GUILTY TRIAL OF CHAD DAYBELL CHARGED WITH MURDER OF JJ VALLOW, TYLEE RYAN AND TAMMY DAYBELL #8

[Ruminations]

I liked the one juror who, when talking about Chad's adult children on the stand, described them as living in a vacuum. It was definitely spot-on. I glanced back at the video for a time-stamp for the juror's comment but can't find it now.

jmo

I was amazed how quickly they concluded the children were not believable, but were is a terrible situation.

MOO

 

[TMcgee]

I don’t believe you get paper and pencils on death row. I think pencils are considered dangerous to one’s self or to the guards.

However, I would predict Chad would stop writing within a short time as he would have no one to read his writings and worship him.

I think he may continue his writing. Instead of facing the truth of what he’s done and how society views him, his story of great importance and martyrdom will be his next defense mechanism.

 

[lightofmine99]

John Wayne Gacy was on death row for I think 14/15 years before he was executed, and during that time he gave several interviews to the media, communicated with journalists, and produced a lot of paintings. He appeared at least once in a televised interview. Of course he also could've done this if he wasn't on death row.

Question is, how does Chad get access to hobby materials if he's alone for 23 hours a day? Does family purchase this for him, like a TV, or what? I don't think Gacy had many "supporters" to buy him things aside from any journalists he spoke with (who weren't like his real friends or anything). MOO.

I think he may continue his writing. Instead of facing the truth of what he’s done and how society views him, his story of great importance and martyrdom will be his next defense mechanism.

If he does so someday I would like to read it. MOO.

 

[reluctant_anthropologist]

You know what's lacking from the Cox / Shiflet statement? Not only accountability but any sense of introspection. Here's my breakdown of paragraphs:

P1: It's boilerplate thanks for the most part ("kindness, support . . . prayers") . . . but with one exception. Rhetorically, it locates the Cox and Shiflet families squarely on the side of the victims ("on behalf of our family and the other victim's [sic] families").

P2: More boilerplate thanks, this time to the jury.

P3: Still more boilerplate thanks, now to the judge, the attorneys, and the prosecution.

P4: Boilerplate acceptance of the verdict and sentence. Generic reference to the "beloved victims."

P5: Mostly boilerplate lamentation that the verdict won't bring the victims back. Once again, the Cox and Shiflet families position themselves unproblematically as victims ("we are left with our grief and sorrow" . . . "Our family will always feel this loss and will never be the same").

P6: Tone-deaf, generic sympathy expressed toward Tammy's and Charles's families. More evidence that the Cox and Shiflet families see themselves as victims. Look at the first use of the word "also" in this paragraph: "We send our deepest sympathy to Tammy's family and Charles's family who have also been devastated by the loss of Tammy and Charles who are also irreplaceable." There are a couple of possible readings here. The first and (charitably) more likely is that also is being used clumsily as a conjunction, meaning they have just been talking about JJ and Tylee, and now they're talking about Tammy and Charles. But there's also a darkly comic reading, where the word is being used adverbially to suggest that, along with the Cox and Shiflet families (the primary victims), Tammy's and Charles's families are also grieving.

P7: It's unclear who the "your" refers to here ("We share your grief" . . .). Is it still the Tammy and Charles families? The new paragraph would suggest it's not and that the pronoun should be read more generally. But who knows? Either way, it would have been a very appropriate sentiment in a different kind of statement, one that acknowledged the harm likely caused by SS and JC making such a public assurance that Lori would never hurt anyone. Actually, I feel like the threshold here is low. If there had been any introspection, any willingness at all to admit that they were not victims in the way that the Douglases and Woodcocks were victims, then the expression of this sentiment would have been fine. Because obviously the Coxes and Shiflets are victims. But their actions and non-actions mean they are not only victims.

P8: This could be pure boilerplate religious nothingness: "We will continue to firmly put our faith in Jesus Christ, and seek for His Mercy and Grace for all those involved." But it could also be interpreted as a deflection of any personal accountability by the Cox and Shiflet families and a plea to not pressure them to take any. At a minimum, something is being hidden behind the phrase "all those involved."

tl;dr: Where the sentiments are appropriate, they are boilerplate. Where they go beyond boilerplate, they are inappropriate and suggest that the Cox and Shiflet families continue to see themselves only, or at least primarily, as victims.

MOO

*

The statement

We want to thank each person that has offered kindness, support, and prayers on behalf of our family and the other victim’s families. That support is deeply felt and appreciated.

We sincerely appreciate the time and dedication of the jury in this case.

We also appreciate all the time and effort that dedicated law enforcement, attorneys and Judge Boyce has taken to adjudicate this case. We acknowledge countless hours put into this case and also time away from their families. We thank you.

We fully accept the determined decision in our justice system. We understand this is just one step towards justice for the beloved victims in this case.

