Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #187

[photographer4]

Thank you. So, to another poster's question, why make 3 podcast episodes about this instead of just reporting this unethical behavior to the powers-that-be? Especially considering one of these podcasters is.....an attorney himself!

IMO MOO

Could this not have gone to the ethics board for lawyers? Or some review board?

 

[TTF14]

Could this not have gone to the ethics board for lawyers? Or some review board?

Good question. Being that one half of this podcasting duo is an attorney, one would hope that would be the first avenue explored.

IMO MOO

 

[katydid23]

If they had these concerns, I wonder, could they not have sent them directly to JG?

Maybe they did.

Is there not some legal footwork here they could have done in order to bring it to her attention in a motion or something? I'm not a lawyer, so this is a genuine question. Why make it public?

So the public, who is currently bing targeted by this Due Process Crew, will now be privy to what they are trying to do.

How much money does each episode garner for Murder Sheets or other content creators? What is their motivation and end goal here? If it were as noble as we hope, then surely there must have been some more ethical way to go about this, no?

I think it was a noble effort, to be honest. These people were trying to figure out a way to create a hung jury situation.
They needed to be stopped, IMO.

What if the prosecution was planning something like that? And there were texts between the State's legal advisors, talking about how they could taint the jury pool, and how they could dig up dirt on future jurors using youtuber sleuths to feed them the dirt?

Would you want those texts leaked, so we'd KNOW what they had been doing? So we could show the public what was happening with the false narratives, trying to paint the defense team as deceitful, etc?

I would.

 

[photographer4]

In general, I don't know.There are supposed to be rules and regulations against FALSELY claiming you are giving it to Jane Doe but then you keep it yourself. But I'm not sure how they do it.

But in this LEGAL case, it was very important that it was clarified and organised and done legally.

Ausbrook was the spokesman on national news shows and msm news articles, concerning the crowd funding. He was not doing it randomly on his own. He publicly did local news appearances asking for donations to pay for RA's legal expert witnesses.

Ok but what obligated him to be transparent about it? If people weren’t forced to donate and did… that’s their problem, no? Not sure I understand the issue.

 

[katydid23]

Could this not have gone to the ethics board for lawyers? Or some review board?

What would that do, in terms of the time frame of an upcoming trial? And only 2 of them are attorneys. I don't think much would happen anyway. It was just 'talk.'

That's why the best course of action, IMO, was to reveal the shadiness.

How to Report a Lawyer for Ethics Violations​

For serious violations, the board will file formal disciplinary charges and hold a hearing. Boards try to resolve disciplinary complaints as quickly as possible, often within 90 days to six months. For complex matters involving formal charges, though, the process can take as long as one to two years.

 

[katydid23]

Ok but what obligated him to be transparent about it? If people weren’t forced to donate and did… that’s their problem, no? Not sure I understand the issue.

The only point I was making is that Ausbrook is closely connected to RA's defense team. He was trusted to take charge of the crowd funder so he is in their inner circle.

 

[MollyDDD]

Not sure I'm remembering this correctly. Was it only the Franks Motion that noted lack of blood at the crime scene? It's hard to accept that when one believes the girls were murdered at the same location they were discovered. If I'm remembering correctly, the Franks also stated a rune like symbol was marked on a tree with one victims blood.

Those that feel this could have been a lone killer, is there anything that sticks out to make you feel this way? I also can accept there was one actor at the crime scene. However, I feel the killer was involved in CSAM and had a connection to the Anthony.Shots account. I guess it's the WHY, why did this happen, why were these two girls murdered.

Justice for Libby and Abby.

It’s been a while since I’ve followed this crime so please forgive my ignorance. Is there any mention of James Brian Chadwell being involved?

 

[TTF14]

Maybe they did.


So the public, who is currently bing targeted by this Due Process Crew, will now be privy to what they are trying to do.

I think it was a noble effort, to be honest. These people were trying to figure out a way to create a hung jury situation.
They needed to be stopped, IMO.

What if the prosecution was planning something like that? And there were texts between the State's legal advisors, talking about how they could taint the jury pool, and how they could dig up dirt on future jurors using youtuber sleuths to feed them the dirt?

Would you want those texts leaked, so we'd KNOW what they had been doing? So we could show the public what was happening with the false narratives, trying to paint the defense team as deceitful, etc?

I would.

In my opinion, noble would have been going to officials or even publishing the info anonymously and without three long episodes of profit lol. But that’s just me. And my lowly opinion.

We still have three months. I have a feeling we haven’t seen the last of leaked private conversations.

IMO MoO

 

[photographer4]

Probably because they wanted to do exactly what this Due Process Gang was trying to do, but in reverse.

Due Process Gang was trying to put forth a false narrative PUBLICLY in order to taint th jury pool.

How can someone combat that by just telling an authority figure? What exactly would happen from that? Probably nothing until after the trial.

But releasing the texts allows the public to see for themselves how the Defense Strategy was being developed. And hopefully helps them better understand how these endless motions aiming to kick JG to the curb is just a farce. It's part of the false narrative being fed to the public.

Out of curiosity, don’t they kinda vet possible jurors to try to prevent including those who have absorbed a lot of social media / regular media / strong views on a topic not in favour of the defense etc?

