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

[photographer4]

Agreed.

FWIW, I could see being reticent to lock down a description if I were BB, not because I didn't want to cooperate or was fearful, but because having only a fuzzy memory/view of a person, I would feel like I wouldn't be able to do a good job with it. I'd want it to be right. And how do you do it right if you feel like you only saw him for a second, from a distance, didn't know it would be important at the time, and were probably thinking about a million other things at the time?

And yet, she agreed to do it. And she was spot on in the ways that matter most. Lone male, bulky, locked down by the fixed facts of her timeline. Even without Libby's video, her testimony and sketch nails RA.

She gave a broad age range, the high end not far off. LE, when publishing the photo, reminded people the individual might appear younger than his age.

I imagine LE got a variety of descriptions that day. Of individuals who had decent reason to be there that day and were not involved. Earlier and later in the day. LE had to sift through them. It's likely IMO that BB's sketch lost priority with the discovery of Libby's video. Photo over sketch.

But later, in 2019, became a fresh offering because, due to BB's known timeline, her BG was pinned on the bridge very close to 2 pm. The man she saw had to be the same man Libby recorded. Which is why LE could say, with confidence at that press conference, the two sketches are the same man.

Black clothes, blue clothes, poofy hair or not, all the prime witnesses (with verified timestamps) saw the same one man who was captured in Libby's video (with a verified timestamp), ordering Abby and Libby down the hill.

It can't be said enough. Libby videotaped a capital crime in progress, hers, theirs. The man, the threat (the voice, the presence of a gun, reaffirmed with the discovery of a unchambered cartridge), truly outstanding work.

If she had been a witness and not a victim, she would have been lauded with a community award IMO, for her wherewithall and bravery.

Instead, RA brutally murdered her. He stole her life.

He doesn't get to take away her wherewithall and bravery.

JMO

Q: by the time the witnesses provided their info to create sketches: had LE seen the video from LG’s phone? Had the artist(s)? Had it been on TV yet??

 

[sunshineray]

Did he actually say he wishes to change his plea to guilty? To his lawyers I mean? Because I don’t think we know this really. He could say it to everyone else on the planet but if he doesn’t say it to his lawyers - then it may be just a game he’s playing with people’s hopes and emotions. If he instructed his lawyers outright to change his plea and they refuse to do so, that would surely be some sort of rules violation or something since they must take their instructions from him even if they don’t agree. They can advise him against it and why it’s a bad idea - but in the end, it’s his call as their client. If they feel super opposed, I think they can ask to be taken off the record and he could find someone else, but I don’t think they can flatly refuse to let him change his plea?

I’m not a lawyer so this is just kinda my thoughts and opinions - but if an actual lawyer could weigh in here I’d appreciate it! @AugustWest - any help here pls and thanks?
<modsnip - off topic>

Well that's the question isn't it, did RA say he was guilty, wanted to plea to it, to his lawyers and they did nothing? Maybe they talked to his family about it and found they were unwilling to accept it (testimony we heard from ISP Hardhman) so listened to them instead? We also know from Dr. Wala's testimony that RA was upset about that.

<modsnip - quoted post was snipped>
AJMO

 

[sunshineray]

Here are some links about false confessions that may help you to understand why one might make a false confession even if they’re not certifiable:

The Psychology of False Confessions

Why would an innocent person, in his right mind, confess to a crime that he did not commit? The answer may surprise you.

www.psychologytoday.com

The Psychology and Power of False Confessions

On July 8, 1997, Bill Bosko returned to his home in Norfolk, Virginia, after a week at sea to find his wife murdered in their bedroom. A few hours later, Bosko’s …

www.psychologicalscience.org

Coerced to Confess: The Psychology of False Confessions - Behavioral Scientist

Why did the they confess to crimes they did not commit? Why did these confessions trump all other evidence in the case? Why did the judge, jury, and DA place so much emphasis on the confessions, despite conflicting DNA and non-existent physical evidence?

behavioralscientist.org

In the last link they discuss the Central Park five case. Very horrifying what happened to all the accused who were convicted even though they had dna and it wasn’t belonging to any of them and yet - they confessed!?

