Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #198

[Niner]

So - no one knows "what time" jury selection starts tomorrow?? 9am??? TIA if anyone can tell me!

 

[mrjitty]

I can’t believe we are two days away.

Can’t wait to hear what the actual state case is after the last year and a bit focussed on wild theories.

Don’t think i’ll bother with jury selection. Bring on opening arguments.

MOO

 

[susiQ]

Can’t wait to hear what the actual state case is after the last year and a bit focussed on wild theories.

Don’t think i’ll bother with jury selection. Bring on opening arguments.

MOO

Thanks to JG, we won’t hear them.

 

[StarryStarryNight]

So - no one knows "what time" jury selection starts tomorrow?? 9am??? TIA if anyone can tell me!

JG has started pretty much all the hearings etc at 9am, so I would guess that.

 

[sunshineray]

Makes sense to me why they may want him though: he may be able to talk about the if Le coached him during interrogations or gave clues about the crime that only the killer would know. He may assert they pressured him to say his dad did the crime. OR: the d may believe he’s a complete moron, and hope that he ends up incriminating himself or someone else on the stand that would create reasonable doubt for RA. Maybe they want him to talk about if he was offered incentives to roll on his dad or someone else such as a plea deal or something?

The D may have a lot of people thinking they’re bad at their jobs. I don’t think they are. I think they have some sort of plan and I’m curious to see what it is.

I think all of that would be unethical, IMO, JMO. I also think the judge would never let him testify, in front of the jury. I don't rightly know what the rules are as far as having to make a court record of KAK's or anyone else ramblings because RA is entitled to have such stuff on the record for appeals. The jury will be sequestered so not able to hear any of this nonsense the defense seems to feel will help RA's case in future appeals, if he's convicted. I find it appalling, not zealous, what this defense has done throughout this case. IMO, lawyers like them are why lawyers in general get a bad rap. I know many will disagree with that. It's all just my opinion.

 

[sunshineray]

Iirc, wasn’t one of the transport orders for another inmate at the same prison as KK? I have no doubt there is method in their “perceived” madness. If I were falsely accused of such a crime, I would not hesitate to hire these two. Even if the outcome were not favourable (due to appealable rulings by a judge) it would not be for lack of trying on their part. I really don’t understand the over the top criticism thrown at them for doing what they were appointed to do! JMHO

Because their actions have been appalling and without integrity. AJMO

 

[Vaderman]

We're nearly there.

Guys...down the hill.

 

[snooptroop88]

I think all of that would be unethical, IMO, JMO. I also think the judge would never let him testify, in front of the jury. I don't rightly know what the rules are as far as having to make a court record of KAK's or anyone else ramblings because RA is entitled to have such stuff on the record for appeals. The jury will be sequestered so not able to hear any of this nonsense the defense seems to feel will help RA's case in future appeals, if he's convicted. I find it appalling, not zealous, what this defense has done throughout this case. IMO, lawyers like them are why lawyers in general get a bad rap. I know many will disagree with that. It's all just my opinion.

Mine as well. If anyone needed any confirmation of it, who are they listing as a witness?

Kline, seriously? I'm so looking forward to seeing that potentially boomerang on the D that I almost hope he does get to testify for them.

 

[Inthedetails]

Even if he didn't actually murder them---if he forced them off the bridge and down the Hill, even if someone else stabbed them at the crime scene, RA would still be Guilty of Murder, legally. IMO

100% ^^

Just spitballing here, but maybe those witnesses are being called to testify how they were treated by LE and corrections when they were suspected of being BG? Maybe their testimony will not be about the crime scene, but the confessions. Just an idea I'm tossing on the table.

jmo

 

[susiQ]

Because their actions have been appalling and without integrity. AJMO

Time will reveal who lacks integrity. JMO

 

[snooptroop88]

I honestly mean it when I say I hope KK gets to testify for the D.

Having KK testify at a murder trial is like someone deciding to take their new pet rattlesnake on a camping trip.

 

[sunshineray]

Time will reveal who lacks integrity. JMO

I respectfully disagree, the past two years has revealed it, over and over again.

 

[FrostedGlass]

Iirc, wasn’t one of the transport orders for another inmate at the same prison as KK? I have no doubt there is method in their “perceived” madness. If I were falsely accused of such a crime, I would not hesitate to hire these two. Even if the outcome were not favourable (due to appealable rulings by a judge) it would not be for lack of trying on their part. I really don’t understand the over the top criticism thrown at them for doing what they were appointed to do! JMHO

I don't know of any way to find find transfer histories for IDOC inmates but maybe most/all with transport orders have done time in Wabash Valley Correctional (or Westville?) I wonder if this is about RA's treatment while being imprisoned in IDOC. The judge will not allow 3rd party but I don't think she can block the D from having these people testify to the prison conditions.

If RA is found guilty, IMO his treatment as a pre-trail detainee will come into play on appeal before the Indiana Supreme Court.

 

[FromGermany1]

Can’t wait to hear what the actual state case is after the last year and a bit focussed on wild theories.

Don’t think i’ll bother with jury selection. Bring on opening arguments.

MOO

Will there still be content of the process in a whole, which won't be allowed to be published??? So that we can't learn of facts?

