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

[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?

 

[photographer4]

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

I'm curious as to what his relationship with "god" (whichever he subscribes to) may be at present? Has his faith always been a consistent factor in his life or did this just randomly appear one day in prison? How's his faith been since having made the "confessions"? I know we don't know - I'm just curious is all.

 

[katydid23]

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?

The only thing that can stop them is if the prosecution does an effective job laying out their case.

IF they are able to show that RA=BG, and was the one that forced the girls off the bridge at gunpoint, then there will are little reason for them to doubt his guilt. IMO

 

[photographer4]

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

I actually don't know - has he? For that matter, has he denied that he was the guy in LG's video or acknowledged it was him? Perhaps I've missed something - I've been following as and when I can, but its a ton to catch up on!

 

[photographer4]

The only thing that can stop them is if the prosecution does an effective job laying out their case.

IF they are able to show that RA=BG, and was the one that forced the girls off the bridge at gunpoint, then there will are little reason for them to doubt his guilt. IMO

Yeah, I suppose we just have to really hope that they have insurmountable evidence that it was indeed RA who marched them off that bridge. I wonder how they present this significant bit to the jury and how the D might argue against it...

 

[Salah11]

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?

Because he is worried about his wife and mother rejecting him.

 

[photographer4]

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.

I've lost track of initials - is DG the father of LG? Or can someone pls give me a hint as to who DG might be? Was this maybe a typo and maybe meant to have been DC?

 

[grannygates]

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.

I can definitely understand how someone could make that assumption. I was just stating in the capacity of people convicting bridge guy of the murder for appearing in the back of a video. I don’t believe that one could definitively state that this man was 100% the voice because there is no video, only audio, so no one can definitively state for a fact who that voice belongs to.

I’m more thinking of it in the “convicting this person of the murder” aspect of the requirement of evidence. I think that it is a fair assumption that the investigators would explore the assumption that the person and the voice could belong to the same person.

MOO

 

[photographer4]

Because he is worried about his wife and mother rejecting him.

Didn't seem to bother him before he was accused of the crime at all. I wonder how he lived with himself and his guilt for all the years he walked about free if he did do this crime? If he did it, he's gonna be an interesting guy for psychologists to study imo.

 

[katydid23]

Yeah, I suppose we just have to really hope that they have insurmountable evidence that it was indeed RA who marched them off that bridge. I wonder how they present this significant bit to the jury and how the D might argue against it...

I think Libby's video is powerful evidence which is why the DT wants so desperately to suppress it. But seeing him right there, alone with them, moments before they are never heard from again is very important evidence. And if it is true that one of the girls is heard saying 'GUN' during the audio portion, that will be very damning. IMO

 

[katydid23]

Didn't seem to bother him before he was accused of the crime at all. I wonder how he lived with himself and his guilt for all the years he walked about free if he did do this crime? If he did it, he's gonna be an interesting guy for psychologists to study imo.

He did go into an institution for some mental health issues in 2019. So it seems it did weigh on him.