Ohmeohmy
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2019
- Messages
- 1,266
- Reaction score
- 18,193
Does anyone have a theory as to why prosecution is having chad as a possible witness? This seems ridiculous to me, do they really think he won't take the 5th when questioned about lori and the kids I am by no.means a lawyer, but can't figure this out, unless they have something up their sleeve. Az lawyer any thoughts?I hope it's allowed to post a copy of the MSM video link to YT studio as that was the only place I could add the 'Morgan Loew interview 2 with Summer and Janis' on CBS.
Can we all agree this attorney is in over his head? MOO
You have to disclose all witnesses you may want to question at trial. It doesn’t matter if they are considered a hostile witness, you still have to disclose them per the rules of court. The defense will also list witnesses that are not necessarily favorable to them. JMODoes anyone have a theory as to why prosecution is having chad as a possible witness? This seems ridiculous to me, do they really think he won't take the 5th when questioned about lori and the kids I am by no.means a lawyer, but can't figure this out, unless they have something up their sleeve. Az lawyer any thoughts?
Yes but why even want to call him to begin with, I can't see him furthering their objective for probable cause, maybe it's just me but it makes no sense.You have to disclose all witnesses you may want to question at trial. It doesn’t matter if they are considered a hostile witness, you still have to disclose them per the rules of court. The defense will also list witnesses that are not necessarily favorable to them. JMO
Perhaps it's tactical, to nudge him into taking a stance, give him the opportunity to say what he knows about Lori's role now, so that if they ever find the children deceased and he is charged jointly with her, he is backed into a corner if he tries to pin it on her and didn't make disclosure in her trial. He would find it very hard to come back from taking the 5th and to justify not separating, and taking independent legal representation.Does anyone have a theory as to why prosecution is having chad as a possible witness? This seems ridiculous to me, do they really think he won't take the 5th when questioned about lori and the kids I am by no.means a lawyer, but can't figure this out, unless they have something up their sleeve. Az lawyer any thoughts?
That's interesting. In the deputy-AG affidavit in support of motion to quash page 1 it refers to the Tammy Daybell matter as a "conflict case".
I always wondered if there was a conflict, with the death having been signed off as non-suspicious. I wonder if that's what it means.
moo
This is so frustrating.
I just recorded the whole thing and the file is too big. Anyone have any ideas how I can share this?
You have to disclose all witnesses you may want to question at trial. It doesn’t matter if they are considered a hostile witness, you still have to disclose them per the rules of court. The defense will also list witnesses that are not necessarily favorable to them. JMO
Perhaps it's tactical, to nudge him into taking a stance, give him the opportunity to say what he knows about Lori's role now, so that if they ever find the children deceased and he is charged jointly with her, he is backed into a corner if he tries to pin it on her and didn't make disclosure in her trial. He would find it very hard to come back from taking the 5th and to justify not separating, and taking independent legal representation.
moo
Thank you for preserving this!I hope it's allowed to post a copy of the MSM video link to YT studio as that was the only place I could add the 'Morgan Loew interview 2 with Summer and Janis' on CBS.
Thank you for preserving this!
That makes sense, thanksDropbox and Google Drive are other places you can dump files and link here. Check with Mod though. That’s copyrighted media so might not be able to share it outside of the source location.
You can also list witnesses that you have no intention on calling. You can also depo them with no intention of calling. My lawyers have listed witnesses they never depo’ed or called and had no intention of doing so. They’ve also called witnesses without depo’ing them. It’s just part of overall strategy especially effective when the other side is chasing its tail about certain witnesses. Listing Chad is likely something along these lines.
And you are right, pleading the 5th doesn't look good at all, and human nature being what it is, it would be hard not to read something in to that.That makes sense, thanks
Yes but why even want to call him to begin with, I can't see him furthering their objective for probable cause, maybe it's just me but it makes no sense.
Then why cant they ask Chad, surely her husband would know where the kids are. Doesnt he say he does by saying they are safe or it will all come out in court. They are waiting for the end so this all goes away. Interesting and scarey that it was stated JJ has had past probations, it can be justified that if he died a 4.2 light he will come back even lighter. Jmoso basically... ‘we know nothing about her current BS but we believe her BS’???
so, you know nothing, then, basically?
Check check... No surprises here... but are you in for a world of hurt...
Lori Vallow Daybell's Sister Says Daybell 'Can't Tell Us' Where the Kids Are Because Jail Calls Are Recorded
Dropbox and Google Drive are other places you can dump files and link here. Check with Mod though. That’s copyrighted media so might not be able to share it outside of the source location.
You can also list witnesses that you have no intention on calling. You can also depo them with no intention of calling. My lawyers have listed witnesses they never depo’ed or called and had no intention of doing so. They’ve also called witnesses without depo’ing them. It’s just part of overall strategy especially effective when the other side is chasing its tail about certain witnesses. Listing Chad is likely something along these lines.
Since she lies as often as she breathes, I doubt she had any real grandparent in mind. She knew he wasn’t with any of his grandparents so she just lied and said grandma, knowing she wouldn’t get any pushback from the questioner.Trying to wrap my head around the "JJ went to live with Grandma"
JJ' paternal biological grandparents are Kay and Larry, I think. Maybe maternal? Either way JJ has the Woodcocks as grandparents and another unknown (to me) set of biological grandparents.
His adoptive maternal grandparents are Lori's parents, JC & BC. His adoptive paternal grandparents would be the parents of Charles (and Kay).
"Grandma" could be 4 different people, maybe more if some of those have multiple marriages.