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

[Le Singe]

Does she? I think it was sealed for 30 deaths originally, surely she has to rule pretty soon.

Paging Dr. Freud. lol

 

[Ontario Mom]

'They believe moving the trial 150 miles away would significantly reduce the likelihood of a tainted jury pool.'
Angela Ganote - Twitter

Based off google search data.

So their logic is, if you haven't used google to search RA's name, you have no opinion of the case, therefore you're possibly an untainted prospective juror.

Utterly ridiculous.

jmo

 

[photographer4]

Wonder what’s so different about the RA probable cause, vs the RL probable cause which they didn’t mind being public:

https://interactive.wthr.com/pdfs/logan-warrrant.pdf

I don't think they wanted that released either - it happened in 2017, but we didn't hear about it until Murder Sheets coughed it up. One big difference here is RL is dead and wasn't / cant be charged?

 

[scapa]

I wasn't aware there was a limit?

"The Prosecutors" podcast and another guest attorney they had on who is a defense attorney (none of these attorneys involved in this case obviously) where saying the it was shocking and highly unusual (to them) how far back the bail hearing was set. And they all speculated that it meant the judge was planning to sit on this for as long as possible maybe even up to the Bail hearing.

That's interesting. It did seem a long way off, and presumably anyone wanting bail is going to want it immediately, not at the Court's convenience.

Not that bail seems realistic in this case, although once again the PC would seem to come into play as the basis for disallowing bail?

 

[photographer4]

I can imagine they might be worried about defamation claims from linking someone to this crime who LE looked at but then didn’t move forward on … RL is deceased so has no defamation claims … just speculating imo

Right and the RL warrant came to public light after he died, not before.

 

[photographer4]

Thanks! It’s rare at least for me to hear person-on-the-street perspectives like those here. But the title of the report is a bit deceiving, as we didn’t hear word that the judge is actually undecided. I’m left wondering if she has decided or not. I assume there will be at least a few days between her decision and the announcement of it to allow time for the written reasons/documents. Again though, I know nothing about legal work or processes — I know only about communications in my field, which is very different.

I am wondering now if she will simply *not* decide at all because a change of venue motion was filed by the defense? Can she do that? Just simply state she won't rule on it and it will be a matter for a new judge in a new area to decide on?

I cannot see her reasonably denying the change of venue motion. I think they'd have to move pretty far to get people who've never heard of it. The documents suggests they would have better odds 150 miles away. That is a reasonable request. I imagine she will want to do whatever she can to ensure a fair trial and to reduce the odds of it being declared a mistrial for any reason.

 

[EOA]

Followed this case for quite awhile, though exclusivey WS since early on - haven't watched MS, DTH, other SM since '17.

In the spirit of..there are no dumb questions/theories, feedback appreciated on this being plausible, likely, no chance, etc. JMO

1. Why they were at the trails/bridge - MOO - I believe it was to meet Anthony Shots. Clearly, L had been in contact with this account in the past, even for several hours (if to be believed per KK's police interview) on the Sunday night 2/12/17 when Abby was sleeping over. Sister KG stated that L requested multiple times the previous week to be driven to the bridge but that she said no (made her feel a bit of a bad sister, thus she relented on 2/13). KK (again if to be believed) stated there was a previous no-show thus I believe there was specific intent on both sides to schedule this meet-up at the south end of the bridge area. IMO this would've been in A & L's mind like a celebrity meet-up - a glamorous, wealthy, handsome older man from like NYC or Beverly Hills, certainly nothing like anyone from Delphi or Carroll Co. My belief is very possible that KK specifically outlined how certain meeting details would transpire leading up to the meeting, thus A & L were not surprised the next day at events that otherwise would've made them suspicious. IMO the meeting was scheduled for 2:30-ish but KG had to drop them off before her work which was a tad earlier than A & L needed to arrive.

