Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #188

[susane7]

Why do you think they aren’t ready?

It's my interpretation from their filings, behavior and constant delayings tactis. They were still looking for a witness for runes less than a moth before the trial. That's one thing that I and BM fully agreed.

 

[susane7]

Apparently JG isn’t ready either. The whole lazy judge thing that was filed by the D and which the Supreme Court Agreed with. Yikes! I’ll be a bit surprised if anything even gets discussed and resolved in the upcoming pretrial.

How many pre trial hearings would be kinda normal for a double homicide case? Just wondering.

I agree that the Judge is taking to long to rule in some motions.

 

[TTF14]

It's my interpretration from their filings, behavior and constant delayings tactis. They were still looking for a witness for runes less than a moth before the trial. That's one thing that I and BM fully agreed.

BM? Barb MacDonald?

 

[Caylee Advocate]

Typos are so funny in our posts every now and then. Not laughing at posters *I do it also*.

 

[m00c0w]

Man, I can’t believe the SCOIN is also corrupt and conspiring against RA. Those Odinists sure do have some power in Indiana.

JMO!

 

[photographer4]

I don’t know if I would call her lazy. Prob wise to not waste her time when she knows the law. Which says once they keep filing motions they can’t hold her to that original deadline.

I’m not calling her lazy - the Supreme Court and the defense did. What probably would have been wiser for her would have been to rule on things within the timeline she is supposed to. Preferably with the benefit of a written decision that show how she arrived at her decision vs just a granted or denied. Or ya know… no response whatsoever.

 

[MollyDDD]

IMO, there may already be quite a lot of evidence that may provide for a reasonable doubt. I’m hoping that the state has a super strong airtight case, and they can get their conviction if in fact, he is guilty. Of course I don’t want him to walk or have this drag on further but if their case isn’t easy to follow and very strong, he may not be convicted.

My opinion is that they do not have the evidence that can prove without a reasonable doubt that Richard Allen is solely responsible for this heinous crime. If they did, this case would have been solved a long time ago.
I do hope I’m wrong for the sake of Abbie and Libby, their family and friends. Let’s hope and pray that the right person, or persons are held accountable.

 

[susane7]

BM? Barb MacDonald?

Bob Motta.

 

[TTF14]

Bob Motta.

My brain isn't working very well tonight. This is the second time....maybe I should go to bed lol.

Thank you .

 

[photographer4]

You're fine, I was just wondering because husband and I are going on a motorcycle ride to the bridge tomorrow and thought I might run into her!

Isn’t the bridge itself closed now to pedestrian traffic? Just wondering. Enjoy the ride and be safe!

 

[photographer4]

Man, I can’t believe the SCOIN is also corrupt and conspiring against RA. Those Odinists sure do have some power in Indiana.

JMO!

Did I miss something? I must have? Has someone here accused SCOIN of this? Or is this your non sarcastic feeling on their ruling?

 

[m00c0w]

I’m not calling her lazy - the Supreme Court and the defense did. What probably would have been wiser for her would have been to rule on things within the timeline she is supposed to. Preferably with the benefit of a written decision that show how she arrived at her decision vs just a granted or denied. Or ya know… no response whatsoever.

They did not… they never ruled on the merits of any of it because it was irrelevant. The motion wasn’t valid to begin with. The verbiage of the rule is that the judge “may” be removed, and there are many exceptions to the rule. All the court did was point out that instead of continuing to file motions, they should have filed for relief the first time a deadline was missed. Or the second. Or the third. Then the court would have actually ruled if there was a violation of trial rules and/or RA’s rights.

IOW, stating the defense should have filed at a different point to make the motion valid is not the same as saying the defense would have won the motion. It wasn’t even considered.

JMO

 

[photographer4]

I agree that the Judge is taking to long to rule in some motions.

I really wonder why sometimes it takes so long? And actually why sometimes she hasn’t issued a written decision (especially for motions she denies)?

 

[photographer4]

My opinion is that they do not have the evidence that can prove without a reasonable doubt that Richard Allen is solely responsible for this heinous crime. If they did, this case would have been solved a long time ago.
I do hope I’m wrong for the sake of Abbie and Libby, their family and friends. Let’s hope and pray that the right person, or persons are held accountable.

