Found Deceased ID - Joshua Vallow, 7, & Tylee Ryan, 16, Rexburg, Sept 2019 *Arrests* #47

[pizzaman12]

Some may describe posy paid devices as burner phones. Jmo

Who?

In my opinion, FEW, if anyone in an authoritative capacity would refer to that as such because its simply not factual, unless they noted how stupid one would be to use a traceable phone

It's either a burner or not.

The fact they got popped with that many tells me it didn't matter...they were morons and got caught. It's a good thing because there's a lot of communication on the other end of those lines that I'm sure they're looking at

 

[Secretly a Secretary]

Such as?

ETA that seemed like a terse response lol! Sorry! I really am curious about your thoughts on this. Trying to catch up.

There have been various instances where BB seems to be more than just Lori’s nieces ex husband. Baptizing Tylee if at the age of accountability was roughly 9 years ago. I vaguely remember a connection between Charles and BB’s employment. Seems like they were very enmeshed. Not to point to anything sinister but just another piece of the puzzle curios if BB was familiar with family prior to Melani and him becoming husband and wife.

 

[CuriousQuiet1]

It's a smallish town and MM is a smallish lawyer. I assume it's one of those community business incubators with the convenience of decent WiFi, a scanner/copier, and a conference room available to those renting the relatively affordable office spaces. If it's like the one in my small town, it beat's a dining room table but that's about it.

I get what you are saying but Meridian is a town of 75,000 with at least dozens of law offices. Big compared to Rexburg. Not one law office I find on sites specifically for finding attorneys lists that address yet Means and Prior both list the same address with the same suite number? The exact address that Drc40 points out is the address of record on the legal filings?

2 defendants in a conspiracy case independently find lawyers hundreds of miles away who are coincidentally sharing pens and pencils and eating lunch together...? I don't believe in coincidences.

I also believe, MOO, it is not incompetence but subterfuge that Means gets the zip code wrong and that the alternate address for Attorney Prior in Caldwell, ID is the same as 4 other law firms yet 3 of 4 law firms at that address on Google maps has a different address in their own websites. Doesn't pass the smell test to me.

Meridian Criminal Lawyers | Compare Top Rated Idaho Attorneys | Justia

Best 30 Attorneys in Meridian, ID with Reviews - YP.com

https://lawyers.findlaw.com

 

[Michael0808]

Who?

In my opinion, FEW, if anyone in an authoritative capacity would refer to that as such because its simply not factual, unless they noted how stupid one would be to use a traceable phone

It's either a burner or not.

The fact they got popped with that many tells me it didn't matter...they were morons and got caught. It's a good thing because there's a lot of communication on the other end of those lines that I'm sure they're looking at

Time out. I’m reading through your post carefully and sticking to the burner phone idea.
A burner phone is a prepaid phone you can pick up at most stores that are untraceable. This is different than a prepaid phone PLAN. It’s simply a phone you can buy, use up, and throw away.
I think our ideas are getting a bit crossed.
ETA PLAN in the post

 

[Michael0808]

There have been various instances where BB seems to be more than just Lori’s nieces ex husband. Baptizing Tylee if at the age of accountability was roughly 9 years ago. I vaguely remember a connection between Charles and BB’s employment. Seems like they were very enmeshed. Not to point to anything sinister but just another piece of the puzzle curios if BB was familiar with family prior to Melani and him becoming husband and wife.

Thank you! And I really wasn’t being short. Just reading and posting unprocessed thoughts lol. Def another piece of the puzzle.

 

[JolietJake]

In the Dr Sievers case burner phone were used by the perps a lot. They had a code when to switch phones. IIRC, LE was able do figure out who had what phone and found there were times that when they used the burner phones their regular phones would ping from the same tower while not being used. It was just a couple of phones instead of the large number of phones mentioned in this case so I don't know if it's relevant to this case but it appears some sort of identification can happen through hard work.

