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

[girlhasnoname]

Link please? I don't remember seeing that statement and would like to add it to my notes.

It was from the ISP Lab report. I'm looking for it, but I have to go through the entire discovery doc dump it might take some time.

 

[sunshineray]

The system can only be as good as the people that are putting information into it. The system's job is not to check the accuracy of information entered into the system or contained in the tip narratives, it is to scan all tips for commonalities so that if patterns are emerging investigators can become aware of all the tips that mention, for example, a black Ford Focus in the area.

My Dad was LE for 30+ years and use to say, "Garbage in, garbage out". Where humans are involved, this is always a risk. Ugggh

 

[sunshineray]

From the same interview I cited above though - this did give me pause, since the interviews are missing from BH & PW...
View attachment 481628

And with that said by a prosecutor on the flip side you have the defense doing just that by continuing to call two men (actually they named more than two in FM) murderers who've been investigated and not charged. Who's more honorable?

 

[FrostedGlass]

It was from the ISP Lab report. I'm looking for it, but I have to go through the entire discovery doc dump it might take some time.

I've seen the lab report about a cartridge in a sealed envelope but there is no mention of chain of custody.

 

[sunshineray]

I think there's zero chance this leads to a dismissal or even to significant discovery sanctions of any kind. Perhaps if they had evidence that the prosecution itself was intentionally destroying evidence. But this seems to be something that happened in 2017, and it appears to have been unintentional. And the evidence in question isn't directly related to Richard Allen.

Thing that worries me is, in some instances, the law says destroying evidence intentionally OR by negligence MAY be grounds for dismissal.

 

[mrjitty]

Thing that worries me is, in some instances, the law says destroying evidence intentionally OR by negligence MAY be grounds for dismissal.

Right - the murder case against BH is probably crippled.

 

[mrjitty]

It was from the ISP Lab report. I'm looking for it, but I have to go through the entire discovery doc dump it might take some time.

I think the defence suggestion from the Franks was that there is no photos of the round recovery. And of course there is the straight up conspiracy that LE cycled a round through his gun to frame him

Why? Reasons!

02c

 

[FrostedGlass]

I think the defence suggestion from the Franks was that there is no photos of the round recovery. And of course there is the straight up conspiracy that LE cycled a round through his gun to frame him

Why? Reasons!

02c

Why are innocent people ever framed? We know it happens.

What a coincidence that the only photos that had turned up at the time of the FM are the 3 of the cartridge still in the ground and 1 of a cartridge in the lab. Maybe they had some kind of camera malfunction?

The cartridge is a biggie for the P... what if they found, after being so sure that RA's their guy, that the bullet at the scene did not match the test bullets from his gun?

Would they just shrug their shoulders and say "Oh, well... guess we just can't place him on the bridge now"

 

[sunshineray]

There were SO MANY tips coming in, IN PERSON, INTERNET, BY PHONE that LE had so much going on, not surprise inexperienced officers were used and made mistakes.

I agree. You'd also think though that if a call came in from a man who said he was at the trails that day, an experienced investigator would have been assigned to interview him at a recorded sit down. JMO

 

[sunshineray]

Wow. I don't see how she can use this rationale without having read the SCOIN opinion. It's quite possible (likely even IMO) that the recusal relief was denied by SCOIN on purely procedural grounds. There hadn't even been a ruling on recusal yet at the trial court level, so it couldn't meet the structural error standard required for granting relief in an original action.

And if that was the basis for their ruling, this order makes no sense. SCOIN saying "We can't grant this relief due to the posture of the case" is a totally different thing from saying "this relief shouldn't be granted by the trial court." I guess we'll see when the opinion is finally released.

She is quoting the bottom line. Does it really matter, in the end, what the SC justice's pattern of thought was to that end?

 

[girlhasnoname]

I've seen the lab report about a cartridge in a sealed envelope but there is no mention of chain of custody.

I'm still looking lol. I specifically remember the lab tech reporting that she removed the unspent bullet first from a sealed brown bag and then from an evidence collection bag.

 

[girlhasnoname]

Oh, and while I'm perusing hundreds of pages of the Discovery Dump, SC (not BB) is the one who saw BG=RA on CRN300. She was driving east, he was walking west. Her statement according to all of the affidavits submitted by LE stated she saw a "man wearing blue jeans and a blue jacket who looked muddy and bloody, like he might have been in a fight".

Where did it ever get started that she said Tan jacket??? Oh, let me guess, the FM by the Defense.

MOO

 

[mrjitty]

Why are innocent people ever framed? We know it happens.

What a coincidence that the only photos that had turned up at the time of the FM are the 3 of the cartridge still in the ground and 1 of a cartridge in the lab. Maybe they had some kind of camera malfunction?

The cartridge is a biggie for the P... what if they found, after being so sure that RA's their guy, that the bullet at the scene did not match the test bullets from his gun?

