Found Deceased IN - Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #161

[HistoryNut]

Welcome back! I think you're right on several counts. I also believe it to be a knife (sharp object). Reason being:

Pg 2 of RL's PCA:
View attachment 389186

My take is that says "by a sharp weapon". If it was by a gun I can't imagine it saying something like "by a projectile weapon" or any such thing. Plus, count the spaces of letters above (including spaces). That's what makes sense to me.

About Abby & Libby recognizing anyone... While they could have, I'm thinking they didn't, but I could be wrong about that.

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

Thanks for your comments. The reason I think they may have recognized one or more of their attackers, who then murdered them so they couldn’t identify them.

 

[Salah11]

Thanks for your comments. The reason I think they may have recognized one or more of their attackers, who then murdered them so they couldn’t identify them.

One of them mums said on a YouTube video they wouldn’t of recognised the killer because they had time to obviously give a clue if they had. There is 45 seconds of video and there is nothing to suggest they knew who it was.

Let’s not forget he had also covered up some of his face and kids don’t really play attention to who is serving them in a drug store imo ( that’s if they had even been in there)

 

[AC4RD]

One of them mums said on a YouTube video they wouldn’t of recognised the killer because they had time to obviously give a clue if they had. There is 45 seconds of video and there is nothing to suggest they knew who it was.

Let’s not forget he had also covered up some of his face and kids don’t really play attention to who is serving them in a drug store imo ( that’s if they had even been in there)

I absolutely see your point, but I think Historynut might well be right. The video stops shortly after DTH, right? Isn't it possible one of the girls said, "Wait, why are you doing this? You're the guy from the drugstore, right? Why are you doing this to us?" MOO but it makes sense to me.

At that point, murder becomes an obvious choice to prevent the girls from identifying him, whether or not he had planned it previously. The girls recognize him and he feels he can't leave them alive. He might not have intended to let them live in the first place; we just can't know what he had in mind.

And @Salah11, I see your point, absolutely, but from what I've seen of youngish teeny-age girls (from my wife's teaching career) I think it's entirely likely that (A.) the girls went in the CVS routinely--shopping is lifesblood to girls that age and the place was full of cosmetics and skin-care products and all that stuff; and (B.) the girls might well have noticed RA, like this:

Girl1: "Hey, the little short guy with the stupid beard is at the counter today." Girl2: "Yeah, I'm not going to buy the (whatever) today, that guy always looks at us in a weird way when he rings up our stuff." (Strictly MOO and speculative but IMO certainly possible.)

 

[StarryStarryNight]

I absolutely see your point, but I think Historynut might well be right. The video stops shortly after DTH, right? Isn't it possible one of the girls said, "Wait, why are you doing this? You're the guy from the drugstore, right? Why are you doing this to us?" MOO but it makes sense to me.

At that point, murder becomes an obvious choice to prevent the girls from identifying him, whether or not he had planned it previously. The girls recognize him and he feels he can't leave them alive. He might not have intended to let them live in the first place; we just can't know what he had in mind.

And @Salah11, I see your point, absolutely, but from what I've seen of youngish teeny-age girls (from my wife's teaching career) I think it's entirely likely that (A.) the girls went in the CVS routinely--shopping is lifesblood to girls that age and the place was full of cosmetics and skin-care products and all that stuff; and (B.) the girls might well have noticed RA, like this:

Girl1: "Hey, the little short guy with the stupid beard is at the counter today." Girl2: "Yeah, I'm not going to buy the (whatever) today, that guy always looks at us in a weird way when he rings up our stuff." (Strictly MOO and speculative but IMO certainly possible.)

The family members were shown the video and they said they did not recognize BG. I would think they would be way more likely to recognize the guy from the drug store than the girls.
The guy reported had part of face his face covered.
Just my thoughts.

 

[Salah11]

Just wanted to back up what I’m saying with the video

About 16 mins in they are talking about if the girls recognised the person/persons.

 

[Landorki]

Delphi murders suspect slipped through net in 2017 due to ‘clerical error’

EXCLUSIVE: An affidavit released this week revealed that Richard Allen had actually been on the radar of law enforcement at the time of the murders and told police that he was at the scene of the murders in 2017

www.independent.co.uk

So they was going back though things and his name popped up as it had been missed.


