Continued from here.
The following represents my notes, not a true transcript of the proceedings. Unfortunately, Martinez talks fast and in incomplete sentences. I had trouble keeping up with him so my notes are much less complete for his presentation.
Jodi was quite attentive during Willmott's presentation but she was too busy writing to pay attention to Martinez. Just another display of disrespect.
Willmott argues "the fact" [cough] that Jodi is wonderful person and a victim.
Martinez argues "the law" that none of the stated mitigating factors presented have connection to the crime, are of high quality or bear any weight.
3:15pm Central (1:15pm Pacific): [Great Seal] - Court scheduled to resume.
3:18pm Central: Judge takes the bench. Calls for the jury.
STEPHENS: Ms. Willmott, you may proceed.
JENNIFER WILLMOTT: People are far better than their very worst deed. Each and every one of you have your own moral decision you have to make. The standard is now preponderance of the evidence, not beyond a reasonable doubt. We only have to prove to you that only one "fact" is more likely true than not. Those mitigating factors are a very personal matter. Each of you can choose to believe a different mitigating factor. You don't have to agree with your neighbor.
You have every right to stand by your decision. You do not have to explain it to anybody else. Mitigation is what we're talking about now. The State has tried to turn this case into nothing more than lies and manipulations. Lying is not a capital crime, it doesn't get you the death penalty. Mitigating factors are reasons... that give you... a reason to believe there is something of value... not excuses. Mitigating factors are completely unrelated and separate from the first degree murder conviction. They are reasons you can find reasonably substantial to give her life in prison.
For example, if one of you were to believe that someone who commits a murder under 30-years-old should get the death penalty then that is your vote.
Mitigation comes in two forms. There are good things they have done before. And there are bad things that might have changed the trajectory of their life.
Good things: She was only 27. She's not been
convicted before. Jodi was a good friend. There are people who care about her. Darryl Brewer trusted Jodi with his son. Jodi also has friends who also testified, people who told you they were shocked, e.g. Leslie Udy. You heard from Ryan Burns that people enjoyed her at PPL meetings. The prosecutor wants to paint her as a one-dimensional character defined by what she did to Travis. She is not. She made so many other people happy prior to coming here. You heard from Desiree and Dan Freeman. They took trips with Jodi and Travis. Dan told you Jodi used to come to his house for dinner and considered her like a sister. You've seen Jodi's family here, day in and day out. They are here for her now. Jodi asked you to consider them. Another reason that adds value and worth is that she has always tried to improve and make the best of her life. Gus Searcy says she was professional. Darryl Brewer told you she was responsible and they bought a house together [uh, it foreclosed, Willmott, ya shouldn't have gone there]. Three times she's been able to grow her hair long enough to donate it to Locks of Love. She has goals, even in prison. She's thinking ahead about what she can do. She can teach Spanish. She has the ability to teach people to read and write. She's an amazing poet, artist and writer. She wants to be able to dedicate herself to victims of domestic violence. The goals can be completed behind bars, in prison. This has been a shock to the people that knew Jodi. She told you this morning it's been a shock to her.
We have to look at why. What changed her life? What made her come here? She could have been a famous artist. She could have been a defense attorney, sitting next to me. When Jodi was a little girl, it was just her and her little brother. She could feel the love from her mother. She felt it every time her mother read her stories. But in a few years, that all changed. When her little sister was born, that all changed. Suddenly she was getting in trouble all the time. Everything changed for Jodi. She watched how her dad treated her mom. She watched her dad yell at her mom, ridicule her mom, tease her mom. But through it all, her mom stayed [with him]. From that, Jodi learned loyalty. [Okay, wait, you want the jury to spare Jodi's life because her parents are unsupportive, abusive dirtbags? I'm confused.]
We know she has low self-esteem. Almost no ego. She suffers from depression. Jodi thought Travis was perfect. He impressed her by taking her to the Executive Director's Banquet. That's why she gave him oral sex. When Travis sent Mormon missionaries to her house she listened. She put Travis on a pedestal. She loved him. She saw all the wonderful qualities his family already knew he had. But she also saw the other side of him. We know that he verbally abused her. You've seen what he said. It's the fact he would be hateful one day and loving the next. You have to know that if Travis were sitting next to me, the prosecutor would be using those same words against him. And Jodi started with the most powerful lie that she told herself about her relationship with Travis. The kind of lie you tell yourself when you look in the mirror. No person truly wants to be treated like that, to be called those names. Jodi didn't deserve it. [Notably fails to mention any physical abuse from Travis.] But I want to be clear. It's not an excuse to kill Travis. You have already convicted her for first to degree murder but abuse is a mitigating factor. It changed the trajectory of her life. Look at the relationship she had with Darryl Brewer and they're still friends.
