Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #197

[Megnut]

d. That the areas of where the bodies were found along with the site of the old CPS building are substantially different from the time the crimes occurred.

I wonder how why the State says the area where the bodies were found (i.e. the crime scene) are now "substantially different from the time the crimes occurred"? Has the area been cleared? I am curious about why this was said.

The crime scene isn't just where AW and LG were found. The bridge is crime scene too, as recorded by LG, that's where the abduction began. A crime in its own right. In its own wrong.

With the changes to the trail, the right-of-way private property situation, that there's a memorial in place, I can't see the judge granting it.

Regardless, I don't think it helps the defense at all. Like many of their motions, it seems like they're writing motions they know won't sail in order to collect NOs from the judge like they're lifesavers to float for dismissal/ appeal.

Maybe it would be compelling for jurors to stand exactly where those young girls were discovered, see the bridge, see the creek (which might look very different than it did in February, 2017) but I don't see a compelling legal argument for doing so.

JMO

 

[Ravenmoon]

Here are two of the P's arguments against the jurors viewing the crime scene.
My question to him would be: Why would the viewing be unfair or not proper?

4. That any benefits of the Jury visiting these areas is outweighed by the dangers such a trip presents to the Jury and to the fairness of trial.
5. That the State does not believe it is proper to have the Jury view the scene or the other various areas.

Adobe Acrobat

acrobat.adobe.com

IMO there could be a compromise on this motion but I doubt that will happen. I see a denial in the future.

From the document posted:

The scene appears substantially different today. ( To fairness)

The terrain is dangerous and the cost ( my interpretation) would be excessive. ( Improper)

 

[ClearAhead]

Have the DT even visited the crime scene area to know what they are asking for? I though the old CPS building was torn down not long after the crime.

Delphi murder suspect wants jurors to see the crime scenes

Delphi murder suspect Richard Allen's attorneys asked Special Judge Frances Gull to allow jurors to see the crime scenes in person.

www.jconline.com

“Jurors also should see the old Child Protective Services building where prosecutors allege Allen parked between 1:30 and 4 p.m. the day of the killings.”

Answer. Yes the old CPS building is no longer there for the jurors to see. Honestly sometimes I get the stong feeling that B&R have subbed out all the work on this file and they only show up for court appearances, acting as if they’re RA’s defense attorneys actively involved in this case.

INDOT decides to demolish old social services building - Carroll County Comet

The Indiana Department of Transportation (INDOT) issued a letter to David McCain, who serves as the secretary of the Deer Creek Township Board, dated Nov. 21, indicating the state plans to demolish the former Social Services Building in east Delphi. The building has been discussed by several...

www.carrollcountycomet.com

According to google, it’s long gone.

 

[FromGermany1]

Do you think the jurors wouldn't be able to look at the unfinished portion directly in front of them and imagine the awfulness of the crime?

IF they tour the large CS (said so by LE), I think, they have to see with their own eyes, where the 4 girls (acc. to RA 3 girls) met BG, where the girls photographed the bench, where the unknown man= BG stood at the entry sign (there was an accentuation on this by DC (?)), where RA stood on the platform "watching fish" (North side), where the girls were forced to go "down the hill" (South side), where the girls arrived (RL property) and where/how RA escaped (prosecution will know, I hope). IMO

I believe, the jurors are able to imagine the scenes on the MHB, which isn't for nothing named "HIGH Bridge" (in addition to being defective and rotten), and around.

 

[Ravenmoon]

What would it do to the case if a crowd of protesters showed up the day of the 'jury field trip' to the crime scene waving posters and shouting 'hang him', or 'murderer', and the like? That'd be a problem I would think.

Then there's media.

I guess they could try and block off the area, shut the road down, prevent anyone having access while the jury is on site.

Whose liability insurance would cover the trip surely would be determined beforehand, I would think

Ha! Somebody's would launch a drone and do a flyover, well, maybe not.

I can see them walking the paved trail to the bridge, but access beyond the bridge likely not, unless via the private lane that passes under the bridge. Access to the actual site where the girls were found, I highly doubt.

Protesters wouldn't surprise me.
This would be easier to control at the courthouse vs courthouse, roads along the way and the trail parking lot and crime scene.

Also, choosing a juror shouldn't be based on physical ability.

JMO

 

[photographer4]

Fair enough.

