Last of the word plays for now:
3) DELPHI, Ind. (Court TV) — In the wake of an explosive memorandum submitted to the court by attorneys representing
Richard Allen, the man accused of murdering two teenagers, the prosecution has fired back, claiming allegations made by the defense are “not completely true.”
Well, "not completely true" certainly doesn't equate to "completely false", in fact while that may be an attempt to discredit any or almost all of the Defense's memorandum, it actually could be an acknowledgement that 20%, 50% or even 99% of the memorandum is true. MOO if even only 10% is true it could be a gamechanger depending on which 10%. I actually would've expected much stronger language than colorful, unprofessional, "not completely true" unless in fact much of it is verifiable.
4) We've often heard "RA placed himself at the scene" which of course sounds very condemning to him. However that's sort of a loaded statement IMO. Yes RA says he was on the trails on the day of 2/13/17, (I do believe per above he concedes around the 1:30 timeframe) and even says he was on the first platform of the MHB at some juncture as well as sitting awhile on a trail bench after exiting the bridge (we haven't seen any time specifics from him on these portions IMO). However the timeline in this case is so narrow that only if he stated he was on the bridge between like 1:53 and maybe 2:01 would that presence be incriminating... both from witness BB's standpoint and a meeting A&L standpoint, which I don't recall him being that specific about when he was there. We know he wasn't in sight of any of L's pics facing both directions after the girls' arrival at MHB.
Also, really "at the scene" was not the first platform of the bridge as no crime was committed there. The abduction scene was 400 yards away from the first platform (& he never to my knowledge has admitted to crossing the whole length of the bridge). Since BG, A, & L exited the bridge from the opposite end, we must admit it's possible BG entered the bridge from that same opposite end, thus it's not mandatory that the abductor ever had to have passed by the first platform. And of course the other crime scene was where the girls were killed or found, but RA specifically said in interview he had never been on that property before (despite some evidence existing to the contrary). The matching clothes descriptions should be trouble for RA that he indeed did go farther than just platform #1, but IMO what he's admitted is best described as "near the abduction scene" or "on a path toward the abduction scene" at a time within the range of when criminal events likely occurred.
5) In regards to the PCA language regarding the various people's cars being sighted:
a) SC (who saw muddy guy) - "Investigators were able to determine from watching the video from HH that SC
was traveling on CR300N at approximately 3:57pm."
b) BB (older witness) - "Video from the HH
captured BB's vehicle traveling eastbound at 1:46pm..." as well as "Her vehicle
is seen on HH video leaving westbound at 2:14pm"..
c) KG (sister of L) - "Video from the HH shows at 1:49pm a white car
matching KG's vehicle"..traveling away from Mears..
however in regards to RA the language is more vague??
d) (per search warrant affidavit p.10) "Upon review of video collected from HH on 2/13/17, investigators were able to locate a vehicle that
appears to match RA's 2016 Ford Focus on the video at 1:27 [no direction given] AND ALSO
e) (per PCA p.5) "Investigators observed a vehicle that
resembled RA's 2016 Ford Focus on the HH video at 1:27pm traveling westbound on CR300N
in a), b), & c), LE seems pretty certain they've matched the cars in question to the driver, but in d) & e) they used the language "appears to match" and "resemble" which seems less certain. Also, there is no bombshell evidence that even if this was RA's car they believe appears and resembles, as to where he was going. Yes, the CPS building was in that direction, but since they (to our knowledge) don't pick up this same vehicle on any other camera anytime else that day going in an opposite direction, can one be certain this was the car that went to park at CPS, as opposed to this was RA leaving the trails, or RA moving his car from one spot to another?
I have always found it odd that it was never definitively announced where RA parked that day. His initial CO conversation said it was "the old Farm Bureau building" which later was dismissed since no such building was operating or had been known to in awhile. At some other juncture, he stated "on the side of some old building". IMO it seems odd that can't be pinned down a bit more, as though RA didn't want to say exactly where he parked as though it may have been somewhere private property that he wasn't supposed to be on, or perhaps there were suspiciously 2 parking spots?