This is not KAK supplying RA’s name to LE because they are connected.

Imo

OR- it is a story they came up with as part of a DEAL with KK? But then again, DC did thank the admin by name in the press conference, complimenting you attention of detail. Again, could be part of the story.....

 

[O.Incandenza]

MS's latest podcast is recounting today's hearing regarding the dropped charges in the KAK case. Basically, they were dropped because of changes in the relevant statutes. Nothing to do with any deal.

 

[Salah11]

MS's latest podcast is recounting today's hearing regarding the dropped charges in the KAK case. Basically, they were dropped because of changes in the relevant statutes. Nothing to do with any deal.

Yep all these theory’s he has a deal. I believe people will still maintain these conspiracy theory’s even if LE came out and said they wasn’t involved. Some just won’t accept that

OR- it is a story they came up with as part of a DEAL with KK? But then again, DC did thank the admin by name in the press conference, complimenting you attention of detail. Again, could be part of the story.....

There is no deal with KAK unless you can provide a link and prove me wrong here?

 

[Forpsy]

One of them mums said on a YouTube video they wouldn’t of recognised the killer because they had time to obviously give a clue if they had. There is 45 seconds of video and there is nothing to suggest they knew who it was.

Let’s not forget he had also covered up some of his face and kids don’t really play attention to who is serving them in a drug store imo ( that’s if they had even been in there)

Except he was really short. I mean abnormally short. Looking at him during the transfer at his hearing, he is soooo much shorter than his handlers. I know his description on PCA said 5'4" but jeez he is really short. <modsnip>JMO

 

[getthefax]

I think he was at the bridge watching for people from the bridge entry point. He had an almost perfect setup but for the quick thinking of our dear Libby.

I think ANY female (child, teen or adult) coming up to the bridge, he would have made a calculated decision to form the attack or not. He saw them come from behind him, he then left the bridge, walked up to where he could see all the way to the drop off point, then doubled back fast.

He would have also looked off the bridge to see if anyone was on driveway/dirt road on the south side of the creek. Him placing himself there which was corroborated by 4 witnesses... was a critical mistake on his part. That is not circumstantial evidence. No jury is going to believe it wasn't him.

Those poor poor girls saw how fast he was walking across the bridge and knew something was the matter.

I pray this monster never sees the light of day again.

Respectfully, I think his window there was very short. I’d be okay with thinking it was a simple crime of opportunity but for the short window he was there, the short window the girls planned to be there, Libby’s known contact with the Ashots account, and the coincidental timing of the KAK-fueled search. None of us knows for certain what exactly occurred, but weighing all these factors, *my personal opinion* is that there is a deeper digital connection that will eventually come to light. MOO

Edited to add that this isn’t a “conspiracy theory.” Even investigators have said they believe other actors are involved. I’m not making up facts to support my opinion (which is really what conspiracy theories are—made up stuff). My only point is that I think it’s reasonable to believe that there is probably another actor/actors involved, as the police have said, and given the confluence of reasons why I believe them.

 

[mpnola]

Good to see you back Ticya. I wish some of the older interested ones like WebSight, Skibaboo, Mpnola, Liltexans, NIN, Margarita25, Gregjrichards were here to add to this board.

Thats sweet of you to say! I’m still following and listening very closely, while watching tons of YouTube videos hahaha. I just haven’t been following the threads very much. I will try to catch up and give my thoughts real soon. Thanks for tagging me, @Laughing

 

[mpnola]

I think he was at the bridge watching for people from the bridge entry point. He had an almost perfect setup but for the quick thinking of our dear Libby.

I think ANY female (child, teen or adult) coming up to the bridge, he would have made a calculated decision to form the attack or not. He saw them come from behind him, he then left the bridge, walked up to where he could see all the way to the drop off point, then doubled back fast.

He would have also looked off the bridge to see if anyone was on driveway/dirt road on the south side of the creek. Him placing himself there which was corroborated by 4 witnesses... was a critical mistake on his part. That is not circumstantial evidence. No jury is going to believe it wasn't him.

Those poor poor girls saw how fast he was walking across the bridge and knew something was the matter.

