Found Deceased IN - Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #158

[Gemmie]

IDK if CVS uses specific clothing but I'm going to assume they do.

He probably changed his looks enough to appear different with said uniform than the person they had seen at the trail
Same reason why it's reasonable his wife or daughter didn't ID him.

Specific clothing won't help him if he tells someone picking up a prescription "Don't Down the pill on an empty stomach".

 

[darlinikkisiks]

One thing this PCA does for me is begin to bring what could be the edge clarity to the FBI’s search warrant for RL, which I could never shake for its ostensibly damning evidence that for some reason, the man whose property a double murder was committed on, had chosen to call and ask someone to fake an alibi for him for the time of the murders — before the bodies of the girls were even discovered. And perhaps less exacting but still uncomfortable for me, his phone was alleged to have pinged in the area their bodies were discovered — again, before their bodies were officially discovered. Perhaps RL saw something that day, panicked, and went back later to check things out. And crucially, what panic looks like for a man who has been in trouble with the law before is not what it might look like to everyone else: he started taking care of making sure he wouldn’t be blamed, however irrational that might seem.

As I said, speculation only. I really can’t find another way to make sense of it, especially with what’s been revealed in RA’s PCA. To be clear, I don’t think RL is involved directly in the murders; just exploring whether he could have been a witness that chose not to be. Perhaps LE understood that, and what looked like tunnel vision to us was them trying to get him to cooperate, not confess.

ETA: Linking a source that summarizes the FBI search warrant for reference.

Search warrant: Delphi killer took souvenir, may have ‘staged’ murder scene

 

[Vpq]

I wonder if it was the same pair of “fresh eyes” that discovered the data had never been extracted and/or analyzed from a cell phone NOT ONLY used to solicit sexually explicit images from underage females via catfishing BUT ALSO used to communicate with one of the victims on the day she was murdered.

I m hoping are doing a forensics on all his electronics. Especially with him hiding what looks like file folders on his phone when his wife jump scares him in the car

 

[Quim The Extraordinaire]

But he admitted he was ON THE BRIDGE wearing those clothes at the time of the murder. So it's not really the clothes, it's that they have video of the kidnapper who was wearing those clothes on the bridge at the time of the murder.

Unless there were two guys on the bridge wearing the same clothes at the same time he's kind of SOL. The PCA made a big deal of the fact that witnesses only saw one person matching that description. It wasn't like a dad convention, where lots of 40-50 year old guys wearing carhart jackets were gathered to watch fish on the bridge as one does.

Questions:
1) What is the date of the 2017 “tip narrative” where RA says he was on the trail 1330 - 1530? Was it Feb, Mar, or later?

2) Did RA actually contact LE and volunteer this information and when did he do it? Or was there a sweep of near-by landowners?

3) Did the 2017 “tip narrative” even ask what RA was wearing?

4) How many tips described middle-aged men as it seems there were few people on the trails that day, much less middle-aged men.

5) Did LE even search for locals who had handgun permits after the recording supposedly captured Abby saying “gun” and they harvested an unspent .40 round?

Do handgun owners even need to have permits in Indiana? Why would RA even keep his handgun if he used it?

6) Did LE show photos of “volunteering” RA to the trail witnesses? Exactly how many people volunteered they were in the trails that day?

7) Why did the 2019 presser show the young BG sketch? Libby’s video clearly captured an older person so who and why put this sketch out there for the “new direction?”

I have no doubt RA did it but this has to be the most-incompetent LE investigation and lazy but bold perp in history.

RBBM above and JMO below.

I would not be surprised if the entirety of the 2017 report is contained at the bottom of page 4 of the PC Affadavit. (The “potential follow up” being the end of the 2017 narrative)

Note the interesting language (RBBM):
-
Investigators reviewing prior tips encountered a tip narrative from an officer who interviewed Richard M. Allen in 2017. That narrative stated:
-
What format was this “narrative?” Was there a lag in time between the 2017 narrative being taken and the narrative being filed?

