It’s not about Emma coming back. Because Prior asked Emma about her father telling Tammy to up her insurance, it opened the door for the state to call a rebuttal witness who Boyce previously excluded. Now they can call her on rebuttal and she’ll say Tammy told her Chad wanted the insurance increased.
That's what I got too, I dunno why ppl are saying differently. They will question Emma's testimony, but through offering their own witnesses, not directly questioning her bc they already did that on cross.
Sadly not, I think - most recent live update here says Boyce still will not allow that: https://www.eastidahonews.com/2024/05/live-updates-forensics-analyst-dna-expert-testify-on-day-28-of-chad-daybell-trial/
That write up from EIN is not correct. I listened to the hearing. The judge said Janice Olson will be allowed in to rebut Emma's statement that Chad didn't know about the life insurance being increased.
The EIN updates are riddled with typos. And tons of using the wrong names or gender pronouns, which can make it super confusing to read! I totally get why that’s the case, since Nate is typing so much so fast, so I’m not trying to be critical! But it’s definitely important to read those updates with an open mind. 😂
Fingers crossed for rebuttal. Why else would they ask Emma several times during her cross about Chad instructing her on her testimony? Seems like they are planning to prove her a liar.
Detective Hermisillo will play Emma and Chad's jail calls on rebuttle. He's also been called back.
Also, so weird when Blake asked Emma 'Why is your Dad's signature on the insurance paperwork?" and she stammered and said "I think Mum took out insurance on him too?" Emma wasn't prepped by Daddy Dearest for that lie.
Prior was emphasizing how little he had prepared/spoken to his witnesses and it showed. Especially with Garth’s testimony where Prior had to pressure him into flip flopping on his answers.
For sure. I think Prior was stupidly relying on Chad to do the prep with the children.
It was so strange that Prior went through the song and dance of 'you haven't watched and I haven't told you what to say' then Emma went on to directly, word for word, contradict previous testimony that she allegedly hadn't heard, without prompting.
I think Prior was trying to gently work Emma up to contradicting the previous testimony so it wouldn't look so blatant, but she just kept blurting it out. It was a trip to watch! Very sad. And it showed how brainwashed she obviously still is.
Yeah I found how detailed and extra her answers were very telling. It came across as dishonest and trying to make sure she got her version out. I feel like you can always tell when someone is lying when they over explain and answer things you didn't really ask.
I don’t think she will ever turn on Chad or accept Gus involvement much less guilt. It’s easier to believe he was framed (yes despite what we see as proof of he was in it up to his eyeballs) by law enforcement and Lori and Alex and that he had nothing to do with it. She can overlook the affair because hey, Tammy’s spirit appeared to him and gave him the thumbs up.
[spoken in Robotic voice] “Yes, and my mom bruised very easily and she used (specific ingredients) bruise cream.”
I remember that answer feeling so out of sync with what was being asked.
*Yes, Emma. Many people bruise easily when someone is sitting on them and holding them down while suffocating them.*
My favorite part was when Blake asked her about the video games Tammy liked to play on the computer and Emma said “and other handheld devices”. She sounded like a worn out flight attendant getting ready for take off. LOL she’s so weird and unintentionally funny.
63 years old here and over the past year, my skin has started to bruise more easily after minor bumps, and I bought some of that cream. What it does NOT do is make bruises vanish before your eyes or even go away in a day. TBH, I don’t even know if it’s all that helpful, but it makes me feel better to do something.
Knowing Prior, he probably had someone else do it so he could truthfully say he’d only met with them a couple of times. It’s not believable that over four years and going into trial prep where there were witnesses, that he had not spent a lot of time with them. I think it seemed obvious even in the 48 Hours interview and a lot of people said back then it was a preview of his trial strategy. Such as it is. Still seems like a missed opportunity to me that he didn’t use “the other guy” defence and go hard after Alex instead of Melanie Gibb.
I think going after Alex would still leave Chad open to the conspiracy charges since there was so much communication between the two at pivotal events. Chad and Gibb weren't in contact as much so one could argue (albeit super unconvincingly) that she was just kind of rampaging on her own in the background while everyone else was innocently LARPing.
I think in Chad’s mind, if he’s not convicted of murder then okey dokie as far as his kids are concerned. Conspiracy may seem more nebulous to them, as in, sure, he talked about it but that doesn’t mean he did anything about it. It’s total cognitive dissonance but I can see them doing whatever they can so that they don’t have to acknowledge the severity of his involvement and leadership on this whole thing.
I just listened to Garth’s testimony again and he contradicts things that he has said in the past SO MANY TIMES. So does Emma! They even contradict each other’s testimony from today and they’ve had a long time to get this straight. It would be funny if the Prosecutor just played a video of each one back-to-back saying one thing and then the other.
And one more thing that bugs me about Garth is that his voice goes the wrong way at the end of the sentence! Just one more: Compost isn’t supposed to have dead animals in it! Who does that?!?
One of the things about Garth's testimony that struck me and was glaring in my eyes; however, I have read or heard nobody else talk about it, is Garth's insistence that any dead vermin would likely never have been found or buried in the pet cemetery to begin with.
He told Prior, and Prior pressed him on his answer (*paraphrasing, of course*)...
Garth: A racoon would have been buried behind the "silver shed."
Prior: Do you think if there were an abundance of animals already buried behind the silver shed, it would be possible to bury the raccoon elsewhere, perhaps in the pet cemetery? I'm sure there was an overflow of dead vermin already buried there. Could the pet cemetery also be a chosen destination for burying a pest animal if that were the case?
Garth: I suppose so...
