Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #195

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
I can only speak for myself.

Because of all the exonerations coming out of Indiana, I would hope that everyone would put this case under a microscope.

Everything we've heard in this 3 day transcript is from the prosecution's side. I'll have to wait to hear from the defense. Too bad that I won't be able to hear it all. Oh, wait... I'm probably not going to hear any of it because it probably won't be streamed. I'll only get to hear what the judge, prosecution and MSM want me to hear.

The judge was willing to set a hearing for S&L. I believe there is evidence in it.

(Snip)
If defendant's new counsel inform the Court they intend to pursue the Franks Motion, the Court will schedule a hearing.
08C01-2210-MR-000001
11/14/2023

the defence just had an entire hearing on the motion in limine in which to present their Franks theory evidence. one has to assume they took their best shot at it. MOO
 
Not so, the Defense presented their own witnesses (magical thinking Pearlmutter) and cross examined every State's witness, so it wasn't just from the Prosecution.

MOO
I think @FrostedGlass was referring to the hard copies of the transcripts thus far beng only "Prosecution" witnesses.

I've linked the google drive for the transcripts from the Three Day Hearings above.

Perlmutter's is already uploaded. They are hoping to have the remainder of the transcripts received and uploaded by the end of the month.

My thanks to those who are actually paying for those transcipts and doing the work to make them all available for us!
 
Is his attorney's really giving him that option though? I'm not so sure.
That’s the issue, unfortunately that RA seems to be surrounded by people who treat him like a puppet.

I can not imagine wanting to cleanse your soul after finding God and being rejected for finally being brave enough to admit the truth. I don't like the man, but even I have some sympathy that he wants to do the right thing, and he isn't allowed to. IMO
 
To be fair, at this point I don’t think RA is guilty.

I believe that could easily change once I hear the states case.

A lot of people are strictly basing his innocence off the lack of publicly available information.

For me personally, following this case since day one. It’s a gut feeling, I believe he possibly played a role in it but I don’t think he was the killer.
How would RA have a role in the killings, yet, not be guilty?
 
That’s the issue, unfortunately that RA seems to be surrounded by people who treat him like a puppet.

I can not imagine wanting to cleanse your soul after finding God and being rejected for finally being brave enough to admit the truth. I don't like the man, but even I have some sympathy that he wants to do the right thing, and he isn't allowed to. IMO
I see your point it's just too bad that he didn't do so (Find God) before he killed two children. Or right after the crime, when he hid the bodies and got rid of the murder weapon. Or in the 5 and a half years leading up to his arrest. Imo.
 
"From the prosecutions side"??

The Defence also called witnesses. In no way, shape or form was this just the "prosecution". Perlmutter for example?

Would that include the testimony where the individuals that the Defence used in supporting the 'facts' (I use that term loosely here) they supposedly laid out in their Franks' saw those individuals testify that they:

- had been taken out of context by the Defence;
- that they could not place any other (previously named) POIs at the crime scene;
- that others (who were allegedly confessed to) were found unbelieveable and unreliable;
- that they had no probable cause for search warrants or arrests of those others;
- Where Dr. Wala herself testifies that she believed RA may have been faking his behaviour;
- the blood expert who noted there WAS blood at the crime scene;
- who also noted that the "F" was not an "F";
- who also testified that Abby was not re-dressed after her murder??

Edited to Add: And slowly but surely the transcripts are being uploaded here (includes Perlmutter's etc). They are hoping to receive the remaining transcripts by the end of the month for upload:
I haven't gotten to Perlmutter's testimony yet. I've missed any at-length discussion of her testimony and forgot about it. I'll correct myself: all the testimony we've heard so far has been from the prosecution witnesses except for one.

Why do you suppose the judge was willing to hear S&L's Franks?
 
That’s the issue, unfortunately that RA seems to be surrounded by people who treat him like a puppet.

I can not imagine wanting to cleanse your soul after finding God and being rejected for finally being brave enough to admit the truth. I don't like the man, but even I have some sympathy that he wants to do the right thing, and he isn't allowed to. IMO
Respectfully, RA could confess to the Court. It might mean going against his Mother and wife's wishes, and those of his D team, but I believe he could request a hearing with the Judge or State's Prosecutor to have this addressed or maybe he has to do it in a scheduled hearing with his D present. IDK

If it comes out that his D literally or intentionally prevented him from confessing, their careers would be over IMO. Depending on his family dynamics at this point, RA may be hoping to be found not guilty at trial.

I still don't know if R&B are facing any disciplinary actions post trial? Anyone know?

MOO
 
I can only speak for myself.

Because of all the exonerations coming out of Indiana, I would hope that everyone would put this case under a microscope.

