Found Deceased ID - Joshua Vallow, 7, & Tylee Ryan, 17, Rexburg, Sept 2019 *mom, arrested* #22

Status
Not open for further replies.
  • #781
@KonaHonu
Thank you I appreciate your apology and clarification
Now I will offer you an apology because I was not aware that your Miranda warning was so specific in that it says that anything you say CAN and WILL be USED AGAINST YOU and for this reason , I now understand your point so my bad , I’m sorry .

In the UK we can arrest straight away

And only after charge do we go away and gather all the evidence to support what we already have initially , which was enough to arrest and interview and subsequently charge ( arraign) . The case is built once the charge procedure begins.

For example when CV was shot and killed, I said in another post that Lori and AC her brother, would have been arrested immediately and J.J. and Tylee would have been taken to a juvenile suite and in the presence of appropriate adults not involved, would have been interviewed on visual recording as to what they had witnessed.
This is because we can arrest on belief and suspicion and we then interview those arrested in order to obtain evidence but also to allow them to give alibis which we can then prove or disprove .
Our caution reads ....
You do not have to say anything but it may harm your defence if you do not mention when questioned something which may later be used to rely on in court . Anything you do say may be given in evidence.

Now the important clarification here is that this caution is only given if you are arrested or if you are brought into a custody suite and detained for the purpose of being questioned under caution and documented by contemporaneous notes .

So there really is a huge difference about speaking to LE in the UK as opposed to the USA

I think we are both straight now on the pertinent differences

Small correction: not all U.S. states say "can AND WILL".

They have discretion to include the latter, as per the four points in the below article:

Know Your Rights: What are Miranda Rights?

"Can and will", is the standard. It does not have to be applied, depending upon jurisdiction ("states' rights"). :) . Point #2 above, characterizes it more properly as "fac[ing] the prospect" that your words may be used in court.

As vocal as BB has been about everything, I HIGHLY DOUBT he would have taken these kids into hiding and NOT informed LE. He has been involved with LE and his own private investigator since the get-go of being shot at, and IMHO, has been a if not one of THE driving forces into LE looking into the shenanigans of Lori & Co....

Yeah, and even Brandon's own private investigator, by his own admission, at the start of the story was like "Whaaaaaaattttt.....?"
 
  • #782
The woman said he was dropping off donations. He is clearing out. In Utah we have Deseret Industries Thrift Stores. Very common to donate household items, clothing, etc., it’s run by the LDS church and employs tons of people. For Chad, having grown up here, it would be second nature to donate to a religiously affiliated shop.

Yup. He'd have had one of those (DI) in Rexburg as well.
 
  • #783
This case has disturbing parallels to the Jacqueline Bouknight case in which a mother refused to disclose what happened to her children. She was jailed for 7 years and finally released without ever providing meaningful information as to her son's whereabouts. In the Bouknight case she claimed to have given the boy to relatives or friends to block the state from putting him with a foster family. Lori's attorney has made the same argument now, saying she did not comply with the Idaho court's order because it would have allowed the state to put her children in foster care. I find myself looking for reassurance that this case will not end in the same stalemate as Bouknight and I come up with the following: 1) There is a very good chance that pressure applied to Chad may cause him to crack. I would think there's a decent chance he could be charged with a conspiracy count alleging he conspired with Lori with respect to the kids; 2) Obviously, all the strange deaths represent a significant difference in this case and one or more charges may result from those incidents; 3) There are likely more people with potential knowledge in this case and, thus, investigators are more likely to solve the mystery with today's forensic & investigative tools; 4) The charges against Lori appear much more serious than any that were leveled against Bouknight. … I'd be interested in anyone else's considered thoughts as to whether or not a Bouknight outcome would be possible here. If so, I hope she is kept incarcerated for at least the 7 years Jacqueline received.

If Chad is charged with conspiracy - as things currently stand - wouldn't that only be conspiracy to obstruct justice - a misdemeanor? Or are we talking about more serious charges?
 
  • #784
Yes. I agree. Let’s imagine that Chad were a “normal”, innocent person, who just lost two spouses in 4 months (in this case, one to death, one to jail). I would fathom they would be destroyed inside. Destroyed. Mourning, barely able to get out of bed.

I feel like CD’s arrest is imminent, because imo he has obviously done and witnessed some shady stuff. I’m just befuddled how he appears so “collected.” Either 1) it’s a defense mechanism, numbly carrying on, going home, donating things, focusing on his white paper, because right now it’s just about survival; or 2) he truly has confidence that things will turn out just fine because of his revelations, beliefs, and general disillusionment.

Moo

Color me curious again. " . . . focusing on his white paper . . . " means that paper he had in hand or some other reference? Thank you.
 
