Hidden True Crime - Lori Vallow's Attention Seeking Day in Court: Dr John Reacts

Episode Date: December 3, 2024

Dr John Matthias assesses Lori Vallow's recent statements in an Arizona Courthouse as she awaits trial for the murder of her husband Charles Vallow and the attempted murder of her former nephew-in-law Brandon Boudreaux. Lori also wants to represent herself in court in 2025. Will the Judge let her? The case is far from over. What started as a simple conversation at their dinner table became a captivating podcast. Join the dynamic duo of Dr. John Matthias, a forensic psychologist, and Lauren Matthias, an investigative journalist, as they delve into the psychological facets of unthinkable crimes every week. Their unique perspectives and in-depth analysis offer a fresh take on true crime storytelling. Thank you for your support through sponsorships, subscribing, listening, and becoming a Patreon member at Patreon.com/HiddenTrueCrime Our Sponsors:* Check out Acorns: https://acorns.com/HIDDENTRUECRIME* Check out Acorns: https://acorns.com/HIDDENTRUECRIME* Check out Armoire and use my code HIDDENTRUECRIME for a great deal: https://www.armoire.style* Check out Effecty and use my code HIDDENTRUECRIME for a great deal: https://www.effecty.com* Check out Happy Mammoth and use my code HIDDENTRUECRIME for a great deal: https://happymammoth.comSupport this podcast at — https://redcircle.com/hidden-a-true-crime-podcast1836/donationsAdvertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Lately, I've been trying to be more intentional about what I wear, intentional about everything, just choosing pieces that feel effortless, still put together, timeless, but also not overthinking it every morning. It's why I keep going back to quince. Their pieces just make getting dressed easier and I feel so classy. I feel elevated. The fits are flattering. The fabric is really high quality. Everything is wearable day to day. I actually got this really, really, beautiful yellow V-neck midi dress from them, and I paired it with some Italian leather sandals. It's one of those outfits that just works. It feels polished but still comfortable. It's exactly what I've been looking for. What surprises me, though, is the quality for the price.

Quince uses premium materials like European linen, organic cotton, but they cut out the middleman. So everything is priced way lower than you'd expect. Refresh. your every day with luxury you can actually use. Head to quince.com slash hidden true crime for free shipping on your order and 365 day returns. That's quince, quince, ui and c e.com slash hidden true crime for free shipping and 365 day returns. Quince.com slash hidden true crime. Ladies and gentlemen, we are now boarding group A. Please have your boarding passes ready to scan. If your phone is cracked, old, or was chewed up by your Chihuahua Travel Companion, please refrain from holding up the line. Instead, go to Verizon and trade in any

phone in any condition from one of their top brands for the new Samsung Galaxy S25 Plus with Galaxy AI and a watch and tab on any plan. Only on Verizon. With new line on my plan, service plan required for watch and tab. Additional terms apply. See Verizon.com for details. Ladies and gentlemen, we are now boarding group A. Please have your boarding passes ready to scan. If your phone is cracked, old, or was chewed up by your Chihuahua travel companion, please refrain from holding up the line. Instead, go to Verizon and trade in any phone in any condition from one of their top brands for the new Samsung Galaxy S25 Plus with Galaxy AI and a watch and tab on any plan. Only on Verizon. With new line on my plan, service plan required for watch and tab. Additional terms apply. See Verizon.com for details.

And were you ever previously determined to be incompetent at any point? Not to my understanding. So my understanding was that the judge did the same thing that you did in abundance of caution. Let's go ahead and put her in and see. And I came out competent. Well, when you say you came out competent, was there a period of time where you were ruled as incompetent? Hello, Hidden Gems. It is Lauren, Dr. John.

I always say that at the beginning, as if all of you are Hidden Gems don't know. But for those of you that are watching and you're new to our channel, I am Lauren and this is my counterpart, Dr. John, my co-host, Dr. John Matthias, he is a clinical and forensic psychologist. I am or was a TV reporter and we are now the host of Hidden True Crime, which delves into the psychological motives behind unimaginable crimes. We just got back from, or I just got back from Delphi, Indiana. And we are wanting to catch up on so many important updates. on other cases that we cover, particularly the Lori Vallow case. For those that thought the Lori Vallow case was over or is over, you are wrong. That's all I can say. Wrong. Right. It is not over.

And not only that in Arizona, where she is preparing for a trial because justice for Charles Valo has not yet happened or for Brandon Boudreau, her former nephew-in-law and her husband is Charles Valo. Charles Valo was murdered and Brandon Boudreau, they say it was an attempted murder. She's been charged with both of those crimes. So we are awaiting her trial in Arizona. In fact, John, maybe you can share a little bit about this. This, you know, major, there's been so much news.

First, she's, I said, why don't you say this? And then I'm like, wait, hold on. I have more to say. First, she didn't show up to some court hearings, which is shocking and so disrespectful, in my opinion. We'll ask Dr. John about it. That's why we're going to talk about this and get caught up. And then now cameras have been allowed in the Arizona courtroom to something that did not happen in Idaho when she was tried and found guilty of murdering her two children, Tiley Ryan and J.J. Valo. But now she wants to represent herself. And most recently, she's spoken court at a, at a, yeah, let's talk about that because it's, is she competent? Is she not competent? Doesn't matter whether or not we should find her competent. There's been a lot of news about this, but Dr. John is going to have some new take. So tell us really quickly, John, what's going on in Arizona, at Maricopa County with Lori

Valo as she prepares. She has a new attorney, too, or counsel. Well, let's start with why we're picking this up again. I think that, of course, we've been on DaBell from the very beginning. That was our first case. So we have a tremendous investment in the outcome of all the daybel cases. But I think I should mention that, you know, getting just justice for Charles. Vallow is really important, and we don't want him to be overlooked. And the families that knew and loved Charles, the victim's families, because Charles was obviously a victim. And in many ways, Charles was the beginning of the entire case that Charles is murder, is what set in motion all the other events that followed.

