Ryan Holle - Life in Prison for Lending his Car to a Friend!

Ryan Holle

On March 10th 2003, Ryan Holle loaned his car to his room mate and friend, William Allen, Jr. Allen then used the vehicle to pick up three men and drove them to the address of a known drug dealer. Where the group planned to steal drugs. Once they had broken in, the men emptied a safe of around $400 and a pound of marijuana. Unfortunately, they were interrupted by the home owner's teenage daughter and, in an effort to silence her, used a rifle from the house to bludgeon her to death. The killer, Charles Miller, Jr and the other men were soon arrested, a then twenty-year old Ryan Holle was also arrested alongside them. Because Florida adopt the Felony Murder Rule, Holle was deemed an accomplice for the loaning of his car and was therefore seen just as culpable for the young girl's death. Facing a first-degree murder charge, Ryan Holle was offered a plea deal, a ten year sentence in return for his testimony on the other men. Adamant that he was innocent of the charge, Holle refused the deal and his case went to trial. 

 When Holle's trial began in 2004,  the prosecutor started by hinting that during initial police questioning Holle gave the impression he knew exactly what the men planned to do that night. The prosecutor also went as far as saying that Holle was actually the mastermind behind the whole robbery and that he had been more than aware that 'knocking someone out' was a probability. He went on to state that Ryan Holle should be found guilty of first-degree murder because 'No Car, No Crime'.  Holle testified to the contrary, saying William Allen Jr had asked him to lend his car to go get food. Ryan Holle explained that he and others had enjoyed a long night of partying and he had no qualms in lending Allen the car, as it was something he had done in the past. He insisted that he had known nothing of the robbery until after the act and even then he had thought the men were joking around. Holle's version of events was also backed up by Allen, Jr himself. The entire trial, including prosecution/defence/witness testimony, jury deliberations, verdict and sentencing, lasted just one day. Ryan Holle was found guilty of first-degree murder and sentenced to life without parole. Despite prosecutors at first seeking the death penalty, Charles Miller Jr also received life without parole, as did the other three men involved. 

I have to admit Ryan Holle's conviction and sentence do not sit well with me at all. If accountability for a murder is being pushed back to the owner of the vehicle used, then isn't the home owner who had drugs in her house just as accountable? She created an unsafe environment for her family by knowingly having (and allegedly selling) marijuana under her roof. Instead, the home owner, and victim's mother, was sentenced to just three years in prison for possession. Why did the prosecution believe Ryan Holle was aware of the potential consequences when he lent his car to William Allen, Jr and the person who had drugs in their home wasn't? After all, following the prosecutor's twisted logic, shouldn't it be "No Marijuana, No Crime"?. In my eyes, Ryan Holle has been convicted of what he may have allegedly been thinking. 

I feel it is also important to note that Ryan Holle did not have a prior criminal record, unlike the other four men who were convicted. So how did the prosecution come to the conclusion that someone who has never been convicted of a criminal act in the past could be the mastermind behind a robbery? Especially when the others involved had all spent time in jail at some point. How did any jury find the alleged evidence against Holle enough to find him guilty, beyond a reasonable doubt? Of course, the prosecution are quick to point out that, on the evidence presented, twelve unbiased jury members found Ryan Holle guilty. However, when I consider that both Casey Anthony and OJ Simpson were found not guilty of murder by twelve unbiased jury members, this point bears no weight with me. Ryan Holle may have exercised poor judgement and naivety, but neither of these are against the law. 

In December 2014, four cabinet members decided to 'take advisment' in Ryan Holle's clemency hearing. This means, he is still waiting for a decision. If the clemency hearing is dismissed and any further appeals fail, Ryan Holle will die in prison for a crime that was committed while he was asleep in bed two miles away. Where is the justice in that? 

What do you think about the Ryan Holle case? Do you think the conviction and sentence were deserved or, like me, do you think he shouldn't have been convicted at all?

Ryan Holle continues to protest he knew
nothing about the robbery.

