Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #200

Status
Not open for further replies.
He's not sitting with the defense team. He's in the galley where the defense team is allowed a # of seats daily. Ali was there today as well. Hennessy will probably show up in the defense-allotted seats. Some of Hennessey's attorney witnesses for the Defense during the contempt hearing detour. Possibly Ausbrook. And Cara. What of it? They're all career Indiana Defense attorneys and they're just there to watch the biggest trial Indiana's seen in some years. (Not Bob - he's IL)
It just shows many of us that the unethical group that plotted to get to the jurors and to try and throw the trial is actually closely connected to the defense attorneys. Good to know.
The jury is sequestered away from all media. What chaos?
They weren't sequestered when Motta tweeted about the misleading 'bombshell' and amped it up by saying it was human and more than one hair found in her fist. Giving the false illusion of 'a clump of a serial killers hair found in a child's clenched fist.' He knew it was from a sister or cousin. He was trying to create chaos and he did for awhile. EVERY news headline on the day before start of trial was about that bogus piece of hair.


What false narratives?
The cult of white power Ritual Sacrificers. BM was hyping that up for months. And of course, the 'unknown DNA found in Abby's cold dead fist'
What conduit?

BM is the conduit between the defense attorneys and the rag tag crew of you-tubers that help the D create content that gives the illusion that poor Rick is a patsy, being railroaded by White Power meth heads and corrupt LE.
Bob's been a practicing defense attorney for 35-some years. Call me crazy but I'm thinkin' Bob can independently think for himself. Has his own opinions and draws from his own experiences. Same for Ali, his wife.
I'm sure he can. He figured out a way to get click bait in concert with his D pals. He knows the Odinists had nothing to do with these murders.
Facts are coming out slowly. Baldwin said what he said and EVERYONE reporting that day - put out the same information as Bob at break - when they did not yet have the full story. Why would folks blame Bob for Baldwin's trial style?

JHMO
It's more than that. I read the things they were talking about in their messages---thinking of ways to research the jurors, find dirt on them, in case they need to disrupt the trial, etc. BM is the conduit between that unethical Due Process Gang and the defense team. IMO MOO
 
Are podcast and influencer defence-guests asking for access to evidence presented during trial testimony, where the jury is sequestered, even though traditional media has been turned away (no cameras or digital devices)?

The Judge has ruled in favour of media silence throughout this trial; other than old fashioned pencil and paper crime story journalists and artists. After verdict, evidence will probably be made available to journalists. Podcasters will continue to find evidence photos through news outlets.
JG's order, Approved Media Only (lets not ... discuss the definition in this trial, since the selection process keeps being fluid in this trial, IMO) is allowed to view the evidence for 15 mins, after the conclusion of each court day.media-to-be-allowed-access-to-trial-exhibits-v0-5xn3u5a8p6vd1.webpmedia-to-be-allowed-access-to-trial-exhibits-v0-pk7dzfd8p6vd1.webp
 
I don't know what the exact words TMS used about BM's seat because I refuse to listen to them but I have seen people posting he was sitting at the defense TABLE with the defendant and defense team which I knew was absolutely incorrect because for anyone to sit there who is not an attorney of record they had to ask the court for permission. State asked for an extra person, defense objected, court granted State's Motion so state can have Mullin and Holeman sitting with them and defense has Baker, not Motta!
JMO
BBM
Please provide a link showing this info is " Incorrect"

all other Msm is reporting he was sitting at the Defense table.

I have not seen anything denying that.
 
Yes. MOO.There needs to be a dedicated Media Bailiff.
The Karen Read case and now what’s likely to be witnessed during Delphi should show the need for this position and relevant legislative guidance. I think- JMO- Judge Gull established unreasonable guidelines (morning and afternoon admittance leaving some without opportunity for lunch, inability to briefly leave and return) for public and media attendance with thoughts of it somehow limiting social media drama.
 
Last edited:
IIRC, the defence said during opening statements that people searched the area where the bodies were found on Feb 13 and did not find them. Then they searched that area on Feb 14 and did find them. This defence statement intends to suggest that bodies were placed there after searchers left on the evening of Feb 13.

Today's testimony explains how that statement is irrelevant. They were not visible from the water. The bodies were 50 feet from shore. It sounds like they were near the bottom of the steep ravine.

"Mears called him to say he got a call that Shane Haygood had found clothing and asked Brown to check the area. Brown parked near the cemetery and talked to a relative of Libby's family.

During his testimony, Brown told the jury, “First I thought they were mannequins.” He then began crying as he told jurors he realized, “We found ‘em.” Brown said he was five feet from Libby and Abby's bodies. "I stood there facing away from them," he said. Then, police came.

Brown said you would not have been able to see the bodies from the water."

