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

[Salah11]

There is no proof RA is BG, this would be very hard to prove without other evidence besides the grainiest 2017 video I’ve ever seen. It could literally be anyone. BG video doesn’t = an eyewitness identified RA, that is inaccurate statement unless the eyewitness identified RA specifically as BG. Otherwise it is only speculation. The eye witnesses have been documented to say something different, unless there is another eyewitness they are referring to in the PCA/SWA? I assumed the D was following up on the witnesses in the PCA/SWA to draw the FM (since the goal of the FM is to get the SWA thrown out due to falsification of grounds for a SWA from my understanding)?

<modsnip: rude/personalizing>

1) RA admits he was there that day
2) He was dressed similarly to BG
3) He owns a gun were a bullet matching said gun was magically found under one of the girls dead body’s
4) audio proves a gun was pulled on the girls
5) RA places himself on that first platform and a witness also says they saw a man on that first platform
6) Multiple witnesses say they saw a man with his head down or hands in pockets and low and behold BG has that exact same pose walking across the bridge
7) confessed 5/6 times to the crime to loved ones

I am sure there are more but off the top of my head those tie him to this crime hook line and sinker. IMO

 

[Jade]

For convenience of reference here are the Court documents tying Richard Allen to the murders:

Delphi Documents Released

 

[AugustWest]

<modsnip: rude/personalizing>

1) RA admits he was there that day
2) He was dressed similarly to BG
3) He owns a gun were a bullet matching said gun was magically found under one of the girls dead body’s
4) audio proves a gun was pulled on the girls
5) RA places himself on that first platform and a witness also says they saw a man on that first platform
6) Multiple witnesses say they saw a man with his head down or hands in pockets and low and behold BG has that exact same pose walking across the bridge
7) confessed 5/6 times to the crime to loved ones

I am sure there are more but off the top of my head those tie him to this crime hook line and sinker. IMO

Those who feel RA is guilty have every right to feel that way. It's a reasonable take. It's an opinion, we all have different ones, and that makes the world more colorful.

However:
(1) being there that day doesn't complete the equation that RA is BG. Others were there.
(2) Others wear blue jackets and blue jeans, so that doesn't complete the equation either.
(3) Some feel the chain of custody is not well established for the bullet, and some feel that ejector toolmark analysis isn't as solid a science as we once thought.
(4) A gun (probably) was pulled on the girls. Whose gun that was we can't conclusively say. Nor can we tell what type of gun was pulled on the girls.
(5) Anyone that has watched "My Cousin Vinny" knows that eyewitness ID's can be wrong at times. People are, wait for it, human, and thus fallible.
(6) The human body is amazing! We can bend our heads down and then up a few seconds later. Doesn't really prove much.
(7) We don't know the circumstances of his "incriminating statements," nor the content of the conversation (yet).

All of this is to say that there are competing, alternative hypotheses to the data which is being discussed. None of the things I listed above are an unreasonable take. This is why I always, regardless of the case I am interested in, keep an open mind until I hear actual testimony. Trials are not a math equation. IMO

 

[Salah11]

For convenience of reference here are the Court documents tying Richard Allen to the murders:

Delphi Documents Released

So frustrating

This content is not available in your country/region​

 

[WildHuncher]

Those who feel RA is guilty have every right to feel that way. It's a reasonable take. It's an opinion, we all have different ones, and that makes the world more colorful.

However:
(1) being there that day doesn't complete the equation that RA is BG. Others were there.
(2) Others wear blue jackets and blue jeans, so that doesn't complete the equation either.
(3) Some feel the chain of custody is not well established for the bullet, and some feel that ejector toolmark analysis isn't as solid a science as we once thought.
(4) A gun (probably) was pulled on the girls. Whose gun that was we can't conclusively say. Nor can we tell what type of gun was pulled on the girls.
(5) Anyone that has watched "My Cousin Vinny" knows that eyewitness ID's can be wrong at times. People are, wait for it, human, and thus fallible.
(6) The human body is amazing! We can bend our heads down and then up a few seconds later. Doesn't really prove much.
(7) We don't know the circumstances of his "incriminating statements," nor the content of the conversation (yet).

