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

RoundPeg · Tuesday at 9:33 AM

Kimster said:
It’s never been mentioned that I know of? I wasn’t able to catch up on anything last night. And now I’m out of time so I can’t read all the updates here either. Sometimes that happens! I miss a huge chunk of what’s going on due to life.

I understand. I'm in the same boat.

Tresir · Tuesday at 10:37 AM

RoundPeg said:
I'm just wondering what happens if she more or less spirals to the point she can't be her own attorney any longer. Will her advisors jump in say "hey we have a huge problem here"?

I am just guessing if that happens then speedy trial would go out the window and she would be assigned a PD. The judge was talking about the jury selection and procedures, so i got the impression that is going ahead this week.

Tresir · Tuesday at 10:41 AM

GrandmaBear said:
Honestly, like the last time, even more so this time, he coud legitimately deny Lori almost everything for being late lol. And the State has every right based on that to ask that all be denied, her witnesses excluded, etc. He's being more than fair though. Lori tries and I think she thinks herself a lawyer, or is trying to act like one, and even though I have a poor opinion of some lawyers myself in life, clearly she isn't. It's just pretty interesting really.

It doesn't show in the courtroom but I'm sure this judge is working a lot more hours than we know with this and getting advice and help too. Another thing I'd point out is like last time the P was at the table by herself most of the hearing but then someone joined her. Similar here, there are two but it looks as if she is the only P when one watches.

It's interesting because imo they don't want it to look as though the State has all the help and she has none, etc.

Nothing wrong with doing that, I'm just saying people then think a D is being bullied, has no help or resources, etc. like the State does. It's being made an issue of these days...i
It's very public of course and imo they want it to look fair.

I recall once way back when when I attended something and I saw an LE officer sitting at the table with the P. I couldn't believe it. I was pretty naive yet. I thought HOW can they be on one side or the other. In uniform. Of course that has an effect on civilians or a jury, I mean I was thinking that way immediately. @Cousin Dupree you see, I do think some things like this, I just don't think every D is innocent lol.

Anyhow I had avoided this hearing til now but had watched the others. And I think they are being as they should be, very, very careful. I really like this judge. I was not a Boyce fan as most know but by the end he HAD grown on me. This one is not going to let the speedy trial thing she plays get the best of the system. Boyce did imo or she would have been on death row just like Chad. Although I want to make it clear he did grow on me by the end and he did do a good job at trial.

Lori is trying to play cards imo that poorer D attys play but for a civilian, well, she's trying right? To me that's as naive as I was in my 20s and we know she's far from that, I do get it. And I'm notn always a fan of our system and yes, it can be loaded or weighted one way, and yes there are dirty or corrupt ones in it. They are going way out of their way here imo to show that's not the case here and she is being treated way more than fairly. Personally I don't think she deserves it but she is going to be hard put to come up with a lot on appeal although she will complain I'm sure about the lack of time in jail, access to what she needed, only getting someone approved and pd for at the last minute, and no pen and probably about her former D attys, etc. but she's not winning the trying to turn it into her own show. And I'm glad of that.

I don't donate to dumb stuff but I'd donate to this judge's vacation fund if one was legal or there was one lol. His patience is exceptional although I can see the weight on him and frustration trying to be hidden more than in the last hearing.

I can't stand Lori but I will say this and it hurts that she is causing it but this is making courts really get on their stuff and make sure all is stellar and done right. That's not to her credit though, she is trying to make it something else, it is due to knowing the world is watching, or some of it.

Anyhow, there I go again but the entire post WAS related to this at least.

Agree with you on this. Judge is bending over backwards to help but he is also pointing stuff out to her too. I'm learning stuff too. I never knew that P got to interview D witnesses before trial, for instance.

kdg411 · Tuesday at 11:00 AM

Lori Vallow Daybell Arizona murder conspiracy trial: Day 2 of jury selection

April 1 marks day two of jury selection in the Arizona trial of Lori Vallow Daybell, the so-called "Doomsday Mom" accused of conspiring to murder her former husband, Charles Vallow.

www.fox10phoenix.com

GrandmaBear · Tuesday at 11:19 AM

RoundPeg said:
I'm just wondering what happens if she more or less spirals to the point she can't be her own attorney any longer. Will her advisors jump in say "hey we have a huge problem here"?

