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

[TTF14]

Busy afternoon at the Court Clerk's office:

09/09/2024	Motion to Shorten Time Filed Third Motion for Order to Shorten Discovery Response Period Filed By: Allen, Richard M. File Stamp: 09/09/2024
09/09/2024	Motion to Certify Interlocutory Order for Appeal Filed Motion for Court to Certify Court Order for Interlocutory Appeal Filed By: Allen, Richard M. File Stamp: 09/09/2024

Judge Gull will of course deny this, but I wholeheartedly agree with what they've written in this excellent motion. The ruling she made about the third party stuff has the appearance of being made solely on whether or not it might cause a jury to exonerate RA, not "confuse them." In other words, in my opinion, she ruled against SODDI because the jurors just might believe it. By her ruling, it looks like (IMO) she has already convicted RA and taken any power (to evaluate the validity of the evidence for themselves) the jurors are supposed to have completely out of their hands. The jury now has no role in this case because the outcome has already been decided. All my opinion and I did not call the judge any names. I'm disagreeing with her ruling, not her character, morals, or what she looks like.

MOO IMO

 

[TTF14]

I think the important issue is that a box of discovery, big or small, was sent to RA in prison. He was left to go through it all by himself, by his idiot lawyers.
This was discussed at the hearing last summer about the motion the defense filed claiming RA was being treated like a prisoner of war. Their intern testified that he took the discovery to RA. He said nothing about going over it with him. The defense attys apparently never did…it was too far to drive.

Didn't someone(s) employed at/by the prison go through every page and make copies of it first? I thought I remembered that.

 

[shonyakay]

Judge Gull will of course deny this, but I wholeheartedly agree with what they've written in this excellent motion. The ruling she made about the third party stuff has the appearance of being made solely on whether or not it might cause a jury to exonerate RA, not "confuse them." In other words, in my opinion, she ruled against SODDI because the jurors just might believe it. By her ruling, it looks like (IMO) she has already convicted RA and taken any power (to evaluate the validity of the evidence for themselves) the jurors are supposed to have completely out of their hands. The jury now has no role in this case because the outcome has already been decided. All my opinion and I did not call the judge any names. I'm disagreeing with her ruling, not her character, morals, or what she looks like.

MOO IMO

Imo Gull ruled against SODDI because the defense did not meet the nexus by providing the ADMISSABLE evidence required. There is absolutely no admissible evidence to show that SODDI. Unless you can point me to said evidence.

 

[vinayd]

How is everyone sitting around reading a 1000 page discovery on the clock? Inmate mail is not that exciting nor is it shared around prisons. If prison employees in any capacity were reading the discovery we would see it on the surveillance.

 

[dkaras]

Didn't someone(s) employed at/by the prison go through every page and make copies of it first? I thought I remembered that.

I would like to understand this process better too.

We're talking about potentially hundreds of documents here. How long would it take a person to do that?

I need to take some time and go back to some articles and motions around this time. I seem to recall many mentions of voluminous discovery, but I'd like the sources to be sure of myself.

 

[shonyakay]

Didn't someone(s) employed at/by the prison go through every page and make copies of it first? I thought I remembered that.

Sorry but that sounds farfetched since everything at the prison was video recorded per testimony.

 

[TTF14]

Imo Gull ruled against SODDI because the defense did not meet the nexus by providing the ADMISSABLE evidence required. There is absolutely no admissible evidence to show that SODDI. Unless you can point me to said evidence.

That is indeed the reason she provided in her very brief response/ruling.

 

[TTF14]

Sorry but that sounds farfetched since everything at the prison was video recorded per testimony.

I'm not implying it was done secretly. I thought I remembered this was procedure because of certain types of drugs being smuggled in on paper.

 

[shonyakay]

I'm not implying it was done secretly. I thought I remembered this was procedure because of certain types of drugs being smuggled in on paper.

Oh, I see. I have to check the transcripts because I am fairly certain they spoke of RA's prison mail and how well it was protected but I will say no more until I actually locate it.

 

[Spartygirl]

I don't disagree with your post re the dumping an unknown number of discovery documents on their client by an intern of the DT. But the mechanics of that dumping it is not clear to me. In general, I know that legal mail is exempt from being searched in Indiana unless it is opened and searched in front of the inmate and only for the purposes of looking for contraband. I would assume that to be true for discovery as well but do not know this to be fact. Which is why I am curious.

I will drop it because nobody seems to know the specifics about exactly how much and in what form that discovery was delivered.

