Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #178

[Emma Peel]

One of RA's defense attorney's lied outright to the judge in chambers.

or ... Rozzi changed his mind when he had some time to think.

<modsnip - quoted post and response removed>

And no, I have NEVER wondered b/c I read the decision.

Because she had no bias. She was thinking about the defendant's right to council that was not negligent but competent in being RA's advocate.

And I read in that opinion that SCOIN said she got ahead of herself, didn't have the information she'd need to make such a decision, and denied counsel due process. SCOIN understood her concerns were valid given the circumstances. They reversed her error.

<modsnip - quoted post and response removed>

JMHO

 

[sunshineray]

RBBM

Far be it from me to be proselytizing but there is more than just TC suggesting the Odin theory was not completely investigated by LE. There must be evidence that it is true but, for now, this is all we know because we weren't in court to hear each word of testimony.

From last week's hearing, the Journal and Courier reports, on March 19, 2024, that Baldwin presented evidence that ISP did not follow up on the Rushville's police officer's investigation into Odinists.

Delphi murder suspect Richard Allen seeks charges' dismissal over lost evidence

You misquoted the article you linked and left out words and most of the context. This is what they said...

"Allen's attorney, Andrew Baldwin, presented evidence that mirrored the defense team's Sept. 18 memorandum theorizing that Odinists killed teenagers Libby German and Abby Williams on Feb. 13, 2017, as part of a ritual sacrifice."

 

[sunshineray]

or ... Rozzi changed his mind when he had some time to think.

JMHO

So, I'm gonna skip the rants...

And no, I have NEVER wondered b/c I read the decision.

And I read in that opinion that SCOIN said she got ahead of herself, didn't have the information she'd need to make such a decision, and denied counsel due process. SCOIN understood her concerns were valid given the circumstances. They reversed her error.

So, again, I'm gonna skip the rants.

He still, with aforethought, made the decision to lie to the judge in chambers thinking he could just change his mind later. So in other words he lacked to moral courage and conviction to say, no I won't withdraw, let's have a hearing, I've done nothing wrong. Instead he lied to a judge because he lacked gumption and valor. AJMO

 

[Emma Peel]

He still, with aforethought, made the decision to lie to the judge in chambers thinking he could just change his mind later. So in other words he lacked to moral courage and conviction to say, no I won't withdraw, let's have a hearing, I've done nothing wrong. Instead he lied to a judge because he lacked gumption and valor. AJMO

Actually, Rozzi was pretty graceful here.
This is what grownups do when they realize a colleague has lost their mind, is making emotional decisions and is breaking laws all over the place.

Grownups recognize when it's wise to dismiss themselves from an impossible conflict, regroup, and try a different approach.

JMHO

 

[DeDee]

You misquoted the article you linked and left out words and most of the context. This is what they said...

"Allen's attorney, Andrew Baldwin, presented evidence that mirrored the defense team's Sept. 18 memorandum theorizing that Odinists killed teenagers Libby German and Abby Williams on Feb. 13, 2017, as part of a ritual sacrifice."

I did no such of a thing as misquote the J&C news. I rightly and simply summarized words from a paid news subscription because the copy and paste of the contents is against copyright law and WS TOS. Therefore, it's my understanding, since it requires a paid subscription to read, the article may not be available to every WS member. As per WS TOS, the online article cannot be directly quoted by copy and pasting it here due to the paywall. Synopsis are allowed and summaries can be made is my understanding. MHOO

Drop down four paragraphs. It begins with

Additionally, Baldwin presented evidence...

just as my OP stated from my paid subscription to jconline.com.

 

[snooptroop88]

Just noting, if the D is supposed to have all this experience and professionalism, the experience and professionalism probably would have been best channeled into making absolutely certain grisly crime scene photos involving murders of two 8th graders were not leaked to the public. While mistakes of all kinds can happen to anyone, that's a mistake other people will have to bear the brunt of for the rest of their lives. I think the families been the ones who've been particularly graceful under the circumstances.

 

[Emma Peel]

If there were any others already down the hill, that would still not negate RA's culpability.

Perhaps you're assuming RA forced the girls off the bridge and down the hill?

For this discussion, I'm not.

If one does not assume that RA forced the girls off the bridge and down the hill, then the presence of others already down the hill may indeed be exculpatory in this example.

Of course, we wouldn't know without further investigation.

