Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #186

[FrostedGlass]

@FrostedGlass

An interlocutory appeal would be filed directly with the appellate court (not sure if to criminal court of appeals or S.C. in Indiana). Defense would motion for, say, recusal, then Gull would have to make a final decision on it by order, then interlocutory appeal of the order. There must be an order by Gull, as the appellate court would deem the issue "not ripe" as attorneys call it. This means the issue hasn't yet become final and would require a court to make an advisory opinion on the matter, which courts won't entertain.

Here is more on the ripeness doctrine:

Ripeness Doctrine: Overview

www.law.cornell.edu

And here is how the process works in Oklahoma:

Interlocutory Appeals in Oklahoma: What, When and How - Oklahoma Bar Association

Oklahoma Bar Journal Interlocutory Appeals in Oklahoma: What, When and How By Chase McBride “An interlocutory order is an order which is not ‘final,’ does not culminate in a judgment [and] leaves the parties before the tribunal to try the issues on the merits...”1 An interlocutory appeal is an...

www.okbar.org

I'll try to find some time to see about the process in Indiana for you, as I'm pretty sure it is your home state. Hope this helps!

Thank you. I am a born and raised Indiana resident.

Nick McLeland has another murder case out of Flora, IN. He asked for an IA in the trial court and was it granted.
Here's the trial court record: 08C01-2106-MR-000001

03/04/2024	Motion Filed 2nd Motion to Certify Record for Interlocutory Appeal.pdf Filed By: State of Indiana
03/06/2024	Order Issued Order from February 22, 2024 hearing entered, per form. Judicial Officer: Hawkins, Troy M. Noticed: McLeland, Nicholas Charles Noticed: James, Lori S
03/07/2024	Order Issued Court grants State's 2nd Motion for Interlocutory Appeal. Further, all proceedings are stayed until the Court of Appeals makes a ruling on the appeal or until further Order of the Court. Defendant will continue to be held on the bond previously set by the Court until further notice, per form. Judicial Officer: Diener, Benjamin A. Noticed: McLeland, Nicholas Charles Noticed: James, Lori S

Then came the answer from the Court of Appeals # 24A-CR-00627

03/13/2024

Motion for Interlocutory Appeal Certificate of Service- Electronically Served 03/13/24 Attorney: Meilaender, Ellen Hope Party: State of Indiana

04/12/2024

Order Granting Motion for Interlocutory Appeal Having reviewed the matter, the Court finds and orders as follows: 1. Appellant's Verified Motion to Accept Jurisdiction over Discretionary Interlocutory Appeal is granted. 2. Appellant is ordered to comply with Appellate Rule 14(B)(3). 3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to send this order to the parties, the trial court, and the Carroll Circuit and Superior Courts Clerk. 4. The Carroll Circuit and Superior Courts Clerk is directed to file this order under Cause Number 08C01-2106-MR-1, and, pursuant to Indiana Trial Rule 77(D), the Clerk shall place the contents of this order in the Record of Judgments and Orders. Riley, Vaidik, JJ., Robb, Sr.J., concur. Judicial Officer: Altice, Robert R. Party: State of Indiana Serve: Brooks-Brown, Shianne Serve: Rokita, Theodore Edward Serve: Meilaender, Ellen Hope Serve: Trial Clerk 08 - Carroll Serve: Diener, Benjamin Asher Serve: James, Lori S File Stamp: 04/12/2024

 

[Jade]

I’m not sure how much you’ve researched the information in the franks motion but it is all publicly available.

Of course I've read the Frank's Motion why would I comment otherwise?

Obviously I don't consider it a reliable source.

People have based doctoral thesis on such themes so I can wait to trial to hear the defence of the notion, imo.

Imo this primarily a lone pervert crime.

It screams pervert with the girls, their ages, clothing play and so on.

The defense wants everyone to look away from the lone pervert with a vast conspiracy theory.

All imo

 

[sunshineray]

I'm not sure exactly how to answer this, but I do think the response served a purpose. First, the defense needed to make a record of their perceived grievances and did so by motion since they feel Gull isn't adequately or accurately keeping the record. If you don't raise certain issues during the trial phase, then the issues can be considered to be "waived." They won't be considered on appeal. Thus the need for an accurate record. It's no big secret and won't come as a shock that a larger-than-usual number of issues on appeal are coming should RA be convicted. I'm not even sure that an interlocutory appeal isn't on the way.

Second, as to Gull being a witness, this certainly could become an issue...the discrepancies in her statements and LE's statements seem pretty clear. This makes it a question of whether LE acted in bad faith. To determine whether LE is and has acted in bad faith is a fact question. This would clearly be a conflict; you can't make a finding of fact on your own credibility.

