Found Deceased ID - Joshua Vallow, 7, & Tylee Ryan, 16, Rexburg, Sept 2019 *Arrests* #53

[LovesPeace2]

So apparently there has been a New Discovery Filing for LVD concerning an alibi. The bone of contention is that the time is not narrowed down enough to present an alibi. Also, her next arraignment is Sept 10th where she will enter her plea.
8/28/20 New Discovery Filing in Lori Vallow Case - Court TV

Just damn about the case against Lori . I wonder if this is where a deal may apply in order to get a conviction against Lori ,but ffs both of them are as guilty as sin . I could see Lori playing the victim threw all this claiming battered wives syndrome bad abusives husbands and brother she just did as she’s told by them, the only plea I’d be ok with is one where Lori gets death penalty and chad lwop for squealing like a pig just my opinion

 

[indicolite22]

I wondered what thoughts everyone has about JP's strategy at the prelim, emphasizing that JJ had difficulty bonding with males?

I think I know where he's going with the MG and LV were close as sisters. I think he's going to say LV was the murderer and even Alex and MG didn't know her, despite being super close, she never shared her secrets with them, or with CD. She pulled the wool over all their eyes, and was an adept liar.

Perhaps the bit about male bonding was that LV killed JJ because she knew he wouldn't want to live with CD. He seems to be sowing seeds also for Tylee not being easy to get along with.

These are not my opinions of the truth, but my thoughts about his trial strategy.

Maybe he will say it was LV who took Alex's phone to Chad's property. He seemed to want to create the impression of a great friendship between Alex and Chad, such that Alex could be trusted by Chad, and emphasized that Alex was not necessarily with his own device.

I don't have any suggestions for how LV would have managed to burn/bury her children without CD knowing. Is he going to suggest the possibility of an unknown accomplice? CD was convinced to send that text to Tammy to cover for what LV was doing?

Just a few ideas. He might be trying to get ahead of LV blaming CD for the murders, since it's common knowledge in her history that she has no loyalty and will do/say anything to save herself and trash everyone around her.

MOO

In regard to Lori and MG being like sisters, I think JP knows of MG's stance that Lori was like a puppet to Chad's puppeteer (MG used a glove and hand analogy in her first interview). Perhaps JP intends to accuse MG of bias (lying for Lori) if she testifies that calling Charles, the kids and Tammy zombies was Chad's idea.

 

[GRT]

If this has been posted previously, my apologies. I didn't spot it. This is way interesting, and caught me out of the blue.

8/27/20 Judge Issues Order in Chad Daybell Case - Court TV

Thank you for that. This is the first I've seen it.

How odd that all plea deals must be on the public record!

This is just my opinion, and I don't want to cast any aspersions on anyone, but what religion are the attorneys, and what religion is the prosecutor?

Who requested this order?

It seems to me that an order of this nature may involve the need to keep a deal from happening when it shouldn't happen.

JMOO, but this feels weird to me.

 

[GRT]

In regard to Lori and MG being like sisters, I think JP knows of MG's stance that Lori was like a puppet to Chad's puppeteer (MG used a glove and hand analogy in her first interview). Perhaps JP intends to accuse MG of bias (lying for Lori) if she testifies that calling Charles, the kids and Tammy zombies was Chad's idea.

That makes sense to me. Prior was laying the groundwork for something, and that could be it.

 

[dixiegirl1035]

Thank you for that. This is the first I've seen it.

How odd that all plea deals must be on the public record!

This is just my opinion, and I don't want to cast any aspersions on anyone, but what religion are the attorneys, and what religion is the prosecutor?

Who requested this order?

It seems to me that an order of this nature may involve the need to keep a deal from happening when it shouldn't happen.

JMOO, but this feels weird to me.

All MOO

It has been reported that the prosecutor used to be an LDS bishop.

As to plea offerings, I would assume would not be public record and would be requested/approved to be sealed when submitted.

I don't see that this order was requested, only that the judge issued such.

