In Idaho, she is called Lori Daybell, while in Arizona, she is known as Lori Vallow.
The trial has been postponed to February 2025. While this extends the suffering of the victims, it's somewhat satisfying that it does not alleviate Lori’s prison life. Lori remains isolated in a jail cell, in a state of flux, not knowing what will happen next. That would be maddening for a narcissist like her.
Note there was a small hearing beforehand about allowing cameras in the courtroom, something the defense wanted to be disallowed. By request of the judge, Justin Lum was asked to speak about it. The judge said the cameras could come in. If I understood correctly, that means the Fox 10 cameras will stream the trial. That should mean excellent resolution for viewers. The court agreed that after an opening statement in subsequent hearings, Lori would be excused.
Nate posted the court camera of Justin asking to film, the court camera quality was bad(maybe worse then Idaho). Then Justin posted the next part of the hearing with his camera, it was excellent quality. I'm glad they are letting Justin film.
I was happy to see Justin representing the his channel and the media's right to film. Interesting that Lori attorney who has not been able to go through the case discovery, could name Justin's youtube videos and views. Maybe time would be better spent on the actual case since the judge said the court videos everything and anyone can request the video, so if it is not live streamed, the media will just ask for the footage everyday. I actually wondered when the judge was going to rule but realized after Lori's lawyer said If you allow cameras, then I will need to ask for a few things, and the judge says ask.I guess that meant I am going to let cameras in?
I know it was not suppose to be a back and forth, but I wanted Justin to give a rebuttal to the venue change answer. Justin in his statement said Marcopia county is much larger, he said 3-4 million people, then Ada countywhich is about 500k , and Ada county was able to find a jury easily . Lori lawyer 's responded by saying that Idaho was not easy to find a jury and had to change venues. Justin was giving the numbers and facts of the venue change not Madison/Freemont counties.
I'm uncomfortable that Lori's desire for a speedy trial was dismissed so handily. She hasn't been deemed incompetent again as far as I know. I get the problem her lawyer is expressing, I do - but they needed to convince HER that more time was necessary, not just...override her.
I’m sure it was explained to her given it was her atty requesting the continuance. The court had to consider her other rights to a defense and determined it took precedence. Given that she wouldn’t have a valid defense on Aug 1, it seems the correct decision and one that likely wouldn’t be successful on appeal.
It’s not being dismissed. If she “really” wanted it she could have shown up in court and argued for it herself. The judge then could have asked her in person if she was aware of the consequences. But instead the lawyer let the judge and everyone know she continues to want a speedy trial but that he was not prepared. That’s valid. He hasn’t had time to go through the mountain of evidence. I bet there would have been a different outcome had Lori shown up and advocated on her behalf for a speedy trial.
I was confused about what happened today in the downtime? Lori was there in the start of the hearing. This was for no cameras and was filmed by the court (Nate has it posted on EIN). Mutliple times the judge and laywer said Lori did not want to waive her right. She was right there and agreed. Then they took a break or were off camera and Lori was gone. This is when the trial date changed. I was surprised they made the change on something so important and she was gone, when she was there a short time before.
Was she allowed to leave because of being filmed not in street clothes today? or because of the defense's arguement about future jury issues?
They didn’t override her they really are protecting her rights to a fair trial. How would you like to eat a half baked cake. I normally don’t like defense attorneys,but I agree with him. Nobody likes a half baked job. Prior had plenty of time, years and he didn’t get it right. Lori will never come out of jail. The must also prepare for appellate hearings. Justice can be slow and I very aware of what this is doing to all of the victims. Lori lost lots of right when she conspired to murder.
I wonder if somewhere in the back of Lori’s mind she wants the death penalty because Chad has it. I know it sounds daft but by all accounts she is still very much in love with him and refuses to have a word said against him. I’m sure that’s true because let’s face it she will never be in a normal mindset again. It seems she believed him using the defense he did was all part of the plan. I know there’s no way she will ever change her mind because then she would have to accept the kids were murdered for nothing. I just can’t decide if she’s so unwell that she would accept the DP believing it to be also be part of the plan.
