IN - Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #170

[AppleTreeGreen]

If it had been just a challenge to the search warrant maybe but that motion went way beyond the boundries of that.

It described many details of the crime scene that were confidential. People don't realize how that can now compromise investigators and even the defendant.

It also named 5 local men, where they lived and accused them of double murder.

It named witnesses and explained what they saw and where.

It laid out in great detail what the defense's strategy for trial was going to be.

It was a travesty of a Franks motion and was subsequently sealed. It never should have been filed with all that in it. The D was grossly negligent.

AJMO

Listening to The Defense Diaries I agree the portion on Odinism is very long and appears fanfiful but I suppose since it the motion is meant to challenge the warrant’s reasonable cause, by questioning the accuracy of witness statements again and reevaluating information regarding other potential POIs, the timeline and the crime scene may have had been necessary or strategic and lawful to include. I suppose too it may help too frame the Odinism stuff in terms of FBI analysis but this is all just JMO but I could be wrong as I am trying to understand how lawyers legally question how evidence is interpreted pre-trial.

I am very sorry for any pain it caused the families and I don’t mean to excuse it at all.

 

[sunshineray]

Listening to The Defense Diaries I agree the portion on Odinism is very long and appears fanfiful but I suppose since it the motion is meant to challenge the warrant’s reasonable cause, by questioning the accuracy of witness statements again and reevaluating information regarding other potential POIs, the timeline and the crime scene may have had been necessary or strategic and lawful to include. I suppose too it may help too frame the Odinism stuff in terms of FBI analysis but this is all just JMO but I could be wrong as I am trying to understand how lawyers legally question how evidence is interpreted pre-trial.

I am very sorry for any pain it caused the families and I don’t mean to excuse it at all.

Challenging the reasonable cause of a warrant does not include outing witness's names nor describing in detail the photos of a crime scene that are sealed evidence.

It also doesn't give the D a stage to accuse alternative people, by name and location, of the crimes. Franks deals with the validity of a warrant, not laying out your trial defense pre-trial to the public. There was a gag order in place for that. You're certainly allowed your opinions though and I respect that.

 

[sunshineray]

I wonder if MW was told to sign a protection order before he became privy to any of the discovery? Doesn't anyone, working on the prosecution or defense, that will view discovery have to sign a legal document to protect discovery? Isn't that required?

 

[Niner]

I'm not, I don't think it's this nefarious at all. I guess we'll find out more on the 15th of Nov.

MOO

Hearing on 11/15?? What is this about - the IN Supreme court case? TIA!

 

[mrjitty]

The other thing about the Odinism stuff is it included a lot of content that will likely be inadmissible at trial.

So the whole point was to get it in the public domain.

 

[katydid23]

I perceive this situation very similar to you. JMP, as you said, I think AB and the ex-employee collaborated or at least AB liked to bounce ideas and get feedback from him with the understanding that due to the gag order the printed pictures and documents could not be copied and disseminated outside the office. I suppose he put blind faith in his friend and former employee.

But he was not allowed to collaborate or bounce ideas off MW because MW was NOT included in people he was allowed to share this info with.
https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/23863585/delphidocs.pdf (begins at Page 212 & 213)
5. That the discovery material may be viewed only by parties, counsel and counsel's investigators and experts.
7. That none of the discovery material shall be divulged to any person not authorized to view the discovery material; this includes other witnesses, family members, relatives and friends of the Defendant.
8. That no person other than the Defendant, Counsel for the Defendant and those persons listed in paragraph 5 shall be granted access to said discovery material, or the substance of any portion thereof unless that person has signed an agreement in writing that he or she has received a copy of this Order and that he or she submits to the Court’s jurisdiction and authority with respect to the discovery; agrees to be subject to the Court's contempt powers for any violation of this Order; and is‘ granted prior permission by this Court to access said discovery.


So AB did not comply with the court's orders in terms of this discovery info. He was not allowed to discuss it with MW at all. Let alone show him the pictures. Showing him the secret files and leaving him access to the discovery is gross negligence on AB's part. IMO

Unfortunately AB’s trust was betrayed by his friend

'Friends' were specifically mentioned as NOT ALLOWED access to this material. So who cares if his friend betrayed him. He was specifically ordered not to share this info with any friends or family.

who seemed to know that AB’s hard copy of the discovery was not locked in his office or his file cabinet, at least not during the work day, when he found it more convenient to keep the door unlocked so he could walk in and out without the hassle.

Again, gross negligence. AB didn't want 'the hassle' of locking his doors and locking away the secret discovery materials, so he left himself vulnerable, to people he was not supposed to share that info with in the first place.

When AB was absent and unaware the ex-employee made copies

Total negligence on AB that anyone was able to make those copies and even knew about them and where they were kept.

to share with a friend or connect who in turned shared it with multiple people, including the individual who would inform MS and shared the pictures with them and possibly others.

IMO they knew they were breaking the law due to the gag order which is why they seem to draw out vows to protect each other should their identities and actions become public or discovered by LE. Others online have mentioned that it is possible that man from Fishers probably felt overwhelmed and distressed with the implications of he and his family losing his position, benefits and place among the U.S. Air Force base if he was found guilty or linked to the crime.

It ended up in a tragic suicide and that gave every right to the judge to shut this attorney down and end their negligence, and irresponsible actions from continuing to affect this case. JMO

 

[girlhasnoname]

I wonder if MW was told to sign a protection order before he became privy to any of the discovery? Doesn't anyone, working on the prosecution or defense, that will view discovery have to sign a legal document to protect discovery? Isn't that required?

MW (not even a licensed attorney) wasn't working for AB at the time, he had another position with a different company according to his interview with MS Podcast. That is what makes this even more suspect to me. Why would he even need to use AB's office?

MOO

 

[girlhasnoname]

Hearing on 11/15?? What is this about - the IN Supreme court case? TIA!

It's the SCOIN due date for responses from the filing against Judge Gull that was originally due on 10/9.

 

[Niner]

It's the SCOIN due date for responses from the filing against Judge Gull that was originally due on 10/9.

Okay - thanks!

 

[steeltowngirl]

Again, I disagree w/ the doxing vehemently.

As to MSM, this is one sentence quoted from what ? 136 pages? (LOL)
The point being, context is everything.
IMO, this topic/discussion in the memo addresses holes/errors/incompetence in the LE investigation.
(The Court will be shocked at ... how inadequate LE's investigation of this Rune area was.)
D's purpose is get this Rune topic admitted and on the Court table for trial.

JHMO

Yes, this is one sentence quoted. We have the full document that mentions BH over 400 times. Of course defense wants to point at perceived holes in the investigation. I get the point. They chose to focus on the Odinism angle. I suppose it’s somewhat of a more believable angle than say… Bigfoot.

We will all have to wait and see what evidence prosecution has and how they arrived at RA. They certainly were not laser-focused on him from the start.

They have something in evidence that they feel is damning. Something stopped the investigation cold in its tracks. And it wasn’t just a tip misfiled in a drawer that they happened upon.

jmo

 

[FrostedGlass]

But he was not allowed to collaborate or bounce ideas off MW because MW was NOT included in people he was allowed to share this info with.
https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/23863585/delphidocs.pdf (begins at Page 212 & 213)
5. That the discovery material may be viewed only by parties, counsel and counsel's investigators and experts.
7. That none of the discovery material shall be divulged to any person not authorized to view the discovery material; this includes other witnesses, family members, relatives and friends of the Defendant.
8. That no person other than the Defendant, Counsel for the Defendant and those persons listed in paragraph 5 shall be granted access to said discovery material, or the substance of any portion thereof unless that person has signed an agreement in writing that he or she has received a copy of this Order and that he or she submits to the Court’s jurisdiction and authority with respect to the discovery; agrees to be subject to the Court's contempt powers for any violation of this Order; and is‘ granted prior permission by this Court to access said discovery.

Snipped and highlighted for focus.
Have we seen any proof that MW did not meet the criteria?
Where is the MW affidavit and why can't we see it?

