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

[girlhasnoname]

Did something change?
2 requests for the mental health records?

I thought the same thing at first, but then I think it's the Motion to Withdraw the request for Medical Records.

JMO

 

[TL4S]

Did something change?
2 requests for the mental health records?

It looks like one request is for medical health records. *I read them both as mental health the first time, too.*

 

[Cyber sleuth]

Did something change?
2 requests for the mental health records?

Yes in motions filed yesterday RA’s mental and physical health was mentioned. Again.

 

[Ravenmoon]

Yes in motions filed yesterday RA’s mental and physical health was mentioned. Again.

My guess is that this would, in fact, open that door to those records.
The judge warned the Defense this was coming!

 

[Emma Peel]

03/14/2024	Order Issuing Warrant for Arrest Court has received a Request for Recording of Court Proceedings by News Media from Jeff Wehe [sic] (WANE 15) and denies same. Judicial Officer: Gull, Frances -SJ Noticed: McLeland, Nicholas Charles Noticed: Baldwin, Andrew Joseph Noticed: Rozzi, Bradley Anthony Noticed: Luttrull, James David JR Order Signed: 03/07/2024
03/14/2024	Administrative Event Adm entry dated 3/14/2024 re: order Issuing warrant for arrest made in error
03/14/2024	Order Issued Court has received a Request for Recording of Court Proceedings by News Media from Jeff Wehe [sic] (WANE 15) and denies same. Judicial Officer: Gull, Frances -SJ Noticed: McLeland, Nicholas Charles Noticed: Baldwin, Andrew Joseph Noticed: Rozzi, Bradley Anthony Noticed: Luttrull, James David JR Order Signed: 03/14/2024
03/14/2024	Order Issued Ex parte communication received from Frank Wesseling and ordered copied and sent to counsel of record and the Clerk of Carroll Circuit Court for filing. Judicial Officer: Gull, Frances -SJ Noticed: McLeland, Nicholas Charles Noticed: Baldwin, Andrew Joseph Noticed: Rozzi, Bradley Anthony Noticed: Luttrull, James David JR Order Signed: 03/14/2024
03/14/2024	Motion Filed 3rd Request for Medical Health Records.pdf Filed By: State of Indiana File Stamp: 03/14/2024
03/14/2024	Motion Filed 4th Request for Mental Health Records.pdf Filed By: State of Indiana File Stamp: 03/14/2024

Arrest.
Arrest in error.

...

Pardon me dear CC Clerk, would you care to elaborate what Order for Warrant of Arrest that was you found mixed in today's stack of Delphi Motions?

moo

 

[Sillybilly]

ADMIN NOTE:

This post lands totally at random.

WS members have the use of the emoji feature, but it seems some members are occasionally using the HaHa one to ridicule or mock other members rather than using as a way to share a chuckle.

The Xenforo software doesn't have a means for us to remove individual emojis but we can remove the entire emoji selection from an individual user.

C'mon folks .. you must know that Websleuths doesn't tolerate rudeness. So, any member found to be obviously using that particular emoji as a sign of disrespect, mockery or ridicule toward others will have that feature entirely removed from their account.

 

[FrostedGlass]

Holy heck, I almost fell over when I read “warrant for arrest”. I thought they caught others. Whew. It was an error in the admin at court.

I bet this guy had a moment, too. lol

News Media from Jeff Wehe [sic] (WANE 15)

 

[mrjitty]

I guess Franks 3 is just more messaging stuff?

To me the new content appears to be hardcore trial stuff, nothing to do with the probable cause in the warrant. Especially I don't see how the phone data discussed is of itself exculpatory for Allan in the SW context - whether or not they can build on it at trial.

 

[Willow Knight]

Whatever they recovered from the SW must be pretty damning to RA and their case. R&B have now filed 3 memos in support of a Frank's hearing. We want, we want, and we want again. If they are so sure of RA's innocence why are they obsessed with getting a Franks hearing when they have been denied 2 times already? There has to be something seriously incriminating there that they don't want to come to light.

Why is this so hard for the Defense to understand? It's because there is something there that can't let come to light. IMO

All MOO

RSBM

Girl, you know it! It is so blatant and now I'm wondering if this is setting up for an appeal (because D expects a guilty verdict) or maybe there will be a plea deal.

LE dug up the yard for a reason. LE searched other homes and there was no arrest, search RA's home and an arrest. The defense is using a lot of energy trying to keep whatever was found during that search from a jury.

 

[twall]

Holy heck, I almost fell over when I read “warrant for arrest”. I thought they caught others. Whew. It was an error in the admin at court.

I had the same reaction!

 

[sunshineray]

For expediency's sake.

I take that this team is not taking the beat to get both handwritten signatures where one will suffice.

All we can surmise is that the single-signed submissions of any brief is managed by the office of the signing counsel.

hurry hurry hurry
JMHurryO

Aren't all these filings done electronically, so the signatures also?

 

[Cyber sleuth]

I guess Franks 3 is just more messaging stuff?

To me the new content appears to be hardcore trial stuff, nothing to do with the probable cause in the warrant. Especially I don't see how the phone data discussed is of itself exculpatory for Allan in the SW context - whether or not they can build on it at trial.