 

[Michael0808]

<modsnip>
I truly, truly have faith in the justice system for Tylee and JJ. I truly do. I have faith in our system. And CD and “Mrs. Daybell”will be brought to full justice.
Be safe. You all are amazing people. Feeling grateful for the site. Back to the books.
<modsnip>

 

[pizzaman12]

Time out. I’m reading through your post carefully and sticking to the burner phone idea.
A burner phone is a prepaid phone you can pick up at most stores that are untraceable. This is different than a prepaid phone. It’s simply a phone you can buy, use up, and throw away.
I think our ideas are getting a bit crossed.

A burner would be any phone you or I could walk into Walgreens and buy with cash with total anonymity. (Minus Walgreens cameras hah)

MOST well known offenders use for 1 call, one day and dispose of (any still get caught). Which is where my confusion is here. They just weren't very good at being criminals. They were dumb. They were either lazy, over confident or simply lacked the knowledge to understand how it really worked.

A post paid would be what the majority of us have. ATT, T-Mobile, etc..

 

[JolietJake]

One thing I'd thought I'd throw out there about the lawyers in the same building, lawyers will often refer clients to other lawyers who specialize in certain areas. There can also be a buddy - buddy thing there being in a relatively small town. Perhaps CD asked MM if he knew anyone and MM may have refered the guy down the hall in his building. Just an thought.

 

[Michael0808]

A burner would be any phone you or I could walk into Walgreens and buy with cash with total anonymity. (Minus Walgreens cameras hah)

MOST well known offenders use for 1 call, one day and dispose of (any still get caught). Which is where my confusion is here. They just weren't very good at being criminals. They were dumb. They were either lazy, over confident or simply lacked the knowledge to understand how it really worked.

A post paid would be what the majority of us have. ATT, T-Mobile, etc..

I hear you.

 

[dixiegirl1035]

Quoted from above post @TheLoadedGoat: "Who imagined when we first heard about an Idaho mother who wouldn't produce her kids back in November/December that'd we would only be just cracking open the story in July?"

My wife happened to have Dateline on when they first reported this case and it caught my eye. After following the Dr. Sievers case here on WS, I thought I'd look this one up and I've been rivited to it ever since. A lot happened since the story broke including winter and then the pandemic and both may have slowed the process down somewhat. Now that the bodies have been found, things should go quicker now especially since they dropped the abandonment portion. Of course it all depends on LE and the court system. I couldn't guess how long this would have dragged on had they not found the kids.

Agree, it could have gone on for a very long time.

Just last night I watched an old episode of Dateline covering the Rucki girls who were sent away and hidden for 2 years by the mother. ( Minnesota sisters whose mother was convicted of hiding them for over 2 years readjusting well, father says ) The mother had brainwashed the 5 children to the point where they were telling the courts during the divorce proceedings that they were abused. In later years, the oldest son recanted and explained how his mother manipulated/brainwashed him etc. (the girls have been very private since returned to the father). Perhaps this may happen too in the case of CR now that his siblings have been found?

So, Lori probably led many to believe that the courts were not protecting her kids and that she was doing something about it, a la the Rucki case, and having them hidden.

Thank goodness for the Woodcock's, Tammy's sister and LE and so many others working to find those children.

 

[mrjitty]

Its also hearsay...”THE FATHER SAYS THAT ROB WOOD SAYS” About as classic as you can get

Actually stuff like this is frequently not regarded as hearsay due to rules of evidence and procedural efficiency.

First, Father may testify as to the content of the conversation and how that shaped his intentions. It may seem a subtle distinction but it is admissible to that extent - just not as to the truth of the allegation

Second, the mother may not dispute the truth of the allegation so that it is not a fact in issue - IIRC it is public knowledge she was assisting police in their inquiries.

Third, when such a dispute went to a defended hearing, the father may well have to attempt to prove the truth of the underlying allegation from the primary source. Of course it might be impossible to get LE to provide anything beyond a basic confirmation of what is public knowledge.

So yeah - I don't think this is hearsay in so far as it goes.

