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

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
zh0r4 said:
Then the prosecution is also not following, if correctly applicable….Which in turn shows JG has blatant bias. JMO.

Source of only 1 instance prosecution filing posts full name:
Post in thread 'IN - Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #171'
IN - Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #171
Click to expand...

Bias or who’s supposed to be checking, the Clerk?, missed that. I don’t think it’s an earth shattering blatant oversight.

But why didn’t the ex-D redact the girl’s names once it was brought to their attention, is my question. It’s as if they preferred the memo to not remain in the public eye.

JMO
 
Ward Thisperer said:
Perhaps, if they were being genuine, they were willing to bankrupt themselves in order to work to free someone they view as an innocent man falsely imprisoned. They wouldn't be the first defense attorneys to work on behalf of a defendant they truly believed, to their own personal and financial detriments.
Click to expand...
I think if they were being genuine, they'd be taking genuine legal actions in response to the case. They wouldn't have set forth this ridiculous Franks document, with unfounded allegations and bizarre claims.

If they were being genuine, they wouldn't have left the secret, sealed documents out on a table, while unsupervised. And then played games in the emergency hearing, by pretending to withdraw and then lying and saying they didn't withdraw. That was their legal strategy. None of that was genuine, imo
 
zh0r4 said:
p. 17,
RESPONDENT'S BRIEF IN OPPOSITION TO RELATOR'S VERIFIED PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS AND PROHIBITION
filed by Gutwein, Stake, & Gull 11/16/2023

bbm

“Relator also seeks to unseal or restore public access to the Franks Memorandum. The Franks Memorandum contains the full first and last names of the deceased minor children who are the crime victims in this case. See, e.g., Record, pp. 57, 70, 106. Names of minor children are required to be redacted from court filings in federal courts. Fed. R. Civ. P. 5.2(a). Indiana, in turn, excludes "Case Records declared confidential or excluded from Public Access pursuant to federal law."

…..Did she just cite federal law to SCION and imply federal law > SCION? That should go over well.

Source:

Indiana Courts Case Search - MyCase

Indiana Supreme Court, Public Access
public.courts.in.gov public.courts.in.gov
Click to expand...

They're stretching it in order to fashion an argument that the removal of the filing was legitimate because they don't have this requirement under Indiana law (as is evidenced by her placing prosecution docs on the record for public consumption that contain the minor victims names). This is what they have to work with:

Indiana Rules of Court, Rules on Access to Court Records

5(C) Personal Information of Litigants, Witnesses, and Children:

(1) Unless necessary to the disposition of the case, the following information shall be redacted, and no notice of exclusion from Public Access is required:

(a) Complete Social Security Numbers of living persons;

(b) Complete account numbers, personal identification numbers, and passwords.

If the information is necessary to the disposition of the case, the document containing the confidential information shall be filed on green paper (if paper filing) or filed as a confidential document (if e-filed). A separate document with the confidential information redacted shall be filed on white paper (if paper filing) or filed as a public document (if e-filing). A separate ACR Form identifying the information excluded from public access and the Rule 5 grounds for exclusion shall also be filed.

(2) The names of child witnesses in cases involving sex offenses shall be excluded from public access, and any references shall be replaced with initials or similar designation that ensures their anonymity, with no notice of exclusion from Public Access required. Names shall not be redacted in protection order cases or on no contact orders.

(3) Addresses (mail or email), dates of birth, and phone numbers of natural persons who are witnesses or victims in criminal, juvenile, or civil protection order proceedings shall be excluded from public access. The document containing the confidential information shall be filed on green paper (if paper filing) or filed as a confidential document (if e-filed). A separate document with the confidential information redacted shall be filed on white paper (if paper filing) or filed as a public document (if e-filing). A separate ACR Form identifying the information excluded from public access and the Rule 5 grounds for exclusion shall also be filed.


so they brought in the fed law (look at 5(b)(1)), and are arguing that Indiana has adopted the federal standards so it had to be redacted --- but only for the defense --- and only for the Franks memo lol

(3 is not intended to cover this, neither is 5(b)(1) imo which pertains to documents in their entirety, not to redaction. The entire case would be sealed)

jmo
 
Last edited:
Jurisprudence said:
They're stretching it in order to fashion an argument that the removal of the filing was legitimate because they don't have this requirement under Indiana law (as is evidenced by her placing prosecution docs on the record for public consumption that contain the minor victims names). This is what they have to work with:

Indiana Rules of Court, Rules on Access to Court Records

5(C) Personal Information of Litigants, Witnesses, and Children:

(1) Unless necessary to the disposition of the case, the following information shall be redacted, and no notice of exclusion from Public Access is required:

(a) Complete Social Security Numbers of living persons;

(b) Complete account numbers, personal identification numbers, and passwords.

