Arias: Juan Martinez

I've waited to assess the performance of prosecutor Juan Martinez until the verdict came in.  That would, for me, be the true test of whether or not his tactics and techniques were effective.  Some worried his animated, combative style might turn jurors off.  Thinking back to the Casey Anthony trial, I found Jose Baez' combative, smarmy style quite offensive yet we learned the jurors really liked him.  Conversely, I found the style and techniques of Jeff Ashton and Linda Drane Burdick to be quite professional yet the jurors didn't like them at all.  Go figure.

There are two ways to arrive at first degree murder in Arizona: premeditated murder and felony murder.  Jodi Arias was charged with both in the murder of ex-boyfriend Travis Alexander.  As we can see from the verdict form, the jurors were not clueless.  Twelve of them found her guilty of premeditated murder and seven found her also guilty of felony murder.  Kudos to Martinez for being able to instruct them on both the facts and the law.  I'll be interested to hear why the five did not find felony murder as I do believe the facts supported the charge.

Another astute move on the part of Martinez was to reject a plea offer for 2nd degree murder.  He knew he had an excellent case against Arias for 1st degree and to have allowed her to plead out to a lesser charge would have been an injustice to Travis Alexander and to the State.

Say what you will about the Martinez style in the courtroom, he had an amazing command of the facts in this case.  He rarely looked at notes, and seemed to be able to make the most amazing u-turns in the middle of examination when testimony warranted it (unlike Jennifer Willmott who worked from a script and stuck to it, even when the scripted questions had already been answered).

Righteous indignation is a powerful weapon and Martinez came to trial well armed.  I think when you're prosecuting a clearly-guilty client who proudly proclaims on national television that "no jury is going to convict me... because I'm innocent," you have to come out of the gate swinging with both fists.  One of the witnesses he hit the hardest was domestic abuse expert, Alyce LaViolette. Some will look back on this trial and remember the bizarre line of cross-examination about Snow White and the Seven Dwarves.  Frankly, I found it totally entertaining -- I enjoyed watching LaViolette squirm to defend her catchy title.  As a footnote, I see that the title of her speech has since been changed to remove the Snow White reference.

I think the most memorable moment for me personally was when Juan Martinez asked Jodi Arias,

M'am, were you crying when you were shooting him? Were you crying when you were stabbing him? How about when you cut his throat?  Were you crying then?

Judge Stephens was criticized for calling the lunch recess just when Martinez had Arias on the ropes with those poignant questions.  But, in hind sight, I think that actually worked well for the prosecution -- it provided a powerful fade to black moment.  Along the same lines, Arias testified she failed at slitting her wrists because the razor stung.  Martinez jumped on that as well, contrasting the sting of a razor versus having your throat slit ear to ear.

All in all, Juan Martinez did an excellent job.  He presented his case in a well-thought-out way and made it easy for the jury to understand.  I'm not sure what more we could have asked for.