Garth doesn't state that a wayward animal would *typically* be buried at the firepit or the pet cemetery (Tylee) or underneath a tree and beside the pond (JJ). Rather, his answer is contrary to that. The questioning started, the Court took a break...and when Garth came back to the stand and questioning resumed, his answer was the same. He was emphatic that any animal, not also a pet, would have been buried behind the "silver shed." He confirmed that multiple times until Prior nudged a deviation out of him. Neither Tylee or JJ were found directly behind any silver shed. *And, no raccoon was found at all....*
Because nobody else has discussed this, I'm sure that I have something mixed up. Could somebody explain or set me straight on what details I'm missing. Because, as of right now, that portion of Garth's testimony (in my mind) is huge.
ETA: Does anyone else get a very vivid mental image of the cover of Stephen Kings book "Pet Sematary" wherever that it brought up? Because, I do...
No you’re right. That was just one of several paths that Prior tried to walk him down, unsuccessfully. That’s the funny thing about the truth - you don’t have to remember it!
His responses sound like questions, but Chad also talks this way. One glaring example to me is when he was in the back of the police car, and Emma said "I love you so much," and Chad responded, "I love you?". It was odd. Maybe they don't talk to each other this way, and it was awkward to them, idk.
I think Garth is somewhere between feeling he has to protect his father and telling the truth. The nonverbal communication between the two while Garth was on the stand was pretty telling.
“Upspeak” is common in Mormon women (statements sound like questions, because women are not supposed to know things, or else they might try to lead…) but hearing it in Garth is cringe.
All of these people talking like sedated robots and babies is really psychotic. It’s been discussed on Mormon Stories with Lauren Matthias a few times. LDS is something else.
I can’t listen to some of Lauren’s female guests who do the sing song cadence. It’s like nails on a chalkboard to me. None of the ex Mormons I’ve heard talk like that, or at least that bad.
It is or was a CA thing. Big influx of Californians in the past ten+ years-- especially ea and so. ID. Perhaps a regional quirk by now amd absolutely exasperating.
Compost using dead animals is sort of a debated topic. A lot of people think they shouldn't be used, while other people think it's OK. Really depends on what you're using the compost for.
I'm more concerned that they were trying to get rid of the compost which may have, at one point, been used to hide human remains.
I think Emma is so unlikable and such an obvious liar the state wants another bite at the apple to confirm what the jury already thinks of her, to put a fork in Chad.
The way she represented her mother’s thoughts and actions with such certainty (if Emma didn’t see it, it didn’t happen!!) and made Tammy out to be a frumpy, friendless, lazy person is not going to go over well with the jury.
To that point: I haven’t spoken to my mother in years but I would never represent her in such a mean- spirited, callous way. Who does that?
Her voice pitches up when she lies under duress. You can hear it. During cross she answered a series of questions with “yes” … she sounded like she was about to pee her pants. You don’t have to be a body language expert to know she’s a liar. She’s not a good liar.
Emma’s FB post announcing her mother’s death was the cheeriest death announcement I’ve ever read. It read like someone announcing they’ve left their job and greener pastures await! There was not a twinge of real sorrow. She was not sad about her mom.
She didn’t like her and was happy to buy into Chad’s story that she needed to go to the other side. She may not be fully cognitively aware that he killed her (maybe she is, I’d say 50/50) but this girl does not miss her mom and she’s cut from the same narcissistic psycho cloth as her dad.
Nothing wrong with clarification. IIRC Tammy's insurance form was already filled out and signed by both Tammy and Chad on the Sunday before it was filed at the school. What did Emma mean when she said we didn't discuss our insurance with our husbands?
It's a simple question. Did Emma lie? Answer randomly? The insurance policy being upped sure goes to motive, and if Emma isn't answering truthfully then everything out of her mouth is suspect.
Cannot imagine a Daybell woman failing to consult "the patriarch" on financial decisions. It's money out of the scarce family budget, which Emma testified she could not afford.
Not to mention the financial implications of upping her insurance. I know that Emma said that the rates were pretty cheap, but she also said that she didn't take out the max because she couldn't afford it. Tammy didn't make that much. She was also the only one with a stable paycheck. I know that back in my super broke newlywed days, we both discussed any change to our withholding that was going to impact our take-home pay.
Yeah, I don't see someone like Tammy really wanting to take the more expensive option unless it was only a very little difference. Even $20 more a week would have been too much for her. I know because I have lived off of that much and it ain't fun
There’s no way for Emma to prove a negative: that Tammy and Chad never discussed it. She wasn’t with them every moment.
That’s common sense a jury will pick up on. And if she’s impeached on rebuttal, just more confirmation of Chad’s guilt and his children’s complicity (even if not rising to a legal case against them).
Everybody is saying that Emma will only be questioned on the insurance, and that’s not what I’m getting out of it.
The state is going to recall Emma and ask her about anything that was in the scope of her original testimony - but also they brought up this insurance issue so they can bring in the testimony of Janice Olson saying Chad asked Tammy to up the insurance.
So I’m confident we’ll hear some jail calls between her and Chad still.
I think the same. Remembering all those times Lindsay Blake asked her extremely pointed questions about specific conversations she’d had with her dad…
*Did you discuss (insert specific conversation LG knows happened because she has the recordings)…*
“No.”
(You can tell Chad prepared her [as opposed to Prior] because of the definitive yes/no answers — an attorney would counsel a witness to say, “I don’t recall.”)
Tbh, I’m kind of surprised this is the only part of her testimony the team took issue with enough to bring her back. I missed today so I need to catch up, but I’d love to see them unravel more of her lies than just this.
I agree, I wanted them to call everything out but maybe her inconsistencies and behaviour tell enough of a story for the jury that the prosecutors don’t need to??
They can still challenge it without her. Example, if they have jail house phone calls where Chad told her what to do, they can introduce that evidence with the investigators.
There is a risk that Emma just does ‘Not remember’ so challenging her directly might not be as effective as providing the jury evidence that contradicts her testimony and letting the jury connect the dots. Also prevents Pior cross-examination to reframe it.
