Found Deceased ID - Joshua Vallow, 7, & Tylee Ryan, 17, Rexburg, Sept 2019 *mom arrested* #26

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Clearly he is not, so is that a good sign the kids are ok? I hope so.
Those two bumbling nincompoops seem sure of themselves, even as they try to dodge the law and get caught flat footed. "If there is a warrant for Lori, no need to arrest her, she will turn herself in, and never mind that subpoena from Idaho, they know nothing about the child custody fight she's embroiled in!" oops It don't work that way, lady! Better start looking humble, right now you're facing 28 years in prison, and that's without the possible murder charges. #Life
 
Chad's 360,000$ insurance money. Has the IRS taken out their share yet? If not, there goes another big bunch. The illegal social security will have to be repaid. Three lawyers will eat up some more. Oh what a tangled web we weave.
 
Oh right. I missed that completely and not sure what that means unless it is to do with possible Arizona deaths and murder attempts. Plus Tammy's death. They may have to shuffle her back and forth between states perhaps so that would make it easier in the future.
I'm thinking it has to do with places she might attempt to flee to, rather than the places that are already investigating her.
 
Could it be a


Couldn’t be under an LLC entity?

It would still come up under their name in a search. Leave the search field for last name empty and type "LLC" into the Legal Description category. It shows all homes in the county owned under an LLC or trust. Select the "details" and you can see the owner's name(s) under the LLC name: Fremont County, Idaho, Terms and Conditions
 
Could it be a


Couldn’t be under an LLC entity?
IF LLc I don't think both their names have to be on it, is that right --our lawyer-types? But if it were in both their names, IF they declared husband and wife in any timeframe besides that few weeks in November, I would think they could be charged with falsification of docs.
 
Would the bank stop paying taxes if Chad stopped paying the mortgage?

Good question and I'm not positive of the answer, but in theory the mortgage payment is, as someone else said above, for PITI. Principal (paying down the balance), interest, taxes, and insurance. The PI portion the bank takes immediately and throws into their pile of money. The TI part is an addition to an escrow balance associated with that morgage. In theory the escrow amount goes up, then drops down when they make a tax payment or pay an insurance premium on your bahalf. They're pretty good at estimating how much is going to be needed and your payment amount for the TI portion is evaluated and adjusted, if needed, each year. While it is possible that the escrow balance might come up short when a payment from it is needed, that shouldn't happen if you are keeping up to date on your payments. I think *if* it were to happen and you were up to date on your payments there is a good chance that the mortage company would let your escrow balance go negative for a short time, but for sure your payment amount will be going up to prevent it from happening again. If you're behind on your payments and that's why the escrow balance is short, I can't guess what they might do, but certainly not making the payment seems to be a potential response.

Having said all of that, I'm wondering how sure we are that the payment hasn't been made on the taxes. Is it possible that the report in the PDF isn't updated that often? If the mortgage company got the payment to the county a bit late, could it have been paid and just not updated yet? I'm also kind of amazed at how big the report is for presumably only people who are late with their property taxes from last year given how taxes normally get collected and paid for those with mortgages and the low population and relative few houses in Fremont County. (I realize that other land and buildings also have property tax on them, but also think the vast majority of land in Fremont County is government land, primarily federal.)
 
Last edited:
from our timeline, regarding Lori transferring her record to Hawaii but not Chad.

Approx 7 Feb 2020 - Lori officially has her membership record transferred into a new congregation (ward). Tylee and JJ’s church records were not transferred into the ward, and neither were Chad’s (East Idaho News).

IMO (and with knowledge of how membership records are handled at the ward level) Chad’s records wouldn’t have ever been allowed to be moved to Hawaii. A ward/his Bishop can (and IMO, likely did) put a hold on his Church membership records so that a “new ward” cannot automatically pull the records into their ward. One reason that a Bishop would put a hold on his records would be if there was pending disciplinary action or the beginning the process of excommunication.

And know that before excommunication happens, the local ward would hold a formal council - and invite Chad in advance to participate, speak, discuss, etc before a decision is made. And so if any of that was “in the works” already and if Chad asked the new ward in Hawaii to move his records to the new ward, that request would have been denied. This is to avoid church members attempting to dodge church discipline by simply moving and trying to start over.

