Hidden True Crime - CHAD DAYBELL TRIAL: Dr. John Breaks Down Key Moments in Closing Arguments & Chad's Behavior in Court

Episode Date: June 5, 2024

Closing arguments are finally wrapped in the Chad Daybell Trial. In this episode, Dr. John analyzes the closing arguments for the prosecution and defense. Join Hidden True Crime as we follow Chad Daybell's trial from beginning to end. Host Lauren Matthias is in the courtroom daily, doing lunch lives on YouTube and summarizing each day and week right here on Hidden: A True Crime Podcast. Lauren Matthias was a television reporter for a decade and has followed the Lori Vallow and Chad Daybell case since 2019. She and her husband, Dr. John Matthias, a criminal psychologist, started Hidden True Crime in 2020 with their Season, 'Beyond the Veil,' a psychological deep dive into the doomsday murders and prophet. What started as a simple conversation at their dinner table became a captivating podcast. Join the dynamic duo of Dr. John Matthias, a forensic psychologist, and Lauren Matthias, an investigative journalist, as they delve into the psychological facets of unthinkable crimes every week. Their unique perspectives and in-depth analysis offer a fresh take on true crime storytelling. Thank you for your support through sponsorships, subscribing, listening, and becoming a Patreon member at Patreon.com/HiddenTrueCrime Our Sponsors:* Check out Acorns: https://acorns.com/HIDDENTRUECRIME* Check out Acorns: https://acorns.com/HIDDENTRUECRIME* Check out Armoire and use my code HIDDENTRUECRIME for a great deal: https://www.armoire.style* Check out Effecty and use my code HIDDENTRUECRIME for a great deal: https://www.effecty.com* Check out Happy Mammoth and use my code HIDDENTRUECRIME for a great deal: https://happymammoth.comSupport this podcast at — https://redcircle.com/hidden-a-true-crime-podcast1836/donationsAdvertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Lately, I've been trying to be more intentional about what I wear, intentional about everything, just choosing pieces that feel effortless, still put together, timeless, but also not overthinking it every morning. It's why I keep going back to quince. Their pieces just make getting dressed easier and I feel so classy. I feel elevated. The fits are flattering. The fabric is really high quality. Everything is wearable day to day. I actually got this really, really, beautiful yellow V-neck midi dress from them, and I paired it with some Italian leather sandals. It's one of those outfits that just works. It feels polished but still comfortable. It's exactly what I've been looking for. What surprises me, though, is the quality for the price.

Quince uses premium materials like European linen, organic cotton, but they cut out the middleman. So everything is priced way lower than you'd expect. Refresh. your every day with luxury you can actually use. Head to quince.com slash hidden true crime for free shipping on your order and 365 day returns. That's quince, quince, ui and c e.com slash hidden true crime for free shipping and 365 day returns. Quince.com slash hidden true crime. Hello, hidden gems. It is Lauren and Dr. John as you believe it as the jury. Deliberates. Well, they actually went back to their hotel. They're sequestered. And so they're back at their hotel. But closing arguments in Chad Daybell's trial happened today.

Both the prosecution and the defense. And then a rebuttal by the prosecution. Lindsay Blake delivered the state's closing arguments. John Pryor, of course, Chad Daybelle's attorney, delivered the defenses, closing arguments. Well, what did you think? I just want to ask you your thought. Yeah, so I think Lindsay Blake delivered. I think she did a great job. I think she, I would call it, looking back, I would call it kind of a day bell greatest hits day in the sense that she, a lot of the stuff you and I have talked about since this trial started,

she covered a lot of the analyses you and I have done. She covered so much of that, I mean, and more. And there were actually a few things I didn't know that she covered. And so I think I always talk about that juries, are often swayed by the best story that fits the evidence. And she told a great story. This, by the way, is a very difficult story to summarize. So, you know, it's hard to tell this story in a succinct way.

She did that. She presented a really compelling narrative and she backed it up with evidence. And honestly, after she finished, I thought, you know, since we live in Vegas, I thought that if the sports books were going to, like, put some odds on this, the odds of acquittal would be astronomically. I think at the end of the closing arguments, I felt like there's just no way, there's no way this jury is going to quit Chad Daybell. So I think the chances of conviction are extremely high.

This is a call from and paid for by. Lori. An inmate at Madison County Jail. This call is subject to recording and monitoring. If you don't wish to talk, hang up now. Thank you for using tellmates. Okay. Hello.

Are you okay? Oh, they're searching the property. The house right now? Yeah. Yeah. And then as Mark means, we'll be talking to you. Well, are they in the house? No, they're out in the property.

Three dead bodies. On the defendant, Chad, Daybell's property and or in the residence, Two of them children, his mistresses, kids, Joshua Jackson Valo, and Tiley Ryan were found buried in the defendant's backyard. Tammy Daybell was found dead in their marital bed. And for what? Money, power, and sex. That's what the defendant cared about. You heard from Zulema Pastanis and Melody. Lynn E. Gibb, how the first time they met, Lori was flirty. She came on to Chad. But Chad was receptive. You heard from Investigator Edwards that a few days after the conference, Google searches were conducted by Chad, Lori Vallow, images of Lori Valo, Charles Valo. At the time Chad and Lori met, their spouses were alive and well. Charles Valo and Tammy Daybell were alive.

live. Rory and Chad were both married, but Chad was Googling about Lori. You heard how sometime after the conference, Lori ended up sharing with Melanie Gibb and Zulema Pastenis, how Chad at the conference had told her that they had been married in previous lives. And you heard through the trial, previous lives, multiple probations, multiple creations, it's all the same idea. Why does that matter? It was a way to justify the affair to the people around them, maybe even to justify the affair to themselves. They were married to other people. But because they'd been married in prior lives,

prior probations, prior creations, everything they were doing was OK. And remember, Zulema talked to you all about how Chad sat the women down. So Zulema, Melanie, some other women, and Lori. And he taught me. them. Chad was the one teaching. Chad was the one sharing these ideas and these concepts. He was sharing them with Lori, too. You also heard how shortly after meeting Lori, the defendant

began drafting his version of their story, the James and Elena story. And throughout the trial, you heard how Chad and Lori would go by different names sometimes, or they had code names or persons that they claim to be in prior lives. James and Elena were two of those names, Raphael and Lily, all really Chad and Lori. The James and Elena's story was written by Chad. Chad's own words. And what do we know from James and Elena? In James and Elena, and you heard about this from Agent Hart and you heard about it from analyst Heideman, James and Elena. Chad writes, at this time, their spirits could not be

restrained any longer, and a long-awaited make-out session took place in that lobby. This was manifest in the mortal world to James and Elena through the scientific phenomenon known as Loinfire. He also another excerpt. He resisted an impulse to kiss her, but his entire body was on fire. He instinctively knew she was everything he had ever dreamed of. Additionally, Her dimensions were exactly what he had always fantasized about, but that revelation would have to wait a month. These are written about his first meeting with Lori. She is everything he's fantasized about.

