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

[katydid23]

Didn't RA go into some sort of rehab or treatment in the weeks following the murder? For depression and/or alcohol issues? Correct me if I'm mis-remembering!

jmo

I believe so, IMO.

 

[Spartygirl]

I agree, the defense team has interfered more than the podcast people. But the podcast people have inserted themselves much further into this case than civilians should. They've cause problems and I'm not sure why, unless they're just doing it for clicks.

I agree that some podcast people and youtubers have inserted themselves than what most normal people do.

However, this is a world wide case, involving the Horrific murders of 2 innocent young girls, LIBBY & ABBY, out on an afternoon walk, enjoying their day off school, so people want to hear things about this tragic and horrific case.

Some have caused problems and issues, but others, report the Truth and facts.

Those are the ones that are truly here for #JusticeforLibby&Abby

 

[TTF14]

I agree that some podcast people and youtubers have inserted themselves than what most normal people do.

However, this is a world wide case, involving the Horrific murders of 2 innocent young girls, LIBBY & ABBY, out on an afternoon walk, enjoying their day off school, so people want to hear things about this tragic and horrific case.

Some have caused problems and issues, but others, report the Truth and facts.

Those are the ones that are truly here for #JusticeforLibby&Abby

Totally agree. There are decent, unbiased, educated people reporting on this case who aren't doing it just for clicks and money. People like Lawyer Lee (and others that aren't approved so I can't name them).

 

[MassGuy]

I'm really not sure it will be the same with this trial since live Tweeting won't even be allowed. Maybe at nighttime when everyone's catching up with their favorite YouTubers covering the case? I'll be watching Lawyer Lee, who is balanced, unbiased, and brilliant (and attending the trial). There will be another big trial going on the same time, too (Sarah Boone). That one will be livestreamed I think, so a lot of attention may be on that since we won't be privy to what's going on in Delphi. IMO MOO JMO

We had a similar order in the Kelsey Berreth case. In that one, reporters had to leave the courtroom and cross the street in order to tweet information about the proceedings. Once they left the courtroom, they couldn't re-enter until there was a break.

I'm not sure how many reporters will be in the courtroom, but I think we could see a similar system. We'll go hours without information (unless something big happens), and then get a bunch of it at several points throughout the day. It's not the worst thing in the world, but it's also not ideal.

It would be nice if each outlet had a couple reporters, so one could leave and report, while the other continues to listen in. Then they could switch off.

 

[TTF14]

We had a similar order in the Kelsey Berreth case. In that one, reporters had to leave the courtroom and cross the street in order to tweet information about the proceedings. Once they left the courtroom, they couldn't re-enter until there was a break.

I'm not sure how many reporters will be in the courtroom, but I think we could see a similar system. We'll go hours without information (unless something big happens), and then get a bunch of it at several points throughout the day. It's not the worst thing in the world, but it's also not ideal.

It would be nice if each outlet had a couple reporters, so one could leave and report, while the other continues to listen in. Then they could switch off.

This courtroom is so tiny, so everyone is still so unsure of how many reporters will even be allowed in. I just hope there are some good, balanced ones who do get in and do decent reporting. And not just reporters, but attorneys who are interested in the procedural goings-on of the case since there's been so much controversy about that aspect of it. Some of us are really interested to hear that take on it as well. I really wish it was going to be livestreamed so we wouldn't have to rely on the telephone game. IMO MOO JMO

 

[MassGuy]

This courtroom is so tiny, so everyone is still so unsure of how many reporters will even be allowed in. I just hope there are some good, balanced ones who do get in and do decent reporting. And not just reporters, but attorneys who are interested in the procedural goings-on of the case since there's been so much controversy about that aspect of it. Some of us are really interested to hear that take on it as well. I really wish it was going to be livestreamed so we wouldn't have to rely on the telephone game. IMO MOO JMO

That was the same issue in the Berreth trial. It was an absolutely tiny courtroom, and one concern was the noise (floors creaking, doors opening).

