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

[Melted]

KAK, TK, RL are off limits, along with the Odin crew.

That is the prosecutions request. It has not been granted.

Interesting to see Keegan Klines name in this case officially.

 

[StarryStarryNight]

I really hope Judge Gull doesn't rule to allow the Prosecution's State's Motion in Limine. If simply blows my mind how RA would get a fair trial.

Simply already with no cameras, lost interviews, issues of evidence issues regarding evidence being shared between the Prosecution and Defense and the whole Judge throwing the Defense off then back on.

I guess the Defense are not allowed to show reasonable doubt lets just gag them ... lets just throw him in jail for good... wait he is already there!!!!

I kept saying .. lets think RA is innocent until proven guilty. At the trial and the evidence will prove one way or another for the jury to decide. Well if the Defense are not allowed to show the reasonable doubt of the evidence which is what I supposed was suppose to happen. Then I find it impossible for the Jury to give him a fair trial.

Allow the Prosecution's State's Motion in Limine then that is basically gagging the Defense and RA will not get a fair trial. Which will result in endless appeals and eventually he will probably be granted another trial. You can not tell me RA rights have not already been overstepped. None of the other accused murders have been thrown in a jail treated where they can barely communicate freely with their Defense Counsel.

Things are very wrong if he does not get a fair trial.

This is not just a prosecution ploy. It involves Indiana rules of evidence and the prosecution feels that the defense’s Odinist theory does not meet the standard.
RA will get a fair trial. The defense at trial can argue the evidence, they can bring in experts, they can cross examine witnesses and call their own. They cannot call witnesses or offer up theories that are not proven relevant to the case. They cannot just say “this might have happened”.
A couple of weeks ago on the The Prosecutors podcast, “Delphi and Some Other Dude Did It”, the hosts went through this and Indiana law. It was all news to me. They predicted that there was a good possibility that the Odinist theory might not pass muster. So now I guess we’ll see what happens.

Edit: typo

A link to the Prosecutors podcast.

 

[WildHuncher]

I really hope Judge Gull doesn't rule to allow the Prosecution's State's Motion in Limine. If simply blows my mind how RA would get a fair trial.

Simply already with no cameras, lost interviews, issues of evidence issues regarding evidence being shared between the Prosecution and Defense and the whole Judge throwing the Defense off then back on.

I guess the Defense are not allowed to show reasonable doubt lets just gag them ... lets just throw him in jail for good... wait he is already there!!!!

I kept saying .. lets think RA is innocent until proven guilty. At the trial and the evidence will prove one way or another for the jury to decide. Well if the Defense are not allowed to show the reasonable doubt of the evidence which is what I supposed was suppose to happen. Then I find it impossible for the Jury to give him a fair trial.

Allow the Prosecution's State's Motion in Limine then that is basically gagging the Defense and RA will not get a fair trial. Which will result in endless appeals and eventually he will probably be granted another trial. You can not tell me RA rights have not already been overstepped. None of the other accused murders have been thrown in a jail treated where they can barely communicate freely with their Defense Counsel.

Things are very wrong if he does not get a fair trial.

That’s an understandable reaction upon reading that motion and pretty close to my own at first go.

It’s apparently not as outlandish or uncommon or even as truly restrictive as it looks. But it’s an unfortunate look.

 

[Melted]

There's no way the P would be totally uninterested in how RA did what he did. They do have solid evidence showing that and it's why they arrested and charged him for murders to begin with IMO. I believe it was something found during the SW of RA's home maybe in connection with a recent tip in.

I can't say if we or anybody other than RA will ever truly know the why? Maybe during his 20+ confessions he did state why, IDK.

IMO that's why the D has been so obsessed with getting the SW tossed, there's something very incriminating there. If RA is completely, 100% innocent like they've stated from the beginning, there wouldn't have been anything incriminating to be found in those searches. Why file 4 Franks Motions?


ALL JMO

Imo they are trying to get the search warrant tossed because that would get the gun tossed and there wouldn’t be any evidence whatsoever linking RA to the crime scene. I don’t think, reading through depositions, they found any bombshells during the SW.

JMO

 

[layer]

They cannot call witnesses or offer up theories that are not proven relevant to the case. They cannot just say “this might have happened”.

These two statements appear contradictory, or at least unrelated. Wouldn't anything that might have happened be relevant to the case? Obviously no one is going to suggest Trump did it, or if they did I would expect the jury to lock down a guilty verdict almost immediately. Alternate suspects and theories would only be a threat to Nick if it they were at least plausible, right?

 

[Ravenmoon]

I really hope Judge Gull doesn't rule to allow the Prosecution's State's Motion in Limine. If simply blows my mind how RA would get a fair trial.

Simply already with no cameras, lost interviews, issues of evidence issues regarding evidence being shared between the Prosecution and Defense and the whole Judge throwing the Defense off then back on.

I guess the Defense are not allowed to show reasonable doubt lets just gag them ... lets just throw him in jail for good... wait he is already there!!!!

I kept saying .. lets think RA is innocent until proven guilty. At the trial and the evidence will prove one way or another for the jury to decide. Well if the Defense are not allowed to show the reasonable doubt of the evidence which is what I supposed was suppose to happen. Then I find it impossible for the Jury to give him a fair trial.

Allow the Prosecution's State's Motion in Limine then that is basically gagging the Defense and RA will not get a fair trial. Which will result in endless appeals and eventually he will probably be granted another trial. You can not tell me RA rights have not already been overstepped. None of the other accused murders have been thrown in a jail treated where they can barely communicate freely with their Defense Counsel.

Things are very wrong if he does not get a fair trial.

It is fair and it's legal.
For reasonable doubt to be found, they don't necessarily need to bring in a circus of potential suspects.

