Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #188

[photographer4]

Exactly, both sides will vet jurors but from professionals. The thing here is Cara wanted that Rozzi and Baldwin gave to that group who include random people who doesn't live in Indiana and have a history of doxxing and intimidating people, names and informations of potential jurors so that those people would dig the dirt on them.

She can want whatever she wants. Makes her look pretty bad but in the end, so long as not agreed to by B&R (in writing) then it is really just people talking. It’s not a reality and shouldn’t have impact on this case.

 

[m00c0w]

Vetting possible jurors is part of voir dire. I can't go back and forth with you on point 1, so I'll just say I disagree. Discord chat logs aren't even "discovery material," so technically (4) doesn't even apply.

Again, I'm very confused by your responses.

The other poster (who was replying to me) did not say anything about voir dire, jurors, vetting jurors, jury lists, or anything else regarding jury or jury interference. They stated that they agreed with me, that there was possibly concern over one particular person drafting a particular motion and her behaviors before and after.

I'm also not sure why you think anyone has said discord logs are "discovery material". The issue at hand is the discussion of discovery material on Discord. Discord is just the platform. It doesn't matter if it was over Discord, Twitter, WebSleuths DMs, or carrier pigeon. The court's order made it very clear that there should be no extrajudicial discussion of discovery materials. What is being talked about now, is the extrajudicial discussion of the discovery materials (such as pathology reports, for instance), and possibly materials that were further protected under seal.

JMO

 

[susane7]

She can want whatever she wants. Makes her look pretty bad but in the end, so long as not agreed to by B&R (in writing) then it is really just people talking. It’s not a reality and shouldn’t have impact on this case.

Because B and R have more ethics and responsibility than she thought or intelligence to not put in writting. If they would give green light, those group probably would done that. Which is scaring. But I don't think B and R will risk that.

 

[photographer4]

Huh? I am not an attorney, nor in any way legally assigned to this case.

I am just posting on a social media site known as Websleuths.

jmo

My remark wasn’t about the goodness or badness of sleuthing people. Only that it happens all the time.

 

[AugustWest]

What’s the most common medium used by attorneys these days to accomplish this task in your opinion? I imagine it’s looking at their online footprints and other publicly accessible info like old news articles etc? Do they usually do this themselves or hire out to somewhere? Is it usually a firm or licensed PI or college kids?? Just curious.

Heh, well, my vetting process is asking my paralegal to find out "dirt" (job of potential juror, voter registration, address, things like that). So, just use of internet searches and the like. Of course, my primary practice is medical malpractice/bad faith insurance claims, not double murder, nationally-renowned, big boy criminal. The guy I know who does that uses a professional service.

Here are a few:

The Crucial Role of Jury Vetting in Modern Legal Proceedings

In an age where information is both widespread and easily accessible, jury vetting has become a pivotal aspect of the judicial process. Jury vetting involves the systematic investigation and assessment of potential jurors to ensure they are unbiased and suitable for a particular trial. This...

xinvestigations.com

Jury Vetting - Nighthawk Strategies

nighthawkstrategies.com

 

[StarryStarryNight]

The discussion about the jury was disconcerting, but the two things that stood out to me were, the groups blatant disrespect for the girls’ families and their talk about the much vaunted Odinist theory being a bunch of fluff, that the defense team itself, that spent 100+ pages in the fantasy FM, knew it was cr*p.
There is nothing these people can say to make that OK. This, in my opinion needs to be the discussion.
The emperor has no clothes! They lied. They made it up. They manipulated people. Why? They have no case.
What a fraud.

 

[Jade]

R & B could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody, okay, and they wouldn't lose any fans, okay? It's like, incredible.


all imo

 

[photographer4]

Agreed. It feels like either B&R or CW (or both), have breached the gag order over the motion for parity.

I think CW has made some big mistakes here. I’m interested to know: if someone obtained the messages by stealing them (use of someone’s password) then what recourse if any does she (and others involved have)? I think it’s unlikely this was a breech by use of password. Who had the password and why? Who gave it to whom? When?

