Found Deceased ID - Joshua Vallow, 7, & Tylee Ryan, 17, Rexburg, Sept 2019 *mom, stepfather found* #14

[Etrup23]

Being turned off may not give location data from the time it was off, but phones attempt to call home when they're turned on. So, let's say it was last used in Rexburg, turned off and now it is in Hawaii. When turned on, it will attempt to call home to the provider. Let's assume it doesn't have service...even then, it will make the attempt and get a denial. On the provider's side, that is entered as an authentication attempt, but it still logs data.

Unless she knows how to really wipe a phone, there's a lot of data that gets left behind in fragments. It might not give the full picture but it gives pieces.

Interesting, I'm just confused if you can trace phone's and most people know that why would Dumb and Dumber bring the daughter's phone to Hawaii.. when they obviously could've smashed the cell phone and sim and chucked it. Why would LV preserve this phone, that might contain a treasure trove of data... seems so strange to me...

 

[KonaHonu]

I understand your point. But they are not in Europe. There would be flight records. There would be records at boarding schools. She is not only keeping Tylee and J.J. from family she doesn't like...she's keeping J.J. and Tylee from ALL family, ALL friends. If a picture is taken of the kids on a certain day, can't IT/Cybersecurity confirm it WAS actually taken on THAT day? (Maybe @securitynerd can answer this.) It's not as hard as they are making it out to be. They are running out of excuses. If there were good indicators that the kids are still alive, whether underground or at a boarding school or otherwise, I really don't think LE would be looking so hard into this. I don't think the FBI would be involved.

And regardless of all that, the Ws have filed for custody. That's a whole different ballgame. That is one avenue where they could get in real big trouble if they don't produce those kids if/when the time comes.

Time will tell.

MOO.

I don't think they are in Europe. I'm just saying that the fact that no one knows where the kids are is not evidence of a crime. "Prestigous music school in Europe" is legally equivalent to "secure bunker in Montana." I'm not aware of any law that says kids must be made available to grandparents, aunts, uncles, cousins, or even other siblings.

As for the Ws custody petition, does Idaho have the jurisdiction to award custody? The only Idaho nexus we have is school enrollment for a couple of weeks. That may be enough but it is arguable.

 

[mrjitty]

Yeah, I know it does not exactly work that way but the point is, the Idaho judge's orders are questionable at best.

RSBM

I think the point you are missing is what has been pleaded in court is not hearsay. It is evidence.

So were LV to submit evidence in opposition, in family court / custodial type proceedings, then yes you are correct - there would be limits on what the court would require, and the case would not be made out.

But she is not submitting any evidence.

A Court will not be mugged off in this way. If you fail to provide any reasonable, evidentially based opposition, you will tend to lose. Once orders are made against her, the burden will lie with LV to mount a reasoned opposition.

This passive "i am not telling because my freedom" approach will necessarily fail in the medium term. The Court will simply find on the balance of probabilities, that she is not providing the requisite care required of a custodial parent, because she failed to provide any evidence of such.

"I'm not telling" doesn't work in civil cases.

 

[KonaHonu]

Interesting, I'm just confused if you can trace phone's and most people know that why would Dumb and Dumber bring the daughter's phone to Hawaii.. when they obviously could've smashed the cell phone and sim and chucked it. Why would LV preserve this phone, that might contain a treasure trove of data... seems so strange to me...

Exactly, which is why I think we are jumping to the wrong conclusions.

I won't defend D&D, a term I love, but I certainly could not convict them on what we know at this point.

 

[Randocalrissian]

Do you that know Chad, think that he will eventually miss doing the podcasts, the book talks he did, the serving in the church? I mean how much can Lori "entertain" him. Life has got to be pretty boring, especially if they are followed everywhere by photogs and gawkers (which is awesome btw) even if they try to go to the beach. How long can he stand this on a day to day basis. What does he enjoy doing that he can't do now? Camping, hanging out with the guys? BBQ's with the kids? I am wondering how long he will hang in there.

I think he has always wanted to be revered as an authority of some sort. I can’t imagine he would want to give that up. But I’m also not sure he could get back to how things were anyway. He and Lori are now partners “in crime” or whatever you call what they are doing or have done. I would have thought the one thing he would miss would be his own children, but right now I just don’t know.

 

[Etrup23]

Yes.

That avenue will be a game changer when the time comes. Once Lori loses custody, then she is open to direct criminal liability and this whole charade ends.

The grandparents went back home. I'm so confused in the lack of urgency by LE/FBI/Judge, most of the people have to be reading the news, its' everywhere. What gives, Dateline is running a 2hr special on Friday. I just feel like an actual GAME CHANGER happens in a sense of urgency, and I don't feel much urgency from anyone involved. This case blows my mind AND honestly makes me believe we are coming to end of the world situation after reading all this LDS forum side bar stuff (SHOUTOUT CHAD 'THA GOD' DAYBELL) i'm slowly losing my mind, slowly..

 

[mrjitty]

As for the Ws custody petition, does Idaho have the jurisdiction to award custody? The only Idaho nexus we have is school enrollment for a couple of weeks. That may be enough but it is arguable.

