Found Deceased ID - Joshua Vallow, 7, & Tylee Ryan, 17, Rexburg, Sept 2019 *mom, arrested* #20

Not open for further replies.
Good Monday Morning Websleuthers...Just marking my place.
I am catching up and see we are now in the LDS Temple discussion. Just my own opinion...I can totally see how this group was meeting up and doing whatever twisted ordinance work they wanted. I would think they had a pre Temple get together and said ok, you are going to do a sealing but when they give you a proxy name of someones relative you are going to actually be doing yourself to whomever . I mentioned the bar code on the bottom of Temple recommends a couple weeks ago. I am sure the church knows who was was in certain Temples on certain days. After reading and watching the East Idaho News article yesterday, I totally believe this group not just twisting a religion to their own but also made 2 kids disappear because of it. Thanks you for coming to my TED Talk...MOO
Can couples get sealed in a temple despite being married to someone else? For example, could Lori and Chad have been sealed to each other before Tammy and Charles had even died?
Short Answer: No.
Long answer:
To be a living couple (because work for the dead is done there too) wanting to be sealed you have to have these things:
1. Both have to have valid temple recommends meaning they had worthiness interviews each with their bishop and again stake president (or counselors)
2. A LEGAL marriage license either from a civil marriage in the past, or one that permits a legal wedding to take place between the two of them that very day. (Tough to do if you are still married to other people legally)
3. A sealer to perform the ceremony. This is a man who has authority in the church through his calling to perform the sealing ordinance (ceremony).

If you have been married before and are divorced, then you need to have a sealing cancellation done (if you're a woman) or a sealing clearance done (if you are a man). Deceased spouses do not require any additional work for men, but they still require cancellation for a woman.

The account I have heard does not indicate that they had a sealer perform the ceremony because they would have to show him a legal marriage license which we know they would not have had while married to other people. It's been known to happen, but it's usually tough to pull off. And it does not sound to me like any sealer or anyone with proper authority in the church performed any such ordinance. Not to mention - there would be a record of it though records for living people are not visible to any but the individual and the lay clergy their membership records are held by.

Based on this couple's track record, I would say they no longer believe that laws, either of men or God apply to them. They don't seem to think the church's actual authority matters much if they believe they are "above" such matters which their behavior indicates. Thus, I believe that they had their "friend" "seal " them in a pseudo ceremony that THEY feel is valid. A lot of what they are doing and the way they are going about things are very much outside the bounds of the order and structure of the LDS church.
In the LDS community, this wouldn't be weird at all. It's common terminology.

for me, being LDS, if an employer told me he/she was prompted to hire me, I would run the other way. This is a job. Qualifications and thought should matter, prayer is for confirmation after your own study. When I hear stuff like that, it’s a sign that this person is a little too extreme for me. Would not want them for an employer.

I’m seeing lots of questions about sealing a in the lds temple. I could absolutely see manipulation and lies happening on their end to secure a temple recommend. If they wanted to be in the temple, up until the arrest, (ruling out possible excommunication of CD) they could’ve likely gotten in due to their lying skills. They wouldn’t be the first to lie their way through temple recommend interviews. In these interviews, they are asked questions like “are you honest in your dealings with others?” “Do you pay a full tithing?” “Do you live the law of chastity?” You can look up all of the questions asked in the interviews if you’re curious. Just an example of a few.

A marriage license is required to perform a sealing. To be sealed after being divorced multiple times, there needs to be Ecclesiastical approval, which usually takes months. I am having a hard time imagining them doing some sort of secret on the side ceremony in the temple without being noticed. It makes me sad to think of, where a temple is a really special place of worship for people who mean so well. but I have a hard time believing other things they’ve actually done. So nothing is out of reach.

Bottom line, LV and CD are so about “religion according to them” that is difficult to draw logical lines between mainstream LDS teachings and what they actually practice.
In my attempting to research Lori... I feel that Lori's first three were not even Mormons... only CV seems to have been willing to change for her. I dunno...I just think LV was a renegade before she was a "devout Mormon". IMO. MOO... of course. And there are obviously people "out there" who could attest to or deny.

I just need to make a tiny point here and the distinction may matter very little to most people. So...I don't think Charles changed faiths "for her." I think he had some things he wanted to change about himself when he met Lori, and he was exposed to a faith that allowed him to do it in a way that he wanted. So I would just say that Charles changed for Charles (and that it might be more accurate to say that he changed in spite of her.). EDIT: At least in hindsight it might be more accurate to say that.
I haven't been able to scroll through all of the last few days of information and have seen people discussing a second trip to Yellowstone. Is this a theory or has there been information released showing evidence of a return trip?
Second trip to Yellowstone?? Just some of us with differing opinions, thats all.
I appreciate your posting this..for us who don't really understand. And in our LV/CD case, after reading the article, I get even more confused about this sealing. With five divorces notches on Lori's belt, and a death on Chads, how does this make sense.
"The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints announced that a man and a woman who have been married civilly will not have to wait one year before getting sealed in the temple". "Temple sealings are an important piece of the church's doctrine regarding eternal families"

Except for CV--who would have had to wait the full year before a Temple ceremony-- none of the other husbands lasted much more than a year!
And the thought of THIS "eternal family" is rather horrifying..

