Found Deceased ID - Joshua Vallow, 7, & Tylee Ryan, 16, Rexburg, Sept 2019 *Arrests* #47

[Tortoise]

Just jumping off our post @mrjitty . This document posted by Justin at Fox10 news states that MP is a POI in the BB shooting only. MP is not stated to be a POI in any other case (afaik).

Justin Lum Fox 10 Phoenix

I posted the relevant text yesterday, it mentions the children's case - which is why the discussion is about hearsay.

see post here Found Deceased - ID - Joshua Vallow, 7, & Tylee Ryan, 16, Rexburg, Sept 2019 *Arrests* #47

this is the link to Justin Lum's full post on the date the papers were published also (BBM) :

Justin Lum Fox 10 Phoenix
29 June at 23:59 ·
BOUDREAUX CASE: Brandon Boudreaux has just filed a few responses in the custody battle with Melani Pawlowski, Lori Vallow’s niece.

Here are my takeaways from the new documents. Pages 1-3 show an affidavit of Gilbert PD detective Ryan Pillar. He’s investigating the murder attempt on Boudreaux from 10/2/19. In the affidavit, he calls Pawlowski a “person of interest” and not a suspect in the case. Pillar says Boudreaux never kept his or his children’s whereabouts from law enforcement. In October, Boudreaux was informed there were concerns over his and his kids’ safety. The day after the shooting, Pillar made contact with Pawlowski to let her know what happened. On 10/16/19, Pillar says Pawlowski contacted him regarding her kids but never again after that.

On page 4 in this post, Boudreaux cites Madison County Prosecutor Rob Wood who is the special prosecutor in both cases against Lori Vallow and Chad Daybell. He says Wood calls Pawlowski a person of interest in other felonious acts as well as the disappearance of JJ Vallow and Tylee Ryan who are both now dead.

Important to note there is a protection ordered petitioned by Natalie Pawlowski against her ex-husband Ian (now married to Melani). The order protects their two kids and Ian can only have supervised parenting time. Documents say since the renewed Protection Order on 6/5/20, Ian has not had any contact with his kids.

In another response, Brandon Boudreaux says Melanie Gibb (Lori Vallow’s former best friend) was told by Pawlowski that two of her own kids are “zombies.” Gibb is supposed to testify in the case. According to Boudreaux, Gibb also tells him Pawlowski allegedly said he went from “dark” to “zombie” and that he was once in Hitler’s tight group of friends when Hitler was alive.

The next hearing is set for July 1 in Maricopa County Family Court.

 

[dixiegirl1035]

that’s why we need the FBI. . This won’t pose them.

It will be interesting if they did many tower dumps in "certain folks area" for HI area codes iykwim.

I say download those spreadsheets and let WS'ers go through them!

 

[Tortoise]

Does that mean if its a condition of bail, it only applies if Chad is bailed? i.e. it doesn't apply if no bail is granted.

The judge's stipulation - I would think so.

It seems there is this service available for victims who don't want to be contacted, which suggests to me there are no restrictions, but I don't actually know -

Victim Services | Idaho Department of Correction

Prisons Support Services

If you are receiving unwanted contact from an IDOC offender it can be stopped.
To block calls from a specific inmate listen carefully to the instructions:

• Press Options #4 on your phone to block the caller.

To block all calls write to:

• Victim Services
  1299 N. Orchard Street, Suite #110
  Boise, ID 83706

This same address can be used to stop unwanted letters from an IDOC offender.

All prisoner mail is read and copied, and all calls recorded anyway.

 

[dixiegirl1035]

RSBM
The next hearing is set for July 1 in Maricopa County Family Court.

Has there been any news on such hearing from the 1st?

 

[Tortoise]

Has there been any news on such hearing from the 1st?

None that I've seen.

 

[mrjitty]

Just jumping off our post @mrjitty . This document posted by Justin at Fox10 news states that MP is a POI in the BB shooting only. MP is not stated to be a POI in any other case (afaik).

Justin Lum Fox 10 Phoenix

I was addressing the narrow issue of whether the statement would be hearsay. My answer is that it would not be, but in any contested hearing, the truth of the central allegation might well be critical creating evidential difficulties for the Father.

Personally I would not be surprised if the Mother simply conceded the point - but its speculative.

 

[Nikynoo]

IANAL, but I have a theory on Lori’s defense. It’s all IMO. Hopefully it’s okay to post.

This assumes that LE has enough electronic and/or physical evidence to male pinning the crimes on Alex a bad defense.

