Found Deceased IN - Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #159

[kittythehare]

I am very disappointed that Court TV had him on and I do not understand why they did. In my opinion it is damaging to the credibility of the channel. They should have commentators on who stick to the facts of cases and have experience in law enforcement or have a legal career working as a Prosecutor or defence attorney. They should not have people on air who make sensationalist, speculative statements and have a lack of consideration for the feelings of the loved ones of victims. Abby and Libby’s families are suffering enough distress and stress without him adding to it. I suspect his motivation for making these claims and threatening to release crime scene photos is making a name for himself and selling his book, rather than ensuring the alleged perpetrator who murdered the girls is held accountable in court for what he has allegedly done.

I doubt he actually has crime scene photos but no crime scene photos should ever be published publicly. The only people who should ever see them are the people sitting in a court room at trial. It would be morally reprehensible and disgusting for anyone to make crime scene photos available for any person to see worldwide. I hope anyone who lacked human decency and compassion and did publish them would face legal consequences for obtaining them and providing to the public, have lawsuits filed against them from the victims loved ones and they would face tremendous public criticism for what they have done.

Agree.
This registers like a desperate attempt to resuscitate an inaccurate work of fiction, the wee book, pretending to be truth.
Disgusting.

 

[GoBuckeyes]

Do you know when, date and time, it took place? I can't find it. Okay, so happened at the grocery store.

I don't mean examined his naked body. I meant, maybe the officer didn't notice any visible scratches, cuts, scrapes, etc.

 

[The Observer]

I am very disappointed that Court TV had him on and I do not understand why they did. In my opinion it is damaging to the credibility of the channel. They should have commentators on who stick to the facts of cases and have experience in law enforcement or have a legal career working as a Prosecutor or defence attorney. They should not have people on air who make sensationalist, speculative statements and have a lack of consideration for the feelings of the loved ones of victims. Abby and Libby’s families are suffering enough distress and stress without him adding to it. I suspect his motivation for making these claims and threatening to release crime scene photos is making a name for himself and selling his book, rather than ensuring the alleged perpetrator who murdered the girls is held accountable in court for what he has allegedly done.

I doubt he actually has crime scene photos but no crime scene photos should ever be published publicly. The only people who should ever see them are the people sitting in a court room at trial. It would be morally reprehensible and disgusting for anyone to make crime scene photos available for any person to see worldwide. I hope anyone who lacked human decency and compassion and did publish them would face legal consequences for obtaining them and providing to the public, have lawsuits filed against them from the victims loved ones and they would face tremendous public criticism for what they have done.

Oh I concur. There was a loud 'wtf' from me at the mention of releasing photos. That appearance did him no favours imo.

 

[The Observer]

Agree.
This registers like a desperate attempt to resuscitate an inaccurate work of fiction, the wee book, pretending to be truth.
Disgusting.

A book no doubt offered to the defence.

 

[rootbeer]

That book is only 97 pages! Shame on Court TV for giving him air time.

 

[everybodhi]

Agree.
This registers like a desperate attempt to resuscitate an inaccurate work of fiction, the wee book, pretending to be truth.
Disgusting.

Todd continues to insist he got it right in his book, despite all evidence to the contrary, including not a drop of blood or any other evidence found during a search of RL’s home after the murders.
Except now he says RL and RA were working together.

News Nation
Delphi murder suspect turned over to state custody

“Chris Todd, an investigative author who has studied the case, argued that Logan was responsible for the murders.”

““Richard Allen may very well be the accomplice with Ron Logan. There is no scenario where it’s just Richard Allen,” he said.”

 

[everybodhi]

Do you know when, date and time, it took place? I can't find it. Okay, so happened at the grocery store.

I don't mean examined his naked body. I meant, maybe the officer didn't notice any visible scratches, cuts, scrapes, etc.

That information has not been released.
His lawyer is who said they met at a grocery store, I don’t know if the interview of a witness on the scene of a double child homicide took place inside the grocery store or the parking lot.
It sounds pretty casual, either way.

 

[everybodhi]

Oh I concur. There was a loud 'wtf' from me at the mention of releasing photos. That appearance did him no favours imo.

In the Court TV interview, Todd says he has three photos of the girl’s clothes in the creek. Then he alludes to what he believes that means and other lurid inside information he claims he has regarding posing of bodies etc., which can easily be confused with him having crime scene photos of the bodies.
Maybe that was intentional. Jmo
I checked the transcript to make sure I got it right.

 

[everybodhi]

I'm skipping ahead several pages to post this so please forgive if discussed already.

Chris Todd an Investigative Producer and author obtained the crime scene photos approx 48 hours ago from whistleblowers.

He discussed them on Court TV and states he is going to release them. He alleges both girls were nude at one time.

He believes RL is BG. Claims RA was arrested 7 days after his book 'Forest For The Trees' was released. Alleges him releasing excerpts of his book 3 weeks earlier is not necessarily a 'coincidence' to RA's arrest.

