Found Deceased ID - Joshua Vallow, 7, & Tylee Ryan, 16, Rexburg, Sept 2019 *Arrests* #51

[minusfour]

Rush4087-it's frustrating, isn't it. I'm comforting myself with the fact that the longer it takes the LE to get their ducks in order, the better order they will be in. (If you get my drift) Hopefully this applies to this case.

 

[mrjitty]

Will Alex's statements to MG be admissible in court?

@Tortoise - bringing this over

Yes - MG can testify what someone told her directly. The jury just has to decide if they believe her but it's for the purposes of why she then did or thought something, not for the truth of what he said.

IIRC there might be some exceptions where the declarant died before trial as well, as he cannot be called to testify.

 

[indicolite22]

That could be why then if they never formally announce anything in public.

It is a little strange why they would want to keep it secret though if they kicked someone out because the kicked out person can go on claiming to be a member when they are really not and everyone thinks they are still a member if the organization does not counter it formally and publically.

Oh well, he wont be able to attend any services from where he is going.

BBM. I'm not LDS and excommunication was discussed here before. If I understood that debate correctly, the excommunicated could still go to church but would lose temple access. You need to provide a current document (temple recommend) to enter the temple. Losing access is a big deal and an important reason why some offshoot groups hide their incompatible beliefs.

 

[Tortoise]

@Tortoise - bringing this over



IIRC there might be some exceptions where the declarant died before trial as well, as he cannot be called to testify.

Thanks. Did you mean exceptions in that what he told her might not be allowed in, or did you mean it comes in when you say as well?

In the phone conversation that MG recorded she says to LVD something like 'Al said to me...' and LVD replies something like 'I don't know why he would have said that'. I'm thinking that isn't affected by hearsay rules is it? - because it isn't her testimony it's what MG said to LVD?

 

[indicolite22]

Thank you SleuthD-o-doubleg for the link to another excellent EIN article.

I apologize in advance for the long rant. All JMO

Please don't get me wrong, as I support our men and women in blue. But I had to bite my tongue after reading in this current (Aug 6, 2020) news article that the Chandler PD are (now) planning to "eventually file charges against LV in connection to the 2019 homicide of her (LVD's) former husband." They key word there is: "eventually".

I was also not surprised to read in the article (even though it's now been over a year since July 2019) that the Chandler PD is "still going through active search warrants and supoenas". The key word there is: "still"

Or that Chandler Police now indicate that a "conspiracy to commit murder" charge is possible". The key word there is: "possible"

After all, back then, who would've been suspicious of a woman who, while being interviewed immediately after the traumatic shooting death of her "then" (not "former") husband, and explaining why there was really nothing she could say that would assuage her neighbors who might've been upset by the shooting - as they had not really gotten to know them yet, having just moved in, brightly quipped: "I'm like, Hi neighbors. Sorry."

Neither was I surprised to read that Chandler PD "still has a ways to go in their investigation", or that a Chandler PD detective had recently told EIN: "This case is a marathon, not a sprint". Roger that. The key phrases there are: "still has a ways to go" and "this case is a marathon".

Maybe the "marathon, not a sprint" phrase was added to the Chandler PD media relations handbook near the end of 2019 when it appears to have first dawned on CPD that LV might actually have LIED to them about what happened that day! No way! And what if all those warnings by CV prior to his death stating: "if I am ever found murdered, Lori and Alex did it" were actually TRUE? What if the shooting hadn't been self defense after all, Mr Hand?

I'm sorry to be so sarcastic, but I think it's warranted. Several CPD investigators on officer cams appeared completely enarmored with (gaga over, really), LV. It was like they had a high school crush on her. They believed every word she said - even her most improbable statements - and apparentjy they refused to even consider the possibility that CV just might have been murdered by a vengeful, evil, lying, (but smiling), cheating, sociopath wife and her all-too-eager-to-please, fake-bump-on-the-head, pit bull of a brother. CV even fore-TOLD them. His lawyer told them. His ex told them. His sister told them. Others could've told them if they'd only been asked. Look at the communication. Come. On.

IMO they should make training videos out of those officer cam tapes: "keep your head, don't let THIS happen!"

Sometimes a race just seems like a marathon because the race actually started six months before you ever heard the gun.

I think that the national news stories about the missing children in Rexburg, the attempted shooting of BB in Gilbert, TD's death (and the later exhumation), the disappearance of LVD and CD, the mysterious marriages, the trips to HI, the new suspicions about JR's death, the charges filed against LVD and CD in Idaho, and the many other incidents and red flags by December finally helped shake the marathon runners from the spell cast upon them by the wicked witch. Before then, I think they were sleeping in poppies.

