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

[sunshineray]

I don't know where all these docs are coming from... but here is the Ex Parte Pleading from 10/12 submitted by Rozzi (found on reddit)
View attachment 458719View attachment 458720View attachment 458721View attachment 458722View attachment 458723View attachment 458724View attachment 458725

Give you three guesses and the first two...ya know ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

[Trebor5591]

from the 11/6/23 brief:

Defense asserted Statements of Duress aplenty in Chambers Conference. Baldwin withdrew in protest of that duress. MOO


footnote re: above chambers record, that the Court Reporter declined to provide transcript.


Advanced-planned Ambush indeed. MOO

I would like to see Judge Gull removed and Baldwin and Rozzi reinstated. Otherwise, any conviction of Allen stands a good chance to be reversed on appeal. MOO

 

[Salah11]

I would like to see Judge Gull removed and Baldwin and Rozzi reinstated. Otherwise, any conviction of Allen stands a good chance to be removed on appeal. MOO

What am I missing here?

Gull wasn’t the one whose office leaked confidential photos of a crime scene. The only people who have behaved unprofessionally are dumb and dumber here and their fan fiction of pagan cult behind this crime just shows their level of incompetence.

MOO

 

[CGBSpender]

I'd love to know...does RA even want to go to trial? I mean...he's alleged to have made admissions...and shortly thereafter stopped calling/texting people...and allegedly being non communicative and unhelpful in his own defense. I have really been wondering whether he even agrees with the scorched earth strategy that seems to have been implemented? I mean...if there was someone else involved in the crime...and RA has info on that...there's probably a deal to be made...although it would mean his lawyers would be out of a job sooner...

JMO

 

[Emma Peel]

What am I missing here?

Gull wasn’t the one whose office leaked confidential photos of a crime scene. The only people who have behaved unprofessionally are dumb and dumber here and their fan fiction of pagan cult behind this crime just shows their level of competence.

MOO

To be fair, one thing we are all missing until Nov 16 is Defendant Gull's answer/submissions for the two writs motions at the SCION.

Have you seen both SCION motions? There was one other - prior to Oct 31st hearing.

The First SCION motion is a review of Gull's docket/record and if it has failed to meet state standards/rules (statute). Does the docket meet transparency standards.

Today's SCION motion is a review of Gull's due process, legal argument(s), remedies, sanctions, that Judge Gull deliberated to arrive at her findings/decision to remove RA's preferred attorneys, deny RA his preferred private (pro-bono) attorneys, as balanced against RA's powerful right to a speedy trial and counsel of his choosing.

It's basically a legal nerd fest. Still, a SCION decision can clarify existing law is to be interpreted given certain circumstances. For this extra RA justice chapter we intervene/interrupt the lower Court proceeding for a short time, we move up to the SCION, and we take a microscope to the lower court's statutory obligations and due process.

We'll see how it's going so far, per the legal eagles on the Supreme Court. JMHO

 

[sunshineray]

So I'm wondering if defense diaries and SleuthieGoosie are now considered defense investigative sources and made privy to discovery? I mean they were used by an appellate lawyer on their way to the SC to argue (God knows what but I'll give it a try) the Delphi case.

The photos themselves, after reading BR's confidential letter to JG, were only shared by MW with an army buddy (who God bless him has since passed on). So we are to believe that this deceased army buddy shared them with various youtubers and a Texas guy and MW was blameless?

And oh yeah the "F-tree" picture, no big deal as far as defense is concerned, was leaked somewhere else as were the descriptions of the girl's crime scene so what's the fault really? Oh but they do feel bad for the families, how considerate.

They said they told Nick right away when guilty conscience MW came to see AB and confessed. Well BR left out the exact date in October when that occured (everything else had exact dates IIRC) so I can't really judge that statement's validity.

Now a confidential letter and affidavit have leaked...

