IN - Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #169

[StarryStarryNight]

Rozzi listed judicial rules: I.2, 2.2, 2.3, 2.6, 2.8, 2.11 per the Indiana Code of Judicial Conduct.

I am very confused as how one would come to the conclusion “it would seem neither D was interested in defending themselves, much less calling witnesses”, when they are saying they had no chance to call their own witnesses due to the incompetence of the court to adequately notify them of the true nature of the upcoming court hearings, and have filed multiple motions trying to state their case-especially RULE 2.6: Ensuring the Right to Be Heard? I am impressed at the amount of energy court-appointed D is putting into trying to represent their client. Everyone deserves defense, it is the prosecution’s job to prove a case beyond reasonable doubt. Even if RA is guilty, the nefarious behavior of the court itself is producing doubt. All documentation should be public, the judge should not be able to hypothetically withhold anything that would help D OR P. This is absolutely ridiculous.

JMO.

I am not impressed with the ex-defense and truly do not believe there has been nefarious behavior from the court.
RA needs competent counsel and he sure wasn’t getting it from Baldwin and Rozzi. Libby and Abby are the victims here, but this is RA’s trial too. He should want someone looking out for his best interest. Those two guys were not.

 

[MistyWaters]

I am fine with them meeting in chambers first to discuss a solution. For instance the Judge may well say she is leaning towards booting them. See if AB agrees to fall on his sword (he should have IMO).

But she needs to hold the hearing. The defence does not decide whether or not they want to attend the hearing. If they don't present then hold them in contempt.

This has blown up in Gull's face because she tried to do it all via backroom pressure and you just can't do that. Why on earth did she tell everyone they agreed to resign when now they say the opposite?

She should recuse now IMO.

It will depend on what the transcript says. We’re only being told one side of the story. If both B and R withdrew, R committing to following it up in writing later then a hearing without any D wouldn’t serve any purpose.

 

[MistyWaters]

It will be interesting to hear what MS has to say. Greenlee has been quite vocal in expressing his opinion that the issues pertaining to the defense leak should be addressed in open court.

Murder Sheet

The Murder Sheet is a weekly true crime podcast hosted by journalist Áine Cain and attorney Kevin Greenlee. We take a journalistic approach to covefing true crime. We have broken national news on major cases, like the Delphi murders and the Burger Chef murders. We also cover plenty of other...

art19.com

The Delphi Murders: Defense Attorney Brad Rozzi Files to Stay on the Case​

One week after defense attorney Brad Rozzi told Judge Fran Gull he would be filing paperwork to remove himself from the Richard Allen case, Rozzi instead files motions arguing that he should stay on the case and that it is Judge Gull who should go. We discuss what he had to say.

 

[abams]

Are the court's rulings backdated or did they just happen to get around to updating the docket as soon as the defense filed their motions today? As I read it, messing with the record (which has to be preserved for the appeals process) is precisely one of the allegations the defense is making for the judge to be disqualified.

 

[SkyBoomer]

As much as I always thought this case was a cluster, from Doug and Tobe and the gang up until the Franks bizz and the photo leaks…..I never thought it would end up needing Benny Hill music as a background. This is as bad as some other high profile crimes currently at trial or awaiting such. Cartoonish and sus.

 

[MistyWaters]

Are the court's rulings backdated or did they just happen to get around to updating the docket as soon as the defense filed their motions today? As I read it, messing with the record (which has to be preserved for the appeals process) is precisely one of the allegations the defense is making for the judge to be disqualified.

Mycase.IN.gov clams to not be the court’s official record.

Indiana Courts Case Search - MyCase

Indiana Supreme Court, Public Access

public.courts.in.gov

Terms of Use​

Odyssey Public Access (the "MyCase" website) is a platform for online services provided by the Office of Judicial Administration (the “Office”).

Electronic access to court information is restricted by federal and state law in addition to court rules and orders. Information on this site is made available as a public service pursuant to order of the Indiana Supreme Court.

Information displayed on this site is not to be considered or used as an official court record and may contain errors or omissions. Accuracy of the information is not warranted. Official records of court proceedings may only be obtained directly from the court maintaining a particular record.

Read the complete Terms of Use »

 

[Jurisprudence]

“Clerk of the Carroll Circuit Court ordered to remove Attorneys Baldwin and Rozzi as attorneys of record in this cause.”
Judicial Officer:
Gull, Frances -SJ

How is this legal? Doesn’t this violate RA’s 6th Amendment rights?

Unbelievable. JMO.

Exactly. She backdated it to the 19th and has been playing with the docket. Apparently there is a recording of what occurred in chambers. Rozzi wants it, filed 2 motions to this morning, one to continue as counsel; another to have her removed from presiding over it and this afternoon the court posted these orders to the docket, back-dated to the 19th (day of hearing) removing them as attys of record effective as of that date based on what occurred in chambers. Arguably now, Rozzi may not get access to those tapes since she removed him. But, he filed first. This will be very interesting to watch. Is this a minute order? Something she rattled off quickly in response to his motions (which were loaded)? Something stinks in Delphi.
jmo

 

[sunshineray]

Disqualify AND Continuance??

And a request for a transcipt...for what was discussed in the judge's chambers I wonder?

 

[Jurisprudence]

Pretty clear copies here (better than Scribd) of Rozzi's filings (scroll down)

1. Verified Notice of Continuing Representation (describing what happened in chambers and how it unfolded) and scrolling down further,

2. Motion to Disqualify

Correction: They were filed last night, not this morning.

Judge grants 2 new court-appointed attorneys for Richard Allen, dismisses filings from former attorney

The trial for the suspect in the Delphi murders case was expected to start Jan. 8, 2024.

www.wthr.com

 

[Jurisprudence]

Disqualify AND Continuance??

He's saying here's my sworn statement that I am staying on the case. Second is to disqualify her bc of how she handled it. Then this afternoon she filed an order (here #349) dated the 19th saying "You're off." Effectively setting up that he no longer has rights to file anything or ask for anything bc he's off the case. But, he filed his first. This is ugly and about to get uglier I think.

jmo

Docs are in link here #349

 

[MistyWaters]

I am not impressed with the ex-defense and truly do not believe there has been nefarious behavior from the court.
RA needs competent counsel and he sure wasn’t getting it from Baldwin and Rozzi. Libby and Abby are the victims here, but this is RA’s trial too. He should want someone looking out for his best interest. Those two guys were not.

I really don’t see how R is going to win at this. He’s been relieved of his duties, the Judge has ordered the discovery to be turned back over to the Prosecution and is in the process of selecting new defense.

What’s R’s options? To hang on to the discovery and elevating his dismissal to a higher court expecting to leave everything in a state of limbo for weeks or months while his conflicts are settled? That’s not fair to anyone. It’s selfish IMO, as if this case cannot move forward without his participation. It’s time that he step aside. JMO

 

[Jurisprudence]

I really don’t see how R is going to win at this. He’s been relieved of his duties, the Judge has ordered the discovery to be turned back over to the Prosecution and is in the process of selecting new defense.

What’s R’s options? To hang on to the discovery and elevating his dismissal to a higher court expecting to leave everything in a state of limbo for weeks or months while his conflicts are settled? That’s not fair to anyone. It’s selfish IMO, as if this case cannot move forward without his participation. It’s time that he step aside. JMO

Moo, removing him and starting over could delay this probably for a year or more. I know it's not a popular opinion, but leaving him on is actually best for the families I think. Not only in terms of timing but in terms of handing him an appealable issue if he's convicted, making the families go through it all again.

jmo

 

[MistyWaters]

Moo, removing him and starting over could delay this probably for a year or more. I know it's not a popular opinion, but leaving him on is actually best for the families I think. Not only in terms of timing but in terms of handing him an appealable issue if he's convicted, making the families go through it all again.

jmo

How can it be the best considering the allegations against him for “gross negligence“? RA deserves competent counsel. The Judge is not going to change her mind at this point anyway, it’s too late now, he’s been dismissed.