So in some ways, if there had been accountability with Charles, or if somehow when Charles was on that now well-known body cam footage looking for help, if somehow there had been an intervention, then we wouldn't be covering any of this, right? So I think getting justice for Charles is very important to us. I think it's important to a lot of the families. And Charles, by all accounts, was a really amazing guy. He was extremely well-liked. He was very generous. Like, Charles just seemed like a really good guy. I mean, we obviously didn't know Charles,

but we've certainly talked to the families and heard stories. And so I think that's really important to reiterate, is that, you know, we're invested in getting just, for all the victims in the daybell cases. And Charles is clearly one of those victims and an important one, because in many ways, if somehow law enforcement or certain people had intervened earlier and up,

then none of this would have occurred. If they had listened to him, I'll say it. If they had listened to him and heard him and took what he was saying seriously, we could have saved many lives. or or even if after the horrendous ambush murder of charles if alx cox had been arrested just held overnight just held overnight even treated as a suspect in a murder and not as someone who just happened to be that impulsively killed someone apparently and was was doing it to defend himself which obviously

the evidence at the crime scene did not show that at all. But if that had occurred, then again, we would have, you know, a lot of this would have been prevented. We know, as you pointed out, the family. We know Charles's sister well. We know that Colby Ryan, Lori Valo's son considered Charles Valo a father figure in his life. we know that he was a good father and a good man. And you're right, Charles Valo Matters. And so this is not yet over.

And the shenanigans, that's what I call him. And I think that's a nice word that is happening in Arizona. Yeah, needs to be talked about. She was found incompetent in Idaho for 10 months, found competent to stand trial. Now she's in Arizona. And it's like deja vu a little bit. or it feels like it, although representing herself and cameras are a whole new thing, or wanting to represent herself.

And now she has new counsel. I mean, it's some pretty wild stuff going on in Arizona. So if you can help us make sense of it, John. Well, she's gone through, I've lost track, but she's gone through many lawyers already. And she's gotten to the point where she wants to represent herself. So she wants to be pro se or pro per in Arizona.

The attorney's calling it pro per. It's the same thing. it means for oneself, essentially represent oneself. So let's back up a little bit. I mean, it's fascinating. So the first thing I would say about what's going on in Arizona with Lori Daybell is for people who follow the Daybell trial, it's a really fascinating look at criminal psychology, the psyche of a convicted murderer. and how she thinks, how she, you know, comports herself, right?

How she acts, how she behaves in court, right? It's, it's, to me, you know, that's our interest, right? We're, we're, she's showing us now in real time. I mean, in some ways it's a horror show. Because if, if she represents herself, I don't know, you know, you know, I've never seen anything like it. A convicted murderer who is trying to fight charges against her who wants to represent herself and put herself on display for the world to see it's just amazing. So the first question you have to ask or I want to ask is why is she doing this, right? Like you would think

that someone who's serving multiple life sentences would reach and would come to some agreement with the state about a plea deal. Just throw on a couple, throw a couple more licenses on, right? I mean, it's possible, and I don't know if the state's negotiated with her. It's possible the state, because of some of their mistakes early on, maybe the state isn't willing to negotiate with her. But I don't think that's true. I think that given a preference, I think in most cases,

states are going to negotiate with people because it saves time and money. Right. Most states don't have the resources to engage in long trials with murderers, especially murderers that have already been convicted. And so I think the first question you have to ask is, why is this happening? Right. Like, if I were in her shoes, my guess is I would just try to get a deal and not, you know, just go away. But not here. Not here. Right. She's. So the most obvious answer, when I think about that, the most obvious answer is this is very attention seeking. This is someone who clearly wants to be in the limelight. This is someone who wants to stand out.

It's almost as if all the attention and all the focus on her for all those years was taken away. And now she wants to get it back, right? She does not want to go into, she does not want to go gently into the night. she wants to make a statement. Right. And that's what she's doing. I can't think of, if you want to make like a statement

about how significant or important you are or whatever she's trying to do, representing yourself in a murder trial is got to be one of the most, you know, salient ways, prominent ways of doing that. And so for me, I, I, I, that's, my first question is why is I can't why is she even doing this why is she why is she creating the

spectacle and so you know I think the answer has to be given what we know about Lori and given that you know that there have been evaluators who have diagnosed her with personality disorders it's not clear which personality disorder exactly but but let's say one or more personality disorders. I guess it depends on who you ask, but according to the courts, she has some type of personality disorder, which would be consistent with someone who,

instead of just taking a deal and walking away from the limelight, that would be consistent with someone who really wants attention and they really want to, I don't know if this is like her last stand, And this is like her chance. Maybe she sees this as an attempt to really plead her case. You know, we know, I just saw, hey, Colby, I just saw Kobe. Colby jumped on.

Colby did, you know, talk to his mom in jail in Arizona. And so we got a glimpse into her perception of what happened. And she believes that Tiley committed the crime. essentially. I mean, that wouldn't be true with Charles, but you can see this is, this is someone who's, you know, this is someone who's not really attuned to reality too well, right? And so, you know, there's something, there's something really unsettling about this too.

Like, it's like watching a train wreck, you know, like I don't, it's not pleasant to watch. this you know you're watching her like she's already a convicted murder but you're watching her self-destruct in real time right and so I mean I I don't know how Colby feels about that but man it's on the one hand you know we all we want justice for Charles but on the other hand this is not pretty to watch and it's not going to be pretty but I guess from my perspective as someone in the forensic world I think if you want

want to see kind of a disordered mind, a criminal mind in real time, you're seeing it. You're going to see it here. I do want to go ahead. In that sense, it's for me, I mean, I don't mean to be cold about this, but it's a little bit of a case study in criminal psychology, right? Like, you know, you're going to really, potentially you're going to dig below the surface a little. more with Lori and kind of see what's there and see what's how she thinks and how she's acting, right?

