Again people, I hope I'm wrong. I think these two are the devils spawn but I have minimal confidence in Wood and now the entire state of Idaho. Didn't the state AG say they were supporting Woods? Didn't they say they were taking a lead role in the case? After those announcements I've seen nothing to indicate they've come through. It's very good news a more experienced prosecuting attorney is getting involved because I've lost almost all confidence in Wood and and state of Idaho's AG office. I know we all want to see these criminals prosecuted to the max and hopefully this attorney can take the case over the edge and get us where we need to go.
Found Deceased ID - Joshua Vallow, 7, & Tylee Ryan, 16, Rexburg, Sept 2019 *Arrests* #56
- Thread starter Patch Tuesday
- Start date
- Status
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2015
- Messages
- 2,806
- Reaction score
- 26,433
Does anybody know:
Are there any public statements or publicly available testimony from M.G. or her bf specifically stating (or declining to answer a related question) regarding:
- When you saw Alex Cox carry in JJ, are you sure he was alive and asleep or could he have been dead? How do you know this?
-When you saw Alex Cox carry in JJ, what exactly was he wearing?
-In the morning you left Rexburg, you did not see or hear JJ. What first woke you up? Did you see or hear anyone else up in the morning? Lori/your bf-gf getting breakfast/making coffee? Doors opening and closing? Lori/your bf-gf in a bedroom getting dressed? making a bed? turning on/off radio, TV, podcast? Talking on phone?
I think that morning is very relevant. At the very least, Melanie and bf should own up to admitting something was very wrong. It seems remarkable, as someone pointed out above, that one of the few specific times Melanie recalled was departure time from this apt. Why was this easier for her to remember? How credible is it that JJ managed to have a bolting episode including knocking something hard from 5' to a hard ground, some communication going out to Alex's home, Alex entering, taking possession of JJ, possibly while he is in meltdown-mode, and leaving.
An autistic kid in a meltdown is different from a kid testing limits or having a tantrum. Melting down is not manipulating; negotiations don't work. If you can hand the kid the cookie they have been demanding, and the head banging stops (not a recommended technique), it is a tantrum, not a meltdown. The child is in control, and no longer needed to have a tantrum when their problem was solved.
When I listen to the baby sitter's narrative, it sounds like an autistic child out of control, and probably trying to regain control by doing things like pushing heavy furniture (to feel his body in space) and hiding under Lori's bed. There are ways to help a child learn to regain control. But behavior mod techniques that are used for manipulative tantrums are useless. You can't reward and punish a kid out of having meltdowns. A tantrum is a means to an end. A meltdown is itself its own undesired state, and the child does not want to have melted down.
This is relevant to me, because unlike a tantrum, once a meltdown starts, regaining control tends to be gradual. It sounds like JJ was not non-verbal in his meltdown with a near stranger (the baby-sitter). So it seems highly unlikely that he would be non-verbal while allegedly bolting up the kitchen walls. I do not believe that happened that morning. (which of the 3 br was over the kitchen?) But the narrative does match with JJ going under Lori's bed. Some kids find it easier to regain control when their bodies are touching something firm. (We can thank autistic kiddos for bringing us weighted blankets. Turns out, you don't have to be autistic to like them!) Such kids would go under a tight bed or between the top of the cabinets and the ceiling.
Speaking of autistic kiddos in general, I can't imagine how dreadful it was for JJ to live with Lori as he got older and older, and his ability to understand what Lori was saying and doing got more and more sophisticated.
Lori is certainly in control of her emotions, but JJ was not. In general, autistic children are not liars. I don't know about JJ, but I personally have seen autistic kids with normal intelligence who would not have even learned to lie well at that age. It appears that Tylee (and CR) were either subtly or overtly put in positions to lie for their mother, and that would have been very difficult to replicate with JJ, I imagine.
JJ was verbal. In general, autistic/persons are not inclined to lie, even a social niceties. Even with average intelligence, some autistic kids his age either can not yet lie or do so very immaturely, like a 3 year old. In general, autistic kids with average intelligence are behind average kids in changing their behavior by location. (A typical 4 year old would know, I can run at aunties and in my basement, no where at GM's or the library, but I can run anywhere on the playground; a 2 year old may not differentiate. An autistic kiddo with average intelligence may learn behavior expectations by location later than neuro-typical kids.) In general, autistic kids take longer to learn the perspective of others compared to neurotypical kids. (They care, so it is not at all failure to care about others.) But there generally is a delay in understanding another's perspective. This delay in understanding another's perspective contributes to the difficulty developing the skill to lie.
