IN - Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #167

[Bergmann]

E is intellectually disabled, maybe he heard rumors or saw something on FB and simply repeated them. IDK, but I don't think there is any way he could have pulled off the murders.

I keep reading that by discussing what EF is alleged to have said that somehow he is being unfairly implicated or accused. This is not the point being made.

To be clear, the points that I find useful to debate is -

a. That on the day after the two girls were murdered, the day they were found (which was what noon or 2pm I can't remember) that EF is alleged to have said he witnessed this, that two others were involved and described placing branches and leaves which the D assert is similar to the actual crime scene. The question being how would he know this, why would he say it?

This is not about mental capacity, this is about the potential for someone to have knowledge of a crime that has only just occurred.

b. How throughly was this investigated and followed up by LE? And in comparison with the RA alleged confessions, why would the nature and detail of EFs alleged confession carry any less weight? Particularly since this was so close to the murders, with investigation just getting into full swing. It is fair for LE to provide rationale for what was done, and why this lead (not necessarily EF as a perp) was filed as closed.

Nothing to do with whether EF was capable or materially involved.

 

[scapa]

I think you might be right. I've never been able to reconcile that statement by her---'he's my person'---with the surrounding circumstances of the hearing.

Maybe she said 'He was my person' ---as in past tense, and lamenting the sad situation that she was once so sure she had found her person and it imploded so horribly and publicly.

The above details don't make it seem like she is convinced he is her person, at this time.

Agree that either way -- "He was / is my person" -- the sense of the remark is that RA was her person, and she his. It is the horror of the crime and the shock and pain of betrayal and lives forever changed compressed into a single line.

He is no longer her person, and perhaps not a person at all to her.

I don't see steadfast support here. More like despair.

 

[girlhasnoname]

I keep reading that by discussing what EF is alleged to have said that somehow he is being unfairly implicated or accused. This is not the point being made.

To be clear, the points that I find useful to debate is -

a. That on the day after the two girls were murdered, the day they were found (which was what noon or 2pm I can't remember) that EF is alleged to have said he witnessed this, that two others were involved and described placing branches and leaves which the D assert is similar to the actual crime scene. The question being how would he know this, why would he say it?

This is not about mental capacity, this is about the potential for someone to have knowledge of a crime that has only just occurred.

b. How throughly was this investigated and followed up by LE? And in comparison with the RA alleged confessions, why would the nature and detail of EFs alleged confession carry any less weight? Particularly since this was so close to the murders, with investigation just getting into full swing. It is fair for LE to provide rationale for what was done, and why this lead (not necessarily EF as a perp) was filed as closed.

Nothing to do with whether EF was capable or materially involved.

RBBM

a. Alleged to have said he witnessed this. Not substantiated at this point by LE.

b. How do we know what amount of attention and to what conclusion LE came to about this tip? LE hasn't provided rationale for anything in particular in regards to leads. We are all just speculating at this point.

MOO

 

[CGBSpender]

What are deer doing standing at a CS where the odor of humans must have been overwhelming with all the blood and the bodies there overnight?

My personal theory...given that this case does not seem to be solvable with DNA, yet given the amount of activity at the scene by the killer(s)...it would seem like there would have been opportunity to recover DNA...my suspicion is that the killer(s) took time to treat the crime scene with a chemical that would operate to damage/destroy DNA left at the scene...and that said chemical when it breaks down (rapidly after encountering organic material)...leaves behind sodium...which is attractive to deer.

Also, I have been wondering if this case is related to a couple of other unsolved killings that seem to have some similarities with the Delphi crime. In one of those cases a chemical was applied to the crime scene by the killer(s), that again, when broken down, leaves behind sodium.

JMO

 

[TL4S]

I keep reading that by discussing what EF is alleged to have said that somehow he is being unfairly implicated or accused. This is not the point being made.

To be clear, the points that I find useful to debate is -

a. That on the day after the two girls were murdered, the day they were found (which was what noon or 2pm I can't remember) that EF is alleged to have said he witnessed this, that two others were involved and described placing branches and leaves which the D assert is similar to the actual crime scene. The question being how would he know this, why would he say it?

This is not about mental capacity, this is about the potential for someone to have knowledge of a crime that has only just occurred.

b. How throughly was this investigated and followed up by LE? And in comparison with the RA alleged confessions, why would the nature and detail of EFs alleged confession carry any less weight? Particularly since this was so close to the murders, with investigation just getting into full swing. It is fair for LE to provide rationale for what was done, and why this lead (not necessarily EF as a perp) was filed as closed.

