Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #191

[ClearAhead]

The witnesses saw BG. No one ID’d RA.

There is no audio/video to support DDs note, so it cannot be proven and is not considered a fact. Therefore, we would default to the only recorded proof of RA actually stating what time he left - the video recorded statement saying 1:30pm. The state holds the burden to prove their facts to be true.

This is why audio/video recording statements is so important.

MOO

I’m sure you know we here on Websleuths are not tasked with determining what is fact and what is not, as much as we might like to believe our opinions are important.

What video recorded statement of RA saying 1:30pm are you referring to?

 

[katydid23]

The witnesses saw BG. No one ID’d RA.

There is no audio/video to support DDs note, so it cannot be proven and is not considered a fact. Therefore, we would default to the only recorded proof of RA actually stating what time he left - the video recorded statement saying 1:30pm. The state holds the burden to prove their facts to be true.

This is why audio/video recording statements is so important.

MOO

That is all very wishful thinking on the DT's part.

Notes from an officer's witness interview ARE considered factual. Not all informal interviews are on video or audiotape.
The info he wrote about the MEID support his accuracy.

There is no reason to 'default' to RA's more recent interview because he had motivation to change his story, as he now knew they had the BG video and more potential evidence against him.

The jury is not going to assume the defendant told the truth when he changed the time of his exit from 3:30 to 1:30.

Especially when the witness testimony fits his original version of the story, and not his newer version.

The witnesses saw BG. Further investigation and evidence confirms that BG=RA. Even RA admits as much.

 

[grannygates]

I’m sure you know we here on Websleuths are not tasked with determining what is fact and what is not, as much as we might like to believe our opinions are important.

What video recorded statement saying 1:30pm are you referring to?

I believe that when we are discussing facts within the context of our “guilty/not guilty” verdicts, it’s important to consider whether the information can be proven as a fact to the jury through evidence. I only consider it a fact if it can be proven through supporting evidence.

I think the majority of us want to do our homework and want facts confirmed via court filings or LE. I don’t think anyone wants to unintentionally spread untrue information or rumours, that’s why we are careful to label what is just our opinion.

The video recorded statement that I am referring to is the police interview that occurred in October/22.

 

[ClearAhead]

The video recorded statement that I am referring to is the police interview that occurred in October/22.

Link please.

 

[grannygates]

That is all very wishful thinking on the DT's part.

Notes from an officer's witness interview ARE considered factual. Not all informal interviews are on video or audiotape.
The info he wrote about the MEID support his accuracy.

There is no reason to 'default' to RA's more recent interview because he had motivation to change his story, as he now knew they had the BG video and more potential evidence against him.

The jury is not going to assume the defendant told the truth when he changed the time of his exit from 3:30 to 1:30.

Especially when the witness testimony fits his original version of the story, and not his newer version.

The witnesses saw BG. Further investigation and evidence confirms that BG=RA. Even RA admits as much.

we’ve been through this a thousand times but the witness testimony was from a group of four girls and RA saw a group of three. The witness saw a twenty year old with brown poofy hair, RA is not that. None of these witness statements match RAs. Was there a group of three girls present from noon-1:30pm? IMO sounds like there could be.

The state has to prove their case. By “losing” the audio recording, DD can’t prove anything. Why would we just automatically believe DDs note about Rick Whiteman can’t have any errors?

I believe in innocent until proven guilty, so I would default to the accused being innocent until the state actually proves something. Especially considering how suspicious all of the several years worth of missing, destroyed, hidden evidence is. This is an awfully important audio recording to just go “missing” like that.

MOO

 

[grannygates]

Link please.