In 2017 I recall reading that one of the volunteer searchers that morning noticed two deer standing together and as he walked in their direction, he found the girl’s bodies. I have no link, just my memory. IMO
 
Apparently the thinking is b/c JG's rule at the moment is only credentialed press can view the exhibits of evidence.

I'm thinking that rule is weird and could be out of constitutional bounds ... is that what you're thinking?

JMHO
I've been to several trials in the general audience. When court is adjourned, I can't imagine I'd be allowed to stay after and go up and look at the exhibits up close. I've never seen that happen. When court it adjourned, the citizens attending are sent on their way.
 
That's my understanding as well. Libby's t-shirt was in the creek, as were one or two shoes. She was not wearing any clothes when found. It sounds like Abby was fully clothed, and wearing Libby's jeans overtop of her skinny-jeans. The accused must have told Libby to take off her pants, and told Abby to put them on. Abby wouldn't do that on her own while he's pointing a gun.

Reporting seems to be vague or generalize rather than providing the detail we want.
One of Libby's shoes was spotted in the creek by a searcher. The other was found under Abby's body. Abby's shoes were both on her feet, with no socks. That is my understanding.
 
I’m very curious how this plays out because Richard Allen should have received all of his discovery far before the confessions started.

Moo
I don’t believe so. IIRC, he began making his initial confession not long after he was arrested and incarcerated, before extensive discovery happened.

Prosecution wouldn’t have made this statement if they didn’t have the “receipts”. They recorded all his phone calls and conversations with visitors in jail and prison. His confession have been recorded with date and time stamp.

Ditto for discovery. It’s all thoroughly catalogued and recorded.
 
Apparently the thinking is b/c JG's rule at the moment is only credentialed press can view the exhibits of evidence.

I'm thinking that rule is weird and could be out of constitutional bounds ... is that what you're thinking?

JMHO
Well that doesn't seem like it's being enforced fairly either. MS are accredited press. A periodical magazine and a Franklin, IN daily newspaper hired them to cover the case. They're being refused media passes and if what you say about the viewing exhibits is true, they would then be denied access to those also. It's unfortunate it's not the same for all. MO

 
Hi all y'all. I haven't been following this case as closely as most of you, but is it true that the jury is allowed to ask questions?

And if so, is that a unique Indiana law? I have never seen the jury allowed to ask questions in any trial I have ever followed.

Also if so, do they have to submit questions in advance and the judge decides which ones are allowed to be asked? How does it work?

Thanks.
 
Hi all y'all. I haven't been following this case as closely as most of you, but is it true that the jury is allowed to ask questions?

And if so, is that a unique Indiana law? I have never seen the jury allowed to ask questions in any trial I have ever followed.

Also if so, do they have to submit questions in advance and the judge decides which ones are allowed to be asked? How does it work?

Thanks.

Yes, true.

I've seen it in Florida trials. I think there are other states that allow it too.

And yes, the judge decides what questions are allowed.

As always, JMO.
 
Hi all y'all. I haven't been following this case as closely as most of you, but is it true that the jury is allowed to ask questions?

And if so, is that a unique Indiana law? I have never seen the jury allowed to ask questions in any trial I have ever followed.

Also if so, do they have to submit questions in advance and the judge decides which ones are allowed to be asked? How does it work?

Thanks.
It happens in a bunch of places.

I answered here about how it worked in Gannon's case (Colorado).

Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #199
 
It happens in a bunch of places.

I answered here about how it worked in Gannon's case (Colorado).

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

Wow, I never knew that. Thanks to you and everyone else who filled in this gap in my knowledge.

Edited to add: I think this is a good thing. I've been on two juries, one civil and one criminal, and I would have loved to have been able to ask questions. I was sending mental messages to the lawyers: Ask this! Why didn't you ask that? etc
 
In theory, I agree, but re: BM - are you aware of the leaked messages of the Due process gang?

That was a group including some youtubers and lawyers who had represented the DT in the SCOIN hearing, and BM. They were discussing how to present insider info to the public, and how to potentially sleuth the jurors, alongside other matters that in my opinion, are unlawful in nature.


In summary, I don't care if you are pro-D or pro-P in any case I follow. Some of the media I follow I disagree with their POV entirely but I find fascinating. My hangup with BM is the potential PR spin that was directly connected to the DT, the insider gaming, if you will. Hope this makes sense?

All MOO
Thanks for sharing that article! I've never seen it.

When I read it, I felt a bit embarrassed for the party insinuating to the press that Cara Weineke is a dirty lawyer. Looks like Weineke easily cleared up the misunderstanding. A defense team does strategic planning and is entitled to have assistance and advisory. Whoever thinks that's a problem must not be terribly familiar with defense/criminal law/trials.

