Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #194

[StarryStarryNight]

My understanding is this recent doctor was interviewed and deposed early on by the defense. I don’t know why. She didn’t add much to their case.
Since the defense’s case has greatly deteriorated since being introduced to sworn testimony, they were desperate and wanted to depose her and that Schindler(?) guy again.
I believe the state referred to it as harassment in their motion to have the S guy’s quashed.
The doctor got her own attorney to take care of it.
I really don’t think it’s a big deal. Just the defense running around taking swings at shadows because their is nothing else they can do.


Just my opinion

 

[tlcya]

My understanding is this recent doctor was interviewed and deposed early on by the defense. I don’t know why. She didn’t add much to their case.
Since the defense’s case has greatly deteriorated since being introduced to sworn testimony, they were desperate and wanted to depose her and that Schindler(?) guy again.
I believe the state referred to it as harassment in their motion to have the S guy’s quashed.
The doctor got her own attorney to take care of it.
I really don’t think it’s a big deal. Just the defense running around taking swings at shadows because their is nothing else they can do.

everyone keeps saying this Dr. Fidler was deposed already early on but nobody can tell me HOW we know this or what she was deposed about.

 

[photographer4]

13News legal expert Katie Jackson-Lindsay said the judge’s ruling is a significant win for Carroll County Prosecutor Nick McLeland.

“That's an advantage for the state. There's no question about it,” Jackson-Lindsay told 13News. “Any prosecutor would love to have a confession on a case, and so while it puts the defense in a position to defend something more, it gives the state an extreme advantage in showing, ‘We know we have the right guy because even the guy told you he's the right guy.’”
Jury can hear Richard Allen's alleged confessions to Delphi murders

“The Court is not persuaded that the detention caused the defendant to make incriminating statements,” Gull wrote Thursday. “While the defendant does suffer from major depressive disorder and anxiety, those are not serious mental illnesses that prevent the defendant from making voluntary statements.”
Jury to hear Richard Allen’s alleged confessions

From the Order: “the court is not persuaded”…

Really shows just how subjective the ruling is here imo.

 

[StarryStarryNight]

everyone keeps saying this Dr. Fidler was deposed already early on but nobody can tell me HOW we know this or what she was deposed about.

I don’t have the answers to those questions either, but I still don’t think it’s a big deal.
I will amend my thoughts to say it’s not a big deal because, among other things, RA has confessed in detail dozens of time in addition to placing himself on the bridge.
He’s still there. Nobody can get him off.

 

[tlcya]

I don’t have the answers to those questions either, but I still don’t think it’s a big deal.
I will amend my thoughts to say it’s not a big deal because, among other things, RA has confessed in detail dozens of time in addition to placing himself on the bridge.
He’s still there. Nobody can get him off.

pleas don't misunderstand. I don't disagree with your post. I am just stuck on the mystery of who is this Dr. I've never heard of in this case who was inexplicably subpoenaed by the DT.

 

[tlcya]

Persuading the Judge Through Writing: How to Win

What does persuade the judge mean?

A judge is persuaded when an advocate presents an articulate position. To persuade, an advocate must inform. Judges are unfamiliar with the details of their cases until they hear argument. They rely on the advocate to provide the background. An advocate's brief can shape a judge's opinion even before oral argument.

 

[photographer4]

Persuading the Judge Through Writing: How to Win

What does persuade the judge mean?

A judge is persuaded when an advocate presents an articulate position. To persuade, an advocate must inform. Judges are unfamiliar with the details of their cases until they hear argument. They rely on the advocate to provide the background. An advocate's brief can shape a judge's opinion even before oral argument.

Meh, still subjective. Two judges looking at the same documents could easily form two different opinions / rulings. It’s luck of the judge draw for many lawyers imo.

 

[tlcya]

Meh, still subjective. Two judges looking at the same documents could easily form two different opinions / rulings. It’s luck of the judge draw for many lawyers imo.

perhaps, and you don't have to like or agree with it but it is literally how this whole thing works.

 

[sunshineray]

So why do you think they want her? In regards to whom?

I don't know but I certainly don't think it has to do with that young man or his father. MO

 

[SouthEnd]

Meh, still subjective. Two judges looking at the same documents could easily form two different opinions / rulings. It’s luck of the judge draw for many lawyers imo.

The fact that the DT did not cite any laws or precedent, didn't specify which confessions should be quashed and under which law they should be stricken, it is bad lawyering in my opinion. I was thinking that ever since I read about the pretrial hearings and JG herself brought it up. Still, she went through every confession and tried to find if there are grounds to strike them from the trial. That's beyond fair, IMO

 

[sunshineray]

From the Order: “the court is not persuaded”…

Really shows just how subjective the ruling is here imo.

