JOSHUA "JJ" VALLOW, TYLEE RYAN, TAMMY DAYBELL, & CHARLES VALLOW: State of Idaho/Arizona vs. Lori & Chad Daybell *GUILTY*

Police seem to be no closer to finding 7-year-old Joshua “JJ” Vallow and 17-year-old Tylee Ryan than they were when this story began months ago.

Since that time, the story has gained international attention as it’s taken twists and turns involving a purported cult, dead spouses, delusions of divinity and preparing for the end of the world. Despite all the angles, and the ever-growing number of people related to the case, the facts remain essentially the same as when it was first announced.

The two children remain missing and the parents, Lori (Vallow) Daybell, and her new husband, Chad Daybell, refuse to disclose their whereabouts to police. Both have been named persons of interest in the disappearance of the children. Law enforcement is also investigating the deaths of the Daybells’ previous respective spouses, Charles Vallow and Tammy Daybell, though neither Chad nor Lori have been named suspects in those cases.

Written timeline of events

• April 3, 2018 - Tylee Ryan's father, Joseph Ryan, dies. Death ruled heart attack.
• December 2018 - Chad Daybell & Lori Vallow make first appearance on Preparing a People podcast.
• February 2019 - Charles Vallow files for divorce from Lori, claiming she viewed herself as a god preparing for the second coming, and she would kill him if he got in her way.
• February - April 2019 - Lori disappears for nearly two months, leaving her children with others.
• June 2019 - Lori's niece demands a divorce from her husband, who says she shares similar beliefs to her aunt.
• July 11, 2019 - Charles Vallow shot and killed by Lori's brother Alex Cox. Shooting initially ruled self-defense.
• August 2019 - Lori moves to Rexburg, Idaho with kids
• September 3, 2019 - Joshua "JJ" Vallow enrolled in school
• September 23, 2019 - JJ last attended school
• September 24, 2019 - Lori unenrolls JJ from school, saying she would be homeschooling him.
• September 2019 - Tylee also seen in September, but it's unclear when and where (she had graduated early)
• October 2, 2019 - Lori's niece's ex-husband was shot at, missing his head by inches. Shooter was driving a vehicle registered to Charles Vallow.
• October 9, 2019 - Tammy Daybell, Chad's wife, called 911 and said a masked man shot at her with a paintball gun.
• October 19, 2019 - Tammy Daybell dies, death is ruled natural
• October 25, 2019 - Tylee, or someone using her phone, texts a friend
• Late October / Early November 2019 - Chad Daybell & Lori Vallow get married
• November 26, 2019 - Welfare check requested for JJ at the request of extended family - police are told he is in Arizona with family, but he is not
• November 27, 2019 - Police return to serve a search warrant, finding the Daybell's gone
• December 12, 2019 - Lori's brother, who had shot her ex-husband, dies mysteriously in Arizona
• December 20, 2019 - Search for JJ and Tylee goes public
• December 30, 2019 - LE says Lori knows where her children are but will not cooperate
• January 25, 2020 - Chad & Lori are located in Hawaii, served with a notice that she must produce the children within 5 days
• January 30, 2020 - Lori fails to produce JJ and Tylee

The latest timeline in the cases of Lori Vallow and Chad Daybell - East Idaho News

REXBURG — Police seem to be no closer to finding 7-year-old Joshua "JJ" Vallow and 17-year-old Tylee Ryan than they were when this story began months ago.

www.eastidahonews.com

edited by staff to add new media link

Are Chad Daybell and Lori Vallow Daybell serial killers? Has their doomsday cult finally ended? Keep up-to-date on this bizarre case!

Keep up-to-date on this case at Crimewatchers.net!

www.crimewatchers.net

 

[RoundPeg]

So far i am only seeing Alex is in a church parking lot 2.5 miles away that night...

That's okay. We all know why he was there. Ugh.

 

[RoundPeg]

 

[Kimster]

Good luck with that one!

 

[Cousin Dupree]

Good luck with that one!

They have to try.

 

[Tresir]

Just coming to post Nate's video about the appeal - haven't watched it yet.

..

And here is the notice of appeal document.

READ: Lori Vallow Daybell's notice of appeal - East Idaho News

Lori Vallow Daybell’s attorney filed a notice of appeal in her murder case. You can read the filing below.

www.eastidahonews.com

See the filing below.

 

[Cousin Dupree]

She has no appeal to me.

 

[Tresir]

I have never looked at a notice of appeal before but that looks like a lot of grounds in there. I will just copy the grounds if I can. See 3 (a) to (o) 15 grounds plus one additional ground that did not copy (p) that was querying the validity of the $165k compensation required.

If she has this appeal lodged in Idaho, will it prevent the extradition to Arizona?

 

[GrandmaBear]

I can only assume a lot of these issues for appeal are standard and what any defense attorney would try although several are specific to Lori's mental health, the speedy trial re Boyce coming up to the wire on it or just past, and other decisions made by Boyce plus claims the prosecution asked for delays, etc.

