Found Deceased ID - Joshua Vallow, 7, Tylee Ryan, 16, Tammy Daybell, 49, Charles Vallow, 62, Oct 2019 *Arrests* #65

[Love Never Fails]

Beginning to think Lori Daybell with die in a psych ward. Daybell himself will die in jail and Ron Woods and John Prior will keep the delays going. No justice for the four murdered innocents!

 

[sassyblue]

I think that office is woefully understaffed and the staff they do have is overwhelmed with a case of this magnitude. And MM's shenanigans and Prior's motions fired like bullets repeatedly haven't helped.

 

[MTW2011]

Blake mentions that is it important to note that a grand jury often hears multiple cases. She then also mentions about how a grand jury is different, and that Idaho Rule 6.1B provides, in part, the "prosecuting attorney the power and duty to investigate and inquire whether or not there are grounds for disqualification for any grand juror". And "it advises the potential juror the possible disqualification of a juror". She adds (BBM) "that the voir dire process is very different than through the trial proceedings, there is actually no inherent right under the Idaho Criminal Rules that the prosecuting attorney even has the opportunity to conduct voir dire. In this situation the prosecuting attorney did have that opportunity, but it is not specifically the prosecuting attorney has the right or duty at the commencement or presentation of an investigation. That is is large part because a grand jury may sit and hear multiple cases and each case may be different. A grand juror may have disqualification for one case but able to sit for other cases and evidence.

(BBM) Judge Boyce interjects and adds "And Ms. Blake I think that's an important point to consider....so you're indicating that, because clearly in a trial with petit (grand) juror you have a vetting of the jurors conducted by both sides. A grand jury proceeding obvi the Defense is not present and there still needs to be some sort of 'gatekeeper' function-" (Prior starts nodding his head in agreement it seems). Judge continues, "to make sure you have fair an unbiased jurors that sit as grand jurors. So you are saying that Idaho Code 1003 there is a different standard applied to challenging grand jurors....essentially vetting out jurors that may not be qualified?"

Blake says this Rule outlines specific challenges that can be made to potential grand jurors, it has 7 possible challenges. She also says the Defendant's brief specifically reference the grounds for challenge 1900-2020 (note - I may have captured this incorrectly, I think I have the # wrong) in which the "challenges are actually different". She continues "and from what the State can discern looking through caselaw it appears that a large part of that differentiation that grand jurors are only making a probable cause determination....We can find no caselaw to support that the same standards would be applicable to the scene of a grand jury."

Judge Boyce then asks "I appreciate your response. So to summarize essentially a 'lower standard' for seating a petit juror versus a trial juror?
Blake answers "Yes.....it does appear to be a lesser standard because there are other remedies available."

(may not be verbatim I am typing as quick as I can). IMO I am not sure why mentioning that the Defense does not get to question these potential jurors AND that the same questioning process for potential grand jurors is not the same as a trial juror.......I do not see how that helps the State's argument. I agree with @sassyblue that their office is 'woefully understaffed'.

 

[altojack]

Very disappointed today. Prior looked in a bad mood from start to finish.

 

[Love Never Fails]

Blake mentions that is it important to note that a grand jury often hears multiple cases. She then also mentions about how a grand jury is different, and that Idaho Rule 6.1B provides, in part, the "prosecuting attorney the power and duty to investigate and inquire whether or not there are grounds for disqualification for any grand juror". And "it advises the potential juror the possible disqualification of a juror". She adds (BBM) "that the voir dire process is very different than through the trial proceedings, there is actually no inherent right under the Idaho Criminal Rules that the prosecuting attorney even has the opportunity to conduct voir dire. In this situation the prosecuting attorney did have that opportunity, but it is not specifically the prosecuting attorney has the right or duty at the commencement or presentation of an investigation. That is is large part because a grand jury may sit and hear multiple cases and each case may be different. A grand juror may have disqualification for one case but able to sit for other cases and evidence.

(BBM) Judge Boyce interjects and adds "And Ms. Blake I think that's an important point to consider....so you're indicating that, because clearly in a trial with petit (grand) juror you have a vetting of the jurors conducted by both sides. A grand jury proceeding obvi the Defense is not present and there still needs to be some sort of 'gatekeeper' function-" (Prior starts nodding his head in agreement it seems). Judge continues, "to make sure you have fair an unbiased jurors that sit as grand jurors. So you are saying that Idaho Code 1003 there is a different standard applied to challenging grand jurors....essentially vetting out jurors that may not be qualified?"

