to be 753

Nurmi took a moment to beg for the millionth time to be released from this whore and with that court was adjourned.

That is it everybody.  The Stabby Arias trial is at an end.  May the Alexander family finally find some peace.

RBMD peacing the fuck out!!

PayPal Donate Button

Please consider a small donation to help ensure content.  All donations are greatly appreciated.

Advertisements

While I Sit Back And Await A Credible Source

March 17, 2015

My goodness things have been happening in Stabby land haven’t they.  It was “reported” that Stabby freaked out and had to be four point restrained (turned out that one wasn’t actually exactly true), Stabby  has had her privileges taken away which is totally true because Sheriff Joe said so, issued a press release and ACTUAL press reported on it.  Stabby is now trying to have her sentencing moved up, Stabby is trying to have her sentencing moved back.  You get the picture.

Now, Stabby’s good buddy ChaCha has allegedly had her name found on 14-(fourteen) bank accounts belonging to Stabby in her attempts to hide money and a hundred billion people are in all kinds of trouble with the IRS.  I’m sure by tomorrow I will be all of them.  Want to know what is funny about todays BOMBSHELL news.  The lack of  the reporting of it by one single credible news source anywhere.  Does anyone besides me find that odd?    Actually News outlets have been breaking their necks in an effort to make sure that everybody knows where it came from but nobody is looking into it.

I don’t know about you all, but I’m going to make some popcorn.

What do you think?

RBMD peacing the fuck out.

EDIT:  Well, I moved that fucking plane again (renae, you may want to stay out of your backyard) took my computer tower hauling cable traintrack walk, was everybody on the internet for a couple of minutes each, made my way around the entire world and now I’m back aaaaaaand I’m still waiting.  Just sayin.  Oh yeah and I’m out of popcorn so eversnark you’re up.

Also, I want to remind everyone that we are a civilized people here.  Play nice with the trolls.

EDIT of EDIT   cricket


A Really Big Mean Dog Rant About Justice

March 3, 2015

Everybody needs to take a deep cleansing breath right about now.

As your Queen/Dean of Fuckery/Law Professor/resident sarcasm expert, sometimes it is up to me to make the hard decisions and I’m making one now.  Unfortunately, the things I am about to say are no doubt going to upset some of you, but I speak from experience and from a place that has come to accept that life is not all sunshine and rainbows and unicorns.

I have watched twitter today, for the first time in months.  I’m very sorry that I did.  There has been fighting, there has been name calling, there has been freaked out posts every 2 seconds.  Every time Juan, or Flores or one of the Alexanders moves there are 50 bajillion tweets about what it all means.  I’m about to tell you.  IT MEANS NOTHING.

The Jury has been out for a long time.  They have already come back and had to have a dynamite charge given.  This means that as of this minute they are deadlocked.  There is no conspiracy, there is no stealth juror.  If anything, the weight of knowing you are the person responsible for the death of a living person, even one as vile and undeserving of that life is maybe to much to have to carry for some of them for the rest of their natural lives.  The Jury did not give an oath to give death because if they had there would have been no need for a penalty phase.  They said they would be able to impose death if they felt it was merited. There is a huge difference there.  A grand canyon sized one.

I believe strongly that we may have a hung jury. AGAIN.  I’m not saying that is a hundred percent, but I would say that odds are good.  Now I’m going to say the thing that is going to bother some of you.  If we have a hung Jury, so fucking what.  So what if the jury hangs again.  Stabby is still convicted, Stabby is still going to Perryville and Stabby is still going to be sentenced.  And if anyone thinks that Not a Judge would give her anything less than natural life is out of their minds because her career as a jurist would be over.  In theory she could, but odds are slim to none.  And in reality this solves oh so many problems.  With a death penalty Stabby can appeal for the next 20 years.  20 more years of the spotlight every time she files an appeal.  What if during one of those appeals she is granted a new trial and the Alexanders have to go through this all over again.  What about them?  I know they want her to die right now.  And I totally get that, I really truly do.  I’d want her to die. But being sentenced to death and the sentence being carried out are two entirely different animals.  What if Arizona abolishes the death penalty before her number is up after all of those appeals?  The way things are going with lethal injection I wouldn’t be even remotely surprised.

Imagine for a moment what natural life in Perryville would be like for the special little snowflake that is Stabby fucking Einstein.  All of my sources tell me that she will be a target from the moment she sets foot in the place.  Imagine the cred that someone who managed to shank her.  People do get killed in prison sometimes, but it is not a rampant thing like they would have you believe on TV, and besides, the inmates would probably have more fun air holing her a couple of times then flat out killing her.   Imagine what it will be like for her when the spotlight is turned off for the last time and she has to assimilate into a prison where she is basically hated.  Where everyone has heard all the versions of her trumped up bullshit.  No more trips to the courthouse, no more being the center of attention, no more anything.  Just spending time in her 4 x 6 cell with nothing to do but read and think about how it was her that got her where she is now.

A lifetime of prison food.  A lifetime of prison entertainment and prison noise and prison showers.  A lifetime of absolute misery.  I like the idea of watching her slowly rot in prison.  Don’t get me wrong, I will be doing the happy dance along with the rest of you if it is death, but I may do an even bigger one if it is LWOP.  Life for this particular person is a much worse punishment than death as far as I am concerned.  Does she deserve to die?  In my opinion yes she does for the horrific acts perpetrated on Travis Alexander.  Will she die?  I think not.

Another thought.  Do you think that Travis would want revenge or repentance?   Think about that, and the man he was.  Do you really think that a man the caliber of Travis Alexander would be screaming for her death or do you think he would try and find it in his heart to forgive her for what she has done?  I think Travis was that kind of man.  I think (although of course I can not know) but I think he would think that her having to live with what she has done for the rest of her natural life would be the ultimate punishment.

And that is my two cents on deliberations as they stand.

Justice in whatever form it comes for Travis Alexander and please god let his family have some peace.

RBMD peacing the fuck out.

 

 


The Stabby Arias Penalty Phase Re-Trial The Fucktards Of The World Unite Edition

February 5, 2015

Dr. DeMarte is quite possibly the best expert witness in the history of ever -Arizona

Hai Everybody.  Your Law Professor/Dean of Fuckery/Doctor of Doctoring/PhD of Sarcasm/ Stabby hater extraordinaire/and purveyor of facts is back to regale you with yet more tales from the courtroom.  Before we get to that, I have a question.  The coffee mugs.  I cancelled the order because of the bullshit that was being bandied about regarding my character, but have since reconsidered because fuck them.  If I don’t complete the order I am on the hook for a 200 set up charge (I have documentation for that) which they are willing to let me pay a little at a time, or I can go ahead with my original plan and order them.  As I have said a hundred million times, I do not want payment up front, I want to wait till I have them, but does anybody still want them?  If you do then I will go ahead and get them.  If not that is cool too.  Just please let me know.

CarlT came up with the perfect video for today and POINTS for Carl cuz this shit is funny.  I dedicate it to those of you that know who you are. Nobody on this blog.  I sincerely hope you enjoy it because I sincerely mean it. Sincerely.

Now, on to todays fuckery. Alfred E. was up to bat and started the day with good morning to Dr. DeMarte. She declined to reply. Alfred E let his douche flag fly immediately when he said I’m sorry, I didn’t hear you. You could tell right away that it was going to be a spectacularly antagonistic day just by that one interaction. Alfred. E. Isadick demanded Dr. DeMarte’s CV since going over it infinitum yesterday apparently wasn’t good enough and also if there is one thing that good old Nurmi can do, it is waste time.

He asked about a couple of other Death Penalty cases that she worked on and when pressed she said with a lot of snark that it was 3 cases. Alfred E. actually called her a defacto Dr. Death. Juan immediately lost his mind and was darted without incident. Nurmi asked her how many hours she had put into this case and DeMarte who was definitely NOT THE ONE today answered “several”. It was becoming very apparent that Dr. DeMarte and Alfred E Numnuts may actually hate each other. Not just strongly dislike, but hate. He asked her how much she makes an hour and she answered $300 and worked more than 50 but less than a hundred hours on this case.

Nurmi Suggested that violent relationships follow a pattern to which the good doctor vehemently disagreed. He then had her define physical and emotional abuse because someone in another courtroom or on the street or in another state might not by now know the definitions of those fucking terms. He actually asked her to explain the law of attraction and I laughed so hard I hurt my side (I don’t have documentation for that) when she said that it is not a psychological practicum.

Dr. DeMarte said that personality disorders are enduring and begin early in life. Nurmi is intent on riding the mental illness train and when Dr. DeMarte says she prefers the term psychological disorder the Anal Wart of the defense team says “you understand that I don’t care about your preferences”. I fully expected the pitbull to stand up, march over to Nurmi and punch him directly in the face, but Detective Flores, dog handler extraordinaire managed to get the catch pole on him before that could happen. Nurmi then said that Dr. DeMarte did not diagnose Stabby as having adjustment disorder. He told her to look at the last page of her notes. She began her answer with I think and Alfred E. was all up in her face again with I don’t care what you think and Juan roared an objection that was probably heard in New Mexico. Alfred E. was being so aggressive that it was definitely turning the Jury off in a big way. Because he is a fucking tool he failed to notice. He asked if borderline personality disorder is a serious mental illness and she agrees that it is. Dr. DeMarte is holding up well under what I can only describe as an outright attack.
Dr. Demarte says that Nurmi is only reading part of the report and not where she diagnosed adjustment disorder. Alfred E. asked if she needed to read it again. She said no, but maybe he needed to read it again. I think the court reporter wanted to high five her right there but it would have been bad form.

Alfred E. was positively dripping sarcasm, or maybe salsa from last nights Taco Bell as he tried to get in that Geffner said that the PTSD test was a diagnostic impression and not a diagnosis. Wait what? They have been saying since the first trial that the bitch had PTSD, now she doesn’t? The Jurors certainly didn’t miss it because everybody took notes on that one.

Alfred E. Asshat asked if BPD makes a person childlike? Dr. DeMarte stated emphatically that she never testified to that. Are BPD’s emotional? DeMarte said yes. 10 minute break.

