Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #191

[Salah11]

Someone being arrested doesn’t mean they’re guilty, or there wouldnt be a “not guilty” option for a jury. RA simply being arrested doesn’t prove he did anything. The evidence is supposed to prove the states case per their theory. Simply believing that a person is guilty because they were arrested isn’t “innocent until proven guilty”. It’s siding with the prosecution just because they’re the prosecution.

The states case is currently contradictory eyewitness statements, somehow matching an unspent round matched to a fired cartridge casing(?) and a series of potentially incriminating statements made after months of solitary confinement at a maximum security prison. Add in the hidden/missing/destroyed evidence and what do we really know about the totality of the investigation. What else is missing?

None of the known evidence says RA did anything, especially beyond a reasonable doubt. So right now I believe that RA is the unluckiest person ever to come forward to provide a witness statement and get thrown in prison without a trial for a crime without any real evidence connecting him to the crime scene or the victims.

MOO

BBM

Well this is simply not true

There is plenty of evidence that would suggest he is the right man, right down to the grainy video and the fact he can be placed on the bridge dressed remarkably similar to BG moments before the girls crossed.

Also, of course, not forgetting his gun, managed to eject a cartridge in the middle of the crime scene. I don’t recall a bunch of other random bullets being found at the crime scene. Just the one from his gun that he pulled on the girls at the end of the bridge which can be heard on the audio.

IMHO

 

[grannygates]

BBM

Well this is simply not true

There is plenty of evidence that would suggest he is the right man, right down to the grainy video and the fact he can be placed on the bridge dressed remarkably similar to BG moments before the girls crossed.

Also, of course, not forgetting his gun, managed to eject a cartridge in the middle of the crime scene. I don’t recall a bunch of other random bullets being found at the crime scene. Just the one from his gun that he pulled on the girls at the end of the bridge which can be heard on the audio.

IMHO

I’m referring to actual definitive proof. Not guesses. The video can’t be used to positively ID anyone. The YBG eyewitness statement doesnt describe RA, she describes a 20 year old with brown poofy hair. Toolmark evidence isn’t science. There’s nothing that we know of that actually proves RA was even at the trail after 1:30. If we are looking for real direct evidence, and not twisting and forcing “evidence” to fit an accused, the actual proof just isn’t there in my opinion.

 

[mrjitty]

Karen Read is a different trial, not RAs. I don't understand why it keeps getting brought up in here.

Different players all together, different jurisdictions and, IIRC, some actual evidence poitning to nefarious LE actions etc.

I've yet to see anything of the sort here in this case. Rather in this case, everyone and everybody is apparently conspiring ... without a shred of evidence to back up these grand isinuations and allegations.

Yet, we have seen the receipts on the Defence's part to manipulate of obfusgate the actual evidence and events of Feb 13th.

It gets brought up because arguably the D have tried to use the same strategies. problem for them is they lack evidence for their conspiracy..: IMO

 

[photographer4]

Unless he is the unluckiest man on the planet, then he is guilty.

All the tiny bits of the puzzle add up to one man being responsible for this crime.

No alibi that we know of and can be placed on the bridge moments before the girls cross.

IMO

No alibi that we know of still doesn't make him the killer. Makes him a man on the bridge just before the girls cross. There is still room to show that RA was the one who followed them across the bridge and spoke the words, G,DTH. Just with what TL reported to LE which was referenced in Franks 1 by the D, I have reasonable doubt. Perhaps that guy wasn't there at the same time of day as the girls, or maybe he was. We simply do not know. Maybe that guy was involved, maybe not. Shame no one seems to know.

 

[photographer4]

Rbbm

In a word, IMO, no. No, they cannot. They will be instructed to consider the totality of the evidence.

No trial removes all doubt. And in any trial, one could point-clunterpoint every bit of evidence. But, just because someone could argue the opposition (the proverbial devil's advocate), doesn't mean it rises to the level of reasonable.

Therer's a reason too that our standard for criminal conviction is BARD. It's a high bar, but even there it is subjective, and they'd the task of a jury. What constitutes reasonable doubt, what constitutes beyond it.

A trial doesn't answer every question, tie up every loop hole, and yet, juries reach the BARD threshold routinely.

