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

[Vern]

IMO, I highly doubt RA will be convicted solely on the PCA and absolutely no one has suggested or inferred that he would be. The confessions (which are not even part of the PCA - they came later) will also go towards that IMO as the Judge has already ruled that they will be allowed into the trial. As will a bunch other evidence that we don't even know that we don't know yet IMO.

I am biased (I can even admit that) - I will always weigh sworn testimony higher than any what-ifs and suppositions given in denied motions. Being unbiased means that one considers and questions and weighs both sides of the equation and their evidence, not merely one side (doesn't seem to be happening at all in this thread). I have concerns that the trial will not be open to the public just as many have, yet I have no concerns with weighing sworn testimony given under oath from the three day hearings that largely debunked the allegations from the FMs.

Especially so when the Defence's own witnesses from LE testified that they investigated SODDIs yet could not place them at the scene at the time of the murders, that they themselves found a sister of one of them to not be credible, that they could not come up with probable cause to execute a search warrant on any of them because they were simply unable to link any of them to the crime. That at least one of them had their words taken out of context by the Defence in the FM. That Dr. Wala herself testified that she thought RA may have been malingering.

We haven't yet seen the vast majority of the State's evidence. That is what trials are for. That should be obvious.

I won't link the MS 3 day hearings (one of the sources for the above testimony that has been linked in here often) as many choose not to listen to anything they put out about this case <modsnip: Please don't reference non approved sources> This is not coming from just the MS.

No, IMO RA will not be convicted on the PCA; there will plenty of evidence presented at trial that will be heard, seen and weighed by the jurors who will be present at trial and whom will decide RA's guilt or innocence and, if required, his eventual fate.

Justice for Abby & Libby. It's their time.

 

[TTF14]

The confessions (which are not even part of the PCA - they came later)

Touché.

We still need to hear the contents and how the confessions were obtained to determine their validity. It is NOT normal to "confess" so many times without pleading guilty. IMO

<modsnip>

IMO MOO

 

[Salah11]

RA is stood accused of murdering 2 young girls so I wouldn’t class anything he does as normal.

Moo

 

[girlhasnoname]

Certainly hard to ignore. And nobody is.

What's important is what was contained in those confessions and how they were obtained, as well as his state of mind (and how he got into that state of mind) when he uttered them.

So, having an open mind here is 100% warranted and, IMO, a part of RA's due process as a still presumed innocent man.

RA should not be convicted solely on the PCA.

IMO MOO

The PCA is the least of RA's worries, he will be convicted on the totality of all the evidence, like I've pointed out on these threads ad nauseam since he was arrested. His freely given confessions, that will be video taped and in self written form will be the cherry on top.

I want the killer of these young girls to answer for his crimes, I want Justice for Abby & Libby, they are the victims. RA=BG=Killer, based on all of the evidence I have studied, read and researched over the 5 years while he was hiding in plain sight.

Having an open mind is NOT 100% warranted or required for us here when we've reached a conclusion based on a reasonable thought process. It's only a must for the jury of his peers.

It's not a giant LE, ISP, FBI, Judge, Medical Examiner conspiracy against a poor little ole' innocent CVS manager. It's because LE has built a wall of guilt around RA brick by brick.

This trial cannot come soon enough. I fully expect this D to pull out every shenanigan and pointless, moot Motion in the meantime to try and get it rescheduled for the 4th time. That's how they roll, especially when they are NOT ready still.

JMO

 

[Sillybilly]

Touché.

We still need to hear the contents and how the confessions were obtained to determine their validity. It is NOT normal to "confess" so many times without pleading guilty. IMO

<modsnip>

IMO MOO

It is pretty standard for an accused to plead NG to try to avoid a death penalty sentence. At least they have a chance of an NG verdict and have nothing to lose by doing so.

 

[TTF14]

It is pretty standard for an accused to plead NG to try to avoid a death penalty sentence. At least they have a chance of an NG verdict and have nothing to lose by doing so.

