Jodi Arias: Hell Hath No Fury

Arias attorneys seek to bar live coverage of trial


Jodi Arias Jennifer Wilmott May 21, 2013 Photo / AP - The Arizona Republic, Rob Schumacher - PoolPHOENIX (AP) – Jodi Arias has sought the spotlight at every turn, granting national television interviews in the months after her arrest, another on the day of her conviction, and about a half dozen the day jurors began deliberating whether she should live or die for her crimes.

Now facing a retrial to determine her sentence, Arias’ lawyers are asking a judge to bar live TV coverage inside the courtroom, an irony not lost on prosecutors and a lawyer representing CNN.

“She has voluntarily thrust herself into the vortex of this public controversy,” the news network’s attorney, David Bodney, told the judge at a hearing Friday. “It is unfair to deprive the public … because someone can’t control her own speech.”

Arias was convicted of first-degree murder May 8 in the 2008 stabbing and shooting death of boyfriend Travis Alexander in his suburban Phoenix home. The same jury failed to reach a decision on whether she should get the death penalty, setting the stage for a second penalty phase.

Arias’ attorneys are arguing that the same intense publicity that enveloped her trial will no doubt come in the second penalty phase as well, hindering her ability to get a fair trial. They also are seeking to have the new jury sequestered, citing thousands of television news shows and newspaper articles about Arias throughout her roughly five-month trial, as well as a Lifetime movie about the case that attorneys said attracted 3.1 million viewers.

In addition, Arias’ lawyers want the retrial moved out of the Phoenix metropolitan area because of excessive publicity, and they want the judge to compel all jurors eventually seated to reveal their Twitter user names so the accounts can be monitored to ensure jurors aren’t communicating about the case.

Arias herself has operated a Twitter account, even throughout the trial, using a third party to post comments on her behalf as she remains jailed. As of Friday, she had more than 78,000 followers.

In one recent motion, prosecutors shot back, noting that the defense efforts fail to acknowledge Arias’ “own role in creating publicity about the trial.”

“She cannot create what she now considers a problem and then expect the court to change its procedure to solve the problem,” the motion read.

The judge excluded the press and the public from the remainder of Friday’s hearing, despite objections from various media outlets. No rulings have yet been issued on any of the defense motions.

Under Arizona law, while Arias’ murder conviction stands, prosecutors have the option of pursuing a second penalty phase with a new jury in an effort to get a death sentence. If the second jury fails to reach a verdict, the death penalty would be removed as an option, and the judge would sentence Arias to ether spend her entire life behind bars or be eligible for release after 25 years.

Arias, 33, admitted she killed Alexander but claimed it was self-defense after he attacked her. Prosecutors argued it was premeditated murder carried out in a jealous rage after the victim wanted to end their affair and planned a trip to Mexico with another woman.

BRIAN SKOLOFF

Source: AP

Copyright 2013 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Share this post!
Facebook Twitter Linkedin Email Pinterest

Comments

tab  
Joyce austin says:

Jodi Arias is now a convicted murderer so who cares what her attorneys are requesting? I say she’s a waste of space and kill her already, but if the judge has to consider the defense requests, go ahead and sequester the jury, and even spy on their twitter accts, but do move the trial or exclude cameras from the courtroom.

   
TrudyLynn says:

never mind I figured it out. I’m confused with all the journal and email and dates in the evidence.

   
TrudyLynn says:

It was June 4th not May 8th as it states in the 2nd or 3rd paragraph. maybe I’m reading it wrong.

   
watching2 says:

First off why does she have a twitter account at all. And what does she care if jurors do? Because she spouts off on twitter. To get more attention. Why does she have a say so in this matter? And to sequester the jurors also? Why does she think she can have her cake & eat it too! Smh a murderer is a murderer, plain and simple

   
goodlawd says:

Cannot believe all of this bull crap the defense is putting out. I know it has been said before but if the murderer had not done those two national TV interviews in 2008, I would venture to say it would not have become a high profile trial.

Moreover, wassup with Twitter accounts? Really? What about Facebook postings as well as a multitude of other ways of communicating? Many jurors who hold professional jobs would also have LinkedIn accounts. The dynamic trio of JA, KN and JW are just plain stupid….and I wish the court system would put a halt to the madness. Thanks for letting me vent.

   
Beverly Spincic says:

It is befitting, based on defendants past behavior, that her trial not be closed to public/media. She created the “circus” surrounding her trial, even before her trial. Disclosing jurors twitter accounts is even more ridiculous. JA has made “horrible” decisions and must now face the consequences.

   

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *