Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #199

[detectivewannab]

Wonder what brought that change of mind about?

I think their plan might be not to overwhelm the jury. Keep it simple.

 

[girlhasnoname]

Part II of my catch-up journey observations. As said earlier, I am in the RA=guilty camp though believe there could be others in addition to him.

The Hoosier Harvestore camera near the trails has been often used as timestamp evidence for various cases to be made. All of KG, BB, SC and a car resembling one of RA's were spotted by this camera. While helpful in a general sense as to times in play, IMO it's meaningful to note as we nitpick over detailed by-the-minute times which have become quite important in this case that the camera (despite being near the Mears parking lot, the MHB, the CPS building, cemetary, etc.), obviously only notes what time the vehicle(s) passed the camera going in a certain direction - and we can only either extrapolate logic, assuming what happened or didn't happen after passing the camera, or rely on witness recall for other specifics. For example:
-- KG is reported by LE to have driven past the HH camera at 1:50 away from the Mears parking lot after letting A&L out of the car at the trails. That assumes she drove off immediately after the girls got out of the car, as 1:50 is being reported as the girls' arrival time as well (AffidavitSearchWarrant). Maybe she told LE she drove off immediately and that she recalled that correctly. However if hypothetically IMO she paused to watch the girls walk out of eyesight or talked a bit longer on phone to boyfriend before driving away, that could put the dropoff at 1:47-1:48 which might put the girls ahead of BB who arrived in the 1:47-1:48 time, thus eliminating the premise of BB being ahead of the girls....
-- BB is reported by LE to have driven past the HH camera at 1:46 heading in the direction of the Mears parking lot. Again the assumption IMO is that she started walking immediately at 1:46 also. However, what IMO if BB did some stretching before the hike, changed her shoes, put her purse in the trunk, took the car key off the keychain, and so forth as many exercisers do all of these? That would have her actually beginning her hike at closer to 1:48-1:49 which certainly is very close to when the girls also started their hike. Again, maybe BB has crystal clear recall about whether she started immediately or not, but remembering that it's reported BB hiked the 6-ish minutes out to the MHB start point plus halfway back before passing A&L, then we're left to grapple with how she covered 9-ish minutes of hiking while A&L only covered 3-ish minutes (halfway out only) when they likely began only 1 to 1.5 minutes apart.
-- SC is reported by LE to have driven past the HH camera at 3:57 before her witnessing of a man who looked like he'd been in a fight. This is the most straightforward one as there's no reason to imagine she pulled over or stopped the car before seeing him, thus reasonable to presume she passed him at 3:58-3:59 along the County Road.
-- RA is thought to maybe have passed the HH camera at 1:27, at least a car resembling one of the two vehicles he owned, traveling in the direction of the CPS building. It's not known IMO whether this vehicle stopped at CPS for sure or not, but the trial may clear that up. It's also not known whether RA exits this car immediately and begins his walk or pauses for whatever reason. Gray Hughes in his excellent timeline video (can't link any longer due to password-protect, so MOO) takes the liberty of having RA stay in his car for about 6 minutes after parking before exiting because... if he starts hiking sooner than that, especially at a brisk pace, he encounters the Freedom Bridge 4 girls at a different spot than where they both claim that encounter takes place. We don't know what really happened after 1:27 passing the camera IMO but it takes some reconciling.

I do think the defense will try to methodically pick apart this timeline minute by minute and I think if they do that well, the events can be jumbled enough to create some doubt of its accuracy in the mind of some jurors.

I appreciate your well thought out posts. I agree the defense will try to pick apart the timeline and everything else, but for me, it's not just the timeline.

It's all the other evidence on top of the timeline. Of which there are 2 versions - one (according to the 1st Franks Memo) has RA being at the trails from Noon until 1:30, and then what RA told Dulin in 2017 and what he told LE in the Oct 2022 interview of 1:30 to 3:30 pm.

It will be the totality of all the coincidences, which are too many to be coincidental IMO.

MOO

 

[arielilane]

#NEW: The full jury in the #Delphi double murder trial has officially been sworn in. It’s made up of 8 women and 4 men. As far as alternates, there are 2 men and women.


#NEW: The defense in the #Delphi double murder trial has withdrawn their request for the jury to visit the crime scene at the Monon High Bridge.


#NEW: On the prosecution's motion for the composite sketches not to be seen by the jury, a witness testified saying he had helped in drawing a sketch, but it is not clear if he is the artist for any of the two sketches released in 2017 and 2019. Gull said she would take things under advisement and have a decision tomorrow morning.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1846931763073061227

 

[Ontario Mom]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1846947404157014483

I haven't followed this case in a long time but do look forward to this trial. And more importantly, justice for those girls.