Well it is my opinion Boyce took time for every single decision he ever made in this case to research it and consult with probably senior judges so we will see if his decisions stand up on appeal. I personally don't think the competency or mental health ones will go anywhere or that they will win on those.

 

[RoundPeg]

I can only assume a lot of these issues for appeal are standard and what any defense attorney would try although several are specific to Lori's mental health, the speedy trial re Boyce coming up to the wire on it or just past, and other decisions made by Boyce plus claims the prosecution asked for delays, etc.

Well it is my opinion Boyce took time for every single decision he ever made in this case to research it and consult with probably senior judges so we will see if his decisions stand up on appeal. I personally don't think the competency or mental health ones will go anywhere or that they will win on those.

I'm wondering how a speedy trial fits with the back and forth of mental health issues.

 

[GrandmaBear]

I'm wondering how a speedy trial fits with the back and forth of mental health issues.

I think I remember hearing or reading not all that long ago (a few months at most) that any time she was in the hospital for evals or treatment, the clock on speedy trial stops. Becuase I used to think the same, that they themselves (the defense and Lori) delayed any chance of speedy trial but I gather it can't be held against the court or prosecution for that, the clock stops or they subtract those times.

 

[GrandmaBear]

Boyce's delays are another story though. And note the defense mentions prosecution delays or attempts for time, etc. but not the judge. The judge as much or more than anyone stretched this out. As I've said many a time he had hearings to have hearings to think about hearings to hear a hearing to finally schedule a hearing. Funny how all avoid saying that it was Boyce as much or more than anyone who took this case just past the edge of speedy trial AND it got the death penalty taken off the table.

 

[Tresir]

So she is not actually appealing the convictions of murder AFAICS. The appeal is based on possible issues with the mental health aspects of the trial and whether there were errors in that process or errors with the conspiracy aspects of the trial, the closing statement and sentencing on several grounds including the consecutive nature of the life sentences with no chance of parole. These don't seem like strong grounds of appeal to me.

 

[Guess Who]

So she is not actually appealing the convictions of murder AFAICS. The appeal is based on possible issues with the mental health aspects of the trial and whether there were errors in that process or errors with the conspiracy aspects of the trial, the closing statement and sentencing on several grounds including the consecutive nature of the life sentences with no chance of parole. These don't seem like strong grounds of appeal to me.

this appeal is because as the first line states - it is her right to appeal. Nobody says it has to be strong grounds. It's called "throwing spaghetti at the walls and see what sticks" or "grasping at straws".

 

[GrandmaBear]

So she is not actually appealing the convictions of murder AFAICS. The appeal is based on possible issues with the mental health aspects of the trial and whether there were errors in that process or errors with the conspiracy aspects of the trial, the closing statement and sentencing on several grounds including the consecutive nature of the life sentences with no chance of parole. These don't seem like strong grounds of appeal to me.

Well it is in essence an appeal of the case, the trial, the conviction. Finding in their favor on any grounds can cause various things--a retrial/new trial, overturning a conviction (you are right in that sense that I don't see much that would warrant that but they'd hope for it of course), or they can come back and say such and such is true but they don't feel it would have resulted in a different verdict, etc., etc., etc. so nothing will change/no action will be taken. They can send it back to the trial judge (Boyce). And so on.

I guess they can say he abused his discretion or the rules on sentencing and send it back to be redone BUT I don't think he did. I mean IF that was the case. I don't think it's overly worrisome. I think the biggest thing or chance they have is the fact a lot was allowed re the murder of Charles, a bit said about Alex, etc. but mostly Charles. And it did I think go some beyond what it was to be. BUT I think the conspiracy and the overall plan they had (her husband, his wife, her kids, etc.) could allow that...? I'm no lawyer but it does play into their grand scheme and the conspiracy...

Seen enough to know that 401 or is it 404b rule or whatever is a big one and it is all about whether other crimes and charges, etc. or the perp's past can be brought into THIS trial at the moment.

I note Archibald didn't claim she had incompetent counsel lol but honestly he did not do much bu then she kind of had his hands tied but even then he didn't go at some things I think he could have. The toughest he got was against Audrey and that was about it. From what I know. I couldn't watch all of course but have seen recaps of most all.

 

[Tresir]

this appeal is because as the first line states - it is her right to appeal. Nobody says it has to be strong grounds. It's called "throwing spaghetti at the walls and see what sticks" or "grasping at straws".

Agree it is her right to appeal, but she is not, for example, appealing the actual murder conviction itself AFAICS. So she accepts that perhaps, especially based on her speech at the end of the trial.

 

[GrandmaBear]

Agree it is her right to appeal, but she is not, for example, appealing the actual murder conviction itself AFAICS. So she accepts that perhaps, especially based on her speech at the end of the trial.

Well, if anything else is found wrong, she is appealing it so to speak. If something major was done wrong or decided wrong, then it would not have proceeded or should not have proceeded and resulted in the verdict it did. For instance, IF the testimony re Charles' murder hadn't come in would she have been found guilty? Who knows is what this all is. Just one example. Imo appealing anything about the case is also appealing the verdict, it is appealing the case itself and trial itself and mistakes throughout or what they claim were mistakes or wrong decisions.