IMO, Lori only moved her records as a “hail Mary” to try to show some kind of residency in Hawaii— with hope that she would get some leniency/preferential treatment from the Hawaiian court system on bail reduction, etc. If I had to guess, she didn’t have any holds or records simply because she hadn’t probably been to church in months/years and the local Bishop in AZ didn’t even know her/know she lived in the ward boundaries.
 
Not as long as he had $$ in his escrow account. Jmo

Which is why I wonder if the report is accurate. If it is and he didn't have money in the escrow account I wonder how close he is to having the bank start repossession proceedings. If Tammy paid the October payment and Chad hasn't paid since, that would be five payments missed. MOO
 
Justin Lum Fox 10 Phoenix

An Idaho Falls BB company tells us they’re trying to work w/ Lori Vallow’s reps. There are obstacles.

- Vallow needs to prove she has $1M in assets
- Bond company’s insurance needs to assess risk
- $100K (10%) needs to be wired to account of bondsman which could take 24 hours.

Im scratching my head about this statement. Surely he misunderstood something.

If she can produce 1M in assets she doesn’t need a bonding company. This doesn’t make sense which is why I think he’s got it wrong.

Another note regarding questions about Chads mortgage. A colleague got burnt about 10 years ago accepting property as partial collateral for his fee. When the accused defaulted on his bail conditions he found out the mortgage had been “amended” and the payoff was higher than the amount originally recorded. He will no longer accept property as payment without first receiving a payoff statement directly from the mortgage company. What he painfully found out is mortgage companies don’t have to change the recorded mortgage if the “note” changes. The note dictates what you owe and the conditions for payment. The mortgage is only the instrument that secures it but the note is not required to be recorded in my jurisdiction. Might be different in other states.
 
There is no precedent here in my opinion. Biologically they are the grandparents. After the adoption, they are still family and if technical they are the JJ's aunt & uncle.

The law in Idaho states that biological Grandparents have no standing for custody rights of an adopted child.

Once a child has been legally adopted, the biological parents and by extension, biological Grandparents have had all legal rights to the child severed.

The biological parents signed away legal rights to child, in effect, completely leaving the child an "orphan". Any claims that the Grandparents had were terminated at the adoption.

True, this could be considered an unusual situation. But, it highlights the issue of problems that a "normal" adoption could have, if "Grandparents", can swoop in at any time after the adoption to "assert their rights".

Their rights ended when they decided not to adopt JJ, themselves.
 
Which is why I wonder if the report is accurate. If it is and he didn't have money in the escrow account I wonder how close he is to having the bank start repossession proceedings. If Tammy paid the October payment and Chad hasn't paid since, that would be five payments missed. MOO

My guess is the kids living there have taken over the payments.
 
I keep wanting to ask you this, so am glad her case popped up again... Is there a "best place" to get the story and synopsis of this case. I keep wanting to know Cupcake too.

Here's here current WS thread: Found Deceased - AL - Kamille "Cupcake" McKinney, 3, kidnapped from party, Birmingham, 12 Oct 2019 *Arrests* #7

Here's her media thread: Kamille "Cupcake" McKinney,3, Media, Maps, timeline -No Discussion

Read the media thread to get details on how her case unfolded.

ETA: I started to type out some details of her case in this post but it made me too angry to relive the horrific details we heard and this is not the thread to discuss Cupcake.
 
The law in Idaho states that biological Grandparents have no standing for custody rights of an adopted child.

Once a child has been legally adopted, the biological parents and by extension, biological Grandparents have had all legal rights to the child severed.

The biological parents signed away legal rights to child, in effect, completely leaving the child an "orphan". Any claims that the Grandparents had were terminated at the adoption.

True, this could be considered an unusual situation. But, it highlights the issue of problems that a "normal" adoption could have, if "Grandparents", can swoop in at any time after the adoption to "assert their rights".

Their rights ended when they decided not to adopt JJ, themselves.

That would be true if legally they were not still the aunt and uncle. It was Kay's brother (Charles Vallow) who adopted JJ. So legally they are still family to JJ and eligible for custody should the court give it to them.
 
The law in Idaho states that biological Grandparents have no standing for custody rights of an adopted child.

Once a child has been legally adopted, the biological parents and by extension, biological Grandparents have had all legal rights to the child severed.

The biological parents signed away legal rights to child, in effect, completely leaving the child an "orphan". Any claims that the Grandparents had were terminated at the adoption.

