Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #179

[FrostedGlass]

It’s tit for tat!

one side throws mud and then the other team responds with more mud. I guess the truth will come out at trial on who’s misinterpreting information. Moooooooooo

Nick has been calling the D liars almost from the beginning. The D have asked numerous times to have a hearing, which have been nixed by Nick and so follows the judge.

Here is Nick's chance to show the world what lyin' liars the D's are.
I say: Let's do it, Prosecutor McLeland. Time for a show n' tell.

 

[katydid23]

It will be interesting to see what this is for. Would they have to do a psych evaluation to allow RA to be unrestrained in the courtroom during trial? Genuine question.

I think they want to explain away the 5 confessions by saying he was off his rocker at the time.

 

[Emma Peel]

Litigation 101: How to deal with false assertions:

1. D's motion to dismiss, 2. P's response (w/ false assertions) to motion to dismiss, 3. D's reply to P's response.

1. Bait, 2. Trap (on the record), 3. Boom.

JMHO

source: Defense's Reply to State's response to Motion to Dismiss.
Adobe Acrobat

in 2017 Sarah Carbaugh never said “bloody” when describing the clothing of the man she observed on the road.

in 2017 Sarah Carbaugh never said the man she observed was wearing a blue jacket. In fact, Carbaugh described the color of the jacket he was wearing as tan.

therefore, that Tony Liggett provided false information in his search warrant affidavit and this false information materially affected the timeline the State of Indiana advanced in its search warrant affidavit.

Betsy Blair described the man that she observed on the bridge as being in his 20’s and having brown poofy hair. This description does not depict the way that the defendant, Richard Allen, looked in 2017

Betsy Blair described a vehicle that was NOT black and furthermore resembled a 1965 Mercury with sharp angles. The Court finds that Richard Allen’s Ford Focus was black and did not resemble a 1965 Ford Focus.

these omitted facts were central facts necessary for establishing law enforcement’s timeline of Richard Allen’s involvement in the crime.

those facts materially affect the timeline in such a way as to show that Richard Allen was not on the bridge nor was his car parked at the CPS lot and was therefore not the man that committed the murders

The defense provided an August 10, 2023, deposition of Jerry Holeman in which Holeman claimed that a Purdue professor stated that “it was not Odinism or any type of cult worshiping that would have conducted the crime.” (Holeman’s 8/10/2023 depo. p. 63, lines 15-25). However, the defense has since provided evidence that Jeffrey Turco never made such a statement. In fact, when asked at his March 21, 2024 deposition if he (Turco) ever uttered the words to the police that based upon his (Turco’s) findings “the sticks were not Odinism or any type of cult worshiping”, Purdue Professor Jeffrey Turco stated the following under oath: “That was not a hypothesis that I was asked to weigh in on in 2017 and certainly would have declined to do so.” (Turco 3/21/24 depo, page 79, lines 18-25). When comparing Holeman’s deposition with Turco’s deposition, at best Holeman did not provide accurate testimony. At worst Holeman lied under oath.

A “few days” after August 14, 2023, law enforcement received Turco’s 2017 report. In the first paragraph of said report Turco wrote the following “the argument that these markings [the sticks] constituted an inscription inspired by Norse runes (or modern recreation thereof) is quite plausible”, contradicting Holeman’s sworn testimony.

Holeman was minimizing Turco’s claims that it was “a given” that the sticks were left behind by someone attempting to replicate a Germanic runic script. Holeman’s report never mentions the word rune one single time and makes it appear as if Turco was claiming that his findings were inconclusive as to whether the sticks were even formed as runes. In fact, the recording makes it clear that Turco never questioned whether the sticks were formed into runes. Turco only questioned the intended interpretation of those runes.

