IN - Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #173

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
steeltowngirl said:
I thought I heard Gutwein say that they didn’t know what RA wanted at the time defense was removed. I will have to watch again.

Really wish RA had attended today, stood up, told SCOIN his side. Would go a ways toward showing his competence.
Click to expand...
I believe RA has always been 'slyly' competent. IFYWIM

MOO
 
Betty P said:
While a tempting prospect, wouldn't it also guarantee a new trial due to incompetent defense?
Click to expand...
Why would it guarantee a new trial due to incompetent defense when members of LE, seasoned attorneys, media analysts and many members of the public believe this theory has merit and find it convincing?
Asserting over and over again that something is laughable and ridiculous doesn't make it so in the face of evidence that this was a theory followed and endorsed by investigators from the beginning of the investigation until after RA was arrested.
 
Ward Thisperer said:
Why would it guarantee a new trial due to incompetent defense when members of LE, seasoned attorneys, media analysts and many members of the public believe this theory has merit and find it convincing?
Asserting over and over again that something is laughable and ridiculous doesn't make it so in the face of evidence that this was a theory followed and endorsed by investigators from the beginning of the investigation until after RA was arrested.
Click to expand...
By all means, please proceed. Let it play out. I'm not a citizen of Indiana, so its not my tax dollars being spent, thank goodness.

Hopefully, once the pre-trial process is allowed to proceed in normal fashion, the drama will fade and the defense attorneys will no longer be allowed to try their case in the news media.
 
Ward Thisperer said:
My guess would be that if B&R are reinstated their first order of business will be to request JG recusal.

Indiana Habeas clinic reaction:
https://twitter.com/x/status/1748035204835340712
"After the argument / hearing, almost confident that we're not going to have an ugly February trying to stop a state trial in fed court. #Delphi #RichardAllen."

Post from Shay Hughes explaining the reference to Strickland during the argument:
https://twitter.com/x/status/1748030729412370470
"Strickland references Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 which created a two part test to determine if counsel was ineffective. A defendant must show 1) performance was deficient; and 2) deficient performance prejudiced the defendant. There is a strong presumption an attorney’s performance was reasonable. Unaware of any caselaw in Indiana where counsel was found to be ineffective for an inadvertent discovery leak (that was later contained). Regardless, the trial court did not use this standard at all and did not rely on it for its argument to deny the writ. You won’t find any reference to “gross negligence” in Strickland. Good for Leeman handling questioning relating to such. Easier to deal w/ questions referencing counter arguments than those not raised by either party. #RichardAllen #Delphi #DelphiMurders"
Click to expand...
I agree, oh and points for kitten gif.
 
Ward Thisperer said:
My guess would be that if B&R are reinstated their first order of business will be to request JG recusal.

Indiana Habeas clinic reaction:
https://twitter.com/x/status/1748035204835340712
"After the argument / hearing, almost confident that we're not going to have an ugly February trying to stop a state trial in fed court. #Delphi #RichardAllen."

Post from Shay Hughes explaining the reference to Strickland during the argument:
https://twitter.com/x/status/1748030729412370470
"Strickland references Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 which created a two part test to determine if counsel was ineffective. A defendant must show 1) performance was deficient; and 2) deficient performance prejudiced the defendant. There is a strong presumption an attorney’s performance was reasonable. Unaware of any caselaw in Indiana where counsel was found to be ineffective for an inadvertent discovery leak (that was later contained). Regardless, the trial court did not use this standard at all and did not rely on it for its argument to deny the writ. You won’t find any reference to “gross negligence” in Strickland. Good for Leeman handling questioning relating to such. Easier to deal w/ questions referencing counter arguments than those not raised by either party. #RichardAllen #Delphi #DelphiMurders"
Click to expand...
I guess my question is if both the ex-D and JG remain, will the reinstated-D even need to file for her recusal, or will JG see all of this as a conflict of interest and see it fit to remove herself. It can't just be water under the bridge at this point, because it leaves another door open for appeal that the judge was biased. JMO.

It was quite noticeable that this aspect was not brought up in the hearing.
 