Nothing to do with whether EF was capable or materially involved.

My interpretation is that some people here don't like that the sister who this information comes from didn't go to LE with it until 2-3 weeks later, which has been explained by the D as her not knowing about the murder until then, but to a lot of people it simply coincides with the first announcement of a reward. She's suspect to people here because she was given a polygraph, even though the D is saying she did this basically because she wasn't being listened to.

Since it's been suggested that the sisters were just out to get the reward money by throwing their brother under the bus, it apparently makes the sisters' statements void. They must have told their brother, "Oh, and if you are ever given a DNA test, tell them you spit on one of the girls!" It doesn't seem like a very logical plan to me, but so be it. It's just my opinion, after all.

It's not even considered by many a possibility that the sisters are telling the truth, because EF isn't behind bars thanks to DNA evidence. Just because he said he spit on one of them doesn't tell the whole story, IMO. To me, the fact that LE has DNA tested KAK, TK, TK's dog, EF, and likely a multitude of others suggests that there is something from the CS to compare, although we don't really know. But the D says JH testified that there isn't RA DNA evidence, either. What do we do with that?

I just don't get the concept that the D is straight up lying in this memo. Their tactics might totally suck, but if they were lying without any supportive evidence to back it up, I'd be worried eventually it would be deemed that RA did not receive competent counsel. I don't want to see that happen, either, if he's guilty. JMO.

 

[MistyWaters]

My interpretation is that some people here don't like that the sister who this information comes from didn't go to LE with it until 2-3 weeks later, which has been explained by the D as her not knowing about the murder until then, but to a lot of people it simply coincides with the first announcement of a reward. She's suspect to people here because she was given a polygraph, even though the D is saying she did this basically because she wasn't being listened to.

Since it's been suggested that the sisters were just out to get the reward money by throwing their brother under the bus, it apparently makes the sisters' statements void. They must have told their brother, "Oh, and if you are ever given a DNA test, tell them you spit on one of the girls!" It doesn't seem like a very logical plan to me, but so be it. It's just my opinion, after all.

It's not even considered by many a possibility that the sisters are telling the truth, because EF isn't behind bars thanks to DNA evidence. Just because he said he spit on one of them doesn't tell the whole story, IMO. To me, the fact that LE has DNA tested KAK, TK, TK's dog, EF, and likely a multitude of others suggests that there is something from the CS to compare, although we don't really know. But the D says JH testified that there isn't RA DNA evidence, either. What do we do with that?

I just don't get the concept that the D is straight up lying in this memo. Their tactics might totally suck, but if they were lying without any supportive evidence to back it up, I'd be worried eventually it would be deemed that RA did not receive competent counsel. I don't want to see that happen, either, if he's guilty. JMO.

Without knowing really anything, including were sticks and branches found to have been deliberately placed on the ground above Abby’s head, was spit noticed, the alleged comments by EF to his sisters are meaningless. The defence wants us to assume just because it’s stated EF said it, it must all be true.

What about LE interviews including why he might’ve thought Abby to be a troublemaker? Nothing. The defence wants us to believe there was no followup with EF at all, except for a sister taking a lie detector test. And his alibi would’ve certainly been possible to easily confirm as hospitals are monitored by CCTV. No mention of that either.

While being presented with EF’s statements over and over amidst a total lack of other facts and supporting details it’s impossible to even form an opinion on the matter and I’d suggest that’s intentional.

What we’re left with is a lot of loose ends that would never make their way into any courtroom or any trial. And why does what we think matter?

 

[Megnut]

EF may have a solid alibi, verified in (historically) later parts of discovery (subsequent LE work product).

EF may be impressionable.

EF may have seen crime scene photos.

Coincidentally, the possibility of crime scene photos might further implicate RA....

JMO

 

[FrostedGlass]

I apologize if this has already been covered, but the copy of the Memorandum in Support of Motion that I happened to download to read...when I open it in Acrobat Pro, there are like 48 text underline/highlight/comments included with the document. It's like someone created a PDF, and forgot to scrub all of the metadata out or something? Some of the commenters are just "guest", but others are actual names of people. Anyone else happen to download a copy like this? It's almost like there was a group of people proofing or reviewing the document. Weird. Just curious.