I’m sorry if this has been discussed at length and I’ve missed it, but the following University of Idaho Law Review link clarifies Idaho’s lack of an insanity defense, and that mental condition may be considered for establishing mens rea (intent).

https://www.uidaho.edu/-/media/UIda...hash=817B444FF49AAFF351E92E8EB7BFFE98566946AA

If I’m understanding it correctly, it sounds like Lori’s mental condition can come into it.

I think that the example on p. 18 of the PDF (p. 592 of the document) indicates that her defense could argue that she lacked mens rea to murder her children because she truly believed that she was killing zombies—not humans—so she lacked the intent necessary to commit first degree murder. IMO, they’ll likely argue this hoping to get it down to second degree murder or manslaughter. (Chad’s defense could technically go the same route.)

This sounds similar to diminished capacity to me, but again IANAL.

Diminished capacity and mens rea (vs. not guilty by reason of insanity) are discussed more generally at this Cornell link:

Diminished Capacity

Thoughts?

Good research! BUT, I think as the bodies were disposed of afterwards, I think this would go to intent e.g. she knew it was wrong to kill. If Lori truly believed she was killing zombies, the bodies would not have been hidden. IMO, if any mental condition comes into play, it will be fitness to stand trial.

 

[Nikynoo]

Interesting. We need some lawyers in here. So, he could potentially call the Woodcocks, CR, Annie, etc...?

Yes, thats my take on it. But why would he?

 

[Nikynoo]

The Attorney issues just feels like a big old ethics labyrinth that I would avoid like the plague/pandemic if I were a professional involved in this case. At this moment in time, I worry because MM has received some sort of retainer for LVD and presumably something for CD - that may have later been transferred to Prior? (not sure on this part). Either way, very soon one or both of them will run out of funding and I suspect the real financials will come out that neither has earned income for several years.
Then we have the "excited utterance" reply to the Judge re: representing alleged co-conspirators involved in this case which might give MM an exit w/dignity if he is chose but I predict he will try to stay with this case by asking for assistance paid by the court - co-counsel.
moo

I don't think he can be co-counsel if the court appoints a Defender. From a previous post, it appears that co-counsel need to have 3 years criminal law experience.

 

[mrjitty]

I posted the relevant text yesterday, it mentions the children's case - which is why the discussion is about hearsay.

RSBM

I mean it would be pretty staggering given everything we know if LE hadn't at least some interest in asking her some questions about the Lori case. The level of interest and LE's satisfaction with the answers are of course unknown to us.

This is why I raised practical aspects of trial procedure. The pleading makes it clear that the father will produce an array of evidence to paint a sinister picture. We don't know what exhibits and witnesses could be produced at the end of the day.

IMO (wild speculation) the mother would be more likely to explain away interest (i helped police) than deny it.

The phrase is so nebulous after all.

 

[Tortoise]

I don't think he can be co-counsel if the court appoints a Defender. From a previous post, it appears that co-counsel need to have 3 years criminal law experience.

If he cares about justice for Lori he won't represent her, because he doesn't have the experience or skills for it. He gave a heartwarming speech on the steps of the court about everyone deserving a defense. That's my take on it.

 

[Tortoise]

MBP said in media interviews that when she moved to ID she didn't see a lot of Lori, and when she visited before that she thought the kids were out with friends and at school etc. If it's true that MG knows for a fact MBP went to Hawaii with Lori in October, without her children, she ducked the question completely.

This is just one example, but there are many others -

Eaton: "Then you moved up in November. You didn’t see the kids at all. Did you think that was a little suspicious? A little weird? I could understand not seeing them one or two days, but after days and days go by and Tylee’s Jeep isn’t there – did you ever ask Lori, “Hey, where are Tylee and JJ?”

MBP: "...And Lori is very independent, doing her own thing. She was next door, but I spent most of my time with Alex. Alex would come over and hang out with me. Those days were hard and teary missing my kids, and he would come over and lift me up.

So if I saw Lori, she was still moving in and getting situated, so I didn’t spend a lot of time over there. I did see some of their things, and she had a room set up perfectly for Tylee and JJ, and it didn’t seem strange to me. I knew the threats she was getting from Kay Woodcock (JJ’s grandmother) and from others, and I guess I didn’t ask questions because I knew that history. I knew what was going on, and in my own head, I’m trying to find out where my own kids are."

