TRIAL OF CHAD DAYBELL CHARGED WITH MURDER OF JJ VALLOW, TYLEE RYAN AND TAMMY DAYBELL #2

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
aafromaa said:
Probably not for a few bucks…but Ratliff might have thought he could get added to the defense team and paid by the state since he is DP qualified. And he might not have even done it for that but can you imagine the publicity for him if he had been successful? Too bad it backfired on him - now we all know his name but most of us would not call him if we needed a lawyer because he looked foolish
Click to expand...
If Ratcliff wanted to be on the defense team, why didn't he accept when JP called him? Waiting until the last minute doesn't make sense.
 
Last edited:
aafromaa said:
Have you noticed, JP doesn’t seem very familiar with the facts of this case for someone who has had several years to prepare as he told that reporter in his pre-trial interview? Perhaps he spent too much time trying to find ways to say it was all LVD’s fault and not enough time learning the details of the crimes.
Click to expand...
You're following this more closely than I am, but isn't sowing confusion for the jury a potentially effective defense strategy? He can claim the evidence presented by the prosecution is contradictory, not himself.

JMO
 
I'm unimpressed by the CourtTV's coverage. Some of their expert (lawyer) guests have very superficial knowledge of the case and are basing their opinions on assumptions that we know aren't true. I wonder if that happens in other cases as well.

Lori's brother Adam was also a guest. He answered questions about Lori's relationship with Tylee and JJ, reiterating previous statements about Lori once being a great mother to JJ. He gave a few reasons why Tylee and Lori would not get along (Chad being one of them).

 
indicolite22 said:
You can find the text of the RD article if you google "battling mysterious crib death".

books.google.si

Sudden Infant Death Syndrome, 1973

books.google.si
Click to expand...
Well that’s pretty cool. I wish we could have found what J Cox actually wrote for Megan but I really think it has to be one of those reader submissions and may be found only if someone goes to a library that has all of the RDs from the early to mid-70’s and checks each of those reader submissions. Lots of libraries have some copies but not many have all the copies. Duke University Library has ALL of them if anyone is anywhere near there and has some time :)
 
Cedars said:
You're following this more closely than I am, but isn't sowing confusion for the jury a potentially effective defense strategy? He can claim the evidence presented by the prosecution is contradictory, not himself.

JMO
Click to expand...
I’ve thought about that and tried to put myself in the jury’s shoes - hearing all this for the first time or at least being only vaguely aware of it before this trial. It might cause me to take more time in deliberations to verify the timelines after he’s muddied the waters but unfortunately for him there are cell records that verify a lot of the dates and times. “Quite frankly” I think as a juror I might see it as an insult to my integrity…or his…but I’m not sure confusion and contradiction is the same thing or would get me to reasonable doubt.
 
Lori Hellis gave her opinion about the Ratliff's motion. Although nobody has seen its contents, she believes that Raitliff had good intentions and made an unfortunate mistake. LH overheard the exchange between JP and prosecutor LB in which JP told the latter that he indeed contacted Ratliff and asked him for help, but that it wasn't what Ratliff had in mind (at 53:13 in the video).

 
aafromaa said:
Once upon a time a long long time ago in this story, MG either gave testimony or statement to LE or media interview where she said she thought that the property visit was on Monday. I wish I could remember - my best guess is it was one of the LE interviews. I think it took a conversation with DW to show it was on Sunday because he was so obviously bothered that CD & the realtor would want to talk business on a Sunday. I only remember it having been originally said it was Monday - well probably it was said it was on the 23rd - MG was very unclear in her days/dates in early LE interviews so I think that is how it happened - I just know that once DW testified in the pre-liminary hearing I remember having to correct my time line. I believe DW that it was Sunday and I think that clarified it for MG who then also began saying Sun when asked about it - it likely was clarified in grand jury hearings but I didn’t know it until the preliminary hearing. Anyway, I think JP forgot to straighten out his timeline or something when that info came out and that he thinks he’s setting up an alibi for CD not to have been at home when AC came to bury JJ Monday morning after MG & DW left to go see his son. That’s my best guess as to what JP was trying to do because as you say there is no other reason to point out CD was in his church clothes since JJ was photographed at home Sunday morning.

Have you noticed, JP doesn’t seem very familiar with the facts of this case for someone who has had several years to prepare as he told that reporter in his pre-trial interview? Perhaps he spent too much time trying to find ways to say it was all LVD’s fault and not enough time learning the details of the crimes.
Click to expand...