Back from the break Nurmi is riding this Borderline Personality Disorder right into the ground. He asked if some people are born vulnerable to the disorder (now it’s a disorder again, guess he forgot that his special little snowflake is mentally ill) Dr. DeMarte says yes it could develop in those who are genetically predisposed if the persons feelings are continuously invalidated. Asked for examples in Stabby’s background DeMarte said that Stabby and her parents did not agree. When parents don’t understand why the child is upset and sais stop it it perpetuates the environment. BPD is hard on parents and they do not know how to react.

Dr. DeMarte explains the fear of abandonment and the fact that Stabby felt a need to constantly check Travis’ myspace account and emails. She also suggests that Stabby got her boob job and new car while with Daryl in an attempt to hang on to him. With Matt McCartney when he told her the relationship was over she reacted by extremely idealizing him. Stabby told Dr. DeMarte she could change depending on who she dated.

Nurmi next demanded proof from Dr. DeMarte that Stabby had suicidal ideations. Zenya(the chick from yesterday)mentioned that Stabby wrote a suicidal letter in High School, she wrote about wanting to die in her own journals and mom of Stabby said she had called her and said she wanted to die. There was no evidence that Stabby got any help for that. Lunch was mercifully called and both Juan and Dr. DeMarte were led away without incident.

Once court reconvened Nurmi wanted to know about Stabby’s relationships with earlier boyfriends. He asked if it was true that Stabby broke it off with Brewer. Dr. DeMarte said she couldn’t recall. From yesterday I remember her saying that Daryl wanted distance from Stabby. Asshole, I mean Nurmi hs now picked a fight about the amount of cordial stabby remained with many of her ex boyfriends. He actually said to Dr. DeMarte “I understand you are not aware of much but, and he was cut off by a thunderous objection which was sustained in record time.

Dr.DeMarte said Stabby breaking up with Daryl and going right to Travis was part of the pattern of Borderline Personality Disorder. Nurmi stated that she turned herself into a worker for PPL, converted to Mormonism and became his sexual plaything in order to please him and totally not because she was a conniving slut with one or more STD’s.

Next he questioned her about the supposed PTSD. Can someone with BPD also have PTSD. DeMarte said that yes it can happen. But Stabby doesn’t suffer from PTSD according to our interpretation of the testing. DeMarte says that is correct. Nurmi wants to know when is the best time to Diagnose PTSD? DeMarte says there is no set time. She is getting a little hostile herself because Numbnuts keeps trying to put words in her mouth.

ChaCha is holding poor little Stabbykins as the mean old state witness shreds her totally made up mitigating factors. Dr. DeMarte says that the way Stabby described the Bobby Juarez incident wasn’t PTSD. Nurmi slides in there that Travis kicked, choked, slapped and grabbed Stabby’s shoulders, which has zero to do with what they are talking about right now.

Since none of the questions he has asked thus far seem to be going his way, Alfred E. Eatadick decided to attack the length of time Dr. DeMarte has been practicing. He iasked if she had been licensed for about a year when giving Stabby the initial tests. DeMarte said NO it WAS a year. Nurmi tried again. Well, about a year. NO, IT WAS A YEAR was the answer, again.

He wanted to know if DeMarte was aware that their expert was licensed in 1980? Are you aware they are published in and the pitbull roared objection and the vet deployed another dart.

Nurmi isn’t giving up on this line of questioning because maybe he can make the jury think she doesn’t know what she is talking about. He asked if she did lectures or peer reviews when you were testing Stabby. She said no and we had a sidebar. Back from sidebar Nurmi continued the character assassination (this seems to be a running theme) So you didn’t publish, do research or give lectures on PTSD. DeMarte answered that was correct. Nurmi then tried to have her disqualified as an expert witness to which Sometimes Judge Stephens told him to eat a dick and ask a fucking question. Nurmi told her that both of the doctors that diagnosed Stabby with PTSD had over 30 years of experience (and wheelbarrows full of money). Juan calls for a sidebar since Nurmi seems to be the one testifying.

Back from the sidebar Alfred E. Asshat seems to have toned it down maybe a little. He asked if you can’t just look at someone and say whether they have PTSD? You have to be trained right? DeMarte agreed to that statement. Nurmi pointed out again that the doctor had only one year of training when she interviewed Stabby. You were only licensed for a year when you gave Stabby her tests? Dr. DeMarte may need a dart from the vet soon because she is getting a little fed up with this questioning. She said that experience doesn’t come the minute you become licensed. She fended off all accusations that she was not inexperienced and she kept her cool while doing so.

Changing gears again Nurmi asked why Dr. DeMarte did not read Travis’ journals. She retorts that she was not hired to evaluate Mr. Alexander. He then asked if Travis was abused wouldn’t that be important. Juan at this point objected that this is not mitigating factors. There is yet another sidebar and the guiness world record book just tore out their last page and started a new one. After the sidebar, DeMarte reiterates that she was hired to evaluate Stabby not Travis. Nurmi then says, and I’m not kidding, “so your case review is incomplete?” DeMarte comes back immediately with No, I was evaluating Stabby.

Moving on to victims of domestic violence Alfred E asks if victims don’t always report. DeMarte agrees that this is true. Nurmi said that Travis was telling people he didn’t want Stabby around but he continued to contact her (take that however you want, me I will be visiting the puke bucket). DeMarte stated that Travis did not like her intrusive behavior. Do you think Travis loved Stabby? DeMarte said that in her opinion that he did early in the relationship. The jury is no longer taking notes. Nurmi seems to think that Travis not only knew that Stabby had BPD but took advantage of it to have sex with her. Dr. DeMarte shook her head and emphatically said NO! Nurmi asked the Dr. about Travis portraying himself as a virgin. She agreed that he wasn’t telling people he was having sex. She does however disagree that he was selling himself as a virgin, he just wasn’t advertising he was having sex.

Nurmi brings up a text where he talks to Michelle about an invasion of privacy but that he was still having sex with Stabby at that time. DeMarte replied that he liked having sex with her because she was willing to literally do anything in the bedroom but he did not like her behavior of invading his personal space, his privacy, his emails and his social media sites.

And with that court was mercifully called for the day. We are in recess until Monday at 9:30am

RBMD peacing the fuck out

PayPal Donate Button

Hai. If you enjoy my writing please consider a small donation so I can keep writing.  All donations are greatly appreciated and completely voluntary. Thank you.


The Motion Ruling I Promised You I Would Fix.

January 16, 2015

 

 

Don’t act surprised, we all knew I couldn’t help myself.

Disclaimer:  I AM NOT REALLY A JUDGE. I AM AWARE I AM NOT A JUDGE AND I AM IN NO WAY SERIOUSLY INTENDING FOR ANYONE TO BELIEVE THAT I AM A JUDGE. I JUST PLAY ONE ON MY BLOG.  ALSO, I TOTALLY JACKED THIS SIXTEEN ITEM MOTIONS JUDGEMENT FROM JEFF GOLD AND CHANGED IT TO HOW IT,IN MY OPINION SHOULD READ. BECAUSE THIS IS WHAT YOU DO WHEN YOU JACK SOMEONE’S STUFF HERE IS THE LINK TO THE REAL DOCUMENT. http://www.thegoldpatrol.com/

SUPERIOR COURT OF KELLY

DISTRICT OF JUAN COUNTY

CLERK OF THE COURT-STABBY’S PENCIL

HON. RBMD

STATE OF FUCKED UP JURISTS and JUAN M MARTINEZ

v.

STABBY ANAL EINSTEIN(001) ALFRED E. NURMI

JENNY FROM THE CELL BLOCK    CHA CHA DE LA HOSA (UNDERBOSS)

RULING

The Court has considered the defendant’s  COMPLETELY RIDICULOUS AND FRIVILOUS Motion to Dismiss the State’s Notice of Intent to Seek the Death Penalty Due to Defendant’s Inability to Present a Complete Case for Life (WHATEVER THE FUCK THAT EVEN MEANS) filed September 26, 2014 (with attachments BECAUSE WHY NOT), the defendant’s Motion to Dismiss State’s Notice of Intent to Seek the Death Penalty Due to being whiny bitches October 1, 2014, the State’s Objection to Motion to Dismiss State’s Notice of Intent to Seek the Death Penalty Due to defendant’s Inability to Present a Complete Case for Life filed October 6, 2014, the State’s Objection to Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Notice to Intent to Seek Death Penalty Due to Continue State Misconduct filed October 10, 2014, Motion to Dismiss State’s Notice of Intent to Seek the Death Penalty Due to still being whiny bitches Supplement #1 filed October 24, 2014, the defendant’s Motion to Dismiss All Charges with Prejudice and/or in the Alternative to Dismiss the State’s Notice of Intent to Seek the Death Penalty BECAUSE THAT SOUNDED REALLY FUCKING COOL WHEN ALFRED E. NURMI THOUGHT OF IT AND HE HAD A BLANK MOTION FORM HANDY both filed on November 10, 2014, the State’s Motion for Discover (Compaq Presario Computer)filed November 13, 2014, the State’s Motion for Sanctions (Compaq Presario Computer) filed November 16, 2014, the State’s Motion to Strike (Compaq Presario Computer) filed November 18, 2014, the State’s Objection to Defendant’s  Motion to Dismiss All Charges with Prejudice and/or in the Alternative to Dismiss the State’s Notice of Intent to Seek the Death Penalty because it sounded really fucking cool and a bunch of other horseshit that doesn’t matter anyway(NOTE TO SELF, FIND OUT IF NURMI THINKS HE IS GETTING PAID BY THE PAGE.) filed November 20, 2014, the Defendant’s Motion for Reconsideration: Motion to Dismiss State’s Notice of Intent to Seek the Death Penalty Due to Defendant’s Inability to Present a Complete Case for Life(SERIOUSLY DOES ANYONE EVEN KNOW IF THAT IS A THING) filed November 26, 2014, Objection to Defendant’s Motion for Reconsideration: Motion to Dismiss State’s Notice of Intent to Seek the Death Penalty Due to Defendant’s Inability to Present a Complete Case for Life filed December 1, 2014, YOU KNOW WHAT, LETS JUST MAKE THIS A LOT EASIER FOR EVERYONE READING AND SAY WE ARE GOING TO DEAL WITH A BUNCH OF STUPID TIME WASTING MOTIONS THAT I CAN ONLY ASSUME COME TO ONE OF THE 4 IDIOTS OF THE APOCALYPSE IN THIER DREAMS AND ANSWERS FROM THE STATE TO SAID MOTIONS.

