My guess is that his original notes are the primary record and that is what will be exhibited - but no expert on police procedure! Maybe it's the digital record that will be relied upon.
MOO
Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #186
- Thread starter Tricia
- Start date
My guess is that his original notes are the primary record and that is what will be exhibited - but no expert on police procedure! Maybe it's the digital record that will be relied upon.
MOO
Yes! You can definitely tell it's ra in that bg picture. 100%!!!!!!!
Unlikely RA was snookered in some way by being led into revealing information by clueless DD.
RA gave DD what was described as a “tip narrative”.
Narrative:
a story or a description of events
narrative
Unlike a questioning which would have more protocol than taking a “narrative” in a public setting:
Questioning:
the situation in which the police ask someone questions about a crime
questioning
imo
FrostedGlass
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 25, 2017
- Messages
- 5,916
- Reaction score
- 28,877
I'm no expert, either.
So you think he has a tip narrative, original notes and a recording he can't find?
It seems unlikely, IMO, they would use that weak tip narrative if they had good notes.
I also think if he had good info, the tip would have come up quickly.
Added:
Here's a link to the search warrant being shown as Exhibit 1.
Along with it is the affidavit which includes the tip narrative.
DocumentCloud
www.documentcloud.org
Last edited:
TTF14
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2014
- Messages
- 14,378
- Reaction score
- 65,421
TTF14
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2014
- Messages
- 14,378
- Reaction score
- 65,421
No idea! I had assumed he took notes in person, either on paper or digital, then ? someone ? entered into a system later.
IMO
Well he admits he went out to platform one and Betsy B. can place him on platform one and then she walks away and passes Abby and Libby.
So I don’t care if she can’t remember what he wore as he admits himself he was dressed similarly as BG and not forgetting his description fits BG.
Moo
Megnut
A piece of peace is peace enough.
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2018
- Messages
- 11,628
- Reaction score
- 202,898
The gag order is not without impact IMO.
The Defense is availing themselves of leaks and motions IMO to get information into the public arena.
The State responds but IMO the State intends to try this case in a courtroom and not in the court of public opinion.
Witnesses are staying silent too. We don't know what misrepresentations are being made -- or what corrections would be offered, if witnesses could speak freely, now prior to trial. No one who was there at the MHB incidentally that day knew there was going to be a crime. They likely weren't studying anyone as if there might be a test later. Instead they formed impressions. Subjective, like a partial snapshot, but never a photograph. Except for Libby, her own best witness because she video-documented what she saw. If RA/BG had gone on to murder someone else later that day, what a tip Libby would have been able to provide. Perhaps she found him as creepy, walking head down as if on a mission, as the juveniles reported, so she filmed him, unaware that she/they were his target. It would seem that, until he said GDTH and/or brandished a firearm or the outline of one, Libby/Abby didn't know that she/they was/were in danger, instantly grave danger.
Libby and Abby had IMO passed by RA on the path, just before the bridge. Maybe they had to wait for him to exit from the platform. Maybe he was on a bench. Maybe he didn't say hi. Maybe he did. Maybe he used their names. Maybe he did not. Maybe he warned them about the bridge, worded oddly. Maybe he did not.
But the girls also passed BB. She was the only person who could still save them. Why didn't they scream? Fight, flight, freez, fawn... but IMO it was one step beyond that. I think, by virtue of their positions on the bridge, RA closed the last gap (between GDTH/gun and Abby) in one decisive move, taking control of Abby, putting Abby's survival in Libby's hands. You scream, I'll kill her.
He wouldn't have even needed to say it for the message to be clear.
IMO THAT'S how he maintained control of the situation. The girls HAD TO BE terrified of what he'd do if they didn't comply. Quietly.
My point here remains. Libby captured her abductor on film. That's a pretty solid witness.
BB saw RA/BG at a distance. She only has a mental image. And she has not had the opportunity to explain herself, respond to representations, especially in Frank's motions, to set her record straight if need be.
At trial, it will matter less HOW she remembered him than THAT she remembered him because he himself places himself there and we know how he looks. It's the timing that will be critical.
Corroborating evidence.
JMO
The Defense is availing themselves of leaks and motions IMO to get information into the public arena.
The State responds but IMO the State intends to try this case in a courtroom and not in the court of public opinion.
