ID - Doomsday Cult Victims - Joshua Vallow - Tylee Ryan - Tammy Daybell - Charles Vallow - *Arrests* #68

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
I'm a bit surprised a victim's advocate didn't explain this possibility to Kay & Larry long before now.

Did the prosecution not foresee this victim/witness issue??

ETA: Who exactly communicates legal issues to victims? (In an effort to protect the rights of the accused, the rights and fairness to the loved ones of the murdered/injured seem to be lost... imo)
 
Last edited:
BeckyF said:
Thank You! That’s what I thought.
Click to expand...

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.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1641830677032357888
 
pizzaman12 said:
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.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1641830677032357888
Click to expand...

SG may be right, but it's not as clear cut as he opines. The W's are family, but in most contexts you can't class them as "immediate" family (parent, brother-sister, child), nor are they directly "victims" of the murder except in the fact that some extended family they love has been killed. The judge has to balance their desires against the prejudicial nature of testimony from them, if they are given an opportunity to hear what others say and then tailor their own testimony to fit.

If they weren't testifying, there would be no issue.

Or, once they have finished, the barriers could be dropped. I'm guessing the judge uses that possibility (throwing it onto the prosecution to call them first) as his way to thread the needle, because what's worse than them excluded would be for the trial choices to create valid issues that get a conviction tossed on appeal. Lori walking free is a way worse outcome than the W's missing some days in the courtroom for everyone, including the W's.

Maybe Boyce can find (or has) case law or prior appellate justification in a similar circumstance, that will then be LIKELY to stand up on appeal. I would wager he is looking for that, but he will want it to be strong. We'll see.
 
Niner said:
I 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.....
Click to expand...
snipped
BOISE, Idaho — 1,800 people were summoned to the Ada County Courthouse this past Monday and Tuesday to fulfill their duty as Idahoans.

Fremont County Judge Steven Boyce — who is still overseeing the case even though the venue has changed to the Ada County Courthouse — gave those 1,800 jurors instructions and had them fill out a 20-page questionnaire.
Ada County Administrative District Judge Steve Hippler said Judge Boyce, prosecutors and Vallow's defense are going over those answers this week and will whittle down the number of jurors.

Beginning Monday, the remaining jurors will be called in groups, and lawyers will individually question them.

Hippler said it's possible this takes all of next week, April 3-7.
Eventually, they'll get to a panel of 12 jurors and six alternates — which is a lot of alternates.

"With 1,800 jurors, they're getting all these questionnaires hitting all major themes that both sides are concerned about to get a fair and impartial jury: the length of the case, publicity of the case, emotional toll of the case because these are children. The manner in which they died is going to be difficult and emotional, and then you have the mental health aspect.

Fisher also said religion will have to be addressed with jurors in the questionnaire and during the trial since it's a major factor in Vallow's case.
Fisher said she thinks finding a fair and impartial jury will be difficult.

Judge Hippler said Ada County courts paused jury trials this week because of all the jurors who were called to the courthouse. He, personally, won't be trying cases during the trial because he needs to be available for anything Judge Boyce and his staff need.

There will be more intense security inside and outside the courthouse. Because it's their case, Madison and Fremont counties sent sheriff's deputies to the courthouse — in addition to other local law enforcement.

"It's really a collaboration with the other counties that are involved from Southeast Idaho and with our team and it's been a process of conducting, choreographing how this will go," Hippler told KTVB. "We're managing it by working really well together as a team. The number of people and agencies involved in coordinating all this is - it's not just the courts; it's the Marshals Service, it's the sheriff's office, it's Boise city police who's helping us with parking and other issues. It's the clerk's office, it's the jury commissioner's office, it's the trial court administrator's office. And so it's a whole army of people and agencies that are helping put this together."


www.ktvb.com

How Ada County is preparing for Lori Vallow Daybell's murder trial

"It's a whole army of people and agencies that are helping put this together," Ada County Administrative District Judge Steve Hippler said.
www.ktvb.com www.ktvb.com

​

 
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.

I cannot get the story to link correctly. It said there had been confusion about the issue, and it would be as I stated above.
 
Last edited:
pizzaman12 said:
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.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1641830677032357888
Click to expand...
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.
 
887sMtreme said:
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.
Click to expand...
What does their Constitution specify to be immediate family?
 
If 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. :(:mad:

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.
 
Caylee Advocate said:
If 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. :(:mad:

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.
Click to expand...
You have a point. Colby maybe? JMHO
 
887sMtreme said:
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.
Click to expand...

I tend to think you are correct.

Boyce has already ruled that witnesses won't watch, with the possible exception of "victims."

He has further focused the question on who is/isn't a victim, and mentioned some lack of clarity in the code as to if/when "immediate family" might qualify for such a victim exception. IOW even immediate family might not.

I know we'd like him to just usher everyone in who has feelings. We want to cater to the grandparents' wishes and emotions. But a trial doesn't work that way.

And can they even get the grandparents into that umbrella of "immediate family"? IMO that seems like a shaky thing to rule. What would that do to every other family law case in the state, if Boyce rules that one who is a grandparent is to be classed as IMMEDIATE family?

The W's do appear to have been very interested and loving. But they lived elsewhere, far away. They weren't raising the kids. They were GRANDparents.

I doubt Boyce would go out on such a limb, especially when the downside (tainted witness testimony) could have undesirable ramifications, unless he can find strong case law to give him cover. We'll see.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 169 more.
Total: 1,098 (members: 170, guests: 928)

Online statistics

Members online
170
Guests online
928
Total visitors
1,098
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
591,778
Messages
17,958,695
Members
228,605
Latest member
0maj0
Back
Top