I don't know. It's kind of fascinating. Sad. It's sad. Colby, who, for those new to this case, is the only surviving child of Lori Valo. He's here with us tonight. He has his own YouTube channel that you can follow and subscribe to. Colby, thank you for being here.

I want to let you know, Colby, that Colby been live last night talking about how frustrated it is to hear some of the media surrounding his family's tragedy. And we went on a date night last night, Colby, the first time in months, by the way, that's not like a regular occurrence here. These are our date nights when we go live here together from separate rooms of our house. But we listen to you, Colby. We listen to your whole live and you're doing exceptional work and we're proud of you and your new addition to your family.

And thank you for being here, even though we're talking. about hard things. We really admire you. And if you have any questions, share that and I'll make sure that Mauds star him or I don't miss them so that we can answer any. And Colby actually has a great interview with John over on his channel

as well that you can check out. Thank you, Colby, for being here. Well, what I want to ask you, John, too, is you say there's going to be a spectacle, there's going to be a show, this is someone that's not well. Is she incompetent? And maybe you can't answer that. And also, by the way, I do have a clip from East Idaho News and Nate Eaton that we can show from this hearing at whatever point you want to.

I just want to throw that out there. Yeah. So that's a great question. You know, this case really turns things upside down in the sense that, you know, that Lori's attorney argues essentially that she's competent and she should. represent herself. And one of the things her attorney says is, so Rule 11 in Arizona is, it has to do with competency hearings. And it's, you know, trying to determine competency. And her attorney points out that usually it's, it's rare that the state will fight to keep someone, you know, to deem someone incompetent.

that usually it's the defense that will seek to have a defendant being competent. And here you have Lori essentially saying, I'm competent. I can represent myself. And the state is objecting to that and saying, no, we need to put her under Rule 11 and really make a ruling on competency. And that's like, so you're reversing the normal process because it's, it's typically the complete opposite. And her attorney argues that. And so like there's so many things going on here. that are atypical in terms of the way this process works

and the way that defendants are represented. And I mean, I'm just scratching the surface. So, but that in and of itself, like this idea of the state trying to retain her under Rule 11 and the state being concerned about our competency and the defense arguing that she's competent. is so unusual. You know, I mean, like, that in and of itself tells you that this is bizarre, and this is going to be a different situation. And I mean, and that doesn't even begin to address this issue of delusional disorder,

which we know that that was one of her diagnoses, according to Judge Boyce, that she was diagnosed with delusional disorder. And so, you know, one big question here is, can someone with delusional disorder represent themselves accurately and fairly, right? And that's putting aside the idea of competence. So competence typically, not always, but competence typically has to do more with,

usually has to do more with psychosis or schizophrenia or just, you know, a detachment from reality, hallucinations, that type of thing. it's a little trickier when it comes to delusions but this situation is going to raise a lot of forensic issues that are really peculiar one thing i find interesting and of course we can watch this together this was this was last week or was it last week yeah well i guess it was about 10 days ago and her original attorneys wanted her to have another competency test. She now has new counsel who seemed to be supporting her desire to represent herself,

which is fascinating, and that they seem to be fighting that she doesn't need a competency test. I mean... Well, their argument is... So there have been forensic evaluators who have examined her, and apparently they've said, some of them said that she's competent. And however, part of the issue was that that determination was not based upon a face-to-face or what I referred to as a contact visit.

The determination was made from records of her. or probably, you know, that in jails and prisons, typically guards or mental health people, it depends on the scenario, but people typically have to take notes about their visits and how people are doing, right? There's going to be logs about people's functioning in jail or prison. And there's going to be records kept. You know, I don't know if she's in mental health treatment, probably not. but the determination was based upon records

and it wasn't based upon an actual contact visit. So that's an issue, right? The state noted that she was incompetent. She was declared incompetent in Idaho in a previous case for 10 months, as you point out, and then she was restored to competence, and then she stood trial when she was competent. And so their concern, I think, is the state's concern, obviously, their biggest concern is that somehow this could result in a mistrial or they could get overturned on appeal.

They're just trying to check all their boxes and make sure that if she represents herself, that there's fairly good reasons for doing so and that this whole thing isn't going to be upended or overturned at some point because of, of issues around competency or maybe even, you know, I haven't heard anything here about like insanity, please, or, but, and I don't think, obviously, I don't, if she represents herself, she's clearly not going to go down that path, but, but something like that might be more of an option if, if she had attorneys representing her, but. As the Krispy Chicken Sandwich from 7-Eleven, people always call me loud. And I'm like, yeah, I know. I'm crispy.

Did you expect me to whisper? If you want quiet, go eat some soup and reflect. Like, I know I'm a handful. I'm bold, I'm juicy. Throw some pickles and barbecue sauce on me, and baby, I'm a whole meal. And with seven rewards, I'm just $4. Quiet. No.

Krispy, saucy, and $4? Very. Only at 711. Valley 362326, participating stores only while supplies lastly out for full terms. You know, I don't know. It's really fascinating because you've got all these forensic issues in play that you don't typically see in a lot of cases, and they're playing out in a really strange way.

Yes. Should we, sorry, hold on. Should we, I apologize, everyone, you couldn't hear that, but I got a call on the screen. And now my flashlight's on. Everything's going wrong here. Okay. Should we listen to some of the hearing? I have it pulled up.

Sure. Okay. And just let me know when you want to stop or say something about this. This was this hearing, her defense attorney, here we are. One thing I noticed is her defense attorney who is new counsel does seem to be a little bit nervous, in my opinion. And you said the same thing. I was like, I'm glad that I wasn't the only one that thought that. What's one financial lesson you learned the hard way?

I'll go first. It's not too late to start saving. Today's episode is sponsored by Acorns. Acorns is a financial wellness app that makes it easy to start saving and investing for your future. You don't need to be an expert. Acorns will recommend a diversified portfolio that matches you and your money goals. You don't need to be rich. Acorns lets you get started with the spare money you have right now.