JMHO

 

[sunshineray]

Actually, Rozzi was pretty graceful here.
This is what grownups do when they realize a colleague has their mind, is making emotional decisions and is breaking laws all over the place.

Grownups dismiss themselves, regroup, and try a different approach.

JMHO

Professionals stand up for themselves and do not knowingly lie to a judge. What was he so afraid was going to happen if he said, no judge I won't withdraw and I want a hearing? I can answer that because since then it's become very obvious, to me, why he didn't want a hearing. There was no defense (except maybe some youtuber's opinions) for his negligence. Again, AJMO

 

[katydid23]

Just noting, if the D is supposed to have all this experience and professionalism, the experience and professionalism probably would have been best channeled into making absolutely certain grisly crime scene photos involving murders of two 8th graders were not leaked to the public. While mistakes of all kinds can happen to anyone, that's a mistake other people will have to bear the brunt of for the rest of their lives. I think the families been the ones who've been particularly graceful under the circumstances.

I don't believe they have shown much concern for the surviving family members. It does not seem to be a high priority for them. After the first accidental leak, when they sent sealed legal info to the wrong person, they certainly didn't increase their security to prevent it from happening again. In fact, a much bigger blunder happened. JMO

 

[Emma Peel]

Professionals stand up for themselves and do not knowingly lie to a judge. What was he so afraid was going to happen if he said, no judge I won't withdraw and I want a hearing? I can answer that because since then it's become very obvious, to me, why he didn't want a hearing. There was no defense (except maybe some youtuber's opinions) for his negligence. Again, AJMO

There's the matter of the Hobson's choice, where Gull made it clear they were welcome to a hearing that would be immediate on camera with no time to prep, and no witnesses, although there were 6 State witnesses awaiting in the galley.

I'm sorry but I've forgotten what Rozzi's negligence was? JMHO

 

[sunshineray]

Perhaps you're assuming RA forced the girls off the bridge and down the hill?

For this discussion, I'm not.

If one does not assume that RA forced the girls off the bridge and down the hill, then the presence of others already down the hill may indeed be exculpatory in this example.

Of course, we wouldn't know without further investigation.

JMHO

Yep I am because of the time that he put himself there first on the trail and then on the bridge itself and the witnesses that corroborated that.

 

[DeDee]

He still, with aforethought, made the decision to lie to the judge in chambers thinking he could just change his mind later. So in other words he lacked to moral courage and conviction to say, no I won't withdraw, let's have a hearing, I've done nothing wrong. Instead he lied to a judge because he lacked gumption and valor. AJMO

It's my impression that Rozzi found himself hoodwinked in Judge's chambers by her tactics and stated what he felt may happen but, later, after more thought on the matter, he changed his mind. I don't know precisely what was in his mind, this simply sounds most reasonable as the way it played out. No lying - a lie is an untruth told. He thought he'd file his exit notice. Perhaps KA pleaded with him, with them, to stay. IDK.

Let me share more of my thoughts on an important matter that gravely concerns me. JG appointed some bad azz lawyers who are kicking it up in Indiana. They are almost too good at their job if we expect the accused to be convicted at trial. Admittedly, there have been errors along the way, grievous, nearly unforgiveable errors, from both sides, but we march towards a trial in 9 weeks. This critical trial must not fail Libby and Abby.

MHOO

 

[Emma Peel]

Yep I am because of the time that he put himself there first on the trail and then on the bridge itself and the witnesses that corroborated that.

I understand.
The abduction location per LE, is .6 miles from where RA puts himself on the bridge and the witness corroborated.

There's .6 miles that requires explaining, and if others are at the "down the hill" location ... it's appropriate to reset assumptions, IMO.

 

[sunshineray]

There's the matte of the Hobson's choice, where Gull made it clear they were welcome to a hearing that would be immediate on camera with no time to prep, and no witnesses, although there were 6 State witnesses awaiting in the galley.

I'm sorry but I've forgotten what Rozzi's negligence was? JMHO

Why take a horse you don't want when you have a choice to say no? Seems to me if you don't want to do something because you feel it's an unfair situation to yourself, the last thing you should do is agree to do it. It's all a matter of personal courage and belief in yourself. BR acted like a mouse not a professional lawyer. AJMO

 

[katydid23]

I understand.
The abduction location per LE, is .6 miles from where RA puts himself on the bridge and the witness corroborated.

There's .6 miles that requires explaining, and if others are at the "down the hill" location ... it's appropriate to reset assumptions, IMO.