This is not a death penalty case (not yet anyway). In addition, guilty pleas usually result in a dropping of the death penalty (if it's on the table in the first place).

IMO MOO

 

[Betty P]

That thin sticks are able to fall down on the ground like Mikado sticks, which are being dropped, and are suddenly a creation of a pattern like runes, I'm doubting. BUT what I find much more interesting is, that the sticks or part of the sticks were fresh cut like with a saw (was it even an electric saw?). Since 2017 nobody is admitting, he had been on that part of RL-land, not even RL himself, afaik. Who sawed the sticks (in the middle of February) and left them there? And for which purpose was it done?

I think, we know, that RA/BG didn't have fresh sawed, long sticks hidden in his clothing, and he also had no electric saw with him. We saw "white things" and other oddities, he might have had in his blouson or in his pants, but a saw wasn't discovered by anyone.

That kind of information will be verified as true or false at the trial. I don't believe anything that comes from the D's pre-trial filings. JMO

 

[Betty P]

Of course a Court Reporter was there that day, I mean really, how could there not be? Any conversations held between the Judge and Attorney's regarding the case of The State of Indiana verses Richard Allen has a record made. It's like when people kept insisting there was no record made of the in chambers hearing when JG DQ'd the Defense. That was pounded into the ground by naysayers for weeks. Low and behold, we got a transcript a few weeks later.

We have no idea of what caused the cancelation of the public hearing it could have been requested by the Defense in order not to have information that reflects poorly on their client heard in public. Maybe a plea deal was offered? Who knows, it's all speculation at this point.

JMO

I'm actually encouraged by some of these closed pre-trial hearings. JMO, it indicates the judge is working diligently to make sure the potential jury pool isn't tainted by sensational, false claims before the trial. It stands to reason that D might try to introduce inflammatory claims, factoids and rumors in the months prior to the trial date. The jury needs factual, evidence based information.

 

[ClearAhead]

Touché.

We still need to hear the contents and how the confessions were obtained to determine their validity. It is NOT normal to "confess" so many times without pleading guilty. IMO

<modsnip>

IMO MOO

Given the nature of the confessions, a jury might convict right after their first coffee break. MOO

Judge rules accused Delphi killer Richard Allen's alleged confessions can be used as trial evidence

A judge ruled multiple confessions that Richard Allen allegedly made in the murders of Abby Williams and Libby German in 2017 can be used as evidence at trial.

abc7chicago.com

"The statements given by the defendant were unsolicited by any of the individuals and were voluntarily given without coercion or interrogation," Special Judge Fran Gull wrote in the ruling. "The evidence shows he specifically sought out the Warden by written communication he initiated, and verbal statements he offered to the guards, inmates, mental health professionals, and medical personnel."

 

[sunshineray]

Sounds like he was attempting to “harass, embarrass, or annoy” the witness.

IMO MOO JMO

Asking an expert witness on the stand a question about their expert opinion is what lawyers do. I believe he was showing her bias. By pointing out she'd made her decision before seeing the pertinent discovery and then when asked if the weapon turned out to be something other than her proposed sacrificial knife, if that would change her mind...she answered in the negative.
To me that smells of brought testimony and a closed mind. AJMO

 

[TTF14]

Asking an expert witness on the stand a question about their expert opinion is what lawyers do. I believe he was showing her bias. By pointing out she'd made her decision before seeing the pertinent discovery and then when asked if the weapon turned out to be something other than her proposed sacrificial knife, if that would change her mind...she answered in the negative.
To me that smells of brought testimony and a closed mind. AJMO

By "bought testimony" do you mean you think Dr. Perlmutter was bribed?

 

[FrostedGlass]

This is not a death penalty case (not yet anyway). In addition, guilty pleas usually result in a dropping of the death penalty (if it's on the table in the first place).

