Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #196

[Salah11]

I am amazed by how quiet the defense is. They are obviously planning something. IMO

 

[katydid23]

I am amazed by how quiet the defense is. They are obviously planning something. IMO

They might be just trying to study the actual evidence set forth by the State, for the first time, in order to go to trial.

 

[Spartygirl]

The 18 minutes actually raises a lot of questions for me. The distance from where they were abducted to where they were found is .14 miles.

I wonder what took 18 minutes.

I wonder so many things, I really hope this goes to trial in October

I am pretty sure it would take at least that long ( 18 minutes) to get from top of MHB to the time Libby and Abby were murdered.

The terrain there is not some smooth pavement .. it is "Down the HIll" which would be slow moving.
Across a creek... a creek with a lot of rocks, boulders, sand, water to have to step across... perhaps barefooted since one of Libby's shoes were found on opposite side of creek from her body.
Walking on rocks, pebbles and boulders while crossing water could slow a person down...especially 3 of them, and One of them with a GUN pointed at the other 2.
Then up into the pocket of land or ravine type area where girls were murdered.
We have read from the 3 day hearing-- that Libby did not die slowly but instead was stumbling around, grabbing a tree trunk for support before succumbing to her fatal wounds.
18 minutes-- Yeah.. I can see that.
JMO

 

[Vern]

D-23

 

[FromGermany1]

I don't like the Like-emoji now; do you, dear members?

 

[sunshineray]

The 18 minutes actually raises a lot of questions for me. The distance from where they were abducted to where they were found is .14 miles.

I wonder what took 18 minutes.

I wonder so many things, I really hope this goes to trial in October

Since Libby's phone was found under Abby's body and Abby was wearing Libby's pants, I think it's safe to assume that Libby was made to remove her clothes ( she was found naked) and Abby was allowed to put on Libby's pants. All that action, if Libby's phone was in her pants pocket (or her sweatshirt's pocket, still not clear if Abby was wearing Libby's sweatshirt) could account for many more minutes of that 18 minutes than just walking from the bridge to the crime scene. JMO

 

[sunshineray]

I truly feel this is all they can prove, but is all it takes for who is responsible for bringing them to such a horrible death. I do believe others are getting away with this, and it makes me very uncomfortable!

They can prove a lot more with 60+ confessions with details and dozens more incriminating statements what exactly happened that day...from the horse's mouth. MO

 

[sunshineray]

I am of the belief that RA acted alone. No one else involved at all.

I believe a sexually motivated crime was premeditated by RA without knowing his future victim(s).
I believe when RA seen Abby and Libby walking toward the bridge he made his move.
He approached them with a gun amd made them go down the hill. At some point he made them take off their clothes. At one point, Abby was unclothed from the waist down and Libby was eventually totally unclothed. At some point they crossed the creek. I believe at some point RA lost control of the situation, OR realized after what he did (kidnapping them and making them take off their clothes) he couldn't leave them alive, and brutally killed them. I believe he inflicted their fatal wounds with his work place issued box cutter.

LE can't place anyone at the scene of the crime except RA. ISP Detective Vito testified to this at the latest hearings.

I believe it was witnessing Abby's murder and then RA turning his attention solely on her that cause Libby to fight and run for her life </3

 

[sunshineray]

One of GH's videos placed L's shoe on the bridge side of the creek and that spawned speculation that some disrobing occurred on that side.

Or she just lost a shoe in the rough terrain. MO

 

[FrostedGlass]

Since Libby's phone was found under Abby's body and Abby was wearing Libby's pants, I think it's safe to assume that Libby was made to remove her clothes ( she was found naked) and Abby was allowed to put on Libby's pants. All that action, if Libby's phone was in her pants pocket (or her sweatshirt's pocket, still not clear if Abby was wearing Libby's sweatshirt) could account for many more minutes of that 18 minutes than just walking from the bridge to the crime scene. JMO

The information was taken from the step counter. See Cecil's testimony.
She was walking between the times of 2:24:34 and 2:32 pm.
It contained no information as to what was happening during those minutes.
IMO

3 Day Hearing - Google Drive

drive.google.com

 

[AmyPond]

Hi everyone. I have been absent from websleuths for a long time. But this was a case I was part of the discussion with back in 2017 when it first happened. I've only casually followed news stories about it over the past several years. Obviously there's no way I can read every single thread/post here.

Can anyone tell me a good way I could get caught up on all the recent details and whatnot? I would read all the threads, if I had the time but I just don't. If I read the last thread or 2, would that be enough? Or is there a good "Cliffs Notes" kind of site or something I could check out? Thanks for any help! I don't want to just jump in over here until I learn what's been going on with everything.