That's an interesting thought, never would have crossed my mind. Did someone suggest that might happen or just a thought? She seems totally competent to me, and I hate to compliment her but she's pretty quick thinking, I think Keith said something like too in one of his interviews, quick thinking, on her feet, something like that. She wasn't perfect with her words a couple of times but it seemed clear to me that's because she is feeling pressured because most of the time even though she said she hadn't even been able to read like all the State's recent filings (or something like that) she generally came up with responses to the judge pretty quickly and well, despite claiming not to be up on a few things yet, no time to read, etc.

have you watched it, I don't want to go on to you if you have but if not, in both the last two hearings there's not a thing about her that seems as if she's got any issues, mental I mean. She certainly doesn't have the years of law school the judge has, or the P has, but for a "civilian", she's not doing the worst job, better than I or many of us maybe could. I recall listening to her with Colby and I'm listening to her now (never thought I could take it again) and she's fine. All I see is someone who was taught or believes certain things and she's not some experienced lawyer.

I know if she did have such a thing happen, I likely would not buy it.

Are you thinking she intends to OR that she really could go off the rails?

I can say this much, in the other trial, that stops the speedy trial thing, or at least it does when it is the D or her having to go in to be restored to competency.

She is bent on the speedy trial thing but at the same time won't waive it to have time to get on top of things. It worked for her in a way before and I think she knew then and knows now that game, but it's not working for her. I wonder whoever advised her of such or it's something she learned elsewhere (meaning like at home)...

I thought he a bit naive for her age as far as thinking her dad, mom and Summer can offer anything to get her out of this (on the stand i mean). I do think she intends or hoped to show that Charles was the bad one, her dad advised on life insurance, etc., etc. The judge keeps saying how testimony has to be relevant. I will admit I've leanred some legal stuff in watching it or at least for AZ, etc. and I consider myself rightly or wrongly to know a bit more than the average bear just because I've worked around such more than once in life but they also change things on us without the public ever knowing so it's hard to know if one is still right or wrong on it.

Anyhow, it's an interesting thought. If she goes off the rails, again for me I wouldn't buy it, but she'd be kind of starting over too and I don't think she wants that but hard to say. I guess she'd not totally start over and would buy some time though...

Hmm. Going to stop. Before I go sideways. Just got back up. Hoping to give this one some thought honestly when more awake. I honestly think in ID they used the hospitalization, I think Means was still her atty both times, it was twice wasnt it?

One bit of a sideways thing--not entirely--does anyone recall the claims the church's atty managed to reach her in the hospital, call and so on? And some other things...

GrandmaBear · Tuesday at 11:20 AM

Kimster said:
I think they dropped the ball, too. How many people shoot and kill another person in self-defense and are only questioned once?

Gilbert has nothing to be proud of--it was them wasn't it with Charles I believe? Or was it Chandler. Man these cases. I think it was Gilbert, pretty sure. I mean they made up for it well after the fact and tried imo to remake the image of them but it was ridiculous how easily they just let it go and bought their lies. I so agree.

GrandmaBear · Tuesday at 11:33 AM

Kimster said:
It’s never been mentioned that I know of? I wasn’t able to catch up on anything last night. And now I’m out of time so I can’t read all the updates here either. Sometimes that happens! I miss a huge chunk of what’s going on due to life.

My numerous posts probably didn't help but just trying to cover that hearing.

I've missed big parts of various cases over the years both due to life, and sometimes due to choice lol, meaning I just can't take it. Kind of borderline right now actually, it's already crazy and shortly will be even more so if not already. I haven't looked, just was watching that hearing. I know Nate's putting out tons already or was.

Another thing that judge is smart about is he's giving 3 days weekends, starting court a bit late each day. Now normally I'd not like that as I think our courts are backlogged and inefficient enough, and I do still believe that, but for this case, and for the jurors and such, I'm in favor of it. I sometimes can change my tune lol. It has me rethinking a few things, like I didn't like what are now called "dark days" these days either, but with the kinks that can be thrown and other things I can see it better although I still think they are horribly inefficient and delay for way too many reasons to easily, etc

Anyhow, not sure I will keep up and not sure if I want to, but at least there will be 3 days with no court each week to do so I guess.