FINAL DRAFT - 9.17 at 6.30 pm - Delphi Franks brief.pdf | PDF Host

PDF Host read free online - FINAL DRAFT - 9.17 at 6.30 pm - Delphi Franks brief.pdf - ANDREW J. BALDWIN

pdfhost.io

 

[ClearAhead]

FINAL DRAFT - 9.17 at 6.30 pm - Delphi Franks brief.pdf | PDF Host

PDF Host read free online - FINAL DRAFT - 9.17 at 6.30 pm - Delphi Franks brief.pdf - ANDREW J. BALDWIN

pdfhost.io

Could you kindly narrow it down to a page number?

 

[grannygates]

Could you kindly narrow it down to a page number?

pg 109. This document contains a lot of information on the case so theres a magnifying glass to search if you want to search any other topics.

 

[TTF14]

RA said on video that he left at 1:30 so I don’t know why it’s constantly being suggested that he put himself on the bridge at the same time as BG or the girls? That was never said by anyone including LE. There is no proof of that anywhere.

BB saw a 20 year old with poofy brown hair, YBG.

DD’s note isn’t a fact and cannot be proven as the audio is “missing”. A reoccurring theme in this case.

This is another example of the “guilty until proven innocent” surrounding this case.

MOO

Well said!

I don't know if RA is guilty of playing a part in this crime (my opinion is that he is definitely not guilty of being the only one, that's for sure), but with the "evidence" we know about before the trial even starts, there is no way a jury is going to find him guilty. Too many goofs, too many conflicting statements, not enough science. It's all beyond a reasonable doubt.

If the State wants to "win," I hope they have more.

IMO MOO

 

[TTF14]

Notes from an officer's witness interview ARE considered factual. Not all informal interviews are on video or audiotape.

RSBM

But, stacked with all of the other blunders and "lost" evidence in this case.....more "lost" recordings and counting on only an officer's memory....major confidence challenger. Major. Jurors may start to think, "hey, what's going on here....?" We saw it in another recent case.

We have NO idea how he posed the question to Richard Allen. And why, just a few days later, while standing on the stage as part of the LE team at the presser, he didn't recognize him as being "BG."

The jurors are going to see this.

IMO MOO

 

[Arkay]

IMO, sure he heard about it.

We were discussing the girls here (and I was in Atlantic Canada) the morning of the 14th of February before they had even been found. I followed the link here to watch the helicopter covering the search live from the air. It was on the scanners, the radios etc.

Link to the very first post on Abby and Libby here on the site:

IN - Abigail Williams, 13, & Liberty German, 13, Delphi, 13 Feb 2017 #1

MISSING: Two 13-year-old girls dropped off to go walking at Carroll County trail Carroll County Sheriff Toby Leazenby said Abigail Williams and Liberty German were last seen around 1 p.m. when they were dropped off to go hiking at High Bridge, just east of Delphi. MISSING: Two 13-year-old...

www.websleuths.com

Darling @Vern you have opened up a portal for me…I joined WS about 2 1/2 years after this case, and I don’t believe I’ve ever read back to the first page.

How terribly heartbreaking it is to read the hopeful first posts, speculating that maybe they’d gone on an adventure, others just wishing they’d show up soon.

Justice for you, Abby. Justice for you, Libby.

 

[photographer4]

How does someone lurking at ' the other side of the bridge' have any effect upon what happened between BG and the two girls standing RIGHT NEXT to him? Seconds into the video Libby took, we hear the voice of a man saying 'Guys, Down the Hill'......someone on the other side of the bridge had no way to be heArd on that video seconds later.

BG is the voice on the video, not some other figment of someone's imagination....IMO

I still think there is some misunderstanding about what I’m suggesting *could* have happened here.

RA could have been at the trail head / start of the bridge. Does not mean he walked across it in pursuit of the two kids / killed them.

There is evidence that TL saw a man that she did not recognize in the area earlier that day. There is further evidence that an officer felt that the sketch of that person seen by TL might have been EF. I’m NOT saying it IS / WAS EF. Only that there was someone described as looking like EF earlier in the day at the other end of the bridge near where the words DTH were spoken to the kids.