This case is wild.

Thank you, just a couple of follow-ups if you don't mind. In looking up interlocutory appeals I got this, which I hope is the basics. What would they be in this case, what issues. #2 is confusing " seperate from the merits if the action?

And have you ever seen such insignificant things like "mean looks" or the "ding ding" thing included in appellate case?

Interlocutory appeals are extremely rare, and a three-part test determines whether the collateral order exception to res judicata makes such an appeal possible:

1. The order must have conclusively determined the disputed question;
2. The order must “resolve an issue completely separate from the merits of the action”;
3. The order must be “effectively unreviewable on appeal from a final judgment.”

 

[AugustWest]

Thank you. I am a born and raised Indiana resident.

Nick McLeland has another murder case out of Flora, IN. He asked for an IA in the trial court and was it granted.
Here's the trial court record: 08C01-2106-MR-000001

03/04/2024	Motion Filed 2nd Motion to Certify Record for Interlocutory Appeal.pdf Filed By: State of Indiana
03/06/2024	Order Issued Order from February 22, 2024 hearing entered, per form. Judicial Officer: Hawkins, Troy M. Noticed: McLeland, Nicholas Charles Noticed: James, Lori S
03/07/2024	Order Issued Court grants State's 2nd Motion for Interlocutory Appeal. Further, all proceedings are stayed until the Court of Appeals makes a ruling on the appeal or until further Order of the Court. Defendant will continue to be held on the bond previously set by the Court until further notice, per form. Judicial Officer: Diener, Benjamin A. Noticed: McLeland, Nicholas Charles Noticed: James, Lori S

Then came the answer from the Court of Appeals # 24A-CR-00627

03/13/2024

Motion for Interlocutory Appeal Certificate of Service- Electronically Served 03/13/24 Attorney: Meilaender, Ellen Hope Party: State of Indiana

04/12/2024

Order Granting Motion for Interlocutory Appeal Having reviewed the matter, the Court finds and orders as follows: 1. Appellant's Verified Motion to Accept Jurisdiction over Discretionary Interlocutory Appeal is granted. 2. Appellant is ordered to comply with Appellate Rule 14(B)(3). 3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to send this order to the parties, the trial court, and the Carroll Circuit and Superior Courts Clerk. 4. The Carroll Circuit and Superior Courts Clerk is directed to file this order under Cause Number 08C01-2106-MR-1, and, pursuant to Indiana Trial Rule 77(D), the Clerk shall place the contents of this order in the Record of Judgments and Orders. Riley, Vaidik, JJ., Robb, Sr.J., concur. Judicial Officer: Altice, Robert R. Party: State of Indiana Serve: Brooks-Brown, Shianne Serve: Rokita, Theodore Edward Serve: Meilaender, Ellen Hope Serve: Trial Clerk 08 - Carroll Serve: Diener, Benjamin Asher Serve: James, Lori S File Stamp: 04/12/2024

I've just taken a cursory glance at Indiana procedure, and there is a difference in procedure for discretionary appeals and interlocutory appeals of right.

The rules for interlocutory appeals are here at Rule 14:

Indiana Rules of Appellate Procedure

See also:

https://www.in.gov/courts/iocs/files/pubs-trial-court-interlocutory-appeals.pdf

It seems like the trial court must certify the appeal, then the party may file with the appropriate appellate court. Much different procedure than OK.

 

[sunshineray]

If you haven’t even researched any of the claims in the FM, how could you have an opinion on how realistic it is? That doesn’t make any sense.

We have the FBI BAU, Purdue & Harvard professor and the Click/FBI terrorism crew all saying this is an option.

The only people saying that the odinists isn’t an option are the LE that destroyed all of the evidence of the experts who said it is an option.

I’m in a twilight zone.

As I've posted before...

"In a statement obtained by the Muder Sheet podcast, Todd Click, a former assistant chief of police from Rushville, IN, said, “No one in law enforcement believes Abby and Libby were killed in a ritual sacrifice. That is the defense twisting facts for sensationalism.”

Attorneys for Richard Allen want client moved, lay out alternative theory of ‘ritualistic’ murder

DELPHI, Ind. – A ritualistic killing involving cultists. A conspiracy among prison guards. Investigators fixated on a single suspect. Those are among the stunning allegations made in court document…

fox59.com

 

[FrostedGlass]

I've just taken a cursory glance at Indiana procedure, and there is a difference in procedure for discretionary appeals and interlocutory appeals of right.

The rules for interlocutory appeals are here at Rule 14:

Indiana Rules of Appellate Procedure

See also:

https://www.in.gov/courts/iocs/files/pubs-trial-court-interlocutory-appeals.pdf

It seems like the trial court must certify the appeal, then the party may file with the appropriate appellate court. Much different procedure than OK.