A quote from the last link: “I have found that lay people have an easier time understanding why someone would kill themselves…than they do why someone would confess to a crime he did not commit.”

I've read many articles on the subject. The biggest things I take away from it in comparison us RA being a sort of island in that none of his extraordinary number of confessions were done under LE interrogation but were freely given, even to his family. MO

The Central Park 5 is a totally different situation, very young suspects under intense interrogations for hours and hours. It's not at all comparable to the Delphi case, as is no case I can think of, IMO.

 

[FrostedGlass]

Galipeau talks about Westville Correctional Facility:

Q Did you tell me that you were not aware of any other circumstance in the
time that you had been at the DOC where someone in his situation had been
confined on a solitary basis?
A Confined on a solitary basis? We have 255 on a solitary basis. It was the
first safekeeper I said that I’ve had.
Q Yes.
A Yes.
Q So you told me that this is the first time you’ve even been in a situation
involving a safekeeper in Richard Allen’s circumstances?
A That I’ve – yes, this is the first one I’ve been involved with.
Q Twenty-eight years?
A Correct.
**********************
Q With regard to the camera cell, A1-107, how many other camera cells are
in your facility?
A In WCU, there’s four, there’s one per pod, A pod, B pod, C pod, and D pod.
Q Okay. And you said there are 255 people in solitary confinement; is that
describing A, B, C, and D?
A Correct, ma’am.
Q And of those 255, four of them, potentially, would be in a cell just like his
– well, he plus three others?
A Correct.

3 Day Hearing - Google Drive

drive.google.com

 

[sunshineray]

I’m not convinced eye witness statements/testimony will be key evidence considering nobody recognized the man they saw, nor did anyone witness the actual murders taking place. Also eye witness testimony is known to be somewhat unreliable. But that doesn’t mean this is a losing case for the P.

I think RA’s incriminated himself deep enough, not only by the confessions but what he said during his LE interviews, that eye witness testimony will become secondary. Very compelling will be the testimony of DD. When did he interview RA and how did their contact come about? What’s his procedure including the likelihood he recorded the 1:30 to 3:30pm time incorrectly? Who filed the tip improperly using his street address as RA’s last name?

RA can’t have known at the time of the interaction with DD that LE would later determine the deaths took place between 2:14 and 3:30pm. In his claim he didn’t see the girls, it appears his intent was to move the time of the murders to before 1:30 or after 3:30pm. Then years later after LE are more forthcoming with details and RA realizes he unknowingly was videoed by Libby on the bridge, so he has to move the time up to between noon and 1:30pm. It’ll be interesting to hear him tell LE how he knew that was the correct time, all those years later. In addition to the confessions, his own admissions will be critical in the jury’s decision. MOO

I think the teenage (at the time) girl who gave a description of BG before the BG photo was even known about or seen publically will be very valuable witness testimony. Especially since a photograph (the bench photo) served to pinpoint a time to that encounter. MO

 

[FrostedGlass]

I was searching for information regarding the P's authority to tell the witnesses not to answer questions. This paper is a fairly easy read on depositions in Indiana.
This part spells out the seriousness of a deposition by giving an example:

6. Explain to the witness the procedures for conducting the deposition, e.g.:

Mr. Witness, I am Alexander Tanford, an attorney representing Ms. Plaintiff. This is a deposition, in which I will ask you questions and you must answer them truthfully unless your attorney tells you clearly and directly not to answer. Although no judge is present, this is a formal legal proceeding just like testifying in court, and you are under the same legal obligation to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. If you do not understand any of my questions, feel free to say so, and I will rephrase it. Before the deposition can be used in court, you will have the opportunity to read over it and correct any mistakes. Do you understand this?