Source: Court TV

if this has violated rules I sincerely apologise

I’m glad you italicized “whistleblower” to set it apart because leaking legitimate crime scene photos has nothing to do with “whistleblowers”.

 

[kittythehare]

Todd continues to insist he got it right in his book, despite all evidence to the contrary, including not a drop of blood or any other evidence found during a search of RL’s home after the murders.
Except now he says RL and RA were working together.

News Nation
Delphi murder suspect turned over to state custody

“Chris Todd, an investigative author who has studied the case, argued that Logan was responsible for the murders.”

““Richard Allen may very well be the accomplice with Ron Logan. There is no scenario where it’s just Richard Allen,” he said.”

..and that's my story and I'm sticking to it and this book cost me a fortune to self publish and I'm up to my ears in debt... etc
Joke.

 

[Bergmann]

Still finding a lot of this hard to take in.

There were only a handful of confirmed people on the bridge/ trails within the timeframe of the kidnap and murder. The perp is either one of the people verified by witness/ interview; or the perp has evaded all sighting/ identification and isn't among the handful confirmed to date.

Its been five years FFS. LE could have interviewed, investigated and eliminated every age/ build/ height guy in Delphi in that time. Given the handful of confirmed people in the vicinity of the crime scene, just how the hell has it taken 5 years to make an arrest?

If RA is the perp then why wasn't he at the top of the investigative list? How on earth did it take till 2022 to get a search warrant and seize items of his property for investigation? He placed himself on the bridge, matches closely enough juve witness statements, and lets face it - how many other men were confirmed as sighted in the vicinity and timeframe? Why wasn't this guy #1 suspect? Why wasn't he investigated and either charged or eliminated back in 2017?

The other conundrum - did the perp (RA?) act alone or did he have an accomplice? LE aren't exactly being candid and clear about this, and appear to be leaving the door open to this possibility. Back to the handful of confirmed people in the vicinity and timeframe of the crime, has any potential accomplice been sighted or has this person also evaded being sighted and identified too?

Motive is the other aspect that has yet to be established. If RA is the perp then hopefully a thorough investigation into his internet history might reveal what he was up to leading up to the crime. As has been said elsewhere, middle aged guys don't go from 'normal' to kidnap and murder with potential sexual assault and crime scene staging without something in between which builds them towards this.

It might also reveal contact with other 'like minded' types and their direct/ indirect role in the events of the crime. I still cannot quite reconcile the KAK catfishing of the victims and his own internet activities related to Delphi as being complete coincidence and not material to the crime but that's just my own rumination at the moment.

As to the trial and prosecution of RA I hope that continued LE/ DA investigation can find digital and DNA evidence that supports their charges over and above the material content of the PCA, largely because I feel that although the witnesses and the bullet are adequate for the purposes of securing his arrest and charge, on their own I do not find that they would prove a case beyond all reasonable doubt to a jury. Fingers crossed.

 

[Elley Mae]

Reporting his presence on the trail to a Conservation Officer outside a grocery store. The CO wrote notes, per defense attorney.
Then what?

‍ Put notes in wrong folder, file, drawer, stack.?

Idk

 

[The Observer]

In the Court TV interview, Todd says he has three photos of the girl’s clothes in the creek. Then he alludes to what he believes that means and other lurid inside information he claims he has regarding posing of bodies etc., which can easily be confused with him having crime scene photos of the bodies.
Maybe that was intentional. Jmo
I checked the transcript to make sure I got it right.

7min 03sec

First thing he says after "Thanks for having me.."

"I just got these crime scene photos, I just received these within probably 48 hours..'

He himself states he got crime scene photos. Regardless what the pics are actually of.

He intentionally says crime scene photos.

 

[everybodhi]

7min 03sec

First thing he says after "Thanks for having me.."

"I just got these crime scene photos, I just received these within probably 48 hours..'

He himself states he got crime scene photos. Regardless what the pics are actually of.

He intentionally says crime scene photos.

Yep.

Todd: “I just got I’ve seen photos I just received the crime scene photos in the last 48 hrs. It’s all brand new. I’m still processing it what to make of it. It’s a little sad it’s going to be emotional for the families for the public to see these and I’m going to bring them forward and I guess we may not show them today but that’s ok.
But these are of the articles of clothing that were found in the creek.”

[me: did court tv producers decline to show them? Probably. Jmo.]

Court tv: “when you talk about articles of clothing does this suggest there may have been some sort of sexual aspect to what happened to these young girls based upon the clothing you saw in these photos?”

Todd: “I can comment a lot more even about the well actual murders themselves we can wait for that if you like not only from whistleblowers that we have I do know a lot about the murders themselves from the clothes”

Court tv: “let it fly let it fly Chris”

I won’t transcribe more because he goes into lurid speculation presented as fact based on three photos of clothes and his secret source “whistleblower”.
Edited to add, I wonder if Todd paid his “whistleblower” for those photos?

 

[The Observer]

Yep.

