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

[MistyWaters]

Thanks for this and thanks to Murder sheet for getting this out on a weekend.

Very interesting and I feel like that was a “drops mic and leaves stage” from Mr Click.

That is the defence twisting facts for sensationalism.

That is the defence twisting facts for sensationalism.

That is the defence twisting facts for sensationalism.

I’m hearing an echo….

 

[texaslb218]

Murder Sheet episode just released:

Todd Click, the detective cited in the Defense Memorandum claims Richard Allen's attorneys misrepresented the facts in a statement to the Murder Sheet

The Delphi Murders: Todd Click on the Franks Memorandum

In this episode, we will report on an exclusive statement from the former assistant chief of police from Rushville, Indiana: Todd Click. Send tips to murdersheet@gmail.com. The Murder Sheet is a production of Mystery Sheet LLC .

art19.com

dbm

 

[Megnut]

dbm

 

[Miya]

That is not correct. Each State has their own Criminal Code. This is Indiana’s and what’s commonly referred to as felony murder. Notice the act of “killing” is a combined component of the crime.

See Section 35-42-1 (2)
“kills another human being while committing or attempting to commit……<> kidnapping

2022 Indiana Code :: Title 35. Criminal Law and Procedure :: Article 42. Offenses Against the Person :: Chapter 1. Homicide :: 35-42-1-1. Murder

Justia Free Databases of US Laws, Codes & Statutes

law.justia.com

We have been through this a million times at this point, examples were posted, felony murder doesn't automatically mean that the person charged with it killed someone.

I saw a video from a lawyer a few days ago as well on that subject, he talks about this case in the video, that RA is charged with felony murder and then explained that this charge doesn't mean someone charged with it killed someone.

From your post: "'kills another human being while committing or attempting to commit……<> kidnapping" - Yes, it could also mean somebody kidnaps someone, the police steps in and tries to shoot the guy but accidentally shoots and kills an innocent bystander, the perp committing the kidnapping would or could be charged with felony murder without killing someone because someone was killed because he committed the felony.

 

[MistyWaters]

We have been through this a million times at this point, examples were posted, felony murder doesn't automatically mean that the person charged with it killed someone.

I saw a video from a lawyer a few days ago as well on that subject, he talks about this case in the video, that RA is charged with felony murder and then explained that this charge doesn't mean someone charged with it killed someone.

From your post: "'kills another human being while committing or attempting to commit……<> kidnapping" - Yes, it could also mean somebody kidnaps someone, the police steps in and tries to shoot the guy but accidentally shoots and kills an innocent bystander, the perp committing the kidnapping would or could be charged with felony murder without killing someone because someone was killed because he committed the felony.

“kills another human being…” seems self explanatory, that’s how the charge reads, can’t dispute that. Kills is a verb, an act, as opposed to another criminal code containing different wording such as “…..a human being is killed…during a kidnapping.”, which it doesn’t say.

 

[O.Incandenza]

“kills another human being…” seems self explanatory, that’s how the charge reads, Kills is a verb, an act, as opposed to another criminal code containing different wording such as “…..a human being is killed…during a kidnapping.”

It may seem self-explanatory, but that's not how the statute is interpreted. I already posted this, but here's a case where the defendant was charged and convicted of felony murder because he kidnapped someone as part of an attempt to free his friend from custody: Jesse Palmer v. State

During the escape attempt, LE shot and killed his friend. He was convicted of his friend's murder under the felony murder statute you're quoting, even though he did not kill him and did not intend to kill him. The Indiana Supreme Court said: "The statutory language 'kills another human being while committing' does not restrict the felony murder provision only to instances in which the felon is the killer, but may also apply equally when, in committing any of the designated felonies, the felon contributes to the death of any person."

 

[MistyWaters]

Again, you instructed me to "see examples" which included those I myself provided in the first place.

Even the post of mine you quoted demonstrated that I clearly know what felony murder is because I included a brief definition.

As for why the DA is going with a theory of felony murder, I think the answer has to be that s/he has no definitive evidence that shows an intent to kill. Whether that's because the DA thinks others were involved (which I find doubtful since s/he hasn't mentioned any others) or simply because the DA lacks witnesses to what took place once RA and the victims left the trail doesn't matter in terms of eventual sentencing, but it matters quite a bit in terms of the DA's burden of proof.