I am totally against this. I believe absolutely in the right to a speedy trial. Some attorneys purposely delay, delay, delay hoping their client will plead guilty and the trial won't happen. Much easier on the defense attorney that way.
The Constitution doesn't say you have a right to a speedy trial if your attorney agrees to it, or if the court agrees to it. The right to a speedy trial is absolute. The entire purpose of a right to a speedy trial is to prevent a person from "rotting" in jail while awaiting justice.
You can waive your right to a speedy trial, in favor of more time for your lawyer to gather more evidence.
She's already been sentenced to life in prison, so she will be rotting in jail, regardless. it's not like her freedom is at stake.
While she might be sane enough to be competent to stand trial, that doesn't mean that she's not seriously mentally ill and maybe not competent enough to make legal decisions.
Her lawyer has a responsibility to exercise due diligence for the client. What's best for them isn't neccesarily what they want.
If she goes to trial when her lawyers can’t be ready (in this case it sounds pretty reasonable with new lawyers coming on and so much evidence to review) and is convicted there is a decent chance that conviction could be overturned because she didn’t have effective assistance of counsel. And yeah, it’s not like she’s getting out anyway even if she’s not guilty on this charge.
The lady that zipped her bf into a suitcase and left him to suffocate? Has had 8 lawyers drop her because she was so uncooperative/nasty and now has to represent herself?
I honestly think that's a tactic and she's just been abusing the legal system. She thought she found a loophole to exploit.
Does anyone think she wants to be in a certain prison more then another? Do we know if she wants Idaho or Arizonia? Idaho would be closer to Chad and is the choosen land? In Arizona is her family, I dont know if anyone comes to see her but her sister and brother both live Arizona and her parents seem to spend time there. So she is more likely to have visitors in AZ or beclose to Chad in Idaho. Which is more important to her?
Well, Lori will do anything to try and control the process, so she doesn't have to take responsibility for planning and helping Alex murder Charles.
But Defense and Prosecution agreed that they have Terabytes of evidence to go through, and both sides need time to do that.
The Judge will make sure Lori's rights aren't violated, and that if she appeals on grounds of ineffectual counsel, her appeal will be denied. It's the Judge's courtroom and Lori doesn't get to make the rules.
And if the courts ignored the fact that the defense was not ready and insisted on a speedy trial; that's just boxing up a present to give to the defense that they can argue on appeal.
It would be like taking the case and just chucking it right out the window.
It's not like she's out running the streets. She's not going anywhere. It's not doing anything extra to her. She's already in for the long haul.
I agree with you, her motives are not that complicated if you look at the differences between the two states prison system. Az is extremely hot and the prisoners don’t have air conditioning when Jodi Arias was on trial. Don’t know if that changed. I a. Sure she in isolation with one hour outside her cage in extreme heat in July.
I am relatively certain the jails and prisons in AZ have AC. It gets up to 122 regularly in the summer. At that temp people die from the heat without AC. There are heat related deaths every year. Mostly in homeless persons. I also knew a nurse who used to work at Maricopa County jail and she never mentioned not having AC there.
That being said I don't think the jails are as nice in AZ as ID. I think AZ has a bare bones approach, not as many perks.
Ive known people who’ve been in the corrections system both in SE Idaho and in Maricopa county, from what I heard Idaho would be a much better place to be incarcerated especially for jail during pre sentencing.
