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

[Emma Peel]

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.

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...

There's lots of ways to think until we get our geotracking expert lessons at trial. And to your good point ... IF we get those lessons at trial.

Did the P order RA's geotracking records?
If so, one would think the D would have it and would not be putting forth an RA timeline that disagrees with digital records.

On the other hand, we may learn that geotracking is so unreliable neither D or P bothered to order it for use as fact evidence of RA's accurate location in time.

What we do see is the D and P disagreeing on timeline ... and both sides likely intend to support their timelines with one type of fact proof or another.

Everyone bides their time awaiting trial differently.
I make lists of things I trust will be clarified at trial. And even that list...is pure speculation.

 

[Justice101]

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

Tons of trials do not have every single fact perfectly laid out.

Because of the limitations that is actually IMPOSSIBLE to be 100.0000% certain on every little fact that is 100.0000% the accused and no chance of it being someone else, the court set the level needed for conviction as PREPONDERANCE of the EVIDENCE.

In my opinion, this is not a murder mystery novel and is going to end up being well above the minimum limit necessary.. In my opinion, a conviction would be the likely outcome.

 

[susane7]

I don't have time to post the filing now but I am just want to say the State filed a answer to the 3rd Franks hearing. Some interestings things about the geofencing and Prof Turco.

 

[mrjitty]

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

i assume he showed his phone to Dulin to get those digits then?

it’s quite a detailed record.

i also note RA gave his two versions about time frames before he was represented. so the defence have always been tied into his police interview timeline, whether or not they have evidence for it.

a good example of why you should never do a police interview without counsel in the US.

 

[layer]

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.

Or... that he wasn't involved in the murders at all.
I'm all for adding two and two to equal four. But without actual transcripts of and details behind these statements by RA, I'd say anything is fuzzy math right now. And nothing has ever added up for me in this case.

 

[AugustWest]

Tons of trials do not have every single fact perfectly laid out.

Because of the limitations that is actually IMPOSSIBLE to be 100.0000% certain on every little fact that is 100.0000% the accused and no chance of it being someone else, the court set the level needed for conviction as PREPONDERANCE of the EVIDENCE.

In my opinion, this is not a murder mystery novel and is going to end up being well above the minimum limit necessary.. In my opinion, a conviction would be the likely outcome.

Where in the post you quoted did I ever dispute that? What is unreasonable about wanting to wait to hear both sides of the story before coming to any conclusion?

I really don't understand why that is so tough, or those who feel like the speculative evidence we have here is conclusive of innocence or guilt.

The discussion was essentially around a statement that those who feel the evidence isn't there for them yet are somehow unable to put two and two together. Why are those who have a differing opinion open to scorn for feeling that way?

 

[zh0r4]

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

MEID is an abbreviation for Mobile Equipment Identifier, also called an electric serial number (ESN). It is similar to the IMEI number except that it is in hexadecimal format and 14 digits long.

Re: data you can potentially extract from this info:
The information MEID provides is mainly added when the phone is built. It doesn’t include any information about the name or address that the phone is registered to, or the number on the SIM card. There is some information about network and location that is transmitted by the MEID number but only locally. From my understanding.

 

[TL4S]

I don't have time to post the filing now but I am just want to say the State filed a answer to the 3rd Franks hearing. Some interestings things about the geofencing and Prof Turco.

I will note, even the P is stating that perhaps the D is not understanding the digital evidence, yet JG denied them any more funding for digital expert assistance. I don't get it...

 

[SleutherGirl]

MEID is an abbreviation for Mobile Equipment Identifier, also called an electric serial number (ESN). It is similar to the IMEI number except that it is in hexadecimal format and 14 digits long.

Re: data you can potentially extract from this info:
The information MEID provides is mainly added when the phone is built. It doesn’t include any information about the name or address that the phone is registered to, or the number on the SIM card. There is some information about network and location that is transmitted by the MEID number but only locally. From my understanding.

Can you explain what this means in short, easy words for the electronically challenged? Please and thank you.

 

[Justice101]

Where in the post you quoted did I ever dispute that? What is unreasonable about wanting to wait to hear both sides of the story before coming to any conclusion?

I really don't understand why that is so tough, or those who feel like the speculative evidence we have here is conclusive of innocence or guilt.

The discussion was essentially around a statement that those who feel the evidence isn't there for them yet are somehow unable to put two and two together. Why are those who have a differing opinion open to scorn for feeling that way?

Sorry, didn't mean to imply that anyone else's opinion was bad. I apologize.

I was just saying that all these nitty picky details of doubt do not necessarily add up in a court room because of a general need to use accumulative evidence to convict.

Sorry again, I will try to check my stronger opinions at the door.

 

[layer]

I will note, even the P is stating that perhaps the D is not understanding the digital evidence, yet JG denied them any more funding for digital expert assistance. I don't get it...

After reading some of the proceedings my impression of JG is that she is a reasonable and intelligent arbiter. But I can't for the life of me understand why she refuses to recuse herself. I almost wonder if she is deliberately driving the case into a ditch so it can get a fresh restart. Or some evidence...

 

[AugustWest]

Sorry, didn't mean to imply that anyone else's opinion was bad. I apologize.

I was just saying that all these nitty picky details of doubt do not necessarily add up in a court room because of a general need to use accumulative evidence to convict.

Sorry again, I will try to check my stronger opinions at the door.

@Justice101 It's not your fault, and I'm definitely not hurt by anything you said. I just enjoy a good conversation/discussion with folks, and I don't want anyone's opinion stifled because they feel ostracized or picked on. Please continue being just who you are; I actually love reading your thoughts.

Have a great day, bud!

 

[Salah11]

After reading some of the proceedings my impression of JG is that she is a reasonable and intelligent arbiter. But I can't for the life of me understand why she refuses to recuse herself. I almost wonder if she is deliberately driving the case into a ditch so it can get a fresh restart. Or some evidence...

Why would she recuse herself?

 

[TL4S]

I don't have time to post the filing now but I am just want to say the State filed a answer to the 3rd Franks hearing. Some interestings things about the geofencing and Prof Turco.

So, after a quick glance over, am I understanding correctly that the phone data is not reliable enough for the D to use (and therefore useless to the P, as well)? How will this influence RA's phone data? Will it just be whether or not the phone was on or off? Sigh...a digital expert I am not. I need some funding, too.

 

[Emma Peel]

I will note, even the P is stating that perhaps the D is not understanding the digital evidence, yet JG denied them any more funding for digital expert assistance. I don't get it...

Mais je proteste!

(imo, You totally get it.)

 

[TL4S]

Mais je proteste!

(imo, You totally get it.)

Googling translation...

Well, I try...

 

[layer]

Because of the limitations that is actually IMPOSSIBLE to be 100.0000% certain on every little fact that is 100.0000% the accused and no chance of it being someone else, the court set the level needed for conviction as PREPONDERANCE of the EVIDENCE.

Wait, what?

 

[Boxer]

It was a nice day and he decided to go for a walk and take in nature. Wrong place at the wrong time.

A walk and murder.

 

[Boxer]

Wait, what?

Beyond a reasonable doubt. BARD.

 

[mrjitty]

I don't have time to post the filing now but I am just want to say the State filed a answer to the 3rd Franks hearing. Some interestings things about the geofencing and Prof Turco.

They accuse the defence of outright lying in multiple places. (screenshot)

I am kind of at a loss as to how this keeps happening in this case. I get disagreements over interpretation, but Turco either said stuff or he didn't. I guess we'll have to wait for his actual exhibits.