 

[sunshineray]

The information was taken from the step counter. See Cecil's testimony.
She was walking between the times of 2:24:34 and 2:32 pm.
It contained no information as to what was happening during those minutes.
IMO

3 Day Hearing - Google Drive

drive.google.com

Yes I know that, it was my suppositions, my opinions on what may have occured.

 

[FrostedGlass]

Or she just lost a shoe in the rough terrain. MO

No, IMO it was found in the water, along with a couple of other items.

But, don't you wonder where the second pair of jeans (Abby's) were?

 

[sunshineray]

Hi everyone. I have been absent from websleuths for a long time. But this was a case I was part of the discussion with back in 2017 when it first happened. I've only casually followed news stories about it over the past several years. Obviously there's no way I can read every single thread/post here.

Can anyone tell me a good way I could get caught up on all the recent details and whatnot? I would read all the threads, if I had the time but I just don't. If I read the last thread or 2, would that be enough? Or is there a good "Cliffs Notes" kind of site or something I could check out? Thanks for any help! I don't want to just jump in over here until I learn what's been going on with everything.

Maybe start with reading the filings on MyCase? Richard M*Allen (I think the * after his middle initial is to distinguish between other RA's in Indiana) then just jump into the articles? There's sooo much!

Indiana Courts Case Search - MyCase

Indiana Supreme Court, Public Access

public.courts.in.gov

 

[sunshineray]

No, IMO it was found in the water, along with a couple of other items.

But, don't you wonder where the second pair of jeans (Abby's) were?

Someone searching found a shoe on the DTH side of the creek, IIRC, and called uphill to KG and asked her what kind Libby was wearing.

We shall find that out at trial I'm sure. Abby's jeans haven't been mentioned in filings or MM, as far as I know. Have you heard differently?

 

[FrostedGlass]

Someone searching found a shoe on the DTH side of the creek, IIRC, and called uphill to KG and asked her what kind Libby was wearing.

We shall find that out at trial I'm sure. Abby's jeans haven't been mentioned in filings or MM, as far as I know. Have you heard differently?

I haven't heard a word about the jeans, not even a theory.

 

[Niner]

@AmyPond - here are my notes from August - maybe that will help a bit....

Judge Gull will hold hearings in Carroll County on Tuesday, Wednesday & Thursday. She’s scheduled to hear multiple motions over the course of the three days:
*State’s Motion for Admissibility (filed May 6, 2024) [Under Advisement/8/1/24] [Granted on 8/28/24]
*Defense Motion to Suppress Second Statement (filed April 15, 2024) [Under Advisement/7/31/24] [Denied on 8/28/24]
*State’s Objection to Defendant’s Motion to Suppress (filed April 15, 2024) [Under Advisement/7/31/24] [Granted on 8/28/24]
*Defendant’s Motion to Compel & Motion for Sanctions (filed April 23, 2024) [Under Advisement/7/30/24]. [Denied on 8/15/24].
*Defendant’s Motion to Vacate Safekeeping Order (filed May 13, 2024) [Under Advisement/7/30/24]. 8/1/24: Order to vacate granted by Judge.
*State’s Motion in Limine (filed April 28, 2024) [Under Advisement/8/1/24]. [Granted & Denied in part on 9/4/24].
*Defense Response to State’s Motion in Limine [Under Advisement/8/1/24] [Granted & denied in part on 9/4/24].
*Defendant’s Second Motion to Dismiss (filed May 20, 2024) [Under Advisement/7/30/24/withdrawn by defense/7/31/24] [Denied on 8/15/24].
*State’s Response to Defendant’s Second Motion to Dismiss (filed June 9, 2024) [Under Advisement/7/31/24]
Transcripts of the 3-day hearing link: https://acrobat.adobe.com/id/urn:aa...jatyBBg3jGPmgBmTR8_aem_8R6ZReLchOkMcOPsLVa0iw