If you believe Ryan Holle should be granted clemancy, you can sign his Change.org petition at the following link - https://www.change.org/p/florida-commission-on-offender-review-governor-rick-scott-grant-clemency-for-ryan-holle-who-was-sentenced-to-life-for-loaning-his-car

To keep up-to-date with the Holle case, check out the Facebook page - https://www.facebook.com/justiceforryanholle

Jodi Arias - Does she Deserve to Die for her Crime?

Jodi Arias mugshot from 2008

The Jodi Arias case has been a constant source of frustration for me, and I am in no way related to the case, live 1000s of miles away and have never met any of the individuals involved. Convicted of the first-degree murder of her ex-boyfriend in 2013, the jury were unable to reach a unanimous decision whether Arias should live or die during the penalty phase. The penalty phase retrial, initially scheduled for July 2014, began on Monday September 29th 2014 and, to this day, is still being heard. 

The toxic, troubled and deeply obsessive love affair between Jodi Arias and her Mormon on/off boyfriend, Travis Alexander, ended in his murder on June 4th, 2008. As the prosecution in the Arias trial would later say, Mr Alexander was murdered three times over - after being stabbed 30 times, shot and having his throat cut from ear to ear. Travis Alexander's body lay undiscovered in the shower at his home until concerned friends broke in and found him. Arias initially denied all knowledge of Travis' murder, instead playing the distraught friend and former love. Unbeknown to Arias, her name had already been mentioned to police by Travis' friends, as early as the 911 call from his home on June 9th. Arias was formally questioned by police on June 14th where she stuck to her story of knowing nothing. However, the physical evidence at the crime scene was beginning to tell a different tale, and Arias knew her game was up when police revealed they had found her hair and blood mixed in with Travis' at the crime scene. Rather than confess any wrongdoing, she told her second set of lies. Weaving a some what elaborate tale of how she and Travis were attacked in his home by two masked ninjas. Travis, she said, had desperately fought for his life. Probably the only true sentence she uttered in her deceitful web of lies. After learning from friends of Travis, his own emails and texts and Arias' own emails and journals, a picture of a beyond obsessed jilted lover soon emerged. She had manipulated Travis Alexander into taking her into his bed by conforming to his Mormon faith and acting like the demure girlfriend in public and a slut in the bedroom. Arias was indicted by Grand Jury for first-degree murder on July 9th 2008 and arrested on July 15th. Following her extradition to Arizona, Arias officially pleaded 'not guilty' on September 11th, 2008. 

The object of Jodi Arias' obsession
Travis Alexander

Due to a number of delay tactics by the defence, including having Arias submitted for an IQ test to assess competency, it was the summer of 2011 when Arias submitted a request to represent herself at trial. Judge Sherry Stephens,presiding over the upcoming trial, agreed to this although she specified that Arias' defence counsel (Victoria Washington and Kirk Nurmi) stay on in an advisory capacity. Later in the same year, Arias requested letters sent to her by Mr Alexander in the weeks leading up to his death be admitted into evidence. According to her, these letters were proof that Travis Alexander was not only a paedophile, but he was also abusive, controlling and violent towards her. Judge Stephens denied the request. She also denied the defence's motion to have the death penalty removed as potential punishment. Shortly after, Victoria Washington's request to step down as Arias' defence counsel was accepted and she was replaced by death penalty qualified attorney, Jennifer Wilmott. Around Christmas 2011, Jodi Arias' sister Angela appeared on a special edition of 48 Hours. During the programme, Angela Arias said her sister's claims of being attacked by ninjas was false and that Jodi Arias herself had killed Travis Alexander in an act of self defence after an abusive Alexander had attacked her. It was, therefore no surprise, when Arias' trial finally opened on January 2nd that she claimed she was guilty of killing Alexander but only because she was defending her own life. It was also no surprise that she had decided to hand over her representation to her attorneys. 

