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

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Public Defender Bill Lebrato represented RA for 79 days before withdrawing when RA's original defense team was reinstated following a decision by the Supreme Court.

Lebrato gave an MSM interview in Feb 2024, and I think he made some interesting comments about both the defense strategy, RA, and Judge Gull.

https://fox59.com/indiana-news/ive-...-delphi-suspect-richard-allen-discusses-case/
So nice to hear confirmation from an insider [Lebrato] what I've always felt to be true. (Below is from your linked article.)

“Judge Gull knows no other way than to be fair,” he said. “She does not play favorites. The Supreme Court didn’t pick her name out of a hat. They chose her for a specific reason. In their ruling, they unanimously voted that Judge Gull stays on this case.”

He said her “ethical and moral standards” were beyond reproach."
 
Cecil’s transcripts clear up a lot of… confusion… about the phone information. The video was timestamped and aligns with the time of other photos of AW on the bridge. GPS from SnapChat puts the photos of AW on the bridge, well, on the bridge. Not perhaps sent after the fact from somewhere else.

We also see that Cecil mentions the phone was powered on until sometime after 4:30am on 2/14; it was never turned off. While the circular discussion around text messages is pretty strange and confusing, it seems like the ultimate premise is the phone received several text messages around 4:33am on 2/14.

The far simplest explanation there is that the area the girls were found in has very poor cell service. The phone, in the location it was found, had difficulty connecting to the tower. At 4:33am, something made it a little bit easier to connect to the tower - this could be something as simple as some strong wind moving tree branches in the right way to clear up just enough line of sight for the phone to connect for a few seconds.

Something I think plenty of folks could identify with if they’ve ever been somewhere with poor but sporadic cell service.

All my opinion.

My gut feeling is that the onboard phone logs don't support the D version, otherwise they would have put this to the witness.

Also I definitely have this experience in our countryside location. Signal drops in and out all the time because there is forest between me and the tower - which is only about 2km away. Atmospherics are the biggest component - the more moisture in the air, the worse the propagation.

I hope we get a proper CAST expert to tell us from the phone logs about on/off, screen on/off etc - these seem a much more direct method to prove on/off instead of indirect inference (message receipts)
 
Cecil's transcript reveals one important thing and a need for caution.

On page 25 line 2, NMcL makes clear that Cecil was only called Cecil to establish, from the Apple Health data and bridge guy video meta, chrono to to cover alibi of 3rd parties.

State concedes messages received at 4.33.

State was not there to discuss whether phone was turned on at 4.33 and did not call the cast expert we know is involved in the case, nor did defence call their own expert witness to show phone was turned on.

D claims by inference, 'something changed about that phone at 4.33" but the expert did not concede this, nor was it shown from any direct log evidence.

So it seems to me, Cecil won't in fact be all the states evidence on this. He was just the witness for this hearing.

IMO
 
Looking at the search warrant return just now and I see something listed as "paper wrapped wooden weave box containing 2 "Audiovox" device...

Any ideas what those are? I googled Audiovox and it isn't clear to me what this could be.
Who is wrapping worn-out (??) Audiovox devices, contained in a nice (??) box, additionally into paper? Seems as being very valuable to the owner. Seems also as being protected against curious non-owners. Interesting ....
 
I have just started to read the Blood splitter expert and my heart literally aches for Libby. She would of seen Abby incapacitated and likely killed before her very eyes to then have to fight her attacker. It’s all so heartbreaking for a child to have to face such evil.

ETA - I am not diminishing what Abby went though but Libby was alive and conscious when she was attacked and literally had to fight.

 
Last edited:
I have just started to read the Blood splitter expert and my heart literally aches for Libby. She would of seen Abby incapacitated and likely killed before her very eyes to then have to fight her attacker. It’s all so heartbreaking for a child to have to face such evil.

ETA - I am not diminishing what Abby went though but Libby was alive and conscious when she was attacked and literally had to fight.

Agree 100%

Libby would have witnessed Abby's murder in a shocking manner. She was most likely completely nude, vulnerable and knew what was coming.

I don't think Libby died immediately. The killer had time to spend with Libby once Abby was out of the way. What did he do with Libby during the time after Abby was murdered and when he bolted out of there and was seen walking along the road?

Was Libby alive all that time, being forced into doing things for the killer, or was she already dead and the killer was abusing her after death.

It's just so horrible.

The 18 minute timeframe of movement and then nothing. The blood splatter analysis is really difficult to read and finally gives us a glimpse into what the girls endured.

MOO
 
So nice to hear confirmation from an insider [Lebrato] what I've always felt to be true. (Below is from your linked article.)

“Judge Gull knows no other way than to be fair,” he said. “She does not play favorites. The Supreme Court didn’t pick her name out of a hat. They chose her for a specific reason. In their ruling, they unanimously voted that Judge Gull stays on this case.”

He said her “ethical and moral standards” were beyond reproach."
I have to wonder if he still feels that way now?

Regardless, he also stated on national television in his interview with BM that he believed RA to be innocent. When asked if that’s what he says about all his clients he responded, “No.” Just sayin’.
 
I have to wonder if he still feels that way now?

Regardless, he also stated on national television in his interview with BM that he believed RA to be innocent. When asked if that’s what he says about all his clients he responded, “No.” Just sayin’.
RA is legally innocent until found guilty by the court of law and a defense attorney that was tasked with defending him is ethically bound to keep that narrative.
Jmo nothing to note with his statements.
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
158
Guests online
3,531
Total visitors
3,689

Forum statistics

Threads
603,699
Messages
18,161,035
Members
231,828
Latest member
kgiridhar07
Back
Top