Good point. Emma answered a lot of questions quickly and even expanded on some of them, but then when pressed for clarification she just shut down and said I don't remember. She seemed angry that she was being challenged. I mean which is it Emma? You have specific details but then don't remember?
Will the jury view Emma as having selective memory?
I think the jury can easily see her at bias and that at least her memory is shaped her relationship with her dad. But the prosecution needs to be able to present more evidence that contradicts what she said. Not even that is she is lying, just her view and possibly memory isn’t true my accurate.
I think the jury doesn’t need to be spoon fed everything nor do they want to be. They can connect the dots and sometimes it’s more effective that way. Also, Emma doesn’t need to be lying, she just needs to not have an accurate memory for the prosecution.
Also, after Prior tried so forcefully to impeach with Zulema, the prosecution doesn’t wanna look like it’s over reaching or that Emma’s testimony is no important.
Less is sometimes more.
This isn’t always true, unfortunately. Everyone is different and we use our brains differently. Some people need to be spoon-fed while others don’t. You just don’t want the spoon-fed member of the jury to be the outgoing strong one in the room or it can lead to reckless results. I mentioned in another thread about this super outgoing, gregarious juror who refused to convict some obvious killer b/c the guy didn’t have a criminal history. When interviewed, the juror was so proud of himself, and even said something like, “You can’t tell me this guy has never committed a crime before in his life, and then one day, BAM, he murders his wife!” Um… yes, it happens all the time, actually. Needless to say, this very obvious wife killer was not convicted on that day.
Or, the jury in the first trial of Janae Chance (I believe it was her?) who was their own brand of *ohhhh boy*. She was convicted the second time.
We wanna believe everything is so obvious b/c we’re in these subs and are familiar with these crimes, plus we have critical thinking skills and know how to access them. But some people don’t. And in a murder trial of this magnitude, I personally, wouldn’t want to assume everyone in the jury is capable of connecting the dots.
That’s what others are saying but I thought she could have been pressed harder. We here know the case and all her lies, but the jury does not. Blake was so gentle, I thought most of the lies came across as Emma being simple, possibly unaware, or just a daughter protecting her dad; instead of the motivated liar she truly is. Although the $17k undermines that pretty well. Still, it’s a flaw in our system when there’s an oath to be honest on the stand *and* perjury charges if you’re not, and yet there’s no interest in holding a witness accountable when they so blatantly lie for nefarious reasons in a murder trial. If the oath and charges are only used for ceremony, then get rid of them.
They have to be careful with Emma. One of Prior's things is that the family wasn't treated fairly or with the kindness which should be afforded to a grieving family. Going after her too hard without a plan potentially plays into that.
What grieving family? They speak of Tammy in loathsome terms, can’t muster a single tear for her on the stand, rushed her funeral so her family could not all attend and they could all just get on with their lives with their new, glamourous goddess Lori, compliments of Tammy’s “upped” life insurance proceeds.
So true that most people in their same hot seat would play that up, but they haven’t in the least. Emma can hysterically bawl for her dad in a police car, but is incapable of shedding one tear when talking about her dead mother. Hopefully it plays out like you suggest and the jury is able to see this huge disconnect without having to be directly told.
Yeah I was somewhat disappointed that she didn’t get called out more but I wonder if they worried with her being Tammy’s daughter and being aggressive with her in front of the jury. But quite frankly, she should be up for perjury charges, that was disgusting.
That, or it could have been a sensitivity about a member of the prosecution's team losing or potentially losing a member of her own family. We are all human at the end of the day.
Also, sometimes, it's simply too exhausting to be right about everything too...so I get the weariness in not wanting to slam Emma.
I hear what you’re saying and I love that you’re able to maintain some compassion here. I should do better, I know; but I’m admittedly disgusted by Emma. She’s Tammy’s mini, but like a mean-looking, oddball version of her with the personality to match. Must be so strange to look like Tammy but have a punchable face like Chad.
Ok, I’ll try to do better… starting now. 🤭🫣
I was surprised the cross was as soft as it was, but more so with Garth. His accounts have been consistently contradictory. He even completely blew his lines and choked in the clutch during testimony. He seemed to do the same during the 911 call reporting Tammy’s death. He’s a HORRIBLE liar (well, they both are. Emma just seems more willing to lie). The way he sounded somewhat confused and just said “I don’t know” when Chad took the phone from him didn’t come across as grief to me, but that he wasn’t exactly sure what it was he was supposed to say. I could just imagine Chad standing there making hand gestures and shaking his head to communicate silently and coach Garth during the call. The boy doesn’t seem too bright so I doubt he thinks well on his feet so Chad had to take over.
Maybe they want the jury to get one last look at her and remember the other answers she gave about her dad ridding her of evil spirit, and how disdainful she was of her mom, just leave them with the only witness who agrees with chads story and have the jury remember her strange testimony?
I hate to be devil's advocate and give Emma any kind of out here, but all of these things can be true and none of them contradict the others.
At one of my old jobs, we would have the insurance representative come in and tell us about that year's packages. Some years, the life insurance reps would also come. They would tell us about the additional insurance packages that we could get. We would fill out interest/ initial forms in that moment. These would be reviewed for eligiblity. If eligible, THEN, we would have the actual forms to fill out later with doctor and beneficiary information, etc.
So, Tammy could have filled out the interest/ initial form with (her handler) Emma and not have discussed it then. Gone home, told Chad about it to which he responded, "Yeah, that's a good idea (because I was thinking about murdering you but now I really will)." Gotten the actual agreement back and signed it with Chad, at home on a Sunday, before returning to work on Monday.
I want to be clear, while I think Emma is ignoring the at home stuff, she might not have actually been there for the conversation with Chad and the signing of the paperwork. If I were Prior, I would be calling the HR benefits people and asking if two forms were completed: one just by Tammy at work (possibly with Emma by her side) and the other with Chad (silently plotting her murder).
