Jodi Arias No verdict, Can you beleive that?

poaky1May 25, 2013

I don't want to give her more mention, but I am shocked that it wasn't a unanimous death sentence. Or at least Life in prison. The jury had to agree that they could invoke a death penalty if needed, I wonder what changed their ability to sentence death. At least life in prison? Travis's family has to suffer longer and suffer financial setbacks etc because these people lied about being able to be responsible for making a decision. I don't get it. If they were not able to sentence her to death, there was the option of Life in prison. This jury needs a wakeup call. Something is fishy here. If they don't want death, there is life in prison. What other fate does someone want for her? Sorry, It is not fair. None of it makes sense.

Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
poaky1

After seeing the death photos, which are online if you are curious enough to search. They are graphic. I have a young brother and would do away with someone who would hurt him. I wonder if they were paid off. They aren't sequestered. I am probably wronge, but very suspicious.

    Bookmark   May 25, 2013 at 3:44AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
littleonefb

You may be suspicious about this, but it is one thing to convict someone of a crime, even first degree murder, but it is a very different thing to then decide whether a person should live or die, regardless of his/her crime.

Juries are made up of human beings and not all human beings think alike, believe the same.

I'm not surprised, in the least, that the jury became deadlocked on the issue of life in prison or death.

Not sure how many people even want to be in the position to decide whether someone should live or die as a punishment for a crime committed and convicted of.

On the other hand, I am against the death penalty for anyone, regardless of the crime.

I don't believe that anyone, including the government has the right to kill someone as punishment for a crime and apparently there where enough people on this jury that also felt the same way as I do.

I applaud the jury members that wouldn't agree to put her to death.

A civilized society, a civilized government just doesn't continue to have the death penalty for any reason.

    Bookmark   May 25, 2013 at 9:31AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
momj47(7A)

You are mistaken. There has been a verdict, she was found guilty. This part of the trial was for punishment - life in prison or death.

I'm glad they deadlocked.

    Bookmark   May 25, 2013 at 9:52AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
mylab123(z5NW)

I am for the death penalty in rare cases that fall within certain narrow parameters and DNA providing proof necessary of guilt if there are no witnesses.

If the convicted murderer poses a very great threat to the anonymous public - like serial killers or committed terrorists, all who have been convicted of murders, some of them would certainly qualify to be judged a grave threat against society should unforeseen circumstances arise which caused them to end up outside the confines of the prison walls.

The jurors on that case could very well have been truthful in their answer that they could render a verdict of the death penalty and yet for reasons they found compelling, they did not think the death penalty was warranted in THIS particular case after hearing all the evidence. Perhaps they felt that now this woman was no longer a strong threat to society.
The decision they had to make is what this phase of the case was all about, after all. Some jurors obviously found that she should be put to death and felt this so strongly that evidently they found themselves unable to vote any other way. It is unfortunate that they could not vote for life without parole instead, putting a period at the end of this case, but this is how our system is supposed to operate.

I think that with life, there should be a punishment that includes something uncomfortable that must be performed correctly every day in order to keep other privileges, something performed for several hours a day.

Like moving a pile of rocks from one spot to another spot 25 yards away. A chore that has no meaning, gives no sense of accomplishment but is done as only as a consequence for outrageous crimes against another person. Then they can return to the decent life that is often forged in prison and then do the good works or work on a higher education and perform tasks which are meaningful and can bring a sense of accomplishment. I believe that life in prison is often something that people adjust to, often quite well, and often can make themselves a reasonable, meaningful and contented life within prison. Good for them.

But a period of time each day in a physical labor (health permitting of course) that is not excessive but is also detested because it is meaningless is something I feel should be considered for those who commit such a deplorable crime against another that they are sentenced to life as a result.
Of course, jmo on the subject.

    Bookmark   May 25, 2013 at 10:16AM
Sign Up to comment
More Discussions
Local (USA) is nothing if we can't compete internationally
I started to comment on the "Dinosaurs are bad"...
steve2416
Ben Carson Clown for all Seasons
Ben Carson, the retired neurosurgeon and potential...
labrea_gw
Pigs Fly . . . Or Try to Fly
California newspapers are proudly announcing that the...
nancy_in_venice_ca Sunset 24 z10
Bibi's speech tomorrow
Are you planning on watching? I sure am!
ogrose_tx
A wonderful man left us last week
Father Theodore Hesburgh of Notre Dame dies at age...
Jmc101 z5
© 2015 Houzz Inc. Houzz® The new way to design your home™