Latest / Murder Files Unsealed / Treehouse Murder of Brandon Chicklis

Transcript

Treehouse Murder of Brandon Chicklis · Murder Files Unsealed

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: Okay, so are you ready for this? This deep dive?
• 0:04
  It's a wild one. It's like straight out of one
• 0:06
  of those true crime shows, like a fatal attraction kind
• 0:09
  of thing.
• 0:10
  Speaker 2: Oh is there a treehouse involved? I love on those
• 0:12
  pop up in cases.
• 0:13
  Speaker 1: You know it. There's a mysterious treehouse right at the
• 0:17
  center of it.
• 0:17
  Speaker 2: All ooh, this is going to be good.
• 0:19
  Speaker 1: It's a wild ride. And get this. Listeners like you
• 0:22
  sent in to count them? Two news articles on this
• 0:26
  whole thing.
• 0:26
  Speaker 2: Wow, they must have been hooked. What's the case all about?
• 0:29
  Speaker 1: It's about this twenty four year old woman, Julia Enright,
• 0:32
  who got convicted of killing her ex boyfriend, Brandon Chickliss.
• 0:36
  Speaker 2: Okay, ex boyfriend already sounds messy, and you said convicted?
• 0:39
  So what's the deep dive for? What else is there? Well?
• 0:42
  Speaker 1: That's the thing, right, We got to unpack all the details,
• 0:44
  try to understand what went down. Was it premeditated or
• 0:48
  what they call a crime of passion? That's a whole
• 0:50
  psychological puzzle.
• 0:51
  Speaker 2: Sounds right up our ally, So where do we even
• 0:53
  begin with this one?
• 0:54
  Speaker 1: All right? So rewind back to June twenty eighteen. We've
• 0:57
  got Julia Enright and Brandon chickliss Xes but they were
• 1:03
  still like on good terms, you know, they agreed to
• 1:06
  meet up, and what went down at that meeting? Well
• 1:08
  that's the million dollar question.
• 1:10
  Speaker 2: Okay, So that's where the juicy stuff comes in, right,
• 1:12
  what do we know about their meetup?
• 1:14
  Speaker 1: So this is where it gets really twisty. We have
• 1:17
  en Right cloning she acted in self defense, she says,
• 1:20
  Chickless assaulted her. But then you have the prosecution saying no,
• 1:24
  this is premeditated murder, that she planned the whole thing.
• 1:26
  Speaker 2: All. That's so we've got two totally different sides to
• 1:28
  the story already.
• 1:29
  Speaker 1: Yep. Talk about conflicting narratives, right, Yeah, and this is
• 1:32
  where the treehouse makes its grand entrance. It was on
• 1:35
  Enright's family property, and let me tell you it becomes
• 1:38
  a key piece of the puzzle.
• 1:40
  Speaker 2: The treehouse. Huh all right, I'm intrigued.
• 1:43
  Speaker 1: How so, Well, think about it. The defense is saying
• 1:46
  it was a place where they used to hang out,
• 1:48
  you know, implying maybe their relationship wasn't completely over. But
• 1:52
  then there's the prosecution saying nope, it was the scene
• 1:54
  of the crime. Talk about a loaded location.
• 1:57
  Speaker 2: Right, Wow, Yeah, that treehouse is like a big old
• 2:00
  question mark in the middle of this whole thing. So
• 2:03
  they meet up. There are two sides to what happened.
• 2:06
  What came next?
• 2:07
  Speaker 1: Okay, so seventeen days after they meet up, get this
• 2:10
  Chickley body.
• 2:11
  Speaker 2: Is sound Oh no, seventeen days later found.
• 2:14
  Speaker 1: Where yes, seventeen days, wrapped in a tarp and plastic bags,
• 2:18
  dumped on the side of a highway.
• 2:19
  Speaker 2: Sounds like someone wanted to make sure he was gone exactly.
• 2:23
  Speaker 1: And that discovery, as you can imagine, set the whole
• 2:25
  legal process in motion. The cops start digging, and they're
• 2:29
  looking at En right, especially some of what they call
• 2:31
  her unsettling interests.
• 2:33
  Speaker 2: Unsettling like what could be so unsettling they'd think murder?
