Is Chad Daybell's defense unraveling mere months before his high-profile murder trial? This question looms large in the latest episode of the "Hidden Killers" podcast, where host Tony Brueski delves into the recent courtroom drama with former Felony Prosecutor and attorney Eric Faddis. The focal point of their discussion: John Pryor, Daybell's attorney, seeking withdrawal from the case and the judge's firm denial of this request.

 

 Pryor's attempt to exit the case, citing non-payment and his lack of qualification for a capital murder case, was met with skepticism by the judge. "You signed up to be Chad Daybell's attorney... You're on the ride," the judge reportedly declared. Faddis, joining Brueski, dissected the merits of Pryor's claims.

 

 Discussing the financial aspect, Faddis noted, "Daybell’s been in custody for quite some time, so I doubt that the attorney is just now learning Chad Daybell can’t pay." He suggested that Pryor should have foreseen the financial difficulties and communicated them to the court much earlier.

 

 The conversation then turned to Pryor's sudden realization of his lack of qualification for a capital case. Faddis likened it to a lawyer taking on a complex case outside their expertise and realizing their inadequacy too late. "It would be a calamity," he said, implying that such a realization should have been made long before the trial was imminent.

 

 The timing of Pryor's withdrawal request, just three months before the trial, sparked debate over its potential strategic underpinnings. Brueski and Faddis explored whether Pryor's move could be a calculated play to create an appellate issue, perhaps a bid to save Daybell's life by later arguing ineffective counsel.

 

 Faddis elucidated the implications of such a strategy. "If Chad Daybell is convicted and they’ve got a statement from his attorney saying, ‘Hey, I’m not good enough to, or I don’t have the experience to handle a death penalty case’... Is an appellate court going to look at that and say, ‘gosh, did this guy really get a fair shake?’"

 

 The dialogue shifted to the nuances of appellate issues in death penalty cases. While a successful appeal could potentially overturn the death sentence, Faddis clarified it wouldn't necessarily reverse the entire conviction. "It likely wouldn’t overturn the entire conviction at the guilt phase at the trial level," he stated.

 

 The duo speculated whether Pryor's arguments, perceived by some as embarrassing admissions of professional inadequacy, were actually part of a larger, more desperate strategy to at least spare Daybell from the death penalty. "Is this John Pryor essentially saying, ‘Hey, Chad Daybell, I can’t save your freedom, but I might be able to spare your life’?" pondered Faddis.

 

 As the conversation wrapped up, Brueski and Faddis agreed that the situation surrounding Daybell's defense is as complex as it is extraordinary. With the trial fast approaching and the defense seemingly in disarray, the question that now hangs in the balance is: What impact will Pryor's continued, albeit reluctant, representation have on the outcome of Chad Daybell's case? And in the shadow of the legal drama, can justice be served?

Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj

The latest on Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK’s Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com