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 Whole Bunch Of Stuff

March 2, 2015

how can there be this many crimes?

Hello everyone.  Your Dean of Fuckery/Law Professor/Queen of the region of mean and surrounding areas/ resident sarcasm expert and owner of one in house psychic has bunches of things to discuss while we wait (possibly forever) for the verdict that will put an end to Stabby and her quest for fame.

First, Eddie Ray Routh, killer of American Sniper Chris Kyle has been found guilty by a jury of is peers of capital murder. It took that Jury just over 2 hours to reach the verdict.  Of course his attorneys plan to appeal.  Good luck with that. It’s Texas, and you killed a man that many consider a hero to the United States.

Jury Selection continues in the Colorado Theatre shooting case.  Selection began on January 2oth and as of March 2 is still ongoing.

The trial of Dzhokhar Tsamaev, the living Boston Marathon Bomber is set to begin March 4 2015.  Is anyone besides me interested in that one.  Since it is kind of historically significant for several reasons I think it might be worth covering but I will defer to you all.

Justin Ross Harris-the human piece of shit that cooked his baby to death in his car was set to begin in January but was delayed.  I cannot find a start date for this trial but if anyone is interested let me know.

If there are any cases that I have not thought of, or flat out forgot that you are interested in let me know.  Stabby is sooner or later coming to an end and we need a new trial to sink our teeth into.

As for our special little snowflake. I’m concerned with the amount of time the deliberations are taking.  I get that this is a heavy load to bear, and I get that these Jurors will have to live with putting someone to death if that is the verdict (there is no verdict yet.)  The way I look at it is that Stabbykins is a lot like a Rabid dog.  Not putting her down puts everybody at risk.  She is dangerous.  It has been shown over and over again her chameleon like qualities and how easy it is for her to sway the opposite sex (see Jury foreman first Death penalty deliberations.) The amount of time being taken tells me that there is a fairly definitive split on life or death and that my friends cannot be a good thing.

That autopsy photo of poor Travis, throat slit ear to ear should have been enough to garner death.  How could anyone look at that and not see the all encompassing evil underneath?

That’s it for tonight kids.  Let me know your pleasure for our next trial and I will begin my homework.

Everybody please keep the faith and pray for an outcome that is so richly deserved.  Hopefully we will have a verdict and hopefully closure for the Alexanders sometime this week

RBMD peacing the fuck out.

PayPal Donate Button

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


Apparently It Was Take Twitter To Work Day In Arizona.

January 23, 2015

ChaCha better hope forever 21 is still hiring when this is over-Arizona

Hai everybody.  Well it was definitely an interesting day in court today.  We won.  Want to know how I know? No, not because my in house psychic told me.  I know we won because Alfred E. Nurmi asked for a mistrial today.  Now I know that you probably think that is what lawyers are supposed to do right?  Well, in most cases I would tend to agree, but this is a special case and Alfred E. would not in any way request a mistrial unless he was fairly positive that his clients goose was well and truly cooked.  Remove the death penalty?  Yup.  Dismiss with prejudice?  Absolutely.  But he would no way ask the judge to grant him the right to do this alllll over again unless he was fully convinced it was all but over.   The defense rolled over and showed its belly today and I was very happy.  So, to the defense team from me, eat a dick mmmmmkay!!

So this happened during court today. ChaChaisafucktard The ever professional Cha Cha Delarosa tweeted this charming thing while in court supposedly working. A copy of course has been forwarded to everyone I could think of in the Arizona court system because that is just how I roll. Please feel free to do the same. I sent one to the court and to the DA’s office. Oh and to Troy Hayden just because the Stabbyites seem to hate him so very much. I’m hoping he can use it for something.  So, Stabbyites, you can also eat a dick.

This is what Stabby wore to court today.

stabbynotappropriate  Nice to see that ChaCha is also aware that the ship is going down and trying to coerce the mens vote along with a lovely tank top.  Kind of like putting lipstick on a pig isn’t it?  Just sayin’.  I’d tell Stabby to eat a dick, but that ship has way sailed.

