TRIAL OF CHAD DAYBELL CHARGED WITH MURDER OF JJ VALLOW, TYLEE RYAN AND TAMMY DAYBELL

[Cindizzi]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1775901914846360050

https://twitter.com/x/status/1775903723459600746

 

[wnk]

I was watching a Court TV segment on this trial and the commentators were kicking around the idea that Lori Daybell Vallow might be called to testify for the defense in Chad Daybell's trial. Does anyone have any thoughts on the possibility of this occurring? IS Lori Vallow listed as a possible witness?

Doomsday Prophet Murder Trial: Did Chad Daybell Murder Wife in Bed?

Prosecutors in the Doomsday Prophet Murder Trial claim Chad Daybell killed Tammy Daybell in their marital bed. Can it be proven?

www.courttv.com

I went on a deep dive here into some legal sites and was surprised to discover that yes, co-conspirators are legally allowed to testify FOR or AGAINST the defense. Even if the co-conspirator plead guilty or were found guilty of the crime, though, they could still plead the Fifth, which is why often the State won't subpoena a co-conspirator unless they know for sure that they will testify against the defense (ie In this case, the State would look bad if they called LVD as a witness and LVD refused to testify against CD).

IMO, the defense would be seriously playing with fire by allow LVD to testify. The State would absolutely tear her apart on cross-examination, and based on her closing statement at her own trial, I don't think it would do CD any favors.

 

[ReadySet]

You are not required to use your challenges. Here's an interesting article that posits preemptory challenges are not really useful and which argues prosecutors should waive them. If lawyers do not use their challenges the judge will cull the jury based on the order called (last called to the box will be the first eliminated). From my experience both as an attorney and a trial consultant, I've never seen or heard of a trial lawyer waiving the right to use a preemptory challenge. Back when I practiced we would occasionally have a "dream" panel who we legitimately felt we could live with without employing challenges. Nevertheless, we always felt there were small issues that would make us prefer somebody over someone else, and making a challenge gives you a sense that you are "choosing" your jury -- rather than leaving it to luck of the draw. I CAN imagine a scenario where counsel might choose to make a psychological gesture by "passing" when his/her turn to challenge comes up. I can see that it might be a disconcerting ploy to have your opposition effectively say, "we're going to win with any jurors you choose from this pool." Good trial lawyers will play mind games if they think they may throw their opponents off balance.

I don't know why that question quoted me, as I didn't ask it. But interesting and helpful answer.

 

[ReadySet]

I went on a deep dive here into some legal sites and was surprised to discover that yes, co-conspirators are legally allowed to testify FOR or AGAINST the defense. Even if the co-conspirator plead guilty or were found guilty of the crime, though, they could still plead the Fifth, which is why often the State won't subpoena a co-conspirator unless they know for sure that they will testify against the defense (ie In this case, the State would look bad if they called LVD as a witness and LVD refused to testify against CD).

IMO, the defense would be seriously playing with fire by allow LVD to testify. The State would absolutely tear her apart on cross-examination, and based on her closing statement at her own trial, I don't think it would do CD any favors.

I guess an outlier possibility would be that if Chad is still obsessed with Lori, he would want to see her so badly that he would demand Prior put her up to testify. After all, where else is he ever going to see her again except in court?

 

[indicolite22]

I guess an outlier possibility would be that if Chad is still obsessed with Lori, he would want to see her so badly that he would demand Prior put her up to testify. After all, where else is he ever going to see her again except in court?

If he was still obsessed with her, he would not have insisted on a separate trial for himself. My guess is, Chad will remain stoic when Prior tries to put all the blame on Lori. Chad's biggest concern is the DP. IMO he doesn't want to die. Or confess.

 

[indicolite22]

Nate Eaton revealed in his Courtroom Insider live (in an answer to a viewer question) that he is trying to get an interview with Lori. He is writing her letters and emails. I can't imagine what else she has to say, apart from her bonkers denial/excuses.

The second information he revealed was about JP not owning Chad's property on his own. There are co-owners (likely Chad's family members).

 

[indicolite22]

I wonder if Chad is now thinking, if only we stopped at killing the spouses. We might have gotten away with it.

 

[mickey2942]

If he was still obsessed with her, he would not have insisted on a separate trial for himself. My guess is, Chad will remain stoic when Prior tries to put all the blame on Lori. Chad's biggest concern is the DP. IMO he doesn't want to die. Or confess.

