Found Deceased IN - Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #157

[Prime8]

I think it's important for everyone to give some time to think about how our justice system works. It's complicated, flawed and every person plays a very specific role. This trial is going to be under a microscope. The prosecutors, defense attorneys, law enforcement and even the judge will speak in ways that may contradict each other or just generally seem confusing. But trials and hearings are very much a complicated dance that the public rarely (if they're lucky) gets to see.

I'm not an attorney but my ex and ex in-laws were criminal defense attorneys. The only thing so far that I have found unusual in this case is the prosecution wanting the PCA sealed for this extended time. Obviously/hopefully there's something going on that we are not privy to and this will someday soon, make sense.

 

[photographer4]

Would love to know what the four exhibits were that the prosecutor showed in court today! They say the redacted PCA was not one of them, that was given to the judge separately to review.

The fact that some witnesses in this case are still underage is a bombshell IMO.

Wait, they had exhibits? I didn’t’ watch the video - who presented exhibits?? Defence or prosecution??!

 

[Alethea]

@Alethea I have a question regarding the order whereby information cannot be disseminated outside of court by a list of people.

How does that affect podcasters, YouTubers, Murder Sheets, FB Groups, websleuths? I mean, these are the places where the rumours fly. Are these groups to be held to the same standard?

This is not a reply to Ella but to @Tealgrove, somehow I bungled this trying to move the quote over from the past thread.

Someone may have already responded to this but the gag order would only apply to the parties in the case. In the United States, the first amendment generally prohibits "prior restraint." That means unless you have extremely good reasons - like national security or imminent harm - the government cannot prohibit the publication of materials. That means the press, unofficial media, publishing platforms, websites, youtube, podcasts, citizens, you and me - we cannot be prevented from publishing our opinions. We can be asked nicely but the government can't require it unless in very specific circumstances.

I know this is NOT the case in many other countries, it is pretty unique.

 

[LammyTheRobot]

6:36 minute marker on the video
Reporter asks attorney to talk about possibility of 2nd suspect involved; attorney replies basically (paraphrasing) that he didn’t hear that and doesn’t know what the reporter who said that was referring to.
Is that the way you understood his response?
I’m feeling all confused now.
Imo

I felt like - and I could be wrong of course - that his response was that he hadn't heard of that before, it's not in the PCA, etc. That was the hint I got anyways.

 

[asyousay]

I felt like - and I could be wrong of course - that his response was that he hadn't heard of that before, it's not in the PCA, etc. That was the hint I got anyways.

Yes so if the defense have no idea about a second party then it’s not in the sealed documents. So it makes zero sense at this stage what’s going on.

 

[*Verdigris]

Richard Allen defense attorneys on what happened inside Carroll County Courthouse

 

[LammyTheRobot]

Yes so if the defense have no idea about a second party then it’s not in the sealed documents. So it makes zero sense at this stage what’s going on.

Yepp. I literally couldn't agree more if I wanted to.

I also want the perp prosecuted, I just don't like "government knows best". Ever.

 

[NugHunter]

Just don't get it. Want to protect witnesses? React their names. Not complicated.

They seem to be making out it's the media and public making unreasonable demands for information in this case, but clearly the ones with the extraordinary demands are the prosecution (violating due process).

It is more complicated then just redacting.

For example : If one of the witnesses is a relative and they state "MY cousin Jennifer who I go to school with showed me a pic of this man at thanksgiving and said it creeped her out"

Remove the name "Jennifer" and the media /webslueth's will take the rest and find out who it is or who they think it is on their own.

Redacting names only removes the name, it does not remove the information given by said witness that can be used to identify said witness.

 

[LammyTheRobot]

As @asyousay quite pertinently points out (I'm taking @asyousay's point and putting in my own words):

There is a humungous logical fallacy in today's hearing. If "other parties" are the reason that LEA wants the probable cause affidavit to remain under seal, and yet the defence lawyer is saying no other parties are mentioned in that same affidavit, then how can it be used as a reason for the affidavit to remain sealed?

 

[LammyTheRobot]

It is more complicated then just redacting.

For example : If one of the witnesses is a relative and they state "MY cousin Jennifer who I go to school with showed me a pic of this man at thanksgiving and said it creeped her out"

Remove the name "Jennifer" and the media /webslueth's will take the rest and find out who it is or who they think it is on their own.

Redacting names only removes the name, it does not remove the information given by said witness that can be used to identify said witness.

Here it's easy :

Original:

"MY cousin Jennifer who I go to school with showed me a pic of this man at thanksgiving and said it creeped her out"

Redacted:

"MY cousin Jennifer who I go to school with showed me a pic of this man at thanksgiving and said it creeped her out".

 

[steeltowngirl]

The defense attorney Andrew Baldwin begins at 2:53, here are my notes.

They are receiving calls from all over country. Some may be a hoax? His wife is a wonderful person, high school sweethearts, they love each other, she fully supports him. She had to leave house. She is in a better place than she was a month ago.