And one of the best things about Acorns is they allow you to see projected growth on their website. Simply go online, type in how much money you'd put in and see the potential future balance of your account. Sign up now and join the over 13 million all-time customers. customers who've already saved and invested over $22 billion with Acorns. Head to Acorns.com slash Hidden True Crime or download the Acorns app to get started. Paid non-client endorsement compensation provides incentive to positively promote Acorns, Tier 1 compensation provided. Investing involves risk, Acorns Advisors, LLC and SEC registered investment advisor. A few important disclosures at acorns.com slash hidden true crime.

Now's the time for a great deal on a new Honda. It's time to take an adventure with rugged capability and commanding style. Check out the Honda Ridgeline, pilot or CRV. For a limited time, well-qualified buyers can get a 3.9% APR on a 2025 pilot or a 2.9% APR on a 2025 ridgeline or CRV. See Dealer for financing details. Ryan Seacrest here. When you have a busy schedule, it's important to maximize your downtime.

One of the best ways to do that is by going to Chumbacasino.com. Chumba Casino has all your favorite social casino games like spin slots, bingo, and solitaire that you can play for free for a chance to redeem some serious prizes. So hop on to chumbacasino.com now and live the chumba life. Sponsored by Chumba Casino. Lots of attorneys in our office. We spoke with our attorney who's in Rule 11 regularly. It's very rare that a doctor attempts to go back out to speak with a client a second time. We never would ever advise a client to not speak in Rule 11.

However, we are defense attorneys. That is Rule 101. Your client shouldn't talk. And in this particular circumstance, we are saying we don't think she needs to be enrolled in Rule 11. So I don't think waiting around for Dr. Hernandez is going to get us anywhere. And we certainly don't need it to meet all of the evidence that is required in the count. And I think one other. The last thing is we don't see this with the state.

How often do we see the state trying to keep a client into Rule 11 proceedings? So we now have, Your Honor, who was concerned about the Rule 11 and didn't necessarily think it was appropriate. We have said that Dr. McGady has now said that Commissioner Morderozion, who was willing to stipulate to her competency, all of these people who are saying we believe she's competent, we should just, you should withdraw our Rule 11, withdraw previous counsel's Rule 11, allow Ms. Valu to be pro per. If at some point, you or the state see something that is concerning, we can certainly put her in Rule 11 again. Competency is fluid. Again, we've never seen the state fight to keep someone in competency proceedings. It's usually the complete opposite. That's all I have.

Okay. Well, there's a big distinction from the LaCount case in this defendant's case. because according to prior counsel's motion for Rule 11, she was previously found incompetent in another jurisdiction and put into some sort of restoration process. And then found competent and tried. Correct. All we're saying is that where we're at right now,

you asked us to come back and give you some evidence of competency. I think we have more than provided that at this point. And at this point, we're just delaying any speedy trial rights, any fundamental right to represent herself. All right. Well, if she were allowed to represent herself prior to that, I'd have to go through a colloquy with her and get some information. And based on that information, could still refer her for a Rule 11, depending on her answers to those questions. Sure, and that was supposed to be my last point was we haven't even done that. with her. So let's do that and see where we end up.

All right. Well, ma'am, I am going to ask you a series of questions and that could inform what happens next. Have you previously in any other criminal proceeding been referred for a competency determination? Yes, previously. All right. And were you ever previously determined to be incompetent at any point? not to my understanding. So my understanding was that the judge did the same thing that you did in abundance of caution.

Let's go ahead and put her in and see. And I came out competent. Well, when you say you came out competent, was there a period of time where you were ruled as incompetent? I would say technically they did do that. That's how they put you into the program in that state. Correct. How long were you in that program? I was in that program for about 10 months.

Okay. And what types of things did you, what did they give you classes? What types of things did they speak to you about where you went through some process where you were later deemed competent? I did go through a process of several things, several classes, competency class, and meeting with doctors and evaluators, many, many evaluators. Are you aware of any diagnosis that you were given? Yes. And what is that? I we're going to object to that, especially with this being public and not sealed. Hmm.

It's not relevant to this determination. Okay, well then this was almost two years ago. Then I'm going to keep her in the rule 11 process to determine that and, um, approach and discuss with you without it being on the, uh, without public on the record, but not public. You mean as far as the diagnosis? Yes. Sure. Which isn't it just delusional on a personality disorder? Or are we referring?

Yeah, I'll skip ahead. You can stop it. You can stop it. You want to stop it? Okay. So there's a moment there that's just mind-boggling to me. There's a moment there that just fascinates me. And that is the judge, the judge says essentially, okay, let's, you know, basically the judge says,

the attorney says, my client's competent. She can represent herself. And the judge says, well, you know, your client's unusual because your client was deemed incompetent before and unable to stand trial for 10 months. And that's a concern. Right. So, and then he says, but, you know, let me talk to your client so we can resolve this. And, right, he starts by asking, if you had a previous competency email?

and she says yes, and then he asks her essentially, were you declared to be incompetent previously? And this is what she says. So I just can't get past this moment. Here's what she says. Not to my understanding. She says, not to my understanding.

So essentially what she tells the judge is, I was never declared incompetent. I was never deemed incompetent, which obviously she was. Right. Like, this is someone, Lori Valade, well, this is someone who in response to the judge asking if she's ever been declared incompetent says not to my understanding. I mean, I guess she doesn't say no.

But for all intents and purposes, she does say, she does deny it, right? She denies it. Yeah. And the question you have to ask. So the question, for me, knowing this case really well, the question for me is, okay, she thinks she's perfectly normal. Straight from her mouth. Yes.

She thinks she's never been incompetent. Like she thinks this is all just an exercise and, I don't know, like frivolity, right? Like the court. All these people declared her incompetent in Idaho. And she just played this little game, knowing that she was perfectly fine.

and here she is in Arizona, even though she's convicted of murder, here she is in Arizona, going through the same song and dance, right? And the judge, it's a factual question. Were you declared incompetent? Yes.