on May 1, 2023, prosecutor McLeland received from law enforcement officer Todd Click a certified letter and packet containing exculpatory information. Furthermore, the Court finds that McLeland did not immediately turn over that exculpatory evidence to the defense, but rather waited four months before turning it over, and only after depositions were conducted in which the prosecution likely determined that it was obvious that the defense would learn of the existence of the exculpatory evidence (as Todd Click was expected to be deposed). Three law enforcement investigators named Click, Ferency, and Murphy believed that their investigation revealed evidence that 3rd party suspects (involved in Odinism) committed the murders. This is consistent with the defense’s theory. In the prosecutor’s response to the defense, the prosecution claims that the defense is continuing to make up a story about Odinism being involved in the murders. However, the very evidence that the prosecution attempted to keep from the defense for over 4 months contains evidence that three law enforcement officers involved in the investigation support many if not most of the findings and theories of the defense. Law enforcement actually supporting theories of the defense is highly unusual and highly exculpatory. The prosecution failed to turn over this evidence in a timely manner.

the defense provided the deposition testimony of Tony Liggett who swore under oath that he believed evidence supported that only one man – Richard Allen – committed the crimes (and therefore it could not be a group of Odinists that committed the crimes). However, the defense also provided the deposition of Tobe Leazenby who testified under oath that he believed that more than one person was involved in the murders because it would take more than one person to commit the crimes. Furthermore, Leazenby testified under oath that Tony Liggett in private conversations agreed with Leazenby that more than one person was involved. This conflicting deposition testimony by the man who authored the search warrant affidavit (Liggett) provides evidence of attempted concealment that multiple people were involved in the crime and therefore supports that Liggett intentionally provided false information and concealed information in his 2022 affidavit for search warrant.

Holeman’s 2023 interview of Turco applies to a 2022 search warrant affidavit when factoring in the requirements of a Franks request: law enforcement’s concealment of evidence in 2023 supports the intentional or reckless concealment of evidence and false information in the search warrant affidavit of 2022. Liggett and Holeman are both tenured members of the Unified Command. McLeland is the prosecutor who signed off on the search warrant affidavit. All three (Liggett, Holeman and McLeland) as shown in paragraphs a-d above have attempted to conceal evidence throughout the case or made statements under oath that have been found to be inaccurate, misleading or false.

Again, the evidence the prosecutor failed to turn over to the defense involved the findings of 3 seasoned investigators, including one that worked alongside the FBI, who all supported the theory that Odinists were involved in the murders. This theory is not just conjured from the imagination of the defense lawyers to gin up public sentiment as suggested by the prosecution. It is a theory supported by multiple law enforcement officers who investigated the case.

Included in this discovery received nearly 10 months late was Liberty German’s phone dump, including the famous “down the hill” video. This phone dump contained very interesting information that the defense had approximately one month to investigate before the prosecutor requested the defense to be kicked off the case. The defense should have had this key piece of evidence to review and provide to its experts no later than December 14, 2022.

Rather than simply identifying the proper law enforcement officer for the defense to depose concerning the geofencing evidence (again, evidence that the prosecutor provided to the defense 10 months late) who put the map together the prosecutor continues to conceal the identity of the actual expert, only narrowing it down to 3 possible candidates.

In his response motion, the State of Indiana claims that the owners of the phones found on the geofencing map in and around the crime scene were interviewed and then dismissed as suspects. The defense has requested the State of Indiana to provide any report, video or document memorializing any and all interviews of those persons whose phones were found on the geofencing map. The State of Indiana still has not provided said information or indicated where such information may be found in the vast discovery. The first the defense has heard that these people were interviewed is in the State of Indiana’s response motion filed April 3, 2024.

Additionally, because the defense has no further funds for our tech expert, the reliance on the prosecutor to provide reports and to provide the name of the correct geofencing expert is even more vital. In his motion, the prosecutor assailed the defense’s attempts to understand the geofencing data. The defense freely admits that they are lawyers and not geofencing experts and furthermore wish that they had accessibility to experts, like the prosecution, that could be called at no cost and consulted with on a moment’s notice.

