Hidden True Crime - Prosecution DESTROYS Lori Vallow Daybell And Co-Conspirators During Closing Arguments

Episode Date: June 13, 2025

In a dramatic end to the Arizona trial, Lori Vallow Daybell used her closing argument to try and prove her innoncence. Prosecutor Treena Kay wasn’t having it, calling out Lori, Chad, Alex, and Melani as co-conspirators in a deadly plan. No tears, no testimony—just blame. Now it’s up to the jury. Surfshark: ⁠⁠https://surfshark.com/hidden⁠⁠ ⁠⁠Brandon Playlist⁠⁠ Limited Trial Merch: https://www.bonfire.com/store/hidden-true-crime-limited-merch/ About Hidden True Crime: What started as a simple conversation at their dinner table became a captivating podcast. Join the dynamic duo of Dr. John Matthias, a criminal 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 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, q-u-in-c-com slash hidden true crime for free shipping and 365 day returns. Quince.com slash hidden true crime. Before I switched to wealth front, my APY was probably zero point one. Like it was a joke. I was literally getting pennies. Once I switched With a Wealthfront cash account, earn up to 4.2% APY on your cash. The high APY with Wealthfront was a clear winner.

There are no petty fees. Every month, there's this much that I'm getting an interest in. I didn't have to do anything. My money is working hard on its own, and I can trust Wealthfront is taking care of me. Earn more on your uninvested cash with a Wealthfront cash account, no account fees, no minimums, and no strings attached. Get started today at Wealthfront.com. Clients were paid $1,000 for their test.

testimonials creating a conflict of interest. Outcomes vary. 3.3%. Base API as of January 30th, 20206, is representative, variable, and earned on funds swept to program banks. 0.65% new client boosts for three months on up to $150,000. Direct deposit $1,000 a month and fund an investing account for a 0.25% increase. Cash account offered by Wealthfront brokerage LLC member FINRA SIPC, not a bank. These and eligibility requirements may apply to certain checking features of the cash account. Hello, Hidden Gems.

We have a lot to cover tonight. state and the defense have arrested. And now it is time for the jury to deliberate, although they did decide to go home right after closing statements concluded. And holy cow closing statements. Wow. We'll get into it all. We'll be there bright and early tomorrow morning while the jury gathers again to deliberate the verdict on whether or not Lori Valo Daibel is guilty of conspiring to murder Brandon Boudreau. A lot. I keep saying that.

So let me just set the stage. We went in this morning, a lot of people were there, Brandon Boudreau and his entire family, as well as Brandon Boudreau's friend. Kay Woodcock was there, again, supporting Brandon. We saw Judge Breske as we got out of our Uber this morning and said hello, good day to him.

We did a morning live because more motions came, down. You can check that out on our morning live as well as our lunch live. But let's get into the details of what the witnesses brought. Day five kicked off with some serious digital forensics. As FBI special agent, Nicholas Balance took the stand. And to remind you, Nicholas Balance, his face cannot be shown because he does a lot of things undercover. But he has also testified at Lori's first Idaho trial and Chad Daybell's trial. This is his third time testifying. I think even actually was he at Charles Valo's trial too,

or he was on the witness list, but maybe never, never testified. He is an expert in this case and an expert in forensic digital evidence. So he takes the stand. You guys can't see him at home, but we're watching him. He is part of the Bureau's cast unit,

the FBI cast unit, and that's the cellular analyst survey team. In plain terms, he is the guy who helps figure out where your phone pinged when everything went down. Cast agents like Balance use cell phone records to help pinpoint the physical location of devices during critical windows of time. And in this case, he was tasked with tracking the phones that matter most. Lori Balladebao, Alex Cox, and even a burner phone that Alex used, referred to in court as a track phone, but it didn't stop there. Investigators also dug into

historical Google location data tied to Alex Cox's Gmail account, Homer J. Maximus at gmail.com. Yes, that's the actual email, a playoff of the Simpsons character tied to one of the most disturbing timelines of the trial. And for those unfamiliar, Google's location history is a service that keeps a log of where your devices go if and only if you've turned it on. So, if you've if you have multiple devices signed in under the same account, only the ones with that feature enabled will actually report location data back to Google. And that's what Cast was working with. A burner phone, a trail of Google locations, and a pair of devices belonging to Lori and her brother Alex, devices that may have traveled right alongside a conspiracy to kill. Agent Balance didn't

come to court empty-handed. He brought maps, reports, and a detailed presentation to walk the jury through a very specific window of time, late September to early October 2019. And that's when things began to accelerate. To make sense of the data, balance had to map out cell tower coverage zones. Now, here's where it gets technical, but stick with me. In crowded cities like Phoenix, there are tons of towers, each covering small areas. But in rural stretches like eastern Idaho, towers are spread thin, each one casting a much wider net. And each of those towers usually has three sides, three sectors sending signals out in different directions. When a phone pings, a tower cast can often determine which sector it is

connected to. So that's what balance did. He started connecting the dots. He also tracked the Homer J. Maximus at gmail.com account. Remember, that account is tied to Alex Cox. Specifically, he traced a mobile equipment identifier or meet and the ID, which is kind of like a VIN number of a phone. It's unique to that device. Using the Mead balance, query different cell carriers to see where and when that phone had been active. And it turns out that Mead had been active on Verizon's network. And yes, it was definitely linked to Alex Cox. Then came the map. In court, the jury was shown a Google location history map tied to the Homer J. Maximus account. The data placed Alex Cox at a Walmart in Idaho Falls on September 25th, 2019.

By the way, just to remind you, when I say things started to accelerate two days after J.J. Valo was buried in Chad DeBell's yard, a couple weeks after Tyler was, he finds himself in the Idaho Falls Walmart on September 25th, 2019, from 707 to 726 p.m. A quick trip, and that's when and where, He bought a burner phone or aka the track phone. But that's not all. We learned at the same time Alex was inside the Walmart,

Lori's phone, her primary phone was pinging off a nearby tower. She received two calls while Alex was inside. One of those calls lasted 10 minutes. And it came from none other than Melanie Boudreau. Let that sink in while Alex buys a burner phone. Lori is just outside on the line with Melanie. And they are all in the same small area of Idaho Falls. Coordinated coincidence?

Probably not coincidence. I'd call it conspiracy. But that was just the beginning. The next slide in Agent Balances presentation pushed things further. On September 26th, the newly purchased track phone, Alex's burner, placed a call pinging at a cell tower near Rexburg, Idaho, just steps from Alex and Lori's townhomes. Now, they have separate townhomes, but they live in the same townhouse complex. I've visited and seen how it's located. They're close, but in walking

distance, but not next door to each other. And now back home, Lori and Alex were communicating off the grid on this burner phone, although not as off the grid as they thought since the FBI witness is obviously giving us a literal play-by-play. It's so fun to think about that too when you're like, Lori is literally watching her entire plan unfold in front of all of us watching. So while they communicate off the grid, we're learning about all that off the grid communication. The irony is not lost on me. So then came something far more revealing. By September 30th, Alex's primary cell phone was tracked inside Lori's apartment.

And it never left. not for hours, not for days. It didn't return to its own unit in the same complex. It just stayed in Lori's apartment or townhome. Townhome apartment, same same for this, for this testimony. So what was happening in that apartment? What was being planned? Meanwhile, the track phone, the burner, that did leave.

Between September 30th and October 1st, the track phone, it traveled from Rexburg, Idaho to Arizona. And then another data point lit up the screen. On October 1st at 919 a.m., the track phone made a call from Arizona to Chad Daybell. So let's pause here. Alex's main phone was still in Idaho at Lori's apartment, but his burner, it was already down in Arizona. Someone had taken it and it was making calls. Agent Balance testified that around the same time he learned something else. Lori had recently rented a storage unit in Rexburg, Idaho, and investigators pulled the data. And on October 1st, Alex's primary phone was tracked at that storage unit

from 310 to 336 p.m. just hours after the track phone called Chad from Arizona. And remember, we saw the video footage of this storage unit visit in court on Tuesday. So while Alex's phone may have been at the storage unit, Alex obviously wasn't there. Rather, it was Chad and Lori, clearly with Alex's phone, the phone he had left at her apartment. Well, Alex is in Arizona. And that's not all. At 2.24 p.m. Arizona time, right around when Alex's phone was at the storage unit in Rexburg with Lori, Lori receives another call from Melanie Boudra, her niece. Brandon soon to be X, Y. too many calls, too much movement to perfectly time.

The final map of the day showed the track phone's activity in Arizona on October 2nd. That's the day of the shooting. The phone moved across the Phoenix metro area, hopping cell towers, and eventually landing near one specific location, the neighborhood where Brandon Boudreau lived. That same day, Brandon would report someone shooting at him in front of his home. and now investigators were tracking a burner phone's path right to his doorstep, a burner that had only ever been linked to Alex Cox. So let's focus on that morning of October 2, 2019,

just hours before an attempted murder would rock a quiet Arizona neighborhood and shatter Prandon's world. Back in Idaho, yes, Idaho, Lori's phone made an outgoing call to Alex's primary phone at around 8 a.m. on October 2nd. The call lasted 23 minutes. And here's where it gets weird. I mean, the whole thing's weird, but here's where it gets weirder. Both phones were connected to the same cell tower and the same sector just outside the Rexburg townhouse complex. So unless Alex figured out how to be in two states at once, someone else was using Alex's phone. And it was probably Lori. Meanwhile, way down in Gilbert, Arizona, the track phone, Alex is burned.

was pinging local towers. That same track phone was then on the receiving end of three phone calls from Chad Daybill placed between 839 and 916 a.m. Now, so here's the timeline that matters. Let's go through this. At 9.13 a.m. Braddon Boudreau was shot at in front of his home, October 2nd. Between 917 and 923 a.m. that morning, the track phone was on the move, leaving the area. At 9. 22 a.m. just nine minutes after the shooting, the track phone called Chad Deba. Translation, Chad called Alex before and immediately after the shooting. And then the track phone called Chad back six minutes later. And while all of that chaos was unfolding in Arizona, Alex's main phone still parked in Lori's apartment. It never moved. Well, it moved once. It moved when

Lori and Chad visited the storage unit. Other than that, it never moved. But Lori's phone, she was busy between 8.50 and 9.46 a.m. on that morning, Arizona time. She had five different calls, including an outgoing call to chat, a 35-minute call to her niece, Melanie Boudreau, and another incoming call to Chad right in the middle of the Melanie call. Remember how testimony in court on Wednesday or a Tuesday, excuse me, explained that Brandon couldn't get a hold of Melanie after the shooting? He tried multiple times. Well, she was chatting with Lori. So that's, we know now why she was busy. Back in Arizona,

the track phone kept moving. By the end of the day, it was pinging towers between Phoenix and Utah, and then, poof, it vanished. The truck. track phone was never seen on a network again. But the morning after the shooting, October 3rd, Alex's primary phone lit up again in Rexburg, this time back near Lori Storage Unit. At 2.13 p.m., surveillance video captured not just his phone, but video of Alex moving a Jeep tire out of the unit. So not only do we have his phone, we have Alex being there.

So you know it's not just his phone. It's Alex too. And who was with him, his sister, Lori Valladevall, his little sister. Between 220 and 22 p.m., Lori got more calls from, you guessed it, Chad DeBow. And with that mountain of digital evidence laid out, prosecutor Trina K. simply said, no further questions. So let's break it down. What does this digital bread from trail tell us?

Alex Cox buys a burner phone. That burner phone travels to Arizona. Chad calls it before and after Brandon is shot at. Meanwhile, Lori's calling Chad and Melanie and possibly using Alex's main phone from her apartment. She also takes Alex's phone to a storage unit while he's gone. The burner disappears. Alex returns to Idaho. He's seen at a storage unit this time with his little sister again, Lori.

Chad's calling again. So is this just a series of coincidences? That's what the jury's going to have to ask. Or is this a carefully coordinated state-spanning murder plot documented minute by minute through the devices they thought would protect them and hide them? Either way, this isn't just tech evidence. It is a timeline and it is damning. It is not circumstantial. It's conspiracy laid out and concise.