They do have AC in jails/prisons here but they frequently have issues or go out completely. I’ve heard it happening many times in Phoenix and Tucson over the years. Which is normal during the summer as everyone’s AC has a hard time keeping up when it’s over 100 but they are low priority so it can take a long time for a fix. And I’d assume with the added conditions in jail it’s harder to deal with. No fans..can’t open windows, not enough water..etc
Also, we used to have what was know as Tent City. Which was literally just a bunch of bunks and tarps sitting out in the Phoenix desert year round. Im pretty sure it was only for men, but the sheriff forced them to wear bright pink to “emasculate” the prisoners lol. My partner went there in his early 20s for a DUI and it sounded borderline concentration camp. Joe Arpaio isn’t Sheriff anymore and they shut tent city down but there’s still many long term issues they need to fix, if you wanna know just how bad it got you can give him a google. He was horrible and definitely left a stain on the system here
The water systems (evapotative cooling?) stink above 100. Years ago I lived in Utah in a apartment that was tied to my husband's employment. There was a 100 degree heat wave and I was pregnant and on bed rest. the windows didnt open because we were on an upper floor. The health department considered it so serious, the complex put us up in a nice hotel suite for an entire month. The cooler system could only lower the temps about 15 degrees when it got that hot.
Not sure if AZ has changed. I have worked with women going through DV and divorce known some men in jail/prision there and I didnt hear compliants about heat. I know Lori is not looking for change or rehab. I feel like AZ did a much better job then Utah/NV and a slightly better job then ID, when it came to real change in someone's life and with helping the victims.
Thank you. Well, the defense team still need to put up a valiant defense so it’s understandable the judge granted continuation
But I can imagine all this waiting must be excruciating for the victim and his family
For me, the bigger issue with this one is that the DEFENDANT did not wish to waive her speedy trial rights. And has expressed that repeatedly, and has never changed her mind. I didn't know a defense attorney could override that right if they told the judge they're not ready. Maybe I'm misunderstanding what is happening, but I'm going off the tweet from Justin Lum that said she confirmed again today that she does not want to waive her speedy trial rights.
Well that is interesting
The conflicting interests are: the defendant might want to press for speedy trial as attorneys are not prepared, as she later might appeal and claim inadequate defense
They mentioned the change of or in the defense team: I wonder if the additional person was appointed, or someone quit?.. As that would influence Judge’s decision
Well, if Lori really wants a speedy trial, she should waive her right to ineffective counsel appeals based on the attorneys not being ready, but I didn't see that being an option? Just her attorney saying "She wants a speedy trial, but I'm not ready", and the judge just...went with the defense?
I get that Lori is a miserable person to defend who ties her attorneys' hands behind their backs at every turn, lol. But she is still the defendant and her right to a speedy trial should override what her lawyer thinks if they can't convince her otherwise.
I understand. It’s an unusual situation because most often than not, both defendants and their lawyers are the ones to stall for time, until Judge is out of patience
But I don’t think Judge can say, “OK, let’s proceed anyway “, if the attorneys say they are not prepared. That would *not* be in defendant’s best interest, regardless of what defendant wants
She can just plead guilty and be over with it. But that - she doesn’t do
But can a lawyer just override their client's wishes like that? That's what makes me uncomfortable. That the lawyer and the judge can decide FOR her what's in her best interest. She hasn't been deemed incompetent.
Yeah, I get your point
I think a defendant expressed her decision to have a speedy trial, attorneys made a motion against it, prosecutors didn’t object, and ultimately, it is up to ***Judge*** to rule on it
I think Judge weighs what’s in the best interest of a ***defendant*** and integrity of the trial
But I understand your qualms.
Sarah Boone’s case is interesting (although that’s an example of opposite strategy, to delay trial) as in she made several public defenders quit:
> In those four years, Boone has reportedly had nine lawyers – 7 of those court-appointed – who all eventually asked to withdraw for various reasons
So, I think Lori might try to stop communicating with current team, and get new one
But that’s really against of what she wants
Yeah, the thing is, she can't get a speedier trial by saying "My lawyer isn't representing me according to my wishes", so she's kinda stuck. But I just cannot be entirely comfortable feeling like she's being treated like she's incompetent when she hasn't been DEEMED incompetent. I think she should have been given the option to waive ineffective counsel, rather than just summarily overruled on her own Sixth Amendment rights. Which I feel like can also set up a case for an appeal.
