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

[Diddian]

I’m hearing conflicting reports but the best I can tell either the jurors were informed inside the court today after being released from their admonition and duty - so my guess would be if that is the case, the judge informed them when he was thanking them in the juror room - or they were informed by a reporter or someone else outside the courthouse as they walked out - either way it is totally acceptable for the to have all the info they want and speak to whomever about whatever once they have been released from jury duty and the comments of this juror could be construed to be from finding out after being released.

Comments from the other juror…I was thinking while driving home yesterday…cannot be taken to have found out today after being released. I’m not sure where that interview was - apparently it was on the Fox 10 live feed but not sure where they were speaking to the juror but it looked to me like he might have been getting ready to get in his car and leave - so there is no way he misspoke and meant driving home today or driving over here today after court if he hadn’t even gotten in his car yet. I think someone in the WS live chat said that he said he heard it on the radio but if he did then he should have informed the court this morning and the way they were being so careful not to let in the information about her convictions I am 99.99% sure if the judge knew it, he would have removed the juror and told them to start deliberations over with an alternate.

There IS conflicting information. The one white-haired gentleman juror did say “when I was driving last night I was thinking she’s serving 3 lives in prison.”

But as you say, it is possible that jurors were provided the bigger picture by the judge (or really anyone who managed to speak to them) immediately after they were thanked and released from duty after the verdict had been read.

And it is also possible, as Nate Eaton supposed in this evening’s “Courtroom Reporter” presentation that the white-haired juror misspoke or misremembered (or expressed his thoughts out of the chronological order in which events occurred) when being asked questions by a horde of news and media folk. Most people aren’t used to being questioned like that and they get nervous or jumbled in their thoughts when trying to express themselves.

The third juror interviewed, Tash Reed-Tucker, was asked a few questions about who knew what when and it seemed clear that the jury did not know before they presented their verdict about the events in Idaho or the fact that 4 out of 5 of those at the house where/when Charles was killed are no longer living and Lori is the only survivor.

It’d be nice to have clarification from the white-haired juror but I expect that will come in time as things settle down for these jurors and they aren’t trying to respond to rapid fire questions at the same time that they’re being told by some of those same people about the deaths of JJ, Tylee, and Tammy and LVD’s conviction for the same.

I’m putting myself and any continuing concern on “wait and see” until then.

 

[Cindizzi]

 

[Niner]

Update!

Tuesday, April 22nd:
*Trial continues (Day 10)-VERDICT REACHED! (Charles) (@ 10:30am MST) - AZ – Charles Vallow (62) shot & killed on July 11, 2019 in Chandler, AZ. *Lori Norene Daybell aka Lori Norene Vallow (46 @ time of crime/48/now 51) indicted (6/24/21), charged & arraigned (12/8/23) with 1 count of conspiracy to commit 1st degree murder. Plead not guilty. Held without bond. Maricopa County
AZ – Brandon Boudreaux (34/now 40) attempted murder on Oct. 2, 2019 in Gilbert, AZ. *Lori Norene Vallow (46 @ time of crime/49/now 51) indicted (2/24/22), charged & arraigned (12/7/23) with 1 count of 1st degree premeditated attempted murder. Plead not guilty. Held without bond. Maricopa County
Jury selection [for Charles] began on 3/31/25 & went thru 4/16/25.
Jury consisted of 12 jurors & 4 alternates. [13 men & 3 women]. As of 4/9/25: 12 jurors & 2 alternates. [12 men & 2 women].
Trial [for Brandon Boudreaux]: Pretrial management conference on 5/14/25 @ 10am. Jury questionnaire & 404(b) hearing on 5/29/25 @ 1pm. Jury selection for voir dire on 5/30/25 @ 10am. Judge sets 6/2/25 for start of Boudreux trial. Trial will be Monday thru Friday, the following week [6/9-13/25-Judge might cancel 6/13/25 date] will be Monday thru Friday & the Judge may be gone for training the following week [6/16-20//25]. Then from 6/23-25/25.
Trial began on 4/7/25. Prosecutors rested their case on 4/16/25 & defense rested their case on 4/21/25. @10:30am to 4:30pm
Jury deliberations [10 men & 2 women]: 4/21/25: 3:15pm to 4:30pm [15 minutes]. 4/22/25 Day 2: 10:30am to 3pm [~3 hours]. Total Deliberations: 3 hours & 15 minutes. GUILTY on all charges. Will be sentenced after Boudreaux trial.
Judge Justin Beresky presiding. State’s attorney Ryan Green. DA Treena Jeanelle Kay. Vallow-Daybell Pro Se with advisory Defense attorneys Gerald Bradley & Denae Suchy.
Case info from 2/24/22 thru 3/27/25 & Jury selection Days 1-2 (3/31 & 4/1/25) & 4/4/25 & Trial Day 1-9/Verdict Watch Day 1 (4/7-4/21/25) reference post #272 here:
https://websleuths.com/threads/az-l...aux-chandler-maricopa-county-4.741528/page-14
4/22/25 Tuesday, Trial Day 10: Jury continued deliberations @ 10:30am to 3pm. Verdict: Guilty of all charges.
Daybell will be sentenced for Charles’s murder after the trial for the attempted murder of Brandon Boudreaux.
Next Pretrial management conference hearing on 5/14/25 @ 10am for Boudreux case.
ID – Vallow found guilty of all charges & sentenced to 3 consecutive life sentences without parole on 7/31/23.