If the information is necessary to the disposition of the case, the document containing the confidential information shall be filed on green paper (if paper filing) or filed as a confidential document (if e-filed). A separate document with the confidential information redacted shall be filed on white paper (if paper filing) or filed as a public document (if e-filing). A separate ACR Form identifying the information excluded from public access and the Rule 5 grounds for exclusion shall also be filed.

(2) The names of child witnesses in cases involving sex offenses shall be excluded from public access, and any references shall be replaced with initials or similar designation that ensures their anonymity, with no notice of exclusion from Public Access required. Names shall not be redacted in protection order cases or on no contact orders.

(3) Addresses (mail or email), dates of birth, and phone numbers of natural persons who are witnesses or victims in criminal, juvenile, or civil protection order proceedings shall be excluded from public access. The document containing the confidential information shall be filed on green paper (if paper filing) or filed as a confidential document (if e-filed). A separate document with the confidential information redacted shall be filed on white paper (if paper filing) or filed as a public document (if e-filing). A separate ACR Form identifying the information excluded from public access and the Rule 5 grounds for exclusion shall also be filed.


so they brought in the fed law (look at 5(b)(1)), and are arguing that Indiana has adopted the federal standards so it had to be redacted --- but only for the defense --- and only for the Franks memo lol (3 is not intended to cover this. The entire case would be sealed)

jmo
Click to expand...

The ex-D knew as soon as the redaction was requested but seems they didn’t care about making an issue over amending it. Why do you suppose that was?

It makes me wonder if B&R had the original data version of the memo in their possession or was it electronically filed on their behalf?
 
susiQ said:
I have no way of knowing how the xD came to the conclusion that AW died slowly. I was responding to OP who said there wasn’t enough time to collect blood from a body. I’m telling you there is, that’s all. I have no details as to all the injuries these poor children suffered or how it all went down. I was speaking only to that one point. JMHO
Click to expand...
The main point remains, the preposterous allegation set forth in the Franks memo, that one of the girls was possibly hung by her feet, is not a real possibility. There was zero blood evidence of that on the bodies.

And one OP said 'maybe they drained the blood.' Again, zero evidence that either of the girls had their blood drained. But that highlights the purpose of that bizarre Franks doc----to send everyone scurrying down rabbit holes. JMO
 
Betty P said:
Wasn't there also a reply that some of the evidence documents/files the defense had asked for had already been delivered or otherwise made available to them?
Click to expand...

Are you talking about her argument that it's moot? Yes, as soon as she asked for the extension it was expected she would use the time to try to clean up the docket as much as possible because if she has done what the writ has asked, there is arguably no justiciable issue and the court would have to dismiss as moot. So asking for the time and seeing the docket grow we kinda knew she was doing this to aim for a dismissal. She does not want to be reprimanded by the state's highest court and compelled by them to do her job. Who would want that on their record. But, had that case never been filed, there would have been no change, and the record for appeal would have been destroyed for this defendant. This is only my personal opinion, but it was pretty obvious imo.

Look at Rule 5(A)

jmo
 
Last edited:
katydid23 said:
The main point remains, the preposterous allegation set forth in the Franks memo, that one of the girls was possibly hung by her feet, is not a real possibility. There was zero blood evidence of that on the bodies.

And one OP said 'maybe they drained the blood.' Again, zero evidence that either of the girls had their blood drained. But that highlights the purpose of that bizarre Franks doc----to send everyone scurrying down rabbit holes. JMO
Click to expand...
Yes, there is zero evidence the girls had their blood drained and collected, just as there is zero evidence of a good portion of what has been posted on these threads. That’s why we have JMO, JMHO, MOO, JMT etc. Some here are aware of certain things. That doesn’t mean others will be convinced of these things. I get it. But if you are permitted the freedom to express your opinions and theories, so too should the others be permitted the option to express theirs. JMHO.
 
katydid23 said:
Were all their major arteries cut and drained? I've never heard anything that says so.
Was the body drained of blood upon discovery?? Not that we have ever heard.

Why are we even discussing something so preposterous at this point?
Click to expand...
The only thing that was ever mentioned quite a while ago was that Abby had been stuck in the neck and in her body. Just something I remembered after they started talking about Abby being exanguinated.
 
Emma Peel said:
Yeah! I just read that in the response. Mea Culpa!
Click to expand...

You were actually correct imo for reasons stated in the later post. And, don't forget too that even JG must think you are correct since she's been posting state filings with their names not redacted for public view (also linked back and up thread) for some time.

jmo
 
zh0r4 said:
To add to @susiQ’s response, IMO it would be harder to commit the murders unnoticed than carry around 8lbs of blood unnoticed. A big bag of dog food is 50lbs, 8lbs wouldn’t even weigh as much as 2 5lb dumbbells.

FTR I don’t think the time of death is accurate and believe the murders likely occurred at night, so that would make it easier too. JMO.
Click to expand...
Wasn't it said that the girls were killed there, where they were found? You think they were killed there at night?

