Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #189

[gremlin444]

Unless their statements are part of the evidence the was "lost." That's what I mean.

IMO MOO

I confess to being confused by this. Can anyone point me to any statements in filings by the defense, the prosecution, or anything in reliable MSM that talks SPECIFICALLY about written documentation of interviews or written witness statements being lost? I've only been able to find the information about the video interviews being lost.

I would think if that if that written documentation of major witness interviews was lost, we would have seen the defense putting that fact into court filings long before now. I'm sure I've probably missed a filing here or there, so if anyone can point me to any allegations/statements by the defense or the state about WRITTEN documentation being lost, I'd love to go read it. TIA.

 

[justtrish]

Outside of BB believing that she sees the girls while she is walking back from the bridge, has any other person on the trial said they saw the girls? MOO There are many more people on the trials that aren’t mentioned in the PCA.

Sadly, wrongful convictions happen all the time. With all the “coincidences” in this case, it’s hard to trust the source that appears to be the cause of said “coincidences”. Then there’s the issue with similar sources on either side. If I’m supposed to trust a cop just because they’re a cop, why would I pick ISP over the FBI? If I’m supposed to not believing the inmate who reported the jail conditions, why would I believe the inmates telling me about confessions?

Eyewitness reports and false confessions are the leading causes of wrongful conviction. We have both options in this case. That’s why so many people are adamant that real evidence should be presented in order to convict someone. Scientific evidence, digital data etc. Items that don’t rely on human opinion.

All MOO

Eyewitness misidentification is one of the most common factors in cases of wrongful conviction. Nationally, 28% of all exonerations involve mistaken eyewitness identification
False confessions have been a factor in 12% of proven wrongful convictions nationwide. While it may seem difficult to understand why someone would confess to a crime they did not commit, there are many reasons that this can happen. For instance, physical intimidation or threats of violence by law enforcement can lead a suspect to falsely confess.

Why Do Wrongful Convictions Happen?

By studying cases where individuals have been exonerated, we have been able to identify the main factors that contribute to wrongful convictions. At KWIP, we

www.colorado.edu

I believe the only people on that section of the trail (from that parking area toward Monon high bridge) was BB and the man she saw out on the bridge, then Abby and Libby. We have no reason not to believe BB when she says she saw a man on the high bridge and then she turns to walk back toward her car and she passes Abby and Libby. I think it's nearly 100% that she actually saw Abby and Libby because her arrival to the parking area is time stamped due to the video cameras. Abby and Libby arriving is also time stamped due to video cameras. BB's time leaving is time stamped due to the video of her car leaving. We have an exact time that Libby takes a photo of Abby on the Monon High bridge. I think those things line up to show that the girls passed BB and then went to the bridge to take the photo and the timing all works.

If the only people BB sees going to the bridge is the man on the bridge and the only people she sees leaving the bridge and going to her car are Abby and Libby, then we know Libby takes that photo and starts recording at almost the exact time BB is leaving in her car.. so there wouldn't be any other people walking at that specific time to see Abby and Libby or BB would have also observed them as she walked to her car.

I guess someone could have been running down the trail and just missed BB as she went to the parking lot, but the man on the bridge doesn't look like much of a runner to me so I'd say the only people that would have seen Abby and Libby, would also have been seen by BB. She had no reason to lie when she gave a statement so I feel confident enough to say nobody else was there at that time.

 

[MiniMoo]

That too but for me, the main take away was more how co-witnesses adopt what their co-witnesses tell them as their own recollections when they discuss things amongst themselves, especially before giving their statements to police. So if the three witnesses went on with their walk, and they spoke about the guy who wore X clothes and was Yay tall, and who didn’t say hello or whatever they said, then each thing said by one of them can and is likely to become part of the other’s collective memory, even if that isn’t how they actually saw it. The research on it is quite interesting and very compelling imo. Often times, witness statements are a huge factor that lead to wrongful convictions. Some stats say that witness statements factor into over 70% of wrongful convictions. Causes of Wrongful Convictions - Innocence Canada.

I’ve read other stats that suggest they factor into well over 75% percent of wrongful convictions. So to me, witness statements are good and helpful but can be also very flawed and dangerous!

Sometimes it can be who writes the witness statements as well getting it wrong.

Years ago, I unexpectedly witnessed these lounge windows (large arch style ones) being shattered from the inside out in the middle of a not sure what.

The apartment was about 3 stories off the ground, well lit up from the inside as it was dark outside and the people inside could be heard arguing prior to the damage being done, but not really anything else.

I do remember this umbrella sticking out like a sore thumb after the last window was smashed in only as there were curtains I couldn't see who was responsible for the damage or who had been holding the umbrella.

