General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsJodi Arias jury deadlocked but must keep deliberating
03:18 PM ET EDT (AP)
PHOENIX Jurors in the Jodi Arias murder trial told the judge Wednesday that they are unable to reach a unanimous verdict on whether the convicted murderer should be get life or death for killing her boyfriend, prompting the judge to send them back to the deliberation room to work through their differences.
The jury reported its impasse after only about two and a half hours of deliberations that began Tuesday afternoon.
"I do not wish or intend to force a verdict," Judge Sherry Stephens told the jurors before sending them back to continue their discussions. She instructed them to try to identify areas of agreement and disagreement as they work toward reaching a decision.
-snip-
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/22/jodi-arias-interview_n_3318543.html
Live-blog: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/22/jodi-arias-penalty-deliberations_n_3320132.html#blog
Live-blog: http://www.hlntv.com/article/2013/05/21/jodi-arias-trial-penalty-phase-arias-statement
Drale
(7,932 posts)especially when life and death are the outcome? Sentencing should be a completely different court, with a panel of judges not connected to the first trial. Average people who make up jury's are not qualified or mentally ready to decided how someone should be punished.
closeupready
(29,503 posts)They ruled that juries had to make that judgment, NOT judges. That's how our system works.
I believe, interestingly, it was Ring v. Arizona.
Mosby
(16,448 posts)Put an end to judges deciding sentencing in death penalty cases.
The SCOTUS put the onus on juries.
longship
(40,416 posts)Arias has already been convicted. What are the judge's options on a deadlocked jury?
Wouldn't it have to be unanimous to go to the death penalty? And wouldn't failure of unanimity default to life without parole? Or to judge decides short of death?
Mr. David
(535 posts)No questions asked.
Tx4obama
(36,974 posts)LeftInTX
(25,915 posts)They are questioned about the death penalty during the selection. If they are absolute anti-death penalty, they don't make it.
Chan790
(20,176 posts)As an anti-DP activist who got summoned for jury duty before I became active in this arena, I was asked this question.
I was not honest. I'm not sure a lot of people who oppose capital punishment would be as it's a good way to prevent executions...get seated on a capital-case and then simply declare in the jury-room post-conviction that you don't feel there was sufficient evidence or grounds for a capital sentence.
Tx4obama
(36,974 posts)... where they found out that the one jurors during deliberations said that they 'were against the death penalty' (for anyone) and the judge tossed that juror off the jury and replaced him/her. And then the verdict ended up unanimous for the death penalty.
longship
(40,416 posts)Tx4obama
(36,974 posts)... then the Judge will dismiss this jury and a brand NEW jury will be picked.
The verdict of 'guilty' and the verdict of 'aggravation found' will stand from the first jury.
The second jury will only decide the 'death or life' issue/phase.
If the second jury in the end cannot decide then it will fall to the judge to decide life in prison without parole or life in prison with possibility of parole after 25 years.
--------
Also...
http://www.hlntv.com/article/2013/05/21/jodi-arias-trial-penalty-phase-arias-statement
Mr. David
(535 posts)to get what the DA wants.
The DA will never get the DP. He's going to have to live with LWOP.
BainsBane
(53,137 posts)A non-unanimous decision is a decision for life in the penalty phase. If they've already decided aggravating circumstances exist, I see no purpose for a second jury. The other poster is right. It will cost taxpayers a fortune to present all that evidence again to a second jury. Let the woman rot in jail for life and be done with it.
Chan790
(20,176 posts)Edit: I see Tx4obama already answered this and had more info than me.
Tx4obama
(36,974 posts)Tx4obama
(36,974 posts)Mr. David
(535 posts)Colorado's Governor Hickenlooper just gave a murderer a temporary reprieve that does not end his sentence - rather slap it in the future.
The case is over 20 years old.
DENVER - Colorado Governor John Hickenlooper delayed the execution of convicted killer Wednesday, citing doubts about death penalty.
Sources tell 9NEWS that Hickenlooper is granting a "temporary reprieve" in the case, not clemency.
Under a reprieve, Dunlap could conceivably be executed some day. The reprieve will stay in place until Hickenlooper or another governor lifts it.
Arguably the most difficult decision of his political career, Hickenlooper's decision may earn him blowback as prosecutors are currently seeking the death penalty against James Holmes for the mass murder at an Aurora movie theater.
Tx4obama
(36,974 posts)before she would be executed.
leftynyc
(26,060 posts)open to her then yes, it will take 20 years. That's really entirely up to her. McVeigh decided not to appeal and was killed pretty quickly.
Tx4obama
(36,974 posts)She does not want to die.
And she also said that she "does not believe in the death penalty".
LeftInTX
(25,915 posts)Right after her conviction - LOL
I'm not following this case, but read she told the court that she was going to start a prison recycling program and few other lame things if she was given life. I don't think this would have helped her case.
Anyway, my hunch is the jury is probably ignoring her recycling pitch and taking mitigating factors etc. into consideration.
Tx4obama
(36,974 posts)... they had a prison official on TV last night and he said, if she is sentenced to life, she will be in the same section of the prison as the other three women that are on death row. Then after three years if she has had good behavior then she could be moved to 'medium security' area where she could mix with other inmates.
But he said there'd be no way that she could come in there and start up her own programs (recycling etc). He said paid professionals are in charge of coming up with, deciding, and implementing the programs that they think are best suited for the inmates.
Basally she would be a 'follower' not a 'leader'.
Pragdem
(233 posts)LWOP should always be handed out to rapists and murderers.
gopiscrap
(23,769 posts)BainsBane
(53,137 posts)who have more than one victim, IMO.
Tx4obama
(36,974 posts)-snip-
So, what happens if Stephens declares a mistrial because the jury is hung?
A mistrial at this point would just apply to the penalty phase of the trial. Arias' first-degree murder conviction would still stand, and so would the jurors' finding that Arias murdered Alexander in a "cruel manner."
A new jury would be selected, and this new jury would only decide whether Arias will be sentenced to death via lethal injection or life in prison.
If the second jury were to say Arias can live out the remainder of her days behind bars, Stephens would decide whether she will get life without parole, or life with the eligibility of parole after 25 years.
-snip-
http://www.hlntv.com/article/2013/05/22/what-happens-if-jodi-arias-jury-hung-0?hpt=hln10_1
Kick in to the DU tip jar?
This week we're running a special pop-up mini fund drive. From Monday through Friday we're going ad-free for all registered members, and we're asking you to kick in to the DU tip jar to support the site and keep us financially healthy.
As a bonus, making a contribution will allow you to leave kudos for another DU member, and at the end of the week we'll recognize the DUers who you think make this community great.