• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Missing Idaho Kids - Should Mother Be Arrested???

Should Lori Vallow Be Arrested?

  • Total voters
    21
Drawdown said:
The lack of dead bodies suggests otherwise
Click to expand...

There are THOUSANDS of cases of murder where the bodies aren't found for months, years, decades. Surely this isn't new news to you.
 
Drawdown said:
The lack of dead bodies suggests otherwise
Click to expand...

The parents not filing a report and then lying twice about the location of the children suggests otherwise.
 
ecofarm said:
I'm feeling charitable, so let's break it down. A non-JW marrying a JW is a hopeless and stupid marriage. It's sadly desperate.
Click to expand...

Oh hell no. My wife was loving, very funny, a super mom, and I fell in love with her and not her religion. She had many desirable qualities. She was drop dead beautiful and a great lover.

I hoped to change one thing, Her religion.

There has to be a lot more of religion A marrying Religion B where divorce is a lot more frequent than her or my religion has.
 
Lursa said:
Same question for you too then, please.

"for any individual whose child/children were unable to be found and they refused to tell them where they were...no welfare check, no investigation?"
Click to expand...

your question lacks a question or even a complete sentence
 
PirateMk1 said:
Post 71 since Josie's questions were similar.
Click to expand...

No, it doesnt address a legal obligation for those kids to be in school.

Nor does it answer this:

"for any individual whose child/children were unable to be found and they refused to tell them where they were...no welfare check, no investigation?"​

Is there a reason you are avoiding direct answers? The questions are direct.
 
Drawdown said:
your question lacks a question or even a complete sentence
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, I took it from another post, here, I'll fix it:

If there is any parent (legal guardian) whose child/children are unable to be found and the parent(s) refused to tell them where they were...should there be no welfare check, no investigation into the whereabouts of the child/children?
 
Josie said:
You refuse to believe facts, therefore, there's no use talking to you about it. Bye.
Click to expand...

NO, that is not what I refuse. I refuse your speculation over what even the law is not accepting as facts.
 
Drawdown said:
2) She doesn't need to.
Click to expand...

Doesn't need to???

Her 7 year old child, who is autistic, is missing. Since September.

As the legal guardian/parent it's her responsibility to protect and raise that child.
Maybe not the 17 year old, but the 7 year old autistic child??? Yes.


What the hell do you mean "she doesn't need to"?
 
Josie said:
There are THOUSANDS of cases of murder where the bodies aren't found for months, years, decades. Surely this isn't new news to you.
Click to expand...

there are 1000's of kids living on the street. Apparently this is news to you.
 
Dragonfly said:
Doesn't need to???

Her 7 year old child, who is autistic, is missing. Since September.

As the legal guardian/parent it's her responsibility to protect and raise that child.
Maybe not the 17 year old, but the 7 year old autistic child??? Yes.


What the hell do you mean "she doesn't need to"?
Click to expand...

Since the police are looking, there is no need to file a report.
 
PirateMk1 said:
The parents dont regard their children to be missing. How's that delusional.
Click to expand...

In your world, a parent can kill their child and the police will never get involved because the parent never reported them missing. Do you not see how asinine and disturbing this sounds?
 
Drawdown said:
Since the police are looking, there is no need to file a report.
Click to expand...

Why are you so nonchalant about children who haven't been seen in months and a mother who doesn't seem all that interested?
 
Lursa said:
I'm sorry, I took it from another post, here, I'll fix it:

If there is any parent (legal guardian) whose child/children are unable to be found and the parent(s) refused to tell them where they were...should there be no welfare check, no investigation into the whereabouts of the child/children?
Click to expand...

You can investigate all you want. assuming" ..." = "then" since without that your "if" goes nowhere.
 
I don't know much about criminal law, but there is zero plausibility to their innocence as far as I'm concerned. The people who should have been Vallow and Daybell's closest loved ones, his wife and her children, die or go completely missing within weeks of each other and they abandon their home to race off to Hawaii, where they look blissful as her children remain missing:

857CD67FA5434201929C5D8D4312ADF8.jpg


Even if there were some glimmer of reasonable doubt on the part of Daybell, e.g. that Vallow is his grief-based rebound relationship, he would have to be psychotic to happily follow her around as she demonstrates no concern for her own allegedly missing children and refuses to cooperate with authorities trying to find them.

I realize the criminal justice system has to pedantically follow its rules, but this situation could not possibly look more damning.
 
Robertinfremont said:
NO, that is not what I refuse. I refuse your speculation over what even the law is not accepting as facts.
Click to expand...

Go away. You are stating outright lies and refusing to accept the truth.

They were LDS. NOT JW's.

Now they're Doomsday Cult people.

The absolute FACT is they were LDS. They were never JW. Never.

That's the facts. You may chose to believe lies you create, but you can't spew them here.

