GUILTY ID - Doomsday Cult Victims - Joshua Vallow, Tylee Ryan, Tammy Daybell, Charles Vallow *Arrests* #76

[LaborDayRN]

IMO, they need to wake up to the reality of their mother's murder, especially because, from everything I have read, she was a loving and caring wife and totally blameless in her brutal death. She was betrayed by her husband and murdered so that he could be with the psychopath who was just convicted. Unfortunately for Tammy's children, continuing to support her murderer will be yet another betrayal for Tammy, to her memory at least. But I think they realize this, and will wait until Chad Daybell's conviction before making any statements, IMO.

I agree. I'm guessing they have been persuaded by CD and his attorney's to appear to be 100% supportive of their father.

 

[887sMtreme]

I think you are right that they will likely not make any statements until after CD’s trial. I hope that the information that came out in LVD’s trial opened their eyes and that they are no longer in denial. I can see how they could still say none of this would have happened if LVD had never come into their lives but I do not see how they could continue to ignore CD’s involvement in all of it including their mother’s murder. I’m sure the sickening texts CD sent to LVD while their mother was still alive had to make them realize CD was not the man they thought he was. And the evidence showing TD was murdered and the contacts with LVD and AC before and after the murder were laid out pretty clear in LVD’s trial. I cannot believe that they could still hold the opinions they had and come to CD’s defense now the way they did in their appearance on “Secrets of Chad Daybell’s Backyard.”

Never underestimate the power of cult beliefs over facts.

 

[887sMtreme]

One more interview coming up:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1674854357450498049

Wow, gods have gotten really stupid and paunchy since Olden Times. I guess they walked more in those days, were regularly exposed to epic poetry ‘n’ stuff.

 

[fred&edna]

Judge B needs to make an exception in this instance.

 

[SteveS]

Judge B needs to make an exception in this instance.

I'm probably in the minority, but I very much disagree, because I think we should not hope for things to happen contrary to ID law, even if we can sympathize with this aunt.

There are legal boundaries. What happens should the judge surpass them? It would give LD an avenue to claim her rights were trampled in getting a fair sentence, and then an appeals court could send it all back to start over (or worse).

It has happened before in an ID case on this very issue - the verdict was overturned because the judge pushed the limits and beyond.

ID says a victim is the person who had the crime done to them, and they can speak of the impact the crime had on them. In a murder their immediate family (parent, child, sibling) can be there to represent them and speak for them. Tammy left behind plenty of immediate family to speak out on her behalf. That law must be followed.

This verdict is almost over the finish line now. Goodness, whatever you do, don't screw it up now. While I feel sorry for this aunt, I applaud the judge for putting justice ahead of emotion.

https://www.ag.idaho.gov/content/uploads/2018/04/VictimsRights.pdf

 

[Gardenista]

Not if it's contrary to ID law, even if we can sympathize with her.

The last thing I would want is for the judge to surpass the legal boundaries, give LD an avenue to claim her rights were trampled in getting a fair sentence, and then an appeals court send it all back to start over (or worse).

He already made an exception for Kay to be the family representative. May as well throw caution to the wind.

 

[fred&edna]

He already made an exception for Kay to be the family representative. May as well throw caution to the wind.

That's what I was thinking.

Did Kay hire an attorney to obtain her "exception"?? Will Tammy's aunt have to do the same?

 

[SteveS]

He already made an exception for Kay to be the family representative. May as well throw caution to the wind.

Different circumstance.

The law says "immediate family" (parent, sibling, child) can represent and speak on behalf of a murder victim. Tammy has tons of immediate family who can speak on her behalf, and there's no need for another.

FWIW I think in the other ruling Boyce maybe went over the line, and is now being super-cautious not to do it any more on this issue.

I also found it interesting that after Boyce ruled as he did on Kay, the prosec made sure she did NOT have to use that ruling to attend the trial. They put her on first and then released her, making it allowable for her to attend the trial like any non-witness. When they did it that way, it made me wonder if the prosec had doubts about the ruling too, and took steps to make sure it had no impact.

