Jodi Arias' trial will likely stretch on until at least September.
Arias, 33, was found guilty of premeditated first-degree murder in May in the killing of her ex-boyfriend, 30-year-old Travis Alexander, in June 2008. Despite returning a guilty verdict, jurors could not unanimously agree if Arias deserved the death penalty or life in prison, and Judge Sherry Stephens declared a hung jury, sending the case into limbo. Now, Arias' defense team is attempting to vacate the possibility of the death penalty by challenging the finding that Alexander's murder was "especially cruel," while the the prosecution continues to prepare for another penalty phase of the trial.
In her first court appearance in weeks, Arias traded her typical conservative business suits for stripes and shackles when she was led into a status update hearing Tuesday by tactical sheriff's deputies. In stark contrast to the rest of her trial, Tuesday's proceedings were uncharacteristically short, and mostly took place behind the closed doors of Judge Stephens' chambers.
Judge Stephens reportedly instructed both the defense and prosecution to schedule a late September court date to begin retrying Arias in a second penalty phase. The status update hearing was initially called to allow Arias lawyer Kirk Nurmi to argue against the court's ruling that Arias killed Alexander in an "especially cruel" manner, a condition that made her eligible for the death penalty.
Arias' defense team has filed a motion alleging that "especially cruel" was too vague of a term for jurors without legal knowledge to fairly judge what specific factor would make one murder more heinous than another. Arizona law defines "cruel manner" as when a victim suffers physical and/or mental pain.
The responsibility of determining what is "especially cruel" rests with jurors thanks to a 2002 U.S. Supreme Court decision that ruled defendants have the right for a jury to decide what aggravating factors could qualify them for the death penalty. Arias' lawyers' motion directly challenges that decision.
Defense attorney Nurmi claims that due to current laws "layperson jurors" are forced to "muddle through" the meaning of "especially cruel."
"By including the word 'especially', the statute was designed to be employed by a judge, one presumed to have the depth and breadth of experience to identify those first degree murders 'above the norm,'" Nurmi wrote in a court filing.
After Alexander's nude body was discovered crumpled over in his bathroom shower, medical examiners found that Arias had stabbed him almost 30 times in the heart, torso, chest, and back, shot him in the face, and cut his throat from ear to ear so deeply that it nearly decapitated him—and all in less than 120 seconds.
While almost a month has passed since Arias' last court date, Nurmi told Judge Stephens the defense was still not ready to argue its case for vacating the "especially cruel" ruling. Judge Stephens set a date of Aug. 5 for Arias' attorneys to file their final case challenging the ruling.
"It appears there are a number of issues that are unresolved so I am reluctant to set a firm trial date for the penalty phase retrial at this time," Stephens announced Tuesday, The Associated Press reported.
"Parties should work toward beginning trial in late September. That is my intention."
Judge Stephens scheduled another status conference for Aug. 26.