Felony murder is almost always easier to prove.

This link to Indiana’s Criminal Code indicates the section was amended in 2022.

2022 Indiana Code :: Title 35. Criminal Law and Procedure :: Article 42. Offenses Against the Person :: Chapter 1. Homicide :: 35-42-1-1. Murder

Justia Free Databases of US Laws, Codes & Statutes

law.justia.com

Your example is from 1999. I think it’s highly possible that the respective law was amended throughout the years to how it reads at present.

From the same link, one is able to look at previous and outdated versions of the same code, which I haven’t done but if you’re interested in doing do, perhaps the answer lies within?

 

[Nova]

“kills another human being…” seems self explanatory, that’s how the charge reads, can’t dispute that. Kills is a verb, an act, as opposed to another criminal code containing different wording such as “…..a human being is killed…during a kidnapping.”, which it doesn’t say.

You can't read legal statutes as if they were written in plain English, and even if you could, few of us would agree as to the meaning of "plain English".

See Paragraph (1) in the statute. It uses the words "knowingly or intentionally kills".

Then see (2) directly below it. It omits all references to intent and substitutes a long list of underlying crimes that make a killing a "felony murder". It also omits any reference to direct, physical contact between the defendant and the dead victim. If the defendant commits any one of the listed felonies and thereby initiates or continues a chain of events that results in somebody's death--even a co-conspirator, as Miya and several of us have pointed out--then the defendant is guilty of felony murder. In Indiana, both intentional murders and felony murders are lumped together in the same charge: Murder. (I.e., there are no "degrees" of murder in Indiana, apparently.)

Paragraph (3) in the statute adds a lengthy list of drug-related activities that can also trigger a charge of felony murder.

I don't have access to LEXIS (the database for court rulings), but the concept of "felony murder" has been around for a long time, and courts have ruled that if a person commits one of the specified crimes and his/her action ends in a death, then that person may be said to have "killed" the deceased. That's your "verb" and the underlying felony is the criminal "act". There is no "as opposed to".

The Wiki link below says the doctrine of "felony murder" derives from something called "transferred intent", in which committing an inherently dangerous act or any act in a dangerous manner is understood to demonstrate "intent" for legal purposes. The principle dates from as far back as the 12th century; the earliest case of "felony murder" was an English case in 1716. Forty-six American states have incorporated the charge into their murder statutes.

Felony murder rule - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[O.Incandenza]

Other than what defence has put out in regard to the YBG sketch ^^, is there anything else to substantiate the claim about BB being the source for that sketch? (Somewhere else .. can't find it now .. someone posted that it was RA or possibly RA who gave that description ???)

This may have been discussed a long time ago, but is it just me that see's a resemblance between the YBG sketch and the young fellow whose pics were uploaded to the anthony shots site.? I'm not going to link to the young man's photos, but they are readily available in google images. This is in NO WAY to make insinuations about the young fellow, just thinking someone who may have been on the anthony shots site may have provided that description as a red herring.

The defense cites and attaches the documents that were given to the sketch artist as well as recent depositions with the LE officers involved and transcripts of interviews with BB about the sketch. I think it's almost certain that BB was the source of the sketch and that it's a sketch of the man she says she saw on the bridge. I don't think there would be any point to them lying about it since it would be so easily disproven by the prosecution. It would be especially counterproductive in a memo where they're accusing LE of misleading a judge.

 

[Nova]

This link to Indiana’s Criminal Code indicates the section was amended in 2022.

2022 Indiana Code :: Title 35. Criminal Law and Procedure :: Article 42. Offenses Against the Person :: Chapter 1. Homicide :: 35-42-1-1. Murder

Justia Free Databases of US Laws, Codes & Statutes

law.justia.com

Your example is from 1999. I think it’s highly possible that the respective law was amended throughout the years to how it reads at present.

From the same link, one is able to look at previous and outdated versions of the same code, which I haven’t done but if you’re interested in doing do, perhaps the answer lies within?

The 2022 amendment added the intentional killing of a fetus to Indiana's definition of murder. It had nothing to do with redefining felony murder statutes. As I wrote above, felony murder is not a new legal concept.

 

[Ravenmoon]

We have been through this a million times at this point, examples were posted, felony murder doesn't automatically mean that the person charged with it killed someone.

