Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #193

[m00c0w]

What the DT needs to do is create reasonable doubt with something that is believable.

Unfortunately, this Odinist theory isn't quite it for me.

They also need to try and get RA out of this window of time the State has put him in for those murders which seems to be between 2:19 pm and just before 3:49 pm.

If they can prove the murders took place at a different time...those confessions won't matter.

RA did put himself on the bridge and trail, but it doesn't mean he committed those murders.

Right now, we don't know for sure until it goes to court and evidence is presented as well as witnesses.

I know for myself that I need to see more.

What the DT could use:

a: Libby's cell phone turning on at 4:33 am is actually an opportunity for the DT as it was when it connected to the Tower, but Im not sure how the DT will be able to prove it was definitely turned on by someone and not by itself.

b: The Searchers that claimed they saw nothing in the exact location the girls were found - could be something to explore. They just need one or two solid witnesses to come forward about not seeing anything there at that exact same spot anytime between 4 pm and when the girls were found and those confessions won't mean a thing.

With the cell phone though I don't think anyone turned it on (could be wrong) and as for the Searchers - how clear would anything have been once it was dark in an area with lots of trees and what have you. But it doesn't mean that that area was missed especially when there were a lot of searchers involved.

All the DT has to do is create reasonable doubt and I'm sure they will try their hardest to achieve it.

Not quite. They need to also be able to explain away BG, as BG is on video (allegedly) with a gun kidnapping the girls at a very specific time.

So far the defense’s theory about that seems to be something along the lines of “Well, BG looks like BH so BH should be a suspect but also the murders actually happened at 4:33am the next day because BH has an alibi for when BG kidnapped the girls.”

Not exactly convincing.

All my opinion.

 

[m00c0w]

Perhaps it has nothing to do with the deaths and more to do with the killer or “helper” taking LG’s phone from her and powering it off??

And brought it back, powered it on, and left it under her at the crime scene?

I suppose that’s possible, maybe…

JMO

 

[MiniMoo]

Not quite. They need to also be able to explain away BG, as BG is on video (allegedly) with a gun kidnapping the girls at a very specific time.

So far the defense’s theory about that seems to be something along the lines of “Well, BG looks like BH so BH should be a suspect but also the murders actually happened at 4:33am the next day because BH has an alibi for when BG kidnapped the girls.”

Not exactly convincing.

All my opinion.

The DT definitely has their work cut out for them that is for sure.

 

[TTF14]

It's also as simple as that for defense lawyers to do what their client wants. Either that or have him declared incompetent to make decisions. They work for him, not for themselves. MO

How do we know this hasn't happened? Just because he's not doing what John Q. Public thinks he should be doing doesn't mean his attorneys are not doing what their client wants.

RA sat there for three full days with them in front of a judge and many other people. He had ample chance to rat out his attorneys.

JMO IMO

 

[TTF14]

And brought it back, powered it on, and left it under her at the crime scene?

I suppose that’s possible, maybe…

JMO

Definitely possible, especially if RA isn't the right guy or he was only one of a larger group.

IMO MOO

 

[photographer4]

Cell phone stopped tracing steps and all movement a mere 18 minutes after the girls were kidnapped off the bridge. Which co-incides with when authorities believe the deaths occured.

What's RA's alibi for that time period? Because the same alibi time period will have to apply to any/all 'other potential perps'.

The cell phone stopped moving, why though? Was it off? Or just not moving? I didn’t follow the hearings, so if this was covered, pls lemme know and pls forgive me.

 

[susiQ]

And brought it back, powered it on, and left it under her at the crime scene?

I suppose that’s possible, maybe…

JMO

I don’t know about what happened at 4:33 am on the 14th and why it powered back on. I’m just suggesting that the girls didn’t necessarily die within 18 minutes because the phone wasn’t clocking movement any longer. There’s a real possibility they died sometime later. JMHO

 

[Vern]

The cell phone stopped moving, why though? Was it off? Or just not moving? I didn’t follow the hearings, so if this was covered, pls lemme know and pls forgive me.

Covered in the three day hearings.

Given that, all the context shows that authorities also place girls time of death in this same time period, I'll go with the "there was no further movement" (as stated in the testimony from the three days) of the phone after that. They certainly didn't testify that "the phone was shut down after 18 minutes" or that "the phone died 18 minutes later".

 

[m00c0w]

I don’t know about what happened at 4:33 am on the 14th and why it powered back on. I’m just suggesting that the girls didn’t necessarily die within 18 minutes because the phone wasn’t clocking movement any longer. It a real possibility they died sometime later. JMHO

Completely fair. Thanks for clarifying.

 

[photographer4]

Yeah isn't it wonderful what RA's DT has done under the hat of just being zealous for their client? Let's thrown these men's names out there and call them child murderers. Who cares if it's not true. Who cares if it adversely effects their lives and families. Criminal actions, IMO

I’m confused here, you think the D has ventured into criminal actions? What law do you reckon they’ve broken? I understand it’s legal for them to name someone in their legal filings per a post upthread? So now I’m confused.

