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

[grannygates]

This motion goes into detail about the funding issues plaguing the defense. They’re having to pay out of pocket for all their expenses, experts, assistants and then just hope the court will ever reimburse them. The court was over 5 months overdue in paying the attorneys legal fees at the time of writing this motion, so basically the defense team is paying to represent RA. MOO

Meanwhile, according to this motion, the prosecution had just hired 3 new experts, apparently right after the judge denied the defense any funding to keep the experts on that they already had. The judge even denied the defense hiring a forensic pathologist. IMO We see those like every trial.

Apparently this is all detailed in the judges order dated March 7,2024, but I haven’t been able to find it yet?

It does scream unfair that the prosecution gets unlimited resources and the defense has to pay for the trial out of their own pocket. It really doesn’t affect me if someone wants to donate their money towards the goal of a fair trial. I don’t see why people care.

Adobe Acrobat

acrobat.adobe.com

 

[grannygates]

Just went through the timeline...

Is there any mention as to how it went from that other individual being looked at to RA becoming a POI - then eventually arrested?

Mainly just how it switched to RA and only RA.

Like what lead to RA becoming the main suspect before being arrested for the crime?

I’d like to know if they were re-interviewing all of the witnesses who gave tips or what caused them to call in RA. TL said they found a “misfiled” tip but the FBI says that the tip was filed properly. Apparently the LEO just put the wrong last name on his profile but that shouldn’t matter? It’s hard to know what’s the truth here.

There wasn’t any real evidence or investigation that actually led to RA. IMO They called him as a witness and he admitted to owning a blue jacket and a gun in his interview. MOO

The sheriffs debate gives a lot of insight into the lengths a person was willing to go to try to secure that spot. MOO

 

[mrjitty]

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.

The point is that kind of jury research is typically properly conducted by contracted professionals.

What was being suggested here, is that the juror questionnaires be leaked to a bunch of online randos who then 'sleuth' the jurors raising risks of doxing etc. Seemingly because the defence did not have the resources to conduct such research themselves.

Frankly a shocking proposal.

MOO

 

[mrjitty]

It's hard to know where to start with all this, but I am glad it's finally all out in the open, and because it is from an approved source, we can at last discuss some things here which have been obvious for some time.

I've suspected ever since BM had DH on his podcast after the MW leak fiasco that BM was the new conduit for Defence messaging. This makes sense as he is an attorney and thus it would be difficult for that ever to be pierced. And the Habeas professor who claimed to have no contact with the defence yet is doing media hits and on every conspiratorial youtube who will have him. Now we know how the cut out structure works.

This answers the biggest question for me, that I asked of attorney @O.Incandenza back in january. Was this an intentional leak?

(Answer snipped for focus)

FWIW, I don't think this was an intentional leak from the defense. If you're going to intentionally leak photos in violation of a protective order and a gag order, you don't do it by having someone take pictures of your prepared exhibits which apparently had distinctive alterations (I'm assuming blurring or added graphics) and can easily be traced back to you.

But on a moral level I think Baldwin is responsible for the leak. He's the one who trusted MW. He's the one who involved him in the case. He's the one who left him alone and gave him the opportunity to take the pictures. Whether or not he's sanctioned, he should be embarrassed by what he did and what it led to.

My thinking was too caught up in a traditional media strategy and I agreed with O.Incandenza that this made no sense. But now I think we know what AB was doing with MW. I am confident MW had access to everything. And perhaps it really is the case that MW simply messed up and they got caught.

In any event, i was intrigued by the MS's theory that the defence's real strategy is to copy the Karen Read template. Now we know what they were so confident in saying that

MOO

 

[mrjitty]

Here are a couple of the more remarkable revelations.

1. CW drafted the defence motion for parity, then ran to twitter to offer analysis of it, as if she wasn't the author. This was done to end run the fact that these details were under seal. IMO Judge Gull might be very interested in this. Doesn't the gag order apply to RA's attorneys?