The answer is yes. And she says, not to my understanding. Right. Like, okay. She's not not incompetent. Not to my understanding. So when I heard that, I thought, oh my gosh, like this is going to be a circus, right?

Like she's going to represent herself and, you know, she may be part of the strategy here is that she represents herself and it becomes such a fiasco that there's a mistrial or maybe on appeal it gets overturned and they have to try it again. I don't know. I don't really, but I don't think she's that good at strategy. I think she's pretty impulsive and pretty focused on the present. I don't really see Lori Valadebel as a good planner. So I don't think this is strategy. No.

I don't think this is strategy. I think, you know, the big question I have is somebody who can't answer that question about competency in a straightforward manner and acknowledge that she was, the question, and someone who's been, diagnosed with delusional disorder?

The question I have is, can she even see what's going on here? Like, can a human being, this is a broad question, this is a broader question, can a human being, if someone's delusional, can they see that they're delusional? Right? That's the problem here. You're going to, this is the problem the court is going to have to grapple with. You have someone who was previously incompetent who's diagnosed with delusional disorder, which, by the way, it's not, doesn't seem to.

to have gone away. And she wants to represent herself. So if somebody is delusional and they're representing themselves in a murder trial and they can't see that they're delusional, can they represent themselves fairly and accurately? And so her attorney basically said there's two prongs to pro se or pro per. She calls it pro per, which is self-representation. there's two prongs to that.

Number one is you have to understand the dispute. In other words, so part of competency is you have to know the charges against you and you have to understand the repercussions of those charges. So if someone is charged with murder, you have to understand what that means and you have to understand that if you're convicted of murdering someone, you're going to spend a lot of time in prison probably.

So the first thing is you have to understand what her attorney calls the dispute. The dispute is that she murdered, Charles Valo. And then the second part of that is you have to formulate a defense. You have to have the capacity, the mental capacity to formulate a defense in this case because she's representing herself in a normal competency evaluation, which is something I might do.

The second part of that is that you have to be able to aid or assist in your defense. So in other words, most clients aren't crazy enough to represent themselves. and murder trials. So in that case, they have to have the capacity to assist their attorneys. So that's how normal competency works. But if someone is so delusional

that they can't even acknowledge, or they're in such denial, that they can't even acknowledge that they were incompetent for 10 months, and they went through a whole process of medication and, you know, if they can't admit that, can they represent them,

themselves in court, right? Like, that's a hell of a tough question for a court to answer. I don't think, I'm not sure, I can't remember a case ever quite like this in terms of having a convicted murderer, then come back in another murder charge and try to represent themselves when they have all these diagnoses of personality disorder, which I don't know what those were exactly. I could speculate, but let's say histrionic may be one of those. I don't know. speculation, maybe borderline, narcissism, whatever. It's probably a cluster B, but... Psychopathy, I said it. Yeah, that's technically, that's not a diagnosis, but yeah. And not a personality disorder, right? You know, so I don't, I mean, part of the issue here is that if you can't see, if you can't even see or acknowledge that you were incompetent previously

and you deny that fact, then you really lack this capacity for reflection. So psychologists sometimes call this metacognition or mentalization. It's this capacity that human beings develop usually as children at some point, and usually kids that are securely attached do better with this than kids that are not securely attached. So in other words, a child that has a secure, stable, loving relationship with a parent is more likely to explore the world and to feel safe doing that. And therefore, they're more likely to develop this capacity to reflect on the world rather than to just to hide from the world. because kids that aren't securely attached,

they feel a lot of fear and they're more in survival mode. So I'm really simplifying that issue, but essentially that's what it comes down to. So what you see here, I think, has to do in part with attachment issues. And this inability to really, this lack of metacognition or this lack of self-reflection, this inability for something as simple as,

Were you incompetent? She can't acknowledge that. Right? She can't. Like, I mean, she would have been, she would have been,

she would have, like if she wants to represent herself, she would have been better off saying, yeah, I was. I was, I was declared incompetent, but then I resolved it

and I stood trial and I understood everything, the charges. I mean, right, that would be the best thing to say. That would be the best thing to say. Right.

That would be the best thing to say. But what she's saying is, no, you know, I don't, I don't think so. I don't think. Not to my understanding. Not to my understanding. They just put me through a program. Yeah, not to my understanding. Right.

It's just what they had to do as some program. So it raises real questions. I mean, technically, technically she could be competent in the sense that she, she understands where she is, she knows what a courtroom is. She knows what the proceedings entail. She's been through this. she can be competent in the sense that she understands the charges and the consequences, right? Like she gets all that.

I mean, these are the things that friends of people look at. And I guess technically she could, you know, she could assist her defense if she had an attorney. I guess technically she could formulate a defense, but it probably wouldn't be a very good formulation, right? It's probably going to be, it's probably good. I mean, when I think about this, you know, when you think about the case in Arizona, if, if, let's just say for the sake of argument, Alex Cox was alive and he was being tried, he would argue with self-defense, right? And so what, what Lori has to argue, I would assume, I don't think she can argue self-defense. I mean, she was in the room.

She's in the room when Charles gets murdered. But I don't think she felt threatened necessarily. I mean, and she didn't pull the trigger. So she's going to be a co-conspirator. Right? So she's going to have to argue. I think she's going to have to argue. The issue is whether that event, whether that murder of Charles Thalo was premeditated and planned.

And the state has a lot of evidence showing emails and texts, right? The state has a lot of evidence showing that Lori was the one who talked to Alex Cox about coming over that morning to see Charles with a plan. I mean, I don't know how detailed the evidence they have is, but it appears fairly clear that this wasn't just some impulsive act of self-defense. That Lori knew that Alex was coming over for a purpose. Right. And so, but her defense, I would imagine her defense has to be that she didn't know. She knew nothing about it, even though Alex Cox never came over to visit Charles.

under these circumstances, her defense, I presume, is going to have to be that it was an impulsive act, it wasn't planned, and she knew nothing about it. She was just an innocent bystander, even though all her behavior before and after contradicts that. Right. Most people don't realize how much their personal information is being bought and sold every day. Data brokers are making billions, pulling details about you from public records. records and the internet, and then packaging and selling it, usually without your consent. That's how your information lands in the hands of scammers, spammers, even stalkers.