With all of this verbal abuse, knowing that it is not an excuse for what she did, Jodi handled it the only way she knew how. She lied. She lied when she pretended those words didn't hurt, didn't matter, that he didn't mean it. So when she did the very worst thing she's ever done in her life... she couldn't even accept that she did it and she lied. She lied to herself, to the detective, to the media and to Travis' family. But despite those lies about killing Travis, it does not diminish the abuse she went through. It does not equal execution.
She was once a bubbly and happy little girl. Somebody who loved to spend her days writing in her journal and reading. She will be haunted by what she did to Travis, to his family and to her own family. She is haunted by that.
The State's own witness came in and told you Jodi suffers from Borderline Personality Disorder. That if often results from a child who is unable to bond with their parents. That these people often have an immaturity and are prone to violent outbursts. Jodi cannot choose to have a personality disorder or not. We know that it wasn't just Dr. DeMarte. Dr. Samuels also told you she suffered from an unspecified personality disorder. Having BPD, any disorder, is not an excuse for what she did to Travis. But it is a reason that you can find that is sufficiently substantial to call for life in prison. It's a reason you have to be merciful.
There is so much mitigation in this case. There is just one aggravating factor. The strongest [mitigating] factor you have before you is that she has no criminal history. While what she did was absolutely horrible, you have convicted her of that. Jodi took Travis away. She took him away from his family and she took him away from this world. But two wrongs do not make a right. Jodi can still contribute to this world. Her life still has value.
A well-known attorney once said, "... all life is worth saving and mercy is the highest attribute." Despite her very worst deed, you can still find mercy and sentence her to a term of life in prison.
JUAN MARTINEZ: To his family, Travis Alexander will be forever young. He will be 30-years-old to his family for the rest of their lives. They tried to remember him as the smiling individual but they can't forget what happened on June 4th, 2008. They can't forget he suffered immense physical pain. [Jodi begins to journal] They can't forget it was especially cruel and neither should you. They can't forget [the image in Exhibit #205 of his slashed throat].
WILLMOTT: Objection.
STEPHENS: Approach.
MARTINEZ: You should not forget Exhibit #205. The family hasn't forgotten it. That is what you need to take back with you when you consider some of these mitigating circumstances.
She is going to spend the rest of her life in prison [however long that may be]. You are not private investigators. What you are back there to do is to find the facts. You don't go out on a limb. You don't investigate whether there are any mitigating factors. You could say she saved him from [ever having] cancer but that's an extreme... it illustrates the point you can't go back and investigate.
You can't consider the fact she's going to spend the rest of her life in prison. Back in December...
WILLMOTT: Objection. May we approach?
MARTINEZ: Think back to the juror questionnaire. It was explained to you that Life in the State of Arizona can mean she can be eligible for release after 25 years.
You were asked to consider the fact she's a good artist. Frank Sinatra, Elvis Presley... because somehow if you have a skill you are entitled... you get an easier path... something you should take into account. All it is is a skill. It's an entitlement to give her preferential treatment. That is not a mitigating factor.
They tell you she was only 27 years old at the time she killed Travis Alexander. She was nine years post her 18th birthday. They showed you that she had a good life with Darryl Brewer and with her parents. Somebody who's intelligent and had a vast array of life experiences at the age of 27. That is not a mitigating circumstance. They could [just as well] make the argument she was only 55. At 27, she had lived a full life. She was living a good life with Mr. Brewer out in California. Travis Alexander is 30 years old. Today he's still 30 years old. And the person responsible for that... she showed you pictures of her growing up. Mr. Alexander is no longer going to have any more yesterdays. He's going to miss Christmases and birthdays....
WILLMOTT: Objection. May we approach?
MARTINEZ: She told you about how she's going to miss all these Christmases... how there's only going to be a photograph of her. How does that mitigate the horrendous violence she heaped on Mr. Alexander.
She told you she doesn't have any prior criminal history.
WILLMOTT: Objection. May we approach?
MARTINEZ: We're talking about what a crime is. Actually, if history is what we're talking about, weren't you present for some of her testimony... she talked to you about the events leading up to the crime. The example about the gas cans... most of you know what perjury is... with regard to her lying they told you she lied over and over again... that's also a crime. There is a history and this is not a mitigating circumstance. [Martinez missed a huge opportunity here to list all the other things Jodi did which were criminal but for which she was never arrested, prosecuted or convicted.]
One of the things we have to keep in mind, what does friendship mean? Doesn't it mean you know someone better than most people, you confide in each other. She held out she was friends with Leslie Udy but wasn't that bond based on a lie? After she killed Mr. Alexander, she lied to Ms. Udy... "I want our kids to play together." That's not what a friendship is. As to Ryan Burns, if friendship means adjusting somebody... but she says he's full of crap. Again, she lied to him, didn't tell him the truth. Is that a good friend? That's not what a friendship is. This is not a mitigating factor.