 

[TTF14]

Cell phone stopped tracing steps and all movement a mere 18 minutes after the girls were kidnapped off the bridge. Which co-incides with when authorities believe the deaths occured.

What's RA's alibi for that time period? Because the same alibi time period will have to apply to any/all 'other potential perps'.

But that only tell us what the cell phone she was purported to be using stopped moving. Just the phone, not the human.

IMO MOO

 

[sunshineray]

How do we know this hasn't happened? Just because he's not doing what John Q. Public thinks he should be doing doesn't mean his attorneys are not doing what their client wants.

RA sat there for three full days with them in front of a judge and many other people. He had ample chance to rat out his attorneys.

JMO IMO

Well maybe we know because he's confessed over 60 times and made dozens of incriminating statements too?

 

[Vern]

But that only tell us what the cell phone she was purported to be using stopped moving. Just the phone, not the human.

IMO MOO

Hard for the phone to remain still if the human laying above and on top of you is still moving about alive isn't it? Especially with the phone being under their lower legs/foot. Just a thought from the testimony actually given under oath at the three day hearings.

 

[FrostedGlass]

Maybe RA's family and his two sets of attorneys believe he's innocent because they know where he was at the time of the murders. Maybe he just can't prove it; it doesn't mean he doesn't have an alibi.

 

[photographer4]

If there had been any evidence against him, back before those tapes were recorded over---LE would have acted upon that evidence at the time. They were actively investigating BH and thinking he might have been their suspect. So why wouldn't they have continued pursuing him, IF THERE WAS ANY EVIDENCE of his guilt?

The hamster wheel feeling only exists because the D is speculating that there is some kind solid evidence that was covered up by LE. That is faulty speculation, in my opinion. He had a solid work alibi.

Well to me, there were issues with people’s alibis - and some discrepancies in the stories given by some folks to LE that didn’t completely line up with stories given by others. In the absence of an approved source to link to here, I’m left with the only option of saying moo. I think this is one of those things where LE doesn’t know what they don’t know until well, they know. And if the tapes etc were recorded over, it doesn’t help them to be able to back to further investigate. If cell phones were not where they were said to be, if someone had details of the scene that were NOT public yet (franks 1 - a Fb group named BH as the killer, and stated details about an F on LG’s body)….

If we’re going to say there is enough circumstantial evidence to worry about RA, then I’m not sure why the same standard doesn’T apply to worrying about the SODDI folks?

 

[TTF14]

Yeah isn't it wonderful what RA's DT has done under the hat of just being zealous for their client? Let's thrown these men's names out there and call them child murderers. Who cares if it's not true. Who cares if it adversely effects their lives and families. Criminal actions, IMO

BH was tipped in within the first few days, by multiple people. Even one of the victim's own grandmother. The defense team did not conjure up this theory. It ALL came from the investigative materials (the ones that didn't disappear) and the Discovery.

The defense team is only guilty of not shutting up about it like the investigators and the prosecutor wanted them to, IMO.

MOO JMO IMO

 

[TTF14]

If there had been any evidence against him, back before those tapes were recorded over---LE would have acted upon that evidence at the time. They were actively investigating BH and thinking he might have been their suspect. So why wouldn't they have continued pursuing him, IF THERE WAS ANY EVIDENCE of his guilt?

The hamster wheel feeling only exists because the D is speculating that there is some kind solid evidence that was covered up by LE. That is faulty speculation, in my opinion. He had a solid work alibi.

Well, that's a very good question, Katydid. Very good question. It seems to be quite the hot button issue for the ISP. Maybe someday we will learn why.

JMO MOO IMO JMO MOO IMO

https://fox59.com/news/judge-considers-motion-to-dismiss-charges-and-sanction-prosecutor-in-delphi-case/

 

[susiQ]

Not quite. They need to also be able to explain away BG, as BG is on video (allegedly) with a gun kidnapping the girls at a very specific time.

So far the defense’s theory about that seems to be something along the lines of “Well, BG looks like BH so BH should be a suspect but also the murders actually happened at 4:33am the next day because BH has an alibi for when BG kidnapped the girls.”

Not exactly convincing.

All my opinion.

What if BG looks like RAbr or JM or PW, known Vinlander associates of BH? Personally, I do not see any resemblance between BG and RA. There’s no “=“ for me there. Also, if LG’s phone got powered off 18 minutes after and these poor girls did NOT die at that point in time, BH’s alibi comes into question as well. Just MOO.

 

[TTF14]

He gave them the printed out emails and messages. That's what you call evidence, in a court of law.

They aren't a court of law, and none of us saw any of the evidence. A couple of podcasters read some stuff, but by the very nature of what podcasts are, we didn't see a thing. Also, as I mentioned. these youtubers are not a court of law.

IMO MOO

 

[sunshineray]

I’m confused here, you think the D has ventured into criminal actions? What law do you reckon they’ve broken? I understand it’s legal for them to name someone in their legal filings per a post upthread? So now I’m confused.

Yep I do. I was answering your post where you said you take it all the way to the highest court, if the same happened to you. Wouldn't that be because you thought you should be allowed to sue them for defaming you without cause? Did I misunderstand your post?