I am guessing it was "Paper" documents JMO

the same ones RA was " Wetting down and Eating" after they were sent to him by his Defense team. IIRC
JMO

 

[AugustWest]

I would like to understand this process better too.

We're talking about potentially hundreds of documents here. How long would it take a person to do that?

I need to take some time and go back to some articles and motions around this time. I seem to recall many mentions of voluminous discovery, but I'd like the sources to be sure of myself.

Millions of pages, actually. 26 terrabytes as of April 30, 2024. And counting.

Earlier this week, McLeland said the state has shared all of its information — 26 terabytes worth — with Allen's attorneys and denied claims of lying to the defense team.

Misconduct allegations in Delphi murder case continue less than two weeks before trial

New court filings from Richard Allen's defense team accuse law enforcement and prosecutors of withholding critical evidence.

www.jconline.com

 

[TTF14]

I am guessing it was "Paper" documents JMO

the same ones RA was " Wetting down and Eating" after they were sent to him by his Defense team. IIRC
JMO

After I heard about paper having drugs on it sometimes, I wondered if he was doing that hoping to get high. Maybe he thought (or someone told him) the paper had drugs on it? Or maybe what he ate wasn't Discovery but actually WAS paper with drugs?

IMO MOO

 

[m00c0w]

Judge Gull will of course deny this, but I wholeheartedly agree with what they've written in this excellent motion. The ruling she made about the third party stuff has the appearance of being made solely on whether or not it might cause a jury to exonerate RA, not "confuse them." In other words, in my opinion, she ruled against SODDI because the jurors just might believe it. By her ruling, it looks like (IMO) she has already convicted RA and taken any power (to evaluate the validity of the evidence for themselves) the jurors are supposed to have completely out of their hands. The jury now has no role in this case because the outcome has already been decided. All my opinion and I did not call the judge any names. I'm disagreeing with her ruling, not her character, morals, or what she looks like.

MOO IMO

I’m not sure JG will deny to certify, but I can see the appellate court refusing to hear it. The defense has not met their burden of proof, in my opinion, and they can’t add on at this point. They’re stuck with a lot of smoke and little actual evidence. Further, JG has actually said she’ll take offers of proof under consideration towards the same evidence during trial if the defense wishes to make such offers.

As far as taking the evaluation of validity of evidence out of the juror’s hands, evidence is suppressed every day in America. Evidence is ruled inadmissible, and things are prohibited from being mentioned in open court. The jury does not get to be exposed to whatever the defense wants to throw out there - there are standards each side must meet, and for good reason. The defense has had numerous opportunities to meet the standards for a third party defense in Indiana, and were found significantly lacking at the end of the day. And now we know (from the transcripts of the hearings) that the defense has greatly stretched the truth to support parts of this theory, despite reassurances from various people that they couldn’t do precisely that in court filings.

They still have plenty of options left for crafting a legitimate defense, such as discrediting the prosecution’s theory of the crime, providing an alibi for RA, impeaching expert witnesses, discrediting evidence… these things would also probably not require the jurors to suspend disbelief for extended periods of time.

All my opinion.

 

[m00c0w]

After I heard about paper having drugs on it sometimes, I wondered if he was doing that hoping to get high. Maybe he thought (or someone told him) the paper had drugs on it? Or maybe what he ate wasn't Discovery but actually WAS paper with drugs?

IMO MOO

That’s an interesting point. Maybe he was high on K2 when he killed the girls, as well. Would explain a lot.

IMO MOO

 

[FrostedGlass]

I think the important issue is that a box of discovery, big or small, was sent to RA in prison. He was left to go through it all by himself, by his idiot lawyers.
This was discussed at the hearing last summer about the motion the defense filed claiming RA was being treated like a prisoner of war. Their intern testified that he took the discovery to RA. He said nothing about going over it with him. The defense attys apparently never did…it was too far to drive.

My version: they sent the intern because his pay was a lot lower. The attys did not want/need to spend hours and hours going over 1000 pages of discovery with RA when there were terabytes yet to go through. Westville kept the discovery. His attys checked on the situation on April 3 and then went to visit the next day. IMO

https://interactive.wthr.com/pdfs/ALLEN-MOVE-PRISON-REQUEST-1.pdf

Attorneys for Mr. Allen delivered nearly 1,000 pages of police reports to Mr. Allen on Friday, March 24, 2023, with the intention of seeking their client's cooperation in his own defense. As of Monday, April 3'", 2023, said information has yet to be provided to Mr. Allen;
...
Up until a visit with Mr. Allen on April 4, 2023...