• 2:37
  Speaker 1: Oh well, they brought up her work as a dominatrix
• 2:39
  for one, and get this, they found her journals.
• 2:45
  Speaker 2: Ooh, journals are like gold mines in these cases. What
• 2:48
  was in them? Spill the tea?
• 2:50
  Speaker 1: So I'm glad you said tea, because apparently there's a
• 2:51
  lot of talk about blood, like a lot. They painted
• 2:55
  a picture of her being fascinated with it. They even
• 2:57
  brought up this whole thing about her allegedly trying to
• 3:00
  get a fetus from planned parenthood.
• 3:02
  Speaker 2: Well, hold up a fetus. Where are they even going
• 3:04
  with this?
• 3:05
  Speaker 1: I know, right, it's a lot, but the judge said
• 3:08
  that part wasn't admissible in court. But still they're building
• 3:11
  this case right, making her seem obsessed with death and
• 3:14
  all that.
• 3:14
  Speaker 2: Okay, I see where they're going with this, But fascination
• 3:16
  with dark stuff that doesn't automatically.
• 3:18
  Speaker 1: Equal murderer, right exactly. And that's the difference between first
• 3:22
  and second degree murder. First degree they got to prove
• 3:25
  it was planned, premeditated. Second degree it's more like a
• 3:28
  crime of passion, something that happened in the heat of
• 3:31
  the moment, got.
• 3:31
  Speaker 2: It, got it. So did they actually find anything that
• 3:36
  directly pointed to premeditation?
• 3:38
  Speaker 1: Well, this is where it gets even more complicated. Yeah,
• 3:40
  the prosecution brought in this whole gift theory.
• 3:43
  Speaker 2: A gift? Who are they a gift for who?
• 3:46
  Speaker 1: They claimed the murder was a gift Forget this her
• 3:49
  boyfriend at the time, John Lynd.
• 3:51
  Speaker 2: You're kidding. What evidence did they have to support that?
• 3:54
  Speaker 1: They said her journals mentioned killing in a way that
• 3:57
  suggested it was meant to please this new guy. A
• 3:59
  whole big thing in the court room.
• 4:01
  Speaker 2: Wow, talk about a twist. So did they ever bring
• 4:04
  this John Lynn guy in to testify?
• 4:06
  Speaker 1: They tried, but he took the fifth classic.
• 4:09
  Speaker 2: Well that just throws another log on the conspiracy fire,
• 4:11
  doesn't it.
• 4:12
  Speaker 1: Totally? And get this, the prosecution even shinted that he
• 4:16
  might become a co defendant later on as of right now,
• 4:19
  though he hasn't been charged with anything.
• 4:22
  Speaker 2: Man, this is already a wild ride and we're just
• 4:25
  getting started.
• 4:26
  Speaker 1: Oh there's so much more to uncover, so many twists
• 4:28
  and turns already, right, and remember this is a murder trial,
• 4:31
  so the stakes are high. It's not just about morbig curiosity.
• 4:35
  The prosecution had to convince a jury that Enright.
• 4:38
  Speaker 2: Was guilty, absolutely, and they had their work cut out
• 4:40
  for them. I mean, it's one thing to have journals
• 4:42
  and theories, but they needed more concrete evidence, right right.
• 4:46
  Speaker 1: And this is where it gets even creepier. They started
• 4:48
  digging into en Right's past, and let me tell you,
• 4:51
  what they found wasn't pretty. They bring in this witness,
• 4:55
  someone who knew Enright, and this person starts describing some
• 4:58
  really unsettling stuff.
• 5:00
  Speaker 2: Oh. I love when they bring in those wildcard witnesses.
• 5:02
  What did this person have to say?
• 5:04
  Speaker 1: So get this. This witness claims that Enwright had this
• 5:08
  thing for collecting roadkill, like you'd pick it up off
• 5:11
  the street and everything road kill.
• 5:12
  Speaker 2: Okay, that's a new one. What was she doing with
• 5:15
  dead animals?
• 5:16
  Speaker 1: It gets weirder. So apparently she would keep these animal
• 5:18
  carcasses in cages around her property.