Despite today’s verdict, we are left with our grief and sorrow over the loss of Tylee and JJ who are irreplaceable. Our family will always feel this loss and will never be the same. We will continue to honor their memories to the best of our ability.

We send our deepest sympathy to Tammy’s family and Charles’ family who have also been devastated by the loss of Tammy and Charles who are also irreplaceable.

We share your grief and offer our heartfelt prayers for healing for all who have been hurt by these horrific crimes. We hope this outcome can offer you a measure of peace and comfort.

We will continue to firmly put our faith in Jesus Christ, and seek for His Mercy and Grace for all of those involved.

 

[Onsdag]

As Artis told us, the LDs church still proudly promotes his book, Visions of Glory. I don’t expect Amazon will remove it until the church does.
Both are greedy, imo.

Can you please verify how and where the Church "still proudly promotes his book, Visions of Glory?"

First of all "Visions of Glory" is not Chad's book, as insinuated. Rather, it is a book written/published by John Pontius from one 'Spencer' supposed account. True, Chad was heavily influenced by this book, but it wasn't his.

Secondly, I'm not seeing that book listed anywhere on the Church' related bookstore, Deseret Book, for sale.

Find amazing products in Product Deseret Book' today | Deseret Book

Deseret Book

www.deseretbook.com

I am seeing it listed on the website ldsbookstore.com, but that is most definitely NOT the Church' website, nor its bookstore. Instead this website/bookstore appears to be, from my limited search, a private company based in Orem, UT. This company is as much related to the Church as FedEx or UPS is to the U.S. Government' own USPS. In short it's a privately owned company, whose owners named it such that they could market themselves to an LDS audience and bank on that name affinity/association in order to gain a following.

So, to be clear, Chad's books are not being sold or promoted by the Church. If you have any other information to suggest/prove otherwise, I'm all ears.

 

[SteveS]

Will Arizona be able to utilize the Idaho Prosecution team as witnesses?

VERY unlikely. They would not have evidence ie things they personally observed. All the prosec attys have is (inadmissible) hearsay to offer, layers removed from being their own testimony to things that happened.

AZ needs the witnesses to things pertaining to AZ (only) crimes and things pertinent to those, and perhaps to detectives who found such things.

 

[indicolite22]

The author of Visions of Glory (John Pontius) died in 2012, so he has no idea that his book inspired Chad and Lori's fantasies. The person whose story is portrayed in the book is alive and is a psychotherapist. A couple of years after the book was published, he wrote an apology letter which prevented him from being excommunicated from the LDS church.

 

[Smelly Squirrel]

Holy smoke, that Visions of Glory book, that started this whole thing, is still for sale on the LDS bookstore website. According to both Lauren and Megan, all of the light/dark stuff and other beliefs that Lori held originated with that and it was the book she was reading when the cops served her, poolside, in Hawaii. Wouldn't you think, in light of what's happened, they would have removed that?

I think it's unfortunate that these weirdos have also somewhat contaminated the topic of NDEs. The first book I ever read about those was from a surgeon whose patients experienced them after being pronounced clinically dead. They are moving, inspiring and cautionary tales about life and don't preach crazy religious ideas like what these people were into. It's a legit and fascinating subject that unscrupulous people capitalized on. Jerks.

There's also a connection from that book to Ruby Franke, Tim Ballard and others who run in that circle of Mormonism and are now in the news. JH was on Harrison's podcast.

Ep. 5: Jodi Hildebrandt: The Counterfeit of Connection

Play Ep. 5: Jodi Hildebrandt: The Counterfeit of Connection by EternalCore on desktop and mobile. Play over 320 million tracks for free on SoundCloud.

m.soundcloud.com

The book is mentioned in one of the lawsuits against Tim Ballard.

"He also told me to read this book, it was called the Visions of Glory. Tim said that he had met with the man who wrote it before he had died. His name was Tom Harrison, and that Tom had told him lots of visions that he had had, that actually had Tim in them. He said that Tim would be a prophet of the LDS church one day, and that he would be the President of the United States."

Discussed in this podcast and this one.

 

[BUF]

Last night I sat down with Blake, Juror #14 in Chad Daybell's trial. I'll share the entire interview tonight at 6:30 p.m. Here's a preview in which Blake expresses frustration with the defense - not only with their lack of evidence but the manner and tone.

Log into Facebook

Log into Facebook to start sharing and connecting with your friends, family, and people you know.

www.facebook.com

Video at link

 

[Teche]

The author of Visions of Glory (John Pontius) died in 2012, so he has no idea that his book inspired Chad and Lori's fantasies. The person whose story is portrayed in the book is alive and is a psychotherapist. A couple of years after the book was published, he wrote an apology letter which prevented him from being excommunicated from the LDS church.

What did Pontius apologize for?