ID - Joshua Vallow, 7, & Tylee Ryan, 17, Rexburg, Sept 2019 *MEDIA MAPS TIMELINE* NO DISCUSSION

 

[Nikynoo]

I posted the relevant text yesterday, it mentions the children's case - which is why the discussion is about hearsay.

see post here Found Deceased - ID - Joshua Vallow, 7, & Tylee Ryan, 16, Rexburg, Sept 2019 *Arrests* #47

this is the link to Justin Lum's full post on the date the papers were published also (BBM) :

Justin Lum Fox 10 Phoenix
29 June at 23:59 ·
BOUDREAUX CASE: Brandon Boudreaux has just filed a few responses in the custody battle with Melani Pawlowski, Lori Vallow’s niece.

Here are my takeaways from the new documents. Pages 1-3 show an affidavit of Gilbert PD detective Ryan Pillar. He’s investigating the murder attempt on Boudreaux from 10/2/19. In the affidavit, he calls Pawlowski a “person of interest” and not a suspect in the case. Pillar says Boudreaux never kept his or his children’s whereabouts from law enforcement. In October, Boudreaux was informed there were concerns over his and his kids’ safety. The day after the shooting, Pillar made contact with Pawlowski to let her know what happened. On 10/16/19, Pillar says Pawlowski contacted him regarding her kids but never again after that.

On page 4 in this post, Boudreaux cites Madison County Prosecutor Rob Wood who is the special prosecutor in both cases against Lori Vallow and Chad Daybell. He says Wood calls Pawlowski a person of interest in other felonious acts as well as the disappearance of JJ Vallow and Tylee Ryan who are both now dead.

Important to note there is a protection ordered petitioned by Natalie Pawlowski against her ex-husband Ian (now married to Melani). The order protects their two kids and Ian can only have supervised parenting time. Documents say since the renewed Protection Order on 6/5/20, Ian has not had any contact with his kids.

In another response, Brandon Boudreaux says Melanie Gibb (Lori Vallow’s former best friend) was told by Pawlowski that two of her own kids are “zombies.” Gibb is supposed to testify in the case. According to Boudreaux, Gibb also tells him Pawlowski allegedly said he went from “dark” to “zombie” and that he was once in Hitler’s tight group of friends when Hitler was alive.

The next hearing is set for July 1 in Maricopa County Family Court.

Ah, I see, Thanks! In that case, its not direct evidence in this case is it? So, would it be hearsay?

 

[Tortoise]

Ah, I see, Thanks! In that case, its not direct evidence in this case is it? So, would it be hearsay?

There are quite a few posts already on it so I won't repeat.

But I'm not sure where people think this classification of it applies? If it's here, then no, we aren't subject to the same rules of evidence as a court, but we can choose to believe BB or not. If it's in BB's custody case, his testimony, then it's something that was said directly to him by an officer of the court, so it would be allowed but not for the truth of what RW said. MOO

 

[mrjitty]

There are quite a few posts already on it so I won't repeat.

But I'm not sure where people think this classification of it applies? If it's here, then no, we aren't subject to the same rules of evidence as a court, but we can choose to believe BB or not. If it's in BB's custody case, his testimony, then it's something that was said directly to him by an officer of the court, so it would be allowed but not for the truth of what RW said. MOO

Exactly

One proves things from primary sources, so ideally you produce both conversation participants to adduce both sides. As we saw on the McStay case, the defence may object to particular prejudicial phrasing.

So IIRC the witness wanted to say "they told me the accused was a crook"

But this had to be watered down to "they gave me reason to be careful in my dealings with the accused"

The point being, the primary witness is allowed to testify as to how the content of the conversation shaped his future actions and intentions

It often comes up in the context of where a witness is asked why they did or thought something, and the answer is they were told it. Especially when they acted on the info. But it is not proof that the info was true - only as to how they understood the situation

 

[dixiegirl1035]

RSBM I did see some of their things, and she had a room set up perfectly for Tylee and JJ, and it didn’t seem strange to me. I knew the threats she was getting from Kay Woodcock (JJ’s grandmother) and from others, and I guess I didn’t ask questions because I knew that history. I knew what was going on, and in my own head, I’m trying to find out where my own kids are."

ID - Joshua Vallow, 7, & Tylee Ryan, 17, Rexburg, Sept 2019 *MEDIA MAPS TIMELINE* NO DISCUSSION

I guess that she was "not seeing" that the bed for JJ was next to Lori's. Or perhaps the bedroom was not the same when the babysitter was there and said JJ's matress/bed was in Lori's room?

*cough cough* (non-Covid related)

 

[mickey2942]

The plan to stay silent ship has sailed. The plan to blame AC for everything is gone. Finding the bodies on CD's property was a total game changer here. I wonder if the police had a tip, because they were very much spot on to the location of the bodies.

I am waiting for CD or LVD to turn on each other like feral dogs. And I believe that their attorneys should wash their hands of this mess. They are probably waiting to milk as much money as possible first.