 

[Foothillbilly]

She does have a LOT of hair. I'm not fond of her Shih Tzu ponytail look. Hopefully, the majority-male jury won't be impressed by it (or anything else about her) either.

She's not all that. She might think she is but all this is putting so many miles on her they'll have to add an hour meter. At this point she doesn't have enough Bondo to cover all the lunar landings.

 

[Tortoise]

You know in a case like this, with international media attention when the children were missing and then found deceased, plus her trial in Idaho, I think with the high risk of a juror knowing about the case or seeing/hearing about it during trial, it would be far better to bring it in, and instruct the jury that even if she was found guilty of other crimes, that doesn't mean she was guilty of this crime, judge the case only on the evidence you hear in this courtroom, and she is appealing her other convictions anyway so no one can say whether those previous convictions will be ruled a miscarriage of justice and overturned in the future, which is why we don't use prior convictions to judge someone's guilt. I think it's better than risking juror misconduct.I think it's out there then, and jurors can do that, rather than being told not to speculate about why Tylee isn't here, why Lori referred to JJ in past tense and Kay hadn't seen him since 2019, how Chad remarried so fast and what happened to Tammy etc. MOO

Sorry about the long sentence! Just rambling thoughts.

 

[Nikynoo]

Because where did he learn that? In the jury room?

I cannot remember where I read/heard this - maybe one of the news reports or interviews with a juror(will look it up), but I am sure that the juror overheard talk of Lori being guilty of the childrens deaths via the oublic seated in the courtroom.

 

[Ruby_PA]

Glad to see the verdict this morning, justice has been served for Charles.
RIP

 

[Diddian]

I cannot remember where I read/heard this - maybe one of the news reports or interviews with a juror(will look it up), but I am sure that the juror overheard talk of Lori being guilty of the childrens deaths via the oublic seated in the courtroom.

I have a question: IF that juror or another confirms that he (and possibly more of the jurors) knew what they were not supposed to know or consider when deliberating (that TR and JJ and Tammy are dead and LVD was convicted for their murders) and a mistrial were to be declared, then what?

After the verdict, LVD stipulated to the aggravating factors, which to me seems like a confession. It was stated without a jury present, but is part of the record.

Given that, how could she be tried again?

 

[Nikynoo]

I have a question: IF that juror or another confirms that he (and possibly more of the jurors) knew what they were not supposed to know or consider when deliberating (that TR and JJ and Tammy are dead and LVD was convicted for their murders) and a mistrial were to be declared, then what?

After the verdict, LVD stipulated to the aggravating factors, which to me seems like a confession. It was stated without a jury present, but is part of the record.

Given that, how could she be tried again?

I was actually thinking along the same lines. Though one could argue that one would only stipulate for various reasons after being found guilty.

 

[Izzylizzy]

I have a question: IF that juror or another confirms that he (and possibly more of the jurors) knew what they were not supposed to know or consider when deliberating (that TR and JJ and Tammy are dead and LVD was convicted for their murders) and a mistrial were to be declared, then what?

After the verdict, LVD stipulated to the aggravating factors, which to me seems like a confession. It was stated without a jury present, but is part of the record.

Given that, how could she be tried again?

If the judge finds that juror misconduct likely influenced the verdict, a new trial may be ordered.
I mistakenly referred to it being a "mistrial" which can only happen before a verdict is reached.
Once a verdict is reached and there is evidence that juror misconduct did or could have affected the trial's outcome a new trial may be ordered.

 

[Izzylizzy]

So far we have 3 jurors who spoke.
Tash who said that there were 10 jurors in agreement of guilty and 2 not convinced and they went over the evidence with them and then they agreed to guilty.
I am going to assume the man in the turquoise shirt was one of the two even though he did say that it was Ray's closing that convinced him I think it was the other jurors.
When Victoria was asked about deliberations and was there undecided jurors and how did they come to an agreement she looked at Karl and said something like "you want to take it?"
Karl said something like as adults they talked about the evidence.
I don't think Karl is too bright considering just the day before closing he was a "not-guilty" plus his comments to the press.
He kept looking to Victoria and then followed her lead.
I misinterpreted Tash who said there was only one LDS juror thinking it was her, I was wrong Victoria said she's a LDS.

