IN - Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #168

[Bergmann]

MOO and speculating: was abby forced to help move libby's body?

I'm quite a rational person with good mental strength and the ability to keep a lid on my emotions.... but, that's a thing I'd rather not imagine/ consider

(Although if I was back in my pretend P role then I'd be stealing that line to use in court).

 

[Justice101]

I think there was an intention to burn.

Interrupted but I believe that would have been next.

JMO

Good point. I never thought of burning the body but he certainly was doing it the wrong way

 

[Bergmann]

Good point. I never thought of burning the body but he certainly was doing it the wrong way

It was February. Cold, and likely damp. There was no sign of accelerant that we know of.

I personally wouldn't speculate any further without a change in the information we have.

 

[Bergmann]

We need to ask ourselves honestly why you we here. if our conscious allows us to answer honestly, we may realize we are here for other reasons than we say.

I can say hand on heart I am not here to make money. If I was I'd be on the entirely wrong platform wouldn't I.

Speculation on a horrific crime to make money is cynical and distasteful in my mind - YMMV.

 

[Emma Peel]

I'm quite a rational person with good mental strength and the ability to keep a lid on my emotions.... but, that's a thing I'd rather not imagine/ consider

(Although if I was back in my pretend P role then I'd be stealing that line to use in court).

It's definitely a mind trick to divorce emotion and move into a zone where it's just puzzle work; consider the evidence from all points of view. We have a limited timeline, kidnap victim control, the physical management of and ultimate placement of 2 victims, clothing/blood transfers ... the timeline has to add up to the facts and evidence. Separate times of death, victim assistance - makes things more efficient. Efficiency necessary for a one man crime matching the witness/evidence timeline.

Did they ever get dogs out there to track movements?

 

[Bergmann]

Just wondering to myself more than anything, what would‘ve been the purpose of “M” plotting to meet with Baldwin to take the opportunity to clandestinely snap photos of crime scene pics and leak them into the public if the photos kiboshed the defence theory of Odinist runes and antlers?

I'd take that in two parts -
1. 'take the opportunity to clandestinely snap photos of crime scene pics and leak them into the public' - beats me, that's why I'm keen to see an investigation arrive at some facts before reaching conclusion. The timing is either coincidence or something's fishy IMO.

2. if the photos kiboshed the defence theory of Odinist runes and antlers - that's a big 'if' and one that needs to be tested by experts rather than SM creators with a financial imperative. Whose judgement should we listen to - a know nothing Youtuber or a College Professor with expertise in that field of interpretation? (Wait, no I'm not convinced by that D assertion/ interpretation of runes and antlers either!)

Is the defence that desperate, rather than defending RA by disputing the prosecution‘s evidence

That's not how I read it overall, but yes if I put my D hat on and play it out for a second (for a change lol as I'm usually pretending to be P!) :-

I would focus on ripping apart the P timeline and misuse of witness statements (yes you Liggett!); dismantling the junk science of the bullet (likely to be two experts cancelling each other out), so maybe just the bullet chain of evidence would swing it for me in terms of admissibility; and then all we have left is the confession which if I'm playing D I'd say hasn't been appropriately validated through fact verification etc.

Like I say, I'm pretending so don't take me too literally!

the prosecution‘s evidence must be so compelling it can’t be refuted!!

After my role play as D above, you must be talking about the evidence we have yet to see

 

[FrostedGlass]

I wonder how different this case would have been if Robert Ives had stayed on as prosecutor.

The quote below is from Aug of 2020. I suspect the three signatures he saw were the runes on Libby, Abby and the tree. That he recognized them as such but was not solidly convinced that they were authentic. MOO

"'There was a lot more physical evidence than that at the crime scene,' Ives said. 'And it's probably not what you would imagine, or what people would think I'm talking about.'

'It was just not your normal "a person was killed here" crime scene, that's probably all I can say about it,' Ives said.

Ives said that the scene was 'odd' and displayed at least three 'signatures', which are unique behaviors by the killer.

However, Ives raised the possibility that elements of the scene had been staged in an attempt to trick investigators by sending them down a false path."

Former prosecutor in unsolved Delphi murders of two teens speaks out

Liberty German, 14, and Abigail Williams, 13, vanished on February 13, 2017 while hiking the Monon High Bridge Trail in Delphi, Indiana. Their bodies were discovered the following day.

www.dailymail.co.uk

 

[gitana1]

I think the defense will bring up the issue and ask for a mistrial or to have the case thrown out via another method both pre-trial and during. I've heard defense attorneys argue it both ways.

@PrairieWind or @gitana1 might be able to answer these questions for us.

Yes, it would not be a mistrial at this stage. The case will not be dismissed, either. They can ask for the latter but it won’t happen.

BTW: Didn’t the leak come from the defense?

