Found Deceased ID - Joshua Vallow, 7, & Tylee Ryan, 17, Rexburg, Sept 2019 *mom, stepfather found* #15

[Dontknow?]

Gilbert LE, Brandon's attempted murder called not Chandler LE. With 6 murders a year in Chandler two involving Lori they were too busy to call the other jurisdictions.

Do you have a link they didn't call? I missed that. Thanks!

 

[KonaHonu]

Re: possible scenarios and charges, I'm no attorney, but I wonder if there might not be a different statute under which maybe at least Lori could be charged (kind of like going after Al Capone for tax evasion..)

I'm sure Idaho has a process for filing charges for custodial interference against a parent if the state is awarded custody, temporary or not. But if we are talking felonies here there would have to be some kind of service of process first and a reasonable time period for them to hand over the kids.

I am a bit confused/disappointed in what happened Wednesday when the hearing turned into 2 hours and the Woodcocks left somewhat dejected. I suspect the judge decided that there simply is no evidence the kids are in danger or that there is no evidence they are alive. Either finding would mean the state would not be awarded custody. The fact that detectives were there is also worrisome because they would have been testifying to whether they had evidence the kids are in danger so presumably they had to admit they had none.

In spite of my comments here that I see scant evidence L&C have committed any crimes (I think they have but I think the evidence is weak), if I were the judge I probably would have done what I could to err on the side of protecting the kids and grasp at any evidence that they are in danger. The fact that the judge did not do so means the judge is probably unconvinced by the evidence.

 

[KonaHonu]

As far as leaving for Mexico, I believe Dateline caught them leaving the hotel and trying to catch the airport shuttle. They only were trying to appear like they were going to the beach. You can see the airport shuttle there on the right and Chad looks at it an mouths “sh#t” as he glances at the shuttle bus. I can also make out a lap top computer and items that are very un-beach like in his canvas bag. This is IMO.
Here’s the video
DATELINE NBC EXCLUSIVE: Friday Special Features Footage of Mother of Missing Idaho Children in Hawaii with New Husband

I am familiar with that hotel. They were walking to the self-park lot. The hotel has a great beach on property. That doesnt mean they wouldn't go to another beach though. But, the pool is the real star of that resort. Google map it and zoom in. Awesome pool!

If they were flying out to Mexico, where were their bags? It's possible they had them delivered to the airport I suppose. I don't remember if the hotel offers that service but I would not be surprised if they do.

 

[KonaHonu]

I am familiar with that hotel.

Took my partner to a Valentine's dinner tonight. She's a teacher and brought up maybe going somewhere close for spring break in about a month. I suggested Kauai without even thinking about the case. We'd stay at the Marriott where they are staying, at least were in the Dateline footage. Now, I will not get myself in trouble by stalking them or anything like that but if I run into them you can bet I'm going to ask about the kids!

 

[Randocalrissian]

Isn't this someone who knew him a long time ago? Is there any indication they had still had contact? I find it hard to believe and cannot be convinced, based upon his AVOW group that this is all her. I think his "friend" didn't know him too well.

He doesn’t know him from recent times. He explains as much on his public social media pages. He also has a bit of an axe to grind with religion, LDS or otherwise, also viewable from his public posts.

 

[Jethro4WS]

Re: possible scenarios and charges, I'm no attorney, but I wonder if there might not be a different statute under which maybe at least Lori could be charged (kind of like going after Al Capone for tax evasion..)

I think in most states when it comes to child custody there is a legal difference between "legal custody" and "physical custody".

I also think that under certain circumstances (such as the death of both parents at the same time) some states have laws allowing the state to assert a claim of "emergency temporary legal custody" to protect a child from imminent harm.

IF Idaho had such a law and it was applicable, the state may already have "emergency temporary legal custody" of the children - even if they don't have physical custody in the legal or conventional sense. We wouldn't know, as the documents are sealed.

The court's "order to produce" also included an order that the State's Dept. of Health and Welfare produce a report by 2/10.

Lori violated the court order by failing to produce the children on 1/30, which probably only resulted in a contempt of court charge.