Next was Lori's turn to cross-examine agent balance and she did. This was someone she was going to cross-examine. So Lori asked hypothetically, If you had three phones attached to your email account and location services turned on for each, which one would it be tracking? Agent Balance stated that there are different columns for each device, so it would be tracking all three, but it can differentiate between the devices. Next, Lori asked if Agent Balance got this information from Google,

and he said that the records were obtained by the Rexberg Police Department. Well, Lori, as she always does, try to poke some holes to insinuate that the data might not have been authentic. And look, let's just take a listen to this. Where did you get your, who sent you the information from Google? Did you get that directly from Google? I had missed that. No, so those records were obtained via a search warrant. I believe it was somebody from the investigative team in Rexburg.

Okay. But I wouldn't be able to provide you a name of who sent those records. And how did those records come to you, like an email or something? Yes, ma'am. They would usually be sent via email. So is that like a lot of data, right? So is it one giant email or several emails? How does that work?

It depends. Specific to this case, I can't remember whether it was sent via email, but we do have options to send larger files. And so if it's a Google record that has location history, has a bunch of different services that are being utilized by that user, it could be a very large file, and then it would be sent electronically to me. Through like a hard drive or a flash drive, something to that effect? We have some ways that we can send it electronically, that they're capable of transferring

larger files, per se. And so the data that you received from this email or from a larger, did you receive it from You don't remember if you received it from an email. Is that correct? I don't recall. I would say that given this particular file, I know it was larger, so I would guess that it probably came via some type of transferring platform versus email. Okay. And then if you don't know who you got it from, how do you know if that information is accurate? So I'm basically mapping out records as I received them. So I would look at the certificate good of authenticity. I would ensure that it's a record that came from Google. But aside from that,

I'm mapping records as I receive. So you don't have any way to know if it was altered before it got to you, basically? Correct. Next, Lori asked if it's typical for people to have their email address attached to multiple devices. Agent Ballant said that in this day and age, that it is pretty common, but it just depends on the individual. If someone has an iPad, laptop, and cell phone, you'd usually connect all of those devices to the same Google account. I agree. That's what I do. Next, Lori asked if it was possible to pinpoint exactly where a person is. Ballant said that all he can do is track a device, not an actual person. It can only be assumed that the device is with the person and not just moving around on its own. But I do have to

stop there and point out that lucky for us, we have surveillance video. So when Lori is heading somewhere with Alex's phone and her phone and she's on the video, then there's no question. Same with when Alex is at the storage unit too. Lori asked if someone else had a track phone, would it mean that they were in that specific place? Well, Balance replied that the device simply reports the location information and that the data and that's the data that he is able to collect. So Lori then asks if it was the track phone that was at the storage unit on October 3rd

at 2.15 p.m. and Ballin said no, that it was Alex's primary cell phone, which we also talked about here. He said the track phone never gave another location in Rexburg after October 3rd, the last data. From the track phone was from the evening of October 2nd, the day of the shooting, southeast of Salt Lake City, Utah. And then it just disappears. I'm sure you just threw it out a window or something. Lori then wanted to know how many meters make up each sector of the cell phone tower. and Balance testified that the sectors are measured in degrees, not meters.

Lori asked how close she and Alex's apartment units were to each other in the complex, and he said he wasn't sure, but knew that they were relatively close. They are. I've seen it myself. And then he said that there isn't a definite way to know, or definitive way, excuse me, to know that the phones were at the different apartments using cell phone records alone, but the Google location history is much more specific. Lori asked Agent Balance to clarify the night her phone was in Idaho Falls while Alex's phone was in the Walmart.

She asked if he has the ability to track someone walking around Walmart and he said, well, you can get an estimation. Lori had questions about Verizon's cell phone towers. Agent Balance said that coverage areas depend on how many users there are. She then asked if it was Gmail or Verizon who gave him the information and that there was no movement of Alex's cell phone from one apartment to the other. He said he gathered this based off of Alex's Google location history from his primary phone. Well, Lori asked if a phone would show all of its movements if it was driving around.

Balance testified that it just depends on the Google location history service and if it's enabled. She asked if a phone would report its location, if it wasn't moving at all. And again, balance said it depends. If it's stationary, it might not report as much as a movement. living phone. The phone has to be turned on and have Google location history enabled. If there isn't a location record, you can't map it. And with that, Lori had no further questions. I don't think that she accomplished, accomplished much. But on redirect, Trina asked if anything about the records appear to be inauthentic or modified. Agent Ballant said, no, he just used the data

and showed us what it said. Next, Trina asked if the Homer J. Macon in this account logged into the track phone and Valenz said yes. After her final question, prosecutor Trina announced that the state was ready to rest. There you go. That's what you're always waiting for. Wow. Lori announced then that she was not planning on testifying, again, not surprising or having any witnesses up on the stand, but she wanted to argue Rule 20 after lunch.

And what Rule 20 is, it's an argument that the state has not proven their case, and thus her entire case, this entire trial should be dismissed. This is a pretty standard argument in Arizona, even though it feels a little wild, but as usual, it's the last minute attempt. So after lunch, Lori argued Rule 20. Let's watch. The court must enter a judgment of acquittal on any offense charged in an indictment if there is no substantial evidence to support a conviction.

Conspiracy to commit first-degree murder requires the state prove that I, one, agreed with another, in this case, Alex, that one or more of us would engage in conduct that equaled first-degree murder, and two, that I intended to promote or assist in the conduct. The only evidence that has been presented simply establishes that I have been seen on video placing items into a storage unit, a phone that is connected. connected to me through an email, made phone calls during this time frame, and a Google search relating to Gilbert, Arizona. None of this evidence establishes that I agreed with Alex Cox to engage in conduct that equals first degree. The state has the burden of establishing all elements of an offense have been committed, and thus there is not substantial evidence to support a conviction. All right. Does the state want to respond for the record? Sheriff, looking at the evidence in the light most favorable to the state, there is substantial evidence for a jury to find the defendant guilty of conspiring with Alex Cox to commit first-degree murder of Brandon Boudreau.

in this case in determining the conspiracy existed. The jury can look at the fact that the defendant went with Alex Cox to buy the burner phone, that she loaned her Jeep to him to be used, that she rented a storage unit that she Googled how to remove the rear seat, that she hid the tire and seat, and that she created an alibi for her brother by having those two phones interact while he was in Gilbert, Arizona. All right.