Todd: “I just got I’ve seen photos I just received the crime scene photos in the last 48 hrs. It’s all brand new. I’m still processing it what to make of it. It’s a little sad it’s going to be emotional for the families for the public to see these and I’m going to bring them forward and I guess we may not show them today but that’s ok.
But these are of the articles of clothing that were found in the creek.”

[me: did court tv producers decline to show them? Probably. Jmo.]

Court tv: “when you talk about articles of clothing does this suggest there may have been some sort of sexual aspect to what happened to these young girls based upon the clothing you saw in these photos?”

Todd: “I can comment a lot more even about the well actual murders themselves we can wait for that if you like not only from whistleblowers that we have I do know a lot about the murders themselves from the clothes”

Court tv: “let it fly let it fly Chris”

I won’t transcribe more because he goes into lurid speculation presented as fact based on three photos of clothes and his secret source “whistleblower”.
Edited to add, I wonder if Todd paid his “whistleblower” for those photos?

I'm not disagreeing with what photos he has. My point (which obviously I didn't make very well) was the way he worded what he said and how intentional it was.

E.g. How right off the bat it was 'I have crime scene photos from a whistleblower and I'm going to put them out there' almost like a clickbait headline. Then you open the clickbait article and it states '3 photos of clothes'.

 

[Yemelyan]

I am not currently a regular watcher of Court TV, but I have been in the past. Tricia or mods, please correct my memory if wrong, but Vinnie had tentatively agreed to have some part in WS podcast, YT, or something similar until his career took him in a different direction??

IMOO, Vinnie has an excellent legal mind. I've personally never seen a CT commentator who wasn't a lawyer, but I'm no longer a regular watcher.

IMOO, it's no more damaging to CT than the last 2+ years have been for ALL MSM, and I don't find it the least bit shocking. Is it in poor taste? ABSOLUTELY! Do I think any less of that network? No. I find all MSM pretty reprehensible. JMOO

As far as sticking to the facts? As harsh as it is, those pictures are the epitome of factual for this case. They can't be disputed or debated. They are cold, brutal facts. I have no desire to see them or read about them in detail, if he does have the photos. Rather than suing CT or this author over them, I'd be far more concerned about local, state, or federal LE/FBI leaking like a sieve and taking bribe/blood money in exchange for them!

Media is going to do what it does, and we need good, hard-hitting investigative journalism. (Not claiming that's what this is.) But LE should never, under any circumstances, put up evidence for the highest bidder. I find it a disgrace to LE if this author's claims are true and he has acquired that evidence.

I didn't watch the Court TV segment in question. Did he indicate that the "whistleblower" who provided him the photos was a person within LE who sold him the photos or is that speculation based on "who else would have them?"

Because many people who followed this case from the beginning already knew or strongly suspected that there were photos out there of at least one of the girls' clothing in the creek, and not from an LE source. I'll just say that it is my opinion that there were MSM photographer(s) on scene documenting the February 14th search who, in the first several hours after the girls were found, may have said and/or published a little too much before being asked to revise their online information.

So I have no trouble believing that photos like this were out there, possibly the author of the book didn't even need to pay anybody for them, but the fact that the author obtained these definitely doesn't have to mean that anyone in LE did anything improper.

Edit to make sure my point is understood: of course I agree that the "author" is well in the wrong for how he's attempting to make money off of this.

 

[everybodhi]

I'm not disagreeing with what photos he has. My point (which obviously I didn't make very well) was the way he worded what he said and how intentional it was.

E.g. How right off the bat it was 'I have crime scene photos from a whistleblower and I'm going to put them out there' almost like a clickbait headline. Then you open the clickbait article and it states '3 photos of clothes'.

I got you, I just wanted to expound upon how really bad it is, word for word.
I transcribed a couple paragraphs after that and as I was typing I was so disgusted I deleted it.

It’s more like Reddit TV if such a thing existed. Ugh. Banish that thought.

 

[PawneeDew]

A LOT of people confuse the colors (dark or navy) blue and black. And from far away or if a person is not really paying attention blue and black can look the same. I am a graphic designer who obsesses over color. But there are many situations where If someone asked me what color shirt someone was wearing I may be only able to identify it as being either "light" or "dark".

Especially if it's wet.

 

[TL4S]

Regardless of where the photos came from, I do not believe they should be published. The clothing condition could be of evidentiary significance as to the sequence of events. If the clothing is intact and free of blood, then it was removed before the murders. If the clothing has puncture marks, tears, and is bloody, then it was likely removed after the murders. In that case, for example, the cut marks might correlate with injuries to the bodies, so it would give away far more about the manner of death than we should be privy to. Which side of the creek the clothing was on might also give hints to events. What items are identifiable might clue us in to which items were taken. It's all too important to the investigation to be released. I hope this person, if he does in fact have these photos, does the right thing here.

 

[Boxer]

‍ Put notes in wrong folder, file, drawer, stack.?

Idk

It was there to find by looking.
That’s how it was found.