8/20/24 Docket update: Correspondence to/from Court filed. [Subject: Cease & Desist: Unlawful Transcript Fees/want to charge him $5.57 instead of $1 per page] filed by Anthony Greeno, True Crime Investigates.
link: https://acrobat.adobe.com/id/urn:aaid:sc:VA6C2:972461ea-af8e-4576-8726-d9c4bd65e45f?fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAR1wiyZTCfkfjKDLg2aG5-0euW5wEUlcjCtHs4ZxBdt010xdu3fCDE9zISs_aem_2am_FAlae7DAJBhUawfyHw&viewer%21megaVerb=group-discover
Next Status hearing on 8/23/24 @ 1pm.
8/22/24 Docket update: Order Issued. This case has generated substantial public interest & media attention. In light of this, and on the Court's own motion to ensure the integrity of the proceedings, to protect the Defendant's constitutional rights for due process, to ensure the safety of the parties & the public & to permit public access to criminal proceedings, the Court sets forth the following rules & guidelines for the hearing set for Friday, 8/23/24, in the Carroll Circuit Court. The Courthouse will open at 8am. All entrances will be closed, except for the handicapped entrance on the north side of the building. The remaining entrances will be locked with no access to the public. All members of the public, including members of the media, are subject to screening by metal detectors. All bags in possession of those entering the building are subject to search. NO weapons of any kind are permitted in the building, except for on-duty law enforcement officers providing security to the Courthouse & the parties. Cellular telephones are permitted in the building, but must be powered OFF & unused at all times while in the building or the Courtrooms. Violations are subject to seizure & destruction of the cellular telephone. No electronic equipment or devices are permitted in the Carroll Circuit Court. The first portion of the hearing will be closed to the public & the media by agreement of counsel & the Court. The Court will declare a recess at the conclusion of the closed hearing. The Court will then reconvene in open court at the end of the recess. This portion of the hearing will be open to the public & the media. Media personnel are permitted to attend the Court session. NO cameras, electronics, lap tops or recording equipment of any kind is permitted in the Carroll Circuit Courtroom. The Court requests the media be mindful that other County offices are conducting business in the building unrelated to this case. Media & members of the public are ordered to conduct themselves in such a fashion as to limit disruption to the offices, personnel & patrons of those offices. The Media are free to use the public areas outside the Courthouse as long as they do not obstruct traffic in the streets & sidewalks surrounding the Courthouse. Seating in the Carroll Circuit Court is limited. The first row of public seats behind the bar separating the well of the courtroom from the public is unavailable for seating. The Sheriff of Carroll County or his designee will ensure that the victim representatives & defendant's family are seated. The remaining seating is available until full. No one, other than Court Security, will be permitted to stand in the Courtroom. All spectators must remain seated until the conclusion of the hearings & the parties have left the Courtroom. No food or beverages are permitted inside the Carroll Circuit Court. Water will be permitted for the parties in the well of the Courtroom. All members of the public & the media are required to follow directives of the Sheriff of Carroll County, Courthouse Security & Courtroom Security. NO court-produced recording will be made available to the public or media. The audio record made pursuant to Indiana Criminal Rule 5 may not be copied or used for purposes other than perpetuating the record. The Court anticipates that all members of the public & the media will conduct themselves in an appropriate fashion. Any violation of this Order & any conduct the Court finds disruptive of the proceedings may result in an order of temporary or permanent exclusion from the Courtroom and/or Courthouse and is punishable as contempt of Court. Signed by Judge Frances Gull. Noticed to: Mceland, Baldwin, Rozzi, Luttrull, Diener & Auger.
8/23/24 Docket update: Motion for Order to Shorten Discovery Time filed by len. 2nd Motion for Order to Shorten by Allen.
Links: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1TDmAjEwr7dQ2Up6fWLz1tjz5ydgSw7dy & https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1TDmAjEwr7dQ2Up6fWLz1tjz5ydgSw7dy
Motion to Quash Deposition filed by State.[Subpoenas for Patrick Westfall, Nick Westfall & Tobe Leazenby] & Motion to Quash Deposition of David Schilling filed by State. [Rebuttal witness to testify as an expert on Odinism].
Links: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1TDmAjEwr7dQ2Up6fWLz1tjz5ydgSw7dy & https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1TDmAjEwr7dQ2Up6fWLz1tjz5ydgSw7dy
