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

[sunshineray]

I am still thinking we may get a possible plea deal, if what we are told is true and he is very concerned about his family hearing all the crime scene and autopsy evidence then the only way to prevent this is to negotiate with the state, he has no wriggle room on sentence but he could ask for consideration as to where he would be housed so that he was near his family.

If he goes to trial on the limited information I have (the veracity of much of the information coming from the pre trial motion hearings is questionable, depending on who is speaking) read or listened to state has a case that they should be able to get to BARD - so going to trial he loses twice, he is found guilty and his family and everyone following trial have heard all the gruesome details of how they died, and that he was the sole perpetrator that did all the horrific things. It will be little comfort to him then if he continues to assert his innocence as by then all these alleged confessions will have been heard in open court, all the evidence will have been revealed and his family will have to continue their lives in the knowledge that all he is ànd has done is public knowledge.
I have no knowledge of how both families would view a plea deal, whether they may hold the view that they would accept a plea deal to not have every detail of the murders in the public domain or whether they wish to see him have a trial, it will be both families who will get to decide on a plea deal if it is ever to be considered, although he could throw a huge spanner in works and plead guilty. I think his mother and wife have decided that for now they are willing to be seen publicly supporting him and they surely have to know the strength of states case so he may know that they are going to continue to be in his life whatever choices he makes.

I don't think his lawyers will let him sign a plea agreement where his sentence can't be appealed. And as fas as RA's not wanting his family members from hearing the gory details of what he did to the girls, they could probably just leace tge courtroom, like they did at the hearings when Cisero took the stand. MO

 

[steeltowngirl]

All the D needs is for a juror or two to refuse to believe that this is the last mark made by a dying kid. I for one, do not believe this was an unintentional mark made by anyone. I see this as an intentional marking, and I do believe it resembles the shape of an F. The long vertical stem is intersected by a horizontal line and there is a ball shape where they intersect. THis makes me believe this was intentional. MOOO. Going to be very interesting to see what the D does with this marking if anything.

It would take 12 jurors to buy into the idea that someone else painted a letter on a tree in Libby’s blood, and therefore it was a ritual, and thus the killer cannot be Richard Allen.

Not 1 or 2 jurors.
Twelve.

A verdict to acquit must be unanimous.

Ain’t gonna happen.
Not with that theory.

jmo

 

[SouthEnd]

Regarding the blood smudge on the tree:

When I was a toddler, I would spend *hours* looking at the marble tiling of my grandma's bathroom. Eventually I'd start making out characters and scenes, entire story lines of scary beasts and cute animals and armies. One day I ran and got my grandma because I was certain I had seen a goathead that moved and that was terrifying. She scolded me for making up stories, but for me, the fear was 100% real.

We have evolved to make out patterns. Or, rather, our eyes take in bits and bobs of visual data and arrange it in ways that make sense, conjuring familiar shapes and faces.

In a sense, that's what allows us to follow storytelling; most stories, whether it is novels or movies, are based on the Jungian/tragic principles of the hero's journey. Our brain does not like new patterns that we can't identify; they mean chaos. Chaos, to our ancestors, was dangerous. Animals they'd never met before and didn't know if they were venomous. Strange weather patterns that could kill the crops.

There is a great article about how otherwise sane minds can extrapolate logically impossible theories out of data that shouldn't add up. When the human tendency to detect patterns goes too far | Psyche Ideas

All this to say... it is great to entertain the possibilities, if you are an investigator, early on. Open-mind and the willingness to ask all the questions means you will (ironically) not get tunnel vision on a single POI. But there is a point where it becomes way more prudent to entertain that a smudge on a tree is not an ever-changing rune, but a smudge.
Why?
Because of probability. If you are by a lake and you hear a duck quack, it could, of course, be a drone, playing the recording of a duck quack, and it might mean that there are no more ducks in the world. But if you are actually seeing a duck, visually, that quacks like a duck, and a blood splatter expert says it bleeds like a duck, then it is most likely a duck.

Occam's razor, and all, 100%, my opinion.

 

[steeltowngirl]

Regarding the blood smudge on the tree:

When I was a toddler, I would spend *hours* looking at the marble tiling of my grandma's bathroom. Eventually I'd start making out characters and scenes, entire story lines of scary beasts and cute animals and armies. One day I ran and got my grandma because I was certain I had seen a goathead that moved and that was terrifying. She scolded me for making up stories, but for me, the fear was 100% real.