 

[sassyblue]

Tammy deserves someone that loved her to stand up for her and speak of what the untimely loss of her means to them. My heart is broken for her.

For Tammy's children to value their murdering, unfaithful, lying, deceitful, scheming piece of gum on a shoe father over their loving, steadfast, hard working, faithful mother is so horrible.

Someday they will regret it. I see no reason a child could not lament the loss of their much loved mother and still support their father....even though he killed her.

Gotta toe the party god line though I guess...even though he's got feet of clay and is very far from being a prophet much less a god. Someday realization will hit.

Moo

 

[Trebor5591]

Never underestimate the power of cult beliefs over facts.

What cult do the Daybell children belong to? Just asking.

 

[ReadySet]

I'm probably in the minority, but I very much disagree, because I think we should not hope for things to happen contrary to ID law, even if we can sympathize with this aunt.

There are legal boundaries. What happens should the judge surpass them? It would give LD an avenue to claim her rights were trampled in getting a fair sentence, and then an appeals court could send it all back to start over (or worse).

It has happened before in an ID case on this very issue - the verdict was overturned because the judge pushed the limits and beyond.

ID says a victim is the person who had the crime done to them, and they can speak of the impact the crime had on them. In a murder their immediate family (parent, child, sibling) can be there to represent them and speak for them. Tammy left behind plenty of immediate family to speak out on her behalf. That law must be followed.

This verdict is almost over the finish line now. Goodness, whatever you do, don't screw it up now. While I feel sorry for this aunt, I applaud the judge for putting justice ahead of emotion.

https://www.ag.idaho.gov/content/uploads/2018/04/VictimsRights.pdf

Which was the Idaho case where the verdict was overturned?

 

[BeachSky]

Hawaii…so bizarre same, same.

JMO
“ If (her) looks could kill “

 

[aafromaa]

I think I have to agree with those who have said Judge B should reconsIder Vicki H’s status on this. The judge did deny her request in his order of June 8th (see below) but also said the court had not been informed of who this person was.

It should be noted for those that are unclear that VH is the sister of TD’s deceased mother and further that TD’s mother died on or about the same day the judge issued this order. VH said in the interview that she would like to have the same status as KW and it would appear that she should have that status.

KW is not being allowed to give a victim’s impact statement because she is JJ’s grandmother (her son is the natural father) nor because she is JJ’s aunt (her brother adopted JJ). She is being allowed to give a victim’s impact statement because the father of one of the victim’s (JJ) is deceased and as the sister of JJ’s father (CV) she has been designated by the court to speak on his behalf.

VH is not allowed to give a victim’s impact statement as the aunt of the victim (TD) but she can be designated by the court to speak on behalf of her deceased sister who was TD’s mother.

The judge’s order includes the fact that he would reconsider those he denied if additional information regarding their standing was presented by the prosecution. Yet VH indicated in her interview that nothing has been submitted on her behalf to the judge by the prosecution requesting that she be designated as the person to speak in place of TD’s deceased mother.

If that’s true, shame on the prosecution for not filing that request with the court by now.

Having said all of that, it is my personal opinion that victim impact statements rarely change the mind of the judge regarding the sentence being imposed but I believe they are important for the families of the victim and I believe that VH should be designated by the court to speak for her mother for the same reasons that KW was designated by the court to speak for CV.

As always MOO

https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/case/CR22211624/060823%20Order%20on%20Victim%20Impact%20Statements.pdf

 

[aafromaa]

That's what I was thinking.

Did Kay hire an attorney to obtain her "exception"?? Will Tammy's aunt have to do the same?

