Found Deceased IN - Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #160

[Gemmie]

Yes. LE asked RA's wife about knives and guns.

I'm under the impression that LE took the knives since they were listed in the search warrant.

I'm thinking 2 things.

1) The were specifically looking for knives because they know the COD, and

2) the PCA mentions knives (plural) but I really doubt he brought a gun and several knives. One is sufficient. I'd think they took all the found to try to determine which of them was the actual murder weapon.

Pg 5 (of 8):


MOO

https://fox59.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/21/2022/11/Probable-Cause-Affidavit-Richard-Allen.pdf

 

[Prime8]

"Right after" is one of those phrases that reminds me of "a car that resembles". Can someone quantify right after, please? TIA

We don't currently know what "right after" means.

 

[MistyWaters]

MOO Complex procedures are handled everyday in police and court systems.
Even if the report was lost or missed, they had a phone on the trail that needed to be matched to a name.
RA said he had a phone, unless that was a lie to the CO.

I hadn’t noticed it ever stated that LE had the technical ability to determine the precise location of cellphones on the trail versus cellphones in general connecting with the two(?) local cell towers. Had you?

 

[Prime8]

SBMFF
I totally agree and have wondered why his phone wasn't investigated when they did the tower dump (I hopefully I'm saying that right). They had to know who was in the area at the time, so how did that get skipped, too? If they looked at all users in the area then they would have investigated him from that angle, despite having "lost" his self reporting being there that day.

There aren't and weren't a lot of towers in the general area. So even if his phone was included in the data they received, it likely meant nothing at the time. From what I understand, a data dump from a tower doesn't give LE any of the personal information from people's phone. If they have a suspect, they can compare information and then dig deeper on that suspect if they have user approval or a warrant.

 

[MistyWaters]

SBMFF
I totally agree and have wondered why his phone wasn't investigated when they did the tower dump (I hopefully I'm saying that right). They had to know who was in the area at the time, so how did that get skipped, too? If they looked at all users in the area then they would have investigated him from that angle, despite having "lost" his self reporting being there that day.

A tower dump only reveals the cellphone identifiers which were in a location near enough to connect with the cell tower. In early threads there are posts regarding the cell tower locations in or near Delphi which served all locals using cellphones, regardless if the person was at home, on the trails, or for others just passing through.

This discussion came up when Libby’s grandfather mistakenly said Libby’s cellphone was pinging “around town” when it was not. Various people far more knowledgeable than I posted on the topic but I don’t ever recall it concluded that LE had the ability to solve this case through a cellphone. If they could, Libby’s cellphone could’ve been tracked when the initial attempt was made. At best, a tower dump might’ve outed someone who claimed they where nowhere near Delphi on the day in question but that’s not the situation with RA.

ETA: I recall a significant murder case being solved by LE using cellphone data but can’t remember the name. Anyway LE was able to prove a suspect drove down a highway to the location of his murder victim by his cellphone pinging with all the cell towers along the way, even though he claimed to be elsewhere at the time. But in that case LE was able to easily conclude he was travelling on the highway while his cellphone was pinging from one tower to the next due his vehicle‘s speed.

Triangulation in urban areas is another way the precise location of cellphones can be determined but Delphi doesn’t have the population to warrant numerous cell towers. JMO

 

[AC4RD]

Wasn't there a Gray Hughes episode talking to Abby's mom (or maybe he was remembering talking to her mom?)where she said there was the sound of a gun on the bridge?

GH talked to a woman who said she was a friend of Abby's mother. And this woman said Abby's mom said there was a noise on the audio that was taken to be a "gun cocking" sound--which might be BG racking the slide on his pistol, but that audio was recorded at the end of the bridge, NOT where the bullet was found.

We also didn't hear the woman who said she was the friend of Abby's mom; GH talked to her but we only heard his side of the discussion, as I recall.

So the "gun noise" on the audio, if it really happened, won't be the source of the bullet found with the girls' bodies. And it has never (AFAIK) been confirmed by lawn forcement or the news sources, just the secondhand discussion on GH's youtube. FWIW. JMO. MOOOoooo!

 

[Boxer]

I hadn’t noticed it ever stated that LE had the technical ability to determine the precise location of cellphones on the trail versus cellphones in general connecting with the two(?) local cell towers.

No cell locating info is in the PCA AFAIK. Locating all cell phone activity is something RI stated they did.

 

[Boxer]

A tower dump only reveals the cellphone identifiers which were in a location near enough to connect with the cell tower. In early threads there are posts regarding the cell tower locations in or near Delphi which served all locals using cellphones, regardless if the person was at home, on the trails, or for others just passing through.

This discussion came up when Libby’s grandfather mistakenly said Libby’s cellphone was pinging “around town” when it was not. Various people far more knowledgeable than I posted on the topic but I don’t ever recall it concluded that LE had the ability to solve this case through a cellphone. If they could, Libby’s cellphone could’ve been tracked when the initial attempt was made. At best, a tower dump might’ve outed someone who claimed they where nowhere near Delphi on the day in question but that’s not the situation with RA.

