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

[sunshineray]

For credibility purposes, I hope so. But for “ick” purposes I hope they don’t. Private conversations should remain private. Morally speaking. I’m sure none of us here would want our private conversations leaked….

IMO MOO

Except if it shows illegal behaviors, then all bets are off...historically speaking...like Nixon's 18 1/2 missing minutes of illegal discussion

 

[Caylee Advocate]

lol sorry I took the opportunity to add my own opinion that was probably not nice. In the words of Mullins “I’ll do better”

I for one value most opinions, and won't accept an apology since none is warranted. Now I have to scram!!

 

[Spartygirl]

So my question was/is, was the coroner included in the gag order? IMO they more than likely were/are, but my lazy butt just wanted a "gimmee" answer.

No problem, I will research tomorrow. G'Nite all!!!

YES!!
The coroner is included --see below

Gull issued a gag order in December 2022 barring attorneys, law enforcement officials, court personnel, the coroner and the girls’ family members from commenting on the case to the public or the media in any form, including social media.

Judge delays trial for man charged in 2017 Delphi murders

A judge on Tuesday delayed until October the murder trial of an Indiana man charged in the killings of two teenage girls after the man’s attorneys expressed concerns they would not have adequate time to present their case.

www.nbcchicago.com

 

[photographer4]

Well Ausbrook (spelling) said tonight on that Unhinged podcast, he said no to signing one of those, when the defense offered to let him see the discovery.

Did he mention if they then still let him view discovery??

 

[photographer4]

No no, sorry! nothing wrong by you! The podcasters are relaying the information out of context in a way to make it sound like these lawyers work for the defense and were giving juror information to random internet sleuths to investigate them, when it’s a group of people talking about how to vet potential future jurors. MOO

Thanks for clarifying! I was worried I had misunderstood the quote!

 

[TTF14]

I’m no expert but I don’t see why not. They’re not using private or priviledged databases. They can only seek public information, like googling someone or looking at their public Facebook page etc. It makes sense to me. If you see someone displaying super strong views publicly (one way or the other) you know they’re probably not impartial, so don’t waste everyones time calling them in. MOO

Sign me up. I can find out the dirt on your neighbor’s ex-husbands new mother-in-law’s college roommate in ten minutes flat!

IMO

 

[photographer4]

I’m no expert but I don’t see why not. They’re not using private or priviledged databases. They can only seek public information, like googling someone or looking at their public Facebook page etc. It makes sense to me. If you see someone displaying super strong views publicly (one way or the other) you know they’re probably not impartial, so don’t waste everyone’s time calling them in. MOO

I believe the lawyers do get the names of potential jurors as well as other basic info like age, occupation, gender, address, name of employer (this one is a maybe). I base this off of having been sent a jury duty notice and questionnaire a few years ago. Maybe it’s not the same where I am? But I’m sure they must because otherwise how would they be able to assess the prospects and determine if they were agreeable to them on the panel or not?

 

[photographer4]

My question was about who can they hire or outsource to do this. Do you have a source/link for how they have to be be employees of the law firm?

Can’t they subcontract out to psychologists etc?

The Who, What & Why of Jury Consultants

Jury consulting is rapidly becoming popular in the legal industry and courtroom but have you ever wondered what exactly jury consultants do or why you should consider using one?

www.opveon.com

 

[MiniMoo]

Or, in my case, not listening at all to the podcast. Hoping a transcript gets released. For those interested, another podcast featuring some of the parties named by MS plans to air their own podcast this evening in response to the MS series on this case. It’s not an approved source so I can’t link or name which one. I won’t listen to that one either for those wondering but hope for a summary or transcript to be released.

Im not listening to anything either - don't mind reading, but don't want to listen to biased views, people witch hunting nor anyone victimising victims and their grieving families.

 

[katydid23]

My question was about who can they hire or outsource to do this. Do you have a source/link for how they have to be be employees of the law firm?

In the high profile murder cases I have followed, the jurors privacy has been protected from the public, for their safety and for the safety of the trial [so no one can reach out to them for obvious reasons]

Because their privacy is highly valued and protected, I am pretty sure that anyone who would be given their names and addresses would have to be verified and vetted by the attorneys, just like if they were sharing private discovery info with someone.

