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

[steeltowngirl]

This is what Bob Motta is missing IMO. He points out it could happen to anyone that you are working in the conference room, go to the bathroom, field a call, and while you are gone for 30 mins, a visitor goes in the conference room and photographs stuff. Sure I get that.

Where are their procedures? They deal with sensitive case documents all of the time. There is simply no excuse for leaving others unattended in a room with crime scene evidence.

Need to field a call? Exit the room, bring prying eyes out with you, close and lock the conference room door behind you. Data security 101.

 

[mrjitty]

Where are their procedures? They deal with sensitive case documents all of the time. There is simply no excuse for leaving others unattended in a room with crime scene evidence.

Need to field a call? Exit the room, bring prying eyes out with you, close and lock the conference room door behind you. Data security 101.

As I understood it, Motta was saying if you were working in there by yourself, then left for some reason, it likely happens 99% of the time that no one ever locks the door in their own office. Then while you are away, a visitor arrives, and is somehow able to go in the conference room. Fine in theory.

What seems unlikely to me is that MW would go in the conference room and start rummaging around the case files when AB could come back at any moment? Doesn't it seem more likely he was allowed in there?

MW doesn't say he sneaked in there in the Affidavit.

So many questions.

 

[Inthedetails]

Where are their procedures? They deal with sensitive case documents all of the time. There is simply no excuse for leaving others unattended in a room with crime scene evidence.

Need to field a call? Exit the room, bring prying eyes out with you, close and lock the conference room door behind you. Data security 101.

I volunteer with a public agency and we have to go through periodic training about information security. Even if ALONE, you don't leave information where somebody could potentially see it, even co-workers. A lowly volunteer like me knows to take it seriously. You don't go to the bathroom, take a call, or take a look out the window if it leaves info visible or accessible.

It feels silly sometimes to secure documents or info on the screen when you're among colleagues you assume are equally serious about security, but we are trained to do just that. And, everyone "gets it."

jmo

 

[steeltowngirl]

I volunteer with a public agency and we have to go through periodic training about information security. Even if ALONE, you don't leave information where somebody could potentially see it, even co-workers. A lowly volunteer like me knows to take it seriously. You don't go to the bathroom, take a call, or take a look out the window if it leaves info visible or accessible.

It feels silly sometimes to secure documents or info on the screen when you're among colleagues you assume are equally serious about security, but we are trained to do just that. And, everyone "gets it."

jmo

I’m a long-time electric utility employee with access to power grid data. If I did what the lawyer did and data was compromised, I’d be fired. End of story.

 

[Megnut]

Looking back at all the old notes, I guess I'm satisfied that a couple of questions have finally been answered.

1. We pondered a lot about why the killer didn't take the phone. Some thought it was lost, some thought it was hidden in L's pocket, some thought she threw where he couldn't find it.
Now we know that he had it and intentionally left it where LE could find it.

2. The "twist" = LE saying they had never seen anything like it in 30 years of service, Ives saying it wasn't just a murder where someone is shot, etc., LE saying one of the twists was they didn't run away; it was a murder.
I believe the "twist" wasn't just the murder; it was how it was done and the scene the murderer created.

Perhaps the murderer believed the phone L had was her own, factory reset with no fresh contact since. Maybe the location was chosen a week prior, just prior to the reset. Perp left the phone, confident there was nothing on it to incriminating him.

I contend that there might have been a second phone that day, one that did have incriminating contact on it (not the least of which was a tracker). And IMO that one was removed from the scene.

JMO

 

[Jurisprudence]

Useful, thanks.

There has been enough recent controversy about that podcast that I won't dredge it up here.

sbm
I have also seen and heard the same - evidenced by "fantastical claims" that are being repeated as Gospel on message boards. And, it is because of what I have seen people repeat, that I am able to assess how people are "consuming" the information they are putting out (PP and MS). For that, I will not even click on them to so much as register a "view" for their algorithm.

jmo

 

[Jurisprudence]

I volunteer with a public agency and we have to go through periodic training about information security. Even if ALONE, you don't leave information where somebody could potentially see it, even co-workers. A lowly volunteer like me knows to take it seriously. You don't go to the bathroom, take a call, or take a look out the window if it leaves info visible or accessible.