Thank you again. That was helpful. I've followed 4 cases involving either IAs and/or trying to get the judge to recuse; they left me confused. lol... Out of my realm of expertise.

 

[snooptroop88]

Um, "mob"??

Yes, well, I'm not hanging my hopes on a defense team where the only way they feel they can win for Ricky is if they get the judge as a party to the defense.

They're probably right. They'll keep forcing out judges until they finally get that one special adjudicator who will happily testify for RA. That's about what it's going to take, thanks to (number disputed) decades of combined experience. The only torch and pitchfork in this scenario have been figuratively wielded by the D against their own case and client.

It takes a certain type of "attorney" to employ the tactics this D are using now. This spectacle would not have occurred with Lebrato, jmo.

 

[AugustWest]

Thank you, just a couple of follow-ups if you don't mind. In looking up interlocutory appeals I got this, which I hope is the basics. What would they be in this case, what issues. #2 is confusing " seperate from the merits if the action?

And have you ever seen such insignificant things like "mean looks" or the "ding ding" thing included in appellate case?

Interlocutory appeals are extremely rare, and a three-part test determines whether the collateral order exception to res judicata makes such an appeal possible:

1. The order must have conclusively determined the disputed question;
2. The order must “resolve an issue completely separate from the merits of the action”;
3. The order must be “effectively unreviewable on appeal from a final judgment.”

I'm not sure of the source of your basics of interlocutory appeals, but they look general enough. Merits of the action would mean issues regarding the murders themselves. Separate would be ancillary issues like decisions on compelling discovery, habeus actions (compelling attendance), jurisdiction and venue issues ... generally just procedural error.

"Insignificant" is your adjective. I won't make a determination on that issue in the instant case because I haven't seen the way Judge Gull is acting towards the parties. Being playful with one side and not with another could rise to the level of an appearance of impropriety; disparate treatment is obviously not something you want from a judge, and I have seen times where a judge is punished for such.

Judges are normally lawyers also, so they must adhere to the Model Rules of Professional Conduct. They also must adhere to the Rules of Judicial Conduct. Here is a link to those rules, specific to Indiana:

Indiana Code of Judicial Conduct

 

[grannygates]

Of course I've read the Frank's Motion why would I comment otherwise?

Obviously I don't consider it a reliable source.

People have based doctoral thesis on such themes so I can wait to trial to hear the defence of the notion, imo.

Imo this primarily a lone pervert crime.

It screams pervert with the girls, their ages, clothing play and so on.

The defense wants everyone to look away from the lone pervert with a vast conspiracy theory.

All imo

My question was whether you had independently researched the information in the franks motion for yourself.

 

[AugustWest]

Thank you again. That was helpful. I've followed 4 cases involving either IAs and/or trying to get the judge to recuse; they left me confused. lol... Out of my realm of expertise.

This is why there are attorneys who only deal with appellate issues. They normally are way above the pay grade of your typical lawyer. There is so much overlapping procedure that the issues can get hard to follow.

 

[photographer4]

If they put the same fantasy out in a Franks Motion as B and R the same issues would remain and by extension, the same uproar.
It’s not who is hawking this nonsense, it’s the fact that it’s nonsense.
The accused doesn’t “deserve” anything except a serious professional defense team.
I disagree that this defense team is vigorously defending RA’s rights. Explain how whining about the judge not having a pet name for you benefits RA in any way?
Why can’t the defense let this judge grudge go? The SCOIN said JG was not biased and everyone should play on. Why can’t that be done?
A decent defense team would have determined whether RA was guilty or innocent. They would have either negotiated the best deal they could for him or prepared tirelessly for the trial to try and prove his innocence. Not this. This has nothing to do with RA at all.

Opinion

Pet names by the judge to the Prosecution denotes familiarity and lack’s impartiality and professionalism. It wasn’t her most appropriate remark & I would have the same issue if she said it to the the D. It is in RA’s best interest for them to keep pointing out concerns over bias. Enough of them may stack up and amount to a real legal issue for future proceedings such as trial or appeals.

Why they can’t let it go: wouldn’t be doing their job if they did. Just because some people think he should be begging for a deal doesn’t mean RA has to do so. They could have suggested this to him and if he declined they have no option but to continue to try to defend him and protect his legal rights.

Just because we think he should plead guilty to this or a lesser crime doesn’t mean it’s in his legal best interest to do so. That’s what the lawyers jobs are. To help make sure his decisions about the case align with his best interests - insofar as RA will allow them to.

