← Drop Dead Serious With Ashleigh Banfield
Drop Dead Serious With Ashleigh Banfield
Lori Vallow's Courtroom Spiral & WILD Closing Arguments
00:30:56
Loading summary
Transcript71 lines
- [00:00]
Sponsor
This episode is brought to you by booking.combooking. yeah. Every time I use booking.com to find a place to stay in the US I know they'll have exactly what I'm looking for. Booking.com has a wide array of options from hotels to vacation rentals. So you can pick a ridiculously right place for you because let's face it, we all have different travel needs. Maybe you're a parent of science obsessed kids. You can find a hotel that's right next to all the best museums and has a balcony where you can stand at night to look at the stars. Maybe you're a group of girl who are determined to have a memorable beach trip. Rain or shine. You can book a vacation rental that's walking distance from the beach and has a sauna in case it rains. No matter what you're looking for, Booking.com helps you find the stay that's ridiculously right for you. Find exactly what you're looking for on booking.com booking yeah.
- [00:58]
Ashlee Banfield
Hey everybody. I'm Ashlee Banfield and this is drop dead serious. Well, this was it. Today was day nine of Lori Valo's murder trial in Arizona and Lori Valo's final shot at convincing a jury that she did not orchestrate the killing of her fourth husband, Charles Vallow. Today was closing arguments, a chance to be that Lincoln lawyer. Stretch your stuff across the well of the courtroom and have your final say face to face with the jury. It is often said that cases can be won or lost in openings or in closings. So imagine the pressure for a defense lawyer in a murder trial. The Laurie chose to do that job herself. So when it was batter up, she took to the floor. But not before the state ripped her a new one with their closing argument. The state typically goes first in closings followed by the defendant's lawyer and then the state gets to wrap it all up. They get the last word because the state they've got the burden of proof. So prosecutor Trina kicked off the day and she did not hold back. She told the jury that this killing was no accident and no tragedy. She said this killing was premeditated murder, cold and calculated. She said Lori Valo wanted to be with Chad Daybell, not with her husband. That she wanted that husband's multi million dollar life insurance payout and that she was willing to use her brother Alex and a set of bizarre religious beliefs to get what she wanted. But when it was Lori Valo's turn, she stood up and she told the jurors this wasn't Murder. It was a family tragedy and that it was self defense. She said her husband Charles was the aggressor and that her brother, Alex Cox was just trying to protect her. And that police, oh well, the police, that they botched the entire case. And when she wasn't blaming law enforcement, she was challenging the prosecution, accusing them of hiding evidence, distorting the facts and attempting to poison boys in the jury against her. This closing argument was everything you'd expect from Lori Valo. It was confident, it was bizarre, and it was totally on brand as an absolute shit show. Today was a lot, so let's break it all down. Prosecutor Trina Kay delivered a closing argument that was methodical, passionate and at times devastating. She started by laying out the big picture. She said Lori Valo had two motivations. The million dollar life insurance policy on her husband, Charles Vallow, and her wild obsession with the new love in her life, Chad Daybell. The prosecutor took jurors back to June and July of 2019. The affair, the secret text messages, the escalating paranoia. She laid out the timeline minute by minute. From Laurie telling her niece, Melanie Boudreaux, that, quote, this week will change everything. To Laurie texting Alex, quote. So the plot thickens. I need you to stay close to me for the next couple of days.
- [04:35]
Prosecutor
Lori Valo wanted a million dollars and she wanted Chad Daybell. And she and Alex used that twisted religious beliefs they had so that they could kill the evil possessed Charles and be like Nephi. I'll remind you that anything the defendant said in her opening was not presented at trial through a witness or through an exhibit. And it is not evidence. We know that she knows about this intervention. She knows about Adam coming. And we know this because again, of her text messages, we see Laurie then starting to round up the troops. Why does she do this? Because she wants to ensure that on July 11, it is Charles and only Charles coming to the house and not the intervention of Adam or Brandon or Zach coming over to help him. So she has Melanie tells her she can't go to this wedding, she has to stay here. It's coming to a head. This week will change everything, Tommy. Then we have July 9th, the text messages with Alex. She tells him. So the plot thickens. Call me when you can't. He doesn't call her initially, so she sends him another message, this one really letting him know. She specifically tells him, I'm going to need you to stay close to me the next couple days. Mel too. She can't go to Utah. She's got a Job. They are planking some kind of intervention, but want Mel out of the way. So I'm left alone.
