IN - Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #166

[FrostedGlass]

I’m sure all prison guards wear body cams.

This article about body cams on LE was from July 2021; I don't know if things have changed since then.

And in state prisons, the Department of Correction said no prisons in Indiana have body cameras, except for a pilot program underway at Miami County Correctional Facility.

Indiana jail touts body camera success

Clinton County's body camera program in the jail is in its second year, but it's a rarity compared to most jails.

www.wthr.com

 

[TL4S]

No additional pics, only the document itself which is cited-I.e. could I post pages from the memo re: the specific topic being discussed about the memo on this thread? I feel it could be helpful as scrolling through over 100 pages looking for something specific is tedious. The more brains to dissect and read it the better JMO. I will repost the link to the doc below.

I did make a list of important points re: the memo-specifically initials of different LE who have different beliefs about the case and different actions surrounding the case. The most important thing to note, that MOO adds legitimacy to the some of the defense’s claims is: 3 investigators from the original task force believe there is likely more than one perpetrator-this includes 2 detectives and a (now) Ret. Rushville Assistant Police Chief.

Those whom believe more than one perp committed the murders:
(1) TC (now Ret. Rushville Assistant Police Chief)
(2) GF (Detective)
(3) KM (Detective)
(4) ToL (Carrol Co. Chief Dep Sheriff); who believes there are “at least 2” perps in his deposition 8/9/2023. ToL also stated he and TL privately discussed more than 1 perp, although TL did not stray from 1 perp in his deposition 8/8/2023. (p.43-44 of the def memo, which is also cited).

-TC directly sent letter re: exculpatory evidence to Prosecutor McLeland (Carroll
Co.) May 1 2023 after being concerned evidence was not being given to the prosecution (p. 6).
-According to Carroll Co. Sheriff TL, the “Unified Command” (Delphi investigation task force) includes:

Carrol County:
(1) TL
(2) KH

ISP:
(3) JH
(4) JHa
(5) DV

**(6) FBI: RD (No longer part of the task force as of 2021)

-According to JH in his deposition, ISP Superintendent DC kicked the FBI off the Delphi murder case in 2021 due to some conflict (JH depo, p. 123-130); TL claimed in his depo he was unaware the FBI was ever kicked off (TL depo, p. 64, lines 14-25)
(p. 9-10 in defense doc).

*Please correct if you see any incorrect/mistyped information above*

LINK TO 136 PAGE DEFENSE MEMO:

DELPHI: Memorandum in Support of Motion PDF | PDF | Prosecutor | Police

DELPHI: Memorandum in Support of Motion.pdf

www.scribd.com

This just reminded me how odd I thought it was that the FBI was not represented at the PC after RA's arrest.

 

[mrjitty]

Sort of, but not really. You can be charged with felony murder if you kill someone during the commission of a felony. But you can also be charged with felony murder if you commit a felony and someone is killed or dies during it even if you didn't personally kill them and had no intent that they die.

For example, here's an Indiana felony murder case where the defendant was convicted because he kidnapped someone to help his friend escape custody and during the escape his friend was shot and killed by police. He didn't shoot his friend, he didn't intend for his friend to die, but he was still guilty of felony murder because his friend died during the commission of a felony that he took part in.

So RA would still be guilty of felony murder if he kidnapped L&A and someone else killed them.

I think this is the key point. The prosecution allows for the possibility one or more people were also involved, but does not allege it. I guess specifically to counter these conspiratorial (in the legal sense) possibilities that the investigation looked in to. All they really need to prove is RA was bridge guy. The rest can be logically inferred.

 

[mrjitty]

What other specific things did you find the most outrageous? I only finished reading it all, there is a lot going on. Can the def state they have exhibits to back up their claims in the document if they actually don’t have the exhibits/evidence to black up what they are saying? Could they be disbarred for that? I have no idea as I don’t have a background in law.

What i find strange about US trials vs what I am used to (UK, commonwealth law) is how the Defence Attorney's are allowed to sock puppet wild theories into the trial based on wild speculation.

For instance, will RA testify at his Frank's hearing about the Odinist prison guards who are trying to railroad him for a crime he didn't commit?

Or is this just pure fanfic written by the defence which actually has nothing to do with the hearing

 

[girlhasnoname]

A couple of people questioned if Westville was really recording RA's and his attys' meetings. They were.
Here is Judge Gull's order:
Case # 08C01-2210-MR-000001

Indiana Courts Case Search - MyCase

Indiana Supreme Court, Public Access

public.courts.in.gov

06/22/2023

Order Issued Defendant appears in person and with counsel, Bradley Rozzi and Andrew Baldwin. State by Prosecuting Attorney Nicholas McLeland. Court is informed by Counsel that the hearing on defendant's Motion to Suppress needs to be continued to be reset once defense counsel files its notice of omissions/inaccuracies. Hearing conducted on defendant's Motion to Reconsider Safekeeping Order. Evidence and arguments of counsel taken under advisement. Defendant's Motion for Temporary Restraining Order on Department of Correction Use of Cameras and Request for Preliminary Injunction to pend as the Department of Correction has stopped remote filming attorney meetings with defendant. Court grants defendant's Motion for Order on Continuing Disclosure of Defendant's Mental Health Records under separate order. Ex Parte Motions heard and concluded. Counsel will submit Ex Parte pleading under seal for the Court to consider. Court will issue a separate, detailed order on the sealed pleadings which will be unsealed by agreement of Counsel. Jury trial ordered set January 8-26, 2024, with jury selection to be conducted in Allen County, Indiana, and trial to be conducted in Carroll County, Indiana. Judicial Officer: Gull, Frances -SJ Order Signed: 06/20/2023

Yes they recorded meetings for safety purposes, but did not audio record them.

I doubt they had the camera focused on RA's lips (in order to read them) but rather an overall view of meeting. If the Defense thought they were lip reading, they would have been raising Cain right then and there IMO.

Another exaggeration by the Defense in their scandalous Memorandum. Pffffff.

MOO

 

[Andieinsyd]

I’m concerned that the nice neat timeline and the witnesses all describing someone resembling RA has been put into question.

Notably it seems that BB who saw the man on the high bridge (and was behind the YBG sketch) says she saw someone around 20yo with brown pouffy hair and also described quite a different car to RAs focus (previous poster posted the car comparison shots).

And the person who saw the muddy bloody person actually described someone wearing a tan coloured jacket Who wasn’t actually bloody according to the Defense. So the sightings closer to the crime in time don’t necessarily match RA. And RA is now saying he left at 1:30pm.

This concerns me more than the Odinism stuff at this point. And if these details being omitted do succeed in invalidating the search there may not be a lot of strong evidence against RA left. Mainly the Confessions? Unless his wife has decided to testify perhaps.

 

[FrostedGlass]

Yes they recorded meetings for safety purposes, but did not audio record them.

I doubt they had the camera focused on RA's lips (in order to read them) but rather an overall view of meeting. If the Defense thought they were lip reading, they would have been raising Cain right then and there IMO.

Another exaggeration by the Defense in their scandalous Memorandum. Pffffff.

MOO

Of course "for safety purposes." I wouldn't expect them to tell the judge anything else.

What if they made him face the camera, would you think differently?

 

[girlhasnoname]

It’s not as if there’s electrical boxes anywhere nearby the crime scene so it’s kind of preposterous for anyone to using an electric saw in the bush. Why an electric saw, why not a handsaw or chainsaw? Probably because whoever wrote this imaginary garbage knew absolutely nothing about saws (except for the fact that some are electric) or saw cuts………Why would sticks for runes need to be sawed when dry and fallen branches can easily be broken by hand?….IMO it’s pointless to even attempt to analyze their “evidence” because it’s all just ridiculous.

Yes and we know RA had possession of a knife so he could have made 'clean cuts' to the sticks with a sharp knife blade. IMO

 

[girlhasnoname]

I’m concerned that the nice neat timeline and the witnesses all describing someone resembling RA has been put into question.

Notably it seems that BB who saw the man on the high bridge (and was behind the YBG sketch) says she saw someone around 20yo with brown pouffy hair and also described quite a different car to RAs focus (previous poster posted the car comparison shots).

And the person who saw the muddy bloody person actually described someone wearing a tan coloured jacket Who wasn’t actually bloody according to the Defense. So the sightings closer to the crime in time don’t necessarily match RA. And RA is now saying he left at 1:30pm.

This concerns me more than the Odinism stuff at this point. And if these details being omitted do succeed in invalidating the search there may not be a lot of strong evidence against RA left. Mainly the Confessions? Unless his wife has decided to testify perhaps.

This is all according to the Defense Memorandum which I have 0% faith in.

 

[Salah11]

I’m concerned that the nice neat timeline and the witnesses all describing someone resembling RA has been put into question.

Notably it seems that BB who saw the man on the high bridge (and was behind the YBG sketch) says she saw someone around 20yo with brown pouffy hair and also described quite a different car to RAs focus (previous poster posted the car comparison shots).

And the person who saw the muddy bloody person actually described someone wearing a tan coloured jacket Who wasn’t actually bloody according to the Defense. So the sightings closer to the crime in time don’t necessarily match RA. And RA is now saying he left at 1:30pm.

This concerns me more than the Odinism stuff at this point. And if these details being omitted do succeed in invalidating the search there may not be a lot of strong evidence against RA left. Mainly the Confessions? Unless his wife has decided to testify perhaps.

At the moment these are claims with nothing to support them.

 

[girlhasnoname]

Of course "for safety purposes." I wouldn't expect them to tell the judge anything else.

What if they made him face the camera, would you think differently?

If it is proven that they had the camera focused on RA's lips, I might think differently. I don't believe they did or why wouldn't the Defense raise hell right away?

Their Motion was that RA's meetings with them (Defense) were being filmed. Which the Judge ultimately ordered stopped, and I agree with that.

MOO

 

[TL4S]

I’m concerned that the nice neat timeline and the witnesses all describing someone resembling RA has been put into question.

Notably it seems that BB who saw the man on the high bridge (and was behind the YBG sketch) says she saw someone around 20yo with brown pouffy hair and also described quite a different car to RAs focus (previous poster posted the car comparison shots).

And the person who saw the muddy bloody person actually described someone wearing a tan coloured jacket Who wasn’t actually bloody according to the Defense. So the sightings closer to the crime don’t necessarily match RA. And RA is now saying he left at 1:30pm.

This concerns me more than the Odinism stuff at this point. And if these details being omitted do succeed in invalidating the search there may not be a lot of strong evidence against RA left. Mainly the Confessions? Unless his wife has decided to testify perhaps.

I agree. I wish I could blow off the entire document as easily as a lot of folks have, but the witness, BB specifically, concerns me.

I could be swayed that the PT Cruiser and Smart car descriptions could arguably be a Ford Focus Hatchback, but a '65 Comet that wasn't black?

Even the original PCA doesn't actually say what kind of car BB claimed to have seen parked at the CPS lot, only how it was parked. I never noticed that omission until now. But I find it relevant that she likely noticed the car because it looked like the kind her father used to own. Imo, that's probably what made it stand out to her, rather than how it was parked. Even if she was mistaken about the exact make and model, a 50 year old not black car with a completely different style just doesn't jive.

Add to it that this same witness also described the man she saw as someone who didn't sound much like RA at all, and it's a problem. Jmo.

The only thing that BB seemed to describe that matched RA was a blue jacket. Although, she did say the man was standing on the bridge platform, which RA admitted he was on watching fish.

To me, it isn't whether or not RA is guilty, it's really how much weight to put on BB's statements. Jmo.

 

[girlhasnoname]

I agree. I wish I could blow off the entire document as easily as a lot of folks have, but the witness, BB specifically, concerns me.

I could be swayed that the PT Cruiser and Smart car descriptions could arguably be a Ford Focus Hatchback, but a '65 Comet that wasn't black?

Even the original PCA doesn't actually say what kind of car BB claimed to have seen parked at the CPS lot, only how it was parked. I never noticed that omission until now. But I find it relevant that she likely noticed the car because it looked like the kind her father used to own. Imo, that's probably what made it stand out to her, rather than how it was parked.

Add to it that this same witness also described the man she saw as someone who didn't sound much like RA at all, and it's a problem. Jmo.

The only thing that BB seemed to describe that matched RA was a blue jacket. Although, she did say the man was standing on the bridge platform, which RA admitted he was on watching fish.

To me, it isn't whether or not RA is guilty, it's really how much weight to put on BB's statements. Jmo.

I'll be anxious to see how BB's statement compares in the State's response to this Defense Memo. Although, we'll probably never see it publicly. They aren't required legally to respond and might just save their battle for the courtroom.

MOO

 

[Charlot123]

This just reminded me how odd I thought it was that the FBI was not represented at the PC after RA's arrest.

Brilliant observation. The rift between FBI and ISP was obvious even in 2019. However, it is 2023, lots of water under MHB, yet nothing changes in Delphi. I don't understand the handling of the case. If as LE, you want to shut down any leaks, then you minimize press exposure. Or, you don't care about your disorganized backyard, but want to demonstrate efficiency; then bring in the FBI. Instead, there is incessant self- promotion interspersed with occasional scandals. KF's case of judicial corruption should have been enough, but no. Now we are discussing odinite groups in Indiana and LEO's membership in them. Sweet... It calls for FBI professionalism. And what's there to be afraid of in Delphi, if people are reading about national scandals, daily?

 

[FrostedGlass]

If it is proven that they had the camera focused on RA's lips, I might think differently. I don't believe they did or why wouldn't the Defense raise hell right away?

Their Motion was that RA's meetings with them (Defense) were being filmed. Which the Judge ultimately ordered stopped, and I agree with that.

MOO

This is My Opinion Only based on what I've read.

I didn't say it was focused on his lips; I don't know the specifics of lip reading but I would guess that if he was facing the camera, they could zoom in enough for an expert to make out at least part of what he was saying.
It's not like they were any big distance away from him.

Rozzi also told the judge that prison guards videotaped his meetings with his client. He said during those meetings, Westville staff directed Allen to sit in a specific chair that faced a window, where prison staff stationed outside the room then videotaped the entire meeting through the window.

Delphi murders defendant Richard Allen living in 8x12 prison cell under suicide watch and 24-hour video surveillance

The Westville prison warden provided very specific details about the cell where Allen is living and the accommodations he is offered.

www.wthr.com

 

[TL4S]

I'll be anxious to see how BB's statement compares in the State's response to this Defense Memo. Although, we'll probably never see it publicly. They aren't required legally to respond and might just save their battle for the courtroom.

MOO

Back in April 2019, when the YBG sketch came out and we found out it had been drawn only a few days after the murder, one of my initial questions was if maybe the reason LE didn't go with the younger sketch first was because the source of that sketch was unreliable for some reason, like a child, a known drug addict, something like that.

Looking at it now, I feel like BB's descriptions of both the vehicle and the man on the bridge are the outliers. A smaller SUV-type dark vehicle was seen in the CPS lot at 2:10 and again at 2:28. A similar vehicle was seen driving west past HH at 1:27, which LE says was likely RA's Ford Focus. All of those descriptions can be argued to be the same car, IMO. But then suddenly you have a not black '65 Comet right in the middle of those other descriptions, at 2:14. BB's description of the vehicle doesn't match the others.

Then you have three juveniles with only slightly varying descriptions of the man they saw. The one who claimed to see his face described more of a middle-aged man with gray hair. The other described the same clothing as the man in the bridge video. BB, meanwhile, described a young slender man with poofy brown hair. Doesn't match.

It seems to me that BB was, perhaps, not as reliable with her descriptions when in comparison to the other witnesses. I can see LE leaving her non-matching statements out of the PCA, because they really only used her to support the timeline AND put a man on scene only minutes before L and A arrived at the bridge.

That still doesn't explain why LE decided to change to her sketch in 2019. But since RA's arrest, the sketches have been vaguely hinted at being one in the same man by DC. JMO. I have trouble with that.

And why, for so long, through both sketches, did LE have reddish-brown hair in the suspect description? That doesn't match what any of the witnesses said, ASAIK. I always thought there might have been hair left at the CS, but it doesn't make sense. JMO.

