IN - Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #172

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

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Salah11 said:
Well said , it’s not the judge who let confidential photos of minors dead bodies be shared around.

As if the families have not suffered enough without these clowns letting this happen on this watch.

Moooooo
Click to expand...

Yes one has to completely overlook the ex-Ds shenanigans in order to place all fault on the judge for taking action.

I must also say I have a really strong hunch it’s greatly feared the new D will not follow through with the ridiculous Odinist theory and that’s the reason for the hostility over the departure of the ex-D. Although I admit that seems a little bizarre, no reason the new D can’t competently defend RA with or without it.

JMO
 
mrjitty said:
I wonder if the families will sue Baldwin over this?
Click to expand...
They may have to wait to see what disciplinary actions take place or if the state of Indiana reinstates Baldwin on this case. If he is reinstated then I believe the state of Indiana could also be party of the civil lawsuit.

I hope the families have sought legal counsel on this.
JMO
 
Last edited:
Wieneke, Smith, & Cook were allowed to respond to Judge Gull’s response (11/16) claiming all of the issues in the first writ were fixed….they say only 20% of the issues were fixed and lay out why their first writ isn’t moot. (Still in progress reading)

IMG_3365.jpeg

Sources:

Indiana Courts Case Search - MyCase

Indiana Supreme Court, Public Access
public.courts.in.gov public.courts.in.gov
Gull 11/16 Response
www.docdroid.net

Brief - Respondent.pdf

Filed: 11/16/2023 3:40 PM. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIANA Cause No. 23S-OR-302 State of Indiana ex rel. Richard Allen,. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ). Relator, v. Carroll Circuit Court and The Honorable Frances C. Gull, Special Judge, Respondents. Original Action from the Carroll Circuit Court Trial...
www.docdroid.net www.docdroid.net
RELATOR'S RESPONSE TO RESPONDENT'S OBJECTIONS (Smith, Wieneke, & Cook)
pdfhost.io

Microsoft Word - Relator's Response to Respondent's Objections 4864-0331-9953 v.1.docx | PDF Host

PDF Host read free online - Microsoft Word - Relator's Response to Respondent's Objections 4864-0331-9953 v.1.docx - smitml
pdfhost.io
 
zh0r4 said:
Wieneke, Smith, & Cook were allowed to respond to Judge Gull’s response (11/16) claiming all of the issues in the first writ were fixed….they say only 20% of the issues were fixed and lay out why their first writ isn’t moot. (Still in progress reading)

View attachment 462795

Sources:

Indiana Courts Case Search - MyCase

Indiana Supreme Court, Public Access
public.courts.in.gov public.courts.in.gov
Gull 11/16 Response
www.docdroid.net

Brief - Respondent.pdf

Filed: 11/16/2023 3:40 PM. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIANA Cause No. 23S-OR-302 State of Indiana ex rel. Richard Allen,. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ). Relator, v. Carroll Circuit Court and The Honorable Frances C. Gull, Special Judge, Respondents. Original Action from the Carroll Circuit Court Trial...
www.docdroid.net www.docdroid.net
RELATOR'S RESPONSE TO RESPONDENT'S OBJECTIONS (Smith, Wieneke, & Cook)
pdfhost.io

Microsoft Word - Relator's Response to Respondent's Objections 4864-0331-9953 v.1.docx | PDF Host

PDF Host read free online - Microsoft Word - Relator's Response to Respondent's Objections 4864-0331-9953 v.1.docx - smitml
pdfhost.io
Click to expand...
I'm glad they are sticking with this. We, the public, have no idea if it's moot because we can't see the documents. Maybe this whole issue will bring about change in the system. There's no reason, IMO, why we can't have online access to the filings.

I went back and re-read JG's response and I still have at lease one unanswered question: Who was responsible for pulling those 118 documents from the CCS?
This response was slightly amusing:
"Similarly, Relator repeatedly refers to the person who allegedly violated the duty to provide public access to certain16records as “someone.” See Petition at ¶¶ 2 (“someone within the court system sua sponte changed all of Allen’s filings to ‘confidential’”), 11 (“someone within the court has since removed/excluded the Franks Memorandum from the CCS altogether”).Relator’s allegations against “someone” are no basis for a writ against Respondent."
 