In this case, for example, and pretending it's an all or nothing proposition, not verifiable in other ways, the jury is deliberating. No evidence, no testimony on HOW RA would've have left the park, just the generalized assumption that he must have, there's just no cctv. (His phone records one way or another will tell on him IMO but this isn't the point of my current argument.) The jury can find RA guilty BARD even if there's NEVER an explanation for how he left. In no node cases, the State doesn'teven have to establish HOW a person died, they can present evidence THAT a person died and get a legitimate conviction.

We are presently in a vacuum. We haven't seen the State's case. The totality of it IMO will look like a slow motion video as RA's movements and deeds are laid bare.

Sure, there might be a lot of middle-aged men in the Midwest who dress and walk and talk like RA, but they'd only one with a big glaring gap where the others have actual alibis (because they were where they were).

Only one was on the bridge and can't get himself off it.

JMO

I agree with you on so much of this - except here. If I were on the jury, no matter what the judge instructs me to do, I have free will. And frankly, if there is a sticking point for me, no matter what you or other jurors might say, if I can't get clarification from the State, or the D has argued out of it reasonably well in my own opinion, then I'm afraid I'm not voting for guilty. To me as a juror, the case the State makes must make SENSE and it must be pretty air tight, otherwise, I'm the State's worst nightmare as a juror as I can't just get in line with the prevailing theory.

 

[photographer4]

Yes parts of the job is the same as a police officer. It would seem to be CO’s were pulled in to support LE right from the beginning, when Libby and Abby were initially reported missing on the Delphi Historic Trail System.

Become an Indiana Conservation Officer

Learn what it takes and how to become an Indiana Conservation Officer

www.in.gov

What training do Indiana Conservation Officer recruits undergo?

After receiving close scrutiny during the hiring process, potential officers must undergo a DNR- sponsored six-week recruit school. Upon graduation from the DNR-sponsored recruit school, officer ca...

faqs.in.gov

WHAT TRAINING DO INDIANA CONSERVATION OFFICER RECRUITS UNDERGO?​

• 8 months ago
• Updated

Follow
After receiving close scrutiny during the hiring process, potential officers must undergo a DNR- sponsored six-week recruit school. Upon graduation from the DNR-sponsored recruit school, officer candidates must complete training and graduate from the Indiana Law Enforcement Academy before becoming a probationary officer for one year.

Thank you! You've more patience for google than I have and I much appreciate it! <3

 

[photographer4]

The basis for the original FM was the argument that A & L were sacrificed for an Odinist ritual. They wrote about a Fehu that was painted on a tree with LGs blood.

This was debunked by a blood splatter expert. The truth is that the mark left on the tree was actually made by a 14 year old girl trying to steady herself while literally taking her last breaths.

The phone stopped counting steps after 18 minutes from the time that we hear " guys, down the hill". This is likely the timing of the end of 2 young lives.

With the 3 days of testimonies and hearings, I personally feel that the Defense has nothing to back up the claims of an Odinist ritual.

There was no Fehu. The girls died right where they were found, and very likely within 30 minutes of their abduction. They were not killed elsewhere.

Delphi had about 2100 people living there at the time of the murders.

53 percent were between the ages of 18 and 64. So, let's estimate this number at around 1080 people. About half of those people are male. So, maybe 540 men in Delphi at the time of the murders. Approximately 80 percent are white. So, now we are left with approximately 430 men are left.



Census profile: Delphi, IN


Out of the 430( ish) men, how many stood between 5' 5' and 5'9"?

How many of those men were familiar with the Monon High Bridge) ?
How many of them also had the mobility and wherewithal to walk across the bridge,?

Of the remaining number of those men, how many of them were at the bridge on February 13th, 2017 between 1:30 and 3:30 PM?

How many of them were seen walking to the bridge, witnessed by 3 young girls, with a purpose?

How many of those people wore the same clothes that BG wore?

If there are ANY, where are their phones?

If anyone is actually left, how many of them have a Sigsauer with the same consistent ejection markings as the bullet at the crime scene?
Last, but not least, how many of those remaining have confessed to the murders IN DETAIL SIXTY ONE times???

Man,RA sure is unlucky.







https://murdersheetpodcast.com/

Excellent questions, but it all assumes the killer from from / living in Delphi at the time of the crime. He may not have been. He could have driven in from elsewhere.

 

[grannygates]

I agree with you on so much of this - except here. If I were on the jury, no matter what the judge instructs me to do, I have free will. And frankly, if there is a sticking point for me, no matter what you or other jurors might say, if I can't get clarification from the State, or the D has argued out of it reasonably well in my own opinion, then I'm afraid I'm not voting for guilty. To me as a juror, the case the State makes must make SENSE and it must be pretty air tight, otherwise, I'm the State's worst nightmare as a juror as I can't just get in line with the prevailing theory.

