ID - Doomsday Cult Victims - Joshua Vallow - Tylee Ryan - Tammy Daybell - Charles Vallow - *Arrests* #67

[Love Never Fails]

The judge did a bad, bad thing when he separated the trials.
My opinion of course.

 

[Ruminations]

I still have concerns about some LDS members regarding Charles' "murder" (as that's how I see it) in AZ. Not that these people were involved in his death but they didn't intervene with a straying LV.

jmo

I don't know if Kreshna's channel of self published videos is an allowed link here- but if it is could someone link the recent video about the LDS church and these crimes? In the meantime, check it out.

It brilliantly and beautifully discusses the LDS secret ritual of the second anointing. I hadn't really grasped that ritual yet because it was kind of dryly presented in places like Mormon stories- I guess I wasn't paying enough attention.

This particular video is not live. It is carefully researched, referenced, and produced so professionally my jaw was agape with shock- except during brief monuments of levity allowing a break for a chuckle. ("Celestial champagne Room") I couldn't peel my eyes or ears away.

Remember when Melanie G was discussing her hot head in a police interview?

Watch Kreshna's video and you will understand that- and this whole case- in a whole new way.

MOO- Rum

 

[SteveS]

The judge did a bad, bad thing when he separated the trials.
My opinion of course.

Unless you want defendants going free (which I trust you don't), it was actually a good and necessary choice. The alternative? One defendant or the other would have eventually been declared innocent on appeal for violation of their constitutional rights. No doubt at all. There was no way to do what the law requires AND keep the trials together (and it's entirely the fault of the prosecutors, who truly have been playing fast and loose with the defendants' rights for quite some time, pushing things right up to the line until finally boxing themselves into a corner).

FWIW, I went back to review the state's declarations in Aug 2021 and Dec 2021, about a trial date and disclosure of evidence. At that time, they were saying they have turned over all evidence to the defense (which we have since seen was not even close to true) and that they were ready for trial (in Aug) while then (later in Dec) asking for a trial date TWO YEARS later, because it just takes time and BS and vagueness and it's oh so complex and etc etc etc. The incompetence delay for Lori gave them a reasonable excuse for some foot-dragging, but their failure to get their job done as the law requires in so many areas is not a good sign. imo

 

[Ruminations]

While I 100% agree with you, this case is so messy that I am sure there will be years of appeals. There have been plenty of anomalies many of which will be raised on appeal. Everything from violation of Lori's right to a speedy trial to the severance being prejudicial against Lori as well as the numerous problems with discovery. If there are contradictory verdicts on the conspiracy charges that could be an issue. I know that is not automatically a problem but even the judge raised is as a potentially serious issue. Remember, these are capital cases so they will be heavily scrutinized for decades!

And I would not be at all surprised if one or both of the defendants are acquitted. We have not seen all of the evidence but I've seen nothing that directly implicates Lori. I think she was involved with conspiring to kill her kids and CV, I just have not heard any evidence of her direct involvement in any murder or the planning.

If I had to guess at strategy I would guess that AC will get blamed by Lori and she will claim ignorance, perhaps even saying that she thought Tylee was with AC. I'd have to review the timeline again to investigate the plausibility of this.

I think Chad's strategy will also blame AC and assert that he just panicked and had to go along with disposing of the body in Tylee's case and will argue that AC went to his house and got rid of JJ on his own.

Either of these strategies will require defense evidence. But the mountain of evidence they have has only been publicly characterized by the prosecution to support their theory. There could very well be cell phone location data for Chad and/or Lori that put them far from crime scenes on important dates.

I really believe they are both guilty and hope they are convicted. But I am not at all confident that will happen.

It is worth recalling that Lori waived her preliminary hearing, so the prosecutors did not present some evidence of her involvement like they did with Chad.

If she had that hearing, you and I would have learned about more of the State's evidence.

MOO

 

[Niner]

Just so I have my notes straight - LV has a pretrial conference hearing on 3/9/23 - correct?

And no new hearing date for CD?

TIA!

 

[Nikynoo]

That suggests that the evidence inculpates, doesn't it?

I wonder what it is.

Hints:

Lori's attorneys want it excluded all together, having seen it.
Chad's attorney wants to have his experts analyze it, but it seems like severing trials was the goal.
The prosecution was scheduling trials before it even came to light, so it seems rather unimportant to them.