What about all the friends and family that searched the area throughout the night?
 
susiQ said:
Respectfully, you asked me three different questions. I prefer not to get into all the specifics on why and what would be done with it. It’s already been questioned by OP, “Why are we even discussing something so preposterous at this point?”

It’s possible the blood was drained and collected, however, I don’t know if that’s what happened here.

FTR, I didn’t begin the discussion. It began with @TheVisual in post #691, which was responded to by @katydid23 in post #908, to which I responded. And, here we are! There’s that! :)
Click to expand...
And I only mentioned it because everyone was talking about Abby being hung upside down and drained of her blood. I'm only going on what has been said previously and only in connection with the Odinists IF they did it as a ceremony type ritual. I have no knowledge of them specially, just assuming. There are some really weird things in this world that we have no idea of. JMO
 
TheVisual said:
A body can drain most all of it's blood in about 5 minutes especially if the right vein is severed and the heart is beating. We only have 4-5 liters of blood. one liter per minute. Not so far fetched katydid23.
Click to expand...
Except it is farfetched because there has been no notice of or mention of either of the bodies having been drained of blood when recovered. So that whole accusation was unfounded and designed as a deflection. JMO
 
Ward Thisperer said:
I'm more prone to believe that they were taken somewhere else and killed at that location, and dumped back in the woods early in the morning.

Reasons this could be plausible:
- phone pinged in the area at 2:30am after not pinging for hours
- the bodies are said to have been moved from the location they were killed
- it is not a long walk from the road or various houses, through the woods to the areas the bodies were found, or to either side of the MHB
- the timeline to commit a kidnapping and murder, move bodies, cross a freezing cold creek, and leave before being seen by searchers is very tight, and very risky if we're to believe the murderer decided to walk well-known trails and park in plain sight before/after the murders
Click to expand...
Do you have any links to the phone pinging in that location at 2:30am---not saying I don't believe you---I do think the family was trying to have it pinged that night...judst haven't found the original soutrce
 
Ward Thisperer said:
I don't have enough confidence in LE to buy into their timeline based on what I know currently.

"In documents later released, an FBI agent noted that pieces of clothing from one of the victims were missing and that it "appeared the girls' bodies were moved and staged." There were no visible signs of a struggle or fight."
Click to expand...

What it be surprising that 2 young, terrified kidnapped girls, held at gunpoint, would not be able to put up any kind of physical fight against a large strong male?
Ward Thisperer said:
www.wthr.com

Here's a timeline of major developments in the Delphi murders case

Police sources confirmed for 13News an arrest was made in the case and a news conference was scheduled for Monday.
www.wthr.com www.wthr.com
Click to expand...
 
TheVisual said:
And I only mentioned it because everyone was talking about Abby being hung upside down and drained of her blood. I'm only going on what has been said previously and only in connection with the Odinists IF they did it as a ceremony type ritual. I have no knowledge of them specially, just assuming. There are some really weird things in this world that we have no idea of. JMO
Click to expand...
RBBM
But I do have an idea. I wasn’t opposed to what you posted, only that someone insinuated someone may be carrying around a couple gallons of blood. I also have no way of knowing if this is what happened in this particular instance. I just don’t know. But, I hear you!
 
katydid23 said:
Do you have any links to the phone pinging in that location at 2:30am---not saying I don't believe you---I do think the family was trying to have it pinged that night...judst haven't found the original soutrce
Click to expand...
I added a link in this post here:
www.websleuths.com

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

I expect your full analysis of Judge Gulls work on my desk by 9am Haha I think you have me confused with somebody else!
www.websleuths.com www.websleuths.com
katydid23 said:
What it be surprising that 2 young, terrified kidnapped girls, held at gunpoint, would not be able to put up any kind of physical fight against a large strong male?
Click to expand...
I don’t dispute that, I think it would be a tight timeline even with their compliance.
 
susiQ said:
Yes, there is zero evidence the girls had their blood drained and collected, just as there is zero evidence of a good portion of what has been posted on these threads. That’s why we have JMO, JMHO, MOO, JMT etc. Some here are aware of certain things. That doesn’t mean others will be convinced of these things. I get it. But if you are permitted the freedom to express your opinions and theories, so too should the others be permitted the option to express theirs. JMHO.
Click to expand...
That's all true and I agree. We all have our own opinions and theories we want to discuss and should be able to do so.

At the same time, we are supposed to base our theories upon the facts and known circumstances. We cannot claim that one of the victims was hung by her feet and drained of blood, if there is no evidence of either of the victims having been drained. So that was my concern---that we were led by this Frank's motion to follow some red herrings, needlessly. JMO
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 84 more.
Total: 2,213 (members: 85, guests: 2,128)

Online statistics

Members online
85
Guests online
2,128
Total visitors
2,213
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
600,625
Messages
18,111,353
Members
230,992
Latest member
Clue Keeper
Back
Top