Jodi Arias claims self defense, or is it Burning Bed?
In the one of the most famous recent criminal murder cases, Jodi Arias testified and claimed her killing of her boyfriend Travis Alexander was justified self-defense (see "Arias breaks down in tears testifying at murder trial" by AZfamily.com).
Jodi Arias, 32, has spent four days on the witness stand recounting her troubled childhood marred by abuse at the hands of her parents, a string of bad relationships, and how Travis Alexander belittled her, cheated on her, call her derogatory names and used her to fulfill his sexual fantasies.
...
She later explained how Alexander once beat her, pushed her to the ground, kicked her in the ribs and broke her finger, then in a theatrical moment for the jury, raised her hand to display her crooked digit.
In Arizona, for a defendant to prevail on the affirmative defense of self-defense, the following two conditions must be true (see "AZ state bar criminal jury instruction 4.04 − Justification for Self-Defense"):
1. A reasonable person in the situation would have believed that physical force was immediately necessary to protect against another’s use or apparent attempted or threatened use of unlawful physical force; and
2. The defendant used or threatened no more physical force than would have appeared necessary to a reasonable person in the situation.
A couple significant points are worth mentioning here: first, the state has the burden of proving beyond a reasonable it was not self defense:
The State has the burden of proving beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant did not act with such justification. If the State fails to carry this burden, then you must find the defendant not guilty of the charge.
This is a change in the law from a few years ago because of a case called State v. Harold Fish. While the defense has a duty to present "some evidence" for self-defense to apply, which is the case for any argument by the defense or state, that duty is light and be carried simply by Ms. Arias testifying. Whether Ms. Arias is believable or not is for the jury to decide.
Second, to be self defense, the threat must be immediate. That means the "burning bed" defense, which seems to be Ms. Arias' actual defense strategy, would not be self defense. The important point here is that from what I know of Francine Hughes' (played by Farrah Fawcett in the movie) acquittal of murdering her husband, James Hughes, her defense at trial was not self defense but temporary insanity.
That brings up the question why wouldn't Jodi Arias instead have tried the insanity defense instead of self defense? I don't know for sure, but probably because winning "guilty except insane" in Arizona is next to impossible, probably even less likely that trying self defense when the threat was not so immediate.
Comments (6)
Read through and enter the discussion by using the form at the endBeverly Bittner - February 17, 2013 6:38 AM
I do not believe all the "abuse stories" which Ms.Arias claims happened to her. She's the "stalker/manipulator" who wanted to be Travis Alexander's wife at any cost. Her way of manipulating the situation was through sex, which most men crave no matter how bad a situation is. This is "her control" over Travis.
Obviously, the defense wants Mr.Alexander to "look abusive and manipulative" to the jury, however, after several days of Jodie's story telling, she's contridicted herself many times. She claimed that Travis ignored her in public, didn't want others to know about their relationship. Later as her story draws nearer to the time of the murder, Travis is now a "jealous boyfriend" who squeezes her butt in public to show his "ownership" of Jodie. If there were any arguments, I believe they were started by Jodie, just so she could execute her control by using sex as the peace prize. This was a continual theme to their situation. I believe there may have been verbal "abuse" but not physical abuse. If the arguments did get physical, I have no doubts that it was Jodie who was the attacker.
Travis wanted Jodie out of his life and when she could not get him to be only exclusively with her, she planned his demise and carried out the act when he would not change his mind. I got the impression that Travis only viewed Jodie as a sex partner and nothing more. This is why she was so angry. She obviously thought that becoming a Mormon would make her appeal more pleasing to Travis, but that too was short lived.
Saving the "sex talk" phone conversation was part of her plan to "blackmail" Travis combined with her threat of "outing" him as a pedephile and causing him problems within the Morman church was her last ditch effort to make him marry her. If they had "sex talk" on the phone on a regular basis, why wasn't any of the other conversations taped? Jodie Arias was "OBSESSED" with the idea of marriage to Travis and if she could not have him then nobody else would either.
Ms. Arias is not "insane", she's just extremely clever and smart. She thinks everyone believes her falsehoods (she probably believes them herself by this time) and she thought she had planned the "perfect murder", but I'm not fooled by her act. She's gulity of premeditated murder as far as I can determine from the evidence and her story telling.
robert richins - February 25, 2013 9:07 PM
I believe jodi arais is insane. At the time of her killing travis, she had an episode.the predition i have of the trial is obvious to many im sure.not guilty by reason of insanity.which means no death sentence and life in an institution away from innocent people.
Eloy A. Role - February 27, 2013 11:35 PM
Jodi Arias is a mental case.
The defense must interpose a psychiatric examination to determine if she could afford trial.
She looks like depressed, schizophrenic, delusional, hysteric, maniac, etc.
Her defense proved to be incompetent, unrehearsed and inexperienced.
Eloy A. Role
Paralegal
Cate Ellington - March 10, 2013 7:35 PM
Hi Vlad,
Its called..'this is the best I could come up with'.
By now, im really surprised anyone would call jodi 'extremely bright'.
Nervy yes. Bright, no. There was a serious underestimating of just how much
Crap people could be expected to take.
Janice Harper - April 1, 2013 5:22 PM
I was a founding member of the Francine Hughes Defense Committee which was established to support Ms. Hughes and raise awareness of domestic abuse. I recently wrote about the difference between these two cases for the Huffington Post: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/janice-harper/the-burning-bed_b_2981003.html
George - April 10, 2013 1:18 AM
Jodi Arias is NOT criminally insane for the following reasons:
She DID know right from wrong at the time of her actions. Afterall, she tried to clean up the murder scene, hide the gun, knife and camera, while putting the license plate on her car upside down. Not to mention the extra gas cans in her vehicle so she wouldn't gave to stop for fuel after the murder. These actions represent guilt of consciousnes, and premeditation
She is the poster girl for the death penalty. She is evil personified!!
This is Murder in the First Degree. PERIOD!!