Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #175

[steeltowngirl]

...It's hurling and obfuscating to ask the judge to follow the rules? And to request that they check with them before scheduling an extremely important hearing with less than 2 weeks notice?

---

Thanks to this tweet from Shay Hughes I looked up some case law relating to the the prohibition of JG ruling on anything prior to the motion for a special judge, in case you're like me and have been fiending for the specifics on that rule.

"In A.T. v. G.T, 960 N.E.2d 878 (Ind. Ct. App. 2012), the Court reversed the trial court’s denial of Mother’s petition for a change of judge in a dissolution custody modification action filed by Father. The Court opined that the trial court should not have held the custody modification hearing because the trial court was deprived of jurisdiction."

https://kidsvoicein.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/A.T.-v.-G.T.-960-N.E.2d-878-Ind.-Ct.-App.-2012.pdf

"As noted above, Judge Boyer had only limited jurisdiction in Bedree's case following his September 5 request for appointment of a special judge.   She could, of course, grant the motion for appointment of a special judge, which she did on January 15.   Judge Fee was appointed the next day.   She also retained jurisdiction to issue orders concerning “emergency matters,” pending the special judge's assumption of jurisdiction. "

https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/in-court-of-appeals/1405799.html

"Indeed, we conclude that the trial court did not err by failing to consolidate the two causes in the case at bar because it did not have jurisdiction to rule on the Cummings' motion by virtue of their pending motion for change of judge. [9]"
[footnote 9] "It is well settled that upon the filing of a motion for change of judge under T.R. 76, the trial court is divested of jurisdiction except to grant the change of venue or to act on emergency matters. See, e.g., State ex rel. Wade v. Cass Circuit Court, 447 N.E.2d 1082, 1083 (Ind. 1983). Consequently, absent any question concerning the motion for change of judge or any emergency matter, the trial court did not have jurisdiction to consider any motions in the Cummings' cause."

In re Adoption of I.K.E.W, 724 N.E.2d 245 | Casetext Search + Citator

Read In re Adoption of I.K.E.W, 724 N.E.2d 245, see flags on bad law, and search Casetext’s comprehensive legal database

casetext.com

"When presented with a timely motion for a change of judge, the trial judge is divested of jurisdiction to act in the case on any matter other than the motion for change of judge or emergency matters. Justak v. Bochnowski, (1979) Ind. App., 391 N.E.2d 872."

State ex rel. Wade v. Cass Circuit Court, 447 N.E.2d 1082 | Casetext Search + Citator

Read State ex rel. Wade v. Cass Circuit Court, 447 N.E.2d 1082, see flags on bad law, and search Casetext’s comprehensive legal database

casetext.com

---

A thought on the discussion of timelines:
If the girls asked to be dropped off at the trail at 1:30
And RA, or whoever the killer is, also arrived at the trail at 1:30, as LE seems to believe
I find it very hard to believe that is a coincidence or that the killer jumped on a lucky opportunity. The killer had to have known they were going to be there that day at that time.

Actually, I borrowed the hurling comment from another poster. I just took it and ran with it.

“Gull might need another paddle ball racket to doublefist the batting of these pesky things the D keeps hurling her way.”

 

[girlhasnoname]

...It's hurling and obfuscating to ask the judge to follow the rules? And to request that they check with them before scheduling an extremely important hearing with less than 2 weeks notice?

---

Thanks to this tweet from Shay Hughes I looked up some case law relating to the the prohibition of JG ruling on anything prior to the motion for a special judge, in case you're like me and have been fiending for the specifics on that rule.

"In A.T. v. G.T, 960 N.E.2d 878 (Ind. Ct. App. 2012), the Court reversed the trial court’s denial of Mother’s petition for a change of judge in a dissolution custody modification action filed by Father. The Court opined that the trial court should not have held the custody modification hearing because the trial court was deprived of jurisdiction."

https://kidsvoicein.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/A.T.-v.-G.T.-960-N.E.2d-878-Ind.-Ct.-App.-2012.pdf

"As noted above, Judge Boyer had only limited jurisdiction in Bedree's case following his September 5 request for appointment of a special judge.   She could, of course, grant the motion for appointment of a special judge, which she did on January 15.   Judge Fee was appointed the next day.   She also retained jurisdiction to issue orders concerning “emergency matters,” pending the special judge's assumption of jurisdiction. "

https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/in-court-of-appeals/1405799.html