What is this about for Chad? Sex. He wants to have sex with Lori Valo. He wants to be in a relationship with her, and he decides that the first time he meets her. We also see in there he has to wait about a month. for the full revelation of her dimensions. What does that mean?

He has to wait a month before he actually gets to see her body. They're absolutely engaged in an affair. They had two favorite positions that particularly bonded them together. Nothing meant more to James than holding Elena in his arms and unifying their bodies in perfect synchronization. Nothing meant more. This was about sex. You also heard how at some point, Chad had deemed Alex to be Lori's protector.

He talked to Alex about how Alex had been her protector in multiple lives, multiple creations, multiple probations. Alex was here to protect Lori. And you heard that Alex relished that role. He relished having a purpose. He relished being part of this. After Charles' death, Lori reaches out to Chad to tell him, I'm not getting the million dollar life insurance.

policy. He must have switched the beneficiary. As they proceed through this conversation, Chad's response, interesting if it was him after he had two bullets in his chest. At this point, they've started to talk about labeling people as dark. And again, Chad is the one that can do that. They start talking about death percentages. Chad, again, is the only one that can determine someone's death percentage. How close someone is to dying is determined by Chad Daybell. He tells Lori in this message, and keep in mind, he is talking about toddler children, young children. He decreased the pain tolerance to 1% and greatly increased his pain. He then asked Lori, do you want me to cause pain to those two threes? Who are the threes? Again, remember, when someone's light or dark, there's also generally

a numeric value or a numeric number assigned to that, in this case, three threes. So they were three dark. He ends up saying, yes, if they are going to act up, will at least give them a reason to scream. These are young children. And specifically, these are the children of Melanie Polowski that are being referenced. Right after saying he's going to give these children a reason to scream, I love, cherish, treasure and adore you. He wants to be with Lori Valo. Chad tells Lori, we are surrounded by telrestrial relatives that are simply obstacles. Earthly relatives that are simply obstacles are surrounding Chad and Lori. And again, he tells Lori, I want to be with you. That is my greatest hope and dream.

to be together, they've got to get rid of the earthly relatives that are simply obstacles. Because remember, they need to remove the obstacles so they can be fully free and unencumbered. Zulema talks about how in August she notices a change in Alex and Chad's relationship. Again, Alex has just shot and killed Charles Valo, and now he and Chad seem to be closer. She talks about Chad giving Alex a blessing. and in the blessing he tells Alex that Alex needs to move to Rexburg. Alex had no known ties to Rexburg outside of Chad Daybell. Alex trusted Chad so much that he flew back with Chad to check out Rexburg.

Eventually, Alex was told that he was exalted. And remember, we talked a little bit about that and you heard about it in the trial. If someone was exalted in a prior life or a prior creation, they were exalted in this one. And you heard Zulema talk about how Lori would address that. If Lori did something and she was asked about it, she'd tap her hand doesn't count for me. It didn't count for her because she was exalted.

They taught Alex that same thing. What Alex did in this life didn't count for him because he had been exalted. Around September 1st of 2019, Lori ends up relocating to Rexburg as well. J.J. and Tiley come with her, as well as Alex Cox, and they moved to 565 Pioneer Road in Rexburg, Idaho. Before Lori moved to Rexburg,

Chad had already shared with her that Tiley was dark and JJ was dark. And we know what has to happen if someone's dark. If someone's dark and they're an earthly object, obstacle, the body has to die. On August 10th again, Lori had asked, please check JJ. Chad's response, or then Lori further pushes, is he at zero yet? Chad's response, yes, he's at zero. If Chad labels someone darker a zombie, the body has to die.

Chad determines the death percentage. When the death percentage hits zero, that person's been marked for death. on September 23rd of 2019, you heard how there was location data associated with Alex Cox looked at. And before that, you'd heard from Melanie Gibb and David Warwick about how they were visiting Lori. They'd come up for an event and they were staying at Lori's house. You heard from them, from Melanie Gibb in particular, that there was an incident where Chad took JJ upstairs. And when Chad came down, he had scratches on his neck, that being Chad had scratches. And when asked what happened, he basically said JJ had freaked out.

On June 9th of 2019, investigators searched Chad's property. And they ended up locating JJ. As they dug JJ up, they noticed a round object covered in black. One of the investigators there cut the black plastic to reveal white plastic. They cut the white plastic and brown human hair came through. They'd finally found JJ. JJ had been buried with his arms duct tape together, the duct tape running around from elbow to elbow.

He had duct tape over his mouth. He had a plastic bag over his head, tape over that plastic bag, and then he was placed in black garbage bags and discarded. That's how JJ was found. Chad labeled him dark. Chad said his death percentage was at zero. Chad said the plan was for he and Lori to be together unencumbered by earthly relatives, earthly obstacles. Chad said those things.

And Alex believed Chad 100%. Chad knew Lori was receiving Social Security money. She told him, we saw that message. I'm still going to receive the 4,000. She was actually receiving more because she'd switched Tiley's money to go to her as well. Chad labeled her children dark. Their bodies were buried on his property, hidden from those looking for them. With them gone, he could be with Lori.

Her time was completely free for him. And knowing if the bodies weren't discovered, Lori would continue to receive that money. On October 5th, Chad messages Lori, big news about Tammy. The short version is, She has been switched. Tammy is in limbo and a level three demonic entity named Viola is in her body. Tammy's now a zombie essentially, or she has a dark entity in her. Again, someone's dark, someone's a zombie.

The body has to die. And Chad can tell and controls the death percentages. Chad goes on to tell Lori, I have now checked three times since I've been. got home and get more affirmative answers each time. Chad then tells her, not fully sure of the timing for removal, but once her actions verify the differences, I don't want to wait. Someone's dark, the body has to die. Chad doesn't want to wait. Instead, what we know is that on October 19th of 2019 just before 6 a.m., Chad Daybell and Garth Daybell made a call to 911 to

911 to report Tammy's death. Remember how Garth described her. She's stiff and cold. Remember what Chad said. She's clearly dead. A little over 24 hours from reporting his wife's death, Chad messages Lori. I know exactly how you feel. I'm feeling sad, but it isn't for the reason everyone thinks. His wife had been reported dead a little over 24 hours before he sent that to Lori. You heard the description of Tammy, stiff and cold, clearly dead. And yet, Garth and Chad say they put her back on the bed.

Garth says he hears a thud and his dad calls for him. However, Garth and Chad were consistent. Tammy didn't fall out of bed. Where's the thud? They both describe the top part of Tammy falling out of the bed and her legs being tangled in the sheets. And you heard from the corner that when she arrived on scene,

there was this rag in the bedroom. And she took the rag and she wiped the foam or the sputum that was coming out of Tammy's mouth. But what you also heard from her was it was a rag Chad had already been using. Tammy's clearly dead. The body's been moved. The foam's been wiped.

