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

[layer]

BBM
Per RA’s PCA. RA/BG can be seen and heard saying “Down the Hill”.

Seen... Why were we never shown BG speaking? Maybe the video was pointing down at that point, no face to see?
Gah, this case drives me nuts

 

[Oculus]

Seen... Why were we never shown BG speaking? Maybe the video was pointing down at that point, no face to see?
Gah, this case drives me nuts

Yes, my guess is that there's no video (moving images, that is) of interest (ie camera in pocket) when BG actually speaks.

But how can we then be CERTAIN that it is him that we hear? Not beyond reasonable doubt at least.

EDIT: I'd like to add, that I believe that it is highly probable that it IS BG who later speaks, but this is a matter of evidence and ways of looking at these things, at least to me.

 

[layer]

Yes, my guess is that there's no video (moving images, that is) of interest (ie camera in pocket) when BG actually speaks.

But how can we then be CERTAIN that it is him that we hear? Not beyond reasonable doubt at least.

EDIT: I'd like to add, that I believe that it is highly probable that it IS BG who later speaks, but this is a matter of evidence and ways of looking at these things, at least to me.

My thinking has always been that Libby started the video as BG approached, stuck the phone in her back pocket when BG got nearer, and it kept recording the video (and audio) in her pocket until the battery died. But now I wonder.

 

[Salah11]

Yes, my guess is that there's no video (moving images, that is) of interest (ie camera in pocket) when BG actually speaks.

But how can we then be CERTAIN that it is him that we hear? Not beyond reasonable doubt at least.

EDIT: I'd like to add, that I believe that it is highly probable that it IS BG who later speaks, but this is a matter of evidence and ways of looking at these things, at least to me.

There is recording so if there was multiple voices that would have been picked up on. It’s clearly one voice who tells them down the hill and then I believe it records but it’s muffled.

There has never been any suggestion that there is more than one kidnapper/voice on the recording. Unless anybody can provide me a link proving me wrong here???

 

[Ravenmoon]

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 first platform is less than a quarter of a mile from the actual abduction point. From there to RL'S property is less than a third of a mile.

 

[Cyber sleuth]

Yes, and I would like to know how they could establish that.

Surely his mouth cannot be seen moving in sync with the audio anywhere in the video... If that were the case, they would have a fairly clear visual of his face.

I don’t know why this wouldn’t be true.
If the video shows him approaching, pulling out his Sig Sauer, cocking said gun and commanding the girls to go down the hill then I can completely understand why they wouldn’t have wanted that to be released to the public.
And perhaps the video is not super crisp and clear as we would like but the PCA is clear about the statement that he is seen and heard saying those words.
It is a precise statement.
No innuendo, no running around the mulberry bush to make ends meet, no 6 degrees of Kevin Bacon, no vagueness.

 

[sunshineray]

Yeah, I'm not a fan of "black and white" thinking. And lawyers certainly don't think that way.
With the exception of facts and law ... there's no such thing as either/or. Everything is on a scale, a negotiation, strategic, nimble.

There's not one way to handle work conflicts; interactions/resolutions exist on a scale. One does their best in the moment, calculates conditions and forming responses carefully in a conflict environment.

JMO

FYI, Contempt matter closing statement papers due tomorrow from Hennessy.

The facts are the facts. You don't bend the facts. How they're applied is the law, which through juries and judges can be interpreted by circumstances and precedents. If the public can't count on the facts being told and unbiased deliberating, there can be no justice. AJMO

 

[susiQ]

Yes, my guess is that there's no video (moving images, that is) of interest (ie camera in pocket) when BG actually speaks.

But how can we then be CERTAIN that it is him that we hear? Not beyond reasonable doubt at least.

EDIT: I'd like to add, that I believe that it is highly probable that it IS BG who later speaks, but this is a matter of evidence and ways of looking at these things, at least to me.