All of this is to say that there are competing, alternative hypotheses to the data which is being discussed. None of the things I listed above are an unreasonable take. This is why I always, regardless of the case I am interested in, keep an open mind until I hear actual testimony. Trials are not a math equation. IMO

You can go through a list item by item and find something, anything, to dismiss each item, looking at each one as if it stood alone as the only thing to consider. But as Bogart said to Mary Astor, “Yeah, but look at how many of ‘em!” (Paraphrase from memory.)

 

[StarryStarryNight]

So you're suggesting that DD basically said:
"Hey, I understand you're telling me that you were there and were dressed similarly to BG. I'll just set this tip aside for the next five years and not tell anyone. Thanks for sharing!"
This makes sense to you?

We don’t know for sure because there hasn’t been a trial yet, but most people seem to think RA had his interview with the CO very soon after the murders, perhaps as early as Feb 14th, the day the girls’ bodies were found.
If that is true, no one, including the CO and LE, would have known about the BG video yet. The CO would have had no reason to ask about what RA was wearing, and if RA offered up that information himself, the CO would have had nothing to compare it to.

 

[AugustWest]

You can go through a list item by item and find something, anything, to dismiss each item, looking at each one as if it stood alone as the only thing to consider. But as Bogart said to Mary Astor, “Yeah, but look at how many of ‘em!” (Paraphrase from memory.)

Yes, you are absolutely correct. Which is why I used the term "reasonable" in my post. Which is what the jury will be tasked with; to find a man guilty or not "beyond a reasonable doubt."

 

[TL4S]

Seems to me RA's phone records (geotraking etc) could provide the contemporaneous record that will confirm his time at the trails. IMO. We'll see at trial.

The suggestion (pure conjecture) that RA's phone was not with him that day - is specious, much like the RA = Bridge Guy true crime social media legend. RA/stock-ticker - he states to LE he had his phone with him, shared his memory of the use of his phone in his interview(s). If we believe RA's report that he was on the 1st platform, if we believe his jacket color, etc.. why do we not believe he had his phone on and working w/ him at the trials as he's reported?

BG photo/video/audio are all highly edited/ manipulated tips-encouragement tools. Again, we'll see at trial that manufactured/manipulated photos, video, and audio will not be used as evidence at trial.

The jury will be shown the actual video/audio from Libby's phone ... or nothing.

JMHO

I also think RA's phone records could end up being significant, either for or against him.

It's well known that some criminals, like Kohberger, leave their cell phones at home or turned off when they commit crimes, because they have a basic understanding of cell phone tracking. In this case, if RA planned to go out and kill somebody that day, and left his phone at home or turned off, then the argument is that he must have had a basic understanding of cell phone tracking, too.

But if he had this basic understanding of cell phone tracking, I have to wonder why he would then turn around a day or two later and purposefully try to place his cell phone in the general vicinity of the CS around the time of the crimes. The assumption here is probably that he is just a dumb***. And maybe he is. But if he's guilty, that appears more like someone trying to cover for the fact that his phone was there. IDK. That's why I simply want to see the phone records for myself before making any assumptions. JMO.

 

[Jade]

So frustrating

How about this link it is all the documents so you will have to look for the Richard Allen Probable Cause document.

https://fox59.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/21/2023/06/DelphiDocumentsCombined.pdf

 

[zh0r4]

So frustrating

Try this link, the SWA begins on page 8.

DocumentCloud

www.documentcloud.org

We don’t know for sure because there hasn’t been a trial yet, but most people seem to think RA had his interview with the CO very soon after the murders, perhaps as early as Feb 14th, the day the girls’ bodies were found.
If that is true, no one, including the CO and LE, would have known about the BG video yet. The CO would have had no reason to ask about what RA was wearing, and if RA offered up that information himself, the CO would have had nothing to compare it to.

The only mention I have seen of Dan Dulin the CO officer is page 9 of the SWA:

“On September 21, 2022, Detective Liggett was provided a tip narrative from ORION DIN-C000074-01 to review. It was from DNR Lieutenant Dan Dulin."