I'm like just so curious sitting in there watching so many things. And Chad Dave, I want to say, lost his poker face today. Oh, yeah. This was a, yeah. let's talk about that. This was a different Chad Daybell. It was. This was a Chad Daybell that I wouldn't say he was emotional.

That would be an overstatement. But this was a Chad Daybell who was making faith, right? He was responding to a lot of things that were being said. He did, to use your term, he did the eyebrow lift Joker face many times today. So many times. He did the pursed lips, shook his head, a number of. of time. So I don't, I mean, you were there.

It's, it's, again, it's, it's not ideal for those of us watching the Zoom feed because it's, that's not the clear speed for assessing non-verbals. But, you know, you were in there. So you, you were able to see it up close. I mean, I, it looked to me like, I think the anger that we've talked about, that was clearly there. Shaking his head was kind of disbelief or, you know, it was, it was, at the very least, it was a negation of some of the things Lindsay was saying.

I mean, and not just, it was a clear negation with almost what I would call a little bit of hostility. Yeah, he would shake his head or nod. And at one time, one time, and the only time in the entire trial I saw, he rolled his eyes today. He rolled his eyes when Lindsay Blake was on rebuttal sharing that they do not know the manner of death for Tiley that they couldn't know because she was burned. He rolled his eyes. I remember I texted my mod right when I saw it so that I would know the time code and I still need to go back and get it. And I don't know if you'll be able to see it on the video, but he rolled his eyes. I was like, I could not believe it.

And at one moment, he mouthed something. Chad says if someone's so darker a zombie, the body has to die. Alex believes Chad 100%. And it wasn't just that. The head shaking was quite frequent. You know, there's a real problem with those types of behaviors, by the way. I mean, understandably, I'm sure Pryor told him to be as still and stoic as possible, and he's done a pretty good job of that for the most part.

But when you shake your head and roll your eyes and mouth off, not only does it show the level of arrogance, there's a certain level of arrogance going on there, and there's a certain level of smugness, but also it's kind of a, it's kind of a, sign of hostility. Like, he's not respecting the prosecution. He's not respecting what they're saying.

He's opposing it openly on, right? And I mean, juries, for the most part, juries aren't going to like that. In fact, I would argue that it's some of those very qualities that got him in trouble in the first place. He's showing us in real time who he is. Right. I completely agree. There were many people that noticed it.

and there was one juror that was actually looking right at him the whole time. So I'm speculating because I can't make eye contact and I can't decide who Chad was looking at. But there was one juror in particular. He was looking at Chad the whole time. Okay. You know, eye contact. And at one point, Chad Debao was looking across the room, looking as if he was looking at someone. So I'm going to assume that juror, but I don't know.

It could have been a different juror. And he finally went, like, like stop looking like Ed, and he raised his eyebrows really. high. It was like hostility that I haven't seen before. And unfortunately, that juror drew an alternate juror. Yeah, we had five. Yeah, we had five jurors draw the alternate. I'll be honest, three of them, I'm pretty disappointed about. The guy that was sleeping in front of prior today during his clothing arguments, he'll be, he'll be deliberating. Also, how random was the draw? I don't think they even shook up whatever they, whatever they drew from, I don't know, a box or a hat or whatever, the numbers were like 16, 17, 18. Like, I mean, I don't think they even bothered to shake up

the box because the numbers were almost consecutive. But it's like the most unofficial, official thing ever in court. And now we do our official hat drying. Yeah, we're going to do it right. We're going to do our random drawings, 15, 16, 17, 18. So I think that, you know, so the Chad's nonverbals were not good for him. They were not good for the defense. I think that it could come back, not that he wasn't in trouble anyway, but it could really backfire on him. It's so arrogant. He just doesn't, you know, he doesn't have a shred of humiliation. Most people don't realize how much their personal information is being bought and sold every day. Data brokers are making billions, pulling details about you from public records and the Internet,

and then packaging and selling it, usually without your consent. That's how your information lands in the hands of scammers, spammers, even stalkers. It's why you get endless robocalls and why ads seem to follow you everywhere. That's where ORA comes in. ORA actively removes your data from broker sites and keeps it off. They also instantly alert you if your information shows up in a breach or on the dark web. But ORA goes beyond data protection. With one app, you get a VPN, antivirus, password manager, spam call protection, dark web monitoring, and even up to $5 million in identity theft

insurance, all backed by 24-7 U.S.-based fraud support. Other companies might sell just credit monitoring or just a VPN. ORA gives you all of it, together, at the same price competitors charge for just one service. Start your free trial today at ORA.com slash remove. Protect yourself now at ora.com slash remove. What's one financial lesson you learned the hard way? I'll go first. It's not too late to start saving. Today's episode is sponsored by Acorns.

Acorns is a financial wellness app that makes it easy to start saving and investing for your future. You don't need to be an expert. Acorns will recommend a diversified portfolio that matches you and your money goals. You don't need to be rich. Acorns lets you get started with the spare money you have right now. And one of the best things about acorns is they allow you. to see projected growth on their website. Simply go online, type in how much money you'd put in

and see the potential future balance of your account. Sign up now and join the over 13 million all-time customers who've already saved and invested over $22 billion with Acorns. Head to Acorns.com slash hidden true crime or download the Acorns app to get started. Paid non-client endorsement. Compensation provides incentive to positively promote Acorns, Tier 1 compensation provided.

Investing involves risk. Acorns Advisors, LLC. an SEC registered investment advisor. A few important disclosures at acorns.com slash hidden true crime. Does anyone else find themselves saying, I feel way older than I actually am, or I feel way younger?

Did you know there might be some truth behind that feeling? That's where true diagnostic comes in. With their true age test, you can discover your true biological age, plus get insights into health risks for heart disease or Alzheimer's, even your mortality. I just ordered my true diagnostic test,

and while nervous, I'm looking forward to what it may tell me about my own health so I can take control of things now. When taking tests pertaining to my health, I want to make sure it's scientifically backed and true diagnostic is. Their true age test is based on peer-reviewed research from scientists working at Harvard, Duke, and Yale. And by tracking your biological age, you can actually see how the changes you make, whether that's exercise, diet, or sleep will affect your health over time. Ready to find out your biological age? Right now, our listeners can get 20% off their entire.

order at true diagnostic.com by using code hidden true crime at checkout. That's true diagnostic, T-R-U-D-A-A-G, and O-T-I-C dot com. Just use code hidden true crime to save 20% off. Plus, if you subscribe, you'll get an additional 20% off. Discover your true age today. Hormonal changes are so hard to see the least. Hot flashes, anyone else. Add in the thousands of hormone disruptors that are in our environment. And it did say, even worse. From our water food, the air we breathe and the clothes we wear, they are everywhere. But the good news is that when hormone harmony enters the picture, it can help reduce hormonal symptoms in women of all ages. Hormone harmony is a supplement that contains science-backed herbal

extracts called adaptogens. The best thing about adaptogens, they help the body adapt to any stressors like chaotic hormonal changes that happen naturally throughout a woman's life. Hormone harmony is actually part of my personal 2024 playbook. Hormone Harmony makes no compromises when it comes to quality and it shows. For a limited time, you can get 15% off your entire first order at happy mammoth.com. That's happy H-A-P-P-Y mammoth, M-A-M-M-O-T-H.com. Just use the code hidden true crime at checkout. That's code hidden true crime. Use that with happy mammoth.com for 15% off today. I think that all the nonverbals, the head shaking, the mouthing off, I think that's indicative of someone who thinks they're right. I will say this.