Commentary that makes this challenging would be 2 things in my mind - a) they were under-dressed for one would expect to be meeting a "celebrity"? though this could be they were wearing what A_S told them to wear (loose clothing and perhaps L should wear tie-dye bright colors so that A_S would know it was her, etc, then b) see below

2. The Hike - AllTrails and the Delphi town website describe the trial they were on as a 1.6 mile out-and-back trail taking 29 minutes to complete. Per the early Gray H and Melvin videos/maps, it was reported to be a slight jaunt from the parking area to this Monon High Bridge Trail beginning, then a 12-15 minute walk from that trail start to the bridge entrance depending on how purposeful the pace, then while considered long for a bridge (435m/yds), one could anticipate only 5-7 minutes one-way on the bridge. Almost all bridge "traffic" (though truly traffic on this dilapidated structure was sparse) began at this end. The flow was that one walked across the bridge then turned around and walked back - no defined trails exiting the bridge at south end, & mostly became private property soon thereafter. The reported dropoff by KG was at 1:00, the Instagram post of L's pic of A was at 2:07 at just entering the latter half of the bridge, thus in 67 minutes they had covered less than what would expected to be covered in 20-25 minutes. Other than the 1 pic (and sometimes reported 1 other) no trail of SM pics/posts exists during that period to fill up that time. Nothing sinister implied but...did they go somewhere else or meet someone else (perhaps the still-minor aged witnesses of some sort mentioned in the PCA)?

Commentary b) being dropped off at 1pm and needing to be back for pickup at 4pm they really didn't allow much time for a potential meeting with A_S if it truly took them 67 minutes to 2:07 and they weren't even at the end of the bridge yet. A 30-45 meet/chat with A_S at end of bridge would surely have made them late for pickup or they'd have to have walked significantly faster back than they did out. However perhaps they knew they had extra time heading out due to the early dropoff by KG and felt they weren't late because they could look behind them on the bridge and see that no one was coming their way to meet them...yet.


3. The Pre-Encounter - MOO - BG is examining the bottom of the hill over to crime scene area, making sure no unexpected hikers/fishermen, etc are present, perhaps re-reviewing the plan with other accomplice(s), perhaps getting the go-ahead that photographic equipment/props are in place, etc. thus as it's nearing 2:30 he should start moving up the hill to see if guest(s?) has arrived and let them know accordingly. Thinking they had the whole bridge to themselves having not passed anyone, girls are surprised but not yet scared that BG is walking toward them to cross paths. Perhaps he nods or greets them then goes far enough past them out of earshot to call below on a burner or someone else's phone saying "yes she's here, actually there are 2 girls here, I will approach them now, expect them down there in 10 minutes, hopefully they go willingly but will have means to coerce if need be".

For brevity of post-length, I'll stop here and continue in another post soon.

 

[photographer4]

Not true, there are people named as POI or suspects all the time before a conviction.

MOO

Just ask Dan Rassier who lived in the house at the end of the driveway where Jacob Wetterling was abducted from: Fmr. Wetterling Case Suspect Dan Rassier Still Plans To Sue Investigators

 

[photographer4]

Check out this company that vets prospective jurors and monitors active jurors!

Black Swan Digital Forensics

blackswandf.com

And this one as a second example:

Our Trial Consultancy Services

IMS offers a fully integrated team of consultants delivering the essential tools that top lawyers need to solve complex problems and win complex disputes.

www.expertservices.com

Vetting a jury can be a big biz for some trials. The lengths either party will go to in an effort to ensure they get the best possible jurors for their client is really quite astounding! Its such a big deal that there are actual courses on how to get involved in the field:

How to Become a Jury Consultant

Jury consultants help legal teams make the strongest case possible for their clients. Learn how you can make a difference with a degree in forensic psychology.

online.maryville.edu

Get an idea of what a jury consultant can get paid here:

Jury Consultant Job Description: Salary, Skills, & More

As a legal career, jury consultants are human behavior experts who help attorneys research and select jurors and provide insight into juror behavior.

www.liveabout.com

 

[LammyTheRobot]

Paging Dr. Freud. lol

OMG damn you autocorrect.

 

[Le Singe]

That's interesting. It did seem a long way off, and presumably anyone wanting bail is going to want it immediately, not at the Court's convenience.

Not that bail seems realistic in this case, although once again the PC would seem to come into play as the basis for disallowing bail?

Agree fully

And yes they were saying the PCA would basically have to become public for the bail hearing.

The main take away for me was that the bail hearing being so far back and the sealing of the PCA for so long are highly unusual doesn't mean its never happened or can't be legit, but just another unusual thing with this case.

For me it all adds up to a lot of people trying to "slow play" things here and it will be interesting to one day know why.

One speculation they discussed to possibly explain the delaying tactics along with the prosecutor's comments on others being involved is that they were expecting/hoping RA was going to flip on someone and it hasn't happened. (this was just one possibility thrown out not their main theory and I'm not sure i buy this one either but it is a possibility).