In addition, it is becoming clearer that Lori's attorneys are not in agreement with her decision to assert her right to a speedy trial. That suggests that the rush causes more harm than the new evidence.

(Tangental thought to the above: Lori's attorneys are hinting that they dispute her competence but respect the court's determination of competence. They are also saying that Lori is making decisions against their advice. In my opinion, they are implying that Lori knows their role, and is considering, then rejecting, their advice. If that is what's going on, she is competent IMO; poor judgement is not the same as incompetence. If the attorneys are asserting Lori is not competent, they should have said she doesn't comprehend that their role, not that they respect her decision against their advice.)

I guess it's not just the evidence I wonder about.

I wonder if the trial will happen in April.

I think the prosecution is ready.

Chad is delaying and severing with the help of his attorney. The recent changes favor Chad a lot.

If Lori's judgement improves, she might waive her right to a speedy trial after all to join the trial again.

If she goes to trial first I wonder if she will turn on Chad. She should. (I think she is guilty but I also agree Chad manipulated her; maybe she could convince someone more charitable that it's all Chad's fault.) But she hasn't telegraphed a strategy like Chad has- by having kids claim he was framed and having his attorney say he has a diametrically opposed defense strategy. If she says Jesus is cool with my actions but I understand the State of Idaho is not, she is basically confessing. So what is her strategy?

If she prefers trial with Chad (and she reportedly does) what does that say about what her strategy is? The same confession above, but with Chad there to agree this was for Jesus? Or the I was manipulated by Chad defense but with him there to---what?---confirm he did manipulate her?

Wouldn't that be easier to pull off without him around to deny it or even around to sit at a table making indignant faces, modeled by his lawyer?

I'm not getting Lori's strategy at all. I do think she is competent because she is reportedly considering and rejecting advice, which her lawyers "respect." They say there are other opinions about her competence, but they are not expressing with exasperation that she is not really making decisions at all.

But, competent as I think she is, she does not seem to be making good legal decisions.

Chad, btw, reportedly does not understand why he's sitting in jail, so he seems to think he did nothing wrong. Or nothing THAT wrong. (According to HTC and his sister-in-law) Yet he has accepted sitting in jail for years- perhaps he thinks the time for hiding bodies is a given anyway. And Chad follows his attorney's advice.

I can't figure out where this is going. My bet is Lori waives speedy trial and hopes to rejoin the trials. Then Chad objects, delays or waits until Lori loses her ability to make decisions again, then hops into his trial, blaming her.

MOO. MOC. (My Own Conjecture.)

IMO Loris strategy is to have a Lori Show. Because she has got away with so much for so long, she thinks she is invincible and, more importantly, believable.

 

[Nikynoo]

Hellis is completely wrong, that LVD can ever be compelled to testify in CD's trial (or vice versa). There are actually TWO laws that get in the way.
-- 1st is that you can't be forced to testify against yourself -- and with the ongoing potential for both other charges and/or appeals, there will never be a time when Lori has to say what they did together. (Can she volunteer such info? Yes. But never compelled.)
-- 2nd is that you can't be forced to testify against your spouse. The fact that Lori and Chad are married, and in many ways considered to be "one," means that LE can't compel them to turn against each other.

But what if the illegal acts happened before they wed?

 

[SteveS]

But what if the illegal acts happened before they wed?

Legally, it doesn't matter. Constitutional rights. For both actions during AND before the marriage, a person can't be forced to testify against their spouse.

As discussed here previously, for most crimes and civil cases, in Idaho you have to have consent of BOTH spouses.

 

[Ruminations]

Idaho is one of the more protective states regarding marital privilege- but I am not wrong.

Note: the images are not in order. Read top, then bottom, then middle.

View attachment 407009View attachment 407010View attachment 407011

Replying to my own message to reinforce that spousal privilege does not apply.

Idaho is a state with stricter spousal privilege than most. In general, federal courts have found it too strong and therefore federal laws and many state laws have weakened spousal privileges. Not so in very conservative Idaho.

However, strong as spousal privilege is in Idaho, it would not apply to this case for any of the 3 murders. See the list of exceptions in the quoted post. (d 2 B and d 2 C.)This case is about crimes against persons living in one household or the other. Therefore spousal privilege does not apply.