 

[sunshineray]

I'd love to know...does RA even want to go to trial? I mean...he's alleged to have made admissions...and shortly thereafter stopped calling/texting people...and allegedly being non communicative and unhelpful in his own defense. I have really been wondering whether he even agrees with the scorched earth strategy that seems to have been implemented? I mean...if there was someone else involved in the crime...and RA has info on that...there's probably a deal to be made...although it would mean his lawyers would be out of a job sooner...

JMO

BR's letter says he's fully aware and still wants them

 

[Emma Peel]

So I'm wondering if defense diaries and SleuthieGoosie are now to considered defense investigative sources and made privy to discovery? I mean they were used by an appellate lawyer on their way to the SC to argue (God knows what but I'll give it a try) the Delphi case.

RSBM for space:
This is a hunch only: The folks who excel with the process of obtaining court records have formally requested docs forcing a decision on confidentiality to be made, and they've been given access to records that are NOT confidential, but were originally categorized as such. JMO

 

[Trebor5591]

What am I missing here?

Gull wasn’t the one whose office leaked confidential photos of a crime scene. The only people who have behaved unprofessionally are dumb and dumber here and their fan fiction of pagan cult behind this crime just shows their level of incompetence.

MOO

What you're missing is that a judge can not remove a defendant's attorneys against their wishes and against the defendant's wishes, and table the motions filed by those attorneys. What an mess! I fully expect Gull to be removed a judge and the two attorneys reinstated, IMO.

 

[Cyber sleuth]

I don't know where all these docs are coming from... but here is the Ex Parte Pleading from 10/12 submitted by Rozzi (found on reddit)
View attachment 458719View attachment 458720View attachment 458721View attachment 458722View attachment 458723View attachment 458724View attachment 458725

More Downplaying and distancing. MW worked for AB first as an intern and then employee, finally becoming the Operations manager. 8 years total. Left in 2021. This is all per MW in his MS interview. So another intentional sleight of hand with the phrase " worked for AB at one point". Also, their definition of "immediately disclosed" seems very different from a laypersons definition if it takes them 3+ DAYS to disclose.
MW is hung out to dry and the defense gets to play the victim. Sorry, I am not buying what they are selling.

The TRUTH could show up with an engraved invitation and valid, unexpired identification and this D would not be able to find it.

 

[StarryStarryNight]

What you're missing is that a judge can not remove a defendant's attorneys against their wishes and against the defendant's wishes, and table the motions filed by those attorneys. What an mess! I fully expect Gull to be removed a judge and the two attorneys reinstated, IMO.

So are you saying that a judge is required to leave out of control attorneys on a case, and let them run roughshod over and ignore the judge’s orders, just because the defendant or the attorneys want to stay?
Or are you saying that attorneys who say they are resigning, then admit that they lied because it was part of their strategy should be allowed to turn everything in its head and remain on the case.
I feel like their fake resigning was their plan. They resign and there’s no hearing. Then they can whine about the judge not having a hearing. The judge showed them some grace by allowing them to resign….for abhorrent behavior…instead of blasting them in open court. They took advantage of her kindness. If she is removed they might as well let RA walk, because the wrong people will be winning this. Libby and Abby will not see justice, and Baldwin and Rozzi don’t care. I don’t think they care about RA either.

 

[Dhighsmith]

Two-Part Post
Part One:
I only assume to know the answers to my posted questions here, Criminal Law is outside my comfort zone of Civil and Regulatory experience so to avoid inaccurate comments- are the issues and circumstances under such a leak that transpired here more of a court administrative issue than evidentiary? Are the issues and the actions by JG regarding the leak grounds for an appeal should RA be convicted?
Tremendously helpful if expert in Criminal Law can clarify these issues specific to the leak, TIA!

Part Two:
The filed Affidavit of MW does not include date that the images were obtained by MW from Defense Attorneys’ crime scene photos located in AB’s conference room of law office. The detail on date of MW’s actions may possibly be relevant to potential claims of a prior leak to the image suspected of depicting “F” symbol on a tree trunk. Does anyone have sourced information on details of a prior leak- possibly of the tree image? TIA!
Request is for sourced info only and not actual image(s)- to avoid any confusion.

