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

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
If that is true, I look forward to seeing a quick filing of charges against the alleged hacker, since that would be trivial to prove. If he inappropriately accessed an account to gain this information, that's just as bad (if not worse) than some of the things being accused of some of the defense members/associates. I would hope those impacted would not hesitate to contact the relevant authorities, as well as pursue civil litigation so that anyone involved in these alleged criminal offenses and slander/defamation are held accountable.

JMO

Purely my observations from following social media in this case.....authorities don't seem to care too much about hacking (or doxxing or harassing or even straight-out death threats) going on among "internet cranks" as the MS calls them.

IMO MOO
 
Hah, CW is running a little low on credibility in this matter right now IMO.

The MS stated up front that the Owner who had all of the rights of the Account gave them the material after he decided to close it down when he felt it was getting dangerously out of hand.

There was no hacking even though that sounds much more conspiracy-ish and underhanded.

I'm attaching the Part One of Three episodes where it plainly states this within the first 5-10 minutes:

The Delphi Murders: The Secret Messages of the Delphi Defense’s Brain Trust: Part One: "Zone of Pain"

EBM: To attach the specific episode

JMO

So, it's PM's word against CW's word.

IMO MOO
 
Who's RA again? Oh yeah, that would be R&B's Defendant Client charged with the brutal murder of two young girls facing LWOP, that they are super emotionally attached to and would have defended pro bono. Right.

Funny how we don't hear much about him lately, R&B are too focused on social media numbers and maligning JG and the State.

Guys do YOUR jobs, please? Even RA deserves better than this. Get Rick to Court and let a jury of his peers decide his guilt or innocence. This is not a game. :mad:

MOO
Have you heard B&R somewhere in social media or even in the news? I have not. I've heard about them only via podcasters and content creators. How far behind am I?
 
If that is true, I look forward to seeing a quick filing of charges against the alleged hacker, since that would be trivial to prove. If he inappropriately accessed an account to gain this information, that's just as bad (if not worse) than some of the things being accused of some of the defense members/associates. I would hope those impacted would not hesitate to contact the relevant authorities, as well as pursue civil litigation so that anyone involved in these alleged criminal offenses and slander/defamation are held accountable.

JMO
So how would we know who is being truthful here? MS is accused of omitting and reading things out of context... CW says someone used a password to "steal" information. Neither side seems to have provided actual hard evidence to the masses... how do we know which side is fully forthcoming?
 
Hah, CW is running a little low on credibility in this matter right now IMO.

The MS stated up front that the Owner who had all of the rights of the Account gave them the material after he decided to close it down when he felt it was getting dangerously out of hand.

There was no hacking even though that sounds much more conspiracy-ish and underhanded.

I'm attaching the Part One of Three episodes where it plainly states this within the first 5-10 minutes:

The Delphi Murders: The Secret Messages of the Delphi Defense’s Brain Trust: Part One: "Zone of Pain"

EBM: To attach the specific episode

JMO
They all lack credibility imo. He said / she said. I already asked in my last post - how do we know which of them is being fully honest? We do not. Because no one seems to want to put it all out in public for us to decide for ourselves. Instead, we're expected to take someone else's word for it. No thanks.
 
I don't believe we have evidence that B & R did the blabbing as of yet? Seems so far all we have is he said / she said? Possibly I've missed updates...? Their job is to make sure RA's rights are not trampled. I believe they've been trying to do this - but I also believe JG isn't really listening (based on lack of hearings / written decisions in many motions she denied).

That is not their job to the point of neglecting and delaying their other duties which is to address the prosecution’s case and position their client if found guilty for the appellate court.

They must present suitable objections and arguments that are adequately documented to secure the grounds for an appeal.

The defense must make those prompt and recorded objections to evidence during trial proceedings.


The Franks Memo is nothing but blabbing so we have precedent set for R & B.


all imo
 
So how would we know who is being truthful here? MS is accused of omitting and reading things out of context... CW says someone used a password to "steal" information. Neither side seems to have provided actual hard evidence to the masses... how do we know which side is fully forthcoming?
MS interviewed the guy who owned the account. I listened to it today. He spoke of his reasons why he came forward and said he gave them the password and permission to view the messages. So unless he's lying (not sure why he would??), MS didn't get the info from anyone that stole the information.

I don't find it appropriate for someone working on RA's case in any way shape or form to be communicating with ANY content creators or talking about any details of the case at all with them. Not sure how that part could be out of context. The fact she felt the need to make a statement about it says she was communicating with them in those messages and that alone shouldn't have been happening.

There is no excuse for bad mouthing the victims families and for that I am not sure it can be taken out of context either. Laughing and joking about crime scene photos of dead children?
 
Can anyone imagine if the State had a group of SM cranks that engaged with a Due Process Gang type of 'lawyers' with this kind of disturbing, highly inflammatory information?

It would break the Internet and the public would be calling for their heads. It's amazing how it's only a one way street it seems.

Just sayin'. ;)

MOO
 
They all lack credibility imo. He said / she said. I already asked in my last post - how do we know which of them is being fully honest? We do not. Because no one seems to want to put it all out in public for us to decide for ourselves. Instead, we're expected to take someone else's word for it. No thanks.
A tip: the girls of that account made a post a few weeks ago complaing "The blabla “X” account was deleted entirely. They explain they do not have access to any of their accounts, including the YouTube channel. They explain it was the guy that locked them out..
 
Last edited:
A tip: the girls of that account made a post a few weeks ago complaing "The blabla “X” account was deleted entirely. They explain they do not have access to any of our their accounts, including the YouTube channel. They explain it was the guy that locked them out..
Uh Oh, he ll hath no fury like a woman locked out of her SM account. :p
 
That is not their job to the point of neglecting and delaying their other duties which is to address the prosecution’s case and position their client if found guilty for the appellate court.

