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

[FrostedGlass]

A lot of information can change in a year. I wonder what TR is thinking now? No case is ever a slam dunk, but I do believe the State has enough evidence, brick by brick, to convict RA.

I don't find recorded and written confessions a godsend to the Prosecution. I find them to be further evidence from a vicious child killer made of RA's own free will.

JMO

MOO

He's probably thinking what a wonderful break it was that RA decided to confess not 3 times, not 27 times but 60+ times. That really should cement the conviction.

Actually, some cases are slam dunks, with solid evidence (which I haven't seen any of in this case yet).
MOO

godsend
noun [ S ] informal
us /ˈɡɑːd.send/ uk /ˈɡɒd.send/
something good that happens unexpectedly, especially at a time when it is needed

godsend

1. something good that happens unexpectedly, especially at a time when it is…

dictionary.cambridge.org

 

[Vern]

IMO the State's Attorney is not putting anything out in the public domain in an interview regarding evidence that the Prosecution has:

1) that isn't already out there; and
2) that would go against the gag order that is still in effect.

He's smarter than that.

60+ Confessions came loooooong after RA had been subject to search warrant, arrested, locked up and denied bail.

They'll certainly help the case, but they are far from 'all they've got' or 'the crux of the case' no matter how some wish it so; else all those precussors to them simply would not have happened.

10 days until jury selection and we get this case underway and see the beginning to the cards beig laid out on the table.

Bring it on. #JusticeForAbbyAndLibby

 

[FrostedGlass]

What 'plan' are you referring to? Whose plan?

Are you saying someone planned for RA to make dozens and dozens of murder confessions to various people?

I can't speak for another poster so here's what Holeman said that's questionable. IMO.
Emphasized by me for focus.

Jerry Holeman: You’re guilty of something. You’re guilty and I know it and I’m gonna prove it.

If he had said: "and we have proof" I wouldn't have given his statement a second thought. Since he worded it the way he did, my question to him would have been: "If you don't have proof now, after all these years, how exactly do you plan to get it?"

https://fox59.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/21/2024/04/Motionpdf.pdf

 

[FrostedGlass]

IMO the State's Attorney is not putting anything out in the public domain in an interview regarding evidence that the Prosecution has:

1) that isn't already out there; and
2) that would go against the gag order that is still in effect.

He's smarter than that.

60+ Confessions came loooooong after RA had been subject to search warrant, arrested, locked up and denied bail.

They'll certainly help the case, but they are far from 'all they've got' or 'the crux of the case' no matter how some wish it so; else all those precussors to them simply would not have happened.

10 days until jury selection and we get this case underway and see the beginning to the cards beig laid out on the table.

Bring it on. #JusticeForAbbyAndLibby

IMO, he certainly would not have had to say one thing or the other. There was much room for vagueness in the question asked. The fact that he said it was circumstantial (at that time of the interview) speaks volumes.

Still this isn't necessarily a slam dunk case in that
respect; uh.. the evidence is circumstantial.

I want to see Justice done and I want to see it done to the right person and.. and..
and this is not the easiest case to prove in that respect.

 

[shonyakay]

Just want to share this regarding circumstantial evidence.

"Circumstantial evidence has to do with the evidence that you have to use deductive logic to determine that a particular person is guilty of a crime.

There's no eyewitness to it, but if you look at all of the evidence, you lead to the conclusion that the person is guilty or innocent.

Both direct and circumstantial evidence is legitimate proof that someone committed a crime. They are common in all state and federal criminal courts."

"If the circumstantial evidence is believable, it's good enough – just as good, in fact – as direct evidence."

https://www.la-criminaldefense.com/difference-between-direct-and-circumstantial-evidence

 

[steeltowngirl]

Does the AG Todd Rokita have access to all of the evidence and discovery? I’m asking, as I honestly do not know.

Due to the gag order, I have not read about State evidence beyond the PCA, and the bit we’ve learned from the 3 day hearings. Most of that told us about the timeline and the fatal injuries.

I know far more about the alternate investigation brought by the defense.