Post is strictly my personal thoughts and opinions.

 

[Jurisprudence]

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."

And at 40:55 in this "But, I've also heard from a lot of different investigators..."
jmo

 

[Trebor5591]

So are you saying that a judge is required to leave out of control attorneys on a case, and let them run roughshod over and ignore the judge’s orders, just because the defendant or the attorneys want to stay?
Or are you saying that attorneys who say they are resigning, then admit that they lied because it was part of their strategy should be allowed to turn everything in its head and remain on the case.
I feel like their fake resigning was their plan. They resign and there’s no hearing. Then they can whine about the judge not having a hearing. The judge showed them some grace by allowing them to resign….for abhorrent behavior…instead of blasting them in open court. They took advantage of her kindness. If she is removed they might as well let RA walk, because the wrong people will be winning this. Libby and Abby will not see justice, and Baldwin and Rozzi don’t care. I don’t think they care about RA either.

They don't seem out-of-control to me. They seem like smart defense attorneys, skilled at their jobs. The leak of the crime scene photos was not good, but it wasn't Baldwin who leaked them, it was his former employee. That would be negligence at best, not gross negligence.

If the judge has problems with them for specific reasons, I believe it's accepted practice to sanction them, not to remove them from the case, above the objections of the defendant.

Let's see what the Indiana Supreme Court rules. I predict Judge Gull will be removed and Baldwin and Rozzi reinstated. JMO

 

[O.Incandenza]

I don't know where all these docs are coming from... but here is the Ex Parte Pleading from 10/12 submitted by Rozzi (found on reddit)
View attachment 458719View attachment 458720View attachment 458721View attachment 458722View attachment 458723View attachment 458724View attachment 458725

I guess that answers the question of whether the apparently intentional violation of the gag order by LE was ever raised with the judge. I wonder if they will investigate that as well?

 

[Emma Peel]

I don't know where all these docs are coming from... but here is the Ex Parte Pleading from 10/12 submitted by Rozzi (found on reddit)
View attachment 458719View attachment 458720View attachment 458721View attachment 458722View attachment 458723View attachment 458724View attachment 458725

@Ward Thisperer
The source is the Court's Docket.
See County stamp top page 1.
*****
TLDR?
Lotta stuff going on here. I'll hand it to Rozzi for pulling a detailed organized brief together.

Westerman doesn't need to worry about sitting for the bar anytime soon.

Westerman lawyered up, took a week to make written confession (affidavit) after coming clean w/ Baldwin. He could be charged with a crime - likely ongoing investigation?

Baldwin gave no permission, is a victim of a crime, and the criminal has admitted as much.

Baldwin's discussion of case w/ former colleague breached the gag order.

What's the appropriate disciplinary action for breach of gag order? (There should be plenty of examples on Court records across gag-happy Indiana.)

Rozzi's accepts responsibility - by way of being co-counsel.

Misc:
(In one sentence, there's a typo that changes the sentence meaning in a negative way. "It is also worth nothing" - should be "noting". Top of last paragraph of section 1. That gave me pause at first.)

Other Observations:
This document (Rozzi to Gull) was filed w/ Rozzi's / Hennesseys set of motions to the Court to remain Counsel. The Court blocked the filing noting that Rozzi was no longer repping RA, withdrew, wasn't permitted to file.

Although I think these motions in Gull's Court, despite her instruction - eventually - remained once the first SCION motion was filed at the higher court. Nevertheless, this document was an attachment to those papers, along w/ MW's affidavit, that was kept as confidential (or sealed?) on the docket.

Obviously at some point today, citizens who followed the process to receive copies of these various documents did receive them in answer to their request.

I'm wondering if they are now available via the electronic Gull docket?

