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

[sunshineray]

The families will be in emotional prison for the rest of their lives, no matter what happens ever in this case. There is no "justice" for the girls or the families left behind. Nothing brings them back and undoes that horrible day. I feel bad that the trial has been delayed yes, but at the same time, I'm more worried that the lack of a speedy trial may infringe upon RA's rights. What exactly IS a speedy trial anyhow? Seems a rather subjective term at best given the years and years an accused could be waiting for his day in court.

There can be justice to be had for the families but their loss will endure forever. The emotional stress level right now must feel like a siege. That's I was referring to earlier. This was such an unnecessary increase for all, the families and the accused. AJMO

 

[Emma Peel]

Gull also could have taken a beat.
(Recess while she researched/consulted/considered RA's request for his pro-bono lawyers).

She didn't.
She did ask the Prosecutor to weigh in - on the fly - give his opinion - his laundry list of complaints against his adversary.

To me ... seems absurd.

JMO but this is how she'll rule each decision through trial?
(Hey, McL, whaddaya think? allow? disallow?)

 

[CGBSpender]

The Court also has many other remedies to manage/control/subdue over-zealous or poor judgement or sealing/gag-order violations concerning members of the Court.

Sanctions. Contempt of Court. Tighter Court guidelines/rules about filings. The power to block a brief and demand it be revised to meet court's briefing standards. The power to redact. The power to permit confidential filings. on and on and on.

I understand Gull took the Defense to task in the past for stuff she didn't like - good for her. But I'm not aware she'd ever assessed a Sanction, or found them in contempt.

JHMO

I feel like at minimum they were careless...and whether foreseeable or not, a man is now dead. To me, other remedies don't seem severe enough, nor do they address the ongoing risk. I mean you have guys that admitted to e-mailing discovery (which was sent to the wrong person as a result), and then admitting to leaving it (presumably unattended) in a conference room...this is 2023, not 1983...there is such a thing as secure data rooms for exactly these kinds of matters.

JMO

 

[Emma Peel]

I feel like at minimum they were careless...and whether foreseeable or not, a man is now dead. To me, other remedies don't seem severe enough, nor do they address the ongoing risk. I mean you have guys that admitted to e-mailing discovery (which was sent to the wrong person as a result), and then admitting to leaving it (presumably unattended) in a conference room...this is 2023, not 1983...there is such a thing as secure data rooms for exactly these kinds of matters.

JMO

I would respectfully take exception to the idea that anyone is responsible for any player who decided to assist the LEAK.

I'd agree with the Judge clobbering them for these errors ... using the powers she does have at her disposal.

A ways back, I expected the "LE investigation of the Leak" to report to the Court. Should either of the Old D be in that LE active investigation list ... they should recuse. I think if that happened, we'd know about it by now. JMHO

 

[MistyWaters]

I feel like at minimum they were careless...and whether foreseeable or not, a man is now dead. To me, other remedies don't seem severe enough, nor do they address the ongoing risk. I mean you have guys that admitted to e-mailing discovery (which was sent to the wrong person as a result), and then admitting to leaving it (presumably unattended) in a conference room...this is 2023, not 1983...there is such a thing as secure data rooms for exactly these kinds of matters.

JMO

That’s an apt description of attorneys who were negligent (ie careless, neglectful), even grossly negligent in securing highly confidential case information.

JMO

 

[Jurisprudence]

Well I understand that the Franks motion never should have been released because of the gag order? Sealing it then makes perfect sense to me. It included many many things that were part of discovery and considered confidential.

[snipped by me]

I think this is a point of contention. My understanding is that they made the Franks motion public and they had the right to do so particularly since the judge unsealed the PCA for the state. State law will have the grounds/reasons/parameters that must be followed to seal a record from public view. Generally a motion to seal must be made and if granted, the reasons for the sealing are notated in the order.

The problem with what JG has been doing in the case, and a point made by the independent attorneys who filed the writ, is that she isn't sealing. Instead, she's declaring things "confidential" and removing them. Confidential is not a thing.

jmo

 

[Jurisprudence]

We have not seen a case though, where a negligent attorney allowed a series of death photos of young girls to be leaked to a couple of you tube channels. And said circumstances triggered the tragic suicide of a young father.

[sbbm]

That last part is unknown.I don't think it's accurate to state that the person got handed the photos and merely being in possession of them caused the act. We do not know. The hearsay sentence in the email attached as one of the exhibits "if he tells the truth he'll be okay" is alarming. Imoo, it needs to be investigated. If the act was linked to the photos why? I realize there are some who think the investigation is complete and RA is the guy but statements like this make people like me wonder if that is so.

jmo

 

[Jurisprudence]

based on the SC attny's twitter, it does appear that they are repping RA via his Old D's behest. MOO
https://x.com/Wienekelo/status/1719328031263564072?s=20

??? The link goes to AB's and BR's notice of appearance filed the night before the 10/31 hearing. What am I missing?

jmo

 

[Jurisprudence]

They could also find that the structure was sound...and rule the attorneys both verbally withdrew in the judge's chambers and hold then to their word. I do hope the SC can get to the root of all this mess, be it whatever outcome. Gotta put faith in the highest court to weed away the theatrics from the lawfully sound bottom line. Wishing good luck and prayers they can get this settled and back on track soon.

I think her problem will be how well they documented this, despite her removing their filings. For example, AB filed a motion on the matter the very day of the 19th. He documented pretty well the reasons why he intends to stay on the case and that this was his client's wish. That filing alone negates any argument by the judge that they came into the 19th hearing with an intent to withdraw.

jmo

 

[Jurisprudence]

New entries. It's a guess as which this granting refers to.
I'm getting a bit lost now; I thought the representation issue was settled at the hearing on the Oct 19th according to JG.

11/02/2023	Automated ENotice Issued to Parties Order Granting ---- 11/1/2023 : Andrew Joseph Baldwin;Bradley Anthony Rozzi;Nicholas Charles McLeland;Robert Cliff Scremin;William Santino Lebrato
11/02/2023	Automated Paper Notice Issued to Parties Order Granting ---- 11/1/2023 : James David Luttrull

It was probably in relation to this:

11/01/2023

Order Granting Order granting withdrawal of counsel Judicial Officer: Gull, Frances -SJ Noticed: McLeland, Nicholas Charles Noticed: Baldwin, Andrew Joseph Noticed: Rozzi, Bradley Anthony Noticed: Scremin, Robert Cliff Noticed: Lebrato, William Santino Noticed: Luttrull, James David JR Order Signed: 11/01/2023

What a mess. We should be able to see and pull those docs off easily unless they are sealed (see Idaho for example). And, where sealed we should see the order sealing enumerating the reasons why. This is what the writ is about.

jmo

 

[Jurisprudence]

I believe the order granting withdrawal of counsel pertains to D. Hennessy. JMO

Agree. And the law firm referenced in an above post and claimed to have nothing on the docket is incorrect imo. They filed their papers and the S Ct docket is in-tact and reflects this. It seems perhaps some are looking at the wrong docket and the wrong court and posting incorrect information?
jmo

Indiana Courts Case Search - MyCase

Indiana Supreme Court, Public Access

public.courts.in.gov

 

[Jurisprudence]

View attachment 457696

It sounds like she's saying he accepts responsibility for the delay so he is considered to waive any rights and must sit in prison. We'll have to look at the dates and timeline. I can't see him "accepting" rule 4 time when he just asked the judge not to remove his attorneys. Ind. R. Crim. P. 4 I wonder if this was dictated and was meant to read "excepting"

ETA: That version is effective Jan 2024. Version in effect today is here.

jmo

 

[Jurisprudence]

Thank you for linking this, I've been trying to look into reliability of unspent bullet identification in particular. It would be interesting to review other cases that relied on unspent bullet identification.

