Up and Vanished - The Trial of Ryan Duke: Part 2

Episode Date: May 13, 2022

The Up and Vanished Team is on the ground in Ocilla reporting on the opening day of Ryan Duke’s trial for the murder of Tara Grinstead. For ad-free listening and for Payne’s exclusive Friday recap episode, subscribe to Tenderfoot+ on Apple Podcasts or visit www.tenderfootplus.com for more details. To learn more about listener data and our privacy practices visit: https://www.audacyinc.com/privacy-policy Learn more about your ad choices. Visit https://podcastchoices.com/adchoices

experience basketball like never before with bet mgm an authorized gaming partner of the nba ready to shoot your shot we've made the bet mgm experience more immersive and fun for all types of basketball fans being on the sidelines is one thing this season experience basketball on the foul line exciting state-of-the-art live tracking technology and dozens of sportsbook selections await you at BetMGM Sportsbook. Tap into every game on your mobile devices. Get up off the sideline and drive to the basket yourself. No matter which team starts popping off, you'll find out why there's truly nothing like laying up a W with the king of sportsbooks. Visit BetMGM.com for terms and conditions. Must be 19 years of age or older. Ontario only. Please play responsibly. If you have any

questions or concerns about your gambling or someone else close to you, please contact Connex Ontario at 1-866-531-2600 to speak to an advisor, free of charge. Hey everyone. Thanks for tuning in to the Up and Vanish trial series. The trial of Ryan Duke.

Opening statements in a trial helps set the tone for arguments both sides will present. It explains the evidence the jury will see and hear, setting the expectations for the course of the trial. It's the first time the prosecution and defense are able to lay out their arguments directly to the jury. Nina instead is in Osceola covering the case for Tenderfoot TV. We have literally been waiting years for today.

Opening statements in the case of Ryan Duke for the murder of Tara Grinstead. The prosecution began their opening statement by reminding the court that Ryan Duke confessed to Tara's murder. He confessed not once, but many times in his words, his DNA, and his prints. He'll tell law enforcement how this has been weighing on him, that he knows he should have come forward. He knows he should have done his best

to give answers to this family. You'll have a chance to see him and make your own decision about this statement. You'll hear from him out of his own words confessing to her murder. You'll see him on video confessing to her murder. And you'll see it in his own handwriting confessing to her murder. Words are useless, but I am burdened with the guilt

of murdering Ms. Grinstead. I don't feel like I deserve to be free to breathe. I can't begin to comprehend the pain I have caused to her family and loved ones. I don't feel like I need to live with the pain I have caused. You'll have a chance to see that document that he wrote. Again, confessing to the murder of Tara Grinstead. He confesses that he's the one that brought the glove. The glove you'll hear about that has DNA.

Tara Grinstead's DNA. He says that when he left her, when he ran after she's on the ground, that he goes home and he gets the glove and he brings the gloves with him along with the blanket and he carries her out of her residence and puts her in the truck. They used their opening statement to lay the framework for their case. They brought up that Tara's home phone was checked when she went missing, but they left out that Marcus Harper's mom was the first one to lay hands on that phone. The prosecutor tells the court that Tara didn't show up at work on Monday, and a call was placed to the neighbors who went to her house to check on her.

They bring up that Tara's married lover, Heath Dykes, was at her home in the late hours on Monday and early hours of Sunday, knocking on her doors and windows looking for her. He left behind a business card with his cell number printed on it. But the prosecution doesn't mention that Dykes never saw the now infamous glove laying on her lawn. They talk about how Osceola's police chief, Billy, responded to the scene himself, summoned by cell phone,

but they don't mention that Tara's former boyfriend, Marcus Harper, works for him. Then they talk about finding DNA in the glove and fingerprints, but not who it belongs to. They are setting the stage for the next several days of trial and the witnesses that they will call to the stand. When the defense offers their opening statement, you can see the structure they are forming, a protective wall around their client, a defense where the lock

on Tara's front door couldn't be picked because she had a strong security lock. It's something similar to what you would see on a door in a hotel, one that can only be locked from the inside. If Tara were home, that security lock would be in place keeping her safe. They want you to believe that she was home and that Ryan Duke broke into her home and harmed her. If you look at the top lock, it's one of those hotel-style locks. So when you go to a hotel and close the door, you can lock it. You can lock it from the inside so that nobody can get in, so that nobody can break in, so that you can't break in with a credit card.

You can't kick that lock. This is the type of lock that if you're home and you have it on your door, the evidence is going to show you would lock it and that Ms. Grinstead would lock evidence is going to show you would lock it. And that Ms. Grinstead would lock this door and would use that to lock the door. The evidence is going to show that that is her habit, that she would lock that top block. And so the version of events that the state has presented and will continue to present conflicts with this. The defense posits that Tara's car wasn't at her home on Sunday until the evening.

