Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #176

[girlhasnoname]

So, we can all agree that any and all involved in this murder should be prosecuted. That’s something .

Here’s my problem. If RA is guilty, which LE and P believe, and a number of LE along with the P believe more than one is involved, how is it that 1 year and 4 months after RA’s arrest we haven’t seen another arrest? Surely by now they would have gleaned something from his phone activity during that crucial time frame? Computer forensics, perhaps? The mere notion that others could be involved makes it a conspiracy. But nothing, zilch, nada, nichts. I find that very, very strange. By now, one would think that RA would gladly have “spilled the beans” and made himself a deal, especially if he was BG and perhaps not involved in the actual deed. Nope. He’s just gonna take the fall for the lot of them.

Not buying it.

Hey we all agree on something, that's a start.

I don't know if RA had an accomplice, I feel like he very well could have. I find the catfishing, CSAM ring and Wabash River Search right before his arrest just too coincidental, but I could be completely wrong.

Maybe RA was/is holding out hope that the case gets tossed?? If so, I can see him holding out until right before showtime for some type of plea deal. His Defense has filed a Motion to Dismiss after all.

Here's the thing that gets me, if he's completely innocent, why not provide an alibi or spill the beans if he knows them and walk out of Washburn right now? If he's so scared of whatever group, he and his family could be placed in witness protection. Why wouldn't a completely innocent man be screaming from the rooftops any info he has that proves his innocence?

Because he can't, because he isn't IMO.

ALL MOO

 

[susiQ]

Hey we all agree on something, that's a start.

I don't know if RA had an accomplice, I feel like he very well could have. I find the catfishing, CSAM ring and Wabash River Search right before his arrest just too coincidental, but I could be completely wrong.

Maybe RA was/is holding out hope that the case gets tossed?? If so, I can see him holding out until right before showtime for some type of plea deal. His Defense has filed a Motion to Dismiss after all.

Here's the thing that gets me, if he's completely innocent, why not provide an alibi or spill the beans if he knows them and walk out of Washburn right now? If he's so scared of whatever group, he and his family could be placed in witness protection. Why wouldn't a completely innocent man be screaming from the rooftops any info he has that proves his innocence?

Because he can't, because he isn't IMO.

ALL MOO

He’s not “screaming from the roof tops” because maybe he doesn’t know anything about who did this? Would you like him to make up a story? In regard to an alibi, I believe it is that he went home by 1:30 pm. Put yourself in his shoes. You went to the park, you left and went home. Your partner was at work, you got on the computer or watched TV or maybe you decided to have a midday snooze. How do you prove you were at home, especially 6 years later?!

 

[sunshineray]

at law school you come across these professors who built their whole career about specialist topics so they are often consulted on cases.

oscar pistorius case vets will remember Prof James Grant was an active commentator as well as other academics

And that's well and good. The problem I see is: yes of course what effects the defendant's attorneys affects the defendant in turn. What about the culpability of the defendant's attorneys who more than bend the line of ethics and violate court orders? Do they get a free skate to be first, investigated and second, to have the details of that investigation revealed...just because they represent the defendant?

It's like the D just wants to skip the reveal of what was found to have happen to create this dilemma and skip over IT to the defendant's rights to council. Skip right over whether their actions may have or have not complicated the question of whether they're fit council. And it seems they ARE overly complicating any administration of sanctions, that may be imposed to mitigate and close the situation, to get the client's trial back on course.

It again begs the question, what is the D afraid of? AJMO and thoughts.

 

[sunshineray]

They are ALL Odinists. The FBI Special agents wear the Odin patches on their blazers. I'm pretty sure Agent Grusing wore one during his testimony in the Mark Redwine trial.


Speaking of conspiracies, I can think of one that makes more sense than the vast conspiracy which would include the FBI,
the ISP, the Delphi detectives and the DNA lab.

What if a couple of people close to EF wanted to cash in on the reward?

Yes, they have no reason to disclose those findings to the public. They keep it organised in the case file and might pull some of it out for the trial, if need be. JMO

OMG do some FBI agents really wear Odinist patches? Are there links you can provide? I would love to see that! TIA if you can, no worries if not.

 

[sunshineray]

He’s not “screaming from the roof tops” because maybe he doesn’t know anything about who did this? Would you like him to make up a story? In regard to an alibi, I believe it is that he went home by 1:30 pm. Put yourself in his shoes. You went to the park, you left and went home. Your partner was at work, you got on the computer or watched TV or maybe you decided to have a midday snooze. How do you prove you were at home, especially 6 years later?!

So he's totally oblivious to any and all information on the murders but yet he confesses to them knowing full well he'd go to prison for life (that's if there's no DP) AND his family/friends situation would be destroyed...all because two patch wearing guards threaten him while he's in a solitary confinement cell, cameras everywhere?
Does his silence really make sense, not reporting that, especially since then he's been transferred to a different facility away from the Odin guards? Are there more of those brutes now at Wabash?

