Sworn Declaration of Abrehet Tedla
Nanny's Eyewitness Account of Walsh's Drugging of Russell
I. DECLARANT BACKGROUND & CREDIBILITY
"My name is Abby Tedla and from March 6 of this year to very recently, I was Evelyn (Evie) Grace Walsh's nanny and primary caregiver. I lived with Mr. Stephen Russell and Ms. Tara Walsh at their home at 301 Mission street."
Qualifications as Witness:
- Employed as primary caregiver from March 6, 2018 through June/July 2018 (4+ months)
- Lived in the household with Russell, Walsh, and Evie — had daily exposure to their interactions
- Initial one-month contract expanded to full-time day and night care
- Had direct responsibility for Evie's safety and welfare
- Maintained knowledge of household routines, medications, and personnel
II. ENVIRONMENT & LIVING CONDITIONS
"First, I'd like to say that I love Evie and she was very well taken care of in San Francisco. In addition to myself, Evie's father, and sometimes staff also helped with Evie. Their home was very nice and well taken care of in one of the nicest buildings in San Francisco, and Mr. Russell had retained one of the top pediatricians in the city for Evie, and Ms. Walsh as well from a concierge medical group called Private Medical."
Significance: Tedla's testimony establishes that the household was well-resourced and Evie was receiving excellent care, undermining any narrative that Walsh's conduct was necessary for the child's welfare.
III. WALSH'S DEPENDENCE ON MEDICATION
"Tara's medication prevented her from being able to take care of the baby at night, especially before Evie was able to generally sleep through the whole night."
Significance: Tedla's statement that Walsh's "medication prevented her" from nighttime care establishes Walsh was taking prescription medications (later confirmed to be Seroquel) for sleep issues. This provides context for the Seroquel that Walsh later admitted placing in Russell's wine.
IV. RUSSELL'S TREATMENT & WALSH'S VERBAL ABUSE
Russell's Behavior:
"I have never seen Mr. Russell be abusive to Ms. Walsh in any way and I do not believe this to be his nature. I have seen Ms. Walsh regularly verbally abuse Mr. Russell, however, but Mr. Russell was always patient and kind to her."
Specific Incidents of Walsh's Verbal Abuse:
"I have witnessed Ms. Walsh yell and call Mr. Russell names such as 'old, fat, asshole'. Due to the ongoing verbal assaults to Mr. Russell, I once asked him 'how do you do it?' I have never seen someone deal so well with another person being so verbally abusive. In fact, I contacted Mr. Crutcher at times and advised him to remove Mr. Russell from the situation as I felt so bad for him."
Critical Observation: Tedla, as a neutral household observer, felt compelled to encourage Russell's security chief to remove Russell from the household due to the severity of Walsh's verbal abuse. This directly contradicts Walsh's allegations that Russell was the abuser.
V. THE BABY INJURY INCIDENT (May 15, 2018)
"On one occasion, on 5/15/2018, I took Evie for a walk with Ms. Walsh's permission. After returning from our daily walk with Evie, Ms. Walsh was yelling and extremely irate. She accused me of trying to take her baby away. Feeling hurt, confused and afraid by her false accusations of trying to kidnap Evie, I left the apartment and started towards the elevator. Moments later, I heard through the closed door Evie screaming. Concerned for Evie's safety I rushed back to see if she was Ok. Tara said Evie had rolled off the bed accidentally. Evie had a bump and red bruise on her head and I was asked to help get the baby to the hospital. After seeing the doctor, it was determined she was fine, thankfully."
Significance: This incident establishes:
- Walsh made false accusations against Tedla (claiming she was attempting to kidnap Evie)
- Immediately after these false accusations, Evie was injured while alone with Walsh
- Walsh's explanation (baby "rolled off the bed") was accepted at the time but raises questions about Walsh's mental state and parenting capacity
- This occurred on May 15, 2018 — consistent with the timeframe of the Seroquel drugging incidents
VI. THE CRITICAL ADMISSION — WALSH'S DRUGGING OF RUSSELL
"Ms. Walsh had been putting drugs in his drinks without his knowledge and she had asked me to lie and tell social services that he was a bad dad/person. Once Ms. Walsh realized I was not going to lie for her or condone her mistreatment and drugging of Mr. Russell, she began to treat me with distain and ultimately fired me."
Critical Elements of This Testimony:
- Drugging Admission: Walsh admitted to Tedla that she was putting drugs in Russell's drinks without his knowledge
- Pattern Conduct: The statement "had been putting drugs" (continuous past tense) suggests repeated conduct, not isolated incidents
- Requested Perjury: Walsh asked Tedla to lie to social services — demonstrates consciousness of guilt and willingness to deceive authorities
- Retaliation: When Tedla refused to participate and expressed concern about the drugging, Walsh "fired" her (first time) — showing retaliatory conduct
- Outburst When Exposed: After Tedla reported the drugging to Russell, Walsh yelled "I hate that fucking nanny!"
"One time after I had told Mr. Russell about her drugging him, she yelled, 'I hate that fucking nanny!' On one occasion she told me she was 'bipolar'. I regret not informing Mr. Russell right away about her putting the pills in his wine, but I did not understand exactly what was happening."
Additional Significance: Walsh's statement to Tedla that she was "bipolar" is consistent with her own later admissions of mental health issues and provides context for the erratic, abusive behavior Tedla observed.
VII. DIRECT OBSERVATION OF DRUGGING INCIDENTS
The Critical Testimony (¶ 9):
"I saw her drug him on at least two occasions; however she told me and Dan Ochoa that she 'did it all the time.' This caused me to fear for Mr. Russell's safety and I saw the effects on those two occasions after he drank the tainted wine. It appeared to cause him to lose consciousness shortly after."