The standard is whether a reasonable juror could find the defendant guilty, whether there's substantial evidence that a reasonable juror could find the defendant guilty. The state has presented a compelling case that Alex Cox traveled to Gilbert, Arizona, and attempted to kill Mr. Boudreau. There's other circumstantial evidence that establishes that the defendant was aware of, of Mr. Cox's plans and facilitated those plans and assisted in those plans in several different ways. It's ordered denying the motion for Rule 20. Hey, can't blame her for a last ditch attempt, but for some reason it won't be your last.

We all know that. Anyway, after that, we are officially on the road to closing arguments. Wow. We had lunch first. So we are first going to take a break from an important sponsor, one that maybe Lori could have used since she's not tech savvy. Take a listen. As technology rapidly evolves, online security is now a vital tool for our homes and families. And that's where Surfshark comes in.

People at Surfshark care about security so much. They created a VPN app that secures your data with industry leading measures by using uncrackable encryption and the most secure VPN protocols. Surfshark is jam-packed with features that go well beyond the basics, so you can know your data is not going anywhere. With just one subscription, you can log Surfshark into your iPhones, Android, PCs, Chrome, Apple TV, Firefox, and more. Their 24-7 support means if you ever have questions,

you'll be taking care of right away. And if you are not satisfied, they have a 30-day money-back guarantee. And in addition to that 30-day guarantee, If you head to surfshark.com slash hidden and use code hidden at checkout, you get an extra four months of Surfshark VPN. That's surfshark.com slash hidden and use code hidden at checkout to get four extra months of Surfshark VPN. All right. Closing arguments. Judge Boreski read off the jury instructions, but I'm going to skip those because admittedly I wasn't even paying attention.

jury instruction, Samira Snoose Fest. But here's where I was paying attention. Prosecutor Trina Kaye, in her black power suit, confidently approached the podium to issue the state's closing argument. And she began with a question. The million dollar question, Officer Rob and Detective Pillar asked Brandon, after he had just been shot at while trying to go home. Who would want to kill you?

And each time Brandon answered this question, he gave the same response. His ex-wife were soon to be ex-wife's aunt Lori Valo DeBow, Lori Valo back then, and her brother, Alex Cox. He believed the shooting was related to an incident in Chandler that occurred in July of 2019. And side note, as we know, this incident was the murder of Charles Vallo, Lori's ex-husband. But now someone was trying to kill him too. Brandon told investigators that Lori used to live in Texas. And the Jeep used in the shooting, well, it had Texas license plates.

Brandon went on to explain what happened. This two-door Jeep sat idly, unusually close to his driveway. It had no spare tire on the back, making it so that whoever was lying in wait could easily open the back window, point a rifle of Brandon, and fire a shot. A bullet struck the frame of his Tesla after that loud, bang, the window shattered terrifyingly close to the top of Brandon's head, just mere inches from death. Brandon was able to speed away and dial 911. He was panicking, panting, bordering on a panic attack, trying to rationalize just what took place. Alex Cox also sped off and immediately called Lori's soon-to-be husband Chad Daybell before Googling backroads to get out of town. As we now know,

the names Brandon initially gave to investigators, well, they turned out to be correct. But Brandon had no idea the amount of scheming that actually went into this shooting, the conspiracy to take his life. Trina said something that I'm sure most of us have thought at one point throughout this trial, that the details can get a little confusing. She knows this and is going to break everything down to make sure that the jury fully understands how everything fits together. Let's put the pieces of the puzzle together and Trina always does in her closing arguments. This was no exception.

How the evidence points to one conclusion that Lori was involved in the conspiracy to commit first-degree murder to kill Brandon Boudreau. The timeline in this case started around June 25th when Brandon learned that Lori had been feeding lies to his then-wife, Melanie. Lori convinced Melanie that Brandon hacked into her computer

that he was gay and that he was trying to get Lori's sacred temple recommend taken away. On the night of that terrible argument between Brandon and Melanie, he texted Lori and asked why she was lying, why she was destroying his marriage. We saw those texts. And as we learned, Lori never responded. She left those texts on Reed. His whole life was going up in flames, but Lori couldn't be bothered. While they don't know the details, the jury did hear about an incident that took place on July 11th in Chandler, Arizona. Again, we know what that was. Charles Ballard's murder. Brandon told

the officers, he thought his shooting could be related. Detective Duncan testified that while investigating the Chandler incident, he located a Jeep in Lori's garage, a gray Jeep with Texas plates. Alex's truck was also there, meaning he had his own vehicle and didn't need to borrow Lori's. As Brandon's divorce was progressing, Lori and Alex both relocated to Rexburg, Idaho. Melanie moved into her own rental house and they put their marital home up for sale. After it was sold on September 13th, Brandon rented his own home at 3875 East Phelps Street. He only told a handful of people his new address, including Melanie Boudreau. After she asked for it on September 17th, the only other people who knew the address were his

two neighbors and a couple of friends, five people total. The only one of them who knew Lori and Alex was Melanie, and she provided it so that Alex could go there later to enact their plan. Brandon moved into his new house on September 25th earlier than expected. Melanie was going out of town and the plan was about to begin. Alex was Googling places to practice shooting in Rexburg and somewhere to get window tinting. Not for his own truck, no. He was going to get tinting done on Lori's Jeep, Wrangler, another part of their plan. The tinting he chose made the windows as dark as possible so that even in the daylight no one could see who was in the back seat. line and wait. So dark that Detective Ray Hermescio testified yesterday was against the law in Idaho,

the tinty. He spent $200 on additional, spending $200 on additional tint was even more suspicious, considering that wasn't even Lori's primary car. What would be the purpose when she had her own Nissan road to drive? Well, they needed a vehicle where Alex could hide and shoot out of the back window. Next, Trina moved on to the infamous burner phone. Oh, that track phone. Special agent Nick Ballant showed cell phone records and Google location data showing that Alex purchased the burner phone from Walmart on September 25th. We also know that Lori's phone was using a cell tower in the same area as the Walmart,

meaning they likely drove out of town together to buy the phone. The next day, well, Alex activated the burner phone to use on his trip to Arizona. That same day, Melanie flew to Rexburg to visit Lori while Brandon took care of their children. Their agreement was for Brandon to keep the children until October 2nd. And then they would go back with Melanie. And that way, when Brandon was shot and killed, the children wouldn't be around to see it, right? Next, we have the beginning of the trip. And Lori's setting up Alex's alibi.