Now, on to court.  Juan was in full pace mode even before court started. Flores was ready and tried distracting him with some goodboy treats while Jenny from the Cell Block finished getting the attack suit on Geffner. Juan was quick to attack. God help Geffner if the attack suit gives out before court does.

Juan asked if the statements about the alleged masturbation incident were made years after her arrest. Geffner said yes. Then the pitbull said this isn’t documented in her journal anywhere. Juan asked if it’s true that Stabby told Geffner’s associate that Travis was viewing the offending material on a computer. Geffner answered that the associate must have typed it wrong. He said he didn’t know why she would have typed internet. The pitbull lunged and said because Stabby told the associate that!! Jenny picked that moment to try out the new ejection seats that have been installed and went three feet strait up as she screeched objection, speculation. Overruled. That seemed to make Juan madder and he asked if Geffner was SPECULATING that the associate made a mistake. He was still bristing as he said Geffner gave Stabby the benefit of the doubt instead of considering she was lying about the bullshit she was spewing. He asked again why associate 1 said internet and then said you just assumed that your associate, the trained associate made a mistake? Geffner said yes. Again, how is this man a doctor? Anybody?

The pitbull continued to pace as he said you weren’t even at the jail when Stabby made this statement so you are making assumptions because you are a hired gun. The Defense objectomatic 3000 was promptly deployed and that last remark was stricken from the record. Next the pitbull brought up the fact that Geffner has made over $100 000 off of testifying. Guess what? SIDEBAR.

Back from the sidebar Juan launched again and the attack suit started to look a little frayed. He ripped apart a ton of cases that Geffner had “worked” on, and then brought out that Dr. Sexpert was a speaker at one of Geffner’s non profits. Then he said so was Jenny from the Cell Block. OMG Jenny fired herself halfway up the aisle while screeching objection sidebar. Apparently that one was sustained, but no matter. The mighty pitbull had made his point that these people were all in collusion. He waited patiently for his goodboy treat before moving on.

Stabby seemed to think everything was all good. She had a slight smile on her face and chattered incessantly to Jenny who ignored her and took another bong hit as she watched the ship begin to sink. Juan asked Geffner why there was no mention in his notes that Stabby is a sick stalker peeping tom fuck? Geffner said he was not provided with that information and it was not an interaction between Travis and Stabby. Wait, what? He was never provided with that information. Wow defense!! Good job!!

Oh goody another definition. Dr. DOCTOR!! Geffner said that they needed to define “dating”. They kept having sex and seeing each other. Juan Snarled. While they were dating Stabby lived in California true? Geffnew answered true. After they broke up did she move to another place in California. Geffner had a mistake in the Stabby Anal Einstein this is your life timeline. Juan was fairly foaming at the mouth as he brought up the co worker from Big Sur that said Stabby’s personality changed in an affidavit. Once again Geffner cannot see the trap being laid so masterfully by the pacing Juan. He said you can’t say it had anything to do with Travis can you? Geffner answered “I can’t say nothing, it had something to do with it.” Juan continued. So you are blaming this change in personality on Travis? It’s more complicated than that Geffner said somewhat shakily. So, you are basing this on Travis and Stabby’s interactions? It involved their relationship and was a key factor in this personality change. A key factor to is a large factor right? the pitbull roared. Geffner answered It’s important. Juan continued to lead Geffner down the path of destruction. Couldn’t this personality factor be due to the fact she just lost her house?! What about her financial problems. Her house was being repossessed? Geffners answer was only that he was not sure about the house. He was looking and sounding decidedly shaky. Juan was very aggressively asking next about the breakup with Matt and Bobby and how Stabby was definitely assertive while hunting down the chick Matt was screwing around with. Isn’t that aggressive he snarled. Geffner’s psychological opinion was no, because that is totally an honest answer. yuwholwnhgtolewa…sorry my head hit the keyboard. Juan is driving home the point that Stabby was very aggressive as he brought back up the peeping tom incident. Travis was entitled to sit on his couch and kiss whoever he wants correct? he was broke up with Stabby? Geffner said the definition of broke up was an issue. Now we are rapidfire back to the timeline and Geffner admits that his timeline may not be 100% accurate.