I pray this monster never sees the light of day again.

I think the same. I actually have a feeling he was following the lady who saw him on platform 1 and then u-turned, once he passes the girls. Here is why… he is not in their photo. He was not on the bridge when they were taking pics. I think once they passed, they were a better target than the lady who was walking back into civilization. So he waited for them to get where they couldn’t escape and attacked.

Heres my other question. From way back when bobcusimano did a topographic map of the crime scene, I was sure BG picked it for a reason. The sides were all uphill or the creek. No way to escape. Well, we know they had to cross the creek, because they crossed the bridge. Is that right? So, would that spot (crime scene spot) have been able to be reached easier from the original side of the bridge or the side after you cross the bridge? Does anyone here know the answer to that?

 

[getthefax]

I remain agnostic on KAK's involvement. But RL being involved makes almost zero sense to me.

RSBM.

Agree. I don’t think RL had anything to do with it either.

 

[getthefax]

Because that quote is literally years out of date. Just because they believed something 5 years ago doesn’t mean it holds true in 2022 imo

They obviously went back to the beginning hence why RA flagged. So I don’t believe their leads planned out and things changed.

IMO

MOO, but I think people think that the Klines are involved because, in addition to the other coincidences (of which there are many), the prosecutors are currently repeating that they feel there are other folks involved now, and the quotes about “other actors” are recent, not only from 5 years ago.

Accused Delphi Killer 'Is Not the Only Actor Involved in This,' Says Prosecutor

Richard Allen, 50, faces two counts of murder in connection to the 2017 deaths of 14-year-old Libby German and her best friend 13-year-old Abby Williams

people.com

From the link dated November 23, 2022, which references the hearing that happened on Nov. 22nd, 2022:

"We believe Richard Allen is not the only actor involved in this," prosecutor Nicholas McLeland told a judge during the suspect's Tuesday hearing, WTHR-TV reports.”

The prosecution is saying there are “other actors” now, not just 5 years ago. This is a big reason why I’m inclined to believe that KAK et al were somehow involved (though exactly how remains a mystery).

MOO

 

[5W's]

I wonder.....

When investigators confronted RA with witness testimony, placing him on the path to see A and L, just as the lady witness did, IMO he knew he'd cornered himself. Maybe that's why he volunteered his phone use. So glued to the stock market he must not have noticed the girls. As if.

He really made a mess of his fail-ibi.

He should've admitted to seeing the girls. Should have admitted to passing them as he exited the park, the way he entered it (we know he didn't leave that way, but he claimed he did).

So.... he has no explanation for 2:17 until the 3:30 time he claims he left. He placed himself on the bridge that whole time.

So problematic for him.

Based on his own answers, he was perfectly positioned as a witness to what happened on the bridge....

And he says they weren't there.

But Libby's video proves they were.

So which was it, RA, were you on the bridge and saw the girls and therefore know what happened to them or were you on the bridge and deny they were? Incriminating no matter how he plays it.

Checkmate.

Win goes to LE. Well-played, Investigators.

JMO

IMO you are correct in this observation. It would make him a witness. So what happened. Did he panic after the murders/hoping for the best/maybe he didn't care of the consequences at the time and afterward he did? IDK just is so bizarre thinking! IDK if the concequences weren't important at the time than that just shows perhaps it may be like getting some sort of high, the killing and the other horror that happened to the kids that day as if it was a significant part of the entire action. The sick high was what was the main concern at the time? Maybe also plans didn't unfold as they were suppose to? Other's involvment being mentioned in earlier posts above and the the plans went wrong for whatever reason and elements of what I just mentioned about concequences playing into this aspect also? https://interactive.wthr.com/pdfs/logan-warrrant.pdf
Page 3) # 11: LE requested consent to search Logan's property and advised him that they would not search his residence if nothing was found. That being said perhaps Logan was smart enough to avoid this complication LE may have unknowingly given him time to get rid of evidence, actually LE has to act accordingly so it was a procedure they had to follow and he took advantage of that procedure. He told LE that he didn't think LE would find evidence leading to that, but said "I don't know." IMO its either yes or no to the question LE asked. What is "I don't know?" Anyways the point is that there may have been something outside of the residence that led LE to lay charges against him but it was inconspicuous and didn't warrant LE's attention and that's how he may have gotten away with being involoved with others involved in this crime. MOO.