 

[girlhasnoname]

So the guards and companion inmates will be allowed to testify about RA's behavior. I think that works in the State's favor.

EBM: To add source from @angelaganote on X

MOO

 

[arielilane]

The Carroll County Council has unanimously approved an additional $2.2 million for #Delphi trial expenses. That’s in addition to the original $2.1 million approved last year. It means the trial will cost every Carroll County resident approximately $200. #wthr 1/


Let’s put that in perspective. Carroll Co budgeted $9.4M for its 2024 budget. It has now budgeted an EXTRA $4.3 million in that general budget solely for trial expenses. ($2.1M original + $2.3M today) It’s an astronomical amount for a county of roughly 2OK residents. #wthr 2/


A county councilor told me they’ve been saving up for unexpected expenses like these, but still says the expenditure is “rough.” He says they cannot cut corners & want to ensure the trial is professional & both sides have adequate $. 3/

https://twitter.com/x/status/1846942365052776698

 

[girlhasnoname]

I think their plan might be not to overwhelm the jury. Keep it simple.

If it were any other DT I would agree with that, but something tells me that now they've experienced actually being in Delphi and near MHB during trial time, they thought better of it.

JMO

 

[TTF14]

Part II of my catch-up journey observations. As said earlier, I am in the RA=guilty camp though believe there could be others in addition to him.

The Hoosier Harvestore camera near the trails has been often used as timestamp evidence for various cases to be made. All of KG, BB, SC and a car resembling one of RA's were spotted by this camera. While helpful in a general sense as to times in play, IMO it's meaningful to note as we nitpick over detailed by-the-minute times which have become quite important in this case that the camera (despite being near the Mears parking lot, the MHB, the CPS building, cemetary, etc.), obviously only notes what time the vehicle(s) passed the camera going in a certain direction - and we can only either extrapolate logic, assuming what happened or didn't happen after passing the camera, or rely on witness recall for other specifics. For example:
-- KG is reported by LE to have driven past the HH camera at 1:50 away from the Mears parking lot after letting A&L out of the car at the trails. That assumes she drove off immediately after the girls got out of the car, as 1:50 is being reported as the girls' arrival time as well (AffidavitSearchWarrant). Maybe she told LE she drove off immediately and that she recalled that correctly. However if hypothetically IMO she paused to watch the girls walk out of eyesight or talked a bit longer on phone to boyfriend before driving away, that could put the dropoff at 1:47-1:48 which might put the girls ahead of BB who arrived in the 1:47-1:48 time, thus eliminating the premise of BB being ahead of the girls....
-- BB is reported by LE to have driven past the HH camera at 1:46 heading in the direction of the Mears parking lot. Again the assumption IMO is that she started walking immediately at 1:46 also. However, what IMO if BB did some stretching before the hike, changed her shoes, put her purse in the trunk, took the car key off the keychain, and so forth as many exercisers do all of these? That would have her actually beginning her hike at closer to 1:48-1:49 which certainly is very close to when the girls also started their hike. Again, maybe BB has crystal clear recall about whether she started immediately or not, but remembering that it's reported BB hiked the 6-ish minutes out to the MHB start point plus halfway back before passing A&L, then we're left to grapple with how she covered 9-ish minutes of hiking while A&L only covered 3-ish minutes (halfway out only) when they likely began only 1 to 1.5 minutes apart.
-- SC is reported by LE to have driven past the HH camera at 3:57 before her witnessing of a man who looked like he'd been in a fight. This is the most straightforward one as there's no reason to imagine she pulled over or stopped the car before seeing him, thus reasonable to presume she passed him at 3:58-3:59 along the County Road.
-- RA is thought to maybe have passed the HH camera at 1:27, at least a car resembling one of the two vehicles he owned, traveling in the direction of the CPS building. It's not known IMO whether this vehicle stopped at CPS for sure or not, but the trial may clear that up. It's also not known whether RA exits this car immediately and begins his walk or pauses for whatever reason. Gray Hughes in his excellent timeline video (can't link any longer due to password-protect, so MOO) takes the liberty of having RA stay in his car for about 6 minutes after parking before exiting because... if he starts hiking sooner than that, especially at a brisk pace, he encounters the Freedom Bridge 4 girls at a different spot than where they both claim that encounter takes place. We don't know what really happened after 1:27 passing the camera IMO but it takes some reconciling.

