Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #192

[grannygates]

I think the D should make every effort to discredit their testimony yes. That is kinda their job to poke holes in the "evidence".

I’m seeing that your comment is being very misunderstood, and I wanted to comment to say that I agree with you that if the eyewitness statement does not match what the state is claiming the eyewitness said, than absolutely it would be very important that the defense get that information out of the witness on the stand, if they are actually going to testify.

I have my doubts that will happen because that exact scenario would be terrible for the states timeline and theory.

 

[grannygates]

It’s a reoccurring theme that allegations of wrongdoing are made without heed to the facts. Where is it stated the phonecalls Harshman reviewed did not contain audio?

I’m not referring to the telephone calls. I would assume those would be all audio and no video. I’m referring to the video recordings.

This was covered during the prison staff testimony on the morning of the second day of the hearings, which was covered by our friends at the Murder Sheet if you wanted to listen to that episode to confirm.

 

[justtrish]

There are two different types of video recording in this case. There is the video camera that is affixed to the wall in the cell, which I don’t understand why it wouldn’t have audio if the sole purpose of putting him in that cell with that camera was to watch and listen to him for “suicide watch”. There are several television shows/documentaries that use wall affixed cameras and they all have audio.

The one that is absolutely intentional in my opinion is the handheld camcorder that a guard carries and follows him around with, every time he leaves his cell. A handheld video camera absolutely defaults to including audio recording.

I am already suspicious by the request that this man be recorded 24/7, which is apparently IMO not standard protocol, so I find the lack of any sort of audio recording very convenient. I think that the prison doesn’t want to include the audio of everyone else outside of RA.

All in my cynical opinion with having reviewed and compared the discrepancies in all of the documentation surrounding the issues in the prison and the transcripts from the warden and safekeeping hearing, all of the filings surrounding the safekeeping, motion to transfer and the content of the states subpoenas for the mental health records and just googling the prison and learning how it earned its reputation. I’m not buying any of it and that’s just my opinion.

I think if these cameras did have audio then people would be crying about that too. They really can't win. I think the purpose of the video recording it to watch someone, not listen to them. They would clearly be able to tell if he was trying to harm himself and they don't need to hear him to do that. I'd say it's more fair to NOT record audio if the sole purpose is to ensure his safety. They were not trying to record him confessing or listen to everything he said 24/7. If they were doing that with that purpose, then I'm sure his lawyers would be crying foul on that.

 

[Salah11]

If he said he was at home with his phone, the pro-guilt side would just say that he had a burner phone. I really don’t think that it matters what he says, the pro-guilt side wont accept it.

At this point the pro-guilt side is saying that Libby’s phone was turned on by a rooting animal or rigor mortis or drying up water. Anything except for a person actually turning the phone on. Like why couldn’t a person have turned the phone on?

It’s not the defendants job to prove himself innocent - It’s the states job to prove that he is guilty. He doesn’t even have to provide an alibi. The burden is on the State to prove that he was involved or, at this point, even there after 1:30pm and we have not heard any real undisputed evidence that suggests that.

It’s not evidence to just say RA=BG, the state has to actually prove it.

BBM

Other than his own words and 60+ confessions.

 

[Ravenmoon]

If he said he was at home with his phone, the pro-guilt side would just say that he had a burner phone. I really don’t think that it matters what he says, the pro-guilt side wont accept it.

At this point the pro-guilt side is saying that Libby’s phone was turned on by a rooting animal or rigor mortis or drying up water. Anything except for a person actually turning the phone on. Like why couldn’t a person have turned the phone on?

It’s not the defendants job to prove himself innocent - It’s the states job to prove that he is guilty. He doesn’t even have to provide an alibi. The burden is on the State to prove that he was involved or, at this point, even there after 1:30pm and we have not heard any real undisputed evidence that suggests that.

It’s not evidence to just say RA=BG, the state has to actually prove it.

Correct me if I am wrong, but didn't you want video proof that BH was at work that day? A man who is not on trial?

Well, if there is video that exonerates RA, I would like to see it as well. I would like to see verifiable proof that RA was anywhere except the trails from 1:30 Pm to 3:30 PM on February 13th,2017.

 

[m00c0w]

I’m seeing that your comment is being very misunderstood, and I wanted to comment to say that I agree with you that if the eyewitness statement does not match what the state is claiming the eyewitness said, than absolutely it would be very important that the defense get that information out of the witness on the stand, if they are actually going to testify.

I have my doubts that will happen because that exact scenario would be terrible for the states timeline and theory.

Luckily, the defense is free to call witness in just such an event! I suspect they won’t, though, because they know they can’t just take commentary out of context when the person is on the stand and open to cross.

JMO

 

[grannygates]

I think if these cameras did have audio then people would be crying about that too. They really can't win. I think the purpose of the video recording it to watch someone, not listen to them. They would clearly be able to tell if he was trying to harm himself and they don't need to hear him to do that. I'd say it's more fair to NOT record audio if the sole purpose is to ensure his safety. They were not trying to record him confessing or listen to everything he said 24/7. If they were doing that with that purpose, then I'm sure his lawyers would be crying foul on that.