  • #785
  • #786
RSBM

To focus in on the most interesting point with relevance to this case (e.g. Melani)

I think it is key to differentiate between the situation of interrogation vs the classic "assisting with inquiries" and also sophisticated vs non sophisticated suspects

David Simon in his classic Homicide pointed out that for your classic unsophisticated suspect pulled off the street, giving any kind of statement is frequently stupid and that's a problem for the process because there is indeed scant upside to cooperation. So of course LE may skirt the process by ostensibly not treating the person as a suspect.

And of course this also answers the question of why potentially guilty parties may cooperate.

e.g. in the recent McStay case where a family of 4 went missing, the business partner (and killer) Chase Merritt sat down at his house to talk to detectives about his last interactions with the missing (murdered) family. But of course, had he refused to do so, he puts himself square in frame.

So IMO, while it may be the case that for Melani to cooperate at all is legally foolish, her failure to cooperate, in practical terms also has significant downside.

We've seen in so many cases that guilty parties think they can divert suspicion by being a "good witness"

In Melani's case, it appears to be purposeful that LE had the FBI question her. Four hours of questioning over three days sounds as if there were a lot of follow-up questions as they checked out certain aspects of her story. Leaves me with the feeling that they were setting the trap for her to waltz into federal charges. MOO
 
  • #787
I'm almost certain this meant MBP claimed BB (not IP) falsified his court documents. Unless I am misunderstanding your statement. (Still confusing though, because where/why would BB claim he got this information). Moo.
I'm curious: How did BB know what IP told police?
 
  • #788
  • #789
Should we assume the FBI was questioning Melani about Lori (Tylee and JJ) AND also about the attempt on BB's life? Is this why she has a criminal attorney to cover all the bases - including family court?
 
  • #790
Color me curious again. " . . . focusing on his white paper . . . " means that paper he had in hand or some other reference? Thank you.

yes - I was just referring to the paper that he has been carrying around, and that we wonder what it could possibly say! Moo
 
  • #791
  • #792
Then the brutal reality will finally strike. She is going to find herself unable to find anyone that will fall for her charms.

Even without the media frenzy, we all have a shelf life on how "good looking/attractive" we are. She is just about there.

When you don't have that, you have to rely on what really matters in a relationship. She won't make it very far. I know a handful of people like that, which are now very angry, bitter people. It's sad really.

What skills does she have to bring to a relationship? Not much. She can cut hair (slow clap)
How does she treat people? Well they seem to end up dead. :confused::confused:
Is she a good mother and role model? :rolleyes: ROFLMAO :D:D
Can she cook? Ask Alex. :eek:

Sadly it's learned behavior. In many ways, I think beautiful woman have to deal with this, more than the rest of us. Fortunately not everyone is skin deep and shallow. JMO

I will just drop this Louisa May Alcott quote here ...

“If you feel your value lies in being merely decorative, I fear that someday you might find yourself believing that's all that you really are. Time erodes all such beauty, but what it cannot diminish is the wonderful workings of your mind: Your humor, your kindness, and your moral courage.”

Time, and jail, erode all such beauty.. and what’s left will be the workings of her mind. What will remain?
Moo
 
  • #793
Absolutely. Share their love...

Morning, Omeohmy! You make me smile each day now...
What do you enter on the website to be able to see the information?
 
  • #794
  • #795
  • #796
  • #797
If Chad is charged with conspiracy - as things currently stand - wouldn't that only be conspiracy to obstruct justice - a misdemeanor? Or are we talking about more serious charges?

A good point. I was thinking it might be possible to make a charge of conspiracy to endanger a child. However, it appears Idaho law requires bodily injury or death to constitute a felony under their child protection laws. Perhaps the fact that J.J. is characterized as having "special needs" might permit a theory premised on a claim that Chad's participation in concealing his whereabouts and welfare may be exposing him to serious harm.

Since Idaho does provide some statutory grandparents' rights I'm wondering whether it might be prudent for them to file a civil case against both Chad and Lori simply to initiate discovery. Lori would likely plead the Fifth and would be upheld since she's facing serious charges. However, I'm not sure Chad would be able to do so under the current circumstances. Law enforcement very likely has a game plan now, but, perhaps, a civil lawyer on their behalf might be able coordinate with the feds to institute discovery proceedings that would possibly ratchet up pressure or even lead to valuable info.
 
  • #798
No, here's another hint.

"Sink me, your tailors have betrayed you."
Scarlet pimpernel. I did think of that at first but recently watched 'Ali' again and his poetry was in my mind.
 
  • #799
  • #800
This thread is dedicated to discussing the disappearance of Tylee and Joshua. It is not a place for general chit chat and lengthy posts about the history of Hawaii or tourism, etc.

It is also not a place for bickering, personalizing and rude comments ... oh, and general arguing over various mental health topics, serial killers and things Ted Bundy.

Please stay on topic, be respectful, or there may be a loss of posting privileges.



Thanks.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
88
Guests online
2,580
Total visitors
2,668

Forum statistics

Threads
632,729
Messages
18,631,018
Members
243,275
Latest member
twinmomming
Back
Top