Prosecutorial misconduct is not merely the result of legal error, negligence, mistake, or insignificant impropriety, but, taken as a whole, amounts to intentional conduct which the prosecutor knows to be improper and prejudicial. State v. Aguilar, 217 Ariz. 235, 172 P.3d 423 (App. 2007). To prove prosecutorial misconduct, the proponent must show : (1) the State’s action was improper; and (2) a reasonable likelihood exists that the misconduct could have affected the jury’s verdict, thereby denying the defendant a fair trial. State v. Ramos, 235 Ariz. 230, 330 P.3d 987 (App. 2014); State v. Montano, 204 Ariz. 413, 65 P.3d 61 (2003); State v.Atwood, 171 Ariz. 576, 832 P.2d 593 (1992). To prevail upon a claim of prosecutorial misconduct, a defendant must demonstrate that the prosecutor’s misconduct so infected the trial with unfairness as to make the resulting conviction a denial of due process. Prosecutorial misconduct sufficient to justify reversal must be so pronounced and persistent that it permeates the entire atmosphere of the trial. State v. Edmisten, 220 Ariz. 517, 207 P.3d 770 (2009). There is a distinction between simple prosecutorial error and misconduct that is so egregious that it raises concerns over the integrity and fundamental fairness of the trial. AND ONE THAT ANY FIRST YEAR LAW STUDENT SHOULD PROBABLY KNOW State v. Minnitt, 203 Ariz. 431, 438, 55 P.3d774 (2002); Pool v. Superior Court, 139 Ariz. 98, 105, 677 P.2d 261, 268 (1984). Conduct is egregious when the material at issue was highly significant to the primary jury issue with the potential to have an important effect on the jury’s determination. Donnelly v.DeChristoforo, 416 U.S. 637, 647 (1974). The prosecutor has a duty to learn of any favorable evidence known to others acting on the government’s behalf in the case, including the police. It is the duty of the State as a whole to conduct prosecutions honorably and in compliance with the law. Kyles v. Whitley, 514 U.S. 419, 437 (1995). The trial judge is in the best position to determine the atmosphere of the trial, the circumstances surrounding the incident, the manner in which any objectionable statement was made, and its possible effect on the jury and trial. Statev. Nelson, 229 Ariz. 180, 273 P.3d 632 (2012): State v. Koch, 138 Ariz. 99, 673 P.2d 297 (1983). The prosecutor has wide discretion in deciding whether to seek the death penalty. Allowing prosecutors the discretion to seek the death penalty is constitutional. State v. Roque, 213 Ariz. 193, 226, 141 P.3d 368 (2006); State v. Spears, 184 Ariz. 277, 291, 908 P.2d 1062(1996).

Each BULLSHIT allegation of prosecutorial misconduct claimed by Defendant STABBY ANAL EINSTEIN will be discussed below AND WE WILL FIND OUT EXACTLY HOW EINSTEIN-Y SHE IS.

1. Potential mitigation witnesses will not testify. Defendant claims possible(PLEASE NOTE THE WORDS POTENTIAL AND POSSIBLE, THEY ARE KIND OF IMPORTANT. JUST SAYIN’) mitigation witnesses will not speak with defense counsel and others will not testify at the penalty phase retrial for fear of reprisal and/or “cyberbullying”. Defendant provided PROBABLY FORGED AND OR COERCED affidavits to support her claim in the attachments to the Motion to Dismiss State’s Notice of Intent to Seek the Death Penalty Due to Defendant’s Inability to Present a Complete Case for Life(WE NEED TO CHANGE THAT IT JUST SOUNDS WRONG) filed under seal(BECAUSE THE DEFENSE ARE A BUNCH OF BIG FAT PUSSIES)  on September 26, 2014. In addition, the Court has reviewed the information provided in the sealed supplements filed on January 5, 2015 and January 7, 2015. In the defendant’s motion to reconsider filed November 26, 2014, Defendant STABBY ANAL EINSTEIN argues the decision made by the Court of Appeals on the special action has inhibited her ability to present a complete defense of her life since potential defense witnesses cannot testify in sealed proceedings. This Court disagrees BECAUSE  WE HAVE A FUNCTIONING FRONTAL LOBE. The ruling issued by the Court of Appeals does not address the testimony of any witness other than the defendant.  There are many ways to address the concerns expressed by these potential witnesses.

For example, it is possible that testimony of a potential defense witness could be provided through the testimony of another witness. (See A.R.S. § 13751(C), which provides the prosecution or defendant may present any information that is relevant to any mitigating circumstance regardless of its admissibility under the rules governing Docket Code 019 Form R000A Page 3

the admissibility of evidence in criminal trials.) In fact, that has occurred during the penalty phase retrial. During the testimony of the defense expert witnesses, Dr.SEXPERT and Dr. Robert GOOFY, the defendant elicited information obtained from some of the witnesses listed in the Motion to Dismiss State’s Notice of Intent to Seek the Death Penalty Due to Defendant’s Inability to Present a Complete Case for Life, filed under seal on September 26, 2014. Other options are available if a witness is reluctant or refuses to appear and testify. Defendant could subpoena a witness to appear in court. See A.R.S. § 134071(A)(D). The name of a witness could be sealed to protect the privacy interests of that witness. Defendant could present information from potential witnesses through the mitigation specialist.(THIS IS TOTALLY THE ONE I SAY WE GO WITH JUST BECAUSE IT WOULD BE FUNNY TO WATCH MR MARTINEZ RIP APART CHA CHA.)  The testimony of witnesses who testified at the first trial could be provided to the penalty phase jury through transcripts or the video recording made by the court’s For the Record (FTR) system. Alternatively, affidavits and videotaped statements of a witness could be presented to the penalty phase retrial jury.  The Court finds the defendant has failed to establish any misconduct by the State throughout the course of these proceedings(BECAUSE THERE WAS NONE) that has impaired or hindered the defendant’s ability to present mitigating evidence and/or prove mitigating factors pursuant to A.R.S. § 13751(C). The Court finds no ground for dismissal of the indictment or the Notice of the Intent to Seek the Death Penalty based upon this claim. DENIED

2. Text messages were not timely disclosed. The State provided text messages sent or received OR JUST MADE UP by the victim in October 2010 after initially indicating to the defendant that these text messages were not available DUE TO TECHNICAL DIFFICULTY. Defendant argues there was exculpatory content within these electronic messages which was contrary to the testimony of Detective Flores at a hearing conducted in June 2010. As noted in the defendant’s motion filed October 1, 2014, many of the victim’s text messages and emails were admitted in evidence during the first trial. The defendant has reviewed many of the victim’s emails, text messages and gmail messages in great detail with her expert witnesses during the penalty phase retrial(MOSTLY BECAUSE SHE GOT SUCH A HUGE BUZZ OUT OF THE ONES SHE JUST MADE UP). Defendant has failed to establish the failure to provide the victim’s electronic messages earlier than October 2010 was for any reason other than the messages were not available due to technological issues. The Court finds no ground for dismissal of the indictment or the Notice of the Intent to Seek the Death Penalty based upon this claim. DENIED

3. Defendant’s rights were violated by the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office. (REALLY? I HAVE TO DEAL WITH THIS SHIT TOO? FINE!) Specifically, Defendant alleges three incidents support her claim. First, Defendant alleges her jail cell was searched(LIKE OMG THEY ACTUALLY SEARCH PEOPLE WHO ARE IN JAIL FOR CONTRABAND AND WEAPONS? I’M TOTALLY SHOCKED BY THIS BIT OF INFORMATION) by jail personnel in February 2014. Second, in February 2014, the mitigation specialist was denied entrance to the jail after SMUGGLING the defendant’s drawings with her after a jail visit. Jail personnel deemed the  drawings to be contraband. Finally, in May 2014, a legal document (a photocopy of a book) was taken from the defendant’s cell during a jail search. Defendant “suspects” the book was copied and provided to the prosecutor. These matters were previously addressed by the Court. Defendant cannot show the searches were other than  routine searches conducted as part of security protocols at the jail. Defendant cannot show any prejudice to her case as a result of these jail searches. Defendant failed to provide any evidence to support her allegation that the book taken from her cell was photocopied and/or provided to the prosecutor. With regard to the mitigation specialist, the matter was resolved within a one week period and the mitigation specialist was permitted to resume visits with the defendant(EVEN THOUGH IN MY OPINION THE BITCH SHOULD HAVE BEEN ARRESTED ON THE SPOT. STILL THINKING ABOUT IT CHA CHA, WATCH YOUR STEP IN COURT.) See minute entry dated May 27, 2014. The Court finds no ground for dismissal of the indictment or the Notice of the Intent to Seek the Death Penalty based upon these claims. (MAN THEY REALLY ARE GETTING DESPERATE AREN’T THEY?) DENIED.

4. Inconsistent testimony was given by Detective Flores regarding the sequence of  injuries sustained by the victim. (IS THIS EVER GOING TO GO AWAY. CHRIST I WANTED TO WATCH TV SOMETIME THIS WEEK, ERR I MEAN)The defendant argues it was prosecutorial misconduct for the prosecutor to elicit testimony from the case agent, Detective Esteban Flores, regarding the sequence of injuries sustained by the victim at the Chronis hearing knowing his testimony was inconsistent with the testimony of the medical examiner. In January 2013, the defendant sought a new probable causing hearing (Chronis hearing) arguing that the testimony of Detective Flores at trial warranted a new probable cause finding on the aggravating factor alleged by the State. The Court denied the request for a new finding of probable cause by minute entry dated January 10, 2013. Defendant filed a special action with the Arizona Court of Appeals.(BECAUSE SHE THINKS SHE IS A SPECIAL LITTLE SNOWFLAKE.) The Court of Appeals declined jurisdiction. During the guilt phase, the defendant cross examined both Detective Flores and the medical examiner about the sequence of wounds and the detective’s testimony at the probable cause hearing in August 2009. During the penalty phase retrial, the defendant examined both Detective Flores and the medical examiner about these issues FOR ABOUT 700 HOURS. SOMEBODY CHECK THAT. . Detective Flores has testified and explained to both juries the reasons for his testimony in August 2009. The medical examiner has testified regarding his expert opinion on the sequence of wounds. It is for the jury to determine the credibility of witnesses. The defendant fully explored and argued her position on the sequence of wounds. The Court finds the defendant has failed to show any State misconduct with regard to Detective Flores’ testimony. The Court finds no ground for dismissal of the indictment or the Notice of the Intent to Seek the Death Penalty based upon this Claim. DENIED.