(Most states AFAIK have also excluded allowing communication and testimony privileges for communications and witnessed events that occurred before marriage. I hadn't known that it was ever a thing that pre-marriage stuff could be privileged. But it was a thing, and apparently still is in Idaho. Yet, marital privilege does not protect Lori or Chad even though most of these crimes occurred before marriage. The privilege does not apply because of the types of crimes, not because of the timing.

This is rather irrelevant, however. because much testimony would be protected for the 5th amendment. And testimony that is not so protected would be of low quality anyway- from a reluctant, compelled witness. The witnesses would probably only testify to those things that the prosecution can already demonstrate in other ways. In other words, they will say as little as possible, citing poor memories, yet to protect against perjury, they will "recall" what the prosecution can prove.

MOO

 

[indicolite22]

Unless you want defendants going free (which I trust you don't), it was actually a good and necessary choice. The alternative? One defendant or the other would have eventually been declared innocent on appeal for violation of their constitutional rights. No doubt at all. There was no way to do what the law requires AND keep the trials together (and it's entirely the fault of the prosecutors, who truly have been playing fast and loose with the defendants' rights for quite some time, pushing things right up to the line until finally boxing themselves into a corner).

FWIW, I went back to review the state's declarations in Aug 2021 and Dec 2021, about a trial date and disclosure of evidence. At that time, they were saying they have turned over all evidence to the defense (which we have since seen was not even close to true) and that they were ready for trial (in Aug) while then (later in Dec) asking for a trial date TWO YEARS later, because it just takes time and BS and vagueness and it's oh so complex and etc etc etc. The incompetence delay for Lori gave them a reasonable excuse for some foot-dragging, but their failure to get their job done as the law requires in so many areas is not a good sign. imo

It looks like the prosecution did some sample testing at the last minute. If no new evidence had been discovered on this occasion, the cases could have stayed joined. The question is, why couldn't all of the testing have been done sooner and how much did Lori's incompetence affect the timing.

 

[SteveS]

Replying to my own message to reinforce that spousal privilege does not apply.

While I agree with you that spousal privilege would not apply to the murders of the children, that's not the bottom line for these trials, as here it certainly would be applicable to the charges of:

• Conspiracy to commit grand theft by deception for the death of Tylee Ryan.
• Conspiracy to commit grand theft by deception for the death of J.J. Vallow.
• Conspiracy to commit first-degree murder in the death of Tammy Daybell.

Two of those are financial crimes and one is spousal, with neither actually being violence against a child. The spousal death of TD was not in the household of LVD, so it gets no exception either. Since all of the charges (those as well as the murders) are being adjudicated in ONE trial, intertwined, spousal privilege would indeed have to be made available to both defendants in their trials.

Obviously it's a moot issue, since the 5th amendment also is in the way.

 

[SteveS]

It looks like the prosecution did some sample testing at the last minute. If no new evidence had been discovered on this occasion, the cases could have stayed joined. The question is, why couldn't all of the testing have been done sooner and how much did Lori's incompetence affect the timing.

Maybe.

Can't wish for "if only they hadn't tested" because then it opens the door to failure to disclose.

The problem is the way they have dawdled all along, not just in setting trial date (LVD's issue) but in giving over evidence (CD's issue).

Listening to the hearing, the state argued that the last minute was reasonable based on A B C time frame. But they are excusing almost a year and a half of didn't get it done, with a "it takes some time" excuse. Seriously? Not believable.

Back in Aug 2021 they said they are ready for trial and have already turned over all the evidence (re-asserted in Dec 2021), and since then we hear about the REPEATED new discovery items turned over, time after time later on. Hard to believe them at all.

 

[Love Never Fails]

Unless you want defendants going free (which I trust you don't), it was actually a good and necessary choice. The alternative? One defendant or the other would have eventually been declared innocent on appeal for violation of their constitutional rights. No doubt at all. There was no way to do what the law requires AND keep the trials together (and it's entirely the fault of the prosecutors, who truly have been playing fast and loose with the defendants' rights for quite some time, pushing things right up to the line until finally boxing themselves into a corner).

FWIW, I went back to review the state's declarations in Aug 2021 and Dec 2021, about a trial date and disclosure of evidence. At that time, they were saying they have turned over all evidence to the defense (which we have since seen was not even close to true) and that they were ready for trial (in Aug) while then (later in Dec) asking for a trial date TWO YEARS later, because it just takes time and BS and vagueness and it's oh so complex and etc etc etc. The incompetence delay for Lori gave them a reasonable excuse for some foot-dragging, but their failure to get their job done as the law requires in so many areas is not a good sign. imo

I hear you. I would love to think all sides are doing their best for their cause or client. But do you realize some of the judge’s choices, combined with prosecutors bad decisions helped create this monster? Do you understand lawyers from both sides talk to each other? Sometimes the deals are done before you see the hearings.