 

[photographer4]

RSBM This is really weird to me too, and the only explanation that makes sense to me is that they believe KAK was involved indirectly, but didn’t participate in the actual murders.

If this is the case, and their client RA was directly involved, it seems like bringing KAK into it doesn’t really help the defense and might end up hurting them.

Has the prosecution opted to call KaK as a witness? Am weeks behind so thanks in advance!

 

[AugustWest]

Pet names by the judge to the Prosecution denotes familiarity and lack’s impartiality and professionalism. It wasn’t her most appropriate remark & I would have the same issue if she said it to the the D. It is in RA’s best interest for them to keep pointing out concerns over bias. Enough of them may stack up and amount to a real legal issue for future proceedings such as trial or appeals.

Why they can’t let it go: wouldn’t be doing their job if they did. Just because some people think he should be begging for a deal doesn’t mean RA has to do so. They could have suggested this to him and if he declined they have no option but to continue to try to defend him and protect his legal rights.

Just because we think he should plead guilty to this or a lesser crime doesn’t mean it’s in his legal best interest to do so. That’s what the lawyers jobs are. To help make sure his decisions about the case align with his best interests - insofar as RA will allow them to.

@photographer4

I just wanted to offer my take on the plea issue. IMO, there is absolutely no way a plea deal is happening here. Why? Because it could constitute a waiver of his right to appeal certain issues.

 

[Spartygirl]

Has the prosecution opted to call KaK as a witness? Am weeks behind so thanks in advance!

We don't know if the Prosecution is planning on calling KAK as they have followed the GAG order !!
Seems like you've been up to date so far, so you are probably not too far behind the rest of us. LOL JMO

 

[StarryStarryNight]

Pet names by the judge to the Prosecution denotes familiarity and lack’s impartiality and professionalism. It wasn’t her most appropriate remark & I would have the same issue if she said it to the the D. It is in RA’s best interest for them to keep pointing out concerns over bias. Enough of them may stack up and amount to a real legal issue for future proceedings such as trial or appeals.

Why they can’t let it go: wouldn’t be doing their job if they did. Just because some people think he should be begging for a deal doesn’t mean RA has to do so. They could have suggested this to him and if he declined they have no option but to continue to try to defend him and protect his legal rights.

Just because we think he should plead guilty to this or a lesser crime doesn’t mean it’s in his legal best interest to do so. That’s what the lawyers jobs are. To help make sure his decisions about the case align with his best interests - insofar as RA will allow them to.

There is nothing this defense team has done that has benefited RA in any way that I can see.
This is not a case about how much distain they have for JG.
It is about the murders of two young girls and determining if RA is the man who did it. Explain how the judge’s facial expressions enter into that? It doesn’t. It is pathetic and silly and frankly desperate. Everyone’s answer is “it shows the judge’s bias”. But the SCOIN has already determined she is not! There Is always much talk about “well, the SCOIN ruled the defense could stay”. They did! Why is that OK for the defense, but not for the judge!
Let’s have a trial and they can toilet paper the judge’s house every night for the next year, but let’s have a trial.

 

[TTF14]

Then why did defense make up a reason in the FM?

Is the word "hate" in the FM?

 

[photographer4]

@photographer4

I just wanted to offer my take on the plea issue. IMO, there is absolutely no way a plea deal is happening here. Why? Because it could constitute a waiver of his right to appeal certain issues.

Thank you for your reply - and for ignoring my egregious grammatical errors!! This is what I get for rushing!

 

[photographer4]

We don't know if the Prosecution is planning on calling KAK as they have followed the GAG order !!
Seems like you've been up to date so far, so you are probably not too far behind the rest of us. LOL JMO

Thanks. I catch snippets here when I can, or I read other sources... and then pop in here to try to follow along, but you know how it goes! One minute you're all caught up, then something happens and you're days behind!

 

[susiQ]

Is the word "hate" in the FM?

All I could find in the FM was a picture of one of the patches worn by Sgt Robinson and Jones which reads, “I Hate People.” But of course, they are just really nice guys that wouldn’t mistreat RA. (Insert sarcasm font) It also mentions an undercover state trooper familiar with “hate” groups.
FM pg. 119-121

FINAL DRAFT - 9.17 at 6.30 pm - Delphi Franks brief.pdf | PDF Host

PDF Host read free online - FINAL DRAFT - 9.17 at 6.30 pm - Delphi Franks brief.pdf - ANDREW J. BALDWIN

pdfhost.io

 

[TTF14]

@photographer4

I just wanted to offer my take on the plea issue. IMO, there is absolutely no way a plea deal is happening here. Why? Because it could constitute a waiver of his right to appeal certain issues.

Agree. Anyone who has been seriously following this case and all of the filings would know this.