Nelson says she feels the caselaw supports her position but has no idea where Edwards argument comes from. Edwards arguing that the court should be the one to decide what is "relevant mitigation"
"Not one case says the jury can arbitrarily decide" Edwards says
Nelson calls this argument a "very big problem in this case"
Nelson says a lot of the mental health evidence came from experts presented by the prosecution, and "it certainly would be absurd for the jurors to think they couldn't consider the testimony of Dr. Reid."
Judge says, "I don't know if that is a good example" because he's sure the defense will include mental health
Judge asks to move on, promises to read the cases
Edwards argue the same issue we've been hearing argued applies to the whole paragraph
Edwards says in a later paragraph jurors don't know the difference between aggravating factor/circumstance and he suggests removing "as aggravation" but leaving "aggravating factor"
Defense disagrees, believe they need both
Judge grants request to take it out, to avoid confusion
Nelson has an objection to language at the beginning of the same instruction
Judge will make the change, he says it is appropriate
Next page, Nelson suggests replacing "deliberations" with "individual determination about mitigation" because this instruction is about how they can each find differing items
Edwards suggests using "or"
Judge is going to have to think about this one too
Edwards objects as "anti-deliberative" and Nelson says that is not correct
Edwards says he is arguing about the word "first"
Judge doesn't think it is a big deal. "As a matter of logic"
Nelson objects to removing first
Judge is just going to take it out
Nelson says she doesn't understand Edward's objection
Now past 6pm, when the judge had wanted to be finished
Higgs says she'd like to leave for an appointment, and judge responds that he'll stop in a few minutes
Nelson does have additional objections to this instruction, making it gender neutral and to remove "with respect to a count" when they weigh the mitigating factors
Nelson objects to sending copies of Phase 1 verdict forms with the jury, but the judge says he either has to send it back or remind them which aggravating factors
Nelson says they'd prefer the instruction, Edwards says prosecution wants to send the forms back
Judge asking if either side wants to give him a heads up about any big issues they might see
Judge reads instruction where jurors can consider compassion for the defendant but not for anyone else at this point
Nelson says that most of the rest of her objections will be quick, but she wants to point out that the "reasonable doubt" instruction doesn't make sense to include
After this long day, we're going to wrap up and say goodnight. Thanks for sticking with us