All of which has nothing to do with WS Forum rules of what constitutes POI of course. I mean only to comment on the legal aspect

 

[Tortoise]

IANAL, but I have a theory on Lori’s defense. It’s all IMO. Hopefully it’s okay to post.

This assumes that LE has enough electronic and/or physical evidence to male pinning the crimes on Alex a bad defense.

I’m sorry if this has been discussed at length and I’ve missed it, but the following University of Idaho Law Review link clarifies Idaho’s lack of an insanity defense, and that mental condition may be considered for establishing mens rea (intent).

https://www.uidaho.edu/-/media/UIda...hash=817B444FF49AAFF351E92E8EB7BFFE98566946AA

If I’m understanding it correctly, it sounds like Lori’s mental condition can come into it.

I think that the example on p. 18 of the PDF (p. 592 of the document) indicates that her defense could argue that she lacked mens rea to murder her children because she truly believed that she was killing zombies—not humans—so she lacked the intent necessary to commit first degree murder. IMO, they’ll likely argue this hoping to get it down to second degree murder or manslaughter. (Chad’s defense could technically go the same route.)

This sounds similar to diminished capacity to me, but again IANAL.

Diminished capacity and mens rea (vs. not guilty by reason of insanity) are discussed more generally at this Cornell link:

Diminished Capacity

Thoughts?

Interesting, but...

If she chooses that tack, as the prosecutor I would argue that she knew she was breaking the law, and breaking her own code, which was to pray for the zombies to die, not kill them. That's why she hid what she was planning to do, and had done, from at least MG. Not to mention running from police and lying to her own inner circle about hiding the children from harm.

There is also evidence she didn't want her children in Jan 2019, abandoned JJ for two months early in 2019, when he was 'light' - taking his medication, service dog's collar and iPad with special apps, told her friend April to abandon her children to join the 144K, and made plans to kill JJ when she handed back his service dog and hid JJ from his family, before she told MG that Chad called to tell her he was a zombie.

Then there is her documented behavior at the police station in January 2019. She said the 'church' link Charles had sent Tylee and Tylee's cousin was about crazy people, and she created a lie for police, MG, and Tylee, that she moved out of the house because Charles was cheating. At Community Bridges I think it's plain that she didn't tell them that Charles wasn't really Charles, or that he was in the way of her mission and that she was a god, or that she had threatened to murder him. If she wants to argue true delusion, she would also need to explain how she controlled her behavior so strategically around health professionals, police and her daughter, and adjudged her own people, presumably, as crazy.

If she truly believed Charles was a zombie, and he was planning to kill her for her life insurance, I would argue she wouldn't have followed him to Texas.

Dateline

MG: when she first went to Texas I’m like ‘why are you going to Texas, you’re trying to run from him?’ She goes ‘I was told by the Lord I need to get his finances in order’.

Nate Eaton

MG: “I used to say to her, ‘Why is everybody in your life turning into zombies? Why is everybody after you? I don’t understand.’ And she would say, ‘Well, it’s because Satan really hates me, and because of my exaltation and the level I’m exalted to, they’re coming straight after me.’

Probable cause:

"At some point after Gibb first learned this doctrine from Vallow and Daybell, she was informed by Vallow and Daybell that they believed it was their mission to rid the world of zombies. When Vallow initially spoke to Gibb about getting rid of zombies she spoke about saying prayers to remove dark spirits from the human bodies they had inhabited. This information has been corroborated by electronic communications made by Vallow and Daybell."

 

[dixiegirl1035]

IANAL, but I have a theory on Lori’s defense. It’s all IMO. Hopefully it’s okay to post.

This assumes that LE has enough electronic and/or physical evidence to male pinning the crimes on Alex a bad defense.

I’m sorry if this has been discussed at length and I’ve missed it, but the following University of Idaho Law Review link clarifies Idaho’s lack of an insanity defense, and that mental condition may be considered for establishing mens rea (intent).

https://www.uidaho.edu/-/media/UIda...hash=817B444FF49AAFF351E92E8EB7BFFE98566946AA

If I’m understanding it correctly, it sounds like Lori’s mental condition can come into it.