I do think the defense will try to methodically pick apart this timeline minute by minute and I think if they do that well, the events can be jumbled enough to create some doubt of its accuracy in the mind of some jurors.

(Above bolded by me)

Add in that in the Gray Hughes/Kelsi German produced Scene of the Crime podcast, in episode 1, the narrator states that Kelsi's boyfriend called her at 1:36 and she was on the phone with him when the girls were dropped off, estimating drop-off time at 1:38 or 1:39.

I don't know if the defense team will focus on time discrepancies or not, but I do think it would be a good strategy to introduce reasonable doubt. It's a muddy timeline, IMO.

Starting around 31 minutes in: https://music.amazon.com/podcasts/c...5939/scene-of-the-crime-delphi-abby-and-libby

As always, JMO.

 

[TTF14]

in hopes that the Jurors discuss amongst themselves and allow these comments to fester in their minds.

Snipped for focus by me.

Aren't jurors prohibited from talking about the case until the deliberation room?

 

[Vern]

Snipped for focus by me.

Aren't jurors prohibited from talking about the case until the deliberation room?

Yep, they should be. I used the word 'hopes'.

If they do discuss, there's grounds for mistrial.

 

[FrostedGlass]

Part II of my catch-up journey observations. As said earlier, I am in the RA=guilty camp though believe there could be others in addition to him.

Camera at the Hoosier Harvestore
The Hoosier Harvestore camera near the trails has been often used as timestamp evidence for various cases to be made. All of KG, BB, SC and a car resembling one of RA's were spotted by this camera. While helpful in a general sense as to times in play, IMO it's meaningful to note as we nitpick over detailed by-the-minute times which have become quite important in this case that the camera (despite being near the Mears parking lot, the MHB, the CPS building, cemetary, etc.), obviously only notes what time the vehicle(s) passed the camera going in a certain direction - and we can only either extrapolate logic, assuming what happened or didn't happen after passing the camera, or rely on witness recall for other specifics. For example:
-- KG is reported by LE to have driven past the HH camera at 1:50 away from the Mears parking lot after letting A&L out of the car at the trails. That assumes she drove off immediately after the girls got out of the car, as 1:50 is being reported as the girls' arrival time as well (AffidavitSearchWarrant). Maybe she told LE she drove off immediately and that she recalled that correctly. However if hypothetically IMO she paused to watch the girls walk out of eyesight or talked a bit longer on phone to boyfriend before driving away, that could put the dropoff at 1:47-1:48 which might put the girls ahead of BB who arrived in the 1:47-1:48 time, thus eliminating the premise of BB being ahead of the girls....
-- BB is reported by LE to have driven past the HH camera at 1:46 heading in the direction of the Mears parking lot. Again the assumption IMO is that she started walking immediately at 1:46 also. However, what IMO if BB did some stretching before the hike, changed her shoes, put her purse in the trunk, took the car key off the keychain, and so forth as many exercisers do all of these? That would have her actually beginning her hike at closer to 1:48-1:49 which certainly is very close to when the girls also started their hike. Again, maybe BB has crystal clear recall about whether she started immediately or not, but remembering that it's reported BB hiked the 6-ish minutes out to the MHB start point plus halfway back before passing A&L, then we're left to grapple with how she covered 9-ish minutes of hiking while A&L only covered 3-ish minutes (halfway out only) when they likely began only 1 to 1.5 minutes apart.
-- SC is reported by LE to have driven past the HH camera at 3:57 before her witnessing of a man who looked like he'd been in a fight. This is the most straightforward one as there's no reason to imagine she pulled over or stopped the car before seeing him, thus reasonable to presume she passed him at 3:58-3:59 along the County Road.
-- RA is thought to maybe have passed the HH camera at 1:27, at least a car resembling one of the two vehicles he owned, traveling in the direction of the CPS building. It's not known IMO whether this vehicle stopped at CPS for sure or not, but the trial may clear that up. It's also not known whether RA exits this car immediately and begins his walk or pauses for whatever reason. Gray Hughes in his excellent timeline video (can't link any longer due to password-protect, so MOO) takes the liberty of having RA stay in his car for about 6 minutes after parking before exiting because... if he starts hiking sooner than that, especially at a brisk pace, he encounters the Freedom Bridge 4 girls at a different spot than where they both claim that encounter takes place. We don't know what really happened after 1:27 passing the camera IMO but it takes some reconciling.

I do think the defense will try to methodically pick apart this timeline minute by minute and I think if they do that well, the events can be jumbled enough to create some doubt of its accuracy in the mind of some jurors.

Thank you.