Thanks. That is helpful.

It is really sad and disturbing to me that this fringe group is at best rebranded. So much damage done. Of course, the vast majority of the brainwashed don't themselves murder, but the ability of the community to protect one-another is very handicapped.

As I recall, there was also inconsistencies about if Lori was there, too.

Obviously, Melanie Gibb is motivated to hold murderers accountable and/or differentiate herself from murderers. I appreciate that. But she is so flawed as a witness because she is tied in knots over stuff nobody outside of the circle is particularly concerned about. That goes for her husband, too. If they didn't have to run the fact finders in circles because grown people shared a bedroom or engaged in business on a Sunday, maybe more facts would be known and sooner. After all these years, how can these people not see the consequences of their absurd moral priorities?

If any of Tammy's children are still soaked in cult brain, my patience is running thin for that, too. I try to tell myself it is different when you have grown up with it...different when your vulnerability is increased by the loss of your mother. But there are people who'd support them even if they considered the evidence against their father, or expressed sadness for Tylee and JJ. At this point, they have all the power over their father. Fill his jail account. Make serving his sentence as comfortable as possible. But in the names of Tammy, Tylee and JJ, do not deny his crimes. And if Chad doesn't like your acknowledgment that he committed crimes, stop filling his jail account. The man is powerless now.

It is a struggle for me these days to muster up patience for cult-brains.

MOO
 
Onsdag said:
Quite frankly I think it's justifiable/forgivable considering how twisted, convoluted, complex, and crazy this whole case has been. Even websleuths who have been following this case extremely closely regularly get facts and details mixed up.
Click to expand...
It is a strategy. Prior is not making "mistakes."

The core of the case is simple. The defendant's wife was asphyxiated in their bed. Children were buried in his yard. His mistresses husband was shot dead. They got enough money to play out their god and goddess fantasies without the burden of original spouses or minor children.

The more Prior can throw in complications, the better. Contradictions and "mistakes" confuse, and can make an exhausted juror think, "This just doesn't make sense. Therefore the State hasn't proven its case."

Prior also outright misleads when phrasing his questions, such as by characterizing Chad's lawn as a pasture or farm.

I know Prior wants to play the underdog and pretend he's all confused because he is a one man team. But he chose to be in this position. Just as his hired flying monkeys attempted to intervene and continue this case at the last most obstructing minute, John Prior has done very much the same. When Lori was sick, he was ready to go to trial immediately, yet waived the right to a speedy trial which makes that sus. When the trial was about to get started, he needed to get more DNA tested. Then, given the time, he never got the DNA tested. Instead, at the last minute, he tried to get off the case (knowing full well he probably would not succeed. But if he did, it would buy Chad more time and only give Chad an advantage). Then, denied getting off the case, he gets to play victim and underdog, one man handling all this against the big government.

Prior is supposed to vigorously defend his client within the bounds of ethics. I'll leave it to the Idaho bar to determine if his leading questions have crossed lines, or if his fact "mistakes" have.

Yet these are strategies, not mistakes. Prior knows what he is doing. He is not confused. He's no small-town country lawyer. He knows the facts.

MOO
 
indicolite22 said:
Lori Hellis gave her opinion about the Ratliff's motion. Although nobody has seen its contents, she believes that Raitliff had good intentions and made an unfortunate mistake. LH overheard the exchange between JP and prosecutor LB in which JP told the latter that he indeed contacted Ratliff and asked him for help, but that it wasn't what Ratliff had in mind (at 53:13 in the video).

Click to expand...
Wow, she's still mad at the judge and possibly Lauren Matthias, IMO. A lot of Lori Hellis' emotions come through on this live.

She did say she thought the lawyer was a well intentioned " hippie-era" actor concerned with appropriate representation of persons facing the death penalty. But she also said he made a mistake in filing the motion. She glossed over that the lawyer had no permission from Chad to represent him. She ignored entirely the fact that Radcliffe had literal years to make his motion, and instead made it sound like the judge and prosecutors were just being whiners about having their weekends interrupted. I found her analysis of the situation more subjective than objective.

She did give an alternate theory to the reasoning behind filing beyond just trying to delay and confuse the case more of behalf of the defense. She theorized it was an idealistic "rescue" of a death penalty-facing defendant. But that simply does not track with 5he timing. Again, he had literal years. Or at the very least, he could have intervened when Prior claimed he wanted off the case. I believe he didn't intervene then because he and Prior were trying to maximize the delay possible by pulling these stunts one at a time.