The policy used to be that if two people who otherwise qualfied for (or possibly had) a temple recommend and got married civilly that they would have to wait a year before going to the temple and getting sealed. Basically you could view a marriage/sealing as two parts, the legal part and the religious part. You could do both parts in the temple at the same time, but if you did the legal part outside of the temple first, they used to make you wait a year to do the religious part.

You might be asking, "why does it matter and why was this an issue?" The situation that happened was that a couple who were devout Mormons would decide to get married. But they'd have close famly members or even parents who couldn't get a temple recommend. So they would go to the temple and get married and sealed, but their parents couldn't attend, either because they weren't even Mormon or they were, but for whatever reason not considered worthy for a temple recommend. The norm would be to hold a wedding reception after the wedding, but a lot of parents rightfully felt left out. The obvious solution (get married civilly to take care of the legal part with parents and everyone you wanted there, then do the religious/sealing part in the temple right after or the next day or whatever you wanted) got shut down because of the policy making a couple wait a year.
Wishing an old school friend of Lori's would come out of the woodwork and share their memories of knowing her growing up. I cannot believe she suddenly changed in these last years - her personality would be the same as it always was. The only thing we can't take away from her is her physical looks - she is a good looking woman and I think she used this to her advantage from an early age.
Yeah me too... have always thought and stated that I think she is a bad seed.... and we have had plenty of additional discussions on what psychological disorders she may have too!!! I have honestly hoped to find old friends speak out too.. everybody wants their 15 minutes of fame!
A card carrying member is just a term us non members use to refer to those with Temple recommends. Actually, I have heard members say this as well. No insult or anything intended. And in my limited experience, I really really doubt Lori has a Temple recommend. I really doubt this.
I've seen Lori's membership record as it was transferred to Kauai actually. She IS indeed a member of the LDS church. As for an actual temple recommend? I couldn't say.
MOO- Sadly, for those who are incriminated directly or by association, seemingly on daily basis in this case now, facts and truth don’t matter, it’s about faith. Faith is the red thread that is connecting every player together. This faith has combined and contorted belief systems of several groups: religious extremists, survivalists, and antigovernment protestors. This case has gotten large not because of these beautiful missing children-it has gotten large because the disappearance of these beautiful children has turned over a rock and shone a light on these system of beliefs that has been brewing for years - waiting for instabilities in our society to justify their fears, giving them a self-righteous purpose to act.

I really commend all those that are speaking out, to the media and here on the forum. This takes moral courage. I commend Nate Eaton for the deep dive into the motivations behind this story. He is an outstanding journalist.

Lori’s parents appear to be antigovernment protestors. We can’t sleuth them to determine their beliefs. I’ve said before, apple falling not far from the tree is my thinking here. Both Alex and Lori have/had psychological issues. This stems from somewhere. Maybe Dr. Phil will talk about that Thursday.

Shout Out to the FBI. They have their work cut out for them with this case. I continue to be grateful for their faith in our democracy and rule of law.

Too late to edit. I want to give give kudos to Nate Sunderland from EIN. Well done!
No. I don't think so. It's not illegal for her to get married in most places in the US at age 16 or 17 with parental permission: Marriage age in the United States - Wikipedia
So what would be the point of hiding her/hiding the marriage?

The dog can't talk and Lori was hoping to get $2500 for the dog. She called the trainer to come get the dog at the last possible moment the day before moving. Probably if the trainer hadn't come to get Bailey then Bailey would have "run away" at a later date, or on the way to Idaho. But that's harder to pull off when the kids are probably super attached to Bailey-- Tylee and JJ would know if she harmed the dog or left the dog behind somewhere to fend for himself.


Just adding to this respectfully


"Under 18:
16 and 17-year-old applicants must be accompanied by a parent or legal guardian, or have a notarized statement signed by their parent or guardian. (Legal guardians will need to show a certified copy of their appointment of guardianship.)"

ETA: This is Idaho Law
Last edited:
Clarification please: Are we talking about a real Temple or just that tabernacle building. I guess I don't remember some of these people are somehow getting into a temple...

Well Chad was executive Secretary so must have had access to the Temple no problem. He is also a prophet according to Lori and so they could in theory have got in the temple and done the sealing themselves after Tammy's death before this all blew up.
I understand he is no longer Exec secretary so has that been confirmed on here ?
Last edited:
She hired one for Sep 19th. I wonder why, what time and for how long.