GrandmaBear · Tuesday at 11:50 AM

Kimster said:
They would have to approach the judge, I think. He’s the one who determined that she could represent herself.

You know we went a long time without ever hearing words out of Lori's mouth other than her PD interviews and it was awhile before they came out, and there she was flirting, lying and working her way out of everything.

Then she sat silent in the last trial until her long speech at the end. Now we've seen her in (well heard I should say) in the interview by Colby and she's been at all these hearings representing self. I haven't watched it but then the Dateline interview.

In a totally unprofessional lol opinion, there's nothing a bit incompetent about her. I think most of us would never do as she's done obviously and I think she's always played games, another thing most of us would not and never lived real life, but that's where i have trouble with mental incompetency, etc. I guess such would be it's own subject and a deep one I suppose.

It's a very good point that the just deemed her capable. And he fully treats her as if she is. I think he has cut her a bit of slack because of having to in representing herself, but that's all ithat is or some would yell (she'd hope anyhow) she is being bullied and run over by the system, etc.

You know in jail she's never had a single iincompetency issue I want to say, only during trials, but then I guess we wouldn't necessarily know, but she's been present for every hearing and went pretty quickly from ID to AZ so I'd very much doubt it...

GrandmaBear · Tuesday at 12:07 PM

Tresir said:
I am just guessing if that happens then speedy trial would go out the window and she would be assigned a PD. The judge was talking about the jury selection and procedures, so i got the impression that is going ahead this week.

I think it stops the speedy trial clock, at least it did in ID. However, yes, she'd probably have to take an atty then and not be allowed to represent herself, at least until "restored". You watched this most recent hearing I think before me, pretty darned interesting aren't they? Imo anyhow. I'm still not quite done, I went down for the count, being up half the night.

I'm not looking for anything new as it was coming too fast and furious already, just trying to finish that one for now, well will be in a bit anyhow, trying to finish it. So long as I don't look at another tab or refresh anything lol I should be safe.

Another very, very gloomy day here, how has it been there. It's just so dark and gray and just plain dreary. Doesn't help either that I hate artificial light, prefer the sun/daylight.

What do you think of her having watched the hearing?

It's interesting Chad and Prior never tried to play a card like that. The mental health I mean. And Lori and Means did however she wanted no part of any kind of defense like that. She went for speedy, he didn't. And it ended up helping them finally getting their trials split, and lost her the DP. I think it bears mentioning and because of such things, is another reason I think it's nothing but a game.

And what do you think of the judge? I'm pretty impressed although I allow for of course he's getting well versed before each thing I'd think and they know full well how public it is. He is really covering the bases as to telling her about a continuance versus speedy trial, etc. making full sure it is more than once on record that this was her choice.

GrandmaBear · Tuesday at 12:30 PM

Tresir said:
Agree with you on this. Judge is bending over backwards to help but he is also pointing stuff out to her too. I'm learning stuff too. I never knew that P got to interview D witnesses before trial, for instance.

Yeah, it's a good education lol, I suppose it comes because she is not an atty so he is explaining some things, more than we'd see in most things. I know they can't "advise" that's a big one but I never knew like if the P said something to Nate that was just stating the law, that's not unethical for instance so I'm assuming or guessing judge can do same, state the rules, the law, etc., just can't advise and yes, he is being more than fair to her.

I knew both sides can depose witnesses, not sure i knew once on a witness list they both can, etc. or need to have that opportunity again or for sure then or not.

Do you recall the part where she is going on about I think she's claiming at the last minute or just recently the P is calling some LE officer an expert? Instead of just the average LE witness? She goes on to the judge about what did he do, take some weekend course to become an expert lol? And what's his CV? Etc. Or where? I laugh a bit because they do do things like this. Meaning taking a day's training or something to bone up for a certain type of trial. I mean she knows some sh*t from somewhere in her life. I don't mean it makes them an expert, but like a P might take a course and talk to say an ME, etc. in a certain type of injury case so their questions can be good and they show the jury they themselves know what they are talking of. She got that kind of stuff from somewhere now or in her past. It was a pretty flippant remark though lol and she's I guess pointing out the system or trying to grab the people out there who might start to think it's been so unfair to her. Works in some others, isn't going to in hers imo.