Next the pitbull pulled out Stabby’s honest and for true journals and began to chew them up like a pair of Louboutins. He brought up the Havasupi trip. Stabby was droning on about it in her journals. She wrote that the day had bad and good parts and that Travis apologized to her saying it was 99% his fault. Geffner can’t remember about the fight and we were mercifully at lunch.

Back from lunch the mighty pitbull got one last ear scratch from Flores and trotted back out to the floor. He was all over Geffner like he was a porterhouse steak. Juan snarled that there was an incomplete picture in the journal. Geffner tried to fight back saying regarding the fight, yes. He next brought up that Stabbykins had written about when Dan called telling her Travis was dead and that everything she had written was basically bullshit. Geffner said she may have been disassociating aaaaand I threw up in my mouth a little. The bullshit that this man is spewing, I wonder how he ever gets the taste out of his mouth. Juan continues the carnage he started before lunch and rips Stabby’s diary to shreds. Every lie that she wrote down to try and cover her ass is being exposed in beautiful hi definition for the Jury to see. I bet if you threw holy water on that journal it would ignite.

Juan knew he had Geffner right where he wanted him and decided that this would be a good Tercio de Muerte. This is a great picture of Alfred E. and Jenny From the Cell Block as they watched their witness go down in flames. nurmiwillmuttPlease note the looks on their faces!  Isn’t it beautiful.

Nurmi picked this moment to request the mistrial because he knew what was coming and he knew if it got in it was going to be game, set, match. Not a Judge Stephens told him to eat a dick and testimony continued. Poor little Stabbykins bullshit PTSD came in. AND THEN THE BULLSHIT LIES SHE TOLD ABOUT THE NINJAS THAT GOT HER THE PTSD DIAGNOSIS CAME IN!!
AND THEN THE LETTER SHE WROTE TO TRAVIS FAMILY ABOUT THE NINJAS CAME IN!! And I peed a little. The story she wrote to the family was pretty close to what the prosecution alleges happened except for the Ninjas, so my guess is this is a fairly accurate representation of what happened except where ever she writes ninja replace that with Stabby.

From Jens Trial Diaries. Jodi says in letter she woke up on bathroom floor and heard Travis screaming in the shower. She goes onto to talk about the intruders attacking her and Travis Jodi says a girl came at her with a knife and she grabbed her wrist. She says she kicked her repeatedly in the knees Jodi says she was at an unfair advantage being barefoot Jodi says she had bleeding feet she didn’t notice until later Jodi says Travis was lying down in the hallway and the female was yelling at him Jodi says sorry about her handwriting she’s shaking Jodi get’s away and runs out the door.

Juan roared as he said, and every answer on the PTSD test are based off of this lie. And at that moment Not a Judge Stephens ended court till 9:15 Monday morning so the Jurors get the added bonus of thinking about that all weekend long.

Well done mighty pitbull!!

Oh and this is pretty much what Geffner looked like at the end of that cross.

afterJuan

RBMD peacing the fuck out!!


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.


The Really Big Mean Dog School Of Law; Letting Your Jury Die Of Old Age

January 12, 2015

I hope sometimes Judge Stephens at least has their plots picked out. It seems like the least she could do – Arizona

Well her we are everyone, the 2nd to last class before exams. Letting your Jury Die of Old Age. YAY! Tonights class promises to be as exciting as it sounds. Before we get to class as usual, your Queen/law professor/dean of fuckery/economics professor/sarcasm expert has some house keeping matters that need to be attended to.

Christine Beswick sent us a note this morning and since I am not sure if you all saw it, here it is. You all are so deeply appreciated I wish I had words to say. Hours later, a whole night sleep even later, and I am still speechless at the response from yesterday. The words thank just seem so *small* in comparison to the feelings of gratitude I have for yall! You’ve left this writer speechless! My deepest gratitude to each of you, and especially to dear Kelly for co-ordinating the mission with her troops. Nothing but love for you Kelly! And you guys too! Honestly, it is people like all of you that make me choose writing/truth telling on a Sunday over couch time. Any day of the week! Much love to the RBMD family! Thank you thank you thank you!!! *kisses*

I am so proud of how quickly you all rallied around our friend Christine when she needed us. Of course she can hold her own, but with the threat of a deluge of the ten or so people plus all their alternate personalities I figured better safe than sorry. That and I think we can all agree that a good time was had by all. Well all people not named SW. I cannot abide bullies. Not now, not ever. Especially when said bully is going after any one of you. That I will not have.