Witnesses are staying silent too. We don't know what misrepresentations are being made -- or what corrections would be offered, if witnesses could speak freely, now prior to trial. No one who was there at the MHB incidentally that day knew there was going to be a crime. They likely weren't studying anyone as if there might be a test later. Instead they formed impressions. Subjective, like a partial snapshot, but never a photograph. Except for Libby, her own best witness because she video-documented what she saw. If RA/BG had gone on to murder someone else later that day, what a tip Libby would have been able to provide. Perhaps she found him as creepy, walking head down as if on a mission, as the juveniles reported, so she filmed him, unaware that she/they were his target. It would seem that, until he said GDTH and/or brandished a firearm or the outline of one, Libby/Abby didn't know that she/they was/were in danger, instantly grave danger.
Libby and Abby had IMO passed by RA on the path, just before the bridge. Maybe they had to wait for him to exit from the platform. Maybe he was on a bench. Maybe he didn't say hi. Maybe he did. Maybe he used their names. Maybe he did not. Maybe he warned them about the bridge, worded oddly. Maybe he did not.
But the girls also passed BB. She was the only person who could still save them. Why didn't they scream? Fight, flight, freez, fawn... but IMO it was one step beyond that. I think, by virtue of their positions on the bridge, RA closed the last gap (between GDTH/gun and Abby) in one decisive move, taking control of Abby, putting Abby's survival in Libby's hands. You scream, I'll kill her.
He wouldn't have even needed to say it for the message to be clear.
IMO THAT'S how he maintained control of the situation. The girls HAD TO BE terrified of what he'd do if they didn't comply. Quietly.
My point here remains. Libby captured her abductor on film. That's a pretty solid witness.
BB saw RA/BG at a distance. She only has a mental image. And she has not had the opportunity to explain herself, respond to representations, especially in Frank's motions, to set her record straight if need be.
At trial, it will matter less HOW she remembered him than THAT she remembered him because he himself places himself there and we know how he looks. It's the timing that will be critical.
Corroborating evidence.
JMO
I wonder if Betsy B wonders what if she had decided to cross the bridge that day.
Was he intent on any victim that day and he just got a opportunity when the girls crossed or was he looking specifically for underage girls.
Moo
Was he intent on any victim that day and he just got a opportunity when the girls crossed or was he looking specifically for underage girls.
Moo
BBM for reference
Snookered:
to cause to believe what is untrue
Thesaurus results for SNOOKERED
Synonyms for SNOOKERED: deceived, tricked, fooled, misled, hoodwinked, suckered, bamboozled, duped; Antonyms of SNOOKERED: undeceived, exposed, revealed, uncovered, unmasked, told, debunked, showed up
www.merriam-webster.com
The suggestion of the post is that DD interfered with Richard Allen’s tip narrative by asking leading questions then directing the narrative where poor ole Rick gets it all wrong because of DD = snookering.
imo
Last edited:
Willow Knight
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 20, 2013
- Messages
- 1,252
- Reaction score
- 6,667
RA was probably wearing his trusty CVS manager coat looking like a dependable trusted good ole' boy.
JMO
IMO this was a huge factor. When Richard Allen was/is seen in public I think it would be mostly at his job. Uniforms give an impression to many people. The image from the cell phone mainly describes the body build, shape, walk, clothing, what BG looked like on that day. As far as the facial feature it is blurry, but would eliminate long blond hair, etc.
LE told the public to focus on his walk style, the clothing, something towards that. I have never saw where LE suggested to look at the face. Opinion only. Those type of tips could give LE a possible person to investigate. To vet people and classify them as a possible POI, or not.
LE has stated BG is possibly hiding in plain sight. To me, that implies BG is being seen regularly, but the connection is not being made. Hiding in plain sight. LE did not go about making every person that was consistent with the image a suspect. Being consistent with the image was not enough alone to make an arrest. It was simply a piece of the puzzle. I believe other evidence had to be discovered in addition to being consistent with the image.
All my opinion.
