The Jodi Arias Show

There’s a real-life drama being played out in a courtroom in the State of Arizona.   A young woman has been charged with felony murder for the death of her on-again, off-again boyfriend.  Most of you are familiar with the details of the case and its’ gruesome nature.  If not, and you’d like to look it up, the official court records are under The State of Arizona v.  Little Miss Smarty Pants, Docket # CR 666-5150.

I tuned in to HLN to see what all the buzz was about, because you can’t avoid reading or hearing something to do with this case.   It’s all over the internet.  There are Facebook pages, Twitter accounts and blogs which are dedicated to nothing but the Jodi Arias trial.   Some of them are divided by which side the owner of the site is on – Jodi’s or that of her victim’s, Travis Alexander.   After reading some of the comments  on one of the pro-Jodi sites, I wondered if these people were seeing and hearing the same things I was.  They  do have some very flattering photos of her, though,  wearing a white parka and sporting her once-blonde hair, like a sweet, innocent, little snow bunny.

You can always tell when trial is in session, especially if you’re on  Twitter, because scores of people begin tweeting each and every excruciating detail.   One person in particular seems to have made it her job to report things minute by minute, even providing links to the very morbid and graphic crime scene photos, including Alexander’s lifeless body and nude shots of Arias.   She’ll remain anonymous in this post because I think she’s about five minutes away from going stark raving mad.  I’m not kidding – she scares the heck out of me with this some of this stuff.  In case you’re interested, there’s also a Justice for Travis fund set up, where you can make donations through PayPal to cover the trial costs for his family.  I don’t know what kind of trial costs they have unless it’s for meals and whatnot.  The prosecutor and all of his expenses are paid  for by the State, so I’m hoping that these donations are going to something or someone with a real connection to the victim and his family.  I guess I’m a little leery of all of the funds that suddenly pop up whenever something is in the news.

Given the fact that HLN is airing the trial, we’re treated to endless commentary by the likes of Jane (Mad Dog) Velez-Mitchell and Nancy (Answer Yes or No) Grace.   I haven’t heard Nancy come up with a nickname for Ms. Arias.  I guess that tot-mom thing just wore her out.   Overall, HLN has really turned this trial into a circus, something they’re very good at.   For what it’s worth, I don’t understand why it’s even on television.   The on-air personalities and the people commenting on social media are comparing Arias to Casey Anthony, as if that somehow gives it gravitas.  Aside from being young, Caucasian females with long brown hair, the two really have nothing in common – okay, they’re both crazy liars with huge egos.  In terms of crimes and noteworthy trials, though,  neither case deserved the attention they got and the defendants certainly weren’t worth all of the time and effort HLN dedicated to them.

This trial could be in any courtroom in any State on any given occasion.  Men and women are killed by someone with whom they’ve had an intimate relationship every single day – estimates are around 4,000 to 5,000 per year in this country, and yet, most of them are reported as nothing more than a very small story in some local newspaper.   I think what’s driving this case and the story, more than all the others, is that it has all of the salacious and gory details that make for good TV.   HLN knows that and they’re dishing up some rather questionable and inappropriate material to their viewers.   I’m not so sure that we need to know what kind of lubricant the couple used or what positions they assumed during their sexual encounters.   I’m also not convinced that this is the kind of public awareness and teaching moments our legal system had in mind when all fifty States decided to allow cameras in our courtrooms.   The jurors have to see and hear all of it, but I think the way it’s being covered, given the nature of the evidence, is more than a little voyeuristic.  It does nothing to elevate the way in which we should view our legal system – or want to, and I think that’s a huge disservice as well as a missed opportunity.

It’s been an extremely long trial, even for a murder, and it’s not looking as if it will end any time soon.  There have been delays, short court weeks and a seemingly endless amount of questions for witnesses.  Arizona is one of only three States that allow jurors to submit questions, a practice that I disagree with.  Arias, herself, answered over two hundred of them, although she did seem to enjoy the experience.   She just doesn’t like it when that mean old prosecutor gets all up in her face.  That’s when she goes into her “fog”  or PTSD or transient amnesia state and gets a migraine.   Apparently, being questioned on the witness  stand has the same effect as committing a murder.  On occasion, she’ll correct his grammar or criticize the way he phrases a question.   When she’s really had enough, she’ll start making the ugly, tearless cry face for the jury and the cameras.    I have to hand it to her, she’s quite the entertainer.   Her defense counsel, on the other hand, look as if they’d like to be anywhere else but in that room.    It’s never a good thing when an attorney has to resort to speaking objections because their client and experts are giving terrible answers, but look at what they have to work with.   I imagine that Arias is the client from Hell and probably doesn’t take advice well.   She’s the smartest one in the room, after all  – just ask her.