They'd have to sign NDA's at the very least. In the group chat they were talking about getting a group of you tube sleuths that they could send the jurors identities to. I don't think that is a proper way to treat that private information. And it potentially opens them up to things going sideways, if any of the jurors receive unwanted calls or messages, mid-trial. etc

The way some of this strident group behaves makes it very risky for them to have this vital info. IMO

 

[katydid23]

Did he mention if they then still let him view discovery??

Motta says he invited MS very politely by email, but he didn’t hear back—then says that they ambushed him when he first appeared on there…
"MS was very critical of me, CW and Ausbrook and a couple of my friends. "


“Tonight Nothing is off the table” BM says….[then they promptly take the jury tampering accusations off the table]


“BM: The Bigger issue is which is really fascinating…—as seen in Karen Read and in Delphi,…” [then Motta trails off and never finishes the statement…]


“Here are the ground rules”…then once again he starts rambling without finishing his thought….

BM :“Should I apologise for telling Kevin to comb his hair and put a clean shirt on before he goes on court tv…I’ll say it to your face…I plan to show up in Delphi, Kevin, if that was your wish,[MS] to get me banned, we’ll see if that works for ya”…

BM:We desperately tried to get Cara on but she had other stuff going on…she gave me bullet points to address later…

We Want to bring on Michael Ausbrook, one of our Cabal…

BM: Here are the issues we want to address, 3 main ones, ...
but first we are going to take a step back from the jury tampering accusations made by MS….we are going to let Michael handle that that because he has a current Indiana law license , we don’t…

25 tweets done last night by Michael to address this tampering accusation…MA says " maybe you can link them here?"
[but I looked and didnt see that BM did link them...]

Ali asked MA and BM—"Have the defense lawyers ever asked you to do anything or say anything on social media for them? "
ALI:" Bob, other than being asked to stand behind a conversation being had in a courtroom that MS then misreported, or talking about concern about how Hennessy was feeling after receiving an email from them,
has the DT ever asked you to do anything or say anything or entice u to speak a certain way for them on social medias?

BM: "NO, absolutely not, inequitably no, I know nothing about any the evidence of the case, when I say nothing I mean nothing…I’ve never asked, bob continues , I mean “Do I communicate with Brad and Andy, obviously yes, in terms of strategy we’ve communicated with Brad and Andy, in what motions to file— how do they get back on the case..."

[OK< IF YOU KNOW ABSOLUTELY NOTHING ABOUT ANY EVIDENCE IN THE CASE HOW CAN YOU STRATEGISE AND DISCUSS WHICH MOTIONS TO FILE?]

"...we are criminal defense attorneys .not investigative journalists,
We are a podcast, not YouTubers, they obviously never have listened to any of our content ever…[then he goes on and on about his stellar podcast career]

Then he goes on and on about Ali’s beef with judges in prior cases, etc…and being accused of violating a court order in Nebraska, and in Iowa, etc…and then now in Delphi…"we have nothing to hide" [not sure why they are even discussing this—not a good look ]

ALI: Ok, to Michael, Outside of doing actual legal work, legal motions legal research, have u been asked to set forth a narrative of any kind by the DT, and Have you see any discovery?

AM: "No, and
No-one from actual DT has asked me to do anything like that and I turned down any offers of seeing discovery…I was offered the full video of BG in exchange for a full NDA and I said No thanks…"


OKAY, SO MA SWEARS HE HAS NO CONNECTION TO THE DT—but why is Ali saying ‘besides doing actual legal research and legal motions….ISN’T THAT A CONNECTION TO THE DT?



Also, who offered him the full video of BG on the bridge? The Defense?

 

[katydid23]

I have always thought that odd also, the different dates of death.
Perhaps Libby's family put that date because it is day she went missing and was killed.
Perhaps Abby's family put her date for the date she was discovered.

IDK... I am also sure they have their reasons and I won't question it.

I remember way back when, during the time the obituary of each were released, we all discussed it. And at one point, Abby's family said publicly they used the date they found her.

 

[katydid23]

I believe the lawyers do get the names of potential jurors as well as other basic info like age, occupation, gender, address, name of employer (this one is a maybe). I base this off of having been sent a jury duty notice and questionnaire a few years ago. Maybe it’s not the same where I am? But I’m sure they must because otherwise how would they be able to assess the prospects and determine if they were agreeable to them on the panel or not?