I will always believe there is some back door dealings between the judge, the defense attorneys. the prosecution and the clients.
In fact, I think the only attorney doing his job is John Prior. And he is using all the mistakes for his advantage.

And all the while, JJs grandparents wait for the release of JJs body to bury him.

This case is a prime example of shoddy work and it all started with the prosecution.

So can someone tell me again that the prosecution and judge want this to go to trial? You really think Lori and Chad will be put away for life? I don’t.

Only my opinion.

 

[Nikynoo]

I hear you. I would love to think all sides are doing their best for their cause or client. But do you realize some of the judge’s choices, combined with prosecutors bad decisions helped create this monster? Do you understand lawyers from both sides talk to each other? Sometimes the deals are done before you see the hearings.

I will always believe there is some back door dealings between the judge, the defense attorneys. the prosecution and the clients.
In fact, I think the only attorney doing his job is John Prior. And he is using all the mistakes for his advantage.

And all the while, JJs grandparents wait for the release of JJs body to bury him.

This case is a prime example of shoddy work and it all started with the prosecution.

So can someone tell me again that the prosecution and judge want this to go to trial? You really think Lori and Chad will be put away for life? I don’t.

Only my opinion.

I know you are anxious about this case, but I truly believe that there is enough on (public) record to ensure that both Lori and Chad will spend the rest of their lives in prison.

My thoughts on the prosecution - I didn’t really think much of RW at Chads PH and I still don’t, but I think adding to his team has helped ‘shore up’ his abilities.

If the prosecution build up on the evidence presented at the PH, then in my mind there is no doubt that the prosecution will prevail. Those two will never see the light of day again.

 

[fred&edna]

Can someone remind me again, what's the penalty for...

• Conspiracy to commit grand theft by deception for the death of Tylee Ryan.
• Conspiracy to commit grand theft by deception for the death of J.J. Vallow.

What will be LVD's likely "in court" explanation for continuing to collect and use Tylee & JJ's SS benefits?

And, will she stick to that line she gave MG regarding JJ... "He's safe and happy"?


Thoughts, anyone??

 

[Ruminations]

The judge did a bad, bad thing when he separated the trials.
My opinion of course.

I'm bummed that the trials are separated.

I think that the judge was unfair to Lindsey (?) forgot her last name. She was right that prosecutors had handed over more than legally required. The prosecution has to hand over anything they plan to use as evidence to make their case.

The prosecution has to hand over anything they find that is exculpatory. Yes they can decide that for themselves.

However, especially in a death penalty case, you might be wise, as a prosecutor, to hand over everything just in case the most innocuous-seeming thing is ever determined to be exculpatory. I think JB feels this is best practice and may even think, as Prior cynically asserts, that this MUST happen.

No prosecution team is going to be stupid enough to leave out a thing that makes their case from disclosure because if they do, it can't be used in trial.

The defense shouldn't trust the prosecution to have as good an eye for exculpatory evidence and should review ALL the evidence the prosecution has in their possession, not just the disclosure.

But all the evidence does not have to included in disclosure. But JB repeated Pryor's assertion in error and unfairly IMO.

I don't know if JB really had a choice about severance. Pryor really wants to test that piece of evidence. The State didn't even care to test it in the first go round, because they felt it could be too easily explained even if it belonged to one of the accused. The prosecution argued it could have easily been transferred to the location where it was foind a lot of ways, making it weak evidence.

Then it came back. Lori's attorneys want it excluded from her trial since they don't have the time to have it retested or more extensively tested.

Who knows what it is. Sounds like some transfer DNA of some sort.

MOO

 

[CSIDreamer]

Can someone remind me again, what's the penalty for...

• Conspiracy to commit grand theft by deception for the death of Tylee Ryan.
• Conspiracy to commit grand theft by deception for the death of J.J. Vallow.

What will be LVD's likely "in court" explanation for continuing to collect and use Tylee & JJ's SS benefits?

And, will she stick to that line she gave MG regarding JJ... "He's safe and happy"?


Thoughts, anyone??

