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

[photographer4]

That sounds logical in theory, but I think PM had seen enough to know that crossing this group would land him in Motta's " zone of pain."

This guy wanted a public record for his safety. He has first hand experience with the way these people handle anyone that disagrees with them.

Plus, we don't know if he has contacted authorities as well. Maybe he has?

JMO

Fair enough. I do hope he did or that MS did on his behalf if he believes he could be in danger. Again, thanks for the discussion.

 

[katydid23]

I agree that he probably saw the girls, and they probably saw him. I'm of the view that is he probably guilty in whole or in part. I'd still like to know how the state actually goes about proving BARD that he did the crime as accused. I hope they manage to if RA is in fact the guilty party

I agree with you that he is probably guilty, in whole or in part. And I don't think the state will have a hard time proving it BARD.

If they can prove that RA=BG, then they will have a Guilty verdict because of that. We have not heard or seen the rest of Libby's video----but those who have say that there is a mention of a gun, and they are given orders as the video goes on.

So if the state can prove that RA is the one that forced the girls off the bridge with a gun, then he is automatically Guilty of murder as well, no matter who actually committed the atrocity. That is what the Felony Murder law says. If someone dies while a perpetrator is committing a Felony, that perp can be charged with murder. I have no doubt they will charge him with murder if they can prove felony kidnapping.

Now, they might have further evidence to show he was actually the one who killed them. I think they do, but who knows? But either way, I think he will be charged with murder for forcing them off the bridge and down the hill, to their eventual death.

 

[MollyDDD]

Bbm.

I think those are some very good questions !

And if those potential jurors didn’t think of that before, they for sure will now!!!

 

[steeltowngirl]

I agree that he probably saw the girls, and they probably saw him. I'm of the view that is he probably guilty in whole or in part. I'd still like to know how the state actually goes about proving BARD that he did the crime as accused. I hope they manage to if RA is in fact the guilty party

If you don’t trust the known evidence, why do you think he’s guilty?

 

[katydid23]

RSBM

Sealed information was allegedly disseminated to random internet strangers by a member of the defense team. That’s pretty egregious…

JMO

If the DT's investigator discussed the Ping info with their wives or close friends, I could certainly understand that. But 'discussing' it with people who produce You-Tube podcasts--->>> that says there was intention behind it, IMO

 

[katydid23]

How do we know this? Link?

How can I link something that does not exist?
I said that RA never said that there was another guy dressed like him on the bridge. I'm pretty sure we'd know about it if he did say that. The DT would have related it publicly many times, imo.

Gotta admit, when I saw that pic I was like damn, that could be my dad.

Middle aged man dress code.

My dad died more than ten years before these murders.

IMO MOO

I think RA is the only man, who not only fit that picture, but also admitted to LE that he was there on the bridge that afternoon. Unlike your Dad.

 

[katydid23]

I appreciate hearing your opinion on this matter, especially since as I noted, I have not and will not listen to the podcast. Bearing that in mind, what makes what MS is saying the gospel truth? I believe it is possible they're reporting it based on how they heard it / saw it / learned about it (whatever "it" is, since I've not heard it, can't really comment on that) - but how come they're the only ones who could be telling the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth? Why is it impossible that some of their sources are unscrupulous, incorrect or somehow motivated to provide such information to perhaps further the "try it in public" idea that we're hearing about? Doesn't the podcast (and other content creations) have the same effect of kinda trying the case in public overall? If that is what MS is trying to blow the whistle on, then I'm not sure I really get how they doing so in ya know, public, is a means to that end?

They are reading the tweets/messages that have been copied from the site. So it its not just 'their opinion' or 'how they heard it'----they are reading to the audience, the messages, word for word. The 'truth' is there in black and white---although it is open to some interpretation.

They are telling the public what the messages said and we can interpret them as we choose. You can listen and make your own interpretations. Maybe you will think it is no big deal that MH was breaking the gag order.

 

[katydid23]

RSBM BBM

No, but they will exploit it. How is this helping further justice for Abby and Libby?

IMO MOO

I think it is revealing the extremes the DT will go to in order to breach the gag order and try to taint the jury pool, with a very biased or distorted view of the evidence. It is important for the public to understand that, IMO.