My hypothesis is that the 2017 narrative did not include information on what RA was wearing because it was a Missing Persons investigation, not a murder investigation when the 2017 narrative was recorded. Then the 2017 narrative was “lost” (which I think simply means it wasn’t properly recorded / transferred to the murder investigation until the “investigators reviewing prior tips” likely trundled over and painstakingly reviewed original hard copies and files (or even recordings). EUREKA!

How and why the 2017 narrative got buried obviously needs to be thoroughly reviewed and there should be accountability. It took too long to catch, but they WERE on the right track (perhaps inadvertently) in 2019 — they strongly suspected Bridge Guy was local and the pool of potential suspects was small enough that it seemed unlikely that Bridge Guy hadn’t been interviewed.

Not an excuse, but perhaps part of a speculated explanation. IMHO, some commentary runs all of RA’s interview information together as if it were all on file and known in 2017, which clearly wasn’t the case. Once they found the 2017 narrative, things seem to have moved fairly quickly.

JMO.

 

[Vpq]

If the car had transfer evidence such as mud and blood from the scene then how do we imagine he explained these to his wife or anyone else at the time? Assuming he went directly home post murders, and knowing a witness saw him covered in blood and mud - how did he get home and himself and the car all cleaned up before anyone saw or how did he explain this?

Could he have cleaned off in the creek a bit

 

[Ghosthunter]

By the way, if anyone wonders the location of Hoosier Harvestore, 6563 W 300 N, Delphi, mentioned in the Affidavit of Probable Cause, whose security camera captured various vehicles of the accused and of witnesses, on the day of the murders, below is a diagram showing the location from Google Maps, in relation to the crime scene, the Monan High Bridge, and the Delphi Cemetery,

View attachment 383624

thank you. This is very helpful

 

[Quim The Extraordinaire]

A criminal on this level seeks to lie as little as possible. The clothes he admitted to wearing was the truth. His presence that day on the bridge was the truth. Where he parked his car was the truth. Those issues are not issues this guy feels pressure to lie about. It was a heinous crime after which the suspect seemingly went back to his life undetected. He wasn’t worried. Of interest would be the critical items he does feel the need to lie about. Example: the gun. Or quite possibly, his accomplices or others who were complicit is bringing him to the bridge that day. I believe school was called off that day, so the girls likely planned something. He was there for a reason. He knew who he was looking for. He lied about why he was there. That combined with the gun is interesting. Also I would not be quick to assume ISP didn’t know what they were doing. They had a lot of help and have been very guarded about this case.

RBBM above and JMO below.

I love this post and others. Add to this that he came forward early on (the 2017 narrative) and remained undetected.

This makes sense to me as to his seeming passivity throughout the search warrant(s) on his house / vehicle and the LE interviews — he simply was sticking to the strategy that had worked for nearly six years.

JMO.

 

[Interested_Party]

The reason no one identified him in the CVS is because he admitted wearing a hood and some kind of head covering on the day (despite it being mild). He also admitted being there at the time and this is corroborated by witness testimony. This plus the bullet is plenty for a PCA.

MOO

 

[Vpq]

Ah, the fish story! I've been on that platform. You can't see any fish from there. Look at the breaking news video that was shot the day after. The water is almost knee deep and too cloudy. If he really wanted to watch fish, he would have taken the south trail to the bank of the creek. This guy really doesn't know when to shut up. Birdwatching would have been a more believable story, not that it would have cleared him.

I live in Canada and would watch the salmon run in May with my dad. We were on the bank and still had a hard time seeing them because the fish patterns camouflage them in the water. His statement sounds stupid

 

[MistyWaters]

Maybe he was busy checking stock prices, it was almost closing time for the NYSE.

Well if RL’s cellphone could place him near the crime scene considering his house is on the same property, then RA’s cellphone ought to confirm he was there throughout the time he claimed to have been and even longer. That and the bullet found would rule out any false confessions, plus any possible DNA results not yet completed.

 

[Soulmagent]

RBBM above and JMO below.

I would not be surprised if the entirety of the 2017 report is contained at the bottom of page 4 of the PC Affadavit. (The “potential follow up” being the end of the 2017 narrative)

Note the interesting language (RBBM):
-
Investigators reviewing prior tips encountered a tip narrative from an officer who interviewed Richard M. Allen in 2017. That narrative stated:
-
What format was this “narrative?” Was there a lag in time between the 2017 narrative being taken and the narrative being filed?