Just Da Truth has been added to the blog roll. I have read a lot of his blog and it is good, so if you are looking for someone different to read, check out Just da Truth. It is a very good blog with a ton of info on Stabbykins.

Now on to todays class. I will provide a synopsis of todays court proceedings and get to the root of the class. Allowing your Jury to simply expire of old age and the ramifications thereof.

True to form, sometimes Judge Stephens started out the day with a sidebar because at this point we wouldn’t want our oldest juror to have a heart attack at a sudden change in the routine. Tweets will be brought to you by Jens Trial Diaries and will appear in quotes unless otherwise stated.

Detective Flores was called to the stand because of course we are still going with porngate. They don’t have anything else and we are trying to drag this out long enough to bump off a couple of the jurors so Flores takes his place on the stand. Jenny From the Cell Block is running this line of questioning and is asking Detective Flores about controlling the crime scene. “Jen is going over the electronic evidence on the scene…phones, laptops etc and the policy in handling them” Detective Flores while looking at Jenny like she had two or more heads said he was well aware of the procedures regarding the computers and he knew he was not supposed to turn it off or on. Since the screen on the laptop was dark he grabbed a pen and poked one of the keys bringing it out of sleep mode. This is NOT turning the computer off or on just for the tinfoil hat wearing bunch out there. He then reported the status of the computer to forensics all per SOP. So Jenny, the same one that asked Dr. DeMarte TWICE during the original trial why she hadn’t interviewed the very dead Travis now asked a completely gobsmacked Detective Flores if he thought it was okay to turn the computer on. The computer that was in sleep mode and was not turned on. That computer. She asked a bunch more crap about the computer that didn’t really matter much and then we got to some more important stuff. “Willmott asks if Flores stopped the defense from looking at evidence and Flores says no he didn’t interfere” Detective Flores then emphatically stated that he did not turn the computer on. He said that Juan was sitting in a corner taking notes and was on the phone. The judge then excused the jury so that Jenny could question Flores in an attempt to form some foundation.

OMG she asked Detective Flores if he recalled Juan making comments about looking for nude photo’s of Stabby Einstein. Ewwwwww. Someone pass the brain bleach and AS IF YOU SKANK HO BITCH. Jenny says that two other lawyers heard him say this??? What lawyers?? When?? Why is this a new thing?? Anyway Juan got a little hot pretty fucking fast at that statement and said to the judge if you are going to let this in lets talk about how the prosecutor said how horrific the crime scene was ( I still find it odd that he refers to himself in the third person) and what a liar multiple Stabby is with her plethora of lies about what happened. Sometimes Judge Stephens says it’s irrelevant. All of it. “Juan says at the time, the accusation of Travis looking at porn or the pedophilia accusation wasn’t even brought up yet.”

OMG I’m dyyyyying. The defense wants Juan to be removed as lead council so that he can be called as a witness. Now this is a maneuver I have seen in a trial or two and it never works and always pisses the judge and the prosecutor off. And it did. Alfred E. decided this was a perfect time for one of his patented fits (pitching a Nurmi- copyright pending) He is now begging for her to let them call Juan as a witness and demanding a mistrial. AGAIN. SOMEMORE. STILL.

There was a ten minute recess. Now, I have a source in Arizona who told me Friday that the transcripts would be released on Tuesday but asked me to keep it to myself so I did. During the recess I found out my source is still a great source because the transcripts are being released on Tuesday. We also found out there will be no ruling on the DP motion until either Flores or the computer tech are done their testimony, but we are not sure yet which one.