A question came in live. In her opinion, is Prior annoying the jury? She said no. However, she did say that he seems to be annoying the judge. I don't see that. The judge is very much overruling the States reasonable objections to Prior, and appears to be respecting his defensive efforts and to be favoring Prior to me. (And this is okay with me. The defendants life is on the line. I'd rather he get a little too much slack than too little. But I don't at all see that the judge is annoyed with Prior.)

MOO
 
Ruminations said:
Well, I think all are true. He is a creep. He is condescending. And he is doing his job.

Being misogynistic, opening the door to conspiracy theories, tying Chad's teachings to main stream LDS, playing the underdog, confusing facts, impeaching witnesses all might be strategies to attempt to get his client acquitted or negotiate the most favorable conviction possible, which is his job.

But he doesn't have to use being a creep or a condescending tone. That is his choice. I don't like it, and he doesn't need my approval. He doesn't need my approval but I'm entitled to my opinion.

MOO
Click to expand...
I agree with your statements / opinions !!
As an earlier poster suggested...he is working his hardest to confuse the jury. That is not a defence, it is a tactic.
With this grotesque case, I do find it "healthy and good", however, to disagree and discuss what we see in all the legal servants
 
Ruminations said:
Boyce doesn't want a mistrial. If this was a stunt for the defense, as I strongly suspect it was, there is no benefit to the court or the prosecution to call that out. Furthermore, it would be very hard to prove that it is a stunt for the defense when Prior and Radcliffe have denied colluding.

Nothing makes sense other than this being a stunt for the defense. I don't see what else it could be. It was perfectly timed for maximum interference. If it were an impulse, drinking and lawyering, as many have quipped, then there was no need to bring it to the stage of showing cause. It could have been quietly withdrawn.

It sounds like Boyce effectively played defense in two ways: He did not continue the case and kept whatever dribble there is in the body of the motion sealed.

MOO
Click to expand...
Well said.
 
aafromaa said:
Probably not for a few bucks…but Ratliff might have thought he could get added to the defense team and paid by the state since he is DP qualified. And he might not have even done it for that but can you imagine the publicity for him if he had been successful? Too bad it backfired on him - now we all know his name but most of us would not call him if we needed a lawyer because he looked foolish
Click to expand...
Not only did he look foolish, but he was obviously impaired when he wrote the pleading. (IMO.)
 
alexwood said:
Not only did he look foolish, but he was obviously impaired when he wrote the pleading. (IMO.)
Click to expand...
I think what bothered me most was all that stuff about he should have asked to intervene as a citizen rather than an attorney and the only reason he represented himself as an attorney for the defendant was because it was a template and he had to identify which party he represented. What? Was he still impaired then? Because he looked pretty foolish saying that too. Part of me is glad the judge shut him down and wouldn’t let him have his say but say but part of me sure wanted to know what he thinks he knows about the case that should have delayed the trial.

It’s been established he is not a party to this case and he isn’t on anyone’s witness list so he isn’t bound by the gag order, right? I wonder if we will see him issue some kind of statement to try to recover from the PR nightmare this must be for his firm?
 
aafromaa said:
I think what bothered me most was all that stuff about he should have asked to intervene as a citizen rather than an attorney and the only reason he represented himself as an attorney for the defendant was because it was a template and he had to identify which party he represented. What? Was he still impaired then? Because he looked pretty foolish saying that too. Part of me is glad the judge shut him down and wouldn’t let him have his say but say but part of me sure wanted to know what he thinks he knows about the case that should have delayed the trial.

It’s been established he is not a party to this case and he isn’t on anyone’s witness list so he isn’t bound by the gag order, right? I wonder if we will see him issue some kind of statement to try to recover from the PR nightmare this must be for his firm?
Click to expand...
Well, like I read in the comments on one of the channels that spoke about this debacle, Mr. Ratliff had two additional intervenors: Mr. Jack Daniels and Mr. Jim Beam. (I laughed so hard when I read that! Sorry, but I thought it was hilarious.)

I have wondered whether Judge Boyce, the State, and the Defense all decided that Mr. Ratliff had made a very grave error, through his own fault (not merely "scrivener's error(s)" as he claimed before the Judge), that could likely impact his future as a Criminal Defense Death-Qualified Attorney; for that reason they decided to shield him and agreed to seal the Motion and accompanying pleadings.
 
alexwood said:
Well, like I read in the comments on one of the channels that spoke about this debacle, Mr. Ratliff had two additional intervenors: Mr. Jack Daniels and Mr. Jim Beam. (I laughed so hard when I read that! Sorry, but I thought it was hilarious.)

