Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #180

[Emma Peel]

DH is subject to the ethics rules, no matter who his client is.

That's obvious. Why are we even talking about this? Are you saying there are actual ethics "rules" on fundraising? Or are there simply "recommendations" for attorneys?

Attorneys are allowed to raise funds, but they should CYA with extensive disclosure.

It's worth listening to the interview even if you don't like MS. The two ladies interviewed provide really great content

Thanks. Found it less painful read the relevant article by the guests.
This drama over Hennessy's fundraiser for RA's expert is manufactured.
SM engagement in false drama, strawman arguments and other logical fallacies based on false premises - not my jam.
JMHO

 

[susiQ]

Would the defense be upset that the P didn't take better precautions with that private info?

RSABBM
Maybe.

But, I’m pretty sure they were teeeeed off when they learned NM read their ex parte motion! If he did it once…….

People are so quick to believe that AB “let” MW, heck CONSPIRED with MW, to get those photos to the public, YET, unwilling to believe that NM knew darn well he wasn’t supposed to be reading things that were NOT for his eyes. In AB’s case it is quite conceivable that MW acted on his own for his own reasons absent AB having any knowledge. NM did what he did and he alone is responsible. JMHO

 

[susiQ]

The funds are EXCLUSIVELY for the necessary experts. (What is happening with leftover money?)

I would suggest donating it to the Innocence Project . JMO

 

[Emma Peel]

The funds are EXCLUSIVELY for the necessary experts. (What is happening with leftover money?)

Good question.
b/c Hennessy is managing the fund, (with obligated audited recordkeeping for escrow/trust rules) folks will actually be able to find out for a fact. Cool beans.

 

[Cyber sleuth]

The funds are EXCLUSIVELY for the necessary experts. (What is happening with leftover money?)

But it doesn’t say that. It only states a very narrow statement of what fees won’t be used for.
it allows the reader to assume it will be used for expert fees and their necessary travel expenses but it doesn’t explicitly state this.

 

[Cyber sleuth]

Good question.
b/c Hennessy is managing the fund, (with obligated audited recordkeeping for escrow/trust rules) folks will actually be able to find out for a fact. Cool beans.

Maybe, maybe not. I am willing to bet we never see any accounting whatsoever.JMO

 

[FrostedGlass]

Today is the day for Westerman; no cameras in the courtroom but maybe we can find one of the news people following it on twitter

04/11/2024

Pretrial Conference Session: 03/07/2024 1:30 PM, Rescheduled Session: 03/27/2024 9:00 AM, Rescheduled Session: 04/11/2024 9:00 AM, Judicial Officer: Cummins, Douglas B. Comment: Defense Motion to Dismiss

 

[TTF14]

Supposedly.

But what would people be saying if the prosecutor left secret medical/mental health files of RA, unsupervised, on a table in an unlocked room? And someone wandered in and took photos and released them to YouTubers?

Would the defense be upset that the P didn't take better precautions with that private info?

Of course. Why wouldn't they be upset? Nobody is saying not to be upset about it.

 

[TTF14]

The funds are EXCLUSIVELY for the necessary experts. (What is happening with leftover money?)

I doubt any will be left over, but they should have made that clear that they will donate it to some kind of defense fund or something.

 

[Emma Peel]

Maybe, maybe not. I am willing to bet we never see any accounting whatsoever.JMO

So, I'm working through a conundrum here.
Do I take this bet and make money off of false allegations like youtubers everywhere?
Or not.

 

[Cyber sleuth]

So, I'm working through a conundrum here.
Do I take this bet and make money off of false allegations like youtubers everywhere?
Or not.

Well it depends, I believe that their are good people that make bad choices and then there are bad faith actors. Birds of a feather and red flags happen in clusters. I’m looking at repeated behavior of the defense and their cohorts so I feel I am justified for having my opinion.
I don’t give the benefit of the doubt to those that repeatedly abuse it. Grace only goes so far.
But we all have our path to walk and lessons to learn- some free of charge and others at great cost to oneself and others.
JMOO and pre coffee musings. Now I will move on…

 

[FrostedGlass]

Well it depends, I believe that their are good people that make bad choices and then there are bad faith actors. Birds of a feather and red flags happen in clusters. I’m looking at repeated behavior of the defense and their cohorts so I feel I am justified for having my opinion.
I don’t give the benefit of the doubt to those that repeatedly abuse it. Grace only goes so far.
But we all have our path to walk and lessons to learn- some free of charge and others at great cost to oneself and others.
JMOO and pre coffee musings. Now I will move on…

I wish all Indiana cases were scrutinized to the degree this one has been. IMO birds of a feather and red flags happen more frequently than we imagine.