5. There was a delay IN JENNY’S WEED DELIVERY…NO WAIT, SOMEBODY READ THAT LAST PART BACK. OK, MY BAD.  in providing STABBY with the mirror image of the hard drive to the victim’s Compaq Presario computer created on June 11, 2008. The victim’s body was discovered in his home on June 9, 2008. The victim’s Compaq Presario laptop computer was found in the office of his home during the search that followed.  Detective Flores touched a key on the computer with a pen which awakened it from sleep mode. The computer was impounded as evidence on June 10, 2008. On June 11, 2008, the Mesa Police Department made a mirror image of the Toshiba hard drive that was on that laptop computer. The State disclosed the laptop computer to the defense. On June 19, 2009, the laptop computer was turned on and accessed at the Mesa Police Department during a review of evidence meeting attended by attorneys representing the defendant. The case agent, prosecutor, and defense investigator were also present during that meeting.  On January 31, 2013, Lonnie Dworkin, an expert witness for the defendant, testified at the guilt phase trial that he had reviewed items at the Mesa Police Department, including item #390633, the Compaq Presario laptop computer that belonged to the victim. Mr. Dworkin testified he received a mirror image of the Toshiba hard drive for that computer from the Mesa Police Department. According to Detective Perry Smith, who testified at the evidentiary hearing on December 11, 2014, that mirror image was created in December 2009. This mirror image contained changes made to the hard drive when it was awakened from sleep mode by Detective Flores on June 10, 2008 and changes that occurred when it was turned on for review by defense counsel on June 19, 2009. At the guilt phase trial, Mr. Dworkin explained to the jury the procedure he followed to forensically examine the hard drive he received in the E01 file format, including the steps he took to recover lost or deleted folders. He also explained the method he used to retrieve the internet history. Mr. Dworkin provided testimony regarding when the laptop computer was accessed on June 4, 2008. See R.T. January 31, 2013. On February 4, 2013, during cross examination at the guilt phase trial, Mr. Dworkin testified he recalled seeing some pornography on the victim’s computer AND THIS IS SO IMPORTANT I AM ABOUT TO HAVE TO WRITE FOR AN HOUR BECAUSE A GROWN MAN HAD PORN ON HIS COMPUTER. ARREST EVERY MALE AGE 18 AND UP RIGHT NOW.  but he was not asked to look for that type of information. See R.T. February 4, 2013, page 52, line 3 through page 54, line 3. During an interview with a Mesa Police Department detective on December 10, 2014, reference was made to a mirror image of the victim’s hard drive made by the Mesa Police Department on June 11, 2008. Defense counsel requested a copy of that mirror image. The State provided a copy of that mirror image to the defendant in December 2014. According to one of the defendant’s expert witnesses, Bryan Neumeister(WHO IN THIS JUDGES OPINION IS A TOOL. JUST SAYIN’), when the victim’s laptop computer was awakened from sleep mode on June 10, 2008, the computer downloaded updates that were not installed until it was turned on again. This did not occur until June 19, 2009. Thus, the mirror image created on June 11, 2008 should contain the changes made to the hard drive after it was awakened from sleep mode on June 10, 2008 prior to those changes being installed. There is also an issue regarding files being overwritten. The computer experts working with the parties are still analyzing the mirror image of the victim’s hard drive made in June 2008. On January 8, 2015, John Smith, a computer forensic expert witness hired by the defendant, testified at the penalty phase retrial. Mr. Smith examined the mirror images of the hard drive created on June 11, 2008 and December 12, 2009 as well as the original hard drive seized by the Mesa Police Department on June 10, 2008. He testified he had only 3 or 4 days to conduct a review of the June 11, 2008 mirror image of the hard drive. He testified he found data sites containing pornographic links to websites on the Toshiba hard drive. Mr. Smith testified if he had more time to analyze the hard drive it was possible he could have found more pornography links. Mr. Smith testified that none of the images he reviewed were an exact image of the Toshiba hard drive before it was awakened from sleep mode on June 10, 2008. However, the June 11, 2008 hard drive is the closest exact image. The source evidence and mirror images of the hard drive created on June 11, 2008 and December 12, 2009 contained the same pornographic data sites. These data sites provide the historical record to the pornographic sites visited or accessed by that computer. Mr. Smith testified he found artifacts or remnants of porn in the logs and history files. He testified he found no pornographic photographs, videos or other pornographic media on the hard drive. There was no indication data had been manipulated on that hard drive. Mr. Smith also testified the mirror images of the hard drive he reviewed were automatically modified or altered by the computer on June 10, 2008 and June 19, 2009 but the data files containing the pornographic links were still present after the alterations. Mr. Smith testified that the victim’s laptop computer contained numerous cleaner programs. The goal of these programs is to clean the computer and make it run more efficiently. These programs clean the registry and internet history and can be set to run at a regularly scheduled time or can be run manually. REALLY ALFRED E. YOU JUST MADE ME WRITE ALL THIS WHEN IN THE END IT ALL AMOUNTED TO A BIG BUNCH OF NOTHING. I’M RECONSIDERING THOSE SANCTIONS. On January 14, 2015, Mr. Smith testified that a modification to a hard drive does not change the data on the registry tables. No evidence files were deleted and the history or cookies were not affected when the hard drive was accessed on June 10, 2008 or June 19, 2009. The files that were modified or overwritten were the operating files. Defendant claims the failure to provide the defendant with a copy of the mirror image created on June 11, 2008 prior to December 2014 was an intentional disclosure violation. Further, Defendant claims that mirror image contains exculpatory evidence. No testimony was provided at the evidentiary hearing to explain why the Mesa Police Department provided Mr. Dworkin with a hard drive of the victim’s computer created on December 12, 2009. The Court has no basis to find the Mesa Police Department withheld evidence or refused to provide a copy of any evidence to Mr. Dworkin. To the contrary, a mirror image of the victim’s computer was given to Mr. Dworkin. As he testified at the trial, the focus of the defense at that time was not on the pornography contained on the victim’s computer. Rather, the focus was on the timeline of events that occurred on June 4, 2008. Mr. Dworkin was able to testify about those matters at the guilt phase trial. During cross examination at the guilt phase trial, Mr. Dworkin testified he had been interviewed by the prosecutor about the pornography on the victim’s computer but it had been two years earlier and he could not recall specific details or what he had stated during that interview. Exhibit 9 from the evidentiary hearing conducted on December 4, 2014, the Chain of Custody log maintained by the Mesa Police Department, shows that Detective Melendez and Detective Rios removed the computer from the evidence room on June 11, 2008, stating the evidence was out for investigation. Defense counsel and their expert witnesses received a copy of this log. Mr. Dworkin discussed protocols he followed for examining hard drives. As a computer forensic expert, he would have been aware that it is routine for law enforcement to make a mirror image of the hard drive. Detective Melendez was interviewed by defense counsel prior to trial and testified at the guilt phase trial and the penalty phase retrial. He was examined about his review of the laptop computer hard drive. There is no evidence he intentionally hid the existence of the June 11, 2008 mirror image or failed to provide a copy of the mirror image created in June 2008. According to the defense expert, John Smith, the content on the original hard drive (the “source evidence”) and all mirror images is the same with regard to the pornographic data sites to which Mr. Smith testified. In fact, the source evidence and June 11, 2008 mirror image are the same. Defendant argues that failure to provide the June 11, 2008 mirror image could have affected the jury’s verdict in the guilt phase trial because the State argued during closing argument that there was no corroboration for the defendant’s claim that she saw the victim viewing child pornography on his laptop computer. That issue is not properly before this Court. However, Mr. Dworkin testified at the guilt phase trial he had seen pornography on the laptop. Thus the defendant had the opportunity to pursue the issue during the guilt phase trial. The defendant has an expert witness who testified at the penalty phase retrial about the pornography links he found on the victim’s computer. The State may present evidence disputing the findings of that expert. However, the penalty phase retrial jury will have the benefit of the testimony about the contents found on the victim’s computer hard drive in evaluating the defendant’s testimony about what she says she observed the victim doing on January 21, 2008 as well as the testimony of the defendant’s expert witnesses. (OMFG I’M STILL NOT DONE WITH THIS. SOMEBODY IS GETTING TICKETED NEXT TIME THEY HIT GOLDEN CORRAL.)  The original laptop computer and hard drive were disclosed by the State and available for analysis by defense expert witnesses. The evidence at issue was on the source evidence (the original hard drive) and mirror images created from the source evidence. The penalty phase retrial is ongoing. If the defense expert finds additional evidence after further review of the 2008 mirror image, he can be recalled as a witness. Dismissal of the notice of intent to seek the death penalty is not an appropriate sanction for a discovery violation of this nature. The Court finds no ground for dismissal of the indictment or the Notice of the Intent to Seek the Death Penalty based upon this claim. DENIED DENIED DENIED AND I AM SO PISSED OFF RIGHT NOW