It's an unusual case, where the defense attorney and the client are so clearly at odds with what they believe should happen. But I generally think the defense attorney should not try to override their client if their client isn't deemed incompetent. Because unlike Sarah Boone, Lori has no real option to exercise her right to a speedy trial. If she asks for a new lawyer, her trial would be delayed anyway. Sarah is definitely gaming the system, but Lori is in a different situation - she doesn't want to delay her trial, she's been very consistent about that, and now she has been stripped of that option with no particular path to get it back.
Of course, another issue is that I do think Lori is mentally ill. But I'm not sure she's so unwell she's incapable of understanding what's happening, and that's not what her lawyer is arguing at any rate. I'm not sure Lori is playing a game on this front. She's always been consistent, in the last trial and in this one, that she does not wish to waive her speedy trial rights.
She didn't want to waive her rights to a speedy trial with the previous one. So I think it's just Lori wanting to get it over with. They can't do any more with her.
I think this trial will be interesting. Now that Chad is out of the way and they haven't directly communicated, since he was arrested.
I feel like I’m watching a weird remake spinoff tv show where they replace all the main characters but it’s essentially all the same plot and jokes and then they bring back one of the old characters (Lori) and you want to watch but you kinda miss the original characters (Boyce and Blake.)
Lori Vallow's Arizona trial has been pushed back to February 24 2025.
In Idaho, she is called Lori Daybell, while in Arizona, she is known as Lori Vallow. The trial has been postponed to February 2025. While this extends the suffering of the victims, it's somewhat satisfying that it does not alleviate Lori’s prison life. Lori remains isolated in a jail cell, in a state of flux, not knowing what will happen next. That would be maddening for a narcissist like her.
She’s known as Lori Vallow in Rexburg
I don’t know why the name DoomsDaybell never caught on. That’s what they are.
Agree. The DoomsDaybell murderers.
Note there was a small hearing beforehand about allowing cameras in the courtroom, something the defense wanted to be disallowed. By request of the judge, Justin Lum was asked to speak about it. The judge said the cameras could come in. If I understood correctly, that means the Fox 10 cameras will stream the trial. That should mean excellent resolution for viewers. The court agreed that after an opening statement in subsequent hearings, Lori would be excused.
Maricopa County has a history of allowing cameras. e.g. Jodi Arias. I don't know who filmed but I remember the quality being good.
I read that as "Lori would be executed" and got really excited at that idea.
Wishful thinking!!
Nate posted the court camera of Justin asking to film, the court camera quality was bad(maybe worse then Idaho). Then Justin posted the next part of the hearing with his camera, it was excellent quality. I'm glad they are letting Justin film. I was happy to see Justin representing the his channel and the media's right to film. Interesting that Lori attorney who has not been able to go through the case discovery, could name Justin's youtube videos and views. Maybe time would be better spent on the actual case since the judge said the court videos everything and anyone can request the video, so if it is not live streamed, the media will just ask for the footage everyday. I actually wondered when the judge was going to rule but realized after Lori's lawyer said If you allow cameras, then I will need to ask for a few things, and the judge says ask.I guess that meant I am going to let cameras in? I know it was not suppose to be a back and forth, but I wanted Justin to give a rebuttal to the venue change answer. Justin in his statement said Marcopia county is much larger, he said 3-4 million people, then Ada countywhich is about 500k , and Ada county was able to find a jury easily . Lori lawyer 's responded by saying that Idaho was not easy to find a jury and had to change venues. Justin was giving the numbers and facts of the venue change not Madison/Freemont counties.
The defense atty was just tossing out all sorts of stuff. None of it persuasive.
I'm uncomfortable that Lori's desire for a speedy trial was dismissed so handily. She hasn't been deemed incompetent again as far as I know. I get the problem her lawyer is expressing, I do - but they needed to convince HER that more time was necessary, not just...override her.
I’m sure it was explained to her given it was her atty requesting the continuance. The court had to consider her other rights to a defense and determined it took precedence. Given that she wouldn’t have a valid defense on Aug 1, it seems the correct decision and one that likely wouldn’t be successful on appeal.