Tylee and CR do not appear to me to have even a dash of autism. They seem quite social. So they would learn to lie younger. And they would learn to roll with it, assume there must be some good reason their good mother was lying. Social kiddos adapt to lying parents at times by finding a justification or even having faith that there is an explanation with which they are not aware. In addition, social kiddos learn what their parents' need and feel driven to provide it (to their psychological detriment, often). Thus, Tylee and CR probably found ways to assume that their mother's lies were for a good end, and in fact, she needed these lies so they learned to lie too or at least stay out of any challenge to the lies. If this is extreme, the children could begin to have an altered view of what is true and real just to keep up and/or survive. (Forget things they should remember or remember things that never happened.) This is of course very distressing in the long-term, but it is a brilliant way for children to survive with a very needy mother. It requires skills that very social kids learn earlier and more autistic kids learn later, if ever.
Lori's string of lies would be very difficult for JJ as he got older and older. Someone who knew JJ would have to comment. Some autistic kiddos are very distressed by what they believe is inaccurate information. If JJ heard Lori mentioning CV's heart attack, he would say something like, "He went on a business trip and couldn't bring me to school." Conflicting information, especially conflicting information about something he cared a lot about---such as his father, could create a lot of anxiety for some autistic kiddos. Autistic kiddos are less likely to rationalize the conflicting information and instead perseverate on it until the conflict is "taken back" or integrated. So, for instance, JJ, I speculate would request that it is repeated around him that CV is on a business trip and did NOT have a heart attack. (Taking the conflicting statement back.) Or, repeat a scenario that integrates the conflict: he went on a business trip, then had a heart attack. In general, autistic kiddos don't just let go of old information when new information comes in as easily as neurotypical kiddos.
JJ, Tylee, CR, and every dependent child in the world needs the adults who raise them. If the adult is needy, children instinctively take on caring for their parents absent some intervention. This is not different for children with any level of or absence of autism, but, in general, autistic kiddos are delayed in learning how to do this. I can't see JJ learning fast enough for Lori not to correct her "mistakes," which he probably would not see as lies, let alone learning to support her lies. No wonder he was "dark" at such a young age.
.
I feel awful for all three of those survivors. It is hard enough to wrap one's young head around explicit physical and/or sexual abuse, as evidently CR and Tylee did at the hands of JR. But to have to comes to terms with that, learn how to integrate parental love, love for parents, betrayal by parents, and come out whole is one thing. But to try to do all of that while evidently meeting your mother's needs for reporting real and/or unreal physical and sexual abuse can only make sorting this kind of stuff out even harder. I felt so bad for Tylee reporting CV stealing her mom's purse. That poor child had no space in her life to feel her own feelings. I can't imagine.
Are there any public statements or publicly available testimony from M.G. or her bf specifically stating (or declining to answer a related question) regarding:
- When you saw Alex Cox carry in JJ, are you sure he was alive and asleep or could he have been dead? How do you know this?
-When you saw Alex Cox carry in JJ, what exactly was he wearing?
-In the morning you left Rexburg, you did not see or hear JJ. What first woke you up? Did you see or hear anyone else up in the morning? Lori/your bf-gf getting breakfast/making coffee? Doors opening and closing? Lori/your bf-gf in a bedroom getting dressed? making a bed? turning on/off radio, TV, podcast? Talking on phone?
I think that morning is very relevant. At the very least, Melanie and bf should own up to admitting something was very wrong. It seems remarkable, as someone pointed out above, that one of the few specific times Melanie recalled was departure time from this apt. Why was this easier for her to remember? How credible is it that JJ managed to have a bolting episode including knocking something hard from 5' to a hard ground, some communication going out to Alex's home, Alex entering, taking possession of JJ, possibly while he is in meltdown-mode, and leaving.
An autistic kid in a meltdown is different from a kid testing limits or having a tantrum. Melting down is not manipulating; negotiations don't work. If you can hand the kid the cookie they have been demanding, and the head banging stops (not a recommended technique), it is a tantrum, not a meltdown. The child is in control, and no longer needed to have a tantrum when their problem was solved.