It feels silly sometimes to secure documents or info on the screen when you're among colleagues you assume are equally serious about security, but we are trained to do just that. And, everyone "gets it."

jmo

This is commonplace. This is not the CIA or NSA. These are not the pentagon papers. It is a war room in a very small office, where materials were out at that time because they were preparing for DEPOSITIONS. FAR too much stock is being placed on this war room. It is, has been, and still remains nothing more than a convenient excuse to rip the defense apart, lobby to try to bring sanctions against them, level law suits against them, to lose sight of the issues, to muddy the waters. I've even seen some posters suggest they be disbarred. It's enough. I hope they see these things.

jmo

The question people should be asking perhaps is how convenient this was; how so many leaking allegations stacked up in such a short period of time, right after the court was noticed that ST demand was signed and would be filed 1st week of November. At some point it should become questionable to believe in such sustained and timely "coincidences", with each one escalating just a little bit more over the prior.

jmo

 

[Jurisprudence]

INBOX: Rokita lied under oath; he must be suspended - The Indiana Lawyer

Attorney General Todd Rokita’s lack of insight into and his lack of any remorse about his prior misconduct and his resumption of misconduct the day the court approved the CA demonstrate that he is currently unfit to practice law in this state.

www.theindianalawyer.com

Three free articles before you hit a paywall.

“In a sworn affidavit attached to the conditional agreement, made under penalty of perjury, Respondent admits these two rule violations and acknowledges that he could not successfully defend himself on these two charges if this matter were tried. Respondent’s acceptance of responsibility is a mitigating factor, as [is] his cooperation with the disciplinary process … .” Opinion at 4-5 (emphasis added). Two justices dissented, “believing the discipline to be too lenient based on the Respondent’s position as Attorney General and the scope and breadth of the admitted misconduct.” Opinion at 4. Every detail of this settlement was undoubtedly carefully negotiated...

... Had the commission and the court known Rokita would engage in further misconduct immediately after the court gave him a slap on the wrist, it seems unlikely the commission would have agreed to, and the court would have narrowly approved, the CA.

Having worked in the area of professional responsibility for 10 years, including two years as a staff attorney with the commission, I cannot remember a case in which an attorney has shown such an unrepentant, defiant attitude toward his ethical duties and the disciplinary process.

Rokita’s lack of insight into and his lack of any remorse about his prior misconduct and his resumption of misconduct the day the court approved the CA demonstrate that he is currently unfit to practice law in this state, let alone serve as its chief law enforcement officer. If not stopped, he will predictably double-down with his misconduct. The only way to protect the public, the profession and the administration of justice in this state is suspension without automatic reinstatement, with readmission to practice only if he proves by clear and convincing evidence that: [cite to rules]"

 

[steeltowngirl]

When will SCOIN decide this matter?
If their decision aligns with the judge and recommendation from the attorney general, is there room for 5 more heads on the proverbial platter?

 

[girlhasnoname]

When will SCOIN decide this matter?
If their decision aligns with the judge and recommendation from the attorney general, is there room for 5 more heads on the proverbial platter?

I definitely think we'll hear something by Wednesday. They can't afford to waste time making a decision, this case has gotten so overblown in the SM world it's beyond sad. <modsnip - no link, rumor>

It's no longer about justice for Abby & Libby and that's what makes me saddest of all.

JMO

 

[StarryStarryNight]

I volunteer with a public agency and we have to go through periodic training about information security. Even if ALONE, you don't leave information where somebody could potentially see it, even co-workers. A lowly volunteer like me knows to take it seriously. You don't go to the bathroom, take a call, or take a look out the window if it leaves info visible or accessible.

It feels silly sometimes to secure documents or info on the screen when you're among colleagues you assume are equally serious about security, but we are trained to do just that. And, everyone "gets it."

jmo

Absolutely.
I worked for awhile out of college in the administrative and operations part of a large bank. There were certain areas that had tighter than the usual tight security. Those areas practiced “dual security” which meant that at least two people had to be together in that area. If there were two people and one had to leave for some reason, they both left, and locked the door behind them.
Not terribly sophisticated but very effective.
It only took a little effort and attention, something the ex-defense was too lazy to do.

 

[StarryStarryNight]

I definitely think we'll hear something by Wednesday. They can't afford to waste time making a decision, this case has gotten so overblown in the SM world it's beyond sad. (I think it's crazy how even CW keeps posting about it and then deleting her posts, what's up with that?) She's RA's appellate Attorney, she probably should stay off X or Twitter or whatever it is.

It's no longer about justice for Abby & Libby and that's what makes me saddest of all.

