Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #177

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
I am trying to get as much information as possible.
The original charges PLUS new murder charges stand.
The new kidnapping charges are dismissed.
That doesn't remove the original charges is what I am being told.

JMO
 
Ravenmoon said:
I am trying to get as much information as possible.
The original charges PLUS new murder charges stand.
The new kidnapping charges are dismissed.
That doesn't remove the original charges is what I am being told.

JMO
Click to expand...
I think the updated/upgraded murder charge includes a mitigating circumstance, such as kidnapping. So it would kinda be like a double kidnapping charge if they left kidnapping on there?
 
Megnut said:
And right above that, "certain phone dump data".

Bingo.

Dump data.

They have direct data from those phones. No doubt those phones were turned over voluntarily!

Smoke and mirrors.

JMO
Click to expand...
Yes, certain people. Mike, Becky, Cody, and Kelsi.

Of course they should have requested phone dumps. That is the only way to retrieve deleted data, right?
 
Ravenmoon said:
Yes!
They aren't supposed to lie, but they are not required to tell the truth.
Click to expand...
Yes, Agree. Of course they CAN lie. They are physically able to. But not without ramifications.

I believe they did not lie when they said they do have the phone records/dumps of Mike, Becky, Kelsi, and Cody.

And that is a huge problem.
 
TTF14 said:
I think the updated/upgraded murder charge includes a mitigating circumstance, such as kidnapping. So it would kinda be like a double kidnapping charge if they left kidnapping on there?
Click to expand...
Mitigating or aggravating? I do see that kidnapping is listed as one of the aggravating factors for the DP in Indiana.
 
Last edited:
TTF14 said:
Yes, certain people. Mike, Becky, Cody, and Kelsi.

Of course they should have requested phone dumps. That is the only way to retrieve deleted data, right?
Click to expand...

TTF14 said:
Yes, Agree. Of course they CAN lie. They are physically able to. But not without ramifications.

I believe they did not lie when they said they do have the phone records/dumps of Mike, Becky, Kelsi, and Cody.

And that is a huge problem.
Click to expand...
Yes, information for those phones was probably not included in a specific data dump.

It arrived in another way.

IMO the defense has -- and has had -- the information. They know where and when KG's phone was.

Let's say LE downloaded KG's phone. Then it was analyzed. Probably straight forward. Reasonable deletions, not unexpected Google searches. It was her personal phone which she would have used personally. Typical search history, no notable gaps in history. LE wouldn't probably investigate it further. Report turned over to the defense.

The defense is talking about a certain data dump. Why would anyone expect there to be additional analysis of KG's phone contained there? It would be a duplication if anything.

I'll eat my words if I have to but I think the defense is purposefully claiming a file is empty when, in reality, they have the useful data, it's just in a different folder.

And it's a lot of noise because, based on the charges, there's nothing exculpatory about those records anyway! Blowing big horns but it's just noise.

JMO
 
Last edited:
Just a note re: The Kidnapping charges were technically lost to the statute of limitations.
Prosecution/State voluntarily withdrew the kidnapping charges. (P had charged against the statute; P withdrew rather than having them denied.) JMHO
 
Emma Peel said:
Just a note re: The Kidnapping charges were technically lost to the statute of limitations.
Prosecution voluntarily withdrew the kidnapping charges. (P had charged against the statute; P withdrew rather than having them denied.) JMHO
Click to expand...


Were the original charges of kidnapping also removed because of the Statute of Limitation?
Or, since they were filed on time, they still stand?

Please help me to understand!
 
Last edited:
Far too much critical early taped evidence has been lost by investigators in this investigation; puts McL/State in an unnecessarily vulnerable position here. Very serious; perilous stuff for the State. JMHO
 
Ravenmoon said:
Were the original charges of kidnapping also removed because of the Statute of Limitation?
Or, since they were filed on time?

Please help me to understand!
Click to expand...
They were filed after the statute of limitations (per Indiana law) had expired.
(The Defense would have caught it, possibly already had raised issue in conference and P acknowledged error ahead of time. This was an obvious error.)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Staff online

Members online

... and 116 more.
Total: 2,262 (members: 117, guests: 2,145)

Online statistics

Members online
117
Guests online
2,145
Total visitors
2,262
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
599,737
Messages
18,098,938
Members
230,917
Latest member
CP95
Back
Top