I was the only witness (outside).

Anyhow, about two weeks after it happened, the young police officer (I remember his face quite clearly) who wrote down my statement came to see me to ask if I would attend court as a witness even though he couldn't say if I'd be called up or not, also, he wanted to make sure my witness statement was in order.

It wasn't!

I told him straight that he had written parts incorrectly and that I would write it again for him instead because what he had written didn't sit right with me at all. Like things in the wrong order and Im sure he was trying to make out I had seen who was inside whereas I hadn't. Silhouettes maybe, but no one's actual face.

Point is - sometimes Witness Statements can be incorrectly written up as well by whoever is doing it.

Most of the time, however, I'm sure they aren't!

 

[mrjitty]

i wonder if Murdersheet can file these leaks into the case for the Judge?

Law enforcement seems the wrong move here. MH may be in contempt.

 

[TTF14]

i wonder if Murdersheet can file these leaks into the case for the Judge?

Law enforcement seems the wrong move here. MH may be in contempt.

Maybe they did by form of a letter to the court? Maybe that's who the "KMS" correspondence was from we can't read?

 

[photographer4]

DD's notes are informal. His notes led to believe that he didn't know about the timeline and the importance of the girls. Which is normal because it was in the early days, probably LE were still worked in a timeline. So probably he was just asking very simple questions like at the time people were there in the trails and what people saw. He tought he was made a recording but probably didn't. Which is my greatest regret about the case: I'm sure if we have a recording of that, RA would be completely screwed. But anyway, RA boxed himself with his own words. DD know it was girls because RA said and even describe one of them. The girls also describe the same interacion than RA. He boxed himself.

I hear ya, but him saying he saw the girls, and them having seen him does NOT necessarily make him a killer. It makes him a man, who at a minimum was at the trails and on the bridge that day who saw a couple of kids. I’m really interested to see the story unfold to learn how they tied him specifically to the crime.

 

[photographer4]

The problem I have is, even if I try and give him the benefit of doubt, then I come back to thinking he is a liar and therefore guilty of this crime.

His timeline, his original one, matches up with the young teenage girls and then the Bridge witness who places him on platform 1, which he admits he went out to and stood there, and we know she saw the girls walk past.

So we can place the girls on his direct path, so I have options

A - He comes off the bridge and walks to find this bench and the girls walk past
B- He is still on the bridge as the girls walk on to it

Whichever option I look at, he must have seen them so therefore, he is lying, and he would only do that because he is involved.

MOOOOOOOO

It is hard to know if he straight up lied that he didn’t see the kids or if he just didn’t register there presence really for some reason. Maybe he was engaged with something else. Maybe his mind was focused on something else. There was a great video on YouTube about this:

For those who haven’t seen it before, I’d be curious to know how well you scored on it?

 

[girlhasnoname]

Outside of BB believing that she sees the girls while she is walking back from the bridge, has any other person on the trial said they saw the girls? MOO There are many more people on the trials that aren’t mentioned in the PCA.

Sadly, wrongful convictions happen all the time. With all the “coincidences” in this case, it’s hard to trust the source that appears to be the cause of said “coincidences”. Then there’s the issue with similar sources on either side. If I’m supposed to trust a cop just because they’re a cop, why would I pick ISP over the FBI? If I’m supposed to not believing the inmate who reported the jail conditions, why would I believe the inmates telling me about confessions?

Eyewitness reports and false confessions are the leading causes of wrongful conviction. We have both options in this case. That’s why so many people are adamant that real evidence should be presented in order to convict someone. Scientific evidence, digital data etc. Items that don’t rely on human opinion.

All MOO

Eyewitness misidentification is one of the most common factors in cases of wrongful conviction. Nationally, 28% of all exonerations involve mistaken eyewitness identification
False confessions have been a factor in 12% of proven wrongful convictions nationwide. While it may seem difficult to understand why someone would confess to a crime they did not commit, there are many reasons that this can happen. For instance, physical intimidation or threats of violence by law enforcement can lead a suspect to falsely confess.

Why Do Wrongful Convictions Happen?

By studying cases where individuals have been exonerated, we have been able to identify the main factors that contribute to wrongful convictions. At KWIP, we

www.colorado.edu

Thank goodness there's going to be far more information and true facts coming in from the State during the trial, which is when it should happen, instead of being sneakily piece milled in Motions, Filings and Hail Mary'd around the gag order.

Guys do your jobs. Get RA to trial and let a jury of his peers decide his innocence or guilt. It's way beyond time and since he's factually innocent (their words) it should be easy for R&B to do. 'Should' being the key word here.