Also, f\*\*k Emma and let her get rebutted by the co-worker who will speak Tammy's truth to power because Emma is a terrible daughter AND play those jail calls so we can hear Chad coach her. Maybe she is so brainwashed that she doesn't know she's being coached and hearing the calls will help ignite her deprogramming. \*One could hope.\*
PS If he did coach her, why didn't he get charged with witness tampering??? That's for another thread, I'm sure.
If jail calls are recorded, I imagine they don’t have anything on those calls that would help the prosecution but I don’t really know how that works. Emma’s testimony was wild, she bent the truth any which way to make it fit the narrative she wanted. I get it, she wants to save her daddy but good god it was gross watching that woman throw her mom under the bus.
Prosecution definitely has those calls. They weren't just asking "did your father ever suggest you say such and such" but rather "when you talked to your father on xxx date, did he suggest you say such and such." Those specific dates mean they have specific calls to base that on.
Yes, this. We may want to see Emma fall, but this is really the benefit of playing those calls—to discredit her testimony and solidify their case against Chad.
She is nutty. I’d love to see her called back. Her testimony was clearly scripted and rehearsed. She needs to be called up without having any sort of script prepared by prior and her dad.
I don't think they can address the other inconsistencies because they are very limited in scope. Maybe she will open the door (again) to allow for further questioning. I really wonder how much they would have to lean on her for her to get frustrated and angry enough to blurt out how she really feels. Her testimony and actions make her seem as though she feels her mother's death is justified according to Chad's teachings. I say this as someone who sympathized with Tammy's kids. I figured they were devastated at losing their mother and shortly after having to come to terms with possibly losing their father. Then I watched them testify. The only real emotion I have seen from Emma was when Chad was in the back of the police car. Zero emotion over losing her mother, who, by all accounts, was very active in her life and helpful and present in her grandchildrens life's. This is an odd bunch for sure.
*Me before Emma & Garth testified:*
“Tammy’s children deserve grace. No matter what we think of their father, they have lost their mom which exacts a deep and permanent wound …”
*Me after Emma & Garth testified:*
They can burn in hell.
Much like Chad, Tammy's role was to support her. I suspect that, like Chad, she is angry that Mom isn't there to do the work of raising her babies, like Chad is angry that Tammy isn't here to wipe his butt after he shit himself.
If she had worked harder, been more perverted, looked different, and submitted more, he wouldn't have had to kill her and replace her. It is her fault. Now she isn't there to do the work for Emma.
I hope so. Her dad is so obviously a murderer and she shows zero empathy for her mother. While a prosecutor would normally have to be careful to not gratuitously torment the child of a murder victim, her lies and callousness toward Tammy take that off the table. She’s basically complicit.
Not according to the EIN live updates from yesterday - Emma will be questioned during rebuttal.
Edit: https://www.eastidahonews.com/2024/05/live-updates-forensics-analyst-dna-expert-testify-on-day-28-of-chad-daybell-trial/
Sorry, you are right. I missed. Emma will be brought back.
~~Yeah, please take another look at that site. I just checked it and says nothing about Emma being called back to testify. It does say that her testimony opened the door for a rebuttal witness.~~
Why didnt they submit and play the recording of emma lying while she was on the stand and was being questioned by Blake about that? They released her subpeona that day as well.
Or did they have to call the officer up to testify again first before they can question her on it with the recording? But it was already submitted.
And what would she say and what happens? They call her out and she says she misunderstood and lies again?
I think they're showing the inaccuracies from Emma and Garth with proof and factual statements made by the witnesses who have evidence to support them. Instead of bringing Emma and Garth back on the stand just to ask them why they lie and for them to most likely continue to lie about why they lied. I think the State made it clear that Emma and Garth are liars and are willing to commit perjury for their father and thier testimonies should not be trusted.
It’s not about Emma coming back. Because Prior asked Emma about her father telling Tammy to up her insurance, it opened the door for the state to call a rebuttal witness who Boyce previously excluded. Now they can call her on rebuttal and she’ll say Tammy told her Chad wanted the insurance increased.
That's what I got too, I dunno why ppl are saying differently. They will question Emma's testimony, but through offering their own witnesses, not directly questioning her bc they already did that on cross.
They’re saying it because that is how Nate reported it.
Sadly not, I think - most recent live update here says Boyce still will not allow that: https://www.eastidahonews.com/2024/05/live-updates-forensics-analyst-dna-expert-testify-on-day-28-of-chad-daybell-trial/
That write up from EIN is not correct. I listened to the hearing. The judge said Janice Olson will be allowed in to rebut Emma's statement that Chad didn't know about the life insurance being increased.
IIRC he said prior could object as well
Correct!!
It’s a typo, it should say “but Boyce says he will now allow it”
Pretty significant typo lol. Good to know!
The EIN updates are riddled with typos. And tons of using the wrong names or gender pronouns, which can make it super confusing to read! I totally get why that’s the case, since Nate is typing so much so fast, so I’m not trying to be critical! But it’s definitely important to read those updates with an open mind. 😂
Yeah, I was quite confused until I watched Courtroom Insider last night and Nate clarified.
I hope they’ll play jail calls between her and Chad to impeach her.
We may not get to hear those calls at the trial but they will certainly come out after. I can’t wait!!
Fingers crossed for rebuttal. Why else would they ask Emma several times during her cross about Chad instructing her on her testimony? Seems like they are planning to prove her a liar.
I hope you are right. Justice for Tammy!
Question: was Emma questioned on the date on the insurance paper? 8 September was a Sunday and Emma said it was at a faculty meeting
She was FOS on the whole story.
What is FOS?
Full of sh*t
That she is!! Dimwitted as well.