RSBM

Again this is where the distinction between civil and criminal cases is key

If the respondent wants to argue that the Idaho court does not have jurisdiction, the respondent will need to offer evidence of which jurisdiction the kid is in

I suspect a judge will laugh you out of town if you try to argue the kid is in a "secret location"

 

[mrjitty]

The grandparents went back home. I'm so confused in the lack of urgency by LE/FBI/Judge, most of the people have to be reading the news, its' everywhere. What gives, Dateline is running a 2hr special on Friday. I just feel like an actual GAME CHANGER happens in a sense of urgency, and I don't feel much urgency from anyone involved. This case blows my mind AND honestly makes me believe we are coming to end of the world situation after reading all this LDS forum side bar stuff (SHOUTOUT CHAD 'THA GOD' DAYBELL) i'm slowly losing my mind, slowly..

I think the lack of urgency/search is somewhat revealing no?

 

[mrjitty]

I'm just saying that the fact that no one knows where the kids are is not evidence of a crime.

Snipped for focus.

In fact, it is a circumstantial evidential point that could point to a crime, in combination with other circumstantial evidential.

IMO there is at least probable cause here, but the main issue is, we are not sure which crime was committed.

That is the imbroglio in these kinds of obfuscation cases.

which crime was committed?

I suspect this is going to become one of the most famous of the genre

 

[Etrup23]

I think the lack of urgency/search is somewhat revealing no?

The lack of urgency is leading you to believe the kids missing for 4+ months are alive OR the lack of urgency leads you to believe the ineptitude of the local courts/LE ... .... as the Biebs would say "What do you mean??"

 

[Etrup23]

Exactly, which is why I think we are jumping to the wrong conclusions.

I won't defend D&D, a term I love, but I certainly could not convict them on what we know at this point.

I understand what you're getting at, but Hawaii has an FBI branch. Why haven't Dumb and Dumber been brought in for questioning. It's the least they could do right now..

 

[KonaHonu]

RSBM

I think the point you are missing is what has been pleaded in court is not hearsay. It is evidence.

When K says C told her X, that is hearsay. Most of what K says is in that category. It's not that I don't believe her, just that it needs additional corroboration in our legal system. If Lori stashed the kids safely away from the Ws and refused to address their concerns, that is not illegal. That could be being a good parent. It could also be neglect. We just don't know because we don't now the circumstances. If KW makes a custody claim based on that she needs evidence. If an Idaho court awards custody simply because a relative alleges that the parent has the kids in hiding the court is in error.

 

[KonaHonu]

I understand what you're getting at, but Hawaii has an FBI branch. Why haven't Dumb and Dumber been brought in for questioning. It's the least they could do right now..

Brought in for questioning for what? In the US, LE cannot "bring you in for questioning." They can request that you answer questions and you can refuse. You can also just answer written questions, which is the best option.

I have committed no federal crimes. I am certain of that. If the FBI showed up to question me tomorrow I would say "no." I would absolutely not answer any questions verbally. Personally, I would NEVER answer a LEO question unless in writing so that I had a record.

In the US almost any lawyer with tell you not to ever answer any question a LEO asks you under any circumstances. So our POIs seem to be behaving as every American should, right? It's just that most of us have been trained for some reason that we should cooperate with police.

 

[PinkPrincessPoop]

I don't think they are in Europe. I'm just saying that the fact that no one knows where the kids are is not evidence of a crime. "Prestigous music school in Europe" is legally equivalent to "secure bunker in Montana." I'm not aware of any law that says kids must be made available to grandparents, aunts, uncles, cousins, or even other siblings.

As for the Ws custody petition, does Idaho have the jurisdiction to award custody? The only Idaho nexus we have is school enrollment for a couple of weeks. That may be enough but it is arguable.

My main point is these things make sense only when they are the sole factors. They are not the sole factors. Please believe me, I do not intend to squash any and all hope that J.J. and Tylee are alive. There is always that small chance. Nothing can take that small chance away until they are found.

A boarding school in Europe may be legally equivalent to a bunker in Montana, but the reasons you had for Lori not producing the children are not applicable to a bunker in Montana.

When K says C told her X, that is hearsay. Most of what K says is in that category. It's not that I don't believe her, just that it needs additional corroboration in our legal system. If Lori stashed the kids safely away from the Ws and refused to address their concerns, that is not illegal. That could be being a good parent. It could also be neglect. We just don't know because we don't now the circumstances. If KW makes a custody claim based on that she needs evidence. If an Idaho court awards custody simply because a relative alleges that the parent has the kids in hiding the court is in error.

It depends what you mean. Lots of stuff Kay has said cannot be backed up in court. But there's still evidence that puts into question Lori's parenting. When she said Tylee would be better off dead (verified in documents), that was to a social worker and that resulted in Lori being psych-evaled. If you are presenting a custody case with "missing" children and a party has that in their history, that is going to be a pretty big blow. Maybe not enough to automatically hand over custody, but maybe enough for a judge to demand to see evidence of life - this time with consequences. Not to mention things like giving away J.J.'s service dog - this could be argued as neglect of a child with a disability. If she claims she got him a new dog, she'd need to provide evidence for that. And her reasoning of getting rid of the old dog better be exactly what she told the trainer at the time. Otherwise that will look really bad too. We could keep going on and on with things that go beyond hearsay.