Your objective (IMO) look at the timeline is much appreciated. I have never been able to make it work and IIRC, in his video, GH had to do some speeding up and slowing down to make it work.

 

[TristanP]

MOO RA was referring to how he had ruined (killed) his family and friends with his actions and later arrest for the girls' murders. I think he was speaking figuratively when he uttered those words to Wala. But as usual, DT thinks they've found the smoking gun to disprove RA's guilt. Lookey here, see he even confessed to killing people who aren't even dead!

as always JMO

You don't find that problematic?

 

[Megnut]

I think it's because they truly don't know if either one of the sketches is accurate.

Sketches are impressions, composites. They include artistic license of the creator who wasn't a witness and uses experience and skull to create a rendition.

A witness couldn't well say, of a sketch, yep, that's him, or shouldn't. Those sketches weren't out forth to test the truthfulness of the witnesses but to put an image out to the public, for help identifying the individual. Far as we know, neither sketch achieved that end.

It was an investigative tool at the time, it isn't a vital one for trial because the witnesses themselves can articulate what they saw, but the State doesn't even intend to call them for the purposes of identifying RA. If they call them, IMO it'll be to authentic timing. When they arrived and left, where they walked, general descriptions of the people they encountered, etc. Things the State will align with cctv and digital timestamps.

It's not IMO relevant to the case how accurate any one witness feels a sketch is.

FWIW however I find the sketches remarkable. The witnesses didn't know that man was going to be significant. No one studied him for the purposes of providing a full drawing. They noticed him and that was probably that. Until they became aware of the significance. In both sketches, I see a suggestion of some bulk, which the jacket provided, but beneath it, RA is actually a rather slight individual IMO. The facial shape, the eyes/eyebrows, the cap or crown of hair if you think the cap is hair. Who has a thick, styled poof of hair? Younger vs older. Younger? How young? Hard to say....

I do think the State will be able to plot RA's movements from parking lot to bridge, validated by the evidence from the juveniles and BB, which will make it clear that no one else crossed the bridge but RA consistent with the timestamps of Libby's video.

It won't matter that it's grainy. There's no one else for it to be.

JMO

 

[tlcya]

You don't find that problematic?

I may once I have the full context but based on what I know now, not at all problematic.

Again, I believe RA was expressing that he has already "killed" his family and friends figuratively and not literally. If that is the case, I don't consider that a confession. At least not one of the 61 confessions the state plans to reference in trial.

As always - JMO YMMV

ETA I believe that RA was expressing his sense of shame to Dr. Wala and not confessing to the murder of family or friends. It would also be interesting to learn at what point this statement was made, before or after he confessed to killing the girls on the phone with his wife and she hung up on him refusing to hear it?

 

[Warwick7]

Judge Gull ruled that witnesses like guards can testify to confessions the defense says Allen made in jail, but they cannot testify as to whether they believe he is guilty or innocent.

I remember when Donald Demarino testified in Tammy Moore's trial. He could not give his opinion on Tammys guilt or innocence, but he could testify as to what he saw in the picture. He was a powerful witness.

 

[TTF14]

Judge Gull ruled that witnesses like guards can testify to confessions the defense says Allen made in jail, but they cannot testify as to whether they believe he is guilty or innocent.

I remember when Donald Demarino testified in Tammy Moore's trial. He could not give his opinion on Tammys guilt or innocence, but he could testify as to what he saw in the picture. He was a powerful witness.

And they even really limited that, IIRC. He could say something like it didn't look like an alive person, but he wasn't allowed to be descriptive about what he saw or why he thought she wasn't alive. Do you remember the same?

As always, JMO.

 

[shonyakay]

I am surprised that the jury was choosen so quickly. The mini opening of NM leads me to believe the case is highly circunstancial against RA. He wanted the jury would use their common sense. I think it's strong circuntanciually but we never know that the jury will do. I hope it is a jury that understand circunstancial evidence.

According to NM there is evidence, photo evidence, and video evidence of RA=BG. Imo.

It was testified too that RA made confession details that only the killer would know.

His CVS work issued Box cutter as the murder weapon?

Possibly someone on the trail or someone returning home in the vicinity of the abduction that day that interrrupted his attempted sexual assault of the girls?

If the state can corroborate these things and possibly other things he has stated about the crime that no one else knew, his guilt will be easy to establish imo.

 

[FromGermany1]

Sorry, respectfully what do you mean? Is there a link or somewhere I can learn more about what you’ve stated?