And again, I wasn't entirely focused on Chad. I missed some of those nonverbals. But there was a moment when Lindsay Blake was finishing up and she put up a picture of the three victims. I think there was maybe just a brief moment, I think, when Chad might have realized that maybe he should have taken a deal. maybe Chad finally got it. I think that Lindsay's Lindsay Blake's closing arguments were so compelling and she told the story so well

and backed it up with excellent evidence. In fact, I would call it kind of a greatest hits of the Daybell trial and many of the greatest hits that you and I have talked about too. So at the very end of that, it looked like Chad might have showed a little bit of fear, maybe a slight amount of fear and maybe a slight amount of humility. And I almost felt like there was sort of this moment of, oh, no, you know, maybe the death penalty is real.

Right. Right. So he had this moment, this moment. But that all disappeared during Pryor's closing arguments, by the way. It did. He felt quite confident after that, didn't he? Oh, he was really empowered, I think, by Clyde Pryor's closing arguments. Now, you've heard some information previously from the other attorney about what the state has to prove. One of the things the state has to prove in regards to the conspiracy charges is that there was an agreement. Okay. And if you recall when we were going through the voir dire process, that fancy French word,

that talks about when we were trying to select the jury, I talked to you and asked a number of you, what an agreement is? What do you believe an agreement is? Okay? But the state has to prove that Chad Daybell, with Lori Vallow, or with Alex Cox, or with other co-conspirators that they haven't named,

with one of them entered into some sort of an agreement to kill the children and to kill Tammy Daybill. jury instruction number three talks about again what I just talked about. The defendant Chad Guy Dable has been charged in the amended indictment with certain counts of conspiracy with Lori Vallow and or Alex Cox, who's deceased, and or other conspirators, both known and unknown. Crime of conspiracy involves an agreement by two or more persons to commit a crime. Okay, it can't be an agreement that we have consistent religious beliefs. It can't be an agreement that we talk about religion without unless there's an extra step. And that extra step has to be, we are going to kill these children.

We are going to agree to kill Tammy Daybell. You can hear all the testimony in the world about dark spirits. You can hear all the testimony in the world about light and dark. you can hear all the testimony in the world about death percentages. Now, the state brings up, yes, oh, Chad, Chad put a death percentage on Tiley and JJ and Tammy, and they're all dead. But you also heard testimony from one of the state's experts that said, we don't know if it was a high number or a low number, and there's confusion as to what that means. And I'd like to go back to the discussion that we'd,

had with one of the FBI agents who mentioned that there were thousands and thousands of messages. An enormous amount of evidence here. You heard from my expert Patrick Eller. He talked about, I think the Library of Congress holds one terabyte of evidence if we went paper to paper through the whole building. And we had six terabytes. Six. Six. bounds of paper that would fit in six libraries of Congress. And what has happened is you've been shown a handful of text messages that talk about a plan, that talk about death percentages, that talk about light and dark, talk about a variety of subjects.

But what you didn't hear is you didn't hear about the thousands and thousands of messages that talked about religious beliefs, talked about a variety of other topics. And if we look at each and every one of ours position, you can always find a text message or a message of some kind that may be slanted or turned in a way to benefit one position or another. And that's not particularly uncommon. How often is that you send out a text message to somebody and it's misconstrued? How often is it that you send an electronic message to somebody through an email and it's misunderstood? or maybe it's looked at in a different way. You know, as a society, we've lost our ability to communicate. Doing what I'm doing today is a lost art.

Lawyers have to do this, especially in our position. But many of people who are in jobs, what it's done is send me a quick email, send me a text message, tell me what you feel. And sometimes those messages can be construed. The prosecuting attorney talked to me. about, oh, there was a plan and insinuating to you, suggesting to you that this plan was to kill the children. And at no time did the prosecuting attorney show you a text message that said, let's kill the kids, let's kill Tammy. Okay? Instead, they talked about a plan. This is what we're

looking to do in the future. Okay. That's what they said to you. And they're trying to insinuate or suggest you that in some way that means, well, that that means that we're going to kill the kids. No, the plan was, and whether you believe with Chad's religious beliefs or not, whether you accept his religious beliefs, the 144,000, that's his beliefs. He was a gatherer. He was a gatherer of the 144,000. And he said, I want to gather people, the sick, the elderly, the children, the impoverished, those that can't handle for themselves and those that may be able to go on and become a part and parcel as this gatherer that he suggests would put together the 144,000 in Rexburg. Now, whether you think that's crazy or not, it doesn't matter.

Whether you agree with light and dark, it doesn't matter. Whether you agree with death percentages, it doesn't matter. He's entitled to his beliefs. And he goes to these conferences and he talks about all of these religious beliefs. He talks about his premonitions. He talks about things that he thinks he can predict. Do you believe him? You don't have to. You don't have to believe anything he stands for. Nobody does. But he has a right to talk about it. And he has a right to say what he wants to say, and that's one of the distinctions, folks, requires involves an agreement. It requires an agreement. You don't get to the overt acts.

You don't get to all of the things the prosecutor has said about all of the things these people have done until you establish that Chad Daybell, by evidence and testimony, in the last two months, has shown that there's been an agreement between him and Lori, him and Alex, or anyone else, there's no agreement. Show me the text message. It says there's an agreement. Show me the text message. It says this is what we're going to do.

You were showing some things to talk about plans. Yeah, the plans of the 144,000, the plans of putting together this village of people to help all of these people out and do all of this. traditional Mormon faith beliefs. Traditional Mormon faith beliefs. Now, whether you agree with that or not, it doesn't matter. But if you have a score set of beliefs, and those are things you believe in,

that's not a crime. The crime only comes into play. The crime of conspiracy involves an agreement to commit a crime. I talk to you a little bit about speculation. I talk to you about hunch. I talk to you about conjecture. I talk to you about guess. They all mean the same thing.