 

[Spartygirl]

Since I mentioned Canada, I just want to say the rules there are different in regards to speedy trial, and from what I have seen the time clock is a very big deal. I love following Canadian trials, simply because we only get to know what the jury knows the entire trial. After everything is said and done we then get to know everything considered too prejudicial. So I always feel like I'm an actual jury member. It's very different compared to the US.

I AGREE !!
I followed both Tim Bosma and Laura Babcock's murders with Dellen Millard and Mark Smich on trial and felt like I was right in the court room and on the jury.

 

[Spartygirl]

This was a word document he wrote himself with bullets written in the third person.. Thank you for this though, I will do a search!!

Just catching up in here but wondering if you found it. @Monger
I have it saved and can send it to you if you have not found it yet.
(I think I have the one you are asking about anyway)

 

[Teche]

I hope there is no plea deal.
What are y’all’s thoughts on murder charges being added? I’m worried that they will never be charged with causing the deaths of JJ and Tylee.

 

[April_Dawn99]

Just FYI: there is a new AnC video on Youtube, and a long one (4 hrs). Just started listening, but from the video description it seems there is a lot she has to say as an insider. She also plans another podcast for tomorrow and it's possible to send her your questions directly.
I am adding link here as it was said previously AnC is an approved source as I recall

 

[lake daze]

I hope there is no plea deal.
What are y’all’s thoughts on murder charges being added? I’m worried that they will never be charged with causing the deaths of JJ and Tylee.

I don't know but, it seems that when a case gets so big and is sensationalized, all common sense is thrown out the window. The OJ trial, the Menedez Bros. (first trials) and Casey Anthony taught me that any ridiculous theories could be thrown against the wall and there will be someone dumb enough to believe those theories. I don't blame the prosecutors, I blame the general public for being so gullible.
I think Chad and Lori saw themselves as modern day Romeo and Juliet. They were supposed to be together against all odds. Lol...unfortunately, our Chad as Romeo could have an AARP card, was probably on Lipitor, and Lori had 5 husbands and gray roots. This should be an open and shut case IMO, but I think it's going to get crazy.

 

[Tortoise]

In regard to Lori and MG being like sisters, I think JP knows of MG's stance that Lori was like a puppet to Chad's puppeteer (MG used a glove and hand analogy in her first interview). Perhaps JP intends to accuse MG of bias (lying for Lori) if she testifies that calling Charles, the kids and Tammy zombies was Chad's idea.

I think his questioning shows his current strategy, even if that might change before trial. I think he deliberately mixed it up so that the prosecution wouldn't see where he was going with it. If you notice he changed tack a few times, but I think on reviewing it all that he was surreptitiously building up to his last question on the subject, which in the event was successfully objected to by the State. His inference seems to be that she didn't tell anyone, not even Chad, imo.

Day 2

1:07:50 - 1:08:33

JP: So you had known Miss Vallow at that point for how long?
MG: A few weeks.
JP: Okay. Did you form a friendship?
MG: Yes.
JP: Was it an immediate friendship?
MG: Yes.
JP: Would you describe…obviously I heard some of your testimony on that tape, but from that time in October until you know maybe the beginning of last year, you had a very close friendship, would that be fair?
MG: Yes.
JP: Sisters.
MG: Possibly.
JP: Well possibly, or were you that close?
MG: We were close.
JP: Okay. You shared a number of things.
MG: Yes.
JP: You shared your belief about having visions, about things that may happen in the future, correct?
MG: Not my visions, not her visions.
JP: Okay. Okay.


[Diverts to how many times MG spoke with Gilbert police. Then her meeting with the prosecutor. Then how many times she spoke to the FBI.]