 

[TL4S]

Listening to The Defense Diaries I agree the portion on Odinism is very long and appears fanfiful but I suppose since it the motion is meant to challenge the warrant’s reasonable cause, by questioning the accuracy of witness statements again and reevaluating information regarding other potential POIs, the timeline and the crime scene may have had been necessary or strategic and lawful to include. I suppose too it may help too frame the Odinism stuff in terms of FBI analysis but this is all just JMO but I could be wrong as I am trying to understand how lawyers legally question how evidence is interpreted pre-trial.

I am very sorry for any pain it caused the families and I don’t mean to excuse it at all.

The judge has not said the D violated the gag order, that I can recall. She has said they were grossly negligent, but has not released anything official, on the docket, as to the exact specific things they did to be grossly negligent. Obviously, we can all name the things we think they have done, and NMcL had a chance in court to name the things he thinks they have done, but hopefully, eventually, there will be an official court record explaining their "gross negligence" in detail. JMO.

As for the Franks memorandum, I'll admit, I didn't like the way it was written, or how it used Odinist sacrifice as the alternative scenario, however, I'm not sure it was all wasted space. While there were probably more details than necessary, the D used all of the context to point out the many, many ways LE failed (in their opinion). It wasn't about just omitting a witness statement to get the search warrant, it was how LE did not investigate enough into this line of suspects, at least one of which admitted to the crimes. Their claim was that key LE officers lied about knowing who the professor was, disappeared the FBI report saying Norse religion could be involved, and that some in LE had believed more than one person was involved yet denied that during testimony. All of this to hide evidence so that RA was a valid suspect to begin with, then omitting more to get the SW...per the D. I'm not saying the D's claims are accurate, but I feel like what was in the Franks was all there to support the D's claims.

Even naming the other POIs was probably not violating anything, nor describing the CS, but it should have been redacted, IMO.

 

[EllaMinnowP]

They chose to focus on the Odinism angle. I suppose it’s somewhat of a more believable angle than say… Bigfoot.

RSBM
Imo, wild as that story sounded, I find it intriguing that there was apparently some early investigation into the Odinism angle, and then I had to pick my jaw up off the floor when it turned out to be true that some IDOC prison guards were in fact wearing Odinist patches on their uniforms! That’s an astonishingly bizarre coincidence.

We will all have to wait and see what evidence prosecution has and how they arrived at RA. They certainly were not laser-focused on him from the start.

If RA is the murderer, or involved, I think that will mean he is one hell of a scary individual! Imagine the cajones of someone who committed a double murder tipping himself in pretty quickly after the crime, then offering to pay for L’s funeral pictures, AND going back so many years later for a police interview -with no representation- even though he knew he had been ‘overlooked’! If RA’s responsible for A&L’s deaths, I don’t know what all of this says about him. It makes me think he probably killed before OR he wanted to be caught. Either way, it paints a picture of a very dangerous monster!

They have something in evidence that they feel is damning. Something stopped the investigation cold in its tracks. And it wasn’t just a tip misfiled in a drawer that they happened upon.

RBBM
I agree 100%.

MOO

 

[girlhasnoname]

RSBM
Imo, wild as that story sounded, I find it intriguing that there was apparently some early investigation into the Odinism angle, and then I had to pick my jaw up off the floor when it turned out to be true that some IDOC prison guards were in fact wearing Odinist patches on their uniforms! That’s an astonishingly bizarre coincidence.

If RA is the murderer, or involved, I think that will mean he is one hell of a scary individual! Imagine the cajones of someone who committed a double murder tipping himself in pretty quickly after the crime, then offering to pay for L’s funeral pictures, AND going back so many years later for a police interview -with no representation- even though he knew he had been ‘overlooked’! If RA’s responsible for A&L’s deaths, I don’t know what all of this says about him. It makes me think he probably killed before OR he wanted to be caught. Either way, it paints a picture of a very dangerous monster!


RBBM
I agree 100%.

MOO

RSBBM

AND going back so many years later for a police interview -with no representation- even though he knew he had been ‘overlooked’!

