legalmomma
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 11, 2014
- Messages
- 1,798
- Reaction score
- 17,498
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I thought Judge had not given a ruling yet. What did I miss?
Thank You! That’s what I thought.From what Nate Eaton & Justin Lum have stated, they have not
Thank You! That’s what I thought.
This was 3 hours ago
NEW: I just spoke to Shanon Gray over the phone. He has filed a motion to allow the Woodcocks in the courtroom and represent JJ Vallow on his behalf. He says under Idaho constitution, they qualify as immediate family and statutory victims. Judge will have to decide soon.
Nate says he's "going to be in the courtroom" next week, so we'll see.LIVE from outside Chad Daybell’s property. | By Nate Eaton - Reporter | Facebook
LIVE from outside Chad Daybell’s property.fb.watch
snippedI can not read this article - forbidden over here - can you give maybe a 10% synopsis on this - plus the 1800 potential jurors part? TIA!
FYI - this article is from Feb. 2, 2021.....
Mot in my world either. But if the world wasn’t crazy, we wouldn’t be watching a Vallow or Daybell case anyway.I cannot imagine a universe where anyone would feel sorry for Lori Vallow.
I thought the Judge was going to release a statement today.Prosecution and Defense were to have their arguments about allowing Victims/Witnesses in the courtroom by 5pm today.
Judge will rule before court Monday morning.
Just hear on local news; will link soon.
That’s not how I read the Idaho Constitution, alas. The Woodcocks are not considered victims because they are not immediate family. Even if they were considered de facto grandparents or aunt/uncle, they wouldn’t fit the bill. This is a mess.This was 3 hours ago
NEW: I just spoke to Shanon Gray over the phone. He has filed a motion to allow the Woodcocks in the courtroom and represent JJ Vallow on his behalf. He says under Idaho constitution, they qualify as immediate family and statutory victims. Judge will have to decide soon.
What does their Constitution specify to be immediate family?That’s not how I read the Idaho Constitution, alas. The Woodcocks are not considered victims because they are not immediate family. Even if they were considered de facto grandparents or aunt/uncle, they wouldn’t fit the bill. This is a mess.
You have a point. Colby maybe? JMHOIf for some legal reason the Woodcock's are stripped of their right to be classed as Grandparent's to JJ, I am left wondering just who in the hell is going to be able to claim his remains so he can be laid to rest after these trials? I remember Kay and Larry being so visibly upset because he and Tylee's remains had never been released.
I apologize if my post is too much, but there is so much hatred and evil in Lori that she will do anything just to hurt others.
That’s not how I read the Idaho Constitution, alas. The Woodcocks are not considered victims because they are not immediate family. Even if they were considered de facto grandparents or aunt/uncle, they wouldn’t fit the bill. This is a mess.