When I listen to the baby sitter's narrative, it sounds like an autistic child out of control, and probably trying to regain control by doing things like pushing heavy furniture (to feel his body in space) and hiding under Lori's bed. There are ways to help a child learn to regain control. But behavior mod techniques that are used for manipulative tantrums are useless. You can't reward and punish a kid out of having meltdowns. A tantrum is a means to an end. A meltdown is itself its own undesired state, and the child does not want to have melted down.
This is relevant to me, because unlike a tantrum, once a meltdown starts, regaining control tends to be gradual. It sounds like JJ was not non-verbal in his meltdown with a near stranger (the baby-sitter). So it seems highly unlikely that he would be non-verbal while allegedly bolting up the kitchen walls. I do not believe that happened that morning. (which of the 3 br was over the kitchen?) But the narrative does match with JJ going under Lori's bed. Some kids find it easier to regain control when their bodies are touching something firm. (We can thank autistic kiddos for bringing us weighted blankets. Turns out, you don't have to be autistic to like them!) Such kids would go under a tight bed or between the top of the cabinets and the ceiling.
Speaking of autistic kiddos in general, I can't imagine how dreadful it was for JJ to live with Lori as he got older and older, and his ability to understand what Lori was saying and doing got more and more sophisticated.
Lori is certainly in control of her emotions, but JJ was not. In general, autistic children are not liars. I don't know about JJ, but I personally have seen autistic kids with normal intelligence who would not have even learned to lie well at that age. It appears that Tylee (and CR) were either subtly or overtly put in positions to lie for their mother, and that would have been very difficult to replicate with JJ, I imagine.
JJ was verbal. In general, autistic/persons are not inclined to lie, even a social niceties. Even with average intelligence, some autistic kids his age either can not yet lie or do so very immaturely, like a 3 year old. In general, autistic kids with average intelligence are behind average kids in changing their behavior by location. (A typical 4 year old would know, I can run at aunties and in my basement, no where at GM's or the library, but I can run anywhere on the playground; a 2 year old may not differentiate. An autistic kiddo with average intelligence may learn behavior expectations by location later than neuro-typical kids.) In general, autistic kids take longer to learn the perspective of others compared to neurotypical kids. (They care, so it is not at all failure to care about others.) But there generally is a delay in understanding another's perspective. This delay in understanding another's perspective contributes to the difficulty developing the skill to lie.
Tylee and CR do not appear to me to have even a dash of autism. They seem quite social. So they would learn to lie younger. And they would learn to roll with it, assume there must be some good reason their good mother was lying. Social kiddos adapt to lying parents at times by finding a justification or even having faith that there is an explanation with which they are not aware. In addition, social kiddos learn what their parents' need and feel driven to provide it (to their psychological detriment, often). Thus, Tylee and CR probably found ways to assume that their mother's lies were for a good end, and in fact, she needed these lies so they learned to lie too or at least stay out of any challenge to the lies. If this is extreme, the children could begin to have an altered view of what is true and real just to keep up and/or survive. (Forget things they should remember or remember things that never happened.) This is of course very distressing in the long-term, but it is a brilliant way for children to survive with a very needy mother. It requires skills that very social kids learn earlier and more autistic kids learn later, if ever.
Lori's string of lies would be very difficult for JJ as he got older and older. Someone who knew JJ would have to comment. Some autistic kiddos are very distressed by what they believe is inaccurate information. If JJ heard Lori mentioning CV's heart attack, he would say something like, "He went on a business trip and couldn't bring me to school." Conflicting information, especially conflicting information about something he cared a lot about---such as his father, could create a lot of anxiety for some autistic kiddos. Autistic kiddos are less likely to rationalize the conflicting information and instead perseverate on it until the conflict is "taken back" or integrated. So, for instance, JJ, I speculate would request that it is repeated around him that CV is on a business trip and did NOT have a heart attack. (Taking the conflicting statement back.) Or, repeat a scenario that integrates the conflict: he went on a business trip, then had a heart attack. In general, autistic kiddos don't just let go of old information when new information comes in as easily as neurotypical kiddos.
JJ, Tylee, CR, and every dependent child in the world needs the adults who raise them. If the adult is needy, children instinctively take on caring for their parents absent some intervention. This is not different for children with any level of or absence of autism, but, in general, autistic kiddos are delayed in learning how to do this. I can't see JJ learning fast enough for Lori not to correct her "mistakes," which he probably would not see as lies, let alone learning to support her lies. No wonder he was "dark" at such a young age.
