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.
Diddian said:
He ruled to stick with the old instructions (the ones read to the jury at the beginning).

I'd love to hear attorneys opine on this given that the Idaho Supreme Ct order says that the new instructions apply "effective immediately" without qualification.

The May 22, 2024 order also indicates that the Order will be published for three consecutive weeks on the Idaho State Bar's website and in its weekly e-Bulletin and that, as soon as practicable, a summary of the amendments impacted by the Order shall be published in one issue of The Advocate.

IANAL, but I would expect that the fact that Prior brought this up would be adequate notice to this judge to seek out and read the Order and follow it.

What typically happens regarding implementation of new Orders to be implemented effective immediately when those Orders are relevant to proceedings in progress?
Click to expand...
Doesn't that seem rather definitive in that it says effective immediately? I don't understand why Boyce chose not to use it because, I would think, it becomes grounds for an appeal.
 
Diddian said:
Note that the judge's name is Boyce (Judge Steven Boyce).

To me (IANAL), it would seem that when the Idaho Supreme Court issues an Order about jury instructions - and particularly those in death penalty cases, it is an attempt to cure something that court has determined was either wrong or not clear in instructions before their Order. So, the prior instructions were absent that cure. And when the Idaho Supreme Court indicates "effective immediately" without additional qualification in their Order, they mean upon issuance of the Order (assuming the relevant parties receive notice of the Order - and I suspect that if a defense attorney brings up the Supreme Court's order, that by itself serves as notice.)

P.S. I do not necessarily agree that the new instructions are better instructions than the latter and would love to know what motivated the change.

My concern: If the new instructions are "more lenient" toward a death penalty defendant than the prior, then why would CD not have the right to be subject to the same jury instructions regarding reasonable doubt than a defendant against whom charges are filed today? Could an appeals court determine that CD was subject to harsher instructions than the Idaho Supreme Court had ordered?

I would think that if a court were ruling on appeal, they'd try to analyze if a jury's decision would be different had they had the new instructions. What I don't understand is why ask an appeals court to attempt to discern that when you could just give the new instructions now, explain to jurors why those revised instructions are being given, and KNOW for certain how a jury would decide based upon the new "cured" instructions?
Click to expand...
Ooops it’s been a long day - thanks for pointing out my mistake on the judge's name - I really did know that :)

A note to clarify - the Defense did not bring up these new instructions - Judge was notified (I think he said via email) and brought it to the attention of both state and defense a few days ago to give them time to form their arguments.

You’ve made some good points, but we’ll probably have to just disagree on whether the Judge made a good decision or should have used the new ones - I might agree with you had the ISC not included the “unless” clause and I believe that Judge Boyce concluded that the fact that the “old” instruction has stood up for decades was enough to use the “unless” clause to continue those instructions here since the trial started by giving those instructions to the jury.

Like you, I have no idea what prompted this action by the ISC but I don’t necessarily think that state supreme courts always make good decisions and whatever prompted it may have been a good reason but I think they did it in a bad way or perhaps I should say in an unwise way. And I suspect if the defense is going to try to use Judge Boyce’s decision to use the “old” instructions as a reason to overturn that they would also have used Judge Boyce changing horses mid-stream if he ruled to use the “new” instructions instead. It should not be an issue for this trial but could be either way that Judge Stephens ruled. And I place the fault for that squarely on the shoulders of the ISC justices - not on Judge Boyce.

PS What is IANAL? I know I’ve seen it before but can’t recall what the letters stand for :)
 
Love Never Fails said:
Maybe. But he has to live with the fact that she knew and wanted him dead. That’s a tough load to carry while that person has paid no penalty for what she did. He would be dead, were it not for the grace of God. And while he has a heart to forgive, and I honor him for that, she needs to be penalized in some way. Maybe a public heartfelt apology during trial for the whole world to see.
How does one ever trust her again?
Click to expand...
He struck me as a very passive person. He doesn't object to sharing custody with her!!! If he has forgiven her, then he must believe there was something to forgive. The question is what did he forgive? Was it her spreading lies about him or that she conspired to kill him? Big difference. Whatever the case, one can forgive someone even conspiring to kill them but that doesn't equal the offender not being charged for it.
 
Re: the new Orders from the Idaho Supreme Court.

Since probably 95% or more of the case was finished when the ruling came down and both the prosecution and defense predicated their arguments under the previous rules, it makes sense to me that Judge Boyce stuck with the old rules. Imo.
 
Snoopster said:
Sorry for quoting myself, but it's too late to edit my post...

Was I the only person that was concerned when Melanie showed up at her in-laws house, with Alex in tow??
Yes, she got detained by police, but I really wonder what might have happened if LE hadn't shown up.
Brandon and his parents must have been petrified. If they weren't, they should have been! Of course they wouldn't have known about all of the people that Alex had killed.

