• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Jodi Arias Trial: 'Why Should We Believe You Now?'

Is there really one human being dumb enough to decide she's guilty without a shred of proof because the media, paid by the wealthy LDS church, told them to think that? Is there anyone dumb enough to think that Jodi's word (who, unless you count a false confession followed by claiming that the Mormon police offers forced a false confession, has never been caught in a lie, and who said that she was in a sexual relationship with the man she killed) versus the word of dozens of Mormons (who, including the Mormon police officers who handled her case, said that she's a pathological liar and that she was stalking him and she killed him for not having sex with her, then when they were confronted with videotapes proving that there was a sexual relationship, said that she's a pathological liar who was abusing him in their relationship, among many lies they've been caught in), makes anyone but the Mormons out to be liars??? Oh well I guees Mormons are that dumb, and Sheeple who get instantly outraged at anyone the media portrays as a villain.
 
Is there one human being dumb enough to not notice that they LDS chuch is just as Mysogenist, violent, and willing to lie as the Sunni muslims, that they are just as often engaging in the use of women as slaves as the Sunni Muslims? That they don't believe that muirdering women is asin, but they do believe awoman defending herself with violence against a man is deserving of the death penalty and that they are quite willing to offer up false testimony to make sure a woman gets convicted on death penalty charges because they believe she deserves it for the mortal sin of self-defense? Muslim extremists have nothing on those Whackos!
 
Why after shooting him, did she stab him multiple times and slit his throat? Seems weird to me. Maybe he was abusing her like she claims.

Still murder though.
 
I haven't really kept up with this trial, but I can see by what you've posted that you haven't either. Also that you have no problem at all overgeneralizing and insulting others even though you don't appear to have many facts.

CNN.com - Transcripts
 
Well, I guess that someone did not vote for Romney, then....
 
I think they need to break Sparky out for her, and make a public example of her.
 
calamity said:
Why after shooting him, did she stab him multiple times and slit his throat? Seems weird to me. Maybe he was abusing her like she claims.

Still murder though.
Click to expand...

From what I gather from watching snippets of the trial, she does not remember anything after shooting him as she was in a "fog". She concedes she must have stabbed him because of the blood evidence. That evidence proves she stabbed him first as he did not bleed out from the shot in the face.

Jodi Arias is a sociopath. They are more common than you would think. One universal trait they have is compulsive lying. They are usually likeable people which makes them especially dangerous to others.
 
Last edited:
AmericanWoman76 said:
Is there really one human being dumb enough to decide she's guilty without a shred of proof because the media, paid by the wealthy LDS church, told them to think that? Is there anyone dumb enough to think that Jodi's word (who, unless you count a false confession followed by claiming that the Mormon police offers forced a false confession, has never been caught in a lie, and who said that she was in a sexual relationship with the man she killed) versus the word of dozens of Mormons (who, including the Mormon police officers who handled her case, said that she's a pathological liar and that she was stalking him and she killed him for not having sex with her, then when they were confronted with videotapes proving that there was a sexual relationship, said that she's a pathological liar who was abusing him in their relationship, among many lies they've been caught in), makes anyone but the Mormons out to be liars??? Oh well I guees Mormons are that dumb, and Sheeple who get instantly outraged at anyone the media portrays as a villain.
Click to expand...

You're being facetious, right? Her bloody hand print was found at the scene. She's told 3 different stories 1. that she was not there at all 2. that she was there and armed burglars killed him, but spared her 3. that she killed him in self defense. They recovered photos from his digital camera of him just before being killed, proving she was there, and she put that camera through the washing machine. She rented a car from 90 miles away from her home to drive there even though she owns a perfectly good car. She filled up gas cans with gasoline and avoided buying gas in Arizona. She claimed he was a pedophile masturbating to photos of young boys, but no such photos were found on his computer or phone, nor were hard copies found, nor did his isp have any record of his visiting any kiddie porn sites. She even admitted on the stand that she killed him, but it was supposedly self defense with him naked in the shower and her holding a knife. I mean, come on. Not a shred of proof. Are you kidding?

Mormonism is irrelevant. Their sex life is irrelevant. It's her behavior that's relevant. That fact is her bloody handprint is there at the scene. The fact is she admitted to killing him, not in a police interrogation, but on the actual witness stand. It supposedly was self defense against a naked showering man when she's the one with the knife. Come on.
 
calamity said:
Why after shooting him, did she stab him multiple times and slit his throat? Seems weird to me. Maybe he was abusing her like she claims.

Still murder though.
Click to expand...

The supposed abuse she points to is his wanting to tie her to a tree and have anal sex with her. But the entirety of the testimony shows that she was in a consensual sexual relationship with him. It shows Alexander being guilty of nothing more than being kinky, something that would not in any way justify her killing him.
 
I definitely do not see this as a death penalty case. It's a crime of passion or whatever they call it when the end result should be a plea bargain for manslaughter these days. Was there ever an offer like that on the table?

It may be that there is a bit of sexism here because there are plenty of examples of men only receiving 15-20 years after killing their wives, if they confess and strike a deal. In fact, we know one guy whose dad killed his second wife that only received a 14-year sentence, and he shot her in the face, twice. Another person we know actually kidnapped his estranged wife, raped her and killed her in cold blood--he got 30 years.
 
calamity said:
I definitely do not see this as a death penalty case. It's a crime of passion or whatever they call it when the end result should be a plea bargain for manslaughter these days. Was there ever an offer like that on the table?

It may be that there is a bit of sexism here because there are plenty of examples of men only receiving 15-20 years after killing their wives, if they confess and strike a deal. In fact, we know one guy whose dad killed his second wife that only received a 14-year sentence, and he shot her in the face, twice. Another person we know actually kidnapped his estranged wife, raped her and killed her in cold blood--he got 30 years.
Click to expand...

I agree that she should not get the death penalty, but I'm against the death penalty in general. If I did believe in the death penalty, I could point to her obvious premeditation to do this. She drove over a thousand miles in a rent-a-car with gas cans filled with gas in the trunk to avoid detection. On the other hand, she did not exhibit a pattern of murdering people like a David Berkowitz type. I think she should be convicted of first-degree murder, but not get the death penalty. I think she should get life. I can't speak to the cases you cite because I don't know all the details, but I think in general when murder is premeditated, the killer should spend the rest of his or her life in prison.
 
Luna Tick said:
I agree that she should not get the death penalty, but I'm against the death penalty in general. If I did believe in the death penalty, I could point to her obvious premeditation to do this. She drove over a thousand miles in a rent-a-car with gas cans filled with gas in the trunk to avoid detection. On the other hand, she did not exhibit a pattern of murdering people like a David Berkowitz type. I think she should be convicted of first-degree murder, but not get the death penalty. I think she should get life. I can't speak to the cases you cite because I don't know all the details, but I think in general when murder is premeditated, the killer should spend the rest of his or her life in prison.
Click to expand...
The guy who shot his wife in the face, twice, was a doctor. She, his nurse. The two of them were in cahoots to defraud the government. In the end she wanted to leave him and take the kids. She tried to use the fraud as leverage, threatening to tell the government everything unless he gave her what she wanted. He killed her on purpose, but it wasn't easy to prove. So the prosecutor took the deal for manslaughter.

The other case was clearly premeditated. He even had rope with duct tape to tie her up and gag her, a shovel and plastic bags to bury her and butchering tools to chop her up in his truck. The prosecutor talked the family into settling for the 30-year sentence simply to avoid a long trial and risk losing to an insanity defense.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom