Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #185

[FrostedGlass]

So now the D didn't have enough time to plead their case against JG!?

IMO, Yes. Most of the half hour was taken up with re-instatement of the D.
The argument to recuse the judge was weak.

Are you able to connect to the SC oral argument?

 

[sunshineray]

IMO, Yes. Most of the half hour was taken up with re-instatement of the D.
The argument to recuse the judge was weak.

Are you able to connect to the SC oral argument?

The arguement was weak because it was weak, not because the poor unfortunate D didn't get enough time. MO

 

[girlhasnoname]

Are Baldwin and Rozzi ever held accountable for anything?!

Baldwin is the moron here. He’s the one who read the organization’s statement skewering the defense’s attempt to pin the girls’ murders on Odinists, yet could not discern that they were not his friends. He’s the one who called and left a message on a machine that for all intents and purposes was public, not knowing who might be hearing it. He’s the one flirting with the gag order.
Ms. Crowe had every right to share that recording with whoever she wished since she was head of the organization and it ended up on her private phone. Again, Baldwin is the one who stupidly left it. Also, MS deleted the moron’s phone number from the podcast. It was never made public.
The latitude and leeway this defense team is given is mindboggling.
If any independent person was allowed to ask RA, he’d probably say he has regrets for giving B and R any trust or credibility.
Just my opinion.

No I don't believe so. They have sidestepped the gag order many times (Franks), fail to file proper paperwork (then blame the Court for non payment) to be paid, released sensitive information, etc.

They are more of the "Ooopsie, I'm sorry I didn't know" type rather than the professional take responsibility for their actions Defense Attorneys. It's gamesmanship to me. Judge Gull has called them out, rightly so, on their behavior and now it's become payback to them.

RA was never important IMO, they only see him as their golden ticket to fame and $$$$, and I think they've manipulated and taken advantage of him from the beginning. I think RA is guilty, but even he deserves better than these 2.

All MOO

 

[FrostedGlass]

The arguement was weak because it was weak, not because the poor unfortunate D didn't get enough time. MO

MOO
There was no "poor unfortunate D".
It was an appellate attorney who had to choose how to use his 30 minutes wisely,
as did the appellate attorney for the other side.
The oral arguments I've watched have been limited to an hour.

Based on the questioning by the justices, what Judge Gull did was a more important issue than the recusal or the speedy trial issue.

 

[steeltowngirl]

I thought in the interrogation transcript on October 26, 2022, when Holeman and Richard Allen were going back and forth, Holeman said that he, Holeman, was not captured in the phone video crossing the Monon High Bridge to which Richard Allen replied that neither was he captured on the phone video crossing the bridge.

I thought that was Richard Allen stating that he is not the person(bridge guy) from the phone video.

Maybe later on in the interrogation he confessed to being the person in the phone video, but that is not documented anywhere that I can find. If he did confess to being the bridge guy from the phone video during the interrogation, then I would think he is guilty. But why would that not be in the PCA? No one knows what is in the entire interrogation video transcript, but LE obviously arrested him after the interrogation.

You are right - good find. It’s on pg 10. That may be as close as we get to RA stating he’s not BG.

He also says that there’s no way a bullet from his gun was used in the murders. I found that interesting, as he’s correct, AFAWK. The girls were not shot. How did RA know that?

Motion_to_Suppress_Second_Statement.pdf

drive.google.com

 

[sunshineray]

MOO
There was no "poor unfortunate D".
It was an appellate attorney who had to choose how to use his 30 minutes wisely,
as did the appellate attorney for the other side.
The oral arguments I've watched have been limited to an hour.

Based on the questioning by the justices, what Judge Gull did was a more important issue than the recusal or the speedy trial issue.

The pro bono D decided not to go full in on getting the judge disqualified for bias. I guess that's an admission of sorts to having a weak case to DQ the judge right there. MO

 

[mrjitty]

So now the D didn't have enough time to plead their case against JG!?

As I noted at the time, Weineke did not cite a single authority to support her written pleading that Judge Gull should be removed.

MOO

 

[mrjitty]

MOO
There was no "poor unfortunate D".
It was an appellate attorney who had to choose how to use his 30 minutes wisely,
as did the appellate attorney for the other side.
The oral arguments I've watched have been limited to an hour.

Based on the questioning by the justices, what Judge Gull did was a more important issue than the recusal or the speedy trial issue.

BIB. I think that's it. The direction is more set by the Justices, who after all, already read all the pleadings. They didn't seem to take seriously the idea that there was apparent bias. Team Weineke certainly didn't explain how Judge Gull's actions compared to any previously decided recusal cases where a Judge was removed.

MOO

 

[girlhasnoname]

As I noted at the time, Weineke did not cite a single authority to support her written pleading that Judge Gull should be removed.

MOO

How absurd is that? (Not really in the big picture of all of the D's actions)

Appellate Defense: We want the Judge recused immediately for being a meanie and biased towards RA, Rozzi and Baldwin.
SCOIN - What proof do you have to support these allegations?
Defense: Ummm, none actually but you need to take our word for it, plus we've been really busy with all the Discovery we haven't looked at yet.

Get outta here already.

JMO

EBM: Clarification of who's who

 

[sunshineray]

How absurd is that? (Not really in the big picture of all of the D's actions)

Appellate Defense: We want the Judge recused immediately for being a meanie and biased towards RA, Rozzi and Baldwin.
SCOIN - What proof do you have to support these allegations?
Defense: Ummm, none actually but you need to take our word for it, plus we've been really busy with all the Discovery we haven't looked at yet.

