IN - Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #171

Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Admitting that your client confessed multiple times in open court, like the ex-defense did, should have been the ex-defense’s cue to start some plea bargain negotiations.
In$tead, they ignored that and began their $corched earth policy of ridiculou$ allegation$ in inflammatory motion$ which have extended and prolonged the proce$$ by their own mi$behavior.
All of the ridiculou$ne$$ $tarted with RA’$ confe$$ion$. Perhap$ the ex-defen$e realized that to plea bargain in the be$t intere$t of RA, the lead up to the trial would be $hortened con$iderably and they would lose acce$$ to the ca$h they were getting for repre$enting RA.
Make$ you wonder….$$$$$$$.


edit: typo

With respect, should this trial become nationally high profile (will it be televised? does the Judge determine this?) ... it would not be it's not uncommon for all various parties involved, including the prosecution, defense, victim's family, and sometimes even the judge, to receive book deals or other media opportunities ... or even new jobs.

That being said, the televising of this potentially high-profile trial seems to be in the hands of the Judge.

JMO
 
With respect, should this trial become nationally high profile (will it be televised? does the Judge determine this?) ... it would not be it's not uncommon for all various parties involved, including the prosecution, defense, victim's family, and sometimes even the judge, to receive book deals or other media opportunities ... or even new jobs.

That being said, the televising of this potentially high-profile trial seems to be in the hands of the Judge.

JMO

Just checking on whether you meant to reference one of my posts or someone else’s because my post didn’t have anything to do with judges or book deals or televising the trial.
It’s all good. Just a little confused.
 
Not a local but there has been discussion of past conduct in cases involving violations.
Ok, thanks. That happened in 2008. Are the same people still involved in RA's case?
 
Admitting that your client confessed multiple times in open court, like the ex-defense did, should have been the ex-defense’s cue to start some plea bargain negotiations.
In$tead, they ignored that and began their $corched earth policy of ridiculou$ allegation$ in inflammatory motion$ which have extended and prolonged the proce$$ by their own mi$behavior.
All of the ridiculou$ne$$ $tarted with RA’$ confe$$ion$. Perhap$ the ex-defen$e realized that to plea bargain in the be$t intere$t of RA, the lead up to the trial would be $hortened con$iderably and they would lose acce$$ to the ca$h they were getting for repre$enting RA.
Make$ you wonder….$$$$$$$.


edit: typo
"Indiana pays public defenders $90 an hour, which will rise to $100 an hour on Jan. 1." (2022 article, so currently paying $100/hr)
"Lawyers in Indiana typically charge between $168 and $448 per hour, with the average being $242."

These are very experienced attorneys who certainly charge a greater fee when they are not contracted for public defense, so I don't really see that this case is a cash grab for them, IMO.
 
Just checking on whether you meant to reference one of my posts or someone else’s because my post didn’t have anything to do with judges or book deals or televising the trial.
It’s all good. Just a little confused.
My post references the dollar signs in your post - a post which states the D is orchestrating and exploiting a false defense and intentionally working against their client's best interests (a plea deal) - because of the D's greed.

Given the D is not exactly making bank on the PD dole; I addressed the next level of this false argument to hasten its end.

IMO, we're all better off discussing the FM's theories on the merits.

JMO
 
My post references the dollar signs in your post - a post which states the D is orchestrating and exploiting a false defense and intentionally working against their client's best interests (a plea deal) - because of the D's greed.

Given the D is not exactly making bank on the PD dole; I addressed the next level of this false argument to hasten its end.

IMO, we're all better off discussing the FM's theories on the merits.

JMO

Got it. My post was not really serious, so I apologize for that.
 
Not a local but there has been discussion of past conduct in cases involving violations.
This can be true of many local judicial organizations across the country. Allegations of Police Misconduct, Prosecutor Misconduct and Defense Lawyer Misconduct abounds, it's not exclusive to CC in Delphi.

Ironically, DH, AB's friend/attorney is facing his own violation for a recent DUI.

jmo
 
Admitting that your client confessed multiple times in open court, like the ex-defense did, should have been the ex-defense’s cue to start some plea bargain negotiations.
In$tead, they ignored that and began their $corched earth policy of ridiculou$ allegation$ in inflammatory motion$ which have extended and prolonged the proce$$ by their own mi$behavior.
All of the ridiculou$ne$$ $tarted with RA’$ confe$$ion$. Perhap$ the ex-defen$e realized that to plea bargain in the be$t intere$t of RA, the lead up to the trial would be $hortened con$iderably and they would lose acce$$ to the ca$h they were getting for repre$enting RA.
Make$ you wonder….$$$$$$$.


edit: typo
Your post made me laugh; especially where you had to edit a typo. :)

Did you forget the xD offered to represent them pro bono?
Pro bono is short for the Latin phrase pro bono publico, which means "for the public good." Pro bono work involves providing free services, rather than cash or goods, to those in need.
 