 

[katydid23]

General question: the people who have provided MS with whatever information is being circulated about now regarding this lawyer or that lawyer's private convos etc - what made them go to MS vs say providing their info to an authority be it police, the Bar, JG herself etc? What is their end goal in providing MS the info in the first place? Do we know?

They may have reported it to authorities as well. As we know, Justice grinds slowly. If they did report it to the Bar or the Ethics Committee, probably nothing would happen for many months. IMO

 

[katydid23]

Well, do we know yet what exactly what MW took photos of and sent around online? I guess I'm asking, is it possible that whatever he took from the attorney's office may not have been *actual* crime scene photos? Could they have been some representation of what the scene looked like vs actual crime scene photos? If the photos were actually taken by LE originally AND unaltered, then yes, they'd be actual crime scene photos. But if they were altered, or somehow changed and were recreations / imaginings or a theory of something, then they may have not even be real crime scene photos in the first place. Unless a judge could see what the original un-edited CS photos were, vs whatever MW snapped photos of an sent out, then I'm not sure the photos were really from the original actual crime scene. I'm not sure I'm articulating this really well, so I hope I make some sort of sense here. To me, given how minor his charges seemed, and that he was given a diversion program instead of some big scary sentence, it just seems that whatever he "leaked" couldn't have been really a breach of the order (no contempt against him?). Couldn't have been as horrible a thing as MS made them out to be really or I'd have expected bigger repercussions for him. Again, I've done my best to articulate my thoughts, but I get they may still be unclear.

This was probably his first offence of any kind. It was not at all unusual for first time offences to be whittled down to a diversion program or a small fine and probation. It does not mean that the original charges were improper, IMO.

 

[MiniMoo]

Indeed! Just like a Defense team can misconstrue, conflate or jumble a witness' words and, with a gag order in place, the witness can't make a public correction.

JMO

I now understand why some, if not most, are advised to answer yes or no (not to elaborate too much if possible) when on the stand because some attorneys will deliberately misconstrue, twist or jumble words, if they can, in order to turn those words against you.

 

[mrjitty]

They are reading the tweets/messages that have been copied from the site. So it its not just 'their opinion' or 'how they heard it'----they are reading to the audience, the messages, word for word. The 'truth' is there in black and white---although it is open to some interpretation.

They are telling the public what the messages said and we can interpret them as we choose. You can listen and make your own interpretations. Maybe you will think it is no big deal that MH was breaking the gag order.

Right.

There are too many questions directed at me so I'll settle for this one post on the subject which jibes with yours.

As before, the MS revelations involve reading out the messages of the participants. Last time, these people did not deny that the messages were accurate, but disputed interpretation. CW also claimed the messages were stolen.

The messages lay out a fairly obvious scheme by MH to give ping data from the discovery to "youtubers" who then used it to create a conspiracy around an apparently innocent person who was investigated and has a hard alibi. None of this was public info, so MS allege the messages do in fact indicate disclosure of the discovery to 3rd parties. i.e exactly what MW was apparently also doing. The difference is this time, we have the messages, whereas currently, police are still trying to crack his iPhone.

Later the defence promoted the same conspiracy in relation to geofence data they claimed to have only just received. Query now whether they actually had it before October '23.

The reason this is at the very least unethical is that the defence has gone beyond PR/advocacy, to fabricating alternate suspects in the public eye. Presumably with the idea of corrupting the jury pool.

Not to mention the gag and protection orders that specifically protect the case evidence against this.

In this case, the whistleblower has simply provided the discord and twitter messages to independent journalists. That is a full legitimate thing for an insider to do.

Claiming MS are just in it for the click$ singularly fails to confront the allegations. Furthermore there is a strong public interest to this reporting. Especially the defence need to cease these activities immediately and if it takes public exposure to do it, so be it. Especially I fail to see how this reporting endangers the actual trial in any way.

My own opinion etc.

 

[MiniMoo]

To be clear, I wasn't asking to see evidence that RA provided info to anyone else before he gave his statement. I was asking in general - since we know that witness statements can be influenced by things such as talking to people before talking to police, talking with co-witnesses, how questions are asked etc etc etc... then I wondered if similar things can affect statements given by a guilty party (any guilty party, doesn't have to be RA in particular). Was just a theoretical question more than anything, not a literal one.

