IN - Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #163

[pseudo_hum]

Impossible RA was the source of either sketch IMO since he initially only spoke with a conservation office in front of a grocery store, then his tip was lost/misfiled. As a result LE didn’t know his statement existed for more than five years.

Anyway the sketches are no longer significant. All it takes is an expert witness to testify about how sketches are notoriously wrong and the person involved to testify “I wasn’t really certain what I remembered but wanted to help”.

Agrre. And I had thought, so IMO, RA had not fessed up to seeing any males on the trail that day. So I highly doubt he was the source for the sketch. But he was the topic for the first sketch. IMO

 

[twall]

New docket entry.

 

[StarryStarryNight]

I think, we don't know:
at what time the witness saw something
at what location the witness saw something (near trails/near water/near any bridge/near street/near building)
whether the witness already knew about the missing girls, when s/he saw something
whether the witness already knew about the found/deceased girls, when s/he saw something
how the person seen was dressed exactly from head to toe
if any car played a role, when the person was seen (ie standing near a car, entering/leaving a car)
if the person was seen walking (gait!) or standing/sitting still
what the person did exactly - we know: something striking unusual/criminal (would help immense to know that, IMO)
whether the person had at least one animal, ie a dog, in his company (here taking some distance from assuming a possible goat )

Idk, what else could be, that we don't know. In any case, if we would know details, the connection with the young face of the YBG suddenly would be more clear to us, I believe. I guess: we the public shouldn't be able to know more at this time; otherwise the further investigation would be impossible.

I appreciate you bringing the goat back into our discussions. I have missed it

 

[M. Kay]

I think, we don't know:
at what time the witness saw something
at what location the witness saw something

I think you are right that we don't know; though your guesses are better than mine, 'FromGermany'. And the more plausible hypothesis come from not so-sure-posts, don't they? Having a last word doesn't leave us enough room for other considerations to develop. On we go...

 

[TL4S]

New docket entry.

Temporary Restraining Orders - What They Can Protect — McNeely Law

A temporary restraining order (“TRO”) is a court order that prevents or “restrains” someone from taking certain actions during a limited period of time.

TROs are issued pre-trial. To get a TRO, a party must petition the court for the TRO. The petition must persuade the court that the petitioning party will suffer irreparable harm if a TRO is not issued. If the judge believes a TRO is necessary to prevent immediate harm, the judge can issue a TRO without a hearing, and without informing the other party or parties

 

[girlhasnoname]

New docket entry.

So who/what is RA trying to get stopped?

ETA:

Preliminary Injunction​

A temporary order made by a court at the request of one party that prevents the other party from pursuing a particular course of conduct until the conclusion of a trial on the merits. A preliminary injunction is regarded as extraordinary relief. The party against whom it is sought must receive notice and an opportunity to appear at a hearing to argue that the Injunction should not be granted. A preliminary injunction should be granted only when the requesting party is highly likely to be successful in a trial on the merits and there is a substantial likelihood of irreparable harm unless the injunction is granted.

Preliminary Injunction

 

[StarryStarryNight]

The restraining order motion might be to temporarily stop the state’s subpoenas until the judge can rule on the defense’s motions to quash those subpoenas. Might not be about people at all.
Like some one mentioned recently, Judge Gull moves pretty slow on things. It took her a week to rule on the defense’s “emergency” motion concerning RA’s prison conditions.

 

[girlhasnoname]

The restraining order motion might be to temporarily stop the state’s subpoenas until the judge can rule on the defense’s motions to quash those subpoenas. Might not be about people at all.
Like some one mentioned recently, Judge Gull moves pretty slow on things. It took her a week to rule on the defense’s “emergency” motion concerning RA’s prison conditions.

Could be, it's got me curious though.

I believe a week in the ruling of RA's emergency moving motion was not excessive, there was a lot of factors to be considered before she made that decision.