They must present suitable objections and arguments that are adequately documented to secure the grounds for an appeal.

The defense must make those prompt and recorded objections to evidence during trial proceedings.


The Franks Memo is nothing but blabbing so we have precedent set for R & B.


all imo
Well, about that, Scrantin and Lebrato had apparently planned to file their own version of a Franks Motion - so they too must have seen some issue with the way in which the LE obtained their search warrant. As I recall, JG was willing to hear them on that issue, but not willing to hear B&R on the same issue for some reason. I'd have liked to have have seen what they'd have put out to be honest. EXCLUSIVE: Richard Allen's former defense attorney doubts he'll get a fair trial
 
No, Baldwin and Rozzi rejected that "brilliant" idea of Cara. Kudos for them. Even they know there are lines that cannot be crossed. If they had given the green light, Cara and the others would have done it. But there is no guarantee that they won't try to do it next time and that they will not have the green light by Baldwin and Rozzi.
That's why it was. so important that these messages were leaked publicly. This will put the brakes on any kind of green light for these kinds of shenanigans, hopefully.
 
MS interviewed the guy who owned the account. I listened to it today. He spoke of his reasons why he came forward and said he gave them the password and permission to view the messages. So unless he's lying (not sure why he would??), MS didn't get the info from anyone that stole the information.

I don't find it appropriate for someone working on RA's case in any way shape or form to be communicating with ANY content creators or talking about any details of the case at all with them. Not sure how that part could be out of context. The fact she felt the need to make a statement about it says she was communicating with them in those messages and that alone shouldn't have been happening.

There is no excuse for bad mouthing the victims families and for that I am not sure it can be taken out of context either. Laughing and joking about crime scene photos of dead children?
Honestly? We still have nothing more than he said / she said. Its a sideshow. A distraction. The very thing most of us say we want to avoid in this (and most other if not all other) case(s). If there is something illegal that went on, someone should deal with it. I've asked upthread who that would be - what powers that be could deal with it? The police? Judge Gull? Ethics committee? Who would deal with it and how would a party get them involved? So far, nothing seems to really have come of it in terms of consequences for the parties nor for RA's actual case. If something is going to come of it, when would we expect this to happen by?

Regarding the family being victimized by the show. The family would probably only imagine it happening until this show came out. Shame on them for making it public. Its just as gross to put the comments out to the public as it is to make the comments in a "private" convo imo. Hopefully the family members didn't bother to listen to the podcast and hopefully none connected to to them will tell them... of course they'd also have to ignore the media outlets who have since reported on the content creators war....
 
I don't find it appropriate for someone working on RA's case in any way shape or form to be communicating with ANY content creators or talking about any details of the case at all with them.

RSBM

I underestand this viewpoint. Many share your opinion. I wonder how many who feel this way would react if the State was doing this or something similar.

Just pondering.

IMO JMO MOO
 
Can anyone imagine if the State had a group of SM cranks that engaged with a Due Process Gang type of 'lawyers' with this kind of disturbing, highly inflammatory information?

It would break the Internet and the public would be calling for their heads. It's amazing how it's only a one way street it seems.

Just sayin'. ;)

MOO
Having been in backrooms of several court rooms with counsel and opposing counsel for various matters at various levels of court... I can assure you, they all make pretty similar remarks about eachother and the judge, and even families / accused etc from time to time. Often times, they even laugh about it. Oh the stories I could tell! LOL. So do we expect some sort of consequences then for the leaker or the involved chat participants or both?
 
That's why it was. so important that these messages were leaked publicly. This will put the brakes on any kind of green light for these kinds of shenanigans, hopefully.
I hope so. Honestly attorneys should not trust "content creators" to help with with their case. What do these content creators know about the case that the defense doesn't know? Nothing. The defense has access to the evidence. I hope it is a lesson and the attorneys stay away from youtube and "contents creators" but I doubt it. They should learn with Brian Kohberger's attorney. High profile case with many people sending love letters to her client, many conspiracies and she still doesn't engage with internet sleuths as far as I know. A breath of fresh air watching an attorney in a high profile case with ethics and only interested in defend her client in COURT and not interested in turning the trial into a circus. I hope she continues that way.
 
Honestly? We still have nothing more than he said / she said. Its a sideshow. A distraction. The very thing most of us say we want to avoid in this (and most other if not all other) case(s). If there is something illegal that went on, someone should deal with it. I've asked upthread who that would be - what powers that be could deal with it? The police? Judge Gull? Ethics committee? Who would deal with it and how would a party get them involved? So far, nothing seems to really have come of it in terms of consequences for the parties nor for RA's actual case. If something is going to come of it, when would we expect this to happen by?

Regarding the family being victimized by the show. The family would probably only imagine it happening until this show came out. Shame on them for making it public. Its just as gross to put the comments out to the public as it is to make the comments in a "private" convo imo. Hopefully the family members didn't bother to listen to the podcast and hopefully none connected to to them will tell them... of course they'd also have to ignore the media outlets who have since reported on the content creators war....
My point being the messages are legit and you can still see it as he said/she said, but that doesn't change the fact the messages happened and a participant in those messages is who shared the access with MS AND he has talked about it. I think someone participating in the discussions would know the context. He spoke about it. So for CW to say it was hacked or stolen or whatever else is just not true and when the person that gave access says they did, I believe them.

This is about the integrity of the defense. The family is already hurting so podcasters exposing the truth about things is not doing more harm than has already been done. I think it in fact confirms what the family already knows about them. They just can't speak about it because they are honoring the gag order.. unlike the defense.
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
166
Guests online
1,757
Total visitors
1,923

Forum statistics

Threads
600,012
Messages
18,102,608
Members
230,968
Latest member
one that lived it
Back
Top