"Indeed, we conclude that the trial court did not err by failing to consolidate the two causes in the case at bar because it did not have jurisdiction to rule on the Cummings' motion by virtue of their pending motion for change of judge. [9]"
[footnote 9] "It is well settled that upon the filing of a motion for change of judge under T.R. 76, the trial court is divested of jurisdiction except to grant the change of venue or to act on emergency matters. See, e.g., State ex rel. Wade v. Cass Circuit Court, 447 N.E.2d 1082, 1083 (Ind. 1983). Consequently, absent any question concerning the motion for change of judge or any emergency matter, the trial court did not have jurisdiction to consider any motions in the Cummings' cause."

In re Adoption of I.K.E.W, 724 N.E.2d 245 | Casetext Search + Citator

Read In re Adoption of I.K.E.W, 724 N.E.2d 245, see flags on bad law, and search Casetext’s comprehensive legal database

casetext.com

"When presented with a timely motion for a change of judge, the trial judge is divested of jurisdiction to act in the case on any matter other than the motion for change of judge or emergency matters. Justak v. Bochnowski, (1979) Ind. App., 391 N.E.2d 872."

State ex rel. Wade v. Cass Circuit Court, 447 N.E.2d 1082 | Casetext Search + Citator

Read State ex rel. Wade v. Cass Circuit Court, 447 N.E.2d 1082, see flags on bad law, and search Casetext’s comprehensive legal database

casetext.com

---

A thought on the discussion of timelines:
If the girls asked to be dropped off at the trail at 1:30
And RA, or whoever the killer is, also arrived at the trail at 1:30, as LE seems to believe
I find it very hard to believe that is a coincidence or that the killer jumped on a lucky opportunity. The killer had to have known they were going to be there that day at that time.

From my understanding this Wade vs Cass is a civil case not a criminal case. Ultimately that verdict was overruled in this case and appointed a Special Judge, but didn't the SCOIN already deny disqualifying Judge Gull outright by unanimous vote from the Defenses' Motion to Disqualify her?

MOO

 

[FrostedGlass]

She is most likely waiting for the SCOIN reasons on this exact issue which is the correct thing to do. The defence really should have waited as well because they have filed a motion that is almost identical to the SCOIN argument without waiting to see why SCOIN refused relief.

In the end the defence motion is now holding up the trial while we wait for SCOIN.

A quote from CJ Rush's published order. What does it mean?

The pendency of this matter in this Court does not stay the proceedings in the trial court.

 

[Ward Thisperer]

I agree RA's interview in Oct 22 will indeed help sink him along with other evidence the State has that we don't know of yet.

I also don't think RA's phone records/activity definitely does not exist. It's amazing what the experts can do now with CAST data, even from seven years ago. If RA was known to use his phone and keep it on prior to the murders consistently, and all the sudden shows he did 'switch it off" during the timeframe of the murders, that in and of itself is going to be damning IMO. It will show a deviation from his typical pattern of phone use during the murders.

MOO

I agree if that is what the evidence shows it would be damning particularly because he told investigators he was on his phone while on the trail. so if he actually didn’t even have his phone or it was off that would show he lied.
I’d be very curious if they could recover any social media accounts from his old phones such as snap chat.

From my understanding this Wade vs Cass is a civil case not a criminal case. Ultimately that verdict was overruled in this case and appointed a Special Judge, but didn't the SCOIN already deny disqualifying Judge Gull outright by unanimous vote from the Defenses' Motion to Disqualify her?

MOO

I didn’t see any of the cases specify a difference in the procedure for civil vs criminal. SCOIN denied DQing JG as a relief for the writ, but without their reasoning we don’t know why. As it stands now, B&R could potentially be DQed again as well after holding a hearing which I think is what they are concerned the plan is for the 12th. At the oral arguments one of the SCOIN justices mentioned the possibility that they could reinstate the attorneys and say JG should hold a hearing on the matter and do the DQ properly, rather than say they can’t be DQed at all. They could have declined to DQ JG on purely procedural grounds and out of respect to JG by giving her the time to recuse herself after they decided against her. I think SCOIN would err on the side of not taking an action unless absolutely necessary. Just like they did with the first writ — they did note that the concerns were valid but said they can attempt to correct this in the trial court and then appeal if needed, rather than order JG to take action.