Jurisprudence said:
That record has done her no favors imo @girlhasnoname I know you feel differently about this and I respect that but I think it is important to mange expectations. This is not a good look for her. They documented on the record everything they claimed to have said and gone through which is pretty impressive considering how shell-shocked they must have been. If the court is inclined to leave things status quo with Gull remaining in place and S&L as substitutes they will absolutely find a way to do so, be it by saying something like well, the 19th marked the notice, and the follow-up hearing wasn't until the 31st so therefore RA's rights weren't violated he had more than 10 days notice or whatever... There are ways to do this. But, it will not be because what she did in there was right (or even constitutional).

jmo

ETA that she was extremely careful on that record, and it still did her no favors.
Click to expand...
I have no problem if the SCOIN replaces Judge G, this circus has not been a good look for her either. I have no vested interest in her personally, I think she was trying to give R&B a way out professionally without suffering as much damage as an In Court on Camera announcement would have created. If that broke the law or infringed on RA's rights, then she needs to answer for that decision.

I want a fair trial, with both sides P & D playing by the rules of Professional Code of Conduct and a Judge who can and will rule impartially and run their Courtroom with the authority, respect and Decorum that the law demands.

This case is about the heinous murder of Abbigal Williams and Liberty German, 2 innocent young girls out for a walk so many years ago. I'm sickened to death of it being about the Defendant, The Defense Team, the Judge and their conduct.

Justice delayed is justice denied IMO.

ALL JMO
 
TL4S said:
This is my concern with it. Even if the ex-D knew the potential of getting DQ'd, that doesn't negate the need for due process. This isn't a "poor me" defense. Personal feelings about the ex-D are a separate matter altogether, IMO.

The P had time to prepare witnesses before the 19th, to talk about the leak investigation, but in the meantime, the ex-D was told to cease working on the case a week before the hearing, via an email by JG. So not only were they not given proper notice as to what would be covered in the hearing, they were basically restricted from doing anything to prepare for the hearing in the seven days prior to it. I'm not seeing how that is appropriate, nor fair, and that has nothing to do with me supporting the ex-D.
Click to expand...
Respectfully, the D were told on teleconference and emails that the State had asked for DQ and Judge G said she was 'leaning that way'. The Defense knew darn well this was a real probability, AB had his own attorney/friend Hennessy there with a Motion prepared on his behalf. That's not an ambush, especially after being told to stop working on the case on Oct 10th knowing LE was investigating the leak and release of highly confidential information from their office.

I agree Judge G should have held a public hearing on the record and followed procedure to DQ them, but it does not negate the gross misconduct of the D Team, which is what ultimately landed this case in the toilet.

RA is entitled to a competent and vigorous defense, not an attorney(s) of his choosing.

MOO
 
girlhasnoname said:
This case is about the heinous murder of Abbigal Williams and Liberty German, 2 innocent young girls out for a walk so many years ago. I'm sickened to death of it being about the Defendant, The Defense Team, the Judge and their conduct.
Click to expand...

[sbm]

Well, there will hopefully be a decision soon one way or the other and then the case will move on in the way it is supposed to. I don't attribute the derailment to them though. Imoo, if it wasn't this, it would have been something else to get them off. To me it seems in hindsight like there's been more than one ongoing (yet albeit failed) effort to try to achieve this going back months now. This is moo. I don't believe she ever expected them to challenge her actions when she first set up the hearing (unbeknownst to them) to be a DQ hearing as opposed to the hearing that was on the calendar. But, once the in-chambers meeting occurred she knew. They told her in chambers - before she acted, that this would be coming. So, she did have an opportunity to course correct and she didn't. B&R were pretty clear to me (moo), despite the "you'll get my motion to withdraw". She's smart. She knew. And, she even acknowledged that as a lawyer she should be very well versed in "reading between the lines".

jmo
 
FrostedGlass said:
I'm glad they are sticking with this. We, the public, have no idea if it's moot because we can't see the documents. Maybe this whole issue will bring about change in the system. There's no reason, IMO, why we can't have online access to the filings.

