GUILTY TRIAL OF CHAD DAYBELL CHARGED WITH MURDER OF JJ VALLOW, TYLEE RYAN AND TAMMY DAYBELL #7

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
BUF said:
Thinking about Chad not wanting any mitigation in the penalty phase, one thing that crossed my mind is that he didn’t want to have his children give impact statements. We all saw what they did testifying in his defense case…the backlash from that must have been pretty bad if only just judging how we felt about it here. The jury saw and heard what we did.

After all, he never rated his kids dark, saving them from the horrible deaths that J.J. and Tylee experienced.

If Prior would have put any other mitigation witnesses on, it would have left a huge question why his kids didn’t give impact statements then.

moo
Click to expand...
I don’t believe he wanted his children spared. And we don’t know if they would be labeled dark in the future. Chad is just trying to make himself a martyr. He makes me sick.
 
watergirl62 said:
I was truly caught off guard by no defense mitigating witnesses. I couldn't help but have Jodi Arias and Warren Jeffs flashbacks... And the victim statements! I had to drop what I was doing a few times because I couldn't see through my tears. Such a heart-wrenching day.

However, I now think CD is going for full-fledged martyrdom and thus, in his telestial psychopathic fantasy-scape vision, it is beneath him. Because of this, I am hoping for LWOP. Anything that treats him from here on out as a mere mortal. The DP would only encourage his grandiosity.

And frankly aafromaa, I think JP is doing the absolute best he can with his losing hand.

I am hoping for swift justice today. Let this end! Let the victims and rifted families and communities begin healing!
Click to expand...
I just can’t agree with you more. I’ve really given it thought. Chad is sitting there acting so pious, like he did with his group. Whatever he said they believed. Now he sits as a martyr. Ugh. I agree with Steve’s post. DPx3.
 
Trebor5591 said:
Yes, they are both murderers, but I don't believe they should be kept from writing letters to each other. I am not sure that would even be legal.
Click to expand...

I don't think freedom of speech extends to "partner" (romantically connected as well as convicted of same felony) convicts. But, I could be totally wrong. I'm sure there are opinions both pro and con.

@vislaw Can you share more insight?
And, also do you applaud (or have any opinions) Prior for staying with his client and doing his best to defend him. **Sorry, I could ask your legal opinions all day long. ;)
 
Last edited:
fred&edna said:
I don't think freedom of speech extends to "partner" (romantically connected as well as convicted of same felony) convicts. But, I could be totally wrong. I'm sure there are opinions both pro and con.

@vislaw Can you share more insight?
Click to expand...
I’ve been told they cannot contact each other in any form. They are serial killers. They’ve lost rights and privileges.
 
I'll say it. Why? At this point, is Chad's life one way or the other worth wasting a weekend over? Just draw lots or have a secret ballot vote and be done with it.
This is unfair to the jurors.
Here in Canada, a case I jurored on also involving a child and a triple murder, each individual juror made their own private sentence reccomendation. Asking jurors to make this decision is too much, IMO. They've done more than enough and the visuals alone will be with them for the rest of their lives. Let judge Boyce make the ultimate choice on this.
 
Alpha_Q said:
I'll say it. Why? At this point, is Chad's life one way or the other worth wasting a weekend over? Just draw lots or have a secret ballot vote and be done with it.
This is unfair to the jurors.
Here in Canada, a case I jurored on also involving a child and a triple murder, each individual juror made their own private sentence reccomendation. Asking jurors to make this decision is too much, IMO. They've done more than enough and the visuals alone will be with them for the rest of their lives. Let judge Boyce make the ultimate choice on this.
Click to expand...
I understand. But this is our system of justice. It’s a unanimous vote by a jury of your peers. It would be unfair to the judge to do this every time. And to add, a lot of our judges cannot be trusted anymore. The jurors knew they would have to vote for the death penalty if the State proved their case and it is State law. It might seem wrong to ask a panel to decide but it’s the best way I believe.
 
Vinnie Politan of Court TV spoke with Nate Eaton at CrimeCon. Vinnie’s show was filmed there with a live mock jury. They voted for the DP one hundred percent.

But, they aren’t sitting on this jury.
 
Last edited:
Alpha_Q said:
I'll say it. Why? At this point, is Chad's life one way or the other worth wasting a weekend over? Just draw lots or have a secret ballot vote and be done with it.
This is unfair to the jurors.
Here in Canada, a case I jurored on also involving a child and a triple murder, each individual juror made their own private sentence reccomendation. Asking jurors to make this decision is too much, IMO. They've done more than enough and the visuals alone will be with them for the rest of their lives. Let judge Boyce make the ultimate choice on this.
Click to expand...

Judge Boyce can't make the decision for death penalty.

In Idaho, only a unanimous jury can.

I guess it's down to if each murder was for remuneration and if each murder was particularly heinous.

It is hard in my mind, TBH. It's hard to think of a murder that is not heinous. Wouldn't just about every murder be punishable by death, then? But the instructions say that conviction for the crime is not reason enough for imposing death. So when does it not apply? Painless assisted suicide for a chronically ill person? IDK.

I don't mind that the jury is thinking this out carefully. And I am fine with their decision, whatever it is.

If the outcome is that the jury can't decide, I don't see Boyce going easier on Chad than Lori, with three consecutive life terms.

MOO
 
I think the victims’ familles were told they would receive word to go the courthouse before media. I think it’s happening.

The reason we all are ok with LWOP from the jury is because we are decent people who aren’t out to kill anyone so the DP is not something we want to hand down to anyone else.

But I absolutely respect whatever they decide. And pray for each one as they go back to their lives.
 
Love Never Fails said:
I understand. But this is our system of justice. It’s a unanimous vote by a jury of your peers. It would be unfair to the judge to do this every time. And to add, a lot of our judges cannot be trusted anymore. The jurors knew they would have to vote for the death penalty if the State proved their case and it is State law. It might seem wrong to ask a panel to decide but it’s the best way I believe.
Click to expand...
Serious question - what happens if they can't reach a unanimous decision? Does it then fall into hands of the judge or is the DP now void? I assume DP will be off the table.

I feel that it's probably come down to a few jurors wanting him to die versus a few not wanting him to die while the rest of the jurors sit back with their arms crossed, waiting I feel bad for the jurors stuck in that room on a beautiful Saturday.

I'm perfectly fine with LWOP.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is DeKalb County John Doe (2022)?

Members online

... and 94 more.
Total: 1,603 (members: 95, guests: 1,508)

Online statistics

Members online
95
Guests online
1,508
Total visitors
1,603
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
601,813
Messages
18,130,197
Members
231,145
Latest member
alicat3
Back
Top