Oh, I don't think RA wanted to go in for another interview at all, and I think his wife joined him because he had stated a story about why/when he was on the bridge the day the murders happened and why LE "cleared' him. Maybe her hinky meter went up, she wanted to hear for herself what RA and LE had to say. I know I would have.

He certainly changed the tune to his story once he found out there were time stamped photos (the young girls took) and witnesses who saw him and placed him there. I believe LE used that to their advantage and totally caught him off guard. He was lulled into thinking he'd gotten away, and he did for 5+ years.

I'd love to know how that ride home from the police hq went between RA & KA???!!

MOO

 

[girlhasnoname]

Snipped and highlighted for focus.
Have we seen any proof that MW did not meet the criteria?
Where is the MW affidavit and why can't we see it?

According to AB himself, through the response filed by his now former attorney, we know that MW didn't meet the criteria, poor AB was 'snookered' by a friend. He didn't give him permission nor did he sign an NDA.

MOO

 

[FrostedGlass]

According to AB himself, through the response filed by his now former attorney, we know that MW didn't meet the criteria, poor AB was 'snookered' by a friend. He didn't give him permission nor did he sign an NDA.

MOO

Maybe you know that but I don't. If he had MW sign docs and get approved, MW's betrayal could still qualify as "snookered". Aren't you curious about the affidavit?

Do we know if prosecution had to follow those guidelines, too?

 

[girlhasnoname]

Maybe you know that but I don't. If he had MW sign docs and get approved, MW's betrayal could still qualify as "snookered". Aren't you curious about the affidavit?

Do we know if prosecution had to follow those guidelines, too?

You know I appreciate you keeping me on my toes Frosted lol.

That is how I interpreted the response from AB, but you could be right. Anything's possible in this circus, and yes, I am definitely curious about the affidavit. I hope it will clearly define the gross misconduct by the former Defense.

JMO

 

[EllaMinnowP]

He certainly changed the tune to his story once he found out there were time stamped photos (the young girls took) and witnesses who saw him and placed him there.

RSBM
Allegedly, imo, he changed his story to fit those. I don’t take any comfort from that, though. I don’t think I could remember at exactly what hour and minute anything happened if you asked me about my whereabouts and doings on a particular day a month ago, much less years ago. Now, if he committed murders, I would think he remembers details. Thankfully, I have no experience with how one’s memory processes such atrocities as that.

As for the witnesses who saw him and placed him there, AFAIK, they described the man they saw, but didn’t identify Richard Allen specifically. I’m not even confident that they were all describing the same man. I do realize that he corroborated that he saw some females, so more than likely they did see each other. I just am not sure I could hang him simply for agreeing that he was present that day.

Oh, I don't think RA wanted to go in for another interview at all, and I think his wife joined him because he had stated a story about why/when he was on the bridge the day the murders happened and why LE "cleared' him. Maybe her hinky meter went up, she wanted to hear for herself what RA and LE had to say. I know I would have.

Sounds plausible to me, for sure!

I'd love to know how that ride home from the police hq went between RA & KA???!!

ME TOO!

 

[FrostedGlass]

The other thing about the Odinism stuff is it included a lot of content that will likely be inadmissible at trial.

So the whole point was to get it in the public domain.

Maybe B&R thought that was the only way they could bring the Odin issue forward? Am I correct in thinking that once something is on record, it's always going to be on record for appeal?
SCOIN has it right now in the Record of Proceedings.
Case # 23S-OR-00302

10/30/2023

Record of Proceedings (Original Action) Certificate of Service- Electronically Served 10/30/23 Party: Allen, Richard M. File Stamp: 10/30/2023

 

[sunshineray]

MW (not even a licensed attorney) wasn't working for AB at the time, he had another position with a different company according to his interview with MS Podcast. That is what makes this even more suspect to me. Why would he even need to use AB's office?

MOO

Exactly and even the paralegals, investigators etc that do work there but aren't lawyers are required to sign that they will protect discovery they're exposed in doing their jobs. AB definitely has some explaining to do in all this. Very odd that his personal attorney has withdrawn considering the hot water AB must be in. Has H been replaced? AJMO