1:23:06 – 1:25:40

JP: I want to switch gears a little bit if we may, and I’d like to talk about Alex Cox. How would you describe your relationship with Alex Cox?
MG: Um a friend, friendly with each other.
JP: How many times did you meet Alex Cox?
MG: Multiple times, I cannot recall.
JP: When is the first time you met Alex Cox?
MG: Shortly after meeting Lori. Um between October and November of 2018.
JP: Okay. How would you describe the relationship, based on the knowledge that you have, between Alex Cox and Lori Vallow?
MG: I’m sorry the relationship I have or they have?
JP: They have, the two of them.
MG: Oh, those two together, um they were good friends and siblings to each other, um they got along really well.
JP: Well they were very close with each other were they not?
MG: Yes.
JP: In fact isn’t it true that when they moved from Arizona to Idaho, Alex moved as well isn’t that true?
MG: Correct.
JP: And in fact he tried to get an apartment right next to Lori’s, isn’t that correct?
MG: I believe so.
JP: Right. And he actually gave up a job so that he could be with Lori in Idaho, is that correct?
MG: I don’t know if he gave it up.
JP: Okay. Did he do that previously as well? In Texas or something like that, do you have any recollection of that?
MG: I don’t know.
JP: So when you describe they had a close relationship it was a little more than close. They were extremely close, weren’t they?
RW: Objection, speculative.
JP: There’s no speculation it’s a specific question. Were they extremely close?
JFE: Miss Gibb I’m gonna authorize the question to be answered if you know the answer to that question.
MG: I would say yes.
JP: Okay. Now you listened to the tape recording that you recorded and that was in December of last year, is that correct, that tape recording? The 21 minute recording with Lori…
MG: ...Yeah December 8th.
JP: You remembered the date.
MG: I did.
JP: Okay.


Diverts to whether MG was prompted by LE to make that call and her objectives for recording the call.


1:26:30

JP: Now I took the liberty of listening to that tape a number of times, and I found something quite interesting, is that Lori Vallow said on the tape that she would not tell anything to Al. When she said she would not tell anything to Al who’s the Al she’s talking about?
MG: Her brother.
JP: That would be Alex Cox?
MG: Correct.
JP: And she also talked about not telling you anything as well. Correct?
MG: Correct.
JP: And you two were more than close friends, you were almost sisters with Lori Vallow weren’t you?
MG: We were really close.
JP: Well were you almost sisters, would you describe it as that close?
MG: Um, possibly.
JP: Okay. Is there a reason why you’re not saying yes?
MG: Well it’s just a big word to say you’re sisters with somebody. I haven’t known her for very long so it’s only been a few months.
JP: Okay. But you knew her long enough to make that phone call to try to get her to help you clear your name, right?
MG: Partially.
JP: Okay. Now would you describe Lori as someone who’s a persuasive person?
MG: Yes.
JP: And she’s got quite a dynamic personality doesn’t she?
MG: Yes.
JP: And she’s very convincing isn’t she?
MG: Yes.
JP: And if she says that she would not discuss anything with any of her children or their whereabouts with anybody close to her, would that be a fair statement?
MG: Yes.
JP: So she would, no matter who it is, she would probably refrain from giving out any information if it served her purpose…
RW: Objection speculative. Calls for facts not in evidence.
JFE: Sustained.

(JP looks at notepad.)

JP: I’d like to switch gears a little bit.

 

[Lyrarya]

I think his questioning shows his current strategy, even if that might change before trial. I think he deliberately mixed it up so that the prosecution wouldn't see where he was going with it. If you notice he changed tack a few times, but I think on reviewing it all that he was surreptitiously building up to his last question on the subject, which in the event was successfully objected to by the State. His inference seems to be that she didn't tell anyone, not even Chad, imo.

Day 2

1:07:50 - 1:08:33

JP: So you had known Miss Vallow at that point for how long?
MG: A few weeks.
JP: Okay. Did you form a friendship?
MG: Yes.
JP: Was it an immediate friendship?
MG: Yes.
JP: Would you describe…obviously I heard some of your testimony on that tape, but from that time in October until you know maybe the beginning of last year, you had a very close friendship, would that be fair?
MG: Yes.
JP: Sisters.
MG: Possibly.
JP: Well possibly, or were you that close?
MG: We were close.
JP: Okay. You shared a number of things.
MG: Yes.
JP: You shared your belief about having visions, about things that may happen in the future, correct?
MG: Not my visions, not her visions.
JP: Okay. Okay.


[Diverts to how many times MG spoke with Gilbert police. Then her meeting with the prosecutor. Then how many times she spoke to the FBI.]