While courts hesitate to strip parents of their custody, the Ws have a few things going for them. J.J. lived with them for about a year (or more?). That matters in these cases, even if it was only the first year. Ws are blood relatives, Lori is not.

I think a lot of the custody case will hinge on the fact that J.J. has a disability and it is not in his best interest to be hidden away from his parents, from society, from doctors, from therapists, from specialized education. I am not sure how she can confidently say there is an entire little society hidden away in a bunker. If there was evidence of J.J. out there going to a doctor, a dentist, or a therapist, the FBI would find it. She does not have the right to change her children's identities to hide them outside of the legal sphere.

I just don't see her producing these kids. I see her losing custody, remaining tight-lipped, and all of us still having many questions.

ALL MOO.

 

[tealrose]

The lack of urgency is leading you to believe the kids missing for 4+ months are alive OR the lack of urgency leads you to believe the ineptitude of the local courts/LE ... .... as the Biebs would say "What do you mean??"

The lack of urgency and very long hearing today convinces me that LE does not have a belief the children are alive.

 

[mrjitty]

When K says C told her X, that is hearsay. Most of what K says is in that category. It's not that I don't believe her, just that it needs additional corroboration in our legal system.

Well that is not actually hearsay depending on the purposes it is used for. K is allowed to give direct testimony of what was said to her, and it is proof of what was said, but not the truth of it. So, combined with other factors like changing the life insurance, it could be probative of what CV was feeling.

If Lori stashed the kids safely away from the Ws and refused to address their concerns, that is not illegal. That could be being a good parent. It could also be neglect. We just don't know because we don't now the circumstances. If KW makes a custody claim based on that she needs evidence. If an Idaho court awards custody simply because a relative alleges that the parent has the kids in hiding the court is in error.

BIB

In civil cases, you cannot hide behind the criminal burden of proof.

One side has produced troubling evidence. e.g loss of contact, the failed welfare check, failure to comply with a court order.

The respondent cannot simply refuse to say if the kids are safe, but raise innuendo that they might be. The failure to produce any evidence may well lead to a conclusion on the balance of probabilities that the kids are not safe.

LV needs to actually say that the kids are in hiding and provide some evidence of the fact.

The Court will not assume they are - that is what we lawyers call "wild speculation"

 

[tresir2012]

Have we considered that TD may have committed suicide? Maybe it has been discussed, I am playing catch up.

She was participating and training for a 5k run that was coming up. So I don't believe it is likely.

 

[mrjitty]

It depends what you mean. Lots of stuff Kay has said cannot be backed up in court. But there's still evidence that puts into question Lori's parenting. When she said Tylee would be better off dead (verified in documents), that was to a social worker and that resulted in Lori being psych-evaled. If you are presenting a custody case with "missing" children and a party has that in their history, that is going to be a pretty big blow. Maybe not enough to automatically hand over custody, but maybe enough for a judge to demand to see evidence of life - this time with consequences. Not to mention things like giving away J.J.'s service dog - this could be argued as neglect of a child with a disability. If she claims she got him a new dog, she'd need to provide evidence for that. And her reasoning of getting rid of the old dog better be exactly what she told the trainer at the time. Otherwise that will look really bad too. We could keep going on and on with things that go beyond hearsay.

While courts hesitate to strip parents of their custody, the Ws have a few things going for them. J.J. lived with them for about a year (or more?). That matters in these cases, even if it was only the first year. Ws are blood relatives, Lori is not.

I think a lot of the custody case will hinge on the fact that J.J. has a disability and it is not in his best interest to be hidden away from his parents, from society, from doctors, from therapists, from specialized education. I am not sure how she can confidently say there is an entire little society hidden away in a bunker. If there was evidence of J.J. out there going to a doctor, a dentist, or a therapist, the FBI would find it. She does not have the right to change her children's identities to hide them outside of the legal sphere.

I just don't see her producing these kids. I see her losing custody, remaining tight-lipped, and all of us still having many questions.

ALL MOO.

All of this

Judges are not idiots and cannot be mugged off by libertarian claptrap in relation to kids at risk

When one party comes to Court with all of the above, and the other party ....

1. Refuses to say what the situation is
2. Breaches a court order to prove the kids are safe

----> direction of travel is obvious

 

[tresir2012]

i am not sure what this would mean? most of my brother's newer Mormon family are into many MLM type businesses.... and for the most part IMO they really do not make money.

I think carbuff may be insinuating that health supplements could have been tampered with, if Tammy was taking any.

 

[mrjitty]

I guess to put it country simple, LV has not even pleaded that the kids are hidden somewhere.

So as such, the Court would have little basis to consider that option

It is wild speculation, not argued by either side.