Why would anyone be upset that they were able to actually hear for themselves what was happening in the prison? Isn’t more evidence better?

This audio would confirm or deny the claims of abuse being alleged by RA, his attorneys and the other inmates who submitted letters on his behalf. Without this audio we have no idea what people are saying to him or what he is saying back. Having the audio would mean we know exactly what was happening. I fail to see any legitimate reason why audio should not have been included, but I am a person who needs to see and hear for myself.

 

[tlcya]

Yes I have great concern that the video recordings of the accused being held at the Prison don’t have any audio, because we have no idea what is being said to him or he is saying back during any of those 24/7 video recordings.

I’m not sure what the point of video without audio is if the whole intention was to record him confessing (my opinion)

This is a reoccurring theme in this case. The video survives but the audio is missing, so the video now becomes unusable to the defense.

the video did not "survive" some erasure event any more than audio is "missing".

It is my opinion it never existed because the surveillance in place at the prison does not feature audio. That isn't evidence of foul play or some greater conspiracy IMO Further, LE and the prosecution and the Odinists didn't make the decision on whether surveillance equipment located at the prison shall feature audio or not. I would imagine that the State of Indiana dictates what is allowed in that regard, while balancing guard and prisoner safety against prisoner privacy requirements.

Using the word missing implies it existed and now doesn't. Can you provide a link that confirms the areas of the jail RA was videotaped in do or did feature the ability to audio record as well as videotape?

 

[grannygates]

the video did not "survive" some erasure event any more than audio "missing".

It is my opinion it never existed because the surveillance in place at the prison does not feature audio. That isn't evidence of foul play or some greater conspiracy IMO Further, LE and the prosecution and the Odinists didn't make the decision on whether surveillance equipment located at the prison shall feature audio or not. I would imagine that the State of Indiana dictates what is allowed in that regard, while balancing guard and prisoner safety against prisoner privacy requirements.

Using the word missing implies it existed and now doesn't. Can you provide a link that confirms the areas of the jail RA was videotaped in do or did feature the ability to audio record as well as videotape?

The comment regarding the great erasure and the missing audio was referring to the interview room footage, where the 5 days were erased and the following 70(?) days had only video but the audio was missing. I used the same terminology that Mullin used in the hearing transcript. If you would like to confirm that wording I will be able to dig out a link but it will take me some time.

It’s my understanding that the source of the request for the videotaping was discussed at the hearing. So once the transcript is released we will be able to see who requested it.

It is my understanding that there is no audio whatsoever for any of the videorecording that occurred at the prison. So I am unable to provide any links that say that there is audio recordings anywhere in the prison outside of the telephone system because I don’t think such link exists

 

[Salah11]

<modsnip - quoted post was removed>

No im talking about the Due Process Gang. Everybody who has listened to the recordings know what they said. I will Find the links again and edit my post to reflect i have a link to back up my claims.

The Delphi Murders: Defense Investigator Matthew Hoffman, Phone Pings, and Youtube Leaks: "If Something Happens to Us"

Today, we will delve more into the relationship between Richard Allen's defense investigator Matthew Hoffman and internet cranks. Specifically, we unpack communications from Discord in which Angela Sadlowski and Courtney Parsons discuss meeting with Hoffman in November 2023 and getting...

art19.com

 

[steeltowngirl]

Took me a while, but circling back to the origin of the ‘creepy guy’ comment. I located the video where AW discusses it. She talks about an incident that happened at a store; not part of the bridge audio.

AW talks about when Abby described the man “made me feel creepy” - starting around 23:25:

 

[Salah11]

Took me a while, but circling back to the origin of the ‘creepy guy’ comment. I located the video where AW discusses it. She talks about an incident that happened at a store; not part of the bridge audio.

AW talks about when Abby described the man “made me feel creepy” - starting around 23:25:

What a strong woman she is and she comes across so well.

 

[tlcya]

The comment regarding the great erasure and the missing audio was referring to the interview room footage, where the 5 days were erased and the following 70(?) days had only video but the audio was missing. I used the same terminology that Mullin used in the hearing transcript. If you would like to confirm that wording I will be able to dig out a link but it will take me some time.

It’s my understanding that the source of the request for the videotaping was discussed at the hearing. So once the transcript is released we will be able to see who requested it.

It is my understanding that there is no audio whatsoever for any of the videorecording that occurred at the prison. So I am unable to provide any links that say that there is audio recordings anywhere in the prison outside of the telephone system because I don’t think such link exists

your comment that I was responding to was as follows:

Yes I have great concern that the video recordings of the accused being held at the Prison don’t have any audio, because we have no idea what is being said to him or he is saying back during any of those 24/7 video recordings.

I’m not sure what the point of video without audio is if the whole intention was to record him confessing (my opinion)

This is a reoccurring theme in this case. The video survives but the audio is missing, so the video now becomes unusable to the defense.