Source: page 9

DocumentCloud

www.documentcloud.org

 

[Cyber sleuth]

Please help me out here.
I've seen zero evidence that he was without his phone. Where does that come from?

To be crystal clear I did state it was my opinion that he did not have his phone. Or at least one that had been presented to DD back in February 2017.
My opinion is formed from the defense’s own Franks memorandum. Pg 129.
https://www.scribd.com/document/672126677/DELPHI-Memorandum-in-Support-of-Motion-pdf

No data extracted from RA’s phone connects him to the murders.
This is very precise language and leads me to believe either his phone was turned off shortly before the murders or he never took it with him.

If RA’s digital data showed him arriving at MHB at noon and departing at 1:30 as he states in his 2022 interview. Or if it showed him stopping at 1st platform and looking at stocks around 1:40 or so then going anywhere but on and across that bridge and the the southwest corner of RL’s property around 3pm as he stated to DD, it would have been on the 1st page of the Franks memorandum. IMO RA would never have been arrested.
If his digital data showed the movements of an innocent person in a enjoyable walk; defense wouldn’t have needed to employ 51k of billable hours crafting a SODDI defense when they could just get their client off with easily traced digital evidence IMO they can’t do this easy peasy defense because their client’s phone wasn’t there. AMO based on what I know at this time.

 

[layer]

We don’t know for sure because there hasn’t been a trial yet, but most people seem to think RA had his interview with the CO very soon after the murders, perhaps as early as Feb 14th, the day the girls’ bodies were found.
If that is true, no one, including the CO and LE, would have known about the BG video yet. The CO would have had no reason to ask about what RA was wearing, and if RA offered up that information himself, the CO would have had nothing to compare it to.

<modsnip - personalizing>Do you think that DD was taking tips on his own, as a concerned citizen, seperate from the official investigation ? Like he and RA were pals having a casual conversation on bowling night?

I still want to know who was in charge at that time, where all these tips, leads and eyewitness statements were converging, and who was charged with following them up. Something is not right here.

 

[Cyber sleuth]

<modsnip - personalizing> Do you think that DD was taking tips on his own, as a concerned citizen, seperate from the official investigation ? Like he and RA were pals having a casual conversation on bowling night?

I still want to know who was in charge at that time, where all these tips, leads and eyewitness statements were converging, and who was charged with following them up. Something is not right here.

He was a conservation officer. Here’s an article written about him and his job from 2011.

August 1st Rotary Meeting Features First Sergeant Dan Dulin | Rotary Club of Kentland


Doesn’t sound like he is trained much in the way of investigating murders. Probably stepped in to try to help find Abby and Libby since they went missing in park territory.IMO
August 1, 2011
Alligator poaching and fast flowing water rescues were just a few of the adventures shared by First Sergeant Dan Dulin of the Indiana Department of Natural Resources at the Kentland Rotary Meeting on Monday August 1st. Officer Dulin highlighted the duties of Indiana Conservation Officers and explained how their training prepares them for much more than watercraft, ATV, hunting, and fishing code enforcement. DNR officers conduct water rescues and evidence searches in natural bodies of water. The DNR also has a canine unit trained to find firearms. This unit found the weapon used at a southern Indiana school shooting earlier this year after other attempts were unsuccessful. The DNR also protects Indiana Ginseng crop from poachers conducting illegal harvest and sale of the valuable root crop. DNR Officers typically work through the local Sheriff’s Department for dispatch. Officers also conduct safety workshops and work with students in local schools, 4-H clubs, and at Indiana DNR properties. Dulin noted that DNR officers are dispatched to other parts of Indiana and to other states. He helped in the days after hurricane Katrina and that gave him the opportunity to discover the alligator poaching violation mentioned earlier in this article, a crime thankfully not relative to the State of Indiana. Officer Dulin was the guest of John Frischi

 

[TL4S]

To be crystal clear I did state it was my opinion that he did not have his phone. Or at least one that had been presented to DD back in February 2017.
My opinion is formed from the defense’s own Franks memorandum. Pg 129.
https://www.scribd.com/document/672126677/DELPHI-Memorandum-in-Support-of-Motion-pdf

No data extracted from RA’s phone connects him to the murders.
This is very precise language and leads me to believe either his phone was turned off shortly before the murders or he never took it with him.

