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

[TTF14]

How do you know that the persons making these claims are really who they claim to be and witnessed these things?

I was simply answering Tricia's question, and because she got her answer and probably does not wish to keep discussing it, I won't either.

As always, JMO.

 

[SouthEnd]

Can someone please clear something up for me?
Did the search parties search the area where Abby and Libby were eventually found BEFORE they were found? In other words, did they not find their bodies under the tree the first time they looked there? OR did they not search that area until they actually found Abby and Libby? That would be the first time that area was searched when they found the girls.
I hope that makes sense.
Thank you,
Tricia

The closest we heard they searched was Brad Weber's property: from Friday's hearing, the testimony of Deputy Mitchell Catron at the Carroll County Sheriff’s Office. He was the first law enforcement officer to the trails to help search for the girls.
- Catron described searching the property of Brad Weber near the trails.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1847457878724010301

It is relevant because the bodies were discovered very near the property of Brad Weber. MS reports that the D asked him if he show the bodies, and Catron said no.

The Delphi Murders: Richard Allen On Trial: Day One: Opening Statements and More

We discuss the first day of Richard Allen's trial. Support The Murder Sheet by buying a t-shirt here: https://www.murdersheetshop.com/ Send tips to...

murdersheetpodcast.com

Nowhere have we heard that a party searched that exact area before - the person who found them headed that direction, following a sighting of their discarded clothing.

Delphi Murders trial: Day 2 testimonies

Day 2 of the Delphi Murders trial begins at 9 a.m. Saturday. Follow WISH-TV's live blog for the latest updates from the courtroom.

www.wishtv.com

 

[susiQ]

So there's an illegal conspiracy to withhold information from the public by LE in this case?

Maybe not illegal, but certainly not a good look either when LE are telling MSM what they can report on. JMO.

 

[Spartygirl]

There are always going to be bad apples in the bunch. IMO

And poor Libby and Abby happened to be murdered by RA and end up with a Bad Apple Defense team. UGH

They are Unrespectable and Unethical.

#JUSTICEFORLIBBY&ABBY

 

[katydid23]

Can someone please clear something up for me?
Did the search parties search the area where Abby and Libby were eventually found BEFORE they were found? In other words, did they not find their bodies under the tree the first time they looked there? OR did they not search that area until they actually found Abby and Libby? That would be the first time that area was searched when they found the girls.
I hope that makes sense.
Thank you,
Tricia

And there are other social media sources which say there was never any certainty anyone went in that specific clearing where the bodies were camouflaged. Even if some people walked nearby or past the area, they wouldn't have seen them unless they were right in that exact place. And the searches didnt really start until after dark.

They were not looking for dead bodies covered up. They were looking for girls who were lost or injured.

It was in a low area, surrounded by trees and they were covered by leaves and branches.

 

[statt#1]

Yes, there was no reason for anyone to search in the darkness of night in the location where they were found, reportedly steep terrain. The testimony yesterday by S Mullen, ex police chief, was that at worst it was believed the girls might’ve succumbed to an accident, ie drowning in the river.

Thank you. The early period of searching, prior to nightfall, involved the trail to the bridge. I also recall quite a bit of activity in terms of reaching out to friends to try and find out where the girls were. In fact, nobody was even thinking murder at that stage, let alone considering going down the hill, across that private lane, through the bottom land, across the creek, and then several yard so the final CS.

 

[ClearAhead]

I think a lot of people are missing the point of why AB mentioned the hair. The point is to show LE didn't do a stellar job of investigating because they didn't id a hair that was found on the hand of a victim.
Rule #1 of criminal defense is attack the investigation. JMO

But is it necessary to attack what surely appears an act of compassion by LE in not naming her? If this female had been named no doubt the D would use her to attempt to create doubt.

They’ve not shown to be particularly selective in who they name even though those people have no known connection to the murders.

 

[FrostedGlass]

Thank you. The early period of searching, prior to nightfall, involved the trail to the bridge. I also recall quite a bit of activity in terms of reaching out to friends to try and find out where the girls were. In fact, nobody was even thinking murder at that stage, let alone considering going down the hill, across that private lane, through the bottom land, across the creek, and then several yard so the final CS.

RL's neighbors got his permission to search his property. It was never said exactly what parts they searched; they may have gone down to the creek or just stayed up around his barnyard and house.

 

[Deleted member 39678]

Maybe not illegal, but certainly not a good look either when LE are telling MSM what they can report on. JMO.

So that X post sure has me confused. It talks about something happening days after the murder in 2017. How could that relate to DNA/hair analysis that would have obviously been done much later?

Law enforcement then asked us to remove that information from our website saying the sheriff was speaking without full knowledge. This was 2017 days after the murder.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1846206582939373978

 

[Cedars]

How do you know that the persons making these claims are really who they claim to be and witnessed these things?