Kimster above and I'd agree reminded how easily they all played Gilbert police. I have to wonder if it was playing them honestly or if she just knew they'd let it slide, and of course all the I guess "flirting" in the interviews. Heck they sat there though at the residence and bought Alex's story too I guess. That murder should have never went off as SELF DEFENSE. Are they just lazy or wanting their second donut? Seriously. Or was there some "connection". And why couldn't Charles get anyone to "hear" him?

I'm in danger of going off a bit so am stopping. Jason was an officer at one time for one, was it Gilbert? Not sure. It was AZ though. Pretty sure.

Yeah I'm getting some education too and I'd guess for you it is something too re our system. We are confusing though too as every state can be different and then there is f ed law. That's both a good and bad thing. Kind of like her, now it gets turned against itself sometimes. Or some states and politicians just ignore the fed law. That is it's own subject and I'm trying hard to behave, staying on course.

Yeah, this judge imo full well is going to cover all bases and knows do do that. I think Boyce knew or learned that too but there were two defendants there playing the game, Chad isn't in this one. H

He is being more than fair to her but think she will not be allowed to game the system if it can be helped. Jmo.

Kimster · Tuesday at 1:12 PM

I just read that Nate Eaten was struck from Lori's witness list. heh

kdg411 · Tuesday at 1:13 PM

Tresir · Tuesday at 1:26 PM

GrandmaBear said:
Yeah, it's a good education lol, I suppose it comes because she is not an atty so he is explaining some things, more than we'd see in most things. I know they can't "advise" that's a big one but I never knew like if the P said something to Nate that was just stating the law, that's not unethical for instance so I'm assuming or guessing judge can do same, state the rules, the law, etc., just can't advise and yes, he is being more than fair to her.

I knew both sides can depose witnesses, not sure i knew once on a witness list they both can, etc. or need to have that opportunity again or for sure then or not.

Do you recall the part where she is going on about I think she's claiming at the last minute or just recently the P is calling some LE officer an expert? Instead of just the average LE witness? She goes on to the judge about what did he do, take some weekend course to become an expert lol? And what's his CV? Etc. Or where? I laugh a bit because they do do things like this. Meaning taking a day's training or something to bone up for a certain type of trial. I mean she knows some sh*t from somewhere in her life. I don't mean it makes them an expert, but like a P might take a course and talk to say an ME, etc. in a certain type of injury case so their questions can be good and they show the jury they themselves know what they are talking of. She got that kind of stuff from somewhere now or in her past. It was a pretty flippant remark though lol and she's I guess pointing out the system or trying to grab the people out there who might start to think it's been so unfair to her. Works in some others, isn't going to in hers imo.

Kimster above and I'd agree reminded how easily they all played Gilbert police. I have to wonder if it was playing them honestly or if she just knew they'd let it slide, and of course all the I guess "flirting" in the interviews. Heck they sat there though at the residence and bought Alex's story too I guess. That murder should have never went off as SELF DEFENSE. Are they just lazy or wanting their second donut? Seriously. Or was there some "connection". And why couldn't Charles get anyone to "hear" him?

I'm in danger of going off a bit so am stopping. Jason was an officer at one time for one, was it Gilbert? Not sure. It was AZ though. Pretty sure.

Yeah I'm getting some education too and I'd guess for you it is something too re our system. We are confusing though too as every state can be different and then there is f ed law. That's both a good and bad thing. Kind of like her, now it gets turned against itself sometimes. Or some states and politicians just ignore the fed law. That is it's own subject and I'm trying hard to behave, staying on course.

Yeah, this judge imo full well is going to cover all bases and knows do do that. I think Boyce knew or learned that too but there were two defendants there playing the game, Chad isn't in this one. H

He is being more than fair to her but think she will not be allowed to game the system if it can be helped. Jmo.