You'll hear evidence that Sunday, her car was not there. Later on Sunday, you'll hear from those same witnesses that they saw her car appear around dusk. The car is gone all day. What does that tell you? Her car was not home on Sunday. And if Tara's car wasn't at the house, listeners, where was it? Where was Tara? You're going to hear that there was a lot of evidence taken in this case. There were over, I had to write this down, there were over 117 swabs taken from Ms. Grinstead's car. And why is her car important? Well, you're going to hear evidence that it wasn't

there on this day. You're also going to hear evidence that it returned to her home and it was dirty. The tires were filthy. There was mud all over them. And that Ms. Grinstead did not keep her car that way. So her car was always clean. So that was odd. Also that the seat in her car was pushed all the way back. She was a tiny person. So the seat was pushed back for someone who was much bigger than Ms. Grinstead. Evidence that her car was not there on Sunday and that someone drove her car. So because of that, the police thought that was important, and they swabbed her car. They took fingerprints, and they took DNA swabs.

Only seven of those were ever actually tested. Keep in mind, you and I don't know when Tara was murdered. The bits of her that were recovered were not enough to autopsy, meaning we have no time of death and no cause of death. The defense takes aim early. They're tackling the statement that Ryan made to the GBI. Then they point out that Ryan took a narcotic, a pain medication, prior to making his statement. Now, this is a subject about pain medication that they introduced to potential jurors during voir dire. They are going to present, we anticipate, a theory based on a statement that Ryan made to a GBI agent.

The evidence is going to show that Ryan admitted that he had taken a narcotic pain medicine prior to that statement. The evidence is going to show that he was under the effects of this pain medicine. You'll see it. The state showed you a photo. You'll see it. They go after the glove, attempting to make it less of a smoking gun and more of a misleading piece of evidence that could not be fully explored due to limitations in DNA testing. This glove that didn't appear until Monday morning, the state cannot get Bo Duke's DNA off of that glove. You will hear evidence that they tried. You will hear evidence that they talked with the GBI and tried to make deviations, and you'll hear all about it, but tried very hard to change standards

to get Bo Duke's DNA off of that glove. At best, it was inconclusive. What does inconclusive mean? You'll hear it means a weak match. It means they cannot get his DNA off of that glove. not get his DNA off of that glove. You'll also hear that that glove had at least three DNA profiles on it. Not two, at least three. We're going to talk about the phone records, especially the call that allegedly came from a payphone in Tara's home. Remember, a phone call is not proof that Ryan harmed Tara. Has submitted to you that the phone records are what they call guilty knowledge. That nobody knows about these phone records and they've been kept secret all these years. And so it's sort of like this smoking gun. Well, two things I want to point out with that.

First of all, Tara's phone records do not show a call from a payphone. Her actual certified phone records do not show that she received a call on October 23 call from a pay phone. Her actual certified phone records do not show that she received a call on October 23 from a pay phone. You will hear from a detective that he looked at her phone on her caller ID and that he compared the caller ID time to his watch and so he thinks it is accurate. But that call does not show up on her phone records. Now the state is going to put in, we believe, evidence that someone used that pay phone around that time to call information, okay? But it doesn't show up on her phone records. But I submit to you, what is the evidence that that phone call

proves that Ryan harmed Tara Grinstead. It doesn't. It's not even accurate. Now they're asking, did the state strong-arm the defendant into a confession? The defense tells the court that we're going to learn during testimony what really happened during the questioning of Ryan Duke. This glove you've heard about,

this phone call you've heard about, the state in their opening said these are things that Ryan confessed to. Well, I'm going to read you some of what the evidence is going to show was said to Ryan when he confessed to these things. Listen very carefully during the interview of Ryan, during the GBI interview. Listen very carefully to who introduces these smoking guns first, because the state has submitted that they are evidence of guilty knowledge. Okay. Guilty knowledge would be, oh, well, only the person who did it knows about this. The gloves. Agent Chaudel, tell me about the gloves. I know there were some gloves at your house. Is that going to have your DNA on it?

Ryan, it should. They were mine. Agent Sheldell keeps asking about the gloves. So you use the gloves when you move the body? Ryan, I don't even think I used them. Agent Sheldell, what did you do to clean up? You said you wore the gloves, right? No, sir. Agent Shaddell, when you went to clean up, you wore gloves. Ryan, no, sir. I never put gloves on. Agent Shaddell introduces the gloves. Ryan doesn't.

Agent Shaddell keeps asking him, a person who has taken medicine and is there and is terrified, terrified for his family. The evidence will show that he is scared to death of Bo Dukes because he knows what Bo Dukes has done and he knows what Bo Dukes is capable of. And he is there telling what he thinks he has to tell to protect his family. So when Agent Shaddell introduces the glove, at first he says no, because he didn't. But after repeated questioning, he gives in. The phone call, this guilty knowledge phone call that's been kept secret all these years. Who introduced it?