The judge's instruction, and what this judge has told us we have to do, and I put it up there for a reason, you must only consider the evidence against the defendant Chad Daybell in this case. It says it in the third instruction that you're going to read. Only in this case. The evidence that you have heard, they have not.

established an agreement. They have not given you any proof that there's any kind of an agreement. Unless there's agreement, it doesn't matter whether he espoused his religious beliefs or not, because everybody's allowed to espouse their religious beliefs. I can tell you all about my religious beliefs. I can tell anybody, you could all talk all day long about our religious beliefs. But unless there's an agreement to commit a crime, you can talk all day long about your religious beliefs. You could say anything you want. I can say there's a little green man in my backyard and I get to dance around with him and talk about religion all day long. And whether you believe it or not, it doesn't matter, but I'm entitled to my opinion to say that. And unless I can get

into an agreement to commit a conspiracy, all the overt acts in the world don't matter. So there are two overt acts in the conspiracy that they talked about with JJ and Tiley. They killed these kids because of Chad's religious beliefs. That's what they're saying. His religion. beliefs and all of this talk about dark and light was the reason Chad, Lori and Alex killed these kids. And then, oh, by the way, the other over that, Chad Googled South Southwest Wind. And yet, we heard from Emma Murray. She said, I Googled South Southwest Wind.

Do not speculate as to any other case or legal proceeding involving the alleged co-conspirator. It's in black and white. facts evidence again that fancy french word voir dire i talked to you about you folks about that i talked about facts and evidence fact chad d'abell was not involved with charles vallow fact chad daybell was not involved with Charles Vallow. Fact. Chad Daybell is not implicated with Brandon Boudreau. Fact.

Chad Daybell espoused religious beliefs. And if you want to believe the prosecutor, well, maybe Chad Daybell did a South, Southwest search. Where's the agreement? Where is the agreement? It's not there. You rest remember, the defendant, Chad. Chad Guy Daybell has the presumption of innocence, and you must consider his innocence based solely on the evidence provided in this case. It's the judge's instruction.

It's not their instruction. It's not the four of them over there. It's the guy that matters here who sets the instruction and tells us the rules we have to follow. And the rule is, you must remember the defendant Chad Guy Daybell has the presumption of innocence, and you must decide. consider as innocence based solely on the evidence, the facts and evidence that you have been presented. That's what you have to consider. We don't speculate. We do not guess.

We do not engage in conjecture. We don't do any of those things. Facts and evidence. Facts and evidence. Reasonable doubt. Under our law and system, this is jury instruction number five. You all took notes. You all have a memory.

I know it's been a couple of months, but you all took notes and you all have a memory. And the judge's other instruction would be rely on your memory. Rely on your notes about what you remembered. Not what the lawyers say. That includes me. If I say something that's different than what you remember in your notes, you rely on your notes. I talked to one of our moderators after court and she thought they were quite compelling. I well let me just ask you wait wait okay say that again that she felt that prior was compelling

yeah and she told me I haven't been on look guys I have not been able to see people's opinions online it's kind of good because it's like super authentic what you're getting from me but she said that there was talk online in sort of groups or you know Reddit I don't know if it was Reddit but some place where people were admitting that he did a pretty good job that it was a good job that it was a good performance. I'll be honest, in court sitting there, what I was feeling was that the jurors were probably annoyed. Again, one of them was sleeping. Yes, he did make it through. He'll be deliberating. I want to know what you think, John, because that was me being in court, and then I'm talking to people out of court. What were your thoughts? Well, first of all,

it started off a little slow. It felt like, to me, it kind of felt like a legal class like he was teaching law school and it was like law school 101 and it was kind of theoretical and he wanted to talk a lot about agreement and what that means and but as we talked about you know his job is to sway one or two jurors and so he's trying to create a little bit of confusion in terms of what terms mean and what reasonable doubt is and I mean I get it but it's you know, but he wasn't really dealing with any of the evidence at that point. It was purely theoretical. I mean, he actually said, you know, I don't have to present any evidence.

The burden of proof isn't on me. You know, there has to be an agreement. What he essentially said was that you need a written agreement. You need proof of an agreement. That no word in any taxed or anywhere, was there any agreement to engage in these murders? But as we talked about with Charles Manson, and I could go on and on, by the way, you know, there's a lot of crimes. As we talked about with Manson. Most people don't realize how much their personal information is being bought and sold every day.

Data brokers are making billions, pulling details about you from public records and the Internet, and then packaging and selling it, usually without your consent. That's how your information lands in the hands of scammers, spammers, even stalkers. It's why you get endless robocalls and why ads seem to follow you every single. That's where ORA comes in. ORA actively removes your data from broker sites and keeps it off. They also instantly alert you if your information shows up in a breach or on the dark web. But ORA goes beyond data protection. With one app, you get a VPN, antivirus, password manager, spam call protection, dark web monitoring, and even up to $5 million in identity theft insurance, all backed by 24-7 U.S.-based fraud support. Other companies might sell just credit monitoring, or just a VPN. ORA gives you all of it, together, at the same. same price competitors charge for just one service. Start your free trial today atora.com slash remove. Protect yourself now atora.com slash remove. It's implied.

The agreement can be implied through one's actions. Yeah. And even more so with like Manson, it's the, it was Manson's beliefs. It was kind of Manson's ideology that, that in the end that led to a conviction. And so, so I think he's trying to sow some confusion. he's starting to create some confusion about what an agreement means. I mean, you don't need a text. And Lindsay Blake came back to this.

You don't need a text showing that Chad's saying, oh, let's go kill all these people, right? Like, you don't need that. It can be implicit. It can be inferred from behavior. Yeah. The legal term is implied. But he's trying to, you know, he's trying to create doubt.

But the problem with it is, I felt like I was in a law school 101 class. Like it was theoretical. It wasn't, you know, at that point, he wasn't really bringing any evidence, right? He wasn't, there was, I thought, oh, man, this is like, this is like Prior has nothing to say and he's filling time. Yeah. He's trying to sound important and he's trying to take him some time so that people think,

oh, he didn't just get up here and rest. I think some of it was filler. Some of it was just trying to create this illusion that, you know, he knew what he was doing and but it was i don't think it would can i don't think those moments will connect to the jury at all he also this is kind of this is kind of a interesting thing is you know he was he was sending the message um you know he kind of sent the memory he said he had to look up the word acquiescence yeah so there's these moments where prior is you know he's presenting himself as kind of this simple he's you know he's trying to present himself as the simple humble guy from i don't know where he's

from from idaho right but i mean but he's doing he's clearly doing that for the for the jury in the sense he's trying to connect with them he's trying to present himself as kind of this simple you know down-to-earth plain guy that you know he's in every he's kind of an every man that the jury can relate to you know but hey i'm going to talk about all these legal terms we're going to talking legalese. So I, you know, I didn't, I wasn't connecting to any of that. It was, it was actually kind of rubbing me in the wrong way. But, but again, you know, I'm not, I'm not on the jury. So it doesn't really, doesn't really matter what I think. Some people are saying they want to know what you thought about what he said about Heather

Daveau and Kay Woodcock, John Pryor. I thought the Heather Daybell thing was fascinating. He just continued to call her a potster. That potster, Heather Daybell. That potster, I'm like, and then Kay, he could kind of put down Kay, implying that Lori truly did have to hide from her and, and that she got this life insurance that, you know, Lori couldn't get. It was, it was kind of a hard moment to hear in court. Yeah, I mean, you know, throwing Kay under the bus and Heather and, you know, people that we've befriended. I mean, it was, I think there was, it was intentional. I think he was, that they've created problems on this case and, you know, they're a little oppositional, which of course is far from the truth. So there were a few jurors.

