IN - Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #174

[photographer4]

Is the “gag order” still in place?

How can Lebrato go on TV and offer up information thoughts etc and not get hit with Contempt of Court? He did serve as RA’s lawyer and is privy to all the details.

This is so messed up.

MOO

I read the article, and I didn't find anything there that would violate the gag order? He said:
- KA had wanted to be there (at SCION hearing - doesn't say why she wasn't) and that he let her know right away the outcome.
- That he needed to apply for a ticket to be let into the hearing - as if he were a regular member of the public.
- The decision was handed down in less than four hours of the SCION hearing.
- That KA expressed her thanks for his team's work. That she stands by her spouse.
- That he didn't really address who RA wanted as his lawyers but that he 'probably' wanted B&R as of Oct 11. He noted the letter to the court was typed, and surmises by B&R as he doesn't think RA had access to a computer or typewriter but that RA had signed it.
- an improvement in RA's mental and physical health since his first meeting with him on Oct 31, 2023. And a weight drop of significance and a gain but still under 150lbs
- Concerns about Odin symbols on staff - specifically named one staff member who removed an Odin patch then had an Odin symbol tattoo placed on his face -and that he was the one in charge or watching Mr. Allen at Westville.
- Feels may be hard for RA to have a fair trial.
- His team had planned to file their on FM - which was similar but different to the one submitted by B&R (doesn't cite the differences).
- Has not seen all the disclosure, but thinks RA may be innocent
-Has not seen RA since the SCION decision was made to reinstate B&R but sent him a letter to advise of the outcome.


The above is only a summary of the article but I see nothing there that might somehow violate a gag order? I did NOT watch the video attached at the link, only read and summarized the article so if I missed out on something, pls let me know!

 

[justtrish]

I'm not asking if she supports him. We know she does. I want to know what he told his wife about that day and where she thinks he was during the timeframe in question.
Everyone in town was discussing the murders, so discussing them at the bar is not the same as saying "omg I was there that day". I guarantee whoever is guilty of these murders, RA or otherwise, has discussed them at some point. Discussing them doesn't make you innocent. Being truthful about where you were and what you were doing does.
IMO
ETA: I think there's a reason he met the officer at a convenient store and not at his house. At his house, he would have to explain his whereabouts to his family. MOO

I understand what you are saying. If my husband was out walking on a trail that 2 girls were murdered on in my small town, wearing similar clothing, I would be talking about it. It would really freak me out especially if I had children in that town.. I'd want to ask my husband if he saw anything, was something off that day, did he see the girls, did he see anything out of the ordinary.. I feel like I'd want to talk about it a lot especially in the first few years when it was in the media more and the press confrences were happening. I'd likely bug him a lot to try to recall anything he could about that day. I feel like that would be a typical reaction for many spouses if their SO was in the location that 2 young girls were brutally murdered. So I too would like to know.. did he tell her? Did they talk about what he did that day at all after that day and before he was arrested, did he tell her he went to give a statement about what he did that day.. did he ever say, OMG I was wearing the same clothing as brige guy.. did she ever think OMG you look like Bridge Guy..


PS I find it impossible to believe if he told her he was there that day (maybe he didn't) that she then didn't examine the photo of bridge guy carefully and wonder if that was in fact her husband.

 

[Pitsleuth]

Thank you for clarifying where the meeting with the conservation officer took place. Who's idea was it for him to meet a CO and not a regular police officer? Who's idea was it for him to see the CO outside a grocery store? Did he just see the officer walking about and approach him or was this a planned appointment? We don't know why he didn't meet the guy at his workplace - we're not told. We can assume it was to avoid rumours etc, but we don't know. We don't know where his wife was either when he met the conservation officer - for all we know, she was in the car waiting for him to meet the guy, or maybe she didn't know he'd met him until years later when police requested the couple to attend the police station. There are a lot of questions to be answered - hopefully all of them will be at trial!

From your link, it does not JUST say he volunteered to meet with a CO".... what it says is: "Rick contacted the police and voluntarily discussed being on the trail that day. and voluntarily discussed being on the trail that day." So again I ask, who's idea was it for him to meet the CO and who set up the grocery store location and why??

Well, in the next bullet point it says that after meeting with the CO he went back to work at CVS and then never heard from LE for 5 years. So it'd be kinda strange if his wife was waiting in the car- "hey honey, I need to talk an officer, meet me outside Kroger and wait in the car while I talk to him". And why wouldn't he tell his wife later that day that he talked to someone? I'm pretty sure when I do a rundown of my day with my husband talking to an officer about being in the same location at the same time as gruesome murders would come up. JMO.