During opening arguments, Maricopa County Prosecutor Juan Martinez pointed out the many lies Jodi Arias had told before settling with her self defence motive. He highlighted the fact that, up until then, she had told many lies and two other versions of the events of June 4th 2008. He pointed out that, not only did Mr Travis Alexander have significant self defence injuries, he had actually been killed three times over. He concluded his opening argument with a segment of interview from July 2008, before Arias claimed stories of ninjas and self defence, where she said "I did not kill Travis. Mark my words, no jury will convict me". Arias' defence team told a much different tale. Telling the jury that Travis Alexander, who appeared wholesome and devoutly Mormon to his friends and loved ones, was actually an aggressive bully who bullied Arias into having both anal and vaginal sex. On June 4th 2008, Alexander had become violently outraged when Jodi Arias accidentally dropped his new camera. Warding off his violent attack, Arias had been left with no choice but to fight back, seemingly to the death. During the trial, Juan Martinez brought several female friends of Travis Alexander to the stand. All testified that Alexander was kind, devout to his religion and that they all felt safe in his company. Police Detective Esteban Flores who had interviewed Arias way back in 2008, remembered her calling him in the days after Travis Alexander's body was found. He told how Arias had said she and Travis were 'friends or buddies', she said they had once had an intimate relationship but that they had broken up as she suspected him of 'cheating...plus he got upset real easy'. He also recalled Arias telling him that she had been told the crime scene was a bloody one and enquiring whether a weapon had been recovered at the scene. Finger print experts, the Medical examiner, forensic firearms experts and blood spatter specialists all took the stand to explain the physical evidence. On January 9th 2013, Ryan Burns a once potential new love interest for Arias, took the stand and revealed how he and Jodi Arias had enjoyed an intense make out session on the day after Travis Alexander was killed. Burns also testified how Arias showed up at his home several hours late and with two fingers covered by bandages. He concluded his testimony by stating that Arias was 'fit' and 'much stronger than she may appear'. Jodi Arias would also take the stand, in fact she testified for 13 long days. During this time she appeared confident, almost emotionless. She was not swayed by the fact the Alexander family were in court,nor was she bothered when she revealed how she had been physically abused by her parents as a child. All this as her mother sat in court in support of her.

The long  trial came to a close in May 2013. The prosecution had painted her as manipulative, obsessive and absolutely determined to 'have' Mr Alexander at any cost. When it looked like he was potentially thinking of marrying someone else, her plan to murder him was put in place. Her active cover up both before and after the murder were proof of premeditation and the prosecution had no doubt if she were to be set free it would only be a matter of time before she killed again. The defence painted an altogether more different person. Jodi Arias, who had been diagnosed with borderline personality disorder since the murder, was deeply in love with Travis Alexander and only ever sort to please him. Her testimony that he was a paedophile and that she had caught him getting aroused over pictures of young boys, was proof that she loved him. She had kept his secret, hoping to help 'cure' him. She put up with abuse and violence from Travis because she saw the good in him. Why, she even chose to enter his religion, because she loved him. Of course, she was actually scared of Alexander and complied with his sexual requests, which she actually found debasing, because she was too scared to say no. The day of the murder, says Arias, Travis flipped and, although she couldn't remember a lot of what happened due to a 'brain fog'. She knew Travis was going to try and kill her.

The jury found Jodi Arias guilty of First Degree murder on May 9th 2013. While the same jury panel found Arias guilty of committing murder in an especially cruel and unusual manner, they could not reach a unanimous verdict on the appropriate punishment - death or life without parole. The jury was dismissed and Judge Sherry Stephens ordered a retake of the penalty phase with a new jury. And that brings us to today, January 5th 2015, some seven years after Travis Alexander's death. The retrial of the penalty phase, which began in October 2014, was originally scheduled to be over by December,2014. However, due to the long list of mitigating factors introduced by the defence, secret testimony by Jodi Arias and a plethora of witnesses still to give evidence it looks like we won't be seeing a verdict soon. 

So, what is your view? Is Jodi Arias guilty of cold, calculated murder and therefore should receive the death penalty? Or does her self defence story have a ring of truth to it, can a jury be happy beyond a reasonable doubt that she DID kill Travis Alexander in cold blood or is there an element of doubt that means she should be sentenced to life without parole?

Update

On April 13th 2015, following a second hung jury, Judge Sherry Stephens sentenced Jodi Ann Arias to life in prison with no chance of parole. 

Jodi Arias refused to give any interviews without makeup or
in her prison stripes.