Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #190

[Inthedetails]

I definitely don’t know nearly enough about the laws to say what the judge will or should allow in, But I have a hard time understanding how they wouldn’t be able to talk about an investigation that spanned the first 2.5 years of the case.

It will definitely be interesting to see how the judge rules. Would a judge actually not allow the FBI agents to testify at the trial about their participation in the case?

I cannot predict what the judge will allow/not allow in this case. But my point is, the prosecution's job is to prove RA did what he is accused of and the jury decides, based ONLY on what is presented in court.

jmo

 

[grannygates]

I cannot predict what the judge will allow/not allow in this case. But my point is, the prosecution's job is to prove RA did what he is accused of and the jury decides, based ONLY on what is presented in court.

jmo

Oh sorry! I totally misunderstood you!

I definitely agree with that.

 

[sunshineray]

If his confessions are solid and consistent and such, could the judge not just issue a summary judgement of guilty against him and remove his right to trial?? Like if she reviewed herself what he said, to whom, what conditions etc — can she forgo trial in favour of a summary conviction? Not a lawyer so genuine question

Probably not?

 

[Inthedetails]

If his confessions are solid and consistent and such, could the judge not just issue a summary judgement of guilty against him and remove his right to trial?? Like if she reviewed herself what he said, to whom, what conditions etc — can she forgo trial in favour of a summary conviction? Not a lawyer so genuine question

No. His plea right now is Not Guilty, and that is his right to claim. Even though he has confessed multiple times, his plea that he made in court on the record is Not Guilty, and the judge cannot change his plea for him.

He can change his own plea to Guilty, however. I am half-expecting him to do so, tbh.

jmo

 

[Inthedetails]

Even IF there were others waiting for them , that does not make RA innocent. MAYBE he had accomplices that he does not want to admit to.

But that still means RA is GUILTY of murder.

Exactly. RA is charged with specific crimes and the prosecution has to prove in court RA committed those crimes.

The defense will work very hard to messy up the case by casting doubt here and there and up a tree, but the jury is there to decide if RA committed the crimes that RA is accused of committing.

jmo

 

[Salah11]

I am a lot more confident after this week that he will be found guilty or he will take a plea at some point.

61 confessions is a crazy amount and the fact some came after he found god speaks volumes.

MOO

 

[grannygates]

I gotta say that I am bewildered by Todd Click's theory of what happened: 1) that the girls either met BH's son at the trails and he took them to the Odinist ritual in progress or they stumbled open it, 2) the girls made fun of the ritual, 3) that enraged the participants in the ritual so they killed the girls.

Even ignoring how that doesn't account for Libby's video.....Click's theory boggles my mind. Grown men participating in a sacred (to them) ritual in the woods near a public park during broad daylight become enraged to the point of double homicide by taunting from two young girls??

Click is offering his idea based on his experience in investigating crimes. Grown men have murdered women for refusing to give them their phone number, so it is believable for a man would murder another person because they felt they were being disrespected. MOO

 

[Megnut]

When RA was interviewed prior to his arrest, LE did not know how he'd respond, whether he'd respond, whether he'd implicate anyone else. IMO LE has the authority to detain/arrest a POI at which time they have cause.

Had RA for example implicated others in a credible way, LE may have pivoted, leaning hard on RA to get to others who wielded the knife/blade/hook/tool/cutter, in which case (if it were true), RA might have ultimately gotten a sweetheart deal in exchange for testifying against the others.

It was reasonable to talk to him, to see how he responded to lines of questioning, crime scene photos if shown, etc.

IMO RA's answers which he supplied voluntarily showed deceit where it mattered most. Akin to an answer for everything even if it doesn't fit the evidence LE had at hand.
.
I don't know this to be true but I can IMAGINE something like this-- a map, showing the timestamps and key individuals. Showing a dot for where and when LE could place him. Then: if you saw this group of juveniles and they saw you, that's at such-and-such time... and if BB saw you, turned, then passed Abby and Libby, how did you not see them?

Was absorbed in the stock ticker on my phone.

Where is the phone that will confirm that?

Oh, that's right, I left before that.

How long were you on the platform? Where did you go from there?

That's how interviews go, the ones I've seen played in trials. Lots of questions, lots of answers, lots of opportunities for a liar to get tripped up. Which IMO is exactly what happened.

JMO

 

[photographer4]

I’m not sure if you’ve already seen this filing, but doc has some quotes from transcripts from the interrogation done by Holeman, so you can see the “interrogation method” being used by this investigator. Saying that if RA doesn’t tell him what happened, he’s gonna go down for it. Holeman says he knows that RA is guilty of something and he’s gonna prove it right before he arrests him. It’s pretty interesting seeing the way that this investigator conducts their interrogations.

2024 4/15 suppress 2nd statement .pdf

drive.google.com

I have seen it thanks! I had this in mind but didn’t recall where it was from or have it handy to link to so thanks!

 

[katydid23]

Click is offering his idea based on his experience in investigating crimes. Grown men have murdered women for refusing to give them their phone number, so it is believable for a man would murder another person because they felt they were being disrespected. MOO

But how and why would the 2 girls be there while these grown men were doing a ritual? And why would they be doing it in the afternoon ?

Besides, there has been no evidence offered that any of these men were actually in Delphi that day, let alone at the Bridge park. So none of this speculation will be heard in the trial, most likely. IMO

 

[Ravenmoon]

We have no idea if the man in the back of the video is the man that is speaking because that is not shown on the video.

