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

Status
Not open for further replies.
Aside from the Dulin interview, I'll be watching for more detail about what happened during that interview with Holeman. The D really wanted that suppressed, and I'd guess there are potentially really interesting reasons as to why.
Even in what the D itself produced in terms of the transcript, there are points of interest. This portion picks it up at the point where RA's saying he doesn't understand what happened with the bullet:
Rick Allen: I’m telling you I can’t explain something that…
Jerry Holeman: And I’m telling you that (expletive) analysts explain it. You can’t get past
this.
Jerry Holeman: I’m not on video
Rick Allen: Neither am I.
Jerry Holeman: Four or five witnesses didn’t see me out there.
Rick Allen: Me either.
Jerry Holeman: My round out of my gun wasn’t 6 inches away from a dead girl.
Rick Allen: Mine neither.
-------------------------------------------------------
He seems to be doing a tit-for-tat with Holeman. I see nothing wrong with tit-for-tat in some instances but this probably isn't a situation appropriate for cutesy, rapid-fire "tit-for-tat" answers with LE. But what really strikes me is the "four or five witnesses didn't see me out there." Actually, there were witnesses that saw him out there, the girls from Freedom Bridge. He said three, but in actuality, it was four, and another woman on the trails at approximately the same time seemed to have no trouble noting it was four. Maybe he miscounted. But were he taking this conversation with Holeman seriously instead of simply doing his "tit-for-tat," probably the more standard response from him in this situation would have been to note he did see people on the bridge but he's not BG.

And more importantly, considering he did see young girls on a trail the same day young girls disappeared off that same trail, I would assume he was on the phone with authorities almost immediately when there was any kind of media attention and he became aware of the situation. He said he didn't get a good look at these girls he passed on the bridge (which he clearly didn't if there were in fact four and he said three), and he said he didn't know Abby or Libby, therefore those girls he saw could have included Abby and Libby as far as he'd have known. I'm interested in how he explained his situation to both Dulin and Holeman in terms of these young girls he spotted on the trail that same day young girls disappeared there.

To my knowledge, the date he tipped himself in is still unknown and the date of the Dulin interview is still unknown. Someone please correct me if this information has been provided somewhere at some source.
 
So the night before it all kicks off what are people's gut feelings on if he will be found guilty?

I am cautiously optimistic and hopeful if the jury finds him guilty that the prosecutors can secure a conviction without giving the defense a realistic chance of overturning it on appeal.
 
The seats for the jury and general public look like horrible back pain waiting to happen! Could they not at least provide super comfy seats for the poor jurors! MOOOO.
This is a serious trial where the jurors will be expected to pay close attention. I don't think anybody is worrying about uncomfortable seats. If they had 'super comfy seats' some would probably be falling asleep during the course of a month long trial.

MOO
 
RSMB/BBM
For illustration purposes I have cut your post down to the only 2 direct quotes by BB in the Franks memorandum you cited.
10 out of 10” is a quote which the defense infers means is reference to BB’s overall description of accuracy of the Sketch #2.
Ok, well then why not quote her entire description? It is sourced in the footnotes as being quoted as part of a whole paragraph in incident report No. 17-0091-S03 on page with other paragraphs.
So why only 3 words are used of this very pivotal evidence? It’s not because they had a word limit to the Franks memo.

My opinion. Because it’s not at all what her full name statements infer. She may have been just talking about one feature such as an eyebrow or nose or wrinkle
That would be incredibly sneaky, but legal.

Which leads me to this point.

Please look at the second phrase “wrong “. Which defense infurs is BB’s description of Sketch #1.
But look down at the footnotes and you will see footnote 147 actually refers to BB stating the golf hat was “wrong “. Not the whole sketch as the defense would have you believe.
Now why would defense take one word out of context like that? Because they can. Because it tricks people just enough without crossing the line.
FINAL DRAFT - 9.17 at 6.30 pm - Delphi Franks brief.pdf | PDF Host

So I can understand why someone could be confused with the PCA when BB’s words were used out of context by the Franks. And honestly can see why BB might have an issue with the hat as many of us have in comparing the sketch to the video.
( some see hair some see hat)
But the PCA makes it pretty clear that BB said that the man she observed on MHB that day matched the man in Victim 2’s video.
Seems straightforward to me.

All my opinion.

https://fox59.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/21/2022/11/Probable-Cause-Affidavit-Richard-Allen.pdf
Oh that Defense and their Infamous Franks Memo #1. I've always said the footnotes are a whole different story of their own. It would be comical if this wasn't such a serious matter.

I believe that BB, SC, and the girls will all confirm that it was RA they saw that day in their opinion. Just a hunch.

JMO
 
Last edited:
Libby’s phone just didn’t have that high-quality resolution. If it was today’s tech, they could likely zoom in without the pixelation.

I don’t fault LE, they worked with it, sent it to NASA. I certainly don’t fault Libby for not having a professional 35mm camera handy that day. That she captured him at all on film is nothing short of a miracle.

jmo
So agree, but I think It was clear enough IMO to see that it was RA's body frame and general features. He is short with a long torso, so every time I've seen pics of him, even besides the video of Libby's, his pants fit the same way. This includes his jail jumpsuits, sweatpants in videos of RA at the local pub, jeans, etc.

It's not like Libby's video shows a 6' 4" skinny or obese black or brown man, the video definitely fits with RA's general stature.

IMO
 
Just got done listening to yesterday's TMS and two interesting nuggets from the courtroom and the motions being argued.

First it seems Cass County Jail personnel are also included in the motion to stop the guards and others at Westville and Wabash from testifying to RA's behaviors and/or statements. So It would imply things have occured to do with those at Cass County Jail.

The other was in arguing, NMcL said, (paraphrasing) Well what if RA said (assuming in earshot of one personnel) well what if RA said that he told the girls to go down the hill, then he got scared and he killed them? So since NMcL did mention in voir dire that RA said he was "interrupted" that may be why he said outloud to one of the personnel, he got scared.

I think RA may still either be talking about his guilt or acting out in some way? Why else would Cass County Jail personnel be include in the motion? AJMO

 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
189
Guests online
776
Total visitors
965

Forum statistics

Threads
625,969
Messages
18,517,325
Members
240,916
Latest member
jennhutt7
Back
Top