• 5:22
  Speaker 2: In cages like as pets what not.
• 5:24
  Speaker 1: Exactly the witness said that Enwright would wrap the carcasses
• 5:28
  in tarts, you know, kind of like how they found
• 5:30
  Chickliss's body, and she'd do it all to supposedly make
• 5:34
  him decompose faster.
• 5:35
  Speaker 2: Okay, that's more than a little creepy. And the prosecution
• 5:37
  definitely made that connection to the case, right.
• 5:39
  Speaker 1: Oh, absolutely, they were hammering home this whole idea that
• 5:43
  en Wright was desensitized to death, that she was comfortable
• 5:46
  with it, even obsessed. But did the medical examiners report
• 5:50
  back up their theory, like, was there anything in there
• 5:52
  that could tell us what actually happened in that treehouse?
• 5:54
  Speaker 2: Well, according to the reports, the autopsy showed that Shickliss
• 5:58
  had several stab wounds on his chest like he had
• 6:00
  been stabbed multiple times, but there was something else, something
• 6:03
  really strange. They found these weird slip marks on.
• 6:07
  Speaker 1: His T shirt, slip marks like he was cut after
• 6:10
  he was already dead.
• 6:11
  Speaker 2: That's what the prosecution wanted the jury to think. Yes,
• 6:14
  they were saying those marks were post mortem, adding fuel
• 6:17
  to their whole calculated murder theory.
• 6:20
  Speaker 1: So they're trying to prove premeditation with these details exactly.
• 6:23
  Speaker 2: They were saying these weren't just random acts of violence,
• 6:26
  that there was a cold and calculated aspect to this
• 6:28
  whole thing. But we can't forget. The defense was sticking
• 6:33
  to their story right right.
• 6:34
  Speaker 1: They were still saying it was self defense all the way.
• 6:36
  They argued that Chickls became violent, that Enright was terrified,
• 6:40
  and she just fought back to protect yourself.
• 6:42
  Speaker 2: Which you know, makes you think about what was going
• 6:44
  through the jury's minds.
• 6:46
  Speaker 1: I can't even imagine to be in that courtroom listening
• 6:49
  to both sides, weighing the evidence, trying to figure out
• 6:52
  what really happened. What was the atmosphere like in there?
• 6:55
  Speaker 2: Intense to say the least. Both families were there for
• 6:58
  most of it. You know, the news reports made it
• 7:00
  sound heavy, super emotionally charged.
• 7:03
  Speaker 1: I bet so. After eleven days, the jury finally had
• 7:07
  to make a decision. They'd heard it all the evidence,
• 7:10
  the arguments, the different sides of the story.
• 7:12
  Speaker 2: Eleven days, that's a long time to be wrestling with
• 7:15
  such a difficult case. Did they go with the prosecution's theory?
• 7:19
  Was it first degree murder?
• 7:20
  Speaker 1: They didn't. In the end, they found her guilty of second.
• 7:23
  Speaker 2: Degree murder, second degree, so they weren't convinced it was premeditated, right.
• 7:27
  Speaker 1: But it's still murder, right? What does that even mean
• 7:30
  for her for her sentence?
• 7:31
  Speaker 2: Well, in Massachusetts where this all went down, a second
• 7:33
  degree murder charge means a life sentence, but she could
• 7:37
  be eligible for parole life what with the chance to
• 7:41
  get out.
• 7:41
  Speaker 1: So what happens now? When will they actually sentence her?
• 7:44
  Speaker 2: The sentencing is scheduled for January eighteenth of the following year.
• 7:48
  Speaker 1: So everyone has to wait, knowing the decision is coming,
• 7:52
  but not what it'll be.
• 7:53
  Speaker 2: It's a tough spot for everyone involved, especially the families.
• 7:56
  No matter what the judge decides, there's no going back,
• 7:59
  no real closure. It's a tragedy all around.
• 8:02
  Speaker 1: Definitely. We've talked a lot about the legal aspects of
• 8:05
  this whole thing, But I'm curious about the psychological side.
• 8:08
  You know, this case, it really makes you think about
• 8:10
  how our minds work.