I went back and re-read JG's response and I still have at lease one unanswered question: Who was responsible for pulling those 118 documents from the CCS?
This response was slightly amusing:
"Similarly, Relator repeatedly refers to the person who allegedly violated the duty to provide public access to certain16records as “someone.” See Petition at ¶¶ 2 (“someone within the court system sua sponte changed all of Allen’s filings to ‘confidential’”), 11 (“someone within the court has since removed/excluded the Franks Memorandum from the CCS altogether”).Relator’s allegations against “someone” are no basis for a writ against Respondent."
Click to expand...

I think what they (CW & Co) did, which was critical, was take screen shots of (or print out) the docket as it stood prior to filing their first original action. So having that information saved they were now in a position to go back in time and compare the "corrected" CCS to the docket that existed prior to filing suit, and this is how they were able to make the statement that only 20% had been corrected, if this makes sense.

jmo
 
Last edited:
Jurisprudence said:
I understand your pov. But, I think we need to remember that the revelations we recently came to learn of from the Franks filing were predominantly from the state's discovery production and depositions under oath. Any speculative theory they put forward aside, the facts in the memo aren't made up facts.

And it is for this reason that they never should have stopped this investigation, and after the FM they should have actually re-opened it imo instead of formulating a plan to have the counsel kicked off so they could buy themselves a trial delay - a delay which at worst would provide them with an opportunity to come up with some answers or a delay which at best, depending on "who" was chosen as substitute counsel, would not only put significant distance between the filing and trial, but might also cause it go *poof* altogether, making any answers to these questions unnecessary.

jmo
Click to expand...
Are you referring to the murder investigation? Even when RA was arrested, LE had indicated they had not stopped.

McLeland, the Carroll County prosecutor, said the case is still open, investigators are still gathering information and he has not ruled out charging other suspects.

"We encourage everybody to continue to call in tips not only about Richard Allen but about any other person that you may have," McLeland said. "For that reason, and for the nature of this case, the probable cause and the charging information has been sealed by the court."

www.wrtv.com

Delphi Murders: Why are court records sealed for Richard M. Allen, the man charged in Abby & Libby's death?

Delphi Murders: Why are court records sealed for Richard M. Allen, the man charged in Abby & Libby's death?
www.wrtv.com www.wrtv.com
 
steeltowngirl said:
Are you referring to the murder investigation? Even when RA was arrested, LE had indicated they had not stopped.

McLeland, the Carroll County prosecutor, said the case is still open, investigators are still gathering information and he has not ruled out charging other suspects.

"We encourage everybody to continue to call in tips not only about Richard Allen but about any other person that you may have," McLeland said. "For that reason, and for the nature of this case, the probable cause and the charging information has been sealed by the court."

www.wrtv.com

Delphi Murders: Why are court records sealed for Richard M. Allen, the man charged in Abby & Libby's death?

Delphi Murders: Why are court records sealed for Richard M. Allen, the man charged in Abby & Libby's death?
www.wrtv.com www.wrtv.com
Click to expand...
Yes, that's what they said.
 
Jurisprudence said:
I think what they (CW & Co) did, which was critical, was take screen shots of (or print out) the docket as it stood prior to filing their first original action. So having that information saved they were now in a position to go back in time and compare the "corrected" CCS to the docket that existed prior to filing suit, and this is how they were able to make the statement that only 20% had been corrected, if this makes sense.

jmo
Click to expand...

If they’re going to challenge the CCS, surely they’ve read the disclaimer and have visited the courthouse.

Indiana Courts Case Search - MyCase

Indiana Supreme Court, Public Access
public.courts.in.gov public.courts.in.gov
“Information displayed on this site is not to be considered or used as an official court record and may contain errors or omissions. Accuracy of the information is not warranted. Official records of court proceedings may only be obtained directly from the court maintaining a particular record.”
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Members online

... and 138 more.
Total: 1,873 (members: 139, guests: 1,734)

Online statistics

Members online
139
Guests online
1,734
Total visitors
1,873
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
605,913
Messages
18,194,799
Members
233,641
Latest member
Mjinmidwest
Back
Top