Show that RA has a solid alibi.
Prove that he never admitted to the murders.
Show that he was really watching that stock ticker.

I feel certain that there are other ways to cause reasonable doubt.

JMO

 

[layer]

It is fair and it's legal.
For reasonable doubt to be found, they don't necessarily need to bring in a circus of potential suspects.
Show that RA has a solid alibi.
Prove that he never admitted to the murders.
Show that he was really watching that stock ticker.
I feel certain that there are other ways to cause reasonable doubt.

It almost seems like you are requiring RA to prove he's innocent there. I agree, there are a million ways to create reasonable doubt, and some jurors are just reasonably doubtful by nature. To my dying days I will never forget the words Where is it, Mr Fung?

 

[AugustWest]

Please read what August West has stated.

There is nothing unfair or unjust being asked for.

@Ravenmoon I just wanted to be clear that I don't think the request that defense show a connection between any third party actors is unreasonable, as Holmes requires. There are sections in the motion I feel are overly burdensome. I was only referencing the issue addressed in Prosecution (7) of the Motion in Limine.

 

[Ravenmoon]

It almost seems like you are requiring RA to prove he's innocent there. I agree, there are a million ways to create reasonable doubt, and some jurors are just reasonably doubtful by nature. To my dying days I will never forget the words Where is it, Mr Fung?

No. I don't believe that the defense needs to prove anything.

It seems more reasonable and actually a heck of a lot easier to show that RA has an alibi.

AFAIK there is no one else on trial except for RA. Not the Heathens or any of their wanna be members.

Actually, if there is nothing that proves RA to be the killer, the Defense can rest without saying a word.

Well, except, "The Defense rests.,"

 

[Ravenmoon]

@Ravenmoon I just wanted to be clear that I don't think the request that defense show a connection between any third party actors is unreasonable, as Holmes requires. There are sections in the motion I feel are overly burdensome. I was only referencing the issue addressed in Prosecution (7) of the Motion in Limine.

I understand Thank you.

 

[vinayd]

All caught up. So basically the State wants the Defense to focus on their client's case. Stop talking about random things and focus on showing their client is innocent? Sounds more than reasonable.

 

[TTF14]

All caught up. So basically the State wants the Defense to focus on their client's case. Stop talking about random things and focus on showing their client is innocent? Sounds more than reasonable.

I don't think this is what that motion is saying. The defense does not have to prove their client is innocent. The burden isn't on them.

IMO

 

[TTF14]

It is fair and it's legal.
For reasonable doubt to be found, they don't necessarily need to bring in a circus of potential suspects.

Show that RA has a solid alibi.
Prove that he never admitted to the murders.
Show that he was really watching that stock ticker.

I feel certain that there are other ways to cause reasonable doubt.

JMO

How would him actually watching a stock ticker provide reasonable doubt? He could be watching Tom & Jerry out there and it wouldn't change a thing if he is guilty. Am I misunderstanding something?

 

[sunshineray]

Sorry, but getting trials confused..... are cameras allowed in the courtroom, one camera streamed, no cameras???

So far JG has denied all requests

 

[layer]

All caught up. So basically the State wants the Defense to focus on their client's case. Stop talking about random things and focus on showing their client is innocent? Sounds more than reasonable.

Again, I don't think they should be limited to proving RA is innocent. Not guilty does not mean innocent.

 

[Ravenmoon]

How would him actually watching a stock ticker provide reasonable doubt? He could be watching Tom & Jerry out there and it wouldn't change a thing if he is guilty. Am I misunderstanding something?

Yes. You are.
His own claim is that he was watching a stock ticker on his phone, but his defense attorneys claim that his phone was nowhere near the scene.
The point is, show that his phone was active on the trail during the time he says he was there.
That should be easy.

JMO

 

[sunshineray]

I don't think this is what that motion is saying. The defense does not have to prove their client is innocent. The burden isn't on them.

IMO

Exactly and do it without undue irrelevance, just evidence and also no prejudicial items/remarks that would unduel influence a jury. I think the State is up for it, we shall see...of course unless RA wants to plea.

 

[TTF14]

Yes. You are.
His own claim is that he was watching a stock ticker on his phone, but his defense attorneys claim that his phone was nowhere near the scene.
The point is, show that his phone was active on the trail during the time he says he was there.
That should be easy.

JMO

Oh, I see. I took you too literally about the stock ticker. Thank you.

 

[layer]

Imo they are trying to get the search warrant tossed because that would get the gun tossed and there wouldn’t be any evidence whatsoever linking RA to the crime scene. I don’t think, reading through depositions, they found any bombshells during the SW.

The gun isn't the only thing linking RA to the CS.
The phone, found at the CS, showing someone that looks suspiciously similar to RA, dressed suspiciously similar to RA, on the same bridge RA himself admitted to being upon, at around the time RA admitted to being there. The gun is pointles at this point IMHO.

 

[TTF14]

Exactly and do it without undue irrelevance, just evidence and also no prejudicial items/remarks that would unduel influence a jury. I think the State is up for it, we shall see...of course unless RA wants to plea.

But mandating the exclusion of other plausible theories that the Prosecution actually provided evidence of doesn't seem fair. The State is basically saying "we know you saw all that stuff we handed over that makes it obvious that there could be another person, or persons ("other actors" as Nick McLeland himself has said) responsible, but we didn't really think you'd notice that....please just keep that quiet because we want to convict THIS guy only, ok?"

It isn't like they are pulling these theories out of the air.....it's all stuff that's been uncovered by the investigators!

Remember, Doug Carter has told us that NOBODY has been cleared. I really hope the jury hears that.

JMO MOO