I was happy with the amount of information we got, in part because there were some excellent reporters (Sam Kraemer anyone)?

Hopefully there’s someone like that here, who takes copious notes and does a YouTube broadcast at the end of the day.

I think we’ll be fine regardless. It’s a huge case and someone will rise to the occasion.

 

[TTF14]

That was the same issue in the Berreth trial. It was an absolutely tiny courtroom, and one concern was the noise (floors creaking, doors opening).

I was happy with the amount of information we got, in part because there were some excellent reporters (Sam Kraemer anyone)?

Hopefully there’s someone like that here, who takes copious notes and does a YouTube broadcast at the end of the day.

I think we’ll be fine regardless. It’s a huge case and someone will rise to the occasion.

I'm familiar with that case, but didn't follow the trial. Do you know why it wasn't livestreamed?

 

[MassGuy]

I'm familiar with that case, but didn't watch the trial. Do you know why it wasn't livestreamed?

It had to do with Colorado law. Each state is different in that regard (cameras in the courtroom), but there the odds are stacked against a judge allowing it.

Some states always allow it, some don’t, and with some it’s a case by case basis.

 

[TTF14]

It had to do with Colorado law. Each state is different in that regard (cameras in the courtroom), but there the odds are stacked against a judge allowing it.

Some states always allow it, some don’t, and with some it’s a case by case basis.

I'd give you a thumbs up, but I don't have a reaction button, so...thank you.

 

[MassGuy]

Just thinking about how the defense will have to approach this:

Attack the science of the tool mark analysis on the unspent round. If that round can definitively be linked to his gun, then it's game over. I think they'll be able to cast some doubt here.

Cast doubt on the man in the bridge video being Allen. No one is going to believe that person is not the killer, so they have to somehow discredit the fact that it's him in the video (an expert to say he's too tall or short or whatever, to match that guy).

Explain away those dozens of confessions (stress, psychotic episode, etc).

Perhaps attempt to show that Allen had already left when the murders happened (he's already admitted to being there).

I imagine they'll cast aspersions on other potential suspects, but that's really useless unless you can explain away those other things.

I'm super curious to know if the searches of the home turned up anything that links him to the victims (trophy or DNA). I do think we'll learn things that really firms up the fact that this has to be the guy.

Anyone got anything else to add, or shoot down?

 

[TTF14]

Just thinking about how the defense will have to approach this:

Attack the science of the tool mark analysis on the unspent round. If that round can definitively be linked to his gun, then it's game over. I think they'll be able to cast some doubt here.

Cast doubt on the man in the bridge video being Allen. No one is going to believe that person is not the killer, so they have to somehow discredit the fact that it's him in the video (an expert to say he's too tall or short or whatever, to match that guy).

Explain away those dozens of confessions (stress, psychotic episode, etc).

Perhaps attempt to show that Allen had already left when the murders happened (he's already admitted to being there).

I imagine they'll cast aspersions on other potential suspects, but that's really useless unless you can explain away those other things.

I'm super curious to know if the searches of the home turned up anything that links him to the victims (trophy or DNA). I do think we'll learn things that really firms up the fact that this has to be the guy.

Anyone got anything else to add, or shoot down?

I don't think any searches of the home (or his DNA) will tie him to the crime. The only other thing I'd add that the defense team might want to consider (but I don't think they will) is to attack the timeline. We, the general public, have no idea what evidence there is (or isn't) to corroborate that the crime happened at the time the State alleges it did. Also, Dan Dulin's "from memory" report of what RA told him when he was there could be faulty since he stood up there on stage (at the press conference) just days later, saw the "BG" pic and didn't recognize it as being RA, who he had just talked to and learned he'd been there that day. So, was RA even there after 1:30, and, if so, why didn't Dan Dulin make that connection? It's odd. Also the conflicting "eye witness" statements....if what's in the Franks memo is true, the State has some 'splainin' to do about what BB and SC saw and didn't see in terms of the man they saw, the car BB saw, etc. IMO MOO JMO