The defense is also sending to the Court, by overnight mail, the following, which the Court may not have, for purposes of analyzing this motion and would request the Court to review the same before rendering its ruling:

a. September 6, 2023 email from Nick McLeland claiming that Holeman still does not know the identity of the Purdue Professor and whom law enforcement may never be able to identify.
b. Jerry Holeman’s September 22, 2023, report memorializing his 9/19/23 interview of Purdue Professor Jeffrey Turco in which Holeman admits that he knew the possible identity of the Purdue professor as early as August 12, 2023 and no later than August 14, 2023.

c. Transcript of Jerry Holeman’s September 19, 2023, interview of Jeffrey Turco.
d. Audiotape of Jerry Holeman’s September 19, 2023, interview of Jeffrey Turco.
e. Jeffrey Turco’s report from (according to his deposition) March 1, 2017. f. Jeffrey Turco’s deposition from March 21, 2024.

Adobe Acrobat

alternatively:
1. Serve 2. Lob 3. Smash

 

[TTF14]

Nick has been calling the D liars almost from the beginning. The D have asked numerous times to have a hearing, which have been nixed by Nick and so follows the judge.

Here is Nick's chance to show the world what lyin' liars the D's are.
I say: Let's do it, Prosecutor McLeland. Time for a show n' tell.

If he can.

But I don't think the defense is lying.

 

[mrjitty]

IMO, this tells us the D hired a psych expert who conducted a pysch eval (to counter the P's phone admission claims). Eval is done, D is confident in results, D shares the eval with the Court.

(This is why the D did not object to the P getting the mental health records. They're fine with it. Note the same date here as Gull releases mental health info to the P (yesterday) - cause/effect hit docket out of consecutive order.)
JMHO

I don't think they had much choice in the end

The confessions put them in a tough spot. Either RA has to testify to say he falsely confessed because reasons, or someone else needs to give expert evidence that the confessions might be false because psychological/medical reasons. That later path inevitably opened up the records to discovery IMO. We heard at the recent hearing from Rozzi that they had already handed a bunch of stuff over, and Gull discussed with him when this subpoena would be issued formally.

I guess this means that the Odinist prison guard theory wouldn't hunt - at least not by itself.

IMO the big unknown is whether RA will take the stand himself. RA obviously shot his own defence in the foot, and it might be the case that a jury will now need to hear him say he didn't do it. I think i would need to hear that.

IMO

 

[Emma Peel]

I don't think they had much choice in the end

The confessions put them in a tough spot. Either RA has to testify to say he falsely confessed because reasons, or someone else needs to give expert evidence that the confessions might be false because psychological/medical reasons. That later path inevitably opened up the records to discovery IMO.

I guess this means that the Odinist prison guard theory wouldn't hunt - at least not by itself.

IMO the big unknown is whether RA will take the stand himself. RA obviously shot his own defence in the foot, and it might be the case that a jury will now need to hear him say he didn't do it. I think i would need to hear that.

True, the D prioritized getting ready for this issue. My point was, the D was on board with the sharing with the P prior to Gull providing the mental health records to the P. Folks were wondering where the D was on this, and why the D didn't object. IMO, they were already on board.

 

[mrjitty]

True, the D prioritized getting ready for this issue. My point was, the D was on board with the sharing with the P prior to Gull providing the mental health records to the P. Folks were wondering where the D was on this, and why the D didn't object. IMO, they were already on board.

Yes - the defence had already handed a lot of it over by the time of the hearing on the 18th. Gull's order was to require DOC to provide the records directly to the Prosecution.

Volume I, Page 77
23 THE COURT All right. I will take the matter under advisement
24 with all of the respective exhibits that have been admitted. And before you all
25 leave, you have respectively filed - the State filed a motion for leave of Court to
Volume I, Page 78
1 subpoena third party records to the Department of Correction. I've received no
2 objection or motions to quash from the Defense. The Defense filed a notice of
3 discovery, indicating that Mr Allen's medical records, part one and two, had
4 been provided to the State, so does that take care of your request for the medical
5 records?
6 MR. MCLELAND: Judge, no, because I think -- Defense and I had a
7 conversation, we're concerned that the records that were provided to the Defense
8 may not be a complete set of records from the DOC. I found it necessary that we
9 want the complete set of medical and mental health records to address those
10 issues at trial and so that is the reason we subpoenaed the DOC, to make sure
11 we get the complete record from DOC

Rozzi goes on to talk about the state of play on pp 79/80

So basically this discovery was already happening.

