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

[shonyakay]

I haven't seen anything in MSM that shows the general public in whole perceives Judge Gull to be biased. I think it's smaller groups of RA defenders from SM, YT, TikTok, X, etc.

Snipped by me: Exactly. A couple of people who talked about what they observed during the hearings said Gull and Rozzi shared a laugh together at one point.

 

[sunshineray]

I wasn't thinking along the lines of his confessions.

My thoughts were the possible violation of his constitutional rights. As far as the judge's opinion, I'm not sure she's qualified to make medical/psychological calls. However, I believe it was within her right to use her opinion to rule on the D's motion.

In what way does the ruling violated RA's rights?

 

[shonyakay]

Agree that KK would make a terrible witness on any topic, and he comes across as very unlikeable as well as untrustworthy. Prosecutors would show what a liar he is, and from there it's not a big leap for the jury to look askance at anything the defense presents.

jmo

Rozzi on cross asked Vido if he was aware that KK failed his poly. His poly showed deception according to Rozzi.

Now they want to put him on the stand?

 

[shonyakay]

Absence of evidence isn’t evidence of absence.

As always, JMO.

True but evidence of presence (i.e. unspent bullet) is more trustworthy than evidence of absence. Imo.

 

[Niner]

My inserts in red font for you. Doc addresses follow.

1. 10/7/24 Docket update: Defendant's response to State's Motion in Limine regarding defense witness [re testimony of William A. Tobin]. See post #727, page 37, thread #197.
2. 10/7/24 Docket update: Motion For Order On Designated Defense Representatives
3. 10/10/24 Docket updates: Motion for Transport Order of IDOC Inmate #240045 [James Haas]. Motion for Transport Order of IDOC Inmate #294614 [Kegan Kline]. Motion for Transport Order of IDOC Inmate #286303 [James Chadwell]. Motion for Transport Order of IDOC Inmate #114393 [Ricci Davis] all filed by Allen.
4. 10/11/24 Docket update: Motion in Limine. [Defendant Allen has reason to believe that the State of Indiana may seek to admit at the trial of this cause, testimony from various prison guards, inmates, LE officers & possibly the testimony of other IDOC staff members as to Defendant Allen's mental state during his detention at the Westville Correctional Facility & Wabash Valley Correctional Facility.
5. 10/11/24 Docket Update: Verified Motion For Certificate Of Appearance Regarding Out-Of-State Witness
6. 10/11/24 Docket update: Defendant's Motion to incorporate evidence presented at the 8/1/24 pretrial hearing into offer of proof at trial filed by Andrew Baldwin. See post #44, page 3, thread #198.
____________
1. _Defendant's Response to State's Motion in Limine Regarding Defense Witness Hearing.pdf
2. _Motion for Order on Designated Defense Representatives.pdf
3. _Motion for Transport of IDOC Inmate.pdf
4. _Motion in Limine.pdf
5. _Verified Motion for Certificate of Appearance Regarding Out-of-State Witness.pdf
6. _Defendant’s Motion to Incorporate Evidence Presented At The August 1st Pre-Trial Hearing Into Offer of Proof at Trial.pdf

Thanks a bunch! Much appreciated!

 

[Vern]

In reviewing the recent filings by the Defence, I note that they do intend to call Dr. Wala to testify at the trial.

Interesting to note that at the time of the three day hearings Dr. Wala was a Psychologist employeed by IDOCs 3rd Party Contractor - Centurion - to provide mental health services to IDOC inmates. In the days following the 3 Day Hearings, Dr. Wala was issued a ''gate disclosure" by IDOC and "may no longer be empoyeed by Centurion" and "the Defense just recently became aware of said gate disclosure and of apparent termination of employment with Centurion".

I wonder if her termination resulted from her sworn testimony during the 3 Day Hearings that she has accessed other inmates records without authorization / and was a member of social media sites dedicated to discussions of the case. Anyone on here in the Health Care profession that can confirm whether those are considered HIPAA violations? To me these seem like ethical concerns that directly relate to her 'professionalism' IMO. Source is MS 3 Day Hearings.

_Verified Motion for Certificate of Appearance Regarding Out-of-State Witness.pdf

drive.google.com

 

[photographer4]

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]​

She ruled on this sure, but this just means the confessions can be used in court. It doesn’t mean that the jury will agree with her view that they were freely given - moooooo.