 

[WildHuncher]

So, I'm working through a conundrum here.
Do I take this bet and make money off of false allegations like youtubers everywhere?
Or not.

I don’t like the word “never” in a bet. When can I safely collect if I seem to be winning?

 

[Cyber sleuth]

I don’t like the word “never” in a bet. When can I safely collect if I seem to be winning?

Ah see you caught that!!! The power of insinuation and the importance of concise language.

 

[FrostedGlass]

Shows up complete on my post.
And what do you think that disclaimer means? “No funds collected will be offset against fees…”

I tried to find a simple answer to your question; this is the best I could do:
My understanding is no funds will be used to reduce the fees the D team incurs.
What do you think it means?

https://www.collinsdictionary.com/us/dictionary/english/offset

If one thing is offset by another, the effect of the first thing is reduced by the second, so that any advantage or disadvantage is canceled out.
The increase in pay costs was more than offset by higher productivity.

12. to balance, complement, counteract, compensate for, etc.
17. to counterbalance as an equivalent does; compensate for
The gains offset the losses

 

[photographer4]

The funds are EXCLUSIVELY for the necessary experts. (What is happening with leftover money?)

I was wondering: if the D needed this funding, couldn’t they have approached RA’s wife and asked her to head up the fundraiser? Would that have alleviated concerns of ethics on part of the D as well as concerns around administration of the funds? Maybe they did ask her and she declined so they proceeded?

When KA sold the family home, would RA have gotten a share of the sale directly or not since they’re still married? Couldn’t the funds from the sale be used in his defence? Just trying to catch back up. Ty in advance.

 

[photographer4]

Maybe, maybe not. I am willing to bet we never see any accounting whatsoever.JMO

Have never done / paid into such a fundraiser so wondered: does the general public get access to any such accounting or is that only for those who contributed?

 

[DeDee]

BBM
The Judge is literally required to decide the funding requests on a case by case basis. I think there is an idea that Judge Gull is doing something strange here, but it appears to me that Judges are required to approve / decline such requests in every trial and that this is something that is happening every day throughout the jurisdiction.

Does JG also decide when the Prosecutor has spent enough on any one expert or is the PTeam given carte blanche and authority over how funds will be utilized?

Of course every defence attorney will be aggrieved when their requests are turned down - possibly in some cases with good reason.

I have no idea how tough Judges are on these requests usually but I think it is unfair to say the Judge has erred in denying some of these when we don't even know what exactly was requested or what standards are usually applied.

The err is found in the Defense Team who felt they needed more funds and sought permission to have access to them which, in turn, was denied. This is not the only current high profile case where funds are raised for the DT using the samepayit2. See Boston, Mass.

By example, if the PT can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that RA kidnapped these precious children from MHB and murdered them in the woods, the D funding would be money well spent because the Defense would have had the means at their disposal to prove otherwise but failed.

MOO

 

[Emma Peel]

I tried to find a simple answer to your question; this is the best I could do:
My understanding is no funds will be used to reduce the fees the D team incurs.
What do you think it means?

https://www.collinsdictionary.com/us/dictionary/english/offset

If one thing is offset by another, the effect of the first thing is reduced by the second, so that any advantage or disadvantage is canceled out.
The increase in pay costs was more than offset by higher productivity.

12. to balance, complement, counteract, compensate for, etc.
17. to counterbalance as an equivalent does; compensate for
The gains offset the losses

In quotes below is a copy/past of the language on the fundraiser page (which I'll not link here).

NOTE: On 30 MAR 2024, the fund's target goal was increased by $20,000. We have identified the experts needed and the costs of fees, travel, and lodging are greater than originally anticipated. Please be advised that no funds collected will be offset against fees related to David Hennessy's law firm, Richard Allen's defense team, or to Richard Allen.

"no funds collected will be offset against ... " = no funds collected will be used to pay ...

after this phrase, a list of parties/items the funds won't be used to pay are listed.


JMO

 

[Cyber sleuth]

In quotes below is a copy/past of the language on the fundraiser page (which I'll not link here).




"no funds collected will be offset against ... " = no funds collected will be used to pay ...

after this phrase, a list of parties/items the funds won't be used to pay are listed.


JMO

See there Ruth’s Chris Cowboy Cut ribeye is not excluded.
They have only given a narrow scope of what it will not be used for and insinuated using vague wording that funds collected MIGHT be used for paying for experts. Everything else is open to DH’s discretion. No audit necessary
Call me jaded but DH has decades of legal experience, the vagueness of his wording is not by accident IMO
My suspicions are supported by the increasing goal for funds- they know how much the experts cost. They already asked the judge for it. So why the increase from the original amount? iMO they discovered people are gullible enough to open their wallets with blind trust.
JMO