Blake says this Rule outlines specific challenges that can be made to potential grand jurors, it has 7 possible challenges. She also says the Defendant's brief specifically reference the grounds for challenge 1900-2020 (note - I may have captured this incorrectly, I think I have the # wrong) in which the "challenges are actually different". She continues "and from what the State can discern looking through caselaw it appears that a large part of that differentiation that grand jurors are only making a probable cause determination....We can find no caselaw to support that the same standards would be applicable to the scene of a grand jury."

Judge Boyce then asks "I appreciate your response. So to summarize essentially a 'lower standard' for seating a petit juror versus a trial juror?
Blake answers "Yes.....it does appear to be a lesser standard because there are other remedies available."

(may not be verbatim I am typing as quick as I can). IMO I am not sure why mentioning that the Defense does not get to question these potential jurors AND that the same questioning process for potential grand jurors is not the same as a trial juror.......I do not see how that helps the State's argument. I agree with @sassyblue that their office is 'woefully understaffed'.

I’m following some other cases that are frustrating and I keep seeing the same comments that “the prosecution are woefully understaffed.” Then the blame goes to Covid or funding. Look, we have murderers out there and victims who need justice. Something has to be be done. RW, it’s been two years! Judge Boyce, it’s been two years!
If RW and his office can’t do the job, send it to someone who will. Our country is going straight down and it may never survive the insanity!

 

[MTW2011]

I’m following some other cases that are frustrating and I keep seeing the same comments that “the prosecution are woefully understaffed.” Then the blame goes to Covid or funding. Look, we have murderers out there and victims who need justice. Something has to be be done. RW, it’s been two years! Judge Boyce, it’s been two years!
If RW and his office can’t do the job, send it to someone who will. Our country is going straight down and it may never survive the insanity!

And totally just my opinion - but the State asking for even more time....and the Court granting it, after noting they already had "a couple weeks" is just adding to this prolonged timeline

 

[MTW2011]

Prior brings up his difficulties in getting discovery materials and that he believes, and believes he has brought up specific instances of, that he has not received all information from the Grand Jury. He mentions that it is very difficult to question details about potential jurors when their identities and details are kept secret. He mentions the voting sheets and not having the associated names with them, just the juror numbers.

Blake then mentions they are not authorized within Rule 6.5 that to give that information over, but they "think the state still has that info". She then goes on to say that if the Court orders or authorizes them to do so then they can. I think - from what she mentioned - that she inadvertently admitted that indeed the Defense did not receive this information (which Prior alleged that he was missing some information).

And to quickly resolve this Judge Boyce mentions if Prior can submit an Order then he can prepare something to allow/authorize the transfer of this information to the Defense. Now- as usual - this is totally my speculation but I think this exchange may have revealed that the State may be trying to use the secrecy rules to keep some additional information from the Defense. I dont know what that could be, but this short exchange does seem to indicate that Prior, at least in part, was correct in his arguments that the Defense has not received everything the State has. Interesting, as usual; hearing is over now. Court is waiting for the State response and Defense rebuttal before they make a ruling regarding this.

 

[Niner]

So... I have the next court date for Chad on 4/20/22 which was the motion hearing re motion for additional evidence re jury - which they obviously discussed today.

Did they mention next court date? TIA!

 

[indicolite22]

And totally just my opinion - but the State asking for even more time....and the Court granting it, after noting they already had "a couple weeks" is just adding to this prolonged timeline

Prior had a whole month and the State had two weeks. IMO the extension was granted to balance the two.

 

[indicolite22]

So... I have the next court date for Chad on 4/20/22 which was the motion hearing re motion for additional evidence re jury - which they obviously discussed today.

Did they mention next court date? TIA!

I read that the 4/20 hearing was moved to 4/19. Someone with access to court schedule/documents could probably check. It was mentioned in an order.

 

[Niner]

I read that the 4/20 hearing was moved to 4/19. Someone with access to court schedule/documents could probably check. It was mentioned in an order.