JMO

There should be a time stamp in the right hand corner. What time does your copy say? Mine is stamped at 2:06 am.

I had one that had "Final Draft" in the left hand corner but that one was taken down so I have no proof that I ever saw it. At the time, I wondered if it was uploaded by accident.

 

[CGBSpender]

There should be a time stamp in the right hand corner. What time does your copy say? Mine is stamped at 2:06 am.

I had one that had "Final Draft" in the left hand corner but that one was taken down so I have no proof that I ever saw it. At the time, I wondered if it was uploaded by accident.

It says 2:06 am on it. It looks like it has since been taken down from where the person I obtained it from downloaded it. Going to guess it was uploaded by accident...someone was probably just working really late and forgot to scrub all of the metadata out of it. The one I read doesn't have draft on it. Ugh...I'm going to have to read this silly thing again since what I read may or may not have been accurate.

JMO

 

[Jade]

I keep reading that by discussing what EF is alleged to have said that somehow he is being unfairly implicated or accused. This is not the point being made.

To be clear, the points that I find useful to debate is -

a. That on the day after the two girls were murdered, the day they were found (which was what noon or 2pm I can't remember) that EF is alleged to have said he witnessed this, that two others were involved and described placing branches and leaves which the D assert is similar to the actual crime scene. The question being how would he know this, why would he say it?

This is not about mental capacity, this is about the potential for someone to have knowledge of a crime that has only just occurred.

b. How throughly was this investigated and followed up by LE? And in comparison with the RA alleged confessions, why would the nature and detail of EFs alleged confession carry any less weight? Particularly since this was so close to the murders, with investigation just getting into full swing. It is fair for LE to provide rationale for what was done, and why this lead (not necessarily EF as a perp) was filed as closed.

Nothing to do with whether EF was capable or materially involved.

Bold by me for focus:

Here is the how:

The volunteer searchers presumably, I doubt LE would, disclosed information about the crime scene they found and the girls condition to the extent that even I, a WS poster who does no deep digging and lives far away, knew rumored details.


And the why:

It is not possible to separate the person from his intellectual disability and if it were possible, the person you'd have left would not be the same person you started with.

E’s intellectual disability is a way of being.

Excitement over the crime and the salacious details is more E’s way of processing it and being a part of also E apparently thought exciting to be included.

It’s not an unusual state for the intellectually disabled when exposed to situations they are not equipped to deal with.

There are experts on this on WS so hopefully someone can better explain why E has to be considered as a whole.

All imo

 

[zh0r4]

<modsnip: Removed personlizing comment> No, the prosecution has not released specifics of RAs confession. As is typical, evidence is saved for the trial.

So there’s no proof these confessions happened or even cited interviews or times he confessed? Got it, thanks

 

[FrostedGlass]

It says 2:06 am on it. It looks like it has since been taken down from where the person I obtained it from downloaded it. Going to guess it was uploaded by accident...someone was probably just working really late and forgot to scrub all of the metadata out of it.

JMO

I don't doubt that "working late". They have a huge amount of info to go through.

From MistyWaters' link:
"Monday afternoon, Allen’s lawyers filed a motion requesting that prosecutor Nick McLeland and the state of Indiana “produce all evidence in its possession immediately and also that the Court set a
Nov. 1, 2023, deadline to do so.”"
...
According to defense attorneys Brad Rozzi and Andrew Baldwin, between December 2022 and June 2023, the state turned over 16 hard drives, four flash drives and one disc of information related to the murders of Abby Williams and Libby German.
...
But they said in just the past three weeks, the prosecutor sent the defense team an additional 14 hard drives, five more flash drives and three more discs — a vast amount of new material that greatly increases the information defense attorneys must review prior to the upcoming trial.
...
The defense team said they anticipate conducting at least 30 to 40 more depositions

Attorneys for Delphi murders defendant ask judge to stop 'drip, drip, drip' of evidence

The defense team pointed to an overwhelming amount of discovery recently provided by the prosecutor in making the deadline request.

www.wthr.com

 

[zh0r4]

I guess you'd have to believe MJ's version. I have a problem with it for sure.

First, IF you believe you had real, credible, eye witness account, why would you wait a few weeks to talk to Delphi LE?

Second, a year and 10 months later in Dec 2018 MJ had an old friend MM help her out. Yeah, no. What was the reward money up to at that time? Just asking.

