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

[FromGermany1]

Why is the Odinism a trail to follow and the "rubber boots and bomb threat" trail (IP with it's many RSOs) is not at all? In 2017 there seemed to be a possible connection.
(Although I for my part never thought of BG wearing rubber boots.)

 

[FrostedGlass]

So now we've all reread the Franks memo, do we agree the defence intentionally referenced an untrue theory about the victim potentially being strung up by her feet to drain her blood when the evidence clearly rules that out? (Her hair would be full of blood)

Why did they do that if they are the kind of counsel who only cite facts?

There is no evidence to support this wild claim. Almost as if they made it up to tie into their odinist conspiracy

ETA: this is why I don't give them the benefit of the doubt when they need to be believed - e.g. about the leak. This is a defence team willing to lie. Odinists prison guards who are in on the murders forcing a confession? Give me a break. No reputable counsel makes that argument.

Before I agree, I need help with the "evidence" part that I noted in red.
Does that come from (what some believe is) the full-of-lies memorandum or somewhere else?

 

[mrjitty]

Before I agree, I need help with the "evidence" part that I noted in red.
Does that come from (what some believe is) the full-of-lies memorandum or somewhere else?

The Memo notes the body was largely free of blood and makes a song and dance about how this might be.

A body hung from a tree to bleed out would drip and run via gravity i.e the head and hair would be stained and soaked. I've seen this in other cases with head wounds where the victim is lying - the hair gets soaked.

Furthermore a body hung from a rope will likely have markings on the ankles or legs where the rope bites.

The defence obviously made this part up.

I simply include it as to the counter the suggestion the defence would not lie or resort to fabrication.

Here we have a specific example of fabulation.

 

[FrostedGlass]

The Memo notes the body was largely free of blood and makes a song and dance about how this might be.

A body hung from a tree to bleed out would drip and run via gravity i.e the head and hair would be stained and soaked. I've seen this in other cases with head wounds where the victim is lying - the hair gets soaked.

Furthermore a body hung from a rope will likely have markings on the ankles or legs where the rope bites.

The defence obviously made this part up.

I simply include it as to the counter the suggestion the defence would not lie or resort to fabrication.

Here we have a specific example of fabulation.

We have very little knowledge of the crime scene looks like. We don't fully know what condition the bodies were in or the extent of all the wounds. "Gruesome" and "nightmares" are words that I've seen used to describe it.

I can think of two scenarios where her hair and body would be clean. One is that the killer used the creek; the other one... I don't want to go there.

 

[mrjitty]

We have very little knowledge of the crime scene looks like. We don't fully know what condition the bodies were in or the extent of all the wounds. "Gruesome" and "horror" are words that I've seen used to describe it.

I can think of two scenarios where her hair and body would be clean. One is that the killer used the creek; the other one... I don't want to go there.

Well sure - it was achieved somehow (if we believe the characterisation), but I am left wondering what the stringing up speculation was doing in a Franks memo

 

[FrostedGlass]

Well sure - it was achieved somehow (if we believe the characterisation), but I am left wondering what the stringing up speculation was doing in a Franks memo

We don't know at this point; but whatever the driving force behind it was must have been worth risking years and years of a successful practice.

My take on the Franks' Memo was evidence was withheld in order to obtain the SW. The Purdue professor and Click info was also withheld from the xD. It seems that those all tie in together.

 

[Jurisprudence]

NM accused the defense in open court of outright lying in their filings. This could be a problem for NM if it is established these attorneys did not lie imo.

An attorney has the right to float a theory. We don't have to like it. I think focus is being lost here in the back-and-forth opinions and outrage over what the various parties involved in this case who are not even the victims or the accused are alleged to have done. Allegations of conspiracy theories are misplaced - and are being misunderstood.

jmo

 

[Megnut]

We don't know at this point; but whatever the driving force behind it was must have been worth risking years and years of a successful practice.