We don’t know if a box cutter was used in this crime. it sounds like it’s being introduced to match a statement made by RA.

The man that the witness saw at the bridge (the man in Libby’s vid) is not OBG. She was hounding the police to put out her sketch YBG because she said it was absolutely not OBG. She described a young guy with poofy brown hair, which if you look at the last frame of the BG video that looks like poofy brown hair. I think it’s impossible to make a definitive ID based on that video.

IMO A random bullet being found in the ground three weeks after the murders by possibly a random civilian with no chain of custody is a hard connection for me to be confident that it has anything relation to this crime to begin with.

The state has not made any mention of any RA cell phone data. His alibi is that he left at 1:30. The state hasn’t proven that he was on the trails after that, nor have they provided any cell phone data whatsoever to say where he was the entire day. We know that he wasn’t caught in the Geofence from the FBI agent. We also know that the FBI agent gave a list of people for law-enforcement to follow up on (which was destroyed). RA wasn’t on that list. All of that sounds fishy to me if they have cell phone data for all these other people.

So I personally would need a lot more than all that uncertainty to be convinced at this point. There’s also soooo much destroyed evidence and IMO Holeman sat up on the stand lying through his teeth. I honestly can’t even believe a single word the Unified Command says. At what point does all of this destroyed evidence no longer become a coincidence.

All just my thoughts !

MOO

DG has stated that the voice and the video are the same nan on the bridge and that he is the person responsible for the murders.

This is in the 2019 presser

I will add my " my opinion"but it has also been stated as fact.

 

[katydid23]

The “Odinist” conspiracy is the original investigation, which the FBI still has record of. The FBI and other agencies outside of the unified command did not destroy all their evidence re: the original investigation once RA was arrested, so that was what was discussed yesterday.

The FBI agent that wrote the search warrant for Ron Logan‘s property also included this theory in her deposition. So it is the real investigation that occurred at the beginning of the crime. It’s not made up. It’s directly from discovery. The 3rd parties are real people, not a religion.

MOO

True, but no one has even been able to place any of the Odinists at the crime scene, or even in Delphi at the time of the murders. They were able to place RA there, on the bridge, and with the girls.

 

[mrjitty]

I gotta say that I am bewildered by Todd Click's theory of what happened: 1) that the girls either met BH's son at the trails and he took them to the Odinist ritual in progress or they stumbled open it, 2) the girls made fun of the ritual, 3) that enraged the participants in the ritual so they killed the girls.

Even ignoring how that doesn't account for Libby's video.....Click's theory boggles my mind. Grown men participating in a sacred (to them) ritual in the woods near a public park during broad daylight become enraged to the point of double homicide by taunting from two young girls??

there’s wild speculation and then there is this Click theory …

i do wonder if the Judge would allow him to say that kind of thing given he has exactly zero evidence for it

 

[mrjitty]

MS reported that investigators spent some time after the arrest of RA trying to find a link to KAK

that could explain why Nick McL originally said more people might be involved.

especially given KAKs dad and the red jeep story. They might have held concerns evidence linking them could be destroyed.

the prosecutors podcast also speculated the defence may have stayed away from the KAK theory also because a link might subsequently be discovered.

so looks like the KAK link is a real thing they threw resource at but didn’t find anything.

MOO

 

[photographer4]

Even IF there were others waiting for them , that does not make RA innocent. MAYBE he had accomplices that he does not want to admit to.

But that still means RA is GUILTY of murder.

I didn't say that it would make him not guilty, or even less guilty at any point? I'm only pointing out, that while a single man who may be RA is on LG's video on the bridge, it doesn't mean that this single male is the only one who was there. Sorry if I was unclear in any way.

 

[steeltowngirl]

Right, I should say professional detective's use their training to increase their success.

As they should. There would be few arrests if LE would only ask a POI to “pretty please” tell them what happened, POI says nothing, then LE simply throw their hands in the air and let a POI walk out the door.

jmo

 

[steeltowngirl]

I didn't say that it would make him not guilty, or even less guilty at any point? I'm only pointing out, that while a single man who may be RA is on LG's video on the bridge, it doesn't mean that this single male is the only one who was there. Sorry if I was unclear in any way.

Has RA denied being the man in the photo on the bridge?

 

[nadia90]

True, but no one has even been able to place any of the Odinists at the crime scene, or even in Delphi at the time of the murders. They were able to place RA there, on the bridge, and with the girls.

Yup moo

 

[photographer4]

The jury is restricted to considering only the info that is presented in court. (That is why there is a fight to keep some info in or out of the trial.) If they don't know about Some Other Guy, they cannot consider Some Other Guy in their deliberations.

jmo

Realistically - if a juror starts to think on their own that some other guy may have done the crime, regardless of the evidence, what stops them from voting that RA is not guilty? I know it is not supposed to work this way, but what would stop someone arguing to the rest of the jury that it *could* have been someone else? I understand they're told instructions by the judge, but again, what stops them?

 

[photographer4]

No. His plea right now is Not Guilty, and that is his right to claim. Even though he has confessed multiple times, his plea that he made in court on the record is Not Guilty, and the judge cannot change his plea for him.

He can change his own plea to Guilty, however. I am half-expecting him to do so, tbh.

jmo

I assume he could just do this himself without need of his lawyers? Like, what would stop him standing up in court and just blurting out what he wants to?