Agent Shaddell. Agent Shaudel. Agent Chaudel. Did you ever make any phone calls or anything like that to the house? Ryan. No sir. Agent Chaudel. Well we know there were some phone calls that got made to her house. Ryan. Oh yeah that's when I called her. I hadn't gotten her at that point. I was hoping she was okay. Well, how did you call? What did you do? Then Agent Shaddell tells Ryan, I know you're telling the truth. At that point, he's introduced the phone call and Ryan at first disputed it. And then when he says, yeah, yeah, you're right, then Agent Shaddell says you're telling the truth. Maybe Investigator Shaddell isn't the hero of this case after all.

Did Ryan confess to murder in order to protect someone? What are you not going to hear? What else are you not going to hear? You're not going to hear any evidence that Ryan had his blood, semen, saliva, skin cells, prints, anything in that house. Not one piece of evidence that Ryan was in that house. Not one piece of evidence that Ryan was in that car. The state's theory, we believe, is based on a statement that was taken from Ryan and that was not the truth. Does the state know the truth? We'll have to see at the end of this case if the state has presented any evidence that they actually know what happened in this case.

But what we do know is that Ryan did not harm Ms. Grinstead. And at the end of this trial, you will agree with us that Ryan did not harm Ms. Grinstead, that he was not in her home, and that he did not assault her. He did not burglarize her. He's charged with burglarizing. He's charged with assault, that he did not do any of those things. As the defense continues their opening, we are reminded of how much there is in this case that we truly do not know. How many questions remain unanswered? The defense believes that this case comes down to power and influence. And in the courtroom, it's the jury that has all of the power and all of the influence. This case is about power and influence.

The people who have it and the people who don't have it. Ryan Duke has neither. He didn't have power and he didn't have influence. Bo Dukes has both. The state has both. And you're going to see that throughout the evidence in this case. What's great about jury service is that at this point, you all hold the power. You have the influence. And at the end of this case, we're going to come back up here and we're going to

ask you to render a verdict. We're going to ask you to render a verdict that speaks the truth and that speaks justice for everybody involved in this case. And that verdict is going to ask you to render a verdict that speaks the truth and that speaks justice for everybody involved in this case. And that verdict is going to be not guilty because Ryan Duke did not commit the crimes that he is charged with committing in Irwin County. He did not murder Ms. Grinstead. He did not assault Ms. Grinstead. He did not burglarize Ms. Grinstead. He did not conceal her death in Irwin County. He did none of the things that he's indicted for. And you all will agree with us at the end of this trial. Thank you.

Think of the last time you bought something to wear, something to decorate your house, something for your family or friends. What if each time you made a purchase, you got a little something back? With Rakuten, you can. You can earn cash back on just about anything you buy from over 750 stores. If you've ever bought electronics, home decor,

fashion and beauty, or booked a trip, well, you could have got cash back. But don't worry, it's not too late. It's free and easy to use, and you get cash back deposited into your PayPal account or sent to you as a check. Earn cash back at stores like Sephora, Old Navy, and Expedia. It's the smartest way to shop, plain and simple. Start your shopping at

Rakuten.ca or get the Rakuten app. That's R-A-K-U-T-E-N dot C-A. Phil Holloway has been vocal about his thoughts and theories on the trial, concentrating on one specific element of the arguments from both the prosecution and the defense. I think the opening statements were very good by both sides, but particularly what I was interested in was the opening statement by the defense because, you know, we've known for some time what the prosecutor's basic theory of the case was, because let's face it, it's what was fed to them, spoon-fed, if you will, by Bo Dukes. And it's based on almost entirely the alleged confession. And I hesitate to use the word confession. I like to call it an incriminating statement.

But I wanted to hear what the defense had to say about the allegation by them that it's a false confession, because in my opinion, and I've said this before, I said it recently, as recently as CrimeCon, that this does bear a lot of the indicators of being false confessions. False confessions is something that we did a pretty deep dive into in Sworn season two. And even Ashley Merchant, who is Bo Duke's defense counsel, was in that episode. So we explored false confessions.

I know they're real. The true crime consumer of true crime media, these people pretty much understand that false confessions are real. The defense is going to have to educate this jury that's probably not necessarily the average consumer of true crime media. They got to educate this jury that's probably not necessarily the average consumer of true crime media.

They got to educate the jury that, first off, false confessions are real, but secondly, that this might be one. Now, they don't have to prove that this was, in fact, a false confession, but if they can raise enough questions about it, of course, that can amount to reasonable doubt. And if there's reasonable doubt, then that would be an acquittal. This whole idea of building the rapport with the person who's being interviewed so that you're sort of soliciting positive sort of feedback, you're encouraged the person to give you what you want them to say. person to give you what you want them to say. That's the read technique. We're going to see that this interview of Ryan Duke bears some of those hallmarks. There's a lot of problems with the so-called read technique. But also, like Dr. Loftus told me when I interviewed her for Sworn,

