Local News

Teens were emotionless after Apex student's slaying

Posted September 17, 2010

— After four days of testimony detailing an Apex High School student's death and the alleged plans leading to it, jurors on Friday heard testimony from detectives who described two of the co-defendants as showing no feelings while being questioned.

Ryan Patrick Hare, 19, is on trial for first-degree murder in the Nov. 30, 2008, death of Matthew Josiah Silliman, but testimony Friday morning focused on three others charged in the case – Aadil Khan, Allegra Dahlquist and Drew Shaw – and investigators' dealings with them after Silliman's body was found two days later.

Worth Brown, a detective with the Apex Police Department, said that, when questioned, Khan led police almost straight to a hole intended to serve as a grave for Silliman's body.

They decided against burying Silliman in the hole because it was filled with water, Khan told Brown.

"He was very nonchalant about it. It all struck us as very odd about how calm and collected he was, just standing there, rocking back and forth, talking about it," Brown testified.

His subsequent arrest didn't faze him, either.

"(There was) no reaction," Brown said. "Just another day is what it seemed like to me."

Detective Benjamin Byrne's testimony was similar regarding Dahlquist, who at one point had feelings for Silliman before going back to her boyfriend, Hare.

"She showed absolutely no emotion," he said. "There was not one tear shed throughout the entire interview."

Matthew Silliman Teens were emotionless after Silliman's death

Witnesses, including Dahlquist and Shaw, testified this week that Hare was jealous of Silliman and created an elaborate plot that included a story of a man named Roger who was out to kill Silliman.

Faced with an ultimatum to be killed or kill himself, Silliman chose to drink a cocktail of horse tranquilizers mixed with wine in an effort to end his life, they said.

Silliman was found with is hands and feet bound with zip ties, his mouth duct-taped and his head covered in a plastic bag with a zip tie tightened around his neck.

Dahlquist testified that she put the zip tie around Silliman's neck and that Hare tightened it when she no longer could.

Byrne testified Friday that Dahlquist told him that Hare tightened it so Silliman "didn't have a pocket of air."

"In her words: 'We wanted to make sure that he died because we hated him. We all did,'" Byrne said.

Defense attorney Robert Padovano asked why.

"The answer she gave me was essentially that he was a bad person who had destroyed so many lives with his actions, that he was such an evil person that he needed to die," Byrne said.

"And she wasn't showing any emotion?" Padovano asked.

"Yes, sir, she was showing no emotion," Byrne said.


This story is closed for comments.

Oldest First
View all
  • newhillhorse Sep 20, 2010

    Under NC state law, they are tried as an adult if they are 16 yrs. or older. Therefor they should be tried as an adult and their consequence should match that of any other adult. The rights of Ryan Hare have been upheld - he has an attorney, he has not yet testified against himself, ect. I don't see a guarantee that him being days from 18 at the time of the murder should provide any leniency in his sentencing. Nor the others, which are recognized by the state as ADULTS. For victims rights in NC please refer to N.C. Const. art. I, § 37.

  • prayn4daylight Sep 20, 2010

    You want me to review rights vs. freedoms?? How about you review rights v. privileges first - you stated "These murders have a right to a fair trial by their peers... and the victim has the right to see that consequence/justice for the murders crimes is carried out." you are half right - the right to a fair trial is guaranteed in the constitution - however the rights for victims to see that justice is carried out?? - there is no such right - If you think there is - please provide where in the constitution this is listed? Trust me you wont find it - its not there.

  • prayn4daylight Sep 20, 2010

    I am sorry to inform you but the fact remains - neither the victim nor his family has any rights in this matter - they are not guaranteed a right to see the murder to go jail - they are not given the right to see justice delivered - the criminals however are afforded several rights - rights not to testify against themselves, rights not only to an attorney but to a state funded attorney if needed - etc etc. I was not attempting to say it is right or wrong - just stating that is how the system is set up - that is how the system works. Yes under the 14th Amendment we have equal rights under the law - but in this case that merely means that murder here in NC is considered to be the same in any other state. As for punishment - I was not attempting to say 5 years upholds any sort of constitutional law - I was merely saying we should treat minors as minors and adults as adults. They committed the crime as minors and should be punished as minors.

  • newhillhorse Sep 20, 2010

    You have some sick twisted out of touch agenda of your own prayn4daylight. You are out of touch with reality if you are claiming that a murder should have more rights then a victim. In the United States we are suppose to have equal rights. These murders have a right to a fair trial by their peers... and the victim has the right to see that consequence/justice for the murders crimes is carried out. Explain to me how life in prison vs. your slap them on the wrist 5 years is upholding their consititutional right. How is murdering someone because they don't like them their right? Maybe you should review rights vs. freedoms... I think you are a little confused. The victim is dead as a result of the murders impending on his rights. And what about the victim's family do they have no rights, they are still alive. What right are we protecting for the criminal??? The time should fit the crime not a person's age. Maybe you have successfully seen youth out of jail. If they commited a lesser crime

  • prayn4daylight Sep 20, 2010

    Trust me - I think those with a uniform and a gun are kids too - they are too young to die for their country - I much prefer for the other guy to die for his country.
    And for the record - victims rights?? really? The victim sad as it is - is dead - there are no victim rights - nor should there be - the rights that need to be protected now are that of the criminal - he does have rights and we need to be equally worried about them. That is how our judicial system is set up - in doubt - look up John Adams on the Boston Massacre and who he as a young attorney defended.

  • rainbooze Sep 20, 2010

    Waving the American Flag……… I wonder WHY:…….Ryan, Adil, Allegra, and Drew have been called Students, Children, and Kids…. YET .. When we give people of approximately the same age… a uniform and a gun … and ask them to defend our constitutional rights to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.. we call them Men and Women.

  • gibsonrj Sep 17, 2010

    Yestersay someone asked... as a parent where did they go wrong...evidence has heard drugs, sex, drunkeness, violent movies, tarocards and witchcraft, web sites with Adolf Hitler's speeches, guns, out all night etc can anyone say where they went wrong... there's just too many options. The Parents that said no saved their daughters from a life in jail..those kids know they own their parents big time.

  • Peace Love and Cold Meds Sep 17, 2010

    ALL of those teens should get life and this soap opera should've ended before it started.

  • maeveduir Sep 17, 2010

    pointedly, that is. My apologies, I am working from a netbook.

  • maeveduir Sep 17, 2010

    @newhillhorse- again, I have stated it many times- I have pontedly said not to waive punishment. Don't misinterpret or misrepresent my words.