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

[Jurisprudence]

Podcasters, you know, the epitome of ethical journalism these days.

Well, Bob and Alison Motta are defense attorneys. Bob (also a legal consultant for Court TV) has made the trip to attend these hearings. He was there for the infamous no-hearing hearing of 10/19/2023 and the pro bono appearance on 10/31.

jmo

 

[sunshineray]

Wieneke also tweeted boosting this article about Odinist white supremecist killers: White supremacists are killing in the name of an ancient Nordic religion

https://twitter.com/x/status/1721554576552182225

Now it fits together that this lawyer was tapped by someone for this case action. Wow...just wow.

 

[StarryStarryNight]

Then you have to ask why was the state never sanctioned or reprimanded for violating the gag order first and more than once? There's no doubt this is a mess.

jmo

ETA: We should remember too that when a case is gagged the only information we can get (should be able to get) is through the filings. So, I see what you're saying about them seemingly using a "backdoor" to get around a gag. But, they do have a right to put forward a theory.

At trial.

 

[sunshineray]

Well, Bob and Alison Motta are defense attorneys. Bob (also a legal consultant for Court TV) has made the trip to attend these hearings. He was there for the infamous no-hearing hearing of 10/19/2023 and the pro bono appearance on 10/31.

jmo

Yes, I believe it was said, by MS, that podcaster was sitting next to H when H was very loudly speaking in the courtroom before the hearing started.

 

[Emma Peel]

At trial.

And pre-trial.

 

[StarryStarryNight]

IMO, pretrial is a preferred time for presenting alternate theories of case.
(Maybe via a separate motion and not squished into a Franks Memo.)

It's a bit much to halt a jury trial just to get all the evidence they've listed as supporting the O-Theory allowed in the middle of a trial. JMO

In the trial, their Odinist theory would have sworn witnesses and cross examinations and expert witness etc, instead of defense scenarios and speculation. I am pretty sure the ex-defense didn’t want any of that, they just wanted to have the floor all to themselves to spin it for potential jurors and do exactly what the judge said she did not want…that this case would not be tried in the court of public opinion, but in a court of law.

 

[Jurisprudence]

Yes, I believe it was said, by MS, that podcaster was sitting next to H when H was very loudly speaking in the courtroom before the hearing started.

ETA: Wait. Who is "H"? Oh, forget it. I realize now AB's atty. Okay
jmo

 

[Jurisprudence]

At trial.

Where is that trial rule?
(ETA: The PCA was made public by the judge and discloses the prosecution's theory and evidence)
jmo

 

[CGBSpender]

Talk to podcasters #802 #668

jmo

From..."sources close to the investigation"...a lot of room for interpretation there...could be a member of LE...or it could be some random redditor on a discord server.

She is right about one thing though...the sticks and tree symbol speculation has been around for years. Right after the victims were found there was talk of information leaking from searchers and/or the coroner.

What I kind of find fascinating is the misinformation. It would actually not surprise me if LE was leaking false information at points...to see if they have leaks...and if so, narrow down where any leaks are coming from.

JMO

 

[Emma Peel]

Yes, I believe it was said, by MS, that podcaster was sitting next to H when H was very loudly speaking in the courtroom before the hearing started.

JMO -
On the 31st in the courtroom:
While MS were busy taking notes on how loud H was, Bob Motta was taking notes for a SCOIN motion.
Listening to MS describe the 31st (IMO, they did fine, thorough job), I got the sense they'd finally dropped the P blinders and took a broader view of due process in play.

 

[Jurisprudence]

From..."sources close to the investigation"...a lot of room for interpretation there...could be a member of LE...or it could be some random redditor on a discord server.

She is right about one thing though...the sticks and tree symbol speculation has been around for years. Right after the victims were found there was talk of information leaking from searchers and/or the coroner.

What I kind of find fascinating is the misinformation. It would actually not surprise me if LE was leaking false information at points...to see if they have leaks...and if so, narrow down where any leaks are coming from.

JMO

She actually says LE investigators in one. The only point to it is that there are people out there who were claiming they were receiving information from persons present at the scene. The situation is the same to people claiming they received evidence from the defense - even though MW was not (and is not) a part of the defense.
jmo

ETA @Ward Thisperer also references another person who received info. However, I haven't listen to that yet so I did not include it. #810

 

[zh0r4]

Page 2

View attachment 458623

This is odd (or maybe it’s normal protocol idk?). It says “This amendment is effective January 1, 2024.” Does that mean it is applicable or not applicable until 1/1/2024?

 

[sunshineray]

Well, WOW this AFFIDAVIT !! - and its contents is more fresh NEWs to me ...

and my goodness, where did you find the illusive, sealed, long sought after MW affidavit?


it's your fault that I'm distracted from work at this moment but I can only say ... my hero.
nice work! thank u! MOO

MW just mozied into the conference room and then noticed photos laying there? The chairs that I'm sure are outside AB's office and conference room were too shabby to sit on and wait? Not one person eyeballed him in a room which held extremely confidential evidence? Yeah I think something smells in this explanation. AJMO

 

[FrostedGlass]

From..."sources close to the investigation"...a lot of room for interpretation there...could be a member of LE...or it could be some random redditor on a discord server.