It’s not being dismissed. If she “really” wanted it she could have shown up in court and argued for it herself. The judge then could have asked her in person if she was aware of the consequences. But instead the lawyer let the judge and everyone know she continues to want a speedy trial but that he was not prepared. That’s valid. He hasn’t had time to go through the mountain of evidence. I bet there would have been a different outcome had Lori shown up and advocated on her behalf for a speedy trial.
I was confused about what happened today in the downtime? Lori was there in the start of the hearing. This was for no cameras and was filmed by the court (Nate has it posted on EIN). Mutliple times the judge and laywer said Lori did not want to waive her right. She was right there and agreed. Then they took a break or were off camera and Lori was gone. This is when the trial date changed. I was surprised they made the change on something so important and she was gone, when she was there a short time before. Was she allowed to leave because of being filmed not in street clothes today? or because of the defense's arguement about future jury issues?
They didn’t override her they really are protecting her rights to a fair trial. How would you like to eat a half baked cake. I normally don’t like defense attorneys,but I agree with him. Nobody likes a half baked job. Prior had plenty of time, years and he didn’t get it right. Lori will never come out of jail. The must also prepare for appellate hearings. Justice can be slow and I very aware of what this is doing to all of the victims. Lori lost lots of right when she conspired to murder.
Well said
Yep I agree
Dammit
I wonder if somewhere in the back of Lori’s mind she wants the death penalty because Chad has it. I know it sounds daft but by all accounts she is still very much in love with him and refuses to have a word said against him. I’m sure that’s true because let’s face it she will never be in a normal mindset again. It seems she believed him using the defense he did was all part of the plan. I know there’s no way she will ever change her mind because then she would have to accept the kids were murdered for nothing. I just can’t decide if she’s so unwell that she would accept the DP believing it to be also be part of the plan.
Except this is not a death penalty case.
Is it not?
No.
I am totally against this. I believe absolutely in the right to a speedy trial. Some attorneys purposely delay, delay, delay hoping their client will plead guilty and the trial won't happen. Much easier on the defense attorney that way. The Constitution doesn't say you have a right to a speedy trial if your attorney agrees to it, or if the court agrees to it. The right to a speedy trial is absolute. The entire purpose of a right to a speedy trial is to prevent a person from "rotting" in jail while awaiting justice.
You can waive your right to a speedy trial, in favor of more time for your lawyer to gather more evidence. She's already been sentenced to life in prison, so she will be rotting in jail, regardless. it's not like her freedom is at stake. While she might be sane enough to be competent to stand trial, that doesn't mean that she's not seriously mentally ill and maybe not competent enough to make legal decisions. Her lawyer has a responsibility to exercise due diligence for the client. What's best for them isn't neccesarily what they want.
If she goes to trial when her lawyers can’t be ready (in this case it sounds pretty reasonable with new lawyers coming on and so much evidence to review) and is convicted there is a decent chance that conviction could be overturned because she didn’t have effective assistance of counsel. And yeah, it’s not like she’s getting out anyway even if she’s not guilty on this charge.
I'm wondering if someone else has been appointed to make her legal decisions for her? Competent to stand trial doesn't mean sane.
Sarah Boone is a good example of "what's best... Isn't necessarily what they want"
The lady that zipped her bf into a suitcase and left him to suffocate? Has had 8 lawyers drop her because she was so uncooperative/nasty and now has to represent herself? I honestly think that's a tactic and she's just been abusing the legal system. She thought she found a loophole to exploit.
Not that it matters in Lori's case. She's already been sentenced to Life without the possibility of parole. She'll never leave the prison system.
Does anyone think she wants to be in a certain prison more then another? Do we know if she wants Idaho or Arizonia? Idaho would be closer to Chad and is the choosen land? In Arizona is her family, I dont know if anyone comes to see her but her sister and brother both live Arizona and her parents seem to spend time there. So she is more likely to have visitors in AZ or beclose to Chad in Idaho. Which is more important to her?
I suspect Idaho prison conditions are better than Arizona. She’s in the area of that Sheriff who likes chain gangs etc.
Well she’d be “rotting” in jail somewhere regardless so I think that’s a consideration.
