Indictments, live interview tonight and much more!
Holy indictments, Batman!
Chad and Lori have been indicted for murder!
There is so much to talk about, but I want to acknowledge how momentous and hard this has been for the families before we get into it. I’m honored to be in contact with Kay and Larry and Colby, and Kelsee. I know everyone following the case feels a giddy sense of relief in yesterday’s announcement of the new charges. I share that emotion, but I also understand that this is only the beginning of a long journey for all the victims’ families. The charges were announced on what would have been JJ’s ninth birthday. I think it’s been easy for some to see Chad’s children as villains rather than victims, and I know many have wondered how they could not see what was going on. I’m sure they are asking similar questions of themselves. Let’s remember they are Tammy’s children too, and they lost their mother under the worst possible circumstances. I hope there is grace enough for everyone involved.
So much has happened in the last few days; it’s hard to know where to start. I want to thank Lauren Matthias for having me on her YouTube live stream last night. I know there were many YouTube creators holding lives at the same time, so thank you if you joined us. If you couldn’t, you can catch the recorded episode at Hidden True Crime. Lauren and I will be doing a short live stream on YouTube on Hidden True Crime this evening to talk about today’s developments, and then I will be joining Trisha at Websleuths for a more in-depth chat. I will be with Lauren at 6 pm PDT and hop over to chat with Trisha at 7 pm PDT
I want to start with the indictment and then move on to some other questions that have come up. The grand jury met last week and issued the indictment on Monday, May 24, 2021. There are nine counts. For those of you who haven’t seen the indictment, here’s a quick rundown:
CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT FIRST-DEGREE MURDER AND GRAND THEFT BY DECEPTION. VICTIM: TYLEE RYAN
FIRST-DEGREE MURDER. VICTIM: TYLEE RYAN
CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT FIRST-DEGREE MURDER AND GRAND THEFT BY DECEPTION. VICTIM: JJ VALLOW
FIRST-DEGREE MURDER. VICTIM: JJ VALLOW
CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT FIRST-DEGREE MURDER. VICTIM: TAMMY DAYBELL
FIRST-DEGREE MURDER. VICTIM: TAMMY DAYBELL (CHAD ONLY)
GRAND THEFT. (LORI ONLY)
INSURANCE FRAUD (CHAD ONLY)
INSURANCE FRAUD (CHAD ONLY)
The conspiracy counts list the “overt acts” that the defendants committed in furtherance of the conspiracy. There was some new information in them that we didn’t know before. Here are some of the interesting new facts:
On September 8, 2019 (the last day Tylee was seen), Chad Googled information about SSW wind direction. Presumably to determine which way smoke might drift.
On September 8, 2019 (the last day Tylee was seen), Chad and Tammy signed an application to increase her life insurance policy to its policy limits.
There were text messages between Chad and Lori about Tammy being in “limbo” and her body being possessed by a spirit named Viola.
Alex Cox researched ammunition and went to a gun range before he attempted to shoot Tammy.
Alex was located 2.5 miles from the Daybell residence on the day Tammy died.
The grand jury indictment listed the names of the witnesses who testified during the grand jury’s review. That’s typical. The grand jury proceedings are recorded, but the parties who can access the recordings are limited to the prosecution and the defense.
The prosecutor did not wrap the earlier charges of destroying evidence into the new indictment. That case remains pending, but the judge has entered a stay of that case as it applies to Lori Vallow Daybell. The maximum penalty the state can seek for the new charges is life in prison or the death penalty. The state has 60 days from the date the defendant enters their plea to file a notice of their intent to seek the death penalty. Both were scheduled for initial appearances on the indictments today.
Today, both Chad and Lori appeared for their initial appearances. Chad’s hearing was held first. The proceeding was straightforward and brief. Chad confirmed that he had seen a written copy of the indictment and had received written notice of his rights. The judge then reviewed each count and the maximum sentence but didn’t read the entire charge. They set the next hearing for arraignment on June 9, 2021, at a time to be determined. There was already a scheduling hearing set for that date in the earlier case.