Agree. Geo fencing doesn’t belong in the Franks. Nothing exculpatory. They didn’t even know RA had what a dozen or more devices when they got the SW.
I do like that they tried to narrow down some of the language by changing “at the crime scene OR 60-100 yards away” to “ at the crime scene AND 60-100 yards away”. They also narrowed down the phones tracked at or near from multiple to 3.
BUT then they expanded the time to 12:39-5:49 so they still are painting a vague picture.
1 phone could be victims’
Another phone could be RL’s ( per his SW)
3rd phone? Who knows. But unless it was hanging around ( within 30 yards) of the crime scene between 2:15-3:47pm it’s not problematic.

 

[twall]

Did something change?
2 requests for the mental health records?

Not sure, I'm catching up. Had an emergency, freezer quit working!

 

[sunshineray]

It seems like R is doing his own filings and B is doing his. If one gets disqualified (AB) for their misconduct, Rozzi will still be left (being DP certified) as possibly continuing representing RA. Purely MOO, this is the only thing I can think of that explains the type of 'separation' we're seeing between the two.

That makes sense, you could be right.

 

[Emma Peel]

Aren't all these filings done electronically, so the signatures also?

no.
Maybe I don't understand your question or ... why it would be relevant?

 

[TTF14]

Agree. Geo fencing doesn’t belong in the Franks. Nothing exculpatory. They didn’t even know RA had what a dozen or more devices when they got the SW.
I do like that they tried to narrow down some of the language by changing “at the crime scene OR 60-100 yards away” to “ at the crime scene AND 60-100 yards away”. They also narrowed down the phones tracked at or near from multiple to 3.
BUT then they expanded the time to 12:39-5:49 so they still are painting a vague picture.
1 phone could be victims’
Another phone could be RL’s ( per his SW)
3rd phone? Who knows. But unless it was hanging around ( within 30 yards) of the crime scene between 2:15-3:47pm it’s not problematic.

If RA's phone wasn't one of the ones in the vicinity, as found by the geofencing, it most certainly is exculpatory.

Unless they are finally willing to admit the timeline is total BS and the crime didn't happen when the pushed narrative said it did of course.

 

[Emma Peel]

It seems like R is doing his own filings and B is doing his. If one gets disqualified (AB) for their misconduct, Rozzi will still be left (being DP certified) as possibly continuing representing RA. Purely MOO, this is the only thing I can think of that explains the type of 'separation' we're seeing between the two.

Seems to be much interest or concern over this minor issue.

This is standard work practice when attnys work in teams - all have noticed there appearance as RA counsel on this case. Hennessey entered a limited appearance for the Contempt quick action - so you'd not expect to see him signing docs related to the RA trial case ... only the Contempt quick action. Ausbrook did the same. Weineke also entered a limited appearance.

But Rozzi and Baldwin both entered appearances as court-appointed defenders and RA's counsel on the RA case where RA is charged with the double murder and either of them alone or together can sign their motions. And if Baldwin signs a motion, Rozzi can show up and argue it and vice-versa.

Nothing much to be surmised from a single signature on motions filed from a counsel team except perhaps a team member was out of the office, sick, on vacation, in court on another case, or there's a timing rush on the document.

Hoping this explanation helps. JMHO

 

[sunshineray]

Holy heck, I almost fell over when I read “warrant for arrest”. I thought they caught others. Whew. It was an error in the admin at court.

That's quite the error considering the climate of late!

 

[sunshineray]

This is why it will be best to wait for the trial and see what is going to be exhibited. It varies state to state as to what can be got from the phone company when you are in the early phase and don't have PC on anyone in particular.

And then when they arrested RA and do have PC, but if his phone was never at the crime scene, ....

It was reasonable to assume they have some kind of tower dump - which we now know they do have, but I think you can drive yourself crazy trying to reverse engineer it based on cryptic motions

There will likely be a CAST report by the FBI agent or similar.

And who's to say RA didn't have a phone with him that day. He could have had a burner phone that he dumped.

 

[sunshineray]

Seems to be much interest or concern over this minor issue.

This is standard work practice when attnys work in teams - all have noticed there appearance as RA counsel on this case. Hennessey entered a limited appearance for the Contempt quick action - so you'd not expect to see him signing docs related to the RA trial case ... only the Contempt quick action. Ausbrook did the same. Weineke also entered a limited appearance.

But Rozzi and Baldwin both entered appearances as court-appointed defenders and RA's counsel on the RA case where RA is charged with the double murder and either of them alone or together can sign their motions. And if Baldwin signs a motion, Rozzi can show up and argue it and vice-versa.

Nothing much to be surmised from a single signature on motions filed from a counsel team except perhaps a team member was out of the office, sick, on vacation, in court on another case, or there's a timing rush on the document.

Hoping this explanation helps. JMHO

Wasn't it their standard to both sign...at least in the previous filings I saw, except the one BR wrote himself to the court and I believe AB did also once? That was when one withdrew and one said he did but then later said he lied in chambers to the judge.