 

[Emma Peel]

Today from the D's Reply: "RA's car wasn't at the CPS lot."

This is no small assertion.
The LE assumption that RA's car was parked at the CPS lot is major component of LE"s timeline and was used for search warrant.

For a very long time it's been a sticking point that LE never positively ID'd RA's car with eyewitness sightings nor otherwise to support their assumption that "RA parked here" - in LE's timeline.

Has the D asserted this in the past? I'd been waiting for it, but I don't think I've seen the D do this before, but I could have missed it.

 

[Emma Peel]

Yes - the defence had already handed a lot of it over by the time of the hearing on the 18th. Gull's order was to require DOC to provide the records directly to the Prosecution.

Volume I, Page 77
23 THE COURT All right. I will take the matter under advisement
24 with all of the respective exhibits that have been admitted. And before you all
25 leave, you have respectively filed - the State filed a motion for leave of Court to
Volume I, Page 78
1 subpoena third party records to the Department of Correction. I've received no
2 objection or motions to quash from the Defense. The Defense filed a notice of
3 discovery, indicating that Mr Allen's medical records, part one and two, had
4 been provided to the State, so does that take care of your request for the medical
5 records?
6 MR. MCLELAND: Judge, no, because I think -- Defense and I had a
7 conversation, we're concerned that the records that were provided to the Defense
8 may not be a complete set of records from the DOC. I found it necessary that we
9 want the complete set of medical and mental health records to address those
10 issues at trial and so that is the reason we subpoenaed the DOC, to make sure
11 we get the complete record from DOC

Rozzi goes on to talk about the state of play on pp 79/80

So basically this discovery was already happening.

As we're learning, quite a lot has already happened.
The assumptions that the D was a lyin' liar about Turco yesterday gave me a giggle fit.
This D was not born yesterday. Nor did this experienced D become incompetent overnight.
If I'm being kind to the P, it looks like (on Turco) Holeman and (on Search Warrant) Ligget may owe the P and the Court an explanation via a Motion to Dismiss / Franks hearing. As wishes aren't horses, I won't hold my breath, of course.
JMHO

 

[FrostedGlass]

If he can.

But I don't think the defense is lying.

I agree with you.

 

[TL4S]

Today from the D's Reply: "RA's car wasn't at the CPS lot."

This is no small assertion.
The LE assumption that RA's car was parked at the CPS lot is major component of LE"s timeline and was used for search warrant.

For a very long time it's been a sticking point that LE never positively ID'd RA's car with eyewitness sightings nor otherwise to support their assumption that "RA parked here" - in LE's timeline.

Has the D asserted this in the past? I'd been waiting for it, but I don't think I've seen the P do this before, but I could have missed it.

I mean, some might argue that this is D word play for BB claiming she saw a '65 Comet parked there. Fwiw...

 

[Emma Peel]

I mean, some might argue that this is D word play for BB claiming she saw a '65 Comet parked there. Fwiw...

I'm not following. Did I miss that an eyewitness ID's a car that matches the car RA owns parked in the CPS lot?

 

[mrjitty]

I mean, some might argue that this is D word play for BB claiming she saw a '65 Comet parked there. Fwiw...

Allan himself seemed to say he parked at the "old farm bureau building" whatever that is. Not sure what he said in his '22 interview with LE.

 

[Emma Peel]

Allan himself seemed to say he parked at the "old farm bureau building" whatever that is. Not sure what he said in his '22 interview with LE.

View attachment 495314

And where is the "old farm bureau building" site in Delphi?

I'm asking b/c I've never taken the time to locate the old site vs the "CPS" building site. Hoping that some sleuths here have figured this out.

