Found Deceased IN - Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #156

[Gemmie]

On a light note, this whole sketch business could’ve been worse, I suppose...

I think the chin is off.

 

[Teche]

I have long thought RA was Emilyann.

Who is Emilyanne? Thanks.

 

[TL4S]

1. I stated I was speculating.

2. It's not that easy to find a DNR conservation officer and start a conversation. This link states right after the murders. I'm fairly literal, and this doesn't say the next day or days later.

Source: Investigators have known for years that the Delphi suspect was on the Monon High Bridge the day Abby and Libby were killed

DELPHI, Ind. (WISH) — Richard Allen, the man arrested in the 2017 double murder of Abigail Williams and Liberty German near Delphi, told a state conservation officer he was in the area on the day of the killings, but his report may have been considered unfounded, a police source tells I-Team 8...

www.wishtv.com

From the article, I would interpret it the same. He talked to a CO on the 13th.

Allen, a 50-year-old resident of Delphi, went to the conservation officer right after the teens’ murders on Feb. 13, 2017, and said he was on the Monon High Bridge that afternoon but didn’t see the two girls, the source says.

 

[Ontario Mom]

From the article, I would interpret it the same. He talked to a CO on the 13th.

Allen, a 50-year-old resident of Delphi, went to the conservation officer right after the teens’ murders on Feb. 13, 2017, and said he was on the Monon High Bridge that afternoon but didn’t see the two girls, the source says.

This sentence structure reminds me of the old English teacher grammar joke "let's eat grandma".

Based on structure or punctuation, it's saying the girls were murdered on the 13th (and they were), and at some unspecified time or day after that event, he went to the CO and said he was on the bridge.

Or, it's saying that literally he went to the CO on the 13th, the same day they were murdered.

I read it as the former, since it doesn't say he went to the CO on the 13th, but that he went to the CO after the girls were murdered on the 13th.

jmo

 

[Gemmie]

I have long thought RA was Emilyann.

RA could be EA if he and KAK were buddies. But if that's the case, they BOTH used the EA account (MOO) because KAK admits he's used it.

Per KAK's recorded statement to LE:

Page 156:

Pg 157, line 1 people from your residence.

https://static.foxnews.com/foxnews.com/content/uploads/2022/09/Tx-statement-Kegan-Kline-10-19-2-FINAL-VERSION-Redacted-1-1.pdf

 

[TL4S]

This sentence structure reminds me of the old English teacher grammar joke "let's eat grandma".

Based on structure or punctuation, it's saying the girls were murdered on the 13th (and they were), and at some unspecified time or day after that event, he went to the CO and said he was on the bridge.

Or, it's saying that literally he went to the CO on the 13th, the same day they were murdered.

I read it as the former, since it doesn't say he went to the CO on the 13th, but that he went to the CO after the girls were murdered on the 13th.

jmo

You're right, I can see it that way too. Why do journalists, who are trained in the art of wording, mess with us like this? I guess it's the "right after" part that makes me think the latter meaning. Sigh... Why can nothing be concise in this case?

 

[Elley Mae]

<modsnip> This timeline mentions that the DNR was there on the 13th but just because they were not mentioned after that on this timeline, doesn't mean they weren't there. The timeline doesn't mention every person that was involved in the search or in keeping a perimeter after they were found or even if they had a larger prescense there once the crime scene was cleared. We also don't know if the conservation officer was on or off duty. <modsnip>

IIRC the individual who was part of the search party that found the girls has never been named.

I surely hope it wasn’t him.

Jmo

 

[Quim The Extraordinaire]

This sentence structure reminds me of the old English teacher grammar joke "let's eat grandma".

Based on structure or punctuation, it's saying the girls were murdered on the 13th (and they were), and at some unspecified time or day after that event, he went to the CO and said he was on the bridge.

Or, it's saying that literally he went to the CO on the 13th, the same day they were murdered.