So I mentioned that there was one juror that was crying today. He is now an alternate. So one of the, there have been several jurors that have cried throughout this case. One of them that was crying today, the one that was certainly crying today became an alternate. it. Another juror I really like, and Vicky had mentioned him as sort of looking at the ceiling when they read about Tiley's remains and what was done to her, and he seemed so angry that day and really upset. He's a younger gentleman. He became an alternate today. And then a gentleman that seemed to be staring at Chad DeBal today.

He and just making contact with him, he became an alternate today. Those were the three I was most disappointed about. Prior was trying to make, overall, he was trying to make the point repeatedly that just because you have religious beliefs doesn't mean that you're involved in committing these murders. And so he kept coming back to this idea. that anyone can express their beliefs, there's nothing illegal about that. And of course,

I mean, so he's arguing essentially for like First Amendment stuff, freedom of speech. But what he's obviously not saying is that when beliefs become extreme and they impact behaviors and especially the behaviors of groups of people that create harm or cause harm,

then it's a problem. Then it becomes illegal. So, I mean, he's trying, again, he's trying to kind of confuse the issue. He's trying to normalize Chad's beliefs, essentially. And I just don't think that worked. I think that was, you know, I can name so many criminals that I would call ideological criminals. You know, the Unabomber would be one. He was probably the first major kind of ideological criminal in the United States that,

wrote a manifesto and had very clear beliefs about what should happen in the country. And so Tim McVey, Charles Manson, right? There's all kinds of criminals that have extreme beliefs that have murdered people. And so I'm glad Lindsay Blake came back to that later. She said, yeah, beliefs are fine, but just not beliefs that lead to people dying and being murdered. Right. And so, but, but, but prior spent a lot of time trying to normalize that idea. I, I don't think that was very effective.

If there are any LDS jurors, they are going to be turned off by that because he was pretty much saying that dark and light scale is, is normal and, you know, commonly taught in church. The chains and priors exhibit deeper meaning. Yeah. It's, first of all, I was shocked that he was using chains because I've had a lot of, I've evaluated a lot of inmates that walk in with shackles, which are chains on their, you know, they walk in with chains and they, they hook them into the table so they can't move, right? Their legs on their feet. To start with chains and links and change is like a prison metaphor. Yes. Who would do that?

Again, is this like we talked about the idea of Freudian slips. I know. Is this like there is something here that could be unconscious about maybe he does have some disdain for Chad? Because he certainly you can look at that. And, you know, if you see that as kind of, it's not even subliminal because it's so obvious, but you can look at that and say, is he saying Chad should be in chains? because that's not the message I'd want to send. And the fact that he doesn't see that,

the fact that he can't catch that is a problem, right? I mean, he clearly is, he's lacking a certain amount of awareness of the situation here and what he's trying to argue. And not only that, the chains were up the whole presentation. Yes, they were. It was really weird. You know, maybe he ran out of PowerPoint money to hire. I don't know.

He could have hired someone off of fiber or something. Or maybe that's what he did. Yeah. Yeah, I think, yeah, he may have turned to fiber. But yeah, that was, when he came out of the blocks with that, I was just like, well, this isn't real, right? Like, links in a chain? I mean, or is he thinking ahead? Maybe he's thinking ahead about ways to break chat out of prison.

I don't know. But it was bizarre. Thank you. So let's let me talk about the most important part of the prior arguments. And that had to be when he got into motive. Lex Cox murdered. Tiley Ryan. Lori Vallow.

on because her beloved little brother, her beloved big brother could be tagged for the murder of Charles Vallow. And those two kids saw it. And Alex Cox took the body after he murdered Tiley Ryan. He took it out somewhere and he burned the body. And while out in the middle of Fremont County or Madison County or wherever he went, where there are thousands and thousands of acres of open ground,

Yellowstone Park is just a short way away, folks. This is a wildlife heaven for hunters. Great place for hunters. The body was burned. It was subjected to a carnivore bite. And then it was put in the ground. And on September 9th, Alex Cox was on Chad Debo's property. At least part of the time, if you remember what Patrick Eller said,

he talked about, you know, the fact that there's a certain block of time, an hour, hour of 15 minutes, an hour of 20 minutes or more. where we can't really identify where Alex Cox was. He was there. He was gone. He came back. But then remember the testimony from the state's expert. And remember the testimony from Patrick Eller.

Six or seven other times, Alex Cox was on the property of Chad Daybell. No location device with Chad Daybell at that time. No indication that Chad Daybell was on the property at that time. at that time when Alex Cox was there, you commit murder of two kids. And the intent is to eventually finish off husband number five. What's the best place, the ideal place to bury bodies? The new husband set him up.

Chad Daybell's electronics weren't there. Chad Daybell wasn't there. Other people were there, especially on the 23rd. the two people who were there when J.J. Valo was brutally murdered, but set Chad up. And then to make things nice and neat, Alex, finish him off like you were going to do Brandon Boudreau. Like you did Charles Vallow. Alex Cox is a murderer, and he is not shy about shooting people. He shot at Brandon Boudreau.

He murdered Charles Vallow. Chad Daybell was next and to make the plan nice and neat. Let's bury the bodies on Chad Daybell's property. Folks, this has nothing to do with religion. I just, I sat there in disbelief. I don't know about you to talk about the things. First of all, he's saying, he tells the jury, you guys can't speculate. You guys can't draw inferences.

Never mind that like every jury that's ever existed has to draw inference from data. they have to, you know, you have to look at facts and make strong conclusions. That's just what they do, right? He's always telling them, but you can't do that unless you have an agreement that's written down. It doesn't count. Don't speculate. But then he launches into like this insane speculation, right?

So it's perfectly fine. I mean, he's right. It's true. The defense doesn't have to really provide evidence to support their case. They don't. the burdens on the state, but it's still not a good look. Right. When you say don't speculate and then you resort to like the most far-fetched, rampant

speculation imaginable. So let's talk about that. So Alex Cox, the two witnesses that he killed, that Alex Cox murdered Tiley and JJ because he didn't want witnesses? I mean, first of all, as Lindsay Blake pointed out, it's not clear whether Tiley witnessed the murders. Right. Secondly,

JJ, presumably JJ was outside during a lot of that. He wasn't even in the house. So, you know, he doesn't, prior doesn't,

that's speculation because Tiley seems to have been in a room and J.J. wasn't in the house. When, after the shots were fired, Lori told Tiley, go get your brother and put him in the car. Right.