MOO

 

[Spiritecho]

The Judge has a certain amount of time to rule on motions. The Plaintiff/Petitioner has a certain amount of time to file a 'Response to xyz". The Defendant/Respondent has a certain amount of time to file any responses. I couldn't find a good place to give me time frames for Indiana Law but the Judge ruling in a week on the Emergency Motion to Move (or whatever it was called) was not slow. She HAD to give the opposing party time to file a response.
MOO

 

[FrostedGlass]

The Judge has a certain amount of time to rule on motions. The Plaintiff/Petitioner has a certain amount of time to file a 'Response to xyz". The Defendant/Respondent has a certain amount of time to file any responses. I couldn't find a good place to give me time frames for Indiana Law but the Judge ruling in a week on the Emergency Motion to Move (or whatever it was called) was not slow. She HAD to give the opposing party time to file a response.
MOO

That hold-up appears to be the fault of the State; Judge Gull issued her order on the same day State's response was file.

04/05/2023	Motion Filed Emergency Motion to Modify Safekeeping Order Filed By: Allen, Richard M. File Stamp: 04/05/2023
04/14/2023	Response Filed State of Indiana files Response to Defense's Emergency Motion to Modify Safekeeping Order. Filed By: State of Indiana File Stamp: 04/14/2023
04/14/2023	Order Issued On November 3, 2022, the Judge of the Carroll Circuit Court, at the request of the Carroll County Sheriff, entered the following order: "Accordingly, pursuant to Ind. Code 35-33-11-1, the Court ORDERS the Sheriff of Carroll County to transfer Defendant to a facility of the department of correction designated by the commissioner of the department as suitable for the confinement of Defendant and provided that space is available." These types of orders are referred to as "safe keeper" ordered. The Department of Correction has complied with this order. Consistent with that Order and the "safe keeper" statute, the Department of Correction is authorized to move the Defendant within the Department of Correction to accommodate his medical and physical needs pursuant to medical directives by the Department of Correction physicians, psychiatrists or psychologists Judicial Officer: Gull, Frances -SJ Order Signed: 04/14/2023

 

[FrostedGlass]

OTOH, I don't understand why Judge Gull would have needed to wait for a response to the prosecution. They didn't have anything to do with it to begin with; that was on the sheriff and the judge.

I also wonder why McLeland felt the need to seal his reply.

 

[Spiritecho]

OTOH, I don't understand why Judge Gull would have needed to wait for a response to the prosecution. They didn't have anything to do with it to begin with; that was on the sheriff and the judge.

I also wonder why McLeland felt the need to seal his reply.

Based on my work in New Mexico. ALL parties are allowed to file a Motion and a Response/Answer to that Motion. Why would ONE side get to have their say to the Judge and not the other?
If it was someone you knew and a party filed something and the Judge says Motion granted, without hearing from opposing counsel? That is not our justice system. The times a Judge can ignore a response if it is not filed in the time frame allotted for that particular Motion.

MOO

 

[sunshineray]

maybe KAK was just a low level garden variety purveyor of *advertiser censored* and RA, who had a lot of repressed urges, swooped in and killed KAK's next intended ... that way they would have been "connected" but not because they were coconspiritors- maybe RA expected that KAK or AS would be blamed...(speculation, IMO)

Anything is possible. I'm sorry but I'm having brain fart on the AS. No names but a clue?

 

[girlhasnoname]

That hold-up appears to be the fault of the State; Judge Gull issued her order on the same day State's response was file.