Emma Peel
an unexpected turn of events
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2008
- Messages
- 11,249
- Reaction score
- 9,493
New Defense filing:
ACCUSED’S RESPONSE TO THIS COURT’S MAY 31, 2024 “ORDER OR
JUDGEMENT OF THE COURT” AND NOTICE OF CONFLICT
Defense Response to Judge Gull’s Order & Notice of Conflict
ACCUSED’S RESPONSE TO THIS COURT’S MAY 31, 2024 “ORDER OR
JUDGEMENT OF THE COURT” AND NOTICE OF CONFLICT
Defense Response to Judge Gull’s Order & Notice of Conflict
Megnut
A piece of peace is peace enough.
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2018
- Messages
- 11,628
- Reaction score
- 202,898
Impressions are so subjective.
We don't know about this case, but we know about suspects attending funerals, arsonists becoming spectators....
Subconscious bias is unchecked because it's on the level awareness. If RA was furtive, on the periphery, reticent, GLOWERING, he might have been identified sooner, tipped in. IMO, as a rule, he presented as friendly, helpful... both to DD and to Libby's family even, when they picked up their family photos. That takes chutzpah. But make no mistake, it's CAMOUFLAGE. Extremely effective camouflage because it permeates into the subconscious where it finds a match with preexisting bias.
The formula goes something like this IMO (and it's occurring subliminally, below active concious thought), RA looks like BG, but RA doesn't act like BG (subconsious belief about how a murderer would act) and therefore (says the mind) he's not a match. Sort of like when a prosoective date is friend-zoned. RA managed to get himself compartmentalized as a good guy on the "we" (community) side of looking for BG, not being BG.
JMO
We don't know about this case, but we know about suspects attending funerals, arsonists becoming spectators....
Subconscious bias is unchecked because it's on the level awareness. If RA was furtive, on the periphery, reticent, GLOWERING, he might have been identified sooner, tipped in. IMO, as a rule, he presented as friendly, helpful... both to DD and to Libby's family even, when they picked up their family photos. That takes chutzpah. But make no mistake, it's CAMOUFLAGE. Extremely effective camouflage because it permeates into the subconscious where it finds a match with preexisting bias.
The formula goes something like this IMO (and it's occurring subliminally, below active concious thought), RA looks like BG, but RA doesn't act like BG (subconsious belief about how a murderer would act) and therefore (says the mind) he's not a match. Sort of like when a prosoective date is friend-zoned. RA managed to get himself compartmentalized as a good guy on the "we" (community) side of looking for BG, not being BG.
JMO
Justice101
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2013
- Messages
- 2,363
- Reaction score
- 15,360
Here's what kills me.
RA was the ONLY ADULT MALE found to be on the trails that day and time and he even told them that.
Yeh, I know hindsight is 20/20..... but Geez, this is Police Work 101 and someone really messed up losing or misfiling the self reported tip. Yeh, I know DD is not a true LE officer but if he was tasked with helping out, he should have known the basic skills and how to file everything.
Anyway, rant is over.
StarryStarryNight
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2017
- Messages
- 3,256
- Reaction score
- 39,401
This is cr#p.
Why do they keep writing these ridiculous things.
When is the defense team actually going to file anything that involves RA’s guilt or innocence?
There is absolutely nothing they have filed pertinent to that. Zero.
If they really had evidence indicating RA’s innocence don’t you think they would have put it in one of their made-for-public-consumption motions, especially since they are intent on trying this case in public?
Trying to have the Judge removed doesn’t make RA innocent.
Trying to have the search warrant and PCA thrown out doesn’t make RA innocent.
Trying to have evidence suppressed doesn’t make RA innocent.
Trying to have two out of three dozen confessions suppressed doesn’t make RA innocent.
We could go on and on and on.
RA’s guilt or innocence will, if the defense will ever shut up and let it happen, be addressed and decided by a trial which these borderline attys are trying to avoid at all costs because they cannot defend RA in a fair trial because RA is guilty!
Megnut
A piece of peace is peace enough.
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2018
- Messages
- 11,628
- Reaction score
- 202,898
I don't even know where to start with this latest motion.
The judge was making faces at us....
There can't be an end date to trial length because someone might get a flat tire....
The judge set the trial at three weeks. The defense had every opportunity THEN to say they needed more time. And justify why.
Their arguments are hypothetical beyond reason. If the prosecution uses up 8 days, they only get 5. If the State goes long, they won't get to defend RA. That didn't happen. The judge didn't, hasn't, wouldn't allow the state to use up all the days!! But regardless, the defense is IMO misrepresenting the situation. Judges DO schedule trials, based on input from both sides. No objection, she books the courtroom.
