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

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Whoever murdered the girls wanted their precious bodies to be found with obvious nonsecular Runes formed on and around them. The sticks did not form a teepee or a leanto.

"In a search warrant request in March 2017, an FBI agent claimed the girls’ bodies appeared to have been “moved and staged” at the crime scene." The CS was "pristine" - RL.

"... the prosecutor spoke with two correctional officers at the Westville Correctional Facility who the defense team claims have ties to Odinism
both correctional officers denied practicing Odinism but admitted to wearing patches on their uniforms" Tsk, tsk.

"Surprising and aggressive move" by JG

thank you! quoting from this video:

"Lebrato ... who ... has argued many cases before Judge Gull."

Gull knows a competent defense is essential;
looks like she's chosen the defense she knows.
 
I feel like former D’s actions may have more to do with CYA efforts regarding malpractice exposure than anything (not keeping client information confidential, and withdrawing from representation at this stage). I don’t see how they can properly focus on and put their allegedly former client’s needs first, when they appear focused on leaks, their reputations, and possible liability as a result.

JMO
 
I feel like former D’s actions may have more to do with CYA efforts regarding malpractice exposure than anything (not keeping client information confidential, and withdrawing from representation at this stage). I don’t see how they can properly focus on and put their allegedly former client’s needs first, when they appear focused on leaks, their reputations, and possible liability as a result.

JMO

Completely agree

They need to focus on their inevitable exposure.
 
Motion to Disqualify | PDF Host

Language is a little ambiguous but page 5 of 8 of Motion to Disqualify states that Judge was upset that AB and BR had brought counsel and they state he was not retained but a friend and colleague serving in the role of “ spokesperson”.

Judge said "hired", motion states not true, Hennessy volunteered.
 
Yes, I remember Gibson. Victim buried in his backyard in southern Indiana. Remember Larry Hall? From Indiana but his kidnapping conviction is Federal. Have you seen Black Bird? Good series about him.
I read Gibson's appeal. What he did to that poor elderly lady...
I don't know about the other two; the name Hall sounds familiar, though.
 
Wow, just wow.

Nothing from Gull for months and then pow, a hearing that never was and a flurry of filings and updates comes thick and fast. Some of them so fast they appear to have travelled back in time!

So it appears as if in the court of J Gull you have to abide by some rules but if you don't like others then you can just ignore it or make it up as you go along.

D have just been illegally railroaded off the case IMO (whether justifiable or not, that's not the issue) without due process of notice, evidence, hearings or DQ motions. Not normal and well outside the rules. This was not even done in court and without notice, presence or consent from the defendant. Just WTF is going on?!

And then she appoints two new counsel for RA from Allen County, one of whom has a limiting behaviour order! So is this two people that she can control? Very convenient IMO if so.

As if having a J who looks like she is making it up as she goes along isn't bad enough, my worry is the following scenario could actually play out -
  • In doing what J Gull has done she has effectively written the basis for any first appeal to a potential conviction
  • Therefore the ideal scenario to avoid that is that this never makes it to trial
  • NMcL motions to put the DP back on the board
  • In return for taking it off again, this new D have to get RA to plea
  • RA pleas, the threat of trial goes away, no pesky Franks hearing or any scrutiny of the P case or LE misconduct, everything all wrapped up nicely and those prematurely convinced of RA's guilt satisfied with the outcome
  • No right of appeal, end of story
Where would the truth be though, of what happened to those two girls in such a scenario? IMO the truth gets buried if that happens. That would be the thinnest veneer of justice being seen to be done.

Justice by Hobson's choice.

MOO-
I don't care whether people think RA is guilty or innocent - I haven't got a clue with what's been put in front of us. But I do think people should care about the truth and justice being served to the highest standards of ethics. This case has descended quite far from that (although the trajectory was set for that some time ago and by actors on all sides).
 
Step one - remove transparency.

qdwm8y69oswb1.jpg
 
A Hobson's choice is a free choice in which only one thing is actually offered. The term is often used to describe an illusion that multiple choices are available. The best known Hobson's choice is "I'll give you a choice: take it or leave it", wherein "leaving it" is strongly undesirable.
Google

Oh, I understand! ;)
 
Here is a recent quadruple murder case Gull presided over and Lebrato help defend. Gull didn't even make the defendant appear in court after the guilty verdict for the penalty phase or for sentencing! I didn't know that was a choice until this case.

Snip and BBM
Thursday afternoon, the jury decided on a penalty enhancement of life without parole, taking the state’s side that the aggravating circumstances outweighed any mitigating circumstances, including mental illness and family trauma.

The jury started deliberations shortly after the verdict at 10 a.m. on the sentence enhancement of life without parole. Hancz-Barron chose not to return to the courtroom and stayed behind in the sheriff’s office, obviously not pleased with the verdict, his attorney, public defender Anthony Churchward, said.

He had the option to return for the afternoon session, but Churchward and his other attorney, William Lebrato, didn’t seem to think he would.


