In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.

lori vallow in court

spasmcreeksrunspasmcreeksrun Member Posts: 1,755 ✭✭✭
and laughing and smiling and all made up like she was on candid camera  ....... and the judge reduced her bail from $5M  down to $1M and ordered an ankle monitor.....ohh the horror ??????...she disappears kids, flees off to hawaii, and they finally bring back to court where she says NOTHING and the "judge" cuts her a ton of slack.....for NOTHING...from the supreme court down to the local level our "justice" system is a disarrayed failure........

Comments

  • Don McManusDon McManus Member Posts: 23,695 ✭✭✭✭

    Is there a crime that has been committed?

    Freedom and a submissive populace cannot co-exist.

    Brad Steele
  • notnownotnow Member Posts: 1,858 ✭✭✭
    I haven't heard what she was charged with.  Let's face it, they're a weird bunch. With a pile of bodies behind them.
  • GrasshopperGrasshopper Member Posts: 17,042 ✭✭✭✭
      Crime?, yea, abandoned children? She says that the girl died? a year ago and no trace of either? Yea, something is rotten in Denmark, for sure.  All you have to do is produce the children to see if they are in a safe place and not in Heaven like I suspect.
  • Don McManusDon McManus Member Posts: 23,695 ✭✭✭✭

    I’ve looked, but do not see where she has said her daughter died. A link would be worth reading. A relative says the kids are safe, and if tru, abandonment is a false charge. After having observed what was done at Ruby Ridge and then at Waco, I am very hesitant to jump on board when people are railroaded for what is perceived as unseemly beliefs. As of now, there is zero evidence that she has done anything. That may change, and if it does, my opinion will change with the facts.

    Freedom and a submissive populace cannot co-exist.

    Brad Steele
  • allen griggsallen griggs Member Posts: 35,693 ✭✭✭✭
    Something's rotten in Denmark.  This is a case where, we need a powerful government to disclose the sordid facts.
  • GrasshopperGrasshopper Member Posts: 17,042 ✭✭✭✭
      Don M. the "media" said that is what she replied in court, just heard that on ABC, yes, I know, the "news" but that is what they reported once. Just tell the judge where the kids are and proceed from there.
  • Rocky RaabRocky Raab Member Posts: 14,502 ✭✭✭✭
    This is big news here in Utah/Idaho, obviously. The whole thing stinks. She and hubby are playing the "dindunuffin" game thinking that silence will protect them. In truth, it's their stubborn silence which raises all the alarm hairs on the necks of the police. It's obvious what everyone fears, and the more the cops dig, the weirder and more suspicious the whole thing gets.
    I may be a bit crazy - but I didn't drive myself.
  • Don McManusDon McManus Member Posts: 23,695 ✭✭✭✭
    edited March 2020
    Where does the Constitution state that we have to produce our children to government for inspection.  The 4th Amendment demands that probable cause exist.  Is the fact that she will not produce her children to her estranged family probable cause?  A slippery slope to be sure.  

    I guarantee to anyone that if the children are dead, they will not become any deader in the next month, year or decade.  Likewise, if they are safe, they are very likely to remain so.  The case started when estranged family members demanded a wellness check on the children, prompted in large degree because they believed Wallow's faith choices constituted a danger to the child.  We have seen where government intrudes upon faith based decisions made by parents regarding medical care and gender orientation.  Some are justified, I believe.  Those that are justified are when there is a demonstrable danger to the health of the children.

    This condition does not exist in this case.  While there is some justification to be concerned, there is not, IMO, a Constitutionally based and demonstrable probable cause for her being charged.  $ 1,000,000.00 bond because you refuse to produce your children so that a group of angry people who disagree with your religious beliefs can take them from you.

    As noted, if actual evidence comes to light, I am open to the evolution of what I believe.  I will not jump on the bandwagon of religious bigotry just because I think someone is a bit off-kilter.
    Freedom and a submissive populace cannot co-exist.

    Brad Steele
  • JunkballerJunkballer Member Posts: 9,309 ✭✭✭✭
    A little backroom waterboarding would answer a lot of questions......fast   ;), despite John McCains personal feelings on whether you like it or not, there's times for it.

    "Never do wrong to make a friend----or to keep one".....Robert E. Lee

  • spasmcreeksrunspasmcreeksrun Member Posts: 1,755 ✭✭✭
    DM ....i doubt the kids grandparents share your beliefs
  • bpostbpost Member Posts: 32,669 ✭✭✭✭
    WTH happened to the presumption of innocent until PROVEN guilty?  WTH happened to the right to remain silent and a few other pesky things in the 5th Amendment?  She has no obligation to help prosecute herself.
  • spasmcreeksrunspasmcreeksrun Member Posts: 1,755 ✭✭✭
    all she was asked was to show the court the kids were OK.....????? ....
  • Don McManusDon McManus Member Posts: 23,695 ✭✭✭✭

    They certainly don’t share Vallow’s.


    I am uncertain how the grandparents beliefs matter from a legal standpoint, however.

    Freedom and a submissive populace cannot co-exist.

    Brad Steele
  • bpostbpost Member Posts: 32,669 ✭✭✭✭
    all she was asked was to show the court the kids were OK.....????? ....

    Yup, and under our system, as flawed as it is she/they do not have to answer.  Right, wrong or indifferent that is our system.  In this particular case it STINKS but any deviation from it hurts all of us.
  • spasmcreeksrunspasmcreeksrun Member Posts: 1,755 ✭✭✭
    many years ago in our small population county in the neighboring town several had noticed that one small boy seemed absent so talk grew and finally a welfare check by police happened (do not remember by what "legal" means) and they found the parents had kept the child locked in a small closet for over a year.....you can bloviate all you want about legal rights and have no cognizance of the situation till it happens in your family....
  • Rocky RaabRocky Raab Member Posts: 14,502 ✭✭✭✭
    That's the crux of it, spas. We aren't talking about a missing BIL Brucie or a lost uncle Lance. When it comes to minor children, it is a different issue altogether. Their legal rights trump those of adults supposedly responsible for them.
    I may be a bit crazy - but I didn't drive myself.
  • Locust ForkLocust Fork Member Posts: 32,082 ✭✭✭✭
    One of the podcasts I listened to covered a bit of this.....she was with a guy that was preaching the end of times and had a religious cult following.    One of her friends in Hawaii said she told her that she was rather see her kids die before the end of days came.     She is a total evil nut job for sure. 
    LOCUST FORK CURRENT AUCTIONS: https://www.gunbroker.com/All/search?Sort=13&IncludeSellers=618902&PageSize=48 Listings added every Thursday! We do consignments, contact us at mckaygunsales@gmail.com
  • dpmuledpmule Member Posts: 6,746 ✭✭✭✭

    So Madison county and Rexburg proper is just up the road from us by 15 miles.

    We know people who work at the jail and who are Deputies, word on the street according to My Bride, is that the women inmates currently incarcerated had made comments to the effect of “ when she gets in here, we will find out where those kids are”.

    So this kind of talk may have swayed the new to his post judge to decide to lower the bail to a somewhat affordable level and require ankle jewelry to prevent anticipated harm to her in general population?

    Everyone locally feels if the judge was that worried about her, he should have put her in solitary.

    Who says a million dollar bond and ankle jewelry will keep her from running again.

    The entire surrounding communities only can pray the the kids are stashed somewhere and at least alive.

    This is one strange event.

    Have any of you followed the disappearance of DeOrr Kunz, the two year old local boy who disappeared on 10-July-2015?

    This case smells similarly.

    Mule

  • GrasshopperGrasshopper Member Posts: 17,042 ✭✭✭✭
      The lastest husband of the cult has stated the world will end in July of this year. They both have several people murdered around them, he married her after his wife died in her sleep? within 2 weeks,, her 4rth husband died under circumstances, her two children are missing and she explains nothing as to there whereabouts, so, as D.M. said, let her go, nothing to see here. 
  • Don McManusDon McManus Member Posts: 23,695 ✭✭✭✭
    I do not believe I have ever even hinted that there is nothing to see here.

    This is obviously bizarre, but at this point, there is no evidence of the crime for which she is being charged.
    Freedom and a submissive populace cannot co-exist.

    Brad Steele
  • GrasshopperGrasshopper Member Posts: 17,042 ✭✭✭✭
      So if all of a sudden you have kids that are nowhere to be found, friend asks you where they are at and you say nothing, gone for months, somewhere DCFS would have to become involved to see the wellness of the children? I have seen this with the DCFS many times as a foster parent but maybe I am totally wrong here.
  • Don McManusDon McManus Member Posts: 23,695 ✭✭✭✭
    I don't know either, grasshopper.  
    There is no evidence that the children have been harmed, abandoned or in danger.  She is obviously a bit different, and may be simply hiding them from an estranged family who may try to take them from her were she to present them.  

    Or they may be dead.

    From every report I have read, she is not being charged with violating a custody order, denying visitation or anything of the kind.  She is being charged with child abandonment without any evidence what-so-ever that she abandoned her children.  

    They may simply be in a safe house maintained by her church.

    Or they may be dead.

    We don't know, but we don't understand or agree with her belief system, so we throw her in jail.
    Freedom and a submissive populace cannot co-exist.

    Brad Steele
  • spasmcreeksrunspasmcreeksrun Member Posts: 1,755 ✭✭✭
    she is charged with 2 counts of felony child desertion & non support of children, misdemeanor resisting, obstructing and officer, solicitation of a crime, and contempt of court......but Don believes in her....he may put up the bail
  • dpmuledpmule Member Posts: 6,746 ✭✭✭✭
    Article says two local Bail bond outfits don't want her business.
    i find that amusing. They must either figure she's a flight risk or more likely they are doing it on principle. 
    I vote the latter.

    Mule
  • Don McManusDon McManus Member Posts: 23,695 ✭✭✭✭
    edited March 2020
    she is charged with 2 counts of felony child desertion & non support of children, misdemeanor resisting, obstructing and officer, solicitation of a crime, and contempt of court......but Don believes in her....he may put up the bail
    Since we do not know where the children are, desertion and non-support are mere speculation.  Both are possible, but are they probable?  Probable is the standard.

    We do not know where the children are yet we jump to the conclusion that she abandoned them because it is possible.

    We do not know where the children are yet we jump to the conclusion that she is not seeing to their support because it is possible.

    It is possible she ate them.  Why not charge her with cannibalism?



      
    Freedom and a submissive populace cannot co-exist.

    Brad Steele
  • Mr. PerfectMr. Perfect Member, Moderator Posts: 66,437 ******

    Is there a crime that has been committed?


    There are children under 18 years of age missing, numerous dead adults in their wake....
    Are you sure there isn't a crime which has been committed?????
    Seems to me, the odds are better there has been a crime committed than not.
    Waterboard her!!!!

    Good to see the presumption of innocence is alive and well.
    Some will die in hot pursuit
    And fiery auto crashes
    Some will die in hot pursuit
    While sifting through my ashes
    Some will fall in love with life
    And drink it from a fountain
    That is pouring like an avalanche
    Coming down the mountain
  • spasmcreeksrunspasmcreeksrun Member Posts: 1,755 ✭✭✭
    the presumption of common sense has died
  • Don McManusDon McManus Member Posts: 23,695 ✭✭✭✭

    The man that wrote ‘Common Sense’ would no doubt choose to error on the side of individual liberty over collectivist presumptive prosecution. So while you are correct, your meaning may be different than would be Mr. Paine’s.

    Freedom and a submissive populace cannot co-exist.

    Brad Steele
  • Mr. PerfectMr. Perfect Member, Moderator Posts: 66,437 ******
    the presumption of common sense has died

    If it turns out her kids are alive and well, will the arrest and incarceration have been justified?
    Some will die in hot pursuit
    And fiery auto crashes
    Some will die in hot pursuit
    While sifting through my ashes
    Some will fall in love with life
    And drink it from a fountain
    That is pouring like an avalanche
    Coming down the mountain
  • Rocky RaabRocky Raab Member Posts: 14,502 ✭✭✭✭
    Don, the logical conclusion of your position would be that no one could be arrested for anything until they've been convicted of it - which is ludicrous.
    The fact is that Ms Vallow has had numerous means to verify the location and condition of those kids - through her attorney as one example - and have it remain in complete confidence. That she has not taken any of those opportunities provides the court with probable cause. I'm not a lawyer, but that's how I see it.
    I may be a bit crazy - but I didn't drive myself.
  • Don McManusDon McManus Member Posts: 23,695 ✭✭✭✭
    Don, the logical conclusion of your position would be that no one could be arrested for anything until they've been convicted of it - which is ludicrous.
    The fact is that Ms Vallow has had numerous means to verify the location and condition of those kids - through her attorney as one example - and have it remain in complete confidence. That she has not taken any of those opportunities provides the court with probable cause. I'm not a lawyer, but that's how I see it.
    That is not the logical conclusion at all, Rocky.  The logical conclusion is that the standard of probable cause must be met for any charges that are filed.  She has been charged with child abandonment and non-support of a child.  The fact that she will not tell government where they are is not evidence of either of these.  Were there a law in Idaho that you must present your children for inspection anytime the government asks, she could certainly be charged with a violation.

    There is something amiss here, I agree.  The problem I have is that even though it looks like something is wrong, I do not believe that government should charge someone for something without evidence that something has even occurred.  
    Freedom and a submissive populace cannot co-exist.