 

[photographer4]

The discussion about the jury was disconcerting, but the two things that stood out to me were, the groups blatant disrespect for the girls’ families and their talk about the much vaunted Odinist theory being a bunch of fluff, that the defense team itself, that spent 100+ pages in the fantasy FM, knew it was cr*p.
There is nothing these people can say to make that OK. This, in my opinion needs to be the discussion.
The emperor has no clothes! They lied. They made it up. They manipulated people. Why? They have no case.
What a fraud.

So you’re mad the D made up the Odinist Theory according to the Murder Sheets?

Why does this anger people? It’s a spin. A strategy. They’re allowed to spin and strategize. Maybe they now wanted this info that they didn’t believe it out there so that they can back away from it without letting on what their new strategy is.

I think it’s comical at this point. And comical as well that all the content creators are so invested in throwing their thoughts into the public. It’s going to be interesting to see in the end what rumours can be proven and which can’t.

If the state has a strong case then they’ll win. And in that case if RA is guilty (he is), then great!

ETA - I didn’t listen to the cast in question etc. I am sorry if the family is listening to it or hearing what horrible things have been said about them. It can’t be easy. Hopefully they don’t bother with it.

 

[photographer4]

Does the defense team or people associated with them have any responsibility ever? Or is always a huge conspiracy involving the prosecution?

I don't think these will have impact in Rozzi and Baldwin. I don't know if they know that MF are saying things to those group and I doubt those group have seen the discovery taking into account they seem very misinformed and know very little about the case. Especially Cara and Ausbrook.

Since all we ever get is he said / she said, I don’t know who’s responsible for what. It is my hope that if the D has done things in violation of any order or if they’ve done things unethically that they meet consequences through the appropriate channels.

 

[photographer4]

Because B and R have more ethics and responsibility than she thought or intelligence to not put in writting. If they would give green light, those group probably would done that. Which is scaring. But I don't think B and R will risk that.

In order to do it, b & r (or someone else with access to the info) would have to:
- agree to it
- provide the info to people.

Neither of which happened. So really, what difference does it make to the case? The actual case. Not the side show craziness.

 

[photographer4]

Heh, well, my vetting process is asking my paralegal to find out "dirt" (job of potential juror, voter registration, address, things like that). So, just use of internet searches and the like. Of course, my primary practice is medical malpractice/bad faith insurance claims, not double murder, nationally-renowned, big boy criminal. The guy I know who does that uses a professional service.

Here are a few:

The Crucial Role of Jury Vetting in Modern Legal Proceedings

In an age where information is both widespread and easily accessible, jury vetting has become a pivotal aspect of the judicial process. Jury vetting involves the systematic investigation and assessment of potential jurors to ensure they are unbiased and suitable for a particular trial. This...

xinvestigations.com

Jury Vetting - Nighthawk Strategies

nighthawkstrategies.com

Thank you! I think being a jury vetter would be absolutely fascinating work!

 

[mrjitty]

Again, I'm very confused by your responses.

The other poster (who was replying to me) did not say anything about voir dire, jurors, vetting jurors, jury lists, or anything else regarding jury or jury interference. They stated that they agreed with me, that there was possibly concern over one particular person drafting a particular motion and her behaviors before and after.

I'm also not sure why you think anyone has said discord logs are "discovery material". The issue at hand is the discussion of discovery material on Discord. Discord is just the platform. It doesn't matter if it was over Discord, Twitter, WebSleuths DMs, or carrier pigeon. The court's order made it very clear that there should be no extrajudicial discussion of discovery materials. What is being talked about now, is the extrajudicial discussion of the discovery materials (such as pathology reports, for instance), and possibly materials that were further protected under seal.

