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

[FrostedGlass]

I think it’s important to note that the lab didn’t say the cartridge came from RAs gun, LE did. LE states it’s from RAs gun and then quote the lab who say that it’s possible followed by a bunch of caveats. Ballistics isn’t a science. It’s a humans opinion. So all it takes is an opposition expert to explain how none of these tests mean anything unless you are able to test every single 40 cal gun in the entire world. (ALL MOO plus possible chain of command issues IMO)

<modsnip - not an approved source>

It also spells out the importance of Chain of Custody. If the P can't find the CoC for that and the search warrant items, will the jury accept testimony from LE?
It'll be interesting in to hear their explanations for why CoC is missing.

Introduction to Forensic Science and Criminology → Module 4 – Forensic Examination and Firearms Evidence - WILBER

wilber-learndev.com

 

[girlhasnoname]

@al66pine

Here's a thread about the fundraiser if you want more information about it, and which crowdfunding site it has been through:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1799166911667638738

What is Lead Pipe Hennessy? CW sure is flamboyant to say the least in her postings. I don't know why an appellate attorney who assistance is done and over with on this case is tweeting out details and keeping the 'public' updated? Strange for a professional attorney IMO.

 

[girlhasnoname]

@al66pine

Here's a thread about the fundraiser if you want more information about it, and which crowdfunding site it has been through:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1799166911667638738

So the $41k raised by DH the administrator has been paid to DH already, good to know.

JMO

 

[mrjitty]

That's one theory I haven't come across yet. I will admit I'm one of those who question the picture of the man on the bridge. From the first time I looked at it, my brain decided he wasn't really on the bridge when the image was taken. BUT that's what LE presented to us so I pretty much went with it.

Ausbrook is a habeas attorney and who he represents is probably not about how he feels personally about those people. Considering the level at which he argues, I'll give his opinions more weight than some others offering their opinions.

MOO

What MS were getting at is Ausbrook has no expertise in the area. So unless he is being briefed on expert info the D have, his opinion is no better than any of us.

I don't have any issue with anyone offering opinion but it does seem an odd speculation for someone who was professionally involved in the case. Like what happens if we get to trial and the confessions are really bad. Egg on face!

My opinion only

 

[girlhasnoname]

It would be nice, if LE had found the first phone (if there were 2 phones), which wasn't left at the CS, with RA's devices .....

Maybe they did. I have never believed that RA turned over the real phone he had out there when he met up with DD in 2017. Or maybe he didn't have a phone at all, just pretended. The geocaching and CAST will help clear this up at trial.

jmo

 

[girlhasnoname]

<modsnip>

It also spells out the importance of Chain of Custody. If the P can't find the CoC for that and the search warrant items, will the jury accept testimony from LE?
It'll be interesting in to hear their explanations for why CoC is missing.

Introduction to Forensic Science and Criminology → Module 4 – Forensic Examination and Firearms Evidence - WILBER

wilber-learndev.com

<modsnip>

I don't think the State has ever publicly addressed the COC or lack of one for the bullet. That will be sure to come out at trial I have no doubt.

That's the entire problem with this case IMO. It's the defense floating half truths out to create a narrative and confusion which they did in spades with the Franks.

JMO

 

[Salah11]

<modsnip>

I don't think the State has ever publicly addressed the COC or lack of one for the bullet. That will be sure to come out at trial I have no doubt.

That's the entire problem with this case IMO. It's the defense floating half truths out to create a narrative and confusion which they did in spades with the Franks.

JMO

Yep that’s the issue with the gag order we are only getting half truths from the less than honest defense.

 

[FrostedGlass]

What MS were getting at is Ausbrook has no expertise in the area. So unless he is being briefed on expert info the D have, his opinion is no better than any of us.

I don't have any issue with anyone offering opinion but it does seem an odd speculation for someone who was professionally involved in the case. Like what happens if we get to trial and the confessions are really bad. Egg on face!

My opinion only

I didn't listen to MS so I don't know what they are saying. I have seen Ausbrook's brief online reply to what MS has said about him.

Is "the area" where he opinioned that the picture was altered? How does MS even know what A's expertise is and why can't he have an opinion just like everyone else has?

Ausbrook's filing involvement was all about what direction JG was taking; he has no professional involvement in the case itself. If MS has information to the otherwise, then, I'm just in the dark.

MOO

 

[FrostedGlass]

Did the podcaster get the pic of the bullet from the Defense or the Franks memo? The D did state they got 3 photos of it in their FM.

I don't think the State has ever publicly addressed the COC or lack of one for the bullet. That will be sure to come out at trial I have no doubt.

That's the entire problem with this case IMO. It's the defense floating half truths out to create a narrative and confusion which they did in spades with the Franks.

JMO

No. My post had nothing to do with the defense floating half truths or the Frank's memo.

From my post:
One of the podcasters published a picture of a fired cartridge with the locations of markings. I found the source but I won't post the pic because of copyright laws. This is a really good, easy to read course on the subject.

Introduction to Forensic Science and Criminology → Module 4 – Forensic Examination and Firearms Evidence - WILBER

wilber-learndev.com

 

[AugustWest]

What is Lead Pipe Hennessy? CW sure is flamboyant to say the least in her postings. I don't know why an appellate attorney who assistance is done and over with on this case is tweeting out details and keeping the 'public' updated? Strange for a professional attorney IMO.

"Lead Pipe" is David Hennessy's nickname.

 

[girlhasnoname]

No. My post had nothing to do with the defense floating half truths or the Frank's memo.

From my post:
One of the podcasters published a picture of a fired cartridge with the locations of markings. I found the source but I won't post the pic because of copyright laws. This is a really good, easy to read course on the subject.

Introduction to Forensic Science and Criminology → Module 4 – Forensic Examination and Firearms Evidence - WILBER

wilber-learndev.com

I was asking about Chain of Custody being in dispute.
From My Response:

I don't think the State has ever publicly addressed the COC or lack of one for the bullet. That will be sure to come out at trial I have no doubt

MOO

 

[girlhasnoname]

"Lead Pipe" is David Hennessy's nickname.

40 years ago maybe, IMO.

 

[susane7]

I am glad that MS commented on this area that has been confusing me for ages.

If you are a respected constitutional scholar or appeal attorney, the innocence or otherwise of the client is not your primary concern. Justice is your concern. Sometimes those can overlap as we see in well known false conviction cases. However in the present case, we haven't had the trial yet, and for all anyone knows, RA is guilty.

The reason i raise this, is we recently had a case of a relatively well known defence attorney who personally vouched for the innocence of her client, hugged him at the dismissal, did media claiming it was all a great injustice - then the body finally turns up in highly incriminating circumstances that torches her own reputation. Why do this?

It feels like every case I follow right now comes not with the mere claim that LE got it wrong but actual allegations of conspiracy and corruption by LE and the DA.

Murder Sheet posed the question, who is all this for exactly? And how is it helping RA?

MOO.

The attorneys shouldn't vouched for the innocence of the client before seeing the evidence against the client. In my opinion, the first thing a attorney should do is consult the evidence and then prepare the defense with the client.

Cw and Michael seem respected attorneys in their field. Michael seems to embrace the theory of the pic of Abby be fake and CW who did a good joob at the Supreme Court seems to believe into any conspiracy theory in the world. I think they should wait to see what happens at the trial instead of constantly twitting about the case and implicating RA's innocence and the guilt of others. Then after the trial as a habeas corpus attorney and appellate attorney makes more sense to them to insert into the case and they can use their expertise if needed.

Even more because the way this defense are behaving - delay trial, delay material hearings that they wanted, etc - makes me believe the case against RA is stronger than what we see in the PCA. But maybe I'm totally wrong.

 

[girlhasnoname]

I didn't listen to MS so I don't know what they are saying. I have seen Ausbrook's brief online reply to what MS has said about him.

Is "the area" where he opinioned that the picture was altered? How does MS even know what A's expertise is and why can't he have an opinion just like everyone else has?

Ausbrook's filing involvement was all about what direction JG was taking; he has no professional involvement in the case itself. If MS has information to the otherwise, then, I'm just in the dark.

MOO

The Murder Sheet interviewed M Ausbrook in February this year, just sayin.

A Conversation with Indiana University Maurer School of Law Federal Habeas Project Director Michael Ausbrook and Law Student Emma Kilbreath

 

[AugustWest]

I mean that ballistics in general is not reliable or reproducible.

There was a study called Ames 2, and what that study found that when they tried to reproduce the opinions of one examiner versus another examiner, they found that over 50% of the time, the second examiner came to a different conclusion on the same evidence than the first examiner," Gilleran explained.

"Reproducibility is a basic science 101 and a requirement for a valid scientific method. This particular method simply is not reproducible, and that's a big, big problem."