 

[Seattle1]

After I heard about paper having drugs on it sometimes, I wondered if he was doing that hoping to get high. Maybe he thought (or someone told him) the paper had drugs on it? Or maybe what he ate wasn't Discovery but actually WAS paper with drugs?

IMO MOO

This idea that RA allegedly had access to volumes of his legal docs/discovery in his cell is so strange to me.

Generally, jail inmates are very restricted in the quantity of docs they have access to in their cell -- if any, and also how docs are delivered to the inmate.

Given the jail is required to retain the originals received via USPS and only give the inmate copies of the docs produced by jail staff, I recall hearings where the Court has ordered the jail to make a laptop available to the inmate, and direct their defense to only send the inmate a thumb drive because of the burden being imposed on the jail staff. Same for transcripts where the court has Ordered transcripts only by mp3 file and a player made available to the inmate.

Perhaps it's different when inmate is housed in prison because in jail, keeping legal docs inside your cell is borderline contraband. Reportedly, legal docs are high on the list of things inmates like to steal -- hoping for any form of inside information that they hope to use to better themselves and/or their situation in jail -- including trying to share information with the prosecutor they allegedly heard from the inmate which is false. They stole the info! MOO

ETA: Jailed inmates also don't have unlimited access to legal docs but reasonable access where it's collected by DOC and returned to their personal property locker.

 

[TTF14]

ETA: Jailed inmates also don't have unlimited access to legal docs but reasonable access where it's collected by DOC and returned to their personal property locker.

RSBM

This makes a lot more sense than allowing inmates (at any level of jail or prison except maybe death row) to keep Discovery in their cells. Although, maybe since RA was in solitary confinement for over a year he was allowed since he didn't share a cell and no other inmates would be entering it?

 

[Seattle1]

RSBM

This makes a lot more sense than allowing inmates (at any level of jail or prison except maybe death row) to keep Discovery in their cells. Although, maybe since RA was in solitary confinement for over a year he was allowed since he didn't share a cell and no other inmates would be entering it?

Seems to me that jurisdictions vary but I recall that federal discovery agreements prohibited turning over physical copies of the documents -- that was supposed to be the attorneys job to communicate or summarize the info for their client. This may have since changed but I know of clients who wanted to see the actual discovery-- and their attorney sat in the visiting room for 5+ hours while the inmate read page by page!

New Ethics Opinion on Incarcerated Defendants' Right to Review Discovery

Many criminal defense lawyers are reluctant to give incarcerated clients copies of discovery materials. Lawyers may worry that the materials will be

nccriminallaw.sog.unc.edu

 

[ClearAhead]

I don't disagree with your post re the dumping an unknown number of discovery documents on their client by an intern of the DT. But the mechanics of that dumping it is not clear to me. In general, I know that legal mail is exempt from being searched in Indiana unless it is opened and searched in front of the inmate and only for the purposes of looking for contraband. I would assume that to be true for discovery as well but do not know this to be fact. Which is why I am curious.

I will drop it because nobody seems to know the specifics about exactly how much and in what form that discovery was delivered.

I recall reading something here that instructed the D that discovery documents couldn’t be copied. Anyone recall that?

So the interim delivers boxes with at least 1000 pages of discovery for RA. But RA has no legal training to understand what he’s been given, he’s not representing himself and he certainly can’t be expected develop his legal strategy, so what was he expected to do with it? I just don’t get it. This scenario reeks of inconsiderate negligence. His D wanted to send him off the deep end?

A situation that would seem far more logical is if his attorneys needed to seek his input, they would meet with him and go through it seeking his input together. Maybe that’s what the prison expected would happen in withholding the documents but the D didn’t show up for almost two weeks.

 

[Trebor5591]

There's these quotes from Harshman's testimony reported on MM. So no "maybe" or "might"

"Harshman said a corrections officer overheard the defendant “apologize for killing Abby,” and that Allen wanted to, “tell the truth and be honest."

https://fox59.com/news/detective-te...nfessed-more-than-60-times-to-delphi-murders/

IMO, that quote is not accurate. Harshman said that a correction office heard Allen talking to himself and while talking to himself, apparently apologized for killing A.W. (according to the correction officer.) If the prosecution wants the jury to hear this, they will have to call the correction officer to the witness stand, IMO, unless Judge Gull is going to allow heresy testimony.

"but it was somewhere along the lines of he was talking to himself and he apologized for maybe killing A.W."