she's one of the preeminent experts worldwide on the idea of false memory and false confession and even implanted memory, she confirmed that individuals who are under the influence of drugs or alcohol are really more prone to this type of false confession than people who are completely sober. But to me, the things that really stand out are things about the statement made by Ryan Duke that don't necessarily match the physical evidence. The GBI's summary of the alleged confession is one thing, but it's not the actual confession. So you want to hear and see exactly what words were used, how these things were elicited. And interestingly enough, and this is going to be big,

we're going to learn that not all of the alleged confession was actually recorded. If you don't have a recording, then all you're left with is what the cops say happened and how it happened. And to me, someone who's naturally hardwired to question everything that I hear, I don't want to hear how you describe something. I want to see it for myself, and I want to make up my own mind what weight to give it. If it's not recorded, we can't hear exactly what was asked and how it was asked and under what circumstances. We're left with what Jason Shadel has to say, and he's not exactly an unbiased witness in the case. He certainly has an interest in this jury's verdict.

So the fact that it's not recorded, by the way, is also another classic earmark of a false confession. So the defense has a good bit to work with in this regard, but the incriminating statements made by Ryan are by far the worst thing that Ryan's got going for him. Fortunately, the defense has done their homework. They've got experience. They've learned and educated themselves about false confessions. They've got experts that they've hired to be consultants, and they're even on the witness list. And hopefully, we'll hear some testimony from them as well. That's what this trial seems

to be about right now is poking holes in the state's case, but also establishing that certain factual elements don't line up with what Ryan told them happened, which they just assumed to be the gospel truth. Basically, the prosecution says, we got a confession, case closed. Well, I can tell you from my own personal experience, I've won trials, not guilty verdicts, where there were statements that prosecutors called confessions that, you know, juries just didn't buy. There's been plenty of cases where people have allegedly confessed to something and then years and years later, other evidence conclusively proves that they didn't do it.

So it's a known phenomenon. It's counterintuitive. Why would you confess to that they didn't do it. So it's a known phenomenon. It's counterintuitive. Why would you confess to something you didn't do? But hey, it does happen. And it's not beyond the realm of possibility, particularly when you start adding in things like the lack of this thing being recorded. Bo Dukes basically feeding Agent Shadel his version of the narrative, and then Shadel trying to get Ryan to confirm those things that Bo says. Oh, and by the way, Shadel went out of his way to try to get Ryan to admit to strangling Tara, and he wouldn't do it, couldn't do it, and didn't do it. If I had any disappointments about the openings, and this would apply to both sides, I would have liked to have had the openings be just a little bit longer. Now, there could be

perfectly legitimate strategic reasons for keeping it short and simple. I personally wanted to hear more about the alibi. The defense has filed a formal notice of alibi. They said, you know, Ryan was home asleep in the trailer, and it was Beau that left. Well, unless they've abandoned that alibi defense, I want to know more about it. I want to know how they expect they're going to prove that. So there were some things that I would have liked the merchant team to have given me. But, you know, that's their call. Sometimes it's better to keep it simple. Both sides gave what I thought to be were very, very short opening statements, much shorter than I would have expected for a case of this magnitude.

When Miss Merchant completes her opening and takes her seat, the first witness is called. It's Tara's elderly father, Billy Grinstead. His testimony is brief, but it is powerful. He is shown a copy of Tara's birth certificate, a piece of paper completed with so much hope and optimism on a November day in 1974. Are you familiar with that document? I am. And what is that document? This is her birth certificate. When you say her birth certificate, whose birth certificate? Tara's birth certificate.

Is that a true and accurate copy of her birth certificate? It is. After we hear from Tara's father, Billy Grinstead, the prosecution calls Danielle Giddens. She was one of Tara's pageant girls, just a teenager on that Saturday in 2005. Giddens talks about Tara's house, which was sort of chaotic that day. Tara had many girls over. She was styling hair and applying cosmetics and advising them ahead of the Miss Sweet Potato pageant that evening. A lot of Gidden's testimony is explaining the layout of the house and what is going on. For example, there are photos of Tara's kitchen and there is a hair implement, maybe a curling iron, next to the sink. In the bathroom sink is yet another curling iron.

It's funny how Tara allegedly went to bed on Saturday but managed to complete her evening routine without taking that curling iron out of the bathroom sink. Is that a true or not true depiction of what it looks like on that bed? No. What is different? Her bed is unmade. There's clothes on the bed. When I had returned, her bed was made. With the exception of those things, is this a true or not true depiction of what her bedroom overall looked like back in October of 2005? Yes. Next up is Osceola High School teacher Rhett Roberts.

Did you know Jared Brimstead, the victim in this case? Yes. And how had you met Mr. Brimstead? We met as co-workers, as both being teachers at the school, and we went out on a few dates. Would it be fair to say that at one point you believed you were a suspect in her disappearance? That would be correct. He said she stopped by his house that Saturday night. Tara did not enter his home.

He said he was familiar with Tara's house because his dad had rented it to her. Listeners, it's worth mentioning that Rhett's brother was called as a potential juror in this case. Rhett will testify that when Tara left his home, it was about 8.45 in the evening. When she left your home, do you recall, was she driving? She was driving, yes. And what kind of vehicle was she in? She was in her white sports car. Was anyone else with her when she left your home? No. Do you recall in which direction she headed She was in her white sports car. No. I believe she went west.