YES, the attorneys for both sides get that very personal info. But when you fill it out, you assume it is staying within the court and the attorneys private files.

The 'Gang' suggested that the defense duo send all of that very private info to a ragtag group of Discord friends, so they can ALL have that private info to do deep dives on it. How many people would be disseminating your private info in a situation like that?

I totally understand that the defense team would give that info to their assistants or interns to try and vet the potential jurors.

But sending them out to group chat on Discord ? That seems way out of line and was not what the jurors expect when they hand over such private information.

 

[photographer4]

Motta says he invited MS very politely by email, but he didn’t hear back—then says that they ambushed him when he first appeared on there…
"MS was very critical of me, CW and Ausbrook and a couple of my friends. "


“Tonight Nothing is off the table” BM says….[then they promptly take the jury tampering accusations off the table]


“BM: The Bigger issue is which is really fascinating…—as seen in Karen Read and in Delphi,…” [then Motta trails off and never finishes the statement…]


“Here are the ground rules”…then once again he starts rambling without finishing his thought….

BM :“Should I apologise for telling Kevin to comb his hair and put a clean shirt on before he goes on court tv…I’ll say it to your face…I plan to show up in Delphi, Kevin, if that was your wish,[MS] to get me banned, we’ll see if that works for ya”…

BM:We desperately tried to get Cara on but she had other stuff going on…she gave me bullet points to address later…

We Want to bring on Michael Ausbrook, one of our Cabal…

BM: Here are the issues we want to address, 3 main ones, ...
but first we are going to take a step back from the jury tampering accusations made by MS….we are going to let Michael handle that that because he has a current Indiana law license , we don’t…

25 tweets done last night by Michael to address this tampering accusation…MA says " maybe you can link them here?"
[but I looked and didnt see that BM did link them...]

Ali asked MA and BM—"Have the defense lawyers ever asked you to do anything or say anything on social media for them? "
ALI:" Bob, other than being asked to stand behind a conversation being had in a courtroom that MS then misreported, or talking about concern about how Hennessy was feeling after receiving an email from them,
has the DT ever asked you to do anything or say anything or entice u to speak a certain way for them on social medias?

BM: "NO, absolutely not, inequitably no, I know nothing about any the evidence of the case, when I say nothing I mean nothing…I’ve never asked, bob continues , I mean “Do I communicate with Brad and Andy, obviously yes, in terms of strategy we’ve communicated with Brad and Andy, in what motions to file— how do they get back on the case..."

[OK< IF YOU KNOW ABSOLUTELY NOTHING ABOUT ANY EVIDENCE IN THE CASE HOW CAN YOU STRATEGISE AND DISCUSS WHICH MOTIONS TO FILE?]

"...we are criminal defense attorneys .not investigative journalists,
We are a podcast, not YouTubers, they obviously never have listened to any of our content ever…[then he goes on and on about his stellar podcast career]

Then he goes on and on about Ali’s beef with judges in prior cases, etc…and being accused of violating a court order in Nebraska, and in Iowa, etc…and then now in Delphi…"we have nothing to hide" [not sure why they are even discussing this—not a good look ]

ALI: Ok, to Michael, Outside of doing actual legal work, legal motions legal research, have u been asked to set forth a narrative of any kind by the DT, and Have you see any discovery?

AM: "No, and
No-one from actual DT has asked me to do anything like that and I turned down any offers of seeing discovery…I was offered the full video of BG in exchange for a full NDA and I said No thanks…"


OKAY, SO MA SWEARS HE HAS NO CONNECTION TO THE DT—but why is Ali saying ‘besides doing actual legal research and legal motions….ISN’T THAT A CONNECTION TO THE DT?



Also, who offered him the full video of BG on the bridge? The Defense?

They can offer suggestions such as “have you considered filing X? Because there was a case the set precedent back in 1901 etc etc”

 

[photographer4]

Motta says he invited MS very politely by email, but he didn’t hear back—then says that they ambushed him when he first appeared on there…
"MS was very critical of me, CW and Ausbrook and a couple of my friends. "


“Tonight Nothing is off the table” BM says….[then they promptly take the jury tampering accusations off the table]


“BM: The Bigger issue is which is really fascinating…—as seen in Karen Read and in Delphi,…” [then Motta trails off and never finishes the statement…]


“Here are the ground rules”…then once again he starts rambling without finishing his thought….