Flores is now back on the stand and is holding firm to his earlier testimony. “Willmott is saying this testimony was false and Juan objects for vouching and we have a sidebar”

Back from sidebar: Flores says defense expert testified also no porn on computer Jenny begins to giggle an evil little giggle for some unknown reason. “Willmott is saying a Mr. Brown found a porn video on the computer. F says he doesn’t know he hasn’t reviewed the whole report” and with that the seething pitbull is up.

Juan first tells the jury that the crime scene wasn’t pristine because Travis’ friends had been on scene before police arrived. Juan asked Flores that unless god comes down on the scene they are all contaminated correct? Detective Flores answered yes. “Juan asks if there was a different policy at the time of this crime on looking at computers on scene. Flores says Yes” “Juan is reading a policy from 09 and Nurmi wants to approach” Detective Flores provided the power source for the laptop and defense team plugged it in. The pitbull asked if one of Flores duties was defense babysitter to which he answered no.

Juan brought up Lonnie Dworkin and how he went and made images and copies himself. He said that in 2009 these mods would have been known to the defense computer expert. And Lunch is mercifully called #giftfrombabyjesus.

So, to reiterate. The defense was accusing Juan of looking for porn on TA and JA’s computer. He denied it vigorously as did Detective Flores. Sometimes Judge Stephens remembered she was indeed sometimes a judge and refused to allow the defense to bring in the accusation about the prosecutor looking for porn. In a report from Det. Brown it states there was no porn movie on this hard drive that belonged to Travis. Smith was talking about the registry only but he said it only had terms on it and no actual porn correct? Flores answered in the affirmative Then the mighty pitbull roared. There was NO child porn of any kind found on any hard drives belonging to Travis Alexander Correct. Flores answered with a resounding correct and the the Travis is a pedophile train barreled off the tracks and hit a building.

And just like that court was over for the day. Nobody knows why. A motion to preclude a witness for the state has been filed and my in house psychic says that witness they do not want anywhere near the stand is Dr. DeMarte. We will have transcripts 2morrow and court on Wednesday again and we still do not have a ruling on the DP thing, although I would say the lack of ruling and the fact that trial is sort of continuing answers that question.

Now, how does all this fit into letting your jury die of old age?  Well, we have now been in the retrial phase since October. It is January and we are going over the same stuff over and over again. I give this at least another month or so.  Our oldest juror could be dead by then.  Several more may be bored to death and then we won’t have enough jurors to get a verdict. That would mean a mistrial and good old not a judge would have to impose sentence.  Alfred E is a slick one.  In a slime highway kind of way.

Oh and tweet of the day goes to @Banyarola who said Do you guys realize we fought and won WW2 in less time then this trial has taken?

That is it for tonight my lovelies

RBMD peacing the fuck out.
PayPal Donate Button

If you enjoy my blog please consider a small donation.  Donations of any size are greatly appreciated.


The Stabby Arias Penalty Phase Retrial – The Dr. Geffner is an Asshat Edition

December 17, 2014

Hai Kids.  You know, it’s nice to be nice once in a while and try and stretch out an olive branch and all that happy peace on earth good will towards men stuff.  I do however feel rather remiss as your law professor/Dean of fuckery/Queen of Mean/ possible supreme ruler of the universe.  You will have to forgive me.  It is a lot of hats that I wear and I get them all confused sometimes.  You know, like how some people get confused that they are still 21 and gorgeous.  Like that.  Now, my palace is just a run down old farm house in the middle of nowhere and I don’t pretend that it isn’t.  I owe back taxes on it but you know what?  When I was still normal I worked hard, I bought it at the age of 19 all by myself and I paid it off all by myself.   It’s old, and it need a makeover badly, but the dogs and cat at least keep it from becoming a rat haven so there is that.  I do have a complete law library (my lawyer is constantly shipping me cartons of law books) in hopes that even now I might somehow be able to fulfill what he considers to be my destiny.  I also study science so I can be all Einstein-y and shit, and I bet I can write an amicus brief better than Jenny from the Cell Block.  When I am not busy doing that I have taken up a new hobby.  I am now making tinfoil hats to send to each and every one of the stabby/mormonmafia/skateboardninjafrapuccinogang/juan Martinez is a bad man because he wins/ conspiracy theorists.  We can read their thoughts because planetary alignment or radio waves or because I have a contract of indentured servitude with my in house psychic who the fuck knows.