- [06:27]
Lori Vallow
He talks.
- [06:28]
Prosecutor
I need to come get the stuff at your house tomorrow and secure it. Lots to do. Thank you for standing by me. It's all coming to a head this week. I will be like Nephi, I am told, and so will you. And then what happens? This gets Alex to call and they talk for almost an hour, an hour planning how they're going to stop the intervention, how they're going to be like Nephi.
- [07:00]
Ashlee Banfield
The prosecutor replayed some of the most damning testimony that came into trial from Lori's only living brother, Adam Cox, and Lori's ex friends, Christina Atwood and Serena Sharp.
- [07:15]
Prosecutor
Lori having any beliefs that were outside of what is accepted by the LDS religion?
- [07:22]
Ashlee Banfield
Yes.
- [07:23]
Prosecutor
Can you tell us what you were aware of that you knew to be outside the LDS religion?
- [07:33]
Judge
Lori told me that she was in the process of translating from a mortal human being to an immortal human being, a celestial state.
- [07:46]
Prosecutor
That's something that the LDS religion supports.
- [07:50]
Judge
I don't. I haven't heard of it. And that it's happened here on Earth yet.
- [07:56]
Prosecutor
During this time, did Lori ever tell you things about her beliefs that seemed to go against what you understood or what you were taught through the LDS church?
- [08:12]
Ashlee Banfield
Yes.
- [08:16]
Prosecutor
Did Lori ever tell you that she did not need to repent?
- [08:20]
Ashlee Banfield
Yes, she did.
- [08:21]
Prosecutor
During this weekend, did Lori talk to you about her husband, Charles Valo, being possessed?
- [08:30]
Ashlee Banfield
Yes, she did.
- [08:33]
Prosecutor
What do you recall about her talking about her husband being possessed?
- [08:39]
Ashlee Banfield
I recall that she spoke about her husband being possessed by an evil spirit and she named the evil spirit.
- [08:51]
Prosecutor
Do you recall what the name was?
- [08:52]
Ashlee Banfield
Yes.
- [08:53]
Prosecutor
What was it?
- [08:54]
Ashlee Banfield
It was Ned.
- [08:55]
Prosecutor
Did you hear Alex making some comments?
- [08:59]
Ashlee Banfield
Yes.
- [09:01]
Prosecutor
And you told us that they made you uncomfortable. What were these comments?
- [09:07]
Ashlee Banfield
He stated he wished that he could just killed Charles.
- [09:11]
Prosecutor
Okay. Was Lori around when he's saying this?
- [09:16]
Ashlee Banfield
Yes, one of the times.
- [09:17]
Prosecutor
Okay, so he said it more than once?
- [09:20]
Ashlee Banfield
Yes.
- [09:22]
Prosecutor
Can you describe first part of his demeanor when he's saying this about wanting to just kill Charles? It was jocular, just.
- [09:38]
Ashlee Banfield
As they're always standing up and just talking about it pretty loudly.
- [09:45]
Prosecutor
And you said one of the times that he said this? It was around Lori?
- [09:49]
Sponsor
Yes.
- [09:49]
Prosecutor
Did she react in any way to hearing her brother say that he wished he could just kill her husband?
- [09:55]
Ashlee Banfield
Not that I recall. And this prosecutor also played Lori's interview with the police, highlighting inconsistencies in her timeline. She played the call to the insurance company. She showed the body cam of Lori pulling up to the house 59 minutes after Charles was shot. Calm, composed, and completely detached.
- [10:21]
Prosecutor
And what was the cause of his passing? Well, he was shot.
- [10:34]
Lori Vallow
Okay. So I don't know how I want to put that. Okay.
- [10:38]
Prosecutor
All right. And I hate to ask, but is it. You can just say yes or no. It. Is it. Was it a homicide?
- [10:49]
Lori Vallow
No, it was an accident.