Thing is, the D submits court documents filled with opinion. “Dulin was sloppy”. “Dulin screwed up.”

Therein lies the issue. I do not rely on D’s statements as factual, nor try to figure out why they leave in (or omit) information from their documents.

They are working to free their client, and will spin narrative accordingly.

jmo

Just as the state is working to have RA found guilty, they'll spin their narrative accordingly. We just have to hope that they have the evidence to back their claims up so tightly that the jury agrees with them.

 

[photographer4]

I'm speculating, if RA knew DD. I don't take anything the D has said in the FMs as truth. It's been shown too many times to be inaccurate. MO

Ah ok. I figured you must be speculating... Its all good. I just don't think even the D can stretch things that far... a tipline vs calling a friend or spotting him investigating and approaching him etc...

 

[Arkay]

JMO, if the purpose of taking the jury to the crime scene is to give them the opportunity to scope out the scene, give them a sense of what happened there, gauge for themselves the elements of the timeline, etc.——I cannot fathom how a substantially upgraded bridge will help them process how menacing it was at the time.

No one could ever get me to go on the bridge as it was back then, it looks so rickety and unsafe, but I’m not a teenager in a rural town with not much else to do.

IMO though, the jury on the bridge as it is now would truly interfere with the jury’s perception of how ominous it was on the day of the murders.

Even the way BG shuffle-walked on that dilapidated bridge wouldn’t be the same if the bridge has been modernized and improved.

Imagine if I were accused of throwing someone out of a window, and in the interim between crime and trial someone has installed window guards and my lawyer says, “see, Arkay couldn’t have done that because look, the windows have guards so it’s impossible.”

I know that’s a simplification but it’s how this whole idea strikes me.

Yes, of course there are photos and videos of the broken down area as it was, so to my mind, that should suffice for both sides.

And of course it may be physically onerous to some jury members to retrace the path—-going on the bridge, down the hill, across the creek, then back up.

JUST MY OPINION.

 

[FromGermany1]

Guessing that the 844 tip line was manned by the FBI who knows how best to do them. Prior to that calls were coming into local pd. City or county.

With how quickly the investigation was moving and with adjustments as entities took over rolls and others yielded or shifted, it's not surprising to me that tips might get lost and buried.

Even mindset shifted as it quickly went from a missing persons case (find the girls) to a homicide investigation (find the killer).

JMO

Crime Stoppers and their volunteers were also working on the phone lines, if I remember well?

 

[photographer4]

Because their duties are not equal.

I do not actually agree. They both have a duty to assess the scene and work out for themselves what might have happened there. MOO.

 

[FromGermany1]

error, sorry

 

[ClearAhead]

I do not actually agree. They both have a duty to assess the scene and work out for themselves what might have happened there. MOO.

The prosecution does not hire a Jury to assess the blood spatter.

 

[photographer4]

I

Nothing in the motion specified a specific route. It adds unnecessary confusion if the jurors are unable to accurately view the point where the kidnapping took place. But this isn’t our decision to make, it’s up to the judge.

Richard Allen wants to tour Delphi crime scene with jurors

Richard Allen's defense is asking to allow jurors and Allen to be transported to the site where the bodies of two teens were found in 2017.

www.courttv.com

DELPHI, Ind. (Court TV) — Weeks before the start of his trial, the Indiana man charged with killing two teenagers in 2017 just outside Delphi is asking the judge to allow him to view the crime scene with jurors.

In a motion filed on Sept. 23, Richard Allen petitioned the court to allow jurors to be transported to the Freedom Bridge, the Monon High Bridge, the site where the victims’ bodies were found, and the site of the old CPS building where prosecutors claim Allen parked the day the girls were killed.

I listed the order of events as they did in the motion and moo that makes the most sense imo - to view it from where the kids arrived to where they were sadly found dead - in order. I can't imagine why they'd want to view this out of order.... maybe they do? MOOOOOO.

 

[photographer4]

The prosecution does not hire a Jury to assess the blood spatter.

No, but they all have the same general job - assess the scene and work out in their minds what happened. I think it makes sense that they should see where the events took place - even if things look different now. If they're as different as the prosecution asserted (post by someone else upthread included a link that I"ll add in a moment).... then how was it helpful to their own expert? Mooo.

