3 MAY 2024 · Chad Daybell is a former gravedigger and author of apocalyptic novels. He gained notoriety in 2020 in connection with the deaths of his former wife, Tammy Daybell, and his new wife, Lori Vallow Daybell's two children, Tylee Ryan and Joshua "JJ" Vallow. The case has received significant media attention due to its bizarre and complex nature. Chad Daybell and Lori Vallow were both involved in a doomsday prepper group and shared similar religious beliefs. They married shortly after the deaths of both of their former spouses. The deaths of Tammy Daybell and the two children were initially considered unrelated, but suspicions arose when investigators discovered inconsistencies and strange behavior from Chad and Lori. Tammy Daybell died in October 2019 under suspicious circumstances, initially attributed to natural causes. However, her body was exhumed after law enforcement began investigating the deaths of Tylee Ryan and JJ Vallow. Autopsy results have not been publicly released. Tylee Ryan, 17, and JJ Vallow, 7, were reported missing in September 2019. Their disappearance sparked a nationwide search. Months later, their bodies were found buried on Chad Daybell's property in Salem, Idaho. Autopsies revealed that Tylee had been dismembered and burned, while JJ had been wrapped in plastic and duct tape. Chad Daybell was arrested and charged with destruction, alteration, or concealment of evidence after the children's bodies were discovered on his property. Lori Vallow was also arrested and charged with multiple counts, including desertion and nonsupport of dependent children, obstruction, solicitation to commit a crime, and contempt of court. In this episode recap what went down during day number 14 of the Chad Daybell trial. (commercial at 10:03) to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com source: https://www.eastidahonews.com/2024/05/live-updates-mother-sister-in-law-take-the-stand-and-body-camera-footage-is-played-on-day-15-of-daybell-trial/

3 MAY 2024 · A motion for recusal or dismissal of a judge is a legal request made by one party in a case asking that the judge assigned to the case be removed or disqualified from presiding over it. This motion can be based on various grounds, such as bias or conflict of interest, which may impair the judge's ability to fairly and impartially adjudicate the case. The party making the motion typically presents evidence or arguments supporting their claim for recusal or dismissal, and the decision on whether to grant the motion is ultimately made by another judge or judicial authority. If granted, a new judge will be assigned to the case to ensure a fair trial or proceeding. - Basis for the Motion: The party seeking recusal or dismissal typically asserts that the judge has a bias, prejudice, or conflict of interest that could affect their ability to fairly adjudicate the case. This bias could be based on personal relationships, financial interests, previous involvement in the case, or other factors that create the appearance of partiality. - Legal Standards: Different jurisdictions have specific rules and legal standards governing when a judge should be recused or dismissed. These standards often require a showing of actual bias or the appearance of bias that would undermine public confidence in the integrity of the judicial process. - Filing the Motion: The party making the motion submits a formal written document to the court detailing the grounds for the recusal or dismissal request. This document may include supporting evidence, such as affidavits, witness statements, or legal precedent, to bolster the argument for why the judge should step aside. - Opposition and Response: The opposing party has an opportunity to respond to the motion, either agreeing or disputing the grounds for recusal or dismissal. They may present counterarguments or evidence to support the judge's impartiality and argue against the motion. - Decision by the Court: The decision on whether to grant the motion is ultimately made by another judge or judicial authority, typically someone higher in the judicial hierarchy. This ensures an independent review of the allegations and promotes public confidence in the integrity of the judicial process. - Consequences of Granting the Motion: If the motion is granted, the judge in question will be recused or dismissed from the case, and a new judge will be assigned to hear the matter. This helps to preserve the fairness and integrity of the legal proceedings and ensures that justice is served. (commercial at 7:34) to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com source: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1MMQGzsGkBk-Kxd3uiIyYzX6gnIlJKet2/view?pli=1

3 MAY 2024 · A motion for recusal or dismissal of a judge is a legal request made by one party in a case asking that the judge assigned to the case be removed or disqualified from presiding over it. This motion can be based on various grounds, such as bias or conflict of interest, which may impair the judge's ability to fairly and impartially adjudicate the case. The party making the motion typically presents evidence or arguments supporting their claim for recusal or dismissal, and the decision on whether to grant the motion is ultimately made by another judge or judicial authority. If granted, a new judge will be assigned to the case to ensure a fair trial or proceeding. - Basis for the Motion: The party seeking recusal or dismissal typically asserts that the judge has a bias, prejudice, or conflict of interest that could affect their ability to fairly adjudicate the case. This bias could be based on personal relationships, financial interests, previous involvement in the case, or other factors that create the appearance of partiality. - Legal Standards: Different jurisdictions have specific rules and legal standards governing when a judge should be recused or dismissed. These standards often require a showing of actual bias or the appearance of bias that would undermine public confidence in the integrity of the judicial process. - Filing the Motion: The party making the motion submits a formal written document to the court detailing the grounds for the recusal or dismissal request. This document may include supporting evidence, such as affidavits, witness statements, or legal precedent, to bolster the argument for why the judge should step aside. - Opposition and Response: The opposing party has an opportunity to respond to the motion, either agreeing or disputing the grounds for recusal or dismissal. They may present counterarguments or evidence to support the judge's impartiality and argue against the motion. - Decision by the Court: The decision on whether to grant the motion is ultimately made by another judge or judicial authority, typically someone higher in the judicial hierarchy. This ensures an independent review of the allegations and promotes public confidence in the integrity of the judicial process. - Consequences of Granting the Motion: If the motion is granted, the judge in question will be recused or dismissed from the case, and a new judge will be assigned to hear the matter. This helps to preserve the fairness and integrity of the legal proceedings and ensures that justice is served. (commercial at 9:54) to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com source: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1MMQGzsGkBk-Kxd3uiIyYzX6gnIlJKet2/view?pli=1