I saw a video from a lawyer a few days ago as well on that subject, he talks about this case in the video, that RA is charged with felony murder and then explained that this charge doesn't mean someone charged with it killed someone.

From your post: "'kills another human being while committing or attempting to commit……<> kidnapping" - Yes, it could also mean somebody kidnaps someone, the police steps in and tries to shoot the guy but accidentally shoots and kills an innocent bystander, the perp committing the kidnapping would or could be charged with felony murder without killing someone because someone was killed because he committed the felony.

Instead of going around in circles over what felony murder could mean maybe you could state what you think Richard Allen's role actually was?

I know that you have made the point that if someone dies during the commission of a crime someone can be charged with murder. But most of us here don't think that is what happened here.

The defense has stated that the girls throats were slit, they bled out. That doesn't sound like an accident to me.

I would like to move past the language to better understand what your thoughts are.

JMO

 

[zh0r4]

Yeah, the defense memorandum makes it very clear that the YBG sketch came from BB, the witness who saw a man on the bridge right before Libby & Abby arrived. They cite the Facial Identification Reference Sheet that contains her description of the man on the bridge (20 years old, brown curly hair, medium build), as well her comments about the accuracy of the YBG sketch (10 out of 10 for accuracy). (pp. 105-106)

She apparently gave that description 4 days after the murders. She then went back to the police in 2019 because she was upset that they had been using the OBG sketch instead. She said that sketch was wrong and didn't resemble the man she saw at all. That presumably led to the eventual release of the YBG sketch.

Thank you for finding the page number re: BB sketch (p.105-106).

 

[Prime8]

Another thing from the memorandum (I hate mentioning this I’m not a ghoul but I just don’t understand this) Abby clean no blood on her hands or body or clothes and wearing Libby’s clothes.

She died slower then Libby due to her injury so she would have grabbed her neck to try and staunch the blood if she could. So are we presuming she died in the creek and then he dressed her? Or we presuming the murderer washed her in the creek after? The creek was it muddy or cleanish water? Do we know??? If you washed in it wouldn’t the water leave your skin dirty??? Did the murderer feel remorse for Abby because she suffered longer then Libby so much so that they dressed her???

I really hope the Prosecution has the answers and evidence.

Snipped for brevity.

Or she could have been unconscious or bound/restrained in a way that prevented blood from getting on the rest of her body.

I'm going to assume that the defenses definition of "clean" in the context they wrote it just referring to blood. Eve with that, they say "little to no blood", meaning there probably was some. They mention that the pink shirt wasn't dirty so I assume all the other clothing and perhaps her body was dirty.

 

[MistyWaters]

Instead of going around in circles over what felony murder could mean maybe you could state what you think Richard Allen's role actually was?

I know that you have made the point that if someone dies during the commission of a crime someone can be charged with murder. But most of us here don't think that is what happened here.

The defense has stated that the girls throats were slit, they bled out. That doesn't sound like an accident to me.

I would like to move past the language to better understand what your thoughts are.

JMO

What I think….”committed the offences as charged”.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/06/29/us/delphi-murders-richard-allen/index.html

“Investigators had the phone call transcribed and the transcription confirms that Richard M. Allen admits that he committed the murders of Abigail Williams and Liberty German. He admits several times within the phone call that he committed the offenses as charged. His wife, Kathy Allen, ends the phone call abruptly,” the document went on to say…”

 

[Ravenmoon]

What I think….”committed the offences as charged”.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/06/29/us/delphi-murders-richard-allen/index.html

“Investigators had the phone call transcribed and the transcription confirms that Richard M. Allen admits that he committed the murders of Abigail Williams and Liberty German. He admits several times within the phone call that he committed the offenses as charged. His wife, Kathy Allen, ends the phone call abruptly,” the document went on to say…”

So then, we have RA at the bridge, we have witnesses that place him there and he has confessed to the crimes of murdering 2 young girls
Yep. It sounds pretty straight forward to me.

JMO

 

[Miya]

“kills another human being…” seems self explanatory, that’s how the charge reads, can’t dispute that. Kills is a verb, an act, as opposed to another criminal code containing different wording such as “…..a human being is killed…during a kidnapping.”, which it doesn’t say.

