Sordid.

We can see why it might be proper, even laudatory, for a lawyer representing a private individual or company to write a book or give interviews – with the client’s permission, of course – about a case, or the client’s story, or whatever.  But for a prosecutor to do that?  Strikes us as trading on their public position for personal gain.

Apparently today’s prosecutors see nothing wrong with it, though, so now we  give you bull dog prosecutor Juan Martinez, writing all about his glorious triumph in the Jodi Arias fiasco:

A juror in the Jodi Arias murder trial fell head-over-heels in love with the convicted killer during the proceedings, according to a new book by one of the prosecutors in the sensational case.

Indeed, a sensational allegation in a sensational case.  One little caveat, though:  the ‘evidence’ supporting this allegation is, well, laughable:

“I’ve never seen this book, but just based on what I felt at the time, I believe it was Bill. Absolutely,” Tara Harris Kelley, 32, told The Post Monday from her Arizona home.

“Whenever we had to go to the principal’s office, as I called the judge’s chambers, he would make eye contact with her, going in and coming out. The rest of us didn’t even want to look at Jody,” she said.

Modal Trigger
Photo: Amazon

Kelley said she and Zervakos often ate lunch together and she could tell from his comments that he had a crush on the defendant.

“We’d have lunch together and he’d tell me how back in the day he was a womanizer. He thought she was young and attractive and he didn’t see how somebody that young and attractive could kill anybody,” she said.

 

 

So, a juror commented that Jodi Arias was young and attractive, made eye contact with her on occasion and expressed skepticism about her guilt.

Obviously, he was “lovesick”.

Sheesh.  What does the juror have to say about it?

“I’m 71 years old, for God’s sake, I’m not going to have a crush on her or anybody. Of course not. That’s ridiculous,” he told The Post. Zervakos accused Martinez, whom he said he “never liked,” of sensationalizing the case to make a buck.

“People can say what they want to say. I haven’t read it, I’m not going to read it. I don’t have a whole lot of respect for him,“ he said. “I just want it to be over.”

You might think that rushing to a conclusion about a juror based on extremely thin evidence is not something a prosecutor would like to in such a public way.  Then again, it’s not like he need have any fear of being called on it.

The legal profession in Arizona needs to re-think how it does things.  Martinez’ boss isn’t worried, though:

But the publication has stirred controversy in Arizona legal circles, with some experts questioning Martinez’s ethics for spilling the beans while her conviction is being appealed.

But Jerry Cobb, a spokesman for Maricopa County Attorney Bill Montgomery, Martinez’s boss, defended the prosecutor.

“We received appropriate assurances that Juan Martinez’s off-duty activities will not violate state statutes or restrictions on attorney conduct,” he told the Arizona Republic.

Ugh.

Advertisements

11 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

11 responses to “Sordid.

  1. Is there any proof that Mr. Martinez has made such a claim as the juror falling in love with the defendant? Without the book, or comments directly quote from the prosecutor, I take it as sensational journalism. Gossip. Here’s an idea — what if this rumor was propagated by the Jodi followers? I think the evidence of this claim is thin too.

    Like

  2. Jessie

    Review copies of the book are already circulating, so I think it’s safe to say the book makes that claim. The article is clear that the book doesn’t name the juror, but the New York Post got another juror to point the finger at a 70-year-old man, who apparently just didn’t hate Arias/love Juan enough—even though that jury did unanimously convict Arias of first-degree murder.

    I kinda hope the dude sues Tara Kelley for defamation. Kelley’s been fame-whoring ever since the first trial.

    None of this is healthy for the justice system. Kirk Nurmi’s publishing a book, too, apparently without Arias’ permission. They may all be assuring that Arias gets handed a new trial, which I guess is at least good for ratings.

    Like

    • Jodi does not have the “right” to be granting permission for any book. As a convicted criminal, those rights were taken away weren’t they?

      Like

      • Who got a review copy of the book? Publication was pushed back… I don’t think it is set for review yet.

        Like

      • Jessie

        No, attorney-client privilege is not a “right” that can be erased by the client’s conviction. It’s a professional responsibility of the attorney. If Nurmi did not get Arias’ permission, then she’ll probably sue him, as well as make it a part of her appeal. Your lawyer can’t violate privilege just because you lost.

        Martinez? Who knows? The district attorney (Martinez’s boss) is on-record as hunky-dory with it, but that doesn’t mean the Arizona bar will be.

        Martinez’s book is scheduled for release in January. Review copies typically go out 6-8 weeks before publication. Several media outlets have quoted from it, including the Arizona Republic, so I doubt the New York Post is just making it up for giggles.

        Like

  3. Jessie

    I’m starting to think Martinez’s book, or a portion of it, were leaked. About a half dozen legitimate/non-tabloid news sources report on the book, sourcing the book itself.

    Either the publisher or Martinez would have had reason to leak it since Nurmi self-published and came out first. Leaking would keep Martinez’s book in the news while Nurmi’s doing his interviews, and it wouldn’t seem unusual even to legitimate to news outlets to receive an advance copy or a portion of it. So they wouldn’t have had to reason to wonder or inquire if it was a leak.

    They could still change the text in advance of the publication date (though I still think Martinez probably does insinuate in the book that one or more jurors were in love with Arias, since he made that suggestion about defense witnesses all through the trial). A leak would also explain why Harper Collins could honestly say that advance copies haven’t been made available yet.

    Like

    • I still don’t think so. Why leak information and deny it is in the book? I still think this is gossip leaked by folks that want to keep Jodi’s trial in the news. The whole “in love” remark is just too unreal of a remark to be made by someone who was sucked in by her psychopathic/sociopathic manipulations. I don’t blame any juror for their vote.

      Like

  4. Jessie

    Well, sure. The publisher has a highly vested interest in Arias remaining in the news. That’s how they’re going to sell the book, especially since Nurmi’s came out at least a month ahead of theirs.

    And I just don’t buy that legitimate news outlets, like WGN in Chicago and the Arizona Republic, are sourcing information to a book that they’ve never even seen a part of. I could believe it of the tabloids, but not of the respectable outlets, who are sourcing information to the book. They’ve read either part or all of it.

    It was Juan who said the book doesn’t claim a juror was “in love” with Arias. Well…ok….maybe it doesn’t in those words, but he insinuated every defense witness was infatuated with her. This is a thing with him. But saying “infatuated” is not saying “in love,” right? RIGHT?? RIGHT!?!!? YES OR NO?!?! (Sorry…I was channeling Juan again…)

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s