I don’t know whether Kay hired an attorney or whether the prosecution requested she be designated by the court to speak on behalf of CV when they first submitted the list of people for consideration for victim impact statements. But if VH is accurate in saying the prosecution has not filed any additional requests on her behalf then she needs to hire an attorney to see if they can help make this happen. I believe the order indicates the clarification of who VH is and the request to be designated by the court to represent TD’s deceased mother would have to come from the prosecution and I’m puzzled why this has not yet been done.

Also note - TD’s mother (VH’s sister) died on or about the same day the judge denied VH’s request to give a victim impact statement. So since his order on this, the situation has changed in that TD’s mother who would have had standing has passed away. I think VH could have been designated by the court prior to the death of TD’s mother since she was sick and in hospice but since it wasn’t filed with the court when she died, it certainly should have been by now.

VH should not “have” to hire an attorney but she might need to just to see that the new information is brought to the Judge before it’s too late.

 

[fred&edna]

Regarding KW hiring an attorney, I believe I was thinking of this:

'Blindsided and heartbroken,' Woodcocks hire attorney after learning they may be barred from attending Daybell trial

JJ Vallow's grandparents were

www.ksl.com

 

[887sMtreme]

I'm probably in the minority, but I very much disagree, because I think we should not hope for things to happen contrary to ID law, even if we can sympathize with this aunt.

There are legal boundaries. What happens should the judge surpass them? It would give LD an avenue to claim her rights were trampled in getting a fair sentence, and then an appeals court could send it all back to start over (or worse).

It has happened before in an ID case on this very issue - the verdict was overturned because the judge pushed the limits and beyond.

ID says a victim is the person who had the crime done to them, and they can speak of the impact the crime had on them. In a murder their immediate family (parent, child, sibling) can be there to represent them and speak for them. Tammy left behind plenty of immediate family to speak out on her behalf. That law must be followed.

This verdict is almost over the finish line now. Goodness, whatever you do, don't screw it up now. While I feel sorry for this aunt, I applaud the judge for putting justice ahead of emotion.

https://www.ag.idaho.gov/content/uploads/2018/04/VictimsRights.pdf

Steve, once again, I agree with you on what might be an unpopular opinion. Excellent reasoning.

 

[887sMtreme]

That's what I was thinking.

Did Kay hire an attorney to obtain her "exception"?? Will Tammy's aunt have to do the same?

Dangerous territory, this.

 

[887sMtreme]

What cult do the Daybell children belong to? Just asking.

Do you not accept that Chad Daybell has for many years presented as a toxic cult leader? Do you not allow for the possibility that his children, reared in this environment, could have bought into his claims of holy invincibility? It’s possible they’re being completely objective or are guided only by filial devotion, of course. We can wonder without ever knowing for sure.

 

[887sMtreme]

I don’t know whether Kay hired an attorney or whether the prosecution requested she be designated by the court to speak on behalf of CV when they first submitted the list of people for consideration for victim impact statements. But if VH is accurate in saying the prosecution has not filed any additional requests on her behalf then she needs to hire an attorney to see if they can help make this happen. I believe the order indicates the clarification of who VH is and the request to be designated by the court to represent TD’s deceased mother would have to come from the prosecution and I’m puzzled why this has not yet been done.

Also note - TD’s mother (VH’s sister) died on or about the same day the judge denied VH’s request to give a victim impact statement. So since his order on this, the situation has changed in that TD’s mother who would have had standing has passed away. I think VH could have been designated by the court prior to the death of TD’s mother since she was sick and in hospice but since it wasn’t filed with the court when she died, it certainly should have been by now.

VH should not “have” to hire an attorney but she might need to just to see that the new information is brought to the Judge before it’s too late.

The tragedy of this case just seems to spread like cancer.

 

[fred&edna]

Tammy may have many people who could give victim impact statements but it doesn't appear any will be there to do so IF her aunt is not permitted. LVD has been convicted of conspiracy in Tammy's murder, and it feels unjust to allow LVD to go to prison without hearing from a victim. I know "feelings" and "legalities" don't really mix so I understand the exception avoidance, but sometimes... rules need adjustments (if possible). jmo