Depositions

 

[Gerrymd8]

I think the teenage (at the time) girl who gave a description of BG before the BG photo was even known about or seen publically will be very valuable witness testimony. Especially since a photograph (the bench photo) served to pinpoint a time to that encounter. MO

I so agree with this. I feel that this person got the best physical information about him and due to the fact that he seemed "off" (I forgot the actual word she used to describe his vibe), but I know when I don't feel right about someone or if they are doing something interesting, strange, etc., I pay more attention to that person. I can't believe she described someone she knew that resembled BG. And in my eyes he does!

 

[sunshineray]

RA is a particularly loving and caring husband, isn't he? Maybe he should have kept his hands off little girls, if his wife is so important to him.
I would like to know, whether RA during his marriage of 25 years more than one time confessed to his wife things, he had done, and whether she always refused to listen to that ....

I was just watching a trailer to something, a murder mystery. Someone said, (probably paraphrasing) " The key to most murder cases is motive. Everybody is jealous of somebody."
Then I saw your post and went "Hummmm?"
My next thought was I wonder what members of RA's family, if any, would possibly give testimony at his trial? Anybody else think that could be a possibility? No need to delve into reasons, just yay or nay?

 

[ClearAhead]

I was just watching a trailer to something, a murder mystery. Someone said, (probably paraphrasing) " The key to most murder cases is motive. Everybody is jealous of somebody."
Then I saw your post and went "Hummmm?"
My next thought was I wonder what members of RA's family, if any, would possibly give testimony at his trial? Anybody else think that could be a possibility? No need to delve into reasons, just yay or nay?

Motive is not always clearly understood. But thinking of the shut down approach by RA’s wife upon hearing his confessions and the fact that she could not possibly truly know if he’s innocent or guilty, yet her reaction of ‘don’t talk about it’ indicates she’s open to the possibility of his guilt since she’s not adamantly denying his words to her. Might this connect with any prior happenings she’s aware of, maybe.

That video of the couple at the bar always comes back to me. It’s as if she can’t allow him an afternoon playing pool with the guys, she needs to be there to supervise him, like a mother hen. Why is that I wonder?

I think RA is much more than an unassuming, quiet short guy and indeed we will hear more about his past during the trial. Just speculating, his ego is directly involved in the motive. The combination of alcohol and mental illness is also known to prove disastrous, if this was involved.
MOO, JMO

 

[photographer4]

I so agree with this. I feel that this person got the best physical information about him and due to the fact that he seemed "off" (I forgot the actual word she used to describe his vibe), but I know when I don't feel right about someone or if they are doing something interesting, strange, etc., I pay more attention to that person. I can't believe she described someone she knew that resembled BG. And in my eyes he does!

Pls clarify: are you saying witness photo had a snapshot of bench described someone she personally knew who happened to look like bg? Is there a link to this?

 

[Arkay]

Yeah, that's typical conditions of anyone who is a Defendant awaiting trial for a double homicide or really any crime across the US being detained until trial in jail or DOC.

Being incarcerated means you do not have the ability to move freely about. There are probably hundreds of thousands of detainees awaiting trial or serving their time that experience these exact same conditions. It's called jail or prison for a reason.

Serous question, how would you propose to keep them incarcerated?

jmo

I agree.

Sometimes I feel the boundaries are being blurred between what are RA’s rights as he awaits trial and what his rights would be if he were not a suspect in a double murder.

It is indeed true that RA is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. At this time he is still presumed innocent until the trial followed by a jury’s verdict.

But this is NOT the same as a free man. Investigation and evidence led to probable cause to find RA to be a likely suspect. He was not arrested on a whim, his home wasn’t searched on a whim, nothing here was whimsical at all but instead based on where the preliminary evidence has pointed.

Therefore under our Constitution, RA is imprisoned until his trial begins and for the duration unless and until the jury should find him Not Guilty.

