Skip to Content

Media objects to not allowing video access at Vallow, Daybell hearings

Lori Vallow Daybell and Mark Means in court July 17
Lori Vallow-Daybell and Mark Means at a court hearing on July 17, 2020 through a Zoom meeting.

IDAHO FALLS, Idaho (KIFI/KIDK) - Local media, including Local News 8, along with other regional and national media organizations have joined together to object to a motion that would not allow video access to court hearings for Lori Vallow-Daybell.  

Idaho Falls Attorney Steve Wright filed the formal objection for the media in Fremont County Court Friday to a motion filed by Special Prosecutor Rob Wood.

Last week, Wood filed a motion to suppress access to the live coverage of legal motions involving Chad Daybell and Lori Vallow-Daybell in pending court cases relating to the disappearance of two of her children.

In light of COVID-19, Wright calls video access to criminal proceedings much more than a convenience. “It is an important means to ensure the Constitutional interests described by our United States Supreme Court are protected,” said Wright.

He argued that transparency and open proceedings also facilitate Vallow-Daybell’s rights to the proper administration of the judicial process.

Wright maintains Wood’s motion is disproportionate to the Constitutional burdens it imposes.   He argued that…”the State of Idaho seeks to use a sledge hammer where the Constitution requires a scalpel.”

The participating media includes East Idaho News, Post Register, KSL-TV, Idaho Statesman, NBC News, KIFI Local News 8, KPVI-TV and KIVI-TV.

Author Profile Photo

News Team



  1. I guess reporters now cannot do a thing on their own. Do they ever read about the days before video? More to worry about than this POS and her dead kids.

    1. Think about this, J W; the de rigueur atrocious use of semantics, spelling errors, etc. on most of these ‘news feed’ items exemplifies that reporters no longer ARE journalists. Combined with the degradation of quality–in almost every aspect OF society–video does, at least, provide the viewing public with some semblance of what is actually happening.
      Besides; either the viewing pubic is riddled with ghouls OR the general news media PERCEIVES that it is. Either way; the tramp involved in this heinous outrage (OOPS: My bad: the tramp ALLEGEDLY involved in this heinous outrage…. 😉 ) gets a disproportionate amount of ‘coverage’.

  2. The other thing that needs to be looked at is the attorneys are going to ask for a change of venue (and I hate to say it, but I agree it is needed for a FAIR trial); however, if this coverage is broadcasted on local stations that will guarantee that a change of venue will be agreed to and if not by the trial judge just wait till it goes to an appeal judge.
    There is NO way this person can get a fair trial in this area. And as much as I believe she is contemptible, everyone regardless of how reprehensible the crime deserves a fair trial.

Leave a Reply

Skip to content