TRIAL OF CHAD DAYBELL CHARGED WITH MURDER OF JJ VALLOW, TYLEE RYAN AND TAMMY DAYBELL #6

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
So, judging from what Nate said, I would guess after the Defense rests, that will be it until next week. Maybe the Judge and attorneys will work on some admin stuff, jury instructions, etc., but we have a nice long weekend before rebuttal and closings next week.
 
How disappointing of Chad, an enlightened prophet of the Church of the First Born, to not testify in his own defense. I thought he was some kind of martyr who had been framed by an evil Jezebel temptress and gullible goon brother? If I were on the jury I'd want to hear from this man.

MOO.
 
While we’re on break, can we talk about how the jury perceives a defendant not testifying? Don’t jump on me…yes I know that the judge will instruct them that they cannot consider that in their deliberations. I’m guessing if anyone brought it up the others would be forced to bring that to the judge’s attention and then I suppose the question would be to remove that juror or was the whole jury tainted by it being brought up.

But I’m talking about each individual juror in their own heads and how it impacts them if a defendant does not testify whether they admit it or not. Maybe a juror is supposed to put that out of their mind completely, but I’m not sure that I could…not completely. I think that even if I didn’t want to consider it when determining guilt or innocence it would always be in that little corner of my mind. I’m not saying it would sway me - I’d have to be in the actual situation to know that and I’ve never sat on a jury. I’m just saying that it would be there and the judge’s instruction not to consider it during deliberations would not erase it from my mind.

Your thoughts?
 
So, judging from what Nate said, I would guess after the Defense rests, that will be it until next week. Maybe the Judge and attorneys will work on some admin stuff, jury instructions, etc., but we have a nice long weekend before rebuttal and closings next week.
I must have missed that. What did Nate say that leads you to conclude the state won’t start their rebuttal today?
 
So…I understand that the state wants to address any possibility of lingering questions in the minds of the jury that might lead to reasonable doubt in their rebuttal. But I don’t think it’s really necessary. I do not believe that the defense case presented any real issues for the jury and certainly not enough to overcome the state’s case against CD. JP’s witnesses may have said a thing or two that was untrue or can be cleared up on rebuttal but was any of it really a cause for concern? I’m not sure. But the only thing I’m interested in that I think the state might bring up in their rebuttal is the jail phone calls between CD & EDM. I don’t need to hear them to help me decide if CD is guilty but I sure do want to hear them.

What do you want to see addressed in the state’s rebuttal?
 
Dawson Murray stated he believes Joe and Emma are "living in fear" and think they are being persecuted. He indicated they get confronted in public by people and of course feel threatened by Hermosillo working out in the gym they use (coincidentally) and cop cars checking on the house. Emphasis on the former - getting confronted in public. Dawson says they should not have to live this way.

And I agree. I don't condone bothering them in public, especially if children are with them. I know that "getting confronted" could mean everything from actual harassment to strangers politely wanting to ask valid questions. These experiences seem to fuel their persecution complex. And I somehow doubt that cops are still trolling the property as often as they used to at this point.

I have sympathy for them for sure, but their lives would be much different if they weren't doubling down on defending Chad so hard years later. I think most people would expect family, children especially, to be in denial about a father's guilt in a murder case at first, and would be gracious to their viewpoint. But this has gone on far too long and they have chosen to engage in inflammatory behavior themselves. I am by no means justifying the harassment they have reportedly recieved, merely expressing that it goes both ways.

I would've asked Dawson if he's heard anything about the other siblings' opinions. If Lauren or a view asked that I didn't hear it. MOO.
 

hmmmm.....bringing on an expert regarding Tylee/burning/bones condition etc, IMO, was not a good note to rest on.
I could not agree more.

I stare at that drawing of Tylee’s remains, front and back, with all missing bones identified in black, and all I can think of is Chad’s text to Tammy, telling her he is burning LIMBS before the rains start. And I imagine him standing there, shovel in hand and a smirk on his face, periodically punching at and stirring the fire to better burn those limbs.
 
What do you want to see addressed in the state’s rebuttal?
  • The 5k - I wish the State had some sort of proof (photos, documentation) that would show Tammy did participate in the 5k, but I feel like this would have been brought forward already if they did.
  • Insurance - We already know that they're going to try to rebut Emma's assertion that Tammy got the school insurance policy without consulting with CD
  • Jail calls - Blake already hinted that they have evidence showing ways that CD coached Emma; I'd love to for the jury to hear this firsthand. Plus, I don't think Emma realizes how CD has been gaslighting her and how manipulative he is, and I think it'd be good for her to see this.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
164
Guests online
2,409
Total visitors
2,573

Forum statistics

Threads
599,874
Messages
18,100,605
Members
230,942
Latest member
Patturelli
Back
Top