She had Alex's phone with her, made calls on it, all to make it look like he was still, there in Rexburg. It was a great idea until Alex linked the burner phone to his Google account. We know that Lori Googled how to remove the backseat from her Jeep, and they removed the spare tire as well. She was helping Alex get ready for his trip. After Alex left, the Jeep was captured on a license plate reader just outside of Rexburg, and then again, in Holbrook, Arizona with no spare tire on the back. While in Arizona, the burner phone only made calls to one person, Chad DeVell. There was other evidence that Alex was in Arizona, too, including a receipt for a restaurant that was recovered in the Jeep after it was back in Idaho. Let's listen to Trina, explain this a little further.

We know the Jeep is down here. As much as the defendant wants to tell you about colors or whatever else, her Jeep was here in Mesa on October 1st of 2019. We can just stop pretending that didn't happen. We know as well when we look at those Google records, we're trying to authenticate them, that the Los Faberitos was on Power Road in Mesa and after having lunch, Alex Cox googled another location on Power Road. This defendant in aiding this conspiracy

and helping her brother starts by renting that storage unit. now. She rents that on October 1st. She also still is in possession of her brother's phone. So this way it looks like Alex Cox is going with her to the storage unit. She's providing that alibi because they don't think that the burner phone has hooked into this Google account. They don't know about the LPR readers. They don't think about the receipt. So Lori Vallow provides is Alavine, she brings the phone with her, and we know that Alex Cox's phone is with this defendant as she's renting a storage unit. Even though we know from the video, he's not there. She's alone. When you watch these videos, and if you want to, they're obviously admitted, you will see one

person get in and out of that car, and one person go into the storage unit. That one person is this defendant, Lori Val. So even though Alex Cox's phone is here, that's just a ruse. That's her aiding, that's her conspiring, that's her trying to cover up this murder or her brother, who is the shooter. While in Arizona, on the evening of October 1st, Alex Googled Brandon's address, the one that only five people knew, including Melanie. With directions, Alex was prepared to enact their plan the next day. The following morning, October 2nd, Alex Googled Brandon's address again. Back in Rexburg, Alex's primary cell phone was utilizing cell towers near his and Lori's apartment. His burner phone? Well, that was utilizing a cell tower near the home of Melanie.

All the calls Alex places were to Lori's soon to be husband Chad. And by 722 a.m., Alex was on the move making his way to Brandon's home. Melanie knows the schedule. Soon Brandon will be leaving to drop the older. kids off at school and the youngest off with her at the park. They'll be safe. And in the meantime, Alex would be waiting. What they didn't anticipate, though, is that Brandon was going to hit the gym that morning, meaning Alex had to lie and wait a little longer than anticipated. This provided time for a neighbor to notice the Jeep, and this neighbor testified that something just felt wrong. It was parked on the wrong side of the road, nose to nose with the white band running for an

extended period of time and had suspiciously dark tint. As a neighbor drove away, he looked in his rearview mirror and noticed a Texas license plate. At 8.02 a.m. Arizona time, Lori had Alex's primary phone back in Rexburg call her phone. She had a fake 24-minute call, all a part of creating that fake alibi. If Alex was making calls in Rexburg, surely he couldn't have been involved in the shooting in Gilbert, Arizona, right? Well, the burner phone was in Gilbert, and it was utilizing cell phone towers near Brandon's home, 25 minutes before Alex shot at Brandon. Lorry received a call from Melanie, still talking, still conspiring, probably wondering what was taking so long. Where was Brandon? Well, he finally returned home around 9.13. Alex had been waiting for nearly two hours,

As Brandon was about to turn into his driveway, he noticed the Jeep, the window opening, and the barrel of a gun pointing directly at him. Another neighbor, Lynette Mendoza, had a ringed doorbell camera. It captured footage of Brandon's black Tesla turning onto his street and a few seconds later a loud bang. Just moments later, Brandon dialed 911 as he sped away. He told the operator he just had been shot at. Next, Trina said something else that most of us have been. thinking that in every picture taken of Lori's Jeep, the color appears to be a little bit different. Whether it's silver, a shade of blue, green, or gray, it doesn't really matter because all of the

photos had the same Texas license plate. They're all Lori's Jeep. While the details of the color were a little foggy, the fact that Brandon's Tesla was shot is crystal clear. No matter what Lori says, the professionals on the scene have experience with bullet holes, and they all knew unequivocally that Brandon's Tesla had been shot, even though they didn't find many fragments. Those fragments were from a bullet. At my bank, I was literally getting pennies using wealthfront. Cheching, there's this much that I'm getting an interest and I didn't have to do anything. Clients like Angela earn up to 4.2% APY on their cash with the wealthfront cash account.

Get started at wealthfront.com. Client was paid $1,000 for their testimonial, creating a conflict of interest. Outcomes vary. 3.3%. Base API as of January 30th, 2026 is representative variable and earned on funds swept to program banks. 0.65% new client boost for three months on up to $150,000. Direct deposit $1,000 a month and fund an investing account for a 0.25% increase. Cash account offered by Wealthfront Brokerage LLC, member FINRA, SIPC, not a bank.

Before I switched to wealthfront, my APY was probably 0.1. Like, it was a joke. I was literally getting pennies. Once I switched, chiching. With a wealthfront cash account, earn up to 4.2% APY on your cash. The high APY with Wellfront was a clear winner. There are no petty fees. Every month, there's this much that I'm getting an interest, and I didn't have to do anything.

