IN - Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #174
- Thread starter Tricia
- Start date
New Posts
-
VERDICT WATCH Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #214- Latest: FromGermany1
-
-
- Status
photographer4
"..marked by obstruction." - Andrea Burkhart.
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2014
- Messages
- 5,647
- Reaction score
- 30,564
Well, according to the FM what Abby was wearing was clean and didn’t even have blood on it. So I’m not confident those girls walked across the creek to be honest. I recall at one point when discussing all the YouTubers out there etc LE stated no one has it right. This makes me think they didn’t go across via the water. I’d believe a canoe maybe. I don’t know. It’s too awful to even think about.
sunshineray
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2019
- Messages
- 9,765
- Reaction score
- 82,046
Yeah the girls made it across, they were probably shorter than him. What's never mentioned by the defense is Abby saying (paraphrasing), Is that a gun? And then a gun was heard being cocked at some point (before or after "Down the hill"). A weapon goes a long way in ensuring the cooperation of an abductee, no matter the smaller size of the abductor. As the D likes to portray him...little weakling RA marched them to their deaths with the power of a weapon. AJMO
The Motta / Prosecutors podcast I found i had to skim as there was too much arguing about the same old stuff. Maybe the only interesting point is that Motta is arguing stuff that isn't public, so he clearly has direct access to the defence. So worth keeping an eye on what he is saying, IMO
Generally this is why I don't believe making such a series of dubious claims in the Franks for the Judge to have to wade through is at all helpful to the credibility of the memo. If you have solid points to make (e.g. alleged false statements) , go big with those points and leave out the obvious nonsense about the victim being hung from the tree
This isn't a legal point, but just a fundamental communications and persuasion point. Including stuff that might have the reader shaking their head in disbelief undermines your own credibility
Your point about the creek crossing is of that genre - when someone makes such dodgy points can we trust the rest of it?
It's obviously different when they are in front of the jury - within the rules - they can make dubious arguments in the hope one juror might believe it - but with the Judge? I don't get it. And it leads to the conclusion that 100 pages of that memo was not written for the Judge.
Lo and behold, the defense had an explanation for that in the FM.
Abby meanwhile was fully clothed, including in Libby’s sweatshirt and jeans, the documents state.
There was no blood on her clothing, indicating that she was likely murdered while naked and then dressed after she was killed. Tree branches and sticks had also been arranged on her body, the documents state.
Allen's defense: Libby and Abby killed in Odinism ritual sacrifice
"Members of a pagan Norse religion, called Odinism ... ritualistically sacrificed Abigail Williams and Liberty German," the motion states.www.jconline.com
BIB
This is one of the claims I am not forming an opinion on until we hear the actual evidence. Personally I suspect there will be evidence if this is true - i.e. blood on the inside of the clothes? Blood directly on the skin under the clothes? Try dressing a murder victim with bloody hair and not get any contact marks on the inside of the sweatshirt?
How much blood was in the hair could offer insights into how the victim lay. Unless the body was actually cleaned up, there will be evidence of flows etc. None of that is in the Franks surprise surprise.
sunshineray
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2019
- Messages
- 9,765
- Reaction score
- 82,046
Just curious, since they've been reinstated have the old/new D made any new filings or spoken to any media?
Like the dumbest police interview ever - they may never have got probable cause for the search if not for those statements
FromGermany1
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Apr 16, 2021
- Messages
- 3,728
- Reaction score
- 28,401
Redressing a victim, cleaning, not getting much blood on one's hands, staging - all that is somehow pointing to an Undertaker .... I remember vague, a certain person has been the subject of conversation years ago?
If we would know or being able to investigate, whom RA did have as close acquaintances in Delphi. Maybe, his wife would know (but doesn't seem to tell).
girlhasnoname
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 4, 2018
- Messages
- 10,333
- Reaction score
- 134,084
<modsnip - quoted post was removed for unapproved source>
TBH, we've been round the mulberry bush with RA's admission of what time he was on the trails (he didn't admit to being on the MHB in 2017). He told CO Dublin 12-1:30 is what I understood (and maybe that is part of why LE didn't look further into him right away), and then corrected the timeline in his Oct 22 interview once he was confronted with the witnesses statements who saw him on the MHB and walk out platform area and some time stamped photos that one of the young girls took.
Feel free to clear that up, anyone. At this point I honestly can't say.
MOO
TBH, we've been round the mulberry bush with RA's admission of what time he was on the trails (he didn't admit to being on the MHB in 2017). He told CO Dublin 12-1:30 is what I understood (and maybe that is part of why LE didn't look further into him right away), and then corrected the timeline in his Oct 22 interview once he was confronted with the witnesses statements who saw him on the MHB and walk out platform area and some time stamped photos that one of the young girls took.