04/05/2023	Motion Filed Emergency Motion to Modify Safekeeping Order Filed By: Allen, Richard M. File Stamp: 04/05/2023
04/14/2023	Response Filed State of Indiana files Response to Defense's Emergency Motion to Modify Safekeeping Order. Filed By: State of Indiana File Stamp: 04/14/2023
04/14/2023	Order Issued On November 3, 2022, the Judge of the Carroll Circuit Court, at the request of the Carroll County Sheriff, entered the following order: "Accordingly, pursuant to Ind. Code 35-33-11-1, the Court ORDERS the Sheriff of Carroll County to transfer Defendant to a facility of the department of correction designated by the commissioner of the department as suitable for the confinement of Defendant and provided that space is available." These types of orders are referred to as "safe keeper" ordered. The Department of Correction has complied with this order. Consistent with that Order and the "safe keeper" statute, the Department of Correction is authorized to move the Defendant within the Department of Correction to accommodate his medical and physical needs pursuant to medical directives by the Department of Correction physicians, psychiatrists or psychologists Judicial Officer: Gull, Frances -SJ Order Signed: 04/14/2023

Looks like the State had x amount of days to respond, here it appears to be 10 days. No fault of the State if that is the case. RA's Defense requested a transfer, he is a defendant in a high profile double murder case. Many factors had to be considered.

You can't just load him on a van and transfer him overnight just because the Defense files an emergency request. If that were the case, every defendant would be wanting a transfer to a place more comfortable/convenient than where they are currently housed.

I personally believe his severe weight loss and mental status is a by product of a guilty conscience and stress over what he is about to face, but that just my opinion.

 

[sunshineray]

I’m thinking RA is not the source for the young guy sketch for two reasons:

—In RA’s statement in 2017 to LE he says he didn’t see anybody else on the trails other than the teenage girls and LE doesn’t mention as follow-up that he had description and needed to be paired with a sketch artist.
—After the young guy sketch came out, the sketch artist said it was made because someone came in and said they had seen something that needed to be reported.

There was someone working very nearby that day, BH, that came forward and said something similar in an article. They'd seen something they thought they should report to LE.

 

[girlhasnoname]

Anything is possible. I'm sorry but I'm having brain fart on the AS. No names but a clue?

Anthony_Shots account

 

[sunshineray]

Anthony_Shots account

Thanks, my bad

 

[girlhasnoname]

Thanks, my bad

No worries, this case has been going on for a long time with a cast of characters.

 

[sunshineray]

The restraining order motion might be to temporarily stop the state’s subpoenas until the judge can rule on the defense’s motions to quash those subpoenas. Might not be about people at all.
Like some one mentioned recently, Judge Gull moves pretty slow on things. It took her a week to rule on the defense’s “emergency” motion concerning RA’s prison conditions.

Help in quashing subpoenas needs a TRO though? What irreparable harm is in a subpoena? A subpoena doesn't mean didley-squat unless the information obtained is eventually used in court. There are legal avenues in place to prevent evidence from coming before a jury. Gathering evidence is what prosecutors do. Doesn't necessarily mean they get to present it to a jury. The defense can always motion to keep it out. Getting a TRO to stop information from being gathered in a case is nuts, IMO.

Only things that come to mind that maybe could be quash beforehand would be a spouse being subpoenaed, clergy or medical records of the defendant but people, even wardens, guards or inmates have a right to give evidence.

I may have missed others. Just some thoughts.

 

[FrostedGlass]

Looks like the State had x amount of days to respond, here it appears to be 10 days. No fault of the State if that is the case. RA's Defense requested a transfer, he is a defendant in a high profile double murder case. Many factors had to be considered.

You can't just load him on a van and transfer him overnight just because the Defense files an emergency request. If that were the case, every defendant would be wanting a transfer to a place more comfortable/convenient than where they are currently housed.

I personally believe his severe weight loss and mental status is a by product of a guilty conscience and stress over what he is about to face, but that just my opinion.

It seemed to take the judge a long time to address an emergency issue. I was pointing out that she didn't respond until the State did. Not saying the State did anything wrong; just that they were apparently the ones who caused the delay in the judge's response.

Regarding the part I put in red: Carroll County LE apparently just loaded him up and sent him to White County very soon after he was arrested; so apparently it can be done. I don't know anything about emergency orders; have you seen cases detailing how the IN courts respond to them?