My money is working hard on its own, and I can trust wealth front is taking care of me. Earn more on your uninvested cash with a wealthfront cash account, no account fees, no minimums, and no strings attached. Get started today at wealthfront.com. Clients were paid $1,000 for their testimonials creating a conflict of interest. Outcomes vary. 3.3% base API as of January 30th, 2026 is representative variable and earned on funds swept to program banks. 0.65% new client boosts for three months on up to $150,000. Direct deposit $1,000 a month and fund an investing account for a 0.25% increase.

Cash account offered by Wealthfront Brokerage LLC member FINRA SIPC, not a bank. These and eligibility requirements may apply to certain checking features of the cash account. Next, Trina said that immediately after missing, missing Brandon's head by inches, Alex took off and began Googling backroad directions to get back to Rexburg and calling who else, none other than Chad DeVell. Knowing that Brandon was still alive, Lori and Chad made their way to the storage unit to hide the spare tire and backseat. We saw a chat on video rolling in that tire.

Why is that so important? Well, it shows that Lori helped make room in to keep in her storage unit for Alex to lie and wait. She helped set up his alibi and now she was helping to hide evidence. Soon, Lori's Jeep and Alex's burner phone arrived back in Idaho. And then what do Alex and Lori do? They both begin Googling for news stories, news of a shooting in Gilbert, Arizona well before the world knew, they knew back in Rexburg, Idaho that somebody in

Gilbert, Arizona had been shot at. And news of Brandon being shot. If all of that wasn't enough, when Lori's Jeep was finally impounded, Alex's DNA was located as well as gunshot residue. Next, Trina moved on to discuss how this evidence relates to the jury instructions. She said that the state has the burden of proof, which is proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Proof beyond a reasonable doubt is proof that leaves you firmly convinced of the defendant. defendant's guilt. There are very few things we know in the world with absolute certainty, and in criminal cases, the law does not require proof that overcomes every doubt. If based on your consideration of evidence, you are firmly convinced that the defendant is guilty of the crime

charge. You must find her guilty. Let's listen to Trina explain the charges against Lori. So let's talk about the crime. The conspiracy to commit first-degree murder requires that the defendant in honor about October 2nd, 2019, with the intent to promote or aid in the commission of first re-murder, agreed with Alexander Cox that at least one of them or another would engage in conduct that constituted first-degree murder. I'm going to go through a few things that I'm going to talk about them altogether, because these jury instructions really have to be considered as one. So, conspiracy. When we're talking about conspiracy, we're talking about conspiracy, we're talking about the defendant agreeing with Alex Cox and others to engage in that conduct,

first-degree murder, that she had to intend to promote or assist, and that's going to be very important here in the commission of that conduct. She doesn't have to be the shooter, she has to promote or assist it, and that the intended conduct would constitute the crime of first-degree murder. Again, it doesn't have to be completed. That's what why it's conspiracy to commit first-degree murder. Proof of the membership. You're told that one may become a member of a conspiracy without knowing every detail.

She doesn't have to know how long Alex is waiting there, what type of bullets he's going to use. The evidence must show beyond a reasonable doubt that the conspiracy was knowingly formed and that the defendant or other persons participated in the unlawful plan with the intent to promote or assist the carrying out of the conspiracy.

In determining whether conspiracy exists, you should consider the actions and statements of all of the alleged participants. So you're going to have to look at everything and look at what this defendant did to promote or assist that conspiracy. So first to be a market. Again, I'm going to just note that conspiracy means

the parties agreed to engage in that conduct, so it doesn't mean there has to be a death, they are conspiring to kill someone. So we know that someone shot at Brandon Boudreau and came very close to causing his death. They have to intend or knew that he or she would cause the death of another person, which when you are shooting at them with a rifle, that is what you are intending or knowing. And they acted with premeditation.

Talk about premeditation and then we'll wrap. but altogether to discuss. So premeditation means that they intended to kill another person and that they formed an intent or knowledge and then reflected on it. Now, in Arizona, premeditation does not require some long, withdrawn out plan. Reflection can be very fast. But in this case, we have premeditation that is days and weeks before this. We're talking about September 23rd, 24th, 25th, all the way through up to October 2nd.

So following that, Trina helped tie everything together. She tied the bow. Lori started aiding in the conspiracy when she went with Alex to buy that burner phone. She showed premeditation by allowing Alex to borrow her Jeep, allowing it to be tinted. She Googled how to remove the backseat and then took off the spare tire. She kept those items with her until she rented the storage unit. She kept Alex's cell phone to help create an alibi and even made phone calls to fake that Alex was still in Rexburg. Those are her actions.

That is the conspiracy. You can't look at the facts separately. You have to look at how they all fit together. She didn't just buy a track phone. She didn't just rent a storage unit to store her own personal property. She didn't just want her Jeep tinted for no reason. All of the pieces fit together in the bicker scheme. Then Trina moved on to discussing the various defenses that Lori had alluded to during this trial.

The first is that there was no shooting at all. The Brandon struck his own car with a tire iron. I still can't get over that defense, but yes, Lori's defense. I don't think one even needs to be entertained by that, although admittedly I am. Sorry, Trina. But the evidence is clear. A bullet struck his car, shattering the window. There were bullet fragments and a bullet hole ring footage captured the noise. Brandon called 911 out of breath and in fear. That is true. That is real. The second defense. Well, maybe Melanie did it. And that was the defense that Lori switched to mid-trial, remember that?

A shocking one for all of us, or at least for me. So let's talk about that defense. Melanie is the one with the financial motive. During her closing, Trina even said, she's not here to say that Melanie isn't involved. She's here to tell you that Lori was involved too. More than one person is typically involved in a conspiracy, including in this case.

