by John M. Curtis
(310) 204-8700

Copyright March 5, 2015
All Rights Reserved.

                Jurors in a Phoenix, Ariz. courtroom deadlocked for the second time today on the death penalty phase of the murder trial of 30-year-old former waitress-turned-ballistic killer Jodi Arias of her lover Travis Alexander.  Whether or not prosecutors agree, the gruesome murder involving some 30 stab wounds and a gunshot to the head ultimately swayed at least one juror.  Deadlocked 11-1 on the death penalty, the lone juror holdout proved that the jury system has a way of getting it right.  While 11 jurors agreed with prosecutors, the one juror digested the erratic nature of the killing, proving, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the premeditated murder was still a crime of passion from a raging ex-lover. Exit interviews of jurors indicated that they believed the one holdout hanging the jury was biased against the death penalty.  If you look at the proper application of the death penalty, it’s not intended as the supreme punishment.

             Coroner’s reports and photos showed the jury irrefutable evidence that Arias rampaged, murdering Alexander, practically decapitating him before shooting him with a single-shot in the head.  How the other eleven jurors didn’t see the overkill used by Arias as evidence of passion is anyone’s guess.  When considering the death penalty, jurors are supposed to consider the extenuating circumstances, especially the details of the murder.  Had O.J. Simpson been convicted Oct. 3, 1995 of the June 12, 1994 double-murder of his ex-wife Nicole Brown Simpson and friend Ron Goldman, jurors would have been forced to deal with the gruesome nature of the killings.  Practically decapitating Nicole and slashing Ron to death would have been mitigating circumstances against the death penalty.  Cold-blooded killers know how to finish victims off without excessive rage expressed in crime scenes.

 .                 Declaring the mistrial today, Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Sherry Stephens will now decide whether Arias gets a life sentence without parole or a life sentence with parole after 25 years.  Maricopa County Attorney Bill Montgomery rolled the dice when he decided to seek the death penalty for the second time.  Costing taxpayers in excess of $3 million, it’s questionable why Montgomery wouldn’t let stand the May 23, 2013 hung jury on the death penalty in the first trial.  Montgomery got the conviction for first-degree murder May 8, 2013 but doggedly pursued the death penalty, wasting millions of Arizona taxpayers’ cash.  “Regret is place in the past.  I can’t afford to live in,” said Montgomery, refusing to explain his reasons behind pursuing the death penalty for the second time.  Montgomery lost sight of what’s really important:  Certainly not the death penalty.

              Getting his conviction for first-degree murder, Montgomery should have called it a day, saving taxpayers millions.   Penalty phase re-trial prosecutor went over the same old ground that resulted in the first mistrial May 23, 2013.  Showing more gruesome crime scene and coroner photos, lead prosecutor Juan Martinez showed how Arias practically decapitated Alexander.  Calling Arias dishonest, Martinez questioned Arias’s remorse, dismissing her history of abuse.  “It doesn’t prove an excuse,” Martinez told jurors in his final argument.  For jurors seeking the death penalty, Martinez preached to the choir.  But for that one juror, his overkill backfired, making the strongest case for letting Arias rot in prison.  If Judge Stephens reviews the case closely, there’s a strong case for giving Jodi the chance of parole in 25 years, much to the dismay of prosecutors and the Alexander family.

Montgomery and Martinez treated the public with best reason for ending the death penalty.  Life in prison with or without the possibility of parole is punishment enough for the 30-year-old misfit, characterized by what defense experts called a Borderline Personality Disorder.  White the state’s experts disputed the diagnosis, it’s a perfectly reasonable diagnosis given Arias’s documented history and behavior.  Prosecutors saw the diagnosis as somehow exculpatory, meaning she killed without regard to the consequences of her behavior.  Whatever evidence the jury heard in the first trial, it was enough to convict Arias of first-degree murder.  Arias’s defense attorneys, led by Kirk Nurmi, told jurors in closing arguments that Alexander’s murder was a “tragedy,” with “no verdict ultimately could repair the that sadness,” asking jurors to consider Arias’s history of abuse and misfortune.

              Arias’s second death penalty trial was entirely unnecessary and wasteful for Arizona taxpayers.  Montgomery overplayed his hand, primarily out of ego, since he had won his conviction for premeditated murder May 23, 2013.  Retrying Arias to get one more shot at the death penalty showed the kind death penalty advocacy reserved for out-of-courtroom debates.  Retrying Arias showed that Montgomery’s ego got in the way of his better judgment.   Anyone watching her unprecedented 18 days on the witness stand showed off her vanity and emotional immaturity that led to her ballistic episode June 4, 2008, stabbing Alexander 30 times and shooting him in the head.  Ballistic killings don’t excuse the perpetrator only provide some evidence to explain why such a gruesome killing took place.  Maricopa County should take a second look at how Montgomery wasted hard-earned tax dollars.

About the Author 

John M. Curtis writes politically neutral commentary analyzing spin in national and global news. He’s editor of OnlineColumnist.com and author of Dodging The Bullet and Operation Charisma.

©1999-2005 Discobolos Consulting Services, Inc.
(310) 204-8300
All Rights Reserved.