Trials of women in love gone wild seem to be increasing in popularity these days. Not only are they grasping a keen interest from the public, but they actually are happening more and more often according to recent data from the Justice Bureau. And the FBI. And there seems to be a running theme amongst them all. That of, a stupid twenty-something being blinded by an inferno of rage fueled by the disappointment that their unhealthy obsessive fixation on a fictitious idyllic fantasy came to an end. It’s stupid twenty-something behavior that rises to the level of narcissistic criminal activity. We’ve got two stupid twenty-somethings who both made the news this week, from the prisons they are serving first degree murder sentences in. And they like it. Jodi Arias who is serving a life sentence for killing someone three times, made headlines for eating a chicken fajita. Monica Lindstrom for KTAR reported Jan.29, most people with a rational brain are just tired of it. She eloquently said out loud what all of us that are deleting the Jodi Arias alerts have been thinking,
“I think it is safe to say that the majority of good Americans and Arizonans do not want to hear her self-indulging, inauthentic, feel-sorry-for-me rhetoric. They just want her to go away — quietly — forever.”
Why won’t she? She’s a narcissist. And she wants to count how many people care about her and the god forsaken chicken fajita. Thank you, Monica. Yes, it is very, very safe to say.
Jodi Arias has been trying to make headlines since she gutted Travis Alexander, nearly decapitated him, and then shot him in the head in 2008. But there’s nothing more to say about her. It’s a good thing she didn’t get the death penalty, or she would be milking the media even more than she already does.
It’s a sad day when you are having someone call a news outlet to ask them to brag about your chicken fajita. But she doesn’t have any more kicks in the can left to try. Although she does like to think she’s special.
Turns out, she’s not. And if anyone cares about her chicken fajita it’s only because her worth to society has been reduced to nothing more than clickbait. The outlets like to talk about it because it translates to cash for them.
And, considering the way this killer courted them and used them and manipulated them and trampled on the Constitution for them so much, why shouldn’t they resort her to clickbait? It’s a win win for them. But Jodi, ever the narcissist, thinks that means people care. So she keeps trying.
Why? For anyone that thinks it’s because she’s special, that is incorrect. It turns out Jodi Arias is just another part of a truly psychopathic trend happening in America, with women.
Or as the character Sheldon Cooper would say on CBS Show The Big Bang Theory, ‘[bleep]s be crazy.” It’s happening more and more every day. Jodi Arias isn’t even the only [bleep] be crazy girl we’ve seen in the news this week.
The second time it was the Shayna Hubers trial out of Kentucky. She’s serving a 40-year-sentence in Kentucky. She found out that the man that said no to her a million times was dating a pageant queen and went, you guessed it, “[bleep] be crazy.”
When her story made headlines shortly after Jodi Arias was carted off to prison for the rest of her life, Shayna was compared to Jodi quite a bit, right down to the multiple stab wounds used in the methodologies of their first degree murders. Their similarities were almost creepy. They were both described as narcissists during their trial and by the public at large.
They even looked the same.This week, Cincinnati News reported Jan. 27 more mysterious details and developments in the Shayna Hubers trial, that have many reminded of previous comparisons to Jodi Arias trial.
In the Jodi Arias trial, nothing was done as it should have been done. A lot of people believe that’s because of the narcissist that is Jodi Arias. Several more million dollars, years, and tears shed later, there was little justice felt in Arizona when Jodi Arias was sentenced to life in prison for the first degree murder of Travis Alexander.
If anything, that extraordinary case exposed more holes in the system of Arizona specifically than anything else. Nobody had ever seen a case tried so poorly and so publicly.
Here was this scorned girl gone wild hosing the system every way that she could to avoid the inevitable, prison time for murder. In that case it seemed, everything that could have gone wrong did. Considering how pretty cut and dry the facts are on that case it is truly a staggering thought to even conceive.
But everyone following it or covering it said the same thing. “I’ve never seen anything like it.” So it was a shock when the Shayna Hubers trial cropped up and the similarities began stacking up. The difference, Shayna Hubers does not seem to be the manipulative fame hugging killer as the previous trial. Or is she?
So far it seems that everything is happening in her case as it should be according to the rules of justice and the laws of the land. Not many, State side or defense side supporters alike from the Jodi Arias trial, believe there was an ounce of justice in the courtroom the day she was sentenced. The Shayna Hubers trial is being handled a little bit differently.
By the laws of the land. And that means, according to Cincinnati News today, the new mysterious turns the Shayna Hubers trial has taken could mean a new trial for Shayna Hubers. So are these coincidences just that, happy coincidences? Or is this another stupid twenty-something narcissist trying to hose the system one last time in an effort to get out of jail free?
Because with Shayna Hubers, that could happen. And here we are with juror drama. Sound familiar?
Once upon a time back before this century started a man in Campbell County, Kentucky, was late on his child support payments. He was ordered jail time, because Kentucky don’t play and considers abandoning your children a felony. His legal matters got worked out by a very good defense attorney.
Do you see where this is going? Fast forward 20 years and he ends up in front of the jury box of the Shayna Hubers trial. And, so does his old lawyer. Awkies!
There’s a thing that happens before a jury is selected in America, and it’s called voir dire. The purpose of voir dire is to avoid these awkward situations, because they do happen that often. Theoretically speaking, defense counsel and the baby daddy in question should have said something.