 

[5W's]

I absolutely see your point, but I think Historynut might well be right. The video stops shortly after DTH, right? Isn't it possible one of the girls said, "Wait, why are you doing this? You're the guy from the drugstore, right? Why are you doing this to us?" MOO but it makes sense to me.

At that point, murder becomes an obvious choice to prevent the girls from identifying him, whether or not he had planned it previously. The girls recognize him and he feels he can't leave them alive. He might not have intended to let them live in the first place; we just can't know what he had in mind.

And @Salah11, I see your point, absolutely, but from what I've seen of youngish teeny-age girls (from my wife's teaching career) I think it's entirely likely that (A.) the girls went in the CVS routinely--shopping is lifesblood to girls that age and the place was full of cosmetics and skin-care products and all that stuff; and (B.) the girls might well have noticed RA, like this:

Girl1: "Hey, the little short guy with the stupid beard is at the counter today." Girl2: "Yeah, I'm not going to buy the (whatever) today, that guy always looks at us in a weird way when he rings up our stuff." (Strictly MOO and speculative but IMO certainly possible.)

This makes sense however, the part that it wasn't preplanned and that it happened because he may have snapped (if that's what is what you are suggesting) I have reservations about that because of the way this whole crime has proceeded and come to where we are today, so its tough to say without more info from what LE know's about this case. I hope we can learn what happened and protect our kids and loved ones or at least becoming victims to this this sort of thing.

 

[mrjitty]

MS's latest podcast is recounting today's hearing regarding the dropped charges in the KAK case. Basically, they were dropped because of changes in the relevant statutes. Nothing to do with any deal.

One of their other podcast guests was talking up the link saying there is 'no such thing as a coincidence" - which is a basic logical fallacy. To me all of this speculation is based on incomplete/inadequate info so I am going to ignore it unless/until something solid comes along.

 

[mrjitty]

I remain agnostic on KAK's involvement. But RL being involved makes almost zero sense to me.

If RA was working with RL in some way like the Daily Mail story claims, why would he park in the exposed location he allegedly did? He could have just parked at RL's and walked through the woods to the bridge. That would have eliminated all (or almost all) of the witness sightings, and would have spared him the incriminating walk back along the highway.

Agreed

It's a naive theory that sounds like a good story until you think about it for more than one second

Especially it is highly unlikely that these 3 guys would be working together on such a plot in the first place - that is not how these kinds of abductions go down.

Indeed the prosecution case is much more typical. The accused had a hunting ground where potential victims could easily be found - and snatched them away to a more secluded area

Unfortunately that happens all the time.

 

[JudgeJudi]

I'm not finished reading the last thread, but as it's now Christmas Eve in Oz, I'll leave you with this.

 

[girlhasnoname]

I absolutely see your point, but I think Historynut might well be right. The video stops shortly after DTH, right? Isn't it possible one of the girls said, "Wait, why are you doing this? You're the guy from the drugstore, right? Why are you doing this to us?" MOO but it makes sense to me.

At that point, murder becomes an obvious choice to prevent the girls from identifying him, whether or not he had planned it previously. The girls recognize him and he feels he can't leave them alive. He might not have intended to let them live in the first place; we just can't know what he had in mind.

And @Salah11, I see your point, absolutely, but from what I've seen of youngish teeny-age girls (from my wife's teaching career) I think it's entirely likely that (A.) the girls went in the CVS routinely--shopping is lifesblood to girls that age and the place was full of cosmetics and skin-care products and all that stuff; and (B.) the girls might well have noticed RA, like this:

Girl1: "Hey, the little short guy with the stupid beard is at the counter today." Girl2: "Yeah, I'm not going to buy the (whatever) today, that guy always looks at us in a weird way when he rings up our stuff." (Strictly MOO and speculative but IMO certainly possible.)

RA didn't have the stupid long beard at the time of the murders. It was a trim goatee, I think he purposely grew it out after the murders to hide. Or maybe he had a vision of ZZ Top?