The area where the crimes were committed must have been pretty muddy/soft dirt. If there were several Odinists at that location, wouldn't we expect to see lots of footprints and tracks?

What is it that needs explaining? I thought there have been a couple of clear scenarios of how the three of them could get from the bridge to the end point. It doesn't seem that mysterious.

 

[sunshineray]

It's my impression that Rozzi found himself hoodwinked in Judge's chambers by her tactics and stated what he felt may happen but, later, after more thought on the matter, he changed his mind. I don't know precisely what was in his mind, this simply sounds most reasonable as the way it played out. No lying - a lie is an untruth told. He thought he'd file his exit notice. Perhaps KA pleaded with him, with them, to stay. IDK.

Let me share more of my thoughts on an important matter that gravely concerns me. JG appointed some bad azz lawyers who are kicking it up in Indiana. They are almost too good at their job if we expect the accused to be convicted at trial. Admittedly, there have been errors along the way, grievous, nearly unforgiveable errors, from both sides, but we march towards a trial in 9 weeks. This critical trial must not fail Libby and Abby.

MHOO

That's not what he said in his letter to the court. He knew he was lying at the time he did it.

As far as being hoodwinked, maybe if that was his state of mind he should rethink his profession. If you can't stand up and defend yourself with conviction, how in the world can you defend a man's life and liberty?

 

[sunshineray]

I understand.
The abduction location per LE, is .6 miles from where RA puts himself on the bridge and the witness corroborated.

There's .6 miles that requires explaining, and if others are at the "down the hill" location ... it's appropriate to reset assumptions, IMO.

Well Libby did film him on the last leg of that .6 miles. I think it's far to assume after BB started down the trail from the bridge and saw Abby and Libby approaching, there was just one person on the bridge and that was RA. He put himself there at the first platform right where BB had just seen him...Oh and said he was wearing the exact same clothes as BG too.

 

[Boxer]

Perhaps you're assuming RA forced the girls off the bridge and down the hill?

For this discussion, I'm not.

If one does not assume that RA forced the girls off the bridge and down the hill, then the presence of others already down the hill may indeed be exculpatory in this example.

Of course, we wouldn't know without further investigation.

JMHO

He is arrested and going on trial for forcing the girls to go down the hill. The

 

[Emma Peel]

It's my impression that Rozzi found himself hoodwinked in Judge's chambers by her tactics and stated what he felt may happen but, later, after more thought on the matter, he changed his mind. I don't know precisely what was in his mind, this simply sounds most reasonable as the way it played out. No lying - a lie is an untruth told. He thought he'd file his exit notice. Perhaps KA pleaded with him, with them, to stay. IDK.

Let me share more of my thoughts on an important matter that gravely concerns me. JG appointed some bad azz lawyers who are kicking it up in Indiana. They are almost too good at their job if we expect the accused to be convicted at trial. Admittedly, there have been errors along the way, grievous, nearly unforgiveable errors, from both sides, but we march towards a trial in 9 weeks. This critical trial must not fail Libby and Abby.

MHOO

This is a great additional point. What's in Rozzi's mind at the moment he conceded - we have no idea. What influenced his retraction of that concession - we have no idea. Thanks for that, I skipped over that and it's very obvious a step in Rozzi's process.

Good point that Gull chose this Defense team.

As to the D's expertise.
I understand your meaning but ... there is no such thing as being too good at your job. The problem here is not the skill of the Defense.

My view is that the State must not fail Libby and Abby.
The State has the burden of proof. The State determined they have a case against RA that they can prove. So, when they bring that proof, they will be just fine.

If they bring a weak case, a premature case, a flawed evidence case, a highly circumstantial case, if the Prosecution is unskilled (and none of us have any idea if that is the case here), if they've made fatal errors/assumptions ... it's not the Defense's fault. It's the State's fault.

FWIW, I really don't think RA's case will be dismissed. But I find it odd, concerning even, that the State thought an important strategy for them was to continue to try to remove the Defense.

JMHO

 

[Emma Peel]

Why take a horse you don't want when you have a choice to say no? Seems to me if you don't want to do something because you feel it's an unfair situation to yourself, the last thing you should do is agree to do it. It's all a matter of personal courage and belief in yourself. BR acted like a mouse not a professional lawyer. AJMO

I think DeeDee has a great point. (see just above)
We can't know all the thoughts firing in Rozzi's head (or anyone's, frankly) in that pressure cooker of a conference.