In the interim he is not given freedom to go about his daily life.

This solitary confinement has already been explained multiple, multiple times by other posters. All the ways in which he was not being treated unlawfully.

He is not in a dungeon being stretched on a rack. He has people around, access to the internet, access to phone calls, access to his lawyers and so on. Food, drink, medical care.

If he’s found Not Guilty I will abide by it.

Meanwhile he is enduring the U.S. justice system but IMO he is getting the rights to which he is entitled.

JMO

 

[ClearAhead]

At this point in time, the general public really only knows what the defense has released in the various FM episodes. So just some thoughts on what topics RA’s DT has avoided -

Nothing referring to an alibi including by what means was RA able to determine almost six years later that he left the trails at 1:30pm rather than his earlier from 1:30 to 3:30pm time frame.

Nothing regarding his work schedule or attendance record at CVS. What if he called in sick February 13th and 14th? What if he was spotted around town on a bender for all or part of those two days? Anyone notice suspicious or unusual behavior around that time, just not quite significant enough to tip? What about the reasons for termination of prior employment or disciplinary actions?

During the trial I expect we should learn more bits and pieces of information to assist in forming an impression of the character is RA, rather than thinking of him as a pathetic, shriveled looking creature locked up wearing dirty clothes and a red housecoat. JMO

 

[katydid23]

I was searching for information regarding the P's authority to tell the witnesses not to answer questions. This paper is a fairly easy read on depositions in Indiana.
This part spells out the seriousness of a deposition by giving an example:

6. Explain to the witness the procedures for conducting the deposition, e.g.:

Mr. Witness, I am Alexander Tanford, an attorney representing Ms. Plaintiff. This is a deposition, in which I will ask you questions and you must answer them truthfully unless your attorney tells you clearly and directly not to answer. Although no judge is present, this is a formal legal proceeding just like testifying in court, and you are under the same legal obligation to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. If you do not understand any of my questions, feel free to say so, and I will rephrase it. Before the deposition can be used in court, you will have the opportunity to read over it and correct any mistakes. Do you understand this?

Depositions

What about this part:
"...in which I will ask you questions and you must answer them truthfully unless your attorney tells you clearly and directly not to answer. "


So the witness's attorney can advise them not to answer some questions?

 

[sunshineray]

Motive is not always clearly understood. But thinking of the shut down approach by RA’s wife upon hearing his confessions and the fact that she could not possibly truly know if he’s innocent or guilty, yet her reaction of ‘don’t talk about it’ indicates she’s open to the possibility of his guilt since she’s not adamantly denying his words to her. Might this connect with any prior happenings she’s aware of, maybe.

That video of the couple at the bar always comes back to me. It’s as if she can’t allow him an afternoon playing pool with the guys, she needs to be there to supervise him, like a mother hen. Why is that I wonder?

I think RA is much more than an unassuming, quiet short guy and indeed we will hear more about his past during the trial. Just speculating, his ego is directly involved in the motive. The combination of alcohol and mental illness is also known to prove disastrous, if this was involved.
MOO, JMO

Especially if he was being treated with any anti depression medication (we have heard of his supposed depression from Dr. Wala) and drinking, very bad combination...if an historical issue for him. MO

 

[shonyakay]

Q: by the time the witnesses provided their info to create sketches: had LE seen the video from LG’s phone? Had the artist(s)? Had it been on TV yet??

Not sure. I do know that a still picture of BG from LG's phone was first released, February 15, 2017, the day after the discovery of the bodies.

No one knew where it came from at that time until the press conference where they mention LG captured this man on her phone.

 

[FrostedGlass]

What about this part:
"...in which I will ask you questions and you must answer them truthfully unless your attorney tells you clearly and directly not to answer. "


So the witness's attorney can advise them not to answer some questions?

