Discussion in 'Currently Awaiting Trial' started by Patch Tuesday, Dec 20, 2019.
Local update: MM and JA were not at the women’s detention center today
So Chad may have "death anxiety"? Well, oh no, boo hoo, and shock horror! I can't imagine it will cause him to think about what his victims may have felt as they were murdered, that's not the way his mind operates.
Good question. I honestly don’t know the answer. Since I don’t have an “in” at the women’s detention center I can’t confirm. But I can confirm what I see outside when i go for errands or a walk.
Hah, I'd dare say none of us predicted what a crazy, tangled web of lies, deceit and murder we'd be unraveling still. This one of the craziest in Websleuths' history IMO.
“Patch” the OP called it! I sure wish we had Tylee, JJ, Charles, and Tammy back. And that Patch wasn’t so darn smart.
I hope you know how much we appreciate your eyes on the ground. Thank you!
Log into Facebook
New court dates from Justin lum
So interesting. Makes me wonder what they are up to.
Still hoping the mods are considering a forum of its on so we can break down each case independently.
We dont even have a page on websleuths for Charles.
SleuthD-0-doubleg, thank you for keeping us up to date . Wish I was over there, I would shout you a lunch/dinner a place of your choice.
If Lori is there or not, I could use a a boast up so I can get over the wall to find out the answer.
(Most people want to break out I want to break in and find out)
This situation is keeping a lot of people guessing, is she there or not.
Just in case you don't have Facebook & can't see the post by Justin Lum:
Chad: Daybell has a motion hearing on 9/20 at 1:30pm, pretrial conference on 9/30 at 9:30am & a hearing for motion for change of venue on 10/5 at 9am.
Lori: Status conference hearing scheduled on 8/30 at 3pm.
I'm going to "assume" these are both for Fremont County.
Preface: I am not a lawyer and this is my understanding of the rules. Would love for our lawyer types to clarify/correct.
The recording release might be attorney misconduct, but it's not directly conflict of interest as lawyers understand it. That would require him to be in some way working both for and against his client, possibly indirectly. In another case I follow, it came up because the defendant filed a misconduct charge against his lawyer over something that happened, and since the misconduct hearing would have required the defendant to testify against the lawyer, that was deemed conflict.
So theoretically if LV was going to be a witness against MM relative to the recording, that might apply, but I don't see how.
It seems like 100 years ago but Lori was originally charged with desertion and non-support of dependent children. Lori was represented by Brian Webb and Edwina Elcox, criminal defense attorneys, and by MM who claimed to specialize in family law (now he claims a lot of specializations). Having an attorney with family law experience seemed to make sense back then. Brian Webb and Edwina Elcox both withdrew after only one appearance. We have had the MM Show since then.
Before Chad had any criminal charges he was represented by Sean Bartholick. Once charges were filed MM took his case. JP showed up when prosecutors pushed on conflict of interest with MM representing 2 clients in the same case. I don't understand how 2 attorneys with the same office is not still conflict of interest.
Diddian had a nice post earlier wondering if Attorneys Webb and Elcox withdrew because they saw issues with Lori's mental competency right away. My guess is they saw that and murdered children and couldn't get away fast enough. Then the fools rush in...
Found Deceased - ID - Joshua Vallow, 7, & Tylee Ryan, 16, Tammy Daybell, 49, Sept & Oct 2019 *Arrests* #58
Edit to add: MOO
woah. smart minds think alike, or something like that I think, ha. I was in the middle of writing something just like this, mentioning the other attorneys who were involved very briefly, very early on. You got it all laid out very clearly, so I only have one thing to add …
one small detail is that Bartholick was actually one of the principal attorneys who hired Rob Wood out of law school. He worked with their firm for a few years, Bartholick was initially his boss and then later on his colleague after Wood worked his way up their chain. I thought it was interesting, knowing that, when Bartholick got himself off the case pretty quickly too. I’ve always wondered if he was attempting to avoid any potential issues that could possibly be brought up considering their close work-history (and if that wasn’t a factor then maybe it was Chad having little funds to pay for an attorney, who knows).
Wood practiced much more “water law, estate planning, and personal injury” [this is and was some of their services listed on their practice website] among other areas which has always intrigued me considering he’s a prosecutor now and almost all his previous work was so different.
So could the current conflict of interest be the same as the previous conflict of interest but refiled relative to the murder cases? The judge found no conflict on lesser charges,but now that it is a capital case the DA is bringing it back up? Hopefully my question makes sense.
ETA: I'm referring to the conflict of interest where MM was claiming to represent both Chad and Lori. Is that a conflict again due to new cases/murder charges and the dropping of the concealment charges?
I am not a lawyer, but I would love to hear from one about this.
I do not see how this recording (as if it had much legal significance to either side- which I question) could be inadmissible.
Why couldn’t either side depose the person who recorded it and/or Melanie Gibb about the tape, and use it?
If it were recorded by LE without a warrant or consent, that is a different situation.
Maybe, but I doubt it, the municipality the recording was made in could press criminal charges if it is a crime there. Maybe Melanie Gibb could sue the recorder civilly, if that is an option based on the laws of whatever municipalities apply.
But I do not see how this evidence, of little value, IMO, is not admissible.
@gitana1 , @Nikynoo , @LaLaw2000 , @AZlawyer , @Midwestmom2019
Certainly Louisiana & Great Britain may be different.
Can anyone straighten this out?
Local update: MM and JA were not at the women’s detention center today.
*sorry for a late update, lots happening today in real life.