The murder trial case involving Jodi Arias dominated public discourse during the court proceedings in May 2013 due to the numerous twists and turns that attended it. In the foregoing, Jodi’s defense counsel sought to argue that she deserved a life sentence rather than the death penalty. Among the most effective arguments about Jodi’s culture and character was that she was far better than her worst deed-the murder of her ex-boyfriend, Travis Alexander (Croakerqueen123, 2013). Accordingly, the defense counsel demonstrated that Jodi’s life still had value despite her heinous crime. In no way was there any attempt to excuse her crime but there were mentioned several mitigating factors to Jodi’s favor. Correspondingly, the defense counsel presented mitigating factors such as Jodi having no criminal history; and that she was friendly to people around her, forming strong bonds with them that lasted many years (Croakerqueen123, 2013). As such, these mitigating factors among others should have informed a judgment of sentencing her to life imprisonment rather than the death penalty.
Another effective argument about Jodi’s culture and character was her experience growing up that might have inadvertently led her on a trajectory to her crime. Notably, Jodi saw her father mistreat and abuse her mother while she had also experienced growing apart from her mother as she punished her even for no reason (Croakerqueen123, 2013). Moreover, Jodi had been reported to have suffered from borderline personality disorder; possibly because of the feelings of not being validated as a child and failing to bond with her parents. As such, it was not Jodi’s choice to suffer the disorder which predisposed her to violent outbursts. Being that her criminal activity might have been caused by the disorder, she, therefore, needed to be shown mercy by serving a life sentence but not being sent to death row.
References
Croakerqueen123. (2013). Jodi Arias Penalty Phase – Day 3 – Part 3 (Closing Statements) [Video]. YouTube.