She is right about one thing though...the sticks and tree symbol speculation has been around for years. Right after the victims were found there was talk of information leaking from searchers and/or the coroner.

What I kind of find fascinating is the misinformation. It would actually not surprise me if LE was leaking false information at points...to see if they have leaks...and if so, narrow down where any leaks are coming from.

JMO

From the video @Jurisprudence posted
10:30 mm
"I've been hearing about these stick formations and this image on the tree for a very long time and very different characterizations than what's in this memorandum. Sources close to the investigation have provided me with drawings of what they say the images look like, the arrangement of the sticks."

"I have spoken to many investigators who were on the scene, at the time, who say the assumption was they were randomly placed."

 

[zh0r4]

Motion for Transcript filed 11/6/2023

This is new information to us (that the court reporter essentially states the judge is not allowing her to release it)

Paragraph 5:
"However, with respect to the in-chambers proceeding, Court Reporter Williams informed counsel that the “in-camera meeting was a meeting of the parties and not a hearing in open court, it is confidential, and I am unable to provide that at this time.”

Paragraph 7:
"Court Reporter Williams informed counsel that she still maintained the in-chambers proceeding was confidential and, thus, she could not provide a transcript to counsel until the trial court granted the motion for transcript."

Paragraph 8:
"Attorney Wieneke asked Court Reporter Williams if Attorney Leeman should remain in Fort Wayne, in the event the trial court ruled on the motion for transcript. In response, Court Reporter Williams indicated that counsel could not obtain the transcript that day, even if the court permitted them to have it."

Paragraph 9:
"As of the date of filing this motion, the trial court has not ruled on counsel’s motion for transcript. Due to the emergent nature of this original action, counsel ... now asks this Court to order the transcript be prepared."

What a mess. jmo

Indiana Courts Case Search - MyCase

Indiana Supreme Court, Public Access

public.courts.in.gov

Wow. What is the probability a transcript doesn’t exist? Is the court reporter under JG’s rule/judicial branch? Or is the court reporter like the clerk and part of the executive branch?

 

[StarryStarryNight]

Where is that trial rule?
(ETA: The PCA was made public by the judge and discloses the prosecution's theory and evidence)
jmo

Why even have a trial?
Why swear in witnesses? Who cares if anybody is telling the truth, or if things could be refuted.
Let’s just have each side conjure up their best unsubstantiated story, and take a poll among all the public, both biased and unbiased, as to which is best.

I’ll add LE is required by law to present the PCA in order to arrest someone.
They had no choice. They did exactly what they were supposed to do. As far as I can tell the prosecution has not released anything else except in response to defense motion. They are preparing for trial.

 

[girlhasnoname]

Well, Bob and Alison Motta are defense attorneys. Bob (also a legal consultant for Court TV) has made the trip to attend these hearings. He was there for the infamous no-hearing hearing of 10/19/2023 and the pro bono appearance on 10/31.

jmo

Yes, I know who they are and the key word here to me is Defense attorneys. They're definitely pro defense in general and biased in this case IMO.

 

[girlhasnoname]

This is odd (or maybe it’s normal protocol idk?). It says “This amendment is effective January 1, 2024.” Does that mean it is applicable or not applicable until 1/1/2024?

Part of it will be effective 1/1/2024.

 

[sunshineray]

I don't understand how they can make this claim of being ready for trial in January. They hadn't even picked up the latest batch of Discovery when they filed the Franks Memo in mid Sept...and there was still more Discovery heading their way up until Nov 1st. To think they would get through all of that discovery competently, and be ready for trial by January does not seem realistic nor in the best interest of the client.

Edit: Not to mention preparing for and arguing the multiple motions the former D filed that have yet to be heard.

JMO

Because now it seems better to say that? May be a point they'll bring up soon to get "Rick" out on bail?

 

[CGBSpender]

even though MW was not (and is not) a part of the defense.

Someone posted a letter titled Ex Parte Pleading sent to JG by BR on 10/12/2023 on another social media site about a half hour ago. The following from it is interesting to your point...

"Andy communicated to me that Mitch was a fairly skilled strategist and that he would sometimes communicate ideas and circumstances with Mitch to get his feedback. Andy reported that he did this, on occasion, in this case. At no time did Andy ever authorize Mitch to duplicate or take physical possession of any exhibits or documentation in this case."

I feel like it gets murkier with each doc that gets released. Reading the above portion...makes me wonder...how much was he getting feedback from this guy, and even though he wasn't authorized to duplicate or take...was this guy being permitted to view the documentation to provide his "feedback"?

JMO