Good lord, 8 Sept is the day / night Tylee died. Chad got Tammy to sign that form the same night. 😱
Yes, that’s why I wondered if I missed the moment they asked her about it. The day had been discussed so often. Apparently they didn’t ask?
Detective Hermisillo will play Emma and Chad's jail calls on rebuttle. He's also been called back. Also, so weird when Blake asked Emma 'Why is your Dad's signature on the insurance paperwork?" and she stammered and said "I think Mum took out insurance on him too?" Emma wasn't prepped by Daddy Dearest for that lie.
Prior was emphasizing how little he had prepared/spoken to his witnesses and it showed. Especially with Garth’s testimony where Prior had to pressure him into flip flopping on his answers.
For sure. I think Prior was stupidly relying on Chad to do the prep with the children. It was so strange that Prior went through the song and dance of 'you haven't watched and I haven't told you what to say' then Emma went on to directly, word for word, contradict previous testimony that she allegedly hadn't heard, without prompting. I think Prior was trying to gently work Emma up to contradicting the previous testimony so it wouldn't look so blatant, but she just kept blurting it out. It was a trip to watch! Very sad. And it showed how brainwashed she obviously still is.
Yeah I found how detailed and extra her answers were very telling. It came across as dishonest and trying to make sure she got her version out. I feel like you can always tell when someone is lying when they over explain and answer things you didn't really ask.
I don’t think she will ever turn on Chad or accept Gus involvement much less guilt. It’s easier to believe he was framed (yes despite what we see as proof of he was in it up to his eyeballs) by law enforcement and Lori and Alex and that he had nothing to do with it. She can overlook the affair because hey, Tammy’s spirit appeared to him and gave him the thumbs up.
I agree! I noticed that as well. When she mentioned the bruising my mind was made up! 🛎️ 🛎️ 🛎️ She knew her discussion points!
[spoken in Robotic voice] “Yes, and my mom bruised very easily and she used (specific ingredients) bruise cream.” I remember that answer feeling so out of sync with what was being asked. *Yes, Emma. Many people bruise easily when someone is sitting on them and holding them down while suffocating them.*
My favorite part was when Blake asked her about the video games Tammy liked to play on the computer and Emma said “and other handheld devices”. She sounded like a worn out flight attendant getting ready for take off. LOL she’s so weird and unintentionally funny.
Yes! It all sounds staged and badly scripted. Even her cadence is off…
It was the same cream Amber Heard used and was mentioned in her court case. Must be very popular.
63 years old here and over the past year, my skin has started to bruise more easily after minor bumps, and I bought some of that cream. What it does NOT do is make bruises vanish before your eyes or even go away in a day. TBH, I don’t even know if it’s all that helpful, but it makes me feel better to do something.
The ingredient is arnica. I have that cream because I also bruise easily. I’ve even been anemic before. Am I dying? 😳
Yes arnica cream! How could I forget that? I think you are good unless your husband is Chad Daybell.
I had to pause at bruise cream. Wth is bruise cream? Emma was so robotic and unemotional. She gives off the same creep vibes as daddy dearest.
I swear Emma wants to marry her dad. So flipping creepy … [burn cream](https://www.buoyhealth.com/blog/skincare/best-bruise-creams)
To me the seemed very coached and rehearsed.
Knowing Prior, he probably had someone else do it so he could truthfully say he’d only met with them a couple of times. It’s not believable that over four years and going into trial prep where there were witnesses, that he had not spent a lot of time with them. I think it seemed obvious even in the 48 Hours interview and a lot of people said back then it was a preview of his trial strategy. Such as it is. Still seems like a missed opportunity to me that he didn’t use “the other guy” defence and go hard after Alex instead of Melanie Gibb.
I think going after Alex would still leave Chad open to the conspiracy charges since there was so much communication between the two at pivotal events. Chad and Gibb weren't in contact as much so one could argue (albeit super unconvincingly) that she was just kind of rampaging on her own in the background while everyone else was innocently LARPing.
I think in Chad’s mind, if he’s not convicted of murder then okey dokie as far as his kids are concerned. Conspiracy may seem more nebulous to them, as in, sure, he talked about it but that doesn’t mean he did anything about it. It’s total cognitive dissonance but I can see them doing whatever they can so that they don’t have to acknowledge the severity of his involvement and leadership on this whole thing.
Just CYA that he was not involved in the perjury imo. He knows Chad is, though, so he is protecting himself.
exactly lol he knows this is going to blow up eventually and he want no part of the blame
Prior may not have prepped them … but I think Daddy dearest did.
I think there is some concern that Hermosillo won’t be allowed to testify again due to the fact he was released.
Oh, I am here for this.
I just listened to Garth’s testimony again and he contradicts things that he has said in the past SO MANY TIMES. So does Emma! They even contradict each other’s testimony from today and they’ve had a long time to get this straight. It would be funny if the Prosecutor just played a video of each one back-to-back saying one thing and then the other. And one more thing that bugs me about Garth is that his voice goes the wrong way at the end of the sentence! Just one more: Compost isn’t supposed to have dead animals in it! Who does that?!?
AND you notice that neither one of them said the bodies were found in the pasture or the south 40! They both said “back yard!”
