Theater shooting trial day 58: Arlene Holmes expected to testify

After the father of the convicted Aurora movie theater shooter concludes the testimony he began Tuesday, the gunman's mother is expected to be the next witness to take the stand.

3rd & 7 37yd

The way I understand it, they have to all agree that mitigation factors out way aggravating factors, but they don't have to all agree on the same mitigating factor that tipped the scales.

by Tammy Garrison 7/29/2015 4:59:09 PM
MayDay43-YES! That's what I was wondering...& about the jury thinking that as well...plus, some of these witnesses don't feel credible because they anticipate the questions, & are SO positive about JH!!! Any HUMAN has SOME flaws...testimony that isn't soooo one-sided would be more credible, in my opinion.

by BluesB 7/29/2015 4:59:18 PM
I can understand the Defense presenting mitigating arguments or testimony. The real question I have is that the fact that he gave no consideration for the victims, both living and dead, to mitigate in their favor so that he could spare their lives. IMHO there is no possible mitigating factors that could outweigh the aggravating factors.

by Harold Finch 7/29/2015 4:59:30 PM
Are any of the posters in this chat room sitting in the court room?

by Marti 7/29/2015 4:59:33 PM
@Marti: That would not be allowed. There is no transmission permitted and no electronic devices permitted. Reporters there must use pen and paper. I once had to return a USB plug to my car, even though I had no computer with which to use it

by Phil Tenser 7/29/2015 5:00:10 PM
Strawberry fields? Artichoke capitol of the world. .? Why...?? Are we in Oz??

by BluesB 7/29/2015 5:01:05 PM
No electronica devises are allowed in the court room that I am aware of @Marti

by LG 7/29/2015 5:01:06 PM
@LG: Correct, the only electronics belong to the court -- including the camera itself

by Phil Tenser 7/29/2015 5:01:25 PM
Barrett says the defendant was a member of a group of teenage boys who lived in the neighborhood

by Phil Tenser 7/29/2015 5:01:50 PM
:) Phil

by LG 7/29/2015 5:05:20 PM
So if one jury member disagrees (with this phase), he gets LWOP automatically?

by LK 7/29/2015 5:05:24 PM
@Phil - bonus points awarded for proper use of "with which"! This English minor's heart swells. ;o)

by jward12 7/29/2015 5:05:25 PM
@LK yes they do or it is LWOP

by Stacie 7/29/2015 5:05:30 PM
Thanks Phil.

by Marti 7/29/2015 5:05:31 PM
I agree with those who are tiring of these witnesses. Very few actually knew him well and shouldn't have testified. I realize defense has little to nothing to present but this is beyond scraping the bottom of the barrel. Makes the defense look even more desperate.

by Sue 7/29/2015 5:05:56 PM
DT has developed the argument that JH, prior to the crime, served as a positive contributing member of the community and his family while not being a trouble maker or demeaning person. Their "but for" argument is that minus the mental illness he would have continued along that path.

by trl2 7/29/2015 5:06:18 PM
Thank you!

by LK 7/29/2015 5:06:19 PM
Barrett says he remembers the boys playing basketball

by Phil Tenser 7/29/2015 5:06:44 PM
Yes what the heck do they have to do with the present??

by Sandy Smith 7/29/2015 5:06:48 PM
When your job is to try to save someone's life, you scrape every bit of everything you can out of that barrel. You never know who someone on the jury will identify with.

by CSP 7/29/2015 5:07:30 PM
Why do they keep asking if he was mean to his sister? Actually, I would find it odd if he wasn't a tiny bit mean - all kids aggrevate their siblings in one way or another. I just find this to be a very strange question.

by DocJ 7/29/2015 5:07:33 PM
@DocJ: Because in earlier testimony there was discussing that he might have hit her one time during a fight on the basketball court... they are trying to reinforce the idea he has no history of violence

by Phil Tenser 7/29/2015 5:07:59 PM
@Sandy- Mitigation isn't about the present.

by CSP 7/29/2015 5:08:08 PM
@Sophia-I agree completely w/you ...this detracts from emotional testimony of father, & puts distance & a risk for boredom to the jury...they should have done father and mother's testimony, last, & left it at that. 'Not very good strategy on part of the DT, in my opinion. They're watering down the only real mitigation they may have...

by BluesB 7/29/2015 5:08:12 PM
Blah Blah Blah this is so stupid to listen to ALL of these witnesses. Does the defense actually think this will sway the jury at all?

