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

[Vern]

Again I ask though: who decided that DD should be involved at all? He’s not a police man, he’s a Conservation Officer. How is this job the same as a police officer? What training if any did he have to conduct interviews in any criminal case, let alone a high profile double murder???

Was DD assigned to go talk to RA specifically or did he just happen upon RA doing a canvas? Did he get assigned to canvas or take it upon himself to go talk to possible witnesses???

Did RA contact DD himself or did he call police and someone told him he would meet with DD at X day and time and place??

How many other interviews did DD do in regards to this case? What was his role? Must have been important since he appears in the press conference video that someone posted a screenshot of upthread….?

MOOOOO no links so just MOOOOO.

I have a theory that DD only became involved because of the tip that he was given by RA.

We've learned that the tip was misfiled based upon the street where he lived being taken as his last name.

Perhaps DD came forward to ask 'what ever happened with that tip I turned in on the guy who said he was at the trail?' And that's what sent the woman who eventually found it out looking to find it. Didn't they also have the woman at that same presser who "found" the tip misfiled and thanked her for finding it?

Perhaps that was the entire point of having her and DD on the stage and commenting that they knew he was hiding in plain sight? A sure sign to RA - if he was watching/watched the presser - that an old tip had been 'located' and that the very CO he spoke with was now featured on the stage ... that they were on to him. The fact the CO was on that stage wasn't obviously a sign to us at the time, but it surely would have been to RA --- "hint, hint --- we are on to you".

 

[justtrish]

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

And add to this, it is one of the most high profile cases where 2 young girls were murdered.. the fact that even one or two people would go along to put the wrong man behind bars is hard to believe, but for all those that would need to be in on it to do so in order to keep the real killer(s) out and put this totally innocent man away is really not something I can believe.

 

[TTF14]

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.

Jury instructions include verbiage to the effect of, "You may give each piece of evidence and person's testimony the weight you think it deserves. You can believe all of it, some of it, or none of it. You are the sole deciders of facts in this case."

Sample jury instructions: https://www.mncourts.gov/mncourtsgo...ases/27-CR-18-6859/JuryInstructions042919.pdf

IMO MOO

 

[grannygates]

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.

RA reported seeing 3 girls and apparently the PCA group was actually 4 girls, reduced to 3. I don’t understand the reason for not including the 4th, other than to fit RAs statement? The 4th girl was still a person who would be seen, even if she was a minor. So that brings up my jury question - was this actually the same group or was there a real group of 3 girls between noon and 1:30 who saw a man?

 

[TTF14]

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).

This is incorrect. A hearing is exactly where this stuff should have been hashed out to determine if anyone was lying. That was the whole purpose of requesting a hearing.

IMO MOO

 

[TTF14]

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

How has it been proven to be incorrect when nobody was given the opportunity, through a hearing, to present their case?

IMO MOO

 

[grannygates]

And add to this, it is one of the most high profile cases where 2 young girls were murdered.. the fact that even one or two people would go along to put the wrong man behind bars is hard to believe, but for all those that would need to be in on it to do so in order to keep the real killer(s) out and put this totally innocent man away is really not something I can believe.

People are found not guilty or get wrongfully convicted all the time. Just because they arrest someone doesn’t mean the person will be found guilty.

Look at Karen Read. They drug her name through the mud and pushed through this entire high-profile case and then look at the quality of the case and the experts the prosecution ended up presenting in the end. It’s very possible and it happens. The more we accept it and excuse it, the more it will continue to happen.

MOO

 

[justtrish]

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.

Just from the beginning it felt as if it had to be someone local or at least at one time local to Delphi. That area was not secluded, but it wasn't right out there either. How would a stranger know they could enter/exit the area from the trail side and from the other side near the cemetery? How would they knew they could walk unnoticed through properties near the trail and come out on the road. How would they know where to park their car to get in and then have an easier time to get out without being seen. Would they walk that bridge to get to the girls without ever doing it before? It all felt like it had to be someone comfortable in that area, but it was baffling too because how could someone known to the area not be caught after all that time.

 

[grannygates]

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

You’ll have to give me some examples of what exactly was proven to be incorrect or untrue. I haven’t heard anything like that.

 

[Salah11]

How has it been proven to be incorrect when nobody was given the opportunity, through a hearing, to present their case?

IMO MOO

MOO
Just one such twisted interpretation of their Franks. I can find More but this one was just the worse one that they tried to manipulate into something it never was.

Perlmutter argued blood smeared on a tree in one leaked crime scene photo was painted to form the letter F, which holds significance in Norse mythology.

But Patrick Cicero, a blood specialist and forensics expert from the LaPorte County Sheriff's Office, said it was more likely a 'transfer stain' from Libby's bloody hand.

Purposely painting a symbol on the tree would have involved the killer repeatedly dipping their hand on blood, he said.

Haunting new details about Delphi murders are revealed in court

Libby German, 14, and Abby Williams, 13, disappeared on February 13, 2017, while hiking the Monon High Bridge Trail in Delphi, Indiana. Richard Allen, 51, was charged with their murders

www.dailymail.co.uk

 

[justtrish]

People are found not guilty or get wrongfully convicted all the time. Just because they arrest someone doesn’t mean the person will be found guilty.

Look at Karen Read. They drug her name through the mud and pushed through this entire high-profile case and then look at the quality of the case and the experts the prosecution ended up presenting in the end. It’s very possible and it happens. The more we accept it and excuse it, the more it will continue to happen.

MOO

I agree people are found not guilty and people are wrongfully convicted. Doesn't mean the arrest was a big conspiracy to frame the wrong man and let a killer stay free.

 

[ClearAhead]

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

When the PCA was allowed to be unsealed I also recall there was an issue with at least one witness who was a minor.

Unsealed documents released in Richard Allen, the Delphi murder suspect's, trial

DELPHI, Ind. (WLFI) — Judge Frances C. Gull has entered an order in State of Indiana vs. Richard M. Allen unsealing a number of documents in that case. The 118

www.wthitv.com

The order did list several documents that will remain sealed:

• Original, unredacted Affidavit for the Probable Cause shall remain sealed as it lists names of juvenile witnesses;

 

[TTF14]

People are found not guilty or get wrongfully convicted all the time. Just because they arrest someone doesn’t mean the person will be found guilty.

Look at Karen Read. They drug her name through the mud and pushed through this entire high-profile case and then look at the quality of the case and the experts the prosecution ended up presenting in the end. It’s very possible and it happens. The more we accept it and excuse it, the more it will continue to happen.

MOO

This (unspoken) "guilty until proven innocent" (and even then, probably still guilty) mindset has got to stop. It's so dangerous. As a people, I think we're smarter than this.

IMO MOO

 

[photographer4]

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.

Just as reasonable imo to believe the person had been to Delphi, perhaps lived there once upon a time, or had visited there / the bridge at some point in their lives.

 

[TTF14]

Just one such twisted interpretation of their Franks. I can find More but this one was just the worse one that they tried to manipulate into something it never was.

Perlmutter argued blood smeared on a tree in one leaked crime scene photo was painted to form the letter F, which holds significance in Norse mythology.

But Patrick Cicero, a blood specialist and forensics expert from the LaPorte County Sheriff's Office, said it was more likely a 'transfer stain' from Libby's bloody hand.

Purposely painting a symbol on the tree would have involved the killer repeatedly dipping their hand on blood, he said.

Haunting new details about Delphi murders are revealed in court

Libby German, 14, and Abby Williams, 13, disappeared on February 13, 2017, while hiking the Monon High Bridge Trail in Delphi, Indiana. Richard Allen, 51, was charged with their murders

www.dailymail.co.uk

Thanks, but this didn't answer my question.

 

[TTF14]

Just as reasonable imo to believe the person had been to Delphi, perhaps lived there once upon a time, or had visited there / the bridge at some point in their lives.

So, exactly what Doug Carter said....?



Source:

 

[Vern]

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.

That's because the prosecution is actually respecting the gag order.

We'll see what they've got at trial. I do believe that the State will be able to show that, "the preponderance of the evidence" will show RA's guilt. That means all types of evidence considered.

IMO, requiring vast conspiracy theories and everyone who will testify, or who has given statements etc, to be conspiring or lying to negate this, that or the other thing and with participation by the girls' families to 'manipulate' the video etc is not, IMO, reasonable.

