Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #182

[vinayd]

This is an interesting paper on discovery written by Lorinda Youngcourt.
Home - National Criminal Defense College - NCDC - National Criminal Defense College › faculty › name › lorinda-youngcourt
Lorinda Youngcourt represented Indiana and Illinois capital and non-capital clients in trial, direct appeal, state post-conviction, and federal habeas.

IMO it's worth the read for those interested in understanding some of the D's actions in this case. It's 18 pgs long but, for now, I'm only going to quote a couple of paragraphs.
********************

https://www.in.gov/ipdc/files/DISCOVER.pdf

... Lorinda Youngcourt
In this chapter I have tried to outline some basic principals about discovery and how it can be used in capital litigation.

I. STRATEGY CONSIDERATIONS
Counsel to a death charged defendant is always striving to learn as much information about her case as quickly as possible. Whether counsel should try to learn this information through formal discovery pleadings or informal interviews is a strategic decision.

A. Make a record. . . make a record. . . make a record. . . make a record. No one wants to lose a death penalty case, but unfortunately it happens. Unless you have made a record of the items you tried to discover but did not receive, there is no issue to pursue on appeal.

B. Once discovery is filed, the burden is on the State to respond. If the State does not adequately respond, it creates an issue to be litigated in pre-trial motions. An inadequate response may lay the ground work for a continuance.

Reading through this now. Here is what stands out to me which we discussed yesterday and I asked if this would be the State's work product.

https://www.in.gov/ipdc/files/DISCOVER.pdf
Pg 4

Although police reports are not discoverable because of the work product exception,
1 a lazy prosecutor, when faced with having to sift through stacks of police reports to answer defense discovery, may determine that providing counsel with copies of all the reports is an easy solution. Verbatim witness statements are discoverable and obviously useful.

State Ex Rel. Keaton v. Cir. Ct. of Rush Cty.
We have recognized that in criminal litigation protection must be extended to the attorneys' work product. State ex rel. Meyers, supra; Spears, supra. The work product doctrine protects materials prepared by agents for the attorney as well as those prepared by the attorney himself. United States v. Nobles (1975), 422 U.S. *1148 225, 95 S. Ct. 2160, 45 L. Ed. 2d 141; Spears, supra. Protection should therefore be afforded to police reports which, as contended by relator, constitute the work product of the prosecuting attorney.

 

[FrostedGlass]

RSBM
You don’t need three guesses for that! I know who’d be on the top of my list! JMO

I'm trying to limit myself to just one person but then I decided to make it plural.
The B-G violation thing needs a bit more definition before I fully decide how many names I'm interested in.

 

[layer]

In the end, however, I'm really interested in what person/s the D are looking at for the B-G violations. P's not wanting that out for whatever reason.

I'm particularly interested in any Giglio material. I'm sure this is oversimplified, but KISS works for me:
In the 1963 Brady v. Maryland case, the Supreme Court held that prosecutors must disclose any exculpatory evidence to the accused material to his guilt or punishment. Subsequently, in the 1972 Giglio v. United States case, the court held that exculpatory evidence also includes information that can be used to impeach the credibility of prosecution witnesses, including police officers.
Source

 

[Yemelyan]

Such a good point @justtrish . I've thought about that over the years. If I were innocent and happened to see Abby & Libby that day right before they were abducted and murdered, I probably would have shared the story 100 times over the years over remorse.

"Oh my gosh, I was right there on the bridge before the girls disappeared". "I wish I had seen something or done something to help them". "I feel so terrible, I wish I could remember exactly who I saw in the area"

Did RA tell KA he was there and gave a statement to LE? Did KA ever tell anyone RA was there that day I wonder? Did RA ever attend the vigils or the town hall meetings/updates?

RA was a local at the pub and pool hall and when asked if he talked about Abby & Libby while there, the owner said he would make a quick comment but not go into any detailed discussions.

Now on the other hand, if I were guilty, I wouldn't bring it up voluntarily to a soul. I would distance myself from anything related to the case. I wouldn't want friends or coworkers knowing I was on the bridge at that time and giving that video clip a good second or third look.

JMO

You and @justtrish make good points/questions...as to the part I bolded, it reminded me that I had heard something once about what KA told other people about RA and the trails. I had to go look it up, it was in the Murder Sheet's episode "Who is Rick Allen?"

Murder Sheet: The Delphi Murders: Who is Rick Allen? on Apple Podcasts

Show Murder Sheet, Ep The Delphi Murders: Who is Rick Allen? - Nov 10, 2022

podcasts.apple.com

I know people vary on their impressions of MS reporting, so take this for what it's worth, but this is what was stated on the podcast (starts at about minute 15:28):

The hosts of MS talked to someone they call "Gabriella" who was a former classmate of RA at North Miami High School. They quote her as saying: "He (RA) was interviewed after the murders happened. Police did interview him. And I got that through his wife telling mutual friends that that happened. She played it off more like he was just part of the community, and they were interviewing everybody in the community, and that's why he was interviewed right away. But I don't know if it was more than that."