If RA’s digital data showed him arriving at MHB at noon and departing at 1:30 as he states in his 2022 interview. Or if it showed him stopping at 1st platform and looking at stocks around 1:40 or so then going anywhere but on and across that bridge and the the southwest corner of RL’s property around 3pm as he stated to DD, it would have been on the 1st page of the Franks memorandum. IMO RA would never have been arrested.
If his digital data showed the movements of an innocent person in a enjoyable walk; defense wouldn’t have needed to employ 51k of billable hours crafting a SODDI defense when they could just get their client off with easily traced digital evidence IMO they can’t do this easy peasy defense because their client’s phone wasn’t there. AMO based on what I know at this time.

These are valid arguments, IMO. Those phone records will likely be ripe with information, either helpful or hurtful to RA's case. If his phone was with him and turned on, LE will know exactly what time he was there. If he's guilty, it should ovelay well with some of the witness statements, even if he turned it off before actually committing the murders. If he didn't have his phone and lied to DD, that will be compelling, as well.

And you're right, if he had it on and was gone by 1:30, would the D not use that in a motion to dismiss, at least? However, the prosecution hasn't talked at all about RA's phone records, either. The fence-sitter in me is batting around the idea that perhaps either the P or the D don't want to risk phone evidence getting tossed out before trial...

 

[Jade]

Page 4:

[...]

Investigators reviewing prior tips encountered tip narrative from an officer who interviewed Richard Allen in 2017.

That narrative stated:

Mr. Allen was on the trail between 1330-1530. He parked at the old Farm Bureau building and walked to the new Freedom Bridge. While at the Freedom Bridge he saw three females. He noted one was taller and had brown or black hair. He did not remember description nor did he speak with them. He walked from the Freedom Bridge to the High Bridge. He did not see anybody, although he stated he was watching stock ticker on his phone as he walked He stated there were vehicles parked at the High Bridge trail head, however did not pay attention to them. He did not take any photos or video.

His cellphone did not list IMEI but did have the following: MED-256 691 463 100 153 495 MEIDHEX-9900247025797

Potential follow up information: Who were the three girls walking in the area of Freedom Bridge?

[...]



https://fox59.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/21/2022/11/Probable-Cause-Affidavit-Richard-Allen.pdf

 

[Cyber sleuth]

These are valid arguments, IMO. Those phone records will likely be ripe with information, either helpful or hurtful to RA's case. If his phone was with him and turned on, LE will know exactly what time he was there, and if he's guilty, it should ovelay well with some of the witness statements, even if he turned it off before committing the murders. And you're right, if he had it on and was gone by 1:30, would it not be used in a motion to dismiss, at least? However, the prosecution hasn't talked at all about RA's phone records, either. The fence-sitter in me is batting around the idea that perhaps the D doesn't want to risk phone evidence getting tossed out before trial...

It was one of the items they wanted to throw out in the Parity Motion.
Said they didn’t have enough funding. Although a digital expert had already been authorized for funding.

 

[Salah11]

i am assuming using a stock app would need mobile data so if his phone wasn’t with him that day I wonder how he was checking stock?

Moo

 

[layer]

He was a conservation officer. Here’s an article written about him and his job from 2011.
August 1st Rotary Meeting Features First Sergeant Dan Dulin | Rotary Club of Kentland
Doesn’t sound like he is trained much in the way of investigating murders. Probably stepped in to try to help find Abby and Libby since they went missing in park territory.

I know who he is, I saw him in action in The Reckoning In Carroll County. This is something that should be easy to flesh out. Either he was an active part of the investigation or he wasn't.

 

[layer]

i am assuming using a stock app would need mobile data so if his phone wasn’t with him that day I wonder how he was checking stock?

Yes! And I assume they would know if one of his pagers was active at that time too.

 

[TL4S]

It was one of the items they wanted to throw out in the Parity Motion.
Said they didn’t have enough funding. Although a digital expert had already been authorized for funding.

I thought they were asking for more funding so they could continue to retain that digital expert, but were denied. Perhaps I misunderstood the filing.