Found Deceased ID - Joshua Vallow, 7, & Tylee Ryan, 17, Rexburg, Sept 2019 *mom arrested* #29

[Alpha Bravo]

Idaho Judicial Cases of Interest

CR33-20-0302 - Madison County

State of Idaho v. Lori Norene Vallow, AKA Lori Norene Daybell

• 02/18/2020 Criminal Complaint
• 02/18/2020 Affidavit of Probable Cause
• 02/19/2020 Assignment by Trial Court Administrator
• 02/20/2020 Warrant Returned - Served
• 02/25/2020 Subpoena Duces Tecum - Hawaii Rental
• 02/25/2020 Subpoena Duces Tecum - Kauai Beach Resort
• 02/25/2020 Subpoena Duces Tecum - Kennedy School
• 02/25/2020 Subpoena Duces Tecum - School District IEP
• 03/02/2020 Adminstrative Order
• 03/03/2020 Order Governing Courtroom Conduct
• 03/03/2020 Amended Order Governing Courtroom Conduct
• 03/03/2020 Notice of Compliance - Hawaii Rental
• 03/03/2020 Notice of Compliance - Kauai Beach Resort
• 03/03/2020 Notice of Compliance - Kennedy School
• 03/03/2020 Notice of Compliance - School District IEP
• 03/04/2020 Notice of Appearance Co-Counsel
• 03/04/2020 Request for Discovery
• 03/04/2020 Motion for Bond Reduction
• 03/04/2020 Order - Vacating Hearing
• 03/04/2020 Order - Request to Obtain Approval to Video/Audio Record, Broadcast or Photograph a Court Proceeding
• 03/04/2020 Order - Request to Obtain Approval to Video/Audio Record, Broadcast or Photograph a Court Proceeding
• 03/04/2020 Order - Request to Obtain Approval to Video/Audio Record, Broadcast or Photograph a Court Proceeding
• 03/05/2020 Order - Request to Obtain Approval to Video/Audio Record, Broadcast or Photograph a Court Proceeding
• 03/05/2020 Defendant's Specific Request for Discovery to Plaintiff
• 03/05/2020 Motion for Relief from Prejudicial Joinder
• 03/06/2020 Order - Request to Obtain Approval to Video/Audio Record, Broadcast or Photograph a Court Proceeding
• 03/06/2020 Notice of Hearing
• 03/06/2020 Notification of Rights
• 03/06/2020 Order Reducing Bail and Condition of Bail
• 03/11/2020 Motion for Disqualifaction Pursuant to Idaho Criminal Rule 25
• 03/11/2020 Stipulation to Continue
• 03/12/2020 Declared Waiver of Statutory Right to Have the Prelimary Hearing Within Fourteen 14 Days
• 03/12/2020 Objection to Motion to Disqualify
• 03/12/2020 Declared Response to Objection to Motion for Disqualification and Alternatively Declared Motion to Disqualify for Cause
• 03/13/2020 Order - Request to Obtain Approval to Video/Audio Record, Broadcast or Photograph a Court Proceeding
• 03/13/2020 Order - Request to Obtain Approval to Video/Audio Record, Broadcast or Photograph a Court Proceeding
• 03/13/2020 Assignment by Trial Court Administrator
• 03/13/2020 Amended Notice of Preliminary Hearing
• 03/13/2020 Order for Continuance of Preliminary Hearing
• 03/13/2020 Order on Motion to Disqualify ICR Rule 25
• 03/13/2020 Notice of Hearing
• 03/13/2020 Amended Notice of Hearing - District Alt Judges
• 03/16/2020 Declared Notice of Nonobjection to Withdrawal
• 03/16/2020 Initial Discovery Disclosure
• 03/19/2020 Motion for Leave to Withdraw as Counsel of Record
• 03/20/2020 Amended Order Reducing Bail and Conditions of Release
• 03/24/2020 Declaration of Defendant in Support of a Motion for Withdrawal and Entry of an Order of Withdrawal
• 03/24/2020 Declared Motion for Bond Reduction
• 03/24/2020 Notice of Non-Objection to Withdrawal

Geez this looks kinda pricey. Lori must have lots of money!