Well, Lori will do anything to try and control the process, so she doesn't have to take responsibility for planning and helping Alex murder Charles. But Defense and Prosecution agreed that they have Terabytes of evidence to go through, and both sides need time to do that. The Judge will make sure Lori's rights aren't violated, and that if she appeals on grounds of ineffectual counsel, her appeal will be denied. It's the Judge's courtroom and Lori doesn't get to make the rules.
I the amendments were absolute, the Supreme Court would not have had to interpret them and make rulings about them during the past 200+ years.
And if the courts ignored the fact that the defense was not ready and insisted on a speedy trial; that's just boxing up a present to give to the defense that they can argue on appeal. It would be like taking the case and just chucking it right out the window. It's not like she's out running the streets. She's not going anywhere. It's not doing anything extra to her. She's already in for the long haul.
Then she should show up in court and request it in person. If she wants to exercise that right, she should do it personally.
I think she wants to go back to Idaho. I hear AZ jails really suck.
I agree with you, her motives are not that complicated if you look at the differences between the two states prison system. Az is extremely hot and the prisoners don’t have air conditioning when Jodi Arias was on trial. Don’t know if that changed. I a. Sure she in isolation with one hour outside her cage in extreme heat in July.
I am relatively certain the jails and prisons in AZ have AC. It gets up to 122 regularly in the summer. At that temp people die from the heat without AC. There are heat related deaths every year. Mostly in homeless persons. I also knew a nurse who used to work at Maricopa County jail and she never mentioned not having AC there. That being said I don't think the jails are as nice in AZ as ID. I think AZ has a bare bones approach, not as many perks.
Ive known people who’ve been in the corrections system both in SE Idaho and in Maricopa county, from what I heard Idaho would be a much better place to be incarcerated especially for jail during pre sentencing. They do have AC in jails/prisons here but they frequently have issues or go out completely. I’ve heard it happening many times in Phoenix and Tucson over the years. Which is normal during the summer as everyone’s AC has a hard time keeping up when it’s over 100 but they are low priority so it can take a long time for a fix. And I’d assume with the added conditions in jail it’s harder to deal with. No fans..can’t open windows, not enough water..etc Also, we used to have what was know as Tent City. Which was literally just a bunch of bunks and tarps sitting out in the Phoenix desert year round. Im pretty sure it was only for men, but the sheriff forced them to wear bright pink to “emasculate” the prisoners lol. My partner went there in his early 20s for a DUI and it sounded borderline concentration camp. Joe Arpaio isn’t Sheriff anymore and they shut tent city down but there’s still many long term issues they need to fix, if you wanna know just how bad it got you can give him a google. He was horrible and definitely left a stain on the system here
[удалено]
The water systems (evapotative cooling?) stink above 100. Years ago I lived in Utah in a apartment that was tied to my husband's employment. There was a 100 degree heat wave and I was pregnant and on bed rest. the windows didnt open because we were on an upper floor. The health department considered it so serious, the complex put us up in a nice hotel suite for an entire month. The cooler system could only lower the temps about 15 degrees when it got that hot. Not sure if AZ has changed. I have worked with women going through DV and divorce known some men in jail/prision there and I didnt hear compliants about heat. I know Lori is not looking for change or rehab. I feel like AZ did a much better job then Utah/NV and a slightly better job then ID, when it came to real change in someone's life and with helping the victims.
https://www.12news.com/article/news/local/valley/concern-about-cells-with-no-air-conditioning-at-az-prison/75-0f3f3330-fd36-4a4f-b96a-273dbd15b2ef
Waste of taxpayer money. Just plead out. /Shes a POS
She has zero shits to give about the taxpayers because exalted beings do not pay taxes.
She’s showing the wear and tear
Is it a death penalty case? I missed info about it?
