Found Deceased IN - Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #162

[TL4S]

Also, do we still think this case is exceedingly “complex” as LE has stated for years? Complex or just a bunch of mess-ups along the way? I basically stopped paying attn when RA was arrested. The threads got too crazy for me to keep up with, and RA just didn’t fit the “complex” narrative for me. Thoughts?

From link: “This case is unlikely any that I’ve seen in an almost 40-year career,” Superintendent Carter tells WIBC’s Hammer & Nigel, “there are so many different tentacles to this. Its very complex.”

A "Complex" Case - ISP Superintendent Doug Carter Talks Richard Allen, Kegan Kline, "Police Sources" & What You Should Be Allowed to Know

DELPHI, Ind. -- Richard Allen, Kegan Kline, public documents and "police sources" - Superintendent Doug Carter with Indiana State Police covered it all when discussing the 2017 Delphi murders investigation Tuesday.

wibc.com

See, DC said this two weeks after RA's arrest. And another week later, McL told the judge there could be other actors involved. Neither had to make those claims. Unpopular or not, I see no reason to dismiss all these statements in favor of a random, lone wolf scenario just yet. I'm not against that idea, because that could be the outcome here, but until McL states otherwise, I'll consider there are other factors muddying the waters.

 

[Schatz]

See, DC said this two weeks after RA's arrest. And another week later, McL told the judge there could be other actors involved. Neither had to make those claims. Unpopular or not, I see no reason to dismiss all these statements in favor of a random, lone wolf scenario just yet. I'm not against that idea, because that could be the outcome here, but until McL states otherwise, I'll consider there are other factors muddying the waters.

That is my thought also. If that does turn out to be the case, do you think the whole, complete suspected narrative will be shared with the jury at trial, or will they stick to just factors specific to RA? Or maybe that will depend on whether they’ve made more arrests?

 

[raja]

See, DC said this two weeks after RA's arrest. And another week later, McL told the judge there could be other actors involved. Neither had to make those claims. Unpopular or not, I see no reason to dismiss all these statements in favor of a random, lone wolf scenario just yet. I'm not against that idea, because that could be the outcome here, but until McL states otherwise, I'll consider there are other factors muddying the waters.

I agree with you. This also may add to the complex nature of the case. There is little doubt in my mind that one or both girls were involved in a catfish scenario and perhaps that did not have anything to do with the murders but it alone would muddy the waters.

 

[Schatz]

Also, do we still think this case is exceedingly “complex” as LE has stated for years? Complex or just a bunch of mess-ups along the way? I basically stopped paying attn when RA was arrested. The threads got too crazy for me to keep up with, and RA just didn’t fit the “complex” narrative for me. Thoughts?

From link: “This case is unlikely any that I’ve seen in an almost 40-year career,” Superintendent Carter tells WIBC’s Hammer & Nigel, “there are so many different tentacles to this. Its very complex.”

A "Complex" Case - ISP Superintendent Doug Carter Talks Richard Allen, Kegan Kline, "Police Sources" & What You Should Be Allowed to Know

DELPHI, Ind. -- Richard Allen, Kegan Kline, public documents and "police sources" - Superintendent Doug Carter with Indiana State Police covered it all when discussing the 2017 Delphi murders investigation Tuesday.

wibc.com

Also, why would a “requestor” be in danger?

• That access or dissemination of the Court Record will create significant risk of substantial harm to the requestor, other persons, or the general public.

 

[Schatz]

Also, why would a “requestor” be in danger?

• That access or dissemination of the Court Record will create significant risk of substantial harm to the requestor, other persons, or the general public.

So the prosecutor and then-assigned judge IIRC received threats, and this states additional concern for requestor, other persons, or general public. When we first heard about the threats in late Oct/November, my thought was “internet crazies,” but it makes more sense to me that it would be whatever other involved parties that don’t want to be nabbed.

 

[MistyWaters]

So the prosecutor and then-assigned judge IIRC received threats, and this states additional concern for requestor, other persons, or general public. When we first heard about the threats in late Oct/November, my thought was “internet crazies,” but it makes more sense to me that it would be whatever other involved parties that don’t want to be nabbed.

Wouldn’t the “requestor” be the person who requested the sealing, the prosecutor?

 

[Schatz]

Wouldn’t the “requestor” be the person who requested the sealing, the prosecutor?

Hmm. My read was any person requesting access to the court record.