True, this could be considered an unusual situation. But, it highlights the issue of problems that a "normal" adoption could have, if "Grandparents", can swoop in at any time after the adoption to "assert their rights".

Their rights ended when they decided not to adopt JJ, themselves.
They have as good a chance as anyone to become the guardians and conservators of JJ, IMO. Who else should it be? To me, it has less to do with grandparent's rights (which I agree were severed on adoption), and more to do with finding a fit guardian, which clearly is not Lori. Moo.
 
All this speculation about bail requirements and the games that can be played reminds one of another case - namely the Jennifer Dulos murder. In the state of CT, Fotis Dulos (who committed suicide, rather than face the music) placed multiple properties as collateral in order to make bail. It turned out that there was so much obfuscation and downright fraud regarding debt on those properties, that at the last subsequent bond hearing, the bond was most likely to be revoked. But that untangling process takes time. This is hopefully different in Idaho, but I somehow doubt it. IMO
 
Last edited:
Good question and I'm not positive of the answer, but in theory the mortgage payment is, as someone else said above, for PITI. Principal (paying down the balance), interest, taxes, and insurance. The PI portion the bank takes immediately and throws into their pile of money. The TI part is an addition to an escrow balance associated with that morgage. In theory the escrow amount goes up, then drops down when they make a tax payment or pay an insurance premium on your bahalf. They're pretty good at estimating how much is going to be needed and your payment amount for the TI portion is evaluated and adjusted, if needed, each year. While it is possible that the escrow balance might come up short when a payment from it is needed, that shouldn't happen if you are keeping up to date on your payments. I think *if* it were to happen and you were up to date on your payments there is a good chance that the mortage company would let your escrow balance go negative for a short time, but for sure your payment amount will be going up to prevent it from happening again. If you're behind on your payments and that's why the escrow balance is short, I can't guess what they might do, but certainly not making the payment seems to be a potential response.

Having said all of that, I'm wondering how sure we are that the payment hasn't been made on the taxes. Is it possible that the report in the PDF isn't update that often? If the mortgage company got the payment to the county a bit late, could it have been paid and just not updated yet? I'm also kind of amazed at how big the report is for presumably only people who are late with their property taxes from last year given how taxes normally get collected and paid for those with mortgages and the low population and relative few houses in Fremont County. (I realize that other land and buildings also have property tax on them, but also thing the vast majority of land in Fremont County is government land, primarily federal.)
I felt the same. When I saw Chad's brothers property on the list, with a very sizable tax amount, and he being a solid professional in the community--well it just didn't quite make sense to me either.
 
The more I think about it. The better it would be for everyone if she was free.

Apart from the randoms who will stop her anywhere she goes.

CR will likely camp on her front lawn until he is let in to speak with her.

You'll have family begging them to stop media camping infront of their house. Or reports their children are being treated differently because they are related to the daybells. Bullying at school etc.

You'll have family constantly putting pressure on them to stop this circus. If the pressure is high enough they could just explode. Say something which actually helps locate the kids.

The law in Idaho states that biological Grandparents have no standing for custody rights of an adopted child.

Once a child has been legally adopted, the biological parents and by extension, biological Grandparents have had all legal rights to the child severed.

The biological parents signed away legal rights to child, in effect, completely leaving the child an "orphan". Any claims that the Grandparents had were terminated at the adoption.

True, this could be considered an unusual situation. But, it highlights the issue of problems that a "normal" adoption could have, if "Grandparents", can swoop in at any time after the adoption to "assert their rights".

Their rights ended when they decided not to adopt JJ, themselves.

But they are also his adoptive aunt and uncle and acted as his adoptive grandparents. Probably doesn't give legal standing. But other than Lori they probably have the same standing legally as loris siblings and parents. However none of them are actively seeking information on jj welfare excluding AdC.

If Lori has had her perental rights terminated. (No idea if possible in USA or if in this case it has as its under seal.) JJ next of kin after Lori is likely to be viewed as LW and KVW or CR. Especially if CR and AdC have said to the judge woodcocks the best position to provide the care jj needs.

Moo
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
58
Guests online
2,678
Total visitors
2,736

Forum statistics

Threads
603,611
Messages
18,159,321
Members
231,786
Latest member
SapphireGem
Back
Top