All JMO

 

[Emma Peel]

Two-Part Post
Part One:
I only assume to know the answers to my posted questions here, Criminal Law is outside my comfort zone of Civil and Regulatory experience so to avoid inaccurate comments- are the issues and circumstances under such a leak that transpired here more of a court administrative issue than evidentiary? Are the issues and the actions by JG regarding the leak grounds for an appeal should RA be convicted?
Tremendously helpful if expert in Criminal Law can clarify these issues specific to the leak, TIA!

Part Two:
The filed Affidavit of MW does not include date that the images were obtained by MW from Defense Attorneys’ crime scene photos located in AB’s conference room of law office. The detail on date of MW’s actions may possibly be relevant to potential claims of a prior leak to the image suspected of depicting “F” symbol on a tree trunk. Does anyone have sourced information on details of a prior leak- possibly of the tree image? TIA!
Request is for sourced info only and not actual image(s)- to avoid any confusion.

Post is strictly my personal thoughts and opinions.

FWIW: It seems this "when did MW do the crime" is answered in Rozzi letter to Gull dated 10/12/23.
I've read it once, and didn't mark the section, but it's an earlier date - near or before August - several months before this 10/12/23, and some case theory that was stolen w/ the photos, the P (Nick) has agreed is an nearly finished draft of what was (in August?) presented to the Court in papers and that theory exists on the docket. I am paraphrasing here; sorry that I'm too lazy to reread the Rozzi missive right now. MOO

 

[Jurisprudence]

...here is the Ex Parte Pleading from 10/12 submitted by Rozzi
View attachment 458719View attachment 458720View attachment 458721View attachment 458722View attachment 458723View attachment 458724View attachment 458725

[sbm] Well. This is quite enlightening imo. The communication was made in response to NM's (prosecutors) comments that they should be disqualified. It is filed for record with a request that it be placed under seal. (Both of these things can be seen on page 1). And, look at paragraph 10. Until this I thought no one on that side was aware of this. I'm glad to see they were (and are). I think it is highly relevant to the dq decision made by the judge.

Thank you for sharing this.

jmo

 

[Emma Peel]

[sbm] Well. This is quite enlightening imo. The communication was made in response to NM's (prosecutors) comments that they should be disqualified. It is filed for record with a request that it be placed under seal. (Both of these things can be seen on page 1). And, look at paragraph 10. Until this I thought no one on that side was aware of this. I'm glad to see they were (and are). I think it is highly relevant to the dq decision made by the judge.

Thank you for sharing this.

jmo

Yes; the Prosecution gets a bye on breaching the gag order, no consequence ...
and demands the Defense - be DQ'd.

 

[zh0r4]

Yes; the Prosecution gets a bye on breaching the gag order, no consequence ...
and demands the Defense - be DQ'd.

And demands the Defense should be DQ’d at the recommendation of…..the Prosecution (their opponent). Hmm.

“9. What are the practical implications of disqualification? As has been previously reported to the Court, the discovery in this case involves tens of thousands of tips, hundreds of thousands of pages of documents, thousands upon thousands of hours of video, and the engagement of various experts, in different disciplines, to address a multitude of evidentiary issues. The Defense has been working feverishly over the past year, to obtain, consume, and understand all of this information. The defense team has engaged in numerous depositions. Various pleadings have been filed with the Court. These pleadings contain work product that has resulted from the thousands of hours spent by the Defense team in preparing Mr. Allen's defense. It is entirely impractical to even consider the prospect of disqualifying either one or both of us. It would be nearly impossible for successor attorneys to effectively engage in such a massive endeavor in familiarizing themselves with the discovery and thereafter, adopting the work product and theories of the current defense team, and thereafter, moving forward with an effective representation of Mr. Allen. We need to see the forest for the trees here. There is no doubt that the breach of security warranted immediate attention and necessitates some action to try and stop the further dissemination of the materials. However, this breach simply does not rise to the level of disqualification which would naturally, unduly delay the administration of justice for Mr. Allen and the victims" families;”