A link was given several threads ago, afaik. If I remember well, it was an interview with Anna/video.
I think, I wouldn't be successful with searching for it.
A "creepy" unknown man , no description, was sitting in a car and then speaking to Abby's mum, asking "Do you know me?" No idea, what Anna answered, but certainly she answered "No." He spoke further to her like a warning: she would have to think of, if she would recognize someone, she could make a mistake and it would be someone other possibly. Things weren't always as they appear. - All my wording.
When I still had my own personal poi for the crime, who I wouldn't name "for reasons", the person would have fitted well with this creepy approach.
Are you a bit satisfied with my answer? I hope so.

 

[EOA]

Part III...again remembering I believe RA to be guilty as charged, though not as clear-cut as some might hope for.

RA's Confessions and "Finding God"
Being from Indiana and having what I think is a pretty good pulse on the local prevalent religious beliefs, yet knowing there are sleuthers here from all over the world from diverse religions if any at all, I thought I'd take a stab at, MOO, what "finding God, or finding Jesus" would likely mean to RA in Delphi Indiana, how confession plays a part in that, and where RA's seemingly new-found beliefs seem misguided/awry. This IMO would be what a chaplain or prison ministry worker, through the Bible, would've most likely conveyed IMO to RA in prison.

The most common denomination in the area is Protestant/Christian, and centers around a systematic belief that doesn't demand works or good deeds, but instead recognizes everyone as a sinner to various degrees, all in need of a Savior in order to enter Heaven after death. Again, it's not works-based as no one can do enough good things to get to Heaven, and (where this could've been appealing to RA and is often to other prisoners) no one can say/think/do too much bad to be deemed un-saveable. Jesus through God lead a perfect life on Earth, died on a cross and was resurrected, qualifying as a substitute for sinners (everyone), becoming that Savior for all, no matter the degree of evil, who trust in his salvation.

How this belief system however IMO seems to go off track a bit for RA:
-- there would be one confession from RA to God, repenting of his sins and asking for God's forgiveness...no requirement for RA to continue confessing 60+ times MOO
-- while some may IMO argue a need for RA to try to confess specifically to those he wronged (A&L's family?), confessing to numerous total strangers would never be part of this system.
-- what is his belief based on which indicates KA and his mother will be in Heaven? Have they made professions in the past which he hadn't, or is it based on them (erroneously per this belief system) just being good people? MOO
-- if he truly understands what finding God means, how could he turn his back on an eternity of undeserved good, in return for maybe 25 more years of living in poor prison conditions, largely apart from those he claims to love? MOO
-- no such thing IMO in this belief system as cleansing of soul by repeatedly confessing to other humans who can do nothing about his eternal state.

 

[photographer4]

Sketches are impressions, composites. They include artistic license of the creator who wasn't a witness and uses experience and skull to create a rendition.

A witness couldn't well say, of a sketch, yep, that's him, or shouldn't. Those sketches weren't out forth to test the truthfulness of the witnesses but to put an image out to the public, for help identifying the individual. Far as we know, neither sketch achieved that end.

It was an investigative tool at the time, it isn't a vital one for trial because the witnesses themselves can articulate what they saw, but the State doesn't even intend to call them for the purposes of identifying RA. If they call them, IMO it'll be to authentic timing. When they arrived and left, where they walked, general descriptions of the people they encountered, etc. Things the State will align with cctv and digital timestamps.

It's not IMO relevant to the case how accurate any one witness feels a sketch is.

FWIW however I find the sketches remarkable. The witnesses didn't know that man was going to be significant. No one studied him for the purposes of providing a full drawing. They noticed him and that was probably that. Until they became aware of the significance. In both sketches, I see a suggestion of some bulk, which the jacket provided, but beneath it, RA is actually a rather slight individual IMO. The facial shape, the eyes/eyebrows, the cap or crown of hair if you think the cap is hair. Who has a thick, styled poof of hair? Younger vs older. Younger? How young? Hard to say....

I do think the State will be able to plot RA's movements from parking lot to bridge, validated by the evidence from the juveniles and BB, which will make it clear that no one else crossed the bridge but RA consistent with the timestamps of Libby's video.

It won't matter that it's grainy. There's no one else for it to be.

JMO

What may matter though is that a guy can be on a bridge and still not be the killer imo. Is it POSSIBLE that a guy was at the far end of the bridge where the words DTH were spoken to the kids? IMO it is. We don’t know. If the image of Bg is unclear on the video (could be RA could be anyone)… then it may form a reasonable doubt for the jurors. Other evidence may clarify or solidify any reasonable doubt. Very interesting to watch unfold imo.