And you're willfully ignorant if you think LDS doesn't do the 144,000 thing.
It's something that can easily be googled. I had to google it last night when I heard it.

144,000 High Priests – LDS Last Days


144,000 - Wikipedia

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints believes that the sealing of the 144,000 relates to the high priests, ordained unto the holy order of God, to administer the everlasting gospel; "for they are they who are ordained out of every nation, kindred, tongue, and people, by the angels to whom is given power over the nations of the earth, to bring as many as will come to the church of the Firstborn
Click to expand...


So just stop.

None of this has anything to do with the arrest of the Mother. Nobody cares about your personal past.

Get On-Topic or start a new thread somewhere else if you wish to push down this path.

Lori Vallow spent many many years in the LDS church. As did her dead husband, and her current husband.
Her current husband was a missionary for the LDS church. Apparently quite a successful one.

It's all documented fact. Not something we're making up here.
 
Last edited:
Drawdown said:
You can investigate all you want. assuming" ..." = "then" since without that your "if" goes nowhere.
Click to expand...

So then why did you write that since "there were no dead bodies," there was no reason to investigate? That was the context of your response.
 
Lursa said:
No, it doesnt address a legal obligation for those kids to be in school.

Nor does it answer this:

"for any individual whose child/children were unable to be found and they refused to tell them where they were...no welfare check, no investigation?"​

Is there a reason you are avoiding direct answers? The questions are direct.
Click to expand...


To the second question first. The parents are under no obligation to talk to any authority of any kind for any reason. This falls under 5th and 4th amendment protections. Their lack of answers is NOT a prerequisite of probable cause.

The legal obligations for the children to be in school only abide if they reside currently in that particular state. Children can reside in other states, or countries, away from the parents, to attend other schools or for other reasons. Parents have no obligation to the states in this regard. Remember they officially withdrew the youngest child from the local school.

These people would be charged if they could be. Apparently as of now they cant. There is more to the story than we know.
 
Josie said:
Why are you so nonchalant about children who haven't been seen in months and a mother who doesn't seem all that interested?
Click to expand...

1) Why do you care so much? It isn't like caring is going to change the outcome one bit

2) Idaho is filled with weird people.

3) Lots of kids end up on the street or living somewhere other than with their parents without formal reports filed.

4) Perhaps mom, who presumably actually knows her children, doesn't seem "interested" because mom feels she has no reason to worry.
 
Dragonfly said:
This is rather large in the news.

Case of the Missing Idaho Kids: A Timeline in the Disappearance of JJ Vallow and Tylee Ryan | Inside Edition

Dateline did a 2 hour show last night on it.

'''Dateline''' to focus on missing Rexburg children case | ktvb.com

Kids are missing. Not one person has seen them since Fall of 2019.

Mother is being completely uncooperative.

My question to you is, should she be charged with a crime, and what charges should be filed?

My thoughts are that at the very least "obstruction of justice" and "child endangerment".

There's also "mysterious deaths" of at least two direct family members being investigated right now, plus a third death of the man the mother is now currently married to.

Oh - and the mother and her new husband think the absolute End of the World will be this coming June of 2020.


But there is currently no information/evidence of what's happened to the children other than zero information as to where they are.

If you don't believe the mother should be arrested, please tell us why.
Click to expand...

She will probably end up being prosecuted, and I hope the police find sufficient evidence against her to merit a search warrant. However, you cannot be prosecuted for refusing to answer the questions of police officers. Obstruction of justice typically refers to people lying to or misleading the police and/or knowingly destroying evidence being sought for an investigation. But it does not refer to refusal to answer the questions of legal authorities. The Fifth Amendment and your right against actual and potential self-incrimination protects all citizens, even those who act in an extremely suspicious manner, from being prosecuted for refusing to answer an officer's questions.
 
Last edited:
PirateMk1 said:
The legal obligations for the children to be in school only abide if they reside currently in that particular state. Children can reside in other states, or countries, away from the parents, to attend other schools or for other reasons. Parents have no obligation to the states in this regard. Remember they officially withdrew the youngest child from the local school.

These people would be charged if they could be. Apparently as of now they cant. There is more to the story than we know.
Click to expand...

No...you are incorrect...the legal guardian must provide proof of the legal obligation to educate the children. Doesnt matter if it's in a different jurisdiction. So again...the legal guardian must answer for this. Please stop denying it.

And Josie brought up the police strategy that has been used before...when you make an arrest, then the suspects can lawyer up and not have to talk at all. The current strategy seems to be to see if they make mistakes, can trip them up, get them to turn, etc etc.

So your conclusion there is possible, but not likely.
 
PirateMk1 said:
To the second question first. The parents are under no obligation to talk to any authority of any kind for any reason. This falls under 5th and 4th amendment protections. Their lack of answers is NOT a prerequisite of probable cause.
Click to expand...

I'm willing to bet this isnt true with respect to children. But I think I'll do some research into it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom