Search for the truth
The Jodi Arias case has become extremely complex and convoluted over time for a number of reasons. As a result it will become more and more difficult to unravel and ascertain the TRUTH.
TRUTH! That is the big word which in the adversarial system has little value or meaning and in this case even less than usual as emotion has played too big a role.
It seems increasingly unlikely that the TRUTH will emerge in the foreseeable future, if ever, for the following reasons:
- Jodi Arias was charged with the First Degree Murder of Travis Alexander.
- She pleaded not guilty to the charge but pleaded guilty of killing Travis Alexander alone in self-defense.
- She was found guilty of the charge of First Degree Murder.
- She will soon be given a sentence which will, in all probability, be stiff even if she avoids the death penalty.
- Assuming she appeals against both the sentence and/or conviction this could take many more years.
Many unbiased, rational observers who have taken an objective and dispassionate interest in the case are disturbed by more than a few things, some of which have been consistent and some which have gradually manifested themselves. The view has become about as clear as a thick pea soup.
Many people have voiced opinions and some, like ‘Spotlight on Law’, ‘Inconvenient Truths’ and ‘Richard Speights’ have analysed the evidence in considerably more detail than, it appears the prosecution or the jury did.
I have always struggled to make sense of the prosecution’s presentation of so-called evidence, which is circumstantial at best, and could not see how a jury could possibly think that it had proved its case. But I can understand how jurors, influenced by media, physically and otherwise threatened, could return a guilty verdict.
Among many concerns I have has been the lack of credibility of so many witnesses. The longer witnesses who perjure themselves are examined the more evidence of perjury surfaces. It is not easy for anyone to maintain a credible level of dishonesty for too long. If perjury is considered a serious offence in Arizona then the courts could be in for a busy time when this case is finally put to bed. But I doubt they care.
Despite the fact that there appears to be overwhelming evidence of prosecutorial misconduct the prosecutor is still holding court. It is now difficult to believe that Martinez has not suborned perjury on more than one occasion. His own antics in the court room are enough to make any reasonable person cringe. I believe prosecutors have far too much power and because they are immune from liability during the course of a trial are able to misuse that power, if they wish, and thus undermine the integrity of the legal system and its ability to achieve justice. A police officer in a similar situation would be suspended pending investigation.
So if perjury and prosecutorial misconduct (add to that a wishy-washy judge, if you like) have pervaded throughout then by now the waters will have become so muddied as to render any chance of uncovering the TRUTH highly improbable.
Many questions still unanswered
But more than anything else I am still suspicious about Jodi Arias’ confession and why she did not even suggest the involvement of anyone else in the killing Travis Alexander. Previously she had claimed (in an interview with 48 hours CBS News) that there were two masked intruders in the house who told her to leave and threatened to kill her and her family if she said anything. Furthermore, to back that claim up, the evidence strongly indicates that it would have been physically impossible for her to have perpetrated the killing alone and left the scene as it was found.
What are we to make of this?
Was the story of the masked intruders purely a figment of Jodi’s vivid imagination?
If not, then why did she drop this claim when it makes more sense than her confession – she did it single-handed?
Was she still scared for her family’s safety?
Is the crime scene evidence misleading or is Jodi’s confession false?
Certainly the crime scene evidence is not conclusive by any stretch of the imagination and, in my opinion, it doesn’t support the confession. Whichever way I look at the evidence I cannot see how Jodi Arias could possibly have carried out the killing alone and left the crime scene as it was.
Because of the attorney – client privileges we are precluded from knowing what may or may not have been disclosed to the defence attorneys in this regard or whether the defence advised or supported the plea.
False confessions are not at all uncommon and a number of theories could be put forward in this case. For example:
- Even though it may not be true, Jodi genuinely believes she did it alone.
- Jodi is prepared to sacrifice her life to save another or others so she knowingly made a false confession.
- Jodi was threatened with something worse than execution or incarceration by the intruders and said nothing about them.
There are still far too many unanswered questions and very little conclusive evidence to make me feel comfortable about the verdict.