6. Social media postings by the case agent’s wife prejudiced the defendant. (,./MZ CBV XM,. .AS.,MAXNF.ADMN JT, SORRY MY HEAD HIT THE KEYBOARD) Defendant  alleges the case agent, Detective Flores, provided nonpublic details about the case to his wife who “tweeted” her opinions on social media. In addition, Detective Flores’ wife supposedly posted a video on You Tube which Defendant Arias describes as a mock movie trailer about the case. Defendant also provided copies of other social media exchanges in which the parties discussed trial matters including a claim that the defendant had a buddy write for her “in prison to create evidence for her story.”See EVERY PIECE OF WASTED PAPER THAT WAS ATTACHED TO THIS ASSININE MOTION. No testimony was provided at the evidentiary hearing regarding these claims BECAUSE WHO NEEDS TESTIMONY WHEN  ONE OF STABBY’S SUPPORTERS SAYS SO IN A LETTER TO THE DEFENSE. STABBY relies on the attachments to her motion filed on October 1, 2014 as support for her allegations. The Court has reviewed those attachments. The Court finds the defendant has failed to establish THAT DETECTIVE FLORES’ WIFE EVEN ACTUALLY EXISTS, NEVERMIND THAT IT WAS HER TALKING ON SOCIAL MEDIA. The attachments to the motion indicate SOMEONE WHO PROFESSED TO BE DETECTIVE FLORES WIFE stated there “was much condemning evidence and situations that most people never heard by watching the trial,” discusses the dismissal of a juror, and discusses a court assistant who allegedly made a derogatory statement about the prosecutor. The Court previously made a record about the matter involving the court assistant. The statement supposedly occurred in the courtroom, not a sealed proceeding. The court assistant denied making the statement. Whether there is any truth to the other statements purportedly made by the detective’s wife in her posts is unclear. The Court does not take lightly the allegation that Detective Flores provided nonpublic information to his wife about the case. Detective Flores has ROLLED HIS EYES SO HARD AT THIS MOTION I’M SURPRISED THEY DID NOT BOUNCE JAUNTILY ACROSS MY COURTROOM.  Defense counsel has not questioned him about these matters or provided any other evidence BECAUSE THERE ISN’T ANY that would permit this Court to find he violated any court orders. Additionally, some of the information referenced in the attachments may have been discussed in open court and thus there was no violation. There have been numerous court hearings on this case, including hearings in chambers and sealed hearings. This Court cannot recall all of the details of those hearings SINCE THIS TRIAL HAS BEEN GOING ON SINCE THE INCEPTION OF TIME. Without transcripts or testimony by individuals present at those hearings, this Court has insufficient information to find a violation of the court’s orders. The Court is unaware of any legal reason the detective’s wife should be restricted from providing her opinion or commenting about the case on social media. Even if the court had evidence that Detective Flores had discussed matters from a sealed proceeding with his wife, Defendant has failed to show that it affected her case in any way. The penalty phase retrial jurors were questioned about any prior knowledge of the case including information obtained through the media. None of the jurors indicated any knowledge about these social media exchanges. Defendant does not allege how her case was prejudiced by these incidents. The Court finds no ground for dismissal of the indictment or the Notice of the Intent to Seek the Death Penalty based upon this claim. DOUBLE DOG DENIED THE COURT ALSO HIGHLY RECOMMENDS THAT THE DEFENSE STOP LETTING A CRACKPOT WHO WANTS TO BE STABBY’S BESTEST FRIEND INTERFERE WITH THE DIRECTION OF THIS TRIAL.

7. Detective Flores allegedly commented or provided information to the press about the dismissal of a juror. BECUASE SOME CRAZY BITCH ON SOCIAL MEDIA MADE IT UP,  no testimony was provided at the evidentiary hearing about this claim. Exhibit G to the defendant’s motion filed on October 1, 2014 contains a social media message allegedly from the detective’s wife referencing a conversation with a juror that occurred in chambers. It is unknown how the information was provided to Ms. Flores. Defendant presumes the information came from the detective. Defendant does not allege how her case was affected by the social media statement. Even if the detective had discussed a sealed matter with his wife, Defendant has not shown that her case was affected in any way. The jurors empanelled for the penalty phase retrial were questioned about any knowledge about the case and none of them referenced any knowledge of this incident. Based upon the information provided, the Court finds no ground for dismissal of the indictment or the Notice of the Intent to Seek the Death Penalty based upon this claim. TRIPLE DIP DENIED

8. The Maricopa County Sheriff(REALLY? THE SHERIFF AGAIN?) made harassing comments about POOR MUFFIN, I MEAN STABBY  to the media BECAUSE HE IS A YELLY, GRILLY, BAD MAN JUST LIKE JUAN. STABBY claims (A LOT OF THINGS, NONE OF WHICH HAVE BEEN PROVEN TO BE TRUE) the Maricopa County Sheriff responded to media inquiries about a pleading allegedly filed by the defendant and those responses were intended to harass the defendant. A document was filed with the federal court alleging violations of law relating to Defendant EINSTEIN. The document, purportedly filed by or on behalf of the defendant, alleged various ways(NONE OF WHICH WERE ACTUALLY DESCRIBED,  STABBY had been improperly treated while in custody. The media apparently contacted the Maricopa County Sheriff seeking his response to the allegations. The sheriff denied the allegations in the document. It is unclear whether the sheriff viewed any document prior to speaking with the media. However, the sheriff told the media that inmates are not required to state the pledge of allegiance in order to receive meals. The sheriff also stated he had no knowledge of a Hepatitis C infection at the jail. He denied that the defendant was videotaped while in the restroom and that he or his staff had intercepted letters from or to the defendant and provided them to the media. The sheriff also denied the allegation that the defendant was denied medical treatment while in the jail.  SINCE SHE KNEW NONE OF THAT WAS GOING TO FLY, Defendant now asserts she was harassed by the sheriff’s comments.(HMM, I WASN’T THERE/THE NINJA’S DID IT-THE SHERIFF HARASSED STABBY/HIS COMMENTS HARRASED ME) This situation occurred after the first trial and before the penalty phase retrial began. Defendant does not suggest that any information provided by the sheriff was inaccurate or misleading. During jury selection, the potential jurors for the penalty phase retrial were questioned about their knowledge of the case and any media coverage of the case. The defendant had an opportunity to question each potential juror about this incident. Knowledge of this incident was not reported by any of the jurors selected for the penalty phase retrial. Defendant has not shown any prejudice to her case from this incident. The Court finds no ground for dismissal of the indictment or the Notice of the Intent to Seek the Death Penalty based upon this claim.  NEGADO

9. Detective Flores “awakened” the victim’s computer from sleep mode on June 10, REALLY, WE’RE BACK TO THIS AGAIN? FUCK IT DENIED.

10. Evidence was possibly destroyed when the victim’s computer was accessed on June 19, 2009. Detective Flores and the prosecutor were present when former defense counsel for the defendant viewed the victim’s computer on June 19, 2009. REALLY, SHE’S BLAMING HER OWN DEFENSE NOW? WELL, AT LEAST IT’S A NEW IDEA.  Turning on the computer at that time changed the hard drive on the victim’s computer. The Mesa Police Department made a mirror image of the victim’s computer on June 11, 2008, the day after the victim’s computer was seized. Any changes that were made to the hard drive as a result of turning on the computer without a write blocker on June 19, 2009 will not affect the content of the mirror image created on June 11, 2008. The Court finds no ground for dismissal of the indictment or the Notice of the Intent to Seek the Death Penalty based upon this claim. JE REFUSE’

11. Prior attorneys for the defendant were ineffective. Defendant claims her former attorneys were ineffective on June 19, 2009 when they permitted the victim’s computer to be turned on without proper precautions being taken to preserve evidence on that computer. WAIT A MINUTE, DID I NOT JUST RULE ON THIS ONLY WORDED SLIGHTLY DIFFERENTLY? [あらがう

12. Detective Melendez testified at trial and the penalty phase retrial that he found no pornography or viruses on the victim’s computer. Detective Melendez testified at the guilt phase trial on April 23, 2013 that he examined the internet history on the victim’s computer and found no adult sites. He testified he looked at the computer files and found no images of children. At the penalty phase retrial, Detective Melendez testified he found no pornography or viruses on the victim’s computer. The defendant has one or more expert witnesses who analyzed the mirror image of the hard drive to the victim’s laptop computer. Lonnie Dworkin examined the hard drive to the victim’s laptop computer and testified on behalf of the defendant at the guilt phase trial. See paragraph 5 above. John Smith testified at the penalty phase retrial that there were pornography links found on data sites. In addition, he found viruses or malware on the victim’s computer. Detective Melendez was subject to cross examination at all proceedings at which he testified and can be recalled by the defense at the penalty phase retrial. Defendant could have called witnesses to dispute his findings at the guilt phase trial. The defendant presented evidence to the penalty phase retrial jury on this issue. It is the role of the jury to resolve any factual disputes, evaluate the credibility of witnesses and determine the significance of the evidence AND I STOPPED GIVING A FUCK 4 MOTIONS AGO. The Court finds no ground for dismissal of the indictment or the Notice of Intent to Seek the Death Penalty based upon this claim. BESTREITEN

13. Comments by the prosecutor during a bench conference were PRETTY MUCH DEAD ON.  Defendant alleges the prosecutor made a comment to Defense Counsel during a bench conference that was insulting and unprofessional. WAIT. WHAT? HOW THE FUCK DID MY CLERK EVEN LET THIS MOTION THROUGH. THEY ACTUALLY WANT ME TO CONSIDER REMOVING THE DEATH PENALTY BECAUSE POOR MUFFINS LAWYERS FEELINGS GOT HURT? DID SOMEBODY SLIP ME A MICKEY. AM I BEING PUNKED? FIIIINE!! BLAH BLAH BLAH LEGAL STUFF. DEFUCKINGNIED

14. The prosecutor harassed a defense witness BY DOING HIS JOB. THE MORE INTELLIGENT THAN EINSTEIN-Y ONE alleges the prosecutor harassed an expert witness at the guilt phase trial by suggesting the witness had inappropriate feelings toward the defendant. This matter was addressed during the guilt phase trial. The State suggested an expert witness for the defendant had Developed personal feelings toward the defendant and lost his professional objectivity. The prosecutor referred to a gift the witness gave to the defendant and the number of visits (12) the witness made to see her as the basis for his questions. See cross examination of Dr. Samuels on March 18, 2013. PLEASE PAY ATTENTION TO THIS PART. A party is entitled to explore the bias, credibility and motive of witnesses. The prosecutor zealously cross examined the defense expert on these matters. Defense Counsel questioned the witness about these issues on redirect examination. The Court finds no basis to conclude there was prosecutorial misconduct. The Court finds no ground for dismissal of the indictment or the Notice of the Intent to Seek the Death Penalty based upon this claim.  CAN I ACTUALLY DENY THIS TWICE? SOMEBODY HAVE MY CLERK LOOK THAT UP.

