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

[girlhasnoname]

The fact that one fallible (like all of us) human being can decide that the third party evidence is false, based solely on opinion, and not let a jury of his peers consider it and decide it (like our justice system is supposed to be), makes me terrified. This is not only about this case and this is not just my take on it (myriad attorneys out there agree with me). JMO MOO IMO

Furthermore, the fact that geofence data (digital EVIDENCE) is being quashed on the DEFENSE side, and the quasi-science of bullet markings on an unspent round on the STATE side, is also terrifying. When one person has the power to decide the outcome of a trial before it even starts and not let a jury decide what THEY think is true....there just is no hope for our justice system, in my opinion. At least not in the state of Indiana.

This is verbiage taken directly from a jury charge, and I have looked at five others and they are very similar. JMO IMO MOO You are the exclusive judges of the facts proved, of the credibility of the witnesses and of the weight to be given to their testimony.

RA's jury has had this power taken away from them before the trial has even started.

JMO MOO IMO

Ballistic evidence is allowed by law to be presented in Indiana period. It's up to the JURY to decide if it's quasi science or not, and I have no doubt there will be dueling experts on this, which is how it should work.

Even the Examiner from the ISP Lab who performed the exam here stated in her own report that the results are open to different interpretation based on the level of expertise of the individual examiner.

The jury should be the ones to make the determination of weight they place from the testimony offered and they will from both sides.

MOO

 

[m00c0w]

Exactly. This is my point. The jury won't even have a chance to decide what they find credible about geofence data since the judge has decided it's not going to be allowed in.

It's shocking.

IMO MOO

That’s just simply not true.

The defense can use geofence data. They can’t misuse the geofence data.



I’m not sure why the narrative keeps getting twisted with the geofence data.

 

[justtrish]

Anybody seen the recent hearings transcripts anywhere? I think it's going to be as elusive as the June 2023 hearing transcript was.

Yes, I just listened to some of the transcripts being read last night. I don't know if it's something I can post here, but maybe google will lead to it. They have the actual transcripts the defense requested. They read Holeman's testimony and someone elses.. I think it's 300+ pages. Seemed they read word for word question/answers so not really opinion or paraphrasing.. just reading the transcripts.

 

[sunshineray]

Which law? ETA: Her rulings are based on case law and her opinion of how they should be interpreted. It's subjective, and I don't think anyone would argue with that.

IMO MOO

It's not subjective in it's application. The judge ruled after hearing and reviewing both arguements. The defense's arguments were not based on the law, they were lacking that. The prosecution's arguements were valid within the law. The judge used the law to make judgement on the motions. That's her job, what she's been educated, prepared and charged to do. MO

 

[sunshineray]

Exactly. This is my point. The jury won't even have a chance to decide what they find credible about geofence data since the judge has decided it's not going to be allowed in.

It's shocking.

IMO MOO

It's not shocking to think more accurate data will give a more accurate picture. Seems logical enough. Of course that's just my opinion

 

[TTF14]

The judge used the law to make judgement on the motions. That's her job, what she's been educated, prepared and charged to do. MO

And she's a human, just like the rest of us, not infallible. I disagree with her decisions and MANY attorneys agree with this same point of view. This will be in appeals for years and years and years, costing Indiana taxpayers millions.

JMO IMO MOO

 

[Arkay]

The fact that one fallible (like all of us) human being can decide that the third party evidence is false, based solely on opinion, and not let a jury of his peers consider it and decide it (like our justice system is supposed to be), makes me terrified. This is not only about this case and this is not just my take on it (myriad attorneys out there agree with me). JMO MOO IMO

You are the exclusive judges of the facts proved, of the credibility of the witnesses and of the weight to be given to their testimony.

There have been many cases during my lifetime in which a judge made decisions that IMO were all wrong.

But what would you have instead? This is the American judicial system as outlined in the Constitution. The judge makes the call.

IMO JG did not, as you state, “decide that the third party evidence is false, based solely on opinion.” It’s that there WAS NO EVIDENCE. There was a narrative provided by the defense, but no hard facts to undergird the theory. The “runes” were not indubitably an F and branches arranged ritualistically could not be proven. The alleged perpetrators had alibis.

When you state the mandate to the jurors, you’re correct that they are to be the “the exclusive judges of the facts proved.”

But NO FACTS WERE PROVIDED.

IMO the judge would not have been upholding the law by including a highly embellished narrative in which not one concrete bit of evidence supported the theory.

I’m no fan of Odinists and their beliefs, but to me the theory sounds like bad fanfic. Yet what I believe is irrelevant. The judge has the knowledge and the training and information unbeknownst to us.

Yes I think judges err at times, but again, this is our Constitution. JG did not flip a coin, but instead thoroughly examined the defense’s theory and found it wanting.