But once the Health and Welfare report was received on 2/10, I'm sure the State's Atty considered it (along with other evidence)
to determine whether additional charges should be filed against Lori.

IF additional charges were (or are to be) filed, I think it's possible they could be based on Idaho's statute pertaining to "interference with custody" (18-4502).

IF the state had "emergency temporary legal custody" of the children beginning sometime around 2/10, every day after that on which Lori failed to produce the children she may have been "interfering with custody" - a crime which according to the code is a felony.

In reading the statute, it wasn't clear to me what the specific penalty was for interference with custody, but it's worth noting that the larger section of code under which the interference statute falls pertains to kidnapping. Penalties listed for kidnapping include from 1 to 25 years, life in prison, and even the death penalty, depending on the circumstances. I wonder if a continuing "interference with custody" could be considered kidnapping?

JMO

The penalty for felony custodial interference in Idaho is up to 5 years and/or up to a $50,000 fine and the court can also require reimbursement for all reasonable costs in locating and returning the children.

As for the current case at hand, it is not a criminal case. There is no requirement that a child welfare case is predicated on a criminal action in Idaho. The basis is:

Reason to believe that a child has been abused, neglected or abandoned, or subject to conditions or circumstances which would reasonably result in abuse, abandonment, or neglect
​

That is it - reason to believe. The State Attorney for Madison County is involved because Idaho Statutes only give State Attorney's the legal standing to initiate child welfare cases and is not indicative of a criminal case.

 

[Jethro4WS]

I'm sure Idaho has a process for filing charges for custodial interference against a parent if the state is awarded custody, temporary or not. But if we are talking felonies here there would have to be some kind of service of process first and a reasonable time period for them to hand over the kids.

I am a bit confused/disappointed in what happened Wednesday when the hearing turned into 2 hours and the Woodcocks left somewhat dejected. I suspect the judge decided that there simply is no evidence the kids are in danger or that there is no evidence they are alive. Either finding would mean the state would not be awarded custody. The fact that detectives were there is also worrisome because they would have been testifying to whether they had evidence the kids are in danger so presumably they had to admit they had none.

In spite of my comments here that I see scant evidence L&C have committed any crimes (I think they have but I think the evidence is weak), if I were the judge I probably would have done what I could to err on the side of protecting the kids and grasp at any evidence that they are in danger. The fact that the judge did not do so means the judge is probably unconvinced by the evidence.

The Woodcock's case is separate. There are two different cases.

ETA: Idaho statute on Custodial Interference. Paragraph 3 defines what makes it a felony versus a misdemeanor. Basically, the child(ren) are still within the state AND are returned prior to arrest reduces it to a misdemeanor. Both requirements must be met or it is a felony.

18-4506. CHILD CUSTODY INTERFERENCE DEFINED — DEFENSES — PUNISHMENT. 1. A person commits child custody interference if the person, whether a parent or other, or agent of that person, intentionally and without lawful authority:
(a) Takes, entices away, keeps or withholds any minor child from a parent or another person or institution having custody, joint custody, visitation or other parental rights, whether such rights arise from temporary or permanent custody order, or from the equal custodial rights of each parent in the absence of a custody order; or
(b) Takes, entices away, keeps or withholds a minor child from a parent after commencement of an action relating to child visitation or custody but prior to the issuance of an order determining custody or visitation rights.
2. It shall be an affirmative defense to a violation of the provisions of subsection 1. of this section that:
(a) The action is taken to protect the child from imminent physical harm;
(b) The action is taken by a parent fleeing from imminent physical harm to himself;
(c) The action is consented to by the lawful custodian of the child; or
(d) The child is returned within twenty-four (24) hours after expiration of an authorized visitation privilege.
3. A violation of the provisions of subsection 1. of this section shall be a felony, unless the defendant did not take the child outside the state, and the child was voluntarily returned unharmed prior to the defendant’s arrest in which case the violation shall be reduced to a misdemeanor.
4. Any reasonable expenses incurred by a lawful custodian in locating or attempting to locate a child taken in violation of the provisions of subsection 1. of this section may be assessed against the defendant at the court’s discretion in accordance with chapter 53, title 19, Idaho Code.