BM :“Should I apologise for telling Kevin to comb his hair and put a clean shirt on before he goes on court tv…I’ll say it to your face…I plan to show up in Delphi, Kevin, if that was your wish,[MS] to get me banned, we’ll see if that works for ya”…

BM:We desperately tried to get Cara on but she had other stuff going on…she gave me bullet points to address later…

We Want to bring on Michael Ausbrook, one of our Cabal…

BM: Here are the issues we want to address, 3 main ones, ...
but first we are going to take a step back from the jury tampering accusations made by MS….we are going to let Michael handle that that because he has a current Indiana law license , we don’t…

25 tweets done last night by Michael to address this tampering accusation…MA says " maybe you can link them here?"
[but I looked and didnt see that BM did link them...]

Ali asked MA and BM—"Have the defense lawyers ever asked you to do anything or say anything on social media for them? "
ALI:" Bob, other than being asked to stand behind a conversation being had in a courtroom that MS then misreported, or talking about concern about how Hennessy was feeling after receiving an email from them,
has the DT ever asked you to do anything or say anything or entice u to speak a certain way for them on social medias?

BM: "NO, absolutely not, inequitably no, I know nothing about any the evidence of the case, when I say nothing I mean nothing…I’ve never asked, bob continues , I mean “Do I communicate with Brad and Andy, obviously yes, in terms of strategy we’ve communicated with Brad and Andy, in what motions to file— how do they get back on the case..."

[OK< IF YOU KNOW ABSOLUTELY NOTHING ABOUT ANY EVIDENCE IN THE CASE HOW CAN YOU STRATEGISE AND DISCUSS WHICH MOTIONS TO FILE?]

"...we are criminal defense attorneys .not investigative journalists,
We are a podcast, not YouTubers, they obviously never have listened to any of our content ever…[then he goes on and on about his stellar podcast career]

Then he goes on and on about Ali’s beef with judges in prior cases, etc…and being accused of violating a court order in Nebraska, and in Iowa, etc…and then now in Delphi…"we have nothing to hide" [not sure why they are even discussing this—not a good look ]

ALI: Ok, to Michael, Outside of doing actual legal work, legal motions legal research, have u been asked to set forth a narrative of any kind by the DT, and Have you see any discovery?

AM: "No, and
No-one from actual DT has asked me to do anything like that and I turned down any offers of seeing discovery…I was offered the full video of BG in exchange for a full NDA and I said No thanks…"


OKAY, SO MA SWEARS HE HAS NO CONNECTION TO THE DT—but why is Ali saying ‘besides doing actual legal research and legal motions….ISN’T THAT A CONNECTION TO THE DT?



Also, who offered him the full video of BG on the bridge? The Defense?

I would love to know what the opinions are of the lawyers for the state and defense! I’d love to know what the other judges think of them! How about past professors and colleagues or opponents??

 

[photographer4]

Motta says he invited MS very politely by email, but he didn’t hear back—then says that they ambushed him when he first appeared on there…
"MS was very critical of me, CW and Ausbrook and a couple of my friends. "


“Tonight Nothing is off the table” BM says….[then they promptly take the jury tampering accusations off the table]


“BM: The Bigger issue is which is really fascinating…—as seen in Karen Read and in Delphi,…” [then Motta trails off and never finishes the statement…]


“Here are the ground rules”…then once again he starts rambling without finishing his thought….

BM :“Should I apologise for telling Kevin to comb his hair and put a clean shirt on before he goes on court tv…I’ll say it to your face…I plan to show up in Delphi, Kevin, if that was your wish,[MS] to get me banned, we’ll see if that works for ya”…

BM:We desperately tried to get Cara on but she had other stuff going on…she gave me bullet points to address later…

We Want to bring on Michael Ausbrook, one of our Cabal…

BM: Here are the issues we want to address, 3 main ones, ...
but first we are going to take a step back from the jury tampering accusations made by MS….we are going to let Michael handle that that because he has a current Indiana law license , we don’t…

25 tweets done last night by Michael to address this tampering accusation…MA says " maybe you can link them here?"
[but I looked and didnt see that BM did link them...]

Ali asked MA and BM—"Have the defense lawyers ever asked you to do anything or say anything on social media for them? "
ALI:" Bob, other than being asked to stand behind a conversation being had in a courtroom that MS then misreported, or talking about concern about how Hennessy was feeling after receiving an email from them,
has the DT ever asked you to do anything or say anything or entice u to speak a certain way for them on social medias?