 

[Boxer]

I don't believe in human sacrifices, because in people who practice them, one would expect to see the trend opposite to what happened in real history.

People practicing pagan rituals today, essentially, go backwards. Historically, paganism would progress to monotheism as tribes merged into nations, and human sacrifices would be replaced by animal sacrifices and then by the smoke. So if modern pagans ever get so nutty as to decide to sacrifice humans, one would expect a progression from small animals to larger animals to humans. If these accused odinites, even one of them, had a habit of butchering/sacrificing animals, or cruelty to animals, I'd believe he could eventually transition to people. If not, it would be hard to convince me.

I am very unsure that it was RA, but I am not convinced in odinites either. Also, at least now we know how the scene looked like. But we are missing an important element, the character of wounds. What if this is a crazy guy whose hero is not Ted Bundy or Israel Keyes, but Jack the Ripper? Or what if he is similar to that mad medical student, Villafuerte? I do not quite believe ISP got their villain.

MOO I am sure RA told them to Go Down the Hill, and they ended up dead.

 

[justtrish]

He told the police he had never been on Ron Logans property.

He told them he didn't see the girls either. I don't believe him.

 

[girlhasnoname]

Back in April 2019, when the YBG sketch came out and we found out it had been drawn only a few days after the murder, one of my initial questions was if maybe the reason LE didn't go with the younger sketch first was because the source of that sketch was unreliable for some reason, like a child, a known drug addict, something like that.

Looking at it now, I feel like BB's descriptions of both the vehicle and the man on the bridge are the outliers. A smaller SUV-type dark vehicle was seen in the CPS lot at 2:10 and again at 2:28. A similar vehicle was seen driving west past HH at 1:27, which LE says was likely RA's Ford Focus. All of those descriptions can be argued to be the same car, IMO. But then suddenly you have a not black '65 Comet right in the middle of those other descriptions, at 2:14. BB's description of the vehicle doesn't match the others.

Then you have three juveniles with only slightly varying descriptions of the man they saw. The one who claimed to see his face described more of a middle-aged man with gray hair. The other described the same clothing as the man in the bridge video. BB, meanwhile, described a young slender man with poofy brown hair. Doesn't match.

It seems to me that BB was, perhaps, not as reliable with her descriptions when in comparison to the other witnesses. I can see LE leaving her non-matching statements out of the PCA, because they really only used her to support the timeline AND put a man on scene only minutes before L and A arrived at the bridge.

That still doesn't explain why LE decided to change to her sketch in 2019. But since RA's arrest, the sketches have been vaguely hinted at being one in the same man by DC. JMO. I have trouble with that.

And why, for so long, through both sketches, did LE have reddish-brown hair in the suspect description? That doesn't match what any of the witnesses said, ASAIK. I always thought there might have been hair left at the CS, but it doesn't make sense. JMO.

Those 2 sketches have been the bane of this investigation IMO. The first BG was said to have been taken from the video footage and I believe it is a dead ringer for RA.

If BB was truly the source for the second sketch, I don't know how to explain that other than he had taken off his cap while walking back to his car and she only got a quick glance of his face? IDK

RA did have reddish brown hair/short cropped beard before the murders in pictures from FB, he shaved his hair closely cropped, mostly bald, and let the beard grow out way long and go gray (I think he was coloring his hair/beard) after the murders I believe in an attempt to help disguise his resemblance to BG.

I still think RA is BG, whether he had an accomplice waiting at the scene I'm torn. I believe he knew Abby & Libby would be there that day and this was preplanned, how else would he know they were randomly out of school that day?

From KK or some other form of catfishing them on FB/SnapChat/Twitter, perv or whatever he knew they would be there.

I totally see your points, that's what has made this case so frustrating over the years.


MOO

 

[Boxer]

I think this is the key point. The prosecution allows for the possibility one or more people were also involved, but does not allege it. I guess specifically to counter these conspiratorial (in the legal sense) possibilities that the investigation looked in to. All they really need to prove is RA was bridge guy. The rest can be logically inferred.

Agree.