IMO, no matter whether charges are eventually filed in Chandler or not, there will never be justice for CV and his family. Sadly, I think that time has passed.

Jmo

I agree that Charles' death would probably not have been properly investigated without all the other cases that followed. That said, what we currently know about Lori's involvement would (IMO) not be enough to convict her of conspiring to kill Charles. Even some of her family believe her version that Charles was a threat to her, so I'm not surprised that she managed to fool the police at first by playing the victim. A smoking gun is needed and I hope there is enough in electronic communications among the involved parties to prove conspiracy. The frustrating part is that analyses take a long time.

 

[The First Article]

If I am correct and Lori, Alex and others thought/think Chad is the Savior, or channels or is otherwise the voice of God as a prophet / first born / godly entity that they may be able to prove Chad and Lori guilty of murder as Chad commanded it while acting as 'God''s voice.

 

[Niner]

@Tortoise - just scanned the last 10 to 20 pages.... Is there a hearing date set yet for LVD?
TIA!

 

[Tortoise]

@Tortoise - just scanned the last 10 to 20 pages.... Is there a hearing date set yet for LVD?
TIA!

Nothing announced yet.

 

[Niner]

Nothing announced yet.

Thanks!

 

[indicolite22]

I think the matter of CD's status in the LDS church is very important as Prior is being very through in laying ground CD is fully consistent with accepted doctrine.

This point looks important to his defense.

Without his special doctrine Chad is no more a cult leader, so he didn't declare people zombies and manipulated others into killing for religious reasons. MG would be the only one testifying against that and she'd be careful not to implicate herself. She doesn't like the word cult either. I think Prior is counting on it - either she knew more of the doctrine that she's willing to admit or nothing objectionable happened.

 

[mrjitty]

Thanks. Did you mean exceptions in that what he told her might not be allowed in, or did you mean it comes in when you say as well?

In the phone conversation that MG recorded she says to LVD something like 'Al said to me...' and LVD replies something like 'I don't know why he would have said that'. I'm thinking that isn't affected by hearsay rules is it? - because it isn't her testimony it's what MG said to LVD?

I recall there are some exceptions to the hearsay rule where the declarant is unavailable - so some extra latitude can be allowed in respect of the statements

Melanie Gibb
“Yeah. Okay, I hope, wow. I hope he’s okay. I hope you guys are okay. I did have a question. I asked Al at one point, your brother if I wanted to know, you know, like where he was? And he said, I did not want to know and that he could not be found. So what does that mean?”

Lori Daybell
“I don’t know why he would say that. But it’s the same story. I didn’t even want Al to know I don’t want anybody to know so that nobody has to be worried about it. I mean, nobody has to be–”

I think in this case, like you say, the recording does not fall foul of the hearsay rule in the first place, because it is not being used as to content but as to context - MG directly asks LV to explain something AC said to her.

We are not interested in the truth or accuracy of the AC quote. Rather LV is clearly lying that she had not told AC where JJ is, when actually we know AC had buried JJ. That is a direct statement from LV and admissible.

The logical inference is that LV knew AC had buried JJ and she is lying to MG to further the conspiracy.

It doesn't even matter if MG made up the AC quote for example.

 

[Tortoise]

Thank you SleuthD-o-doubleg for the link to another excellent EIN article.

I apologize in advance for the long rant. All JMO

Please don't get me wrong, as I support our men and women in blue. But I had to bite my tongue after reading in this current (Aug 6, 2020) news article that the Chandler PD are (now) planning to "eventually file charges against LV in connection to the 2019 homicide of her (LVD's) former husband." They key word there is: "eventually".

I was also not surprised to read in the article (even though it's now been over a year since July 2019) that the Chandler PD is "still going through active search warrants and supoenas". The key word there is: "still"

Or that Chandler Police now indicate that a "conspiracy to commit murder" charge is possible". The key word there is: "possible"

After all, back then, who would've been suspicious of a woman who, while being interviewed immediately after the traumatic shooting death of her "then" (not "former") husband, and explaining why there was really nothing she could say that would assuage her neighbors who might've been upset by the shooting - as they had not really gotten to know them yet, having just moved in, brightly quipped: "I'm like, Hi neighbors. Sorry."