 

[photographer4]

OT from the legal stuff, I'd like to know what RA told his wife about that day. Did he mention in the weeks/months/years following- honey, it's so weird I can't believe I was there that day and didn't see anything? Where did she think he was during those hours?
So not only did he not come forward (again) to the police, but my suspicion is that he never mentioned anything to his wife, or anyone else for that matter. If he's innocent, why? IMO.

I mean, if he had never mentioned having been there and talking to DD about that day to his wife, then I can only imagine her shock when police contacted them several years later and asked them to come in to be interviewed. Seems neither of them were overly nervous about that meeting - they seem to have attended without a lawyer. But I would absolutely like to know - what did he tell her about that day? Any discrepancies between what he told her and what he told DD or subsequent police in years later?

Neither the P nor the D have made any statements regarding where RA is said to have gone after the murders or what witnesses say he was like that night or in the days following. Neither has said if he was seen by anyone before or after the murders at all. Curious isn't it?

 

[tlcya]

at 1.03 in the video w former defense atty/public defender reporter states once he was off case he is no longer bound by the gag order.

 

[justtrish]

Well, in the next bullet point it says that after meeting with the CO he went back to work at CVS and then never heard from LE for 5 years. So it'd be kinda strange if his wife was waiting in the car- "hey honey, I need to talk an officer, meet me outside Kroger and wait in the car while I talk to him". And why wouldn't he tell his wife later that day that he talked to someone? I'm pretty sure when I do a rundown of my day with my husband talking to an officer about being in the same location at the same time as gruesome murders would come up. JMO.

Also, this is a small town.. this is likely the only thing anyone was talking about for weeks/months after this. This isn't one of many random crimes that happened in a large city.. this was THE topic of discussion no doubt.. at work, at home, at school.. people were terrified to send their kids to school. to let them to anywhere without an adult, to play at parks to be outside because there was a crazy murderer on the loose. They had children so surely they discussed it and if he didn't tell her he was at the trail that day, then huge red flag. I mean it's literally changed their town and people are terrified and so if he didn't mention to her he was there that day BIG red flag.. if he did, then there is no way they didn't talk about it more than a passing comment.

 

[Emma Peel]

Re: Court TV article/video LeBrato/McDonald linked above:

Also - No mention of bullet casing.

 

[scapa]

A bit OT, but I suspect this the case LeBrato was discussing in his interview as the quadruple homicide that had very little traction outside the state. The details are appalling.

Judge Gull also involved with this one.

‘He killed them, they’re dead’: Court document details deaths of woman, 3 children

Cohen B. Hancz-Barron, 21, is being held in the Allen County Jail on four preliminary counts of murder, accused of killing his girlfriend and three children inside the southeast-side home before da…

www.wane.com

Man Accused of Brutally Murdering Girlfriend and Her 3 Kids Allegedly Had Escaped Home Detention

The suspect had defensive wounds, indicating Nicole Zent fought for her life and those of her children

people.com

Jury deliberating in trial of man accused of killing mother, 3 children

Cohen Hancz-Barron could face life without parole in the killings of Sarah Zent, 26, her sons, Carter, 5, and Ashton, 3, and her 2-year-old daughter, Aubree.

www.wane.com

Coroner IDs family killed in quadruple homicide at Gay Street home, suspect held on no bond

The first officers with Fort Wayne Police Department on the scene entered the home and found the bodies of a woman and three young children.Three Rivers Ambulance Authority Medics pronounced

www.wfft.com

 

[TL4S]

Of note, Lebrato also said JG is the right judge for this case. Clearly, he has tried cases before her court, and she assigned him to this case, so there is a working relationship there. Yet, he said they had been working on their own Franks motion, and while their strategy was going to be different, he said there's something to the Odinism stuff. I'm willing to hear out all sides on this.

 

[SharonNeedles]

I’ve said it before: it’s obvious to me that the defense team believes their client is 100% innocent. You may not believe what they’re saying, and I don’t necessarily believe it either, but they absolutely do.

 

[Salah11]

I’ve said it before: it’s obvious to me that the defense team believes their client is 100% innocent. You may not believe what they’re saying, and I don’t necessarily believe it either, but they absolutely do.

Well I think they are absolutely deluded in that belief and considering their actions so far I wouldn’t trust them as far as I could throw them either. They are actually doing more damage to RA with their actions as I have lost all sympathy for him.

The man has admitted he was out there and dressed as BG and confessed multiple times.


"If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck."