Can anyone recall when this incident happened?
Click to expand...
It was 11/15/19 so about 2 weeks after MBP moved to Idaho and right around the time she started dating IP. I’m sure that BB’s parents had been informed of AC’s attempt on his life and his suspicions that MBP was involved. I’m sure by then they also suspected LVD & AC had murdered CV. I don’t know if they knew TD was also dead by then or even who she was at that time and don’t think they knew that Tylee & JJ were missing by then - I think everyone besides Larry & Kay found out the children were missing in late Nov after the welfare check - but BB could have had contact with Larry & Kay so I can’t say for sure he didn’t know they were missing but didn’t likely know they were dead or that CD had declared some of BB’s children were dark either.
 
vls12345 said:
Re: the new Orders from the Idaho Supreme Court.

Since probably 95% or more of the case was finished when the ruling came down and both the prosecution and defense predicated their arguments under the previous rules, it makes sense to me that Judge Boyce stuck with the old rules. Imo.
Click to expand...
Gosh, I sure hope that's right. I think if I were the judge, I would have called the Idaho SC to ask!
 
Diddian said:
Note that the judge's name is Boyce (Judge Steven Boyce).

To me (IANAL), it would seem that when the Idaho Supreme Court issues an Order about jury instructions - and particularly those in death penalty cases, it is an attempt to cure something that court has determined was either wrong or not clear in instructions before their Order. So, the prior instructions were absent that cure. And when the Idaho Supreme Court indicates "effective immediately" without additional qualification in their Order, they mean upon issuance of the Order (assuming the relevant parties receive notice of the Order - and I suspect that if a defense attorney brings up the Supreme Court's order, that by itself serves as notice.)

P.S. I do not necessarily agree that the new instructions are better instructions than the latter and would love to know what motivated the change.

My concern: If the new instructions are "more lenient" toward a death penalty defendant than the prior, then why would CD not have the right to be subject to the same jury instructions regarding reasonable doubt than a defendant against whom charges are filed today? Could an appeals court determine that CD was subject to harsher instructions than the Idaho Supreme Court had ordered?

I would think that if a court were ruling on appeal, they'd try to analyze if a jury's decision would be different had they had the new instructions. What I don't understand is why ask an appeals court to attempt to discern that when you could just give the new instructions now, explain to jurors why those revised instructions are being given, and KNOW for certain how a jury would decide based upon the new "cured" instructions?
Click to expand...
It's a rock and hard place situation IMO.

If Judge Boyce ruled to use the new instruction then there would still possibly be an avenue for appeal, based on the fact that the jury were given 2 different instructions , and were thus confused. ISC have, unintentionally I'm sure, created a guaranteed appeal hook for all DP cases currently being heard.
 
Last edited:
Snoopster said:
Sorry for quoting myself, but it's too late to edit my post...

Was I the only person that was concerned when Melanie showed up at her in-laws house, with Alex in tow??
Yes, she got detained by police, but I really wonder what might have happened if LE hadn't shown up.
Brandon and his parents must have been petrified. If they weren't, they should have been! Of course they wouldn't have known about all of the people that Alex had killed.

Can anyone recall when this incident happened?
Click to expand...
Nov 15, 2019....did she really think anyone would come out of that house and that LE wouldnt be called...yet again? considering this was her second attempt showing up. Im confident Brandon's parents knew he was shot at.....Melaniece actually mentions it when she was arguing with LE, 'he says he was shot at, now he's in hiding' saying he is on drugs....and the rest of her lies.....it was a wonderful thing listening to the officer SCREAM at her, and subsequently arrest her for trespassing.

I can imagine how those LE officers feel finding out later that AC, a killer, was in the vehicle. I hope they have realized IMO they saved BB's life that nite. IMO, what happened to CharlesV was going to happen to Brandon that nite if he stepped outside that house. all it would take is AC starting something with him and then pull out the gun and shoot him 'to protect Melaniece'. he got away with it with CharlesV. IMO, that was the plan.
 