Along those lines I don’t find it very convincing to say that B&R should have waited for the SCOIN opinion before asking for her recusal. NM was clearly already working on his motion to hold them in contempt prior to getting that decision, he didn’t wait for SCOIN’s opinion, and JG didn’t wait for the SCOIN decision before giving it a hearing. Who knows if we will even have the opinion by the 12th?! JG didn’t seem too concerned about that. B&R seemed to make a totally necessary strategic move with that motion to ensure she needs to rule on the recusal before anything else, and continue to make a record for a potential appeal.

 

[sunshineray]

He's been moved from Westville to Wabash. Now he wants to be moved from Wabash. What are the odds that the next place they move RA (if they do) he will also be unhappy and people will be picking on him and mistreating him according to him?

RA is going to have it rough no matter where he is; he is a Defendant in a high profile, vicious child murder case. I believe the State is just trying to keep him alive and protected from others and himself until trial time rolls around.

JMO

Yes...let's move him to a county jail so he's more comfortable and better access to attorneys and family...RA is either murdered or kills himself...why in the world did "they" move him to a county jail with less security, did they want him dead before his trial began?
I can just see the headlines. AJMO

 

[FrostedGlass]

There is another update this morning

02/06/2024	Appearance Filed Limited Appearance Form on behalf of Andrew Baldwin For Party: Allen, Richard M. File Stamp: 02/06/2024
02/06/2024	Appearance Filed Limited Appearance Form on behalf of Bradley Rozzi For Party: Allen, Richard M. File Stamp: 02/06/2024

 

[Justice101]

I think he may have glanced at his phone a time or two during his walk but I highly doubt he called anyone or even checked stocks live.

This was probably an excuse.. .like his excuse looking at fish below the bridge which is doubtful due to the smallness of about any fish at that height. I'm a fisherman myself and I do the same thing but on bridges only 1/3 the height... and it is very hard to see even in clear water.

In the end, it really doesn't matter what he did one the trail. He placed himself there at the time.. in the same clothing as witnesses said..

 

[sunshineray]

Where do we get the time that KG dropped the kids off at the trail? And was anyone else with them? I'm asking because a google search has shown me a wide range of times that she is said to have dropped them off. One media site (linked below) says 1pm. Its from 2022.
Delphi murders: What to know about the 2017 killings of Libby German and Abby Williams

This link (Court Tv) shows a different time noted (1:49pm)
Delphi Murders: Everything you want to know

This one says "around 1:35pm"
Suspect arrested in connection with 2017 Delphi murders: report

So which is it?

Go to the PCA and look at the times Kelsei's car and Adult Witness#1's car were seen on video. Adult Witness#1 saw no other cars when she parked, so no Kelsei. She also saw Abby and Libby walking towards the bridge when she was walking back to her car. She'd already saw the man on the bridge and decided to leave. I'm guessing maybe he made her uneasy?

The girls could have stopped for a minute or two after getting out of KG's car before starting their walk. KG's car leaving on video minus however many seconds from Mears lot to Harvest store (where the videos originated) would be the drop off time?

People's car clocks and phone clocks are not necessarily synced so the error in a few minutes, give or take, and people's memories being not completely accurate under stress is not a big deal to me. Using the PCA video descriptions is the most accurate I'd think. I'm taking a guess from what I've read that drop off may have been around 1:48-1:49-ish. IMO and AJMO

 

[photographer4]

Isn't it ironic that Rozzi is going to be out of town on the 12th for personal reasons?

For 2 Defense attorneys who were asking for STM in Oct/Nov and represented that they would be ready to go in January, things sure have changed. Yes, I understand the delay over the SCOIN ruling, but even then they were still claiming they were ready to go in Jan. Now they're saying several weeks just to receive Discovery back from S&L (why?) and more time to review the voluminous amount of Discovery associated with the updated charges against RA by the State.

They were never ready IMO for trial on Jan 14th, especially once the information of the leaks was made public knowledge.

JMO

How long did they book for original trial? Two weeks? When was it set for? Early Jan? Then it should have been already over by the 12th and no need of his presence. Further, we don’t know where he is off to. Could be a vacay or could be a short get away for two days. Either way, he was not going to be unavailable during the original trial date and couldn’t have reasonably foreseen JG would book a contempt motion for the 12th. Even if he could, they should have consulted with him on his schedule. I wonder, did she ask the prosecution for his availability to attend that day??

 

[FrostedGlass]

Just for the record, Scremin and Lebrato were removed from the attorney record this morning.