JMO

 

[Ravenmoon]

MurderSheet has a new episode on alleged leaks from the defence investigator MH to 'internet cranks'

The Delphi Murders: Defense Investigator Matthew Hoffman, Phone Pings, and Youtube Leaks: "If Something Happens to Us"

Today, we will delve more into the relationship between Richard Allen's defense investigator Matthew Hoffman and internet cranks. Specifically, we unpack...

murdersheetpodcast.com

Honestly, I hope that JG, NMcL and anyone that has been targeted by this Dupe Process Gang get a hold of this information ASAP.

If the receipts are there, I would hope that it's dealt with and that anyone that follows the case pays close attention.

It is disgraceful.

JMO

 

[TTF14]

Honestly, I hope that JG, NMcL and anyone that has been targeted by this Dupe Process Gang get a hold of this information ASAP.

If the receipts are there, I would hope that it's dealt with and that anyone that follows the case pays close attention.

It is disgraceful.

JMO

I'm more interested in the actual information, not who he allegedly showed it to. It's still not "out there" so it's still confidential it would seem. No harm, no foul?

IMO MOO

 

[Ravenmoon]

I'm more interested in the actual information, not who he allegedly showed it to. It's still not "out there" so it's still confidential it would seem. No harm, no foul?

IMO MOO

Considering that the gag order was repeatedly violated, I would reply"Harm has been done, and the 2 main attorneys are at fault."

Of course, this is my opinion.

 

[MiniMoo]

It is hard to know if he straight up lied that he didn’t see the kids or if he just didn’t register there presence really for some reason. Maybe he was engaged with something else. Maybe his mind was focused on something else. There was a great video on YouTube about this:

For those who haven’t seen it before, I’d be curious to know how well you scored on it?

That exercise was fun to do!!!

Overfocused I think as I thought the passes were just white to white until I thought I saw (surely not) white to black around the time that costumed person slid into the middle.

I didn't see the moonwalk at all nor did I really pay any attention to that bear.

I counted 16 passes because of that mishap.

 

[ClearAhead]

To be clear, I don’t think that there was a conspiracy to lose interviews by LE or the State. I think these things do happen - quite by accident. But it’s not good when those interviews could have been helpful to a jury to see exactly what was asked, how it was asked and what the answers were. EG: a lot of human communication isn’t spoken. Instead, it is body language. Imagine hearing as a juror that a witness described a man emerge from the woods “bloody and muddy” - now imagine seeing how she was asked to describe the man she saw, and watching her become quite animated in doing so on a tv screen. Big difference imo as now you can see, hear and assess what happened entirely vs just being told from an officer’s notes what happened. No link… so MOOOO.

Regarding witnesses: I don’t believe they’d testify falsely on purpose at all. I think though there are very real and rather well researched and documented cases where witness testimony has been subtly (not even intentionally) impacted by factors such as: what they’re asked, by whom, when they’re asked. By factors such as: whether they witnessed a violent crime, or didn’t even know a crime was taking place when they became a witness… etc etc…

The list of issues a witness statement could have is quite long actually, so… have a link instead: Eyewitness Misidentification - Innocence Project.

Again, I believe there are concerns with RA - he is likely guilty in whole or in part but I’m waiting for the trial before I convict him.

A jury is never going to be asked to listen to LE interviews with someone not charged with any crime so it’s not going to matter if they were overwritten. Who appears to be the guiltiest (pick one?!) is just not how criminal trials are conducted. The vast majority of this fluffy stuff we’ve ben hearing about pretrial is never going to see the light of day during the actual trial. However I can understand how the D antics may be misleading depending on how many criminal trials you’ve followed.

Until the trial occurs I also don’t think it’s worth speculating whether or not RA will get wrongfully convicted, or even whether a mistrial occurs or a guilty verdict is successfully appealed and he is later retried. Those happenings are anomalies, along the lines of WHAT IF a plane crashes into the roof of the courthouse during the trial? The verdict in the vast majority of convictions stand as given and of the total of all flights, thankfully plane crashes are very rare.

In the past I’ve followed trials where I’ve been certain the accused is innocent, sometimes going against popular opinion. Then comes the trial and evidence/testimony is presented which I had no idea even existed and it changes my opinion. My conclusion as a result of that is for some reason we the public tend to think we know everything, possibly because often we rely on the media to know everything about everything. The only thing I’m going to predict is that’s rarely true, better to keep an open mind until the trial occurs.
MOO and JMO

 

[susane7]

I hear ya, but him saying he saw the girls, and them having seen him does NOT necessarily make him a killer. It makes him a man, who at a minimum was at the trails and on the bridge that day who saw a couple of kids. I’m really interested to see the story unfold to learn how they tied him specifically to the crime.