 

[MistyWaters]

See, DC said this two weeks after RA's arrest. And another week later, McL told the judge there could be other actors involved. Neither had to make those claims. Unpopular or not, I see no reason to dismiss all these statements in favor of a random, lone wolf scenario just yet. I'm not against that idea, because that could be the outcome here, but until McL states otherwise, I'll consider there are other factors muddying the waters.

If nothing more comes of the possibility of other actors involved, it may’ve just been prudent and due diligence to allow an open window of time between the sudden arrest of RA (who wasn’t at all on the public radar until then) and the release of the PCA so any person with knowledge of other actors potentially involved could contact LE without having the benefit of information which led to his arrest. Better that than to announce the case is closed and risk the defence learning of other involvement, using it to have their defendant found not guilty. JMO

 

[MistyWaters]

Hmm. My read was any person requesting access to the court record.

Although I can’t find a similar request to seal I have a strong hunch it’s a standard legal proforma and isn’t specific to just this case.

 

[FromGermany1]

Heya. Would love to hear one of our verified legal expert’s interpretation of the specific point “That dissemination of the information contained in the record will create serious and imminent danger to the public interest;”

Motion reveals prosecutor’s reasons for sealing court documents in Delphi murder case

CARROLL COUNTY, Ind. – We now have some additional insight into the reasons Carroll County’s prosecutor asked a judge to seal records in the Delphi murder case. Among other things, Carroll County P…

fox59.com

bbm

Danger not to the public but to the public interest (to have found and judged and pull out of traffic the real killer). IMO

 

[minazoe]

here we go!

 

[Trebor5591]

@Trebor5591 I respect your opinion, but I have to say I definitely am more aligned with @TL4S line of thinking.

Even if you think RA would not just suddenly kill some young girls out of nowhere, and was armed because that’s common in Indiana, it’s equally incredible to me that a man with allegedly no plans to murder would react so violently to teenage snickering. And of course we have no one to tell us if anything like this even took place.

Unless RA ever says “oh yeah, I was minding my own business, then these girls mouthed off at me, so I lost it,” we will never know.

IMO I cannot agree that murdering two teenagers just because of a flippant or mocking comment is, as you say, a “reasonable” and “logical” theory.

MOO someone so volatile as to do that is someone who was mentally ready to kill. No “normal” person would slaughter two young girls, and commit all the details listed by @TL4S, for such a trifling reason.

Even if he is married and has a daughter. In fact, a man with a grown daughter should already be familiar with how teenaged girls can act at times.

IMO then, no excuses for him.

I was just trying to articulate an understandable motive beyond the "man married to his high school sweetheart and never arrested before in his life just woke up one day and decided to kill two girls", which makes no sense to me, IMO. I wasn't making an excuse for him and if he is guilty I hope he gets the death penalty.

 

[Trebor5591]

Motion reveals prosecutor’s reasons for sealing court documents in Delphi murder case

The motion included six reasons McLeland wanted the probable cause affidavit and other court documents related to Allen kept under seal. They boiled down to protecting the public interest and preventing information from being released that could “damage an ongoing murder investigation,” although the motion didn’t elaborate on the latter point.

The state argued:

• That the public interest will be secured by the sealing of the record;
• That dissemination of the information contained in the record will create serious and imminent danger to the public interest;
• That any prejudicial effect created by dissemination of the information cannot be avoided by any reasonable method other than sealing of the record;
• That there is substantial probability that sealing of the record will be effective in protecting the public interest against the perceived danger;
• That the public interest will be substantially served by prohibiting access for the reason that the release of the information might damage an ongoing murder investigation; or;
• That access or dissemination of the Court Record will create significant risk of substantial harm to the requestor, other persons, or the general public.

In my opinion, "protecting the public interest" is a smokescreen for protecting the reputation of LE due to the many mistakes that would be apparent if the documents were made public. Just self-serving suppression of information by a county-level government official. MOO

 

[FrostedGlass]

So far, the only comments I've found on the release of the document are from Shay Hughes aka Hoosier Public Defender on Twitter. He has some additional comments on how Access to Court Records Rule 6 applies here.

Verified Request released. The Request is problematic. Couldn’t imagine filing such w/o reasoning/evidence in support, esp w/ the burden of clear/convincing evid

https://twitter.com/x/status/1628854153157001218

 

[FromGermany1]

any person requesting access to the court record ......

..., which is sealed for a purpose. Yes, so I believe as well. That is the "requestor", who wants the sealing to be overcome. IMO

 

[Justice101]

My thought on the "other actors may be involved" thing was that RA may have taken pictures and shared electronically with someone else but only after the effect. In my opinion, at the time, the prosecution was trying everything they could to close the details up on the case until they had done more investigating.