I think we are going to have one of those things where we are missing each other. I get that there is nothing in the appeal that says hey, the verdict was wrong or the jury got the wrong verdict. It is how they came to the verdict with some of the appeal grounds and would they have?

When Archie talks of whether the three life sentences being consecutive and did Boyce abuse his discretion on sentencing, that doesn't mean they accept the verdict, it is just another issue raised, they are all different issues and separate. Okay, if you don't find for us on this one and all the others are upheld, then how about this one, DID HE sentence fairly??

I'm no attorney but an appeal doesn't necessarily zero in on the verdict itself, it is the entirety of the case and any issues and of the trial, etc. Any or some of which can bring about an overturn of the verdict, a new trial, etc.

Like in Murdaugh, now we have a clerk allegedly influencing and pressuring the jury. So did that affect the verdict is what they are saying for one? They wouldn't appeal the verdict so to speak, they'd appeal on the grounds of jury tampering, etc. and DID it affect it? If things had been run right and no wrong been done, would the jury have come to this verdict? Who knows is the best one can probably say about that without a new trial probably with no such shenanigans. IF that all shakes out as truth.

 

[Tresir]

Well, if anything else is found wrong, she is appealing it so to speak. If something major was done wrong or decided wrong, then it would not have proceeded or should not have proceeded and resulted in the verdict it did. For instance, IF the testimony re Charles' murder hadn't come in would she have been found guilty? Who knows is what this all is. Just one example. Imo appealing anything about the case is also appealing the verdict, it is appealing the case itself and trial itself and mistakes throughout or what they claim were mistakes or wrong decisions.

I think we are going to have one of those things where we are missing each other. I get that there is nothing in the appeal that says hey, the verdict was wrong or the jury got the wrong verdict. It is how they came to the verdict with some of the appeal grounds and would they have?

When Archie talks of whether the three life sentences being consecutive and did Boyce abuse his discretion on sentencing, that doesn't mean they accept the verdict, it is just another issue raised, they are all different issues and separate. Okay, if you don't find for us on this one and all the others are upheld, then how about this one, DID HE sentence fairly??

I'm no attorney but an appeal doesn't necessarily zero in on the verdict itself, it is the entirety of the case and any issues and of the trial, etc. Any or some of which can bring about an overturn of the verdict, a new trial, etc.

Like in Murdaugh, now we have a clerk allegedly influencing and pressuring the jury. So did that affect the verdict is what they are saying for one? They wouldn't appeal the verdict so to speak, they'd appeal on the grounds of jury tampering, etc. and DID it affect it? If things had been run right and no wrong been done, would the jury have come to this verdict? Who knows is the best one can probably say about that without a new trial probably with no such shenanigans. IF that all shakes out as truth.

Ok so the grounds could still affect the actual conviction rather than just, for example, the sentence.

I agree that the Charles evidence would have to be included to prove the conspiracy as a whole (eg her husband and his wife plus her kids were all murdered as part of the conspiracy ). I suppose Brandon's testifying would also be part of the bigger conspiracy to get rid of husbands for their life insurance.

 

[Guess Who]

Agree it is her right to appeal, but she is not, for example, appealing the actual murder conviction itself AFAICS. So she accepts that perhaps, especially based on her speech at the end of the trial.

Because she has nothing to base an appeal on for the actual conviction, it seems. This is exactly what the 'grasping at straws' comes to mean here.

 

[GrandmaBear]

Ok so the grounds could still affect the actual conviction rather than just, for example, the sentence.

I agree that the Charles evidence would have to be included to prove the conspiracy as a whole (eg her husband and his wife plus her kids were all murdered as part of the conspiracy ). I suppose Brandon's testifying would also be part of the bigger conspiracy to get rid of husbands for their life insurance.

I agree on Charles and Brandon but I do think it was argued that Boyce let the Charles thing go too far and beyond the scope of what he was going to allow if I recall.

Everything they throw out there, that might stick as guessy says, can result in something or different things. As you know a new trial could bring a different verdict. If Boyce was out of line in his senteincing it could be sent back to him I imagine for review and to resentence. Etc. Or an argument/ground/complaint might be found to be true but the appeals court may say it wouldn't have made a difference in the outcome because of a, b and c which would have caused the same outcome despite the error. Etc.

It's beyond me, believe me. I actually "typed" briefs and appeals years ago and I hated that part of a job I had. They are full of legal citations, generally very long, and have to follow a picky and precise format as to spacing, indenting, margins, where the citations go, and so much more and that's just the format. They were looked over about ten times by first us, then the attorney, then another, etc.

Maybe it has changed because Archie's seems pretty darned basic to me.

 

[Mel70]

That would be my best guess and not just because she was convicted, but because one of his kids in that one interview they made sounded like they believe Lori and Alex were the master minds. I don’t know how they can get around their dad’s texts, but that’s for another day I guess.

I think we should make T-shirts "It's Lori's fault".