IMO:

 

[Izzylizzy]

You know in a case like this, with international media attention when the children were missing and then found deceased, plus her trial in Idaho, I think with the high risk of a juror knowing about the case or seeing/hearing about it during trial, it would be far better to bring it in, and instruct the jury that even if she was found guilty of other crimes, that doesn't mean she was guilty of this crime, judge the case only on the evidence you hear in this courtroom, and she is appealing her other convictions anyway so no one can say whether those previous convictions will be ruled a miscarriage of justice and overturned in the future, which is why we don't use prior convictions to judge someone's guilt. I think it's better than risking juror misconduct.I think it's out there then, and jurors can do that, rather than being told not to speculate about why Tylee isn't here, why Lori referred to JJ in past tense and Kay hadn't seen him since 2019, how Chad remarried so fast and what happened to Tammy etc. MOO

Sorry about the long sentence! Just rambling thoughts.

BBM:
I don't believe that the great majority of people/jurors are able to judge just the evidence presented in the current case knowing the past criminal history of the defendant.
Imagine these jurors seeing/listening to LVD cross the state's witnesses knowing that she was already found guilty of killing her 2 children whose names come up in the trial and guilty of conspiring in the killing of her lover's wife?
Had I been a juror and knew her criminal history it would be constantly running through my mind and I would be totally biased against her.
IMO:

 

[Megnut]

This has happened in quite a few cases with jurors in high profile cases and in the end the guilty verdict held.
What concerns me about this guy is he was undecided so when and where did he hear about her 3 life sentences yesterday?

Maybe he's inarticulate.

He said he felt sorry for her. Combining his drive thoughts with fresh revelations.

Hoping somehow it's insignificant.

JMO

 

[Izzylizzy]

I’m hearing conflicting reports but the best I can tell either the jurors were informed inside the court today after being released from their admonition and duty - so my guess would be if that is the case, the judge informed them when he was thanking them in the juror room - or they were informed by a reporter or someone else outside the courthouse as they walked out - either way it is totally acceptable for the to have all the info they want and speak to whomever about whatever once they have been released from jury duty and the comments of this juror could be construed to be from finding out after being released.

Comments from the other juror…I was thinking while driving home yesterday…cannot be taken to have found out today after being released. I’m not sure where that interview was - apparently it was on the Fox 10 live feed but not sure where they were speaking to the juror but it looked to me like he might have been getting ready to get in his car and leave - so there is no way he misspoke and meant driving home today or driving over here today after court if he hadn’t even gotten in his car yet. I think someone in the WS live chat said that he said he heard it on the radio but if he did then he should have informed the court this morning and the way they were being so careful not to let in the information about her convictions I am 99.99% sure if the judge knew it, he would have removed the juror and told them to start deliberations over with an alternate.

I thought I heard "Karl" say he heard the "3 life's" while driving home on the first juror footage I saw after the verdict and it was from Lauren @ 'Hidden True Crimes" so I went back to her 2 videos of the 3 jurors speaking and couldn't find it yet I'm known to miss things.

 

[Izzylizzy]

Maybe he's inarticulate.

He said he felt sorry for her. Combining his drive thoughts with fresh revelations.

Hoping somehow it's insignificant.

JMO

Could be and also when he was asked about what he thought of her defending herself he said " what did she have to lose, guilty or not-guilty" then he repeated it.
I thought if he had no knowledge of the murder convictions he must have heard about them before the verdict because a not-guilty would have freed her.
At first I interpreted that as an indication he already knew about her prior convictions then realized he could have been speaking with hindsight, it was LVD who knew she had nothing to lose defending herself because she already was a 3x lifer w/o parole.
imo

 

[Smelly Squirrel]

 

[Smelly Squirrel]

 

[mickey2942]

I refuse to worry because I have done enough of that lately....but if that juror or others knew she was already sentenced for 3 lives murdered already...and had the nerve to state that on camera....wow.

It doesn't matter in the long run because she will eventually end up back here in Idaho for the deaths of Tylee, JJ and Tammy Daybell but I want her to be held accountable for every MURDER and attempted murder she is responsible for. I wish the same for Chad. He was involved in Charles murder and Brandon's attempted murder too.

There is always the final judgement to come. Good luck with that one, Lori and Chad.

That is why I wish jurors had to sign a confidentiality agreement. Jurors should not discuss anything about deliberations.

 

[MerlinFalcon]

I watched part of the media interviews with Karl and the female juror. He was talking all over her. I think he enjoyed the limelight a bit too much.

 

[Izzylizzy]

"Happy Happy Joy Joy"
Nate has such a dedicated following and seeing him sincerely acknowledging them is a plus.