Advertisements
 

The Never Ending Saga of Stabby Fucking Einstein

July 6, 2018

Please Rise and Salute The Flag of the Great State of Arizona and then Salute Kirk Nurmi For His Testicles Finally Dropping.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS STATE OF ARIZONA DIVISION ONE

STATE OF ARIZONA, No. 1 CA-CR 15-0302 Appellee, v. JODI ANN ARIAS, Appellant. Maricopa County Superior Court No. CR-2008-031021-001 DT

APPELLANT’S OPENING BRIEF

MARICOPA COUNTY PUBLIC DEFENDER

Deputy Public Defenders Downtown Justice Center 620 West Jackson, Suite 4015 Phoenix, Arizona 85003 Telephone (602) 506-7711 ACE@mail.maricopa.gov Attorneys for APPELLANT

Not a Judge Sherry Stephens and Totally Should be a Judge Kelly McFadden Presiding

Ladies and Gentlemen we are going to start with some off the record housekeeping matters. Firstly Stabby’s Pencil is still out on mental health leave so Stabby will be afforded a crayon. If anyone hears any shrieks of laughter up and down the hallway it is just Kirk Nurmi and it should be ignored. We get it Kirk and the neener neener was probably not necessary. The vet, a box of good boy treats and the tranquilizer gun have all been placed on stand by. Totally should be a Judge Kelly will be working most of the first part of what we are all sure is going to be an overly dramatic and way to long appeals process.

The Repellant er I mean Appellant has made several million assertions in her opening (good god is this really just the opening) brief which we will of course have to cover. Pretoria was polite enough to forward all unused puke buckets and they are located at the ends of the aisles for your convenience. As the law dictates you are allowed and encouraged to ask any questioned of the lying ho, sorry I mean appellant that you feel are pertinent. Okay I think we are ready to go so I will hand things off to Totally should be a judge Kelly.

Good afternoon everyone. I have been handed a note that the citizens of earth would like to just go ahead and apologize now that you have to be here. Thank you citizens, we accept your apology.

So lets deal with this shit. Firstly I am going to have to cover exactly what an appeals process entails.

For your edification : Appeal: A request to a higher court to review the lower court’s proceedings and outcome. The defendant argues that the lower court violated his or her rights in some way that warrants getting a new trial or a reduced sentence. Direct Appeal: Filed with the Arizona Court of Appeals. In death penalty cases, the direct appeal is filed with the Arizona Supreme Court. Opening Brief: A written document in which arguments are presented that the defendant’s conviction or sentence is improper and should be reversed.

What we are dealing with today believe it or not is just the opening brief. All 5 million pages of it. Seriously could she have crammed any more stuff in this thing? Jesus H Christ the only thing missing is the chorus from O Holy Night.

Since there is so much garbage to get through I am breaking it up into parts and this is what we are starting with. My answers to statements will be in italics.

STATEMENT OF THE CASE

1

The state indicted appellant, Jodi Ann Arias, for the murder of her boyfriend, T.A. (Instrument 1, hereinafter I.). The state charged her with first degree premeditated murder or in the alternative, felony murder. This is a factual statement that actually happened.

On October 31, 2008, the state made notice of its intention to seek the death penalty. (I. 32-33). On August 7, 2009, the court held a Chronis hearing and found that the state presented probable cause to support one aggravating factor: the crime was committed in an especially cruel manner. (ME 8-10-09). The parties could not settle after a settlement conference. (RT 7-5-11, pp. 2-58). They conducted a second settlement conference before the retrial, which was also unsuccessful. (ME 10-24-13). If this is part of her appeal you will have to excuse me while I bang my head off of the keyboard. aoehtaefhsd. Her idea of a settlement was 10 years for basically killing the man 3 times.

Stabby’s trial began December 10, 2012, with

jury selection. (RT 12-10-12, p. 12). The jury found Arias guilty of first degree murder on May 8, 2013. (RT 5-8-13, p. 11). The aggravation phase began May 15, 2013. (RT 5-15-13, p. 4). The state sought to prove one aggravator, the killing was done in an especially cruel manner.

 

, p. 9). At the conclusion of the aggravation phase, the jury found that the state proved this aggravating factor. \

Please note there may be a slight discrepancy in the cites to the record depending on whether one is referring to the electronic version of the transcripts or the hard copy of the transcripts.

 

2 The penalty phase began May 16, 2013. (RT 5-16-13, p. 53). It concluded on May 23, 2013, when the jury could not agree on life or death. (RT 5-23-13, p. 8). The court declared a mistrial. (I. 1154; RT 5-23-13, p. 10). The defense argued a Motion for Mistrial on May 20, 2013. (RT 5-20-13 #1, pp. 9-18). The court denied that motion. Because there was no reason for a mistrial.

, p. 18). The defense filed a Motion to Vacate the Aggravation Phase verdict pursuant to Rule 24.2. (I. 1174). The court denied that motion. (ME 8-9-13).

Arias’s retrial began September 29, 2014. Once again, the jury could not

agree on a sentence. (I. 2058; RT 3-5-15, p. 6). The court declared a mistrial.

The court sentenced Arias to natural life. (RT 4-13-15, p. 56). The parties stipulated to the amount of restitution. (ME 6-22-15). Arias filed a timely Notice of Appeal. (I. 2083). This Court has jurisdiction pursuant to Article 6, § 9 of the Arizona Constitution, and A.R.S. §§ 12-120.21 (A) (1), 13-4031 and 13-4033 (A).