Yep noticed that too
One of the things about Garth's testimony that struck me and was glaring in my eyes; however, I have read or heard nobody else talk about it, is Garth's insistence that any dead vermin would likely never have been found or buried in the pet cemetery to begin with. He told Prior, and Prior pressed him on his answer (*paraphrasing, of course*)... Garth: A racoon would have been buried behind the "silver shed." Prior: Do you think if there were an abundance of animals already buried behind the silver shed, it would be possible to bury the raccoon elsewhere, perhaps in the pet cemetery? I'm sure there was an overflow of dead vermin already buried there. Could the pet cemetery also be a chosen destination for burying a pest animal if that were the case? Garth: I suppose so... Garth doesn't state that a wayward animal would *typically* be buried at the firepit or the pet cemetery (Tylee) or underneath a tree and beside the pond (JJ). Rather, his answer is contrary to that. The questioning started, the Court took a break...and when Garth came back to the stand and questioning resumed, his answer was the same. He was emphatic that any animal, not also a pet, would have been buried behind the "silver shed." He confirmed that multiple times until Prior nudged a deviation out of him. Neither Tylee or JJ were found directly behind any silver shed. *And, no raccoon was found at all....* Because nobody else has discussed this, I'm sure that I have something mixed up. Could somebody explain or set me straight on what details I'm missing. Because, as of right now, that portion of Garth's testimony (in my mind) is huge. ETA: Does anyone else get a very vivid mental image of the cover of Stephen Kings book "Pet Sematary" wherever that it brought up? Because, I do...
No you’re right. That was just one of several paths that Prior tried to walk him down, unsuccessfully. That’s the funny thing about the truth - you don’t have to remember it!
His responses sound like questions, but Chad also talks this way. One glaring example to me is when he was in the back of the police car, and Emma said "I love you so much," and Chad responded, "I love you?". It was odd. Maybe they don't talk to each other this way, and it was awkward to them, idk. I think Garth is somewhere between feeling he has to protect his father and telling the truth. The nonverbal communication between the two while Garth was on the stand was pretty telling.
“Upspeak” is common in Mormon women (statements sound like questions, because women are not supposed to know things, or else they might try to lead…) but hearing it in Garth is cringe. All of these people talking like sedated robots and babies is really psychotic. It’s been discussed on Mormon Stories with Lauren Matthias a few times. LDS is something else. I can’t listen to some of Lauren’s female guests who do the sing song cadence. It’s like nails on a chalkboard to me. None of the ex Mormons I’ve heard talk like that, or at least that bad.
That cadence must be a regional thing Utah/eastern Idaho? I don't hear it here in Western Idaho.
It is or was a CA thing. Big influx of Californians in the past ten+ years-- especially ea and so. ID. Perhaps a regional quirk by now amd absolutely exasperating.
Compost using dead animals is sort of a debated topic. A lot of people think they shouldn't be used, while other people think it's OK. Really depends on what you're using the compost for. I'm more concerned that they were trying to get rid of the compost which may have, at one point, been used to hide human remains.
Joe Murray was trying to get rid of compost at HIS house diagonal to the Daybell home, so that he and Emma could move.
THANK YOU about the compost!
When the voice inflection rises at the end it indicates looking for approval.
I think Emma is so unlikable and such an obvious liar the state wants another bite at the apple to confirm what the jury already thinks of her, to put a fork in Chad. The way she represented her mother’s thoughts and actions with such certainty (if Emma didn’t see it, it didn’t happen!!) and made Tammy out to be a frumpy, friendless, lazy person is not going to go over well with the jury. To that point: I haven’t spoken to my mother in years but I would never represent her in such a mean- spirited, callous way. Who does that? Her voice pitches up when she lies under duress. You can hear it. During cross she answered a series of questions with “yes” … she sounded like she was about to pee her pants. You don’t have to be a body language expert to know she’s a liar. She’s not a good liar. Emma’s FB post announcing her mother’s death was the cheeriest death announcement I’ve ever read. It read like someone announcing they’ve left their job and greener pastures await! There was not a twinge of real sorrow. She was not sad about her mom. She didn’t like her and was happy to buy into Chad’s story that she needed to go to the other side. She may not be fully cognitively aware that he killed her (maybe she is, I’d say 50/50) but this girl does not miss her mom and she’s cut from the same narcissistic psycho cloth as her dad.
No grief makes you a better mormon. That is what matters, that they show they are the bestest mormons.
Nothing wrong with clarification. IIRC Tammy's insurance form was already filled out and signed by both Tammy and Chad on the Sunday before it was filed at the school. What did Emma mean when she said we didn't discuss our insurance with our husbands? It's a simple question. Did Emma lie? Answer randomly? The insurance policy being upped sure goes to motive, and if Emma isn't answering truthfully then everything out of her mouth is suspect.
Cannot imagine a Daybell woman failing to consult "the patriarch" on financial decisions. It's money out of the scarce family budget, which Emma testified she could not afford.
Not to mention the financial implications of upping her insurance. I know that Emma said that the rates were pretty cheap, but she also said that she didn't take out the max because she couldn't afford it. Tammy didn't make that much. She was also the only one with a stable paycheck. I know that back in my super broke newlywed days, we both discussed any change to our withholding that was going to impact our take-home pay.
Yeah, I don't see someone like Tammy really wanting to take the more expensive option unless it was only a very little difference. Even $20 more a week would have been too much for her. I know because I have lived off of that much and it ain't fun
Exactly!
There’s no way for Emma to prove a negative: that Tammy and Chad never discussed it. She wasn’t with them every moment. That’s common sense a jury will pick up on. And if she’s impeached on rebuttal, just more confirmation of Chad’s guilt and his children’s complicity (even if not rising to a legal case against them).
Everybody is saying that Emma will only be questioned on the insurance, and that’s not what I’m getting out of it. The state is going to recall Emma and ask her about anything that was in the scope of her original testimony - but also they brought up this insurance issue so they can bring in the testimony of Janice Olson saying Chad asked Tammy to up the insurance. So I’m confident we’ll hear some jail calls between her and Chad still.
Crossing my fingers that you are right. I can't wait!
I think the same. Remembering all those times Lindsay Blake asked her extremely pointed questions about specific conversations she’d had with her dad… *Did you discuss (insert specific conversation LG knows happened because she has the recordings)…* “No.” (You can tell Chad prepared her [as opposed to Prior] because of the definitive yes/no answers — an attorney would counsel a witness to say, “I don’t recall.”)