by Sandy Smith 7/29/2015 5:08:13 PM
The DT is trying to humanize JH with these witnesses to try to get sympathy. To try to show he was "normal" before the psychotic break.

by Stacie 7/29/2015 5:08:36 PM
@LK - unanimous or that count automatically defaults to LWOP.

by mandi 7/29/2015 5:08:42 PM
It is nice of these people to testify.

by NeuroNonsense 7/29/2015 5:08:58 PM
Barrett says the boys ran on the track team together

by Phil Tenser 7/29/2015 5:09:37 PM
If they do not agree 100% it is automatic LWOP

by Stacie 7/29/2015 5:09:40 PM
aahh.. Thanks, Phil! Want some zucchini? haha

by DocJ 7/29/2015 5:09:45 PM
@Phil Why didn't the defense go for diminished responsibility seeing how he is mentally ill and get life in prison?

Do they have a choice or did Brachler said "no way" to DR, the only choice they had was to plead NGBRI to save the clients life? Is that how all this works?

by Me 7/29/2015 5:09:51 PM
@Me: I don't know what "diminished responsibility" is or even if it exists here in Colorado. I'm not a lawyer, I just talk to one on Tv sometimes. But the old documents to indicate the defense says a plea deal was offered but not accepted and the DA says it was because the victims/families wanted him to pursue the death penalty

by Phil Tenser 7/29/2015 5:11:14 PM
All the defense has proven to Me so far was that the Defendant had numerous caring people that he could have reached out too rather then commit a mass murder.

by Mrs. Arnaz 7/29/2015 5:11:25 PM
DOC J -I think because AC kept mentioning he backhanded his sister -implying he was a violent child and there was much "cover up".... also alluding to why she didn't visit or write him in jail/that they had a strained relationship...

by BluesB 7/29/2015 5:11:30 PM
I think of the mitigation witnesses has building material, all by themselves it is hard to see what they are going to look like once put together. We will find out what the DT is trying to build when they sum it up in their closing argument.

by Humble Pride 7/29/2015 5:12:23 PM
I still find it weird that both Robert Holmes and the father of the Sandy Hook shooter were both involved with the Lipdor scandal...what are the odds...

by mandi 7/29/2015 5:12:39 PM
@DocJ I was thinking the same thing. My brother and I terrorized each other for our whole childhood. Now, as adults, we're very close, we have all the same friends and get along great! So I thought it to be odd that the defense wants to drive it home so hard that they got along so well as kids. It would be more "normal" if they didn't get along I think lol! I'm always hearing parents complain about how their kids never get along while their young.

by Della (Me) 7/29/2015 5:13:38 PM
Okay, legal question. At the end of all these witnesses testifying, then what happens? Is there another round of closing arguments? If so, then does the jury deliberate again? Then what happens?

by Nadine 7/29/2015 5:13:41 PM
@Nadine: Yes, there will be a closing argument and then deliberations for this phase

by Phil Tenser 7/29/2015 5:13:58 PM
*Libor

by mandi 7/29/2015 5:14:00 PM
Do you agree that it would be easier to find for death if JH would have been a juvenile delinquent with violent crimes or a drug history?

by trl2 7/29/2015 5:14:04 PM
ETA on Arlene Holmes?

by Victoria 7/29/2015 5:14:12 PM
@Victoria: No time has been announced, but by our notes this is video 7 of 9

by Phil Tenser 7/29/2015 5:14:27 PM
In knowing people just like these, including just like JH, there is extreme dysfunction within the family unit, and secretiveness, meaning they don't tell anyone outside about what is really going on behind closed doors. They know of their dysfunction and yet they don't discuss it even amongst themselves, there are a lot of internal issues with these people. The outside world is not aware of. Looking at something being wrong with the kid, would mean looking at something being wrong with the parents themselves, and therefore like the dad said "we don't talk about these things" and he was unaware his kid had issues at the age of 8 cause "Arlene took care of these things". He just stuck his head under the carpet and didn't involve himself. People don't just all of a sudden show up and kill people, this has gone on for a very very long time, and nothing was done to get him help, cause like the dad said "didn't seem like therapy was making any changes in his ability to make friends" so they just quit therapy! The person I knew, his family told me that they were worried he was going to have a "psychotic break", however, never did anything to get him any kind of medical or psychological help. The entire family, I know, are all nuts, all of them, and yet none of them will get into therapy of any kind, and their dysfunction continues to this date.

by tim 7/29/2015 5:14:46 PM