1:23:06 – 1:25:40

JP: I want to switch gears a little bit if we may, and I’d like to talk about Alex Cox. How would you describe your relationship with Alex Cox?
MG: Um a friend, friendly with each other.
JP: How many times did you meet Alex Cox?
MG: Multiple times, I cannot recall.
JP: When is the first time you met Alex Cox?
MG: Shortly after meeting Lori. Um between October and November of 2018.
JP: Okay. How would you describe the relationship, based on the knowledge that you have, between Alex Cox and Lori Vallow?
MG: I’m sorry the relationship I have or they have?
JP: They have, the two of them.
MG: Oh, those two together, um they were good friends and siblings to each other, um they got along really well.
JP: Well they were very close with each other were they not?
MG: Yes.
JP: In fact isn’t it true that when they moved from Arizona to Idaho, Alex moved as well isn’t that true?
MG: Correct.
JP: And in fact he tried to get an apartment right next to Lori’s, isn’t that correct?
MG: I believe so.
JP: Right. And he actually gave up a job so that he could be with Lori in Idaho, is that correct?
MG: I don’t know if he gave it up.
JP: Okay. Did he do that previously as well? In Texas or something like that, do you have any recollection of that?
MG: I don’t know.
JP: So when you describe they had a close relationship it was a little more than close. They were extremely close, weren’t they?
RW: Objection, speculative.
JP: There’s no speculation it’s a specific question. Were they extremely close?
JFE: Miss Gibb I’m gonna authorize the question to be answered if you know the answer to that question.
MG: I would say yes.
JP: Okay. Now you listened to the tape recording that you recorded and that was in December of last year, is that correct, that tape recording? The 21 minute recording with Lori…
MG: ...Yeah December 8th.
JP: You remembered the date.
MG: I did.
JP: Okay.


Diverts to whether MG was prompted by LE to make that call and her objectives for recording the call.


1:26:30

JP: Now I took the liberty of listening to that tape a number of times, and I found something quite interesting, is that Lori Vallow said on the tape that she would not tell anything to Al. When she said she would not tell anything to Al who’s the Al she’s talking about?
MG: Her brother.
JP: That would be Alex Cox?
MG: Correct.
JP: And she also talked about not telling you anything as well. Correct?
MG: Correct.
JP: And you two were more than close friends, you were almost sisters with Lori Vallow weren’t you?
MG: We were really close.
JP: Well were you almost sisters, would you describe it as that close?
MG: Um, possibly.
JP: Okay. Is there a reason why you’re not saying yes?
MG: Well it’s just a big word to say you’re sisters with somebody. I haven’t known her for very long so it’s only been a few months.
JP: Okay. But you knew her long enough to make that phone call to try to get her to help you clear your name, right?
MG: Partially.
JP: Okay. Now would you describe Lori as someone who’s a persuasive person?
MG: Yes.
JP: And she’s got quite a dynamic personality doesn’t she?
MG: Yes.
JP: And she’s very convincing isn’t she?
MG: Yes.
JP: And if she says that she would not discuss anything with any of her children or their whereabouts with anybody close to her, would that be a fair statement?
MG: Yes.
JP: So she would, no matter who it is, she would probably refrain from giving out any information if it served her purpose…
RW: Objection speculative. Calls for facts not in evidence.
JFE: Sustained.

(JP looks at notepad.)

JP: I’d like to switch gears a little bit.

I agree, with the way you broke it down, there could definitely be a stratagy there. I wonder if it's for the current charges, or ammo for the future.
Its weird how he almost begged her to state that she and LV were "as close as sisters". It is such a subjective term, I wonder why it was so important.

 

[FLmom777]

This thing about wanting a specific time in order to have an alibi is rather odd. The conspiracy to conceal was a long term issue, not just a specific moment in time like a murder would be. She isn’t being tried for murder but MM acts like the prosecution should give a time for the concealment charge. It actually was ongoing from the time of death until the children were found.

 

[JolietJake]

I'm repeating myself from a post a while back but I believe that if this hadn't turned into such a high-profile case, right now there's tons of evidence that would convict them both today. Add the evidence we don't yet know about like electronic evidence and fibers/fingerprints on the duct tape etc and I cannot see how any jury can have reasonable doubt that these two are involved and guilty.