Ok, looking at it again, this is not about felony murder, it's about murder as it says in the title:

"2022 Indiana Code
Title 35. Criminal Law and Procedure
Article 42. Offenses Against the Person
Chapter 1. Homicide
35-42-1-1. Murder"

 

[zh0r4]

This is a footnote that I came across and I have a couple of questions that someone might be able to answer.
What exactly is a narrative and what is the difference between a memorandum and any other legal document.

"The Defense only has a narrative that allegedly memorializes Westfall’s interview.
The Defense has requested both Holder’s and Westfall’s videotaped interviews."

Re: the interviews, I interpret that as saying the defense is skeptical about anything allegedly said in those interviews without seeing the videotaped interviews first hand. No idea about the difference between a document and memorandum, is there a difference?

 

[zh0r4]

They won't like that.
Short and sweet and very very powerful.

if defense insist upon bringing this to court they will be met with a very strong rebuttal which in all likelihood will make them look like heedless clowns.

The main thing to me in the memo re: what Click and the others were investigating, was the probability of more than 1 perp. Per the summary he didn’t deny that stance, but it could be due to the gag order.

 

[Miya]

Instead of going around in circles over what felony murder could mean maybe you could state what you think Richard Allen's role actually was?

I know that you have made the point that if someone dies during the commission of a crime someone can be charged with murder. But most of us here don't think that is what happened here.

The defense has stated that the girls throats were slit, they bled out. That doesn't sound like an accident to me.

I would like to move past the language to better understand what your thoughts are.

JMO

My thoughts are that I don't know what happened and if he acted alone, but that he probably did it, maybe with others involved (either in the crime or before or after like KK with the Anthony Shots account).

The felony discussion is not about me thinking he didn't do it or is not involved, my question was why is he charged with "felony murder" and what does it mean in general and what could it mean in this case. And what the prosecution can prove and can't prove, meaning, what evidence they have. And the "felony murder" charge probably means, in my opinion, that they have no evidence that he actually killed them, things like DNA, fingerprints, etc. This is also not about if they think he did it or if I think he did it, it's about what can be proven in court. And it could also mean that they think others are involved or are not sure about it or, like now, what the defense might bring up that might make the jury think others were involved, which could cause reasonable doubt.

This was never about me thinking he didn't do it or wasn't at least involved (the kidnapping alone shows he was), this was about all that legal stuff and what it could mean, why they charged him with that, what evidence they probably don't have, and if they can't prove murder, they have to charge him with something else or the jury will find him not guilty (reasonable doubt).

I also wanted to post this link:

How It Is Possible to be Convicted of Murder Without Killing Anyone

The statute defining murder is very simple in Indiana. In order to convict someone of murder, the State must prove that: The Defendant; Knowingly; Killed; Another person. Can You Be Charged With Murder if You Never Killed Someone? This is by far the most common method in which individuals are...

banksbrower.com

"Can You Be Charged With Murder if You Never Killed Someone?​

This is by far the most common method in which individuals are charged with the intentional killing of another. It is important to understand, however, that it is possible to be charged with murder even if you are not the person that killed another.

The doctrine of felony murder allows the State to prosecute individuals for murder even if they are not the person that directly caused the death of another. A person convicted of felony murder faces the same penalty range as murder (45-65 years). To convict someone of felony murder, the State must prove that a death occurred while the defendant was committing or attempting to commit one of these felonies:

• Burglary
• Child molest
• Arson
• Rape
• Kidnapping
• Robbery
• Carjacking
• Drug Dealing/Manufacturing

The idea behind the felony murder statute is that the above listed felonies are so inherently dangerous on their own that a death could reasonably occur as the crime is taking place. The legislature reasons that these crimes are so dangerous that any death that occurs through the commission of them should have been foreseeable to the defendants. Therefore, if a death occurs during the commission of these felonies, everyone that participated in the underlying felony is responsible for that death."

 

[kittythehare]

The main thing to me in the memo re: what Click and the others were investigating, was the probability of more than 1 perp. Per the summary he didn’t deny that stance, but it could be due to the gag order.

Realistically, they probably investigated 00's of people- AT THE TIME!
Defense maintaining they want them to investigate the most sensational theory again?
With zero new evidence?

That dog won't run, simple as.