Agree. And, I would just love to have recordings of EF, JM, and RAbr speaking. BH apparently has an alibi for that time frame, but I’m not aware that PW has. Was that even investigated? This case raises more questions than it gives clear answers. JMHO

 

[girlhasnoname]

I don’t know why this wouldn’t be true.
If the video shows him approaching, pulling out his Sig Sauer, cocking said gun and commanding the girls to go down the hill then I can completely understand why they wouldn’t have wanted that to be released to the public.
And perhaps the video is not super crisp and clear as we would like but the PCA is clear about the statement that he is seen and heard saying those words.
It is a precise statement.
No innuendo, no running around the mulberry bush to make ends meet, no 6 degrees of Kevin Bacon, no vagueness.

The video shows more than we are privy to at this point. RA=BG came upon those girls on MHB and marched them to their deaths. They crossed the creek at the shallow sandbar IMO and he had them under his complete control, 2 8th grade young girls scared out of their minds of course they complied.

What happened to those innocent girls afterward was EVIL and I believe with all my heart RA is going to pay heavily as will any other actor (if involved).

#Justice4Abby&Libby

MOO

 

[girlhasnoname]

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.

The funny thing about the Truth, it doesn't change. You can tell and retell a truthful story 100 times with little to no change. Lying on the other hand changes stories often. This is how criminals are caught IMO

 

[girlhasnoname]

Agree. And, I would just love to have recordings of EF, JM, and RAbr speaking. BH apparently has an alibi for that time frame, but I’m not aware that PW has. Was that even investigated? This case raises more questions than it gives clear answers. JMHO

We are not entitled to that information until Trial. Since you asked my a hypothetical about EF earlier, can you please name one high profile murder case where the police released who they interviewed and how they cleared each and every person they talked to? Especially BEFORE trial?

JMO

 

[layer]

From there to RL'S property is less than a third of a mile.

Is RL's property on both sides of Deer Creek or only on the north?

 

[Salah11]

Agree. And, I would just love to have recordings of EF, JM, and RAbr speaking. BH apparently has an alibi for that time frame, but I’m not aware that PW has. Was that even investigated? This case raises more questions than it gives clear answers. JMHO

Why would the general public know if he was investigated? He isn’t sitting charged with these crimes and therefore it’s irrelevant if he was looked into.

Let’s not forget the circus around RL and the damage social media did to him.

 

[Boxer]

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.

His actions were to leak photos of the murdered girls. The meeting was about his actions and the obvious course of action, to retire from the case.

 

[layer]

Let’s not forget the circus around RL and the damage social media did to him.

SM went off gonzo in the Moscow murders too. Several people were basically publicly accused of the murders. It's nice to have WS to protect us from going off the rails like that.

 

[twall]

03/25/2024

Order Issued Defendant appears in person and with counsel, Attorneys Bradley Rozzi and Andrew Baldwin. State appears by Prosecuting Attorney Nicholas McLeland, Deputy Prosecuting Attorney James Luttrell, and Deputy Prosecuting Attorney Stacey Diener. Hearing held on Defense Motion to Dismiss for Destroying Exculpatory Evidence. Matter taken under advisement to review the evidence submitted. Judicial Officer: Gull, Frances -SJ Noticed: McLeland, Nicholas Charles Noticed: Baldwin, Andrew Joseph Noticed: Rozzi, Bradley Anthony Noticed: Luttrull, James David JR Noticed: Diener, Stacey Lynn Order Signed: 03/22/2024

03/25/2024

Order Issued The Court has taken under advisement the State's Motion to Enter Protective Order for Evidence Gathered from the Indiana Department of Correction (filed March 17, 2024) and the Defendant's Response (filed March 19, 2024) and denies the State's Motion. The Court, however, prohibits the defense from any dissemination of the personal practices of any deponent. Judicial Officer: Gull, Frances -SJ Noticed: McLeland, Nicholas Charles Noticed: Baldwin, Andrew Joseph Noticed: Rozzi, Bradley Anthony Noticed: Luttrull, James David JR Noticed: Diener, Stacey Lynn Order Signed: 03/22/2024