I'm curious, if RA claims at trial to have been threatened so badly, by these Odin patch-wearing guards, that he was so mentally and physically stressed out he confessed multiple times, does that open the door for the prosecution to get his prison medical physical and mental health files?

 

[photographer4]

So, we can all agree that any and all involved in this murder should be prosecuted. That’s something .

Here’s my problem. If RA is guilty, which LE and P believe, and a number of LE along with the P believe more than one is involved, how is it that 1 year and 4 months after RA’s arrest we haven’t seen another arrest? Surely by now they would have gleaned something from his phone activity during that crucial time frame? Computer forensics, perhaps? The mere notion that others could be involved makes it a conspiracy. But nothing, zilch, nada, nichts. I find that very, very strange. By now, one would think that RA would gladly have “spilled the beans” and made himself a deal, especially if he was BG and perhaps not involved in the actual deed. Nope. He’s just gonna take the fall for the lot of them.

Not buying it.

It might well depend on how afraid he is of whomever he was working with / for here. If he knows what someone else did to the kids and how they set it up, he might well be too scared to speak up about anyone else involved at all for fear of his own life, or someone he loves. I find it a bit hard to believe he did all that by himself, but I wouldn't find it hard to believe that he used a gun to control one kid and made her into his assistant (which is really horrible to even imagine!). The entire thing is really horrible to imagine.

 

[AugustWest]

I'm a bit stuck on these recent plays from the Bench (both at the same time yesterday):

Gull's decision on Ausbrook's Dismissal Motion was:
"Reviewed and denied without hearing". (No reason provided.)

and

Gull's decision on Hennessey's Clarification Request as to the Prosecution's Contempt Motion was:
"Reviewed and denied because the Court has scheduled a hearing on the State's pleading."


As to Ausbrook's Dismissal Motion (the 1st):
Appreciate that this is a brush-off. Now there's a record that Gull acknowledges she reviewed the Ausbrook legal arguments related to the Prosecutions erroneously formed Contempt thing-a-ma-jig. I feel like Ausbrook takes the (relative) win that his filing was reviewed and formally acknowledged.

As to Hennessey's Clarification (the 2nd):
This one's not as straightforward. Are there three possible interpretations?

a) Is Gull saying that she's scheduled a "clarification/procedural" hearing as to the State's Pleading format itself? (Given the Ausbrook acknowledgement.)

b) Or is Gull saying she's holding a hearing and she'll figure it out from the bench so be ready to proceed regardless.

c) Or is Gull's decision that she is holding the Contempt hearing and therefore Hennessey's Clarification Request is irrelevant?

Any thoughts?

(also, @AugustWest who just popped in the thread not too long ago ... )

@Emma Peel

Sorry for the delay in reply; I jumped off last night soon after my post.

In my opinion, JG is choosing most closely your option (b). Hennessey seems confused to which form of contempt hearing will be held (indirect civil vs. criminal). Indiana case law is a bit unclear on whether a criminal contempt hearing can be held without an original action. Meaning in this regard a case which must be filed outside the State v. Allen framework.

I'm not sure if he can be linked, but Shay Hughes has a good rundown on his twitter; the tweet is from February 13 and covers the issue well and includes links to case law addressing same.

Hope this helps!

 

[AugustWest]

Thanks for this post.

It was interesting reading the cases cited in response on this issue, that bias seemed to always require an external factor to the case. e.g the Judge had been involved in an election campaign with a party or a personal / professional relationship.

Wieneke didn't cite a single case that supported her argument for removal.

I think the defence still have the problem that they are relying on Gull's adverse decisions to allege bias. Like not holding a Franks Hearing is an adverse decision at the end of the day?

@mrjitty

Yes! Exactly! The facts to support a showing of bias or prejudice must come from outside decisions adverse to the complainant. Not holding a Franks hearing could be error, but not doing such doesn't equate to bias.

 

[twall]

Was there a ruling on the State's Motion to add charges? (4 I believe)

 

[steeltowngirl]

So, we can all agree that any and all involved in this murder should be prosecuted. That’s something .

Here’s my problem. If RA is guilty, which LE and P believe, and a number of LE along with the P believe more than one is involved, how is it that 1 year and 4 months after RA’s arrest we haven’t seen another arrest? Surely by now they would have gleaned something from his phone activity during that crucial time frame? Computer forensics, perhaps? The mere notion that others could be involved makes it a conspiracy. But nothing, zilch, nada, nichts. I find that very, very strange. By now, one would think that RA would gladly have “spilled the beans” and made himself a deal, especially if he was BG and perhaps not involved in the actual deed. Nope. He’s just gonna take the fall for the lot of them.