So the third defense was that Lori believes she's just not responsible for her brother's behavior. But we know better. She is responsible. She conspired. She assisted. She promoted and was definitely involved in this crime. Now, I want to listen to Trina finishing up with her incredible closing argument. And then we've got a lot more. Let's take a listen. Brandon Boudreau knew who was involved. He may not have seen who did this. The defendant has tried to explain away the evidence and questioning witnesses, asking if it's possible

for a single piece of evidence to mean something other than what everyone knows it means. Is it possible that a Coke bottle broke in the street and one little shard stayed there right where Brandon Boudreau's Tesla was located when it was shot, a shard that looks just like the glass from his car in the driveway inside the seats. Is it possible that a tire iron made that bullet hole in the Tesla? Is it possible that the GSR in the Jeep is hairspraying fireworks?

Is it possible that a Jeep with Texas plates belong to someone else who wanted to kill Brandon? Is it possible that Alex was in Idaho and called her on October 2nd at 802? for those 24 minutes. Don't fall for the defendant's questions about what is possible. When the evidence shows exactly what occurred, the only explanation when we look at all of the evidence together is that this defendant conspired with her brother and others to try to kill Brandon Woodrow. The state asks you to look at all of the evidence, not just to do. just the is it possible and find the defendant guilty of conspiracy to commit first degree murder. Thank you.

Well, so of course, Trina Kay finishing up her closing arguments means that it's Lori's turn. It's her turn, Lori Valadebel's turn once again for her own closing argument. And it was something. The courtroom echoed with objections. Lori stumbled through her statement, clearly forgetting what closing arguments are even for. I don't know if she ever knew, though, too. I think you'd have to know before you forget. But it felt less like a defense and more like a derailment.

And honestly, we should just listen to this whole thing together. Let's watch this. I have been actually waiting all afternoon and evening to watch it with all of you. So here we go. When a family breaks apart, it is a tragedy, with the devastation far-reaching, affecting many people. I am not exempt from tragedy, none of us are. But what we learn from it is most important. Because of this experience, I've studied the law and the judicial system, and that knowledge will stay with me forever.

When we experience tragedy, we can grow stronger from the experiences, and then those experiences are not. not all negative. You would think that often people in my position would feel defensive or angry. And from where I'm standing, I understand that very well. But I don't feel any of those things. You have watched me under pressure, under scrutiny, and even under attack. And I have shown you that I'm not on any of those things. I'm going to check to character evidence and testimony that's not in evidence. Ms. Davao, can I have you pull that microphone a little closer, please? You can't be upset with people who are forced to look at your life from a distance or judge it through a lens that's being intentionally distorted or being at least very limited.

Like the lens, the state has shown you on this event. There's so much more going on that is not included to your view. The law prevents some of these things from being shared. I have checked, Your Honor, to improper. sustained. You have seen, you have seen opinions formed by strangers trying to put together a narrative. I have shown you that basically there is no defense to what a person did not do or did not participate in. Other than what you've seen, which is no evidence that I made in agreement to commit a crime because no such evidence exists.

So I'm not defensive. I'm not angry. Nobody has all the pieces to this puzzle. It is complex. Like most families, this is a complex issue. And like the state, I was not there. But there is no agreement, no plan, no game. I am no stranger to tragedy. The breaking up of a family is tragedy. On June 25, 2019,

Brandon Boudreau decided that I was responsible for his family tragedy. And I'm really sorry that he feels that way. No, Your Honor, I'm going to object again to testimony. All right, the jury is reminded that what is said in closing statements, or closing arguments is not evidence, it is not testimony. The intent of the closing argument is for each side to argue what the evidence shows. Go ahead. I did and have supported my niece, Melanie.

when she suffered tragedy as a young child and during this terribly difficult time in 2019. We read the text from Brandon to me on June 25, 2019, where he claims that he will never stop until he proves that I am responsible. Well, here we are, almost six years later, and I'm charged with conspiracy to commit first-degree murder. In order to have a conspiracy, two or more people have to make an agreement to commit a crime. There is no such agreement between me and my brother Alex, although I did love my brother Alex.

And I'm going to object again, Your Honor, to testifying. There is no agreement that was shown to you between myself and Melanie Boudreau, although I love Melanie. And I'm going to object again to testifying. Sustained. I cannot tell you what happened that day on October 2nd, 2019, because I was not there. And I'm going to again object to testifying, and please strike everything the defendant has said. All right. The defendant is admonished. You cannot argue things that were not admitted into evidence. The prosecutor wasn't there. Law enforcement wasn't there. Only Brandon

knows what happened before he called 911. Only Brandon said he will not stop. The fact that I supported Melanie and her time of need does not make me against Brandon. I had nothing to gain by Brandon being hurt. Brandon has worked with law enforcement for almost six years to make sure that I pay a consequence. I'm going to object to misstating the evidence. Stain, the jury will determine what the evidence did and did not show. Your job is to determine if I committed a crime, this crime, a conspiracy, an agreement, not cleaning out a garage, but an agreement to commit murder. You did not see an agreement You did not hear an agreement.

You heard Detective Duncan say that he had spent hundreds of hours going over my I cloud accounts. They have 19 years of my accounts. Text messages. Can I object to Ms. states the evidence and no. If there was an agreement. Hold on. The objection sustained.

The jury is reminded that they will determine what the evidence did and did not show. Go ahead. If there was an agreement, they would. would have showed it to you. There is no agreement. We've all experienced tragedies in our lives. And naturally people want someone to blame, someone to pay a price.

My brother is no longer here. We can't ask him about that day. There were things presented in this case that I did not know. And I would object again to testifying, Your Honor, and asked to strike. Sustained. Things that I saw, I thought.

And again, I'm going to already ask to strike, All right. The defendant cannot testify to things that we're not testified to from the witness stand. Because this is the theory the prosecutor wants you to see, it is limited. How can we say clearly when the law only allows for a skewed view of things? The devastation this family has gone through is the tragedy. After almost six years, it's time for healing. Well, that's not it.

Just when we couldn't have thought we could all love Trina K anymore than we already do, she did her rebuttal, which was a complete mic drop moment. Shocking. Because it seems to be that she decided Lori finally opened some doors there. She opened some doors that they had warned her about. Don't open these doors, Lori. if you do, if you keep speaking to your character, we can rebut that character.

