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

[tlcya]

Please explain "one percenters"? I'm not following.

An outlaw motorcycle club, known colloquially as a biker gang or motorcycle gang, is a motorcycle subculture generally centered on the use of cruiser motorcycles, particularly Harley-Davidsons and choppers, and a set of ideals that purport to celebrate freedom, nonconformity to mainstream culture, and loyalty to the biker group.

In the United States, such motorcycle clubs (MCs) are considered "outlaw" not necessarily because they engage in criminal activity, but because they are not sanctioned by the American Motorcyclist Association (AMA) and do not adhere to the AMA's rules. Instead, the clubs have their own set of bylaws reflecting the outlaw biker culture.[1][2][3][4][5]

The U.S. Department of Justice defines "outlaw motorcycle gangs" (OMG) as "organizations whose members use their motorcycle clubs as conduits for criminal enterprises".[6]
[snip]
Some outlaw motorcycle clubs can be distinguished by a "1%" patch worn on the colors. This is said to refer to a comment made in 1960 by William Berry, a former president of the American Motorcyclist Association (AMA), that 99% of motorcyclists were law-abiding citizens, implying the last one percent were outlaws.[27][28]

The alleged AMA comment, supposedly in reference to the Hollister riot of 1947,[29][30][28] is denied by the AMA, who claim to have no record of such a statement to the press and that the story is a misquote.[27][note 1] Whether the original quote is true or not, the "1%" patch is worn only by clubs immersed in criminality.[31][32][33][34]

Outlaw clubs began wearing the "1%" patch after Hells Angels president Sonny Barger convened a meeting of the leaders of various Hells Angels chapters and other California clubs in 1960 in which the various clubs parleyed over the mutual problem of police harassment. The clubs voted to ally under the patch.[35] In 1963, the Outlaws became the first club east of the Mississippi River to begin wearing the "1%" emblem.[36]
Outlaw motorcycle club - Wikipedia

 

[O.Incandenza]

Yes, I was under the impression that RA tipped himself in, like called to report himself as having been on the trails that day, when LE were asking people to do so.

This is what the defense memo says:
"The conversation between Richard Allen and Dan Dulin came about when Richard Allen called the tip line to provide the limited information that he (Richard) may have had from his time on the trail that day. Dulin and Richard met at a grocery store in Delphi." (p. 131)

So like you said, I assume that is the 'tip' mentioned in the PCA and the 'tip narrative' would be Dulin's follow-up report on what RA said.

 

[TL4S]

Is it cerain what day he talked to the CO? I believe it was the 14th.

I've never seen or heard what the date was, but I'd sure be curious.

Since it was a CO taking the tip, it makes me think. I don't believe every one of those LE officers taking tips knew all the details of the crime, so in order to get pertinent questions answered, I wonder if maybe investigators might have handed out a predetermined set of questions for LE to ask all tipsters. Especially since they were entering this data into a database for later retrieval of tip data. If so, did the CO ask, "What time were you on the trail?" or might he have asked, "Were you on the trail at any time between 1:30 and 3:30?" How the question was asked, if it was asked, would make a difference to me if RA just answered "1:30."

 

[Emma Peel]

An outlaw motorcycle club, known colloquially as a biker gang or motorcycle gang, is a motorcycle subculture generally centered on the use of cruiser motorcycles, particularly Harley-Davidsons and choppers, and a set of ideals that purport to celebrate freedom, nonconformity to mainstream culture, and loyalty to the biker group.

In the United States, such motorcycle clubs (MCs) are considered "outlaw" not necessarily because they engage in criminal activity, but because they are not sanctioned by the American Motorcyclist Association (AMA) and do not adhere to the AMA's rules. Instead, the clubs have their own set of bylaws reflecting the outlaw biker culture.[1][2][3][4][5]

The U.S. Department of Justice defines "outlaw motorcycle gangs" (OMG) as "organizations whose members use their motorcycle clubs as conduits for criminal enterprises".[6]
[snip]
Some outlaw motorcycle clubs can be distinguished by a "1%" patch worn on the colors. This is said to refer to a comment made in 1960 by William Berry, a former president of the American Motorcyclist Association (AMA), that 99% of motorcyclists were law-abiding citizens, implying the last one percent were outlaws.[27][28]

The alleged AMA comment, supposedly in reference to the Hollister riot of 1947,[29][30][28] is denied by the AMA, who claim to have no record of such a statement to the press and that the story is a misquote.[27][note 1] Whether the original quote is true or not, the "1%" patch is worn only by clubs immersed in criminality.[31][32][33][34]

Outlaw clubs began wearing the "1%" patch after Hells Angels president Sonny Barger convened a meeting of the leaders of various Hells Angels chapters and other California clubs in 1960 in which the various clubs parleyed over the mutual problem of police harassment. The clubs voted to ally under the patch.[35] In 1963, the Outlaws became the first club east of the Mississippi River to begin wearing the "1%" emblem.[36]
Outlaw motorcycle club - Wikipedia

ah okay thought you were hangin' at a bar w/ Zuck and Musk and Taylor and Beyonce or something.

 

[Boxer]

I've never seen or heard what the date was, but I'd sure be curious.

Since it was a CO taking the tip, it makes me think. I don't believe every one of those LE officers taking tips knew all the details of the crime, so in order to get pertinent questions answered, I wonder if maybe investigators might have handed out a predetermined set of questions for LE to ask all tipsters. Especially since they were entering this data into a database for later retrieval of tip data. If so, did the CO ask, "What time were you on the trail?" or might he have asked, "Were you on the trail at any time between 1:30 and 3:30?" How the question was asked, if it was asked, would make a difference to me if RA just answered "1:30."

Just one note.

He was on the bridge as they approached.

The witness saw him on
platform 1, turned around and passed the girls who were on their way to the MHB, MOO he either passed them A&L on the trail going to the bench or he went out of sight across the bridge or into the woods.

The bench is at trail junction at the Mears lot to go down to the creek or to the MHB.

Just one note.
He was on the bridge as they approached.

From Mears lot to MHB there is a small curve in the trail close to Mears, since trail is an old RR bed the trail is very straight.
One can see the bridge for a long way.
No way he did he not pass Abby and Libby "walking to a bench."

RA lied. His path down the trail would have crossed theirs.

MOO just he didn’t know he had been seen. The lie would have worked without a witness seeing both him and the two girls on the trail back to back.

However his lie never was tested, and has lain dormant for 5 years since police lost track of their prime suspect.

 

[CGBSpender]

This is what the defense memo says:
"The conversation between Richard Allen and Dan Dulin came about when Richard Allen called the tip line to provide the limited information that he (Richard) may have had from his time on the trail that day. Dulin and Richard met at a grocery store in Delphi." (p. 131)

So like you said, I assume that is the 'tip' mentioned in the PCA and the 'tip narrative' would be Dulin's follow-up report on what RA said.

I don't recall where I read it, but it was made public at some point that there was a process for how tips were dealt with. I want to say they went into a database, and then reviewed by someone to determine if follow-up was required, and if so, an officer was sent out to conduct said follow-up. I envision it early on being something like...okay this guy was there that day, find out when he was there, where he parked, who he saw, and get his cell phone ID Information. Perhaps the cellular information didn't match what they thought the perp was using...and because he didn't claim to see any male on the trail, no one went out of their way to seek him out again?

JMO

 

[girlhasnoname]

Is it cerain what day he talked to the CO? I believe it was the 14th.

Yes, from what I recall it was. I don't know the timing, but it was definitely before the BG video came out. I bet he just about crapped his pants when that was released.

For people questioning if RA is BG, please take the time and look at photos of RA wearing blue jeans. Just google RA images and you'll get a bunch. His jeans are always baggy in the same exact way BG's were. We know RA's not tall, about 5 7" according to his most reliable jail photo, (not 5 4" like some people like to reiterate) so I'm sure he has a hard time finding jeans with a short enough length. That, along with RA admitting he was wearing the same thing as BG on the MHB at the same time is just too coincidental. What are the odds?

JMO

 

[Boxer]

I don't recall where I read it, but it was made public at some point that there was a process for how tips were dealt with. I want to say they went into a database, and then reviewed by someone to determine if follow-up was required, and if so, an officer was sent out to conduct said follow-up. I envision it early on being something like...okay this guy was there that day, find out when he was there, where he parked, who he saw, and get his cell phone ID Information. Perhaps the cellular information didn't match what they thought the perp was using...and because he didn't claim to see any male on the trail, no one went out of their way to seek him out again?

JMO

The CO knew he interviewed someone on the bridge.

 

[girlhasnoname]

I've never seen or heard what the date was, but I'd sure be curious.

Since it was a CO taking the tip, it makes me think. I don't believe every one of those LE officers taking tips knew all the details of the crime, so in order to get pertinent questions answered, I wonder if maybe investigators might have handed out a predetermined set of questions for LE to ask all tipsters. Especially since they were entering this data into a database for later retrieval of tip data. If so, did the CO ask, "What time were you on the trail?" or might he have asked, "Were you on the trail at any time between 1:30 and 3:30?" How the question was asked, if it was asked, would make a difference to me if RA just answered "1:30."

Good thoughts @TL4S , plus we know it was filed as Richard A. Whitehall. Unbelievable that these human errors cost 5 + years in this case.

JMO

 

[Boxer]

As it’s been stated all along, the two sketches are not photographs of “entirely different people”. I‘m not sure why you’d think LE released them expecting an exact resemblance, as they discounted that several times.

They‘re simply a tool to aid LE in seeking tips. While neither may not be introduced as evidence, the person who assisted in the sketches is at liberty to cast total doubt on her recollect. “I really don’t get a good look at his face, I was just guessing”.

Sketches are often wildly off for that reason.
In this case RA put himself on the bridge.

 

[FrostedGlass]

Next Thursday 10/19 can't get here soon enough. We need something new to bat around, I hope the Franks Hearing is held on 10/31.

Gray Hughes? The first 20 minutes.

 

[JnRyan]

I've never seen or heard what the date was, but I'd sure be curious.

Since it was a CO taking the tip, it makes me think. I don't believe every one of those LE officers taking tips knew all the details of the crime, so in order to get pertinent questions answered, I wonder if maybe investigators might have handed out a predetermined set of questions for LE to ask all tipsters. Especially since they were entering this data into a database for later retrieval of tip data. If so, did the CO ask, "What time were you on the trail?" or might he have asked, "Were you on the trail at any time between 1:30 and 3:30?" How the question was asked, if it was asked, would make a difference to me if RA just answered "1:30."

Good example. As an auditor we were instructed to avoid questions which could be answered with a Yes-No answer (Were you on the trail at any time between 1:30 and 3:30?). It can make a difference in the results of the interview.

 

[girlhasnoname]

Gray Hughes? The first 20 minutes.

According to Gray Hughes:
Wow, so Libby was wearing jeans not sweatpants after all. She had sweats on earlier in the day.
There was nothing resembling antlers with the girls. No apparent Odinism design there.
Can't find any connection between RA and KK according to 2 of Gray Hughes's sources.
One of Libby's shoes was found in the creek and the other shoe was found under Libby as was her phone.
He showed an actual CS photo of the supposed F on the tree, it doesn't look like an F at all.
At the 1:40 mark Gray Hughes shows a photo of RA playing pool in a beanie type head covering/hat. He pulled up a close up of the BG video and it looks just like the one BG was wearing, same color, same shape, etc.

It took a lot for me to watch this entirely, but I took one for the team. HAHAHA

 

[StarryStarryNight]

I have very little faith nor trust in the LE and DA in this case. I understand for lots of people YMMV so please don't be offended or feel the need to put me right, this is just opinion only.

• Leazenby calls off the official search early
• LE fail to collect all the evidential material - the sticks left out in the elements for two weeks, the tree bark and blood just left there
• The sketches
• Doug Carter I just cannot take to, the man IMO speaks in riddles
• Liggett lying and changing witness statements
• The decision to put RA in Westville
• Holeman who says he doesn't know who the Nordic Prof is, but at the same time is organising a follow up interview
• McLeland has never tried a murder case before
• McLeland sealing all the documents and trying to keep cameras out of court

Mostly, and there's nothing to back this up - I've always felt something was off in this case and not quite right. I still can't put my finger on it properly and its just hunch type feeling so probably completely wrong.




Good lord I would not believe nor recommend others to believe everything that D has said! Equally I wouldn't dismiss is it either. Remember when NMcL dismissed the D 136p memo saying it was 'colourful, dramatic and highly unprofessional', he also said it was 'not completely true' - oh ok Nick so which bits are true...

Well…here we are again, @Bergmann. Relax, I’m not offended, LOL!

Here’s my take on the things on your list. A ton of other people and myself have been following this case since day one and trust me, we have been plenty perplexed and angry with things. We do not accept everything the prosecution spouts out. We have been very critical over the years. That said, throwing the baby out with the bath water seems a bit extreme. The things you list don’t, individually or as one, seem like reasons to place the entire prosecution case in a shadow, while, at the same time, declaring that although the defense has made mistakes…those mistakes are acceptable.