We have evolved to make out patterns. Or, rather, our eyes take in bits and bobs of visual data and arrange it in ways that make sense, conjuring familiar shapes and faces.

In a sense, that's what allows us to follow storytelling; most stories, whether it is novels or movies, are based on the Jungian/tragic principles of the hero's journey. Our brain does not like new patterns that we can't identify; they mean chaos. Chaos, to our ancestors, was dangerous. Animals they'd never met before and didn't know if they were venomous. Strange weather patterns that could kill the crops.

There is a great article about how otherwise sane minds can extrapolate logically impossible theories out of data that shouldn't add up. When the human tendency to detect patterns goes too far | Psyche Ideas

All this to say... it is great to entertain the possibilities, if you are an investigator, early on. Open-mind and the willingness to ask all the questions means you will (ironically) not get tunnel vision on a single POI. But there is a point where it becomes way more prudent to entertain that a smudge on a tree is not an ever-changing rune, but a smudge.
Why?
Because of probability. If you are by a lake and you hear a duck quack, it could, of course, be a drone, playing the recording of a duck quack, and it might mean that there are no more ducks in the world. But if you are actually seeing a duck, visually, that quacks like a duck, and a blood splatter expert says it bleeds like a duck, then it is most likely a duck.

Occam's razor, and all, 100%, my opinion.

It’s like seeing Jesus’ face in toast. It’s there for one who wants to believe and see. Which is great!

But in the end, it’s still toast.

jmo

 

[SouthEnd]

I don't think his lawyers will let him sign a plea agreement where his sentence can't be appealed. And as fas as RA's not wanting his family members from hearing the gory details of what he did to the girls, they could probably just leace tge courtroom, like they did at the hearings when Cisero took the stand. MO

I am not judging the family of an accused person, but if someone I loved was accused of something that horrific, I would at least - personally - feel obligated to see everything for myself. See how that person I loved reacted when all the horrors were described. Everyone, IMO, is capable of snapping and committing atrocities. I would not want to think it is true, but I would want to get all the information I could get.

 

[TTF14]

Regarding the blood smudge on the tree:

When I was a toddler, I would spend *hours* looking at the marble tiling of my grandma's bathroom. Eventually I'd start making out characters and scenes, entire story lines of scary beasts and cute animals and armies. One day I ran and got my grandma because I was certain I had seen a goathead that moved and that was terrifying. She scolded me for making up stories, but for me, the fear was 100% real.

We have evolved to make out patterns. Or, rather, our eyes take in bits and bobs of visual data and arrange it in ways that make sense, conjuring familiar shapes and faces.

In a sense, that's what allows us to follow storytelling; most stories, whether it is novels or movies, are based on the Jungian/tragic principles of the hero's journey. Our brain does not like new patterns that we can't identify; they mean chaos. Chaos, to our ancestors, was dangerous. Animals they'd never met before and didn't know if they were venomous. Strange weather patterns that could kill the crops.

There is a great article about how otherwise sane minds can extrapolate logically impossible theories out of data that shouldn't add up. When the human tendency to detect patterns goes too far | Psyche Ideas

All this to say... it is great to entertain the possibilities, if you are an investigator, early on. Open-mind and the willingness to ask all the questions means you will (ironically) not get tunnel vision on a single POI. But there is a point where it becomes way more prudent to entertain that a smudge on a tree is not an ever-changing rune, but a smudge.
Why?
Because of probability. If you are by a lake and you hear a duck quack, it could, of course, be a drone, playing the recording of a duck quack, and it might mean that there are no more ducks in the world. But if you are actually seeing a duck, visually, that quacks like a duck, and a blood splatter expert says it bleeds like a duck, then it is most likely a duck.

Occam's razor, and all, 100%, my opinion.

Even though I don't completely agree with you, this was so beautifully written (and thoroughly enjoyable), I had to comment. I really enjoy your way of writing.

 

[Tealgrove]

All the D needs is for a juror or two to refuse to believe that this is the last mark made by a dying kid. I for one, do not believe this was an unintentional mark made by anyone. I see this as an intentional marking, and I do believe it resembles the shape of an F. The long vertical stem is intersected by a horizontal line and there is a ball shape where they intersect. THis makes me believe this was intentional. MOOO. Going to be very interesting to see what the D does with this marking if anything.

“A dying kid”?

I think Libby deserves more respect than that.

