ID - Joshua Vallow, 7, Tylee Ryan, 16, Tammy Daybell, 49, Charles Vallow, 62, Oct 2019 *Arrests* #66

[Countem]

Vallow-Daybell asking state to release witness statements

Lori Vallow-Daybell’s attorneys are asking that Seventh District Court Judge Steven Boyce “compel” the prosecution to turn over all witness statements in her case.

www.rexburgstandardjournal.com

Lori Vallow-Daybell’s attorneys are asking that Seventh District Court Judge SB “compel” the prosecution to turn over all witness statements in her case.

They also wrote that the state does not believe it is required to turn the information over because non-state investigators conducted the interviews.

The attorneys countered that the interviews were done “at the request of the prosecuting attorney, conducted in state law enforcement facilities and were observed by and listened to by the prosecuting attorneys,” wrote JA and JT.

 

[Niner]

So - now that LV is competent again - any news on any hearings coming up?? Maybe this new motion will bring about a date!
TIA if anyone knows!

 

[887sMtreme]

Scott Reisch on the latest JB's decision to deny severance:

SR thinks a joint trial "is going to be a mess", partly due to JP's intent to present evidence of Lori's prior bad acts. If it's about evidence for which she hasn't been convicted yet, it wouldn't be admissible in Lori's case.

This means that if Chad’s plan is to throw Lori under the bus, he’ll have to dream up something more creative than just dredging up her sketchy past. Man, there won’t BE enough popcorn for this one — and I say that with full understanding that this is not a show; it’s real life-and-death stuff, with the most important deaths already, sadly, on record.

 

[BeckyF]

Can someone explain to me like I’m 5. Why does Scott Reisch think it’s best to sever the trials? What is the advantage to either the prosecution or the defense to sever? I’d ask him myself but he isn’t in my contact list. TIA.

 

[DI_Isokawa]

Can someone explain to me like I’m 5. Why does Scott Reisch think it’s best to sever the trials? What is the advantage to either the prosecution or the defense to sever? I’d ask him myself but he isn’t in my contact list. TIA.

Lori Hellis has explained this a couple of times in her newsletter and videos. The short answer, as I understand it, is that a joint trial is only clean, simple, and fair if the two defendants are mounting the same defense. If they mount different defenses, and as is likely in this case, blame each other, things get godawful complicated and the chances of a successful appeal rise dramatically. As I said, that's my understanding. I recommend you look up what Lori Hellis has said about this.

 

[Tortoise]

Also, Lori Vallow has not waived her right to a speedy trial, whereas Chad has, so it looks like the judge is ignoring her constitutional rights. Not good.

 

[BeckyF]

Lori Hellis has explained this a couple of times in her newsletter and videos. The short answer, as I understand it, is that a joint trial is only clean, simple, and fair if the two defendants are mounting the same defense. If they mount different defenses, and as is likely in this case, blame each other, things get godawful complicated and the chances of a successful appeal rise dramatically. As I said, that's my understanding. I recommend you look up what Lori Hellis has said about this.

Thank you so much! I will do that.

 

[indicolite22]

Can someone explain to me like I’m 5. Why does Scott Reisch think it’s best to sever the trials? What is the advantage to either the prosecution or the defense to sever? I’d ask him myself but he isn’t in my contact list. TIA.

One of the complications (according to Lori Hellis) is a possibility of two separate juries in one trial. Also, some evidence might be admissible for one defendant and not the other. The judge would have to give additional instructions to the jury which evidence to disregard.

 

[LinasK]

One of the complications (according to Lori Hellis) is a possibility of two separate juries in one trial. Also, some evidence might be admissible for one defendant and not the other. The judge would have to give additional instructions to the jury which evidence to disregard.

Yes, that just happened with Paul Flores and his father. Ruben's jury wasn't able to hear some of the evidence, and he got off- only Paul was convicted of the murder of Kristin Smart.

 

[kittythehare]

I can't remember - did Chad express any grief at Tammy's death?

I don't think so.
Immediately moved in with a 'friend' aka black widow spider..

 

[Tricia]

Short Version of the post below. If you would like to donate to our volunteer moderator staff please do so using one of the places below. Please put "FOR THE MODS" in the description. Thank you.
PayPal Pay Websleuths.com using PayPal.Me
Venmo name Tricia-Griffith-14
OR
Cash App $tgrif14
Bank to Bank using zelle please use the email address [email protected]
Please be sure to put in the memo "FOR THE MODS"

Hi Everyone,
Forgive me for interrupting but this is important. Please do not post questions about this post on this thread. Go to THIS THREAD to ask questions.

DID YOU KNOW BY THE END OF THE DAY OUR MODS WILL HAVE HANDLED HUNDREDS AND HUNDREDS OF ALERTS? YOU WOULD NOT KNOW THIS BECAUSE THAT IS HOW GOOD THE MODS ARE AT THEIR JOBS.

One of the many things I love about Websleuths is we can come on here, discuss true crime, and not have to deal with all the stupid drama and baloney we have to deal with on other platforms. Do you know why? It is the hard work of our wonderful volunteer moderators.