IMO MOO

IMO, Indiana isn't very strong on the DP, not even for LE murdered in the line of duty. I doubt that the jury would go for it, even with solid evidence against RA.

OTOH, if RA is as intent on committing suicide as we've been led to believe, then maybe the DP would be preferable to LWOP. Maybe he could skip all the appeals and be done with it.

 

[susane7]

It did not work very well, as it left him open to suspicion even 5 and a half years later.

I wonder how this case would have turned out if he had not come forward to the conservation officer?

It did not work very well because there are a video of him by a victim which he probably didn't know that existed when talked with the conversation officer in my opinion.

If he hasn't come forward to the conservation officer, he will probably would get away with the murders which is terryfing. That doesn't means he is innocent, just means sometimes killers made some mistakes thankfully IMO.

 

[sunshineray]

It amuses me to see that NM has to work so hard to suppress his own discovery. If he has such a rock solid case against RA, he has nothing to fear, right? He’ll go in there and make mince meat of the D. Why would he care if the D make fools of themselves? His argument that it will confuse the jury is nonsense. All the jury has to do is listen to the evidence, all the evidence, and make a rational decision as to whether or not the State has shown BARD that RA is guilty. JMO

They will listen to the evidence but should not hear information that has been ruled irrelevant to the case against RA. I trust the judge to make those decisions using the law as a measure. MO

 

[TTF14]

They will listen to the evidence but should not hear information that has been ruled irrelevant to the case against RA. I trust the judge to make those decisions using the law as a measure. MO

This is such a fine line for the judge (any judge) to have to walk. Since RA is still presumed innocent, and still should be in the judge's eyes, they can't (shouldn't) make "relevancy" rulings based on his guilt, which is what seems to be happening here, at least in the minds of the public/people discussing the case. In other words, "The SODDI stuff shouldn't be allowed in because it might make people think RA isn't guilty."

A fine line. I hope the judge makes the right decision.

IMO MOO

 

[sunshineray]

I don't think it's really working so hard to file a simple motion.. seems short and to the point. It is his job to present as clear of a case as he can so that it will be easy to follow for the jury. The defense will try to muddy all the waters so the jury is confused because they don't have any solid evidence to exclude their client from the bridge or from the trail from 130-330. They want the jury to be confused, the state wants it to be clear. This trial should not be going through every single thing LE did to investigate this case. It would take months to do that and it comes back to having zero to do with RA, who is on trial. Jurors have lives too and this shouldn't take 3 months just so the defense can drag it on calling everyone that ever was looked at to the stand and trying to pin it on them.

Exactly, well said...MO

 

[sunshineray]

It did not work very well, as it left him open to suspicion even 5 and a half years later.

I wonder how this case would have turned out if he had not come forward to the conservation officer?

We don't know but he could just as well have been tipped by one or more people...considering how many confessions he's made. Maybe there are pre-arrest confessions we know nothing about that may have started the RA ball rolling?
Just a thought.

 

[Sillybilly]

This is not a death penalty case (not yet anyway). In addition, guilty pleas usually result in a dropping of the death penalty (if it's on the table in the first place).

IMO MOO

The prosecution has up until trial to decide whether to seek the DP. RA can change his plea even during trial, so if/when it becomes known that the prosecution is seeking the DP, he can change the plea and hope for a deal at that time.

JMO

 

[susiQ]

This is such a fine line for the judge (any judge) to have to walk. Since RA is still presumed innocent, and still should be in the judge's eyes, they can't (shouldn't) make "relevancy" rulings based on his guilt, which is what seems to be happening here, at least in the minds of the public/people discussing the case. In other words, "The SODDI stuff shouldn't be allowed in because it might make people think RA isn't guilty."

A fine line. I hope the judge makes the right decision.

IMO MOO

IANAL (as you all know), but if JG rules against allowing the SODDI defense, she has imo added one more error to this case which will end in an appeal should RA be convicted. JMO