ETA: I recall a significant murder case being solved by LE using cellphone data but can’t remember the name. Anyway LE was able to prove a suspect drove down a highway to the location of his murder victim by his cellphone pinging with all the cell towers along the way, even though he claimed to be elsewhere at the time. But in that case LE was able to easily conclude he was travelling on the highway while his cellphone was pinging from one tower to the next due his vehicle‘s speed.

Triangulation in urban areas is another way the precise location of cellphones can be determined but Delphi doesn’t have the population to warrant numerous cell towers. JMO

MOO Delphi has two towers which is sufficient for CAST.

 

[UnapologeticallyAspie]

Is it possible that the gun/bullet was one of his signatures (in some way, shape, form or fashion)?
IMO that sounds far fetched but I thought that I’d ask anyway since it popped into my mind.

Edit: I know very little about guns.

 

[EOA]

IMO this is a case where LE assumed too much about the perpetrator's behavior following the crime. LE probably assumed this person would feel shame and not want to associate with the crime, would never come forward even as a "witness" at the bridge that day and if they did, would throw off a whole lot of behavioral cues that would tell LE to look closer at this person.

I believe we all agree that with RA having admitted what he did to the CO, RA should've been interviewed and investigated much more vigorously. As it pertains to your thought above, that maybe LE made assumptions as to expected perp behavior and someone self-reporting presence near CS didn't fit with those expectations. In that light it would be very interesting to know.....

How vigorously was the female Witness 4 interviewed and investigated? She likewise must have self-reported her presence on the trails and at the bridge on 2/13/17. RA doesn't state that he saw her, A & L whether or not they did - they couldn't report it, and the other 3 juvenile girls which W4 saw wouldn't have been able to identify her face - only as a vehicle passing underneath the SR25 bridge they were near crossing. And we already know her vehicle was in the area anyway based on Harvestore camera.

Now I presume there's no sliver of possibility based on L's audio and her video pic of BG that Witness 4 could be suspected of being BG. Plus her car was observed on camera approaching the subject area at 1:46 and again leaving the subject area at 2:14, so she couldn't directly be suspected of the 2:13 abduction or subsequent murders. But it would be interesting to see how much LE put her through the ringer in terms of what she was wearing, her exact route walking, other things or people she did or didn't see, everything laid out on a timeline, was her phone searched if with her on the trails, etc etc. After all, she drove in for a very very short time for an exercise walk, like 25 minutes on the trail total. It would be good/reassuring to know that LE vetted her thoroughly and cleared her as a possible accomplice of some sort.

If in fact they did a full inquiry into her, it's even more so egregious it appears that they missed RA similarly. However if they blew off Witness 4's self-report and didn't really formally question her or check for pre/post-correspondence and so forth it would mesh that they just were looking for behavior that a self-reporting individual didn't fit.

 

[Jade]

GH talked to a woman who said she was a friend of Abby's mother. And this woman said Abby's mom said there was a noise on the audio that was taken to be a "gun cocking" sound--which might be BG racking the slide on his pistol, but that audio was recorded at the end of the bridge, NOT where the bullet was found.

We also didn't hear the woman who said she was the friend of Abby's mom; GH talked to her but we only heard his side of the discussion, as I recall.

So the "gun noise" on the audio, if it really happened, won't be the source of the bullet found with the girls' bodies. And it has never (AFAIK) been confirmed by lawn forcement or the news sources, just the secondhand discussion on GH's youtube. FWIW. JMO. MOOOoooo!

Why couldn't it be the source?

Op says that most of those who carry have one in the chamber ready to shoot so going along with it like that must be no big deal.

Couldn't he chamber it and continue to use that it is ready to shoot to scare them into cooperating?

Then eject it when there is no longer a need for it to scare them and prepare it to travel back to his car?


All imo

 

[Gemmie]

Is it possible that the gun/bullet was one of his signatures (in some way, shape, form or fashion)?
IMO that sounds far fetched but I thought that I’d ask anyway since it popped into my mind.

Edit: I know very little about guns.

It very well could be but I'm thinking it's more accidental that it was where it was, than placed there on purpose.

 

[Yemelyan]

He has requested bail. He has proclaimed his innocence, and he's not happy to waiting around and incarcerated. The judge hasn't ruled on bail yet, AFAIK. Further, she won't until next year; although, the bail hearing already took place. (That was new to me, but I am a complete novice. Perhaps that happens often.)

Respectfully snipped and bolded by me....can you give more info about the bail hearing already taking place? I had only seen that it was scheduled for Feb 17th (I believe) but may have missed some updates.

 

[pseudo_hum]

It very well could be but I'm thinking it's more accidental that it was where it was, than placed there on purpose.

Agreed, same thought here. But, IMO, if it were a signature of sorts, I would have thought it to be found located on one of the girls? Obviously, an animal (sorry) may have moved it? So, I too think it was an oversight mistakenly left there by the guilty one.

 

[Gemmie]

Agreed, same thought here. But, IMO, if it were a signature of sorts, I would have thought it to be found located on one of the girls? Obviously, an animal (sorry) may have moved it? So, I too think it was an oversight mistakenly left there by the guilty one.