Wieneke has filed a limited appearance and a motion for transcripts
View attachment 457707

View attachment 457708View attachment 457709View attachment 457710View attachment 457713

Wieneke on twitter:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1720127953437143497

Good to see they are moving right along and getting the trial record for their case in the Supreme Court

jmo

 

[Jurisprudence]

Gull also could have taken a beat.
(Recess while she researched/consulted/considered RA's request for his pro-bono lawyers).

She didn't.
She did ask the Prosecutor to weigh in - on the fly - give his opinion - his laundry list of complaints against his adversary.

To me ... seems absurd.

JMO but this is how she'll rule each decision through trial?
(Hey, McL, whaddaya think? allow? disallow?)

It's more than absurd imo. It's really problematic. Hard to tell since we weren't physically present but it sounds from all the reporting like she invited the prosecutors to weigh in just as you say above, and in response they entered all of these disparaging things into the record about these 2 attorneys who have no disciplinary history, and then did not allow them to respond. This is such a huge mess, particularly since Lebrato himself was recently suspended in 2022.

jmo

Allen County’s chief public defender reinstated after weeks long suspension

Lebrato has been the chief public defender since January, 2020.

www.wane.com

 

[AugustWest]

What a mess. We should be able to see and pull those docs off easily unless they are sealed (see Idaho for example). And, where sealed we should see the order sealing enumerating the reasons why. This is what the writ is about.

jmo

It is completely absurd this is the record the Indiana S.C. is going to have for a case of first impression on a pretty interesting and very important issue.

 

[CGBSpender]

[sbbm]

That last part is unknown.I don't think it's accurate to state that the person got handed the photos and merely being in possession of them caused the act. We do not know. The hearsay sentence in the email attached as one of the exhibits "if he tells the truth he'll be okay" is alarming. Imoo, it needs to be investigated. If the act was linked to the photos why? I realize there are some who think the investigation is complete and RA is the guy but statements like this make people like me wonder if that is so.

jmo

Agreed. Very alarming statement if true. I also found it odd that based on the e-mails, the suicide appeared to take place late in the evening on the 11th...despite the fact that the identity of MW as the alleged source of the leak had already been disclosed by AB to NM and JG on the afternoon of Oct 10th.

JMO

 

[Jurisprudence]

Agreed. Very alarming statement if true. I also found it odd that based on the e-mails, the suicide appeared to take place late in the evening on the 11th...despite the fact that the identity of MW as the alleged source of the leak had already been disclosed by AB to NM and JG on the afternoon of Oct 10th.

JMO

Imoo, any potential connections between parties/actors must be looked into.
jmo

 

[M. Kay]

That’s an apt description of attorneys who were negligent (ie careless, neglectful), even grossly negligent in securing highly confidential case information.

JMO

I was away, so have clarifying questioning: was it a 'not-high-up' individual given big task of copying reams for defense from prosecutor? Did whoever copied then pass directly to one friend who then disseminated to others? Though I never viewed them, it was tricky to unread some descriptions. I know here on WS we are all most sad for families. Was there a link to Odinism construed in CS images; or, what spurred that rumor to arise when it did?
Thank you for replies...

 

[FrostedGlass]

New filing.

11/02/2023	Appearance Filed Limited Appearance of Cara Schaefer Wieneke For Party: Allen, Richard M. File Stamp: 11/02/2023
11/02/2023	Praecipe for Transcript Filed Defendant's Motion for Transcripts Filed By: Allen, Richard M. File Stamp: 11/02/2023

 

[Jurisprudence]

It is completely absurd this is the record the Indiana S.C. is going to have for a case of first impression on a pretty interesting and very important issue.

I hate to even think this but it's probably a reality: the attys who made the filing are going to have to get the documents filed by B&R (to the extent they don't already have them) and compare each one of them to the filings on the record that are produced for them in response to their request. They'll also have to check and flag any orders that suddenly appear and are backdated. This kind and level of distrust in our judicial system just should not be imo.