“A dying kid”. SMH

MOO

 

[StarryStarryNight]

I'm basing my current opinion on the information available. I did ask earlier in a post whether LG had any defensive markings on her arms. Was there anything to suggest that her arm rested against that tree? A sliver perhaps from sliding it down along her fingers, hand or forearm? I have a hard time believing that a person who has been slashed who has been attacked and is bleeding from the neck is going to remove their hand from that wound -- unless they're trying to defend themselves from another attack. If she did lean against the tree, and she fell to her knees, then is there evidence that she fell face forward? That she was then flipped over to be looking up toward the sky? I'm not sure where exactly she is said to have been found. But if we're ONLY looking at the shape of the marking? Then, I'm afraid to me, that there is an intentional marking and it could well be an "F". I don't see it as a random thing caused by a dying child's last movements. I reserve the right to consider further evidence from both sides before I finalize my thoughts on this. MOOO.

You have done an excellent job holding tight to the defense team’s fiction.
We all want to hear the details, as explained by science and not fiction.
I truly don’t think you or anyone else here understands or can imagine how someone, much less a child, is going to react to having their throat gashed opened and trying to deal with pints and pints of blood gushing out of you. That’s a much different scenario than cutting your arm on some glass where you would cover it with your hand.
If an Odinist killed the girls, which they didn’t, and they felt compelled to rejoice by painting an F on a tree, they absolutely would make sure there was no doubt that was whatever rune it they wanted it to be. We could all see the F. Yet we don’t.
The defense’s case is dismantling. It has been coming apart since some actual sworn testimony has been heard. It’s being completely gutted since the defense fiction narrative is no longer the only game in town.

My MOO too

 

[photographer4]

You have done an excellent job holding tight to the defense team’s fiction.
We all want to hear the details, as explained by science and not fiction.
I truly don’t think you or anyone else here understands or can imagine how someone, much less a child, is going to react to having their throat gashed opened and trying to deal with pints and pints of blood gushing out of you. That’s a much different scenario than cutting your arm on some glass where you would cover it with your hand.
If an Odinist killed the girls, which they didn’t, and they felt compelled to rejoice by painting an F on a tree, they absolutely would make sure there was no doubt that was whatever rune it they wanted it to be. We could all see the F. Yet we don’t.
The defense’s case is dismantling. It has been coming apart since some actual sworn testimony has been heard. It’s being completely gutted since the defense fiction narrative is no longer the only game in town.

My MOO too

I'm not upholding their version - I'm questioning the State's version. I have noted this that it may or may not be an F as the D purports, but imo, that isn't a random mark. I've noted many times I would like to hear both sides before I'm willing to convict a man for a crime as heinous as this.

 

[sunshineray]

I am not judging the family of an accused person, but if someone I loved was accused of something that horrific, I would at least - personally - feel obligated to see everything for myself. See how that person I loved reacted when all the horrors were described. Everyone, IMO, is capable of snapping and committing atrocities. I would not want to think it is true, but I would want to get all the information I could get.

RA may have already told them, on phone calls, more than they'd ever want to hear, know. JMO

 

[sunshineray]

I'm not upholding their version - I'm questioning the State's version. I have noted this that it may or may not be an F as the D purports, but imo, that isn't a random mark. I've noted many times I would like to hear both sides before I'm willing to convict a man for a crime as heinous as this.

The F won't acquit or convict him, IMO. His 60+ confessions with details though just might do the trick. Also MO

 

[katydid23]

With respect, where did I call LG a "dying kid"?

You might not have meant to make that off handed comment, it was probably just a quick description of the situation. The thing is, it feels like the victims have been overlooked and kind of re-victimized, by some of the complicated speculation in this thread. It is a sensitive situation.

Libby, an actual 14 yr old child, was standing by that very tree, bleeding out, gushing blood, in the final moments of her young life. And a very experienced, well respected blood splatter forensics expert has testified about the crime scene and about that transfer of blood to the tree from the victim.

It was a very gruesome and brutal scene and should be given some reverence, IMO. It seems to me to be an obvious circumstance---she was cut so badly that she was nearly decapitated, and she was found drenched in blood. So why is it such a stretch to think she fell or leaned against the tree and transferred blood? It seems like such a jump to then deny that possibility and attribute it to someone else, who can't even be shown to have been there. Why twist ourselves like pretzels in order to deny the dying victim her truth?

 

[SouthEnd]

I think sometimes passions overflow. Whether it is the passion for finding the truth, for defending someone's freedom or, sometimes, the passion for being right.