 

[Cindizzi]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1798045369932427404

Labrador Letter - Daybell Trial

 

[BreadnLumpit]

John Wayne Gacy was on death row for I think 14/15 years before he was executed, and during that time he gave several interviews to the media, communicated with journalists, and produced a lot of paintings. He appeared at least once in a televised interview. Of course he also could've done this if he wasn't on death row.

Question is, how does Chad get access to hobby materials if he's alone for 23 hours a day? Does family purchase this for him, like a TV, or what? I don't think Gacy had many "supporters" to buy him things aside from any journalists he spoke with (who weren't like his real friends or anything). MOO.

If he does so someday I would like to read it. MOO.

You would be surprised.

I have a good friend who writes to people on death row and does very occasionally buy them small items from the commissary.

She's not some nutter who gets off on fan girling deranged killers. She's a married woman, has a successful career and is a magistrate here in the UK. She gets put in touch with death row inmates via a UK non profit called Human Writes. She writes regularly to three different inmates around the US and, when one of them is put to death, after an interval, she adds a replacement to her "rota".

People may or may not agree with her doing that (and I can certainly understand why some would find it offensive) but she doesn't choose who she will be writing to, doesn't pander to their egos, doesn't discuss their crimes and never, ever campaigns to have their sentences commuted.

 

[fred&edna]

You know what's lacking from the Cox / Shiflet statement? Not only accountability but any sense of introspection. Here's my breakdown of paragraphs:

P1: It's boilerplate thanks for the most part ("kindness, support . . . prayers") . . . but with one exception. Rhetorically, it locates the Cox and Shiflet families squarely on the side of the victims ("on behalf of our family and the other victim's [sic] families").

P2: More boilerplate thanks, this time to the jury.

P3: Still more boilerplate thanks, now to the judge, the attorneys, and the prosecution.

P4: Boilerplate acceptance of the verdict and sentence. Generic reference to the "beloved victims."

P5: Mostly boilerplate lamentation that the verdict won't bring the victims back. Once again, the Cox and Shiflet families position themselves unproblematically as victims ("we are left with our grief and sorrow" . . . "Our family will always feel this loss and will never be the same").

P6: Tone-deaf, generic sympathy expressed toward Tammy's and Charles's families. More evidence that the Cox and Shiflet families see themselves as victims. Look at the first use of the word "also" in this paragraph: "We send our deepest sympathy to Tammy's family and Charles's family who have also been devastated by the loss of Tammy and Charles who are also irreplaceable." There are a couple of possible readings here. The first and (charitably) more likely is that also is being used clumsily as a conjunction, meaning they have just been talking about JJ and Tylee, and now they're talking about Tammy and Charles. But there's also a darkly comic reading, where the word is being used adverbially to suggest that, along with the Cox and Shiflet families (the primary victims), Tammy's and Charles's families are also grieving.

P7: It's unclear who the "your" refers to here ("We share your grief" . . .). Is it still the Tammy and Charles families? The new paragraph would suggest it's not and that the pronoun should be read more generally. But who knows? Either way, it would have been a very appropriate sentiment in a different kind of statement, one that acknowledged the harm likely caused by SS and JC making such a public assurance that Lori would never hurt anyone. Actually, I feel like the threshold here is low. If there had been any introspection, any willingness at all to admit that they were not victims in the way that the Douglases and Woodcocks were victims, then the expression of this sentiment would have been fine. Because obviously the Coxes and Shiflets are victims. But their actions and non-actions mean they are not only victims.

P8: This could be pure boilerplate religious nothingness: "We will continue to firmly put our faith in Jesus Christ, and seek for His Mercy and Grace for all those involved." But it could also be interpreted as a deflection of any personal accountability by the Cox and Shiflet families and a plea to not pressure them to take any. At a minimum, something is being hidden behind the phrase "all those involved."

tl;dr: Where the sentiments are appropriate, they are boilerplate. Where they go beyond boilerplate, they are inappropriate and suggest that the Cox and Shiflet families continue to see themselves only, or at least primarily, as victims.

MOO

*

The statement

We want to thank each person that has offered kindness, support, and prayers on behalf of our family and the other victim’s families. That support is deeply felt and appreciated.

We sincerely appreciate the time and dedication of the jury in this case.

We also appreciate all the time and effort that dedicated law enforcement, attorneys and Judge Boyce has taken to adjudicate this case. We acknowledge countless hours put into this case and also time away from their families. We thank you.

We fully accept the determined decision in our justice system. We understand this is just one step towards justice for the beloved victims in this case.

Despite today’s verdict, we are left with our grief and sorrow over the loss of Tylee and JJ who are irreplaceable. Our family will always feel this loss and will never be the same. We will continue to honor their memories to the best of our ability.

We send our deepest sympathy to Tammy’s family and Charles’ family who have also been devastated by the loss of Tammy and Charles who are also irreplaceable.