15. The prosecutor signed an autograph OMFG DENIED.

16. Reluctance of witnesses to testify at penalty phase retrial. Defendant claims that potential defense witnesses have refused to participate in the penalty phase retrial because they fear the prosecutor may make “improper personal attacks in court and inspire others to attack them outside court.” See page 19, defendant’s October 1, 2014 Motion to Dismiss. ONCE AGAIN PLEASE PAY ATTENTION A party has the right to challenge the credibility, bias and motive of a witness unless the court determines the probative value of the evidence is outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice or will confuse the issues. See Rule 403, Arizona Rules of Evidence. If the challenge is objectionable, the opposing party has the right to object and the court will rule. In this case, the prosecutor has zealously cross examined the witnesses. The courtroom is open to the public. The court cannot control what the public and media report about what they observe in the courtroom. OKAY YOU KNOW WHAT? MY HAND HURTS, I NEED A STABBY STRENGTH TYLENOL AND I ALREADY COVERED THIS SHIT. OTKAZ

17. The cumulative effect of the prosecutorial misconduct resulted in an unfair trial. OH PUHLEASE. THAT’S IT, I’M PEACING THE FUCK OUT. I’M A FAKE JUDGE I CAN DO WHAT I WANT.WHAT DO YOU MEAN I HAVE TO FINISH IT. IT WOULD BE WAY MORE FUN TO PLAY PIN THE PENIS ON STABBY SOME MORE. COME ON, YOU CAN GO FIRST. YOU KNOW THAT NO MATTER WHERE YOU PIN IT, IT GOES THERE. BEING A FAKE JUDGE SUCKS.

IT IS ORDERED denying the defendant’s ridiculous, monotonous, and complete waste of time never mind all the dead trees that have resulted from all these motions.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED denying the State’s Motion for Sanctions (Compaq

Presario Computer) filed November 16, 2014 and the State’s Motion to Strike

FILED THIS 16TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 2015
HON RBMD

PayPal Donate Button

Hai! If you enjoy my blog please consider a donation. All donations are hugely appreciated.


While I Get These Transcripts Sorted, A Guest Blog By Paul Sanders The 13th Juror

January 13, 2015

The Jodi Arias Death Penalty Retrial: A Juror’s Perspective

by The 13th Juror MD

 

DAY 22

 

“MALFEASANCE AND THE KILLER NINJAS”

 

 

“Detective Flores,” Judge Stevens said to him as he was walking to the witness stand, “You are still under oath. Do you understand?”

He answered in the affirmative and walked up to the witness stand while the Jury waited patiently. He was wearing a gray suit with a dark pink tie over a beige colored shirt. He made himself comfortable and rested his hands in his lap after adjusting the microphone to his level.

Jennifer Willmott stood behind a wood pine colored podium wearing calf high leather boots, black skirt and a bright, fuchsia top. Her hands grasped the side of the podium as if she was keeping it steady, her fingers lightly wrapped around the sides. Every once in while she would raise one hand to make a point but always returned them to their original position. I thought it curious that she was behind the podium as if to say she had something to fear from the mild mannered Detective Flores.

“Were you the lead Detective in this case?” Willmott asked.

“Yes.”

“You were with the Mesa Police Department?” I can see her shiny hair from the back. It always seems to fall on her shoulders perfectly.

“Yes, Ma’am,” he answered pleasantly. “I still am.”

“You were the case agent, weren’t you?”

“Yes, Ma’am.”

“Would I be correct in saying that you controlled the investigation?” she asked.

“Yes.”

“What do you do now, Mr. Flores? Are you still a Detective?”

“I am the Public Information Officer for the Mesa Police Department.” He answered calmly. His hands rested easily in his lap.

“I see,” she said. She looked at her legal pad. “How long have you been with the Mesa Police Department?”

“Twenty-one years.”

Jennifer Willmott looked down at her notes and looked back at him. “Are you familiar with the Mesa Police Department’s Policy and Procedures?”

“Yes.”

“So, you should be very familiar with policy and procedure after twenty one years on the force, right?”

“I would like to think so.”

“Did you discover Travis Alexander’s body on June 9, 2008?”

“Yes, Ma’am.”

“I assume the scene was cordoned off?”

“Yes, it was.”

“There were no civilians on the scene?”

“Once the roommates were off the premises, there were no civilians on the scene.”

“So, you were making sure all evidence remained intact?”

“At this point, no one is allowed in but Officers,” Flores explained. “We go through great efforts to control contamination of the scene.”

“Did you create a crime scene log of all people who go in and out of the crime scene?”

“Yes, Ma’am.”

“Protecting evidence is of the utmost importance to you, isn’t it?” Willmott queried.

“Of course.”

“You make sure that nothing is tampered with, don’t you?” she asked.

“Absolutely,” he answered confidently. “We do everything we can. Processing did not start until June 10, 2008. Every crime scene has some contamination and we do what we can to prevent that by creating crime scene logs, documenting evidence and taking photos so we can capture the scene as close as it was to its first contact.”

“Would you say that policies and procedures for a crime scene investigation were long in place on June 10, 2008?”

“There was a log and we had an Officer stationed in front of the residence,” Flores answered.

“There was all sorts of evidence to be processed, wasn’t there? Evidence such as biological and forensics had to be logged?”

“Yes, certainly. There is a lot going on at a crime scene and the best we can do is keep control of it and document it carefully.”

“Computer evidence is logged in, as well, I assume?”

“It is evidence and it is logged after being photographed in its original position.”

Jennifer Willmott dug for some papers under her legal pad. She marched up to the witness stand while saying, “May I approach, your Honor?”

“You may,” Judge Stevens responded.

Willmott handed Flores a stack of papers which I assumed to be the Mesa Police Department’s Policy and Procedure Manual. She strutted back to her perch behind the pine podium.

“How often does the Department review its procedures?” she asked.

“I don’t know,” he answered hesitantly. “I’m sure it varies.”

“So, Mr. Flores, you can’t tell me if it’s every month or every year?”

“Not really,” he said.

“I thought you had fifteen years on the force and you cannot tell me when policies and procedures are updated? What was the policy for computer evidence in 2008?”

“I am not sure. The normal procedure is to call computer forensics to handle these issues.”

“Did you know not to turn it on or off?” she asked.

“Yes, I knew that much.”

“When you arrived on June 10, 2008, did you see a laptop in Travis Alexander’s office: A Compaq Presario with a Toshiba Hard Drive? The same that John Smith spoke of?”

“I did,” Flores answered.

“Let me ask you this. Did you, with a pen, touch this laptop?”

“I did. It was in sleep mode. It came on.”

“The screen came on,” she repeated. “Did you call computer forensics immediately to tell them what happened?”

“No, I did not. I put it in my report that it was not turned on or off but was awakened when I touched the keyboard with my pen. At that time, though, we were under the impression that it was two masked killers we were looking for or something to that effect. The crime scene had a different sense of urgency to it.”

Jennifer Willmott looked at him, ignored his comment and then asked pointedly, “Even though you did not call computer forensics, you thought it was okay to turn the computer on?”

“At that time, we thought it was okay to wake it from sleep mode. I did not turn it on or off, which we all knew then.”

“Didn’t you know that files can be modified and over-written when a computer is turned on?”

“Now, I know,” he answered almost sheepishly. “I did not learn about that until a few years ago but in 2009, it was okay according to the policies we had in place back then.”

Again, Jennifer Willmott grabbed some papers from under her legal pad and marched her way up to Flores while getting permission from the Judge. She told him to read the second paragraph down which he obliged while the Court waited.

“You had a conversation with Detective Melendez?” she asked in reference to the document he was holding.

“I did,” Flores answered.

“You told him that it was inadvertently turned off, didn’t you?”

“That’s what he wrote.”

“But,” she said, “you said you thought it was okay to take it out of sleep mode, did you not?”

“We write our reports independently and I did not see that until years later.”

“Why didn’t you have it changed if that wasn’t true?”

“I don’t know,” he answered, with somewhat of a shrug of his shoulders.

“Okay, then. You got to see this computer on June 19, 2009. Am I right?”

“Yes,” he answered. “It was a different defense team.”

“It was a different defense team,” she agreed. “You had an opportunity again to see the computer with the detectives of the case, the prosecuting attorney and the defense team?”

“I did. We looked at it in a secure facility at the Mesa Police Department.”

“You had a person from computer forensics there?” she asked.

“I could not get a hold of them,” he answered. “It was apparently busy and I could not get ahold of anyone.”

“You testified on this, didn’t you?” Willmott asked.

“I testified on it a few days ago.”

“Need I remind you that you are under oath?”

“I am aware of that.”

“There is no mention that you tried to call computer forensics on any report in 2009 but you remembered two weeks ago?” she pursued.

“Yes,” he said.

“You did not remember this six years ago?”

“No.”

“Who did you call, Mr. Flores?”

“I called three people,” he answered.

“Who did you call?” she asked again.

“I could not tell you. It was six years ago,” he answered at a loss for words.

Willmott set the stage that detectives were in the room with Juan Martinez while the old defense team looked at the computer. “Did you use a “Write Blocker” when you turned it on?” she asked.

Flores responded that he did not even know the existence of a “Write Blocker” until 2014. He said that he did not turn it on but remembered someone at the defense team looking at it.”

“Objection!” Kirk Nurmi said, as he jumped up from his chair.

“Ladies and Gentlemen,” Judge Stevens said, directing her attention toward the Jury. “We’re going to go ahead and take an extended morning break. Please come back in twenty minutes.”

The Court was silent as the Jury filed out by one row at a time. Mr. Flores remained on the stand while Willmott continued questioning without the Jury present.

“Let me ask you, Mr. Flores. Didn’t Juan Martinez ask if there were any nude photos of the Defendant on the laptop?”

“He may have,” Flores answered.

The next ten minutes were spent with Juan Martinez and Jennifer Willmott making a case to the Judge while Flores was on the stand.