- [10:51]
Prosecutor
An accident. So what we hear here is Lori Valo being untruthful to ban her life insurance. We'll talk about credibility later. But it becomes very relevant that even in the smallest of things, this defendant exaggerates, minimizes, and is completely untruthful to various people. We all know that she was not the beneficiary. She didn't. But we also know that Charles Vala was not accidentally shot. She told the police she was there. She knows that her brother intentionally shot him. Of course they want to claim it's self defense. There's no accident about that. When you shoot someone twice. And I know the defendant wanted to make sure that it was clear that everyone else was calm, but no one else had just allegedly seen their husband get shot and killed by their brother. When you were looking at the reasonableness of her testimony, you have to consider in the light of reason, common sense and experience, and the way that she was acting and reacting that day, as well as her own statements do not fit the evidence, do not fit the physical evidence. And you will see her credibility throughout this whole case has been questionable. Whether or not she wants to claim it's self defense or not. There was nothing accidental about shooting him twice. Then that second call to Banner life insurance where she tells Robin Smith Scott a few different things to garner sympathy. And she asked her if she could do anything about the change in beneficiary. Can't. I mean, I can't give too much information, but I can tell you that the beneficiary was changed in March of this year. Okay.
- [12:52]
Lori Vallow
Okay.
- [12:53]
Prosecutor
I'm trying to figure out what he was doing since we have five kids and we've been married for 15 years. I'm sorry. So Lori tells this woman, we have five kids, which if you want to count them all and admit that three of them are adults and. Okay. Really, they have one kid in common. Tyler, you learned, was actually getting Social Security survivor benefits from her dad's death starting in 2018. Lori's son Colby isn't living with them. Charles son's never lived with them. Why does she say these things? She can't help it. She just wants to just make Herself seem better than she is.
- [13:38]
Ashlee Banfield
And then the prosecutor closed with this. Words, actions, motive and physical evidence all tell you what happened the morning Lori Valow conspired to kill Charles Vallow. And under Arizona law, that is first degree murder. And then it was Laurie's turn, her moment in the spotlight. A place where Laurie feels right at home, especially when men are around. And on this jury there are 10 of them. She started calm and even casual and said, quote, self defense is not a crime. But then in true Laurie fashion, she turned the courtroom into full blown chaos, alternating between delivering a closing argument as a lawyer and then testifying as a defendant, something she had already agreed on the record she did not plan to do. And the objections started flying in. Between all the volleys, Laurie called out the Chandler police for the things that they screwed up.
- [14:45]
Lori Vallow
In Arizona, self defense is defined as not being a crime. So let's look at what we've learned in this trial. We learned that a shooting occurred and, and that 911 was called, that law enforcement was notified. We learned that fire, EMS and Chandler police arrived at the scene. We learned that my brother Alex Cox came out of the house with his hands up as directed by 911 and was questioned by the police in the driveway. We learned that I came up with my daughter Tylee and we were told to wait by the car until police would speak with us. We learned from Detective Inkland on the stand that we asked for Tylee's medication from the house for her panic attacks, but it was not given to her. We learned that eventually my brother Alex was taken in a police car to the Chandler Police department uncuffed. We learned in this trial that my daughter Tylee and I were also taken to Chandler police department department in a police van. We heard from Detective Inkland's testimony that her goal was to make small talk with us. And.
- [16:09]
Judge
The jury will determine what the testimony did or did not show. Go ahead.
- [16:15]
Lori Vallow
That her goal was to make the small talk with us and all the way to the station so she could speak with us separately before we would talk about what actually happened. We learned that all three of us were separated and taken to three interview rooms where we each told police of the events of the day, each from our own perspectives and answered all questions asked of us. We saw snippets of that interview in the trial here the state did not show you the entire interview. Most of my police interview is admitted though into evidence in this exhibit. It's number 286. And I would encourage you to Watch that entire interview when you start your deliberations. It is important. It is important for you to determine for yourselves my demeanor and not listen to anyone else. You can see it with your own eyes and hear it with your own ears. We heard from several witnesses that because this event was almost six years ago, that their memories of the events and statements were probably better back then. Well, my police interview happened that very morning and I told the police the events from my perspective at that time. It is admitted into evidence and will answer many of your questions. You did not see Tyler's interview. But we did learn from Detective England that she did an interview that morning as well. You did not see Alex's interview. But we learned that Alex was interviewed that morning by Detective Moffitt, the original case agent, whom we did not hear from in this trial. The state chose not to show you those interviews. Object, your honor, or let you listen to the 911 call.
- [18:05]
Judge
The jury shall disregard that last statement. Okay. The jury can only consider what was admitted into evidence.