It's why you get endless robocalls and why ads seem to follow you everywhere. That's where ORA comes in. ORA actively removes your data from broker sites and keeps it off. They also instantly alert you if your information shows up in a breach or on the dark web. But ORA goes beyond data protection. With one app, you get a VPN, antivirus, password manager, spam call protection, dark web monitoring, and even up to $5 million in identity theft insurance, all backed by 24-7 U.S.-based fraud support. Other companies might sell just credit monitoring or just a VPN.

ORA gives you all of it, together, at the same price competitors charge for just one service. Start your free trial today atora.com slash remove. Protect yourself now at aura.com slash remove. And so... All of it. All of it. Yeah, all of it. You say all of it. You mean all of it.

Right. And as long as we're talking about this, like, I mean, it's, it's, Chad Daybell, by the way, was, was involved in some of this. There were, there were emails and some correspondence between Chad and Lori prior to all of this. And so Chad's not being charged here, I presume, because they don't have enough evidence. But I think it's worth mentioning that that Chad Daybell, also a convicted murderer, was corresponding with, more with Lori about some of the events that were going to transpire. I mean, you know, again, the state felt like they didn't have enough evidence, but that's not to say that the Chad wasn't potentially or hypothetically involved in some of the planning of this particular event or this particular murder. And so that what I'm saying, so technically, I guess if you look at the letter of the law, and if you look at what forensic people do, I guess you could say that she's competent at some level.

But then if you step back, you have to wonder like, this is someone who in many ways, she's in denial, she's got delusional disorder, right? Is she capable of representing herself in a way? I mean, you know, representing herself in a way that would be even remotely reasonable

or competent, right? And not only that, in the clip you played, the attorney said, you know, I'm a defense attorney. We tell our clients shut up. We tell our clients don't talk. And here you have a scenario,

here you have a scenario, right, where the alleged murderer is not only representing herself, but she's going to be talking a whole bunch. And they're going to put her on the stand. Right. I mean, I don't, it's just such an unusual situation.

I mean, I when you did when you thought this case might be slowing down right when you thought day ball was when you thought day ball was over no here we go here we go again get on the get on the daybell merry-go-round because this is this is just this is I don't even know this is crazy making going on in Arizona far from over far from over yeah far from over yeah far from over Yeah. Thank you for explaining that. You know, we're getting a lot of questions.

Could I ask you a few questions? Yeah. And thank you to those who have supported us. I appreciate it so much. Yes, justice for Charles. Thank you, Colby. Thank you, Deb, for sharing our playlist. That's one question from Jessica.

I'm going to share a few and you can decide what. Brooke asks, Do you believe she's telling herself that Jesus wants her to do this, that this is part of her purpose? I do. What do you think? Yeah, that's an interesting question. Wow. Based on the previous trials, yeah, I think you'd have to say that she does, right, she talks to communicate with Jesus,

and Jesus has given her a plan and a mission. So, yeah, I guess you probably would have to see that as an element here. But when you put aside the religious aspect, I think underneath it at all, and I appreciate the fact, by the way, that Colby agreed with me on my attention-seeking element, when you put everything else aside, I think she's just starving for attention. I think she's starving for the limelight. And this is, to me, this is a type of acting out. She's acting out.

Yeah. You said, you thought I was gone? I'm not going away. I'm coming back. Here I am. you know, I'm in your face and I'm going to be everyone's favorite mother to hate again. Again. Yeah.

What, I mean, I don't know if you can even answer this because it's speculation, but what do you think she considers incompetent? Or is that even just hard to speculate on? Yeah. What is she considering incompetent? Apparently not what she went through an idol. I guess. Apparently, whatever, I can say that whatever it is she went through an idol,

she doesn't think that has anything to do with competency. So, and what she went through in Idaho seemed to be pretty elaborate, and there seemed to be a lot of people evaluating her. So, you know, it raises another question and raises a big question about, about who, whose perception should be considered more accurate. The courts, the courts are going to bring on, you know, So in Arizona, like most states, you have to get a rule 11 of competency. You have to have evaluations by professionals.

You know, usually that would be forensic evaluators. And they would make that determination. So the question here, one of the questions is, should the court make that determination or should Lori make that determination? And yeah, I don't know. Like the way we normally evaluate competency, I, this,

this really raised some questions about whether the typical competency evaluation would be sufficient in this type of scenario. Yeah. Because it's so, you have so many other big issues here. In particular, delusional disorder. Like, how does that affect?

I mean, part of her, part of her, from what I understand, from what our sources have told us, part of her designation as being incompetent in the past had to do with delusional disorder, or at least partly with that. Okay. Well, I love what Aurora said. Have you been convicted of murder? Not to my understanding. Exactly.

Like what? Not to our understanding. And, you know, in her interview with Colby Ryan, I'll get closer to my mind. Forgive me. In our interview with Colby Ryan, her son, you can see that whole interview on Colby Ryan's channel. She states, and you point this out in your assessment of the interview, that she says, in my mind, in my mind, this is how it happened. Right.

In her understanding, you know, so the question is, what does she mean by her understanding? What is she saying there in my mind, in my understanding? is does she know the truth and she's twisting it or what's going on? Right. Is it is it? Yeah, I don't know. I mean, I don't, right. That's, that's the big question.

I've stumped Dr. John. That's the big question. Is it is it a manipulation? Is she, you know, playing games with semantics and language? right right or does she know and right does she right does she know the truth i mean because she had really believed that she had not been deemed incompetent she would have simply said no you know not to my understanding or in my mind there's there's some language there that but i i think if i had i think she she tends to live a lot in fantasy right and so

as L.A. States. Yeah. Right. In that sense, I think her fantasy world is more important to her than reality. So there might be a part of her that understands what happened, but she's simply not willing to acknowledge it. Yeah. People ask. Do crazy people know they're crazy?