Neither was I surprised to read that Chandler PD "still has a ways to go in their investigation", or that a Chandler PD detective had recently told EIN: "This case is a marathon, not a sprint". Roger that. The key phrases there are: "still has a ways to go" and "this case is a marathon".

Maybe the "marathon, not a sprint" phrase was added to the Chandler PD media relations handbook near the end of 2019 when it appears to have first dawned on CPD that LV might actually have LIED to them about what happened that day! No way! And what if all those warnings by CV prior to his death stating: "if I am ever found murdered, Lori and Alex did it" were actually TRUE? What if the shooting hadn't been self defense after all, Mr Hand?

I'm sorry to be so sarcastic, but I think it's warranted. Several CPD investigators on officer cams appeared completely enarmored with (gaga over, really), LV. It was like they had a high school crush on her. They believed every word she said - even her most improbable statements - and apparentjy they refused to even consider the possibility that CV just might have been murdered by a vengeful, evil, lying, (but smiling), cheating, sociopath wife and her all-too-eager-to-please, fake-bump-on-the-head, pit bull of a brother. CV even fore-TOLD them. His lawyer told them. His ex told them. His sister told them. Others could've told them if they'd only been asked. Look at the communication. Come. On.

IMO they should make training videos out of those officer cam tapes: "keep your head, don't let THIS happen!"

Sometimes a race just seems like a marathon because the race actually started six months before you ever heard the gun.

I think that the national news stories about the missing children in Rexburg, the attempted shooting of BB in Gilbert, TD's death (and the later exhumation), the disappearance of LVD and CD, the mysterious marriages, the trips to HI, the new suspicions about JR's death, the charges filed against LVD and CD in Idaho, and the many other incidents and red flags by December finally helped shake the marathon runners from the spell cast upon them by the wicked witch. Before then, I think they were sleeping in poppies.

IMO, no matter whether charges are eventually filed in Chandler or not, there will never be justice for CV and his family. Sadly, I think that time has passed.

Jmo

Yes. Exactly. It kind of irked me to see the former lead detective's appearance on Dateline too.


What MG had to say (on Dateline) should have been reported to the Chandler cops too, hopefully -

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’.”
Keith Morrison: “Lori was worried Charles might leave his $1mill life insurance to his sister Kay.”
MG: “She started wondering ‘is Kay going to get the money?’ Because she now was told by Chad that Kay was a zombie, so she was like ‘I bet he’s going to change it around. He’s going to give her the money’.”


Who could you say "going to get the money" to and leave them in any doubt, before it happens, let alone when you hear afterwards that they didn't die naturally, that it wasn't a total set-up? (yes, I know the answer to that, MG!)

If LVD had her own life policy, since she was very much into getting finances in order, and moving money around, I can't wait to see the evidence that she changed her own life insurance to secure benefit for her five children and ensure her plotting husband and brother didn't reap the reward for their efforts to kill her.

 

[indicolite22]

Charles Vallow filed for divorce in Feb. 2019. A month later he dismissed the petition. On April 2, 2019 he sent his attorneys this email. He wanted to make his marriage work with Lori Vallow.

“Love always wins.”

Three months later he was shot and killed by Lori’s brother Alex Cox.
Justin Lum Fox 10 Phoenix

I was wondering how she managed to win him back temporarily after calling him a zombie, threatening to kill him and taking all his money. It looks like she "apologized" and explained her behavior as "misunderstanding". Since she accused him of cheating, maybe he thought she acted out of misguided jealousy.

Justin Lum Fox 10 Phoenix

 

[indicolite22]

I rewatched MG's interview with Nate Eaton (beginning of part 3). It would seem that MG talked to Lori and Chad at least three times after they asked her to be unresponsive to police and/or lie for them (which she did).

The first time was on MG's way back from Utah to Arizona (which date?) when she stopped her car, called them and asked them to say a prayer together. While Chad was very nervous, Lori seemed fine.

On the second (shorter) call during the same week she and a friend (DW?) confronted Lori and Chad about their "testimony" and asked why they weren't told about the kids' whereabouts. Chad and Lori gave the safety excuse. MG and the friend eventually hung up. MG went to police after that (according to Lori's affidavit the date was December 6).

After talking to police a third, longer call occured (presumably on December 8), It appears that that call was recorded and was the one played in court. The first two calls weren't mentioned.

 

[Dylansmom08]

Was trying to figure out what reasons Lori and her attorney would have to waive the prelim in doing some research I came across this really informative legal page on the subject. The first two reasons it gives are;
1)The defendant intends to plead guilty and wants to avoid publicity.

