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

[girlhasnoname]

That seems to be an unfair framing imo, considering they only were given what they believe to be exculpatory evidence less than 2 weeks before putting out the FM.

The Defense got the majority of all the State's Discovery in April. That's when RA went crazy, broke his tablet, started eating the discovery docs and then confessed 5 times over a recorded phone line to his wife and mother.I don't think that is a coincidence.

That's also when RA went on a hunger strike and started drooling on himself, which I think was a concerted effort on his (and the D's) part to present him as mentally unstable. Up until that time RA had been eating, showering, using his exercise time, reading, talking to his family, not in jeopardy as the Defense claimed subsequently after that.

JMO

 

[mrjitty]

I will state again that there is no way, based on what we currently know that the Defense was going to be prepared for a jury trial in January. They haven't even had the FM hearing and many others. With holidays and the Courts calendar during this time, I just don't find it realistic. They had a signed Motion by RA for Speedy Trial waiting to be dated.....

Another bluff by the Defense IMO.

JMO

My beef with this interview is my ongoing beef with these interviews. The attorney cites no actual authorities for his statements. I get that is because they might want to keep it accessible, but it feels very much like trial attorney stuff, and not the kind of legal analysis and argumentation required on appeal.

For instance the attorney states that the dismissal of the duo once they pivoted to pro-bono raises important constitutional issues because of the strong constitutional right of the defendant to his selected attorney. But that isn't actually the issue here. Had they been pro bono attorneys, Gulls discretion to dismiss them would be much less. But that didn't happen. The question is whether dismissed court appointed attorneys can simply be reappointed by the defendant via this back door route. The idea this is protected in the constitution is thin indeed. I understand from The Prosecutors there is only one weak authority which is not discussed in the interview - but surely its the most important thing to look at?!

To demonstrate this, consider the situation where Baldwin is conflicted out because he now faces criminal and disciplinary action for the leak. Clearly the defendant cannot simply reappoint him pro-bono. Indeed it is laughable, because Baldwin is almost certainly in jeopardy in those respects.

So the question is not "but the constitution" but whether they were validly removed.

 

[girlhasnoname]

As a general matter a defendant has a right to counsel of its choice - especially when it's privately retained and even when it's court-appointed if there has been a relationship established (and arguably here, the relationship established was significant). These cases are discussed in the thread and in the briefs and filings accessible on the docket except for lower court docket bc she wiped them out but you will find them as exhibits to the SCOIN action. But this scenario here is unprecedented. While it's possible this might have happened before, no one seemed to care enough to challenge it. Had defense counsel been provided notice and opportunity to be heard and the ability to adequately prepare for a hearing on these issues and then they (RA) still lost, I'm not sure SCOIN would have even accepted the case. I don't think they would have become involved and we probably wouldn't even be talking about this anymore tbh.

This is why in the 2 volume record of proceedings that accompanied the relator's brief in the second original action filed in SCION on 10/6 (linked here: IN - Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #170), you'll see Hennessy made it a point to get objections on the record (Exhibit T) and then later, filed a sworn supplement to expand upon and preserve them (Verified Supplementation of Record, entered on 2nd docket below on 10/31/2023)

All jmo

Indiana Courts Case Search - MyCase

Indiana Supreme Court, Public Access

public.courts.in.gov

Indiana Courts Case Search - MyCase

Indiana Supreme Court, Public Access

public.courts.in.gov

I wonder if there are any examples of this type involving Defense Council charged with gross misconduct, and leaking of CS photos and Depositions? It's not like Judge Gull disqualified them because she didn't like their suits or something frivolous. JG has actually ruled in favor of the Defense in previous Motions, she recently denied the State access to RA's medical records.

A leaker in the chain of recipients of this evidence committed suicide, this is extraordinary IMO.

MOO

 

[mrjitty]

I wonder if there are any examples of this type involving Defense Council charged with gross misconduct, and leaking of CS photos and Depositions? It's not like Judge Gull disqualified them because she didn't like their suits or something frivolous. JG has actually ruled in favor of the Defense in previous Motions, she recently denied the State access to RA's medical records.

A leaker in the chain of recipients of this evidence committed suicide, this is extraordinary IMO.

