AZ - Lori Vallow Daybell charged w/ conspiring to kill ex-husband Charles Vallow and another relative, Brandon Boudreaux, Chandler, Maricopa County #2

[Diddian]

Oh, my.
LVD has a legal fan, praising her delivery.

'PHOENIX (AZFamily) — An attorney who’s not connected to the case says Lori Vallow Daybell is faring better than some lawyers do in court as she represents herself for the 2019 murder of her former husband."

Kolsrud said Daybell is likely to do well, resonating with the jurors.

“The jurors are going to see an attractive woman who’s very smart, she’s meticulous, and she may be sympathetic,” he said. “The fact that she’s representing herself is a wild card in this case that, you know, we’ll see how effective it is once the jury makes their verdict.”

That jury not knowing anything about Daybell’s history and prior convictions is important for an impartial decision.

“If they find out that Lori Vallow (Daybell) was already convicted of murder in Idaho under similarly situated circumstances, it’s really going to prejudice the jury against her,” Kolsrud said."

Attorney: Lori Vallow Daybell faring better than some lawyers while representing herself in court

He said Daybell’s preparation is something that’s not usually seen when defendants represent themselves for murder.

www.azfamily.com

Ugh. But will the jury hear about Idaho?

Last night, Nate Eaton at East Idaho News in his daily “Courtroom Insider” pointed out that the first responder in answer to LVD’s question about what he had reviewed to prepare his testimony said in part, “my testimony from Idaho.”

LVD did not object.

Will that mention and LVD’s lack of objection to it be enough for the prosecution to bring the trial in Idaho into evidence in this case?

Starts around 10:25 in the video:

COURTROOM INSIDER | A gun, a bat, CPR, evidence and more - East Idaho News

Tonight on “Courtroom Insider,” the jury sees a gun, a bat, more evidence and lots of talk about CPR. Nate Eaton breaks it all down. Watch in the video player above.

www.eastidahonews.com

 

[Izzylizzy]

Ugh. But will the jury hear about Idaho?

Last night, Nate Eaton at East Idaho News in his daily “Courtroom Insider” pointed out that the first responder in answer to LVD’s question about what he had reviewed to prepare his testimony said in part, “my testimony from Idaho.”

LVD did not object.

Will that mention and LVD’s lack of objection to it be enough for the prosecution to bring the trial in Idaho into evidence in this case?

Starts around 10:00 in the video:

COURTROOM INSIDER | A gun, a bat, CPR, evidence and more - East Idaho News

Tonight on “Courtroom Insider,” the jury sees a gun, a bat, more evidence and lots of talk about CPR. Nate Eaton breaks it all down. Watch in the video player above.

www.eastidahonews.com

BBM

IIRC:
That's what happened when SD was testifing in the "hush money" trial.
It opened Pandora's Box to the benefit of the state.

 

[Warwick7]

Oh, my.
LVD has a legal fan, praising her delivery.

'PHOENIX (AZFamily) — An attorney who’s not connected to the case says Lori Vallow Daybell is faring better than some lawyers do in court as she represents herself for the 2019 murder of her former husband."

Kolsrud said Daybell is likely to do well, resonating with the jurors.

“The jurors are going to see an attractive woman who’s very smart, she’s meticulous, and she may be sympathetic,” he said. “The fact that she’s representing herself is a wild card in this case that, you know, we’ll see how effective it is once the jury makes their verdict.”

That jury not knowing anything about Daybell’s history and prior convictions is important for an impartial decision.

“If they find out that Lori Vallow (Daybell) was already convicted of murder in Idaho under similarly situated circumstances, it’s really going to prejudice the jury against her,” Kolsrud said."

Attorney: Lori Vallow Daybell faring better than some lawyers while representing herself in court

He said Daybell’s preparation is something that’s not usually seen when defendants represent themselves for murder.

www.azfamily.com

My comment is twords this ignorant attorney. One of the first adjectives out of this attorney's mouth is the word attractive.

 

[Izzylizzy]

"Nate Eaton and Jordan Wood are on the way to day 3 of Lori Vallow Daybell’s trial. Here’s what we can expect today".

 

[Izzylizzy]

My comment is twords this ignorant attorney. One of the first adjectives out of this attorney's mouth is the word attractive.

It's an insult to the juror's intelligence besides being sexist.
Maybe he's trying to woo LVD for future employment?
I works well in politics.

imo

 

[Tricia]

Good Morning,
It's day 3 of the Lori trial. Remember to look at the top of this thread, and you will see the live stream of the trial. There is no need to leave Websleuths to watch. Please let your other friends know Websleuths is the place to watch and comment on the trial.
Thank you everyone!
Tricia

 

[Diddian]

LVD being "chewed out" by the judge and prosecution, over and over again.
LVD switches to little girl giggles with witnesses, "cringey".

If you watch this, see it through to the end! The interview of a judge for her perspective on Lori’s behavior toward the judge presiding over the case and how he will likely handle it.

 

[Izzylizzy]

"Nate Eaton and Jordan Wood are on the way to day 3 of Lori Vallow Daybell’s trial. Here’s what we can expect today".

@17:58 EJ begins with we don't know what can or can't be brought in from the Idaho case and will LVD open the door to TR and JJ?
He gets to jurors asking the the judge about the children who have been mentioned.