Would they just shrug their shoulders and say "Oh, well... guess we just can't place him on the bridge now"

Sure it happens - especially in cases involving poorly represented defendants in cases which will never receive any attention. But I have a hard time with the usual conspiratorial claims that the defendant has been framed in these high profile cases, based on no evidence.

If the defence has legitimate concerns about the chain of custody, they should bring a motion for it's exclusion. That is correct and fine. But i can't go along with the idea RA has been framed via corrupt officers without some factual basis.

 

[mrjitty]

Oh, and while I'm perusing hundreds of pages of the Discovery Dump, SC (not BB) is the one who saw BG=RA on CRN300. She was driving east, he was walking west. Her statement according to all of the affidavits submitted by LE stated she saw a "man wearing blue jeans and a blue jacket who looked muddy and bloody, like he might have been in a fight".

Where did it ever get started that she said Tan jacket??? Oh, let me guess, the FM by the Defense.

MOO

Do you have a link to that doc? I'd love to read it

 

[FrostedGlass]

I'm still looking lol. I specifically remember the lab tech reporting that she removed the unspent bullet first from a sealed brown bag and then from an evidence collection bag.

Pg 276 begins the lab analysis.

When this first came out, I compared the items taken to the lab and agency numbers. As best as I could tell, item 016 was possibly the one that came from the crime scene.

From your post, I thought you found that info from a news source and that's why I asked for a link.

https://fox59.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/21/2023/06/DelphiDocumentsCombined.pdf

 

[sunshineray]

Tuesday is Delphi Filings Day, apparently.

Here's another filing from D moving for Summary judgement (Denial) of the P's Contempt motion.
Seems the arguments for Denial are technical in nature / procedural, etc.. The many ways the P's Contempt motion is a faulty charge (such that Gull can't hear or decide) are explained.

I don't recognize the authoring attorney's name (Michael Ausbrook) as "appearing" on the docket yet... his "appearance" notice likely accompanies? This attorney is from the Habeaus Project at Mauer School of Law, IN. - (Appellate wizards hang out there, JMO.)
View attachment 481690

View attachment 481692
View attachment 481693
View attachment 481695View attachment 481694
View attachment 481696
View attachment 481697
View attachment 481698

View attachment 481699

AB did "willfully" shared discovery details with MW. Was it not stated by the prosecution, that AB admitted to doing that? MW was not in the employment of AB at the time. Was the discovery not in AB's office unsecured from a person who was not in AB's employ? Was the discovery also not emailed to a random youtuber from AB's office? Did not AB & BR sign their names to a long and detailed publically accessible document called the Franks Memorandum, in which confidential information was included throughout?
The new filing seems whole lot of nothing, AJMO

 

[girlhasnoname]

Do you have a link to that doc? I'd love to read it

https://fox59.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/21/2023/06/DelphiDocumentsCombined.pdf

 

[sunshineray]

BH said he didn’t have the money to sue. JM said he was pursuing legal action “after the sensational allegations turned his life ’upside down’."

'Cultist' who Delphi defense blames for 'ritualistic' murders breaks silence

A MAN accused by Richard Allen’s attorneys of carrying out the Delphi murders as part of a ritualistic sacrifice said he’s exploring legal action after the sensational allegations turne…

www.the-sun.com

Where's the pro bono lawyer advocates for these men? Just remarkable. Guess they need to be arrested first.

 

[girlhasnoname]

Also from the linked discovery above, the DEFENSE postponed 2 bail hearings that were set for RA. One in Feb. which they wanted to change from Motion to Let Bail to Motion to Suppress in July (getting the SW thrown out would have helped that cause). Which Judge Gull approved.

There's a lot of information in these documents that show the Defense and their outraged SM podcasters and Appealate Lawyer hangers on have failed to read obviously. Like Judge Gull has denied the State RA's medical and psych records while at Westville even though they cite often (especially after his phone confessions stating he did murder the girls) that he is mentally unstable and possibly psychotic. Funny how he was faring pretty well up until that point, and has since resumed his normal activities now.

Also there were photos shown to witnesses that picked RA out as the man they saw that day. I questioned that back a few threads ago. Good to know though.

The FM twisted and contorted the facts to fit their narrative IMO. This latest attempt is another one of their ploys. They cleared BH and PW and I'm sure we will know exactly why even without the recordings.

JMO

 

[sunshineray]

As per The Prosecutors Podcast both on this case and the Stephen Smith case, lawyers on either side are allowed to make accusations in court filings/court proceedings without the ability to be sued. Now, if they go out on the steps of the courthouse and give an interview to a reporter and say those things, that's when they risk it.

It seems filing it in documents that are of public access and therefore on the internet and able to ruin a person's reputation and life is going out on the courthouse steps and then some! IMO