.I feel awful for all three of those survivors. It is hard enough to wrap one's young head around explicit physical and/or sexual abuse, as evidently CR and Tylee did at the hands of JR. But to have to comes to terms with that, learn how to integrate parental love, love for parents, betrayal by parents, and come out whole is one thing. But to try to do all of that while evidently meeting your mother's needs for reporting real and/or unreal physical and sexual abuse can only make sorting this kind of stuff out even harder. I felt so bad for Tylee reporting CV stealing her mom's purse. That poor child had no space in her life to feel her own feelings. I can't imagine.
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2018
- Messages
- 4,069
- Reaction score
- 39,666
SABBM (excellent post BTW): This is one thing we know for a fact from the staff at JJ's then-daycare. JJ was in denial about Charles' death and protested vociferously whenever it was even hinted at; and they may even have said this is because Lori told him Charles was "away on a business trip". (I remember it stuck in my head as part of the continuum of Lori-lies that other people than JJ would have to remember; because I too was thinking it would be harder for he than for anyone.)
Even if JJ's sense of time passing was looser than the norm (I'm extrapolating this from the fact that it was not unusual for him, by their own admission, to use his laptop to FaceTime his family members some 20-3o times/day); sooner or later after a certain amount of "sleeps had passed", even JJ would notice that Charles isn't coming home and know that no "business trip" would allow for the passage of months to years. I would speculate that the approach of Tylee's birthday possibly had JJ asking if Charles were going to be home from his "business trip" by the time he, JJ, had his own next birthday; because it seems like a logical thought to have to me.
Aside: I also imagine it was difficult for all the children to be constantly trained and told by third parties that Lori was a "terrific mother", simply partly because Lori was up for anything, and in fact treated them like peers. Even if they thought something was wrong, they apparently had lots of people gaslighting them on the topic, even if unintentionally so.)
Squareandrabbit a special thank you for this post. Bless those children.
The ID AG's office was meant to fund the investigation and gather evidence, they have deeper pockets. I do not believe they were meant to prosecute. Jmo
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2019
- Messages
- 11,330
- Reaction score
- 94,948
The ID AG's office only handled Tammy's case upon Fremont County prosecutor's request. When a new prosecuting attorney was elected, the case was handed back to the county.
Article from Feb 4:
AG transfers Tammy Daybell death investigation back to Fremont County Prosecutor - East Idaho News
Article from Feb 4:
AG transfers Tammy Daybell death investigation back to Fremont County Prosecutor - East Idaho News
DI_Isokawa
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2020
- Messages
- 609
- Reaction score
- 5,570
Thank you for your perceptive and enlightening post. I have a few questions, if you would be so kind: what is your opinion on whether JJ and his support dog Bailey could have been in or near the house when the shots were fired that killed CV? My supposition is that they could not have been, for the sound of the shots (.45 caliber rounds are loud) would surely have set Bailey off. Wouldn't that have set poor JJ off as well? We know Bailey was alert to noises because in the January incident, when CV was locked out of his house, CV told the accompanying officer as they walked up to the house that he knew Bailey was gone because the dog would have been barking as they got close. And even if Bailey was not there (which raises issues of premeditation and accessories before the fact), how long do you think it would have taken JJ to recover from the sound of the shots? Do you think at his age he would have known what gunfire meant? And do we know whether JJ was allowed to keep Bailey while at school?
I ask this because in my opinion CV was surprised by AC and held at gunpoint while Lori took his wallet, phone, and the key fob to the rental Kia. She then left with JJ, Tylee, and possibly Bailey and AC then shot CV. All the stories they gave were pure fabrication.
Colorado303
Verified Insider Watts Case
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2018
- Messages
- 2,719
- Reaction score
- 39,261
Colorado303
Verified Insider Watts Case
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2018
- Messages
- 2,719
- Reaction score
- 39,261
After reading Wood’s letter, Rachel Smith sounds like a terrific addition. Not only is she an experienced homicide prosecutor she’s also has been consulting with less experienced DA’s in Missouri for some time.
I would think Prior is particularly displeased with this new turn of events, as he appears to believe he’s much better than Woods. Unless he’s deluded he can’t feel the same about Ms Smith.