Police and the State want us to believe RA was the man who killed those kids. I want police and the State to show us why it HAD to be RA, and why it couldn’t have been literally any other man - eg: the dude seen by TL who an officer felt looked like EF.

Sounds wild right? No more wild than RA chasing two kids across a crazy rickety old bridge imo. Either is plausible. Neither seems to more wild than the other. That RA did exactly this, or that a second guy could have been at the other end where RA may never have ventured.

MOOOOOOOO. If the state is very sure of themselves and their theory on RA then it shouldn’t matter if people think it was someone else, they should be able to prove it BARD. So far, for me, they haven’t. yet.

 

[TTF14]

Darling @Vern you have opened up a portal for me…I joined WS about 2 1/2 years after this case, and I don’t believe I’ve ever read back to the first page.

How terribly heartbreaking it is to read the hopeful first posts, speculating that maybe they’d gone on an adventure, others just wishing they’d show up soon.

Justice for you, Abby. Justice for you, Libby.

Yes. I remember the shock at hearing they'd been murdered. Nobody was expecting that at all!

 

[statt#1]

Then there's RA, likely overcome with a burden of guilt too heavy to bear, blaring out to whoever, I can only imagine, confessing his guilt, pick the number, but said to be over 60 times, maybe more. It's gonna be VERY interesting to get a detailed play by play testimony to just what all these confessions were.

I'd love to hear from him, if there's truth to his coming to find God, and if that was truly his motivation to clear his conscience, and if so, why so many seem to have sought, and continue to seek, to deny his attempt to declare his guilt, and seek forgiveness from a God he's found, presumably, so as to save his soul for eternity.

I'd imagine there are those who may pass this off with the argument the man was coerced, under duress, subjected to torture to achieve these confessions, etc. etc.

Over 60 times? Seriously, RA had a NEED....it appears he was DRIVEN to confess this crime. I've never heard of it...over 60 times. How'd he find 60+ people to confess to? Was it his cellmates? His attorneys? His family? The prison staff? A cleric? The warden? I mean....think about it. Over 60 times!

Always, typed by me, emanating from the confines of my mind, and therefore, my speculative opinion

 

[Arkay]

- The bullet found between the two victims;

This, for me, has always been compelling.

If someone else somehow got hold of a bullet from RA’s gun, and went to the bridge after the fact and placed it there, just how would that person know where to place it so it would be between both bodies…long after their corpses had been removed?

Jmo

 

[TTF14]

Then there's RA, likely overcome with a burden of guilt too heavy to bear, blaring out to whoever, I can only imagine, confessing his guilt, pick the number, but said to be over 60 times, maybe more. It's gonna be VERY interesting to get a detailed play by play testimony to just what all these confessions were.

I'd love to hear from him, if there's truth to his coming to find God, and if that was truly his motivation to clear his conscience, and if so, why so many seem to have sought, and continue to seek, to deny his attempt to declare his guilt, and seek forgiveness from a God he's found, presumably, so as to save his soul for eternity.

I'd imagine there are those who may pass this off with the argument the man was coerced, under duress, subjected to torture to achieve these confessions, etc. etc.

Over 60 times? Seriously, RA had a NEED....it appears he was DRIVEN to confess this crime. I've never heard of it...over 60 times. How'd he find 60+ people to confess to? Was it his cellmates? His attorneys? His family? The prison staff? A cleric? The warden? I mean....think about it. Over 60 times!

Always, typed by me, emanating from the confines of my mind, and therefore, my speculative opinion

I'm not sure that huge number has actually been verified, but we did hear from a prison psychologist about his seriously deteriorated mental state due to the psychological torture he was experiencing, as a presumed innocent man.

The jurors will see this and it will matter.

IMO MOO

 

[photographer4]

I have a theory that DD only became involved because of the tip that he was given by RA.

We've learned that the tip was misfiled based upon the street where he lived being taken as his last name.