I try to not feel the anger when I listen to true crime. I do get obsessive over the details and I'm sure it doesn't all come from a good and moral place.

I'm feeling hopeful with where the case is heading after listening and reading some more about the pretrial motions. There are some people working the case, who, I dare imagine, think of Abby and Libby before going to bed every night.

Today I thought, they would have been entering their 20s now. In another world, where a selfish, pitiful human had not happened upon then, they would be driving cars. To work, or college, or heck, taking a road trip. I think they would have loved Tik Tok. I want to imagine they would still have been the best of friends.

I'm following this case for many selfish reasons, but also because the moment I first heard what happened to them my stomach dropped. Theories are one thing, free speech is a right and a gift. But I believe that, if we are not actively in the trenches, helping the case, the best we can do is keep watch of what is happening, keep their memory alive and hold a candle until this investigation has been led to rest.

My thoughts are, always, with the families.

ETA to add clarity.

 

[Tricia]

Everyone,
If you see a post that upsets you and you feel violates our rules please do not quote the post and attack the poster. Report the post. You create a lot of work for our mods when this happens.
Thank you,
Tricia

 

[GoBuckeyes]

<modsnip - quoted post was removed>

I watched the saddest video (imo) on this case the other night.

https://www.investigationdiscovery.com/video/still-a-mystery-investigation-discovery/down-the-hill

After the family learned of their murders...

Anna talked about being concerned that Abby had not been baptized. Kelsi talked about how she would look for Libby's light on when she would return home because she didn't want her to be gone. So heartbreakingly sad.

I can't even imagine the heartbreak.

 

[GoBuckeyes]

If the Defense doesn't meet the legal threshold for a third party defense, it won't come in.

If previous trials are any indication, IMO this Defense WILL try to get names and theories before the jury. Opening statement, cross examination -- even if the State objects and the judge sustains it (which the Defense would know and expect), the jury will have heard it. Planting seeds of doubt...

If the Defense has no legitimate third party defense, there will be no need for an expert on Odinism nor any foundation IMO for calling the tree blood an F or an L.

The jury won't even know about all that noise.

The State's expert will describe and explain how he thinks it came to, in conjunction with the other blood evidence.

The Defense ask him few or might ask him may questions to try to weaken his testimony with tangents and supposes and contempt in the hopes of leaving A juror with any kind of doubt.

There are posts on this thread questioning the strength of the State's case (I happen to think it's strong and as yet unrevealed), but for me, the real bar is not about the State having a solid case; it's that the Defense IMO that has no case.

If he was truly somewhere else, he'd have an alibi. Even if it were somehow beyond the realm to prove. The Defense would be screaming, he didn't do it, he wasn't there. He was [insert something, somewhere], just don't have any real or digital witnesses.. but you can believe us because we're very believable.

I think the State's witnesses will be naturally believable. And all the individual pieces are put together. the picture will tell the whole devastating story.

JMO

JMO

The state is the only one who needs a strong case. They alone have the burden of proof.

 

[GoBuckeyes]

I am still thinking we may get a possible plea deal, if what we are told is true and he is very concerned about his family hearing all the crime scene and autopsy evidence then the only way to prevent this is to negotiate with the state, he has no wriggle room on sentence but he could ask for consideration as to where he would be housed so that he was near his family.

If he goes to trial on the limited information I have (the veracity of much of the information coming from the pre trial motion hearings is questionable, depending on who is speaking) read or listened to state has a case that they should be able to get to BARD - so going to trial he loses twice, he is found guilty and his family and everyone following trial have heard all the gruesome details of how they died, and that he was the sole perpetrator that did all the horrific things. It will be little comfort to him then if he continues to assert his innocence as by then all these alleged confessions will have been heard in open court, all the evidence will have been revealed and his family will have to continue their lives in the knowledge that all he is ànd has done is public knowledge.
I have no knowledge of how both families would view a plea deal, whether they may hold the view that they would accept a plea deal to not have every detail of the murders in the public domain or whether they wish to see him have a trial, it will be both families who will get to decide on a plea deal if it is ever to be considered, although he could throw a huge spanner in works and plead guilty. I think his mother and wife have decided that for now they are willing to be seen publicly supporting him and they surely have to know the strength of states case so he may know that they are going to continue to be in his life whatever choices he makes.

I still don't understand why he hasn't plead guilty. Has he walked back any of the confessions? If not, what gives?