• 8:11
  Speaker 2: It's fascinating, isn't it. I mean, was en Wright's fascination
• 8:15
  with death? Was it just a morbid curiosity? Or was
• 8:20
  it a sign of something darker, something that could actually
• 8:23
  drive her to kill?
• 8:24
  Speaker 1: That's the big question, right, and one that might not
• 8:27
  have a clear answer. How do you separate someone who's
• 8:29
  just into dark stuff from someone who's actually capable of violence?
• 8:34
  Speaker 2: That's the million dollar question in cases like this, isn't it?
• 8:36
  There's no easy answer. Human behavior is just so complex,
• 8:40
  and sometimes we try to fit things into neat little
• 8:42
  boxes when the reality is far more nuanced.
• 8:45
  Speaker 1: Totally, and what about the whole crime of passion argument?
• 8:48
  I mean, it's easy to get caught up in the
• 8:50
  evidence and the theories. But could it have been as
• 8:52
  simple as that.
• 8:53
  Speaker 2: It's possible, isn't it. Think about it. They were in
• 8:56
  that treehouse, maybe an argument, a struggle, things escalated. We
• 9:01
  can't discount the possibility that it's spun out of control
• 9:05
  and the consequences, well, they were irreversible.
• 9:08
  Speaker 1: It's like The pieces of the puzzle are all there,
• 9:10
  but we still might never know how they truly fit together.
• 9:14
  Were Enright's actions calculated or was she driven by something else,
• 9:18
  something more primal, more emotional.
• 9:20
  Speaker 2: And that's what makes this case so captivating, right, the
• 9:23
  mystery of it all. We have the prosecution story, this
• 9:26
  picture of a woman with a dark side, someone who
• 9:28
  is planning something sinister. Then we have the defense's narrative,
• 9:31
  a story of self preservation, of fear and desperation.
• 9:34
  Speaker 1: And then there's John lynd lurking in the background. Did
• 9:37
  he play a role in all this? We will never know.
• 9:39
  Speaker 2: He's the wild card in all of this, right, choosing
• 9:42
  to stay silent, leaving us to speculate about what he knows,
• 9:46
  what he might be hiding. It's like something out of
• 9:48
  a movie, totally.
• 9:50
  Speaker 1: So where do we go from here? We've covered so
• 9:53
  much ground already, dug into the evidence, the psychology, the
• 9:56
  whole nine yards.
• 9:57
  Speaker 2: We've really gone deep, haven't we. But I think it's
• 10:00
  it's important to take a step back for a second
• 10:01
  to think about what we can learn from all of this.
• 10:05
  It's a stark reminder, isn't it that in a world
• 10:07
  where information spreads like wildfire, where everyone has a platform.
• 10:12
  We have to be extra careful about what we believe
• 10:15
  about rushing to judgment.
• 10:16
  Speaker 1: It's so easy to get swept up in the headlines
• 10:18
  of the speculation. But at the end of the day,
• 10:20
  truth can be a slippery thing, and sometimes we have
• 10:24
  to be okay with not knowing all the answers, with
• 10:26
  accepting that some mysteries might never be fully solved exactly.
• 10:31
  Speaker 2: But that doesn't mean we stop searching, right We keep
• 10:34
  asking questions, keep digging, keep trying to understand the world
• 10:37
  around us, even when it's messy and complicated.
• 10:40
  Speaker 1: It's about staying curious, keeping an open mind, and never
• 10:43
  losing sight of the fact that behind every headline, every trial,
• 10:47
  there are real people whose lives have been forever changed
• 10:50
  by the events we're discussing. It sticks with you, doesn't it.
• 10:54
  You keep replaying it in your head, all those details
• 10:56
  that things will never know for sure.
• 10:58
  Speaker 2: Yeah, you can't help but think about it even after
• 11:00
  the trial's over. It makes you wonder about the people involved,
• 11:03
  especially the families.
• 11:04
  Speaker 1: Especially Chickley's family. They were in the courtroom for all
• 11:07
  of it, right, Yeah, do we know how they reacted
• 11:09
  to the verdict.
• 11:10
  Speaker 2: They were there when they read the verdict, but they
• 11:12
  decided not to speak to the press, you know, make
• 11:15
  a statement or anything.