 

[katydid23]

Well if the timeline is attacked, as the defense is clearly aiming to do. Then LE’s investigation into KK’s whereabouts during

I don't think they will successful in damaging or distorting the current LE timeline. There is too much common sense circumstantial evidence corroborating it, IMO.

again

““Testimony on Thursday also provided answers to why ISP took temporary custody of another person of interest, Kegan Kline, and spent weeks searching the Wabash River under a bridge near his Peru Home.”

KK is a bright red herring.

 

[sunshineray]

RSBM for focus.
I'm only speaking for myself as to why I question this case. I've seen 50 other cases in my state of Indiana where innocent people were sent to prison for crimes they did not commit. I think I see red flags in this case.

I'm absolutely with you in hoping the State has strong evidence against RA.

It looks to me like JG is a well respected and very experienced judge. She was just appointed this past January to serve as Allen Superior Court's Chief Judge. I think she knows and respects the law and follows it fairly.

Judge Gull to Serve As Next Superior Court Chief Judge | Allen Superior Court

allensuperiorcourt.us

 

[sunshineray]

She ruled on this sure, but this just means the confessions can be used in court. It doesn’t mean that the jury will agree with her view that they were freely given - moooooo.

Of course the jury will ultimately decide what they believe or not. Judge Gull's role is to decide what they facts/evidence they consider in making their decision. I believe she will follow the law fairly in doing that. AJMO

 

[katydid23]

Time will reveal who lacks integrity. JMO

That^^^ we agree on. Time will reveal just who lacks integrity and who doesn't.

 

[BUF]

Like so many who have followed this horrible case since it happened, I am eagerly awaiting to hear the facts that come out at trial…especially what else was discovered on Libby’s recording….was there anything more, even audio? Rarely does a victim record their perpetrator/murderer. I only hope reporters take good notes as they will be physically writing them. Hopefully what one reporter misses the next one won’t. We will all be waiting for the next bit of news to come out.

 

[FrostedGlass]

It looks to me like JG is a well respected and very experienced judge. She was just appointed this past January to serve as Allen Superior Court's Chief Judge. I think she knows and respects the law and follows it fairly.

Judge Gull to Serve As Next Superior Court Chief Judge | Allen Superior Court

allensuperiorcourt.us

You may be right but she made the really bad decision to remove the D.

 

[katydid23]

IMO the Indiana Supreme Court's definition of bias is quite different from what the general public perceives.

There was a case I watched that I was undecided on and I felt the judge clearly favored the prosecution over the defense. That made me look at the case in a whole different light. I hope this judge displays a neutral attitude in front of jurors.

So the Indiana Supreme Court does not understand the true meaning of Judicial Bias? But the general public does?

 

[katydid23]

You may be right but she made the really bad decision to remove the D.

I think it was the correct decision to remove them but she did not do it correctly. JMO

 

[sunshineray]

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

jmo

But that proves nothing about how RA was treated. It's RA's trial. Calling other even former suspects does nothing but raise questions to be answered about their experiences. Each claim would need to be separately investigated and decided on. RA's trial is not the place for that. I doubt that is why those 4 men were put on the witness lists anyway but if it is, sounds like worse than a Hail Mary or spaghetti-throwing event idea for RA's trial. AJMO

 

[FrostedGlass]

So the Indiana Supreme Court does not understand the true meaning of Judicial Bias? But the general public does?

Clearly, I did not say that. I said the definitions were different.
However, the general public does not read the Supreme Court's definitions, they just go by what their understanding is. IMO

 

[Inthedetails]

But that proves nothing about how RA was treated. It's RA's trial. Calling other even former suspects does nothing but raise questions to be answered about their experiences. Each claim would need to be separately investigated and decided on. RA's trial is not the place for that. I doubt that is why those 4 men were put on the witness lists anyway but if it is, sounds like worse than a Hail Mary or spaghetti-throwing event idea for RA's trial. AJMO

I agree the whole thing is a Hail Mary, but they are indeed on a witness list for some reason. What are some other guesses to why?

jmo

 

[sunshineray]

I'm not sure what Randos are (random witnesses?). Records show two of these witnesses have been in Wabash Correctional and IMO may have spent time in solitary. I don't know how Wabash is laid out but it's probably similar to Westville. The cells area where RA was incarcerated in Westville are all the same except for the suicide watch cells. In those, the beds are lower to the ground and there is a 24 hour camera in each one.

I don't know if he had companions in Wabash.

MOO

They asked for four witnesses to be delivered. What about the other two? Any ideas on them? I'm stumped.

 

[FrostedGlass]

I think it was the correct decision to remove them but she did not do it correctly. JMO

I don't know if there was a correct way for the judge to remove RA's attys of choice.