Perhaps DD came forward to ask 'what ever happened with that tip I turned in on the guy who said he was at the trail?' And that's what sent the woman who eventually found it out looking to find it. Didn't they also have the woman at that same presser who "found" the tip misfiled and thanked her for finding it?

Perhaps that was the entire point of having her and DD on the stage and commenting that they knew he was hiding in plain sight? A sure sign to RA - if he was watching/watched the presser - that an old tip had been 'located' and that the very CO he spoke with was now featured on the stage ... that they were on to him. The fact the CO was on that stage wasn't obviously a sign to us at the time, but it surely would have been to RA --- "hint, hint --- we are on to you".

I don’T remember this presser particularly well - was this presser before or after RA was arrested? If it was before, why would they want to tip him off at all? Wouldn’t that have just given him the heads up to start ditching evidence if he was in possession of any? Unless they wanted to spook him and hope for some sort of obvious reaction from him that they could observe from a distance, then why would they want to suggest to RA that they were on to him specifically??

 

[TTF14]

This, for me, has always been compelling.

If someone else somehow got hold of a bullet from RA’s gun, and went to the bridge after the fact and placed it there, just how would that person know where to place it so it would be between both bodies…long after their corpses had been removed?

Jmo

That's an excellent question.

Also, it brings up the fact that if it's true it was found days later, there's no confidence-assuring chain of custody. So many people were traipsing around the area.

Major reasonable doubt.

IMO MOO

 

[katydid23]

I still think there is some misunderstanding about what I’m suggesting *could* have happened here.

RA could have been at the trail head / start of the bridge. Does not mean he walked across it in pursuit of the two kids / killed them.

There is evidence that TL saw a man that she did not recognize in the area earlier that day. There is further evidence that an officer felt that the sketch of that person seen by TL might have been EF. I’m NOT saying it IS / WAS EF. Only that there was someone described as looking like EF earlier in the day at the other end of the bridge near where the words DTH were spoken to the kids.

Police and the State want us to believe RA was the man who killed those kids. I want police and the State to show us why it HAD to be RA, and why it couldn’t have been literally any other man - eg: the dude seen by TL who an officer felt looked like EF.

Sounds wild right? No more wild than RA chasing two kids across a crazy rickety old bridge imo. Either is plausible. Neither seems to more wild than the other. That RA did exactly this, or that a second guy could have been at the other end where RA may never have ventured.

MOOOOOOOO. If the state is very sure of themselves and their theory on RA then it shouldn’t matter if people think it was someone else, they should be able to prove it BARD. So far, for me, they haven’t. yet.

Ok, but that long reply does not touch upon the fact that during Libby's video, she films BG walking right up to them, then SECONDS later there is a man telling them to walk down the hill, and Abby is heard saying 'He's got a gun.'

You are wanting LE to show evidence that BG is the kidnapper. Isn't that pretty solid evidence that there is a video of a stranger and the seconds later we hear a male voice forcing the off the bridge at gunpoint? What else do you need?

Saying some other potential man that may or may not exist, but we know he was not in the video lens, does not create reasonable doubt for me. JMO

 

[Arkay]

That's an excellent question.

Also, it brings up the fact that if it's true it was found days later, there's no confidence-assuring chain of custody. So many people were traipsing around the area.

Major reasonable doubt.

IMO MOO

Mutual respect for opinions that differ from our own is what makes WS a reliable website, so thank you.

IMO of course we have all seen jury verdicts that we believe were utter miscarriages of justice. For me those would be O.J. and Casey Anthony.

Yet I can’t think of a much more fair system than each side having legal representation, and a jury of peers sorting though the evidence presented by each side.

Also IMO, LE is often constrained to hold back from the public information that points more directly toward the killer. For example, without that video of Murdaugh actually being where he said he wasn’t, perhaps he’d have gotten away with killing his wife and son.

I have my strong beliefs about guilt or innocence here, but I am content to wait for the case to unfold.

Justice for you, Abby. Justice for you, Libby.
Peace for your families.