Do they have to prove he was the only one responsible to get the conviction? Not a lawyer so it’s a genuine question.

 

[TTF14]

I’m not calling her lazy - the Supreme Court and the defense did. What probably would have been wiser for her would have been to rule on things within the timeline she is supposed to. Preferably with the benefit of a written decision that show how she arrived at her decision vs just a granted or denied. Or ya know… no response whatsoever.

It just gives the impression that she thinks the rules don't apply to her. IMO MOO

 

[m00c0w]

Did I miss something? I must have? Has someone here accused SCOIN of this? Or is this your non sarcastic feeling on their ruling?

No one here, but I have seen people lamenting about how corrupt the system is because of this ruling.

JMO

 

[TTF14]

IOW, stating the defense should have filed at a different point to make the motion valid is not the same as saying the defense would have won the motion. It wasn’t even considered.

JMO

But wouldn't the Supreme Court have to follow the rule of the law had they filed at a different point? They did say what she did was wrong (paraphrasing). So, you're saying that even though they said she was wrong they still wouldn't have been obligated to grant the motion?

IMO MOO

 

[vinayd]

If the Defense filed things correctly or timely they would have better results. She could have ruled quicker but the answer to Franks and the follow ups is a blanket DENIED. Search warrant is in.

 

[FrostedGlass]

This is twice now the Supreme Court has found her lacking on this case alone. I haven’t looked but I wonder if she’s been before the SC in other matters? I may try to google this later. I also wonder, as a judge, does she have a supervisor of some sort to oversee her or is that just the SC?

The first was for removing b & r as counsel of record and now this.

Yes, she has been before the Indiana Supreme Court before.
Here's the case that started it all: 02D05-1910-F4-000103
35-42-4-3(b)/F4: Child Molesting Fondling or touching with child under 14.

Indiana Courts Case Search - MyCase

Indiana Supreme Court, Public Access

public.courts.in.gov

Indiana Supreme Court | Case No. 21S-CR-373 | April 27, 2022
Juventino V Ramirez v. State of Indiana
OR see it here:

Ramirez v. State

The Supreme Court reversed Defendant's conviction of one count of felony child molestation, holding that the trial court denied Defendant's requests for a continuance.

law.justia.com

Conclusion
Though the trial court ultimately erred in its pretrial decisions that prohibited Ramirez from receiving a copy of A.P.’s forensic interview, those errors do not require reversal. However, because the court abused its discretion when it denied Ramirez’s continuance request, we reverse and remand for a new trial.
David, Massa, Slaughter, and Goff, JJ., concur.

 

[photographer4]

They did not… they never ruled on the merits of any of it because it was irrelevant. The motion wasn’t valid to begin with. The verbiage of the rule is that the judge “may” be removed, and there are many exceptions to the rule. All the court did was point out that instead of continuing to file motions, they should have filed for relief the first time a deadline was missed. Or the second. Or the third. Then the court would have actually ruled if there was a violation of trial rules and/or RA’s rights.

IOW, stating the defense should have filed at a different point to make the motion valid is not the same as saying the defense would have won the motion. It wasn’t even considered.

JMO

I’m confused. Did they not agree she failed to issue a ruling by whatever date she should have done so by? Because this article says they did agree with the motion:

“The supreme court agreed with the defense that Judge Gull missed a deadline that could lead to her removal from the case…”

Supreme Court denies motion to dismiss Judge Gull from Delphi Murders trial

In a recent filing, the supreme court has denied a motion to dismiss Judge Fran Gull from the Delphi Murders trial.

www.wrtv.com

By failing in her duty to issue a ruling according to the law, does this not make her a lazy judge since the motion filed by the D is also known as a “lazy judge motion”?? Here is a post by one of members that explains this type of motion in better detail:

Post in thread 'Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #176'
Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #176

Supreme Court denies motion to dismiss Judge Gull from Delphi Murders trial

In a recent filing, the supreme court has denied a motion to dismiss Judge Fran Gull from the Delphi Murders trial.

www.wrtv.com