Just recently, the judge made mention of plea deal conversations to go on the record and that is quite unusual from what's been told on lawyer-based websites. As it stands today, they are only charged with destroying or hiding evidence so a plea would have to be for those charges. If one takes a plea for those charges, it would be next to impossible to plead not guilty for murder or conspiracy once you've already admitted to altering and burying the bodies and/or knew that it was being done. That means this person would then best take another plea when the more serious charges come down.

I'm guessing that since it's well known that LV is a liar to the bone, not to mention many other choice ways to describe her, there's not a judge or jury on this planet that would believe a word she says. She's been in la-la land and coniving her whole life and she has no one supporting her any more. To me, MM is incompetent in this area of law. She may be facing charges in Arizona that CD may have little to do with. She may be charged with fraud by collecting government funds for deceased children and Lord only knows what else. I don't think LV is a candidate for a plea deal.

With the grisly evidence already out there, all JP can attempt to do to defend CD is to confuse the jury and that would be a huge and uphill battle. There the's also TD factor that's sure to be brought up at a trial. JP may be crude but he's not a dummy. I think that with all the strong and physical evidence against his client, he has no choice but to advise CD to take a plea deal and cover his (CD's) butt the best he can.

Of course, I can be completely wrong but regardless of what happens and when it happens, LV and CD are still toast.

 

[wenwe4]

I agree, with the way you broke it down, there could definitely be a stratagy there. I wonder if it's for the current charges, or ammo for the future.
Its weird how he almost begged her to state that she and LV were "as close as sisters". It is such a subjective term, I wonder why it was so important.

Celestial Sister Wives?
ETA: Given CD's pick up line w/all females "Weren't we married in a previous life?" CD may have told JP about this and that is what JP is trying to get on record?

 

[wenwe4]

I wonder if the Atty's & presiding Judge have read through LVD's previous court orders from Tx & Az & discovered that she does not follow court orders at any given opportunity. She has a significant history of distorting facts (even to the courts) and despite being caught she just packs up & moves to yet another State. Maybe this is one way to put everything on the record so there will be no way to dance her way out of saying she never agreed or they never offered a plea deal (I just do not trust her at all). MOO

 

[Monger]

Just catching up in here but wondering if you found it. @Monger
I have it saved and can send it to you if you have not found it yet.
(I think I have the one you are asking about anyway)

PLEASE!!! And thank you so much!!

 

[Monger]

I think his questioning shows his current strategy, even if that might change before trial. I think he deliberately mixed it up so that the prosecution wouldn't see where he was going with it. If you notice he changed tack a few times, but I think on reviewing it all that he was surreptitiously building up to his last question on the subject, which in the event was successfully objected to by the State. His inference seems to be that she didn't tell anyone, not even Chad, imo.

Day 2

1:07:50 - 1:08:33

JP: So you had known Miss Vallow at that point for how long?
MG: A few weeks.
JP: Okay. Did you form a friendship?
MG: Yes.
JP: Was it an immediate friendship?
MG: Yes.
JP: Would you describe…obviously I heard some of your testimony on that tape, but from that time in October until you know maybe the beginning of last year, you had a very close friendship, would that be fair?
MG: Yes.
JP: Sisters.
MG: Possibly.
JP: Well possibly, or were you that close?
MG: We were close.
JP: Okay. You shared a number of things.
MG: Yes.
JP: You shared your belief about having visions, about things that may happen in the future, correct?
MG: Not my visions, not her visions.
JP: Okay. Okay.


[Diverts to how many times MG spoke with Gilbert police. Then her meeting with the prosecutor. Then how many times she spoke to the FBI.]