Host KG: "Actually, the story his wife told people wasn't quite true. Russ McQuaid, of Channel 59 here in Indianapolis, reported that actually, Allen went to the police himself and identified himself as someone who was at the trails, at roughly the time of the murders. So naturally police at that time were interested in talking to him. For whatever reasons, maybe this is something we can discuss in the future, he got off the radar. And he wasn't really a target of the investigation, wasn't a focus of the investigation for awhile. And obviously, at some point that changed. And there has been speculation about what it was that made that change."

 

[TTF14]

That's one way of looking at it...but

If the conditions of the treatment of RA were sooooo horrendous that it made RA make all these confessions and caused a psychotic break, and the Defense had proof to support their claims of this mistreatment since April of 23, why oh why hasn't an outside agency come in to investigate these accusations? The IDOC is not unanswerable to everyone in the United States.

RA has civil rights even beyond the SCOIN, why wasn't the ACLU notified to do an investigation? It's been highly publicized and talked about for over a year now. I believe it's because this is yet another gross over exaggeration made by the Defense in order to garner sympathy for RA and to also suppress incriminating confessions.

ALL JMO

Are you saying that the assumption that an outside agency hasn't stepped in (yet) (that we know of) to investigate these accusations is proof they didn't occur?

I think there are many, many, many people wondering why this man's inhumane imprisonment hasn't been/wasn't investigated and Judge Fran Gull dismissed it all without a hearing.

IMO MOO

 

[FrostedGlass]

I'm particularly interested in any Giglio material. I'm sure this is oversimplified, but KISS works for me:
In the 1963 Brady v. Maryland case, the Supreme Court held that prosecutors must disclose any exculpatory evidence to the accused material to his guilt or punishment. Subsequently, in the 1972 Giglio v. United States case, the court held that exculpatory evidence also includes information that can be used to impeach the credibility of prosecution witnesses, including police officers.
Source

I need examples.

So, if any of the witnesses for the prosecution lied about a legal issue and then admitted to it, would that fall under B-G?

 

[AugustWest]

Reading through this now. Here is what stands out to me which we discussed yesterday and I asked if this would be the State's work product.

https://www.in.gov/ipdc/files/DISCOVER.pdf
Pg 4

Although police reports are not discoverable because of the work product exception,
1 a lazy prosecutor, when faced with having to sift through stacks of police reports to answer defense discovery, may determine that providing counsel with copies of all the reports is an easy solution. Verbatim witness statements are discoverable and obviously useful.

State Ex Rel. Keaton v. Cir. Ct. of Rush Cty.
We have recognized that in criminal litigation protection must be extended to the attorneys' work product. State ex rel. Meyers, supra; Spears, supra. The work product doctrine protects materials prepared by agents for the attorney as well as those prepared by the attorney himself. United States v. Nobles (1975), 422 U.S. *1148 225, 95 S. Ct. 2160, 45 L. Ed. 2d 141; Spears, supra. Protection should therefore be afforded to police reports which, as contended by relator, constitute the work product of the prosecuting attorney.

Remember yesterday when I made the distinction between executive and judicial function? This Indiana rule differs from my jurisdiction, so I'm going have to go educate myself regarding this by reading the case outlined in the footnote.

 

[layer]

So, if any of the witnesses for the prosecution lied about a legal issue and then admitted to it, would that fall under B-G?

As I understand it, any information the prosecution has that could be used to impeach the credibility of their own witnesses, including LEO's, must be turned over; not doing so constitutes a B-G violation. But I'm not a lawyer.

 

[Justice101]

This trial is going to be extremely interesting.

In addition to facts, there is going to be some supposition on both P & D parts.

 

[vinayd]

As I understand it, any information the prosecution has that could be used to impeach the credibility of their own witnesses, including LEO's, must be turned over; not doing so constitutes a B-G violation. But I'm not a lawyer.

Since the D originally filed this asking for it if it exists. Deadline of 4/19. Got nothing. Could this simply mean it doesn't exist. That's how I'm hearing it.

Maybe they are implying the State (specific law enforcement) violated this. Like saying muddy and bloody instead of muddy. Saying blue jacket instead of tan. Since they have called out these statements then use the depositions to show inaccuracies. Maybe they are saying the State needs to agree these officers were in violation. idk

 

[Megnut]

.

You and @justtrish make good points/questions...as to the part I bolded, it reminded me that I had heard something once about what KA told other people about RA and the trails. I had to go look it up, it was in the Murder Sheet's episode "Who is Rick Allen?"

Murder Sheet: The Delphi Murders: Who is Rick Allen? on Apple Podcasts

Show Murder Sheet, Ep The Delphi Murders: Who is Rick Allen? - Nov 10, 2022

podcasts.apple.com

I know people vary on their impressions of MS reporting, so take this for what it's worth, but this is what was stated on the podcast (starts at about minute 15:28):

The hosts of MS talked to someone they call "Gabriella" who was a former classmate of RA at North Miami High School. They quote her as saying: "He (RA) was interviewed after the murders happened. Police did interview him. And I got that through his wife telling mutual friends that that happened. She played it off more like he was just part of the community, and they were interviewing everybody in the community, and that's why he was interviewed right away. But I don't know if it was more than that."