The Defendant never fails to come up with a good lie. And the lies about the mitigating factors come from the Defendant. Has that been proven to be more likely than....
WILLMOTT: Objection. May we approach?
MARTINEZ: Patricia Womack... consider the credibility when you assess or determine whether there is a good friend out there... nothing that can be a preponderance of the evidence.
Another mitigating factor is that she lacks the support of her family yet she says they've been here throughout the trial. Which is it? When, back in 2007, she saw Travis with another woman she called her father about it. He was supportive. When she wanted to move back to Yreka, who did she call? She called her mother.
She goes over this issue of suffering abuse and neglect as a child. At the time, she liked to play the victim even though she wasn't. There are no school or medical or police reports of any abuse.
WILLMOTT: Objection. May we approach? [I wonder if the jury is sufficiently pissed at Willmott by now for all these ridiculous, unsustained objections.]
MARTINEZ: There were no reports of any kind with report to any abuse at all as a child. All we have is the word of the Defendant. They just want to smear Mr. Alexander. She said it was never her intent to do that. Have we determined there were any reports to support his abuse? They have not carried their burden that she suffered any abuse as a child or as an adult.
If you take a look at her statement that she tries to make the best of her life and improve... isn't that what most people do... she does the bare minimum and wants you to look at that and say it's a mitigating circumstance.
None of these are mitigating circumstances. And the jury instructions tell you [what mandatory verdict you must return]. You can say maybe they are mitigating circumstances, any connection [to the crime] or lack thereof may effect the strength and quality of that mitigating circumstance. It shows you they are not worth considering. Even though you know she has committed other crimes... that has nothing to do with mitigation.
They are not entitled to much weight if they have no connection. The analysis process is the same as it was in the first and second phase. Look at the facts, look at the law, then reach your decision. You are asked to determine if there are mitigating circumstances sufficiently substantial to call for leniency that it is adequate to vote for a sentence of life... nothing they have presented here or in any other phase is sufficient. You can consider victim impact statements. Travis will never been more than 30 years old. Photo Exhibit #661 -- that's it, that's as old as he'll get.
Even if you find some mitigating circumstances, they are not sufficient. You have a duty to actually do the right thing even though it may be difficult... it's never easy... the difficult thing, the only thing you can do... is to return a verdict of death.
STEPHENS: Calls 15 minute recess. Please return at 2:45 [Pacific]. Jury is excused.
STEPHENS: 4:48pm Central - Takes the bench and calls for the jury.
WILLMOTT: The simple question set before you is do you kill her. She has done something very bad. And you have convicted her of that. But the question is now, do you kill her. Does she have value? Is there something you believe is worth her living? You are not to consider the possibility of parole after 25 years.
The prosecutor wants to tell you these things don't matter. But they do matter. It matters she hadn't done anything wrong in her life before [killing Travis]. There are no entitlement feelings here. It's begging. The fact that she's a talented artist is something you may feel... is something worth keeping her around.
When the prosecutor talks about criminal history... we know she's lied. That's been the entire case. Lying is not a capital offense. She does not need to be sentenced to death because of the lies.
He talked about friendship, that it's not important or adds value. Her friendships were not based on lies. What [the relationship with Brewer] shows you is that something happened to change the trajectory of her life.
He wants to talk to you about the lack of support yet they're here. Her family was not there for her when she needed. When she was a teenager they were not there. Lack of bonding, detached from parents, is what caused her BPD. It changed the course of her life is important for you to consider, a reason to be merciful and give her life in prison. [Again, these are the people we want to spare Jodi's life for?]
He wants to remind you about the one statement that came out in this case, that she likes to play the victim. It came from a girl who knew her between 1st grade and 5th grade. Someone who he didn't bring into trial. [Yeah, but Jodi's claiming her parents and Travis abused and neglected her. Doesn't that prove she's still playing the victim?]
He wants to tell you she's done nothing but the bare minimum... what all of us do. The fact that she has something to give to this world is important. She looks beyond her current situation... Travis' family is suffering... but your conviction of 1st degree murder is how they can hopefully get some peace. It speaks to what she did. We're not explaining it. The question now before her is do you kill her for the one act, the one horrible act, or can you see there is a reason to let her live. Can you see that there is value and love from her family. [Uh... now you're just sounding stupid.] She won't be living with them or with any of us. She will be living in prison. Even there she can contribute to this world.
We are asking you to find mercy, to find that these mitigating factors, these reasons to show mercy, to find value in a person's life... despite what she has done... to give her life in prison.
STEPHENS: [Reads more jury instructions and the verdict form.] Jurors #10, 15 and #17 will continue to serve as alternate jurors. At this time [5:00pm Central] you may retire to begin your deliberations [jury leaves]. We are at recess.
.jpg)