RSBM x2 (idk if I’m suppose to RSBM twice or can say x2? Feel free to correct me ofc)

I interpreted it this way because contextually, saying something is not fact is synonymous with falsified. It is fine if that’s how you feel, I don’t report anyone & respect different opinions. Ijs contextually, not fact = falsified.

Source:
Not a fact, in that context, to me means has not been submitted as fact, cross examined as to validity and corroborated by further testimony or physical evidence. Either side can spin many things for advantage. If not proven fully at trial, the weight a jury may give it is up in the air and open to their interpretation. AJMO
 
These are very experienced attorneys who certainly charge a greater fee when they are not contracted for public defense, so I don't really see that this case is a cash grab for them, IMO.
RSBM
I think the main difference is that most individuals may not have $200k +++ to hire and defend their case and may not WANT to use all their family resources. Most will have a limit to billable hours they can afford.
The state may cut some line item expenses but isn’t going to track the invoiced hours and audit them for inconsistencies like an individual would.
An individual may not have authorized 5 figure franks memorandum.
 
MOO But I believe it is more of an attempt to “prove” rather than to “explain away” that their client confessed under duress and fear of violence toward his family and self. As I said before, fear is a powerful tool of control. How many of us here under a similar circumstance would not confess if someone threatened harm to our family. Do we accept that all guards are ”nice” to inmates especially those charged with such a crime?

I’m not judging anyone for their opinion, we all have one, just challenging everyone to contemplate deeply. What would YOU do?

I don’t know if RA is innocent at this point, but I am not convinced of his guilt either. As many here will acknowledge, not all is well in Carrol County. JMO
Personally, I'd let the authorities know, my lawyers know and the media. I'd tell them who was threatening and what...all of them, naming names. My family's lives would matter more than my own. IF all that threatening and basically blackmail was going on. I don't believe it was BUT IF it was. AJMO
 
<modsnip - quoted post was removed>

EDIT:

The defense never said there was a rope in the description of the crime scene. (p.28-32 is CS description) But in the footnote on p.39 under the hypothetical crime scenario section beginning on p.33

This is hypothetically what 5’4 RA would need to do in one hour and 17 minutes to commit the murders alone.
-the mention is of a yellow rope at the crime scene in the footnote on page p.39 (thank you @TL4S!) p. 39 “on a tree stringing her up by her feet.”

I may need to read the FM 2 more times, the footnotes alone!

Pics below of p. 33 with intro of hypothetical, p.39, p.40

Source:
DELPHI: Memorandum in Support of Motion PDF | PDF | Prosecutor | Police
Isn't a "hypothetical" neither true nor false? It's a proposition of a concept not fact, so it shouldn't be presented as fact. It can be submitted, in court, to a jury at opening statements but they are not testimony, right?
 
Cult murders have happened but I’ve never heard of an Odinism specific cult murder. There is o9a (more like Satanists) who allegedly use Norse runes in their rituals.

But in his MS interview, Click says although he agrees with the defense about who may have murdered the girls, that no one in LE believes they were killed in a ritualistic sacrifice. IMO multiple perps are most likely.

JMO.
No, but I am wondering if this is even something that has ever happened?

Have any young girls been found in the woods with branches placed as horns and Runes carved in trees?

No one would have to call it into the local news if there was the same ritualistic crime scene left behind.

It seems more likely it was a staged crime scene than it was really evidence of any cult murder that day. Wouldn't someone notice a cult of white bearded prison guards lurking in the woods that day?
Of course not. People try to claim that there have been ritualistic cult killings in this country. Remember the Satanic Panic? It’s really never happened. The only things we’ve seen are some cults murdering their own members for various reasons. But not as sacrifices.

No one is stalking strangers to kill them in a bizarre, pagan ritual.
 
So I wonder why the defense put all that focus on it being a Odinist cult doing a ritual killing in the woods with horns going out of the girl's heads? It just makes a nonsensical joke about the girl's gruesome deaths.

It makes them sound like lunatics. JMO
You know they’re counting on creating doubt in the minds of at least some jurors who might be swayed by unfounded fears of pagan ritual murders.

I mean we had people believing in that weird theory of perverts feeding off the tears of kids being tortured or whatever. So they know that there is a subset of the population that can possibly be affected by this kind of suggestion.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
147
Guests online
1,646
Total visitors
1,793

Forum statistics

Threads
605,899
Messages
18,194,645
Members
233,636
Latest member
flimflam
Back
Top