3

FACTS (Oh this should be good)

This appeal is about Jodi Arias and T.A., whose lives were bound together by secrets. Arias grew up in northern California. (RT 2-4-13 #1, pp. 101-102; 116; 122). Stabby’s  parents abused her physically. (facts not in evidence)

, pp. 101; 104-108). She moved out when she was seventeen years old. (

, pp. 122-125). Arias left school and worked as a waitress. (

 

, pp. 122; 125). She supported herself. (when she wasn’t mooching off of whatever guy she had entranced with her slutty ways)

, pp. 125; RT 2-4-13 #2, p. 21). Arias found work waitressing at resorts in Crater Lake and Monterey. (RT 2-5-13, pp. 9; 20). She lived in Palm Desert, California for four years with her boyfriend, D.B., and was happy there.

, pp. 30; 39-41). Arias was a spiritual seeker, always interested in self-improvement. (facts so far out of evidence they may be circling jupitor)

, pp. 7-

8; 84). She became involved in “PPL,” Pre

-Paid Legal Services, a Pyramid scheme, lets just call a spade a spade here mmmkay.

, pp. 56; 61). She enjoyed the inspiring, motivational PPL functions. (

, pp. 75; 84). She met T.A. at a PPL function in Las Vegas in September of 2006. (

, pp. 62; 67). T.A. was an executive director of PPL. (

, p. 69). He approached Arias at a social function and introduced himself. (

, p. 68). They spent time together that weekend.

 

, pp. 70-74). She was his date at a formal banquet.

, pp. 70-74). She considered T.A. to be a new friend.

 

, pp. 97-100). After leaving Vegas, they talked on the phone every night.

, p. 106). By the weeks end stabby broke up with D.B.

, pp. 98-99). She wanted to start a family. (and hopefully at some point collect a bunch of spousal and child support)

, p. 99). D.B. did not want to get married. because he was a smart, smart man

, pp. 102-103). Arias and T.A. met the following weekend at their friends’ residence in California for a pyramid scheme event

, pp. 103-104). Once everyone was asleep, T.A. arrived at Arias

’s bedroom for a night time rendezvous. because of course he did, she was giving it away for fucks sake.

, p. 106). T.A. initiated sexual contact. Assuming facts not in evidence and my personal guess is someone named stabby initiated sexual contact

 

, p. 118). Arias knew that T.A. was Mormon. That is actually a true statement

, p. 90). He wore his temple garments during that sexual encounter. Assumes facts not in evidence and EWWWW

, p. 121). The next morning, they attended a Mormon church service together.

, p. 126). T.A. encouraged her to explore Mormonism.

, pp. 129-130). T.A. was a priest of the order Melchizedek and a respected church member. (RT 2-13-13, pp. 133-134). Arias believed T.A. was superior to her in all matters concerning religion. (I’m gonna give her this one.)

, p. 134). He gave her a copy of the Book of Mormon and sent missionaries to visit her at her home. (RT 2-5-13, p. 129). Two months after they met, T.A. baptized

Arias into the Mormon religion. (RT 2-6-13, pp. 25-26). After the baptism ceremony, the couple returned to Arias home where they had sex (assumes facts not in evidence)

, pp. 45-47). The Law of Chastity forbids sexual contact between unmarried persons. (RT 1-30-13, p. 96). T.A. instructed Arias that the church permitted sexual contact but not vaginal intercourse. (RT 2-6-13, p. 17). Arias trusted T.A. when he assured her that oral and anal sex between unmarried persons were acceptable. (so einstein is an idiot. Is that what we are going with?)

, pp. 20; 16-17). Eventually, the unmarried couple engaged in vaginal intercourse as well as other types of sexual behavior. How many fucking types are there we’ve covered anal, oral, vaginal, desserts, what’s missing maybe livestock?

, p. 99). Arias and T.A. became an exclusive couple in February of 2007

, p. 51). They met at PPL events and travelled together to visit Mormon historical sites.

, pp. 100; 122). Travelling together as an unmarried couple was frowned upon by Mormons. (RT 1-30-13, p. 24). T.A. assured her that the church approved of their sexual relationship. ( I CALL BULLSHIT ON THIS ENTIRE STATEMENT)

 

We will pick up with the rest of the opening salvo tomorrow. I need a tylenol and maybe a xanax or something.

RBMD peacing the fuck out

Advertisements

Well it’s happened. The apocalypse is upon us. Stabbys Appeal Process Has Started And Oddly (so not oddly) We Are All To Blame.

July 6, 2018

 

 

My loyal subjects, your royal majesty, high commander of the realm, horse whisperer, honorary DVM, pretend Judge, pretty fucking good pretend lawyer, dog lactation consultant and as always queen of all I survey am back.  And if that has happened that has to mean stabby is back.  Boy is she.

Her first shot across the bow, keeping the appeals process sealed was a swing and a miss so I can pick apart her opening salvo at my leisure.  Which I will as soon as I finish reading the stupid thing.  Bitch learned some new words and shit.

It is roughly equivalent to war and peace if you left the peace part out so I will take yet another one for the team, read the fucking thing, translate it into English and put it up on here.

gotta go read now.  RBMD Peacing the fuck out


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.


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.


Varmt News Network

It's the Internet.

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

Varmt News Network

It's the Internet.

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