My hypothesis is that the 2017 narrative did not include information on what RA was wearing because it was a Missing Persons investigation, not a murder investigation when the 2017 narrative was recorded. Then the 2017 narrative was “lost” (which I think simply means it wasn’t properly recorded / transferred to the murder investigation until the “investigators reviewing prior tips” likely trundled over and painstakingly reviewed original hard copies and files (or even recordings). EUREKA!

How and why the 2017 narrative got buried obviously needs to be thoroughly reviewed and there should be accountability. It took too long to catch, but they WERE on the right track (perhaps inadvertently) in 2019 — they strongly suspected Bridge Guy was local and the pool of potential suspects was small enough that it seemed unlikely that Bridge Guy hadn’t been interviewed.

Not an excuse, but perhaps part of a speculated explanation. IMHO, some commentary runs all of RA’s interview information together as if it were all on file and known in 2017, which clearly wasn’t the case. Once they found the 2017 narrative, things seem to have moved fairly quickly.

JMO.

That implies that they were not breifing key people and not pulling all know information propery forward ,which actualy imply's a rushed investigation , when it was a slow due to the unoffical and offical search and immediate responce, I really do see how this happened and I am sure they were aware at the time of the risk because the girls could be injured and bleeding out and need rescue ,on the other hand you risk losing a crime scene . 10 percent one way and 90 the other ,i would like to think they would take the 10 , even though in there position it was the 90 percent . Wild card. Not bad policing. IMO.

 

[Boxer]

I certainly hope that you are right. I am not saying that I support my Devil's Advocate theory. I am just saying that the PCA leaves much room for reasonable doubt. There's something about it that just isn't sitting right or even adding up. Of course, all of the dots aren't connected, but there seems to be something missing.

RSBM. If the second sketch is a result of one of the witnesses mentioned in the PCA, it's going to cause problems. Is sketch #2 the man you saw on Feb. 13? Yes. Is that man RA [shows picture where RA looks nothing like second sketch]? Not sure. So was RA the man you saw on Feb. 13? Not sure. I can see where this goes off the rail very quickly.

My whole point is that perhaps RA was never actually there. He claimed he was, but that doesn't make is so. DA can claim that RA is a fame seeker, but that doesn't make him a killer. He put himself at the scene of the crime because it felt cool, etc., but when he realized that he could be held accountable for their murders, he realized how stupid he was, etc. Maybe he said he was there to get more information on the crime, etc. Some people are really screwed up. RA has NEVER admitted being involved in their murders... just put himself in the area of the crime. But RA's story is based on the movements and clothing of BG, which have been documented very clearly and very publicly. The evidence against RA seems to be missing something, but I freely admit that we don't have everything.

And what if RA's impounded car turns up no forensic evidence?

He said he was on the trail, using his phone. He was seen on the trail, minutes before Abby and Libby got to the bridge he was seen on the first platform.

The defense will try to sow doubt and superfluous facts will be their game.

 

[asyousay]

So will the defence be RA is bridge guy but BG isn’t the killer?

 

[TL4S]

It's like RA thinks to himself that since he was seen by witnesses, and his phone pinging will give him away, he better account for everything by telling LE that sure, he has similar clothing as the bridge guy, but he was just hanging out, fish watching, sitting on the bench, looking up stocks on his phone. He has all his bases covered. Except the unspent round, of course.

Saying he was watching fish from the bridge, coincidentally only minutes before the murdered girls arrived, is just as believable as that he was using his phone to look up stocks. This is why I think LE suggests there are others involved. I think his phone activity will be very telling. JMO.

 

[Le Singe]

And now my biggest fear is that something from the search ends up being invalid and the items seized from the house end up inadmissible. I'd really like to see THAT search warrant application.

its' almost certianly exactly what's in the PCA - the gun match and RA quotes from 10/13/2022 aka he was seen on the bridge, admits to being on the bridge, dress like BG, we found a bullet that could be matched. No reason to believe anything else is in there.