Maybe CD and LVD are still waiting for July 20th. Once that Koolaid trip is finished, we may see some significant changes.

 

[Tortoise]

The plan to stay silent ship has sailed. The plan to blame AC for everything is gone. Finding the bodies on CD's property was a total game changer here. I wonder if the police had a tip, because they were very much spot on to the location of the bodies.

I am waiting for CD or LVD to turn on each other like feral dogs. And I believe that their attorneys should wash their hands of this mess. They are probably waiting to milk as much money as possible first.

Maybe CD and LVD are still waiting for July 20th. Once that Koolaid trip is finished, we may see some significant changes.

I think Chad's text about making a fire and burying a raccoon in the pet cemetery, the day Tylee disappeared, gave them her likely location.

Alex's phone pings in the yard that day and the day after JJ was last seen, too coincidental.

The cadaver dog confirmed the spots, imo.

 

[wenwe4]

My fellow sleuth Ettie Mae. She knows all about Tylee, JJ, and all of you. She’s committed nightly, and sending all of you hugs. She probably has it figured out lol.

Ettie Mae is adorable! Thank you for sharing - she looks like she is a whole lot of snuggles!

 

[wiggy]

Interesting, but...

If she chooses that tack, as the prosecutor I would argue that she knew she was breaking the law, and breaking her own code, which was to pray for the zombies to die, not kill them. That's why she hid what she was planning to do, and had done, from at least MG. Not to mention running from police and lying to her own inner circle about hiding the children from harm.

There is also evidence she didn't want her children in Jan 2019, abandoned JJ for two months early in 2019, when he was 'light' - taking his medication, service dog's collar and iPad with special apps, told her friend April to abandon her children to join the 144K, and made plans to kill JJ when she handed back his service dog and hid JJ from his family, before she told MG that Chad called to tell her he was a zombie.

Then there is her documented behavior at the police station in January 2019. She said the 'church' link Charles had sent Tylee and Tylee's cousin was about crazy people, and she created a lie for police, MG, and Tylee, that she moved out of the house because Charles was cheating. At Community Bridges I think it's plain that she didn't tell them that Charles wasn't really Charles, or that he was in the way of her mission and that she was a god, or that she had threatened to murder him. If she wants to argue true delusion, she would also need to explain how she controlled her behavior so strategically around health professionals, police and her daughter, and adjudged her own people, presumably, as crazy.

If she truly believed Charles was a zombie, and he was planning to kill her for her life insurance, I would argue she wouldn't have followed him to Texas.

Dateline

MG: when she first went to Texas I’m like ‘why are you going to Texas, you’re trying to run from him?’ She goes ‘I was told by the Lord I need to get his finances in order’.

Nate Eaton

MG: “I used to say to her, ‘Why is everybody in your life turning into zombies? Why is everybody after you? I don’t understand.’ And she would say, ‘Well, it’s because Satan really hates me, and because of my exaltation and the level I’m exalted to, they’re coming straight after me.’

Probable cause:

"At some point after Gibb first learned this doctrine from Vallow and Daybell, she was informed by Vallow and Daybell that they believed it was their mission to rid the world of zombies. When Vallow initially spoke to Gibb about getting rid of zombies she spoke about saying prayers to remove dark spirits from the human bodies they had inhabited. This information has been corroborated by electronic communications made by Vallow and Daybell."

ITA. I don’t think it’s a winning defense, but I think it may be her ONLY defense if LE has enough evidence to show that she was heavily involved in the murders of her children.

IMO, she did not believe the gospel according to Chad, and she planned and is responsible for these crimes. Regardless of that, her team needs to defend her, and I think this is a plausible strategy that seems to be allowed in Idaho, despite the fact that the insanity defense is not. The Supreme Court‘s example in that document struck me; IMO, Lori will argue that she believed her children were “wolves”, so to speak.

In his opinion, Justice Breyer gave two examples of mentally insane criminal defendants. One of the defendants believed the victim was a wolf. The other defendant believed that a wolf ordered him to kill the human victim, so he shot and killed the human to comply with the wolf’s demand. The first defendant, because he lacked the requisite mens rea for the crime of murder in that he lacked intent to kill a human, is not guilty. But the second defendant, even though mentally insane, would have no defense to the crime of murder, because he knew he killed a human and he had the requisite criminal intent to kill the human. Under current Idaho law, even though both defendants are mentally insane, the second defendant would be guilty.

That said, I don’t think it will be difficult for the prosecution to disprove that she truly believed her children to be zombies at the times of the murders.