If you're 100% delusional, is it true to you? These are all the questions we're asking. Yeah. I mean, right. And that's what's so fascinating about this trial is these issues are now coming up. Like I just thought she would get an attorney. They'd try the case, right? But no, here we're, this is like we're back on the crazy train.

Like, no, I mean, for the most part, a crazy person does not know they're crazy. Because they've lost, usually like kind of the, those touchstones and markers of reality, they've lost those. Okay. Those things that keep normal people grounded, usually they're, you know, they're, they're unmoored from those markers of reality.

Right. And as slam RN brings up, even if you have a fixed false belief that isn't necessarily true, you know, right, false, fixed false belief,

that's still not always being crazy, you know. Right. That, yeah, I mean, right now. Now, right. Yeah, we're going to get into all the issues that we talked about for years with Daybell. But, yeah, I mean, that's true of false belief. Yeah, I mean, plenty of people have false beliefs.

Yeah, but they can do business with the world. So it wouldn't necessarily mean that they have psychological symptoms or mental health issues. Yeah, that's true. Yeah. Tani asks, Dr. John, how on earth? Does anybody think or could say that she knows right from wrong? And she thinks she's done nothing wrong all this time. And now, in this, again, okay, so let's dig deeper with this. Now that, now you're starting to cross over into insanity stuff. Right? So that one of the, in Arizona, in many states, one of the, the major tenants of the insanity plea is that someone at the time of the crime,

didn't know that they weren't able to distinguish right from wrong and they didn't know that what they were doing was wrong. Right? So there's a fine line between a lot of these types, these issues all kind of bleed into one another, which raises the question, right? That Idaho does not have an insanity plea. Arizona does.

So should she get an attorney and go down that route? Should she argue that Her attorney's going to be herself So she's going to say I am not insane And I know right from wrong And I am right Well which is precisely why she can't

She can't go down the path of insanity Because you can't represent yourself I don't know I've never seen this I mean is it possible to represent yourself And say that you're insane Or that you're not insane She's going to be like not insane not insane.

As Sherry says, legally wrong, but she believes morally right. I think in many ways she does believe that she did do things that were against the law, but morally it's okay for her to do it. That's my opinion. Yes, that's a really great insight. I agree. Yeah. Dutie Ron is here with us tonight.

Thank you, Dutie Ron, for being here, our friend Dutie Ron. I feel like Shallow Val, why have I never heard that nickname? I feel like Shallow Val. is playing the system to get more attention and out of prison time. She will continue to manipulate the system. Love to Lauren, Dr. John, and the hidden gems. And Dudirond, we are glad that your cancer treatments are going well and that there is hope this holiday season. It's good to see you here.

Yeah. Yes. For sure. So happy. Shallow Valo. Where have we been for five years? I know. I know.

We haven't heard. Wow. I feel like we really missed the bus on that one. Like we should have been using that years ago. Yeah, so I agree with duty Ron that, yeah, a lot of this is just acting out. A lot of this is attention seeking. I just don't, I don't think she knows how to walk away from the limelight. This is like her last hurrah.

Yeah. We've also, we've brought up Charles. Of course, Charles lost his life. But I do want to bring up Brandon. And Brandon also deserves justice. He is lucky to be alive. Very lucky to be alive. And he has, you know, very lucky to be alive.

I can't say that enough. And so he also deserves justice. And he is very traumatized. Yes, on this attempt. And he needs justice. Thank you. We couldn't agree more. and and Brandon took over along with Kay where Charles left off, you know, just really fighting for an investigation and to understand what was going on.

Let's see what else I have here. Rosie asks, why is she mounting a defense in Arizona when she didn't in Idaho? I think she did in Idaho. I just think that her attorneys took the reins a little bit more, in my opinion. It wasn't the most coherent defense. I think it was, it was, it was a defense. Part of the issue was in Idaho, I think that she was unwilling to throw Chad Daybell under the bus. Otherwise, she probably would have had a much stronger coherent defense.

But, I mean, her defense was very limited. Yeah. But now, now maybe, maybe in Arizona we'll get, you know, we'll get a tell-all version of her, you know, perception of events. I don't know. I mean, it doesn't involve the kids, obviously, but, but I don't know. I wouldn't be surprised for her to start talking about zombies at some point. I think that the prosecution has to be afraid of the fact that you have someone who could, in her own defense, she could talk about possessions, right,

demonic possessions or zombies or, and I mean, if somebody started doing that, it would really throw into question the entire process, right? It would really raise questions about mistrial and I don't know. Like, again, I don't know,

um, you know, I don't know if that's part of her strategy. is that maybe she wants to subvert this thing to such a degree that it gets thrown out or retried? I don't know, but it's really bizarre. It is. It is. Beth is saying, is it possible Lori Fears' punishment sentence in a mental institution if found incompetent? Is that her rational fear?

I think I know what her rational fear is actually about being found incompetent, but what do you think? That's a good point. I mean, in the in the, well, in the, I don't know, I've heard Maricopa County is pretty bad. I've heard the Arizona is so low worse than Idaho, the prison. Yeah, in the prison system in general, the, you know, someone who's placed in a mental health facility, it tends to be nicer. It's, it's not pleasant, but I mean, I don't, and I don't know about Arizona specifically, but, prisoners generally would prefer to be in mental institutions rather than in, you know, hardcore prisons.

But so I don't know if that would be part of her fear. I think it's more about how she perceives herself. Yes. I completely agree. I want to remind you of a story we have or we have a story that not everybody saw play out on court, a behind-the-scenes story. In her Idaho trial, closing arguments, many people wondered and were curious why her defense team had not yet brought up pointing the finger at Chad Daybell.