JMO

 

[Salah11]

Apparently Indiana have very strict laws on 3rd party suspects allowed in. So it’s Not down to Gull and the defense are at fault for not doing their job better.

MOO

 

[SouthEnd]

And she's a human, just like the rest of us, not infallible. I disagree with her decisions and MANY attorneys agree with this same point of view. This will be in appeals for years and years and years, costing Indiana taxpayers millions.

JMO IMO MOO

Saying that a judge is human thus fallible and that online DT disagree with her judgement? IMO that's arguing that the whole US judicial system should be handed over to reddit attorneys.

I am not only referring to your posts but the general outcry on Social Media that this case will bring down the whole institution of Criminal Justice. Has no one ever followed trials before? Judges are extremely fallible. Michael Peterson, the Judge allowing the bisexuality in the first trial, so much evidence that later he admitted shouldn't have been allowed. Yes, Judges can be very fallible but this is the system that is in place right now. IMO it is what it is, if the Judge makes a decision that's within her rights, that's it. That's why there is a court of appeals.

 

[sunshineray]

And she's a human, just like the rest of us, not infallible. I disagree with her decisions and MANY attorneys agree with this same point of view. This will be in appeals for years and years and years, costing Indiana taxpayers millions.

JMO IMO MOO

We seem to have two very different viewpoints on how our justice system is set up to work. We can agree to disagree about this topic.

 

[Salah11]

By the sounds of they should have spent a lot less time on hear-say and rumors and actually found some evidence which they have none of. Yet somehow that’s Judge Gulls fault. It’s pathetic!!

MOO

 

[TTF14]

By the sounds of they should have spent a lot less time on hear-say and rumors and actually found some evidence which they have none of. Yet somehow that’s Judge Gulls fault. It’s pathetic!!

MOO

I'd call a confession to two siblings evidence, but that's just me.

IMO JMO

 

[iamshadow21]

I'd call a confession to two siblings evidence, but that's just me.

IMO JMO

As has been discussed in relation to RA himself, the competency and reliability of the person making the confession has to be taken into account along with corroborating evidence.

MOO

 

[mrjitty]

snipped

i understand your pause here but let me take a whack at this. geofencing and bullet evidence differ significantly in their methodologies and scientific scrutiny. geofencing relies on location data from smartphones within a defined geographic area, which can be broad and capture numerous individuals, potentially making it overly inclusive and imprecise.

bullet evidence involves comparing tool marks on casings to a specific firearm, but it could face criticism for lacking standardization. geofencing is more digital and broad, especially if there aren't tools to triangulate a boundary properly, while bullet evidence is more physical and specific to forensic comparisons

either way, both could and probably would be challenged by experts on the defense side. up to the jury what they find credible.

Also we now know thanks to Murdersheet coverage, .exactly why the geofence data lacks any relevance to the case.

As we know from the defence filing, the geofence warrant returned 3 phones. But the state ran down all 3 of those phones and they are not alternative suspects in the case.

IMO the D would have been able to use the geo-fence if one of those people could clear the bar for SODDI in the case. But we know that what defence surrogates tried to do was create a false conspiracy that a young man was a suspect, when in fact he had been ruled out by law enforcement. See the MS coverage on the due process gang

So Judge Gulls ruling simply prevents the D from floating a conspiracy like they did in their motion - but this time at trial in front of the jury i.e. pretending that the geofence reveals an alternate suspect

MOO

 

[ClearAhead]

By the sounds of they should have spent a lot less time on hear-say and rumors and actually found some evidence which they have none of. Yet somehow that’s Judge Gulls fault. It’s pathetic!!

MOO

Your remarks reminded me of prior discussions here regarding wrongful convictions. Often the wrongs were caused by such things as hearsay and rumours. Now the courts have tightened up the laws to rid hearsay and rumour from the courtroom. Good on Judge Gull for protecting Indiana from taking a step backward! JMO

 

[mrjitty]

In my opinion, nothing about Judge Gull's ruling on the motion in limine is going to stop the defence from using mobile location data to challenge the timeline.

 

[TTF14]

In my opinion, nothing about Judge Gull's ruling on the motion in limine is going to stop the defence from using mobile location data to challenge the timeline.

I hope you're right.

 

[m00c0w]

I'd call a confession to two siblings evidence, but that's just me.

IMO JMO

It’s inadmissible evidence. Nothing but hearsay.

It’s possible the statements may fall under an exception, but the defense never even tried to make an offering as such.

Indiana Rules of Evidence

JMO

 

[Arkay]

I'd call a confession to two siblings evidence, but that's just me.

But 61 confessions from the horse’s mouth mean nothing?

 

[mrjitty]

It’s inadmissible evidence. Nothing but hearsay.

It’s possible the statements may fall under an exception, but the defense never even tried to make an offering as such.

Indiana Rules of Evidence

JMO

As we've discussed, these witnesses didn't even appear at the hearing so I am guessing they couldn't get this evidence