From the snippet defense shared of the interview with RA. Holeman told RA he would prove it. The interview room wasn’t the place he should prove it, nor is that his job. That place is the courtroom, where Holeman’s testimony, and the rest of the evidence, will be presented by the prosecutors.

As it should be.

jmo

 

[shonyakay]

Woah. Listen to the 2:45 time mark.

He is talking about the reward money and he says, "It's for the person that helped us get the evidence, and a conviction."

Maybe someone who gave a tip that led LE to RA?

 

[FrostedGlass]

Does the AG Todd Rokita have access to all of the evidence and discovery? I’m asking, as I honestly do not know.

Due to the gag order, I have not read about State evidence beyond the PCA, and the bit we’ve learned from the 3 day hearings. Most of that told us about the timeline and the fatal injuries.

I know far more about the alternate investigation brought by the defense.

From the snippet defense shared of the interview with RA. Holeman told RA he would prove it. The interview room wasn’t the place he should prove it, nor is that his job. That place is the courtroom, where Holeman’s testimony, and the rest of the evidence, will be presented by the prosecutors.

As it should be.

jmo

If Indiana's attorney general is not knowledgeable about the case, he sure shouldn't be making such comments on it. "Holding it close to the vest" might have been a better way around the question. MOO

I believe the gag order only applies to extra-judicial statements to the public. IMO

Holeman would not have to prove anything in the interrogation room; but I would have expected him to say "we have proof" instead of what he did say. MHO

 

[FrostedGlass]

Woah. Listen to the 2:45 time mark.

He is talking about the reward money and he says, "It's for the person that helped us get the evidence, and a conviction."

Maybe someone who gave a tip that led LE to RA?

Here's the rest of his answer:
(Transcript)
also I remember
that I have um on a a reward out that
I'd like to see the state police make
sure if there is a conviction here it
gets out to the right people so I mean
back from when I was in Congress there
was I think a 25 000 award that I was
part of so who would get that in this
case uh we'll have to wait and see and
see how that works out but uh it's it's
for the person that that helped us get
the evidence you know that could have
made a conviction

 

[susane7]

Does the AG Todd Rokita have access to all of the evidence and discovery? I’m asking, as I honestly do not know.

Due to the gag order, I have not read about State evidence beyond the PCA, and the bit we’ve learned from the 3 day hearings. Most of that told us about the timeline and the fatal injuries.

I know far more about the alternate investigation brought by the defense.

From the snippet defense shared of the interview with RA. Holeman told RA he would prove it. The interview room wasn’t the place he should prove it, nor is that his job. That place is the courtroom, where Holeman’s testimony, and the rest of the evidence, will be presented by the prosecutors.

As it should be.

jmo

I also don't understand why people give so much importance what Holeman said in one of the first phases of the investigation in the interview room where the police often play games to try to get the person talk. And if I remember correctly, a few months after, when the defense deposed him about the DNA and other things I think he answered something like "ask your client, he is the one who killed the girls". Therefore back then and now he think RA killed the girls.

 

[shonyakay]

Here's the rest of his answer:
(Transcript)
also I remember
that I have um on a a reward out that
I'd like to see the state police make
sure if there is a conviction here it
gets out to the right people so I mean
back from when I was in Congress there
was I think a 25 000 award that I was
part of so who would get that in this
case uh we'll have to wait and see and
see how that works out but uh it's it's
for the person that that helped us get
the evidence you know that could have
made a conviction

Yeah. Thanks. I got it. However, the end of the transcript is not right. He does not say "that could have'" made a conviction.

It sounds like he is saying someone led LE to RA and if there is a conviction they should get the reward.

 

[FrostedGlass]

Yeah. Thanks. I got it. However, the end of the transcript is not right. He does not say "that could have'" made a conviction.

It sounds like he is saying someone led LE to RA and if there is a conviction they should get the reward.

Maybe they edited it?

 

[steeltowngirl]

If Indiana's attorney general is not knowledgeable about the case, he sure shouldn't be making such comments on it. "Holding it close to the vest" might have been a better way around the question. MOO

I believe the gag order only applies to extra-judicial statements to the public. IMO

Holeman would not have to prove anything in the interrogation room; but I would have expected him to say "we have proof" instead of what he did say. MHO

I can’t speak to why the AG or Holeman have spoken the way they have, but was just wondering if Rokita would have access to case evidence.