People insert themselves and make accusations all the time in high profile, large reward cases. I personally believe LE vetted the tip on E and ruled him out with convincing evidence. E is intellectually disabled, maybe he heard rumors or saw something on FB and simply repeated them. IDK, but I don't think there is any way he could have pulled off the murders.

MOO

JMO I don’t believe some psychopaths can even pass a polygraph, much less a normal person. I know they are not admissible in court but I have more evidence JM is telling the truth than lying. Why would I assume anyone who passed a polygraph is lying about something like this?

 

[zh0r4]

You did.

Bergmann said:
Except the evidence that they want to get into the public domain of course. Both sides play this game, no good pretending that this somehow one sided.

RA’s confession was not leaked. Documents that had been previously sealed were released by the Judge. It appears the confessions were discussed during a prior hearing when the defence asked that ‘Rick’ be moved to a county jail because he was being treated like a prisoner of war. This was before the Odinist jail guards got written into the story.

Richard Allen confessed to killing Indiana girls as investigators say "sharp object" used in murders, documents reveal

Richard Allen confessed multiple times to killing Abigail Williams and Liberty German in phone calls to his wife and mother while in prison, according to court documents.

www.cbsnews.com

The quote said nothing about leaking evidence, Bergmann was only stating that both the D and the P want to win the case, both have jobs to do.

The public domain and public opinion can influence juries. So either side could choose to release or not release information that could hurt their case to the public.

 

[mrjitty]

So there’s no proof these confessions happened or even cited interviews or times he confessed? Got it, thanks

The defence has admitted they happened in court

 

[Bergmann]

The volunteer searchers presumably, I doubt LE would, disclosed information about the crime scene they found and the girls condition to the extent that even I, a WS poster who does no deep digging and lives far away, knew rumored details.

Yes that's what I keep considering. I suppose it's increasingly material when exactly he is alleged to have said those things, ie if his sister alleges he said those things in the morning of the 14th before the girls were found, or later on when rumours might have circulated rapidly through the community.

Like I say, devil is in the detail and that's why it needs to be examined properly.

 

[Bergmann]

The defence has admitted they happened in court

It worries me how much the trial might hinge on these confessions if say the timelines offered by either side cancel each other out and the jury can't choose between them and the confessions swing the balance.

As a rule I really don't like convictions that rely on confession evidence, I would prefer some solid forensics to underpin what has been confessed to, makes a conviction much more robust.

I know others would happily take the confession and convict!

 

[MistyWaters]

So there’s no proof these confessions happened or even cited interviews or times he confessed? Got it, thanks

In defending someone, it’s always advantageous to know of some of the facts already disclosed in advance of the upcoming trial.

Richard Allen made 'admissions of guilt' to multiple people, according to Carroll Co. prosecutor

Richard Allen is back in court Thursday for a hearing in the Delphi Murders case against him. Allen is charged with murder in the February 2017 deaths of Abby Williams and Libby German.

www.wrtv.com

“The state's testimony included several mentions of “admissions” that Allen had allegedly made on at least five or six occasions regarding his involvement in the 2017 killings of Liberty German and Abigail Williams.

Both the defense and the prosecuting attorney admitted knowledge of these conversations. The defense argued that due to Allen’s mental and physical state, due to his current housing situation, those “admissions” should not be trusted. It was not made clear exactly what type of admissions Allen had made.”

 

[MistyWaters]

Yes that's what I keep considering. I suppose it's increasingly material when exactly he is alleged to have said those things, ie if his sister alleges he said those things in the morning of the 14th before the girls were found, or later on when rumours might have circulated rapidly through the community.

Like I say, devil is in the detail and that's why it needs to be examined properly.

How do you know it hasn’t been examined properly? No matter how many times that gets repeated does not make it true. None of us here have access to investigative files.

 

[mrjitty]

It worries me how much the trial might hinge on these confessions if say the timelines offered by either side cancel each other out and the jury can't choose between them and the confessions swing the balance.

As a rule I really don't like convictions that rely on confession evidence, I would prefer some solid forensics to underpin what has been confessed to, makes a conviction much more robust.

I know others would happily take the confession and convict!

He confessed on tape, so the jury will get to hear it. It's not your jail house confession to some narc.

Personally I think this wrecks his defence. Indeed it is hard to overstate what a disaster it is.