 

[MistyWaters]

I'd take that in two parts -
1. 'take the opportunity to clandestinely snap photos of crime scene pics and leak them into the public' - beats me, that's why I'm keen to see an investigation arrive at some facts before reaching conclusion. The timing is either coincidence or something's fishy IMO.

2. if the photos kiboshed the defence theory of Odinist runes and antlers - that's a big 'if' and one that needs to be tested by experts rather than SM creators with a financial imperative. Whose judgement should we listen to - a know nothing Youtuber or a College Professor with expertise in that field of interpretation? (Wait, no I'm not convinced by that D assertion/ interpretation of runes and antlers either!)


That's not how I read it overall, but yes if I put my D hat on and play it out for a second (for a change lol as I'm usually pretending to be P!) :-

I would focus on ripping apart the P timeline and misuse of witness statements (yes you Liggett!); dismantling the junk science of the bullet (likely to be two experts cancelling each other out), so maybe just the bullet chain of evidence would swing it for me in terms of admissibility; and then all we have left is the confession which if I'm playing D I'd say hasn't been appropriately validated through fact verification etc.

Like I say, I'm pretending so don't take me too literally!


After my role play as D above, you must be talking about the evidence we have yet to see

Time might prove me wrong but I really do think RA will change his plea before his trial ever occurs, maybe on a deal removing the death penalty or the offer of a reduced sentence.

The defence has known this will occur for quite some time and RA’s confessions reaffirmed it.

But as any good legal team would advise, he must wait until the full discovery file is received and reviewed before that can happen. No sense in pleading guilty if a serious flaw would have got the charges tossed instead.

That’s left the attorneys with only a narrow window to get their names out in the public, to capitalize on their association with a high profile case in order to gain future business. Many criminals expect their chosen attorneys to be aggressive in flouting the rules so gaining that sort of reputation can prove very lucrative. It’s not really about RA‘s guilt or innocence at the expense of an Odinist theory at all...he’s their PR. JMO

 

[Betty P]

Yes, it would not be a mistrial at this stage. The case will not be dismissed, either. They can ask for the latter but it won’t happen.

BTW: Didn’t the leak come from the defense?

Thank you. Is it possible the defense could prevent the jury from seeing the crime scene photos?

 

[iamshadow21]

Thank you. Is it possible the defense could prevent the jury from seeing the crime scene photos?

They always try. They rarely succeed. Oh, they might get a photo here and there held back from view, but never all of them. The body is evidence, and photos of it are the way it can be presented to the jurors at trial.

MOO

 

[Boxer]

1st podcast:
My understanding: MS said their mole (Mark) thought the photos were good for the defense - in that - the crime scene photos support the defense theory presented in recent Defense Memo (and the granular descriptions of the crime scene therein).

IMO, this is the 3rd MS podcast ... in the 2nd - major corrective editing to the original that I heard and more clarity on the suicide.

The Leak is all crime scene. These are not prejudicial facts. They're investigative facts on the ground about the crime relative to the case that is the subject of the trial.

If it was leaked ... that RA was disciplined and suspended for watching girls in the locker room in High School through a peephole ... THAT's not relevant to the case ... but could be prejudicial.

The case moves forward. JMHO.

Defense pretending bunch of random branches are like tea leaves at the bottom of a cup.
Look, they sort of spell SODDI.

 

[Boxer]

Yes, it would not be a mistrial at this stage. The case will not be dismissed, either. They can ask for the latter but it won’t happen.

BTW: Didn’t the leak come from the defense?

Defense ploy.

 

[Boxer]

It's definitely a mind trick to divorce emotion and move into a zone where it's just puzzle work; consider the evidence from all points of view. We have a limited timeline, kidnap victim control, the physical management of and ultimate placement of 2 victims, clothing/blood transfers ... the timeline has to add up to the facts and evidence. Separate times of death, victim assistance - makes things more efficient. Efficiency necessary for a one man crime matching the witness/evidence timeline.

Did they ever get dogs out there to track movements?

The had dogs on scene, Leazenby sent them away.

 

[abams]

Just wondering to myself more than anything, what would‘ve been the purpose of “M” plotting to meet with Baldwin to take the opportunity to clandestinely snap photos of crime scene pics and leak them into the public if the photos kiboshed the defence theory of Odinist runes and antlers?

And what’s with the Purdue professor who the defence claimed had emphatically supported the branches/sticks represented Odinist symbols?

How can the topic of branches and sticks, which should be quite simple become so conflicted? Is the defence that desperate, rather than defending RA by disputing the prosecution‘s evidence, they‘re only hope is to influence a jury into believing they are seeing something that’s not there?

That’s a refreshing thought in terms of Justice for Abby and Libby and their families —- the prosecution‘s evidence must be so compelling it can’t be refuted!!

bbm. This is the opposite of what the defense is claiming in their memo. The defense is claiming they received discovery that the investigation on the rune angle was closed because some unnamed Purdue professor of Norse history or something didn't think they were runes. The defense is asking for more discovery on this person.