Subpoena Duces Tecum [for Sheriff commanded to summon, IDOC documentation requested] & Subpoena Duces Tecum [filed subpoenas for DOC therapist Dr. Monica Walla's work records, including performance evaluations, attendance records, internal investigations regarding employment matters & conflict of interest statements. Allen's attorneys asked Special Judge Frances Gull to order the records be turned over in 15 days, rather than the typical 30 days].
Links: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1TDmAjEwr7dQ2Up6fWLz1tjz5ydgSw7dy & https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1TDmAjEwr7dQ2Up6fWLz1tjz5ydgSw7dy
8/23/24 Update: Judge Gull held one status hearing Friday afternoon behind closed doors in case against suspect Allen. A second scheduled hearing was expected to be in public hearing, was canceled, without explanation.
8/27/24 Docket update: Appearance filed/Temporary appearance of Jessica Fidler, MD [a family physician at Greencastle Family Health] filed. Motion to Quash subpoena filed by Jessica Fidler, MD. Proposed Order on motion to quash for Fidler. Response by State to Defense's memorandum filed.
8/28/24 Docket update: Order Issued. The Court, having reviewed the Motion to Quash Subpoena filed by Jessica Fidler, M.D., on 8/26/24, now finds that the Motion is well founded in law & the Indiana Trial Rules & grants the Motion to Quash Subpoena. Signed by Judge Gull; noticed to: McLeland, Baldwin, Rozzi Luttrull, Diener & Auger. 8/28/24 Docket update: Order Issued. At request of counsel, Court orders the Clerk of Carroll County to withdraw the appearances of the attorneys delineated in the order, as they were entered as intervenors or for a limited purpose. Signed by Judge Gull; noticed to McLeland, Baldwin, Rozzi, Luttrull, Diener & Auger.
8/29/24 Update: Confessions made by Allen may be used as evidence in his upcoming trial. Judge Gull made that ruling Thursday, saying all statements made by Allen to psychologists, inmates, guards, police & family are admissible. 8/29/24 Docket update: Order Issued. The Court, having had this matter under advisement following a hearing conducted on 7/31/24, on the Defendant's Motion to Suppress Statements (filed 4/11/24), the State's Objection to Defendant's Motion to Suppress Filed 4/11/24 (filed 4/23/24), the State's Motion to Dismiss the Motion to Suppress Filed 4/11/24 (filed 5/17/24), & the State's Motion for Admissibility (filed 5/6/24), and having considered the witnesses' testimony, the exhibits admitted into evidence, the arguments of counsel & the applicable statutes & case law, now grants the State's Request for Pre-Trial Ruling on Admissibility pursuant to I.C. 25-33-1-17. The statements given by defendant to Dr. Monica H. Wala, Psy.D., are not privileged based upon the exception noted in the Statute, "(1) Trials for homicide when the disclosure relates directly to the fact or immediate circumstances of said homicide." All statements given by defendant to Dr. Wala are admissible in the trial. Defendant's arguments to the contrary go to the weight the jury would give such statements, not their admissibility. Having taken the State's Motion to Dismiss the Motion to Suppress Filed 4/11/24 under advisement at the hearing, the Court agrees with the State that the defendant has failed to comply with the Criminal Rules of Procedure by neglecting to clearly state which specific statements he is seeking to suppress, nor the legal basis for the suppression. Despite these deficiencies, the Court has been able to determine that the statements given to the defendant's family members were voluntary, not coerced by any State action & were not made under threats of violence, or improper influence. Although the Defendant is clearly in custody, he initiated the communication with his family & was not subject to custodial interrogation when he spoke to this family. Further, the statements given by defendant to the correctional officers, inmate companions, the Warden, mental health personnel, medical personnel & the Indiana State Police were unsolicited by any of those individuals & were voluntarily given without coercion or interrogation. The defendant has not shown that he suffered from psychological coercion by the State which caused him to make these statements. To the contrary, the evidence shows he specifically sought out the Warden by written communication he initiated & verbal statements he offered to guards, inmate companions, mental health professionals & medical personnel. The defendant has failed to show any of these statements were the result of coercive interrogation by the State, or that they were the result of his pretrial detention. The totality of the circumstances of defendant's pretrial detention were not intended to force confessions from the defendant. The defendant's pretrial detention is to protect him from harm. The Court is not persuaded that the detention caused the defendant to make incriminating statements. While the defendant does suffer from major depressive disorder & anxiety, those are not serious mental illnesses that prevent the defendant from making voluntary statements. The Court finds the statements given by the defendant to Dr. Wala, the Warden, inmates, guards, medical personnel, mental health professionals & law enforcement personnel were not coerced, were voluntary, were not the result of interrogation by the State or its actors, nor the product of his confinement and, therefore, denies the defendant's Motion to Suppress Statements filed 4/11/24. Judicial Officer Frances GUll; noticed: McLeland, Baldwin, Rozzi, Luttrull, Diener & Auger. 8/29/24 Docket update: Notice of delivery of transcript filed. Noticed: McLeland, Baldwin, Rozzi, Luttrull, Diener & Auger.