Lori’s scheduled appearance was delayed by about 20 minutes. When the hearing began, Judge Eddins indicated that he and all the lawyers had been in a sidebar conference before the open hearing began. Judge Eddins said Mark Means, Lori’s attorney, had asked for a continuance of this hearing, citing extenuating circumstances. Prosecutor Rob Wood objected to the continuance, but the judge granted it over Wood’s objection. Why? Well, here we enter the realm of educated speculation. This is the first time we have seen Lori in nearly a year. She sat very still and wore a mask. We know that there has been something going on that has affected Lori’s ability to participate in her case, dating back a few months. Means requested a stay in the earlier case, which the court granted. Typically, a stay is granted when a person is unable to participate in their case, usually because of a mental disease or defect. I have several newsletters that address the difference between an insanity defense and Lori’s fitness to proceed with a trial. The questions are different. If, as it appears, Lori is not competent to aid and assist her in her defense, the remedy is NOT dismissal of the charges and is NOT a finding that she is guilty but insane or not guilty by reason of insanity. The remedy is a period of treatment to restore her to competency. Mental competency is a fairly low bar. Lori must understand the role of the judge, the prosecution, and the defense, understand her lawyer’s advice, and understand her rights, such as the fundamental right not to testify. There is very little danger that Lori will escape prosecution, but a high likelihood that her part of the case will be delayed.
The court found Lori indigent. What does that mean, and why is it important? The state of Idaho says a person is indigent if their current income is less than 187% of the federal poverty guidelines. Additionally, the court can consider other material factors such as property owned, outstanding obligations and the number and ages of dependents, and the cost of bail. Lori has no income. As far as we know, she does not own any property. Her husband, Chad, had some assets, and Idaho is a community property state, so everything acquired DURING THE MARRIAGE is considered half Lori’s. Note that I emphasized during the marriage. Chad owned his house with Tammy. When Tammy died, her interest in the house passed to Chad before he married Lori. That’s also true for the insurance proceeds he received from Tammy’s life insurance. Bank records obtained after Lori was arrested last year indicated that Chad had about $130,000 remaining at that time. I’m sure that has been eaten up in living expenses and attorney fees. Chad deeded his home to John Prior in lieu of attorney fees. Neither Lori nor Chad has income or assets. Idaho Statute 19-852 outlines an indigent person’s right to counsel. That includes the right to be counseled at every state of the matter, “beginning with the earliest time when a person providing his own counsel would be entitled to be represented by an attorney.” Usually, when the defendant attends their arraignment on the indictment, they are advised of the charges against them and advised that they have the right to counsel. If they qualify for a lawyer, one is appointed for them then. The declaration that Lori is indigent clears the way for an attorney to be appointed to represent her in any future proceeding, including criminal charges or civil commitments. Lori’s attorney, Mark Means, told East Idaho News reporter Nate Eaton that he intended to continue representing Lori. It’s hard to say what that means. The Idaho Standards for Defending Attorneys says:
19-855. QUALIFICATIONS OF COUNSEL. No person may be given the primary responsibility of representing an indigent person unless he is licensed to practice law in this state and is otherwise competent to counsel and defend a person charged with a crime.
And yes, it seems pretty vague. Attorneys representing clients in more specialized cases such as juvenile, child protection, immigration, and mental health commitments must have specialized training.
Attorneys who represent defendants in death penalty cases have much stricter requirements. Unless and until Lori is charged with a crime that includes the death penalty. Mark Means can continue to represent Lori. It appears under Idaho’s rather loose public defense qualifications that Means could be paid by public defense services for representing Lori. Before you object, be aware that the pay for public defenders across the country is abysmal. Prosecutors are usually paid more – sometimes double. Public defenders in Idaho make $50,000 - $70,000 per year. That may seem like a decent wage, but remember, they pay a lot of overhead from that salary. There is a nationwide shortage of public defenders because of this. New attorneys aren’t going into public defense because they can come out of law school so burdened by student loans they can’t afford to live on the salary. Some programs offer loan forgiveness for public defenders, but not everyone qualifies.
