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.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
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.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.
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.
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
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
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.Sounds like he was attempting to “harass, embarrass, or annoy” the witness.
IMO MOO JMO
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.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
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.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?
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. MOIt 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
Exactly, well said...MOI 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.
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?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?
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.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
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. JMOThis 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
It's her job, her career, what's she qualified to do. I trust her to interpret the law fairly and wisely. MOThis 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
Yes indeed and the judge made very clear, in her ruling to allow in all the confessions RA made, that there was no coercion by anyone, the confessions were freely given by him. That's a very important ruling in this case. The jury will hear what RA has to say, in his own words, about his guilt, motive and seemingly his regret too.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.
<modsnip>
IMO MOO