I also noticed that she had a go about that. Of course she also says she only has an hour to do all her stuff, which I don't understand and i think you said that too so she may be restricted in her AZ jail for some reason. She is a triple murderer, after all. Did you hear when she asked about not having the stun belt if LE used armed guards? He wouldn't go with her not having the belt but confirmed no shackles or cuffs. She also managed to get in that there is an appeal in her Idaho case so I didn't know that did you?

I hate to give her credit, but she is not doing a bad job.

Tresir · Tuesday at 1:34 PM

Kimster said:
I just read that Nate Eaten was struck from Lori's witness list. heh

Yeah. The judge asked her why she wanted him and she said she wanted to question him about interviews he did. I immediately thought of the interview with Melanie Gibb that he did. The judge said that they could use the interviews that Nate has done as evidence instead (I think that's what he said anyway) so he wouldn't need to be called as a witness.

GrandmaBear · Tuesday at 1:35 PM

Kimster said:
I just read that Nate Eaten was struck from Lori's witness list. heh

Lol yeah the judge does that in this hearing I still haven't finished. He left it kind of open though as he did with a number of things, like it could be revisited at trial and then she asked if she could like call him from the back of the room if he was there, not being sure she didn't have to have him on the list, subpoena him, etc. It's a pretty fair education in someone representing self... Not that I wouldn't over taking some attys lol.

It got into some hearsay talk and whether he'd have anything to offer that was relevant, the rights of journalists to attend and more. I know you have a lot going on but it's worth a watch, I need to get on some stuff here too, big time. So just saying if trying to choose when you get a moment, I covered or tried to a lot on it but there's so much more. And it is a bit of a legal education, some of it. It is NOT dull.

GrandmaBear · Tuesday at 1:35 PM

Tresir said:
Yeah. The judge asked her why she wanted him and she said she wanted to question him about interviews he did. I immediately thought of the interview with Melanie Gibb that he did. The judge said that they could use the interviews that Nate has done as evidence instead (I think that's what he said anyway) so he wouldn't need to be called as a witness.

OMG MIME. Posted similar about the same time. You are so much better with shorter than I though!

GrandmaBear · Tuesday at 1:40 PM

Tresir said:
Yeah. The judge asked her why she wanted him and she said she wanted to question him about interviews he did. I immediately thought of the interview with Melanie Gibb that he did. The judge said that they could use the interviews that Nate has done as evidence instead (I think that's what he said anyway) so he wouldn't need to be called as a witness.

Yeah that's right and she asked if she could call him from the back of the room. I forgot about she could always play the interviews. There is a LOT in that hearing, one could never cover it all. And I just saw that part earlier lol. So much it's hard to recall all or cover but also he said he didn't see them hitting that bridge or something, meaning she'd have to show a lot for it to even happen, jump through a lot of hoops to call him to the stand, etc. She is out of her depth.

And also he was represented (nate was) by that media atty. He also said if it DID happen that Nate was called, he wanted to be notified so that he would have time to come and cross or something like that... You reminded me of some of the things, I'm further along in it now. There is SO much, a real education but not a dull one lol.

GrandmaBear · Tuesday at 1:41 PM

kdg411 said:

Really?? WOW. I'm staying off new stuff for the moment til I finish that hearing but i am reading here. Well that will shave off a lot of time if so.

GrandmaBear · Tuesday at 2:08 PM

Tresir said:
I also noticed that she had a go about that. Of course she also says she only has an hour to do all her stuff, which I don't understand and i think you said that too so she may be restricted in her AZ jail for some reason. She is a triple murderer, after all. Did you hear when she asked about not having the stun belt if LE used armed guards? He wouldn't go with her not having the belt but confirmed no shackles or cuffs. She also managed to get in that there is an appeal in her Idaho case so I didn't know that did you?

I hate to give her credit, but she is not doing a bad job.

I did not hear yet he made a decision about the belt. She definitely should have one, they don't show, and there should be plenty of guards, etc. although if they want to try to make them seem normal and not as if she's a risk, that would be understandable so the jury isnt influenced but they need to be ready to move.

Yeah there was the bit about it not being confidential with the ID appeals atty but the judge told her it was likely the atty's failure, NOT the state's lol.