If the state pursues the death penalty, neither John Prior nor Mark Means could remain on the case as the lead counsel. Prior could remain on as the assistant counsel. Idaho has something called the Extraordinary Litigation Fund (ELF). The purpose of the fund is to provide funding for extraordinary trial-level services and litigation costs.
Their rules state: “ELF monies may only be used for services rendered for defendants who have been found indigent by an Idaho Court pursuant to Idaho Code or Idaho Court Rules in a case handled by a defending attorney who is on the PDC PD Roster, or otherwise meets Indigent Defense Standards as promulgated by the PDC, at the time the services are sought. The finding of indigency must have been made within the case for which ELF monies are sought.”
Next, let’s talk about Melanie Gibb, Mark Means’ subpoena, and the rumored recorded telephone call. If, as most believe, the recorded call is authentic, it proves that Melanie Gibb knew much more much earlier than she initially told police. The subpoena that she received from Mark Means is interesting. First, her reaction to being served was intriguing. Reportedly, she became furious, tried to refuse the document, and then told the process server to call Rob Wood. Why would she do that? Is it possible that she has some sort of immunity agreement with the prosecution and thought Rob Wood could take care of the pesky subpoena? The contents of the subpoena made it onto social media because Gibb left it in her Rexburg hotel room when she checked out. The subpoena is enormous. In true shotgun style, it asks for virtually every communication Melanie has had with anyone from 2018. I expect Rob Wood to file a motion to quash the subpoena as it applies to any communication he had with Gibb, which I think he will claim is privileged as attorney work product. Melanie will likely have to hire her own attorney if she wants to object to the rest. Melanie isn’t the only one to receive such a subpoena from Mark Means. Heather Daybell, Chad’s sister-in-law, wife of Chad’s brother, Matthew, received one as well.
There were some other good questions in the live chat from last night that I wanted to address.
If Melanie Gibb committed perjury at Chad’s preliminary hearing, it would be up to the prosecutor to decide whether to charge her. Also, we don’t know if she has any sort of immunity agreement with the state.
The prosecutor chooses the witnesses to call before the grand jury. Generally, the defense does not attend the grand jury. No provision in the Idaho statute allows the defense to be included, so I do not believe they were there.
People askes about calling different people as a “hostile witness.” This only applies at trial. For example, the prosecutor might call a person as a witness who is favorable to the defense. In that instance, if the judge declared the person a hostile witness, the prosecution could ask leading questions during their direct examination. It’s not as helpful as the courtroom dramas would lead you to believe.
It’s likely the autopsy reports were presented to the grand jury. I noticed Brenda Dye was on the witness list, and I know from Chad’s preliminary hearing that she works for the medical examiner.
What is the status of Chad’s house? Land transfers and estate law can get complicated. At the time Tammy died, she and Chad each owned the house in its entirety. (That’s different than each owning 50%). When Tammy died, it left Chad as the sole owner. Chad was free to dispose of the property any way he wanted. He signed a deed giving his entire interest in the property to his lawyer, John Prior, in lieu of attorney fees. If there is an outstanding mortgage, Prior would assume it. It is permissible and considered ethical for a lawyer to accept property in lieu of fees, either by having a lien against the property or receiving it through a deed. Idaho has a slayer statute. That law prohibits a person convicted of murder from benefiting from their crime. It’s not retroactive, and Chad has not been convicted of anything and is presumed innocent. The Daybell children have no legal basis to sue John Prior to recover any interest in the house. That ship has sailed. And yes, I recognize that many of you feel that’s unfair.
An attorney can write about their client’s case. It’s dangerous ground because, to interest readers, an attorney will no doubt reveal client confidences. Kirk Nurmi, who defended Jodi Arias, was disbarred after he wrote a book about his work on her case. He’s now pursuing a career in standup comedy.
There is so much more to talk about, but this email is already way too long. Thank you again for your devotion to the case and your interest in this newsletter. Please tune in to Hidden True Crime and Websleuths for more. Rest assured that I will be writing newsletters and making appearances with Lauren and Trisha when there are new developments.