 

[Izzylizzy]

Good Morning,
It's day 3 of the Lori trial. Remember to look at the top of this thread, and you will see the live stream of the trial. There is no need to leave Websleuths to watch. Please let your other friends know Websleuths is the place to watch and comment on the trial.
Thank you everyone!
Tricia

It's a BIG thank you to you.
It's so convenient .

 

[Izzylizzy]

wrong thread edit

 

[TigerLou]

@17:58 EJ begins with we don't know what can or can't be brought in from the Idaho case and will LVD open the door to TR and JJ?
He gets to jurors asking the the judge about the children who have been mentioned.

As a juror, I would have absolutely written a question about Idaho. Its shocking what information is held back from jurors, and while I get it, it seems so wrong. The case for Charles was absolutely brought into the Idaho cases because they were so intertwined, and it's hard to see it not being the same vice versa. I always feel for the jurors who have to give so much of their lives to these cases but I feel even more for these jurors who have so much pertinent information being held back from them.

 

[Tanager]

Occasionally in a trial I put together information that was probably obvious to others a long time ago.
Just my opinion- Lori took his phone, his wallet, and his car so Charles couldn't escape, call for help or have any resources. She trapped him and created reasons to delay him on top of trying to enrage him. It was part of a contingency plan in case he realized what was going to happen and he tried to leave like a rational person, or he managed to escape during a struggle. Lori knew Charles would not want to be part of a physical conflict so she had to layer these obstacles to keep him there long enough so they could manufacture the appearance of a conflict to shoot him over. I think they likely shot him very soon upon arrival because they thought he would exercise a lot of other options before engaging in a physical fight. He was vulnerable because of his gentle nature on top of being deprived of these necessities.

Just pure premeditated evil. I just didn't realize she had HIS car. How did she explain why any of these items were in her possession when she left? I have been married 24 years and I've never had my husband's phone, wallet, and car in my possession (without him present) even once. I can't think of any reasonable explanation for her having all of these items with her mid-conflict.

Lori's theme song is CONTROL, and she grabbed everything.

 

[Tortoise]

I think where she might come unstuck, and open the door to Idaho, might be if she raises the issue of not being charged in connection with Charles' death until 2021.

She is insinuating that the reasons for charging her later were connected with further criminal activity after Charles, and the jury wouldn't understand her argument without being given the context.

 

[TigerLou]

I think where she might come unstuck, and open the door to Idaho, might be if she raises the issue of not being charged in connection with Charles' death until 2021.

She is insinuating that the reasons for charging her later were connected with further criminal activity after Charles, and the jury wouldn't understand her argument without being given the context.

Probably her biggest issue with representing herself is not having the experience or skill to stay out of this one.

 

[Tortoise]

Probably her biggest issue with representing herself is not having the experience or skill to stay out of this one.

Yeah exactly. It doesn't make sense to criticize police for not charging you straight away (as she did in her opening statement), unless you want to argue it was influenced by your missing children, and Brandon, and Tammy, etc

 

[Tricia]

Charles Vallow was very athletic. If Charles had hit Alex with a bat, his head would be gone.
Take a look at Alex Cox's "wound". This is pulled from a video of his interview with the police shortly after Alex shot Charles.
Does this look like he was hit with a baseball bat? Remember the prosecution said there was nothing found on the bat. This whole story is such a huge lie. What is so frustrating is how long it took the police to do something. Why didn't they arrest Alex shortly after the incident?

 

[iamshadow21]

Charles Vallow was very athletic. If Charles had hit Alex with a bat, his head would be gone.
Take a look at Alex Cox's "wound". This is pulled from a video of his interview with the police shortly after Alex shot Charles.
Does this look like he was hit with a baseball bat? Remember the prosecution said there was nothing found on the bat. This whole story is such a huge lie. What is so frustrating is how long it took the police to do something. Why didn't they arrest Alex shortly after the incident? View attachment 577856

That looks like a scratch or a small shallow cut with a knife.

And if he's right handed, then the angle looks correct for it to be self inflicted.

MOO

 

[Ruby_PA]

That looks like a scratch or a small shallow cut with a knife.

And if he's right handed, then the angle looks correct for it to be self inflicted.

MOO

Yes, it does. I have seen massive goose eggs caused by what seemed like a minor bump and this is a hit by a baseball bat given by a former (semi?) pro player? Yeah.... no. It's almost funny, but it's not.

 

[Tricia]

OMG, we are 5 minutes into testimony, and Lori already has me so irritated I can't take it.

 

[iamshadow21]

Yes, it does. I have seen massive goose eggs caused by what seemed like a minor bump and this is a hit by a baseball bat given by a former (semi?) pro player? Yeah.... no. It's almost funny, but it's not.

Yeah, my housemate plays baseball in an amateur league. She got hit in the face with a ball, bit of a fat lip and a bruise. The next day, she had to go to the doctor - half her face had swelled up overnight. She had a hairline crack in her jaw that showed up on x-ray. And this is a friendly league, where some games, she'll play for the 'other' team if not enough of their players turn up and they're short, so that everyone still gets to play.

The idea that a former pro player wouldn't leave at the least an egg and a serious bruise when they are trying to hurt someone is just silly.

MOO