- [18:14]
Lori Vallow
We learned in this trial from Officer Koutheim's testimony that Alex was injured on the back of his head with a bump and according to his testimony, a 1 inch laceration. We did not see those pictures documenting that injury as well. We learned in this trial that we did not know, the three of us, that our interviews were being recorded. We learned that Alex's phone was taken by police and put into an evidence bag, according to Detective Duncan, and that no digital copy of Alex's phone was taken by the Chandler Police Department, even though this is their normal protocol. We learned that Alex's phone was returned to him that same day with no further inquiries. We learned that after my interview and Tylee's interview that we were introduced to a victims advocate and that gave us further instructions in another room where Tylee and I were reunited. We learned that soon after that, all three of us, Alex, Tyler and myself were taken in another van and dropped off back at our house. We learned that we were instructed at that time that we could not enter the house yet that we were directed by law enforcement to take the rental car. Since all three of our cars were inside the police tape, we were directed to return later in the afternoon when the scene was cleaned up. We learned in this trial that we did as directed and left the house and the rental car close to 12:00pm p.m. we learned that we did not return to the house until contacted by Detective Inkland to return to the house so that Alex could walk through. Walk the detectives through what they call a Walkthrough. We learned that many detectives were present during that walk through with Alex. We learned that Detective Duncan was there, Detective Coons was there, Detective Moffitt was there, Detective Werther was there, and an officer with a body cam was there. And yet we were told by Detective Duncan, the case agent on this case, on the stand, that because of some problem, the walkthrough is not recorded. Detective Duncan also informed us that he does not know if any of the people present wrote a report about it. We can infer from Detective Duncan's testimony and, and the fact that we don't have an evidence, any body cam footage of the walkthrough and no reports talking about it, that there are none. Even though this would be crucial evidence for you, the jury to have.
- [21:02]
Judge
Sustained. The jury should disregard that comment. Again, the jury can only consider evidence that was admitted into testimony. I'm sorry, testimony that was admitted into evidence, or exhibits that were admitted into evidence.
- [21:19]
Lori Vallow
The state of Arizona has the obligation to show you evidence to prove that this event was not self defense as stated by the only three witnesses. So why not show. You show the jury all the evidence that they gathered?
- [21:36]
Judge
Again, sustained. The jury can only consider the evidence and testimony that was admitted into evidence.
- [21:45]
Lori Vallow
We learned in this trial that Alex fully cooperated with law enforcement. We learned that my daughter Tylee fully cooperated with law enforcement. We learned that I fully cooperated with law enforcement. We learned that law enforcement treated all of us that day kindly and courteously on July 11, 2019. That law enforcement treated us that day like this was self defense. We were not given instructions to stay in town. We were not given instructions that we were under investigation of any kind. On July 11, 2019, we were interviewed by Chandler police and released with no further instructions. We learned that Chandler police put out a press release that day. On July 11.
- [22:42]
Judge
I'll sustain that objection to the extent the jury is to determine what the facts did or did not establish.
- [22:51]
Lori Vallow
Under Arizona. Under Arizona law, I had the right to self defense. Tyler had the right to self defense. Alex had the right to self defense. This event was not planned or expected. It was shocking. We learned in this trial that Chandler Police department neglected to do a thorough investigation. We learned that they did not swab Alex's hands for gunpowder residue. We learned that they did not swab my hands for gunpowder residue. We learned that they did not swab Tyler's hands for gunpowder residue. We learned that they did not lumen all the gun. We learned that they did not lumen all the bat they did not test the DNA on the bat that they collected. They did not test the floorboard. They did not test the projectile. They did not test my husband's shirt. They did not search the rental car. They did not search any of our three cars that were there at the scene. They did not test the gun until over five years later.
- [24:01]
Ashlee Banfield
Then Lori went for it, laying it on thick, digging right into the hearts of the family men on the jury. And you know, the family women too.
- [24:14]
Lori Vallow
The Chandler Police Department did treat this event just like it was self defense and a tragic family event. We learned in this trial that Charles and I were obviously having marital problems regardless of what was happening in our marriage at the time. On July 11, this was self defense when Tylee came out with the bat to protect me, her mother. Charles did not have to take the bat from Tylee and start swinging. At 62 years old, Charles had a choice that day and could have put the bat down. A two minute period changed our lives forever. How are you supposed to choose between three people you love? Your husband, your daughter, your brother.