 

[Dontknow?]

Gilbert LE, Brandon's attempted murder called not Chandler LE. With 6 murders a year in Chandler two involving Lori they were too busy to call the other jurisdictions.

What 2 in Chandler? I only know of Charles. I thought JC was in San Tan? I'm behind...

San Tan Valley is around 23 miles from Chandler. Population around 80K. Chandler has a population of around 250k. tia

 

[KonaHonu]

Thank you and yes, big differences. Without sharing too much personally, I grew up in rural areas of eastern Oregon, north Idaho and southern Idaho. Think maybe Ruby Ridge...family members personally knew some involved. Right or wrong, when you live in these rural areas, you depend on each other not LE or government. A lot has changed over time but distrust of government lingers. It is not necessarily a religious thing but in these rural communities, they trust each other more than outsiders including government.

I grew up in the same place in Arizona. I get exactly what you are saying. I would go so far as to say that, although many where I grew up were LDS and distrusted the government, their political views did not come from the church. I can't say the church discouraged them because I simply don't know. But plenty of other mormons open disapproved of the anti-government people yet they all worshiped together every week. And when someone in the community needed help, for the most part people rallied together and your political views or religious beliefs did not matter in a crisis.

 

[KonaHonu]

This is in regard to Lori looking at wedding dresses before Tammy's death. The source is an anonymous (to us) Lori's family member in Gray Hughes' YouTube video (Dec 25).

Here's the dynamic I think is at play in L&C's relationship. The two fell in love/lust over a 1-2 year period. Lori was infatuated by Chad's books and ideas. Chad was infatuated by Lori in more carnal ways, but also she stroked his ego by believing in his ideas. They may or may not have done anything physically or even talked about a future. Then Charles dies, planned or not. (I tend to think planned by AC and L). Lori tells Chad she did her part so they can be together, makes him an accessory after the fact to murder. Then she shows up in his town. She probably tells him he better grow a pair or else. Then things start happening. Tammy is attacked with a (paintball?) gun. Chad freaks and sends her to her parents to protect her. (I should check the timeline on that). Then Tammy dies. Lori tells him she fixed his problem. (Because I don't think Chad had the guts to kill Tammy. Somehow Lori arranged it) He better follow through on their plans. Honestly, he may not have even known about the kids until they were already gone.

I'm not saying Chad is innocent. I'm only saying that he is now stuck between a rock and a hard place and his only real option is to go along with everything.

 

[KonaHonu]

The Woodcock's case is separate. There are two different cases.

ETA: Idaho statute on Custodial Interference. Paragraph 3 defines what makes it a felony versus a misdemeanor. Basically, the child(ren) are still within the state AND are returned prior to arrest reduces it to a misdemeanor. Both requirements must be met or it is a felony.

18-4506. CHILD CUSTODY INTERFERENCE DEFINED — DEFENSES — PUNISHMENT. 1. A person commits child custody interference if the person, whether a parent or other, or agent of that person, intentionally and without lawful authority:
(a) Takes, entices away, keeps or withholds any minor child from a parent or another person or institution having custody, joint custody, visitation or other parental rights, whether such rights arise from temporary or permanent custody order, or from the equal custodial rights of each parent in the absence of a custody order; or
(b) Takes, entices away, keeps or withholds a minor child from a parent after commencement of an action relating to child visitation or custody but prior to the issuance of an order determining custody or visitation rights.
2. It shall be an affirmative defense to a violation of the provisions of subsection 1. of this section that:
(a) The action is taken to protect the child from imminent physical harm;
(b) The action is taken by a parent fleeing from imminent physical harm to himself;
(c) The action is consented to by the lawful custodian of the child; or
(d) The child is returned within twenty-four (24) hours after expiration of an authorized visitation privilege.
3. A violation of the provisions of subsection 1. of this section shall be a felony, unless the defendant did not take the child outside the state, and the child was voluntarily returned unharmed prior to the defendant’s arrest in which case the violation shall be reduced to a misdemeanor.
4. Any reasonable expenses incurred by a lawful custodian in locating or attempting to locate a child taken in violation of the provisions of subsection 1. of this section may be assessed against the defendant at the court’s discretion in accordance with chapter 53, title 19, Idaho Code.