 

[Alpha Bravo]

Lol. For real though, what possible facts could he be referring to? Is he going to try and pin everything on Alex, and claim LVD is a victim? That would seem stupid. I do think something in the evidence that was handed over during the initial discovery will be the "new facts", but at the same time, I think Mr. Means is looking for ways to get her off on some technicality. I can't think of one thing that would make her look like she is less of a risk or deserves her bail to be reduced. Please, fellow WS pals, give me something to ponder during home quarantine. Share your thoughts of what these new facts could possibly be.

Honestly cant think of anything that could help her besides turning in the kids. New judge should say: “What’s this, you are still in contempt of the child order? Bail $2m! And $3m next time you ask, if no kids!”

 

[Alpha Bravo]

Does it bug anyone else where they state two facts in the story/headline and one of them is, if not out and out wrong, at least only partly right? He's not a new lawyer like they said, she started with 3 lawyers and 2 of the three appeared to quit. They didn't get fired unless she fired the 2 and didn't tell the third since all the evidence in the hearing when the two "withdrew" was that Means didn't know it was coming.

MOO

Maybe she actually did hire a new attorney and they forgot to name him? Haha. Either way...

 

[Mae123]

I'm wondering what will happen with LVD/CD when July comes and goes and the world doesn't end. That train wreck could have long tentacles -- affecting some of their followers.[/

I always operate from the presumption of innocence as hard as it is to do sometimes. This particular one is a huge test of that principle.
However if they are criminals, they are not very savy ones. They had a big bag of money and could of went somewhere they could not be expedited from and lived their lives out there. Instead they thought hiding in Hawaii was smarter? I could easily see them thinking that marriages would serve as a legal shield when it does not. They are not smart criminals if they are criminals at all.
As dumb as they are, if the grandparents had not found out the adress lori was living at, they might of gotten away withtheir scheme. I think that welfare check was the lynchpinto everything going awry for them. If they get convicted, its all gonna trace back to two worried grandparents giving the police an address to have a welfare check at.

I absolutely agree with that! But wasn’t Lori also being investigated by Arizona LE during that time as well, because of the attempted drive by on BB? So prior to the welfare check?

 

[Mae123]

I'm wondering what will happen with LVD/CD when July comes and goes and the world doesn't end. That train wreck could have long tentacles -- affecting some of their followers.[/

I always operate from the presumption of innocence as hard as it is to do sometimes. This particular one is a huge test of that principle.
However if they are criminals, they are not very savy ones. They had a big bag of money and could of went somewhere they could not be expedited from and lived their lives out there. Instead they thought hiding in Hawaii was smarter? I could easily see them thinking that marriages would serve as a legal shield when it does not. They are not smart criminals if they are criminals at all.
As dumb as they are, if the grandparents had not found out the adress lori was living at, they might of gotten away withtheir scheme. I think that welfare check was the lynchpinto everything going awry for them. If they get convicted, its all gonna trace back to two worried grandparents giving the police an address to have a welfare check at.

I absolutely agree with that! But wasn’t Lori also being investigated by Arizona LE during that time as well, because of the attempted drive by on BB? So prior to the welfare check?

 

[TLG127]

Asking, if motion to reduce bail is based on according to her attorney new facts that have come to light, Doesn't the judge get to look at those facts prior to granting motion to see if they are actually legit arguments and new. If they are will allow motion to be argued but if they are not can grant motion denied?? TX u.

 

[Gardener1850]

If the bond isn't reduced this time will her attorney file a motion to get another new judge. Then, if successful, file another bail reduction motion?! lol! (It's like wash, rinse, repeat, repeat, repeat... only much uglier.)

No. She can't IMO. The rule says they are only allowed one disqualification of a judge without cause: I.C.R. 25. Disqualification of Judge. | Supreme Court
They might try to get the new judge disqualified with cause, but that's probably more difficult. Here are the circumstances where they are allowed to ask for disqualification with cause:

(b) Disqualification for Cause. Any party to an action may disqualify a judge from presiding in any action on any of the following grounds:

(1) that the judge is a party, or is interested, in the action or proceeding;

(2) that the judge is related to either party by consanguinity or affinity within the third degree;

(3) that the judge has been attorney or counsel for any party in the action or proceeding; or

(4) that the judge is biased or prejudiced for or against any party or that party's case.

---------------

IMHO the defense would have to go with the last one and that's pretty hard to prove and likely to backfire- when the judge disagrees that she is prejudiced and refuses to allow disqualification of herself on that basis, then Lori's lawyers are stuck arguing in front of a judge they made false accusations against. That won't help their case. MOO and I'm not an attorney of course.

