AZ - Lori Vallow Daybell charged w/ conspiring to kill ex-husband Charles Vallow and another relative, Brandon Boudreaux, Chandler, Maricopa County #4

Status
Not open for further replies.
I don't; get why LVD hangs on to the incompetent LE interviews and no investigations.testing etc and gave all 3 a "self-defense pass.

She heard LE admit had they known then what they eventually found out it never would have been a "self-defense " case.
imo
 
I’m a little concerned by the jury’s decision to go home without deliberating. I get they had a long boring day today with jury instructions and closings that were tedious and somewhat less than helpful. But isn’t it still pretty early in AZ? Still, if this was a slam dunk for the state, wouldn’t you think they would want to get down to business and perhaps even get a verdict in tonight and be done with it?
I expected for them to want to go home and try to digest all this info they received for hours.
 
I promise I never heard Kay say that. Never heard the prosecutor bring it up in closing statement. I’m just shocked.
From East Idaho News Live Updates on Day Four of LVD’s trial at 4:02 pm: “Lori had Charles cremated and his cremains were sent via FedEx to Kay’s office. Some high school jackets and trinkets were also sent. ‘Charles had a watch collection and she just sent some crap.’ “


And at 6:32:51 in this video of Kay’s testimony:
 
Last edited:
From East Idaho News Live Updates on Day Four of LVD’s trial at 4:02 pm: “Lori had Charles cremated and his cremains were sent via FedEx to Kay’s office. Some high school jackets and trinkets were also sent. ‘Charles had a watch collection and she just sent some crap.’ “


And at 6:32:51 in this video of Kay’s testimony:
Thanks for finding the video of Kay on the stand being asked by the State about how she received Charles’ remains.
Also there are tweets:


IMG_1953.webp
 
I had expected the state to also address the reasonable and proportionate aspect of self-defense and to my knowledge they didn’t. Admittedly, I’ve missed a lot of this trial and of the state’s closing today. But since one of their goals was to dispel the notion of self-defense why not bring up that CV went to pick up his son that morning completely unarmed and someone in the house introduced weapons to the situation - whether you believe that Tylee brought in the bat or not it is a weapon that CV did not bring and he certainly didn’t bring the gun. He was picking up his son - not picking a fight. If CV had killed AC that day, that would have been self-defense but bringing weapons into the verbal argument supposedly going on between CV & LVD is not reasonable and proportionate and was not self-defense. Did the state bring that up and I missed it?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
208
Guests online
6,141
Total visitors
6,349

Forum statistics

Threads
622,963
Messages
18,459,222
Members
240,221
Latest member
LamontWilk
Back
Top