Regarding what to say or not say in an interrogation interview I'm sure perpetrators have access to a number of resources out there without having to talk to anyone.

 

[sunshineray]

Then they can still testify to what they saw/witnessed and were questionned about. Then be cross examined by the Defence.

IMO MOO.

The videos or interviews that were inadvertently lost have written reports describing what occured during those interviews. MO

 

[sunshineray]

Right.

There are too many questions directed at me so I'll settle for this one post on the subject which jibes with yours.

As before, the MS revelations involve reading out the messages of the participants. Last time, these people did not deny that the messages were accurate, but disputed interpretation. CW also claimed the messages were stolen.

The messages lay out a fairly obvious scheme by MH to give ping data from the discovery to "youtubers" who then used it to create a conspiracy around an apparently innocent person who was investigated and has a hard alibi. None of this was public info, so MS allege the messages do in fact indicate disclosure of the discovery to 3rd parties. i.e exactly what MW was apparently also doing. The difference is this time, we have the messages, whereas currently, police are still trying to crack his iPhone.

Later the defence promoted the same conspiracy in relation to geofence data they claimed to have only just received. Query now whether they actually had it before October '23.

The reason this is at the very least unethical is that the defence has gone beyond PR/advocacy, to fabricating alternate suspects in the public eye. Presumably with the idea of corrupting the jury pool.

Not to mention the gag and protection orders that specifically protect the case evidence against this.

In this case, the whistleblower has simply provided the discord and twitter messages to independent journalists. That is a full legitimate thing for an insider to do.

Claiming MS are just in it for the click$ singularly fails to confront the allegations. Furthermore there is a strong public interest to this reporting. Especially the defence need to cease these activities immediately and if it takes public exposure to do it, so be it. Especially I fail to see how this reporting endangers the actual trial in any way.

My own opinion etc.

The protective order on discovery has definitely been breached by MH (intern/investigator for D) UNLESS CP and AS are contracted workers also for the Defense and have also signed NDAs. MO

 

[sunshineray]

I'd be so much more impressed if the "whistleblower" hadn't gone to a social media creator to blow the whistle though, and had instead gone to an actual authority who could DO something about it all! I'd be even MORE impressed if we were to find out that the content creators in question went to the authorities and filed a report - I could understand them putting it out in public if the powers that be had refused to listen to their concerns. That would make sense. But as it is, I just can't really get behind these creators as a good thing for either side of the case really. Maybe I'll eventually be pleasantly surprised.

How do you know MS has not passed this information, of a breach in the protective order for discovery, onto the court? I'd say, IMO they most certainly have, just like when they contacted the defense and LE about the crime scene photos leak from Baldwin's office. MO

 

[sunshineray]

The DT PURPOSELY leaked crime scene information to a couple of random you-tubers, and that is 'no harm, no foul?'
How so? He was under a court ordered gag order. And there have been other leaks as well, which he tried to deny being intentional. This new info makes me doubt his prior explanation for those leaks.

Extremely doubtful. I wonder if LE can get AS's phone records to verify her supposed communications with AB, BR and MH? There's a protective order on all discovery even being talked about with others not associated with the defense. BIG legal NO-NO!

AB himself sent MS an email response saying he never spoke with AS. Yet, even verified defense associate CW seems to verify, in her conversation texts with AS, that AS knows how AB and BR think. Is that a reference to CW admitting she knows what AS is saying is from the horses mouth...ie...AB and BR? Yes, IMO

Bottom line...some multiple heads should role for violating the protective order on discovery in place since early 2023. AJMO

 

[AppleTreeGreen]

Listening to the episode now but I hope before it ends I learn that MH informed Lebrato and Scremin in November 2023 about what he did in terms of violating the protective order by sharing the aforementioned information with that group of YouTubers and podcasters.

That way Lebrato and Scremin could escalate that info to JG and the prosecution and later the following year to AB and BR.

However, considering that MH is still working for the DT I doubt it since it is my impression that months ago Lebrato and Scremin would both have reported him immediately and it would have addressed it with JG and the prosecution months ago in a hearing or such.

Not sure what exactly MH was thinking. Not only did MH have access to paralegals and other staff and team members working with DT to share this information without violating the protective order but he nearly sabotaged or put at risk the integrity of the case and the process to obtaining both justice for Libby and Abby and fair trial for RA. After all the shifts and changes that RA and his fellow Defense team members were already experiencing at that time why take that chance?