I read it as the former, since it doesn't say he went to the CO on the 13th, but that he went to the CO after the girls were murdered on the 13th.

jmo

Quote being referenced: Allen, a 50-year-old resident of Delphi, went to the conservation officer right after the teens’ murders on Feb. 13, 2017, and said he was on the Monon High Bridge that afternoon but didn’t see the two girls, the source says.

The quote doesn’t only say “after.” It says “right after.”

We know the girls were not found until Feb. 14. If the “on Feb. 13” in the quote refers to the time the girls were murdered (but before they were found), then the “right after” language suggests that RA also went to the CO on Feb. 13. JMO and hopefully we’ll get clarity soon.

Why this makes sense to me: RA (assuming he’s Bridge Guy) would have been aware of anyone who may have spotted him in the area and was seeking to establish a plausible reason for being there without implicating himself. Mileage varies, but he likely did not know about the Snapchat photo or the audio/video that Libby captured, both of which placed the girls on the bridge and established Bridge Guy as the POI. Since the girls were left away from the bridge, he did not think when he made the statement on Feb 13 that placing himself on the bridge would be implicating himself. JMO and speculation.

 

[GoBuckeyes]

This is quite possible but what about timing? Did this occur before or after ISP got KAK involved in the Delphi case resulting in a few weeks of searching the river? If they ”caught on” to RA, why were they negotiating anything with KAK? JMT

Also, the OP is suggesting that they collected his DNA without a warrant to obtain a warrant. I'm not sure that's legal.

 

[CSIDreamer]

Quote being referenced: Allen, a 50-year-old resident of Delphi, went to the conservation officer right after the teens’ murders on Feb. 13, 2017, and said he was on the Monon High Bridge that afternoon but didn’t see the two girls, the source says.

The quote doesn’t only say “after.” It says “right after.”

We know the girls were not found until Feb. 14. If the “on Feb. 13” in the quote refers to the time the girls were murdered (but before they were found), then the “right after” language suggests that RA also went to the CO on Feb. 13. JMO and hopefully we’ll get clarity soon.

Why this makes sense to me: RA (assuming he’s Bridge Guy) would have been aware of anyone who may have spotted him in the area and was seeking to establish a plausible reason for being there without implicating himself. Mileage varies, but he likely did not know about the Snapchat photo or the audio/video that Libby captured, both of which placed the girls on the bridge and established Bridge Guy as the POI. Since the girls were left away from the bridge, he did not think when he made the statement on Feb 13 that placing himself on the bridge would be implicating himself. JMO and speculation.

Exactly how I'm interpreting it.

 

[flashy09]

You're right, I can see it that way too. Why do journalists, who are trained in the art of wording, mess with us like this? I guess it's the "right after" part that makes me think the latter meaning. Sigh... Why can nothing be concise in this case?

I also keep wondering about the "unfounded" wording. Unfounded means "having no basis in foundation or fact." Is that really what was thought of the statement?

 

[lonetraveler]

Per Carter on the live: sketches were not a mistake. He was convinced they could be used together.

Carter feels the arrest affidavit will be released. Not much else on the live.

THIS! Is what I just can't absorb. How the heck can the two sketches be used together? Only reason I can think of is if there were two individuals involved. But, and that is a big but, each sketch was portrayed by LE as THE BG. This is really bothering me. JMO

 

[GoBuckeyes]

I don't think RA is the source of either sketch. From yesterday's article, it appears RA spoke with a CO on the 13th, while the girls were only considered missing, and that's it. He was then forgotten about. So I think that excludes him from any more LE interaction, especially the interview process of a witness for making a sketch. JMO.

That's what I thought I read shortly after his arrest, that he spoke to LE on the 13th, in the general area of the search. (Just letting them know that he'd been there earlier and didn't see anything unusual.) That's a little concerning due to the timeframe. So, we're to believe that he committed the murders, left, cleaned up, and circled back to the search area before they suspended it on the 13th?

 

[lonetraveler]

Hi Welcome to the forum. Thank you for joining and for posting in Abbey and Libby’s case thread. I’m also Scottish.