2. BM discussed his belief that the murders might be drug related. Remember when AB conducted that bizarre examination of Click about Messer and a supposed abduction? And BM+D conspiracists claimed it was the abduction of a young girl which then had to be retracted? I've always suspected that was intentional. AB led testimony that has nothing to do with the case in order to promote the drug gang conspiracy. And now we know BM talks to the defence routinely. So was he prepped for that?

There are many more examples but what's the point really.

I am shaking my head at how deeply dishonest and unethical this all is.

MOO

 

[StarryStarryNight]

One thing that caught my ear was one of the auxiliary attorneys suggested that they start a rumor that the video on Libby’s phone was fake. He goes on to remark that if people thought that was true they would figure Libby’s family was involved somehow and he was OK with that.
They were openly brainstorming lies they could throw out to the public.
That is not OK.

 

[mrjitty]

One thing that caught my ear was one of the auxiliary attorneys suggested that they start a rumor that the video on Libby’s phone was fake. He goes on to remark that if people thought that was true they would figure Libby’s family was involved somehow and he was OK with that.
They were openly brainstorming lies they could throw out to the public.
That is not OK.

It's the deeply unethical nature of this which troubles me the most - especially seeing as how these guys made a song and dance about how this was not about guilt or innocence (which they can't know) but the high minded constitutional issues.

As I pointed out with the Morphew case, what happens if you personally stake your reputation on the defendant's innocence and then whoops he's obviously guilty and it becomes clear you've been lying?

Especially I believe it is bad for the client if it becomes clear to the Judge that counsel has been deceitful.

Why do this?

MOO

 

[girlhasnoname]

Also attorney referring to a sitting Judge as a "ratchet b*ch" isn't the best look either. I hope Judge Gull makes a complaint after the rubbish the defense have put her though.

IMO

It just shows the true face and mentality of those who participated in this group. I'm not a pearl clutcher, but some of the language and thoughts on Judge Gull and NMcL were very disturbing to say the least. The fact they would even attempt to talk poorly about Libby's family is disgraceful IMO.

I would be prepared for the hate and language before listening, it does get that bad.

MOO

 

[Salah11]

Sorry I am a UK’er so I didn’t respond late last night but I see other posters responded on my behalf so thank you.

 

[Salah11]

It just shows the true face and mentality of those who participated in this group. I'm not a pearl clutcher, but some of the language and thoughts on Judge Gull and NMcL were very disturbing to say the least. The fact they would even attempt to talk poorly about Libby's family is disgraceful IMO.

I would be prepared for the hate and language before listening, it does get that bad.

MOO

It’s a shame that the defense are that desperate to get RA off at any costs that they have aligned themselves with some very questionable people.

IMO

 

[girlhasnoname]

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.

I think the gimmie money was first set up by a YT person and then Hennessy took control, not Ausbrook.

The Due Process Gang was making fun of DH. That's gotta sting when he hears what they've said about him.

JMO

 

[mrjitty]

Interesting to see what sources go dark as a result of this. I think i underestimated how much inauthentic content was out there. IMO

 

[khsullivan]

If there was only 1 assailant, why didnt the girls run? The assailant couldn't have caught them both. I understand being a scared little girl, but IMO I think there was more than one assailant. I think the girls would have fought and tried to run. Maybe they froze, but I cant get it out of my head...why didn't they run?

 

[girlhasnoname]

It’s a shame that the defense are that desperate to get RA off at any costs that they have aligned themselves with some very questionable people.

IMO

Absolutely, and 'supposedly' lawyers themselves. This Due Process Gang gives Defense lawyers a bad name and that's a shame because we desperately need good Defense Attorneys for the Justice system to work correctly, balancing the scales.

I wonder if RA even knows of all this? I still believe RA would have had better representation with S&L. This group wants the attention, infamy and click$$$$$$.