Agreed. I definitely don't think that he will take the stand. He will let Prior speak for him, deny, shift blame, CD is just an innocent bystander.

I am still interested in TD's autopsy, there are a lot of "maybe", "possibly" in the report, which does leave it open for Prior to tear it apart. Probably the biggest problems for CD is the fact that AC was at his home several times. And the issue of the "racoon" burial. Plus, his response when he spoke with LVD about the police being at his house.

Tammy Daybell may have been restrained when she died, Utah medical examiner says

Witnesses in the Lori Vallow Daybell murder trial testified Monday that hair attached to an adhesive was from Daybell and Tammy Daybell may have been restrained when she died.

www.ksl.com

 

[Cindizzi]

BOISE — A motion to delay the trial of Chad Daybell was filed late Friday night but little is known about why it was filed and what is contained in the motion.

Terry Ratliff, a lawyer who practices in Mountain Home, filed the motion through the iCourt portal. Wendy Olson, an attorney hired by EastIdahoNews.com last year to argue for camera access during the trial, was served the motion, along with prosecutors and the defense.

Boyce instructed the attorneys not to disseminate the motion and on Tuesday, he signed an order sealing it.

[…]

Boyce temporarily sealed the motion until he’s able to schedule a hearing to determine whether it will remain sealed “and set the substance of the motion for hearing.”

[…]



Judge seals last minute motion asking to delay Chad Daybell's trial; jury selection continues - East Idaho News

 

[fred&edna]

You are not required to use your challenges. Here's an interesting article that posits preemptory challenges are not really useful and which argues prosecutors should waive them. If lawyers do not use their challenges the judge will cull the jury based on the order called (last called to the box will be the first eliminated). From my experience both as an attorney and a trial consultant, I've never seen or heard of a trial lawyer waiving the right to use a preemptory challenge. Back when I practiced we would occasionally have a "dream" panel who we legitimately felt we could live with without employing challenges. Nevertheless, we always felt there were small issues that would make us prefer somebody over someone else, and making a challenge gives you a sense that you are "choosing" your jury -- rather than leaving it to luck of the draw. I CAN imagine a scenario where counsel might choose to make a psychological gesture by "passing" when his/her turn to challenge comes up. I can see that it might be a disconcerting ploy to have your opposition effectively say, "we're going to win with any jurors you choose from this pool." Good trial lawyers will play mind games if they think they may throw their opponents off balance.

As always, it's very good to see you here @vislaw !

 

[Cindizzi]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1775943043419623427

https://twitter.com/x/status/1775943393715376546

 

[Cedars]

If he was still obsessed with her, he would not have insisted on a separate trial for himself. My guess is, Chad will remain stoic when Prior tries to put all the blame on Lori. Chad's biggest concern is the DP. IMO he doesn't want to die. Or confess.

I agree. I feel certain that prosecutors have offered him a deal to avoid the DP, by pleading guilty and testifying against Lori in her trials.

And it seems to me extremely unlikely either of their lawyers would want her to testify in Chad's defense:

If she was expected to claim there was no conspiracy, no crimes - well, her credibility is so low, she didn't even testify to that in her own defense!

And, IMO, if she threw herself on a sword and claimed it was all her and Alex, then she's just verifying the prosecution's case that there was a conspiracy to commit multiple murders, and she wouldn't be able to explain the children being buried on Chad's property, nor Tammy dying while Chad was sleeping in the same bed, so it would backfire big time.

In my opinion, Chad's defense has few options, except hoping the jury will feel an upstanding Mormon would never do such things.

I expect the quick and utterly convincing conviction of Alex Murdaugh, as well as of Lori, has probably punctured that hope.

JMO

 

[indicolite22]

I agree. I feel certain that prosecutors have offered him a deal to avoid the DP, by pleading guilty and testifying against Lori in her trials.

And it seems to me extremely unlikely either of their lawyers would want her to testify in Chad's defense:

If she was expected to claim there was no conspiracy, no crimes - well, her credibility is so low, she didn't even testify to that in her own defense!

And, IMO, if she threw herself on a sword and claimed it was all her and Alex, then she's just verifying the prosecution's case that there was a conspiracy to commit multiple murders, and she wouldn't be able to explain the children being buried on Chad's property, nor Tammy dying while Chad was sleeping in the same bed, so it would backfire big time.