2)The defendant is guilty of more than the charged offenses and fears further charges from the potentially damning evidence that may come out at the preliminary hearing. Also, if the facts of the case are particularly nasty, and the defendant plans to plead guilty anyway, the less the sentencing judge hears about the facts, the better for the defendant.

I think either one or both of those statements could apply to Lori it would be in her best interest to just plead guilty but I really hope she's not planning on doing that because I want her to have to go face a jury in that court room and hear all the details of the horrible things she has done. She doesn't deserve to be spared from all of that and she definitely doesn't deserve to take the easy way out in my opinion.

When Does it Make Sense to Waive the Preliminary Hearing?

 

[Laughing]

Just glad that the word homicide is now used to describe the death of Charles Vallow --- by someone other than us.

The latest on Charles Vallow's death and when charges could be filed against Lori Daybell | East Idaho News

Police in Arizona will eventually ask prosecutors to file charges against Lori Vallow Daybell in connection to the 2019 homicide of her former husband, Charles Vallow.

Eventually has no place in this!

Justice for Colby, Kay & Larry, please.

JMHO YMMV LRR

 

[watergirl62]

Was trying to figure out what reasons Lori and her attorney would have to waive the prelim in doing some research I came across this really informative legal page on the subject. The first two reasons it gives are;
1)The defendant intends to plead guilty and wants to avoid publicity.

2)The defendant is guilty of more than the charged offenses and fears further charges from the potentially damning evidence that may come out at the preliminary hearing. Also, if the facts of the case are particularly nasty, and the defendant plans to plead guilty anyway, the less the sentencing judge hears about the facts, the better for the defendant.

I think either one or both of those statements could apply to Lori it would be in her best interest to just plead guilty but I really hope she's not planning on doing that because I want her to have to go face a jury in that court room and hear all the details of the horrible things she has done. She doesn't deserve to be spared from all of that and she definitely doesn't deserve to take the easy way out in my opinion.

When Does it Make Sense to Waive the Preliminary Hearing?

3) Spite (wrath)

4)Publicly losing face (pride)

5)Blond hair dye not done fermenting (vanity)

I could go on...

 

[Boxer]

I agree that Charles' death would probably not have been properly investigated without all the other cases that followed. That said, what we currently know about Lori's involvement would (IMO) not be enough to convict her of conspiring to kill Charles. Even some of her family believe her version that Charles was a threat to her, so I'm not surprised that she managed to fool the police at first by playing the victim. A smoking gun is needed and I hope there is enough in electronic communications among the involved parties to prove conspiracy. The frustrating part is that analyses take a long time.

The smoking gun was there when the deputy arrived.
The deputy accepted the tale of an angry ex husband.
LV was running around with CVS keys or phone taunting him. Led him into a trap.
You can see she has people lie to the police per MG testimony.
The case of self defense rested in an there being an immediate threat with a bat.
MOO the bat was placed in CVs hands after Alex shot him and LV convinced TR tell a small lie that she brought the bat to her bedroom door.
Immediate seperate questioning would have revealed inconsistencies.

 

[Boxer]

Just catching up....LV waived her prelim???

I feel robbed. There must be something wrong with me. I really wanted to see her reactions to the descriptions of finding the bodies. I feel so disappointed.

MOO its the defense attempting to avoid the risk of conflicting testimony between CD and LV eventual cooperatuve story.

 

[Dontcha Know]

Was trying to figure out what reasons Lori and her attorney would have to waive the prelim in doing some research I came across this really informative legal page on the subject. The first two reasons it gives are;
1)The defendant intends to plead guilty and wants to avoid publicity.

2)The defendant is guilty of more than the charged offenses and fears further charges from the potentially damning evidence that may come out at the preliminary hearing. Also, if the facts of the case are particularly nasty, and the defendant plans to plead guilty anyway, the less the sentencing judge hears about the facts, the better for the defendant. (BBM)

I think either one or both of those statements could apply to Lori it would be in her best interest to just plead guilty but I really hope she's not planning on doing that because I want her to have to go face a jury in that court room and hear all the details of the horrible things she has done. She doesn't deserve to be spared from all of that and she definitely doesn't deserve to take the easy way out in my opinion.

When Does it Make Sense to Waive the Preliminary Hearing?

This trick has never admitted guilt to anything in her life, I think she will try and pin this all on Chad. JMO

3) Spite (wrath)

4)Publicly losing face (pride)

5)Blond hair dye not done fermenting (vanity)

I could go on...

Yes!