That would have been away from her home. Next on the stand is a man named Jared Luke. In 2005, he was one of Tara's students. In 2022, he is the assistant principal at the school he attended. Good morning. My name is Jared Luke. I am assistant principal here at the high school and middle school. I'm born and raised in this city. I've been here my whole life. How old would you have been in 2005?

17. Did you know Tara Grinstead, the victim in this case? I did. How did you know Ms. Grinstead? She taught me in high school. He saw Tara the weekend she vanished because Tara was watching his puppy. She knew I had just gotten a puppy, a German Shepherd, and so we both had a love for German Shepherds. And she knew we were going out of town. She offered to keep Duke that weekend for me.

Yeah, you heard that right. On the weekend Tara went missing, she was dog-sitting a puppy named Duke. He dropped the dog off on Friday, and his brother Phillip would pick up the dog on Saturday. Remember, Tara had a German Shepherd dog of her own, Dolly Madison, and this was a chance for the dogs to socialize in Tara's yard. Jared went back to Tara's house on Sunday evening, because when his brother picked up Duke, he forgot to get the food and water bowls. Jared would arrive at her house around 7.30 that night. It's still daylight. He parked behind her white sports car. He goes to the front door and knocks, but there's no answer. So he walks back across the yard and heads for the gate to get into the backyard and get the

bowls from the shed. At no time does Jared see the latex glove that is such an important part of this case. And when you were walking to our front door, you did not see a glove anywhere in that yard when you were walking to our front door? I did not, no sir. And you didn't see another kind of trash or other debris? No sir.

Our next witness is Jared's brother, Philip Luke. He's the one who picked up the dog on Saturday. When he's cross-examined by the defense, they have questions for him about Ryan Duke and Bo Dukes. You personally knew Ryan Duke at the time of his Grinstead disappearance, right? I did. And other people in your friend group, I guess you had over-lightening friends, knew Ryan as well. Sure. Ryan had a reputation as a peaceful, non-violent person, didn't he? He did. And he had a reputation for being trustworthy.

I would agree, yes. Overall, Ryan was considered a nice guy. Yes. Plight. Yeah. You also knew Bo Dukes at the time Ms Miss Grinstead's disappearance, didn't you? I did. And other people similar to Ryan, sort of friend groups overlapped and people you knew knew Bo.

Sure. Bo had a reputation as a liar, didn't he? He did. And as between Mr. Dukes, Mr. Ryan Duke and Mr. Bo Dukes, Bo was considered the more dominant of those two individuals, wasn't he? He was. The prosecution objects to this line of questioning, but I think the message gets through. Ryan was a nice guy. Bo, on the other hand, Bo was trouble.

So the fact that you indicated that you thought he was a good guy, what was that based on? My interactions with Ryan before she went missing. Okay. So I just want to be clear, in the statements that you've made about Ryan's personality, do you really know what Ryan was like at all in October of 2005? I do not. And as it related to his relationship with Beaudouin, how would you describe their friendship? I would have described them as best friends. Then we have a witness that everyone has been waiting for. I know I was excited to hear him called to the stand, Dr. Troy Davis.

Davis now works near St. Augustine, Florida, but in 2005 he worked with Tara, and he may be the last person to see her alive before she came across her killer or killers. Davis talked about an incident that happened about a week or 10 days before she went missing, a day that Tara became so upset, I think it's fair to say that she was hysterical. Tara pulled her car to the side of the road and sobbed and sobbed. Marcus Harper's dad and stepmom came to her aid, and they called Davis, too.

They drove her car home, and Davis carried Tara into the house. He stayed with her for half the night. You see, Marcus, a man she'd been dating for years, a man she loved and thought she was going to marry, had ended their relationship. He was seeing other people. Tara was despondent. I was concerned about Tara. I'm not a mental health expert, but I was concerned about Tara. How did Tara wind up getting into her house that day? I carried Tara in after trying to talk her into going to that. She was very upset, very distraught.

When you took Tara into her house, what did you do with her? I laid her on the couch, on her couch in her living room, because I was not sure about Tara at that point, where she wanted to leave and we did not want her to leave. Now, listeners, we know that on Saturday night after the pageant, Tara stopped by the Davis home where there was a cookout. Davis tells the court that Tara took a phone call, which she ended with, and I love you. She told me it was an old high school friend. What did I hear her say on the telephone? She had a conversation with someone, and at the end,

she ended the conversation, I love you. That old high school friend was a man she loved, a man she was intimate with. It was her lover, Heath Dykes. Dykes will be our next witness. I'm James Heath Dykes. I work for the Perry Police Department. I run the Criminal Investigative Division. Perry is a community about 80 miles north of Tara's home in Osceola.