It wasn't until the 11th hour that defense suddenly cries fouls, demands more time than the junket can afford.... never mind that she granted them the additional time, just had to relocate it on the calendar. False comparison. Had they gone to trial, had the defense actually run out of time because of legitimate overages, the judge may have had to shuffle cases, put a pause on this case, resuming it. The defense can't KNOW that the judge would have truncated their defense!!! They're assuming that to make their (weak) point
As soon as they asked for more time, she granted it. Even though it was unfair to the State and caused an unfortunate delay to the trial....
To the other issue -- why were they planning to transport a felon to court anyway? Why couldn't he testify remotely, for everyone safety? Interesting that the Defense glosses over the fact that their supposed witness refused transport, presumably refusing to testify.
As to moving him, access to family and to his lawyers, is less critical than preserving his life while in protective custody. RA appears to need a great deal of babysitting, namely 24 hour monitoring and supervision, something only a well staffed prison (both hired staff and originally vetted prisoners) could provide.
I fear that the moment RA has an opportunity and a gap in supervision, he will be at serious risk of self-harm, including suicide. The defense continues to claim that RA is so emotionally compromised he's making false confessions. Are they in any position to judge how emotionally stable he is? How can they be certain he'd remain safe FROM HIMSELF in a less guarded facility?????
What an absolute travesty -- for the law, for RA himself, and for anyone who still loves him and /or simply values him as a human being, regardless of what he's alleged to have done -- if he were to commit suicide because supervision lagged.
The defense aren't doctors. Maybe RA isn't acting out or devolving because of conditions where he's at but because his mental health AND a residual ounce of conscience is eating away at him. Perhaps he doesn't need freedom from protective custody as much as freedom to unburden himself. The truth shall set you free, even in protective custody.
IMO the Defense is not defending him well if he seeks to confess. They should instead, if that's the case, represent as best they can, help present him in the most favorable way...
It has to be noted, that for all their claims of his supposed emotional collapse -- due to conditions, including Odinite guards -- they have not called for a mental health evaluation. Seems like Stsp 1, if they truly believe what they are saying. I don't Halen to think they do, believe what they are saying.
And finally, ding dong.
That was a sitcom exchange. A Who's On First comedy routine. And the defense still doesn't see how dumb it was. Let me re-write it, for clarity:
D: can we have a short recess?
J: why?
D: need a potty break
Here, the judge had to exercise her role as keeper of the time. It was butting up against the lunch hour. Mentally she's calculating for the jury whether that's the best time to break and to break for how long.
J: how long will you need? (Meaning, for this next portion, who do you still have for witnesses and NOT do you need enough time to go #1 or #2? Sheesh!)
D: well, it'll just be quick because (#1)
J: no, ding dong, (I'm not asking about your bowel/bladder habits but it's nice you just shared that with everyone), I'm just trying to determine whether I call for lunch now or wait until after your return from the brief recess and finish with this witness...
IMO the attorney must have REALLY had to go, so much so, it was all he could think of! So he jumped the gun thinking she was thinking of it too.
And how this differs from her EASY exchange with the State's request at a different time for a quick recess:
1. No one was doing a silent potty dance
And 2. The State probably wasn't asking for their recess right up against a logical break point like lunch.
Sorry for being wordy but I'm trying to distill 21 pages of over-wordiness.
JMO
The judge was making faces at us....
There can't be an end date to trial length because someone might get a flat tire....
The judge set the trial at three weeks. The defense had every opportunity THEN to say they needed more time. And justify why.
Their arguments are hypothetical beyond reason. If the prosecution uses up 8 days, they only get 5. If the State goes long, they won't get to defend RA. That didn't happen. The judge didn't, hasn't, wouldn't allow the state to use up all the days!! But regardless, the defense is IMO misrepresenting the situation. Judges DO schedule trials, based on input from both sides. No objection, she books the courtroom.
It wasn't until the 11th hour that defense suddenly cries fouls, demands more time than the junket can afford.... never mind that she granted them the additional time, just had to relocate it on the calendar. False comparison. Had they gone to trial, had the defense actually run out of time because of legitimate overages, the judge may have had to shuffle cases, put a pause on this case, resuming it. The defense can't KNOW that the judge would have truncated their defense!!! They're assuming that to make their (weak) point
As soon as they asked for more time, she granted it. Even though it was unfair to the State and caused an unfortunate delay to the trial....