8/30/24 Docket update: Order granting Motion for Order to shorten Discovery response period & Order granting 2nd Motion for Order to shorten Discovery response period both signed by Judge Gull.
9/4/24 Docket update: Order Issued. The Court having had the State's Motion in Limine under advisement following a hearing conducted on 8/1/24 & having heard & considered the evidence, admitted exhibits, arguments of counsel, Defendant's Supplement Submission regarding State's Motion in Limine (filed 8/13/24) & the State's response to defendant's Memorandum of Law (filed 8/26/24) grants paragraphs 1 thru 6, over defendant's objection & grants paragraphs 8 thru 12 over defendant's objection. As it relates to paragraph 7, the burden is on the defendant to show a nexus between Odinism, cult or ritualistic killing, Brad Holder, Patrick Westfall, Johnny Messer, Elvis Fields, Ned Smith, Rod Abrahms, Kegan Kline, Jerry Kline, Ron Logan & the murders of the 2 victims. The case law is quite clear that the nexus must not be based on speculation, conjecture, rumors or hearsay, but rather on admissible evidence. The Court finds the defense has failed to produce admissible evidence demonstrating a nexus between Odinism, cult or ritualistic killing, Brad Holder, Patrick Westfall, Johnny Messer, Elvis Fields, Ned Smith, Rod Abrahms, Kegan Kline, Jerry Kline, Ron Logan & the murders. Therefore, the Court grants paragraph 7 of the State's Motion in Limine over defendant's objection. The Court will not permit the evidence submitted by the defense in support of their arguments regarding third-party perpetrators in the trial of this cause as the probative value of such evidence is greatly outweighed by confusion of the issues & its potential to islead the jury. The Court will allow the evidence to support an offer of proof at the trial if one is made by Counsel. Jury selection will commence in Allen Superior Court, 10/14/24 with trial commencing in the Carroll Circuit Court, concluding 11/15/24. Signed by Judge Gull. Noticed: McLeland, Baldwin, Rozzi, Luttrull, Diener & Auger.
9/4/24 Docket update: Order Issued. Defendant appears with Attorneys Bradley Rozzi & Jennifer Auger. State appears by Prosecuting Attorney Nicholas McLeland & Deputy Prosecuting Attorney Stacey Diener. Closed status hearing [8/23/24] conducted & concluded. Noticed: McLeland, Baldwin, Rozzi, Luttrull, Diener & Auger.
9/9/24 Docket updates: Motion to shorten time filed. Third Motion for Order to shorten Discovery response period. Filed by Allen. Motion to Certify Interlocutory Order for Appeal filed. Motion for Court to Certify Court Order for Interlocutory Appeal pursuant to Appellate Rule 14 & request to rule expeditiously on said motion filed by Baldwin, Rozzi & Auger. [Allen’s defense has signaled they want the Indiana Court of Appeals to overturn Special Judge Fran Gull’s decision barring them from presenting its Odinisim theory in court]. [See post #899, page 45, thread #195].
9/10/24 Docket update: Objection filed by State's Response for Motion to Certify Court Order for Interlocutory appeal [see post 35-37, page 3, thread #196.
9/11/24 Docket update: Order Issued. The Court, having had the Defendant's Motion for Court to Certify Court Orders For Interlocutory Appeal Pursuant to Appellate Rule 14 & Request to Rule Expeditiously on Said Motion, filed 9/9/24 & the State's Objection to Certification of Orders to Allow for Interlocutory Appeal, filed 9/10/24, under advisement, now denies the Motion to Certify Court Orders. Trial remains set 10/14/24-11/15/24, with jury selection being conducted in Allen County & trial being conducted in Carroll County. Signed by Judge Gull. Noticed to McLeland, Baldwin, Rozzi, Luttrull, Diener & Auger.

 

[Salah11]

So is the next date in court just before the trial starts?

 

[photographer4]

So is the next date in court just before the trial starts?

Based on the post directly above yours, it sounds like jury selection is the next step.moo

 

[FromGermany1]

Since Libby's phone was found under Abby's body and Abby was wearing Libby's pants, I think it's safe to assume that Libby was made to remove her clothes ( she was found naked) and Abby was allowed to put on Libby's pants. All that action, if Libby's phone was in her pants pocket (or her sweatshirt's pocket, still not clear if Abby was wearing Libby's sweatshirt) could account for many more minutes of that 18 minutes than just walking from the bridge to the crime scene. JMO

Apropos Libby's pants on Abby: My thought was, if RA did the redressing on Abby, he might have chosen Libby's pants, because the pants were wider cut than Abby's (Idk, but I assume) and in a half wet condition more easy to handle on a slim person. MOO