I have wondered whether Judge Boyce, the State, and the Defense all decided that Mr. Ratliff had made a very grave error, through his own fault (not merely "scrivener's error(s)" as he claimed before the Judge), that could likely impact his future as a Criminal Defense Death-Qualified Attorney; for that reason they decided to shield him and agreed to seal the Motion and accompanying pleadings.
Click to expand...
Possibly but I suspect it is just to keep it from interfering in any way with this trial and I suspect that it may be unsealed when the trial is over…hopefully anyway lol
 
Monday, April 22nd:
*Trial continues (Day 8) (@ 8:30am MT) & Motions Hearing (@ 3:30pm MT) – ID – Joshua Jaxon (JJ) Vallow (7) & Tylee Ashlyn Ryan (16) (JJ last seen Sept. 23, 2019 & Tylee on Sept. 9, 2019, Rexburg; found June 9, 2020 buried in Daybell’s yard in Salem, ID) & Tamara “Tammy” Michelle Douglas Daybell (49) (died on Oct. 19, 2019 at her residence in Salem, ID; dob 5/4/70). – *Chad Guy Daybell (53/now 55) arrested (6/9/20) & indicted (5/25/21) & charged (5/26/21) & arraigned (6/9/21) with Count 1 (for Tylee): Conspiracy to commit 1st degree murder & grand theft by deception (for Daybell, Vallow & Alex Cox) & other co-conspirators. Count 2 (for Tylee): 1st degree murder. Count 3 (for JJ): Conspiracy to commit 1st degree murder & grand theft by deception. Count 4 (for JJ): 1st degree murder. Count 5 (for Tammy, 49, died 10/19/19): Conspiracy to commit 1st degree murder. Count 6 (for Tammy): 1st degree murder. Count 8 & 9: Insurance Fraud (Two counts of insurance fraud related to 2 different life insurance policies he had on Tammy). Plead not guilty. No bond. DA will seek DP. (Judge denied removing DP 3/14/24). Fremont County
Trial began on 4/1/24 with final jury selection & ended on 4/8/24. Jurors: 12 jurors & 6 alternates. [10 men & 8 women]. Jury will be sequestered during deliberations in the guilt phase thru the penalty phase.
Trial began on 4/10/24. (approx. 8 weeks) Court hours are 8:30am to 3pm Monday-Friday. Trial is being held in Ada County.
Judge Steven W. Boyce presiding. Prosecutors: Fremont County Prosecuting Attorney Lindsey Blake, Madison County Prosecuting Attorney Rob Wood, Special Attorney General Prosecutor Ingrid Batey & Fremont County Deputy Prosecuting Attorney Rocky Wixom & defense attorney John Prior.
Court info from 6/10/20 thru 3/29/24 & Jury Selection Day 1-6 (4/1-4/6/24) & thru 4/9/24 & Trial Day 1-6 (4/10-4/18/24) reference post #332 here:
https://www.websleuths.com/forums/t...tylee-ryan-and-tammy-daybell-2.710166/page-17
4/19/24 Friday, Trial Day 7: State witnesses: Melanie Gibb is back on stand & continuing cross-exam. Retired FBI Agent Doug Hart & was FBI Supervisor in the case. Hart is currently the Chief Deputy for the Canyon County Sheriff’s Office.
For more info on direct see post #392 here:
https://www.websleuths.com/forums/t...tylee-ryan-and-tammy-daybell-2.710166/page-20
Trial continues on Monday, 4/22/24.
 
After watching a Mormon Stories podcast episode with host John Dehlin and guests Lauren Matthias (HTC) and Lori's cousin Meegan, it's clearer to me why JP wanted JD as a defense witness. While JD believes that most of Chad's doctrine is based on LDS teachings (new or old), the guests tried to make a distinction. Church of the Firstborn is one such example. They expressed that if this was not done, Chad might get away with it. JP's plan is likely to paint Chad as a mainstream Mormon and, if the teaching were harmful, blame the Church. The goal is to deny existence of a cult and Chad's leadership.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 83 more.
Total: 3,838 (members: 84, guests: 3,754)

Online statistics

Members online
84
Guests online
3,754
Total visitors
3,838
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
593,417
Messages
17,986,884
Members
229,131
Latest member
Migrant
Back
Top