And allegedly it was because she told them not to, that she did not want to blame Chad Daybell at all. And in the closing arguments, her attorney, Archibald, decided to say, Chad Daybill was calling the shots. Davell, this doomsday author, Chad Daybel manipulated this woman. Chad Daibel is a cult leader, all those things that we were all wondering and thinking. And Lori was visibly angry in court. Nobody could see this necessarily because there was only audio, but we were able to report

how angry she was, but this was being said. Well, behind the scenes, allegedly, Lori went back and shared with her defense team just how angry she was. And what she was angry about was someone walked in there and she said, you made me look dumb. You made me look dumb. I find that fascinating. It wasn't, you put my, you know, you put my husband down or, you know, it was, you, now everybody out there thinks I'm stupid. What's that about? You know, it's about her. her, right? Like her perception of herself. Right, exactly. It's about her self image and how she wants to be seen by other people.

It's about her ego, narcissism, vanity, same old stuff. Almost every criminal has some element of hubris or narcissism, vanity. I mean, it's a constant thread through almost, you know, every, maybe not all. all, but almost every criminal I've evaluated struggles to some degree with issues along those lines. Yeah. Yes. That's a fascinating idea.

Do you think she wants to represent herself as a way to try to have contact with Chad? Now we're really getting into some legal issues. Who knows? I know one thing she doesn't do is ever waive her right to a speedy trial. So, you know, who knows? Well, I just had the thought maybe she plans on calling Chad as a witness. Right. I know. I know. She could call Chad as her star witness.

Right. She, yeah. I mean, I don't. She would be like, yep, not incompetent. She knew exactly what she was doing, guys. I am here to vouch for the woman I'm married to. Not incompetent. She's got this one. He would be great witness for that.

Master planner. She's a master planner. She knows what she's doing. She knows right from wrong. Look at her. Yeah. Right. I'm sure you'd be like, yes, pick me.

You'd be a pick me boy right there. I'm like, I'll be your witness, your star witness right here. Right. It was all her idea. This woman's a genius. A genius, I tell you. Right. And they'll try to get his case overturned. Yeah. Well, we need to wind down. We've been going for about an hour and we have to, we have to be done. But this was so good to finally talk about this. It's been on our minds. Justice for Charles is on our minds. Justice for Brandon and this of case, this case that we have covered for years now. For those that don't know, John and I started our podcast with this case where we only talk.

about this case for a very, very long time for years, and we will see it through and we have become close friends with Woodcocks and with Colby and with so many of the surviving victims. And we, our hearts are in this case. Somebody wrote earlier, by the way, I actually started. They said, Lauren, don't you think you get too close to these cases? And don't you think you're a little emotional over this? And yeah, actually, I did get more close to this case than any case I ever have. for that I'm grateful I was able to maybe leave my television reporting career for a little bit

so I could delve deeply into a case in a way I never have before, which has become a human interest case for me, and one where I care dearly and passionately for the surviving victims. And yes, I will see it through and I care. Yeah. And we will be there at the trial and air. Arizona. Hanging out with Justin Lum and Nate. Can't wait to see my buddy Justin.

Yeah. He hasn't been able to, he wasn't able to come to the last trial. Anything else you want to say? I assume Justin's been covering all the hearings. He has. He is the reason Justin testified in court. Justin Lum with local Fox affiliate in Phoenix,

Arizona, reporter, he argued in court for cameras in the courtroom, and he is the reason we are sitting back and watching cameras in the courtroom once again. So yes, he has been following it closely, and we rely on him. Anything else, babe, before we head out? Just want to say it's great to connect with our gems again, and I hope everyone had a great Thanksgiving and holidays upcoming. Hope everyone is getting prepared for the holidays. I know we're trying to,

but it's been slow. But anyway, thanks to everyone for being here. And happy belated Thanksgiving. Thank you to those who like and subscribe. It means so much. It's the greatest support you can give us. It's free. It means so much to those of you that become you

members or Patreon members at patreon.com slash into crime. We also appreciate you there so much and it's a great way to support us. We are so glad to be home together this holiday season and we will be catching up on all of the cases that we set aside while I was in Delphi, Indiana, this being the first. And we know that there are so many James Craig, Madeline Soto and the Bridegan case as well as anymore. So bit by bit, we will be catching up on all the recent updates. So make sure to hit subscribe and notifications so you can be with us as we delve again into unthinkable crimes and the psychological motivations behind them. Thank you, everyone. And as you just said,

have a blessed night. And thank you to our moderators. We'll see you. Bye. Bye. Good night. Yeah, sure thing. Hey, you sold that car yet? Yeah. Sold it to Carvana. Oh, I thought you were selling to that guy. The guy who wanted to pay me in foreign currency, no interest over 36 months? Yeah, no. Carvana gave me an offer in minutes, picked it up and paid me on the spot.

It was so convenient. Just like that. Yeah? No hassle. None. That is super convenient. Sell your car to Carvana and swap hassle for convenience. Pick up fees may apply.

Now's the time for a great deal on a new Honda. It's time to take an adventure. with rugged capability and commanding style. Check out the Honda Ridgeline, pilot or CRV. For a limited time, well-qualified buyers can get a 3.9% APR on a 2025 pilot or a 2.9% APR on a 2025 Ridgeline or CRV. See dealer for financing details. Most people don't realize how much their personal information is being bought and sold every day.

Data brokers are making billions, pulling details about you from public records and the internet, and then packaging and selling it. without your consent. That's how your information lands in the hands of scammers, spammers, even stalkers. It's why you get endless robocalls and why ads seem to follow you everywhere. That's where ORA comes in. ORA actively removes your data from broker sites and keeps it off. They also instantly alert you if your information shows up in a breach or on the dark web. But ORA goes beyond data protection. With one app, you get a VPN, antivirus, password manager, spam call protection, dark web monitoring, and even up to $5 million in identity theft. insurance, all backed by 24-7 U.S.-based fraud support. Other companies might sell just credit monitoring or just a VPN. ORA gives you all of it, together, at the same price competitors charge for just one service. Start your free trial today atora.com slash remove. Protect yourself now atora.com slash remove.