My take on the Franks' Memo was evidence was withheld in order to obtain the SW. The Purdue professor and Click info was also withheld from the xD. It seems that those all tie in together.

Withheld from the SW? Or just not included? The bigger issue, if there us one, is whether it was withheld from the defense, not handed over in discovery.

I still need more information. Is the Prosecution required to share every single email, especially if no report is filed?

Rather than any flagrant abuse of discovery, this has the feel to me what we see in every criminal trial, as the defense tries to exploit any angle they can, which is in many ways the strength of the justice system. It pushes the prosecution to work at proving their case.

And the defense will continue to look for holes, pole holes, wriggle holes in an attempt to create or expose reasonable doubt.

We are a long way away from trial, I fear, regardless of who represents RA. We all need to want the fairest of trials.

Me, I hope it results ultimately in a solid conviction.

JMO

 

[Jurisprudence]

Something that is odd to me about US trials compared to my home jurisdiction is the willingness of defence counsel to engage in active deception not to mention smearing of the fellow professionals without evidence. I'd face disciplinary proceedings if I claimed corruption by a prosecutor without evidence.

[bbm]
Oh, you are an attorney? I agree -- I believe NM could have a problem.

jmo

 

[Jurisprudence]

I would hope a judge would read something before ruling on it, especially something as serious as a Franks memo-which was released September 18. I would think both judges and lawyers are required to read a heap of documents as a part of their job?

Instead of reading it and reading how the search warrant appears to have been conducted on falsified and/or misleading evidence, by some of the same LE who have violated constitutional rights re: search warrants before….she just DQ’d the defense with no due process, simultaneously violating the constitutional rights of the defendant and his attorneys. Seems legit.

JMO

Link to picture of transcript with her exact words:
Post in thread 'IN - Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #171'
IN - Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #171

It's clear that we all have opinions on this highly publicized case. Mine is that she never read it in detail because once received and doing a slugging/skim, she never planned to have a hearing on it. She expects it to be dropped by the newly appointed counsel. This is speculation only. And, time will tell.

jmo

 

[sunshineray]

The Memo notes the body was largely free of blood and makes a song and dance about how this might be.

A body hung from a tree to bleed out would drip and run via gravity i.e the head and hair would be stained and soaked. I've seen this in other cases with head wounds where the victim is lying - the hair gets soaked.

Furthermore a body hung from a rope will likely have markings on the ankles or legs where the rope bites.

The defence obviously made this part up.

I simply include it as to the counter the suggestion the defence would not lie or resort to fabrication.

Here we have a specific example of fabulation.

I agree. The D had access to all the discovery. If this had happened to AW the medical reports would have noted such a thing, the effects on her body. That the D didn't mention anything from an after death report that would substantiate that AW's feet/ankles/legs were affected in any way speaks loudly to the fact there was nothing to suggest it. What a horrific fabrication, what unethical and un-empathic behavior on their part, spinning such a tale like that and then filing it for public consumption. AJMO

 

[dotr]

'Nov 13, 2023
The judge refused to reinstate Allen's original attorney even though they wanted to represent him for free.'

 

[sunshineray]

We don't know at this point; but whatever the driving force behind it was must have been worth risking years and years of a successful practice.

My take on the Franks' Memo was evidence was withheld in order to obtain the SW. The Purdue professor and Click info was also withheld from the xD. It seems that those all tie in together.

Tie together in what way? A PCA for a search warrant does not include every bit of information LE have delved into through 6 years of investigations. It includes just enough facts at that time to convince a judge to sign it. Did you expect the search warrant to be a mirror of the after-the-fact theories that the suspect's defense lawyers supposedly gleaned from the mountains of discovery? That makes no sense to me. AJMO

 

[Jurisprudence]

With respect, this is not true. There have been plenty of ritual killings in the U.S.