The law related to DNA sample collection when investigating a crime is a much stricter in Indiana and in the U.S than it is in the UK. People who are arrested in Indiana for a felony crime were not legally required to provide a DNA sample so that the sample could be submitted to the DNA database until it became law in the State in January 2018, almost a year after the murders of Abbey and Libby. It would be very difficult to get consent from all the men in the area to willingly provide DNA samples when there is no indication that any of them have any involvement in a murder case. Unfortunately there is a massive backlog of DNA samples waiting to be tested for serious offences in Indiana and in States across the U.S.

In recent years Law enforcement have been turning to genealogy websites to see if they can find family members who have DNA profiles related to samples collected in crime scenes. This has been useful in helping to find perpetrators involved in serious crimes who have no prior arrests or DNA samples taken by law enforcement

Welcome back.

 

[lonetraveler]

I don't mean to second guess LE that obviously knows way more than I do, but from a general public perspective I wish a bit more information could have been given. It seems a waste to give a very dramatic, very effective PC with finally more video released and more audio and all the talk about living or working in Delphi and hiding in plain sight... and maybe even being in the room! No doubt locals were back to staring at every male, trying to hear the voice, and now wanting to see a walk. Except what popped out was a frat boy with shampoo ad quality hair.

It also wasn't said to use the sketches together. They didn't put the two sketches up next to each other and at that crucial moment of renewed interest OBG felt done. It was just YBG and the age range went to 18. I bet the tip line got so many useless tips.

Maybe I will understand on Nov 22, but right now I really don't!

I totally agree with you. When the OBG sketch was issued to the public, it was issued as if it replaced the other sketch. JMO

 

[chocolope]

What about DNA from under the girl/s' fingernails?
Maybe they both or one of them fought for their life?

The search warrant for Ronald Logan's property indicated that this didn't appear to be the case.

> The warrant also said the "rest of their clothing" was found, and that there were no signs of a "struggle or fight."

Search warrant reveals Delphi murder suspect may have taken souvenir, 'staged' scene

The FBI agent who wrote the search warrant said it's possible the suspect physically removed something from or took photos of the crime scene.

www.wdrb.com

 

[mrtnira]

I also keep wondering about the "unfounded" part. Unfounded means "having no basis in foundation or fact." Is that really what was thought of the statement?

If RA was local, and the conservation officer was local, I wonder if the conservation officer took RA's statement and then put a conclusion into the report that it was not a concern? Made to appear less threatening by familiarity? (My own questions and thoughts.)

 

[SkyBoomer]

Per Carter on the live: sketches were not a mistake. He was convinced they could be used together.

Carter feels the arrest affidavit will be released. Not much else on the live.

Oh good Lord. I just can’t with this sketch back-and-forth anymore. Ridiculous.

 

[chocolope]

Any speculation about why LE would have considered RA's claim that he was in the area not credible? Could this be as ridiculous as writing off his claim because he said he didn't see the girls (or presumably anyone) when LE knew the girls were there at the time?

 

[SkyBoomer]

I don't mean to second guess LE that obviously knows way more than I do, but from a general public perspective I wish a bit more information could have been given. It seems a waste to give a very dramatic, very effective PC with finally more video released and more audio and all the talk about living or working in Delphi and hiding in plain sight... and maybe even being in the room! No doubt locals were back to staring at every male, trying to hear the voice, and now wanting to see a walk. Except what popped out was a frat boy with shampoo ad quality hair.

It also wasn't said to use the sketches together. They didn't put the two sketches up next to each other and at that crucial moment of renewed interest OBG felt done. It was just YBG and the age range went to 18. I bet the tip line got so many useless tips.

Maybe I will understand on Nov 22, but right now I really don't!

A helpful member posted several links last night where LE clearly stated to “disregard the first (first released, OBG) sketch”.

I was confused about thinking that BOTH sketches were supposed-to be BG.

But, IMO, after reading all of those links, LE was emphatic that the OBG sketch was not of a POI and no longer relevant.

So, seriously? Wth? Now they are saying differently? This is such crap.