So, to suggest that Alex Cox murdered the two kids to eliminate witnesses is beyond speculation. It's not consistent, as Lindsay Blake thankfully said that later, but she said, go look at that, look at that evidence. You'll see that Tiley was not a witness. And JJ, JJ was almost certainly not a witness. So to lead with that, I was shocked. I mean, the problem with, I've been waiting for a theory of the case from prior for this whole trial,

and now we finally got it. And it was insane. You know what? I agree. And you know what? I was actually really gratefully put all the puzzle pieces together. You know what I was thinking the whole time? I was like, okay, so this is what the daybell kids think.

I mean, there's a part of me that's really always wanted to know, how is this whole thing put together? How is this word salad or this, you know, this mental gymnastics done? And he laid it out and I was like, okay. I mean, it wasn't believable, but I was like, okay, so that's what the kids think. I'm like, thanks for like, at least laying it out, but it was wild. Not only did he lay it out, what he was showing us was Chad's psyche. This is Chad. Chad is, I believe that Chad is the one directing prior towards.

this theory of the case. Because you could see Chad's nonverbals. When he talked about that Chad was, did you see this? When he talked about Chad being the target of the so-called paintball shooting, Chad was like, yes. No, I missed that, really? He wasn't that demonstrative, but I mean, he was like, you know, you could see he was like. Oh, I do think I saw that.

He nodded. Didn't he nodded? Yeah, he nodded. He nodded, right. And I, so. Right. His wife has been attacked and he's like, that was. me. Yep, that was me. Right, exactly. I mean, he knows it wasn't him. In the police report,

he actually, he comes out the side of the house after the fact, right? Like, he knows what's going to happen. He knows exactly what's going to happen. And then he, he, so he knows what's going on. He's waiting for her to get shot. So to suggest that Chad was in the car, Alex Cox wanted to shoot him, That was the other thing that was that was absolutely nonsensical. Like it was when when Pryor was trying to make that argument, he kept stumbling over himself. He kept saying, I don't know if you caught this. He kept saying, I was waiting for, I was waiting for something coherent. And it was like incoherent because he kept saying, well, Lori, he was making an argument that Lori only cared about money and herself and Alex Cox.

So somehow, because she only cared about money and herself. about money and herself and Alex Cox. She wanted Alex to kill Chad. So she was angry because she didn't get the insurance money, Charles insurance money. So that set her up for her next victim who was going to be Chad. And so this is what he argued. He kept saying, well,

because Lori had been married five times and because Lori had been married five times and because that he clearly had to kill Chad, because that's what you do when you're married five times. You go, you know, and you don't get insurance money. You go kill the person that you want to marry, that you marry two months later or a month later. Yeah, it's not a great thing too since, you know,

three of her husbands are still alive. And notice what he didn't say, by the way. He didn't, what he didn't say, he says, he starts off by saying, Lori only cared about the money and he was trying to go to the fact that he was going to kill Chad for the money, the insurance money, but he couldn't say it

because Chad and Tammy were the only ones on the policies. So Lori couldn't have killed Chad. If Chad was the target, she wasn't killing him for the money because Lori wouldn't have gotten the money. Lori wouldn't have been the beneficiary of the money. So his whole argument was convoluted

but basically came down to the fact that I guess he was divorced, shaming, Lori, and maybe even like... Yes, he was. Divorce shaming was definitely happening. And maybe even I could go further and probably using another term. He was shaming her for being promiscuous, I guess. Yes. Clearly like...

Formiscuous shaming. Clearly like his disdain for women keeps coming out repeatedly during this trial. Because his argument was, well, you know, she's been married five times. So of course she had to go after Chad, because that's just what I guess. guess that's what black widows do, even though she's obsessed with money and she wasn't to get money for killing Chad. She had to kill him. And I mean, I was just scratching my head at the end of that. Like, this was his big aha moment that Chad was really the victim and Chad was the target. But since he was talking about motive and he couldn't identify motive, the whole thing fell apart.

So if Chad was the target, what was the motive? It wasn't money. What was the motive? He didn't identify. That's where he kept stumbling all over himself. He couldn't form a pogent argument for his biggest aha moment of the entire trial, aside from the fact that JJ and Tyler were witnesses to the murder of Charles and had to be eliminated. His biggest aha moment was that Chad was really the target, not Tammy, but he couldn't figure out why. Nor could Chad, by the way. Alex was targeting Chad for his not not money. or targeting Chad because she was he was right it was it was implied because Alex was trying to protect Lori but if she was trying to protect Lori then why did Lori marry Chad like a month

and a half later and why did Chad give Alex a blessing two months later right like none of that made any sense no for anyone who's followed this trial with you know to any degree like none of that added up and I actually kind of thought you know if you're going to throw, I've said this before, if you're going to throw out a theory of the case as the defense, you need to, it has to be tied to some reality. And if it's not, if it's not, it will backfire spectacularly. And I think, unless the jury's just been sleeping the whole trial, this is going to backfire. But this is what Chad wants the world to know. Chad wants the world to know that Alex Cox was coming for him, that he's the victim. He had nothing

to do with JJ and Tiley because Alex wanted to kill them because they were witnesses. And the Chad, the true victim in all this is Chad Daybeau. And presumably, and maybe the raccoon and maybe Melody Gibb. Right, right. And the quarter pounder. Right. Chad Daybele was the victim in everything. He was next on Lori's list.

That was a remarkable moment that Chad was the target. Because, I mean, I just, I'm still trying to process it. It was so far-fetched and so unbelievable that I can't believe that Pryor went there. Prior really thought that Alex wanted to kill Chad, then why fight that it was a paintball gun instead of a rifle? Like pick one, either it was a paintball gun and, you know, a kid in the neighborhood, or it was a target on Chad, and it was a rifle. But, I mean, again, just sort of like, it's like seeing what sticks,

you know, throwing spaghetti on the wall and seeing what sticks. Right. Yeah, right. There was a lot of that. But I mean, when he finally got around to kind of formulating his actual theory of the case, it didn't, it was disjointed. And it just, there was no basis in reality. And Lindsay Blake came back to that and refuted a lot of it, thankfully.

But it was still, for me, it was still a really, I don't know. you know, a really absurd moment. I was. Also, I want to say the things that he said about Kay Woodcock, you know, and he pointed at Kay. He pointed at Kay. I don't think that's going to go over well with the jury either. You know, they've seen Kay there every day to, you know, she testified to kind of gesture towards her isn't going to do well either.

Did you notice things like that too? Well, he pointed it, didn't he pointed Chad too when he said he's the, my man is the target? Yeah. The other thing I loved is the reference to Keith. Keith Morrison and Dateline. I kept thinking, you know, was that, I hope that was the episode we were on. Yeah, Keith, Keith Morrison, that's a good point. Keith Morrison was trying to protect the LDS church with Melanie Gibb.