In 2005, he was a married father and a police officer in Perry. Were you married in 2005 when your relationship turned to a sexual nature? Yes. How often would you see her? Maybe twice a month. We spoke daily. Dykes tells the court that he last saw Tara on Wednesday, October 19, 2005. The two had plans to see each other on Sunday the 23rd, but those plans would never materialize. Now, Dykes lived almost 90 minutes away, and while he said he had plans to see Tara on Sunday, he didn't get up and head over. Instead, he went deer hunting in the morning,

and in the afternoon, he took his children to a fall festival and went out for lunch. He tried to reach Tara and left her several messages. Then, Dykes said something that I found interesting. He said he called Tara's mom to ask if she knew where Tara was. Mom said no. Now, did Tara's mother know about their intimate relationship? I'm not 100% sure she knew the extent of it. She knew we were really close and real good friends. Okay. Well, we can't say for sure.

I do find it interesting that he both had Ms. Fay's number and that he was comfortable calling her to check in. He said that Tara seemed down or sad on Saturday and that he called her back just once to cheer her up. She was kind of down. She was, I don't know, kind of sad. And I, you know, tried to, you know, talk to her and cheer her up, you know, try to be funny with her. Basically, when we hung up the phone, about five or six seconds later after we hung up. I called her right back and she answered the phone. She seemed to be in a better mood. It'll be nearly 10 30 p.m. on Sunday when he decides to drive to Osceola to check on Tara. I pulled up in the driveway and it was late

for around 12 a.m. I called Miss Faye and told her I was there. I went to the front door, Faye and told her I was there. I went to the front door, knocked on the door several times, walked around. The dog was barking and I walked around to the fence and patted it, calmed down. And I walked back over to the carport where a car was and I put my hand on top of the car to see if it was warm and it was cold. I tapped on the window up there trying to see if, you know, put my knuckles and hit the window to see if, you know, somebody would hear me. I could see some ambient light in there like a computer screen was lit up, like a screensaver was lit up. And I could see the ambient light in there, but that's all you could see. It was very dim. Yes, sir.

And I just banged on it trying to get somebody to come to the door. Why? Because I was worried about something was wrong I just knew it wasn't like her character to uh not respond not answer just completely go Yeah. Hey Terrence, we're at least in the phone. Trying to get worried about you now. Okay, just let me know you're alive. If you have, I'll talk to you in another call or update. Hey Terrence, worried about you is I called your mom now. She said she didn't get over it either. She said she didn't get over it either. She just wanted to know you were alright, not preaching. She wanted to know if you were okay. She had one child with her parents.

She wanted to know if you were okay. It's more in the morning. She's on the way to the hospital. I want you to call her and let her know you're okay. I got a phone with you let him know you're okay. I got a call from Tina. Call me. Bye. Yeah, I got a call from Tina. Wait, you got a connection?

Did you ever, did Tina ever call you back? No. The defense will ask if he saw a latex glove on the lawn. Heath Dykes is a detective. He is an investigator. He's at his girlfriend's house late in the evening on a Sunday because he's worried about her, but he doesn't notice any glove on the lawn. Okay, so your testimony is that you walked over that area twice.

Yes, sir. And you don't, you can't say one way or the other whether you would have noticed it. I did not see the glove. I don't know if it was there or not. Is it possible that the glove isn't there yet? That's something to consider. He did know that Tara was afraid of a few things. One was Marcus.

She said he was abusive during their relationship. She was also afraid of being attacked in her home, which made her security conscious. Sir, did you have an occasion to talk to Ms. Greenstead about anything she was fearful of? One of her biggest fears was somebody coming in her house and getting her. Was that true in October of 2005? Yes. In fact, when we spoke, you mentioned that was her greatest fear, wasn't it? That's what she had told me. At the end of Heath's visit to Tara's home on Sunday, he takes one of his business cards.

As a police officer, he carries cards, and he sticks one in the screen door at the front of the house. Then he starts the long, lonely drive north back to Perry. Our next witness is a breath of fresh air in the courtroom. It's Joe Fortier, Tara's friend and next-door neighbor. Joe and his wife Myrtle are close with Tara. They have keys to Tara's home. Well, after a while after she moved in there,

she was, you know, in and out of our house, and she's become near about like a daughter. Because we saw her a lot more than we did our own kids. But Joe Fortier is a hardy 79-year-old. He appears healthy and tells the court that he still works as a CPA here in town. He tells the court that Mr. Dykes, that's Heath, called him on Monday morning asking him to check on Tara. First, Fortier called the principal. Small town, remember? But he was out of town, so Fortier called the school and learned that Tara didn't show up. Then he called his wife, who was at work, and told her to come home.

Myrtle is the one with the key to Tara's house. Somehow, Larry and Dina Harper, that's Marcus Harper's dad and stepmom, are also at Tara's house when Myrtle arrives with the key. The four enter Tara's home to search for her. Tara's house was modest, so the search didn't take long. When there is no sign of Tara in the house, Joe Fortier steps outside to call police. That's when he notices a latex glove in the yard. He said he also found the business card from Heath Dykes. The defense will ask if the house showed signs of a struggle, and Fortier responds, signs of a bunch of girls coming in and out, yeah. And this draws a laugh from the gallery. Our next witness is Dina Causei. You may know her best as Marcus Harper's stepmom.