To the other issue -- why were they planning to transport a felon to court anyway? Why couldn't he testify remotely, for everyone safety? Interesting that the Defense glosses over the fact that their supposed witness refused transport, presumably refusing to testify.
As to moving him, access to family and to his lawyers, is less critical than preserving his life while in protective custody. RA appears to need a great deal of babysitting, namely 24 hour monitoring and supervision, something only a well staffed prison (both hired staff and originally vetted prisoners) could provide.
I fear that the moment RA has an opportunity and a gap in supervision, he will be at serious risk of self-harm, including suicide. The defense continues to claim that RA is so emotionally compromised he's making false confessions. Are they in any position to judge how emotionally stable he is? How can they be certain he'd remain safe FROM HIMSELF in a less guarded facility?????
What an absolute travesty -- for the law, for RA himself, and for anyone who still loves him and /or simply values him as a human being, regardless of what he's alleged to have done -- if he were to commit suicide because supervision lagged.
The defense aren't doctors. Maybe RA isn't acting out or devolving because of conditions where he's at but because his mental health AND a residual ounce of conscience is eating away at him. Perhaps he doesn't need freedom from protective custody as much as freedom to unburden himself. The truth shall set you free, even in protective custody.
IMO the Defense is not defending him well if he seeks to confess. They should instead, if that's the case, represent as best they can, help present him in the most favorable way...
It has to be noted, that for all their claims of his supposed emotional collapse -- due to conditions, including Odinite guards -- they have not called for a mental health evaluation. Seems like Stsp 1, if they truly believe what they are saying. I don't Halen to think they do, believe what they are saying.
And finally, ding dong.
That was a sitcom exchange. A Who's On First comedy routine. And the defense still doesn't see how dumb it was. Let me re-write it, for clarity:
D: can we have a short recess?
J: why?
D: need a potty break
Here, the judge had to exercise her role as keeper of the time. It was butting up against the lunch hour. Mentally she's calculating for the jury whether that's the best time to break and to break for how long.
J: how long will you need? (Meaning, for this next portion, who do you still have for witnesses and NOT do you need enough time to go #1 or #2? Sheesh!)
D: well, it'll just be quick because (#1)
J: no, ding dong, (I'm not asking about your bowel/bladder habits but it's nice you just shared that with everyone), I'm just trying to determine whether I call for lunch now or wait until after your return from the brief recess and finish with this witness...
IMO the attorney must have REALLY had to go, so much so, it was all he could think of! So he jumped the gun thinking she was thinking of it too.
And how this differs from her EASY exchange with the State's request at a different time for a quick recess:
1. No one was doing a silent potty dance
And 2. The State probably wasn't asking for their recess right up against a logical break point like lunch.
Sorry for being wordy but I'm trying to distill 21 pages of over-wordiness.
JMO
Last edited:
Megnut
A piece of peace is peace enough.
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2018
- Messages
- 11,628
- Reaction score
- 202,898
Ooooooop, I forgot to mention the EX PARTE filings! (And now they want the State sanctioned for reading their improperly filed motions!)
As I understand it, the Court set up an official channel for EX PARTE filings.
The defense has used the Dropbox instead, relying on two things 1. The Court staff to file it as EX PARTE and 2. Nobody reading it who they want ex-partied. Is that the Court staff's job? The defense can't be this clueless!!! If it's filed under drop box, staff should consider it filed, period. If the Defense wants their ex parte motion filed EX PARTE, they should use the system set up to receive them that way, and not rely on staff to read their banner!
It is not their first day practicing law.
So what is their end game here? What a waste of court time.
JMO
As I understand it, the Court set up an official channel for EX PARTE filings.
The defense has used the Dropbox instead, relying on two things 1. The Court staff to file it as EX PARTE and 2. Nobody reading it who they want ex-partied. Is that the Court staff's job? The defense can't be this clueless!!! If it's filed under drop box, staff should consider it filed, period. If the Defense wants their ex parte motion filed EX PARTE, they should use the system set up to receive them that way, and not rely on staff to read their banner!
It is not their first day practicing law.
So what is their end game here? What a waste of court time.
JMO