 

[FrostedGlass]

I wasn't quite clear as to what the problem was with the Request according to Hoosier Public Defender until I read Rule 6. Disclaimer: It's possible that I'm misunderstanding.

Now my question is: "Why did Judge Gull agree to it?"

Indiana Rules on Access to Court Records

Here is the relative section; it appears that NMcL just re-worded it and failed to demonstrate the why or how to items 1-3:

Rule 6: Excluding Other Court Records From Public Access.​

(A) In extraordinary circumstances, a Court Record that otherwise would be publicly accessible may be excluded from Public Access by a Court having jurisdiction over the record. A verified written request to prohibit Public Access to a Court Record may be made by any person affected by the release of the Court Record. The request shall demonstrate that:

(1) The public interest will be substantially served by prohibiting access;
(2) Access or dissemination of the Court Record will create a significant risk of substantial harm to the requestor, other persons or the general public; or
(3) A substantial prejudicial effect to on-going proceedings cannot be avoided without prohibiting Public Access.

Bringing forward NMcL's request:
1. That the public interest will be secured by the sealing of the record;
2. That dissemination of the information contained in the record will create serious and imminent danger to the public interest;
3. That any prejudicial effect created by dissemination of the information cannot be avoided by any reasonable method other than sealing of the record;
4. That there is substantial probability that sealing of the record will be effective in protecting the public interest against the perceived danger;
5. That the public interest will be substantially served by prohibiting access for the reason that the release of the information might damage an ongoing murder investigation; or;
6. That access or dissemination of the Court Record will create significant risk of substantial harm to the requestor, other persons, or the general public.

 

[TL4S]

I wasn't quite clear as to what the problem was with the Request according to Hoosier Public Defender until I read Rule 6. Disclaimer: It's possible that I'm misunderstanding.

Now my question is: "Why did Judge Gull agree to it?"

Here is the relative section; it appears that NMcL just re-worded it and failed to demonstrate the why or how to items 1-3:

Rule 6: Excluding Other Court Records From Public Access.​

(A) In extraordinary circumstances, a Court Record that otherwise would be publicly accessible may be excluded from Public Access by a Court having jurisdiction over the record. A verified written request to prohibit Public Access to a Court Record may be made by any person affected by the release of the Court Record. The request shall demonstrate that:

(1) The public interest will be substantially served by prohibiting access;
(2) Access or dissemination of the Court Record will create a significant risk of substantial harm to the requestor, other persons or the general public; or
(3) A substantial prejudicial effect to on-going proceedings cannot be avoided without prohibiting Public Access.

Bringing forward NMcL's request:
1. That the public interest will be secured by the sealing of the record;
2. That dissemination of the information contained in the record will create serious and imminent danger to the public interest;
3. That any prejudicial effect created by dissemination of the information cannot be avoided by any reasonable method other than sealing of the record;
4. That there is substantial probability that sealing of the record will be effective in protecting the public interest against the perceived danger;
5. That the public interest will be substantially served by prohibiting access for the reason that the release of the information might damage an ongoing murder investigation; or;
6. That access or dissemination of the Court Record will create significant risk of substantial harm to the requestor, other persons, or the general public.

NMcL did list reasons at the hearing, like to protect juvenile witnesses, plus he had affidavits from JH and his investigator in support of keeping everything sealed, so were those things supposed to be included in this document? I don't understand any of it. Good thing I didn't go into law...

 

[FrostedGlass]

NMcL did list reasons at the hearing, like to protect juvenile witnesses, plus he had affidavits from JH and his investigator in support of keeping everything sealed, so were those things supposed to be included in this document? I don't understand any of it. Good thing I didn't go into law...

"The request shall demonstrate that" = I take that to mean: We need to see in writing, in this document, exactly why or how it will harm, etc. I personally thought it would list the actual reasons why and wondered why we weren't hearing from MSM.

Shay H's opinion on his Twitter (he has some issues that I haven't read yet):
"Worth noting that Rule 6 is to be applied in extraordinary circumstances. There is a presumption of public access. Thus, there must be compelling evidence to overcome presumption. As stated, the State provided a conclusory argument."

 

[schooling]

As of 2022 the murder solve rate was only 50%, so most people don't get caught. I would probably agree that most people who commit murder don't put a lot of time and effort into planning it.

With the irony being the more you do to plan, the more likely you are to be caught. Which is why IMO spontaneous random murders with no connections between perp and victim are much harder to solve.

The internet privacy community have settled on a similar reality. Doing various things to make yourself untrackable actually makes you more trackable.