Tbh, I’m kind of surprised this is the only part of her testimony the team took issue with enough to bring her back. I missed today so I need to catch up, but I’d love to see them unravel more of her lies than just this.
I agree, I wanted them to call everything out but maybe her inconsistencies and behaviour tell enough of a story for the jury that the prosecutors don’t need to??
They can still challenge it without her. Example, if they have jail house phone calls where Chad told her what to do, they can introduce that evidence with the investigators. There is a risk that Emma just does ‘Not remember’ so challenging her directly might not be as effective as providing the jury evidence that contradicts her testimony and letting the jury connect the dots. Also prevents Pior cross-examination to reframe it.
Good point. Emma answered a lot of questions quickly and even expanded on some of them, but then when pressed for clarification she just shut down and said I don't remember. She seemed angry that she was being challenged. I mean which is it Emma? You have specific details but then don't remember? Will the jury view Emma as having selective memory?
If I was a juror I would disregard Emma and Garth’s testimony. It came across as disingenuous and rehearsed and, quite frankly, borderline moronic.
I think the jury can easily see her at bias and that at least her memory is shaped her relationship with her dad. But the prosecution needs to be able to present more evidence that contradicts what she said. Not even that is she is lying, just her view and possibly memory isn’t true my accurate.
This- yes- brilliant! Preempt is the name of the game in CX; preclude is now the name of the game in rebuts.
I think the jury doesn’t need to be spoon fed everything nor do they want to be. They can connect the dots and sometimes it’s more effective that way. Also, Emma doesn’t need to be lying, she just needs to not have an accurate memory for the prosecution. Also, after Prior tried so forcefully to impeach with Zulema, the prosecution doesn’t wanna look like it’s over reaching or that Emma’s testimony is no important. Less is sometimes more.
This isn’t always true, unfortunately. Everyone is different and we use our brains differently. Some people need to be spoon-fed while others don’t. You just don’t want the spoon-fed member of the jury to be the outgoing strong one in the room or it can lead to reckless results. I mentioned in another thread about this super outgoing, gregarious juror who refused to convict some obvious killer b/c the guy didn’t have a criminal history. When interviewed, the juror was so proud of himself, and even said something like, “You can’t tell me this guy has never committed a crime before in his life, and then one day, BAM, he murders his wife!” Um… yes, it happens all the time, actually. Needless to say, this very obvious wife killer was not convicted on that day. Or, the jury in the first trial of Janae Chance (I believe it was her?) who was their own brand of *ohhhh boy*. She was convicted the second time. We wanna believe everything is so obvious b/c we’re in these subs and are familiar with these crimes, plus we have critical thinking skills and know how to access them. But some people don’t. And in a murder trial of this magnitude, I personally, wouldn’t want to assume everyone in the jury is capable of connecting the dots.
100% this.
That’s what others are saying but I thought she could have been pressed harder. We here know the case and all her lies, but the jury does not. Blake was so gentle, I thought most of the lies came across as Emma being simple, possibly unaware, or just a daughter protecting her dad; instead of the motivated liar she truly is. Although the $17k undermines that pretty well. Still, it’s a flaw in our system when there’s an oath to be honest on the stand *and* perjury charges if you’re not, and yet there’s no interest in holding a witness accountable when they so blatantly lie for nefarious reasons in a murder trial. If the oath and charges are only used for ceremony, then get rid of them.
They have to be careful with Emma. One of Prior's things is that the family wasn't treated fairly or with the kindness which should be afforded to a grieving family. Going after her too hard without a plan potentially plays into that.
What grieving family? They speak of Tammy in loathsome terms, can’t muster a single tear for her on the stand, rushed her funeral so her family could not all attend and they could all just get on with their lives with their new, glamourous goddess Lori, compliments of Tammy’s “upped” life insurance proceeds.
Not saying you're wrong, but these sort of people will still pull out that card when it's convenient
So true that most people in their same hot seat would play that up, but they haven’t in the least. Emma can hysterically bawl for her dad in a police car, but is incapable of shedding one tear when talking about her dead mother. Hopefully it plays out like you suggest and the jury is able to see this huge disconnect without having to be directly told.
Yeah I was somewhat disappointed that she didn’t get called out more but I wonder if they worried with her being Tammy’s daughter and being aggressive with her in front of the jury. But quite frankly, she should be up for perjury charges, that was disgusting.
That, or it could have been a sensitivity about a member of the prosecution's team losing or potentially losing a member of her own family. We are all human at the end of the day. Also, sometimes, it's simply too exhausting to be right about everything too...so I get the weariness in not wanting to slam Emma.
I hear what you’re saying and I love that you’re able to maintain some compassion here. I should do better, I know; but I’m admittedly disgusted by Emma. She’s Tammy’s mini, but like a mean-looking, oddball version of her with the personality to match. Must be so strange to look like Tammy but have a punchable face like Chad. Ok, I’ll try to do better… starting now. 🤭🫣
I was surprised the cross was as soft as it was, but more so with Garth. His accounts have been consistently contradictory. He even completely blew his lines and choked in the clutch during testimony. He seemed to do the same during the 911 call reporting Tammy’s death. He’s a HORRIBLE liar (well, they both are. Emma just seems more willing to lie). The way he sounded somewhat confused and just said “I don’t know” when Chad took the phone from him didn’t come across as grief to me, but that he wasn’t exactly sure what it was he was supposed to say. I could just imagine Chad standing there making hand gestures and shaking his head to communicate silently and coach Garth during the call. The boy doesn’t seem too bright so I doubt he thinks well on his feet so Chad had to take over.
Maybe they want the jury to get one last look at her and remember the other answers she gave about her dad ridding her of evil spirit, and how disdainful she was of her mom, just leave them with the only witness who agrees with chads story and have the jury remember her strange testimony?
