Arizona judge denies Lori Vallow Daybell's request for new trial
An Arizona judge on Friday denied a request from Lori Vallow Daybell for a new trial after jurors found her guilty of conspiring to murder her then-husband, Charles Vallow.
She asked for a new trial on May 1, just over a week after she was found guilty, claiming misconduct from jurors and prosecutors and claimed the judge was not impartial. She also argued that statements from Tylee Ryan and Alex Cox — who are both dead — should have been allowed in the trial, that part of a detective's testimony should not have been allowed and that she should have been given the opportunity to use newer download technology on her husband's phone.
Arizona Judge Justin Beresky denied that any of these things caused prejudice against Lori Daybell.
Daybell was given five life sentences in Idaho after being found guilty of murdering her two children, 16-year-old Tylee Ryan and 7-year-old JJ Vallow, and conspiring to murder them and Tammy Daybell, before marrying Chad Daybell.
In an interview immediately after the Arizona trial, a juror seemed to say he knew she had already been given multiple life sentences before the end of the trial. In multiple other comments in media interviews, however, the same juror verified he did not know until after the guilty verdict was delivered.
The judge considered all of the statements that juror made to the media and ruled in Friday's decision that there was not a 'clear indication of juror misconduct' or any evidence of prejudice against Daybell from this — which she would have needed to prove.
Beresky maintained his previous ruling, saying out-of-court statements from Tylee and Cox would be considered hearsay because they are dead and could not testify. He said Daybell was invited to bring specific statements from them for him to consider outside the jury's presence during the trial, but she never did.
The judge also determined that Daybell did not offer any evidence that the information she might have found on Vallow's phone could have negated her guilt.
Beresky also found that none of the arguments in her request for a new trial 'come close' to establishing misconduct from prosecutors.
Daybell's argument of prosecutorial misconduct included claims that the prosecutor repeatedly brought up her religion throughout the trial, thus violating her rights to religious freedom. The judge determined this was not the case.
'The (Religious Freedom Restoration Act) does not protect someone from committing criminal acts in the name of religion,' he said.
Beresky also determined he correctly ruled to strike witnesses from her list because she did not establish they had any relevant information, and did not show prejudice against her. He said she was told she could make the request again if she had new arguments that the witnesses were relevant, but she did not.
The judge did agree that he made a comment that was 'not necessary' — when denying an objection from prosecutors while Daybell, acting as her own attorney, was questioning Serena Sharpe, but he said it did not show bias or partiality. That comment was: 'To the extent that you are comparing yourself to these biblical figures I will allow it.'
Bereksy said that although he should not have made the comment, there was no evidence it influenced jurors.
Daybell asked to be sentenced in this case after her next criminal trial. That trial, on charges alleging she conspired to murder Brandon Boudreaux, her niece's then-husband, will begin in June.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CBS News
22 minutes ago
- CBS News
1 person dead after fire in north suburban Des Plaines
A person died in a building fire in north suburban Des Plaines overnight. Around 12:30 a.m., multiple fire departments, including Des Plaines and Niles, responded to a residential building fire at 9805 Bianco Terrace. Crews found a fire in a unit on the first floor that was quickly extinguished. Video from the scene shows a shattered screen door and charred inside of the building. Fire Chief Robert Greiner with the North Maine Fire Protection District said firefighters found a person unconscious from smoke inhalation. Greiner said despite life-saving measures, the victim died at the scene. The victim has not been identified. The cause of the fire is under investigation.