ETA: here is the link to the post I mentioned: Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #197

 

[Ravenmoon]

I

I listed the order of events as they did in the motion and moo that makes the most sense imo - to view it from where the kids arrived to where they were sadly found dead - in order. I can't imagine why they'd want to view this out of order.... maybe they do? MOOOOOO.

Can we also acknowledge the fact that the DT had great concerns about the time allotted for the trial? This trip could take an entire day away from the courtroom.

Who foots the bill for transportation, security, road blocks, etc.

What happens if one ( or even two) of the jurors slips,.falls in the creek, trips on a rock? They have to go to the hospital, trial is delayed further...

If there is great drone footage, accurate video and photos of all of this, it would be the best option.

JMO

 

[Cyber sleuth]

Do you think the jurors wouldn't be able to look at the unfinished portion directly in front of them and imagine the awfulness of the crime?

Why take them to the physical location if they still have to use their imagination?

 

[ClearAhead]

I listed the order of events as they did in the motion and moo that makes the most sense imo - to view it from where the kids arrived to where they were sadly found dead - in order. I can't imagine why they'd want to view this out of order.... maybe they do? MOOOOOO.

I’m not sure what you’re referring to but according to my link, the motion by the defense requests one of the sites to be visited by the Jury is the site of the old CPS building. As the building is no longer there what’s the point? It’s only a piece of bare land now. Furthermore it’s impossible to view the crime scenes ‘in order’ because the full length of the bridge can no longer be crossed. Only the part directly over the creek has been improved, the end piece where the kidnapping occurred is unimproved, dangerously rotten and barricaded off, preventing the Jury from going DTH.

BBM
“In a motion filed on Sept. 23, Richard Allen petitioned the court to allow jurors to be transported to the Freedom Bridge, the Monon High Bridge, the site where the victims’ bodies were found, and the site of the old CPS building where prosecutors claim Allen parked the day the girls were killed.”

 

[photographer4]

I’m not sure what you’re referring to but according to my link, the motion by the defense requests one of the sites to be visited by the Jury is the site of the old CPS building. As the building is no longer there what’s the point? It’s only a piece of bare land now. Furthermore it’s impossible to view the crime scenes ‘in order’ because the full length of the bridge can no longer be crossed. Only the part directly over the creek has been improved, the end piece where DTH happened is still dangerously rotten and barricaded off.

BBM
“In a motion filed on Sept. 23, Richard Allen petitioned the court to allow jurors to be transported to the Freedom Bridge, the Monon High Bridge, the site where the victims’ bodies were found, and the site of the old CPS building where prosecutors claim Allen parked the day the girls were killed.”

I would want to see the key points of the case if I were a juror. I am glad the bridge is no longer crossable, but I'd still like to see the rest of it - including the old CPS building area, even if is just a plot of land now. Distance / how long it takes to traverse from the crime scene to that old CPS building where the state parked, how tricky is the lay of the land etc... those would leave me with an impression. I think there IS a point but that is just MOO. I'm sure JG is going to deny the motion anyhow because of the possibly safety issues to RA and the Jury / Staff etc...

 

[Ravenmoon]

I would want to see the key points of the case if I were a juror. I am glad the bridge is no longer crossable, but I'd still like to see the rest of it - including the old CPS building area, even if is just a plot of land now. Distance / how long it takes to traverse from the crime scene to that old CPS building where the state parked, how tricky is the lay of the land etc... those would leave me with an impression. I think there IS a point but that is just MOO. I'm sure JG is going to deny the motion anyhow because of the possibly safety issues to RA and the Jury / Staff etc...

Genuine question for you:

Could a visit to the crime scene convince you that RA is either guilty or innocent?

What would factor into your choice?

 

[AugustWest]

It's my understanding that the defense can ask for a continuance up until the day before jury selection.

Depending on why they ask, the judge decides if it will be granted.

I would imagine if they need more time because of new discovery or because they aren't quite ready because of changes...it could be granted.

@AugustWest
Could you clarify?
Thank you!

I'm a little late to answer here @Ravenmoon, but yes, the defense could ask for a continuance by motion. At this point I don't think it would be granted but for the most serious of matters.

Rule 53.5 - Continuances, Ind. R. Trial. P. 53.5 | Casetext Search + Citator

Read Rule 53.5 - Continuances, Ind. R. Trial. P. 53.5, see flags on bad law, and search Casetext’s comprehensive legal database

casetext.com