We share your grief and offer our heartfelt prayers for healing for all who have been hurt by these horrific crimes. We hope this outcome can offer you a measure of peace and comfort.

We will continue to firmly put our faith in Jesus Christ, and seek for His Mercy and Grace for all of those involved.

Thank you for the breakdown. I wasn't expecting anything of real value from the statement, nor from the SS interview. If someone can't show-up to exhibit denouncement (nor support) for the conspiratorial murderers during trial then what's the real point? jmo (as unpopular as it may be)

 

[indicolite22]

What did Pontius apologize for?

He said that he should have kept the visions to himself and that the book author added to them.

 

[indicolite22]

I don't know where HTC got the information from, but they claim that the sidebar after Annie Cushing's victim impact statement was about her not reading the approved version of the statement. Victims' families were given guidelines about the topics to avoid. They couldn't mention Chad, the crime or what should happen next. In any case, no action seems to have been taken.

 

[fred&edna]

Colby lost his mother, father, and siblings, and although he is a grown man with a wife and family of his own, where was the Cox family to show support for him??

 

[indicolite22]

Last night I sat down with Blake, Juror #14 in Chad Daybell's trial. I'll share the entire interview tonight at 6:30 p.m. Here's a preview in which Blake expresses frustration with the defense - not only with their lack of evidence but the manner and tone.

Log into Facebook

Log into Facebook to start sharing and connecting with your friends, family, and people you know.

www.facebook.com

Video at link

Wow, this juror is very critical of JP's attitude and lack of mitigating evidence.

 

[Love Never Fails]

Can you please verify how and where the Church "still proudly promotes his book, Visions of Glory?"

First of all "Visions of Glory" is not Chad's book, as insinuated. Rather, it is a book written/published by John Pontius from one 'Spencer' supposed account. True, Chad was heavily influenced by this book, but it wasn't his.

Secondly, I'm not seeing that book listed anywhere on the Church' related bookstore, Deseret Book, for sale.

Find amazing products in Product Deseret Book' today | Deseret Book

Deseret Book

www.deseretbook.com

I am seeing it listed on the website ldsbookstore.com, but that is most definitely NOT the Church' website, nor its bookstore. Instead this website/bookstore appears to be, from my limited search, a private company based in Orem, UT. This company is as much related to the Church as FedEx or UPS is to the U.S. Government' own USPS. In short it's a privately owned company, whose owners named it such that they could market themselves to an LDS audience and bank on that name affinity/association in order to gain a following.

So, to be clear, Chad's books are not being sold or promoted by the Church. If you have any other information to suggest/prove otherwise, I'm all ears.

I replied earlier today to another poster that I was mistaken about the author of Visions of Glory. Perhaps you didn’t see my post?

As far as his books, I was told they are still at the church and on Amazon.

 

[indicolite22]

There's also a connection from that book to Ruby Franke, Tim Ballard and others who run in that circle of Mormonism and are now in the news. JH was on Harrison's podcast.

Ep. 5: Jodi Hildebrandt: The Counterfeit of Connection

Play Ep. 5: Jodi Hildebrandt: The Counterfeit of Connection by EternalCore on desktop and mobile. Play over 320 million tracks for free on SoundCloud.

m.soundcloud.com

The book is mentioned in one of the lawsuits against Tim Ballard.

"He also told me to read this book, it was called the Visions of Glory. Tim said that he had met with the man who wrote it before he had died. His name was Tom Harrison, and that Tom had told him lots of visions that he had had, that actually had Tim in them. He said that Tim would be a prophet of the LDS church one day, and that he would be the President of the United States."

Discussed in this podcast and this one.

Thom Harrison didn't write Visions of Glory, but his visions are portrayed in it. He is still alive. It's the book's author John Pontius who died.

 

[Ruminations]

I don't know where HTC got the information from, but they claim that the sidebar after Annie Cushing's victim impact statement was about her not reading the approved version of the statement. Victims' families were given guidelines about the topics to avoid. They couldn't mention Chad, the crime or what should happen next. In any case, no action seems to have been taken.

I actually noticed this "live" because I somehow already knew the statements couldn't mention Chad or the crime or the deserved punishment, all decisions of the jury. The statements were just supposed to talk about impact.

After her stayement, which did mention Chad, Prior asked for a side bar with his clenched teeth smile.

But after the side bar, there was never any objection, motion to discuss, etc. so I doubt it matters. If Prior did object I would think the judge would have given some instruction to the jury to disregard the "wrong" parts.

Tylee's aunt probably just mixed up the instructions or something. Victims can mention the defendant or even address him in other states.

I came to the same conclusion- that the side bar was for that non-conforming victim impact statement. But I don't really know if Lauren and I are right about the purpose of the side bar. It could have been requested for an unrelated reason.

MOO