“The enemy of my enemy is my friend” — I bet Prior joined Means at the jail to strategize on how to get Smith removed from the case. Doesn’t mean Prior won’t throw Lori under the bus, just he’d prefer to do it without Rachel Smith around.
I also think Means may inadvertently say stuff that Prior finds useful in constructing Chad’s defense. I’m sure Prior encourages Means to think they are buddies in this “joint fight” and Means probably welcomes his “help”.
In his letter Woods explains Smith is already working with his team. Whether she’s allowed to practice in court or not, I’m glad the prosecution will have the benefit of her expertise.
Who thinks Prior will still be smiling when tomorrow’s hearing starts? Not me! And Means just may throw up on camera.
Colorado303
Verified Insider Watts Case
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2018
- Messages
- 2,719
- Reaction score
- 39,261
That’s assuming there will be murder charges for Tammy. Even if the autopsy found something suspicious about her death, the DA may not be confident he can get a jury to convict. If that’s the case, he could bargain away a murder charge re Tammy in exchange for Chad’s testimony re JJ and Tylee’s deaths.
Lori may very well try turning the tables to implicate Chad in Tammy’s death, but it’s now well known she’s an Olympic calibre liar. Discrediting her wouldn’t be impossible.
Colorado303
Verified Insider Watts Case
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2018
- Messages
- 2,719
- Reaction score
- 39,261
Top notch surgeons faced with an usual surgery for the first time seek advice from surgeons w/success in that procedure. It’s not even unusual for the experienced surgeon to scrub in the day of surgery.
This case is the legal equivalent of life and death surgery, with only one shot to get it right. I’m glad Wood’s ego isn’t too big to seek help!
Onsdag
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2019
- Messages
- 546
- Reaction score
- 7,933
I would think there's enough circumstantial evidence of premeditated murder, even if the autopsy comes clean.
What about the wedding ring and wedding dress Lori was shopping around for while Tammy was still alive? The same wedding ring and dress seen in the photos of Chad and Lori's wedding just weeks after Tammy was gone? How about that Lori had these items bought, paid for, and shipped to her under her dead husband's name, Charles Vallow, and through his Amazon account, to a P.O. box in a different town than where she lived so that it couldn't immediately be linked to her?
How about the increase of Tammy's life insurance (motive?) by Chad shortly before she met her untimely death? How about the report from Charles that he discovered Lori was developing a relationship with Chad and sending him inappropriate dancing videos and using his (Charles') email to try hiding their relationship, all while they were still married? Or what about the fact that Lori tried to lock Charles out of his own life insurance policy so he couldn't alter it, naming her as the beneficiary, and then he too met an untimely and suspicious death shortly thereafter (I realize this isn't directly tied to Tammy's death, but it is most definitely related and shows a pattern of criminal behavior by the parties involved).
How about the witness account of Chad talking with them about Tammy dieing long before she ever did?
How about all the digital evidence we haven't even seen or heard about yet between the different parties involved?
I'm no attorney and claim no knowledge or experience in criminal law, but I'm fairly confident the DA and State has enough evidence to bring murder charges against Chad and Lori for Tammy's death, even without the autopsy. I mean they had enough suspicion and probable cause to get a judge to sign off on them digging Tammy's body up for a proper autopsy, and that was back in 2019.
Just one person's ignorant and biased opinion. Fwiw.
Last edited:
Colorado303
Verified Insider Watts Case
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2018
- Messages
- 2,719
- Reaction score
- 39,261
I completely agree they have enough evidence to bring charges. I just think a prosecutor might be less confident that every single member of a jury would agree Chad is guilty of killing Tammy beyond a reasonable doubt.
Defense would argue he’s guilty of the affair, but most adulterers don’t murder. And Lori undoubtedly had every intention of marrying Chad soon, as proven by the ring she ordered. But can it be proven that Chad approved of the ring purchase or even knew about it? I don’t know.
The DA might feel one or two jurors would find reasonable doubt if defense argues Lori (or Alex) killed Tammy, unbeknownst to Chad. And I imagine that possibility would undoubtedly be served up by most defense attorneys.
Onsdag
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2019
- Messages
- 546
- Reaction score
- 7,933
RSBM.
It can be proven that he greatly increased Tammy's life insurance shortly before she died. While this does happen innocently enough on occasion, I'm guessing more often than not such things happen for nefarious reasons. Taken together with everything else I mentioned above, well, I think a strong case could be made for premeditated murder.