BM: "NO, absolutely not, inequitably no, I know nothing about any the evidence of the case, when I say nothing I mean nothing…I’ve never asked, bob continues , I mean “Do I communicate with Brad and Andy, obviously yes, in terms of strategy we’ve communicated with Brad and Andy, in what motions to file— how do they get back on the case..."

[OK< IF YOU KNOW ABSOLUTELY NOTHING ABOUT ANY EVIDENCE IN THE CASE HOW CAN YOU STRATEGISE AND DISCUSS WHICH MOTIONS TO FILE?]

"...we are criminal defense attorneys .not investigative journalists,
We are a podcast, not YouTubers, they obviously never have listened to any of our content ever…[then he goes on and on about his stellar podcast career]

Then he goes on and on about Ali’s beef with judges in prior cases, etc…and being accused of violating a court order in Nebraska, and in Iowa, etc…and then now in Delphi…"we have nothing to hide" [not sure why they are even discussing this—not a good look ]

ALI: Ok, to Michael, Outside of doing actual legal work, legal motions legal research, have u been asked to set forth a narrative of any kind by the DT, and Have you see any discovery?

AM: "No, and
No-one from actual DT has asked me to do anything like that and I turned down any offers of seeing discovery…I was offered the full video of BG in exchange for a full NDA and I said No thanks…"


OKAY, SO MA SWEARS HE HAS NO CONNECTION TO THE DT—but why is Ali saying ‘besides doing actual legal research and legal motions….ISN’T THAT A CONNECTION TO THE DT?



Also, who offered him the full video of BG on the bridge? The Defense?

Also thank you for the time you took to do this for us!!

 

[photographer4]

YES, the attorneys for both sides get that very personal info. But when you fill it out, you assume it is staying within the court and the attorneys private files.

The 'Gang' suggested that the defense duo send all of that very private info to a ragtag group of Discord friends, so they can ALL have that private info to do deep dives on it. How many people would be disseminating your private info in a situation like that?

I totally understand that the defense team would give that info to their assistants or interns to try and vet the potential jurors.

But sending them out to group chat on Discord ? That seems way out of line and was not what the jurors expect when they hand over such private information.

It doesn’t sound like the D accepted any such offer for this though? It sounds like people discussed it but it didn’t become an actual plan or actioned in any way.

Doing so would have been very bad for sure. But discussing the concept? Meh. They can have their fantasy strategy all they want. But throwing the idea out doesn’t mean that they’d ever do it for real.

We hope. Right??

 

[Boxer]

BBM
Right-- and who didn't show up for the D team in their Youtube show to "set the record" straight ?? CM--that's who.

They are lying liars that lie = circus clowns =unprofessional and Unethical individuals.

While I feel that prosecutors have the right guy=BG=RA, I do kind of feel sorry for RA having these a$s hats as his defense attys.

Agree.

 

[grannygates]

From what I’m reading the contractors who do jury vetting are PI firms who hire skip tracers, which makes sense. These skip tracers have to have a high school diploma and a clean criminal record check. They work under the company’s umbrella licence so they don’t need a personal licence. I’m not sure if it’s the same in Indiana this is just a quick look MOO

Jury Vetting - Nighthawk Strategies

nighthawkstrategies.com

https://www.indeed.com/cmp/Nighthawk-Investigations/job-titles/Locator

License Requirements for Skip Tracers

Skip tracers locate individuals on behalf of collection agencies, lawyers and private investigator firms. They use skip tracing techniques such as database searches or contacting the missing person's neighbors. Most states require private investigators hired as skip tracers to be licensed.

work.chron.com

 

[MollyDDD]

YES!!
The coroner is included --see below

Gull issued a gag order in December 2022 barring attorneys, law enforcement officials, court personnel, the coroner and the girls’ family members from commenting on the case to the public or the media in any form, including social media.

Judge delays trial for man charged in 2017 Delphi murders

A judge on Tuesday delayed until October the murder trial of an Indiana man charged in the killings of two teenage girls after the man’s attorneys expressed concerns they would not have adequate time to present their case.

www.nbcchicago.com

A question for the more seasoned sleuth's here…would you say that most criminal cases have as strict gag orders as this case?