Wednesday, May 29th:
*Trial continues (Day 31)–CLOSING ARGUMENTS! (@ 10am 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]. 5/2/24: Juror dismissed due to illness. Now: 12 jurors & 5 alternates. [No gender count].
Jury will be sequestered during deliberations in the guilt phase thru the penalty phase.
Trial began on 4/10/24. Court hours are 8:30am to 3pm Monday-Friday. Trial is being held in Ada County. State rested their case on 5/16/24. Defense began their case on 5/20/24 & ended on 5/23/24. State’s rebuttal case started 5/23 & ended 5/28/24. Closing arguments on 5/29/24.
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 Days 1-6 (4/1-4/6/24) & thru 4/9/24 & Trial Days 1-29 (4/10-5/23/24) reference post #974 here:
https://www.websleuths.com/forums/t...tylee-ryan-and-tammy-daybell-6.713174/page-49
5/28/24 Tuesday, Trial Day 30: *State’s rebuttal witnesses: Dr. Eric Christensen, the Utah Medical Examiner who did the autopsy on Tammy Daybell. Retired Rexburg Police Det. David Stubbs. Rexburg Det. Ray Hermosillo.
*State has no further rebuttal witnesses. Both sides rest their cases.
*Judge Boyce says the next stage is jury instructions in the case. They have been working on them. Closing arguments will be conducted tomorrow. A formal jury instruction conference will be held later today.
*Jury instructions will be read to the jurors at 10am followed by closing arguments.
For more info on direct see post #989 here:
https://www.websleuths.com/forums/t...tylee-ryan-and-tammy-daybell-6.713174/page-50
Trial continues on Wednesday, 5/29/24 @ 10am.
 
Snoopster said:
Sorry for quoting myself, but it's too late to edit my post...

Was I the only person that was concerned when Melanie showed up at her in-laws house, with Alex in tow??
Yes, she got detained by police, but I really wonder what might have happened if LE hadn't shown up.
Brandon and his parents must have been petrified. If they weren't, they should have been! Of course they wouldn't have known about all of the people that Alex had killed.

Can anyone recall when this incident happened?
Click to expand...
Agree!
 
Pruddennce said:
Nov 15, 2019....did she really think anyone would come out of that house and that LE wouldnt be called...yet again? considering this was her second attempt showing up. Im confident Brandon's parents knew he was shot at.....Melaniece actually mentions it when she was arguing with LE, 'he says he was shot at, now he's in hiding' saying he is on drugs....and the rest of her lies.....it was a wonderful thing listening to the officer SCREAM at her, and subsequently arrest her for trespassing.

I can imagine how those LE officers feel finding out later that AC, a killer, was in the vehicle. I hope they have realized IMO they saved BB's life that nite. IMO, what happened to CharlesV was going to happen to Brandon that nite if he stepped outside that house. all it would take is AC starting something with him and then pull out the gun and shoot him 'to protect Melaniece'. he got away with it with CharlesV. IMO, that was the plan.
Click to expand...
That’s why she should be in prison. She can get counseling there.
 
Artis said:
He struck me as a very passive person. He doesn't object to sharing custody with her!!! If he has forgiven her, then he must believe there was something to forgive. The question is what did he forgive? Was it her spreading lies about him or that she conspired to kill him? Big difference. Whatever the case, one can forgive someone even conspiring to kill them but that doesn't equal the offender not being charged for it.
Click to expand...
He does object. Judge didn’t give him a choice.
 
Onsdag said:
To add to that, as I understand it, in certain cases charges can and will be pressed by LE regardless of whether the victim wants to press charges or not. This because the State and/or its people are also considered victims to the crime. I'm pretty sure attempted murder would be considered such a crime.
Click to expand...
True. The prosecution considers the feelings of the human victims but also weighs the interests of the community as a whole. A state may prosecute something like an attempted murder even if the intended target would rather they did not.

I trust Brandon's judgment. He hasn't said or done anything that makes me think he makes bad decisions. I have to trust Arizona's judgment, because I can't make them investigate or prosecute anything. It does seem to me the local police were better investigators in Brandon's jurisdiction than in Charles'.

Melani has had a very unusual life. She makes extremely unusual decisions. I think she may find herself incarcerated; it doesn't seem like an unfair result for what she has done, to my eyes, especially helping Alex with a murder by providing the essential information about the location of the victim.

She also did not help prevent or solve multiple other murders, completed, attempted or planned, including of her own children.

But somehow, I don't feel like Melani did it for the money or power, even though she could arrange a serious pay day for her crimes. I feel like she did it for Lori and Chad's love and approval. She was operating in utter powerlessness.

MOO
 
BreadnLumpit said:
It's a rock and hard place situation IMO.

If Judge Boyce ruled to use the new instruction then there would still possibly be an avenue for appeal, based on the fact that the jury were given 2 different instructions , and were thus confused. ISC have, unintentionally I'm sure, created a guaranteed appeal hook for all DP cases currently being heard.
Click to expand...
I don't understand this. I thought the jury instructions were issued just before the jury retired to deliberate. When they claim they need to use the old jury instructions because they were already given to the jury--when was the jury first instructed?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 82 more.
Total: 2,518 (members: 83, guests: 2,435)

Online statistics

Members online
83
Guests online
2,435
Total visitors
2,518
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
599,731
Messages
18,098,805
Members
230,917
Latest member
CP95
Back
Top