Snip and BBM
Friday, Superior Court Judge Fran Gull made it official. Gull who presided over the 2-week trial said she had little compare it to because it was so horrific.

“I’ve been on the bench for a while,” said Gull who was a deputy prosecutor in Allen County prior to becoming a judge. “I had a death penalty case in the mid-90s. I can’t recall (another) circumstance that this court has witnessed that has been as horrific as this crime.”

The brutality affected not only the family she commended for sitting through the terrible details, but it was difficult to endure for the public defender, prosecutors and the court staff, she said.

“I’ve never seen anything like this,” Gull said before several of the family got up to speak, even though Hancz Barron chose not to attend his own sentencing. With them at the lectern was Patrice Coleman of Victim Assistance, quietly assisting them as she did during the trial.
 
Here is a recent quadruple murder case Gull presided over and Lebrato help defend. Gull didn't even make the defendant appear in court after the guilty verdict for the penalty phase or for sentencing! I didn't know that was a choice until this case.

Snip and BBM
Thursday afternoon, the jury decided on a penalty enhancement of life without parole, taking the state’s side that the aggravating circumstances outweighed any mitigating circumstances, including mental illness and family trauma.

The jury started deliberations shortly after the verdict at 10 a.m. on the sentence enhancement of life without parole. Hancz-Barron chose not to return to the courtroom and stayed behind in the sheriff’s office, obviously not pleased with the verdict, his attorney, public defender Anthony Churchward, said.

He had the option to return for the afternoon session, but Churchward and his other attorney, William Lebrato, didn’t seem to think he would.


Snip and BBM
Friday, Superior Court Judge Fran Gull made it official. Gull who presided over the 2-week trial said she had little compare it to because it was so horrific.

“I’ve been on the bench for a while,” said Gull who was a deputy prosecutor in Allen County prior to becoming a judge. “I had a death penalty case in the mid-90s. I can’t recall (another) circumstance that this court has witnessed that has been as horrific as this crime.”

The brutality affected not only the family she commended for sitting through the terrible details, but it was difficult to endure for the public defender, prosecutors and the court staff, she said.

“I’ve never seen anything like this,” Gull said before several of the family got up to speak, even though Hancz Barron chose not to attend his own sentencing. With them at the lectern was Patrice Coleman of Victim Assistance, quietly assisting them as she did during the trial.
It's obviously something people can opt for in certain places. Lucy Letby recently didn't bother attending the verdicts for her charges after the first couple came in guilty, and didn't show her face for her sentencing either. Of course, the courts are different in England to the US, but it's the first example I could think of.

MOO
 
Here is a recent quadruple murder case Gull presided over and Lebrato help defend. Gull didn't even make the defendant appear in court after the guilty verdict for the penalty phase or for sentencing! I didn't know that was a choice until this case.

Snip and BBM
Thursday afternoon, the jury decided on a penalty enhancement of life without parole, taking the state’s side that the aggravating circumstances outweighed any mitigating circumstances, including mental illness and family trauma.

The jury started deliberations shortly after the verdict at 10 a.m. on the sentence enhancement of life without parole. Hancz-Barron chose not to return to the courtroom and stayed behind in the sheriff’s office, obviously not pleased with the verdict, his attorney, public defender Anthony Churchward, said.

He had the option to return for the afternoon session, but Churchward and his other attorney, William Lebrato, didn’t seem to think he would.


Snip and BBM
Friday, Superior Court Judge Fran Gull made it official. Gull who presided over the 2-week trial said she had little compare it to because it was so horrific.

“I’ve been on the bench for a while,” said Gull who was a deputy prosecutor in Allen County prior to becoming a judge. “I had a death penalty case in the mid-90s. I can’t recall (another) circumstance that this court has witnessed that has been as horrific as this crime.”

The brutality affected not only the family she commended for sitting through the terrible details, but it was difficult to endure for the public defender, prosecutors and the court staff, she said.

“I’ve never seen anything like this,” Gull said before several of the family got up to speak, even though Hancz Barron chose not to attend his own sentencing. With them at the lectern was Patrice Coleman of Victim Assistance, quietly assisting them as she did during the trial.
Hancz-Barron = we followed his case here. I never paid attention to who the judge and the attys were.

 
Hancz-Barron = we followed his case here. I never paid attention to who the judge and the attys were.


Thanks! I didn't follow it here since Ft. Wayne news is local for me and didn't think about looking it up here.

Another fact-Ft. Wayne to Westville prison is approximately 2 hours drive time.
 
I just hope the newly assigned counsel can get this case back on track. He deserves a solid defense, and A and L deserve their day in court.

Their lives shouldn't get lost amid this drama, much of it manufactured.

It's time for justice.

JMO
 
I'm trying to figure out what NewsNation, Law and Crime, Court TV, and Channel 13 WTHR did to get their requests denied. Here are JG's two orders on the issue dated 10/17/2023. I've copied them and broken them into paragraphs for easier reading:
1. Order Issued
The Court has received multiple requests for various legitimate media outlets to record the Court proceedings to be conducted on October 19, 2023, at 2:00 p.m. (These requests are filed in the case with this Order). Pursuant to the Code of Judicial Conduct, Rule 2.17, a judge shall prohibit broadcasting, televising, recording, or taking photographs in the Courtroom.