Probative Elements:
- Multiple Witnesses: Tedla directly observed the drugging on at least two occasions
- Walsh's Pattern Admission: Walsh explicitly told Tedla (and Dan Ochoa) that she drugged Russell "all the time" — contradicting the later claim of only two incidents
- Observable Effects: Tedla observed Russell "lose consciousness" after drinking the tainted wine — demonstrating the incapacitating nature of the medication
- Witness Fear: Tedla's fear for Russell's safety was reasonable given the observed effects
- Protective Measures: Tedla took protective action, including throwing away food and warning security to tell Russell not to drink anything
"Once, when Tara's friend was visiting, I threw away any open containers of food in case maybe Tara had added it to other food or drink in the house. I also told Bryan to tell Steve not to drink anything. That night I threw away the leftover food. That was the only time I threw away food. I wasn't otherwise concerned for my safety."
Significance: Tedla's statement that she threw away food "only" that one time (when she was concerned about third-party presence) suggests she was concerned about Russell being drugged, not about her own safety — indicating her protective measures were for Russell's benefit.
VIII. WALSH'S MENTAL HEALTH & DELUSIONS
"Mr. Russell gave me 3-month severance and asked that I consider helping in case of an emergency. Ms. Walsh had just then agreed to see a new Psychiatrist after another incident where she believed she saw Mr. Russell was running around with a gun, which didn't happen. When she realized that was a delusion, she called her mother and doctor who said Ms. Walsh needed an immediate medical intervention and delusions like this had happened in the past."
Significance: This testimony establishes that:
- Walsh experienced delusions (believing Russell had a gun when he did not)
- Even Walsh's mother and psychiatrist confirmed these were recurring delusions
- Walsh required psychiatric intervention and medication
- This occurred around the time of the Seroquel drugging incidents, suggesting Walsh may have been experiencing mental health crisis while drugging Russell
IX. RUSSELL'S COMMITMENT TO WALSH'S RECOVERY
"Mr. Russell seemed genuinely committed to helping Tara and was hopeful that with treatment she might get better."
Significance: This testimony from a neutral observer establishes that Russell's response to discovering Walsh's drugging and mental health issues was not retaliatory, but focused on getting her treatment — further undermining Walsh's abuse allegations against him.
X. FINAL CHARACTERIZATION
"I love Evie and only want what is best for her. She had a very good home in San Francisco and many people who cared for her. Tara was difficult, but I believe this is part of her mental illness, and in reality Mr. Russell does want her to get better. Mr. Russell is a good person who provided for everything Ms. Walsh and baby needed and had many close family and staff nearby. Even though Ms. Walsh fired me twice, I came back because of Evie who is the happiest baby I have ever seen in my entire life."
Significance: Despite being fired twice by Walsh, Tedla describes Evie as "the happiest baby I have ever seen in my entire life," Russell as "a good person," and the home as providing everything Walsh and Evie needed. This is powerful testimony from someone who had the most direct observation of household dynamics.
XI. DEPARTURE FROM CALIFORNIA
"My last act for Ms. Walsh and Mr. Russell was to help Ms. Walsh and the baby visit Ms. Walsh's parents. I was not present when this happened, but I heard that in the previous two weeks, Ms. Walsh had tried to secretly leave the state first by herself and then with the baby. On the second occasion, Mr. Russell took emergency action and received a court order to keep Evie in the state until a mediation hearing. But, Mr. Russell also thought a 2-3 week break might be helpful to Ms. Walsh. So, he agreed to let her visit her parents in NY if she would agree to stay at her parents' house and return home in 2-3 weeks. Tara agreed. I flew with Ms. Walsh and the baby and saw her father pick them up at the airport. I then stayed the night in a hotel and flew back the next day."
Significance: Tedla's testimony establishes that:
- Walsh attempted to secretly leave California, first alone and then with Evie
- Russell obtained a court order to prevent Evie's removal
- Russell nonetheless permitted a temporary visit to Walsh's parents
- Tedla accompanied Walsh and Evie to New York and saw Walsh's father pick them up
- Walsh subsequently never returned — using the "temporary visit" as cover for permanent abduction
XII. FINAL STATEMENT
"Since that time, my only conversations with Tara have been pleasantries. I did not expect her to stay in NY or make the accusations she has."
Significance: Tedla expresses surprise at Walsh's decision to remain in New York and make accusations against Russell, suggesting that this was contrary to Walsh's representations that the visit would be temporary.
EVIDENTIARY SIGNIFICANCE OF TEDLA DECLARATION
The Tedla Declaration is powerful evidence because:
- Neutral Observer: Tedla was hired by Russell to care for the baby, not to support his legal case, yet her observations consistently corroborate Russell's allegations
- Multiple Specific Incidents: Tedla testifies to observing the drugging "at least two occasions" and seeing Russell "lose consciousness" after drinking tainted wine
- Pattern Evidence: Walsh's statement to Tedla that she drugged Russell "all the time" corroborates the nanny's and Russell's allegations of repeated, chronic drugging
- Corroboration: Tedla's account is consistent with Walsh's own admission in her DV-120 Response and Bryan Crutcher's observations as security chief
- Custody Implications: Tedla, as Evie's primary caregiver, is uniquely positioned to observe child welfare. Her testimony that Evie was "the happiest baby" and well-cared for supports Russell's fitness as parent and primary caregiver
- Mental Health Context: Tedla's observation of Walsh's delusions and need for psychiatric intervention provides medical context for Walsh's erratic, dangerous behavior
- Retaliation Evidence: Walsh's firing of Tedla immediately after she learned about the drugging demonstrates consciousness of guilt and retaliatory conduct
- Perjury Request: Walsh's request that Tedla lie to social services demonstrates willingness to deceive authorities and manipulate the record