 

[photographer4]

That's interesting. It did seem a long way off, and presumably anyone wanting bail is going to want it immediately, not at the Court's convenience.

Not that bail seems realistic in this case, although once again the PC would seem to come into play as the basis for disallowing bail?

Would the defense submit a motion for bail if they *really* believed their client didn't have a shot at actually getting bail? Or is this a tactic to instill reasonable doubt ahead of any prospective trial?

 

[photographer4]

RE: jury consulants -

Am just reading here as well that sometimes lawyers bring in child psychologists to help them handle child witnesses on the stand. I can imagine they'll want to bring in consultants for this trial for sure, especially since this involves a possible death penalty.

Become a Trial Consultant: Job Duties, Education, Skills & Degrees

 

[Marzipan]

I am wondering now if she will simply *not* decide at all because a change of venue motion was filed by the defense? Can she do that? Just simply state she won't rule on it and it will be a matter for a new judge in a new area to decide on?

I cannot see her reasonably denying the change of venue motion. I think they'd have to move pretty far to get people who've never heard of it. The documents suggests they would have better odds 150 miles away. That is a reasonable request. I imagine she will want to do whatever she can to ensure a fair trial and to reduce the odds of it being declared a mistrial for any reason.

It sounds like you could be right about that. As Shakespeare and Rush said, “When you choose not to decide you still have made a choice”
IF she’s allowed the time, she may take it. I still think she will release it very soon, but I may be proven wrong pretty quickly. (I imagined she had decided and was writing legal reasons over the weekend and we’d hear yesterday, today or tomorrow.)

 

[Le Singe]

(**Sorry i accidentally posted this halfway through composing so if it makes no sense sorry)


So what do y'all make of the prosecutors stating one reason for not releasing the PCA was some witnesses were and/or are juveniles? Not asking relative to is it a reason to keep the PCA sealed, more brain storming on what it implies might be in the PCA. Does it suggest:

1. As some here, including myself, have speculated that even though RA has no substantial criminal record that he had done things in the past that he just didn't get caught/prosecuted for. Where these witnesses witness to RA acting inappropriate to underage girls etc.?

2. Was one (or both) of the two victims aware of RA somehow and he creeped them out did they discuss this with their peers. (this one seems unlikely because from what we know they did not seem to recognise or "know" BG)

3. Did one or both of the victims discuss someone with their peers that was actual RA catfishing?

4. Something more mundane like confirming a piece of jewelry found a RAs (JUST A HYPOTHETICAL NOT SUGGESTING THIS HAPPENED) belong to one of the victims.

What do y'all think.

 

[Megnut]

Followed this case for quite awhile, though exclusivey WS since early on - haven't watched MS, DTH, other SM since '17.

In the spirit of..there are no dumb questions/theories, feedback appreciated on this being plausible, likely, no chance, etc. JMO

1. Why they were at the trails/bridge - MOO - I believe it was to meet Anthony Shots. Clearly, L had been in contact with this account in the past, even for several hours (if to be believed per KK's police interview) on the Sunday night 2/12/17 when Abby was sleeping over. Sister KG stated that L requested multiple times the previous week to be driven to the bridge but that she said no (made her feel a bit of a bad sister, thus she relented on 2/13). KK (again if to be believed) stated there was a previous no-show thus I believe there was specific intent on both sides to schedule this meet-up at the south end of the bridge area. IMO this would've been in A & L's mind like a celebrity meet-up - a glamorous, wealthy, handsome older man from like NYC or Beverly Hills, certainly nothing like anyone from Delphi or Carroll Co. My belief is very possible that KK specifically outlined how certain meeting details would transpire leading up to the meeting, thus A & L were not surprised the next day at events that otherwise would've made them suspicious. IMO the meeting was scheduled for 2:30-ish but KG had to drop them off before her work which was a tad earlier than A & L needed to arrive.

