After watching the OJ and Casey Anthony trials, it won't shock me if she walks.

She was found guilty of first degree murder.

Video of the verdict being read -

http://www.cnn.com/2013/05/08/justice/arizona-jodi-arias-verdict/?hpt=hp_t2

Yeah, I was listening. ..I didn't follow the trial that closely, but from what I did see, there was a lot of evidence against her, and little if any to support her defense.

Considering her "defense" was "I shot him in self-defense, but I don't remember slitting his throat or stabbing him 30 times or hiding his body in the shower, then driving out to the desert to dump the gun," it's kind of hard to find support for that.

It's scary stuff when that's not you summing up her defence but actually quoting her.

Sorry, I didn't mean to mislead, that was me paraphrasing her testimony. However, that pretty much did sum it up.

Fair enough i thought th\t was a bit odd, but i read one of the articles and i agree that sums it up.

Watched a lot of this case. Glad this bitch got guilty. She better get the death penalty.

Kly, would you clear this up? The following is part of a news item. "Over a five minute meeting, he reminded the jury they must be unanimous on all counts and asked the group to return to the jury room and discuss the charges further."

He is charged with 250 counts. Certainly, the jury can find him not guilty and some, but not others, correct? Is PA law different?

If the counts are redundant then usually they do not have to find on all of them if one is all inclusive. The problem comes if they do not go for the whole enchilada, then they have to keep looking down the food chain count by count, many of which probably contain lesser included offenses.

Ok DT, but the judge's instructions indicate that the jury faces an election of all or nothing. That seems to be contrary to all states laws with which I'm am familiar.

The jury has come to a verdict in the murder trial of the PA doctor accused of murdering babies.

Found Guilty! Guilty!

He's eligible for execution; the jury will deliberate.

Ray of light for cons jailed in slays after work by retired NYPD Detective Louis Scarcella comes under cloud
Brooklyn DA to reopen about 50 murder cases after conviction of David Ranta is tossed amid charges of coercing suspects and witnesses

Comments (40)
BY SIMONE WEICHSELBAUM , VERA CHINESE AND BARRY PADDOCK / NEW YORK DAILY NEWS

SUNDAY, MAY 12, 2013, 11:03 PM


ENID ALVAREZ/NEW YORK DAILY NEWS

David Ranta, who served over 20 years in jail in the slaying of a Brooklyn Rabbi, was freed this year after his conviction was thrown out because of shoddy police work by Scarcella.
Now that every murder conviction linked to a retired NYPD detective will be reexamined, men he put behind bars are hoping their names will at last be cleared.

About 50 cases that Detective Louis Scarcella worked will be reopened by the Brooklyn district attorney’s Conviction Integrity Unit in the wake of a judge’s decision to toss David Ranta’s conviction two months ago.

Ranta served more than two decades in prison in the killing of a Brooklyn rabbi before Scarcella’s shoddy police work came to light. One witness, only 13 at the time of the investigation, claimed Scarcella coached him to pick Ranta out of a lineup.

Ranta, 58, was not the first man freed because of questions about the integrity of Scarcella’s work.

“It’s despicable, in this time and age, for people who are innocent to still be sitting in jail,” said Derrick Hamilton, who was paroled in 2011 after the Daily News reported Scarcella’s only witness had recanted her claim that Hamilton killed her boyfriend.

Hamilton, 47, is still fighting to get a judge to officially clear his name.

“Now that it’s revealed that Scarcella is who he is and his real character is coming out, I'm hopeful,” Hamilton said.

When Scarcella arrested him, the detective made a shocking admission, according to Hamilton.

“He told me, ‘I know you didn’t commit this murder, but I don’t care,’ ” he said.

Hamilton, who had previously done six years in prison on a manslaughter rap, says Scarcella told him he was being pinned for the new case because he didn’t do enough time for the old one.

Scarcella, 61, decline to comment as he entered his Staten Island home Sunday.

“I’m sorry I can’t speak to you,” he said. “Enjoy Mother’s Day.”

A spokesman confirmed Brooklyn District Attorney Charles Hynes was reviewing about 50 cases tied to Scarcella, but declined to comment further.

In a 1985 murder Scarcella investigated, Alvena Jennette, 49, was convicted with his brother Darryl Austin. Jennette was released in 2007, but his brother died in prison.

The only witness to their crime was drug addict Teresa Gomez.