Forbes
25 minutes ago
- Forbes
Trump's Pardons Are Part Of Remaking DOJ
Donald Trump has not been shy about his approach to pardons. In some cases, it reflects his ... More makeover of the Department of Justice. In 2025, President Donald Trump issued a series of high-profile pardons and commutations, notably surpassing his previous clemency record (143 pardons and 85 commutations). A significant action was the mass pardon on January 20, 2025, for approximately 1,500 individuals convicted in connection with the January 6, 2021, U.S. Capitol attack. This included full pardons for leaders of extremist groups such as the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers. Other notable clemency recipients included Ross Ulbricht, founder of the Silk Road dark web marketplace, who received a full and unconditional pardon; 23 anti-abortion activists convicted under the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act; former New York Congressman Michael Grimm and former Connecticut Governor John Rowland. Grimm and Rowland were pardoned in May. Critics have raised concerns that these actions may undermine the justice system and that these pardons are the result of Trump insiders simply paying those close to the president for access for a commutation or pardon. However, Trump's DOJ issued new guidance on enforcement, that was critical of past 'over broad and unchecked corporate and white-collar enforcement [that] Government prosecutors are not going to want to bring a case that Trump may toss with a commutation or pardon. While the big government shakeup being experienced in the U.S. continues, pardons and commutations seem to be an almost daily part of the Trump administration. Trump appointed Alice Johnson, herself the recipient of a Trump pardon in his first term, as Pardon Czar and her focus has been on those who received long sentences that now seem draconian. As was pointed out in a Washington Post piece about Johnson's work, she looks closer to what prison personnel have to say about someone seeking a pardon over the objections of US prosecutors. In some cases, Trump's pardons come without the need to talk to prison officials as pardons are being given to those who have not even seen the inside of a prison. There is an old adage that many prisoners will state that they were or are wrongly imprisoned. In fact, in my business, many tell me about over prosecutions that led them to prison. I have heard the line, 'You've probably heard this before, but I didn't do it.' Why would someone admit to a crime they did not commit? In our justice system it happens everyday because of something called the Trial Penalty. The federal trial penalty refers to the significantly harsher sentences defendants face if they reject a plea deal and choose to go to trial. This penalty stems from the belief that defendants who go to trial are seen as unapologetic about their behavior, leading to prosecutors to seek longer sentences. As a result, many defendants plead guilty to avoid the risk of a much more severe punishment. However, the primary way to properly preserve one's rights to an appeal is to go to trial. It is an old problem that many have just accepted as a way the system works. Kay Rogers currently has a pending pardon application. Rogers, a former Butler county Ohio Auditor (Republican), who went to prison for 24 months for a bank loan that the bank says she does not even owe, has been asking for someone to look at her case. Now, out of prison for many years and off of supervised release, Rogers sees Trump as a possible way to clear her name and save her home. 'I pled guilty,' Rogers said in an interview, 'but I was a single mother with 6 kids and going to trial just was something I could not afford.' Rogers wants the pardon because even though the bank says she had nothing to do with the fraud that sent her to prison, the US government still wants to collect restitution. 'They have a lien on my home,' Rogers told me in an interview, 'and I have no idea where this money they want from me would even go.' Other women who believe they were overcharged in their crimes have made repeated requests to have their cases reviewed for pardons. Aaron Zahn, former CEO of the Jacksonville Electric Authority (JEA), was convicted in March 2024 of conspiracy to embezzle federal property and wire fraud for allegedly orchestrating a $40 million payout linked to JEA's privatization. Prosecutors claimed this scheme would have cost Jacksonville taxpayers hundreds of millions, but Zahn's defense argued no such scheme existed. Zahn is currently appealing his 4-year sentence, asserting he was wrongly prosecuted for defrauding a city of property that never existed. Zahn and JEA's CFO, Ryan Wannemacher, were tried together, with Wannemacher being found not guilty. Before Zahn became CEO, JEA faced major financial challenges, including declining sales and a poor power contract. Privatization was discussed, but political resistance hindered progress. Zahn, brought in to drive change, pushed for privatization and was involved in the creation of a strategic plan that included the possibility of selling JEA. Despite the suspension of the Performance Unit Plan (PUP), a leaked memo exaggerating its costs led to public outrage, Zahn's termination, and an investigation. Zahn's Garrity statement, pertaining to statements given under immunity during an internal investigation, was used in his prosecution. Such statements are typically protected from being used against an individual in criminal cases, raising concerns about legal precedent, something Zahn's is contesting in his appeal. Zahn is currently imprisoned at FCI Edgefield satellite camp. Some have criticized the Trump administration and the pardons given, but the pardon and commutation system has been inconsistent in doling out fairness in the past. Those with access have always been moved to the top for presidential consideration and Alice Johnson, who definitely deserved her pardon, would likely be still in prison had it not been for advocates, namely Kim Kardashian, who personally pled with Trump for her release. Biden, and even Trump in his first term, gave commutations sparingly throughout their terms until it came to the last days of the administration. Now, there is an ongoing process of review and action that is leading to action, and that is a refreshing change.