 

[mrjitty]

100% ^^

Just spitballing here, but maybe those witnesses are being called to testify how they were treated by LE and corrections when they were suspected of being BG? Maybe their testimony will not be about the crime scene, but the confessions. Just an idea I'm tossing on the table.

jmo

IMO this wouldn't be admissible testimony because it invites speculation.

 

[sunshineray]

I don't know of any way to find find transfer histories for IDOC inmates but maybe most/all with transport orders have done time in Wabash Valley Correctional (or Westville?) I wonder if this is about RA's treatment while being imprisoned in IDOC. The judge will not allow 3rd party but I don't think she can block the D from having these people testify to the prison conditions.

If RA is found guilty, IMO his treatment as a pre-trail detainee will come into play on appeal before the Indiana Supreme Court.

The judge ruled on RA's treatment already. His confessions were freely given, not because he was mistreated. It's all in her order from August 29, 2024

Order Issued The Court, having had this matter under advisement following a hearing conducted on July 31, 2024, on the Defendant's Motion to Suppress Statements (filed April 11, 2024), the State's Objection to Defendant's Motion to Suppress Filed April 11, 2024 (filed April 23, 2024), the State's Motion to Dismiss the Motion to Suppress Filed April 11, 2024 (filed May 17, 2024), and the State's Motion for Admissibility (filed May 6, 2024), and having considered the witnesses' testimony, the exhibits admitted into evidence, the arguments of counsel, and the applicable statutes and case law, now grants the State's Request for Pre-Trial Ruling on Admissibility pursuant to I.C. 25-33-1-17. The statements given by defendant to Dr. Monica H. Wala, Psy.D., are not privileged based upon the exception noted in the Statute, "(1) Trials for homicide when the disclosure relates directly to the fact or immediate circumstances of said homicide." All statements given by defendant to Dr. Wala are admissible in the trial. Defendant's arguments to the contrary go to the weight the jury would give such statements, not their admissibility. Having taken the State's Motion to Dismiss the Motion to Suppress Filed April 11, 2024 under advisement at the hearing, the Court agrees with the State that the defendant has failed to comply with the Criminal Rules of Procedure by neglecting to clearly state which specific statements he is seeking to suppress, nor the legal basis for the suppression. Despite these deficiencies, the Court has been able to determine that the statements given to the defendant's family members were voluntary, not coerced by any State action, and were not made under threats of violence, or improper influence. Although the Defendant is clearly in custody, he initiated the communication with his family and was not subject to custodial interrogation when he spoke to this family. Further, the statements given by defendant to the correctional officers, inmate companions, the Warden, mental health personnel, medical personnel, and the Indiana State Police were unsolicited by any of those individuals and were voluntarily given without coercion or interrogation. The defendant has not shown that he suffered from psychological coercion by the State which caused him to make these statements. To the contrary, the evidence shows he specifically sought out the Warden by written communication he initiated, and verbal statements he offered to guards, inmate companions, mental health professionals, and medical personnel. The defendant has failed to show any of these statements were the result of coercive interrogation by the State, or that they were the result of his pre-trial detention. The totality of the circumstances of defendant's pre-trial detention were not intended to force confessions from the defendant. The defendant's pre-trial detention is to protect him from harm. The Court is not persuaded that the detention caused the defendant to make incriminating statements. While the defendant does suffer from major depressive disorder and anxiety, those are not serious mental illnesses that prevent the defendant from making voluntary statements. The Court finds the statements given by the defendant to Dr. Wala, the Warden, inmates, guards, medical personnel, mental health professionals, and law enforcement personnel were not coerced, were voluntary, were not the result of interrogation by the State or its actors, nor the product of his confinement and, therefore, denies the defendant's Motion to Suppress Statements filed April 11, 2024. Judicial Officer: Gull, Frances -SJ Noticed: McLeland, Nicholas Charles Noticed: Baldwin, Andrew Joseph Noticed: Rozzi, Bradley Anthony Noticed: Luttrull, James David JR Noticed: Diener, Stacey Lynn Noticed: Auger, Jennifer Jones Order Signed:​

[td]

08/29/2024​

[/td]​

 

[FromGermany1]

He came home alive and they did not.

Sad - and very well said.

 

[mrjitty]

I don't know of any way to find find transfer histories for IDOC inmates but maybe most/all with transport orders have done time in Wabash Valley Correctional (or Westville?) I wonder if this is about RA's treatment while being imprisoned in IDOC. The judge will not allow 3rd party but I don't think she can block the D from having these people testify to the prison conditions.

If RA is found guilty, IMO his treatment as a pre-trail detainee will come into play on appeal before the Indiana Supreme Court.

I agree they'll try to attack the validity of the confessions. I just wonder how much scope there would be to call Randos who didn't directly see RAs conditions?

Like I could imagine them calling one of the watchers who has direct knowledge.

IMO

 

[Inthedetails]

IMO this wouldn't be admissible testimony because it invites speculation.

It's not speculation if the witnesses simply tell their own experiences with LE and corrections.

jmo

 

[mrjitty]

It's not speculation if the witnesses simply tell their own experiences with LE and corrections.

jmo

Right, but then one has to speculate how representative that is in order to infer the same things apply to RA