Because of these incredible moderators, you don't see the following, the trolls that constantly try and disrupt. You don't see the newbies who don't know the rules and post a bunch of unproven rumors in cases, You don't see the mean people insulting your posts, you don't see the stupid threats angry people post, and guess what? I could go on and on. In other words, the mods make your experience the best you can find when it comes to discussing true crime.

If you could donate even one dollar that would be great. If half the people that come to Websleuths today donated one dollar we would be able to give the mods a wonderful bonus for all their hard work.

One hundred percent of the money raised goes to the moderators.

If you cannot donate we completely understand. If you could please post a word of thanks to our mods on THIS THREAD that would be wonderful.

If you would like to donate to the moderators at Websleuths.com please do so using one of the places below and be sure and put in the description "FOR THE MODS"
Pay Websleuths.com using PayPal.Me
OR you can use
Venmo name Tricia-Griffith-14
OR
Cash App $tgrif14
Bank to Bank using zelle please use the email address [email protected]
Please be sure to put in the memo "FOR THE MODS"

Websleuths.com will always be free for members. It costs nothing to join and it never will.
If you like to read at Websleuths because of the incredible work of our members please know the reason our members are able to do what they do is because of our dedicated volunteer moderator staff.

This video explains what the moderators do every day to keep Websleuths the most respected true crime discussion forum on the Internet.
Thank you,
Tricia Griffith Owner/Websleuths.com

 

[montegrl]

@Niner Here are the new docket entries for LV, nothing new in CD's case right now:

• 11/22/2022 Motion to Compel
• 11/23/2022 Motion
  Comment
  to Declare Death Penalty Unconstitutional
• 11/23/2022 Notice of Hearing
• 12/08/2022 Motion Hearing
  Judicial Officer
  Boyce (District), Steven
  Hearing Time
  09:30 AM
  Comment
  Motion to Compel, Motion to Declare Death Penalty Unconstitutional

 

[montegrl]

Here's the briefs:

• 11/22/2022 Motion to Compel
• 11/23/2022 Motion to Declare Death Penalty Unconstitutional
• 11/23/2022 Notice of Hearing

 

[MTW2011]

The Motion to Declare Death Penalty Unconstitutional IMOO is very compelling for a future appeal.

 

[pizzaman12]

The Motion to Declare Death Penalty Unconstitutional IMOO is very compelling for a future appeal.

I don't follow as many cases as others but hasn't this been unsuccessfully challenged by many over many years?

 

[watergirl62]

I don't follow as many cases as others but hasn't this been unsuccessfully challenged by many over many years?

It recently worked for Scott Peterson based upon impartial jury selection. Converted his DP sentence to LWOP. But, California.

 

[Kemug]

The Motion to Declare Death Penalty Unconstitutional IMOO is very compelling for a future appeal.

I believe murdering your children is also "unconstitutional"?

 

[Niner]

@Niner Here are the new docket entries for LV, nothing new in CD's case right now:

• 11/22/2022 Motion to Compel
• 11/23/2022 Motion
  Comment
  to Declare Death Penalty Unconstitutional
• 11/23/2022 Notice of Hearing
• 12/08/2022 Motion Hearing
  Judicial Officer
  Boyce (District), Steven
  Hearing Time
  09:30 AM
  Comment
  Motion to Compel, Motion to Declare Death Penalty Unconstitutional

Thank you!!

 

[887sMtreme]

I believe murdering your children is also "unconstitutional"

I believe murdering your children is also "unconstitutional"?

Treason is the only crime specifically mentioned in the Constitution.

And then there’s that pesky 8th Amendment. SCOTUS has come down on both sides of whether or not “cruel and unusual punishment” includes the death penalty, ruling in 1972 that it does and reversing itself in 1976. Today, states are almost evenly divided on the issue. The debate may continue indefinitely.

i wonder how many jurors in DP cases make it through voir dire as being on one side or the other, only to reverse themselves as the facts (and arguments) are presented during the trials, resulting in surprising verdicts. This one might well go totally off the rails. MOO of course, and mind, IANAL.

 

[MTW2011]

Treason is the only crime specifically mentioned in the Constitution.

And then there’s that pesky 8th Amendment. SCOTUS has come down on both sides of whether or not “cruel and unusual punishment” includes the death penalty, ruling in 1972 that it does and reversing itself in 1976. Today, states are almost evenly divided on the issue. The debate may continue indefinitely.

i wonder how many jurors in DP cases make it through voir dire as being on one side or the other, only to reverse themselves as the facts (and arguments) are presented during the trials, resulting in surprising verdicts. This one might well go totally off the rails. MOO of course, and mind, IANAL.

You may be interested in looking at one of these. One is from 2008 & the other one is from 1998

https://secure.in.gov/ipdc/files/Overview-of-CJP-and-Other-Findings-spring-2010.pdf

https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/216738153.pdf

The first one highlights a lot of their findings from interviewing jurors after a death penalty trial. The second focuses on “remorse” of the trial strategy on death penalty cases. Likely boring and tough to tread through reading for most but I wanted to share them.