@montegrl - has the motion hearing on 4/20 moved to 4/19 - TIA!

 

[sassyblue]

Hi Niner! Montegrl is super busy today so you get a response from me instead!

• Judicial Officer
  Boyce (District), Steven
  
  Hearing Time
  9:30 AM
  
  Comment
  Motion to Dismiss
  
  
• 04/19/2022 Motion Hearing
  
  Judicial Officer
  Boyce (District), Steven
  
  Hearing Time
  9:00 AM
  

 

[sassyblue]

Looks like they combined it with this one:

04/19/2022 Motion Hearing

Judicial Officer
Boyce (District), Steven

Hearing Time
9:00 AM

Comment
Motion to Reconsider Transport or Transfer of Venue to Ada County

 

[pizzaman12]

Did I miss the part about disqualifying Rachel Smith?

 

[sassyblue]

It wasn't mentioned today....that I heard. That motion is sealed anyway so who knows if we will even hear anything.

 

[BeachSky]

Very disappointed today. Prior looked in a bad mood from start to finish.

Prior reminds me so much of Mark Geragos defending Scott Peterson. Like they have hitched their career sail to this high profile muderering monster sinking ship.
Prior, like Mark Geragos , will go home after the trial is over to his cozy abode, breath free air …as CD is shuffled off to sleep next to his toilet forever.
CD is getting played …yep like he played sooooo many people. He probably believes Prior is going to save him.
Looks to be some slow & painful karma IMO.

 

[Love Never Fails]

Prior reminds me so much of Mark Geragos defending Scott Peterson. Like they have hitched their career sail to this high profile muderering monster sinking ship.
Prior, like Mark Geragos , will go home after the trial is over to his cozy abode, breath free air …as CD is shuffled off to sleep next to his toilet forever.
CD is getting played …yep like he played sooooo many people. He probably believes Prior is going to save him.
Looks to be some slow & painful karma IMO.

For Daybell, I am sure it is Prior or nothing. If Daybell sweats over it, it is fine with me. He murdered his wife for THAT!

 

[Niner]

Hi Niner! Montegrl is super busy today so you get a response from me instead!

• Judicial Officer
  Boyce (District), Steven
  
  Hearing Time
  9:30 AM
  
  Comment
  Motion to Dismiss
  
  
• 04/19/2022 Motion Hearing
  
  Judicial Officer
  Boyce (District), Steven
  
  Hearing Time
  9:00 AM

Looks like they combined it with this one:

04/19/2022 Motion Hearing

Judicial Officer
Boyce (District), Steven

Hearing Time
9:00 AM

Comment
Motion to Reconsider Transport or Transfer of Venue to Ada County

Thanks sassyblue for all that info! Much appreciated!

 

[pizzaman12]

Prior reminds me so much of Mark Geragos defending Scott Peterson. Like they have hitched their career sail to this high profile muderering monster sinking ship.
Prior, like Mark Geragos , will go home after the trial is over to his cozy abode, breath free air …as CD is shuffled off to sleep next to his toilet forever.
CD is getting played …yep like he played sooooo many people. He probably believes Prior is going to save him.
Looks to be some slow & painful karma IMO.

I might not like the situation but he's doing what a lawyer should and he's doing a good job for his client. He's a career lawyer and he's confident when he speaks. LB absolutely struggles. It could be many things. I don't like doing stuff via Zoom, etc...It could take her out of her comfort zone. She might just not be as experienced. I don't think she did a bad job but nothing great. RW can hardly sit up straight in his chair for some of the previous meetings (obviously he wasn't there for most of the meeting today) and between RW & LB, they're either slow playing this a ton or they have to get their act together. I would imagine there would be some tightropes to be walking given the LV situation so I suppose we'll see.

I'll note that while I think JP has done a very good job defending his client, it will be interesting to see how he controls his style and the impact that has with the jury. Most probably won't handle his style well. I would think he's smart enough to know that and make adjustments. Even if he's been successful throughout the years, he's now on the biggest stage and this isn't a jaywalking charge

 

[StrangerThanFiction]

Very disappointed today. Prior looked in a bad mood from start to finish.

He ALWAYS looks like that, IMO. I’d like to know when the dude HASN’T been in a foul mood. He reeks of it in every appearance.