Again, JMO.
ETA: Also, in regards to the ring, how could Lori pick out and purchase a ring perfectly sized for Chad's finger without him knowing something was going on? And did Lori do the proposing? Or was it like Chad said, a happy coincidence that they met each other in Hawaii and he proposed right then and there? Just wondering.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Oct 3, 2014
- Messages
- 2,978
- Reaction score
- 14,823
Agree with this. The people who don’t want daily updates can scroll.
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2016
- Messages
- 16,074
- Reaction score
- 154,735
I actually think that this whole, "We are bringing in a "Special Prosecutor" is to save face for Wood. He screwed up.
Daybell attorneys ask for removal of Idaho prosecutor, allege misconduct
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2015
- Messages
- 276
- Reaction score
- 2,549
I agree that there is enough circumstantial evidence for murder charges right now. This case is so bizzare with so many twists and turns that it caught the attention of millions. If this hadn't become such a media event, murder charges would have already been handed down and a trial already set or perhaps even taken place by now. It evolved and grew into what it is so it has to be handled correctly.
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2015
- Messages
- 2,806
- Reaction score
- 26,433
Hmmm. That is an interesting theory. Bailey probably was selected for his important job because he did not react to noises. JJ could have been bothered by the sound or have hardly seemed to hear it. I do not know, but someone who knew JJ might. Even if neither Bailey nor JJ support your theory, it does not mean your theory is not possible.
I do not think Bailey would "pass" his training if he were reactive to gun shots or other sudden loud noises. He was likely unfazed by the gunshot.
As for JJ and the gun shot, that is very JJ specific. My experience with autistic children is that they often have sensory differences, but the differences vary. Some over-react to various sensory input and some under-react. Some crave various kinds of sensory input and usually this is (in combination of not seeing the point of view of others, who might be making fun) what motivates behaviors that look strange. There might be a certain kind of sensation that each individual autistic person might over respond to, under-respond to, or crave.
It depends on JJ if the gun shot sound- apart from its meaning- would have been aversive, neutral or pleasant. If aversive, Bailey would have probably made it feel less aversive, if he was there. Some autistic kids can ignore a fire alarm, and would rather finish whatever they are doing than evacuate a building. Others run for the hills because of the sound of a fan in the distance that "hurts their ears" even when no one else noticed it.
It also depends on JJ's experience about what the gun shot means- separate from its sound. I don't think autism is a factor here. I do not think it is likely he did not know what a gun was, but I do think it was likely he had a young-white child-appropriate favorable view of guns. A gun shot may not have been as traumatic to him as it would be to me. I am old, and most of my life experience is in suburbs close to larger cities. When I hear a gun, I think homicide or police violence. But JJ probably associated guns with good guys and video games. JJ lived in areas where adults might have thought of guns as symbols of freedom, hunting or self-protection.
Unless JJ happened to be bothered by loud noises, the trauma of the morning was more likely the sudden change in plans. Suddenly changing his ride MAY have bothered him. However, Bailey (if he was there) and still stopping for his ritual breakfast would have helped ease the anxiety caused by the sudden change.
His school in AZ was private, right? I haven't seen references to Bailey attending. By the time he got to ID, Bailey was given back.
I don't know anything about the school and if they were asked and declined to allow Bailey to attend, If Bailey was there, or if Bailey waited for JJ at home and the school was not asked.
Colorado303
Verified Insider Watts Case
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2018
- Messages
- 2,719
- Reaction score
- 39,261
Just to be clear, I personally think Chad killed Tammy beyond any reasonable doubt. I was equally convinced OJ killed Nicole and Casey killed her daughter though. It just takes one juror .......
Onsdag
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2019
- Messages
- 546
- Reaction score
- 7,933
I know. I wasn't trying to be argumentative or anything. Just pointing out that there is a lot of circumstantial evidence that seems pretty damning. People can be convicted on circumstantial evidence. I'm thinking of the recent example of Donthe Lucas - Kelsie's body was never found and they only ever had circumstantial evidence, and yet a jury was able to be convinced enough on the evidence presented (mostly digital) that they passed a guilty verdict of murder. I believe there is even more circumstantial evidence in this case.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
Online statistics
- Members online
- 93
- Guests online
- 1,373
- Total visitors
- 1,466