- [25:07]
Judge
All right, hold on. All right. I'll caution the defendant not to testify about things that were not entered into evidence.
- [25:20]
Lori Vallow
How can you decide for another person if they feel threatened? Why does the state want to blame to someone?
- [25:27]
Prosecutor
It's a reasonable person standard, not the standard of the person.
- [25:31]
Judge
I'm sure you'll point that out in rebuttal. I'll allow the argument as that inference. Go ahead.
- [25:38]
Lori Vallow
Why does the state want to blame someone for this tragic event? What evidence did the state show you in this trial that I wanted harm to come to my husband. We learned in this trial that I was praying for my husband. We learned in this trial that even though my husband and I were having marital issues, that we were both trying to do the best things for our son with special needs. JJ we learned in this trial that I was shocked that Charles had changed his life insurance policy. But I was not angry as the state alleges in the phone call we heard from the insurance company. We heard that I was disappointed for our children, our grown children as well as our children still at home. But I was not angry. My husband Charles was providing for our children still at home. I had no motive to change that.
- [26:31]
Ashlee Banfield
Then Laurie turned her attention to her Mormon faith. Some have called it her twisted, cult like version of her Mormon faith. But she laid it out this way.
- [26:41]
Lori Vallow
We heard a lot in this trial about the Book of Mormon prophet named Nephi. This is the state's evidence to murder over self Defense. And it is utterly ridiculous. We heard from Detective Duncan, who admitted on the stand that he had no idea what I meant in the text message when I said, we will be like Nephi in Mormon culture. Nephi signifies strong faith, perseverance, and courage.
- [27:16]
Judge
Sustained.
- [27:18]
Lori Vallow
The state's attempt to misconstrue the positive text message about a wonderful religious figure, Nephi, and try to turn it into an order to kill someone is absurd. This is an attempt by the state to try to retrofit a crime that doesn't exist. This event was not a crime. It was a tragedy. Don't let them turn my family tragedy into a crime.
- [27:49]
Ashlee Banfield
And finally, Lori made her last pitch.
- [27:52]
Lori Vallow
When I'm done speaking to you, the state gets to get up and rebut all that I've told you. They've got to have the last word, so to speak, because it is 100% their burden to prove to you that I committed a crime. And you won't be allowed to hear from me again. So I want you to remember that it is the state's job to prove to you that I committed a crime. And if you have not seen the evidence, that leaves you firmly convinced that I have committed this very crime, then the state failed to show you the evidence that you need because I did not commit this crime. The only interview the state entered into evidence is mine. So I encourage you to go watch it. I told you just what happened that day, just the way it happened. The state put forth a bunch of evidence in this trial in an effort to make you dislike me, to try to attack my character so that you would just say guilty, no matter what evidence they showed you. But only you get to decide. The state put up witnesses that had zero knowledge of a conspiracy. The state did not show you evidence of an agreement to commit murder. They showed you evidence of a family tragedy. And then they showed you the sad effects of a family torn apart because of that tragedy.
- [29:38]
Ashlee Banfield
The last word is extremely powerful in a murder case. And the prosecutor gets it. Trina K. Stood back up and dug right in. And in her rebuttal, she did not mince words telling the jury that, quote, the execution of Charles Vallow is not a family tragedy, end quote. She pointed directly at Laurie's own words. She told the jurors Lori wanted Chad, Laurie wanted money, and that Laurie used religion as a shield and Alex as a weapon. And she left the jurors with a final reminder that Arizona law does not allow you to execute a man when he's lying on the ground. And now we wait. It's always a waiting game. When the jury retires to the deliberation room, sometimes it only takes minutes, sometimes hours, sometimes days. And sometimes they don't get there and they hang. In my opinion, this one will not be that. This one will be more like minutes, maybe an hour, maybe two. I may eat my words, but this one seems pretty clear cut. However, I do have the benefit of having covered trial number one. These jurors, I don't know how much they already knew coming in. They all had to swear that they could be unbiased and listen to the evidence. But Here we are, 12 jurors, hours of testimony, weeks of evidence, and two closing arguments that could not have been more different. And when they come back, when those jurors have reached a decision, even if they haven't, we will be here as we have, wrapping up every day of this case. I'm Ashley Banfield. Thanks so much for listening. And remember, the truth isn't just serious, it's drop dead serious.