MOO

it seems most of the time counsel is removed is due to conflicts

Conflict can also arise where counsel does something naughty in the case, which might lead to discipline. Say for example counsel tried to obstruct justice in preparation of the case, counsel might then be conflicted out as their own interests could come in to conflict with the client's interests.

 

[Salah11]

I wonder if there are any examples of this type involving Defense Council charged with gross misconduct, and leaking of CS photos and Depositions? It's not like Judge Gull disqualified them because she didn't like their suits or something frivolous. JG has actually ruled in favor of the Defense in previous Motions, she recently denied the State access to RA's medical records.

A leaker in the chain of recipients of this evidence committed suicide, this is extraordinary IMO.

MOO

I don’t understand U.S law as I’m British but if Judge Gull gets thrown off and the 2 Clowns reinstated then I find it farcical. It would be like rewarding them for misconduct and considering the fact these images were of underage murdered girls it’s even more sickening.

MOO

 

[Justice101]

I don’t understand U.S law as I’m British but if Judge Gull gets thrown off and the 2 Clowns reinstated then I find it farcical. It would be like rewarding them for misconduct and considering the fact these images were of underage murdered girls it’s even more sickening.

MOO

I don't think that would happen.

A judge has a right (no, responsibility) to JUDGE whether a defendant's defense team is competent and ethical.

 

[Salah11]

I don't think that would happen.

A judge has a right (no, responsibility) to JUDGE whether a defendant's defense team is competent and ethical.

Fingers crossed

 

[Justice101]

Oh please Odinists

i read that entire document and it was farcical and then we have his lawyers friends popping by and leaking confidential documents. They are a bunch of clowns!!

IMO

The Odonists is pretty far fetched.

I think this is an indicator that the defense does not have a lot of options for defending him.

But that is just my opinion based on what I've read from the PCA and other released documents.

 

[FrostedGlass]

Attorney Shay Hughes weighs in; he has the two documents included in his post.
https://twitter.com/publicdefender_
Shay Hughes
@publicdefender_

Good example would be the Court’s Order issued May 25, 2023 (1st pic). Order provides the hearing on June 15, 2023 will address Allen’s Motion to Reconsider and Request for Due Process Hearing.

Now review the Order issued Oct 12, 2023 (2nd pic). Mentions a status hearing will take place to discuss an upcoming hearing and other matters that have arisen. Status hearings are generally uneventful w/ the parties providing a status to the court regarding the case and, sometimes, scheduling a future hearing.

Yes, Judge Gull sent an email expressing her concern over Allen’s defense. But she makes no mention of disqualification. Also realize Allen provided a letter wishing Baldwin/Rozzi to remain as counsel on Oct 11, 2023. But a defendant forecasting what a court may do is not adequate notice.

Instead, sufficient notice is tailored to the circumstances of each case and depends on the private/government interests involved. Bc the Oct 19 chambers session involved disqualifying trial counsel, it logically follows that a heightened degree of notice is necessary. Referring to the hearing as a ‘status hearing’ falls short and, in some respects, is misleading as the chambers sessions was much more than mundane. #RichardAllen #Delphi #DelphiMurders #truecrime

https://twitter.com/x/status/1724960176447397967

 

[Salah11]

The Odonists is pretty far fetched.

I think this is an indicator that the defense does not have a lot of options for defending him.

But that is just my opinion based on what I've read from the PCA and other released documents.

Yep when their client has confessed multiple times to loved ones and also placed himself moments before the crime happened in the same outfit it must be incredibly hard to come up with reasons why it wasn’t him . imo

 

[steeltowngirl]

That's a great question. KAK would make a great patsy. In fact, he actually confessed to being part of the crime at one point. Said he drove his car to the McDonalds and waited after dropping off the killer/

I am still not sure how he was cleared.

Was KAK cleared?

On November 11th 2022, Doug Carter (Superintendent of the Indiana State Police & well known leader & figurehead of the Delphi Murders investigation) visited the Hammer & Nigel Show at the 93.1 WIBC studio.

DOUG CARTER: We’ll continue to work… work on Kegan Kline, and whatever his connectivity might be to Abby and Libby and… almost 2100 days ago. So we will continue to work towards that.