Not buying it.

Can you expand on your theory? In the spirit of open-mindedness, I’d like to consider alternative thoughts, but I want to understand them. Who is covering up for who? And why? Who do you think murdered Libby and Abby?

 

[sunshineray]

Was there a ruling on the State's Motion to add charges? (4 I believe)

Not yet, wasn't that also on the docket for a hearing first?

 

[katydid23]

True, but there is a connection between EF and BH and that’s what interests me. And yes, I am aware that lie detector examinations are not admissible and that BH has an “alibi.” What I would like to have seen are the phone records of the Odinists connected to EF and likely BH, like Messer and Abrams in and around the time of the murders. Why did BH implicate his former friend PW to his ex? Look over there, not here. EF knew BH and BH knew AW and according to EF, AW was a “trouble maker.”

Delphi is a very small town and everyone 'knew' everyone and they were connected in many ways. So EF knew BH and BH knew AW---is that really that surprising or incriminating?

So, in my mind, where’s there’s smoke, something was simmering. LE shut down that line of investigation and threw a bucket of water on the fire but the embers were still simmering under the ashes and R & B uncovered them.

Why would they shut down that line of investigation if it was leading somewhere productive?

Is it possible they walked away from it because they felt it was a dead end?

If one can outright ignore everything in the FM, so be it. But I don’t find any justice or pleasure in convicting a man while ignoring other strong candidates that may have had a hand in this tragedy. The investigation was sabotaged by agents of deception IMO. The “brotherhood” strikes again. Also JMO.

So the Odinists sabotaged the investigation? They are that powerful and in control that they shut down the FBI and the ISP ?

 

[twall]

Was there a ruling on the State's Motion to add additional charges? (4 I believe)

Not yet, wasn't that also on the docket for a hearing first?

Yes, I found it. It is to be heard at the 3/18 hearing.

 

[twall]

DENY (Summary Denial Motion from Ausbrook)
DENY (Defense Counsel's request for Clarification regarding Contempt Hearing)
and
ORDER for RA TRANSPORT to March 18th Hearing

View attachment 485006

Still wonder why this says 2:00 p.m. I looked at JG's court calender and she has 5 or so different cases scheduled for the afternoon of 3/18. RA is not on there at all unless he doesn't show up due to it being a Carroll county case.

 

[steeltowngirl]

Still wonder why this says 2:00 p.m. I looked at JG's court calender and she has 5 or so different cases scheduled for the afternoon of 3/18. RA is not on there at all unless he doesn't show up due to it being a Carroll county case.

I count 41 cases with Gull’s name on them to be held 3/18 in the afternoon. Can that be right? Hearing Calendar - Court Calendar

 

[twall]

I count 41 cases with Gull’s name on them to be held 3/18 in the afternoon. Can that be right? Hearing Calendar - Court Calendar

I don't know I didn't count that closely! I just searched Superior Court 4&5 because that is where JG usually presides. Some are the same people with different case numbers.

 

[Boxer]

I suppose I wasn’t clear enough. Whoever killed the girls did not use the gun to kill them. Yes, it was likely used to threaten them to do as they were told. MOO

As far as carrying anyone, your guess is as good as mine. We weren’t there. But, have you ever tried to “move” someone of that weight? I’ve done enough caregiving in my lifetime to know how difficult it can be to move someone of much less weight by oneself. That goes for dressing and undressing.

We obviously do not see this in the same way. That’s okay.

Agree.
And the police said they were killed where they were found.

 

[girlhasnoname]

IMO, the gag order relieves this the State from updating (should there be an update).

The gag order works the same way for both the State and Defense, only the State has chosen to follow it. The Defense likes to snookerly get around it for their benefit.

MOO

 

[girlhasnoname]

Ausbook is an academic as I understand it. It's common enough for these professors to get involved in cases where it is their specialist area. Way back he appeared to be fascinated about the case and a potential habeas application down the track - as many here know, he gave an extended murdersheet interview on this topic.

My guess is this is why he is involved - because he is interested in the constitutional impacts on RA and a potential habeas (maybe). I suspect he is less interested in whether <modedit> Rozzi get sanctioned per se.

Yes, and he gets to post fun emojis and talk about it on SM. I'd guess nobody was talking much about Ausbook before this, or CW or BM or any of the other Defense Attorneys 'jumping on the band wagon' in the name of altruism.

moo

EBM: Added word for clarification

 

[sunshineray]

I count 41 cases with Gull’s name on them to be held 3/18 in the afternoon. Can that be right? Hearing Calendar - Court Calendar

Don't they say on those websites a disclaimer about it all being totally accurate? Sounds like they're just behind on updating the info.