 

[Dontknow?]

I absolutely agree with that! But wasn’t Lori also being investigated by Arizona LE during that time as well, because of the attempted drive by on BB? So prior to the welfare check?

I remember posting that Chandler Police were also investigating AC and her as of August 1st, 2019 for CV's death. I'll try to find the article again.

 

[Colorado303]

Why am I confused or what have i forgotten? From time to time, we all go back to our Prize winning timeline, right?
So based on what is below, WHO was at the storage unit in Rexburg on 22 Oct?
Chad was at the funeral services in Utah. Alex was being served papers in San Tan Valley AZ.(or do we have to ask if it was Alex, who was served the papers)


22 Oct 2019 – Funeral services are held in Utah and Tammy Daybell is buried in Springville, Utah (Tammy's Obit).

22 Oct 2019, 3:14 - 3:24 pm - A man visits Lori’s storage unit alone in the pick-up truck belonging to Alex and he takes something out of the unit (Dateline).

22 Oct 2019 – BB and Melani’s divorce is finalized (Consent Decree); BB requested full custody of their 4 children on the grounds that he believes Melani was behind the attempt on his life in early October; He also requested Melani not see the children without supervision; Melani did not show up for court to challenge custody of the children; (Court records; Arizona Republic). Family Court Case Information - Case History

22 Oct 2019 – Final eviction notice is served via sheriff/constable at the San Tan Valley rental house of Lori’s brother Alex.

IMO it was Alex in the storage unit that day. To serve an eviction notice the person doesn’t have to be present. If you can’t find them you can simply tape the notice to their door.

 

[Picklepuck]

I absolutely agree with that! But wasn’t Lori also being investigated by Arizona LE during that time as well, because of the attempted drive by on BB? So prior to the welfare check?

I believe they had an investigator watching Alex in Rexburg, starting around November 1st. JMO based on my clouded memory.

 

[Colorado303]

Lori Vallow asks for her bond to be lowered again and hires a new lawyer

I get that journalists may be new to a case, but how hard is it really to do sufficient background research to know that Means isn’t a new attorney, he’s been there all along?

 

[noassnancy]

Geez this looks kinda pricey. Lori must have lots of money!

It's pricey if you have a good lawyer (this is easily a seven-figure case for a reputable firm), but those billable hours get soft when when you hire an attorney who's in over his/her head and would love to make a name for him/herself in criminal defense. This is exactly how Jose Baez took off. Ambulance chasing sometimes leads to a high-profile opportunity. It's a transaction: the attorney offers pro bono services or a reasonable flat fee in exchange for the exposure. They turn the case into a circus, and they become a household name.

I had thoughts that Brian Webb and Edwina Elcox bowed out to save face - they may have recognized that they're not qualified to defend Lori (who is?), or they decided that this case is too bizarre, and Lori is a liability and a reputation killer.

I also considered that they weren't willing to work for free, but Mark Means, personal injury attorney, was.
And it's also likely that Lori said some crazy stuff that they just couldn't defend. We'll never know.

Mark Means is in waaaaaay over his head. I don't foresee him defending her in the long term (and certainly not after July 20).

 

[noassnancy]

No. She can't IMO. The rule says they are only allowed one disqualification of a judge without cause: I.C.R. 25. Disqualification of Judge. | Supreme Court
They might try to get the new judge disqualified with cause, but that's probably more difficult. Here are the circumstances where they are allowed to ask for disqualification with cause:

(b) Disqualification for Cause. Any party to an action may disqualify a judge from presiding in any action on any of the following grounds:

(1) that the judge is a party, or is interested, in the action or proceeding;

(2) that the judge is related to either party by consanguinity or affinity within the third degree;

(3) that the judge has been attorney or counsel for any party in the action or proceeding; or

(4) that the judge is biased or prejudiced for or against any party or that party's case.

I expect Lori's defense strategy will be loaded with religiously motivated motions designed to design a mistrial, so buckle up. If they're really crazy, and they are, they might claim that a judge is a clandestine member of Lori's religion or is a descendent of someone who is. I have some specific ideas about how they could disqualify any judge based on:

-Lori's belief in multiple lives (grounds 1, 2, 3 & 4)
-Lori's affiliation with LDS (grounds 1 & 2)
-Lori's high-profile "cult mom" reputation (ground 4)(maybe even 1, 2 & 4)

 

[tresir2012]

So will she be in court for this bail reduction motion today? Will the media circus be there again like before? And will it be televised again?