Yes. I didn't know if Nick was the witnesses' attorney.
Are Galipeau, Holeman, Liggett and Mullin legally his clients? I couldn't find an answer to that question.

 

[shonyakay]

I think the teenage (at the time) girl who gave a description of BG before the BG photo was even known about or seen publically will be very valuable witness testimony. Especially since a photograph (the bench photo) served to pinpoint a time to that encounter. MO

Did she describe the man to a friend in a text message? When did she first give details about him? Tia.

 

[Vern]

I was searching for information regarding the P's authority to tell the witnesses not to answer questions. This paper is a fairly easy read on depositions in Indiana.
This part spells out the seriousness of a deposition by giving an example:

6. Explain to the witness the procedures for conducting the deposition, e.g.:

Mr. Witness, I am Alexander Tanford, an attorney representing Ms. Plaintiff. This is a deposition, in which I will ask you questions and you must answer them truthfully unless your attorney tells you clearly and directly not to answer. Although no judge is present, this is a formal legal proceeding just like testifying in court, and you are under the same legal obligation to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. If you do not understand any of my questions, feel free to say so, and I will rephrase it. Before the deposition can be used in court, you will have the opportunity to read over it and correct any mistakes. Do you understand this?

Depositions

Interesting then that they answered questions but the Defence didn't like the answers they gave to the defence's "hypotheticals".

A hypothetical is not the truth, whole truth and nothing but the truth ... it is rather a request for an individual being questioned to make a - what's that word again?? - a supposition.

Ironic.

 

[Vern]

Galipeau talks about Westville Correctional Facility:

Q Did you tell me that you were not aware of any other circumstance in the
time that you had been at the DOC where someone in his situation had been
confined on a solitary basis?
A Confined on a solitary basis? We have 255 on a solitary basis. It was the
first safekeeper I said that I’ve had.
Q Yes.
A Yes.
Q So you told me that this is the first time you’ve even been in a situation
involving a safekeeper in Richard Allen’s circumstances?
A That I’ve – yes, this is the first one I’ve been involved with.
Q Twenty-eight years?
A Correct.
**********************
Q With regard to the camera cell, A1-107, how many other camera cells are
in your facility?
A In WCU, there’s four, there’s one per pod, A pod, B pod, C pod, and D pod.
Q Okay. And you said there are 255 people in solitary confinement; is that
describing A, B, C, and D?
A Correct, ma’am.
Q And of those 255, four of them, potentially, would be in a cell just like his
– well, he plus three others?
A Correct.

3 Day Hearing - Google Drive

drive.google.com

Hasn't Judge Gull already ruled that the conditions of RAs confinement played no part in his confessons?

What am I missing? The testimony also showed that RA was treated differently than others being held. I'll echo the previous comments regarding extended family visits, being kept without any 'room-mates', 24/7 access to his own tablet upon which he could make calls anytime he wished, watch movies etc etc etc ...

 

[AugustWest]

What about this part:
"...in which I will ask you questions and you must answer them truthfully unless your attorney tells you clearly and directly not to answer. "


So the witness's attorney can advise them not to answer some questions?

Yes. I didn't know if Nick was the witnesses' attorney.
Are Galipeau, Holeman, Liggett and Mullin legally his clients? I couldn't find an answer to that question.

Standard 3-1.3 The Client of the Prosecutor​

The prosecutor generally serves the public and not any particular government agency, law enforcement officer or unit, witness or victim. When investigating or prosecuting a criminal matter, the prosecutor does not represent law enforcement personnel who have worked on the matter and such law enforcement personnel are not the prosecutor’s clients. The public’s interests and views should be determined by the chief prosecutor and designated assistants in the jurisdiction.

https://www.americanbar.org/groups/criminal_justice/standards/ProsecutionFunctionFourthEdition/#:~:text=for%20such%20activities.-,Standard%203%2D1.3%20The%20Client%20of%20the%20Prosecutor,or%20unit%2C%20witness%20or%20victim.