Are you saying that if the state takes custody Lori is instantly a felon? No service or notice required? Because that sounds blatantly unconstitutional to me. My only point was that due process dictates that the state would need to give some reasonable notice to Lori if it takes custody before a felony charge could be entered.

I'd not that affirmative defense 2(a) might be a slam dunk if Lori knows of a threat against the kids and is protecing them.

 

[WhereIsWaldo]

What 2 in Chandler? I only know of Charles. I thought JC was in San Tan? I'm behind...

San Tan Valley is around 23 miles from Chandler. Population around 80K. Chandler has a population of around 250k. tia

Agree. Need some facts regarding population, law enforcement, ems, fire,...etc, if both Chandler and San Tan Valley, AZ are distinct and separate municipal jurisdictions.

 

[WhereIsWaldo]

I grew up in the same place in Arizona. I get exactly what you are saying. I would go so far as to say that, although many where I grew up were LDS and distrusted the government, their political views did not come from the church. I can't say the church discouraged them because I simply don't know. But plenty of other mormons open disapproved of the anti-government people yet they all worshiped together every week. And when someone in the community needed help, for the most part people rallied together and your political views or religious beliefs did not matter in a crisis.

Curious, White Mountains, Show Low or maybe farther east, near the archeological area?

 

[mrjitty]

Are you saying that if the state takes custody Lori is instantly a felon? No service or notice required? Because that sounds blatantly unconstitutional to me. My only point was that due process dictates that the state would need to give some reasonable notice to Lori if it takes custody before a felony charge could be entered.

The felony would be committed when she refused to surrender the kids when the state tries to collect them. At that point she would be arrested

I'd not that affirmative defense 2(a) might be a slam dunk if Lori knows of a threat against the kids and is protecing them.

She'd get to make that argument at her criminal trial, if she could provide evidence.

 

[WhereIsWaldo]

Are you saying that if the state takes custody Lori is instantly a felon? No service or notice required? Because that sounds blatantly unconstitutional to me. My only point was that due process dictates that the state would need to give some reasonable notice to Lori if it takes custody before a felony charge could be entered.

I'd not that affirmative defense 2(a) might be a slam dunk if Lori knows of a threat against the kids and is protecing them.

Absolutely agree.

 

[mrjitty]

The Woodcock's case is separate. There are two different cases.

ETA: Idaho statute on Custodial Interference. Paragraph 3 defines what makes it a felony versus a misdemeanor. Basically, the child(ren) are still within the state AND are returned prior to arrest reduces it to a misdemeanor. Both requirements must be met or it is a felony.

18-4506. CHILD CUSTODY INTERFERENCE DEFINED — DEFENSES — PUNISHMENT. 1. A person commits child custody interference if the person, whether a parent or other, or agent of that person, intentionally and without lawful authority:
(a) Takes, entices away, keeps or withholds any minor child from a parent or another person or institution having custody, joint custody, visitation or other parental rights, whether such rights arise from temporary or permanent custody order, or from the equal custodial rights of each parent in the absence of a custody order; or
(b) Takes, entices away, keeps or withholds a minor child from a parent after commencement of an action relating to child visitation or custody but prior to the issuance of an order determining custody or visitation rights.
2. It shall be an affirmative defense to a violation of the provisions of subsection 1. of this section that:
(a) The action is taken to protect the child from imminent physical harm;
(b) The action is taken by a parent fleeing from imminent physical harm to himself;
(c) The action is consented to by the lawful custodian of the child; or
(d) The child is returned within twenty-four (24) hours after expiration of an authorized visitation privilege.
3. A violation of the provisions of subsection 1. of this section shall be a felony, unless the defendant did not take the child outside the state, and the child was voluntarily returned unharmed prior to the defendant’s arrest in which case the violation shall be reduced to a misdemeanor.
4. Any reasonable expenses incurred by a lawful custodian in locating or attempting to locate a child taken in violation of the provisions of subsection 1. of this section may be assessed against the defendant at the court’s discretion in accordance with chapter 53, title 19, Idaho Code.