Feel free to clear that up, anyone. At this point I honestly can't say.
MOO
Last edited by a moderator:
Cyber sleuth
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2015
- Messages
- 1,264
- Reaction score
- 11,411
I think you have an error here. Or maybe it’s my reading comprehension before adequate coffee consumption.
RA initially told CO Dublin that he had been on Freedom Bridge heading toward MHB when he saw 3 teenage girls. He said he was there between 1330-1530 (1:30-3:30). He said he did not see Abby or Libby.
During his October 13, 2022 interview RA stated he had been at the trail from 12-130.
IMO this is a clear case of adaption.
Adaption is a pretty clear indication of guilt. The suspect adapts their story after knowledge of evidence to try to distance themselves.
He knew the 3 teens had seen him around 130 so he thought changing his timeline would clear him. The problem is there are more witnesses.
This is JMO on the time matter. JMO, IMO, MOO, etc....and a bit of devil's advocacy.
The Feb. 2017 DD interview tip narrative with RA is worded in the PCA that RA was on the trail from 1:30 to 3:30. According to the FM, DD was unable to (at the time) find the recording of that interview, so we're left to what he wrote. We also do not know the nature of the questions. Did DD ask RA if he was on the trail at any point between 1:30 and 3:30? Because if RA's answer was simply "yes," then that doesn't mean his later statement that he was at the trail from noon to 1:30 is inaccurate. In a venn diagram, 1:30 would be in the overlapping space. Hopefully, DD was able to find the recording and the question was more open-ended, like "what time where you at the trail?" That would hold more weight, IMO.
No matter how unlikely it might seem, what if there was a group of three (not four) girls near FB around noon, and saw RA, who also saw them? There is a lot of data about who saw each other between 1:30 and 3:30, but there is no witness data in the PCA from between noon and 1:30. I would like to see that data, if it exists.
And RA's phone records, cell data, GPS, etc., might provide the most accurate evidence of RA's location, if such evidence exists. But we won't know about any of this until the trial. In the meantime, all we have is what was in the PCA and FM, and I'm unwilling to put all my eggs in either basket. JMO.
The Feb. 2017 DD interview tip narrative with RA is worded in the PCA that RA was on the trail from 1:30 to 3:30. According to the FM, DD was unable to (at the time) find the recording of that interview, so we're left to what he wrote. We also do not know the nature of the questions. Did DD ask RA if he was on the trail at any point between 1:30 and 3:30? Because if RA's answer was simply "yes," then that doesn't mean his later statement that he was at the trail from noon to 1:30 is inaccurate. In a venn diagram, 1:30 would be in the overlapping space. Hopefully, DD was able to find the recording and the question was more open-ended, like "what time where you at the trail?" That would hold more weight, IMO.
No matter how unlikely it might seem, what if there was a group of three (not four) girls near FB around noon, and saw RA, who also saw them? There is a lot of data about who saw each other between 1:30 and 3:30, but there is no witness data in the PCA from between noon and 1:30. I would like to see that data, if it exists.
And RA's phone records, cell data, GPS, etc., might provide the most accurate evidence of RA's location, if such evidence exists. But we won't know about any of this until the trial. In the meantime, all we have is what was in the PCA and FM, and I'm unwilling to put all my eggs in either basket. JMO.
FrostedGlass
Tightly Wrapped in Foil
- Joined
- Feb 25, 2017
- Messages
- 6,776
- Reaction score
- 32,703
A neutral voice is a good thing!
The fact that DD stood up there in the press conference a week or so after the murders, and the image of BG did not ring a bell, makes me wonder if he was the one who took that tip. It's not signed or dated by anyone.
We know Liggett was provided a tip narrative from ORION DIN-000074-01 to review. It was from Dan Dulin.
Who or what is the ORION reference?
I'm really curious about that, too.
There was no OBG sketch until August 2017, right? IIRC. So all they had was a grainy image of a guy walking on the bridge, maybe some voice, and the YBG sketch (drawn on Feb 17), which they didn't see reason to release until 2019. RA hadn't described his clothing until 2022. And, from the BG video, could anyone guess outright that the man on there was only 5'4" or 5'5" tall? That was not even the original description. All JMO.
Personally, I don't think DD (or whoever took the tip narrative), nor the public, saw this tiny little CVS worker, with no criminal history, as a suspected killer, even if he said he was on the trail that day. "Unfounded" was the word used, IIRC. I think RA was too forgettable and unlikely for anyone to see the sketches, or think back to interviews, and have him come to mind. If he's guilty, I think this is exactly how he hid in plain sight for so long. JMO.