1:23:06 – 1:25:40

JP: I want to switch gears a little bit if we may, and I’d like to talk about Alex Cox. How would you describe your relationship with Alex Cox?
MG: Um a friend, friendly with each other.
JP: How many times did you meet Alex Cox?
MG: Multiple times, I cannot recall.
JP: When is the first time you met Alex Cox?
MG: Shortly after meeting Lori. Um between October and November of 2018.
JP: Okay. How would you describe the relationship, based on the knowledge that you have, between Alex Cox and Lori Vallow?
MG: I’m sorry the relationship I have or they have?
JP: They have, the two of them.
MG: Oh, those two together, um they were good friends and siblings to each other, um they got along really well.
JP: Well they were very close with each other were they not?
MG: Yes.
JP: In fact isn’t it true that when they moved from Arizona to Idaho, Alex moved as well isn’t that true?
MG: Correct.
JP: And in fact he tried to get an apartment right next to Lori’s, isn’t that correct?
MG: I believe so.
JP: Right. And he actually gave up a job so that he could be with Lori in Idaho, is that correct?
MG: I don’t know if he gave it up.
JP: Okay. Did he do that previously as well? In Texas or something like that, do you have any recollection of that?
MG: I don’t know.
JP: So when you describe they had a close relationship it was a little more than close. They were extremely close, weren’t they?
RW: Objection, speculative.
JP: There’s no speculation it’s a specific question. Were they extremely close?
JFE: Miss Gibb I’m gonna authorize the question to be answered if you know the answer to that question.
MG: I would say yes.
JP: Okay. Now you listened to the tape recording that you recorded and that was in December of last year, is that correct, that tape recording? The 21 minute recording with Lori…
MG: ...Yeah December 8th.
JP: You remembered the date.
MG: I did.
JP: Okay.


Diverts to whether MG was prompted by LE to make that call and her objectives for recording the call.


1:26:30

JP: Now I took the liberty of listening to that tape a number of times, and I found something quite interesting, is that Lori Vallow said on the tape that she would not tell anything to Al. When she said she would not tell anything to Al who’s the Al she’s talking about?
MG: Her brother.
JP: That would be Alex Cox?
MG: Correct.
JP: And she also talked about not telling you anything as well. Correct?
MG: Correct.
JP: And you two were more than close friends, you were almost sisters with Lori Vallow weren’t you?
MG: We were really close.
JP: Well were you almost sisters, would you describe it as that close?
MG: Um, possibly.
JP: Okay. Is there a reason why you’re not saying yes?
MG: Well it’s just a big word to say you’re sisters with somebody. I haven’t known her for very long so it’s only been a few months.
JP: Okay. But you knew her long enough to make that phone call to try to get her to help you clear your name, right?
MG: Partially.
JP: Okay. Now would you describe Lori as someone who’s a persuasive person?
MG: Yes.
JP: And she’s got quite a dynamic personality doesn’t she?
MG: Yes.
JP: And she’s very convincing isn’t she?
MG: Yes.
JP: And if she says that she would not discuss anything with any of her children or their whereabouts with anybody close to her, would that be a fair statement?
MG: Yes.
JP: So she would, no matter who it is, she would probably refrain from giving out any information if it served her purpose…
RW: Objection speculative. Calls for facts not in evidence.
JFE: Sustained.

(JP looks at notepad.)

JP: I’d like to switch gears a little bit.

I have said all along during questioning that JP is alluding to the fact that if LV didn’t tell her very close brother AC where the children were (per the secret recorded phone call) and she didn’t tell her “sister” MG either....that LVD didn’t tell CD either. Her husband. IMO that’s where JP was going with this. He made it sound incestuous (Regarding AC) though because he pushed a little TOO hard about closeness with AC.

ETA: It’s crazy, but to me it shows CD defense is going to throw LVD under the bus big time.

 

[Gardenkeep]

This thing about wanting a specific time in order to have an alibi is rather odd. The conspiracy to conceal was a long term issue, not just a specific moment in time like a murder would be. She isn’t being tried for murder but MM acts like the prosecution should give a time for the concealment charge. It actually was ongoing from the time of death until the children were found.

My thoughts exactly!

 

[Dontknow?]

I agree, with the way you broke it down, there could definitely be a stratagy there. I wonder if it's for the current charges, or ammo for the future.
Its weird how he almost begged her to state that she and LV were "as close as sisters". It is such a subjective term, I wonder why it was so important.

It's to show her testimony might be tilted towards LVD. Discredit her testimony in regards to Chad.