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

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
The defense brought up as an example how at least 600 files on one disc were labeled in numbers rather than a description of what the evidence is.”

That’s insane. There has to be some type of ledger somewhere ? How would anyone be able to work like that ? How could you possibly work on a case with several other people and have all your files titled by random numbers with no organization or identifiers?


(Unless these are files that the prosecution isn’t using at all so they don’t care to title them in a normal way )


 
The defense brought up as an example how at least 600 files on one disc were labeled in numbers rather than a description of what the evidence is.”

That’s insane. There has to be some type of ledger somewhere ? How would anyone be able to work like that ? How could you possibly work on a case with several other people and have all your files titled by random numbers with no organization or identifiers?


(Unless these are files that the prosecution isn’t using at all so they don’t care to title them in a normal way )



I've heard a defense attorney speak on this. Can't link the source, so take this as my personal experience and opinion. He says this is somewhat common practice to just make things more difficult for the other side. Maybe not on this scale, but it isn't unheard of.

IMO MOO
 
The defense brought up as an example how at least 600 files on one disc were labeled in numbers rather than a description of what the evidence is.”

That’s insane. There has to be some type of ledger somewhere ? How would anyone be able to work like that ? How could you possibly work on a case with several other people and have all your files titled by random numbers with no organization or identifiers?


(Unless these are files that the prosecution isn’t using at all so they don’t care to title them in a normal way )


Was that information labeled and color-coded for the prosecution as they collected it for 6+ years during their investigation?
 
Finally Det. Kevin Murphy testifies in court and this is what we get:
The Court also heard testimony from retired Indiana State Police detective Kevin Murphy. The defense team says Murphy and two other investigators believed third-party suspects might have been involved in the murders.
 
I'm confused by this statement. What does it mean?
"McCleland argues that State is in compliance and that any violations due to timeliness should result in a continuance as opposed to the item being excluded from being introduced."

I think he is saying that IF the FBI or certain experts have not yet released their reports, that should result in a continuance, or a postponement, and not a suppression of evidence. IMO
 
Last edited:
Finally Det. Kevin Murphy testifies in court and this is what we get:


And this little bit...

Kevin Murphy, a retired Indiana State Police officer who worked on the Delphi case from 2017 to 2019, said that while other investigators did not consider Holder a suspect, he and two others did. He said there was an "undeniable link" between Delphi and supposed Odinists from Rushville.

 
McCleland argues that State is in compliance and that any violations due to timeliness should result in a continuance as opposed to the item being excluded from being introduced.

I think he is saying that IF the FBI or certain experts have not yet released their reports, that should result in a continuance, or a postponement, and not a suppression of evidence. IMO

OK, thank you. I was thinking this was about evidence from the State being turned over to the Defense, and I wasn't understanding.....because I think the point would be, if it was intentional, that the State did not want it to be introduced. But you're saying evidence to BOTH sides? Hope you understand my questions. I don't know if I'm being clear.
 
And this little bit...

Kevin Murphy, a retired Indiana State Police officer who worked on the Delphi case from 2017 to 2019, said that while other investigators did not consider Holder a suspect, he and two others did. He said there was an "undeniable link" between Delphi and supposed Odinists from Rushville.

The part about Holeman becoming irate with him in the hallway about it was quite interesting. Guy has a temper!

IMO MOO
 
And this little bit...

Kevin Murphy, a retired Indiana State Police officer who worked on the Delphi case from 2017 to 2019, said that while other investigators did not consider Holder a suspect, he and two others did. He said there was an "undeniable link" between Delphi and supposed Odinists from Rushville.

An undeniable link with supposed Odinists.
How can it be undeniable if they are only supposed?
 
To be fair, The prosecution included a video of a random unrelated deceased man being turned over by cops within their discovery material, so we can’t really point the finger at just the defense.

So let's say the state did NOT include the info of the dead body----later on would the DT use that against them, trying to say they hid that info from them? I think they might have tried to twist it that way...
There have been established protocols in the past for cases that include graphic material, again I would refer to the gannon stauch and Tylee/JJ cases.

I personally see no unique reason in this case for not broadcasting, which has not been solved in another.
 
An undeniable link with supposed Odinists.
How can it be undeniable if they are only supposed?
To paraphrase Pollyanna... If you look for Odinists, you shall surely find them.

I think some people involved in this case were looking hard for ritual and conspiracy. So they found them, but never conclusively enough for anything resembling probable cause, and they missed the CVS guy who looked exactly like BG who'd admitted to being at the abduction site at the right time on the day.

MOO
 
Was that information labeled and color-coded for the prosecution as they collected it for 6+ years during their investigation?
I think they were just expecting actual words. I’m not sure how anyone would think labelling 600 documents with random numerical titles with no ledger would be acceptable in any office setting.
 
So let's say the state did NOT include the info of the dead body----later on would the DT use that against them, trying to say they hid that info from them? I think they might have tried to twist it that way...

Not sure I'm following.... it was a completely unrelated dead body. How would they even know it existed to be able to use it against them? Why would they complain that the State didn't include the dead body of Mr. Winston Abernathy (I just made that name up) who died of natural causes in his bed on 123 Main Street? Seems much more egregious that they DID include it in Discovery, no? (I mean, poor Mr. Abernathy!)

IMO MOO
 
I think they were just expecting actual words. I’m not sure how anyone would think labelling 600 documents with random numerical titles with no ledger would be acceptable in any office setting.

Unless you were purposefully trying to make things difficult.

IMO MOO
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
159
Guests online
2,376
Total visitors
2,535

Forum statistics

Threads
601,001
Messages
18,116,923
Members
230,995
Latest member
truelove
Back
Top