 

[WildHuncher]

It's like RA thinks to himself that since he was seen by witnesses, and his phone pinging will give him away, he better account for everything by telling LE that sure, he has similar clothing as the bridge guy, but he was just hanging out, fish watching, sitting on the bench, looking up stocks on his phone. He has all his bases covered. Except the unspent round, of course.

Saying he was watching fish from the bridge, coincidentally only minutes before the murdered girls arrived, is just as believable as that he was using his phone to look up stocks. This is why I think LE suggests there are others involved. I think his phone activity will be very telling. JMO.

Remind me to forget my phone if I go out to murder someone.

 

[DeDee]

He was arrested at the ISP post in Lafayette: Clock ticking on Delphi suspect’s constitutional rights

I, too, had wondered where RA was located when the arrest happened. From the link:

"DELPHI, Ind. — When troopers at the Indiana State Police post in Lafayette slapped handcuffs on Richard Allen and told him he was under arrest for the killings of two girls abducted from the Monon High Bridge east of Delphi in February of 2017, the clock started ticking on the Carroll County man’s constitutional rights of presumed innocence."

Does this indicate that RA was at the ISP post in Lafayette when he was arrested? Maybe they called him in to question him and proceeded to place BG under arrest, finally.

"Prosecutor Nicholas McLeland has indicated that investigators will continue to develop their case against Allen and potentially follow leads to other suspects while the details of the PC remained sealed."

Why would the Prosecutor announce there may be other potential suspects?

 

[photographer4]

Playing Devil's Advocate. What if the defense decides to say that RA is trying to seek fame by putting himself in the vicinity of the crime scene? Since RA (apparently) didn't mention his clothes until the second interview, how do we know RA isn't lying? Everything that RA has allegedly admitted is publicly available. And the fact that his Ford Focus is being confused with either a smart car or a small SUV points to HIS vehicle not being the one that was actually parked at the old CPS building. Again, there has to be something or someone that actually puts RA at the scene of the crime! Everyone knows, especially with the massive billboard campaign and the international media coverage, that there was a man dressed in jeans and a blue jacket on the bridge that day. But what makes RA that man? The defense could even argue that RA would have to be the worst criminal to put himself at the crime scene at the time of the crime. What guilty person would do that? Think of it as a "false confession."

They needed one small thing. Investigators would know it when they saw it. Guessing it’s the bullet and the gun match. How does he explain his bullet there at all let alone between two murdered kids? If he found the kids dead- he didn’t call 911 so it’s not that he found them before anyone else. The bullet didn’t fly or walk there via another animal, did it? He has said he couldn’t explain that detail. That may be the one thing they didn’t reveal because they knew someone would get rid of the matching gun.

So. Did they ask other suspects about what guns they may own or use? I imagine they did but didn’t find the matching gun and were probably told about other brands etc. so they likely knew not to mention the bullet to them lest it get out.

Once they asked what guns he owns, OR they found the gun, then he was kinda screwed wasn’t he?

 

[MistyWaters]

The reason no one identified him in the CVS is because he admitted wearing a hood and some kind of head covering on the day (despite it being mild). He also admitted being there at the time and this is corroborated by witness testimony. This plus the bullet is plenty for a PCA.

MOO

Plus he said he noticed the three juveniles and the three in turn gave statements to LE regarding the sighting of him therefore it verifies his presence. That and another witness‘s collaboration of what he admitted about standing on the first platform.

Why tell LE that? It possibly all began when he told the conservation officer after the murders that he was at the bridge that day and hadn’t saw the girls, not realizing a photo was about to be released, maybe to appear eagerly helpful, concerned, cooperative, and most importantly innocent while inflating his own self-importance. But after that not much he could do to erase that early statement, it locked him in. JMO

 

[TL4S]

Remind me to forget my phone if I go out to murder someone.

Yeah...my phone activity would already look suspicious with all my WS refreshes.

Not only did RA have his phone on him, he was likely using it. He offered that he was using it to watch stocks, but IMO, that's just an excuse for why his phone was active during the time in question. It adds so much suspicion to me for what he was really using his phone for while murdering two girls.