 

[twall]

03/25/2024

Order Issued Defendant appears in person and with counsel, Attorneys Bradley Rozzi and Andrew Baldwin. Attorneys Rozzi and Baldwin appear with Attorney David Hennessy. State appears by Prosecuting Attorney Nicholas McLeland, Deputy Prosecuting Attorney James Luttrell, and Deputy Prosecuting Attorney Stacey Diener. Prior to the commencement of the hearing on the State's Verified Information of Contemptuous Conduct, the following preliminary matters are addressed: 1. The State's Motion for Leave to Amend Charging Information by adding Counts 3 and 4 is granted without objection. Counsel waive Initial Hearing on Counts 3 and 4. 2. The State's oral motion to dismiss Counts 5 and 6, kidnapping, Level 3 Felony, granted without objection. 3. The Verified Petition for Recusal of Prosecutor from Contempt Proceedings is heard and denied. 4. State withdraws its Motion for All Future Pleadings and Filings to be Sealed for the Court's Review Before Being Released to the Public. 5. Attorney Hennessy's Verified Emergency Motion for Continuance and Supplement to Verified Emergency Motion for Continuance heard and again denied. 6. Attorney Hennessy's Motion to Stay All Ancillary Proceedings and Get This Case to Trial and the State's Objection heard. As the hearing is proceeding, the Motion to Stay is Denied. The Court has previously granted Attorney Rozzi and Baldwin's Motion for a Speedy Trial and the cause is now set for speedy trial May 13-31, 2024. 7. Attorney Hennessy's Motion for Specific Findings of Fact and Conclusions Thereon granted with respect to the contempt proceeding. 8. Attorney Hennessy's Verified Petition for Recusal from Contempt Proceedings heard and denied. 9. Attorney Hennessy's Objection to Change of Venue noted. No objection was made by defense counsel or defense counsels' attorney until March 12, 2024. The hearing was previously set in February and continued to March 18, 2024, on defense counsels' Motion without objection to the hearing taking place in Allen County. Court overrules the objection, but will conduct future hearings, if any, in the Carroll Circuit Court. Court then conducts the hearing on the State's Verified Information of Contemptuous Conduct and takes the evidence and arguments of counsel under advisement. Attorney Hennessy requests an opportunity to submit a post-hearing brief. Court orders him to submit same on or before March 25, 2024. State will submit a response brief on or before April 1, 2024. The Court's thirty (30) days to rule begins April 1, 2024. Judicial Officer: Gull, Frances -SJ Noticed: McLeland, Nicholas Charles Noticed: Baldwin, Andrew Joseph Noticed: Rozzi, Bradley Anthony Noticed: Luttrull, James David JR Noticed: Diener, Stacey Lynn Order Signed: 03/22/2024

 

[sunshineray]

Yes, and I would like to know how they could establish that.

Surely his mouth cannot be seen moving in sync with the audio anywhere in the video... If that were the case, they would have a fairly clear visual of his face.

I suppose the view would depend on exactly how Libby was holding her phone as BG got close. The audio was pretty clear, with enhancements I'm sure.

 

[Ravenmoon]

Barring the unlikely case where the defense has absolute proof that their client is innocent, isn't raising reasonable doubt basically the defense's job?

It sure is.
The problem that I see is that they are doing their best to taint the jury pool.

JMO

 

[sunshineray]

Yes, my guess is that there's no video (moving images, that is) of interest (ie camera in pocket) when BG actually speaks.

But how can we then be CERTAIN that it is him that we hear? Not beyond reasonable doubt at least.

EDIT: I'd like to add, that I believe that it is highly probable that it IS BG who later speaks, but this is a matter of evidence and ways of looking at these things, at least to me.

RA's own words and the timeline corroborated by witnesses and their timelines being corroborated by a photo's data (teen girl's) and video data (Harvest store) puts it and him all in a very small window. MO