Gomez claimed in court to have also seen two separate murders by Jennette’s stepbrother, Robert Hill, who was acquitted of the first and convicted of the second murder. He remains in prison.

Gomez testified in court in other murder cases Scarcella investigated, The New York Times reported, and may have been rewarded for her cooperation.

“How is it possible a detective could use a witness in that many murder trials without any red flags being raised?” Jennette asked.

Because he is out of prison, Jennette’s case will likely be a lower priority for review.

“I still have a murder conviction,” said Jennette, a construction worker. “Do you know how hard it is to find a job?”

Lawyer Ron Kuby is representing another man Scarcella helped put away, Shakaba Shakur, 48, who is 26 years into a 40-years-to-life murder sentence.

Kuby says Shakur’s confession, which his client denies ever making, parallels Ranta’s questionable confession.

Scarcella somehow managed to get admissions — which were not witnessed, recorded or written.

“You’d think after two or three or five of these magical confessions, some judge somewhere would say, ‘Hmm . . . ’ ” Kuby said.

Kuby acknowledges not all of the people Scarcella arrested can be innocent.

“Even a blind squirrel finds a nut now and then,” he said.

With Shane Dixon Kavanaugh and Erin Durkin



Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/crime/dozens-murder-cases-new-article-1.1342215#ixzz2TDQyHZrr

My guess is that the news report was inartfully drafted. It would be reversible error for the judge to suggest that the jury must return the same verdict for every count against the defendant. The instruction more likely was that in order to find him guilty or not guilty of each separate count, you must be unanimous in your verdict for that count.

Thanks Kly.

These two occurrences are rather disturbing if the facts are as reported.

In one situation the police beat a man to death and then supposedly without warrant confiscate the phones of witnesses who viewed/recorded the incident, in one instance preventing a man from leaving his home for three hours until he gave up his phone.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/15/us/fat...ublic.html?_r=0





In another story a couple is arguing and someone outside of the home mistakes this for domestic violence. The police arrive and despite not having a warrant kick down the door and tase the couple.

http://jonathanturley.org/2013/05/16/cou...d-taser-couple/

..

Kly and DT, I may have asked this question before. A subpoened witness cannot be in the courtroom before testifying, correct? But since a witness can be recalled, are they ever allowed in the courtroom?

They are allowed to remain if the opposing side doesn't object. If they are recalled, their testimony is usually limited to impeaching or contradicting subsequent testimony. If they are recalled to add additional facts or events to their previous testimony, I would object.

Kly, while the 14th amendment precludes states from denying citizens equal protection of the law, I don't find any similar constitutional provision that applies the same preclusion to the federal government. Your comments?

Dale Cregan the guy who killed 2 police last year in Manchester has now admitted to killing a Father and Son. Scumbag . http://news.sky.com/story/1094200/dale-cregan-admits-murder-of-father-and-son

The Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment applies to the federal government through the Due Process Clause of the Fifth by way of reverse incorporation. The doctrine is found in Bolling v. Sharpe.

As usual, thanks Kly. It's been decades since I read Bolling and then only a syllabus. I'll read it again, but it appears like a convoluted path (now I'm writing like a strict constructionist).

Kly and DT, what do you think about Lois lerner voiding her 5th amendment claim during her (limited) testimony before the House committee examing the IRS targeting issue? After being sworn in she gave an attempted exculpatory statement followed by her 5th claim when questioned.

If I represented her, I would have advised that I, not she, read a general opening statement, but still would have advised her to take the Fifth.

The climate of the Committee hearings is dangerous as House Republicans have on multiple occasions expressed an opinion that people have to go to jail as a result of the IRS scandal although I haven't yet heard what specific laws have been broken. It very well may result in federal prosecutions, but the call for jail sentencesby representatives before the facts are known is a warning sign.

Issa is considering whether the opening statement constituted a waiver of the Fifth Amendment privilege. I don't think it's close. The invocation of the right is valid. If they really want her testimony, they will have to grant immunity.

Kly, in PA are juries exposed to VISs?

No. They are irrelevant and may be unduly prejudicial on the issue of guilt.

MI SC Justice gets one year in jail

It's really nice to read that you all people are completely conscious about the security of our country. I also just reading a report which was a local area about the street crime. they told that a car has been lifted after every 40 second and a thief has been occurred in the home after 50 second.

The pos who killed that little girl April has been found guilty and sentenced to life in prison. Good riddance.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-22687971