 

[Owutatangledweb]

Lol. For real though, what possible facts could he be referring to? Is he going to try and pin everything on Alex, and claim LVD is a victim? That would seem stupid. I do think something in the evidence that was handed over during the initial discovery will be the "new facts", but at the same time, I think Mr. Means is looking for ways to get her off on some technicality. I can't think of one thing that would make her look like she is less of a risk or deserves her bail to be reduced. Please, fellow WS pals, give me something to ponder during home quarantine. Share your thoughts of what these new facts could possibly be.

"Share your thoughts of what these new facts could possibly be".

Maybe she "found religion" in jail!

 

[Trouble1321075]

I absolutely agree with that! But wasn’t Lori also being investigated by Arizona LE during that time as well, because of the attempted drive by on BB? So prior to the welfare check?

MOO...
If she is a POI for any crimes prior to being married and that person has evidence against her pertaining to that crime and had that evidence prior to them being married, in that situtation I believe, spousal immunity would not apply. The prosecution would be within their legal right to call the spouse to testify on the stand as a hostile witness.

 

[Trouble1321075]

No. She can't IMO. The rule says they are only allowed one disqualification of a judge without cause: I.C.R. 25. Disqualification of Judge. | Supreme Court
They might try to get the new judge disqualified with cause, but that's probably more difficult. Here are the circumstances where they are allowed to ask for disqualification with cause:

(b) Disqualification for Cause. Any party to an action may disqualify a judge from presiding in any action on any of the following grounds:

(1) that the judge is a party, or is interested, in the action or proceeding;

(2) that the judge is related to either party by consanguinity or affinity within the third degree;

(3) that the judge has been attorney or counsel for any party in the action or proceeding; or

(4) that the judge is biased or prejudiced for or against any party or that party's case.

---------------

IMHO the defense would have to go with the last one and that's pretty hard to prove and likely to backfire- when the judge disagrees that she is prejudiced and refuses to allow disqualification of herself on that basis, then Lori's lawyers are stuck arguing in front of a judge they made false accusations against. That won't help their case. MOO and I'm not an attorney of course.

MOO...
I dont think the defense making that argument puts them at any disadvantage with the judge. I think the judge views it as the lawyers duty to provide the best defense possible which includes them attempting to get a judge who they think will be inclined to rule sympathetically toward their client. I imagine judges dont take it personally but more as buisiness as usual.

 

[Tortoise]

Could new facts be anything to do with the virus?

Chad better get his bottom back to ID if he wants to show he lives there before he is locked down in UT.

 

[Trouble1321075]

It's pricey if you have a good lawyer (this is easily a seven-figure case for a reputable firm), but those billable hours get soft when when you hire an attorney who's in over his/her head and would love to make a name for him/herself in criminal defense. This is exactly how Jose Baez took off. Ambulance chasing sometimes leads to a high-profile opportunity. It's a transaction: the attorney offers pro bono services or a reasonable flat fee in exchange for the exposure. They turn the case into a circus, and they become a household name.

I had thoughts that Brian Webb and Edwina Elcox bowed out to save face - they may have recognized that they're not qualified to defend Lori (who is?), or they decided that this case is too bizarre, and Lori is a liability and a reputation killer.

I also considered that they weren't willing to work for free, but Mark Means, personal injury attorney, was.
And it's also likely that Lori said some crazy stuff that they just couldn't defend. We'll never know.

Mark Means is in waaaaaay over his head. I don't foresee him defending her in the long term (and certainly not after July 20).

Maybe one of our resident lawyers can weigh in here but i dont think its as simple as a lawyer just deciding to dump a client because they ran out of money after they accepted the initial retainer. They need better cause than that to withdraw from the case. Also I think the state will reimburst some of their unpaid fees so they are not working for free.
The problem however might be that chad married her and she wont be considered destitude until both their reserves are drained.

 

[Trouble1321075]

I think i read somewhere MBP and BB are due in court today to decide on their childrens custody
Im not sure if that will be made public but i would love to hear any testimony given by his PI