This is where I am. If I have a doubt whether this person did the crime or I believe that it’s possible that someone else could have done it, I would be not guilty.

I wouldn’t be able to agree to putting a potentially innocent person in jail making the amount of guesses or assumptions that we have to with the state’s current theory and timeline of the case.

 

[photographer4]

I think LE had this timeline long before they had RA. They had asked for anyone who was there to share with them and it seems that is what happened. The girls seeing a man at a certain time was one piece. Then when BB sees a man on the bridge and after putting it together with time stamps from photos and the video camera it could be linked that the guy that the girls saw very well could be the man on the bridge. Not specifically because of the clothing, but due to the timeline. Man walking with a purpose over here.. then walking to the other bridge it lines up with the right time that BB saw a man on the bridge. Later they have a video from Libby that shows a man on the bridge coming at them. We know BB left (her car on video) at exactly the time Libby is recording a man. So while it isn't 100% that the guy that was near Freedom bridge is the same guy that BB saw and then the same one that Libby recorded, it could be or I'd say it can't be ruled out.. the timeline fits.

THEN when the note is found in 2022 from RA telling DD he was there and he sees the girls walking near Freedom bridge and he admits to walking from there toward MHB and then out to the first platform and looking at fish. BB saw the man on the platform.. So no it isn't something that seals the deal, but I'd say it all lines up and when a timeline LE puts together based on several witnesses and then the actual perp gave a statement that puts him in the exact places others saw him, it does raise my eyebrows.

Add to this RA saying he was wearing the exact outfit BG is videoed in. Sure many men might wear similar clothing.. but what other man admits to being on the bridge at that time in that outfit? Another piece of the puzzle.

This isn't just about one specific thing like the girls seeing a man or BB seeing a guy on the bridge. It's all of it AND RA giving a statement about what he did and where he was and without the girls knowing that they put him in the exact places he admits he was that day.

I agree, there are some things that seem to fit together:
The 3 girls saw RA and RA saw them.
RA went to the bridge and out to the platform and was seen by BB but he didn't (?) see her (?? did he?)

The kids arrive and they cross the bridge (but RA didn't see them - or lied about this one).

But then we have bits that may not fit or haven't been worked out yet:
- who did TL see (franks 1, looked like EF per one officer)??? Why was he there? HOw long was he in the area? How'd he get there? How'd he leave? COULD HE BE THE KILLER? If we're only going based off her sighting him time then he could have been imo.
- Who was seen "muddy / bloody" leaving the area?
- who's car was parked at the old CPS building?
- why was there a car and who's was it left at the side of the road near the trail head - Grey Hughes - video pest control guy called in and reported this.

I'm sorry but there are too many unexplained things here for me to be ok to convict quite yet.

 

[Ravenmoon]

From an article in March 2017:

Investigators are anxiously awaiting full DNA test results being compiled by FBI forensic analysts.

/////////////////////
A statement from Ives:


"and I certainly would have said, if experienced investigators, as we have in this case, had the evidence that was available in this case, I would expect them to solve it within a month. That’s without DNA and cell phones which are a big part of what’s going on here."

https://fox59.com/news/prosecutor-s...r-received-crucial-tip-due-to-scope-of-probe/

 

[justtrish]

We have no idea what exactly the state has. It isn't the job of the PCA to lay out the entire case that will be presented at trial. It is bare minimum to get an arrest. I think they clearly showed how they got to the arrest of RA. It isn't about each specific piece in the PCA.. it's about all of it and the picture it created for LE. The puzzle doesn't have to be fully seen in the PCA for the judge to say there is enough for an arrest. They had to arrest RA when they did because the risk of him destroying evidence after that interview was high.

 

[TTF14]

Karen Read is a different trial, not RAs. I don't understand why it keeps getting brought up in here.

Different players all together, different jurisdictions and, IIRC, some actual evidence poitning to nefarious LE actions etc.

I've yet to see anything of the sort here in this case. Rather in this case, everyone and everybody is apparently conspiring ... without a shred of evidence to back up these grand isinuations and allegations.

Yet, we have seen the receipts on the Defence's part to manipulate of obfusgate the actual evidence and events of Feb 13th.