• 11:17
  Speaker 1: I get it. It's such a heavy thing. Their son,
• 11:19
  their brother, it's got to be a lot to process.
• 11:24
  Speaker 2: Absolutely, and it's not over for them, not really. We
• 11:27
  talked about and write sentencing being in January. Well, that's
• 11:30
  another agonizing weight for everyone.
• 11:33
  Speaker 1: Right because even though it's second degree murder, there's still
• 11:35
  a range.
• 11:35
  Speaker 2: Right exactly with a second degree murder conviction. She's facing
• 11:38
  a life sentence, but the judge could decide she's eligible
• 11:42
  for parole at some point. It's all up in the
• 11:44
  air until January.
• 11:46
  Speaker 1: So they're stuck waiting, wondering. It's a horrible thing for
• 11:49
  everyone involved, a real tragedy no matter how you look
• 11:52
  at it.
• 11:53
  Speaker 2: No winner is in a case like this, that's for sure.
• 11:55
  Speaker 1: We've talked about the case itself, the legal stuff, but
• 11:58
  it's the human element that gets me, the choices, the consequences,
• 12:03
  the things we might never fully understand.
• 12:05
  Speaker 2: I know what you mean. This case it forces you
• 12:08
  to think about, like, how do our minds work? How
• 12:11
  do you tell the difference between someone who's just curious
• 12:14
  about dark stuff versus someone who's actually dangerous.
• 12:18
  Speaker 1: And what about the idea that it was a crime
• 12:20
  of passion. Couldn't have been as simple as that.
• 12:22
  Speaker 2: That's the thing, right, It's easy to get caught up
• 12:25
  in the evidence the trial, but we have to remember
• 12:28
  those final moments in the treehouse. We can only speculate
• 12:32
  what happened.
• 12:33
  Speaker 1: It's like there are missing pieces to the puzzle and
• 12:36
  we're left to fill in the blanks ourselves.
• 12:38
  Speaker 2: We have two completely different stories. Was Enwright planning this
• 12:41
  all along like the prosecution said, or was she truly
• 12:45
  defending herself that she claimed?
• 12:47
  Speaker 1: And then there's John Lynd What was his role in
• 12:49
  all of this? It's like he holds a piece of
• 12:52
  the puzzle that no one can get to.
• 12:54
  Speaker 2: He's the wild card, for sure. He could clear up
• 12:56
  so much if he wanted to, but he's not talking.
• 12:59
  Speaker 1: So we're left with more questions than answers. It's a
• 13:02
  lot to.
• 13:02
  Speaker 2: Wrap your head around, it is, and I think that's
• 13:04
  the biggest takeaway for me. In a world where we're
• 13:06
  bombarded with information stories, different sides to every story, we
• 13:11
  have to be careful about rushington judgment.
• 13:14
  Speaker 1: It's tempting to pick a side, to decide what we
• 13:16
  believe and stick to it. Yeah, but sometimes the truth
• 13:19
  is a lot messier than that.
• 13:21
  Speaker 2: Exactly. There's a lot of gray area, and we might
• 13:23
  never have all the answers.
• 13:25
  Speaker 1: But that doesn't mean we stop asking questions.
• 13:27
  Speaker 2: Right, of course not. We keep an open mind, stay curious,
• 13:30
  and remember that behind every headline, every case we discuss,
• 13:34
  there are real people whose lives have been forever changed
• 13:37
  by these events.
• 13:38
  Speaker 1: Well said this deep dive. It's been a wild ride.
• 13:42
  It's disturbing, it's fascinating. It's a story that makes you
• 13:45
  think about good and evil, about the choices we make
• 13:48
  and the consequences that follow.
• 13:50
  Speaker 2: And sometimes that's all we can do. Right, keep thinking,
• 13:52
  keep learning, and hopefully keep those conversations going.
• 13:56
  Speaker 1: Exactly so, to our listeners, thank you for diving in
• 13:59
  with us. If you want to explore this case further,
• 14:02
  check out those news articles we mentioned, keep the conversation going,
• 14:05
  and until next time, remember, sometimes the most unsettling mysteries
• 14:10
  are the ones we can never fully solve.