    Brad Steele
  • medic07medic07 Member Posts: 5,222 ✭✭✭
    While my gut feeling is that this lady and her current (5th) husband had something to do with 2 or 3 adult deaths and most likely the death of her children, I tend to think the judge was bound by the state/federal statutes as well as the Constitution (8th Amendment).

    $5M would be appropriate if they had any evidence of murder or manslaughter.  However, they only have her on Child Abandonment and Contempt of Court Order (to the best of my knowledge).  I think he most likely was bound to set bail to reflect those charges.

    Do not get me wrong...I think this woman's cheese done slid of her cracker and those kids will never be seen alive.
  • jimdeerejimdeere Member, Moderator Posts: 26,286 ******
    She looks good in orange.
  • Don McManusDon McManus Member Posts: 23,695 ✭✭✭✭
    edited March 2020
    @Don McManus   DM, in reading your posts, I do understand where you are coming from and in some respects I don't disagree completely with you.  However, the nagging question I have is...there are abundant causes one could choose to take a stand on against society, so why would someone decide their 'line in the sand' is simply proving whether their own children are alive and well?  This makes zero sense to me. 
    She's not being demanded to send them to public schools, or force them to be vaccinated, or any number of a myriad of other things.  She's only being asked to evidence they are alive and well.  Doesn't seem too overly difficult to me...unless of course... they're not.
    And here's the thing; if her love and devotion to her children is so great that she feels compelled to conceal their well being, then she should also realize all this attention to the matter is effecting the real possibility that her children may well now be taken from her by social services when and if they are found to be alive and well.  This would not have been the case had she just given evidence of their well being at the outset.  Not even Randy Weaver, nor Cliven Bundy, nor even David Koresh felt compelled to adopt this approach.
    I get the whole civil liberties and constitutional angle, but there needs to be a stated purpose or underpinning principle for her actions, and to the best of my knowledge Lori Vallow has not identified such a cause.  And, "Meh" is not a stated cause or purpose, not when it comes to minor children, not by any legal standard.  Therein lies the difference.
    The legal standard for the distinction between a 'Minor' and an 'Adult' is, fundamentally, a "minor" is considered (legally) not to be able to look out for their own well being without the supervision of a legal adult guardian.  In the United States we have chosen this demarcation line between minor and adult to be 18 years of age.  I'm pretty sure this applies in Idaho too.
    Right or wrong, if a parent takes a pregnancy full term to birth, then this person has a legal responsibility to provide for the well being of the child until the age of 18 years.  That, or put them up for adoption, or relinquish their legal right to be a parent and make the child a ward of the state.  Lori Vallow has chosen none of these options publicly, and that is not legal in the state of Idaho.
    You've talked about constitutional law in many of your posts on this subject, and I share many of those underpinning principles.  However, in this case, you cannot simply ignore State law which you seem to be doing.  That is, unless, you are adopting an  absolutist Constitutionalism doctrine.
    The bottom line is pretty much this...if Lori Vallow has been more than a day without 'parenting' her minor children then she, as their sole guardian, needs to provide evidence of how they are being cared for.  Heck, they could be at 'band camp' for all we know...or...they could be dead.  As their legal guardian, she has the responsibility to say which it is.
    "Do you know where your kids are?"
    (that was a rhetorical question by the way)
    It doesn't make any sense to me either, FCD, but then if people could be prosecuted when they did things that don't make sense to me, the streets of the U.S. of A. would be a lot less crowded.

    All of your points are valid, and yes, the obvious and probably best thing for her children (if we assume they are still alive) would have been to not have them break contact with the grandparents and to provide proof of their well-being when asked.  

    You mention that I am ignoring State Law.  I am unsure if that is correct.  I confess to not having read the actual statutes in Idaho of Child Abandonment and Failure to support a child, but one would assume the language in the statute has something to do with abandoning or failing to provide support for the child.  We have no evidence of either of these things.  We can speculate as to her motivation for doing what she is doing (and I think we both share a suspicion that there is something very dark involved in that motivation) but should we prosecute for a crime absent evidence because of those suspicions.

    Many on the far left believe that the desire to own a firearm is sufficient reason to prohibit ownership.  A prejudgment based upon suspected motivation.  I am struggling with finding where the line in this Vallow case should be, but my gut tells me that while I suspect something, the answer at this point is not incarceration for the reasons stated.
    Freedom and a submissive populace cannot co-exist.

    Brad Steele
  • AlpineAlpine Member Posts: 15,092 ✭✭✭✭
    If you have a suspicion, then by the reasonable man test, the state can go to a judge, which was done in this case.
    And the rest is going to be public knowlege.
    ?The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.?
    Margaret Thatcher

    "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics."
    Mark Twain
Sign In or Register to comment.