Just to lighten things up a bit: when I googled their names, google asked me if I meant: Screamin and Labrador.
Whatever works.

 

[sunshineray]

How long did they book for original trial? Two weeks? When was it set for? Early Jan? Then it should have been already over by the 12th and no need of his presence. Further, we don’t know where he is off to. Could be a vacay or could be a short get away for two days. Either way, he was not going to be unavailable during the original trial date and couldn’t have reasonably foreseen JG would book a contempt motion for the 12th. Even if he could, they should have consulted with him on his schedule. I wonder, did she ask the prosecution for his availability to attend that day??

The old/new defense just has the most rotten luck in this court, it's quite remarkable.

 

[Ravenmoon]

How long did they book for original trial? Two weeks? When was it set for? Early Jan? Then it should have been already over by the 12th and no need of his presence. Further, we don’t know where he is off to. Could be a vacay or could be a short get away for two days. Either way, he was not going to be unavailable during the original trial date and couldn’t have reasonably foreseen JG would book a contempt motion for the 12th. Even if he could, they should have consulted with him on his schedule. I wonder, did she ask the prosecution for his availability to attend that day??

Yet he FOUGHT to stay on the case knowing full well the trial was reset for October 2024.

 

[photographer4]

Yet he FOUGHT to stay on the case knowing full well the trial was reset for October 2024.

What has October got to do with a motion set to be heard in Feb? Unless you’re suggesting he shouldn’t take a personal day or any time away until after trial?

 

[Ravenmoon]

So... Rozzi and Baldwin want Hennessy to appear on their behalf?

I am, once again, confused!!

 

[Ravenmoon]

What has October got to do with a motion set to be heard in Feb? Unless you’re suggesting he shouldn’t take a personal day or any time away until after trial?

Everything..
They knew that they would have to be available when necessary.
It's literally their job.

 

[photographer4]

The old/new defense just has the most rotten luck in this court, it's quite remarkable.

Or they have a judge who is biased against them (or appears to be), who went months upon months without paying them, who skipped a hearing to Dq them, who issues summary judgements against their motions without benefit of written explanation or hearings….. I wouldn’t call it bad luck so much as poor case management and lack of impartiality of JG. But sure, we can go with rotten luck since they had no choice over the presiding judge or how she runs this matter.

 

[sunshineray]

Or they have a judge who is biased against them (or appears to be), who went months upon months without paying them, who skipped a hearing to Dq them, who issues summary judgements against their motions without benefit of written explanation or hearings….. I wouldn’t call it bad luck so much as poor case management and lack of impartiality of JG. But sure, we can go with rotten luck since they had no choice over the presiding judge or how she runs this matter.

Oh I definitely think rotten luck, like Joe Btfsplk and his cloud. JMO

 

[Ravenmoon]

Or they have a judge who is biased against them (or appears to be), who went months upon months without paying them, who skipped a hearing to Dq them, who issues summary judgements against their motions without benefit of written explanation or hearings….. I wouldn’t call it bad luck so much as poor case management and lack of impartiality of JG. But sure, we can go with rotten luck since they had no choice over the presiding judge or how she runs this matter.

Sometimes I wish there was a new judge.

Why? So all of this nonsense can come to an end.

B&R are NOT victims.

When a new (if) judge comes on the case and is even more harsh, refuses to put up with the shenanigans people will scream taint and bias. It won't make any difference.

Most of us that are supportive of NMcL and Judge Gull don't care for the exD , but we accept that they are back on the case.

Seems like those that support B&R can't reciprocate by allowing the judge to do her job.


JMO

 

[Emma Peel]

There is another update this morning

02/06/2024	Appearance Filed Limited Appearance Form on behalf of Andrew Baldwin For Party: Allen, Richard M. File Stamp: 02/06/2024
02/06/2024	Appearance Filed Limited Appearance Form on behalf of Bradley Rozzi For Party: Allen, Richard M. File Stamp: 02/06/2024

Ah, the docket now reveals this is defense attny David Hennessey (again) appearing for BOTH Baldwin and Rozzi.

(Previously - October - Hennessey appeared to rep Baldwin against Gull's removal of D counsel.)

 

[Ravenmoon]

JUST MY OPINION:

All of theatrics will come to end before too long. . Why? I think RA will make a plea deal. I seriously doubt that this case will ever go to trial.

AMOO JMO