19th is a Thursday. Presumably JJ went to school though, so this might have been after he got off of school and into the evening at most.

20th is a Friday. Nothing special we know of happened that day although presumably JJ was at school during the day.

21st and 22nd are weekend.

23rd is a Monday and JJ went to school.

24th is Tuesday. JJ didn't show up at school, but Lori did to disenroll him.

Not what you asked, but when she hired the sitter on the 19th the impression the sitter got was that she was going to want them to sit JJ fairly often. Then we don't have many days before JJ appears to be gone and the sitter is no longer needed (not sure when they were told that or if Lori never explictly did anything to indicate they were no longer needed). So really we're talking 2 weekdays and 2 weekend days. If the sitter's impression was correct and Lori was sincere (what are the odds) in needing the sitter in the future, plans sure changed fast in a short time. I also find it interesting that she went to the trouble of finding a brand new sitter which sounds like a bit of a hassle and it was only for a few hours one afternoon/evening.
I want to add this to the general knowledge out here in the forum -
Temple recommends are renewed every two years. A lot can happen in that time. They expire after that point, and you have to go in for the worthiness interviews once again to renew them, but it's not unheard of for people to do awful things to not be worthy, and still have a recommend until it expires, or to even lie about the standards. Some Bishops or Stake Presidents detect that but most probably don't.

These are the worthiness questions:
Questions 12 and 13 are omitted when youth are interviewed for a limited-use recommend.
  1. Do you have faith in and a testimony of God, the Eternal Father; His Son, Jesus Christ; and the Holy Ghost?
  2. Do you have a testimony of the Atonement of Jesus Christ and of His role as your Savior and Redeemer?
  3. Do you have a testimony of the Restoration of the gospel of Jesus Christ?
  4. Do you sustain the President of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints as the prophet, seer, and revelator and as the only person on the earth authorized to exercise all priesthood keys?

    Do you sustain the members of the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles as prophets, seers, and revelators?

    Do you sustain the other General Authorities and local leaders of the Church?
  5. The Lord has said that all things are to be “done in cleanliness” before Him (Doctrine and Covenants 42:41).

    Do you strive for moral cleanliness in your thoughts and behavior?

    Do you obey the law of chastity?
  6. Do you follow the teachings of the Church of Jesus Christ in your private and public behavior with members of your family and others?
  7. Do you support or promote any teachings, practices, or doctrine contrary to those of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints?
  8. Do you strive to keep the Sabbath day holy, both at home and at church; attend your meetings; prepare for and worthily partake of the sacrament; and live your life in harmony with the laws and commandments of the gospel?
  9. Do you strive to be honest in all that you do?
  10. Are you a full-tithe payer?

    For new members seeking a limited-use recommend: Are you willing to obey the commandment to pay tithing?
  11. Do you understand and obey the Word of Wisdom?
  12. Do you have any financial or other obligations to a former spouse or to children?

    If yes, are you current in meeting those obligations?
  13. Do you keep the covenants that you made in the temple, including wearing the temple garment as instructed in the endowment?
  14. Are there serious sins in your life that need to be resolved with priesthood authorities as part of your repentance?
  15. Do you consider yourself worthy to enter the Lord’s house and participate in temple ordinances?
Can someone in the know tell me if Parrett, Chad and Lori all share the same beliefs? And, does Parrett continue to lead youths (OA)?
My take, after studying LDS offshoots for 25 years, is that the PaP and AVOW groups are more loosely aligned and not organized, than compared to say an FLDS or Kingston clan. Oh, there are plenty of other, smaller offshoots as well, mostly going for polygamy, under the radar or semi so, but in comparison, IMHO these two groups the Daybells are in are more loosely aligned via the web and at seminars and not meeting at homes or a churck 3x a week, or with any specific name of their group. So not an "official cult" per se, just cult like beliefs. (ie: End of the World happening on X-day)

Interesting, don't know if it's been noted as I can't keep up, but Parret said after chatting with Daybells that the "fight was over custody and a massive amount of money" (sp)

~Yeah, we know Lori is unhappy about getting cut out of the million... but now that she has lost her freedom, will she trade the kids for that? Or did she terminate them for spite?
Well Chad was executive Secretary so must have had access to the Temple no problem. He is also a prophet according to Lori and so they could in theory have gotvin the temple and done the sealing themselves after Tammy's death before this all blew up.
I understand he is no longer Exec secretary so has that been confirmed on here ?
Yes, they could do that... but that's kind of like holding your own wedding without anyone officiating and having it be non-legal. Does that make sense? You can certainly do that, but it doesn't make it a real thing.
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
Guests online
Total visitors

Forum statistics

Latest member