Get outta here already.

JMO

EBM: Clarification of who's who

Yeah I hear violins playing.

 

[Mirabel091]

You are right - good find. It’s on pg 10. That may be as close as we get to RA stating he’s not BG.

He also says that there’s no way a bullet from his gun was used in the murders. I found that interesting, as he’s correct, AFAWK. The girls were not shot. How did RA know that?

Motion_to_Suppress_Second_Statement.pdf

drive.google.com

BBM. I see two different ways he could know it.

1. He was there and knows exactly what methods were used to kill the girls and what can be plausibly denied.

2. He was not there and knows his gun and bullets were safely locked up at home so whatever happened to the girls, he feels safe in saying it was not his.

As much as I think he likely is the guy, 2 is not impossible based on the wording alone. MOO.

 

[mrjitty]

How absurd is that? (Not really in the big picture of all of the D's actions)

RSBM - I wouldn't say it's absurd - just that there was no precedent for it.

MOO

 

[AugustWest]

As I noted at the time, Weineke did not cite a single authority to support her written pleading that Judge Gull should be removed.

MOO

This isn't correct; she noted Indiana Judicial Conduct Rule 2.11. When a clear rule exists, which spells out exactly what a breach of the rule would entail, an attorney wouldn't reference anything outside of the rule. The reasoning being that there is no need to look at common law, because the Indiana legislature has spelled out exactly what the rule is.

See at pg. 18 here: 11/6 Brief-Relator.pdf

 

[AugustWest]

No I don't believe so. They have sidestepped the gag order many times (Franks), fail to file proper paperwork (then blame the Court for non payment) to be paid, released sensitive information, etc.

They are more of the "Ooopsie, I'm sorry I didn't know" type rather than the professional take responsibility for their actions Defense Attorneys. It's gamesmanship to me. Judge Gull has called them out, rightly so, on their behavior and now it's become payback to them.

RA was never important IMO, they only see him as their golden ticket to fame and $$$$, and I think they've manipulated and taken advantage of him from the beginning. I think RA is guilty, but even he deserves better than these 2.

All MOO

The defense isn't "sidestepping" the gag order by filing a motion. That is the procedure for how things are done. That's how attorneys relay information to the court. This is a statutory requirement.

 

[mrjitty]

This isn't correct; she noted Indiana Judicial Conduct Rule 2.11. When a clear rule exists, which spells out exactly what a breach of the rule would entail, an attorney wouldn't reference anything outside of the rule. The reasoning being that there is no need to look at common law, because the Indiana legislature has spelled out exactly what the rule is.

See at pg. 18 here: 11/6 Brief-Relator.pdf

to be clear i know she cited the rule. by precedent i meant she cited no case law.

just to clarify.

interesting as to why she may have done that. thanks.

MOO.

 

[sunshineray]

I haven’t listened to the message or the podcast but it occurs to me such maybe he left the message with the HOPE it would end up in the public domain? The lawyers for RA seem to want to try the case in the media more than in the the courtroom. Just sayin, this may be part of a grander plan / hope of theirs.

Listen to it, the phone message. I can't believe he'd actually want to have it leaked with him sounding so maladroit? JMO

 

[sunshineray]

The defense isn't "sidestepping" the gag order by filing a motion. That is the procedure for how things are done. That's how attorneys relay information to the court. This is a statutory requirement.

Totally disagree and believe the FM's were used in inappropriate ways to air lots of fantastical and inaccurate could-have-beens to the public. AJMO

 

[steeltowngirl]

BBM. I see two different ways he could know it.

1. He was there and knows exactly what methods were used to kill the girls and what can be plausibly denied.

2. He was not there and knows his gun and bullets were safely locked up at home so whatever happened to the girls, he feels safe in saying it was not his.

As much as I think he likely is the guy, 2 is not impossible based on the wording alone. MOO.

True. But if the unspent bullet found at the crime scene is his, how is that explained?

 

[Justice101]

True. But if the unspent bullet found at the crime scene is his, how is that explained?

The defense will have an expert testify that unspent bullets with chambering marks only is junk science and can't be taken seriously as evidence.

IMO, unspent bullets are 95% accurate and can certainly be used to RULE OUT people, but not necessarily convict them.

I think it will be used by the prosecution anyway... to say the marks are consistent but not 100% proof that it came from his gun. UNLESS he had old bullets left over in his house from the same box of ammo... which is possible... Many times, someone shoots and then doesn't shoot again for years. I'm sure the labs would be able to tell if the bullet is from the same lot or not as compared to what he might still have in boxes.

 

[steeltowngirl]

The defense will have an expert testify that unspent bullets with chambering marks only is junk science and can't be taken seriously as evidence.

IMO, unspent bullets are 95% accurate and can certainly be used to RULE OUT people, but not necessarily convict them.

I think it will be used by the prosecution anyway... to say the marks are consistent but not 100% proof that it came from his gun. UNLESS he had old bullets left over in his house from the same box of ammo... which is possible... Many times, someone shoots and then doesn't shoot again for years. I'm sure the labs would be able to tell if the bullet is from the same lot or not as compared to what he might still have in boxes.

Agree, defense will tear it apart. Let’s pretend for a minute that it is RA’s ammo. How does he explain that? Another coincidence, along with him being on the trails in the same clothing as BG in the same timeframe. A round that matches his gun is found next to 2 murdered girls. His voice, body build, and walking pose match BG.

If BG is a RA doppelgänger that was also on the trails as the same time as RA, this guy has to be the one extremely unlucky man.