JMO

In addition to your points (well made), I was specifically referring to CW's public tweets about the motion for parity, which she allegedly drafted. These would appear to me to be in breach of the Court's order prohibiting extra-judicial statements to the public

On the Court's motion, in response to defendant's undated "Press Release", the Court issues an order granting the State's Motion for Order Prohibiting the Parties, Counsel, Law Enforcement Officials, Court Personnel, Coroner, and Family Members from Disseminating Information or Releasing Any Extra-Judicial Statements by Means of Public Communication in whole, pending hearing which the Court has just recently scheduled for January 13, 2023, at. 10:00 a.m. in the Carroll Circuit Court.

And

Counsel for the State of Indiana and the Defendant, as well as their professional staff and other personnel, Law Enforcement Officials, Court Personnel, Coroner, and all family members are prohibited from commenting on this case to the public and to the media, directly or indirectly, by themselves or through any intermediary, in any form, including any social media platforms. Counsel are reminded that they are required to conform to the Indiana Rules ofCourt, Rules of Professional Conduct, specifically Rule 3.6 Trial Publicity in its entirety, and Rule 3.8 Special Responsibilities of a Prosecutor in its entirety.

It seems arguable that either CW was acting in a professional capacity for the defendant whilst making public statements on social media OR she was given such information by the cousnel for the defendant in order to end run the gag order.

At the end of the day, it would seem an odd state of affairs if the defense can circumvent the gag order simply by getting a surrogate attorney they are coordinating with to make the statements on their behalf?

... directly or indirectly, by themselves or through any intermediary, in any form, including any social media platforms.

So like you say, perhaps unsurprising that CW has not made any further tweets about the case.

MOO

 

[Emma Peel]

Heh, well, my vetting process is asking my paralegal to find out "dirt" (job of potential juror, voter registration, address, things like that). So, just use of internet searches and the like. Of course, my primary practice is medical malpractice/bad faith insurance claims, not double murder, nationally-renowned, big boy criminal. The guy I know who does that uses a professional service.

Here are a few:

The Crucial Role of Jury Vetting in Modern Legal Proceedings

In an age where information is both widespread and easily accessible, jury vetting has become a pivotal aspect of the judicial process. Jury vetting involves the systematic investigation and assessment of potential jurors to ensure they are unbiased and suitable for a particular trial. This...

xinvestigations.com

Jury Vetting - Nighthawk Strategies

nighthawkstrategies.com

Thanks, August for bringing real-life US lawyering into perspective.
Normal legal practice by professional defense teams here in the US are being characterized/presumed as being "unethical".
[mod snip]

 

[AugustWest]

Again, I'm very confused by your responses.

The other poster (who was replying to me) did not say anything about voir dire, jurors, vetting jurors, jury lists, or anything else regarding jury or jury interference. They stated that they agreed with me, that there was possibly concern over one particular person drafting a particular motion and her behaviors before and after.

I'm also not sure why you think anyone has said discord logs are "discovery material". The issue at hand is the discussion of discovery material on Discord. Discord is just the platform. It doesn't matter if it was over Discord, Twitter, WebSleuths DMs, or carrier pigeon. The court's order made it very clear that there should be no extrajudicial discussion of discovery materials. What is being talked about now, is the extrajudicial discussion of the discovery materials (such as pathology reports, for instance), and possibly materials that were further protected under seal.

JMO

<modsnip>

@mrjitty said this:

Agreed. It feels like either B&R or CW (or both), have breached the gag order over the motion for parity.

The issue I was addressing with my response to this quote (not your quote) was whether B & R or CW breached the gag order.

I then produced the gag order to show the exact wording of the gag order. You know, to show what actually must happen for a breach of the gag order to occur.

https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/23863585/delphidocs.pdf

Issue 1: Did B breach gag order? Did R breach gag order?
Rule 1(gag order #4): That the discovery material shall not be publicly exhibited, displayed, shown, used for educational, research or demonstrative purposes or used in any other manner, except in judicial proceedings in the above referenced action. Rule 2(gag order #5): That the discovery material may be viewed only by parties, counsel and counsel's investigators and experts.
Application: No discovery material has been publicly exhibited by B or R. Any discovery material that was exhibited was shown to "counsel's investigators."
Conclusion: B & R did not breach the gag order.