MOO

 

[girlhasnoname]

If there was only 1 assailant, why didnt the girls run. The assailant couldn't have caught them both. I understand being a scared little girl, but IMO I think there was more than one assailant. I think the girls would have fought and tried to run.

Not with a gun pointed at you IMO. Fight, Flight or Freeze are basic instincts when thrust into a situation like this.

JMO

 

[susane7]

I listened the two episodes. Awful like I said. For Libby's family, victims, Judge Gull, Nick, but also for Richard Allen. We deserves a fair trial and they are not doing anything to ensure he gets that.

Interesting this group was happy when the trial are delayed because the defense isn't ready (what a surprise) but said they would try to pin the blame on Judge Gull and the Prosecution. What a surprise again..But many gullible people believe in it.

 

[Salah11]

If there was only 1 assailant, why didnt the girls run? The assailant couldn't have caught them both. I understand being a scared little girl, but IMO I think there was more than one assailant. I think the girls would have fought and tried to run. Maybe they froze, but I cant get it out of my head...why didn't they run?

He had a gun and the girls were loyal to each other. So neither one was going to abandon the other one to death. IMO

 

[khsullivan]

Not with a gun pointed at you IMO. Fight, Flight or Freeze are basic instincts when thrust into a situation like this.

JMO

I edited my post because I thought about that too. Freezing is a possibility but I just dont think one girl would have just stood/sat there in the woods while her best friend was being tortured by a single person unless she or both of the girls were incapacitated by being bound, unconscious or another person was there or even multiple people. IMO

 

[katydid23]

I think the gimmie money was first set up by a YT person and then Hennessy took control, not Ausbrook.

The Due Process Gang was making fun of DH. That's gotta sting when he hears what they've said about him.

JMO

Ausbrook had a big part in it too. He made the MSM rounds, pretending to just be an unbiased law professor, giving an interview.

"Its unheard of, as far as I know, for the defense lawyers in a case as big as this would not be paid by the court, would not have their experts approved by the court," Professor Michael Ausbrook, with the IU Maurer Law School, said to FOX59. "Its probably a constitutional violation in motion."

Defense attorneys in Delphi, Indiana, murder case asking for crowdsource funding​

• Mar 27, 2024 Updated Mar 27, 2024

Defense attorneys in Delphi, Indiana, murder case asking for crowdsource funding

Richard Allen, 51, was arrested in October 2022 and charged with two counts of murder in the 2017 slayings of 13-year-old Abigail Williams and 14-year-old Liberty German. The Delphi, Indiana,

www.wdrb.com

- Court-appointed attorneys representing Richard Allen, the man accused of killing two Indiana teenagers, are asking for crowdsource funding to cover their outside costs, reported by FOX59.

Defense attorneys have complained in motions and emails that Special Judge Fran Gull was slow to reimburse their bills or was denying them funds to pay for expert witnesses.

"Its unheard of, as far as I know, for the defense lawyers in a case as big as this would not be paid by the court, would not have their experts approved by the court," Professor Michael Ausbrook, with the IU Maurer Law School, said to FOX59. "Its probably a constitutional violation in motion."


To combat the alleged disparity, Allen’s attorneys have requested that Gull approve all of their submitted and anticipated funding requirements. If that request is denied, the attorneys asked that the state be proscribed from calling such expert witnesses and introducing evidence that would require the defense to call its own expert witness, or order Carroll County Prosecutor Nicholas McLeland to personally pay for such experts.

“Its unheard of, as far as I know, for the defense lawyers in a case as big as this would not be paid by the court, would not have their experts approved by the court,” Professor Michael Ausbrook of the Indiana University Maurer Law School told Indianapolis Fox affiliate WXIN. “It’s probably a constitutional violation in motion.”

 

[khsullivan]

If RA is the one that did this completely on his own, and had a loaded gun, why were the girls killed with a sharp object and not shot???