I honestly think she is going to say she had no idea they were dead. JMO

 

[Love Never Fails]

I know you are anxious about this case, but I truly believe that there is enough on (public) record to ensure that both Lori and Chad will spend the rest of their lives in prison.

My thoughts on the prosecution - I didn’t really think much of RW at Chads PH and I still don’t, but I think adding to his team has helped ‘shore up’ his abilities.

If the prosecution build up on the evidence presented at the PH, then in my mind there is no doubt that the prosecution will prevail. Those two will never see the light of day again.

Hi@Nikynoo, I am anxious about the case. I really want to see real justice for the kids and Charles and Tammi too. And I care so much about the grandparents. I think they are victims who are being ignored.

I know you are a lawyer with good insight. I read your posts on many cases here at WS and I appreciate you. Just because I rail on and on about attorneys, please just ignore me or attribute it to my ignorance. I don’t pay much attention to the wranglings of the court. And as much as I can appreciate our system of fairness in trials, some people do not deserve it at all. These two certainly don’t. IMO.

I have felt from the beginning the prosecution had the goods on both Lori and Chad and if they do their jobs, no defense attorney could stand up to the facts. A jury would put them both in prison for life in the worst prison possible.

When i was a girl you would see prisoners working outside on chain gangs. Sounds awful but Lori and Chad would look good working outside in the heat with chains on. I don’t think that’s permissible anymore in the U.S. Maybe it should be.

 

[Love Never Fails]

I'm bummed that the trials are separated.

I think that the judge was unfair to Lindsey (?) forgot her last name. She was right that prosecutors had handed over more than legally required. The prosecution has to hand over anything they plan to use as evidence to make their case.

The prosecution has to hand over anything they find that is exculpatory. Yes they can decide that for themselves.

However, especially in a death penalty case, you might be wise, as a prosecutor, to hand over everything just in case the most innocuous-seeming thing is ever determined to be exculpatory. I think JB feels this is best practice and may even think, as Prior cynically asserts, that this MUST happen.

No prosecution team is going to be stupid enough to leave out a thing that makes their case from disclosure because if they do, it can't be used in trial.

The defense shouldn't trust the prosecution to have as good an eye for exculpatory evidence and should review ALL the evidence the prosecution has in their possession, not just the disclosure.

But all the evidence does not have to included in disclosure. But JB repeated Pryor's assertion in error and unfairly IMO.

I don't know if JB really had a choice about severance. Pryor really wants to test that piece of evidence. The State didn't even care to test it in the first go round, because they felt it could be too easily explained even if it belonged to one of the accused. The prosecution argued it could have easily been transferred to the location where it was foind a lot of ways, making it weak evidence.

Then it came back. Lori's attorneys want it excluded from her trial since they don't have the time to have it retested or more extensively tested.

Who knows what it is. Sounds like some transfer DNA of some sort.

MOO

Great posts from posters like you who know something about the legal system (I admit I don’t).

Doesn’t it seem like three years has been a long time to wait for justice for four people, all murdered separately and all so these two could have sex as a god and goddess and start a cult? Shouldn’t the good people of Idaho be screaming about these lawyers and the judge and their shenanigans?

Obviously I could never be a lawyer. It’s an art form. Debating in court and sometimes killers go free. And likewise the innocent are given hard terms. It just can’t be that hard to use common sense.

I have a nephew in Houston, who is a very prominent attorney and I love him dearly. But I bet if you the put the two of us in a room alone, talking about court cases,I would be pulling my hair out at all the ways he could use the law against my emotional thinking of just hanging them in the Town square LOL.

 

[Ruminations]

Great posts from posters like you who know something about the legal system (I admit I don’t).

Doesn’t it seem like three years has been a long time to wait for justice for four people, all murdered separately and all so these two could have sex as a god and goddess and start a cult? Shouldn’t the good people of Idaho be screaming about these lawyers and the judge and their shenanigans?

Obviously I could never be a lawyer. It’s an art form. Debating in court and sometimes killers go free. And likewise the innocent are given hard terms. It just can’t be that hard to use common sense.

I have a nephew in Houston, who is a very prominent attorney and I love him dearly. But I bet if you the put the two of us in a room alone, talking about court cases,I would be pulling my hair out at all the ways he could use the law against my emotional thinking of just hanging them in the Town square LOL.

Emotions matter. Thanks for caring so much.