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

[TTF14]

I highly doubt they will lose the jury when they will hear the confessions to his wife and anybody who would listen.

Then add in the fact he admitted he was out there dressed as BG at the time in question.

Moo

There's a lot more to this case than these confessions and him being on the trails on 2-13-17.

As always, JMO.

 

[TTF14]

Her court.

True that! And maybe she just doesn't like them.

As always, JMO.

 

[katydid23]

DBM
Duplicate

 

[Simply Southern]

On page 43 of this thread #200, Post# 855. Poster Warwick7 was kind enough to find mention of it in a media tweet. In the past I had bad luck linking posts so I'm sorry I'm not making it easier to access by just linking it.

That post relates to press access. Podcasters are not considered credentialed press. Most claim the title of creative director or creative producer of entertainment material.

That does not qualified podcasters under the law in the post.

Also see @Seattle1 post she posted the Indiana Rules on Court Records. #871

I’m moving on, clearly many links laws and regulations have been posted for credentialed press and does not include Podcaster, creative Director/Producers or any other name used by persons providing information to the public through social media. There are clear definitions of what qualifies as credentialed press. If you will read the documents it will give you the answers you seek.

Moo…

 

[Warwick7]

There's a lot more to this case than these confessions and him being on the trails on 2-13-17.

As always, JMO.

I'm afraid that is the case. This trial is going to reveal evidence that will be graphic and horrific. There will be data and etc....
I hope I am up to the horrific and graphic.
:0(

 

[katydid23]

This leads me to another question...

IIUC... LE are required to report when their guns are drawn/handled in the course of any case...
If this bullet was from a gun of LE...
Ideally speaking...
would there not be a report of a gun related action by the LE?

JMO...

I don't think any officers pulled out a gun and cycled a bullet through, and then left it on the ground. None of that makes any sense. This was a '2 girls lost in the woods case'---not one in which cops would have their guns out and cocked.

I suppose the D might be trying to imply that maybe a cop killed the girls? Anybody but the guy who was on the bridge last the time and confessed 60+ times.

 

[MassGuy]

I don't think any officers pulled out a gun and cycled a bullet through, and then left it on the ground. None of that makes any sense. This was a '2 girls lost in the woods case'---not one in which cops would have their guns out and cocked.

I suppose the D might be trying to imply that maybe a cop killed the girls? Anybody but the guy who was on the bridge last the time and confessed 60+ times.

I don’t think they are trying to imply that a cop did this, just that the round is irrelevant because it didn’t come from the killer.

 

[Deleted member 39678]

I don't think any officers pulled out a gun and cycled a bullet through, and then left it on the ground. None of that makes any sense. This was a '2 girls lost in the woods case'---not one in which cops would have their guns out and cocked.

I suppose the D might be trying to imply that maybe a cop killed the girls? Anybody but the guy who was on the bridge last the time and confessed 60+ times.

I'd like to know how markings that tie RA's gun to the cartridge found at the crime scene could also be found on a cartridge cycled through an officers gun.

As this happens, the extractor pulls on the case, leaving a grip impression on the side. As the slide nears the end of its movement, the case makes contact with the ejector, causing the case to flip up and out of the slide. This leaves a small mark on the bottom left of the case.

Forensic Marks on a Cartridge Case

When a bullet is fired from a semiautomatic handgun, the gun leaves distinctive markings on the cartridge case. These markings can be used to match the case to the gun from which it was fired. When the trigger is pulled, the firing pin springs forward and makes contact with the primer, igniting the

www.nist.gov

 

[katydid23]

I see it still says pair of black Nikes and shoes, not shoe.

As always, JMO.

I found three articles that said 'A SHOE' and I saw a picture from the scene showing one shoe.

I've seen 2 articles that said a pair of shoes, but I do think that is a mistake by the reporter. IMO

I went back down the rabbit hole of old interviews from 2017. Kelsey says clearly in 2 interviews that there was ONE shoe found in the mud in the creek. The other was under Abby's body with the cell phone.

 

[TTF14]

That's true. However, this group was formed to actually try to do such things. That was the plan and some of it has been accomplished. Like taking over the headlines the night before the trial began, with the bogus 'hair in the fist bombshell.'

That hoax was orchestrated. Obviously the 'authorities' have nothing to say about it. But it is dirty tricks, unethical and will continue because they are bring in BM front and centre to continue this kind of BS.

Was BM "front and center to continue this BS" before or after journalist Angela Ganote posted this from a hearing on October 15th, two days before opening arguments?

As always, JMO.

 

[TTF14]

I found three articles that said 'A SHOE' and I saw a picture from the scene showing one shoe.

I've seen 2 articles that said a pair of shoes, but I do think that is a mistake by the reporter. IMO

I went back down the rabbit hole of old interviews from 2017. Kelsey says clearly in 2 interviews that there was ONE shoe found in the mud in the creek. The other was under Abby's body with the cell phone.

BBM

Could you please share an approved link to that photo?

Thanks!