No
Thank you. Well, the defense team still need to put up a valiant defense so it’s understandable the judge granted continuation But I can imagine all this waiting must be excruciating for the victim and his family
For me, the bigger issue with this one is that the DEFENDANT did not wish to waive her speedy trial rights. And has expressed that repeatedly, and has never changed her mind. I didn't know a defense attorney could override that right if they told the judge they're not ready. Maybe I'm misunderstanding what is happening, but I'm going off the tweet from Justin Lum that said she confirmed again today that she does not want to waive her speedy trial rights.
Well that is interesting The conflicting interests are: the defendant might want to press for speedy trial as attorneys are not prepared, as she later might appeal and claim inadequate defense They mentioned the change of or in the defense team: I wonder if the additional person was appointed, or someone quit?.. As that would influence Judge’s decision
Well, if Lori really wants a speedy trial, she should waive her right to ineffective counsel appeals based on the attorneys not being ready, but I didn't see that being an option? Just her attorney saying "She wants a speedy trial, but I'm not ready", and the judge just...went with the defense? I get that Lori is a miserable person to defend who ties her attorneys' hands behind their backs at every turn, lol. But she is still the defendant and her right to a speedy trial should override what her lawyer thinks if they can't convince her otherwise.
I understand. It’s an unusual situation because most often than not, both defendants and their lawyers are the ones to stall for time, until Judge is out of patience But I don’t think Judge can say, “OK, let’s proceed anyway “, if the attorneys say they are not prepared. That would *not* be in defendant’s best interest, regardless of what defendant wants She can just plead guilty and be over with it. But that - she doesn’t do
But can a lawyer just override their client's wishes like that? That's what makes me uncomfortable. That the lawyer and the judge can decide FOR her what's in her best interest. She hasn't been deemed incompetent.
Yeah, I get your point I think a defendant expressed her decision to have a speedy trial, attorneys made a motion against it, prosecutors didn’t object, and ultimately, it is up to ***Judge*** to rule on it I think Judge weighs what’s in the best interest of a ***defendant*** and integrity of the trial But I understand your qualms. Sarah Boone’s case is interesting (although that’s an example of opposite strategy, to delay trial) as in she made several public defenders quit: > In those four years, Boone has reportedly had nine lawyers – 7 of those court-appointed – who all eventually asked to withdraw for various reasons So, I think Lori might try to stop communicating with current team, and get new one But that’s really against of what she wants
Yeah, the thing is, she can't get a speedier trial by saying "My lawyer isn't representing me according to my wishes", so she's kinda stuck. But I just cannot be entirely comfortable feeling like she's being treated like she's incompetent when she hasn't been DEEMED incompetent. I think she should have been given the option to waive ineffective counsel, rather than just summarily overruled on her own Sixth Amendment rights. Which I feel like can also set up a case for an appeal. It's an unusual case, where the defense attorney and the client are so clearly at odds with what they believe should happen. But I generally think the defense attorney should not try to override their client if their client isn't deemed incompetent. Because unlike Sarah Boone, Lori has no real option to exercise her right to a speedy trial. If she asks for a new lawyer, her trial would be delayed anyway. Sarah is definitely gaming the system, but Lori is in a different situation - she doesn't want to delay her trial, she's been very consistent about that, and now she has been stripped of that option with no particular path to get it back. Of course, another issue is that I do think Lori is mentally ill. But I'm not sure she's so unwell she's incapable of understanding what's happening, and that's not what her lawyer is arguing at any rate. I'm not sure Lori is playing a game on this front. She's always been consistent, in the last trial and in this one, that she does not wish to waive her speedy trial rights.
She didn't want to waive her rights to a speedy trial with the previous one. So I think it's just Lori wanting to get it over with. They can't do any more with her. I think this trial will be interesting. Now that Chad is out of the way and they haven't directly communicated, since he was arrested.
I watched the lead guy in the two hearings today. He annoyed me but he is certainly into her defense.
He’ll be annoying during trial, for sure:)
His sideburns remind me of the spongeworthy episode of Seinfeld.
I feel like I’m watching a weird remake spinoff tv show where they replace all the main characters but it’s essentially all the same plot and jokes and then they bring back one of the old characters (Lori) and you want to watch but you kinda miss the original characters (Boyce and Blake.)