 

[Bergmann]

Time might prove me wrong but I really do think RA will change his plea before his trial ever occurs, maybe on a deal removing the death penalty or the offer of a reduced sentence.

Unless the P are sat on some absolutely bombshell evidence that the D have not yet seen in their discovery process then I don’t see why he would.

I mean if they have then yes like 90% of cases where there’s case closing evidence then the best thing all round would be a guilty plea.

But, out of interest what do you think that kind of evidence might be in the light of LE saying under oath that they have no DNA or electronic forensics which tie RA to the crime scene (but they do claim to have DNA). I’ve been trying to imagine what this might be, even if it isn’t ‘bombshell’ level.

As it stands there’s nothing that conclusively solves or brings truth to this case IMO. If I were D (again!) firstly I’d do a better job and behave more professionally, but without anything else I’d be rolling up my sleeves and getting ready to bat what P have away in court, no way would I advise a plea. Not even the alleged confessions would deter me without something else.

These cases are fascinating in how differently people choose to see things and then that perspective shapes how evidence and procedure etc should be interpreted.

As I keep saying, hopefully the whole truth will come out in the course of justice.

 

[sunshineray]

So now along with the circus of the central players we have additional sensationalising, sermonising and virtue signalling from the sidelines - good grief.

Do Aine and Kevin think they are the first people to receive unauthorised evidence from sources known/ unknown?

Do they not think that this happens to actual real journalists on a frequent basis?

And what do those real journalists do? They quietly hand them over to the proper authorities and move on without making a big scene about it.

What they don't do is - rush to broadcast; monetise their 'scoop'; quiet/ soft brag about seeing the photos and pass opinion on what they might mean for the case; sermonise about the actions of others when they are doing the exact thing they are seeking to criticise.

MS - you could have just handed the photos onto the authorities. You need to answer why chose to do much more than that.

On second thoughts, don't bother - you're not credible.

"MS - you could have just handed the photos onto the authorities. You need to answer why chose to do much more than that."

IMO they handled it very well. They contacted police with all the info given to them. Then deleted the photos they recieved. What more exactly did they do that you feel was so egregious, I'm not seeing it?

 

[legalmomma]

https://x.com/angelaganote/status/1714680502110564654?s=46&t=CebEjvidhDaYxPmQntcKRQ

We are getting so many questions about how to watch tomorrow's Richard Allen court hearing. It is scheduled to start at 2pm. We can air the hearing with a 30-minute delay. You can watch it on Fox59 or online @fox59. Look for us starting at 2:30 Thursday.

 

[MistyWaters]

Unless the P are sat on some absolutely bombshell evidence that the D have not yet seen in their discovery process then I don’t see why he would.

I mean if they have then yes like 90% of cases where there’s case closing evidence then the best thing all round would be a guilty plea.

But, out of interest what do you think that kind of evidence might be in the light of LE saying under oath that they have no DNA or electronic forensics which tie RA to the crime scene (but they do claim to have DNA). I’ve been trying to imagine what this might be, even if it isn’t ‘bombshell’ level.

As it stands there’s nothing that conclusively solves or brings truth to this case IMO. If I were D (again!) firstly I’d do a better job and behave more professionally, but without anything else I’d be rolling up my sleeves and getting ready to bat what P have away in court, no way would I advise a plea. Not even the alleged confessions would deter me without something else.

These cases are fascinating in how differently people choose to see things and then that perspective shapes how evidence and procedure etc should be interpreted.

As I keep saying, hopefully the whole truth will come out in the course of justice.

I’m totally skeptical of defence tactics because frankly I see a lot of deception between what they say and do. Why bother with complaining they’re still waiting on discovery? Just get on with the trial, get LE on the stand who will testify there’s nothing to link RA to the crime he’s been charged with. Not guilty, Who needs to waste time pouring through 6 years of discovery material? Or better yet, file a Motion to Dismiss and just show the deposition to the judge, LE said there’s no evidence. Charges dropped!

No, better yet invent an Odinist theory instead and get stuff leaked…….that’s the truth by this defence that you hopefully expect? No their only truth is they probably refer to RA behind his back as PR. JMO

 

[tlcya]

"MS - you could have just handed the photos onto the authorities. You need to answer why chose to do much more than that."

IMO they handled it very well. They contacted police with all the info given to them. Then deleted the photos they recieved. What more exactly did they do that you feel was so egregious, I'm not seeing it?

Maybe not monetize it by proceeding to make a podcast about it

They could have done exactly what they did minus broadcasting to the world what they did. IMO

I agree w @Bergmann on this. Their reporting it to authorities and then allegedly deleting the materials but going on to create a public hubbub about it to their own benefit while simultaneously purporting to be concerned about the public furor is disingenuous at best and a bit slimy at worst. MOO