Yeah, right. That's not a conspiracy theory. I mean, I can even see like Melanie Gibb wanting to protect the LDS church. When you're throwing in Keith Morrison into your closing argument about wanting to protect the LDS Church, I mean, what? Where are you going with this? I mean, well, he, right. So let's so this is another theory. So again, he's running into problems because he's got multiple theories of the case. He would have kept, I think he would have been a lot better off by keeping things a lot simpler. But so I took his argument to be that Melanie Gibb and David Warwick and apparently Heather Daybell, all of them set up Chad. And the church, by the way, so the entire mainstream LDS church, they portrayed, they were trying to portray Chad as a religious zealot because he was making the church look bad.

So once again, Chad was the target. He was the victim because even though his beliefs were completely normal and he was writing these books, which people loved, and he has every right to express himself, that's true. The church couldn't handle it. And the church couldn't, they could see the zealotry behind the ideas. And his prior said, even though there wasn't any zealotry. And they had to target him. They had to take him down because the church was threatened. Right.

That one's going to stick to the wall. That's going to be the one. They're going to be like, ah, now you're getting somewhere, Mr. Pryor. I think right now, I think he believes that he's going to be acquitted. So I think he'll be surprised. Do you think that Chad has convinced Lori that throwing her under the bus was part of the plan? Part of their plan. They had a plan.

And then Rye, the guy says this, remember how reluctant and upset Lori got when Archibald was throwing Chad under the bus. Chad sure seemed not as reluctant to throw her under the bus. He seemed fine with it. Any thoughts on that? Yeah, he doesn't care. He'd saw her out in the heartbeat. I mean, but I think Lori will be fine with it because Chad's probably already told her that it's going to happen. And he's just doing it because he needs to be acquitted. One of them has to be acquitted in order to carry on their gathering. Tell me about what did you think about Lindsay Blake. How did you feel Lindsey Blake did? Because I feel like the jurors might have been really confused throughout the entire trial with all the going back and forth. And I thought what Lindsay Blake. Blake did well was sort of tie everything together and remind people of all the evidence that they saw. How did you feel she did, though?

I thought she did great. That's what I said at the start of the show. I thought she did a remarkable job of tying everything together and not only tying it together, but so she told a compelling story and she backed it up with evidence, and that's what juries want. I thought at the end of her closing arguments that there would be virtually no chance for Chad to get acquitted. I kind of enjoyed that it was Lindsay Blake giving that closing argument, a female attorney. Anyway, I love that.

Thoughts on that, John? Yeah, I agree. I think that was part of Chad's hostility through his nonverbals. I think that was part of it. I think that the fact that he had to endure Lindsay Blake doing the closing arguments and doing so well with it, I think it must have irked him to no end. Yeah. Man, he was irked. He was irked. Just watching him. He was irked. Anything else you noticed? Anything else you noticed today? I think it went well for the prosecution. I'll be interested to after the outcome, after there is a verdict, I'll be interested to see what some of the jurors think of prior and in particular with closing arguments.

Yeah, I will be interested as well. They were very dramatic. What did you think about him repeating himself over and over again? Was that a style? He would say, but let me think, Creasing, but Chad is the victim. Chad is the victim. Chad. Target. Target. Chad is the target.

Chad is the target. He'd say something like four times before I went on. I'm like, dude, we could have like done this closing argument like half the time. Was that just a style thing? Is it just an emphasis, a style? Or was it just as annoying as I thought it was? I think it's just, he's repetition is, is, part of what attorneys do. Lindsay Blake did the same thing. She kept saying he's dark,

he knew death percentages, right? And the body had to be destroyed, right? She kept, she had talking points. She kept coming back to you, by the way. So when Prior wants you to know, this is a code from Prior. So he was talking about how so much information was ignored, like texts, for example, that had contrary information than the prosecution presented. And Pryor wants to know that, quote, what I'm doing today is a lost art. Pryor is one of the lucky few, apparently, who can still communicate well and still, right, did you hear that part? He can still communicate and he can still make a compelling argument to the jury.

So to answer your question, I think repetition is part of driving home his message. That's why he's repeating himself so often because clearly we know we've learned from this trial that John Pryor has figured out the lost art of true communication. It was a masterclass in communication from John Pryor. Shetting and communication or how not to shed. Or shedding is okay. Aren't abusers always the victims in their story? Yes, quite frequently. It's one of the main tenets of narcissism is just this inability to take responsibility and to play the victim role and to blame others for all your problems. Because obviously if you're perfect and incapable of making mistakes

and you have no faults, then you're going to have to blame other people. Prior skipped body shaming Tammy today. He didn't blame Tammy for not being petite enough. But he sure shamed the heck out of Lori. He did. Lori, Lori the convicted murderer. But, you know, still, he wanted to make the point somehow that being married five times means that you, you're going to target people for money or whatever.

She was, I don't, I still don't understand why she was targeting him, but whatever it was, it had to do with the fact that she's divorced or she's been married five times. What do you think is going to happen tomorrow? So, so let me, well, let me explain what we know. So we all hung around court again for until they kicked us out when they said the jurors are going back to their hotel. There's a questioner. That's going to make things rush along, by the way. because they can't go home until they have a verdict.

So that's going to push them to get a verdict guilty or not guilty sooner than later. I would, if you want to be there for the verdict, I'd probably be there tomorrow. I don't know how early. But I think there's so much evidence, though, that I think it's quite possible that they're not going to come to an initial agreement without going through a fair amount of evidence. So I think it may take them a moment to get through some evidence. But I don't, I mean, I could be wrong about this. I don't, you've seen the jury and you've seen how they paid attention. But it seems to me like after Lindsay Blake's closing arguments, I just don't know.

It was so compelling. Yeah. I just don't see them deliberating that long. I would expect it by the end of the week. But, you know, it may take. them a day. There's so much evidence. It may take them a day to kind of work through some of it again, just to be sure. I think those are the main points, but it's been a long journey, and here we are at the end. So we've, this is, in some ways, you and I have kind of come full circle. So we started

with this four years ago, and we're seeing it through to the end. You're right. You're right. Right, except that I might get sick tonight And not get you know You're going to miss the verdict No, I will find a way I will find a way I will find a way Jonas fastned in a billcue

Again Ay, aye, aye But Jonas just flina Out of the elandet Morron traffic Little enclare when you It's on job Good thing for industry, school and contor

It is happiness at work from AI products Most people don't realize How much their personal information is being bought and sold every day. Data brokers are making billions, pulling details about you from public records and the internet, and then packaging and selling it,

usually without your consent. That's how your information lands in the hands of scammers, spammers, even stalkers. It's why you get endless robocalls and why ads seem to follow you everywhere. That's where ORA comes in. ORA actively removes your data from broker sites and keeps it off.

They also instantly alert you if your information shows up in a breach or on the dark web. But ORA goes beyond data protection. With one app, you get a VPN, antivirus, password manager, spam call protection, dark web monitoring, and even up to $5 million in identity theft insurance, all backed by 24-7 U.S.-based fraud support. Other companies might sell just credit monitoring, or just a VPN. ORA gives you all of it, together, at the same price competitors charge for just one service.

Start your free trial today atora.com slash remove. Protect yourself now atora.com slash remove.