What Happened
Lori Daybell was found guilty of conspiracy to commit murder by an Arizona jury in her second trial, which concluded on June 12, 2025. The jury deliberated for less than an hour before reaching a verdict regarding the attempted murder of Brandon Boudreaux, who was once married to Daybell’s niece. Prosecutors alleged that Daybell conspired with her deceased brother, Alex Cox, to orchestrate a shooting incident that occurred in October 2019, where Boudreaux was shot at while driving his vehicle, narrowly escaping injury.
This trial was part of a series of legal proceedings involving Daybell, who has been implicated in multiple murder cases. Earlier in 2025, she was convicted of conspiring to murder her former husband, Charles Vallow, and in previous trials, she faced charges related to the deaths of her two children, Tylee Ryan and Joshua “JJ” Vallow. Daybell represented herself during the trial, and her defense argued that there was no substantial evidence of a conspiracy, while prosecutors presented evidence including cell phone data and testimony regarding the planning of the shooting.
Key Details
- Verdict: Lori Daybell was found guilty of conspiracy to commit murder.
- Victim: Brandon Boudreaux, who survived an attempted shooting in October 2019.
- Co-conspirator: Alex Cox, Daybell’s brother, who is now deceased.
- Previous Convictions: Daybell was previously convicted of conspiring to murder Charles Vallow and was implicated in the deaths of her children.
- Trial Duration: The jury deliberated for less than an hour before reaching a verdict.
- Defense Strategy: Daybell did not call any witnesses and chose not to testify in her defense.
- Prosecution Evidence: Included cell phone mapping and testimony regarding the planning of the shooting.
Multiple Perspectives
The prosecution’s case centered on the assertion that Daybell had a clear motive and means to conspire against Boudreaux, particularly due to his connection to her niece and the ongoing divorce proceedings. Prosecutors argued that Daybell and Cox had made specific preparations for the shooting, including modifications to a vehicle used in the incident. They maintained that the evidence pointed to a well-planned conspiracy.
Conversely, Daybell’s defense claimed that the evidence presented was circumstantial and did not definitively prove a conspiracy. Daybell herself expressed her belief in her innocence, arguing that there was no concrete plan or agreement to commit murder. This defense strategy has been a consistent theme throughout her trials, where she has sought to portray herself as a victim of circumstance rather than a perpetrator of crime.
Context & Background
Lori Daybell, often referred to as the “Doomsday Mom,” has been at the center of a highly publicized legal saga that has drawn significant media attention. Her cases are intertwined with a series of tragic events, including the deaths of her children and the suspicious deaths of her former husband and her brother. The broader implications of her trials touch on issues of mental health, religious extremism, and the legal system’s handling of complex murder cases.
The Daybell case has also raised questions about the influence of personal beliefs on criminal behavior, particularly in the context of her and her late husband’s apocalyptic religious views. The trials have highlighted the intersection of familial dynamics, legal accountability, and societal perceptions of morality and justice.
What We Don’t Know Yet
While the verdict in Daybell’s latest trial has been reached, several aspects remain uncertain. For instance, the full extent of her involvement in the planning and execution of the various alleged crimes is still under scrutiny. Additionally, the implications of her previous convictions on her sentencing in this case have yet to be determined, as she has opted to delay sentencing for her conspiracy to murder Charles Vallow until after the conclusion of this trial.
Furthermore, the ongoing investigations into the deaths of her children and the circumstances surrounding her relationships with her former spouses continue to raise questions. As the legal proceedings unfold, it remains to be seen how these factors will influence public perception and the judicial process moving forward.
In summary, Lori Daybell’s conviction for conspiracy to commit murder adds another chapter to a complex and tragic narrative that has captivated the public and legal community alike. The implications of her actions and the legal outcomes will likely continue to evolve as further details emerge and additional trials are conducted.