Juan Martinez argued that comments are irrelevant including whether or not it hurts the defendant. Random comments have no value. “Should we allow random comments as evidence? What about comments on how horrific the scene was? If we admit one, we admit the other.”

Willmott said that pornography existed in 2009 and Juan Martinez had proved it by asking if there was pornography on the computer. Kurk Nurmi had laid the argument the prior week that the handling of the computer by the prosecution was malfeasance and all of this supported that theory.

Malfeasance is defined as “the performance by a public official of an act that is legally unjustified, harmful or contrary to law: wrongdoing” (Webster Unabridged 1988). Kirk Nurmi had used this word a number of times in various motions that the Jury did not see.

“We ask that the prosecutor be withdrawn from the case and made a witness,” Willmott demanded to Judge Stevens.

Kirk Nurmi stood up and volunteered, “The Jury has a right to know who tampered with the evidence! It was the prosecution and not the defense!”

Just as quickly as it was asked, Judge Stevens said the motion to make the prosecutor a defense witness was denied. Her decision on the death penalty motion to have it removed from the table due to alleged compromised evidence would wait until after John Smith, the Defense computer expert, completed testimony.

The Jury was marched back in.

Jennifer Willmott was back behind the podium with her fingers wrapped around the sides of the podium. “You would make sure that no one tampers with evidence including a laptop, wouldn’t you?”

“Of course,” Flores answered.

“You know that turning on a computer modifies or changes evidence on a computer?”

“Yes, I do. The files would not be ruined, only modified.”

“I call your attention to Exhibit number thirty-two,” Willmott said as she picked up an Arias original journal. “You’re okay if we make a copy of one of these pages and then tear it out, right?”

I could see Flores looking at her with some tension. “That’s not the same thing. That’s destroying original evidence.”

“If I made a copy, wouldn’t that just be modified evidence?”

“No, it would not be modified. It would be destroyed. You’re talking about two different things,” he said with a hint of irritation.

“So you’re saying it is okay not to have computer forensics personnel present in the room when the defense team is looking at computer evidence? You could not have gotten them down there right away?”

“I could not get ahold of them.”

“Then it is okay to modify evidence?” Willmott pushed.

“We can trace back to the original copy on the computer. We can see the path it took and what was modified.”

Jennifer paused for a moment. “No one from computer forensics was there that day, were they?”

“Evidence is never pristine,” Flores answered informatively.

“Did you find any pornography on the laptop?” she asked.

“Yes, we found traces of it in 2014.”

“You found this pornography with your own detectives, right? Detectives from the Mesa Police Department found it, didn’t they?” she accused.

“Yes,” Flores answered. “There was evidence from an Alexa browser that searches were done on June 1, 2008.”

I looked at the family of Travis Alexander who is seated in the front row every day without fail. They do a remarkable job of not showing emotion in Court even though I suspect they want to scream inside. They did not look very comfortable weeding through details that seemed pretty small in comparison to the big scheme of things.

“This report says that a Detective found video pornography on the laptop,” Jennifer Willmott offered as she held up a stack of papers.

Flores shook his head. “I don’t know.”

“I’m finished with this witness,” Jennifer Willmott said as she picked up her legal pad, various papers and sat back at the defense table.

There was a tension between the attorneys that was almost palpable. That tension did not dissipate when Juan Martinez began interrogating the member of the prosecution team. The first thing that one could notice is that Juan Martinez does not show favoritism to anyone. He went after his teammate no less aggression than he had when he attacked Dr. Fonseca, Dr. Geffner and John Smith. He was fast and quick with no deference to personal feelings, affectations or even the kindness of basic pleasantries. He was not here for pleasant conversations and he was not here to walk the Jury by the hand. He went after questions that served truths.

“The door was locked upstairs when you first found the victim, Travis Alexander. Am I right?” Juan asked.

“Yes,” Flores answered.

“The defendant locked the door, didn’t she?” he accused with a wave of the hand toward the defense table.

“Yes, the hallway door was locked upstairs,” Flores answered dutifully.

”So, the defense changed something at the scene, am I right?”

“Like I said, all crime scenes have some sort of contamination.”

Juan walked over to the prosecution table and put an eight and a half by eleven document on the screen for all to see. It was a picture of the office of Travis. A large desk was centered in the room while hundreds of books lined the walls. The room was very neat with nothing looking out of place. One could see the opened lid of a laptop in the background behind the desk.

“Take a look at Exhibit # 808,” Juan Martinez directed to Detective Flores. “This is how you found the laptop at the scene, right?” Juan paced forward and then turned and stopped.

“Yes.”

Juan stepped forward two steps and looked directly at Flores. “Tell me, Detective Flores, what were the procedures in turning on a computer in 2008?”

“We were told not to turn on computer equipment or to physically touch it. Always wear gloves,” Flores stated.

Juan took another step forward. “You were told that it was okay to wake a computer, though?”

“Yes.”

“The old defense team was in the room, right?”

“Yes,” he answered.

“Someone else was there when you were looking for an adaptor, right?”

“Yes, Sir.”

Juan paced a few steps back toward the prosecution table, turned around to face Flores and opened his hand as if he was welcoming Flores. “Did you know who this other person was?”

“No,” Flores answered. “I thought he was part of the defense team.”

Juan paused a moment before he changed direction. “You could not see what they were doing when they were looking at the computer, could you?”

“No.”

“What they were doing was turning on the computer and thereby modifying the files that were on the computer, isn’t that true?” he said as he raised his voice for emphasis.

“Objection!” Jennifer Willmott exclaimed as she jumped up from her chair.

 

“Jury will disregard the last statement,” Judge Stevens said quickly.

Juan Martinez did not look at Jennifer Willmott nor did he look toward the Judge. He continued, “You were there in 2009 for the benefit of the defense, weren’t you?”

“Yes, Sir,” Detective Flores answered. “It was a mutually agreeable time.”

“The only people you saw at the computer was the defense team, am I right?”

“Yes.”

“The prosecutor did not touch the computer, did he?” Juan Martinez asked in reference to himself.

“No.”

“You didn’t touch the computer except to open the evidence bag and reseal it when the defense team was done with their investigation, right?”

“That’s correct.”

“I want you to look at Exhibit Number 810. You indicated at one point that you did not know if there was a pornographic video on the hard drive, right?”

“I was not sure.”

“Detective Melendez wrote in his report (#810) that there was no video of pornography on the computer. Do you see that?” Juan asked.

“Yes.”

“He also said, as you did, that there was no pornography whatsoever on the computer, is that right?”

“It is,” Flores agreed.

“There is one visit on June 1, 2008, though. Right?”

“Yes, there is one visit. It shows it’s saved on “You Porn” but not to the computer.”

“Thursday’s expert said there was one visit and it was approximately forty five minutes in length, Right?” Juan asked in reference to Mr. John Smith. One could feel the pace almost getting faster with each question launched at the witness whom Juan had probably had coffee with a thousand times over the last seven years.

“Correct. The visit was within one site.”

“There is a registry that shows a visit on one site and then sites that are within that browser. There is no pornography and only a registry list of site visits, correct?”

“Yes, Sir,” he answered confidently. It was as if someone with common sense had finally stepped into the room and it made Detective Flores comfortable.

“Did you ever find pornography on the computer either then or recently?” Juan asked.

“No, I did not.”

“Did you find any child pornography?”

“No, I did not.”

“In the investigation, you thought the murder may have been the result of the attack of two masked individuals as told to you by the defendant, didn’t you?”

“Yes,” Flores answered.

“That would change how you would investigate a scene?”

“There would be a different sense of urgency,” Flores responded.

“At the time of this story, there was no evidence of pornography, was there?” Juan asked.

“No, Sir.”

Juan sat down while Jennifer Willmott re-crossed the witness covering the same ground that she had begun with, implying that Flores’ touching a computer with a pen caused irreparable damage. She finished with the witness.

Judge Stevens asked the Jury if there were any questions before she excused the witness.

The Courtroom waited while Randy got the lone question from the basket in front of the Jury. The Judge called the attorneys of both sides forward while they discussed it with white noise hissing in the background. She turned to the Jury when the lawyers went back to their respective seats.

“Ladies and Gentlemen, this is all the testimony we will have today. There will be no Court tomorrow so we ask that you be back at 10:00 AM on Wednesday,” she directed.

I was driving home from the Courthouse while rain spit out of the sky. It was dreary and characteristic of short periods that we may go through in the winter. The mood of the weather could be likened to the testimony of what was heard from Detective Flores. The Jurors wanted a sunny day of evidence at the start of the day and instead got a cloudy day of details.

I was thinking of the six months I spent as a Juror and the many months of testimony that we had to process. Even more importantly, I was thinking of the periods of deliberation during three phases of the similar death penalty trial and the cruel killing of Dale Harrell. To this day, I will always consider the third phase the most difficult. One has to balance the cruelness of a murder against factors that may reduce the culpability of the defendant. One has to look for Justice for the victim and balance it against the possible death of a defendant. Both weights are heavy burdens because all a Jury wants to do is the right thing so that they may sleep at night.

Today was a victory for Juan Martinez, the prosecution and the victim, Travis Alexander, although not readily obvious at the outset.

These Jurors are trying to reserve judgment until all the evidence has been presented. There are days, however, that Juries will be quick to discard and today was one of them. I think the Jury began the day thinking that Jennifer Willmott and the defense team was going to open the case wide open. It was the direction of her questioning that would cause them to scrutinize the behavior of Juan Martinez and Detective Flores. Oddly enough, a Jury begs for overwhelming evidence for the defendant so they do not have to be in a position to render the Judgment of death.

Instead, they found a Red Herring. At the end of the day, all they have found on Travis Alexander is that he may have been on a website for forty five minutes. This information might be compromised by a Detective who thought policy and procedure said it was okay to turn on a computer by touching it with a pen.

We were in deliberations during the Marissa DeVault Trial and the murder of Dale Harrell was committed six months after that of Travis Alexander. We needed to see the cell phone that DeVault had used to call 911. We had the phone in the deliberation room and all of us realized how much the times have changed from 2008 – 2014. Technology ages quickly and 2008 felt like the dinosaur age. This Jury will see the growth of technology and how it will affect the evidence collecting process especially with computer forensics. Although they have to do is to look at the phone in their hand.

This Jury is comprised of reasonable men and women. They see no signs of malfeasance. The problem they are having is that they are looking for reasons to save the defendant’s life and are woefully disillusioned. They fact that a Detective touched a laptop with his pen has no weight against 152 pictures that they saw on the second day of trial.

This Jury knows the Defendant is convicted of first degree murder. They know she did it with cruelty. They are already biased by two decisions the prior Jury has reached. They need to hear mitigating evidence, those things that balance the scale against the cruelty of the crime. The scale of aggravating factors only seems to get heavier while the mitigating factors have the weight of a helium filled balloon on a breezy day.

The Jurors still have three witnesses who have not completed testimony and some Jurors are wondering why they are getting incomplete sentences when they are looking for a path to Justice. They remember that Dr. Geffner will be coming back in the latter third of the month. Some are wondering what happened to John Smith as a return was expected.

Most of them are wondering why they only heard a day and a half of testimony from the defendant. This is the witness they need to hear from the most. They want to hear about ownership of the death of Travis Alexander and they expect remorse. Neither may be enough to save her life but lack of either will certainly give her death.

The Jury no longer wants to hear the quibbles of the defense team and the defendant. They need to know the hard answers to face the atrocities done to Travis Alexander.

I thought it interesting that only one question was asked of Detective Flores by the Jury. The question was discarded by the Court. The fact that no other question was asked of the Detective is a great sign for Travis Alexander.

This is a Jury of reasonable people.

I will bet there are Jurors that think Juan Martinez has already presented his case. Because this is a retrial of the third phase, he had the opportunity to provide only an overview which is an aberration from normal third phase proceedings. They are not trained on the sequencing of a trial.

This Jury is in for a pleasant surprise not too far down the horizon. Every day that passes is another step toward Juan Martinez assuming the reigns. Each passing day represents a step closer to Justice for Travis Alexander and his family.

I cannot imagine that the defense team is looking forward to the wrath of Juan…especially the defendant.

Every good relationship that develops as a result of this Trial is the manifestation of the Spirit of Travis Alexander.”

Justice 4 Travis Alexander…

Justice for Dale…

Paul A. Sanders, Jr.

The 13th Juror @The13thJurorMD (Twitter)

Brain Damage: A Juror’s Tale” available on:

(Amazon.com and http://www.Barnesandnoble.com)


Porngate Part 3- alt Title Willmott is a Tool.

December 11, 2014

Alt Alt title, Nurmi is also a tool-Arizona

Hai kids.  Welcome to the never ending porngate escandolo.  I’m so sick of all of this I considered writing it in a different language just to liven things up, but I don’t know who all can read Gaelic so I figured I’d just go with good old English.

It is freezing up in this bitch.  We got snow, like 8 to 10 inches of snow.  Your queen hates, hates, hates snow.  So, make it stop.

Okay so the mugs are now ordered.  I don’t have to pay the printer till they are gone so I figured I’d go ahead and get them because they are cool.  We had to make a color change because you can’t screen purple for some fucked up reason that I’m not even going to go into but this is what they look like now.  really big mean dog school color logo for black coffee cups. Hope you like them.

Since poor old Joe Santos or is it Santa, hard to tell with that wiggly jiggly thing that IS the look is so butthurt about my donate button I though being that it is Christmas I would help out his number one finger bang wet dream so I present the Stabby Gallery stabby artThere ya go, now if people want to they can purchase one of the above lovely portraits.  All funds of course going to the irrevocable trust for that super duper appeals attorney. (NOT A THING!)

Before I get started on todays fuckery I’d just like to send a very special shout out to the whole goddamn Stabbyite camp.  HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHA!!

So, there was a shit ton of computery type stuff that nobody that is not a computer forensics expert ever needs to know and because I don’t feel like typing out a bunch of mumbo jumbo that maybe three of us will actually understand (and by us I certainly don’t mean me, I was totally fucking lost at hash value) I figured Jenny was calling her dealer but turns out I was totally wrong.  I will just skip to the part where it got very interesting.  So hope you are here right now PV.  Sincerely.  Our main dog wrangler was on the stand for the first bit and Willmott the tool tried to go after him.  This is the guy that has to deal with a raging pitbull on a daily basis to Jenny from the Cell Block was nothing.  The tool wants to know if Flores saw Juan on the computer and Flores says nuh uh, nope, he was off to the side taking notes.  The tool then asked if Stabby mentioned anything about naked pictures or porn on the computer to which Flores answered that nope he didn’t think so.  Willmott then says that he, Flores didn’t do anything to stop the defense from turning the computer on?  Flores gave the obvious answer that he is not allowed to interfere with the defense looking at evidence.  Getting absolutely nowhere Jenny moved on to a video camera that was collected. It was not broken but the door had to be forced opened to get the tape.  And then Jenny who very obviously graduated Suma Cum Laud said the following “But you never contacted defense to see if they wanted to view it?”  Now, I don’ t know about you all, but as a law professor and Dean of Fuckery it is my understanding that it is not the prosecutions job to tell the defense what or how to view evidence.  Just sayin’  And so did Juan.  He was up like he had a spring loaded ass and said to Flores “is it your job to tell the defense how to view evidence? To which Flores said “No duh”. A ten minute recess was then called so Jenny could curl into the fetal position and lick her wounds.

After the recess Juan was up and called Perry Smith.  Perry Smith is a computer god.  He works in computer forensics at the Mesa PD but dude is known all over the place by geeks everywhere.  Basically he says he needs the drive that big numpti is working with and for some reason that he won’t give, he is refusing to up it.  His dad died is his latest excuse for why it has not been produced.  Now pay attention because here is where things get very very interesting in a really good way if your name isn’t Stabby fucking Einstein. An incinerator folder was found in the recycle bin.  A folder that could not have existed on the original hard drive BECAUSE IT DID NOT EXIST at that time.  Willmott the tool is objecting like her life depends on it. Or somebody’s.  Sometimes Judge Stephens however seems to be seeing the light and is NOT THE  ONE today.  She basically told Jenny to sit the fuck down and shut the fuck up.  Someone actually went into the computer and attempted to delete the incinerator program manually. ON OCTOBER 22 2014 AT 10:16 PM TO BE EXACT.

Jenny is back up and because she has not made enough of an ass of herself for one day she takes a run at probably one of the most prominent computer handlers on the planet.  This should be fun…for us.  Here was her big question because I’m just not typing them all out, they are mostly moot and just time wasters.  Jenny asked  If someone from Mesa PD turned on computer does that violate policy? Perry said yes BUT it doesn’t include defense turning it on. She asked a couple more things that really didn’t matter, she has obviously clued in that she is in waaaay over her head and Juan who may or may not be on fire is back up for re-direct.

The pitbull who was quite literally foaming at the mouth (and I would be too. Prosecutorial misconduct my ass.)(And eat a dick PV for spreading that rumor around)said you were asked about Mesa PD guidelines. Does it address defense attorney’s and their right to look at computers? Perry said no it did not.   You found the incinerator on the working copy correct? Perry said yes. So, couldn’t it be tampering by having this incinerator program on there? Absolutely answered Perry.

After Lunch Jenny decided she wanted to call a surprise witness because why the fuck not at this point.  Juan objected saying they hadn’t been interviewed but he seemed like he really didn’t give a shit one way or the other.  Gilbert McReynolds who is some kind of investigator is on the stand. His big moment was saying he saw Flores turn on one of the computers. Then Juan was up.  McReynolds admitted that he never saw Juan touch a computer.  Now lets get to the good stuff.

Nurmi threw the biggest tantrum of the trial this far. He said that according to Juan LaViolette has problems with the truth, Jodi has problems with the truth and maybe she was telling the truth. And then Juan got up and completely lost his fucking mind.

You say there are all these leaks made by the state? Lets talk about the Mitigation Specialist for a moment mmmmkay. This Mitigation Specialist that goes by cougarlicious has leaked info to Michael Kiefer and others constantly through out this case. ( I swear I peed a little that cougarlicious is in the record until the end of time.) You are insane enough to blame the state and Sheriff Joes Homey Don’t Play That House of Indefinite Incarceration for her giving an interview? How is that a state action. Maybe the defendant should say no. The accusation of the Sheriff office harassing ChaCha and Stabby has already been settled. (he is talking about when the smuggling dance instructing perpetually thinking she’s 20 stabby’s best mule got kicked for a couple of days) In conclusion, I am asking that you see that the defense couldn’t defend a parking violation and throw this whole mess right the fuck up out of the bitch. And with that the mighty pitbull caught a goodboy treat in mid air and headed back to the prosecution table.

Nurmi got up and asked the court to look at the facts and then Jenny started poking him in the back and making slicing motions across her neck so he said some other stuff. He brought up some case that has absolutely shit to do with good old Stabby and said do we wait 23 years for her to be exonerated. Um, he was in court when she said she did it right? Like I didn’t hallucinate that or anything did I? Then he actually asked for the case to be dismissed and court was called till Monday.

That is it for tonight kids. RBMD laughing my fucking ass off.

PayPal Donate Button

If you enjoy my blog please donate to the I don’t want to freeze to death fund. All donations to me not dying of hypothermia are greatly appreciated.


Behind The Words... With Kim

Examining the minds and actions of female killers

Varmt News Network

It's the Internet.

Just Da Truth!

musings of a dangerous mind

peskyvarmt

Just another WordPress.com site

Asleep in Left Field-My Life

4 out of 5 Friends recommend this WordPress.com site

Out in left field

(Totally fictional) Drama Queen Stories

CALLS FOR JUSTICE

sometimes, there are monsters walking amongst us

Behind The Words... With Kim

Examining the minds and actions of female killers

Varmt News Network

It's the Internet.

Just Da Truth!

musings of a dangerous mind

peskyvarmt

Just another WordPress.com site

Asleep in Left Field-My Life

4 out of 5 Friends recommend this WordPress.com site

Out in left field

(Totally fictional) Drama Queen Stories

CALLS FOR JUSTICE

sometimes, there are monsters walking amongst us