Commentary that makes this challenging would be 2 things in my mind - a) they were under-dressed for one would expect to be meeting a "celebrity"? though this could be they were wearing what A_S told them to wear (loose clothing and perhaps L should wear tie-dye bright colors so that A_S would know it was her, etc, then b) see below

2. The Hike - AllTrails and the Delphi town website describe the trial they were on as a 1.6 mile out-and-back trail taking 29 minutes to complete. Per the early Gray H and Melvin videos/maps, it was reported to be a slight jaunt from the parking area to this Monon High Bridge Trail beginning, then a 12-15 minute walk from that trail start to the bridge entrance depending on how purposeful the pace, then while considered long for a bridge (435m/yds), one could anticipate only 5-7 minutes one-way on the bridge. Almost all bridge "traffic" (though truly traffic on this dilapidated structure was sparse) began at this end. The flow was that one walked across the bridge then turned around and walked back - no defined trails exiting the bridge at south end, & mostly became private property soon thereafter. The reported dropoff by KG was at 1:00, the Instagram post of L's pic of A was at 2:07 at just entering the latter half of the bridge, thus in 67 minutes they had covered less than what would expected to be covered in 20-25 minutes. Other than the 1 pic (and sometimes reported 1 other) no trail of SM pics/posts exists during that period to fill up that time. Nothing sinister implied but...did they go somewhere else or meet someone else (perhaps the still-minor aged witnesses of some sort mentioned in the PCA)?

Commentary b) being dropped off at 1pm and needing to be back for pickup at 4pm they really didn't allow much time for a potential meeting with A_S if it truly took them 67 minutes to 2:07 and they weren't even at the end of the bridge yet. A 30-45 meet/chat with A_S at end of bridge would surely have made them late for pickup or they'd have to have walked significantly faster back than they did out. However perhaps they knew they had extra time heading out due to the early dropoff by KG and felt they weren't late because they could look behind them on the bridge and see that no one was coming their way to meet them...yet.


3. The Pre-Encounter - MOO - BG is examining the bottom of the hill over to crime scene area, making sure no unexpected hikers/fishermen, etc are present, perhaps re-reviewing the plan with other accomplice(s), perhaps getting the go-ahead that photographic equipment/props are in place, etc. thus as it's nearing 2:30 he should start moving up the hill to see if guest(s?) has arrived and let them know accordingly. Thinking they had the whole bridge to themselves having not passed anyone, girls are surprised but not yet scared that BG is walking toward them to cross paths. Perhaps he nods or greets them then goes far enough past them out of earshot to call below on a burner or someone else's phone saying "yes she's here, actually there are 2 girls here, I will approach them now, expect them down there in 10 minutes, hopefully they go willingly but will have means to coerce if need be".

For brevity of post-length, I'll stop here and continue in another post soon.

Regarding your #1, I think it's likely the girls (L specifically) did not expect to meet a boy that day. I think they may have been expecting to meet a girl. Namely, EmilyAnn.

Maybe "EmilyAnn" promised to hand-deliver a gift from "Anthony" -- a sweatshirt, a bracelet -- you know, because "Anthony" would have but he was suddenly out of the country on a modeling shoot. Yada Yada.

Meeting up with another teen girl -- safe, safe.

Unless the teen girl is a 45 year old man.

JMO

 

[EOA]

continued from above in what currently is Post #749... still MOO

4. The Encounter - MOO - BG pivots moving away from them and starts coming back towards A & L which now makes L skittish enough to begin videoing, realizing they're kind of pinned in - trying not to make it too obvious so largely pointing the phone towards A or some lovely scenery from up high on bridge. Upon getting closer, he asks
BG- "are you the young lady(ies) here to meet Anthony Shots?
A/L - "yes" or "maybe so"...."where is he?" or "who are you?"
BG - "you're almost there - your Guy's (guy is).. down the hill." or "I'm one of his bodyguards" (which A_S may have prepped them to encounter). "I'll call you in to the other Security Guys down the hill."
It's at this point L's phone becomes an issue (why did she cease recording?) that I think could go 2 ways - a) L now feels safe that BG is part of Anthony's entourage and this was all how A_S said previously it would go down, so she is no longer fearful and turns off the recording (some random weird guy wouldn't know all of this accurate detail). OR b) BG reminds her that Anthony doesn't allow filming so he'll take possession of their phones (only L had one) until the meeting is finished then return the phones to them afterwards or in the parking lot. JMO he may well state that once down to Anthony they'll be directed to a shortcut to the parking lot thus they won't be returning to the bridge (which might make A as a first-time bridge hiker gleeful that she doesn't have to go back over that rickety bridge). So they start down the hill at the end of the bridge on their own volition. It's possible that BG follows them all the way to the CS, possible that BG takes them down as far as to where another "security guy" picks up the escort, or possible that BG (in his most innocent scenario) doesn't accompany them at all and another person emerges at/near the top to help out out if they can't find their own way to the meetup spot.

5. Once journey to bottom/CS is complete - MOO - as with most of you, this part is up for grabs though I don't believe any pre-planning was to kill them. Most likely is they refused to comply with what KK wanted them to do (perhaps he posed as another 'condition' to getting behind the curtain to the conceived Anthony who 'may have still been 1 more step away...up in the cabin or something'. They may have said something taken as offensive to a perp(s). They may have recognized one of the people at the CS or mentioned they recognized BG. KK may have been furious that more than 1 girl was present. Perhaps more remotely is they attempted to escape, but one fell hitting their head on a rock and losing consciousness and the other girl/perps didn't know what to do. Perhaps the girls were drugged for SA purposes but one stopped breathing entirely without that being the intent. . I wouldn't find it shocking if there were 3-5 people at the bottom and all of a sudden 1 of the perps started killing the girls for some unknown reason and the others didn't intend that but knew they'd be just as guilty as the actual murderer based on their presence and circumstances. Something very unexpected to the perps must've happened which threw the scene into a tizzy and it was felt both girls must be killed and staged in a way to deflect investigative attention toward another direction. I realize the more people involved, the less likely it gets that all remain quiet - but that pact will get broken once the first or second of the dominoes start to fall.

6. BG in his most innocent scenario - MOO - as of yet in this post I've not attributed BG to being RA but...if we try to reconcile based on some things we've heard: RA as BG might believe he's innocent if he only met the girls on the bridge and directed them to the place they wanted to go. Perhaps he didn't take L's phone or any other of their property. He would not consider it a ruse/kidnapping if they said they were there to meet A_S and he directed them to where they could find A_S (perhaps even unknown to RA that the girls' image of A_S was different than the actual person/account-holder A_S), especially if he did not use any intimidation/coercion nor even accompany them all of the way down. He may have had no idea until the public did that they would later be reported missing, much less murdered. Now of course I believe he's guilty (of something), at the least not reporting all of the details of the meeting and who else might've involved - but I could understand how he might rationalize to an extent that what he's arrested for is nowhere close to what he perceived his role as.

That's all for now - hope we get to the bottom of all of it very soon!

 

[photographer4]

It sounds like you could be right about that. As Shakespeare and Rush said, “When you choose not to decide you still have made a choice”
IF she’s allowed the time, she may take it. I still think she will release it very soon, but I may be proven wrong pretty quickly. (I imagined she had decided and was writing legal reasons over the weekend and we’d hear yesterday, today or tomorrow.)

I wasn't expecting her to write her decision over the holiday weekend really. I had imagined she'd take as long as possible, if for no other reason than to hope the police could capture and charge anyone else who may have been involved. That would be the smartest way to go in my view. Then if they hadn't charged anyone further by the date I needed to release the decision, I'd just keep it sealed.

 

[girlhasnoname]

(**Sorry i accidentally posted this halfway through composing so if it makes no sense sorry)


So what do y'all make of the prosecutors stating one reason for not releasing the PCA was some witnesses were and/or are juveniles? Not asking relative to is it a reason to keep the PCA sealed, more brain storming on what it implies might be in the PCA. Does it suggest:

1. As some here, including myself, have speculated that even though RA has no substantial criminal record that he had done things in the past that he just didn't get caught/prosecuted for. Where these witnesses witness to RA acting inappropriate to underage girls etc.?

2. Was one (or both) of the two victims aware of RA somehow and he creeped them out did they discuss this with their peers. (this one seems unlikely because from what we know they did not seem to recognise or "know" BG)

3. Did one or both of the victims discuss someone with their peers that was actual RA catfishing?

4. Something more mundane like confirming a piece of jewelry found a RAs (JUST A HYPOTHETICAL NOT SUGGESTING THIS HAPPENED) belong to one of the victims.

What do y'all think.

I think it could be perhaps Libby and Abby confided in other girls about A-shots or other juvenile girls were targeted by RA and they have their own stories to tell.

JMO

 

[Gemmie]

These vids of Abby & Libby's may be old news to some, but not everyone has been in this thread from the beginning so I thought I'd share. Although what happened to the girls is extremely sad, both of these vids still brought a smile to my face watching and listening to them.

Libby's compilation:

Abby singing:

Mod approved youtubes (Thank you, Sillybilly)