The whole request for a Franks hearing/Franks memorandum was because of alleged nefarious actions by LE (alleged lying to obtain search warrant).

For starters.

IMO MOO

 

[Ravenmoon]

Excellent questions, but it all assumes the killer from from / living in Delphi at the time of the crime. He may not have been. He could have driven in from elsewhere.

Would it not be reasonable to believe that the person was from Delphi?

They obviously knew the lay of the land and how to get back to their vehicle.

 

[justtrish]

I agree, there are some things that seem to fit together:
The 3 girls saw RA and RA saw them.
RA went to the bridge and out to the platform and was seen by BB but he didn't (?) see her (?? did he?)

The kids arrive and they cross the bridge (but RA didn't see them - or lied about this one).

But then we have bits that may not fit or haven't been worked out yet:
- who did TL see (franks 1, looked like EF per one officer)??? Why was he there? HOw long was he in the area? How'd he get there? How'd he leave? COULD HE BE THE KILLER? If we're only going based off her sighting him time then he could have been imo.
- Who was seen "muddy / bloody" leaving the area?
- who's car was parked at the old CPS building?
- why was there a car and who's was it left at the side of the road near the trail head - Grey Hughes - video pest control guy called in and reported this.

I'm sorry but there are too many unexplained things here for me to be ok to convict quite yet.

Of course we don't have all the pieces and the only reason we have any of this additional info is because of the Franks memos. It isn't the states job to try this case before the trial so the defense is putting out their take on things while the state remains quiet, as they were instructed to do. They want to preserve the integrity of this case and try it in court where evidence can be presented and witnesses on both sides to get to the bottom of what exactly happened.

 

[TTF14]

IIRC, didn't it come out earlier that 1 of the 4 was a very young child? This could be the difference in there being 3 statements, but the group of 4 girls on the trail.

I don't remember this. Do you have a link supporting this?

 

[Megnut]

Probable Cause is just that. Enough evidence to charge.

Probable Cause IS a legal document. Can it contain errors? Yes. Sometimes typographical, sometimes accurate at the time it was drafted, but outdated due to ongoing investigation and new evidence.

It is not and never is the State's entire case.

We know that the State has phone data. IMO digital forensics is the new DNA analysis. And I look at the Defense's actions which confirm to me that the State has compelling data, or the Defense wouldn't other trying to exploit and/or confuse it.

I notice too that the Defense HASN'T said the defendant HAS an alibi, that is just hard to validate it because, for instance, he was on a deserted island so no one van verify it.

I'm not a jury, this is not s courtroom, but this is a crime forum leading into a trial, and I've followed trials, each with similarities and differences to other trials. You get a sense of them after a time.

I am not tasked TODAY with convicting him because I'm not a juror, the evidence hasn't been presented yet, but I do think the jury will find him guilty, based on the case that will be before them.

JMO

 

[Ravenmoon]

This is where I am. If I have a doubt whether this person did the crime or I believe that it’s possible that someone else could have done it, I would be not guilty.

I wouldn’t be able to agree to putting a potentially innocent person in jail making the amount of guesses or assumptions that we have to with the state’s current theory and timeline of the case.

I think that there is a difference between doubt and reasonable doubt.

Reasonable doubt can exist only after one weighs all of the evidence and impartial consideration of that evidence.

 

[ClearAhead]

The whole request for a Franks hearing/Franks memorandum was because of alleged nefarious actions by LE (alleged lying to obtain search warrant).

For starters.

IMO MOO

If LE was proven to have lied to obtain the SW, the Frank’s Hearing would’ve been granted. I doubt the Frank’s Hearing/memo will ever see the light of day during the trial because it’s not entirely factual (ie it contains lies).

 

[m00c0w]

It gets brought up because arguably the D have tried to use the same strategies. problem for them is they lack evidence for their conspiracy..: IMO

It does get kind of tricky when the conspiracy would involve multiple witnesses, law enforcement agencies at all levels, laboratory personnel, court officers all essentially colluding to set up this one guy. For reasons that still aren’t quite explained except TL had to win an election, I guess.

JMO

 

[Salah11]

The whole request for a Franks hearing/Franks memorandum was because of alleged nefarious actions by LE (alleged lying to obtain search warrant).

For starters.

IMO MOO

Yet the Franks’s most it’s already been proven to be incorrect.

Their interpretation of some of the facts were fiction. Then add in then using Youtubers to further their agenda against the victims families. I mean talk about unprofessional.

IMHO