Doesn’t the gag order prevent prosecution from explaining their evidence and case to the public? That’s why I think posters are saying we will learn what they have in court. It’s not about bombshells; it’s simply that we have not heard the entirety of states’s case and evidence. Defense has provided in their memos and motions some of what they have obtained, but in fairness, their sharing has been through their own lens.

 

[steeltowngirl]

More on will someone get a reward? Carter, starting at 4:30: “We’ll work through all those details as time goes on.”

 

[girlhasnoname]

Yeah. Thanks. I got it. However, the end of the transcript is not right. He does not say "that could have'" made a conviction.

It sounds like he is saying someone led LE to RA and if there is a conviction they should get the reward.

Some of us have wondered if RA was tipped in vs. the stumbled upon misfiled tip of Dulin's interview. It wouldn't surprise me to find out someone tipped RA in and that is how the focus gained or regained traction in Sept. 2022.

Just speculating out loud. LOL

 

[girlhasnoname]

More on will someone get a reward? Carter, starting at 4:30: “We’ll work through all those details as time goes on.”

@steeltowngirl I was going to mention that very thing, but I could not find a link. I admire you're having these so handy.

Yes, I think it's possible, DC seemed sort of caught off guard by the question.

JMO

 

[Justice101]

IMO the State's Attorney is not putting anything out in the public domain in an interview regarding evidence that the Prosecution has:

1) that isn't already out there; and
2) that would go against the gag order that is still in effect.

He's smarter than that.

60+ Confessions came loooooong after RA had been subject to search warrant, arrested, locked up and denied bail.

They'll certainly help the case, but they are far from 'all they've got' or 'the crux of the case' no matter how some wish it so; else all those precussors to them simply would not have happened.

10 days until jury selection and we get this case underway and see the beginning to the cards beig laid out on the table.

Bring it on. #JusticeForAbbyAndLibby

Yep, confessions are icing on the cake so to speak, but not the cake.

The cake is him placing himself there when he had a clear mind BEFORE he was incarcerated. In the same clothes at the same time, and him being witnessed by multiple people on the trail.

RA's defense has to come up with something in his defense... but RA's admissions have tied their hands immensely.

From just what we know so far (on a gag ordered case), there is a very high probability RA is convicted.

 

[ClearAhead]

Yep, confessions are icing on the cake so to speak, but not the cake.

The cake is him placing himself there when he had a clear mind BEFORE he was incarcerated. In the same clothes at the same time, and him being witnessed by multiple people on the trail.

RA's defense has to come up with something in his defense... but RA's admissions have tied their hands immensely.

From just what we know so far (on a gag ordered case), there is a very high probability RA is convicted.

Yes I totally agree. Another indication of a conviction is the D immediately putting out that preposterous SODDI theory. Taking a desperate action such as that can be an indication they have no way of convincingly disputing the evidence the State has against their client. JMO

 

[sunshineray]

I suspected that what they stated in the arrest PCA was all they had. Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita pretty much confirmed my suspicions. Those 60+ confessions were certainly a godsend to the prosecution.
Moo

Here's what TR said last year in a WLFITV news interview:

2:03 mm
Question: So what do you make of the case in general against Richard Allen?

Rokita: Well I'll tell you. You know I've been following this case ever since I
was the congressional representative from this area; and it's.. it's.. it's so
heartbreaking as a father to... to to keep rehashing that story and I know the
people of this community and myself.. we've we've been waiting so long uh for
justice to be served. uh Still this isn't necessarily a slam dunk case in that
respect; uh.. the evidence is circumstantial.

I want to see Justice done and I want to see it done to the right person and.. and..
and this is not the easiest case to prove in that respect.

All said before RA started confessing with details only the killer would know?

 

[sunshineray]

The news came out that day about the confessions; that's why I said they were a godsend to Nick.

Is that a bad thing for the prosecution? Do you think the Defense will bring that up as a defense?