Ballistics evidence not reliable, Maryland Supreme Court says

The "DNA of a gun" used to convict the DC Snipers and hundreds of others doesn't meet scientific standards, judges rule.

www.wusa9.com

Here is a link to the Ames 2 study at the National Institute of Health website, should anyone be interested:

Planning, design and logistics of a decision analysis study: The FBI/Ames study involving forensic firearms examiners

This paper describes design and logistical aspects of a decision analysis study to assess the performance of qualified firearms examiners working in accredited laboratories in the United States in terms of accuracy (error rate), repeatability, and reproducibility ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

 

[Justice101]

That would be absolutely moronic and make zero sense as with audio and video footage now he has been caught it’s helped sink his ship.

If they were in communication then he likely took a phone not realizing there was more than one.

Imo

I don't think it was ever disclosed where Libby's phone was found. Was it?

I suspect she dropped it in the leaves where the girls were found or previously going up the muddy bank.

Regardless, I think BG couldn't locate it or he would have taken it with him and destroyed it.

 

[girlhasnoname]

The attorneys shouldn't vouched for the innocence of the client before seeing the evidence against the client. In my opinion, the first thing a attorney should do is consult the evidence and then prepare the defense with the client.

Cw and Michael seem respected attorneys in their field. Michael seems to embrace the theory of the pic of Abby be fake and CW who did a good joob at the Supreme Court seems to believe into any conspiracy theory in the world. I think they should wait to see what happens at the trial instead of constantly twitting about the case and implicating RA's innocence and the guilt of others. Then after the trial as a habeas corpus attorney and appellate attorney makes more sense to them to insert into the case and they can use their expertise if needed.

Even more because the way this defense are behaving - delay trial, delay material hearings that they wanted, etc - makes me believe the case against RA is stronger than what we see in the PCA. But maybe I'm totally wrong.

In today's age I see a lot of this SM blathering just for a little fame and notoriety. Most of these speaking on behalf of RA were never heard of except in their own little corner of the world before this case.

It's nice not to hear a peep out of the Prosecution. The trial should be held in the Courtroom not in the media.

JMO

 

[katydid23]

On one hand, the D in their Second Motion to Dismiss pp 9-10 refers to multiple Elvis Fields interviews, Rod Abrams interviews (plural but didn’t state “multiple”), multiple Johnny Messer interviews, and multiple Taylor Hornaday interviews. Well if these folks were all interviewed multiple times, which could mean 2 times but also could mean 4 or 5, it’s hard to complain that LE didn’t investigate these people.

On the other hand, in the State’s Response to the above mention, the P states that Brad Holder’s phone extraction data wasn’t lost as accused by the D, because it wasn’t ever extracted. (even though Holder himself seemed certain in interviews that he gave his phone to LE). IMO if the Odin angle was considered legitimate enough to interview multiple Odin-connected people multiple times why wouldn’t the head Odinist’s phone data have been examined? Apparently he had an alibi that he couldn’t have been physically present at LE’s believed tight timeline, but that doesn’t mean he’s clear from any conceivable electronic connection or couldn’t have been the mastermind organizer who hired the other minions to carry it out. JMO

They need a warrant to dump his phone. Maybe if he had an alibi, and if none of the other odinists were panning out, they didn't have any probable cause to get the warrant?

I gather from Click’s position that yes some or all of the Odinists were investigated, possibly even thoroughly investigated, a volume & degree of evidence was uncovered which some LE considered very serious while other LE considered minimal. In the end the latter view won out and the resources moved on elsewhere while the former group was in disbelief.

I think the former group was a very small contingent. IMO

 

[girlhasnoname]

Another side of the Ames II coin:

<snipped>

And the recent studies were intentionally challenging. In the 2022 Ames II study, 173 trained firearm examiners compared a total of 8,640 fired cartridge cases and bullets. The firearms and ammunition were carefully chosen for their “propensity to produce challenging and ambiguous test specimens.” Study ammunition, for example, had “steel cartridge cases and steel-jacketed bullets (steel, being harder than brass, is less likely to be marked).” With fewer microscopic markings, the comparison’s difficulty increases. Even faced with these stacked odds, the overall false positive error rate was less than 1 percent.

Firearm Forensics Has Proven Reliable in the Courtroom. And in the Lab

 

[girlhasnoname]

They need a warrant to dump his phone. Maybe if he had an alibi, and if none of the other odinists were panning out, they didn't have any probable cause to get the warrant?

I think the former group was a very small contingent. IMO

Yeah, it's that pesky little thing called a gag/protective order that prevents the State from claiming what was done in detail at this point. They're saving that for trial, not the media.

IMO