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

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
mrjitty said:
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?
Click to expand...
Appellate record. - yes. IMO

@mrjitty ETA: on timing/strategy
1. When is there not time for a motion to dismiss?
2. This motion to dismiss seems to have served a strategic purpose for the Defense. They have the State on the record with regard to the State's (per the D) misrepresentations with regard to Turco's representations and with regard to Geofencing discovery, and to get on the record the negative affect of the Court's denial of critical experts. This is a planned/strategic motion, including this reply. IMO, much of this reply was written prior to the State's response. There's some interesting timing going on - with the Motion to Dismiss and Turco's actual deposition date with the D.

JMHO
 
Last edited:
mrjitty said:
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?
Click to expand...
Maybe they are hoping this time she'll actually read it.

But yes, also for appeal.
 
TTF14 said:
I'm not from Delphi, but I'm pretty sure it does exist and LE just assumed he meant the CPS building. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong.
Click to expand...
It's location exists. It was a place. This article suggests it was on Washington street. Near Monroe Street. (Which is on the other side of the creek from prince wm road and the CPS.)

Farm Bureau to build new building - Carroll County Comet


The CPS is located at:
901 Prince William Road, Suite G, Delphi, IN 46923
per: https://www.in.gov/dcs/contact-us/local-dcs-offices/carroll/
901 Prince William Road Suite G Delphi, IN 46923 at DuckDuckGo

Again, I'm unfamiliar w/ the area.

Just wondering why LE thinks when RA states he parked at the "old farm bureau", (Washington St) that RA meant the CPS building (Prince William Road).
 
TTF14 said:
I'm not from Delphi, but I'm pretty sure it does exist and LE just assumed he meant the CPS building. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong.
Click to expand...
I responded to this with some location info.

I wanted to ask ... has no one here ever asked why LE just assumed he meant the CPS building?
Especially when no RA car was seen at the CPS building? Surely LE had a reason?
 
layer said:
That's always been my understanding.
Click to expand...

Emma Peel said:
why?
Click to expand...
@layer

Whoops, it's never good to give a one-worder ... I took a call and pressed post too soon.

why?
I'm asking not you specifically, but asking whoever has thought about this before:
Why it has been the understanding that RA states he parked one place and that LE can assume - without confirming with RA (apparently) that RA parked where they say he parked, rather than RA parking where RA says he parked?

(I've also skipped over that "RA says he parked here so we assume he parked where it works for us". And now, I'm finding it all very odd. Probably b/c the D asserts in papers (I think for the first time) that RA did not park where LE says he parked.)

Anyway, I think the answer is ... we had the understanding that RA parked at that location because ... LE has asserted that he did ... in some super serious paperwork that's landed RA in solitary for a year plus.

JMO
 
Emma Peel said:
It's location exists. It was a place. This article suggests it was on Washington street. Near Monroe Street. (Which is on the other side of the creek from prince wm road and the CPS.)

Farm Bureau to build new building - Carroll County Comet


The CPS is located at:
901 Prince William Road, Suite G, Delphi, IN 46923
per: https://www.in.gov/dcs/contact-us/local-dcs-offices/carroll/
901 Prince William Road Suite G Delphi, IN 46923 at DuckDuckGo

Again, I'm unfamiliar w/ the area.

Just wondering why LE thinks when RA states he parked at the "old farm bureau", (Washington St) that RA meant the CPS building (Prince William Road).
Click to expand...
This is where I'm hoping the P unveils some very strong evidence at trial. The PCA makes a lot of assumptions. I'm not saying they aren't compelling, and it was enough for probable cause, but I would like to see more, personally. There are no witnesses to a black Ford Focus, that we are aware of. There is a purple PT cruiser, a smart car, and HH footage of a vehicle that is "consistent" with RA's car driving by. It's not stated if there is footage of it even parking. Not to mention what vehicles were around from noon to 1:30.

Where was the light colored '65 Comet? BB's description of BG is about as accurate to RA as the Comet is to his Focus. Why didn't the PCA provide a description of the car BB saw parked oddly in the CPS lot? Was the car she described the Comet, or a different car? Why was the Comet omitted from the PCA? BB's the only witness who puts BG on the bridge in the moments before the girls got there, so it's important. JMO.

RA has placed himself on the trails at two different times, but without us being able to see the context of how he was asked the question on time, I don't feel comfortable making assumptions about that, either. And he said he saw three girls, but there were four girls who saw the man dressed in all black and/or jeans and blue jacket. Was there a group of three girls near FB around noon? It's just a nagging question in my mind.

Yes, I know all about how notoriously unreliable witness statements are, but the assumptions the P makes in the PCA are only that, an assumption, just like their assumption that the old farm bureau building is the CPS lot. I'd prefer more, which I hope the P will offer at trial. Likely, they have saved the best for last. Maybe the bullet evidence will be stellar. Or the confessions damning. Maybe the similar description of the clothing to what RA said he was wearing will be convincing enough. Perhaps there's solid digital or DNA evidence that the D is lying about there not being any. I truly do hope that, because I want them to have the right guy. I just don't want there to be any doubt. I so hope this.
 
Last edited:
Emma Peel said:
Anyway, I think the answer is ... we had the understanding that RA parked at that location because ... LE has asserted that he did ... in some super serious paperwork that's landed RA in solitary for a year plus.
Click to expand...
I never got in to the weeds with the car/parking. I just remember that seemed like the concensus among the people that did. I'm only referring to the specifics of the location (old Farm Building = CPS building), not anything related to RA. I'm open to examining any aspect of this investigation.
 
