SleuthD-o-doubleg
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 11, 2020
- Messages
- 966
- Reaction score
- 15,878
Local update: MM and JA were not at the women’s detention center today
Local update: MM and JA were not at the women’s detention center today
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.Is Lori??!!![]()
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.I think it's wild that we have generated a 62 page discussion about a case that isn't even close to going to trial yet.
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.
I hope you know how much we appreciate your eyes on the ground. Thank you!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.
So interesting. Makes me wonder what they are up to.Local update: MM and JA were not at the women’s detention center today
Still hoping the mods are considering a forum of its on so we can break down each case independently.I'm actually surprised it's only at 62 threads, what with how crazy, complicated, and chaotic this whole case (and related intrigues) has been. The OP was truly prescient when they said "I believe this is going to be a more complicated case than it looks on the surface." And it just keeps getting more and more... interesting... (I don't know if interesting is the right word, but I'll run with it...) as time goes on.
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.Local update: MM and JA were not at the women’s detention center today
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.How did JP and MM get chosen to defend LV and CD? If I suddenly needed a criminal attorney, I imagine my google search would say something like "criminal attorney near me" and my top google results would probably be lawyers within like 50 miles of my location. From there, I would narrow the options down by attorneys that specialize in defending the type of crime I am charged with. How did they end up with 2 lawyers that are 4 hours away from their location and neither specializes in criminal cases? Was there a prior relationship with these guys? Were they suggested to the Daybells by someone else? Why these specific 2 attorneys? Using the bare minimum common sense and logic, these attorneys would not be the best fit for the Daybell needs. Just in charges for travel time, they would have blown thru Tammy's life insurance in no time. Something is fishy here, IMO.
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
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
Short answer: the "recording" is not in fact "the sealed documents" to which people are now referring. Two separate chunks of information.
Now I'm confused and can't really recall what happened, lol; but I think there were 2 unrelated blunders laid end-to-end, or maybe simultaneously being discussed at cross-purposes, resulting in confusing overlap.
Was going to say this, plus the lady who recorded her chat with MG, did so from a two-party consent state and (obviously) did not bother to ask consent of MG, so the call is inadmissible and really a big "uh-oh"; thus probably why YTers keep pulling the thing down and editing it down to 12-second soundbites, like Hidden True Crime wound up doing.
If it's a call obtained illegally, even if the person chatting to MG didn't know it was illegal to record her, people disseminating it in large chunks could probably (happy to be corrected by a lawyer on this if it's false) be sued themselves by MG; not that I know if MG has tried to sue anyone.