At 8:05
ISP Superintendent Doug Carter - Hammer + Nigel Show Podcast

 

[katydid23]

Attorney Shay Hughes weighs in; he has the two documents included in his post.
https://twitter.com/publicdefender_
Shay Hughes
@publicdefender_

Good example would be the Court’s Order issued May 25, 2023 (1st pic). Order provides the hearing on June 15, 2023 will address Allen’s Motion to Reconsider and Request for Due Process Hearing.

Now review the Order issued Oct 12, 2023 (2nd pic). Mentions a status hearing will take place to discuss an upcoming hearing and other matters that have arisen. Status hearings are generally uneventful w/ the parties providing a status to the court regarding the case and, sometimes, scheduling a future hearing.

Yes, Judge Gull sent an email expressing her concern over Allen’s defense. But she makes no mention of disqualification. Also realize Allen provided a letter wishing Baldwin/Rozzi to remain as counsel on Oct 11, 2023. But a defendant forecasting what a court may do is not adequate notice.

Instead, sufficient notice is tailored to the circumstances of each case and depends on the private/government interests involved. Bc the Oct 19 chambers session involved disqualifying trial counsel, it logically follows that a heightened degree of notice is necessary. Referring to the hearing as a ‘status hearing’ falls short and, in some respects, is misleading as the chambers sessions was much more than mundane. #RichardAllen #Delphi #DelphiMurders #truecrime

https://twitter.com/x/status/1724960176447397967

Wait a minute---the judge didn't just 'mention' a hearing was coming up---Didn't she say that 'something has come up', and she expected everyone to clear their calendars, STOP working on the case, and they all needed to deal with this new issue?
ALL of the parties were aware of the leak and the tragic suicide that ensued. How can anyone pretend that the old defense team had no idea what was about to happen? How could they not know they were going to be heavily scrutinised and possibly sanctioned or fired?

 

[FrostedGlass]

Wait a minute---the judge didn't just 'mention' a hearing was coming up---Didn't she say that 'something has come up', and she expected everyone to clear their calendars, STOP working on the case, and they all needed to deal with this new issue?
ALL of the parties were aware of the leak and the tragic suicide that ensued. How can anyone pretend that the old defense team had no idea what was about to happen? How could they not know they were going to be heavily scrutinised and possibly sanctioned or fired?

Since neither one of us are attorneys, neither one of us knows the answer.
It was supposed to be a status hearing

10/16/2023

Hearing Scheduling Activity Status Hearing originally scheduled on 10/19/2023 at 2:00 PM was rescheduled to 10/19/2023 at 2:00 PM. Reason: Data Entry Error.

I'll make a wild guess that SH thinks there should have been an additional hearing scheduled to deal with the matter instead of IMO closed-door sabotage.

 

[FrostedGlass]

The Defense got the majority of all the State's Discovery in April. That's when RA went crazy, broke his tablet, started eating the discovery docs and then confessed 5 times over a recorded phone line to his wife and mother.I don't think that is a coincidence.

That's also when RA went on a hunger strike and started drooling on himself, which I think was a concerted effort on his (and the D's) part to present him as mentally unstable. Up until that time RA had been eating, showering, using his exercise time, reading, talking to his family, not in jeopardy as the Defense claimed subsequently after that.

JMO

XD was still asking for discovery pretty early in October. I've never seen it stated what percentage P had turned over to them as of April. Have you seen it? XD took about a thousand docs to him on March 24 but he still hadn't received them as of April 3.

10/10/2023

Order Issued The Court having reviewed Defendant Allen's Motion for Discovery Deadline, the Court now orders the following: without objection by the State. The State of Indiana must produce all discovery to defense counsel on or before November 1, 2023.

If you come across the date when the Odin guards took over watching RA, please post it. I'm looking but I haven't found it yet. Maybe RA was eating the docs in hopes of making himself sick enough to get to the infirmary.

I'd really like to see what kind of meds were administered to RA and when.

 

[sunshineray]

I think you are opining that Indiana's rule on redactions is atrocious. Because Old D was in compliance w/ Indiana's existing rules. Under those rules, it's not inappropriate that the Defense reviewed LE's investigative work in detail and got it into the record.