TL4S said:
This is where I'm hoping the P unveils some very strong evidence at trial. The PCA makes a lot of assumptions. I'm not saying they aren't compelling, and it was enough for probably cause, but I would like to see more, personally. There are no witnesses to a black Ford Focus, that we are aware of. There is a purple PT cruiser, a smart car, and HH footage of a vehicle that is "consistent" with RA's car driving by. It's not stated if there is footage of it even parking. Where was the light colored '65 Comet? BB's description of BG is about as accurate to RA as the Comet is to his Focus. Why didn't the PCA provide a description of the car BB saw parked oddly in the CPS lot? Was the car she described the Comet, or a different car? Why was the Comet omitted from the PCA? BB's the only witness who puts BG on the bridge in the moments before the girls got there, so it's important. JMO.

RA has placed himself on the trails at two different times, but without us being able to see the context of how he was asked the question on time, I don't feel comfortable making assumptions about that, either. And he said he saw three girls, but there were four girls who saw the man dressed in all black and/or jeans and blue jacket. Was there a group of three girls near FB around noon? It's just a nagging question in my mind.

Yes, I know all about how notoriously unreliable witness statements are, but the assumptions the P makes in the PCA are only that, an assumption, just like their assumption that the old farm bureau building is the CPS lot. I'd prefer more, which I hope the P will offer at trial. Likely, they have saved the best for last. Maybe the bullet evidence will be stellar. Or the confessions damning. Maybe the similar description of the clothing to what RA said he was wearing will be convincing enough. Perhaps there's solid digital or DNA evidence that the D is lying about there not being any. I truly do hope that, because I want them to have the right guy. I just don't want there to be any doubt. I so hope this.
Click to expand...
I really need to start on that Cliff's Notes. Between what we know and what we think we know and what we don't knonw... I'm slipping into the Rumsfeld Matrix
...there are known knowns; there are things we know we know
...there are known unknowns; we know there are some things we do not know
...there are also unknown unknowns; the ones we don't know we don't know
...it is the latter category that tends to be the difficult ones
 
Cyber sleuth said:
He also had guns which was a probation violation and he was weeks from his probation being over. I think he was trying to avoid jail time.
I don’t think he had any idea these girls would be found on his property when he asked for the alibi. He was just trying to distance himself from being caught doing other things wrong.
AMO
Click to expand...
Thank you for clearly addressing 'RL' issue again in fairness. If only this post could be "once and for all." His misdeeds have been aired many times, though no evidence of his involvement
in the murders. He visited the scene, he may have known more.
The FBI woman investigator admitted loading up the search warrant. He's long dead, yet clearing his name never lasts here.
 
TL4S said:
This is where I'm hoping the P unveils some very strong evidence at trial. The PCA makes a lot of assumptions. I'm not saying they aren't compelling, and it was enough for probably cause, but I would like to see more, personally. There are no witnesses to a black Ford Focus, that we are aware of. There is a purple PT cruiser, a smart car, and HH footage of a vehicle that is "consistent" with RA's car driving by. It's not stated if there is footage of it even parking. Where was the light colored '65 Comet? BB's description of BG is about as accurate to RA as the Comet is to his Focus. Why didn't the PCA provide a description of the car BB saw parked oddly in the CPS lot? Was the car she described the Comet, or a different car? Why was the Comet omitted from the PCA? BB's the only witness who puts BG on the bridge in the moments before the girls got there, so it's important. JMO.

RA has placed himself on the trails at two different times, but without us being able to see the context of how he was asked the question on time, I don't feel comfortable making assumptions about that, either. And he said he saw three girls, but there were four girls who saw the man dressed in all black and/or jeans and blue jacket. Was there a group of three girls near FB around noon? It's just a nagging question in my mind.

Yes, I know all about how notoriously unreliable witness statements are, but the assumptions the P makes in the PCA are only that, an assumption, just like their assumption that the old farm bureau building is the CPS lot. I'd prefer more, which I hope the P will offer at trial. Likely, they have saved the best for last. Maybe the bullet evidence will be stellar. Or the confessions damning. Maybe the similar description of the clothing to what RA said he was wearing will be convincing enough. Perhaps there's solid digital or DNA evidence that the D is lying about there not being any. I truly do hope that, because I want them to have the right guy. I just don't want there to be any doubt. I so hope this.
Click to expand...
I can agree, the case dynamics are such that assumptions are going to be necessary. I guess expect assumptions to be supported by ... facts ... rather than just being pulled out of a clear blue sky.
 
layer said:
I really need to start on that Cliff's Notes. Between what we know and what we think we know and what we don't knonw... I'm slipping into the Rumsfeld Matrix
...there are known knowns; there are things we know we know
...there are known unknowns; we know there are some things we do not know
...there are also unknown unknowns; the ones we don't know we don't know
...it is the latter category that tends to be the difficult ones
Click to expand...
Me too. And I believe it's the unknown unknowns that will be presented at trial, if they exist. I know what I know, and it's not enough for me to make a decision.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 60 more.
Total: 3,640 (members: 61, guests: 3,579)

Online statistics

Members online
61
Guests online
3,579
Total visitors
3,640
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
593,645
Messages
17,990,297
Members
229,193
Latest member
imaguppynotashark
Back
Top