A defense team chat group named "Due Process Gang" makes all sorts of sense. The writs related to this trial that Weineke prevailed in - for her client RA - were all about due process. I was aware that social media sleuths provide Weineke with organized RA trial docs when Weineke couldn't get them from the Court docket that wasn't keeping proper records.

This case has really seen so much interesting action - and I really agree with you how fascinating it's all been!

JMHO
 
Hi all y'all. I haven't been following this case as closely as most of you, but is it true that the jury is allowed to ask questions?

And if so, is that a unique Indiana law? I have never seen the jury allowed to ask questions in any trial I have ever followed.

Also if so, do they have to submit questions in advance and the judge decides which ones are allowed to be asked? How does it work?

Thanks.

It happened in the Jodi Arias trial as well.
 
My understanding of the Defence's theory thus far is:

If there was an unspent bullet in the scene, it was because the Police left it there. But if you don't believe the police left it there, then one alternative suspect left it there. But if you believe that the one suspect could be RA, then the wounds mean that two separate ppl committed the attacks. But if there is no proof of 2+ perps being in the trails and the scene because of lack of footsteps, then the girls were murdered somewhere else. But if you don't believe that they were murdered somewhere else because of the cold, hard blood evidence, then how do you explain that one of the phone's had a brief handshake with a towed in the early morning hours?

You don't need to worry about damning evidence if you keep moving the goalposts. Just keep juicy theories with little evidenciary backing coming, and perhaps at least once juror will be bamboozled enough to not realise that the train of thought they lead them on has no wheels.

All MOO
:cool:
 
I’m just going off what I have heard so far about his confessions and his mental state during said confessions.
Have you heard what the warden had to say or just what the Defens teams accusations are?
I have seen first hand how solitary confinement can take the most hardened lifelong criminals (nearly the opposite of Richard Allen) and completely break them in less than a month.
He was not really in solitary. He had his own tablet to make calls and was offered his own tv.
I have also personally suffered a psychotic break with reality, twice. One time I was fully convinced I had been shot in the head even thought I hadn’t had contact with anyone, in my mind I truly believed a biker gang had came and shot me. I ended up laying on the sidewalk without a shadow of a doubt that I had been shot in my head and I was currently dying, going so far as to wish that I could have a chance to say goodbye to my daughter until police and paramedics showed up, they put me in a 8 point restraint and even in the ambulance when the paramedic was trying to give me a shot of whatever calms you down I thought he was part of said biker gang and was there to finish the job.

Needless to say, none of this really happened and if nothing that I said while suffering that psychotic episode should in any way whatsoever be interpreted as reality.
I'm sorry you went through that. It's good to see you safe and sound now.
This is why it is so interesting to me that Richard Allen confessed to killing his family,

I think we will find that he never actually confessed to killing his family. I think the context of the conversation with Dr Wala will show that he was using the word as a figure of speech, not as a literal confession.

Dr Wala did not call to check on the family's well being. She did not see it as a confession either.
that’s the type of thing I can imagine someone suffering a psychotic episode to say and I am sure at the time that the accusations made against him were weighing extremely heavy on his mind.
Or possibly, his prior actions were weighing heavily upon his mind?
Add on to this we know that he was literally eating his own feces
Again, we don't know that for sure yet.
and paperwork and smashing his head against the wall it paints the picture of a completely mentally broken man,
And yet his own psychiatrist testified that she sometimes thought he was malingering.
and nothing said by him during the time he was locked down in solitary confinement having a psychotic break should be taken as truth.

And from the only 2 confessions we heard, which are he shot the girls in the back and buried them in a shallow grave
From what I understand, that one was not recorded but was a 2nd hand description, by an inmate, who overheard him saying something like this. So that is possibly unreliable.
and that he murdered his family, we know that those are NOT true.
YES, we know that is not true, and from what was reported, he was not confessing to actually killing his family.

I'm pretty sure we will be hearing audio tapes of him confessing, to his wife and mother, while in sound mind, and with correct facts.
Whether he is guilty or not is another story completely. In my opinion, taking the ramblings of a man who’s having a mental breakdown in solitary confinement in a maximum security state prison as evidence is harrowing.
Reportedly, in 2019 he sought help for mental health issues and checked in for treatment. So his mental breakdown was not necessarily from incarceration.

And he was not really in solitary confinement. He had his own tablet which allowed him to call out and so he could call his wife or parents or friends anytime he wanted to. He could also watch films or read books or listen to music. And his psychiatrist visited him every day. And he had 24/7 trustees right outside his cell, as suicide watch.

So he was not in a dark hole, locked away in solitary with no human contact. That is a misnomer. I'm sure it was depressing but he did have ways to reach out whenever he wanted to.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
170
Guests online
632
Total visitors
802

Forum statistics

Threads
625,736
Messages
18,509,040
Members
240,841
Latest member
noahguy
Back
Top