Discussion in 'Located Persons Discussion' started by Patch Tuesday, Dec 20, 2019.
Discussing the case on HLN now.
Guess I missed it. All i'm hearing is Corona virus. IMO
How bizarre this cult is. Sweat lodge, multiple marriages and a pool party when someone is murderd, plus honeymoon and vacations when kids disappear and even more people die.
Part of that might be that they expect more to testify than they can fit in one day of court, but part of it is definitely that the prosecutor had one witness who it was going to be an issue getting there soon enough on the 18th, but could be on the 19th IIRC the discussion when setting the dates at the last session. (Wasn't that the arraignment that happened and this is the preliminary hearing? I'm not positive, but think those are the terms that apply. This is where they show enough evidence to convince the judge they have enough to move forward, right? Whereas the first one was strictly to set bail and had no real evidence pertaining to the charges, only that pertaining to flight risk.)
Justin Lum Fox 10 on Twitter
The field office location might be part of it. It's also a reasonable spot that while not as easy for the AZ and ID people as being at home would be for one of them, it is reasonably accessable to both, so a good compromise. MOO
I have 2 questions that may have already been covered, if so forgive me as this is such a lot to read.
1- Have we heard anything from husbands 1 or 2 about LVD or AxC?
2- I know this is gross but... has anyone else here thought that AxC devotion to Lori almost seems like incestous love?
The books are rubbish and it is saving people from wasting their money so it is doing them a service. It is all constant rehashing of the same stuff but by different authors. I hope people realise what the whole book/conference/podcast nonsense really is now this story has gone viral. Its fraudulent IMO.
I'll answer with a cliche. "The person who acts as their own attorney has a fool for a client."
Even if she doesn't talk there is still a lot for an attorney to do leading up to and during the eventual trial. At least in theory and attorney could argue in the preliminary hearing that the evidence presented wasn't sufficient to support the charges and get the charges dismissed by the judge. (Not likely, but possible.) I'm not sure whether can question the witnesses at the prelim, but at any eventual trial the attorney will be able to as well as presenting witnesses that would tend to exonerate her. She needs an attorney and, in fact, one of the big reasons (from her side) might just be to keep on her to keep her mouth shut. As the Miranda warning says, anything she says and and will be used against her.
It was on “True Crime Live” and Joseph Scott Morgan was one of the people interviewed. Among other things, he was asked about Tammy’s autopsy/toxicology and agreed it could take up to a year for the results due to embalming and the amount of time she was buried before exhumation. He also said that Alex’s results would be back already.
Thank goodness for the stand up bondsmen. But I don’t understand why the judge lowered her bail in the first place.
Bondsmen are refusing to help 'cult' mom Lori Vallow post $1million bail ahead of missing kids trial | Daily Mail Online
IMO, you're right, the books are rubbish. But just as with you those opinions are based on nothing concrete. If you haven't read the book you have nothing to base an honest, legitimate review on. MOO
Yes, the last session was an arraignment (where the charges are read) and a bail hearing. The next step is the preliminary hearing on the 18th.
Is LV's oldest son Colby the son of her second husband Joe Ryan? I got the impression when reading an interview with Joe's sister that Joe was only the parent of Tylee. But Colby has his last name...I wonder who the first husband was?
I think there is good reason to keep accusations made by persons related to our POIs separate from solid evidence, to weight them differently in our minds. It’s a fact that CV made those statements about Lori. It’s an important fact, IMO. CV seems to be a reliable source even from beyond the grave and his statements in the divorce documents carry a lot of weight, but they are still accusations and they do need to be proven (it’s good KW has a recording of Lori). However, let’s think about this a little more. Some things can get distorted, especially when they deal with whacky religious beliefs. I’m sure CV was floored by the strange things coming out of LVs mouth and may not have exactly understood her perfectly. The details don’t matter much to most people, either way it’s crazy talk. But it does matter to those who support CD and LV. If we are making fun of them for thinking (for example and we could use many examples) the world will end in July 2020, but they don’t actually believe that, then the hype we and the media make around the issue can prove to their supporters that we are overreacting and persecuting them. Maybe they believe cataclysmic events will transpire within a certain timeframe that will lead to fulfillment of biblical prophesy. The distinction in their minds will be really important. I’m not claiming I know what they definitely do or do not believe. I am simply stating that certain kinds of evidence bear more weight than others and if we get carried away with assumptions, it can be harmful inasmuch as it can propel the narrative CD and LV are constructing of “media hype,” “rumor” and “speculation.” MOO
Thank you! If I remember correctly that guy is super knowledgeable, sorry I missed it. Thanks again for the recap!