All just my opinion below:

—Leazenby calls off the search
*a huge huge mistake. Nothing justifies it in my opinion. A huge mistake but has zero effect on where we are now or RA’s guilt or innocence.
—LE fails to collect evidential material like sticks etc at crime scene
* if LE thought the sticks were just sticks, why would they collect them? It only matters if the defense’s pagan fantasy is true. It’s not a factual document. Why would I believe them over the prosecution.
—The sketches
* LE and the prosecution have a lot to explain concerning the sketches. It has never made sense to anybody. Personally I think LE at that time had absolutely no idea where to look next, and made the bone headed decision to reveal the second sketch. A gigantic mistake! Does it mean RA is innocent? Not necessarily, we need to hear about it in trial. Could it cause RA to walk even if he’s guilty. Yes, I think it could.
—Doug Carter
* he drives me crazy too. He says something, then spends two weeks having to correct or explain what he meant. I never questioned his heart however. DC’s inability to communicate effectively makes him inept at his position. I don’t think DC’s weaknesses equates to him organizing a giant conspiracy against a CVS employee. I doubt he could pull that off anyway.
—Liggett lying and changing witness statements
*Haven’t seen the actual document, only defense’s thoughts. I would like to see it in court.
—the decision to put RA in Westville
* He’d be dead by now if they hadn’t in my opinion. Where should they have put him? He couldn’t stay in Carroll County Jail…dead man walking. Any other county jail would have the same safety issues. He was not going to get bond for this crime, and the local Holiday Inn seems inappropriate. Despite all that, how does RA being in Westville affect his guilt or innocence. Also the judge already blew up the hooey about RA being abused by being there.
—Holeman doesn’t know Nordic professor but tries to find him.
*why wouldn’t he do that? So he forgot the guy’s name, I don’t see why that’s a big deal. It would be a big if he hadn’t tried to find him I think. Let’s see what he says at trial.
—McL has never tried a murder case
* it would be great if there was an old grizzled prosecutor with 500 cases under his belt. But there isn’t. Why this equates to incompetence or corruption makes no sense to me. He seemed pretty good at the last hearing where he shredded the defense’s claims of abuse. Let’s see him at trial.
—McL sealing the documents and not wanting cameras
*that sure didn’t make me happy but I understood it at the time. The judge corrected that earlier this year. The Judge also stated that it was an error by her court employees to do that, they were sealing things even when no one requested they be sealed. How is that McL’s fault. I would like cameras in the court room.

 

[FrostedGlass]

According to Gray Hughes:
Wow, so Libby was wearing jeans not sweatpants after all. She had sweats on earlier in the day.
There was nothing resembling antlers with the girls. No apparent Odinism design there.
Can't find any connection between RA and KK according to 2 of Gray Hughes's sources.
One of Libby's shoes was found in the creek and the other shoe was found under Libby as was her phone.
He showed an actual CS photo of the supposed F on the tree, it doesn't look like an F at all.
At the 1:40 mark Gray Hughes shows a photo of RA playing pool in a beanie type head covering/hat. He pulled up a close up of the BG video and it looks just like the one BG was wearing, same color, same shape, etc.

It took a lot for me to watch this entirely, but I took one for the team. HAHAHA

More from GH video: Some thought the D were outright lying because they said Abby was wearing Libby's jeans. Now we know the D were being truthful.

The phone being under A was relatively new, too. We thought it was under L.

We thought L's shoe was found on the same side as the bridge and that turned out to be not true.

GH thought the sticks looked like they were trying to build a lean-to. I guess we all see what we want to.

IMO, there will likely be a lot more things we thought we knew but didn't.

 

[Ravenmoon]

Good thoughts @TL4S , plus we know it was filed as Richard A. Whitehall. Unbelievable that these human errors cost 5 + years in this case.

JMO

Sooooo...


I have a theory about the Whitehall.
Maybe the CO jotted down the name RA, followed by a dash that was meant to reflect where RA lived. ( the Whitehall address)

Then, filed it away thinking nothing more about it.

My assumption would be that he made a big lapse in judgement, and I would also bet that RA appeared clean shaven and looking very different from the day that he was on the bridge.

Maybe someone in his office was supposed to forward the information to the police, but it never happened.

Maybe the CO had trouble of his own and just didn't connect the dots.

I imagine that he feels pretty inadequate and low for not pressing this.


JMO

 

[Megnut]

More from GH video: Some thought the D were outright lying because they said Abby was wearing Libby's jeans. Now we know the D were being truthful.

The phone being under A was relatively new, too. We thought it was under L.

We thought L's shoe was found on the same side as the bridge and that turned out to be not true.

GH thought the sticks looked like they were trying to build a lean-to. I guess we all see what we want to.

IMO, there will likely be a lot more things we thought we knew but didn't.

Funeral pyre? Perhaps the base for what could've become a massive bonfire? The sticks arranged like a pyramid....

How quickly would tinder burn in February? Dry kindling turned instant conflagration?

An effigy of sorts?

But was interrupted?

jmo

 

[Knitty]

Thread is closed. Please continue the discussion at Thread #168