However, a judge may authorize the broadcasting, televising, recording, digital streaming, or photographing of court proceedings or the Courtroom by members of the news media under certain conditions. (Rule 2.17(3)(a)(b)). News media is defined as persons employed by or representing a newspaper, periodical, press association, radio station, television station, or wire service and covered by I.C. 34-46-4-1. All of the submitted requests meet this definition.

Counsel for the State and the defense have been provided with these requests, and both have previously submitted pleadings stating their positions on cameras in the Courtroom. (See defense Motion for Broadcasting Order, filed September 13, 2023, and State's Response to Defendant's Motion for Broadcasting Order, filed September 25, 2023). The Court has determined that allowing recording of the October 19, 2023, hearing is permitted provided that the means of recording will not distract the participants or impair the dignity of the proceedings, and the hearing itself is a non-confidential proceeding.

The Court, therefore, authorizes the recording and broadcasting of the hearing set for October 19, 2023. The Court WILL NOT permit photographing or digital streaming of the proceedings. All news media will be required to wear/display identification and to wear appropriate attire. One or two cameras will be authorized for pool coverage of the hearing. Members of the general public are prohibited from broadcasting, recording, or photographing this proceeding.

The Court will prohibit media broadcast during this hearing of attorney-client communications, bench conferences, and materials on counsel tables and the Court's bench. The Court has the sole discretion to interrupt or stop the coverage, or to limit or terminate the recording and broadcast by a news media organization at any time during the proceeding. The Court requests the media to become familiar with I.C. 34-46-4-1 and the Code of Judicial Conduct, Rule 2.17.

2. Order Issued
This case has generated substantial public interest and media attention. In light of this, and on the Court's own motion to ensure the integrity of the proceedings, to protect the Defendant's constitutional rights for due process, to ensure the safety of the parties and the public, and to permit public access to criminal proceedings, the Court sets forth the following rules and guidelines for the hearing set for Thursday, October 19, 2023, in the Allen Superior Court.

The Courthouse will open at 8:00 a.m. All entrances are closed, except for the entrance on the east side of the building. The remaining entrances are locked with no access to the public. All members of the public, including members of the media, are subject to screening by metal detectors. All bags in possession of those entering the building are subject to search. NO weapons of any kind are permitted in the building, except for on-duty law enforcement officers providing security to the Courthouse and the parties. Cellular telephones are NOT permitted in the building. Violations are subject to seizure and destruction of the cellular telephone. No electronic equipment or devices are permitted in the Allen County Courthouse. This includes electronic watches.

Media personnel are permitted to attend the Court session. One or two cameras providing pool coverage will be permitted in the Court session. No still photography or other recording will be permitted. No other media equipment will be permitted in the Courthouse. The Court requests the media be mindful that other County offices are conducting business in the building unrelated to this case. Media and members of the public are ordered to conduct themselves in such a fashion as to limit disruption to the offices, personnel, and patrons of those offices. The Media are free to use the public areas outside the Courthouse as long as they do not obstruct traffic in the streets and sidewalks surrounding the Courthouse.

Public seating in the Allen Superior Courtroom One is limited to 90 spectators. The Sheriff of Allen County or his designee will ensure that the victim representatives are seated and that the defendant's family is seated. The first two rows of public seating in the south side of the Coutroom will be reserved for the State, the State's staff, victims representatives, and State designees. The first two rows of public seating in the north side of the Courtroom will be reserved for the defense staff, defense family, and defense designees. The remaining seating is available until full. No one, other than Court Security and law enforcement, will be permitted to stand in the Courtroom. No food or beverages are permitted inside Allen Superior Court. Water will be permitted for the parties in the well of the Courtroom. All members of the public and the media are required to follow directives of the Sheriff of Carroll County, the Sheriff of Allen County, Courthouse Security, and Courtroom Security.

NO court-produced recording will be made available to the public or media. The audio record made pursuant to Indiana Criminal Rule 5 may not be copied or used for purposes other than perpetuating the record. At the conclusion of the scheduled hearing, all members of the public and media will remain seated in the courtroom until Court Security releases them. The Court anticipates that all members of the public and the media will conduct themselves in an appropriate fashion. Any violation of this Order and any conduct the Court finds disruptive of the proceedings may result in an order of temporary or permanent exclusion from the Courtroom and/or Courthouse and is punishable as contempt of Court.
 
From the order-In light of the unauthorized filming and broadcasting of pre-hearing activities in the Courtroom on October 19, 2023, the Court denies these requests in full.

@FrostedGlass the media recorded before she was at the bench then broadcast Rozzi storming from the back and motioning RA's wife and mother to leave the courtroom. It probably made her mad!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
59
Guests online
2,644
Total visitors
2,703

Forum statistics

Threads
602,490
Messages
18,141,138
Members
231,409
Latest member
relaxininaz
Back
Top