If this case ever reaches a conclusion, the jury should have no problem finding her guilty as charged.    I’d vote for guilt, beyond any reasonable doubt, something I couldn’t have said with regard to Casey Anthony.  The State of Arizona has proved their case and Jodi hasn’t proved that she acted in self-defense – that was her choice, that was her plea, that was her burden and I really think she failed.    I won’t watch any more of it but I’m sure that someone will tweet the verdict just as soon as it comes in.   She’s facing the death penalty, but, from what I’ve written here, you probably already know that I’d prefer to see her in prison for the rest of her life.   Then she can sing and do handstands, dig through trashcans,  and fix her makeup for her prison booking photo, happy as a crazy clam, but without the television cameras and an audience.  No one will be watching anymore or caring, and all of it will fade away from our memories and tweets, just like any other program at the end of its’ run.   HLN will pack up their props and reenactments and studio juries, and move on to the next titillating case without any sense of remorse, conscience or responsibility for their part in this terrible and real reality show.


This entry was posted in In The News, Making Stall Talk, Trials and The Law and tagged , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

16 Responses to The Jodi Arias Show

  1. Kaereste says:

    Now now Empress, I know you only watch trashy HLN for “professional reasons” but let us peasants have our fun.

    Of course the salacious details are wonderfully titillating … errrrrmmm…. intrusive and embarrassing to hear. My goodness! LOL. Don’t you just adore the professionals in court and HLN discussing them while wearing their business attire?

    The best part of all is Jodi’s obvious pleasure while testifying about the most intimate things. She is beaming! Now THAT is great showmanship!

    Yes, I know a young man is dead but so are the other victims in those brief stories in my newspaper.


    PS – Casey Anthony – the most interesting aspect to me was the Anthony family dynamics.

  2. melthehound says:

    Since I haven’t watched any of it, I’ll reserve most of my commentary on it. I do have to say though that I kind of like the idea of the Jury Questions. Too often, I think, I see the lawyers tailoring their questions to get an exact, predictable, answer that I don’t always think, tells the complete story. Especially in a DP case, she should have every opportunity available, to hang herself (pun intended). I suspect from what you and others have written though, she’s almost proud of what she’s done and is excited for the attention.

    • Kaereste says:

      …”she’s almost proud of what she’s done and is excited for the attention.” BINGO.

    • FWIW, the jurors have asked some good questions and it sounds as if they already have her number. My issue with questions from juries is that it changes their role from fact finders to a more active one by becoming a part of the evidence that they’ll have to consider during deliberations.
      Arias is proud that, at least in her mind, she’s putting on the performance of a lifetime with her wit, superior intellect and acting skills. IMHO, the only one she’s fooling is herself.

      • melthehound says:

        I understand, Empress. I’m sure it’s a double edged sword letting the jurors ask questions directly. Unless I’ve missed something, people don’t have to take the stand and testify against themselves and with everything I’ve read, she’s forgotten that 5th amendment right or completely ignored it.

        • She had to take the stand. In order to claim self-defense, the burden of proof shifts to the defendant. She didn’t really have a choice in terms of a plea because she confessed to the crime and then scurried about trying to cover her tracks.

          • Sorry, that should have said, after she scurried about…

          • melthehound says:

            I get that. Can’t claim self defense and not be willing to back it up. I’m told that the bullet casing from the gun was laying in a pool of blood, without being covered in blood itself. Suggests, that she slashed him first, and Then shot him to make sure he was dead. At this point, it seems the only choice to make is life or death (I think you know what side of that one I come down on). I know your post isn’t about the particulars but the actual spectacle of it all and the cable news Nancy Grace types are experts at turning these things into spectacles.

  3. baronessbeachcomber says:

    Empress, I agree with your perspective on this. I haven’t watched any of it but it certainly seems to be fascinating to some. From what I’ve read about it from those who are watching religiously, seems to be a lot of wasted time and discussion about issues that are not even remotely connected to the crime itself. Whenever I’m in the mood for true crime/investigation/courtroom drama, I just tune in to the ID channel. Works for me.

    • I remember when Court TV first won the right to cover trials and the anchors were Fred Graham and Cynthia McFadden. They’re both smart and level-headed people who took the time to explain what was going on, giving little classes on the law and court proceedings. I don’t think that either one of them would stoop to the kind of lurid spectacle HLN has turned these cases into.

    • Kaereste says:

      I only drop into HLN occasionally but that is often enough to learn how cookoo the defendant and the network both are. There appears to be game show going on in the TV studio with a faux jury. Its just nuts.

  4. thedesigndiva2 says:

    Good post..I had started to watch then a light bulb went off… I refuse to acknowledge the presence of such evil …by watching and discussing it..she knows a bunch of people boosts her ego and she actually gets off on sick chick for sure…may she rot in hell…
    that is all
    hugs and peace

  5. nohausfrau says:

    Empress you always have a sane, balanced approach to the media craziness. I’m aware of the trial, but not watching it. I can’t stand HLNs coverage of trials and Nancy Grace is not one of my favorites (or Jane either).

Comments are closed.