And so when it was time for her official rebuttal, she did just that. Take a lesson. Defendant wants you to think that Brandon has it out for her. She has tried to insinuate that Brandon was involved and with working with Detective Pillar for years just to get her. But what you heard was that Brandon has actually been working with law enforcement on multiple

investigations and that in fact Melanie Boudreau is a subject of multiple investigations. So again, as the defendant sits up here and tries to portray and paint a picture for you of her innocence and sadness and family tragedy, she again misrepresents what was told to you at trial. She tells you there was no plan, but she ignores the facts and the evidence of a very obvious long plan, a plan that started when she began this defendant, Lori Vallow meddling in Melanie and Brandon's marriage. And when that marriage was finally ending, this defendant, continued to help her niece, Melanie. She continued to aid her.

And what we see in every one of these bits of evidence is this core group of people. This defendant, her brother Alex, Melanie Boudreau, and Chad Daybelle. The four of them working together, do we need to have words of video? No. We do not. That is why there is that jury instruction on direct and circumstantial evidence. Because you look at what is going on here. And it screams to you a conspiracy by this defendant, by Melanie Boudreau, by Alex Cox, and by Chad DeBell to kill Brandon Boudreau.

Every action you see there, the defendant would like you to look at them individually and pretend that they don't all point to. what happened on October 2nd. But everything they did leading up to then shows you a way to cover up and prepare for the murder of Brandon Boudreau. When we talk about a plan and this defendant's actions, the most obvious and screaming piece of information is this defendant holding on to her brother's phone for days.

holding on to the 480 351-910 number for days while her brother is gone with her Jeep, without the rear tire, without the back seat, with a gun with him. That is part of the plan. That is the assisting, that is the promoting, that is the conspiracy that this defendant wants you to pretend doesn't exist. We don't need words. We have actions that are obvious. And they're done by this defendant and her co-conspirators. The state asks you to look at everything together,

regardless of how many people want to cry up here, regardless of how many people want to try to testify. This is not evidence. What is evidence is what was presented to you in trial, and each piece of that tells us. you this defendant is guilty. And so I ask you to find her guilty of the conspiracy to commit murder against Brandon Boudreau. Thank you. Catherine asks, wow, did Trina just say outright Melanie is involved? Yes. Yes, she did. And that was bold because Melanie hasn't even been

charged, but she absolutely said that. She said this is a conspiracy between Chad Daybel, who is also not been charged in this he's sitting on death row in Idaho for other crimes Lori Valo Daibel and Melanie Boudreau quite the mic drop well after this mic drop moment three alternate jurors were chosen and they were let go but not actually let go they were actually asked to stick around because for all they know they might if there's a problem they might have to take the place of one of the jurors that's deliberating. So you still need to be around.

And many are asking what the jurors were doing and how they were feeling and listening. There was a little bit more poker face today than yesterday. Yesterday there were smiles, but they were listening intently. I wouldn't call it poker face. They were intently listening. They were taking notes. They were invested. They had those few that make the most sort of facial tells.

they had that concern or that confusion, whatever you want to call it. I'm going to chalk it up to concern today. That's what the jurors were doing today as they listened to everything. So after the three alternate jurors were chosen, they were back there for probably less than 15 minutes. And we went out into the hallway. We were asked to stick around. I even thought, we might have a verdict today. If they all go out there and they talk and they say, yeah, we think she's guilty.

there's no carol in this jury pool. Maybe they'll come back in an hour. Maybe it'll be Murdoch, you know, and they come back in 30 minutes. But no. After about 15 minutes, they left and we were told that they would be back at 10 a.m. tomorrow. And that's, of course, where I will be tomorrow at 10 a.m. as well, earlier than 10 a.m. We will be ready and waiting for a verdict.

And I understand now, many of us had questions, if you remember, about why they were separating Charles Valo's trial and Brandon Boudreau's trial. I don't have those questions anymore. I don't know how they would have ever put them together. These are two completely different crime cases with two completely sets of evidence. So it makes complete sense. And Trina Kay certainly gave us a hint. I would call it more than a hint. She just called out Melanie Utrell.

She said she was involved. And I know that many of us have questioned whether or not Melanie and Zulma had immunity, right? They both testified in Idaho. Zulema certainly had immunity in Idaho. And she was an excellent witness, right? And I've wondered, you know, I don't know. I've wondered about Arizona. I realize I don't know who has immunity in Arizona.

I wonder about Melanie Gifti? I don't know. But from the sound of it, it seems like Melanie Boudreau-Pulowski not only doesn't have immunity, she's being called out right now, directly by the state's prosecutor saying that she was involved in this conspiracy. It's definitely, I think, an unexpected plot twist six years after this murderous spree across states. I know it's been something that's been like weighing heavily on me a little bit.

It's big. It's big. Anyway, thank you, thank you, everybody for your kindness, for your support. I will get some sleep tonight. It feels like we can rest. We might go grab dinner or a drink somewhere. And thank you, everyone, for your kindness. It will be absolutely strange when it is over.

But I think I've actually. I'm feeling what Judge Boreski has shared so eloquently, are you done? I think I'm genuinely, and I mean to sincerely grateful that I hopefully will never have to look at Lori's face again. But claim this last words, fingers crossed. All right, guys, we'll see you. May justice be served. Before I switched to wealth front, my APY was probably 0.1. Like, it was a joke.

I was literally getting pennies. Once I switched, chit-ching, with a wealth front. cash account earn up to 4.2% APY on your cash. The high APY with Wellfront was a clear winner. There are no petty fees. Every month, there's this much that I'm getting an interest in. I didn't have to do anything. My money is working hard on its own, and I can trust Wellfront is taking care of me. Earn more on your uninvested cash with a Wealthfront cash account, no account fees, no minimums, and no strings attached. Get started today at Wealthfront.com. Clients were paid $1,000 for their testimonials creating a conflict of interest.

outcomes vary. 3.3%, base API, as of January 30th, 20206, is representative variable and earned on funds swept to program banks. 0.65% new client boosts for three months on up to $150,000. Direct deposit $1,000 a month and fund an investing account for a 0.25% increase. Cash account offered by Wealthfront Brokerage LLC member FINRA SIPC, not a bank. These and eligibility requirements may apply to certain checking features of the cash account.