- Video;
- Witnesses sightings (verified by bench photo timing) and the timing of his arrival by the girls who RA also stated he passed;
- Harvest Store video;
- RAs own original statement to the CO (placing himself at the scene at the time [later all changed of course when he realized he'd been caught on camera];
- Clothing;
- The DTH recording;
- The gun;
- The bullet found between the two victims;
- His total lack of alibi for the time in question (ergo why they need a conspiracy and to see the ToD moved to later when he was at work);
- His multiple confessions;
- DNA potential from his deceased cat;
- His own further statement to LE that he had never loaned his gun out and had never been at the actual spot in the woods where the girls were murdered;
- His own further statement and change to timing once he found out he was on video and that a witness he didn't see actually saw BG on the bridge standing on same platform he stated he had been standing on --- ergo BG = RA);
- etc etc etc

Taken as a whole, the preponderance of the evidence looks pretty damning for RA. He locked himself into his "alibi" when he put himself at the scene at the time and as corraborated by others who simply have zero reason or incentive to lie about it (while he certainly does have incentive to change his story at the later interviews). He wasn't at home. He wasn't at work. He was at the MHB murdering two girls who absolutely did not deserve it and, IMO, the state will prove that based upon the preponderance of all the evidence being taken into consideration beyond a reasonable doubt.

Alledging a conspiracy theory does not make it so.

 

[ClearAhead]

Thanks, but this didn't answer my question.

What’s the point of rehashing something that was already decided almost nine months ago?

Court denies Franks Hearing in Richard Allen Case

According to Judge Gull, the court found that the search was reasonable and that the evidence contained was relevant.

www.wrtv.com

 

[statt#1]

It appears much of the discussion is in the realm of what we know. It's the realm of what we DON'T know, that is known to LE investigators, and most likely to the defense team, that I suspect 'reasonable doubt' to be eliminated.

Wouldn't it be just crazy if investigators matched a boot print in the mud along the bank of the Deer creek to a pair of boots in RA's closet?

Or how insane would it be, if when investigators searched RA's property, they found a hair, or a fiber, or a drop of blood from one of the girls?

How the discourse might change if RA truly admitted to just one little piece of truth about the crime scene that was never revealed to the public, a marking the killer left on one of the girls bodies, or some trinket that was left at the scene, or the exact position of an object left nearby, that no person would know, save the killer.

These are just 3 simple speculative possibilities that emerge from my magical magnifying mind

Oh yeah, then there's the BIG question...DNA? Do we have definitive proof of the capture of DNA? I've never seen anything to that effect, though there has been mention of it. What if there's some DNA that was recovered at the scene, or at RA's home, or in his car? Now, THAT would throw a wrench to things now, wouldn't it?

So, all these things, these speculations, are in the realm of things we don't know, yet I believe, though maybe not exact to my speculations, I believe there to be evidence yet unheard in this case.

 

[grannygates]

That's because the prosecution is actually respecting the gag order.

We'll see what they've got at trial. I do believe that the State will be able to show that, "the preponderance of the evidence" will show RA's guilt. That means all types of evidence considered.

IMO, requiring vast conspiracy theories and everyone who will testify, or who has given statements etc, to be conspiring or lying to negate this, that or the other thing and with participation by the girls' families to 'manipulate' the video etc is not, IMO, reasonable.

- Video;
- Witnesses sightings (verified by bench photo timing) and the timing of his arrival by the girls who RA also stated he passed;
- Harvest Store video;
- RAs own original statement to the CO (placing himself at the scene at the time [later all changed of course when he realized he'd been caught on camera];
- Clothing;
- The DTH recording;
- The gun;
- The bullet found between the two victims;
- His total lack of alibi for the time in question (ergo why they need a conspiracy and to see the ToD moved to later when he was at work);
- His multiple confessions;
- DNA potential from his deceased cat;
- His own further statement to LE that he had never loaned his gun out and had never been at the actual spot in the woods where the girls were murdered;
- His own further statement and change to timing once he found out he was on video and that a witness he didn't see actually saw BG on the bridge standing on same platform he stated he had been standing on --- ergo BG = RA);
- etc etc etc

Taken as a whole, the preponderance of the evidence looks pretty damning for RA. He locked himself into his "alibi" when he put himself at the scene at the time and as corraborated by others who simply have zero reason or incentive to lie about it (while he certainly does have incentive to change his story at the later interviews). He wasn't at home. He wasn't at work. He was at the MHB murdering two girls who absolutely did not deserve it and, IMO, the state will prove that based upon the preponderance of all the evidence being taken into consideration beyond a reasonable doubt.

Alledging a conspiracy theory does not make it so.

This is why I dislike Nancy Grace as a source. Wasn’t she the one that started this cat hair rumour? There’s no mention about matching the animal hairs in RAs SW. I don’t think we see anything about searching for matching animal hair in court docs after RLs SW, do we ?