You referenced prison video footage that does not have audio and how concerning that is to you. You then state you don't understand what the point of video without audio is if the intention was to record confessions made by RA. That is exactly my point. There is no intention of following prisoners using video and audio to record stray confessions. That is not the point of prison surveillance.

Your last sentence then references a recurring theme of video surviving while audio is missing. Stating the video survives while audio is missing implies that audio in the prison videos once existed.

If your post was not intended to suggest that there is something nefarious about prisons not having all their video surveillance also record audio and was actually about two differing types of video involved in this case then I am glad we hashed this out. Because that is not at all how it read to me.

 

[grannygates]

your comment that I was responding to was as follows:



You referenced prison video footage that does not have audio and how concerning that is to you. You then state you don't understand what the point of video without audio is if the intention was to record confessions made by RA. That is exactly my point. There is no intention of following prisoners using video and audio to record stray confessions. That is not the point of prison surveillance.

Your last sentence then references a recurring theme of video surviving while audio is missing. Stating the video survives while audio is missing implies that audio in the prison videos once existed.

If your post was not intended to suggest that there is something nefarious about prisons not having all their video surveillance also record audio and was actually about two differing types of video involved in this case then I am glad we hashed this out. Because that is not at all how it read to me.

I think that the semantics within my comments are getting mixed up. I personally think that the intention of following him around with a video recorder was to elicit a confession. That’s my own opinion and obviously law-enforcement isn’t going to admit that so I can’t show anyone a link stating that was their intention. It’s just my impression of the situation.

I was saying that it’s a reoccurring theme in this case that video will exist without audio, essentially rendering the video useless. I can see that it was confusing that I made reference to missing audio, like the 70 days of interviews with missing audio instead of just simply audio not existing, like the handheld video recorder set to not record audio (or what happened with this audio..?)

 

[Salah11]

I think that the semantics within my comments are getting mixed up. I personally think that the intention of following him around with a video recorder was to elicit a confession. That’s my own opinion and obviously law-enforcement isn’t going to admit that so I can’t show anyone a link stating that was their intention. It’s just my impression of the situation.

I was saying that it’s a reoccurring theme in this case that video will exist without audio, essentially rendering the video useless. I can see that it was confusing that I made reference to missing audio, like the 70 days of interviews with missing audio instead of just simply audio not existing, like the handheld video recorder set to not record audio.

So him finding God and wanting to cleanse his soul for eternity had nothing to do with his confessions.

He actually only confessed due to be followed around being recorded?!

 

[ClearAhead]

I’m not referring to the telephone calls. I would assume those would be all audio and no video. I’m referring to the video recordings.

So what is your concern about video with no audio, knowing 61 confessions occurred during recorded telephone calls for which the audio was reviewed by Harshman. I’d assume 61 confessions is more than adequate proof RA was busily confessing to the murders of Libby and Abby without having to add even more confessions made within the prison to anyone who would listen, since those probably cannot be proven.

 

[grannygates]

So him finding God and wanting to cleanse his soul for eternity had nothing to do with his confessions.

He actually only confessed due to be followed around being recorded?!

Well the prosecution wants you to believe he “found god”, but don’t think that was ever suggested by anyone else including the psychologist who described his psychotic process and administration of involuntary medication.

I think that he was thrown in this prison, in solitary confinement, with 24/7 video recording and was tortured and harassed by guards and inmates 24 hours a day until he confessed to something. We have only heard broad generic statements or statements that conflict with known facts, so we have yet to hear an actual statement that was “something only the killer would know”.

 

[FromGermany1]

Took me a while, but circling back to the origin of the ‘creepy guy’ comment. I located the video where AW discusses it. She talks about an incident that happened at a store; not part of the bridge audio.

AW talks about when Abby described the man “made me feel creepy” - starting around 23:25:

I'm asking myself, if this creepy man with his mysterious statement was RA? (I only remember, what I read years ago, without listening to this video. I often don't understand very well.)
IF the man was RA and IF he stared at Abby, it would be not so obvious, which girl of the two he had his eye on at the MHB. Was it Abby or was it Libby or were it both of them?

 

[grannygates]

So what is your concern about video with no audio, knowing 61 confessions occurred during recorded telephone calls for which the audio was reviewed by Harshman. I’d assume 61 confessions is more than adequate proof RA was busily confessing to the murders of Libby and Abby without having to add even more confessions made within the prison to anyone who would listen, since those probably cannot be proven.

I haven’t seen any confirmation that the 61 was only telephone calls? I only heard of one call to the wife and one to mom, so I’m missing a lot of info here. We also heard of inmate door sheets and letters to the warden and the chaplain, whispers through the cell door

But if you have something that confirms that all approximate 61 confessions were on the telephone calls?

 

[SouthEnd]

Unsuccessful in JG"s subjective opinion. I wouldn't mind one bit if they took this higher

They've already took it higher. There were three motions raised to the Indiana Supreme Court and they rejected two, stating that JG is the right person to judge (aka state opinions and pass judgment) on the case. IMO.