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

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Emma Peel said:
FWIW -

This article says RA's "NEW ATTORNEYS" brought this appeal to the Supreme Court.

oh my.
one step forward for transparency and one step backward for media fact-checking.
Click to expand...
Yep, and there may be more in the future, allegedly. JMO.

By: /s/ Maggie L. Smith

Maggie L. Smith, #19572-53
FROST BROWN TODD LEP
111 Monument Circle, Suite 4500
Indianapolis, IN 46244-0961
317-237-3800

/s/ Cara S. Wieneke

Cara S. Wieneke, #2437449
WIENEKE LAW OFFICE LLC
PO Box 368
Brooklyn, IN 46111
317-331-8293

/s/ Jessie A. Cook
Jessie A. Cook, 3715-84
Attorney at Law
3650 N. Washington Blvd.
Indianapolis, Indiana 46205
812-232-4634

Attorneys for Relator Richard Allen

I mean to list them in the first post abt the writ, my bad!
 

Attachments

  • IMG_2486.jpeg
    IMG_2486.jpeg
    74.4 KB · Views: 4

<modsnip: Quoted post was removed due to no link> ... There was NO ambush by Judge Gull. She had EVERY right to hold the hearing in public and admonish the attorneys publicly. But, she offered them to be spared from this taking place in public.

The way Rozzi stomped through the court room would make one conclude that he did, in fact, agree to withdraw.

The fact that Rozzi now refuses to step down and asks that Gull be removed is disgusting. Ego for days.

Regardless of how anyone feels about RA's guilt or innocence, I would imagine that the public would support their removal. They have been amazing with their antics and side shows. It seems like many people have forgotten about the horrific murders of two children. Shame, shame.


JMO
 
Last edited by a moderator:
girlhasnoname said:
I really can't wait to see what the submissions will look like. I hope all of the D's misconduct comes out publicly and they face severe sanctions/disbarment. I don't believe Judge Gull will be recused, but if so, let it happen now too.

This is actually a good thing for the State, they won't have to worry about this coming up on appeal. I wish I had a dollar for every time I've said 'Can this case get any more bizarre?". :eek:

JMO
Click to expand...

Agree, whatever happens, happens soon hopefully. Even without this latest setback I don’t think the trial would’ve occurred in Jan/24 anyway, considering a year later and the ex-D was still feuding over RA’s incarceration.

I’d be totally shocked if they’re are put back on the case after being accused of gross negligence, since they intentionally prevented the public from knowing what was going on (aka public shaming!). JMO
 
zh0r4 said:
Legal proceedings being conducted professionally without violating law & throwing a potentially innocent man in prison is totally relevant to justice for Abby and Libby. JMO.
Click to expand...


That should and must be done with dignity.
That would include protecting vital information that is not meant to be seen by the public pretrial

That especially includes keeping the photos of 2 young girls lying lifeless, throats slit and one nude protected from being handed out.

Oh .. let's also not forget the REPEATED mention of how one child lay helpless suffering a slow death.

I hope that these people stay far, far away from the case and that RA gets professional representation.


JMO
 
MistyWaters said:
Agree, whatever happens, happens soon hopefully. Even without this latest setback I don’t think the trial would’ve occurred in Jan/24 anyway, considering a year later and the ex-D was still feuding over RA’s incarceration.

I’d be totally shocked if they’re are put back on the case after being accused of gross negligence, since they intentionally prevented the public from knowing what was going on (aka public shaming!). JMO
Click to expand...
B&R are not going to be restored as Attorney's of record for Defendant Allen I feel confident. I will eat my favorite pink golf cap, please don't make me - hah.

IMO
 
Emma Peel said:
State of Indiana v. Richard M. Allen | Allen Superior Court

See above goldmine zip file.

Q: Has this Gull Court zip file of submissions been studied here in the past?
Click to expand...
Bbm

RELATOR’S BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF PETITION FOR WRITS OF MANDAMUS AND PROHIBITION
www.docdroid.net

Brief_in_Support_of_Petition_for (1).pdf

Filed: 10/30/2023 10:54 AM 23S-OR-00302. IN THE INDIANA SUPREME COURT CASE NO. ____________ STATE OF INDIANA ON THE RELATION OF RICHARD ALLEN, Relator, v. THE CARROLL CIRCUIT COURT and THE HONORABLE FRANCES C. GULL, SPECIAL JUDGE, Respondents. ) ) ) ) ) CAUSE NO. 08C01-2210-MR-000001 ) ) ) ) )...
www.docdroid.net www.docdroid.net
p. 19-20

“As noted above, although Allen's April 5, 2023 filings were marked as public documents, someone within the court system sua sponte changed all of the filings to "confidential" and excluded all of them from public access. The next three months of court records were all improperly excluded from public access as well (also without the
mandatory ACR Form).

On June 28, 2023, the trial court explained that all of the above pleadings had been excluded from public access "to comply with the Court Order dated December 2, 2022, which prohibits public comment, commonly referred to as the 'Gag Order'" which the trial court appears to recognize was improper because the trial court created a link to State of Indiana v. Richard M. Allen | Allen Superior Court containing a Zip Drive with 118 documents uploaded.

This did not satisfy the trial court's duties under the Access to Court Records Rules.

First, the trial court allowed the parties to "agree" to exclude the entirety of certain records from public access. Section II.A., supra, sets out how that violates

Rule 5 of the Access to Court Records Rules in two different ways.

Second, the Zip Drive does not provide meaningful public access. The file names for the 118 documents have no clear identifying information to enable someone to recognize what the document actually is; every document has the same date of 6-27 2023; and none of the exhibits to a particular filing are connected to the actual filings.
(Record, pp.47-50.)

The actual CCS in this case still has every one of the 118 documents excluded from public access. (Record, pp. 15-23.) As noted above, this means the only way a member of the public can access anything in this case is if they somehow know to read the June 28, 2023 order, see the link embedded therein, and then proceed to open each of the 118 documents until they find the filing they are looking for.

This does not provide the public access mandated by the Access to Court Records Rules.

In addition, there are still two documents that remain excluded, are not on the Zip Drive, do not have an ACR Form, and for which an ACR Rule 6 hearing has never been held: (1) a June 20, 2023 filing by the Carroll County Sheriff; and (2) a July 5, 2023 letter from a D.O.C. inmate. (Record, pp. 22-23.)

A Writ of Mandamus is needed ordering that the 118 documents must be made publicly accessible on the CCS itself and that the two documents listed above may only remain excluded upon compliance with the Access to Court Records Rules.”
 

Attachments

  • IMG_2484.jpeg
    IMG_2484.jpeg
    124.7 KB · Views: 2
  • IMG_2485.jpeg
    IMG_2485.jpeg
    133.9 KB · Views: 2
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Members online

... and 190 more.
Total: 772 (members: 191, guests: 581)

Online statistics

Members online
191
Guests online
581
Total visitors
772
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
608,014
Messages
18,233,199
Members
234,275
Latest member
MaestraV
Back
Top