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

[mrjitty]

https://murdersheetpodcast.com/


28 minutes in and I am shocked.
Defense had Bob Motta sitting at the defense table at today’s trial.
He was not in line or given a press pass. He was a guest of defense.
They also allege he shared a hotel room in Fort Wayne with another podcaster that had been seen approaching individuals outside the courtroom during jury selection and asking them if they were potential jurors and photographing car license plate of potential jurors.
How is this ok?

i was coming to mention this as I see Defence Diaries being posted here. Motta is not independent. He is a defence surrogate. So take his posts with that in mind.

It is also hard to square how Judge Gull reconciles her media orders with the defence bringing its own youtubers??

Imagine if the prosecution gave some of its seats to guilter podcasters?

 

[iamshadow21]

I wondered if RA’s alleged confessing to shooting them, then burying them resembles a mental behaviour similar to ‘undoing’. That’s not quite as barbaric as slicing throats or leaving a naked teen to the elements, save for a few branches tossed over them perhaps including other ground litter. Altering the truth might make his actions appear a little less monstrous in his own head. JMO

Yeah, we see that kind of minimisation by suspects all the time. They'll admit to killing someone but not raping them, especially when the victims are kids. They'll admit to being a passenger but not the driver. They'll lie about acts of sadism or post mortem rituals, body manipulation or destruction, or necrophilia, even when it's obvious that those things happened. They lie and say it was an accident, that they only hit them once, or that they found them like that. And those stories often change, or are subject to continuous revisions, some small, some huge.

People lie. And when it's a case of murder, they lie a lot, and not always, 'I didn't do it'. Quite often, the lie is, 'I didn't do it like that'.

MOO

 

[zh0r4]

If it hasn't been answered yet, it is in the PCA. The affidavit has it all.

What page in the PCA does it say any of the eyewitnesses specifically name Richard Allen as the person they saw? I have read the PCA (not in the typical font, so maybe I missed something) numerous times and didn’t see anywhere the eyewitnesses identified RA as the person they saw?

 

[MassGuy]

Solid recap here:

"Grandma, I'll be okay" - A Look at the Delphi Murders Trial Day One

DELPHI, Ind. -- It didn't take long for tears to start flowing down the faces of witnesses, family and jurors alike during day one of the State of Indiana versus Richard Allen. This is what went down inside the Carroll County Courthouse Friday.

t.co

-Multiple cameras were confiscated. It’s unclear if the individual journalists themselves are banned from the remainder of the trial or the media outlet itself. Nevertheless, it provided Judge Gull with more ammunition towards media.

-“Richard Allen deserves a fair trial outside of the nonsense of the media,” Gull told the court Friday. The jury then entered the room, and the judge read their instructions aloud

-McLeland repeated his claim that Richard Allen is Bridge Guy, or simply put, the man you have witnessed numerous times in pictures shared by police. A man in blue walking on the Monon High Bridge, and who McLeland claims used his gun to direct the girls “down the hill.” McLeland said Allen is that man and the State of Indiana will prove it.

-Baldwin spent just as much time criticizing the bullet, or what he called the “magic bullet.” Baldwin claimed the unspent shell casing found near the bodies, which the State claims is directly from Allen’s gun, was mishandled by police and that there are serious ballistics issues with that bullet.

-Baldwin went back to the “strands of hair” revelation from jury selection this week, and expanded upon it to claim the hairs were of female origin and wrapped around the fingers of Abigail Williams, root and all.

-Eventually, Judge Gull interjected and warned Baldwin that he was waning into “evidence” territory, and that opening statements are not evidence.

-As of Friday, Gull had not ruled on a prosecution motion to block testimony from William Tobin, a forensic metallurgist the defense plans to call as a witness to question the accuracy and reliability of the state’s examination of a bullet found near the girls’ bodies.

 

[mrjitty]

So it seems from Nicks opening that those of us who said the D selectively misquoted SC in the Franks about the muddy / bloody evidence will be proved correct.

I can’t get over how blatantly they hoaxed the internet on that one.

I suspect we will see the Judge correctly tossed the Franks once she discovered that subterfuge because the affiant simply did not lie or mislead.

sigh.

MOO

 

[snooptroop88]

ABC News/the "he" they refer to is Baldwin: "He said the prosecution's timeline puts Allen in a parking lot near the trial (typo/trail) at 1:30 p.m. but his cellphone data shows he was gone by 2:15 p.m."

Okay, so the prosecution's timeline puts RA there at 1:30. Correct, that's what the P believes. What is the D saying about what his cellphone data shows-- either through activity or lack thereof-- for 1:30?

And per D, RA's cellphone data shows he was gone by 2:15. Shows it how? There's no other way for the phone to "show" it than through activity or a lack of activity. All I get from this statement is that D is probably saying there is no activity on the phone after 2:15, unless they can show activity/signals at another location, which I'd guess we'd probably already be aware of.

However, the D never said anything about activity or inactivity on that phone up to 1:30, and between 1:30 and 2:15. And my guess is that the reason for the D's wording on this-- using the prosecution's timeline for the 1:30 mark instead of the actual data-- may likely be that RA had no phone at all on him that day on the trail. But the implication in the way it has been worded is a phone that was in the area but dropped off at 2:15.

I don't think so. MOO, definitely could be wrong, but I still suspect RA had no phone. And I believe the P's timeline is the correct one, and believing that, the D is very close in my mind to noting here that RA had no activity in that timeframe. Was there activity from someplace else on RA's phone after the 2:15 mark? If so, I think it's likely we'd already know that, but we'll see.