Agreed. Like if it was placed in one of their hands, for example. But since it was just "there"... it feels accidental to me.

 

[girlhasnoname]

Is it possible that the gun/bullet was one of his signatures (in some way, shape, form or fashion)?
IMO that sounds far fetched but I thought that I’d ask anyway since it popped into my mind.

Edit: I know very little about guns.

Due to the fact it placed within the distance between the girls, I wouldn't count it out that it was symbolic. Maybe not, but possible.

MOO

 

[girlhasnoname]

SBMFF
I totally agree and have wondered why his phone wasn't investigated when they did the tower dump (I hopefully I'm saying that right). They had to know who was in the area at the time, so how did that get skipped, too? If they looked at all users in the area then they would have investigated him from that angle, despite having "lost" his self reporting being there that day.

Would turning off his phone during the critical hour(s) keep it from being identified in a tower sweep? I think he used this phone (which I don't think is his real every day phone) to make sure A&L were going to be there for some kind of innocent meet up with a cute boy and ran into this monster.

Maybe he turned his phone off once he saw the SnapChat of Abby on the bridge?

MOO

 

[girlhasnoname]

This is all MOO. I don't mean the following in an argumentative way. I'm genuinely asking for help to see the strategy. The asking for help primarily comes toward the end. TIA

He has requested bail. He has proclaimed his innocence, and he's not happy to waiting around and incarcerated. The judge hasn't ruled on bail yet, AFAIK. Further, she won't until next year; although, the bail hearing already took place. (That was new to me, but I am a complete novice. Perhaps that happens often.)

If he didn't waive his right to a speedy trial, the prosecution can ask for continuances until the cows come home, but that won't pause the clock. At a certain point, and pretty soon if the trial is slated for early next year, the prosecution is going to have to turn over in discovery all of their evidence, evidence that some contend is of the slam dunk variety.

It really does the state no favors to "bury the lead," as it were, and not disclose evidence in the PCA, if their evidence really is quite strong. What family wants to sit through that trial? I don't want to know the details, and I'm not friends or family of the victims. The state will spend an absolute fortune, both during the trial and for all of the D.P. appeals. Further, if the state is trying to sniff out any further perpetrators, why not show their strong, unequivocal evidence to the defense via the PCA and scope of the warrant, and force RA to give up conspirators in exchange for Life or LWOP, however Indiana words that? I suspect the families would be fine with that. That way they and the town can begin to heal. And the families can continue to focus upon A&L's legacies and the philanthropic works that they are doing in their names.

Am I missing something? Doesn't that seem to be the better part of wisdom, if their evidence is strong and LE is still investigating others?

As it stands now, between the sketches and the ongoing investigation, the state has supplied the defense attorney with one or more alternate theories for who could be the doer.

Can someone please help me understand this strategy? TIA

AMOO

Felony Murder in Indiana in a non-bailable offense:

I.C. 35-33-8-2 states, “Murder is not bailable when the proof is evident or the presumption is strong. In all other cases, offenses are bailable.” This results in almost all people being charged with murder at least initially, being held without bond. However, that is not the final answer. The statute evident proof and showing a strong presumption.

This portion of the statute allows a defendant to request, by motion, that the court allow a bail in a murder case when the proof is not evident or the presumption is not strong. The Indiana courts have addressed this in numerous cases. The leading case in this area of law is Fry vs. State, 990 N.E.2d 429 (Ind. 2013). In this Indiana Supreme Court case the, the Court decided a number of issues regarding bail in murder cases. First, the Court found that the burden to establish a defendant is not entitled to bail rests with the State.

I think the proof is evident and presumption strong here. It will be determined in a PH I expect.

MOO

 

[Momofthreeboys]

Yes, he appears to be wearing a gaiter. Shadows and silhouettes are all that is seen to try to attempt a facial description. Walking with his head down and refusing to make eye contact further hid his features.

If I were in that rickety bridge I don’t think I would looking up. I would be looking down watching my steps carefully. If you are wearing a ball cap and looking down you will not see a persons face.

 

[Kudzuu]

GH talked to a woman who said she was a friend of Abby's mother. And this woman said Abby's mom said there was a noise on the audio that was taken to be a "gun cocking" sound--which might be BG racking the slide on his pistol, but that audio was recorded at the end of the bridge, NOT where the bullet was found.

We also didn't hear the woman who said she was the friend of Abby's mom; GH talked to her but we only heard his side of the discussion, as I recall.

So the "gun noise" on the audio, if it really happened, won't be the source of the bullet found with the girls' bodies. And it has never (AFAIK) been confirmed by lawn forcement or the news sources, just the secondhand discussion on GH's youtube. FWIW. JMO. MOOOoooo!

If this is true then RA racked the gun to put a round in the chamber and scare the girls. Maybe his preference was to carry without a round in the chamber so before he left the scene he racked the slide again and enjoyed the round. Perhaps he couldn't find it and left. Only an idiot would keep that gun! Or maybe since it wasn't fired he didn't know it could be traced back to his gun.

Edited enjoyed should be ejected. EBM