JMO

The ex-defense certainly don’t care about Abby and Libby. They stated such in their in camera meeting on October 19th.
I would also say they don’t care about RA either. They bring his name up occasionally but there is no way any of this is helping him.
It is 100% all about Baldwin and Rozzi.

 

[zh0r4]

When will SCOIN decide this matter?
If their decision aligns with the judge and recommendation from the attorney general, is there room for 5 more heads on the proverbial platter?

From CW on 11/27 (before the reply 12/1):

“No timetable. The Court will likely be awaiting a possible reply. And it is rare for a hearing to be set. They usually prefer to decide these matters by written decision. It could take no time at all. It could take a few months. And unfortunately, all of this happening around the holidays.”


Source:

https://x.com/wienekelo/status/1729292953808441428?s=46&t=rlxmmTQVKLhzP78ILfWjKQ

 

[KentuckyMama]

It seems to me that Libby and Abby are being used by many to bolster their own names. They want to be associated in any way they can with the case to gain....I don't know. Fame? Money? Book deal? Talking head position? Whoever doesn't follow the rules on either side should be shut out. Why is this case such a clown show? It seems so much more than the cases I've followed before. This entire case from the night those sweet girls were reported missing up until today. Just so much is strange. None of it seems normal or logical. Maybe just me being grumpy.

 

[Ward Thisperer]

18:41. They state that MRC did not leak to anyone else but TMS with the agreement they would help him “plug the leak”.

This part is contradicted in the MW PCA however which says MRC leaked to multiple shows. I wonder if he told MS he didn't send it to anyone else and LE discovered he was lying?

I don’t think an employee of Carroll County would have defense strategies, activities and results of investigations.

I think "employee of Carroll County" could be anyone including an investigator.
When Chris Todd discussed having received CS photos on CourtTV, he said he received them from "LEO whistleblowers".

RSBM

IIRC in episodes weeks ago, Murder Sheet says the leaked content included info like Baldwin's travel, defence strategy, and who would next be accused of Odinism. This is how Murder Sheet knew from the start that the leak came from the defence. I can't give you a timecode for this, but you can start with the episode where they break this story.

I recall them saying that but my understanding was that it was info that had been leaked through conversations, not actual images of discovery. Info on defense strategy or Baldwin's travel wouldn't be accurately classified as "leaked discovery."

 

[StarryStarryNight]

They are still waiting.

 

[steeltowngirl]

This part is contradicted in the MW PCA however which says MRC leaked to multiple shows. I wonder if he told MS he didn't send it to anyone else and LE discovered he was lying?

Didn’t Gray Hughes have it too? How did he receive it?

 

[Willow Knight]

RSBM

It's interesting that the defence did not raise RL or KAK in the Franks. Obviously different issues apply there, but i do wonder if they intend to offer these suspects alternatively at trial?

Same thing has crossed my mind several times. Went back through the threads in this case to refresh my mind on RL and KAK. It is my opinion that many statements made by LE in the early days would have been brought up at trial. Especially statements, search warrants, etc regarding RL by LE.

I personally would put much interest into a testimony by KAK. Strongly hope the trial could explain how this AS (shots) account worked. Specifically if LE could trace who, when, where had access to the knowledge Abby and Libby would be on that bridge at that time.

Didn't RA live in the same town as the K's at one time? RA isn't the same age bracket as KAK, however he would be around the same age as a parent of KAK.

Very interesting the XD did not focus on KAK and/or RL, maybe it was yet to come? Or maybe the XD didn't want focus on KK or RL?

 

[Jurisprudence]

It seems to me that Libby and Abby are being used by many to bolster their own names. They want to be associated in any way they can with the case to gain....I don't know. Fame? Money? Book deal? Talking head position?

sbm

I agree that doing this would be wrong. It's why I am selective in what I consume.

jmo

 

[Cyber sleuth]

This part is contradicted in the MW PCA however which says MRC leaked to multiple shows. I wonder if he told MS he didn't send it to anyone else and LE discovered he was lying?

RSBM
Perhaps MRC was untruthful to TMS. Would be a dumb move since he was also insisting the leaked evidence to be given to LE. It would be found out soon enough if he leaked them. But people do dumb things all the time. Time will tell. I am setting aside judgement on this because I don’t have enough information to decide.
I don’t take MW’s affidavit as 100% truthful as it seems to be so narrow in scope. I think a lot is omitted. I don’t find his character moral or ethical from the patten of behavior we are being reported. So i am less inclined to believe him without proof.
JMO