Farm Bureau to build new building - Carroll County Comet

Carroll County Farm Bureau representatives Mike Beale and Shawn Ashby presented plans for a new building to be constructed on a recently acquired Monroe St. site, adjacent to the office located on Washington St. in Delphi. It was reported that Farm Bureau plans to break ground for the new office...

www.carrollcountycomet.com

ETA: there's a 2015 map with the article below. (I'm not great with directions.)
Is 2015 "old farm bureau building" the same site as 2022 "CPS"?

Dozens spend day after Christmas hiking

About 40 people braved the rain and post-Christmas lethargy to hike along the Monon High Bridge Trail east of Delphi Saturday afternoon. Walkers were treated to a guided tour of

www.newsbug.info

 

[vinayd]

Allan himself seemed to say he parked at the "old farm bureau building" whatever that is. Not sure what he said in his '22 interview with LE.

View attachment 495314

On top of the harvest feed store capturing what “appeared” to be his car.

 

[layer]

Is 2015 "old farm bureau building" the same site as 2022 "CPS"?

That's always been my understanding.

 

[Ravenmoon]

And where is the "old farm bureau building" site in Delphi?

I'm asking b/c I've never taken the time to locate the old site vs the "CPS" building site. Hoping that some sleuths here have figured this out.

Farm Bureau to build new building - Carroll County Comet

Carroll County Farm Bureau representatives Mike Beale and Shawn Ashby presented plans for a new building to be constructed on a recently acquired Monroe St. site, adjacent to the office located on Washington St. in Delphi. It was reported that Farm Bureau plans to break ground for the new office...

www.carrollcountycomet.com

ETA: there's a 2015 map with the article below. (I'm not great with directions.)
Is 2015 "old farm bureau building" the same site as 2022 "CPS"?

Dozens spend day after Christmas hiking

About 40 people braved the rain and post-Christmas lethargy to hike along the Monon High Bridge Trail east of Delphi Saturday afternoon. Walkers were treated to a guided tour of

www.newsbug.info

The old farm bureau building doesn't exist.

 

[TL4S]

I'm not following. Did I miss that an eyewitness ID's a car that matches the car RA owns parked in the CPS lot?

I should have been clearer. As others have pointed out, the PCA puts RA in the CPS lot multiple ways: RA stating he parked in the farm bureau building (assumed CPS), HH video of car consistent with RA's at 1:27, and several witnesses listing cars parked there during that time that bear resemblance to his Ford Focus (Purple PT Cruiser, Smart Car, etc). What the D claims was omitted was BB's description of the '65 Comet.

When the D says RA's car wasn't there, could they be playing off some of these factors, like the Comet description, which is clearly NOT a 2016 Ford Focus? Or, is there other evidence he wasn't there? I'm truly fascinated to see what evidence both sides presents.

 

[Gardenista]

I don't think they had much choice in the end

The confessions put them in a tough spot. Either RA has to testify to say he falsely confessed because reasons, or someone else needs to give expert evidence that the confessions might be false because psychological/medical reasons. That later path inevitably opened up the records to discovery IMO. We heard at the recent hearing from Rozzi that they had already handed a bunch of stuff over, and Gull discussed with him when this subpoena would be issued formally.

I guess this means that the Odinist prison guard theory wouldn't hunt - at least not by itself.

IMO the big unknown is whether RA will take the stand himself. RA obviously shot his own defence in the foot, and it might be the case that a jury will now need to hear him say he didn't do it. I think i would need to hear that.

IMO

Yup, he backed his defense right into the corner.

 

[mrjitty]

I do wonder, just a few weeks from trial, why the defence is investing time writing franks pleadings which obviously aren't even intended for a hearing (Gull already denied the basis for one)

Is it to create a record about discovery for appeal? (today's piece focusses on discovery, which is nothing to do with a Franks). Maybe public messaging?

it does seem odd so close to trial to be writing that kind of pleading rather than for new evidential hearings that might actually happen?