As always, JMO

 

[katydid23]

I understand what you're saying, which is why it's a confusing detail that needs to be cleared up. I don't think a mistake by Wish-TV is the only explanation, although of course it's a logical possibility. A flubbed-up staging of the scene could be another explanation, which you'd have to be open to RA being not guilty to consider.

So somebody tried to frame RA, but they accidentally left THREE black Nikes at the crime scene? How would that happen? They bought an extra pair of shoes like Libby's and left one behind by mistake somehow?

I'm confident the evidence that comes out will make it clear. Until then, my attention to detail will keep it tucked away in my brain.

ETA: Also, opening statements from the Prosecution (or defense) aren't evidence. And I think (could be wrong) the PCA is also not evidence. What witnesses say on the stand is evidence, however, and this article says the witness said a pair of Nikes. Hence my confusion.

As always, JMO.

What the witness says on the stand is evidence. TRUE. But what a reporter writes in an article is not evidence, if they get it factually incorrect.

There is no way there was THREE black Nikes at the crime scene. IMO

 

[MassGuy]

I'd like to know how markings that tie RA's gun to the cartridge found at the crime scene could also be found on a cartridge cycled through an officers gun.

Forensic Marks on a Cartridge Case

When a bullet is fired from a semiautomatic handgun, the gun leaves distinctive markings on the cartridge case. These markings can be used to match the case to the gun from which it was fired. When the trigger is pulled, the firing pin springs forward and makes contact with the primer, igniting the

www.nist.gov

That’s really what it comes down to; showing that the markings found on that unspent round could only have been made by RA’s gun, and not by any other gun.

For that, I expect them to explain the science behind this, and how accurate such a conclusion would be.

 

[katydid23]

Was BM "front and center to continue this BS" before or after journalist Angela Ganote posted this from a hearing on October 15th, two days before opening arguments?

As always, JMO.


View attachment 539222

Yes, he was. HE was the one that added "IT WAS HUMAN HAIR' by tweet. Angela says above 'we have no idea if it's human hair' ----So BM jumps in and said YES, it was Human.

He was tweeting about it and hyping it up. Just as planned.

 

[MiniMoo]

Was BM "front and center to continue this BS" before or after journalist Angela Ganote posted this from a hearing on October 15th, two days before opening arguments?

As always, JMO.


View attachment 539222

For clarification:

Does this mean the Defense may not have known anything about the hair?

Jury selection was only last week.

JMT MOO JMT

 

[TTF14]

So somebody tried to frame RA, but they accidentally left THREE black Nikes at the crime scene? How would that happen? They bought an extra pair of shoes like Libby's and left one behind by mistake somehow?

What the witness says on the stand is evidence. TRUE. But what a reporter writes in an article is not evidence, if they get it factually incorrect.

There is no way there was THREE black Nikes at the crime scene. IMO

No, I don't think anyone set out to frame Richard Allen specifically. That's not my theory of the crime. And RA may very well be involved and guilty. We don't know yet.

And the reporter may be wrong in what was testified to. I'm simply asking questions about a discrepancy I noticed from the trial testimony.

As always, JMO.

 

[MassGuy]

So somebody tried to frame RA, but they accidentally left THREE black Nikes at the crime scene? How would that happen? They bought an extra pair of shoes like Libby's and left one behind by mistake somehow?

What the witness says on the stand is evidence. TRUE. But what a reporter writes in an article is not evidence, if they get it factually incorrect.

There is no way there was THREE black Nikes at the crime scene. IMO

If there was any funny business with the shoes, the defense would have mentioned that.

This reminds me of the Berreth case when a reporter indirectly tweeted that Kelsey “loved her dog,” when her mom said on the stand that she “loved her God.”

So naturally we had 20 pages of comments regarding this missing dog, what breed it was, its whereabouts during the crime, and where that dog was now.

 

[katydid23]

BBM

Could you please share an approved link to that photo?

Thanks!

As always, JMO

I didn't add the photo. I do have a link but am uncertain so I won't post it.

 

[TTF14]

Yes, he was. He was tweeting about it and hyping it up.

I'll take a look at his Twitter to see what dates and times he was hyping it up. I think it was probably after it came out in the mini opening statement from jury selection, where the defense team publicly stated it for all to hear, not just BM.

ETA: I checked. Same date, a few hours after Angela Ganote broke the news from an open hearing. BM got the info. from the open hearing, not some secret inside information from the defense team.

As always, JMO.

 

[Melted]

There isn't a State in the country where their respective Criminal (Civil) Statute doesn't govern how and when trial evidence is made public, and it's typically not on demand! While criminal records are presumed to be accessible to the public, there have always been exceptions-- the US Constitution notwithstanding.

To be clear, unless a court record or any part of a court record is inaccessible to the public pursuant to statute, rule, regulation, or Chief Justice Directive, the court may deny the public access to a court record or to any part of a court record only in compliance with the State's rule.

Indiana Rules on Access to Court Records

If they are making it public to the press by the law of the constitution it has to be accessible to anyone in the public