No way he logically thought that the Odinists would annihilate all of them. It’s not like they are being added to the Clinton’s’ 2016 Hit List or being forced to go the depths of the Atlantic in a mini-submarine operated by a Dell keyboard. They are trying a criminal court case like normal.

Also, AS saying she knows how BR and AB thinks gives me the impression that she probably feels that way because of the insight she unfortunately gained from MH as she read through their filed court documents and paid attention to any interviews or press conferences they gave as they prepared for trial. Perhaps thanks to that and particularly MH she feels like at this point she can predict how they will respond to prosecutions motions and strategy as they manage their own research, strategize and prepare themselves and their team for trial without ever really talking to them herself directly. JMO

After everything they have been through why put themselves, RA, Libby’s and Abby’s loved ones, JG, the trial and their team’s members, staff, expert witnesses, time, money, and resources at risk again for a repeat of their Fall 2023 experience? I do find it find somewhat hard to believe they or any rational DT would again, IMO.

 

[girlhasnoname]

Listening to the episode now but I hope before it ends I learn that MH informed Lebrato and Scremin in November 2023 about what he did in terms of violating the protective order by sharing the aforementioned information with that group of YouTubers and podcasters.

That way Lebrato and Scremin could escalate that info to JG and the prosecution and later the following year to AB and BR.

However, considering that MH is still working for the DT I doubt it since it is my impression that months ago Lebrato and Scremin would both have reported him immediately and it would have addressed it with JG and the prosecution months ago in a hearing or such.

Not sure what exactly MH was thinking. Not only did MH have access to paralegals and other staff and team members working with DT to share this information without violating the protective order but he nearly sabotaged or put at risk the integrity of the case and the process to obtaining both justice for Libby and Abby and fair trial for RA. After all the shifts and changes that RA and his fellow Defense team members were already experiencing at that time why take that chance?

No way he logically thought that the Odinists would annihilate all of them. It’s not like they are being added to the Clinton’s’ 2016 Hit List or being forced to go the depths of the Atlantic in a mini-submarine operated by a Dell keyboard. They are trying a criminal court case like normal.

Also, AS saying she knows how BR and AB thinks gives me the impression that she probably feels that way because of the insight she unfortunately gained from MH as she read through their filed court documents and paid attention to any interviews or press conferences they gave as they prepared for trial. Perhaps thanks to that and particularly MH she feels like at this point she can predict how they will respond to prosecutions motions and strategy as they manage their own research, strategize and prepare themselves and their team for trial without ever really talking to them herself directly. JMO

After everything they have been through why put themselves, RA, Libby’s and Abby’s loved ones, JG, the trial and their team’s members, staff, expert witnesses, time, money, and resources at risk again for a repeat of their Fall 2023 experience?

RSBBM

I do find it find somewhat hard to believe they or any rational DT would again, IMO.

Rational would be the key word here. A DT working to provide a vigorous and competent defense would not have to stoop to the level Rozzi and Baldwin have done from the first day they were appointed. That tells me all I need to know about their <lack of> character.

IMO

 

[m00c0w]

I find it quite interesting how theories are concocted about juvenile witnesses altering testimony, colluding with each other to push a particular narrative, witness reports getting lost, even the witnesses possibly outright lying with absolutely zero evidence of any of this... yet, members of the defense team apparently get a free pass to violate court orders because "Well how do we really know this wasn't all just manufactured by MS, even though there would be serious legal consequences for them doing so?"

I'm pretty sure if one of NM's investigators was leaking discovery to random internet sleuths, it would simply be concrete evidence of how unfairly RA is being treated and the massive conspiracy to get him convicted. No questions asked. If a police investigator was handing over investigative materials to third parties, there would be demands they get fired and charged with crimes. Which would not necessarily be wrong in that case, either.

I simply don't understand why some are apparently vigorously defending people that may actually be putting RA's defense in jeopardy. Even if $omene relea$ed the epi$ode for click$, that doe$n't make the material incorrect or le$$ valid. That'$ a $trawman argument. They can be money-grabbers and have a legitimate story at the same time - your local news channel certainly has ads and likely choose what stories are aired and significant resources dedicated to based on what will attract viewership.

JMO