That's how it's always stated, in legalize jargon. I think there's nothing subjective about saying, (in layman's verbage) I read your stuff, you've not convinced me your argument has any merit and oh by the way you filed stuff wrong...yet again. Pretty straight forward and decisive, IMO. The words "grossly negligent" keep ringing in my ears, just more of the same. AJMO

 

[sunshineray]

Meh, still subjective. Two judges looking at the same documents could easily form two different opinions / rulings. It’s luck of the judge draw for many lawyers imo.

They go by the written law

 

[Megnut]

So far, the only detail I'm seeing that could exonerate RA is if he left before 1:30 but then easily he would have phone records and a valid alibi to support it.

Neverminding that the 1:30 wasn't his original story.

Still. On. The. Bridge.

JMO

 

[vinayd]

The fact that the DT did not cite any laws or precedent, didn't specify which confessions should be quashed and under which law they should be stricken, it is bad lawyering in my opinion. I was thinking that ever since I read about the pretrial hearings and JG herself brought it up. Still, she went through every confession and tried to find if there are grounds to strike them from the trial. That's beyond fair, IMO

They were called on this so long ago and didn't take the time to update. They def march to the beat of their own drum.

 

[TTF14]

My understanding is this recent doctor was interviewed and deposed early on by the defense. I don’t know why. She didn’t add much to their case.
Since the defense’s case has greatly deteriorated since being introduced to sworn testimony, they were desperate and wanted to depose her and that Schindler(?) guy again.
I believe the state referred to it as harassment in their motion to have the S guy’s quashed.
The doctor got her own attorney to take care of it.
I really don’t think it’s a big deal. Just the defense running around taking swings at shadows because their is nothing else they can do.


Just my opinion

Why is everyone saying this doctor was already deposed? I've seen no evidence at all of that. Do you have a link?

Lumping her together with their Odinism/jail management "expert" being deposed as "harassment" is odd to me...they are not the same person, don't have the same career, and we have seen no evidence she was already deposed. Furthermore, the judge's ruling on the matter was because of the "9 days notice" instead of "10 days notice" component.

Please, someone enlighten me. I've been out of pocket for a few days so maybe I missed something.

IMO MOO

 

[ClearAhead]

everyone keeps saying this Dr. Fidler was deposed already early on but nobody can tell me HOW we know this or what she was deposed about.

I think perhaps people wrongly believe her name was included in that earlier objection to depose by the State that included TL but it wasn’t. This motion was filed on behalf of herself. There’s nothing anywhere to suggest she was deposed earlier.

MOO

 

[StarryStarryNight]

Why is everyone saying this doctor was already deposed? I've seen no evidence at all of that. Do you have a link?

Lumping her together with their Odinism/jail management "expert" being deposed as "harassment" is odd to me...they are not the same person, don't have the same career, and we have seen no evidence she was already deposed. Furthermore, the judge's ruling on the matter was because of the "9 days notice" instead of "10 days notice" component.

Please, someone enlighten me. I've been out of pocket for a few days so maybe I missed something.

IMO MOO

It’s fine. It was just my opinion. I don’t think it’s important at all.

RA is still on that bridge.

 

[ClearAhead]

<modsnip>

On a brighter note, Cara Wieneke posted on her X that Indiana now has two, yes TWO, innocence projects. Apparently, Indiana has a problem. This might explain the 50 exonerations that have taken place there. Not hard to see why following this miscarriage of justice! JMO

https://twitter.com/x/status/1829162849349804435

IMO it’s the defense who has a problem. After RA confessed the first time or the 2nd time, or even the 12th time why didn’t his DT seek an independent phycologist to review his mental state and determine if in fact he was suffering from psychosis and if so, he’d be deemed to require hospitalization for a time. Why just let his loose lips go on and on more than 60 times?

But that the DT did says to me they deliberately intended for his mental diagnosis to remain unknown because it would harm his case….easier to make unproven accusations in the hopes of seeking public pity.

JMO and MOO

 

[mrjitty]

IMO it’s the defense who has a problem. After RA confessed the first time or the 2nd time, or even the 12th time why didn’t his DT seek an independent phycologist to review his mental state and determine if in fact he was suffering from psychosis and if so, he’d be deemed to require hospitalization for a time. Why just let his loose lips go on and on more than 60 times?

But that the DT did says to me they deliberately intended for his mental diagnosis to remain unknown because it would harm his case….easier to make unproven accusations in the hopes of seeking public pity.

JMO and MOO

agreed. i think they made a big blunder back in the spring of 23 by not getting the assessments made then.

 

[Salah11]

His goose is cooked. He has no alibi and can be placed on the bridge.

The video which is grainy can not rule out it’s not him as he is built exactly same way and he admits he was basically dressed the same.

He owns the same gun that left a bullet between the bodies.