 

[StarryStarryNight]

Moo, removing him and starting over could delay this probably for a year or more. I know it's not a popular opinion, but leaving him on is actually best for the families I think. Not only in terms of timing but in terms of handing him an appealable issue if he's convicted, making the families go through it all again.

jmo

Nobody wants a delay, but it is certainly preferable to allowing the ex-defense to continue to waste everybody’s time with ridiculous filings, to thumb their noses at Judge’s gag orders and protective orders, and treat sensitive photos of the bodies of precious children like last month’s Batman comic.
The ex-defense are the reason the trial will be delayed.
Most of the heartache for the families since RA’s arrest can be traced directly to the antics of the ex-defense.
The ex-defense is the reason for their own removal. They are the reason the trial will be delayed.They do not get to win in any way here.

 

[Jurisprudence]

Nobody wants a delay, but it is certainly preferable to allowing the ex-defense to continue to waste everybody’s time with ridiculous filings, to thumb their noses at Judge’s gag orders and protective orders, and treat sensitive photos of the bodies of precious children like last month’s Batman comic.
The ex-defense are the reason the trial will be delayed.
Most of the heartache for the families since RA’s arrest can be traced directly to the antics of the ex-defense.
The ex-defense is the reason for their own removal. They are the reason the trial will be delayed.They do not get to win in any way here.

The attorney filing the papers is Brad Rozzi on behalf of himself. It's not Andrew Baldwin.

jmo

 

[sunshineray]

MOTION TO DISQUALIFY (8 pages)
10/25/2023
Filed: 7:51 (?)

EDIT: to remove AM from 7:51 because it is cut off in the doc

Allen's Response to "d" found at the very top of page 5 is...unbelieveable, as are many other of the Responses.

 

[StarryStarryNight]

The attorney filing the papers is Brad Rozzi on behalf of himself. It's not Andrew Baldwin.

jmo

I’m aware.
Rozzi was an equal part of the ex-defense team. He signed off on all the shenanigans. It was equally his circus.

 

[mrjitty]

It will depend on what the transcript says. We’re only being told one side of the story. If both B and R withdrew, R committing to following it up in writing later then a hearing without any D wouldn’t serve any purpose.

I agree with you on that score, but I guess I am struggling with the idea that the judge can simply remove counsel in chambers, claiming they agreed to quit, then one says he didn't quit, so she orders him gone

If BR is to appeal that - where is the decision with reasoning he can appeal because there doesn't seem to have been a proper hearing

to my mind it is awfully cavalier and the judge opened herself up to this by not putting things on the record in open court in the first place. Like why does her order of the 19th only appear publicly today?

Even if Rozzi is being deceptive, this is all a very bad look

 

[girlhasnoname]

It will be interesting to hear what MS has to say. Greenlee has been quite vocal in expressing his opinion that the issues pertaining to the defense leak should be addressed in open court.

Murder Sheet

The Murder Sheet is a weekly true crime podcast hosted by journalist Áine Cain and attorney Kevin Greenlee. We take a journalistic approach to covefing true crime. We have broken national news on major cases, like the Delphi murders and the Burger Chef murders. We also cover plenty of other...

art19.com

The Delphi Murders: Defense Attorney Brad Rozzi Files to Stay on the Case​

One week after defense attorney Brad Rozzi told Judge Fran Gull he would be filing paperwork to remove himself from the Richard Allen case, Rozzi instead files motions arguing that he should stay on the case and that it is Judge Gull who should go. We discuss what he had to say.

Just when we thought this case couldn't be more crazy. Thank goodness I have some coffee to help process this, although I almost knocked it over by my face plant. Hah

 

[FromGermany1]

Pretty clear copies here (better than Scribd) of Rozzi's filings (scroll down)

1. Verified Notice of Continuing Representation (describing what happened in chambers and how it unfolded) and scrolling down further,

2. Motion to Disqualify

Correction: They were filed last night, not this morning.

Judge grants 2 new court-appointed attorneys for Richard Allen, dismisses filings from former attorney

The trial for the suspect in the Delphi murders case was expected to start Jan. 8, 2024.

www.wthr.com

As usual: no access