I agree, plus, what's the point of arguing about evidence out there in internet-land, when the only evidence that matters is what will be presented in court, and nobody's social media counts there, not one iota.

JMO

 

[TTF14]

But is it necessary to attack what surely appears an act of compassion by LE in not naming her? If this female had been named no doubt the D would use her to attempt to create doubt. They’ve not shown to be particularly selective.

With all due respect, the responsibility of a defense attorney is to their client, not to show compassion to family members. They should not be total ____s, but they don't have to tiptoe around evidence to spare feelings, either. Their #1 priority is their client. Criminal defense isn't always pretty.

As always, JMO.

 

[susiQ]

Oh, OK
it speaks volumes to most of us.

Perhaps we should afford RA’s daughter the same respect that we afford the girls’ families? We have NO idea what her situation is, and quite frankly it’s none of our business. I found it very sad that KA found it necessary to publicly profess her support of her husband through an attorney due to rumours that were echoed on these threads and rightfully removed. JMHO

 

[TTF14]

I agree, plus, what's the point of arguing about evidence out there in internet-land, when the only evidence that matters is what will be presented in court, and nobody's social media counts there, not one iota.

JMO

Nobody is arguing. The owner of this website asked a question and I answered it.

As always, JMO.

 

[Cyber sleuth]

Can someone please clear something up for me?
Did the search parties search the area where Abby and Libby were eventually found BEFORE they were found? In other words, did they not find their bodies under the tree the first time they looked there? OR did they not search that area until they actually found Abby and Libby? That would be the first time that area was searched when they found the girls.
I hope that makes sense.
Thank you,
Tricia

There has been no sourced evidence that the area that the victims were found on 2/14 was searched prior to that moment they were found.
In the two days of trial not one family member, law enforcement of Delphi citizen has testified to looking in the precise location the victims were found. In fact the individual that found the girls testified about his search locations the night of the 13th and early morning of the 14th. The individual that spotted LG’s sweatshirt also provided his movements in searching and had not been in the crime scene location prior.
The murder sheet episode goes over both of their testimony and I believe everyone that has testified as being involved in searching also showed on a map where they were and when.
https://murdersheetpodcast.com/podc...-trial-day-two-steve-mullin-and-the-searchers

 

[Deleted member 39678]

I agree, plus, what's the point of arguing about evidence out there in internet-land, when the only evidence that matters is what will be presented in court, and nobody's social media counts there, not one iota.

JMO

Yes. I'm sure if I chose to search social media about this case I would find all sorts of claims being made.

No thanks.

 

[Seattle1]

Can someone please clear something up for me?
Did the search parties search the area where Abby and Libby were eventually found BEFORE they were found? In other words, did they not find their bodies under the tree the first time they looked there? OR did they not search that area until they actually found Abby and Libby? That would be the first time that area was searched when they found the girls.
I hope that makes sense.
Thank you,
Tricia

Although I believe the search was concentrated down river (as if the girls fell off of the bridge), I think it was also a situation that the girls bodies had been camouflaged by branches and darkness than the area not being searched. MOO

ETA: Recalling testimony from Saturday from the searcher who found Libby's clothes in the creek, heard the searcher say "we found them" but he could not see neither the the searcher nor the bodies from his vantage.

 

[katydid23]

Well, they didn’t test it for DNA which should have been done 7 years ago. My point is, not testing it is just another failure in this investigation which the D was only too happy to show. MOO.

They DID DNA test it.

The ONLY way to know that it is female hair, and that there is a familial connection is to DNA test it.

They tested it enough times to figure that much out, and that was 20k worth of testing.

It was not a failure. It was a financial budgeting decision. They don't really need to know anymore than they already figured out. It was a borrowed hoodie from Libby's female relative. So hair from a female relative is no big bombshell surprise.

 

[TTF14]

They DID DNA test it.

The ONLY way to know that it is female hair, and that there is a familial connection is to DNA test it.

They tested it enough times to figure that much out, and that was 20k worth of testing.

It was not a failure. It was a financial budgeting decision. They don't really need to know anymore than they already figured out. It was a borrowed hoodie from Libby's female relative. So hair from a female relative is no big bombshell surprise.

Could you please provide a link/source that states that the 20K worth of testing was for this hair?

Thanks!

 

[susiQ]

How do you know that the persons making these claims are really who they claim to be and witnessed these things?

Doesn’t matter what we think or anyone else out in SM. If there is any basis in this rumour it will come out during the trial. Someone must testify to this if it is so. Patience. JMO

 

[ClearAhead]

RL's neighbors got his permission to search his property. It was never said exactly what parts they searched; they may have gone down to the creek or just stayed up around his barnyard and house.

Do you have a link that RLs property was searched that same night? I’ve never seen it. Perhaps permission was being obtained if it became necessary to continue the search the following morning?