There have been entire tv shows and movies devoted to how jury selection is messed with. And how some lawyers hire people to help them with the process or read how the jury is maybe perceiving their case.

Eg: the Lincoln lawyer (adapted to Netflix based on a book I think). Movie version included some big star who’s name I don’t recall.

Bull: tv show from around 2016 being another.

This isn’t a new thing. It’s been around for ages.

 

[TTF14]

It’s been a while since I’ve followed this crime so please forgive my ignorance. Is there any mention of James Brian Chadwell being involved?

No, not really

And welcome back.

 

[katydid23]

It’s been a while since I’ve followed this crime so please forgive my ignorance. Is there any mention of James Brian Chadwell being involved?

No, not anymore. But at one time he was closely looked at for it. He sure fits the profile.

 

[katydid23]

Out of curiosity, don’t they kinda vet possible jurors to try to prevent including those who have absorbed a lot of social media / regular media / strong views on a topic not in favour of the defense etc?

You can never weed them all out.

There have been entire tv shows and movies devoted to how jury selection is messed with. And how some lawyers hire people to help them with the process or read how the jury is maybe perceiving their case.

Nothing wrong with that.

Eg: the Lincoln lawyer (adapted to Netflix based on a book I think). Movie version included some big star who’s name I don’t recall.

Bull: tv show from around 2016 being another.

This isn’t a new thing. It’s been around for ages.

 

[katydid23]

In my opinion, noble would have been going to officials or even publishing the info anonymously and without three long episodes of profit lol. But that’s just me. And my lowly opinion.

So if they had just published it anonymously , you'd have been ok with that?

I don't think anyone would have taken it seriously or thought it was credible if it just popped up, with no context.

We still have three months. I have a feeling we haven’t seen the last of leaked private conversations.

IMO MoO

Probably not.

 

[photographer4]

Maybe they did.


So the public, who is currently bing targeted by this Due Process Crew, will now be privy to what they are trying to do.

I think it was a noble effort, to be honest. These people were trying to figure out a way to create a hung jury situation.
They needed to be stopped, IMO.

What if the prosecution was planning something like that? And there were texts between the State's legal advisors, talking about how they could taint the jury pool, and how they could dig up dirt on future jurors using youtuber sleuths to feed them the dirt?

Would you want those texts leaked, so we'd KNOW what they had been doing? So we could show the public what was happening with the false narratives, trying to paint the defense team as deceitful, etc?

I would.

I hear ya but honestly? I think all these social media creators do is muddy the waters. I would rather we focus on the actual trial and legal issues vs pay creators to sling mud at others when they’re just as bad as the others.

If this was some sort of legal violation by any party then this wasn’t the way to go about it. If it was a grand conspiracy to derail the trial well, sorry but this happens all the time. We would hope not. But clearly it does.

If we don’t like it then it’s time to change the laws. Maybe the people who are so angry at those involved can now take steps to affect change. But no one will. It’s more fun to be outraged from a keyboard than to seek actual change.

I am replying to your comment yes, but this isn’t a call out to you specifically. It’s just how I see things here.

 

[photographer4]

What would that do, in terms of the time frame of an upcoming trial? And only 2 of them are attorneys. I don't think much would happen anyway. It was just 'talk.'

That's why the best course of action, IMO, was to reveal the shadiness.

How to Report a Lawyer for Ethics Violations​

For serious violations, the board will file formal disciplinary charges and hold a hearing. Boards try to resolve disciplinary complaints as quickly as possible, often within 90 days to six months. For complex matters involving formal charges, though, the process can take as long as one to two years.

Exactly. Probably nothing would come of it legally so really? Who cares? Unless they did something that’s actually illegal then it’s just people talking. Is it a good look? No. But realistically? Who cares.

Focus on the trial. Ensuring RAs rights are maintained and hope the state has enough evidence for their conviction.

The rest is a bit too much drama and makes everyone forget to focus on the trial itself.

 

[MollyDDD]

No, not really

And welcome back.

Thank you. I’ve popped in every now and then for updates but after seven years it seemed like they’d never solve the case. I’m glad to see a trial is getting closer. I often think about Libby and Abby and their family members and what a long nightmare this has been for them. It’s just horrifying to know what they went through that day.

 

[MollyDDD]

No, not anymore. But at one time he was closely looked at for it. He sure fits the profile.

I agree and I just can’t shake the feeling that he was involved in some way. Since he’s locked up now for life, society is safer.

 

[photographer4]

The only point I was making is that Ausbrook is closely connected to RA's defense team. He was trusted to take charge of the crowd funder so he is in their inner circle.

So he set up a funder. Good way to show the class division in the justice system.

 

[katydid23]

So he set up a funder. Good way to show the class division in the justice system.

They didnt need the funder though. That's the point. It's part of the false narrative they are pushing.

In reality, they did get paid by the state for that expert. But they hadn't filled out the paperwork initially, and they wanted to make a BIG SHOW AND TELL out of it--pretending it was what you just described---pretending it was a class division thing and poor RA was bing undeserved.

But that was not true. They just needed to fill out the written request correctly, which they had not done. JG explains this in her long, recent written answer to their long list of complaints.