ETA: Then, when the sketch changed in 2019, I'm not sure anyone would see RA in that! JMO.
Last edited:
Exactly. Claiming later you weren’t there isn’t exculpatory in my view. Rather potentially incriminating
In any event I am not convinced it needed to be included in a search warrant application.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2010
- Messages
- 4,954
- Reaction score
- 14,523
MOD NOTE:
All attorneys have opinions. Lots of attorneys have social media. All of those opinionated attorneys aren't approved sources here. Can you imagine if we just let anybody on X be approved because some members like what they have to say?
If you have questions about whether a source is approved, please use the report link below any post to ask. If you ask on the thread, all it does is give us more to clean up if the source is not approved.
Edit to clear up some apparent confusion. If someone is interviewed or quoted in MSM, that can be discussed. That does not mean their social media is approved.
All attorneys have opinions. Lots of attorneys have social media. All of those opinionated attorneys aren't approved sources here. Can you imagine if we just let anybody on X be approved because some members like what they have to say?
If you have questions about whether a source is approved, please use the report link below any post to ask. If you ask on the thread, all it does is give us more to clean up if the source is not approved.
Edit to clear up some apparent confusion. If someone is interviewed or quoted in MSM, that can be discussed. That does not mean their social media is approved.
Last edited:
Link for Libby's clothes Abby was dressed in were "clean" ?
As far as blood on clothing the D’s contradict themselves on Page 29
https://www.scribd.com/document/672126677/DELPHI-Memorandum-in-Support-of-Motion-pdf
First saying: “No blood appeared on Abby’s clothing,”
Then: “very little (if any) blood was found anywhere else on Abby’s body or clothing.”
And: “lack of blood on Abby’s body/undergarments/over garments”
So which was it: no, very little or if any, or lack of? How are they quantifying that as visible or tested as blood?
Page 34: 14. […] there was little-to-no blood found on any of the clothing Abby was wearing […]
Page 39: 64. “Since there appeared to be no blood on Abby’s tennis shoes and other clothing […]”
66. “[…] Abby had no visible blood on her body or clothes […]”
D’s are slippery about the blood on clothing:
“Abby was fully clothed. In fact, Abby was dressed in Libby’s sweatshirt and jeans. No blood appeared on Abby’s clothing, […]”
What about Libby’s clothes with “little to no blood” Abby was dressed in?
Which its it little or no blood and who’s since DNA is mentioned about the tree blood when it suits their theory?
The D’s try to impose their theory by referring to BG as “murderers”
What other evidence have they presented besides that they feel RA is overall inadequate so there surely must have been some real men around?
Any evidence that there were multiples of grown men gathering in the area of MHB during the time frame?
No, we have Abby’s evidence showing us a single man advancing on them then a recording of a single voice ordering them down the hill.
all imo
Last edited:
Jurisprudence
Verified Attorney
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2021
- Messages
- 3,042
- Reaction score
- 22,723
Judge Gull has all but guaranteed that these families will be going through two trials. Two.
My opinion only - based on the law that I know and have read.
My opinion only - based on the law that I know and have read.
IMO ORION is part of the tip management system that was used in the investigation.
It's been theorized by some that they crossed farther upstream, where the water is a lot deeper and that steep bank is. We have no evidence of where they did actually cross, to my knowledge.
Remember what we were told:
Why Police Have Not Released Details on the Murders of Libby German and Abby Williams from Delphi, Indiana
Since the 2017 murder of Indiana teens Libby German and Abby Williams, local authorities have not released any information about the cause or time of death of either victim, leading to rumors and speculation. We spoke with Indiana State Police First Sgt. Jerry Holeman about why the police are...www.aetv.com
Of course the Defense is theorizing crossing the deepest spot with high banks since they act like their client is short with no dexterity and want the picture to be that he would be nearly underwater.
Here’s the monitoring location:
Deer Creek Near Delphi, IN
I’ve never seen any You Tube reenactments of a crossing nor did I refer to any in my post.
There are many drone footages along Deer Creek and the rocky nature of the sand bars is a prominent feature. In some places the sand bars reach almost across the creek and there are many flat limestone boulders to walk on. Their time in water during the crossing may have been minimal where they crossed.
Whilst looking at fish in Deer Creek RA would have noticed the numerous rocky sand bars and the large flat limestone boulders that are typical in Deer Creek.
The monitor that reported on water depth and flow that day only represented that very location. Sand bars, large flat limestone boulders or other debris that could have interrupted water flow or provided shallow step stones or even dry parts adjacent and elsewhere, imo.
Deer Creek varies widely in depth and rate due to the nature of the sediment forming the sandbars, hard pan and geological features, imo.
all imo
Last edited:
- Status