Forbes
42 minutes ago
- Forbes
Coinbase Hack Exposes 3 Insider Threat Enablers
Cybercriminals bribed Coinbase employees and contractors for customer data access. Bankrolling cybersecurity may soothe momentary leadership angst, but often does little to address rising insider threats and basic internal control failures. Coinbase joined a long and growing list of hacked companies undermined by bribed, planted or tricked employees. The crypto exchange giant disclosed that cybercriminals gained access to sensitive customer account data by 'paying multiple contractors or employees working in support roles outside the United States to collect information from internal Coinbase systems to which they had access in order to perform their job responsibilities.' Coinbase declined to pay the hackers $20 million ransom. Instead, the company posted a $20 million reward to catch and convict the extortionists. Despite the bold stance, remediation, reimbursement and indemnification costs are preliminarily estimated 'to be within the range of approximately $180 million to $400 million.' That's a hefty financial and reputational hit – even for a market-leading entity which closed 2024 with $9 billion in cash reserves and a penchant for spending heavily on cyber investments. The nefarious methods may seem novel, but the case is neither isolated nor unique. The 2025 Ponemon-Sullivan Security Report found almost half of insiders had more access than needed. While no cyber defense is impenetrable, fixating on technical design proves futile when incentives, incompetence and indifference undermine internal controls design, implementation and effectiveness. Data are digital era treasure. That's what hackers know, yet too many company directors and executives underestimate. While internal controls were first established to curb asset misappropriation, sharpen business processes and maintain financial integrity, they are widely viewed as mere compliance requirements. That's a dangerous mindset as IT systems and safeguards are often highly technical and considered 'invisible.' Compounding that AI-age naivete is excuse-making that insider threats are "rogue bad actors.' As reported on Forbes, Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong lamented 'the criminals have been approaching our overseas customer support agents, looking for a weak leak , someone who would accept a bribe in exchange for sharing customer information with them. Unfortunately, they were able to find a few bad apples.' The problem wasn't that low-paid, offshored workers were susceptible to payola. Rather, access controls were inadequate, insufficient and/or non-existent. Even worse, the deficiencies were exploitable (and monetizable) for several months without detection. Those gaps are widespread. The 2023 Ponemon-Sullivan Security Report found that cyber incidents due to employee negligence (55%) outnumbered the combined total incidents involving criminal or malicious insiders (25%) and credential theft (20%). Fraud requires opportunity, incentives/pressure and rationalization -- cybercriminals and their AI tools prowl for such juicy vulnerabilities. Antidotes require meaningful assessment and action. That's far more than hollow audit committee charters, toothless assurance models and self-congratulatory periodic reporting. Effective defenses, supported by stewardship workplace cultures, learn and adapt to pre-empt problems. Boards and c-suites need to ask serious questions and expect credible answers about how incentives, incompetence and indifference – the three common corporate post-mortem culprits – enable insider threats that put their organizations at risk. Hostile actors will do what they can to bribe, trick or, worse, plant employees. While payoffs cost Coinbase, in 2023, an employee impersonator verbally convinced MGM's IT help desk to share system access credentials. The subsequent breach shuttered casino operations costing over $100 million, spawning a lengthy remediation quagmire. Yet, planting real or fictitious employees is also a real challenge, especially from cash-desperate regimes. In February, Christina Chapman pled guilty in federal court to allegedly running a 'laptop farm' from her Arizona home which posed North Koreans as U.S. workers in remote IT positions at more than 300 U.S. enterprises, including multiple Fortune 500 companies. Chapman's three-year purported scheme netted over '$17 million in illicit revenue' for her and the Hermit Kingdom. The payroll largess was falsely reported to the tax agencies in the names of over seventy identify theft victims. Clearly, a few hundred organizations were susceptible to adding 'ghost' employees. Shay Colson, Intentional Cybersecurity managing partner, advises tech leaders to collaborate with HR to 'vet new employees and ensuring that you're not either supporting this sanctioned regime or giving up legitimate credentials to these threat actors.' That's a foundational step towards competence, care and control. Here are starter questions that boards can independently ask IT, HR and audit leaders: (Non) answers and 'not my job' responses will be quite telling. Digital era danger necessitates coordinated, prepared and tested defenses – well before a breach. Countless case examples, benchmarking data, tabletop exercises and technical performance reports hold little lasting value, if companies lack credible, strategic tech leaders who can articulate the competitive, financial, reputational and business consequences of cybersecurity inaction. Perhaps worse are gilded executive teams fixated on strategy (and compensation) acceleration, while risking everything by settling for disincentivized, demotivated, distracted and disloyal staff. Et tu, IT?