Marcus's dad died back in 2019. And while they do touch on Tara dating Marcus, the testimony I found most compelling was that while Dina was in Tara's house, she noticed her phone's handset on the floor of the bathroom and she picked it up. Her husband redirected her, hey, don't touch anything,

and she put it up. Her husband redirected her, hey, don't touch anything, and she put it back. I find it concerning that she touched Tara's home phone. She also saw but claims not to have touched Tara's cell phone, which was charging. After Dina is Osceola Police Chief Billy Hancock. I'm Billy Hancock. I'm Chief of Police of the city of Osceola. And how long have you been chief of police in Osceola? 29 years and 10 months. Chief Billy, as he is affectionately known, has been the chief in Osceola for nearly 30 years. He said that he got a call from Joe Fortier on his cell phone and headed over. When he arrived, he found the Fortiers and the Harpers standing around.

He said that he called the Osceola Police Department's one and only detective, Bill Bars. Tara's car was parked in its usual place and there was a latex glove on the lawn. So you saw the glove twice while you were on scene? Yes, sir. Once when you walked to the front door and then once when you came back out onto the front porch? That was the crime. And as you told me, it stuck out like a sore thumb. Yes. It was the crime. Yes. It's very obvious. I did not.

Yes, based on what I was being told. I think it looked normal. There was nothing that stuck out to you that would suggest it was Price? Nothing. He said that when news spread of Tara being missing, the department was overwhelmed with tips and calls. He said that these days they don't keep much on Tara's case because everything was turned over to the GBI. On redirect, he's asked a few questions,

but one I thought was particularly powerful. As you sit here today, sir, is there a report in the Osceola Police Department's file indicating a report of a burned body in Fitzgerald Farms from November of 2005? Yes. Nina, instead, our reporter down in Osceola, joining me once again. Nina, how are you? How are things going? It's been a couple of days since we last spoke. Yes, I'm doing well, Eric.

It's been a couple of very interesting days in court. Look, Phil Holloway was talking about how there was a bit of, well, the prosecution was objecting a lot over the course of this case or the course of this trial. Do you get that sense? What's the mood like between the prosecution and the defense? So up until today, I would have said that it was a cordial exchange in the courtroom, but things definitely got more tense this morning and then apparently came to a head today at lunch. ahead today at lunch. I have been seeing a lot of objections from the prosecution, JD, calling those out. And it's really hampering the flow of the defense, in my opinion.

Their questioning is maybe not going as smoothly as it could because they keep getting sort of pulled back with these objections. Their questions didn't flow maybe as well as they could, which could potentially make it less impactful for the jurors. I was going to ask, do you think that's going to affect the jurors? In which way do you feel like it would sway them or how do you think it would sway them in that case? We've had a lot of repetition in court, a lot of witnesses. Earlier in the week, we were establishing photographs of Tara's house, photographs of Tara's yard, photographs of Tara's car. Then we've been bringing in evidence and looking at those photographs and looking at phone records. And we just seem to keep going over.

Once we've established them in evidence, then we're talking about them with this witness. Then we're talking about them with the next witness. So I think the jurors are doing a good job picking up what they are supposed to be picking up. The jurors seem focused and attentive and interested. Any contentious moments or anything like that? Anything to really make this kind of trial, anything that would add a little bit of spice to the proceedings? So today there were some fireworks in the courtroom. This is Wednesday, and the judge dismissed the jury for lunch.

And the rest of us, the press, with the exception of the court TV people, we filed out with the rest of the gallery. And apparently while we were at lunch, there was a discussion, a rather animated discussion involving the judge, the prosecution, the defense about the confession tape and about it being admissible or inadmissible, about parts being admissible or inadmissible. And it sounds like the honorable judge scolded Mr. Gibbs, who's the attorney for the defense, scolded Mr. Gibbs, who's the attorney for the defense, in open court and was very firm with him. And I know this because later in the day, he apologized to Mr. Gibb and said, I reprimanded you in open court and I feel that I should apologize in open court. But after that lunchtime, if you want to call it a kerfuffle,

between the prosecution and the defense, things were definitely tense between the two factions. They literally had to go through the transcript of the confession line by line, page by page. And we're talking about a two and a half hour confession. Fortunately, they made pretty good time, two and a half hour confession. Fortunately, they made pretty good time, but it was definitely, the edges were definitely a little sharper when they were responding to one another as they sorted out what was admissible, what was inadmissible, what was hearsay, what could be allowed in. What does that sound like as you're in there listening to what's going on? So my understanding, and I'm going to be very candid with listeners, they played the confession in court and it was really hard to hear, like frustratingly hard to