He says his client is wrong guy. Nothing to hide. Although it may seem weird for defense lawyers wanting things unsealed, they are confident nothing in PCA is for them to worry about.

Rick is bewildered and confused. No idea why this going on. How an innocent man can have life turned upside down? How can an innocent man be convicted in court of public opinion? They are getting calls from people saying Rick is not the right guy.

His says they cannot handle suppression issue in public. Documents need to be unsealed. Baldwin says RA looked him in the eye and said he’s innocent. They are not impressed with PCA.

Second person involved is news to them.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1595082618844086273

 

[Algo214]

As @asyousay quite pertinently points out (I'm taking @asyousay's point and putting in my own words):

There is a humungous logical fallacy in today's hearing. If "other parties" are the reason that LEA wants the probable cause affidavit to remain under seal, and yet the defence lawyer is saying no other parties are mentioned in that same affidavit, then how can it be used as a reason for the affidavit to remain sealed?

The defense generally speaking will always refute the Prosecution's point and, in this case, say that in their interpretation they don't see a second party being involved, according to the PCA.
That's if you can seriously and responsibly assert and prove your point. This goes for both parties.
"There is reason to believe a second party is involved because X, Y and Z" - Prosecutor
"That claim is unfounded because A, B and C" - Defense.

I know I would as a criminal defense attorney

 

[TL4S]

As @asyousay quite pertinently points out (I'm taking @asyousay's point and putting in my own words):

There is a humungous logical fallacy in today's hearing. If "other parties" are the reason that LEA wants the probable cause affidavit to remain under seal, and yet the defence lawyer is saying no other parties are mentioned in that same affidavit, then how can it be used as a reason for the affidavit to remain sealed?

He also said it was to protect witnesses. These witnesses need protection from the media, but perhaps they also need protection from someone(s) who was involved in the murders but who is not in custody. Just one thought.

It could also be due to the nature of what LE does have for evidence, and that the evidence might tip off anyone involved that LE is on a certain trail...

 

[LammyTheRobot]

He also said it was to protect witnesses. These witnesses need protection from the media, but perhaps they also need protection from someone(s) who was involved in the murders but who is not in custody. Just one thought.

It could also be due to the nature of what LE does have for evidence, and that the evidence might tip off anyone involved that LE is on a certain trail...

So protect them. Don't name them. Redact heavily. Put them into witsec while the trial happens (which happens all the time). Protect them, don't trample on the public and the justice system. IMO...

 

[OverTheRhine]

Defense attorney is trying to manipulate a potential jury and the public before the trial. This is nothing new and no one should be buying into it. If the PCA remains sealed, he's hoping people will take his word at face value and create reasonable doubt.

 

[Prime8]

Defense attorney is trying to manipulate a potential jury and the public before the trial. This is nothing new and no one should be buying into it. If the PCA remains sealed, he's hoping people will take his word at face value and create reasonable doubt.

To be fair, the prosecution will also try to manipulate a potential jury and public. That's the way it goes, that's the dance. I honestly never hold a lot of stock into what either side says or the story they create around the evidence, I put stock into the actual evidence they present.

 

[LammyTheRobot]

Defense attorney is trying to manipulate a potential jury and the public before the trial. This is nothing new and no one should be buying into it. If the PCA remains sealed, he's hoping people will take his word at face value and create reasonable doubt.

Spinning a jury with that specific answer he gave to a reporter? I doubt it - every juror will see all of the evidence right in front of them. The attorney answering that one question on this day will be long forgotten, and over-rode by any actual evidence presented in court.

 

[raja]

Trying to make sense of keeping pc sealed by prosecutors because others may be involved in actual crime yet defense say that is news to him. Could the others be mentioned as witnesses yet information pertaining to their actual involvement is not mentioned directly. Does that make any sense?

 

[Ontario Mom]

Well dang, I was hoping for a pizza night while we dissected the PCA.

A few things of notable interest though:

his wife supporting him (not surprised, sadly, she'll be demonized ruthlessly by the know-it-alls on social media)
protection of underage witnesses (what?! how?? witnesses to what, exactly?)
and the prosecution believing there's another part involved (and yet not arrested for anything? what?!)

 

[Erutan]

I think it's important for everyone to give some time to think about how our justice system works. It's complicated, flawed and every person plays a very specific role. This trial is going to be under a microscope. The prosecutors, defense attorneys, law enforcement and even the judge will speak in ways that may contradict each other or just generally seem confusing. But trials and hearings are very much a complicated dance that the public rarely (if they're lucky) gets to see.

I'm not an attorney but my ex and ex in-laws were criminal defense attorneys. The only thing so far that I have found unusual in this case is the prosecution wanting the PCA sealed for this extended time. Obviously/hopefully there's something going on that we are not privy to and this will someday soon, make sense.

bbm
Agreed with all of this, esp. the bolded !
This might be applied to other cases as well.

Sounds today like they're admitting there may have been an accomplice ?
Fingers crossed they can nab the other one if that's the case ?

These sweet girls had so much of their lives ahead of them !