And with the "all hands on deck" meeting in SLC being widely publicized any FOC's (friends of Chad)/BB still on the fence probably bailed (pun intended).
It the Preliminary Hearing in Magistrates court. If the prosecution prevails the case will be bound over to District Court where she will be Arraigned on the charges.
Yes. Just a point on the devices. Also add Tylee's phone and Jj iPads digital trails, that were found in possession of The Daybells. Why wouldn't the kids still have these items rather than the Daybells?
SLC ME performed Tammy’s autopsy. But I think the FBI field office is most likely the reason. They cover Utah, Idaho and Montana and have the on-site tech resources to handle a complicated meeting such as this.
I am sitting on the edge of my chair waiting for the outcome. This meeting has taken a long time coming. Hope Lori and Chad are acutely aware of this meeting today...
The last hearing was the Initial Appearance.
The next is the Preliminary Hearing where the prosecution needs to prove probable cause and fairly low bar. Witnesses and evidence will be presented, but only enough to prove probable cause the rest will be saved for trial. See part (b).
Idaho Criminal Rule 5.1. Preliminary Hearing; Probable Cause Finding; Discharge or Commitment of Defendant; Procedure
(a) Preliminary Hearing. Unless indicted by a grand jury, a defendant charged in a complaint with any felony is entitled to a preliminary hearing. If the defendant waives the preliminary hearing, the magistrate must immediately file a written order in the district court requiring the defendant to answer. If a waiver of preliminary hearing form is used, the waiver form must be the Supreme Court waiver of preliminary hearing form found in Appendix A of these rules. If the defendant does not waive the preliminary hearing, the magistrate must schedule a preliminary hearing within a reasonable time, but in any event not later than 14 days following the defendant's initial appearance if the defendant is in custody and no later than 21 days after the initial appearance if the defendant is not in custody. Time limits in this subsection may be extended with the consent of the defendant and on showing of good cause, taking into account the public interest and prompt disposition of criminal cases. In the absence of consent by the defendant, time limits may be extended only on a showing that extraordinary circumstances exist. Extraordinary circumstances include disqualification of the magistrate by the defendant pursuant to Rule 25.
(b) Probable Cause Finding. If the magistrate finds that a public offense has been committed and that there is probable or sufficient cause to believe that the defendant committed the offense, the magistrate must immediately require the defendant to answer in the district court. The finding of probable cause must be based on substantial evidence on every material element of the offense charged. Hearsay in the form of testimony or affidavits, including written certifications or declarations under penalty of perjury, may be admitted to show the following:
(1) the existence or nonexistence of business or medical facts and records,
(2) judgments and convictions of courts,
(3) ownership of real or personal property, and
(4) reports of scientific examinations of evidence by state or federal agencies or officials or by state-certified laboratories, provided the magistrate determines the source of said evidence to be credible. Nothing in this rule prevents the admission of evidence under any recognized exception to the hearsay rule of evidence. The defendant is entitled to cross-examine witnesses produced against the defendant at the hearing and may introduce evidence in the defendant's own behalf. Motions to suppress must be made in a trial court as provided in Rule 12. However, if at the preliminary hearing the evidence shows facts which would ultimately require the suppression of evidence sought to be used against the defendant, the evidence must be excluded and must not be considered by the magistrate in determining probable cause. A record of the proceedings must be made by stenographic means or recording devices.
(c) Discharge of Defendant. If the magistrate determines that a public offense has not been committed or that there is not probable or sufficient cause to believe that the defendant committed the offense, the magistrate must dismiss the complaint and discharge the defendant.
(d) Records. After concluding the proceeding, the magistrate must immediately deliver all papers in the proceeding to the clerk of the district court.