 

[susan1122]

I was wondering if anyone can tell me if there is proof that Keegan Kline didn’t get out of his car? Wasn’t he supposed to be meeting Libby at the bridge? I know he is in jail now for very good reasons. It just seems likely that he could be further connected to this case.

 

[susan1122]

What page in the PCA does it say any of the eyewitnesses specifically name Richard Allen as the person they saw? I have read the PCA (not in the typical font, so maybe I missed something) numerous times and didn’t see anywhere the eyewitnesses identified RA as the person they saw?

I would like to know that too. I have not heard RA was specifically named. What does PCA mean? I am back after many years gone. But listen on You Tube. Trish said there is good info on this case here. This case is really different, imo.

 

[rez125]

I would like to know that too. I have not heard RA was specifically named. What does PCA mean? I am back after many years gone. But listen on You Tube. Trish said there is good info on this case here. This case is really different, imo.

Probable cause affidavit

 

[mrjitty]

Just noting that RA being at the trails until 2.15 is the third version he has offered.

 

[susan1122]

Probable cause affidavit

Thank you!

 

[zh0r4]

I would like to know that too. I have not heard RA was specifically named. What does PCA mean? I am back after many years gone. But listen on You Tube. Trish said there is good info on this case here. This case is really different, imo.

Probable Cause Affidavit. Here is the link to it if you want to read it:
https://fox59.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/21/2022/11/Probable-Cause-Affidavit-Richard-Allen.pdf

 

[steeltowngirl]

I would like to know that too. I have not heard RA was specifically named. What does PCA mean? I am back after many years gone. But listen on You Tube. Trish said there is good info on this case here. This case is really different, imo.

Richard Allen was not specifically identified by name by the trail witnesses back in 2017. They likely didn’t even know RA. He had not been arrested (that came in 2022), so he was certainly not in a lineup. The witness statements were important to establish the timeline at the trail on 2/13/17.

The witnesses described a man who the State believes was BG, the man who murdered the girls. The State plans to prove that the man was Richard Allen.

 

[TristanP]

Banfield is discussing the Delphi trial now on NewsNation.

Notes:

• Susan Hendricks was in court today. KA teared up when Nick described the murders and how girls were found.
• “Undoing” is the reason Abby was redressed.
• BP reached for her own throat when Nick described how Libby likely reached for her slit throat and the tree as she fell to her death.

Who is Susan Hendricks?

What does “undoing” mean?

 

[steeltowngirl]

Who is Susan Hendricks?

What does “undoing” mean?

Susan Hendricks is a journalist and wrote the book “Down the Hill”.

According to one study, undoing is a defense mechanism that offenders use to relieve feelings of guilt or remorse. (Wiki)

 

[TristanP]

D's again on a bridge to nowhere with their "hair," jmo. Based on statements in MSM, there was testing on the hair, the D is just not satisfied there was "enough" testing on the hair. This is hardly surprising that they'd be shocked and aghast, again MOO. Does this hair track back to an actual potential murderer? I believe that's a no, and this is no smoking gun, jmo. They might be able to get some traction from the fact that LE didn't do "enough" testing, but that's not going to be enough for the D, MOO.

I'm seeing NMcL noted RA's confessions include details only the killer could know, and this is in MSM. THAT is the smoking gun, imo, not the mystery hair, which it turns out is of an insufficiently "mysterious" nature to have much impact on anything. Maybe the D will shock me and it will turn out to have some substance, but based on what I'm seeing, it doesn't.

Someone said in a prior post they'd seen there was a distinctive blade in use in these murders. Among the knives seized from RA's home was a katana sword, which leaves distinctive cut marks that they could probably see on tool mark analysis. (No, I'm not saying he used this, but I do find it of interest in that the prior poster noted the distinctive blade).

Thinking as a juror: “Oh, good, the hair was tested. Probably belongs to a family member of the other victim. Wait, probably? LE didn’t test it to be able to identify it with certainty? What if there is other evidence they say IS related to RA? How can I be sure it was tested to certainty vs probability?”

 

[TristanP]

My bad! Shows how unfamiliar the terms are for me! Of course I meant tool marks.

Very damning for RA.

JMO

Not damning if they don’t really match, and most especially if it can’t be replicated.

 

[mrjitty]

Now that The D has put some cards on the table we can see how committed they are to their conspiracy. But now rebranded as timeline since it flopped like a dead whale on the beach at the 3 day hearings.

Despite having better suspects I think it is clear why they have to do this. RA looks like Bridge Guy and he places himself there at the right time.

So they need another Bridge Guy. AND they need murder in the middle of the night. It’s obviously not possible that one person brings back two murdered girls in the dead of night.

Is any of this sensible comapared to just saying their man wasn’t there? I suspect not but it shows the huge problem at the centre of their case. RA puts himself there so it really does have to be him.

MOO

 

[snooptroop88]

Thinking as a juror: “Oh, good, the hair was tested. Probably belongs to a family member of the other victim. Wait, probably? LE didn’t test it to be able to identify it with certainty? What if there is other evidence they say IS related to RA? How can I be sure it was tested to certainty vs probability?”

Well, understood, but at the moment, I'm thinking more of the juror who's thinking this is the hair of a potential murderer other than RA, and that appears not to be the case.

It'll be clarified in the course of the trial, so we can all be assured we'll get answers on that.

 

[TristanP]

I had to go look..

Undoing is a special form of offender behavior representing a symbolic reversal of the crime. This special form of personation occurs at a crime scene when there is a close association between the offender and the victim or when the victim represents someone of importance to the offender.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/317501193_Undoing_or_Symbolic_Reversal_at_Homicide_Crime_Scenes

Interesting, since there is zero connection between RA & the girls.