Jodi Arias convicted of first-degree murder

[moi621 (imported)]

Or once the act is initiated there is such a flood of emotions at being motivated to cross the line I can understand the "over kill" aspect similar to the grand mother convicted of killing her grandson.

And then the fear at facing the police and justice system putting such a person into a mental stutter.

Moi

[considering (imported)]

A friend of mine is doing life on a murder one charge-yeah, I have friends in low places. What he says, and it resonates here, is that however he plead and with whatever he was charged, you could not jump over the fact that he killed another person. Whatever his state of mind-he and the deceased were both strung out on drugs-it did not alter the fact that he shot the guy. What the jury had problems with was, as here premeditation. In both cases, it's hard how premeditation exists except in the mind of the beholders, in this case the jury. Both were overkill (my buddy emptied a full clip into him) but while the theory is that this sort of excessive violence is sometimes reflective of former conditions, that's a hard row to hoe in terms of proof.

My own personal distaste for this sort of trial by media is that the media found a juicy case with lots of back stories, an accused who provided fodder for her own accusations and defense and...they ran with it. The public seems to love this sort of lurid trial in the same way that the Roman masses were diverted from their own problems with the gladiator games etc.

By the way, juries such as this one deserve hazardous duty pay. Of course, how a substantial part of their near future works out depends on how silent they choose to be. I will assume some of them cannot resist telling it to whomever and will appear; This makes them a public figure and when they open the door to get their paper and the cameras are rolling and a well dressed person with a microphone starts asking questions, they laid themselves open to it.

[Dave (imported)]

There is a long history of certain parts of the media being devoted to courtroom proceedings and televised commentary on those trials.

I'm not sure it started with OJ Simpson, might have been before but the sensationalization of crime and trials is one of the distasteful aspects of Media.There's been several "trials of the century" on "crimes of the century" that are nothing more than sensationalistic wastes of time.

Nancy Grace makes a living doing this.

The old cable outlet COURT TV made reputations on televising trials for good or bad.

Greta Van Susteren is another of those commentators who made a reputation on TV.

Dan Abrams is a third.

As for exploiting the unfortunate -- Dr Phil is up there with the best.

So is Keith Ablow who tends to judge with the barest minimum of evidence.

Nothing beats Maury Povich screaming "guilty" or the "kid is yours" or the lie detector says yada yada yada...

The "breathless", "this is earth-shaking", converge by commentators who seem to think they hold the morals and conscience of the world in their hands is nothing but cheap, self-deluded, tabloid journalism.

Jody Arias was just the latest in a long line of trials where without the press the proceedings would have been 1/3 the time or less and the decision never in doubt.

[Losethem (imported)]

Jodi Arias, the teen years. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EOJCojemHd4)

What happened the first time someone tried to break up (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zg6iMDfOl9E) with Jodi Arias.

--LT

[A-1 (imported)]

Jodi Arias, the teen years. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EOJCojemHd4)

What happened the first time someone tried to break up (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zg6iMDfOl9E) with Jodi Arias.

--LT

Oh.........my..........GOD!!! ...that's awful!

[Losethem (imported)]

Nancy Grace makes a living doing this.

Did you see The Daily Show getting on Nancy Grace about interviewing another CNN reporter live via-satellite from a parking lot in Phoenix? As in, both of the people on the satellite interview were about 50ft. from one another in the same parking lot? You could see the same cars going by behind one of them then show up a second later behind the other one.

I think the 24-hour news cycle has finally jumped the shark.

--LT

[janekane (imported)]

Many years ago, I took a college class in "American Government." The professor, whose reputation was that of the most challenging professor in the college, used a form of teaching based on the then-popular Jeopardy television program; he would give a definition and the class members, in teams organized by seats one behind the other, were to state what was being defined.

For the first time ever in my whole life, I was the most popular person in a group. Each team got a combined score, and the team of which I was the front row member dramatically out-scored every other team. Came the next term, the professor told me that he had to delete something like half of my grade score before he could enter it into the college records computer system. The professor told me that I was not the first person for whom that had happened, but it was very, very rare.

I learned something of jeopardy during that class.

So, in the manner of that Professor's pedagogy:

What is an optimal label for what Jodi Arias did? Correct answer: "Acting out a prior abuse-generated, thwarted freeze discharge, psychotic break."

What is an optimal label for those who found Jodi Arias to be, under the rule of law, "guilty"? Correct answer: "People who are consciously oblivious to their own tragically similar psychotic break."

What is plausibly the most devastating form of psychotic break yet recognized by any qualified scientist? Correct answer: "The traditional infant-child transition that typically happens at the age of about 18 months."

What is plausible evidence for the typical infant-child transition being of the form of a psychotic break? Correct answer: "The amnesia it produces for early childhood lived experience(s)."

What is the most dangerous form of trauma of the traditional infant-child transition? Correct answer: "Shattering a person's inborn basis of ethical morality by making innocence and truthfulness immensely more painful than deception and dishonesty."

What is the basis, janekane, for your aforementioned, espoused beliefs? Correct answer: "However it happened, before I learned to talk in English word sentences of two or more words, I had observed that telling a child that telling the child something meant that the child (toddler age?) could, by words alone, actually understand something that the child (toddler age?) had not actually done, when understanding is the form of learning that happens only by actually doing something; and, because I was somehow able to recognize that the infant-child transition was the indoctrination of deception and dishonesty in children (toddler age?) before anyone attempted to coerce me, using whatever form of terrifying intimidation that was available, into transitioning from infancy childhood, I was able to avoid going through the infant-child transition, and have avoided going through it for the whole of my life so far."

What is a name for the condition in which a child (toddler age?) does not go through the infant child transition, and does not go through it at any later age? Correct answer: "Autism."

[Dave (imported)]

Did you see The Daily Show getting on Nancy Grace about interviewing another CNN reporter live via-satellite from a parking lot in Phoenix? As in, both of the people on the satellite interview were about 50ft. from one another in the same parking lot? You could see the same cars going by behind one of them then show up a second later behind the other one.

I think the 24-hour news cycle has finally jumped the shark.

--LT

The Daily Show did a good job of skewering Nancy Grace...

Here's a link to it: http://www.mediaite.com/tv/jon-stewart- ... inorities/

I think he could have done more but he went on to mock Dick Harpootlian and Jon Stewart's images of a Harp-Poodle are just disturbing.

[devi (imported)]

Kinda watched more of that stupid trial than I intended to. A real time waster! There was definately a major mob scene mentallity present. What kind of people are these that do that sort of thing? But I do have to say that Jodi's defense just had too too many plausibles and no confirmed's. Let's give one plausible a value of one in ten, multiply another plausible to the first plausible of one in ten equalling one in a hundred, add a few more plausibles for well beyond one in a million and then add the fact that she would change her story pretty much at will and you'd think somebody like that wouldn't deserve all the time that crowd was giving her. Also she did seem to me to have spent an awful lot of time and energy toward the pre-planning, the act itself and then the cover up to be regarded as credible. Nonsense!