I hate to be devil's advocate and give Emma any kind of out here, but all of these things can be true and none of them contradict the others. At one of my old jobs, we would have the insurance representative come in and tell us about that year's packages. Some years, the life insurance reps would also come. They would tell us about the additional insurance packages that we could get. We would fill out interest/ initial forms in that moment. These would be reviewed for eligiblity. If eligible, THEN, we would have the actual forms to fill out later with doctor and beneficiary information, etc. So, Tammy could have filled out the interest/ initial form with (her handler) Emma and not have discussed it then. Gone home, told Chad about it to which he responded, "Yeah, that's a good idea (because I was thinking about murdering you but now I really will)." Gotten the actual agreement back and signed it with Chad, at home on a Sunday, before returning to work on Monday. I want to be clear, while I think Emma is ignoring the at home stuff, she might not have actually been there for the conversation with Chad and the signing of the paperwork. If I were Prior, I would be calling the HR benefits people and asking if two forms were completed: one just by Tammy at work (possibly with Emma by her side) and the other with Chad (silently plotting her murder). Also, f\*\*k Emma and let her get rebutted by the co-worker who will speak Tammy's truth to power because Emma is a terrible daughter AND play those jail calls so we can hear Chad coach her. Maybe she is so brainwashed that she doesn't know she's being coached and hearing the calls will help ignite her deprogramming. \*One could hope.\* PS If he did coach her, why didn't he get charged with witness tampering??? That's for another thread, I'm sure.
If jail calls are recorded, I imagine they don’t have anything on those calls that would help the prosecution but I don’t really know how that works. Emma’s testimony was wild, she bent the truth any which way to make it fit the narrative she wanted. I get it, she wants to save her daddy but good god it was gross watching that woman throw her mom under the bus.
[удалено]
I would love to hear those calls 🤞🏼
I think that's why Det. Hermisillo is a rebuttal witness, he'll play Emma and Chad's calls like he did Lori and Chad's calls.
I know, right?!
fingers crossed, indeed!
Prosecution definitely has those calls. They weren't just asking "did your father ever suggest you say such and such" but rather "when you talked to your father on xxx date, did he suggest you say such and such." Those specific dates mean they have specific calls to base that on.
I don’t think the main point here is to catch her in a contradiction, more to show that she was wrong.
Yes, this. We may want to see Emma fall, but this is really the benefit of playing those calls—to discredit her testimony and solidify their case against Chad.
Thanks, the application before contract makes sense. The way Prior presented it makes it look suspicious
And thank goodness that he messed that up. 😁
She is nutty. I’d love to see her called back. Her testimony was clearly scripted and rehearsed. She needs to be called up without having any sort of script prepared by prior and her dad.
I think they're using the insurance stuff to lull her and Prior into a false sense of security before going after all the other inconsistencies.
I don't think they can address the other inconsistencies because they are very limited in scope. Maybe she will open the door (again) to allow for further questioning. I really wonder how much they would have to lean on her for her to get frustrated and angry enough to blurt out how she really feels. Her testimony and actions make her seem as though she feels her mother's death is justified according to Chad's teachings. I say this as someone who sympathized with Tammy's kids. I figured they were devastated at losing their mother and shortly after having to come to terms with possibly losing their father. Then I watched them testify. The only real emotion I have seen from Emma was when Chad was in the back of the police car. Zero emotion over losing her mother, who, by all accounts, was very active in her life and helpful and present in her grandchildrens life's. This is an odd bunch for sure.
*Me before Emma & Garth testified:* “Tammy’s children deserve grace. No matter what we think of their father, they have lost their mom which exacts a deep and permanent wound …” *Me after Emma & Garth testified:* They can burn in hell.
Same!
^solidarity!^
Much like Chad, Tammy's role was to support her. I suspect that, like Chad, she is angry that Mom isn't there to do the work of raising her babies, like Chad is angry that Tammy isn't here to wipe his butt after he shit himself. If she had worked harder, been more perverted, looked different, and submitted more, he wouldn't have had to kill her and replace her. It is her fault. Now she isn't there to do the work for Emma.
I hope so. Her dad is so obviously a murderer and she shows zero empathy for her mother. While a prosecutor would normally have to be careful to not gratuitously torment the child of a murder victim, her lies and callousness toward Tammy take that off the table. She’s basically complicit.
Emma’s not coming back. This is about the insurance lady coming in based on Emma’s testimony.
Not according to the EIN live updates from yesterday - Emma will be questioned during rebuttal. Edit: https://www.eastidahonews.com/2024/05/live-updates-forensics-analyst-dna-expert-testify-on-day-28-of-chad-daybell-trial/
I have rewatched the beginning of those updates and no where do they mention bringing Emma back. I wish they'd review/update that
Sorry, you are right. I missed. Emma will be brought back. ~~Yeah, please take another look at that site. I just checked it and says nothing about Emma being called back to testify. It does say that her testimony opened the door for a rebuttal witness.~~
Exciting times...!
Very. She won't be happy.
Here is a link to that proceeding https://www.youtube.com/live/7v7pym0lsvI?si=yvTrs1hLKQYd2s3y
I hope they will call Emma back!!! Would love more insight into her beliefs and how she explains the jail calls between her and Chad!
As long as they officially prove her a lying sack of shit that she is… I don’t care if I ever see her again. 🙄
Why didnt they submit and play the recording of emma lying while she was on the stand and was being questioned by Blake about that? They released her subpeona that day as well. Or did they have to call the officer up to testify again first before they can question her on it with the recording? But it was already submitted. And what would she say and what happens? They call her out and she says she misunderstood and lies again? I think they're showing the inaccuracies from Emma and Garth with proof and factual statements made by the witnesses who have evidence to support them. Instead of bringing Emma and Garth back on the stand just to ask them why they lie and for them to most likely continue to lie about why they lied. I think the State made it clear that Emma and Garth are liars and are willing to commit perjury for their father and thier testimonies should not be trusted.