Betty P said:
By all means, please proceed. Let it play out. I'm not a citizen of Indiana, so its not my tax dollars being spent, thank goodness.

Hopefully, once the pre-trial process is allowed to proceed in normal fashion, the drama will fade and the defense attorneys will no longer be allowed to try their case in the news media.
Click to expand...

RA is definitely not getting a free get out of jail card for any of this.

Regardless of what the SCOIN decides, it will only shorten or lengthen the time before the trial or plea deal.
 
TL4S said:
I guess my question is if both the ex-D and JG remain, will the reinstated-D even need to file for her recusal, or will JG see all of this as a conflict of interest and see it fit to remove herself. It can't just be water under the bridge at this point, because it leaves another door open for appeal that the judge was biased. JMO.
Click to expand...
I think if the SCOIN reinstates the ExD and does not disqualify the Judge or allow her to recuse herself, then I think it can go forward with a slap on the hand and "don't do it again" for Judge G.

This entire ExD debacle and hold up has already give RA an appellate issue IMO no matter what the outcome.

jmo
 
Betty P said:
By all means, please proceed. Let it play out. I'm not a citizen of Indiana, so its not my tax dollars being spent, thank goodness.

Hopefully, once the pre-trial process is allowed to proceed in normal fashion, the drama will fade and the defense attorneys will no longer be allowed to try their case in the news media.
Click to expand...
As someone who lived not too far from where this happened,Monticello. My guess is that the area is pushing for this to resolve because it is hurting tourism at nearby Indiana Beach. I myself, am experiencing some skepticism that they have the right guy or everyone involved. We will see what comes out in trial. Still talking to Delphi community friends.
 
Ravenmoon said:
I can't believe I am saying this, but I now hope that Baldwin and Rozzi are reinstated and trial begins by May.

Let's do this. Let him have EVERYTHING he wants!


JMO
Click to expand...

If they are reinstated it sets a horrible precedent. It’s telling defense attorneys they have a green light to ignore court orders, pass sensitive crime scene photos and discovery around at their next family barbecue, and lie to judges.
If the true concern of the justices is to get this trial back on the rails, get rid of both the attorneys and the judge.
 
StarryStarryNight said:
If they are reinstated it sets a horrible precedent. It’s telling defense attorneys they have a green light to ignore court orders, pass sensitive crime scene photos and discovery around at their next family barbecue, and lie to judges.
If the true concern of the justices is to get this trial back on the rails, get rid of both the attorneys and the judge.
Click to expand...
I admit, I had to kind of chuckle when the one SCOIN judge mentioned "insubordination." Even if AB and BR are reinstated, they've possibly done some damage to their uptown street cred. JMO.
 
Justice101 said:
RA is definitely not getting a free get out of jail card for any of this.

Regardless of what the SCOIN decides, it will only shorten or lengthen the time before the trial or plea deal.
Click to expand...

All things being equal, I think insistence on keeping him in the state prison during pre-trial is an unforced error. Unless their system of county jails is seriously flawed or deficient, they should leave him in one of those, per standard protocol. Doesn't have to be in the county where the trial is being held, just any county that has the room and quality security. It's been done before.

Otherwise, its going to play out, regardless of the news and social media drama. Juries mostly do their jobs well in these circumstances. Judges deserve to have control and order in their court, defendants deserve a fair trial, drama not necessary.
 
StarryStarryNight said:
If they are reinstated it sets a horrible precedent. It’s telling defense attorneys they have a green light to ignore court orders, pass sensitive crime scene photos and discovery around at their next family barbecue, and lie to judges.
If the true concern of the justices is to get this trial back on the rails, get rid of both the attorneys and the judge.
Click to expand...
Very good point. These guys went waaay out of bounds. Re-instating them would likely result in a mistrial, too. They've already demonstrated bad faith, dishonesty, etc.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is DeKalb County John Doe (2022)?

Members online

... and 111 more.
Total: 2,291 (members: 112, guests: 2,179)

Online statistics

Members online
112
Guests online
2,179
Total visitors
2,291
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
602,483
Messages
18,141,041
Members
231,407
Latest member
kcee
Back
Top