These names won't be introduced at trial. The venue change request is on record, and the Judge granting that request will help further with concerns about case-oblivious juries. The jury will never have heard of anyone's names, won't be the prosecution's 2nd uncle twice removed.

Via testimony and cross, LE will explain their 5 year investigative process to the jury.

They fact that LE looked into these other suspects earlier on, and determined they weren't involved (and why), and cleared them ... will only strengthen their case against RA. LE will have the opportunity to make sense of their case AND prove they've eliminated any other possibilities.

The parks officer that failed to properly file RA's witness statement, is STILL working the county, so that means he'll (likely) be able to explain how his errors kept the entire town in terror for 5 years over a misfile.

Otherwise, see Indiana Trial Rules posted here yesterday for what must be redacted from filings. IMO and as I recall, it's minors only. No minors in the FM. If Gull, who is in charge of the court record, believes there should be redactions beyond what the IN state statute requires, she's able to to provide specific instructions, and while she wouldn't do that for the Old D, (while she wasn't keeping the record properly), Gull has stated in her new order (in response to the SCION) that she looks forward to doing it for the New D, per yesterday's Order from Gull on her Court docket. (Gull's latest order also posted on this thread yesterday).

LE looked into many people with tens of thousands of tips and submitted confidental reports. What the D did was tantamount to publically accusing those 5 men of murdering two young girls on theory. Considering the writer's and filers have been removed from the case for gross negligence and JG sealed the FM. I hope those named are able to sue them for it. Again that's AJMO.

 

[susiQ]

They weren't there long enough to collect an entire body full of blood. It was daylight, right next to the trails, where people had already begun looking for the missing girls.

No way a ragtag cult of bearded guards was standing by a hanging corpse and draining the blood. That memo is so ridiculous.

Depending on how the artery/arteries are cut, major arteries can drain in 2 - 5 min. Death will occur within seconds. JMO

 

[Jurisprudence]

They never really planned to follow through on that Pro Bono promise. A murder trial like this would bankrupt them if they didn't get paid.

How can you say this as a fact and not even opinion? How do you know this?

jmo

 

[Jurisprudence]

So how did the 2 defense attorneys expect to do this 2 million dollar double murder case Pro Bono? Do they each have a million bucks available to donate to RA's defense?

The state side requested an obtained a budget of $2.1M (link upthread) back in March 2023. The defense was getting funds from the county as court appointed counsel until October 2023 (in court documents - Gull's email). RA executed a speedy trial request intending it to be filed in the beginning of November (see Relator's Brief in Second original Action filed 10/6/2023, Section I.D., page 7). Their plan was to proceed to trial. They needed to compel outstanding discovery but in their estimation they had enough reasonable doubt from their own investigation. They were going to trial. Imo, the state was nowhere near ready. It still would have cost them quite a lot I imagine, probably in excess of $1M but asking a person not a member of the firm to opine to their bottom line accounting is silly snark and looks foolish. The business numbers are available on line if you'd like to ask this of a person with actual knowledge of their P/L. Please come back and let us know what they say.

 

[Jurisprudence]

The State pushing for the disqualification of B&R was for gross misconduct in the leaking of CS photos and Depositions, not the Memorandum in support of the Franks Motion Hearing.

MOO

Or, maybe they just weren't ready ....
and knew they would not be.
It's possible.
jmo

 

[Jurisprudence]

I will state again that there is no way, based on what we currently know that the Defense was going to be prepared for a jury trial in January.

[sbm]

No way in the world you can make this statement as fact. Unless you are in that war room and you are in on where you stand with the investigation and discovery and unless you read the multitude of problems they presented in the FM you do not know. I believe they would have pushed ahead. I believe this threw the state into a panic. I believe it was the state that was not ready. After seeing the FM they knew they had some big problems that needed to be cleaned up.

This is jmo, not fact

The Defense got the majority of all the State's Discovery in April. That's when RA went crazy, broke his tablet, started eating the discovery docs and then confessed 5 times over a recorded phone line to his wife and mother.I don't think that is a coincidence.

[sbm]

Do we have all of the motions to compel? If so would you please provide a link. I am interested to see where they stood in terms of production and whether they produced the reports on the DNA collected in 2017 which they announced to the press would be expedited (7 years ago). TIA