Issue 2: Did CW breach gag order?
Rule (gag order #5): That the discovery material may be viewed only by parties, counsel and counsel's investigators and experts.
Application: first, CW is not bound to the gag order. She is not RA's attorney of record for this particular cause of action. Even if she was to be considered "counsel" for the purposes of Gag order 5, she would not be in breach, as she has not publicly exhibited any discovery material. In the alternative, any discovery material she has viewed is allowed under Gag order 5, as "counsel's investigators" are allowed to view same.
Conclusion: CW did not breach the gag order.

The point I was making about vetting and the voir dire process was more for everyone. Vetting of jurors is a normal occurrence in trial preparation. Hope this helps.

ETA: a vetting service would be counted as "counsel's investigators" for the purpose of Rule 5 of the Gag order

 

[steeltowngirl]

So you’re mad the D made up the Odinist Theory according to the Murder Sheets?

Why does this anger people? It’s a spin. A strategy. They’re allowed to spin and strategize. Maybe they now wanted this info that they didn’t believe it out there so that they can back away from it without letting on what their new strategy is.

I think it’s comical at this point. And comical as well that all the content creators are so invested in throwing their thoughts into the public. It’s going to be interesting to see in the end what rumours can be proven and which can’t.

If the state has a strong case then they’ll win. And in that case if RA is guilty (he is), then great!

ETA - I didn’t listen to the cast in question etc. I am sorry if the family is listening to it or hearing what horrible things have been said about them. It can’t be easy. Hopefully they don’t bother with it.

Here’s one reason I’m mad. They placed motive for the murders on the Odinist’s perceived hatred towards the mother of one the victims - due to alleged interracial dating.

Entirely unfounded and unsubstantiated.
Disgusting.

jmo

 

[TTF14]

the much vaunted Odinist theory being a bunch of fluff, that the defense team itself, that spent 100+ pages in the fantasy FM, knew it was cr*p.

These people, who are not the defense attorneys, are entitled to their own opinions and interpretations of what they think the defense team thinks. But that doesn't make it fact.

IMO MOO

 

[grannygates]

MW has his final pre-trial hearing today.

Indiana Courts Case Search - MyCase

Indiana Supreme Court, Public Access

public.courts.in.gov

 

[TTF14]

I think CW has made some big mistakes here. I’m interested to know: if someone obtained the messages by stealing them (use of someone’s password) then what recourse if any does she (and others involved have)? I think it’s unlikely this was a breech by use of password. Who had the password and why? Who gave it to whom? When?

I don't think any password stealing was necessary. The person who created/"owned" the Discord group just decided to release all the private conversations within it, from what I understand. I don't get the feeling any hacking happened here. Maybe the two ladies he use to be "with" had the password to that Discord so they all could be admins, and he changed the password to lock them out so he could preserve all the messages in it for the purpose of taking them to the MS for publication to the masses, tattle tale style. Just my opinion and interpretation of what happened here.

JMO MOO

 

[Emma Peel]

In addition to your points (well made), I was specifically referring to CW's public tweets about the motion for parity, which she allegedly drafted. These would appear to me to be in breach of the Court's order prohibiting extra-judicial statements to the public



And



It seems arguable that either CW was acting in a professional capacity for the defendant whilst making public statements on social media OR she was given such information by the cousnel for the defendant in order to end run the gag order.

At the end of the day, it would seem an odd state of affairs if the defense can circumvent the gag order simply by getting a surrogate attorney they are coordinating with to make the statements on their behalf?



So like you say, perhaps unsurprising that CW has not made any further tweets about the case.

MOO

There's been nothing much to tweet (or post) about on this case, has there?

FWIW, CW tweeted just last week (7 days ago) regarding the praecipe.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1811384787761864867