But they didn’t. And now all of a sudden, the defense counsel in question has a brain wave one night and says, “Oh yeah! NOW I know where I remember that guy from!”
Cincinnati News is saying that’s exactly what happened. When the Shayna Hubers trial first started, neither the baby daddy nor the defense counsel in question said a thing, and they should have. Which is exactly why Shayna could get a retrial, and possibly even be found innocent by a different jury.
It’s devastating news to the family members of the victim who are spent in every possible way after having to go through that trial at all in the first place. Again? Really?
Was this really just an accidental memory recall? Cincinnati News reports today that when voir dire was occurring for the Shayna Hubers trial, she vaguely remembers seeing that name pop up and wondering if that meant anything. It wasn’t until she began investigating for the appeal that the name “popped up” again.
“I know, I know, what are the odds? If I wasn’t watching and paying attention, I wouldn’t have seen it. If I hadn’t remembered the name, if it hadn’t been me. … It is the weirdest.”
Wow that is really convenient timing for the defense, huh? What are the odds indeed? Well, it is not all that slim as she suggests. What are the odds that a defense counsel in a Campbell County case previously defended someone in the jury box on a former Campbell County case?
Actually, pretty good. Happens all the time. There are only so many defense attorneys to go around for all of the criminals. That’s why they have voir dire.
What was the first thing she did? Well she had to disclose that immediately, in her motion for a mistrial. She says, according to Cincinnati News today, that legally speaking, if he had been pardoned or his rights restored he was still okay for jury duty.
She alleges that she tried to find that out, and cited a difficult website as the reason she couldn’t get the full answer on that. That sounds a little weird too. What are the odds that a lawyer, who has access to infinitely more public records of felons than almost any other profession on the planet, would have a difficult time accessing a website to determine a pardon or not?
Slim to none. That information also is very easy to get by any lay person, on almost anyone with a record in the United States, in just a couple of minutes. All you need is a computer, Internet connection, their name and a credit card.
Nobody is supposed to know the name of any jurors. For obvious reasons. Criminals be crazy. It’s practically illegal to even acknowledge that jurors are humans with names at all.
But Baby Daddy Juror definitely does have a name. That defense counsel investigating for an appeal would know what it is. And this is something that they could then punch into any computer, in any country, and access any of the millions of different public records databases online and find out if he has been pardoned or not.
With just a name and a credit card, anybody could do that within minutes. But, this defense counsel, who does this for a living, was too busy writing motions for mistrial to wait for one website to load, apparently. What are the odds? She’s even trying to suggest the juror has honesty issues.
“We ask jurors a series of questions and we trust them to be fair and honest.”
Campbell County Commonwealth Attorney that prosecuted Shayna Hubers won’t even comment on this “mysterious” development. The courts do say there won’t be a decision on this motion for many months. Cincinnati News asked today, “What are the odds she will find something else” as she continues her investigation into the Shayna Hubers appeal.
It’s almost a loaded question. What indeed are the odds, that new information suddenly crops up during an investigation for the appeal? Was this an honest memory flashback? Or is this a defense that is looking more and more like the tricks played by the Jodi Arias team every day?
Are these mysterious coincidences? Or do things like this actually happen every day in the American justice system? Or, are Jodi and Shayna really more alike than originally suspected?
What does all of this tell us? That the oddest of odds in juror drama has occurred twice in two different States in two different murder trials and we have two very unique stupid twenty-something narcissistic women killers, and trial processes on our hands? Not at all.
It tells us that this probably happens more often than we think. It just doesn’t happen so often that the narcissistic female killers make headlines, as has happened in both of these trials. Murders happen every day in America, and not all of them are committed by men.
In fact, more than 75 percent of murder victims are male according to 2010 FBI Homicide Data. The FBI also says that over 53 percent of murders are committed by someone the victim knows, and that 41.8 percent of 2010 murders in America happened during or right after arguments that included love triangles.
That’s a lot of crazy jealous women. What is happening in America? Their reports also show that murder by female is not all that uncommon. In 2011, arrests for men went down while arrests for women went up.
Arrests for men for violent crimes also went down in 2011, but also went up for women as well. According to this data of the almost 2 million crimes committed by females in 2011, 801 of them were for murder. So when any two of those murders makes bigger headlines than usual on any given year, the chances of them having many similarities actually increases.
Criminal behavior and the criminal mind are just that predictable. And when it comes to two women having so many similarities in their murder trials, that is not all that surprising either when looking at this data. They aren’t special.
In other words, Jodi Arias and Shayna Hubers may actually be two peas in a pod. And their trial processes may have even had some very odd similarities and overlaps. It happens. And it’s going to happen again.
We are already looking at a case out of Seattle where another woman is standing trial for killing 6 members of her own family. That is the case of the Carnation Murders. We’ve been getting daily updates from author and reporter from inside the courtroom Paul Sanders, the infamous 13th Juror, and will begin looking at that narcissistic relationship profile next.
That accused, Michele Anderson, is coming off to many already as a narcissist as well. Just another example that these women killers aren’t special. There will be more after Michelle as well.
One day soon, people will care even less that Jodi Arias was one of 300 million people eating a chicken fajita on a Tuesday. Watch WCPO talk about the narcissism in the Shayna Hubers trial, and how, she’s really not all that special either. Seems to happen a lot these days. Why do you think women become this way in relationships?