Tracey Grist Takes the Stand and Denies Knowing About a Murder Plan
Day 5 of the Tracey Grist trial shifted sharply into the defense case, with jurors hearing first from Grist’s son and then from Grist herself. The day focused on family dynamics, Kathryn Restelli’s marriage to Matthew Restelli, and Grist’s own account of what happened on July 12, 2024. Most importantly, Grist denied knowing about any plan to kill Matthew and told jurors she was caught off guard when he arrived at her house.
Grist’s son testified about the family
The first witness Monday morning was one of Tracey Grist’s sons. His testimony focused on the family itself, including Grist’s four marriages and the relationships among the siblings.
He also spoke about Matthew Restelli, his murdered brother-in-law. He told jurors he did not hate Matthew and described him as a big talker. That testimony added more background about how Matthew was viewed inside the family and gave the defense another witness who did not frame the relationship in simple terms.
Tracey Grist described Kathryn’s marriage and planned divorce
Tracey Grist then took the stand in her own defense. She told jurors that her daughter, Kathryn Restelli, had been planning to divorce Matthew and said the marriage was having problems.
Grist described arguments involving Matthew and testified that Kathryn was using dating apps and going on dates while she was in Utah. That testimony appeared aimed at giving jurors more context about the state of the marriage and the family tensions that existed before the shooting.
The defense used Grist’s testimony to paint a picture of a deteriorating relationship rather than a coordinated murder plot.
Grist denied tracking Matthew with an AirTag
One of the more pointed parts of her testimony involved the AirTag evidence. Grist denied having an AirTag to follow Matthew Restelli.
That denial goes directly to one of the prosecution’s stronger planning points. Earlier testimony suggested family members were tracking Matthew’s movements and discussing an AirTag connected to his truck. By denying involvement, Grist tried to separate herself from evidence prosecutors have used to suggest preparation and surveillance before Matthew reached the house.
Grist told jurors she was surprised when Matthew arrived
Grist also laid out her own timeline of July 12, 2024, and said she was surprised when Matthew came to her home.
She testified about the moment Kevin Ellis killed Matthew and claimed there was no communication between the two men before the shooting. According to Grist, Ellis told her afterward that Matthew had a knife.
That account is important because it reinforces the defense position that the shooting was not the result of a coordinated ambush directed by Grist. Instead, her testimony tried to place her in the role of someone responding to a sudden and violent situation inside the house.
She said Kathryn did not help Matthew and denied any murder plan
Grist also testified that Kathryn Restelli did not provide aid to her husband after he was shot. That detail may matter as jurors continue weighing what each family member did in the moments after the shooting.
Most significantly, Grist denied knowing about any plan to murder Matthew Restelli. That denial put the core issue of the case squarely in front of the jury. Prosecutors say Grist helped plan the killing with Kathryn and Kevin Ellis. Grist told jurors she had no such knowledge.
Why Day 5 matters
Day 5 gave jurors their first direct chance to hear Tracey Grist explain herself. After several days of testimony built around planning, tracking, staging, and family coordination, Grist answered those accusations in her own words.
Her testimony did not just challenge isolated pieces of evidence. It challenged the prosecution’s entire theory. She denied knowing about a murder plan, denied tracking Matthew with an AirTag, and said she was surprised by his arrival and by what followed.
That makes credibility central moving forward. Jurors now have to weigh Grist’s denial against Kathryn Restelli’s testimony, the digital evidence, and the forensic testimony presented earlier in the trial.
What comes next
With Tracey Grist now on the stand, the trial has entered a phase where the defense is directly contesting the prosecution’s version of events witness by witness. The next key question is how Grist’s testimony holds up against earlier evidence about the AirTag, the timeline, and the family’s communications.
The jury has now heard both the state’s theory of planning and Grist’s denial from the witness stand. The remaining testimony will likely focus on whether jurors believe this was a plotted killing or a family situation the defense says spiraled into deadly violence without Grist’s involvement in a plan.