Host KG: "Actually, the story his wife told people wasn't quite true. Russ McQuaid, of Channel 59 here in Indianapolis, reported that actually, Allen went to the police himself and identified himself as someone who was at the trails, at roughly the time of the murders. So naturally police at that time were interested in talking to him. For whatever reasons, maybe this is something we can discuss in the future, he got off the radar. And he wasn't really a target of the investigation, wasn't a focus of the investigation for awhile. And obviously, at some point that changed. And there has been speculation about what it was that made that change."

I wonder if RAspeak was ever in the dialect of gaslighting.

*MOO* let's say that RA worked through it in his head. Knows he was seen by the group of juveniles, decides to get out in front of that, speaks with DD.

LE releases the video clip.

Let's say his wife DOES see a resemblance.... but RA gets out in front of that too. Tells her he spoke to LE, overstates the weight of that interaction, emphasizes how uber helpful he was, helping them lock down the timeline for example... would a GUILTY person do that? Ask BMorphew who voluntarily interviewed for 3 30hrs because, in his words, "a guilty person wouldn't do that". RA presenting himself as active, helpful, practically sporting sn honorary LE sticker badge, would go a long way IMO toward assuaging any nagging suspicion. Maybe that was all it took to give KA the layer of trust/relief that carried her through the years, believing very much that LE had spoken to him at length and, if they had no doubts, she needn't nurse any either. Could be the very same reasoning he used in retaining the jacket, the gun, the vehicle, the beard/stubble. It'd look suss to lose any of them so he worked them, that they would cement the not-guiltiness he wanted to project.

Of note, I think most people assume that a guilty person would... act guilty. Slink, dodge, roll. Betting MY money, RA banked on his role as husband, father, provider, protector, CVS employee of the week, extending courtesies even to the victims' families. And that's how you hide in plain sight. Social camouflage.

JMO

 

[AugustWest]

Remember yesterday when I made the distinction between executive and judicial function? This Indiana rule differs from my jurisdiction, so I'm going have to go educate myself regarding this by reading the case outlined in the footnote.

@vinayd

Got it now. This Indiana court would allow for inspection of the police reports by the defense (to look for exculpatory evidence), rather than just blanket discovery of the entire police report (which may contain elements of work product). There is a dissent in this opinion; this seems like an issue the IN courts are moving towards more broad discovery but haven't quite gotten there yet. I can't make a guess as to what outcome will follow.

IN case: State Ex Rel. Keaton v. Cir. Ct. of Rush Cty.

US Supreme Court case (there are lots of arguments for and against in the cited case law):

United States v. Nobles, 422 U.S. 225 (1975)

United States v. Nobles

supreme.justia.com

 

[susiQ]

Host KG: "Actually, the story his wife told people wasn't quite true. Russ McQuaid, of Channel 59 here in Indianapolis, reported that actually, Allen went to the police himself and identified himself as someone who was at the trails, at roughly the time of the murders. So naturally police at that time were interested in talking to him. For whatever reasons, maybe this is something we can discuss in the future, he got off the radar. And he wasn't really a target of the investigation, wasn't a focus of the investigation for awhile.

RSABBM
For awhile? That’s quite an understatement! Like 5 years?? Makes no sense at all. DD was on the stage at the first PC, having spoken with RA days earlier. I’d venture to say, they all need to brush up on their investigative skills. JMHO

 

[TTF14]

This trial is going to be extremely interesting.

In addition to facts, there is going to be some supposition on both P & D parts.

Could you explain what you mean by "supposition?"

 

[vinayd]

Suppression I bet.

 

[layer]

DD was on the stage at the first PC, having spoken with RA days earlier.

Has it ever been verified exactly when they spoke, or even what timeframe it was in? All I've ever seen is non-specific language like "in 2017". I would love to pin this down.

 

[susiQ]

This trial is going to be extremely interesting.

In addition to facts, there is going to be some supposition on both P & D parts.

Yes, I can hear it already.
The D makes a supposition. The P objects. JG sustains.
The P makes a supposition. The D objects. JG overrules.
She’s that predictable.
MOO

 

[layer]

Suppression I bet.

I think it was an allusion to the fact that every crime is going to have things that are unknown, and are basically filled in with suppositions. If so, I agree.

 

[susiQ]

Could you explain what you mean by "supposition?"

Not OP but, a belief held without proof. Hypothesis.

 

[susiQ]

Has it ever been verified exactly when they spoke, or even what timeframe it was in? All I've ever seen is non-specific language like "in 2017". I would love to pin this down.

I don’t have it handy, but iirc it was only a day or two post murders. I’ll try to locate that, but I’m sure another member will beat me to it!