I agree and disagree on her not doing a bad job. She's out of her depth but she does known some things and they have to kid glove it to a point with her. It reminds me of what we'd heard about her dad, or a jailhouse lawyer kind of info though, but seems she has been doing some jailhouse law library things too, not sure how on an hr a day but something is up with her getting only an hour imo... My gut is saying she got herself in trouble for something because again she won't quite go there or explain in full.

She could be worse, no doubt, and she boned up or has tried to on a lot of things but the large part of her stuff is trying to get the prejudicial remark, constitutional stuff in which is pretty typical D stuff when no other defense and so on.

In the hearing b4 this I think she pointed out more than once that she has sat through jury selection and one trial of hers and the years and she knows how such works, yada, yada. She probably has learned some of it from just all the D attys she's had and so on and watching. The speedy trial thing imo is a strategy and has been in both. And this judge lol is keeping it known she has a choice and COULD have more time if she wanted. Very good thing to do with them (I think Chad used it too, doing the opposite) and I think too their attys conferred. Jmo.

Anyhow I don't know that I'd say she's doing great but she's hitting on imo a lot of stuff D attys do when there's little other defense though, hate to give her credit, she is clearly asking or learning about the process, what each thing means, how it works, etc.

I don't think it's unusual for a pro se defendant to try to ask a judge for advice but I guarantee you she knows and she'd like to get him to cross that line, so yes, there's a fair bit she knows, I guess I'd agree with that.

Imo he has to look as if she isn't being bullied, the P needs to be as if they don't have way more resources than her, but he also cannot advise her WHILE trying to balance being somewhat nice and fair. And in that respect I guess she's not too bad as she knows most of this... He made a point of saying in this hearing that he cant advise her and I did think he came close in the last one I watched.... It's a big no no. Not claiming to know a lot or all, no expert, but I know that one. Clearly so does she. That would be an appeal basis right there I think. He's got a hard line to walk but I'm impressed with him, I think he's doing it pretty darned well.

Man it is so dreary out and the hunger is hitting again from the last Pred. I was so hoping it would help but I'm actually happy to be done with it as it didn't seem to do a thing as far as helping. Enough of that.

Yeah i want to get this hearing all watched before I look at another thing as I'm sure they are reporting on it, I can name some that will be there even aside from Nate, I'm sure. Guessing shows and such are coming out at breaks, just guessing.

Anyhow, I kind of look at if she's any good at it kind of two different ways. She clearly has tried to study or maybe learn from the "advisors" but again a lot of her stuff is pretty standard in what she claims and is doing. Not all of it, but some. She'd be better of w/an atty IF they gave her a good one and usually in death cases, they get a pretty decent one. Something I learned in our case and never knew prior.

Tresir · Tuesday at 2:20 PM

Right I am thinking of how she will defend herself. The first thing i remember is that Charles came in to pick up JJ and took him and put him in his car. Then he realised he had left his phone on the counter top and went back in to retrieve it. A shouting match started right outside Tylee's room and Tylee came out of her room with a baseball bat which Charles took off her. Lori told Tylee to go and sit with JJ in the car. Then Alex came out and got in an argument with Charles, who hit him on the back of the head with the baseball bat. Alex went and got his gun and came back and shot him. Lori went out to drive JJ and Tylee for breakfast and school and left Alex to call 911. LE arrived and Alex is sitting on the kerb at one point when Loree and Tylee then return. Important points will be how long after they left was LE called and how many shots were fired that killed Charles.

I am also wondering if her Dad is helping or coaching her even,

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

Eradicate hamas.

Well-known member

Well-known member

Administrator

Deputized Emu Slayer/Horse Thief Hunter

Deputized Emu Slayer/Horse Thief Hunter

Deputized Emu Slayer/Horse Thief Hunter

Deputized Emu Slayer/Horse Thief Hunter

Deputized Emu Slayer/Horse Thief Hunter

Deputized Emu Slayer/Horse Thief Hunter

Administrator

Administrator

Well-known member

Well-known member

Deputized Emu Slayer/Horse Thief Hunter

Deputized Emu Slayer/Horse Thief Hunter

Deputized Emu Slayer/Horse Thief Hunter

Deputized Emu Slayer/Horse Thief Hunter

Deputized Emu Slayer/Horse Thief Hunter

Well-known member

Forum statistics

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