[sbm]

I agree with this overall point you are making here. I also do not believe that factual statements can be made that this has never happened in this country before and therefore, the defense theory is false and conspiratorial. Absent an official report making a finding that this has never happened in the United States, it's akin to proving a negative. Conversely, sources citing that they have occurred, while they may be rare, would be easier to find. And, even assuming there is disagreement in whole or in part with the sources that do reference it, that mere disagreement still does not provide any support for factual statements made to the contrary (that this has never happened in the US). Thank you for the references you provided.

jmo

 

[sunshineray]

It's clear that we all have opinions on this highly publicized case. Mine is that she never read it in detail because once received and doing a slugging/skim, she never planned to have a hearing on it. She expects it to be dropped by the newly appointed counsel. This is speculation only. And, time will tell.

jmo

Maybe it deserves to be dropped in it's current form and done over in a more professional way?

 

[FrostedGlass]

Tie together in what way? A PCA for a search warrant does not include every bit of information LE have delved into through 6 years of investigations. It includes just enough facts at that time to convince a judge to sign it. Did you expect the search warrant to be a mirror of the after-the-fact theories that the suspect's defense lawyers supposedly gleaned from the mountains of discovery? That makes no sense to me. AJMO

Infamous Memorandum, pg 90
QOUTE
Liggett either intentionally or recklessly concealed the Odinite/Brad Holder information
from Judge Diener in his October 13, 2022, Affidavit for Search Warrant. Then Liggett and McCleland attempted to conceal exculpatory information from the Defense.
Had Judge Diener known of this concealed evidence, then Diener would not – or should
not – have signed the warrant. And had the Defense not dug in hard and found the needles in the haystack that led to its knowledge of Holder and Odinism, then the Defense may never have thought to ask for the missing discovery, and McCleland would never have turned over the Click letter to the Defense. Without the Click letter the Defense would not have learned of other exculpatory evidence.
The facts show that Liggett acted intentionally and recklessly.

DELPHI: Memorandum in Support of Motion PDF | PDF | Prosecutor | Police

DELPHI: Memorandum in Support of Motion.pdf

www.scribd.com

 

[mrjitty]

The Odinism stuff doesn’t have anything to do with PCA for a search warrant

Basis for a warrant is on whether there is sufficient grounds to believe evidence might be recovered. Other suspects or exculpatory evidence might be relevant to an arrest warrant but not a search warrant.

The defence arguments seem better suited to a preliminary hearing IMO

Probable cause: The officer should give reasonable information to support the possibility that the evidence of illegality will be found

Probable cause

 

[Cyber sleuth]

I agree. The D had access to all the discovery. If this had happened to AW the medical reports would have noted such a thing, the effects on her body. That the D didn't mention anything from an after death report that would substantiate that AW's feet/ankles/legs were affected in any way speaks loudly to the fact there was nothing to suggest it. What a horrific fabrication, what unethical and un-empathic behavior on their part, spinning such a tale like that and then filing it for public consumption. AJMO

I’m going to say it again. The fact that they did not meet with the forensic pathologist that conducted the autopsies prior to filing the Franks Memorandum speaks volumes.

 

[DeDee]

So in your view the Prosecution is to blame that the Defence leaked the discovery?

The P is to blame because the D did not leak the photos. P saw the case slipping away in AUG and were in full blown panic mode by Sept 18 when the Franks Memo dropped. They took advantage of a man who was willing to play dirty and possibly needed money or whatnot. The photos were like insurance or an Ace in the hole to the P. The leak was used to manipulate the D off the case .

This was the legal activity during AUG when the photos were stolen

8/8/23 - Sheriff Liggett deposition where he learns D is interested in the Odin theory
8/10/23 - Holeman deposition
8/17/23 - Guards stop wearing Odin patches

P needed this line of Defense to stop in its tracks. JG helped them.
MOO

TY to @duckcat @Ward Thisperer for the AUG TimeLines

 

[mrjitty]

Maybe it deserves to be dropped in it's current form and done over in a more professional way?

Filing applications is a professional way focussed only on the relevant facts and citing the relevant authorities at hand?

Whatever next!