I understand but I think the girls said the guy they saw on the trails is BG, the man on the pics/video. The timeline works and doesn't look good for RA IMO.

 

[photographer4]

That exercise was fun to do!!!

Overfocused I think as I thought the passes were just white to white until I thought I saw (surely not) white to black around the time that costumed person slid into the middle.

I didn't see the moonwalk at all nor did I really pay any attention to that bear.

I counted 16 passes because of that mishap.

And did you notice the “fake passes”? Where some folks pretend to pass the ball, but there was nothing in their hands to begin with? I found it super interesting! It really shows something I’m learning about recently - that we pay attention to things that seem pertinent, sometimes so much so that we don’t really notice the peripheral things that might be going on! No link, so MOOOO.

 

[photographer4]

I understand but I think the girls said the guy they saw on the trails is BG, the man on the pics/video. The timeline works and doesn't look good for RA IMO.

Yes, it it could well be that they did see RA - it seems likely that they did as he seems to have also noticed the girls. But that still doesn’t make him a proven killer. It still only shows that he was where he said he was (so far). Them seeing one another doesn’t automatically make RA a killer. Did RA also note that he saw the lady leaving the area who saw him on the platform? I cannot recall.

 

[mrjitty]

I guess not many have listened to the MS bombshells yet

In short, the defence investigator, MH, is alleged to have shared the ping evidence with the You Tubers who used it to manufacture a conspiracy out of whole cloth. This was not public info. The defence latter amplified this conspiracy with their Franks filing about the ping evidence.

This MS reporting lays bare precisely the japery the defence is engaged in here. They know full well the ping evidence is not exculpatory. Rather they are amplifying a conspiracy they themselves already engineered.

Its bonkers.

There are other alarming allegations but that is the gist of it.

So yet again, it is now clear what MW was doing. These are blatant breaches of the protective order IMO. At the very least, the Judge needs to haul MH in to explain himself.

MOO

 

[photographer4]

I guess not many have listened to the MS bombshells yet

In short, the defence investigator, MH, is alleged to have shared the ping evidence with the You Tubers who used it to manufacture a conspiracy out of whole cloth. This was not public info. The defence latter amplified this conspiracy with their Franks filing about the ping evidence.

This MS reporting lays bare precisely the japery the defence is engaged in here. They know full well the ping evidence is not exculpatory. Rather they are amplifying a conspiracy they themselves already engineered.

Its bonkers.

There are other alarming allegations but that is the gist of it.

So yet again, it is now clear what MW was doing. These are blatant breaches of the protective order IMO. At the very least, the Judge needs to haul MH in to explain himself.

MOO

Thank you for providing a summary for people like me who won’t listen to it. So I am wondering, how does anything being discussed by the podcasters MS actually affect the case at hand, if at all? What good does it do the D to put the info out there (if they did in fact do this)? What good does it do the MH guy to put it out there? What is the end goal here? If the case is going to be tried and decided upon by a jury, who may not even know about any of these things, then why is this material relevant to the case? I take MS and YouTubers as nothing more than entertainment for the masses. I don’t listen to them or follow them really so this is my actual question - what is their end goal in having this stuff out there?

 

[ClearAhead]

Yes, it it could well be that they did see RA - it seems likely that they did as he seems to have also noticed the girls. But that still doesn’t make him a proven killer. It still only shows that he was where he said he was (so far). Them seeing one another doesn’t automatically make RA a killer. Did RA also note that he saw the lady leaving the area who saw him on the platform? I cannot recall.

That’s right, the jury rarely votes to convict based on a single piece of evidence. They consider everything they’ve heard - the totality of evidence - and includes not only people who claimed to have seen someone who might look like him, but also what he said during his own interviews, what he may have said to other people, what was collected during the search warrant along with results of forensic examinations. MOO

 

[TTF14]

Thank you for providing a summary for people like me who won’t listen to it. So I am wondering, how does anything being discussed by the podcasters MS actually affect the case at hand, if at all? What good does it do the D to put the info out there (if they did in fact do this)? What good does it do the MH guy to put it out there? What is the end goal here? If the case is going to be tried and decided upon by a jury, who may not even know about any of these things, then why is this material relevant to the case? I take MS and YouTubers as nothing more than entertainment for the masses. I don’t listen to them or follow them really so this is my actual question - what is their end goal in having this stuff out there?

I'd guess their end goal is to get the defense team thrown off the case (and, in turn, have the trial delayed). But that's just a guess because I also can't understand the purpose in releasing the existence of private information out into the masses, thus giving internet sleuths more things/people to start digging into. Private information was discussed among a few people who are on the side of the defense. MS found out about it, so decided they had to make it public. It's a head scratcher, I agree.

IMO MOO