The Woodcock case might be superfluous at this stage

 

[Tricia]

Does anyone know where we can watch the Dateline episode? I check the NBC page but they don't have it up yet.

Thanks

 

[indicolite22]

Here's the dynamic I think is at play in L&C's relationship. The two fell in love/lust over a 1-2 year period. Lori was infatuated by Chad's books and ideas. Chad was infatuated by Lori in more carnal ways, but also she stroked his ego by believing in his ideas. They may or may not have done anything physically or even talked about a future. Then Charles dies, planned or not. (I tend to think planned by AC and L). Lori tells Chad she did her part so they can be together, makes him an accessory after the fact to murder. Then she shows up in his town. She probably tells him he better grow a pair or else. Then things start happening. Tammy is attacked with a (paintball?) gun. Chad freaks and sends her to her parents to protect her. (I should check the timeline on that). Then Tammy dies. Lori tells him she fixed his problem. (Because I don't think Chad had the guts to kill Tammy. Somehow Lori arranged it) He better follow through on their plans. Honestly, he may not have even known about the kids until they were already gone.

I'm not saying Chad is innocent. I'm only saying that he is now stuck between a rock and a hard place and his only real option is to go along with everything.

If Chad was innocent, he would have done the right thing and reported Lori a long time ago. He would not have hooked up with a potential serial killer. IMO the two planned things together. He knew she had children and they couldn't have just vanished into thin air. They could only get together after getting rid of their spouses. Life insurance money would provide them with funds that divorces would not. As for the deaths, they justified them with their crazy cult philosophy.

 

[jjenny]

If you tell somebody you did something bad/illegal after the fact, that somebody isn't made an accessory after the fact since they surely have an option of reporting what you told them to authorities.

 

[KonaHonu]

Agree. Need some facts regarding population, law enforcement, ems, fire,...etc, if both Chandler and San Tan Valley, AZ are distinct and separate municipal jurisdictions.

It's all one big metropolitan area - Phoenix, Tempe, Mesa, Gilbert, Chandler, Scottsdale, Queen Creek, San Tan Valley but there are many different LE jurisdictions, multiple counties, etc. Google is helpful for specifics you might be looking for. In general, after a few deaths in the 70s when LE from one jurisdiction did not respond a few feet within another jurisdiction, Arizona has weak jurisdiction for emergency response. Near boundaries, everyone will respond and questions about payment etc. are asked later.

Those places are all big cities with excellent EMS. I had EMS training and certification in Arizona. Arizona is above average nationally in its EMS system. I don't think there are any systematic deficiencies in the fire, LE or EMS systems in major cities in Arizona that are at play here. The 911 calls we've heard have all been very prompt, professional, and appropriate.

My one criticism in everything I've heard would be the Chandler PD telling Alex to stop CPR and leave the house. While that may be how they are trained, you NEVER stop CPR until a physician declares death or you are physically unable to continue. Stopping CPR is literally causing death because you are stopping the heart from beating which defines death. In my training (in Arizona) I was taught that, once started, you do not stop treatment even if ordered by a police officer. You ask the officer what the threat is and advise him that you are solely responsible for your patient and he cannot lawfully direct your treatment unless he has a higher level of EMS certification. If he tells you to stop treatment he is assuming responsibility for any outcome. My instructor was a paramedic and police officer and his comment was that lifesaving measures trump police actions and that many cops are ignorant of that fact so you have to remind them.

There is a protocol at scenes. Police are responsible for scene safety and then their job is to stay out of the way while EMS and fire do their job. That is mostly what we saw, but IMO, the order to AC to stop CPR on CV was not consistent with Arizona law. If CV bled out peripherally the cop could be guilty of manslaughter. If the bullet went through his heart or aorta there was never any hope. So the autopsy should reveal that. Given lack of blood on AC though I'm betting on internal bleeding.

If you start paying attention at accident scenes you will notice that ambulances are always parked tail in, pointed the the hospital they are headed toward, fire engines park skew to the road, and police are farther out, directing traffic. There are variations depending on the specific incident and local issues.