listen to because Jason Shadel is loud and direct. And then you've got Ryan who's doing this confession and talking with him and he's sort of low and mumbly and harder to hear. So it was really a challenge to capture what was going on as someone in the gallery. And I think, I fear that tomorrow it's going to be a challenge for the jurors. They are going to hear a redacted recording. They are going to see a redacted recording. And when I say they're going to see a redacted recording, the image of Ryan with his long shaggy hair, you know, we've all seen the picture and long shaggy hair, scraggly beard. He's wearing the striped shirt. I think it's green and white. They're just going to mute him and they're going to play the confession in court, but there are going to be parts of the

video confession where they just mute the audio. So you can't hear what he's saying because it's been redacted. That sounds like it's going to be frustrating for everybody. I don't know. I'm sure there's reasons for the redactions, but wouldn't it make more sense just to play the whole thing? It would be ideal if they could play the whole thing, but there's a lot of, well, Bo said, or Bo told me, or I know when Bo did this, and that can't be admitted. And again, this is my understanding from sitting in on a jury-free afternoon in court today. And what happens after this? I mean, this is the kind of, I think this is the central focus of the prosecution, if I'm not mistaken. And what happens after this? Where does their case go? My understanding is that they have some more law enforcement witnesses to call,

including the GBI agent who was in the room with Chanel and Ryan when he confessed. I know that's one of the witnesses coming up. The prosecution has talked about wrapping up their side of the case by Monday. Does it look like it would take probably as long for the defense to kind of state their case or state their defense? I would have to look at the witness list the defense has put forward and if it differs from the prosecution's witness list,

because I know some of the key points the defense wants to present and wants to get through to the jury is that a phone call is not evidence of a crime. His confession was given under duress. He was medicated. He was, you could argue, strong-armed by the GBI. He was intimidated by the GBI. I think that's what they're going to argue. And then there is the angle that they're taking that Tara's car was gone from her home at some point on Sunday, which throws the whole timeline into question. I think this case could go to the jury as early

as next week. So aside from the frustrating confession tape, it seemed like earlier in the week we had audio issues in the courtroom. Are those still going on? How has that kind of been handled over the course of the trial? So the audio issues have gotten better. I think if you're watching or listening to the trial online, you will notice that Tuesday was a big improvement and same with today, Wednesday, big improvement in sound quality. Part of it was some changes that our friends at Court TV made

with their equipment in the courtroom. Also, I think that they just got a better handle on things and we've gotten used to the rather unusual sound that the air conditioning unit makes when it kicks on in court. People are asking, is there a chicken in the courtroom? Nope, no chicken in the courtroom. That is the sound the air conditioning makes. This is a vintage building. It is a beautiful old building and it creaks a little bit. And did you get in a little bit of trouble over the course of today's events? I might've gotten my hand slapped a little bit today, but I deserved it. I had my phone in court,

which is a big no-no. And I was texting, I was texting you and I was a little more open with it than I should have been. And I was redirected and I apologized and it's not appropriate. My father was a lawyer. I have absolute respect for the decorum required in a courtroom and I should have known better and done better. So Thursday, it looks like they're lined up to go over this confession tape. You've got, you know, the GBI's favorite witness and then Friday's a half day. What's, you know, what, Are you excited about this rest of the

week when it comes to the trial? I am excited. Tomorrow, I'm finally going to get to lay eyes on Jason Shadel from the GBI. He's the one that got the confession out of Ryan Duke. And we're going to go through the confession tape line by line. We're going to hear it. The jury is going to hear it. If you watched on Court TV, you may have heard or not heard because the audio was really questionable, parts of it. And then Friday sounds like it could be a shortened day. Some of the witnesses that they wanted may not be available until Monday. And hopefully the prosecution wraps up on Monday and we're talking about dissecting the defense and what they're doing and how they're kind of

countering everything that's been said so far. Nina, thank you so much for your hard work, your continued hard work. And we'll catch you next time. Sounds good. Thank you, Eric. Tune in Tuesday for more on the Up and Vanish trial series, The Trial of Ryan Duke. Don't forget to tune in to Payne's Weekly Recap every Friday on Tenderfoot+. Up and Vanish is produced by Tenderfoot TV in Atlanta,

with production support by Core TV. Created by Payne Lindsey. Executive producer, Donald Albright. Produced by Thrasher Banks, Meredith Stedman, and Eric Quintana. Edited by Thrasher Banks. Hosting and field production by Nina Instead. Music by Makeup and Vanity Set. Sound design and mixing by Cooper Skinner. Original artwork by Nina Instead. Music by Makeup and Vanity Set. Sound Design and Mixing by Cooper Skinner.

Original Artwork by Trevor Eiler. Special thanks to Beth Hemphill, Julie Grant, and Philip Holloway. Check out the discussion board at upandvantage.com. If you have any questions, leave us a voicemail at 770-545-6411. For ad-free listening and Payne's exclusive

Friday recap episode, subscribe to TenorFoot Plus on Apple Podcasts or visit tenorfootplus.com