The murder incident involving Jodi Arias is one of the most perceptible cases of contemporary crime. Allegedly, the young woman was involved in the gruesome murder of her boyfriend, Travis Alexander. She was convicted of first-degree murder in 2013. The Jodi Arias case is one of the many stories of passionate love that eventually escalated into murder (croakerqueen123, 2013). This paper presents an analysis of the reactions of both the prosecutor and the defense attorney pertaining to this case.
Themes and Concepts in the Prosecutor’s Argument
The lead prosecutor in the Jodi Arias case, Juan Martinez, handled the case in a manner that depicted utter professionalism and shrewdness. The prosecutor’s closing argument was enough proof that Jodi Arias had indeed murdered her ex-boyfriend. Clearly, the most compelling thing about the prosecutor’s argument is implicit in how he presents his arguments. Walking around the front dais of the courtroom, Martinez uses numerous anecdotes to convince jurors that Jodi is indeed a murder convict who deserves capital punishment for the crime she has committed (croakerqueen123, 2013). On the underscore, it is notable that Martinez portrays some form of intentional misconduct during his presentation of the closing argument. Remarkably, the prosecutor downplays the enormity of killing another human being by utilizing concepts such as execution and capital punishment (croakerqueen123, 2013). He attempts to create a cocoon for the jurors so that individual jurors can hide behind the group decision so as to minimize any personal responsibility that an individual juror has in voting for death as a mode of punishing murder convicts.
Themes and Concepts in the Defense Attorney’s Argument
Cory Engle, the defense attorney, in this case, claimed that Jodi did not get a fair trial because of the prosecutor’s behavior during the trial. According to Cory, the prosecutor portrayed misconduct that was so pervasive and persistent that it guaranteed the overturning of the guilty verdict. Apparently, the most compelling aspect of the defense attorney’s argument is that he leverages the prosecutor’s behavior and disregards the nature of the crime committed by the defendant. The defendant’s attorney postulated that the trial had a carnival-like atmosphere that created an environment of publicity (TheTawniDilly, 2013). Consequently, Jodi’s lawyer claimed that the unfriendly atmosphere had a significant contribution to the defendant’s conviction. Remarkably, the lower court allowed a live stream of the trial to be broadcast on numerous news channels. As such, the media coverage influenced the decisions of the jury.
On the underscore, the defendant attorney also justified the involvement of the media. For instance, Jodi had voluntarily presented herself to the media for interviews after her trial. The defense attorney referenced these interviews and noted that Jodi actively sought media attention. Apparently, she focused more on the public relations aspect of the case by trying her case in the press. There was, therefore, no evidence to show that the media was indeed prejudiced by media coverage. In addition to the impact of the media coverage, Jodi’s defense attorneys claimed that the prosecutor committed several instances of misconduct, which denied the defendant a fair trial. The concept of proximal litigation is well depicted in this case. According to Jodi’s defense attorney, the prosecutor’s manner of handling the case altered the orientation of the entire case. Martinez portrayed aggressive behavior when cross-examining witnesses in the case (croakerqueen123, 2013). Literally, he compelled the jurors to convict Jodi Arias.
Some of the procedures of conducting the victim impact assessments favored the defendant. Conventionally, the victim’s family members deliver their statements while directly facing the defendant. However, in Jodi Aria’s case, Travis’s siblings delivered their statements while facing away from the defendant (TheTawniDilly, 2013). This gives the defendant some relief from the torment of having to directly face the family members in court. Apparently, this arrangement was quite helpful in the defendant’s allocution. During her allocution, Jodi had the requisite courage to express her remorse for her actions. She openly admits that she meant no harm to Travis. However, it is notable that there are no signs of remorse in her facial expressions. Despite this, the jurists cannot use this presumption to conclude that the defendant was utterly impassive (TheTawniDilly, 2013). Jodi notes that she is willing to contribute to a positive cause of helping other victims of murder. In essence, the victim impact assessments did not affect the presentation of her allocution.
Victim Impact Statements
Conventionally, victim impact statements outline the effect that victims have suffered as a result of the actions of the defendant. In Jodi’s case trial, the victim impact assessments are quite emotional. The family members of Travis confess how he was a big part of their lives and was ripped away from them too soon. For instance, Steven Alexander, a younger brother to Travis, explains how he received the bad news with an intense shock. Markedly, Alexander thought that his brother was strong to end up being killed by a woman (TheTawniDilly, 2013). On the underscore, Travis’s younger sister, Samantha, expresses her feelings in utter grief.
It is imperative to counter the emotion expressed in the victim impact statements (VIS). One of the best ways to do this is by ensuring that the statements do not affect legal decision-making. As a jurist, I would counter these emotions by ensuring that the verdict delivered is not affected by the nature of emotions during the VIS. There are certain themes that are implicit in the victim impact statements. One of the perceptible themes is vengeance; for instance, Travis’s brother, Alexander, speaks in a manner that denotes utter vengeance (TheTawniDilly, 2013). If given a chance, Alexander could do anything to avenge the death of his brother. Additionally, the theme of remorse is also evident. In her statement, Samantha expresses great remorse for what happened. She openly admits that something could have been done to save the life of her brother.
croakerqueen123 (2013). Jodi Arias Trial – Day 55 – Part 1 (Prosecution Closing) [Video]. Web.
TheTawniDilly (2013). Victim Impact Statements. Steven and Samantha Alexander. Jodi Arias Murder Trial. Better quality [Video]. Web.