Moo

 

[TL4S]

Well I think they are absolutely deluded in that belief and considering their actions so far I wouldn’t trust them as far as I could throw them either.

The man has admitted he was out there and dressed as BG and confessed multiple times.


"If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck."

Moo

It's easy to get on here and say that these guys are clowns, but it was JG who appointed all four of them to RA...

We can't pick what the evidence is. If this is what four different defense attorneys see as a logical defense, crazy as it sounds, maybe it is worth hearing them out. IDK.

 

[Salah11]

It's easy to get on here and say that these guys are clowns, but it was JG who appointed all four of them to RA...

We can't pick what the evidence is. If this is what four different defense attorneys see as a logical defense, crazy as it sounds, maybe it is worth hearing them out. IDK.

I do want to hear it but it doesn’t mean I believe it.

He has admitted his guilt and even if a trial is in 2030 I am convinced he will he found guilty. I don’t believe there was multiple men out there that day dressed all as BG waiting on that first platform.

 

[photographer4]

I do want to hear it but it doesn’t mean I believe it.

He has admitted his guilt and even if a trail is in 2030 I am convinced he will he found guilty. I don’t believe there was multiple men out there that day dressed all as BG waiting on that first platform.

Just because a jury could find him guilty, doesn't mean he did it. Just ask the people who rotted in prisons because a jury believed they did it, when they didn't. Here is a link to where you can read about just a few such persons and the cases that ruined their lives: Cases - Innocence Project

ETA: you can even filter by "false confessions" - and still get 59 results. Wow.

 

[Salah11]

Just because a jury could find him guilty, doesn't mean he did it. Just ask the people who rotted in prisons because a jury believed they did it, when they didn't. Here is a link to where you can read about just a few such persons and the cases that ruined their lives: Cases - Innocence Project

Of course the system is not full proof we all know it has flaws but most of the time it gets it right.

 

[mrjitty]

Of note, Lebrato also said JG is the right judge for this case. Clearly, he has tried cases before her court, and she assigned him to this case, so there is a working relationship there. Yet, he said they had been working on their own Franks motion, and while their strategy was going to be different, he said there's something to the Odinism stuff. I'm willing to hear out all sides on this.

I mean obviously you'd file a franks - it's a long shot chance to collapse a key part of the case before trial

 

[photographer4]

Of course the system is not full proof we all know it has flaws but most of the time it gets it right.

Maybe. But I still don't want someone innocent rotting in prison for a crime he didn't commit. I don't know if RA did it or not. I'd like evidence and arguments from both sides to help me make up my mind. I don't have any side as a hero right now. I trust no one. Its going to be one heck of a fight to win the votes of the jurors in any direction.

 

[SharonNeedles]

I'm willing to hear out all sides on this.

^^^ This.
That’s the only path to justice.

 

[Ward Thisperer]

I am pretty sure that using a non-employee, non-attorney as an informal consultant is in violation of the gag order. It stipulates who is allowed to see the sealed documents and pictures, and MW would not fit the criteria.

The gag order is not the protective order. If AB did show MW the pictures, it would violate the PO, not the GO. However the Contempt motion does not even accuse AB of showing MW sealed documents and pictures. It is written cleverly to drive that implication and misstates BR's words from his Oct 12th letter in order to serve this implication, but it does not say so. In fact, the end of the order specifically alleges ONLY that D "failed to secure" discovery, not that they actually showed the discovery to anyone willfully.

Because he wasn't a consultant and he framed MW as a thief. Which is the opposite of being "open". He did this in attempt to separate himself and the defense from the leak.

If you serve someone dinner at the table (let someone read your own work product), it is still theft if they steal your jewelry (sneak into your office and take pictures of protected material).

In fact initially they proclaimed there was no way the leak came from defense. Even in chambers they tried to insinuate that it was a clerk on the other side. Thou dost protest too much.

We still have no evidence showing they had any foreknowledge that MW had accessed discovery material.

MW was a civilian, "the public" and should not have been allowed access to any of the evidence, crime scene photos, discovery, defense strategies or details of the case outside of what had been released to the public legally.

The GO applies to putting info out for public consumption such as through the media or social media.
The PO doesn't apply to defense strategies or information about the case.
Again, the Contempt motion doesn't say there is any evidence of MW being given access to discovery material. The INFO that the discovery contains is NOT protected under the order.
The Contempt motion does not say that he was allowed access to the discovery material.

Editing to add, just to be safe: I am of course not a lawyer this is just my own opinion.

 

[zucchinibread]

Do we know yet if his confessions will be admissible at trial?