Here in  a nutshell is what I know.  I will type slowly in hopes that the fucktards that still think stabby is going to magically be freed in the next 8 days might get it.

1. Stabby, your patron saint of debauchery(look it up stabbyites I don’t have time to spoon feed you this) has been CONVICTED OF FIRST DEGREE PREMEDITATED MURDER.

2.Stabby is eligible for the death penalty. Now nurms can write motions till he gets carpal tunnel syndrome and that is NOT going to change the fact that she is DP eligible. And if you think that you aren’t starting to piss off the jury with all these stall tactics then you sir are an idiot.

3.Stabby is a fucking liar. How do we know? Her mouth is moving. I bet she lies about what she has for breakfast. We certainly know she lies about being starved to death by good ole sheriff Joe. How’s that lawsuit coming Stabby? Just wondering.

4.Stabby is what I like to call a weasel. Have you ever seen a weasel. Vicious little things. Kind of like ferrets but with rabies and their period all at the same time. Weasels will go into a chicken coop and they will kill a bird and eat it. Then just for the fuck of it they will kill every other bird in the coop. I guess so there aren’t any witnesses. Kinda like tossing a camera in the washing machine. A weasel would do that.

5.Stabby thinks that the whole entire world is dumber than her (and that ladies and gents says a lot). We have I wasn’t there, and then two American ninjas did it and then not only did the ninjas do it but as luck would have it the gun misfired and the one with the knife forgot how to use it and I grabbed my purse and ran. Because a purse at that point would be so important. Then, I killed Travis in self defense. Because he said mean things to me and I didn’t like it. He called me a fucking whore. Because you were a fucking whore. I’m a fucking blonde. Deb is my fucking star student. Mama is a fucking great story teller. You see where I am going with this? It all means NOTHING.

6.Now she has her brother in on the action. He has signed a statement that was read into the record that Stabby mom did indeed beat not just stabby but now both of them with a wooden spoon and Dad of stabby had paddles with their names emblazoned on them (but those never got used). It is AMAZING how the story is evolving to suit her new idea of mitigation.

7.Speaking of mitigation. When are we going to see some. you don’t get to claim the PTSD you (doubtfully have) that you got from killing a guy. Mommy hit you with a spoon. Poor muffin. My dad shot me and I didn’t kill anybody.

8.Geffner is a wash. He has pretty much completely swung his entire testimony and it’s a damn shame the jury isn’t going to find that out till after. He did however make that fairly large goof and call Stabbykins a psychopath. That would be one of the only truthful statements of the “paid experts” thus far.

9.Juan is going to turn him into steak tartar. JUST. LIKE. LAST. TIME.

10.Alfred E. is gonna go to the supreme court. Bless his heart. He probably had the motion already written so he could get it in in time for Christmas bonus dividends as Christine Beswick said.

11.I am sick of the eleventybillion tweets a day that Stabby is innocent

12.I am completely pissed off at the ones saying Travis deserved it because he hurt poor muffins feelings.

13.Porngate turned into nothinggate just like I said it would. Unless you are PV. In that case Juan bad, prosecutorial misconduct blah, fucking blah.

14.I will be very happy when Stabby is stuck in a shu somewhere awaiting her ultimate punishment, whatever that may be.

15.There is no way in hell that LWP is even a remote possibility. LWOP is the very best that she is going to do.

16.Walmart never loses anything EVER.

17.This trial is likely to drag out well into the middle of 2015 and if Nurmi really goes to the supreme court (and he will) maybe longer.

18.That could present us with a mistrial and that would probably be the best thing all the way around. Stabby gets LWOP and goes away and we all get to start ragging on some other trial.

There, that feels better. I feel like my old self again.

A very good friend of mine told me today “meddle not in the affairs of dragons, for thou art crunchy and taste good with ketchup.”     I say fuck dragons.

RBMD peacing the fuck out.

PayPal Donate Button

Fucking Dragons. Please donate to my I don’t want to die of hypothermia or be eaten by a dragon fund. All donations are greatly 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