I think that the example on p. 18 of the PDF (p. 592 of the document) indicates that her defense could argue that she lacked mens rea to murder her children because she truly believed that she was killing zombies—not humans—so she lacked the intent necessary to commit first degree murder. IMO, they’ll likely argue this hoping to get it down to second degree murder or manslaughter. (Chad’s defense could technically go the same route.)

This sounds similar to diminished capacity to me, but again IANAL.

Diminished capacity and mens rea (vs. not guilty by reason of insanity) are discussed more generally at this Cornell link:

Diminished Capacity

Thoughts?

There was a really good post on this discussion about a month ago. I tried to refind it, but cannot remember the posters name to search for it. But they had said the same thing.

 

[mrjitty]

Probable cause:

"At some point after Gibb first learned this doctrine from Vallow and Daybell, she was informed by Vallow and Daybell that they believed it was their mission to rid the world of zombies. When Vallow initially spoke to Gibb about getting rid of zombies she spoke about saying prayers to remove dark spirits from the human bodies they had inhabited. This information has been corroborated by electronic communications made by Vallow and Daybell."

RSBM

I am really amazed not murder conspiracy charges have dropped yet. I mean there is no really hurry given they have her in custody, but i don't see how they are missing the fundamentals of a conspiracy from all 3 to murder and conceal the bodies.

The details of how each person participated is not so relevant, given they would appear to have more than enough to tie LV to an active role in the scheme.

I mean LVs active defence would have to be Alex did it all by himself and she and Chad are accessories after the fact - but how do they intend to evidence that? And it really doesn't fit well with their affair and subsequent "death" of Chads wife

 

[squareandrabbet]

That's like 80+ devices in this story.

that’s why we need the FBI. . This won’t pose them.

 

[Tortoise]

I thought he was told at arraignment no contact with victims family members. I didn't think it was hooked into bail. Jmo

It was a condition of bail.

starts around the 8 minute mark

 

[Tortoise]

RSBM

I am really amazed not murder conspiracy charges have dropped yet. I mean there is no really hurry given they have her in custody, but i don't see how they are missing the fundamentals of a conspiracy from all 3 to murder and conceal the bodies.

The details of how each person participated is not so relevant, given they would appear to have more than enough to tie LV to an active role in the scheme.

I mean LVs active defence would have to be Alex did it all by himself and she and Chad are accessories after the fact - but how do they intend to evidence that? And it really doesn't fit well with their affair and subsequent "death" of Chads wife

I think they're just dotting their i's. If the defense demands a trial and the processing of evidence isn't complete yet. The children's autopsies for example.

 

[Nikynoo]

Actually stuff like this is frequently not regarded as hearsay due to rules of evidence and procedural efficiency.

First, Father may testify as to the content of the conversation and how that shaped his intentions. It may seem a subtle distinction but it is admissible to that extent - just not as to the truth of the allegation

Second, the mother may not dispute the truth of the allegation so that it is not a fact in issue - IIRC it is public knowledge she was assisting police in their inquiries.

Third, when such a dispute went to a defended hearing, the father may well have to attempt to prove the truth of the underlying allegation from the primary source. Of course it might be impossible to get LE to provide anything beyond a basic confirmation of what is public knowledge.

So yeah - I don't think this is hearsay in so far as it goes.

All of which has nothing to do with WS Forum rules of what constitutes POI of course. I mean only to comment on the legal aspect

Just jumping off our post @mrjitty . This document posted by Justin at Fox10 news states that MP is a POI in the BB shooting only. MP is not stated to be a POI in any other case (afaik).

Justin Lum Fox 10 Phoenix

 

[Nikynoo]

It was a condition of bail.

starts around the 8 minute mark

Does that mean if its a condition of bail, it only applies if Chad is bailed? i.e. it doesn't apply if no bail is granted.