3 MAY 2024 · Massachusetts Rule of Criminal Procedure 17 (Mass. R. Crim. P. 17) outlines the procedures for subpoenas in criminal cases within the Massachusetts court system. Here's a detailed summary of its key provisions: - Authority and Purpose: Rule 17 derives its authority from the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court and is designed to facilitate the production of evidence and the summoning of witnesses in criminal proceedings. - Issuance of Subpoenas: The rule allows for the issuance of subpoenas by the clerk of the court, a notary public, or any attorney authorized to practice law in Massachusetts. Subpoenas may be issued for the attendance of witnesses or the production of documents or other tangible evidence. - Form and Content: Subpoenas must be issued in writing and must command the person to whom it is directed to attend and give testimony, or to produce specified documents or tangible things, at a specified time and place. - Service of Subpoenas: Subpoenas may be served by any person who is not a party to the case and who is at least 18 years old. Service may be made by delivering a copy of the subpoena to the person named in it, or by leaving a copy at their residence with a person of suitable age and discretion. - Witness Fees and Mileage: Witnesses who comply with a subpoena are entitled to receive witness fees and mileage reimbursement as provided by law. - Protection of Persons Subject to Subpoenas: Persons subject to subpoenas may seek protection from undue burden or harassment by filing a motion with the court. The court may quash or modify a subpoena if it is unreasonable or oppressive. - Contempt for Failure to Obey Subpoena: Failure to obey a subpoena without reasonable excuse may result in a finding of contempt by the court. Contempt may be punished by fines, imprisonment, or other sanctions. - Service of Subpoenas Outside the Commonwealth: The rule provides procedures for the service of subpoenas outside the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. - Service of Subpoenas on Behalf of the Commonwealth: When the Commonwealth is the party seeking evidence or witnesses, subpoenas may be issued and served by any attorney authorized to represent the Commonwealth. - Notice to Parties: The rule requires that notice of the issuance of a subpoena must be given to all parties in the case. Overall, Mass. R. Crim. P. 17 is designed to ensure the efficient and fair gathering of evidence and witness testimony in criminal cases, while also providing protections for individuals subject to subpoenas. It establishes clear procedures for the issuance, service, and enforcement of subpoenas within the Massachusetts court system. As we continue to get prepared for the Karen Read trial that kicks off April 29th, we are now takign a look at the Commonwealth's memorandum in opposition to defendants motion pursusant to rule 17 of criminal precedure directed to Brian Albert, Verizon and AT&T. (commercial at 7:40) to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com source: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1MMQGzsGkBk-Kxd3uiIyYzX6gnIlJKet2/view?pli=1

3 MAY 2024 · From the archives: 1-7-23 Bryan Kohberger, the man suspected of murdering four college students in Moscow, Idaho might be facing not only life behind bars, but a possible date with executioner of Idaho. Sources are reporting that the Idaho Prosecutors responsible for trying Kohberger have signaled that they will, in fact, seek the death penalty at trial instead of seeking life in prison. (commercial at 7:56) to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com source: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/idaho-prosecutors-will-seek-death-penalty-says-casey-anthony-judge/ar-AA164HoL?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=f27b2ba9066e4847b520493777b77fb1

3 MAY 2024 · From the archives: 2-2-23 On this edition of the morning update, we take a look at some of the headlines from the past few days and see where things currently stand as of this morning. (commercial at 8:30) to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com source: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/crime/idaho-murders-update-reddit-bryan-kohberger-eyebrows-b2274194.html

3 MAY 2024 · The dive into the court documents continues in this episode as we once again discussing the gag order. This time, we are taking a look at Kohberger's response to the AP's attempt to act as an Intervenor. (commercial at 7:33) to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com source: https://s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/isc.coi/CR29-22-2805/060623+Response+to+Associated+Press+Motion+to+Intervene++Motion+to+Vacate+the+Amended+Nondissemination+Or.pdf

3 MAY 2024 · The dive into the court documents continues in this episode as we once again discussing the gag order. This time, we are taking a look at Kohberger's response to the AP's attempt to act as an Intervenor. (commercial at 7:00) to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com source: https://s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/isc.coi/CR29-22-2805/060623+Response+to+Associated+Press+Motion+to+Intervene++Motion+to+Vacate+the+Amended+Nondissemination+Or.pdf

2 MAY 2024 · The dive into the court documents continues in this episode as we once again discussing the gag order. This time, we are taking a look at Kohberger's response to the AP's attempt to act as an Intervenor. (commercial at 7:14) to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com source: https://s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/isc.coi/CR29-22-2805/060623+Response+to+Associated+Press+Motion+to+Intervene++Motion+to+Vacate+the+Amended+Nondissemination+Or.pdf

2 MAY 2024 · The dive into the court documents continues in this episode as we once again discussing the gag order. This time, we are taking a look at Kohberger's response to the AP's attempt to act as an Intervenor. (commercial at 7:17) to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com source: https://s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/isc.coi/CR29-22-2805/060623+Response+to+Associated+Press+Motion+to+Intervene++Motion+to+Vacate+the+Amended+Nondissemination+Or.pdf