In my opinion, Chad's defense has few options, except hoping the jury will feel an upstanding Mormon would never do such things.

I expect the quick and utterly convincing conviction of Alex Murdaugh, as well as of Lori, has probably punctured that hope.

JMO

Lori would never confess to anything either. She was generally never held accountable for any of her actions and always found a way to blame other people. I was surprised that she didn't turn on Chad to try to save herself, but she's not all there.
Chad's defense can only hope that the jury will decide for life without parole based on some weird mitigation factor. (all IMO)

 

[Nikynoo]

BOISE — A motion to delay the trial of Chad Daybell was filed late Friday night but little is known about why it was filed and what is contained in the motion.

Terry Ratliff, a lawyer who practices in Mountain Home, filed the motion through the iCourt portal. Wendy Olson, an attorney hired by EastIdahoNews.com last year to argue for camera access during the trial, was served the motion, along with prosecutors and the defense.

Boyce instructed the attorneys not to disseminate the motion and on Tuesday, he signed an order sealing it.

[…]

Boyce temporarily sealed the motion until he’s able to schedule a hearing to determine whether it will remain sealed “and set the substance of the motion for hearing.”

[…]



Judge seals last minute motion asking to delay Chad Daybell's trial; jury selection continues - East Idaho News


View attachment 495004View attachment 495005View attachment 495006

Looks like he is a death penalty qualified attorney. Though looking at the filing quotes in the order, I wonder if this is a case of drunk filing? Legal | Ratliff Law Offices | United States

Edited to clarify.

 

[Cedars]

Looks like he is a death penalty qualified attorney. Though looking at the filing quotes in the order, I wonder if this is a case of drunk filing? Legal | Ratliff Law Offices | United States

Edited to clarify.

I haven't been paying close attention...didn't Prior say he was resigning? And then called for a delay because of new evidence?

 

[lightofmine99]

I haven't been paying close attention...didn't Prior say he was resigning? And then called for a delay because of new evidence?

I think Prior has tried to quit but the judge has refused because he had previously emphatically insisted on working pro bono.

 

[indicolite22]

BOISE — A motion to delay the trial of Chad Daybell was filed late Friday night but little is known about why it was filed and what is contained in the motion.

Terry Ratliff, a lawyer who practices in Mountain Home, filed the motion through the iCourt portal. Wendy Olson, an attorney hired by EastIdahoNews.com last year to argue for camera access during the trial, was served the motion, along with prosecutors and the defense.

Boyce instructed the attorneys not to disseminate the motion and on Tuesday, he signed an order sealing it.

[…]

Boyce temporarily sealed the motion until he’s able to schedule a hearing to determine whether it will remain sealed “and set the substance of the motion for hearing.”

[…]



Judge seals last minute motion asking to delay Chad Daybell's trial; jury selection continues - East Idaho News


View attachment 495004View attachment 495005View attachment 495006

Terry Ratliff is a DP qualified attorney in Idaho. Not sure if this is the same guy. Perhaps he's trying to get on Prior's team or take over Chad's defense from him? Could someone else be paying him?

ITLA FYI

www.itla.org

 

[fred&edna]

Terry Ratliff is a DP qualified attorney in Idaho. Not sure if this is the same guy. Perhaps he's trying to get on Prior's team or take over Chad's defense from him?

ITLA FYI

www.itla.org

Just jumping off your post and thoughts

If so... and judge approves... that almost certainly would cause a BIG delay in this trial, no?

Can such a motion be heard at this stage?

 

[Cedars]

Terry Ratliff is a DP qualified attorney in Idaho. Not sure if this is the same guy. Perhaps he's trying to get on Prior's team or take over Chad's defense from him? Could someone else be paying him?

ITLA FYI

www.itla.org

Maybe an unusual marketing strategy? Getting one's name/company inserted in high profile murder trials might be the next big thing: 'this portion of the defense is sponsored by....'

(joke)

 

[TigerLou]

In my opinion, Chad's defense has few options, except hoping the jury will feel an upstanding Mormon would never do such things.

There is enough evidence to prove Chad was not living like an upstanding Mormon. If he's depending on that, he will be very disappointed.