Everything we've heard in this 3 day transcript is from the prosecution's side. I'll have to wait to hear from the defense. Too bad that I won't be able to hear it all. Oh, wait... I'm probably not going to hear any of it because it probably won't be streamed. I'll only get to hear what the judge, prosecution and MSM want me to hear.

The judge was willing to set a hearing for S&L. I believe there is evidence in it.

(Snip)
If defendant's new counsel inform the Court they intend to pursue the Franks Motion, the Court will schedule a hearing.
08C01-2210-MR-000001
11/14/2023
The notes for this date say

. If defendant's new counsel inform the Court they intend to pursue the Franks Motion, the Court will schedule a hearing.

This does not state that they filed a franks motion, or even informed the court they intended to pursue one.
Do you have any sources to support your statement that a Franks was filed and was going to be granted a hearing by S&L?
Otherwise it seems like speculation. IMO
 
Respectfully, RA could confess to the Court. It might mean going against his Mother and wife's wishes, and those of his D team, but I believe he could request a hearing with the Judge or State's Prosecutor to have this addressed or maybe he has to do it in a scheduled hearing with his D present. IDK

If it comes out that his D literally or intentionally prevented him from confessing, their careers would be over IMO. Depending on his family dynamics at this point, RA may be hoping to be found not guilty at trial.

I still don't know if R&B are facing any disciplinary actions post trial? Anyone know?

MOO
True. RA wrote a letter to the warden confessing. I don't think Baldwin had a hand in that one. Imo.
 
Respectfully, RA could confess to the Court. It might mean going against his Mother and wife's wishes, and those of his D team, but I believe he could request a hearing with the Judge or State's Prosecutor to have this addressed or maybe he has to do it in a scheduled hearing with his D present. IDK

If it comes out that his D literally or intentionally prevented him from confessing, their careers would be over IMO. Depending on his family dynamics at this point, RA may be hoping to be found not guilty at trial.

I still don't know if R&B are facing any disciplinary actions post trial? Anyone know?

MOO


I believe that as soon as his wife and mother gave him the cold shoulder and refused to communicate with him he reverted back to the same old selfish RA. So he If they had lovingly told him they would support him no matter what he would of pleaded guilty by now. So he wont go against their wishes is my take.

moo
 
Last edited:
That's a dead link. It appears that you linked to the page that contained the link and that page is no longer there.
It's the pdf that needs to be downloaded to read the transcript. The Cecil, Cicero and Holeman testimony transcripts were all on scribd and would just open, no download needed. The only transcript I could find for Harshman's was not. If someone has Harshman's testimony on scribd I'd appreciate the link greatly!
 
The notes for this date say

. If defendant's new counsel inform the Court they intend to pursue the Franks Motion, the Court will schedule a hearing.

This does not state that they filed a franks motion, or even informed the court they intended to pursue one.
Do you have any sources to support your statement that a Franks was filed and was going to be granted a hearing by S&L?
Otherwise it seems like speculation. IMO

I never said S&L filed a Franks Memo and it's a moot point to what I did say.
I said the judge was willing to set a hearing, which was what you quoted.

I have asked why she would be willing to set a Franks hearing for S&L but not for B&R.
 
It's the pdf that needs to be downloaded to read the transcript. The Cecil, Cicero and Holeman testimony transcripts were all on scribd and would just open, no download needed. The only transcript I could find for Harshman's was not. If someone has Harshman's testimony on scribd I'd appreciate the link greatly!
ETA this is a pdf download so not what you asked for. Leaving it stand as it’s easy to download though.

 

Attachments

Last edited:
Why do you suppose the judge was willing to hear S&L's Franks?

A judge isn’t going to guarantee holding a Franks Hearing without ever having received a motion from S&L. First it has to be determined if the D have grounds to request a Franks Hearing, S&L never got that far and the present D didn’t make it past the first gate. JMO

“Judge Fran Gull Tuesday denied the hearing requests for the third and fourth Franks motions. She argues the defense could not provide solid proof that law enforcement or the original judge in the case acted on false or misleading information.

A hearing has been scheduled for Friday, August 23rd, but it’s unclear what will be discussed at that hearing. Part of the hearing will be closed to the public and part will be open, says the court.”
 
I believe that as soon as his wife and mother gave him the cold shoulder and refused to communicate with him he reverted back to the same old selfish RA. So he If they had lovingly told him they would support him no matter what he would of pleaded guilty by now. So he wont go against their wishes is my take.

moo

His wife and mother gave him the cold shoulder and refused to communicate with him? Please cite your source.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
157
Guests online
252
Total visitors
409

Forum statistics

Threads
609,448
Messages
18,254,305
Members
234,656
Latest member
GentleWarrior
Back
Top